Iconos

Iconos
Volcán Popocatépetl

domingo, 15 de abril de 2018

Alas, this is far from over!
April 15, 2018
Let’s begin by a short summary of events.
·         About a month ago Nikki Haley announces to the UNSC that the USA is ready to violate the rules of this very self-same UNSC should a chemical attack happen in Syria
·         Then the Russians announced that they have evidence that a chemical false flag is being prepared in Syria
·         Then a chemical attack (supposedly) takes place (in a location surrounded and, basically, controlled by government forces!)
·         The OPWC sends investigators (in spite of western powers loudly proclaiming that no investigation was needed)
·         The AngloZionists then bomb Syria
·         Next, the UNSC refuses to condemn the violation of its own rules and decisions
·         Finally, the US Americans speak of a ‘perfect strike’
Now tell me – do you get a sense that this is over?
If you tell me that 32/103 is hardly perfect, I will reply that you are missing the point.  In fact, if anything, 32/103 is further incentive to bomb again!
Let’s look at the differently for a second and ask this: what has the AngloZionist attack actually demonstrated?
·         The western general public is so terminally zombified that false flag attacks can now be announced 4 weeks in advance
·         The Europeans now live by the motto “my honor is called solidarity” (a variation of the SS motto “my honor is loyalty“)
·         Lead by the USA, western countries have no objections to wars started in violation of their own national laws
·         The UN Security Council has no objections to wars started in violation of the UN Charter and International Law
·         The PRC leaders, in their infinite wisdom, act as if they have nothing personal at stake and act like bystanders
·         The Israelis, via the UN Neocons, are now in total control of the Empire and use it to “clean house” next door
Oh, I hear the objections.  They go something like this:
– But the attack was a dismal failure!
– So what? the Empire did not pay any price for executing it.
– But the US Americans did blink! The attacked from Jordanian airspace and from the Red Sea! They avoided the Russians completely!  They are afraid of them!
– So what? They still bombed a Russian ally with total impunity.
– But, surely you are not suggesting that the Russians should have started a war against the USA over a strike which did not even kill a single person?
– No, of course not, but by not taking any action the Russians also failed to deter any future attacks.
– But what could the Russians have done?
Now *that* is the right question!
Let’s look at it a little closer.  Roughly speaking, the Russians have a choice of 3 types of retaliatory measures: political, economic and military.  However, each one of them has a specific set of prerequisites which are currently problematic to say the least:
Measures
Political
Economic
Military
Prerequisites
Assumes a minimal amount of decency, integrity and respect for the rule of law by the rest of the planet.
Assumes that other countries, especially China, would be willing and able to support such measures.
Assumes that Russia has the military capability to defeat the AngloZionist “coalition”.
Current reality
Russia can moan, bitch, complain, protest, appeal to higher values, logic or facts – nobody gives a damn.
The Chinese and the rest of them are not willing to do anything at this time to support Russia.
Russia can militarily defeat the AngloZionists, but only by risking the future of our planet.
This really can be summarized a simple sentence: the AngloZionist Hegemony is a threat for the entire planet, but nobody besides Russia and Iran is willing to take it on.  Ain’t that an irony!
The so-called “Christian West” has become a willing parasite for its Zionist host and the only ones with the courage and moral integrity to take it on are Orthodox Christians and Muslims! Sic transit gloria mundi indeed…
But what is even more important is this: while it is true that the US Neocons did not succeed in delivering the kind of massive attack they would have wanted to, and while it is true that the US attack was just about as lame as can be, you need to completely forget about these facts.  Facts simply don’t matter.  And neither does logic.  All that matters are perceptions!
And the perception is that “we” (the AngloZionist rulers and their serfs) “kicked” Assad’s “ass” and that “we” will “do it again” if “we” feel like it.  That is all that matters in the Empire of Illusions which the AngloZionist Hegemony has become.
As soon as you understand that, you also will have to agree that Trump was right: it was a “perfect strike” (again, not in reality, but in the world of illusions created around it).
So now we come full circle.
The AngloZionist Hegemony demands that the entire planet bows down and worships it.  Except for Russia and Iran, everybody meekly goes down on their knees or, at most, meekly looks away.  In their own delusional reality, the ‘Mericans feel empowered to smack down Russia or Iran at anytime.  There is nothing Iran can do to stop them, and while Russia can, she can only do that at the risk of the future of our entire planet.
Now you tell me – do you really think this is over?

The Saker

sábado, 14 de abril de 2018

Trump Attacks Syria With Chemical Experts on the Way
April 13, 2018 
By Joe Lauria  Special to Consortium News

President Donald Trump on Saturday (Syria time) ordered air strikes against Syria in retaliation for an alleged chemical weapons attack last weekend outside Damascus.
“I ordered the United States armed forces to launch precision strikes on targets associated with the chemical weapon capabilities of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad,” Trump said from the White House.
The strikes were carried out together with Britain and France, he said.  CNN reported explosions at a research facility near Damascus. At a news conference later, Pentagon officials said this “phase” of the missile strikes against three so-called chemical research targets, one in the center of the Syrian capital, were completed and “no additional attacks are planned.”
U.S. officials said Russia had been told of the military operation but Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, told the press briefing Friday night (Washington time) that Moscow was not informed of the Syrian targets. Russia had vowed to shoot down incoming U.S. and allied missiles as Russian military personnel are embedded with the Syrian Arab army at various locations in the country.
U.S. military analysts say the U.S. wanted to avoid hitting Russian targets, but once unleashed, military action can lead to unintended consequences.
Pentagon officials said they only had reports that Syrian, but not Russian, anti-missile defenses had been engaged. Whether any U.S. missiles or planes were hit would be made plain on Saturday morning in Washington, they said.
OPCW Team Was on the Way
A team of experts from the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons was on its way to Syria after accepting an invitation from the Syrian government to study soil and other samples in Duma, the Damascus suburb where the alleged attack took place.
It’s not clear whether the U.S.-led operation would complicate their mission as the team was due to arrive later on Saturday. It is also not certain whether the timing of the U.S.-led attack was intended to prevent the team from gathering evidence to prove whether or not chemicals were used. The OPCW does not assess blame.
Trump had threatened earlier in the week, in perhaps his strangest Tweet yet, to send “smart” and “clean” missile strikes into Syria to attack “Animal Assad.” He also blamed Russia for supporting Assad, which may have been intended to get critics, who accuse him of being a Putin puppet, off his back. Indeed this latest display of American militarism may also be driven by Trump’s anti-Russian critics.
Trump had backed off his threat when it was revealed that his aides had not yet agreed to the attack.
In April 2017 the U.S. fired 59 cruise missiles at a Syrian airbase that Washington believed was used to carry out a chemical attack. U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis later said the U.S. did not have concrete evidence that Syria was responsible.

No Proof Made Public
Likewise no public proof has been offered that Syria was behind the alleged chemical attack last weekend in Duma, where as many as 70 people may have been killed.
The gas allegedly used in the Duma attack is chlorine. In 2014 Syria was certified by the OPCW to have given up its entire chemical weapons arsenal in a deal with the United States and Russia. The chemicals were destroyed on a U.S. Navy ship.
Chlorine, however, is not on the OPCW list of banned chemicals, and is not classified as a chemical weapon. Any country, including Syria, is allowed to possess it, but cannot use it as a weapon. U.S. officials know this but say incorrectly that Russia had failed to give up chemical stocks that were on the OPCW banned list. The military strikes were, as usual, egged on by influential U.S. pundits, some masquerading as reporters. Christiane Amanpour said on CNN after the attack was launched that Russia had stopped President Obama from attacking Syria by agreeing to eliminate its chemical weapons.
“The allies have been forced into this,” Amanpour said, adding that they had no choice. “Russia promised that they would remove Syrian chemical weapons but they have chlorine,” she said, clearly uniformed that it was a joint-U.S.-Russia operation and that chlorine is not classified as a chemical weapon.

Consortium News this week published two pieces calling on Trump to obtain evidence of Syria’s guilt and legal authorization before launching an act of war. The U.S. has neither demonstrated that it is acting in self-defense nor did it get U.N. Security Council approval, making tonight’s actions clearly illegal. Nor has Trump received authorization from Congress, making it illegal under U.S. law. Several Congressmen complained of this after the attack, but Dunford told the Pentagon briefing that Trump acted legally because U.S. interests were involved.

viernes, 13 de abril de 2018

What price will mankind have to pay for the collapse of the Empire?
April 13, 2018
[This analysis was written for the Unz Review]
We are currently living the most dangerous days in human history. You think that this is hyperbole?
Think again.
We are risking a nuclear Armageddon
The first thing to realize is that this is not, repeat, not about Syria or chemical weapons, not in Salsbury, not in Douma. That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them. The truth is that the AngloZionists are the prime proliferators of chemical weapons in history (and the prime murderers of Arabs and Muslims too!). So their crocodile tears are just that – crocodile tears, even if their propaganda machine says otherwise.
Does anybody seriously believe that Trump, May, Macron or Netanyahu would be willing to risk an apocalyptic thermonuclear war which could kill several hundred million people in just a few hours because Assad has used chemical weapons on tens, hundreds or even thousands of innocent Syrian civilians (assuming, just for argument’s sake, that this accusation is founded)? Since when do the AngloZionist care about Arabs?! This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever!
For those who would say that speaking of “several hundred million people” killed is hyperbole, I would recommend looking up past western plans to “solve the Russian problem” including:
·         Plan Totality (1945): earmarked 20 Soviet cities for obliteration in a first strike: Moscow, Gorki, Kuybyshev, Sverdlovsk, Novosibirsk, Omsk, Saratov, Kazan, Leningrad, Baku, Tashkent, Chelyabinsk, Nizhny Tagil, Magnitogorsk, Molotov, Tbilisi, Stalinsk, Grozny, Irkutsk, and Yaroslavl.
·         Operation Unthinkable (1945) assumed a surprise attack by up to 47 British and American divisions in the area of Dresden, in the middle of Soviet lines. This represented almost a half of roughly 100 divisions (ca. 2.5 million men) available to the British, American and Canadian headquarters at that time. (…) The majority of any offensive operation would have been undertaken by American and British forces, as well as Polish forces and up to 100,000 German Wehrmacht soldiers.
·         Operation Dropshot (1949): included mission profiles that would have used 300 nuclear bombs and 29,000 high-explosive bombs on 200 targets in 100 cities and towns to wipe out 85% of the Soviet Union’s industrial potential at a single stroke. Between 75 and 100 of the 300 nuclear weapons were targeted to destroy Soviet combat aircraft on the ground.
Articles like this one, this one, and this one are also good pointers (these are all estimates, of course, nobody knows for sure; all that matters is an approximate orders of magnitude).
By the way, I am not suggesting that at this point in time the AngloZionists would want to deliberately start a thermonuclear war with Russia. What I am suggesting is that there is a very simple and basic asymmetry between the Russian and AngloZionist forces in the Middle-East which could lead to such an outcome regardless of original intentions. Here is how:
How are we risking a nuclear Armageddon?
Step one: the AngloZionists strike Syria hard enough to force the Russians to retaliate.
Step two: now outraged by the Russian response, the AngloZionists retaliate against the Russian forces in Syria.
At this point it is crucial to remember that while the Russians have better equipment and far better soldiers than their “western” opponents (the examples of Alexander Prokhorenko or Roman Filipov will tell you all you need to know about how Russians in Syria fight, especially compared to the kind of personnel deployed by the US and NATO), the CENTCOM+NATO+Israel+KSA have an immense numerical advantage. It does not matter how effective the Russian air defenses or (tiny) air superiority aircraft force is when it can simply be overwhelmed by numbers. All the Empire needs to do is first fire a large number of dumb old Tomahawk cruise missiles, let the Russian use their stores of air defense missiles and then follow-up with their more advanced weapons. The truth is that if the Empire wanted to, it could even establish a no-fly zone over Syria and completely wipe-out the Russian task force. Sure, there would be losses on both sides, the Russians would fight heroically, but they would lose. Unless, of course, they got help from the Motherland, specifically in the form of cruise missile attacks from the Black Sea Fleet, the Caspian Flotilla, the aircraft stationed in southern Russia (Crimea) or even in Iran. Russia also strike with land and sea based missiles. So Russia does have the capability to strike at numerous lucrative (and more or less defenseless) US and “coalition” targets throughout the Middle-East. But what would be the consequences of that?
Step three: Russian strikes on CENTCOM targets would force the Empire to fight back and strike at Russian Navy ships and, even worse, at military installations in Russia proper.
Step four: US/NATO attacks on Russian territory would inevitably trigger a Russian response on the USA itself.
That response would be initially conventional, but as the losses on both sides would mount, the use of nuclear weapons would be almost inevitable.

Yes, in theory, at any time during this escalatory cycle both sides could decide to de-escalate. In theory. But in the real world, I don’t see that happening nor have I ever seen any model which would convincingly explain how such a de-escalation could happen (especially with the exceptionally low-quality type of narcissistic and psychopathic individuals in command in the USA – think Trump or Bolton here – and all their “we are the best and biggest and greatest” pseudo-patriotic nonsense).
I am not predicting that this is what will actually happen, but I am saying that this is the risk the AngloZionist Empire is willing to take in order to achieve.. what exactly? What is worth taking such a risk?
I think that the UK Minister of Defense put it best: the AngloZionists want Russia to “go away and shut up”.

Why we are risking a nuclear Armageddon (go away and shut up!)
“Go away and shut up” has been the dream of all western leaders since at least a millennium (interspersed and strengthened by regular (and failed) attempts at conquering and/or converting the Russians). Just think how frustrating it has been for a civilization which has established colonies worldwide, including in the farthest regions of our planet, to have this unconquerable nation right next door which was not only refusing to submit, but which would regularly defeat them on the battlefield even when they all joined forces lead by their “best and brightest” leaders (Napoleon, Hitler and… Trump?). Just imagine how a civilization centered on, and run by, bankers would go crazy realizing that immense riches were literally “right next door” but that those who lived on that land would, for some unfathomable reason, refuse to let them exploit it! The very existence of a “Russian Russia” is an affront to all the real (as opposed to official) western values and that is simply not something the leaders of the Empire are willing to tolerate. Hence Syria, hence the Ukraine, hence all the silly accusations of “novichok” cum buckwheat attacks. These are all expressions of the same policy
1.    Paint Russia as some kind of Mordor and create yet another “grand coalition” against her
2.    Force Russia to submit to the AngloZionist Hegemony
3.    Defeat Russia politically, economically or militarily
These are objectives for which it is worth risking it all, especially when your own Empire is collapsing and time is not on your side. What we are witnessing since at least 2015 is yet another western Crusade against Russia, a kind of holy war waged in the name of everything the West holds sacred (money, power, hegemonic world domination, secularism, etc.) against everything it abhors (sovereignty, independence, spirituality, traditions).
The simple truth is this: were it not for the Russian military capabilities, the West would have wiped Russia “off the map” long ago, and replaced it with something like a number of “mini-Poland’s” ruled by a liberal comprador elite just like the one currently in charge of the EU. The desperate scream “go away and shut up” is just the expression of having this “western dream” frustrated by the power of the Russian armed forces and the unity of the Russian people behind their current leader. But even the admittedly frustrating existence of Russia is not a sufficient reason to risk it all; there is much more at stake here.
Russia as the tip of a much larger iceberg
Due to geographical, historical, cultural, religious and military factors, Russia is today the objective leader of the worldwide resistance to Empire, at least in moral, psychological and political terms. But that does not mean that she is “anti-USA”, not at all. For one thing, Russia does absolutely not run or control the worldwide resistance to Empire. In fact, to a superficial analysis, Russia often looks pretty much alone in her stance (as shown by the recent Chinese behavior at the UN Security Council). The truth is that other countries who want an end to the AngloZionist hegemony have absolutely no incentive to join Russia on top of the US “shit list” and expose themselves to the wrath of the Hegemon, especially not when Russia seems to be more than willing to bear the brunt of the Empire’s hatred. Besides, like all large and powerful countries, Russia lacks real friends and most countries are more than happy to demand that Russia fix all their problems (as shown by the constant stream of accusations that Russia has not done enough in this or that part of the planet). And yet all these countries are not exactly standing in line to show solidarity with Russia when she might need it. So when I say that Russia leads the resistance I am not suggesting that she does that the way the USA runs NATO or some “coalition of the willing”. Russia simply leads by the fact that she does not “go away” or, even more so, does not “shut up”.
Russia is the only country on the planet, with the possible exception of Iran, which openly and unapologetically dares to denounce the Empire’s hypocrisy and which is willing to back her words with military power if needed. The DPRK is a unique and local case. As for the various Bolivarian countries and movements in Latin America, they are currently being defeated by the Empire. In theory, the Muslim world definitely has the potential to play a bigger role in the resistance to the Empire, but the Wahabi-virus injected into the Muslim world by the USA+KSA+Israel has, at least so far, prevented the emergence of a successful and truly Islamic model besides the one of the Islamic Republic of Iran (hence the demonization of the latter by the AngloZionists).
And yet …
The Empire is in the process of losing the entire Middle-East. Not so much because of some brilliant and Machiavellian Russian or Iranian policies, but more as a courtesy of its own infinitely arrogant, stupid and self-defeating policies. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein will probably go down in history as one of the dumbest political decisions ever (Bolton was behind that one too, by the way). That was an entirely self-inflicted catastrophe. As was the almost equally disastrous invasion of Afghanistan. Another self-inflicted disaster for the AngloZionists was their support for the US/EU led coup in the Ukraine, which not only resulted in a calamity which the Europeans will have to pay for for many decades to come (think of it as a big Somalia on the EU’s doorstep) but also did an amazing job uniting the Russian people behind their leaders and reduced the pro-Western feelings in the Russian public opinion to something in the range of 2-5 percent at the most. “Getting” the Ukraine sure would not have been worth “losing” Russia.
Then there is China which the USA has grossly mismanaged since the so-called Third Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1996 when Clinton militarily threatened China (see here for details) and with whom Trump has now launched a trade war in order to MAGA (good luck with that!).
In contrast, all the real “action” is now centered around the OBOR project in which China and Russia play the main role and in which the Anglosphere will play no role at all. Add the Petro-Yuan to the equation and you have the emergence of a new Eurasian model which threatens to make the entire Empire simply irrelevant.
And then there is Turkey (2nd most powerful NATO member state). And Pakistan for that matter. Or Afghanistan. Or Iraq. Or Yemen. Everywhere the Empire is in full retreat leaving only chaos behind.
The truth is that Russia would never be a credible threat to the AngloZionist Hegemony if it was not for the innumerable self-inflicted disasters the Empire has been absorbing year after year after year. In reality, Russia is no threat to anybody at all. And even China would not be a threat to the Empire if the latter was not so arrogant, so over-stretched, so ignorant, reckless and incompetent in its actions. Let me just give one simple, but stark, example: not only does the USA not have anything remotely resembling a consistent foreign policy, it does not even have any ministry of foreign affairs. The Department of State does not deal with diplomacy simply because the US leaders don’t believe in diplomacy as a concept. All the DoS does is issue threats, sanctions, ultimatums, make demands, deliver score-cards (on human rights and the like, of all things!) and explain to the public why the USA is almost constantly at war with somebody. That is not “diplomacy” and the likes of Nikki Haley are not diplomats. In fact, the USA has no use for International Law either, hence the self-same Nikki Haley openly declaring at a UNSC meeting that the USA is willing to ignore the decisions of the UNSC and act in complete violation of the UN Charter. Simply put: thugs have no need for any diplomacy. They don’t understand the concept.
Just like their Israeli masters and mentors, the US Americans have convinced themselves that all they need to be successful on the international scene is to either threaten the use of force or actually use force. Which works great (or so it seems) in Gaza or Grenada, but when dealing with China, Russia or Iran, this monomaniacal approach rapidly shows its limitations, especially when your force is really limited to shooting missiles from afar or murdering civilians (neither the USA nor Israel nor, for that matter, the KSA has a credible “boots on the ground” capability, hence their reliance on proxies).
The Empire is failing, fast, and for all the talk about “Animal Assad” or “Rocket Man” being in need of AngloZionist punishment, the stakes are the survival of Hegemony imposed upon mankind at the end of WWII and, again, at the end of the Cold War, and the future of our planet. There cannot be one World Hegemon and a multipolar world order regulated by international law. It’s an either-or situation. And in that sense, this is all much bigger than Syria or even Russia.
From Douma to Donetsk?
There is still a chance that the AngloZionists will decide to strike Syria symbolically, as they did last year following the previous chemical false flag in Khan Sheikhoun (Trump has now probably tweeted himself into a corner which makes some kind of attack almost inevitable). Should that happen though, we should not celebrate too soon as this will just be a minor course change, the 21st-century anti-Russia Crusade will continue, most likely in the form of a Ukronazi attack on the Donbass.
Quick reminder: the purpose of such an attack will not be to reconquer and then ethnically cleanse the Donbass, but to force the Russian Federation to prevent such an outcome by openly intervening. Such a Russian intervention will, of course, quickly stop the war and crush the Ukronazi forces, but at that point the tensions in Europe will go through the roof, meaning that NATO will (finally!) find a halfway credible mission for itself, the Germans will have to give up on North Stream II, Poland and the Baltic statelets will make money by becoming the East European version of Okinawa and the Anglo powers (US/UK) will firmly reestablish control over the EU, Brexit notwithstanding. Furthermore, Russia will become the target of a total economic war, including an energy blockade (the US will be more than happy to impose its overpriced gas on the Europeans), a disconnection from SWIFT, a seizure of Russian assets, a ban on Russian financial operations in the EU, etc. That could be risky, of course, especially with a trade war with China also taking place, but these are just options. What is certain is that as long as Putin or anybody like him remains in power in Russia, the Congress will continue to slap sanctions after sanctions after sanctions on Russia. In fact, during most of her history, even before the Revolution, Russia was under one type of western sanctions or another. There is absolutely nothing new here and, as I like to remind people these days, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, especially with maniacal regimes and leaders.
Besides, as I have already mentioned in the past, and unlike the current confrontation in Syria, a war in the Ukraine is a very safe bet for the Empire. First, when the goal is the defeat of “your” side, almost any military adventure is pretty safe. Second, once the Russians are in Novorussia, they will “own it”, meaning that they will have to carry the huge financial burden of rebuilding it. Third, such a Russian presence would consolidate and even boost the Ukie nationalists who, by the way, will have a golden opportunity to blame everything they did wrong over the past 4 years on the Russians. Fourth, any such operation will get a lot of the worst and most rabid Ukronazi killed and that will remove a potential problem from the Poroshenko-types the US much prefers to deal with. Finally, as I said, this will give NATO a sacred mission to “defend Europe against a revanchist Russian rogue state” thereby crushing any European hopes for even a modest degree of independence from the Anglosphere. And the worst case? The worst case would be if the Novorussians can stop the Ukronazi attack without overt Russian intervention. But even if that happens and even if the Novorussians launch some kind of counter-offensive liberating Mariupol or Slaviansk, these are irrelevant losses from the point of view of the Empire which sees both Russians and Ukrainians as cannon fodder. Just as the Empire wants Arabs and Muslims to kill each other on Israel’s behalf in the Middle-East, so does the Empire want nothing more than to see Ukrainians and Russians kill each other in maximal numbers and for as long as possible.
[Sidebar: Some might suggest here that the Novorussians could not only defeat the Ukronazi forces but also liberate the rest of the Ukraine, including Kiev. I find that exceedingly unlikely. Here is why: First, all the hurrah-patriotic nonsense notwithstanding, there are very good and objective reasons why the Novorussians could not liberate Mariupol the first time around (there was a major risk of Ukrainian envelopment for the Novorussian force) or why it took them so long to retake control of the Donetsk airport: during most of their existence, Novorussian forces were composed of a mix of different types of units which, for all their personal courage, were simply not capable of operational-level offensives. They were limited to tactical-level engagements which, even when successful, do not necessarily lead to operational-level developments. There seems to have been major changes made in the command structure of the Novorussian forces. The liberation of the Donetsk airport and, even more so, the Debaltsevo “cauldron” were joint DNR-LNR efforts, but even if, as I suspect, the Novorussians are now capable of operational-level counter-offensives, this is still not what it would take to liberate Kiev. Furthermore, as one Novorussian officer commented, “the further West we go, the less we are seen as liberators and the more as occupiers”. Last but not least, Russia will not allow the Novorussians to liberate most of the Ukraine even if they could do so, because then Russia would have to pay for the staggering costs of trying to fix this massive “European Somalia”, and that is a task far beyond her current means. For all the East-European hallucinations about some Russian invasion, Russia has neither the desire nor even the means to invade anybody. The painful reality is this: the Ukrainians will pay a dear price for their Russophobic delusions and most of the bill to fix that mess will have to be paid by the rest of Europe. They created that nightmare, let them fix it now.]
Conclusion: back to Syria
None of the above should distract us from what is by far the biggest danger currently facing us all – the risks of a US-Russian war in Syria. In fact, this reality seems to be slowly dawning even on the most obtuse of presstitutes who are now worrying about a spill-over effect. No, not in Europe or the USA, but on Israel, of course. Still, the fact that there are folks who understand that Israel might not survive a superpower clash on its doorstep is a good thing. Maybe the Israel lobby in the USA, or a least the part of it which cares for Israel (many/most only pretend to), will be more vocal than all the silent Anglo shabbos-goyim who don’t seem to be able to muster even a minimal amount of self-preservation instinct? Bibi Netanyahu felt the need to call Putin after the Israeli ambassador to Russia was read the riot act by Russian officials following the (admittedly rather lame) Israeli airstrike on the T-4 Syrian air force base. Not much of a hope, I admit...
This is not about good guys versus bad guys anymore. It’s about sane versus insane. I think that we can safely place Trump, Bolton, Haley and the rest of them in the “terminally delusional” camp. But what about the top US generals? I asked two well-informed friends, and they both told me that there is probably nobody above the rank of Colonel with enough courage left to object to the Neocon’s insanity, even if that means WWIII. Again, not much hope here either…
There is a sura (Al-Anfal 8:30) of the Qur’an which Sheikh Imran Hosein often mentions which I want to quote here: And [remember, O Muhammad], when those who disbelieved plotted against you to restrain you or kill you or evict you [from Makkah]. But they plan, and Allah plans. And Allah is the best of planners. And since we are talking about Syria where Iran and Hezbollah are targets as much (or more) as the Russians, it is also fitting here to quote a very popular Shia slogan which calls to remember that the battle against oppression must be fought ceaselessly and everywhere: “Every Day Is Ashura and Every Land Is Karbala”. And, of course, there are the words of Christ Himself: “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matt 10:28).
Such religious references will, no doubt, irritate the many “enlightened” westerners for whom such language reeks of obscurantism, fanaticism, and bigotry. But in Russia or the Middle-East, such references are very much part of the national or religious ethos. To illustrate my point I want to quote from Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s “Divine Victory Speech” spoken in 2006 following the crushing victory by a relatively small Hezbollah force of the combined might of the Israeli ground, air and naval forces:
We are today celebrating a big strategic, historic, and divine victory. How can the human mind imagine that a few thousand of your Lebanese resistance sons – if I wanted, I would give the exact number – held out for 23 days in a land exposed to the skies against the strongest air force in the Middle East, which had an air bridge transporting smart bombs from America, through Britain, to Israel; against 40,000 officers and soldiers – four brigades of elite forces, three reserve army divisions; against the strongest tank in the world; and against the strongest army in the region? How could only a few thousand people hold out and fight under such harsh conditions, and [how could] their fighting force the naval warships out of our territorial waters? By the way, the army and the resistance are capable of protecting the territorial waters from being desecrated by any Zionist. [Applause] [And how could their fighting] also lead to the destruction of the Mirkava tanks, which are an object of pride for the Israeli industry; damage Israeli helicopters day and night; and turn the elite brigades – I am not exaggerating, and you can watch and read the Israeli media – into rats frightened by your sons? [How did this happen] while you were relinquished by the Arabs and the world and in light of the political (human solidarity was profound though) division around you? How could this group of mujahidin defeat this army without the support and assistance of Almighty God? This resistance experience, which should be conveyed to the world, depends – on the moral and spiritual level – on faith, certainty, reliance [on God], and readiness to make sacrifices. It also depends on reason, planning, organization, armament, and, as is said, on taking all possible protective procedures. We are neither a disorganized and sophistic resistance, nor a resistance pulled to the ground that sees before it nothing but soil, nor a resistance of chaos. The pious, God-reliant, loving, and knowledgeable resistance is also the conscious, wise, trained, and equipped resistance that has plans. This is the secret of the victory we are today celebrating, brothers and sisters.

These words could also be used to describe the relatively small Russian task force in Syria. In fact, there are numerous parallels which could be made between Hezbollah’s role and position in the Middle-East and Russia’s role and position in the world. And while both are well-trained, well-armed and well-commanded, it is their spiritual power which will decide the outcome of the wars waged against them by the Hegemony. AngloZionist secularists will never understand that – they just can’t – and that will bring their inevitable downfall. The only question is the price mankind will have to pay to have that last Empire finally bite the dust.

The Saker

miércoles, 11 de abril de 2018

¿QUÉ ATACARÁ ESTADOS UNIDOS EN SIRIA? ¿RESPONDERÁ RUSIA?

En las próximas horas Donald Trump deberá decidir entre las opciones que el Departamento de Defensa le haya presentado para lanzar misiles a instalaciones militares sirias y/o incluso, a edificios gubernamentales en la capital Damasco.
Trump no puede echarse para atrás, pues el establecimiento político-militar de Washington, dominado por los neoconservadores, el lobby pro Israel y el complejo militar-industrial-de seguridad, logró que el propio presidente se auto acorralara con sus promesas de castigo al régimen de Assad, por el fabricado ataque químico en Douma; por lo que ahora el manipulado Trump sólo tiene la opción de “decidir” entre un ataque limitado o uno que amplíe el involucramiento de Estados Unidos en Siria. Pero ya no puede decidir no hacer el ataque.
Así, lo neoconservadores en voz de algunos de sus integrantes, como el senador republicano Lindsey Graham o el ex senador demócrata, Joseph Liberman, ya han propuesto que el ataque tendría que “destruir” todas la infraestructura de la fuerza aérea siria, incluidos sus aviones de combate; lo que en los hechos implicaría una lluvia de misiles sobre prácticamente todo el territorio sirio, lo que muy probablemente implicaría bajas entre el personal militar ruso, y con ello la posibilidad del inicio de una guerra entre las dos superpotencias nucleares.
También se ha mencionado la posibilidad de que los misiles se dirijan contra la infraestructura gubernamental siria en la capital Damasco, lo que implicaría cientos o miles de muertos civiles, y con ello el escalamiento de las hostilidades entre las fuerzas armadas de Siria, sus aliados rusos e iraníes, y las potencias occidentales e Israel, nuevamente poniendo a la región al borde de una guerra generalizada.
Otra propuesta ha sido “descabezar” al gobierno sirio; o sea, tratar de matar a Assad y a sus principales colaboradores, lo que parece improbable, pues ello implicaría un conocimiento preciso del lugar en donde está el presidente sirio, y por lo tanto un “golpe quirúrgico” que no parece factible en la situación actual que se vive en ese país, dado que Assad ha recuperado buena parte del control del mismo; y, por lo tanto, es más difícil ubicarlo.
En todo caso, lo más probable es que se lancen más misiles que el año pasado (59 misiles Tomahwak), cuando Trump ordenó un ataque contra la base de Al-Shayrat (7 de abril del 2017), por el anterior ataque químico de “falsa bandera”, realizado por los mercenarios y terroristas pagados por Occidente e Israel; y, además que los misiles se dirijan a varias bases militares (aéreas y centros de comunicación y control).
Ya Israel realizó un ataque el 9 de abril pasado, a la base aérea T-4 de la fuerza aérea Siria en Homs (por parte de dos aviones F-15), matando a diez soldados sirios y a 4 asesores iraníes. Esto lo realizó Netanyahu con el objetivo de “darle el ejemplo” a Trump de lo que debe hacer; y enviando el mensaje a Moscú de que seguirá bombardeando a placer a los sirios, mientras sigan presentes milicias y asesores iraníes en ese país. De hecho, Putin y Netanyahu ya hablaron por teléfono sobre este hecho, y el presidente ruso le advirtió al primer ministro israelí de los riesgos que corre si sigue realizando este tipo de acciones (de los 8 misiles lanzados por los aviones israelíes, los rusos dicen que con las defensas antiaéreas que tienen los sirios, se pudieron derribar 5 de los mismos). Y por su parte, Netanyahu insistió en que Israel seguirá atacando blancos en Siria, si en ellos se encuentran iraníes o armas destinadas a Hezbollah.
Así que Trump muy bien puede meterse en un agujero del cual ya no pueda salir, pues si las bases a las que va a dirigir los misiles tienen las defensas antiaéreas que ha proveído Rusia (S-300 y S-400), es posible que no todos los misiles lleguen a su destino, y ello puede ser una gran propaganda para Moscú y Damasco.
En cambio, si las defensas antiaéreas no pueden detener la mayoría de esos misiles, sería un golpe a la credibilidad de Moscú, por lo que la posibilidad de que intente “cobrarse” la afrenta con un ataque a las posiciones de lo que queda de los grupos de mercenarios y terroristas proccidentales y/o incluso el lanzamiento de misiles que caigan cerca de las bases estadounidenses en el Este de Siria, de igual forma puede llevar a un escalamiento de la respuesta estadounidense, y al borde de la guerra entre ambas super potencias.
Moscú responderá proporcionalmente al alcance del ataque estadounidense -y al parecer también francés, pues el lacayo Macron ya se unió a esta insensatez. Primero, verá si las defensas antiaéreas rusas pueden detener la mayor parte de los misiles que se lancen; y después evaluará si el daño hecho no es de gran magnitud. Si es así, Moscú ya no escalará el conflicto, a menos que lo sigan haciendo Estados Unidos, Francia, Gran Bretaña e Israel.
En cambio, si los ataques van contra el gobierno en Damasco, además de contra bases militares sirias, es posible que Moscú lance ataques contra las bases estadounidenses en el Este de Siria, quizás sólo de advertencia; esto es, el lanzamiento de misiles que caigan cerca de las mismas (o de los buques de guerra estadounidenses en el Mediterráneo). Pero si el ataque estadounidense implica bajas rusas y una destrucción considerable de infraestructura militar siria y rusa; con lo que los mercenarios y terroristas pro occidentales podrían reiniciar sus hostilidades contra el gobierno sirio, entonces es factible que Moscú ponga en juego todo su arsenal en Siria y lance misiles (los crucero tipo Kalibr) a posiciones estadounidenses o incluso israelíes (en los Altos del Golán por ejemplo), desde sus submarinos nucleares y buques de guerra que están en el Mediterráneo. Y ello por supuesto llevaría a la guerra entre las superpotencias.
Putin trata de mantener dentro de la racionalidad este enfrentamiento (ya a estas alturas es muy difícil, con el establecimiento político militar de Washington, Londres, Paris y Tel Aviv en modo de guerra) que él pensaba, junto con Siria e Irán, que ya habían ganado, al derrotar a los mercenarios y terroristas prooccidentales y proisraelíes. Pero resulta que Occidente e Israel decidieron poner en juego sus propias fuerzas armadas para revertir la derrota, esperando qué con ello, tanto Putin, como la teocracia iraní y Assad en Siria, preferirían perder lo ganado y negociar desde una posición de debilidad.
Habrá que ver si Putin, Rohani y Khamenei en Irán y Assad están dispuestos a renunciar a su victoria, ante la amenaza de guerra con Occidente e Israel. O, deciden enfrentarlos, esperando que sean ellos los que en el último momento desistan. Un juego tan peligroso como éste, podría desatar la Tercera Guerra Mundial. Recordemos que en la crisis de octubre de 1962, los buques rusos que se dirigían a Cuba con misiles, fueron enfrentados por los buques de guerra estadounidenses, y sólo en el último momento vino la orden de Moscú de que dieran la vuelta, con lo que en ese entonces Kennedy, ganó ese “round” de la Guerra Fría.

La diferencia ahora es que no está Kennedy como presidente de Estados Unidos, y los “halcones” de Washington dominan el escenario, a diferencia de 1962, cuando al menos estaban en igualdad de condiciones las “palomas” y los “halcones”. Hoy todo puede ser muy distinto.