Driving a Sunni wedge in the Shiite Arc - June, 2014

The nation of Iraq is making headlines once again. Over ten years after the Anglo-American-Zionist empire's "forces of freedom and democracy" mercilessly sacked the ancient city of Baghdad, Western promises of freedom and democracy continues to be an elusive fantasy for beleaguered Iraqis as the brutal cycle of sectarian bloodletting continues unabated. After hundreds-of-thousands of deaths, hundreds-of-thousands of maimed, millions of lives uprooted and the utter plundering of an oil rich nation, Iraq has in recent years been a nation that barely exists. A weakened Iraq's already terrible situation just got much worst. A new terror network known as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has occupied significant territories inside Sunni populated region's of Iraq.

The story at hand does not simply begin and end with the group ISIS. The story behind the story is that Iraq's weakness is currently being exploited by a conglomeration of foreign powers towards a greater regional geostrategic agenda.

As in Syria, we see in Iraq a number of major political interests vying for power and/or influence. Western powers, Gulf Arab states, Kurds, Turks, Israelis, Iranians and Russians are in varying degrees involved in the Iraqi equation and a number of other nations are playing supporting roles. As in Syria, we are seeing an agenda to reshape the borders of Iraq. Similar to what we saw attempted in Syria, what is going on in Iraq is a proxy war in which Iranian interests (and to a lesser degree Russian interests) are battling a conglomeration of Western, Arabian, Turkish, Kurdish and Jewish interests. Will the Maliki government pull together similar to how Bashar Assad's government did and preserve the modern state of Iraq, or will Iraq break up into pieces? 

I personally believe Iraq is - much more so than Syria ever was - in a serious danger of falling apart. Unlike Syria, Iraq had already been utterly devastated by twenty years of war. Unlike Syria, Iraq's military is very weak. Unlike Syria, Iraq is demographically too fragmented. Unlike Syria, Iraq's government is too saturated with Western mercenaries (although this may be changing) to be able to organize an effective resistance against those trying to destroy it.

If Iran and Syria do not immediately begin providing Baghdad serious military assistance, Iraq will sooner-than-later break into three pieces - Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish. The good news is that Iran and Syria are beginning to come to Iraq's assistance. And Moscow is also stepping in to provide Baghdad with much needed aid.

While the agenda to redraw the map of the Middle East is self-evident (they haven't even tried to conceal their intentions) we can only guess at what their ultimate end-game is. In other words, what is it exactly that they want and what lengths are they willing to go to get it?

In my opinion, with their military setback in Syria and their continuing powerlessness against Iran's growing strength in the region, they may now be taking the fight into Iraq. And similar to what they are doing in Ukraine with Russia, they may also be trying to pull Iran into the fight in Iraq. After all, Tehran is the epicenter of the Shiite world. Lebanon's Hezbollah, Syria's Alewite regime and Iraq's Shiite majority government cannot survive without Iran.

The reader may have noticed that when news first broke out about ISIS gains in Iraq, there was a lot of talk in the Western press about Iran being a "natural ally" of the US and the need for Washington to begin talks with Tehran. Have Western powers had a change of heart about Tehran? Is Tehran all of a sudden a lesser threat against Western, Israeli, Gulf Arab and Turkish interests? Not as far as I can tell. Tehran is not going to stop its nuclear pursuit; Tehran is not going to stop aiding Hezbollah; Tehran is not going to stop aiding Bashar Assad's government; Tehran is not going to stop aiding Iraq's Shiite led government; and Tehran is not going to stop being Shiite. Therefore, them wanting to have talks with Tehran is in fact a very troubling sign, as far as I'm concerned.

In my opinion, because of Iran's strength, they are resorting to more devious measures against Tehran. I personally believe they are attempting to draw Iran into a civil war in Iraq. Why? I do not know the very exact reason why for I don't sit in at Council of Foreign Relations Meetings. But I can surmise based on what I observe taking place on the ground. In my opinion, the plan is to plunge the region into serious sectarian violence and entrap Tehran in a civil war in which the opposing, Sunni side is being aided by a conglomeration of  Western, Arabian, Turkish and Jewish interests. Similar to what they did in the 1980s with the Iran-Iraq war, they may be seeking to entrap Iran in another protracted bloody conflict.  

Many of the Middle Eastern conflicts in recent years have emerged from an attempt to curb the growth of Iranian power in the Middle East - as well as keeping Russian influence out of the region. We saw this agenda play-out in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war; we saw this agenda play-out in the 2006 Israel–Hezbollah War; we have been seeing this agenda play-out in Syria and Iraq in more recent years. The growth of Iranian power in the region is the number one geostrategic problem for Western powers and their regional allies. 

Their fear of Iran 

On April 5, 2001 an assessment concerning Russian-Iranian relations was featured in the website of the now infamous The Heritage Foundation, one of the premier neoconservative think tanks in the United States. The article was more-or-less a set-by-step, geopolitical blueprint for the Bush administration. As noted above, this work comes to us from a period in time when the terms "neocon" and "war on terror" were still unknown to the general public. However, as the article clearly reveals, even before it all supposedly began in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, the grand agenda of special interest groups working deep within power centers of Washington was there for all to see. 

Their main fear for the Middle East is the growth of Iranian influence.  Their main fear for Eurasia is the reassurance of Russia as a superpower. 

Their fear is that if left unchecked Iran and Russia will disturb what is termed as the "balance of power" in their respective regions. This so-called balance of power is where Western powers, the Zionist state and several US-backed Arab monarchies enjoy total supremacy and complete impunity. As a result, many in positions of power in the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia have been quite vociferous in calling for a preemptive war against Iran. They fear that they will no longer have the impunity to do as they will, once Iran becomes a nuclear power and begins projecting its interests throughout the region.
The growth of Iranian power and influence in the Middle East in recent decades has thus been keeping officials in Washington, London, Tel Aviv, Brussels, Ankara, Riyadh and Doha awake at nights. This is because, as mentioned above, Tehran threatens to disturb what the Anglo-American-Zionist alliance terms "the balance of power" in the region. In other words, they are afraid of a real balance of power emerging because in such a political environment, they will not feel invincible and will no longer be able to act with impunity.

In particular, Iran's rise as a regional power is seen as an existential threat for Israel. For the Zionist state to survive in the Middle East it has to enjoy total supremacy over its neighbors. 

Moreover, Tehran's rise as an independent regional power also threatens the free flow of the region's Western controlled energy production and distribution. Being that Iran is one of the world's largest producers of energy (natural gas in particular, which the developed economies of Europe, Turkey and Israel desperately need), Tehran's rise as a major regional power is seen as a serious strategic, long-term threat. But as alluded to above, Iran is not their only problem here because there is also the Russian Federation. Russia's resurgence as a Eurasian superpower has essentially monopolized the production and distribution of Central Asia's much coveted energy resources.

Central Asia and the Persian Gulf are increasingly coming under Russian and Iranian influence, and I should also add that China is beginning to project its power in the Far East. This is cause for serious consternation in the Western world. And this is why they want to see a greatly diminished Iranian and Russian and Chinese role in global affairs. In short, Tehran and Moscow are redefining global energy politics and are currently on the verge of changing the geopolitical landscape Eurasia. 

What I just outlined above is more-or-less the geostrategic basis of all the volatility we have been witnessing in the Middle East and elsewhere. Their fear of increasing Iranian - and Russian - power in the Middle East lurks behind the international aggression we have been see taking place against Syria - because the road to Tehran starts in Damascus.
True to their predatory spirit: Since Iran is a much tougher opponent to take on directly, they are first going after Syria and now Iraq. Before they are able to take on a large and powerful nation like Iran, they must first stamp-out Iranian support in the region.

Driving a Sunni wedge in the Shiite Arc 

In the big geostrategic picture, what is happening in Iraq today can be accurately characterized as a Western/Saudi Arabian effort to drive a Sunni wedge into the Shiite Arc. This arc (also known as "a victorious arc of Iranian terror from the Gulf to the Mediterranean backed by nuclear weapons") is a swath of territory essentially stretching from southern Lebanon to western Afghanistan, a strategic territory where Iran wields great influence.

A by-product of an Iranian political awakening that reached its climax in Iran during the late 1970s, this arc gradually came into existence as a direct yet unintended consequence of Western machinations in the region. Iran's rise as an independent regional power began in 1979 when Iranians managed to depose their country's Western-backed dictator Shah. Iranian power and influence was thereafter refined during the brutal war Iran fought against Iraq in the 1980s, during which Western powers were encouraging the fighting by supplying both sides with weaponry. The 1980s also saw the rise of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon as a direct consequence of Western-backed Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. Then came the Western military aggression against Iraq in 1991 and its subsequent invasion in 2003. This inadvertently enabled Iraq's Shiite majority to dominate the political landscape in Baghdad through the help of double agents like Ahmad Chalabi. Then came the 2006 war in Lebanon during which the Hezbollah heroically stopped Israel's massive war machine dead in its tracks. This propelled Hezbollah to the top of political influence in Lebanon. Finally, the Western aggression against Syria and Iraq has resulted in the further fusing of Shiite/Alewite cooperation between Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon's Hezbollah.

The Iranian/Shiite Arc can therefore be characterized as something that was forged in fire and something that won't be broken easily.

Backed by Russia, Tehran has built a massive, well organized military force and is currently on the verge of acquiring nuclear capability. The defeat of the Western-backed Sunni Islamic insurgency in Syria has greatly increased Bashar Assad's regional political clout. And Israel is once again sounding the alarm about Hezbollah's growing military capabilities. Therefore, in a certain sense, it was only inevitable that they would set their eyes back on Iraq - the weakest link in the Shiite Arc

Therefore, let it surprise no one that trigger-happy Western forces do not want to carry-out air strikes or send in ground troops against Islamic terrorists that have occupied large territories throughout Iraq. They were so enthusiastic about bombing Syria... but all of a sudden they are concerned about getting caught in a civil war and killing civilians? All of a sudden they do not have any good options on the table?

Let it also surprise no one that the Western news press as well as Western officials are placing all blame on Maliki's Shiite-led government. The Western new press is framing the recent crisis as a sectarian violence brought upon by the Maliki government and Western voices have been unanimous in telling Baghdad to reach out to Sunnis and Kurds. The blame Maliki campaign is now seen in all corners of the empire's disinformation machine. In stark contrast to what Washingtonians have been doing in Ukraine (where the West has been backing the central government's bloody crackdown on pro-Russian separatists in the country), talk about Iraq is instead focusing on the importance of creating an "inclusive government" where the rights of Sunnis and Kurds (both entities supported by the Anglo-American-Zionist establishment) are respected by the nation's majority Shiites.

Is ISIS a tool of Western foreign policy?

Due to multiple, interrelated players, constantly changing and overlapping variables not to mention the very murky world of intelligence services, I admit that the topic of Islamic terrorism is a difficult matter to truly wrap one's mind around. I myself still have some trouble with it. 

With that said, groups like ISIS (said to be state-less Sunni extremists) are too well organized, too well armed, too well trained, too well manned and too well funded to exist independently or against the wishes of regional state interests. What are these state interests? In my opinion, primarily Gulf Arab states, Turkey, Israel and Western powers.

The reader can think of militant groups like ISIS or Al-Qaeda in this way: A rabid monster created by certain state interests and then thrown onto the laps of their enemies. 

These groups are like rabid animals that even their trainers/handlers try to keep at a safe distance and use only when needed. They don't even have to have direct control over the beast in question. It is inevitable, even natural, that such rabid animals cannot be fully controlled. But they can be guided (given a path) to do damage against one's enemies. Such militants are often times controlled through intelligence services of Western-backed nations such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan and Turkey. Often times such movements are disbanded or destroyed once their mission is fulfilled. Sometimes such movements take on a life of their own. 

And sometimes such movements are not what they seem.

Consider this: ISIS has regularly clashed with Syrian rebels who are opposed to Bashar Assad. There have also been reports that Bashar Assad's government has been purchasing oil from ISIS controlled territories in Syria. There are reports of internal problems within Saudi Arabia's intelligence services, leading to suspicions that Riyadh's Western-backed Islamic terror networks have somehow been compromised. Moreover, Damascus has been known to have intimate connections with some Islamic militant groups in the past. Bashar Assad has even recently threatened to "unleash" such groups against Israel. Finally, during the US occupation of Iraq, Damascus had been providing aid to Sunni rebel groups within Iraq's Anbar province, where ISIS is said to have come into existence...

All this is leading to some theories that suggest ISIS may somehow be connected to or colluding with the regime in Damascus and articles such as this and this are fueling the speculation.

So, is ISIS an elaborate Syrian/Iranian plan to pit Sunnis against each other in Syria, and create the premise for deeper Iranian influence in Iraq? 

I personally do not think so.

The above theory ultimately neglects to take into full account the well known fact that ISIS has only been able to achieve its successes in Iraq and Syria by closely coordinating its actions with various Saudi-backed local Sunni tribes and rebel groups that have been fiercely opposed to Bashar Assad and Iraq's Shiites. The theory in question also neglects to take into account a growing body of evidence suggesting that ISIS volunteers, many of whom arriving from the Western world, are funneled into Syria and Iraq from Western-backed nations of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. There have also been reports that US intelligence in tandem with Turkey's MIT are running ISIS operations out of Turkey. There are even accusations that ISIS commanders have received treatment inside Turkey. There have also been reports that US intelligence has been training ISIS in Jordan. The above mentioned theory also neglects to take into account a growing body of evidence suggesting that funding for ISIS is coming from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. I'd like to remind the reader that the news/propaganda network known as Al-Jazeera is funded by the Qatari government and that the small but oil wealthy nation of Qatar hosts one of the largest US military bases in the world. Nevertheless, without support - Sunni support to be exact - ISIS could not achieve what it has achieved. With that said, there is still a lot the public does not yet know about this mysterious group. Time will ultimately reveal the true identity of those behind ISIS. 

But as the American saying goes - "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it most probably is a duck"

At least on the surface, actions carried out by ISIS directly serves the Western and Saudi Arabian agenda of curbing Iranian power in the region by weakening Syria and Iraq.
Similar to how the Ukraine crisis is meant to create circumstances to drive a bloody wedge between Europe and Russia and breath new life into NATO, the recent crisis in the Middle East is meant to drive a bloody wedge between Shiites and Sunnis, draw Western forces back into the strategic region and perhaps support the creation of a Kurdish state. It is also quite significant that the leader of ISIS was jailed and later released by Americans several years ago. I say this bit of information is significant because of the following: Sometimes, inmates under US custody that have been assessed to be potentially useful to the empire's overall agenda are recruited and prepared for action by their captors. This is not merely my personal speculation. If you read between the lines of the following mainstream article you will see that there have been similar accusations made against Guantanamo Bay.

In other words, if Western intelligence operatives assess that an inmate under their control can be useful for Western interests somewhere in the world, they will set him/her free regardless of whether or not he/she is anti-American. As I have said in the past, a few American lives lost from time-to-time is a price well worth paying for political value such operatives bring to the table. There are many-many cases of Islamic militants kept in US facilities and then suddenly released without any explanation. We saw this happen in Libya, Syria and most recently in Afghanistan. 

Once more, the existence of a militant Sunni movement in Iraq (even if it is also anti-American) serves to limit Shiite influence and dissect the Shiite Arc. Periodic property damage and losing a few Western lives here and there is well worth the price to pay for Western policymakers.

For added insight on this topic please listen to Michel Chossudovsy's interview -
"ISIS:  An Instrument of the Western Military Alliance": http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/103872
And please revisit my blog commentary on Islamic terrorism -
Tsarnaev brothers, secret services and Islamic terrorism - (April, 2013): http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/2013/04/tsarnaev-brothers-secret-services-and.html
For several decades now Western powers have been colluding with Islamic militants in various hotspots around the world. This unholy convergence of interests between Western powers and Islamic forces is in fact nothing new. The Western world has found common ground with Islam for hundreds of years. Five hundred years ago it was German-made technology in the form of giant canons that helped Ottoman troops defeat Byzantine forces defending Constantinople thereby forever changing the course of history. 1853 French and British interests united with Ottoman Turks to fight Imperial Russia. In 1914, British forces aided Islamic tribes in the Arabian desert against Ottoman Turks. In 1979, Western powers began helping Saudi Arabia and Pakistan organize an Islamic insurgence inside Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. In the 1990s, Western powers aided the Islamic insurgency against the Russian Federation in northern Caucasus and against Serbia in the Balkans. In recent years, Western powers have been fully behind the Islamic insurgency in Libya, Syria and Iraq. 

Nothing personal, mind you. It's all merely an execution of realpolitik. Western powers naturally seek tools with which to carry-out their imperial agendas against Russia, Iran, Arab nationalism, etc. Islam, with its backward but aggressive character, has often times been that useful tool for Western interests.

Subtext to all this is of course pipeline politics. To put it into simplest terms as possible: Tehran would eventually like to build an east-west pipeline to the Mediterranean Sea through Shiite-friendly Iraq and Syria. Gulf Arab states and their Western/Jewish masters on the other hand would like to lessen their dependence on transporting oil through the very narrow Strait of Hormuz by constructing a north-south pipeline to the Mediterranean Sea through Iraq and Turkey - or if Bashar Assad could be defeated, through Syria. These wishes therefore create ideal circumstances for an international clash of interests. And given Russia's near total dominance of Central Asian gas and oil distribution, energy production and distribution within the Middle East continues to be taken very seriously by Western and Gulf Arab states. More on this topic can be read in the following article -

Oil Road Through Damascus (2012 Asia Times report): http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NB15Ak02.html
Prominent in all these equations is the modern entity known as Kurdistan. And little known in all this is how powerful Western and Israeli stakes are in Kurdistan. Carved out of northern Iraq beginning in 2003, Kurdistan has been a joint US/Israeli project. For its creators, the existence of a Kurdistan is ultimately meant to act as a buffer against Arabs, Iranians and Turks. This agenda has actually been the root cause of tensions between Ankara and Washington/Tel Aviv in recent years.

Remaking the Middle East

Western powers have been successful in their plans to weaken Syria and Iraq as a geostrategic prerequisite for their eventual move against Iran. However, I would like to once again point out here that Syria, Iraq and Iran are not their only targets and their overall agenda is nothing new. In fact a sinister plan for the entire Middle East was first hatched three decades ago by one Israeli named Oded Yinon. The following is his Strategy for Israel in the 1980s” as summarized by anti-Zionist Jewish political activist, Israel Shahak -
"The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel’s satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation."
Plans to breakup the Middle East into smaller, more manageable states is thus decades old. The intent is to more effectively exploit such weakened nations and ensure Israel's overwhelming military dominance in the region. They were basically emboldened when one of their strategic obstacle, the Soviet Union, collapsed in 1991. And they acted. More recent calls to breakup regional nations into smaller pieces could be heard just before the foreign-backed Islamic uprisings began in Syria and Iraq. The following chilling words from another Zionist Jew was first published in 2010 -
"The total disintegration of Lebanon into five regional, localized governments is the precedent for the entire Arab world... The dissolution of Syria, and later Iraq, into districts of ethnic and religious minorities following the example of Lebanon is Israel's main long-rage objective on the Eastern Front. The present military wreaking of these states is the short-range objective. Syria will disintegrate into several states along the lines of its ethnic and sectarian structure... As a result there will be a Shiite Alawi state, the district of Aleppo will be a Sunni state, and the district of Damascus another state which will be hostile to the northern one. The Druze-even those in Golan - should form a state in Huaran and in northern Jordan... The oil rich but very divided and internally strife-ridden Iraq is certainly a candidate to fit Israel's goal... Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation... will hasten the achievement of the supreme goal, namely breaking up Iraq into elements like Syria and Lebanon. There will be there states or more around the three major cities, Basra, Baghdad and Mosul, while Shiite areas in the south will separate from the Sunni north, which is mostly Kurdish...The entire Arabian Peninsula is a natural candidate for (dissolution)... Israel's policy in war or peace should be to bring about the elimination of Jordan..." Beware of small states, David Hirst, p. 125-126
Their intent has always been to divide and conquer. It is painfully clear that there have been serious, long-term designs on the much troubled region. This all should bring to mind the now infamous confession/talk US general/war criminal Wesely Clark gave several years ago -
General Wesley Clark tells of how Middle East destabilization was planned as far back as 1991: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7NsXFnzJGw
Taking advantage of the Soviet Union's collapse, the West has been embarked on a long term, geostrategic plan to redraw the borders of the Middle East. While some of the plan envisions the death of certain nations seem as problematic (e.g. Syria, Iraq, Libya), some plans call for the creation of certain nations (e.g. Kurdistan, Islamic Caliphate). Lesser nations such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey are maneuvering within this Western template in hopes of extracting benefits. The overall agenda is to ensure Israel's survival in the tumultuous region; ensure that the region's energy production remains firmly within Western control; curb the growth of pan-Arabic nationalism; curb the growth of Iranian power; and keep nations such as Russia and China from entering the region.

Despite what the retired General Clark's politically motivated rhetoric at the time was trying to insinuate, when it comes to core national interests there are no real differences between Democrats and Republicans in the United States. The recent Western aggression against Russia, Syria, Iraq and Libya are ample proof that US presidents, regardless of their party affiliations, or race for that matter, do not make political policy. The privilege of making US policy is reserved for special interests groups that run the American empire.

Who formulates major political decisions in Washington? Primarily: US military industrial complex, Council on Foreign Relations, oil industry, Federal Reserve, Western based multi-national mega corporations, Wall Street bankers and the Jewish lobby. The United States of America is a global empire run by special interests and corporations. Once Americans understand this - once the rest of the world understands this - they will understand why the US does what it does and why the world is in the shape it is today.

Despite what countless sheeple around the world believe, democratic principles and human rights are not guiding principals of Western officials. As a matter of fact, such lofty notions have never been a serious matter for consideration in power centers in the Western world. Similar to what religion was in earlier times and similar to what Marxism was more recently, the notions of human right, democracy and civil society are powerful sociopolitical tools Western officials have cleverly used to manipulate and exploit the ignorant masses of the world. As it has been since the dawn of human civilization, the primary intent of any governing body is to project power and secure wealth.

We are in the very midst of a forced remaking of the Middle East. The old format put together by England and France between the two world wars less than a century ago no longer seems suitable for them. While they normally use Western grants, opposition politicians, rights activists, economic blackmail and cultural invasion as a way of undermining nations that are not enslaved by them, the West has resorted to remaking the region at the tip of a sharp and now very blood-covered bayonet.

If on this eve of the one hundredth anniversary of the First World War the world does not descend into yet another major world war as a result of this cruel manipulation and exploitation of humanity, we may yet live to see a stronger Turkish, Saudi Arabian, Zionist and Kurdish presence in the region.

Failed states are preferable

Take what you are being told by the Western news media with a grain of salt. What is undoubtedly clear is that the terrible carnage in Syria, Iraq and Ukraine is essentially a result of imperial policies of the Western political/economic establishment. In the big picture, what's been happening aforementioned countries is Western democracy in action. Every single one of Iraq's catastrophic problems are a result of Western meddling. At a time when most things are made in China, some things remain exclusively made in America. We will continue witnessing more-and-more bloodbaths around the world because of attempts to preserve Western hegemony. Whole nations will be made to suffer simply so that Westerners are able to continue living their carefree lives.

Islamic societies tend to be tribal, backward, oppressive, economically primitive, culturally stagnant, militarily incompetent and thus easily manipulated and/or controlled. Moreover, Wahhabi or Salafist forms of Sunni Islam is an effective way to curb the growth of Iranian Shiism. Anyone familiar with the region knows that Sunni Arabs and Shiites have an almost instinctual disdain towards each other. In fact, the historic rivalry between Sunni and Shiite sects of Islam are much deeper and much bloodier than Islam's rivalry against Christianity or Judaism.

Therefore, as they go on pitting one group against the other, as they replace one leader with another, as they form and reform nations, as they divide and conquer... It could be said that the West is, simply put, micromanaging the much troubled region.
In the meanwhile, failed states - or fragmented states if you will - will be the Anglo-American-Zionist global order's best friend, not only in the Middle East but everywhere, as we have been seeing in Ukraine. 

The motto of the Western elite these days seems to be: When can't own it or control it, break it!

Weakened states are much easier to deal with than cohesive, independent ones that do not want to cooperate with Western officials or money men. Fragmented nations are also much easier to control and they pose no serious threat militarily, financially or economically. Fragmented states such as Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Libya and Ukraine are also good sources for financial servitude, cheep energy, cheep labor, narcotics and of course loot (e.g. precious metals and gems). The geostrategic intent is to isolate, undermine or weaken nations that are not part of the Western world or under the Western boot. And what better way to do it all than democracy as prescribed by Western powers?

The above assessment should be the general perspective from which we need to observe the actions of Western powers and their allies around the world. As they seemingly champion the causes of "self-determination", "democracy" and "human rights" in various targeted nations, they are in fact covertly engaged in the systematic process of destroying nation-states that they no longer have any use for or those that pose a threat to them.

As long as the Western world is protected by oceans and allied buffer states - and as long as they control the commodities trade and the money flow in the world - failed stated within targeted areas of the world actually serve their long term interests. As long as the Western establishment is not made to suffer severe consequences for their actions around the world, they will continue their egregious crimes against humanity.

Money as a weapon of mass destruction 

Leo Tolstoy wrote: “Money is a new form of slavery, and distinguishable from the old simply by the fact that it is impersonal – that there is no human relation between master and slave”.

Emperor Napoleon lamented: "When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes… Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain".

Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild boasted: “Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws".

When the big guns don't work against a particular enemy, money continues to be by-far the Western establishment's all-time favorite weapon-of-mass-destruction. As long as they continue controlling the creation and dissemination of money - and set prices of commodities and the parameters of global trade - they will continue being the masters of the universe.

Therefore, let it surprise no one that prices of major global commodities such as gold, diamond and oil are determined every morning within the City of London. Let it surprise no one that most nations on earth (including Armenia in recent years) have had central bank officials trained in the Western world. Let it surprise no one that nation-states are forced to borrow money from Western lending institutions. Let it surprise no one that nation-states are forced to accept Western restrictions by entering into Western trade organizations. The above is why representatives of nations around the world are forced to quietly sit at the table with Wall Street executives and IMF officials.

Making nations dependent - financially and economically and thus politically - on the Western world is incomparably a more effective weapon than Western bombs and missiles.

For the past several hundred years global commence and finance had been, to a large degree, controlled by a multinational, albeit European powers: Britain, France, USA, Germany, Holland, Italy, Switzerland, Spain, Russia, Sweden, etc. This multinational character in trade and fiance began to change as a result of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia and Germany's two defeats in 1918 and 1945. With economic giants at the time such as Russia, Germany - and Japan - no longer in the equation, Anglo-American influence in global commerce and finance - and thus politics - rose to unprecedented heights. The economic and financial principles set by Anglo-Americans at Bretton Woods at the close of the Second World War thus came to dominate the world. Since Second World War all roads have thus led to the new Rome. For nearly one hundred years the global financial system and global trade has been rigged solely to their benefit. For nearly one hundred years Western powers have looked at the rest of the world as a playground for their financial/corporate elite. For nearly one hundreds years Western corporations and currency dominated the world. For nearly one hundreds years Western societies have thus enjoyed unprecedentedly high standards-of-living. This however came at a great cost to the rest of the world.

The following Swiss study may go a long way in explaining why the world is in the shape it currently is and why the Western economic/financial paradigm is in fact a very dangerous animal that needs to be killed before it drags down the entire world. When one begins to realize that over 90% of mega-corporations that control most of the global economy are Western entities - and that the Western war-machine essentially exists to protect the global operations of these mega-corporations - that is when political matters around the world today will start making better sense -

Does one 'super-corporation' run the global economy? Study claims it could be terrifyingly unstable: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2051008/Does-super-corporation-run-global-economy.html#ixzz1k2BaFZ00
The whole system is designed/rigged to make nations dependent on the Western system. The whole system is designed/rigged to bring wealth into the coffers of the Western elite - at the cost of either destroying or enslaving nation-states around the world. Their financial system is ultimately why the Western world holds unprecedented powers over mankind. As Argentinians and Greeks have found out in recent years, indebtedness and financial servitude - on a personal level as well as on a national level - is indeed a weapon-of-mass-destruction. This is how they make or break peoples/nations around the world. The Greek tragedy and Argentina's plight in recent years is a stark lesson for humanity, yet a majority of the sheeple still do not see the fundamental problem at hand.

A glaringly obvious and yet a mostly overlooked absurdity in global financial matters is the inability of nation-states to print their own currency based on their own economic forecasts and financial formulas. The right to print money has almost exclusively been relagated to Western institutions. This Western right to create money out of thin air and lend it to developing nations at interest lies at the very root of their power and influence. You take this right away from them, you take away their power and influence.

Why does Armenia, for instance, have to beg interest-charging-money-lending cartels to acquire the essential funds it needs to develop its national infrastructure? Why can't official Yerevan simply print the money it needs for such types of development projects and create job for its citizens in the process? Why does Armenia have to borrow(!) money from a foreign entity? Please think about this for a while because we have been born and raised in a world (the Anglo-American-Jewish era) where this question is almost never asked. And in rare times when it is asked, a proper answers is never given. We all simply assume that it can't be done. Yet it can be done!

For a nation to prosper and be truly independent, it has to be able to print its own money as needed. For further insight on this most important of topics please visit the link to a film following this paragraph. In my opinion, Secret of Oz is one of the most important documentaries ever made because the subject matter directly impacts each-and-every human being alive today. Producers of the film are adherents of fiat currency. Fiat money is literally anything that a government recognizes as legal tender. The currency is then regulated by state agencies and not by private banks or private financial institutions. Propagators of fiat money are opposed to gold-backed currencies because commodities such as gold can be manipulated by foreign interests -
The Secret of Oz: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swkq2E8mswI
The following presentation, produced by Austria's prestigious Ludwig von Mises Institute, presents the advantages of a gold-based monetary system -
Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYZM58dulPE
Both schools-of-thought, those who support fiat currency and those who support a gold-backed currency, adamantly oppose the control of a nation's monetary system by private banking institutions. Incidentally, the financial system we have in the world today (thanks to Anglo-American-Jewish entities such as the Federal Reserve, the IMF and the World Bank) is more-or-less a "privately" run form of fiat money. After all, what is the Dollar? Nothing but paper! An exclusive group of people - primarily Anglo-American-Jews - print as much of the paper in question as they need and they go on to make financial policy for the entire world. 

As long as nation-states do not take back the right to print their own money independent of Western wishes - be it fiat or gold based currency - they will remain dependent upon Western powers for survival. As long as nation-states allow themselves to become dependent upon Western loans for their national development, they will remain dependent upon Western powers for survival. As long as nation-states stake their economic survival on trading with the Western world, they will remain dependent upon Western powers for survival.

Financial freedom - the unrestricted implementation of fiscal policy of sovereign nations - is thus the key to a successful nation-state. With that in mind let's recognize that the Anglo-American-Jewish global order will rule the backward barbarians of this world as long as the backward barbarians in question (Argentinians in the following particular case) blindly embrace the financial/economic paradigm setup by the Anglo-American-Jewish global order at the end of the Second World War -
This Is How A Hedge Funder Brings An Entire Country To Its Knees: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-hedge-fund-guide-bringing
And time-to-time, even western European nations are terrorized by Uncle Sam's money cartels -
Just imagine: A global entity makes a unilateral decision to severely punish a nation - and has the precise levers to do so - simply because the nation in question did not abide by its self-serving laws. Where is the backlash? Where is the public outcry? Does the public even understand what is going on? When this happens to small, developing nations around the world, not much noise it made and the nation easily falls prey. But when this happens to a well established nation, like France in this case, noise is sometimes made. But mere noise is not enough. I really hope the French finally wake up from their post-De Gaullian stupor before it kills their nation -
France lashes out against US dollar, calls for ‘rebalancing’ of world currencies: http://rt.com/business/170864-france-balance-dollar-bnp/
As noted above, the control Washington has over global commerce and finance is unprecedented in human history. This is a serious matter for humanity. Even Fareed Zakaria, a Council of Foreign Relations member and a professional propagandist for the American empire, admitted in his show recently that Washington's control over global financial and trade matters is a very powerful weapon that is being used recklessly -
Fareed Zalaria: "I'll tell you how America is wielding a unique weapon that is the economic equivalent of a killer drone":  http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1407/13/fzgps.01.html
Russia has managed to survive Western sanctions because of its energy reserves, massive size, powerful military and geopolitical importance. But even Russia would not want to bare the brunt of a serious Western financial/trade onslaught. Needless to say, lesser nations around the world do not stand a chance.

As long as all roads led to Rome, punishing nations for not following Roman dictates proved easy for Romans. Today, all roads (financial, economic and cultural) have been meticulously paved to lead to Washington and London. It has therefore become troublingly easy for the Western establishment to impose harsh penalties on nations that do not follow rules it has created for its self-interest.

The only way humanity can free itself from the monster that the political West has become is to strive for the creation of a multi-polar world order where multiple centers of power are established and seek the end of the US Dollar's reign as global reserve currency. The leader in this monumental effort can be the Russian nation -
BRICS establish $100bn bank and currency pool to cut out Western dominance: http://rt.com/business/173008-brics-bank-currency-pool/
As powerful as the Western financial order currently is, it is also vulnerable.

The Western world has been living in a bubble created by the US Dollar's global hegemony. The Western financial system has grown so immense in size today that it is essentially a virtual reality and a house of cards. This Anglo-American-Jewish paradigm is living its twilight years. Once this Western financial bubble finally bursts and the house of cards falls apart - it's only a matter of time before it does - it will be lights out. The Soviet Union's collapse will look like a leisurely walk through a pretty flower garden in comparison because the Western world is too developed, too well fed, too complacent, too dumbed-down, too medicated and, too racially/culturally mixed to survive such a downturn. At this point in history, the only thing the West has going for itself is hype, the mere notion/facade of superiority (e.g. American exceptionalism) and the semblance/facade of stability achieved by the global dominance of the US Dollar. Once the US Dollar falls, so will the political West.

In the not too distant past, Western powers went to war to preserve the global hegemony of the US Dollar. It can be argued that the criminal actions against Iraq and Libya in recent years were at least in part an attempt to preserve the US Dollar's supremacy in international trade. But, needless to say, Russia and China are not Iraq or Libya. Moscow and Beijing have been discussing the need for ending the US Dollar's dominance. With that said, the final end may prove long in coming. As long as Western puppet-masters are able to use their levers of social engineering to continue making the self-destructive peasantry in places such as Armenia and Ukraine think they will be "happy" living under the Western world order, the rest of humanity will have to wait before the beast is finally killed.

As long as the political West is not made to suffer it will create suffering

Western powers are bloated with several centuries of plundered wealth and nearly a century of near total dominance over global affairs. Western powers have come to control global trade routs and the commodities exchange. Western powers set the world's political, financial and cultural trends. The US Dollar is the world's reining reserve currency. Western power and influence is thus unprecedented in the annals of human history - but it has been in decline in most recent years. With dwindling natural resources under their direct possession and/or control the emergence of competitive powers around the world, their near total control of the political and financial life of the world is slowly being challenged.

I think the fundamental danger lies in the fact that Western powers are doing their best to secure their hegemony in a new century when emerging powers are poised to become their global competitor. In other words, the Western elite is deeply worried about maintaining its opulent lifestyle. The tens-of-millions of Westerners that live in mansions, gated communities and on vast estates - and the political/financial elite that preside over them - want to maintain their standard-of-living and not surrender it to Asiatic, backward upstarts in Russia or China.

The worrying part here for me is that they will go to great lengths - including bringing the world to the very brink of catastrophe - simply to ensure their global supremacy and money flow. Another worrying things is that Western powers feel immune, and in the particular case of Washingtonians, they feel destined to rule the world as evidenced by a peculiar psychosis infamously known as "American Exceptionalism".

The Western world's world view has been cultivated by centuries of easy money and a safe geography. Western nations such as the US and Britain have historically provoked wars around the world knowing well that due to their safe distances from the killing fields, their respective societies could weather such crisis and then simply come in to exploit the spoils in the aftermath. Thus, from a distance they destroy, they destabilize... they then come in to gather the spoils of war, rebuild and lead. Of course there is also the added benefit of selling weapons to warring factions and purchasing assets and/or commodities in troubled nations at rock bottom prices. Another benefit to sowing unrest around the world is enjoying the acquisition of hard currency. The more nations they destabilize, the more money pours into their coffers by wealthy individuals and firms taking their money out of those troubled nations and placing it into the perceived security of Western banks. Immense amounts of wealth have in fact been poured into London and New York in recent years from all over the world in this very manner. While the situation may be changing in recent times, where did many of Russia's Jewish oligarchs flee to with their plundered wealth after President Putin chased them out? The City of London! 

This imperial arrogance, megalomania, opulence and gluttony coupled with financial worries and the strong sense that nothing will happen to them regardless of what they do overseas, drives their political thinking and world view. It also drives their blood-thirst.

As long as the Anglo-American-Jewish world is not made to suffer serious consequences for their actions overseas, they will continue their volatile sociopolitical experiments and militaristic aggression around the world regardless of the amount of misery and carnage it causes. 

Once more, I would like to remind the reader that as long as the Western world's political/financial establishment is not seriously threatened with destruction (i.e. as long as the Western world does not suffer dire consequences for their actions around the world) they will continue to treat the world as a far way, exotic land where to safely carryout toxic experiments. Think of it this way: They destroy nations, kill millions and ruin the lives of hundreds-of-millions and then they go up on public podiums and contemplate whether it was the right thing to do... In other words, regardless of how bad it gets around the world as a direct result of their policies, at the end of the day, they simply get into their luxury cars, go to their estates or gated communities, sit by their fireplace, sip their wine and check to see how their stocks are doing. As long as this now centuries old process continues, the Anglo-American order will enjoy superiority in world affairs.

June, 2014


The Engineered Destruction and Political Fragmentation of Iraq


The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham: An instrument of the Western Military Alliance

The Western media in chorus have described the unfolding conflict in Iraq as a “civil war” opposing the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham against the Armed forces of the Al-Maliki government. (Also referred to as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) or Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS)) The conflict is casually described as “sectarian warfare” between Radical Sunni and Shia without addressing “who is behind the various factions”.  What is at stake is a carefully staged US military-intelligence agenda. 

Known and documented, Al Qaeda affiliated entities have been used by US-NATO in numerous conflicts as “intelligence assets” since the heyday of the Soviet-Afghan war. In Syria, the Al Nusrah and ISIS rebels are the foot-soldiers of the Western military alliance, which oversees and controls the recruitment and training of paramilitary forces.

The Al Qaeda affiliated Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) re-emerged in April 2013 with a different name and acronym, commonly referred to as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). The formation of a terrorist entity encompassing both Iraq and Syria was part of a US intelligence agenda. It responded to geopolitical objectives. It also coincided with the advances of Syrian government forces against the US sponsored insurgency in Syria and the failures of both the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and its various “opposition” terror brigades.

The decision was taken by Washington to channel its support (covertly) in favor of a terrorist entity which operates in both Syria and Iraq and which has logistical bases in both countries. The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham’s Sunni caliphate project coincides with a longstanding US agenda to carve up both Iraq and Syria into three separate territories: A Sunni Islamist Caliphate, an Arab Shia Republic, and a Republic of Kurdistan.

Whereas the (US proxy) government in Baghdad purchases advanced weapons systems from the US including F16 fighter jets from Lockheed Martin, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham –which is fighting Iraqi government forces– is supported covertly by Western intelligence. The objective is to engineer a civil war in Iraq, in which both sides are controlled indirectly by US-NATO.

The scenario is to arm and equip them, on both sides, finance them with advanced weapons systems and then “let them fight”.

US-NATO is involved in the recruitment, training and financing of ISIS death squads operating in both Iraq and Syria. ISIS operates through indirect channels in liaison with Western intelligence. In turn, corroborated by reports on Syria’s insurgency, Western special forces and mercenaries integrate the ranks of ISIS.

US-NATO support to ISIS is channeled covertly through America’s staunchest allies: Qatar and Saudi Arabia. According to London’s Daily Express “They had money and arms supplied by Qatar and Saudi Arabia.”

“through allies such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the West [has] supported militant rebel groups which have since mutated into ISIS and other al‑Qaeda connected militias. ( Daily Telegraph, June 12, 2014)

While the media acknowledges that the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has accused Saudi Arabia and Qatar of supporting ISIS, it invariably fails to mention that both Doha and Riyadh are acting on behalf and in close liaison with Washington.

Under the banner of a civil war, an undercover war of aggression is being fought which essentially contributes to further destroying an entire country, its institutions, its economy. The undercover operation is part of an intelligence agenda, an engineered process which consists in transforming Iraq into an open territory.

Meanwhile,  public opinion is led to believe that what is at stake is confrontation between Shia and Sunni. America’s military occupation of Iraq has been replaced by non-conventional forms of warfare. Realities are blurred. In a bitter irony, the aggressor nation is portrayed as coming to the rescue of a “sovereign Iraq”.

An internal “civil war” between Shia and Sunni is fomented by US-NATO support to both the Al-Maliki government as well as to the Sunni ISIS rebels. The break up of Iraq along sectarian lines is a longstanding policy of the US and its allies. (See map of Middle East below)

“Supporting both Sides”

The “War on Terrorism” consists in creating Al Qaeda terrorist entities as part of an intelligence operation, as well as also coming to the rescue of governments which are the target of  the terrorist insurgency. This process is carried out under the banner of counter-terrorism. It creates the pretext to intervene.

ISIS is a caliphate project of creating a Sunni Islamist state. It is not a project of the Sunni population of Iraq which is broadly committed to secular forms of government. The caliphate project is part of a US intelligence agenda.

In response to the advance of the ISIS rebels, Washington is envisaging the use of aerial bombings as well as drone attacks in support of the Baghdad government as part of a counter-terrorism operation.  It is all for a good cause: to fight the terrorists, without of course acknowledging that these terrorists are the “foot soldiers” of the Western military alliance.

Needless to say, these developments contribute not only to destabilizing Iraq, but also to weakening the Iraqi resistance movement, which is one of the major objectives of US-NATO. The Islamic caliphate is supported covertly by the CIA in liaison with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkish intelligence. Israel is also involved in channeling support to both Al Qaeda rebels in Syria (out of the Golan Heights) as well to the Kurdish separatist movement in Syria and Iraq.

More broadly, the “Global War on Terrorism” (GWOT) encompasses a consistent and diabolical logic: both sides –namely the terrorists and the government– are supported by the same military and intelligence actors, namely US-NATO.

While this pattern describes the current situation in Iraq, the structure of “supporting both sides” with a view to engineering sectarian conflict has been implemented time and again in numerous countries. Insurgencies integrated by Al Qaeda operatives (and supported by Western intelligence) prevail in a large number of countries including Yemen, Libya, Nigeria, Somalia, Mali, the Central African Republic, Pakistan. The endgame is to destabilize sovereign nation states and to transform countries into open territories (on behalf of so-called foreign investors).

The pretext to intervene on humanitarian grounds (e.g. in Mali, Nigeria or the Central African Republic) is predicated on the existence of terrorist forces. Yet these terrorist forces would not exist without covert US-NATO support. 

The Capture of Mosul:  US-NATO Covert Support to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) 

Something unusual occurred in Mosul which cannot be explained in strictly military terms. On June 10, the insurgent forces of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) captured Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, with a population of over one million people.  While these developments were “unexpected” according to the Obama administration, they were known to the Pentagon and US intelligence, which were not only providing weapons, logistics and financial support to the ISIS rebels, they were also coordinating, behind the scenes, the ISIS attack on the city of Mosul. 

While ISIS is a well equipped and disciplined rebel army when compared to other Al Qaeda affiliated formations, the capture of Mosul, did not hinge upon ISIS’s military capabilities. Quite the opposite: Iraqi forces which outnumbered the rebels by far, equipped with advanced weapons systems could have easily repelled the ISIS rebels.

There were 30,000 government forces in Mosul as opposed to 1000 ISIS rebels, according to reports. The Iraqi army chose not to intervene. The media reports explained without evidence that the decision of the Iraqi armed forces not to intervene was spontaneous characterized by mass defections.
Iraqi officials told the Guardian that two divisions of Iraqi soldiers – roughly 30,000 men – simply turned and ran in the face of the assault by an insurgent force of just 800 fighters. Isis extremists roamed freely on Wednesday through the streets of Mosul, openly surprised at the ease with which they took Iraq’s second largest city after three days of sporadic fighting. (Guardian, June 12, 2014, emphasis added)
The reports point to the fact that Iraqi military commanders were sympathetic with the Sunni led ISIS insurgency intimating that they are largely Sunni:
Speaking from the Kurdish city of Erbil, the defectors accused their officers of cowardice and betrayal, saying generals in Mosul “handed over” the city over to Sunni insurgents, with whom they shared sectarian and historical ties. (Daily Telegraph,  13 June 2014)
The report is misleading. The senior commanders were largely hardline Shiite. The defections occurred de facto when the command structure collapsed and senior (Shiite) military commanders left the city.

What is important to understand, is that both sides, namely the regular Iraqi forces and the ISIS rebel army are supported by US-NATO. There were US military advisers and special forces including operatives from private security companies on location in Mosul working with Iraq’s regular armed forces. In turn, there are Western special forces or mercenaries within ISIS (acting on contract to the CIA or the Pentagon) who are in liaison with US-NATO (e.g. through satellite phones).

Under these circumstances, with US intelligence amply involved, there would have been routine communication, coordination, logistics and exchange of intelligence between a US-NATO military and intelligence command center, US-NATO military advisers forces or private military contractors on the ground assigned to the Iraqi Army in Mosul and Western special forces attached to the ISIS brigades. These Western special forces operating covertly within the ISIS could have been dispatched by a private security company on contract to US-NATO.
Islamic State in Iraq and Greater Syria

In this regard, the capture of Mosul appears to have been a carefully engineered operation, planned well in advance. With the exception of a few skirmishes, no fighting took place. Entire divisions of the Iraqi National Army –trained by the US military with advanced weapons systems at their disposal– could have easily repelled the ISIS rebels. Reports suggest that they were ordered by their commanders not to intervene. According to witnesses, “Not a single shot was fired”.
The forces that had been in Mosul have fled — some of which abandoned their uniforms as well as their posts as the ISIS forces swarmed into the city. Fighters with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), an al-Qaeda offshoot, overran the entire western bank of the city overnight after Iraqi soldiers and police apparently fled their posts, in some instances discarding their uniforms as they sought to escape the advance of the militants. http://hotair.com/archives/2014/06/10/mosul-falls-to-al-qaeda-as-us-trained-security-forces-flee/
A contingent of one thousand ISIS rebels takes over a city of more than one million? Without prior knowledge that the US controlled Iraqi Army (30,000 strong) would not intervene, the Mosul operation would have fallen flat, the rebels would have been decimated. Who was behind the decision to let the ISIS terrorists take control of Mosul? Who gave them the “green light”Had the senior Iraqi commanders been instructed by their Western military advisers to hand over the city to the ISIS terrorists? Were they co-opted?

Was the handing over of Mosul to ISIS part of a US intelligence agenda? Were the Iraqi military commanders manipulated or paid off into allowing the city to fall into the hands of the ISIS rebels without “a single shot being fired”.

Shiite General Mehdi Sabih al-Gharawi who was in charge of the Mosul Army divisions “had left the city”. Al Gharawi had worked hand in glove with the US military. He took over the command of Mosul in September 2011, from US Col Scott McKean. Had he been co-opted, instructed by his US counterparts to abandon his command?

US forces could have intervened. They had been instructed to let it happen. It was part of a carefully planned agenda to facilitate the advance of the ISIS rebel forces and the installation of the ISIS caliphate.

The whole operation appears to have been carefully staged. In Mosul, government buildings, police stations, schools, hospitals, etc are formally now under the control of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). In turn, ISIS has taken control of military hardware including helicopters and tanks which were abandoned by the Iraqi armed forces.

What is unfolding is the installation of a US sponsored Islamist ISIS caliphate alongside the rapid demise of the Baghdad government. Meanwhile, the Northern Kurdistan region has de facto declared its independence from Baghdad. Kurdish peshmerga rebel forces (which are supported by Israel) have taken control of the cities of Arbil and Kirkuk. (See map above) 

Concluding Remarks 

There were no Al Qaeda rebels in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. Moreover, Al Qaeda was non-existent in Syria until the outset of the US-NATO-Israeli supported insurgency in March 2011. The ISIS is not an independent entity. It is a creation of US intelligence. It is a US intelligence asset, an instrument of non-conventional warfare.

The ultimate objective of this ongoing US-NATO engineered conflict opposing the al-Maliki government forces to the ISIS insurgency is to destroy and destabilize Iraq as a Nation State. It is part of an intelligence operation, an engineered process of  transforming countries into territories. The break up of Iraq along sectarian lines is a longstanding policy of the US and its allies.

The ISIS is a caliphate project of creating a Sunni Islamist state. It is not a project of the Sunni population of Iraq which historically has been committed to a secular system of government. The caliphate project is a US design. The advances of ISIS forces is intended to garnish broad support within the Sunni population directed against the al-Maliki government.

Through its covert support of  the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, Washington is overseeing the demise of own proxy regime in Baghdad. The issue, however, is not “regime change”,  nor is the “replacement” of the al-Maliki regime contemplated. The division of Iraq along sectarian-ethnic lines has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than 10 years.

What is envisaged by Washington is the outright suppression of the Baghdad regime and the institutions of the central government, leading to a process of political fracturing and the elimination of Iraq as a country. This process of political fracturing in Iraq along sectarian lines will inevitably have an impact on Syria, where the US-NATO sponsored terrorists have in large part been defeated.

Destabilization and political fragmentation in Syria is also contemplated: Washington’s intent is no longer to pursue the narrow objective of “regime change” in Damascus. What is contemplated is the break up of both Iraq and Syria along sectarian-ethnic lines. The formation of the caliphate may be the first step towards a broader conflict in the Middle East, bearing in mind that Iran is supportive of the al-Maliki government and the US ploy may indeed be to encourage the intervention of Iran.

The proposed re-division of both Iraq and Syria is broadly modeled on that of the Federation of Yugoslavia which was split up into seven “independent states” (Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia (FYRM), Slovenia, Montenegro, Kosovo). According to Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, the re division of Iraq into three separate states is part of a broader process of redrawing the Map of the Middle East.

The above map was prepared by Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters. It was published in the Armed Forces Journal in June 2006, Peters is a retired colonel of the U.S. National War Academy. (Map Copyright Lieutenant-Colonel Ralph Peters 2006). Although the map does not officially reflect Pentagon doctrine, it has been used in a training program at NATO’s Defense College for senior military officers”.

New Iraq crisis is part of US agenda to target Syria and Iran


By hook or by crook or by carrots or sticks, the US and its NATO and regional allies will not stop targeting Syria and Iran until they vanquish both. The crisis in Iraq is just a new phase in those objectives.

The anti-government forces ravaging Iraq and Syria are mostly the same overzealous or gung-ho head choppers, rapists, extortionists, thugs, and cannibals that were pillaging and senselessly devastating the Syrian countryside with the aim of occupying Damascus in 2011. These ever morphing and constantly name changing groups are not new at all. They have just been rebranded.

Some may recall the leaks about the training facilities and secret headquarters that the US and its allies erected for the Syrian insurgents in Jordan, where the buffoon King Abdullah II pretends to manage his discontent subjects while the US and Israel really run the show. The groups marauding Iraq have been trained in these not-so-secret Jordanian facilities.

But this is where the plot thickens. The US was using sticks for the last few years against the Syrians and Syria’s staunch ally Iran. That has changed. Poisonous carrots are now in use.

Dividing Iraq

It just so happens that the Irbil-based autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government made a de facto military annexation of Kirkuk. The Kurdistan Regional Government did this by sending its peshmerga forces into the oil-rich city when the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL/DAISH) caliphate was being carved out of northern Iraq, and northern Iraq was in disarray as the Iraqi military and security forces were repositioning themselves.

What is very telling is that there were very few clashes, if any, between the peshmerga and the DAISH/ISIL forces. Iraq was being carved into three chunks. Although the process did not take place overnight, the country was literally divided into an autonomous Kurdistan region waiting in the wings to declare its independence from Iraq, a pseudo-caliphate enveloping the areas of Iraq predominately inhabited by Sunni Muslim Arabs, and the federal territories enveloping the predominately Shiite Muslim Arab parts of Iraq in a matter of days. This division fell exactly into line with America’s Biden Plan and Israel’s Yinon Plan.

It also so happened that the mendacious Masoud Barzani President of the Kurdistan Regional Government said that the Iraqi Kurds were preparing to declare their independence. It was no mere coincidence that Israel also announced it was high time for Iraq to dissolve with the secession of Iraqi Kurdistan. No wonder there were reports from Baghdad that Israeli forces were assisting both the ISIL/DAISH forces and the Kurdish peshmerga in northern Iraq.

Nor should it be a surprise that American and Israeli weapons have been reported to be used by the pseudo-caliphates forces.

When the pseudo-caliphate was being carved in Iraq, the US declared that it was going to openly aid the insurgents in Syria. Looking past the Orwellian doublespeak, what this meant was that the US was going to help the pseudo-caliphate. The calculus is simple: insurgents in Syria are the same people that have helped takeover Mosul and carve the pseudo-caliphate in Iraq against the people of Iraq, particularly the Christians.

Sending weapons to help or to divide Iraq?

When it was declared that the not-so-covert US-supported pseudo-caliphate in northern Iraq was fighting the Kurdistan Regional Government, the US and its NATO partners wasted no time in calling for more arms shipments to be sent to Iraq. Not wishing to be indicated, the US let France to take the lead in this.

The trickery lies here. Instead of sending arms to the national military of Iraq, the calls were for sending weapons to the Kurdistan Regional Government. Under the cover of a new crisis in Iraq, the Kurdistan Regional Government is being militarily armed and supported so that it can break away from Iraq.

When the US started bombing Iraq, it was not going after Abu Baker Al-Baghdadi’s forces. No man’s land was being bombed. The Pentagon was demarcating northern Iraq between the pseudo-caliphate and Iraqi Kurdistan. In other words, boundaries were being drawn out for both sides.

Destroying plurality and diversity

Consistently in the backdrop of the crises in Iraq and Syria, there has been a persecution of minorities and deliberate sectarianism aimed at creating sedition. It is no coincidence that Yazidis and Christians are systematically being targeted in Iraq, just like how Christians, Alawies, and Druze have been targeted in Syria.

It should be mentioned that while minority groups are being systematically targeted, the majority of people being killed by groups like ISIL/DAISH, Al-Nusra, and the Free Syrian Army are actually the innocent Sunni Muslims that oppose these troublesome militant groups.

The Foreign Minister of Lebanon Gebran Bassil, made an interesting connection between the Israeli war crimes against Palestinian civilians of Gaza and the ISIL/DAISH murder of Iraqis in Mosul. For Foreign Minister Bassil, himself a Maronite Catholic Christian, the connection was clear. Both Israel and ISIL/DAISH are working to redraw the ancient region by destroying all traces of plurality and diversity. This is why Bassil and the Lebanese government sent a request to the International Criminal Court to investigate the crimes of Israel against the Palestinians and the crimes of the ISIL/DAISH.

Using the crisis in Iraq to co-opt Iran and to attack Syria?

The US is still holding a stick behind its back. Washington could use its intervention in Iraq to open a gateway for intervention against Syria as a means of shifting the balance of power against the Syrian government.

Washington is now talking about intervening in Syria to bomb the same troublesome groups that it is supposedly fighting in Iraq. Pentagon military honcho, General Martin Dempsey, has stated that the ISIL/DAISH “cannot be defeated unless the United States or its partners take on the Sunni militants in Syria” on August 21, 2014. Speaking about the Pentagon strikes in Iraq, General Dempsey stated: “Can they be defeated without addressing that part of the organization that resides in Syria? The answer is no.”

At the same time Washington, London, Paris, and their cohorts are dangling carrots too. The US and its allies are talking about cooperating with Iran and Syria to fight the groups that the US and its allies have created and unleashed in Iraq and Syria. The Independent newspaper in London had this to report about the British government’s position on August 17, 2014: “Britain must prepared to ally itself with Iran to combat the ‘shared threat’ of Sunni Islamist extremists in Iraq and Syria who want to create ‘a terrorist state’ that could extend to “the shores of the Mediterranean,” David Cameron has said.”

What the US and its allies are dangling in front of Tehran and Damascus is not fully known yet. Cooperation, however, is a poisoned chalice that neither Iran nor Syria should drink from. The whole world knows what happened to Muammar Qaddafi and the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya when Tripoli cooperated with the US, Britain, and France. Cooperation was used to infiltrate the Jamahiriya and to buy out officials. In the end it ended up in regime change in Tripoli and the murder of Colonel Qaddafi by NATO-controlled Libyan militants.

Nor should it be discounted that Washington wants to turn Tehran against Moscow. Iran and Russia are important partners for one another in bypassing sanctions, and the US is very unhappy with the oil-for-goods deal that has been authored by the two sides. So on the one hand Washington holds its stick whereas on the other hand it dangles its poisonous carrots.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Hussein Amir-Abdollahian, however, has dismissed the chatter about cooperation with the US and its allies, saying that Iran sees no need to cooperate with the US and British governments to fight the terrorists plaguing Iraq that both the US and Britain have helped create.

Source: http://rt.com/op-edge/183336-iraq-crisis-us-target/

​ISIS in Iraq stinks of CIA/NATO ‘dirty war’ op


For days now, since their dramatic June 10 taking of Mosul, Western mainstream media have been filled with horror stories of the military conquests in Iraq of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, with the curious acronym ISIS. ISIS, as in the ancient Egyptian cult of the goddess of fertility and magic. The media picture being presented adds up less and less. Details leaking out suggest that ISIS and the major military ‘surge’ in Iraq - and less so in neighboring Syria - is being shaped and controlled out of Langley, Virginia, and other CIA and Pentagon outposts as the next stage in spreading chaos in the world’s second-largest oil state, Iraq, as well as weakening the recent Syrian stabilization efforts. 

Strange facts

The very details of the ISIS military success in the key Iraqi oil center, Mosul, are suspect. According to well-informed Iraqi journalists, ISIS overran the strategic Mosul region, site of some of the world’s most prolific oilfields, with barely a shot fired in resistance. According to one report, residents of Tikrit reported remarkable displays of “soldiers handing over their weapons and uniforms peacefully to militants who ordinarily would have been expected to kill government soldiers on the spot.”
We are told that ISIS masked psychopaths captured “arms and ammunition from the fleeing security forces” - arms and ammunition supplied by the American government. The offensive coincides with a successful campaign by ISIS in eastern Syria. According to Iraqi journalists, Sunni tribal chiefs in the region had been convinced to side with ISIS against the Shiite Al-Maliki government in Baghdad. They were promised a better deal under ISIS Sunni Sharia than with Baghdad anti-Sunni rule.

According to the New York Times, the mastermind behind the ISIS military success is former Baath Party head and Saddam Hussein successor, General Ibrahim al-Douri. Douri is reportedly the head of the Iraqi rebel group Army of the Men of the Naqshbandi Order as well as the Supreme Command for Jihad and Liberation based on his longstanding positions of leadership in the Naqshbandi sect in Iraq.

In 2009, US ‘Iraqi surge’ General David Petraeus, at the time heading the US Central Command, claimed to reporters that Douri was in Syria. Iraqi parliamentarians claimed he was in Qatar. The curious fact is that despite being on the US most wanted list since 2003, Douri has miraculously managed to avoid capture and now to return with a vengeance to retake huge parts of Sunni Iraq. Luck or well-placed friends in Washington? 

The financial backing for ISIS jihadists reportedly also comes from three of the closest US allies in the Sunni world—Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. 

US passports?

Key members of ISIS it now emerges were trained by US CIA and Special Forces command at a secret camp in Jordan in 2012, according to informed Jordanian officials. The US, Turkish and Jordanian intelligence were running a training base for the Syrian rebels in the Jordanian town of Safawi in the country’s northern desert region, conveniently near the borders to both Syria and Iraq. Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the two Gulf monarchies most involved in funding the war against Syria’s Assad, financed the Jordan ISIS training.

Advertised publicly as training of ‘non-extremist’ Muslim jihadists to wage war against the Syrian Bashar Assad regime, the secret US training camps in Jordan and elsewhere have trained perhaps several thousand Muslim fighters in techniques of irregular warfare, sabotage and general terror. The claims by Washington that they took special care not to train ‘Salafist’ or jihadist extremists, is a joke. How do you test if a recruit is not a jihadist? Is there a special jihad DNA that the CIA doctors have discovered?

Jordanian government officials are revealing the details, in fear that the same ISIS terrorists that today are slashing heads of ‘infidels’ alongside the roadways of Mosul by the dozens, or hundreds if we believe their own propaganda, might turn their swords towards Jordan’s King Abdullah soon, to extend their budding Caliphate empire.

Former US State Department official Andrew Doran wrote in the conservative National Review magazine that some ISIS warriors also hold US passports. Now, of course that doesn’t demonstrate and support by the Obama Administration. Hmm...

Iranian journalist Sabah Zanganeh notes, "ISIS did not have the power to occupy and conquer Mosul by itself. What has happened is the result of security-intelligence collaborations of some regional countries with some extremist groups inside the Iraqi government." 

Iraq’s Chechen commander

The next bizarre part of the ISIS puzzle involves the Jihadist credited with being the ‘military mastermind’ of the recent ISIS victories, Tarkhan Batirashvili. If his name doesn’t sound very Arabic, it’s because it’s not. Tarkhan Batrashvili is a Russian - actually an ethnic Chechen from near the Chechen border to Georgia. But to give himself a more Arabic flair, he also goes by the name Emir (what else?) Umar al Shishani. The problem is he doesn’t look at all Arabic. No dark swarthy black beard: rather a long red beard, a kind of Chechen Barbarossa.

According to a November, 2013 report in The Wall Street Journal, Emir Umar or Batrashvili as you prefer, has made the wars in Syria and Iraq “into a geopolitical struggle between the US and Russia.”

That has been the objective of leading neo-conservatives in the CIA, Pentagon and State Department all along. The CIA transported hundreds of Mujahideen Saudis and other foreign veterans of the 1980s Afghan war against the Soviets in Afghanistan into Chechnya to disrupt the struggling Russia in the early 1990s, particularly to sabotage the Russian oil pipeline running directly from Baku on the Caspian Sea into Russia. James Baker III and his friends in Anglo-American Big Oil had other plans. It was called the BTC pipeline, owned by a BP-US oil consortium and running through Tbilisi into NATO-member Turkey, free of Russian territory.

Batrashvili is not renowned for taking care. Last year he was forced to apologize when he ordered his men to behead a wounded ‘enemy’ soldier who turned out to be an allied rebel commander. More than 8,000 foreign Jihadist mercenaries are reportedly in ISIS including at least 1,000 Chechens as well as Jihadists Saudi, Kuwait, Egypt and reportedly Chinese Uyghur from Xinjiang Province.

Jeffrey Silverman, Georgia Bureau Chief for the US-based Veterans Today (VT) website, told me that Batrashvili “is a product of a joint program of the US through a front NGO called Jvari, which was set up by US Intelligence and the Georgian National Security Council, dating back to the early days of the Pankisi Gorge.”

Jvari is the name as well of a famous Georgian Orthodox monastery of the 6th century. According to Silverman, David J. Smith—head of something in Tbilisi called the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies, as well as the Potomac Institute in Washington where he is listed as Director of the Potomac Institute Cyber Centerr—played a role in setting up the Jvari NGO.

Silverman maintains that Jvari in Rustavi, near the capital, Tbilisi, gathered together Afghan Mujahideen war veterans, Chechens, Georgians and sundry Arab Jihadists. They were sent to the infamous Pankisi Gorge region, a kind-of no-man’s lawless area, for later deployment, including Iraq and Syria.

Batrashvili and other Georgian and Chechen Russian-speaking Jihadists, Silverman notes, are typically smuggled, with the assistance of Georgia’s Counterintelligence Department and the approval of the US embassy, across the Georgia border to Turkey at the Vale crossing point, near Georgia’s Akhaltsikhe and the Turkish village of Türkgözü on the Turkish side of the Georgian border. From there it’s very little problem getting them through Turkey to either Mosul in Iraq or northeast Syria.

Silverman believes that events in Northern Iraq relate to “wanting to have a Kurdish Republic separate from the Central government and this is all part of the New Great Game. It will serve US interests in both Turkey and Iraq, not to mention Syria.”

Very revealing is the fact that almost two weeks after the dramatic fall of Mosul and the ‘capture’ by ISIS forces of the huge weapons and military vehicle resources provided by the US to the Iraqi army. Washington has done virtually nothing but make a few silly speeches about their ‘concern’ and dispatch 275 US special forces to allegedly protect US personnel in Iraq.

Whatever the final details that emerge, what is clear in the days since the fall of Mosul is that some of the world’s largest oilfields in Iraq are suddenly held by Jihadists and no longer by an Iraqi government determined to increase the oil export significantly. More on this aspect in an upcoming article.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

​Chaos theory: ISIS and Western foreign policy

A fighter of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) holds an ISIL flag and a weapon on a street in the city of Mosul, June 23, 2014. (Reuters / Stringer)

As ISIS/ISIL cuts a swathe through the Middle East, retroactively transforming Osama Bin Laden into the highbrow arm of modern Islamic terrorism, we’ve quite naturally begun the game of deciding who to blame for its existen. In fact, Tony Blair showed admirable consistency in sticking to the doctrine of preemptive self-defense by firing off a statement that the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant had nothing to do with his policies in Iraq - the moment they made their big break into mainstream television.

This back and forth over responsibility is really at the heart of the matter, but in a far deeper way than we usually get around to discussing.

After all, a good deal of Western foreign policy post-Cold War has revolved around NATO states voluntarily assuming responsibility for issues that were, strictly-speaking, not their responsibility. Someone needs to ‘police the world’, ‘bring the bad guys to book’, exercise their ‘R2P’ (‘responsibility to protect’ – yes, we have descended into text-speak) and ‘nation-build’.

It looks good on paper.

But if you really look at how this policy has played out on the ground, you will notice that far from nation-building, this voluntary ‘assumption of responsibility’ has instead sown a level of chaos and dissension that cannot plausibly be blamed purely on ‘mistakes’ or ‘unforeseeable circumstances’.

Instead, it seems to be the old divide and conquer strategy at work and we probably have keen minds like Richard Perle and Bill Kristol of the neo-conservative think tank Project for a New American Century (PNAC) to thank for this modern take on an old classic. We will return to the thoughtful documents penned and disseminated by PNAC shortly. But first, let’s try to figure out what is really going on beyond the rhetoric when it comes to our ‘responsibilities’ around the world.

I think we can discern a few key trends.

The first trend is that Western countries do engage in what could be termed nation-building activities in a few select, small countries, provided those countries have for one reason or another really made headlines. Think of Timor L’Este (now independent after a mere 30 years of occupation); Rwanda (yes, 800,000 people were killed, but we did give them a tribunal once activists remembered to play the racism card), and Kosovo (presents a somewhat more contested narrative, but it was too close to the EU’s future borders for comfort).

Other troubled nations like Sierra Leone, Liberia and Cote d’Ivoire (another contested narrative) have certainly seen their fortunes improve in recent years, thanks in part to international peacekeeping missions and efforts to facilitate community reconciliation and post-conflict justice. But those are, in a certain sense, ‘the lucky few’. In most other places, we have chosen to ‘take responsibility’ along more Blair-ish lines, which means that our sense of responsibility tends to come and go with astonishing rapidity. Consider the following:


The failed state par excellence. Americans were apparently willing to ‘take responsibility’ for restoring law and order in Somalia until 19 of them were killed. That was too much ‘responsibility’ and Somalia was left minus a government and awash with weapons next to one of the greatest shipping lanes in the world. All things considered, it took Somalis a surprisingly long time to master modern piracy.

Sudan, South Sudan, Chad, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo

All rocking around on the cusp of failed statehood for decades now; in the case of the DRC ever since Western countries decided to rid the world of Patrice Lumumba back in the ’60s.


Currently a respectable No. 38 on the Fund for Peace’s Failed State Index, but Taureg rebels control an impressive hunk of territory.

Ukraine and Pakistan

Both pretty nearly failed states, run along semi-feudal lines by leaders who are openly oligarchs, whether that be the ‘new money’ of Ukrainian industrialists or the ‘old money’ of tribal leadership in Pakistan.


Currently rated an uneasy No. 54 on the Failed State Index, down from a comfortable No. 111 in 2010 (on par with South Africa) before we decided to get rid of Gaddafi, only to be instantly stricken with amnesia about the country he ran for 42 years.


Despite having the latest technology in drone strikes lavished upon it, Yemen maintains a virtually unbroken record in the top 10 failed states, currently at No. 6.


Locked in a civil war, which has seen a once secular-oriented nation become the home of armed jihadists, who were permitted to obtain their weapons and cash with remarkable ease. Apparently ‘getting rid of Assad’ was the sum total of our planning abilities on what should happen in Syria.


Round and round she goes, and where she stops nobody knows. Spiraling somewhere.

Iraq and Afghanistan

I’m not even sure what the correct term for Iraq and Afghanistan, rated No. 11 and No.7 respectively on the Failed State Index, would be these days. Suffice it to see that after more than a decade of nation-building, we are having difficulty discerning progress on these construction sites, which I’m pretty sure haven’t even gone one day without a work-related accident. Of course, the already abysmal ratings were handed out before ISIS went big last week. (Interesting fact: current ISIS head Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who, unlike many detainees, truly did have a history of terrorist involvement, was captured by Americans in Iraq in 2004 but released in 2009. You had one job…)

Then there are places like Western Sahara, Transdniester and Palestine, which cannot fail because they do not even count as states. To add to our woes, the UN recently announced that there are more displaced persons today than at any time since the end of WWII. These are a lot of open problems to have for a world hegemony so bent on nation-building and stability, especially when you consider that its citizens spend something like a trillion dollars annually on ‘defense’.

When you are forking over that kind of money, you like to see results, and not hear excuses about the world’s instability being ‘also’ rooted in local problems. I can see very well that organizations like ISIS are ‘also’ rooted in local problems. However, I am also fairly certain that if some alien power used its superior resources to bomb us back to the Stone Age and then failed to provide any meaningful replacement infrastructure, that our ‘local’ problems would begin to get uglier too. And the reason is that they would have destroyed the social fabric and rule of law that keeps any place running as well as it does. Create that kind of power vacuum and anything can happen. To expect ‘the locals’ to pick themselves up, dust themselves off and jolly well carry on because we have suddenly lost interest in our overwhelming ‘responsibility’ to them is little short of delusional.

The second trend that I think emerges is closely linked to the first.

It is the deliberate ripping of the social fabric within states that are still relatively stable and prosperous. That this could in any way be connected to the first trend occurred to me while reading ‘A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm’, which was written by Richard Perle for Benjamin Netanyahu back in the 1990s. Now - and I do not say this lightly - not only does this document have a title that sounds like its composer was experiencing LARP-withdrawal at the time he wrote it, the text itself resembles the creation of an eight-year-old who was subjected to a crash course on international relations followed by a heavy dose of LSD. There are sudden switches in topic, where the free associative connection is at first less-than-obvious to the sober reader.

One of these switches was an abrupt change from harping on Israel’s alleged need to pursue a no-compromises peace strategy to urging a comprehensive privatization plan on the state. According to this paper, efforts to salvage Israel’s socialist institutions were undermining the legitimacy of the State of Israel and “Israel can become self-reliant only by, in a bold stroke rather than in increments, liberalizing its economy, cutting taxes, re-legislating a free-processing zone, and selling-off public lands and enterprises — moves which will electrify and find support from a broad bipartisan spectrum of key pro-Israeli Congressional leaders, including [then-]Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.”

Why Newt Gingrich’s support was synonymous with self-reliance was left unexplained.

However, like many things that happen on acid, ‘Securing the Realm’ has a weird strain of truth to it, because it combined, albeit clumsily, two separate ways to erode the social fabric. The first was to become much more aggressive externally and seek to crush foreign entities as oppose to negotiate with them, even when those negotiations had yielded results, most notably under the leadership of Yitzhak Rabin, assassinated just one year before ‘Securing the Realm’ was written. The second was to actually work on eroding Israel’s alleged socialism from within by selling off the same public goods, which they under no circumstances would give to Palestinians, to private bidders.

I would argue that we can see both of these strains at work around the world, in that we push aggressive, no compromises foreign policy to its limits (witness Ukraine and Syria) without much thought for the destabilization that this engenders, not to mention its quite extreme effect on our own bank balance.

We are also hard at work undermining our own prosperity. Western countries are the most prosperous on earth. We unequivocally enjoy the highest standard of living. China, India and Brazil are still a long way off the kind of lifestyle most of us are accustomed to. And enjoy that lifestyle partly because we were pretty successful at ripping other people’s wealth off them in the past and partly because we invented a brilliant economic system after WWII which centered on what Richard Perle - aka the Prince of Darkness - would probably designate ‘socialist institutions’.

Western nations may not have fully gotten the knack for doing good in the world, but there was certainly what I would term growing interest and truly altruistic concern for people in other parts of the world among ordinary Western citizens pre-9/11.

Thanks to policies like those the Prince of Darkness so thoughtfully outlined for Netanyahu all those years ago, we have privatized, liberalized and cut taxes to the point that most people in Western nations are now experiencing a deterioration in their own living standards and society is increasingly divided between the haves and have-nots. We are, in other words, tearing up our own social fabric.

What that means is that the place that would have been most able to use its resources to truly stabilize and improve those parts of the globe most in need now not only refuses to do so (which was bad enough), in the future it might be unable to so do. We may, in short, be destabilizing the rest of the world, while simultaneously reducing our own capabilities to ever put it back together. The natural consequence of being responsible in short, sharp bursts.

Source: http://rt.com/op-edge/168336-isis-western-foreign-policy-chaos/

All you need to know about ISIS and what is happening in Iraq

A militant Islamist fighter uses a mobile to film his fellow fighters taking part in a military parade along the streets of Syria's northern Raqqa province June 30, 2014. The fighters held the parade to celebrate their declaration of an Islamic caliphate after the group captured territory in neighbouring Iraq, a monitoring service said. The Islamic State, an al Qaeda offshoot previously known as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), posted pictures online on Sunday of people waving black flags from cars and holding guns in the air, the SITE monitoring service said. Picture taken June 30, 2014. REUTERS/Stringer

As ISIS, a group thought to consist of only a few thousand people led by a shadowy figurehead, defeats forces many times its size to capture a large part of Iraq, RT looks into what is ISIS, and how has it achieved its terrifying triumphs.

So, what is ISIS? And is it even ISIS, or is it ISIL?

The world’s most committed and fanatical radical organization has only recently gone by its current name, after the unrecognized Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) was proclaimed in April last year. Al-Sham has been most commonly translated from Arabic as the Levant, hence ISIL. It was previously known as Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, Al-Qaeda in the Islamic State of Iraq. 

The frequent name changes are not cosmetic – but the direct result of the transforming circumstances which have allowed ISIS to rapidly flourish. Initially focused on achieving dominance in Iraq, it was kept under control in the relatively calm period between the initial sectarian strife that broke out following the US-led invasion in 2003, and the outbreak of hostilities following the American military withdrawal in 2011.

Since then, it has become a major player, receiving another critical boost when the civil war in Syria turned into a sectarian conflict, bringing in millions of dollars in funding and thousands of fresh recruits from around the world. Currently, ISIS strongholds extend from Raqqa in northern Syria all the way down to the outskirts of Baghdad – a stretch of more than 500 km, though the group doesn’t have comprehensive oversight of the roads and settlements between them. 

The speed with which the Islamist group is closing in on Baghdad can be compared – if not exceeds – the pace of the 2003 invasion. Unlike the US and allies, though, ISIS does not have a capability of launching destructive air strikes, however in its latest offensives the group has reportedly managed to significantly boost its military power capturing dozens of US-made armored vehicles and other heavy weaponry from the retreating Iraqi military. 

ISIS is part of and similar to Al-Qaeda, right?

No, it is significantly worse. Al-Qaeda has been the touchstone for the Western understanding of terrorism ever since 9/11, but ISIS differs from it philosophically, organizationally, and even officially, as it has declared itself an entirely separate body. If anything the two organizations – though both espousing Sunni Islam – are currently more rivals than allies. While Al-Qaeda, in its most well-known forms, is a terrorist organization, with sleeper cells, training camps and terrorist attacks, ISIS as of now is more a militia and a rogue territory with its own infrastructure, more similar to Boko Haram and other localized fiefdoms that have spawned in lawless or failed African states.

Al-Qaeda has become more conscious of avoiding acts of indiscriminate or counter-productive brutality since the demise of Osama Bin Laden, but ISIS revels in it, espousing a religious philosophy so uncompromising it appears almost nihilistic. The areas it has secured have been kept under control by an endless stream of floggings, mutilations, beheadings and crucifixions. The targets can be well-chosen or arbitrary, but no one is spared – Shia opponents, Sunni rivals, captured soldiers or “immoral” women.

Unsurprisingly, although the first leader of ISIS, the late Abu Musab, did swear fealty to Al-Qaeda back in the early 2000s, the two organizations have fallen out. The breaking point was the internecine fighting between ISIS and Al-Qaeda-backed Nusra in Syria. Pleas by Al-Qaeda to divide spheres of influence were flatly rejected by Abu Bakr, the ISIS leader, who spent four years in US captivity, before being released in 2009. After increasingly testy communication between the sides, Al-Qaeda “disowned” ISIS earlier this year, in return provoking ISIS to call the organization “traitors” and “a joke.” With the rise of ISIS, many say that it is now Al-Qaeda’s Ayman al-Zawahiri who should be pledging allegiance to the 43-year old Abu Bakr. 

How is ISIS funded?

ISIS operates as a half-mafia-style commercial enterprise, half pious international charity, looking for wealthy donors in the Gulf States and throughout the globe. It is certainly not lacking in opportunism in commercializing its military activities. In 2012 ISIS – or ISI as it was then – took over oil fields in Syria, reaping profits from selling the oil at discounted prices to anyone willing to pay. It has traded in the raw materials in areas it has captured, and even dabbled in selling antiques from monuments under its control.

Sometimes, it doesn’t have to be so elaborate. Its biggest single success was plundering a government vault in Mosul – captured last week – that reportedly contained more than $425 million. With the loot taken during its recent advances, ISIL’s estimated war chest now stands at over $2 billion.

But just as important is ISIS income from its unknown – yet easily guessed – backers from the Arabian Peninsula. As the world’s foremost proponents of Saudi-style Wahhabism, Iraqi officials claim ISIS gets a steady stream of funds and support from politically engaged operators, working from the safety of Saudi Arabia’s and Qatar’s US-protected borders.

Like any up-and-coming enterprise, its recent publicity and burgeoning reputation is likely to form a virtuous circle, where ISIS will receive additional funds, to wreak more impressive feats of destruction to the delight of its backers. 

How did ISIS manage to capture so much territory?

On June 10, less than a thousand of ISIS militants on soft-shelled pickup trucks occupied the northern Iraqi city of Mosul with a population of 1.8 million people. The city was supposed to be under the protection of the US-trained Iraqi military force of about 30,000 stationed in the region. It was equipped with sophisticated US-made military equipment – part of the weaponry and hardware supplied by Washington to Baghdad, which has been estimated to cost billions of US dollars.

However, Mosul fell with no apparent resistance as scores of Iraqi troops fled dropping their uniforms and leaving the precious hardware behind. The militants celebrated getting US-made Humvees and tanks – some of which have since headed to Syria to be used against the government forces – and even allegedly captured at least one Black Hawk helicopter.

General lack of morale and cohesion in the Iraqi army has been named the cause for the humiliating loss of this and other cities – including the strategic city of Tal Afar close to the Syrian border and Saddam Hussein’s birthplace Tikrit. Aiding this parade of ISIS victories has been the allegedly sweeping support of the local Sunni population, who previously supported the Sunni regime of Saddam Hussein overthrown by the US-led forces.

Sectarian factors, but also the way the post-invasion Iraqi PM Nouri al-Maliki’s government has handled religious and social conflicts in the country, certainly contributed to Iraqi army being unpopular in ISIS-occupied regions. Apparently, replacing some Sunni commanders with Shiites locally did not help, and the way ISIS won the support of local tribes via negotiations has shown how little the new central government is valued in northern rural Iraq. 

However, one also has to realize that ISIS is no bunch of poorly-trained extremist thugs. With years of experience on the Syrian battlefield, the group boasts training camps producing well-prepared fighters, and it has been joined by scores of professionally trained overseas mercenaries.

ISIS spokesman Shaykh Muhammad Adnani has explained the group’s current success by the will of God, saying that “the [Islamic] State has not prevailed by numbers, nor equipment, nor weapons, nor wealth, rather it prevails by Allah’s bounty alone, through its creed” in a recent statement posted on YouTube.

 It remains unclear for how long the brutal and repressive policies of ISIS will guarantee their support on the ground in Iraq, while they are trying to win the locals’ hearts with religious propaganda and dreams of a huge cross-border caliphate.

It is ironic that the hardcore Islamist group will be using the equipment provided by Washington to Baghdad in the Western-backed insurgency in Syria, but at the same time may be confronted by the West in Iraq, where the militants are now contesting the country’s largest oilfield.

Having spent billions on Iraq and war on terror for securing its own interests in the region, the US and its allies have been unwilling to admit the devastating 2003 invasion was a mistake with disastrous consequences for the whole Middle Eastern region. While 2013 was marked by the bloodiest sectarian violence in Iraq in five years, it mostly went unnoticed with the “international community.” Recently, the former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair chose to blame“bad systems of politics mixed with abuse of religion” as the root of all the problems in Middle East.

Source: http://rt.com/news/166836-isis-isil-al-qaeda-iraq/

Baghdad slams Saudi Arabia for ‘encouraging genocide’ in Iraq


The Iraqi government says that it holds Saudi Arabia “responsible” for the current crisis and has blamed Riyadh for encouraging “genocide” in the country through the backing of Sunni militants.

“We hold them [Saudi Arabia] responsible for supporting these groups financially and morally, and for the outcome of that - which includes crimes that may qualify as genocide: the spilling of Iraqi blood, the destruction of Iraqi state institutions and historic and religious sites,” the Shiite-led cabinet said in a statement issued by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's office. Comments from Riyadh this week "indicate siding with terrorism."

Maliki pointed the finger at both Saudi Arabia and Qatar for perceived support of terrorism in Iraq in March. Making the statement could have serious implications for the conflict, only serving to deepen religious divisions in Iraq society.

“Sectarian tensions in Iraq are part of a larger ‘Cold War’ going on between Iran and the Gulf States-namely Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait. So the US- if it can send a protection force in to protect its embassies and it can try to deal with sectarianism in Iraq, but unless it gets on top of this wider regional conflict, and namely, until it starts to deal with its allies in the gulf and stop them spreading sectarian hate, events in Iraq are going to spill over,” Warwick University’s Dr. Oz Hassan told RT.

Crisis in Iraq spiked after a massive and sudden siege by Sunni ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) militants who captured cities in the north of the country – including the main city of Mosul – and started marching towards Baghdad shortly afterwards. The jihadists have already declared the capture of the capital Baghdad to be their top priority objective. Since the group began its mission at the beginning of June, militants have carried out violent beheadings. UN staff and foreign embassy staff have been partially withdrawn from the country out of personal safety fears.

“If sectarianism spills out onto the streets of Baghdad it’s going to be incredibly hard to contain because you’re going to have Sunnis and Shi’ites fighting each other street to street,” Hassan said.

It was reported Monday that the USS Mesa Verde, with 550 Marines onboard, has entered the Persian Gulf for a possible operation in Iraq. Iraq has requested the hastened delivery of major weapons orders, including dozens of F-16 fighter jets contracted with Lockheed Martin and dozens of Boeing’s Apache helicopters, to counter the insurgent fighters.

An offshoot of Al-Qaeda, ISIS, the hyper-fundamentalist group active in Iraq and Syria, fell out with the global terrorist network. It gained notoriety for its ruthless tactics, which include publicly crucifying and beheading those who violate their strict religious interpretations. Its rise and consolidation owe a great deal to the simultaneous power vacuum that arose after the Syrian civil war broke out and the ongoing tumult in Iraq after the US invasion and occupation.

Fighting against the Shia governments of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Baghdad and Bashar Assad in Damascus has also allowed the Sunni organization to recruit thousands of people under its aim of eventually turning the entire region into an ultraconservative Muslim caliphate.

Source: http://rt.com/news/166592-saudi-arabia-genocide-iraq/

U.S. Trained ISIS at Secret Jordan Base


Members of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIS, were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan, according to informed Jordanian officials.

The officials said dozens of ISIS members were trained at the time as part of covert aid to the insurgents targeting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. The officials said the training was not meant to be used for any future campaign in Iraq. The Jordanian officials said all ISIS members who received U.S. training to fight in Syria were first vetted for any links to extremist groups like al-Qaida.
In February 2012, WND was first to report the U.S., Turkey and Jordan were running a training base for the Syrian rebels in the Jordanian town of Safawi in the country’s northern desert region. That report has since been corroborated by numerous other media accounts. Last March, the German weekly Der Spiegel reported Americans were training Syrian rebels in Jordan.

Quoting what it said were training participants and organizers, Der Spiegel reported it was not clear whether the Americans worked for private firms or were with the U.S. Army, but the magazine said some organizers wore uniforms. The training in Jordan reportedly focused on use of anti-tank weaponry. The German magazine reported some 200 men received the training over the previous three months amid U.S. plans to train a total of 1,200 members of the Free Syrian Army in two camps in the south and the east of Jordan.

Britain’s Guardian newspaper also reported last March that U.S. trainers were aiding Syrian rebels in Jordan along with British and French instructors. Reuters reported a spokesman for the U.S. Defense Department declined immediate comment on the German magazine’s report. The French foreign ministry and Britain’s foreign and defense ministries also would not comment to Reuters.

The Jordanian officials spoke to WND amid concern the sectarian violence in Iraq will spill over into their own country as well as into Syria. ISIS previously posted a video on YouTube threatening to move on Jordan and “slaughter” King Abdullah, whom they view as an enemy of Islam.

WND reported last week that, according to Jordanian and Syrian regime sources, Saudi Arabia has been arming the ISIS and that the Saudis are a driving force in supporting the al-Qaida-linked group. WND further reported that, according to a Shiite source in contact with a high official in the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, the Obama administration has been aware for two months that the al-Qaida-inspired group that has taken over two Iraqi cities and now is threatening Baghdad also was training fighters in Turkey.

The source told WND that at least one of the training camps of the group Iraq of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Syria, the ISIS, is in the vicinity of Incirlik Air Base near Adana, Turkey, where American personnel and equipment are located. He called Obama “an accomplice” in the attacks that are threatening the Maliki government the U.S. helped establish through the Iraq war. The source said that after training in Turkey, thousands of ISIS fighters went to Iraq by way of Syria to join the effort to establish an Islamic caliphate subject to strict Islamic law, or Shariah.

Source: www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-jordan-base/5387532

Turkey's Support for ISIS Islamist Terrorists

This photograph shows ISIL commander Abu Muhammad, April 16, 2014, allegedly receiving free treatment in Hatay State Hospital after being injured during fighting in Idlib, Syria.

The battle in Iraq consists of "Turkish-backed Sunni jihadis rebelling against an Iranian-backed Shi'ite-oriented central government," I wrote in a recent article. Some readers question that the Republic of Turkey has supported the "Islamic State in Iraq and Syria," the main Sunni group fighting in Iraq. They point to ISIS attacks on Turkish interests, within Turkey, along its border with Syria, and in Mosul and a successful recent meeting of the Turkish and Iranian presidents. Good points, but they can be explained.

First, ISIS is willing to accept Turkish support even while seeing the Islamist prime minister and his countrymen as kafirs (infidels) who need to be shown true Islam. Second, the presidential visit took place on one level while the fighting in Syria and Iraq took place on quite another; the two can occur simultaneously. Turkish-Iranian rivalry is on the rise and, as the distinguished Turkish journalist Burak Bekdil notes in the current issue of the Middle East Quarterly:

Recent years have often seen official language from the two countries about prospering bilateral trade and common anti-Israeli ideological solidarity. But mostly out of sight have been indications of rivalry, distrust, and mutual sectarian suspicion between the two Muslim countries.
Ankara may deny helping ISIS, but the evidence for this is overwhelming. "As we have the longest border with Syria," writes Orhan Kemal Cengiz, a Turkish newspaper columnist, "Turkey's support was vital for the jihadists in getting in and out of the country." Indeed, the ISIS strongholds not coincidentally cluster close to Turkey's frontiers.

Kurds, academic experts and the Syrian opposition agree that Syrians, Turks (estimated to number 3,000), and foreign fighters (especially Saudis but also a fair number of Westerners) have crossed the Turkish-Syrian border at will, often to join ISIS. What Turkish journalist Kadri Gursel calls a "two-way jihadist highway," has no bothersome border checks and sometimes involves the active assistance of Turkish intelligence services. CNN even broadcast a video on "The secret jihadi smuggling route through Turkey."

Actually, the Turks offered far more than an easy border crossing: they provided the bulk of ISIS' funds, logistics, training and arms. Turkish residents near the Syrian border tell of Turkish ambulances going to Kurdish-ISIS battle zones and then evacuating ISIS casualties to Turkish hospitals. Indeed, a sensational photograph has surfaced showing ISIS commander Abu Muhammad in a hospital bed receiving treatment for battle wounds in Hatay State Hospital in April 2014.

One Turkish opposition politician estimates that Turkey has paid $800 million to ISIS for oil shipments. Another politician released information about active duty Turkish soldiers training ISIS members. Critics note that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has met three times with someone, Yasin al-Qadi, who has close ties to ISIS and has funded it.

Why the Turkish support for wild-eyed extremists? Because Ankara wants to eliminate two Syrian polities, the Assad regime in Damascus and Rojava (the emerging Kurdish state) in the northeast.

Regarding the Assad regime: "Thinking that jihadists would ensure a quick fall for the Assad regime in Syria, Turkey, no matter how vehemently officials deny it, supported the jihadists," writes Cengiz, "at first along with Western and some Arab countries and later in spite of their warnings."

Regarding Rojava: Rojava's leadership being aligned with the PKK, the (formerly) terrorist Kurdish group based in Turkey, the authoritative Turkish journalist Amberin Zaman has little doubt "that until recently, Turkey was allowing jihadist fighters to move unhindered across its borders" to fight the Kurds.

More broadly, as the Turkish analyst Mustafa Akyol notes, Ankara thought "anybody who fought al-Assad was a good guy and also harbored an "ideological uneasiness with accepting that Islamists can do terrible things." This has led, he acknowledges, to "some blindness" toward violent jihadists. Indeed, ISIS is so popular in Turkey that others publicly copy its logo.

In the face of this support, the online newspaper Al-Monitor calls on Turkey to close its border to ISIS while Rojava threatened Ankara with "dire consequences" unless Turkish aid ceases.

In conclusion, Turkish leaders are finding Syria a double quagmire, what with Assad still in power and the Kurdish entity growing stronger. In reaction, they have cooperated with even the most extreme, retrograde and vicious elements, such as ISIS. But this support opened a second front in Iraq which, in turn, brings the clash of the Middle East's two titans, Turkey and Iran, closer to realization.

More than 1,000 Turks fighting for the Islamic Caliphate


The number of Turkish citizens fighting under the umbrella of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) is slightly more than 1,000, according to Turkish officials, who admit that they are unable to learn the exact number. The estimated number of armed ISIL fighters is around 12,000 to 15,000, which shows that Turks make up just less than 10 percent of the jihadist group.

Turkey has long been accused of not efficiently controlling its borders to prevent those foreigners joining the jihadist extremist groups and stop the flow of weapons into Syria. In response to these criticisms, Turkish officials have noted the difficulty of controlling a nearly 900-kilometer-long border while blaming Western countries for not sharing intelligence on potential recruits for the jihadist groups.

However, when it comes to Turkish citizens’ participation in one of the world’s deadliest groups, these explanations are unconvincing. Who organized the recruitment of these people for ISIL? What organizations sponsored these recruitments? Which routes have been used? Assuming the security forces and the intelligence are closely following the jihadist movements in Turkey, how did they fail to realize that more than 1,000 Turks have joined ISIL? Could it be because security forces and intelligence skipped their main duties and responsibilities as they are chasing what the government calls the “parallel state”?

Whatever the answers to these questions are, there is one absolute reality: Turkey is facing the danger of the jihadist structure, both inside and outside. In Iraq, 49 Turkish citizens have been in ISIL captivity since early June. Due to the sensitivity of the issue, mainstream media does not frequently write on the issue, but one thing is certain: Somebody will have to answer some very disturbing questions once our citizens, including Turkey’s consul general in Mosul, return home safe.

Inside Turkey, there is enough evidence to get concerned about increasing extremism. First, we have seen some Sunni groups attacking a mosque belonging to the Caferis, a branch of Shiite Islam. With ISIL making new advances, their sympathizers have become more visible in a bid to display their contentment with the developments. It was on July 31 when the Hürriyet Daily News reported about an Istanbul-based Islamic charity organization that had to suspend its activities after it was criticized for using an insignia adopted by the ISIL.

There were also allegations that the charity was recruiting militants for the fight in Syria and Iraq. In separate news, Turkish media broadcast a few days ago pictures of hundreds of men with long beards in Taliban-style dress gathering for Eid al-Fitr somewhere in Istanbul. The group was allegedly linked with ISIL, and they dedicated their Eid al-Fitr prayers to ISIL fighters in Iraq and Syria.

Another development that has boosted the public showcase of these jihadist groups is the Israeli attack on the Palestinians. Israeli brutality deserves all sorts of reactions, but demonstrations staged by groups, especially in Ankara and Istanbul soon became violent. These are obviously the best moments for such groups to gain more supporters in society and reach out to different segments of the society. The government has the full responsibility to keep these demonstrations in check without causing any unwanted, irreparable incident.

Before it is too late, the intelligence and security forces must be on full alert to stop the growth of these jihadist groups, recruitment to ISIL or other terrorist organizations, while the government should issue strong statements that it won’t tolerate these inclinations in a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-sect society.

Source: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/more-than-1000-turks-fighting-for-the-islamic-caliphate-.aspx?pageID=238&nid=69867&NewsCatID=429

John McCain: "Thank God for the Saudis"


“Thank God for the Saudis and Prince Bandar,” John McCain told CNN’s Candy Crowley in January 2014. “Thank God for the Saudis and Prince Bandar, and for our Qatari friends,” the senator said once again a month later, at the Munich Security Conference.

McCain was praising Prince Bandar bin Sultan, then the head of Saudi Arabia’s intelligence services and a former ambassador to the United States, for supporting forces fighting Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria. McCain and Senator Lindsey Graham had previously met with Bandar to encourage the Saudis to arm Syrian rebel forces.

But shortly after McCain’s Munich comments, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah relieved Bandar of his Syrian covert-action portfolio, which was then transferred to Saudi Interior Minister Prince Mohammed bin Nayef. By mid-April, just two weeks after President Obama met with King Abdullah on March 28, Bandar had also been removed from his position as head of Saudi intelligence—according to official government statements, at “his own request.” Sources close to the royal court told me that, in fact, the king fired Bandar over his handling of the kingdom’s Syria policy and other simmering tensions, after initially refusing to accept Bandar’s offers to resign. (Bandar retains his title as secretary-general of the king’s National Security Council.)

The Free Syrian Army (FSA), the “moderate” armed opposition in the country, receives a lot of attention. But two of the most successful factions fighting Assad’s forces are Islamist extremist groups: Jabhat al-Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the latter of which is now amassing territory in Iraq and threatening to further destabilize the entire region. And that success is in part due to the support they have received from two Persian Gulf countries: Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra, to the point that a senior Qatari official told me he can identify al-Nusra commanders by the blocks they control in various Syrian cities. But ISIS is another matter. As one senior Qatari official stated, “ISIS has been a Saudi project.”

ISIS, in fact, may have been a major part of Bandar’s covert-ops strategy in Syria. The Saudi government, for its part, has denied allegations, including claims made by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, that it has directly supported ISIS. But there are also signs that the kingdom recently shifted its assistance—whether direct or indirect—away from extremist factions in Syria and toward more moderate opposition groups.

The United States, France, and Turkey have long sought to support the weak and disorganized FSA, and to secure commitments from Qatar and Saudi Arabia to do the same. When Mohammed bin Nayef took the Syrian file from Bandar in February, the Saudi government appeared to finally be endorsing this strategy. As The Washington Post’s David Ignatius wrote at the time, “Prince Mohammed’s new oversight role reflects the increasing concern in Saudi Arabia and other neighboring countries about al-Qaeda’s growing power within the Syrian opposition.”

The worry at the time, punctuated by a February meeting between U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice and the intelligence chiefs of Turkey, Qatar, Jordan, and others in the region, was that ISIS and al-Qaeda-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra had emerged as the preeminent rebel forces in Syria. The governments who took part reportedly committed to cut off ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, and support the FSA instead. But while official support from Qatar and Saudi Arabia appears to have dried up, non-governmental military and financial support may still be flowing from these countries to Islamist groups.

Senior White House officials have refused to discuss the question of any particular Saudi officials aiding ISIS and have not commented on Bandar’s departure. But they have emphasized that Saudi Arabia is now both supporting moderate Syrian rebels and helping coordinate regional policies to deal with an ascendant ISIS threat.

Like elements of the mujahideen, which benefited from U.S. financial and military support during the Soviet war in Afghanistan and then later turned on the West in the form of al-Qaeda, ISIS achieved scale and consequence through Saudi support, only to now pose a grave threat to the kingdom and the region. It’s this concern about blowback that has motivated Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to encourage restraint in arming Syrian rebels. President Obama has so far heeded these warnings.  

John McCain’s desire to help rebel forces toss off a brutal dictator and fight for a more just and inclusive Syria is admirable. But as has been proven repeatedly in the Middle East, ousting strongmen doesn’t necessarily produce more favorable successor governments. Embracing figures like Bandar, who may have tried to achieve his objectives in Syria by building a monster, isn't worth it.

Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/06/isis-saudi-arabia-iraq-syria-bandar/373181/

Saudi refutes UK media claims of ‘ISIS support’


Saudi Arabia has denied financing or supporting militant group, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), after some UK media outlets accused the country of supporting the group which is currently taking over swathes of Iraq.

“The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wishes to emphasize, once again, that it does not and has not supported, financially, morally or through any other means, the terrorist organization known as… (ISIS),” the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia in London said in a statement issued Tuesday.

“Despite having clarified this issue on numerous occasions, several inaccurate, misleading and distorted allegations, made by certain media outlets in the UK, requires us to do so,” the statement added.

“We urge the British and international media to take an in-depth look into the financial backing and organizational structure of this terrorist organization, as well as to report the situation in the region objectively and fairly and to verify allegations before reporting them as fact,” the statement said.

The statement also added that the kingdom believed “the lack of international involvement that has paved the way for terrorist affiliated networks to breed within Syria,” where the kingdom has been providing – through the Friends of Syria – support to the Syrian opposition. The Friends of Syria group is an international diplomatic collective of countries and international bodies, organized by the United States, aimed at providing aid for the crisis in Syria.

“Through the Friends of Syria, Saudi Arabia has provided support only to the moderate Syrian opposition. All these groups share a common goal in supporting a political transition in Syria that will see the removal of the Assad regime. We believe it is the lack of international involvement that has paved the way for terrorist affiliated networks to breed within Syria,” the statement added.

Last March, Saudi Arabia blacklisted ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Saudi branch of Shiite movement Hezbollah and the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front, labeling them terrorist organizations. In June, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz ordered “all” necessary measures be taken to protect the kingdom, as ISIS extremist fighters began nearing the border shared between Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

Source: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/world/2014/07/09/Saudi-Arabia-refutes-UK-media-allegations-of-supporting-ISIS-.html

Was ISIS chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi radicalized in a US-run prison in Iraq?


In early July, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the head of the jihadist terror group now known as the Islamic State—formerly the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or ISIS [1]preached on high in Mosul [2] and declared himself the "Caliph Ibrahim" of a new fundamentalist Sunni state [3] stretching from western and northern Iraq to northern Syria. This announcement came after months of fighting over territory and skirmishes with Iraqi forces, as ISIS invaded and captured dozens of Iraqi cities including Tikrit [4], Saddam Hussein's hometown.

In short order, Baghdadi has become Iraq's most prominent extremist leader. But for much of his adult life, Baghdadi did not have a reputations as a fiery, jihadist trailblazer. According to the Telegraph [5], members of his local mosque in Tobchi (a neighborhood in Baghdad) who knew him from around 1989 until 2004 (when he was between the ages of 18 and 33) considered Baghdadi a quiet, studious fellow and a talented soccer player. When the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, Baghdadi was earning a degree in Islamic studies in Baghdad.

But within a couple years of the US invasion, Baghdadi was a prisoner in Camp Bucca, the US-run detainment facility in Umm Qasr, Iraq. And a US compound commander stationed at that prison—and other military officials—have in recent weeks wondered whether Baghdadi's stint there radicalized him and put him on the path to taking over ISIS in 2010 and guiding the movement to its recent military victories.

The details of Baghdadi's time in Camp Bucca are murky. Some media reports [6] note that he was held as a "civilian internee" at the prison for 10 months in 2004. Others report [7] that he was captured by US forces in 2005 and spent four years at Camp Bucca. The reason why he was apprehended is not publicly known; he could have been arrested on a specific charge or as part of a large sweep of insurgents or insurgent supporters. (A confidential Red Cross report [8] leaked in May 2004 suggested than around 90 percent of detainees of Iraqi origin were arrested "by mistake.") Army Colonel Kenneth King, the commanding US officer at Camp Bucca in 2009, recently told the Daily Beast [9]that he distinctly remembered a man resembling Baghdadi: "He was a bad dude, but he wasn't the worst of the worst." King noted he was "not surprised" that such a radical figure emerged from the facility.

James Skylar Gerrond, a former US Air Force security forces officer and a compound commander at Camp Bucca in 2006 and 2007, says that he believes Baghdadi's stay at the prison contributed to his radicalization—or at least bolstered his extremism. After Baghdadi proclaimed the Islamic State a new nation and himself its leader, Gerrond tweeted, "Many of us at Camp Bucca were concerned that instead of just holding detainees, we had created a pressure cooker for extremism." Gerrond is now a civilian working for the Department of Defense.

"Like many Iraq vets, I've been following the situation with ISIS for the last several weeks and trying to understand why things are falling apart so badly in the region," Gerrond tells Mother Jones in an email. "When some of Baghdadi's personal history started to come out, such as the fact that he was detained at Camp Bucca around the same time I was deployed there, I started to reflect on my deployment and what the conditions were at the facility during that time."

Gerrond notes that US military officials in charge of the prison fretted that prisoners could be radicalized at the facility: "This was something that everyone in the chain of command [for Camp Bucca] (and other detention facilities) were always concerned with." Maj. General Douglas Stone, the deputy commander for detainee operations in 2007, told Newsweek that year [11]that potential radicalization was a "very real concern" at Camp Bucca.

According to Gerrond—and documents released by the US military back him up [12]—the military officials running Camp Bucca took steps to prevent radicalization of inmates and violence at the camp. This included careful segregation and later, specific anti-extremist re-education programs. Prisoners were separated on the basis of ideology, among other factors, in order to prevent the commingling of extremists and moderates. The prisoners who were identified as the "most extreme," including those who associated with radical factions, were isolated.

By quarantining extremists from younger or more moderate detainees, US military officials believed they could keep others from being converted, according to Gerrond. However, he says, it was incredibly difficult at Camp Bucca to regulate and monitor whether or not these efforts were successful. "In theory, this segregation should have kept those with the most heinous and violent ideologies separate from those detainees that were less motivated to commit violence," says Gerrond. Yet efforts to curtail extremism fell short:

There was a huge amount of collective pressure exerted on detainees to become more radical in their beliefs. Obviously, this was supported by the fact that the detainees were being held against their will in a facility with minimal communication with their family and friends. This led to detainees turning to each other for support. If there were radical elements within this support network, there was always the potential that detainees would become more radical in their beliefs.
Gerrond notes the US military instituted several initiatives to counter the spread of extreme beliefs among the prisoners at Camp Bucca. Most preaching, he says, was conducted in public, where it could be monitored, and translators stood by to identify radical rhetoric. The facility also implemented an anti-extremist re-education program that offered various courses, including literacy classes and seminars on reading the Koran that were designed to counter interpretations of the holy book that justified violence. Most of these courses were voluntary and likely only reached a small percentage of detainees. The program, according to US military records [12], enlisted Islamic clerics, psychologists, and behavioral scientists to work with prisoners.

"I would be surprised if more than 5 to 10 percent of the detainee population participated," says Gerrond. He recalls that the first graduation ceremony for this program was "somewhat surreal…with a round of sincere handshakes and congratulations between American guards and Iraqi detainees." The program also attempted to increase family visitation privileges to provide psychological support to moderates and prevent radicalization. But the camp's location in southeast Iraq, on the border of Kuwait, [13] made it difficult for many families to visit, because of the distance and the danger in traveling.

Former inmates told Al Jazeera in 2009 [14] that Camp Bucca, which closed in September of 2009 [15]and transferred detainees to Iraqi custody, was an "Al Qaeda school," where extremists gave chalkboard lessons on explosives and suicide bombing techniques to younger prisoners. One former prisoner, Adel Jasim Mohammed, told the Arab news service that one extremist "stayed for a week and recruited 25 of the 34 detainees" he was grouped with. Mohammed said that the US military officials did essentially nothing to stop radicals from indoctrinating other detainees, though US military officials denied to Al Jazeera that jihadists had radicalized moderate prisoners there.

The US military investigated [16]the management of the camp and other detention facilities in 2004 and cited serious problems including "inexperienced guards, lapses in accountability, complacency, lack of leadership presence, and lack of clear and concise communication between the guards and the leadership." But this inquiry did not examine whether conditions had fostered extremism.

As sectarian violence flares in Iraq, Gerrond thinks back to a "chilling conversation" he had with a "Shia Iraqi corrections officer" at Camp Bucca. He "stated to me (through a translator) that when the Americans departed Iraq, his only request was that we leave them enough ammunition so that they could kill all the [Sunni] detainees that were being held."

Iran Pursues Subtle Strategy on Iraq

Iran is pursuing a delicate strategy of supporting fellow Shiite Muslims and preserving its influence in neighboring Iraq—where the government is under siege by radical Sunni militants—without pushing the confrontation into outright sectarian warfare. For the second straight week, influential clerics, who are appointed by the Islamic Republic's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, used their Friday sermons to denounce the militant groups and support Iraq's government. But their speeches steered clear of explicitly encouraging individual Shiites to act against the Sunni insurgents.

"We are ready to help Iraq as they ask for help," Ayatollah Mohammad Saeedi told thousands of Iranians gathered for Friday prayers in Qom, Iran's religious capital.

The country has openly sent top military advisers to help the Iraqi government, and blamed a collection of foreign enemies from Saudi Arabia to Israel and the U.S. for the violence. It deployed at least three battalions of elite Revolutionary Guards units to Iraq, according to Iranian security officials—an action Iran's foreign ministry denied. Yet it has stopped short of sending in large numbers of its own troops and discouraged ordinary Iranians from crossing the border to fight or defend holy sites in Iraq.

Iranians have been at least as alarmed as Western countries at the rapid advance through Iraq by the group calling itself the Islamic State, which was formerly known as ISIS. The militants, who advocate violence against those who don't accept their religious views, have killed thousands of Iraqi Shiites and vowed to destroy Shiite holy sites. They also disparage Iranian influence in the country.

Their threats to the holy sites are designed to stoke tensions between Sunnis and Shiites. A successful attack on a major Shiite site could tip Iraq into a sectarian civil war, as the destruction of a Shiite shrine by Sunni militants in 2006 did. That prospect has alarmed Iran's leadership because a larger conflict could bring down Iraq's government, spill across the border or force Iran to send large numbers of troops into Iraq.

"We have to make sure this does not turn into a Sunni-Shiite war," said Hossein Sheikholeslam, an international affairs adviser to the conservative speaker of Iran's parliament.

So Iran's government has strained to lay blame on a collection of enemies, arguing that what it calls a small number of fighters could only have taken so much territory with help, including from Saudi Arabia, the U.S., and supporters of the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

Iran's influence in Iraq has grown dramatically since the U.S.-led invasion toppled Hussein in 2003. His Sunni-led government fought a brutal eight-year war with Iran during the 1980s, and was a check on Iranian influence in the Middle East for decades.

With the U.S. occupation eventually assenting to the Shiite-dominated central government in Iraq led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Iran has become a major power broker across the border. Trade and investment ties have grown as well, amid the flowering of long-suppressed religious ties between the Shiite religious capitals of Qom in Iran and Najaf in Iraq.

Last year, some 2.5 million pilgrims traveled each way between the two countries, according to the Pilgrimage Research Center in Qom, and billions of dollars in investment in hotels, prayer centers and religious donations have flowed with them.

"Both countries are united. We don't even think of ourselves as separate countries," said Hamid Reza Taraghi, who heads a religious foundation operating under the auspices of the supreme leader. "We've helped Iraq flourish, especially in these holy cities."

To protect those ties, Iran has openly rushed to aid Mr. Maliki's government with military advisers, weapons and intelligence.

Perhaps its biggest contribution, referred to only obliquely in Iranian media, has been helping Mr. Maliki's government overhaul Iraq's lackluster professional military. Iran has provided advisers and trainers of zealous and often battle-trained militias formed and largely controlled by hard-line Iraqi Shiite religious groups with close ties to Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Iran has made no secret of the presence of Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Revolutionary Guards' overseas unit known as the Quds Force, inside Iraq to advise the Iraqi government and its armed forces. It has emphasized that Iran is willing to provide whatever help the Iraqi government requests, and news about the conflict is widely broadcast in Iran.

To justify those outlays, it has played up the need to protect Shiite holy sites in Iraq and help defend what it sees as Iraq's popularly elected Shiite government. Yet at the same time, the Iranian government has sought to play down the increasingly sectarian character the Iraqi military is taking on under Iranian tutelage. And it has sought to stress that the Iraqi government and military are capable of handling the insurgent's onslaught. The drumbeat of Iranian news reports and religious pronouncements has created a wellspring of emotional support for Iraq within Iran.

"We're furious about those who insult our beliefs," said Mohammed Vahid Nikouseffat, a 26-year-old seminary student studying in Qom.

Mr. Nikouseffat spoke as he entered one of Iran's biggest and most prominent Shrines, known as Jamkaran. All around the towering domed mosque thousands of regular Iranians worshipers prayed and sang verses of the Quran after breaking their Ramadan fast. Mr. Nikouseffat said Iranians are ready to help defend the holy sites in Iraq if necessary. But for now, they must obey their Supreme Leader's instructions to leave the fight against Iraq's enemies to the government—and a higher power.
"We believe God will judge them," he said.

The US Is Flying Right Into The Iran-Russia-Syria Plan In Iraq

The US Is Flying Right Into The Iran-Russia-Syria Plan In Iraq

An AH-64D Apache attack helicopter from Company B, 1st Battalion, 227th Aviation Regiment, 1st Air Cavalry Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, Multi-National Division - Baghdad, flies over Baghdad providing security for U.S. ground forces nearby near Camp Taji in Baghdad, in this June 11, 2009.

The skies of Iraq are getting crowded. U.S. Apache attack helicopters and unarmed drones are being deployed along with the 500 American troops already ordered to the country. They're just the latest foreign aircraft to join the fight against ISIS, the jihadist group that's swept through northern and western Iraq in recent weeks.

The Syrian Air Force bombed targets that were allegedly ISIS positions in western Iraq last week. Iran has reportedly sent its entire fleet of Sukoi-24 fighter jets to Iraq. And Russia has sent jets and "advisers" to assist Baghdad.

The U.S. military is now in a situation where it likely has to work out military logistics with countries that are typically adversarial with both U.S. policy and international norms more generally.

As combat aviation expert and blogger at The Aviationist David Cenciotti explained when reached by Business Insider, " it is possible to fly Apache and drones in Iraq without any coordination with other air forces operating in the same airspace, but it would be quite dangerous For proper deconfliction of tactical assets, prior coordination and air space management and control are required."

Cenciotti notes that this could be done through "creating a coordination cell" with the other militaries present in the country, or even by "deploying a dedicated asset" like surveillance aircraft "for Airspace Control, Airborne Early Warning, ground targets identification, and mapping."

So U.S. military planners will have to coordinate their activities with other actors to avoid friendly fire incidents or other potentially dicey confrontations between countries with plenty of political and strategic baggage in their relationships with the U.S.

More than that, the deployment of U.S. combat aircraft means that the U.S. is acting as a potential force multiplier for some of the international community's most problematic actors.

The Dangers With Aligning With Iran-Russia-Assad

The Syrian government is one of the most oppressive in the world and was responsible for a chemical-weapons attack in Damascus that killed over 1,500 people in August 2013. Iran is one of the world's leading state sponsors of terrorism, according to the U.S. State Department, and has fostered violent sectarianism in Iraq through its arming of Shiite militias and support for despotic Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea got it kicked out of the G8 in March, and several Russian officials are under E.U. and U.S. sanctions over the country's expansionist policies toward Ukraine.

Yet the alliance between these three countries has transformed the Middle East in the years after the Arab Spring protests of 2011. Russian and Iranian support allowed the Syrian regime of Bashar al Assad to survive against a constellation of secular and jihadist rebel groups — feeding a war that's killed over 150,000 people and leading to the displacement of over 9 million.

Iran's strong position in Syria — enabled through Russian financial, diplomatic and military support for Assad — has allowed it to turn Baghdad into a veritable client, to the point where Qods Force commander Qassem Suleimani is arguably the most powerful person in the country.

And there's been plenty of blowback from these policies throughout the Middle East, from the destabilization of Lebanon to the ongoing falling out between the U.S. and its Gulf allies to the potential creation of an independent Kurdistan.

The U.S.'s deployment of attack helicopters to Iraq for possible use against ISIS doesn't prove that Washington is explicitly assisting Moscow, Damascus, and Tehran in their regional ambitions, which have had such a disruptive effect on the post-Arab Spring Middle East. But that may be the likeliest effect of the U.S. joining the fight in Iraq on the side of Russia, Syria, and Iran.

Michael Doran, a former senior director at the National Security Council and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, told Business Insider that the Obama administration needs to stifle both Iran and ISIS's regional strategies if it wants a comprehensive solution to the problems wracking Syria and Iran. In his view, the U.S. needs to avoid taking a side in the region's larger Sunni-Shiite split — now encapsulated in the fight between Shiite Iran and its Iraqi clients, and Sunni extremists like ISIS — and work to curtail all of the region's bad actors.

"If you want to build up a non-jihadi Sunni force that is capable of commanding loyalty from people on the ground then you have to fight Assad and push against Iran, and you push back against ISIS and Iran at the same time," he said. "If you're just fighting ISIS then you're building an Iranian security system in the region."

U.S. policy could have this effect even if it isn't the Obama administration's intent to strengthen Iran's hand. Even simply coordinating intelligence with a sectarianized and Iranian-infiltrated Iraqi military could play to Tehran's advantage.

"The Iraqis are a thin membrane between the U.S. and the Qods Force," says Doran, referring to the foreign arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. "Any intelligence that we give to the Iraqis is probably going to be on the desk of Qassem Suleimani in less than a day."

With this increased commitment of U.S. military assets to Iraq, the U.S. isn't just forcing itself to coordinate logistics with the Iranian-Syrian-Russian alliance in the Middle East. It's also bringing American policy alarmingly close to that of some of the region's more destructive forces — whether Obama intends for this or not.

Why ISIS gains in Iraq are reshaping Syrian regime's war strategy


With Islamic militants at the vanguard of what appears to be a general Sunni uprising against Baghdad’s Shiite-dominated government, the conflicts in Syria and Iraq are beginning to merge under the strains of sectarian and ethnic competition.

The shockwaves are already reverberating in Syria’s civil war and changing the calculus of both the regime of President Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian armed opposition. One element of that opposition is the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, also known as ISIL or ISIS. Last week it seized Mosul and it has advanced on Baghdad, raising alarm bells in Washington – and in Damascus, which had previously shown tacit tolerance for a group that controls a swath of northeast Syria.

Over the weekend, the Syrian Air Force staged its first major attacks on ISIS strongholds in the provinces of Raqqa and Hasakeh. These strongholds were the launching pad for the group's recent gains in Iraq. The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that Syrian jets had targeted ISIS headquarters in Raqqa and the group's religious courts. There was no word on casualties. 

“ISIL was useful to the [Assad] regime and [Assad’s ally] Iran for the pressure it put on the Syrian opposition,” says Frederic Hof, senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East. “But given what's happened in Iraq, ISIL's shelf life in Syria has expired.”

Although sworn enemies on paper, ISIS has largely refrained from fighting the Syrian regime to focus on building an Islamic state in northern Syria and ousting more moderate rebel rivals. In return, the regime has left ISIS alone, allowing the Syrian military to concentrate on fighting the moderate rebel groups. At the same timeAssad also points to the brutal exploits of ISIS and other jihadist groups in the conflict to justify its argument to the international community that it is fighting Islamic “terrorists.”

The Iraq upheaval appears to have changed that calculation. It has also injected uncertainty into Assad's reliance on Iraqi Shiite fighters to seize the upper hand in Syria's war.

In recent weeks, “thousands” of Iraqi Shiite fighters who were in Syria to defend the Assad regime have left, according to a diplomatic report from a European embassy in Beirut. Some of the Iraqi Shiites withdrew from the town of Rankous in the mountainous Qalamoun region north of Damascus. Two months ago, the town fell to the Assad regime. Last week, Syrian rebels took advantage of the weakened regime presence in Rankous to mount a counter-attack in which at least 11 Lebanese Shiite Hezbollah fighters were killed.

“The rebels launched a surprise attack on the edge of Rankous. The fighting is ongoing,” says a veteran Hezbollah combatant who has served multiple tours in Syria. 

Challenge of holding territory

Despite a succession of battlefield successes in western Syria over the past year, the Assad regime barely has sufficient forces to hold its newly seized territory. With the Syrian Army weakened by desertions and exhaustion, the regime relies heavily on its allies, chiefly Hezbollah as well as Iraqi paramilitaries and the National Defense Force (NDF), a militia composed mainly of Alawites, the splinter Shiite sect to which Mr. Assad belongs. 

It is estimated that there are around 5,000 Hezbollah fighters in Syria at any one time and they have spearheaded key offensives in the past year, backed by Syrian air power and artillery. Before the ISIS offensive in northern Iraq, there were an estimated 20,000 to 30,000 Iraqi Shiite fighters serving in Syria, most of them ill-trained recruits on six-month contracts offered by Iran with a promise of a job upon return. The Iraqi Shiites mainly defend religious sites and man checkpoints. The strength of the Iran-trained NDF is thought to have reached 80,000.

Even before ISIS seized Mosul, some Iraqi Shiites were pulled out of Syria in response to rising tensions in Iraq where Sunni militants had a growing presence in Anbar Province. But the advance toward Baghdad and a vow by Abu Mohammed al-Adnani, the group’s spokesman, to take the war to the “filth-ridden city” of Karbala and Najaf, “the city of polytheism,” both containing paramount Shiite shrines, has upped the ante. For Iraqi Shiites in Syria, protecting these holy sites is a more pressing priority than defending Assad’s regime.

A drawdown of Iraqi Shiites could make Syria's regime even more dependent on Hezbollah fighters, further straining the Lebanese group’s support base. Lebanese Shiites generally have supported Hezbollah’s intervention in Syria, especially when Shiite areas of Lebanon suffered suicide bombings last year by extremist Sunni groups.

But the last car bombing occurred at the end of March, and since then Lebanon has enjoyed a period of relative calm. Now, there is a sense of unhappiness building among the families of Hezbollah fighters. They are increasingly asking how much longer their fathers, husbands, brothers, and sons will be sent to fight and die on the Syrian front. 

Regional recalculations

More broadly, the Iraq crisis could change the regional and international calculus toward Syria. The sight of ISIS militants equipped with American vehicles and weaponry looted from Iraqi Army bases may further dampen the White House's willingness to supply arms to moderate Syrian rebels in case they fall into the wrong hands.  

Iran also is having to recalibrate its position in light of the Iraq crisis. Tehran has committed a significant financial and military investment in propping up the Assad regime over the past three years. It also is showing a willingness to come to the rescue of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government and reportedly has dispatched elite troops to Baghdad.

“Iran’s primary interest has been to maintain the axis of Iran, Maliki’s Iraq, Assad’s Syria, and Hezbollah in Lebanon,” says the European diplomatic report. “Iran is therefore now entering its very own two-front situation [Syria and Iraq] and may face a lengthy problematic situation that could affect the quantity and quality of the financial and military support to Assad’s Syria.”

Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2014/0616/Why-ISIS-gains-in-Iraq-are-reshaping-Syrian-regime-s-war-strategy-video

Newsweek: Maliki Compromised CIA Spies in Iraq for Years

Nuri al-Maliki

U.S. military advisors arriving in Iraq better be careful who they talk to and where they go: Their Iraq ‘allies’ will almost certainly be spying on them.

According to three current and former CIA officers, the Iraqi government, led by Muslim Shiites with close ties to Iran, has waged an aggressive campaign against the spy agency and other U.S. security personnel in the country for several years.  “They cover us like a blanket,” says former CIA official John Maguire, who was deputy CIA station chief in Iraq in 2004 and maintains widespread contacts there as an oil business consultant.

The first targets of Iraq’s counterspies were CIA contacts in the fledgling Iraq National Intelligence Service, or INIS, set up by the CIA in 2004, Maguire and others say. Its first chief was a longtime CIA asset, Gen. Mohammed Shahwani, an Iraqi Sunni who had plotted against the late dictator Saddam Hussein. The INIS soon came under assault by the rival, Shiite-led Ministry of Interior, headed by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

“They fired all the guys who they considered suspect, which was basically all the guys we put into the [intelligence] service, and solidified control around the Shia and Iran,” Maguire tells Newsweek. In 2007 Shahwani was ousted. “Then their technological operations [against the CIA] began in earnest. About two years ago was when they really started to work us hard.”  

According to Maguire and another former CIA operations officer, the Iraqis acquired sophisticated cell phone monitoring equipment, probably from Iran, and began tracking CIA operators to identify their spies, especially inside the Maliki government. “It wasn’t so much the agency people they were interested in as who they were meeting and talking to,” says another CIA source, a paramilitary operations specialist who did three tours in Iraq. Although he was not authorized to discuss the subject, he agreed to be quoted on condition of anonymity because he felt U.S. advisers just arriving in Iraq needed to be warned.

“They are very aggressive,” he says of the Iraqi security services. “They have the best equipment Iran has,” including devices known as StingRays, that can lock onto a cell phone and extract all its data, from contacts to photos and music.

CIA operators in Iraq today, Maguire explains, make it too easy for Iraqi agents to know who they’re meeting. “They are working out of the Green Zone,” the high security area of Baghdad which is home to the U.S. embassy, Maguire notes.  “Everything they do is done on phones. And Iraq and Iran can see that... “

It’s a common lament of CIA oldtimers that the current crop of operators don’t measure up to past standards. But Maguire is appalled at how easy at least some CIA spy-handlers, called case officers in espionage jargon, make it for the Iraqis to find them. “I can't tell you the number of times I've been driving around the city the last several years and I would see a station motorcade come by with a lead car, a car with a case officer in it and a follow car.  And the case officer would be in the passenger seat and have his feet on the dash reading a newspaper. That is not clandestine collection tradecraft. It's embarrassing.”

To enhance security, more CIA operators need to hide in the city, he says. “When the situation deteriorated in 2004, we stopped crossing the [security] lines to get into the Green Zone,” Maguire says.  “We stayed in the city in safe houses with our assets. There's no reason, with today's technology, to come back to the embassy to send classified messages. You can send them from everywhere. Crossing security lines is always the most risky, from both a safety and a counterintelligence aspect, so if you don't go into the Green Zone, you don't come up on a lot of people's screens.”

While dealing with the current emergency, the U.S. and Iraq will maintain the fiction that they are allies. According to the Pentagon, 90 U.S. military advisers will begin setting up one of two joint information centers where U.S. and Iraqi personnel will share intelligence.

“They better be careful,” the CIA paramilitary officer says. “The Iraqis are going to be all over them.”

ISIS Proposes Truce With Iraqi Kurds as Fighting Grows


Officers in the Kurdish Peshmerga paramilitary force say that they have received an informal offer of a truce from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syrian (ISIS) fighters who have been sweeping through Iraq recently. “If you don’t attack us, we would not attack you,” appears to have been the extent of the offer, which was delivered by courier from ISIS territory to Peshmerga fighters south of Kirkuk. Though ISIS has often fought with the Kurdish factions in Syria, they have so far focused on the military in Iraq, against whom they have won several overwhelming victories. The Peshmerga has used the fighting as an opportunity to seize some Iraqi cities of their own, and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) seems to be getting closer to outright secession. Given that, they seem in no hurry to start fighting ISIS, especially if ISIS isn’t going to threaten their territory. That could change quickly, of course, but for now it seems mutually beneficial for ISIS and the KRG to ignore one another and focus instead on shoring up their respective domains out of territory the Maliki government simply can’t hold any longer.
Iraq Official Says Iran's Military Mastermind Is In Charge 


A former CIA operative described Qassem Suleimani, the head of Iran’s Quds Force, as the “most powerful operative in the Middle East today.” Qassem Suleimani, the head of the Qods Force, the foreign arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guards Corps, is leading the Iraqi reaction to a radical Islamist group's takeover of much of the country, according to a senior Iraqi official quoted by The Guardian.

"Who do you think is running the war? Those three senior generals who ran away?" the unnamed official asked The Guardian's Martin Chulov. "Qassem Suleimani is in charge. And reporting directly to him are the militias, led by Asa'ib ahl al-Haq."

Asaib ahl al-Haq (AAH)  organization is one of several Iraqi groups that serve as instruments of Iranian policy through the region, as University of Maryland researcher Philip Smyth explained in a policy brief for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy earlier this week.

Specifically, it is a Shiite militia and Iranian proxy in Iraq that deployed fighters to the Syrian theater to support the regime of Bashar Assad. But Smyth writes that AAH fighters have now been recalled to Iraq to combat the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), the al-Qaeda castoff that took over vast stretches of the country's oil-producing north last week.  
"Many of the Shiite Islamist forces fighting in Iraq operate as part of Iranian proxy groups that have been attached to [Iraqi Security Forces] and Iraqi army units," Smyth wrote. "Some even operate as a direct part of these official Iraqi military forces."

So it would make sense if Suleimani were calling the shots inside of Iraq itself. He's responsible for arming and organizing sectarian militias that are semi-integrated into the official security apparatus in parts of the country. And he was in Baghdad meeting with Shiite parliamentarians not long before things escalated.

It's a place he knows well. In his profile of Suleimani for The New Yorker last year, Dexter Filkins recounted how the Qods Force chief used his connections in Iraq to play the Americans, Sunni terrorists, and Shiite proxy militias off of one other during the U.S.'s military presence in the country. He even visited Baghdad's Green Zone:

Throughout the war, [Suleimani] summoned Iraqi leaders to Tehran to broker deals, usually intended to maximize Shiite power. At least once, he even traveled into the heart of American power in Baghdad. “Suleimani came into the Green Zone to meet the Iraqis,” the Iraqi politician told me. “I think the Americans wanted to arrest him, but they figured they couldn’t.”

The pro-Iranian Iraqi government that ensured the U.S. military would leave the country in 2011 is essentially Suleimani's creation as well. Suleimani is deeply invested in keeping together the network of influence and control that he spent much of the past decade building in Iraq. Still a major open question: whether he'll have the U.S. on his side in his efforts.


7 Times When Iran's Strategic Mastermind Reshaped The Middle East


A former CIA operative described Qassem Suleimani, the head of Iran’s Quds Force, as the “most powerful operative in the Middle East today.”

Qassem Suleimani has been called the single most powerful operative in the Middle East today. Take a look at his resume and it's no surprise why. As the commander of Iran’s Quds Force — the foreign branch of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards best described as a cross between the CIA and Special Forces — Suleimani has emerged as Iran’s leading foreign strategist. Suleimani has fomented unrest in Iraq, lead, supplied, and trained Bashar al-Assad's army in Syria, and maintained a vast network of contacts and operatives throughout the world.

Due to the nature of his position, Suleimani’s operations have usually been clandestine. It’s often impossible to know for sure whether Suleimani and his Quds Force have been involved. But after one look at the circumstantial evidence, patterns begin to emerge. Here’s a few of the operations that Suleimani has been tied to over the last twenty years. 

1. Guiding the Iraqi insurgency throughout the Iraq War (2003-2011)


Since the beginning of the Iraq War, Suleimani has sent Qods Force agents and officers into Iraq to train, fund, and lead Shiite militias against Saddam Hussein’s Ba’athist party. Once that was eliminated, Suleimani trained his attention on Coalition forces. Senior Qods Force officers, including the third highest-ranking officer in the Force, have turned up in Iraq. At one point, it was estimated that as many as 30,000 Iranian operatives were in Iraq.  

Initially, Iranian involvement amounted to training and arming the country's militias. After the U.S. caught wind of Iran’s strategy and began capturing Iranian officers, Suleimani and Iranian forces began directly attacking Coalition forces through their proxies.  In addition, Iran helped create "secret cells," groups of 20-60 Iraqis that have been trained and armed in Iran to attack Coalition forces and undermine the Iraqi government.

The Qods Force is responsible for importing the roadside bombs, IEDs, and explosively-formed projectiles, that inflicted a massive amount of casualties on Coalition troops. It’s estimated that around 20% of American combat deaths in Iraq came directly or indirectly from Iran and the Quds Force. 

2. The 2005 Assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafic Hariri 


On February 14th, 2005, Rafic Hariri, a former prime minister of Lebanon and of the leaders of the country's Sunni community, was assasinated when more than 2,000 pounds of TNT detonated by his motorcade in Beirut, killing him and 21 others.

Shortly after the assassination, the United Nations began investigating the bombing and convened its Special Tribunal for Lebanon in 2006. The Tribunal, which is still investigating the attack, charged four Hezbollah members in 2011, all of whom have since disappeared — although one has resurfaced in Syria, fighting for Assad).

Many in the Tribunal believe that Hezbollah carried out the attack with the approval and support of both Syria and Iran. Syrian officials and Hezbollah have conversely accused Israel and the Mossad of carrying out the assassination, although there is no evidence to support these claims.

Investigators reportedly found that one of the disposable cell phones used by the killers made at least a dozen calls to Iran before and after the assassination. In addition, Iranian operatives were overheard minutes before the assassination, directing the attack. 

“If indeed Iran was involved, Suleimani was undoubtedly at the center of this,” Robert Baer, a former senior C.I.A. official,  told Dexter Filkins of the New Yorker in 2013.   

The assassination triggered the Cedar Revolution, a series of demonstrations that led to the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon. If Iran did carry out the assassination, the expulsion of Syrian troops doesn’t seem like the intended result. But that almost didn't matter: Hezbollah ended up wrecking the country's post-Revolution coalition government, and nearly triggered a civil war in 2008.

3. 2006 Hezbollah Cross border raid on Israel
lebanon israel war

After years of increased tensions between Hezbollah and Israel, Hezbollah fighters crossed the border into Israel and attacked two Humvees on July 12th, 2006, killing three soldiers and abducting two. The sophisticated attack included other Hezbollah contingents that opened fire on seven Israeli army posts at the same time, knocking out surveillance and communications.

The incident set off the 2006 Lebanon War. The 34-day conflict included Israel airstrikes on both Hezbollah military targets and Lebanese civilian infrastructure, a naval blockade, and a ground invasion of southern Lebanon. 

The conflict has been considered by many to be the opening round of an Israeli-Iranian proxy war. Iranian Revolutionary Guards reportedly assisted Hezbollah fighters in firing rockets on Israel, and helped operate Hezbollah outposts during the war. Iran has long been involved with Hezbollah, helping to form, train, and finance the group since its inception.

According to some Middle Eastern security officials, the original cross-border raid was enacted with Suleimani’s guidance, though he did not expect such an intense reaction from Lebanon's southern neighbor.

4. Arranging the 2006 deal that made Nouri al-Maliki Prime Minister of Iraq

Nouri Al Maliki Iraq President Prime Minster

When Nouri al-Maliki was selected to be the Prime Minister of Iraq in 2006, the U.S. actually saw it as a great victory for their troubled policy in the country. After the first post-war prime minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, fell from favor, the U.S. went to great lengths to vet potential replacements, partly out of concern over their relationship to Iran. Maliki was seen as someone who was “independent of Iran” Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq said, at the time.

More recently, it has been reported that Maliki is far more of a puppet for Iran than U.S. policymakers had thought or expected during the American presence in the country. In Filkins' New Yorker exposè, he reports that Suleimani arranged the deal that put Maliki in power, extracting promises of support from the Shiite and Kurdish leaders that eventually put Maliki in power. Suleimani supposedly offered benefits to those that agreed to back Maliki, including an agreement to build a lucrative oil pipeline to Syria. 

It now appears that Maliki has been helping Iran evade Western economic sanctions via the Iraqi banking industry. He's provided Suleimani with proceeds from 200,000 barrels of Iraqi oil a day. If all that is true, then it isn't such a stretch to assert that Suleimani is the most powerful man in the Arab League's fourth most-populous country.

5. 2007  Raid on the Karabala provincial headquarters in Iraq


Spc. Johnathan B. Chism of Louisiana, Pvt. Johnathon M. Millican, of Alabama, and Pvt. Shawn Falter of New York are three of the five Americans captured and killed in the raid on the Karbala base in 2007.

On January 20th, 2007, a team of twelve men disguised as U.S. soldiers arrived at the Karbala Provincial Joint Coordination Center in Iraq, where U.S. soldiers were conducting meetings with local officials. Once in the compound, the team headed straight for the one building with American soldiers, capturing and eventually killing five U.S. troops. 

After an investigation, American military officials concluded that the Quds Force knew of, supported, and helped plan the Karabala attack. Many believe that the attack was in retaliation to U.S. forces detaining five Iranian officials accused of helping Iraqis kill American soldiers.

The U.S. successfully killed the attack's leader, a member of the Iranian-backed group Asaib al Haq, and ended up capturing several of it's planners and participants — one of whom confirmed that the attack was ordered by Iranian officals. Suleimani supposedly messaged the American ambassador in Iraq, denying responsibility for the attack. Few Americans believe him. 

6. 2011 plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador in Washington, D.C.


In October 2011, the United States arrested Iranian-American used car-salesman Mansour J. Arbabsiar and Gholam Shakuri, a known member of the Quds Force, for plotting to murder the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S. in Washington, D.C.

The plan involved Arbabsiar hiring assassins from the Los Zetas drug cartel for $1.5 million to bomb a restaurant that the ambassador often visited, and included bombings at the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington. The plot never got off the ground because the Los Zetas representative that Arbabsiar was negotiating with was actually a DEA informant.  

Numerous U.S. officials believe that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader, and Suleimani at least knew of the plot. An FBI investigation found that money from a Quds Force bank account had been wired to Arbabsiar and that he was able to identify Quds Force officers from a photo array while in custody. In addition, law enforcement had Arbabsiar make calls to Shakuri in Iran, during which Shakuri urged Arbabsiar to carry out the plot. 

Nonetheless, many Middle East and Iran analysts found it hard to believe that Iran would carry out an attack on U.S. soil, using a non-Muslim proxy in such a haphazard manner. If Iran did order the attack, it could mark a worrying shift in strategy. 

7. Providing Bashar al Assad with billions of dollars in arms, support, strategic training, and troops in Syria


While Iran and Syria have always been close allies, Suleimani has gone a step further by taking care of the job that dictator Bashar al-Assad and his generals couldn't: turning the tide of the country's brutal civil war, which has killed over 150,000 people over the past three years.

According to American officials, Suleimani travels to Damascus frequently, where he operates out of a heavily fortified command post, directing the Syrian military, Hezbollah commanders, and Iraqi Shiite militias. Suleimani has used his connections with the Iraqi government to arrange access to Iraqi airspace, allowing him him to fly operatives and arms to Damascus. This supply route has been integral to the maintenance and perhaps even the survival of the Assad regime. 

In addition, Suleimani reportedly planned and orchestrated the Battle of al-Qusayr, a key confrontation that made the Assad regime's victory over the rebels not only possible, but likely. The momentum of the two-week battle was shifted with the help of Iranian and Hezbollah officers, who encircled the town. 

According to John Maguire, a former C.I.A. officer in Iraq, Suleimani orchestrated the Battle of al-Qusayr, which was a "great victory for him" — another strategic masterstroke from one of the most important and shadowy figures in the Middle East.

Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/7-times-irans-strategic-mastermind-170927343.html

'It fell on deaf ears': CIA and MI6 knew about ISIS assault in advance, failed to react


As Iraq’s western border falls beyond the control of the country’s government, a new report suggests the United States and Britain were warned of a burgeoning insurgency months before militants began gaining territory.

According to a report by the UK-based Telegraph, senior Kurdish intelligence officials said they tried to explain to their allies in the CIA, MI6, and the central Iraqi government that the members of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) could represent a great threat to Iraq's stability, but that those warnings failed to spark any action.

In addition to calling attention to potential territorial gains in Iraq – a new Reuters report states the “entire Western frontier,” comprising borders with Syria and Jordan, is now “beyond government control” – Kurdish officials warned that ISIS is attracting foreign-born Muslims to its cause. Senior Kurdish intelligence officer Rooz Bahjat said that of the 4,000 estimated foreigners fighting alongside ISIS, somewhere between 400 and 450 were born in Britain and convinced to join the insurgency.

These officials also said a formal alliance between ISIS members and ex-Baathists, who held power under Saddam Hussein, was nearly completed, and that it would lead to an attack on Mosul and other cities in northern Iraq.

“We had this information then, and we passed it on to [the British] government and the US government,” Bahjat told the Telegraph. "We knew exactly what strategy they were going to use, we knew the military planners. It fell on deaf ears.”

Although ISIS has now quickly taken control of multiple cities in Iraq, it’s believed that many Sunnis have decided to support the extremist organization over the lack of an inclusive government in central Iraq. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s Shia-led government has failed to bridge the country’s sectarian divide, leaving many Sunnis feeling as if they have no stake in the country’s future.

As RT reported previously, there have been indications that the US wants Maliki to resign his post so that attempts at Sunni/Shia reconciliation could be made, but there is little evidence to suggest Maliki will go, and the US has not declared this preference publicly. Speaking on the situation last week, President Obama said, "It’s not our job to choose Iraq’s leaders … But I don’t think that there’s any secret that, right now at least, there is deep division between Sunni, Shia and Kurdish leaders.”

During a recent interview with CBS News, Obama stated that ISIS is “a medium- and long-term threat” to US national security, but also cautioned that it is “just one of a number of organizations that we have to stay focused on.”

Speaking with the Telegraph in a separate article, head of Kurdish intelligence Lahur Talabani said it wasn’t simply the 2003 invasion of Iraq that’s responsible for today’s violence, but that the lack of willingness on the part of Western powers to establish a peaceful government in the war’s aftermath is primarily to blame. The Kurds have called for more substantial intervention from the West, to no avail so far.

"I have completely lost hope in America after listening to President Barack Obama," he said. "I blame him personally for what has happened in Syria, in the Middle East, in Iraq at the moment. I have no hope any more.”

For his part, President Obama has ruled out the return of American troops to Iraq. Last week, he announced that 300 military advisers – in addition to 275 troops meant to safeguard the American embassy in Baghdad – would be sent to help train and support Iraqi troops. The US is reportedly mulling the use of airstrikes and drones at the request of Maliki’s government, but has also expressed reluctance at entering a conflict with no clear political solution.

Initially, the use of airstrikes was also ruled out due to the lack of good intelligence related to ISIS, something analyst Michael Stephens of the Royal United Services Institute think tank believes is the result of policies that placed significantly less emphasis on Iraq.

“Both the Americans and the British had options to upgrade their presence on the ground many months before this happened but seem not to have acted on that,” he said to the Telegraph.
“For one reason or another there was a feeling that Iraq was not an important foreign posting and as a result it was seen as a place where careers go to die rather than a place to build a career. That meant the assets that should have been available to us weren’t really there when this kicked off.

Source: http://rt.com/usa/167912-ica-mi6-isis-iraq/

Why Israel is in love with Kurdistan


The “Middle East” invented by British and French colonial powers almost a century ago is fast dissolving as ISIS carves a vast piece of real estate from the suburbs of Aleppo to Tikrit and from Mosul to the Jordanian/Iraqi border.

Artificial geography, established in the midst of World War I, via the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement, is at risk; and it’s no accident the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) itself, although dreaming of a Caliphate, is also graphically emphasizing the point. Those states carved out of the fragmented Ottoman Empire are all at risk. In this geopolitical vortex the ultimate free electron is definitely the notion of a Greater Kurdistan.

Iraq is breaking up before our eyes and it would appear that the creation of an independent Kurdish state is a foregone conclusion.” The analysis might have come straight from ISIS – but in fact came from none other than former bouncer and unreformed Zionist, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

What the invariably truculent Lieberman told US Secretary of State John Kerry this week pertained mostly to the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq, an autonomous region that - quite handily – is also exporting oil to Israel (the KRG angrily denies it.)

By all practical purposes, Kurdish Peshmergas are now also in control of heavily disputed, oil-rich Kirkuk – after the ignominious withdrawal of Baghdad’s predominantly Shi’ite army as ISIS was advancing. The wily KRG president Masoud Barzani has been adamant; “We will bring all of our forces to preserve Kirkuk.

Talk about being handed over The Big Prize on a plate; the KRG has been trying to control Kirkuk by all means necessary since the 2003 Shock and Awe. In any future scenario Kirkuk would be the absolutely fabulous gas station fueling the wealth of a prosperous Kurdish nation. Baghdad is confronted with yet another quagmire.

It’s no secret in the “Middle East” that Tel Aviv and the Kurds have had a fruitful working relationship – in military, intel and business terms - since the 1960s. It’s a no brainer Israel would instantly recognize a possible new Kurdish nation-state. No wonder Israeli President Shimon Peres, also this week, told US President Barack Obama, “the Kurds have, de facto, created their own state, which is democratic. One of the signs of a democracy is the granting of equality to women.

At least they are not Arabs

So why this sudden interest in the welfare of Kurdish women? Something fishy is afoot. Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal is heavily peddling Kurdish independence. What is Tel Aviv really up to here? The consensus narrative in Israeli media is that Kurdish independence is “good for Israel” because Kurds, well, they are not Arabs, Persians or Turks. Kurdistan – at least Iraqi Kurdistan – is seen by Tel Aviv as a “non-hostile entity” that, crucially, is not exactly touched by the plight of the Palestinians. 

From a strictly Israeli point of view, Kurds are regarded as moderate, secular Muslims who have been victims – and that’s the key operative notion – of Arab chauvinism, be it on nationalist or hardcore Islamist terms. At least in theory, Kurds won’t antagonize the notion of “Jewish self-determination.”

And even more crucially, projecting ahead, a Greater Kurdistan would be the ideal buffer state acting in tandem with larger Israeli strategic interests; in one go, it would simultaneously amputate Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. Even an independent Iraqi Kurdistan would be not only the proverbial “friend of Israel” but also a viable, prosperous state; Irbil, for instance, even though it is not Arab, wants to market itself as the Arab Capital of Tourism. And all this in a region Tel Aviv regards – paranoia included – as a basket case of failed states. What’s not to like?

Ankara’s double game

So expect from now on all sorts of made-in-the-shade moves by Israel to advance the Balkanization of Iraq into a Sunni state, a Shiite state and an Iraqi Kurdistan. There’s no question the KRG has been for all practical purposes independent since the First Gulf War in 1991 – boasting its own military (the Peshmerga) and now its own (Baghdad-contested) oil exports.

Yet the whole saga is also overloaded with myth – such as the supposedly irreconcilable gulf between Arabs and Kurds in Iraq. For nearly 10 years there has not been a single credible poll stating that the majority of Iraqi Kurds want independence. As much as there’s a yearning for independence, Kurds are also part of the government in Baghdad.

True, the KRG has brokered an uneasy truce between the Turkish government and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). But the Kurdish question in both Syria and Turkey is way more complex. Syrian Kurds have been enjoying a much larger degree of autonomy after a deal with Damascus – although they have refrained, for the moment, from demanding an independent state in Syria. Iraqi Kurds are busy helping them – from experience – in their autonomous ways.

The Kurdish question has become increasingly explosive as the Empire of Chaos preferred Divide and Rule strategy of pitting Sunnis against Shi’ites has metamorphosed into the ISIS blitzkrieg. Disaffected young Kurds in Turkey – incited by Saudi religious rhetoric, weaponizing and cash – have been particularly attracted to the Syrian jihad. Funerals in predominant Kurdish areas across Anatolia for ISIS jihadis always draw large crowds – and are the perfect recruiting opportunity for ISIS operatives.

This is only happening because – as many Kurds insist – the AKP is looking the other way. Picture the scene of a jihadi free flow in the Turkish-Syrian border at a minimum tolerated by Ankara (because it is anti-Assad) – but with the added complicating factor that ISIS in Syria is also fighting Syrian Kurds. And a lot of ISIS weaponizing also comes straight from Turkey.

The Holy Grail for Ankara is to prevent by all means necessary Turkish Kurd demands for autonomy. Their only plan so far has been to blame Syrian Kurds for their links with the PKK.

All this happens within a booming trade scenario; over 70 percent of the annual, $12 billion trade between Iraq and Turkey circulates via Iraqi Kurdistan, where over 1,500 Turkish firms are in business. It’s a contradiction pile up: Ankara in theory supports the KRG, but would never dream of supporting more autonomous Syrian and Turkish Kurds.

What’s certain is that wishful thinking – from Tel Aviv to Washington – will keep permeating calculations about the Kurdish question, as in assuming Turkey will be allowed accession to the EU (it won’t) and thus Kurdistan will be the EU’s de facto eastern border. Bordering what? A Sunnistan across the Levant? Over the Pentagon’s collective dead body, of course.

What Big Oil in the US – and also Israel – sees, most of all, is the mirage of a Western-friendly major oil exporter in the long run. That’s why Balkanization sounds so juicy. This has nothing to do with the welfare of the historically wronged Kurdish people. It’s hardcore business. And yet another Divide and Rule power play. Expect plenty of hardcore moves ahead.

Source: http://rt.com/op-edge/169672-israel-kurdistan-conflict/

ISIS, oil and war

Smoke rises from the the Baiji oil refinery in northern Iraq, 19 June 2014. Workers were evacuated from Iraq's key Baiji refinery, local sources said, as it remained unclear who was actually in control of the plant which accounts for almost a third of the country's refining capacity. Baiji has been the scene of intermittent fighting since the jihadist Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) launched its attack against Iraqi government forces last week, seizing the northern city of Mosul and a string of towns stretching south towards Baghdad. EPA/STR +++(c) dpa - Bildfunk+++

ISIS militants are selling oil from their conquered territories, further fueling tensions in the region. This has caused uncertainty on the world market, but could also lead to a drop in global oil prices.

First al-Omar and now al-Tanak: The extremist group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has been making substantial and rapid progress in its conquest of major Syrian oil fields. Together with an Iraqi oil field captured at the end of June, the militants have taken control of wide development areas on both sides of the Syria-Iraq border. And on Thursday (03.07.2014), ISIS reportedly began selling oil out of Iraq.

Since ISIS is unable to sell the oil through legitimate channels, it has taken to the black market. According to news reports, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius has accused ISIS of selling oil to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Obviously, the militants are aiming to achieve the highest possible revenue in order to prepare themselves for upcoming conflicts.

"ISIS militants are selling the oil to anyone who is interested," said the governor of the northern Iraqi town of Tuz Khormato, speaking with Turkish news agency Anadolu. "They need the money for weapons and ammunition."

The oil sales could contribute to further chaos in the war-torn region. With the oil, the Assad regime would be able to fill up its tanks and send them against the insurgents. And with the money it gets from the sale of the oil, ISIS would be able to further finance its conquest in Syria and Iraq.

It's a big risk for the regime in Damascus, as the ISIS militants will only be temporary partners with the Assad regime. They're not concerned with keeping Assad in power. Their goal is to further expand the area of their recently declared caliphate, which already extends from Iraq through Syria to the Turkish border. And in Iraq, ISIS is planning to extend its territory to the south.

Impact on the oil market

The al-Omar oil field has been in the hands of the jihadists since last November. At the time it was conquered by the al-Nusra front, which has since ceded it to ISIS. Since that time, militants have extracted around 10,000 barrels of oil a day.

The most recent ISIS conquests have not only contributed to escalating violence in the region, but have also triggered uncertainty on the international oil market. In May, the International Energy Agency listed Iraq as one of the most important future oil exporters. By 2035, the agency said it expected an annual output of 9 million barrels from Iraq, nearly three times the currently extracted 3.3 million barrels, turning the country into an even greater oil exporter than Saudi Arabia.

But these lofty expectations have since been dashed with the triumph of ISIS. Militants are still able to celebrate their high revenues from oil sales, but under ISIS there are unlikely to be many oil exploration companies willing to invest in Iraq. Even today, according to a recent article in "The Wall Street Journal" by U.S. political scientists Gal Luft and Robert McFarlane, only 15 percent of the investment in new oil fields is currently being invested in the Middle East.

"With Iraq sinking deeper into protracted civil war, investment will fall even more, creating fuel shortages down the road," they wrote.

Iran, the beneficiary

Iraq's largest oil fields, in the south and thus in a Shiite-controlled area, are not yet seriously threatened. Nevertheless, the rise of ISIS could still lead to further uncertainty in the international oil market. The fight against ISIS will then only be successful if Iran is involved, said Paul Stevens, an economist with the British think tank Chatham House.

In fact, Iran also has a strong vested interest in preventing the birth of a radical Sunni caliphate on its northwestern border. Nevertheless, Iran should expect a certain compromise from the international community for its commitment, and developments in Iraq have made an agreement almost mandatory, said Stevens. This could also include the lifting of sanctions, "enabling Iran to open its extraction and production facilities to much-needed investment."

New role for Saudi Arabia

This new shift toward Iran is likely to spook a current partner of the West: Saudi Arabia. If Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki remains in office and - thanks to help from Iran - is able to hold off ISIS, Saudi Arabia, the leader of the Sunni Muslims, would have to adjust to a strong Shiite presence on its northern borders. And the Saudis have had little to say about the recent American-Iranian rapprochement, said Stevens. One possible response would be to lower oil prices, something that Saudi Arabia would be able to implement immediately - to the benefit of buyers on the international market.

 "That would hurt both Iran and Iraq, both of which are in need of immediate income," said Stevens.

Is Russia Replacing US in Iraq?


Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Thursday told BBC Arabic that he was buying used fighter jets from the Russian Federation and from Belorussia. He said it had been a huge mistake to depend on the US for arms purchases, since the US arms pipeline is extremely slow and F-16 fighter jets ordered some time ago still have not arrived.

Al-Maliki was likely also reacting to the attempt of US President Barack Obama to strong arm him into resigning from his office in favor of a national salvation government. Al-Maliki is widely blamed for the debacle of the past few weeks, in which he has lost a third of his country to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. Al-Maliki’s stubborn sectarianism and inability to work with Sunni Arabs pushed them over the edge. Al-Maliki’s narrative is rather different. He maintains that his troops in the north and west lacked close air support because of American foot-dragging on weapons already paid for. Al-Maliki maintains that the jets can be in Iraq withing 3 days, and can be deployed in bombing raids on ISIS positions in the north.

Al-Maliki also portrays the idea of a unity government as anti-democratic, since it sets aside such issues as which party won the most seats.

Determined to stay as prime minister for another four years, al-Maliki is seeking to accomplish several things at once. He wants to do an end run around Obama so as to avoid succumbing to American pressure to resign. He wants to impress Iraqi parliamentarians with his external contacts such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, so that they might support a third term for him. And practically speaking he wants to adopt the Syrian Baath’s model of dealing with ISIS, which is to bomb them intensively, both aerially and by artillery, even at the risk of extensively damaging the local urban environment and killing and making refugees of millions. That he is even talking about this strategy publicly is probably meant as a threat with which to menace Mosul.

Al-Maliki has changed geopolitical positions quite a lot in a decade. He had been bureau chief of the covert Da’wa Party in Damascus in the 1980s and 1990s and formed a deep dislike of the Syrian regime. When he first became prime minister in 2006, al-Maliki blamed all the bombings and violence in Baghdad on the Syrian government. Then after the Syrian attempted revolution and accomplished civil war, al-Maliki switched around and began supporting Bashar al-Assad, in fear of ISIS moving back from conquests in Syria to Iraq (he was prescient).

As for Russia, its predecessor the Soviet Union had been the patron of the Iraqi Baath Party in the 1970s and forward. The Kennedy and Johnson administrations had conspired with the Baath Party. In return for building it up, the Baath would crush the Iraqi communist party, of which American officials were universally afraid.

But after the Baath failed coup of 1963, it bided its time and in 1968 made a definitive coup. From the early 70s the Baath government allied with the Soviets rather than with the US (joining Syria, Libya, the PLO and others in the Steadfastness Front in the face of Israeli expansionism).

The Soviet patronage of Baathist Iraqis lasted until the Gulf War in 1990-91. Soviet premier Mikhail Gorbachev tried to mediate a bit, but in the end acquiesced in Bush senior’s war on Iraq. Just as Putin has recovered the Syrian government as a client, so Putin seems to want to recover Iraq.

Putin is in a good position to pick up Iraq. Putin is consistent, hating the ISIS in Syria as much or more than the one in Iraq. Russia has fighter jets and helicopter gunships of sufficient firepower to hold ISIS at bay. Geopolitically, Russia is relatively close to Iran (Maliki’s backer as of 2010), as well as to al-Maliki’s ally, Bashar al-Assad. 

Al-Maliki’s apparent desire to mimic the Syrian Baath Party’s tactics is misguided. The  Syrian regime’s extensive shelling of Homs has reduced it to rubble. Al-Maliki told the BBC he had not asked Syria to bomb the ISIS positions at the Qa’im border crossing, but added that it was perfectly all right with him for foreign nations to bomb his own. The Yeltsin approach to Chechnya comes to mind.

Source: http://www.juancole.com/2014/06/russia-replacing-iraq.html

Israel: Hezbollah is now stronger than any Arab army


Israel's top military officer warned today that Hezbollah's capabilities have grown substantially since the 2006 war, putting much of Israel within the reach of the Lebanese Shiite militant organization.

Israel’s top military officer warned today that Hezbollah is more powerful than most of the world’s armies and that a confrontation between Israel and the Lebanese Shiite militant organization was a near certainty.  While the threat posed by conventional Arab armies has diminished in recent years, Israel now faces highly mobile enemies like Hezbollah, skilled in asymmetric warfare and equipped with advanced weapons systems, Gen. Benny Gantz said. However, the massive destruction Israel can inflict on Hezbollah’s assets and Lebanon’s infrastructure continues to deter Hezbollah from overt aggression against Israel.

“Bring me four or five states that have more firepower than Hezbollah: Russia, China, Israel, France, and England,” he told Israel’s annual security-oriented Herzliya Conference. “What is this enormous power that they [Hezbollah] have that can cover every area of the state of Israel?”  

Gantz’s comments reflect Israel's longstanding concern about Hezbollah’s growing might, which has soared in terms of weaponry, technology, and personnel since the two enemies last fought each other in open war in 2006.  Last week, an anonymous Israeli intelligence officer wrote in Israel’s Maarachot military magazine that in the next war, Hezbollah would not merely defend against an Israeli invasion but could make a “ground offensive and multi-pronged attack on Israeli territory."

In the past eight years, the Iran-backed group is believed to have acquired GPS-guided Syrian-manufactured missiles fitted with 1,100-pound warheads with ranges of at least 150 miles. That puts Tel Aviv within range of the Lebanese border. It also has drones that can carry dozens of pounds of explosive. In October 2012, a drone operated by Hezbollah penetrated Israeli airspace in the south before being detected and shot down by Israeli jets.

Hezbollah’s reconnaissance and communications capabilities have also improved. Fighters serving in Syria use thermal imaging cameras to monitor rebel movements and prepare ambushes, including one in February that killed 175 rebel fighters near Otaiba, east of Damascus. It has built a few dozen training camps across the Bekaa Valley in recent years to process the steady influx of new recruits.  But the most significant change may be the crucial combat experience Hezbollah's cadres have gained from fighting in Syria's war on behalf of the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. Hezbollah is credited with helping turn the tide against the rebel forces in the past year, granting Mr. Assad the confidence to hold a presidential election last week that saw him earn his third seven-year term in office in a poll widely derided by the Syrian opposition and the West.

“Iran is investing a lot in Hezbollah in Syria.... Hezbollah is involved up to their necks in it,” Gantz said. It is fortunate for Israel that Hezbollah's attention is divided between domestic politics, military preparations against Israel, and its intervention in Syria, Gantz said. Fear of a damaging war has served as a mutual deterrence. “Hezbollah is like a state and they know exactly what is going to happen in Lebanon if they start a war with us, and that this would set Lebanon back decades,” he said. 

Despite that, tensions rose in February and March after an Israeli airstrike on a Hezbollah facility in the Bekaa Valley. The target was a 2,450-sq.-ft. utility building, possibly a temporary arms storage facility, beside a track used by Hezbollah to smuggle weapons into Lebanon from neighboring Syria, according to comparisons of satellite imagery on Google Earth.  It was the first Israeli air attack against Hezbollah in Lebanon since 2006. In response, Hezbollah detonated a roadside bomb against Israeli troops on Lebanon’s southern border. It is also thought responsible for staging three other attacks against soldiers in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, wounding four.

‘US hegemony in world has ended’: Russia’s deputy security chief


The deputy head of Russia’s supreme security body says US international dominance is being replaced by multiple centers of power. He urged a global agreement on the results of the Cold War, warning that the world could otherwise become engulfed in chaos.

The United States has an impression that the breakup of the Soviet Union was the only result of the Cold War. This is arguable, and this is possible. But no one has attempted to analyze the results or make any conclusions from the situation. The unipolar world headed by Americans simply appeared,” Evgeny Lukyanov told the RIA Novosti.

However, this status quo was not built to last. New power centers have appeared on the international arena, including the BRICS nations, and Russia itself has managed to regain its stance. Nations openly declare their interests and demand respect to their basic rights. This is how the US hegemony on the international arena has ended and of course Washington officials cannot agree with this,” the Russian official stated.

Lukyanov emphasized in the interview that the USSR was no more.

Russia is a different state, a participant of international processes and we want to have a say, we have national interests which we intend to defend,” he said. “This caused the West to overreact, on the verge of hysteria. But you cannot ignore the ‘Russia factor’ in the world,” the official added.

Lukyanov told reporters that all nations should gather and reach an agreement finalizing the Cold War. He suggested that it is done at a global congress of all major players and said that the only existing organization for such task is the UN and its Security Council.

Otherwise, we will have no rules of the game, no agreements. Violations will happen without concrete obligations, and the world will become less manageable and more chaotic,” he said.

Lukyanov also touched upon the current situation in Ukraine and mentioned that US advisors were actively helping the Kiev regime.

I am talking about intelligence specialists and people from US power structures. Of course, these people do not limit themselves to advice, they are developing a strategic line that the authorities are following strictly in making their decisions,” he noted.

The official also recalled that Russia also used US advisors during the reforms of the early ’90s and said that the results of this cooperation could be a warning to everyone who decides to repeat it.

He also said that it was unlikely that Kiev officials could establish order while using mercenaries from private military companies, such as Greystone Limited. German press has reported earlier that about 400 contractors from US private security firms were taking part in the Ukrainian military operation against anti-government protesters in southeastern regions of the country.

Source: http://rt.com/politics/169860-us-hegemony-brics-russia/

Heritage Foundation: Countering Russian-Iranian Military Cooperation


April 05, 2001

Iranian President Mohammed Khatami's recent visit to Russia resulted in expanded strategic cooperation between the two states, particularly in the areas of weapons and nuclear and ballistic missile technology. Iran already is the third largest importer of Russian arms after China and India.1 A new de facto alliance between Russia and Iran that increases Tehran's military capabilities will make this sponsor of terrorism more of a threat to vital U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf as well as to the security of America's allies in the Middle East. Moreover, by gaining nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and other advanced weapons systems, Iran could one day threaten the United States directly.

Nevertheless, Moscow has ignored Washington's repeated protests over the proliferation of its advanced weaponry and technology to Iran, particularly technology that could be used in producing weapons of mass destruction (WMD). For these reasons, Khatami's visit to Moscow on March 12-15 and the agreement by Iranian officials to buy state-of-the-art Russian surface-to-air missile defense systems have greatly increased concerns in Washington over this close relationship. On March 19, Secretary of State Colin Powell issued a warning to both Russia and Iran that the United States would closely watch their military cooperation and would take unspecified action if their activities threatened to destabilize the Middle East.2

Rhetoric alone will not be enough to deter cooperation between Iran and Russia. The Bush Administration will need to employ an array of military, diplomatic, and economic measures to slow Iran's strategic buildup of weapons, deal with its radical Islamic regime, and prevent further deterioration of U.S. relations with Russia. The Administration should proceed cautiously but deliberately to:
* Maintain a strong U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf to deter and defend against Iranian aggression or terrorism;

* Ensure that no U.S. enterprises or government credits contribute to Iran's buildup of missiles or development of weapons of mass destruction;

* Prevent American investors from subsidizing Russian projects that generate revenue for the Iranian government that could be used to purchase advanced military technology;

* Task the interagency WMD working group at the National Security Council with designing a strategy for sanctioning Russia and Iran because of their proliferation activities;

* Support the rescheduling of Russia's $150 billion debt to the Paris Club only in exchange for Moscow's active cooperation in cutting the flow of advanced military technology to Iran and other states;

* Accelerate the development of sea-based missile defense systems to be deployed in the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf;

* Strengthen U.S. military ties to the Gulf Cooperation Council, which includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, and encourage the council's members to form a more effective military alliance; and

* Assist the Iranian people in their quest to achieve genuine democracy.

Concerns over Russia's increasing military ties with Iran, especially in the area of weapons proliferation, have grown since 1994 when senior Iranian officials first took steps to establish relations with Russian bureaucrats in charge of nuclear and missile programs in the post-Soviet military-industrial complex. Up to $25 million changed hands to facilitate Tehran's access to Russian advanced technology.3

After intensive consultations, Vice President Al Gore and Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin on June 30, 1995, signed a confidential agreement that was supposed to limit Moscow's sales of arms to Iran. Russia agreed to supply only weapons specified under the 1989 Soviet-Iranian military agreements and promised not to deliver advanced conventional or "destabilizing" weapons to Iran. Finally, Russia agreed not to sell any weapons to Iran beyond December 31, 1999.4

With sales exceeding $4 billion between 1992 and 2000, however, Iran is now the third largest customer for Russian weapons. Among the systems Russia supplied to Iran in the 1990s are three Kilo-class attack submarines, which could be used to disrupt shipping in the Gulf; eight MiG-29 fighter bombers; 10 Su-24 fighter bombers; and hundreds of tanks and armored personnel carriers.5

In addition, the Russian Ministry of Nuclear Industry and affiliated firms may have transferred uranium enrichment technology to Iran while building a civilian nuclear reactor slated for completion in 2003 in the Gulf port of Bushehr.6 This technology is necessary in the development of nuclear bombs. Moscow has facilitated the sale of technology to Iran that is used in the manufacture of the Soviet-era SS-4 intermediate range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) and has helped Iran to develop its Shahab-3 IRBM, which has a range of 1,200 kilometers and is capable of hitting targets throughout the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia and Israel.7

Cooperation between Moscow and Tehran increased after the election of President Vladimir Putin last spring and Moscow's November 2000 renunciation of the 1995 Gore-Chernomyrdin Agreement.8 Anticipating lucrative arms sales, a large number of Russian hard-line politicians and generals have endorsed Russia's rapprochement with the Islamic Republic.9 For its part, Tehran sees Russia as a valuable source of military technology that Western states have declined to provide since Iran's 1979 revolution.10

A Boost from Official State Visits

Khatami's state visit to Moscow reciprocated the visit of Russian Defense Minister Marshal Igor Sergeev to Tehran in December 2000. Sergeev's visit, in addition to being a major breakthrough in the military relationship between the two governments, was the first visit by a Russian defense minister to the Islamic Republic since Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini seized power in 1979.

During his visit to Iran, the former commander of the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces toured Iranian aerospace, electronics, and missile facilities and consulted with top Iranian leaders on strategic cooperation in the Middle East and Central Asia.11 Sergeev and his Iranian counterpart discussed a 10-year arms and military technology program worth over $3 billion that would include training for Iranian military officers and engineers at Russian military academies. The representatives agreed that their governments would consult each other on "military doctrines, common challenges and threats," effectively bringing the status of their bilateral ties to that of an informal alliance.12 Sergeev bluntly rejected U.S. concerns about the relationship, telling the Iranian media upon his arrival in that state that "Russia...intends to pursue its own ends."13

During President Khatami's visit to Russia last month, Putin reiterated that stance, stating that Russia has the right to defend itself.14 Iranian officials toured a Russian missile factory and agreed to buy Osa and TOR-M1 surface-to-air missiles, which have missile defense capabilities. Khatami also toured a nuclear reactor plant in St. Petersburg and signaled that his country would buy another reactor from Russia. Since Iran already controls some of the world's largest natural gas reserves, the need for two nuclear reactors--at a cost of $1.8 billion--is questionable at best. The reactors could provide cover for a clandestine nuclear weapons program, which could make use of Iranian scientists who currently are studying nuclear physics and ballistic rocketry in Russia and the more than 500 Russian experts currently working in Iran on supposedly peaceful applications of nuclear science.


Moscow has two strategic goals in pursuing a military relationship with Iran: keeping its own military-industrial complex solvent and building a coalition in Eurasia to counterbalance U.S. military superiority. Russia has found in Iran a large, oil-rich customer for its military-industrial complex, which supports over 2 million jobs. Russian leaders hoped the export revenues would allow them to save the research and development capabilities and technology base they inherited from the Soviet Union that could be used to develop new major weapons systems for the Russian armed forces and foreign customers. To achieve economies of scale, however, Russia needs access to large arms markets, such as China, India, and Iran.

The state-owned arms exporter, Rosoboronexport, is pursuing such former Soviet clients in the Middle East as Algeria, Libya, and Syria and is developing markets for arms in Latin America and East Asia, from Malaysia to Vietnam. Senior Russian officials reportedly have taken bribes from foreign customers anxious to gain access to Russia's sensitive technologies.15 Moreover, direct payments from foreign customers are often put in offshore bank accounts, from which some funds find their way into private pockets.

More worrisome for U.S. policy planners is the geopolitical dimension of Russian-Iranian rapprochement. In early 1997, then-Foreign Minister Evgeny Primakov and his Iranian counterpart, Ali Akbar Velayati, issued a joint statement calling the U.S. presence in the Persian Gulf "totally unacceptable." Primakov sought to build a Eurasian counterbalance to the Euro-Atlantic alliance, which would be based on a coalition that included Russia, China, India, and Iran.16 Such efforts make it likely that the United States and its allies will be the target of Russian-Iranian military cooperation in the future.

The Russian Federation and the Islamic Republic cooperate over a broad range of policy issues, with military ties being an important aspect of relations between the two countries. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Iran has refrained from actively promoting its brand of Islamic radicalism in the former Soviet republics. Despite fashioning itself as defender of all Muslims, Tehran did little when the Russian military slaughtered tens of thousands of Muslim civilians in the first Chechen war (1994-1996), and it put forth only weak protestations against Moscow's excessive use of force in the second Chechen war (1999-2001). Moscow and Tehran also have cooperated against Afghanistan's radical Taliban regime by supporting the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance opposition coalition; support Armenia rather than the pro-Turkish, pro-Western Azerbaijan; and oppose a "western" route for exporting oil from the Caspian Sea basin through Georgia to Turkey.

Some Russian officials, however, recognize that cooperation with Iran has its limits. As arms control expert Alexei Arbatov, Deputy Chairman of the Duma Defense Committee, has warned, technology transfers to Iran may backfire. Within 10 to 15 years, he predicts, Russian technology could be used by radical Islamic terrorists or in Iranian, Algerian, Saudi, Egyptian, and Libyan missiles and other weapons aimed at Russia.17


Iran's military buildup poses direct threats to U.S. interests in the Middle East.18 Iran has long aspired to play a dominant role in the Middle East and the Islamic world. Under the late Shah as well as the current radical Islamic leadership, Iran has sought to build its military capabilities and its ability to defend itself against Iraq. However, its aspirations go beyond legitimate self-defense. Islamic militants in Iran make little effort to hide the fact that they want to destroy the United States and its ally, Israel.

For example, senior Iranian officials, including the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamanei, repeatedly have denied Israel's right to exist. In a 1998 parade in Tehran, a Shahab-3 missile carrier prominently displayed an inscription that read, "Israel should be wiped off the map."19 By opposing Arab-Israeli peace negotiations and maintaining a militant anti-Israeli posture, Tehran hopes to build support for its leadership role in the Arab and Muslim world. Iran also backs the Hezballah (Party of God) terrorist organization that is based in Lebanon.

A more aggressive, nuclear Iran would cause further political instability that could lead to high oil prices, which would benefit both Russia and Iran as oil exporters. Moreover, a nuclear- and missile-armed Iran could well present a serious challenge to America's allies and major oil exporters in the Gulf. Iran could use its missile capabilities to blackmail the West, deter the United States and its allies from deploying forces to defend oil shipping routes, or deny the U.S. Navy access to the Gulf itself.

According to Admiral Thomas R. Wilson, Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Tehran is "not unlikely" to re-export the sensitive Russian technology for weapons of mass destruction it obtains to militant Muslim regimes or terrorist groups in other countries, from Algeria to Sudan.20 If America's efforts to limit the proliferation of weapons and weapons technologies from China, Russia, and other countries to Iran fail, the United States will have little recourse but to impose sanctions on the violators and take other measures to punish countries that proliferate weapons of mass destruction.


The Bush Administration faces many challenges in dealing with the issue of strategic military cooperation between Russia and Iran. It inherited an ineffective policy from the Clinton Administration, which attempted to reason with Russia to limit arms proliferation to Iran. Although the United States spent $5 billion to secure Russia's nuclear arsenal, Moscow still sold its sensitive nuclear and ballistic technology to China, Iran, and other states of concern. In addition, American companies paid Russia $2 billion for commercial satellite launches authorized by the Clinton White House as compensation for Moscow's agreement to give up its arms trade with Tehran.21 Finally, President Clinton waived congressionally mandated sanctions against the suppliers of weapons and military technology to countries that support terrorism.

Congress attempted to limit the damage from these ill-advised Clinton Administration policies by imposing sanctions on companies that do business in Iran. In 1998, Congress overwhelmingly passed the Iran Missile Proliferation Sanctions Act (H.R. 2709) sponsored by Representative Benjamin Gilman (R-NY), chairman of the House International Relations Committee.22 The act mandated that the President report to Congress when there is credible information that a foreign entity has transferred any technology that is governed by the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). All licensed exports, sales of defense items, and U.S. government financial assistance to that entity would then be terminated. However, President Clinton vetoed that legislation in June 1998. Instead, he issued Executive Order 12938 to assign penalties to companies that provide assistance to nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs.23

Nevertheless, Congress insisted on stronger steps and passed the Iran Nonproliferation Act (P.L. 106-178), which was signed into law on March 14, 2000. This law authorizes, rather than mandates, the President to impose sanctions on Russian entities that assist Iran's missile or weapons of mass destruction programs. These sanctions include a ban on U.S. government procurement from or contracts with the entity, a ban on U.S. assistance to the entity, a ban on U.S. sales to the entity of any defense articles or services, and a denial of U.S. licenses for exports to the entity of items that can have military applications.

The Clinton Administration's counter-proliferation policy was too little, too late. It has neither limited the willingness of states or companies to sell advanced technology to Iran nor stopped the flow of forbidden items and technicians. Until the regime in Tehran abandons its anti-American stance or the Iranian people replace it with a democratic government, tensions between Iran and the United States and its allies are likely to remain high.

To staunch the transfer of Russian weapons and missile technology to Iran, the United States should develop a counter-proliferation policy that is deliberate, vigilant, and aggressive. Specifically, it should:

* Maintain a strong U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf to deter and defend against military threats from Iran. Since the 1979 Islamic revolution, Iran has targeted Arab monarchies in the Persian Gulf with terrorism and subversion. It has sought to intimidate smaller neighbors with periodic naval exercises and has seized three islands claimed by the United Arab Emirates. To deter Iran from aggression and protect the free flow of oil exports, the United States must maintain a robust naval presence in the Gulf. As long as the United States stands by its allies, the chances of attack from Iran are low. A vigilant and robust naval presence in the Gulf would deter Iranian aggression, reassure nervous Arab states that the United States is committed to peace in the region, and help contain Iraq. The United States currently has deployed forces in Kuwait, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia, and it has pre-positioned military equipment in Qatar. The United States should deploy as few ground troops as necessary in the region to avoid a political backlash that Iran, Iraq, or local anti-Western movements could exploit. U.S. naval forces should limit their time in port and restrict refueling and resupply operations to only the most secure facilities to reduce their vulnerability to terrorist attack.

* Ensure that U.S. enterprises and government credits do not contribute in any way to Iran's buildup of missiles or weapons of mass destruction programs. The United States should expand sanctions against Russian companies and institutions that help Iran build missiles or that transfer weapons technology. They should be forced to choose between trading with America or aiding Iran. Under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-132), the President can withhold U.S. aid to any country that provides assistance to a government that the State Department deems a terrorist state. Iran has been on the U.S. terrorism list since 1984, and the State Department lists it as the most active state sponsor of international terrorism in its April 2000 Patterns of Global Terrorism report.24 Finally, the Administration should suspend all Export-Import Bank and Overseas Private Investment Corporation insurance and credits to U.S. companies that do business with Russian entities that are linked to Iran's military build-up activities.

* Prevent U.S. investors from subsidizing Russian projects that could generate revenue for Iran, which Tehran could use to obtain advanced military technology. Russian companies investing in Iran should not be allowed to raise capital in U.S. financial markets. The Securities and Exchange Commission should deny U.S. investors access to Russian companies that do business in Iran. Such investment, particularly in Iran's energy sector, would generate revenue for Tehran that could be used to buy military technology and weapons systems from foreign suppliers. U.S. sanctions under the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act (P.L. 104-172) penalize companies that invest over $20 million in Iran's oil industry. However, these measures should be amended and expanded when the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act comes up for renewal later this year. For example, the waiver provisions should be toughened by excluding a presidential waiver for any company from a country that sells arms or nuclear equipment to Iran. Russian government-controlled companies, such as the natural gas monopoly Gazprom, should not be allowed to raise funds from U.S. investors for energy schemes in Iran, since they could fund its military buildup and ultimately could be used to threaten U.S. interests in the region.

* Task the interagency WMD working group at the National Security Council with designing a strategy for sanctioning Russia and Iran because of their proliferation activities. In the past, Congress has taken the lead in mandating sanctions against proliferators of WMD and related technologies. These sanctions, however, were narrowly focused on U.S. assistance or trade in goods and services, and have proven ineffective in stopping proliferation. A new approach by the Administration is necessary. The intelligence community should be tasked with a comprehensive assessment of the ongoing technology transfer and weapons programs, and with providing recommendations identifying "choking points" that are vulnerable to sanctions.

The current WMD working group at the NSC should be tasked with developing a sanctions strategy that targets Russian and Iranian officials, businesses, and individuals involved in the proliferation of WMD technologies, materiel, or know-how, as well as their sources of financing. This strategy could include restrictions on access to U.S. capital markets, scrutiny of international investment and banking activities by violators, and stricter visa controls for the individuals involved. The working group should include representatives from the Department of State; the Department of Defense; the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN) and U.S. Customs Service within the Department of the Treasury; and (to control the visa regime for officials and business executives) the Immigration and Naturalization Service within the Department of Justice.

* Support the rescheduling of Russia's $150 billion debt to the Paris Club only in exchange for its active cooperation in cutting the flow of advanced military technology to Iran. The Administration should make clear that it opposes further rescheduling of Russian debt to the Paris Club as long as Moscow continues to export dangerous military technology to Iran. If Russia were to cooperate in stopping the flow of weapons technology to Iran, Washington should support debt rescheduling with full disclosure of past transactions. Disclosure of other proliferation activities, such as Russia's sales of advanced nuclear and ballistic missile technology to China and rogue states like Iraq, should also be included in any deal on debt rescheduling.

* Accelerate the deployment of sea-based missile defense systems on U.S. ships in the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf. Washington should cooperate with Israel and Turkey in the Mediterranean region and the states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to deploy a sea-based anti-ballistic missile system, the upgraded Navy Theater Wide (NTW) program, on U.S. ships. Once deployed, such a system would blunt the emerging threat of Iranian missile attack and bolster the ability of America's allies in the region to withstand Tehran's attempts at intimidation.

* Strengthen U.S. military ties with the Gulf Cooperation Council to help it become a more effective military alliance. Washington should assist the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council--Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates--in transforming their loose collective security arrangement into an effective military alliance. It can do so by expanding joint military exercises and defense planning; assuring the continuous stockpiling of military supplies in the region; helping the GCC members to integrate their command, control, and communications networks; and assisting them in coordinating their military training programs. The Gulf states should speed up execution of the Cooperative Defense Initiative to enhance interoperability. They also should improve control of airspace over the Gulf by accelerating work on an integrated civilian-military air traffic control system. Bolstering the GCC would lessen Iran's ability to intimidate its weaker neighbors and would enhance efforts to contain both Iran and Iraq.

* Assist the Iranian people in their quest to achieve genuine democracy. Despite the reform efforts of President Khatami, the current regime under Ayatollah Ali Khamanei remains a harsh dictatorship of radical Islamic ideologues. The Bush Administration should work with U.S. allies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to expose the regime's human rights violations. It should support the creation of an international network of NGOs concerned with the plight of Iranian students, businessmen, national and ethnic minorities, and women, the main supporters of reform who voted for President Khatami in 1997 and for reformers during the 2000 parliamentary elections. Washington should help Iranians gain access to uncensored information by expanding the broadcasting range and frequencies of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and the Voice of America. This strategy, implemented under President Ronald Reagan in Soviet-dominated Eastern Europe, proved highly successful. Applied to Iran, it could lead to the ascendancy of democratic forms of government and leadership.


Russian assistance to Iran in developing ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction increasingly threatens U.S. interests, U.S. forces, and U.S. allies in the Middle East. Should Iran develop a nuclear arsenal, it could use it to deny the United States access to strategically important Persian Gulf shipping lanes and to interfere with the export of oil, wreaking havoc in global energy markets. In the longer term, it could use its missiles to threaten U.S. territory directly. The Administration must develop a comprehensive strategy that relies on pro-active diplomacy, creative economic countermeasures, and innovative military responses to address this growing threat from Iran.

Source: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Rus...sia/BG1425.cfm

John Bolton: To Defeat ISIS, Create a Sunni State


America is debating how to respond to the terrorist attacks in Paris. Unfortunately, both President Obama’s current policy and other recent proposals lack a strategic vision for the Middle East once the Islamic State, or ISIS, is actually defeated. There are no answers, or only outmoded ones, to the basic question: What comes after the Islamic State?

Before transforming Mr. Obama’s ineffective efforts into a vigorous military campaign to destroy the Islamic State, we need a clear view, shared with NATO allies and others, about what will replace it. It is critical to resolve this issue before considering any operational plans. Strategy does not come from the ground up; instead, tactics flow deductively once we’ve defined the ultimate objectives. Today’s reality is that Iraq and Syria as we have known them are gone. The Islamic State has carved out a new entity from the post-Ottoman Empire settlement, mobilizing Sunni opposition to the regime of President Bashar al-Assad and the Iran-dominated government of Iraq. Also emerging, after years of effort, is a de facto independent Kurdistan.

If, in this context, defeating the Islamic State means restoring to power Mr. Assad in Syria and Iran’s puppets in Iraq, that outcome is neither feasible nor desirable. Rather than striving to recreate the post-World War I map, Washington should recognize the new geopolitics. The best alternative to the Islamic State in northeastern Syria and western Iraq is a new, independent Sunni state.

This “Sunni-stan” has economic potential as an oil producer (subject to negotiation with the Kurds, to be sure), and could be a bulwark against both Mr. Assad and Iran-allied Baghdad. The rulers of the Arab Gulf states, who should by now have learned the risk to their own security of funding Islamist extremism, could provide significant financing. And Turkey — still a NATO ally, don’t forget — would enjoy greater stability on its southern border, making the existence of a new state at least tolerable.

The functional independence of Kurdistan reinforces this approach. The Kurds have finally become too big a force in the region for Baghdad or Damascus to push them around. They will not be cajoled or coerced into relinquishing territory they now control to Mr. Assad in Syria or to Iraq’s Shiite militias. The Kurds still face enormous challenges, with dangerously uncertain borders, especially with Turkey. But an independent Kurdistan that has international recognition could work in America’s favor.

Make no mistake, this new Sunni state’s government is unlikely to be a Jeffersonian democracy for many years. But this is a region where alternatives to secular military or semi-authoritarian governments are scarce. Security and stability are sufficient ambitions. As we did in Iraq with the 2006 “Anbar Awakening,” the counterinsurgency operation that dislodged Al Qaeda from its stronghold in that Iraqi province, we and our allies must empower viable Sunni leaders, including tribal authorities who prize their existing social structures. No doubt, this will involve former Iraqi and Syrian Baath Party officials; and there may still be some moderate Syrian opposition leaders. All are preferable to the Islamist extremists.

The Arab monarchies like Saudi Arabia must not only fund much of the new state’s early needs, but also ensure its stability and resistance to radical forces. Once, we might have declared a Jordanian “protectorate” in an American “sphere of influence”; for now, a new state will do. This Sunni state proposal differs sharply from the vision of the Russian-Iranian axis and its proxies (Hezbollah, Mr. Assad and Tehran-backed Baghdad). Their aim of restoring Iraqi and Syrian governments to their former borders is a goal fundamentally contrary to American, Israeli and friendly Arab state interests. Notions, therefore, of an American-Russian coalition against the Islamic State are as undesirable as they are glib.

In Syria, Moscow wants to dominate the regime (with or without Mr. Assad) and safeguard Russia’s Tartus naval base and its new Latakia air base. Tehran wants a continuing Alawite supremacy, with full protection for Hezbollah in Lebanon and Syria.

As for Iraq, Russia and Iran want the Sunni territories returned to Baghdad’s control, reinforcing Iran’s regional influence. They may wish for the same in Kurdistan, but they lack the capability there. Sunnis today support the Islamic State for many of the same reasons they once supported Al Qaeda in Iraq — as a bulwark against being ruled by Tehran via Baghdad. Telling these Sunni people that their reward for rising against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq will be to put them back in thrall to Mr. Assad and his ilk, or to Shiite-dominated Baghdad, will simply intensify their support for the jihadists. Why would they switch sides?

This is why, after destroying the Islamic State, America should pursue the far-reaching goal of creating a new Sunni state. Though difficult in the near term, over time this is more conducive to regional order and stability. Creating an American-led anti-Islamic State alliance instead of Moscow’s proposed coalition will require considerable diplomatic and political effort. American ground combat forces will have to be deployed to provide cohesion and leadership. But this would be necessary to defeat the Islamic State even if the objective were simply to recreate the status quo ante.

The Anbar Awakening and the American military’s 2007 “surge” provide the model, as do Kurdish successes against the Islamic State. Local fighters armed, trained and advised by the United States would combine with Arab and American conventional forces. The military operation is not the hardest part of this post-Islamic State vision. It will also require sustained American attention and commitment. We cannot walk away from this situation as we did from Iraq in 2011.

The new “Sunni-stan” may not be Switzerland. This is not a democracy initiative, but cold power politics. It is consistent with the strategic objective of obliterating the Islamic State that we share with our allies, and it is achievable.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/25/opinion/john-bolton-to-defeat-isis-create-a-sunni-state.html?_r=0


  1. A Malaysia airliner exploded or was shot down over south-eastern Ukraine. Make no mistake about it, this is a setup by anti-Russian interests in the region. Why was a passenger aircraft flying over a region that was in the state of war - an area that had just recently seen several military aircraft downed by anti-aircraft missiles?

    In my opinion, the aircraft could have been made to give off signals that it was military. If the released recording of Strelkov's conversation are genuine, it means that pro-Russian forces in the area were indeed attempting to shoot down an aircraft that they electronically identified as a Ukrainian military transporter. At 33,000 feet, the only way to identity an aircraft is through its transponder. And if pro-Russian forces did not shoot it down, the aircraft could have been rigged to explode in flight. The whole purpose of this incident is to intensify the conflict at hand and place international pressure on Moscow,

    PS: While watching what's going on with this airliner always keep in the back of your mind the other Malaysian airliner (also a Boeing 777) that disappeared several months ago. I never for once believed that it had crashed into the Pacific Ocean. It was obvious after a few days that its disappearance was some kind of a black operation. In my opinion, the best place to have looked for the aircraft was in the many huge hangers of Diego Garcia...

  2. Arevordi, some facts about this plane is surfacing very quickly. I monitor russian sites that closely report on the conflict. Here is what's been found out. The stuff posted on youtube is doctored. By the way, Strelkov is not there at all. Come to find out, in their haste for this false-flag, SBU (Ukraines security service) posted this a whole day and half before the incident. The characters discussing the plane are unidentified.

    This is a provocation of course. The militias completely denied their involvement and not only that they really have no technical means to reach such heights.

    What's still puzzling is exactly who ordered this provocation. There are multiple theories floating about, some of them happen to be of an internal oligarchial struggle in Ukraine. Russian defense ministry says that Ukraine's radars were at work and it was likely shot down by either a SAM or a fighter jet.

    Incidentally, here is what Strelkov said about this. He said that he spoke to a couple of people and learned that some of the bodies were not "fresh". He completely excluded the posibility of that their forces did/could have brought down the plane.

    Incidentally, he also said that no ceasefire is needed for internation investigators and Kiev to visit the site because it is in their deep rear and is not a place of fighting. They intend to continue their actionst the army group surrounded in the "southern cauldren".

    Also of note, is that Ukraines General prosecutor pointedly stated that the rebels have no Buks, S-200s, or S-300s - supporting the theory of an internal dimension to this provocation.

    But it is certainly being used in the mass-media hysteria against Russia. Tough times ahead. Incidentally, Lugansk has been getting hammered by artillery with over 40 civilians dying - but the Boing is of coarse the "biggest story".

  3. Some more on the plane:

    A Spanish dispatcher working in Kiev on his twitter account wrote:
    "Before they take our phones away or break my head in, it was shot down by Kiev".

    His frantic tweaks in order:

    1. Air catastrophe civil airliner crashed in Ukraine in Donetsk region
    2. Air catastrophe B777 in Donetsk
    3. B777 Malasia airlines crashed in Ukraine near Russian border
    4. B777 280 passagers crashed in Donetsk Ukraine
    5. Kiev is trying to make it look like it was shot down by pro-Russia militia
    6. ATTENTION! Possible B777 in Ukraine was shot down. 280 passengers on board.
    7. Looks like Kiev got what it wanted.
    8. In Kiev they again captured the dispachers tower.
    9. Confirmed: B777 disappeared from radar, there were no reports of anomalies
    10. The plane was shot down, this was no accident
    11. Kiev got what it wanted. I already mentioned that in previous tweets
    12. This isn't a normal air catastrophe, they are threatening us at the dispatcher's booth
    13. Any moment they will take our phones
    14. Before they take away our phones, or bust my head, it was shot down by Kiev.
    15. We have confirmation. Plane was shot down. Kiev regime is already informed. Shot down. Now we are calm.
    16. What are foreigners doing in the dispatchers booth? Gathering information.
    17. When I can will write later.
    18. Plane B777 was flying with 2 fighter jet escorts before it disappeared from radar.
    19. If Kiev regime wants to tell the truth 2 jets were flying near the plane before the even, it was not shot down by a jet.
    20. Right after the B777 disappeared from radar, Kiev military people reported on the fall. How did they know?
    21. 7:00 report about plane being shot down, a little later our dispatcher booth was occupied. Foreigners are still here.
    22. Those who are not trusting. Radars caught everything. Plane was shot down by Kiev. We know this and the military people too.
    23. Here military people confess that this could have been done by other military people but they are not sure who gave the order.
    24. The military people confirm that this was done by Ukraine. They don't know who gave the order.
    25. A few days ago I said that the military people want to remove Poroshenko. Maybe this is so, and the order came from Timoshenko.
    26. Fighter jets were flying behind the plane and after just 3 minutes it disappeared. Just 3
    27. Closing the airspace.

    This dude is claiming seeing one plane shooting at another:

    Here is what's of note. Although the western media is raising hysteria about Russia and "pro-Russia separatists" Obama, the state department, and Europe are not laying direct blame unlike with the Assad chemical weapons provocation.

    Putin is said to have called Obama right away and "informed" him of the incident. This was before this was reported in the media. He also called Merkel. What he told Merkel and Obama exactly is not really known -But what it suggests is that Russia has direct data of exactly how and who shot the plane. And of coarse Russian radars monitor the airspace and there is also satellite data.

  4. Additionally, there was an emergency session of the National security council called by Putin. Members were literally summoned from their homes in non-working hours with most of the meeting taking place behind closed doors.

  5. It is going to be an mammooth exercise to find who has done it. At the moment we are dealing with factoids and highly generative speculation and an array of theories coming out of the theoretician assembly lines. Even if in the end it is proven, western press ot the official mainstream mass communication organs will cover it up by a denials. It was an accident of sorts, either the Malaysian crew mishandled the plane ( Malaysia has a strict an enforced affirmative action programme where the native malays, useless as they may be, are given preferential quotas in every segment of commerce and industry); or one of the warring sides fired either deliberately or by error to an unidentified flying object. The egregious paradigm in this accident is that a civilian plane was flying in war zone, it should not have been there at all. This operation in ukraine with the civilian aircraft is serving an excelent screen to deflect attention from the israley genocidal murderous war machine rampaging and razing Gaza to the ground. Keep the masticating bisons concentrated on why the plane was blown in the sky in a war zone, and let israel focus in its genocidal campaign in Palestine.

  6. After studying conspiracies and hoaxes from the 1898 USS Maine sinking to Sandy Hook, my immediate reaction to news of this latest Malaysian airliner crash was "logically the Russians have been playing a perfect diplomatic game since Putin came to power in 2000, they would not commit an act like this which would result in zero tactical or strategic gains and would instead invite international condemnation... it must have been the Ukrs under orders from western intelligence." I'm sure there are other sources as well to corroborate this theory, but here is one of my favorite websites Tomatobubble.com presenting evidence that there is a conspiracy behind the airliner which crashed in Novorossiya.


    BTW it was from Skhara's on-point posts that I realized that the preferred Russian term for the Donetsk and Lugasnk regions, which were once subjugated to being Ukraine's eastern provinces but have not waged a struggle for independence, is Novorossiya ("New Russia"). The Wikipedia entry states "Novorossia was a historical term denoting an area north of the Black Sea, presently part of Russia and Ukraine... conquered by the Russian Empire at the end of the 18th century from the Ottoman Empire." Just a quick reminder of how important it is for Armenia that the Turk-EU-US-Jew alliance be defeated in Novorossiya. It is definitely in Armenia's interest that a precedent be set whereby Russia re-liberates territory it had won from the Turks but which were returned by the Bolshevik assholes in 1918, which also include large swaths of Western Armenia.

    Also, apart from Putin-bashing, the west is desperate to keep the public attention away from the massacres that the jew scum are committing in occupied Palestine. The era of total censorship and domination of the news and public opinion by the jew-owned mainstream media died out with the rise of the Internet. So many people are now at least partially awake to Jewish crimes that most comments sections under articles from mainstream news sources are heavily-censored or disabled entirely. Thus the establishment is trying to get the goyim riled up over false claims of Russian "aggression".

    This all reminds of the period right before England and France declared war on Germany in 1939, when the west did everything it could to convince Germany's neighbors like Poland to provoke Germany into taking action against them. False flags, war being glorified in the media and presented as a requirement for national security, and a prelude through economic and financial skirmishes. Good thing Russia, unlike 1930s Germany, has the resources, equipment and manpower to prevent the west from inciting another war.

    Can anyone explain the significance of Malaysia in all of this? Why are their planes being shot down, or being staged to look like they were shot down?

  7. Regarding Arevordi's blog "Why does Armenia have to borrow(!) money from a foreign entity? Please think about this for a while because we have been born and raised in a world (the Anglo-American-Jewish era) where this question is almost never asked. And in rare times when it is asked, a proper answers is never given. We all simply assume that it can't be done. Yet it can be done!"

    Arevordi touches upon a very important issue here. The establishment dominates the educational/indoctrination system in this country. No economist, however well-read and no matter how many diplomas they received and research papers they authored, has any capability to think outside the boundaries of the current western economic model. There is no critical thinking, and most business majors would simply brush off Arevordi's question with "can't be done, Armenia or any other country would simply print too much worthless money and it would not be accepted anywhere in the world for trade" without realizing the irony that what they described is exactly what the Federal Reserve has done for over a century now, the only difference being that the fed has the imperialistic US Armed Forces to force other countries to continue accepting the dollar for the time being... For anyone interested, National Socialist Germany set the gold standard for how to run an economy free from the usury/debt obsessed anglo-american-zionist system:


  8. Stephen Cohen: Downed Malaysian Plane Raises Risk of War Between Russia and the West: http://www.democracynow.org/2014/7/18/stephen_cohen_downed_malaysian_plane_raises

    1. The Juden West are raising an anti Putin hysteria. The psychopathic media ( 80% of the scribblers are juden in any case) are calling him " Pariah Putin". Cameron " warns" Putin, the Dutch PM, claims "Putin's last hour to come clean" and other diatribes flow in a raging torrent to demonize Russia and his leader. Putin and Russia have to brake away from the Juden banking system to which they are an integral part. The war against Hitler was precisely the fact that the great German broke loose from the shackles of juden finance/banking usurious system. Why all this Putin demonization ? Is it because Vladimir is heading and driving in the opposite direction of Juden finanz ? Are the juden sensing that although Russia is inside their Juden finanz labyrinthine web the omen for the future under Putin does not guarantee it ? Who knows ? Here there is more than meets the eye. If that is the case, war is inevitable. The juden will not meet this challenge without a colossal war. They have achieved supreme power through the blood of others,they are not going to let it go without a holocaust. If you take the finanz nettle/trap away from the Juden; what has he got left ? Nothing. What happened to Nethanyue warning to the world ( in 2012) that Iran was going to have a nuclear capability in six months, and it better be a war now to stop them ? . Juden lies, no one seems to remember or bother about it now. Has Iran gone nuclear after 24 months ?

    2. Putting aside the jews for a moment, the Dutch themselves are as gay and pathetic as other western Europeans. These cowards don't seem bothered by the torrent of Muslims and Blacks pouring into their country, or the large scale theft by the banks and corporations, or the ZOG controlling their media, government, schools and organizations. Their degenerate PM and their impotent public, rather than issuing laughable ultimatums to the Russian president, should instead end the willful blindness on their part and demand accountability from the US and the Kiev junta.


      And these are the same Dutch assholes who rushed to Turkey with a Patriot air defense system when Ankara started panicking after it antagonized Syria in 2013. Amsterdam has been supporting terrorism from Syria to Kiev for years now. Seems to me like just comeuppance and retribution for their nation to have some of those terrorists blow up a plane loaded with Dutch citizens.

    3. I don't agree with this kind of stuff in diceminating information. I mean "juden this" and "great German" that. I hope you don't engage in that kind of conversation elsewhere -- this only provokes people who might otherwise listen -- especially jews who may otherwise could be an ally.

      This goes back to the British empire and the working of a part of European jewery into the anglo-saxon elite. Now its not so much a geno-type (anglo-saxon), but a ideological/geopolitical worldview.

      Hitler was hardly independent, that's why he made disasterous decisions made on militarism rather than cold hard calculation.

    4. "I don't agree with this kind of stuff in diceminating information. I mean "juden this" and "great German" that. I hope you don't engage in that kind of conversation elsewhere -- this only provokes people who might otherwise listen "

      You have too many good comments for me to flame you. You should honor yourself by refraining from politically correcting thinking in defense of the YAHOODI

      You are chasing the Germans away, and if Alvordi let this comment through I don't think we need you as a moderator on this forum.

      As to your comment about might listen, you should take a sound check, as you yourself used the words might. Sadly this will never happen, the juden are raping America blind, not to mention the rest of the world. America keeps taking the blame but it is the jeden Yahoodi that is making all the profit.

      Continue to post your points of view, don't let me see you moderating on someone's dime.


  9. They are now wanting to kick russia out of the g-20 because of this setup disaster. They are doing their best to pull russia into serious war. Putin has to resist provocation and continue its plans.


    1. I agree. They are in fact inciting violence across the world. They are attempting to start fires in strategic areas. The ultimate purpose seems to be the preservation of their financial, political and cultural hegemony. They are attempting to draw Russia and Iran into protracted conflicts with their neighbors. The purpose is to curb their growing influence. Putin has to resist their attempts. We are one unfortunate incident away from a world war. Moscow cannot afford to enter into a major war. But it also needs to continue protecting its interests. The Anglo-American-Jewish global order is in decline. Time is on Russia's side...

  10. http://www.businessinsider.com/source-malaysia-flight-mh17-was-being-escorted-by-ukrainian-su-27-fighter-jets-2014-7

    Why dont we hear about this in cnn?

  11. Here is from Russia's defense ministry.

    Here it is on rt with English language summary:

    Basically Russian radar-navigation and satellite navigation at work here. Note the difference between Obama's ramblings, threats, "we have evidence - but we aren't showing them".

    VS this elegant answer -- military people giving cold hard facts of the information they have.

  12. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/15/world/middleeast/israelis-watch-bombs-drop-on-gaza-from-front-row-seats.html

    Filthy, depraved scum.

  13. As the Western trained Polish prime minister revealed only a few weeks ago, behind closed doors even nations officially allied to the Anglo-American-Zionist order recognize the dangers of Western hegemony. Perhaps that is why Paris will go ahead with the "controversial" sale of the warship to Moscow despite strong pressure from Washington - https://news.yahoo.com/amid-sanctions-france-warship-sale-russia-111627317--finance.html

    1. I feel that France is desperate for the cold hard cash that only Russia and the gulf states can deliver right now. France was hit particularly hard with the US imposed sanctions against Iran. Peugeot is almost bankrupt because of it. Its fascinating seeing the dichotomy that is set up by western nations time and time again with ideology and greed trumping all national and nation building priorities. Example is the exodus of US corporations to China and Mexico for higher wall street profits, a move fully supported and encouraged by successive US governments, but then look at the state of the US economy now as a result and the monster they have created in China which has become a national security headache for them. They always want their cake but don't realize they can't eat it too.

      Russia and China are playing the cool, level headed long term gain. I would even say it is like ping pong or chess, where you don't have to necessarily win, but just sit back, play your cards right and just wait until your dichotomy causing, fragmented and arrogant enemy loses on his own accord. Russia is restructuring its economy as we speak with military spending going up from 17.1% to over 20% of GDP by 2017 and most of that extra spending is going towards retooling so that they will no longer have to buy anything from abroad. There goal is to be completely independent in all aspects, energy, manufacturing, agriculture. What they can't make up on they will get from China. If you think Europe is in a tough squeeze now, just wait until 2025. I often feel that the US won't be "livable" for working class people 10 or 15 years from now due to lower average salaries and the higher cost of living that is being created, along with the huge disparity in wealth.

      The only issue remaining for the BRICS is the financial dependency they have on the western financial system. As long as the west controls all levers of data communications, they will have no other option. What will really change the playing field is if Russia/China start laying their global fiber optic and satellite communications infrastructure and lay the groundwork for a totally independent global data network which will cost trillions.

      The US dollar may be on its way down but the same people that control the US dollar won't give up that easy and a new form of fake currency will be created via this existing data network and and millions of people around the world will have access to it via their ipads..etc. If you control the data flow channels, you control the currency. Its a simple as that.


  14. Russian media on downed airliner: The CIA did it: http://www.cnbc.com/id/101852656?__source=yahoo|finance|headline|headline|story&par=yahoo&doc=101852656

    Read the readers comments!

  15. http://www.examiner.com/list/russia-s-top-10-lies-about-downed-malaysia-airliner

    Take it for its worth. I'd like to see a detailed pairing of Russian accusations vs. Western/Ukrainian accusations.


  16. On yahoo news there was a mass of hysterical articles blaming RUssian and "pro-Russia separatists". Along with all those articles there was an army of trolls. So most of the commenters would make anti-Russia comments and any adequate post would get lots of thumbs down and an army of trolls writing stuff like:
    "Why don't you go back to Russia comrade"
    "You are nothing but a paid Russian troll"
    and a host of other brilliant comments like this

    It looked like it was all well coordinated, like the major western news outlets and all the trolls were activated too.

    Noticing something today. Go to yahoo, the articles toned down their rhetoric, while the comments people are making are adequate. Where did all the trolls go?

    It looks like the provocation failed. Much of it appears to be due to incompetence of Ukraine's security services. Now what follows is a softening of rhetoric, "experts" will drag their feet with the investigation, and when they are done no one will remember this plane. In western public the forced opinion would be "Of coarse the russians did it. we think".

  17. http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/07/no_author/awkward-questions-for-us-ukraine/

    And here we have the opposite.


  18. http://news.yahoo.com/did-putin-just-bring-russia-cold-202745709.html

    Western spin on Putin's speech from yesterday. Putin is a pragmatic man and he is not going to head into a conflict which his enemies have designed. Instead he will choose when and where to engage, hence keeping the offensive and disallowing his opponents the chance to win against Russian interests.


  19. http://rt.com/news/174768-putin-security-nato-ukraine/

    Putin said 'Russia does not belong to any alliances' What does he mean? Did he forget about the CSTO? Perhaps someone who read the Russian transcript can provide clarification.


  20. Regarding the discussion on Dutch people above (@Sarkis86) and their role in the present Anglo-American-Zionist order, one should hold in mind that the Dutch are at the forefront of the empire, and are not passive bystanders.
    More info on this topic:
    The Modern Anglo-Dutch Empire, its Origins, Evolution and anti-Human outlook.

    It's a pity that while the main theme of Arevordi's commentary is about ISIS in Iraq, the discussion shifted to ongoing developments in Ukraine mainly triggered by flight MH17 crash. But this tells us how rapidly major events are unfolding such as the takeover of Iraq by ISIS, MH17 and the Gaza massacre.

    Regarding flight MH17, I wonder why no-one considers a possible counter attack by China, keep in mine around 150 Chinese citizens were kidnapped while one the previous Malaysian airline flight. We don't know who were those passengers, but I do not think the Chinese government would simply standby and accept the fact that such a number of their citizens simply disappeared without identifying who was responsible for it.

    On MH17 one interesting speculation is this:

    Of course the source is conspiracy theory/lunatic fringe website, but typically that's what the elite would do to invalidate/discredit information that might otherwise be authentic. Take for example what the likes of Alex Jones and David Icke broadcast, quite mind sobering information out there but so easy to discredit simply because the broadcasters are certified psychotics.

    But before discrediting the possibility that Russia might have forcefully stopped the transfer of hazardous bio-material intended for malicious purposes such as a biological attack on China, how would one explain the presence of significant number of cadavers in that same flight as well as a large numbers of top scientists in the field of virology?

    "A top pro-Russia rebel commander in eastern Ukraine has given a version of events surrounding the Malaysian jetliner crash — suggesting many of the victims may have DIED DAYS BEFORE THE PLANE TOOK OFF."


    1. Aroutin,

      Dutch are indeed part and parcel of the Anglo-American-Zionist global order. They, however, operate mainly behind the scenes. Their political/financial elite has been closely tied to Britain and the US. After all, Holland is where the infamous Bilderberg group first began their global operations.

      The militia commander's observations about the cadavers not being fresh could very well have been an emotionally skewed outburst to the news media because the crash of the aircraft was immediately met by suspicion by the Russian side. In others words, those on the ground were instinctively looking for things that may have seemed out of the ordinary. In any case, until further proof is given, I don't think we should take those comments too seriously. But I am curious to know what suspicions, if any, you may have?

  21. The BRICS group forms part of the global financial juden scheme. They have to overthrow the scheme, by moving out of its clutches. Financial independence, or financial autarky can not be accomplished when you are part of the global juden financial trap.The BRICS group have the weight and clout to accomplish this; hence a conflict of major dimension might be in the offing. Take Argentina, a land mass self sufficient to feed its inhabitants and half of the globe. Why must argentina be beholden to the Juden monetary monopoly schemes ? Likewise Brazil, although Brazil presents a somwhat demographic challenge. South Africa is another case, wholly dependent for oxygen on the Juden financial entrapment. Break from the shackles of monetary serfdom break from being glued to the Juden financial deadly network. For that a major war could be in the making, a hecatombe of nations, and nation states.

    1. BRICS nations are made up of nations that are - in varying degrees - dependent on the Anglo-American-Zionist global order for survival. BRICS is also made up of nations that are clearly trying to do something about it. This is where they deserve our respect and our support, for they have taken on a gargantuan task. After all, we are living in an Anglo-American-Jewish era in world history. The only nation on earth today that is fully independent of the Anglo-American-Zionist global order is perhaps North Korea. Divorcing the US Dollar wont be a fast affair, nor will it been easy or blood free...

  22. Romanian AnonymusJuly 24, 2014 at 7:13 AM

    @Dutch are indeed part and parcel of the Anglo-American-Zionist global order

    Some additional reasons why this is so:

    "Following the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions of the 1490’s, many Jews immigrated to the Low Countries. The first colony of Portuguese “New Chrisitan”—recently converted from Judaism—merchants was established in Antwerp in 1511 and throughout the next century many moved into provinces farther north. Many of these immigrants privately maintained Jewish traditions, for which their community was subject to persecution. The Protestant Reformation brought new ideas of religious tolerance, and gradually, Jews were granted religious freedom in various townships. During the first half of the seventeenth century, Amsterdam was established as the center of the Portuguese Diaspora, with most Sephardim (Jews of Iberian background) involved in trade through a network of Portuguese traders. Further, during the seventeenth century, small numbers of Ashkenazim (Jews from Germany and Eastern Europe) began to immigrate to the Republic of the United Netherlands, seeking economic opportunity....
    The commercial policy that led to the Navigation Act in October 1651 made Oliver Cromwell want to attract the rich Jews of Amsterdam to London so that they might transfer their important trade interests with the Spanish Main from Holland to England. The mission of Oliver St John to Amsterdam, though failing to establish a coalition between English and Dutch commercial interests as an alternative to the Navigation Act, had negotiated with Menasseh Ben Israel and the Amsterdam community....
    William III (of Orange-Nassau, Stateholder of Holland), is reported to have been assisted in his ascent to the English throne by a loan of 2,000,000 guilders from Antonio Lopez Suasso and later Baron Avernes de Gras...
    William's reign brought about a closer connection between the predominantly Sephardic communities of London and Amsterdam; this aided in the transfer of the European finance centre from the Dutch capital to the English capital".
    You will remember that New York was initially the New Amsterdam.

    1. Very interesting. Thank you, RomAn. Are there any sources about this topic that you could refer the readers to?

    2. Romanian AnonymusJuly 26, 2014 at 6:16 AM

      Arevordi, I must apologize that sometimes "senior moments' catch up with me. I pushed the send button before I indicated the source which is none other than Wikipedia (History of the Jews in the Netherlands - Wikipedia, the free ..., Resettlement of the Jews in England - Wikipedia, the free ...). Of course there is a whole literature about the topic, but wiki is a good start for those interested (with all the caution required when you consult it).

  23. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/23/us-ukraine-crisis-commander-exclusive-idUSKBN0FS1V920140723

    Isn't this guy thought to be an agent of Kiev?


    1. He is a shady character. But in actuality, he was approached to comment on this and denied saying what's written in the reuters article. Reuters did seem to mix things. Incidentally, he is a commander of the Vostok battalion. From the previous section posted by Arevordi, we read an interview with the young man from Armenia about that disasterous airport operation planned by Khodokovsky. An agent or lack of competence? Not determined.

    2. The jist of his point that only the US benefits from rocking the boat in Karabakh, Russia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan (as in citizens of Azerbaijan) do not. A conflict there puts Moscow in a rough spot because Armenia is a strategic ally, but Moscow keeps cordial relations with Azerbaijan. Basically, Russia wants to keep the status quo.

  24. Just read the article. It smells like it...

  25. With all the anti-Russian hysteria in the Ukr media. Ukr soldiers in the surrounded southern group hauled over the border to Russia to treat wounded:

  26. This weekend on Russian tv, they showed Ukrainian servicemen crossing the border to Russia to ask for treatment for wounded. They took them to Odessa today. They are surrounded to the south of territory controlled by rebels, in the Ukr media they claim that they are getting shot from Russia, but for some reason the wounded run to Russia.

    Incidentally Strelkov was asked if soldiers in that surrounded group is surrendering to them. He says, no they won't surrender to us. Scared. They know they can cross the border, where 'nice guys' will treat their wounds and feed them.

  27. Want to bring your guy's attention to something. BBC Russia service:

    Current link:

    Google cache:

    Western media censure.
    Witnesses are talking about jet fighter and claiming that it was shot down by the fighter jet.

    Incidentally. Alexander Zhilin gave an interesting account of what happened.
    He said, a SU-25 fighter jet shot an air to air missile at the Boing. Hit its engine. But something went terribly wrong because the plane spun arround 180 degrees. The intent was for the plane to fall in the Russia Ukraine border. It was to solve the problem of the surrounded "southern cauldron" group and blame Russia/militia for it. The world community would than raise noise about a "ceasefire" in the area and allow the Ukraine troops to seal of the area essentially deblockading the blockaded group.
    But bacause the plane turned around, it trajectory may have taken it into the territory controlled by Ukrs, so the command was then given "DESTROY". The Buk-M1 system kills a plane pretty quickly. It broke it right in half.

  28. Thank you Aroutiun, Romanian Anonymous and Arevordi,

    I vaguely knew of the Anglo-Dutch conglomerates of Royal Shell in the energy industry, and Unilever in general groceries and processed, GMO-laden foods. But I never looked too deeply into Dutch complicity in the Anglo-American-Zionist system. It's sad to see the Dutch whoring themselves with the Anglo-Jews in light of the genocidal treatment the ethnic Dutch Boers were subjected to in South Africa by the Anglo-Jews. What a soulless group of people. It puts the self-destructiveness of the Armenians in a new perspective.

    Whatever, it's not our job to prevent the western Europeans from digging their own graves. In fact, as I've said before, the sooner the Turk-allied states of Europe experience a total, utter collapse, the better it will be for Armenia and Russia.

  29. There have certainly been a lot of very interesting developments lately. There was a massive rally of Iranians, RT reported "hundreds of thousand", against the massacres in Gaza. I find it remarkable that the Sunni Muslim Palestinians get more support out of Shiite Persians than they do out of their worthless Sunni Arab relatives. There aer hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of terrorists in the Middle East. They have all sorts of access to weapons and training. The regional is almost entirely Muslim demographically. Yet not one of these idiots ever attempts an attack against the IDF. The thought doesn't seem to have crossed a single peon's mind in any of the hundreds of militia's doing the west's bidding in the region. They are too busy waging "jihad" against Syria or executing civilians in Iraq (all while taking selfies on their cell phones to share with the internet of course). Absolutely worthless idiots.

    And while Americans are struggling with continuously declining living standards, the Evangelical trash and servile "conservatives" and their liberal, pro-"humanitarian massacres" counterparts on the left are busy decrying the fact that the Obama regime extended flight suspensions to the zionists state. John "the faggot" bolton was on Fox News complaining. I wonder how much sicker and more depraved the American political establishment can get. On the bright side, with each passing day more and more average people seem to be rejecting the official position that "israel is defending its right to exist". Even some of the normally worthless celebrities are letting a #PrayforGaza Tweet slip by. This was a pretty good, unbiased article from infowars on the subject (http://www.infowars.com/america-is-the-only-country-with-a-favorable-view-of-israel/)

    America's animalistic "pop culture" at its politicized finest. Not that The Bloodhound Gang is in any way relevant or popular, but the behavior of this faggot as he was "performing" in Kiev is really quite disgusting. But hey, he's an American, so I guess it would be safe to assume he comes from a broken home, and that his mother was a meth-addicted trailer-trash whore and slept with Blacks for money. "Don't tell Putin" indeed:
    Bloodhound Gang wiped ass with Russian flag

    While I'm on the topic of western trash, take a good look at the "white nationalist" clowns on this website (http://www.destroyzionism.com/). They have really outdone themselves in trying to demonize President Putin as a "tool of the Jews". In their eyes, if a world leader does not openly declare his intention of genocide against the jews, he must be a pawn of the jews. Subtleties like diplomacy, geopolitics, and resurrecting a rotting nation before declaring war on the all-powerful Anglo-American zionist establishment are just more "Jew lies". Seriously, WTF is with these neo-Nazi trash and their obsessive drive to oppose the only serious threat the powers that be today. Hitler would be rolling over in his grave if he could see these neo-Nazi homos playing the role of Jewish street soldiers.

    I wonder what other embarrassing revelations will come out in the coming days regarding the false flag Malaysian airliner attack. And since that failed, it seems the west is ordering Ukraine to launch artillery into Russian territory in order to goad Russia to respond. Will Russia let Ukraine slide into bankruptcy and lawlessness, or will they speed up the process by "accidenting" a few key Kievan assholes?

    1. As I am increasingly admiring the work of the man who made the documentary "The Greatest Story Never Told", it is quite fitting that I read his answer to a question on what message he gives to "neo-Nazis", and it's that the Hitler they admire is non-existent. Genuine NatSocs are far more educated than these clowns who would shoot themselves in the foot too many times, even if said foot was prosthetic.

      Even more disgraceful is that 'Neo-Nazi' organizations like Svoboda and Right Sector are actually fighting to advance Judeo-Western interests, and at the same time they even referred to Putin as Putler. If these guys consider them Nazis, then perhaps they should stop the genocide of the Russophones and overthrow the Ukrainian government. At least Patsy Yatsy's gone though

  30. Motyl: Putin, just evil enough

    I didn't bother reading past the part where the author of this propaganda piece, who also happens to be the author of books such as "The Jew Who Was Ukrainian", writes about Putin and Biden (speaking of Biden, as an Armenian-American I demand an apology from the ANCA for claiming Biden is "pro-Armenian" and thereby worthy of my support and donations, but that's another story). The "chutzpah"of the controlled media of a pariah government like Washington, which has spread misery, death, and destruction all across the globe and domestically, to call President Putin evil is pretty sickening.

    Equally as pathetic are the top comments underneath the article. I strongly suspect GayNN has censored a majority of comments that reject their bullshit. As others have pointed out, it's no wonder that the mainstream media is collapsing. They have zero credibility left. The only people I know of who generally still buy into the controlled press are the senior citizens, rapture bunnies, and prissy university students and recent grads who think reading the WSJ or Economist turns them into elite, upper class "leaders of tomorrow".

  31. https://i.imgur.com/Dtx73WI.png

    Somebody posted that on Reddit. The user was, of course, attacked and called an anti-semite, but he also received some support. It is an interesting perspective on the psych-ops and information war situation at present. Jews are numerically inferior and have largely been unable to censor the Internet so far. If truth-seekers get their act together, they can drown out the enemy.

    I made an account on Reddit a few months ago and spent a couple of days fighting the "Putin invaded Ukraine" cyber-warriors there. There was an organized group of about 20-25 people who would down-vote everything I posted. There was one user, though, who backed up my comments and added lengthy, well-cited ones of his own. Our posts had facts, the Russophobes had links to BBC articles about corruption in Russia and false, 1990s-era cliches about "even poor EU citizens live better than rich Russians". It wasn't much different than battling the cyber-warrior faggots on Asbarez.

    If anyone is interested, the link to the thread is below. For fun, go to "Sort by" and click "Controversial":

  32. There are demonstrations all over Ukraine right now to "get their kids back". They are morons, none of them are actually protesting against war in the first place. Before they thought it was going to be shooting fish in a barrel, now they straight up fear "the separatists".

    A media leak of a report prepared by Nalivajchenko and Avakov claimed that last week the Ukr army had near 4000 deserters and 1300 disappeared without a trace. They claim this is due to increased effectiveness of their foe in inflicting casualties.

  33. Data from the flight recorders is indicating that there are multiple hits on the aircraft. So much for the Western worlds hype. I guess the West has to grow up, just because the Jewden wants it does not make it so.

    Here is what is killing me, days ago I read something about the two fighters following the MH-17. The story goes something like this, one of the two Ukie planes shot at the Boeing, but instead of going the the direction they wanted, it went in the other direction. They freaked out, and used a BUK to finish the job. As the original plan was for the plane to continue until Russian airspace thous insuring that the Russians would get the blame, but the situation changed on them. The crime dictated yet another crime, to use a BUK to finish the job, just maybe the original plan would happen as planed, but the plane fell either case short of Russian airspace. double crime, you did not kill the victim once, so you killed them twice.

    Just dying to see what this Western world really is. Has the Jew done such a good job that idiots must follow the Juden plot no matter what? Sorry I'm not part of the game.


  34. What happened to my man Yatz? Why the sudden resignation? After all the JMF, I mean IMF was going to give them money now they don't want the Limelight?


  35. See some videos of continued horrific losses for Ukraines army in the cauldron:
    That's whats left of a person at 2 min. Incidentally, some phycos in Ukraine were saying "shish-kabab" after the Odessa event on May 2.

    Here are the moms of those still left alive crying:

    They don't still don't know what's going on. What are they dying for? Surrender to militia.

  36. http://nationalinterest.org/feature/five-russian-weapons-war-nato-should-fear-10816


  37. Here is the Ministry of Defense briefing about the Boing:

  38. Romanian AnonymusJuly 28, 2014 at 5:28 AM

    I think that I broached the subject already, but that's from the horse's mouth:

    "it is now revealed, Israel will withdraw its settlers from communities beyond the settlement blocs—and relocate them at least temporarily to Ukraine. Ukraine made this arrangement on the basis of historic ties and in exchange for desperately needed military assistance against Russia... All Jews who wish to return would be welcomed back without condition as citizens, the more so if they take part in the promised infusion of massive Israeli military assistance, including troops, equipment, and construction of new bases. If the initial transfer works, other West Bank settlers would be encouraged to relocate to Ukraine, as well. After Ukraine, bolstered by this support, reestablishes control over all its territory, the current Autonomous Republic of Crimea would once again become an autonomous Jewish domain. The small-scale successor to the medieval empire of Khazaria (as the peninsula, too, was once known) would be called, in Yiddish, Chazerai".

    Read more: Leaked report: Israel acknowledges Jews in fact Khazars; Secret plan for reverse migration to Ukraine | Jim Wald | Ops & Blogs | The Times of Israel http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/leaked-report-israel-acknowledges-jews-in-fact-khazars-secret-plan-for-reverse-migration-to-ukraine/#ixzz38iq7QWUm

    Retain the date of the article: March 18, 2014, 11:34 pm!


    1. I think the article is a satirical piece.


  39. MH17: Dutch mayor wants Vladimir Putin's daughter Maria deported
    The scum politicians of the Netherlands taking personal cheap-shots against President Putin. They'll lower themselves to the most depraved behavior in order to goad Russia into taking hostile retaliatory action it seems... The spineless Dutch and their leaders call for the deportation of President Putin's lovely daughter, but remain oddly quiet regarding the massive levels of Turkish and other third-world settlers their country has seen WWII. According to Wikipedia the percentage of ethnic Dutch in their three largest cities are 49.5% in Amserdam, 52.3% in Rotterdam, 49.9% in The Hague. Jackasses.

    Angry Russia to 'sanction' US tech firms

    In separate news, good for Russia. Western sanctions are forcing Russia to develop its own, secure IT. Despite the high initial costs, the payoff would be worth it for Russian society to free itself from back-door laden Western technology.

    ՀՀ ԶՈւ պատվո պահակախմբի ելույթը

    Taking a break from the political news, here is a very nice clip of Armenian servicemen on parade.


  40. http://securityassistance.org/content/us-nato-boosting-military-cooperation-georgia

  41. Cat is out of the bag!

    I was just watching Euronews to see what they were reporting and there you have it folks. It is now confirmed that the plane was hit multiple times. This is now out in the open and being talked about in at least European news. This is a can of worms that has just been opened. It will be interesting to see what unfolds politically from this.

    The Ukies are trying their hardest to make life difficult for the investigation by firing on the areas of the investigation. This last gambit is only making them take more gables with a poker hand that is now visible for all too see.

    Enjoy the show that is going to unfold from this. At the very least this is going to create a huge rift in the Atlantic front. The US should never have played this stupid game in the Ukraine. With all the geopolitical events in the world they did not need to open yet another front, but they did. Now look out sally as the chickens are coming home to roost.


  42. They are talking "Poroshenko's peaceful plan" again. From this weekend to Monday launched a very strong attack but I guess with big losses they didn't gain their strategic objectives and it seemed to be a bit of an adventure. Attack was on Shakhtersk and Torrez near the plane crash site. It was also in the plans as part of the plan to surround the Donetsk conglomorate and cut it off from Lugansk.

  43. Guys did anyone catch the CNN report about Ukrs use of ballistic rockets? CNN reported that they launched 3 such rockets. What's interesting is that neither the Donetsk or Lugansk militia know anything about it. Russia is silent. Russian media only sited the CNN report and only.

    On CNN they say US intelligence reported this and it is an indication of an escalation of the conflict. Kerry started talking about imediate peace.

    "Conspiracy" articles in Russian social sites say that the Tochka-U rockets were actually lanuched at Russia and Russia shot them down. This theory actually makes sense to me because they carry 500kg warheads and neither in Donetsk or Lugansk no body noticed anything. It would have caused much destruction/casualties. However, just today the site rusvesna reports that the Lugansk militia found broken parts of a Tochka-U rockets. Seems that a lot of this news is behind the scenes.

    1. Skhara, thank you for keeping us updated regularly via Russian language news media.

  44. The downing of the plane is trite news and vacuous protestations. The Malasyan plane crash has been superseded by other fresher and more ominous developments. Whoever did it, wether deliberate or accident is now irrelevant. There will be condemnation and counter condemnation, but that will be it. Nothing else. The Western catamites have slammed sanctions and more sanctions on Russia. The conflict in Ukraine turns nastier and more fraticidal by the hour. A bleak scenario could unfold with Russia intervening in the Russian Ukraine, and Nato overlapping on to western Ukraine, the two armies come close to each other for each other's discomfort. In the ME the Israley Juden carry out massacres and genocide of Palestinians with utter impunity and high moral righteousness. Palestinians are being killed mercilessly, might makes right, that is the essence of the nature of politics. The string of sanctions imposed on Russia might trigger the mechanism prompting Russia to exit the Juden -Western financial entrapment . That will signal the commencement to the race toward war. No nation can leave the Juden financial domination and supremacy in a peaceful manner. There is a price to pay for national autarky, that price is war and the outcome is uncertain.

  45. Check out this collection of anti-Putin 'newsmagazine" and newspaper (more accurately called propaganda rag) covers from various western nations. Dumbed-down to simple, cartoonish pictures, and designed to create hysteria while lacking any credible source or objectivity:


    They try to distort President Putin's image by presenting him as low-grade gangster or criminal. Or they try to present him as a reincarnation of powerful leaders of Russia's Soviet past like Stalin or Brezhnev, in order to frighten western civilians into allowing themselves to become canon fodder or human shields against Russia. And there is this persistent myth that "the Putin regime is showing signs or cracking", due of course to "Russian peoples yearning for democracy" coupled with the "devastating" effects of western sanctions. Never mind President Putin's all-time record high approval ratings since the Sochi Olympics. Facts have about as much relevance in the west today as they in ancient Rome in the decades immediately preceding the collapse.

    I have to say though I actually like this one by the Economist. It's not very creative as it is just a rehash of old Soviet era propaganda, complete with the red background, MiGs and Sukhois in the air, and the massive Red/Russian Army marching with massive flags. But this time they are marching under Russian flags, and under the command of a Russian leader who is firmly nationalistic, visionary, traditional, strong, and Orthodox. Despite the fact that Putin and Lavrov have been flawless diplomats, I think its safe to say that significant numbers of people look at this image of a revived, menacing Russia and see the only hope of stopping the criminal Anglo-American-Zionist alliance that threatens to enslave the world. Such attitudes are now appearing even in long-subjugated western and central Europe.


  46. Romanian AnonymusJuly 31, 2014 at 5:48 AM

    Very interesting news from:


    Wednesday, July 30, 2014
    July 30th Combat SITREP by Juan
    Information from very reliable sources. These sources are in Novorossiya, Russian Federation, EU and Ukraine:

    29.07.2014 in afternoon Ukraine time 4 SS-21 Tochka tactical ballistic missiles were fired by Ukraine Armed Forces. At least two were clearly aimed at Saur Moglia with the idea of the Ukes trapped in The Cauldron having a sudden escape route opened for them. Moments before launch Russian Federation units surged toward the border at The Cauldron area and to the north of The Cauldron.

    None of the 4 Tochka missiles reached their targets. I repeat, none of the 4 Tochka missiles reached their targets and none impacted with the ground anywhere that can be found in anything close to one piece. As you know this missile can carry a tactical nuke, chem/bio, cluster munition or HE in the weight of just under 500 kilos.

    When the 4 missiles failed to reach their targets the Armed Forces of RF immediately halted their surge and held position. They are in the same positions 30.07.2014.

    There has been a noticeable slow down of fighting activity since the launches and Strelkov has pointedly said again that Novorossiya is open to negotiations.

    The 4 Tochka missiles were shot down over Novorossiya territory occupied by Ukraine Armed Forces before the missiles reached their programmed height. They were shot down from inside RF according to normally reliable sources. No visual evidence has been provided of RF shooting down the Tochka systems nor of the system used to shoot down the Tochka missiles.
    Posted by VINEYARDSAKER: at 13:21


  47. This looks like a translation from Russian, but on "unofficial" Russian media channels there are reports of a US general Randy Allen Key being wounded in ambush set up by a recon group of the Donbass militia in the Izum area of Kharkov oblast. Guerilla type attacks have been conducted on military columns since the escalation of the conflict in May. 3 americans dead, Randy Allen injured.

  48. There is a picture of Randy Key Allen here:

    Word is that a GRU officer met with some European colleagues and let them know that they have undeniable information over the Boing and will go public if the wave of slander from the White House against Russia does not stop.

    Also 180 American Pentagon advisors arrived in Ukraine. He also let them know, that even without the order from his commander in chief, he can send a hundred of very well trained cadres who will make sure all 180 come back in coffins in a span of 4 weeks.

    In Mariupol on July 24th one such advisor was shot dead by a sniper while taking a swim in the Azov Sea and his pals were not able to come to his rescue because they took over. Now this recon style attack on the exact vehicle that Allen was in.

    1. I hope what you saying is real and not propaganda meant to satisfy pro-Russian sentiments. There is a lot of active propaganda and political spin on both sides. This is natural given the situation. Nevertheless, as long as the Kremlin does not make the Ukraine crisis very costly for Russia's antagonists in the Western world the anti-Russian agenda in Ukraine will continue and escalate - and may even spread to other areas on Russia's periphery.

      PS: I personally think Moscow is begin too careful, too caution for its own good. This is being translated as weakness by the West. I don't mean Moscow needs to take on the West directly. But it needs to find an effective way to make the West pay a high cost for their actions. Example: Eliminate military and civilian leaders of Junta in Kiev; Establish no fly zones over eastern Ukraine; Cut off gas shipments to antagonistic NATO members; Station nuclear submarines off the coast of USA, Britain and Israel; Establish military facilities in central and south America; Assassinate Western mercenaries operating in Ukraine; Help anti-Western forces in Afghanistan and Syria... There are a lot of things that can be done to hurt Western interests without directly coming into confrontation with the West - but these are not being done because Kremlin officials fear escalation. My point is, the Russian fear of begin drawn into a major war in Europe is in fact encouraging the West to escalate the crisis in Europe.

    2. Arevordi, yes it could be an information toss. But I think Russia has at least one "lost" black box even though officially they said that they will not take any since ICAO is supposed to do the investigation, but already it goes somewhat non-independent. For some reason Malasians hand over the black box to the Brits.

      The Americans being killed is accurate from what I understand. Incidentally, it seems like the elements in the Ukrainian security and military are selling them off. It's interesting that in Izyum the exact vehicle with the Allen was attacked.

      Also, do you remember in the last blog the picture of mangled metal after a Grad attack on the Ukr positions? Turns out certain officers put them there, they broke typical rules by putting the trucks, tanks, APCs very close together and when Grads hit they hit them exactly on the rectangle they occupied -- not left, not right, but exactly. When the surviving soldiers called the staff, the officer was surprised and asked them: "you are still alive?". The soldiers said "yes, we need to be evacuated." The officer said: "How can I evacuate you if you are not even supposed to be there?".

      So basically, some officers in the Ukr structures are fighting an undercover war against Poroshenko/US themselves. Presumably the militia of Donetsk and Lugansk have like 75 tanks together right now. That's a lot of lost perfectly functioning tanks while no evidence and no captured footage of Russia sending the militias anything heavy. Grads that they have, also come right out of the Ukr stockpiles.

    3. Arevordi, concerning the other points. I think that Russia wants the Ukr society deprogrammed. Part of the problem is that the anti-Russian agenda was nurtured for 23 years, Russia even after the coming of Putin did nothing in the information/propaganda sphere to nurture Russophilia in Ukraine. They propped up its economy. They spent 250 billion on economic subsidies, while Americans spent 5 billion on mass zombification -- the result is obviously a major setback for Russia. But Russia may catch up quickly now, because this misery and war has a way of sobering people up. Many Ukrs buried their heads in the sand from politics alltogether, but now their men are being dragged out of their homes and being sent as cannon fodder to the east giving rise to massive anti-war and protest moods. Already the original maidan is turning against Poroshenko.

    4. Skhara,

      I have long suspected that elements within Ukraine's security services are working for Moscow. This was to be expected. This is the reason why the junta in Kiev and its Western handlers have been frantically trying to put together new military units that are manned by handpicked western Ukrainians.

      Russophobia in Ukrainian society is not a post-Soviet phenomenon. Surviving pro-Nazi elements in Ukraine were exploited by Western intelligence and Russophobia was nurtured during the cold war between the West and the Soviet Union. Of course this agenda was intensified in the post-Soviet years.

      Moscow, perhaps mistakenly, thought that by providing financial aid, trade cooperation and cheep energy to Kiev, they will manage to win the hearts-and-minds of the human cattle in Ukraine. Again, Moscow's approach was old fashioned/traditional. Similar to what they have done in Armenia in the post-Soviet years, the approach was essentially top-down. Since they do not have the levers/capabilities to appeal to the lower layers of society in Ukraine, they helped the top layer hoping that it will eventually translate to support from the bottom layer (i.e. the cattle). Moscow has failed to appreciate Western style hands-on activism and the funding of various social projects. With that said, I do not want to come down too hard on Moscow. Russia is simply not capable of matching the West in regards of propaganda, social engineering, political spin and public relations. As I have said numerous times in the past: This unprecedented ability to manipulate human society is the Western world's most powerful weapon.

      As I have said numerous times in the past: If we the sheeple want to speak their language, watch their films, sing their songs, dance to their music, attend their universities, live and work in their lands, work for their organizations, trade in their currency, eat their foods, dress in their clothing.... They have already won half the battle.

      We give them their power. Please think about this.

  49. interesting article regarding ukraine:


  50. U.S. Warns Armenia Over Sanctions Against Russia


    Evidently, rather than putting pressure on Ankara to open the border with Armenia, the United States has effectively decided to join in on Turkey's and Azerbaijan's efforts at blockade and isolation of Armenia.

    The United States is better off to warn Azerbaijan to about their multi-billion arms deals with Russian defense companies. I'm wondering, when is the US planning to issue a statement to that effect? How hypocritical, indeed.


    1. This was so enraging to read! Aren't Armenia's opposition freaks always hysterically decrying the false claim that "Armenia is losing its sovereignty to Moscow?" I am confidant not a single voice in the so-called independent opposition and the equally worthless diaspora will raise a peep of protest.

      My initial reaction was "I hope the Armenian government sharply rebukes the assholes at the US embassy," but as we all know President Sargsyan, not unlike President Putin, does not make emotion-based, unprofessional outbursts. Therefore I can understand Armenian officials officially refusing to comment in public. But I sincerely hope in private communications Armenia's government tells the US to back the fuck off. Ideally, Armenian leaders could state "our relations with Russia are based on the tenets of diplomacy, international law, bilateral treaties between Yerevan and Moscow, and Armenian national interests. They are not directed against any third parties. Armenia cannot unilaterally apply sanctions against an ally without a UN madate {which would be impossible because Russia would obviously always veto}. Furthermore, Armenia will never take any steps to damage ties with our strategic partners with Moscow, nor will Armenia ever agree to sanctions which would severely cripple Armenia's economy".

      Seriously, these jackals in Washington seem unaware that the 2008 LTP coup de'tat, 2013 Raffi coup d'etat, and the EU trap at the November 2013 Vilnius Summit failed to subjugate Armenia into a western province. They cannot dictate policy for Armenia to follow, neither foreign nor domestic. Thank God we did not end up an EU pawn like the clowns in Kiev.

      I really hope that the Kremlin takes this latest antic by the US inside Armenia VERY PERSONALLY. Armenia is clearly acknowledged as being within the Russian sphere of influence. This is a direct challenge to Moscow's interests in the South Caucasus, just a step lower than the US-sponsored 2008 Saakashvili assault on Russian-backed South Ossetia. Russia has already condemned the "thinly veiled threats" coming from the US embassy. Former Russian Ambassador to Armenia Vyacheslav Kovalenko, as well as Dmitry Kiselyov and others have been proven to be fully justified in their warnings over US attempts to drive a wedge in the Armenia-Russia strategic alliance. Let's pray Russia retaliates through clandestine operations in Yerevan eliminating key western agents.

    2. I'm sure its just a "coincidence" that azerbaijan has stepped up its attacks against Armenia. The word on Zoravar's hyeclub forum is there was another skirmish on July 31, 8 azeris killed on battlefield, 1 additional death in azeri hospital, 5 wounded according to official azeri sources. History indicates that the real numbers are much higher, as Azerbaijan usually minimizes or outright denies casualties, and then over the following weeks reports some of its troops died in car accidents, drowning, weapons misfire, illness, concrete fell on their heads, etc... What surprises me is that the Azeris confirmed their casualties, which are already a noticeably high number, right away. I can't be sure but I suspect that the west has given the azeris a green light to intensify attacks against Armenia, under the calculation that a war in the South Caucasus would harm Russia's position while it is distracted with Ukraine and Syria. History repeats itself, and here we are witnessing the west sacrificing Armenia again as we approach the eve of the centennial of the Armenian Genocide.

      Sadly two more of our young soldiers sacrificed their lives defending Armenia against the demonic western-turkish-jewish alliance. Armenia published photos of captured azeri equipment from their latest raid. I'm proud of the Armenian military's performance and am confidant that - in a very cold calculation - we can maintain the upper hand even at the heightened rate of casualties we've lost this year to enemy raids. We mourn our casualties on deeper levels that any Azeri is capable of experiencing, but these Azeri intimidation and demoralization attempts against Armenia and Artsakh will backfire, with or without the west backing them.

      Russia should know the west is working overtime, via its controlled media in Armenia and the diaspora, to spin these latest attacks - which the west probably green-lighted - as supposedly being a result of Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan. It's easier to scare the Armenian public with that western generalization than it is to explain to them that most of Azerbaijan's purchases have been attack jets, helicopters anti-aircraft systems, tanks and artillery which have not been used in these recent Azeri subversive attacks, and for the most part are very unlikely to be used.


    3. Start the boycott to American companies doing business with Turkey and Azeries. Sanctions will in the long run strengthen Russia's infrastructure and self suficiency leading to a postion of complete autarky. A strong nation like Russia should throw out the Juden Kissinger philosophy which has dominated American Juden ideology post war international relations, that of " Interdependence". An interdependent comunity of nations is negative, an independent community of nations is positive. Sanctions will ultimately prove to be a wet fart. Iran has been under sanctions for decades. Saddam was under sanctions for decades, in the final chapter they had to invade Iraq, destroying it, and dethrone Saddam, because sanctions were not yielding the desired results. South Africa was under sanction for decades ,and they never had it so good as in the days of sanctions.They yielded the land to the majority because they had no will to continue preserving the country. During sanctions S.A. was a nuclear power. But you won't read this in mainstream media. They applied sanctions to Nationalist Socialist Germany, they applied sanctions to Mussolinis Italy. They apply sanctions against anyone running counter to their interests. In the end they end up in a war .

  51. Vladimir Putin: The Dangers of Escalation. Sanctions and Economic Warfare directed against the Russian Federation

  52. This is coming apart fast! Germans reporting that they found 30mm rounds downed the plane.


    While Europe paid lip service with more timid sanctions the European street knows this info as much as we do here. The stock market is down, there are things in the air and it's not just the same old data that everyone is avoiding. All of the sudden without any huge news market is down 300 points it is down for a reason and this is probably related. What ever moppets are running Europe are not popular as is. there are practically riots on the streets with what the Juden are doing in Palestine. You really think the European street is going to let their timid bought and paid for leader go ahead with this escapade with Ukraine go any longer?

    There is going to be some type of rift in the Western hemisphere. There is going to be tension between the Western powers as this was a joke from the start. If the leaders in the Eurozone don't have strong reaction to this downing by the Ukies then the European street that is brimming with issues is going to force a change or there is going to be a lot of disruptions. So Anglia better come up with some balls soon and change her tune, this is not going well at all. As is in the last elections in Europe the streets are brewing. If these clowns the West think everyone is stupid they are sadly mistaken. What do you think is happening in the East do you really think that the Orient is looking at this in a favorable light? While the West loves to talk non stop talks a good game of shit, with values and human rights they just shot down an airline full of people. Bravo! Europe just shot down jet full of human beings for a fucking silly game in Ukraine, a silly game that no one believes.

    No one needed this escapade in Ukraine, but the Western world from the start should not have started. Each setback should have been a good time to rethink this stupid game over and think hard. Yet each time, with each new disappointing setback the Western world has only managed to double down on the game. You have to have staying power to last as many rounds as it takes before you double down. The problem no one in the West understood from the start was that this game had some rules, and the rules state you can only double so many times before you take your loss.

    They should have cut their loss and moved on to something else, but they picked to stay and now the loss is too much to fathom yet they simply have no option left to double down. The Game ends and we will see what parts of Europe remain as well as this relationship in the Atlantic. Just like a gambler who doubled down too many times passed his limit. The gambler has to face the results of his actions the West has run out of everything. From moral capital, to the trust of it's assets, from the news to the poloticos running the show. There is not one once of faith left in this bankruptcy. Hell you can’t even fly an airplane in Europe without them shooting it down.

    I said at the start for everyone to take a vacation for a month or two and then come back. I must admit I did not think there was going to be this much foolishness from the West, but Moscow stood still just as I expected it too. In the end it's not who wins the stupid moves, it's the guy who gets a checkmate that wins the game. Bravo Vladimir Vladimirovich for there is still one Christian leader left in this world.


  53. @Russophobia in Ukrainian society is not a post-Soviet phenomenon

    Actually its origins are at least in the Unia.


    1. I mean in the territory of post Soviet Ukraine. "Ukrainianism" in itself is originally Russian people hating everything Russian. It was a project of the Austro-Hungarian intelligence general staff. It was nurtured in Galichina, but the problem is that post-Soviet Ukraine as a government ideology was built that Ukranianism, they created texbooks to support it and it spread like a locust to central Ukraine and even to South and East Ukraine.

  54. Russia , wish you march westward and sweep all across your path. American domination, colonization, subversion and culturalization of Europe must come to an end. Russian troops ought to march and take over the entire Ukraine. Ukraine was never an independent nation, it might have enjoyed some ephimerous patch of independence after WW1. Americans Raus of Europe, go back to your multiracial miscegeneated state and stay there. Take back with you the aboniable hamburgers, Macdonalds, Jazz, Rock, porno, drugs and all the fith and lechery you transpanted around the world since the end of WW2.

  55. Captured paratroopers in Shakhtersk.

    He is crying. "I didn't want to kill anybody". I am noticing in the politics they are deliberately sending guys from villages in center and west Ukraine to Donbass. There is nothing in this kid that says he is a nationalist - just ignorant. Looks like they will just send him home.

  56. I don't believe for a secod that the azeri provocations lately are independent decisions.

    1. I'm currently in Armenia. Some people here are suspecting a connection between recent skirmishes at the line of contact, billionaire Levon Hayrapetyan's arrest in Moscow and the following interview by Zhirinovsky -


      Something may be brewing but we cant make the mistake of prematurely assuming that the three things I mentioned above have to be interrelated.

      Regarding Levon Hayrapetyan: Zori Balayan's said it best - "let's stop making predictions like a bunch of gipsies and wait to see what really happened." There is not much to say about the case. No one yet knows what was the real reason behind his arrest. With that said, it is known that Putin's government has been coming down hard on influential/wealthy people in Russia who are not in-line with the Kremlin. Kremlin officials are going after people who are taking their wealth out of the country, those who are money laundering and those who are having unsupervised dealings with western entities. Levon Hayrapetyan may have been guilty of any one of the aforementioned. We'll find out sooner or later. Note that he was arrested while returning from Monaco. Being a major benefactor in Artsakh does not mean he has been an angel in Russia. He made his billions in Russia. He needs to understand that he may have to dance to the tune played by the Kremlin. Ironic part in his case: Those championing his release are essentially those who were not too long ago cursing him for being an oligarch.

      Regarding the recent border skirmishes: It's very likely that Baku is trying to lure Armenia to militarily respond in a way that will derail Yerevan's ascension to the Customs Union. It's also very likely that Baku is doing this to put pressure on official Yerevan and increase tensions between the Armenian government and the Armenian people.

      Regarding Zhirinovsky's interview: I admit it was unexpected of him. His words however should not be taken as if he has had a fundamental change of mind with regards to Artsakh, Armenia and regional Turks. The man has been an outspoken champion of Artsakh for over twenty years. Despite the politically motivated lip service he is giving Baku now, I don't see him changing his views with regards to Artsakh.

      With that said, it is undeniable that official Moscow is clearly doing its utmost best to keep Baku within its orbit and Azeris are for their part - unlike our Captain Americas, Eurotic idiots and Chobans-in-Armani-Suits - doing their best to have a presence in the Kremlin. At a crucial time like this, we Armenians are still too preoccupied with fighting corruption, importing Western values into Armenia and cooperation with Western/Globalist institutions - something that Azerbaijan is, relatively speaking, free of due to it being a dictatorship (a big plus for dictatorships).

      As I have been saying all these years, all this "democracy" and "civil society" non-sense has been a red herring - distraction - keeping us from more important things. With that said, if the three matters noted above are indeed interrelated, it may then actually be an indicator that Moscow is preparing to settle the festering problem that is Artsakh. How Artsakh fares in the end is ultimately dependent upon our abilities as a collective people.

      I'm not too hopeful.

    2. The following translated excerpt from Zhirinovsky's interview indirectly explains why I am not very hopeful -

      "Zhirinovsky drew particular attention to the careful attitude of Azerbaijan to the Russian language. "In Azerbaijan, 400 Russian schools, and not one closed. In Baku, a powerful Russian Theater, University. Here's an example" - said Russian deputy."

      In comparison, every single one of the Russian schools in Armenia were shut down almost as soon as the Soviet Union collapsed. The now very influential American University of Armenia opened its doors almost as soon as the Soviet Union disappeared. Only in the late 1990s did the Russian language Slavonakan Hamalsaran (Slavonic University) open its doors in the suburbs of Yerevan. Other than that little known university not a single Russian school exists in Armenia. Consequently, English has come to dominate the country, especially amongst the post-Soviet generation, especially here in Yerevan. When Russians rightfully raised concerns recently about the declining status of the Russian language in Armenia, instead of recognizing the strategic importance of maintaining the Russian language in Armenia, Armenians from all layers of society - including government officials - cried foul.

      Apparently, Turks recognize the value of the Russian language better than is Armenians. And we Armenians are supposed to be the smart ones?!

      Once more: If things start going downhill for Armenia and Artsakh geopolitically, it will be as a result of Yerevan's foreign policy failures such as "complimentary politics" and the Armenian people's Western fetishes. Simply put: We seem to be failing to understand the game being played around us.

    3. Arevordi, you have said in previous blog postings that Russia will be able to take control over Armenia...in other words, no matter what. Do you still stand by that? I fear for Armenia's predicament...

    4. Robert, as a general rule, my comments should be looked at only within the context of the discussion in question and time period they were made. With that said, I will repeat that Moscow will sooner lay waste to Armenia than see it fall into NATO hands. This distrust, which is natural in international relations, is behind the reason why Moscow has no problems arming Baku. They make Armenians and Azeris dependent on them, making it easier to control both sides. With that said, despite the Armenian Diaspora's Western fetishes and official Yerevan's on-going flirtations with the political West, Moscow continues to control Armenia's lifeline and a majority of the population in Armenia continues to have warm sentiments towards Russia. There is no doubt that Armenia will remain within the Russian orbit. The only concern I have is about Artsakh. Not about whether it will exist or not but what will its borders look like in the end. We are not investing enough effort in the Kremlin in this regard.

    5. Being in Armenia as well, since the recent skirmishes started, a lot of Anti-Artsakh Hysteria has started once again.

      Today I heard the following self-destructive phrases from Armenians' mouths:

      "Artsakhtsis are worst than turks, they take our boys and send them to protect Artsakh's borders and they treat them like shit"

      Artsakh, being a volatile zone, needs to be heavily protected. There is no surprise that extra soldiers from Armenia need to be sent there. And how do you expect to be treated in the army? Life is tough in the army, it's time for Armenians to man up. That's the whole point of the army. To survive and endure under bad conditions.
      The problem here is psychological/mental. Armenians of Armenia (and most of the diasporans for that matter) do not have true nationalistic/fighting spirit. They are only good at either making long "patriotic" toasts or organizing jamborees in Armenia.

      "the Artsakh conflict has been and continues to be Armenia's main obstacle to prosper"

      Apparently these low-lives believe that had Armenians accepted living with azeris in peace (Artsakh being under the control of azerbaijan), today Armenia would have very warm relations with turkey, azerbaijan and Georgia, and therefore do "bizness" with them, and money would enter in the country, and everyone will live happily ever after. Only one thing, they forget that that would translate to Armenian suicide. No Artsakh = No Armenia = turkish cesspool = pan-turkism realized

      "Artsakhtsis are worst than turks"
      Sure, I guess fighting to preserve liberated land is classified as turkic. So with the same logic, giving that land back is pure Armenianism.

      "Russia is arming azerbaijan with offensive weapons"
      The age old argument which has already been addressed countless times in the blog. Russia is giving azerbaijan offensive weapons that are export versions, which means not as effective as the original. Second, if Russia won't give its garbage to azerbaijan, than azerbaijan will buy more sophisticated weapons from Russia's geopolitical foes, which pose an even bigger danger in the region.

      The sad reality about Armenia's people is, we are a very demoralized nation. At the same time, we are jealous of whoever is successful, we do not accept the harsh realities of our homeland and its difficulties and all we do is blame the Government. Just like how in the past we beheaded Mkhitar Sparapet and handed its head to the turks, we are now more than ready to behead all Artsakhtsis and send them as gift to azerbaijan. We do not lobby in Moscow, while our enemies who are dumber than us, realize the importance of lobbying in Moscow. We instead lobby for "genocide recognition".

      As sad as this may sound, before we decide to lobby in Moscow, before we start taking proactive measures within the walls of the Kremlin, we need to fix the Armenian. A new generation is desperately needed.

  57. Azerbaijan is taking big hits. President Serje said more than a year ago before all this Ukraine mess started that major changes were expected in the region in the next 5 years, and that those changes would already be noticeable in 2 years, when he predicted the downfall of Azerbaijan.

    Getseh Artsakh!

  58. Toorks dropping like flies.








    Whatever happened they suffered greatly. While we are talking a cautionary tone to this and reporting the same amount of dead they are they must have had a bloodbath on their hands and the numbers are a lot more then being reported as usual, but what has changed is that they suffered so much they can’t hide it. Remember they have a state controlled media, for them to publicly admit dead they must have a lot that they can’t just hide. Dead after dead on national baboon TV, when is the last time you seen that?

    With Weapons dropped behind we bring you the latest in carnage brought to you by fighting Armenians. Let there be no mistake, if we are nocking off baboon special forces like flies they had better reconsider their position. There is a lot more that is not being shown wisely by Armenia, if this thing rips open again this is going to be a game changer. So whomever has this match lit and ready better think twice, if all the effort in Ukraine went badly this game that is being played with the Armenians is going to be a game change, you can bet on it.

    Toorks are dropping like flies, time to celebrate, now where did I put those Raspberry truffles?...LOL


  59. All this bring back memories.

    After all this is not the first time. Far from it.

    this is the 1000th time we have shot baboons in the arse.

    Yes that is right have a look...LOL


    Not once but twice we shot the shame guy in the arse. He cried like a bitch, but it did not change much. The fact of the matter was we shot them in the ass twice he was too stupid to notice the first time but he noticed it the second time...LOL

    If they have such sort memories it is high time we remind them again!


  60. There were some relevant articles on inforwars. Two concerning the Malaysian airline case which is increasingly being exposed as a false flag opertion that Kiev's junta jackals botched, and another article touching the point that was raised here earlier about the junta basically dragging civilians from the west and using them as canon fodder. All three articles contain a lot of useful links within their text.

    Ukrainians Protest Against Conscription Orders

    Ukraine MH17 may be CIA false flag and it ain’t flying

    Ukrainian Government SU-25 Fighter-Jets Shot Down Malaysian Airliner

    Also, not to alarm anyone, but the super-democratic, peace-loving, totally legitimate government in Kiev, which came to power through the most democratic process imaginable, is making a very tiny, temporary adjustment to its human-rights-focused Freedom of Expression laws. This expansion of the scope of the Freedom of Expression law is required to fight the invading autocratic Putin regime to the east of course. It's a true monument to the results of US-funded democracy programs in action.Specifically:

    "In response {Kiev} authorities have promised to arrest anybody who uses social media to engage in political activism against the war {that Kiev is waging against the Novorossiya region}. The order was issued by Anton Gerashenko, an advisor to the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

  61. I find it difficult to fathom that Russia will compromise the independence of Artsakh in order to gain Azeri loyalty. Russia does not need to give Azeries anyhting in exchange for their fidelity. It is Azeries gain to become integrated in the Russian orbit, and not the other way around. Any territorial concessions on Artsakh will indirectrly debilitate and weaken Russia position in the area vis a vis the Turanians. How will Armenia reach a common border with Russia if not through the acquisition of territory in the east. Azerbaijan can fracture into the various communities making the Azery state. Azerbaijan is not a homogenuous nation like Armenia is. In spite of our inner and obvious weaknesses in terms of geography and demographics we have a greater strength than the rest of our enemies and that is that Armenia is Armenian in its purest sense. We don't have potential ethnic trojan horses in our midst and we must stay that way for ever; that is why we have survived against impossible odds. The blood, the race. We need to arm ourselves , we need to embrace technological advances and scientific research to make up for the deficit in numbers.We need to mould Armenia in a modern Spartan ethic. It is better to be poor and remain Armenian, than rich, wealthy, and deracinated in a multiethnic hell hole. Besides we have the diaspora too, good or bad it serves a purpose.

    1. There is absolutely no talk in Russia about compromising Artsakh's independence, nor will there be. You'll hear such talk only amongst Turks - and Yerevanians. As we have seen too many times in our history the Trojan Horse you mentioned can be Armenians themselves. And if you tell an typical Armenian today that it's better to be poor and remain Armenian than be a wealthy citizen of the world in some multiethnic melting pot, he or she will laugh in your face. The Armenian Diaspora serves a purpose indeed: It's the perfect advertizement for encouraging Armenians to abandon their homeland and the perfect catalyst for importing "Western values" into Armenia.

  62. http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2014/07/28/russia-is-not-nigeria/



  63. http://www.rferl.org/content/obama-says-russia-doesnt-produce-anything/25479693.html

    What a silly monkey.


    1. Obama is a sell-out, as anyone with experience in politics could have pointed out in 2007. Of course "anyone with experience" rules out the Armenian diaspora that was kissing his ass. But I question how much Obama believes his own words, which are ghostwritten by the real masters behind the scenes. He's no better or worse than any other US/UK/Anglosphere politician, whether they claim they are left or right wing. The entire western system is corrupt, twisted, living in an alternate reality and really has no logical conclusion but collapse. He may be scum in a certain sense, but this is the best the west can produce at this point. Still a bit better than mccain or any of those servile neoconservative chickenshit war-mongers in office.

      As Arevordi predicted in the past, they are going to blame their pet negro for the declines that America will continue to experience. Already the line is being pushed that the (American-backed) Sunni terrorists are destroying Iraq because Obama "failed to bomb Syria". Luckily for the powers that be Americans are so stupid that such illogical arguments enter public thought with little scrutiny.

  64. Jokers at work.
    THe Islamic State of Donbass and Lugant.

    Some of the fighters indeed joke with "Allah Akbar" I guess in response to Kiev seeing Chechens everywhere.

  65. Don't play with matches or you will get burned.




  66. The user "Artsakh" posted this on another forum, I believe he posts here as well.


    Take a look at these naive, "we are all brothers" comments written in English in the comments section of this article. I can't help but wish Armenia would deport these fucking idiots to Azerbaijan and let them experience in person just how "fraternal" the Muslim Azeri Turks can be. Of course there is almost no chance such liberal attitudes were fostered in Armenia, except maybe in the most degenerate segment of Yerevan's population. This is part of the reason why Armenia is not ready for prime-time.

    Luis 18 hours ago
    This is #$%$! None of us wants war! We all know that all this is political #$%$! Both Armenia and Azerbaijan make our young men go out there and fight and get killed for nothing! I mean do you even know why you #$%$ hate each other so much? Don't believe in everything your government says, don't waste your life hating and judging people you don't know anything abut, people that haven't done anything wrong, just cus your history teacher told you to do so! I mean fighting over a stupid piece of land? Don't you see that this is a trap! We are better than that! Hell we both are! Use your logic! We are not savages, not anymore! There is enough war around! We just want peace and safety for our people! And if we refuse to fight - they can't make us! Peace.

    Robert 2 days ago
    As an Armenian I have no ill will for the Azerbaijani people. I've met a few of them in the states and we get along as friends and neighbors. People are never the problem but leaders are a different story. On both sides the politicians drum up hatred for one another. After independence names had to be made and what better way than bloody and pointless war. We were peaceful neighbors for hundreds of years before and both suffered under the Persians, Ottomans and Communists. Despite religious differences our Kavkaz cultures are very similar. We both enjoy Kabab, Lavash and making fun of Georgians. I kid they're OK too. Bottom line for the sake of our children we must learn to forget our hatreds and learn to love each other as fellow human beings.
    And this something everyone on Earth should learn to do as well.

    vasken markosian 1 day ago
    Robert, as a an armenian, myself, I cant help agree with u more. I also have met a couple of people from Azerbaijan and from Turkey in the states and have gotten along with them just fine, I even speak with them in Turkish. I do hope a peaceful solution is worked out. War and killing is not the answer. Hatred and talking ill to one another is not the answer.

    Luis 16 hours ago
    Can we finally let go of the past and think about the future? Do you really think that all this conflict is not a play of the governments? I know one thing for sure people don't want to fight, mothers don't want their kids dead! I hope when it comes to war both sides will refuse to fight! That would be the victory of intelligent people over greedy politicians!

    1. Trolls. Do not pay much heed to them.


    2. I figured as much LG. Although I'm not sure if its a professional psych-op agent or just a delusional simpleton from the diaspora. I remember one example from this blog during President Putin's visit to Armenia in December 2013 where the commentator on yahoo posted something like "it's true, I've been in Yerevan all day and police are gassing and beating people".

      I can't find the link, but I remember from several years back reading some state department sponsored program where Armenian and Azeri students were in a program and the Armenians wrote a piece saying "these were the first actual Azeris I met after being told for years they are our enemies. I can't believe it, they are people just like us".

      I can imagine a few bleeding heart, psychologically damaged people in the diaspora reading these things and tearing up. If it wasn't so dangerous and subversive, it would be funny.

    3. Don't worry Sarkis. The morale is high in Artsakh. It's here in Yerevan that people are spending time talking shit about Artsakh, as if it were Armenia's main obstacle for "political stability", "freedom" and "democracy". While they try and find a way to bribe themselves out of serving in the army, Volunteers from Berdzor and other regions of Artsakh have joined our men on the front-lines. They are the role models Armenian men desperately need nowadays, not the typical "qyartu" who squats and eats "semushka" for a living, or the diasporan who spends his time going from the pub, to the hookah lounge, to the nightclub in Yerevan (Yes, that's what diasporans visiting here do best, doing the same shit they do in Beirut, LA or istanbul)

      Nevertheless, as much as pacifist-hippie diasporans talk about befriending turks and azeris, as much as Yerevantsis blame Artsakh for their problems, Artsakhtsis and Hayastanci sodliers in Artsakh are doing work on the ground.

    4. Morale is high in Yerevan too. Lets not paint with a broad brush.


  67. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-03/india-s-toilet-race-failing-as-villages-don-t-use-them.html

    I'm sure the percentage of many other Asian and African nations are much worse than India, but since those nations are not part of BRICS they don't selected for front page humiliation.

    That's not to say that India is not disgusting, only that this is an example of bias in western media. There is no shortage of homeless Americans defecating in public like animals either, for example by a freeway bridge literally a block down from Los Angeles's multi-million dollar Staples Center (home of the L.A. Lakers, Clippers and Kings).

  68. Life is a struggle. The weak bend under the strong. The price of Peace is War. Just as the price of life is death. If there is an Eden on earth then we can all sing the same lullabies, if we manage to fit in all in one. Everything in life is bound by unremitting struggle and those who fail to understand this can go on chanting the Mantra we are all brothers , we are all the same, there is one human race, bla bla bla. Maybe the suffering Palestinians can console themselves with such platitudinal flim flam; just like the martyrs in 1915 asking why is this catastrophe unfolding. Nobody wants war. Wish for peace but always be ready for War, and then be prepared. Atsakh was not won by peaceniks, flower youth, hedonistic followers, nor drug addicted catamites. As for those peace mongers and raving maniacs we all brothers and the same, there is a surprise for you all. Armenia's geography does not fit that mental mould. Shape up or ship out peace lover hedonist and armies of debauched atomized denizens. The islands of Mykonos, Cancun ,Vegas and Cayman beckon you all peace lovers and beatniks. If Armenia gets any respect today, in this criminal world, from friend and foe alike is thanks to her armed forces and the unremitting resoluteness to preserve her unique identity. FQ

  69. Wow...

    Հարձակումներից հետո մենք ոչ միայն չենք վախենում, այլ համախմբվում ենք մեր զինվորի շուրջ. կամավորներ
    Posted on Օգոստոս 4, 2014 by Հասմիկ Մելիքսեթյան

    Քաշաթաղից 106 կամավոր արդեն սահմանին է ու սահմանապահ զինծառայողների կողքին։ Վաղը կամ մյուս օրը նրանց փոխարինելու կգնա երկրորդ հարյուրյակը, որի մեջ ես էլ կլինեմ։ Մենք գնում ենք, որ մեր զինվորներն ավելի ամուր կանգնեն, ավելի մարտունակ լինեն։
    Քաշաթաղի շրջանի վերաբնակեցման վարչության պետ Ռոբերտ Մաթևոսյան

    Քաշաթաղի շրջանի վերաբնակեցման վարչության պետ Ռոբերտ Մաթևոսյան

    Այս մասին Ռազմինֆոյի հետ զրույցում ասաց Քաշաթաղի շրջանի վերաբնակեցման վարչության պետ, կամավորների հավաքման կազմակերպիչներից Ռոբերտ Մաթևոսյանը։

    «Քաշաթաղցին ցույց է տալիս, որ ամուր է, միասնական։ Մենք և մեր գործն ենք անում, և´ ստեղծագործում ենք, և´անասնապահությամբ զբաղվում, և´ արդյունաբերությունն աշխատեցնում ու նաև կարողանում բանակ գործուղել մեր կամավորներին տղաների կողքին լինելու համար։ Ադրբեջանն էլ թող իմանա, որ այդ դիվերսիաներից ու հարձակումներից հետո մեր ժողովուրդը ոչ միայն չի վախենում, այլ համախմբվում է իր զինվորի շուրջ»,- հավելեց Մաթևոսյանը։

    Ինչպես տեղեկացնում է Ռոբերտ Մաթևոսյանը կամավորների թվում կան «Արաբո», «Տիգրան Մեծ» և այլ ջոկատներից ազատամարտիկներ։
    Կամավորներին զինվորական հագուստ տրամադրել է Արցախի վետերանների միությունը, սննդի հարցը լուծում են բարեգործական ընկերությունները, իսկ սպառազինության համար համագործակցում են Պաշտպանության բանակի հետ։

    «Մենք ինքնագործունեություն չեն ծավալում, այլ համագործակցում ենք ՊԲ-ի հետ։ Իսկ ինչ վերաբերում է, որ սահմանին մեր տղաները քիչ են դրա համար ենք գնում, սխալվում են բոլորը, մեր տղաները մեզնից հազարապատիկ ուժեղ են ու ամուր, մենք բարոյահոգեբանական տեսանկյունից ենք նրանց աջակցում»,- եզրափակեց Մաթևոսյանը։

    Հավելենք, որ բացի Քաշաթաղից կամավորական ջոկատներ են կազմվում նաև Մարտակերտի շրջանում։

    Մարտակերտի շրջանի «Ջրաբերդ» պաշտոնաթերթի խմբագիր Լուսինե Զաքարյանը Ռազմինֆոյի հետ զրույցում նշեց, որ կամավորական ջոկատը դիրքեր է մեկնել երեկ՝ օգոստոսի 3-ին, Արցախի Ազատամարտիկների միության վարչության նախաձեռնությամբ։

    Կամավորների թվում հիմնականում Մարտակերտն ազատագրած ազատամարտիկներն են, ովքեր այսօր էլ իրենց գիտելիքներով ու փորձով զինծառայողների կողքին են։

    Հիշեցնենք, որ հուլիսի 31-ից մինչ օրս առաջնագծում լարված վիճակ է։ Ադրբեջանական կողմը պարբերաբար խախտում է հրադադարի ռեժիմը, ձեռնարկում հետախուզադիվերսիոն հարձակման փորձեր, առաջնագծի տարբեր հատվածներում գրանցվել է փոխհրաձգություն։ ՊԲ պաշտոնական տվյալներով՝ նշված ժամանակահատվածում հայկական կողմն ունեցել է 5 զոհ, 7 վիրավոր։


  70. The Eurasian union will impact Russia and Belarus Armenia negatively as central Asians will move around as they please. Surely this will mirror the European Union in replacement of Russians/Belarusians/Armenians.

    Sorry if this sounds stupid but I would like any honest feedback on this.

    1. I agree that is nonesense. Actually, the central asians in the eurasian customs union ultimately will give them economic oportunities at home so they don't feel any need to move arround.

      During Soviet times they didn't feel the need to move anywhere because of the integrated economic system.

  71. OK, so I'm not sure if this is true, but the article in Russian apparently talked about a proposal made by Novorossiya fighters to make a truce with the Ukrainian Army and to liberate Kiev from Poroshenko's control or something like that.


    Speaking of which, this news piece on RT made me think that Putin's waiting game was actually paying off, as desertions within the Ukrainian Army is becoming common.


    1. Jerriko, there is no instances of any whole battalion joining the militias. Only individual cases and mass desertions. On the other hand, the combatants are indeed comming into direct speaking contact with one another and indeed trying to understand one another. That is a good sign and a nightmare scenario for the regime in Kiev.

      Unfortunately there is still mass misunderstanding going on. There is very good reason why Kiev avoids like the plague real talks as a lot of truth of what's going will hit a lot of citizens as well as many soldiers many of whom are comming to the realization that they are being used as meat.

      What's been going on for the last week is a fracticidal carnage. Real fracticidal carnage. The losses among the militias were heavy, but the losses among Ukrainian military with both people and armoured vehicles catastrophic.

      Incidentally, over 400 Ukrainian servicemen crossed into Russia on the night of Sunday to Monday. This is from the southern cauldron. Apparently this was negotiated with the militia. So the army formations in the southern cauldron are being finished off. Incidentally, most of the soldiers decided not to return to Ukraine while hostilities are ongoing, so Russia is building them a camp where they can suf the internet, get hot meals, warm baths, and a comfortable enough sleeping area. Something they have been dreaming about for the last several weeks. Food, sleep, not being pounded with artillery, brushing their teeth, shaving, taking a bath, not being eaten alive my mosquitos.

  72. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-OsrCkXTNY&feature=youtu.be

    Video below they are complaining about their government. They are crumbling!




  73. "Evidence Is Now Conclusive: Two Ukrainian Government Fighter-Jets Shot Down Malaysian Airlines MH17. It was Not a ‘Buk’ Surface to Air Missile"


    Ah ha said the blind man reading the newspaper to his def son.


  74. https://slavyangrad.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/inevitable-finale.jpg

  75. At 25 seconds you will see an Armenian tank in the background the tank has mostly white turret and this year Armenia placed second.


    I like it a lot this year, they stepped it up a notch and it looks a lot more complex and interesting. Think of this as top gun of tanks, good to see a lot of other countries joined.


  76. More in Russian on the biathion this is a good long video. Armo tank in the green.



  77. http://rt.com/business/178028-russia-eu-sanctions-dobrolet/

    Lufthansa said it could potentially lose more than €1 billion in three months if it does not use trans-Siberian routes, according to Forbes.

    The US orders Europe to impose sanctions on Russia, Europe obeys its Washingtonian masters, Russia retaliates against Europe. €1 billion is equivalent to more than one billion and 338 million dollars. Even for a wealthy nation like Germany, that kind of loss for the national airline is disastrous. Gee, if I didn't know better I'd suspect that the US is purposefully trying to weaken Germany's economy, the euro as a currency, and Europe in general.

    They screwed up the geopolitical calculus during the last great war and paid for it. I hope Deutschland's leadership can somehow overthrow the Anglo-American yoke and forge an alliance with Moscow ASAP.

    Reminds me of this from 2010:

    Germany attacks US economic policy

    Germany has put itself on a collision course with the US over the global economy, after its finance minister launched an extraordinary attack on policies being pursued in Washington. Wolfgang Schäuble accused the US of undermining its policymaking credibility, increasing global economic uncertainty and of hypocrisy over exchange rates. The US economic growth model was in a "deep crisis," he also warned over the weekend. His comments set the stage for acrimonious talks at the G20 summit in Seoul starting on Thursday. Germany has been irritated at US proposals that it should make more effort to reduce its current account surplus. But Berlin policymakers were also alarmed by last week's US Federal Reserve decision to pump an extra $600bn into financial markets in an attempt to revive US economic prospects through "quantitative easing".

    On Friday, Mr Schäuble described US policy as "clueless". In a Der Spiegel magazine interview, to be published on Monday, he expanded his criticism further, saying decisions taken by the Fed "increase the insecurity in the world economy". " They make a reasonable balance between industrial and developing countries more difficult and they undermine the credibility of the US in finance policymaking." Mr Schäuble added: "It is not consistent when the Americans accuse the Chinese of exchange rate manipulation and then steer the dollar exchange rate artificially lower with the help of their [central bank's] printing press." Germany's export success, he argued, was not based on "exchange rate tricks" but on increased competitiveness. "In contrast, the American growth model is in a deep crisis. The Americans have lived for too long on credit, overblown their financial sector and neglected their industrial base. There are lots of reasons for the US problems -- German export surpluses are not part of them."

    There was also "considerable doubt" as to whether pumping endless money into markets made sense, Mr Schäuble argued. "The US economy is not lacking liquidity." On the future of the eurozone, Mr Schäuble confirmed in the same interview that Berlin will push for a greater private investor involvement in future bail-outs. To ensure German taxpayers faced the smallest possible burden it was important to have the possibility of an orderly debt restructuring with the participation of private creditors, he said. Germany's proposals for a planned new rescue mechanism have run into resistance from the European Central Bank, which fears they will add to investor uncertainty at a crucial time for Europe's 12-year old monetary union. Mr Schäuble said the new mechanism would apply only to new eurozone debt but argued the European Union "was not founded o enrich financial investors".

  78. http://www.eurasianet.org/node/69346

    "During the meeting, said Azerbaijani analyst Tofik Abbasov, "Aliyev will pose the question to Sargsyan point blank: either return occupied Karabakh and the seven adjacent regions, or expect war."

    I doubt aliyev will say this but if so then war it is bitch!


    1. I have absolutely no tangible evidence to back this up, but it seems plausible, even likely, to me that the US is behind the recent Azeri aggression. Perhaps the west promised Aliyev Turkish/NATO support in order to encourage him to attack Armenia. Russia is the alpha and omega in the South Caucasus, so the Americans may calculate "what have we got to lose?"
      A war in the west would only benefit the west at the expense of Russia, and I don't think Russia would want to orchestrate an Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict at this moment since its presence in Armenia, and Armenian ascension to the Eurasian Union are firmly secured. Several factors:

      -The Azeris tried hard, two nights in a row, supposedly with some of their "special forces" and heavier than normal weaponry, to break into Artsakh. The good news, however, is that the Armenian military crushed them.

      -The Azeri government, in an unprecedented move, actually confirmed the deaths and released names and details of their latest "martyrs". This no doubt was intended to incite their public to focus their rage on Armenia.

      -I have become convinced that western leaders are seriously out of touch with reality. Ukraine and Syria are proof of this, because any barely competent analyst could have pointed out "these operations will fail and yeild nothing but loses". Taking a look at Stratfor articles and the crap that passes for "academic" research in the west only confirms my suspicions that the leadership of the west has, en masse, finally started to believe their own lies and are now less capable of making rational decision. This "academic" piece of shit that LG found still stands out in my mind:

      -The west will take any distraction given the incredibly negative attitudes towards Israel over the latest Gaza massacres, as well as the fact that the false flag operation regarding the Malaysian airliner over Ukraine is falling apart.

      If Aliyev is actually going to present President Putin with an ultimatum, I hope Putin gives a subtle reply that such behavior is unacceptable. Something to really make Aliyev shit his pants, like maybe national hero safarov gets blown to bits in a "leaking gas line" accident in Baku.

    2. This is classic in my view, look at all the places the West has lit the match. One after another, this is yet one more thing on Moscow's boarders.

      also the Juden keep bombing the shit out of kids, they amp up an make noise someplace else to hide the crime.


  79. Have a feeling something is going to snap. Last few days stupid videos from the baboon have been cropping up. The Ukraine thing is in the bag for Moscow considering the plane downing by Ukraine it is game over politically. Ukraine is dying from within it is simply a failed state. Having failed at this mission twice, first time was the fake revolution that did not go down well, second go was to tangle Moscow and that is a disaster for Ukraine and the West. Whats up another trick up the sleeve!

    First and foremost lest look at some timelines and events. Before the Ukraine mess went full swing there was a lot of pressure on Armenia with joining the CU. That pressure went away as soon as Ukraine went haywire, as Ukraine thing would if it went down the way they wanted would put unbearable pressure on Armenia. Since Ukraine is not going right, time to flare up something else this time in the Caspian basin. Having engulfed the world from one hotspot to another the West has a nasty habit of lighting the match without thinking of the ramifications or any goal in mind except mayhem. The next place of action is going to light up between Armenia and baboonistan. Iran is now distracted in the ME, Russia is distracted in Ukraine, so perfect timing? Somewhere someone things this is a perfect time to start.



  80. http://www.thenation.com/article/180825/why-washington-risking-war-russia


  81. Dugin's take on the recent escalation


    Can anyone brief us what he's talking about? specially what he means with the last part

    Мы бы показали силу, и тот же Карабах могли бы загасить железной рукой. Но если эта рука в Крыму железная, а на Донбассе не очень (это мы видим по той толерантности, которую власть демонстрирует в отношении "невводил" и прочей предательской швали, и, увы, не только по этому признаку - это я применяю эвфемизм), то ее попытаются оторвать и не только ее, но и голову и все остальные части России как Великой Державы.
    Нас спасет только Железная Рука Москвы. Не будет ее, не будет ничего.

    1. I didn't read the whole thing only that last part. But my understanding is that he is saying we need to show an "iron hand" and that would put out the fire in Karabakh -- basically, showing that Russia means business and stop provocations.

      Dugin has been a little bit inadequate lately. Russia works in the assesement of her own power. The revolution to liberate Russia is already started from the top, by Putin himself -- its going. Ukrainians need to sober up themselves first and foremost.

      Russia taking military action in Dobass would be do what? What's the end-game, what about the rest of Russian-speaking Ukraine? What about the rest of the Ukraine speaking Orthodox christian Ukraine?

  82. http://rt.com/business/178316-russia-iran-oil-deal-sanctions/

    Through its actions the West is pushing China, Iran, and Russia closer together. As Western pressure increases against any one of the above mentioned states the relations between the trio improve and rise to new levels.


  83. While our traitorous opposition-supporting peasantry are busy blaming the Armenian government and occasionally the "Karabax clan" for the recent flare ups on the Line of Contact, and the traitorous opposition leadership is busy preaching acceptance of homosexual propaganda and dangerous cults as well as accepting silly "awards" from the Turcophile State Department and EU Foreign Affairs officials, the turks and azerbaijanis are busy trying to incite their own populations for a war against Armenia. Naturally they are also trying to blame the Azeri aggression on President Putin, even though the truth is more likely that the Americans are to blame as indicated in the Dugin link Aroutiun posted above. I highlighted some of the most eggregious lies from this piece of militaristic mental masturbation which appeared in Turkish newspaper. As you read it, ask yourselves if this does not sound EXACTLY like the type of shit that the foreign-funded, so-called "independent" propaganda outlets in Armenia and the Diaspora would publish?


    -For Russia, pushing Armenia to destabilize the region and attack Azerbaijan is part of Putin's campaign to exact a heavy price for Western allies for their support of Ukraine's territorial integrity.

    -Azerbaijani civilians are living under constant fear of getting killed and Armenian snipers are playing a shooting game by targeting children.

    -Increasing reports indicate that Armenian authorities mostly refuse to issue passports to its citizens to prevent them from leaving the country.

  84. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYDW7en_oII


  85. Can someone translate? To me it sounds like they are scared shit.


  86. here's why I'm not worried about any war between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

    in 2006 Israel failed to invade a few kilometers into Lebanon.

    The army in lebanon was passive, hi-tech all mighty Israel was fighting against 5000 Hezbollah members, who did not have any air defenses whatsoever, they had no tanks, artillery etc. just some basic rockets and anti-tank weapons, and the lebanese society was split in their support to Hezbollah, the international community was vehemently anti-Hezbolla, and yet, Israel could not enter a few meters into Lebanon.

    Compare that scenario with Armenia's 40,000 very well trained army, and consider that Azerbaijan army is not comparable to the level of IDF, add on top Armenia's topographic advantage, then clearly, it would be utter insanity for Azerbaijan to attempt any invasion, they have LOTS to loose, not only in terms of casualties, but above all, economy.

    If there is any war anytime soon, then it's up to us to decide the timing. We can't simply wait until our enemy someday when ready attacks us. We must stop being pussies and realize that if you don't go offensive, at some point, conditions ripen for the enemy to attack you.

    Food for thought. NATO captured territory through which Russian gas flows, i.e. Ukraine.
    So perhaps, Russia might consider to retaliate in places through which NATO (BP) energy flows i.e. Azerbaijan

    In that case, situation is to our advantage, that we have an opportunity to capture more territories and finally establish that terrestrial link to Russia. just saying

  87. Russia imposed sanctions on EU and US by banning agricultural products from those countries. So far Latvia and Poland are asking Brussels for compensation for the losses they will suffer. In Greece, its opposition party is demanding the cancellation of all sanctions against Russia.

    In the meantime, Latin American producers are rejoicing. Incidentally, Latvia is going to get screwed because the former Soviet countries after joining the EU were de-industrialized, but kept agriculture which was mostly consumed by Russia. Now Latvia is going to lose 80-90% of its consumers for its famous Riga Sprouts.

  88. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10204396684738117&set=vb.1260604466&type=2&theater

    Well Bibi had some interesting things to say back in the day.


  89. http://rt.com/usa/178784-pentagon-aid-kurdish-yazidis/

    What a sick joke. The US has succeeded today where the Ottomans and Arabs failed for 1300 years: the US has all but exterminated the Christian population of the Middle East.

  90. A certain segment of Armenians tend to focus solely on Russian arms sales to Azerbaijan, not based on an assessment of military significance but rather purely based on spreading an anti-Russian agenda within Armenia. However, it is clear that Russian arms have not been used by Azerbaijan against Armenia at this point, as many of the weapons Azerbaijan purchased are defensive in nature (e.g. S-300s) while other weapons they bought (export version T-90 tanks) are extremely unsuitable for use in mountainous terrain like Artsakh. These weapons constitute the bulk of Azerbaijan's much-hyped, multi-million dollar, retail-priced weapons purchased from Russia. However, the weapons that Israel and NATO-member Turkey supply to Azerbaijan, weapons which are largely based on American and European designs and technology, compromise the main tools used by Azerbaijan in its subversive attacks against Armenia and Artsakh.

    At 1:26 we see that the weapons that the Azeris used in their most recent, failed raid attempt were Israeli-manufactured grenade launchers and secure communications equipment.

    Ադրբեջանական բանակի հերթական խայտառակությունը

  91. If this actually happened it's hilarious! The Russian activists need to focus a lot more on producing "in your face", shock-jock style depictions of homosexual behavior to remind the average citizen what exactly is considered normal in the west.


  92. No matter how much they pushed and prodded Moscow did not take the bait. I can see trying to disrupt the CU that Moscow is trying to build. I can see the West trying to get in the way of BRICS but I fail to see the end game here is. At this point this has become beyond embarrassing to say the least. The West has a bunch of clowns for leadership. When all is said and done, no matter how much they fan the flames and light matches like little kids and poke their heads in the sand, none of these silly games are going to make one bit of difference. In fact all the West is doing is hurrying the process without being ready for the outcome. What the West should be doing is gearing up for the New World Order, not the one they wished to control but what others have already built. The West has to learn how to trade and do business like normal human beings again. Without playing games, without playing in other peoples affairs and learn to build cars and computers and whatever it takes to get mankind into the 21st century. When all is said and done the world is simply going to pass by this clusterfuck that the West has become.

    Everything the West has done and continues to do is one major clusterfuck after the other. The West is a mess of idiots, they have lost their minds. Despite what the US did in Ukraine the Eurotrash took advantage of the moment ran with their with their hands and feet to sign on Ukraine. As if there are not enough failed states in the Eurozone to begin with, they needed to add Ukraine to the Mix? They jumped on board for sanctions and now they are crying?

    Enjoy the show folks, and be ready all of you. Understand the ground swell under your feet, for if you are in the Western world you are going to pay a price for all this. As is obvious by the all these disasters all over the place that there is no military solution for this, they can't keep savages quite yet they went and poked the bear with a stick.

    Beef will now come from Brazil, Moscow does not need tainted fucked up beef from the West. Either they are selling you horse meat, or mad cow disease. Brazil is part of the new economic order. What better way to start trade with each other. This is bigger then the gas deal with China. And where does this leave the West? This leaves the West in Ukraine, Libya, Afgans, Iraq, Syria, Gaza, Yemen, Egypt...the list goes on. what a healthy list of players. Add to this the list of countries in the EU that are on their knees as we speak. So now we have sanctions and the Euro bitches are crying that they will take this to the world court. And what are they going to tell the judge? ( the fake one ) oh your honor I sanctioned Moscow and they sanctioned back this is not fair? .... God help us we are dealing with mere idiots.

    How about some genetically modified chicken? Not just normal chicken that has been with mankind since the Dino age, no this is modern Western chicken. This chicken eats frankencorn, gets injected with chemicals and before leaving the factory gets fucked in the ass.


  93. At 12.06 listen to Armenian Defense Ministry Press-Secretary Artsrun Hovhannisyan addressing the danger that NATO-member Turkey poses to Armenia and Artsakh, especially in light of the recent Azeri aggression. Of course Hovhannisyan, like all Armenian officials, knows the rules of diplomacy and therefore is not hysterically condeming NATO or issuing threats, but his statements address concerns that every Armenian should have regarding Turkish, and broader NATO, support for Azerbaijan and the courage this gives the Azeris to carry out such attacks.

    Արծրուն Հովհաննիսյան

  94. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russian-strategic-bombers-conduct-more-than-16-incursions-of-u-s-air-defense-zones/

    Long time reader

  95. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQt60LuVjMU

    This Armenian guy obviously wasn't all there in the head. Nor was he in the military, let alone in the Special Forces carrying that shit load of equipment. The "official story" out of Baku is that he was caught asking some village woman for tea and her some for cigarettes.

    The Azeris are trying extremely hard to push Armenia towards launching a massive retaliatory operation. There is a minute chance they may succeed in pushing the situation into a war. If it happens, then starting the war will be the sole success Azerbaijan will see because the battlefield will produce nothing but defeats for them. The less rational part of me is calling for Gandzak to be reduced to another Aghdam or Khojali. But it's not going to happen over one man, things will remain more or less the same.

    I believe that this disgusting display will, for once, rally even the majority of opposition leaning segments of Armenian society behind the flag. Not the direct agents of the west like the Heritage Party and Hetq.am assholes, but their peasant followers at least. There is absolutely no way to blame this on the Armenian government, no matter how hard they try. And I noticed that the Azeri animals did not bother asking that now-deceased Armenian captive whether he was a Hayastantsi, Artsaktsi or any other type of Armenian. At this point in time, anyone inside Armenia expressing sympathy for the Azeris or describing them as a "noble people who would be Armenia's brothers" needs to be made an example of. I had in mind the filth Paruyr Hayrikyan and that Georgi Vardanyan faggot as I wrote that last sentence. And any citizen, or organization, spreading anti-Artsakh rhetoric needs to be arrested or dismantled. Hopefully for once Armenians will rally in Yerevan in a way that benefits the Armenian national cause.

    As most of us know, this is merely the latest case in recent years of Armenian civilians being murdered by the Azeris, and that's not counting villagers living in border towns killed by snipers or soldiers dying on the frontline. In 2004, 25-year old Gurgen Margaryan was decapitated while sleeping in bed in Hungary at a NATO-sponsored English-language course by classmate Ramil Safarov, who was subsequently declared a national hero in Azerbaijan. In 2010, 20-year-old Manvel Saribekyan, an Armenian villager who stumbled into Azeri territory, was "found hanged" in his Baku jail cell. In July of 2014 17-year-old Smbat Tsakanyan was murdered when a three man Azeri subversive group infiltrated into Artsakh. And now this latest outrage.

    I hate to make a political stand during tragic times, but Armenians need to get their shit together. From what I can see, Yerevan is too tolerant of Azeris. Film festivals, giving points to Azeris in politicized events like Eurovision, Karabakh clan" rhetoric from lowlifes assholes.

    I'm really curious at what President Sargsyan will do now regarding the meeting with Aliyev that's supposed to take place soon in Russia. Aliyev's people have been the ones stating that a meeting is uncertain. Armenia was adamant that it would take place.

    1. Sarkis, don't hold your breath about the political peasantry in Hayastan changing their attitudes as a result of this murder. Their level of ignorance is beyond repair. We just need to wait for the next generation that is brought up with better education to see any real change. And off course all the bought and paid for opposition will continue, maybe even amplify their activities and the incompetent and impotent Armenian authorities will continue to do nothing to stop them. Any change will come slowly and the main focus for the government now is joining the EEU, preventing a war and increasing more economic opportunities, although I'm not sure if their incompetence and greed will allow them to capitalize on what opportunities that may present themselves for the country. We shall see.

      The thing I'm having difficulty with and I'd like someone to help me out with, is if you've lived in a dangerous border village all your life, or if you're serving on the front lines against an enemy at war, how the F@#$ do you just accidently get up and walk over to the other side and ask for tea, or take your cow across the border to graze? What part of the picture am I missing here. I don't believe for a minute they were subversives but why such stupid moves? Nearly all the civilians killed in custody and the young soldier Azerbaijan is still holding captive just simply walked over to the other side this way.


    2. Arto jan, I have been near the border in Tavush. Believe it or not, the border in that region is very porous due to its rugged and forested terrain. The same applies to the Karvachar region of Artsakh. Needless to say, better measure need to be employed to monitor such borders.

    3. Arevordi, my issue is not in monitoring those borders which is indeed a difficult task for which my hat goes off to the military, but rather educating the people that "BEYOND THOSE TREES IS ENEMY TERRITORY, DO NOT CROSS". How hard is it for the village head, local schools, government officials and military officials to take such simple, practical steps to inform everyone which would save innocent lives? This is an example of what I'm referring to regarding disorganization and incompetence and it makes my blood boil. Perhaps I'm the ignorant one and I'll accept that but from what I see there's a lot to improve upon.

    4. Sarkis, I agree with you 100%

      While I get the fact of building Hayastan and soon the oil will run out and all that, we need not be this passive.

      In addition I think people are making a mistake in repeating what the baboon press is saying about this guy wondering off and asking for tea. If the boarder is this porous they could have sneaked up on him and captured him. Why are we all sitting here repeating what the baboons are saying?

      Our propaganda department sucks! In addition all these brownie points Armenia thinks it's getting by acting low key is a big mistake. The baboons are supported 100% by USA, by Israel and by England. BP has money in the game. We are idiots for constantly going back to the world community for actions taken for a few dead soldiers. They don't care about Genocide of Armenians and can't even manage to say the G word and they are going to do something about this? They are welcoming these moves by the baboon. To date nothing has happened to them in any sense of the word. Yet we Armo's sit here and do nothing. We are making a big mistake.


    5. Vahram, I appreciate your passion. I would not call what Armenia has been doing a mistake or stupid, it's obviously working to a certain degree. After all, the kill-to-loss ratio in the recent skirmishes was in Armenia's favor by a factor of five (officially five Armenian losses versus twenty-five Azeri losses), despite the fact that Azerbaijan's military budget greatly dwarfs that of Armenia. That is in no small part due to the prudent policies of Armenia's government and security services. What I want to say, as Arto pointed out, is that there is so much room for Armenians themselves to improve. From eliminating the western-funded subversives on the political scene, to remedying the issue of villagers straying into the wrong side of the border, to hardening the population and ending the cynicism and Collective Destructionism the nation is suffering from (Worth Reading: http://theriseofrussia.blogspot.com/2012/08/collective-destructionism-and-armenias.html). And of course no one expects anything serious from the "international community" composed mainly of Turcophile westerners and their propaganda outlets.

      Look to Russia as an example, the mighty, nuclear-capable Russian Army has restrained itself even though such massacres of civilians have been a daily reality for their compatriots in Novorossiya. The only way to win this dirty game is with emotionless patience and clandestine operations, no matter how high the toll may be on the personal feelings of citizens or officials. The Azeris are desperately trying to get Armenia to lose its cool and launch large-scale operations in order to derail Armenia's ascent to the Eurasian Union, and to create headaches for the Kremlin. I'm sure the west, through Turkey, put the Azeris up to it. In poker terms, the Azeris are going all in. But don't lose sight of the score, the Aliyev regime is in a weaker position than may initially appear; its billions have largely been embezzled or spent on weaponry unsuitable for use against Armenia (e.g. MiG-29s, helicopters, S-300s, and naval equipment); large segements of the Azeri population live in abject poverty despite promises of petro-billions; and the weak but ever-present racial divides in Azerbaijan... They need to produce something (anything) the regime can showcase as a "glorious Azeri victory" before SHTF.

      I could be wrong but if I had to speculate, I would guess Aliyev will order another subversive operation in the coming days. During the last subversive attack, according to Artsrun Hovhannisyan, Armenian forces knew through their intelligence (հետախույզական) services of the Azeri attack and could have inflicted much heavier losses on the Azeris, but the Armenian commanding officers ordered the Armenian soldiers to not descend down from their position in order to finish off the retreating and wounded Azeris, because the Armenian officers had decided not to risk additional Armenian casualties (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1KPoyjmO1A). So failing in their attempt to lure an Armenian reaction, the Azeris decided to execute some Armenian civilian. Armenian soldiers on the frontline must be enraged at this point. The best revenge would be to deliver another couples of dozen corpses to Azerbaijan in case they try again. Soon it will get to a point where Aliyev will either have to escalate to artillery fire, or back down and try to convince the Azeri population that road accidents claimed the lives of a hundred soldiers in a span of two weeks.

      Last point: the Aliyev is intensifying attacks in the time period immediately before Aliyev and President Sargsyan are scheduled to meet mediate by Putin. I sincerely hope the great Russian President takes this as a personal insult from Baku at a time when Russia's plate is already full. The desperation of the Azeri regime plays into Armenia's hands.

    6. Arto,

      As a general rule, you should not take what the press says - be it Azeri or Armenian - as the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Political spin and disinformation is an effective political tool used by all sides without exception, regardless of who is right or wrong in the big picture. According to the Armenian side here, the young man that was just murdered in Azeri custody was said to be someone that was mentally underdeveloped. This is not hard to believe. There are people with mental and psychological problems everywhere. No amount of warning will be sufficient in deterring these types of people if they decided for some reason that they wanted to cross the border. With that said, could the man in question really been part of a covert Armenian military operation in Azerbaijan? That is also a possibility...

    7. Sarkis,

      I understand the peace thing, they are not suffering. They are playing a game, they pick the time and place, they also pick how many men join the rush. They put together what they can afford to risk and they strike. If they have success then great the bet was worth it, if they fail they don't care they measured the risk ahead of time and know exactly what they will loos.

      They also know the international community is not going to do anything about it. What they get is not even a slap on the wrists. They gave them Eurovision, they even let them sit on the EU board. What a joke the EU is. What a joke it is to have nations go around and talk about human rights when they put Alieve at the center of minsters. If this was not so sad and shameful this should show us clearly what we are gaining by playing nice. The EU is full of idiots, they have lost all touch with reality and they are as crooked as it gets. You are better off dealing with a 3rd world polotico rather then trusting a word that comes out of the Wests mouth.

      So expect more probes, and unless we do the same, with measured risk then this is going to go on until finally the oil runs out.


  96. 11 of 13 attempted comments on asbarez censored. I think that's a new record.

    1. Sarkis, I've stopped trying. Another trick they do is place their article on the front page and only publish irrelevant meaningless comments from that dickhead Hratch but as soon as other people start laying in to him the article suddenly disappears into the archive. The editorial head of Asbarez is clearly a real nasty Russiaphobe and sad to say an Armenophobe. I never really had any respect for the Dashnaks here but now I only have scorn and anger towards them. And I'd like to know who that Hratch really is. Arto2

    2. Arto,

      The editor of Asbarez is a arrogant fag. Hratch has several alter egos. He also posts comments as Vahagn and Armenian. He is either a psychologically disturbed individual or one of Washington's cyber warriors.

    3. Yes Arto and Arevordi are both correct. I had not commented on Asbarez since May because of the censorship, but I felt guilty because I was quitting while some patriots were still posting so I started again on Wednesday. Needless to say the cyber-warriors jumped all over my posts with personal insults, which I found both amusing and creepy.

      I actually noticed that trick Arto mentioned as well, their choice of what remains on their front page has nothing to do with the relevance or importance of the subject matter. And yes, that "Hratch" aka "Armenian" and "Vahagn" is exactly as Arevordi described, it posts an irrelevant anti-Russia message on almost every single article, even if the article happens to be about puppies in Yerevan. It also goes out of its way to defend America's terrorists in Iraq and Syria. But the psych-war will accomplish nothing, because no one of any importance to the Armenian cause reads Asbarez anyway. The Dashnaks have an extremely small following inside Armenia. A good portion of the asbarez audience is most likely those 50 and 60 year old immigrants to America from the Middle East who were born and raised to see the ARF as the central focus of being Armenian. Their ability to influence Armenia is non-existent, and they gave up their only mean of "influence"/effect when they stopped donating to Armenia Fund a few years back - luckily the Russian-Armenians picked up the slack.

      The younger AYF Dashnaks that read Asbarez have big mouths but are tiny where it counts. They typically revel in bashing Armenia, the Armenian state, and often times Eastern Armenians as well because they are trying to make excuses for the fact that despite all of their talk of "nationalism" and "we're going to 'free Armenia' through war" the sad truth is that virtually none of them are interesting in repatriating to Armenia, and essentially none of their men/boys would have the courage to join the military and stand on the front lines. I used to have some of the leading members as friends on Facebook, and believe me these pop-culture zombies were 100% useless to Armenia and Artsakh. The highlight of their "activism" was posting pictures of themselves posing with flags on April 24.

      And the fact that the US ARF allowed a fag to make it to the top position at asbarez shows how sick and twisted the Armenian-American community and the ARF really are. Faggots are mentally diseased people, plain and simple. They simply cannot function as an objective normal professional should, they always twist whatever they are involved with into an unwholesome, profane attack on decency. For example: "Of course, as a teenager, I realized that I was different. When most of my childhood friends spoke of their sexual desires, I could not understand why mine were different. As my friends looked as Samantha Fox, I preferred ogling Madonna’s back-up dancers." (source http://asbarez.com/103290/armenians-are-tolerant/)

      Lastly, whoever "Hratch" and the others are does not matter, because as is they serve as near perfect examples of the average college-educated Armenian-American activist: completely irrational, smug and arrogant, completely without critical thinking, no type of love or understanding for Armenia whatsoever, and always ready to parrot the dangerous globalist and anti-Nationalist rhetoric that their Jew professors taught them. We are always told "education is the key difference between a success and a failure" and that Armenian-Americans are proud that they have such high university graduate rate, yet here we see what kind of subversive parasites America's indoctrination centers produce and unleash on the community. There are literally hundreds of "Hratches" to be found in the "Armenian Students Associations" across US campuses.

  97. Tacky.

    Israeli soldiers and members of the Breslauer Hassidic sect dance and bless artillery shells

  98. http://rt.com/news/179216-us-submarine-russian-waters/

    This caught my eye:

    "“A collision with US nuclear submarine, Toledo, was one the main explanations of the Kursk submarine tragedy in 2000,” the (Russian) Navy source said."

    Arevordi had sent out a French documentary suggesting that the Kursk submarine was sank by a US submarine. I can't find the exact link, I think it was this:


    1. The anniversary for the tragedy that took place fourteen years ago is in two days. Very ironic that this incident happened just recently - and it is interesting is that RT implicated USS Toledo in reference to the Kursk incident...

    2. It was sunk, Washington and Moscow decided to bury it with Washington giving a number of concessions to Moscow concerning natural resources rights, that allowed Russia to crack down on the greedy oil theft and raise the citizens standard of living.

  99. If the following incident in France happened in Russia instead (where there are tens-of-thousands of illegal migrants from Armenia), ever single one of Armenia's EUrotic idiots and Captain Americas would be out in force protesting in front of the Russian embassy. But since the French like to blow smoke up Armenian asses every once in a while, there will not be a protest in front of the French embassy -


    1. Had they been Sunni Muslim ISIS members France would have given them free room and board, money and training to kill, rape behead and stuff crosses down their mouths, all in the name of regime change and democracy! .


  100. Video below shows graphic image of a Christian girl raped, then brutally murdered by having a cross stuff down her mouth. It was so forceful she bleed from her mouth, even from her eyes, don't look if you can't handle it, 3.22 minutes into the video.



  101. Something massive has changed in our favor.


    Now take a good look at Aliyev face and look at Serzh face. This tells it all for me! Some thing in the status has changed, what you can look for next is the CU thing should rap up quick the game played at the last meeting with shitbayoff was another Aliyev stunt, all washed down the drain.


  102. In the news...

    Sanctions bite-back: Bickering, EU infighting over Russia retaliation

    Senator David Norris condemns Obama Israel bombs first and weeps later


    Սերժ Սարգսյան. Մեր հրթիռները ցանկացած ծաղկուն բնակավայր ավերակ կդարձնեն

    1. Poland is crying. Russian banned their apples. They asked the US to buy their apples since they supported their sanctions. But reality is even if the US allows Polish apples on its market, they will never win market share -- they will simply be too expensive compared to local produce.

      Now Poland is launching a complaint against Russia to the WTO, claiming that "Russia is punishing us for political reasons because we supported sanctions against them".
      Well Duh!!!! Poland is one of the hawks, that supports anti-Russia policy.

    2. It's a pretty sad realization that a significant number of the foreign policy decisions undertaken by the west, and their Russophobic lackeys in Eastern Europe and across the world, are so poorly planned and detached from rational calculations, that they end up failing and backfiring.

      "Well Duh!!!!" applies so well to almost everything they have attempted to do since the Saakashvili invasion of South Ossetia. Sanctions imposed by a nearly bankrupt EU against a giant trading partner? Anti-Missile systems on Russia's borders? Annexing Ukraine and Georgia into NATO? Funding pro-faggot, pro-globalist ultraliberals, and those topless FEMEN-type attention whores and NGOs within Russia? Supporting Muslim terrorists/separatists in the North Caucasus?... And now these same western pariahs are "surprised" that the Russians decided they had enough of the West's provocations and have taken steps to defend Russian interests? Well Duh!!!!

      As for the Poles, they have always been tools by the Anglo-American-Zionist alliance. Used against the Germans in 1939, being used against Russia since the 1990s. Poland is an example of a nation with no self-respect. I'd like to see that artificially enlarged state cut down to size. If/when the Anglo-Americans lose their iron grip on the region, the time would be right for Germany to reclaim Danzig and large parts of East Prussia.

    3. Unfortunately, one portion of East Prussia is Russia's Kaliningrad territory so it could be extremely awkward for Russia to give up territory to Germany. To think that they had actually led one of the most tolerant empires in the world at one point (tolerant in terms of they actually promoted religious tolerance before the issue with the Jesuits), Poland has really declined. I would also love to see Russia retake the Baltics too if possible, but the main problem is that Poland and the Baltics are NATO member states and it will take the complete collapse of NATO for that to realistically happen. In addition, once Anglo-American-Zionist power also declines, I'd like to see the complete extinction of Albania and Kosovo (with Serbia and Montenegro helping themselves on those lost territories) and Bosnia partitioned once again (this time the Bosniaks would be under Croat rule). A lot of things I would like to see that might not happen, but hopefully it will.

      I also agree that there should be a time when pro-faggot, degenerate ultraliberalism should be completely and utterly destroyed for good.

  103. Idiots.



    1. Worthless/mindless crap like this is what I mean when I say we are being distracted and as a result stagnating. These things are red herrings/diversions from the more important things we need to be doing - like putting all our efforts in lobbying Kremlin officials and organizing symposiums with influential Russians...

  104. Sombody elses misfortune is the fortune of others. good news for armenian farmers - http://rbth.com/news/2014/08/11/russia_has_list_of_countries_to_replace_sanctioned_food_importers_-_agri_38902.html


  105. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/armenia-azerbaijan-reach-negotiated-solution-093156433.html#zV08nMH


    Oskanyan op-eds.


    1. Conquering Russia and the Heartland was readable. I guess Oskanian is beginning to get it. But he is not fully there yet. A person going by the name of "ArindamB" put things in much better perspective by posting the following comment in the article's comments section -

      Though interesting, I'd have to disagree with the author on a few points:

      1) Karl Haushofer was in favour of a Germany-Soviet Union-Japan alliance against the British empire, and so cannot be said to be responsible for Hitler's invasion of the USSR.

      2) The USA - with its military bases on every continent - is the empire, not Russia. The bogeyman of Russian imperialism merely serves as a distraction from the reality of American imperialism. 'Moral interventionism' is merely an euphemism for the latter.

      3) What the USA is indulging in is not containment: it is 'roll back' - in this case, rolling back Russian influence in Europe which it sees as its main competitor. Indeed, Washington's ideal is to roll back Russia to the Yeltsin era when its society was in turmoil, its economy and demography in decline, and its political influence negligible. Putin opposes this, not because he is an imperialist, but because he is a nationalist.

      4) The ideological basis of this conflict should be clear to everyone by now: the USA stands for plutocratic globalism - (mis)rule by an extremely wealthy international élite; Russia stands for authoritarian nationalism - rule or misrule by a local strongman and his subordinates. The difference between the two is this: ordinary people can hold a local strongman accountable - just like how the Egyptians put Mubarak on trial. There's no way of holding an international élite accountable: they'll simply fly from one country to another whenever threatened, and continue their machinations from their new home.

      A better (albeit much longer) article on this subject is Alexander Dugin's classic 'The Great War of Continents.'

    2. Yes, that commentator is spot on. I would only add the ideological and philosophical dimension to the above points. Russia represents Traditionalism, the West with the US at the forefront represents Rationalism (material over immaterial/spirit), or we can all it militant Liberalism.


    3. Arevordi, concerning Dugin -- in one of his lectures she shared an experience where he had a candid conversation with Zbignew Brezhinsky after Dugin read his "Grand Chessboard" book.

      Dugin asked him (Brezhinsky)

      Dugin: Didn't you promise Gorbachev not to expand NATO?
      Zbignew: YES
      Dugin: Well what gives?
      Zbignew: We have tricked him

      Next Dugin asked him about the book
      Dugin: I read your book, do you realize that the game of chess has two players opposing one another
      Zbignew: I never really thought of that

  106. interesting analysis

    Russia Can't Let Nagorno-Karabakh Slip Into War http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/russia-cant-let-nagorno-karabakh-slip-into-war/504902.html


    1. http://history.unc.edu/people/graduate-students/stephen-riegg/


      The author makes a mistake by framing the conflict as a religious one. It is purely ethnic and territorial. Above is a link to his bio.


    2. Most Russian analysts believe that behind Azerbaijan are Americans. Pyakin who speaks of global wheelers and dealers called Azerbaijani elites "fashist" who don't care about their citizens and ready to let Azerbaijan burn for their own financial interests only to destabilize the southern caucuses to cause problems for Russia and pressure Armenia.

      Incidentally, some say that America has got a Poroshenko type government ready to go for Armenia as well.

    3. Any one of Armenia's wealthy monopolists/oligarchs can fit the role perfectly because money here in Armenia can buy anything. With that said, Russia also has money and Russian operatives and pro-Russian Armenians are found in all layers of Armenian society - particularly in Armenia's security apparatus, particularly amongst Armenians in Armenia that live out side of Yerevan. Moreover, Armenian masses are not as militaristic, hateful, violent or self-organized as eastern Europeans. Therefore, what's being suggested by "some" is more fearmongering than reality.

  107. Everyone should watch this video. This gives all the info you ever wanted to know about ISIS coming from a Alkida dude himself.


    Watch every minute of it, read all the titles on the bottom. It is eye opening, we all know ISIS is a Western tool, but this really nails it home. The good news is that even if they keep this out of the Western press, the bottom line is the Arab street is waking up.


  108. http://aanirfan.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/isis-run-by-simon-elliot-mossad-agent.html

  109. Interview with Samvel Bektashian on (http://www.louysworld.com/) saying that the latest skirmishes in Artsakh are directed by Russia. He claims that Russia is showing the west that it can instigate a war at any time it pleases and destroy the pipelines from Azerbaijan if it is pushed to do so via Ukraine. I don't know who these two men are in the interview but I used to check this website out frequently a while ago when Stepan was on it.

  110. Here's what a well known Iraqi lawyer has to say about ISIS:

    “When the Syrian crisis started, a group called Al-Qaeda In Iraq set up a sub-group called Al-Nusra, for volunteers who wanted to fight in Syria against the government. Al-Nusra remains part of the Al-Qaeda project for a global caliphate, but some of them thought that getting a caliphate in Syria and Iraq was doable in the near future, so they split from Al Nusra and founded The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). When they were defeated in Syria, they came back to Iraq.”

    “ISIS had been fighting in Syria, receiving training and arms from the USA and its local allies, they were beaten in Syria and they had nowhere to go but back to Iraq.
    Most of them are from Iraq, but they have fighters from Saudi Arabia and other places.”

    Here is discussed the allies of ISIS, the ex-Baath guys:
    “Tens of thousands of soldiers, police and civil servants lost their jobs–most of them in the Sunni North-West. As you can imagine, in the lawless atmosphere of the US occupation, where every tribe and every religious faction had its own militia, many of these men saw joining a militia as the only way to survive and protect their loved ones. They saw the chaos and dreamed of returning to the order that they knew before 2003. They saw the new state as a foreign imposition, and thus illegitimate, and they felt that the USA had, in fact, handed Iraq over to Iranian influence. We often hear the slogan “We will save Iraq from the Iranian Occupation,” particularly from the Naqshbandi Army that is headed by Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, Saddam’s deputy.
    They are mostly made up of Revolutionary Guard and Ba’ath Party, with some young men joining them now. They probably have no more than three thousand fighters, but they could depend on some level of support from up to 40% of the Sunni population.”

    Look at this interesting opinion:
    “In a certain sense, also, these groups (ISIS) can appear as the only real way to fight Western cultural and economic imperialism. Everything Western is isolated and rejected.”

    My question, what if the Islamic State movement were truly a genuine Islamic (and barbaric) resistance movement that has capacity to rip down the anglo-american-zionist global regime?

    Moreover, ISIS seem to have no problem with accepting US weapons and training in Syria, but they feel they are using the USA, just as the USA feels it’s using them. We also have to consider the billions of dollars the Gulf monarchies have poured into these groups.

    Here come the scariest factor:
    For a poor young man (Afro-Asiatic), with very little prospects, the power that comes with having Gulf money in your pocket and a gun in your hand is very appealing.

    Can you you imagine how large the pool of human resources is for jihad?

    The calls for a caliphate might in fact, resonate in all different parts of the world, oh, I forgot, the caliphate already got established!!

    As to Abu bakr al Baghdadi, his assumed real name is Ibrahim Awwad Ibrahim Ali al-Badri al-Samarrai, so if you notice Ali and Badri echo Shiite extract.
    Same for his theocratic name Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi Al-Husseini Al-Qurashi:
    Abu Bakra is let's say chief of Sunni Muslims, Hussein is chief of Shiia.

    What I'm trying to say is that, the intent of Abu Bakr character resonantes a reconciliatory message for all muslims.

    Their alliance with Naqshabandi (ex-Baath) must always be stated, their agenda being also a nationalistic one, therefore might explain why they are have set their eyes on both, Erbil and Baghdad.

  111. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-atamian/as-conflict-escalates-ilham-aliyev_b_5663964.html

    Another moron. Here we have an artist writing on a geopolitical issue.


  112. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/30/iraq-haider-al-abadi-isis-iran-airstrikes-unites-states_n_5543252.html

    This is from June.


  113. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/12/russia-military-exercises-japan_n_5671124.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

    Russia sending a signal to the Japs.


  114. The US is planning to launch a satelite propaganda channel aimed at the Russian public. Similar to "Voice of America" during the USSR times. This along with the "Act of prevention of Russian agression".

    Good luck. I somehow don't think this is now going to work all taht well.

  115. Assessment of Undiscovered, Technically Recoverable Oil and Gas
    Resources of Armenia, 2014


    I wonder how extractable these sources of gas and oil truly are and whether the USGS already has some sort of stake in it.

  116. https://zionismsucks.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/israel-dog.jpg


  117. Some good strategic porn, the best part starts at 1:42 marker to give a good overall picture of what awaits the baboon. Now the question remains, was it Alieve the stupid who pressed the button or was it someone else?



  118. I hear the Yezidis have petitioned the Government to offer refuge to the Iraqui Yezidis ? They can go to Iran, Kurdistan,Syria. There is no space in Armenia for Armenians themselves,.They need to be directed towards those countries, or the USA, the instrument of evil and instigator of the destruction of Iraq. felix

    1. Yezdis fought alongside Armenians in the Artsakh Liberation War. They are a model minority and it is in the interest of Armenia to boost its population. Ideally this is done through Armenians already living in Armenia having at least three children, as well as the repatriation of Armenians. Next the immigration of ethnic groups similar to Armenians either culturally, ethnically or linguistically; not in mass numbers but a few thousand. Such ethnic groups are the Ossetians for example.


  119. Georgians are working on opening a base in Javakhk, the same place where the previous Russian base was located.


  120. Things are NOT making sense anymore. IS, backed by the AngloZionists is attacking the Kurds backed by the AngloZionists. But wait, now Iran is supporting the Kurds but not Maliki. Headspinning

    I thought ISIS was meant to drag Iran into war in Iraq, but turned out the US got engaged instead?

    Here's a collection of western press material, the truth is lost out there....

    super cool ISIS military parade in ar-Raqqa


    Hezbollah's Nasrallah sees IS as a growing "monster" that could threaten Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf states.


    US thinks IS is now a Threat to West


    IS kills dozens of Syrian rebels after seizing two towns near Aleppo (rebels worried about their supply routes)


    Syrian Forces Advance on Aleppo, Rebels Fear Another Siege
    Fall of Largest Rebel-Held City Could Benefit Islamic Jihadists Along With Regime


    Syrian regime said cooperating with ISIL advance on rebel-held Aleppo


    1. Aroutin,

      Yes, the truth is out there somewhere. But there is little doubt that Turkey and Gulf Arab states are involved with ISIS. Turkey, in particular, seems very involved. I don't think we are giving the Turkish factor in this equation enough thought. The Turkish factor also explains ISIS clashes with Kurds. I understand that there is another explanation: ISIS could also be somehow involved with the Syrian regime. What do you think?

  121. Airstrikes against Islamic State will lose effectiveness


  122. It is difficult to come to a quick answer as to who is currently involved in administering ISIS. We quickly fall into the error of oversimplification. Undeniably, Turkey and Qatar where directly supporting a myriad of other Islamist groups (including the FSA) to topple Assad. And probably, elements in now so called ISIS were also supported by Turkey. But always remember, you can plant a seed, but it is hard to control its growth. Loyalty is controlled by the almighty dollar, but there are always higher bidders, and ISIS managed to finance itself through looting, taxing, and controlling oil wells.

    Even Turks acknowledge they had a role in starting ISIS

    “The self-proclaimed Islamic State, which was formerly known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), obtained support from Turkey in earlier phases of its growth in the Middle East”

    The senior IS commander's remarks, however, suggest otherwise: “We used to have some fighters -- even high-level members of the Islamic State -- getting treated in Turkish hospitals,” he said. “And also, most of the fighters who joined us in the beginning of the war came via Turkey, and so did our equipment and supplies.”

    He added that the group had grown so strong in Iraq that it no longer needed to rely on the Turkish border. “Now we are getting enough weapons from Iraq, and there is enough to buy even within Syria,” he said. “There is no real need to get things from outside anymore.”

    The Washington Post report said IS militants, for many months, were able to grow in power partly by using the border of Turkey “as a strategically vital supply route and entry point to wage their war.”

    But alarmed by IS' expansion in Syria and Iraq, Turkey has started cracking down, according to the report.


    Islamic State militants threaten Turkey with violence if Euphrates water supply not restored

    Turkey is so infiltrated with Islamists, it is impossible to control such elements, sleeping cells, one blown up building in Istanbul, and you'll see the whole Turkish economy in free fall, and total fragmentation of Turkish society. In my opinion, ISIS has Turkey by the balls, and I think Assad is giving them safe refuge in ar-Raqqa, so no matter how much US bombs them, they can always revert to Raqqa and come out whenever they want. Only Assad has the capacity to eradicate them entirely.

    PS: there is a western campaign to demonize ISIS and in fact they are attributing crimes that was not committed by them. So if ISIS was an AngloZionist element, why demonize them as such? Even the Yezidi events are over exaggerated. Fact is Sinjar is a very important link between Mosul and Raqqa.

    I think ISIS is a phenomena that has many actors involved, and can be directed by those various actors, including Israel, US, Turkey, Saudi BUT also Syria.

  123. I'm as perplexed as all of you, sometimes to the point of hysterical laughter, as it seems more and more like an absurd, endless joke.
    But, using my intimate knowledge of the Muslim world, I wonder if you are not simply underestimating the sheer, stupid yet hyperactive power of the sunni Ummah.

    I know in general there are many hidden, elite powers at work, and this is a main subject of this blog, but maybe this time you are underestimating the big, worldwide radical sunni anthill (and that means tens of millions of people).
    They are not particularily smart since they are fanatics, but they kinda have this same shrewdness the declining Ottomans/Turks had/have : this "hahaha you think we are weak, stupid, easy-manipulated, well, think this if you want, probably right, but you'll be surprised by how far we can go".
    And this, not inside the head of a handful of strategists, but inside the heads of millions of sympathizers / donors / wannabe jihadists.

    Actually there is no doubt Saudis, Qataris and Turks are or have been involved, but I really doubt anybody is actually controlling IS, and I believe that private donors (mainly from the Gulf) may well have been enough to fund the group before it laid its hands upon such large booty.
    Don't underestimate the sheer power of religion. IS is exactly putting in practice the teachings of the Qur'an, at least how they have been put in practice by the Prophet and its immediate successors, in a very litterate, very pure form, so much that it is breathtaking if you are familiar with Islam. Even better than how the Ottoman Empire and its predecessors pretended to do. I know a lot of Muslims who cannot help but get a hard-on seeing this. They have been educated to wait for that very moment.


  124. By the way I don't think IS is necessarily a splinter in the back of the Syrian insurgency. This is what the spokesmen of this insurgency say, but actually many of the many groups which are part of it are slowly defecting to IS. And unifying all those thousand and one brigades under a strong commandment is an absolutely necessary step if any insurgency is willing to win in the long run. Basically, IS is just doing what any dominant group should do in that situation : absorb the others. So far the "united commandement" has totally failed. This is Middle-East...
    Of course the remaining independant groups are barking about "IS is a creation of Assad !!! Conspiracy !!!! help us !!!!!", but I really really doubt that. Assad is playing with it for the moment, just like the USA, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, even Kurdistan have been or still are playing with, but that's like playing with a rabid tiger, nobody is really in control.

    This said, they seem fanatically reckless, I don't get why they attacked the Kurds so early. But, they may have some big hidden cards not yet in display, like uprisings in the nearby Sunni nations, or maybe they are really that powerful now.
    Or maybe just reckless to the suicide.
    We'll see soon.

    On a personal note, maybe Israel, USA et al have let IS grow that big just as a kind of vaccine against any future pansunni uprising (the biggest threat to Israel, the Kurds, Iran, all minorities and even us Armenians, and even Europe given its future religious problems). Properly crushed, and after a lot of decapitations, mutilations and "convert or die", maybe it's intended to put a stop to the decades-growing Sunni militantism (while dragging Sunnis and Shias into a long conflict anyway).
    But that would be a very hazardous strategy I'd say.


  125. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-atamian/armenia-and-its-russian-imperialism-problem_b_5658169.html

    I want to smack this faggot.


  126. The truth is out there somewhere but it is not in the Western press. One should only find shame in going back for a second helping, and a third a fourth and wondering why one is confused. At some point you have to stop going back to the poison well, after some time it becomes your own fault for reading. Reuters for one is not just any old Jew media but one directly controlled by Rothschild Family.


    The West has been funding ISIS from day one, in fact they outright support ISIS in Syria. In fact despite what you are being told ISIS is not new! They started in 2007 and all of sudden they have an army that came from thin air and the West knew nothing about it? Now we are to entertain an idea that the Syrian government is somehow involved with working with ISIS? We are only watering down our capacity to think critically if we go on like this.



    Screaming Takbir the ISIS call for their celaphate they chop a Syrian soldiers head off with a knife that is too small for the job.


    Two Syrian Rebel kids, scrounging for bread. They are abandoned by the Muslim Celaphate to pick little bits of bread.

    “If no one is on our side, God is on our side.”

    When asked what message they would send the world the 10 year old said

    “Nothing... they all left us, no one stayed by our side. Al Khatib family used to be so big, but they all departed and left us here. The only thing I say to the people is may you be happy and blessed with what you have.”


    It snowed in Syria today, and these rebel kids are all alone, hungry, abandonded by their Muslim family in the snow. While ISIS tears a hole in the Middle East. Just who do you think ISIS is helping? Syria? Iraq? Lebanon? They are systematically beheading Christian Children, they are raping and then brutally killing them, I already posted that video some days ago. They went to Washington and informed the gov that this is out of control more then 8 weeks ago, since then they have done nothing but help the Kurds that that West is allied with. Christians don’t count, Shia don’t count, just the Kurds that fit into their sick game. When ISIS was marching on Bagdad they did nothing, the minute the start with the Kurds that was out of line for the West. As of now even France is helping who? .... the Kurds.


  127. When the truth is all out in the open.

    "Meanwhile on Friday, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution freezing the assets and imposing an arms embargo and travel ban on six of ISIS jihadists. "

    So you mean to tell me until last week these known ISIS members had accounts, making money off of Christian blood and plunder were free to have bank accounts and buy weapons.


  128. I agree with the comments expressed by Xndzor and Vahram.

    ISIS is a rabid animal created and then throw into the region for purposes that are yet to be seen. In my opinion, because other Sunni Islamic groups in the region have proved incapable, ISIS is being primarily tasked with dissecting the Shiite Arc - and may be used as a pretext for another round of US military involvement in the region.

    The apparent demonization of ISIS or exaggerations of its capabilities in the Western press may be related to an agenda we simply do not know: An agenda such as returning US troops to the region or simply a "Social Engineering" effort to shock and scare the public in the Middle East, thereby make them very reluctant to resist ISIS.

    The clashes between ISIS and Kurds may be due to a turf battle (who gets to control what) or due to the Turkish factor in the organization which seems very significant. Losing control over ISIS actions is also another explanation.

    Everything is speculation at this point. But one thing that remains beyond doubt is that ISIS is strongly supported by elements within the Turkish and Gulf Arab governments and both are supported by the Western establishment. Any seemingly cooperative efforts between ISIS and Damascus may be circumstantial or merely a matter of political spin put out by the Anglo-American-Zionist alliance.

  129. Arevordi I agree here is more evidence http://rt.com/op-edge/180544-iraq-us-syria-maliki/