The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
The War Against Syria: Both Sides Go to “Plan B”
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_116696656

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

In view of the total failure of the US policy to regime-change Syria and overthrow Assad, the time has now come for the United States to make a fundamental choice: to negotiate or double down. Apparently, Kerry and others initially tried to negotiate, but the Pentagon decided otherwise, treacherously broke the terms of the agreement and (illegally) bombed the Syrian forces. At which point, Kerry, Power and the rest of them felt like they had no choice but to “join” the Pentagon and double down. Now the US “warns” Russia that if the Aleppo offensive continues, the US will not resume negotiations. This is a rather bizarre threat considering that the US is clearly unable to stick to any agreement and that the Russians have already concluded that the US is “not-agreement-capable”. The Russia reaction was predictable: Lavrov’s admitted that he could not even take his American colleagues seriously.

Okay, so both sides are fed-up with each other. What comes next?

The US will send more weapons to Daesh, including MANPAD s, TOW s and Javelins. The effect of that will be marginal. Russian fixed-wing aircraft fly at over 5,000m where they are out of reach from MANPADs. They are currently the main provider of firepower support for the Syrians. Russian combat helicopters, while probably not immune to MANPADs, are still very resistant to such attacks due to three factors—survivability, weapons range and tactics: Mi-28s and Ka-52 have missiles with a maximum range of 10km and the way they are typically engaged is in a kind of ‘rotation’ where one helicopters flies to acquire the target, fires, immediately turns back and is replaced by the next one. In this matter they all protect each other while presenting a very difficult target to hit. Russian transport helicopters would, however, be at a much higher risk of being shot down by a US MANPAD. So, yes, if the US floods the Syrian theater with MANPADS, Syrian aircraft and Russian transport helicopters will be put at risk, but that will not be enough to significantly affect Russian or Syrian operations.

Russian escalatory options are far more diverse: Russia can send more T-90 tanks (which TOWs, apparently, cannot defeat), more artillery (especially modern multiple rocket launchers and heavy flamethrower systems like the TOS-1). The Russian Aerospace forces could also decide to engage in much heavier airstrikes including the use of cluster and thermobaric munitions. Finally, Russia could send in actual ground forces ranging in size from a few battalions to, in theory, a full-size brigade. The problem with that option is that this would mark a major increase in the commitment of Russian forces to this war, something which a lot of Russians would oppose. Still, since the Iranians and, especially, Hezbollah have been used like a “fire brigade” to “plug” the holes in the front created by various defeats of Syrian army units, it is not impossible that the Russians might commit a combined-arms battalion tactical group to a crucial segment of the front and then withdraw it as soon as possible. The purpose of this strategy would be double: to support the struggling Syrians with as much firepower as possible while, at the same time, slowly but surely bleeding the Daesh forces until they reach a breaking point. Basically, the same strategy as before the ceasefire.

So why did the Russians agree to that ceasefire in the first place?

Because of the long held belief that a bad ceasefire is better than a good war, because Russia is trying hard not to escalate the confrontation with the US and because Russia believes that time is on her side. I am pretty sure that the Russian military would have preferred to do without that ceasefire, but I am equally sure that they were also okay with trying it out and seeing. This is the old contradiction: westerners also want results *now*, while the Russians always take their time and move very slowly. That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination. Where this typically Russian attitude becomes a problem is when it signals to the leaders of the US deep state that Russia is not only hesitant, but possibly frightened. In a perverse way, the lack of “show of force” by Russia risks giving the Americans the impression that “the Russkies have blinked”. I am always quite amazed when I see western reactions to the soft, diplomatic language used by Russian diplomats. Where the Americans openly compare Putin to Hitler and demand the imposition of a (completely illegal) no-fly zone over Syria, the Russians respond with “my friend John” and “our partners” and “negotiations must proceed”. More often than not, when Americans hear the diplomatic language of the Russians, they mistake it for weakness and they feel further emboldened and they make even more threats. It is in partly for this reason that Russia and the United States are, yet again, on a collision course.

Once the US comes to realize that its policy sending MANPADs to Syria did not work, it will have only one last card to play: attempting to impose a no-fly zone over Syria.

The good news is that judging by this exchange, US generals understand that any such US move would mean war with Russia. The bad news is that the Neocons seem to be dead-set on exactly that. Since such an event has now become possible, we need to look at what exactly this would entail.

ORDER IT NOW

The way the US doctrine mandates imposing a no-fly zone is pretty straightforward: it begins with an intensive series of USAF and USN cruise missile strikes and bombing raids whose aim is to disable the enemy air defenses and command and control capabilities. At this stage heavy jamming and anti-radiation missile strikes play a key role. This is also when the Americans, if they have any hope of achieving a tactical surprise, will also typically strikes at enemy airbases, with a special emphasis on destroying landed aircraft, runways and fuel storage facilities. This first phase can last anything between 48 hours to 10 days, depending on the complexity/survivability of the enemy air defense network. The second phase typically includes the deployment of air-to-air fighters into combat air patrols which are typically controlled by airborne AWACS aircraft. Finally, once the air defense network has been destroyed and air supremacy has been established, strike fighters and bombers are sent in to bomb whatever can be bombed until the enemy surrenders or is crushed.

In Syria, this ideal scenario would run into several problems.

First, while there are only a few S-400/S-300 systems in Syria, the US has never had to operate against them, especially not against the Russian version of these formidable systems. Worse, Russia also has very long range radars which will make it impossible for the USA to achieve a tactical surprise. Last but not least, Russia also has deployed powerful electronic warfare systems which are likely to create total chaos in key US command, control, communications and intelligence systems.

Second, these S-400/S-300 systems are mostly located on what is legally “Russian territory”: the Khmeimim airbase and the Slava-class or Kuznetsov-class cruisers off the Syrian coast. The same goes for the key nodes of the Russian communications network. If the Americans were crazy enough to try to hit a Russian Navy ship that would open up the entire USN to Russian attacks.

Third, while Russia has deployed relatively few aircraft in Syria, and while even fewer of them are air-to-air interceptors, those which Russia has deployed (SU-30SM and SU-35) are substantially superior to any aircraft in the US inventory with the possible exception of the F-22A. While the US will be able to overwhelm the Russians with numbers, it will be at a steep cost.

Fourth, the use of USAF AWACS could be complicated by the possibility that the Russians would decide to deploy their anti-AWACS very-long range missiles (both ground launched and air launched). It is also likely that Russia would deploy her own AWACS in Iranian airspace and protect them with MiG-31BMs making them a very difficult target.

Fifth, even if the USA was somehow able to establish something like an general air superiority over Syria, the Russians would still have three formidable options to continue to strike Daesh deep inside Syria:

1) cruise missiles (launched from naval platforms of Tu-95MS bombers)

2) SU-34/SU-35 strike groups launched from Russia or Iranian

3) supersonic long range bombers (Tu-22M3 and Tu-160)

It would be exceedingly difficult for the US to try to stop such Russian attacks as the USAF and USN have not trained for such missions since the late 1980s.

Sixth, even a successful imposition of a no-fly zone would do little to stop the Russians from using their artillery and attack helicopters (a difficult target for fixed-wing aircraft to begin with). Hunting them down at lower altitudes would further expose the USAF/USN to even more Russia air defenses.

Seven, last but not least, today is not 1995 and Syria is not Bosnia: nowadays the Europeans don’t have the stomach to fight the Syrians, nevermind Russia. So while some European leaders will definitely send at least some aircraft to show their loyalty to Uncle Sam (Poland, Germany, Holland and maybe one 2nd hand F-16 from a Baltic state), the regimes that matter (France, UK, Italy, etc.) are unlikely to be interested in a dangerous and completely illegal military intervention. This is not a military problem for the USA, but would present yet another political difficulty.

To sum all this up I would simply say that if the Americans and their allies have a huge advantage in numbers, in terms of quality they are outgunned by the Russians pretty much at all levels. At the very least, this qualitative edge for the Russians makes the imposition of a (completely illegal!) no-fly zone over Syria an extremely risky proposition. Could they do it? Yes, probably, but only at a very substantial cost and at the very real risk of a full-scale war with Russia. As I have said it many times, Syria is smack in the middle of the CENTCOM/NATO area of “responsibility” end at the outer edge of the Russian power projection capability. Where Russia has tens of aircraft, the Americans can bring in many hundreds. So the real question is not whether the Americans could do it, but rather whether they are willing to pay the price such an operation would entail.

At a political level it is important to repeat the following here:

1) The US presence in Syria – all of it – is completely illegal and has no UNSC mandate

2) Any and all US military operations in Syria are also completely illegal

3) The imposition of a US enforced no-fly zone would also be completely illegal

While this has not stopped the Empire so far, this might offer the Europeans a perfect excuse not to participate in any such operation. Of course, the Americans don’t need any European air force to try to impose a no-fly zone on Syria, but politically this would definitely hurt them.

Finally, there is one more problem for the US to deal with: the imposition of a no-fly zone over Syria is a very large operation which would require hundreds of aircraft. Where would the US operate from? I might be naïve here, but I don’t think that Erdogan would let the US use Incirlik for that purpose. Iraq would most likely at least try close its airspace to any aircraft participating in such operation, especially if Syrian or Russian forces are hit. This leaves Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and US aircraft carriers to launch from. None of them are very suited for that: Jordan does not have the infrastructure and is too close, Israel would not help the US against Russia and neither would Egypt. And while the Saudis have excellent facilities, they are far away. As for aircraft carriers, they are the best option, but they are far from ideal for a sustained air campaign (which the imposition of such a no-fly zone would be).

Again, none of that is a show-stopper, but it very substantially complicates the work of US planners.

Conclusion:

The risk of a US attempt to impose a no-fly zone over Syria will remain very real for the foreseeable future unless, of course, Trump beats Hillary to the White House. If Hillary wins – then that risk will sharply escalate. As for Obama, he probably does not want to stick a big stick in such a hornet’s nest right before leaving the White House (at least I hope so). Finally, regardless of who actually sits in the White House, the idea of imposing a no-fly zone over Syria would have to be measured against the so-called “Powell doctrine” of military interventions. So let’s see how this plan would measure up to the series of questions of the Powell doctrine:

Q: Is a vital national security interest threatened?

A: No

Q: Do we have a clear attainable objective?

A: Kinda

Q: Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?

A: Yes, and they are potentially extremely high

Q: Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?

A: No

Q: Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?

A: No

Q: Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?

A: Yes, and the biggest risk is WWIII against Russia

Q: Is the action supported by the American people?

A: No

Q: Do we have genuine broad international support?

A: No

As we can easily see, this plan fails to meet the minimal criteria of the Powell Doctrine on most points. So as long as somebody mentally sane is in the White House all this talk should remain what it has been so far – empty threats. Of course, if Hillary makes it into the White House and then nominates a maniac like Michèle Flournoy as Secretary of Defense along with a national security team composed of rabid warmongers then all bets are off.

Please consider that before you go to vote.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Russia, Syria 
Hide 143 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. It’s too bad that Powell never applied his own doctrine. If he had, many lives would have been saved and his career may have taken him out of the house slave role to freeman, or even master…could he have become the first black prez instead of the disappointing weakling we have?

    The empire’s Plan A for Syria is “Assad must go”. Plan B is : Syria must go. Syria would go in either case, but now our (western) fearless leaders are coming to terms with the idea that Asad will remain as leader of an Alawite statelet based in Latakia, or maybe, if they swallow hard and grit their teeth, they can stand it if he stays in Damascus with a rump of rump Syria, which they will deride as not the real Syria…and they would be right, except that is not going to happen; because most Syrians support their President, and they now clearly see the plot that has been hatched against their country and the Arab nation, and they know the evil of their enemies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anti_republocrat

    It’s too bad that Powell never applied his own doctrine.
     
    It was not in the nature of the My Lai coverup man.

    they now clearly see the plot that has been hatched against their country and the Arab nation, and they know the evil of their enemies.
     
    Most of them, including most Sunnis, saw it from the beginning. Some became demoralized in 2014 and early 2015, but that's over now. The few who actually joined the revolt and are now being amnestied are the few whose eyes are opened anew and will remember what they have learned.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /tsaker/the-war-against-syria-both-sides-go-to-plan-b/#comment-1592242
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Fifth, even if the USA was somehow able to establish something like an general air superiority over Syria, the Russians would still have three formidable options to continue to strike Daesh deep inside Syria:

    1) cruise missiles (launched from naval platforms of Tu-95MS bombers)

    2) SU-34/SU-35 strike groups launched from Russia or Iranian

    3) supersonic long range bombers (Tu-22M3 and Tu-160)

    Why yes, of course, the natural, logical priority after the US begins knocking Russian warplanes out of the sky would be to continue launching missiles at packs of Wahhabi inbreds in the Syrian desert. /s

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kiza
    I understood this as continue strikes against Daesh and their Western (Israeli, US, French, British) intelligence and logistics officers (as the story goes about the three Caliber missiles) aka US sneakers-on-the-ground (no US boots Made in China, only US sneakers Made in Vietnam).

    But why would US have to knock Russian planes out of the sky to establish "general air superiority", which is obviously not the same as a no-fly zone? They could just increase the number of sorties and start openly and regularly hitting SAA troops on the ground just like Israel is doing. If Russia does not start shooting down their planes (just as it does not shoot-down Israeli now) then they could leave the Russian planes flying. This is like what goes on now just on steroids. If US somehow increased the number of its sorties over Syria say 10 times, would Russia dare shootdown US jets with S400 and S300 just because US is killing Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah?

    What a nitpicker you are. Maybe you could try to make your yellowed comments when you have something of analytical value to say, not to split hairs.

    , @Serge
    Yes, Sacker really should not have told this :)
    IMHO opinion if US starts knocking Russian planes down, saturating Syria with those wonderful S-300/400 and others similar options while hitting US installations in ME with those Caliber and other missiles both sea, air and land based and bringing some air to air fighters plus simultaneously making move against US anti missiles installations along Russia border would be an option. I think Ukraine and Baltic situation is where Russia wants them to be at the moment, but so called anti missile systems and possibility of more is not. It might lead to Cuban style crisis all over again. I do not think Syria should be abandoned in this case, as USA should be pinned down there with Russia trying to expend as little assets as possible while hitting elsewhere where Russia has clear escalation superiority and where the game worth the while. I think making it clear that no anti missile systems can be located anywhere within Russia vicinity is strategical question. I am but amateur so please have mercy on me :)
    Now, it all sounds like madman options quite frankly we do not want to go there.
    P.S: I rarely like Sacker analysis about anything.
    , @Anonymous
    Anatoly, no reason to be so salty.

    Saker was just pointing out that Syria is not Iraq. A no fly zone over Syria would create a lot of blow back for America if it tried, and it wouldn't even be effective since Russia could still target whatever it wanted to.

    No doubt if the US really took out the Russian airforce, Russia would have more important targets on its mind. But the point being that there would be a lot of pain for the US to make that move for very little tactical gain.

    And sorry to say Anatoly but there is a real reason Russia is in this fight besides Putin being BFF with Assad. The plight of Syria affects Russia a great deal. Syria is a major tactical location and acts as a gateway to Europe. That's why Syria has been constantly attacked since forever.

    This affects everything from Russia blue water navy to pipelines to Europe to trade and preventing being isolated. So don't give me this cap about Syria being unimportant to Russia.

    If it is so unimportant, why is the west so hell bent on escalating when they have so little leverage?

    Sorry to have to call you out, but being a Russian Jew I think you are playing both sides here and hope to leave Syria to devolve into greater Isreal and to have Russia focus on Ukraine so they aren't paying attention to the Middle East.

    What a poor excuse of a human you've shown yourself to be here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. […] Written by TheSaker; Originally appeared at TheUnzReview […]

    Read More
  4. […] Written by TheSaker; Originally appeared at TheUnzReview […]

    Read More
  5. Manpads are not the great solution people might think as it is very likely that some of them might end up back in the USA and prove a threat to domestic airlines. Scary indeed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
    This reveals a downside of that standard American technique: accusing your opponent of what you have already been doing.

    The Americans have threatened Russia with sending Russian soldiers home in body bags, and even terrorist attacks on Russian cities. We know that Russians do not threaten, but it may have occurred to some of the brighter Americans that, if they were to deliver a few thousand MANPADS to Syria, some (or even many) of them might turn up soon after in various parts of the USA itself. Possibly even quite close to Washington and its airports, or the White House...

    Flying in Air Force One might not be quite such an undiluated pleasure if you were never sure it would get fairly off the ground (or back down on the ground) before being ripped apart.
    , @Alan
    Well one thing for sure.

    If US domestic planes got hit , we would not even bother to think about it.

    You reap what you sow .. westerners (just to overthrow a good Arab leader to replace him with ISIS.)

    Don't cry for me "Argentina"..
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Darin says:

    Apparently, Kerry and others initially tried to negotiate, but the Pentagon decided otherwise, treacherously broke the terms of the agreement and (illegally) bombed the Syrian forces. At which point, Kerry, Power and the rest of them felt like they had no choice but to “join” the Pentagon and double down.

    If true, if Pentagon really went rogue, its scary situation, resembling the Imperial Japan in 1930′s.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukden_Incident

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

    Almost all “moderate” rebels, that is terrorists, are foreign mercenaries. Most of real Syrian opposition is now quiet or with Assad, for the same reason that many former opponents of Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi came to regret the Western “help”. Fighting for the West makes one a traitor instead of opponent to a dictator. Since money for mercenaries appears to be running out, this limits options available to the Coalition Of the Sponsors of Terrorism (COST) even further. Time is truly running out and this makes the US war functionaries very nervous – they experience hyperventilating emotional break-downs in UN (Powers) and they make totally stupid threats against Russia (Kirby).

    I would agree with Saker’s analysis except on the participation of the EU. If US issues a command its EU puppets will roll out army onto their own streets (to prevent terrorism, of course) and send their airforces to support US in Syria. For example, the French Aircraft carrier is already in the vicinity of Syria. Therefore, Saker commonly and seriously overestimates “Western democracy”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Among the traitors: phony PR assets, the WHITE HELMETS.

    "...making the White Helmets into an international sensation is just one of the successes THe Syria Campaign has achieved in its drive to oust Syria's government."

    Very good article with much detail -
    http://www.alternet.org/world/inside-shadowy-pr-firm-thats-driving-western-opinion-towards-regime-change-syria
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Kiza says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Fifth, even if the USA was somehow able to establish something like an general air superiority over Syria, the Russians would still have three formidable options to continue to strike Daesh deep inside Syria:

    1) cruise missiles (launched from naval platforms of Tu-95MS bombers)

    2) SU-34/SU-35 strike groups launched from Russia or Iranian

    3) supersonic long range bombers (Tu-22M3 and Tu-160)
     
    Why yes, of course, the natural, logical priority after the US begins knocking Russian warplanes out of the sky would be to continue launching missiles at packs of Wahhabi inbreds in the Syrian desert. /s

    I understood this as continue strikes against Daesh and their Western (Israeli, US, French, British) intelligence and logistics officers (as the story goes about the three Caliber missiles) aka US sneakers-on-the-ground (no US boots Made in China, only US sneakers Made in Vietnam).

    But why would US have to knock Russian planes out of the sky to establish “general air superiority”, which is obviously not the same as a no-fly zone? They could just increase the number of sorties and start openly and regularly hitting SAA troops on the ground just like Israel is doing. If Russia does not start shooting down their planes (just as it does not shoot-down Israeli now) then they could leave the Russian planes flying. This is like what goes on now just on steroids. If US somehow increased the number of its sorties over Syria say 10 times, would Russia dare shootdown US jets with S400 and S300 just because US is killing Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah?

    What a nitpicker you are. Maybe you could try to make your yellowed comments when you have something of analytical value to say, not to split hairs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Israel does not openly or regularly hit SAA troops on the ground. The US has only attacked a Syrian government target once in five years of war.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    First off, the Saker uses "no-fly zone" 11 times in his article, and "general air superiority" once, so naturally I assume he is talking of the former. (Especially since the latter will naturally come about as a consequence of the former). And as the good American general points out, whom Saker cites himself, a no-fly zone is an act of war against Russia. The only way that would not be the case would be if the US and Russia agree on jointly establishing a no-fly zone, but that is obviously not in the cards. So I assume the no-fly zone will involve the actual classical features of an American no-fly zone: Only US aircraft are to be allowed to operate within it, with anything that potentially threatens them (other fighters; SAM systems) to be destroyed without notice.

    Second, if I was a US planner relying on the Saker's analysis, who wanted to humiliate Russia, I would quite frankly be pushing all out for a no-fly zone!

    Why wouldn't I? Let's take a look at the essence of his proposals, which are essentially the following two ideas:

    (1) Bleeding Russian air assets in a now completely futile attempt to help the SAA, in the face of an enemy that even the Saker admits had an order of magnitude more air assets to bring to the table. It struggles enough to make permanent gains when it has help from both the SyAF and RuAF; after a no-fly zone is imposed, it is safe to say the SAA, never high in morale to begin with, will crumble.

    (2) Recall that brigade which Russia had sent in previously? They now find themselves in a spot of bother! Absence of air support, quite possibly under air attack from the Americans themselves, are expected to make up for the deficiencies of the SAA, which is not only as incompetent and riddled with corruption as ever but is now disintegrating besides. At which point the Kremlin will tell them to either perish heroically for no purpose or if they have some scrap of conscience left they will beg the US and Turkey to allow them a temporary air corridor to airlift them back to Russia.

    This will of course do wonders for Putin's popularity. /s

    The next couple of years will be consumed with managing nationalist and liberal protest, who will once again make common cause as they did in 2011 and may well be a lot bloodier this time round. Ukraine will doubtless use this opportunity for an Operation Storm and it cannot be excluded it will be successful. As the advisor who pushed for the no-fly zone, I will be extremely chuffed and presumably up for promotion.

    Fortunately, I don't really think the Kremlins are as stupid and don't take "Syrian-Slavic Orthodox brotherhood" as seriously as the Saker apparently believes they do.

    , @Stein
    Big difference to IDF attacks: they normally cause no casualties, are more like warning assaults. Otherwise they would not have been tolerated and Israel have ceased the large-scale air attacks that were seen early in the war.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. The real problem here is that you can’t trust anything Washington says and there may come a time when Washington needs people to believe them, but no one will. This isn’t just one administration either. It seems to be the mindset or worldview of the American Establishment.

    As an American I’m embarrassed by my country and have been since at least the Clinton administration. George W. Bush was VERY hard to take, but given our system all you have do is wait it out and eventually they leave office.

    Oh well. Our country has essentially been hijacked by Globalists bent on world domination through force. I don’t really know what to tell foreigners, except for “Don’t trust Washington.” Any agreements you make with Washington need to be of short duration and have liberal escape clauses in them. They will try to hold you accountable to the deal while giving themselves a pass to violate it. You can’t look to Washington for leadership. You will have to find your own way forward.

    America has lost its way.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
    'I don’t really know what to tell foreigners, except for “Don’t trust Washington.”'

    And even that would be superfluous, if the foreigners in question have an elementary knowledge of history.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. 5371 says:
    @Kiza
    I understood this as continue strikes against Daesh and their Western (Israeli, US, French, British) intelligence and logistics officers (as the story goes about the three Caliber missiles) aka US sneakers-on-the-ground (no US boots Made in China, only US sneakers Made in Vietnam).

    But why would US have to knock Russian planes out of the sky to establish "general air superiority", which is obviously not the same as a no-fly zone? They could just increase the number of sorties and start openly and regularly hitting SAA troops on the ground just like Israel is doing. If Russia does not start shooting down their planes (just as it does not shoot-down Israeli now) then they could leave the Russian planes flying. This is like what goes on now just on steroids. If US somehow increased the number of its sorties over Syria say 10 times, would Russia dare shootdown US jets with S400 and S300 just because US is killing Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah?

    What a nitpicker you are. Maybe you could try to make your yellowed comments when you have something of analytical value to say, not to split hairs.

    Israel does not openly or regularly hit SAA troops on the ground. The US has only attacked a Syrian government target once in five years of war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Fish and Cip
    The US and/or "Coalition" aircraft struck Syrian troops in Deir ez-Zor on December 6 of last year, killing four, I think. The US wants the SAA out of that area because it could be a valuable staging area for liberating Raqqa, and the US already has some evil secret maps for repartitioning the Arab territories of the former Ottoman Empire - since, apparently our betters think that the partitions of the Mandate period did not go far enough.

    The Israelis have also struck government positions around Damascus and in the Quneitra area many times, including the assassination by missile of a prominent Palestinian Druze activist/former terrorist as well as striking a Hezbollah/SAA convoy near Quneitra that killed Imad Mughnieh's son and an Iranian General.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @5371
    Israel does not openly or regularly hit SAA troops on the ground. The US has only attacked a Syrian government target once in five years of war.

    The US and/or “Coalition” aircraft struck Syrian troops in Deir ez-Zor on December 6 of last year, killing four, I think. The US wants the SAA out of that area because it could be a valuable staging area for liberating Raqqa, and the US already has some evil secret maps for repartitioning the Arab territories of the former Ottoman Empire – since, apparently our betters think that the partitions of the Mandate period did not go far enough.

    The Israelis have also struck government positions around Damascus and in the Quneitra area many times, including the assassination by missile of a prominent Palestinian Druze activist/former terrorist as well as striking a Hezbollah/SAA convoy near Quneitra that killed Imad Mughnieh’s son and an Iranian General.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon_the_nth
    ISIS is only an umbrella name. Its function is to act as an intermediary vessel controlling land, since you know, land "occupied by terrorists isn't really anyone's land". ISIS takes land and gives it to USA. East Syria is an important area for Pipelinestan, for negotiations and the balkanization process. Raqqa may or may not be important for the same reason, but now that SAA is further away from Raqqa, so is US interest in it less than it was before, hence no race to Raqqa for now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. The US coalition aircraft struck a Syrian position – also in Deir al Zor – on Dec 6 of last year. Apparently our betters think that the partitions of the Arab territory of the former Ottoman Empire that happened during the Mandate period did not go far enough and eastern Syria is supposed to go to a future Salafistan.

    The Israelis have hit government positions in the Damascus area several times since 2011 as well as in the Quneitra area – recently, and not so recently.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  13. Sorry for the double. I thought my comment had gone where most of my posts at The Intercept go…but this isn’t a “gatekeeper” site, I see.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. You guys had better hope that Trump wins the election and is able to rein in the pentagon. If Hillary wins, we have a serious possibility of WWIII with Russia (and China) which could conceivably go nuclear.

    I have never seen anything so asinine in my entire life.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
    Agreed.

    This isn't a comment on the author's essay, but half-way through I had to pinch myself as I realised that what I was reading was a run-through of how the US might attack Russian military forces.

    And all for what appears to be the goal of securing a gas pipeline for the US' wahhabi 'allies'!

    'Asinine' is way too kind. There is no word in English to describe this mind-melting stupidity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @Kiza
    I understood this as continue strikes against Daesh and their Western (Israeli, US, French, British) intelligence and logistics officers (as the story goes about the three Caliber missiles) aka US sneakers-on-the-ground (no US boots Made in China, only US sneakers Made in Vietnam).

    But why would US have to knock Russian planes out of the sky to establish "general air superiority", which is obviously not the same as a no-fly zone? They could just increase the number of sorties and start openly and regularly hitting SAA troops on the ground just like Israel is doing. If Russia does not start shooting down their planes (just as it does not shoot-down Israeli now) then they could leave the Russian planes flying. This is like what goes on now just on steroids. If US somehow increased the number of its sorties over Syria say 10 times, would Russia dare shootdown US jets with S400 and S300 just because US is killing Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah?

    What a nitpicker you are. Maybe you could try to make your yellowed comments when you have something of analytical value to say, not to split hairs.

    First off, the Saker uses “no-fly zone” 11 times in his article, and “general air superiority” once, so naturally I assume he is talking of the former. (Especially since the latter will naturally come about as a consequence of the former). And as the good American general points out, whom Saker cites himself, a no-fly zone is an act of war against Russia. The only way that would not be the case would be if the US and Russia agree on jointly establishing a no-fly zone, but that is obviously not in the cards. So I assume the no-fly zone will involve the actual classical features of an American no-fly zone: Only US aircraft are to be allowed to operate within it, with anything that potentially threatens them (other fighters; SAM systems) to be destroyed without notice.

    Second, if I was a US planner relying on the Saker’s analysis, who wanted to humiliate Russia, I would quite frankly be pushing all out for a no-fly zone!

    Why wouldn’t I? Let’s take a look at the essence of his proposals, which are essentially the following two ideas:

    (1) Bleeding Russian air assets in a now completely futile attempt to help the SAA, in the face of an enemy that even the Saker admits had an order of magnitude more air assets to bring to the table. It struggles enough to make permanent gains when it has help from both the SyAF and RuAF; after a no-fly zone is imposed, it is safe to say the SAA, never high in morale to begin with, will crumble.

    (2) Recall that brigade which Russia had sent in previously? They now find themselves in a spot of bother! Absence of air support, quite possibly under air attack from the Americans themselves, are expected to make up for the deficiencies of the SAA, which is not only as incompetent and riddled with corruption as ever but is now disintegrating besides. At which point the Kremlin will tell them to either perish heroically for no purpose or if they have some scrap of conscience left they will beg the US and Turkey to allow them a temporary air corridor to airlift them back to Russia.

    This will of course do wonders for Putin’s popularity. /s

    The next couple of years will be consumed with managing nationalist and liberal protest, who will once again make common cause as they did in 2011 and may well be a lot bloodier this time round. Ukraine will doubtless use this opportunity for an Operation Storm and it cannot be excluded it will be successful. As the advisor who pushed for the no-fly zone, I will be extremely chuffed and presumably up for promotion.

    Fortunately, I don’t really think the Kremlins are as stupid and don’t take “Syrian-Slavic Orthodox brotherhood” as seriously as the Saker apparently believes they do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Gigi
    so, what is your expected/most probable course of events? Thanks
    , @5371
    I take your comment not as blackpilling, but as pointing out that Russia would have better things to do than go on aimlessly lobbing missiles at IS.
    , @g2k

    Why wouldn’t I?
     
    Not wanting to get into a potentially escalatory situation in which strategic nukes could be used is certainly a big reason. Same reason they didn't attack impose a no fly zone over Russia in the 90s and early 00s to help the cuddly Chechens (yes, there is the point about the conventional forces in Syria being especially vulnerable, but still) and carve it up like Yugoslavia.

    Whilst that scenario is certainly a possibility, and will become more plausible if the hag gets elected, it's still pretty far fetched. The Somalia/Yemen/Iraq scenario is more likely; the war drags on for years, but the intensity of the fighting dwindles very slowly, eventually ending with periodic skirmishes as de-facto partition emerges, even if unacknowledged/unrecognised.

    The usual suspects are spitting feathers, but, even amongst the political elite, there hasn't been the same consensus that developed over Ukraine (nobody serious is even taking about sanctions) and the us military types seem the least keen of all to get involved.

    Having said all of this, it seems very surprising that nobody has seriously suggested partition yet, not least the Russians (I can see why the backers of the rebels would oppose this). It would leave the government in charge of the least damaged and most prosperous and civilised parts of the country, all of the coast and remove the inherent instability of the place that's always been present.

    , @Max Payne
    I have to agree.

    If I was the US I'd risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone (though I don't agree with what the US is doing, from their standpoint the risk/reward seems acceptable especially if it gets that Russian thorn out of its side). Sure it'll cost some lives, a few downed jets, probably a downed pilot or two decapitated but after the that the world will know (or be reminded) of the mid-range projection of CENTCOM and the technological capabilities of the US military. Even better is shredding Russian assets on TV. People don't know numbers, how much is deployed where and what things can do... they'll see flybys of F-22s and snippets of crashing Su-23s and people will assume its like the First Gulf War all over.

    After the operation the US can decelerate and patch things up with Russia, Russians always fall for appeasement (after all they believe a bad peace is better than a good war...that's why their economy failed by the way; war is good business). The US will make 1-2 substantial concessions that are of Russian interests (like backing away from Ukraine or at the least giving that campaign a 5-year 'ignore' status), a few token gestures (like easing travel restrictions), some kind words, and Russia will be all happy and move on and the US would have sent a clear message that if need be it can push over your allies and get you.


    More often than not, when Americans hear the diplomatic language of the Russians, they mistake it for weakness and they feel further emboldened and they make even more threats.
     
    When you have a criminal mentality diplomacy is just another sign of weakness. Jailhouse rules.
    , @Kiza
    This is a real contribution Anatoly.

    An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel's almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone Russia. It is better not to declare an act of war if you cannot or will not respond in kind.

    I do not agree with the rest of your analysis, principally because you assume little or no political cost of almost any Pentagon's action in Syria. If there was no political cost, a US no-fly zone would have been declared even before the Russian contingent arrived. In other words, Carter can get away with a stunt of taking out about 200 SAA troops, but to declare a no fly zone he cannot. Only Hillary could fulfill her election campaign promise and declare one, but there is good three months before now and her inauguration. If the Russians do not get delayed by any more by the Kerry the circus clown show, maybe they could bring the Syrian situation to where a no-fly zone would not be a useful option.

    But this is your opinion with explanations and I respect it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. Gigi says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    First off, the Saker uses "no-fly zone" 11 times in his article, and "general air superiority" once, so naturally I assume he is talking of the former. (Especially since the latter will naturally come about as a consequence of the former). And as the good American general points out, whom Saker cites himself, a no-fly zone is an act of war against Russia. The only way that would not be the case would be if the US and Russia agree on jointly establishing a no-fly zone, but that is obviously not in the cards. So I assume the no-fly zone will involve the actual classical features of an American no-fly zone: Only US aircraft are to be allowed to operate within it, with anything that potentially threatens them (other fighters; SAM systems) to be destroyed without notice.

    Second, if I was a US planner relying on the Saker's analysis, who wanted to humiliate Russia, I would quite frankly be pushing all out for a no-fly zone!

    Why wouldn't I? Let's take a look at the essence of his proposals, which are essentially the following two ideas:

    (1) Bleeding Russian air assets in a now completely futile attempt to help the SAA, in the face of an enemy that even the Saker admits had an order of magnitude more air assets to bring to the table. It struggles enough to make permanent gains when it has help from both the SyAF and RuAF; after a no-fly zone is imposed, it is safe to say the SAA, never high in morale to begin with, will crumble.

    (2) Recall that brigade which Russia had sent in previously? They now find themselves in a spot of bother! Absence of air support, quite possibly under air attack from the Americans themselves, are expected to make up for the deficiencies of the SAA, which is not only as incompetent and riddled with corruption as ever but is now disintegrating besides. At which point the Kremlin will tell them to either perish heroically for no purpose or if they have some scrap of conscience left they will beg the US and Turkey to allow them a temporary air corridor to airlift them back to Russia.

    This will of course do wonders for Putin's popularity. /s

    The next couple of years will be consumed with managing nationalist and liberal protest, who will once again make common cause as they did in 2011 and may well be a lot bloodier this time round. Ukraine will doubtless use this opportunity for an Operation Storm and it cannot be excluded it will be successful. As the advisor who pushed for the no-fly zone, I will be extremely chuffed and presumably up for promotion.

    Fortunately, I don't really think the Kremlins are as stupid and don't take "Syrian-Slavic Orthodox brotherhood" as seriously as the Saker apparently believes they do.

    so, what is your expected/most probable course of events? Thanks

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I certainly hope it won't come to a no-fly zone. I don't think it will come to that even under Hillary Clinton.

    If it does, however, I certainly hope that Russia doesn't expend limited manpower and resources in an assuredly futile attempt to shore up Assad, who is only friends with Russia by necessity. (Before 2011 he was a more frequent visitor to Paris than to Moscow).

    If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage - that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @Fish and Cip
    The US and/or "Coalition" aircraft struck Syrian troops in Deir ez-Zor on December 6 of last year, killing four, I think. The US wants the SAA out of that area because it could be a valuable staging area for liberating Raqqa, and the US already has some evil secret maps for repartitioning the Arab territories of the former Ottoman Empire - since, apparently our betters think that the partitions of the Mandate period did not go far enough.

    The Israelis have also struck government positions around Damascus and in the Quneitra area many times, including the assassination by missile of a prominent Palestinian Druze activist/former terrorist as well as striking a Hezbollah/SAA convoy near Quneitra that killed Imad Mughnieh's son and an Iranian General.

    ISIS is only an umbrella name. Its function is to act as an intermediary vessel controlling land, since you know, land “occupied by terrorists isn’t really anyone’s land”. ISIS takes land and gives it to USA. East Syria is an important area for Pipelinestan, for negotiations and the balkanization process. Raqqa may or may not be important for the same reason, but now that SAA is further away from Raqqa, so is US interest in it less than it was before, hence no race to Raqqa for now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Not this pipeline crap again! Don't people learn anything from those who claimed the US's Afghan occupation was all about building a pipeline to get the GAZILLION barrels of oil out from under the Caspian?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. 5371 says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    First off, the Saker uses "no-fly zone" 11 times in his article, and "general air superiority" once, so naturally I assume he is talking of the former. (Especially since the latter will naturally come about as a consequence of the former). And as the good American general points out, whom Saker cites himself, a no-fly zone is an act of war against Russia. The only way that would not be the case would be if the US and Russia agree on jointly establishing a no-fly zone, but that is obviously not in the cards. So I assume the no-fly zone will involve the actual classical features of an American no-fly zone: Only US aircraft are to be allowed to operate within it, with anything that potentially threatens them (other fighters; SAM systems) to be destroyed without notice.

    Second, if I was a US planner relying on the Saker's analysis, who wanted to humiliate Russia, I would quite frankly be pushing all out for a no-fly zone!

    Why wouldn't I? Let's take a look at the essence of his proposals, which are essentially the following two ideas:

    (1) Bleeding Russian air assets in a now completely futile attempt to help the SAA, in the face of an enemy that even the Saker admits had an order of magnitude more air assets to bring to the table. It struggles enough to make permanent gains when it has help from both the SyAF and RuAF; after a no-fly zone is imposed, it is safe to say the SAA, never high in morale to begin with, will crumble.

    (2) Recall that brigade which Russia had sent in previously? They now find themselves in a spot of bother! Absence of air support, quite possibly under air attack from the Americans themselves, are expected to make up for the deficiencies of the SAA, which is not only as incompetent and riddled with corruption as ever but is now disintegrating besides. At which point the Kremlin will tell them to either perish heroically for no purpose or if they have some scrap of conscience left they will beg the US and Turkey to allow them a temporary air corridor to airlift them back to Russia.

    This will of course do wonders for Putin's popularity. /s

    The next couple of years will be consumed with managing nationalist and liberal protest, who will once again make common cause as they did in 2011 and may well be a lot bloodier this time round. Ukraine will doubtless use this opportunity for an Operation Storm and it cannot be excluded it will be successful. As the advisor who pushed for the no-fly zone, I will be extremely chuffed and presumably up for promotion.

    Fortunately, I don't really think the Kremlins are as stupid and don't take "Syrian-Slavic Orthodox brotherhood" as seriously as the Saker apparently believes they do.

    I take your comment not as blackpilling, but as pointing out that Russia would have better things to do than go on aimlessly lobbing missiles at IS.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Kiza
    How about lobbing missiles at non-existent Western military logistics officers on he ground in Syria who are helping the operations of the moderate head choppers?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. 5371 says:
    @anon_the_nth
    ISIS is only an umbrella name. Its function is to act as an intermediary vessel controlling land, since you know, land "occupied by terrorists isn't really anyone's land". ISIS takes land and gives it to USA. East Syria is an important area for Pipelinestan, for negotiations and the balkanization process. Raqqa may or may not be important for the same reason, but now that SAA is further away from Raqqa, so is US interest in it less than it was before, hence no race to Raqqa for now.

    Not this pipeline crap again! Don’t people learn anything from those who claimed the US’s Afghan occupation was all about building a pipeline to get the GAZILLION barrels of oil out from under the Caspian?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Krollchem
    Wrong! The war against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) was about getting oil out of the Caspian Sea. It was estimated by the USGS that the Caspian Sea contained 200 billion barrels of light sweet oil. The plan was to control the pipeline routes through the FRY. Turns out the USGS screwed up on their oil estimate.

    The war in Afghanistan was about a natural gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to India as described by the newly appointed education minister at the start of the war. Hope you didn't think the war was about capturing or killing Ben Laden (LOL). Come to think of it, the US and UK sure managed to dramatically increase the brown sugar opium production in Afghanistan in support of the KLA heroin production in Kosovo.

    The Qatar pipeline war in Syria was planned ensure that Iran could not transport South Pars oil to Turkey via the Islamic pipeline.

    Just because you know nothing about oil geopolitics and the goals of globalism (control of transportation routes, resources and labor) doesn't negate its importance.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @The Saker

    You forgot to mention China…the Chinese are fully supporting Assad, and the Russian mission in Syria, in every way they can. They are arming, supplying, and training the SAA in Syria…that is to say that they have a significant interest in not letting Syria fall into the bloody hands of the “terrorists” (a.k.a.Western powers, a.k.a. NWO). And the Chinese are currently in the process of increasing their presence in Syria. So, you need to recalculate, and expand your scenarios accordingly.

    ps…the Chinese aren’t going to leave Russia to face the massive US/NATO (NWO) military machine on it’s own…to do so would be reckless and self-destructive. Obviously, the US wants to escalate the conflict. Why? They risk setting the world on fire, over what? A fuckin’ pipeline?! No. I don’t think so. There is obviously something much larger going on here…a greater plan is being implemented.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. @Gigi
    so, what is your expected/most probable course of events? Thanks

    I certainly hope it won’t come to a no-fly zone. I don’t think it will come to that even under Hillary Clinton.

    If it does, however, I certainly hope that Russia doesn’t expend limited manpower and resources in an assuredly futile attempt to shore up Assad, who is only friends with Russia by necessity. (Before 2011 he was a more frequent visitor to Paris than to Moscow).

    If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage – that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage – that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.}

    Ukraine is understandable, but how will Russia 'retaliate' in the Baltics?
    What will it do - invade?
    What benefit will it give Russia: nothing.
    Novorossiya declaring independence and liberating the rest of Eastern Ukraine is one thing: there will be a lot of noise from the usual suspects, but people will eventually come to accept the fact same as Crimea.

    But Baltics are not historic Russian lands: it will be rightly regarded as naked aggression. And there is no long term benefit to Russia: only trouble.
    , @Randal

    I certainly hope it won’t come to a no-fly zone. I don’t think it will come to that even under Hillary Clinton.
     
    I agree with this. Imo the escalation risk is what in the end makes it not a viable option. Though there are a few crazies and ideological zealots around (especially) Clinton who would be prepared to run that risk, the grownups will sit on them (even if one of them is President). This is the benefit of the nuclear peace.

    I've noted before that were it not for the Russian nuclear deterrent, the US sphere would have been at war with Russia by now.


    If it does, however, I certainly hope that Russia doesn’t expend limited manpower and resources in an assuredly futile attempt to shore up Assad, who is only friends with Russia by necessity. (Before 2011 he was a more frequent visitor to Paris than to Moscow).

    If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage – that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.
     
    The problem is that the Russians can't just ignore a declared no fly zone. They either defy it or submit to it - there's no middle way. Politically, they surely have to defy it. And surely politically the US cannot afford to ignore the Russians defying it.

    So if we assume a no fly zone gambit by the US, it is correct to examine the military options in the Syrian theatre because they most likely come into play, even though Russia is at a disastrous disadvantage there and the US sphere has escalation superiority there, as Russia has escalation superiority in Ukraine. But even though Russia has escalation superiority in Ukraine, it has few really beneficial options there, militarily. Yes, it could launch military action in Ukraine in response to US action in Syria, and it could militarily defeat and occupy Ukraine in short order. Then what? All it has achieved is to acquire a largely hostile territory to occupy, and terminally alienated the European states who will then rearm with actual enthusiasm.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. g2k says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    First off, the Saker uses "no-fly zone" 11 times in his article, and "general air superiority" once, so naturally I assume he is talking of the former. (Especially since the latter will naturally come about as a consequence of the former). And as the good American general points out, whom Saker cites himself, a no-fly zone is an act of war against Russia. The only way that would not be the case would be if the US and Russia agree on jointly establishing a no-fly zone, but that is obviously not in the cards. So I assume the no-fly zone will involve the actual classical features of an American no-fly zone: Only US aircraft are to be allowed to operate within it, with anything that potentially threatens them (other fighters; SAM systems) to be destroyed without notice.

    Second, if I was a US planner relying on the Saker's analysis, who wanted to humiliate Russia, I would quite frankly be pushing all out for a no-fly zone!

    Why wouldn't I? Let's take a look at the essence of his proposals, which are essentially the following two ideas:

    (1) Bleeding Russian air assets in a now completely futile attempt to help the SAA, in the face of an enemy that even the Saker admits had an order of magnitude more air assets to bring to the table. It struggles enough to make permanent gains when it has help from both the SyAF and RuAF; after a no-fly zone is imposed, it is safe to say the SAA, never high in morale to begin with, will crumble.

    (2) Recall that brigade which Russia had sent in previously? They now find themselves in a spot of bother! Absence of air support, quite possibly under air attack from the Americans themselves, are expected to make up for the deficiencies of the SAA, which is not only as incompetent and riddled with corruption as ever but is now disintegrating besides. At which point the Kremlin will tell them to either perish heroically for no purpose or if they have some scrap of conscience left they will beg the US and Turkey to allow them a temporary air corridor to airlift them back to Russia.

    This will of course do wonders for Putin's popularity. /s

    The next couple of years will be consumed with managing nationalist and liberal protest, who will once again make common cause as they did in 2011 and may well be a lot bloodier this time round. Ukraine will doubtless use this opportunity for an Operation Storm and it cannot be excluded it will be successful. As the advisor who pushed for the no-fly zone, I will be extremely chuffed and presumably up for promotion.

    Fortunately, I don't really think the Kremlins are as stupid and don't take "Syrian-Slavic Orthodox brotherhood" as seriously as the Saker apparently believes they do.

    Why wouldn’t I?

    Not wanting to get into a potentially escalatory situation in which strategic nukes could be used is certainly a big reason. Same reason they didn’t attack impose a no fly zone over Russia in the 90s and early 00s to help the cuddly Chechens (yes, there is the point about the conventional forces in Syria being especially vulnerable, but still) and carve it up like Yugoslavia.

    Whilst that scenario is certainly a possibility, and will become more plausible if the hag gets elected, it’s still pretty far fetched. The Somalia/Yemen/Iraq scenario is more likely; the war drags on for years, but the intensity of the fighting dwindles very slowly, eventually ending with periodic skirmishes as de-facto partition emerges, even if unacknowledged/unrecognised.

    The usual suspects are spitting feathers, but, even amongst the political elite, there hasn’t been the same consensus that developed over Ukraine (nobody serious is even taking about sanctions) and the us military types seem the least keen of all to get involved.

    Having said all of this, it seems very surprising that nobody has seriously suggested partition yet, not least the Russians (I can see why the backers of the rebels would oppose this). It would leave the government in charge of the least damaged and most prosperous and civilised parts of the country, all of the coast and remove the inherent instability of the place that’s always been present.

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

    Reminds me of the rarely (if ever) mentioned results of the MANPADs employed by Hezbollah in the 2006 Lebanon war. So effective were they in shooting down IDF choppers, the bulk of IDF choppers were grounded. Never heard about that, did you?
    Did you hear the one about the 50 Merkava main battle tanks they also knocked out? Kornet ATGM, mostly.
    Ever hear of Kosovo? It was there the US sent ‘Apaches to the rescue’ except after losing the first two choppers sent out on test/probe missions, within the hour, these choppers too were grounded, never employed and sent to Albania for the duration.

    Despite all the rah rah rah for the low level combat aircraft like choppers and the A-10, attempting to fly combat missions in foggy, rainy woods, hills and mountains, results in a short life expectancy.

    Google: Verba MANPAD

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. Max Payne says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    First off, the Saker uses "no-fly zone" 11 times in his article, and "general air superiority" once, so naturally I assume he is talking of the former. (Especially since the latter will naturally come about as a consequence of the former). And as the good American general points out, whom Saker cites himself, a no-fly zone is an act of war against Russia. The only way that would not be the case would be if the US and Russia agree on jointly establishing a no-fly zone, but that is obviously not in the cards. So I assume the no-fly zone will involve the actual classical features of an American no-fly zone: Only US aircraft are to be allowed to operate within it, with anything that potentially threatens them (other fighters; SAM systems) to be destroyed without notice.

    Second, if I was a US planner relying on the Saker's analysis, who wanted to humiliate Russia, I would quite frankly be pushing all out for a no-fly zone!

    Why wouldn't I? Let's take a look at the essence of his proposals, which are essentially the following two ideas:

    (1) Bleeding Russian air assets in a now completely futile attempt to help the SAA, in the face of an enemy that even the Saker admits had an order of magnitude more air assets to bring to the table. It struggles enough to make permanent gains when it has help from both the SyAF and RuAF; after a no-fly zone is imposed, it is safe to say the SAA, never high in morale to begin with, will crumble.

    (2) Recall that brigade which Russia had sent in previously? They now find themselves in a spot of bother! Absence of air support, quite possibly under air attack from the Americans themselves, are expected to make up for the deficiencies of the SAA, which is not only as incompetent and riddled with corruption as ever but is now disintegrating besides. At which point the Kremlin will tell them to either perish heroically for no purpose or if they have some scrap of conscience left they will beg the US and Turkey to allow them a temporary air corridor to airlift them back to Russia.

    This will of course do wonders for Putin's popularity. /s

    The next couple of years will be consumed with managing nationalist and liberal protest, who will once again make common cause as they did in 2011 and may well be a lot bloodier this time round. Ukraine will doubtless use this opportunity for an Operation Storm and it cannot be excluded it will be successful. As the advisor who pushed for the no-fly zone, I will be extremely chuffed and presumably up for promotion.

    Fortunately, I don't really think the Kremlins are as stupid and don't take "Syrian-Slavic Orthodox brotherhood" as seriously as the Saker apparently believes they do.

    I have to agree.

    If I was the US I’d risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone (though I don’t agree with what the US is doing, from their standpoint the risk/reward seems acceptable especially if it gets that Russian thorn out of its side). Sure it’ll cost some lives, a few downed jets, probably a downed pilot or two decapitated but after the that the world will know (or be reminded) of the mid-range projection of CENTCOM and the technological capabilities of the US military. Even better is shredding Russian assets on TV. People don’t know numbers, how much is deployed where and what things can do… they’ll see flybys of F-22s and snippets of crashing Su-23s and people will assume its like the First Gulf War all over.

    After the operation the US can decelerate and patch things up with Russia, Russians always fall for appeasement (after all they believe a bad peace is better than a good war…that’s why their economy failed by the way; war is good business). The US will make 1-2 substantial concessions that are of Russian interests (like backing away from Ukraine or at the least giving that campaign a 5-year ‘ignore’ status), a few token gestures (like easing travel restrictions), some kind words, and Russia will be all happy and move on and the US would have sent a clear message that if need be it can push over your allies and get you.

    More often than not, when Americans hear the diplomatic language of the Russians, they mistake it for weakness and they feel further emboldened and they make even more threats.

    When you have a criminal mentality diplomacy is just another sign of weakness. Jailhouse rules.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bluedog
    You have to be out of your freaking mind speaking about criminal mentality,now just why in hell would we wish to create another failed state, why in hell are we even over there attacking another sovereign nation without cause, maybe its time the world did end up in a mushroom cloud for it appears we have far to many with a criminal mentality.!!!
    , @Simple Pseudonymic Handle
    "If I was the US I’d risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone"

    I hope no one in Washington is that stupid. If I were a nationalist Russian, there is no way I'd EVER tolerate a loss to that evil POS empire, especially one grounded in blatantly illegal Hitleresque aggression. I'd invade Ukraine and the Baltics + crater NATO headquarters in retaliation. Put that on tv. Any and all Russian casualties would be met with efforts to reciprocate with American casualties, not limited to the Syrian front or even just conventional weapons. Anyone who thinks an illegal no fly-zone is a good idea is a fool who is seriously misreading the situation.

    , @Randal

    If I was the US I’d risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone (though I don’t agree with what the US is doing, from their standpoint the risk/reward seems acceptable especially if it gets that Russian thorn out of its side). Sure it’ll cost some lives, a few downed jets, probably a downed pilot or two decapitated but after the that the world will know (or be reminded) of the mid-range projection of CENTCOM and the technological capabilities of the US military.
     
    You omit the main cost of the "no fly zone" gambit as far as the US regime is concerned - the unacceptably high risk of escalation.

    Doubtless the US and its regional allies could crush the Russian expeditionary force in Syria at a bearable cost, viewed in isolation. But that means suppressing or destroying the Russian fleet in the Med, with the potential involvement of submarine warfare out of theatre and the likely loss of some US ships and the likely need for the US to pre-empt such attacks or retaliate for them, and it means the Russians being likely to take out bases in Turkey and the Gulf states, again expanding the conflict unpredictably.

    Escalation on that scale is probably not worth risking, even for some of the more wild-eyed Clintonist R2P and US-uber-alles types in and around the US regime and military, and those who would like to take the risk are likely to be squashed by their more sensible colleagues. We still live in the shade of the nuclear peace, as far as direct conflict between the superpowers in concerned.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Svigor says:

    Question for the gallery: are there any good blogs about Russian geopolitics and military out there that aren’t in the tank for the Kremlin, like Saker here?

    Read More
    • Troll: landlubber
    • Replies: @Simple Pseudonymic Handle
    "Question for the gallery: are there any good blogs about Russian geopolitics and military out there that aren’t in the tank for the Kremlin, like Saker here?"

    Sorry, you'll have to stick to American publications, all of which are in the tank for Washington and its lies. Find those WMD yet?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Svigor says:

    Nothing to say about MH17, eh? Not surprised.

    In view of the total failure of the US policy to regime-change Syria and overthrow Assad, the time has now come for the United States to make a fundamental choice: to negotiate or double down. Apparently, Kerry and others initially tried to negotiate, but the Pentagon decided otherwise, treacherously broke the terms of the agreement and (illegally) bombed the Syrian forces.

    Well, that’s been the Kremlin’s (and thus your) talking point, anyway. Maybe Hussein ordered the strike. And if the Kremlin decides that Hussein ordering the strike would better serve their interests, that will quickly become Saker’s story.

    Note that I have nothing against Putin, the Kremlin, or Russia. But I still know a Kremlin shill when I see one.

    This is a rather bizarre threat considering that the US is clearly unable to stick to any agreement and that the Russians have already concluded that the US is “not-agreement-capable”.

    Yes, we all saw your devastating piece about the Kremlin’s devastating deployment of the devastating rhetoric of “not agreement capable.” It was devastating. I was devastated.

    As for the rest of the piece, it seems to be an effort to characterize something the US probably won’t do (no-fly zone) as something the US won’t do because they’re scared of the Bear. Sure, whatever floats your boat.

    Are you the best the Kremlin can afford? Or are you simply the best of a set of bad choices?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Kiza says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    First off, the Saker uses "no-fly zone" 11 times in his article, and "general air superiority" once, so naturally I assume he is talking of the former. (Especially since the latter will naturally come about as a consequence of the former). And as the good American general points out, whom Saker cites himself, a no-fly zone is an act of war against Russia. The only way that would not be the case would be if the US and Russia agree on jointly establishing a no-fly zone, but that is obviously not in the cards. So I assume the no-fly zone will involve the actual classical features of an American no-fly zone: Only US aircraft are to be allowed to operate within it, with anything that potentially threatens them (other fighters; SAM systems) to be destroyed without notice.

    Second, if I was a US planner relying on the Saker's analysis, who wanted to humiliate Russia, I would quite frankly be pushing all out for a no-fly zone!

    Why wouldn't I? Let's take a look at the essence of his proposals, which are essentially the following two ideas:

    (1) Bleeding Russian air assets in a now completely futile attempt to help the SAA, in the face of an enemy that even the Saker admits had an order of magnitude more air assets to bring to the table. It struggles enough to make permanent gains when it has help from both the SyAF and RuAF; after a no-fly zone is imposed, it is safe to say the SAA, never high in morale to begin with, will crumble.

    (2) Recall that brigade which Russia had sent in previously? They now find themselves in a spot of bother! Absence of air support, quite possibly under air attack from the Americans themselves, are expected to make up for the deficiencies of the SAA, which is not only as incompetent and riddled with corruption as ever but is now disintegrating besides. At which point the Kremlin will tell them to either perish heroically for no purpose or if they have some scrap of conscience left they will beg the US and Turkey to allow them a temporary air corridor to airlift them back to Russia.

    This will of course do wonders for Putin's popularity. /s

    The next couple of years will be consumed with managing nationalist and liberal protest, who will once again make common cause as they did in 2011 and may well be a lot bloodier this time round. Ukraine will doubtless use this opportunity for an Operation Storm and it cannot be excluded it will be successful. As the advisor who pushed for the no-fly zone, I will be extremely chuffed and presumably up for promotion.

    Fortunately, I don't really think the Kremlins are as stupid and don't take "Syrian-Slavic Orthodox brotherhood" as seriously as the Saker apparently believes they do.

    This is a real contribution Anatoly.

    An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel’s almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone Russia. It is better not to declare an act of war if you cannot or will not respond in kind.

    I do not agree with the rest of your analysis, principally because you assume little or no political cost of almost any Pentagon’s action in Syria. If there was no political cost, a US no-fly zone would have been declared even before the Russian contingent arrived. In other words, Carter can get away with a stunt of taking out about 200 SAA troops, but to declare a no fly zone he cannot. Only Hillary could fulfill her election campaign promise and declare one, but there is good three months before now and her inauguration. If the Russians do not get delayed by any more by the Kerry the circus clown show, maybe they could bring the Syrian situation to where a no-fly zone would not be a useful option.

    But this is your opinion with explanations and I respect it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
    "An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel’s almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone Russia".

    That turns out not to be the case. In fact, an act of war is in no way dependent on being declared or made the subject of a complaint. Of course, the consequences that may follow are different in each case. However, any act of war establishes a state of war between the aggressor and the victim. Until that state of war is formally ended by an agreement of peace between both parties, the war continues to exist.

    A bully like the US government would, of course, dearly love to create a doctrine whereby unprovoked acts of aggression are not considered as such unless the victim complains of them. If victims are made sufficiently afraid of the consequences of complaining, they will remain silent and then it can be argued that no act of war has taken place! A conclusion which is obviously ridiculous, both in ethical and legal terms.

    Israel's bombing of the SAA or any other target on Syrian soil is an act of war, and created a state of war between Israel and Syria. Like the USA, Israel hopes that it will not suffer any consequences from this because of its overwhelming military power.

    So did Hitler when he invaded the USSR.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Bluedog says:
    @Max Payne
    I have to agree.

    If I was the US I'd risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone (though I don't agree with what the US is doing, from their standpoint the risk/reward seems acceptable especially if it gets that Russian thorn out of its side). Sure it'll cost some lives, a few downed jets, probably a downed pilot or two decapitated but after the that the world will know (or be reminded) of the mid-range projection of CENTCOM and the technological capabilities of the US military. Even better is shredding Russian assets on TV. People don't know numbers, how much is deployed where and what things can do... they'll see flybys of F-22s and snippets of crashing Su-23s and people will assume its like the First Gulf War all over.

    After the operation the US can decelerate and patch things up with Russia, Russians always fall for appeasement (after all they believe a bad peace is better than a good war...that's why their economy failed by the way; war is good business). The US will make 1-2 substantial concessions that are of Russian interests (like backing away from Ukraine or at the least giving that campaign a 5-year 'ignore' status), a few token gestures (like easing travel restrictions), some kind words, and Russia will be all happy and move on and the US would have sent a clear message that if need be it can push over your allies and get you.


    More often than not, when Americans hear the diplomatic language of the Russians, they mistake it for weakness and they feel further emboldened and they make even more threats.
     
    When you have a criminal mentality diplomacy is just another sign of weakness. Jailhouse rules.

    You have to be out of your freaking mind speaking about criminal mentality,now just why in hell would we wish to create another failed state, why in hell are we even over there attacking another sovereign nation without cause, maybe its time the world did end up in a mushroom cloud for it appears we have far to many with a criminal mentality.!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Max Payne
    Are you serious?
    , @Tom Welsh
    Respectfully,

    "maybe its time the USA did end up in a mushroom cloud for it appears we have far to many with a criminal mentality.!!!"

    FTFY - there will be no charge. 8-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  29. @Abelard Lindsey
    You guys had better hope that Trump wins the election and is able to rein in the pentagon. If Hillary wins, we have a serious possibility of WWIII with Russia (and China) which could conceivably go nuclear.

    I have never seen anything so asinine in my entire life.

    Agreed.

    This isn’t a comment on the author’s essay, but half-way through I had to pinch myself as I realised that what I was reading was a run-through of how the US might attack Russian military forces.

    And all for what appears to be the goal of securing a gas pipeline for the US’ wahhabi ‘allies’!

    ‘Asinine’ is way too kind. There is no word in English to describe this mind-melting stupidity.

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

    East Syria is an important area for Pipelinestan

    How so? Western/coastal Syria seems more important, in terms of pipelines.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon_the_nth

    East Syria is an important area for Pipelinestan
     
    West Syria is better but out of reach, East Syria is an alternative, easier to obtain and still shortens it compared to fully dragging it through Iraq. Hence USA uses ISIS as an intermediary occupation force.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Kiza says:
    @5371
    I take your comment not as blackpilling, but as pointing out that Russia would have better things to do than go on aimlessly lobbing missiles at IS.

    How about lobbing missiles at non-existent Western military logistics officers on he ground in Syria who are helping the operations of the moderate head choppers?

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    There's a whole air war to be fought, as the Saker says. It just has nothing to do with IS any more.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Max Payne says:
    @Bluedog
    You have to be out of your freaking mind speaking about criminal mentality,now just why in hell would we wish to create another failed state, why in hell are we even over there attacking another sovereign nation without cause, maybe its time the world did end up in a mushroom cloud for it appears we have far to many with a criminal mentality.!!!

    Are you serious?

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    Isn't that what we are looking for after all the great American past time is killing someone ( there have been few years of peace since this country was created) if not abroad then at home as the Windy City shows, or BLM if abroad its some third world country that cannot defend itself and even at that we don't make out so well Korea Nam Iraq Afghanistan Libya,no we are a rogue nation among nations and will remain that way.!!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. 5371 says:
    @Kiza
    How about lobbing missiles at non-existent Western military logistics officers on he ground in Syria who are helping the operations of the moderate head choppers?

    There’s a whole air war to be fought, as the Saker says. It just has nothing to do with IS any more.

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

    Sheer twaddle; the predicate of the article is that Russia has mere tens of aircraft while America has hundreds. In fact the Russkies have already secured airbases in conjunction with the Iranian and Iraqi military; they could ferry as many aircraft as it takes to the area of operations. Further their formidible submarine missile capability would ensure US airbases in the region would be destroyed easily. Also China is now involved and would send support via the super highways and high speed rail networks now active across the silk road. In a few weeks the US would be outnumbered both qualitatively and quantitatively. Neither Russia or China do things by halves once the chips are down. Also which European nation wants to burn to a crisp for Empire America? Your analyist has rocks in his head and has done too many Micky Mouse courses at Western Academic Establishments which are tired ideological fronts for simple minded bean counters. Make no mistake if the current loony NeoCons launch their war there will be little left to rule over when the dust settles. The rest of the world would become involved (like it or not) if the Big H is used either tactically of strategically. The criminal Elite would be confined to their underground cities for hundreds of years, thus their demise would be slower and more awful than we poor gullible masses frying and dieing quickly on the surface of a ruined planet. Fools write and gibber but we are on the razors edge and it is due to vacuous passivity. Mass action against the Elite is necessary (Vietnam style) to stop the madmen, not idiot assumptions and hair splitting by liberal theorists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon_the_nth
    It's true Russia can't support logistics in Syria without Bosporus access, but they haven't still committed too much resources in Syria. The logistic strength of Russia is in Russia and on Russian borders. If USA shoots down an airplane or two, that will give casus belli to take out some NATO bases in Europe, namely Rammstein, Incirlik and airfields in east Europe and potential US navy in the Baltic. I'm not sure what will happen in Ukraine though but I'd suspect Novorrossia is strong enough to beat an Ukie attack trying to take advantage.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. The effect of that will be marginal. Russian fixed-wing aircraft fly at over 5,000m where they are out of reach from MANPADs.

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).
    The usual incoherent fantasies from my favourite b-analyst. In the light of his original b-analysis which claimed as the main purpose for the limited Russian intervention the creation of conditions for a political settlement the Russians have failed. After one year of effort they have achieved exactly zero unless one wants to call the capture of a ruin of Aleppo suburb a resounding success. The inevitable consequences of knee jerk reaction for which Putin has become famous. His actions have nothing to do with shrewdness, cunning, brilliance or chess moves. His actions look more like a reaction of a patient who gets hit under the knee in a psychiatrist office. Georgia, Ukraine, Syria three hits producing three knee jerk reactions. The psychiatrist (US) must be amused.

    I am pretty sure that the Russian military would have preferred to do without that ceasefire, but I am equally sure that they were also okay with trying it out and seeing.

    That statements invalidates the author’s claim that Putin wants a political settlement. Since he likes to adjust his b-analyses according to the the current whim of his fancy this is not really surprising.

    That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination.

    I am glad the author has mentioned those famous Slavic qualities namely lack of purpose and determination. The Slavs resemble a fish that has jumped out of the water, landed on the beach and cannot make up its mind if it wants to get back in the water or just die. I could continue commenting on individual paragraphs except it would be a waste of time. The authors ideas about possible actions of US and Russia and his proposals about the use of military hardware and how it could be or would be used remind me of a ten year old playing with tin soldiers. One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier. In case of our author that top happened a long time ago if there ever was one. He is embarrassing himself and his fans the same way Muhammad Ali did in his last fights. Putin has no plan B, never had one. He can still leave, badly bruised but in one piece and enjoy for a few more years the delusion of Russian greatness which sadly is a thing of the past. He can also stay and perish standing together with a lot of spectators.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    [I could continue commenting on individual paragraphs except it would be a waste of time.]

    Every word you ever wrote has been a waste of time, and you never let that stop you before!

    , @Tom Welsh
    "I am glad the author has mentioned those famous Slavic qualities namely lack of purpose and determination. The Slavs resemble a fish that has jumped out of the water, landed on the beach and cannot make up its mind if it wants to get back in the water or just die".

    Hello - Alfred? Is that really Alfred Rosenberg, back from the dead, after all these years?
    , @Tom Welsh
    "One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier".

    One should also try to post in a language which he can spell. Otherwise readers are liable completely to misunderstand what he is trying to say.
    , @anon_the_nth

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).
     
    Range is not the same as altitude. Stinger altitude is less than 4km. While apparently, the ground range can be 8km which is irrelevant in this case.

    Of course theoretically it can fly higher than that but then the range similarly decreases a lot and it becomes less utilizable.

    , @Harold Smith
    Why not get off your cowardly Jewish ass, grab your rifle, get over to Syria and show those dastardly Russians who's boss?

    BTW just because your perverse Jewish-supremacist "mind" can't imagine it doesn't mean that Putin doesn't have a plan. How do you know that he doesn't by now understand the demonically evil nature of the "beast" and its agenda - which goes way beyond Syria? How do you know he's not just stalling for time, trying to avoid a direct conflict with the beast - partly to avoid giving the "U.S. government" an excuse to cancel the election - while he continues to field S-500 systems and prepare for a nuclear war? How do you know he won't strike like lightning - with everything he has - when the beast is least expecting it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Serge says: • Website
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Fifth, even if the USA was somehow able to establish something like an general air superiority over Syria, the Russians would still have three formidable options to continue to strike Daesh deep inside Syria:

    1) cruise missiles (launched from naval platforms of Tu-95MS bombers)

    2) SU-34/SU-35 strike groups launched from Russia or Iranian

    3) supersonic long range bombers (Tu-22M3 and Tu-160)
     
    Why yes, of course, the natural, logical priority after the US begins knocking Russian warplanes out of the sky would be to continue launching missiles at packs of Wahhabi inbreds in the Syrian desert. /s

    Yes, Sacker really should not have told this :)
    IMHO opinion if US starts knocking Russian planes down, saturating Syria with those wonderful S-300/400 and others similar options while hitting US installations in ME with those Caliber and other missiles both sea, air and land based and bringing some air to air fighters plus simultaneously making move against US anti missiles installations along Russia border would be an option. I think Ukraine and Baltic situation is where Russia wants them to be at the moment, but so called anti missile systems and possibility of more is not. It might lead to Cuban style crisis all over again. I do not think Syria should be abandoned in this case, as USA should be pinned down there with Russia trying to expend as little assets as possible while hitting elsewhere where Russia has clear escalation superiority and where the game worth the while. I think making it clear that no anti missile systems can be located anywhere within Russia vicinity is strategical question. I am but amateur so please have mercy on me :)
    Now, it all sounds like madman options quite frankly we do not want to go there.
    P.S: I rarely like Sacker analysis about anything.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. 5371 says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    The effect of that will be marginal. Russian fixed-wing aircraft fly at over 5,000m where they are out of reach from MANPADs.

     

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).
    The usual incoherent fantasies from my favourite b-analyst. In the light of his original b-analysis which claimed as the main purpose for the limited Russian intervention the creation of conditions for a political settlement the Russians have failed. After one year of effort they have achieved exactly zero unless one wants to call the capture of a ruin of Aleppo suburb a resounding success. The inevitable consequences of knee jerk reaction for which Putin has become famous. His actions have nothing to do with shrewdness, cunning, brilliance or chess moves. His actions look more like a reaction of a patient who gets hit under the knee in a psychiatrist office. Georgia, Ukraine, Syria three hits producing three knee jerk reactions. The psychiatrist (US) must be amused.

    I am pretty sure that the Russian military would have preferred to do without that ceasefire, but I am equally sure that they were also okay with trying it out and seeing.

     

    That statements invalidates the author's claim that Putin wants a political settlement. Since he likes to adjust his b-analyses according to the the current whim of his fancy this is not really surprising.

    That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination.

     

    I am glad the author has mentioned those famous Slavic qualities namely lack of purpose and determination. The Slavs resemble a fish that has jumped out of the water, landed on the beach and cannot make up its mind if it wants to get back in the water or just die. I could continue commenting on individual paragraphs except it would be a waste of time. The authors ideas about possible actions of US and Russia and his proposals about the use of military hardware and how it could be or would be used remind me of a ten year old playing with tin soldiers. One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier. In case of our author that top happened a long time ago if there ever was one. He is embarrassing himself and his fans the same way Muhammad Ali did in his last fights. Putin has no plan B, never had one. He can still leave, badly bruised but in one piece and enjoy for a few more years the delusion of Russian greatness which sadly is a thing of the past. He can also stay and perish standing together with a lot of spectators.

    [I could continue commenting on individual paragraphs except it would be a waste of time.]

    Every word you ever wrote has been a waste of time, and you never let that stop you before!

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

    East Syria is an important area for Pipelinestan
     
    How so? Western/coastal Syria seems more important, in terms of pipelines.

    East Syria is an important area for Pipelinestan

    West Syria is better but out of reach, East Syria is an alternative, easier to obtain and still shortens it compared to fully dragging it through Iraq. Hence USA uses ISIS as an intermediary occupation force.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @Attilla
    Sheer twaddle; the predicate of the article is that Russia has mere tens of aircraft while America has hundreds. In fact the Russkies have already secured airbases in conjunction with the Iranian and Iraqi military; they could ferry as many aircraft as it takes to the area of operations. Further their formidible submarine missile capability would ensure US airbases in the region would be destroyed easily. Also China is now involved and would send support via the super highways and high speed rail networks now active across the silk road. In a few weeks the US would be outnumbered both qualitatively and quantitatively. Neither Russia or China do things by halves once the chips are down. Also which European nation wants to burn to a crisp for Empire America? Your analyist has rocks in his head and has done too many Micky Mouse courses at Western Academic Establishments which are tired ideological fronts for simple minded bean counters. Make no mistake if the current loony NeoCons launch their war there will be little left to rule over when the dust settles. The rest of the world would become involved (like it or not) if the Big H is used either tactically of strategically. The criminal Elite would be confined to their underground cities for hundreds of years, thus their demise would be slower and more awful than we poor gullible masses frying and dieing quickly on the surface of a ruined planet. Fools write and gibber but we are on the razors edge and it is due to vacuous passivity. Mass action against the Elite is necessary (Vietnam style) to stop the madmen, not idiot assumptions and hair splitting by liberal theorists.

    It’s true Russia can’t support logistics in Syria without Bosporus access, but they haven’t still committed too much resources in Syria. The logistic strength of Russia is in Russia and on Russian borders. If USA shoots down an airplane or two, that will give casus belli to take out some NATO bases in Europe, namely Rammstein, Incirlik and airfields in east Europe and potential US navy in the Baltic. I’m not sure what will happen in Ukraine though but I’d suspect Novorrossia is strong enough to beat an Ukie attack trying to take advantage.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. I’d say if USA implements a no fly zone and cover the very small Russian contingent with hundreds of aircraft, that would be a tactical victory for Russia. Those planes then cannot be in the Baltic giving a wider range of options for retaliation for the eventual shootdown. If it goes to that, the whole importance of Syria, bombing inbreds in the desert, capturing Aleppo, Raqqah etc. suddenly drops to zero with the US having invested a ton of stuff there while the Russian investment is miniscule.

    This applies only to short term tactical opportunities, of course and no one knows what happens after those are utilized.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  41. Tom Welsh says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    Manpads are not the great solution people might think as it is very likely that some of them might end up back in the USA and prove a threat to domestic airlines. Scary indeed.

    This reveals a downside of that standard American technique: accusing your opponent of what you have already been doing.

    The Americans have threatened Russia with sending Russian soldiers home in body bags, and even terrorist attacks on Russian cities. We know that Russians do not threaten, but it may have occurred to some of the brighter Americans that, if they were to deliver a few thousand MANPADS to Syria, some (or even many) of them might turn up soon after in various parts of the USA itself. Possibly even quite close to Washington and its airports, or the White House…

    Flying in Air Force One might not be quite such an undiluated pleasure if you were never sure it would get fairly off the ground (or back down on the ground) before being ripped apart.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Tom Welsh says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    The effect of that will be marginal. Russian fixed-wing aircraft fly at over 5,000m where they are out of reach from MANPADs.

     

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).
    The usual incoherent fantasies from my favourite b-analyst. In the light of his original b-analysis which claimed as the main purpose for the limited Russian intervention the creation of conditions for a political settlement the Russians have failed. After one year of effort they have achieved exactly zero unless one wants to call the capture of a ruin of Aleppo suburb a resounding success. The inevitable consequences of knee jerk reaction for which Putin has become famous. His actions have nothing to do with shrewdness, cunning, brilliance or chess moves. His actions look more like a reaction of a patient who gets hit under the knee in a psychiatrist office. Georgia, Ukraine, Syria three hits producing three knee jerk reactions. The psychiatrist (US) must be amused.

    I am pretty sure that the Russian military would have preferred to do without that ceasefire, but I am equally sure that they were also okay with trying it out and seeing.

     

    That statements invalidates the author's claim that Putin wants a political settlement. Since he likes to adjust his b-analyses according to the the current whim of his fancy this is not really surprising.

    That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination.

     

    I am glad the author has mentioned those famous Slavic qualities namely lack of purpose and determination. The Slavs resemble a fish that has jumped out of the water, landed on the beach and cannot make up its mind if it wants to get back in the water or just die. I could continue commenting on individual paragraphs except it would be a waste of time. The authors ideas about possible actions of US and Russia and his proposals about the use of military hardware and how it could be or would be used remind me of a ten year old playing with tin soldiers. One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier. In case of our author that top happened a long time ago if there ever was one. He is embarrassing himself and his fans the same way Muhammad Ali did in his last fights. Putin has no plan B, never had one. He can still leave, badly bruised but in one piece and enjoy for a few more years the delusion of Russian greatness which sadly is a thing of the past. He can also stay and perish standing together with a lot of spectators.

    “I am glad the author has mentioned those famous Slavic qualities namely lack of purpose and determination. The Slavs resemble a fish that has jumped out of the water, landed on the beach and cannot make up its mind if it wants to get back in the water or just die”.

    Hello – Alfred? Is that really Alfred Rosenberg, back from the dead, after all these years?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Tom Welsh says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    The effect of that will be marginal. Russian fixed-wing aircraft fly at over 5,000m where they are out of reach from MANPADs.

     

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).
    The usual incoherent fantasies from my favourite b-analyst. In the light of his original b-analysis which claimed as the main purpose for the limited Russian intervention the creation of conditions for a political settlement the Russians have failed. After one year of effort they have achieved exactly zero unless one wants to call the capture of a ruin of Aleppo suburb a resounding success. The inevitable consequences of knee jerk reaction for which Putin has become famous. His actions have nothing to do with shrewdness, cunning, brilliance or chess moves. His actions look more like a reaction of a patient who gets hit under the knee in a psychiatrist office. Georgia, Ukraine, Syria three hits producing three knee jerk reactions. The psychiatrist (US) must be amused.

    I am pretty sure that the Russian military would have preferred to do without that ceasefire, but I am equally sure that they were also okay with trying it out and seeing.

     

    That statements invalidates the author's claim that Putin wants a political settlement. Since he likes to adjust his b-analyses according to the the current whim of his fancy this is not really surprising.

    That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination.

     

    I am glad the author has mentioned those famous Slavic qualities namely lack of purpose and determination. The Slavs resemble a fish that has jumped out of the water, landed on the beach and cannot make up its mind if it wants to get back in the water or just die. I could continue commenting on individual paragraphs except it would be a waste of time. The authors ideas about possible actions of US and Russia and his proposals about the use of military hardware and how it could be or would be used remind me of a ten year old playing with tin soldiers. One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier. In case of our author that top happened a long time ago if there ever was one. He is embarrassing himself and his fans the same way Muhammad Ali did in his last fights. Putin has no plan B, never had one. He can still leave, badly bruised but in one piece and enjoy for a few more years the delusion of Russian greatness which sadly is a thing of the past. He can also stay and perish standing together with a lot of spectators.

    “One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier”.

    One should also try to post in a language which he can spell. Otherwise readers are liable completely to misunderstand what he is trying to say.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Regnum Nostrum
    Another reply full of substance. Are you competing with 5371 in the nitpicking Olympics? If you knew as many languages as I do you would make an occasional mistake. The smart people will get the meaning anyway and the dumb do not count. Not to mention their inability to recognize a spelling mistake. Take it as a subtle praise of your intellect.
    , @Anonymous
    Come on, careers turning into carriers are a daily occurrence.
    Quit the hair-splitting, lol.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. Tom Welsh says:
    @Bluedog
    You have to be out of your freaking mind speaking about criminal mentality,now just why in hell would we wish to create another failed state, why in hell are we even over there attacking another sovereign nation without cause, maybe its time the world did end up in a mushroom cloud for it appears we have far to many with a criminal mentality.!!!

    Respectfully,

    “maybe its time the USA did end up in a mushroom cloud for it appears we have far to many with a criminal mentality.!!!”

    FTFY – there will be no charge. 8-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Tom Welsh says:
    @Kiza
    This is a real contribution Anatoly.

    An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel's almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone Russia. It is better not to declare an act of war if you cannot or will not respond in kind.

    I do not agree with the rest of your analysis, principally because you assume little or no political cost of almost any Pentagon's action in Syria. If there was no political cost, a US no-fly zone would have been declared even before the Russian contingent arrived. In other words, Carter can get away with a stunt of taking out about 200 SAA troops, but to declare a no fly zone he cannot. Only Hillary could fulfill her election campaign promise and declare one, but there is good three months before now and her inauguration. If the Russians do not get delayed by any more by the Kerry the circus clown show, maybe they could bring the Syrian situation to where a no-fly zone would not be a useful option.

    But this is your opinion with explanations and I respect it.

    “An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel’s almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone Russia”.

    That turns out not to be the case. In fact, an act of war is in no way dependent on being declared or made the subject of a complaint. Of course, the consequences that may follow are different in each case. However, any act of war establishes a state of war between the aggressor and the victim. Until that state of war is formally ended by an agreement of peace between both parties, the war continues to exist.

    A bully like the US government would, of course, dearly love to create a doctrine whereby unprovoked acts of aggression are not considered as such unless the victim complains of them. If victims are made sufficiently afraid of the consequences of complaining, they will remain silent and then it can be argued that no act of war has taken place! A conclusion which is obviously ridiculous, both in ethical and legal terms.

    Israel’s bombing of the SAA or any other target on Syrian soil is an act of war, and created a state of war between Israel and Syria. Like the USA, Israel hopes that it will not suffer any consequences from this because of its overwhelming military power.

    So did Hitler when he invaded the USSR.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonimous
    “An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel’s almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone RussiaÈ
    Deciding is such things is an act of war or not depends upon deciding party capability and ability to respond to that act appropriately. Syria can do nothing about all those acts hence decides not to see it as an act of war.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. Tom Welsh says:
    @Si1ver1ock
    The real problem here is that you can't trust anything Washington says and there may come a time when Washington needs people to believe them, but no one will. This isn't just one administration either. It seems to be the mindset or worldview of the American Establishment.

    As an American I'm embarrassed by my country and have been since at least the Clinton administration. George W. Bush was VERY hard to take, but given our system all you have do is wait it out and eventually they leave office.

    Oh well. Our country has essentially been hijacked by Globalists bent on world domination through force. I don't really know what to tell foreigners, except for "Don't trust Washington." Any agreements you make with Washington need to be of short duration and have liberal escape clauses in them. They will try to hold you accountable to the deal while giving themselves a pass to violate it. You can't look to Washington for leadership. You will have to find your own way forward.

    America has lost its way.

    ‘I don’t really know what to tell foreigners, except for “Don’t trust Washington.”’

    And even that would be superfluous, if the foreigners in question have an elementary knowledge of history.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. @Regnum Nostrum

    The effect of that will be marginal. Russian fixed-wing aircraft fly at over 5,000m where they are out of reach from MANPADs.

     

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).
    The usual incoherent fantasies from my favourite b-analyst. In the light of his original b-analysis which claimed as the main purpose for the limited Russian intervention the creation of conditions for a political settlement the Russians have failed. After one year of effort they have achieved exactly zero unless one wants to call the capture of a ruin of Aleppo suburb a resounding success. The inevitable consequences of knee jerk reaction for which Putin has become famous. His actions have nothing to do with shrewdness, cunning, brilliance or chess moves. His actions look more like a reaction of a patient who gets hit under the knee in a psychiatrist office. Georgia, Ukraine, Syria three hits producing three knee jerk reactions. The psychiatrist (US) must be amused.

    I am pretty sure that the Russian military would have preferred to do without that ceasefire, but I am equally sure that they were also okay with trying it out and seeing.

     

    That statements invalidates the author's claim that Putin wants a political settlement. Since he likes to adjust his b-analyses according to the the current whim of his fancy this is not really surprising.

    That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination.

     

    I am glad the author has mentioned those famous Slavic qualities namely lack of purpose and determination. The Slavs resemble a fish that has jumped out of the water, landed on the beach and cannot make up its mind if it wants to get back in the water or just die. I could continue commenting on individual paragraphs except it would be a waste of time. The authors ideas about possible actions of US and Russia and his proposals about the use of military hardware and how it could be or would be used remind me of a ten year old playing with tin soldiers. One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier. In case of our author that top happened a long time ago if there ever was one. He is embarrassing himself and his fans the same way Muhammad Ali did in his last fights. Putin has no plan B, never had one. He can still leave, badly bruised but in one piece and enjoy for a few more years the delusion of Russian greatness which sadly is a thing of the past. He can also stay and perish standing together with a lot of spectators.

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).

    Range is not the same as altitude. Stinger altitude is less than 4km. While apparently, the ground range can be 8km which is irrelevant in this case.

    Of course theoretically it can fly higher than that but then the range similarly decreases a lot and it becomes less utilizable.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kiza
    • Replies: @anti_republocrat
    Thank you for the excellent comment. I hadn't noticed the conflation of range with altitude, though I did notice that nothing else made any logical sense at all and was basically just anti-Slav racism.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  48. Avery says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I certainly hope it won't come to a no-fly zone. I don't think it will come to that even under Hillary Clinton.

    If it does, however, I certainly hope that Russia doesn't expend limited manpower and resources in an assuredly futile attempt to shore up Assad, who is only friends with Russia by necessity. (Before 2011 he was a more frequent visitor to Paris than to Moscow).

    If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage - that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.

    {If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage – that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.}

    Ukraine is understandable, but how will Russia ‘retaliate’ in the Baltics?
    What will it do – invade?
    What benefit will it give Russia: nothing.
    Novorossiya declaring independence and liberating the rest of Eastern Ukraine is one thing: there will be a lot of noise from the usual suspects, but people will eventually come to accept the fact same as Crimea.

    But Baltics are not historic Russian lands: it will be rightly regarded as naked aggression. And there is no long term benefit to Russia: only trouble.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Serge
    Actually Baltic states ARE historical Russian lands. They were such in and out since 8-9 th centuries and permanently since Peter the Great.
    The whole point however is that any attempt by US to impose no fly zone in Syria would mean shot down Russian planes and dead Russians which would only mean Russia and Putin would have two options. Either start fighting or drop trousers and let US to have Russia from the rear which is not the option. That leaves war and it is not going to be limited to Syria as Karlin states but I do not think it will be either Ukraine or Baltic.
    Those will be taken care off but later.
    , @Simple Pseudonymic Handle
    "But Baltics are not historic Russian lands: it will be rightly regarded as naked aggression. And there is no long term benefit to Russia: only trouble."

    It will be seen as rightful retaliation against illegal aggression upon Syria by the empire of the United States. Europeans will cower and do nothing as Russia 1. humiliates the US 2. gets a buffer zone against NATO encroachment. In fact, since there are a few commenters who think the risk of the US imposing a no-fly zone over Syria is a good thing, if I were the Russians, I'd encourage them to try just so I could do it. In the long run, it would be worth it for Russia to expel NATO aggressors from its immediate borders, despite the loss of Syria (although with many American planes shot down in the process, further humiliating the US). European leadership will moan, but the public will not be fervently for any significant action. They'll get over it.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Stein says:
    @Kiza
    I understood this as continue strikes against Daesh and their Western (Israeli, US, French, British) intelligence and logistics officers (as the story goes about the three Caliber missiles) aka US sneakers-on-the-ground (no US boots Made in China, only US sneakers Made in Vietnam).

    But why would US have to knock Russian planes out of the sky to establish "general air superiority", which is obviously not the same as a no-fly zone? They could just increase the number of sorties and start openly and regularly hitting SAA troops on the ground just like Israel is doing. If Russia does not start shooting down their planes (just as it does not shoot-down Israeli now) then they could leave the Russian planes flying. This is like what goes on now just on steroids. If US somehow increased the number of its sorties over Syria say 10 times, would Russia dare shootdown US jets with S400 and S300 just because US is killing Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah?

    What a nitpicker you are. Maybe you could try to make your yellowed comments when you have something of analytical value to say, not to split hairs.

    Big difference to IDF attacks: they normally cause no casualties, are more like warning assaults. Otherwise they would not have been tolerated and Israel have ceased the large-scale air attacks that were seen early in the war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  50. Serge says: • Website
    @Avery
    {If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage – that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.}

    Ukraine is understandable, but how will Russia 'retaliate' in the Baltics?
    What will it do - invade?
    What benefit will it give Russia: nothing.
    Novorossiya declaring independence and liberating the rest of Eastern Ukraine is one thing: there will be a lot of noise from the usual suspects, but people will eventually come to accept the fact same as Crimea.

    But Baltics are not historic Russian lands: it will be rightly regarded as naked aggression. And there is no long term benefit to Russia: only trouble.

    Actually Baltic states ARE historical Russian lands. They were such in and out since 8-9 th centuries and permanently since Peter the Great.
    The whole point however is that any attempt by US to impose no fly zone in Syria would mean shot down Russian planes and dead Russians which would only mean Russia and Putin would have two options. Either start fighting or drop trousers and let US to have Russia from the rear which is not the option. That leaves war and it is not going to be limited to Syria as Karlin states but I do not think it will be either Ukraine or Baltic.
    Those will be taken care off but later.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {Actually Baltic states ARE historical Russian lands.}

    Well, I am sure you know Russian history better than I. But my understanding is that Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania were separate entities from Russian Empire at some point in their history. I mean Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians are different ethnos: they are not Slavs like Ukrainians, are they?


    {...would only mean Russia and Putin would have two options. Either start fighting or drop trousers and let US to have Russia from the rear which is not the option.}

    Again you know Russians and Putin better than I. However, I doubt very much US will openly attack Russian AF: it will be chalked up to a "mistake", "miscommunication" ,....etc. Highly doubtful US wants an intentional nuke war with Russia: many of Russia's 8,000 nukes will reach D.C. And the D.C. chickenhawks know it.

    As to Putin and trousers: let me ask you to comment on two events.

    1. Sinking of the Kursk.
    It is pretty certain by now that the Kursk was sunk by a US sub.
    US reportedly paid Russia some $ billions, and Putin let it slide.
    US will shoot down some Russian jets by "mistake", and then pay some compensation to RF for the "mistake". And the process can be repeated ad nauseam until either RF or US gets tired and walks away.

    2. Shootdown of Su-24 by Turkey.
    Right after the shootdown, Putin was genuinely and visibly angry and promised to take a very tough line with Turkey. Later, he almost desperately clung to the non-apology given by Erdogan, and forgot about his tough talk. All has been forgiven, apparently. Where is the genuine apology to Russia ? (the non-apology was to pilots' families). Where is the compensation?

    What do you call that other than dropping Russia's trousers for the perfidious Turk? (Full disclosure: I am of Armenian descent).
    , @Konga
    "I do not think it will be either Ukraine or Baltic"

    Sorry for telling this replying to you, but this is an opportunity as any other, and since you wonder where...

    I never see anyone pointing on the most "red" point (and probably next "warm" zone) other than the ones always followed by MSM, alternative et al. It's always Syria, Ukraine, Baltics, South China Sea etc.

    When we mention the Black Sea everybody links it to the Crimea subject. I think the reason why Nato, together with Romania, try to put warships there is the delta of the Danube, the Prut and the Dniester rivers, is that region that interests them. Nato already tried to "occupy" Moldova to test the waters, made recently some pressure to "solve" the conflit with Transdniester/Transnistria, even asked the UN peacekeepers (Russian soldiers) to go back home, placed Saakashvili on the border (tools).

    To answer you both, and others: the region to where Russia can divert Nato's eyes, apart from Novorossyia, is that one. Suffice to feed or fuel the dreams of independence of Transnistria (already declared) and Budjak or even Gagauziya, and that's it, the new jewel of the ZioNaziCons is surrounded by three or four fronts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Anonimous says:
    @Tom Welsh
    "An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel’s almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone Russia".

    That turns out not to be the case. In fact, an act of war is in no way dependent on being declared or made the subject of a complaint. Of course, the consequences that may follow are different in each case. However, any act of war establishes a state of war between the aggressor and the victim. Until that state of war is formally ended by an agreement of peace between both parties, the war continues to exist.

    A bully like the US government would, of course, dearly love to create a doctrine whereby unprovoked acts of aggression are not considered as such unless the victim complains of them. If victims are made sufficiently afraid of the consequences of complaining, they will remain silent and then it can be argued that no act of war has taken place! A conclusion which is obviously ridiculous, both in ethical and legal terms.

    Israel's bombing of the SAA or any other target on Syrian soil is an act of war, and created a state of war between Israel and Syria. Like the USA, Israel hopes that it will not suffer any consequences from this because of its overwhelming military power.

    So did Hitler when he invaded the USSR.

    “An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel’s almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone RussiaÈ
    Deciding is such things is an act of war or not depends upon deciding party capability and ability to respond to that act appropriately. Syria can do nothing about all those acts hence decides not to see it as an act of war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kiza
    Thank you for explaining my point, that Tom Walsh appears to have missed. Declaring an act of war is not a "complaint to the aggressor", as Tom states. Instead, it is a diplomatic declaration followed by a military response. Syria and Russia have done neither towards Israel to avoid making the situation even more complicated at the moment (one enemy at a time), but I doubt that President Assad will forgive Israel its support to Al Qaeda and ISIS.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. @Tom Welsh
    "One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier".

    One should also try to post in a language which he can spell. Otherwise readers are liable completely to misunderstand what he is trying to say.

    Another reply full of substance. Are you competing with 5371 in the nitpicking Olympics? If you knew as many languages as I do you would make an occasional mistake. The smart people will get the meaning anyway and the dumb do not count. Not to mention their inability to recognize a spelling mistake. Take it as a subtle praise of your intellect.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Avery says:
    @Serge
    Actually Baltic states ARE historical Russian lands. They were such in and out since 8-9 th centuries and permanently since Peter the Great.
    The whole point however is that any attempt by US to impose no fly zone in Syria would mean shot down Russian planes and dead Russians which would only mean Russia and Putin would have two options. Either start fighting or drop trousers and let US to have Russia from the rear which is not the option. That leaves war and it is not going to be limited to Syria as Karlin states but I do not think it will be either Ukraine or Baltic.
    Those will be taken care off but later.

    {Actually Baltic states ARE historical Russian lands.}

    Well, I am sure you know Russian history better than I. But my understanding is that Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania were separate entities from Russian Empire at some point in their history. I mean Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians are different ethnos: they are not Slavs like Ukrainians, are they?

    {…would only mean Russia and Putin would have two options. Either start fighting or drop trousers and let US to have Russia from the rear which is not the option.}

    Again you know Russians and Putin better than I. However, I doubt very much US will openly attack Russian AF: it will be chalked up to a “mistake”, “miscommunication” ,….etc. Highly doubtful US wants an intentional nuke war with Russia: many of Russia’s 8,000 nukes will reach D.C. And the D.C. chickenhawks know it.

    As to Putin and trousers: let me ask you to comment on two events.

    1. Sinking of the Kursk.
    It is pretty certain by now that the Kursk was sunk by a US sub.
    US reportedly paid Russia some $ billions, and Putin let it slide.
    US will shoot down some Russian jets by “mistake”, and then pay some compensation to RF for the “mistake”. And the process can be repeated ad nauseam until either RF or US gets tired and walks away.

    2. Shootdown of Su-24 by Turkey.
    Right after the shootdown, Putin was genuinely and visibly angry and promised to take a very tough line with Turkey. Later, he almost desperately clung to the non-apology given by Erdogan, and forgot about his tough talk. All has been forgiven, apparently. Where is the genuine apology to Russia ? (the non-apology was to pilots’ families). Where is the compensation?

    What do you call that other than dropping Russia’s trousers for the perfidious Turk? (Full disclosure: I am of Armenian descent).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Serge Krieger
    "But my understanding is that Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania were separate entities from Russian Empire at some point in their history."

    In no time those so called states ever existed before 1917 beyond Russia except of possibly Litva.
    Nevertheless, those territories were torn from Russia by German invasion in 1917-1918 and returned back by Stalin. Before Peter the Great paid for those lands final acquisition to Sweden, those territories were owned interchangeably by Kievan Rus, Russia, Swedes, Germans, Litva and Poland and never existed as independent states.
    The last 300 years those territories were part of Russia. Now , imagine Texas which was part of Mexico pretty recently to secede...
    The argument is useless as no matter what people say, those territories were part of Russia long enough and are of strategic importance. Sooner or later the issue will be taken care of. The better those states behave towards Russia the longer they can continue being "independent". I would like to point also to the fact that those states basically are dissapearing in demographic and economic terms...

    I remember Kursk sinking and I am familiar with US sub sinking Kursk theory., It is quite amusing but it is just a theory. I was not reading as to what was the conclusion about the cause of that disaster but I guess considering mess of those times there must be some mishap on crew part of probably under maintained equipment break up.

    Regarding Turkey, Putin reacted and quite effectively. There was no need to start war in those circumstances. Turkey was hurt badly and Erdogan later came on all four to Vladimir Vladimirovich as we know.

    If USA however starts imposing no fly zone and shooting down Russia planes it will not be one time event like with SU-24... That will be clearly casus belly.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. @Regnum Nostrum

    The effect of that will be marginal. Russian fixed-wing aircraft fly at over 5,000m where they are out of reach from MANPADs.

     

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).
    The usual incoherent fantasies from my favourite b-analyst. In the light of his original b-analysis which claimed as the main purpose for the limited Russian intervention the creation of conditions for a political settlement the Russians have failed. After one year of effort they have achieved exactly zero unless one wants to call the capture of a ruin of Aleppo suburb a resounding success. The inevitable consequences of knee jerk reaction for which Putin has become famous. His actions have nothing to do with shrewdness, cunning, brilliance or chess moves. His actions look more like a reaction of a patient who gets hit under the knee in a psychiatrist office. Georgia, Ukraine, Syria three hits producing three knee jerk reactions. The psychiatrist (US) must be amused.

    I am pretty sure that the Russian military would have preferred to do without that ceasefire, but I am equally sure that they were also okay with trying it out and seeing.

     

    That statements invalidates the author's claim that Putin wants a political settlement. Since he likes to adjust his b-analyses according to the the current whim of his fancy this is not really surprising.

    That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination.

     

    I am glad the author has mentioned those famous Slavic qualities namely lack of purpose and determination. The Slavs resemble a fish that has jumped out of the water, landed on the beach and cannot make up its mind if it wants to get back in the water or just die. I could continue commenting on individual paragraphs except it would be a waste of time. The authors ideas about possible actions of US and Russia and his proposals about the use of military hardware and how it could be or would be used remind me of a ten year old playing with tin soldiers. One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier. In case of our author that top happened a long time ago if there ever was one. He is embarrassing himself and his fans the same way Muhammad Ali did in his last fights. Putin has no plan B, never had one. He can still leave, badly bruised but in one piece and enjoy for a few more years the delusion of Russian greatness which sadly is a thing of the past. He can also stay and perish standing together with a lot of spectators.

    Why not get off your cowardly Jewish ass, grab your rifle, get over to Syria and show those dastardly Russians who’s boss?

    BTW just because your perverse Jewish-supremacist “mind” can’t imagine it doesn’t mean that Putin doesn’t have a plan. How do you know that he doesn’t by now understand the demonically evil nature of the “beast” and its agenda – which goes way beyond Syria? How do you know he’s not just stalling for time, trying to avoid a direct conflict with the beast – partly to avoid giving the “U.S. government” an excuse to cancel the election – while he continues to field S-500 systems and prepare for a nuclear war? How do you know he won’t strike like lightning – with everything he has – when the beast is least expecting it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    The nitwit usually claims to be Czech, for what it's worth, though how that is supposed to fit in with his denigration of Slavs I do not know.
    , @Regnum Nostrum

    Why not get off your cowardly Jewish ass, grab your rifle, get over to Syria and show those dastardly Russians who’s boss?

     

    This is really getting tiresome. Every time I raise a point that is not praising Putin, Saker's b-analysis or Russian cleverness or technological superiority I am challenged to take my rifle and go to war with the Russians. I hate to disappoint everybody but I am not going to go to war with Russia or anybody else for that matter. I am also not planning any space mission even though I am interested in outer space. By the way you have made two false assumptions in that single sentence which demonstrates how poorly you comprehend the world. I am not a coward and I am not a Jew. When I first came to Unz review I bumped into a few interesting and intelligent comments and thought that the site differed from the other blogs infested with all sorts of low life unable to find their own ass without a map. Well I was wrong. In order not to bother intellectual giants on this site who are clearly annoyed by my stupidity I have decided to leave. Enjoy the company of equals.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. 5371 says:
    @Harold Smith
    Why not get off your cowardly Jewish ass, grab your rifle, get over to Syria and show those dastardly Russians who's boss?

    BTW just because your perverse Jewish-supremacist "mind" can't imagine it doesn't mean that Putin doesn't have a plan. How do you know that he doesn't by now understand the demonically evil nature of the "beast" and its agenda - which goes way beyond Syria? How do you know he's not just stalling for time, trying to avoid a direct conflict with the beast - partly to avoid giving the "U.S. government" an excuse to cancel the election - while he continues to field S-500 systems and prepare for a nuclear war? How do you know he won't strike like lightning - with everything he has - when the beast is least expecting it?

    The nitwit usually claims to be Czech, for what it’s worth, though how that is supposed to fit in with his denigration of Slavs I do not know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. bluedog says:
    @Max Payne
    Are you serious?

    Isn’t that what we are looking for after all the great American past time is killing someone ( there have been few years of peace since this country was created) if not abroad then at home as the Windy City shows, or BLM if abroad its some third world country that cannot defend itself and even at that we don’t make out so well Korea Nam Iraq Afghanistan Libya,no we are a rogue nation among nations and will remain that way.!!!

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

    Israel would not help the US against Russia and neither would Egypt.

    I don’t want war with Russia, but the U.S. is trying to overthrow Assad at the behest of the ungrateful Israelis, so if they don’t help we should freeze all funding to them and perhaps bomb Tel Aviv for a few hours. Israel has a sweet gig where they manipulate the U.S. into doing all their dirty work and don’t suffer any of the blow back.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  58. @Harold Smith
    Why not get off your cowardly Jewish ass, grab your rifle, get over to Syria and show those dastardly Russians who's boss?

    BTW just because your perverse Jewish-supremacist "mind" can't imagine it doesn't mean that Putin doesn't have a plan. How do you know that he doesn't by now understand the demonically evil nature of the "beast" and its agenda - which goes way beyond Syria? How do you know he's not just stalling for time, trying to avoid a direct conflict with the beast - partly to avoid giving the "U.S. government" an excuse to cancel the election - while he continues to field S-500 systems and prepare for a nuclear war? How do you know he won't strike like lightning - with everything he has - when the beast is least expecting it?

    Why not get off your cowardly Jewish ass, grab your rifle, get over to Syria and show those dastardly Russians who’s boss?

    This is really getting tiresome. Every time I raise a point that is not praising Putin, Saker’s b-analysis or Russian cleverness or technological superiority I am challenged to take my rifle and go to war with the Russians. I hate to disappoint everybody but I am not going to go to war with Russia or anybody else for that matter. I am also not planning any space mission even though I am interested in outer space. By the way you have made two false assumptions in that single sentence which demonstrates how poorly you comprehend the world. I am not a coward and I am not a Jew. When I first came to Unz review I bumped into a few interesting and intelligent comments and thought that the site differed from the other blogs infested with all sorts of low life unable to find their own ass without a map. Well I was wrong. In order not to bother intellectual giants on this site who are clearly annoyed by my stupidity I have decided to leave. Enjoy the company of equals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold Smith

    This is really getting tiresome. Every time I raise a point that is not praising Putin, Saker’s b-analysis or Russian cleverness or technological superiority I am challenged to take my rifle and go to war with the Russians. I hate to disappoint everybody but I am not going to go to war with Russia or anybody else for that matter.
     
    Well of course not; that's what the lowly Goyim are for, right?

    I am also not planning any space mission even though I am interested in outer space.
     
    Can you direct me to some of your equally passionate, detailed and long-winded posts about "outer space"?

    By the way you have made two false assumptions in that single sentence which demonstrates how poorly you comprehend the world. I am not a coward and I am not a Jew.
     
    Just because you're not a religious "Jew", doesn't mean you're not a Jew; of course you're a Jew.
    And cowardice is a general Jewish trait. For example, a Jew will have no trouble emptying an M-16 magazine into an unarmed 13 year old schoolgirl, but when facing a capable and determined foe on an approximately level playing field, e.g., Hezbollah, the Jew will apparently run away every time.

    When I first came to Unz review I bumped into a few interesting and intelligent comments and thought that the site differed from the other blogs infested with all sorts of low life unable to find their own ass without a map.
     
    ROTFL! As if you weren't the one who started with the derogatory ad hominem. Yo, Shlomo, you're supposed to be looking at your monitor, not your mirror, as you type your hapless Jewish-supremacist drivel.


    Well I was wrong.
     
    Well you should be used that by now.

    Anyway, I think you're just sour grapes because your Satanic, messianic, Judeo-communist "New World Order" is crumbling before your eyes.

    But rather than take it out on us humans, maybe you can find another hobby? Or maybe to relieve some stress you can torture small animals or paint swastikas on your front door or defraud your insurance company or something like that?

    In order not to bother intellectual giants on this site who are clearly annoyed by my stupidity I have decided to leave. Enjoy the company of equals.
     
    Please do; and don't let the door hit your pompous Jewish ass on the way out.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. @Avery
    {Actually Baltic states ARE historical Russian lands.}

    Well, I am sure you know Russian history better than I. But my understanding is that Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania were separate entities from Russian Empire at some point in their history. I mean Latvians, Estonians, Lithuanians are different ethnos: they are not Slavs like Ukrainians, are they?


    {...would only mean Russia and Putin would have two options. Either start fighting or drop trousers and let US to have Russia from the rear which is not the option.}

    Again you know Russians and Putin better than I. However, I doubt very much US will openly attack Russian AF: it will be chalked up to a "mistake", "miscommunication" ,....etc. Highly doubtful US wants an intentional nuke war with Russia: many of Russia's 8,000 nukes will reach D.C. And the D.C. chickenhawks know it.

    As to Putin and trousers: let me ask you to comment on two events.

    1. Sinking of the Kursk.
    It is pretty certain by now that the Kursk was sunk by a US sub.
    US reportedly paid Russia some $ billions, and Putin let it slide.
    US will shoot down some Russian jets by "mistake", and then pay some compensation to RF for the "mistake". And the process can be repeated ad nauseam until either RF or US gets tired and walks away.

    2. Shootdown of Su-24 by Turkey.
    Right after the shootdown, Putin was genuinely and visibly angry and promised to take a very tough line with Turkey. Later, he almost desperately clung to the non-apology given by Erdogan, and forgot about his tough talk. All has been forgiven, apparently. Where is the genuine apology to Russia ? (the non-apology was to pilots' families). Where is the compensation?

    What do you call that other than dropping Russia's trousers for the perfidious Turk? (Full disclosure: I am of Armenian descent).

    “But my understanding is that Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania were separate entities from Russian Empire at some point in their history.”

    In no time those so called states ever existed before 1917 beyond Russia except of possibly Litva.
    Nevertheless, those territories were torn from Russia by German invasion in 1917-1918 and returned back by Stalin. Before Peter the Great paid for those lands final acquisition to Sweden, those territories were owned interchangeably by Kievan Rus, Russia, Swedes, Germans, Litva and Poland and never existed as independent states.
    The last 300 years those territories were part of Russia. Now , imagine Texas which was part of Mexico pretty recently to secede…
    The argument is useless as no matter what people say, those territories were part of Russia long enough and are of strategic importance. Sooner or later the issue will be taken care of. The better those states behave towards Russia the longer they can continue being “independent”. I would like to point also to the fact that those states basically are dissapearing in demographic and economic terms…

    I remember Kursk sinking and I am familiar with US sub sinking Kursk theory., It is quite amusing but it is just a theory. I was not reading as to what was the conclusion about the cause of that disaster but I guess considering mess of those times there must be some mishap on crew part of probably under maintained equipment break up.

    Regarding Turkey, Putin reacted and quite effectively. There was no need to start war in those circumstances. Turkey was hurt badly and Erdogan later came on all four to Vladimir Vladimirovich as we know.

    If USA however starts imposing no fly zone and shooting down Russia planes it will not be one time event like with SU-24… That will be clearly casus belly.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Regnum Nostrum

    Why not get off your cowardly Jewish ass, grab your rifle, get over to Syria and show those dastardly Russians who’s boss?

     

    This is really getting tiresome. Every time I raise a point that is not praising Putin, Saker's b-analysis or Russian cleverness or technological superiority I am challenged to take my rifle and go to war with the Russians. I hate to disappoint everybody but I am not going to go to war with Russia or anybody else for that matter. I am also not planning any space mission even though I am interested in outer space. By the way you have made two false assumptions in that single sentence which demonstrates how poorly you comprehend the world. I am not a coward and I am not a Jew. When I first came to Unz review I bumped into a few interesting and intelligent comments and thought that the site differed from the other blogs infested with all sorts of low life unable to find their own ass without a map. Well I was wrong. In order not to bother intellectual giants on this site who are clearly annoyed by my stupidity I have decided to leave. Enjoy the company of equals.

    This is really getting tiresome. Every time I raise a point that is not praising Putin, Saker’s b-analysis or Russian cleverness or technological superiority I am challenged to take my rifle and go to war with the Russians. I hate to disappoint everybody but I am not going to go to war with Russia or anybody else for that matter.

    Well of course not; that’s what the lowly Goyim are for, right?

    I am also not planning any space mission even though I am interested in outer space.

    Can you direct me to some of your equally passionate, detailed and long-winded posts about “outer space”?

    By the way you have made two false assumptions in that single sentence which demonstrates how poorly you comprehend the world. I am not a coward and I am not a Jew.

    Just because you’re not a religious “Jew”, doesn’t mean you’re not a Jew; of course you’re a Jew.
    And cowardice is a general Jewish trait. For example, a Jew will have no trouble emptying an M-16 magazine into an unarmed 13 year old schoolgirl, but when facing a capable and determined foe on an approximately level playing field, e.g., Hezbollah, the Jew will apparently run away every time.

    When I first came to Unz review I bumped into a few interesting and intelligent comments and thought that the site differed from the other blogs infested with all sorts of low life unable to find their own ass without a map.

    ROTFL! As if you weren’t the one who started with the derogatory ad hominem. Yo, Shlomo, you’re supposed to be looking at your monitor, not your mirror, as you type your hapless Jewish-supremacist drivel.

    Well I was wrong.

    Well you should be used that by now.

    Anyway, I think you’re just sour grapes because your Satanic, messianic, Judeo-communist “New World Order” is crumbling before your eyes.

    But rather than take it out on us humans, maybe you can find another hobby? Or maybe to relieve some stress you can torture small animals or paint swastikas on your front door or defraud your insurance company or something like that?

    In order not to bother intellectual giants on this site who are clearly annoyed by my stupidity I have decided to leave. Enjoy the company of equals.

    Please do; and don’t let the door hit your pompous Jewish ass on the way out.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Alan says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    Manpads are not the great solution people might think as it is very likely that some of them might end up back in the USA and prove a threat to domestic airlines. Scary indeed.

    Well one thing for sure.

    If US domestic planes got hit , we would not even bother to think about it.

    You reap what you sow .. westerners (just to overthrow a good Arab leader to replace him with ISIS.)

    Don’t cry for me “Argentina”..

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. This is a pretty fair analysis, however, bankrupts do very strange things. The United States of America is massively bankrupt and its power is slipping away. So rational processes might not come into play.

    The UK and US, the US being a crown (not royal) corporation, have dominated global affairs for over 400 years. They won’t give this power away. Proof of this was the 2008 designed financial collapse, which was a sacrifice for global domination. All sorts of things can appear, more staged terror, global pandemic, hyperinflation, a return to conscription and an internet lock down looks imminent.

    So while the article is fair and balanced on a military/diplomatic footing, there are many other factors which can propel the NWO agenda forward.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Very astute comment. It doesn't take very much imagination to see how easy it would be to trigger things like race-riots, cash and food shortages etc to create social chaos across America meanwhile running amok around the world with the co-opted US military forces. When the dust settled the geo-political landscape would be massively changed as a fait accompli. A huge and reckless gamble.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. […] Saker 30 Sept. 2016  the Russians have already concluded that the US is “not-agreement-capable”. The Russia reaction was predictable: Lavrov’s admitted that he could not even take his American colleagues seriously. […]

    Read More
  64. […] Saker 30 Sept. 2016: Die Russen haben schon gefolgert, dass die Amerikaner nicht “vereinbarungs-fähig” seien.  Die russische Reaktion war vorhersagbar: Lawrow gab zu, dass er seine amerikanischen Kollegen nicht ernst nehmen könnte. […]

    Read More
  65. Krollchem says:
    @5371
    Not this pipeline crap again! Don't people learn anything from those who claimed the US's Afghan occupation was all about building a pipeline to get the GAZILLION barrels of oil out from under the Caspian?

    Wrong! The war against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) was about getting oil out of the Caspian Sea. It was estimated by the USGS that the Caspian Sea contained 200 billion barrels of light sweet oil. The plan was to control the pipeline routes through the FRY. Turns out the USGS screwed up on their oil estimate.

    The war in Afghanistan was about a natural gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to India as described by the newly appointed education minister at the start of the war. Hope you didn’t think the war was about capturing or killing Ben Laden (LOL). Come to think of it, the US and UK sure managed to dramatically increase the brown sugar opium production in Afghanistan in support of the KLA heroin production in Kosovo.

    The Qatar pipeline war in Syria was planned ensure that Iran could not transport South Pars oil to Turkey via the Islamic pipeline.

    Just because you know nothing about oil geopolitics and the goals of globalism (control of transportation routes, resources and labor) doesn’t negate its importance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    You seem to be a human museum of yesterday's paranoia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. The algebra of fog of war modulo expansionist powers’ duplicity:

    Russia also has very long range radars which will make it impossible for the USA to achieve a tactical surprise. – Saker informs us.

    [F]rom 5pm to 5:50pm near an aerodrome of the Deir ez-Zor city (Syria), the aircraft of ‘anti-IS coalition’ (two F-16 and two A10) delivered four airstrikes at units of Syrian government forces which were surrounded by Islamic State terrorist groupings. – Igor Konashenkov per TASS

    You don’t commit a mistake for more than one hour – Assad said in the interview.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. @Carl Jones
    This is a pretty fair analysis, however, bankrupts do very strange things. The United States of America is massively bankrupt and its power is slipping away. So rational processes might not come into play.

    The UK and US, the US being a crown (not royal) corporation, have dominated global affairs for over 400 years. They won't give this power away. Proof of this was the 2008 designed financial collapse, which was a sacrifice for global domination. All sorts of things can appear, more staged terror, global pandemic, hyperinflation, a return to conscription and an internet lock down looks imminent.

    So while the article is fair and balanced on a military/diplomatic footing, there are many other factors which can propel the NWO agenda forward.

    Very astute comment. It doesn’t take very much imagination to see how easy it would be to trigger things like race-riots, cash and food shortages etc to create social chaos across America meanwhile running amok around the world with the co-opted US military forces. When the dust settled the geo-political landscape would be massively changed as a fait accompli. A huge and reckless gamble.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @Max Payne
    I have to agree.

    If I was the US I'd risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone (though I don't agree with what the US is doing, from their standpoint the risk/reward seems acceptable especially if it gets that Russian thorn out of its side). Sure it'll cost some lives, a few downed jets, probably a downed pilot or two decapitated but after the that the world will know (or be reminded) of the mid-range projection of CENTCOM and the technological capabilities of the US military. Even better is shredding Russian assets on TV. People don't know numbers, how much is deployed where and what things can do... they'll see flybys of F-22s and snippets of crashing Su-23s and people will assume its like the First Gulf War all over.

    After the operation the US can decelerate and patch things up with Russia, Russians always fall for appeasement (after all they believe a bad peace is better than a good war...that's why their economy failed by the way; war is good business). The US will make 1-2 substantial concessions that are of Russian interests (like backing away from Ukraine or at the least giving that campaign a 5-year 'ignore' status), a few token gestures (like easing travel restrictions), some kind words, and Russia will be all happy and move on and the US would have sent a clear message that if need be it can push over your allies and get you.


    More often than not, when Americans hear the diplomatic language of the Russians, they mistake it for weakness and they feel further emboldened and they make even more threats.
     
    When you have a criminal mentality diplomacy is just another sign of weakness. Jailhouse rules.

    “If I was the US I’d risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone”

    I hope no one in Washington is that stupid. If I were a nationalist Russian, there is no way I’d EVER tolerate a loss to that evil POS empire, especially one grounded in blatantly illegal Hitleresque aggression. I’d invade Ukraine and the Baltics + crater NATO headquarters in retaliation. Put that on tv. Any and all Russian casualties would be met with efforts to reciprocate with American casualties, not limited to the Syrian front or even just conventional weapons. Anyone who thinks an illegal no fly-zone is a good idea is a fool who is seriously misreading the situation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @Avery
    {If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage – that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.}

    Ukraine is understandable, but how will Russia 'retaliate' in the Baltics?
    What will it do - invade?
    What benefit will it give Russia: nothing.
    Novorossiya declaring independence and liberating the rest of Eastern Ukraine is one thing: there will be a lot of noise from the usual suspects, but people will eventually come to accept the fact same as Crimea.

    But Baltics are not historic Russian lands: it will be rightly regarded as naked aggression. And there is no long term benefit to Russia: only trouble.

    “But Baltics are not historic Russian lands: it will be rightly regarded as naked aggression. And there is no long term benefit to Russia: only trouble.”

    It will be seen as rightful retaliation against illegal aggression upon Syria by the empire of the United States. Europeans will cower and do nothing as Russia 1. humiliates the US 2. gets a buffer zone against NATO encroachment. In fact, since there are a few commenters who think the risk of the US imposing a no-fly zone over Syria is a good thing, if I were the Russians, I’d encourage them to try just so I could do it. In the long run, it would be worth it for Russia to expel NATO aggressors from its immediate borders, despite the loss of Syria (although with many American planes shot down in the process, further humiliating the US). European leadership will moan, but the public will not be fervently for any significant action. They’ll get over it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon_the_nth

    It will be seen as rightful retaliation against illegal aggression upon Syria by the empire of the United States.
     
    This is the key point which should be pretty obvious to anyone. Any invasion of the Baltic states will not be an invasion for the sake of "invading" but connected to a retaliation against NATO shooting down jets in Syria or elsewhere. If NATO declares war on Russia, the NATO status of those Baltic states override the nation state status, as NATO territory is used to wage war on Russia, hence they will be needed as a defensive buffer at least for the duration of the war, or neutralized one way or the other. Of course Kaliningrad might suffer a similar fate but not before they take out missile defense sites and some other bases in Poland I suspect. Then it turns into a tis-for-tat.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Fifth, even if the USA was somehow able to establish something like an general air superiority over Syria, the Russians would still have three formidable options to continue to strike Daesh deep inside Syria:

    1) cruise missiles (launched from naval platforms of Tu-95MS bombers)

    2) SU-34/SU-35 strike groups launched from Russia or Iranian

    3) supersonic long range bombers (Tu-22M3 and Tu-160)
     
    Why yes, of course, the natural, logical priority after the US begins knocking Russian warplanes out of the sky would be to continue launching missiles at packs of Wahhabi inbreds in the Syrian desert. /s

    Anatoly, no reason to be so salty.

    Saker was just pointing out that Syria is not Iraq. A no fly zone over Syria would create a lot of blow back for America if it tried, and it wouldn’t even be effective since Russia could still target whatever it wanted to.

    No doubt if the US really took out the Russian airforce, Russia would have more important targets on its mind. But the point being that there would be a lot of pain for the US to make that move for very little tactical gain.

    And sorry to say Anatoly but there is a real reason Russia is in this fight besides Putin being BFF with Assad. The plight of Syria affects Russia a great deal. Syria is a major tactical location and acts as a gateway to Europe. That’s why Syria has been constantly attacked since forever.

    This affects everything from Russia blue water navy to pipelines to Europe to trade and preventing being isolated. So don’t give me this cap about Syria being unimportant to Russia.

    If it is so unimportant, why is the west so hell bent on escalating when they have so little leverage?

    Sorry to have to call you out, but being a Russian Jew I think you are playing both sides here and hope to leave Syria to devolve into greater Isreal and to have Russia focus on Ukraine so they aren’t paying attention to the Middle East.

    What a poor excuse of a human you’ve shown yourself to be here.

    Read More
    • Troll: Anatoly Karlin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. 5371 says:
    @Krollchem
    Wrong! The war against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) was about getting oil out of the Caspian Sea. It was estimated by the USGS that the Caspian Sea contained 200 billion barrels of light sweet oil. The plan was to control the pipeline routes through the FRY. Turns out the USGS screwed up on their oil estimate.

    The war in Afghanistan was about a natural gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to India as described by the newly appointed education minister at the start of the war. Hope you didn't think the war was about capturing or killing Ben Laden (LOL). Come to think of it, the US and UK sure managed to dramatically increase the brown sugar opium production in Afghanistan in support of the KLA heroin production in Kosovo.

    The Qatar pipeline war in Syria was planned ensure that Iran could not transport South Pars oil to Turkey via the Islamic pipeline.

    Just because you know nothing about oil geopolitics and the goals of globalism (control of transportation routes, resources and labor) doesn't negate its importance.

    You seem to be a human museum of yesterday’s paranoia.

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

    The US will send more weapons to Daesh

    Evidence this ever happened?

    I am aware we had a stupid policy of arming “the moderate rebels” and those weapons ended up with ISIS. That policy stopped a while ago, and at this point the only group in Syria we are arming are the Kurds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anti_republocrat
    Weapons deliveries to Daesh are laundered through Saudi Arabia and al-Nusra. When you do A, and B occurs, but you continue to do A over and over again anyway, your intent is that B will occur.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. KA says:

    Saker omits the relevance of the war that is going on in Iraq . In Iraq ,America is fighting against IS . In Syris ,America is fighting for IS .

    I think the American interest is being served well . The emergence of IS has drawn America back in Iraq and has given the opportunity to Kurds to solidify their position . This was the expressed desire of American Governmnet . Iraq is Balkanized with American support . Anerican presence in the middle of the conflicts and territory has made him the arbiter between Iraqi gov and Kurd.

    IS can only go to Syria from Iraq . Once IS is secure in Syria America again may decide how to address that new Syria . It may switch side and kill IS to prolong its presence as it is doing in Libya effectively lengthening the period of anarchy . IS them might move to neighboring countries like Saudi Arab or Turkey giving America another chance to Balkanize those countries .and also send Refugges to EU.

    Obviously Russia has to be defeated in Syria to achive 100% but even if Russia checkmates America, Saudi or Egypt or Turkey aren’t out of danger from America-IS threat . Defeated IS will look for new land.

    Again its not the oil or pipeline that is propelling American moves . But having control of oil and pipe,one doesn’t hurt and does help in the long run . In the short run that claim can hide the monstrosity of the Balkanization plan and can draw support from business .

    Recent justified Saudi bashing and coloring of Saudis in bad light may usher is into a new period where Anerican Governmnet will offer platitudes of support to corrupt thuggish Saudi royals but will nonetheless undermine it from multiple angles . A weakened Saudi will also be unable to provide much diplomatic and financial support to Pakistan rendering that country without friend and resources and vulnerable in conflicts with India and Afghanistan which America wants in this new anti Chinese atmosphere . Chances are that we will see Pakistan China Russia Iran arrayed against America with its total control of the Balkanized Middle East and control of oil supply. Jordan possibly will be asked to absorb Palestinian from WB and Gazan will be moved to Sinai . IS will maintain its presence as long as America needs this particular excuse for domestic and foreign plans and incursions. Even friend India is vulnerable and Amerrica can use IS not only against India but also against Mynammar if situation warrants . IS is the foot soldier of American new imperialism . It softens the target before America will move in.

    This war in Syria is not going well because of resistance from Russia and Iran but it is the continuation of the same plan that ushered into Iraq war . The local architect of the different sections of this original war may not know that he or she is really involved in a cosmic struggle -Bush didn’t know and neither possibly Clinton Kerry or Obama or Ashton Carter . They did their parts at their times There was a reason that WW4 was invoked in early weeks following 911, because the visionary of that hellish world have been talking of taking down 7 countries and imposing American values throughout Middle East .

    Money and blood – lost in the war haven’t deterred or changed that vision . The continued war will bleed and weaken America , bleed Russia ,fragment Midfle East and prepare ME ready for political ,economic and social / religious engineering from outside and push America to more tyrannical dictatorial posturings at home .

    Middle East ‘s fate will be at the mercy of Israel Iran,China and India . America will recede so will Russia . The migrants in EU and in America will play the designated roles in psychological and later territorial Balkanization .
    Islam like Christianity will debate about peripheral social issues and self flagellate itself because of all the crimes that been committed under its name .

    Kadarshian will find home in Mecca and Muslim will be eventually liberated . American values now succeessfully planted will now survive outside America .

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    American values now successfully planted will now survive outside America .
     
    But will America, or anyone else survive American values? The American ec0nomy is flat, the industrial economy is declining. The welfare state generates millions of gamma minus morons raised at public expense by more or less illiterate low-IQ single mothers, and the globalist imperative sucks in millions of illegal aliens intent on "Making America Mexico Again."

    Meantime, Chinese values generates 7% annual GDP growth, or a doubling of GDP by 2026, and India graduates 550,000 engineers a year.

    Whether in Europe or the ME, adoption of American values looks like a commitment to economic, cultural and genetic self-destruction.

    , @anti_republocrat

    I think the American interest is being served well .
     
    It ain't over til it's over, and right now things aren't going all that well in E. Aleppo. When it falls, tens of thousands of allied troops will be re-deployed to take back Idlib and thoroughly seal the border.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Randal says:

    Where this typically Russian attitude becomes a problem is when it signals to the leaders of the US deep state that Russia is not only hesitant, but possibly frightened. In a perverse way, the lack of “show of force” by Russia risks giving the Americans the impression that “the Russkies have blinked”. I am always quite amazed when I see western reactions to the soft, diplomatic language used by Russian diplomats. Where the Americans openly compare Putin to Hitler and demand the imposition of a (completely illegal) no-fly zone over Syria, the Russians respond with “my friend John” and “our partners” and “negotiations must proceed”. More often than not, when Americans hear the diplomatic language of the Russians, they mistake it for weakness and they feel further emboldened and they make even more threats. It is in partly for this reason that Russia and the United States are, yet again, on a collision course.

    A good illustration of the truth in the usually false argument (when endlessly deployed by US sphere interventionists in the US sphere media) that appeasing an aggressor never works and only encourages more aggression.

    The problem is that the interventionists either don’t understand, or know full well and don’t care, that the US is the aggressor state in most of these conflicts, pursuant to its destabilising universalist ideology and the natural greed for increased power on the part of the already powerful.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  75. Randal says:
    @Max Payne
    I have to agree.

    If I was the US I'd risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone (though I don't agree with what the US is doing, from their standpoint the risk/reward seems acceptable especially if it gets that Russian thorn out of its side). Sure it'll cost some lives, a few downed jets, probably a downed pilot or two decapitated but after the that the world will know (or be reminded) of the mid-range projection of CENTCOM and the technological capabilities of the US military. Even better is shredding Russian assets on TV. People don't know numbers, how much is deployed where and what things can do... they'll see flybys of F-22s and snippets of crashing Su-23s and people will assume its like the First Gulf War all over.

    After the operation the US can decelerate and patch things up with Russia, Russians always fall for appeasement (after all they believe a bad peace is better than a good war...that's why their economy failed by the way; war is good business). The US will make 1-2 substantial concessions that are of Russian interests (like backing away from Ukraine or at the least giving that campaign a 5-year 'ignore' status), a few token gestures (like easing travel restrictions), some kind words, and Russia will be all happy and move on and the US would have sent a clear message that if need be it can push over your allies and get you.


    More often than not, when Americans hear the diplomatic language of the Russians, they mistake it for weakness and they feel further emboldened and they make even more threats.
     
    When you have a criminal mentality diplomacy is just another sign of weakness. Jailhouse rules.

    If I was the US I’d risk the operation to establish a no-fly zone (though I don’t agree with what the US is doing, from their standpoint the risk/reward seems acceptable especially if it gets that Russian thorn out of its side). Sure it’ll cost some lives, a few downed jets, probably a downed pilot or two decapitated but after the that the world will know (or be reminded) of the mid-range projection of CENTCOM and the technological capabilities of the US military.

    You omit the main cost of the “no fly zone” gambit as far as the US regime is concerned – the unacceptably high risk of escalation.

    Doubtless the US and its regional allies could crush the Russian expeditionary force in Syria at a bearable cost, viewed in isolation. But that means suppressing or destroying the Russian fleet in the Med, with the potential involvement of submarine warfare out of theatre and the likely loss of some US ships and the likely need for the US to pre-empt such attacks or retaliate for them, and it means the Russians being likely to take out bases in Turkey and the Gulf states, again expanding the conflict unpredictably.

    Escalation on that scale is probably not worth risking, even for some of the more wild-eyed Clintonist R2P and US-uber-alles types in and around the US regime and military, and those who would like to take the risk are likely to be squashed by their more sensible colleagues. We still live in the shade of the nuclear peace, as far as direct conflict between the superpowers in concerned.

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

    The risk of a US attempt to impose a no-fly zone over Syria will remain very real for the foreseeable future unless, of course, Trump beats Hillary to the White House. If Hillary wins – then that risk will sharply escalate.

    Though he is rather over-optimistic about the capabilities of Russian systems, imo the Saker is correct in his overall conclusion – that there are certainly figures within and around the US regime and military who would love to impose a no fly zone on Russia, but that in the end it would be just too risky a gambit for them to be able to swing it. The political and military risks and costs he describes are real, but probably ultimately bearable, but the escalation risk is jus too high.

    The highest risk will come with a Clinton Presidency, because of the three individuals (Obama, Trump, Clinton) she is the most aggressive and irrationally militarist, as demonstrated over Libya, and is the most surrounded and the most in hock to the kinds of people who would advocate such aggression (R2Pers and foreign lobbyists).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  77. Randal says:
    @Anatoly Karlin
    I certainly hope it won't come to a no-fly zone. I don't think it will come to that even under Hillary Clinton.

    If it does, however, I certainly hope that Russia doesn't expend limited manpower and resources in an assuredly futile attempt to shore up Assad, who is only friends with Russia by necessity. (Before 2011 he was a more frequent visitor to Paris than to Moscow).

    If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage - that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.

    I certainly hope it won’t come to a no-fly zone. I don’t think it will come to that even under Hillary Clinton.

    I agree with this. Imo the escalation risk is what in the end makes it not a viable option. Though there are a few crazies and ideological zealots around (especially) Clinton who would be prepared to run that risk, the grownups will sit on them (even if one of them is President). This is the benefit of the nuclear peace.

    I’ve noted before that were it not for the Russian nuclear deterrent, the US sphere would have been at war with Russia by now.

    If it does, however, I certainly hope that Russia doesn’t expend limited manpower and resources in an assuredly futile attempt to shore up Assad, who is only friends with Russia by necessity. (Before 2011 he was a more frequent visitor to Paris than to Moscow).

    If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage – that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.

    The problem is that the Russians can’t just ignore a declared no fly zone. They either defy it or submit to it – there’s no middle way. Politically, they surely have to defy it. And surely politically the US cannot afford to ignore the Russians defying it.

    So if we assume a no fly zone gambit by the US, it is correct to examine the military options in the Syrian theatre because they most likely come into play, even though Russia is at a disastrous disadvantage there and the US sphere has escalation superiority there, as Russia has escalation superiority in Ukraine. But even though Russia has escalation superiority in Ukraine, it has few really beneficial options there, militarily. Yes, it could launch military action in Ukraine in response to US action in Syria, and it could militarily defeat and occupy Ukraine in short order. Then what? All it has achieved is to acquire a largely hostile territory to occupy, and terminally alienated the European states who will then rearm with actual enthusiasm.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Simple Pseudonymic Handle
    "Then what? All it has achieved is to acquire a largely hostile territory to occupy, and terminally alienated the European states who will then rearm with actual enthusiasm."

    There is NO value for the Russians to sit back and tolerate a blatant act of Hitleresque aggression upon their forces and the forces of a sovereign nation. A line has to be drawn somewhere or the empire will keep pushing until they push too far somewhere else.

    Russia would get a valuable buffer between themselves and NATO expansion plus some valuable farm real-estate. In the long-run, relations with Europe will return to normal because Europe is decrepit and needs food and fuel. Even if Russia had to retreat from those territories at some point, it would only come after a formal treaty is signed keeping them forever out of the American sphere of influence - a win for Russia.

    A decrepit Europe, flooded with immigrants and sacked with low-birth rates, is in no shape to resume a real cold war (and despite what you think, the Empire is in no condition to both pivot to Asian AND resume the Cold War in Europe). Further, the European public isn't going blame Russia for retaliating against American aggression. I base that upon polls taken in various European countries (Germany) after the US overthrew the Ukrainian president. Despite all the Western propaganda, European intellectuals were shocked to learn that many members of the public rightfully blamed the US for starting the whole thing.

    Unlike with Iraq, the global public isn't naive enough anymore to just blindly accept whatever BS propaganda the US spews out. The Russians will counter whatever the US says, so there will be no build-up to "we have to do something because - humanitarian." The US has no option other than to sit back and take it. That's what they get for supporting terrorists.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. […] Saker 30 Sept. 2016: Die Russen haben schon gefolgert, dass die Amerikaner nicht “vereinbarungs-fähig” seien.  Die russische Reaktion war vorhersagbar: Lawrow gab zu, dass er seine amerikanischen Kollegen nicht ernst nehmen könnte. […]

    Read More
  79. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    I’m not sure if Putin is for real and sincerely trying to help Syrians, or if he’s just another bit player in this Rothschild Opera.

    If you want to see heart-breaking before and after pics of Syria, check the link below to see what the REAL Axis of Evil, the USA/Israel/Saudi Arabia has done to Syrian historical spots.

    http://www.boredpanda.com/before-after-war-photos-aleppo-syria/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  80. @Simple Pseudonymic Handle
    "But Baltics are not historic Russian lands: it will be rightly regarded as naked aggression. And there is no long term benefit to Russia: only trouble."

    It will be seen as rightful retaliation against illegal aggression upon Syria by the empire of the United States. Europeans will cower and do nothing as Russia 1. humiliates the US 2. gets a buffer zone against NATO encroachment. In fact, since there are a few commenters who think the risk of the US imposing a no-fly zone over Syria is a good thing, if I were the Russians, I'd encourage them to try just so I could do it. In the long run, it would be worth it for Russia to expel NATO aggressors from its immediate borders, despite the loss of Syria (although with many American planes shot down in the process, further humiliating the US). European leadership will moan, but the public will not be fervently for any significant action. They'll get over it.

    It will be seen as rightful retaliation against illegal aggression upon Syria by the empire of the United States.

    This is the key point which should be pretty obvious to anyone. Any invasion of the Baltic states will not be an invasion for the sake of “invading” but connected to a retaliation against NATO shooting down jets in Syria or elsewhere. If NATO declares war on Russia, the NATO status of those Baltic states override the nation state status, as NATO territory is used to wage war on Russia, hence they will be needed as a defensive buffer at least for the duration of the war, or neutralized one way or the other. Of course Kaliningrad might suffer a similar fate but not before they take out missile defense sites and some other bases in Poland I suspect. Then it turns into a tis-for-tat.

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

    The Romans, a very practical race, always first asked the question Cui Bono to quickly finger the actual primary perp outfit causing a problem. So who exactly benefits the most from the serial destruction of nations in the mideast? And once fingered, how is the perp nation to be dealt with and neutralized? With hardly any effort at all, the jooies are on a roll….how long will it last now that whitey nations are in obvious economic decline and undergoing an invasion of human debris from the turd world?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  82. Boris says:

    I wonder how much the Russians pay for this terrible propaganda. The only people buying it are the outcasts at Unz Review and some morons of the Alt-Right. It is just a make-work job to try and stimulate the stagnated Russian economy? Maybe digging holes and filling them in would be more of a boon to the Russian reputation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Less imaginative than the lies you Jews and homosexuals produce, that's for sure. But then when you have the truth you can do without flights of fantasy. And it's a funny thing, but the rulers of the west seem much more worried about its people hearing and believing the truth than a Z-lister like you pretends to be. Hence the panic about RT etc.
    , @Avery
    {..... outcasts at Unz Review and some morons }

    You have finally recognized your true self: congratulations.

    , @Simple Pseudonymic Handle
    Those of us with high IQs like to hear different perspectives, not just the ravings and lies of the American media and fake 'Murican patriotards. Find those WMD yet? Hear any mention of Saudi Arabia's war on Yemenese civilians in the American mainstream press? Hear any mentions of the US demanding Saudi Arabia stop its illegal war? I guess all that military equipment your country is surrounding China with is for peaceful purposes only. Get lost sheep.
    , @anon_the_nth

    I wonder how much the Russians pay for this terrible propaganda. The only people buying it are the outcasts at Unz Review and some morons of the Alt-Right. It is just a make-work job to try and stimulate the stagnated Russian economy? Maybe digging holes and filling them in would be more of a boon to the Russian reputation.
     
    I wonder how much Stratcom trolls get paid. Obviously whatever it is it's too much, but guess it goes hand to hand along with the rest of the waste of breath going on in EU/USAistan.
    , @Stephen R. Diamond
    Actually, there seem to be some left-truthers who dig the Saker.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @KA
    Saker omits the relevance of the war that is going on in Iraq . In Iraq ,America is fighting against IS . In Syris ,America is fighting for IS .

    I think the American interest is being served well . The emergence of IS has drawn America back in Iraq and has given the opportunity to Kurds to solidify their position . This was the expressed desire of American Governmnet . Iraq is Balkanized with American support . Anerican presence in the middle of the conflicts and territory has made him the arbiter between Iraqi gov and Kurd.

    IS can only go to Syria from Iraq . Once IS is secure in Syria America again may decide how to address that new Syria . It may switch side and kill IS to prolong its presence as it is doing in Libya effectively lengthening the period of anarchy . IS them might move to neighboring countries like Saudi Arab or Turkey giving America another chance to Balkanize those countries .and also send Refugges to EU.

    Obviously Russia has to be defeated in Syria to achive 100% but even if Russia checkmates America, Saudi or Egypt or Turkey aren't out of danger from America-IS threat . Defeated IS will look for new land.

    Again its not the oil or pipeline that is propelling American moves . But having control of oil and pipe,one doesn't hurt and does help in the long run . In the short run that claim can hide the monstrosity of the Balkanization plan and can draw support from business .

    Recent justified Saudi bashing and coloring of Saudis in bad light may usher is into a new period where Anerican Governmnet will offer platitudes of support to corrupt thuggish Saudi royals but will nonetheless undermine it from multiple angles . A weakened Saudi will also be unable to provide much diplomatic and financial support to Pakistan rendering that country without friend and resources and vulnerable in conflicts with India and Afghanistan which America wants in this new anti Chinese atmosphere . Chances are that we will see Pakistan China Russia Iran arrayed against America with its total control of the Balkanized Middle East and control of oil supply. Jordan possibly will be asked to absorb Palestinian from WB and Gazan will be moved to Sinai . IS will maintain its presence as long as America needs this particular excuse for domestic and foreign plans and incursions. Even friend India is vulnerable and Amerrica can use IS not only against India but also against Mynammar if situation warrants . IS is the foot soldier of American new imperialism . It softens the target before America will move in.

    This war in Syria is not going well because of resistance from Russia and Iran but it is the continuation of the same plan that ushered into Iraq war . The local architect of the different sections of this original war may not know that he or she is really involved in a cosmic struggle -Bush didn't know and neither possibly Clinton Kerry or Obama or Ashton Carter . They did their parts at their times There was a reason that WW4 was invoked in early weeks following 911, because the visionary of that hellish world have been talking of taking down 7 countries and imposing American values throughout Middle East .

    Money and blood - lost in the war haven't deterred or changed that vision . The continued war will bleed and weaken America , bleed Russia ,fragment Midfle East and prepare ME ready for political ,economic and social / religious engineering from outside and push America to more tyrannical dictatorial posturings at home .

    Middle East 's fate will be at the mercy of Israel Iran,China and India . America will recede so will Russia . The migrants in EU and in America will play the designated roles in psychological and later territorial Balkanization .
    Islam like Christianity will debate about peripheral social issues and self flagellate itself because of all the crimes that been committed under its name .

    Kadarshian will find home in Mecca and Muslim will be eventually liberated . American values now succeessfully planted will now survive outside America .

    American values now successfully planted will now survive outside America .

    But will America, or anyone else survive American values? The American ec0nomy is flat, the industrial economy is declining. The welfare state generates millions of gamma minus morons raised at public expense by more or less illiterate low-IQ single mothers, and the globalist imperative sucks in millions of illegal aliens intent on “Making America Mexico Again.”

    Meantime, Chinese values generates 7% annual GDP growth, or a doubling of GDP by 2026, and India graduates 550,000 engineers a year.

    Whether in Europe or the ME, adoption of American values looks like a commitment to economic, cultural and genetic self-destruction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    I was alluding to a tragedy here The values that have destroyed Ameriica will be tried on the Balkanized and defeated MEcountries 's social ethos and on their foreign policies
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. 5371 says:
    @Boris
    I wonder how much the Russians pay for this terrible propaganda. The only people buying it are the outcasts at Unz Review and some morons of the Alt-Right. It is just a make-work job to try and stimulate the stagnated Russian economy? Maybe digging holes and filling them in would be more of a boon to the Russian reputation.

    Less imaginative than the lies you Jews and homosexuals produce, that’s for sure. But then when you have the truth you can do without flights of fantasy. And it’s a funny thing, but the rulers of the west seem much more worried about its people hearing and believing the truth than a Z-lister like you pretends to be. Hence the panic about RT etc.

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

    A good reply for the “humanitarian” Samantha Powers et al at the State Dept:
    Patrick Bahzad: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2016/10/showdown-in-aleppo.html#comments
    “1. most US and Western medias report about Syria from safe places in Turkey, KSA, or Lebanon. Not many people on the ground anymore, they get some of the video reports directly from “militant” reporters embedded with whatever group is controlling the area they report about.
    2. There have been a number of sieges or siege like situations in the wars of the ME over the past 15 years, the ones you mention being the most recent ones of course. I’m pretty sure the level of destruction lately seen in Fallujah and Ramadi is much worse than anything currently happening in Aleppo. Many of the civilians in the Eastern part the city are family members of the fighters opposing R+6, that is also a reason why they are not leaving. By their presence alone, they have a deterring effect on any attacker employing more firepower to level those areas to the ground, in the way the ISF did in Ramadi. Double standards have been the rule for very long, I don’t expect this to change anytime soon.
    3. The Syrian rebel scene is such a madhouse it is very difficult to tell one group from the other. Personal and structural links make it almost impossible to tell who is AQ and who isn’t. R+6 strategy also aims at pushing what is left of the “moderates” (i.e. US supported groups) towards Nusra, in order to be in a position to target them all.”

    A very proper reminder of the US barbarity in Fallujah and Ramadi

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  86. Avery says:
    @Boris
    I wonder how much the Russians pay for this terrible propaganda. The only people buying it are the outcasts at Unz Review and some morons of the Alt-Right. It is just a make-work job to try and stimulate the stagnated Russian economy? Maybe digging holes and filling them in would be more of a boon to the Russian reputation.

    {….. outcasts at Unz Review and some morons }

    You have finally recognized your true self: congratulations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    I think he was engaging in some kind of irony. That's what I want to think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    This is the old contradiction: westerners also want results *now*, while the Russians always take their time and move very slowly. That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination.

    That’s why I contend that Russia is an Asian country, not an European, to displeasure, usually, of my Russian counterparts, who hate to view their nation as Asian (always leaving me wondering on the why).

    Read More
    • Replies: @attonn
    That's just plain moronic.

    In terms of pure geography, Russia is the largest European country.

    And in terms of mentality, who the hell knows what being "European" means? In that department, there is a bigger gap between southern Italian and a Dane than between Pole and a Russian.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Avery
    {..... outcasts at Unz Review and some morons }

    You have finally recognized your true self: congratulations.

    I think he was engaging in some kind of irony. That’s what I want to think.

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

    More on the Aleppo tragedy and the “humanitarians” at the White House and State Dept. http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2016/10/showdown-in-aleppo.html#comments
    Chris Chuba:
    “1. In similar situations we used to routinely hear them refer to the use of human shields when the Israelis conducted military operations but this term has vanished in today’s coverage. They have simply ignored all reports regarding R+6′s efforts to establish corridors to allow civilians to leave eastern Aleppo and Al Nusra 2.0′s prevention of this by shooting of those who have attempted to do so. This was reported on http://www.almasdarnews.com. Apparently, U.S. media exclusively gets its news sourced basically from the U.S. State Dept and its proxies.”
    “Proxies” means Nusra and other “moderate” jihadis including those affiliated with Al Qaeda.

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

    The Green Berets have some proper words for the perfumed princes and princesses in the White House and Pentagon: “US Special Forces sabotage White House policy gone disastrously wrong with covert ops in Syria” By JACK MURPHY 09.14.2016 http://turcopolier.typepad.com
    “Nobody believes in it. You’re like, ‘Fuck this,’” a former Green Beret says of America’s covert and clandestine programs to train and arm Syrian militias. “Everyone on the ground knows they are jihadis. No one on the ground believes in this mission or this effort, and they know they are just training the next generation of jihadis, so they are sabotaging it by saying, ‘Fuck it, who cares?’”
    “I don’t want to be responsible for Nusra guys saying they were trained by Americans,” the Green Beret added.” (sofrep.com)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  91. @Svigor
    Question for the gallery: are there any good blogs about Russian geopolitics and military out there that aren't in the tank for the Kremlin, like Saker here?

    “Question for the gallery: are there any good blogs about Russian geopolitics and military out there that aren’t in the tank for the Kremlin, like Saker here?”

    Sorry, you’ll have to stick to American publications, all of which are in the tank for Washington and its lies. Find those WMD yet?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. @Boris
    I wonder how much the Russians pay for this terrible propaganda. The only people buying it are the outcasts at Unz Review and some morons of the Alt-Right. It is just a make-work job to try and stimulate the stagnated Russian economy? Maybe digging holes and filling them in would be more of a boon to the Russian reputation.

    Those of us with high IQs like to hear different perspectives, not just the ravings and lies of the American media and fake ‘Murican patriotards. Find those WMD yet? Hear any mention of Saudi Arabia’s war on Yemenese civilians in the American mainstream press? Hear any mentions of the US demanding Saudi Arabia stop its illegal war? I guess all that military equipment your country is surrounding China with is for peaceful purposes only. Get lost sheep.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Boris

    Those of us with high IQs like to hear different perspectives, not just the ravings and lies of the American media
     
    Hearing different perspectives is fine. Gulping down obvious bullshit is not so fine.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. Wouldn’t a “no-fly zone” instantly produce a brigade of Russian troops entering Syria to aid Assad? Would that not ice the cake for Assad’s forces? Is the likelihood that the US would counter with American troops pretty much at zero percent?

    Ergo: There will not be a no-fly zone.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  94. The vast majority of informed Americans prefer that we just leave Syria alone and pull out. Even most our Generals think so, as the video clip mentioned by Saker shows the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs explain this reality to a confused Congressman.

    So the first sign of trouble will be if Clinton starts ousting senior Generals who quietly object. All this seems improbable, but remember that most of Syria is part of the Promised Land mentioned in the Bible, no different than the West Bank. If Assad is gone, Syria is gone, and others are free to grab parts. Israel could grab a huge chunk as a security zone, and then quietly annex it just as they did with Syria’s Golan Heights.

    Keep in mind that if the USA attacks Russia’s bases in Syria, Russia is free to attack American airbases in Iraq, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia with cruise missiles. But the biggest unknown is Iran, which knows that if Syria is destroyed, it is next. While the USA is tied up over Syria, it could launch a surprise attack on USA military targets in the Gulf region, and swarm into Iraq where its Shi’ite allies would help round up 10,000 American POWs. Might as well grab oil rich Kuwait too.

    This could be the end of NATO too as people might rise up, as Hungary has done. So I don’t think Russia would take any military actions in Europe. The Germans are mad about the refugee mess, and if the Russians threaten to shut off their vital natural gas pipelines, Germany might hang Merkel and order all American bases there closed and send its troops to shut them down.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anti_republocrat
    The clip is too short. What occurred immediately afterward was McCain berating Dumbford for saying a no-fly zone could not be established without going to war with Russia and Syria, and Dumbford saying he never said that and that a no-fly zone is different from controlling all of Syria's air space. Huh? Do they think Russia is going to cooperate with the US by imposing a no-fly zone on the Syrian air force? Yes, indeed. Parallel universes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Tom Welsh
    "One should leave the stage when one is at the top of his carrier".

    One should also try to post in a language which he can spell. Otherwise readers are liable completely to misunderstand what he is trying to say.

    Come on, careers turning into carriers are a daily occurrence.
    Quit the hair-splitting, lol.

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

    I certainly hope it won’t come to a no-fly zone. I don’t think it will come to that even under Hillary Clinton.
     
    I agree with this. Imo the escalation risk is what in the end makes it not a viable option. Though there are a few crazies and ideological zealots around (especially) Clinton who would be prepared to run that risk, the grownups will sit on them (even if one of them is President). This is the benefit of the nuclear peace.

    I've noted before that were it not for the Russian nuclear deterrent, the US sphere would have been at war with Russia by now.


    If it does, however, I certainly hope that Russia doesn’t expend limited manpower and resources in an assuredly futile attempt to shore up Assad, who is only friends with Russia by necessity. (Before 2011 he was a more frequent visitor to Paris than to Moscow).

    If retaliation must be sought it should be sought where Russia has the advantage – that is, Ukraine, or the Baltics.
     
    The problem is that the Russians can't just ignore a declared no fly zone. They either defy it or submit to it - there's no middle way. Politically, they surely have to defy it. And surely politically the US cannot afford to ignore the Russians defying it.

    So if we assume a no fly zone gambit by the US, it is correct to examine the military options in the Syrian theatre because they most likely come into play, even though Russia is at a disastrous disadvantage there and the US sphere has escalation superiority there, as Russia has escalation superiority in Ukraine. But even though Russia has escalation superiority in Ukraine, it has few really beneficial options there, militarily. Yes, it could launch military action in Ukraine in response to US action in Syria, and it could militarily defeat and occupy Ukraine in short order. Then what? All it has achieved is to acquire a largely hostile territory to occupy, and terminally alienated the European states who will then rearm with actual enthusiasm.

    “Then what? All it has achieved is to acquire a largely hostile territory to occupy, and terminally alienated the European states who will then rearm with actual enthusiasm.”

    There is NO value for the Russians to sit back and tolerate a blatant act of Hitleresque aggression upon their forces and the forces of a sovereign nation. A line has to be drawn somewhere or the empire will keep pushing until they push too far somewhere else.

    Russia would get a valuable buffer between themselves and NATO expansion plus some valuable farm real-estate. In the long-run, relations with Europe will return to normal because Europe is decrepit and needs food and fuel. Even if Russia had to retreat from those territories at some point, it would only come after a formal treaty is signed keeping them forever out of the American sphere of influence – a win for Russia.

    A decrepit Europe, flooded with immigrants and sacked with low-birth rates, is in no shape to resume a real cold war (and despite what you think, the Empire is in no condition to both pivot to Asian AND resume the Cold War in Europe). Further, the European public isn’t going blame Russia for retaliating against American aggression. I base that upon polls taken in various European countries (Germany) after the US overthrew the Ukrainian president. Despite all the Western propaganda, European intellectuals were shocked to learn that many members of the public rightfully blamed the US for starting the whole thing.

    Unlike with Iraq, the global public isn’t naive enough anymore to just blindly accept whatever BS propaganda the US spews out. The Russians will counter whatever the US says, so there will be no build-up to “we have to do something because – humanitarian.” The US has no option other than to sit back and take it. That’s what they get for supporting terrorists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    Imo, your analysis is coloured too much by wishful thinking, and while I sympathise with your emotional positions, I don't agree with your conclusions.

    Experience tells me that a Russian retaliation in Ukraine for US aggression in Syria will not be generally recognised as such in the managed information spaces of the US sphere. The mainstream media will ignore (for this purpose) events in Syria, painting US actions there as "humanitarian" and supposedly disinterested, and will trumpet the Russian action in Ukraine as supposedly unprovoked and opportunist land grabbing. This merely builds on well established propaganda untruths that are already generally (though not universally) accepted in the US sphere.

    There are certainly dissident opinions and news sources online, and a significant minority in the general population of the US sphere who are sceptical of the official truths, but they will just be dismissed as Russian propaganda tools and Kremlin trolls. It has worked before and it will work again, at least sufficiently to provide the necessary political cover for the political establishment to fund a massive return to Cold War levels of military confrontation of Russia in eastern Europe, and an ongoing insurgency in western Ukraine, that will ultimately make it too costly for Russia to hold onto.

    There is NO value for the Russians to sit back and tolerate a blatant act of Hitleresque aggression upon their forces and the forces of a sovereign nation. A line has to be drawn somewhere or the empire will keep pushing until they push too far somewhere else.
     
    My argument is precisely that Russia will have to respond, and that is why the risk of escalation makes the imposition of a no fly zone ultimately unacceptable even for the US elites. An attempt to impose a no fly zone on a defiant Russia means war.

    I just don't see any particularly good options for Russia in Ukraine for large scale retaliation, though doubtless a push for a land link with Crimea would happen once the gloves come off. But that kind of thing is more of a benefit to the US regime as a propaganda tool than any real cost to them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. @Boris
    I wonder how much the Russians pay for this terrible propaganda. The only people buying it are the outcasts at Unz Review and some morons of the Alt-Right. It is just a make-work job to try and stimulate the stagnated Russian economy? Maybe digging holes and filling them in would be more of a boon to the Russian reputation.

    I wonder how much the Russians pay for this terrible propaganda. The only people buying it are the outcasts at Unz Review and some morons of the Alt-Right. It is just a make-work job to try and stimulate the stagnated Russian economy? Maybe digging holes and filling them in would be more of a boon to the Russian reputation.

    I wonder how much Stratcom trolls get paid. Obviously whatever it is it’s too much, but guess it goes hand to hand along with the rest of the waste of breath going on in EU/USAistan.

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

    The Jews have been thrown out of every single country they’ve been to in any numbers. It’s time for the US to throw them out too. The whole middle east war is nothing but a war for Israel. Started by their attack on the US on 9-11. You can never trust the psychopathic Jews who have betrayed us time after time and are continuing to do so. Our interest is actually that Assad survives and controls all of Syria to control the various Jihadi groups. Only Israel wants him dead.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  99. @Fish and Cip
    It's too bad that Powell never applied his own doctrine. If he had, many lives would have been saved and his career may have taken him out of the house slave role to freeman, or even master...could he have become the first black prez instead of the disappointing weakling we have?

    The empire's Plan A for Syria is "Assad must go". Plan B is : Syria must go. Syria would go in either case, but now our (western) fearless leaders are coming to terms with the idea that Asad will remain as leader of an Alawite statelet based in Latakia, or maybe, if they swallow hard and grit their teeth, they can stand it if he stays in Damascus with a rump of rump Syria, which they will deride as not the real Syria...and they would be right, except that is not going to happen; because most Syrians support their President, and they now clearly see the plot that has been hatched against their country and the Arab nation, and they know the evil of their enemies.

    It’s too bad that Powell never applied his own doctrine.

    It was not in the nature of the My Lai coverup man.

    they now clearly see the plot that has been hatched against their country and the Arab nation, and they know the evil of their enemies.

    Most of them, including most Sunnis, saw it from the beginning. Some became demoralized in 2014 and early 2015, but that’s over now. The few who actually joined the revolt and are now being amnestied are the few whose eyes are opened anew and will remember what they have learned.

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

    Here is a surprise from Brooklyn: VICE news working overtime as a loyal propaganda-tool for State Dept.: https://news.vice.com/article/bombs-fall-on-aleppos-largest-hospital-as-russia-sends-more-warplanes-to-syria

    The article quotes Kerry: “What we are trying to do is help Syrians fight for their own country. The opposition was doing very well until the Russians came in.” – Whoa!

    The VICE news are mourning, along with the mournful Kerry, the demise of “moderate” freedom fighters in Aleppo, while suffering a complete amnesia about the grand “humanitarian” exploits of US/NATO in Iraq and Libya. The VICE authors seem to be unaware that the US/NATO have been bombing Syria since 2011, in addition to arming (illegally) the numerous “freedom fighters” in Syria. The bombings and interventions have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of human beings of all ages.
    The VICE news article is so obviously propagandistic that it has neither father nor mother but an abstract parentage “By VICE News.

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

    The causes of Syrian tragedy: https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/18328

    The obscenity of the US illegal subversive activity against the sovereign Syria.
    “US Special Forces sabotage White House policy gone disastrously wrong with covert ops in Syria”
    By JACK MURPHY: http://turcopolier.typepad.com
    “Nobody believes in it. You’re like, ‘Fuck this,’” a former Green Beret says of America’s covert and clandestine programs to train and arm Syrian militias. “Everyone on the ground knows they are jihadis. No one on the ground believes in this mission or this effort, and they know they are just training the next generation of jihadis, so they are sabotaging it by saying, ‘Fuck it, who cares?’”
    “I don’t want to be responsible for Nusra guys saying they were trained by Americans,” the Green Beret added.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. @anon_the_nth

    The FIM 92 Stinger has a range of 26,000 feet (7,900 m).
     
    Range is not the same as altitude. Stinger altitude is less than 4km. While apparently, the ground range can be 8km which is irrelevant in this case.

    Of course theoretically it can fly higher than that but then the range similarly decreases a lot and it becomes less utilizable.

    Thank you for the excellent comment. I hadn’t noticed the conflation of range with altitude, though I did notice that nothing else made any logical sense at all and was basically just anti-Slav racism.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. Kiza says:
    @Anonimous
    “An act-of-war is only something that the object of the act declares to be an act-of-war. Israel’s almost clock-work regular bombing of SAA in support of terrorists was not declared an act of war by even Syria let alone RussiaÈ
    Deciding is such things is an act of war or not depends upon deciding party capability and ability to respond to that act appropriately. Syria can do nothing about all those acts hence decides not to see it as an act of war.

    Thank you for explaining my point, that Tom Walsh appears to have missed. Declaring an act of war is not a “complaint to the aggressor”, as Tom states. Instead, it is a diplomatic declaration followed by a military response. Syria and Russia have done neither towards Israel to avoid making the situation even more complicated at the moment (one enemy at a time), but I doubt that President Assad will forgive Israel its support to Al Qaeda and ISIS.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. KA says:
    @CanSpeccy

    American values now successfully planted will now survive outside America .
     
    But will America, or anyone else survive American values? The American ec0nomy is flat, the industrial economy is declining. The welfare state generates millions of gamma minus morons raised at public expense by more or less illiterate low-IQ single mothers, and the globalist imperative sucks in millions of illegal aliens intent on "Making America Mexico Again."

    Meantime, Chinese values generates 7% annual GDP growth, or a doubling of GDP by 2026, and India graduates 550,000 engineers a year.

    Whether in Europe or the ME, adoption of American values looks like a commitment to economic, cultural and genetic self-destruction.

    I was alluding to a tragedy here The values that have destroyed Ameriica will be tried on the Balkanized and defeated MEcountries ‘s social ethos and on their foreign policies

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

    The US will send more weapons to Daesh
     
    Evidence this ever happened?

    I am aware we had a stupid policy of arming "the moderate rebels" and those weapons ended up with ISIS. That policy stopped a while ago, and at this point the only group in Syria we are arming are the Kurds.

    Weapons deliveries to Daesh are laundered through Saudi Arabia and al-Nusra. When you do A, and B occurs, but you continue to do A over and over again anyway, your intent is that B will occur.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @KA
    Saker omits the relevance of the war that is going on in Iraq . In Iraq ,America is fighting against IS . In Syris ,America is fighting for IS .

    I think the American interest is being served well . The emergence of IS has drawn America back in Iraq and has given the opportunity to Kurds to solidify their position . This was the expressed desire of American Governmnet . Iraq is Balkanized with American support . Anerican presence in the middle of the conflicts and territory has made him the arbiter between Iraqi gov and Kurd.

    IS can only go to Syria from Iraq . Once IS is secure in Syria America again may decide how to address that new Syria . It may switch side and kill IS to prolong its presence as it is doing in Libya effectively lengthening the period of anarchy . IS them might move to neighboring countries like Saudi Arab or Turkey giving America another chance to Balkanize those countries .and also send Refugges to EU.

    Obviously Russia has to be defeated in Syria to achive 100% but even if Russia checkmates America, Saudi or Egypt or Turkey aren't out of danger from America-IS threat . Defeated IS will look for new land.

    Again its not the oil or pipeline that is propelling American moves . But having control of oil and pipe,one doesn't hurt and does help in the long run . In the short run that claim can hide the monstrosity of the Balkanization plan and can draw support from business .

    Recent justified Saudi bashing and coloring of Saudis in bad light may usher is into a new period where Anerican Governmnet will offer platitudes of support to corrupt thuggish Saudi royals but will nonetheless undermine it from multiple angles . A weakened Saudi will also be unable to provide much diplomatic and financial support to Pakistan rendering that country without friend and resources and vulnerable in conflicts with India and Afghanistan which America wants in this new anti Chinese atmosphere . Chances are that we will see Pakistan China Russia Iran arrayed against America with its total control of the Balkanized Middle East and control of oil supply. Jordan possibly will be asked to absorb Palestinian from WB and Gazan will be moved to Sinai . IS will maintain its presence as long as America needs this particular excuse for domestic and foreign plans and incursions. Even friend India is vulnerable and Amerrica can use IS not only against India but also against Mynammar if situation warrants . IS is the foot soldier of American new imperialism . It softens the target before America will move in.

    This war in Syria is not going well because of resistance from Russia and Iran but it is the continuation of the same plan that ushered into Iraq war . The local architect of the different sections of this original war may not know that he or she is really involved in a cosmic struggle -Bush didn't know and neither possibly Clinton Kerry or Obama or Ashton Carter . They did their parts at their times There was a reason that WW4 was invoked in early weeks following 911, because the visionary of that hellish world have been talking of taking down 7 countries and imposing American values throughout Middle East .

    Money and blood - lost in the war haven't deterred or changed that vision . The continued war will bleed and weaken America , bleed Russia ,fragment Midfle East and prepare ME ready for political ,economic and social / religious engineering from outside and push America to more tyrannical dictatorial posturings at home .

    Middle East 's fate will be at the mercy of Israel Iran,China and India . America will recede so will Russia . The migrants in EU and in America will play the designated roles in psychological and later territorial Balkanization .
    Islam like Christianity will debate about peripheral social issues and self flagellate itself because of all the crimes that been committed under its name .

    Kadarshian will find home in Mecca and Muslim will be eventually liberated . American values now succeessfully planted will now survive outside America .

    I think the American interest is being served well .

    It ain’t over til it’s over, and right now things aren’t going all that well in E. Aleppo. When it falls, tens of thousands of allied troops will be re-deployed to take back Idlib and thoroughly seal the border.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @Carlton Meyer
    The vast majority of informed Americans prefer that we just leave Syria alone and pull out. Even most our Generals think so, as the video clip mentioned by Saker shows the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs explain this reality to a confused Congressman.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmE9Jj-rEVs&feature=youtu.be

    So the first sign of trouble will be if Clinton starts ousting senior Generals who quietly object. All this seems improbable, but remember that most of Syria is part of the Promised Land mentioned in the Bible, no different than the West Bank. If Assad is gone, Syria is gone, and others are free to grab parts. Israel could grab a huge chunk as a security zone, and then quietly annex it just as they did with Syria's Golan Heights.

    Keep in mind that if the USA attacks Russia's bases in Syria, Russia is free to attack American airbases in Iraq, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia with cruise missiles. But the biggest unknown is Iran, which knows that if Syria is destroyed, it is next. While the USA is tied up over Syria, it could launch a surprise attack on USA military targets in the Gulf region, and swarm into Iraq where its Shi'ite allies would help round up 10,000 American POWs. Might as well grab oil rich Kuwait too.

    This could be the end of NATO too as people might rise up, as Hungary has done. So I don't think Russia would take any military actions in Europe. The Germans are mad about the refugee mess, and if the Russians threaten to shut off their vital natural gas pipelines, Germany might hang Merkel and order all American bases there closed and send its troops to shut them down.

    The clip is too short. What occurred immediately afterward was McCain berating Dumbford for saying a no-fly zone could not be established without going to war with Russia and Syria, and Dumbford saying he never said that and that a no-fly zone is different from controlling all of Syria’s air space. Huh? Do they think Russia is going to cooperate with the US by imposing a no-fly zone on the Syrian air force? Yes, indeed. Parallel universes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal
    Seems there are fewer and fewer reasons for not regarding McCain as certifiably insane. I'm not sure whether the appropriate response to the professionals who have to humour him should be contempt or pity.

    Even as a visceral traditionalist conservative, and for all my general contempt for Obama and hatred of his ideological positions, it's ever clearer the US and the world dodged a bullet in 2008.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @Boris
    I wonder how much the Russians pay for this terrible propaganda. The only people buying it are the outcasts at Unz Review and some morons of the Alt-Right. It is just a make-work job to try and stimulate the stagnated Russian economy? Maybe digging holes and filling them in would be more of a boon to the Russian reputation.

    Actually, there seem to be some left-truthers who dig the Saker.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. Randal says:
    @anti_republocrat
    The clip is too short. What occurred immediately afterward was McCain berating Dumbford for saying a no-fly zone could not be established without going to war with Russia and Syria, and Dumbford saying he never said that and that a no-fly zone is different from controlling all of Syria's air space. Huh? Do they think Russia is going to cooperate with the US by imposing a no-fly zone on the Syrian air force? Yes, indeed. Parallel universes.

    Seems there are fewer and fewer reasons for not regarding McCain as certifiably insane. I’m not sure whether the appropriate response to the professionals who have to humour him should be contempt or pity.

    Even as a visceral traditionalist conservative, and for all my general contempt for Obama and hatred of his ideological positions, it’s ever clearer the US and the world dodged a bullet in 2008.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. Randal says:
    @Simple Pseudonymic Handle
    "Then what? All it has achieved is to acquire a largely hostile territory to occupy, and terminally alienated the European states who will then rearm with actual enthusiasm."

    There is NO value for the Russians to sit back and tolerate a blatant act of Hitleresque aggression upon their forces and the forces of a sovereign nation. A line has to be drawn somewhere or the empire will keep pushing until they push too far somewhere else.

    Russia would get a valuable buffer between themselves and NATO expansion plus some valuable farm real-estate. In the long-run, relations with Europe will return to normal because Europe is decrepit and needs food and fuel. Even if Russia had to retreat from those territories at some point, it would only come after a formal treaty is signed keeping them forever out of the American sphere of influence - a win for Russia.

    A decrepit Europe, flooded with immigrants and sacked with low-birth rates, is in no shape to resume a real cold war (and despite what you think, the Empire is in no condition to both pivot to Asian AND resume the Cold War in Europe). Further, the European public isn't going blame Russia for retaliating against American aggression. I base that upon polls taken in various European countries (Germany) after the US overthrew the Ukrainian president. Despite all the Western propaganda, European intellectuals were shocked to learn that many members of the public rightfully blamed the US for starting the whole thing.

    Unlike with Iraq, the global public isn't naive enough anymore to just blindly accept whatever BS propaganda the US spews out. The Russians will counter whatever the US says, so there will be no build-up to "we have to do something because - humanitarian." The US has no option other than to sit back and take it. That's what they get for supporting terrorists.

    Imo, your analysis is coloured too much by wishful thinking, and while I sympathise with your emotional positions, I don’t agree with your conclusions.

    Experience tells me that a Russian retaliation in Ukraine for US aggression in Syria will not be generally recognised as such in the managed information spaces of the US sphere. The mainstream media will ignore (for this purpose) events in Syria, painting US actions there as “humanitarian” and supposedly disinterested, and will trumpet the Russian action in Ukraine as supposedly unprovoked and opportunist land grabbing. This merely builds on well established propaganda untruths that are already generally (though not universally) accepted in the US sphere.

    There are certainly dissident opinions and news sources online, and a significant minority in the general population of the US sphere who are sceptical of the official truths, but they will just be dismissed as Russian propaganda tools and Kremlin trolls. It has worked before and it will work again, at least sufficiently to provide the necessary political cover for the political establishment to fund a massive return to Cold War levels of military confrontation of Russia in eastern Europe, and an ongoing insurgency in western Ukraine, that will ultimately make it too costly for Russia to hold onto.

    There is NO value for the Russians to sit back and tolerate a blatant act of Hitleresque aggression upon their forces and the forces of a sovereign nation. A line has to be drawn somewhere or the empire will keep pushing until they push too far somewhere else.

    My argument is precisely that Russia will have to respond, and that is why the risk of escalation makes the imposition of a no fly zone ultimately unacceptable even for the US elites. An attempt to impose a no fly zone on a defiant Russia means war.

    I just don’t see any particularly good options for Russia in Ukraine for large scale retaliation, though doubtless a push for a land link with Crimea would happen once the gloves come off. But that kind of thing is more of a benefit to the US regime as a propaganda tool than any real cost to them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon_the_nth

    Experience tells me that a Russian retaliation in Ukraine for US aggression in Syria will not be generally recognised as such in the managed information spaces of the US sphere. The mainstream media will ignore (for this purpose) events in Syria, painting US actions there as “humanitarian” and supposedly disinterested, and will trumpet the Russian action in Ukraine as supposedly unprovoked and opportunist land grabbing. This merely builds on well established propaganda untruths that are already generally (though not universally) accepted in the US sphere.

     

    I'm actually quite sceptical that Russia would "invade" Ukraine. One assumption I think they might have made with good reason is that in the event of US shooting down jets in Syria, they expect the US asset Poroshenko to try to take advantage of it, and what they might do at most is move regular army currently in UKR borders into DPR/LPR to reinforce them. What's more likely though is that they might let UKR attack a bit, then begin a strong and coordinated counter attack to roll them out and hamper the capability to renew any kind of offensive any time soon, for a very long time atleast. Similarly if UKR doesn't attack (most unlikely scenario imo), nothing will happen. If US starts ships weapons into UKR, RU will have free reign to ship any weapons they wish at well. In any case, unless things go completely ballistic, DPR/LPR are there to stay for the duration of the rest of Ukraine being under US control. It's Porky who will make the first move and there are certain counters for everything. If this attempt fails, his regime will be weakened severely in my view.

    Depending on how things escalate Estonia and Latvia might need to be rolled over for nothing else than a defensive buffer, again, for the duration of the "war". But NATO will, again, need to make a "first move". CIA false flag border attack events followed by media barrage aren't completely out of the question here. Soviet Union did it at least once in history and the more desperate US gets, the more desperate attempts they will try as well.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. annamaria says:

    The patriotic and intelligent brass are coming on rescue of the US citizenry that has been duped and betrayed by the ziocons-infected US government.

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/10/02/obama-warned-to-defuse-tensions-with-russia/

    “A group of ex-U.S. intelligence officials is warning President Obama to defuse growing tensions with Russia over Syria…”
    ALERT MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
    FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
    SUBJECT: PREVENTING STILL WORSE IN SYRIA
    “We write to alert you, as we did President George W. Bush, six weeks before the attack on Iraq, that the consequences of limiting your circle of advisers to a small, relatively inexperienced coterie with a dubious record for wisdom can prove disastrous.* Our concern this time regards Syria.”

    The coterie has been busy with arming and protecting jihadis. The pipelines and Eretz Israel are the coterie’s leading stars; the approaching WWIII is of no concern for the perfumed princess and princesses, each hand-picked by plutocracy.

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

    Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity:
    “We write to alert you…that the consequences of limiting your circle of advisers to a small, relatively inexperienced coterie with a dubious record for wisdom can prove disastrous.* Our concern this time regards Syria.”

    How “inexperienced” is the coterie? – Judge for yourself:

    “One of the reasons explaining the failure of the latest US-Russian ceasefire agreement is the refusal by what is left of moderate rebels inside Aleppo to break-up with the more radical groups, first and foremost “Jabhat al-Nusra”, or whatever other name they like to be called these days. The two major groups that controlled the Eastern neighborhoods… actually joined the Al Qaeda Jihadis and left them in charge of the operational command inside the city.”

    Take a note that the “operational command” in Aleppo used to include American military servicemen that were killed during Russians’ attack on the jihadis. Who was that idiot that had sent the US military servicemen to Syria to risk their lives for the glory of jihadis’ victory in Aleppo?

    “No one on the ground believes in this mission or this effort, and they know they are just training the next generation of jihadis, so they are sabotaging it by saying, ‘Fuck it, who cares?’” “I don’t want to be responsible for Nusra guys saying they were trained by Americans,” the Green Beret added. “http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2016/09/us-special-forces-sabotage-white-house-policy-gone-disastrously-wrong-with-covert-ops-in-syria-ttg.html

    Meanwhile, “THE US BACKS ISIS AGAIN:” http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/10/syria-bombing-us-backs-isis-again.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  113. Boris says:
    @Simple Pseudonymic Handle
    Those of us with high IQs like to hear different perspectives, not just the ravings and lies of the American media and fake 'Murican patriotards. Find those WMD yet? Hear any mention of Saudi Arabia's war on Yemenese civilians in the American mainstream press? Hear any mentions of the US demanding Saudi Arabia stop its illegal war? I guess all that military equipment your country is surrounding China with is for peaceful purposes only. Get lost sheep.

    Those of us with high IQs like to hear different perspectives, not just the ravings and lies of the American media

    Hearing different perspectives is fine. Gulping down obvious bullshit is not so fine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Everything you have ever written on this site has been obvious bullshit; how do you suggest we treat it?
    , @Avery
    {Gulping down obvious bullshit is not so fine.}

    Speaking from personal experience no doubt, since you grade it so precisely.
    You keep discovering new and interesting things about yourself, homes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. 5371 says:
    @Boris

    Those of us with high IQs like to hear different perspectives, not just the ravings and lies of the American media
     
    Hearing different perspectives is fine. Gulping down obvious bullshit is not so fine.

    Everything you have ever written on this site has been obvious bullshit; how do you suggest we treat it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. @Randal
    Imo, your analysis is coloured too much by wishful thinking, and while I sympathise with your emotional positions, I don't agree with your conclusions.

    Experience tells me that a Russian retaliation in Ukraine for US aggression in Syria will not be generally recognised as such in the managed information spaces of the US sphere. The mainstream media will ignore (for this purpose) events in Syria, painting US actions there as "humanitarian" and supposedly disinterested, and will trumpet the Russian action in Ukraine as supposedly unprovoked and opportunist land grabbing. This merely builds on well established propaganda untruths that are already generally (though not universally) accepted in the US sphere.

    There are certainly dissident opinions and news sources online, and a significant minority in the general population of the US sphere who are sceptical of the official truths, but they will just be dismissed as Russian propaganda tools and Kremlin trolls. It has worked before and it will work again, at least sufficiently to provide the necessary political cover for the political establishment to fund a massive return to Cold War levels of military confrontation of Russia in eastern Europe, and an ongoing insurgency in western Ukraine, that will ultimately make it too costly for Russia to hold onto.

    There is NO value for the Russians to sit back and tolerate a blatant act of Hitleresque aggression upon their forces and the forces of a sovereign nation. A line has to be drawn somewhere or the empire will keep pushing until they push too far somewhere else.
     
    My argument is precisely that Russia will have to respond, and that is why the risk of escalation makes the imposition of a no fly zone ultimately unacceptable even for the US elites. An attempt to impose a no fly zone on a defiant Russia means war.

    I just don't see any particularly good options for Russia in Ukraine for large scale retaliation, though doubtless a push for a land link with Crimea would happen once the gloves come off. But that kind of thing is more of a benefit to the US regime as a propaganda tool than any real cost to them.

    Experience tells me that a Russian retaliation in Ukraine for US aggression in Syria will not be generally recognised as such in the managed information spaces of the US sphere. The mainstream media will ignore (for this purpose) events in Syria, painting US actions there as “humanitarian” and supposedly disinterested, and will trumpet the Russian action in Ukraine as supposedly unprovoked and opportunist land grabbing. This merely builds on well established propaganda untruths that are already generally (though not universally) accepted in the US sphere.

    I’m actually quite sceptical that Russia would “invade” Ukraine. One assumption I think they might have made with good reason is that in the event of US shooting down jets in Syria, they expect the US asset Poroshenko to try to take advantage of it, and what they might do at most is move regular army currently in UKR borders into DPR/LPR to reinforce them. What’s more likely though is that they might let UKR attack a bit, then begin a strong and coordinated counter attack to roll them out and hamper the capability to renew any kind of offensive any time soon, for a very long time atleast. Similarly if UKR doesn’t attack (most unlikely scenario imo), nothing will happen. If US starts ships weapons into UKR, RU will have free reign to ship any weapons they wish at well. In any case, unless things go completely ballistic, DPR/LPR are there to stay for the duration of the rest of Ukraine being under US control. It’s Porky who will make the first move and there are certain counters for everything. If this attempt fails, his regime will be weakened severely in my view.

    Depending on how things escalate Estonia and Latvia might need to be rolled over for nothing else than a defensive buffer, again, for the duration of the “war”. But NATO will, again, need to make a “first move”. CIA false flag border attack events followed by media barrage aren’t completely out of the question here. Soviet Union did it at least once in history and the more desperate US gets, the more desperate attempts they will try as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon_the_nth
    I might add, the number one priority of course is to defeat the Ukraine attack as covertly as possible, i.e. best if the PRs defeat it on their own (with a little help from a hidden hand of course). Estonia and Latvia are really really worst case scenarios, the last resort. One issue for NATO would also be how can they convince the EU members to allow it to use their land for physical attack (bombing runs etc. against Russia), since they signed in for a defensive treaty, not a mutual US offensive pact. The treaty isn't coherent in this sense and it doesn't sound likely that such strong conditions can be created to convince these countries to willingly act as suicide bombers.

    Of course, some people also theorize that sovereign states within NATO don't exist as NATO can override any national decisions or non-decisions at will, in which case the situation could get very ugly quickly. I hope though that this is just baseless speculation and these countries still have a backbone left in them, but always expect for the worst.
    , @annamaria
    "If US starts ships weapons into UKR..."
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/threatening-russia-u-s-congress-legalizes-delivery-of-lethal-defensive-weapons-to-ukraine/5548573
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. @anon_the_nth

    Experience tells me that a Russian retaliation in Ukraine for US aggression in Syria will not be generally recognised as such in the managed information spaces of the US sphere. The mainstream media will ignore (for this purpose) events in Syria, painting US actions there as “humanitarian” and supposedly disinterested, and will trumpet the Russian action in Ukraine as supposedly unprovoked and opportunist land grabbing. This merely builds on well established propaganda untruths that are already generally (though not universally) accepted in the US sphere.

     

    I'm actually quite sceptical that Russia would "invade" Ukraine. One assumption I think they might have made with good reason is that in the event of US shooting down jets in Syria, they expect the US asset Poroshenko to try to take advantage of it, and what they might do at most is move regular army currently in UKR borders into DPR/LPR to reinforce them. What's more likely though is that they might let UKR attack a bit, then begin a strong and coordinated counter attack to roll them out and hamper the capability to renew any kind of offensive any time soon, for a very long time atleast. Similarly if UKR doesn't attack (most unlikely scenario imo), nothing will happen. If US starts ships weapons into UKR, RU will have free reign to ship any weapons they wish at well. In any case, unless things go completely ballistic, DPR/LPR are there to stay for the duration of the rest of Ukraine being under US control. It's Porky who will make the first move and there are certain counters for everything. If this attempt fails, his regime will be weakened severely in my view.

    Depending on how things escalate Estonia and Latvia might need to be rolled over for nothing else than a defensive buffer, again, for the duration of the "war". But NATO will, again, need to make a "first move". CIA false flag border attack events followed by media barrage aren't completely out of the question here. Soviet Union did it at least once in history and the more desperate US gets, the more desperate attempts they will try as well.

    I might add, the number one priority of course is to defeat the Ukraine attack as covertly as possible, i.e. best if the PRs defeat it on their own (with a little help from a hidden hand of course). Estonia and Latvia are really really worst case scenarios, the last resort. One issue for NATO would also be how can they convince the EU members to allow it to use their land for physical attack (bombing runs etc. against Russia), since they signed in for a defensive treaty, not a mutual US offensive pact. The treaty isn’t coherent in this sense and it doesn’t sound likely that such strong conditions can be created to convince these countries to willingly act as suicide bombers.

    Of course, some people also theorize that sovereign states within NATO don’t exist as NATO can override any national decisions or non-decisions at will, in which case the situation could get very ugly quickly. I hope though that this is just baseless speculation and these countries still have a backbone left in them, but always expect for the worst.

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

    Experience tells me that a Russian retaliation in Ukraine for US aggression in Syria will not be generally recognised as such in the managed information spaces of the US sphere. The mainstream media will ignore (for this purpose) events in Syria, painting US actions there as “humanitarian” and supposedly disinterested, and will trumpet the Russian action in Ukraine as supposedly unprovoked and opportunist land grabbing. This merely builds on well established propaganda untruths that are already generally (though not universally) accepted in the US sphere.

     

    I'm actually quite sceptical that Russia would "invade" Ukraine. One assumption I think they might have made with good reason is that in the event of US shooting down jets in Syria, they expect the US asset Poroshenko to try to take advantage of it, and what they might do at most is move regular army currently in UKR borders into DPR/LPR to reinforce them. What's more likely though is that they might let UKR attack a bit, then begin a strong and coordinated counter attack to roll them out and hamper the capability to renew any kind of offensive any time soon, for a very long time atleast. Similarly if UKR doesn't attack (most unlikely scenario imo), nothing will happen. If US starts ships weapons into UKR, RU will have free reign to ship any weapons they wish at well. In any case, unless things go completely ballistic, DPR/LPR are there to stay for the duration of the rest of Ukraine being under US control. It's Porky who will make the first move and there are certain counters for everything. If this attempt fails, his regime will be weakened severely in my view.

    Depending on how things escalate Estonia and Latvia might need to be rolled over for nothing else than a defensive buffer, again, for the duration of the "war". But NATO will, again, need to make a "first move". CIA false flag border attack events followed by media barrage aren't completely out of the question here. Soviet Union did it at least once in history and the more desperate US gets, the more desperate attempts they will try as well.
    Read More
    • Replies: @anon_the_nth

    “If US starts ships weapons into UKR…”

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/threatening-russia-u-s-congress-legalizes-delivery-of-lethal-defensive-weapons-to-ukraine/5548573

     

    When does the "Stability and democracy for America act" occur, a.k.a delivering Dragunov's and AK47s to Black Lives Matter?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. annamaria says:

    US/NATO gift to Syria: http://thesaker.is/latest-developments-in-northern-syria-the-race-for-al-bab-and-the-debacle-of-euphrates-shield-map-included/
    Comment section: “Time to create a new word: Libyanization
    Libyanization: is a geopolitical term, originally used to describe the process of bringing extreme chaos and division in a region or state, ending in warlords controlled territories fighting each other with constantly shifting allegiances.”

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

    Bernard Henri Lévy, the first certified war criminal of supposedly philosophical persuasion.

    http://thesaker.is/ecumenism-new-ideological-weapon-of-the-imperialism-on-some-defects-from-1968/

    “Bernard Henri Lévy has become known in recent years as a promoter of the coups of the West against the sovereignty of Libya, Syria and Ukraine. Still, the coup career of Bernard Henri Lévy is quite extensive. For example, in 1985 he called for intervention in Nicaragua against the Sandinistas, … in the 90s to divide Yugoslavia and to introduce Muslim nationalists in Bosnia as “multiethnic non-nationalist” (it is known an interview he did in 1992 in Sarajevo “under the bombs”, which was revealed to be a montage (4)). Henri Levy perfectly explains his imperialist idea in this interview [2014], where he clearly states that he considers “Europe as the only ecumenical civilization” and is therefore forced to “intervene in world politics” if it wants to keep alive “the idea of ​​Europe” (5). That is, according to Henri Lévy, Europe has, on behalf of “ecumenism”, the right and even the obligation to intervene in any State; since for the Zionist Bernard Henri Lévy, any system that is outside the “European Ecumenical ideology” it is in itself totalitarian.”

    This spoiled wealthy scoundrel adores himself for the bloody supremacist ideas that have been put to practice with the spectacular results.
    The “grateful” Parisians should have tarred and feathered Bernard Henri Lévy already for a sight of the trashed Parisian boulevards by sub-Saharan migrants, courtesy of Bernard Henri Lévy’ “ecumenical” plans for the Middle East. (Libya used to control the migration). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-aG5dU3_a4
    And there are millions of dead and/or displaced Libyans and Syrians whom the scoundrel is not able to recognize as human beings thanks to his “high” European/Jewish upbringing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  120. @annamaria
    "If US starts ships weapons into UKR..."
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/threatening-russia-u-s-congress-legalizes-delivery-of-lethal-defensive-weapons-to-ukraine/5548573

    “If US starts ships weapons into UKR…”

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/threatening-russia-u-s-congress-legalizes-delivery-of-lethal-defensive-weapons-to-ukraine/5548573

    When does the “Stability and democracy for America act” occur, a.k.a delivering Dragunov’s and AK47s to Black Lives Matter?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. Avery says:
    @Boris

    Those of us with high IQs like to hear different perspectives, not just the ravings and lies of the American media
     
    Hearing different perspectives is fine. Gulping down obvious bullshit is not so fine.

    {Gulping down obvious bullshit is not so fine.}

    Speaking from personal experience no doubt, since you grade it so precisely.
    You keep discovering new and interesting things about yourself, homes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. The constant drumbeat of “we must do something”, “no-fly zone NOW” stories and op-eds in the UK media illuminated and explained.

    http://www.alternet.org/world/inside-shadowy-pr-firm-thats-driving-western-opinion-towards-regime-change-syria

    From a quick look at his twitter timeline, I’m not a fan of Max Blumenthal’s politics in general, but if what he writes is true it explains a lot.

    BBC US correspondent Jon Sopel was more or less openly saying tonight “what’s the use of the US being a superpower if it can’t impose its will on Russia?”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    "what’s the use of the US being a superpower if it can’t impose its will on Russia?”.
     
    "What's the point of you saving this superb military for, Colin, if we can't use it." - Madeleine Albright (born Marie Jana Korbelová)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  123. RobinG says:
    @Kiza
    Almost all "moderate" rebels, that is terrorists, are foreign mercenaries. Most of real Syrian opposition is now quiet or with Assad, for the same reason that many former opponents of Saddam Hussein and Gaddafi came to regret the Western "help". Fighting for the West makes one a traitor instead of opponent to a dictator. Since money for mercenaries appears to be running out, this limits options available to the Coalition Of the Sponsors of Terrorism (COST) even further. Time is truly running out and this makes the US war functionaries very nervous - they experience hyperventilating emotional break-downs in UN (Powers) and they make totally stupid threats against Russia (Kirby).

    I would agree with Saker's analysis except on the participation of the EU. If US issues a command its EU puppets will roll out army onto their own streets (to prevent terrorism, of course) and send their airforces to support US in Syria. For example, the French Aircraft carrier is already in the vicinity of Syria. Therefore, Saker commonly and seriously overestimates "Western democracy".

    Among the traitors: phony PR assets, the WHITE HELMETS.

    “…making the White Helmets into an international sensation is just one of the successes THe Syria Campaign has achieved in its drive to oust Syria’s government.”

    Very good article with much detail –

    http://www.alternet.org/world/inside-shadowy-pr-firm-thats-driving-western-opinion-towards-regime-change-syria

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    More on White Helmets

    Syria’s White Helmets: War by Way of Deception – Part I
    http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/10/23/syrias-white-helmets-war-by-way-of-deception-part-1/

    Part II – Syria’s White Helmets: War By Way of Deception ~ ‘Moderate Executioners’
    http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/10/28/part-ii-syrias-white-helmets-war-by-way-of-deception-moderate-executioners/

    Who Are Syria’s White Helmets? “First Responders” for the US and NATO’s Al Nusra/Al Qaeda Forces?
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-are-syrias-white-helmets-first-responders-for-the-us-and-natos-al-nusraal-qaeda-forces/5532119
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. geokat62 says:
    @Anonymous Nephew
    The constant drumbeat of "we must do something", "no-fly zone NOW" stories and op-eds in the UK media illuminated and explained.

    http://www.alternet.org/world/inside-shadowy-pr-firm-thats-driving-western-opinion-towards-regime-change-syria

    From a quick look at his twitter timeline, I'm not a fan of Max Blumenthal's politics in general, but if what he writes is true it explains a lot.

    BBC US correspondent Jon Sopel was more or less openly saying tonight "what's the use of the US being a superpower if it can't impose its will on Russia?".

    “what’s the use of the US being a superpower if it can’t impose its will on Russia?”.

    “What’s the point of you saving this superb military for, Colin, if we can’t use it.” – Madeleine Albright (born Marie Jana Korbelová)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. saker tries too hard trying to cover every side of his points. that devolves into ramblings at times.

    and I agree with karlin that the moment a no fly zone is established over syria, usa has won. there will be no buts at that point. either russia sit on it’s ass while usa does it or usa destroys russian forces in syria in doing so. the latter means world war III long before the no fly zone is even established.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  126. Blosky says:

    Lotsa talk from Washington DC. And that’s about it. For crying out loud, John Kerry is involved. A complete schmuck. A loser who tossed his medals over a fence (or claimed he did).

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

    “Do We Really Want Nuclear War with Russia?” by Robert Parry:

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/10/03/do-we-really-want-nuclear-war-with-russia/

    Comment section:
    “There’s the fabricated WMD evidence used to invade Iraq.
    PNAC, the “Wolfowitz Doctrine” and “Securing the Realm” have all been well publicized, and existed before the fact. And let’s not forget, “Yats is the guy!”
    The major charge at Nuremberg was “conspiracy”. That’s right, conspiracy to wage aggressive war. NOT genocide. That was included with “crimes against humanity”, as part of the “accumulated evil of the whole”. No wonder our current media culture finds the term “conspiracy” frightening. There have been civilians wantonly murdered, refugees displaced, schools and hospitals bombed, hundreds of people tortured…all by accident of course. But that’s where the “accumulated evil of the whole” part effectively dispenses with lame excuses. We’ve got farcical accusations of gas attacks, airline shoot downs, and failure to negotiate, none of which are supported by legitimate exculpatory documentation. Has anyone read John Kirby’s State Department announcement? That tissue of lies and misrepresentations? For Christ’s effing sake, even Ribbentrop knew better than to put that kind of sh*t in writing. And, to top it all off, the story has just come out that Hillary Clinton seriously wanted to “drone” Julian Assange!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. utu says:
    @RobinG
    Among the traitors: phony PR assets, the WHITE HELMETS.

    "...making the White Helmets into an international sensation is just one of the successes THe Syria Campaign has achieved in its drive to oust Syria's government."

    Very good article with much detail -
    http://www.alternet.org/world/inside-shadowy-pr-firm-thats-driving-western-opinion-towards-regime-change-syria

    More on White Helmets

    Syria’s White Helmets: War by Way of Deception – Part I

    http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/10/23/syrias-white-helmets-war-by-way-of-deception-part-1/

    Part II – Syria’s White Helmets: War By Way of Deception ~ ‘Moderate Executioners’

    http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/10/28/part-ii-syrias-white-helmets-war-by-way-of-deception-moderate-executioners/

    Who Are Syria’s White Helmets? “First Responders” for the US and NATO’s Al Nusra/Al Qaeda Forces?

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-are-syrias-white-helmets-first-responders-for-the-us-and-natos-al-nusraal-qaeda-forces/5532119

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. The BBC is giving huge space to the plight of children in Aleppo (obviously not in the government-held side, who cares about them?) and has just rolled out its ultimate media weapon – reporter Fergal Keane, emoting magnificently as only a Celt can.

    In fact the last time I heard him reporting like this was from the former Yugoslavia, just before the US started bombing Serbia.

    We are definitely being prepped. Where’s the UK Stop The War campaign when you need them?

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    Did you listen to the VP debate tonight? Pence went totally ugly-nuts, dissing Putin and calling for No-Fly Zone and "safe zone" in Syria. We're being prepped, no doubt about it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  130. Art says:

    Folks – we are getting a new Benghazi Hustle – The Jew MSM started screeching that Gaddafi was going to massacre all the people of Benghazi (it was a lie – an impossibility) – three days later we started bombing Libya – what a humanitarian disaster that followed.

    We are now being treated to the Aleppo Hustle by the same Jew MSM.

    This is much more dangerous – it involves Russia, Iran, the good brave people of Syria, Turkey, Israel, and Hezbollah.

    There is only one reason Assad has maintained leadership in Syria for FIVE years – that is because the good people of Syria back him. They would rather have Assad than anything the Israel and US government will install over them.

    Art

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  131. RobinG says:
    @Anonymous Nephew
    The BBC is giving huge space to the plight of children in Aleppo (obviously not in the government-held side, who cares about them?) and has just rolled out its ultimate media weapon - reporter Fergal Keane, emoting magnificently as only a Celt can.

    In fact the last time I heard him reporting like this was from the former Yugoslavia, just before the US started bombing Serbia.

    We are definitely being prepped. Where's the UK Stop The War campaign when you need them?

    Did you listen to the VP debate tonight? Pence went totally ugly-nuts, dissing Putin and calling for No-Fly Zone and “safe zone” in Syria. We’re being prepped, no doubt about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    I do not know about Max Blumenthal - but this article has some surprising facts. Government money for anti-Assad propaganda.

    Inside the Shadowy PR Firm That’s Lobbying for Regime Change in Syria
    By Max Blumenthal

    October 04, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "Alternet" - On September 30, demonstrators gathered in city squares across the West for a "weekend of action” to “stop the bombs” raining down from Syrian government and Russian warplanes on rebel-held eastern Aleppo. Thousands joined the protests, holding signs that read "Topple Assad" and declaring, "Enough With Assad." Few participants likely knew that the actions were organized under the auspices of an opposition-funded public relations company called the Syria Campaign.

    ….

    …..

    But like The Syria Campaign, the White Helmets are anything but impartial. Indeed, the group was founded in collaboration with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)’s Office of Transitional Initiatives, an explicitly political wing of the agency that has funded efforts at political subversion in Cuba and Venezuela. USAID is the White Helmets’ principal funder, committing at least $23 million to the group since 2013. This money was part of $339.6 millionbudgeted by USAID for “supporting activities that pursue a peaceful transition to a democratic and stable Syria" -- or establishing a parallel governing structure that could fill the power vacuum once Bashar Al-Assad was removed.

    The Article:

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45595.htm

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. […] Saker 30 Sept. 2016: Die Russen haben schon gefolgert, dass die Amerikaner nicht “vereinbarungs-fähig” seien.  Die russische Reaktion war vorhersagbar: Lawrow gab zu, dass er seine amerikanischen Kollegen nicht ernst nehmen könnte. […]

    Read More
  133. Art says:
    @RobinG
    Did you listen to the VP debate tonight? Pence went totally ugly-nuts, dissing Putin and calling for No-Fly Zone and "safe zone" in Syria. We're being prepped, no doubt about it.

    I do not know about Max Blumenthal – but this article has some surprising facts. Government money for anti-Assad propaganda.

    Inside the Shadowy PR Firm That’s Lobbying for Regime Change in Syria
    By Max Blumenthal

    October 04, 2016 “Information Clearing House” – “Alternet” – On September 30, demonstrators gathered in city squares across the West for a “weekend of action” to “stop the bombs” raining down from Syrian government and Russian warplanes on rebel-held eastern Aleppo. Thousands joined the protests, holding signs that read “Topple Assad” and declaring, “Enough With Assad.” Few participants likely knew that the actions were organized under the auspices of an opposition-funded public relations company called the Syria Campaign.

    ….

    …..

    But like The Syria Campaign, the White Helmets are anything but impartial. Indeed, the group was founded in collaboration with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)’s Office of Transitional Initiatives, an explicitly political wing of the agency that has funded efforts at political subversion in Cuba and Venezuela. USAID is the White Helmets’ principal funder, committing at least $23 million to the group since 2013. This money was part of $339.6 millionbudgeted by USAID for “supporting activities that pursue a peaceful transition to a democratic and stable Syria” — or establishing a parallel governing structure that could fill the power vacuum once Bashar Al-Assad was removed.

    The Article:

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article45595.htm

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. Konga says:
    @Serge
    Actually Baltic states ARE historical Russian lands. They were such in and out since 8-9 th centuries and permanently since Peter the Great.
    The whole point however is that any attempt by US to impose no fly zone in Syria would mean shot down Russian planes and dead Russians which would only mean Russia and Putin would have two options. Either start fighting or drop trousers and let US to have Russia from the rear which is not the option. That leaves war and it is not going to be limited to Syria as Karlin states but I do not think it will be either Ukraine or Baltic.
    Those will be taken care off but later.

    “I do not think it will be either Ukraine or Baltic”

    Sorry for telling this replying to you, but this is an opportunity as any other, and since you wonder where…

    I never see anyone pointing on the most “red” point (and probably next “warm” zone) other than the ones always followed by MSM, alternative et al. It’s always Syria, Ukraine, Baltics, South China Sea etc.

    When we mention the Black Sea everybody links it to the Crimea subject. I think the reason why Nato, together with Romania, try to put warships there is the delta of the Danube, the Prut and the Dniester rivers, is that region that interests them. Nato already tried to “occupy” Moldova to test the waters, made recently some pressure to “solve” the conflit with Transdniester/Transnistria, even asked the UN peacekeepers (Russian soldiers) to go back home, placed Saakashvili on the border (tools).

    To answer you both, and others: the region to where Russia can divert Nato’s eyes, apart from Novorossyia, is that one. Suffice to feed or fuel the dreams of independence of Transnistria (already declared) and Budjak or even Gagauziya, and that’s it, the new jewel of the ZioNaziCons is surrounded by three or four fronts.

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

    I find the whole premise of the article ridiculous. First of all, the minute Russian aircraft gets hit by the Americans, Russia will pull out of START treaty and start to feverishly rearming itself with strategic nukes.
    Second, all USAF bases in Europe and /or Saudi Arabia will be taken out by cruise missiles within a day. Same goes for the US carriers – those are tracked all the time, would have to be fairly close ( no more than 500 miles ) to the theatre and would be disabled or sunk pretty quickly.
    And third, there is absolutely zero chance of containing Russian-American war to conventional weapons. US attack on Russia – anywhere in the world – would quickly lead to all-out nuclear exchange, and the end of both Russia and the West.
    Apart from allowing the author to demonstrate some rudimentary military knowledge, writings like this one are useless at best.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    "...the whole premise of the article ridiculous.."
    It ceased to be ridiculous as soon as one gives a thought to the level of expertise among the most influential deciders in the US administration. Here is a problem: the most competent and honest have been systematically replaced by incompetent opportunists. Try to google a story of Douglas Feith (a "fucking idiot"and fervent Israel-firster) and Colonel Patrick Lang ( a retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces (The Green Berets). Colonel Lang was trained and educated as a specialist in the Middle East by the U.S. Army and served in that region for many years. He was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point... and so on: http://turcopolier.typepad.com). The encounter between Feith and Lang should give you a pause. The obnoxious, idiotic Feith is the picture perfect of a triumphant powerful ziocon; the ziocons not only have been influencing the most important US policies, but - to protect the influence - the ziocons have been weeding out the competent and honest servants to the US interests.
    The perfumed princes (see Morell and Carter) and princesses (see Power and Nuland-Kagan) in the US government could well start a nuclear war by the most stupid accident, out of incompetence and arrogance (the latter goes with incompetence).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. attonn says:
    @Anonymous

    This is the old contradiction: westerners also want results *now*, while the Russians always take their time and move very slowly. That is why to a western audience the Kremlin under Putin is always “late” or “hesitant” or otherwise frustrating in what appears to be almost a lack of purpose and determination.
     
    That's why I contend that Russia is an Asian country, not an European, to displeasure, usually, of my Russian counterparts, who hate to view their nation as Asian (always leaving me wondering on the why).

    That’s just plain moronic.

    In terms of pure geography, Russia is the largest European country.

    And in terms of mentality, who the hell knows what being “European” means? In that department, there is a bigger gap between southern Italian and a Dane than between Pole and a Russian.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. annamaria says:
    @attonn
    I find the whole premise of the article ridiculous. First of all, the minute Russian aircraft gets hit by the Americans, Russia will pull out of START treaty and start to feverishly rearming itself with strategic nukes.
    Second, all USAF bases in Europe and /or Saudi Arabia will be taken out by cruise missiles within a day. Same goes for the US carriers - those are tracked all the time, would have to be fairly close ( no more than 500 miles ) to the theatre and would be disabled or sunk pretty quickly.
    And third, there is absolutely zero chance of containing Russian-American war to conventional weapons. US attack on Russia - anywhere in the world - would quickly lead to all-out nuclear exchange, and the end of both Russia and the West.
    Apart from allowing the author to demonstrate some rudimentary military knowledge, writings like this one are useless at best.

    “…the whole premise of the article ridiculous..”
    It ceased to be ridiculous as soon as one gives a thought to the level of expertise among the most influential deciders in the US administration. Here is a problem: the most competent and honest have been systematically replaced by incompetent opportunists. Try to google a story of Douglas Feith (a “fucking idiot”and fervent Israel-firster) and Colonel Patrick Lang ( a retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces (The Green Berets). Colonel Lang was trained and educated as a specialist in the Middle East by the U.S. Army and served in that region for many years. He was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point… and so on: http://turcopolier.typepad.com). The encounter between Feith and Lang should give you a pause. The obnoxious, idiotic Feith is the picture perfect of a triumphant powerful ziocon; the ziocons not only have been influencing the most important US policies, but – to protect the influence – the ziocons have been weeding out the competent and honest servants to the US interests.
    The perfumed princes (see Morell and Carter) and princesses (see Power and Nuland-Kagan) in the US government could well start a nuclear war by the most stupid accident, out of incompetence and arrogance (the latter goes with incompetence).

    Read More
    • Replies: @attonn
    You are free to believe what Fox News wants you to believe - namely that the US Government is full of crazies who dream about starting war with Russia, and only Obama/Kerry duo prevents them from doing so.

    Nothing is further from the truth.

    All this bloviating is done by third-rate operators (McCain, etc.) who decide absolutely nothing, but who play a bad cop to Obama's good cop on TV - in order to improve US negotiating position and soften the adversary without any need or real desire to throw a punch.

    Typical primitive psy-ops, but apparently very effective for messing with Saker's head.

    Maybe yours too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. attonn says:
    @annamaria
    "...the whole premise of the article ridiculous.."
    It ceased to be ridiculous as soon as one gives a thought to the level of expertise among the most influential deciders in the US administration. Here is a problem: the most competent and honest have been systematically replaced by incompetent opportunists. Try to google a story of Douglas Feith (a "fucking idiot"and fervent Israel-firster) and Colonel Patrick Lang ( a retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces (The Green Berets). Colonel Lang was trained and educated as a specialist in the Middle East by the U.S. Army and served in that region for many years. He was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point... and so on: http://turcopolier.typepad.com). The encounter between Feith and Lang should give you a pause. The obnoxious, idiotic Feith is the picture perfect of a triumphant powerful ziocon; the ziocons not only have been influencing the most important US policies, but - to protect the influence - the ziocons have been weeding out the competent and honest servants to the US interests.
    The perfumed princes (see Morell and Carter) and princesses (see Power and Nuland-Kagan) in the US government could well start a nuclear war by the most stupid accident, out of incompetence and arrogance (the latter goes with incompetence).

    You are free to believe what Fox News wants you to believe – namely that the US Government is full of crazies who dream about starting war with Russia, and only Obama/Kerry duo prevents them from doing so.

    Nothing is further from the truth.

    All this bloviating is done by third-rate operators (McCain, etc.) who decide absolutely nothing, but who play a bad cop to Obama’s good cop on TV – in order to improve US negotiating position and soften the adversary without any need or real desire to throw a punch.

    Typical primitive psy-ops, but apparently very effective for messing with Saker’s head.

    Maybe yours too.

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

    Guess you did not like the explanation of ziocons’ meddling in the US policies?

    I am reposting the text: “Here is a problem: the most competent and honest have been systematically replaced by incompetent opportunists. Try to google a story of Douglas Feith (a “fucking idiot”and fervent Israel-firster) and Colonel Patrick Lang ( a retired senior officer of U.S. Military Intelligence and U.S. Army Special Forces (The Green Berets). Colonel Lang was trained and educated as a specialist in the Middle East by the U.S. Army and served in that region for many years. He was the first Professor of the Arabic Language at the United States Military Academy at West Point… and so on: http://turcopolier.typepad.com). The encounter between Feith and Lang should give you a pause. The obnoxious, idiotic Feith is the picture perfect of a triumphant powerful ziocon; the ziocons not only have been influencing the most important US policies, but – to protect the influence – the ziocons have been weeding out the competent and honest servants to the US interests.”

    Where have you found any references to Obama, Kerry, and McCain in this text? Why are you trying to assign (to my post) your fantasies about the alleged separation of the duo from the government at large?
    Also, if you wanted to express your hatred towards Saker – whom I do respect very much for his military expertise and for his service to the public by maintaining an important alternative source of information – you could simply focus on this your goal, preferably in a separate post and not as unrelated commentary on my text.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  140. […] Saker 30 Sept. 2016  the Russians have already concluded that the US is “not-agreement-capable”. The Russia reaction was predictable: Lavrov’s admitted that he could not even take his American colleagues seriously. […]

    Read More
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
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
A simple remedy for income stagnation