The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
Revisiting the Win-Win-Win-Win Outcome in Syria
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Assad and His Commanders

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In his recent article “The Road to Damascus: How the Syria War Was Won” Pepe Escobar summarized the outcome of the war in Syria in the following way:

“It’s a quadruple win. The U.S. performs a face saving withdrawal, which Trump can sell as avoiding a conflict with NATO ally Turkey. Turkey has the guarantee – by the Russians – that the Syrian Army will be in control of the Turkish-Syrian border. Russia prevents a war escalation and keeps the Russia-Iran-Turkey peace process alive. And Syria will eventually regain control of the entire northeast.”

This otherwise excellent summary overlooks two out of three members of the “Axis of Kindness”, including Israel and the KSA. Of course, later in his analysis Pepe does address these actors, and also includes Kuwait. Furthermore, a thorough discussion of what took place would have to also include China, Hezbollah, Yemen and the EU (well, the ones that matter, the UK and France. The rest are just voiceless colonies of the US).

Most of the analyses of what just took place focused on the “what”. I will try to look into the “why” and the “how” of what just happened in Syria. Still, I don’t propose to make such a detailed analysis, but I do want to re-classify the actors in a somewhat different way: by their relative strength.

Actor Theoretical Strength
The “Axis of Kindness”:

United States+CENTCOM+NATO+Israel+KSA

by far the most powerful actor almost by any measure: a bigger military force then all the other actors combined (at least when looked at regionally), huge economic power (the dollar is still THE #1 currency on the planet), total control of the region (via CENTCOM) and quasi unconditional support from Europe (via NATO). Finally, Israel does pack a powerful military punch. This actor has only ONE weakness, but more about that later.
Iran+Hezbollah+Houthi+Shia forces in Iraq in regional terms, Iran is the local superpower which can even successfully defy the Axis of Kindness forces (and has done so since the Islamic Revolution of 1979).
Russia+Syria I placed Russia and Syria in the same group and I could have added Iran, but since I believe that Russia objectively has more power over the Syrian government than Iran, I think that it is important to put Russia and Syria together simply because Damascus cannot say “no” to Moscow, but could do so, at least in theory, to Tehran. Finally, Russia and Iran agree on the main issues, but have different visions for the future of the Middle-East. Thus this is another reason to look at them separately, even if not necessarily in opposition to each other. In military terms, Russia is very strong, then very vulnerable, then very strong again, it all depends on your level of analysis (see below)
Turkey+pro-Turkish factions in Syria That one is a difficult one to classify. On one hand, Turkey does not have any regional allies (the Ottoman Empire left only hatred and deep resentment in its former colonies). For a while, the pro-Turkish factions, which were liberally showered with weapons, money, training, logistical support, etc, by the US and the KSA, but eventually these factions grew weaker and weaker until they reached a state of advanced impotence leaving Turkey pretty much alone (we will also look into that below).
The Kurds For a while, they sure looked potentially powerful: not only did the Kurds have a pretty big military power (albeit mostly one restricted to infantry), they had the support of Axis of Kindness and, especially, Israel which saw any form of Independent Kurdistan as a great tool to weaken and even threaten Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria. Furthermore, the Kurds happened to control a lot of oil rich regions and they could always retreat in the mountainous areas if needed.
The Takfiris (i.e. the many and constantly name-changing franchises of what used to be called “al-Qaeda”). In reality, the Takfiris really ought to be classified together with the Axis of Kindness since they have been the foot-soldiers/cannon-fodder for the AngloZionist since the 1980s (from Afghanistan then to modern day Syria). Nonetheless, we will consider them as distinct from the rest of the Axis of Kindness forces.
Of course, and just like any other taxonomy, this one is necessarily somewhat subjective and others might use different criteria or categories. Now let’s look at what I believe is the key to the control of the entire region: the ability to place “boots on the ground” or the lack of such an ability:

Actor Ability to place boots on the ground
The “Axis of Kindness”:
ORDER IT NOW

United States+CENTCOM+NATO+Israel+KSA

This is The One Big Weakness of the Axis of Kindness members: while they have huge armed forces, and even nuclear weapons, while they can deploy numerically very large forces, while they can (arguably) achieve air and naval supremacy/superiority pretty much anywhere in the region, they cannot follow up any of these options with a credible ground force. While this is always carefully obfuscated by the legacy AngloZionist propaganda, the US, Israeli and KSA ground forces are only capable of murdering civilians or primitive resistance forces en masse. But as soon as any of these militaries meets a halfway decent enemy force which is willing to fight on the ground, they are defeated (name me ONE meaningful victory of these Axis of Kindness forces in the last couple of decades or more!).
Iran+Hezbollah+Houthi+Shia forces in Iraq The Iranians and their local allies (calling them “proxies” completely misses the real nature of the relationship between Iran and these regional forces!) are all capable of deploying very capable ground forces. In fact, they have all done so with tremendous success (especially Hezbollah). What Iran provides to this informal alliance is the capability to augment it with new, high-tech and modern weapons, including anti-shipping missiles, air defenses, ATGMs, communications, drones, etc. In terms of ground forces, this alliance is the #1 power in the region.
Russia+Syria Both Russia and Syria have very competent and well-balanced forces deployed in Syria. However, truth be told, I believe that Hezbollah+Iran currently have even more military weight, at least in terms of ground forces in Syria. The thing to keep in mind is this: if only Russian forces existed inside Syria (Tartus, Khmeimin, plus assorted special units all over Syria) then Russia is definitely weaker than the Axis of Kindness. But if we assume that Russian forces outside Syria could (and probably would!) intervene to defend the Russian forces inside Syria, then we would have to flip much of this equation around and categorize Russia as even more powerful than the Axis of Kindness (I will explain in more detail why and how below).
Turkey+pro-Turkish factions in Syria There can be no doubt that at the initiation of the international aggression against Syria, Turkey had a credible and powerful military. Then something went very wrong and with each new development (starting with the coup attempt against Erdogan) Turkey only got weaker and weaker. The country which dared to shoot down a Russian Su-24 eventually found itself in the humiliating position to have to ask for Russian help not once, but over and over again. The latest Turkish invasion of northern Syria has proven that, while the Turks can still beat the Kurds, that’s about all they can do, and even that not very well.
The Kurds Frankly, I never believed in the chances of the Kurds for anything even remotely resembling an independent Kurdistan. Oh sure, my sympathies were often with the Kurds (at least in their struggle against Turkey), but I always knew that the notion of imposing some new (and very artificial) state against the will of ALL the regional powers was both naive and self-defeating. The truth is that the US and Israel simply used the Kurds if and when needed, and ditched them as soon as it became obvious that the Kurds outlived their utility. The best the Kurds will ever get is a regional autonomy in Iran, Iraq and Syria. Anything else is a dangerous pipe dream.
The Takfiris (i.e. the many and constantly name-changing franchises of what used to be called “al-Qaeda”). Just like the Turks, the various Takfiris appeared as a formidable force when the aggression against Syria was initiated. And if the the US GWOT appeared to be a true blessing for the “good terrorists” (that’s, of course, all the terrorists in this region) it is because it was. Then something went very very wrong, and now they look as weak and clueless as the Kurds.
Now let’s sum this up. This is how the relative strength of these regional actors has changed since the initiation of the AngloZionist aggression against Syria:

Actor Evolution of strength of each regional power
The “Axis of Kindness”:

United States+CENTCOM+NATO+Israel+KSA

DOWN: from strongest to one of the weakest in the region
Iran+Hezbollah+Houthi+Shia forces in Iraq UP: arguably the most balanced military force in the region
Russia+Syria UP: in a process which only looked like sheer “good luck” Russia and Syria grew stronger and stronger with each passing year.
Turkey+pro-Turkish factions in Syria DOWN: in sharp contrast to Russia, a weird process of what looked like sheer “bad luck” Turkey and its allies in Syria just seemed to get weaker and weaker with each passing year.
The Kurds DOWN: the Kurds made the immense mistake of believing all the empty promises (often called “plan B”, “plan C”, “plan D”, etc.) made by the AngloZionists. Now all their dreams are over and they will have to settle for autonomy inside Iraq and Syria.
The Takfiris (i.e. the many and constantly name-changing franchises of what used to be called “al-Qaeda”). DOWN: their situation is almost as bad as the one of the Kurds. Their sole advantage is that they are not linked to any one piece of land and that they can try to regroup somewhere else in the region (or even the world); never say never again, but it looks to me like this will not happen in the foreseeable future.
It is now time to try to make sense of all this and try answer the question of why one group of relatively strong actors had so much bad luck as to become weaker and weaker, while the weaker became stronger and stronger.

The first thing we need to agree upon is that irrespective of the public posturing, everybody is, and has been, talking to everybody else. This “conversation” could be official and public, or behind closed doors, or even by means of intermediaries and, last but not least, a state version of “body language”: by means of actions which send a message to the other party or parties. Still, while this is certainly true, it is the quality of the communications between the various parties which made all the difference. When, say, Netanyahu or Trump publicly proclaim they they don’t give a damn about anything at all (including international law) and that they reserve the right to threaten or even attack anybody, at any time, for any reason whatsoever, this is a very clear message to, say, the Iranians. But what is that message, really? It says a couple of things:

  1. Resistance is futile because we are so much stronger than you and therefore
  2. We don’t give a damn about you or your national interests and therefore
  3. We are not interested in negotiating with you (or anybody else for that matter). Your only solution is to submit to us

This is really crucial. The US and Israel have proclaimed their total superiority over the entire planet and, specifically, over every single actor in the Middle-East. Furthermore, their entire worldview and ideology is predicated on this very strong sense of military superiority. Ask any Israeli or American what their countries will do if some coalition of local powers is successful in attacking them: they will reply something along the lines of “we will simply nuke all the friggin’ ragheads and sand-niggers – f**k them!”. This line is always delivered with a tone of absolute finality, a total certitude and the mental equivalent of “’nuff said!”.

Alas, for the Axis of Kindness, this is a completely counter-factual belief. Why?

First, the quick appeal to nukes is an implicit admission that there is something very wrong with the rest of the armed forces of the Axis of Kindness. Furthermore, the real regional powers all understand that it is not in their interest to give the US or Israel a pretext to use nukes. Thus, while, say, the Iranians sure have the means to strike Israel or any one of the many CENTCOM facilities in the Middle-East, they have been very careful to keep their counter-attacks below the dangerous threshold in which the legacy AngloZionist corporate media would be unable to conceal the magnitude of the disaster and demand that nukes be used (yes, if it comes to that, both the Israeli and the US media will demand nuclear strikes just as they cheered for every war of aggression ever committed by the US and Israel).

Second, precisely because the US and Israel are unable to have real allies (they only have colonies run by comprador elites), they cannot operate successfully in a multi-lateral kind of relationship with other actors. The contrast between the US/Israel, on one hand, and Russia and Iran, on the other, could not be greater. Both Russia and Iran understand that having real allies is much more advantageous than having puppets. Why? Because in order to convince somebody to become your ally you absolutely have to offer that party something tangible as part of a compromise goal setting. When this is done, the weaker ally feels that it is defending its own interests and not the interests of a patron which might be unreliable or which might even backstab you.

Third, one of the best US experts on the theory of negotiations, Professor William Zartman, wrote in his seminal book “The Practical Negotiator” that

One of the eternal paradoxes of negotiations is that it allows the weak to confront the strong and still come away with something which should not be possible if weakness and strength were all that mattered (…). Weaker parties tend to seek more formal negotiating forums and to strengthen their hand through organizations (…). Weak states can afford erratic or irresponsible behavior more easily than stronger parties, particularly when the rules of regularity and responsibility favor the strong (…). Weak states do best by rewarding stronger states’ concessions rather than than by “hanging tough” and by opening high to indicate needs and to facilitate rewards (…). The tactics of toughness and softness vary according to the strength of the parties: under symmetry, toughness tends to lead to toughness and under asymmetry to softness, with weaker parties following the leader of stronger parties.

There is a lot to unpack here (and there is much more in this book which I highly recommend to everybody!).

First, let’s compare and contrast the Russia and US approaches to creating negotiation fora. The US cooked up the “Friends of Syria” forum which was most remarkable in two unique ways: first, in spite of calling itself “Friends of Syria” this group only contained a who’s who of Syria’s, Iran’s and Russia’s enemies (just like to “Friends of Libya” was a cornucopia of countries hostile to Libya). Secondly, the self-evident (and not really denied) purpose and function of this group was to bypass the UNSC. There is nothing new here, the US has been trying to replace the UN and its role in upholding international law with all sorts of gimmicks including “coalition of the willing” or appeals for a “rules-based international order”. Needless to say, with the possible exception of a few truly dim propagandists, all these tricks are designed to avoid the already existing international fora, beginning with the United Nations. Russia, in contrast, not only used the UN for all its (admitted limited) worth and succeeded in forcing the US to accept resolutions on Syria (or the Ukraine for that matter) which the US did not want to agree to, but which they could not veto on political considerations. Not only that, Russia also created the Astana peace process which, unlike the US created fantasies, brought together different parties including parties hostile to each other. The most brilliant move of the Russians was to impose on all parties the notion that “those willing to negotiate are legitimate parties whose interests must be considered while those who refused to sit down are all terrorists“. Of course, the many al-Qaeda franchises tried to play the “rebranding game”, but this did not help: you can change names once every 24 hours if you want, but if you ain’t sitting down at the negotiating table you are a terrorist and, therefore, a legitimate target for Russian/Iranian/Syrian attacks. Once the Empire had to accept these terms, backed by a UNSC resolution, it became locked-in in a process which they could only stop by means of a military victory.

And here we come back to the boots on the ground issue. For all its combined military power, the Axis of Kindness does not have a ground force it can put on the ground. Whereas the Syrians, Hezbollah, Iran and Russia very neatly and most effectively (even if informally) agreed to the following assignment of tasks:

  1. The Syrians will let the Russians reorganize their armed forces, especially a few elite units, and slowly, step-by-step liberate their lands.
  2. The Iranians and Hezbollah will act like a fire-brigade and will directly support the Syrian operations with their own forces in crucial sectors of the line of contact.
  3. The Russians will take control of the Syrian airspace and provide the Syrians, Iran and Hezbollah protection from AngloZionist missile and bomb strikes. Finally, Russian special operation forces will be engaged in high priority operations which are beyond Iranian or Hezbollah capabilities.

What was the biggest obstacle to the Syrian-Iranian-Hezbollah-Russian plans?

Turkey, of course. The Turks have always hated Assad (father and son) and their Neo-Ottoman delusions still give them a, shall we say, “special desire” to intervene beyond their own borders. Furthermore, Turkey also very much saw Syria as a contributing factor to their “Kurdish problem”. Finally, Turkey did have the kind of military which made it possible for it to threaten intervention or even intervene in Iraq and Syria (obviously not against Iran). Thus, what Russia needed to do was take Turkey out of the equation or, at least, weaken Turkey as much as possible. And that is exactly what Russia did.

For the Kremlin the shooting down of the Su-24 was tantamount to a declaration of war. Except that the Russians, quite aware of their relative weakness if compared to the US+NATO+CENTCOM+Turkey, wisely decided not to retaliate in kind and, say, strike Turkish military facilities. But Putin did promise “you won’t get away with just not selling us tomatoes” (Russia imposed an embargo on a number of Turkish export goods). Besides a number of political and economic sanctions, you can be sure that the Russians decided to use all their methods and means to weaken and destabilize both Erdogan personally and Turkey as a whole. Then, here is what happened:

  • On November 24th, 2015, Turkey shot down a Russian Su-24
  • In the next days, Russia closed down the north Syrian airspace, severed all contacts with the Turkish military, promised to shoot down any other Turkish aircraft attacking any target in Syria (regardless from what airspace) and imposed political and economic sanctions.
  • In December Putin ominously declared “Если кто-то думает, что, совершив подлое военное преступление: убийство наших людей — они отделаются помидорами, или какими-то ограничениями в строительной и других отраслях, то они глубоко заблуждаются” (“if somebody thinks that by committing a vile war crime they will get away with tomatoes or some type of restrictions in the construction and other industries, they are profoundly mistaken“).
  • In June 2016, Erdogan sent a letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin expressing sympathy and ‘deep condolences’.
  • On 15 July 2016, a coup d’état was attempted against Erdogan and almost cost him his life. By all accounts, Russia played some kind of behind-the-scenes role and saved Erdogan’s life and power.
  • Following the failed coup, Turkey embarked on a major re-alignment and cast its lot with Russia and Iran, even if that meant having to accept Assad in power in Syria.

What exactly Russia did behind the scenes (versions range from warning Erdogan to actually using Russian special forces to evacuate him in extremis) will probably remain a secret for many years, but neither does it really matter. All we know for sure, is that after the coup, Erdogan made a 180 and completely changed his tune. My personal belief is that the Russians used their covert means to entice the US and its Gulenist CIA puppets to try to overthrow Erdogan only to then foil their coup attempt. I find the two other main options (the US is fantastically stupid and incompetent and Russia is an amazingly lucky country) much harder to believe. But even if we accept these options, or some combination thereof, Russia still superbly played her cards (by, for example, using the pretext of Turkey’s downing the Su-24 to strongly beef up Russian air defense capabilities in Syria) and Turkey was removed as a “powerful hostile actor” from the Russian equation of the Middle-East.

After that, what was left was only a kind of “political and military mopping-op operation.

Russia repeatedly tried to make the Kurds realize that their strategy of fighting every single neighbor they had was a non-starter which will inevitably backfire. Alas for the Kurdish people, their leaders were either too delusional, or too corrupt, to understand this. In the meantime, Erdogan and the rest of the Turkish political establishment were adamant they Turkey would under no circumstances allow the Syrian (or Iraqi) Kurds to ever establish their own state.

ORDER IT NOW

I really feel sad for the Kurds, but I also have to say that they really did it to themselves. This ought to be systematically studied, but their appears to be two kinds of small nations: those who are smart enough to play one big neighbor against the other while collaborating with both (say Kazakhstan or Mongolia) and then there are those who have no sense of history at all and who end up repeating the same mistakes over and over again like, say, the Poles or the Kurds. These nations always have a bloated sense of self-worth which leads them to act as if they were the big guys on the block and every time all they achieve is alienating all their truly big neighbors. Apparently, irrespective of the number of times these folks were smacked down by others in history, their narcissistic self-aggrandizement and, frankly, arrogance, gets them invaded, then invaded again and then invaded some more. You could say that they are born losers or that they “failed to learn the lessons of history”. Same difference, really.

For the Kremlin, the solution was obvious: use the Turks to force the Kurds to accept the inevitable but don’t let the Turks establish a permanent invasion force in northern Syria.

True, the Russians have voiced their rather flaccid disapproval of the Turkish operation and they called everybody to come back to the negotiation table. This is one rather rare example in which Russia’s rhetoric did not match her actions because in reality the Turkish operation would have been absolutely impossible if the Russians had not given Ankara an unofficial, but very trustworthy, go ahead beforehand. Furthermore, according to at least one report (which I find reasonably credible) the Russian Aerospace Forces even scrambled a pair of Su-35S to engage a Turkish pair of F-16 which, as soon as they saw what was about to happen, decided to make a run for their lives. Yet, in other instances, we know for a fact that F-16’s were used against Kurdish targets. It is pretty clear that the Russians not only told Erdogan what was acceptable and what was not, they also “fine tuned” the Turkish operation just so it would force the Kurds to negotiate while not making it possible for the Turks to establish any kind of meaningful presence in northern Syria.

What happened next was a domino effect. The Kurds tried to fight as best they could, but everybody realized that they were doomed. The Americans, very predictably and, I would argue, very logically, also ran for their lives. Trump used this (totally true, but nevertheless pretext) to get out of Syria (at least officially) not only to protect US lives, but to also get out of the political quicksand which Syria has become for the Axis of Kindness.

Last but not least, the Israelis were absolutely livid, and for good reason: there is no doubt that they are the biggest losers in this entire process and they now find themselves in the situation of depending on a pretend superpower which cannot deliver anything of value (except loads of dollars which the Israelis spend on a lot of useless hardware). The recent events in the region have not only shown that US ground forces plainly suck, they have also show that US guarantees are worthless while US weapons systems are vastly over-rated.

Here we come to what I believe is the single most important development of this conflict: ALL the many Israeli plans for the region collapsed one after the other. Most pathetically, all the trips Netanyahu made to Russia to try to con the Russians into taking Israel seriously have failed. Why? Because the Russians have long understood that Israel is a paper tiger with impressive “roar” (aka the massive international Zionist propaganda machine known as the “western free media” among infants and dull people) but who is unable to follow up its loud roaring with anything more tangible. Yes, I know, the worse things go for the Israelis, the bigger their boastful propaganda becomes: after having promised that the “invincible IDF” conducted “hundreds” of strikes in Syria and Iraq they now make noises about having a “killing list” which includes Hassan Nasrallah. Right. As for their “hundreds” of airstrikes, they must be the most inept and poorly executed air campaign since the total failure of NATO’s air campaign in Kosovo. Ask yourself this basic question:

If the Israelis have been conducting “hundreds” of airstrikes in Syria – why have they not resulted in any tangible effects on the military situation on the ground?

After all, when the Russians intervened, they changed the course of the entire war. In fact, the (very small) Russian Aerospace task force in Syria reversed the course of that war.

Why did the Russian air campaign yield such truly phenomenal results and why did the Israel air campaign yield absolutely nothing (except some much needed psychotherapy for the many Zionists who suffer form what Gilad Atzmon brilliantly referred to as “pre-traumatic stress disorder”)?

The answer is simple: one was a real military campaign while the other was just “feel good” PR.

A very good example of Zartman’s thesis that “Weak states can afford erratic or irresponsible behavior more easily than stronger parties, particularly when the rules of regularity and responsibility favor the strong” can be found in the relative position of, on one hand, Iran, Hezbollah and the Houthis and, on the other, the US and Israel. Not that Iran or its allies have acted irresponsibly, they have not, but when they reacted, it was always with a double message: we don’t want war, but we are ready for it. But when the US engages in rather crude threats (just think of all the silly threats Trump has made during his presidency, including the most recent ones to wage war on Turkey if needed, not a joke, check here), these threats always end up further weakening the US. It is a true blessing for Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and the Syrians that their enemies are not only so inept, but also so good at cornering themselves in the worst kind of situations. In the end, the US still managed to lose face, even if you were never told about it. What do I mean?

Just look at what just took place: Trump sent Erdogan such a crude and rude letter (he sounds like a 10 year old), which was so insulting to Erdogan that he not only tossed it in the trash bin, but he also made sure to tell his aides to “leak” to the media how Erdogan treated Trump’s silly threats and insults. Turkey also launched a full-scale invasion and clearly challenged the US to do something about it. At this point, the two other “geniuses” in the White House (Pompeo and VP Pence) had to scramble to Ankara in what was clearly a desperate “damage control” mission, beg for a meeting, and then beg the Turks to agree to an entirely symbolic ceasefire which gave just enough time for the Kurds to agree to all the Syrian terms and to let the Syrian army take control of huge swaths of land without firing a single shot. Now here is the beauty of it all:

Pompeo and Pence demanded that Erdogan agree exactly to the kind of balanced outcome the Russians have been advocating all along! I am amazed that the Dem-media has not accused Pompeo and Pence of being Russian agents because what they just “demanded” and “obtained” from Turkey is exactly what Putin wanted 🙂

Of course, this was all wrapped in all sorts of threats and promises to wipe out this or that country (including Turkey, a NATO member state which could, in theory, invoke Art 5 and ask NATO to defend it against the US! Of course, this would not happen as this would mark the end of NATO) and all the rest of the obligatory barking we always hear from the US when the “best military in world history” fails to achieve anything at all (even if Trump seriously claims that the US – not Russia – defeated the Takfiris the West has so lovingly been federating, supporting, I strongly believe, directing them for decades). Yes, Trump did the right thing when he declared that he wanted the US forces out of Syria, but let’s not be naive about that either: he did not order that because he is some great humanitarian, but because if the Turks, the Kurds, the Syrians or anybody else had taken a hard shot at the US forces in the region, this would have resulted in a bigger war which would certainly cost Trump his presidency.

Which brings us to the Russian task force in Syria. As I said, it is strong, then weak and then strong again. It all depends on your assumptions:

If we look just at the Russian task force in Khmeinim and Tartus, we see that it is protected by cutting edge Russian weapons systems including S-400s, Su-34s, Su-35S, EW stations, battle management stations, etc. This is more than enough to beat back a pretty powerful missile and/or bombing strike. In this case we can think of the Russian task force in Syria as very powerful and capable of dealing with many types of attack.

On the next level, however, it becomes obvious that the biggest weakness of the Russian task force in Syria has been, from day 1, its very small size. Irrespective of its sophistication, the Russian air defenses can be over-run by a determined attack by any combination of Axis of Kindness forces simply because at the end of the day, air defenses are always a part of a numbers game. Even in the best of cases, one Russian air defense missile can only engage one attacking missile or aircraft. For an attack to be successful, all the Axis of Kindness forces need to do is calculate how many missiles the Russians have, then shoot about 1.5x that number of (rather antiquated) Tomahawks, and once the Russians use up their stores, follow up with a second wave of missiles, this time modern and difficult to target ones. At this point the Russians would have to reply with only their AA artillery and their EW capabilities. Inevitably, there will come a point when they will be overwhelmed. In this scenario, Russia is the weaker party and the Russian task force is doomed in case of a sustained US/NATO/CENTCOM attack.

Finally, there is a third level which the AngloZionists have to consider: the Russians have made it pretty clear that in case of an attack on the Russian task force in Syria, Russia will use her strategic striking capabilities to protect her task force. Such measures could include: long range cruise missile attack and air strikes (possibly coming from the Iranian airspace). In this case, as my friend Andrey Martyanov explained many times, including in his article “Russia’s Stand-Off Capability: the 800 Pound Gorilla in Syria” which he concluded by the follow words:

“This simple, single operational fact shows precisely why for two years a relatively small Russian military contingent has been able to operate so effectively in Syria and, in fact, dictate conditions on the ground and in the area of its operations. The answer is simple—many adrenaline junkies are lowered in a cage into the water to face sharks, with only metal rods separating them and sharks’ deadly jaws. Yet, up there, in the boat one can always put a man with a gun which can be used in case of emergency to a deadly effect should the cage give. The Russian military contingent in Syria is not just some military base—it is the force tightly integrated with Russian Armed Forces that have enough reach and capability to make anyone face some extremely unpleasant choices, including the fact that it is Russia, not the US, who controls escalation to a threshold and that can explain a non-stop anti-Russian hysteria in US media since the outcome of the war in Syria became clear”

Here, again, we have the same stance as Iran’s: we don’t want war, but we are ready for it. One could say that the US stance is the polar opposite: we do want war (heck, we need it for political and economic reasons!), but we are completely unprepared for it (including psychologically).

Conclusion: remember all those who are now proven wrong!

ORDER IT NOW

Remember all the folks who predicted with absolute confidence that Russia was “selling out” Syria? They began their tune when Russia prevented a US attack on Syria by catching the US at its word and offering to remove all chemical weapons from Syria. Not only were these weapons useless, they were a prefect pretext for the Axis of Kindness to strike Syria. The US was livid, but had to accept. Well, all the “Putin/Russia is/are selling out” Syria immediately claimed that Russia was disarming Syria to make it easier for Israel to attack.

Yet, in reality, no (meaningful) Israeli attack ever materialized.

Then the same folks claimed that Russia “allowed” Israel to strike Syria, that the Russians turned off their S-300s/S-400s, etc, etc, etc.

Yet, in reality, the US pretty much gave up, while the Israelis claimed “hundreds” of sorties. Maybe they even did hit a few empty and therefore unprotected buildings, who knows?

Then there was the massive choir of trolls declaring that Russia would partition Syria. Yet, for all the convincing sounding arguments (at least to those who did not understand Russia or the Middle-East), one by one the various “good terrorists” strongholds fell to the Syrian military. Now more Syrian land has been liberated than ever before. As for the Turks, they can dream on about a bigger Turkey or about creating some kind of security/buffer zone, but they understand that they cannot do that if Russia and Syria both oppose this. In fact, Turkey has officially promised to respect the territorial integrity of Syria (see here, in Russian)

Memorandum of Understanding Between Turkey and the Russian Federation

October 22, 2019 (emphasis added by me, VS)

President of the Republic of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President of The Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin agreed on the following points:

1. The two sides reiterate their commitment to the preservation of the political unity and territorial integrity of Syria and the protection of national security of Turkey.

2. They emphasize their determination to combat terrorism in all forms and manifestations and to disrupt separatist agendas in the Syrian territory.

3. In this framework, the established status quo in the current Operation Peace Spring area covering Tel Abyad and Ras Al Ayn with a depth of 32 km will be preserved.

4. Both sides reaffirm the importance of the Adana Agreement. The Russian Federation will facilitate the implementation of the Adana Agreement in the current circumstances.

5. Starting 12.00 noon of October 23, 2019, Russian military police and Syrian border guards will enter the Syrian side of the Turkish-Syrian border, outside the area of Operation Peace Spring, to facilitate the removal of YPG elements and their weapons to the depth of 30 km from the Turkish-Syrian border, which should be finalized in 150 hours. At that moment, joint Russian-Turkish patrols will start in the west and the east of the area of Operation Peace Spring with a depth of 10 km, except Qamishli city.

6. All YPG elements and their weapons will be removed from Manbij and Tal Rifat.

7. Both sides will take necessary measures to prevent infiltrations of terrorist elements.

8. Joint efforts will be launched to facilitate the return of refugees in a safe and voluntary manner.

9. A joint monitoring and verification mechanism will be established to oversee and coordinate the implementation of this memorandum.

10. The two sides will continue to work to find a lasting political solution to the Syrian conflict within Astana Mechanism and will support the activity of the Constitutional Committee. The key elements of this MoU are

  1. US out, Russia in
  2. Syria’s borders cannot be changed

You can see the full press conference of Putin and Erdogan by clicking here.

Finally, this is the reaction of one of the worst AngloZionist propaganda outlets in Europe:

”Die Kapitulation des Westens” (The Capitulation of the West)
”Die Kapitulation des Westens” (The Capitulation of the West)

I can’t say that I disagree with their conclusion 🙂

Finally, does this “capitulation talk” not remind you of something else we have all seen recently?

Yes, of course, the Ukronazi “Ні капітуляції!” (no to the capitulation!).

Again, what does all that talk of “capitulation” strongly suggest?

If this is not a triumph of Russian diplomacy then I don’t know what this is!

And, just for those who disagree, let me throw in a rhetorical question:

If Putin is such a loser who “sells out” everything and who works with/for Israel and for Netanyahu specifically, if Russia is so weak and clueless, why is it that it is not the Russian people who are denouncing a “capitulation” but, instead, why are all the enemies of Russia freaking out about capitulating?

* * *

And now, where do we go from here?

Actually, I am very cautiously optimistic since there is a huge difference between Russia and the US: the US needs constant wars simply in order to survive, whereas Russia needs peace to flourish. Now that the Russians are the biggest player in the Middle-East (well, with the Iranians, of course), they will use the fact that they have pretty good relationships with everybody, including (former?) enemies of Russia like the KSA or the UAE.

Of course, there shall be no peace between Israel and the rest of the Middle-East, if only because by its very nature Israel is a mortal threat to every country in the region, even for countries which currently eagerly collaborate with Israel (like the KSA). The only way for the long suffering Middle-East to finally live in peace again would be for the Zionist “occupation regime over Jerusalem to vanish from the arena of time” to use the famous, and often mistranslated, words of Ayatollah Khomeini. The current Iranian Supreme leader also clearly spelled out the only manner in which the Palestinian question can be solved peace will be achieved in the Middle-East:

“The Islamic Republic’s proposal to help resolve the Palestinian issue and heal this old wound is a clear and logical initiative based on political concepts accepted by world public opinion, which has already been presented in detail. We do not suggest launching a classic war by the armies of Muslim countries, or throwing immigrant Jews into the sea, or mediation by the UN and other international organizations. We propose holding a referendum with [the participation of] the Palestinian nation. The Palestinian nation, like any other nation, has the right to determine their own destiny and elect the governing system of the country.”

Both Iranian leaders are absolutely correct. There shall never be peace in the region as long as a crazed racist regime which has only contempt for the rest of the planet continues its slow motion genocide of the indigenous population of Palestine.

In the meantime, now that Syria, Russia, Iran, the Houthis, Hezbollah and the Shia forces in Iraq have successfully shown Uncle Shmuel the door out of Syria, the last Israeli plan (a “plan Z” perhaps) has now collapsed along with any hopes of creating an independent Kurdistan.

Israel is in no condition to take on such a powerful coalition. I would argue that even the US cannot win against this force, even if it still is capable of triggering a bloodbath (just like the Israelis did in 2006).

Of all the strategic collapses we have seen under the Obama and Trump presidencies, the loss of influence in the Middle-East is probably the biggest one of them all. This is a very positive development for the region and for the world. Now let’s just hope that whoever makes it into the White House in 2020 will understand that this is a done deal and will not try to make “the Empire great again” and reverse that course as any such attempts will result in a major regional war.

PS: here is a video of the “best military in history” being pelted by stones and veggies by disgusted Kurds while the US forces evacuate in a hurry. Really says it all, doesn’t it? Feel the love 😉

It also appears that the same sentiment is shared by the Iraqis who are now trying to take legal action to finally also give the boot to Uncle Shmuel, see here: https://www.rt.com/news/471645-iraq-pleads-un-help-us-troops/

Again, feel the love, the respect and the (lack) of fear 🙂

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Iran, Israel, Kurds, Russia, Syria, Turkey 
Hide 220 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. The article misses possibly the most important long-term thing.

    The USA buys oil with “security”. It’s done in a complex, round-about way, but the fundamental deal is that oil-producing states cede all of their oil to the USA (by way of selling it in USD), in exchange for which the USA will defend them militarily. Often, from their own people. That is how the world has worked for nearly 80 years.

    If US “security” is no longer any good, then the deal is off. It cannot afford to lose wars, which is what it has been doing. Their best bet at this point is to annexe Mexico for solar farms.

    • Agree: nokangaroos, Tom Welsh
    • Replies: @Patrikios Stetsonis
    , @nsa
  2. Svevlad says:

    Tbh I wonder how desperate will (((they))) get? Back down and downsize the military-industrial complex? Death by sperging? Have them rage so much their head explodes on live TV (I vote for that one, or live televised suicide, they truly deserve nothing better). If the US doesn’t get itself into some bullshit soon, it gonna pop like a balloon

    • Replies: @niteranger
    , @Tom Welsh
  3. Drumpf’s

    11th “withdrawal from Syria” has no more substance than the first 10.

    In particular, thousands of US ZOG troops continue to occupy the easternmost, a.k.a “Oil Province”, of Syria. Where all of Syria’s oil is being stolen and sent to the same place it was stolen and sent when ISIS controlled that province:

    Israhell. So

    Sakir’s claim to “Victory in Syria” is premature at best.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  4. Seeing this analysis from The Saker, whom I consider one of the most-confirmed-by-subsequent-events-as-true analysts of geostrategic conflicts, I am delighted to find that he is saying everything that I already believe to be true regarding the conflicts in Syria. However, he does not mention the Tehran Agreement, on 9 September 2018, which I described the next day, (see http://archive.is/1pxcy ) which was even before it became announced to the world. When I wrote on September 10th about that agreement — or more precisely should say that when I wrote there what I was hoping that it would be and would consist of — I was describing the way that I thought that Putin could engineer a win of the Syrian conflict, and could nullify the U.S. and UN propaganda and nullify Trump’s threat to intensify the war. He did it then. It seems to me to have been the death-knell for the U.S.-and-allied war against Syria. Do you agree, that that was a crucial moment in the history of this conflict?

    • Replies: @Dr. Chops
  5. FB says: • Website

    Wow…what a rambling, incoherent and completely meaningless waste of time…

    I honestly tried reading this 7,000 word ode to irrelevance…but finally had to call it quits after wasting about half an hour of god-given time…

    It is amazing to me how someone who with a straight face professes some actual knowledge about how military and political conflicts actually work, can get so many things so badly wrong…

    There is so much to deconstruct here that one could make a career of it…but I will start with the most ridiculous…namely that the Russian contingent in Syria could be overwhelmed by a cruise missile attack from the US forces nearby [mainly naval in the case of cruise missiles]…and the only thing stopping this is the fact that Russia could retaliate with its long range conventional cruise missiles…

    …the Russian air defenses can be over-run by a determined attack by any combination of Axis of Kindness forces simply because at the end of the day, air defenses are always a part of a numbers game.

    Even in the best of cases, one Russian air defense missile can only engage one attacking missile or aircraft.

    For an attack to be successful, all the Axis of Kindness forces need to do is calculate how many missiles the Russians have, then shoot about 1.5x that number of (rather antiquated) Tomahawks, and once the Russians use up their stores, follow up with a second wave of missiles, this time modern and difficult to target ones.

    At this point the Russians would have to reply with only their AA artillery and their EW capabilities. Inevitably, there will come a point when they will be overwhelmed.

    Right…air defenses are a ‘numbers game’…and it takes exactly 1.5 times as many missiles to kill the opponent…?

    Which is why over 1,000 Nato aircraft plus hundreds of cruise missiles couldn’t overrun the tiny, Vietnam era Serb air defenses in 1999…?

    This amazing ‘analyst even mentions this surprising SEAD setback himself…calling it…

    …the total failure of NATO’s air campaign in Kosovo.

    Which is correct…

    But of course he then goes on to conclude the EXACT OPPOSITE in the case of Russia’s hugely more formidable air defenses in Syria…constituting no less than an ‘A2/AD bubble’ the likes of which top USAF generals are fretting about publicly…

    And would somehow suffer a defeat that the much smaller and orders of magnitude less capable Serb air defenses were able to withstand successfully…

    I guess Nato and the USAF hadn’t figured out Saker’s magic formula of ‘1.5x’ back then in 1999…good thing they know this now…whew…!

  6. Anonymous[397] • Disclaimer says:
    @FB

    Say, FB, how do you shoot down an X number of missiles when your air-defense stores contain only Y number of missiles and Y<X?

    • Replies: @FB
  7. FB says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    I guess you don’t know my rule about not discussing with anonymice…

    My second rule is quite simple…if you have a substantive and intelligent question, you will get a substantive and insightful answer…

    If your understanding of the subject matter…as revealed by an obviously childlike question…is preschool level…then my suggestion is to put that question to your preschool teacher…

  8. Dr. Chops says:
    @Eric Zuesse

    Eric:

    I remember that column and your diplomatic pipe dream has indeed proven you correct. Not surprised.

    • Replies: @Eric Zuesse
  9. Anonymous[383] • Disclaimer says:

    Oh brilliant mind, forgive my lowliness and my unoriginal alias, in the name of science, philosophy and true expertise in matters relating to air defenses, may I ask you to break your sacred rule and inform us, vulgar plebes, how you would reply to the question you were asked?
    After all, since the question asked is primitive, illiterate and otherwise vulgar, surely you can deign to answer it, not as a sign of respect or appreciation for the stupid moron who asked it, but to educate the illiterate masses with the fruits of your superior mind?
    Oh great genius of aeronautics and air defenses (you surely have personal experience in real-life air defense matters, right?!), please bestow on us, sincere, if ignorant imbeciles, your wisdom and expertise?
    Alternatively – let me submit this: unless you answer the question you were asked, you will just come across as an ignorant, if self-enamored, imbecile who can’t even answer a very VERY simple question 🙂
    Oh master of wisdom – the ball is in our court.

  10. @Dr. Chops

    Thanks for your opinion on this matter. When I wrote that article, I was hoping that this is what Putin would do. Turkey was assigned the role of policing Idlib. A week later on 17 September 2018, I did a follow-up report ( http://archive.is/4sfza ). The U.S. and NATO were still threatening. So, it was now a waiting-game. That would be a losing game for the U.S.-NATO side. During the following weeks, it became clear that this was the case; and, so, Trump and NATO had no option but to quit. The decision wasn’t the one that Trump made, but instead the one that Putin had made on September 9th, and which was concurred-in by both Erdogan and Rouhani. That seemed to settle the victory for Syria and for Russia. Then, on 14 July 2019, I headlined “Turkey Will Get a Chunk of Syria” ( http://archive.is/3uxpU ), and reported that Erdogan was trying to take advantage of its position as the policeman for Idlib, in order to seize and keep Syrian territory. But, again Putin made the principled and wise decision: he said no to that. And Turkey accepts this decision. Syria wins. Putin did it. In effect, Turkey is now allied with Russia. It’s the first NATO country to do that. This is history being made, on a large scale.

    • Replies: @PetrOldSack
  11. Dr. Doom says:

    The Amerikwan Empire is now dead.

    The Jewish Century is now over.

    Civil War and WWIII? Maybe.

    Geopolitical shifts are usually bloody affairs though.

    • Replies: @anon
  12. utu says:

    Putin-Netnayahu original agreement to keep Turkey out of Syria seems to be accomplished. American-Saudi destabilization of Syria while originally along the lines of the Israeli Yinon doctrine created a possibility for Turkey filling up the vacuum in Syria as Obama was unwilling to commit ground troops to Syria. Thus Netanyahu invited Russia to stabilize Syria on much weaker level and to keep Turkey from entering Syria. The next step will be the removal of Iranian forces from Syria.

  13. anon19 says:

    ANY outcome where American troops are withdrawn from overseas and return home is a BIG win for Americans.

    • Replies: @alexander
    , @Biff
    , @sally
  14. Rinsi says: • Website

    4 x Win sounds good, seems good, would be great if it is true, and holds the test of time.

    But how would you figure this into the picture, the Saker ? Who is pulling all the strings ?

    Rabbi Reveals Shocking History of Putin, KGB, Chabad, & Mossad

    And this

    https://russia-insider.com/en/solzhenitsyns-damning-history-jews-russia-review/ri22354

    • Replies: @Robjil
  15. idealogus says: • Website
    @FB

    Your answer says nothing. You basically have no arguments and you want confusion , smoke and mirrors.
    The comparison with Vietnam – Syria is not good at all.
    Vietnam had a big army of peasants with AKMs and flip-flops hidden in the jungle and through tunnels. The country had no roads, bridges or factories. The houses were made of bamboo and everything was transported on bicycles. The weapons and ammunition came for free from China and the USSR.

    In Syria everything is backwards:
    – the Russian contingent cannot hide in the jungle or in the tunnels
    – in desert you cannot hide unlike the jungle
    – the Russian contingent is very small in number
    – The Russian contingent is not made up of peasants with flip-flops and AKM
    – the efficiency of the Russian contingent depends not on the AKM quantity but on the quality of the very modern and expensive equipment but small in number
    – if the very modern weaponry fall short of ammunition (and Syria is far from Russia) the Russian soldiers are at WW2 technological level
    – if a few dozen of rusians equipment run short of ammunition and are destroyed (they are very easy to find and destroy) the rusian soldiers are toasted
    – nobody gives anything for free to rusians, everything has to be brought from Russia in a difficult way

    I do not agree with Saker in many respects but neither should it be criticized when it is not the case.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  16. Walt says:

    Russia is a super power in many ways. One of them is geopolitical influence. They stretch 6,000 miles across the Euroasian continent and their influence in Asia is obvious. Turkey is moving away from U.S.A. toward Russia. The UK is doing a Brexit which tells you that the EU is weakening. Several EU countries are against sanctions the U.S. is placing on Russia. If Trump wants to MAGA he should have an alliance with Russia.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  17. Rinsi says: • Website

    “Now let’s just hope that whoever makes it into the White House in 2020 will understand that this is a done deal and will not try to make “the Empire great again” and reverse that course as any such attempts will result in a major regional war.”

    Could and what if it collapses, instead !?

  18. Alfred says:
    @FB

    Forested and mountainous Serbia cannot be compared to the tiny areas occupied by the Khmeimim and Tartus bases.

    The Serbs hid their army from NATO and let the planes bomb decoys and civilians.

    • Replies: @FB
  19. @Svevlad

    Your first line says it all, ” I wonder how desperate will (((they))) get?” The Jews have been outwitted by crazy Trump. I don’t know if he knew what he was doing or not but it worked. The Jews’ IDF are a joke and everyone in the US Military knows it. The Jews only strength is in their espionage gathering systems.

    The scary part is the Jews want war and a chance to continue to expand their borders and may try something crazy including false flags and other little tricks to bring the US into conflicts in the region. Syrian forces, Hezbolah and the Iranian military scare the living shit out the weak Israeli troops. I would hope they would do it and then have the combined forces of Syria, Hezbolah and Iran to blow them out. It would show the world that Israel is not to be feared and the only thing they have is the psychological propaganda of the Holocaust and antisemitism to fire at the world. Meanwhile Putin would be watching it all and just smiling.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
  20. Antares says:

    Putin is the strategist and Trump has blinked. The article presents a realistic perspective and I share its major conclusions. Only question: what will happen to the remaining terrorists?

    • Replies: @journey80
    , @Wally
  21. alexander says:
    @anon19

    It sure is.

    As far as I am concerned it is not ENOUGH just to end our stupid, “illegal”, unconstitutional wars of aggression over there.

    After 9-11, there was a clear mandate from the American people to bring the perpetrators of that heinous crime… to justice.

    There was NO mandate, EVER, to start unconstitutional wars of aggression against countries who never attacked us, and never intended to.

    The fact is … the American people were DECEIVED by our own “ruling elites” into starting these illegal wars.

    Because of their LIES and DECEPTIONS the US taxpayer is now facing a whopping TWENTY THREE TRILLION DOLLARS..of heinous, unconscionable, war debt.

    Who says that’s okay ?

    Not me !

    I don’t just want to (finally) end these stupid illegal wars….Sorry….,this is not enough !

    I WANT MY MONEY BACK !

    I say , make our RULING ELITES pay !.

    I say, we , the American people , start to demand that our Zillionaire “ruling oligarchs” COUGH IT UP …every penny…to pay for THEIR war fraud.

    Let them pay for their lies, because we shouldn’t have to.

    No “taxation”…….without “representation” !

    THE WAR FRAUD ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2020…it is way overdue.

  22. First, the quick appeal to nukes is an implicit admission that there is something very wrong with the rest of the armed forces of the Axis of Kindness.

    Not really. What it really says is that the politicos don’t have the political wherewithal to use them to a satisfactory outcome because they can’t bear to face the repercussions of thousands of aluminum coffins coming home in a short period of time. 9/11 gave some political cover for a few thousand over the course of 15 years, but Trump’s election on a platform of getting out of endless wars showed that the American people have reached a limit.

    If the Iranians sank a carrier or took out a base, there might be some blood-lust among the American population, but I think most Americans would clamour to get out of the region long before favouring letting things go nuclear. There’s no such thing as a limited nuclear war; the Iranians or whoever would find a way to take a few American cities with them.

    Our politicos know that they can, as the US is wide open to all sorts of attacks because the Department of Defence has very little defensive capability, and the Department of Homeland Security is a parody of security when hundreds of thousands of foreigners can literally walk into the US relatively unmolested while little old ladies are being groped at America’s airports. So until the world sees the tactical indicator that the US is serious about the defence of its home territories, the threat of going nuclear is empty bluster.

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
  23. Lochearn says:

    This article is a patronizing rehash of what is already out there. With its columns and use of bold it tries to big itself up but it arrives after everyone else has had their say – I’ve seen the win-win-win-win title so many times now. Saker had his moment of relevance during the Ukraine war where he gave us an invaluable day-by-day account. Since then b. at Moon of Alabama has become far more relevant.

  24. Biff says:
    @anon19

    ANY outcome where American troops are withdrawn from overseas and return home is a BIG win for Americans.

    Not for private contractors, war profiteers, and their bought-and-paid-for politicians..

  25. sally says:
    @anon19

    The reason the troops were not returned home with a NYC ticker tape parade is because the object of such a parade would serve as a wake up call to all Americans.. Few Americans have any basis for understanding the truth of what has happened in the middle east since Kennedy was eliminated their access to information has been controlled.

    Saker is correct .. the USA and its feudal lord corporate plunder artists have lost out in Syria and looks like also in Yemen, but Saker failed to express Americans may be the biggest winner of all. Putin’s vision of the world at peace on Russian Terms is problematic for the monopoly powers that have for so long dominated the world (need to get rid of patents, copyrights, government contracts, and privatization). Maybe now Americans can restart their industries, learn the new technologies, and try very hard to regain some ability to compete in economic space where the rules of the game are not dynamically controlled by the economic opponent.

  26. TKK says:

    On 15 July 2016, a coup d’état was attempted against Erdogan and almost cost him his life. By all accounts, Russia played some kind of behind-the-scenes role and saved Erdogan’s life and power.

    The Turkish people saved Erdogan’s political capital and image but he was utterly safe the entire time. This was all a fiction- it was over before it started. I was there, in a working class neighborhood of Istanbul where all the men and boys over 12 rushed into the street and fought the military- who were fighting FOR THEM- while Erdogan was tucked safely in a holiday home at an undisclosed location at the time.

    Erdogan got on FaceTime with CNN and was pleading like a little girl for people to fight for him in the streets. He was never in any danger himself.

    The military did attempt to overthrow Erdogan, but it was over as soon as it started because the top brass began executing any officers or soldiers “suspected”of involvement.

    Erdogan then inflated the emergency as a Gulen “terrorist” take over, long after any threat was dead, and used it to arrest almost 80,000 people. 100s of thousands lost their jobs. Due to alleged Gulen ties- people who couldn’t identify Pennsylvania on the map were accused of being Gulen terrorists.

    Similar to Democrats, the urge to identify Russia/Putin as an invisible all knowing global actor is silly.

    Putin is too smart to fall for Erdogan’s Caliphate delusions- that coup was theater for Erdogan to tighten his iron grip. On 13 July, less than two days before the coup was launched, Erdogan signed a bill giving Turkish soldiers immunity from prosecution while taking part in domestic operations.

    Strange coincidence.

    To all the cowards and hypocrites who abandon the Kurds- whom the whole world owes a debt for losing 1000s of their own to fight ISIS-

    may life and fate cut them off at the knees.

  27. Mikhail says: • Website

    In reverse chronological order, a consistent accuracy from 2015 to the present:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/10/17/geopolitical-realism-utilized-by-obama-and-trump/

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/10/09/answering-russia-critics-on-syria/

    It wouldn’t surprise that Syria came up in discussions between Putin and the Saudi and UAE leaders last week. It would also not surprise if some countries (perhaps including Saudi Arabia and the UAE) are now accepting (unofficially or otherwise) that Assad is the reasonably best choice and that it’s in the best interests of some states to aid Syria.

  28. Robjil says:
    @Rinsi

    How about this article about the “denial” law in Russia. Chabbad tried to get it enforced three times. It failed. It is a big nothing burger in Russia.

    https://russia-insider.com/en/history/holohoax-denial-not-illegal-russia-contrary-many-news-reports/ri27711

    Many Chabbad rabbis have been kicked out of Russia in recent years.

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-seeks-to-force-out-foreign-rabbis-as-national-security-threat/

    Asher Krichevsky, Siberia’s chief rabbi, has been battling to stay in the country after Russian authorities accused the Israeli citizen of attempting to overthrow the state.

    Russia has recently stepped up expulsions of believers and missionaries from Christian denominations that originated abroad such as Mormons, Pentecostal Christians and Jehovah’s Witnesses.

    But it is also focusing on foreign rabbis, despite Judaism being legally recognized in the secular state as having historic roots in Russia, along with Christianity, Islam and Buddhism.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  29. anon[346] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dr. Doom

    Most of the conflicts around the globe will be over as soon as the Zionist ceases to breathe .

    Iran has said it doesn’t want to see Israel getting wiped off the map. But that is precisely what is needed .

    • Replies: @druid55
  30. Great article!

    I expect the Golan Heights to be the next focal point and for Israel to back off. The clear winners in the ME are now going to turn the tables on Israel and Saudi Arabia.

    Israel was established by accepting stolen property when the Brits gave them something the Brits didn’t own. The locals owned the lands and the Israeli’s accepted the property from the British thieves to establish the state of Israel. The proper thing to do is to return the stolen property to the original inhabitants and terminate the state of Israel. Since the Brits started this mess, the Israeli’s should all relocate to London and make nice with it’s Muslim controlled inhabitants.

    Sadly, Israel will probably survive, but the Palestinian issue just might get resolved on more favorable terms for the real owners of the lands claimed by Israel.

  31. Thanks for this well reasoned and very convincing military-diplomatic analysis. The screaming from the imperial Beltway and its MSM chorus shows it is on the mark. If the overriding political objectives of each of the various powers actually involved on the ground in Syria are satisfied, as it increasingly appears, it looks like check mate for spoilers from afar.

  32. @niteranger

    They MUST have Southern Lebanon and the Bekaa, or it´s game over – it´s a simple water question. So far they have managed on fossil groundwater (running out) and the Jordan (overstretched).
    It´s not a question of “if” …

    • Replies: @niteranger
  33. Pheasant says:
    @FB

    The Russian contingent are not on home soil. Thier missile stocks will only last so long in the event of a mass air attack. The serbs were different. They were on home soil and so had no logistic train.

    Answer his question it was quite reasonable.

    • Replies: @Commentator Mike
  34. journey80 says:
    @Antares

    Oh, haven’t you heard? They’re now White Helmets.

  35. anon[346] • Disclaimer says:

    As long as the illegitimate regimes like Jordan and Saudi and UAE exist, the tension and threat will not dissipate . These rogues carry the waters for Israel USA and often for UK . In return,they get protections . It is destructive to the local. These vassals need to be wiped off the map . Sooner the better.

    As long as the neocons ,stay out of jail, strut around without accountability and responsibility , they will keep on trying fomenting trouble . Other than suggesting plan for more wars,they haven’t done anything . This is all what they know and as skill ,all they possess . Unless America deals with them as it deals with cold calculating premeditated murders, peace and prosperity will elude the world and Anerica while the cockroach Israel will survive.
    Aneruca needs reeducation camps to avoid much worst possibilities .

    America might enter into dictatorship or junta run regime . In certain way,it is already . But power play might lead to more open brazen admission of some one making the claim that he is the leader .
    Democrats if get elected will continue to harp on Trump and Russia . It will try to get rid of Putin type leaders and policies in Russia . It will face a manufactured crisis by Israel and be forced to appease Israel again . At home race riot will increase . Iran will be forced to defend Syria Lebanon and Gaza . That excuse will be used by Israeli run Democrats not to resurrect JCOPA .
    Trump getting elected is high but he once free from the reelection issue , might start behaving purely for his business interest . But the 4 more years of Trump will be more unproductive and chaotic.
    America ,either way will lose more and suffer more globally . Brexit like situation might develop and weakened US will become from satellite or vassal to dumping ground of Israel .

    Empire will become what Saudi Arab or UAE or Jordan is – dependent on mercy of Israel.

  36. Christopher Jon Bjerknes

    As I reported earlier, the real reason why the House of Representatives opened an impeachment inquiry is because Donald Trump would not or could not attack Iran. With the threat of impeachment and eventual criminal prosecution hanging over his head, Trump is now setting us up to make that attack.

    Trump gave Turkey the greenlight to invade Syria, because Syria is an ally of Iran and there are Russian forces present in Syria. Turkey is a NATO ally. The presence of Turkish forces in Northern Syria places NATO forces at the ready to attack not only Damascus if necessary, but also to confront any Russian forces intending to join the battle on behalf of Syria and or Iran.

    In the name of pulling American troops out of the Middle East, Trump is instead readying them for combat with Iran. In the name of ending Middle Eastern wars, Trump is instead preparing to launch the worst one yet.

    Trump, at the behest of Israel, has created the necessary conditions for an American attack on Iran and has Turkey securing Northern Syria for the benefit of Israel, so as to draw any fighting away from Israel and towards Turkey. Turkey would then have the option of invoking Article 5 of the NATO charter and bring in the full forces of NATO against Syria and Iran, whether it is the United States or Saudi Arabia which triggers a war with Iran.

    US President Donald J. Trump has betrayed us to Israel yet again. In the name of instigating a new era of peace, Trump is instead laying the ground work for World War III, which could easily commence should Turkey or the US engage Russia in combat.

    https://jewishracism.blogspot.com/

    I find this scenario quite possible. Just sayin’

    • Replies: @z
  37. z says:

    Anyone else noticing the similarities between the behavior of some of the Jews and the Kurds?

    This line of thinking motivated me to do a little searching where I came across this article:

    Study Finds Close Genetic Connection Between Jews, Kurds

    The people closest to the Jews from a genetic point of view may be the Kurds, according to results of a new study at the Hebrew University.

    Which reminded me of this work done by Stanislaw Szukalski:

    Anthropolitical Motivations

    Think Szukalski was definitely onto something here. Anyone have any thoughts on how can this be solved?

  38. @Dave from Oz

    You are full of shit.
    USA, DOES NOT get oil from the Middle East, but rather from Venezuela.

    Now close your eyes and imagine how much oil FOR FREE US will get say from …..Iran, if Trump decides to bomb israel a bit.

  39. FB says: • Website
    @Alfred

    Forested and mountainous Serbia cannot be compared to the tiny areas occupied by the Khmeimim and Tartus bases.

    The Serbs hid their army from NATO and let the planes bomb decoys and civilians.

    Well…at least you do not make the mistake of simply repeating the imbecilic ‘weapons stores’ trope…

    As for Syria’s terrain and vegetation, maybe you should take a quick look into that before taking a run at me like some angry little terrier…

    You will note that there are major mountain ranges along the Syrian coast [in Latakia province where the Russian contingent is based]…as well as inland from Lebanon, where the Anti-Lebanon range rises as high as 10,000 feet…

    As for Forests in Syria, they are mostly covering these mountains and make up two percent of the country by area…

    So already you have learned something new…which you could have done without wasting my own time…

    As for the ridiculous nonsense in this article…I have already debunked all of this in some detail, back when Martyanov posted an article here on this subject…[which Saker also refers to here]…

    I have neither the time nor inclination to educate lazy, stupid people about air combat and air defense…if you do not know anything about the subject perhaps it is because you have not studied it…

    • Replies: @Begemot
  40. It’s not even yet Sunday and the Saker is at it again. Why can’t you just summarize your musings?

  41. KA says:

    Empire is juggling with many pieces most of them are mutually inconsistent In the process the empire is exposing it’s true nature to the uninformed brainwashed devotees . Until now people of Iraq only knew Saddam as better than US leaders and emissaries and his policy was better than the US , not only that they knew that Saddam love for Iraq was stronger than US leaders love for America, Hopefully the brainwashed incurious devotees of the empire will soon come to know that as well.

    This is from national interest —

    Breaking pencil on the face ! How is that different from Saddam throwing hot coffee at subordinate? Open solicitation to work for jihadists.?

    “The National Interest has learned from multiple sources about tense meetings between SDC diplomats and State Department officials who oversee the Trump administration’s policy on Syria. The State Department repeatedly pushed for the SDC to work with Turkish-backed Islamist rebels while berating Syrian Kurdish officials and refusing to listen to their concerns, according to multiple sources.
    One source with firsthand knowledge of the screaming session told the National Interest that Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Joel Rayburn, who is a special envoy for Syria, yelled at SDC officials and broke a pencil in a translator’s face. Two sources with secondhand knowledge confirmed this version of events.
    “[Rayburn] loves the Syrian Islamist groups,” one of the three sources said. “He thinks they can counter Iran. He is dreaming.”

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/middle-east-watch/exclusive-inside-state-departments-meltdown-kurds-90241

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  42. The ZUS is using the Hitler template in the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya and Syria and Yemen and destroying these countries for zionist Israel and of course seizing the oil fields, who the hell would believe anything the ZUS government ever said or did after this!

    All this bombing and killing of millions was brought on by the Israeli and ZUS traitors attack on the WTC on 911, to be blamed on the Arabs and to give the ZUS the excuse to destroy and occupy the mideast for zionist Israel.

    The business of the ZUS government is war and killing and profit for the zionist bankers and the MIC, the terrorists run the ZUS gov and the Israeli gov!

  43. @Pheasant

    Russians are in Syria by invitation of a sovereign country. Their bases can only be attacked by terrorists. If any state power were to attack their bases then that means escalation and they too could be attacked anywhere, like say the US base in Seoul. Or anywhere in Europe from Kaliningrad. It’s pointless to debate as all know the consequences.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  44. Tom Welsh says:
    @Svevlad

    I would be up for having Hillary Clinton and some of the lesser demons commit ritual seppuku on TV.

    Probably not quite as painful as what she had done to Colonel Qadafi, and – if done in the right spirit – infinitely more dignified.

    Above all, it would be supremely edifying. “Pour decourager les autres”, etc.

  45. Tom Welsh says:
    @FB

    FB, your original comment was discourteous and naive. (If you resent “wasting” your valuable time, why do you read The Saker’s posts?)

    Your reply to Anonymous is downright rude and, furthermore vacuous. If you think any reader of The Saker’s blog fails to see that you cannot answer Anonymous’ simple question, you are mistaken.

    I am not posting anonymously; and moreover “Tom Welsh” is my real name (unlike your handle).

    So let me ask you:

    Say, FB, how do you shoot down an X number of missiles when your air-defense stores contain only Y number of missiles and Y<X?

    • Agree: bluedog, Daniel Rich
  46. nsa says:
    @Dave from Oz

    “best bet is to annex Mexico for solar farms”
    Stupid idea. Mexico is an ungovernable failed narco state with few natural resources. Look north instead. Canada with its vast mineral/energy assets and arctic access has already been annexed economically, and its docile spoiled disarmed population incapable of offering any resistance to a direct military invasion and takeover.

  47. Tom Welsh says:
    @Walt

    “The UK is doing a Brexit which tells you that the EU is weakening”.

    While agreeing with your general drift, I strongly disagree with that particular assertion.

    I personally voted to leave the EU mainly because it is getting far too “strong”. I prefer to live in an independent sovereign nation.

    If that seems hard to understand, would the USA join a federation like the EU – on the same level as all the other dozens of members?

    And when will Japan agree to become just another province of China?

  48. @Commentator Mike

    If any state power were to attack their bases then that means escalation and they too could be attacked anywhere

    Exactly. As an example–navy ships of any nation (Russian, American, Italian) are essentially floating sovereign territories of their states. Same goes to military installations abroad. Just a curiosity–Russia owns a small part of Switzerland near Devil’s Bridge in Alps. Swiss are smart–they do not keep their eggs in a single basket;)) As per hypothetical attack on Russia’s base in Syria, as I already stated not for once, including here at Unz in early 2017–any US asset is within range of Russian retaliation in case of (hypothetical) attack. Stand-off weapons are a really good tool for cooling hotheads.

  49. FB says: • Website
    @Tom Welsh

    Now look here pinhead…I’m not here for your pleasure or anyone else’s…

    See my comment above and go to my original debate with Martyanov on the matter…

    Once you have studied that and can actually formulate RELEVANT and SPECIFIC questions, I will be glad to respond…[assuming a pinhead like you is capable of synthesizing the knowledge I presented in that thread…]

    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
  50. z says:
    @Johnny Walker Read

    The North Atlantic Treaty
    Washington D.C.-4 April 1949

    Article 5
    The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

    Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.

    Am I missing something here or would article 5 not apply since this would not be taking place in either Europe or North America?

  51. @KA

    Hopefully the brainwashed incurious devotees of the empire will soon come to know that as well.

    US so called “diplomacy” and structures, including of intelligence-analytical nature (I omit here so called “foreign policy think-tanks”) associated with it is a collection of amateurs who went through atrocious American “international relations” programs and have very little knowledge but egos larger than cathedrals. Apart from being a laughing stock around the world, US problems with the so called “diplomacy” started long time ago. US incompetence in “foreign relations” is startling and is driven by delusions of grandeur.

    • Replies: @Republic
  52. Agent76 says:

    Oct 15, 2019 Syrian Exposes Media Lies About Syria Withdrawal

    A message to the American people from Syria – your media is lying to you.

    Oct 21, 2019 The Road to Syria–Obama Admin. KNEW Weapons Were Shipped from Benghazi to Syrian Rebels/Jihadists

    The heavily redacted documents do not disclose who was shipping the weapons. Another DIA report, written in August 2012 (the same time period the U.S. was monitoring weapons flows from Libya to Syria), said that the opposition in Syria was driven by al Qaeda and other extremist Muslim groups: “the Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood, and AQI are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria.”

    • Agree: DESERT FOX
  53. Wally says:
    @Antares

    If Trump “blinked” then his base sure liked it.

    • Replies: @Vullsain
  54. @Agent76

    I do not know why this Syrian girl in the video, call the perfidious US jews, neocons and neo-liberals and not, what exactly they are: Jews!!!!

  55. @FB

    You are correct!!!
    But you forget to mention that all Caspian see Russian flotilla was on standby alert with all missiles aimed on targets and ready to be fired at instant notice that could destroy any entity in Syria. And US forces were very well aware of it. (They are not entirely stupid you know.

  56. Saker

    I really d0n’t give a hoot about the Kurds….Not one White Working Class Teenager from the American Heartland should be used as disposable body fodder to protect the Kurds…..I also don’t want the Kurds imported into America LEGALLY…..

    Interesting to note that Noam Chomsky supports a Kurdish Nation….while at the same time agitates for the demographic murder of my people within the borders of America….

    • Replies: @the grand wazoo
  57. Herald says:
    @z

    Am I missing something here or would article 5 not apply since this would not be taking place in either Europe or North America?

    On that dodgy basis, nearly all of Turkey, which is in Asia, would fall outside of the NATO defensive area, and so attacking Ankara would be OK, but not so Istanbul.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  58. @z

    At present, NATO has 29 members. In 1949, there were 12 founding members of the Alliance: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the United States. The other member countries are: Greece and Turkey (1952), Germany (1955), Spain (1982), the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland (1999), Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia (2004), Albania and Croatia (2009), and Montenegro (2017).

    Highlights
    Provision for enlargement is given by Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

    Article 10 states that membership is open to any “European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area”.

    Any decision to invite a country to join the Alliance is taken by the North Atlantic Council, NATO’s principal political decision-making body, on the basis of consensus among all Allies.

    https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_publications/20170608_1706_memb-part-e.pdf

    Good question, one I can’t answer. I guess it would depend on what the definition of “European State” is.

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  59. Tom Verso says:
    @Tom Welsh

    It seems to me that the x< y discussion misses the point about long range cruise missiles. Russia does not have to shoot down all the incoming, it can attack the source e.g. US ships in the Mediterranean. That capability 'deters' the US attack. Russia can easily replace its loses in Syria, but the US cannot aircraft carriers and other naval assets.

    Similarly Iran:
    In a recent article or comment somewhere, can remember the source, it was suggested that the US could destroy all of Iran's significant military locations (air defense, missiles, etc.) in one felt sweep. In response to this capability, the analysis suggested that Iran has a military policy in place; that as soon as they 'see' US launching (i.e long before the incoming gets to Iran) the Iranians would launch the whole of their cruise and ballistic missile inventory (i.e. hundred, thousands?) at US and allies (e.g. Israel, Saudi Arabis, all US military bases). In short, Iran as a variation of nuclear power's 'mutual assured destruction'.

    • Replies: @Wally
  60. druid55 says:
    @anon

    It;s actually more than just Zionists. Zionism is a recent phenomenon. These Talmudists have been interfering for centuries – Donmeh, French Revolution, Russia, Poland, maybe the civil war in the US, Sabbateanism, etc

  61. @idealogus

    I dunno … I seem to recall roads, bridges, harbours, etc.

    https://www.loc.gov/resource/g7821f.ct002820/

  62. Wally says:
    @Tom Verso

    – Sure enough, dumb, but expensive, aircraft carriers are sitting ducks.

    – Don’t forget Iran’s chemical / biological weapons … the poor man’s nukes.

    No nukes? Who cares?

  63. @Andrei Martyanov

    I am sorry but your reasoning is irresponsible.
    Any Russian response outside of area of conflict would lead inevitably and instantly to WW3.

  64. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    Any Russian response outside of area of conflict would lead inevitably and instantly to WW3.

    First, “WW 3”, I assume in your understanding a nuclear one, may not escalate to a nuclear threshold at all precisely for the reasons of Russia’s conventional superiority in high precision stand-off weapons. This, in itself, is not only was but remains a main deterrent in Eastern Mediterranean against US (NATO) shenanigans (not even powerful AD systems in Syria) and it is these weapons which constitute operational stability of Russian contingent in Syria. They also are the main reason for an acute case of risk aversion and avoidance on the American part in Syria. It is one thing to plan SEAD operation against powerful but limited Russian AD at Khmeimim and Tartus–after all, there are enough morons in US political top who wouldn’t be averse even with the loss of scores of USAF aircraft in case of such an attack. But planning SEAD when one knows that the response will be at the decision centers and all forces involved across all platforms (do you need a reminder of Macron’s panic call to Putin begging not to sink French combat ship in April, 2018?) ALL of it within totally conventional paradigm. No nukes, just conventional high-explosive munitions. The exchange ratio is NOT in favor of the United States and military people in US know it. Now, per this:

    I am sorry but your reasoning is irresponsible.

    No, you got it exactly in reverse, US reasoning is irresponsible as is its foreign policy and non-stop wars with millions of civilian casualties all over the globe–THAT IS irresponsible. Deterring aggressor and increasingly irrational bully is the only responsible reasoning. I reason like this for years. Russia knew what was needed (she always did, actually) to restrain lunatics, she’s got the tools for that.

  65. @FB

    It appears you may have mistakenly taken this argument out of context. The text you referred to was preceded by:

    “On the next level, however, it becomes obvious that the biggest weakness of the Russian task force in Syria has been, from day 1, its very small size.”

    and he is referring to its ability to withstand a large all out attack. In such a case he is saying the small contingent of Russian forces would most likely be overwhelmed. (Assuming it did not go global or nuclear, which he did not explore.)

    I thought the article was very worth reading and most of it I had surmised already. It has been said many times: U.S. plays checkers conquering pieces; Russia plays chess positioning pieces.

    The U.S. has screwed up its foreign policy in its most recent attempt to invade southwest asia, which began about 1980 just after admitting defeat in southeast asia. Thanks Zbigniew!

  66. HEREDOT says:
    @Agent76

    If anyone is inferior to Bush, it’s obama.

  67. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    I am sorry but your reasoning is irresponsible.

    It would be irresponsible of US or any other state to attack any Russian base anywhere.

  68. @FB

    I’m not here for your pleasure

    That’s called delusion. That’s the ONLY reason you are here. You, The Saker, and Martyanov.

  69. @flashlight joe

    he is referring to its ability to withstand a large all out attack.

    There are also plenty of US bases around the world that can’t withstand an all out attack. So? Like I wrote, only terrorists can be expected to attack Russian bases in Syria, or US bases for that matter. All states know the consequences if they should do that.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  70. As a reader who hangs on your words, this commenter was surprised to hear you characterize the UK as an EU state that matters. I’m trying to reconcile that with the abject colonial ass-kissing in this travesty of a court:

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/10/assange-in-court/

    Lewis and Baraitser are two of the most servile W.O.G.s I’ve ever seen suck Western dick to get ahead. Their CIA ventriloquists shake them around and make them talk in a contemptuously obvious manner. Little Britain has exactly the influence that Lamb Chop has on Shari Lewis. It’s Puerto Rico with a P-5 veto and no hurricanes. If they ever dare step out of line, you’ll see what CIA does to their British butlers.

  71. Anonymous[607] • Disclaimer says:
    @flashlight joe

    You are wasting your time trying to reason with FB. His agenda is really simple and does not change from article to article topic. All FB wants (really, probably NEEDS) is to
    1. try to convince us that he is a real expert
    2. try to convince us that nobody else is
    3. try to make us accept that he is the only person who knows anything about aerospace
    He is having a hard time, and that enrages him, especially if somebody else is seen as the true expert (narcissists really can’t stand not being center stage 24/7).
    His true “expertise” is revealed when he is asked to reply to a very simple question.
    Don’t waste any more of your time on him, only a mental health professional might be able to help him.

    • Agree: flashlight joe
  72. @Commentator Mike

    All states know the consequences if they should do that.

    One caveat, though. US is not agreement-capable (in fact it is now largely ungovernable) since precisely 08-08-08 when, despite all attempts to wash one’s hands such as Condolezza Rice did, it is clear as a sunny day that Georgia’s attack in Ossetia was inspired not only by imbecility of Saakashvili and his “cabinet” but on the promises of help by none other than, at that time running an election campaign, John McCain and structures associated with him. In other words, already then there was nobody to talk too in D.C. As per consequences, the latest attack of drones (successfully repelled, as usual) was directed by US P-8 which was patrolling off shore off Latakia. This was openly stated at Russia’s MoD briefing earlier this month. Russia’s EW and electronic reconnaissance capabilities are pretty impressive, plus Russian MoD are not known to be drama queens, so if they say it, that means it did happen. Proxy attempts against Russia on US part will continue. They will be initiated and controlled by parts of US government which are at war with other parts, of fully dysfunctional, US government. Do not discount also a major butt-hurt factor. It is a powerful force in American politics.

  73. anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Walt

    European powers are internally and even
    itrnalaly ( if there is a word to emphasize this aspect ) is weak corrupt publicity seeking corporate servants who want to be seen different from Trump on democracy human right freedom – blah blah blah .

    These bastards talk of peace ,danger of nuclear proliferation ,and human life but can’t follow JCOPA , can’t stop selling arms to Saudi , can’t stop thinking of creating No Fly Zone over Syria and now Syria – Turkey border , can’t help themselves from temptation of using any opportunity of blaming Iran .

    Without their roles , Libya won’t be where it is today and thousands of sub Saharan will not be jumping to sea burial ,millions from other countries would remain employed in Libya and thousands of black wouldn’t have been killed. It was France who initiated with full CIA backing , this Syrian fiasco .

    They are shameless mass killers who want to be praised as humanitarian .

    Thank god Chengiz or Hitler or Churchill didn’t have that fascinations of being seen as non -racist, pious and ,freedom liberty promoters.

    They were thugs and they were proud of it .

    • Replies: @Hillbob
  74. @The Alarmist

    Quote: “…of thousands of aluminum coffins coming home in a short period of time.

    Reply: Brass gets a bit squirmish when you use ‘strong‘ language like that and prefers you adhere to their mumbo jumbo of ‘Horizontal Aluminum Transportation Tubes‘ [aka HATT].

    This is not a joke

    • LOL: Kiel
  75. Republic says:
    @FB

    I honestly tried reading this 7,000 word ode to irrelevance…but finally had to call it quits after wasting about half an hour of god-given time…

    Pepe Escobar is a much better analyst than The Saker as he can make his case in only 2500 words.

    Thus the truth to the old adage: brevity is the soul of wit

    • Agree: HEREDOT
  76. Republic says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    The US does not do diplomacy, instead it issues threats

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  77. @Tom Welsh

    Quote: “Say, FB, how do you shoot down an X number of missiles when your air-defense stores contain only Y number of missiles and Y<X?"

    Reply: You throw frozen turkeys at them, as they've managed to bring down a holy F-35…

    Like many [or some], I know next to nothing about adequate air defenses and would be delighted if a knowledgeable individual/person would be kind enough to bring me [and others] up to speed.

    Getting a better understanding of certain elements in the ME helps in getting a better picture of unfolding events in that particular and volatile region.

    Y<X = indeed ???

  78. @Andrei Martyanov

    This suffices [among many other options] :

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  79. Hillbob says:
    @anon

    Of course , you are so right!

  80. Hillbob says:

    The US is doing something that I thought was anatomically impossible . Butt….hey carry on and go down real deep

  81. Begemot says:
    @FB

    wasting my own time

    This and earlier comments by you show that you have a very high regard for yourself. If you truly feel the lesser beings here are “wasting your time”, perhaps you should consider spending your time elsewhere, where you time and your presence can receive the appreciation and admiration you feel you deserve.

  82. @Haxo Angmark

    Maybe. But it can’t be denied that there’s been some progress. The American media wouldn’t be shitting their pants over this if it was completely hollow.

  83. @Walt

    America and Russia are natural allies, hopefully it will be realized some day. The oligarchs in America will do anything to prevent that, sadly.

    • Agree: Buck Ransom
  84. @nokangaroos

    Right! Israel needs the water while the Palestinians are barely getting enough.

  85. @Republic

    The US does not do diplomacy, instead it issues threats

    It also bluffs a lot, but agree–there are no diplomats left anymore.

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
  86. @Beefcake the Mighty

    The oligarchs in America will do anything to prevent that, sadly.

    Agree.

  87. @Robjil

    This is encouraging news. However, I do recall a few years ago some Russian liberal news station was shut down for suggesting that it might have been better if the Soviet government had capitulated at Leningrad, given the loss of life during the siege. Seems like a reasonable position, so I am not sure the Russian state has completely done away with Soviet-era myths.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  88. Julian Assange is being tortured to death in prison….his physical brain has been targeted for liquidation by MI-5 TORTURERS….Julian Assanges’s crime:EXPOSING THE WAR CRIMES OF BUSH H…BUSH W….THE HOMOSEXUAL KENYAN FOREIGNER….and THE OLD FARTING NASTY BOOMER BULLDYKE HILLARY CLINTON……

    While Americans dissolve their brains in NFL FANTASY FOOTBALL….

    America is a psychotic Nation armed with nukes….Are they playing FANTASY FOOTBALL in the Missile Silos?….Does the Fortan launch code know this?

    “A SCREAMING COMES ACROSS THE SKY?

  89. @Beefcake the Mighty

    However, I do recall a few years ago some Russian liberal news station was shut down for suggesting that it might have been better if the Soviet government had capitulated at Leningrad, given the loss of life during the siege. Seems like a reasonable position, so I am not sure the Russian state has completely done away with Soviet-era myths.

    You got it exactly upside down. 180 degrees.

    1. Try not to mention, if in Russia, and especially if talking to St. Petersburgers, even of younger generation, that this was “reasonable position”;

    2. The station was and still is Dozhd (Rain)–West’s financed–so called “independent” station, which is still operational and it was precisely Russian government which refused to close this POS after an overwhelming response from Russian public opinion which demanded to shut this station down;

    This:

    I am not sure the Russian state has completely done away with Soviet-era myths.

    I know no more mythological, if not completely delusional, view of WW II history, including direct falsifications turned into mass-industry, than in Western world. But, evidently, this is aggravated even more by total inability to learn and establish even simple, forget complex, historic causalities. The frustration grows (it will continue to grow the more things go out of control) but I can bet you my own ass that still nobody will get their facts straight or admit that maybe, just maybe, what they know about Russia is mostly myth, but not the Russian one. I’ll give you a hint–Russia Studies field in the West is a pseudo-academic wasteland populated by all kinds of fringe figures with zero relevant education or experiences. Most of it are shysters who sold their “expertise” to a higher bidder. That is why US cannot find itself in all this whole international affairs–no historic experience with war.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  90. @Andrei Martyanov

    Fair enough, the station in question may have been a classic US front operation.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  91. @nsa

    For your information Mexico is a CIA run Narco-State, kept in perpetual discord. It’s the Afghanistan of N. America. Or soon to be.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  92. @War for Blair Mountain

    Noam Chomsky is Israel lite. Like his sister-in-arms Amy Goodman, he is a shill. Neither will ever speak of the jews involved in 911.

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
  93. Well .. it is difficult to predict ..especially about the future .. a danish Humourist has said … and overall .. good people should all rejoice ..in what EVENTUALLY can bring peace to Syria . The Western ” comprador Elites ” and their media Whores are busy trying to find some grimaces hiding their utter defeat .. trying to explain the situation to their populations to whom they have lied and lied ..and once more lied .. for all the time .

    I like POETRY .. and allow me to put attention to a brilliant Poet .. who in expressionist poetic form describes the situation … beautifull , insightful and utterly SCATHING :

    Jewish Terrorism by Taxi

    https://platosguns.com/2019/03/17/jewish-terrorism/?fbclid=IwAR1SuVvDdBNXC4OWDRZEJRjrKJUJsKBoUEfPl6r6Ix_D6imJ6BouB5Pc8E8

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
    , @Pegasus
  94. Prayers for Vladimir Putin, Bashir Assad and the people of Syria.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  95. @the grand wazoo

    Quote: “Noam Chomsky is Israel lite. Like his sister-in-arms Amy Goodman, he is a shill. Neither will ever speak of the jews involved in 911.”

    Reply: I was shocked when Chomsky said, “Who cares who’s behind 9/11.” It was an off camera remark and caught on a cellphone.

    Says it all…

  96. @Andrei Martyanov

    I just wonder how Russian FM Lavrov feels when he has to deal with his partners on either side of the pond…

    To make matters worse, history is littered with countless skeletons of TPTB’s Machiavellian shenanigans. This is one of them:

    How The Deep State Overthrew The Last Nationalist Government Of Canada… In 1963 – Link to Fort Russ

    Excerpt :”The CIIA (since renamed the Canada International Council in 2006) was the Canadian branch of Britain’s Royal Institute for International Affairs (aka: Chatham House) founded in 1919. In America, a branch was set up in 1921 under the title “Council on Foreign Relations” (CFR). The CIIA had been formed in 1928 as a new incarnation of the Cecil Rhodes Roundtable Group and would promote the Empire’s post World War I strategy of dismantling sovereign nation-states using the mechanism of the League of Nations. After the failure of the League in 1940, the CIIA would enforce the new strategy of perverting the United Nations and organized for World Government under new supranational military body of NATO and global banking and regulatory structures.”

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  97. @Ole C G Olesen

    Thanks for sharing Taxi’s link.

    Appreciated.

  98. Vullsain says:
    @Wally

    Exactly, over the last three years we have witnessed Trumps attempts to withdraw from Syria, and incredibly “Assad” would “Gas” civilians to the outrage of the international community, the MSM, NeoCons and Democrats. Amazingly convenient how when Assad forces would gain the upper hand in Aleppo and during a cease fire, US air power would “accidentally” fire upon Syrian forces inflicting casualties and the loss of strategic advantage resulting in prolonging the urban warfare. All the while fighting The Russian Collusion Conspiracy, Putins Puppet Propaganda and the MIC, MSM, Neocon cabal.
    Incredible how according to The Saker the idiot Drumph has lucked out and against incredible opposition appears to have kept a campaign promise that got him elected.

  99. A major complication was missed by the Saker, which will have long-term implications. The CIA-Gulen failed coup against Erdogan in Turkey in 2016 (in the works since at least 2012) was incredibly stupid, and forces Turkey away from the US and into the orbits of Russia and China.
    When Erdogan demanded the extradition of CIA asset (and controllable theocrat) Fethullah Gulen from Pennsylvania, Obama refused. Erdogan and Turkey (and secular Arabs throughout the MidEast) were incredulous as they had turned over any “terrorist” demanded by the US, no questions asked. The refusal by Obama was more than a slap in the face, it was the end of an alliance built in the Korean War with NATO, and probably the beginning of the end of the NATO depot of nuclear weapons on the Russian/ Turkish border (maybe superfluous with the encircling of Russia with East European NATO bases?) At any rate, pushing away one of the few real historic US allies can only harm US influence in the MidEast, far beyond the 20 million Kurds in Turkey or the 1.5 million Kurds in Syria on which so many want to focus.

  100. Krollchem says:
    @Tom Welsh

    If you look at the combined air defense capabilities of the Syrian and Russian forces as well as the Russian warships offshore of Syria you would find that the France, UK and the US (FUKUS) would run out of missiles and launch vehicles first.

    To be blunt, only France and the UK would be dumb enough to join the US in going against this combined Syrian defense force. The rest of NATO (e.g. Italy, Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Denmark, etc) would set on their hands. Further limits to their capabilities are:

    (1) The FUKUS militaries could only deploy a small portion of their total forces into the theatre of operations;
    (2) Much of the air power counted by these three countries are phantom planes that are needing repairs or are just hanger queens as in the case of the remaining F-22s;
    (3) Many countries that host FUKUS forces in the Middle East would not allow attacks to be launched from their airbases (e.g. Turkey, Qatar, Iraq);

    There are those who (including myself, unfortunately) have brought up drone swarms as a means to overcome the integrated defenses of the Syrian and Russian forces. Yes, the US is working on drone swarms but Russia has developed drone killer drones and now have new versions of the BUK-M2 and Pantsir S2s that are capable of launching 4x as many sub-munitions as before.

    Russia has explicitly stated that the bases, ships and planes that launch such attacks would be destroyed. Russian air superiority fighters as well as Russian forces in the Black and Caspian Seas would join in the conflict and assist in taking out such launch vehicles and bases. Needless to say, the outcome would likely be total nuclear war initiated by FUKUS which has been discussed in previous UNZ articles.

    I hope you explore the opposing forces capabilities in detail. The articles by Andrei Martyanov and his two books and the comments may be of some assistance. These as scary times.

    Best wishes.

    • Replies: @FB
  101. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @the grand wazoo

    Mexico was poor back when Russia was the enemy and Afghanistan and Bin Laden were our friends circa Rambo III.

  102. Robjil says:

    This is something our Zion free press MSM doesn’t talk about. They blab about “concentration camps” on US border. Yet, real ones exist that the ZUS created exists in Syria.

    https://alethonews.com/2019/03/28/syrias-rukban-now-little-more-than-a-us-controlled-concentration-camp-and-the-pentagon-wont-let-refugees-leave/

    The United States military has rejected offers to resolve the growing humanitarian crisis in the Rukban refugee camp in Syria, which sits inside a 55 km zone occupied by the U.S. along the Syria-Jordan border. The U.S. has also refused to let any of the estimated 40,000 refugees — the majority of which are women and children — leave the camp voluntarily, even though children are dying in droves from lack of food, adequate shelter and medical care. The U.S. has also not provided humanitarian aid to the camp even though a U.S. military base is located just 20 km (12.4 miles) away.

    • Agree: DESERT FOX
    • Replies: @anon
  103. @Beefcake the Mighty

    the station in question may have been a classic US front operation.

    They are not the only one. Luckily Russia has created her own law on foreign agents and many organization (very deservedly) ended up on this list ranging from Navalny’s “anti-corruption” cottage industry to Memorial (a fancy allegedly anti-GULAG org, in reality front) to hell knows how many. The law is good in a sense that it put them on notice. Everyone knows who is who in Russia.

  104. @Daniel Rich

    I just wonder how Russian FM Lavrov feels when he has to deal with his partners on either side of the pond…

    For that Russia has a now super-famous meme from Lavrov’s meeting with Saudi FM couple of years ago at his and Saudi FM press-conference. This is the moment recorded for posterity by a scores of microphones and cameras. At this moment Lavrov says Fvcking imbeciles (Debily, blyat’):)))

    Russians even issued a patch with this,LOL.

    This is how Lavrov feels when he speaks to morons.

  105. @Daniel Rich

    This suffices [among many other options] :

    True, and it was the United States which brought nuclearism back recently (see Nuclear Posture Review 2018) when understood that it lost a conventional arms race. But nukes are deterrent–still, under this umbrella, a lot is going on in a conventional sense to fight a war. United States doesn’t know any modern war other than it being fought elsewhere. Now, the fact that US proper, not to speak of US bases around the globe, can be attacked conventionally with a devastating effect and with minimal civilian losses, thus moving towards nuclear ambiguity is a completely new game for the United States. For Russia it is a normal historic experience. Russia can take out Diego-Gracia without any nukes, as an example, and it is suddenly not so black-and-white if, say, in the process of escalation US Navy sinks some Russian sub. It is not anymore that clear–escalation becomes fairly complex and those who have superior conventional ability can control such an escalation. In general, very complex issue and if not for it being technologically and operationally complex, huge cultural factor adds itself here.

  106. FB says: • Website
    @Krollchem

    That is a pretty good, concise summary Kroll…

    As I mentioned earlier, Martyanov and I had already had this debate…and it is settled…

    Martyanov is a competent naval guy, but he is out of his depth when it comes to air combat…

    A ship is different from a terrestrial integrated air defense system, where mobility and choosing when to engage and how to engage are entirely at your discretion…this is not possible on a ship, which sits out in the open with no place to hide…and which also has a limited amount of stores…

    This isn’t the case with terrestrial IADS, where you can easily hold huge quantities of stores, or air lift them in fairly easily…

    But stores aren’t the problem…and neither is the mickey mouse notion that you are going to use up all your missile shooting down cruise missiles…

    The main problem here is the idea that cruise missiles have a role to play in attacking air defenses…this is absolutely kindergarten level, as I prove in the aforementioned debate…

    Cruise missiles are not a SEAD weapon [suppression of enemy air defense]…nor have EVER been used in such a role…for the simple reason that they are capable only of hitting a fixed target, whose precise geographical location must be known in advance and programmed into its flight plan…just as a passenger jet crew must program their flight plan before departure for a destination…

    So the idea of overwhelming an IADS with a huge cruise missile barrage is nonsensical and laughable to any actual air combat practitioner…it just doesn’t work that way…[and S300/400 missiles would not be used against cruise missile anyway…later I talk about what kind of SAM is used in this role]…

    The ONLY way to take out air defense is with missiles that home in on the air defense radars, called HARMS [high speed anti-radiation missiles]…the Nato air armada of over 1,000 combat aircraft fired 750 such HARMs, but killed only THREE mobile Serb SA6 SAMs, which are of Vietnam era…and have quite a short range…

    In return the Serbs killed THREE NATO aircraft including TWO F117s [one was downed over Serbia, the other limped back to Italy [a short hop over the Adriatic] but was written off so counts as killed…

    A number of other aircraft were also damaged enough to be written off, but these are not acknowledged in Nato tallies…[although by rules of air combat any aircraft that is written off by enemy action counts as killed]…

    The fact is that despite this huge overwhelming force and the proximity of Nato air bases, the SEAD campaign was a failure…as acknowledged by US experts and published in top USAF journals…

    The Serb air defense was not able to be neutralized even after 78 days of a SEAD campaign involving 1,000 aircraft…which meant that Nato aircraft could not fly where they wanted and when they wanted…

    It was a repudiation of the entire Nato doctrine of air combat…which in fact arose after the disastrous Israeli losses to Syrian air defenses using those same, mobile SA6s in 1973…

    In that air war, the Syrians made quick work of the Israeli Air Force…downing an astounding 102 Israeli fighter jets in the opening hours…

    This disaster prompted the US to start the Have Blue program to create ‘stealth’ aircraft that could penetrate these new and formidable air defenses [in the case of the 1973 war, these ADs were the same SA6 that Nato still couldn’t take out 26 years later in Kosovo]…

    However, the US did develop capable airborne jamming systems and decent HARM missiles…the ‘stealth’ proved to be a dud, as USAF Colonel Riccioni has documented extensively so I will not dwell on that…

    But the answer to these improvements in offensive air capability [jamming and HARMS] came in the form of the Russian S300 which used huge mobile radars of the phased array type against which jamming was not effective…plus a reach of well over 200 km for these missiles which made it impossible to get jamming aircraft close enough, and well outside the range of HARM missiles also, which even today have a range of only 150 km…

    The S400 only expands these envelopes with a reach of over 400 km…in his 2002 assessment in Air Power Journal, the USAF’s flagship technical publication, Dr Lambeth notes that had the Serbs had S300s the outcome might have been the the outright denial of the airspace altogether…

    One SA-10/12 [aka S300] site in Belgrade and one in Pristina could have provided defensive coverage over all of Serbia and Kosovo.

    They also could have threatened Rivet Joint, Compass Call, and other key allied aircraft such as the airborne command and control center and the Navy’s E-2C operating well outside enemy airspace.

    Kosovo and the Continuing SEAD Challenge, page 19

    Today, with the advent not only of the S400 but the lower tier, shorter range system that support these big guns, such as Buk, Pantsir and Tor…the result is the creation of A2/AD zones…anti-access, area denial…which are now the bane of USAF air combat practitioners and theoreticians…

    There is simply not a way to effectively attack these zones…that’s the reality…which is why people like USAF Gen Breedlove are suggesting that a new type of LAND-BASED weapon is required to attack these zones…

    It is an admission that every practitioner in this field knows full well…the tools that are available now are the exact same as those in 1999…but the air defense are orders of magnitude more capable and powerful…

    Btw…the Tor is the SAM that is specifically designed to shoot down cruise missiles…it was the first weapon of its kind developed just for this purpose…and is highly effective…

    These mobile cruise missile killers use small and cheap short range missiles that can be kept easily on hand in quantities of many hundreds…for each Tomahawk you can buy and keep on hand 10 or 20 Tomahawk killing Tor missiles…

    There is also the fact to consider that Russia’s Southern Military District is only two hours flight time from Syria…A large number of Russian fighter jets are a short scramble away…

    Fighter jets are also extremely good at shooting down cruise missiles…the MiG-31 supersonic interceptor was designed to do exactly this…with still the world’s most powerful phase array radar on a combat jet…

    Also any naval force in the Med attacking Russia in Syria is dangerously susceptible to for example TU22 supersonic bombers carrying ship-killing supersonic missiles with a 1,000 km range [Kh32]…

    A Tu22 in flight carrying THREE Kh22 anti-ship missiles…

    Each one of those monster missiles weighs SIX TONS…carries a 2,000 lb warhead that can sink any ship and flies at Mach 4.6…

    These and other air assets like AWACS and airborne jamming platforms can easily operate under the umbrella of the long range S400…

    The effect of these combat jets plus the ground based IADS is very symbiotic in terms of delivering an additional layer of capability…

    So we see the big picture that stealth proved to be a mirage in tackling the SEAD problem that arose after the Yom Kippur disaster, as the Serbs so emphatically proved in 1999…

    Airborne jamming and HARMS [also developed in the wake of the Yom Kippur disaster] have reached their inherent physical limits…while IADS on the Russian side has become truly formidable…

    Bottom line is like I said…the statements on this subject by Saker are laughable kindergarten stuff…the real world of air combat and SEAD doesn’t work on the basis of two juveniles firing bbs at each other until one runs out first…that’s just fucking stupid…

    Air combat and air defense is a highly technical area that should be left to those with the actual knowledge and training to discuss this issue meaningfully…

  107. This is what passes for analysis on the Zionazi end.

    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15068/erdogan-putin-nato-alarm-bells

    Primitive Bronze-Age Hebes try to use their words like big boys. It comes out slogan, slogan, slogan. Where did all the smart Jews go? These yids are the least convincing retards ever to bullshit over bongs.

    The funniest part is quoting blackmailed pedo fudgepacker Lindsay Graham invoking NATO Charter Article Square Root of Negative 1 (hint: it’s imaginary!) Graham, you little sleeve, it’s not in there.

    https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm

    Greece would be less of a sacrifice zone if they’d denounced NATO when the EU was stripping their assets.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  108. @-.5σ Ashkenazis

    This is what passes for analysis on the Zionazi end.

    How to become military and geopolitical “analyst” in the US:

    1. Graduate high-school, preferably some elite one;
    2. Avoid by any means entering any military academy or any military service with tactical-to-operational transition. Avoid working in real intelligence at the same level. We are not talking about serving as a grunt or a seaman, that is not even in the cards, and should be below Western “military analyst”;
    3. Enter any of these university “programs”: philosophy, political science, law, journalism, public relations, communications, conflict resolution, English language, theater and interpretive dance, with minoring in broadcasting and fashion;
    a) Avoid by all means studying real history;
    b) Geography;
    c) Operational Theory;
    d) Under no circumstances study Physics, Differential Equations, electronics and weapons;
    e) Read a lot of Tom Clancy and watch a lot of Hollywood movies, also keep a hand on the pulse of other similar “analytical” organizations;

    4. Find well-paying think-tank and try sucking to its bosses to get a job there, if not, and if your relatives left you couple billion dollars–organize one yourself (one may call it The Institute for Study of War, oh, wait–this one already exists) and offer you services to a highest bidder and toe the line (instructions can be obtained easily in D.C., including through embassies of foreign states);
    5. Write one’s own opinions and represent wishful thinking (and delusions) on wars, history, geopolitics and politics as “expertise”;
    6. Get Ph.D. thesis on The Influence of the Race and Gender on The Ballistic Properties of Modern Artillery’s Munitions or Influence of Judaism and Torah on the Evolution of the Operational Concepts of Hypersonic Weapons, or something like that;
    7. Expect to be invited to CNN and MSNBC.

    Works like a charm. Results of such “analysis”, as we all can observe around us, are a whopper of a success in every field. So, I think when the smoke will clear from the rubble a lot of gratitude and praise should be heaped on a wonderfully competent and objective American “analytical” class.

    • LOL: Daniel Rich
  109. @Herald

    It’s “dodgy” to abide by the terms of the NATO founding document?

    All that’s needed is a geographical definition of Europe for this purpose. I wouldn’t include any of turkey, but one might reasonably include the very western part, I suppose.

    • Agree: Herald
  110. anon[117] • Disclaimer says:
    @Robjil

    No news paper has covered the terrorism committed by their masters and blamed on their foreign “deplorable”

    OPCW Whistleblower Panel on the Douma attack of April 2018
    23 October, 2019

    Today WikiLeaks publishes a statement made by a panel that listened to testimony and reviewed evidence from a whistleblower from the OPCW (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) last week. To accompany this statement, Wikileaks is also publishing a previously leaked engineering assessment of the alleged chemical attack in Douma, Syria on April 7th last year. This assessment was omitted in the final report by the OPCW, which does not support its findings.
    WikiLeaks editor Kristinn Hrafnsson took part in the panel to review the testimony and documents from the OPCW whistleblower. He says: “The panel was presented with evidence that casts doubt on the integrity of the OPCW. Although the whistleblower was not ready to step forward and/or present documents to the public, WikiLeaks believes it is now of utmost interest for the public to see everything that was collected by the Fact Finding Mission on Douma and all scientific reports written in relation to the investigation.
    We call out to people within the OPCW to leak these documents securely to us via wikileaks.org/#submit” One of the panel members was Dr José Bustani, the first Director-General of the OPCW, who concluded that: “The convincing evidence of irregular behaviour in the OPCW investigation of the alleged Douma chemical attack confirms doubts and suspicions I already had. I could make no sense of what I was reading in the international press. Even official reports of investigations seemed incoherent at best. The picture is certainly clearer now, although very disturbing”
    https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/

    A whistleblower with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), responsible for conducting an independent investigation into the alleged chemical attack in the Syrian town of Douma on April 7, 2018, has presented WikiLeaks with a body of evidence suggesting the chemical weapons watchdog agency manipulated and suppressed evidence.
    A prior official OPCW report of the investigation issued last March found “reasonable grounds” for believing a toxic chemical was used against civilians, likely chlorine. Long prior to any independent investigators reaching the site, however, Washington had launched major tomahawk airstrikes against Damascus in retribution for “Assad gassing his own people”. –https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/wikileaks-releases-new-documents-questioning-syria-chemical-attack-narrative

    And when the Organisation for the Prevention of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) – which represents 193 member states throughout the world – reports on chlorine attacks in Syria, we assume we are hearing the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
    Until now. For in the last few days, there has emerged disturbing evidence that in its final report on the alleged use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime in the city of Douma last year, the OPCW deliberately concealed from both the public and the press the existence of a dissenting 15-page assessment of two cylinders which had supposedly contained molecular chlorine – perhaps the most damning evidence against the Assad regime in the entire report
    It is difficult to underestimate the seriousness of this manipulative act by the OPCW

    In a response to the conservative author Peter Hitchens, who also writes for the Mail on Sunday – he is of course the brother of the late Christopher Hitchens – the OPCW admits that its so-called technical secretariat “is conducting an internal investigation about the unauthorised [sic] release of the document”.

    Then it adds: “At this time, there is no further public information on this matter and the OPCW is unable to accommodate [sic] requests for interviews”. It’s a tactic that until now seems to have worked: not a single news media which reported the OPCW’s official conclusions has followed up the story of the report which the OPCW suppressed.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/douma-syria-opcw-chemical-weapons-chlorine-gas-video-conspiracy-theory-russia-a8927116.html

  111. Krollchem says:
    @FB

    Thanks for fleshing out the reality of the Russian air defense systems. I could never understand why the Saker grossly underestimated the combined Russian/Syrian air defense systems. Likewise the capabilities of NATO forces are overestimated and poorly run by what Col. Hackworth called “Perfumed Princes”.

    I followed the NATO war against FRY closely and fully agree with your analysis. Really admired the Serbian use of decoys (fake tanks, wooden Mig-29s and artillery pieces made of irrigation pipe and rubber tires) and false radar targets (microwave oven arrays). I will also never forget the long line of shiny tanks and helicopter formations as the Serbian forces exited the Pristina base. As Stratfor pointed out, the NATO forces would not have been able to invade the Kosovo across the pass and thus resorted to massive destruction of civilian infrastructure as well as the Chinese embassy.

    In closing , I also really enjoyed the flankerbandit analysis of the attack on the Saudi oil facilities at MoA. It was extremely informative as well as humorous in tone.

    Thanks again for the education.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    , @FB
  112. FvS says:

    While this is always carefully obfuscated by the legacy AngloZionist propaganda, the US, Israeli and KSA ground forces are only capable of murdering civilians or primitive resistance forces en masse.

    I’m opposed to empire building, but I guess I’ll stick up for the American military here. In pretty much all of these conflicts, U.S. forces are actually the only ones constrained by any rules of war. They’ve also been fighting a lot of insurgencies. In order to lead a successful counter-insurgency, you either have to win over the general populace so that the insurgents lose their support (very difficult for an invading power to do, especially if civilians are still being killed through collateral damage) or you have to be absolutely ruthless and start killing everyone. Guess which option the American military will never be allowed to choose.

    • Replies: @Republic
  113. @Krollchem

    Do you have a link to that MoA piece?

    • Replies: @Krollchem
  114. FB says: • Website
    @Krollchem

    Always glad to be of some use, Kroll…

    Yes the air war against Serbia was a disaster…

    I often go to Lambeth as he gives a good technical overview of the order of battle and how things went bad…but he is underplaying things a little [not mentioning the second F177 killed]…and he even gets the day wrong…being the THIRD night of the bombing campaign that Maj Zelko’s Nighthawk was downed, not the fourth…

    Still, even Lambeth admitted this…

    Fortunately for NATO, the Serb IADS did not include the latest-generation SAM equipment currently available on the international arms market.

    Referring to the S300…

    At the time, the downing of the ‘invisible’ US ‘stealth’ aircraft was a huge shocker…in the editor’s note preceding the article…

    Editorial Abstract: Just as the attacks of 11 September 2001 refocused national attention on terrorism, so did the shootdown of an F-117 stealth aircraft over Kosovo in 1999 serve as a wake-up call for the Air Force to improve tactics, techniques, and procedures relating to the suppression of enemy air defenses

    My emphasis…YES IT WAS THAT BIG…and still is a case study taught at the Academy and pored over by strategists…

    The F117 wreckage in the Belgrade Aviation Museum…

    Also very relevant to this discussion is that the SERBS had no air force…they did have a couple of old and quite unservicable MiG29s and there were a couple of decent dogfights, resulting in a couple of those getting downed, or in other cases the MiG backing out [one was a quite spirited battle where the MiG pilot aggressively went after a couple of F16s before being forced to turn around and bug out]…but those MiGs were really in awful shape…reportedly not even working radar…

    This is not the case with the Russians, of course, who could put into the air a force of fighters, interceptors, AWACS and the like that would just in and of itself discourage any kind of attack in the first place…

    Here is a map showing the flight distance from the Rostov on Don region where the 4th Air and Air Defence Forces are based…It’s less than a leisurely two hour hop subsonically…one hour if you really want to go fast…

    Just looking at this air army which includes several fighter, bomber and other aviation regiments…this is not something you want to seriously tangle with…

    The Russians also have an air base in Armenia which cuts the distance in half, if they want to use that as a jumping off point…

    Also worth mentioning here…the Serb commander of the 250’th Missile Brigade…which brought down both F117s, plus the F16 of then Col David Goldfein [now Gen Goldfein and the USAF Chief of Staff]…took a visit [many years later] from the man he shot down…here’s a brief trailer but the whole documentary is also on youtube…

    Btw…I have a more thorough analysis of the Houthi Quds-1 cruise missile on my website…

  115. Pegasus says:
    @Ole C G Olesen

    “it is difficult to predict … especially about the future … a danish Humourist has said ” and for this piece became a Nobel laureate in Physics … a truly impressive man!

  116. Republic says:
    @FvS

    “I’m opposed to empire building, but I guess I’ll stick up for the American military here. In pretty much all of these conflicts, U.S. forces are actually the only ones constrained by any rules of war”.

    US forces over the years have committed countless acts of War crimes. What are these rules of War that the US are constrained by?

    The attack of 2003 on Iraq was a war crime of the highest order. In Nuremberg, Justice Jackson stated that initiation of a war of aggression was a supreme crime, a war crime.

    • Replies: @FvS
  117. @FB

    Cue PeterAUS… “but…but…Von Clausewitz said….”

    • LOL: FB
  118. FvS says:
    @Republic

    Just compare and contrast the methods of the various actors in the region. Americans look like choir boys in comparison.

  119. Smith says:

    Well, I’m happy that the US is getting out I guess.

    As said, let the carrion-eaters fight each other while the US slurps on oil.

  120. anonymous[307] • Disclaimer says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    Of course, how many times we should tell you that Russia is ally to and part of the CRIMINAL west. I am glad that people finally realized and accepted this fact.

  121. kemerd says:

    @FB
    Thank you for your contribution on the forum on air defense. I find them very valuable.

    But, I think you did not address one important question that Martyanov alludes to be impossible: would it be possible for the air defense systems to keep their protective umbrella over their area of responsibility while they are on the move? Of course, the launchers can move as there are many of them. But, how about the radar which incidentally is the only target that anti-radiation missiles can hit? I suspect the answer is yes when networked with other radars in the area but that is my layman’s conclusion as the Russians say their radars are integrated. Would you please confirm? How do radars coordinate their moves under attack while guiding missiles in the air to their targets?

    A second issue is the reloading time/ammunition: cruise missiles cannot target mobile systems but they surely can target buildings, depots, runways, etc. Since air defense systems are there to protect those valuable assets, they would have to use their “rounds” until they run out of ammunition. Afterwards, heavy bombers can come to hit all valuable target with impunity as air defense batteries without ammunition is useless. I think that was the point that Martyanov was trying to make (with his less than cordial style) and thus referring to Russian counter-attack capabilities from afar. I think his example of 120 missiles is too low as the latest attack in Syria where Russian missiles even did not engage shows. The real saturation level appears to be much higher, perhaps an order of magnitude but obviously there exists a finite saturation point.

    As I understand, your point is that US/NATO does not have that kind of capability necessary to really saturate Russian air defenses to actually destroy the airbase, even when Russians operate in purely defensive posture. That point is, of course, moot as it is clear that Russians would not give a chance to the attackers to take attack positions en masse and would not allow a salvo of 1000 missile to be fired at the first place. But it would be interesting to know what would be the assessment of air-defense professional on the actual numbers and kind of weapons that would be used for such an attack. Again, not to suppress the air defense systems but to destroy the Russian base as that would be the actual purpose of any such attack.

    BTW, does my summary reflect your thinking? You mentioned you would give an idea of how you would plan such an attack but obviously did not have much time to elaborate as you spent quite some energy while exchanging with Martyanov. Would you summarize how such an attack would look like?

    Thanks again, appreciated

    • Replies: @FB
  122. Roger says:
    @FB

    “Wow…what a rambling, incoherent and completely meaningless waste of time…”

    “I honestly tried reading this 7,000 word ode to irrelevance…but finally had to call it quits after wasting about half an hour of god-given time…”

    Let me get this straight. You spent half an hour reading this ‘rambling, incoherent, and completely meaningless ode to irrelevance’, then finally gave up? Why did it take you so long before you quit?

    I don’t know how long it took me to read the whole thing, but I am pretty sure it wasn’t longer than half an hour. Nevertheless, if I start reading something and find out that it appears to be what you call “a rambling, incoherent and completely meaningless waste of time…”, I stop reading as soon as I figure that out. Why waste my time on something I find useless? Why did you waste your time on something you found useless…unless you had an axe of some sort to grind? In that case, it is perfectly understandable why you would slog through the mud to find something, anything, you could refute.

    Get a grip!

    • Replies: @L.K
  123. L.K says:
    @Roger

    Roger to FB

    Why did you waste your time on something you found useless…unless you had an axe of some sort to grind?

    He(FB) DOES(have an axe to grind).

    In that case, it is perfectly understandable why you would slog through the mud to find something, anything, you could refute.

    Yep.

  124. Captain Orangemane pirates Syrian oil;
    Greed no end in taking a losing war’s spoil.
    Today he boasts the death of al-Baghdadi;
    But soon he’ll face sacking by al-Pelosi.

    • Replies: @anon
  125. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @SeekerofthePresence

    LOL. That’s the bitching and moaning, out of the loop al-Pelosi.

    Now, where are the anticipated doubters that al-Baghdadi is really dead? (And is he/was he a Jewish born Mossad agent, after all?)

    From Jake Morphonios: “Lewinsky testified that Clinton told her a foreign gov’t had bugged their lines during their phone-sex. Turns out it was the Israeli Mossad. They used 30 hrs of tape to blackmail Clinton into ending an FBI investigation into an Israeli spy.”

    How the Israeli Mossad Blackmailed Bill Clinton with Lewinsky Tapes

    (If anyone actually watches all of this, let us know if it’s worth it.)

    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  126. @nsa

    Ouch!!
    But being Canadian myself I find your assessment to be correct.

  127. @anon

    Thanks for the video, well worth watching.
    Gives a very good psychological profile of our Prez,
    especially as regards his #2 fan (after himself), Israel.

    In Israel, according to investigator Jake Morphonios, there are large Trump signs on walls with “Make Israel Great Again.”

    As with Clinton and Epstein, Israel’s Hoover-like ears don’t miss much.
    Listening devices would seem to be the Mossad’s favorite sex toy.

  128. Erebus says:
    @FB

    and kemerd as well…

    …the result is the creation of A2/AD zones…anti-access, area denial…which are now the bane of USAF air combat practitioners and theoreticians…

    There is simply not a way to effectively attack these zones…

    This is of course quite true, but the A2/AD zones in Syria are a relatively recent development that came long after the strategic implications of Russia’s entrance into Syria had become apparent.

    The fact is that the Russians had deployed little in the way of AD until they lost an SU-24 to a rogue Turk F-16 some 7 wks into their campaign. They didn’t begin creating an A2/AD zone until well into 2016, and even then it remained un-integrated with the Syrians’ own systems until much later than that.

    During those months of AD vulnerability, they nevertheless enjoyed almost complete freedom of action and began raising eyebrows across the region with a textbook demonstration of military efficiency. Within a couple of weeks it became obvious to all clear-eyed observers that they would become a serious challenge to the Empire’s hold on the M.E if allowed to continue. IOW, they presented an immediate strategic threat to Imperial interests in the region.

    Given that the petro-dollar that underpins the Empire’s global power is itself underpinned in no small measure by CENTCOM’s hold on the M.E., the threat was global. This can’t be overstated.

    Faced with these threats, the USM sat on its hands from Day 1 onwards. In my estimation, fear of losses can account for NATO’s reluctance to engage in Yugoslavia, but it can’t account for what amounts to a stand-down in a strategically critical node of Empire – especially against a lightly defended expeditionary force that was impressing those of the Empire’s allies & proxies that it wasn’t bombing the crap out of. If the Pentagon really thought the Russians were going headlong into a quagmire and decided to let them, they made a world-historical strategic blunder. Maybe that’s so, but I’d think it’s much more likely that they started planning a campaign for their removal within hours/days of the Russians’ commencement of operations.

    The only thing I can see to account for the USM’s stand-down during those critical months is that they were put in zugzwang when 26 Kalibrs landed amongst takfiris in Syria only a few days after Russia’s air campaign began. Their launch versatility, range and precision made it clear that Russia’s expeditionary force in Syria was not isolated, and so any Pentagon planners were put on notice that any attempt to remove them would bring unanswerable counterattacks on theatre assets from stand-off range. With that, the Pentagon (and a few analysts) knew they could maintain their grip on the M.E. only if they were prepared to take the fight to Russian soil. That, in reality, is what they stood down from.

    IOW, the Kalibr demonstration moved the goalposts. In fact, they moved ’em so far as to change the game entirely and the Pentagon was no longer in it. That 7 wk (or months) window of apparent opportunity had, in fact, never opened. I don’t think one can easily exaggerate the impact on the world’s balance of power as capitals around the world watched history’s largest military stand down before a small expeditionary force.

    The tectonic shifts that resulted from those 26 Kalibrs (and further stand-off demonstrations, incl Russian diplomacy and continued military efficiency) are now clearly visible. Turkey is on its way out of NATO, which will shatter it. The Koreas are making kissy-kissy. Japan is squirming in the USM’s grip. M.E. rivals are discussing rapprochement under a Russian proposed regional security umbrella. Europe is in turmoil.

    Most importantly, in fact pivotally, Western Central Banks as well as global financial institutions such as the IMF are now openly talking about a post-USD world. Everything always follows the money. So will the Empire.

    • Disagree: utu
  129. alpha says:

    >ukronazi
    >slow motion genocide of palestinians

    lol, why people who presumably lean right-wing (and therefore should know better) write such bs?

  130. @Erebus

    In fact, they moved ’em so far as to change the game entirely and the Pentagon was no longer in it.

    What many people also forget is this:

    https://warisboring.com/a-russian-fleet-gathers-near-syria/

    At that time many didn’t understand a significance of that deployment which provided a screen against USN. It did deter US assault on Syria. Obviously, a variety of butt-hurt comments in Western media followed. As always it also demonstrated utter professional incompetence of America’s “analytical” class.

  131. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    Ok…so there are some fundamental factual gaps in what you have presented here…which are in fact crucial…

    Let me just recap your argument here…first, that the small Russian air contingent that arrived on the scene in fall of 2015 was operating without air defense cover…this is false…since the ships deployed to Syria at the time had the naval version of the S300, plus naval versions of some of the other SAMs I previously mentioned…

    Next, you posit that it was the demonstration of the Kalibr cruise missile strikes that deterred any aggressive moves by the US and its allies against the Russian contingent in Syria…

    This is even more wrongheaded, because the Kalibr is NOT a game-changing weapon…it is really just another cruise missile and is really no more capable than the US Tomahawk…

    Let’s begin there, with a discussion about cruise missiles and where they fit in…

    The most important thing to note is that a cruise missile is basically a pilotless aircraft…the very first Russian cruise missile from the 1950s was in fact a MiG15 airframe without the cockpit and carried under the wing of the large Tupolev Tu16 jet bomber…

    If I could get ahold of one of these, I’m pretty sure I could cut a hole in the top and put a seat in it and have myself an open-cockpit MiG15…LOL [although I’d have to put it on floats, since rigging up a landing gear would be too much work]…

    Here’s a Tu16 ‘Badger’ in flight…with the ‘Kometa’ cruise missiles seen hanging underwing…

    These were produced in great numbers as antiship weapons and also evolved into land attack variants…the idea obviously was to have a Kamikaze weapon without having to sacrifice a pilot…

    Today’s T-Hawk and Kalibr are just an evolution of that Kometa cruise ‘missile’…just as today’s aircraft have evolved and become INCREMENTALLY better than the passenger jets and fighter jets and bombers of the 1950s…

    But cruise ‘missiles’ are still the same type of aircraft…a jet powerplant and wings that sustain it in flight at subsonic jet aircraft speeds…it is not actually a ‘missile’ because it is in fact a pilotless aircraft…

    So there is nothing new or significant about the Kalibr…it may be a little more capable than the T-Hawk [Russians do have quite excellent engineers and designers] and their industry is much more focused and serious…

    In fact, as I dissect on my website about the Houthi Quds-1 cruise missile…its capability is in fact only INCREMENTALLY less than something in the class of the T-Hawk or Kalibr…[but still good enough to scare the KSA into suing for peace]…

    So the Kalibr is not the big deal that various know-nothings in the laughable US media made it out to be after those long range strikes in Syria…

    It is worth noting though that the US air defenses consist mostly of the Patriot, which is a little suspect, even against cruise missiles…[the US has never developed something analogous to the Tor anti-cruise missile system]…

    The second important aspect where this line of thinking falls apart is the dynamics of escalation…

    Let’s continue the Saker proposition here about a hypothetical US cruise missile attack on Russian assets in Syria…such an attack would involve USN ships launching those T-Hawks…the obvious and RECIPROCAL [and justifiably DEFENSIVE] response would be the Russians launching strikes on those same ships that carried out the attack…

    This would NOT involve Kalibrs because they are not capable of the anti-shipping role [just like T-Hawks are not capable of hitting mobile air defense targets]…

    The response would come by way of any number of anti-shipping weapons that the Soviet Union long ago developed and which are quite deadly…I already mentioned the Tu22M bomber that is capable of carrying the KH22/32 missiles, which have a range of 600 to 1,000 km…

    That is a serious standoff range which means those Tu22M bombers taking off from the southern military district could be in position to launch those antiship missiles within half an hour flight time [the Tu22M is supersonic and will quickly reach Mach 1.8]…and possibly while still over the Black Sea…depending on where those attacking US ships would be…

    The Kh22/32 missiles are near hypersonic [M4.6 maximum speed] and pretty much unstoppable once they are cut loose…they would hit their targets within MINUTES…

    So within an hour of a T-Hawk launch from USN ships, those ships could in fact be dead without much fuss…the USN has been well cognizant of this fact of life for many decades, since this weapons system was developed a long time ago and epitomizes the Soviet doctrine of an effective asymmetrical counter to the powerful US surface fleet…in fact this system is still the main deterrent for said fleet…

    Admiral Charles R. Larson, Commander in Chief, US Pacific Fleet, sits in the cockpit of a Soviet Tu-22M Backfire aircraft during a visit to a Soviet air base during the latter Cold War period (US DoD).

    I think the look on the admiral’s face tells the story…nothing has changed since then in terms of stopping a near-hypersonic anti-ship missile with standoff range that puts it outside the combat radius of carrier-borne jet fighters…

    The Tu22M is still the mainstay of Russia’s anti-naval deterrent…and this large bomber [it weighs about as much as a Boeing 757 fully loaded, but flies twice as fast]..and the KH22/32 antiship missiles it carries have been continuously modernized and improved over the years…Russia has about 70 of these in service…that’s quite a bit of punching power right there…

    No US military planner is going to contemplate a strike on any Russian assets in Syria without taking this beast into account…

    Also, Russian ships and subs in the area could launch similar antiship and antisub missiles like the P500, P700 or P1000…

    So the idea that Russian military would decide to launch a Kalibr barrage on say the USAF Al Udeid air base in Qatar…as a response to USN ships firing T-Hawks is not sound because it is not necessary, nor reciprocal and would be seen as an escalation that requires an even heavier response from the US side…

    The military chiefs on both sides are very mindful of escalation dynamics…neither side wants to see things spiral out of control, to a possible nuclear exchange scenario…I’m sure Martyanov would agree with that…

    Now…as to your idea that the small air contingent originally deployed to Syria was without air defense cover…this is of course not factual…

    From the end of September 2015, while in eastern Mediterranean, the [Moskva] cruiser was charged with the air defences for the Russian aviation group based near the Syrian town of Latakia that conducted the air campaign in Syria.

    On 25 November 2015, after the 2015 Russian Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown, it was reported that Moskva, armed with the S-300F surface-to-air missile system, would be deployed near the coastal Syria-Turkey border. In 2016, she was replaced by sister ship Varyag in the eastern Mediterranean Sea.

    There were smaller ships there also with the naval equivalents of the Buk, Osa and Tor air defense systems…so that was in fact an IADS right from the get-go…

    Now those ship-based SAMs are certainly not equivalent to the A2/AD zone that has been subsequently built up in Syria [as continued provocations and deterioration in the political climate made that necessary]…but it was enough to ensure that a surprise attack [which would necessarily be quite small in terms of SEAD capability, since it takes a while to move such assets into place] could be repulsed…

    Now let’s look at this entire question from another perspective…what would the Russian military staff demand in terms of protecting the expeditionary force to Syria in 2015…?

    That is quite simple…they certainly would NEVER go along with a hare-brained scheme that would allow the Russian contingent to be attacked and possibly destroyed…thus also destroying Russia’s reputation and that of its armaments industry…

    Would Putin go along with Saker’s idea that ‘sure, we’ll put those aircraft into Syria to bomb the terrorists…but what the hell, if the Americans decide to take them out, we’ll simply shrug and go home [after using up our BBs]’…

    It seems quite unnecessary to underline that the real world does not work this way…no military on earth [much less that of a major power] goes outside its borders to conduct operations without a backup plan…and a backup plan for that backup plan…

    The fact of the matter is as I have outlined here already and on other threads, that the Russians went into Syria FULLY PREPARED for any eventuality…that’s how military planning works…[again I think Martyanov would have to agree]…

    At the time in 2015 when Russia went in, the US and its Nato puppets were super hostile to Russia about Ukraine and Crimea…they were boiling mad…Killary and Obomber were talking openly about a no-fly zone in Syria [LOL]…

    Do you think Gen Valery Gereasimov [Russian Chief of Staff] and his men were simply going to roll the dice…that is incredibly stupid…

    Does this guy look like he has anything to do with STUPID…?

    Yet some here would have us believe exactly that…

    You can’t have it both ways…either the Russian entry into Syria was quite stupid because they came in knowing they could ultimately be ‘overwhelmed’…OR they knew exactly what they were doing…as time and many provocations and tensions have borne out…

  132. Mike P says:
    @FB

    I wouldn’t know whether or not the Kalibr weapon could have become crucial in a showdown in Syria; my knowledge of military affairs is zero. However, assuming you are right and Kalibr would not have played a major role even in the case of a showdown: what do you make of that demonstration?

    Erebus suggested the Kalibr attack was meant to show that the expeditionary force was not isolated, and that Russia was prepared to join the fight from within its own territory if needed. That still seems to make sense; whether or not that particular weapon itself would have played a prominent role is interesting from a technical point of view, but seems irrelevant to the political message.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @FB
  133. @Erebus

    According to Rothschild, whoever controls the currency wins.

    If the US lost world dollar hegemony, then its military gigantocracy and colossal welfare state might face collapse, like air going out of a party balloon. It could no longer print infinite money for forever wars. $1 Trillion yearly deficits would have to be trimmed.

    That could mean the end of foreign adventures and even the breakup of the country into fiefdoms. Small is beautiful.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  134. FB says: • Website
    @kemerd

    …would it be possible for the air defense systems to keep their protective umbrella over their area of responsibility while they are on the move?

    Ok…you have to understand how these air defense systems are structured, in terms of their individual components…

    Let’s start with a diagram of the S400…

    Here we see one ‘battery’ or ‘battalion’…we can see that it consists of multiple elements, including command post, an acquistion radar, up to six engagement or ‘fire control’ radars…all of this supporting up to 16 TELs [transporter erector launcher]…the image here is more than a decade old and specifies only 12 TELs…

    Additionally, at the bottom are extra elements such as special radars for low-observable aircraft, plus passive emitter locator sensors that are designed to pick up enemy radar signals without turning on your own radar…

    Now we can see that each of these elements is truck mounted and mobile…so the plan in a combat situation is to disperse the various elements and move them as necessary to another location, in the event that their location is found by the enemy…

    This applies to the radars especially, since the enemy will want to locate those, since they are the only equipment that is emitting detectable radio signals…the latest info on the S400 is that they can set up and be ready to fire in five minutes…

    The command module communicates with all the elements and directs the action…all of the elements are linked by secure microwave communication…

    Additionally, each S400 battery comes with a Pantsir S, which is used to defend those radars from anti-radiation missiles that would be used against them…

    Now there are four such batteries in an S400 REGIMENT…which means a total of 64 launchers, each with four tubes for a total of 264 missiles of the LARGE variety…each missile tube can also carry four smaller missiles for shorter range work…so potentially you could have 1,056 short range missiles in a SINGLE S400 regiment…

    A regiment would be four times that much…

    So we see here that the answer is obvious…these elements are designed to be mobile and on the move because this is in fact the big revolution in air defense systems…mobility…as I noted previously this was already demonstrated in the early 1970s with the SA6 [aka 2K12 Kub]

    And again in the Kosovo war, where those same by then outdated Kubs proved hard to kill…and the Serbs improvised a quick teardown and relocation of the FIXED S125s which killed the two F117s and the F16…

    So dispersal and mobility is the key…

    As it relates to the Syrian contingent, any move to conduct a SEAD operation would necessarily be telegraphed and picked up by the Russians, which would lead to those air defense elements dispersing in a way that is regularly exercised and planned for in advance…

    So again, the cruise missiles would be irrelevant in terms of killing those air defenses, since the locations would not be known…

    You are correct in stating that cruise missile would be used to target fixed installations and even runways…so those would need to be defending by systems such as the Tor, which I mentioned previously…

    I won’t get into a long discussion about this because the issue is about the AIR DEFENSES which are indeed capable of withstanding a concerted SEAD operation…and thus capable of keepign enemy aircraft out of the airspace…

    That is the goal…you want to hold on to the airspace, the ground facilities are secondary…

    For instance even if the Hmeimim air base comes under a severe attack that cannot be beaten back…you can always withdraw those airplanes to another airfield or even land them on highways…this is part of the Russian air combat doctrine…

    But as long as you control the airspace, you deny the opponent the ability to threaten your presence…even huge losses of ground infrastructure do not change this basic formula…

    Btw…destroying a major airbase is going to require control of the airspace so you can fly freely overhead and rip up the runways with runway-buster munitions…cruise missiles can do some damage, but as we saw in the attack on the Shayrat airfield in 2017, they were not able to hit the runways, even though that was a major objective…

    The reason is that electronic warfare can degrade the cruise missile accuracy in the terminal phase…so the ones that slip by that you don’t take out with the Tor and other air defenses, can at least be disrupted so they don’t tear up the runways…

    So just to refocus here as a summary…the purpose of the IADS is to deny the airspace to ENEMY AIRCRAFT…

    If you can do that, and there is certainly every reason to expect that the Russian IADS in Syria is capable of fully denying the airspace to even a huge and concerted force of let’s say comparable to the 1,000 aircraft that attacked Yugoslavia in 1999…then there is no way to actually FORCE YOU OUT…

    It doesn’t matter then what kind of damage the base itself sustains…if you continue to control the airspace you win…simple as that…

    Now I have already discussed what the response would be if the base were attacked…and those response options are quite effective…

  135. utu says:
    @Erebus

    Your analysis is simplistic. The Russian contingent could have been wiped out in 2 hours if Israel and US wanted to do so. No question about it! But obviously the US under Obama did not want an escalation. Obama was conflicted about Syria and did not want to commit similar support as he did in Libya, so the destabilization was taking place on the ground only with money from Saudi Arabia and some Gulf States. Still w/o air support Assad’s regime was losing fast.

    ISIS was a sideshow but had a great propaganda value to intervene which Obama and Europeans were resisting. Yet a coalition was created to bomb ISIS but bombing of Syrian regime targets was neither requested nor authorized by Obama.

    We will never know how Bataclan November 15, 2015 attack was organized who was behind it (qui bono: Russia+Israel) but clearly it gave a great support to Russian intervention in Syria and calls in France to join Russians in Syria were heard. Thus a cold shower had to be turned on the pro-Russian enthusiasm. This was done by ambushing and shooting down of Russian Su-24 by Turkey 11 days later. All NATO countries had to toe the line then and stand behind its NATO member Turkey. No more cheering for Russia!

    The US was conflicted about Syria. CIA and DIA were working against each other in Syria. DIA when General Dempsey was the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and General Flynn was in DIA authorized sabotaging of CIA shipments of weapons to Syrian rebels via Turkey and maintained open lines with Assad’s regime via Berlin and Moscow.

    So it is possible that Obama wanted to leave the hot potato of Syria to Netanyahu in his passive-aggressive manner: You wanted to carry out your f… Yinon Plan in Syria, so now deal with it and all consequences and deal with Turkey that will move in.

    And Netanyahu ha dot give up on Obama and had to deal with the unfolding situation in Syria and the possibility of Syria being overrun by Turkey once Assad’s regime collapsed. So the scope of Yinon Plan had to be modified by bringing in Russia to stop the fall of Assad regime and keep control of Iranian influence in Syria. It is possible that it was Netanyahu who actually egged on Putin to take great risk and get involved in Syria. So no attempts were made to stop Russians because Russia moved in having the blessings and assurances of Netanyahu.

    The bottom line is that now Putin is Netanyahu’s bitch and does fighting for him because Obama refused to be one. In his parting shot Obama refused to veto the UN resolution on behalf of Netanayahu and it was Gen. Flynn who was making calls to Russian ambassador on behalf of the president in waiting Donald Trump imploring Amabassador Sergey Kislyak to do the vetoing. This had bad consequence for Gen. Flynn and showed Trump’s great weakness as he was not able to protect Gen. Flynn.

    • LOL: L.K, FB
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @L.K
  136. @utu

    Your analysis is simplistic.

    Yours, however, is a complete delirium of a person who has zero qualifications but is very big on a butt-hurt. So, being, I assume Finnish, cuck you vent your butt-hurt by writing all kinds of BS. Granted, having zero knowledge of Russia. But then again, you are typical for discussion boards dominated by so called “alt-right” daydreamers.

  137. @SeekerofthePresence

    According to Rothschild, whoever controls the currency wins.

    Mr. Rothschild thinks largely within the framework of the 19-20th century geopolitics and classic usury . It doesn’t work like this anymore, in fact, it never did. I believe similar discussion took place somewhere here at Unz and while Rothschild may be big on banking and currency, he, definitely, as a body of overwhelming empirical evidence has shown, is not big on real power. No real military power–no control of currency, period. Especially in the times when some loitering stand-off munition may have your name on it (literally). De-dollarization is in a full swing and it cannot be stopped unless the United States was to sustain a catastrophic military defeat after which it would not really matter who controls currency.

    • Replies: @SeekerofthePresence
  138. @Mike P

    Erebus suggested the Kalibr attack was meant to show that the expeditionary force was not isolated, and that Russia was prepared to join the fight from within its own territory if needed.

    Do not forget also that there were also launches of X-101s from strategic bombers (Tu-95 and Tu-160), those have a range of 5,500 kilometers. It was the start what today I call “a revelation mode”. It was rolling out one cutting edge technology after another, with today continuing with Russia helping China in terms of missile attack warning system and Turkey getting ready to buy (in addition to S-400s) 36 Su-35s. In between of all that was March 1, 2018 arriving of real revolution in military affairs and it seems “revelations” will continue for a while. Grossly unprofessional “mission” to Arkhangelsk region to gather samples and info on allegedly Burevestnik’s (Petrel’s) failure by US intelligence people shows the level of desperation. Any US military base in Europe and ME is completely “covered” by a variety of stand-off weapons. Well, realistically US proper too is within “range”.

    • Agree: Mike P
    • Replies: @Mike P
  139. Mike P says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    No real military power–no control of currency, period.

    It is truly amazing that the rulers of the U.S. – the real, not the elected ones – would let it come to this, to allow the U.S. military to be completely outclassed by Russia. Of course, it is good news for the rest of mankind, so I’m not complaining – I’m actually rooting for the Russians and the Chinese, may their ascent and Uncle Sam’s demise be speedy and complete – but it is mind-boggling nevertheless.

    • Agree: Robjil
  140. FB says: • Website
    @Mike P

    …what do you make of that [Kalibr] demonstration?

    Like I said…it’s a good cruise missile, but not a game changer…it’s still a cruise missile…

    The Houthi cruise missile attack on KSA was in fact more of an eye opener, because it showed that building a quite decent cruise missile is now within reach of players that do not necessarily have the industrial infrastructure previously required to build and deploy precision guided munitions…

    Certainly the Kalibr has not ‘moved any goalposts’…what has moved goalposts is the Avangard hypersonic boost glide vehicle…

  141. utu says:
    @FB

    In that air war, the Syrians made quick work of the Israeli Air Force…downing an astounding 102 Israeli fighter jets in the opening hours…

    But nine years later ” in 1982, Israel launched Operation Mole Cricket 19 targeting Syrian SAM sites using nearly a hundred F-15 and F-4 Phantom fighters supported by E-2 radar planes. In a matter of hours, they succeeded in knocking out thirty Syrian SAM sites without losing a single airplane, demonstrating how a combination of electronic warfare and standoff antiradiation missiles could be used to methodically take apart even an integrated air-defense network.”

    S-400: The Air Force’s Ultimate Nightmare or Over-hyped?
    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/s-400-air-forces-ultimate-nightmare-or-over-hyped-26016

    • Replies: @utu
  142. @Andrei Martyanov

    Hope your answer is correct. Long live de-dollarization!
    It would hopefully make perpetual war unaffordable and slow the rise of the welfare mega-state.

    Of course your comment invites the question,
    Whom does the military work for?

    Does it report to the Commander-in-Chief?
    Whom does he report to: the Deep State.

    The Deep State, it seems to me, is a syndicate of Pentagon and IDF officials; FBI, CIA, Mossad; CFR, Trilateralists, Illuminati; banksters and CEOs, especially defense and media; assorted NWOers. Perhaps such a quintuple grouping is not unlike the Five Families.

    Seems to me the authorities running the country are NOT: the Congress, Executive, courts, Pentagon, or corporations; but rather a dark hand over-arching those institutions who see themselves as World Imperator.

  143. @utu

    Russian S-400 Capability Overrated: Swedish Defense Research Agency

    Read attentively this, for warmup.

    https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2019/10/i-think-i-owe-it-to-my-readers.html

    Sweden defense “analysts” are about the same phenomena as Jewish Eskimos. In general, it is a fine Western tradition to allow people with degrees in drama and fashion to express their opinions on this they have no clue about. That is why combined West finds itself in a deep hole, because Western “expertise” in military is about the same as my expertise in Chinese choreography.

    • Troll: L.K
  144. @Mike P

    but it is mind-boggling nevertheless.

    It is, but then again, when was the last time Boston was bombed and how many panzer divisions perished on Cleveland-Chicago axis? Zero. It is next to impossible to explain to people who have no culture of continental warfare and everything it brings with it what does it mean and how it is fought. It is beyond their experiences. No US servicemen ever fought in modern history having any worry that his wife (or girlfriend) will be raped and killed, property burned, his town destroyed, parents killed, brothers and sister die from hunger if he retreats. No one, ever. So BS on the industrial scale (including direct falsifying of history) not to mention bottom line and stock options ruled, rule and will continue to rule, while modern war will develop on its own, away from most American technological and doctrinal options. Some people in the US understand that (Ochmanek, Macgregor, Davies, others) but they are not the ones whose actual expertise is in demand. As Sergei Gorshkov used to say: the problem with the Americans is that they don’t follow their own doctrine(c). Nowadays, there is NO doctrine just rah-rah and PC BS. That’s the danger, because once actual modern warfare is experienced against peer, the result could be devastating. It will also be impossible to declare victory and leave–different circumstances.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  145. @SeekerofthePresence

    Whom does the military work for?

    The best answer could be provided (in re: US military) not by me, I am just a passerby. Colonel Patrick Lang can professionally answer this question here; in fact, I believe he has an article on that here at Unz and, I am sure, Phil Giraldi can too. Plus some American military personnel who is present on this discussion boards. From what I observe currently, the United States is not only non-agreement capable entity, it is also ungovernable one and I have literally zero insight into the balance of power in the top military-political-intelligence echelons in the US to give any competent answer on that. I would, however, assume that US Armed Forces are not homogeneous at all and are split, same as the so called US “elites”. It is unprecedented situation in the US history. Any parallels with antebellum are a stretch. Different time, different forces involved.

  146. @FB

    “Does this guy look like he has anything to do with STUPID…?”

    I don’t know; you know him personally?

  147. Erebus says:
    @FB

    … the Kalibr is NOT a game-changing weapon…it is really just another cruise missile and is really no more capable than the US Tomahawk…

    Well, Jane’s thinks it is.

    The Kalibr and its variants, as you well know are a generation ahead of the Tomahawk due to…

    – much higher precision (CEP 3M vs 10M),
    – supersonic terminal phase capabilities (3 stage, dropping jet engine & firing rocket),
    – launch versatility (air, sub-surface & surface ships (even small corvettes) and land)…

    … but the real reason it changed the game is that Pentagon war planners were not only forced to consider war against a stand-off peer for the first time in decades (encompassing whole careers), the only war they could plan would necessarily involve Russian territory. That’s a qualitatively different war than taking a few, relatively undeveloped bases out in a limited war zone. Qualitatively different because taking the war to Russia places the US homeland squarely in the line of fire. Lucy ain’t never seen the kind of ‘splainin’ the Pentagon/POTUS would have to do when things started blowing up in Norfolk and San Diego.

    Parenthetically, you may recall that the US claimed 2 0r 4 of the Caspian Kalibrs crashed en route in northern Iran. Judging by the photos then circulated, they sorta did. What was found were the jet engines and aft sections that were jettisoned when the missiles went supersonic.

    As Martyanov points out, the Russians then just kept rolling out newer, more capable weaponry as their operations continued. Perhaps they timed the rollouts so that no sooner had the Pentagon’s planners gotten their heads around the last weapon, in comes another more capable one, raising the stakes.

    … (Kalibrs) are not capable of the anti-shipping role [just like T-Hawks are not capable of hitting mobile air defense targets]…

    I’d agree that what the Caspian corvettes fired isn’t an anti-shipping weapon, but the Kalibr is in fact a family of missiles that use the Kalibr vertical launcher, and includes both anti-ship and anti-submarine variants.

    Do you think Gen Valery Gereasimov [Russian Chief of Staff] and his men were simply going to roll the dice…that is incredibly stupid…

    No. Exactly the opposite. They knew well that they had what it took to protect their expeditionary force. It’s the Americans who didn’t, and their impromptu education was the game changing event. They learned they were in zugzwang, which changed everything the Pentagon and the RoW believed.

    As you know from our previous discussions, I hold the Shoigu-Gerasimov team as the pre-eminent military professionals on the planet, and what they’ve done to transform the Russian military to the point where it can pull off operations like Crimea and Syria with clockwork precision and textbook efficiency will be studied in military academies for generations. Uncannily able to leverage every asset to just the right point, they’re as good as it gets and the world is already better for it.

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
    , @FB
  148. utu says:

    Don’t Believe the Russian Hype
    https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/03/07/dont-believe-the-russian-hype-a2-ad-missiles-sweden-kaliningrad-baltic-states-annexation-nato/

    “The most notable example of such fearmongering is the often-cited claim that the Russian S-400 air defense system can create no-go zones reaching 400 kilometers (250 miles) from Kaliningrad. If true—or just believed to be true—this could have major consequences. If NATO is seen as unable to protect its Baltic members from Russian aggression, this puts its fundamental collective defense commitment into question. Thus, Russia has a strategic interest in making its missile capabilities seem more threatening than they are.”

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  149. @FB

    This would NOT involve Kalibrs because they are not capable of the anti-shipping role

    So, 3M54 is not Klaibr then. OK. I can disclose some “secret”, 3M54 is anti-shipping missile which goes M-2.9 on terminal , there are Kalinrs which are capable of even ASW. They are called 91RTE.

  150. @utu

    If true—or just believed to be true—this could have major consequences

    Read their “report”–it is written by amateurs with humanities degrees in nothing. None of them has any tactical or operational experience, nor they have any serious academic background to pass any judgements on military-technological issues. Their “research” is basically an trash for propaganda purposes. I could be wrong about you, you could be a Swede, right? That will explain a lot.

  151. Well the fat lady hasn’t sung yet since the US just sent those evacuated troops back along with more troops and armoured vehicles to the oil fields they assert are now theirs.

    An incredibly stupid and dangerous act I think at this stage but definitely a rather large and filthy fly in the ointment. Furthermore Russia has released satellite images showing a vast oil smuggling operation overseen by the US forces out of the oilfields. Turkey is involved since the tanker trucks are going through Turkey. The sheer audacity of it and the chutzpah to even say it out loud is both infuriating and yet kind of positive to me. Finally the big hypocrite is taking off its mask and admitting it is not the land of freedom, democracy and morality but an ugly thuggish pirate entity bent on domination and theft of every resource on earth.

    I see getting them out as a likely many years long battle. There will be UN resolutions, protests and eventually there will be attacks even if by small groups against the US forces but they’ll just dig in I guess and dare somebody big enough to do anything about it. I sincerely hope they do get massacred but also that it is clear to the world on that day that they had no right to be there and no right to retaliate.

    The vile Americans’ refusal to leave unfortunately puts a pause on something else I had hoped to see eventuate on the heels of the struggle against US and Zionist backed Takfiri savages. That is the recapture of the Golan Heights. The time for this is now or soon. There won’t be a better time and there won’t be any other way than militarily. Instead the US limited occupation will soon become the main problem Syria faces.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Andrei Martyanov
  152. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rabbitnexus

    …. they’ll just dig in I guess and dare somebody big enough to do anything about it.

    This is why it must be done politically. I only see one real hope for that:

    @TulsiGabbard: “Trump using our troops to occupy Syrian oil fields—part of our regime change war to topple the Syrian government by crippling their economy—is a modern-day siege that will hurt the Syrian people the most.”

    • Replies: @Rabbitnexus
  153. L.K says:
    @utu

    Utu, your post #140 is a testament to your “creativity”.

    Sadly for you, it belongs in the category of “Bad Fiction”.
    Your ‘script’ has more gaping holes than the avg Hollywood movie script and that’s saying something… maybe jewlly, er, I mean, Hollywood is hiring?

  154. @Erebus

    I get this message when I try to open your link [in both Opera and Firefox]:

    “Janes360 – Page Not Found! – 404 Error”

    The .PDF can’t be found

    A quick search led to this [rest behind subscription request] on Jane’s 360:

    Russia upgrades Kalibr cruise missiles – Tim Ripley, London – Jane’s Defence Weekly, 25 September 2019

    “Russia has improved the targeting system of its ship- and submarine-launched 3M14 Kalibr cruise missiles to improve their ability to conduct time sensitive attacks.

    Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu revealed the development, which was initiated as a result of combat experience in Syria, in an interview with the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper on 22 September.

    “If we talk about the use of precision weapons, for example, [previously] loading a flight mission into the Kalibr cruise missile took so much time that the target could go [away],” said Shoigu, “and today the loading time for a Kalibr flight mission has decreased, I emphasise, by a multiple, and this work to reduce the time it takes to transmit target designations is ongoing.”

    “Based on the results of this work, [President Vladimir Putin] gave direct orders to refine or improve certain characteristics of some weapons,” said Shoigu. “So it was with our Kalibr cruise missiles, the armament of long-range aviation and submarines. As a result of the hostilities in Syria, we naturally had a great debriefing, and not one, not ten. I can tell you that about 300 types of weapons were finalised taking into account the Syrian experience.”

    If you have a working link, please be so kind to provide it. Thanks in advance.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  155. Erebus says:
    @Daniel Rich

    I get this message when I try to open your link [in both Opera and Firefox]:
    “Janes360 – Page Not Found! – 404 Error”

    I got the same thing after reading your post, but on 3rd try got through.
    I have no idea how I got through the 1st time, or why I failed and then succeeded subsequently.

    I downloaded it this time so I can quote it at length, but only if Ron expressly approves as it contains legal language forbidding its distribution in whole or in part without written consent.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  156. @Erebus

    I downloaded it this time so I can quote it at length, but only if Ron expressly approves as it contains legal language forbidding its distribution in whole or in part without written consent.

    There are other, less legally strict sources in English. Like this (I always make fun of The National Interest–their team of military “experts” is one to behold, LOL). In the end, all of that data is picked up from Russian sources.

    As a military insider source told TASS earlier this week, “The newest high-precision ship-based Kalibr-M cruise missile with a maximum firing range of more than 4,500 km is being developed for the Russian Navy. The creation of the rocket is at the stage of scientific research and financed by the Ministry of Defense.”

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-dangerous-%E2%80%9Ckalibr%E2%80%9D-cruise-missile-could-see-range-doubled-report-41427

    One reader of my blog, after I was forced to react to this BS by Swedish military “experts”, quoted one other “expert” that S-400 doesn’t have 400 km range 40N6 “operational”, while in reality it is already fully deployed with S-400s for more than a year. This whole so called Western military “analysis” today is one huge BS infused self-medicating delusion. They literally invent things and then act on them.

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
  157. @Rabbitnexus

    The vile Americans’ refusal to leave unfortunately puts a pause on something else I had hoped to see eventuate on the heels of the struggle against US and Zionist backed Takfiri savages. That is the recapture of the Golan Heights.

    Do not put your hopes for Golan Heights high–not gonna happen any time soon. As per US “defending Syria’s oil fields from ISIS”, LOL, it doesn’t change much because the game is global, not regional. In accordance to Colonel Wilkerson (and not him only, in fact data is picked from GAO report), by 2030 US will not have Discretionary Spending left, zero. In fact, this may happen even earlier. As you may know Pentagon is financed through Discretionary Spending. Once one gets this fact internalized, together with ongoing dedollarization and US incapable of conducting serious military operations within (near) peer-to-peer framework, things become very clear.

    • Replies: @Rabbitnexus
  158. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    …the US claimed 2 0r 4 of the Caspian Kalibrs crashed en route in northern Iran. Judging by the photos then circulated, they sorta did. What was found were the jet engines and aft sections that were jettisoned when the missiles went supersonic.

    Ok…so to set things straight here, the variant of the ‘Kalibr’ family launched against ISIS targets in Syria was NOT the version with the supersonic terminal phase…

    That would be the 3M-54 which has a cited maximum range of 660 km…

    A quick description from wiki on the ‘Kalibr’ family…here…

    As for the crashes in Iran, I did a quick search for info and the reports from the US media really did not link to anything resembling credible…I found zero pictures of crashed Kalibrs or anything that looked like it might resemble a small jet engine…if you have something please share…

    From what I see it sounds like empty talk…the WaPo for instance linked to what looks like a mickey mouse Iranian blog…but I didn’t bother searching through it to find anything about the ‘cows that were killed’ by the supposedly crashed cruise missile…

    As for the ‘Kalibr’ family…there are some interesting and very capable variants there…but the land attack version is really not much different from the T-Hawk…again we are talking incremental improvements…

    Yes these are a new generation and the significant advantage is the launch tube system which has been made compact enough to fit on small ships down to corvettes in the 1,000 ton class…versus USN ships carrying similar armament that are in the destroyer and cruiser class of over 8,000 tons…

    Now of course those small Russian ships can only carry a fraction of the munitions that a much bigger ship can carry…but the interesting thing here is that you can launch from within Russian territory…

    And the REALLY interesting thing is that this is not even confined to the Caspian…those corvettes are capable of traversing the entire Volga river system, which is a huge area…this relates to the big issue of intermediate range nuclear missiles, which treaty is now dead since the US walked away some months back…

    Neither side was ever prevented form putting nukes on ship-borne cruise missiles…so those small and hard to find ships that can even traverse the Russian river system and still reach to the heart of Europe or the Mideast are definitely a strategic card…

    But the nuclear game is not what this discussion is about…it’s about cruise missiles and again, I note that these are in fact pretty good weapons because of their small size which makes them difficult to pick up on air defense radar, plus their ability to fly low to terrain, which also helps avoid detection…plus the fact that even flying subsonically at low altitudes still makes them a dangerous weapon…

    I am not discounting the value of cruise missiles, and certainly the new generation fielded by Russia is going to be better than improved old generations of the T-Hawk…

    Also worth noting some of those versions with the supersonic terminal phase…now this is in fact something new…and is worth taking note…

    Some of these can be launched by either ship or sub, and there’s even a version which carries a torpedo to kill enemy subs [this one is ship launched and after the rocket motor burnout the torpedo dives in and heads for the kill…this isn’t in fact new either but it’s a modernized and presumably more capable than existing classes of such]

    So my comments here have been strictly about that long range land-attack version which was demonstrated in Syria [firing from the Caspian]…and how that relates to the subject under discussion which is the supposed ‘gamble’ the Russian military took by putting their forces in Syria where they could be ‘overwhelmed’…

    I think I have presented here a good exposition of the workings of what such an operation to ‘overwhelm’ the Russian air defense in Syria would involve [it would be a very large SEAD operation]…and their chances of success…which are slim to none…

    And this was true from day one of the deployment since the Russian naval ships off the coast provided the naval version of S300 plus the other SAMs that make up an IADS…

    As tensions ratcheted up, the IADS was strengthened…right now it is silly to think of taking control of Syrian airspace…

    No the USAF is not capable of doing that by force…and any attempt to do such would be very costly in terms of lost aircraft and the loss of prestige and military credibility that goes with that…

    So the discussion really is about SEAD and the A2/AD challenge that the US military faces…it should be noted also that these A2/AD zones involve Russian air assets, not just the ground based systems…it is silly to talk about the S400 in isolation from the fighter jets, the AWACS aircraft and the electronic warfare aircraft that all operate as part of the air defense shield…

    I mean that is just kindergarten level…

    • Replies: @Erebus
  159. @Andrei Martyanov

    + Erebus,

    Thank both of you.

    “Sir, the Russians have installed new, silent diesel engines on their subs.”

    “Really? Where are they?”

    “We don’t know, sir. We can’t hear them.”

    That’s the kinda logic you gotta <3

  160. Erebus says:
    @FB

    I found zero pictures of crashed Kalibrs or anything that looked like it might resemble a small jet engine…if you have something please share…

    They were on Iranian social networks at the time, and I think I even saw some in a Tabriz(?) newspaper, but that was 2 laptops ago.

    That would be the 3M-54 which has a cited maximum range of 660 km…

    Um, I think you’d want to take that one back. The 3M-54 family are anti-shipping missiles, and 660km doesn’t get you from the Caspian to anywhere useful inside Syria (you may reach the NE tip, but that’s it).

    Your cited Wiki article in fact says:

    Russia fired 26 3M14T cruise missiles from four surface ships in the Caspian Sea against 11 targets in Syria on 7 October 2015.
    According to state television news (broadcast of 11.10.2015),[46] launch of production took place in 2012. Details of this version[47] – a maximum speed of Mach 3, a range of 4,000 km, basing in the air, on land, on water and under water. The missile can make in-flight maneuvers 147 times or more (in any direction), it has a minimum height of 10 meters, an average one of 20 – 50 meters (up to 1000 m), it will automatically follow terrain, it can be controlled in flight.[48].

    If Wiki’s right, that ain’t your Grandfather’s Tomahawk.

    The rest of your points are well taken. Yes, it would be a real war.

    My fundamental point remains that what stayed the USM’s hand was that the Russians’ escalating demonstrations of stand-off power surprised, even shocked the USM. They were surprised to learn that they did not in fact have the ability to concentrate force sufficiently to keep a conflict boxed up in Syria, or even the wider Middle East, and that even if they did any “victory” would be Pyrrhic at best. The costs in men and materiel even a restricted theatre conflict would inflict would be so high that the Middle East was lost to them even if they “won”.

    That’s where I differ from the Saker and others. The Russians took what appeared initially as a suicidally hi-risk gambit, but then promptly and repeatedly showed it was no gambit at all. It was a move born of a strength the RoW was insufficiently aware they possessed. Some are still insufficiently aware, it seems.

    • Agree: Daniel Rich
  161. FB says: • Website

    E, that info from wiki on the 3M14T is not correct…it does not have a supersonic terminal phase…

    Also there is in fact a land attack version of the 3M54 that does have a supersonic terminal phase…but its range is the same as the antiship ones, 660 km…

    Now the Russians are working on a new and bigger version with a range in excess of 4,000 km…but here’s some basics about aircraft range…it depends on several things…

    1. the specific fuel consumption of the engine

    2. a high fuel fraction, which is the amount of fuel mass relative to total aircraft mass

    3. a high glide ratio, which is the lift to drag ratio

    4. flying at high altitude where air density is low

    Now cruise missiles are designed to fly at low altitudes, so that leaves the other three…the glide ratio is not going to be very good because a cruise missile must by necessity have small wings that can fold up in the launch tube…you will notice that gliders have a very long wingspan, you can’t have that on a cruise missile…

    So that leaves fuel fraction and engine efficiency…now fuel fraction gets bigger as the aircraft gets bigger…a small airframe like a cruise missile is not going to have a high fuel fraction…it already has to carry a payload of 1,000 lb [the warhead]…plus the weight of the airframe and engine and guidance system…

    That leaves engine fuel efficiency…now small turbine engines cannot be as fuel efficient as the large turbine engines we see on large passenger jets…the Williams turbofan on the T-Hawk burns about one pound of fuel per pound of thrust per hour…which is nearly twice the fuel consumption of large turbofans…

    There are inherent limitation in small turbine engines that limit their fuel efficiency…a big engine will always be more efficient than a small engine due to the square-cube law…which tells us that volume increases by the cube, but area only by the square…since the friction losses of air moving through an engine are a function of internal area, it means that as an engine gets smaller, its ability to move air decreases much more quickly than the internal area…thus the engine will have a greater surface to volume area and more friction losses for the amount of air it can move…

    So those are the limitations…there is no magic formula…both the US and Russia are working very hard on increasing small turbine engine efficiency…the USAF has been offering for several years a two million dollar prize for a small turbine engine with high fuel efficiency…

    Nobody has yet claimed that prize…and I think that program has been folded now without any entry meeting those specifications…

    Theoretically, based on the laws of thermodynamics, it is possible to increase gas turbine engine efficiency significantly by capturing some of the wasted exhaust heat and using it to increase the air temperature before it enters the combustor…therefore less fuel is required to be burned to bring the air temperature up to the engine’s working temperature limit…

    That’s called the ‘regenerative cycle’ and could provide small turbine engines with fuel efficiency approaching large turbines…but the devil is in the details…it’s not going to be easy to capture that exhaust heat in a heat exchanger…the aircraft engine industry has been working on this for more than 70 years without a breakthrough…

    That is why the Russians are developing the Burevestnik subsonic cruise missile that is fueled by heat coming fro a small nuclear reactor…its range would be practically unlimited as even a small amount of fissile fuel could keep such a craft flying for days or even weeks…

    I have already talked about how this would work elsewhere on this website…and it involves using the same kind of small jet engine that subsonic cruise missiles already use, but the heat supplied to the combustion chamber would come from the reactor, not by burning kerosene…

    You can see two ordinary GE J47 jet engines, with tubing from the engine combustion chamber running to the reactor on top and then carrying the heated air back down to the engine combustion chamber…this was from a US program in the 1960s…this scheme circulated the jet engine air directly through the reactor, so it produced a lot of radioactivity in its exhaust…

    Keeping radioactivity contained requires a different approach…the same way as with a nuclear power plant, which uses lake or river water for cooling the reactor and pumps that water back without radioactivity of course…that is accomplished by using two separate streams for the heat exchange from the reactor…the core is cooled by a closed loop, with a separate open loop exchanging heat with that…for nuclear fueled aircraft that’s called the indirect air cycle…

    That was never built…the technical challenges were too great…if the Russians have been able to tackle those challenges, then there is no technical or physical reason that such a craft could in fact be built…

    Btw…the US media and a lot of mickey mouse ‘analysts’ have been postulating that the recent nuclear incident that claimed the lives of several Russian scientists was related to the Burevestnik…it most certainly was not…that test involved a liquid fuel rocket, and most likely a radioisotope thermoelectric generator, or RTG…

    It is known that such a generator [which does not involve fission] can be used to heat rocket fuel and oxidizer tanks that use so-called ‘room temperature fuels…these are known as hypergolic propellants because the fuel and oxidizer combust spontaneously when they come in contact with each other…

    These kinds of propellants are useful for liquid fuel missiles, because they can be fueled and stored ready to fire any time, for years on end…unlike cryogenic propellants like liquid oxygen and liquid hyrdogen, which must be fueled just before rocket takeoff…but they turn solid below room temp, so in cold environments you want to keep the tanks warm…an RTG is a good way to do that…something obviously went wrong there, possibly due to those hypergolic propellants coming into contact due to mishandling…

    So the bottom line is that, once we understand how cruise missiles work, and their physical limitations, it becomes clear that, barring a major breakthrough in engine efficiency, there is not going to be a whole lot that is game changing…

    So range is indeed very important for a cruise missile…Martyanov mentioned that the air launched Kh101 has a range over 5,000 km…

    These were also launched against targets in Syria from the Tu160, the world’s biggest supersonic combat jet…it weighs nearly as much as a Boeing triple seven, but flies twice as fast…

    But that new longer range ship launched Russian cruise missile that is in development is necessarily going to be physically bigger [fuel fraction increases with aircraft size, due to scaling laws]…its increased size means it will be more visible to radar…so there are always tradeoffs…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  162. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @FB

    Putting radioactive materials into a cruise missile is insanely irresponsible. We’ve had enough problems with conflict remnants like land mines, UXOs, and depleted uranium already.

    Whoever approved this program should be shot.

  163. FB says: • Website

    These cruise missiles are going to be nuclear armed…so any nuclear ‘safety’ issue is really pretty much irrelevant…

    Also you sound like you know very little, if anything, about nuclear power…it’s also used to power large warships like aircraft carriers and icebreakers, as well as large subs…

    Some satellites are nuclear powered…nuclear power is in fact very safe and reliable…

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
    , @Anonymous
  164. @FB

    …nuclear power is in fact very safe and reliable…

    The [ex] inhabitants of Fukushima disagree with this/your notion…

    • Replies: @FB
  165. FB says: • Website
    @Daniel Rich

    The Fukushima reactor complex was built on a tectonic fault line prone to earthquakes, which goes against guidelines by the IAEA…

    Also there were a lot of shortcuts and inadequacies in terms of contingency planning…so this is not a representative case of nuclear power…France gets 70 percent of its electricity from nuclear and has not had any problems in many decades…

    The Chernobyl disaster was likewise a case of disregarding important safety procedures…

    Nuclear power is of course the science of harnessing a very energetic and potentially dangerous process of nuclear fission…but the technical solutions of keeping these things operating safely are very well known…

    Also nuclear power plants should be in the hands of serious government agencies, not for-profit private enterprise which is known for cutting corners to make profits…

    One of the big safety issues right now is not with the plants themselves [provided they are run properly] but with the nuclear waste that accumulates and must be stored safely…this is because current NPPs run on the ‘once-through’ cycle…

    This is where the so-called ‘closed-cycle’ nuclear technology comes into play…this new generation of reactors is able to use that ‘waste’ material and remove this problem almost entirely…

    The WorldNuclear Association notes…

    Fast neutron reactors (FNRs) are a technological step beyond conventional power reactors, but are poised to become mainstream.

    The biggest plus is that they are able to burn the plutonium waste that comes from conventional NPPs and is a million-year radiation hazard…

    The closed nuclear fuel cycle requires 150 times less natural uranium. It allows companies to either cut back heavily on uranium mining or increase generation at nuclear power plants with the same level of extraction. This has the consequence of increasing the life of the nuclear industry from hundreds to thousands of years.

    Russia has already brought the first such commercial reactor online and is building more, including in China and India…

    There is a lot of misinformation out there about nuclear power, because the public does not really understand important technical issues…also the hydrocarbon fuel industry is behind a lot of this anti-nuclear propaganda because they want to see electricity generated by burning hydrocarbons instead of clean nuclear…

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Erebus
  166. @Johnny Walker Read

    The “definition” of any word is exactly what the USG says it is! Surely to God, any fool knows that! What is a “rules based order”? Clearly, it is an order, a state of affairs, where the USG makes the rules and everybody else (Though not the USA and Israel) obeys them.

  167. @Mike P

    It is truly amazing that the rulers of the U.S. – the real, not the elected ones – would let it come to this, to allow the U.S. military to be completely outclassed by Russia.

    Not really such a great surprise. It seems to me that the Bankers can control a government, or many governments and can (or could until just recently) cause wars as they wish, but to control corruption in the MIC is probably beyond them. Even if they realized that it was undermining their side’s abilities, in military terms, where would they begin? Their rule is based on corruption, so perhaps they did not understand just how corrosive it can be to efficiency. Also the Bankers are not, in general, military or engineering experts, while the MIC is chock full of expert bullshitters who can sell almost anything to anyone. The torrent of money voted by the governments was quite widely spread throughout the various centres of power, so there was no great incentive to look out for coming problems. Well satisfied greed is probably a great disincentive to analytical thinking.

  168. @SeekerofthePresence

    Of course your comment invites the question,
    Whom does the military work for?

    What is absolutely clear is that whoever controls the money supply can veto any proposal that he does not like.

    • Agree: SeekerofthePresence
  169. FB says: • Website
    @FB

    Just to add a little more useful info on the recycling of nuclear waste using so-called breeder reactors [aka fast neutron reactors]…

    A very good explanation of how this works geared to the layman reader, here…

    Breeder reactors can create as much or more fissile material (atoms that readily split) than they use.

    Here’s a graphic of how that cycle works…

    The existing, known deposits of Uranium could last tens of thousands of years, using this kind of recycling with the breeder reactors…

    You could power the entire US electricity grid off of the energy in nuclear waste for almost 100 years…

    So it is certainly prudent to look at nuclear energy in an informed way…

  170. Erebus says:
    @FB

    I was going to reply to Daniel Rich, but you pretty much did my typing for me.
    Yes, Russia’s fast neutron reactors are looking very much like another game changer, this time in the power generation field.

    Fast neutron breeder technology has long been known, but the solution to its Achilles’ Heel – accelerated embrittlement – has escaped researchers. Russia’s Rosatom claims to have solved embrittlement with a new steel that, combined with new construction and ancillary techniques will yield a reactor service life of 60 years.

    So, it runs ~2.5x longer, burning 1/10th the fuel, producing 1/50th the waste (eventually, none), and (with some processing) can burn the waste of common nuclear plants. With these breakthroughs, nuclear power may finally fulfil its promise.

    What doesn’t cease to amaze me is how many of these “breakthroughs” are, in fact based on fundamental scientific and developmental work done by Soviet scientists and engineers. That the West was ignorant, even dismissive of Soviet advancements, and more recently of Russia’s following through on them, has contributed mightily to leading it into the self-congratulatory morass it now finds itself in.

    • Agree: FB
    • Replies: @FB
    , @Anonymous
  171. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    Fast neutron breeder technology has long been known, but the solution to its Achilles’ Heel – accelerated embrittlement – has escaped researchers. Russia’s Rosatom claims to have solved embrittlement with a new steel that, combined with new construction and ancillary techniques will yield a reactor service life of 60 years.

    Thanks for providing that essential technical insight, E…

    This is often the case in difficult engineering problems…it often boils down to one very specific problem that holds the whole thing back…for instance in the case of the high performance rocket engines with the oxygen-rich staged combustion cycle, it was likewise a metallurgy problem…which Soviet science solved back in the 1960s…the US and other nations have not yet done so…

    I second your thoughts about the rigor of the Soviet scientific establishment…this was truly a world-leading intellectual infrastructure…this legacy has been only partially retained in the Russian successor state, which is kind of sad to see…

  172. Erebus says:

    …for instance in the case of the high performance rocket engines with the oxygen-rich staged combustion cycle, it was likewise a metallurgy problem…

    That was crossing my mind as I typed.

    That’s the sort of fundamental STEM work the Soviet intellectual ecosystem excelled at. They weren’t half as interested, it seems in subjects that could be spun-off into the consumer market for profits. I’m guessing that that was simply because there was no such thing as profits in the Soviet system.

    Net result?

    The US still leads the world in the biomedical field (which is great) and “financial engineering” (which is anything but), while the Russians build working SCRAMjets and FBRs. Pooled, the two countries would be capable of truly great things, IMHO. Instead, we get pathological ravings like “Gas station with nukes”.and “Russia doesn’t make anything”. As shameful as it is counter-productive to progress.

    …this legacy has been only partially retained in the Russian successor state, which is kind of sad to see…

    Sad indeed, but I’m actually hopeful that as Russia’s role in Eurasia’s development grows we’ll see more and more emerging. Russia’s working hard on putting a less “Soviet”, but equally rigorous STEM eco-system in place. There’s profit involved now, and so I like to think that “mining” the Soviet archives for relevant knowledge/inventions/discoveries will become increasingly attractive.

    • Replies: @Daniel Rich
    , @FB
  173. @Erebus

    + FB,

    Thanks [both of you] for your valuable input. Appreciated.

    One last question: can we dismiss human error?

    • Replies: @Erebus
  174. Erebus says:
    @Daniel Rich

    Thank you for the kind words, Mr. Rich.

    I think human error will be with us for as long as there is an “us”. The best one can do is place carefully engineered safeguards around everything so as to drive the probability of something going horribly wrong as close to zero as one can.

    It’s been that way since we started harnessing fire.

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  175. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    …I’m actually hopeful that as Russia’s role in Eurasia’s development grows we’ll see more and more emerging. Russia’s working hard on putting a less “Soviet”, but equally rigorous STEM eco-system in place.

    Me too…I see a definite resurgence in the strength of those venerable Russian scientific institutions lately…not least because the demand for capable STEM graduates is very high in Russian industry…not just armaments but also space industry and energy [both hydrocarbon, but especially nuclear]…

    I have zero exposure to biotech, but I certainly agree that US is leading this field…our own AnonfromTN is well placed in this sector and I count his observations as completely credible…

    As for US-Russian cooperation going forward, I find it hard to imagine to be honest…the Russian people have reached their tipping point with the bullshit coming from the US and its EU vassals…they’re simply not interested anymore…Russia is the most self-sufficient major country with imports amounting to only 7 percent of GDP…half of the US and one sixth of Germany where imports account for 40 percent of GDP…

    [Incidentally, we note now that Denmark has finally yielded on Nordstream 2 and has issued the permits…another big blow for US perceived power and prestige…]

    The ill-conceived western sanctions have only strengthened this drive for complete self-reliance…Russia certainly has both the human and natural resources to accomplish this…perhaps the only country in the world thus equipped…

    I have seen this up close in the civil aviation sector…back in January the US imposed silly sanctions on a couple of goofy items related to composite structures for aircraft…hoping to hobble the MC21 passenger jet program…well Russia turned to its immensely capable scientific infrastructure [and specifically RosNano, an institute I was not even aware of]…they came up with a technically superior ‘goop’ [the sanctioned item was an epoxy-based glue for use in bonding carbon fiber woven cloth] so quickly it made my head spin…

    Problem solved…

    Then we have the successful completion of a hugely important domestic high bypass turbofan engine for the same airplane…and more important, this engine core will be expanded to sizes both bigger and smaller, right up to the thrust class of the very large engines like the GE9x that powers the 787…

    Interestingly…the Russians are also working on re-engining the IL96 widebody which is comparable in size to the triple seven, but uses four engines…a new wing and two of the big engines will give Russia its own version of a long-range wide-body…

    Here is some inside scoop for you…the Russians aren’t super happy with the attitude of their partners in the Chinese aviation industry on the CR929 project…it took a lot of arm-twisting to convince the Chinese that the design and certification should be led by Moscow…the Russians were not impressed by the fact that the Chinese seemed blissfully unaware that they simply do not have the talent required to be assigned a major role in such an advanced project…in an industry where they are neophytes…

    I think the US and Russia are in fact more natural partners in advanced fields like aerospace, since they have capabilities on a similar level in many areas [although the US seems to be going downhill fast]…we have seen historically some good cooperation in this area…the ISS for example and other space projects…

    But again…I think the over-the-top anti-Russian hysteria from the US has quite badly infected the American public and the Russians simply aren’t interested anymore…they are a proud and cultured people, and are starting to rightfully view Americans as slobs and philistines with a big attitude problem…

  176. @FB

    slobs and philistines with a big attitude problem…

    Thanks so much for making vital engineering challenges intelligible to the layperson.

    Slobbery can be fatal in the long run.
    It weakens one’s defenses and bankrupts the country.

    As Andy Grove said, “Only the paranoid survive.”

    Congrats to Russia for rejuvenating those great New England virtues that made America great: innovation, industry, thrift.

  177. @Erebus

    November 1, 2019 at 10:41 am GMT • 100 Words
    @Daniel Rich
    Thank you for the kind words, Mr. Rich.

    I think human error will be with us for as long as there is an “us”. The best one can do is place carefully engineered safeguards around everything so as to drive the probability of something going horribly wrong as close to zero as one can.

    It’s been that way since we started harnessing fire.

    Probably as far back as the ’60s there was an American (NY?) mfg of transistorized power supplies called Gould, who decided to make a “really robust” TPS. They designed it with overload protection, overheating shutdown, short-circuit protection, protection against too high and too low voltage supply, everything they could think of in the way of possible abuse. Finally, they thought they had it licked and shipped the first one to a customer, who complained that when he switched it on he got no output and “it smoked”.

    Gould sent an engineer to find out why and he did not have a long investigation to make. The customer had connected the output terminals to the mains and was trying to get an output from the mains input wires.

    Gould’s comment has stayed in my mind, ever since, as a really basic piece of advice. His comment was: “You cannot make anything “Idiot Proof”, the idiots are smarter than we are – they know more ways!”

    • Replies: @Erebus
  178. @FB

    the Russians aren’t super happy with the attitude of their partners in the Chinese aviation industry on the CR929 project…it took a lot of arm-twisting to convince the Chinese that the design and certification should be led by Moscow…the Russians were not impressed by the fact that the Chinese seemed blissfully unaware that they simply do not have the talent required to be assigned a major role in such an advanced project…in an industry where they are neophytes…

    The Russians should have, could have, quoted Mao at their Chinese colleagues :

    “It is well known that when you do anything, unless you understand its actual circumstances, its nature and its relation to other things, you will not know the laws governing it, or be able to do it well.”

    “Problems of Strategy in China’s Revolutionary War” Dec. 1936.
    or

    “Only those who are subjective, one-sided and superficial in their approach to problems will smugly issue orders or directives the moment they arrive on the scene, without considering the circumstances, without viewing thing in their totality (their history and their present state as a whole) and without getting to the essence of things (their nature and the internal relations between one thing and another). Such people are bound to trip and fall.”

    On Practice. July 1937.

    • Replies: @FB
  179. Erebus says:
    @foolisholdman

    His comment was: “You cannot make anything “Idiot Proof”, the idiots are smarter than we are – they know more ways!”

    I’ve long known that principle, but expressed as “In making something “foolproof”, remember that there’s no way to outwit a really determined fool.”

    • LOL: FB
  180. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @FB

    These cruise missiles are going to be nuclear armed…so any nuclear ‘safety’ issue is really pretty much irrelevant…

    Not exactly. Weapons grade fuel is not very radioactive before it goes off, whereas an onboard reactor/RTG definitely is. Crashes become much more dangerous.

    Also you sound like you know very little, if anything, about nuclear power

    Wrong.

    it’s also used to power large warships like aircraft carriers and icebreakers, as well as large subs…

    Did I say these are a good idea? Nuclear subs have had lots of disasters, probably most of which we’ve never heard about. I think one was so bad the Soviets chucked the entire nuclear reactor overboard.

    Some satellites are nuclear powered

    We’re talking small scale RTGs to power electronics, not big fuckoff reactors to run jet engines. And also, they have been known to burn up on reentry and spread radioactive debris all over the food chain.

    nuclear power is in fact very safe and reliable…

    Yayaya so is the world banking system

  181. Anonymous[367] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    So, it runs ~2.5x longer, burning 1/10th the fuel, producing 1/50th the waste (eventually, none), and (with some processing) can burn the waste of common nuclear plants. With these breakthroughs, nuclear power may finally fulfil its promise.

    On paper, it sounds great. Then again, so did atoms for peace. And nuclear fusion.

    I think pro-nuclear people like FB overindulge in the technical details and treat the whole thing as an engineering exercise, while being blind to the huge human cost of mistakes. Every time a plant blows up we seem to learn some minor technical details and the pro-nuclear people are happy once again. We haven’t even seen the worst, since spent fuel pools usually contain way more curies than the reactor itself, are dependent on water cooling to prevent spontaneous combustion, and are often positioned above ground level. It’s insane to think about, and yet it’s considered just a detail in the minds of FB and his ilk.

    I’m not ruling out the possibility of genuinely safe and clean nuclear fission; I’m just aware that substandard nuclear technologies have been pushed into mass production for political and short-term economic reasons and the sociopolitical climate that allows this to happen is apt to make the same mistakes in future.

    • Replies: @Erebus
    , @FB
  182. FB says: • Website

    [Needless crude profanity may considerably increase the likelihood of your comment being trashed.]

    Like I said shithead…you know less than nothing…so stop squirting diarrhea here…

    There have been dozens of NUCLEAR REACTORS powering satellites, not RTGs which are just nuclear batteries…

    BES-5, also known as Bouk or Buk (Russian: бук, lit. ‘beech’), was a Soviet thermoelectric generator that was used to power 31 satellites in the US-A (RORSAT) project. The heat source was a uranium 235 fast fission nuclear reactor (FNR).

    BES-5

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  183. FB says: • Website
    @foolisholdman

    Thanks for that…great quote…

    Mao sure had a collection of chestnuts when it came to common sense…

    • Replies: @foolisholdman
  184. Erebus says:
    @FB

    …not least because the demand for capable STEM graduates is very high in Russian industry…

    From where I sit, I’d like to see Russia focus on the machine tool industry.

    The sanctions bite hardest there because it’s difficult to get to the next level in aerospace, nuclear, etc without cutting edge machine tools. The Chinese are not (yet?) at the levels needed, and Russia’s has languished since it was easy to import from Germany, Japan, and a few other places. I hear that Russia is giving that some priority. If so, I’d say it’s definitely a move in the right direction.

    As for US-Russian cooperation going forward, I find it hard to imagine to be honest…

    Agreed. The world is bifurcating, or more accurately being deliberately bifurcated.

    Apparently, there was much more to Shrub’s “You’re with us or against us” than the comic book bravado that met the eye at the time. At least my eye. Of course, quite a few elites around the world understood him perfectly and the others came around to understanding it soon enough. America’s power elites intended to bifurcate the world, and they thought they had Russia in the bag. Both the Russians and Chinese had other ideas. If you’re bifurcating the world, driving them into an alliance, even temporarily, is a strategic blunder of world historical proportions. It quite simply guarantees that the bifurcation will result in reducing their power rather than enhancing it. Megalomania will take its toll, and it ain’t cheap.

    …they came up with a technically superior ‘goop’… so quickly it made my head spin…

    Whoever dreamed up that sanction had no idea what he was doing. The Periodic Table is a Russian invention, so you’d think they’d know a thing or two about chemical compositions. In any case, epoxy complexes are pretty well understood, and whatever uniquely desirable characteristic the American one offered could be quickly reverse engineered and even improved, or at least chemically tuned to the MC21’s engineers’ specific requirements. RosNano is doubtless grateful for the opportunity to show their stuff.

    Here is some inside scoop for you…the Russians aren’t super happy with the attitude of their partners in the Chinese aviation industry on the CR929 project… the Chinese seemed blissfully unaware that they simply do not have the talent required…

    I don’t know much about the CR929, but I have lots of experience with Chinese engineers. The problem (from my read of it) is that in the Chinese system, the textbook represents the wisdom of the Masters, the ultimate word on the topic, rather than a springboard for further development. The notion that once you’re in the air, you’re on your own seems alien to the culture. The talented one that break through that can be formidably good at what they do. Combined, memorization of the “Master’s word” and the talent and will to push beyond it are hard to beat.

    Thanks for the exchange, FB.

    • Replies: @FB
  185. Erebus says:
    @Anonymous

    … substandard nuclear technologies have been pushed into mass production for political and short-term economic reasons and the sociopolitical climate that allows this to happen is apt to make the same mistakes in future.

    The primary reason that we have the current types of reactors has nothing to do with economics. The current Western technology is much more expensive than what Russia’s doing. Politics, of course, is another matter.

    The reason we have the kind of reactor we have today is because they produce plutonium and tritium needed for nuclear weapons. The early ones produced electricity as a “by-product”, to disguise their real, military purpose and make it easier to sell to the public. Being a military, rather than public project, safety, health and long term consequences were of little concern. The nascent nuclear power industry inherited that military technology, taking great benefit from the sunk public costs of development and a combination of inertia and profit-seeking did the rest.

    I’m not ruling out the possibility of genuinely safe and clean nuclear fission;

    Nothing is 100% safe. Hydro dams break, coal has plenty of issues from mining accidents onwards, and even natural gas has its problems, especially if you believe it contributes to AGW.

    What’s more, if making electricity is dangerous, the electricity itself is even more dangerous. Tens of 1,000s of people are electrocuted each year, ~10k people in India alone (~500 in the US), while many more than that are injured. Nobody suggests India, or anybody else foregoes electricity.

    In any case, Rosatom is selling lots of these reactors, in large part because they take care of everything. From engineering & building the plant, supplying the fuel, training operations staff, performing the re-fueling, removing spent fuel for re-processing, to decommissioning the plant at end of life. That’s a compelling sales package and obviously attractive to both the customer and, frankly to the rest of us. Head & shoulders above everybody else, they’re building ~60% of the world’s current nuclear power projects. The only reason I can see that they aren’t building 100% is indeed politics.

    • Agree: FB
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  186. Anonymous[214] • Disclaimer says:
    @FB

    You sound like a very unpleasant person, FB. I wonder to what degree your emotional imbalances factor into your willingness to take risks with unknown technologies?

  187. Anonymous[214] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    The reason we have the kind of reactor we have today is because they produce plutonium and tritium needed for nuclear weapons. The early ones produced electricity as a “by-product”, to disguise their real, military purpose and make it easier to sell to the public.

    Yes this is exactly what I meant by politics. ‘Atoms for peace’

    Being a military, rather than public project, safety, health and long term consequences were of little concern

    Exactly. The Americans were planning on simply diluting their high level waste and dumping it into the river until someone clued them in on bioaccumulation. The Russians didn’t get the memo and ended up with the concrete lake.

    Nothing is 100% safe. Hydro dams break, coal has plenty of issues from mining accidents onwards, and even natural gas has its problems, especially if you believe it contributes to AGW.

    You’re quite right. The difference is that hydro dams regularly suffer worst case scenarios, whereas we’ve never even come close to a fully loaded spent fuel pool burning to completion. Nuclear safety is always about trying harder and harder to prevent something Very Bad from happening and, considering the 4 orders of magnitude variation in chernobyl death toll calculations, we honestly haven’t a clue how bad it would even be.

    Another thing is that the effect of electrocuting 10,000 Indians does not extend very far into the future. The unborn won’t miss them, there will be zero loss of arable land, and zero damage to the genetic information still in play.

    That’s a compelling sales package and obviously attractive to both the customer and, frankly to the rest of us. Head & shoulders above everybody else

    I see it as harm reduction and I’m very glad they’re making it widely available.

    Unfortunately, the risks may still be higher than advertised and perceived safety means that politicians will start to plan a nuclear reactor on every street corner.

    • Replies: @FB
  188. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    Always interesting to hear your take on any aspect of China, E…considering your many years of industry experience there…

    I agree with you about the Russian machine tool industry, and they are giving it a push from above…there’s an interesting recent study on that very subject out of Sweden…

    Russian Machine Tool Industry: Prospects for a Turnaround?

    Naturally, they conclude that no, there will be no turnaround…which is predictable wishcasting, but not actually supported by the data they present…

    Of course this is out of the Swedish Defense Research Agency, which Martyanov recently dismantled [it seems some clown with a degree in basket weaving or some such, wrote a ‘study’ about how the S400 was mostly smoke and mirrors…LOL…]

    But some interesting stuff in there nonetheless…

    While contributing to only a small fraction of total industrial production, the machine tool industry provides the principal industrial equipment base for all other manufacturing industries.

    This is of course true…and will certainly reverberate with those of us who value a good tool…

    Interestingly the size of the global industry is much smaller than I would have guessed…it peaked at 100 billion USD a few years back, but has since fallen back…in Japan, which leads the world in machine tool production, the industry represents only two percent of total machinery production…

    Also the size of the companies making machine tools is smaller than I would have thought, with small and medium enterprises accounting for 80 percent of global production…there are a few big companies of course, but there has not been any kind of huge consolidation…

    Interesting to note that the US is actually far more import-dependent on machine tools than Russia…and has been for a long time…even in the ’80s the top three machine tool makers were Japan, Germany and the USSR…

    But Russia is definitely now stimulating the domestic machine tool industry with what looks to be an effective industrial strategy and incentives…this is of course a very strategic industry as we both know…so definitely something to watch…

    Btw…I will point you to a good source of quite informed and substantive reporting about Russia’s economy from a very qualified expert…John Hellevig…a list of his articles here…

    For instance he notes that Russia’s merchandise trade surplus ranks third, after China and Germany…[I emphasize that is merchandise, not commodities]…

    With Global Recession Looming, Russia Looks Strong

    So when we hear about how Russia is dependent on commodities exports like oil and gas, like in that Swedish machine tool report…it only raises flags about the credibility of their ‘forecasts’…

    Incidentally, Forbes has a similar statistic about trade surplus that shows Russia in third place…but the Hellevig reports really break things down much more finely…

    As for the epoxy withholding…it was a couple of products made in Japan and Germany…but yeah, certainly this is not rocket science, it’s well established chemistry…

    • Replies: @Erebus
  189. FB says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    I’m just aware that substandard nuclear technologies have been pushed into mass production for political and short-term economic reasons

    Is that right tiny pinhead…

    Since you are ‘aware’ of these ‘substandard nuclear technologies’ why don’t you share the specifics of those technologies with us here…?

    The fact of the matter is that you know less than nothing about nuclear technologies…but you insist on freaking out here and making a lot of useless noise…

    But of course, I am always eager to hear about some ‘unknown’ technologies that I wasn’t aware of…LOL

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  190. FB says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    The Americans were planning on simply diluting their high level waste and dumping it into the river until someone clued them in on bioaccumulation. The Russians didn’t get the memo and ended up with the concrete lake.

    Wow…what a fanciful tale you spin here…without any details, much less links to credible material to support this hallucinatory dreamworld of yours…please try to substantiate this complete bullshit…

  191. @FB

    Mao sure had a collection of chestnuts when it came to common sense…

    It is interesting to note that each of his really bad mistakes was made when he ignored his own advice!
    I dare say, that given the ideological dispute between the CPSU(B) and the CCP in Mao’s time, there are not very many copies of the “Little Red Book” in Russian in Russia.

  192. Erebus says:
    @FB

    Interestingly the size of the global industry is much smaller than I would have guessed… Also the size of the companies making machine tools is smaller than I would have thought…

    The machine tool industry is the tip of the machinery industry pyramid. It makes the machines that make the machines that make the things we use, so it’s necessarily a tiny fraction of the industry.

    It generally also represents the tip of the machinery industry’s talent. Sorta like F1 attracts the tip of the pyramid of talent in automotive engineering. The machinery industry is as dependent on breakthroughs in machine tool capability as the automotive industry is on breakthroughs in F1.

    Btw…I will point you to a good source of quite informed and substantive reporting about Russia’s economy from a very qualified expert…John Hellevig…

    Hellevig is my go-to guy on Russia stats, and I’ve pointed quite a few know-it-alls in his direction for the quantitative realities behind Russia’s resurgence. Alas, most of those have so internalized some false narrative (which is why I pointed them there) that they simply back away from the cognitive dissonance that results when they come face-to-face with realities. In fact, they’re often much less than appreciative of having been put in that position.

    As for epoxy, and similar mission critical chemistry, the issues aren’t so much in the “design” as they are in tight production controls holding production quantities close to the original laboratory intent. Doubtless the Japanese and German vendors were working to tight tolerances, and that’s why they were originally chosen. I’d guess a lack of similar vendors is why Russia went shopping afield, and I’d further guess that the primary advice RosNano brought to the table addressed production standards

    • Replies: @FB
  193. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:
    @FB

    FB, try harder to be nice and I’ll give you a response (actually wrt. Substandard technologies, Erebus got there already).

    Regarding high level waste dumping, please google for Lake Karachay.

    • Replies: @FB
  194. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    That makes perfect sense about the machinery industry E…

    I agree that it is important to have that talent above all…if you have the ability and knowledge, you can build just about anything…

    Yeah, I like Hellevig a lot…very thorough guy…he also notes that the only big problem is the Russian central bank…

    This is my big beef also…I think the central bank and the money industry is trying to create a FIRE industry in Russia that is going to do what these financial kleptocrats do everywhere…hollow out everything that matters and is of value in a productive, industrial economy…for the benefit of a parasite class…

    In this regard, I think China is really on the right track…they are not going to allow this kind of ‘financialization’ and they are very tough on corruption…I really think Xi is doing great work in this regard…it’s always a battle and Putin is trying…but I think the Russian system needs overhauling along the Chinese lines…

    Of course then, all the fake ‘democracy’ stentorians are going to be blasting about ‘dictatorships’ and such from the mountaintops…

    It’s only ever a ‘dictatorship’ if the criminal elements in society are not given free reign…LOL

    • Replies: @Erebus
  195. FB says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    Look fool…I’m not here to play games with a profoundly retarded tree monkey…

    I challenged you to back up your statement about ‘substandard technologies’…

    You have come up with bupkus…because you are obviously a clown blowing a lot of flatulence…thinking that is somehow entertaining here…

    That Lake Karachay waste site had nothing to do with ‘substandard nuclear technologies’ pinhead…it was about cutting corners and poor practices…the Hanford site in Washington state is another example of this…

    I already discussed here [intelligently…as did Erebus] that the problem is not with the technology which is extremely safe and reliable…but with the nuclear waste issue…that is why I explained the significance of fast reactors and closing the fuel cycle…

    In the early years of the cold war, powerful individuals in the MIC on both sides had a similar mentality about simply burying radioactive waste…of course as time went on, individuals with this kind of mentality were increasingly held to account and this kind of thing is no longer possible…so it was a people problem, not a technology problem…

    Like I said…you are just an illiterate noisemaker…but you don’t seem to mind taking up bandwidth in this discussion by showing just how ignorant you are…

    In the meantime, I think we will all be waiting for quite some time for a tree monkey like yourself to coherently explain just what ‘substandard technologies’ exist in the nuclear industry…

  196. Anonymous[186] • Disclaimer says:

    That Lake Karachay waste site had nothing to do with ‘substandard nuclear technologies’

    I agree. Read again. I think you were too angry to parse my post properly.

    In the meantime, I think we will all be waiting for quite some time

    Yes. Like I said before, I’m waiting for you to be more civil before I answer your question. Unfortunately for all of us, it seems unlikely to happen.

  197. Erebus says:
    @FB

    Of course then, all the fake ‘democracy’ stentorians are going to be blasting about ‘dictatorships’ and such from the mountaintops…

    Yeah, I just came across an example of the jaw-droppingly silly rubbish Americans are fed daily.

    I think the central bank and the money industry is trying to create a FIRE industry in Russia……hollow out everything that matters and is of value in a productive, industrial economy…for the benefit of a parasite class…

    In Russia’s case, I’d think the goals would be more ambitious than merely hollowing out the economy. Sure, financialization yields profit for them which they share with the local comprador elite. More importantly, as finance becomes the drug the economy runs on, their power over local elites strengthens until they’re able to grasp political control. That would be their goal, just as it was in the US, but in Russia’s case it means control of (Mackinder’s) Heartland.

    Given the way the Russian constitution and Central Bank are structured, I can’t see Putin et al doing much more than hanging on until the GFR (Global Financial Reset) knocks all the Central Banks over.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
  198. FB says: • Website
    @Erebus

    Wow…just had a quick look at that ‘article’ you pointed to…isn’t Gordon Chang the same clown who wrote a book about a decade or more back about how China was about to implode…?

    Doesn’t seem to have hurt his so-called ‘credibility’…LOL

    Yeah I don’t know what to make of the Russian central bank situation viz a viz Putin…certainly that Goldman-Sachs written Russian constitution guaranteed that nobody could do anything to separate the central bank from its Wall Street patrons…

    However, I do think Putin has room to maneuver…a specific example I like was FDR’s Reconstruction Finance Corporation, which was…

    …used like a national bank to fund thousands of great infrastructure, transport, energy, and water projects during the New Deal…

    That from an interesting article from Matthew Ehret, a writer I really like…here

    Putin has been doing some things in this direction, like mandating the banks to give mortgages at favorable and affordable rates to young families…especially those with multiple children…plus making capital available for large scale housing construction at affordable prices and lending terms etc…

    So these kinds of initiatives are clearly aimed at getting around the constrictions of the central bank and its high interest rate policy that is clearly coming from its masters on Wall Street and London and is holding back the Russian economy…

    FDR faced the same kind of constraints from the same kind of financial powers…but he moved boldly with the RFC…greatly expanding its scope and powers…and in fact much of the crucial infrastructure that modernized large swaths of America, like rural electrification, was accomplished in this way…

    A similar scheme to the RFC has long been proposed by people like Glazyev and his Stolipyn bonds idea to fund a similar infrastructure buildup that circumvents the central bank…

    But I think at bottom, Putin is very cautious…he doesn’t want to rock the boat too much, and he is probably right in that regard, as picking a fight with the global finance juggernaut could unleash even more problems…

    Still, he has improved the country on every level by staying within the constraints and being very prudent with finances…at some point he, or his successor, may feel comfortable about rearranging the furniture in a much more radical way…this may well come about as the general global finance balance of power shifts as you suggest…[I think no one can deny it is coming]…

  199. @Erebus

    That article is indeed amazingly stupid. However, you do see what dots to connect there, no? Hint: it’s not about dictatorship as such, but rather a particular kind.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  200. Erebus says:

    That from an interesting article from Matthew Ehret, a writer I really like…here

    Thanks for that link. Damn interesting, I’d say. I’ll have to search for more of Ehret’s articles as he’s got a viewpoint to be reckoned with.

    (French Finance Minister Bruno) Le Maire stated ever-so candidly that “the Bretton Woods order has reached its limits. Unless we are able to re-invent Bretton Woods, the New Silk Road might become the New World Order”.

    There it is in a nutshell.

    Le Maire should have said “Unless we’re able to take Bretton Woods back to its roots…”, but that’s the sort of historically contextless void in which the West’s elites plan the West’s destiny. In showing that BRI is in fact carrying on from where Bretton Woods left off when it was hijacked, Ehret connects a lot of salient dots yielding a new (at least to me) context for what’s going on. Looking at BRI as 1944’s Bretton Woods Redux drops a lot pieces into place.

    Parenthetically, in 2014, after Xi’s visit Castro referred to Xi as “the most hard-core revolutionary I’ve ever met”. Castro knew a thing or two about revolutions, so the quote stuck with me because I wondered what he saw that the rest of us didn’t. The remark was so at odds with Xi’s demeanour and image.

    Ehret points to Castro’s meaning. Not only is he changing China, Xi wants to change the way the whole world works by going back to Bretton Woods’ original 1944 ideals. BRI is how he intends to do it, which explains why BRI reaches into Africa and S. America which the Old Silk Roads took no account of. The successors of those who derailed FDR’s plans are now tearing their hair out wondering how they’ll derail Xi’s. They can’t. Xi is not alone.

    It wasn’t just blind luck that he’s got a hell of a like-minded partner in just the right spot – the Kremlin. Primakov proposed Eurasian integration in the mid-’90s. I happen to have had a long conversation with a participant in the early planning discussions regarding Eurasian transport and economic corridors that started long before BRI was announced. Doubtless, a lot of deep background political understandings between patriotic Russians and Beijing had to have preceded the planning groups.

    Not only does that explain why Putin was so quickly and vigorously denounced by the West when he came to power and why he (and Xi) are painted as devils incarnate now, it goes far in explaining Brexit. Particularly Johnson’s Brexit which, if the article I read immediately after Ehret’s is right, will turn Britain into Orwell’s “Airstrip 1”.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @anon
  201. Erebus says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    The dots that connect for me are those that point to the world’s bifurcation into 2 armed camps. I’m convinced that’s what the “Trade War” and the establishment of Russo/Sino-phobic memes are setting up the West’s populations for. Chang is just doing his job to further that along.

    I’m guessing Oz will be Airstrip 3, after Canada’s Airstrip 2. Having visited both in the past quarter, I couldn’t miss the fact that the constant, phobic drumbeat is significantly louder and more emphatic than I remember even a year ago. Sadly, I also noted that people who were sceptical of what they were hearing a year ago are coming around to the mainstream view. Repetition works its magic on anyone not paying the closest attention.

    Anyhow, I’ve long felt that Brexit will split the West. Without it, there’d be almost no way for Europe to join Eurasia, while with it it’s almost likely. Anglo-America’s rulers aren’t going to accept 2nd Tier status no matter how small and oppressive their sandbox gets, while continental Europe’s elites are long used to 2nd Tier, and would prefer the chance at an enhanced 2nd+ Tier status in a much bigger and richer sandbox than they know the bankrupt Anglosphere can offer.

    I recommend reading both the Ehret article and the one I linked. Interesting stuff.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  202. @Erebus

    I largely agree, but in fact the “liberal” West is less driven by ideological concerns and more by the ethnic interests of the group that dominates the West’s political and social systems. Hence the non-stop (and specific) invocation of Nazi Germany whenever some threat to the oligarchs’ interests arises. Indeed, it’s useful to speculate what role India will play in the Orwellian geopolitical system you describe.

    • Replies: @Rabbitnexus
  203. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    Ehret is inspired by the thinking of Lyndon LaRouche, as he says at his site, http://canadianpatriot.org/author/matthew/

    If you’re familiar with LaRouche, nobody need mention this, the theme of British scheming is so recognizable. There’s no doubt that LPAC, especially EIR (Executive Intlligence Review), does excellent research. But do you buy the whole package – unlimited growth (no Malthusians allowed) based on unlimited energy (nuclear fusion just around th corner… still), rule by technocrats, space colonization, etc.? And remember, it was Lyn who sold the SDI to Reagan.

    Energy is the key. For some reason, the LaRouchies want many more humans in this techno future. (Why, when so much will be done by robots, IDK.) Eventually, there will be no life left on the plant but humans and our food. At the extreme, will this be grown in laboratories, like the new meat? Would there be machines to provide oxygen, after we cut down all the trees? Only if there’s boundless energy to operate the labs and the machines. Not to mention to process all the human waste.

    This is just rumination. I also liked Ehret’s article.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  204. @Andrei Martyanov

    I realise that collapse of the US power and influence is what Russia, China and other resistance states are waiting for and banking on. Rather than confront the juggernaut they have wisely chosen to slowly let the air out of its tires. Absent the US interference now I think the Golan was on the cards. The Shia crescent they hoped to stop from closing has become complete and connected and Syria could have relied on Hezbollah and Iran to assist in the taking. It would be a regional war as result but it would not be enough to trigger a full scale missile attack against anyone I would think given the balance of destructive power. Indeed if anything the balance is against “Israel” which is so small that a fraction of the missiles aimed at them would plough the little strip of land end for end and sideways. The entire Zionist arsenal including Nukes would not be enough to do anything close to the same to rugged mountainous Iran or huge sprawling Syria.

    It won’t happen of course and especially now that Uncle Sam has planted his fat arse in the middle of the board and dares anyone to do anything about it. As said that will likely be a long term situation. Given the indication that Washington is not interested in pandering to former delusional thinking about their good intentions but is quite content to remove the mask and show their ugly demonic visage to the world so no amount of legality or morality will shift them.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  205. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    P.S. ____ The original Silk Road connected northern Africa as far as Timbuktu.

    • Replies: @Erebus
  206. @anon

    Tulsi is going nowhere. Her CFR membership concerns me anyway but she is the best looking possibility so far. However she has zero chance of the nomination that is already reserved for Clinton. She will be tossing her beanie into the ring very soon as the NH registration is on 11th November I think. The other candidates we are seeing are just chumming the waters. They are the opening act. I’m even pretty sure the Ukraine thingy is as much about hobbling Biden out of the way for her as it is about trying to get Trump. Tulsi may go indy but it will serve no purpose and have the Dems screaming to blame her (and Russia) for their inevitable defeat. That they ran an un-electable evil witch will once again be ignored for blaming someone else.

    Trump sometimes seems to still maintain some desire to abide by his election promises but he is become more hemmed in as time progresses and clearly he is surrounded by handlers who no doubt feed him exactly what they want to manipulate his behaviour and decisions. The longer it goes the better they’ll be at it. He is also a narcissist so the approval he gets across the board when he bombs someone or sends troops in somewhere will become hard for him to resist. I think his love of self exceeds his love of the USA by orders of magnitude.

    So I don’t see any real hope at all.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  207. @Beefcake the Mighty

    Interesting observation about the Hitler slurs we are accustomed to. Of course it reflects who runs the show. I had never thought of the connection before.

  208. Erebus says:
    @anon

    Indeed it did, though I never really thought of it as Silk Road proper. Rather, as part of the ancient African trade routes that eventually tied in with the Eurasian Silk Roads via ancient trade routes in the Middle East and Europe itself.

    The ancient world was criss-crossed by trade flows and at some point one has to distinguish between them. Many pre-date trade with China, so they can’t meaningfully all be Silk Roads.

  209. Erebus says:
    @anon

    Sorry, I know little/nothing about LaRouche. Perhaps I should learn more.

    Obviously, I can’t “buy the whole package” because I’m unaware of it, but I certainly can’t buy any of what you’ve said about it. It may be what’s coming, but I’d hope for the diametric opposite, in fact. I’d rather think that economic growth will plateau and allow us to consolidate our gains, stabilize our population and eliminate/learn from the losses & mistakes we made in our mad rush up the left side of the Bell Curve.

    That I’d rather think so is no prediction, much less a guarantee that it will happen. 🙂

    • Replies: @anon
  210. @Rabbitnexus

    Probably true, unfortunately. BTW the whole Ukraine thing is probably less directed at an insider like Biden but rather at the hard left faction in the Democratic Party. Impeachment will of course be a huge failure, leading to a major embarrassment that the Party leadership will pin on the “progressives”, leading the way for either Biden or the return of the Hildebeast. It’s actually happened a lot in American politics, party insiders will subvert their more radical members, they may lose an election but they’ll maintain control of the Party (which is what they really want). See the great old American lefty Walter Karp:

    https://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/karp_toc.htm

  211. @Rabbitnexus

    It won’t happen of course and especially now that Uncle Sam has planted his fat arse in the middle of the board and dares anyone to do anything about it. As said that will likely be a long term situation. Given the indication that Washington is not interested in pandering to former delusional thinking about their good intentions but is quite content to remove the mask and show their ugly demonic visage to the world so no amount of legality or morality will shift them.

    Planting one’s fat ass anywhere should start with the question which normal statesmen ask first–if the position where the arse is planted tenable? This is not the question Uncle Sam is taught to ask. Hence the whole ordeal with global re-balancing. Good and effective policies appear only when there is a clear understanding of the adequacy of resources to the objectives which must be achieved. That is where the real problem for the US and the combined West is. Not only they didn’t learn about their enemies, following Sun Tzu’s dictum, they have no idea what they are themselves. Specifically, US weakness (I am not even talking about a bunch of clowns in Europe) became, as was predicted, so evident that it doesn’t matter where the fat arse will be “planted”. I am sure, unless some other arrangements are being made behind the curtain, Russia will have no objections to the US getting embroiled in yet another shooting regional affair, granted these Syrian oil fields are not really big oil providers.

  212. anon[113] • Disclaimer says:
    @Erebus

    I agree, and hope you notice this reply on an old thread.

    I don’t read Karlin (do you?) but was curious about his latest. At the bottom he wrote,

    (25) Nobody really knows the carrying capacity of our industrial world economy – all we can say for sure is that we are still far below the limits to growth.

    My guesstimate is that the planet can support ~100 billion people.

    It may be so, but what kind of a life would it be? Ans this is a strange concept: it’s not what the planet can sustain, but “our industrial world economy” can carry. Is this like bankers making credit default swaps instead of investing in tangible enterprise? Karlin calls himself a futurist. Maybe he as an explanation, but it looks like dystopian science fiction to me.

  213. Smith says:

    Now that the peace deal between Turkey and Russia is officially off, and Erdogan has resumed Operation Peace Spring: https://twitter.com/thomelbyy/status/1192813647975866369

    What happened to the Win-Win-Win-Win Outcome?

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All The Saker Comments via RSS