The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
Week Seven of the Russian Intervention in Syria: Dramatic Surge in Intensity
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

This week was clearly dominated by two major events: the terrorist attacks in Paris and the Russian official declaration that Kogalymavia Flight 9268 was, indeed, destroyed by a bomb.

First, I would notice that contrary to so many prediction that the Russians, Egyptians and other nations involved would lie and cover up this attack, this did not happen. Both the Russians and the Egyptians were open and honest about this attack from day 1. There is something to be learned here: while some politicians clearly have lost the ability to speak the truth even if they tried to, others did not. While lying is the standard operating procedure for most (all?) of “western” (Empire-run) states, this is still not the case everywhere else. It is simply wrong to assume that Russia is some kind of “anti-USA” and that the Kremlin has a policy of systematic deception like the White House. To the extend that Russia could be considered an “anti-USA” this ought to include categorically different methods and motives.

Second, and this might seem highly counter-intuitive, it is undeniable that Daesh did everything in its power to invite retaliation: not only did Daesh immediately claim that it blew up Flight 9268, it also claimed the credit for the Paris attacks and even threatened more such attacks, including against the USA. Again, this might seem outright bizarre, but Daesh appears to be doing everything it can to create a large, multi-national coalition to destroy it. We must keep this in mind every time we consider the retaliatory steps taken by Russia, France and others (see below).

Third, while it is too early to call the recent French attacks a “false flag” it is logical to at least consider that possibility as likely, if not highly likely. I personally do not like knee-jerk conclusions and I would prefer waiting for more info to come out. But at this point in time whether this was a “real” attack or a “false flag” really makes no difference. Why? Because whether the French ‘deep state’ was an accomplice/culprit or whether the regime is completely incompetent, the “action is in the reaction” – that is to say that the French are getting involved with their own military operation in Syria and they are doing so in coordination with the Russians. So, at this point in time, I suggest focusing on that.

But first, let’s look at the really important development this week.

Russia dramatically increases her anti-Daesh operations

While you can read my initial assessment here, the dramatic surge in Russian strikes against Daesh is important enough to take a more detailed look at it.

First, in purely military terms, what the Russians did was both predictable (and I had predicted just that for several weeks now) and highly significant. The small Russian contingent at the Khmeimim air base in Latakia was, if amazingly skilled and outright heroic, simply too small to really hurt Daesh. Keep in mind that Russia does not have the kind of power projection capabilities the USA has and that regardless of that disadvantage, the Russian succeeded in creating a full airport capable of supporting the 24/7 night and day operation of about 50 aircraft in a record time. And they did that without the Empire ever getting any good intelligence about what the Russians were up to. By the time the Empire understood what the Russians had done, it was way too late to stop them. In terms of organization and logistics, this was an absolutely brilliant operation and the folks who organized it most certainly deserve to get a medal and promotion for it. I mention that here because it was probably simply impossible to bring in a bigger force. Even right now the Khmeimim air base is over-saturated with flights and the extra aircraft flow in will make a very difficult situation even worse. This is why I predicted that the long-range aviation would have to be brought in at least as a stop-gap measure until either a “Khmeimim 2” airport is built near Latakia or another airfield(s) become(s) available (maybe in Iran). Bottom line is this: bombing or not bombing, the Russians had no choice but to bring in the long-range aviation.

Second, and this is significant, the Russians clearly decided to take advantage of the fact that the long-range aviation was not constrained by any logistical difficulties: the force they brought in this time around is a big and powerful one: not only will another 37 aircraft now join the Russian force in Syria (including the formidable SU-34: to the 4 already present in Syria another 8 will be added for a total force of 12), but 25 long-range bombers are now fully dedicated to the Russian effort, including Tu-22M3, Tu-95MC and Tu-160. Now this is a “big stick”. Even the “old” Tu-95MC and Tu-22M3 are highly modernized versions of excellent airframes who can deliver plenty of very powerful and highly accurate munitions in any weather conditions, including gravity bombs and strategic cruise missiles. In other words, Russia has at least doubled her Syria-based capabilities and much more than doubled it if the Russia-based long-range bombers are included. From being a small force, the Russian air force contingent now dwarfs what the French will bring in on their Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier and what the Empire has been using until now. We can now expect the Daesh logistics, communications and infrastructure to suffer a major degradation. And just to make sure that it hurts were it counts, the Russians began their long-range attacks with strikes on oil processing and distribution networks, including depots, trucks, fueling stations, etc. The Russian long-range bombers will not make a big difference to the Daesh frontline fighters, but their attacks on the Daesh infrastructure will free the Russian helicopters and Su-25s to finally provide close air support to the Syrian forces (so far, this task was mostly limited to the Syrian Air force which cannot fly at night). I also believe that the current SU-24 and SU-34 force will also be given much more frontline attack missions to provide the Syrians with much needed firepower. Bottom line: the Russians have brought in a “big stick” and this time Daesh will really hurt. But, remember, Daesh wanted exactly that (see above).

Third. The Kremlin did an excellent job of “selling” this dramatic increase of the pace and intensity of Russian operations in Syria. Polls show that most Russians fully approve. However, from personal contacts in Russia, I am told that they approve but are getting very uncomfortable. There is no denying that Russia has now suffered from what I like to call a “mandate creep”: from going in to support the Syrians and fighting the Takfiri crazies away from home rather than at home, Russia is now promising retribution for the murder of her citizens. Putin made that absolutely clear when he said that military forces and special services will be used to hunt down the perpetrators of this atrocity. He said:

We will find and punish these criminals. We will do this with no limitation period. We will find out all their names. Will will hunt them down everywhere, regardless of where they are hiding. We will find them in any location on the planet and we will punish them. (…).

He even added a “Dubya” -like warning that anybody supporting or protecting them will be fully responsible for the consequences of doing so.

All those who might try to render assistance to these criminals must know that the consequences for such a protection will lie entirely upon them.

Keep in mind that the last time Putin issued such a warning was in 1999 when he promised that Russia would hunt down the Chechen Wahabi terrorist everywhere, “even in toilets”, and kill every one of them. At this occasion Putin used a colorful Russian slang idiom “мочить” which can very roughly be translated as “off them off” (or even to “f**king blast them”). What is less remembered is that the Russians did just that: they killed every single Takfiri insurgency leader including Baraev, Dudaev, Maskhadov, Iandarbiev, Hattab, Raduev, Basaev and many many others. Some of these executions were botched (Iandarbiev) some were superb (Dudaev, Hattab). But Putin got every single one of them. Every one. Putin has just made exactly the same threat, though in more diplomatic terms. And while most Russian agree with Putin, and while they know that he does not make empty threats, they also realize that suddenly a small and local military operation has turned into a potentially worldwide chase for terrorists. Considering how poorly the USA did just that after 9/11 there are plenty of good reasons to be worried. But I would also immediately add that most Russians also realize that Putin and Dubya are in different leagues and that while the USA seems to be chronically unable to do anything right “Russia does not start wars – she ends them” (as the expression goes in Russia). Bottom line: I believe that the Russians will not repeat the mistakes made by the clueless US Neocons and that the hunt for Daesh leaders is now on.

Fourth. There is an uncanny political dimension to this about which I am frankly very unsure. Everybody in Russia knows that Qatar is the prime sponsor of terrorism in Syria and in Egypt. How will the Kremlin square that knowledge with the publicly made promise to punish every person guilty for the murder of 224 Russian citizens in anybody’s guess. Since Qatar is basically one giant US base, there is no way to strike at Qatar without hitting the CENTCOM. Alternatively, the Russians could decided to hunt down and kill specific Qatari officials in various “accidents”. What is certain is that the Russian foreign intelligence service – SVR – has teams capable of such actions (Zaslon, Vympel), as does the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff – GRU – which has Spetsnaz GRU officer teams and special operation forces SSO units capable of such operations. For better deniability (assuming that is a goal), the Russians might also use their deep connections inside the Russian mob (quite a few of whom are ex-secret services, especially in the middle-ranks) to “subcontract” such an operation. Whatever options the Kremlin choses, I would not sleep well if I was a Qatari official involved in this atrocity. Bottom line: Putin has publicly made it a point of personal honor to get every single one of the bastards responsible, regardless of where or who they are, and I strongly believe that he will deliver on that promise.

Fifth. There are other nations besides Qatar who are also very much co-sponsors of Daesh. They include Turkey (and, by extension, NATO), the KSA and even the Ukraine (see here and here). Potentially, all of them can become targets of Russian retaliation (whatever form it takes). Finally, there are all the western financial institution who are providing crucial services for Daesh, including many involving the export of oil from Daesh controlled territory and the import of modern weapon (primarily US-made) into Daesh territory. The list is long and the fact that the Russians have now openly threatened a long list of powerful entities is certainly a dramatic increase in the scope of the Russian involvement in this war.

Sixth. As with any escalation the stakes and the risks for Russia have now sharply increased. The timeframe has now officially changed from “about three months” to “as long as needed”, the size and nature of the force committed now fully engages the Russian political prestige and all of the above makes Russia a prime target for Daesh retaliation, both inside and outside Russia. Now that Putin has officially declared that Russian special services are tasked with the elimination of those who blew up the Russian aircraft, the use of some kind of “boots on the ground”, even if these are “special boots”, becomes much more likely. For somebody like myself who has always been very reluctant about the use of military force it is disturbing to see how rapidly Russia is getting pulled-in into the war in Syria with no exit strategy I can discern, at least not in the foreseeable future. I personally do not believe that the Russians will send in boots, but I cannot say that I am categorically certain that this will not happen. Currently unpredictable events might well force them to.

The attacks in Paris

Tragic and horrible as these attacks were, the first thing that comes to my mind is the obscene difference in which the western media and zombified public treated 129 (provisional figure) murdered French and 224 murdered Russians. We had the “Je Suis Charlie” abomination and now we have the “Je Suis Paris” collective (planetary!) grief-fest. I don’t recall any “Je Suis Russie”, or “Je Suis Donbass” grief-fests? Or any “Je Suis Aleppo” or even “Je Suis Iraq”. Apparently, Russian or Arab lives matter a hell of a lot less than US or French lives (even if only in Iraq the body count is well over a million!). This is disgusting, unworthy of respect, utterly dishonest and terminally stupid. This is no “homage” to any victims, but your garden variety media-induced hysteria. The West ought to be ashamed of such pathetic lack of simple courage and maturity. Truly, did they really believe that they can play at such “terrorist games” and not eventually get hurt themselves (by a false flag or otherwise)?! Did not Putin warn the West of exactly that when he said:

I’m urged to ask those who created this situation: do you at least realize now what you’ve done? But I’m afraid that this question will remain unanswered, because they have never abandoned their policy, which is based on arrogance, exceptionalism and impunity. (…) In fact, the Islamic State itself did not come out of nowhere. It was initially developed as a weapon against undesirable secular regimes. (…) The situation is extremely dangerous. In these circumstances, it is hypocritical and irresponsible to make declarations about the threat of terrorism and at the same time turn a blind eye to the channels used to finance and support terrorists, including revenues from drug trafficking, the illegal oil trade and the arms trade. It is equally irresponsible to manipulate extremist groups and use them to achieve your political goals, hoping that later you’ll find a way to get rid of them or somehow eliminate them. I’d like to tell those who engage in this: Gentlemen, the people you are dealing with are cruel but they are not dumb. They are as smart as you are. So, it’s a big question: who’s playing who here? The recent incident where the most “moderate” opposition group handed over their weapons to terrorists is a vivid example of that. We consider that any attempts to flirt with terrorists, let alone arm them, are short-sighted and extremely dangerous. This may make the global terrorist threat much worse, spreading it to new regions around the globe, especially since there are fighters from many different countries, including European ones, gaining combat experience with Islamic State. Unfortunately, Russia is no exception. Now that those thugs have tasted blood, we can’t allow them to return home and continue with their criminal activities. Nobody wants that, right?

Prophetic words by Putin indeed. But since the AngloZionists have a long and “distinguished” tradition of using death-squads, vicious dictatorships and, of course, terrorists, Putin’s words were ignored. Heck, even after the Paris attacked the West is still supporting Nazis in the Ukraine! I suppose it will take some Nazi atrocity in London, Warsaw or Munich to wake up the zombified western general public to the simple reality that sponsoring and using terrorist is always a very dangerous policy. If not, then the West will continue on a neverending cycle of terrorism sponsoring and grief-fests, over and over again.

[Sidebar: I am often criticized for stating that Russia is not part of the West, ever was, and never will be. If you believe that I am wrong, ask yourself a simple question: why is it that Russian victims of atrocities (including Western sponsored atrocities!) are treated just like Black or Brown people and not like the other putatively “civilized” Whites? QED.]

Oh how much I wish most people in the West could understand Russian read the Russians newspapers, watch Russian talkshows or listen to Russian conferences! They would see something which they have been conditioned to consider impossible: far from fearing the West, most Russians find it crippled with narrow-minded consumerism, devoid from any real moral or ethical values, fantastically ignorant and provincial and suffering from terminal infantilism. Even the tiny pro-Western minority has now given up on defending the West and, at most, it retorts against the typical tsunami of anti-western arguments something like “what about us – are we not as bad?” or even “let’s not sink down to their level!”. It is quite amazing to see that happening in a country which used to almost worship anything western just 20-30 years ago! I should add that if the most despised and ridiculed country must, of course, be Poland, France is not far behind in the list of “most pathetic”, As for the USA, it is the least despised adversary simply because most Russian respect the US for defending whatever it perceives has its national interests and for making Europe it’s “bitch”. The Russians always say that to get something done one must talk to the USA and not waste time with its European colony.

If we look beyond all that rather shameful display of narcissistic self-pity, the real question is what is France going to do about it? Here again, there are two dimensions:

First, in purely military terms France will now commit the Charles de Gaulle with its wing of Rafales to the strikes on Daesh. Good, but compared to what the Russians are brining to the fight, it’s really irrelevant.

Second, in purely political terms, the French just might do something very interesting: apparently they have agreed with the Russians that the Russian forces in Syria will provide “cover” for the French. I am not really sure why a Rafale would need “cover” but whatever – what matters here is that the French have de-facto entered into an alliance with Russia over Syria and that, in turn, could open the door for other western countries. In other words, we just might (finally!) see a multi-national Russian-lead alliance take on the fight with Daesh and that, in turn, means that these countries would de-facto find themselves allied with Damascus. If northern Europe walks in lockstep with Uncle Sam, countries of southern Europe (Italy? Greece?) might decide to assist the Russians, as might Egypt or Jordan. I am not sure that such a coalition will happen, but at least now it might and that, by itself, is also an interesting development. This being said, Hollande is about to meet Obama in the US and he will probably be told in no uncertain terms that he must not “play ally” with Russia. Considering how abjectly subservient Hollande has been the the USA, I am not optimistic at all about the French meaningfully joining forces with Russia.

Third, there is no doubt in my mind, but many others do disagree, that the Zionist regime in power in Paris is making the maximal use of all these events to stir up an anti-Muslim hysteria in France. And I am not talking about the stupidity of insisting to serve an non-halal meal with wine to an Iranian leader who also happens to be a cleric, or the now “old” anti-hijab harassment in French schools. What I am talking about is the openly declared idea that traditional Islam is incompatible with the secular French Republic and that it therefore represents a danger to society. Conversely, the only “good” form of Islam is one of abject collaborationism with the Zionist regime typified by the infamous Hassen Chalghoumi, Imam of the mosque in Drancy. The message is clear: the only “good Muslim” is a Zionist Muslim. All others are potential or actual, terrorists and shall be treated as such. That, in turn, makes it easier for Takfiri recruiters to find more volunteers for their terrorist operations which, in turn, make it possible to the regime to pass even more draconian laws, including laws against free speech or Internet freedom. Being a real, pious and practicing, Muslim in France will become very, very hard in the near future. It certainly appears to me that the warnings of Sheikh Imran Hosein are coming true.

The unknown “breaking point” of Daesh

After six weeks of very hard fighting Russia has brought in the big stick, but those who expect Daesh to collapse under Russian air operations should not rejoice too soon. Breaking Daesh will probably take a much bigger effort. But let me explain why I am saying “probably”.

For the first time in many weeks and months Daesh is truly in a difficult situation, not a desperate one yet, but a difficult one. Unless something changes in the current dynamic, time is now beginning to run against Daesh. Still, the resilience of Daesh in the current conditions is close to impossible to predict, at least without some very good information from the frontlines and that is something which most analysts, including myself, don’t have. When a force is put under pressure the way Daesh has been, there is a breaking point somewhere in the future at which point the force collapses really fast. The problem is that it is extremely difficult to estimate how far away in time such a (wholly theoretical) breaking point might be because it really depends on the morale and determination of the Daesh fighters on the ground. All we can say at this point in time is that such a breaking point exists in a theoretical future and that we hope that it will be reached soon. But we also have to be aware that this might not be the case at all. Not only that, but we have to take a long hard look at the most puzzling issue of them all: why did Daesh deliberately place itself in such a position. Here are a few hypotheses I can come up with:

1) Daesh leaders are crazed lunatics. They are in such a hurry to get to heaven that all they want is to die in combat against the infidels. Alternatively, they are so deluded about their power that they think that they can take on the entire planet and prevail. While I cannot discount this hypothesis completely, I find it highly unlikely simply because even if the rank-and-file Takfiri is an ignorant goat herder, the middle and top level commanders are clearly sophisticated and well-educated.

2) Daesh has outlived its utility for the AngloZionist Empire and now it is sent into a battle it cannot win, but which will kill off thousands of now useless liver-eating sociopaths. Maybe. I don’t know where any evidence to support this hypothesis could be found, but this one at least make sense to me.

3) The real purpose for Daesh has always been the same: to inflict such damage to the entire Middle-East that, by comparison, an Israeli occupation would appear as a liberation to the few lucky ones who would survive the medieval horrors meted out by Daesh on a daily basis on all the territories it controls. So the bigger and the bloodier the fight, the better for the Israelis who have taken a relatively strong state controlled by relatively strong Baathist leaders – Assad père et fils – and who have now turned it into a heap of smoldering ruins. The problem with this theory is that unless something changes Daesh will not win, but lose, and that Assad will come out not weaker, but much stronger. And I won’t even mention the fact that Syria now has a small, but battle hardened military whereas the putatively “invincible” Tsahal only is experienced at shooting unarmed civilians. So if there was an Israeli plan to prepare for a future “Grand Israel” it backfired pretty badly.

Frankly, I find none of the hypotheses above really convincing and that makes me nervous. The question which always haunts all analysts is “what am I missing” and, in this case, it also haunts me. I honestly cannot imagine that the Daesh leaders would sincerely believe that they can win the kind of “war against everybody” they apparently are determined to fight. I would hope that somebody with better understanding of Daesh, fluent in Arabic and well-versed in Takfiri literature would give us all the reply to this apparently simple question: what does Daesh really want? I will gladly admit that I have no idea. And that worries me a lot.

The Resistance and its options

Seven weeks into the Russian intervention, the Resistance to the Empire is doing well and it still has the potential to intensify its struggle. First and foremost, what is most needed at this point in time are more combatants on the ground. I still believe that the Russians are not going to provide ground troops for Syria. My guess is that Hezbollah is pretty close to being maxed out. Unless I am missing something, this means that the only party capable of providing many more combatants on the ground is Iran. Right now, the official line out of Moscow, is that one of the goals of the Russian intervention is to give the Syrians enough time to reorganize and field a much bigger force. Maybe. I hope that they can do that soon enough to fully use the momentum created by the Russian intervention.

As for the Russians, they are also coming close to being maxed out. In terms of air force, they could have allocated even more aircraft, but they did not do so simply because they know that there is only that much any air force can do when intervening in a civil war. Still, this time around the Russians really “mean business”: According to the latest figures, the latest Russian strikes was formidable: ten ships from the Caspian Sea and the Mediterranean coordinated strategic cruise missile strikes on Daesh targets (18 cruise missiles were fired by only four ships the Caspian Sea flotilla see footage here: According to official figures, in just four days, the Russian air force have conducted 522 sorties, deploying more than 100 cruise missiles and 1,400 tons of bombs of various types. Just one cruise missile strike in Deir ez-Zor had killed more than 600 militants. Clearly, Daesh is taking a formidable beating (the “pretend airstrikes” of the US-lead “pretend coalition” probably gave them a false sense of security of what an angry superpower can *really* do when it means it).

I am quite certain that Russia can keep up this pace of operations for a long while: while the stocks of the latest “Kalibr-NK” are reportedly low, Russia is now using a lot of her immense Cold War arsenal where there stocks of cruise missiles and gravity bombs are plentiful. Russia will run out of targets long before she runs out of these strategic weapons. This is no joke, by the way: it makes no sense to fire multi-million Ruble cruise missiles at non-lucrative, secondary or even tactical targets. The situation is better with relatively cheaper gravity bombs, but the biggest problem is that Daesh targets will eventually split into two groups: destroyed ones and well hidden ones. At this point the Russian intervention will not become useless, but it will reach a point of diminishing marginal returns, both in a financial and in a strategic sense. This happened to the USA and NATO in Kosovo and it happened to Israel in Lebanon. Of course, the AngloZionists then switched their attention to what they call “infrastructure” and “support” target destruction, but which are basically terror strikes against the civilian population. Russia will not engage in such systematic policy of war crimes and thus the option of bombing Raqqa into oblivion is not something we will see the Russians do (the US, in contrast, probably will). This leaves only the naval component of the Russian task force.

The main task of the Russian naval task force has been to protect the Russian logistics and to provide air defenses to the newly built airbase with Latakia. Apparently, Russian denial notwithstanding, there are S-400s in Khmeimim, but if not, we can assume that S-300s are there. So the air-defense task for the Russian naval task force is now been replaced by a role of support for the Russian logistical effort which I expect to not only continue, but even to also sharply increase. This is where the Russians can do the most good and where they are not maxed out: help the Syrians reequip, reassemble, reorganize, retrain and *finally* provide them with relatively modern equipment (at least on par with what Daesh has). My guess is that after 4 years of war the Syrians need literally *everything* and this is were the Russians can play a crucial role.

The current Russian naval task force allocated to Syria is far from being trivial, see for yourself:

Graphic by SouthFront

Graphic by SouthFront

This is by no means a small force. Still, there have been some speculations that the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov might join the naval task force off the Syrian coast. I find that rather unlikely. Unlike the US aircraft carriers, the Admiral Kuznetsov was designed from day 1 to be primarily an anti-aircraft platform (primarily to protect the Russian submarine bastions) and not as a landstrike aircraft carrier. The Russians are currently reconsidering this role, but for the time being the Kuznetsov has very limited landstrike capabilities. Of course, if needed, the Kuznetsov could be used to strengthen the air-defense capabilities of Syria or the Russian contingent in Syria, but that is not something which will directly affect Daesh. Still, I would not count out the Kuznetsov either: according to the latest reports, she will be sent to a patrolling area off the Kola Peninsula, but that is not set in stone.

In terms of direct attack support, a possible Russian option would be to use submarine-based cruise missiles, but with 25 long-range strategic bombers already allocated to this task, this would not be a game changer either. My feeling is that the Russians are now as strongly committed as they can be. The only thing they could do now would be to increase the flow of modern weapons to Syria and to provide the technical personnel to train the Syrians. In my opinion this, along with an energetic political campaign to force the West to accept the facts on the ground, is the most likely Russian strategy for the future: continue to pound Daesh, while re-building the Syrian military and “engaging” Russia’s western “partners”.

Frankly, I will conclude by saying that I find this Russian strategy as militarily sound as it is morally correct. Russia cannot win this war “for” the Syrians. The best thing Russian can do is to provide meaningful help, and that she is very much doing.

With Hezbollah probably maxed-out, the big unknown is Iran: will the Iranians dare to bring in a much larger contingent of ground-forces to take the pressure off the Syrians? I hope not – because that would mean that the Syrian could do well even without such aid, but I still consider an Iranian surge as very likely.

As for the Syrians, Assad has just declared that he would not leave power before the defeat of Daesh. In other words, Assad has just turned the tables on the West and declared that the “departure” (i.e. elimination) of Daesh is now a pre-condition of his departure. Only time will show whether this is grandstanding or true confidence.

What about the “Indispensable Nation”:

I realize that bashing the USA is always a popular exercise, but for all my hostility to the AngloZionist Empire I also have to admit that the US is in a very bad and complicated position: it has created a bloody mess (literally), then it painted itself into a political corner, and all of its so-called ‘regional allies’ are, I believe, inherently disloyal and pursue their own interests. If you look at the relationship between the USA, on one hand, and countries like Turkey, Qatar, the KSA or Israel on the other, it really is hard to establish who uses whom and whether what we are seeing is a case of a tail wagging the dog. Take Qatar: there is no doubt that the presence of CENTCOM in Qatar gave the Qatari a strong sense of impunity which, in turn, bred arrogance and, frankly, irresponsibility. The Qatari wanted Assad “out” so they could get their gas to the Mediterranean, but now they are directly involved in the bombing of a Russian airliner. As for their much wanted pipeline, they can forget it for at least a decade now. How smart was that? More relevantly: is Qatar a good ally for the USA? What about Turkey which is actively supporting, financing, equipping and training Daesh (and al-Qaeda – same difference!) under the convenient protection of NATO. They apparently cannot decide which is worse: Assad or the Kurds, and since they fear them both, they end up in bed with liver-eating sociopaths. Is that a good ally for the USA? I won’t even go into the Israeli issue – we all know that AIPAC runs Congress and the Neocons try run the White House. None of which elicits any big love or loyalty from the Israelis who are constantly looking at the “Russian option” (partnering up with Russia) to get things done in the Middle-East. Besides, since the slow-mo genocide of Palestinians by the Ziocrazies currently in power is continuing, being allied to the Israelis means being hated by everybody else. Still, at least and unlike the other “regional allies” of the USA, the Israeli regime itself is stable, fairly predictable and can unleash an immense amount of violence. So compared to the Saudis, the Israelis look outright attractive. Still, at the end of the day, the USA has to try to get out of this mess without alienating its allies too much, but also without being manipulated by them.

Some seem to believe that the correct policy for the USA would be to work together with Russia. While this would undoubtedly make sense for the USA as a country, it would make no sense at all for the USA as an Empire. For the US (AngloZionist) Empire and the “deep state” forces which run it Russia is, indeed, a far bigger threat because Russia directly threatens the imperial status of the USA. The USA can either be the “Indispensable Nation” and world hegemon, or a “normal country” part of a civilized and multipolar world system ruled by the rule of law. It cannot be (or do) both. So when the US “deep state” is categorical in its refusal to do anything meaningful with Russia, it does act logically, at least from its point of view. As any other Empire, the USA sees its relationship with any competitor (actual or possible) as a zero-sum game which means that anything good for Russia is bad for the USA and vice-versa. Yes, this is sick and sociopathic, but this is how all Empires function. Hence the current US policies: the only good coalition is a US-lead one, any anti-Russian force must be supported, there will be no negotiations with Russia – only demands and ultimatums, etc. Add to this the apparently total lack of well-educated and competent diplomats (Americans get killed in every single negotiation they have conducted with the Russians), and you will see why the US is so averse to any notion of being anything other than hostile and confrontational with Russia.

The USA is in a terrible mess, the upcoming elections are only making matters worse and that makes the USA highly unpredictable. Yes, there is, I suppose, a small chance that the French might set a precedent for collaboration with Russia, but I am not holding my breath here. Maybe if another massacre is committed in Europe, especially Germany, but even that is a long shot. Still, there have been cases in history when a slave gave some good advice to his master and maybe this will happen this time around. I sure hope so.

Addendum: was I wrong about my predictions about the Russian intervention in Syria?

I think that this is a good time to reply to those who have accused me of being wrong about the Russian intervention in Syria. I could have done that as soon as these accusations were made, but I concluded that to do so in the flag-waving “go Russia! go!” kind of atmosphere this was futile. Many at that time were sure that this was the “showdown of the century” (no less), a “game changer” and that it was all “over” for Daesh. Seven weeks into this intervention, I propose to revisit what I actually said.

First, I never said that no military intervention would take place. In fact, I repeated over and over again that I cannot prove a negative and that an intervention *might* take place, I even suggested one (limited to intelligence support, training and weapons). All I said that the kind of intervention which was discussed 7-8 weeks ago would not take place: no Russian boots, no MiG-31, no forces in Damascus, no Russian SSBNs, no Airborne Forces, etc. And, indeed, that kind of intervention did not happen. Furthermore, I also said that the notion that Russia could “protect” Syria from NATO is laughable. It still is! Does anybody still seriously believe that the Russian contingent in Syria really has that kind of capabilities?! If so, I got a bridge to sell them. Now, I will gladly admit that I did not think that Putin would agree to what I consider an extremely daring and risky option of sending a very small force into Syria, a force just barely big enough to (maybe) give enough relief for the Syrians to reorganize and counter-attack. That I did, indeed, miss. As did everybody else who predicted a *much* larger Russian intervention (with MiG-31s and all the rest of the nonsense). I will also admit that I am still amazed at the fact that the Russians, who are both intervention-averse and risk-averse, did go for such a risky move and I marvel at the superb way they executed their operation. But they way they actually did it is something which nobody predicted.

Second, I also got in trouble for raising the alarm about the limited capabilities inherent to any air operation and, specifically, to a rather small Russian one. Now that the Russians had to use their cruise missiles and strategic aviation (which I did predict, by the way) is there anybody who will deny that I was right about the limitation of using airpower against Daesh, especially with the low number of aircraft initially brought in?

Third, I did point out that the Russian law and general public are extremely foreign intervention averse. That is still very true and that is still limiting the Kremlin’s options. This is why Russian officials go out of their way to stress that the Russian intervention in Syria is primarily in Russia’s national interest.

I want to set the record straight today not because of some ruffled feathers or a hurt ego, but because I am sick and tired of having to reply to a toxic combo of strawman accusations and j ingoistic predictions. High-fiving, flag waving and back-slapping are all very fine unless you are the one sent into combat. Then they become obscene.

There are those out there (quite a few, in fact), who accuse me of “pessimism” and of writing “defeatist” analyses when what is needed is “uplifting” and “inspiring” essays. If that is the accusation, then I plead “guilty as charged”. But I will also add that this is not how I see my role. My role is to write truthful and honest analyses regardless of whether they are received as “uplifting” or “pessimistic”. There are plenty of “inspiring” and “uplifting” blogs out there, so if that is what you are in to, you know where to find them.

Finally, I also got into trouble for saying early on that one ought to wait for facts before coming to conclusions about what happened to Flight 9268 and for saying that my personal working hypothesis was that it was a bomb. Then I was accused of being naïve when I said that I did not believe that the Russians would lie about it. I know that there are still those who believe that the Israelis did it or that some kind of directed energy weapon did it. Whatever. There never was a shred of evidence to support either one of these hypotheses and I very much doubt that the future will bring any. To which we will be told that “the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence”. Again – whatever. It is also possible that a swarm of subatomic UFOs did it. “Possible” is a very low standard since almost anything is possible. But is it “probable” or “likely”? As soon as the “evidentiary bar” is raise just above the “possible” level all these theories instantly collapse. Again, while others are welcome to explore all sorts of “possible” hypotheses, I personally will stick to those who are at least probable.

At the end of the day it is you – the reader – who gets to pick and chose whatever you like. There is a big and diverse blogosphere out there and that is a very good thing. I strive to present fact-based and logical analyses and I am not trying to win a popularity contest of “inspire” you (-: unless, of course, you find fact-based and logical analyses inspiring 🙂

Having clarified this, I won’t do that again the next time I am accused of writing what I never wrote or of failing to cheer on the good guys.

• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: ISIS, Paris Attacks, Russia, Syria 
Hide 69 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Kiza says:

    I really, really like this long write up. If for no other reason then for the realism of the statements on mandate creep (also called mission creep):

    …they (the Russians) also realize that suddenly a small and local military operation has turned into a potentially worldwide chase for terrorists…

    which is, BTW, what I have been commenting right from the starts of this Russian intervention. Almost all long wars starts as small military interventions.

    I am still also concerned about the cost of all this, but perhaps Putin understand this trade-off better than we do. It may be much “cheaper” to spend a couple of tens of billions to help Syria now then to fight a global nuclear war against the sponsors of terrorism. The US military is simply not commanded by US people then by foreign interests: Israeli, Qatari, Saudi, Turkish and so on. US military is a rent-an-army with nuclear weapons. It is extremely useful to show to the interested parties that Russian military is not a pushover that the foreign interests may think it is. Simply, the Russian military has retained some of the USSR strategic capability and combined it with the most modern agile warfare methods. The Syrian operation is a perfect illustration of the power of this combination – the force transfer, combination and use that is truly impressive.

    Definitely, not a pushover any more.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  2. tbraton says:

    And not to be overlooked is the fact that Putin is operating from the moral high ground by complying with the standards of international law by fighting in Syria at the invitation of the legitimate government of Syria against the terrorists who are seeking to overthrow the legitimate government of Syria. That posture stands in stark contrast to that of the U.S. of A. It also helps that Russia is waging war against two extremist Muslim organizations, Al Qaeda and ISIS, which I thought were enemies of the U.S. of A. And Russia has clearly demonstrated that the phony war Obama has ostensibly waged against ISIS for the past year is a complete sham.

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @Capn Mike
  3. Kiza says:

    I would like to address three other points from the Saker’s essay.

    Firstly, the problem of over-analysis. Saker, you are over-analysing Daesh:

    …apparently simple question: what does Daesh really want?

    It is true that the leadership of ISIS/Daesh are former Ba’athists, that is intelligent and educated people. But even such people get carried away by the initial success. They started from nothing and created, with the help of the sponsors of terrorism, a formidable force and a large cross-border caliphate that the whole World is talking about. They are not complete crazies (your Option 1), unlike some of their foot-soldier sociopaths on the NATO war drug Captagon, but why cannot they just get carried away with hubris. Simply Saker, you assume hyper-rationality of ISIS and then tremble that you do not fully understand why they are irrationally confronting the whole World. As an example, the US (Anglo-Zionist Empire) is considered hyper-rational, but it still pushes Russia and China together, out of the same hubris. IMO, there is not much more there as an explanation, there is no grand hidden plan. ISIS was beloved by Israel, US, Qatar, Turkey and Saudis, but it has grown out of usefulness and has become a liability before it finished its main job – to bring down the Syrian Government.

    Secondly, what is the future of Syria? It would be extremely naive to assume that the sponsors of terrorism would give up on their plans: both Israel and Turkey want parts of Syria and Qatar wants its gas pipeline. And the Saudis still want to stick it to Iran. It is a delay, not an end of plans. I honestly cannot see a lasting way out of the current Syrian mess. There is a chance for a peaceful solution under the Russian diplomatic push, as you describe it. But there is a much bigger chance for the Coalition of the Sponsors of Terrorism to take direct military action in Syria. If ISIS is not an option for bringing down the legitimate Syrian government any more, what is the next best option? Turkey and Israel moving their troops into Syria and creating no-fly zones. The biggest obstacle to this is the outgoing President Obama, totally disinterested in such blatant aggression just before his retirement. But what about President Hitlary? Is it hard to imagine her presidency beginning with a two-sided attack on Syria (Turkey and Israel) supported by the US/NATO airforce. The Russians at the Syrian airport ending up pushed into the Mediterranean Sea (onto ships and home)? Thus, my humble prediction – a temporary peace in Syria till the next Democratic Party President. Under the Trump scenario, the temporary peace would probably turn into a shaky longer-term status quo.

    Finally, something that we are 100% in agreement, it is my old point that you stated so clearly:

    I am often criticized for stating that Russia is not part of the West, never was and never will be. If you believe that I am wrong, ask yourself a simple question: why is it that Russian victims of atrocities (including Western sponsored atrocities!) are treated just like Black or Brown people and not like the other putatively “civilized” Whites?

  4. 5371 says:

    I don’t know why the Saker accepts without question the Saudi line that they themselves are moderate, uninvolved or innocent while Qatar is behind everything bad. If he has actual evidence to support this – which jejune speculations about hypothetical pipelines are not – he should present it.

    • Replies: @KA
  5. Chaban says:

    Two sides of the same coin to further the world revolution.

    For me the big tell was the reaction of markets worldwide after the Obama/Putin meeting in September. They SKYROCKETED. Their meeting was the trigger. It began that very day.
    So obviously Wall Street and the City of London are not at all worried by the action of Russia in Syria. They know their interests are not threatened.
    Did you know that the 1999 elections were looking terrible for Eltsine, who was losing to a hardcore antizionist in all the polls? Eltsine’s party was going to lose big time. That’s when he pulled Putin out of a hat.
    Putin oversaw the ratification of one of the most prozionist laws in the world last year. Try asking questions about certain aspects of WWII in Russia now and you will spend up to five years in jail.
    Just a coup,e months ago, he moved to ban nationalist parties in Russia.
    Here is the situation in the Middle East and Ukraine in the last two years. It has accomplished several things:
    -emptied large territories around Israel
    -weakened Europe via population substitution (see Coudenhove-Kalergi plan, but also Talmudic doctrines)
    -neutralized some of the fiercest nationalist forces in Europe (goes back to point above)
    -has had homogeneous white populations kill each other off (again, goes back to the second point). And you will note that Putin has not done one thing about that. Why are Russian planes and personnel in Syria while they’re not doing anything for the population of Donbass?
    And we are supposed to believe that all of a sudden western leaders have seen the light and are forming a grand coalition around Putin?

    In the end, who benefits?

    Obama and Putin work together for their masters. No doubt in my mind.

    • Replies: @FLOR solitaria
  6. @Chaban

    What aspects of WWII, and who was the hardcore anti-zionist ?

    • Replies: @Chaban
  7. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website

    the war in Syria with no exit strategy

    Hm, does achieving political objectives of the war count as “exit strategy”?

  8. Excellent summary. Thank you, Saker.

  9. Svigor says:

    Second, and this might seem highly counter-intuitive, it is undeniable that Daesh did everything in its power to invite retaliation: not only did Daesh immediately claim that it blew up Flight 9268, it also claimed the credit for the Paris attacks and even threatened more such attacks, including against the USA. Again, this might seem outright bizarre, but Daesh appears to be doing everything it can to create a large, multi-national coalition to destroy it.

    Terrorists usually claim the attacks they make, it’s kind of the point. ISIS wants to be seen as strong, as hitting their enemies hard. They have a much stronger interest in this than, e.g., the USG does, because they live and die on public perception of their legitimacy (broadly defined). In other words, if they’re seen as weak, they start losing fighters, fast. Also, dragging “Crusader” forces into an engagement on Muslim turf is a grade-A way to recruit more fighters (and money and equipment).

    Keep in mind that the last time Putin issued such a warning was in 1999 when he promised that Russia would hunt down the Chechen Wahabi terrorist everywhere, “even in toilets”, and kill every one of them.

    You mean Russian security services false-flag phony terrorists everywhere.

    What is less remembered is that the Russians did just that: they killed every single Takfiri insurgency leader including Baraev, Dudaev, Maskhadov, Iandarbiev, Hattab, Raduev, Basaev and many many others.

    What you mean is, after the Russians bombed themselves in false-flag attacks, they went out and killed a bunch of Muslims.

    For better deniability (assuming that is a goal), the Russians might also use their deep connections inside the Russian mob (most leaders of which are Zhids, probably thick with Zionists)


    Tragic and horrible as these attacks were, the first thing that comes to my mind is the obscene difference in which the western media and zombified public treated 129 (provisional figure) murdered French and 224 murdered Russians. We had the “Je Suis Charlie” abomination and now we have the “Je Suis Paris” collective (planetary!) grief-fest. I don’t recall any “Je Suis Russie”, or “Je Suis Donbass” grief-fests? Or any “Je Suis Aleppo” or even “Je Suis Iraq”. Apparently, Russian or Arab lives matter a hell of a lot less than US or French lives (even if only in Iraq the body count is well over a million!).

    Boo hoo. Here’s a hanky for those salty Russian tears. Such a sensitive bunch.

    Skipped the rest.

  10. KA says:

    Saudis are not moderate . This whole ‘moderate” word is part of deceptive lexicon of the neoocns
    Having found the easy path to GWOT blocked in Iraq,and then Lebanon , Zionist started enlisting the support of the Saudis and the Gulf openly as partner against terror . Rebranding was in the works .

    The war on terror have two remaining legs -Iran and for show and for sowing confusion ,it has NK as well. But Neo Cons were interested in Ghaddfai,Assad and Iran. Including them and not one non Arab actor would have exposed the true murderous nature of the anti Islam Zionist .
    To get to Iran they figured out that they could not depend on US anymore to act on old GWOT
    They found out that they have to create mini terror ,mini 911, engage in provocation, and spread the chaos . They did that all over Arab using the Jihadist which definitely freaked Saudis .Nature of Bahrain conflict would have bought the loyalty of the Gulf kingdom to Zionist and exactly that has happened .Zionist now proudly claim how “moderates” cooperate with them.

    Now they are trying same in EU through Islamophobia and terror attacks.
    One has to bear in mind that the lies don’t become truth just for because it is repeated million times . Epicenter of the chaos still lies in middle of the failed wars on terrors that arose out of the Zionism itself .Iraq,Somlaia,Yemen,Libya and Syria should never been the target of the GWOT.
    Zionist is color coding different countries . Saudi is friend now so is the French Fry non producing country like France . Russia hasn’t yet buckled – joining the neocon led parade and letting the Zionist loot the country’s middle class . That is their hope .

  11. Svigor says:

    Hey Saker, how much does the FSB pay you for these articles?

    • Replies: @annamaria
    , @Avery
  12. Macilrae says:

    … the obscene difference in which the western media and zombified public treated 129 (provisional figure) murdered French and 224 murdered Russians. We had the “Je Suis Charlie” abomination and now we have the “Je Suis Paris” collective (planetary!) grief-fest (…) This is disgusting, unworthy of respect, utterly dishonest and terminally stupid.

    Thank you, thank you for saying this.

    Compare also the international public and media reaction to suspected ISIS bombing in Ankara which killed at least 97 people on October 10th.

  13. Nazis in the Ukraine?!? Please.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  14. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Regarding what Daesh wants, or what benefit did they receive from the Paris terror attacks. You first have to understand that Daesh is just a construct of the Anglo-Zionist mafia. And that the Anglo-Zionist mafia is not one cohesive unit, but rather is made up of different groups that have different interests.

    The Paris attacks don’t help America in anyway, it actually makes things much more complicated and is backing America against a wall. On the other hand, Isreal benefits from the Paris attacks a lot for the reasons you mentioned. Isreal was already getting more heat internationally about Palestine, now due to the attacks they are getting more sympathy about how Isreal treats its Muslims.

    Now you can see the master plan all along. Flood Europe with Muslims, then radicalize them and force Europeans to treat Muslims like shit. Once Europeans are doing it, they cannot say anything about the way Isreal is treating Palestinians.

    It may seem reckless and shortsighted on the outside, and really it is. But on the other hand, Anglo-Zionists own the media, walstreet, and the parliament everywhere in the western world and when you have these things it is easy to erase mistakes and control the narrative.

  15. Rehmat says:

    Saker missed the spot.

    Russian president Vladimir Putin is arriving in Tehran on November 23 to attend one-day Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF) to be held in Tehran on Monday. On Friday during a telephone conversation with his Iranian counterpart, Sheik Hassan Rouhani, Putin mentioned his desire to meet Iran’s Spiritual Leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenei. Last time Putin met Khamenei in Tehran was in in 2007.

    Putin will also meet Iran’s president Sheikh Hassan Rouhani to discuss bilateral trade relations. Moscow is keen to boost its trade with Iran after the UN lifting of sanctions against Iran. Heads and high-ranking government officials from France, Germany, UK, Australia and Austria have already visited Iran earlier for the same reason.

    However, Putin’s meeting with Khamenei is basically for Russia’s recent military involvement in Syria. For the last four years, Putin besides his pro-Assad rhetoric, never committed Russian boots in Syria. He left it to Syrian army, Hizbullah and Iran to defeat US-Israel-Turkey funded insurgency (ISIL). Once it’s almost achieved, Putin joined the war to take credit for that. Furthermore, during his recent meeting in Moscow, Netanyahu told Putin that a Syrian victory against ISIL would boost Iranian influence in the region which would pose a great threat to Israel.

    Putin will take the opportunity to discuss Iran’s nuclear program, which though, doesn’t threaten Russia’s security as the latter hold world’s largest nuke stockpile. However, a nuclear Iran is sure to provide a booster for the Islamic Resistance group fighting to ‘wipe nuclear Israel off the map’.

    “Putin has deplored Syrian Arab Army shelling of Israel and in some ways a bigger Russian presence in Syria may increase Israeli security. Putin has hinted that he thinks the al-Assad regime should concentrate on its extremist enemies within. i.e. a big diversionary attack on Israel by Syria or Hizbullah to gain street cred with ordinary Syrians is likely no longer a possibility, since Moscow would forbid it,” wrote Dr. Juan Cole, a CIA consultant and with Jewish family roots.

    Khamenei, a poet and author of several books on religion and politics, is the most powerful Iranian leader under country’s Constitution. He is two-terms former president of Iran (1981-89). Before elected president, Khamenei srved as Defense Minister and commander of Revolutionary Guards. He assumed the position of Iran’s Supreme Leadership in 1989 after the death of Iran’s revolutionary leader Imam Khomeini. His name for the position was proposed by Imam Khomeini’s only surviving son Sheikh Ahmad Khomeini (d. 1995).

    Khamenei during his presidency visited several foreign nations but not the Soviet Republic due to latter’s occupation of Iran’s next door neighbor Afghanistan and Moscow’s arms sale to Saddam Hussein during the 8-year Iraq-Iran War. After becoming country’s Supreme Leader, Khamenei has not stepped out of the country. In September 2015, both Khamenei and Rouhani declined Putin’s invitation to attend the opening of Moscow’s renovated Grand Mosque.

    Moscow maintained good neighborly relation with Tehran during Pahlvi dynasty. Imam Khomeini was against both world superpowers, Judo-communist Soviet Union and Capitalist United States. He explained Iran’s foreign policy by saying: “Neither West nor East.” Iran-USSR relation hit rock bottom when on January 1 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini addressed Mikhail Gorbachev with a message in which he spoke of the necessity of learning about Islam and said that Communism should be looked for in museums of political history and that Iran follows the principles of being a good neighbor.

  16. Art says:

    The Saker “I am often criticized for stating that Russia is not part of the West, ever was, and never will be.”

    Russia is part of the West – in fact, today it is more Western then the Anglo-Zionist West.

    Russia is part of the West because it is Christian – the West is fundamentally Christian – Christianity is what ties it together. Even after 70 years of Jew commie control – Russia still has underlining Christian values.

    The Western nations: America, UK, Canada, France, Germany, et al, are currently in the evil grip the Jew, moving away from their Christian heritage. This will not last. It is self evident that Christian philosophy and values are unquestionably superior to old world primordial Jew hate, greed, and tribalism.

    The people of the West are basic Christians – but not their political leaders. Their political types bring more and more tribal war. Look at Syria – Putin protects minority life – Obama et al, sides with the Jew friendly Sunni killer majority.

    It is more than apparent that Putin is the grownup of the Christian Western world.

    • Replies: @Rehmat
    , @Seraphim
  17. annamaria says:

    “… the phony war Obama has ostensibly waged against ISIS for the past year is a complete sham”

    This is the greatest moral hazard for the US (and the US “handlers”) – the exposure of the real facts on the ground

  18. annamaria says:

    Svidor, you did not abuse the author of the article; he is an honest person. You have abused the intelligence of the Unz Review readers.

  19. annamaria says:

    Why are you so surprised?

    “House grilled Nuland over US’ Cooperation with Neo-Nazis in Ukraine:” “A two-hour hearing of US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland at the House Foreign Affairs Committee over the Obama administration’s and the US’ role in the developments in Ukraine nailed down Nuland over the United States overt cooperation with and use of neo-Nazis.”

  20. “I am often criticized for stating that Russia is not part of the West, never was and never will be. If you believe that I am wrong, ask yourself a simple question: why is it that Russian victims of atrocities (including Western sponsored atrocities!) are treated just like Black or Brown people and not like the other putatively “civilized” Whites?”

    I think that many Western governments and peoples do indeed consider Russia to be part of the West. That would explain much of the Russo-phobia I’ve seen, as well as explain why Russia is uniquely hated for doing exactly the same kinds of things Western “allies” around the world do all the time.

    Russia is hated, in part, among Western elites and social progressives for the fact that Russia is perceived to be a predominantly White, Western country ruled by quasi-nationalists and social conservatives (bad whites). When Russia embraces some piece of “anti-gay” legislation, it makes waves among the Western punditry and media for years…but when brown India does the same, it’s largely ignored. Hatred for Russia is just liberal-progressive projection onto a people they consider to be similar to the people they hate in their own countries.

    Therefore, it’s not surprising that Western elites wouldn’t care that predominantly white, conservatives (bad whites) were killed (or perceived to be the majority killed) when that airliner was downed. It’s also not surprising that the same liberals would be outraged when fellow liberal (good white) Frenchmen were killed.

  21. Rehmat says:

    Russia has always been part of Europe, no matter what Russian propagandists say. In fact, United States and Canada were also colonies of Europe a few centuries ago.

    Czarist Russia became part of Asia when it occupied vast non-European Muslim lands, i.e., Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Chechnya, etc.

    Russia like the other ZOG western nations is anti-Muslim. While Putin is shoring up Russian influence in the Muslim Middle East, he is helping Russian Orthodox Serbs to further break-up Muslim-majority Bosnia.

  22. Ron Unz says:

    Actually, at first glance I’m pretty skeptical that the Paris Attacks were any sort of “false flag.”

    The first question to ask is “Cui Bono?” In this case I think the overwhelming beneficiary was Russia, since the attacks are forcing France and the rest of the West to now work with Russia in Syria. From what I’ve heard, lots of the anti-Russians in DC are extremely unhappy about this.

    So maybe Russia was behind the attacks? Virtually impossible. False flags are extremely difficult and risky unless you have effective control of the media and also at least substantive infiltration of the investigative and security forces or the regime. In this case, both the French MSM and the regime were fervantly anti-Russian, and trying a false flag would have been insanely risky, even for someone less cautious than Putin.

    I suppose it’s possible that the anti-Russian side tried a false flag, hoping to force the West to send military forces to Syria, balancing the recent Russian deployment. But that would seem a very strange strategy, which naturally didn’t work.

    Finally, since there are lots of mutually-hostile Islamicist factions and terrorist attacks like this seem a little unusual for ISIS, it’s possible some other Muslim extremist group did this attack, perhaps hoping to cause trouble for ISIS, but that’s a pretty weak form of the hypothesis.

    • Replies: @Kiza
    , @Anonymous
  23. Avery says:

    Hey Svigor:

    The same can be said about you or anybody else.

    If you tell us how much CIA/MI6/Mossad/Turkish MIT/Saudi Prince Bandar’s goons/Qatar terrors masters, etc,etc are paying you for writing posts, I’ll see what I can do about finding out how much FSB is paying TheSaker.

    I will also make an extra effort to find out if he is being paid in hard currency or worthless rubles.

  24. Art says:

    Everybody in Russia knows that Qatar is the prime sponsor of terrorism in Syria and in Egypt. How will the Kremlin square that knowledge with the publicly made promise to punish every person guilty for the murder of 224 Russian citizens in anybody’s guess. Since Qatar is basically one giant US base, there is no way to strike at Qatar without hitting the CENTCOM.

    Qatar chief finical supporter of the terrorist organization, Daesh in Syria and Iraq – the US Nave supports Qatar – ergo the US Nave supports the enemy – it supports terrorism.

    What is this – what a friggen mess – what have the Jew done to us – time to come home.

  25. Kiza says:
    @Ron Unz

    Yes Ron, your quick analysis is valid. There is no clear Cui Bono in the Paris attack pointing at any party’s false flag. I have offered two equally valid hypothesis:
    1) it was a blow-back from the extremists that the French and Belgian military trained in its former North African colonies for the Lybia government change operation and in its former colony of Sirya,
    2) it was a false-flag by a faction of the French establishment, an internal French power play to establish a marshal law and state of war (much like the Algeria crisis was used in the past).

    There are facts pointing to either possibility. First, In my view the cooperation between France and Russia is being overblown by the media. It is much more important that the Western countries are sending very heavy navy forces to the Eastern Mediterranean, making an aircraft carrier parking lot of it (both French and US carrier battle groups are on the way, possibly Russian too). Who is going to fight who, once the powerful forces are in place is not clear yet.

    Second, to my knowledge no Islamist group has publicly and reliably claimed the Paris attack. Compare this with the downing of the Russian airliner, where the initial claim turned out to be true.

    Third, there is that one similarity between the lates Paris attack and the previous Charlie Hebdo and 911 attacks, of terrorist carrying official government documents (passports, driving licenses) to the place of their final moments. That should be just too much even for the most credulous believers in the official stories.

    In summary, we have to wait for things to clear up to draw conclusions.

  26. Capn Mike says:

    @ tbraton
    Thank You!
    This is ignored in virtually all accounts of what’s happening in Syria.
    Much like Crimea.
    The Russians were INVITED by their ALLY. The LEGAL SOVEREIGN government of Syria.

    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    , @annamaria
  27. what does Daesh really want? I will gladly admit that I have no idea. And that worries me a lot.

    I read an article a few months back that ISIS was apoclyptic and truly wanted a showdown in the Syrian town of Dabiq, because in the Quran Dabiq is mentioned as the place where Islam will confront the enemy (Armies of Rome) in the end of days. Their magazine is called Dabiq.

    Most you have read this great article . The “The Apocalypse” talks about ISIS’ apoclyptic worldview.

  28. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz

    The obvious Cui Bono is Isreal.

    The biggest thing threatening Isreal is the west being critical of the way they treat Palestinians.

    Isreal has taken a lot of heat lately with Europe pushing for origin labels on goods from occupied territories and increased media coverage on the Palestinian plight.

    I believe the play all along with Syrian refugees was to push them onto the Western world and then have false flag attacks that are then blamed on Arab muslims.

    The more the West blames and takes action on Muslims, the more leaway Isreal will have to finish the job in Palestine. Note that the attacks targeted young French people. Why would ISIS target them as opposed to targeting old rich powerful people, as the young French are more likely to be sympathetic to the Muslim plight? The only thing that makes sense to me is that Isreal targeted the young because they were most likely to be pro Palestine.

    Meanwhile, you never answered your own question. Cui bono? It is hard to pin down a benefit to anyone except for Isreal. How is ISIS benefiting from seeing a coalition built against it at the precise time they are getting weakened from Russia? They obviously aren’t so who else is left?

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @greysquirrell
  29. @Capn Mike

    U.S. Eyes Russia-Iran Split in Bid to End Syria Conflict
    Washington’s Middle East allies aim to coax Putin to support limits on Tehran-backed Assad’s time in power

    WASHINGTON—The Obama administration and European and Arab allies are seeking to peel Russia away from its alliance with Iran, a partnership that has bolstered Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, said senior diplomats involved in efforts to end Syria’s lengthy conflict.
    The efforts, which have unfolded quietly through meetings involving Russian President Vladimir Putin and Middle Eastern leaders, are meant to coax support from Moscow for a limit on Mr. Assad’s time in power. Such a step would solidify an emerging international coalition and help clear the way for a more concerted military effort to counter Islamic State in Syria and Iraq.
    Iran is seen as a brake on those efforts because of its more staunchly pro-Assad position, which it wants the Kremlin to support. If Russia holds fast to Iran and Mr. Assad, it would undermine hopes for an international consensus.

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @tbraton
  30. geokat62 says:

    Meanwhile, you never answered your own question. Cui bono? It is hard to pin down a benefit to anyone except for Isreal.

    As I’ve repeatedly stated in previous comments, I’d love to get a glimpse of the Mossad’s to-do list.

    I also think this scenario also satisfies the conditions specified by Ron:

    False flags are extremely difficult and risky unless you have effective control of the media and also at least substantive infiltration of the investigative and security forces or the regime.

    I’ve even heard some people say the Israel Lobby in France (CRIF) is even more powerful than AIPAC, which says a lot.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  31. geokat62 says:

    The Obama administration and European and Arab allies are seeking to peel Russia away from its alliance with Iran, a partnership that has bolstered Syrian President Bashar al-Assad,…

    This development brings into sharp focus the neocon strategy behind the Ukrainian coup last February in Maiden Square. They needed a bargaining chip with which to entice the Russians to abandon the Syrians and Iranians.

    As I’ve repeatedly stated, if one is striving to understand events unfolding in the ME or in regions that are allied with countries in the ME, the neocon ideology is most likely the driving force behind these events.

    • Replies: @Avery
  32. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    It’s not precisely clear as to what ISIS is apart from the observation that it’s an exclusively Sunni affair. They have an army in Syria that has a hierarchy and military command structure. Yet it’s also amorphous and supposedly everywhere from carrying out plane bombings in Egypt to terror attacks in France to Libya, Iraq, Mali, Tunisia and elsewhere. If current reporting can be taken at face value then it’s also a movement that transcends borders whose methods include encouraging independent cells to form who don’t know about each other for security reasons. They act independently against the countries deemed to be enemies. Something like this is hard to deal with since there is no network that can be charted and rolled up. The relationship to other groups such as the previously much discussed AQ is also murky. It’s also not clear as to what is the actual depth of sympathy and support that they have within the various Sunni communities in and outside of the Muslim countries. And of course there’s the unpleasant little fact of state sponsorship by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and the US and how they’ll now decide if their clever scheme has blown up in their face or if they’ll simply double down and try something else. It’s not over until it’s over.

  33. tbraton says:

    I believe Putin has made it clear more than once that Russia’s position is that it is up to the Syrian people to determine who their leader is. Apparently, Assad has the overwhelming support of the bulk of the Syrian people, who clearly don’t want ISIS or Al Qaeda to rule Syria. Otherwise we wouldn’t have that immense flow of “Syrian refugees” seeking asylum in Germany and there wouldn’t be an SAA fighting ISIS and Al Qaeda and the other jihadists in Syria.

  34. annamaria says:
    @Capn Mike

    And on which side is Ukraine? “…the Qatar Ministry of Defense is arranging supplies of the Ukrainian air defense systems to Syria-based terrorist organizations via Bulgaria and Turkey. The US officers in Qatar have approved the deals.”

    Meanwhile, Kiev’ loyalists have committed terrorist act in Crimea: “On Saturday, Ukrainian police said that power lines in southern Ukraine supplying the Crimean peninsula with electricity were blown up by activists from the group which launched the unsuccessful, Kiev-sanctioned ‘food blockade’ of the peninsula in September… Ukrainian energy officials have formally rejected offers for assistance from the Russian energy ministry…”

    • Replies: @Avery
  35. Seraphim says:

    How much Christian the West remains when what you hear all the time is that West is “post-Christian” era? And is increasingly afraid to “offend” other “faiths” by exhibiting a Christian behaviour?

  36. Russia does have a realistic option for an exit strategy that has always been denied US efforts in the ME. Because its efforts are always to eliminate viable governments and create chaotic dystopias. Russia has the legitimate, established, internationally recognized current government of Syria.
    If they can crush ISIS or simply drive it into Iraq, and crush the US supported Jihad against Assad, then help Assad to establish effective control of his country. That is a big if, since the US/EU/Unnamed, strategy is completely focused on Assad’s removal, and are not likely to quite the program at any time during the fight or after. It may take Russia successfully executing a geopolitical strategy to neutralize that effort. Not easy considering the economic, diplomatic and military forces arrayed to perpetuate it.
    In he end, it may depend upon the US electing a president who is not a slave to neocons or R2P, and key EU partners doing the same. The Unnamed are a wild card, and do have exceptional influence regionally, and in the halls of US/EU power.
    So, as the author said, an escalation may not have an exit strategy, but only in the sense that the rational and viable exit strategy is tangled in the much larger struggle to prohibit the conquest by chaos both the ME and east Europe by the US/EU/Unnamed coalition.

  37. Avery says:

    {Meanwhile, Kiev’ loyalists have committed terrorist act in Crimea….}

    Turkish MIT is most certainly involved in collaboration with Neocon puppets in Kiev.
    About a year ago during the events in Crimea, FSB discovered and neutralized an efforts by Turks to setup an Islamist terrorist movement in Crimea using Muslim Tatars.

    And Tatars were most certainly involved in this terrorist criminal act.

    {Ukrainian officials said they encountered activists blockading the site when they tried to repair the damaged pylons.
    Russian news agencies reported that Crimean Tatars, a local ethnic group that opposes Russia’s annexation of the Crimean peninsula, held a protest at the site. }

    RFERL, a Neocon propaganda outlet is lying: Tatars were not protesting.
    They were fighting with the security personnel who came to move the criminals away, so towers could be repaired.

    And Tatars in Crimea are not local: they are invaders from East Asia, like nomad Turks.

  38. Avery says:

    {They needed a bargaining chip with which to entice the Russians to abandon the Syrians and Iranians…}

    Ukraine is no bargaining chip.
    Ukraine, Kievan Rus, is the cradle of Russia.
    Nothing for Russia to bargain away there.
    Russia does not want trouble there right now: she is biding her time.
    Testing, demonstrating,a and improving her military in actual combat.
    Some T-160s flew a long circuitous rout over the Atlantic, skirting UK, to bomb Syria: there was a reason. A message.

    There is nothing Neocons have to entice either Russia or Iran to abandon Syria. And both Russian and Iranian leaders know Neocons are mortal enemy to both. Neocons’ ultimate goal is not Syria or Iran: their goal is dismemberment of Russia. Dismemberment of Syria, then Iran, is part of the Grand plan to get to Russia.
    So far they have failed.

    Russia and Iran have not pulled all stops to save Syria to bargain it away.
    They need to save Syria to secure a Shia arc, in order to block the cancerous spread of Sunni Wahhabism, aided and abetted by Neocon psychos.

    • Replies: @geokat62
    , @Seraphim
    , @geokat62
  39. Kiza says:

    I would be the first to cry false-flag if there was clear basis for it. I have little doubt what 911 was (soon after the Israeli art students were mentioned) and the likelihood that Charlie Hebdo was a false flag is also very high. But this Paris terror act is rather unclear. We cannot see direct Israeli or CRIF involvement yet, it is possible but no direct benefit. The other two possibilities I mention in response to Ron are more likely.
    But let me list again a few suspicious facts:
    1) the terrorists struck the random, general, young, multicultural population instead of the power structure of France,
    2) the French security establishment rushed to judgement before the proper investigation even begun (MH17 anybody?),
    3) maximally tacky media campaign, almost matching the previous Charlie Hebdo campaign,
    4) the supposed organizer, Abaaoud, kept travelling through the EU domain unobstructed for years and so on.

    The proper investigation has just begun, let us not “jump to judgement” against Israel just like the Western regimes do in the opposite direction.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @geokat62
  40. @Anonymous

    I don’t see it as specifically targetting “young French people”. It was just a target that was easiet to hit and would cause the most deaths. Sports games, concerts , marathons all have lots of people congregating in a tight space.

    I don’t believe that ISIS is just an Israeli or American or French false flag. ISIS’ brutality is just too much for that to be the case.

    • Replies: @geokat62
  41. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I would also add that it is suspicious that “Syrian Refugees” just after arriving in the country would have access to automatic weapons and explosives.

    Now sure, Muslim terrorists could have stockpiled the weapons ahead of time. But why would they trust an operation like that to newly arrived Syrian refugees?

    • Replies: @Avery
  42. geokat62 says:

    Ukraine is no bargaining chip.

    I hope you’re right… but ultimately time will tell.

    Speaking of bargaining chips, I wonder if the Iranians, to secure a nuclear deal, had to make commitments to end their support of certain “terrorist” organizations.


    P.S. Leading members of the George W Bush administration along with Blair and the leading neocons/Israel firsters must be brought to justice for the crime of launching an aggressive war against Iraq. The names of the leading neocon/Israel firsters are:

    Paul Wolfowitz
    Richard Perle
    Abram Shulsky
    Douglas Feith
    Lewis Scooter Libby
    Judith Miller
    Michael Ledeen
    The Kagan clan, incl. Victoria Nudelman
    The Kristol clan
    The Podhoretz clan
    David and Meyrav Wurmser
    Paul Bremer
    Joe Lieberman
    Chuck Schumer
    Alan Dershowitz
    John Hagee
    Pat Robertson
    Eternal World Television Network (EWTN)
    Elliot Abrams
    William Luti
    Eliot A. Cohen
    Eliot Engel
    Charles Krauthammer
    David Frum
    David Horowitz
    Ken Pollack
    Walter Slocombe
    John Bolton
    Jennifer Rubin
    Joshua Muravchik
    Michael Rubin
    Frank Gaffney
    Ed Royce
    Daniel Pipes
    Marc Grossman
    James Woolsey
    Michael Chertoff
    Sheldon Adelson
    Rudy Giuliani
    Newt Gingrich

    The names of the torture facilitators are:

    Bruce Jessen
    James Mitchell
    Alberto Gonzales
    Timothy Flanigan
    John Yoo
    John Rizzo
    Jay Bybee
    Ricardo Sanchez
    Robert Delahunty

  43. geokat62 says:

    … let us not “jump to judgement”

    Who’s jumping to judgement? I thought we were all engaging in some speculation as to who is the prime suspects based on the principle of Cui Bono.

    Just out of curiosity, if you had to speculate about which operations are in the top 5 of the Mossad’s to-do list, what would they be?

    • Replies: @Kiza
  44. Avery says:

    {But why would they trust an operation like that to newly arrived Syrian refugees?}

    My guess would be the ‘Syrian refugees” were skilled Jihadists, known and trusted by the organizers. Killing lots of people in cold blood is not for amateurs: the organizers had to be sure the killers would not freeze when the time came.

    Using the cover of the “refugee” -flood to infiltrate operatives into EU was very logical.
    Impossible to check everyone, and by the time their operatives were discovered, it would be too late, as events proved.
    It should also be noted that even if it was an inside job, very few people would know.
    Meaning, the regular police agencies would not know, and their own intelligence agencies had to be careful to avoid routine detection by regular police or border controls.

  45. geokat62 says:

    I don’t believe that ISIS is just an Israeli or American or French false flag. ISIS’ brutality is just too much for that to be the case.

    You’re obviously not familiar with the brutality the Zionist project inflicted on the USS Liberty.

  46. Kiza says:

    I am not an intelligence professional and it is pointless for me to speculate on Mossad targets. Just keep in mind that Mossad collects information at least as much as it does ops. The focus is on Syria. I am just guessing that collection of the list of targets in Syria and assisting Al Qaeda (Al Nusra) with information would be the main current activity.

    On my original topic, we should know more about the Paris attack by about the New Year, because by then the US and the French aircraft carriers will arrive next to Syria and we will see their battle plan.

  47. Seraphim says:

    @Neocons’ ultimate goal is not Syria or Iran: their goal is dismemberment of Russia.

    That was the plan of all con or neo-conmen all along history. As we know, it always failed because of the nature of things, no matter how well planned the new plans were.
    That proves that the “planners” are insane. “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

    • Replies: @Avery
  48. Any comments from The Saker over the downing by Turkey of a Su-24?

    And related is the matter of British intervention. Cameron’s keen to get the RAF bombing Syria but I’m not convinced that he’s given up his ambition to overthrow Assad. Any idea of what might happen if the RAF attacks Syrian Army positions? Any contingency plans by Moscow in the event of either side shooting down the other’s planes?

  49. Avery says:

    They are insane.

    But, unfortunately lots of innocent people are killed every time because the insane keep trying.

  50. Svigor says:

    @Neocons’ ultimate goal is not Syria or Iran: their goal is dismemberment of Russia.

    That was the plan of all con or neo-conmen all along history. As we know, it always failed because of the nature of things, no matter how well planned the new plans were.
    That proves that the “planners” are insane. “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

    1. It’s not actually a real definition of insanity, so it proves nothing.
    2. It’s about methods, not goals. As you’ve interpreted it, it’s a recipe for accomplishing nothing, ever, losing every war, losing every fight, etc.

  51. Kiza says:

    One quick comment about the downing of the Russian bomber by Turkish fighter jets. This downing and so far one dead pilot go on Putin’s head. Because he was the moron who turned his back to the Turks to get stabbed. I have been commenting for about a year now that the sponsors of terrorism will not give up on ripping apart and pillaging Sirya. Erdogan’s own son is the main oil trader with ISIS.

    I REPEAT – IT TAKES A MORON TO TURN HIS BACK TO THE TURKS TO GET STABBED. Did moron Putin really think that Israel and Turkey would let him stop their ISIS boys in their civilian beheadings and money making opportunities?

    Does Putin need someone to explain to him that Turkey shot down the Russian bomber under US permission?

    The Turks did exactly the same thing with a Syrian jet back in March 2014 – shot it down over Syria and claimed that the Syrian jet violated their airspace. Yet, this was not a lesson for the Russians to send fighter jets with bomber jets when bombing near Israel and Turkey!?!?!!

    Did Putin think that the US did not know how to bomb ISIS and Co. (which the US kept arming) so that Putin had to show them how to?

    Finally, I repeat for the 20th time – the solution is to bomb The Coalition of the Sponors of Terrorism, not the “poor” terrorists, the rif-raf on the ground. If Putin was not prepared for this, why did he get involved in Syria?

    There is no such thing as a limited military intervention, there is only a small beginning to a big war, or going home with a bloodied nose after picking up a fight which you cannot finish in your own favor.

  52. Anonymouse says: • Website

    Dear sir,
    Is it impolite to ask where you have chosen to live?
    (it goes almost without saying that I have been enjoying/learning a great deal from your essays.)
    Michael Eisenstadt, Austin Texas

  53. @Kiza

    Putin appears to have made another blunder by not vetoing Security Council Resolution 2249 which gives authority to everybody (including NATO states ) to bomb Syria.

    He let this through on 20th November, last Friday. Today Turkey shoots down one of his planes. Is that why he used the words “stab in the back?”

    • Replies: @Kiza
  54. Kiza says:
    @Tsar Nicholas

    When things clear up a bit, it is the Russian military leadership in Syria which is to blame for the shoot-down. Now they will send fighter jets together with bombers. I could not believe it when I read that Russian bombers were doing sorties without fighter jet support!!!!!!!! But Putin’s statement about back stabbing is still the pinnacle of stupidity. And the Russians really need to stop calling the Western shits “our partners”, it is making them look even more stupid in the eyes of the World than this “back-stabbing” comment. Halo Putin, the Coalition of the Sponsors of Terrorism is your enemy, not your partner.

    With such stupid leaders, the West is playing Russia like a violin. How many Odessa City Halls, MH17 shoot-downs, airliner bombings etc etc need to happen to open the eyes of the Russian morons?

    The resolution you mention is another Russian blunder but is almost irrelevant compared with what is coming the Russia’s way now that the West has exposed the Russian leadership for what it is.

    • Agree: Stephen R. Diamond
    • Replies: @5371
  55. krollchem says:

    Concerning Turkey’s act of war on Russia:

    Official Turkish letter to the UN states: “Disregarding these warnings, both planes, at an altitude of 19,000 feet, violated Turkish national airspace to a depth of 1.36 miles and 1.15 miles in length for 17 seconds from 9:24:05 local time.”

    As the article at ZeroHedge points out: Journalists: Learn to do basic maths. Look at Turkey’s statement to UN: 1.15 miles / 17 seconds x 60 x 60 = 243 miles/hour = 391 km/hour

    According to those numbers, the Su-24 would have had to be flying at stall speed. It appears that the official Turkish line is a lie:

    Hakan Fidan, the head of Turkey’s National Intelligence Organization is a major supporter of ISIS. He recently stated that in order to deal with the vast number of foreign Jihadists craving to travel to Syria, it is imperative that ISIS must set up a consulate or at least a political office in Istanbul:

    Coincidently, Serena Shim an American reporter died in Turkey under suspicious circumstances after being threatened by MIT:

    It also appears that most of the 1000 oil tankers destroyed by Russia in Syria were owned by Erdoğan’s son with the collaboration adding about 1-2 billion US\$ to the ISIS coffers:

    • Replies: @Kiza
    , @annamaria
  56. 5371 says:

    [But Putin’s statement about back stabbing is still the pinnacle of stupidity.]

    No, it’s not stupid. When someone shows himself to be a snake publicly for the first time, you don’t stay silent because you privately knew he was a snake all along.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  57. Kiza says:

    Turkey showed snake like behavior for the first time?????? Which planet are you from? On this planet, the Turks are born snakes. Just ask any group of Arabs who the Turks abused for almost a thousand years.

    One would think that the Russians should know the Turks by now because they fought so many wars against them. But stupidity rules in Russia, especially at the top level.

    Probably the funniest is that the West appears set to convince Russia that this was Turkey’s own action, not supported by US and NATO. It is so cute: the US signed an agreement with Russia on airforce coordination and then sicked the Turks onto the Russian bombers. Will the Russians show such level of stupidity to swallow this cheap trick??? Check it out, the West is prepared to condemn Turkey for this act just to make bigger fools of the Russians.

    • Replies: @5371
    , @Avery
  58. Kiza says:

    It is totally pointless to discuss what Turkey has done or what Turkey has said. For the Russian airforce general to say that Turkey has broken “the international law” is simply embarrassing. Which planet are these idiots from? Criminals break the law again and again and again, because they have the protection of the biggest criminal and terrorist sponsor in the World – the USA. That is what the criminals do, it is their job. Suck it up general.

    Imagine just for a moment if a US bomber jet was shot down by Turkey, regardless of any true or lied about border violation, would the US keep talking about the “stabbing in the back” or about the “international law”? The US would kill maybe 100 Turkish pilots for every US pilot killed. Two Russian pilots got killed, one was saved by the Syrians.

    BTW, here is the Russian official radar data on flight paths:

    • Replies: @5371
  59. 5371 says:

    Israel killed 34 US sailors on the USS Liberty. I don’t remember the US killing 3400 Israelis in response. But maybe my memory is defective.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  60. 5371 says:

    Please try to read more carefully.

  61. Avery says:

    {On this planet, the Turks are born snakes}

    So, [Kiza], how do you really feel about Turks ?

    Of course not all Turks are born so: many good, humane Turks.
    But savage, nomad, genocidal Turks, originally from Uyguristan (East Asia), who invaded Asia Minor around 1000A.D. and spread their death and destruction to Middle East and the Balkans, have been a menace since the cursed day they showed up in our regions.

    {Just ask any group of Arabs who the Turks abused for almost a thousand years.}

    Also ask any Armenian, Assyrian, Greek, Kurd, Serb, ………

    Stupid Europeans (and Anglo-Americans) have saved the Turks more than once from total defeat and dismemberment of their criminal state at the hands of the Russian Empire and USSR. Now the thanks they are getting from the backstabbing nomads is the Islamization of Europe spearheaded by Islamist Erdogan and AKP.

    I would say serves them right, but the Christian people of Europe are victims of their sold-out, treacherous leaders. It would be a sad day. If and when Europe is Islamized, Europe will be like what Islamist Turkey is today.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  62. Kiza says:

    I have no biff with anything you just wrote, a very nice summary. I have written a very similar comment myself before about Turkey on articles from other authors. I am actually from one of the nations which was savaged and occupied by those East Asian nomads that you mention.

    As far as the EU servants of the US and Israel and sponsors of terrorism go, I have no compassion for their refugee troubles. If God exists, he is definitely paying them back. But 900,000 thousand already in is nothing compared to 14M yet coming. I look forward to things getting worse.

  63. Kiza says:

    Is it possible that you think that you can compare the killing of the US sailors by the US boss Israel with the killing of the Russian pilots by US/Turkey? The captain of Liberty was lucky that he was not eliminated from this world by the US secret services after 34 of his sailors were killed by Israeli jets, to cover up this crime. To this day, the surviving Liberty sailors are under the gag orders of the US Government. Too much publicity and they could get concrete shoes.

    You are truly lost. Do you know what the packing order is?

  64. annamaria says:

    Thank you for the information. It explains a lot.

  65. geokat62 says:

    Ukraine is no bargaining chip.

    The semi-official Israeli Institute for National Security Studies published an interesting analysis about a month ago. Here is an excerpt:

    Two, in case of failure in moving the “Western” coalition into concurrent action against Assad and ISIS, Israel should strive to realize the fourth option – an Assad-free Syria – as an arrangement reached in partnership with Russia.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  66. Kiza says:

    Very good. This is a good take on what the plans of the Western “Anti-ISIS Coalition” really are: once inside Syria, fight both ISIS and the legitimate Government of Syria. This is actually a continuation of the current bombing of ISIS – it often bombs the Syrian Government infrastructure under the guise of bombing ISIS.

    If you have not noticed, due to all the MSM noise about the “Russian violation of Turkish territory, Israel just did a bombing run in South Western Syria and killed some Syrian troops and Hezzbolah fighting the Israeli sponsored terrorists inside Syria. The Russians did nothing – they are waiting for Israel to shoot-down some of their planes and then say – stab in the back.

    I kept writing that Israel, US, EU and Turkey will never give up on their plans to smash up and pillage Syria. But I do not think that this will happen under Obama, it will have to wait for President Hitlary.

  67. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    come on saker, where are you. I need your analysis since week 7.

Current Commenter

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 have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All The Saker Comments via RSS
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.