Leave a Reply --Link to Moderation Policy--
Only Logged in users can comment.
New Commentators Register here to comment.
Saker Message:
Only Logged in users can comment.
New Commentators Register here to comment.
Clearly, “Plan B” is “Plan Bullsh_t”.
Here’s the likely scenario:
1. Continue to “f_ck the EU” via the Ukraine and now Turkey extorting as much as possible for the human cargo in transit etc. (work in progress)
2. Use Arab stooges to punish Lebanon and alienate Hezbollah. (completed)
3. Use Israel to attack Russian-Syrian-Iran at weakest point being Hezbollah in Lebanon under some contrived pretext with express aim to avoid any focus on Golan Heights etc. (work commencing)
4. Use opportunity during US election cycle to expand settlements in occupied Palestine etc. (planning)
5. Undermine BRICS to boost USD petro-dollar systems. (Brazil in focus)
6. Re-ignite the Ukrainian aggression as last desperate act before failed state then dump carcass back on Russia. (early planning stages)
7. Dutch likely to vote “No!” to Ukrainian EU membership etc while retaining the negotiating power of the real MH17 report (until Poroshenko regime falls at least). (work in progress)
8. Transfer failed ISIS/Daesh etc back to Libya for future post-election Syrian ‘pipeline’ business. (3Q16-1Q17)
9. Work on future post-election Syrian ‘pipeline’ business with emerging Kurdistan ‘partition’. (2017)
While the above ‘general drift’ unfolds the key strategic actions will be Israel working every knuckle and nerve to ensure their neocons win the White House — whomever the actual nominated candidates be. If that succeeds then 1-9 looks 80% certain. If it fails (and Trump seems to be the only slightly higher than average uncertainty) then probability drops to 50% (general drift maintained but timing delayed).
7 is an interesting take though I am not sure how much negotiating power it gives. More like a suicide vest.
I see some Dutch politicians are making noises about MH17 but most go along with the narrative so a lot of heads would roll if an accurate report ever came out.
Here in Australia, not one politician has made noises about the investigation that can be heard.
On #3, while that may be in the plans, I don’t see it working well. It’d be 2006 all over again; Israel would attack, Hezbollah would win. There were plenty of recriminations in Israel after losing last time, but I never got the impression they had actually overcome their institutional inertia enough to make serious changes. Meanwhile since then, the IDF has had 10 more years of being bullyboys and glorified prison guards and bombing people who can’t fight back, while Hezbollah has been honing their skills in Syria. The IDF has lots of big technology, but the 1967 days when they were tougher fighters than anyone around are I think gone; they have lost their edge somewhere in the process of doing occupation and emulating the US military style.
And the thing is that for Israel to attack Hezbollah, they have to attack Lebanon. Last time, that resulted in a wave of popularity for the brave folks who stopped the bastards, which is why Hezbollah is a big player in the Lebanese government today. Another failed attack by Israel and Hezbollah would probably be able to push their friends in the March 8th coalition over the top and gain true governing power despite the wonky designed-to-fail nature of the Lebanese parliamentary system.
The idea that the US has learned anything from its mistakes in Iraq (besides the huge mistake of invading) is foolish. Before Iraq was invaded in 2003 the same talk was coming out of Washington and how did it turn out then? The US invaded and proceeded to make every mistake possible as though it intended to utterly wreak the country.
I agree with Pepe Escobar that the US is the Empire of Chaos. Like Al Qaeda (which the US created) the US agenda is to create Chaos.
They talked about a partition of Syria would need a “massive” US military commitment and they didn’t see the “US willing to do that”. I consider that is an arrogant way to look at that. Its not a matter if the US would do that. Its a matter if Russia,Iran,and Syria itself would “permit” them to do that.If at no other time in history,here and now,is the time for the World,and especially those nations. To say a definite,with no ambiguity in it,”no” to that. If they lose this opportunity to stand up. There is a strong possibility that they themselves will lose their ability to be independent states from then on. Syria is a “defining” moment for those states. And we will see,if they seize that moment, or fall because of not taking action.
Oh, boy, I wish Mercouris hadn’t been cut off at the end. I really wanted to hear the rest of what he had to say about the consistency of Russia’s stance and Washington’s femand that Assad go (Well, ci guess you could say that Washing has also been consistent—in its irrationality. I like the charactertization that the demand that Assad go “crystalized” the irrationality of Washington. And, they have stuck to it!!! Madness. The consistency of the irrational.
Still love Mercouris. He is the best.
The guy in Washington is a slow starter but also had some good things to say, if one had to patience to wait for him to get it out. glad that POeter did not cut him off.
Only one mentoin of Israel as a USA “ally.” I hope Peter really focuses on this—on the interests O Israel and its backers in the USA in this conflict— more in the future.
By the way, a $34 billion suit has been brought in Los Angeles against various players in the Occupied territories, including Sheldon Adelson.
Katherine
.Katherine
He has got it down to a fine art I feel. An absolute pro.