The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewW. Patrick Lang Archive
Are the Russians Correct?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
syria-strike-2018

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

The US Government claims that 100% of the 100 plus cruise missiles launched by the coalition it heads reached their targets on Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites.

The Syrian and Russian governments state that 75% of these missiles did not reach their targets.

Who should we believe?

The extreme nature of the US claim should inspire caution. No system functions at 100% efficiency and effectiveness. None. A very senior civilian colleague in DIA once asked me why sophisticated weapons so often malfunction or are otherwise defeated. I told her that it was simply a fact of life that in actual warfare “whatever can go wrong, will go wrong.” She resolutely stated that this should not be. “The manufacturers guarantee that they will work as advertised,” she insisted. “They lie,” I told her. “That’s business.” She was not happy with that answer, but it was the truth. There is no such thing as a perfectly functioning weapon system.

System malfunctions are only one of the many things that can and will go wrong in war.

Complex air defense systems like that in Syria should not be thought of as merely a collection of Surface to Air Missiles (SAM), air defense guns, radars and Electronic Counter Measures (ECM) jammers for use against the cruise missiles from ships or air launched missiles from aircraft.

AirDefenseCombatReadiness2017-08

These tools are not successfully used separately. In a well-designed system they are employed holistically as integrated parts of a whole linked together electronically with centralized air defense computers coordinating their effects. The radars detect their incoming targets, the jammers disrupt the navigation systems of the missiles and in many Russian systems then give the missiles a new and harmless target. The SAMS and Anti-Aircraft guns are tasked by the air defense computers and the hope on the defense side is that one does not run out of SAMS and ammunition before the attackers run out of missiles. In bygone years the Syrians were unable to integrate all these various systems to defeat their great enemy, Israel. That time has now passed and the Russo-Syrian air defense has become one integrated whole functioning according to the standards and discipline brought by the Russians even though the best of the Russian equipment present in Syria has not yet been committed to the fight.

It has been noted that a lot of the SAM systems presently in the hands of the Syrians are old Soviet era materiel. This is largely irrelevant. Such weapons systems are subject to repeated product improvement projects that essentially make them into new and more modern instruments of war.

ORDER IT NOW

This takes place in the supply chain of every military equipment manufacturing country in the world. If they do not do that, their equipment will have a short service life and is not worth buying when others do better. Good examples of product improvements are the service cycle of warships. These are repeatedly programmed for a year or so in a shipyard being modernized. Another is the venerable US B-52 heavy bomber. Named for the year they first went into service (1952) they continue to “soldier on” having been repeatedly made into modern aircraft through re-fits. On that model of design the Russo-Syrian air defense force should not be thought of as backward at all.

Russia has dedicated a lot of its limited industrial resources to refining old Soviet systems and developing many new ones. These have a great export potential as we have seen in Iran, Turkey and India so it is easy to justify the expenditure of so much in these projects,

The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding.

So what happened?

I am told by several foreign sources with access to the information needed to make a valid judgment that the Russians are correct. These people are friendly to the United States as are their governments. Over two thirds of the US coalition missiles failed to reach their targets. Why? All the reasons cited above must have played a role in this aerial defeat. Obsolescent weapons, a fully integrated air defense and skill brought to the fight.

There is an ongoing investigation to determine what is to be done to rectify the situation.

At the same time it is clear that there was an understanding between the governments to insure that Russian red lines were not crossed. The evidence for the Douma gas attack is non-existent. The film evidence has now been thoroughly de-bunked as part of the information operations (propaganda) of the White Helmets scheme funded by the Saudis and largely conducted by the UK info warriors of 77 Regiment. It seems clear that US DoD was not privy to that IO project and for that Reason SECDEF Mattis was blind-sided by the deception. The struck targets (successful or not) have long been known to the US IC as facilities of the former Syrian Government chemical warfare programs. The Russians were told to stay out of those areas and so a reasonable compromise was made with a president easily fooled by social media and under heavy pressure by a population equally easy to deceive.

Nevertheless, most of the missiles failed and that failure must be dealt with.

 
Hide 299 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    In an age of fake news, fake food, fake sex, Trump has taken the next logical step, by introducing fake war to keep the NeoCon Bastards off his back.

    Read More
    • Agree: GourmetDan
    • Replies: @Noah Way
    Trump can't keep the neocons off his back - they are driving the bus. He's strapped into the driver's seat but isn't allowed to touch anything.

    This isn't 4D chess, it's hang on and try to survive. The last president who bucked the deep state was JFK.
    , @Wally
    "fake war to keep the NeoCon Bastards off his back"

    The same way the fake & impossible '6M Jews / holocaust' was conjured up to keep the goys under the thumbs of Jews.

    www.codoh.com

    , @Paw
    The Cold War was fake too. No side broke any agreements.
    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
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Erebus says:

    Nevertheless, most of the missiles failed and that failure must be dealt with.

    FWIW, Twitter reports coming from “crater-counting missile chasers” in Syria indicate that the situation is much, much worse than even the Russian reports. They reported intercepting 70-odd missiles, but said little about the 30-odd they didn’t intercept.

    If the half dozen guys going from site to site counting craters and estimating how many missiles hit an ostensible target are to be believed, the numbers drop precipitously – ranging from 10-15 with the spread centred around a dozen. That number is commensurate with the damage we’ve seen, whereas 30+ isn’t and 105 hits has no connection to reality. Apparently 2 were found more or less intact, having probably run out of fuel after losing their targeting functions.

    If the USM is looking at a 10-15% success rate, even without direct Russian AD action (they apparently provided only radar tracking & data integration), their ability to execute anything less than an all-in stand-off attack has effectively been neutralized. Not only were 2/3 of the missiles intercepted kinetically, 2/3 of the ones that got through succumbed to either electronic counter measures or to malfunction. If these reports are true, the Pentagon brain trusts are shitting pyramids as they look at the post-attack assessments.

    That also greatly exacerbates the USM’s vulnerability to a stand-off counterattack, especially salvoes of modern Russian missiles against which the US has no effective defence. Other than the fact that the USM can probably present more targets than the Russians have missiles, they’d be completely annihilated. Maybe that’s their strategy and explains why they’re spending all that money building targets.

    Read More
    • Agree: JR
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    against which the US has no effective defence.
     
    And here is a conundrum--most US policy-makers sincerely believe (it is expected from them--most of them are badly educated) in the narrative of "invulnerability" of the US assets in Europe and Asia through THAAD, Patriot-PAC 3 and other anti-air-missile defenses. This is dangerous, because those systems do not work but belief in their efficiency may create a desire to attack Russians or someone else and may escalate immediately with really bad consequences for the American assets. Considering US inherent bias towards nukes' use one has to tread these waters cautiously and literally peel away, layer by layer, American myth of military-technological superiority, until US policy-makers get the message and either completely bankrupt country trying to "catch up" (they will not) or, finally, get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.
    , @Erebus
    Later on the same day I posted comment #2 above, the Russians released data saying that, in fact, 22 missiles hit a target.

    - 105 missiles launched (according to the Pentagon)
    - 66 missiles intercepted (according to the Russian military)
    - 22 missiles hit their targets (according to the Russian military)
    - 2 unexploded missiles were delivered to moscow (according to the Russian military)
    - a part of the missiles did not reach their targets by some reasons, most likely technical failures (according to the Russian military)
     
    It would appear that 17 missiles either suffered technical failure or were misdirected (incl the 2 that were found unexploded). Lots of photos at the link.
    https://southfront.org/trumps-smart-missiles-in-syria-summing-up-evidence-and-numbers-provided-by-russia/

    About twice as many missiles hit as the Twitter reports claimed, but a 21% success rate isn't something that instils confidence. This is especially so as it remains unclear how and how much the Russians contributed to the defence.

    What should be clear (but probably isn't, yet) is that had the Russians struck back in anger with a similar number of Kalibrs, not to speak of Zircons and Kinzhals, there'd be an awesome din coming out of Washington about the instant loss of a staggering quantity of capital assets. London and Paris too, even though the French apparently suffered almost 100% "Failed to Launch" on their fancy new sea-launched MdCN cruise missiles, so it wouldn't be very sporting to sink the hapless frigates responsible, the Aquitaine & Auvergne.

    Apparently both the UK's and France's air launched SCALPs didn't fair much better.

    The takeaway on the attack is that another one would be either sheer folly, or a collaborative 4D chess move on the part of the Russians and the Rational Faction in Washington.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Anonymous[196] • Disclaimer says:

    Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription.

    Welfare. One large jobs program. It is impossible to come up with a scenario where the U.S. would need or would commit to a large ground campaign. But hey, I’m all for growing this social program, it might take money away from creating more white elephant weapon systems. I’d rather have the obscene DoD dollars actually help real people, lower-middle class Americans, than pay Jack Keane several hundred $k to sit on the boards of multiple Beltway bandits.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Patrick Lang
    The maintenance of a body of ground troops designed to conduct expeditionary overseas requires a much larger force than that to be projected because of the impossibility of maintaining the force overseas indefinitely. Units must be rotated. Units must be trained outside the theater of operations, etc. The key to javing a smaller army and marine corps is to have a different, non-interventionist foreign policy. This has nothing to do with "welfare" for the deplorables. The great costs in an all volunteer force are down stream retirement costs, medical costs and the VA.
    , @Low Voltage
    I would like to see universal conscription for the armed forces, and by universal, I mean everyone (2 years of service between 18-20) with no lottery and no deferments. Service would be required during peacetime and not just when the Generals need cannon fodder. Conscripts would be exempt from any overseas duty unless they volunteered. In fact, overseas service should consist of a sort of American Foreign Legion (funded by the corporations who profit from these bloodbaths).

    Of course, this would be an expensive army, but in a nation that worships the military like our modern day Confederacy, everyone should be thanking each other for their service. We might not be McMansion Nation any longer, but that would be a good thing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Wo Fat says:

    Yes, well if the supposed chemical weapons production facility, i.e. pharmaceuticals & snake antivenin lab were hit by 76 Tomahawks at I believe 1.8 million dollars each, (!!!)I’d expect to see not even one whole brick on top of another, much less the destroyed but not flattened structures seen in photos online. Must have been them Tomahawks with the new M-80 warhead 4th of July variety to leave those concrete columns still vertical like that and the cinder blocks not pounded into dust. To me the photos look like two hits, three at most, but 76? Give me a break. The nearby structures would have crumbled from the concussions and there wouldn’t be a hill there anymore. Mattis & Dunford might get away with feeding that line of bull to a platoon of jarheads in boot who have no choice but to accept it, but for those of us beyond that level of innocence, the official version doesn’t even rise to the level of insulting our intelligence. If it weren’t so criminal it’d just be laughable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. The B-52 first flew in 1952 and entered service in 1955. I have never heard that Air Force aircraft numbering is based on year first flown or entry into service and doubt that that is the case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Quartermaster
    You are correct. The 52 first flew much earlier.
    , @Godfree Roberts
    You may be too young to remember it but the Douglas Aircraft Company's DC-3 was first flown in 3 AD, during the reign of the Emperor Augustus, and entered service on the Danube Frontier a scant 18 months later. The rest is history...
    , @Alfa158
    The numbers are assigned in sequence as aircraft become official projects. The B-52 was the 52nd bomber design accepted for development by the Air Corp/Air Force. The first prototypes were completed around 1952 but that was coincidence.
    The rest of the article is fairly good, but there is no excuse for that sort of unforced error opens Lang to attack on his credibility.
    The truth on the attack's effectiveness is probably somewhere in the middle. After WW2 comparisons of records on claimed enemy aircraft and ships destroyed versus actual losses losses showed that the actual success rate is somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of what is claimed. Additionally in WW2 the number of US aircraft downed by the enemy (about 20,000) was roughly equal to the number lost to mechanical malfunction, pilot error, navigation errors etc. It would be reasonable to assume that somewhere around those ratios of the missiles were shot down or malfunctioned, so 30 to 50 missiles not reaching any target would be believable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. The Russians also stated there were different targets. According to them, most of the missiles going through hit empty buildings, while the military targets were not hit by any missiles at all.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. MarkU says:

    I can think of two other important questions, what is the point of lying? and who exactly do they think they are fooling?

    Firstly it is worth saying that both sides are likely to exaggerate the effectiveness of their systems, deliberately or otherwise. Let us start with the US claim of 100% effectiveness of their weapons system and 0% of the Syrian/Russian systems, this is plainly nonsense. Even with no air defences at all a certain number of malfunctions would be expected to happen. The Syrian/Russian claims are also likely to be wrong, many of the claimed intercepts were just as likely to be malfunctions.

    So what is the point of lying?

    First off, a reputation for unreliability is bad for sales, pure and simple. Nobody is going to be enthusiastic about spending large amounts of money on stuff that doesn’t work very well, this would apply equally to both sides.

    Secondly, the appetite of the general public for war in general and superpower confrontation in particular is going to be somewhat diminished if it is perceived that the other side is technologically equal or even superior. This factor is logically going to be more important to the side likely to initiate conflict.

    So who do they think they are fooling?

    Potential customers for weapons systems are usually not going to be naive enough to take the manufacturers claims at face value, they are likely to employ their own experts to assess the various claims. They will not be completely immune to deception of course.

    Each other. Neither side would want their opponents to have the best information available, for obvious reasons. It is notable that both sides appear to have declined to fully commit their latest equipment, the Russians in particular. It is likely that both sides have reasonably good intelligence on what happened, neither side is likely to be fooled easily.

    The general public are the most obvious targets of deception and the most easily fooled. It is one thing to risk a superpower conflict when your population in general is confident that you have a clear technological edge and are likely to escape the worst. It would be quite another matter to get the public on board if they believed they were up against a more or less equal opponent and were likely to get thoroughly nuked. Once again this logic applies far more strongly to the side likely to initiate a conflict for they are the ones who must manufacture consent. For this reason it would appear that the Russians have somewhat less motivation to lie than their US counterparts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Ohh stop being rational.
    , @Johann
    They lie because they can and after lying their pathetic lives away they are not even aware that they are lying. Hilary can fall down the steps in front of hundreds of cameras and lie that she did not fall. Joe Biden can lie to a reporter that he graduated number one in his law class and totally ignore the school records that he graduated in the bottom of his law class.
    , @Zogby

    I can think of two other important questions, what is the point of lying?
     
    It's not about lying to the public, it's about the Pentagon lying to the nitwit that bragged about "nice, new, smart" missiles a couple days earlier and can't handle the truth.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. El Dato says:

    Sounds like a plausible résumé.

    However, how does that work:

    The radars detect their incoming targets, the jammers disrupt the navigation systems of the missiles and in many Russian systems then give the missiles a new and harmless target.

    What exactly can you jam? Is this about spoofing the GPS information? Do these robots have no intertial guidance / terrain reconnaisance systems?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    Terrain reconnaissance doesn't give geolocation and missiles need geolocation to reach targets. Inertial navigation is based on 'guesstimating' position. Satellite guidance helps the guess being much more accurate.
    Yet, jamming the GPS beams to make the T-hawks get lost, I grasp. Providing them with new targets, I don't know, maybe the Russians have the capacity to feed them with fake GPS beams.
    , @1RW
    Missiles also have radar altimeters which can be fooled. The missile will then either slam into the ground because it thought it was higher than it was, or fly too high and get easier to shoot down because it thinks it’s lower than it is, or just get confused even more when used in combination with GPS spoofing
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. Reading the article what crosses my mind is a report by the USA institution that audits USA government spending, about the Patriot anti missile system.
    The report states that either the Patriot does nog functionat all, or hardly.

    If it is very relevant, I do not know, but when a USA navy ship mistakenly shot down an Iranian airliner just at the 23rd or so effort the crew succeeded in entering the right codes into the missiles.

    Some historian wrote that power is merely bluff.
    British were flabbergasted when little yellow men sank two battle ships, the Repulse and the Prince of Wales, even more when supposed impregnable Singapore fell to yellow men advancing of bicycles throught the jungle.

    So how many missiles were intercepted, I do not know.
    That the USA would admit, if this was the truth, that two third haven been intercepted, impossible.

    In WWII Lindemann, Churchill’s scientific advisor, despite radar observations, denied that Germany would be able to send a missile up to 80 km height.
    Jones joked that is the British could not do it, maybe the Germans could.
    Churchill was not amused.

    That Germany nearly had a functioning hydrogen bomb early in 1945, very few are able to accept this fact.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Quartermaster
    The Germans weren't close to having a functioning fission weapon, much less a thermonuke. David Irving deals with this in his book "The Virus House." The allies found the German's last attempt at a nuclear reactor and if it had worked, everyone in the building would have been lethally irradiated.

    The "report" of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.
    , @nsa
    "but when a USA navy ship mistakenly shot down an Iranian airliner...."

    mistakenly?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Yes , the russians are correct .

    The western hollywoodians always lie .

    Western white man double tongue

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jesse James
    Several American Afros have lied for the US at the UN and to the US public while looking straight into the cameras on TV. African dictators also lie. Are you an anti-intellectual bigot?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. anonymous[107] • Disclaimer says:

    Col. Pat Lang at his best — explaining how military systems and strategies work.

    But Lang wrote: “It seems clear that US DoD was not privy to that IO project and for that Reason SECDEF Mattis was blind-sided by the deception.”

    That would not have happened if Mattis — and Trump — included Phil Giraldi and Unz forum, as well as Lang’s own SST in their daily intelligence diet.

    Phil Giraldi exposed the White Helmets almost a year ago –

    https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-fraud-of-the-white-helmets/

    Unz has provided a platform for Ron Paul’s Liberty Report interview of Vanessa Beeley’s reporting on Syria/White Helmets

    http://www.unz.com/video/ronpaullibertyreport_the-ngos-pushing-a-new-syria-war-with-guest-vanessa-beeley/

    and for Eva Bartlett’s on-the-scenes coverage of White Helmets activities in Syria.

    The Corbett Report can be found on the Unz Forum. Corbett painstakingly deconstructed a Guardian hit-piece on Beeley, Bartlett and Tim Anderson, reproducing the emails in which the Guardian journo accused those independent correspondents of collusion with a Russian propaganda effort

    https://steemit.com/news/@corbettreport/an-open-letter-to-olivia-solon

    Unz Forum also hosts the Jimmy Dore show which amplified a corporate-media interviews of Jeffrey Sachs, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_O2TRzA2ezk , who told (what is presumably) a large audience that US has been engaged in the deliberate destabilization of Syria and killing of Syrian citizens since at least 2012, (and that it should STOP!);

    Sachs named Operation Timber Sycamore,

    http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/scarier-than-john-bolton/#comment-2302872

    Three Green Berets were killed in Jordan as part of Timber Sycamore http://www.worldinwar.eu/timber-sycamore-the-cias-syrian-regime-change-operation/

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/world/middleeast/cia-syria-rebel-arm-train-trump.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=684B48451C194C2DD4F4ACB98226AA8B&gwt=pay

    Mattis knew none of this?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Phil Giraldi exposed the White Helmets almost a year ago –

    https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-fraud-of-the-white-helmets/

    Unz has provided a platform for Ron Paul’s Liberty Report interview of Vanessa Beeley’s reporting on Syria/White Helmets

    http://www.unz.com/video/ronpaullibertyreport_the-ngos-pushing-a-new-syria-war-with-guest-vanessa-beeley/

    and for Eva Bartlett’s on-the-scenes coverage of White Helmets activities in Syria.
     
    Is the Trump Administration/DoS trying to gaslight us?

    US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert yesterday: we "are very grateful for all the work the White Helmets continue to do.. on behalf of the US government and coalition forces.. I just exchanged emails with them the other day... peoples bills are still being paid..'

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/987297513974747136?s=20

     

    , @anonymous
    "Mattis knew none of this?"

    That Mr. Lang would think so seems even more clueless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. m___ says:

    Media, keeping scores, rigged experiments

    .

    False flags, needed, on both sides. In the West that means catching of-handed the media, all media, all alternative media, by infusing lies, firehosing bloat, short attention span snippets to decoy and on, nothing yet invented to the rescue. That seems to work still, since the public still baits the flying dung, a given, and the scribes and editors, the graphically endowed complying.

    Military back and forth, “arena” sports, pro-wresling, nothing more, nothing much. The better teams can as well play video games to see who “wins”. War is essentially obsolete, makes the superstructures of the war machines on all sides obsolete. The main reason is environmental toxicity which blows back with a vengeance, war having no impact on population numbers, war having an impact on migration numbers and directions though. The migration effects of local wasteland wars seems to be interpreted by dumb elites globally as desirable(herding and how to herd large numbers of humanoids), a learning experiment. Our guess, in the long term, an unefficient weapon.

    The information interchanges, essentially deciding on the rules of the local experiment, of the major players, open up views on how a global elite can function. For now in the early stages, but since global rule is unavoidable, an encouraging phenomenon.

    The back country, our “gens de rien”, our “deplorables” yet do not, will never, understand what is driving their sorry asses. The middle class of “shepherd dogs” tow the line of the de facto power, no independent thinking to be expected. The internet is as obfuscating as the printed press and TV ever was. Give or take, seventy percent of it ignorance of writer-editors, thirty percent of incapacitation to see anything but career and individual interests in the short term.

    Technology(hard and soft, as they go together) has been wrestled from the hands of independent players, the major example being Asssange, who had an impact on the exact granular outliers, where it matters, and has been put aside silently by the ones, the only ones that should be grateful and could have had an impact on using chaos of the masses, globally, to counter the dummer, short-term policies of the elites, and pressure for faster and cleaner global rule. The middle class as a whole sucks up to power, they have done so always historically.

    In all, the world goes well, the Chinese are ahead, the Russians and most independant power nuclei(Iran, Brasil(fell of the wagon), Turkey, most of Asia), now align themselves regarding systemic thinking. Nationalism of course is dead most local elites know this, even in the US, and probably Putin, the overt advertising to the Russians just a decoy. Sunny Islam has no rational stategy, and in the short term, bets everything on breeding.

    Consumerism(dead man walking), has truly dumbed down the masses globally, regarless of other factors. It has been the biggest success of capitalism Western style. Again the world goes well …for having global rule act more decisively, where it matters, to step up local experiments into global strategy, in the long term.

    The main problem to be addressed, since it affects all other burning issues, as ecological toxicity, and on, by reinforcing these positive tendencies. One single person less, has at least a fifty percent larger impact than any other measure of redress on survival of the human race per individual. The local experiments of global attitudes hopefully are a start to smarter elites behaviour. Our elites have failed for a long time now, anything progress has been a detour to decay and sludge, and timeliness is pressing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Excellent analysis. Thanks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. I think you mean 77th Brigade (a propaganda and psi ops unit).

    The 77th Regiment were the East Middlesex – and were disbanded in 1881.

    BTW, the 77th Brigade takes its number from the Chindits – Orde Wingate’s Indian Army special operations unit, who carried out deep penetration raids against the Japanese in Burma.

    Wingate was a rather fanatical Zionist and helped set-up the Haganah, the precedecessors of the IDF.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Patrick Lang
    You are correct. 77th Brigade, Denison Barracks Berkshire.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Randal says:

    My inclination has been to believe the Russian side from quite early on, mostly on the basis that the claimed US targeting spread simply doesn’t seem credible. To aim 76 missiles and guided bombs at the Barzeh “complex” seems ludicrous overkill, for a small group of basically civilian buildings that once were part of the chemical weapons program but according to recent OPCW inspections are no longer in use as such. The spread suggested by the Russians, on the other hand, seems much more credible for a punitive strike, especially if you assume the US did not expect Syrian only defences to work effectively and thus did not plan for much redundancy.

    As this becomes more widely accepted, it makes the US action in Syria much less of a defeat for Russia (because they had to stand by and watch their ally get pummelled) and much closer to something that is actually a win for Russia and an embarrassment for the US. It all helps to push the credibility of Russian air defences to still higher levels.

    If the Russian government goes through with the suggested plan to deliver the promised S300 systems to Syria in response, then this will have been a major defeat for those behind this shameful incident and this shameful war – primarily the Israelis and US Israeli lobby, along with the Saudis. Doing so would be the absolute best way to make those behind the attack grind their teeth in frustration, so hopefully Russia will go through with it this time rather than coming to some “compromise” with Israel.

    At some point, Russia needs to end the impunity Israel has to strike at Syria at will, and to declare an exclusion zone over the whole of Syria for all un-invited foreign air forces (ideally this would include a deal with Lebanon to allow that country also to exclude Israeli air operations from its own airspace). The need to rebuild Syria is endlessly hampered by regular attacks and the threat of them. Once the recovery of territory on the ground is complete or nearly so, the best way to do this would seem to be to first make the Syrian air defences, backed up by Russian forces in extremis, strong enough for the task. Then to authorise the Syrians to retaliate to Israeli strikes on a tit for tat basis with missile attacks on Israeli territory. Then to announce a full exclusion of US and other intruding air forces, perhaps in conjunction with an offensive to recover territories in the east after Idlib has been settled.

    Imo this is what the Russians need to do if they are to bring the Syrian matter to a successful conclusion, but it will mean some more tense confrontations with the various US sphere forces.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Yak-15
    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks. In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.

    It would be over rather quickly. Of course, the escalation could get extremely ugly for the Israelis but I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.
    , @Vojkan
    The Russians knew when they responded to Syria's plea for help that the operation wouldn't be a cakewalk and that the liberation of Syria would be a step by step process. So far, so good.
    , @seeing-thru
    I agree with, and like, much if what you write here but do wish to add two thoughts that are germane to my understanding of this whole Syria thing.
    1. You are quite correct in your reasoning as to why the Russian account of the missile’s interception is much more plausible. Additionally, although this point you did not bring up, we have to understand that Trump was practically forced to go through the motions of an attack, what with the hounds around him and the media barking non-stop for blood and more blood (doesn’t matter whose blood, just give us more blood, death, and destruction).
    2. You are quite right in saying that Russia needs to end the impunity that Israel has in bombing Syria. However, I feel (and fear) that the time may be past due. That is something that Putin should have done on day one as soon as Russia entered the Syrian picture. And it should have been done on grounds of international law and morality. After so many violations of so many countries by the USA/NATO, I believe if Russia had played its international PR cards right it would have roused up scores of countries and people. Those cards have been thrown away by the Russians and the world has sort of again resigned to the fact that the US has the right to intervene whenever it chooses to. For Russia to now deny Syrian airspace to Israel, US, and others will be politically iffy; the legal and moral high ground has been lost.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    Mr. Lang sounds like Mr. Buchanan in his latest piece published here: someone who considers himself dissident, but who thoughtlessly accepts that his Uncle Sam is the good guy.

    The article, especially this paragraph

    “The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding.”

    begs some questions:

    1. Does Mr. Lang support the attack on the alleged “Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites”? He sounds like he does. But why?

    2. Does Mr. Lang support US military conscription? He sounds like he does. But why?

    3. Does Mr. Lang believe that more money should be spent on US military equipment like Tomahawk missiles for use against the government forces of Syria and Russia? He sounds like he does. But why?

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as “interesting, important, and controversial,” with a “perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kafka
    Speaking of being the 'good guys':

    http://thesaker.is/ask-yourselves-are-we-the-bad-guys/

    makes a case of why we are in fact the bad guys.
    , @Kingfelix
    100% with you on this, I don't like the pro-USG sub-text of this piece either.
    , @Patrick Armstrong
    Why don't you re-read what he actually said? Think about it. Re-read. Think.Repeat. (PS it's not possible to put down every single thought that you have ever had in 1500 words). PPS re-read and think, research even.
    , @WJ
    My opinion - Lange didn't support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options. Mostly ineffective strike to satisfy the neocons. He has a good website that focuses on Syria.

    I don't know why he would support conscription, but I know why I would. There would have been no long term , or perhaps even short term Iraq war, if there were conscription with no exceptions. Middle class people sending their precious Brandons and Brittanys to a war as ridiculous as that debacle, would not have dragged on very long. I realize the war was fought by mostly middle class southerners but they were volunteers. Each and every one of them.

    Lange's views on Syria are 180 degrees from the MSM. The big networks are in lock step unison on the "Assad gassed his own people" story. No deviation. I wonder who is paying them.
    , @Alexandar
    16 Anonymous
    There is nothing in this article and paragraph related to your questions.
    You clearly try to smear Colonel Lang.
    Hope you are paid to do that.
    , @Randal

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as “interesting, important, and controversial,” with a “perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media.”
     
    Interesting and important are to some extent matters of personal taste and opinion, I suppose, though how anyone with an interest in current military and related activities in the ME could not find interesting the opinion of someone with Lang's bio (W. Patrick Lang) is difficult to understand. There's no necessity to agree with his opinions, either, to regard them as interesting or important.

    controversial,” with a “perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media.”
     
    As for these, as far as I can see Lang falls directly into these categories, having been largely excluded from the mainstream US TV and other news media precisely because his opinions aren't what the ruling neocon/pro-Israeli/pro-Saudi elite consensus wants to see broadcast to the general population.
    , @Anonymous
    "begs some questions:"

    It might even raise them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. “Are the Russians Correct?”

    Well, they can make stupid mistakes:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/04/25/loud-clear-commits-suicide/

    ^

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
    Oh yeah, 'on topic' ... there's this:

    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201804251063880424-syrian-army-air-defense/

    and this

    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201804251063884207-opcw-chemical-weapons-syria-damascus/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. tyrone says:

    Well, Trump won’t pulling out ,so I guess this rather ham handed operation worked,maybe the white helmets will get a no-bell piece prize.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Randal says:

    largely conducted by the UK info warriors of 77 Regiment

    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.

    However, I do feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades, from Kosovo to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria (along with pathetic propaganda scams such as the Skripal nonsense). These have been in no way glorious, and in no way necessary for the national interest, subordinate as they have been to the interests of foreign powers. The British government struts as though it is a force on the international scene, while clinging to the coat-tails of the US and currying favour pathetically with Gulf sunni despots and vicious Israeli thugs. Meanwhile it seemingly colludes with some of the worst elements in US politics to try to interfere in that country’s elections.

    The suspected involvement in black propaganda in Syria on behalf of jihadists is perhaps a new low in the activities of the British government.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Shahna

    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.
     
    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.

    In fact, I'm only surprised you now feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades ..... What? Bombs too graphic for you? Starving Yemeni children and brides dead by your ordinance waking you up? Perhaps it's just Syrian lies or the utter destruction Libya? Bully for you.

    From South Africa.
    , @Carroll Price
    As a conservative (or liberal) Englishman, you have a hell of a lot to be ashamed of. With the same being true for Americans who, if anything, are even worse.
    , @KA
    Last 2 decades are not any aberration . It is contnuation of the policies of the past., You could have said what you just did in 1920, 1950, and in 1970 and nothing would look out of place
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Ronald Thomas West
    "Are the Russians Correct?"

    Well, they can make stupid mistakes:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/04/25/loud-clear-commits-suicide/

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

    Many thanks, Colonel.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. Anonymous[201] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous
    Col. Pat Lang at his best -- explaining how military systems and strategies work.

    But Lang wrote: "It seems clear that US DoD was not privy to that IO project and for that Reason SECDEF Mattis was blind-sided by the deception."

    That would not have happened if Mattis -- and Trump -- included Phil Giraldi and Unz forum, as well as Lang's own SST in their daily intelligence diet.

    Phil Giraldi exposed the White Helmets almost a year ago --
    https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-fraud-of-the-white-helmets/

    Unz has provided a platform for Ron Paul's Liberty Report interview of Vanessa Beeley's reporting on Syria/White Helmets
    http://www.unz.com/video/ronpaullibertyreport_the-ngos-pushing-a-new-syria-war-with-guest-vanessa-beeley/

    and for Eva Bartlett's on-the-scenes coverage of White Helmets activities in Syria.

    The Corbett Report can be found on the Unz Forum. Corbett painstakingly deconstructed a Guardian hit-piece on Beeley, Bartlett and Tim Anderson, reproducing the emails in which the Guardian journo accused those independent correspondents of collusion with a Russian propaganda effort
    https://steemit.com/news/@corbettreport/an-open-letter-to-olivia-solon

    Unz Forum also hosts the Jimmy Dore show which amplified a corporate-media interviews of Jeffrey Sachs, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_O2TRzA2ezk , who told (what is presumably) a large audience that US has been engaged in the deliberate destabilization of Syria and killing of Syrian citizens since at least 2012, (and that it should STOP!);

    Sachs named Operation Timber Sycamore,
    http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/scarier-than-john-bolton/#comment-2302872

    Three Green Berets were killed in Jordan as part of Timber Sycamore http://www.worldinwar.eu/timber-sycamore-the-cias-syrian-regime-change-operation/
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/world/middleeast/cia-syria-rebel-arm-train-trump.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=684B48451C194C2DD4F4ACB98226AA8B&gwt=pay


    Mattis knew none of this?

    Phil Giraldi exposed the White Helmets almost a year ago –

    https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-fraud-of-the-white-helmets/

    Unz has provided a platform for Ron Paul’s Liberty Report interview of Vanessa Beeley’s reporting on Syria/White Helmets

    http://www.unz.com/video/ronpaullibertyreport_the-ngos-pushing-a-new-syria-war-with-guest-vanessa-beeley/

    and for Eva Bartlett’s on-the-scenes coverage of White Helmets activities in Syria.

    Is the Trump Administration/DoS trying to gaslight us?

    US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert yesterday: we “are very grateful for all the work the White Helmets continue to do.. on behalf of the US government and coalition forces.. I just exchanged emails with them the other day… peoples bills are still being paid..’

    Read More
    • Replies: @GourmetDan

    Is the Trump Administration/DoS trying to gaslight us?
     
    The whole world is gaslighting you...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Kafka says:
    @anonymous
    Mr. Lang sounds like Mr. Buchanan in his latest piece published here: someone who considers himself dissident, but who thoughtlessly accepts that his Uncle Sam is the good guy.

    The article, especially this paragraph

    "The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding."

    begs some questions:

    1. Does Mr. Lang support the attack on the alleged "Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites"? He sounds like he does. But why?

    2. Does Mr. Lang support US military conscription? He sounds like he does. But why?

    3. Does Mr. Lang believe that more money should be spent on US military equipment like Tomahawk missiles for use against the government forces of Syria and Russia? He sounds like he does. But why?

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as "interesting, important, and controversial," with a "perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media."

    Speaking of being the ‘good guys’:

    http://thesaker.is/ask-yourselves-are-we-the-bad-guys/

    makes a case of why we are in fact the bad guys.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous
    Col. Pat Lang at his best -- explaining how military systems and strategies work.

    But Lang wrote: "It seems clear that US DoD was not privy to that IO project and for that Reason SECDEF Mattis was blind-sided by the deception."

    That would not have happened if Mattis -- and Trump -- included Phil Giraldi and Unz forum, as well as Lang's own SST in their daily intelligence diet.

    Phil Giraldi exposed the White Helmets almost a year ago --
    https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-fraud-of-the-white-helmets/

    Unz has provided a platform for Ron Paul's Liberty Report interview of Vanessa Beeley's reporting on Syria/White Helmets
    http://www.unz.com/video/ronpaullibertyreport_the-ngos-pushing-a-new-syria-war-with-guest-vanessa-beeley/

    and for Eva Bartlett's on-the-scenes coverage of White Helmets activities in Syria.

    The Corbett Report can be found on the Unz Forum. Corbett painstakingly deconstructed a Guardian hit-piece on Beeley, Bartlett and Tim Anderson, reproducing the emails in which the Guardian journo accused those independent correspondents of collusion with a Russian propaganda effort
    https://steemit.com/news/@corbettreport/an-open-letter-to-olivia-solon

    Unz Forum also hosts the Jimmy Dore show which amplified a corporate-media interviews of Jeffrey Sachs, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_O2TRzA2ezk , who told (what is presumably) a large audience that US has been engaged in the deliberate destabilization of Syria and killing of Syrian citizens since at least 2012, (and that it should STOP!);

    Sachs named Operation Timber Sycamore,
    http://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/scarier-than-john-bolton/#comment-2302872

    Three Green Berets were killed in Jordan as part of Timber Sycamore http://www.worldinwar.eu/timber-sycamore-the-cias-syrian-regime-change-operation/
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/world/middleeast/cia-syria-rebel-arm-train-trump.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=684B48451C194C2DD4F4ACB98226AA8B&gwt=pay


    Mattis knew none of this?

    “Mattis knew none of this?”

    That Mr. Lang would think so seems even more clueless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Patrick Lang
    Some of you do not understand the degree of compartmentation in government. It is nothing like a monolith. The WHs are largely funded by USAID which is part of State Department, and administered by the UK. There is no particular reason why Mattis would know much about it. It is possible that Trump doesn't know much about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. @Diversity Heretic
    The B-52 first flew in 1952 and entered service in 1955. I have never heard that Air Force aircraft numbering is based on year first flown or entry into service and doubt that that is the case.

    You are correct. The 52 first flew much earlier.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vidi

    You are correct. The 52 first flew much earlier [than 1952].
     
    According to Wikipedia, "The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. @jilles dykstra
    Reading the article what crosses my mind is a report by the USA institution that audits USA government spending, about the Patriot anti missile system.
    The report states that either the Patriot does nog functionat all, or hardly.

    If it is very relevant, I do not know, but when a USA navy ship mistakenly shot down an Iranian airliner just at the 23rd or so effort the crew succeeded in entering the right codes into the missiles.

    Some historian wrote that power is merely bluff.
    British were flabbergasted when little yellow men sank two battle ships, the Repulse and the Prince of Wales, even more when supposed impregnable Singapore fell to yellow men advancing of bicycles throught the jungle.

    So how many missiles were intercepted, I do not know.
    That the USA would admit, if this was the truth, that two third haven been intercepted, impossible.

    In WWII Lindemann, Churchill's scientific advisor, despite radar observations, denied that Germany would be able to send a missile up to 80 km height.
    Jones joked that is the British could not do it, maybe the Germans could.
    Churchill was not amused.

    That Germany nearly had a functioning hydrogen bomb early in 1945, very few are able to accept this fact.

    The Germans weren’t close to having a functioning fission weapon, much less a thermonuke. David Irving deals with this in his book “The Virus House.” The allies found the German’s last attempt at a nuclear reactor and if it had worked, everyone in the building would have been lethally irradiated.

    The “report” of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    It was a hydrogen fusion bomb primed by ordinary explosives.
    Just three German phycisists were developing the bomb, one of them a jew.
    Compare this to the 30.000 man Manhattan project.
    On the Prague airport two converted Heinkels stood ready to drop the first bomb on the Ural hydroelectric plants, to stop tank production.
    Rudel was to drop the bomb.
    He did not well know what it was, called it an atomic bomb.
    An emissonary of Mussolini witnessed a succesfull trial.
    An area of a few square kilometres was destroyed.
    Rainer Karlsch, 'Hitlers Bom, Hoe Nazi-Duitsland nucleaire wapens testte in een wanhopige poging om de oorlog te winnen, Tielt, 2005 (Hitlers Bombe, München)
    Hans-Ulrich Rudel, ´Mein Kriegstagebuch, Aufzeichnungen eines Stukafliegers’, 1983, 2006 Dresden
    In
    Walter Dornberger, Peenemünde, Die Geschichte der V-Waffen, Esslingen 1981, 2003
    Dornberger writes that during a visit there Hitler said he had to apologise to two people, one of them Dornberger.
    I long wondered who the second was, until I read the book about the hydrogen book.
    In early 1945 Hitler's hope for turning the war were based on this bomb.
    , @Svigor

    The “report” of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.
     
    There's a lot of the "this food is terrible, and the portions are so small" stuff from the flatheads. One minute they're shitting their pants over how the US is "forcing" Russia to develop all these new nuclear delivery systems because of our ABM defense capabilities and deployments, the next they're guffawing about how ineffective our ABM capabilities and deployments are.
    , @Thirdeye
    There's a reason why 400% redundancy is in the doctrine of intercepting with the Patriot system. Despite all the hype, its efficiency against the Scud during Desert Storm was low. And that was against sporadic launches of a large single-stage missile that made a big juicy tracking and proximity detonation target. A barrage of modern warheads would present a much more difficult situation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Whatever they do to fix their missiles they had better hurry. According to wikipedia sixty thousand Americans commit suicide every year – around 120 a day- and the number is rising.
    Pretty soon they are going to start running out of people to fix them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  28. A lot of fake news in this column.

    It is wise to take Russian claims with a ton of salt. Because of the poor performance of the S-400 system, the Russians are now shipping the S-300 to Syria. It has also been reported that the Russians are shipping heavy armor to Syria. Putin isn’t withdrawing, he’s doubling down.

    Putin’s Russia has become like the USSR, a disinformation operation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    But I live in a country that loudly proclaims they don't but does . . . .


    One can gave faults, but one cannot very well be a kettle calling others pots all the while claiming they are really Tupperware leading a life of better example.

    , @Jesse James
    You are amusing. The Patriot system has been discredited by the Israelis who published their findings after the First Bush Regime War Against Iraq. The US-UK-FRA will illegally strike Syria's cities and it's people again, and we will again get to see who lies the most.
    , @Twodees Partain
    If something is to be dismissed as being insignificant, you would take it with a grain of salt. Saying that it should be taken with a ton of salt is meaningless. I take everything you post with a grain of salt, because your attempts at disinformation are insignificant.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. Shahna says:

    “Who should we believe?”

    Perhaps it’s easier to work out who we should not believe.
    Over and above the sublime claim that 100% of missiles fired hit 100% of their targets (likely a first in the history of modern warfare) we are also expected to believe that 70+ missiles hit 3 buildings in close proximity to eachother at Barzeh – and left the foundations intact.

    But that’s only 2 impossible things before breakfast – I guess I still have 4 to go.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus

    70+ missiles . . . hit three buildings . . . and left the foundations intact.
     
    Ah but you see, all that firepower was concentrated on burning up the toxic plume to prevent "collateral damage."

    Steve Russell, R-OK and a member of the "Warriors Caucus," appeared on C Span on Apr 18, 2018, ~15:30 on timeline
    https://www.c-span.org/video/?444201-5/washington-journal-representative-steve-russell-r-ok-discusses-congress-role-syria-conflict

    question:


    "If we bomb a factory making. . .chemical weapons . . . does that spread, does that release the chemical or biological factor in the environment?"
     
    Rep. Steve Russell's response:

    "This was part of the concerns when we did the strike on the three facilities. Now a couple of them were storage, but the one which was the research and development facility, there was a lot of concern when it was struck that it would not create a plume or a collateral damage, where if the chemicals were there, that it was — so the way that the attack was designed, you know, explosions and things do have a way of consuming other problems and I think when they look at striking this target that they did it in such a way that it would minimize collateral damage.

    You know, that is a real credit to the United States and to our other western civilized nations, but the United States in particular: no one goes through more pains to use weapons without causing undue human suffering and the taking of innocent life. Only the United States goes through the lengths we go through.

    And yet we see Russia, its indiscriminate air campaigns taking out hospitals, infrastructure, water works, public works, these types of things.

    Syria, with its barrel bombs wiping out entire apartment complexes and different things with just complete indiscrimination, we don’t do that.

    We spend a lot of money on missiles to get them right to the doorstep and this particular attack, We did take all of those things into account so there would not be those concerns that you raised. "
     

    Warrior Russell's other comments were equally cringe-worthy. If you've got half-an-hour to spare and a strong stomach, tune in at the link.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Diversity Heretic
    The B-52 first flew in 1952 and entered service in 1955. I have never heard that Air Force aircraft numbering is based on year first flown or entry into service and doubt that that is the case.

    You may be too young to remember it but the Douglas Aircraft Company’s DC-3 was first flown in 3 AD, during the reign of the Emperor Augustus, and entered service on the Danube Frontier a scant 18 months later. The rest is history…

    Read More
    • LOL: Carroll Price
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Shahna says:
    @Randal

    largely conducted by the UK info warriors of 77 Regiment
     
    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.

    However, I do feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades, from Kosovo to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria (along with pathetic propaganda scams such as the Skripal nonsense). These have been in no way glorious, and in no way necessary for the national interest, subordinate as they have been to the interests of foreign powers. The British government struts as though it is a force on the international scene, while clinging to the coat-tails of the US and currying favour pathetically with Gulf sunni despots and vicious Israeli thugs. Meanwhile it seemingly colludes with some of the worst elements in US politics to try to interfere in that country's elections.

    The suspected involvement in black propaganda in Syria on behalf of jihadists is perhaps a new low in the activities of the British government.

    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.

    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.

    In fact, I’m only surprised you now feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades ….. What? Bombs too graphic for you? Starving Yemeni children and brides dead by your ordinance waking you up? Perhaps it’s just Syrian lies or the utter destruction Libya? Bully for you.

    From South Africa.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.
     
    [Yawn]

    Show me a country whose ancestors have done nothing bad and I'll show you a country whose ancestors have done nothing. Meanwhile the British kick-started the industrial revolution, contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment (though not everyone would regard this as entirely a good thing), built a global empire from the unpromising start of a small, cold and wet island off Europe while kicking the backsides of most of the peoples they came up against around the world, in a time when there wasn't even the pretence of a "global rule of law", and played a big part in bringing civilisation and the modern world to Africa, especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.

    Plenty to be proud of and plenty to be embarrassed about, but on balance a pretty damned good performance.
    , @Svigor
    Hi. Just a friendly reminder, you are in a thread thick with flatheads, descendants of the people who subjugated and murdered central Asians, stole their land, raped their women, etc.
    , @dearieme
    "those who invented the concentration camp": oh God this rubbish again. The first use of concentration camps, so called, was by the Spanish in Cuba, the second by the Americans in the Philippines. None of these camps - Spanish, US, or British - were concentration camps in Hitler's sense. Why do you repeat Nazi propaganda?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. @Quartermaster
    The Germans weren't close to having a functioning fission weapon, much less a thermonuke. David Irving deals with this in his book "The Virus House." The allies found the German's last attempt at a nuclear reactor and if it had worked, everyone in the building would have been lethally irradiated.

    The "report" of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.

    It was a hydrogen fusion bomb primed by ordinary explosives.
    Just three German phycisists were developing the bomb, one of them a jew.
    Compare this to the 30.000 man Manhattan project.
    On the Prague airport two converted Heinkels stood ready to drop the first bomb on the Ural hydroelectric plants, to stop tank production.
    Rudel was to drop the bomb.
    He did not well know what it was, called it an atomic bomb.
    An emissonary of Mussolini witnessed a succesfull trial.
    An area of a few square kilometres was destroyed.
    Rainer Karlsch, ‘Hitlers Bom, Hoe Nazi-Duitsland nucleaire wapens testte in een wanhopige poging om de oorlog te winnen, Tielt, 2005 (Hitlers Bombe, München)
    Hans-Ulrich Rudel, ´Mein Kriegstagebuch, Aufzeichnungen eines Stukafliegers’, 1983, 2006 Dresden
    In
    Walter Dornberger, Peenemünde, Die Geschichte der V-Waffen, Esslingen 1981, 2003
    Dornberger writes that during a visit there Hitler said he had to apologise to two people, one of them Dornberger.
    I long wondered who the second was, until I read the book about the hydrogen book.
    In early 1945 Hitler’s hope for turning the war were based on this bomb.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Svigor

    It was a hydrogen fusion bomb primed by ordinary explosives.
    Just three German phycisists were developing the bomb, one of them a jew.
    Compare this to the 30.000 man Manhattan project.
     
    Well, the Manhattan project produced, you know, actual nukes.
    , @Quartermaster
    You can not get the pressure and heat required to set off a fusion without a fission weapon at the heart. The Germans were no where near producing a nuke of the fission variety, much less a fusion weapon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Kingfelix says:
    @anonymous
    Mr. Lang sounds like Mr. Buchanan in his latest piece published here: someone who considers himself dissident, but who thoughtlessly accepts that his Uncle Sam is the good guy.

    The article, especially this paragraph

    "The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding."

    begs some questions:

    1. Does Mr. Lang support the attack on the alleged "Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites"? He sounds like he does. But why?

    2. Does Mr. Lang support US military conscription? He sounds like he does. But why?

    3. Does Mr. Lang believe that more money should be spent on US military equipment like Tomahawk missiles for use against the government forces of Syria and Russia? He sounds like he does. But why?

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as "interesting, important, and controversial," with a "perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media."

    100% with you on this, I don’t like the pro-USG sub-text of this piece either.

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

    Maybe there is another possibility.
    Merely speculating.
    Mr. Trump claims he sent 100 plus missiles to impress whoever he needs to impress. They are satisfied. He looks tough.But he sends in only 20.
    The Russians claim he sent in 100 and they nullified 2/3. They look good.
    If 2/3 of 100 were nullified, should there not be more random craters with missile remnants or duds recovered by the Syrians?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. annamaria says:

    A word for Macron (aka micron): http://www.voltairenet.org/article200905.html
    “France continually stressed that it was not going to war against «Bachar’s regime» – comments that were immediately contradicted by Syria, which returned President el-Assad’s Grand Cross of the Légion d’Honneur … «There is no honour for President Assad in wearing a decoration attributed by a slave régime of the United States which supports terrorists », declared the Presidential spokesman. …
    … while the United States, France and the United Kingdom showed with this operation that they exist outside of international law, they also showed that their armies are not what they used to be.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  36. @MarkU
    I can think of two other important questions, what is the point of lying? and who exactly do they think they are fooling?

    Firstly it is worth saying that both sides are likely to exaggerate the effectiveness of their systems, deliberately or otherwise. Let us start with the US claim of 100% effectiveness of their weapons system and 0% of the Syrian/Russian systems, this is plainly nonsense. Even with no air defences at all a certain number of malfunctions would be expected to happen. The Syrian/Russian claims are also likely to be wrong, many of the claimed intercepts were just as likely to be malfunctions.

    So what is the point of lying?

    First off, a reputation for unreliability is bad for sales, pure and simple. Nobody is going to be enthusiastic about spending large amounts of money on stuff that doesn't work very well, this would apply equally to both sides.

    Secondly, the appetite of the general public for war in general and superpower confrontation in particular is going to be somewhat diminished if it is perceived that the other side is technologically equal or even superior. This factor is logically going to be more important to the side likely to initiate conflict.

    So who do they think they are fooling?

    Potential customers for weapons systems are usually not going to be naive enough to take the manufacturers claims at face value, they are likely to employ their own experts to assess the various claims. They will not be completely immune to deception of course.

    Each other. Neither side would want their opponents to have the best information available, for obvious reasons. It is notable that both sides appear to have declined to fully commit their latest equipment, the Russians in particular. It is likely that both sides have reasonably good intelligence on what happened, neither side is likely to be fooled easily.

    The general public are the most obvious targets of deception and the most easily fooled. It is one thing to risk a superpower conflict when your population in general is confident that you have a clear technological edge and are likely to escape the worst. It would be quite another matter to get the public on board if they believed they were up against a more or less equal opponent and were likely to get thoroughly nuked. Once again this logic applies far more strongly to the side likely to initiate a conflict for they are the ones who must manufacture consent. For this reason it would appear that the Russians have somewhat less motivation to lie than their US counterparts.

    Ohh stop being rational.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @anonymous
    Mr. Lang sounds like Mr. Buchanan in his latest piece published here: someone who considers himself dissident, but who thoughtlessly accepts that his Uncle Sam is the good guy.

    The article, especially this paragraph

    "The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding."

    begs some questions:

    1. Does Mr. Lang support the attack on the alleged "Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites"? He sounds like he does. But why?

    2. Does Mr. Lang support US military conscription? He sounds like he does. But why?

    3. Does Mr. Lang believe that more money should be spent on US military equipment like Tomahawk missiles for use against the government forces of Syria and Russia? He sounds like he does. But why?

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as "interesting, important, and controversial," with a "perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media."

    Why don’t you re-read what he actually said? Think about it. Re-read. Think.Repeat. (PS it’s not possible to put down every single thought that you have ever had in 1500 words). PPS re-read and think, research even.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    "PPS re-read and think, research even."

    OK, I started with Wikipedia. Not reliable, but often - for that reason - informative, especially when a relatively obscure person has a lengthy entry that he appears to have worked on himself. And here's what I think.

    1. Why the photo in dark sunglasses looking 85 degrees away?

    2. There's a cryptic, self-serving passage about his registration "on advice of counsel" as a foreign agent, and subsequent de-registration. Did he stumble in the revolving door when he retired?

    3. There's some overlong plugging of his three works of historical fiction, what one might see on the dust jackets. Embarrassing.

    4. Can anyone provide any details on his falling out with the admirable Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity over "policy"? Wiki says that a citation is needed about that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. WJ says:
    @anonymous
    Mr. Lang sounds like Mr. Buchanan in his latest piece published here: someone who considers himself dissident, but who thoughtlessly accepts that his Uncle Sam is the good guy.

    The article, especially this paragraph

    "The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding."

    begs some questions:

    1. Does Mr. Lang support the attack on the alleged "Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites"? He sounds like he does. But why?

    2. Does Mr. Lang support US military conscription? He sounds like he does. But why?

    3. Does Mr. Lang believe that more money should be spent on US military equipment like Tomahawk missiles for use against the government forces of Syria and Russia? He sounds like he does. But why?

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as "interesting, important, and controversial," with a "perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media."

    My opinion – Lange didn’t support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options. Mostly ineffective strike to satisfy the neocons. He has a good website that focuses on Syria.

    I don’t know why he would support conscription, but I know why I would. There would have been no long term , or perhaps even short term Iraq war, if there were conscription with no exceptions. Middle class people sending their precious Brandons and Brittanys to a war as ridiculous as that debacle, would not have dragged on very long. I realize the war was fought by mostly middle class southerners but they were volunteers. Each and every one of them.

    Lange’s views on Syria are 180 degrees from the MSM. The big networks are in lock step unison on the “Assad gassed his own people” story. No deviation. I wonder who is paying them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Patrick Lang
    Lang not Lange I do not support conscription because I am a professional soldier and I do not like to see amateurs in my metier. As for those here who object to my being an American patriot. I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America. My blog does not focus on Syria any more than it does on anything else that interests me.
    , @RobinG
    "Lange didn’t support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options."

    Better than the option of allowing a real investigation? Which would likely show that there was
    a) No chemical attack on the medical clinic (as claimed by some), nor on the neighborhood from which people came to that clinic, and
    b) An intentional poisoning of hostages in some discreet location, done by "rebels" to accuse SAA and facilitate US attack.

    The US might not be able to admit the extent to which they've [intentionally] supported ISIS, but with the mounting evidence that the Douma incident was a fabrication, they should be able to throw the White Helmets under the bus.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Alexandar says:
    @anonymous
    Mr. Lang sounds like Mr. Buchanan in his latest piece published here: someone who considers himself dissident, but who thoughtlessly accepts that his Uncle Sam is the good guy.

    The article, especially this paragraph

    "The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding."

    begs some questions:

    1. Does Mr. Lang support the attack on the alleged "Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites"? He sounds like he does. But why?

    2. Does Mr. Lang support US military conscription? He sounds like he does. But why?

    3. Does Mr. Lang believe that more money should be spent on US military equipment like Tomahawk missiles for use against the government forces of Syria and Russia? He sounds like he does. But why?

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as "interesting, important, and controversial," with a "perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media."

    16 Anonymous
    There is nothing in this article and paragraph related to your questions.
    You clearly try to smear Colonel Lang.
    Hope you are paid to do that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    Wow, this new author has brought along some sensitive wingmen.

    No, I’m not paid. Nor have I smeared anyone. I like this website and often comment when I read something that seems especially good or bad.

    In his first piece published here, Mr. Lang apparently used quotation marks around something that he was paraphrasing, and rather poorly at that. We don’t know, because he declined to address the point, even though some of us did in comments that he seems to be reviewing closely.

    In this, his second piece published here, he has been sloppy in conveying what we’re then told he has addressed elsewhere in opposition to the wrongful warmongering of a government that he nevertheless served for decades. My impression is that he’s a company man, with appeal predominantly to others that naively romanticize the military component of the Establishment, especially of their time in its employ.

    So at this point, Mr. Lang seems below the level of most authors published here. But at least he responds (to some extent) to criticism. And I hope to be complimenting him here if his future work is better. But when he bristles that “I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America,” I won’t be getting my hopes up too high.

    Please consider confining your future comments to the substantive.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Yak-15 says:
    @Randal
    My inclination has been to believe the Russian side from quite early on, mostly on the basis that the claimed US targeting spread simply doesn't seem credible. To aim 76 missiles and guided bombs at the Barzeh "complex" seems ludicrous overkill, for a small group of basically civilian buildings that once were part of the chemical weapons program but according to recent OPCW inspections are no longer in use as such. The spread suggested by the Russians, on the other hand, seems much more credible for a punitive strike, especially if you assume the US did not expect Syrian only defences to work effectively and thus did not plan for much redundancy.

    As this becomes more widely accepted, it makes the US action in Syria much less of a defeat for Russia (because they had to stand by and watch their ally get pummelled) and much closer to something that is actually a win for Russia and an embarrassment for the US. It all helps to push the credibility of Russian air defences to still higher levels.

    If the Russian government goes through with the suggested plan to deliver the promised S300 systems to Syria in response, then this will have been a major defeat for those behind this shameful incident and this shameful war - primarily the Israelis and US Israeli lobby, along with the Saudis. Doing so would be the absolute best way to make those behind the attack grind their teeth in frustration, so hopefully Russia will go through with it this time rather than coming to some "compromise" with Israel.

    At some point, Russia needs to end the impunity Israel has to strike at Syria at will, and to declare an exclusion zone over the whole of Syria for all un-invited foreign air forces (ideally this would include a deal with Lebanon to allow that country also to exclude Israeli air operations from its own airspace). The need to rebuild Syria is endlessly hampered by regular attacks and the threat of them. Once the recovery of territory on the ground is complete or nearly so, the best way to do this would seem to be to first make the Syrian air defences, backed up by Russian forces in extremis, strong enough for the task. Then to authorise the Syrians to retaliate to Israeli strikes on a tit for tat basis with missile attacks on Israeli territory. Then to announce a full exclusion of US and other intruding air forces, perhaps in conjunction with an offensive to recover territories in the east after Idlib has been settled.

    Imo this is what the Russians need to do if they are to bring the Syrian matter to a successful conclusion, but it will mean some more tense confrontations with the various US sphere forces.

    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks. In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.

    It would be over rather quickly. Of course, the escalation could get extremely ugly for the Israelis but I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.

    Read More
    • Agree: L.K
    • LOL: Vojkan
    • Replies: @Mulegino1
    Despite overwhelming numerical superiority, complete control of the air and a naval presence, the mighty IDF were unable to dislodge a few hundred or so light infantrymen in Southern Lebanon- who had no tanks, heavy artillery or aircraft.

    Everyone knows that Israel is a paper tiger. The IDF are quite successful when engaging teenagers throwing rocks, but otherwise, they are a spent force which cannot fight its way out of a paper bag without massive US support.

    Those yellow flags flying defiantly on the southern Lebanese border may not be intended to symbolize the cowardliness and weakness of the IDF, but they just as well ought to.
    , @Randal

    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks.
     
    Presumably it wouldn't be a bluff, and presumably the need for it not to be a bluff is why the Russians haven't done it yet.


    In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.
     
    This appears to be pure fantasy.

    Regardless, Israel isn't going to go to war with Russia merely to defend its freedom to attack Syria any time it wants. For all the wailing by Israel advocates, it just isn't that important to them. So long as they can get away with it, they'll do it. When they are forced to stop, they'll stop.

    I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.
     
    Israel's existence is not meaningfully threatened by the loss of their ability to launch illegal attacks on Syria at will. The idea that it is, is a lie put about by the Israel lobby to rationalise and justify its actions.
    , @redmudhooch
    I think you mean the Americans would, pull American troops out of Israel/ME, cut off Israels multi-billion taxpayer funded welfare checks, Israel will sit down and shut up. Count on it.
    , @annamaria
    "... The Israelis would absolutely massacre..."
    -- You have been too much into slaughtering the unarmed and caged natives. What are the IDF' latest achievements? Killing another well-known journalist wearing press jacket and killing another Palestinian boy that was not even close to the ghetto border?
    As for "Israel' existence.." - it is all about the Eretz Israel by any means. Millions of human beings died in the Middle East because of the ziocons' policies. Libya is destroyed. Iraq is destroyed. Syria has been fighting for her survival against the rapacious parasitoid that has been dreaming about world domination since capturing the US. And who is going to provide the moral rationale for the "existence?" -- The Moldovan, Ukrainian, and Bolgarian thugs in Knesset. Tragicomedy.
    , @L.K
    Ooops, I hit the Agree button by mistake!

    Your post is ridiculous and I meant LOL.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. I am not in favor of any of your three propositions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. @Anonymous

    Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription.
     
    Welfare. One large jobs program. It is impossible to come up with a scenario where the U.S. would need or would commit to a large ground campaign. But hey, I’m all for growing this social program, it might take money away from creating more white elephant weapon systems. I’d rather have the obscene DoD dollars actually help real people, lower-middle class Americans, than pay Jack Keane several hundred $k to sit on the boards of multiple Beltway bandits.

    The maintenance of a body of ground troops designed to conduct expeditionary overseas requires a much larger force than that to be projected because of the impossibility of maintaining the force overseas indefinitely. Units must be rotated. Units must be trained outside the theater of operations, etc. The key to javing a smaller army and marine corps is to have a different, non-interventionist foreign policy. This has nothing to do with “welfare” for the deplorables. The great costs in an all volunteer force are down stream retirement costs, medical costs and the VA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Svigor
    A big part of the "welfare" is corporate. Boeing, Lockheed, etc.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @anonymous
    "Mattis knew none of this?"

    That Mr. Lang would think so seems even more clueless.

    Some of you do not understand the degree of compartmentation in government. It is nothing like a monolith. The WHs are largely funded by USAID which is part of State Department, and administered by the UK. There is no particular reason why Mattis would know much about it. It is possible that Trump doesn’t know much about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Herald
    If Mattis didn't know about it, then he should have done and likewise with Trump. Ignorance of the hard facts by either of these men is scarcely believable and even if true would be totally inexcuseable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @jimmyriddle
    I think you mean 77th Brigade (a propaganda and psi ops unit).

    The 77th Regiment were the East Middlesex - and were disbanded in 1881.

    BTW, the 77th Brigade takes its number from the Chindits - Orde Wingate's Indian Army special operations unit, who carried out deep penetration raids against the Japanese in Burma.

    Wingate was a rather fanatical Zionist and helped set-up the Haganah, the precedecessors of the IDF.

    You are correct. 77th Brigade, Denison Barracks Berkshire.

    Read More
    • Replies: @skrik
    Ah! All that 'deep background' may well explain the 'standard' Berkshire rhyming slang...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. nsa says:
    @jilles dykstra
    Reading the article what crosses my mind is a report by the USA institution that audits USA government spending, about the Patriot anti missile system.
    The report states that either the Patriot does nog functionat all, or hardly.

    If it is very relevant, I do not know, but when a USA navy ship mistakenly shot down an Iranian airliner just at the 23rd or so effort the crew succeeded in entering the right codes into the missiles.

    Some historian wrote that power is merely bluff.
    British were flabbergasted when little yellow men sank two battle ships, the Repulse and the Prince of Wales, even more when supposed impregnable Singapore fell to yellow men advancing of bicycles throught the jungle.

    So how many missiles were intercepted, I do not know.
    That the USA would admit, if this was the truth, that two third haven been intercepted, impossible.

    In WWII Lindemann, Churchill's scientific advisor, despite radar observations, denied that Germany would be able to send a missile up to 80 km height.
    Jones joked that is the British could not do it, maybe the Germans could.
    Churchill was not amused.

    That Germany nearly had a functioning hydrogen bomb early in 1945, very few are able to accept this fact.

    “but when a USA navy ship mistakenly shot down an Iranian airliner….”

    mistakenly?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Patrick Lang
    nsa

    No, panic. The CO of the Vincennes clearly had in mind the destruction of the career of the captain of USS Stark.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. None of this is of any help to Putin. He’s still irreversibly bogged down in Syria and if US weapons are as inefficient as the Russians claim, then they’ll just have to be improved. And if the whole thing was a scam cooked up between Trump and Putin to fool the American public then that just digs Trump even deeper into Russiagate. From Trump’s point of view, the only scenario that helps him is: 1) the Syrian chemical attack took place, 2) the US missiles did substantial damage and 3) there was no collusion with Russia. Trump has already shot himself in the foot by backing off on sanctions. I don’t think Nikki Haley got it wrong. Sanctions were agreed on at the meeting, as she announced, but somewhere after the announcement, Trump backed off for a reason we are not being told and Kudlow, probably on his own iniative, messed the whole thing up by attacking Haley. It’s possible that Trump only then discovered that the whole thing had been a scam but until he comes clean, people will assume that it’s a new, and far more serious, example of Trump’s collusion with Putin. And if it was a scam, the purpose was probably to discredit the Skipral investigation, which in its turn points the accusing finger staright at Putin. Thus, however all this plays out, both Trump and Putin are losers and the winners are those demanding tougher action against Putin (in Ukraine, for example).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cold N. Holefield
    Great comment. I agree completely. Couldn't have said it better myself.

    Trump wants an Autocracy like Xi & Putin have. Think about it. He's a Billionaire. He's accustomed to getting what he wants when he wants it and now he wants his very own Autocracy and a Moronic Army of Numbnuts who call themselves Patriots, but are ironically instead Traitors, are willing to do the Heavy Lifting needed to make that happen.

    Despite what ultimately happens with Trump, his Ascension from Billionaire Reality TV Show Host to POTUS has been instructive. It has exposed the Traitors. The question now is, what do we do with the Traitors? They're not going to stop of their own volition. They will need to be put down in some form, otherwise they will keep at it until America transforms itself into an Autocratic Russian Vassal State ruled by Putin's Bitch Boy Oligarchs.
    , @General Giap
    In which Michael Kenny tries to provoke everyone with the hot buttons that drive statists like him crazy. Bogged down. You know, like in Korea, and Vietnam, and Somalia, and Afghanistan. Except this time it's not US loser chumps bogged down, it's Putin who's bogged down, nyah, nyah (he means Russia, not Putin, and strictly speaking the СБРФ, though he doesn't know what that is, but statist propagandists try to personalize everything for better emotional manipulation.)

    Only СБРФ is supporting the host nation with optimal efficiency, systematically rolling up CIA's armed irregulars with extraordinary attention to protection of civilians, and routing CIA's clandestine war of aggression while effectively inhibiting US escalation. It's a tour de force, and all US statists with 3-digit IQs are shitting bricks.

    Kenny is naturally fixated on Russiagate, that being the original Red-Scare neurosis of the US CIA regime, which has flared up again as CIA gets crushed and humiliated in Syria and Ukraine. Except Russiagate's going to go away just like Chinagate did. Oh, you don't remember Chinagate? Of course you don't. Nobody gives a rat's.

    https://thebaffler.com/latest/is-trump-the-new-clinton-al-gharbi

    Followed by lots of white-noise speculation with a non sequitur tacked on, you know what it is by now: in any case it's all terrible for Putin and Trump [because they're the same.]

    And you wonder why Russia is kicking the CIA's ass. Russian government staff have got 20 IQ points on their opposite numbers from Putin on down. That's because all the smart Americans go into theft and fraud for investment banks.
    , @annamaria
    Out of curiosity, had you been contacted to co-author the Steele Dossier?
    It is also extremely touching to read how much you admire the "I-am-not-confused" Nikki Haley.
    As for your brilliant thoughts on the Skripal Affair, the readers are left reassured that you have never studied that messy chemistry.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Erebus

    Nevertheless, most of the missiles failed and that failure must be dealt with.
     
    FWIW, Twitter reports coming from "crater-counting missile chasers" in Syria indicate that the situation is much, much worse than even the Russian reports. They reported intercepting 70-odd missiles, but said little about the 30-odd they didn't intercept.

    If the half dozen guys going from site to site counting craters and estimating how many missiles hit an ostensible target are to be believed, the numbers drop precipitously - ranging from 10-15 with the spread centred around a dozen. That number is commensurate with the damage we've seen, whereas 30+ isn't and 105 hits has no connection to reality. Apparently 2 were found more or less intact, having probably run out of fuel after losing their targeting functions.

    If the USM is looking at a 10-15% success rate, even without direct Russian AD action (they apparently provided only radar tracking & data integration), their ability to execute anything less than an all-in stand-off attack has effectively been neutralized. Not only were 2/3 of the missiles intercepted kinetically, 2/3 of the ones that got through succumbed to either electronic counter measures or to malfunction. If these reports are true, the Pentagon brain trusts are shitting pyramids as they look at the post-attack assessments.

    That also greatly exacerbates the USM's vulnerability to a stand-off counterattack, especially salvoes of modern Russian missiles against which the US has no effective defence. Other than the fact that the USM can probably present more targets than the Russians have missiles, they'd be completely annihilated. Maybe that's their strategy and explains why they're spending all that money building targets.

    against which the US has no effective defence.

    And here is a conundrum–most US policy-makers sincerely believe (it is expected from them–most of them are badly educated) in the narrative of “invulnerability” of the US assets in Europe and Asia through THAAD, Patriot-PAC 3 and other anti-air-missile defenses. This is dangerous, because those systems do not work but belief in their efficiency may create a desire to attack Russians or someone else and may escalate immediately with really bad consequences for the American assets. Considering US inherent bias towards nukes’ use one has to tread these waters cautiously and literally peel away, layer by layer, American myth of military-technological superiority, until US policy-makers get the message and either completely bankrupt country trying to “catch up” (they will not) or, finally, get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    Let us hope that the US military have more brains than the US policy makers and that they have the guts to speak truth to the morons.
    , @Erebus

    ... belief in their efficiency may create a desire to attack Russians or someone else and may escalate...
     
    As Mark Twain said: "It ain't what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."
    , @anonymous

    get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.
     
    I'm not very sanguine about that. American policy has been premised on being able to sail around the world and act unilaterally as it sees fit, using force whenever it wants to. This course has been in motion for the past 120 years since the Spanish-American war (if one can call it that). See the pattern? Reversing this would require a very fundamental change on many different levels, something that would not be achievable barring some extremely strong leadership which seems unlikely to arise under current conditions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Vojkan says:
    @El Dato
    Sounds like a plausible résumé.

    However, how does that work:

    The radars detect their incoming targets, the jammers disrupt the navigation systems of the missiles and in many Russian systems then give the missiles a new and harmless target.
     
    What exactly can you jam? Is this about spoofing the GPS information? Do these robots have no intertial guidance / terrain reconnaisance systems?

    Terrain reconnaissance doesn’t give geolocation and missiles need geolocation to reach targets. Inertial navigation is based on ‘guesstimating’ position. Satellite guidance helps the guess being much more accurate.
    Yet, jamming the GPS beams to make the T-hawks get lost, I grasp. Providing them with new targets, I don’t know, maybe the Russians have the capacity to feed them with fake GPS beams.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kiza
    The terrain recognition (it is not reconnaissance) is one of the features of Tomahawks. But apparently the precision of the hit can suffer if GPS has been spoofed and the missile computer relies only on terrain recognition and gyros.

    The way GPS is spoofed is a matter of debate and a military secret. There are indications that there is false signal feeding, which appears to have delivered the most modern US drone to the Iranians back a few years ago.

    Overall, these Tomahawks were being both shot-down and were failing at a very high rate. Most of them must have been close to expiry (shoot, refurbish or decomission). Finally, it is clear that the age of subsonic cruise missiles is finished, they are simply an obsolete weapon, the spruced up but still the German V1 from WW2.

    Finally, the main difference between the upgraded old Soviet AA defence that Syrians used and the most modern Russian S300VM and S400 is that the new ones could not be easily overwhelmed. To overwhelmed an integrated system based on S300VM, S400 and Russian AWACS planes the West would have to launch simulateously more than 1000 cruise missiles, possibly even several thousand missiles (swarming) which is a very difficult task to do. But defenses against cruise missiles and ballistic missiles are two totally different games, the latter being much more difficult.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Nate 43 says:

    Why would you want our missiles to work against the Russians? This debacle has given us at least another six months of relative peace. The SAA can now continue clearing out jihadist in the East. FUKUS won’t try again after making some adjustments to harden the electronics, but that will take some time. The only other option would be an overwhelming attack, winning through sheer numbers, but in that case the Russians will certainly counterattack, & I don’t think CENTCOM wants to find out first hand how effective Russian offensive missiles systems are.

    Note: If I were to guess, the Tomahawk attack was almost completely neutralized. It was the B-1, firing at relatively close range, that scored the hit on the “chemical weapons complex.” This is why the Russians are sending the S-300 to Damascus.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. Vojkan says:
    @Randal
    My inclination has been to believe the Russian side from quite early on, mostly on the basis that the claimed US targeting spread simply doesn't seem credible. To aim 76 missiles and guided bombs at the Barzeh "complex" seems ludicrous overkill, for a small group of basically civilian buildings that once were part of the chemical weapons program but according to recent OPCW inspections are no longer in use as such. The spread suggested by the Russians, on the other hand, seems much more credible for a punitive strike, especially if you assume the US did not expect Syrian only defences to work effectively and thus did not plan for much redundancy.

    As this becomes more widely accepted, it makes the US action in Syria much less of a defeat for Russia (because they had to stand by and watch their ally get pummelled) and much closer to something that is actually a win for Russia and an embarrassment for the US. It all helps to push the credibility of Russian air defences to still higher levels.

    If the Russian government goes through with the suggested plan to deliver the promised S300 systems to Syria in response, then this will have been a major defeat for those behind this shameful incident and this shameful war - primarily the Israelis and US Israeli lobby, along with the Saudis. Doing so would be the absolute best way to make those behind the attack grind their teeth in frustration, so hopefully Russia will go through with it this time rather than coming to some "compromise" with Israel.

    At some point, Russia needs to end the impunity Israel has to strike at Syria at will, and to declare an exclusion zone over the whole of Syria for all un-invited foreign air forces (ideally this would include a deal with Lebanon to allow that country also to exclude Israeli air operations from its own airspace). The need to rebuild Syria is endlessly hampered by regular attacks and the threat of them. Once the recovery of territory on the ground is complete or nearly so, the best way to do this would seem to be to first make the Syrian air defences, backed up by Russian forces in extremis, strong enough for the task. Then to authorise the Syrians to retaliate to Israeli strikes on a tit for tat basis with missile attacks on Israeli territory. Then to announce a full exclusion of US and other intruding air forces, perhaps in conjunction with an offensive to recover territories in the east after Idlib has been settled.

    Imo this is what the Russians need to do if they are to bring the Syrian matter to a successful conclusion, but it will mean some more tense confrontations with the various US sphere forces.

    The Russians knew when they responded to Syria’s plea for help that the operation wouldn’t be a cakewalk and that the liberation of Syria would be a step by step process. So far, so good.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Think of the trillions we’ve laid out for wars for Israel. Iraq and Afghanistan (which was to limit the influence and reach of Iran) have cost us trillions. We spend tens of billions in welfare handouts to Israel each year. Germany has paid Israel 1/10 of a trillion in reparations. When is this shit gonna end?? All this insanity so Jews— of w/ largely European genetics— can play country.

    [MORE]

    GERMAN CEO: ISRAEL SHOULD NO LONGER RELY ON GERMANY FOR ITS EXISTENCE

    https://m.jpost.com/International/German-CEO-Israel-should-no-longer-rely-on-Germany-for-its-existence-552571

    In an eye-popping commentary in the Die Welt newspaper last week, Mathias Döpfner, the pro-Israel CEO of the Axel Springer media conglomerate in Berlin, wrote that the Jewish state should no longer depend on Germany if it is attacked and its existence is on the line.

    Döpfner wrote that in the past, he would answer “Yes” to the inevitable question while visiting Israel about whether Germany would send weapons and soldiers if the Jewish state faced attacks that threatened its survival. However, over the last few years, he has started to hesitate. “Today, I would say: ‘Better to not rely on us,’” wrote Döpfner.

    The CEO of Europe’s largest media company listed a bill of particulars in his commentary outlining Germany’s failure to learn the important lessons from the Holocaust. He said for the 70th year anniversary of Israel’s founding, “Germany distinguishes itself as the world master of paying lip service. The solidarity to Israel and the fight against antisemitism take place on paper.”

    The media giant took Germany to task for its pacifism in the face of Syrian children being gassed.

    Döpfner said one frequently hears on the streets and in offices more criticism of US President Donald Trump, French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Theresa May for their bombing of military sites and airports in Syria than they do of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. The US, Britain and France accused Assad of using poison gas in April that murdered scores of Syrians in the city of Douma.

    He summed up the practical effect of Germany’s Holocaust remembrance culture: “In remembrance we are giants. In action and help we are dwarfs.”

    The Jerusalem Post reported in April that the Merkel administration continues to allow the Baden-Württemberg-based German company Krempel to conduct business with Iran, after it sold material to Iranian companies that later turned up in Iranian chemical rockets in the Damascus suburb of Eastern Ghouta, .

    Merkel has rejected the US administration’s push over the last few months to get Germany outlaw Hezbollah, which the US classifies as terrorist organization.

    According to German intelligence reports, there are 950 Hezbollah operatives in the Federal Republic.

    Döpfner blasted the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign) in Germany. He wrote “An international lobby organization calls for a boycott of Israeli products and no one gets upset in a country that 75 years ago scrawled ‘Don’t buy from Jews’ on the walls.”

    The Post exposed the Cologne-based Bank for Social Economy’s vigorous defense of BDS accounts used by groups to undercut Israel’s existence.

    Sammy Endzweig, the president of the pro-Israel group Keren Hayesod Germany, told the Post by email on Sunday that his organization is dissatisfied with the bank’s response to the BDS accounts it maintains.

    Endzweig said he plans to send a new letter to the bank demanding clear answers about the bank’s alleged antisemitic activity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @smellyoilandgas
    https://friendsofsyria.wordpress.com/

    a little evidence might help
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. The Zionist controlled U.S. gov lies about everything and especially about the wars the U.S. is fighting for Israel in the Mideast and so the Russians are right and approximately 75% of the missiles were shot down, liars lie, that is what the ziocons do.

    If anyone doubts that Israel controls the U.S. gov, just remember , Israel did 911 and got away with it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @DESERT FOX
    Actually, according to a report on Southfront.org today only 22 missiles hit their target, or 79% failed to hit the target.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Vojkan says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    against which the US has no effective defence.
     
    And here is a conundrum--most US policy-makers sincerely believe (it is expected from them--most of them are badly educated) in the narrative of "invulnerability" of the US assets in Europe and Asia through THAAD, Patriot-PAC 3 and other anti-air-missile defenses. This is dangerous, because those systems do not work but belief in their efficiency may create a desire to attack Russians or someone else and may escalate immediately with really bad consequences for the American assets. Considering US inherent bias towards nukes' use one has to tread these waters cautiously and literally peel away, layer by layer, American myth of military-technological superiority, until US policy-makers get the message and either completely bankrupt country trying to "catch up" (they will not) or, finally, get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.

    Let us hope that the US military have more brains than the US policy makers and that they have the guts to speak truth to the morons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EugeneGur

    the US military . . . have the guts to speak truth to the morons.
     
    The existence of which they so far failed to demonstrate. I don't see any reason to hope.
    , @Macon Richardson
    According to a recent post by The Saker, no one in the US military above the rank of colonel has either brains or guts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. Mulegino1 says:
    @Yak-15
    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks. In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.

    It would be over rather quickly. Of course, the escalation could get extremely ugly for the Israelis but I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.

    Despite overwhelming numerical superiority, complete control of the air and a naval presence, the mighty IDF were unable to dislodge a few hundred or so light infantrymen in Southern Lebanon- who had no tanks, heavy artillery or aircraft.

    Everyone knows that Israel is a paper tiger. The IDF are quite successful when engaging teenagers throwing rocks, but otherwise, they are a spent force which cannot fight its way out of a paper bag without massive US support.

    Those yellow flags flying defiantly on the southern Lebanese border may not be intended to symbolize the cowardliness and weakness of the IDF, but they just as well ought to.

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

    Indeed. We may never know what really happened, though. What is weird is just how divergent the claims are. The Syrians are claiming a success rate better than ANY air defense system has ever achieved in real combat. The Americans are claiming a 100% success rate for complex missiles of different makes, some of which have never been employed in combat before at all. It’s a puzzler.

    A few random thoughts though:

    1. If 70 cruise missiles or so had been intercepted or diverted, Syria should be littered with wrecked missiles. Where are they?

    2. If Syria really did achieve this success rate against a pre-planned saturation attack, this would largely eliminate the US ability to bomb countries it doesn’t like back to the stone age. This would completely gut the heart of current US strategy (if you could even dignify such chaos as ‘strategy’). This should have resulted in apoplexy by the US establishment, and a massive spike in orders for Russian air defense systems. So far, I’m not seeing that.

    3. The Americans claimed that the Syrians launched a bunch of interceptors after the attack was over. At first, that made no sense. But, if the Syrians really had been caught with their pants down, and they wanted to claim that they had shot down some missiles, they would have had to fire off some interceptors so that there would be witnesses seeing them launch. Sure, the Americans could be lying about this to make their claims more credible, but self-consistency is not a hallmark of American propaganda. On the other hand, the Syrians had apparently been warned ahead of time about the time and place of the attacks, so it’s hard to believe that they were taken by surprise. Again, it’s a puzzler.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kafka

    1. If 70 cruise missiles or so had been intercepted or diverted, Syria should be littered with wrecked missiles. Where are they?
     
    Spread out all over the countryside of a country that has been at war for 7 years now. That war has raged across most parts of the country. As a result it is littered with spent munitions and debris. Recognizing bits and pieces of downed cruise missiles when you happen to come across them requires skill. Both the syrians and russians have other issues at the moment that they'd rather address over scouring the empty fields, mountains, deserts and swamps of Syria for cruise missile remains.

    I get the impression that people who ask this question think that when a cruise missile gets 'intercepted' it lands more or less intact or at least recognizable as a cruise missile. It usually doesn't. So no, it's not strange that there are only limited remains of downed cruise missiles on display at the moment. The russians and syrians just don't have this need to prove themselves to that spoiled western audience that feels they deserve all the answers.
    , @siberiancat
    Russian MOD just had a briefing with a lot of bent metal on display, including a bunch of missile fragments with the shrapnel holes

    https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/4145770.html
    , @Aedib
    There are some wrecks:

    https://www.rt.com/news/425120-russia-shows-downed-missiles-syria/

    Anyway, take the "71 hits score" with a bag of salt. The 10-30 hits range seems to be the most likely.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @Michael Kenny
    None of this is of any help to Putin. He's still irreversibly bogged down in Syria and if US weapons are as inefficient as the Russians claim, then they'll just have to be improved. And if the whole thing was a scam cooked up between Trump and Putin to fool the American public then that just digs Trump even deeper into Russiagate. From Trump's point of view, the only scenario that helps him is: 1) the Syrian chemical attack took place, 2) the US missiles did substantial damage and 3) there was no collusion with Russia. Trump has already shot himself in the foot by backing off on sanctions. I don't think Nikki Haley got it wrong. Sanctions were agreed on at the meeting, as she announced, but somewhere after the announcement, Trump backed off for a reason we are not being told and Kudlow, probably on his own iniative, messed the whole thing up by attacking Haley. It's possible that Trump only then discovered that the whole thing had been a scam but until he comes clean, people will assume that it's a new, and far more serious, example of Trump's collusion with Putin. And if it was a scam, the purpose was probably to discredit the Skipral investigation, which in its turn points the accusing finger staright at Putin. Thus, however all this plays out, both Trump and Putin are losers and the winners are those demanding tougher action against Putin (in Ukraine, for example).

    Great comment. I agree completely. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    Trump wants an Autocracy like Xi & Putin have. Think about it. He’s a Billionaire. He’s accustomed to getting what he wants when he wants it and now he wants his very own Autocracy and a Moronic Army of Numbnuts who call themselves Patriots, but are ironically instead Traitors, are willing to do the Heavy Lifting needed to make that happen.

    Despite what ultimately happens with Trump, his Ascension from Billionaire Reality TV Show Host to POTUS has been instructive. It has exposed the Traitors. The question now is, what do we do with the Traitors? They’re not going to stop of their own volition. They will need to be put down in some form, otherwise they will keep at it until America transforms itself into an Autocratic Russian Vassal State ruled by Putin’s Bitch Boy Oligarchs.

    Read More
    • Troll: Miro23
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. So, a 100% success rate can’t be believed, it’s just too extreme. But Soviet era systems shooting down a large majority of modern weapons, well, that’s easy to believe. Nothing extreme about it at all.

    People mostly believe whichever extreme story supports their preconceived notions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    But Soviet era systems shooting down a large majority of modern weapons, well, that’s easy to believe. Nothing extreme about it at all.
     
    See the original article: these are "Soviet era systems" in the same way the B-52 is an "early Cold War" system. Framework might be largely the same, but capabilities hugely upgraded.

    People mostly believe whichever extreme story supports their preconceived notions.
     
    Indeed. Though there is also a tendency to believe neither and assume the truth must be somewhere in the middle.
    , @nate 43
    @ Ozymandias, TG

    This isn't complicated: the damage shown by the brass is not commiserate with 100+ missile strikes, not even close.

    Syrian defense systems on their own would not be able to intercept a cruise missile. However, with the help of Russian EW, which forces the Tomahawk to gain altitude, they can easily be targeted.

    Interference has always been the achilles heel of remote control warfare. As of now the code is broken. FUKUS can now either try again much later, or fight like MEN in manned aircraft over Syria & take causalities for a cause that the Israelis and the Saudis believe in.
    , @Patrick Lang
    Ozymandius

    "People mostly believe whichever extreme story supports their preconceived notions." I don't do that. I have a long history of not doing that. It cost me dearly in career terms. Once again, I am not guessing.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. why did the Russians allow Israel so much freedom in Syria..from the start of their Syrian project?

    I could never understand that..it seemed/seems so obviously contradictory and counter-productive.
    and why is Putin ever so conscious to ‘compromise’ with Israel – in Israel’s favor no less..all the time?

    oh my! these things make no sense in modern reality, nor in historical perspective. the Khazars have no reason to love Russia/Russians..indeed have every reason to hate them, and desire to eliminate Russia/Russians. and it seems clear the 1917 Revolution turned into a Khazar revenge for the destruction of old Khazaria with Russian collusion..not to mention the German invasion the intent of which surely was to destroy Russia, bring whatever remaining Russian rump to its knees in perpetual servitude..the Russian ‘Fatherland’ forever under rape of its resources by the global capitalists

    but this is not something I tear my hair out at the roots over. I think Putin is a fine politician and a very smart man..but he is still a politician. and as per the way politicians operate, and the way Jews handle politicians and politics globally, the way Putin behaves relative to Israel suggests the Zionists have something on him that is serious enough to discipline his behavior in their favor..in Israels favor

    Putin has no reason at all, as a real Russian patriot, charged with the protection of the collective Russian interest, to be as conscientious, solicitous, of Israeli interest as he is. that he is is not a good sign at all. from afar I would like to trust Putin, revere him as the current savior of the world, but cant go all the way with him. I dearly appreciate the fact that he appears bent on prevention of ww3. that is a globally commendable fact, one I am sure the world appreciates

    but that Russian/Israeli-Jewish thing is rather unseemly and very concerning

    Read More
    • Replies: @CK
    Why expand the war that they are winning into a bigger war that is less likely of victory?
    The Izzies have learned that their planes are no longer safe attacking from Syrian airspace, the s-300 mean that the Izzies will no longer be safe attacking Syria from Lebanese airspace.
    From what I have read of him President Putin is a strategist as well as a Patriot.
    There are still some shrinking pockets of rebellion in Syria, then there is the Turkish acquisition of Northern Syria to unwind, slowly slowly catchee monkee.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @WJ
    My opinion - Lange didn't support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options. Mostly ineffective strike to satisfy the neocons. He has a good website that focuses on Syria.

    I don't know why he would support conscription, but I know why I would. There would have been no long term , or perhaps even short term Iraq war, if there were conscription with no exceptions. Middle class people sending their precious Brandons and Brittanys to a war as ridiculous as that debacle, would not have dragged on very long. I realize the war was fought by mostly middle class southerners but they were volunteers. Each and every one of them.

    Lange's views on Syria are 180 degrees from the MSM. The big networks are in lock step unison on the "Assad gassed his own people" story. No deviation. I wonder who is paying them.

    Lang not Lange I do not support conscription because I am a professional soldier and I do not like to see amateurs in my metier. As for those here who object to my being an American patriot. I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America. My blog does not focus on Syria any more than it does on anything else that interests me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nsa
    If you want respect for being a servile government flunkie.....trundle on down to the American Legion lounge with the rest of the geezer drunks and frauds.
    , @bluedog
    Damn that makes all 26 of my ancestors who fought to help create this country somehow traitors, instead of I hate the word patriots, for its been well over used beaten to death brought back to life so it could be flayed again by the sunshine patriots,the same sunshine patriots who sit by as we lie,lie,lie,after all that's what professional soldiers do if they want to climb the rank ladder that is ,to get into another war.!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:

    Russia is going to ship the s-300 to Syria. Looks like Trump skunked the Jews again. When are the Jews going to smarten up and stop attacking Trump?

    https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/syria/russia-says-will-deliver-new-air-defense-systems-to-syria-soon-escalating-tensions-with-israel-1.6029530

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. Unzerker says:

    I am told by several foreign sources with access to the information needed to make a valid judgment that the Russians are correct

    Really? Is that all you got?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Really? Is that all you got?
     
    I am sure it is on several orders of magnitude more than whatever you will be able to present. This is not to speak of you being disrespectful towards a man with combat, intelligence and human experience of which you can not even conceive. Yes, Colonel Lang's word has weight, a real one. Yours--zero.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. EugeneGur says:
    @Vojkan
    Let us hope that the US military have more brains than the US policy makers and that they have the guts to speak truth to the morons.

    the US military . . . have the guts to speak truth to the morons.

    The existence of which they so far failed to demonstrate. I don’t see any reason to hope.

    Read More
    • Agree: Herald
    • Replies: @Vidi


    the US military . . . have the guts to speak truth to the morons.
     
    The existence of which they so far failed to demonstrate. I don’t see any reason to hope.
     
    Apparently it was Secretary of Defense (General Mattis) who convinced Trump to avoid hitting any Russians in Syria. Maybe because the U.S. would have no defense against a Russian reprisal. Perhaps there's still some hope.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. Randal says:
    @Ozymandias
    So, a 100% success rate can't be believed, it's just too extreme. But Soviet era systems shooting down a large majority of modern weapons, well, that's easy to believe. Nothing extreme about it at all.

    People mostly believe whichever extreme story supports their preconceived notions.

    But Soviet era systems shooting down a large majority of modern weapons, well, that’s easy to believe. Nothing extreme about it at all.

    See the original article: these are “Soviet era systems” in the same way the B-52 is an “early Cold War” system. Framework might be largely the same, but capabilities hugely upgraded.

    People mostly believe whichever extreme story supports their preconceived notions.

    Indeed. Though there is also a tendency to believe neither and assume the truth must be somewhere in the middle.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Shahna
    "Who should we believe?"

    Perhaps it's easier to work out who we should not believe.
    Over and above the sublime claim that 100% of missiles fired hit 100% of their targets (likely a first in the history of modern warfare) we are also expected to believe that 70+ missiles hit 3 buildings in close proximity to eachother at Barzeh - and left the foundations intact.
    https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2018/04/Slide2-640x400.png

    But that's only 2 impossible things before breakfast - I guess I still have 4 to go.

    70+ missiles . . . hit three buildings . . . and left the foundations intact.

    Ah but you see, all that firepower was concentrated on burning up the toxic plume to prevent “collateral damage.”

    Steve Russell, R-OK and a member of the “Warriors Caucus,” appeared on C Span on Apr 18, 2018, ~15:30 on timeline

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?444201-5/washington-journal-representative-steve-russell-r-ok-discusses-congress-role-syria-conflict

    question:

    “If we bomb a factory making. . .chemical weapons . . . does that spread, does that release the chemical or biological factor in the environment?”

    Rep. Steve Russell’s response:

    “This was part of the concerns when we did the strike on the three facilities. Now a couple of them were storage, but the one which was the research and development facility, there was a lot of concern when it was struck that it would not create a plume or a collateral damage, where if the chemicals were there, that it was — so the way that the attack was designed, you know, explosions and things do have a way of consuming other problems and I think when they look at striking this target that they did it in such a way that it would minimize collateral damage.

    You know, that is a real credit to the United States and to our other western civilized nations, but the United States in particular: no one goes through more pains to use weapons without causing undue human suffering and the taking of innocent life. Only the United States goes through the lengths we go through.

    And yet we see Russia, its indiscriminate air campaigns taking out hospitals, infrastructure, water works, public works, these types of things.

    Syria, with its barrel bombs wiping out entire apartment complexes and different things with just complete indiscrimination, we don’t do that.

    We spend a lot of money on missiles to get them right to the doorstep and this particular attack, We did take all of those things into account so there would not be those concerns that you raised. “

    Warrior Russell’s other comments were equally cringe-worthy. If you’ve got half-an-hour to spare and a strong stomach, tune in at the link.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alexandar
    16 Anonymous
    There is nothing in this article and paragraph related to your questions.
    You clearly try to smear Colonel Lang.
    Hope you are paid to do that.

    Wow, this new author has brought along some sensitive wingmen.

    No, I’m not paid. Nor have I smeared anyone. I like this website and often comment when I read something that seems especially good or bad.

    In his first piece published here, Mr. Lang apparently used quotation marks around something that he was paraphrasing, and rather poorly at that. We don’t know, because he declined to address the point, even though some of us did in comments that he seems to be reviewing closely.

    In this, his second piece published here, he has been sloppy in conveying what we’re then told he has addressed elsewhere in opposition to the wrongful warmongering of a government that he nevertheless served for decades. My impression is that he’s a company man, with appeal predominantly to others that naively romanticize the military component of the Establishment, especially of their time in its employ.

    So at this point, Mr. Lang seems below the level of most authors published here. But at least he responds (to some extent) to criticism. And I hope to be complimenting him here if his future work is better. But when he bristles that “I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America,” I won’t be getting my hopes up too high.

    Please consider confining your future comments to the substantive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    But when [Lang] bristles that “I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America,” I won’t be getting my hopes up too high.
     
    That does sound like something parroted by Slumlord Hannity and other Fox News types. What is America? Land? People? Government? If I don’t like the government and its policies (purchased by moneyed interests and non-Americans) am I an “America hater”? I lived all my life in America. I have close relatives and immediate family who fought in wars and immediate family buried at Arlington. How does one qualify as an America hater? Not to genuflect to the military and their illegal and gravely immoral wars and actions? To disagree with the neocon/neolib policies and policymakers? Policies which run counter to Christian morality and natural law? If so then I’m an America hater in good standing.
    , @aleksandar
    1 -I repeat :there was nothing in Pat Lang article that could have led to your question.
    At least for a guy with an average IQ.
    It's fact.
    2 - Nobody cares about your " impression". This is about military stuff, not philosophy or painting.
    , @Patrick Lang
    More sad childish ad hominem nonsense.
    , @Dissenter
    I agree in that Pat Lang writting capabilities are in the best case quite limited not differing from those of many average folks out there, at least for what I have read at his site so far.

    That he dedicates himself to award ad hominems to anyone who in an intelligent, well reasoned and well redacted way could criticise him or his views even in the slightest way ends being quite odd.
    But then is him who always feel attacked by others.....

    In that he does not differ from other US "bloggers" which show a supposed critical view on the current Us foreign policy, like The Saker and "b" from MoA, to the extent that I even got to think that all these blogs work together, since all show the same pattern on fragility towards the slightest criticism and overreactions of rage, which derive in banning and plainly insulting critical commenters all the way.
    The population of sycophants at every of the named blogs is also a constant, as well as the group-attacking harassment of critical commenters by this fixed population at those sites...
    Then they pretend all to have a high level discussion forums there and I wonder how could that be when any dissenting/different voice is systematically silenced by harsh censure....

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. Randal says:
    @Yak-15
    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks. In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.

    It would be over rather quickly. Of course, the escalation could get extremely ugly for the Israelis but I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.

    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks.

    Presumably it wouldn’t be a bluff, and presumably the need for it not to be a bluff is why the Russians haven’t done it yet.

    In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.

    This appears to be pure fantasy.

    Regardless, Israel isn’t going to go to war with Russia merely to defend its freedom to attack Syria any time it wants. For all the wailing by Israel advocates, it just isn’t that important to them. So long as they can get away with it, they’ll do it. When they are forced to stop, they’ll stop.

    I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.

    Israel’s existence is not meaningfully threatened by the loss of their ability to launch illegal attacks on Syria at will. The idea that it is, is a lie put about by the Israel lobby to rationalise and justify its actions.

    Read More
    • Agree: The Scalpel
    • Replies: @Miro23

    Regardless, Israel isn’t going to go to war with Russia merely to defend its freedom to attack Syria any time it wants. For all the wailing by Israel advocates, it just isn’t that important to them. So long as they can get away with it, they’ll do it. When they are forced to stop, they’ll stop.

     

    I think that that this touches on the whole US/Israel relationship. There's a lot of Israeli opportunism in the face of US societal disorganization and weakness. Some US push back would greatly improve the situation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. nate 43 says:
    @Ozymandias
    So, a 100% success rate can't be believed, it's just too extreme. But Soviet era systems shooting down a large majority of modern weapons, well, that's easy to believe. Nothing extreme about it at all.

    People mostly believe whichever extreme story supports their preconceived notions.

    @ Ozymandias, TG

    This isn’t complicated: the damage shown by the brass is not commiserate with 100+ missile strikes, not even close.

    Syrian defense systems on their own would not be able to intercept a cruise missile. However, with the help of Russian EW, which forces the Tomahawk to gain altitude, they can easily be targeted.

    Interference has always been the achilles heel of remote control warfare. As of now the code is broken. FUKUS can now either try again much later, or fight like MEN in manned aircraft over Syria & take causalities for a cause that the Israelis and the Saudis believe in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TG
    Ah, some good points. Still.

    1. It sure looked stupid that the US sent about 70 cruise missiles to just one industrial complex. Still, stupid and US strategy are not strangers. Maybe they just wanted to use 70 missiles to 'send a message.' And boost defense contractor profits. And as far as damage goes: indeed, probably 5 or 6 missiles would have eliminated the sites' ability to process chemicals, but to completely raze reinforced concrete buildings is hard. I watched a documentary on the allied invasion of Italy in WWII, there was this monastery on top of a hill, they dumped hundreds of tons of explosives on it. It was destroyed as a building, for sure, but there were still some walls standing. So 70 tones of high explosive? Yeah, it could be true. Maybe.

    2. Interference? Hard to say. In theory, if I were designing these systems, I would use GPS sparingly and switch to jam-proof inertial systems and direct radar terrain guidance at the first sign of interference. What the US systems really use I have no idea. I am just saying that, in principle, jamming might not be an Achilles heel of at least this form of warfare.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. Is the Trump Administration/DoS trying to gaslight us?

    LOL. Why, yes, now that you mention it. Quelle surprise, eh?

    The “attack” on Syria had two purposes: a saving of face, and a disposal of old ordnance.

    I suspect that only Israel had any real interest in saving the face of their hired boogeyman. Trump being a flunky of Israeli, he did what he had to do.

    Old ordnance or semi-0ld, revenue must be generated for the MI-complex. The bigger it grows, the more maintenance it requires. Disposal of old weaponry is just a form of cashflow. The wealthy and powerful insist on remaining wealthy and powerful. Your money is required to maintain that wealth and power. You will surrender your money to the powerful, or you will die. A simple equation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cold N. Holefield

    I suspect that only Israel had any real interest in saving the face of their hired boogeyman. Trump being a flunky of Israeli, he did what he had to do.
     
    I agree Trump is an Israeli Flunky, but he likes Missile Strikes, so I think the Missile Strike, his second on Syria, was as much his idea as it was Israel's. It makes for great Optics. It makes Trump, in his Twisted Mind at least, look Big & Strong throwing Rocks at Toddlers in their Playpens.

    It makes me laugh, and cry, to see all the Anti-Zionists fervently support Trump. What a bunch of Buffoons. Who is the ONE PERSON in Trump's Admin besides Kellyanne Blueberry Conway to remain unscathed and still intact? Stephen Miller. There's a reason for that, methinks. Everyone else was purged Stalin-like, but Stephen Miller, the weasel practicing Jew lurking in the shadows, remains.

    CNN, more so than the Russians, interfered in our Democracy and helped Trump win. They gave him 24/7 coverage during the Campaign and he didn't pay a Red Cent for it. CNN is owned, in part, by Aviv Nevo, an Israeli Oligarch, who owns a large stake in Time Warner. CNN is run by Jeff Zucker, another Jew, who worked with Trump on the show The Apprentice.

    If you think about it, Russia and Israel are Mirror Images of one another in how they act and hold themselves and I don't think it's a coincidence both have their Hooks deep into Trump to the point they share him as their Manchurian Candidate. Trump is a Time Share Manchurian Candidate co-owned by Russia & Israel.

    The Stephen Miller Band

    This FREAK is only 32 years old. Wrap your head around that. Per the following article, that takes him to task for admonishingly referring to Liberals as Cosmopolitan, he bought his first condo in D.C. at the age of 23 for nearly half a million dollars and his latest condo in D.C. is worth $1.2 million at least.

    How does Stephen Miller, this punk from Santa Monica, do it? Do you think him being Jewish has anything to do with it? I do. I think it has EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IT. Does he work for Mossad? I think so. That's my theory and I'm sticking with it until proven otherwise.

    How could he survive while so many with so much more Street Cred & Stature didn't? It doesn't add up. Unless. Unless he's Mossad. And if he is Mossad, and I think he is, it proves yet again what a bunch of psychopathic scumbags they are. What psychos the Israelis are and the Zionists. They are making fools of Americans and they are destroying America and laughing all the way.

    When I look at this guy, Stephen Miller, deep into his conscienceless eyes, I can see him laughing without cracking a smile. This is FUN FOR HIM and I assure you, they're laughing their asses off in Israel too. Make me POTUS and they won't be laughing for long, that I will guarantee. They'll be too busy fighting the Arabs to laugh, and I mean a REAL FIGHT. Never again will an American life be sacrificed on their soulless, sadistic behalf.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Oniric says:

    Russians are correct

    F-UK-US always lie , they ( and their propaganda machine MSM ) would never let reality contradict their ” dreams “

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  71. @Quartermaster
    A lot of fake news in this column.

    It is wise to take Russian claims with a ton of salt. Because of the poor performance of the S-400 system, the Russians are now shipping the S-300 to Syria. It has also been reported that the Russians are shipping heavy armor to Syria. Putin isn't withdrawing, he's doubling down.

    Putin's Russia has become like the USSR, a disinformation operation.

    But I live in a country that loudly proclaims they don’t but does . . . .

    One can gave faults, but one cannot very well be a kettle calling others pots all the while claiming they are really Tupperware leading a life of better example.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Quartermaster
    Now, now. I realize that facts are a hard thing to absorb, but they are there and they don't go away. Putin grew up in a system that new that it couldn't take on what it saw as its primary enemy in a straight up fight, and Russia is back to that place again. So, all Putin has left is the disinformation operation he grew up with. You may not like that fact, but that's just too bad.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Unzerker

    I am told by several foreign sources with access to the information needed to make a valid judgment that the Russians are correct
     
    Really? Is that all you got?

    Really? Is that all you got?

    I am sure it is on several orders of magnitude more than whatever you will be able to present. This is not to speak of you being disrespectful towards a man with combat, intelligence and human experience of which you can not even conceive. Yes, Colonel Lang’s word has weight, a real one. Yours–zero.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
    Agree
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Anybody listening to this little Rothchild weasel Macron speaking at congress, he’s called for a new world order two times now, I guess he is supposed to be convincing us to go to war again, after we’ve been losing for 17 years now.
    Keeps using the freedumb and democracy shtick, even though we have less of both, after 17 years of war, its enough to make you puke.
    DC and everyone there should be nuked, that is the only thing tht will make world a better place.

    America is falling apart, people can’t afford to go to doctors, price of everything keeps going up, pay sucks, homeless camps popping up in rural Georgia, and all DC can think of is more war. 21 trillion in the hole, and they couldn’t care less.

    Hang the bankers

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    DC and everyone there should be nuked, that is the only thing tht will make world a better place.
     
    Nuking DC amounts to killing the indentured servants of those with wealth and power. DC is mostly a collection of people who enable the destroyers -- somewhat analogous to harem guards. A better target would be Manhattan Island, and Florida from Lauderdale to Key West.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. @Yak-15
    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks. In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.

    It would be over rather quickly. Of course, the escalation could get extremely ugly for the Israelis but I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.

    I think you mean the Americans would, pull American troops out of Israel/ME, cut off Israels multi-billion taxpayer funded welfare checks, Israel will sit down and shut up. Count on it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Randal says:
    @anonymous
    Mr. Lang sounds like Mr. Buchanan in his latest piece published here: someone who considers himself dissident, but who thoughtlessly accepts that his Uncle Sam is the good guy.

    The article, especially this paragraph

    "The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding."

    begs some questions:

    1. Does Mr. Lang support the attack on the alleged "Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites"? He sounds like he does. But why?

    2. Does Mr. Lang support US military conscription? He sounds like he does. But why?

    3. Does Mr. Lang believe that more money should be spent on US military equipment like Tomahawk missiles for use against the government forces of Syria and Russia? He sounds like he does. But why?

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as "interesting, important, and controversial," with a "perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media."

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as “interesting, important, and controversial,” with a “perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media.”

    Interesting and important are to some extent matters of personal taste and opinion, I suppose, though how anyone with an interest in current military and related activities in the ME could not find interesting the opinion of someone with Lang’s bio (W. Patrick Lang) is difficult to understand. There’s no necessity to agree with his opinions, either, to regard them as interesting or important.

    controversial,” with a “perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media.”

    As for these, as far as I can see Lang falls directly into these categories, having been largely excluded from the mainstream US TV and other news media precisely because his opinions aren’t what the ruling neocon/pro-Israeli/pro-Saudi elite consensus wants to see broadcast to the general population.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rollie
    You want important? Get Francis Boyle up here. One of the world's pre-eminent legal scholars, who stopped a US war with lawfare, identified the Amerithrax perps, exposed the Lockerbie bombing deception, and denounced illegal US biological warfare in Africa. You want excluded? They put him on the friggin no-fly list.

    There's no shortage of people telling us what Colonels think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. tac says:

    New air defense systems will soon be delivered to Damascus

    the Syrian Defense Ministry “analyzed in detail” the results of the missile attack of the United States and its allies.

    “Based on it, a number of changes have already been introduced into the air defense system of the country, which will further increase its reliability,” Rudskoy said.

    While the air defense systems were not named, it is widely believed to be the S-300 system.

    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/official-russian-announcement-of-new-air-defense-systems-to-be-delivered-to-syria-video/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. @Michael Kenny
    None of this is of any help to Putin. He's still irreversibly bogged down in Syria and if US weapons are as inefficient as the Russians claim, then they'll just have to be improved. And if the whole thing was a scam cooked up between Trump and Putin to fool the American public then that just digs Trump even deeper into Russiagate. From Trump's point of view, the only scenario that helps him is: 1) the Syrian chemical attack took place, 2) the US missiles did substantial damage and 3) there was no collusion with Russia. Trump has already shot himself in the foot by backing off on sanctions. I don't think Nikki Haley got it wrong. Sanctions were agreed on at the meeting, as she announced, but somewhere after the announcement, Trump backed off for a reason we are not being told and Kudlow, probably on his own iniative, messed the whole thing up by attacking Haley. It's possible that Trump only then discovered that the whole thing had been a scam but until he comes clean, people will assume that it's a new, and far more serious, example of Trump's collusion with Putin. And if it was a scam, the purpose was probably to discredit the Skipral investigation, which in its turn points the accusing finger staright at Putin. Thus, however all this plays out, both Trump and Putin are losers and the winners are those demanding tougher action against Putin (in Ukraine, for example).

    In which Michael Kenny tries to provoke everyone with the hot buttons that drive statists like him crazy. Bogged down. You know, like in Korea, and Vietnam, and Somalia, and Afghanistan. Except this time it’s not US loser chumps bogged down, it’s Putin who’s bogged down, nyah, nyah (he means Russia, not Putin, and strictly speaking the СБРФ, though he doesn’t know what that is, but statist propagandists try to personalize everything for better emotional manipulation.)

    Only СБРФ is supporting the host nation with optimal efficiency, systematically rolling up CIA’s armed irregulars with extraordinary attention to protection of civilians, and routing CIA’s clandestine war of aggression while effectively inhibiting US escalation. It’s a tour de force, and all US statists with 3-digit IQs are shitting bricks.

    Kenny is naturally fixated on Russiagate, that being the original Red-Scare neurosis of the US CIA regime, which has flared up again as CIA gets crushed and humiliated in Syria and Ukraine. Except Russiagate’s going to go away just like Chinagate did. Oh, you don’t remember Chinagate? Of course you don’t. Nobody gives a rat’s.

    https://thebaffler.com/latest/is-trump-the-new-clinton-al-gharbi

    Followed by lots of white-noise speculation with a non sequitur tacked on, you know what it is by now: in any case it’s all terrible for Putin and Trump [because they're the same.]

    And you wonder why Russia is kicking the CIA’s ass. Russian government staff have got 20 IQ points on their opposite numbers from Putin on down. That’s because all the smart Americans go into theft and fraud for investment banks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    " It’s a tour de force, and all US statists with 3-digit IQs are shitting bricks. "

    Both of them? ;-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Anonymous[240] • Disclaimer says:

    The latest Syria bombing: tactically irrelevant, it showed the foundation of the F.UK.US-Israel empire, air power, ineffective and was a major strategic defeat.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  79. @redmudhooch
    Anybody listening to this little Rothchild weasel Macron speaking at congress, he's called for a new world order two times now, I guess he is supposed to be convincing us to go to war again, after we've been losing for 17 years now.
    Keeps using the freedumb and democracy shtick, even though we have less of both, after 17 years of war, its enough to make you puke.
    DC and everyone there should be nuked, that is the only thing tht will make world a better place.

    America is falling apart, people can't afford to go to doctors, price of everything keeps going up, pay sucks, homeless camps popping up in rural Georgia, and all DC can think of is more war. 21 trillion in the hole, and they couldn't care less.

    Hang the bankers

    DC and everyone there should be nuked, that is the only thing tht will make world a better place.

    Nuking DC amounts to killing the indentured servants of those with wealth and power. DC is mostly a collection of people who enable the destroyers — somewhat analogous to harem guards. A better target would be Manhattan Island, and Florida from Lauderdale to Key West.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Herald
    Yes, good thinking but still there is no reason to give Washington a free pardon.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Vidi says:
    @EugeneGur

    the US military . . . have the guts to speak truth to the morons.
     
    The existence of which they so far failed to demonstrate. I don't see any reason to hope.

    the US military . . . have the guts to speak truth to the morons.

    The existence of which they so far failed to demonstrate. I don’t see any reason to hope.

    Apparently it was Secretary of Defense (General Mattis) who convinced Trump to avoid hitting any Russians in Syria. Maybe because the U.S. would have no defense against a Russian reprisal. Perhaps there’s still some hope.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. Given this utterly lackluster performance, how do you think our vaunted mulit-billion dollar missile defense will behave once John Bolton finally goes through with his threats of WW3? I guess if we all dig holes and put doors on top we’ll be just fine. However given that Russia now has nukes that can travel at Mach 20, maybe we won’t have the time?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  82. @Western lies
    Yes , the russians are correct .

    The western hollywoodians always lie .

    Western white man double tongue

    Several American Afros have lied for the US at the UN and to the US public while looking straight into the cameras on TV. African dictators also lie. Are you an anti-intellectual bigot?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @Quartermaster
    A lot of fake news in this column.

    It is wise to take Russian claims with a ton of salt. Because of the poor performance of the S-400 system, the Russians are now shipping the S-300 to Syria. It has also been reported that the Russians are shipping heavy armor to Syria. Putin isn't withdrawing, he's doubling down.

    Putin's Russia has become like the USSR, a disinformation operation.

    You are amusing. The Patriot system has been discredited by the Israelis who published their findings after the First Bush Regime War Against Iraq. The US-UK-FRA will illegally strike Syria’s cities and it’s people again, and we will again get to see who lies the most.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Quartermaster
    So, the Israelis bought a weapon system that was discredited. And they still love the system. Did you actually engage your brain before clicking publish?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @manorchurch

    Is the Trump Administration/DoS trying to gaslight us?
     
    LOL. Why, yes, now that you mention it. Quelle surprise, eh?

    The "attack" on Syria had two purposes: a saving of face, and a disposal of old ordnance.

    I suspect that only Israel had any real interest in saving the face of their hired boogeyman. Trump being a flunky of Israeli, he did what he had to do.

    Old ordnance or semi-0ld, revenue must be generated for the MI-complex. The bigger it grows, the more maintenance it requires. Disposal of old weaponry is just a form of cashflow. The wealthy and powerful insist on remaining wealthy and powerful. Your money is required to maintain that wealth and power. You will surrender your money to the powerful, or you will die. A simple equation.

    I suspect that only Israel had any real interest in saving the face of their hired boogeyman. Trump being a flunky of Israeli, he did what he had to do.

    I agree Trump is an Israeli Flunky, but he likes Missile Strikes, so I think the Missile Strike, his second on Syria, was as much his idea as it was Israel’s. It makes for great Optics. It makes Trump, in his Twisted Mind at least, look Big & Strong throwing Rocks at Toddlers in their Playpens.

    It makes me laugh, and cry, to see all the Anti-Zionists fervently support Trump. What a bunch of Buffoons. Who is the ONE PERSON in Trump’s Admin besides Kellyanne Blueberry Conway to remain unscathed and still intact? Stephen Miller. There’s a reason for that, methinks. Everyone else was purged Stalin-like, but Stephen Miller, the weasel practicing Jew lurking in the shadows, remains.

    CNN, more so than the Russians, interfered in our Democracy and helped Trump win. They gave him 24/7 coverage during the Campaign and he didn’t pay a Red Cent for it. CNN is owned, in part, by Aviv Nevo, an Israeli Oligarch, who owns a large stake in Time Warner. CNN is run by Jeff Zucker, another Jew, who worked with Trump on the show The Apprentice.

    If you think about it, Russia and Israel are Mirror Images of one another in how they act and hold themselves and I don’t think it’s a coincidence both have their Hooks deep into Trump to the point they share him as their Manchurian Candidate. Trump is a Time Share Manchurian Candidate co-owned by Russia & Israel.

    The Stephen Miller Band

    This FREAK is only 32 years old. Wrap your head around that. Per the following article, that takes him to task for admonishingly referring to Liberals as Cosmopolitan, he bought his first condo in D.C. at the age of 23 for nearly half a million dollars and his latest condo in D.C. is worth $1.2 million at least.

    How does Stephen Miller, this punk from Santa Monica, do it? Do you think him being Jewish has anything to do with it? I do. I think it has EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IT. Does he work for Mossad? I think so. That’s my theory and I’m sticking with it until proven otherwise.

    How could he survive while so many with so much more Street Cred & Stature didn’t? It doesn’t add up. Unless. Unless he’s Mossad. And if he is Mossad, and I think he is, it proves yet again what a bunch of psychopathic scumbags they are. What psychos the Israelis are and the Zionists. They are making fools of Americans and they are destroying America and laughing all the way.

    When I look at this guy, Stephen Miller, deep into his conscienceless eyes, I can see him laughing without cracking a smile. This is FUN FOR HIM and I assure you, they’re laughing their asses off in Israel too. Make me POTUS and they won’t be laughing for long, that I will guarantee. They’ll be too busy fighting the Arabs to laugh, and I mean a REAL FIGHT. Never again will an American life be sacrificed on their soulless, sadistic behalf.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Anonymous[343] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous
    Wow, this new author has brought along some sensitive wingmen.

    No, I’m not paid. Nor have I smeared anyone. I like this website and often comment when I read something that seems especially good or bad.

    In his first piece published here, Mr. Lang apparently used quotation marks around something that he was paraphrasing, and rather poorly at that. We don’t know, because he declined to address the point, even though some of us did in comments that he seems to be reviewing closely.

    In this, his second piece published here, he has been sloppy in conveying what we’re then told he has addressed elsewhere in opposition to the wrongful warmongering of a government that he nevertheless served for decades. My impression is that he’s a company man, with appeal predominantly to others that naively romanticize the military component of the Establishment, especially of their time in its employ.

    So at this point, Mr. Lang seems below the level of most authors published here. But at least he responds (to some extent) to criticism. And I hope to be complimenting him here if his future work is better. But when he bristles that “I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America,” I won’t be getting my hopes up too high.

    Please consider confining your future comments to the substantive.

    But when [Lang] bristles that “I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America,” I won’t be getting my hopes up too high.

    That does sound like something parroted by Slumlord Hannity and other Fox News types. What is America? Land? People? Government? If I don’t like the government and its policies (purchased by moneyed interests and non-Americans) am I an “America hater”? I lived all my life in America. I have close relatives and immediate family who fought in wars and immediate family buried at Arlington. How does one qualify as an America hater? Not to genuflect to the military and their illegal and gravely immoral wars and actions? To disagree with the neocon/neolib policies and policymakers? Policies which run counter to Christian morality and natural law? If so then I’m an America hater in good standing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EnglishOutsider
    I dislike the policies of my government as much as you appear to dislike the policies of yours. So we're on the parallel tracks there. But it's possible to do that and still be a patriot. That's democracy.

    Democracy's not working at present, certainly not in my country and maybe not quite as expected for all those Americans patriots who voted anti-neocon. But it's still a good idea, democracy, wouldn't you agree?

    ,
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Johann says:
    @MarkU
    I can think of two other important questions, what is the point of lying? and who exactly do they think they are fooling?

    Firstly it is worth saying that both sides are likely to exaggerate the effectiveness of their systems, deliberately or otherwise. Let us start with the US claim of 100% effectiveness of their weapons system and 0% of the Syrian/Russian systems, this is plainly nonsense. Even with no air defences at all a certain number of malfunctions would be expected to happen. The Syrian/Russian claims are also likely to be wrong, many of the claimed intercepts were just as likely to be malfunctions.

    So what is the point of lying?

    First off, a reputation for unreliability is bad for sales, pure and simple. Nobody is going to be enthusiastic about spending large amounts of money on stuff that doesn't work very well, this would apply equally to both sides.

    Secondly, the appetite of the general public for war in general and superpower confrontation in particular is going to be somewhat diminished if it is perceived that the other side is technologically equal or even superior. This factor is logically going to be more important to the side likely to initiate conflict.

    So who do they think they are fooling?

    Potential customers for weapons systems are usually not going to be naive enough to take the manufacturers claims at face value, they are likely to employ their own experts to assess the various claims. They will not be completely immune to deception of course.

    Each other. Neither side would want their opponents to have the best information available, for obvious reasons. It is notable that both sides appear to have declined to fully commit their latest equipment, the Russians in particular. It is likely that both sides have reasonably good intelligence on what happened, neither side is likely to be fooled easily.

    The general public are the most obvious targets of deception and the most easily fooled. It is one thing to risk a superpower conflict when your population in general is confident that you have a clear technological edge and are likely to escape the worst. It would be quite another matter to get the public on board if they believed they were up against a more or less equal opponent and were likely to get thoroughly nuked. Once again this logic applies far more strongly to the side likely to initiate a conflict for they are the ones who must manufacture consent. For this reason it would appear that the Russians have somewhat less motivation to lie than their US counterparts.

    They lie because they can and after lying their pathetic lives away they are not even aware that they are lying. Hilary can fall down the steps in front of hundreds of cameras and lie that she did not fall. Joe Biden can lie to a reporter that he graduated number one in his law class and totally ignore the school records that he graduated in the bottom of his law class.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Josecanuc
    
    “One thing I have come to know thoroughly: the abysmal lack of character in man.”
    Kierkegaard
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Vidi says:
    @Quartermaster
    You are correct. The 52 first flew much earlier.

    You are correct. The 52 first flew much earlier [than 1952].

    According to Wikipedia, “The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952″.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress

    Read More
    • Replies: @Quartermaster
    You trust Wikipedia?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Randal says:
    @Shahna

    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.
     
    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.

    In fact, I'm only surprised you now feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades ..... What? Bombs too graphic for you? Starving Yemeni children and brides dead by your ordinance waking you up? Perhaps it's just Syrian lies or the utter destruction Libya? Bully for you.

    From South Africa.

    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.

    [Yawn]

    Show me a country whose ancestors have done nothing bad and I’ll show you a country whose ancestors have done nothing. Meanwhile the British kick-started the industrial revolution, contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment (though not everyone would regard this as entirely a good thing), built a global empire from the unpromising start of a small, cold and wet island off Europe while kicking the backsides of most of the peoples they came up against around the world, in a time when there wasn’t even the pretence of a “global rule of law”, and played a big part in bringing civilisation and the modern world to Africa, especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.

    Plenty to be proud of and plenty to be embarrassed about, but on balance a pretty damned good performance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @L.K
    Yawnnn... laughable British apologia...

    This bit

    "contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment"
     
    is just simply funny.

    Considering that factions of the Brit deep state were very much responsible for both world wars, obsessed as they were with destroying the up and coming competitor Germany, Britain really was a major contributor to the steep decline of Europe.

    Since then, it has been the ZUS major sidekick in crimes against peace. In fact, if we look back 200 years or more, it's hard to think of a more warmongering country than Perfidious Albion... well, I guess Zamerica learned from the best...
    , @anon
    I want to move past the long dead history of the past. I can forgive also. But any behavior suggestive of the old behavior is not negotiable is not forgivable is not pardonable Revenge in case of no justice should define the response .

    Today we see France and UK riding on the back of US are trying to re enact the imperialism. This must be destroyed. UK and France should face the consequences So will their citizen if they re elect their leaders.

    The behaviors become despicable recidivism when one Clinton goes to Guatemala and apologizes for overthrowing the democratically elected president and another goes to Hawaii and apologizes for acquiring that nation island but forgets not to repeat same behavior in Iraq, Libya and Syria.

    Destruction yes violent destruction of the system that allow some psychopaths to acquire position and then repeat the same abuse of the power nonchalantly blithely is what is required.

    , @byrresheim

    especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.
     
    How sweet of the British.

    I like the euphemism "give us a run for our money" where Shahna used the less than elegant term "concentration camp".

    As far as kickstarting the industrial revolution is concerned, in describing the phenomenon please do not forget to mention its capitalisation by the enourmous monies plundered in India, the one and only economically successful colony (the other one might have been what is now the United States, but that went awry a while before the invention of the concentration camp.)

    , @deschutes
    Your typical British modesty and humbleness are duly noted. What I've always admired about the Brits is how they never act priggish, arrogant, pedantic or condescending towards others :-D
    , @Herald
    It doesn't really matter too much what the British did right or wrong in the dim and distant past. The problem is that as of right now the British Government is a complete shambles stuffed with incompetents and liars in its major offices of state. It's on a par with Washington and performing that badly really does take some effort.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. “a forum for people who hate America”

    Old soldier Lang presents with a classic case: decompensation of a US-indoctrinated statist. His first response to insufficient reverence was to curl up in a methodological ball and treat narrowly technical problems, leaving his civic religion implicit.

    But continued cognitive dissonance from outside the GI bell jar induces a fit. Evidently someone hates America. Lang uses this abstract term, obscurely coupling it with the emotive word hate for catharsis of some sort. Lang doubtless cannot say whether by America he means the land mass, the population, the social assemblage, the culture, the criminal state, the flag he was taught to worship, or something else, ineffable but nice.

    But who hates an abstraction? Does anybody hate the square root of negative 1, or transuent causation, or Kant’s antinomies? Of course not. Lang’s statement is ridiculous, a meaningless ejaculation of a fanatic’s creed. People who think for themselves don’t grovel for his magic word America, and he can’t handle it.

    Prognosis: he’s going to deal with the failure of his circumscribed statist logic by giving his tormentors comforting labels and reciting another little pledge of allegiance. And he’ll die without understanding how this criminal kleptocracy made a tool of him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  90. Why would Russia bother to send the S-300 when their “upgraded” Soviet era systems appear to be the most effective the world has ever known? Sounds like a step backwards.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Why would Russia bother to send the S-300 when their “upgraded” Soviet era systems appear to be the most effective the world has ever known? Sounds like a step backwards.
     
    Two issues here - first the question of why add the S300 and second the implicit questioning of the claimed performance of the air defences by suggesting it is unrealistically good. The former hardly needs answering - S300 is a more modern system from the ground up than anything the Syrians already have except the short range Pantsirs, and adds capability that can be directly integrated with the Russia systems already in theatre.

    As for the claimed performance by the defences being unrealistically high, well it's necessary to consider the point that this was close to a "best case" situation for the air defences. The attack was telegraphed literally days in advance, and it appears there was some - possibly considerable - "deconfliction" discussion between the parties to narrow down the range of permitted targets and probably attack routes (the missiles reportedly avoided Russian-controlled airspace for their approach routes), rendering the attacks relatively predictable. There was no SEAD effort, and presumably limited EW support, meaning the operators could relax and do their jobs pretty much unhindered. The Russian theatre-wide coverage was entirely unthreatened and undistracted, and presumably able to devote its time fully t0 supporting the Syrian systems. The attacking systems were limited in number and mostly slow cruise missiles, not like the ballistic missiles the Patriot etc systems struggle to hit.

    Basically it was almost exercise conditions for the Syrian/Russian air defences. One would expect optimum success rates, I think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. Kafka says:
    @TG
    Indeed. We may never know what really happened, though. What is weird is just how divergent the claims are. The Syrians are claiming a success rate better than ANY air defense system has ever achieved in real combat. The Americans are claiming a 100% success rate for complex missiles of different makes, some of which have never been employed in combat before at all. It's a puzzler.

    A few random thoughts though:

    1. If 70 cruise missiles or so had been intercepted or diverted, Syria should be littered with wrecked missiles. Where are they?

    2. If Syria really did achieve this success rate against a pre-planned saturation attack, this would largely eliminate the US ability to bomb countries it doesn't like back to the stone age. This would completely gut the heart of current US strategy (if you could even dignify such chaos as 'strategy'). This should have resulted in apoplexy by the US establishment, and a massive spike in orders for Russian air defense systems. So far, I'm not seeing that.

    3. The Americans claimed that the Syrians launched a bunch of interceptors after the attack was over. At first, that made no sense. But, if the Syrians really had been caught with their pants down, and they wanted to claim that they had shot down some missiles, they would have had to fire off some interceptors so that there would be witnesses seeing them launch. Sure, the Americans could be lying about this to make their claims more credible, but self-consistency is not a hallmark of American propaganda. On the other hand, the Syrians had apparently been warned ahead of time about the time and place of the attacks, so it's hard to believe that they were taken by surprise. Again, it's a puzzler.

    1. If 70 cruise missiles or so had been intercepted or diverted, Syria should be littered with wrecked missiles. Where are they?

    Spread out all over the countryside of a country that has been at war for 7 years now. That war has raged across most parts of the country. As a result it is littered with spent munitions and debris. Recognizing bits and pieces of downed cruise missiles when you happen to come across them requires skill. Both the syrians and russians have other issues at the moment that they’d rather address over scouring the empty fields, mountains, deserts and swamps of Syria for cruise missile remains.

    I get the impression that people who ask this question think that when a cruise missile gets ‘intercepted’ it lands more or less intact or at least recognizable as a cruise missile. It usually doesn’t. So no, it’s not strange that there are only limited remains of downed cruise missiles on display at the moment. The russians and syrians just don’t have this need to prove themselves to that spoiled western audience that feels they deserve all the answers.

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

    System malfunctions are only one of the many things that can and will go wrong in war.

    True, but generally speaking, the simpler the task and the simpler the solution, the less things tend to go wrong. Hitting a building with a bullet is orders of magnitude simpler than hitting a speeding bullet with a bullet, which is what missile defense is.

    At the same time it is clear that there was an understanding between the governments to insure that Russian red lines were not crossed. The evidence for the Douma gas attack is non-existent.

    So why are the Russians saying it was a false flag attack carried out by rebel groups? Why were inspectors denied access?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  93. CK says:
    @Ben Sampson
    why did the Russians allow Israel so much freedom in Syria..from the start of their Syrian project?

    I could never understand that..it seemed/seems so obviously contradictory and counter-productive.
    and why is Putin ever so conscious to 'compromise' with Israel - in Israel's favor no less..all the time?

    oh my! these things make no sense in modern reality, nor in historical perspective. the Khazars have no reason to love Russia/Russians..indeed have every reason to hate them, and desire to eliminate Russia/Russians. and it seems clear the 1917 Revolution turned into a Khazar revenge for the destruction of old Khazaria with Russian collusion..not to mention the German invasion the intent of which surely was to destroy Russia, bring whatever remaining Russian rump to its knees in perpetual servitude..the Russian 'Fatherland' forever under rape of its resources by the global capitalists

    but this is not something I tear my hair out at the roots over. I think Putin is a fine politician and a very smart man..but he is still a politician. and as per the way politicians operate, and the way Jews handle politicians and politics globally, the way Putin behaves relative to Israel suggests the Zionists have something on him that is serious enough to discipline his behavior in their favor..in Israels favor

    Putin has no reason at all, as a real Russian patriot, charged with the protection of the collective Russian interest, to be as conscientious, solicitous, of Israeli interest as he is. that he is is not a good sign at all. from afar I would like to trust Putin, revere him as the current savior of the world, but cant go all the way with him. I dearly appreciate the fact that he appears bent on prevention of ww3. that is a globally commendable fact, one I am sure the world appreciates

    but that Russian/Israeli-Jewish thing is rather unseemly and very concerning

    Why expand the war that they are winning into a bigger war that is less likely of victory?
    The Izzies have learned that their planes are no longer safe attacking from Syrian airspace, the s-300 mean that the Izzies will no longer be safe attacking Syria from Lebanese airspace.
    From what I have read of him President Putin is a strategist as well as a Patriot.
    There are still some shrinking pockets of rebellion in Syria, then there is the Turkish acquisition of Northern Syria to unwind, slowly slowly catchee monkee.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. Svigor says:
    @Quartermaster
    The Germans weren't close to having a functioning fission weapon, much less a thermonuke. David Irving deals with this in his book "The Virus House." The allies found the German's last attempt at a nuclear reactor and if it had worked, everyone in the building would have been lethally irradiated.

    The "report" of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.

    The “report” of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.

    There’s a lot of the “this food is terrible, and the portions are so small” stuff from the flatheads. One minute they’re shitting their pants over how the US is “forcing” Russia to develop all these new nuclear delivery systems because of our ABM defense capabilities and deployments, the next they’re guffawing about how ineffective our ABM capabilities and deployments are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Is flathead an insult for American? In the Quebec vernacular, "tête-carrée" (squarehead) is an insult used against English speaking people.
    , @JerseyJeffersonian
    Well, Svigor, I have been given to understand that the true danger from those missiles sited near the Russian border is that these missiles can quickly be repurposed as offensive missiles, and given their location right on the border, they could be used in a first strike capacity against Russia's military forces. The ineffectiveness of these US missiles in a defensive role is well known, but their dual use is a source of concern; this has been clearly articulated by the Russians for some time. These deployments are revelatory of intent to continue to chase after a first strike/decapitation strike capability by the US and its poodles. This aggressive intent is what lies behind the Russian development of weapon systems not succeptible of destruction in such a strike; a restoration of deterrence regardless of the US's scheming is the primary aim.
    , @Herald
    Yes we all know that, but so what?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. @TG
    Indeed. We may never know what really happened, though. What is weird is just how divergent the claims are. The Syrians are claiming a success rate better than ANY air defense system has ever achieved in real combat. The Americans are claiming a 100% success rate for complex missiles of different makes, some of which have never been employed in combat before at all. It's a puzzler.

    A few random thoughts though:

    1. If 70 cruise missiles or so had been intercepted or diverted, Syria should be littered with wrecked missiles. Where are they?

    2. If Syria really did achieve this success rate against a pre-planned saturation attack, this would largely eliminate the US ability to bomb countries it doesn't like back to the stone age. This would completely gut the heart of current US strategy (if you could even dignify such chaos as 'strategy'). This should have resulted in apoplexy by the US establishment, and a massive spike in orders for Russian air defense systems. So far, I'm not seeing that.

    3. The Americans claimed that the Syrians launched a bunch of interceptors after the attack was over. At first, that made no sense. But, if the Syrians really had been caught with their pants down, and they wanted to claim that they had shot down some missiles, they would have had to fire off some interceptors so that there would be witnesses seeing them launch. Sure, the Americans could be lying about this to make their claims more credible, but self-consistency is not a hallmark of American propaganda. On the other hand, the Syrians had apparently been warned ahead of time about the time and place of the attacks, so it's hard to believe that they were taken by surprise. Again, it's a puzzler.

    Russian MOD just had a briefing with a lot of bent metal on display, including a bunch of missile fragments with the shrapnel holes

    https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/4145770.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Alfa158 says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    The B-52 first flew in 1952 and entered service in 1955. I have never heard that Air Force aircraft numbering is based on year first flown or entry into service and doubt that that is the case.

    The numbers are assigned in sequence as aircraft become official projects. The B-52 was the 52nd bomber design accepted for development by the Air Corp/Air Force. The first prototypes were completed around 1952 but that was coincidence.
    The rest of the article is fairly good, but there is no excuse for that sort of unforced error opens Lang to attack on his credibility.
    The truth on the attack’s effectiveness is probably somewhere in the middle. After WW2 comparisons of records on claimed enemy aircraft and ships destroyed versus actual losses losses showed that the actual success rate is somewhere between 1/3 to 1/2 of what is claimed. Additionally in WW2 the number of US aircraft downed by the enemy (about 20,000) was roughly equal to the number lost to mechanical malfunction, pilot error, navigation errors etc. It would be reasonable to assume that somewhere around those ratios of the missiles were shot down or malfunctioned, so 30 to 50 missiles not reaching any target would be believable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. Svigor says:
    @jilles dykstra
    It was a hydrogen fusion bomb primed by ordinary explosives.
    Just three German phycisists were developing the bomb, one of them a jew.
    Compare this to the 30.000 man Manhattan project.
    On the Prague airport two converted Heinkels stood ready to drop the first bomb on the Ural hydroelectric plants, to stop tank production.
    Rudel was to drop the bomb.
    He did not well know what it was, called it an atomic bomb.
    An emissonary of Mussolini witnessed a succesfull trial.
    An area of a few square kilometres was destroyed.
    Rainer Karlsch, 'Hitlers Bom, Hoe Nazi-Duitsland nucleaire wapens testte in een wanhopige poging om de oorlog te winnen, Tielt, 2005 (Hitlers Bombe, München)
    Hans-Ulrich Rudel, ´Mein Kriegstagebuch, Aufzeichnungen eines Stukafliegers’, 1983, 2006 Dresden
    In
    Walter Dornberger, Peenemünde, Die Geschichte der V-Waffen, Esslingen 1981, 2003
    Dornberger writes that during a visit there Hitler said he had to apologise to two people, one of them Dornberger.
    I long wondered who the second was, until I read the book about the hydrogen book.
    In early 1945 Hitler's hope for turning the war were based on this bomb.

    It was a hydrogen fusion bomb primed by ordinary explosives.
    Just three German phycisists were developing the bomb, one of them a jew.
    Compare this to the 30.000 man Manhattan project.

    Well, the Manhattan project produced, you know, actual nukes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Svigor says:
    @Shahna

    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.
     
    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.

    In fact, I'm only surprised you now feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades ..... What? Bombs too graphic for you? Starving Yemeni children and brides dead by your ordinance waking you up? Perhaps it's just Syrian lies or the utter destruction Libya? Bully for you.

    From South Africa.

    Hi. Just a friendly reminder, you are in a thread thick with flatheads, descendants of the people who subjugated and murdered central Asians, stole their land, raped their women, etc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Alfa158 says:

    “A very senior civilian colleague in DIA once asked me why sophisticated weapons so often malfunction or are otherwise defeated. I told her that it was simply a fact of life that in actual warfare “whatever can go wrong, will go wrong.” She resolutely stated that this should not be. “The manufacturers guarantee that they will work as advertised,” she insisted. ”
    Another reason we can’t win wars and we get into wars we shouldn’t. Senior officials that naive and uninformed about warfare.

    Read More
    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Aka women, homosexuals, trannies and "people of colour". Not surprising that other countries kick the west's ass militarily when our institutions are staffed with such sorry, second rate excuses of people.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. Svigor says:
    @Patrick Lang
    The maintenance of a body of ground troops designed to conduct expeditionary overseas requires a much larger force than that to be projected because of the impossibility of maintaining the force overseas indefinitely. Units must be rotated. Units must be trained outside the theater of operations, etc. The key to javing a smaller army and marine corps is to have a different, non-interventionist foreign policy. This has nothing to do with "welfare" for the deplorables. The great costs in an all volunteer force are down stream retirement costs, medical costs and the VA.

    A big part of the “welfare” is corporate. Boeing, Lockheed, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Check out the comment from Mattis. What a tool.

    Lockheed Martin got $35.2 billion from taxpayers last year. That’s more than many federal agencies.

    Of Lockheed Martin’s $51 billion in sales last year, nearly 70 percent, or $35.2 billion, came from sales to the U.S. government. It’s a colossal figure, hard to comprehend.

    ...

    Boeing is in second place with annual sales of $26.5 billion in 2016, a year in which the top five defense contractors — including General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman — had total sales of nearly $110 billion to the U.S. government, according to federal procurement data. The five biggest defense contractors took in more money from the U.S. government than the next 30 companies combined.

    But no one can touch Lockheed, the manufacturer of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The company is so big that some have likened it to a government agency and have quipped that Marillyn Hewson, Lockheed’s chief executive, is as powerful as a Cabinet secretary — or higher. When she gives her annual state of the company speeches, flanked by a pair of flags — one American, one with the company logo — she looks, well, presidential.

    ...

    In 2013, Marine Corps Gen. Jim Mattis, now the secretary of defense, told Congress, “If you don’t fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition.”



    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-trumps-budget-lockheed-looms-almo st-as-large-as-the-state-department/2018/02/15/e7eb3aa8-11c1-11e8-9570-29c9830535e5_story.html?sw_bypass=true&utm_term=.b90ea79cc444
     
    , @SolontoCroesus
    Just came across this LATimes report of the Lockheed - Martin Marietta merger in 1994.
    http://articles.latimes.com/1994-08-31/business/fi-33290_1_lockheed-martin-marietta

    Analysts say that to make the Lockheed-Martin Marietta merger successful, the new company will have to slash thousands of jobs.

    "This merger can't create more revenue. It can only pay off through reduced costs, and that means people" will be laid off, said Robert D. Paulson, who heads the aerospace industry practice for the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. in Los Angeles.
     
    ---

    Norman Augustine was the focus of the article and head of the merged companies who was expected to wield the "scalpel" in order make the merger financially viable.

    Over the years I'd done some research on Augustine, so when I saw a video of Augustine schmoozing with George W. Bush at the Cosmos Club celebrating Bush's inauguration early in 2001, I thought, Uh oh, the game's afoot.

    Cutting staff simply was not producing the revenue stream Lockheed Martin needed to support lavish lifestyles that even LM weapons sellers enjoyed, particularly when their major clients were based in TelAviv, requiring visits of 5 to 8 months' duration.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. annamaria says:
    @Yak-15
    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks. In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.

    It would be over rather quickly. Of course, the escalation could get extremely ugly for the Israelis but I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.

    “… The Israelis would absolutely massacre…”
    – You have been too much into slaughtering the unarmed and caged natives. What are the IDF’ latest achievements? Killing another well-known journalist wearing press jacket and killing another Palestinian boy that was not even close to the ghetto border?
    As for “Israel’ existence..” – it is all about the Eretz Israel by any means. Millions of human beings died in the Middle East because of the ziocons’ policies. Libya is destroyed. Iraq is destroyed. Syria has been fighting for her survival against the rapacious parasitoid that has been dreaming about world domination since capturing the US. And who is going to provide the moral rationale for the “existence?” — The Moldovan, Ukrainian, and Bolgarian thugs in Knesset. Tragicomedy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @deschutes
    Great post. The Zionist Israelis are the shit and scum of planet Earth. You cannot get any worse than Avigdor Lieberman, Ariel Sharon (now dead thank god!), Bibi Netanyahu, etc. The Zionists are very much like the CIA: they work secretly, scheming and planning their ugly machinations in the shadows for selfish gain.

    But seriously, Israel is arguably the most vile, hate consumed, parasitical, shithole 'country' that ever existed! Look at how it is such a massive parasite on the US taxpayer and US government: over 2 billion in 'aid' every year, and rising! Why!? Why does Israel get this American foreign aid, the largest foreign recipient by far, with not so much as a question from congress? Because fucking AIPAC has every congressman by the balls! If they don't have their tongue deeply wedged up the collective Zionist asshole–the zionists donate massively in the next election cycle to an obedient pro-zionist candidate to replace said thinking, reasonable congressman. These are the facts!

    Oh, and make sure to watch the youtube videos on illegal Israeli settlers in Hebron. Fucking outrageous: these Zionist settlers make white slave holders during the Old South era look like saints! They terrorize Palestinians, literally throwing shit, urine, vomit, molotov cocktails, rocks, burning tires, anything that causes harm at the Arab homes. And they do it with a sick fucked up kind of satisfaction as the IDF soldiers look on and couldn't give a shit. And what does the US government do about this? Nothing! Not a goddamned thing is done; in fact they provide the weapons to kill off the Palestinians. And don't forget the fucking asshole CAT corporation, making millions selling those giant tank bulldozers to the Israeli zionists to bulldoze Arab homes, olive trees, roads, and people! If I ever run into a CAT employee I'm gonna kick his fucking ass!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. deschutes says:

    “The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding.”

    WTF!? What utter hogwash, i.e. Obama spent more on social programs. What “social programs” are there left in USA? Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Compared to any other modern industrialized country, the USA is a neo-liberal austerity shithole. ALL money already goes to pork barrel defense spending, more than 1/2 of every tax dollar goes to fighting wars, making weapons, nukes, tanks, ordnance, etc. USA spends more on “defense” spending than the next 8 countries combined. That is one very sick and fucked up country. The military industrial complex since WWII just keeps getting bigger and bigger–yet this author thinks there’s not enough being spent!? Fuck off!

    Slash that fucking defense budget in half! Or even suspend ALL defense spending for the next 50 years! ALL of that money should go back to Americans, to improve their lives in every imaginable way: guaranteed healthcare for all; guaranteed eductation K-PhD, as far as you want to go; guaranteed housing; free internet for all; spend massively on schools, universities, places of higher learning; recononstruct nation’s crumbling infrastructure; build new hospitals, etc.

    Every dollar that goes to defense (which let’s be honest is actually for ‘offense’ as in sanction, invade, bomb, occupy and serve the fucking Zionists by fighting all their neighbors). Good god, what a fucked up country the USA has become. If you happen to bump into an employee of Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Boeing, or Booze Allen please do me a favor: kick that motherfucker in the balls as HARD as you possibly can. Then punch him in the face several times for good measure. His profit making weapons to kill others by the millions in faraway lands for empire comes at a terrible cost for every other American trying to make ends meet via right livelihood.

    “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.”

    – quote by Dwight D. Eisenhower, From a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953
    34th president of US 1953-1961 (1890 – 1969)

    Read More
    • Replies: @English Outsider
    "Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.”

    That's such a fine quote. Thank you for reminding me of it.

    But that's about it, I'm afraid. You don't seem quite to have grasped the thrust of the above article and your language is - terrible. How can I email the article to others if there's that sort of - nonsense in the comments section?

    I suppose I'll have to do what I did with articles in Moon of Alabama when their comments section was itself not above reproach in that respect. Cut and paste the article solo. But it's a pity since there are some great comments here.

    There's always ZH you know, if you really have to get it off your chest.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. annamaria says:
    @Michael Kenny
    None of this is of any help to Putin. He's still irreversibly bogged down in Syria and if US weapons are as inefficient as the Russians claim, then they'll just have to be improved. And if the whole thing was a scam cooked up between Trump and Putin to fool the American public then that just digs Trump even deeper into Russiagate. From Trump's point of view, the only scenario that helps him is: 1) the Syrian chemical attack took place, 2) the US missiles did substantial damage and 3) there was no collusion with Russia. Trump has already shot himself in the foot by backing off on sanctions. I don't think Nikki Haley got it wrong. Sanctions were agreed on at the meeting, as she announced, but somewhere after the announcement, Trump backed off for a reason we are not being told and Kudlow, probably on his own iniative, messed the whole thing up by attacking Haley. It's possible that Trump only then discovered that the whole thing had been a scam but until he comes clean, people will assume that it's a new, and far more serious, example of Trump's collusion with Putin. And if it was a scam, the purpose was probably to discredit the Skipral investigation, which in its turn points the accusing finger staright at Putin. Thus, however all this plays out, both Trump and Putin are losers and the winners are those demanding tougher action against Putin (in Ukraine, for example).

    Out of curiosity, had you been contacted to co-author the Steele Dossier?
    It is also extremely touching to read how much you admire the “I-am-not-confused” Nikki Haley.
    As for your brilliant thoughts on the Skripal Affair, the readers are left reassured that you have never studied that messy chemistry.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. Anonymous[343] • Disclaimer says:
    @Svigor
    A big part of the "welfare" is corporate. Boeing, Lockheed, etc.

    Check out the comment from Mattis. What a tool.

    Lockheed Martin got $35.2 billion from taxpayers last year. That’s more than many federal agencies.

    Of Lockheed Martin’s $51 billion in sales last year, nearly 70 percent, or $35.2 billion, came from sales to the U.S. government. It’s a colossal figure, hard to comprehend.

    Boeing is in second place with annual sales of $26.5 billion in 2016, a year in which the top five defense contractors — including General Dynamics, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman — had total sales of nearly $110 billion to the U.S. government, according to federal procurement data. The five biggest defense contractors took in more money from the U.S. government than the next 30 companies combined.

    But no one can touch Lockheed, the manufacturer of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The company is so big that some have likened it to a government agency and have quipped that Marillyn Hewson, Lockheed’s chief executive, is as powerful as a Cabinet secretary — or higher. When she gives her annual state of the company speeches, flanked by a pair of flags — one American, one with the company logo — she looks, well, presidential.

    In 2013, Marine Corps Gen. Jim Mattis, now the secretary of defense, told Congress, “If you don’t fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-trumps-budget-lockheed-looms-almo st-as-large-as-the-state-department/2018/02/15/e7eb3aa8-11c1-11e8-9570-29c9830535e5_story.html?sw_bypass=true&utm_term=.b90ea79cc444

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. @Anonymous

    But when [Lang] bristles that “I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America,” I won’t be getting my hopes up too high.
     
    That does sound like something parroted by Slumlord Hannity and other Fox News types. What is America? Land? People? Government? If I don’t like the government and its policies (purchased by moneyed interests and non-Americans) am I an “America hater”? I lived all my life in America. I have close relatives and immediate family who fought in wars and immediate family buried at Arlington. How does one qualify as an America hater? Not to genuflect to the military and their illegal and gravely immoral wars and actions? To disagree with the neocon/neolib policies and policymakers? Policies which run counter to Christian morality and natural law? If so then I’m an America hater in good standing.

    I dislike the policies of my government as much as you appear to dislike the policies of yours. So we’re on the parallel tracks there. But it’s possible to do that and still be a patriot. That’s democracy.

    Democracy’s not working at present, certainly not in my country and maybe not quite as expected for all those Americans patriots who voted anti-neocon. But it’s still a good idea, democracy, wouldn’t you agree?

    ,

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    " But it’s still a good idea, democracy, wouldn’t you agree?"

    Do you mean the proposition that 51% of voters can enslave the other 49%?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. nsa says:
    @Patrick Lang
    Lang not Lange I do not support conscription because I am a professional soldier and I do not like to see amateurs in my metier. As for those here who object to my being an American patriot. I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America. My blog does not focus on Syria any more than it does on anything else that interests me.

    If you want respect for being a servile government flunkie…..trundle on down to the American Legion lounge with the rest of the geezer drunks and frauds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Hey, little letters "nsa." A petty person is easy to recognize by his/her petty thinking and his/her immature manners.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. annamaria says:

    Know your war criminals, particularly the dishonorable military officers: “UNMASKING THE WHITE HELMETS,” http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/harper-unmasking-the-white-helmets.html
    — Here is the terrorist camp in Turkey, run by a British officer James le Mesurier:
    “James le Mesurier founded both Mayday Rescue and the White Helmets after “retiring” from the British Army and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Mayday Rescue’s annual budget is $35 million, with the funds coming from USAID, the UK Conflict Security and Stability Fund, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. To date, an estimated 3,000 recruits have been through the Mayday Rescue training programs and deployed into 120 different locations in rebel-held parts of Syria.”
    — Here is another dishonorable British officer, Paul Tilley: “Tilley ran British government communications during the Libya invasion, working directly out of 10 Downing Street. In November 2014, soon after le Mesurier was founding Mayday Rescue and the White Helmets, Tilley “retired” from the British service to found the strategic communications firm. Incostrat provides the social media and other communications services for Mayday and the White Helmets.”
    – Any Qs about le Mesurier’ and Tilley’ devotion to militant Islamists and fanatical Israelis when good money is paid for the devotion??

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  108. @Svigor
    A big part of the "welfare" is corporate. Boeing, Lockheed, etc.

    Just came across this LATimes report of the Lockheed – Martin Marietta merger in 1994.

    http://articles.latimes.com/1994-08-31/business/fi-33290_1_lockheed-martin-marietta

    Analysts say that to make the Lockheed-Martin Marietta merger successful, the new company will have to slash thousands of jobs.

    This merger can’t create more revenue. It can only pay off through reduced costs, and that means people” will be laid off, said Robert D. Paulson, who heads the aerospace industry practice for the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. in Los Angeles.

    Norman Augustine was the focus of the article and head of the merged companies who was expected to wield the “scalpel” in order make the merger financially viable.

    Over the years I’d done some research on Augustine, so when I saw a video of Augustine schmoozing with George W. Bush at the Cosmos Club celebrating Bush’s inauguration early in 2001, I thought, Uh oh, the game’s afoot.

    Cutting staff simply was not producing the revenue stream Lockheed Martin needed to support lavish lifestyles that even LM weapons sellers enjoyed, particularly when their major clients were based in TelAviv, requiring visits of 5 to 8 months’ duration.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. deschutes says:
    @annamaria
    "... The Israelis would absolutely massacre..."
    -- You have been too much into slaughtering the unarmed and caged natives. What are the IDF' latest achievements? Killing another well-known journalist wearing press jacket and killing another Palestinian boy that was not even close to the ghetto border?
    As for "Israel' existence.." - it is all about the Eretz Israel by any means. Millions of human beings died in the Middle East because of the ziocons' policies. Libya is destroyed. Iraq is destroyed. Syria has been fighting for her survival against the rapacious parasitoid that has been dreaming about world domination since capturing the US. And who is going to provide the moral rationale for the "existence?" -- The Moldovan, Ukrainian, and Bolgarian thugs in Knesset. Tragicomedy.

    Great post. The Zionist Israelis are the shit and scum of planet Earth. You cannot get any worse than Avigdor Lieberman, Ariel Sharon (now dead thank god!), Bibi Netanyahu, etc. The Zionists are very much like the CIA: they work secretly, scheming and planning their ugly machinations in the shadows for selfish gain.

    But seriously, Israel is arguably the most vile, hate consumed, parasitical, shithole ‘country’ that ever existed! Look at how it is such a massive parasite on the US taxpayer and US government: over 2 billion in ‘aid’ every year, and rising! Why!? Why does Israel get this American foreign aid, the largest foreign recipient by far, with not so much as a question from congress? Because fucking AIPAC has every congressman by the balls! If they don’t have their tongue deeply wedged up the collective Zionist asshole–the zionists donate massively in the next election cycle to an obedient pro-zionist candidate to replace said thinking, reasonable congressman. These are the facts!

    Oh, and make sure to watch the youtube videos on illegal Israeli settlers in Hebron. Fucking outrageous: these Zionist settlers make white slave holders during the Old South era look like saints! They terrorize Palestinians, literally throwing shit, urine, vomit, molotov cocktails, rocks, burning tires, anything that causes harm at the Arab homes. And they do it with a sick fucked up kind of satisfaction as the IDF soldiers look on and couldn’t give a shit. And what does the US government do about this? Nothing! Not a goddamned thing is done; in fact they provide the weapons to kill off the Palestinians. And don’t forget the fucking asshole CAT corporation, making millions selling those giant tank bulldozers to the Israeli zionists to bulldoze Arab homes, olive trees, roads, and people! If I ever run into a CAT employee I’m gonna kick his fucking ass!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. RobinG says:
    @WJ
    My opinion - Lange didn't support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options. Mostly ineffective strike to satisfy the neocons. He has a good website that focuses on Syria.

    I don't know why he would support conscription, but I know why I would. There would have been no long term , or perhaps even short term Iraq war, if there were conscription with no exceptions. Middle class people sending their precious Brandons and Brittanys to a war as ridiculous as that debacle, would not have dragged on very long. I realize the war was fought by mostly middle class southerners but they were volunteers. Each and every one of them.

    Lange's views on Syria are 180 degrees from the MSM. The big networks are in lock step unison on the "Assad gassed his own people" story. No deviation. I wonder who is paying them.

    “Lange didn’t support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options.”

    Better than the option of allowing a real investigation? Which would likely show that there was
    a) No chemical attack on the medical clinic (as claimed by some), nor on the neighborhood from which people came to that clinic, and
    b) An intentional poisoning of hostages in some discreet location, done by “rebels” to accuse SAA and facilitate US attack.

    The US might not be able to admit the extent to which they’ve [intentionally] supported ISIS, but with the mounting evidence that the Douma incident was a fabrication, they should be able to throw the White Helmets under the bus.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    “Lange didn’t support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options.”

    Better than the option of allowing a real investigation?
     
    At the crucial moment, Lang published the following on his website. More than likely it was seen by Mattis:

    An appeal to James Mattis

    I beseech you, sir, to consider the possibility that the supposed chlorine gas attack at Douma, Syria may have been a carefully constructed propaganda fraud on the part of the rebels encircled in Douma. Such a fraud would have as its purpose the elicitation of exactly the kind of response that we are seeing in the Western media. The rebels have been defeated in East Gouta Their fighters and families are being evacuated to Turkish occupied Jarabulus by air-conditioned bus. How would it benefit the Syrian government to make such an attack in this situation?

    I hope that you will determine the exact facts of what occurred at Douma before any action is taken.

    I recommend that you send someone competent to Syria to make an on the ground investigation.

    W. Patrick Lang

    Colonel (Ret.) US Army
     
    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/an-appeal-to-james-mattis.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. tac says:

    Russian Military Shows Wreckage Of US Missiles Intercepted In Syria

    The chief of the Russian General Staff’s main operations directorate added that Russia will supply the Syrian military with more air-defense systems and will continue to train Syrian air defense troops.

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-25/russian-military-shows-wreckage-us-missiles-intercepted-syria

    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/official-russian-announcement-of-new-air-defense-systems-to-be-delivered-to-syria-video/

    New air defense systems will soon be delivered to Damascus

    According to him, the Syrian Defense Ministry “analyzed in detail” the results of the missile attack of the United States and its allies.

    “Based on it, a number of changes have already been introduced into the air defense system of the country, which will further increase its reliability,” Rudskoy said.

    While the air defense systems were not named, it is widely believed to be the S-300 system.

    https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/official-russian-announcement-of-new-air-defense-systems-to-be-delivered-to-syria-video/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  112. @Svigor

    The “report” of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.
     
    There's a lot of the "this food is terrible, and the portions are so small" stuff from the flatheads. One minute they're shitting their pants over how the US is "forcing" Russia to develop all these new nuclear delivery systems because of our ABM defense capabilities and deployments, the next they're guffawing about how ineffective our ABM capabilities and deployments are.

    Is flathead an insult for American? In the Quebec vernacular, “tête-carrée” (squarehead) is an insult used against English speaking people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Svigor
    Russian ultranationalist apes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @Alfa158
    "A very senior civilian colleague in DIA once asked me why sophisticated weapons so often malfunction or are otherwise defeated. I told her that it was simply a fact of life that in actual warfare “whatever can go wrong, will go wrong.” She resolutely stated that this should not be. “The manufacturers guarantee that they will work as advertised,” she insisted. "
    Another reason we can't win wars and we get into wars we shouldn't. Senior officials that naive and uninformed about warfare.

    Aka women, homosexuals, trannies and “people of colour”. Not surprising that other countries kick the west’s ass militarily when our institutions are staffed with such sorry, second rate excuses of people.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye

    Aka women, homosexuals, trannies and “people of colour”. Not surprising that other countries kick the west’s ass militarily when our institutions are staffed with such sorry, second rate excuses of people.
     
    Yes, the Pentagon is full of trannies and drag queens these days.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. Herald says:
    @Patrick Lang
    Some of you do not understand the degree of compartmentation in government. It is nothing like a monolith. The WHs are largely funded by USAID which is part of State Department, and administered by the UK. There is no particular reason why Mattis would know much about it. It is possible that Trump doesn't know much about it.

    If Mattis didn’t know about it, then he should have done and likewise with Trump. Ignorance of the hard facts by either of these men is scarcely believable and even if true would be totally inexcuseable.

    Read More
    • Agree: RobinG
    • Replies: @L.K

    If Mattis didn’t know about it, then he should have done and likewise with Trump. Ignorance of the hard facts by either of these men is scarcely believable and even if true would be totally inexcuseable.
     
    So true... but I'm pretty sure they knew.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. tac says:

    105 hits in Syria? Not likely, says Russia & shows fragments of missiles downed in US-led strikes

    On Wednesday, the Russian Defense Ministry held a media briefing to present its analysis of the missile attack on three sites in Syria by the US, UK and France on the night of April 13. It said evidence on the ground, including missile fragments, holes made by the warheads and damage to the targets, could positively confirm only 25 successful hits, calling the US claim of 105 missiles reaching their targets dubious.

    Many of the missiles were intercepted by Syrian air defense, the ministry said, adding that some of the better-preserved fragments would be studied by Russian military engineers working on improving its anti-aircraft systems.

    https://www.rt.com/news/425120-russia-shows-downed-missiles-syria/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  116. Anonymous[209] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous
    Mr. Lang sounds like Mr. Buchanan in his latest piece published here: someone who considers himself dissident, but who thoughtlessly accepts that his Uncle Sam is the good guy.

    The article, especially this paragraph

    "The US has been committed to global war for seventeen years. This has been a special kind of war waged against Islamist guerrillas and terrorists worldwide. Such a war often demands equipment quite different from that used against states, especially a peer state. In that context relatively scarce funds have not been devoted to product improvement on things like TLAM (Tomahawk). Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription. The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding."

    begs some questions:

    1. Does Mr. Lang support the attack on the alleged "Syrian government chemical warfare connected sites"? He sounds like he does. But why?

    2. Does Mr. Lang support US military conscription? He sounds like he does. But why?

    3. Does Mr. Lang believe that more money should be spent on US military equipment like Tomahawk missiles for use against the government forces of Syria and Russia? He sounds like he does. But why?

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as "interesting, important, and controversial," with a "perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media."

    “begs some questions:”

    It might even raise them.

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

    “The first causality of war is the truth.” — 1918 US Senator Hiram Warren Johnson

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    “The first causality of war is the truth.”
     
    A rather comical spelling error, implying the cause of war is truth, where it is almost always lies, not truth.

    Did you intend "casualty"?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. Randal says:
    @RobinG
    "Lange didn’t support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options."

    Better than the option of allowing a real investigation? Which would likely show that there was
    a) No chemical attack on the medical clinic (as claimed by some), nor on the neighborhood from which people came to that clinic, and
    b) An intentional poisoning of hostages in some discreet location, done by "rebels" to accuse SAA and facilitate US attack.

    The US might not be able to admit the extent to which they've [intentionally] supported ISIS, but with the mounting evidence that the Douma incident was a fabrication, they should be able to throw the White Helmets under the bus.

    “Lange didn’t support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options.”

    Better than the option of allowing a real investigation?

    At the crucial moment, Lang published the following on his website. More than likely it was seen by Mattis:

    An appeal to James Mattis

    I beseech you, sir, to consider the possibility that the supposed chlorine gas attack at Douma, Syria may have been a carefully constructed propaganda fraud on the part of the rebels encircled in Douma. Such a fraud would have as its purpose the elicitation of exactly the kind of response that we are seeing in the Western media. The rebels have been defeated in East Gouta Their fighters and families are being evacuated to Turkish occupied Jarabulus by air-conditioned bus. How would it benefit the Syrian government to make such an attack in this situation?

    I hope that you will determine the exact facts of what occurred at Douma before any action is taken.

    I recommend that you send someone competent to Syria to make an on the ground investigation.

    W. Patrick Lang

    Colonel (Ret.) US Army

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/an-appeal-to-james-mattis.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    This letter simply wouldn't matter. It doesn't matter. The agenda driving the question hasn't much to do with challenging the use of chemical weapons.
    , @RobinG
    Thanks, Randal. And thanks to Col. Lang for the excellent letter.

    (Hopefully Lang actually sent it to Mattis, didn't just post it on his blog! That would be like my neighbors who post complaints on the local listserve, rather than actually contacting the police or the appropriate government department,)

    But if Mattis did see this, it rather contradicts Lang's assertion that the compartmentalized Mattis had no way of knowing what was going on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  119. @anonymous
    Wow, this new author has brought along some sensitive wingmen.

    No, I’m not paid. Nor have I smeared anyone. I like this website and often comment when I read something that seems especially good or bad.

    In his first piece published here, Mr. Lang apparently used quotation marks around something that he was paraphrasing, and rather poorly at that. We don’t know, because he declined to address the point, even though some of us did in comments that he seems to be reviewing closely.

    In this, his second piece published here, he has been sloppy in conveying what we’re then told he has addressed elsewhere in opposition to the wrongful warmongering of a government that he nevertheless served for decades. My impression is that he’s a company man, with appeal predominantly to others that naively romanticize the military component of the Establishment, especially of their time in its employ.

    So at this point, Mr. Lang seems below the level of most authors published here. But at least he responds (to some extent) to criticism. And I hope to be complimenting him here if his future work is better. But when he bristles that “I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America,” I won’t be getting my hopes up too high.

    Please consider confining your future comments to the substantive.

    1 -I repeat :there was nothing in Pat Lang article that could have led to your question.
    At least for a guy with an average IQ.
    It’s fact.
    2 – Nobody cares about your ” impression”. This is about military stuff, not philosophy or painting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    You "repeat"? So you're also "Alexandar" in #39 above?

    Must be military stuff.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  120. @deschutes
    "The Obama Administration liked to use the armed forces but did not think of them with anything like the high priority it gave to its social programs. The resulting sequester of defense funding played a role in the decline of US equipment efficacy against that of the Russians. There will be a change in that funding."

    WTF!? What utter hogwash, i.e. Obama spent more on social programs. What "social programs" are there left in USA? Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Compared to any other modern industrialized country, the USA is a neo-liberal austerity shithole. ALL money already goes to pork barrel defense spending, more than 1/2 of every tax dollar goes to fighting wars, making weapons, nukes, tanks, ordnance, etc. USA spends more on "defense" spending than the next 8 countries combined. That is one very sick and fucked up country. The military industrial complex since WWII just keeps getting bigger and bigger–yet this author thinks there's not enough being spent!? Fuck off!

    Slash that fucking defense budget in half! Or even suspend ALL defense spending for the next 50 years! ALL of that money should go back to Americans, to improve their lives in every imaginable way: guaranteed healthcare for all; guaranteed eductation K-PhD, as far as you want to go; guaranteed housing; free internet for all; spend massively on schools, universities, places of higher learning; recononstruct nation's crumbling infrastructure; build new hospitals, etc.

    Every dollar that goes to defense (which let's be honest is actually for 'offense' as in sanction, invade, bomb, occupy and serve the fucking Zionists by fighting all their neighbors). Good god, what a fucked up country the USA has become. If you happen to bump into an employee of Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Boeing, or Booze Allen please do me a favor: kick that motherfucker in the balls as HARD as you possibly can. Then punch him in the face several times for good measure. His profit making weapons to kill others by the millions in faraway lands for empire comes at a terrible cost for every other American trying to make ends meet via right livelihood.

    "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."

    – quote by Dwight D. Eisenhower, From a speech before the American Society of Newspaper Editors, April 16, 1953
    34th president of US 1953-1961 (1890 - 1969)

    “Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.”

    That’s such a fine quote. Thank you for reminding me of it.

    But that’s about it, I’m afraid. You don’t seem quite to have grasped the thrust of the above article and your language is – terrible. How can I email the article to others if there’s that sort of – nonsense in the comments section?

    I suppose I’ll have to do what I did with articles in Moon of Alabama when their comments section was itself not above reproach in that respect. Cut and paste the article solo. But it’s a pity since there are some great comments here.

    There’s always ZH you know, if you really have to get it off your chest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @deschutes
    Dear English pompous sphincter,

    Sorry to not have met your pedantic, patronizing, supercilious, insufferable ass-clown standards of propriety. Why is it that you, like all of the British peeps I've met over the course of my life (and that's a lot btw) are such arrogant, smug, pedantic self-important twats?

    Leaving you to your self-appointed school nanny internet finger wagging,

    DM

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. @Vojkan
    Let us hope that the US military have more brains than the US policy makers and that they have the guts to speak truth to the morons.

    According to a recent post by The Saker, no one in the US military above the rank of colonel has either brains or guts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. L.K says:
    @Yak-15
    If Russia declared Syria an exclusion zone Israel would call that bluff within weeks. In that theater of operations the Israelis would absolutely massacre the Russian presence and any reinforcements. Israel would easily take apart any integrated air defense system and accompanying ground units the Russians could employ by combined commando raid, ground incursion and air/missile strikes.

    It would be over rather quickly. Of course, the escalation could get extremely ugly for the Israelis but I believe if Israel sees its existence threatened it will act decisively.

    Ooops, I hit the Agree button by mistake!

    Your post is ridiculous and I meant LOL.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. L.K says:
    @Herald
    If Mattis didn't know about it, then he should have done and likewise with Trump. Ignorance of the hard facts by either of these men is scarcely believable and even if true would be totally inexcuseable.

    If Mattis didn’t know about it, then he should have done and likewise with Trump. Ignorance of the hard facts by either of these men is scarcely believable and even if true would be totally inexcuseable.

    So true… but I’m pretty sure they knew.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. skrik says:
    @Patrick Lang
    You are correct. 77th Brigade, Denison Barracks Berkshire.

    Ah! All that ‘deep background’ may well explain the ‘standard’ Berkshire rhyming slang…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. dearieme says:
    @Shahna

    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.
     
    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.

    In fact, I'm only surprised you now feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades ..... What? Bombs too graphic for you? Starving Yemeni children and brides dead by your ordinance waking you up? Perhaps it's just Syrian lies or the utter destruction Libya? Bully for you.

    From South Africa.

    “those who invented the concentration camp”: oh God this rubbish again. The first use of concentration camps, so called, was by the Spanish in Cuba, the second by the Americans in the Philippines. None of these camps – Spanish, US, or British – were concentration camps in Hitler’s sense. Why do you repeat Nazi propaganda?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. @DESERT FOX
    The Zionist controlled U.S. gov lies about everything and especially about the wars the U.S. is fighting for Israel in the Mideast and so the Russians are right and approximately 75% of the missiles were shot down, liars lie, that is what the ziocons do.

    If anyone doubts that Israel controls the U.S. gov, just remember , Israel did 911 and got away with it.

    Actually, according to a report on Southfront.org today only 22 missiles hit their target, or 79% failed to hit the target.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  127. Modern wars are mostly infomercials for weapons.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. Aedib says:
    @TG
    Indeed. We may never know what really happened, though. What is weird is just how divergent the claims are. The Syrians are claiming a success rate better than ANY air defense system has ever achieved in real combat. The Americans are claiming a 100% success rate for complex missiles of different makes, some of which have never been employed in combat before at all. It's a puzzler.

    A few random thoughts though:

    1. If 70 cruise missiles or so had been intercepted or diverted, Syria should be littered with wrecked missiles. Where are they?

    2. If Syria really did achieve this success rate against a pre-planned saturation attack, this would largely eliminate the US ability to bomb countries it doesn't like back to the stone age. This would completely gut the heart of current US strategy (if you could even dignify such chaos as 'strategy'). This should have resulted in apoplexy by the US establishment, and a massive spike in orders for Russian air defense systems. So far, I'm not seeing that.

    3. The Americans claimed that the Syrians launched a bunch of interceptors after the attack was over. At first, that made no sense. But, if the Syrians really had been caught with their pants down, and they wanted to claim that they had shot down some missiles, they would have had to fire off some interceptors so that there would be witnesses seeing them launch. Sure, the Americans could be lying about this to make their claims more credible, but self-consistency is not a hallmark of American propaganda. On the other hand, the Syrians had apparently been warned ahead of time about the time and place of the attacks, so it's hard to believe that they were taken by surprise. Again, it's a puzzler.

    There are some wrecks:

    https://www.rt.com/news/425120-russia-shows-downed-missiles-syria/

    Anyway, take the “71 hits score” with a bag of salt. The 10-30 hits range seems to be the most likely.

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

    “Lange didn’t support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options.”

    Better than the option of allowing a real investigation?
     
    At the crucial moment, Lang published the following on his website. More than likely it was seen by Mattis:

    An appeal to James Mattis

    I beseech you, sir, to consider the possibility that the supposed chlorine gas attack at Douma, Syria may have been a carefully constructed propaganda fraud on the part of the rebels encircled in Douma. Such a fraud would have as its purpose the elicitation of exactly the kind of response that we are seeing in the Western media. The rebels have been defeated in East Gouta Their fighters and families are being evacuated to Turkish occupied Jarabulus by air-conditioned bus. How would it benefit the Syrian government to make such an attack in this situation?

    I hope that you will determine the exact facts of what occurred at Douma before any action is taken.

    I recommend that you send someone competent to Syria to make an on the ground investigation.

    W. Patrick Lang

    Colonel (Ret.) US Army
     
    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/an-appeal-to-james-mattis.html

    This letter simply wouldn’t matter. It doesn’t matter. The agenda driving the question hasn’t much to do with challenging the use of chemical weapons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    This letter simply wouldn’t matter. It doesn’t matter. The agenda driving the question hasn’t much to do with challenging the use of chemical weapons.
     
    Clearly it matters to Lang that he did what he could to draw attention to the situation as he saw it. Whether it affected the subsequent discussions about exactly what kind of strike to launch, who knows? Obviously the neocon, Israeli and Saudi driving forces behind US Syria policy are not interested in Lang's opinion (and nor are they interested in whether or not there was any gas attack), but there appears to be a view that in the end it came down to Mattis and Dunford talking Trump and Bolton down from some literally stupid proposals, so perhaps it did have an effect on Mattis' thinking on the issue.

    We likely will not know until Mattis publishes some memoirs, and quite possibly not even then.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. RobinG says:
    @Randal

    “Lange didn’t support the strike but he saw it as the best of a lot of bad options.”

    Better than the option of allowing a real investigation?
     
    At the crucial moment, Lang published the following on his website. More than likely it was seen by Mattis:

    An appeal to James Mattis

    I beseech you, sir, to consider the possibility that the supposed chlorine gas attack at Douma, Syria may have been a carefully constructed propaganda fraud on the part of the rebels encircled in Douma. Such a fraud would have as its purpose the elicitation of exactly the kind of response that we are seeing in the Western media. The rebels have been defeated in East Gouta Their fighters and families are being evacuated to Turkish occupied Jarabulus by air-conditioned bus. How would it benefit the Syrian government to make such an attack in this situation?

    I hope that you will determine the exact facts of what occurred at Douma before any action is taken.

    I recommend that you send someone competent to Syria to make an on the ground investigation.

    W. Patrick Lang

    Colonel (Ret.) US Army
     
    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/an-appeal-to-james-mattis.html

    Thanks, Randal. And thanks to Col. Lang for the excellent letter.

    (Hopefully Lang actually sent it to Mattis, didn’t just post it on his blog! That would be like my neighbors who post complaints on the local listserve, rather than actually contacting the police or the appropriate government department,)

    But if Mattis did see this, it rather contradicts Lang’s assertion that the compartmentalized Mattis had no way of knowing what was going on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Hopefully Lang actually sent it to Mattis, didn’t just post it on his blog!
     
    I assume so, but I didn't say so because I don't know so, if you see what I mean.

    But if Mattis did see this, it rather contradicts Lang’s assertion that the compartmentalized Mattis had no way of knowing what was going on.
     
    I don't think so. This was just a letter from an experienced, retired colleague suggesting further enquiries. It would be nice to have been a fly on the wall when the response to any queries prompted by the letter came back (assuming Mattis made them), perhaps......
    , @JerseyJeffersonian
    RobinG,

    It were wise to consider that Mattis' access to information might be being impeded - actively and/or passively - by the NeoCon bitter enders installed during the previous administrations, people who believe that it is their job to do so. (We have been seeing this very thing from the bitter enders at the FBI and the "Justice" departments in their plotting against the new administration, yes? So you have an example of that right in front of your eyes.)

    With that understanding, and given Col. Lang's likely experience of this sort of obstruction by hostile underlings, his appeal to Mattis might be seen as an admonition to dig a little deeper, & to press his underlings about their truthfulness. So, Mattis could indeed be misinformed, and precisely because of the compartmentalization that you accede. Hence the letter going hand in hand with his worries about active and/or passive obstruction in access to vital information, or the existence of contrary intelligence and interpretation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. @Art
    “The first causality of war is the truth.” --- 1918 US Senator Hiram Warren Johnson

    “The first causality of war is the truth.”

    A rather comical spelling error, implying the cause of war is truth, where it is almost always lies, not truth.

    Did you intend “casualty”?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Svigor says:
    @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Is flathead an insult for American? In the Quebec vernacular, "tête-carrée" (squarehead) is an insult used against English speaking people.

    Russian ultranationalist apes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. @Svigor

    The “report” of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.
     
    There's a lot of the "this food is terrible, and the portions are so small" stuff from the flatheads. One minute they're shitting their pants over how the US is "forcing" Russia to develop all these new nuclear delivery systems because of our ABM defense capabilities and deployments, the next they're guffawing about how ineffective our ABM capabilities and deployments are.

    Well, Svigor, I have been given to understand that the true danger from those missiles sited near the Russian border is that these missiles can quickly be repurposed as offensive missiles, and given their location right on the border, they could be used in a first strike capacity against Russia’s military forces. The ineffectiveness of these US missiles in a defensive role is well known, but their dual use is a source of concern; this has been clearly articulated by the Russians for some time. These deployments are revelatory of intent to continue to chase after a first strike/decapitation strike capability by the US and its poodles. This aggressive intent is what lies behind the Russian development of weapon systems not succeptible of destruction in such a strike; a restoration of deterrence regardless of the US’s scheming is the primary aim.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Randal says:
    @RobinG
    Thanks, Randal. And thanks to Col. Lang for the excellent letter.

    (Hopefully Lang actually sent it to Mattis, didn't just post it on his blog! That would be like my neighbors who post complaints on the local listserve, rather than actually contacting the police or the appropriate government department,)

    But if Mattis did see this, it rather contradicts Lang's assertion that the compartmentalized Mattis had no way of knowing what was going on.

    Hopefully Lang actually sent it to Mattis, didn’t just post it on his blog!

    I assume so, but I didn’t say so because I don’t know so, if you see what I mean.

    But if Mattis did see this, it rather contradicts Lang’s assertion that the compartmentalized Mattis had no way of knowing what was going on.

    I don’t think so. This was just a letter from an experienced, retired colleague suggesting further enquiries. It would be nice to have been a fly on the wall when the response to any queries prompted by the letter came back (assuming Mattis made them), perhaps……

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. Randal says:
    @EliteCommInc.
    This letter simply wouldn't matter. It doesn't matter. The agenda driving the question hasn't much to do with challenging the use of chemical weapons.

    This letter simply wouldn’t matter. It doesn’t matter. The agenda driving the question hasn’t much to do with challenging the use of chemical weapons.

    Clearly it matters to Lang that he did what he could to draw attention to the situation as he saw it. Whether it affected the subsequent discussions about exactly what kind of strike to launch, who knows? Obviously the neocon, Israeli and Saudi driving forces behind US Syria policy are not interested in Lang’s opinion (and nor are they interested in whether or not there was any gas attack), but there appears to be a view that in the end it came down to Mattis and Dunford talking Trump and Bolton down from some literally stupid proposals, so perhaps it did have an effect on Mattis’ thinking on the issue.

    We likely will not know until Mattis publishes some memoirs, and quite possibly not even then.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. @RobinG
    Thanks, Randal. And thanks to Col. Lang for the excellent letter.

    (Hopefully Lang actually sent it to Mattis, didn't just post it on his blog! That would be like my neighbors who post complaints on the local listserve, rather than actually contacting the police or the appropriate government department,)

    But if Mattis did see this, it rather contradicts Lang's assertion that the compartmentalized Mattis had no way of knowing what was going on.

    RobinG,

    It were wise to consider that Mattis’ access to information might be being impeded – actively and/or passively – by the NeoCon bitter enders installed during the previous administrations, people who believe that it is their job to do so. (We have been seeing this very thing from the bitter enders at the FBI and the “Justice” departments in their plotting against the new administration, yes? So you have an example of that right in front of your eyes.)

    With that understanding, and given Col. Lang’s likely experience of this sort of obstruction by hostile underlings, his appeal to Mattis might be seen as an admonition to dig a little deeper, & to press his underlings about their truthfulness. So, Mattis could indeed be misinformed, and precisely because of the compartmentalization that you accede. Hence the letter going hand in hand with his worries about active and/or passive obstruction in access to vital information, or the existence of contrary intelligence and interpretation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. We will see how the US will deal with the failure….by that time Russia will still be ahead….

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  138. Erebus says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    against which the US has no effective defence.
     
    And here is a conundrum--most US policy-makers sincerely believe (it is expected from them--most of them are badly educated) in the narrative of "invulnerability" of the US assets in Europe and Asia through THAAD, Patriot-PAC 3 and other anti-air-missile defenses. This is dangerous, because those systems do not work but belief in their efficiency may create a desire to attack Russians or someone else and may escalate immediately with really bad consequences for the American assets. Considering US inherent bias towards nukes' use one has to tread these waters cautiously and literally peel away, layer by layer, American myth of military-technological superiority, until US policy-makers get the message and either completely bankrupt country trying to "catch up" (they will not) or, finally, get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.

    … belief in their efficiency may create a desire to attack Russians or someone else and may escalate…

    As Mark Twain said: “It ain’t what you don’t know that kills you. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sparkon
    It's a great saying, but Twain isn't the original author. In fact, there's no record he ever said it. Sometimes Satchel Paige is given credit, Josh Billings, Kin Hubbard, and others. I've written about this before at UR, so this is another entry for my

    • Broken Record Department

    I first saw this familiar saying years ago in a book of aphorisms, where it was attributed to "Kin" Hubbard, and rendered as:

    It ain't what you don't know that hurts you;
    It's what you know that just ain't so.

    https://newrepublic.com/minutes/126677/it-aint-dont-know-gets-trouble-must-big-short-opens-fake-mark-twain-quote

    Similarly, there is no good record Abraham Lincoln ever said:


    You can fool all of the people some of the time,
    And some of the people all of the time,
    But you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
     
    https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/161924

    The need to get some celebrity involved is a reflection of the human belief that things are more profound when uttered by famous lips, but both sayings remain valid irrespective of the fame of the original author.

    The next part of my broken record is that false knowledge is dangerous, but what you don't know -- ignorance -- can hurt you as well.

    In this word, we all labor with some measure of ignorance.

    In this case, we certainly do not know what really happened in Syria during this recent attack, as Col Lang notes. Whatever the case, it must have been an exciting night for personnel staffing air defense positions in the Syrian military.

    From what I can gather, we may not even know what happened at Shayrat last year. As you know, I've taken the minority position about the Shayrat attack, and have said I think the ISI images show that many if not most of the cruise missiles hit their targets at Shayrat. That concurs with the ISI analysis, as well as statements from the U.S. and Syria.

    According to the ISI analysis, many of the Tomahawks in April 2017 were directed at hardened aircraft shelters, and several of these received multiple hits. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that the targets of these cruise missiles were any aircraft parked in the shelters, and not the shelters themselves.

    It follows that Syria might have upgraded its air defenses around airfields in the wake of these attacks, especially if in fact the primary target was parked aircraft - sitting ducks. It is not unreasonable to assume that they would want to enhance their AD, and these improved air defenses might account for the very good Syrian results reported by the Russians, if you accept this line of reasoning.

    Again, as always, the caveat applies that we are dealing with open-source material about recent and ongoing military action and adventures, so take it with the proverbial grain or fistful of salt. Tequila optional, pedantry guaranteed.

    Cheers!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. Rollie says:
    @Randal

    I also wonder why Mr. Unz sees this new author as “interesting, important, and controversial,” with a “perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media.”
     
    Interesting and important are to some extent matters of personal taste and opinion, I suppose, though how anyone with an interest in current military and related activities in the ME could not find interesting the opinion of someone with Lang's bio (W. Patrick Lang) is difficult to understand. There's no necessity to agree with his opinions, either, to regard them as interesting or important.

    controversial,” with a “perspectiv[e] largely excluded from the American mainstream media.”
     
    As for these, as far as I can see Lang falls directly into these categories, having been largely excluded from the mainstream US TV and other news media precisely because his opinions aren't what the ruling neocon/pro-Israeli/pro-Saudi elite consensus wants to see broadcast to the general population.

    You want important? Get Francis Boyle up here. One of the world’s pre-eminent legal scholars, who stopped a US war with lawfare, identified the Amerithrax perps, exposed the Lockerbie bombing deception, and denounced illegal US biological warfare in Africa. You want excluded? They put him on the friggin no-fly list.

    There’s no shortage of people telling us what Colonels think.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. annamaria says:
    @nsa
    If you want respect for being a servile government flunkie.....trundle on down to the American Legion lounge with the rest of the geezer drunks and frauds.

    Hey, little letters “nsa.” A petty person is easy to recognize by his/her petty thinking and his/her immature manners.

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

    The Kagans clan’ project of banderization of Ukraine is getting steam: “Donbass Shelled Under NATO Command” https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/04/breaking-donbass-shelled-under-nato-command/
    “Today, mortar shelling has been carried out on the Yasinovaya town by the Ukrainian army, under the command of NATO. Such a statement was made by the deputy head of the operational headquarters of the self-proclaimed Democratic People’s Republic of Donetsk, Eduard Bazurin. “According to our information, the operation was conducted by NATO artillery advisers, who arrived the day before to conduct field tests and training of Ukrainian security forces,” said Basurin.
    He added that American radar systems are deployed on the roofs of several multi-storey houses in Avdeevka, a few kilometers north of Donetsk.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  142. @Anonymous

    Phil Giraldi exposed the White Helmets almost a year ago –

    https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/the-fraud-of-the-white-helmets/

    Unz has provided a platform for Ron Paul’s Liberty Report interview of Vanessa Beeley’s reporting on Syria/White Helmets

    http://www.unz.com/video/ronpaullibertyreport_the-ngos-pushing-a-new-syria-war-with-guest-vanessa-beeley/

    and for Eva Bartlett’s on-the-scenes coverage of White Helmets activities in Syria.
     
    Is the Trump Administration/DoS trying to gaslight us?

    US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert yesterday: we "are very grateful for all the work the White Helmets continue to do.. on behalf of the US government and coalition forces.. I just exchanged emails with them the other day... peoples bills are still being paid..'

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/987297513974747136?s=20

     

    Is the Trump Administration/DoS trying to gaslight us?

    The whole world is gaslighting you…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. anonymous[397] • Disclaimer says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    against which the US has no effective defence.
     
    And here is a conundrum--most US policy-makers sincerely believe (it is expected from them--most of them are badly educated) in the narrative of "invulnerability" of the US assets in Europe and Asia through THAAD, Patriot-PAC 3 and other anti-air-missile defenses. This is dangerous, because those systems do not work but belief in their efficiency may create a desire to attack Russians or someone else and may escalate immediately with really bad consequences for the American assets. Considering US inherent bias towards nukes' use one has to tread these waters cautiously and literally peel away, layer by layer, American myth of military-technological superiority, until US policy-makers get the message and either completely bankrupt country trying to "catch up" (they will not) or, finally, get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.

    get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.

    I’m not very sanguine about that. American policy has been premised on being able to sail around the world and act unilaterally as it sees fit, using force whenever it wants to. This course has been in motion for the past 120 years since the Spanish-American war (if one can call it that). See the pattern? Reversing this would require a very fundamental change on many different levels, something that would not be achievable barring some extremely strong leadership which seems unlikely to arise under current conditions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Herald
    Yes, Andrei seems rather optimistic but I would suspect he is just talking about a best case scenario.
    , @Sergey Krieger
    Whatever has the beginning has the end. Reality is a tough thing to go against.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  144. @nsa
    "but when a USA navy ship mistakenly shot down an Iranian airliner...."

    mistakenly?

    nsa

    No, panic. The CO of the Vincennes clearly had in mind the destruction of the career of the captain of USS Stark.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. @Ozymandias
    So, a 100% success rate can't be believed, it's just too extreme. But Soviet era systems shooting down a large majority of modern weapons, well, that's easy to believe. Nothing extreme about it at all.

    People mostly believe whichever extreme story supports their preconceived notions.

    Ozymandius

    “People mostly believe whichever extreme story supports their preconceived notions.” I don’t do that. I have a long history of not doing that. It cost me dearly in career terms. Once again, I am not guessing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. Colonel

    According to l’Opinion the French frigates had problems with their missile launches, hence Pravda on the Potomac was lying through it’s teeth as usual. The Russkies should send their latest S-300 batteries to Syria, since once these missiles are married to the Russian air intercept network, it will improve the S-300′s abilities. Furthermore, Allied cruise missiles , whether new, as in the French ones, or older models, these types of missiles are subsonic, hence travel at a low altitude. According to the Russian military, some of the cruise missiles were diverted off target by Russian ECM hardware.

    Enjoy …. Some of the comments were worth reading … One against Franglish.

    https://www.lopinion.fr/blog/secret-defense/marine-a-rencontre-aleas-technique-lors-tir-missiles-croisiere-147551

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  147. L.K says:
    @Randal

    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.
     
    [Yawn]

    Show me a country whose ancestors have done nothing bad and I'll show you a country whose ancestors have done nothing. Meanwhile the British kick-started the industrial revolution, contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment (though not everyone would regard this as entirely a good thing), built a global empire from the unpromising start of a small, cold and wet island off Europe while kicking the backsides of most of the peoples they came up against around the world, in a time when there wasn't even the pretence of a "global rule of law", and played a big part in bringing civilisation and the modern world to Africa, especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.

    Plenty to be proud of and plenty to be embarrassed about, but on balance a pretty damned good performance.

    Yawnnn… laughable British apologia…

    This bit

    “contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment”

    is just simply funny.

    Considering that factions of the Brit deep state were very much responsible for both world wars, obsessed as they were with destroying the up and coming competitor Germany, Britain really was a major contributor to the steep decline of Europe.

    Since then, it has been the ZUS major sidekick in crimes against peace. In fact, if we look back 200 years or more, it’s hard to think of a more warmongering country than Perfidious Albion… well, I guess Zamerica learned from the best…

    Read More
    • Agree: Herald
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    I'm as irritated as anybody by Brit-chauvinism, but their eminent contribution to the technical and philosophical foundations of modern society - from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing - is undeniable.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. bluedog says:
    @Patrick Lang
    Lang not Lange I do not support conscription because I am a professional soldier and I do not like to see amateurs in my metier. As for those here who object to my being an American patriot. I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America. My blog does not focus on Syria any more than it does on anything else that interests me.

    Damn that makes all 26 of my ancestors who fought to help create this country somehow traitors, instead of I hate the word patriots, for its been well over used beaten to death brought back to life so it could be flayed again by the sunshine patriots,the same sunshine patriots who sit by as we lie,lie,lie,after all that’s what professional soldiers do if they want to climb the rank ladder that is ,to get into another war.!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Patrick Lang
    bluedog

    Pathetic childish ad hominem. Only 26? My favorite among my numerous War of Independence ancestors is Color Sergeant Amos Hall 7th Connecticut Line. He served from 1775 50 1782 and was at Valley Forge and Cornwallis' surrender. I prefer him to the various militia colonels who raised their own regiments for the war.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  149. Herald says:
    @Svigor

    The “report” of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.
     
    There's a lot of the "this food is terrible, and the portions are so small" stuff from the flatheads. One minute they're shitting their pants over how the US is "forcing" Russia to develop all these new nuclear delivery systems because of our ABM defense capabilities and deployments, the next they're guffawing about how ineffective our ABM capabilities and deployments are.

    Yes we all know that, but so what?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. Thirdeye says:
    @Quartermaster
    The Germans weren't close to having a functioning fission weapon, much less a thermonuke. David Irving deals with this in his book "The Virus House." The allies found the German's last attempt at a nuclear reactor and if it had worked, everyone in the building would have been lethally irradiated.

    The "report" of the Patriot not, or barely, functioning is fake news. The system has worked quite well.

    There’s a reason why 400% redundancy is in the doctrine of intercepting with the Patriot system. Despite all the hype, its efficiency against the Scud during Desert Storm was low. And that was against sporadic launches of a large single-stage missile that made a big juicy tracking and proximity detonation target. A barrage of modern warheads would present a much more difficult situation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Herald says:
    @anonymous

    get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.
     
    I'm not very sanguine about that. American policy has been premised on being able to sail around the world and act unilaterally as it sees fit, using force whenever it wants to. This course has been in motion for the past 120 years since the Spanish-American war (if one can call it that). See the pattern? Reversing this would require a very fundamental change on many different levels, something that would not be achievable barring some extremely strong leadership which seems unlikely to arise under current conditions.

    Yes, Andrei seems rather optimistic but I would suspect he is just talking about a best case scenario.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. Thirdeye says:
    @L.K
    Yawnnn... laughable British apologia...

    This bit

    "contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment"
     
    is just simply funny.

    Considering that factions of the Brit deep state were very much responsible for both world wars, obsessed as they were with destroying the up and coming competitor Germany, Britain really was a major contributor to the steep decline of Europe.

    Since then, it has been the ZUS major sidekick in crimes against peace. In fact, if we look back 200 years or more, it's hard to think of a more warmongering country than Perfidious Albion... well, I guess Zamerica learned from the best...

    I’m as irritated as anybody by Brit-chauvinism, but their eminent contribution to the technical and philosophical foundations of modern society – from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing – is undeniable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing
     
    A list from Anglophone history books. All these guys can easily be replaced by some French or German guys. In 19 century where most of history of science and technology was being written Britain was the dominat power. France was in decline and Germany was barely rising. If Britain was swallowed by the seas in 16 century the history obviously would be different but humanity would not miss anything.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. anon[228] • Disclaimer says:
    @Randal

    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.
     
    [Yawn]

    Show me a country whose ancestors have done nothing bad and I'll show you a country whose ancestors have done nothing. Meanwhile the British kick-started the industrial revolution, contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment (though not everyone would regard this as entirely a good thing), built a global empire from the unpromising start of a small, cold and wet island off Europe while kicking the backsides of most of the peoples they came up against around the world, in a time when there wasn't even the pretence of a "global rule of law", and played a big part in bringing civilisation and the modern world to Africa, especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.

    Plenty to be proud of and plenty to be embarrassed about, but on balance a pretty damned good performance.

    I want to move past the long dead history of the past. I can forgive also. But any behavior suggestive of the old behavior is not negotiable is not forgivable is not pardonable Revenge in case of no justice should define the response .

    Today we see France and UK riding on the back of US are trying to re enact the imperialism. This must be destroyed. UK and France should face the consequences So will their citizen if they re elect their leaders.

    The behaviors become despicable recidivism when one Clinton goes to Guatemala and apologizes for overthrowing the democratically elected president and another goes to Hawaii and apologizes for acquiring that nation island but forgets not to repeat same behavior in Iraq, Libya and Syria.

    Destruction yes violent destruction of the system that allow some psychopaths to acquire position and then repeat the same abuse of the power nonchalantly blithely is what is required.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Thirdeye says:
    @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Aka women, homosexuals, trannies and "people of colour". Not surprising that other countries kick the west's ass militarily when our institutions are staffed with such sorry, second rate excuses of people.

    Aka women, homosexuals, trannies and “people of colour”. Not surprising that other countries kick the west’s ass militarily when our institutions are staffed with such sorry, second rate excuses of people.

    Yes, the Pentagon is full of trannies and drag queens these days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @aleksandar
    1 -I repeat :there was nothing in Pat Lang article that could have led to your question.
    At least for a guy with an average IQ.
    It's fact.
    2 - Nobody cares about your " impression". This is about military stuff, not philosophy or painting.

    You “repeat”? So you’re also “Alexandar” in #39 above?

    Must be military stuff.

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

    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.
     
    [Yawn]

    Show me a country whose ancestors have done nothing bad and I'll show you a country whose ancestors have done nothing. Meanwhile the British kick-started the industrial revolution, contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment (though not everyone would regard this as entirely a good thing), built a global empire from the unpromising start of a small, cold and wet island off Europe while kicking the backsides of most of the peoples they came up against around the world, in a time when there wasn't even the pretence of a "global rule of law", and played a big part in bringing civilisation and the modern world to Africa, especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.

    Plenty to be proud of and plenty to be embarrassed about, but on balance a pretty damned good performance.

    especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.

    How sweet of the British.

    I like the euphemism “give us a run for our money” where Shahna used the less than elegant term “concentration camp”.

    As far as kickstarting the industrial revolution is concerned, in describing the phenomenon please do not forget to mention its capitalisation by the enourmous monies plundered in India, the one and only economically successful colony (the other one might have been what is now the United States, but that went awry a while before the invention of the concentration camp.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    You disqualify yourself from even the credit due a UR thread standard of expertise by ignorance of the economic success of Australia's six colonies(later states), Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, Malaya, Ceylon, Fiji, Hong Kong and Singapore not to mention the West Indies...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. Trump shouda put that McMahon wrestling lady in the propaganda department, shes pretty good at convincing 50 year old adults that wrestling is real.
    Americans just aren’t buying what these idiots are trying to sell us with these chemical attacks by the brutal dicktaters.
    I’m honestly confused by the stupidity lately, either Trump is a genius or he is the dumbest person on the planet.
    The totally insane actions of these morons lately is waking people up in massive numbers, is he doing it intentionally? Like a call for help or something? Trying to show us who is really behind all this this crap? (Israel)
    Because if he isn’t, thats exactly what its doing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    Haha really eh, I do believe that he's putting up some sort of resistance, I want to believe the 4D chess meme but at this point I can't in good faith.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Noah Way says:
    @CanSpeccy
    In an age of fake news, fake food, fake sex, Trump has taken the next logical step, by introducing fake war to keep the NeoCon Bastards off his back.

    Trump can’t keep the neocons off his back – they are driving the bus. He’s strapped into the driver’s seat but isn’t allowed to touch anything.

    This isn’t 4D chess, it’s hang on and try to survive. The last president who bucked the deep state was JFK.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. Sparkon says:
    @Erebus

    ... belief in their efficiency may create a desire to attack Russians or someone else and may escalate...
     
    As Mark Twain said: "It ain't what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."

    It’s a great saying, but Twain isn’t the original author. In fact, there’s no record he ever said it. Sometimes Satchel Paige is given credit, Josh Billings, Kin Hubbard, and others. I’ve written about this before at UR, so this is another entry for my

    • Broken Record Department

    I first saw this familiar saying years ago in a book of aphorisms, where it was attributed to “Kin” Hubbard, and rendered as:

    It ain’t what you don’t know that hurts you;
    It’s what you know that just ain’t so.

    https://newrepublic.com/minutes/126677/it-aint-dont-know-gets-trouble-must-big-short-opens-fake-mark-twain-quote

    Similarly, there is no good record Abraham Lincoln ever said:

    You can fool all of the people some of the time,
    And some of the people all of the time,
    But you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.

    https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/161924

    The need to get some celebrity involved is a reflection of the human belief that things are more profound when uttered by famous lips, but both sayings remain valid irrespective of the fame of the original author.

    The next part of my broken record is that false knowledge is dangerous, but what you don’t know — ignorance — can hurt you as well.

    In this word, we all labor with some measure of ignorance.

    In this case, we certainly do not know what really happened in Syria during this recent attack, as Col Lang notes. Whatever the case, it must have been an exciting night for personnel staffing air defense positions in the Syrian military.

    From what I can gather, we may not even know what happened at Shayrat last year. As you know, I’ve taken the minority position about the Shayrat attack, and have said I think the ISI images show that many if not most of the cruise missiles hit their targets at Shayrat. That concurs with the ISI analysis, as well as statements from the U.S. and Syria.

    According to the ISI analysis, many of the Tomahawks in April 2017 were directed at hardened aircraft shelters, and several of these received multiple hits. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that the targets of these cruise missiles were any aircraft parked in the shelters, and not the shelters themselves.

    It follows that Syria might have upgraded its air defenses around airfields in the wake of these attacks, especially if in fact the primary target was parked aircraft – sitting ducks. It is not unreasonable to assume that they would want to enhance their AD, and these improved air defenses might account for the very good Syrian results reported by the Russians, if you accept this line of reasoning.

    Again, as always, the caveat applies that we are dealing with open-source material about recent and ongoing military action and adventures, so take it with the proverbial grain or fistful of salt. Tequila optional, pedantry guaranteed.

    Cheers!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus
    That the Twain quote is of doubtful provenance surprises me not at all. Many/most of these pithy sayings come down to us because they encapsulate a fundamental truth and have probably been around since well before any celebrity repeated/embellished them and raised their profile.

    In repeating them, the celebrity would of course have raised the profile of the pithy saying, spreading it widely and increasing the likelihood that it would down to us as having been coined by them.
    Who knows how many the celebrities missed and are now lost to the mists of time.

    BTW, Tequila is never "optional" when there's salt involved. YMMV ;-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Patrick Armstrong
    Why don't you re-read what he actually said? Think about it. Re-read. Think.Repeat. (PS it's not possible to put down every single thought that you have ever had in 1500 words). PPS re-read and think, research even.

    “PPS re-read and think, research even.”

    OK, I started with Wikipedia. Not reliable, but often – for that reason – informative, especially when a relatively obscure person has a lengthy entry that he appears to have worked on himself. And here’s what I think.

    1. Why the photo in dark sunglasses looking 85 degrees away?

    2. There’s a cryptic, self-serving passage about his registration “on advice of counsel” as a foreign agent, and subsequent de-registration. Did he stumble in the revolving door when he retired?

    3. There’s some overlong plugging of his three works of historical fiction, what one might see on the dust jackets. Embarrassing.

    4. Can anyone provide any details on his falling out with the admirable Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity over “policy”? Wiki says that a citation is needed about that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. utu says:
    @Thirdeye
    I'm as irritated as anybody by Brit-chauvinism, but their eminent contribution to the technical and philosophical foundations of modern society - from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing - is undeniable.

    from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing

    A list from Anglophone history books. All these guys can easily be replaced by some French or German guys. In 19 century where most of history of science and technology was being written Britain was the dominat power. France was in decline and Germany was barely rising. If Britain was swallowed by the seas in 16 century the history obviously would be different but humanity would not miss anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye

    All these guys can easily be replaced by some French or German guys.
     
    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing. Important German contributions to science and social philosophy were jump-started by British influences. Even the Chinese, whom the British treated loathsomely, used derivations of British social philosophy to bring their society into the modern age.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Would not miss anything? As a tautology perhaps because what you don't know you don't think about. But if you are referring to the substantial advances mankind has made in what all believe to be important I suggest about 100 years. You have perhaps ignored culture in contrast to a few great men. And one of the big causal factors was the fact that Britain was an island safe from major invasion while the English tamed the Scots and Irish (and eventually benefited from the Scottish Enlightenment). Protestantism was vital regardless of what you think of Weber or Tawney. It is hardly likely that the Protestant Ethic would have been so successful in promoting Die Geist des Kapitalismus without British Protestantism. And Sir Edward Coke's telling James l that he was not above the law was way ahead of its time but was an English truth. You might find reason too in Gregory Clark's fascinating "A Farewell to Alms" to modify your view. Admittedly Clark's work makes one ask why Britain before the rest of North Western Europe and again it inspires thoughts of timing and also Britain's not having to worry about Continental neighbours as long as they ruled the waves.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. @byrresheim

    especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.
     
    How sweet of the British.

    I like the euphemism "give us a run for our money" where Shahna used the less than elegant term "concentration camp".

    As far as kickstarting the industrial revolution is concerned, in describing the phenomenon please do not forget to mention its capitalisation by the enourmous monies plundered in India, the one and only economically successful colony (the other one might have been what is now the United States, but that went awry a while before the invention of the concentration camp.)

    You disqualify yourself from even the credit due a UR thread standard of expertise by ignorance of the economic success of Australia’s six colonies(later states), Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, Malaya, Ceylon, Fiji, Hong Kong and Singapore not to mention the West Indies…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan
    India did not do too badly under the British notwithstanding the bellyaching we hear from the leftists. They provided better administration than all the bums before them. The British had left their African colonies with the same respect for the law and property rights as in their other possessions. Can't blame them for the Africans being unable to make good on what was endowed to them.
    , @byrresheim
    The ignorance is entirely on your part, sir.

    Perhaps you might care to take a look at the timeline for starters and then, in case that did not intellectually exhaust you entirely, undertake a little research for the sums we are talking about here.

    I do admit that I should have mentioned the west indies as well, if only to remind you of the interesting use made of irish slaves over there.
    , @Twodees Partain
    " the economic success of Australia’s six colonies(later states), Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, Malaya, Ceylon, Fiji, Hong Kong and Singapore not to mention the West Indies…"

    Australia's six colonies? The Australian federation consists of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia, and Western Australia, doesn't it?

    The colonies you listed are colonies of the British Empire.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. 1RW says:
    @El Dato
    Sounds like a plausible résumé.

    However, how does that work:

    The radars detect their incoming targets, the jammers disrupt the navigation systems of the missiles and in many Russian systems then give the missiles a new and harmless target.
     
    What exactly can you jam? Is this about spoofing the GPS information? Do these robots have no intertial guidance / terrain reconnaisance systems?

    Missiles also have radar altimeters which can be fooled. The missile will then either slam into the ground because it thought it was higher than it was, or fly too high and get easier to shoot down because it thinks it’s lower than it is, or just get confused even more when used in combination with GPS spoofing

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  164. As long as the American public thinks the attack was a success is what matters.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    The truth is destroying the presstitute narrative: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/harper-unmasking-the-white-helmets.html#disqus_thread
    Comment section:
    Lang: "It is very clear that the WH [White Helmets] operation is a brainchild of the Clinton/Obama regime with British and Saudi participation. The British actually have conducted the operation."
    Rob: "More to do with Saudi and Arab interests. Doesn't help that they are aligned with Zionists on this matter, but I wouldn't say neocons are the key factor..."
    Lang: "There is little doubt that the UK is running these projects with money from USAID (State) and the Saudis."

    The massive joint efforts of the presstitute stenographers, including the "progressive" branch of MSM presstitutes (such Sonali Kolhatkar on Truthdig), are failing.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. The note for Assads air defence is 3+, passable.
    RF had at least a cruiser at sea at the moment of missile attack, which had its air defense radar lit up and its FC radar probably powered down.
    That alone permitted the RF AD complex at Tartus to immediately detect and classify the raid, then to datalink everything in realtime to various syrian batteries(pantsirs have a high probability of russian crews).
    The raid itself was heavily handicapped by apparent absence of any escorting EW aircraft, and obvious impossibility of suppressing enemy radars – this fact alone doomed it from the start.
    Apparently, RF did not link the information about the weapons fired from NATO planes to syrian batteries, and the majority of these weapons hit their targets unopposed.
    We can conclude from these factors that both sides manifested extreme caution in their target qualification, and that the whole exercise was exclusively a political gesture.

    As an amusing footnote, seven S-200 Vietnam-era weapons were launched, and did not hit anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jesse James
    S-200's ( which were used to shoot down two Israeli F-16's this year ) are strictly anti-aircraft, not anti-missile.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. @Randal

    largely conducted by the UK info warriors of 77 Regiment
     
    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.

    However, I do feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades, from Kosovo to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria (along with pathetic propaganda scams such as the Skripal nonsense). These have been in no way glorious, and in no way necessary for the national interest, subordinate as they have been to the interests of foreign powers. The British government struts as though it is a force on the international scene, while clinging to the coat-tails of the US and currying favour pathetically with Gulf sunni despots and vicious Israeli thugs. Meanwhile it seemingly colludes with some of the worst elements in US politics to try to interfere in that country's elections.

    The suspected involvement in black propaganda in Syria on behalf of jihadists is perhaps a new low in the activities of the British government.

    As a conservative (or liberal) Englishman, you have a hell of a lot to be ashamed of. With the same being true for Americans who, if anything, are even worse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Damn straight!
    , @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    They have nothing to be ashamed of, the conquered inferior peoples for their own gain. Put yourself in the mindset of the time.

    I have French-Canadian background, yet you will never hear me join on the anti British bitching and moaning train. I regard francophones who do as nothing but bitchy women.

    Besides, if not for the British, the Americans who have completely destroyed our culture. I am thankful for their (relative) tolerance at the time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. Kiza says:
    @Vojkan
    Terrain reconnaissance doesn't give geolocation and missiles need geolocation to reach targets. Inertial navigation is based on 'guesstimating' position. Satellite guidance helps the guess being much more accurate.
    Yet, jamming the GPS beams to make the T-hawks get lost, I grasp. Providing them with new targets, I don't know, maybe the Russians have the capacity to feed them with fake GPS beams.

    The terrain recognition (it is not reconnaissance) is one of the features of Tomahawks. But apparently the precision of the hit can suffer if GPS has been spoofed and the missile computer relies only on terrain recognition and gyros.

    The way GPS is spoofed is a matter of debate and a military secret. There are indications that there is false signal feeding, which appears to have delivered the most modern US drone to the Iranians back a few years ago.

    Overall, these Tomahawks were being both shot-down and were failing at a very high rate. Most of them must have been close to expiry (shoot, refurbish or decomission). Finally, it is clear that the age of subsonic cruise missiles is finished, they are simply an obsolete weapon, the spruced up but still the German V1 from WW2.

    Finally, the main difference between the upgraded old Soviet AA defence that Syrians used and the most modern Russian S300VM and S400 is that the new ones could not be easily overwhelmed. To overwhelmed an integrated system based on S300VM, S400 and Russian AWACS planes the West would have to launch simulateously more than 1000 cruise missiles, possibly even several thousand missiles (swarming) which is a very difficult task to do. But defenses against cruise missiles and ballistic missiles are two totally different games, the latter being much more difficult.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    Recognition it is, not reconnaissance OK. I'm getting unnerved by this discussion. Using the wrong word doesn't change the substance.
    Terrain recognition is used to stay above whatever the aircraft is flying over. The best instrument for terrain recognition is the combo eyes+brain of the animal reign. Granted, human pilots used landscape to estimate their position. A cruise missile is just not that smart, terrain recognition doesn't tell it where exactly it is. Obviously, when flying over dull landscapes, terrain recognition wasn't enough. There the sun could help. Again, a cruise missile is not that smart.
    Then there were night flights. Maybe a compass. Actually, humans were a bit smarter, before the GPS, there was something called radio navigation. They used ordinary AM radio stations to triangulate their position. Then there were beacons on the ground and transponders. All this is unsatisfying to the military and just didn't help cruise missiles and inertial navigation as in the V1 and V2, however improved, just wasn't precise enough to take out fixed targets with a known position.
    About the gyroscope, I don't know how the modern ones are made but I know the principle, a graduated ball, one like in European, not American football, with a fixed position relative to the Earth, enclosed in three intersecting cercles around the three cartesian axes, with a fixed position relative to the aircraft. It serves to know the angles of the aircraft - roll around the longitudinal x axis - pitch around the lateral z axis - I guess that's why some people confuse it with measuring longitude and latitude - and yaw around the vertical y axis- at any given moment - I guess that's why they call it angular moment. How one can infer geolocation from that beats me.
    Now, back to navigation. To have a missile reach its target with great accuracy, you don't show it a picture of the target, and hope it will recognise it, you don't make it smell a piece of cloth taken on site and let it follow the trail, no, you feed it with a geolocation, at least that's what I would do, but maybe I overestimate the US military. Not only, would I feed it with a geolocation, but I would also feed it with a trajectory, a set of geolocations between which it will use inertial navigation indeed, but on which it can check and correct its trajectory and make turns, in order for instance to avoid the most possible air-defences, at least that's what I would do, but maybe I overestimate the US military again. To know the geolocation, a cruise missile has to read GPS beams, there's no other way to achieve precision.
    As for ballistic missiles, they're a wholly different subject on which I'm even less an expert.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. Maybe the purpose for the attack was to see how effective Russia’s air defense really is.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  169. Ivan says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    You disqualify yourself from even the credit due a UR thread standard of expertise by ignorance of the economic success of Australia's six colonies(later states), Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, Malaya, Ceylon, Fiji, Hong Kong and Singapore not to mention the West Indies...

    India did not do too badly under the British notwithstanding the bellyaching we hear from the leftists. They provided better administration than all the bums before them. The British had left their African colonies with the same respect for the law and property rights as in their other possessions. Can’t blame them for the Africans being unable to make good on what was endowed to them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @byrresheim

    India did not do too badly under the British
     
    There seems to have been a recurring problem with famines under british rule.

    The last few million Bengals who perished needlessly seem to have been the straw that broke the camel's back.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. Ivan says:

    I don’t see any objective reason why when the Russians can track the cruise missiles flying at subsonic speed, they or the Syrians cannot shoot them down. Russian anti-aircraft systems are designed to intercept fighter planes travelling at Mach2 or more. They may or may not succeed against the latest fighters but should perform creditably against subsonic cruise missiles whose time has come and gone.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TG
    A big difference intercepting a mach 2 target flying a straight course at altitude (what the russian systems are optimized for), and a mach 0.8 target that is low and weaving between valleys. There is a reason that modern airforces have completely abandoned high-speed high-altitude attacks, and gone to lower-speed terrain-hugging attack profiles.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @Anonymous

    Instead the funds available have been devoted to UAVs (drones) and the incredible costs of large ground forces in the absence of conscription.
     
    Welfare. One large jobs program. It is impossible to come up with a scenario where the U.S. would need or would commit to a large ground campaign. But hey, I’m all for growing this social program, it might take money away from creating more white elephant weapon systems. I’d rather have the obscene DoD dollars actually help real people, lower-middle class Americans, than pay Jack Keane several hundred $k to sit on the boards of multiple Beltway bandits.

    I would like to see universal conscription for the armed forces, and by universal, I mean everyone (2 years of service between 18-20) with no lottery and no deferments. Service would be required during peacetime and not just when the Generals need cannon fodder. Conscripts would be exempt from any overseas duty unless they volunteered. In fact, overseas service should consist of a sort of American Foreign Legion (funded by the corporations who profit from these bloodbaths).

    Of course, this would be an expensive army, but in a nation that worships the military like our modern day Confederacy, everyone should be thanking each other for their service. We might not be McMansion Nation any longer, but that would be a good thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
    Baring financial collapse, a conscripted army with no deferments other than for severe physical handicaps is the only way of bringing military adventurism to a halt.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. TG says:
    @nate 43
    @ Ozymandias, TG

    This isn't complicated: the damage shown by the brass is not commiserate with 100+ missile strikes, not even close.

    Syrian defense systems on their own would not be able to intercept a cruise missile. However, with the help of Russian EW, which forces the Tomahawk to gain altitude, they can easily be targeted.

    Interference has always been the achilles heel of remote control warfare. As of now the code is broken. FUKUS can now either try again much later, or fight like MEN in manned aircraft over Syria & take causalities for a cause that the Israelis and the Saudis believe in.

    Ah, some good points. Still.

    1. It sure looked stupid that the US sent about 70 cruise missiles to just one industrial complex. Still, stupid and US strategy are not strangers. Maybe they just wanted to use 70 missiles to ‘send a message.’ And boost defense contractor profits. And as far as damage goes: indeed, probably 5 or 6 missiles would have eliminated the sites’ ability to process chemicals, but to completely raze reinforced concrete buildings is hard. I watched a documentary on the allied invasion of Italy in WWII, there was this monastery on top of a hill, they dumped hundreds of tons of explosives on it. It was destroyed as a building, for sure, but there were still some walls standing. So 70 tones of high explosive? Yeah, it could be true. Maybe.

    2. Interference? Hard to say. In theory, if I were designing these systems, I would use GPS sparingly and switch to jam-proof inertial systems and direct radar terrain guidance at the first sign of interference. What the US systems really use I have no idea. I am just saying that, in principle, jamming might not be an Achilles heel of at least this form of warfare.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. TG says:
    @Ivan
    I don't see any objective reason why when the Russians can track the cruise missiles flying at subsonic speed, they or the Syrians cannot shoot them down. Russian anti-aircraft systems are designed to intercept fighter planes travelling at Mach2 or more. They may or may not succeed against the latest fighters but should perform creditably against subsonic cruise missiles whose time has come and gone.

    A big difference intercepting a mach 2 target flying a straight course at altitude (what the russian systems are optimized for), and a mach 0.8 target that is low and weaving between valleys. There is a reason that modern airforces have completely abandoned high-speed high-altitude attacks, and gone to lower-speed terrain-hugging attack profiles.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ivan
    That is a fair point.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. Wally says:
    @CanSpeccy
    In an age of fake news, fake food, fake sex, Trump has taken the next logical step, by introducing fake war to keep the NeoCon Bastards off his back.

    “fake war to keep the NeoCon Bastards off his back”

    The same way the fake & impossible ’6M Jews / holocaust’ was conjured up to keep the goys under the thumbs of Jews.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. @Aaron Hilel
    The note for Assads air defence is 3+, passable.
    RF had at least a cruiser at sea at the moment of missile attack, which had its air defense radar lit up and its FC radar probably powered down.
    That alone permitted the RF AD complex at Tartus to immediately detect and classify the raid, then to datalink everything in realtime to various syrian batteries(pantsirs have a high probability of russian crews).
    The raid itself was heavily handicapped by apparent absence of any escorting EW aircraft, and obvious impossibility of suppressing enemy radars - this fact alone doomed it from the start.
    Apparently, RF did not link the information about the weapons fired from NATO planes to syrian batteries, and the majority of these weapons hit their targets unopposed.
    We can conclude from these factors that both sides manifested extreme caution in their target qualification, and that the whole exercise was exclusively a political gesture.

    As an amusing footnote, seven S-200 Vietnam-era weapons were launched, and did not hit anything.

    S-200′s ( which were used to shoot down two Israeli F-16′s this year ) are strictly anti-aircraft, not anti-missile.

    Read More
    • Replies: @byrresheim
    Could you please provide links (for my convenience?)
    I only read of one F-16 shot down.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. Anonymous[682] • Disclaimer says:

    We May Hit Russian Systems in Syria, Israel Says After Threats of ‘Catastrophic Consequences’

    Russia to send advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Assad, officials said Monday, warning Israel not to attack the new air defense systems

    Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Tuesday that Israel may strike the Russian-made S-300 anti-aircraft defense systems in Syria if they are used against Israel.

    “One thing should be clear – if someone fires on our planes, we will destroy them,” Lieberman said in an interview with the Israeli website Ynet. “What’s important to us is that the weapons defense systems that the Russians transfer to Syria are not used against us. If they are used against us, we will act against them.”…

    https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/syria/we-may-hit-russian-systems-in-syria-israel-says-after-threats-of-catastrophic-consequences-1.6027919

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  177. Vojkan says:
    @Kiza
    The terrain recognition (it is not reconnaissance) is one of the features of Tomahawks. But apparently the precision of the hit can suffer if GPS has been spoofed and the missile computer relies only on terrain recognition and gyros.

    The way GPS is spoofed is a matter of debate and a military secret. There are indications that there is false signal feeding, which appears to have delivered the most modern US drone to the Iranians back a few years ago.

    Overall, these Tomahawks were being both shot-down and were failing at a very high rate. Most of them must have been close to expiry (shoot, refurbish or decomission). Finally, it is clear that the age of subsonic cruise missiles is finished, they are simply an obsolete weapon, the spruced up but still the German V1 from WW2.

    Finally, the main difference between the upgraded old Soviet AA defence that Syrians used and the most modern Russian S300VM and S400 is that the new ones could not be easily overwhelmed. To overwhelmed an integrated system based on S300VM, S400 and Russian AWACS planes the West would have to launch simulateously more than 1000 cruise missiles, possibly even several thousand missiles (swarming) which is a very difficult task to do. But defenses against cruise missiles and ballistic missiles are two totally different games, the latter being much more difficult.

    Recognition it is, not reconnaissance OK. I’m getting unnerved by this discussion. Using the wrong word doesn’t change the substance.
    Terrain recognition is used to stay above whatever the aircraft is flying over. The best instrument for terrain recognition is the combo eyes+brain of the animal reign. Granted, human pilots used landscape to estimate their position. A cruise missile is just not that smart, terrain recognition doesn’t tell it where exactly it is. Obviously, when flying over dull landscapes, terrain recognition wasn’t enough. There the sun could help. Again, a cruise missile is not that smart.
    Then there were night flights. Maybe a compass. Actually, humans were a bit smarter, before the GPS, there was something called radio navigation. They used ordinary AM radio stations to triangulate their position. Then there were beacons on the ground and transponders. All this is unsatisfying to the military and just didn’t help cruise missiles and inertial navigation as in the V1 and V2, however improved, just wasn’t precise enough to take out fixed targets with a known position.
    About the gyroscope, I don’t know how the modern ones are made but I know the principle, a graduated ball, one like in European, not American football, with a fixed position relative to the Earth, enclosed in three intersecting cercles around the three cartesian axes, with a fixed position relative to the aircraft. It serves to know the angles of the aircraft – roll around the longitudinal x axis – pitch around the lateral z axis – I guess that’s why some people confuse it with measuring longitude and latitude – and yaw around the vertical y axis- at any given moment – I guess that’s why they call it angular moment. How one can infer geolocation from that beats me.
    Now, back to navigation. To have a missile reach its target with great accuracy, you don’t show it a picture of the target, and hope it will recognise it, you don’t make it smell a piece of cloth taken on site and let it follow the trail, no, you feed it with a geolocation, at least that’s what I would do, but maybe I overestimate the US military. Not only, would I feed it with a geolocation, but I would also feed it with a trajectory, a set of geolocations between which it will use inertial navigation indeed, but on which it can check and correct its trajectory and make turns, in order for instance to avoid the most possible air-defences, at least that’s what I would do, but maybe I overestimate the US military again. To know the geolocation, a cruise missile has to read GPS beams, there’s no other way to achieve precision.
    As for ballistic missiles, they’re a wholly different subject on which I’m even less an expert.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. ivan says:
    @TG
    A big difference intercepting a mach 2 target flying a straight course at altitude (what the russian systems are optimized for), and a mach 0.8 target that is low and weaving between valleys. There is a reason that modern airforces have completely abandoned high-speed high-altitude attacks, and gone to lower-speed terrain-hugging attack profiles.

    That is a fair point.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. Randal says:
    @Ozymandias
    Why would Russia bother to send the S-300 when their "upgraded" Soviet era systems appear to be the most effective the world has ever known? Sounds like a step backwards.

    Why would Russia bother to send the S-300 when their “upgraded” Soviet era systems appear to be the most effective the world has ever known? Sounds like a step backwards.

    Two issues here – first the question of why add the S300 and second the implicit questioning of the claimed performance of the air defences by suggesting it is unrealistically good. The former hardly needs answering – S300 is a more modern system from the ground up than anything the Syrians already have except the short range Pantsirs, and adds capability that can be directly integrated with the Russia systems already in theatre.

    As for the claimed performance by the defences being unrealistically high, well it’s necessary to consider the point that this was close to a “best case” situation for the air defences. The attack was telegraphed literally days in advance, and it appears there was some – possibly considerable – “deconfliction” discussion between the parties to narrow down the range of permitted targets and probably attack routes (the missiles reportedly avoided Russian-controlled airspace for their approach routes), rendering the attacks relatively predictable. There was no SEAD effort, and presumably limited EW support, meaning the operators could relax and do their jobs pretty much unhindered. The Russian theatre-wide coverage was entirely unthreatened and undistracted, and presumably able to devote its time fully t0 supporting the Syrian systems. The attacking systems were limited in number and mostly slow cruise missiles, not like the ballistic missiles the Patriot etc systems struggle to hit.

    Basically it was almost exercise conditions for the Syrian/Russian air defences. One would expect optimum success rates, I think.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. @Wizard of Oz
    You disqualify yourself from even the credit due a UR thread standard of expertise by ignorance of the economic success of Australia's six colonies(later states), Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, Malaya, Ceylon, Fiji, Hong Kong and Singapore not to mention the West Indies...

    The ignorance is entirely on your part, sir.

    Perhaps you might care to take a look at the timeline for starters and then, in case that did not intellectually exhaust you entirely, undertake a little research for the sums we are talking about here.

    I do admit that I should have mentioned the west indies as well, if only to remind you of the interesting use made of irish slaves over there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @byrresheim
    Economically successful of course is a euphemism for: the plunder was definitely worth more than the investment needed.

    While Canada and New Zealand – or Australia for that matter – are certainly nice places to live in, the return on investment for the motherland was far from sensational, contrary to India.


    I do admit once again that I should have mentioned the West Indies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. @Ivan
    India did not do too badly under the British notwithstanding the bellyaching we hear from the leftists. They provided better administration than all the bums before them. The British had left their African colonies with the same respect for the law and property rights as in their other possessions. Can't blame them for the Africans being unable to make good on what was endowed to them.

    India did not do too badly under the British

    There seems to have been a recurring problem with famines under british rule.

    The last few million Bengals who perished needlessly seem to have been the straw that broke the camel’s back.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan
    India did not escape the Malthusian Trap until well into the 1970s. Famines are a recurring phenomena in agricultural societies. The Chinese did not do all that much better even though they were nominally independent. The Bengal Famine had many causes, among them a crop blight, the refugee population fleeing war in Burma and, indifference in Whitehall, though not of the administrators on the ground.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @Jesse James
    S-200's ( which were used to shoot down two Israeli F-16's this year ) are strictly anti-aircraft, not anti-missile.

    Could you please provide links (for my convenience?)
    I only read of one F-16 shot down.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jesse James
    https://www.sott.net/article/383143-Two-Israeli-jets-not-one-were-downed-in-February-Israel-persists-to-invade-Damascus-ready-for-confrontation
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @byrresheim
    The ignorance is entirely on your part, sir.

    Perhaps you might care to take a look at the timeline for starters and then, in case that did not intellectually exhaust you entirely, undertake a little research for the sums we are talking about here.

    I do admit that I should have mentioned the west indies as well, if only to remind you of the interesting use made of irish slaves over there.

    Economically successful of course is a euphemism for: the plunder was definitely worth more than the investment needed.

    While Canada and New Zealand – or Australia for that matter – are certainly nice places to live in, the return on investment for the motherland was far from sensational, contrary to India.

    I do admit once again that I should have mentioned the West Indies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    You are certainly not gracious in defeat. Having realised that you had just uttered nonsense by referring to timelines which were never specified or implied AND that you had said "economically successful" and forgotten you said it you retreat to the hopeless position of supporting your original crass statement by suggesting that investments in the white Commonwealth were OK but not as good as elsewhere. Pathetic.

    I'm interested in your knowing about Irish slaves in Barbados (you just referred to WI) in the mid 17th century. It makes me wonder if your father was one of the Nazi officers who turned up in Iceland expecting to meet the purest of pure Aryans only to be shocked at the features acquired from Irish slave ancestors. And while I am competing for pathetic anachronisms as if civilisation hasn't advanced in recent centuries allow me to point out that German and other Popes over a hundred years later than that slavery were having little boys testicles removed so they could go on singing for them with unbroken voice. And no anachronism in pointing to the last German Pope's failure to deal with the child sexual abuse which has done so much to weaken Western civilisation's confidence and ability to sustain itself.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    You are certainly not gracious in defeat. Having realised that you had just uttered nonsense by referring to timelines which were never specified or implied AND that you had said "economically successful" and forgotten you said it you retreat to the hopeless position of supporting your original crass statement by suggesting that investments in the white Commonwealth were OK but not as good as elsewhere. Pathetic.

    I'm interested in your knowing about Irish slaves in Barbados (you just referred to WI) in the mid 17th century. It makes me wonder if your father was one of the Nazi officers who turned up in Iceland expecting to meet the purest of pure Aryans only to be shocked at the features acquired from Irish slave ancestors. And while I am competing for pathetic anachronisms as if civilisation hasn't advanced in recent centuries allow me to point out that German and other Popes over a hundred years later than that slavery were having little boys testicles removed so they could go on singing for them with unbroken voice. And no anachronism in pointing to the last German Pope's failure to deal with the child sexual abuse which has done so much to weaken Western civilisation's confidence and ability to sustain itself.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. Thirdeye says:
    @utu

    from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing
     
    A list from Anglophone history books. All these guys can easily be replaced by some French or German guys. In 19 century where most of history of science and technology was being written Britain was the dominat power. France was in decline and Germany was barely rising. If Britain was swallowed by the seas in 16 century the history obviously would be different but humanity would not miss anything.

    All these guys can easily be replaced by some French or German guys.

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing. Important German contributions to science and social philosophy were jump-started by British influences. Even the Chinese, whom the British treated loathsomely, used derivations of British social philosophy to bring their society into the modern age.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vidi

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing.
     
    Newton: there is substantial controversy as to who invented Calculus, Newton or Leibnitz. As for gravity, Newton's theory was based on the work of Kepler.

    Maxwell: two of Maxwell's four equations were by Gauss.

    Turing: John von Neumann (a Hungarian) arguably did more on the fundamentals of computing.

    So this is one of the very few occasions on which I agree with utu: if these British men had never been born, the world would have gone on much the same.

    , @utu

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing.
     
    It just happened that on another thread few days ago I wrote something about Newton and also Maxwell.
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/pinker-on-iq/#comment-2296188

    And also here few month ago I made several comments on Newton:

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/iq-in-time-and-space/#comment-2202199

    Mind you I am not against Newton, I am against excessive idolization and misrepresentation of his contributions. The giants and geniuses are usually constructed for reasons, often political. They never exist in vacuum. They often are inspired by others and sometimes they steal from others. If Newton did not exist we would be OK. Actually then Hooke would get much more credit which he deserved but he was pushed aside by Newton's unscrupulous shenanigans.

    Narratives are simpler to create if they include giants. So giant are created. It works on children and popular culture and it serves nationalist purposes. Then people, mostly boys, create list who was the greatest and the 2nd greatest and so on. This is very autistic need chiefly affecting boys and immature grown ups who are incapable or too lazy to learn how things really happened.

    Maxwell was very good but he did not do what he did ab nihilo. His differential equations are directly obtainable form various laws of electro-magnetism that were established earlier and which were expressed in terms of integral equations not differential ones.

    As far as Turing, he was a decent mathematician but not super outstanding. Alonzo Church preceded his work. Actually Church's work also influenced Godel. You could also add Tarski to this group. Then the whole story of Enigma is blown out of proportions. Bletchley Park with Turning got the big kick start when the work of Polish mathematicians was turned over to French and Brits in 1939. Most of work was done by Poles. But we haven't learned about it until 1980s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. Zogby says:

    Out of the 71 intercepts claimed by the Russians, 47 were made by modern Pantsir and Buk systems that Syria bought around 10 years ago and received around 2010. Their claimed success rate were 23/25 for the Pantsir and 24/29 for the Buk (over 90% and 80% respectively). The original claim made by Russia that the intercepts were done by outdated Soviet-era air defence were far from true, as the older systems had a much lower hit rate (around 50% or less), and account for only 24 hits. Looking at the technical specs for modern Pantsir and Buk, I see no reason to doubt that they can shoot down any subsonic incoming object – even at short range and/or low altitude. Subsonic weapons are obsolete against them. They have 360 degree rotating phase array radars. The detection and tracking systems have all the latest features and algorithms to detect anything, including “stealth” fighters. So it’s a matter of reacting quickly enough and missile capabilities – all of which are there – at least for subsonic speeds. Whether they can intercept an incoming missile at mach 3 or mach 8 is a different matter altogether.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  186. Zogby says:
    @MarkU
    I can think of two other important questions, what is the point of lying? and who exactly do they think they are fooling?

    Firstly it is worth saying that both sides are likely to exaggerate the effectiveness of their systems, deliberately or otherwise. Let us start with the US claim of 100% effectiveness of their weapons system and 0% of the Syrian/Russian systems, this is plainly nonsense. Even with no air defences at all a certain number of malfunctions would be expected to happen. The Syrian/Russian claims are also likely to be wrong, many of the claimed intercepts were just as likely to be malfunctions.

    So what is the point of lying?

    First off, a reputation for unreliability is bad for sales, pure and simple. Nobody is going to be enthusiastic about spending large amounts of money on stuff that doesn't work very well, this would apply equally to both sides.

    Secondly, the appetite of the general public for war in general and superpower confrontation in particular is going to be somewhat diminished if it is perceived that the other side is technologically equal or even superior. This factor is logically going to be more important to the side likely to initiate conflict.

    So who do they think they are fooling?

    Potential customers for weapons systems are usually not going to be naive enough to take the manufacturers claims at face value, they are likely to employ their own experts to assess the various claims. They will not be completely immune to deception of course.

    Each other. Neither side would want their opponents to have the best information available, for obvious reasons. It is notable that both sides appear to have declined to fully commit their latest equipment, the Russians in particular. It is likely that both sides have reasonably good intelligence on what happened, neither side is likely to be fooled easily.

    The general public are the most obvious targets of deception and the most easily fooled. It is one thing to risk a superpower conflict when your population in general is confident that you have a clear technological edge and are likely to escape the worst. It would be quite another matter to get the public on board if they believed they were up against a more or less equal opponent and were likely to get thoroughly nuked. Once again this logic applies far more strongly to the side likely to initiate a conflict for they are the ones who must manufacture consent. For this reason it would appear that the Russians have somewhat less motivation to lie than their US counterparts.

    I can think of two other important questions, what is the point of lying?

    It’s not about lying to the public, it’s about the Pentagon lying to the nitwit that bragged about “nice, new, smart” missiles a couple days earlier and can’t handle the truth.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. @Carroll Price
    As a conservative (or liberal) Englishman, you have a hell of a lot to be ashamed of. With the same being true for Americans who, if anything, are even worse.

    Damn straight!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. @jilles dykstra
    It was a hydrogen fusion bomb primed by ordinary explosives.
    Just three German phycisists were developing the bomb, one of them a jew.
    Compare this to the 30.000 man Manhattan project.
    On the Prague airport two converted Heinkels stood ready to drop the first bomb on the Ural hydroelectric plants, to stop tank production.
    Rudel was to drop the bomb.
    He did not well know what it was, called it an atomic bomb.
    An emissonary of Mussolini witnessed a succesfull trial.
    An area of a few square kilometres was destroyed.
    Rainer Karlsch, 'Hitlers Bom, Hoe Nazi-Duitsland nucleaire wapens testte in een wanhopige poging om de oorlog te winnen, Tielt, 2005 (Hitlers Bombe, München)
    Hans-Ulrich Rudel, ´Mein Kriegstagebuch, Aufzeichnungen eines Stukafliegers’, 1983, 2006 Dresden
    In
    Walter Dornberger, Peenemünde, Die Geschichte der V-Waffen, Esslingen 1981, 2003
    Dornberger writes that during a visit there Hitler said he had to apologise to two people, one of them Dornberger.
    I long wondered who the second was, until I read the book about the hydrogen book.
    In early 1945 Hitler's hope for turning the war were based on this bomb.

    You can not get the pressure and heat required to set off a fusion without a fission weapon at the heart. The Germans were no where near producing a nuke of the fission variety, much less a fusion weapon.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. @Vidi

    You are correct. The 52 first flew much earlier [than 1952].
     
    According to Wikipedia, "The B-52 took its maiden flight in April 1952".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress

    You trust Wikipedia?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vidi

    You trust Wikipedia?
     
    I had other sources I could have cited; Wikipedia was just convenient. For example, the Encyclopedia Britannica also says that the B-52 was "first flown in 1952":

    https://www.britannica.com/technology/B-52
    , @FB
    Way to go Quarterpounder...

    Filling the airwaves here on Unz with your volatile gas eruptions...

    From the Boeing Logbook 1952...


    '...April 15: A.M. "Tex" Johnston and Guy Townsend take the B-52 Stratofortress prototype on its first flight from Boeing Field in Seattle to Larson Air Force Base, Moses Lake, Wash...'
     
    As for the naming of the B52 Stratofortress...the '52' does indeed denote the consecutive design number...however in 1962 the Tri-Service Aircraft Designation System was implemented so later bombers such as B1 and B2 came after the B52...

    The naming convention by the USAF is simplified as 'MDS'...

    which stands for...Modified Mission...Design Number...Series Letter...

    So in the case of the B52-H...it means Bomber..design number 52...series H...

    Some very silly comments here trying to write off Col Lang's entire article on the basis of nitpickery regarding an insignficant bit of minutia...

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. @Jesse James
    You are amusing. The Patriot system has been discredited by the Israelis who published their findings after the First Bush Regime War Against Iraq. The US-UK-FRA will illegally strike Syria's cities and it's people again, and we will again get to see who lies the most.

    So, the Israelis bought a weapon system that was discredited. And they still love the system. Did you actually engage your brain before clicking publish?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  191. @EliteCommInc.
    But I live in a country that loudly proclaims they don't but does . . . .


    One can gave faults, but one cannot very well be a kettle calling others pots all the while claiming they are really Tupperware leading a life of better example.

    Now, now. I realize that facts are a hard thing to absorb, but they are there and they don’t go away. Putin grew up in a system that new that it couldn’t take on what it saw as its primary enemy in a straight up fight, and Russia is back to that place again. So, all Putin has left is the disinformation operation he grew up with. You may not like that fact, but that’s just too bad.

    Read More
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    Th point is not that Russia doesn't engage in misinformation. Whether is as intense as during the Cold War is doubtful.

    However, what is more disconcerting is the level of misinformation being engaged in what is arguably the democratic republic on the planet. I am more concerned that our press has become more instruments of government or corporate agendas than that Russia has a long legacy still to shake off before she has a "free press."

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. deschutes says:
    @Randal

    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.
     
    [Yawn]

    Show me a country whose ancestors have done nothing bad and I'll show you a country whose ancestors have done nothing. Meanwhile the British kick-started the industrial revolution, contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment (though not everyone would regard this as entirely a good thing), built a global empire from the unpromising start of a small, cold and wet island off Europe while kicking the backsides of most of the peoples they came up against around the world, in a time when there wasn't even the pretence of a "global rule of law", and played a big part in bringing civilisation and the modern world to Africa, especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.

    Plenty to be proud of and plenty to be embarrassed about, but on balance a pretty damned good performance.

    Your typical British modesty and humbleness are duly noted. What I’ve always admired about the Brits is how they never act priggish, arrogant, pedantic or condescending towards others :-D

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Your typical British modesty and humbleness are duly noted
     
    Just not interested in getting into the same old colonialism arguments with obsessives quoting decades (sometimes centuries) old atrocity stories (some true, many of them fantasies) and refusing point blank to admit to the many good qualities and results of the European expansion, on this thread. I've made my position clear, they've made theirs. Seems to me that's pretty much enough.

    As for "modesty and humbleness", we live in a world in which the dominant zeitgeist (for white nations and people, at any rate), is endless, terminally boring and pathetic humility and apologetic modesty. Even the anti-colonialist and antiracist obsessives would have gotten bored of it by now, if they weren't obsessives and if it didn't serve all kinds of lobby agendas to keep pushing it.

    So I'll stick to my stand - not denying crimes, but equally not denying things to be proud of. If you don't like it you can go and read the Guardian or almost any other mainstream media outlet for yet another dose of apologetics.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. @byrresheim
    Economically successful of course is a euphemism for: the plunder was definitely worth more than the investment needed.

    While Canada and New Zealand – or Australia for that matter – are certainly nice places to live in, the return on investment for the motherland was far from sensational, contrary to India.


    I do admit once again that I should have mentioned the West Indies.

    You are certainly not gracious in defeat. Having realised that you had just uttered nonsense by referring to timelines which were never specified or implied AND that you had said “economically successful” and forgotten you said it you retreat to the hopeless position of supporting your original crass statement by suggesting that investments in the white Commonwealth were OK but not as good as elsewhere. Pathetic.

    I’m interested in your knowing about Irish slaves in Barbados (you just referred to WI) in the mid 17th century. It makes me wonder if your father was one of the Nazi officers who turned up in Iceland expecting to meet the purest of pure Aryans only to be shocked at the features acquired from Irish slave ancestors. And while I am competing for pathetic anachronisms as if civilisation hasn’t advanced in recent centuries allow me to point out that German and other Popes over a hundred years later than that slavery were having little boys testicles removed so they could go on singing for them with unbroken voice. And no anachronism in pointing to the last German Pope’s failure to deal with the child sexual abuse which has done so much to weaken Western civilisation’s confidence and ability to sustain itself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. @byrresheim
    Economically successful of course is a euphemism for: the plunder was definitely worth more than the investment needed.

    While Canada and New Zealand – or Australia for that matter – are certainly nice places to live in, the return on investment for the motherland was far from sensational, contrary to India.


    I do admit once again that I should have mentioned the West Indies.

    You are certainly not gracious in defeat. Having realised that you had just uttered nonsense by referring to timelines which were never specified or implied AND that you had said “economically successful” and forgotten you said it you retreat to the hopeless position of supporting your original crass statement by suggesting that investments in the white Commonwealth were OK but not as good as elsewhere. Pathetic.

    I’m interested in your knowing about Irish slaves in Barbados (you just referred to WI) in the mid 17th century. It makes me wonder if your father was one of the Nazi officers who turned up in Iceland expecting to meet the purest of pure Aryans only to be shocked at the features acquired from Irish slave ancestors. And while I am competing for pathetic anachronisms as if civilisation hasn’t advanced in recent centuries allow me to point out that German and other Popes over a hundred years later than that slavery were having little boys testicles removed so they could go on singing for them with unbroken voice. And no anachronism in pointing to the last German Pope’s failure to deal with the child sexual abuse which has done so much to weaken Western civilisation’s confidence and ability to sustain itself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @utu

    from Newton and Bacon through Locke, Smith, and Burke to Maxwell, Whitehead, and Turing
     
    A list from Anglophone history books. All these guys can easily be replaced by some French or German guys. In 19 century where most of history of science and technology was being written Britain was the dominat power. France was in decline and Germany was barely rising. If Britain was swallowed by the seas in 16 century the history obviously would be different but humanity would not miss anything.

    Would not miss anything? As a tautology perhaps because what you don’t know you don’t think about. But if you are referring to the substantial advances mankind has made in what all believe to be important I suggest about 100 years. You have perhaps ignored culture in contrast to a few great men. And one of the big causal factors was the fact that Britain was an island safe from major invasion while the English tamed the Scots and Irish (and eventually benefited from the Scottish Enlightenment). Protestantism was vital regardless of what you think of Weber or Tawney. It is hardly likely that the Protestant Ethic would have been so successful in promoting Die Geist des Kapitalismus without British Protestantism. And Sir Edward Coke’s telling James l that he was not above the law was way ahead of its time but was an English truth. You might find reason too in Gregory Clark’s fascinating “A Farewell to Alms” to modify your view. Admittedly Clark’s work makes one ask why Britain before the rest of North Western Europe and again it inspires thoughts of timing and also Britain’s not having to worry about Continental neighbours as long as they ruled the waves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    you have perhaps ignored culture in contrast to a few great men.
     
    That's what the other guy did, it's unfair to criticize utu for taking advantage.

    English tamed the Scots and Irish
     
    This is a good point. What would Irish culture have produced if it had not been half-murdered by the English?

    Okay, I'm joking, a little. Obviously utu is exaggerating, pardonably I think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. Randal says:
    @deschutes
    Your typical British modesty and humbleness are duly noted. What I've always admired about the Brits is how they never act priggish, arrogant, pedantic or condescending towards others :-D

    Your typical British modesty and humbleness are duly noted

    Just not interested in getting into the same old colonialism arguments with obsessives quoting decades (sometimes centuries) old atrocity stories (some true, many of them fantasies) and refusing point blank to admit to the many good qualities and results of the European expansion, on this thread. I’ve made my position clear, they’ve made theirs. Seems to me that’s pretty much enough.

    As for “modesty and humbleness”, we live in a world in which the dominant zeitgeist (for white nations and people, at any rate), is endless, terminally boring and pathetic humility and apologetic modesty. Even the anti-colonialist and antiracist obsessives would have gotten bored of it by now, if they weren’t obsessives and if it didn’t serve all kinds of lobby agendas to keep pushing it.

    So I’ll stick to my stand – not denying crimes, but equally not denying things to be proud of. If you don’t like it you can go and read the Guardian or almost any other mainstream media outlet for yet another dose of apologetics.

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

    Seriously people, this is all about the crash of the petrodollar. I’m surprised that no one has mentioned it. One by one the Mideast ARab states are being enticed into abandoning the dollar for payments for just about everything. Iran has switched to the Euro, the Saudis are playing footsies with Russia while drilling off angle in Yemen, Armenia has just had a revolution (read: regime change) and most of it is about the Silk road and the Russian pipeline going to Turkey which has decided to switch allegiances yet again. The Controllers of the US are panicked because the conditions engendered by the waning petrodollar will produce revolutionary tendancies in the US through massive inflation and shortages so the incompetents are hoping for WW3 to detrack and slow down the inevitable disintegration. The gold-backed RMB is the death knell.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dissenter
    Short and concise, your comment sums it all.
    Without needing so much pretended profund divagations by some here....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @Quartermaster
    A lot of fake news in this column.

    It is wise to take Russian claims with a ton of salt. Because of the poor performance of the S-400 system, the Russians are now shipping the S-300 to Syria. It has also been reported that the Russians are shipping heavy armor to Syria. Putin isn't withdrawing, he's doubling down.

    Putin's Russia has become like the USSR, a disinformation operation.

    If something is to be dismissed as being insignificant, you would take it with a grain of salt. Saying that it should be taken with a ton of salt is meaningless. I take everything you post with a grain of salt, because your attempts at disinformation are insignificant.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @Low Voltage
    I would like to see universal conscription for the armed forces, and by universal, I mean everyone (2 years of service between 18-20) with no lottery and no deferments. Service would be required during peacetime and not just when the Generals need cannon fodder. Conscripts would be exempt from any overseas duty unless they volunteered. In fact, overseas service should consist of a sort of American Foreign Legion (funded by the corporations who profit from these bloodbaths).

    Of course, this would be an expensive army, but in a nation that worships the military like our modern day Confederacy, everyone should be thanking each other for their service. We might not be McMansion Nation any longer, but that would be a good thing.

    Baring financial collapse, a conscripted army with no deferments other than for severe physical handicaps is the only way of bringing military adventurism to a halt.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. @bluedog
    Damn that makes all 26 of my ancestors who fought to help create this country somehow traitors, instead of I hate the word patriots, for its been well over used beaten to death brought back to life so it could be flayed again by the sunshine patriots,the same sunshine patriots who sit by as we lie,lie,lie,after all that's what professional soldiers do if they want to climb the rank ladder that is ,to get into another war.!!

    bluedog

    Pathetic childish ad hominem. Only 26? My favorite among my numerous War of Independence ancestors is Color Sergeant Amos Hall 7th Connecticut Line. He served from 1775 50 1782 and was at Valley Forge and Cornwallis’ surrender. I prefer him to the various militia colonels who raised their own regiments for the war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  201. annamaria says:
    @Carroll Price
    As long as the American public thinks the attack was a success is what matters.

    The truth is destroying the presstitute narrative: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/harper-unmasking-the-white-helmets.html#disqus_thread
    Comment section:
    Lang: “It is very clear that the WH [White Helmets] operation is a brainchild of the Clinton/Obama regime with British and Saudi participation. The British actually have conducted the operation.”
    Rob: “More to do with Saudi and Arab interests. Doesn’t help that they are aligned with Zionists on this matter, but I wouldn’t say neocons are the key factor…”
    Lang: “There is little doubt that the UK is running these projects with money from USAID (State) and the Saudis.”

    The massive joint efforts of the presstitute stenographers, including the “progressive” branch of MSM presstitutes (such Sonali Kolhatkar on Truthdig), are failing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    "......the UK is running these projects with money from USAID (State)....."

    This US support of White Helmets should stop!
    You wrote, "The massive joint efforts of the presstitute stenographers, including the “progressive” branch of MSM presstitutes ......are failing." Well, maybe. There may be a bigger group awaking to this fraud, but the corporate media are redoubling their efforts. This morning, the BBC devoted 10 minutes to belittling, attempting to discredit Vanessa Beeley. Both left and right, Democracy [Later] and Breitbart, are peddling the official meme. Amy Goodman hosted jihadi apologist Ramah Kudaimi.

    Nevertheless, isn't now the time to get behind the few honest journalists and truth tellers - like Col. Lang - to expose the WH psy-op? Wasn't their staging/filming the Douma clinic 'hosing' their fatal blunder? Wouldn't a WH denouement indict not only the WH, but the lying media that have force fed Americans with this propaganda?

    UR readers have been accused of 'all whining, no action'. If this opening is allowed to pass, this chink in the Matrix not exploited, that will be sadly true.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. @General Giap
    In which Michael Kenny tries to provoke everyone with the hot buttons that drive statists like him crazy. Bogged down. You know, like in Korea, and Vietnam, and Somalia, and Afghanistan. Except this time it's not US loser chumps bogged down, it's Putin who's bogged down, nyah, nyah (he means Russia, not Putin, and strictly speaking the СБРФ, though he doesn't know what that is, but statist propagandists try to personalize everything for better emotional manipulation.)

    Only СБРФ is supporting the host nation with optimal efficiency, systematically rolling up CIA's armed irregulars with extraordinary attention to protection of civilians, and routing CIA's clandestine war of aggression while effectively inhibiting US escalation. It's a tour de force, and all US statists with 3-digit IQs are shitting bricks.

    Kenny is naturally fixated on Russiagate, that being the original Red-Scare neurosis of the US CIA regime, which has flared up again as CIA gets crushed and humiliated in Syria and Ukraine. Except Russiagate's going to go away just like Chinagate did. Oh, you don't remember Chinagate? Of course you don't. Nobody gives a rat's.

    https://thebaffler.com/latest/is-trump-the-new-clinton-al-gharbi

    Followed by lots of white-noise speculation with a non sequitur tacked on, you know what it is by now: in any case it's all terrible for Putin and Trump [because they're the same.]

    And you wonder why Russia is kicking the CIA's ass. Russian government staff have got 20 IQ points on their opposite numbers from Putin on down. That's because all the smart Americans go into theft and fraud for investment banks.

    ” It’s a tour de force, and all US statists with 3-digit IQs are shitting bricks. ”

    Both of them? ;-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @Andrei Martyanov

    Really? Is that all you got?
     
    I am sure it is on several orders of magnitude more than whatever you will be able to present. This is not to speak of you being disrespectful towards a man with combat, intelligence and human experience of which you can not even conceive. Yes, Colonel Lang's word has weight, a real one. Yours--zero.

    Agree

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. @anonymous
    Wow, this new author has brought along some sensitive wingmen.

    No, I’m not paid. Nor have I smeared anyone. I like this website and often comment when I read something that seems especially good or bad.

    In his first piece published here, Mr. Lang apparently used quotation marks around something that he was paraphrasing, and rather poorly at that. We don’t know, because he declined to address the point, even though some of us did in comments that he seems to be reviewing closely.

    In this, his second piece published here, he has been sloppy in conveying what we’re then told he has addressed elsewhere in opposition to the wrongful warmongering of a government that he nevertheless served for decades. My impression is that he’s a company man, with appeal predominantly to others that naively romanticize the military component of the Establishment, especially of their time in its employ.

    So at this point, Mr. Lang seems below the level of most authors published here. But at least he responds (to some extent) to criticism. And I hope to be complimenting him here if his future work is better. But when he bristles that “I confess that I was unaware that this is a forum for people who hate America,” I won’t be getting my hopes up too high.

    Please consider confining your future comments to the substantive.

    More sad childish ad hominem nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    It should come as no surprise that a writer ignorant of the proper use of quotation marks would own goal his ad hominem, too.

    Mr. Lang, I now wish that you weren't here. But as long as you are, please try to engage, not insult, the readership.

    Sick Temper Tantrumus
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. Anon[198] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    Would not miss anything? As a tautology perhaps because what you don't know you don't think about. But if you are referring to the substantial advances mankind has made in what all believe to be important I suggest about 100 years. You have perhaps ignored culture in contrast to a few great men. And one of the big causal factors was the fact that Britain was an island safe from major invasion while the English tamed the Scots and Irish (and eventually benefited from the Scottish Enlightenment). Protestantism was vital regardless of what you think of Weber or Tawney. It is hardly likely that the Protestant Ethic would have been so successful in promoting Die Geist des Kapitalismus without British Protestantism. And Sir Edward Coke's telling James l that he was not above the law was way ahead of its time but was an English truth. You might find reason too in Gregory Clark's fascinating "A Farewell to Alms" to modify your view. Admittedly Clark's work makes one ask why Britain before the rest of North Western Europe and again it inspires thoughts of timing and also Britain's not having to worry about Continental neighbours as long as they ruled the waves.

    you have perhaps ignored culture in contrast to a few great men.

    That’s what the other guy did, it’s unfair to criticize utu for taking advantage.

    English tamed the Scots and Irish

    This is a good point. What would Irish culture have produced if it had not been half-murdered by the English?

    Okay, I’m joking, a little. Obviously utu is exaggerating, pardonably I think.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. @EnglishOutsider
    I dislike the policies of my government as much as you appear to dislike the policies of yours. So we're on the parallel tracks there. But it's possible to do that and still be a patriot. That's democracy.

    Democracy's not working at present, certainly not in my country and maybe not quite as expected for all those Americans patriots who voted anti-neocon. But it's still a good idea, democracy, wouldn't you agree?

    ,

    ” But it’s still a good idea, democracy, wouldn’t you agree?”

    Do you mean the proposition that 51% of voters can enslave the other 49%?

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    Do you mean the proposition that 51% of voters can enslave the other 49%?
     
    More of your utterly stupid shit. There's elections, and there's laws, regulations, constitutional provisions and state, local and municipal courts.

    Grow up, SFB.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. Ivan says:
    @byrresheim

    India did not do too badly under the British
     
    There seems to have been a recurring problem with famines under british rule.

    The last few million Bengals who perished needlessly seem to have been the straw that broke the camel's back.

    India did not escape the Malthusian Trap until well into the 1970s. Famines are a recurring phenomena in agricultural societies. The Chinese did not do all that much better even though they were nominally independent. The Bengal Famine had many causes, among them a crop blight, the refugee population fleeing war in Burma and, indifference in Whitehall, though not of the administrators on the ground.

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

    The AEI (actually, The American Israel-First Institute or The American Fifth Column Institute) has sponsored a “secret conservative forum held on a luxury island in America’s deep south:” https://www.rt.com/uk/425204-secret-conference-gove-javid/
    “Gove and Javid, the only UK politicians at the event, both spoke at the conference. …
    Javid, the secretary of state for communities and local government, joined a panel discussing whether or not last year was “the best year in human history”. He shared the panel with Frederick Kagan, another figure from the Project for the New American Century; Glen Hubbard, chief economic adviser to President George Bush before the 2008 market crash; and Elliott Abrams, who was convicted over his involvement in the ‘Iran Contra’ scandal of the 1980s – when senior administration officials in the Reagan era secretly facilitated the sale of weapons to Iran, which was under an arms embargo. The money from those sales was used to arm the right-wing human rights-violating Contra fighters, in their battle against the Nicaraguan government.
    The secretive conference’s pièce de résistance was the session “Sci-Fi Weapons that actually exist today.” Billionaires and politicians alike were privy to a “show-and-tell session that your second-grade teacher could never have imagined,” read the event program.”
    — Sounds like a nice profiteering event for wealthy idiots and ziocons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
    Sounds like a Bilderberg meeting for the technically inclined.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. @Wizard of Oz
    You disqualify yourself from even the credit due a UR thread standard of expertise by ignorance of the economic success of Australia's six colonies(later states), Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, Malaya, Ceylon, Fiji, Hong Kong and Singapore not to mention the West Indies...

    ” the economic success of Australia’s six colonies(later states), Canada, New Zealand, Ireland, Malaya, Ceylon, Fiji, Hong Kong and Singapore not to mention the West Indies…”

    Australia’s six colonies? The Australian federation consists of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia, and Western Australia, doesn’t it?

    The colonies you listed are colonies of the British Empire.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Before Federation they functioned as seperate colonies and most of the people considered themselves British.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. annamaria says:

    More on the event sponsored by the American Fifth Column Institute (the AEI): https://www.rt.com/uk/425204-secret-conference-gove-javid/
    “Gove spoke on one conference panel entitled “The New Empire Builders: China, Iran, Russia.” He appeared alongside Gary Schmitt, who helped establish the Project for the New American Century, a neo-con group that successfully advocated for the war with Iraq prior to 2003.
    According to the timetable that advertised Gove’s session, “now is the era of the rise of the revisionist powers – Once great empires, these nations are led by imperial nostalgics bent not simply on accumulating power and wealth for themselves but also in changing the balance of power.”
    1. First of all, why Gary Schmitt, this mega scoundrel, is still free, whereas the courageous and principled Assange is basically in detention?
    2. Mr. Gove is projecting: “these nations [China, Iran, Russia] are led by imperial nostalgics bent not simply on accumulating power and wealth for themselves but also in changing the balance of power.”
    — For Mr. Gove attention, “these nations” are self-sufficient, whereas the Gove’s and AEI’ handlers want, desperately, to appropriate the resources of China, Iran, and Russia, by any means. The US/UK banksters want this wealth. But Gove would never let his thinking to wonder in this inconvenient direction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Thanks for this information and links, annamaria.

    The RT report linked to an article on Vice https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/xw79qq/top-tories-attended-a-fancy-hawkish-us-neo-con-conference
    that named the location -- Sea Island, Georgia, about 20 miles north of Jekyll Island, Ga, where US federal reserve bank was hatched in 1910, and 250 miles south of Bernard Baruch's "barony" in South Carolina. The three locations could probably be visited in a One day yachting outing on the Atlantic seaboard.

    The rising ambitions of "revisionist empires" Iran, Russia and China were very much on the minds and ideological menus of the conferees.

    Vice also named some attendees: in addition to Fred Kagan, Philip Anschutz, and other Republicans joined Democrats like Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz and former Google chairman Eric Schmidt.

    The fee for the 3-day event was a $25,000 donation to buttress AEI's $84 million annual revenues. Presumably, Kagan, a "resident scholar" at AEI, enjoyed a free weekend. Does he have to report that on his income tax?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  211. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Patrick Lang
    More sad childish ad hominem nonsense.

    It should come as no surprise that a writer ignorant of the proper use of quotation marks would own goal his ad hominem, too.

    Mr. Lang, I now wish that you weren’t here. But as long as you are, please try to engage, not insult, the readership.

    Sick Temper Tantrumus

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Could you simply disappear from the UnzReview, "anonymous 340?" -- Your pettiness is ugly.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  212. @anonymous

    get to their senses, whatever is left of them, and finally seat at the table to discuss new geopolitical configuration and how to deal with it in civilized peaceful manner.
     
    I'm not very sanguine about that. American policy has been premised on being able to sail around the world and act unilaterally as it sees fit, using force whenever it wants to. This course has been in motion for the past 120 years since the Spanish-American war (if one can call it that). See the pattern? Reversing this would require a very fundamental change on many different levels, something that would not be achievable barring some extremely strong leadership which seems unlikely to arise under current conditions.

    Whatever has the beginning has the end. Reality is a tough thing to go against.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. @Quartermaster
    Now, now. I realize that facts are a hard thing to absorb, but they are there and they don't go away. Putin grew up in a system that new that it couldn't take on what it saw as its primary enemy in a straight up fight, and Russia is back to that place again. So, all Putin has left is the disinformation operation he grew up with. You may not like that fact, but that's just too bad.

    Th point is not that Russia doesn’t engage in misinformation. Whether is as intense as during the Cold War is doubtful.

    However, what is more disconcerting is the level of misinformation being engaged in what is arguably the democratic republic on the planet. I am more concerned that our press has become more instruments of government or corporate agendas than that Russia has a long legacy still to shake off before she has a “free press.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan
    It would appear for many people including myself that the supposedly free press in the US, by not following up on inconvenient stories, burying them, misdirecting efforts at the truth, smearing those who dissent as traitors and apologists, is in practice resembling a controlled press. Not that other countries are so much better off. But as you say, it it US that pretends that it has a free untrammeled press and thus has to have its pretensions exposed
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  214. @Twodees Partain
    " But it’s still a good idea, democracy, wouldn’t you agree?"

    Do you mean the proposition that 51% of voters can enslave the other 49%?

    Do you mean the proposition that 51% of voters can enslave the other 49%?

    More of your utterly stupid shit. There’s elections, and there’s laws, regulations, constitutional provisions and state, local and municipal courts.

    Grow up, SFB.

    Read More
    • Troll: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    What is stupid is the presumption that the form of government of the US is democracy. Find the word "democracy in the US Constitution, and tell me where it is. Just the Article will do. Cite which Article mentions democracy or admit that you're the "utterly stupid shit" who needs to grow up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  215. @annamaria
    More on the event sponsored by the American Fifth Column Institute (the AEI): https://www.rt.com/uk/425204-secret-conference-gove-javid/
    "Gove spoke on one conference panel entitled "The New Empire Builders: China, Iran, Russia." He appeared alongside Gary Schmitt, who helped establish the Project for the New American Century, a neo-con group that successfully advocated for the war with Iraq prior to 2003.
    According to the timetable that advertised Gove’s session, "now is the era of the rise of the revisionist powers – Once great empires, these nations are led by imperial nostalgics bent not simply on accumulating power and wealth for themselves but also in changing the balance of power.”
    1. First of all, why Gary Schmitt, this mega scoundrel, is still free, whereas the courageous and principled Assange is basically in detention?
    2. Mr. Gove is projecting: "these nations [China, Iran, Russia] are led by imperial nostalgics bent not simply on accumulating power and wealth for themselves but also in changing the balance of power."
    --- For Mr. Gove attention, "these nations" are self-sufficient, whereas the Gove's and AEI' handlers want, desperately, to appropriate the resources of China, Iran, and Russia, by any means. The US/UK banksters want this wealth. But Gove would never let his thinking to wonder in this inconvenient direction.

    Thanks for this information and links, annamaria.

    The RT report linked to an article on Vice https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/xw79qq/top-tories-attended-a-fancy-hawkish-us-neo-con-conference
    that named the location — Sea Island, Georgia, about 20 miles north of Jekyll Island, Ga, where US federal reserve bank was hatched in 1910, and 250 miles south of Bernard Baruch’s “barony” in South Carolina. The three locations could probably be visited in a One day yachting outing on the Atlantic seaboard.

    The rising ambitions of “revisionist empires” Iran, Russia and China were very much on the minds and ideological menus of the conferees.

    Vice also named some attendees: in addition to Fred Kagan, Philip Anschutz, and other Republicans joined Democrats like Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz and former Google chairman Eric Schmidt.

    The fee for the 3-day event was a $25,000 donation to buttress AEI’s $84 million annual revenues. Presumably, Kagan, a “resident scholar” at AEI, enjoyed a free weekend. Does he have to report that on his income tax?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. @redmudhooch
    Trump shouda put that McMahon wrestling lady in the propaganda department, shes pretty good at convincing 50 year old adults that wrestling is real.
    Americans just aren't buying what these idiots are trying to sell us with these chemical attacks by the brutal dicktaters.
    I'm honestly confused by the stupidity lately, either Trump is a genius or he is the dumbest person on the planet.
    The totally insane actions of these morons lately is waking people up in massive numbers, is he doing it intentionally? Like a call for help or something? Trying to show us who is really behind all this this crap? (Israel)
    Because if he isn't, thats exactly what its doing.

    Haha really eh, I do believe that he’s putting up some sort of resistance, I want to believe the 4D chess meme but at this point I can’t in good faith.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. Ivan says:
    @EliteCommInc.
    Th point is not that Russia doesn't engage in misinformation. Whether is as intense as during the Cold War is doubtful.

    However, what is more disconcerting is the level of misinformation being engaged in what is arguably the democratic republic on the planet. I am more concerned that our press has become more instruments of government or corporate agendas than that Russia has a long legacy still to shake off before she has a "free press."

    It would appear for many people including myself that the supposedly free press in the US, by not following up on inconvenient stories, burying them, misdirecting efforts at the truth, smearing those who dissent as traitors and apologists, is in practice resembling a controlled press. Not that other countries are so much better off. But as you say, it it US that pretends that it has a free untrammeled press and thus has to have its pretensions exposed

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
    The Western main-stream press is free to print anything that falls within Zionist thought and speech codes. The success or failure of individual editors and news readers depend on their skill in determining what becomes news.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. @Carroll Price
    As a conservative (or liberal) Englishman, you have a hell of a lot to be ashamed of. With the same being true for Americans who, if anything, are even worse.

    They have nothing to be ashamed of, the conquered inferior peoples for their own gain. Put yourself in the mindset of the time.

    I have French-Canadian background, yet you will never hear me join on the anti British bitching and moaning train. I regard francophones who do as nothing but bitchy women.

    Besides, if not for the British, the Americans who have completely destroyed our culture. I am thankful for their (relative) tolerance at the time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
    So, were the Scotch and Irish a conquered inferior people? The only difference between the Irish Potato Famine (when food was withheld from the Irish by the Crown) and the Ukrainian Famine (when food was withheld from the Ukrainian people by Stalin) was in scope only.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. annamaria says:
    @anonymous
    It should come as no surprise that a writer ignorant of the proper use of quotation marks would own goal his ad hominem, too.

    Mr. Lang, I now wish that you weren't here. But as long as you are, please try to engage, not insult, the readership.

    Sick Temper Tantrumus

    Could you simply disappear from the UnzReview, “anonymous 340?” — Your pettiness is ugly.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    I have been checking back to see whether Mr. Lang or one of his enthusiasts might address what I maintain are important questions fairly asked of a public author.

    1. Paul Wolfowitz helped engineer a despicable war, and any additional evidence of that should be brought out. But Mr. Lang appears at this point to have falsely quoted him. That quotation should be substantiated or withdrawn.

    2. Invited to "research" after asking questions, I see a Wikipedia entry that prompts more, including to what extent it is autobiographical.

    Please explain why either of these concerns is "petty" or, as Mr. Lang has said in his last words posted on this website, "sad childish ad hominem nonsense."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. annamaria says:

    The best description of the “I-am-not-confused” Nikki Haley: http://thesaker.is/on-sanctions/?inmoderation
    Comment section:
    “Nimratta Haley belongs to Sheldon Adelson, who has sponsored her entire political career, and who purchased her seat at the United Nations representing the United States on behalf of the UK-Rothschild ‘Octopus’ Crime Family, a group which also controls the Treasury, Justice Department and FBI.
    That’s quite a lineup if you are attempting to control the United States, and of course, they also control almost all mainstream media.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  221. tac says:

    This two-part article encapsulates the media hysteria over the Douma ‘gas attack’ aptly named “Douma…Deception In Plain Sight“:

    UK corporate media are under a curious kind of military occupation. Almost all print and broadcast media now employ a number of reporters and commentators who are relentless and determined warmongers. Despite the long, unarguable history of US-UK lying on war, and the catastrophic results, these journalists instantly confirm the veracity of atrocity claims made against Official Enemies, while having little or nothing to say about the proven crimes of the US, UK, Israel and their allies. They shriek with a level of moral outrage from which their own government is forever spared. They laud even the most obviously biased, tinpot sources blaming the ‘Enemy’, while dismissing out of hand the best scientific researchers, investigative journalists and academic sceptics who disagree.

    Anyone who challenges this strange bias is branded a ‘denier’, ‘pro-Saddam’, ‘pro-Gaddafi, ‘pro-Assad’. Above all, one robotically repeated word is generated again and again: ‘Apologist… Apologist… Apologist’…

    http://medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2018/868-douma-part-1.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  222. Vidi says:
    @Thirdeye

    All these guys can easily be replaced by some French or German guys.
     
    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing. Important German contributions to science and social philosophy were jump-started by British influences. Even the Chinese, whom the British treated loathsomely, used derivations of British social philosophy to bring their society into the modern age.

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing.

    Newton: there is substantial controversy as to who invented Calculus, Newton or Leibnitz. As for gravity, Newton’s theory was based on the work of Kepler.

    Maxwell: two of Maxwell’s four equations were by Gauss.

    Turing: John von Neumann (a Hungarian) arguably did more on the fundamentals of computing.

    So this is one of the very few occasions on which I agree with utu: if these British men had never been born, the world would have gone on much the same.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    I think it's overstating Kepler's role to say his work was the foundation for the theory of gravity. Kepler had a good way of describing the kinematics of planetary motion consistent with empirical data but he was lost on the mechanics. He was looking for mystical causes and held some frankly Aristotelian ideas on the conditions of motion. Newtonian mechanics made sense of Kepler's ad hoc descriptions in terms of three laws that had power far beyond planetary motion. Leibniz presented a computationally superior form of calculus but the conceptual breakthrough of tying calculus to physical meaning was Newton's.

    Maxwell was definitely benefited by developments in mathematics before him, but his derivation of the speed of light that made it a fundamental property outside the realm of Galilean transformation took the world to the doorstep of Special Relativity.

    , @FB
    I see the know-nothing 'Turdeye' is pontificating again on physics...of which his expertise, by his own admission, consists of a freshman level course...LOL

    He kicked up a lot of dust on the other thread trying to yap about conservation of angular momentum...of which he knows nothing...

    I have challenged him to an elementary conservation of angular momentum problem that any first year engineering student could solve in two seconds...just to see if his walk matches the talk...

    ...but he is yet to respond...I think we will be waiting a long time...

    In the meantime...maybe Unz readers can chip in for this device to contain the 'Turdeye' noxious gas emissions...


    https://s20.postimg.cc/6qwxb28ql/3071325b2cc0f707e407cf6715ceab69.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. @byrresheim
    Could you please provide links (for my convenience?)
    I only read of one F-16 shot down.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. Vidi says:
    @Quartermaster
    You trust Wikipedia?

    You trust Wikipedia?

    I had other sources I could have cited; Wikipedia was just convenient. For example, the Encyclopedia Britannica also says that the B-52 was “first flown in 1952″:

    https://www.britannica.com/technology/B-52

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  225. FB says:
    @Quartermaster
    You trust Wikipedia?

    Way to go Quarterpounder…

    Filling the airwaves here on Unz with your volatile gas eruptions…

    From the Boeing Logbook 1952…

    ‘…April 15: A.M. “Tex” Johnston and Guy Townsend take the B-52 Stratofortress prototype on its first flight from Boeing Field in Seattle to Larson Air Force Base, Moses Lake, Wash…’

    As for the naming of the B52 Stratofortress…the ’52′ does indeed denote the consecutive design number…however in 1962 the Tri-Service Aircraft Designation System was implemented so later bombers such as B1 and B2 came after the B52…

    The naming convention by the USAF is simplified as ‘MDS’…

    which stands for…Modified Mission…Design Number…Series Letter…

    So in the case of the B52-H…it means Bomber..design number 52…series H…

    Some very silly comments here trying to write off Col Lang’s entire article on the basis of nitpickery regarding an insignficant bit of minutia…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. Thirdeye says:
    @Vidi

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing.
     
    Newton: there is substantial controversy as to who invented Calculus, Newton or Leibnitz. As for gravity, Newton's theory was based on the work of Kepler.

    Maxwell: two of Maxwell's four equations were by Gauss.

    Turing: John von Neumann (a Hungarian) arguably did more on the fundamentals of computing.

    So this is one of the very few occasions on which I agree with utu: if these British men had never been born, the world would have gone on much the same.

    I think it’s overstating Kepler’s role to say his work was the foundation for the theory of gravity. Kepler had a good way of describing the kinematics of planetary motion consistent with empirical data but he was lost on the mechanics. He was looking for mystical causes and held some frankly Aristotelian ideas on the conditions of motion. Newtonian mechanics made sense of Kepler’s ad hoc descriptions in terms of three laws that had power far beyond planetary motion. Leibniz presented a computationally superior form of calculus but the conceptual breakthrough of tying calculus to physical meaning was Newton’s.

    Maxwell was definitely benefited by developments in mathematics before him, but his derivation of the speed of light that made it a fundamental property outside the realm of Galilean transformation took the world to the doorstep of Special Relativity.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. FB says:
    @Vidi

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing.
     
    Newton: there is substantial controversy as to who invented Calculus, Newton or Leibnitz. As for gravity, Newton's theory was based on the work of Kepler.

    Maxwell: two of Maxwell's four equations were by Gauss.

    Turing: John von Neumann (a Hungarian) arguably did more on the fundamentals of computing.

    So this is one of the very few occasions on which I agree with utu: if these British men had never been born, the world would have gone on much the same.

    I see the know-nothing ‘Turdeye’ is pontificating again on physics…of which his expertise, by his own admission, consists of a freshman level course…LOL

    He kicked up a lot of dust on the other thread trying to yap about conservation of angular momentum…of which he knows nothing…

    I have challenged him to an elementary conservation of angular momentum problem that any first year engineering student could solve in two seconds…just to see if his walk matches the talk…

    …but he is yet to respond…I think we will be waiting a long time…

    In the meantime…maybe Unz readers can chip in for this device to contain the ‘Turdeye’ noxious gas emissions…

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

    Freedom of speech and freedom of information under the ziocon assault in the US: “Israel Has Purchased the South Carolina Government,” by Alison Weir

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49295.htm

    “The South Carolina Senate has recently passed legislation that changes the definition of anti-Semitism to include criticism of Israel
    Israel’s Jerusalem Post newspaper called the South Carolina legislation “a landmark bill that is set to be the model for states across America and countries around the world.”
    The pro-Israel Brandeis Center, which helped promote the legislation, declared: “… we are hoping this momentous step will result in another national wave to, once and for all, begin defeating rising anti-Semitism.” Anti-Semitism, that is, defined to include many forms of criticism of Israel.”

    The pro-Israel Brandeis Center needs some scrutiny re its name: https://simtenormsivazmonstruos.wordpress.com/2014/08/14/justice-louis-brandeis-zionism-and-his-secret-group/
    “… most Americans are unaware of the significant role he [Brandeis] played in World War I and of his connection to Palestine. … there was significant opposition at the time to his appointment to the Supreme Court, largely centered on widespread accusations of unethical behavior. A typical example was the view that Brandeis was “a man who has certain high ideals in his imagination, but who is utterly unscrupulous, in method in reaching them.”
    While today such criticisms of Brandeis are either ignored or attributed to political differences and/ or “anti-Semitism,” there is evidence suggesting that such views may have been more accurate than Brandeis partisans would like. …
    Zionist membership expanded dramatically during World War I, despite the efforts of some Jewish anti-Zionists, one of whom called the movement a “foreign, un-American, racist, and separatist phenomenon.” …
    Brandeis was a leader of “an elitist secret society called the Parushim, the Hebrew word for ‘Pharisees’ and ‘separate,’ which grew out of Harvard’s Menorah Society.” “The image that emerges of the Parushim is that of a secret underground guerilla force determined to influence the course of events in a quiet, anonymous way.” … Brandeis’s membership in a secret society [Parushim] that covertly pushed Zionism both in the U.S. and internationally
    – Brandeis was a spiritual father of the modern-day ziocons. The genocidal wars in the Middle East are his main legacy along with the zionization of the US Congress and the US military. His were anti-American activities.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Tragically, Supreme Court Justice James Clark McReynolds was, and continues to be vilified for his strenuous opposition to Louis Brandeis's activities while on the bench.

    After serving as Woodrow Wilson's attorney general for two years, the President Wilson appointed McReynolds to the Supreme Court in 1914. He remained on the court until 1946. McReynolds was one of the "Four Horsemen" that opposed progressive and New Deal measures, and among the targets of FDR's failed court packing scheme.

    The tales of McReynolds' behavior toward Brandeis, and indeed his overall demeanor are so universally negative that it is difficult to form a true picture of the man. It can be discerned that he was well-educated at schools in his native Kentucky, then Vanderbilt and University of Virginia law school, and he put his intellectual gifts and training to good use in the private practice of law and later, in a long career in US government. He was kind to orphans -- really! -- he sponsored the care of orphans during his lifetime and in his will left significant sums for their benefit.

    Nearly a decade ago, in an effort to clear his name and revisit the history of that era, a relative of McReynolds's, Ann McReynolds Bush, published Executive Disorder: The Subversion of the United States Supreme Court, 1914-1940.

    This review captures some of the book's highlights:

    If you are a lawyer or a libertarian, you are doubtless aware that the headlong rush to trample the Constitutional limitations on governmental power sprang largely from events during FDR's presidency. The presidential and congressional policies then adopted--which were ultimately sanctioned by the Supreme Court--led inexorably to the nanny state that we "enjoy" today.

    But you have almost certainly never heard the compelling and powerful story of that era as seen through the eyes of one of the "Four Horsemen"--the four Supreme Court Justices who consistently opposed FDR's expansion of the breath and scope of the federal government's grasp. The recently released book titled Executive Disorder: The Subversion of the United States Supreme Court, 1914-1940 tells this important story. This breezy yet gripping narrative carefully recounts--using the writings of Justice James Clark McReynolds and others--the events that led to the dismantling of substantive due process and the broadened perceived reach of the Commerce Clause. The following excerpt from Justice McReynolds' opinion in Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1925) succinctly summarizes his view of these issues:

    If the phrase `executive power' infolds the one now claimed, many others heretofore totally unsuspected may lie there awaiting future supposed necessity, and no human intelligence can define the field of the President's permissible activities. A masked battery of constructive powers would complete the destruction of liberty.

    We owe a debt of gratitude to the author of Executive Disorder, Ann McReynolds Bush, for providing us with this fascinating account. It is a "must read" for students of constitutional history and libertarian philosophy. https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R20ELIB650J0W7/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1453652647
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. @manorchurch

    Do you mean the proposition that 51% of voters can enslave the other 49%?
     
    More of your utterly stupid shit. There's elections, and there's laws, regulations, constitutional provisions and state, local and municipal courts.

    Grow up, SFB.

    What is stupid is the presumption that the form of government of the US is democracy. Find the word “democracy in the US Constitution, and tell me where it is. Just the Article will do. Cite which Article mentions democracy or admit that you’re the “utterly stupid shit” who needs to grow up.

    Read More
    • Agree: FB
    • Replies: @manorchurch
    Perhaps YOU assumed that, SFB, because I did not use the word "democracy". You bitched, like the little squirmy bitch you are, that "51% of voters can enslave the other 49%".

    1. They can't. And thanks for noting that 51% of voters deny the vote of 49%. Kinda like democracy, huh?

    2. Who said "voter", you or me?

    3. Why does the Constitution insist on "election", using that word 16 times?

    You figger the Founders didn't mean "democracy" at all, they just used the word "election" for kicks and stuff?

    You lose, dilbert.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. RobinG says:
    @annamaria
    The truth is destroying the presstitute narrative: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/harper-unmasking-the-white-helmets.html#disqus_thread
    Comment section:
    Lang: "It is very clear that the WH [White Helmets] operation is a brainchild of the Clinton/Obama regime with British and Saudi participation. The British actually have conducted the operation."
    Rob: "More to do with Saudi and Arab interests. Doesn't help that they are aligned with Zionists on this matter, but I wouldn't say neocons are the key factor..."
    Lang: "There is little doubt that the UK is running these projects with money from USAID (State) and the Saudis."

    The massive joint efforts of the presstitute stenographers, including the "progressive" branch of MSM presstitutes (such Sonali Kolhatkar on Truthdig), are failing.

    “……the UK is running these projects with money from USAID (State)…..”

    This US support of White Helmets should stop!
    You wrote, “The massive joint efforts of the presstitute stenographers, including the “progressive” branch of MSM presstitutes ……are failing.” Well, maybe. There may be a bigger group awaking to this fraud, but the corporate media are redoubling their efforts. This morning, the BBC devoted 10 minutes to belittling, attempting to discredit Vanessa Beeley. Both left and right, Democracy [Later] and Breitbart, are peddling the official meme. Amy Goodman hosted jihadi apologist Ramah Kudaimi.

    Nevertheless, isn’t now the time to get behind the few honest journalists and truth tellers – like Col. Lang – to expose the WH psy-op? Wasn’t their staging/filming the Douma clinic ‘hosing’ their fatal blunder? Wouldn’t a WH denouement indict not only the WH, but the lying media that have force fed Americans with this propaganda?

    UR readers have been accused of ‘all whining, no action’. If this opening is allowed to pass, this chink in the Matrix not exploited, that will be sadly true.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. @annamaria
    Freedom of speech and freedom of information under the ziocon assault in the US: "Israel Has Purchased the South Carolina Government," by Alison Weir
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/49295.htm
    "The South Carolina Senate has recently passed legislation that changes the definition of anti-Semitism to include criticism of Israel ...
    Israel’s Jerusalem Post newspaper called the South Carolina legislation “a landmark bill that is set to be the model for states across America and countries around the world.”
    The pro-Israel Brandeis Center, which helped promote the legislation, declared: “... we are hoping this momentous step will result in another national wave to, once and for all, begin defeating rising anti-Semitism.” Anti-Semitism, that is, defined to include many forms of criticism of Israel."
    ---
    The pro-Israel Brandeis Center needs some scrutiny re its name: https://simtenormsivazmonstruos.wordpress.com/2014/08/14/justice-louis-brandeis-zionism-and-his-secret-group/
    "... most Americans are unaware of the significant role he [Brandeis] played in World War I and of his connection to Palestine. ... there was significant opposition at the time to his appointment to the Supreme Court, largely centered on widespread accusations of unethical behavior. A typical example was the view that Brandeis was “a man who has certain high ideals in his imagination, but who is utterly unscrupulous, in method in reaching them.”
    While today such criticisms of Brandeis are either ignored or attributed to political differences and/ or “anti-Semitism,” there is evidence suggesting that such views may have been more accurate than Brandeis partisans would like. ...
    Zionist membership expanded dramatically during World War I, despite the efforts of some Jewish anti-Zionists, one of whom called the movement a “foreign, un-American, racist, and separatist phenomenon." ...
    Brandeis was a leader of “an elitist secret society called the Parushim, the Hebrew word for ‘Pharisees’ and ‘separate,’ which grew out of Harvard’s Menorah Society.” “The image that emerges of the Parushim is that of a secret underground guerilla force determined to influence the course of events in a quiet, anonymous way.” ... Brandeis’s membership in a secret society [Parushim] that covertly pushed Zionism both in the U.S. and internationally ...
    -- Brandeis was a spiritual father of the modern-day ziocons. The genocidal wars in the Middle East are his main legacy along with the zionization of the US Congress and the US military. His were anti-American activities.

    Tragically, Supreme Court Justice James Clark McReynolds was, and continues to be vilified for his strenuous opposition to Louis Brandeis’s activities while on the bench.

    After serving as Woodrow Wilson’s attorney general for two years, the President Wilson appointed McReynolds to the Supreme Court in 1914. He remained on the court until 1946. McReynolds was one of the “Four Horsemen” that opposed progressive and New Deal measures, and among the targets of FDR’s failed court packing scheme.

    The tales of McReynolds’ behavior toward Brandeis, and indeed his overall demeanor are so universally negative that it is difficult to form a true picture of the man. It can be discerned that he was well-educated at schools in his native Kentucky, then Vanderbilt and University of Virginia law school, and he put his intellectual gifts and training to good use in the private practice of law and later, in a long career in US government. He was kind to orphans — really! — he sponsored the care of orphans during his lifetime and in his will left significant sums for their benefit.

    Nearly a decade ago, in an effort to clear his name and revisit the history of that era, a relative of McReynolds’s, Ann McReynolds Bush, published Executive Disorder: The Subversion of the United States Supreme Court, 1914-1940.

    This review captures some of the book’s highlights:

    If you are a lawyer or a libertarian, you are doubtless aware that the headlong rush to trample the Constitutional limitations on governmental power sprang largely from events during FDR’s presidency. The presidential and congressional policies then adopted–which were ultimately sanctioned by the Supreme Court–led inexorably to the nanny state that we “enjoy” today.

    But you have almost certainly never heard the compelling and powerful story of that era as seen through the eyes of one of the “Four Horsemen”–the four Supreme Court Justices who consistently opposed FDR’s expansion of the breath and scope of the federal government’s grasp. The recently released book titled Executive Disorder: The Subversion of the United States Supreme Court, 1914-1940 tells this important story. This breezy yet gripping narrative carefully recounts–using the writings of Justice James Clark McReynolds and others–the events that led to the dismantling of substantive due process and the broadened perceived reach of the Commerce Clause. The following excerpt from Justice McReynolds’ opinion in Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1925) succinctly summarizes his view of these issues:

    If the phrase `executive power’ infolds the one now claimed, many others heretofore totally unsuspected may lie there awaiting future supposed necessity, and no human intelligence can define the field of the President’s permissible activities. A masked battery of constructive powers would complete the destruction of liberty.

    We owe a debt of gratitude to the author of Executive Disorder, Ann McReynolds Bush, for providing us with this fascinating account. It is a “must read” for students of constitutional history and libertarian philosophy. https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R20ELIB650J0W7/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1453652647

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Thank you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  232. @Twodees Partain
    What is stupid is the presumption that the form of government of the US is democracy. Find the word "democracy in the US Constitution, and tell me where it is. Just the Article will do. Cite which Article mentions democracy or admit that you're the "utterly stupid shit" who needs to grow up.

    Perhaps YOU assumed that, SFB, because I did not use the word “democracy”. You bitched, like the little squirmy bitch you are, that “51% of voters can enslave the other 49%”.

    1. They can’t. And thanks for noting that 51% of voters deny the vote of 49%. Kinda like democracy, huh?

    2. Who said “voter”, you or me?

    3. Why does the Constitution insist on “election”, using that word 16 times?

    You figger the Founders didn’t mean “democracy” at all, they just used the word “election” for kicks and stuff?

    You lose, dilbert.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB
    Hey 'moronchurch'...we tend not to want to hear from disneylanders here on Unz...


    https://s20.postimg.cc/s9vwh860t/Disneyland_Pioneers.jpg

    , @Twodees Partain
    "Perhaps YOU assumed that, SFB, because I did not use the word “democracy”."

    So, you weren't actually replying to what I said, you were simply flaming and slinging insults. You really aren't making any sense here.
    The men who debated the Constitution mentioned democracy many times, and always in a derogatory sense. "King Numbers" was one description of it.

    Here's what the actual text has to say, Article 4 Section 4:

    "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

    It's too much to ask you to actually cite anything in the document to support your fantasy that "the Founders" meant democracy because they mentioned elections, though the actual text refers only to a republican form of government. Since you're so much in love with democracy, I'll assume that you're a democrat.

    Since we aren't face to face, acting tough and slinging insults just makes you look like a shrieking little democrat queer.

    Thanks for showing me early on just what a demented little troll you are, and at the same time, revealing what you're doing here. Liberal democrats like you always have to have the last word, so go ahead.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  233. annamaria says:
    @SolontoCroesus
    Tragically, Supreme Court Justice James Clark McReynolds was, and continues to be vilified for his strenuous opposition to Louis Brandeis's activities while on the bench.

    After serving as Woodrow Wilson's attorney general for two years, the President Wilson appointed McReynolds to the Supreme Court in 1914. He remained on the court until 1946. McReynolds was one of the "Four Horsemen" that opposed progressive and New Deal measures, and among the targets of FDR's failed court packing scheme.

    The tales of McReynolds' behavior toward Brandeis, and indeed his overall demeanor are so universally negative that it is difficult to form a true picture of the man. It can be discerned that he was well-educated at schools in his native Kentucky, then Vanderbilt and University of Virginia law school, and he put his intellectual gifts and training to good use in the private practice of law and later, in a long career in US government. He was kind to orphans -- really! -- he sponsored the care of orphans during his lifetime and in his will left significant sums for their benefit.

    Nearly a decade ago, in an effort to clear his name and revisit the history of that era, a relative of McReynolds's, Ann McReynolds Bush, published Executive Disorder: The Subversion of the United States Supreme Court, 1914-1940.

    This review captures some of the book's highlights:

    If you are a lawyer or a libertarian, you are doubtless aware that the headlong rush to trample the Constitutional limitations on governmental power sprang largely from events during FDR's presidency. The presidential and congressional policies then adopted--which were ultimately sanctioned by the Supreme Court--led inexorably to the nanny state that we "enjoy" today.

    But you have almost certainly never heard the compelling and powerful story of that era as seen through the eyes of one of the "Four Horsemen"--the four Supreme Court Justices who consistently opposed FDR's expansion of the breath and scope of the federal government's grasp. The recently released book titled Executive Disorder: The Subversion of the United States Supreme Court, 1914-1940 tells this important story. This breezy yet gripping narrative carefully recounts--using the writings of Justice James Clark McReynolds and others--the events that led to the dismantling of substantive due process and the broadened perceived reach of the Commerce Clause. The following excerpt from Justice McReynolds' opinion in Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1925) succinctly summarizes his view of these issues:

    If the phrase `executive power' infolds the one now claimed, many others heretofore totally unsuspected may lie there awaiting future supposed necessity, and no human intelligence can define the field of the President's permissible activities. A masked battery of constructive powers would complete the destruction of liberty.

    We owe a debt of gratitude to the author of Executive Disorder, Ann McReynolds Bush, for providing us with this fascinating account. It is a "must read" for students of constitutional history and libertarian philosophy. https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R20ELIB650J0W7/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1453652647
     

    Thank you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  234. @Randal
    My inclination has been to believe the Russian side from quite early on, mostly on the basis that the claimed US targeting spread simply doesn't seem credible. To aim 76 missiles and guided bombs at the Barzeh "complex" seems ludicrous overkill, for a small group of basically civilian buildings that once were part of the chemical weapons program but according to recent OPCW inspections are no longer in use as such. The spread suggested by the Russians, on the other hand, seems much more credible for a punitive strike, especially if you assume the US did not expect Syrian only defences to work effectively and thus did not plan for much redundancy.

    As this becomes more widely accepted, it makes the US action in Syria much less of a defeat for Russia (because they had to stand by and watch their ally get pummelled) and much closer to something that is actually a win for Russia and an embarrassment for the US. It all helps to push the credibility of Russian air defences to still higher levels.

    If the Russian government goes through with the suggested plan to deliver the promised S300 systems to Syria in response, then this will have been a major defeat for those behind this shameful incident and this shameful war - primarily the Israelis and US Israeli lobby, along with the Saudis. Doing so would be the absolute best way to make those behind the attack grind their teeth in frustration, so hopefully Russia will go through with it this time rather than coming to some "compromise" with Israel.

    At some point, Russia needs to end the impunity Israel has to strike at Syria at will, and to declare an exclusion zone over the whole of Syria for all un-invited foreign air forces (ideally this would include a deal with Lebanon to allow that country also to exclude Israeli air operations from its own airspace). The need to rebuild Syria is endlessly hampered by regular attacks and the threat of them. Once the recovery of territory on the ground is complete or nearly so, the best way to do this would seem to be to first make the Syrian air defences, backed up by Russian forces in extremis, strong enough for the task. Then to authorise the Syrians to retaliate to Israeli strikes on a tit for tat basis with missile attacks on Israeli territory. Then to announce a full exclusion of US and other intruding air forces, perhaps in conjunction with an offensive to recover territories in the east after Idlib has been settled.

    Imo this is what the Russians need to do if they are to bring the Syrian matter to a successful conclusion, but it will mean some more tense confrontations with the various US sphere forces.

    I agree with, and like, much if what you write here but do wish to add two thoughts that are germane to my understanding of this whole Syria thing.
    1. You are quite correct in your reasoning as to why the Russian account of the missile’s interception is much more plausible. Additionally, although this point you did not bring up, we have to understand that Trump was practically forced to go through the motions of an attack, what with the hounds around him and the media barking non-stop for blood and more blood (doesn’t matter whose blood, just give us more blood, death, and destruction).
    2. You are quite right in saying that Russia needs to end the impunity that Israel has in bombing Syria. However, I feel (and fear) that the time may be past due. That is something that Putin should have done on day one as soon as Russia entered the Syrian picture. And it should have been done on grounds of international law and morality. After so many violations of so many countries by the USA/NATO, I believe if Russia had played its international PR cards right it would have roused up scores of countries and people. Those cards have been thrown away by the Russians and the world has sort of again resigned to the fact that the US has the right to intervene whenever it chooses to. For Russia to now deny Syrian airspace to Israel, US, and others will be politically iffy; the legal and moral high ground has been lost.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carroll Price
    Putin's reluctance in seizing the initiative has been driving Paul Craig Roberts insane since shortly after the US-financed coup in Ukraine. It's enough to make one wonder if he is actually in cahoots with the West, and simply playing a game to keep everyone (including his own people) in a state of confusion. Eustace Mullins always said the Cold War was a joint effort between the US and Russia and he may have been right.
    , @annamaria
    "... if Russia had played its international PR cards right it would have roused up scores of countries and people. Those cards have been thrown away by the Russians..."
    -- Not clear how the "international PR cards" could have been played in a case of MH17 or in a case of the Skripal Affair. For an educational moment, look at the "solidarity" of the European vassals that have expelled the RF diplomats under a flimsy fact-free pretense. Note that the UK has broken all international protocols by refusing the consular access to Yulia Skripal.
    What kind of "international PR cards" could be used against the Ziocon USA/UK that have been doing the wars of aggression in the Middle East for some 15 years, disregarded habeas corpus on a global scale, and turned the Geneva Conventions into a wrapping paper?
    To suggest that the "grounds of international law and morality" exist for the ZUSA (including the European vassals) is supremely naive.
    Russians had tried their best in their attempts at establishing a civilized dialogue with the zionized warmongers; this approach did not work and could not work.
    For the lawless banksters and ziocon fanatics to come to their senses they need a hard lesson.
    The RF tried to avoid the confrontation, but the warmongering imperial idiots could be disciplined through the harsh measures only; otherwise, there will be no human life on this planet. The best would be if the "deciders" got their lessons on a personal level, one decider's family at a time.
    , @Randal

    Additionally, although this point you did not bring up, we have to understand that Trump was practically forced to go through the motions of an attack, what with the hounds around him and the media barking non-stop for blood and more blood (doesn’t matter whose blood, just give us more blood, death, and destruction).
     
    It's true that Trump operates in a media and political context that generally puts pressure on him to act militarily, and in ways that protect him from accusations of being soft on Russia. (To some extent that situation was no doubt created intentionally by those who want to ensure such policies continue during his period in office.) But I'm not sure how much credit, if any, to give him for that. His statements have been simply too inconsistent and contradictory to form any strong opinion as to his real positions.

    And in respect of the Syria incidents specifically, he' absolutely has only himself to blame for creating a situation in which there was pressure on him to attack the Syrian government. His ridiculous and emotionally incontinent response to the supposed use of chemical weapons last year was literally stupid (and entirely unnecessary) and set a precedent which he then built upon directly (and again entirely unnecessarily) with his similarly ridiculous and similarly emotionally incontinent response to this year's incident. In effect, he gratuitously drew an Obama-style "red line" and created hope amongst the establishment media and lobby warmongers that it could be used to force the regime change level attacks in Syria they have so desperately wanted for 7 years now. He almost singlehandedly created the feverish media atmosphere that required an attack, and one noticeably bigger than last year's.

    You are quite right in saying that Russia needs to end the impunity that Israel has in bombing Syria. However, I feel (and fear) that the time may be past due. That is something that Putin should have done on day one as soon as Russia entered the Syrian picture.
     
    I certainly understand the point you are making here and it is one I have often wondered about myself.

    Fwiw, my conclusion has been that the Russians (probably rightly - the Russian government has earned respect as a highly competent strategic operator over the past ten years) have felt that neither they nor the Syrian government, were strong enough to make such a declaration and make it stick. Essentially, in 2011 or 2013 or 2015, or in 2017, such a declaration would have been a bluff, which would have quickly been called by the US and by Israel. The reality is that military strength on the ground easily trumps international law and morality, and as has been seen in numerous UN votes and diplomatic engagements, enough countries can be relied upon to support the US for it or its proxies to act with impunity (as in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria). no matter how morally bankrupt its position. The focus had to be instead on doing the hard grind of shoring up the Syrian government position on the ground and defeating the jihadists, while rebuilding the battered Syrian military and steadily building up air defences in theatre, and avoiding a too open break in relations with other powers in the region (Israel, Saudi) even while opposing their interests directly in Syria.

    The danger of such a declaration even today remains significant. It will likely trigger a confrontation with Israel and with the US that could easily spiral into uncomfortable levels.

    Perhaps the Russian government can be criticised for excessive caution. I doubt it, though. They have imo played a weak hand with skill over the past decade or so, and proved in Crimea that they could act decisively and aggressively when it was called for and when they could control the context and outcome. The situation in Syria has been far less stable, and responsible caution has imo been the correct approach.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. @Seamus Day
    Think of the trillions we’ve laid out for wars for Israel. Iraq and Afghanistan (which was to limit the influence and reach of Iran) have cost us trillions. We spend tens of billions in welfare handouts to Israel each year. Germany has paid Israel 1/10 of a trillion in reparations. When is this shit gonna end?? All this insanity so Jews— of w/ largely European genetics— can play country.

    GERMAN CEO: ISRAEL SHOULD NO LONGER RELY ON GERMANY FOR ITS EXISTENCE

    https://m.jpost.com/International/German-CEO-Israel-should-no-longer-rely-on-Germany-for-its-existence-552571

    In an eye-popping commentary in the Die Welt newspaper last week, Mathias Döpfner, the pro-Israel CEO of the Axel Springer media conglomerate in Berlin, wrote that the Jewish state should no longer depend on Germany if it is attacked and its existence is on the line.

    Döpfner wrote that in the past, he would answer “Yes” to the inevitable question while visiting Israel about whether Germany would send weapons and soldiers if the Jewish state faced attacks that threatened its survival. However, over the last few years, he has started to hesitate. “Today, I would say: ‘Better to not rely on us,’” wrote Döpfner.

    The CEO of Europe’s largest media company listed a bill of particulars in his commentary outlining Germany’s failure to learn the important lessons from the Holocaust. He said for the 70th year anniversary of Israel’s founding, “Germany distinguishes itself as the world master of paying lip service. The solidarity to Israel and the fight against antisemitism take place on paper.”

    The media giant took Germany to task for its pacifism in the face of Syrian children being gassed.

    Döpfner said one frequently hears on the streets and in offices more criticism of US President Donald Trump, French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Theresa May for their bombing of military sites and airports in Syria than they do of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. The US, Britain and France accused Assad of using poison gas in April that murdered scores of Syrians in the city of Douma.

    He summed up the practical effect of Germany’s Holocaust remembrance culture: “In remembrance we are giants. In action and help we are dwarfs.”

    The Jerusalem Post reported in April that the Merkel administration continues to allow the Baden-Württemberg-based German company Krempel to conduct business with Iran, after it sold material to Iranian companies that later turned up in Iranian chemical rockets in the Damascus suburb of Eastern Ghouta, .

    Merkel has rejected the US administration’s push over the last few months to get Germany outlaw Hezbollah, which the US classifies as terrorist organization.

    According to German intelligence reports, there are 950 Hezbollah operatives in the Federal Republic.

    Döpfner blasted the BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign) in Germany. He wrote “An international lobby organization calls for a boycott of Israeli products and no one gets upset in a country that 75 years ago scrawled ‘Don’t buy from Jews’ on the walls.”

    The Post exposed the Cologne-based Bank for Social Economy’s vigorous defense of BDS accounts used by groups to undercut Israel’s existence.

    Sammy Endzweig, the president of the pro-Israel group Keren Hayesod Germany, told the Post by email on Sunday that his organization is dissatisfied with the bank’s response to the BDS accounts it maintains.

    Endzweig said he plans to send a new letter to the bank demanding clear answers about the bank’s alleged antisemitic activity.

     

    https://friendsofsyria.wordpress.com/

    a little evidence might help

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. FB says:
    @manorchurch
    Perhaps YOU assumed that, SFB, because I did not use the word "democracy". You bitched, like the little squirmy bitch you are, that "51% of voters can enslave the other 49%".

    1. They can't. And thanks for noting that 51% of voters deny the vote of 49%. Kinda like democracy, huh?

    2. Who said "voter", you or me?

    3. Why does the Constitution insist on "election", using that word 16 times?

    You figger the Founders didn't mean "democracy" at all, they just used the word "election" for kicks and stuff?

    You lose, dilbert.

    Hey ‘moronchurch’…we tend not to want to hear from disneylanders here on Unz…

    Read More
    • Replies: @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    You are really an unpleasant bastard, eh?

    Don't get me wrong - your technical analysis is on point, but unfortunately your knowledge seems to be used on figurative dick measuring competitions with other users.

    Refocus yourself and try to make productive comments on this website. I know you can do it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. @manorchurch
    Perhaps YOU assumed that, SFB, because I did not use the word "democracy". You bitched, like the little squirmy bitch you are, that "51% of voters can enslave the other 49%".

    1. They can't. And thanks for noting that 51% of voters deny the vote of 49%. Kinda like democracy, huh?

    2. Who said "voter", you or me?

    3. Why does the Constitution insist on "election", using that word 16 times?

    You figger the Founders didn't mean "democracy" at all, they just used the word "election" for kicks and stuff?

    You lose, dilbert.

    “Perhaps YOU assumed that, SFB, because I did not use the word “democracy”.”

    So, you weren’t actually replying to what I said, you were simply flaming and slinging insults. You really aren’t making any sense here.
    The men who debated the Constitution mentioned democracy many times, and always in a derogatory sense. “King Numbers” was one description of it.

    Here’s what the actual text has to say, Article 4 Section 4:

    “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.”

    It’s too much to ask you to actually cite anything in the document to support your fantasy that “the Founders” meant democracy because they mentioned elections, though the actual text refers only to a republican form of government. Since you’re so much in love with democracy, I’ll assume that you’re a democrat.

    Since we aren’t face to face, acting tough and slinging insults just makes you look like a shrieking little democrat queer.

    Thanks for showing me early on just what a demented little troll you are, and at the same time, revealing what you’re doing here. Liberal democrats like you always have to have the last word, so go ahead.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    So, you weren’t actually replying to what I said
     
    Wrong. I replied to what you said, specifically. And, specifically, what you said was wrong. Wrong. Erroneous. Incorrect. Stupid, pinheaded, moronic, imbecilic, indicative of mental inadequacy.

    Now, you choose to entertain yourself with invention. You waste my time, and the time of anyone sufficiently unfortunate to read your ego-puffing, posturing nonsense. Since I am inclined to say what needs saying, in a brief and dismissive context, go fuck yourself, shit-for-brains. You're Ignored.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  238. @FB
    Hey 'moronchurch'...we tend not to want to hear from disneylanders here on Unz...


    https://s20.postimg.cc/s9vwh860t/Disneyland_Pioneers.jpg

    You are really an unpleasant bastard, eh?

    Don’t get me wrong – your technical analysis is on point, but unfortunately your knowledge seems to be used on figurative dick measuring competitions with other users.

    Refocus yourself and try to make productive comments on this website. I know you can do it.

    Read More
    • Agree: Mike P, Randal
    • Replies: @FB
    http://media.santabanta.com/joke/visuals/8693.jpg
    , @Vojkan
    Actually, I think his jerkish behaviour is to ward off any contradictor and have only blind followers who admire his "science" continue reading him. As for "technical analysis", well, I read only superficially his posts before and noticed already that he's not really best friends with math. I stopped reading at all and added him to my "ignore list" when after he insulted me, he proceeded to write that a gyroscope is used for geographic positioning. If you still believe after that that the guy is knowledgeable then I can't help you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. @annamaria
    The AEI (actually, The American Israel-First Institute or The American Fifth Column Institute) has sponsored a "secret conservative forum held on a luxury island in America’s deep south:" https://www.rt.com/uk/425204-secret-conference-gove-javid/
    "Gove and Javid, the only UK politicians at the event, both spoke at the conference. ...
    Javid, the secretary of state for communities and local government, joined a panel discussing whether or not last year was "the best year in human history". He shared the panel with Frederick Kagan, another figure from the Project for the New American Century; Glen Hubbard, chief economic adviser to President George Bush before the 2008 market crash; and Elliott Abrams, who was convicted over his involvement in the ‘Iran Contra’ scandal of the 1980s – when senior administration officials in the Reagan era secretly facilitated the sale of weapons to Iran, which was under an arms embargo. The money from those sales was used to arm the right-wing human rights-violating Contra fighters, in their battle against the Nicaraguan government.
    The secretive conference’s pièce de résistance was the session "Sci-Fi Weapons that actually exist today." Billionaires and politicians alike were privy to a “show-and-tell session that your second-grade teacher could never have imagined,” read the event program."
    --- Sounds like a nice profiteering event for wealthy idiots and ziocons.

    Sounds like a Bilderberg meeting for the technically inclined.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. @seeing-thru
    I agree with, and like, much if what you write here but do wish to add two thoughts that are germane to my understanding of this whole Syria thing.
    1. You are quite correct in your reasoning as to why the Russian account of the missile’s interception is much more plausible. Additionally, although this point you did not bring up, we have to understand that Trump was practically forced to go through the motions of an attack, what with the hounds around him and the media barking non-stop for blood and more blood (doesn’t matter whose blood, just give us more blood, death, and destruction).
    2. You are quite right in saying that Russia needs to end the impunity that Israel has in bombing Syria. However, I feel (and fear) that the time may be past due. That is something that Putin should have done on day one as soon as Russia entered the Syrian picture. And it should have been done on grounds of international law and morality. After so many violations of so many countries by the USA/NATO, I believe if Russia had played its international PR cards right it would have roused up scores of countries and people. Those cards have been thrown away by the Russians and the world has sort of again resigned to the fact that the US has the right to intervene whenever it chooses to. For Russia to now deny Syrian airspace to Israel, US, and others will be politically iffy; the legal and moral high ground has been lost.

    Putin’s reluctance in seizing the initiative has been driving Paul Craig Roberts insane since shortly after the US-financed coup in Ukraine. It’s enough to make one wonder if he is actually in cahoots with the West, and simply playing a game to keep everyone (including his own people) in a state of confusion. Eustace Mullins always said the Cold War was a joint effort between the US and Russia and he may have been right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @seeing-thru
    Sadly, I think you are right. I agree with you 80%. As to the 20% shortfall: the other explanation is that Russia is in reality much weaker (and disorganized, and a divided-house, and economically in trouble) than she projects. That would also explain Russia's puzzling behaviour.

    A caution: most folks find such thoughts to be wicked heresies. Having voiced a heresy yourself, be prepared to duck and dodge the verbal assaults that could be coming your way.
    , @Randal

    Putin’s reluctance in seizing the initiative has been driving Paul Craig Roberts insane since shortly after the US-financed coup in Ukraine. It’s enough to make one wonder if he is actually in cahoots with the West, and simply playing a game to keep everyone (including his own people) in a state of confusion.
     
    Far easier simply to assume reasonable caution on the part of the leaders of a country that knows it is the weaker side in economic and in military (certainly power projection) terms, at least in the short term, and sees its interests best served by steady defence and playing for time rather than grand gestures, than such a rather implausibly complicated conspiracy, imo.
    , @Twodees Partain
    "Eustace Mullins always said the Cold War was a joint effort between the US and Russia and he may have been right."

    That seemed accurate to me during the Cold War, but today, it appears that only one side is actually fighting the "new Cold War". Russia seems to be just soldiering on, following their own path forward with a minimum of reaction to much of the provocation from the US and UK.

    Sanctions on Russia are being ameliorated by currency swaps with China, and there is a general trend towards using gold for international trade instead of the USD. Now that there is no USSR, assaults via sanctions may be blunted and turned back upon what passes for US diplomacy. Sanctions and saber rattling could lead to self inflicted wounding of US interests.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. FB says:
    @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    You are really an unpleasant bastard, eh?

    Don't get me wrong - your technical analysis is on point, but unfortunately your knowledge seems to be used on figurative dick measuring competitions with other users.

    Refocus yourself and try to make productive comments on this website. I know you can do it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  242. @Twodees Partain
    "Perhaps YOU assumed that, SFB, because I did not use the word “democracy”."

    So, you weren't actually replying to what I said, you were simply flaming and slinging insults. You really aren't making any sense here.
    The men who debated the Constitution mentioned democracy many times, and always in a derogatory sense. "King Numbers" was one description of it.

    Here's what the actual text has to say, Article 4 Section 4:

    "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

    It's too much to ask you to actually cite anything in the document to support your fantasy that "the Founders" meant democracy because they mentioned elections, though the actual text refers only to a republican form of government. Since you're so much in love with democracy, I'll assume that you're a democrat.

    Since we aren't face to face, acting tough and slinging insults just makes you look like a shrieking little democrat queer.

    Thanks for showing me early on just what a demented little troll you are, and at the same time, revealing what you're doing here. Liberal democrats like you always have to have the last word, so go ahead.

    So, you weren’t actually replying to what I said

    Wrong. I replied to what you said, specifically. And, specifically, what you said was wrong. Wrong. Erroneous. Incorrect. Stupid, pinheaded, moronic, imbecilic, indicative of mental inadequacy.

    Now, you choose to entertain yourself with invention. You waste my time, and the time of anyone sufficiently unfortunate to read your ego-puffing, posturing nonsense. Since I am inclined to say what needs saying, in a brief and dismissive context, go fuck yourself, shit-for-brains. You’re Ignored.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. @Carroll Price
    Putin's reluctance in seizing the initiative has been driving Paul Craig Roberts insane since shortly after the US-financed coup in Ukraine. It's enough to make one wonder if he is actually in cahoots with the West, and simply playing a game to keep everyone (including his own people) in a state of confusion. Eustace Mullins always said the Cold War was a joint effort between the US and Russia and he may have been right.

    Sadly, I think you are right. I agree with you 80%. As to the 20% shortfall: the other explanation is that Russia is in reality much weaker (and disorganized, and a divided-house, and economically in trouble) than she projects. That would also explain Russia’s puzzling behaviour.

    A caution: most folks find such thoughts to be wicked heresies. Having voiced a heresy yourself, be prepared to duck and dodge the verbal assaults that could be coming your way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch

    the other explanation is that Russia is in reality much weaker (and disorganized, and a divided-house, and economically in trouble) than she projects. That would also explain Russia’s puzzling behaviour.
     
    Probably, yes. Keep in mind that Russia is a less-affluent, but similar version to the USA: a militarized plutocracy, owned and operated by the rich, for the purposes of the rich, with all attendant and analogous conflicts deriving from that non-natural, out-of-balance state of human affairs.

    Militarism, and concomitant imperialism, is the curse of the human race. Right now, it's running out front, on afterburner, bound and determined to destroy the world in the demented pursuit of world dominance, via whatever preferred style in which the eventual victor succeeds.

    Hunker down and watch. Life goes on. If humanity can ever rid itself of this monster, we might have a chance. But, things don't look so good.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  244. annamaria says:
    @seeing-thru
    I agree with, and like, much if what you write here but do wish to add two thoughts that are germane to my understanding of this whole Syria thing.
    1. You are quite correct in your reasoning as to why the Russian account of the missile’s interception is much more plausible. Additionally, although this point you did not bring up, we have to understand that Trump was practically forced to go through the motions of an attack, what with the hounds around him and the media barking non-stop for blood and more blood (doesn’t matter whose blood, just give us more blood, death, and destruction).
    2. You are quite right in saying that Russia needs to end the impunity that Israel has in bombing Syria. However, I feel (and fear) that the time may be past due. That is something that Putin should have done on day one as soon as Russia entered the Syrian picture. And it should have been done on grounds of international law and morality. After so many violations of so many countries by the USA/NATO, I believe if Russia had played its international PR cards right it would have roused up scores of countries and people. Those cards have been thrown away by the Russians and the world has sort of again resigned to the fact that the US has the right to intervene whenever it chooses to. For Russia to now deny Syrian airspace to Israel, US, and others will be politically iffy; the legal and moral high ground has been lost.

    “… if Russia had played its international PR cards right it would have roused up scores of countries and people. Those cards have been thrown away by the Russians…”
    – Not clear how the “international PR cards” could have been played in a case of MH17 or in a case of the Skripal Affair. For an educational moment, look at the “solidarity” of the European vassals that have expelled the RF diplomats under a flimsy fact-free pretense. Note that the UK has broken all international protocols by refusing the consular access to Yulia Skripal.
    What kind of “international PR cards” could be used against the Ziocon USA/UK that have been doing the wars of aggression in the Middle East for some 15 years, disregarded habeas corpus on a global scale, and turned the Geneva Conventions into a wrapping paper?
    To suggest that the “grounds of international law and morality” exist for the ZUSA (including the European vassals) is supremely naive.
    Russians had tried their best in their attempts at establishing a civilized dialogue with the zionized warmongers; this approach did not work and could not work.
    For the lawless banksters and ziocon fanatics to come to their senses they need a hard lesson.
    The RF tried to avoid the confrontation, but the warmongering imperial idiots could be disciplined through the harsh measures only; otherwise, there will be no human life on this planet. The best would be if the “deciders” got their lessons on a personal level, one decider’s family at a time.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  245. @seeing-thru
    Sadly, I think you are right. I agree with you 80%. As to the 20% shortfall: the other explanation is that Russia is in reality much weaker (and disorganized, and a divided-house, and economically in trouble) than she projects. That would also explain Russia's puzzling behaviour.

    A caution: most folks find such thoughts to be wicked heresies. Having voiced a heresy yourself, be prepared to duck and dodge the verbal assaults that could be coming your way.

    the other explanation is that Russia is in reality much weaker (and disorganized, and a divided-house, and economically in trouble) than she projects. That would also explain Russia’s puzzling behaviour.

    Probably, yes. Keep in mind that Russia is a less-affluent, but similar version to the USA: a militarized plutocracy, owned and operated by the rich, for the purposes of the rich, with all attendant and analogous conflicts deriving from that non-natural, out-of-balance state of human affairs.

    Militarism, and concomitant imperialism, is the curse of the human race. Right now, it’s running out front, on afterburner, bound and determined to destroy the world in the demented pursuit of world dominance, via whatever preferred style in which the eventual victor succeeds.

    Hunker down and watch. Life goes on. If humanity can ever rid itself of this monster, we might have a chance. But, things don’t look so good.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  246. Erebus says:
    @Sparkon
    It's a great saying, but Twain isn't the original author. In fact, there's no record he ever said it. Sometimes Satchel Paige is given credit, Josh Billings, Kin Hubbard, and others. I've written about this before at UR, so this is another entry for my

    • Broken Record Department

    I first saw this familiar saying years ago in a book of aphorisms, where it was attributed to "Kin" Hubbard, and rendered as:

    It ain't what you don't know that hurts you;
    It's what you know that just ain't so.

    https://newrepublic.com/minutes/126677/it-aint-dont-know-gets-trouble-must-big-short-opens-fake-mark-twain-quote

    Similarly, there is no good record Abraham Lincoln ever said:


    You can fool all of the people some of the time,
    And some of the people all of the time,
    But you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
     
    https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/161924

    The need to get some celebrity involved is a reflection of the human belief that things are more profound when uttered by famous lips, but both sayings remain valid irrespective of the fame of the original author.

    The next part of my broken record is that false knowledge is dangerous, but what you don't know -- ignorance -- can hurt you as well.

    In this word, we all labor with some measure of ignorance.

    In this case, we certainly do not know what really happened in Syria during this recent attack, as Col Lang notes. Whatever the case, it must have been an exciting night for personnel staffing air defense positions in the Syrian military.

    From what I can gather, we may not even know what happened at Shayrat last year. As you know, I've taken the minority position about the Shayrat attack, and have said I think the ISI images show that many if not most of the cruise missiles hit their targets at Shayrat. That concurs with the ISI analysis, as well as statements from the U.S. and Syria.

    According to the ISI analysis, many of the Tomahawks in April 2017 were directed at hardened aircraft shelters, and several of these received multiple hits. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that the targets of these cruise missiles were any aircraft parked in the shelters, and not the shelters themselves.

    It follows that Syria might have upgraded its air defenses around airfields in the wake of these attacks, especially if in fact the primary target was parked aircraft - sitting ducks. It is not unreasonable to assume that they would want to enhance their AD, and these improved air defenses might account for the very good Syrian results reported by the Russians, if you accept this line of reasoning.

    Again, as always, the caveat applies that we are dealing with open-source material about recent and ongoing military action and adventures, so take it with the proverbial grain or fistful of salt. Tequila optional, pedantry guaranteed.

    Cheers!

    That the Twain quote is of doubtful provenance surprises me not at all. Many/most of these pithy sayings come down to us because they encapsulate a fundamental truth and have probably been around since well before any celebrity repeated/embellished them and raised their profile.

    In repeating them, the celebrity would of course have raised the profile of the pithy saying, spreading it widely and increasing the likelihood that it would down to us as having been coined by them.
    Who knows how many the celebrities missed and are now lost to the mists of time.

    BTW, Tequila is never “optional” when there’s salt involved. YMMV ;-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  247. Vojkan says:
    @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    You are really an unpleasant bastard, eh?

    Don't get me wrong - your technical analysis is on point, but unfortunately your knowledge seems to be used on figurative dick measuring competitions with other users.

    Refocus yourself and try to make productive comments on this website. I know you can do it.

    Actually, I think his jerkish behaviour is to ward off any contradictor and have only blind followers who admire his “science” continue reading him. As for “technical analysis”, well, I read only superficially his posts before and noticed already that he’s not really best friends with math. I stopped reading at all and added him to my “ignore list” when after he insulted me, he proceeded to write that a gyroscope is used for geographic positioning. If you still believe after that that the guy is knowledgeable then I can’t help you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  248. Randal says:
    @seeing-thru
    I agree with, and like, much if what you write here but do wish to add two thoughts that are germane to my understanding of this whole Syria thing.
    1. You are quite correct in your reasoning as to why the Russian account of the missile’s interception is much more plausible. Additionally, although this point you did not bring up, we have to understand that Trump was practically forced to go through the motions of an attack, what with the hounds around him and the media barking non-stop for blood and more blood (doesn’t matter whose blood, just give us more blood, death, and destruction).
    2. You are quite right in saying that Russia needs to end the impunity that Israel has in bombing Syria. However, I feel (and fear) that the time may be past due. That is something that Putin should have done on day one as soon as Russia entered the Syrian picture. And it should have been done on grounds of international law and morality. After so many violations of so many countries by the USA/NATO, I believe if Russia had played its international PR cards right it would have roused up scores of countries and people. Those cards have been thrown away by the Russians and the world has sort of again resigned to the fact that the US has the right to intervene whenever it chooses to. For Russia to now deny Syrian airspace to Israel, US, and others will be politically iffy; the legal and moral high ground has been lost.

    Additionally, although this point you did not bring up, we have to understand that Trump was practically forced to go through the motions of an attack, what with the hounds around him and the media barking non-stop for blood and more blood (doesn’t matter whose blood, just give us more blood, death, and destruction).

    It’s true that Trump operates in a media and political context that generally puts pressure on him to act militarily, and in ways that protect him from accusations of being soft on Russia. (To some extent that situation was no doubt created intentionally by those who want to ensure such policies continue during his period in office.) But I’m not sure how much credit, if any, to give him for that. His statements have been simply too inconsistent and contradictory to form any strong opinion as to his real positions.

    And in respect of the Syria incidents specifically, he’ absolutely has only himself to blame for creating a situation in which there was pressure on him to attack the Syrian government. His ridiculous and emotionally incontinent response to the supposed use of chemical weapons last year was literally stupid (and entirely unnecessary) and set a precedent which he then built upon directly (and again entirely unnecessarily) with his similarly ridiculous and similarly emotionally incontinent response to this year’s incident. In effect, he gratuitously drew an Obama-style “red line” and created hope amongst the establishment media and lobby warmongers that it could be used to force the regime change level attacks in Syria they have so desperately wanted for 7 years now. He almost singlehandedly created the feverish media atmosphere that required an attack, and one noticeably bigger than last year’s.

    You are quite right in saying that Russia needs to end the impunity that Israel has in bombing Syria. However, I feel (and fear) that the time may be past due. That is something that Putin should have done on day one as soon as Russia entered the Syrian picture.

    I certainly understand the point you are making here and it is one I have often wondered about myself.

    Fwiw, my conclusion has been that the Russians (probably rightly – the Russian government has earned respect as a highly competent strategic operator over the past ten years) have felt that neither they nor the Syrian government, were strong enough to make such a declaration and make it stick. Essentially, in 2011 or 2013 or 2015, or in 2017, such a declaration would have been a bluff, which would have quickly been called by the US and by Israel. The reality is that military strength on the ground easily trumps international law and morality, and as has been seen in numerous UN votes and diplomatic engagements, enough countries can be relied upon to support the US for it or its proxies to act with impunity (as in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria). no matter how morally bankrupt its position. The focus had to be instead on doing the hard grind of shoring up the Syrian government position on the ground and defeating the jihadists, while rebuilding the battered Syrian military and steadily building up air defences in theatre, and avoiding a too open break in relations with other powers in the region (Israel, Saudi) even while opposing their interests directly in Syria.

    The danger of such a declaration even today remains significant. It will likely trigger a confrontation with Israel and with the US that could easily spiral into uncomfortable levels.

    Perhaps the Russian government can be criticised for excessive caution. I doubt it, though. They have imo played a weak hand with skill over the past decade or so, and proved in Crimea that they could act decisively and aggressively when it was called for and when they could control the context and outcome. The situation in Syria has been far less stable, and responsible caution has imo been the correct approach.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  249. Randal says:
    @Carroll Price
    Putin's reluctance in seizing the initiative has been driving Paul Craig Roberts insane since shortly after the US-financed coup in Ukraine. It's enough to make one wonder if he is actually in cahoots with the West, and simply playing a game to keep everyone (including his own people) in a state of confusion. Eustace Mullins always said the Cold War was a joint effort between the US and Russia and he may have been right.

    Putin’s reluctance in seizing the initiative has been driving Paul Craig Roberts insane since shortly after the US-financed coup in Ukraine. It’s enough to make one wonder if he is actually in cahoots with the West, and simply playing a game to keep everyone (including his own people) in a state of confusion.

    Far easier simply to assume reasonable caution on the part of the leaders of a country that knows it is the weaker side in economic and in military (certainly power projection) terms, at least in the short term, and sees its interests best served by steady defence and playing for time rather than grand gestures, than such a rather implausibly complicated conspiracy, imo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cold N. Holefield
    It does seem increasingly that it's possible Putin isn't Putin. The Original Putin perhaps was assassinated and this New Putin took his place or several Putin Doppelgängers have since. The look and voice of this New Putin or these New Putins is/are discernibly distinct from the Original Putin of the late 1990s/early 2000s.

    Putin The Shapeshifter

    The Potemkin President.

    Why not? If it worked for Catherine, it can work for Russia's Oligarchs.
    , @Avery
    {Far easier simply to assume reasonable caution on the part of the leaders of a country that knows it is the weaker side in economic and in military (certainly power projection) terms, at least in the short term, and sees its interests best served by steady defence and playing for time rather than grand gestures, than such a rather implausibly complicated conspiracy, imo.}

    Very well said.

    PCR is prone to hyperbole, sees conspiracies everywhere and sees things through a Western prism, which is natural since he was and is an American and thinks like one. I am not Russian, but know enough about Russians to say that their thinking and worldview (...I mean the leadership) is completely alien to Washingtonthink.

    Look at what has been achieved with very judicial use of force and minimum loss of Russian lives in Syria, then tell us whose moves are producing results vs bombast.

    Kremlin knows what their limitations are and are very, very careful not to overextend.
    Which is exactly what US and its many sycophants want by all these childish provocations.

    And so far Putin is no taking their bait: very smart.

    , @aleksandar
    Thanks for you interesting and clever posts.
    The main point to understand Russia position is time as you said.
    The idea that $ will collapse in a not so far future due to US debt is widespread in Russia.
    This will bring US empire to death.
    Another thing is that russians ( it's not only Putin ) are in a " revovery move " that need time and must be planned for the next 20 years to come
    No need to hurry.
    Don't be bothered by mosquitos.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  250. utu says:
    @Thirdeye

    All these guys can easily be replaced by some French or German guys.
     
    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing. Important German contributions to science and social philosophy were jump-started by British influences. Even the Chinese, whom the British treated loathsomely, used derivations of British social philosophy to bring their society into the modern age.

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing.

    It just happened that on another thread few days ago I wrote something about Newton and also Maxwell.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/pinker-on-iq/#comment-2296188

    And also here few month ago I made several comments on Newton:

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/iq-in-time-and-space/#comment-2202199

    Mind you I am not against Newton, I am against excessive idolization and misrepresentation of his contributions. The giants and geniuses are usually constructed for reasons, often political. They never exist in vacuum. They often are inspired by others and sometimes they steal from others. If Newton did not exist we would be OK. Actually then Hooke would get much more credit which he deserved but he was pushed aside by Newton’s unscrupulous shenanigans.

    Narratives are simpler to create if they include giants. So giant are created. It works on children and popular culture and it serves nationalist purposes. Then people, mostly boys, create list who was the greatest and the 2nd greatest and so on. This is very autistic need chiefly affecting boys and immature grown ups who are incapable or too lazy to learn how things really happened.

    Maxwell was very good but he did not do what he did ab nihilo. His differential equations are directly obtainable form various laws of electro-magnetism that were established earlier and which were expressed in terms of integral equations not differential ones.

    As far as Turing, he was a decent mathematician but not super outstanding. Alonzo Church preceded his work. Actually Church’s work also influenced Godel. You could also add Tarski to this group. Then the whole story of Enigma is blown out of proportions. Bletchley Park with Turning got the big kick start when the work of Polish mathematicians was turned over to French and Brits in 1939. Most of work was done by Poles. But we haven’t learned about it until 1980s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Claude Shannon had much more effect on the development of information theory, and of course as other guy said von Neumann had much more effect on practical computing.
    , @Ivan
    If anything the British of yesteryears, the Victorians and Edwardians, though not of today were very shy in claiming credit. Though there are any number of great scientists in the 19th century, the British through Faraday, Maxwell, Kelvin, Thompson and Heaviside, have in any contest determine who invented invented the Electric Century, the winning team. The same goes for their early work in putting mechanisms and steam to real work in the Industrial Revolution. The mechanical books are chock full of mechanisms and contrivances for fuel utilisation that ultimately trace back to them.

    And no, Turing was no 'ordinary mathematician', he was a great mathematician who in addition to his many theoretical works made practical computer designs. The Enigma breakthrough though important, was actually overshadowed by the Colossus machine, which the British kept secret for many years, denying its engineers, men such as Tommy Flowers their credit. All through the pioneering days of computing, the British came up with designs, the Ferranti, the Lyons computer, advances in microprogramming etc that led the world. But since they no longer had an Empire, and no captive market like the US and USSR, whose 'military Keynesianism', subsidised technological development, they naturally fell behind, in among other fields as also in aircraft development.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  251. @Ivan
    It would appear for many people including myself that the supposedly free press in the US, by not following up on inconvenient stories, burying them, misdirecting efforts at the truth, smearing those who dissent as traitors and apologists, is in practice resembling a controlled press. Not that other countries are so much better off. But as you say, it it US that pretends that it has a free untrammeled press and thus has to have its pretensions exposed

    The Western main-stream press is free to print anything that falls within Zionist thought and speech codes. The success or failure of individual editors and news readers depend on their skill in determining what becomes news.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  252. @UrbaneFrancoOntarian
    They have nothing to be ashamed of, the conquered inferior peoples for their own gain. Put yourself in the mindset of the time.

    I have French-Canadian background, yet you will never hear me join on the anti British bitching and moaning train. I regard francophones who do as nothing but bitchy women.

    Besides, if not for the British, the Americans who have completely destroyed our culture. I am thankful for their (relative) tolerance at the time.

    So, were the Scotch and Irish a conquered inferior people? The only difference between the Irish Potato Famine (when food was withheld from the Irish by the Crown) and the Ukrainian Famine (when food was withheld from the Ukrainian people by Stalin) was in scope only.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  253. Anon[198] • Disclaimer says:
    @utu

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing.
     
    It just happened that on another thread few days ago I wrote something about Newton and also Maxwell.
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/pinker-on-iq/#comment-2296188

    And also here few month ago I made several comments on Newton:

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/iq-in-time-and-space/#comment-2202199

    Mind you I am not against Newton, I am against excessive idolization and misrepresentation of his contributions. The giants and geniuses are usually constructed for reasons, often political. They never exist in vacuum. They often are inspired by others and sometimes they steal from others. If Newton did not exist we would be OK. Actually then Hooke would get much more credit which he deserved but he was pushed aside by Newton's unscrupulous shenanigans.

    Narratives are simpler to create if they include giants. So giant are created. It works on children and popular culture and it serves nationalist purposes. Then people, mostly boys, create list who was the greatest and the 2nd greatest and so on. This is very autistic need chiefly affecting boys and immature grown ups who are incapable or too lazy to learn how things really happened.

    Maxwell was very good but he did not do what he did ab nihilo. His differential equations are directly obtainable form various laws of electro-magnetism that were established earlier and which were expressed in terms of integral equations not differential ones.

    As far as Turing, he was a decent mathematician but not super outstanding. Alonzo Church preceded his work. Actually Church's work also influenced Godel. You could also add Tarski to this group. Then the whole story of Enigma is blown out of proportions. Bletchley Park with Turning got the big kick start when the work of Polish mathematicians was turned over to French and Brits in 1939. Most of work was done by Poles. But we haven't learned about it until 1980s.

    Claude Shannon had much more effect on the development of information theory, and of course as other guy said von Neumann had much more effect on practical computing.

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

    No attack, no victims, no chem weapons: Douma witnesses speak at OPCW briefing at The Hague

    https://www.rt.com/news/425240-opcw-russia-syria-douma-witnesses/

    New false-flag operations against Damascus are “possible, since our American partners are once again threatening to take military action against Syria, but we will not allow that,” Russia’s permanent representative to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Aleksandr Shulgin, said during a press conference in The Hague on Thursday.

    “Two gas cylinders, allegedly dropped by the government forces from helicopters, were found in two apartments.”

    One of the cylinders lacked any makeshift upgrades, such as fins, to make it usable as an aerial munition, and, surprisingly, it was not even deformed.

    “It’s quite peculiar that the cylinder was not deformed, which doesn’t fit its purported fall from a big altitude on concrete floor.”

    The other cylinder, while fitted with some crude fins, also remained in nearly pristine condition despite its “fall.”

    The cylinder has partially retained impermeability and is almost undamaged, which is impossible after a fall from some 2,000 meters, the usual altitude used by the Syrian army helicopters,” Kirillov said.

    The cylinder was likely hauled by the “authors of the staged video” from outside, the official stated, as “multiple chips and dragging marks at the stairwell” indicated. An apartment below was being used by its owner to breed chickens, and all the livestock miraculously “made through the so-called chemical attack alive,” according to Kirillov.

    https://www.rt.com/news/425256-russia-wont-allow-attack-syria/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  255. @Randal

    Putin’s reluctance in seizing the initiative has been driving Paul Craig Roberts insane since shortly after the US-financed coup in Ukraine. It’s enough to make one wonder if he is actually in cahoots with the West, and simply playing a game to keep everyone (including his own people) in a state of confusion.
     
    Far easier simply to assume reasonable caution on the part of the leaders of a country that knows it is the weaker side in economic and in military (certainly power projection) terms, at least in the short term, and sees its interests best served by steady defence and playing for time rather than grand gestures, than such a rather implausibly complicated conspiracy, imo.

    It does seem increasingly that it’s possible Putin isn’t Putin. The Original Putin perhaps was assassinated and this New Putin took his place or several Putin Doppelgängers have since. The look and voice of this New Putin or these New Putins is/are discernibly distinct from the Original Putin of the late 1990s/early 2000s.

    Putin The Shapeshifter

    The Potemkin President.

    Why not? If it worked for Catherine, it can work for Russia’s Oligarchs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Herald
    "The look and voice of this New Putin or these New Putins is/are discernibly distinct from the Original Putin of the late 1990s/early 2000s"

    Yes it is indeed quite surprising that Putin doesn't look quite like the Putin of 25 years ago and even odder when you can clearly see that the passage of time has hardly affected the rest of us. Very strange indeed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  256. Herald says:
    @Randal

    I expect no less from a descendant of those who invented the concentration camp, interned Boer woman and children in them and fed them ground glass.
     
    [Yawn]

    Show me a country whose ancestors have done nothing bad and I'll show you a country whose ancestors have done nothing. Meanwhile the British kick-started the industrial revolution, contributed disproportionately to the wider European enlightenment (though not everyone would regard this as entirely a good thing), built a global empire from the unpromising start of a small, cold and wet island off Europe while kicking the backsides of most of the peoples they came up against around the world, in a time when there wasn't even the pretence of a "global rule of law", and played a big part in bringing civilisation and the modern world to Africa, especially South Africa which was in the process of being carved up between uncivilised negro conquerors from the north and thuggish Boers who were every bit as aggressively murderous as the Brits, and good enough at it to give us a run for our money.

    Plenty to be proud of and plenty to be embarrassed about, but on balance a pretty damned good performance.

    It doesn’t really matter too much what the British did right or wrong in the dim and distant past. The problem is that as of right now the British Government is a complete shambles stuffed with incompetents and liars in its major offices of state. It’s on a par with Washington and performing that badly really does take some effort.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  257. Herald says:
    @Cold N. Holefield
    It does seem increasingly that it's possible Putin isn't Putin. The Original Putin perhaps was assassinated and this New Putin took his place or several Putin Doppelgängers have since. The look and voice of this New Putin or these New Putins is/are discernibly distinct from the Original Putin of the late 1990s/early 2000s.

    Putin The Shapeshifter

    The Potemkin President.

    Why not? If it worked for Catherine, it can work for Russia's Oligarchs.

    “The look and voice of this New Putin or these New Putins is/are discernibly distinct from the Original Putin of the late 1990s/early 2000s”

    Yes it is indeed quite surprising that Putin doesn’t look quite like the Putin of 25 years ago and even odder when you can clearly see that the passage of time has hardly affected the rest of us. Very strange indeed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  258. Herald says:
    @manorchurch

    DC and everyone there should be nuked, that is the only thing tht will make world a better place.
     
    Nuking DC amounts to killing the indentured servants of those with wealth and power. DC is mostly a collection of people who enable the destroyers -- somewhat analogous to harem guards. A better target would be Manhattan Island, and Florida from Lauderdale to Key West.

    Yes, good thinking but still there is no reason to give Washington a free pardon.

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

    There can be clear, no drama, thinking about the US/NATO amazing triumph in Syria: http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2018/04/a-fake-news-triumph.html#more
    “When the Americans tell the Europeans to jump, they do jump”—not very high, mind you, or their knees would snap. As an added bonus, Theresa May’s government got a welcome distraction from the Skripal poisoning case, which is falling apart most awkwardly. …
    You might think that hiding behind a wall of unreality is a sign of weakness, and you would be right. But if you are a former superpower that’s hurtling toward national bankruptcy, international irrelevance and full-blown collapse, then indulging in make-believe can be most helpful in alleviating the pain—especially if you follow it up with a dose of fentanyl…”
    – Amen.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  260. Josecanuc says:
    @Johann
    They lie because they can and after lying their pathetic lives away they are not even aware that they are lying. Hilary can fall down the steps in front of hundreds of cameras and lie that she did not fall. Joe Biden can lie to a reporter that he graduated number one in his law class and totally ignore the school records that he graduated in the bottom of his law class.

    
    “One thing I have come to know thoroughly: the abysmal lack of character in man.”
    Kierkegaard

    Read More
    • Replies: @manorchurch
    "I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent."

    --Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Hopkinson, March 13, 1789
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  261. KA says:
    @Randal

    largely conducted by the UK info warriors of 77 Regiment
     
    As a conservative Englishman I have spent my life laughing off the poisonous leftist anticolonial and antiracist propaganda that has (largely successfully) indoctrinated the people of my country to be ashamed of its history and personally guilty for the supposed crimes of our (actually pretty glorious, if not always so) ancestors, and ashamed of not being humble and apologetic enough, for some genuinely incomprehensible reasons, towards foreigners with different skin colours, whether still resident in their own countries or having migrated to this country.

    I feel no such shame, no such guilt and no such humility, and despise those who do.

    However, I do feel genuine shame for the actions abroad of my government, in my name, in the past two decades, from Kosovo to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and now Syria (along with pathetic propaganda scams such as the Skripal nonsense). These have been in no way glorious, and in no way necessary for the national interest, subordinate as they have been to the interests of foreign powers. The British government struts as though it is a force on the international scene, while clinging to the coat-tails of the US and currying favour pathetically with Gulf sunni despots and vicious Israeli thugs. Meanwhile it seemingly colludes with some of the worst elements in US politics to try to interfere in that country's elections.

    The suspected involvement in black propaganda in Syria on behalf of jihadists is perhaps a new low in the activities of the British government.

    Last 2 decades are not any aberration . It is contnuation of the policies of the past., You could have said what you just did in 1920, 1950, and in 1970 and nothing would look out of place

    Read More
    • Agree: L.K
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  262. @Josecanuc
    
    “One thing I have come to know thoroughly: the abysmal lack of character in man.”
    Kierkegaard

    “I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent.”

    –Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Hopkinson, March 13, 1789

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

    More on the adorable White Helmets, the darlings of Hollywood and the State Department:

    The US taxpayers money at work: The US financing of the Daesh’ and Al Nusra “moderate” “terrorists” and their dishonorable trainers: https://ahtribune.com/world/north-africa-south-west-asia/syria-crisis/2127-james-le-mesurier.html
    “Le Mesurier carries about him the inescapable whiff of Britain’s malign legacy and history of dirty wars, waged in Kenya, Aden, Ireland, Iraq, Libya, in other words wherever London’s blood-soaked imperialist foot has tread around the world. A product of Britain’s prestigious Royal Military Academy of officer training at Sandhurst, he served in various UK military/NATO military deployments over the past three decades, specifically Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq and Lebanon.”
    “Unmasking the White Helmets: “http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/harper-unmasking-the-white-helmets.html
    “Another element of the British government flowchart backing the White Helmets is the communications and media firm Incostrat, founded by Paul Tilley, another British Army veteran, who ran the Ministry of Defence’s Strategic Communications for the Middle East and North Africa. Tilley ran British government communications during the Libya invasion, working directly out of 10 Downing Street. In November 2014, soon after le Mesurier was founding Mayday Rescue and the White Helmets, Tilley “retired” from the British service to found the strategic communications firm. Incostrat provides the social media and other communications services for Mayday and the White Helmets.”
    – These two are dishonorable profiteers — similar to their sponsors in the US and EU.
    Let the ziocons suffer their worst nightmares.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Please [EVERYBODY] Phone the office of your Representative and Senators and

    demand that they STOP FUNDING WHITE the HELMETS

    Stop sending MILLIONS of our Tax $$$ Dollars to a Terrorist Propaganda Op!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  264. RobinG says:
    @annamaria
    More on the adorable White Helmets, the darlings of Hollywood and the State Department:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH0_bOvOeGg
    The US taxpayers money at work: The US financing of the Daesh' and Al Nusra "moderate" "terrorists" and their dishonorable trainers: https://ahtribune.com/world/north-africa-south-west-asia/syria-crisis/2127-james-le-mesurier.html
    "Le Mesurier carries about him the inescapable whiff of Britain’s malign legacy and history of dirty wars, waged in Kenya, Aden, Ireland, Iraq, Libya, in other words wherever London’s blood-soaked imperialist foot has tread around the world. A product of Britain’s prestigious Royal Military Academy of officer training at Sandhurst, he served in various UK military/NATO military deployments over the past three decades, specifically Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq and Lebanon."
    "Unmasking the White Helmets: "http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/harper-unmasking-the-white-helmets.html
    "Another element of the British government flowchart backing the White Helmets is the communications and media firm Incostrat, founded by Paul Tilley, another British Army veteran, who ran the Ministry of Defence's Strategic Communications for the Middle East and North Africa. Tilley ran British government communications during the Libya invasion, working directly out of 10 Downing Street. In November 2014, soon after le Mesurier was founding Mayday Rescue and the White Helmets, Tilley "retired" from the British service to found the strategic communications firm. Incostrat provides the social media and other communications services for Mayday and the White Helmets."
    -- These two are dishonorable profiteers -- similar to their sponsors in the US and EU.
    Let the ziocons suffer their worst nightmares.

    Please [EVERYBODY] Phone the office of your Representative and Senators and

    demand that they STOP FUNDING WHITE the HELMETS

    Stop sending MILLIONS of our Tax $$$ Dollars to a Terrorist Propaganda Op!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  265. Avery says:
    @Randal

    Putin’s reluctance in seizing the initiative has been driving Paul Craig Roberts insane since shortly after the US-financed coup in Ukraine. It’s enough to make one wonder if he is actually in cahoots with the West, and simply playing a game to keep everyone (including his own people) in a state of confusion.
     
    Far easier simply to assume reasonable caution on the part of the leaders of a country that knows it is the weaker side in economic and in military (certainly power projection) terms, at least in the short term, and sees its interests best served by steady defence and playing for time rather than grand gestures, than such a rather implausibly complicated conspiracy, imo.

    {Far easier simply to assume reasonable caution on the part of the leaders of a country that knows it is the weaker side in economic and in military (certainly power projection) terms, at least in the short term, and sees its interests best served by steady defence and playing for time rather than grand gestures, than such a rather implausibly complicated conspiracy, imo.}

    Very well said.

    PCR is prone to hyperbole, sees conspiracies everywhere and sees things through a Western prism, which is natural since he was and is an American and thinks like one. I am not Russian, but know enough about Russians to say that their thinking and worldview (…I mean the leadership) is completely alien to Washingtonthink.

    Look at what has been achieved with very judicial use of force and minimum loss of Russian lives in Syria, then tell us whose moves are producing results vs bombast.

    Kremlin knows what their limitations are and are very, very careful not to overextend.
    Which is exactly what US and its many sycophants want by all these childish provocations.

    And so far Putin is no taking their bait: very smart.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  266. Ivan says:
    @utu

    You clearly have no conception of the standout nature of the work of Newton, Maxwell, and Turing.
     
    It just happened that on another thread few days ago I wrote something about Newton and also Maxwell.
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/pinker-on-iq/#comment-2296188

    And also here few month ago I made several comments on Newton:

    http://www.unz.com/akarlin/iq-in-time-and-space/#comment-2202199

    Mind you I am not against Newton, I am against excessive idolization and misrepresentation of his contributions. The giants and geniuses are usually constructed for reasons, often political. They never exist in vacuum. They often are inspired by others and sometimes they steal from others. If Newton did not exist we would be OK. Actually then Hooke would get much more credit which he deserved but he was pushed aside by Newton's unscrupulous shenanigans.

    Narratives are simpler to create if they include giants. So giant are created. It works on children and popular culture and it serves nationalist purposes. Then people, mostly boys, create list who was the greatest and the 2nd greatest and so on. This is very autistic need chiefly affecting boys and immature grown ups who are incapable or too lazy to learn how things really happened.

    Maxwell was very good but he did not do what he did ab nihilo. His differential equations are directly obtainable form various laws of electro-magnetism that were established earlier and which were expressed in terms of integral equations not differential ones.

    As far as Turing, he was a decent mathematician but not super outstanding. Alonzo Church preceded his work. Actually Church's work also influenced Godel. You could also add Tarski to this group. Then the whole story of Enigma is blown out of proportions. Bletchley Park with Turning got the big kick start when the work of Polish mathematicians was turned over to French and Brits in 1939. Most of work was done by Poles. But we haven't learned about it until 1980s.

    If anything the British of yesteryears, the Victorians and Edwardians, though not of today were very shy in claiming credit. Though there are any number of great scientists in the 19th century, the British through Faraday, Maxwell, Kelvin, Thompson and Heaviside, have in any contest determine who invented invented the Electric Century, the winning team. The same goes for their early work in putting mechanisms and steam to real work in the Industrial Revolution. The mechanical books are chock full of mechanisms and contrivances for fuel utilisation that ultimately trace back to them.

    And no, Turing was no ‘ordinary mathematician’, he was a great mathematician who in addition to his many theoretical works made practical computer designs. The Enigma breakthrough though important, was actually overshadowed by the Colossus machine, which the British kept secret for many years, denying its engineers, men such as Tommy Flowers their credit. All through the pioneering days of computing, the British came up with designs, the Ferranti, the Lyons computer, advances in microprogramming etc that led the world. But since they no longer had an Empire, and no captive market like the US and USSR, whose ‘military Keynesianism’, subsidised technological development, they naturally fell behind, in among other fields as also in aircraft development.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon

    Colossus machine, which the British kept secret for many years,
     
    Yes, hence it was a dead end, despite the very real genius of Tommy Flowers.

    they naturally fell behind
     
    Yeah, the postwar period really hit Britain hard.
    , @utu
    I think you do not know much about it. You do not know what papers Turing wrote and what is their significance and you do not know history of physics of both steam engine age and electricity age.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  267. annamaria says:

    The war criminals Theresa, Boris and micron (Macron) are not alone in their criminal endeavors; they have an army of whoring “diplomats” such as France’s ambassador to the Netherlands Philippe Lalliot and Britain’s envoy to the OPCW Peter Wilson: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-27/no-attacks-no-victims-syria-chemical-attack-video-participants-speak-opcw-briefing
    These two scoundrels went on the offensive against the witnesses from Douma, that is, against the truth that does not cooperate with the ziocons-created “reality” in Syria, a la Rove.
    “…an emergency worker who treated people at the Douma hospital the day of the attack, said that while some patients did come in for respiratory problems, they were attributed to heavy dust, present in the air after recent airstrikes, but that nobody showed signs of chemical warfare poisoning. … emergency paramedic Ahmad Saur who is with the Syrian Red Crescent, said that his hospital ward did not receive any patients exposed to chemical weapons the day of the alleged incident…
    The West – unhappy with this unexpected diversion to its narrative – has called the Russian press conference a “stunt…”
    — The French idiot Philippe Lalliot immediately stepped with his protests: “This obscene masquerade does not come as a surprise from the Syrian government, which has massacred and gassed its own people for the last seven years.”
    —The British idiot Peter Wilson doubled down with his support for the French idiot Lalliot: “The OPCW is not a theatre… Russia’s decision to misuse it is yet another Russian attempt to undermine the OPCW’s work, and in particular the work of its fact-finding mission investigating chemical weapons use in Syria.”
    In other words, the West is happy to bomb a sovereign nation based on nothing more than non-public “evidence” suspected to have been staged and provided by the White Helmets [a terrorist group financed by the US/UK] but when actual residents of Douma show up to tell their side of it, they are condemned as an “obscene masquerade” and denied an opportunity to submit their testimony on the record.”
    — Here are the two “righteous prostitutes” for the ziocon empire:
    Lalliot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcAL1JFCcL4
    Wilson: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/22nd-conference-of-the-states-parties-to-the-chemical-weapons-convention

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  268. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @annamaria
    Could you simply disappear from the UnzReview, "anonymous 340?" -- Your pettiness is ugly.

    I have been checking back to see whether Mr. Lang or one of his enthusiasts might address what I maintain are important questions fairly asked of a public author.

    1. Paul Wolfowitz helped engineer a despicable war, and any additional evidence of that should be brought out. But Mr. Lang appears at this point to have falsely quoted him. That quotation should be substantiated or withdrawn.

    2. Invited to “research” after asking questions, I see a Wikipedia entry that prompts more, including to what extent it is autobiographical.

    Please explain why either of these concerns is “petty” or, as Mr. Lang has said in his last words posted on this website, “sad childish ad hominem nonsense.”

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

    The US State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert:
    “We recognize and appreciate and are very grateful for all the work that the White Helmets continues to do on behalf of the people of their country and on behalf of the US Government [!?] and all the coalition forces. They’re doing incredible work in rescuing in some cases, and in other cases it’s recovery efforts.”
    – Heather Nauert could not be a real person; only a heartless and intellectually limited automation could be so insistent on the lies, against all evidence. If Heather Nauert is a real person, then she represents an American breed of psychopaths that are systematically dishonest and callous. — A nation of Cheneys.

    Compare her to real human beings: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9F-cHc5Qog
    And another real human being: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCu8mNC1JyE

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Heather Nauert is just the latest in an unbroken line of official bitches.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  270. Erebus says:
    @Erebus

    Nevertheless, most of the missiles failed and that failure must be dealt with.
     
    FWIW, Twitter reports coming from "crater-counting missile chasers" in Syria indicate that the situation is much, much worse than even the Russian reports. They reported intercepting 70-odd missiles, but said little about the 30-odd they didn't intercept.

    If the half dozen guys going from site to site counting craters and estimating how many missiles hit an ostensible target are to be believed, the numbers drop precipitously - ranging from 10-15 with the spread centred around a dozen. That number is commensurate with the damage we've seen, whereas 30+ isn't and 105 hits has no connection to reality. Apparently 2 were found more or less intact, having probably run out of fuel after losing their targeting functions.

    If the USM is looking at a 10-15% success rate, even without direct Russian AD action (they apparently provided only radar tracking & data integration), their ability to execute anything less than an all-in stand-off attack has effectively been neutralized. Not only were 2/3 of the missiles intercepted kinetically, 2/3 of the ones that got through succumbed to either electronic counter measures or to malfunction. If these reports are true, the Pentagon brain trusts are shitting pyramids as they look at the post-attack assessments.

    That also greatly exacerbates the USM's vulnerability to a stand-off counterattack, especially salvoes of modern Russian missiles against which the US has no effective defence. Other than the fact that the USM can probably present more targets than the Russians have missiles, they'd be completely annihilated. Maybe that's their strategy and explains why they're spending all that money building targets.

    Later on the same day I posted comment #2 above, the Russians released data saying that, in fact, 22 missiles hit a target.

    – 105 missiles launched (according to the Pentagon)
    – 66 missiles intercepted (according to the Russian military)
    – 22 missiles hit their targets (according to the Russian military)
    – 2 unexploded missiles were delivered to moscow (according to the Russian military)
    – a part of the missiles did not reach their targets by some reasons, most likely technical failures (according to the Russian military)

    It would appear that 17 missiles either suffered technical failure or were misdirected (incl the 2 that were found u