The
Warmakers
4
May, 2018
Between
the US strikes on Syria in April and the recent developments on the
Korean Peninsula, we are in somewhat of a lull in the Empire’s
search for a new war to start. The always helpful Israelis, in the
person of the ineffable Bibi Netanyahu, are now beating the drums
for, well, if not a war, then at least some kind of false flag or
pretext to make the USA strike at Iran. And then there is the always
bleeding Donbass (which I won’t address in today’s analysis). So
let’s see where we stand and try to guesstimate where we might be
heading. To be honest, trying to guess what ignorant warmongering
psychopaths might do next is by definition a futile exercise, but
since there are some not negligible signs that there are at least a
few rational people still left in the US White House and/or Pentagon
(as shown by the mostly “pretend strikes” on Syria last month),
we can assume (hope) that some residual degree of sanity is still
present. At the very least Americans in uniform have to ask
themselves a very basic and yet fundamental question:
Do
I want to die for Israel? Do I want to lose my job for Israel? How
about my pension? Maybe just my stock options? Is it worth risking a
major regional war for such a “wonderful” state?
A
lot depends on whether the US military leaders (and people!) will
have the courage to ask themselves this question and, if they do,
what their reply will be.
But,
first, let’s begin with the good news:
The
DPRK and ROK are in direct talks with each other.
This
is indeed a truly great development for at least two reasons. First,
of course, the main and objective one: anything which lowers the
risks of war on the Korean Peninsula is good. But there is a second
reason which we should not discount: Trump can now take all the
credit for this and claim that his (empty) threats are what brought
the North Koreans to the negotiating table. I say – let him. In
fact, I hope that they organize a parade for Trump somewhere in the
USA, with confetti and millions of flags. Like for an astronaut. Let
him feel triumphant, vindicated and very, very manly. MAGA, you
know?!
Yeah,
that will be sickening to the thinking (not to mention
counter-factual), but if a little bit of intellectual nausea is the
price to pay for peace, I say let’s do it. If Trump, Bolton, Haley
and the rest of them can feel that they “kicked ass” and that
their “invincible military” is what brought “Rocket Man” to
“give up his nukes” (he never said any such thing, but never mind
that) then I sincerely wish them a joyful and highly ego-pleasing
celebration. Anything to stop them from looking for another war to
start, at least for a now.
Now
the bad news.
The
Israelis are at it again
Amazing,
isn’t it? The Israelis have been whining about “imminent”
Iranian nukes for years, and they are still at it. Not only that, but
these guys have the nerve to say “Iran lied”. Seriously, even by
the already unique Israeli standards, that is chutzpah elevated to a
truly stratospheric level. If it were just Bibi Netanyahu, then this
would be comical. But the problem is that Israel has now fully
subjugated all the branches of the US government to its agents (the
Neocons) and that they now run everything: from the two branches of
the Uniparty to Congress, to the media and, now that Trump has
abjectly caved in to all their demands, they also run the White
House. They apparently also run the CIA, but there still might be
some resistance to their lunacy in the Pentagon. The USA is now quite
literally run by a Zionist Occupation Government, no doubt about it
whatsoever.
So
what are these guys really up to? Listen to the one man who knows
them best, and whose every single word you can take to the bank,
Hezbollah General Secretary Nasrallah (ever wondered why Hezbollah,
which has not committed anything even remotely looking like a
terrorist attack since the 1980s is called the “A-Team of
terrorists”? Just saying…):
The
first event is the Israeli blatant and manifest aggression against
the T-4 base or airport on the outskirts of Homs, that targeted
Iranian forces from the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution of Iran
who were present there, hitting them with a large number of missiles,
causing 7 martyrs among its officers and soldiers and wounding
others. This was a new, significant and important event. Maybe some
people do not pay attention to its importance and magnitude. In this
operation, Israel has deliberately killed (Iranian soldiers). This is
an unprecedented event. In the past, Israel has struck us [Hezbollah]
for example in Quneitra, and it turned out that coincidentally
Guardians [of the Islamic Revolution] officers were with us. Israel
declared hastily that they did not know it, and thought that all
(targeted soldiers) were Hezbollah’s. This is an event that has no
precedent since 7 years, it is unprecedented since 7 years, that
Israel openly targets the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution in
Syria, killing deliberately, in an operation that caused a number of
martyrs and wounded (…) I want to tell the Israelis that they must
know – I wrote that statement accurately and I read it to them –
they must know that they have committed a historic mistake. This is
not a simple blunder. They committed an act of great stupidity, and
by this aggression, they entered in a direct confrontation with Iran,
the Islamic Republic of Iran. And Iran, O Zionists, is not a small
country, it is not a weak country, and it is not a cowardly country.
And you know it very well. As a comment on this incident, I stress
that it constitutes a turning point in the situation of the region.
What follows will be very different from what preceded it. This is an
incident that cannot be considered lightly, contrary to what happens
with many incidents here. It is a turning point, a historic turning
point. And when the Israelis committed this stupid act, they had some
assessment (of the situation), but I tell them that their evaluation
is false. And even in the future, since you have opened a new path in
the confrontation, (you should ensure) not to be wrong in your
evaluations. In this new path you opened and initiated, don’t be
wrong in your assessment, when you are face to face, and directly (in
conflict) with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
I
can only agree with this evaluation. As does The Jerusalem Post, NBC
News, and many others. Regardless of how crazy this notion might
sound to rational people (see below), there are all the signs that
the Israelis are now demanding that the USA start a war against Iran,
either by choice or more likely, to “stand by our Israeli allies
and friends” after they attack Iran first.
Israel
is truly a unique and amazing country: not only does it openly and
brazenly completely ignore international law, not only is it the last
overtly racist country on the planet, not only has it been
perpetuating a slow-motion genocide against the Palestinians for
decades, it also constantly uses its considerable propaganda
resources to advocate for war. And in order to achieve these goals,
it does not mind allying itself with a regime almost as despicable
and evil as the Zionist one – I am talking about the Wahabi
nutcases in the KSA. And all that under the high patronage of the
United States. Some “Axis of Kindness” indeed!
What
is their plan? Actually, it is fairly straightforward.
The
Israeli plan “A” (failed)
Initially,
the plan was to overthrow all the secular (Baathist) regimes in power
and replace them by religious nutcases. That would not only weaken
the countries infected by that spiritual rot, it would set them
backwards for many decades, some of them would break up into smaller
entities, Arabs and Muslims would kill each other in large numbers
while the Israelis would proudly claim that they are a “western
country” and the “only democracy in the Middle-East”. Even
better, when the Daesh/ISIS/al-Qaeda/etc types commit atrocities on
an industrial scale (and always on camera, professionally filmed, by
the way), the slow-motion genocide of Palestinians would really be
completely forgotten. If anything, Israeli would declare itself
threatened by “Islamic extremism” and, well, extend a couple of
“security zones” beyond its borders (legal or otherwise), and do
regular bombing runs “because Arabs only understand force” (which
would get the Israelis a standing ovation from the “Christian”
Zionist rednecks in the USA who love the killing of any Aye-rabs and
other “sand niggers”). At the end of all this, the Zionist wet
dream: unleashing the Daesh forces against Hezbollah (which they fear
and hate since the humiliating defeat the IDF suffered in 2006).
Now
I will readily agree that this is a stupid plan. But contrary to the
propaganda-induced myth, the Israelis are really not very bright.
Pushy, arrogant, nasty, driven – yes. But smart? Not really. How
could they not realize that overthrowing Saddam Hussein would result
in Iran becoming the main player in Iraq? This is a testimony of how
the Israelis always go for “quick-fix” short-term “solutions”,
probably blinded by their arrogance and sense of racial superiority.
Or how about their invasion of Lebanon in 2006? What in the world did
they think they would achieve there? And now these folks are taking
on not Hezbollah, but Iran. Hassan Nasrallah is absolutely correct,
that is a truly stupid decision. But, of course, the Israelis now
have a “plan B”:
The
Israeli plan “B”
Step
one, use your propaganda machine and infiltrated agents to re-start
the myth about an Iranian military nuclear program. And never mind
that the so-called “The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” was
agreed upon by all five of the UNSC Permanent Members, and Germany
(P5+1) and even the European Union! And never mind that this plan
places restrictions on Iran which no other country has ever had to
ever face, especially considering that since 1970 Iran has been a
member in good standing with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty
(NPT) while Israel, of course, is not. But the Zionists and their
Neocon groupies are, of course, quite exceptional people, so they are
constrained by neither facts nor logic. If Trump says that the JCPOA
is a terrible deal, then this is so. Hey, we are living in the
“post-Skripal” and “post-Douma” era – if some Anglo (or
Jewish) leaders say “highly likely” then it behooves everybody to
show instant “solidarity” lest they are accused of
“anti-Semitism” or “fringe conspiracy theories” (you know the
drill). So step one is the re-ignition ex nihilo of the Iranian
military nuclear program canard.
Step
two is to declare that Israel is “existentially threatened” and
therefore has the right to “defend itself”. But there is a
problem here: the IDF simply does not have the military means to
defeat the Iranians. They can strike them, hit a couple of targets,
yes, but then when the Iranians (and Hezbollah) unleash a rain of
missiles on Israel (and probably the KSA) the Israelis will not have
the means to respond. They know that, but they also know that the
Iranian counter-attack will give them the perfect pretext to scream
“oy vey!! oy, gevalt!!” and let the dumb Americans fight the
Iranians.
You
might object that the USA does not have a mutual defense treaty with
Israel. You are wrong. It does, it is called AIPAC. Besides, last
year the USA established a permanent US military base in Israel,
making it a “tripwire”: just claim that “the Ayatollahs”
tried to attack the US base with “chemical weapons” and, bingo,
you now have a pretext to use all your military forces in
retaliation, including, by the way, your tactical nuclear forces to
“disarm” the “genocidal Iranians who want to wipe Israel off
the map” or some variation of this nonsense.
You
might wonder what the point of all that would be if Iran does, as I
say, not have any military nuclear program?
5My
answer would be simple: do you really think the Syrians have been
using chemical weapons?!
Of
course not!
All
this nonsense about Saddam’s WMD, the Iranian nuclear program, the
Syrian chemical weapons or, for that matter, Gaddafi’s “Viagra
armed raping soldiers”, and before that the “Racak massacre” in
Kosovo or the various “Markale market” atrocities in Sarajevo for
that matter: these were just pretexts for aggression, nothing more.
In
Iran’s case, what the Israelis fear is not that they will be “wiped
off the map” (that is a mistranslation of words originally spoken
by Ayatollah Khomeini) by Iranian nukes; what really freaks them out
is to have a large, successful Muslim regional power like Iran openly
daring to denounce Israel as an illegitimate, racist state. The
Iranians are also openly denouncing the US imperialism and they are
even denouncing the Wahabi dictatorship of the House of Saud. That is
Iran’s real “sin”: to dare defy openly the AngloZionist Empire
and be so successful at it!
So
what the Israelis really want to do is:
inflict
a maximum amount of economic damage upon Iran
punish
the Iranian population for daring to support the “wrong” leaders
overthrow
the Islamic Republic (do to it what they did to Serbia)
make
an example to dissuade any other country who dares to follow in
Iran’s footsteps
prove
the omnipotence of the AngloZionist Empire’s
To
reach this objective, there is no need to invade Iran: a sustained
cruise missile and bombing campaign will do the job (again, like in
Serbia). Finally, we just have to assume that the Zionists are evil,
arrogant and crazy enough to use nuclear weapons on some Iranian
facilities (which they will, of course, designate as “secret
military nuclear research” installations).
The
Israelis hope that by making the USA hit Iran really hard, they will
weaken the country enough to also weaken Hezbollah and the other
allies of Iran in the region sufficiently and break the so-called
“Shia crescent”.
In
their own way, the Israelis are not wrong when they say that Iran is
an existential threat to Israel. They are just lying about the nature
of this threat and why it is dangerous for them.
Consider
this:
IF
the Islamic Republic is allowed to develop and prosper and IF the
Islamic Republic refuses to be terrified by the IDF’s undisputed
ability to massacre civilians and destroy public infrastructure, then
the Islamic Republic will become an attractive alternative to the
kind of repugnant Islam embodied by the House of Saud which, in turn,
is the prime sponsor of all the collaborator regimes in the
Middle-East from the Hariri types in Lebanon to the Palestinian
Authority itself. The Israelis like their Arabs fat and corrupt to
the bone, not principled and courageous. That is why Iran must,
absolutely must, be hit: because Iran by its very existence threatens
the linchpin upon which the survival of the Zionist entity depends:
the total corruption of the Arab and Muslim leaders worldwide.
Risks
with Israel’s plan “B”
Think
of 2006. The Israelis had total air supremacy over Lebanon – the
skies were simply uncontested. The Israelis also controlled the seas
(at least until Hezbollah almost sank their Sa’ar 5-class
corvette). The Israelis pounded Lebanon with everything they had,
from bombs to artillery strikes, to missiles. They also engaged their
very best forces, including their putatively ‘”invincible”
“Golani Brigade”. And that for 33 days. And they achieved exactly
*nothing*. They could not even control the town of Bint Jbeil right
across the Israeli border. And now comes the best part: Hezbollah
kept its most capable forces north of the Litany river so the small
Hezbollah force (no more than 1000 man) was composed of local
militias supported by a much smaller number of professional cadre.
That a 30:1 advantage in manpower for the Israelis. But the
“invincible Tsahal” got it’s collective butt kicked like few
have ever been kicked in history. This is why, in the Arab world,
this war is since known as the “Divine Victory”.
As
for Hezbollah, it continued to rain down rockets on Israel and
destroy indestructible Merkava tanks right up to the last day.
There
are various reports discussing the reasons for the abject failure of
the IDF (see here or here), but the simple reality is this: to win a
war you need capable boots on the ground, especially against an
adversary who has learned how to operate without air-cover or
superior firepower. Should Israel manipulate the USA into attacking
Iran, the exact same thing will happen: CENTCOM will establish air
superiority and have an overwhelming firepower advantage over the
Iranians, but other than destroying a lot of infrastructure and
murdering scores of civilians, this will achieve absolutely nothing.
Furthermore, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is no Milosevic, he will not
simply surrender in the hope that Uncle Sam will allow him to stay in
power. The Iranians will fight, and fight, and continue to fight for
weeks, and months and then possibly years. And, unlike the “Axis of
Kindness” forces, the Iranians do have credible and capable “boots
on the ground”, and not only in Iran, but also in Syria and Iraq
and Afghanistan. And they have the missiles to reach a very large
number of US military facilities across the region. And they can also
not only shut down the Strait of Hormuz (which the USN would
eventually be able to re-open, but only at a cost of a huge military
operation on the Iranian coast), they can also strike at Saudi Arabia
proper and, of course, at Israel. In fact, the Iranian have both the
manpower and know-how to declare “open season” on any and all US
forces in the Middle-East, and there are plenty of them, mostly very
poorly defended (that imperial sense of impunity “they would not
dare”).
The
Iran-Iraq war lasted for eight years (1980-1988). It cost the
Iranians hundreds of thousands of lives (if not more). The Iraqis had
the full support of the USA, the Soviet Union, France and pretty much
everybody else. As for the Iranian military, it had just suffered
from a traumatic revolution. The official history (meaning Wikipedia)
calls the outcome a “stalemate”. Considering the odds and the
circumstances, I call it a magnificent Iranian victory and a total
defeat for those who wanted to overthrow the Islamic Republic
(something which decades of harsh sanctions also failed to achieve,
by the way).
Is
there any reason at all to believe that this time around, when Iran
has had almost 40 years to prepare for a full-scale AngloZionist
attack the Iranians will fight less fiercely or less competently? We
could also look at the actual record of the US armed forces (see Paul
Craig Roberts’ superb summary here) and ask: do you think that the
USA, lead by the likes of Trump, Bolton or Nikki Haley will have the
staying power to fight the Iranians to exhaustion (since a land
invasion of Iran is out of the question)? Or this: what will happen
to the world economy if the entire Middle-East blows up into a major
regional war?
Now
comes the scary part: both the Israelis and the Neocons always,
always, double-down. The notion of cutting their losses and stopping
what is a self-evidently mistaken policy is simply beyond them. Their
arrogance simply cannot survive even the appearance of having made a
mistake (remember how both Dubya and Olmert declared that they had
won against Hezbollah in 2006?). As soon as Trump and Netanyahu
realize that they did something really fantastically stupid and as
soon as they run out of their usual options (missile and airstrikes
first, then terrorizing the civilian population) they will have a
stark and simple choice: admit defeat or use nukes.
Which
one do you think they will choose?
Exactly.
Going
nuclear?
Here
is the paradox: in purely military terms, using nukes on Iran will
serve no pragmatic purpose. Nuclear weapons can be used in one of two
ways: against military assets (“counterforce”) or against
civilians (“countervalue”). The point is that by the time the
Neocons and their Israeli patrons come to the point of considering
using tactical nuclear forces against the Iranians, there won’t be
a good target to hit. Iranian forces will be dispersed and mostly in
contact with allied (or even US forces) and nuking an Iranian
battalion or even a division won’t fundamentally alter the military
equation. As for nuking Iranian cities just out of savagery, this
will only serve one purpose: to truly get Israel wiped off the map of
the Middle-East. I would not put it past the Neocons and their
Israeli bosses to try to use a tactical nuclear weapon to destroy
some Iranian civilian nuclear facility or some underground bunker
with the very mistaken hope that such a show of force and
determination will force the Iranians to submit to the AngloZionist
Empire. In reality, this will only infuriate the Iranians and
strengthen their resolve.
As
for the currently “macronesque” Europeans, they will, of course,
first show “solidarity” on the basis of “highly likely”,
especially Poland, the Ukies and the Baltic statelets, but if nuclear
weapons start going off in the Middle-East, then the European public
opinion will explode, especially in Mediterranean countries, and this
might just trigger yet another major crisis. Israel wouldn’t give a
damn (or, as always, blame it all on some totally mysterious
resurgence of anti-Semitism), but the USA most definitely does not
want the Anglo grip on the continent compromised by such events.
Maybe
a Korean scenario?
Is
there a chance that all the huffing and puffing will result in some
kind of peaceful resolution as what seems to be in the works in
Korea? Alas, probably not.
A
few months ago it sure looked like the USA might do something
irreparably stupid in Korea (see here and here) but then something
most unexpected happened: the South Koreans, fully realizing the
inanity of Trump’s reckless threats, took the situation in their
own hands and began making overtures to the North. Plus all the rest
of the regional neighbors emphatically and clearly told Trump &
Co. that the consequences of a US attack on the DPRK would be
apocalyptic for the entire region. Alas, there are two fundamental
differences between the Korean Peninsula and the Middle-East:
On
the Korean Peninsula, the local US ally (the ROK) does not want war.
In the Middle-East it is the local US ally (Israel) which pushes the
hardest for a war.
In
Far-East Asia all the regional neighbors were and are categorically
opposed to war. In the Middle-East most regional neighbors are sold
out to the Saudis who also want the US to attack Iran.
So
while the risks and consequences of a conflagration are similar
between the two regions, the local geopolitical dynamics are
completely different?
What
about Russia in all this?
Russia
will never *choose* to go to war with the USA. But Russia also
understands that Iran’s security and safety is absolutely crucial
to her own security, especially along her southern borders. Right now
there is a fragile equilibrium of sorts between the (also very
powerful) Zionist lobby in Russia and the national/patriotic
elements. In truth, the recent Israeli attacks in Syria have given
more power to the anti-Zionist elements in Russia, hence all the talk
about (finally!) delivering the S-300s to Syria. Well, we will see
if/when that happens. My best guesstimate is that it might already
have happened and that this is simply kept quiet to restrain both the
Americans and the Israelis who have no way of knowing what equipment
the Russians have already delivered, where it is located or, for that
matter, who (Russians or Syrians) actually operate it. This kind of
ambiguity is useful to placate the pro-Zionist forces in Russia and
to complicate AngloZionist planning. But maybe this is my wishful
thinking, and maybe the Russians have not delivered the S-300s yet
or, if they have, maybe these are the (not very useful) S-300P early
models (as opposed to the S-300PMU-2 which would present a huge risk
to the Israelis).
The
relationship between Russia and Israel is a very complex one (see
here and here), but if Iran is attacked I fully expect the Russians,
especially the military, to back Iran and provide military assistance
short of overtly engaging US/Israeli/NATO/CENTCOM forces. If the
Russians are directly attacked in Syria (and in the context of a
wider war, they very well might be), then Russia will counter-attack
regardless of who the attacker is, the USA or Israel or anybody else:
the Zionist lobby in Russia does not have the power to impose a
“Liberty-like event” on the Russian public opinion).
Conclusion:
Accursed are the warmakers, for they shall be called the children of
Satan
The
Israelis can eat falafels, create “Israeli kufiyeh” and fancy
themselves as “orientals”, but the reality is that the creation
of the state of Israel is a curse on the entire Middle-East to which
has only brought untold suffering, brutality, corruption and wars,
wars and more wars. And they are still at it – doing all they can
to trigger a large regional war in which many tens or even hundreds
of thousands of innocent people will die. The people of the USA have
now allowed a dangerous cabal of psychopathic Neocons to fully take
control of their country and now those, who Papa Bush used to call
the “crazies in the basement” have their finger on the nuclear
button. So now it all boils down to the questions I opened this
article with:
Dear
US Americans – do you want to die for Israel? Do you want to lose
your job for Israel? How about your pension? Maybe just your stock
options? Because make no mistake, the US Empire will not survive a
full-scale war against Iran. Why? Because all Iran needs to do to
“win” is not to lose, i.e. to survive. Even bombed out and
scorched by conventional or nuclear strikes, if Iran comes out of
this war still as an Islamic Republic (and that is not something
bombs or missiles will change) then Iran will have won. In contrast,
for the Empire, the failure to bring Iran to its knees will mean the
end of its status as the world Hegemon defeated not by a nuclear
superpower, but by a regional conventional power. After that, it will
just be a matter of time before the inevitable domino effect breaks
up the entire Empire (check out John Michael Greer’s excellent book
“Twilight’s Last Gleaming” for a very plausible account on how
that could happen)
Okay,
unlike Russia, Iran cannot nuke the USA or, for that matter, even
reach it with conventional weapons (I don’t even think that the
Iranians will successfully attack a US carrier as some pro-Iranian
analysts say). But the political and economic consequences of a
full-scale war in the Middle-East will be felt throughout the United
States: right now the only thing “backing” the US dollar, so to
speak, are USN aircraft carriers and their ability to blow to
smithereens any country daring to disobey Uncle Sam. The fact that
these carriers are (and, truly, have been for a long while) useless
against the USSR and Russia is bad enough, but if it becomes known
urbi et orbi that they are also useless against a conventional
regional power like Iran, then that’s it, show over. The dollar
will turn into monopoly money in a very short span of time.
Wars
often have “Nietzschean consequences”: countries which wars don’t
destroy often come out even stronger than before they were attacked,
even if it is at a horrendous price. Both the Israelis and the
Neocons are too dialectically illiterate to realize that by their
actions they are just creating increasingly more powerful enemies.
The old Anglo guard which ran the USA since its foundation was
probably wiser, possibly because it was better educated and more
aware of the painful lessons learned by the British (and other)
Empire(s).
Frankly,
I hope that the ruling 1%ers running the USA today (well, they are
really much less than 1%, but never mind that) will care about their
wealth and money more than they care about appeasing the Neocons and
that the bad old Anglo imperialists who built this country will have
enough greed in themselves to tell the Neocons and their Israeli
patrons to get lost. But with the Neocons controlling both wings of
the Uniparty and the media, I am not very hopeful.
Still,
there is a chance that, like in Korea, somebody somewhere will say or
do the right thing, and that awed by the potential magnitude of what
they are about to trigger, enough people in the US military will
follow the example of Admiral William Fallon and CENTCOM commander at
the time who told the President “an attack on Iran will not happen
on my watch”. I believe for his principled courage, the words of
Christ “Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the
children of God” (Matt 5:9) can be applied to Admiral Fallon and I
hope that his example will inspire others.
The
Saker
Listen to a recent inteview with the Saker HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.