A ZioWahabi attack on Hezbollah and Iran? | The Vineyard of the Saker

Israel, Saudi Arabia Setting Preconditions For War With Hezbollah – a critical analysis

This article was written for the Unz Review

SouthFront has just released a very interesting video analysis warning about the possibility of a war involving Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and, possibility, Syria, Iran, and Israel. That, of course, also means that Russia and the USA would be involved. First, please see the video here:

https://southfront.org/israel-saudi-arabia-setting-preconditions-for-war-with-hezbollah/

What I propose to do is go over the implications of such a scenario.

The context: a total AngloZionist failure on all fronts

To understand the context for these developments we first need to quickly summarize what has taken place in Syria and the rest of the Middle-East in the past few years.

The initial AngloZionist plan was to overthrow Assad and replace him with the Takfiri crazies (Daesh, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, ISIS – call them whatever you want). Doing this would achieve the following goals:

Bring down a strong secular Arab state along with its political structure, armed forces and security services.
Create total chaos and horror in Syria justifying the creation of a “security zone” by Israel not only in the Golan, but further north.
Trigger a civil war in Lebanon by unleashing the Takfiri crazies against Hezbollah.
Let the Takfiris and Hezbollah bleed each other to death, then create a “security zone”, but this time in Lebanon.
Prevent the creation of a Shia axis Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon.
Breakup Syria along ethnic and religious lines.
Create a Kurdistan which could then be used against Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran.
Make it possible for Israel to become the uncontested power broker in the Middle-East and forces the KSA, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait and all others to have to go to Israel for any gas or oil pipeline project.
Gradually isolate, threaten, subvert and eventually attack Iran with a wide regional coalition of forces.
Eliminate all center of Shia power in the Middle-East.

That was an ambitious plan, but the Israelis felt pretty confident that their US vassal-state would provide the resources needed to achieve it. And now this entire plan has collapsed due to the very high effectiveness of an informal but yet formidable alliance between Russia, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah.

To say that the Israelis are seething with rage and in a state of total panic would be an understatement. You think I am exaggerating? Then look at it from the Israeli point of view:

The Syrian state has survived and its armed and security forces are now far more capable than they were before the war started (remember how they *almost* lost the war initially? The Syrians had to bounce back, learn some very hard lessons, but by all reports they have made tremendous improvements and while at a critical moment Iran and Hezbollah were literally “plugging holes” in the Syrian frontlines and “extinguishing fires” on local flashpoints, now the Syrians are doing a very good job of liberating large chunks of their country, including every single city in Syria).
Not only is Syria stronger, but the Iranians and Hezbollah are all over the country now which is driving the Israelis into a state of panic and rage.
Lebanon is rock solid, even the latest Saudi attempt to kidnap Hariri is backfiring.
Syria will remain unitary and Kurdistan is not happening. Millions of displaced refugees are returning home.
Israel and the USA look like total idiots and, even worse, as losers with no credibility left.

This is all a disaster for the AngloZionists who now are falling back to their typical attitude when met with resistance: if we can’t control it, then let’s destroy it.

The plan: force the USA to attack Iran

The following is only my speculation and nothing more. I have no way of knowing what the Axis of Kindness (USA-Israel-KSA) as come up with, but I feel that I can take an educated guess. For one thing, this is nothing new. The Saudis and the other Gulf states have in the past made noises about intervening in Syria and we know that the Saudis have intervened in Bahrain and Yemen. As for the Israelis, their record of (completely illegal) military interventions is so long that we can safely assume that the Israelis will be involved in *any* ugly or evil plan to late the region to waste. The main problem for the Saudis and the Israelis is that they have bad armies. Expensive ones – yes. High-tech ones – yes. But their problem is that their only true area of expertise is massacring defenseless civilians, that they are real experts at. But in terms of real warfare, especially against truly formidable adversaries like the Iranians or Hezbollah, the “ZioWahabis” (what a combo!) don’t stand a chance and they know it (even if they never admit it). Imagine how frustrating that must be: you basically control the USA which you have turned into a vassal-state, you spent billions and billions of dollars in equipping and training your bloated armed forces, but at the end of the day the Shias are just laughing in your face. And, for some reason you cannot fathom, every time you try to “teach them a lesson”, it is you who has to crawl back home in total shame to lick your wounds and try to hush up the magnitude of your defeat. That hurts, badly. So a plan to make the Shias pay for it had to be concocted. Here is what I think it will be.

First, the goal will not be to defeat Hezbollah or Iran anywhere. For all their racist rhetoric and hubris, the Israelis know that neither they nor, even less so, the Saudis have what it would take to seriously threaten Iran, or even Hezbollah. But their plan is, I think, much cruder: to trigger a serious conflict and then force the USA to intervene.

I have written many articles explaining that the US military does not have the means to win a war against Iran. And that might be the problem here: the US commanders know full well that and they are therefore doing whatever it takes to tell the Neocons “can’t do, so sorry!” (that is the only reason why a US attack on Iran has not happened yet). From an Israeli point of view, this is totally unacceptable and the solution is simple: simply force the USA into a war they really don’t want. After all, who cares how many US goyim will die? As for the Iranians, the goal of a Israeli-triggered US attack on Iran would not be to defeat Iran, but only to hurt it, very very badly. That is the real goal. As far as the Israelis are concerned, not only don’t they give a damn about how many non-Jews will die (Judaic ethics teach that all non-Jews are most likely deserving to die anyway) as long as their Master Race benefits from it. Simply put: to them we are only tools, tools capable of thought, but tools nonetheless. That is also how Neocons view us, of course. In fact, I can just about imagine the glee of the Israelis seeing the Shia and Sunni Muslims are killing each other. Throwing in a few Christians only makes it even better.

So it’s all simple: have the Saudis attack Lebanon and/or Iran, observe how they lose, then switch on the propaganda machine at full power and explain to the average TV-watching goy that Iran is a threat to the region and the aggressor here, that the Saudis are only defending themselves from Iranian aggression. And if that is not enough, they scream “oy gevalt!” in the US Congress and have the prostitutes on the Hill explain to the American people that the US must “lead the Free World” to “defend” the “only democracy in the Middle-East” against Iranian “aggression” and that the USA have a “responsibility” to prevent the Iranians of “seizing the Saudi oil fields” etc. etc. etc.

It’s a win-win situation for the Israelis as long as there are not caught red-handed manipulating it all. But we can count on our beloved Ziomedia to make sure that no such “anti-Semitic” accusations are ever made, even if Israeli fingerprints are all over the place.

Moon of Alabama has just posted an interesting article entitled “Revealed – Saudis Plan To Give Up Palestine – For War On Iran” which seems plausible to me and which further corroborates my thesis that the goal is to get the USA to attack Iran. Of course, the very notion that the Saudis could give up Palestine implies two outright outlandish notions: first, that the KSA has not already sold out the Palestinians many times over and, second, that the Saudis could somehow “deliver” Palestine to the Zionist Entity. Still, I recommend the reading of this article which contains a lot of very interesting revelations about the true nature and intentions of the Saudis regime.

As for the Israelis, they are offering to share intelligence (read: targeting data) with the Saudis. How touching it is to see these two medieval, backward and generally evil regimes are so willing to work together. At least they are both now showing their true, ugly, faces!

The counter-plan

The Iranians really have no good options here. The least bad option is to do what Putin is doing in the Donbass: remain externally passive at the risk of having the not too gifted accusing you of caving in. Regardless, if your enemy’s plan is not to win, but to lose, then refusing to engage him makes perfectly good sense, at least on the strategic level and temporarily.

I am not suggesting that the Iranians not fight back on a tactical level. Even the Russian Task Force in Syria has official orders to defend itself if attacked. I am talking at a strategic level. Basically, tempting as it might be, the Iranians have to refrain from striking back at Saudi Arabia or Israel. In a paradoxical way, Iran cannot do what Hezbollah did in 2006 and the reason for that is very simple: by the time the first Hezbollah missiles began raining down on Israel the Israelis had already reached their highest level of escalation (their usual vicious campaign to make civilians pay). But in the case of Iran, the AngloZionist Empire could step up the level of violence way beyond what the Israelis and the Saudis could ever do by themselves. The combined power of Israel and the Saudis is dwarfed by the kind of firepower the USA (CENTCOM+NATO) could unleash against Iran and it is therefore crucial that the Iranians not give the US Americans any pretext to officially join the attack. Instead of destroying the regime in Riyadh the Iranians should let, or even help, the regime in Riyadh destroy itself. I think that the Saudis have even less staying power than the USA or the Israelis, so there is no need to force a rapid outcome of any war between Iran and the KSA.

Needless to say, if the AngloZionist Empire joins in and unleashes its full military might against Iran, something which I consider a very real possibility, then all bets are off and Iran should, and will, retaliate with a full set of symmetrical and asymmetrical responses, including strikes against Israel and the Saudis, and even strikes against CENTCOM bases in the entire region. However, such a situation would have catastrophic consequences for Iran and should therefore be avoided if at all possible.

At the end of the day the best hope the world has is that a US American patriot will see through this rather obvious plot to “wag the dog” and tell the ZioWahabis “not on my watch” like Admiral Fallon did in 2007 (will that honorable man ever get the historical recognition he deserves, say a Nobel Peace Prize? Possibly never in this world, but in the judgment of God he shall be called a “son of God” (Matt 5:9)). By themselves the Israelis and the Saudi are just a gang of medieval thugs which even Hezbollah can terrify and force to run. Their only real power is the power they have in Congress and the US Ziomedia: the power of corruption, the ability to lie, deceive and betray. I know for a fact that there are many US officers on all levels in the US armed forces which see straight through these Zionist smokescreen and whose loyalty is to the United State and not to the nasty little Zionist Entity in Palestine. I have studied and worked with such patriots and there are plenty of them in the Saker Community today. I am not suggesting that we should count on top US commanders refusing to execute a Presidential order (like this article is suggesting). The truth is that anybody who has served in the military, especially at a high command level (Pentagon, CENTCOM), knows that there are all sorts of creative ways to make sure that something does not happen. Finally, I have not lost all hope that Trump could do the right thing. Yes, he is a weak man, yes, he is now cornered and has no allies left, but when faced with the horrendous consequences of a attack on Iran he still might say “no” and order his staff to come up with some other plan. Trump might also realize that refusing to wage war on Iran would be his best revenge against those who have smeared him and who are now apparently trying to impeach him.

Conclusion: will the attack happen?

In short, probably yes. The simple truth is that the nutcase regimes in power in Israel and Saudi Arabia are cornered and desperate. The rise in power of Iran over the past decade has been immense and irresistible. The recent failure of the ZioWahabis to bring even tiny Qatar to heel is indicative of the tremendous erosion in power and credibility these wacko regimes have suffered. I believe that the recent trips by Bibi Netanyahu and even the Saudi King to Moscow are all part of an effort on the part of the ZioWhabis to gauge the Russian response to an attack on Iran.

[Sidebar: While we will never know what was said behind closed doors, my guess is that Putin indicated in clear terms to the ZioWahabis that Russia will not step aside and let them strike at Iran. In truth, Russia has very limited options. Unless Russian personnel are directly attacked, Russia cannot just go to war in a overt and formal way, that would be way too dangerous, especially against the USA. But Russia could immensely (and very rapidly) strengthen Iranian air defense capabilities by deploying her aircraft (A-50, MiG-31s), in Iran or even by flying them in from Russia to conduct surveillance flights. Russia can provide the Iranians with intelligence far beyond anything the Iranians could collect themselves. Likewise, the Russians could quietly deploy some of their electronic warfare systems to key locations in Iran. The US Americans would rapidly detect all this, but Russia would still have a “plausible deniability” on a political level. Finally, the Russians could do for Iran what they have done for Syria and integrate all the Iranian and Russian air defense capabilities into a single network thereby immensely improving the capabilities of the currently rather modest, but rapidly improving, Iranian air defense capabilities.]

At this moment in time it is pretty clear that an attack on Iran is being prepared and such an attack is possible or even likely. But it is not a done deal yet. For one thing the Saudis and Israelis have a long history of empty threats and both regimes love posturing and grandstanding. And for all their bravado they do realize that Iran is a formidable and very sophisticated adversary. They probably also remember what happened when the Iraqis, with the full help and support from the USA, the Soviet Union, France, Britain and pretty much everybody else attacked Iran when Iran was at its weakest. Following a long and horrible war, the Iranians are now stronger than ever, Saddam is dead and the Iranians are more or less in control of Iraq. Iran is simply not a good country to attack, especially with a lack of a clear vision of what “victory” constitutes. So you ought to be crazy to attack Iran. The problem is, of course, that the Saudis and the Israelis are crazy, they have proved that many times over. So our best hopes is that they might be just “crazy”, but not “that crazy”. Not much of a hope, but that’s the best we got.

The Saker

Anonymous on November 18, 2017 · at 12:57 pm EST/EDT

Hmmm, so if the goal is to force the US to intervene, lets look at that question?

First, we might need to modify the question. Perhaps it should state ‘force the US to intervene without Russia also intervening.” As The Saker has often stated, the Russian expeditionary forces in the region are rather small, especially compared to what the US/NATO alliance could bring to bear. But, its also true that Russia has been showing capabilities for forces outside of Syria to have an impact. Kalibre missile strikes and long range attacks from Tupolev bombers being the more prominent examples. There’s also a question of what Russian electronic warfare can do in such a fight, as well as the other item The Saker has previously discussed which is how Russia can use asymetric warfare in such a fight.

Thus, while it may not seem that Russia provides an insurmountable opposition to Anglo-Zion-Wahabist plans in the region, it also seems rather clear that if Russia also intervenes then the advantage gained by US intervention is lost. Especially since if US/NATO has to worry about a wider war, then they might be much less concerned with the Israeli-Hezbollah fight in southern Lebanon.

Yet, lets look at the chances of Israel and KSA getting the USA to intervene in such a war.

First, who holds the power to be the ‘decider’ in the US about such an intervention.
— first, it might rest almost entirely with the Pentagon. Certainly, opposition from the JCS would be a major obsticle to such an intervention. It might be an outright veto capability. Could Congress, the media and the President all combine to force the Pentagon into doing something it does not want to do? That at best is doubtful. Name for me all of the times in the last 30 years or so that the Pentagon has been forced over its strong objections into doing something? I have a hard time thinking of any such instances.

— we do know that the Pentagon has previously rejected an earlier President’s request to go to war with Iran. The Dubya neocons wanted a war with Iran, but the JCS at the time, an Admiral Mullen IIRC, said no.

— we’ve also seen the Pentagon being very, very careful about its interventions in Syria. They have pushed back against the media and politicians on the topic of a ‘no-fly zone’ over Syria, with leaks and some statements from people with high rank warning that this would/could lead to a war with Russia. The Pentagon has been working carefully with some forces inside Syria, and has been launching some airstrikes in Syria. But they’ve also backed off every time it seemed like these actions would lead to a direct confrontation with Russia.

— Its hard to tell where Trump stands on such a war. On one hand, he was very sceptical about ‘regime change’ wars as a candidate. But, when he made a deal with Sheldon Adelson to finance his general election campaign, he also became a strong supporter of Israel since that was a ‘red-line’ condition of Mr. Adelson. Jared, his son-in-law, seems to be close to Israel and KSA, or at least MBS in KSA.

— the US media of course gives only the Israeli-KSA party line.

— Congress is pretty much owned by Israel and KSA between them. And if not, if MBS takes some of the billions of dollars he’s been stealing of late, then any US member of Congress has a for-sale sign around his neck and can easily be bought. There might be a few exceptions, but they are powerless in Congress or could quickly be rendered such.

— However, one of the problems with the last two points is that American voters have been breaking free of their media mind-washing. The Democrats have become 100% pro-war and pro-banker and I’m sure can be easily bought by KSA money if for some reason they have not yet been. And yet, the American voter has been showing signs of no longer following media orders.

— Both corporate political parties have been badly fractured. In the last election, we saw strong opposition campaigns in both parties. Trump’s went on to win the election. Bernie might well have been President if the Democratic Party leadership wasn’t a corrupt swamp that rigged the whole thing against him. And while Bernie was very quiet on military issues and also supportive of Israel, much of his base behind him criticized him for this and at best accepted it as being the best way for him to try to win. The Bannon-Trump movement within the Republicans responded strongly to Trump’s anti-war stances, but also responds to the infantile cries that America must be #1 and for supporting Israel. There is strong popular support in America for ending the wars, and has been for about a decade. Both of the last two Presidents had to pretend to oppose the existing wars in order to be elected.

What does all of this add up to?

The media and Congress would support such a war, but that’s not enough. It would take Trump also coming out in favor of a war for this to happen. And given Trump’s anti-Iran rhetoric, that’s certainly possible.

Any new war in the Middle East would jack up the price of oil. That might be good news for T-Rex and Exxon. But it would be very bad news for the world economy. Trump is very focused on trying to show success on the economic front to his voters, and any wise advisors would tell him that a war in the ME would stop this dead in its tracks, and likely make Trump and his movement a one-term President.

And then there is still the Pentagon. Yes, they love to show off their toys. And yes, any up-and-coming officer views a war as a chance to prove themselves and to quickly rise to the top. But still, the US military has been reluctant to go to war in Syria, at least not the sort of full-on war like Israel and KSA are dreaming about in Lebanon.

And again, if Trump is not leading the way, its highly unlikely that the media and Congress on their own can force a war. They might pass more sanctions against Iran and Hezbollah, but they can not force a war. Especially not if Trump is not out front leading the charge/sales-pitch.

All in all, this seems like another Netanyahoooo and MBS mis-calculation. I don’t think Trump would see enough gain to make it worth risking his presidency and a collapse of the world economy. And I don’t think the Pentagon would be very enthusiastic about the idea. Especially as at this time, Syria would certainly aid Hezbollah, and Iran would as well. The Russians would likely try to stay in the background, but would also be giving their own support …..like for instance Hezbollah getting access to Russian satelite photos and other eavesdropping info that would let Hezbollah have the best intel they’ve ever had while fighting Israel.

One problem is that both Netanyahooooo and MBS seem likely to miscalculate all of this. Netanyahooo thinks he has more control over the US than he really does have. And MBS just seems to be constantly wrong. So, the chances for an Israeli attack on Hezbollah with KSA support do exist. I just don’t think they’ll be able to drag the US into such a war, which means this will turn out worse for Israel and KSA. Hezbollah showed a decade ago that they could defeat then an Israeli attack across the border. And KSA can’t seem to beat anyone in a war, not even tribesmen in Yemen. Where Trump might fail in all of this is that he might not be clear enough and forceful enough with Israel and MBS about the fact that they US won’t join them, which would likely lead to a war where lots of people die before Israel and KSA admit they can’t achieve their goals.

145 Comments

Larchmonter445 on November 17, 2017 · at 1:29 am EST/EDT

Will there be war?

Of course. More war because that’s all the nutcases have.

The immediate future well into 2018 will be more Syrian war, the Golan as hot as the Israelis can make it, and CENTCOM trying to stay in bases along both sides of the Iraq-Syria border.
- proper gander on November 17, 2017 · at 5:51 am EST/EDT
  
  More war, of course? Really?
  
  Even my libtard sister can see that the world has become an awful lot more peaceful under Trump. A few missiles over Syria, with a pre-warning and 90% shot down. A big mother bomb over Afghanistan. All the rest is threats and tweets and gestures in the right direction for the benefit of the deep state. But he ain’t shooting.
  
  This discussion is based on the observation that the Anglo zionists are cornered, do not have the backing of the State department, and its agents (CIA, Media, Israel and sidekicks) are beginning to try and act alone, to drag the US in. I don’t believe Trump will move.
  
  Bannon, Trump and Co. understand that the war within the US is globalist vs nationalist. They know that globalism rides on the back of the power and military of dollar hegemony towards a global leadership, and that global currency and global control at some point must and will remove the crown from the dollar and the USA . It has to. A nationalist knows that the dollar and military is critical to US interests, but that the whole mechanism has been captured, controlled and expanded for the interests of people who do not believe in US, or any, sovereignty.
  
  This is the fine line that Trump must walk, and is walking. He can’t collapse the dollar system, but he must take the hammer out of the hands of the globalists or, sooner or later, it will lead to the necessary demise of the US.
  
  This war talk is globalist. Trump will not back it, I am quite certain. And neither Israel nor Saudi can do this without them. Nor can the CIA pull the necessary power together without either impeaching Trump or the provocation of an unequivocal false flag and media pressure
  - Larchmonter445 on November 17, 2017 · at 9:23 am EST/EDT
    
    You are virtually alone in thinking Trump has control of the Shadow Government/Deep State.
    
    It would be wonderful if he was in command.
    
    The details and facts on the ground indicate the US is preparing its remaining proxies and willing “rebels” in Syria and among Kurds in Iraq and Syria for a long war of insurgencies to harass the governments (allied with Iran, Turkey and Russia). Thus, more war is reason enough for CENTCOM to stay active and in pursuit of kinetic actions against Hezbollah, Shia militias, PMUs and IRGC forces.
    
    Notify us all here when CENTCOM leaves Syria and Iraq. Until then, war in small form will persist.
    
    And some form of larger scale action will be on the front burner, as Saker indicates above. The target will be Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran proper. Israel is not going to become the smallest of all in the region. And that is what her influence will be if the status quo (Russia the regional decisive power) remains as it is going. Russia is moving on all fronts, economic, diplomatic, military, gas and oil, weapons sales, training militaries, humanitarian. Countries are waiting in line for S400s, for jets, for tanks, and for Russian Intel against terrorists and destabilizing plots.
    
    Israel is the outsider, banded with corrupt regimes like SA.
    
    Trump is a non-factor in the reality of the ME. He went, he danced with sword, he left with arms sales. That’s all he cares about.
    Next round of sales requires more war. N’est pas?
    
    Your Trump can’t even stop Porky in Kiev from killing children and old women in his war crimes bombardments of Donbass. And you pitch us this drivel of Trump, POTUS.
    He’s “45”-IMPOTUS.
    
    His keepers won’t even let him talk to Putin. What Commander is on such a tether?
    
    Only the deft diplomacy and skills of Putin and Nasrallah and the effectiveness of Russian General Staff and their weapons systems will have a chance at preventing more war.
    
    The forces of hatred want to “bleed” Iran and upset her development arc. Iran is destined to be very rich, very young, very inventive and a powerful nation within the ME and South Asia regions. Israel could not compete in its own neighborhood. That terrifies the monsters who rule there. And those monsters call the shots in DC, not the super salesman Trump.
    - TSP on November 17, 2017 · at 10:51 am EST/EDT
      
      “You are virtually alone in thinking Trump has control of the Shadow Government/Deep State.”
      I think the comment was that the deep state doesn’t have the authority to wor.
      Not bc Trump has control, but because the JCS/Pentagon has control.
      And they know they can’t win.
      
      “The target will be Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran proper.”
      My target is the moon, but it doesn’t matter when its totally unattainable.
      
      “His keepers won’t even let him talk to Putin.”
      Did I see something about them shaking hands, last weekend?
      
      Democrats are against every war when a repub is in the WH.
      Anyone with a sense of fiscal conservativism is against every war regardless.
      I just described about 90% of the national voter base.
      Elections are 11 months away, and the house and senate hang in that balance.
      
      No one here has any appetite for a middle eastern war. Literally, nobody.
      - Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:10 pm EST/EDT
        
        America has not had ‘civilian control of the military’ since at least the early 90’s. Examples of when the civilians have tried to tell the Pentagon what to do are rare, but here are a few …
        
        — Clinton soon after taking office tried to fulfill a campaign promise about ‘gays in the military’. The Pentagon told Clinton where he could stuff that and with suggestions of how hard to do it.
        
        — During the East Timor crisis, Clinton tried sending an Admiral over to talk to the Indoneseans about lessening the massacres. The Admiral disobeyed orders and instead expressed support for the Indoneseans and their killings. Clinton had to order him back with orders to give his message instead. Not at all sure that was ever delivered.
        
        — Dubya pretty much did whatever the Pentagon said to do. The Saker above mentions the one notable case where Dubya/Cheney wanted to attack Iran and the JCS just said no.
        
        — We’ve seen the conflict between the Pentagon and the Deep State against Trump’s campaign promises to improve relations with Russia. That the power does not lie with the candidates elected by the American people is now obvious.
        
        — Early in the exchange of bombast between the soulmates Kim and Trump, Trump said he was ordering a second CV to Korea. But, the Pentagon didn’t bother to send the order and the CV was instead spotted sailing around Indonesia.
        
        All of which means, at this time, I’d say the Pentagon is going to do what it wants to do.
      - Struth on November 18, 2017 · at 7:49 pm EST/EDT
        
        “Elections are 11 months away, and the house and senate hang in that balance.”
        
        This is the key… Trump won’t (and indeed cannot) do anything until he has allies in the political system to support him. I hope/believe he is playing the long game, playing cozy with the neo-cons/zionists in order to keep his head and his position until he has the support necessary to do what he wants to do.
        
        The ‘sacrifice’ of some of his allies was exactly that… a sacrifice to the neo-con ‘gods’ to keep them placated and solidify the illusion he is pandering to them. Perhaps I am only being optimistic… time will tell.
      - Franz on November 23, 2017 · at 12:06 pm EST/EDT
        
        But it is true that as Putin and Trump shook hands and talked, quite clearly about talking more, there was a ‘handler’ standing by. It is quite a chilling video in fact of a President who, perhaps like Saad Hariri, is a prisoner and his family hostages. It is the Wahabi-Zionist way.
        Fascinating times we live in. I wish they were a bit less fascinating.
        
        But what is clear is that, while the Yinon plan smolders and dies in Syria and Iran, and the Crazy new dictator of Saudi Arabia tears that utterly corrupt and tottering nation apart at his own mad whims and pleasures, the only thing The American dog is able to do is savage Russian Olympic athletes and choirs and attack RT, which humiliates them with every broadcast, and is, as they have failed to notice, run by exactly the kind of woman that every man, woman and child in the benighted USA aspires to be – Margarita Simonyan.
    - proper gander on November 17, 2017 · at 12:07 pm EST/EDT
      
      @ Larch
      
      If your reply is based on the premise of your first sentence, I won’t read any further. I said no such thing. I am no Trump apologist, either. I gave reasons why this war won’t happen, in response to the article.
      
      I stated that:
      1. There is a war in the US between globalists (deep state, AZ’s) and Nationalists
      2. the ME has been a globalist’s war
      3. Trump is not a globalist, and is not playing ball.
      4. That the anglozionists / deep state/ CIA etc can not operate, or start this war in Lebanon without effectively circumventing the authority of the President (people) or putting his arm up his back with a false flag, or impeaching him.
      
      This war can’t happen because of the internal struggle in the US, which is plain to see. It does not mean the vestiges of the last 30 years interventionist policy will evaporate over night, or its flywheel stop spinning, or that Trump does not see some benefit in selling arms or ‘pivoting to Asia’. But the deep state / AZ’s can no longer orchestrate and start new globalist acts with the unquestioning approval of the president as they have done. The rational of war in the US is shifting towards nationalism. And that is a big shift.
      
      We are watching impotent actors whipping up dust and pushing a little here and there from old positions. That’s all. And Trump is not playing ball. We are watching a wind down. He is no pacifist, but this is a wind-down of a war that he described as an expensive disaster and of no benefit to the US.
      
      Time will tell who is right.
      - Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 8:26 pm EST/EDT
        
        Internal struggle? Are you sure? Could the struggle be simply a deception? That’s where I’d investigate.
        
        proper gander on November 18, 2017 · at 3:25 am EST/EDT
        
        @ anon
        
        Go have a listen to some of Bannon’s very recent speeches. He is still working hand in glove with Trump. You (and I) might not agree with everything he says, but he is specifically nationalist and very, very anti globalist.
        
        The main thrust of Trumps presidency seems to be taking back, and aggressively if necessary, trade and manufacturing from China. Of course, the possible error in presumption is that America is better at manufacture than China, and the US population is more capable and better educated. He knows it is not. Bannon seems to say that all the ills of America – under employment, under education, opioid crisis, crime, social inequality etc – flow from lack of stuff to do and make. And I agree with him.
        Try this:
        
        https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bannon+speech+sept+2017&t=ffnt&atb=v35-2&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=Qfa5-icI3xw
        
        Imran on November 25, 2017 · at 10:42 pm EST/EDT
        
        ?. Bannon’s recent speech literally begged US Zionists of America to back a war on Islam/Iran.
        
        nick on November 28, 2017 · at 9:36 pm EST/EDT
        
        breitbart news was made in israel. Bannon is illuminati, he himself praises satan. him and trump woo top illuminati henry kissinger. he’s nothing but baaaaad news.
      - nick on November 28, 2017 · at 9:28 pm EST/EDT
        
        Your comments are incisive and your argument persuasive but you forget how these money changer devils work. If Amerika does not dispense its century old role as Zionist attack dog, the petrodollar is bye bye. Since the vast majority of the American population lives paycheck to paycheck and have no gold, what would be the outcome of a dollar hyperinflation attack. We are talking about the entity calling itself israel, a creation of the same satanic bankers that run the fed and a heck of a lot more, and Saudi Arabia, literally the bedrock of the petrodollar. The deal was that saudi would sell in dollars in exchange for American protection. Trump? His wealth depends on this petrodollar scam. Bannon??? Puh-leeeze, Breitbart news was made in israel and is more about spreading racism than any true nationalist, populist movement. Why hasn’t Trump enacted that 45% import tax on chinese goods in order to reindustrialize the USA? Because his wealth depends on this crooked system. Your “wealth” depends on it too.
        
        That will be the argument the ZioWahabis will put to the military puppeteers pulling Trump’s strings along with a serious fait accompli on the ground. It is very much in their evil, selfish interests to have the USA nuke Iran back into the stone age. Their authority would be cemented for decades. The petrodollar would be safe for a while longer. Amerika would be feared if not respected and again, the death and destruction will be in other people’s lands so Americans don’t care.
        
        Fiscal conservatism? That’s funny. The fed is a money printing machine keeping this deindustrialized welfare/police state running. It’s main purpose is to fund the death machine, the satanic pentagram. You can’t say no to th devil once you’ve been in bed with for soooo looong!
  - Mataman on November 17, 2017 · at 12:17 pm EST/EDT
    
    What on Earth are you going on about here? Under Trump the rate of bombing and droning countries in Africa and the ME have increased. But one of many articles confirming this:
    http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-is-dropping-bombs-at-unprecedented-levels-2017-8
    
    We know he has increased troop levels in Afghanistan and Africa. There is the insane brinksmanship with North Korea, and the unrelenting build up on Russia’s borders.
    
    And, if that were not enough, we have his absurd imperialist Ziocon UN speech, and his self-congratulatory weapons sale speech this week. Not to mention all the offensive talk of Japanese samurais and encouraging Japan to return to it’s imperial roots.
    
    This notion that Trump is a secret strategic mastermind, as opposed to a blowhard hack, needs to end. He is busy having his administration role back environmental protections at home, the only kind of trade he seems interested in are weapons sales, and he’s pushing for a huge tax break for the oligarchs. Oh, and let’s not forget that right when China is finally banning the abhorrent ivory trade, Trump has lifted restrictions on hunting endangered animals because his sons enjoy murdering for sport. How people can believe this man is the savior of the America is beyond me. As if America could ever elect anyone who wasn’t a monster—our “leaders” can only reflect what we have become. And as much as his naive supporters want to frame his victory as some sort of populism, again, look at his campaign backers (Adelson, for example), and his cabinet (Goldman Sachs, Neocons, corporate interest) and then explain how this is populism or how TPTB would even allow his election. His election was the defeat of one group of oligarchs by another, nothing more. And finance still comes out on top, even if oil and mining have curried more favor than social media and cell phones.
    
    So we are going to see more war because we have already seen more war, and because Trump’s America continues to refuse diplomacy. You don’t put a Nikki Haley in the UN to make peace.
    - nazcalito on November 17, 2017 · at 8:19 pm EST/EDT
      
      Mataman, I was a little puzzled too about what he was talking about. :-)
      - proper gander on November 18, 2017 · at 3:43 am EST/EDT
        
        In reply to both Mataman and nazcalito.
        
        I am not trying to find in Trump what I want to find. I have listened to what his acolytes are saying and at what he is and is not doing, and have made a prediction about what is going to happen in Lebanon.
        
        Can I refer you also to this video:
        
        https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bannon+speech+sept+2017&t=ffnt&atb=v35-2&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=Qfa5-icI3xw
        
        or here
        
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qfa5-icI3xw
        
        The intro comments by Gorka say it all, but carry on through. Listen at 1.5x speed, if you are impatient. If you listen to nothing else, listen from the 12th minute, for about 1 min. Sovereignty!
        
        The US is moving away from globalism and towards nationalism. Elementary thinking tells you that globalist governance requires the US to hand over its authority to supra national interests.
        
        Lebanon won’t happen because it is not in the interests of the US. Period.
        
        Daphne O’Brien on November 23, 2017 · at 10:36 pm EST/EDT
        
        Thank you for the link. I’m from Oz, and watched the entire show. This is the America the world loved! Of course there are issues I don’t fully agree with, but now I finally understand exactly what Trump is trying to achieve and I so hope he makes it.
        
        Goodness, just to keep Merry Christmas” alive will be a huge achievement! But basically he is for America and totally against globalism. And this achievement, if he can pull it off, will be huge.
    - JJ on November 18, 2017 · at 6:12 am EST/EDT
      
      Ermmm…also record 590billion defense bill authorised too!!! ! To me…the build of momentum to do something is just relentless…….DT will enjoy his chocolate cake when sending off missiles as showmanship but sadly may have to eat the consequences and not enjoy the taste in his mouth…..I do think that stuff he cannot deal with just goes to the back of his mind for sineone else to be tasked with dealing with then fires them if it goes wrong….but by then the issues he should have dealt with by support of a trusted intelligence agencycould have gone irrepairably snafu…..unlike VVP and his trusted intelliegence,defence ,diplomatic and military support systems. Too many rogue lions and elephants in usa services…..and they do not want to be brought home as “trophies”… methinks.
      - JJ on November 18, 2017 · at 10:27 am EST/EDT
        
        Correction…700 b defence budget authorised.
        
        proper gander on November 18, 2017 · at 12:54 pm EST/EDT
        
        @jj
        
        I have not said anything about ‘no war’ or ‘Trump the peacemaker’.
        
        The objective of US aggression is shifting from globalist goals to nationalistic goals. The article is about a ramp up in war in Lebanon, and I believe Trump will not buy it, because it is part of the historical use of US military for globalist goals. It is not in the interest of the US. The world has become peaceful as the globalist agenda is de-funded (except where US proxies and mercenaries need to be wiped up – Somalia, Syria, etc)
        
        Is Trump preparing for a trade confrontation with China, or at least an aggressive trade and encirclement policy? Yes. 100% Will this succeed? No. 100%
  - lizzie dw on November 17, 2017 · at 2:55 pm EST/EDT
    
    Proper Gander. I appreciate you clear remarks about what our president may be doing. It has appeared to me to be big noise – no action, which I applaud for sure but was only hopeful that this was a correct interpretation. It is reassuring to see that another thinks the same.
    - mundanomaniac on November 17, 2017 · at 3:40 pm EST/EDT
      
      just what I think, big noise – no action, great player
      with a weak hand, in for a longer game
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 11:25 am EST/EDT
  
  If we look at things like recidivism, habit, and the like it would seem that war is never off the table, and one on the way. Nutcases. What was that expression, about the Bourbons or something, forgotten nothing and learned nothing? Dead reckoning has a whole other meaning.
Dr. NG Maroudas on November 17, 2017 · at 2:53 am EST/EDT

Very interesting to see Saker’s analysis posted side by side with Rev.NasrAllah’s call to refrain from analysis until we have a clearer idea of the facts behind recent turmoil in/by the KSA. Saker’s analysis chimes with that of Nasr’Allah insofar as any attack by Israel on Lebanon would not depend on the politics of KSA/Lebanon but only on whether the ZioNazi regime thought they could get away with it; moreover, Rev.Nasr’Allah laughs at the idea of KSA even having capability to move its army anywhere near Lebanon (see Episode 4 of his speech as posted on the Vineyard). So, that leaves the Saker’s suggestion: that Uncle $cam’s favourite nephew, little Izzy, will scam Uncle into sending The Man to do and die in the thousands for Israel, as The Man from Uncle did in Iraq. We shall see, especially with the growing realization that things were getting better — in the USA, in the MENA generally and in Israel as well, until 2010 when Nobel Peace Laureate, Barak Obomba, appointed Lady Macbeth from Arkansaw, Hilary Shrillery Killery Clinton, to direct US foreign policy. There is a great longing for peace after these last 7 years of senseless Anglo-Zio-Capitalist inspired wars; the world might seize the opportunity that Russia and Allies have provided by defeating them once again on the field of battle.

“Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice … ?”.
DannyO on November 17, 2017 · at 3:06 am EST/EDT

There is an under estimation of the Iranians resolve in this article – the point is well made by the Saker that Iran stood against the world and survived. However, this time Iran will not only survive but prevail. If – and this is a still a big IF – the zionists attack Iran I believe four things will happen.
1. An immediate and totally devastating retaliatory attack against the entity – both military and civilian targets by Iran and Hezbollah using overwhelming numbers of ballistic missiles.
2. A direct mobilization of ground forces by Iran, Hezbollah and the SAA into occupied Palestine. Likely across Galilee and straight to the coast cutting the strip in half.
3. The iof will collapse on all fronts and retreat to Haifa and Tel Aviv – the zionists will immediately call for a cease fire once the see that coordinated air defense systems are keeping iof jets contained.
4. The US, on seeing the rapid debacle, will get cold feet and demand the zionists accept a cease fire with Russia and the US as guarantors of whatever the iof is still holding onto of the entity.

As for the ksa they will be sitting on the sidelines begging for mercy and praying they are not next.
There will be no war between Iran and ksa – however, the entity will be crushed if it raises its hand against Iran and ksa will collapse under its own weight.
I believe the western oligarchy maybe aware of the outcome of such a blunder?
- Yk on November 17, 2017 · at 6:43 am EST/EDT
  
  You made some valid points but, you’re overlooking something, something very vital which is that if – I concur it’s a big IF – the Zionists attack the Resistance Axis(led by Iran) in other to create a major war it would be base on the guarantee that the US will intervene on their behalf. Iran will not take this bait and will allow Hezbollah and assortment of Shia militias across the middle east to do the fighting with Qods Forces and IRGC embedded among them and supply them to the hilt with necessary weapons and political cover this is a of the purpose of the land bridge from Iran the Mediterranean. I believe this will do the job and deny Washington the pretext for directly intervening in the war, the most dangerous scenario is if Israel bomb Iran, then Iran like any major power will have to respond militarily and directly could this prompt a military action from Washington on Iran? Honestly I still think there are some sane people left in Washington even among the deep state who can clearly see this for what it is ‘a suicide mission’ and who will do whatever it takes to avert it though I believe Iran will not base her decision on such notion. Now the question is: will America intervention subdue Iran? The Saker as correctly stated this in the past: if all major powers failed to subdue Iran in the past in her weakest state, what will stop Iran now? Do I hear nuclear weapons? I can recall when Ali Akhbar Salehi was Iran foreign minister he said even if Iran is nuked it won’t stop Iran, I believe this is based on calculated risk. Look at the picture of the middle east if there’s a nuclear fallout which country is safe? On the Northern side of Iran we have Azerbaijan an America ally on the Eastern side we have Pakistan an America ally, on the Western side we have gulf nations, all America allies with America bases. And we have Hezbollah embedded in population centers and a stone throw from Israel with pinpoint missiles that can hit Israel’s nuclear facilities and nuclear weapons sites. I don’t think a nuclear war is possible in the middle east without the local populace turning against America and their government. And I remember a speech by Iran supreme leader a man not known for telling lies or exaggeration that if America attack Iran that Iran will harm America’s interest all over the world.
  
  https://www.memri.org/tv/iranian-leader-ali-khamenei-if-americans-attack-iran-iran-will-harm-their-interests-worldwide
  
  This is as far back as 2006, is this possible? Coming from a man who was president of Iran during the 8 years war with Iraq and have seen it all well your guess is as good as mine. That doesn’t mean one can figure out everything and that Iran will not be wrecked and damaged beyond recognition by such war, but let’s just call a spade a spade the cost for America will be the loss of superpower status and America will never be the same again, not in the middle east and not in the rest of the world. Those in Washington who are in the know knows these and I repeat will do everything to avert it. But the rest of the world are preparing.
  - Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:32 pm EST/EDT
    
    Presuming that the prevailing winds in the area come from the west.
    
    Pakistan, to the east of Iran, is at best a very shaky American ally. Several reports, say from Mr. Escobar for example, have pointed out that as the USA has shifted its alliance from Pakistan to India, Pakistan in turn has been moving closer towards being a Chinese ally.
    
    So, I’m not sure how much concern fallout in Pakistan might cause DC. But India is next in the path of the fallout to the east. And at some point, just the sheer numbers of people affected by the fallout in both Pakistan and India would cause concern.
    
    With the EU being the more interested party to watch. The EU is generally closer to Iran and willing to do deals with Iran. And the EU would be the population most likely to strongly object to mass civilian disease and casualty rates from nuclear fallout.
    
    A nuclear strike would certainly rally the Shiite world to Iran’s side. So far, we have not seen Shiite terrorists attacking the west. That might well change if people are inspired by a nuclear strike. And its not entirely clear that even the Sunni part of the ME would be happy with this. There would likely be a strong current of belief that the USA and Israel just sacrificed a lot of lives in the ME, and there has long been a current within the ME against the USA and its dominence. Much of the Sunni-Wahabbi terrorists talk along such lines, and just because the CIA controls the leaders of the terrorists, that doesn’t mean the rank n file can’t have other ideas.
- Katherine on November 17, 2017 · at 10:28 pm EST/EDT
  
  How do you say “Make my day” in Farsi?
  
  I should would love to see DannyO’s scenario come to pass.
  Katherine
- Bessarab on November 18, 2017 · at 8:15 pm EST/EDT
  
  Your words in God’s ear . Thanks
Master on November 17, 2017 · at 3:55 am EST/EDT

Where the hell is China in all of this? Do they think everyone will do the dirty job for their OBOR project? How can a regional power like China not be able to even muster and station a Landing Ship in the Persian Gulf to protect their interest? Is China that militarily impotent globally?
- proper gander on November 17, 2017 · at 6:18 am EST/EDT
  
  China’s weapon is better, fairer trade deals and more money than the US can offer. This diplomatic war against the US is better served by less military activity. It is a silent strangle hold, and arguably more effective than bombs.
  
  Pretty deadly alliance this Russia -China thing.
- Larchmonter445 on November 17, 2017 · at 10:17 am EST/EDT
  
  China has no policy or intention of projecting military or hegemonic power.
  It uses its wealth and infrastructure technologies as its calling card.
  
  It won’t fight on the ground or air or sea anywhere beyond its own territorial interests.
  
  Sadly, the Chinese won’t do what would be smart to do in the ME. Show up with some peace-keeping military power. Even its base in Djibouti will be tiny. It’s an outpost and will be dwarfed by the US’s Camp Lemonnier. It will serve as a filling station for PLA Navy ships on patrol for anti-piracy work in the region. They planted a flag and not much else.
  
  Chinese simply are not a martial nation. They absorb enemies. They don’t fight them.
  Now that Russia is out in the world again, China sees less reason than ever to stand with anyone in war or to confront the Hegemon where it rains chaos and death.
  
  The opportunity in Syria to fight Uyghurs was passed up. A very stupid decision. Those fighters will go to Xinjiang, Yunnan and Sichuan and kill Chinese. The PLA should have gotten into the fight. They didn’t.
  
  China is a massive power, but not a true military power anyone has to worry about unless they plan to attack China or try to separate from it (Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan).
  
  The Chinese will try this strategy until the new Indo-Pacific ring around her closes tight. Then its economy will be very limited, the Hegemon’s containment will have worked.
  The only saving factor will be Eurasian rail and North Arctic Route, both safeguarded by Russian military.
  
  China is playing coy about its latent power. But rope-dope led to Ali’s Parkinsons because he took a pounding thereafter, using that defense.
  
  In geopolitics, military is crucial. And China’s military is a huge weakness, not a strength. If you don’t throw a punch, you don’t have a punch, and your rival has nothing to respect or fear. But China’s enemies are building massive militaries in the Indo-Pacific in order to confront and contain China. A doubled oppositional force is forming against China. India-Japan-US-Australia are the Quad of the Indo-Pacific containment arc.
  
  China should have put a few planes and a few thousand special forces into Syria.
  There and Iraq, China has big oil interests, so too, in Iran. But China did not want to bleed. China did not want to take sides. She did not want to join the anti-hegemonist forces. We’ll see how this works out over the next five years.
  
  The Hegemon has nearly everything important going its way at the present. It wins when it loses, because chaos is all it needs to maintain fear and trepidation among its challengers.
  
  China is classic in the form of “strength is weakness”. The gigantic PLA is a National Guard, not a true Military of a SuperPower. Russia, one-tenth the size of China in economic and population size, is ten times the military of China. All the world fears the latent power of the RF. China’s three biggest foes, India, Japan and the US have little fear of the Chinese PLA. They each taunt Beijing, knowing the Chinese are passive.
  They have their red lines, but all are at its own borders.
  
  China is playing a very long game of Wealth. Expecting Beijing to change is unrealistic. It’s not in their nature. They are not a martial nation. The masses all want to be rich, not strong. The leaders are ideological political infighters, not boyars. Does anyone study Chinese military history like they study Russian military history? Warlords and serfs work only as long as the horses have oats and water. Even naval power is not fully projected or built to be projected. It’s all green water littoral strength, not much blue water. The last time China had global naval presence, Admiral Zheng He was the big maritime leader (1433–six centuries ago).
  - Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 11:33 am EST/EDT
    
    And now China has an overseas base. Where might their next base be? China has stated I believe, that they will protect their silk road projects, I could be wrong. So complexity could show up.
  - proper gander on November 17, 2017 · at 12:26 pm EST/EDT
    
    “In geopolitics, military is crucial.”
    
    No it is not. Military is crucial if you are playing European imperialism.
    
    Everything else you have written, analyzing China from this perspective, is therefore gob-shite.
    
    The Chinese do trade. Their military exists to defend against internal threats to continuation of governance. It’s current military is to defend the same against external threats.
    
    Traders don’t think in terms of war. It is bad business.
    - Red Ryder on November 17, 2017 · at 1:33 pm EST/EDT
      
      You might want to document contemporary geopolitics, say the last 50 years, in any region, with no military component.
      
      We’ll wait . . .
      - proper gander on November 17, 2017 · at 4:57 pm EST/EDT
        
        @ red Ryder
        
        Yes. Contemporary ‘geopolitics’ has been the one way traffic of imperial plunder, since the 16th century reformation/redistribution. It is not politics. It is piracy. It started with the outright theft of the peoples land (held in trust by the Church) in Europe for the benefit of the few, extended to enclosures of common land and then extended to other peoples lands. That is the trajectory and history of contemporary ‘geopolitics’.
        
        Over the last 50 years that plunder has been transitioned into plunder by usury, aka the dollar reserve system enforced at the point of a gun. It is the same old piracy.
        
        The Chinese do not do this, and never have.
        
        What the west is failing to come to terms with, and is being beaten by, is the effect the internet has had on the ability of the globe to communicate and trade impartially and peacefully. You can not overrun, lay siege to or plunder a country that is in 24hr full view of the planet and has an infinite number of digital tunnels through which it communicates, trades and supplies itself. Since 2012 we have seen the US attempt the exact playbook that easily broke the Soviets in the 80’s. It has entirely failed because of a failure to grasp this fact.
        
        This is a paradigm shift in genuine geopolitics into which China naturally fits. Stability by trading contract, not stability by storming and occupying everyone’s castle.
        
        Chinese tradition is dynastic in family and governance. Their faith and traditions esteem looking back to forefathers and re-enforcing the dynastic lineage and duty to it. Their military exists for an entirely different purpose to ours, that is, to ensure dynastic stability at the top tier of responsibility, and therefore national stability.
        
        This is the future. Not plunder, but contract. This is what I think Trump and co. want a big slice of: superiority by robust trade.
        
        In summary, if you go into a shop with a gun and no wallet, you are looking for a short term bonanza, no option for return, and a boom bust life style. You are a pirate. If you go into a shop with a wallet and build a relationship, you win out in the end. You are politic. A military has nothing to do with politics. It is the absence of politics.
        
        The sooner you American’s all get your head around this, and start trading – yes even your small outfits – internationally rather than fighting, the better. I buy stuff all over the Europe, China, all direct super rapid and cheap. I sell plenty into the US, but I tried 5 times this year to buy different products – upto $16k sales from the US from companies that really out to know better, and could I hell. Not interested, not able, didn’t even understand why I would ask.
        
        The future is not about fighting and plunder. It is about trade and the geopolitics of trade relations.
        
        J on November 18, 2017 · at 11:31 pm EST/EDT
        
        PG, Well put. Chinese army is to defend, protect and serve the country. Not to waging war.
        People from other culture do not comprehend it, that it why they are short lived.
  - Anonymous on November 18, 2017 · at 4:19 am EST/EDT
    
    And when lightning stuck the imperial palace, the emperor thought that the naval expeditions were angering the ‘mandate from heaven’. The emperor had all the Chinese naval vessels dismantled and prevented Zheng He from sailing and exploring new lands via sea route. The emperor turned china into a hermit kingdom due to which China would stagnated for centuries to come. Fast forward a few centuries ahead when the British and French navies allied to attack mainland china after the Chinese prohibited opium trade, the chinese response was to accept defeat and sign a treaty that asked china to pay for the wars that the european colonizers ganged up and waged against it, allow missionaries on its soil and give key chinese coastal cities to them. The Chinese being meek thought that the colonizers would stop at this, what followed were perpetual wars waged by the European powers against china. From the British, French, Portuguese, Germans, Russians to the Japanese, all descended upon china to plunder her and take her spoils. All this happened because the chinese wanted to deal diplomatically rather that militarily, with the enemies far away from their homeland and their policy hasn’t changed much. The Chinese just choose to selectively learn lessons from history.
S-400 on November 17, 2017 · at 4:06 am EST/EDT

Los Angeles gala raises $53.8 Million for Israeli soldiers:

https://israelpalestinenews.org/los-angeles-gala-raises-53-8-million-israeli-soldiers-videos/

US Treasury blocks relief fundraising to Iran quake victims:

http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2017/11/16/542378/Iran-earthquake-US-Treasury-blocks-donations

The 2 headlines above speak volumes for those intelligent enough to discern and understand what is happening in the US, and who controls what.

The US and its interests are totally and completely subordinated to the interests of Israel.
Americans now need to wake up and accept their vassel status and the humiliation that inevitably comes with it.

If and when they do, it will make headlines like the one below, much easier to accept:

Texas city refuses to give people hurricane aid unless they pledge not to boycott Israel

https://www.google.com.jm/amp/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/texas-hurricane-aid-dickinson-israel-boycott-pledge-harvey-financial-help-free-speech-a8011141.html%3famp

By the way, would it surprise you to know that everyone in the US MSM refused to look at the Texas story?

US citizens who were victims of a natural disaster are told that they will only get assistance if they pledge loyalty to a foreign country, and no US politician dare utter a word about it.

Yet these same politicians in the US Congress rant and rave about Russia on a daily basis.

They’re all just a pathetic bunch of cowards!
- wdg on November 17, 2017 · at 12:10 pm EST/EDT
  
  I prefer to take a very broad view. The Satanic State of Israel (which BTW has nothing to do with the Israel of the Old Testament) and its vassel states of the US, Canada and western Europe are on thge path to destruction. Just call it a war between unspeakable evil and goodness.
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:35 pm EST/EDT
  
  CA voted overwhelmingly for Clinton. And she still lost. Its unwise to assume that the Harvey Weinsteins of Hollywood represent the American people. And if $50 million plus was raised in CA, then its a sure guess that it was not the migrant fruit pickers giving the money.
Blue Dotterel on November 17, 2017 · at 4:10 am EST/EDT

I guess the question is, would Israel use its nuclear weapons in such a conflict, especially, if losing, and what would be the consequences
- proper gander on November 17, 2017 · at 6:13 am EST/EDT
  
  @ Blue
  
  Also. Will Israel risk the possibility of having their missiles shot down over Israel?
  
  The ‘Russian meddling’ theme is not without foundation. Not that it relates to the election, but the US and Israel have clearly been on the receiving end of many examples of Russian intelligence of such penetration, plus a few cyber battle tech tools that I think everyone in the ‘West’ is terrified of what the Russian hackers can do. They have led the world for over a decade now. We have read about many events, such as the latest leak of the bomb proof encrypted diplomatic wire from Israel to its ambassadors to escalate the Saudi spat with Lebanon; recording V. Nuland from the state dptment to Ukraine; The bombing out of Israeli intelligence bases in Syria; The shutting down of ships and grounding of planes in Canada. And on and on, plus a lot of stuff going under the table that ‘the west’ dare not mention.
  
  The greatest dread of a nuclear power is missiles returning to point of origin. This all means that, in the end, boots matter. Israel doesn’t have many, and the Saudi’s can’t point a gun at a wall and hit it.
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 8:24 am EST/EDT
  
  yes out of the BLACK into the BLUE….NUCLEAR…make no mistake here ,team chaos game doing very well, never mind who is in the driver seat now, it is still THE team in play. Nutanyahoo better start a war or he will be in the slammer pity the guy.Many here are missing the ultimate prize thats up for crap..THE SAUDI OIL FIELDS…The only two thing standing between them and control of the fields is MBS another silly fool played to the hilt and the mad mullahs of persia.
  
  The game is simple get nato ,gcc and the neocon who are still holding half of U.S behind the plan to get control of the BLACK GOLDEN FIELDS.Start a war ..MBS is taken out after he loses to the mad mullahs strike the ‘WINNING’ mullahs with nukes ,behind the cry..””MULLAHS ARE GOING TO GRAP THE FILEDS”’and the whole world agrees.
  
  But ultimately, it won’t be that way cause many state actors are very very bored with this game..Evil putin and the red emperor will not stand for this so, it won’t end as planned ; also half the U.S won’t play along too…so game over..SADLY for team chaos..finally WAR IS DECLARED ..and no one shows up.Its too late for team chaos to start ww111 it ends in Damascus.
  
  Moderation policy – no caps please. Mod
Uncle Bob 1 on November 17, 2017 · at 4:43 am EST/EDT

I think the proxy they will use first is France. I think the French visit to Saudi Arabia,Hariri going to France,and France threatening sanctions on Iran.Shows pretty clearly that they are up to no good.When we put that together with what Saker has written here.Then the smoke-screen gets a little clearer.France will lead a campaign against Iran.Getting the EU to support them.They’ll say (as Macron already has) that Iran’s “meddling” in the Levant is a danger.That Iran’s missile program is a threat to the region and must be stopped,etc,etc.That way the US can “lead from behind”.And appear to only be supporting its “European allies” in confronting Iran.One of the US’s favorite ploys is to let someone else go first.And then they pretend to be “forced” to go to war to help them.We saw that in WWI,WWII,the Korean War,Vietnam,the first Gulf War.Even the Afghan and Iraq War and the Libya bombing,is framed similarly inside the US.I don’t see them changing actions that have worked so well for them over decades.While under Macron,France wants to complete their old plans against Assad and get more influence in the Middle East.Probably hoping for some Saudi money (and sucking up to Israel) as well.
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 6:51 am EST/EDT
  
  French Banker Boy Wonder is out and about without his ‘mom’ in the ME but I doubt of any import unless Bernard-Henri Levy is involved. A yapping French poodle in a wolf pack fight.
  
  All the while, the UK is offering the KSA a few billion pounds ‘gift’ for the 2018 super IPO in London and Trump is offering the KSA prince-ling empire wet dreams for the IPO in NY. Turkey is making an ex-ante play for Qatar and a “Yankee go home!” in support for an emergent independent Iraq etc. The bankrupt EU needs business with Iran — not war. And although the “Assad Must Go” chant has dropped to a whisper there is still the mandatory “Assad has no future in government’ etc — as if the Western losers can’t accept that their invasion program has failed and the Syrian people, and resurrected battle hardened military, will make their own democratic decisions on their futures.
  
  The French lost their credibility with the destructive war on Libya and they have failed to influence Syrian or Lebanese outcomes — and Iran is a far larger and more complex challenge. Unless they have another Ayatollah Khomeini in the wings the french are largely irrelevant: can they even keep ship building contracts with Russia? Nyet, and now Egypt has both ships and Russian assets.
  - Ann on November 18, 2017 · at 1:05 am EST/EDT
    
    you sound like Pepe Escobar.
  - traducteur on November 18, 2017 · at 8:51 am EST/EDT
    
    There was an article by BHL in yesterday’s Globe and Mail. Beware!
Beijing Expat on November 17, 2017 · at 4:50 am EST/EDT

There is also a new wild card; United Iraq.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/48204.htm

The Iraqi people, instead of being Balkanised, are more united than ever, in spite of sect and tribe, and guess who they blame for ISIS killing so many of their countrymen.

So in addition to failing in Syria, they have coalesced the long suffering Iraqi people, and they have learned how to fight and are not our vassals.

Interesting times.
- Red Ryder on November 17, 2017 · at 10:34 am EST/EDT
  
  Excellent observation. Concur.
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 10:19 pm EST/EDT
  
  and the hundreds, if not thousands, of not only shia but also sunni muslims from irani neighborhood like Pakistan, central asia and caucuses pouring in into Iran to take the battle to their enemies’ homes. And the possibility of a muslim uprising and civil war inside Turkey and Saudi Arabia by people opposing the war.
_smr on November 17, 2017 · at 5:05 am EST/EDT

Can’t agree. No war on Lebanon. No war on Iran. Not now.
- proper gander on November 17, 2017 · at 6:21 am EST/EDT
  
  Yeah. Me too. It’s soooo last-president.
  
  These assessments are based on the residual fear of an historic, unopposed neo-con ideology. Well, its failing everywhere, and they know it. Want to act, but reality dictates they can’t.
  - Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 11:20 am EST/EDT
    
    Sanctions isn’t acting? And other international impositions aimed at debilitation? Of course their acting, using every institutional resource available. They never stop. Multi-pronged.
    - Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:59 pm EST/EDT
      
      At this point, sanctions are a purely US measure. Combined with threats against non-US companies to use the banking system against them to get compliance. But, Europe seems rather sick of this. The threats to use sanctions to block North Stream 2 did not go over very well at all with Germany. And the EU has been very clear that they do not regard the Iran nuclear deal as dead, and they seem far more interested in doing business with Iran these days.
      
      There seems to be a point approaching quickly when the Europeans quit shooting themselves in the foot based on orders from DC. The recent moves towards a EU Army, which the US has always opposed as a competitor to NATO that would be out of their control seems to be another dot to connect.
    - proper gander on November 17, 2017 · at 2:01 pm EST/EDT
      
      Yes, acting, but it is residual activity. Old plays being stretched out. Not new initiatives.
      
      The US is shifting from globalist to nationalist war. Not ‘no war’. Just different motivations. Lebanon is a globalist target. It is of no interest to Trump, who is a nationalist. It seems quite clear that even Israel bleating about Hezbollah, and saying it will act alone hasn’t elicited a response from him, at all.
Hans on November 17, 2017 · at 6:11 am EST/EDT

Need to add China to this discussion, will they just stand by idly as the US threatens the critical oil lanes out of the Gulf that supply most of China’s oil ? Russia would temporarily gain from an oil spike but China would be crushed which is why China would need to intervene in a major way
Pass the popcorn... on November 17, 2017 · at 6:14 am EST/EDT

1. Saker: “The recent failure of the ZioWahabis to bring even tiny Qatar to heel is indicative …” — well, actually it is Qatar plus big brother Turkey.

2. Dannyo: the problem with these plausible war scenarios is they play out ok on the game console but generally fail to take into account the more complex geopolitical impacts and risks — e.g., oil supplies to China; global financial system chaos; and domestic uprisings etc. Indeed, although a WW3 ‘reset’ may well seem positive to certain players (up to their noses in unsustainable fiat debt) the larger impacts on local economies by Chinese response (displeasure) may help ensure sensible rational outcomes.

3. Egypt: a glaring omission in many discourses. Agreed, Egyptian elites are currently captured by Saudi and US bribes. And some write that all is quiet on the borderlands with Israel. However, it would be foolish to discount the huge impact on the regional dynamics if/when the Zionist/KSA missions begin to crumble. There is an ancient dormant strategic civilizational/empire triangle between Turkey-Iran-Egypt which could come into active play under the right geopolitical factors. Look for Russia facilitating emergence between Turkey and Egypt (e.g., arms sales etc) and it is not hard to see a new ME region in which the Shia oil and gas assets of the ‘former’ KSA are shared on an operational basis. Qatar is just the pointed end: and Turkey has just issued a challenge to the US (http://theduran.com/breaking-turkeys-president-erdogan-accuses-us-financially-supporting-isis-syria/).

Once the Zionist myth is exposed and broken then natural forces and right-of-return will likely flip the Palestine zone back to 80% Arab and 20% apartheid Jew limited to a ‘Gaza’ strip along the Mediterranean — aka 1967.

The strategic pressure point is still the Golan Heights — once Syria (& friends) reclaim their lands (at least) then the Zionist bully will be screaming all the way to a suddenly resurrected ‘relevant’ UN. Too late, it’s gone: “Sheriff Putin in the Golan with the S-400” is still the likely scenario, imo. And any number of ‘win-win’ pipelines can crisscross the Syrian plains as long as Russia operates them. It’s called ‘protection’ … and war is a racket.

4. Iran: will play the ‘rope-the-dope’ unless it gets very personal — after all now that the regional gangrene has begun in KSA/Zioland there is no need to do anything except stay as far away from it as possible. The Europeans (now looking to establish a non-Nato defense system) are basically looking for business and trade while Afghanistan, although a risk hosting US air forces, is hardly an invasion scenario. Iran will play the long game and look to future SCO strategies (and hence China/Russia) for support.
Biloxi on November 17, 2017 · at 6:47 am EST/EDT

Collective consciousness unfortunately is the programming via “media” (mass). The mass media takes the consciousnesses from almost all the people who view IT, almost all the time. Hundredth Monkey Theory? Even so called “intelligent” Americans watch almost 24/7 mass media. They are not interested in the “internets”. Therefore what we have in this time is “What It Is” (Buddha’s statement supposedly – the words work).

A plan in the event the world earth is nuked. What is that/this plan. Imagination must be allowed to be a whole spectrum in “these most interesting times”. Vanga was a Russian Seer. There are many Seers who saw this coming time. Open-minded is vital, and so so being prepared. Sad world, my youngest son (37) is expecting his first child to come to earth, in December 2017. I keep my unconscious, subconscious, conscious, superconscious in the balance of wholeness because this is my choice.
- G on November 17, 2017 · at 7:41 am EST/EDT
  
  Vanga was Bulgarian. Check your facts.
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:42 pm EST/EDT
  
  In the last US election, there was a clear split between those who listened to the ‘mass media’ and followed their instruction to vote for Hillary. But polls also showed that the one thing that Trump’s supporters had almost universally in common was that they did not believe and did not listen to the ‘mass media’.
  
  Trump won.
  
  What happens when the ‘mass media’ tries to tell Americans what to do, but no one is listening?
Biloxi on November 17, 2017 · at 6:49 am EST/EDT

posted you on artdailyprayer.wordpress.com Love your commitment to living truth.
Kalchain on November 17, 2017 · at 6:53 am EST/EDT

I was wondering why it wouldn’t be possible for Russia and China to come together before the world and issue a joint statement. Something like, Iran is our alli we will absolutely not allow it to be attacked. Does Russia and China together not have the capability to assist Iran? How is it possible that they would allow the complete destruction of Iran like in Syria, and maybe then come in very late to assist or rebuild? Why wait until millions have died and all the infrastructure destroyed to step in. I understand that Russia and China place a much higher value on the lives of their military men and women than the west but wouldn’t a joint statement to the USA, Israel and the KSA back them down? Isn’t the destruction of all Syria, Iraq, Libya Afghanistan, Palestine, Yemen enough? At what point would Russia and China together say no more? Oh I should add Ukraine. I will continue my day now, like it started, shaking my head and wondering.
- Yk on November 17, 2017 · at 9:00 am EST/EDT
  
  It is called national interest, unless there national interest is directly threatened by such war I don’t think they’ll do anything other than issue statements or in some cases provide political cover for Iran at the UNSC and that’s if Iran can successfully justify her innocence with the real international community. Russia will never hesitate just like in Syria to back Iran if such war put her core interest at risk, while China will suffice with supplying of weapons and political cover probably due to geographical distance or her policy of passive support.
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:46 pm EST/EDT
  
  Watch North Korea, because what you describe sounds exactly like what has been happening with that crisis. China and Russia issued a joint statement of a peace plan, or at least a ‘de-escalation’ plan. China also clearly stated that if North Korea was attacked that they would support North Korea. I don’t think I remember Russia joining them on that. But, with China and Russia they seem to pick their spots for when one leads and the other sits back. And, in today’s world, one would have to assume that a war with either is likely to be a war with both.
  
  So far, no attack. Trump blusters and rants, and tells lies about the Chinese position….. but no attack.
- Mataman on November 17, 2017 · at 1:08 pm EST/EDT
  
  They have made joint statements—like hey, we have brokered a deal in North Korea, all you Americans need to do is just stop military drills. Ignored. Then you have Trump putting words in China’s mouth about the above deal (which was never mentioned in the MSM). Oh, China agrees that the double-freeze won’t work. Accept they never did. Russia can present evidence that the US actively supports ISIS. The US can present “evidence” of chemical attacks that put “victims” in the hospital before the “attack” occurred. So what point is there in any Russian-Chinese joint statement? The only thing the American people will get is shrieking Haley’s response. And, as it is, the US is trying to shut down authentic news sources for the 5% of the population that might be awake. So pretty soon such joint statements would never make it through the Internet Iron Curtain of America. Wasted breath—it’s better to prepare and act than to try to wake up the sleeping subjects of the empire.
- Arioch on November 17, 2017 · at 3:59 pm EST/EDT
  
  All the redlines are essentially remote control units, like the one with your TV
  
  You just suggested Russia and China should give control of their foreign policy to USA and Israel.
  
  They hardly will do.
- JJ on November 18, 2017 · at 6:50 am EST/EDT
  
  It is time China and Russia totallly exposed UN as a useless sham….not defending Syrian rights….time to take initiative away from DT revision plans whatever happened to them……
B.F. on November 17, 2017 · at 7:35 am EST/EDT

An excellent article as always from The Saker. I would just like to add the following: Some analysts have speculated that Saudi Arabia might attack Iran on it’s own, which is absurd, as not only is the Saudi military incapable of winning the war in Yemen, it possesses the mentality of the Roman Praetorian Guard, existing solely for the protection of the Saudi royal house. You cannot expect much from such a military. However, a combined attack against Iran by Saudi Arabia, Israel and the US is possible, not so much because of Iranian influence in the Middle East, but because Iran is destined to join the Eurasian Economic Union, whose backbone would be Russia, China and Iran. That is the greatest motive for an attack against Iran, as Wall Street wants to prevent this at any price. The Eurasian Economic Union would transform itself into the most powerful economic block in the world, and one which would inevitably be joined by Europe, a disaster for Wall Street. Should the US launch a war against Iran, the repercussions in the world would be tremendous. Europe would be against it, as it has economic ties with Iran. Worse, such an attack could well lead to the breakup of the EU and NATO, as both are incredibly unpopular in Europe. As I have written before, the impression in Europe is that the Washington political establishment has lost all sense of reality, incapable of grasping what the rest of the world is thinking. This fact is very dangerous for the US, which needs to understand that the international community is sick of Americas wars, all fought under false pretenses. Any more of this, and the US will in the end find itself all alone on the international scene. Many in Europe now have more confidence in Moscow and President Putin than they have in Washington D.C.
Harry on November 17, 2017 · at 8:09 am EST/EDT

I would suggest that a strategy exists to completely such a plan from being used, and certainly Russias’ strategic planners will note it. But the decision to use such a counter strategy will, if it comes to that be supremely difficult.

Let us all pray for some sanity to manifest.
Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 8:46 am EST/EDT

“Finally, the Russians could do for Iran what they have done for Syria and integrate all the Iranian and Russian air defense capabilities into a single network thereby immensely improving the capabilities of the currently rather modest, but rapidly improving, Iranian air defense capabilities.”

Russia, don’t wait, don’t hesitate, do this now. Why have they not already completed this protective action?
- Larchmonter445 on November 17, 2017 · at 10:42 am EST/EDT
  
  Iran is very proud and didn’t even want to move up the chain to S400s. They want to build their own system. I think they ought to have gone for the best as fast as possible.
  
  The Iranian government has made other strategic errors over its four decades. Let’s hope this is not another one. They don’t need war of any kind. And a tight missile defense is imperative.
  
  Even Turkey understands this, as did the old King of SA. He went to Moscow to get one.
  And of course, the US has decided to remove the king because of it.
  - Yk on November 17, 2017 · at 1:48 pm EST/EDT
    
    @larchmonter445
    It is called lack of trust because back then Russia was using the Iran card for strategic bargain with the west, and it will be so dumb of the iranian authority to trust Russia again with the period it will require to build the S400, how can Iran trust Russia not to used her in the bargain with the western world again? So Iran did the smartest thing take what you have and forget what you don’t. Maybe later when Russia has justify the trust again she can be relied upon. And with the S300 Iran can do some re engineering and master the technology and even developed a better system of her own. Talk of kill two birds with one stone.
    - Larchmonter445 on November 17, 2017 · at 4:01 pm EST/EDT
      
      A Missile Defense System like S-300 has not been built anywhere by anyone. Much less the S-400.
      
      These aren’t yo-yos or passenger cars. They involved tremendous subsystems of technologies that have to be masked from attack, survive and still perform. Iran could take two decades to emulate an S-300 and get halfway to an S-400.
      
      Meanwhile, Russia has an S-500 coming on line next year. It’s in testing now.
      
      If Russia test for two years or more these systems, imagine the development phase.
      Don’t forget, the export versions don’t have all the bells and whistles of the Russian-based units.
      
      China has never pirated the EW end of Russian systems. I doubt Iran can do it any decade soon.
      
      Can they develop a Pantsir-style defense? Probably. But the S-series hasn’t been cracked by Israel or US. What leads you to believe Iran can?
      
      Flip the switch on the S-300 or S-400 and the skies clear at Mach 2.5, be the invader be US or IDF. They know they are dead men flying if they stay for one second of thought.
      
      Iran needs Russia. It should accept that with a strong heart instead of some pride. Over time, a few more decades, Iran will be a powerful military and economic reality. Playing with fate is not too smart.
      
      Integrated defenses is the future for Eurasian nations along the Rimlands.
      
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rimland
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:55 pm EST/EDT
  
  The question is how quickly could the Russian’s “gift” a few S-400 systems to Iran? And if I was a military analyst, I’d be curious if any such systems were unaccounted for and thus possibly loaded for quick shipment to Iran?
  
  We saw the US transport its THAAD system to South Korea. Seems like I heard different reports on how long it took. Some early reports said it was operational within a week or so when set up on that golf course. But others seemed to follow later that it was completely operational a few weeks later.
  
  From the Saker’s writings on the respective militaries, I’d have to guess that Russia could get an S-400 to Iran and set up and operational quicker than the Americans did in Korea.
  
  If the attack on Iran is sudden, then no, you could not move such a system there immediately. But if there is the usual couple of weeks of Trump bluster prior to the attack, then my guess is that Russia could complete such a move.
Alaric on November 17, 2017 · at 8:48 am EST/EDT

Interesting analysis but neither Saudi, the US nor Israel are going to attack Iran. Not happening.

That action is too risky as it would cost many Israeli Jews and Saudi Royals their lives and possibly their rule. It would send oil to $300 a barrel and destroy the western economies.

What you are seeing is an attempt to destabilize Lebanon from within. The hope here was to start a civil war in Lebanon. It failed.

Israelis and Saudis will never risk themselves. They want someone else to do the dirty work and they’ll continue to try that. Their next gambit might be to use the Syrian Kurds to attack the SAA in hopes of getting the US involved.
- traducteur on November 18, 2017 · at 1:09 pm EST/EDT
  
  That action is too risky as it would cost many Israeli Jews their lives
  
  As noted by The Saker: “As far as the Israelis are concerned, they don’t give a damn about how many non-Jews will die (Judaic ethics teach that all non-Jews are most likely deserving to die anyway) as long as their Master Race benefits from it.”
  
  Sure, it’s much more advantageous for them to use the grunting subhuman goyim to do their fighting for them.
Dfv on November 17, 2017 · at 9:16 am EST/EDT

What about an aerial war with the Saudis ?

Iranian Air Force is obsolete and outdated because of the embargo. It is even worse than the Syrian air force. It has American aircraft from the Shah era of the 1960-1970.
Iran had developed various ballistic missiles but they will lose air superiority.
- B.F. on November 17, 2017 · at 10:28 am EST/EDT
  
  Iran has sophisticated ground to air missiles, both Russian and domestically designed. Saudi Arabia would be foolish to attack Iran, as the air battles would be fought over Iranian territory. You wont find one Saudi pilot who would be willing to fight over Iran and get either killed or captured. Don’t forget Iran would be on the defensive. If a Saudi plane got shot down, Saudi Arabia would lose both the plane and the pilot. You cannot train a new pilot overnight.
  - Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:49 pm EST/EDT
    
    With the Saudis, the last question becomes ‘can you buy a new pilot overnight?’
    - Anonymous on November 19, 2017 · at 9:29 pm EST/EDT
      
      The Saudis are using NATO (US and Brit) pilots flying and bombing in Yemen now, in Saudi-owned and marked planes.
Dr. George W. Oprisko on November 17, 2017 · at 9:59 am EST/EDT

The alternative………. support the Houthis in Yemen…….. with AShMs AAA AAMs…….

To………. sink the Saudi Navy……… destroy Saudi airbases…….. civilian airports………… export terminals……….

To destroy those 60 F-22s stationed on the peninsula……….. perhaps…….. the US Navy flotilla at anchor in Bahrain…..

INDY
vot tak on November 17, 2017 · at 10:11 am EST/EDT

Very good analysis by Saker in my opinion. I agree the zionazis intend to attack Lebanon and Iran, but in a direct assault, like they did Iraq. They will use their terrorist proxy strategy instead. The sort of war they used against Syria. A zionazi kurdistan is important to this strategy because it would provide the zionazis a corridor to move their terror proxies and logistics from Lebanon (whom they will try to destroy first) to Iran.

This article from Sputnik is interesting in the context of Saker’s analysis here. One can see the zionazis quietly developing their strategy (the usual full spectrum dominance, where only the most overt aspects are mentioned by the zionazi propaganda machine).

Lebanon FM Reveals Attempt to Intimidate Country Into Canceling Russian Gas Deal

https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201711171059189191-lebanon-gas-russia/

“We are about to sign our first contract on gas field exploration on the shelf with the participation of Russian companies. We are now seeing an attempt to make Lebanon leave this positive path,” Geral Bassil said.

“A campaign to scare Lebanon, to create obstacles in its path with the use of terrorist forces under different pretexts is underway,” the minister said, adding that “the campaign against Lebanon is being carried out by the same forces that support terrorists in Syria.”

According the top diplomat, “some parties” to the conflict are trying to displace the head of the country from his office.

“We hope that Russia will continue building up its influence in the Middle East in order to form a balance of powers in the region,” Bassil added.

For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said “we are interested in Lebanon being safe and with the effective participation of all branches of power. And the most important thing, we support the resolution of all urgent issues by the Lebanese themselves without any external interference.”

More later.
- vot tak on November 17, 2017 · at 11:14 am EST/EDT
  
  “but in a direct assault”
  
  but not in a direct assault
Arthur G Brina on November 17, 2017 · at 11:19 am EST/EDT

I certainly hope that Hezbollah and IRGC are keeping their target lists up to date, and the long range components of their respective militaries alert and ready for action, should the Saudis and Israelis initiate armed conflict against them. If their arsenals of missiles are worth anything like they proclaim them to be, Riyadh and Tel Aviv will suffer as much as Beirut and more than Tehran. But they better not be bluffing.

Should armed conflict begin, both Hezbollah and IRGC must escalate rapidly to all-out war. Otherwise, it will be left to the Israelis to control the tempo. The inventories and military bases of the Shiite axis would be destroyed before they can be deployed. If it comes to a war of annihilation/attrition, I am doubtful that Hezbollah can fight and win a long war against Israel; but I am confident that Iran can succeed versus Saudi Arabia. So, short and terrible would be preferable to prolonged and agonizing.

Should Hezbollah and IRGC exhaust their military forces before they have achieved victory -or worse, should they find themselves overwhelmed by the Israeli/Saudi (+American?) alliance, they can count on Russia+China to force a ceasefire through the UN Security Council.

Whenever the day of reckoning comes, they should embrace it.
Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 11:43 am EST/EDT

Keep in mind one thing….. when you say that Israel ‘controls the United States’, that ‘control’ relies on one belief. That for a Congressperson or President to win an election, they need support of the Israeli lobby. And that if the Israeli lobby instead supports an opponent in an election, then that spells defeat for a politician. However, that belief can be broken or shaken, and like all beliefs, that can happen relatively quickly.

For example, the ‘Bannon movement’ hasn’t been particularly close to Israel. You could see this early in Trump’s campaign. Later, after the convention, Trump made a deal with Sheldon Adelson and got the money needed to defeat the Hillary-Goldman Sachs camp, and that’s when Trump swore fealty to Isreal and made concessions like giving the ambassador to Israel post to the guy who I assume that Adelson wanted. The point being, the next elections are shaping up as a contest in multiple races between the Bannon Republicans and the hardline, old school Bush Republicans. Lets just imagine that the Bannon movement wins that fight, and all the land’s politicians get some vibrant examples of Bush Republicans supported by Israel going down in defeat.

Remember, Israel’s control over the US rests entirely on the belief of American politicians that supporting Israel is key to their election/re-election. If that gets shaken, and if larger numbers of Americans start questioning America’s Israel First policy, that belief can vanish over night. Nothing moves faster than a politician when the politician sees the world changing. If they were not instantly adaptable to new alignments of power, its not likely they’d have risen as high as running for Congress. The politicians who don’t learn that trick rarely rise above the county commission level. Oh, I’m sure there’s a few idiots who are so locked into their current power support structures that they can’t change. But they can be defeated next, and then that only speeds the transition as more and more politicians learn that connections to serial human rights abuses that lead to constant wars and numbers of Americans coming home in bodybags because of Israel and Saudi wars can change things in a real hurry.

And remember, America always fights its wars with an almost insane adversion to casualties. There is of course a reason for this. I’d imagine that the Pentagon and the NSA listening on every America know that the support for these wars is shallow and only good for as long as the wars seem successful. And also remember, the Bannon movement got a lot of traction with Trump against a Bush scion by openly stating that all of these regime change wars were mistakes that were hurting the country. The support of Americans for more of these wars is thin, shallow and apparently very fragile. Also remember that in America today, a majority of voters now regard the NYT and CNN as fake news and thus the pro-war propaganda is much less powerful than it was before.

The story was that the Vietnam War ended when the Pentagon Generals decided they needed the army at home to defend themselves against a growing revolution on the streets. I’d suspect there are a few of the smarter ones in the Pentagon now having some worries about who’s going to guard the homefront when the troops are off fighting a two-front war in North Korea and the Middle East.
Carmel by the Sea on November 17, 2017 · at 12:05 pm EST/EDT

The Abomination ( isReal) does not like to lose.

God grant us that other men with Admiral Fallon’s mentality are in charge and in unison say :
” Not on our watch”!
- Ann on November 18, 2017 · at 1:09 am EST/EDT
  
  the more I learn about Israel – the less of a reality I consider them to be. Its only the absurdity of the times we live in that allow an entity such as that to even exist – its a non-reality – and the killing that they do, and the suffering they cause – is the only reality that they are. Be it on their heads….and that pig Trump.
Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 12:37 pm EST/EDT

There is one fundamental point missing from the shopping list of perceived outcomes. Israel has a plan to supply the EU with energy from 2025. This plan involved creating an energy conduit from Israel to Cyprus, then Crete, Italy and mainland EU. The direct route of the israel-Cyprus link runs through Lebanese territorial waters, though the issue is complicated by a territorial dispute.

Now the Lebanese and Russians are currently negotiating for energy exploration in this and adjacent Lebanese territory. If there are RUssian assets in the way, it will greatly complicate Israel’s ambitions to replace Russia as a major energy supplier to the EU (a side effect of which would be the use of energy supply to suppress EU condemnation of Israel’s actions in the Occupied Territories).

So while Israel would be happy for enemies (Lebanon/Hezbollah – Iran – Saudi) to destroy each other (Israel has no allies, only corrupt leaders in vassal states) with the possibility of a servile Lebanon as one outcome, the energy issue does not depend on the outcome. If Lebanon is made servile, Israel getss the territory for its route. If Lebanon is reduced to a destabilized state, it can take the area by force. The presense of Russian assets totally blocks that either way, so Israel is keento get the action started before these assets are in place.
- Melotte 22 on November 17, 2017 · at 8:02 pm EST/EDT
  
  Can you please elaborate in what capacity can Israel possibly replace Russia as a major energy supplier to EU?
  - Cyril on November 18, 2017 · at 7:26 pm EST/EDT
    
    The Leviathan field, that Israel is so excited about, has 453 km^3 of natural gas. Europe’s annual gas consumption is 560 km^3.
    
    In other words, Leviathan would last Europe less than a year.
hamburglar on November 17, 2017 · at 1:11 pm EST/EDT

sorry for this dumb question.

historically why didn’t Israel aligned w/the Shia? As the standard colonial/imperial divide and conquer tactic is that you support the minority power.

The Iranian Ayatollah was no less anti-Israel than the founder of the House of Saud.

Is it just that Sunnis/the Saudis are more Machiavellian?

thanks to anyone who spends the time replying.
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 10:44 pm EST/EDT
  
  I will try to answer with my limited knowledge.
  1) After the WW II, the west installed puppet leaders all over the middle east. They couldn’t do that in Iran (though they did succeed for a brief period of time like the reinstallation of the shah, but they failed when the shah was deposed).
  2) Iran’s support for the Palestine movement is massive, the Arab support has gradually decreased. It’s natural then to take Iran as their supreme enemy.
  3) There is no sunni militia like the shia militia, Hezebollah. If at any point they did exist, all were corrupted by Saudi takfiris with massive fundings (like the afghan resistance which mutated into the taliban due to saudi funding).
  4) Leaders in the sunni world who opposed the west like King Faisal did exists but were quickly neutralized by the empire. The saudis influence the sunni muslim world with their oil wealth and remember, the saudis are pawns of the empire.
- alfredmelbourne on November 18, 2017 · at 2:36 am EST/EDT
  
  “sorry for this dumb question.” – dumb people don’t ask questions. :)
  
  I think you have skipped the history.
  
  The first ally of the Jews of Europe who wanted to invade British-occupied Palestine was Joseph Stalin. He allowed the Jews of Eastern Europe to move to Palestine and to break the British naval blockade.
  
  Later, the British and French were allies of Israel. The British wanted to regain control of the Suez Canal and the French wanted to regain control of Lebanon and Syria which had been French colonies. The American president Eisenhower forced all three to move back after they invaded Egypt in 1956.
  
  The French continued being the main arms supplier to Israel in the lead up to the 1967 war. The US started supplying weapons only later on.
  
  Israel was quite unambitious until it was able to control US media and its political machinery. That control is currently being undermined by the internet – hence they label sites like this one as “Fake News”
  
  This whole Sunni-Shia divide is largely nonsense. It is an attempt to divide up the peoples of the Middle East. The Syrian army is mostly Sunni, for example. Iran has lots of different peoples and religions.
  
  In a memo written for President Franklin Roosevelt, Lt. Col. Harold B. Hoskins, the president’s Middle East envoy, reported that Ibn Saud accepted the Zionist plan for a Jewish state in return for a £20,000,000 bribe paid to Ibn Saud by Weizmann. The Jews bought the founder of Saudi Arabia. They have always been allies.
- Latinoamericano on November 18, 2017 · at 3:40 am EST/EDT
  
  I think that I can answer:
  The Khazarians don’t choose just one option. They try every possible way to attain they goal, which is absolute power. In the case of Arabs, they simultaneously do the following:
  1. Divide et Impera (Divide and Rule): So they sow division and conflict by creating sects within the already established religions (if the sect succeeds, they call it: schism, or “national church” or true religion or whatever suits best). So for Islam, they support their own version of the Sunni faction of Islam (“Wahabism”), of course more extremist and tyrannical than the original Sunni proposals could ever implement. Modern Shia Islam is much more tolerant, while Sunni Islam has been very suitable to extremist proposals because the way that Sunni Islam got propagated is terrorist by itself: Convert to Sunni Islam or be annihilated! And the Sharia law (instead of self-governance based on natural law) is a fertile ground for tyrannical rulers. So all the Khazarians have to do is infiltrate their crypto-pseudojews within the ranks of the Sunni and also Shia clergymen (Same kind of infiltration within Christianity, e.g.: Jesuits).
  2. Wahabism only works for their made-up country of “Saudi Arabia” (ruled by cryptos), so the Khazarians need a way to subvert the elites in the Arab societies. That’s where the Freemasonry kicks in. So the zioMI6 concocted their own version of Islamic Freemasonry, and called it: “Muslim Brotherhood”. All Freemasonic sects are in reality, political mafias, infiltrated by the Satanism of Khazarians, and supported with the wealth of their past and present loots.
  3. Promotion of their own cryptos to the control of economic and political systems of a nation. This list is huge, but you can easily compile a list revealing that almost all presidents and most of the political and economical cadres are Freemasons or Cryptos, or both (And many of them are also transexuals or Satanists or pedophiles).
Fd-Tunis on November 17, 2017 · at 2:32 pm EST/EDT

The Saker: “the nutcase regimes in power in Israel and Saudi Arabia are cornered and desperate”, …”these two medieval, backward and generally evil regimes are so willing to work together”.

One can better understand the zio-wahabite desperation when related to their struggle to maintain their very existence.

The Al-Saoud total and compulsive hate to the Iran has nothing to do with sectarian doctrines within Islam but only because its régime represents a direct threat to the very perpetuation of the “dynastic state” in this hyper wealthy region. Iran is the ultimate example of a working Islamic democratic concept of State, which respect to a large extent its citizens’ will, including ethnic and religious minorities, with effective effort to advance social, economic, educational and cultural welfare. Total opposite of what KSA is, where a family/dynasty kidnapped territories and subjugated the inhabitants as Saudis. The Dynasty and its profiteers are simply terrified they could loose it all the terrible day when the populace will threw all of them out and organize the recuperation of the national fortune.

For its parts, Israel’s existence is now for the first time, directly and openly threaten by a fervent country, which has necessary resources, allies, means and preparedness to bring it to its knees. The easiest way to convey the Zionist regime towards a vanishing road is to demonstrate to a significant majority of jewish Palestine’ inhabitant that their army is not in capacity to respond to this existential threat coming from Iran and it’s local allies and then to quit the soonest possible.

Wahabi-Saudi and Zionist régimes are both directly threaten by the same moral Iran. Although the Israelis have a deep and irreversible contempt for the Arabs-Saudis, they are using them, their money, their influence power and their unlimited capacity to corrupt people, to their mutual but temporary benefit. It is disgusting for them but they are ready to join hands with the Saudis to delay the fatal event and, why not, to extract few billions USD in passing.
- nikov on November 17, 2017 · at 3:51 pm EST/EDT
  
  president strumpet will do what he’s told. People just can’t understand, or Don’t Want To Understand, the power of their money. It’s getting to the time of year when the ziononazi whore mongers get so much of their money (Christmas shopping) to buy the media and political whores. If a substantial number of people would just not shop and instead spend the season “of peace and goodwill” praying or just meditating for peace and justice, that would be the proverbial 2X4 across the heads of these scumbags. Coordinated money can defeat concentrated money. That is our real power, not the phony elections run by uncle sham. I myself boycott hollywood entirely, and I buy only generic products. The difference in price between name brands and generic products mostly goes for advertising, which in turn funds the ziononazi propaganda machine.
  - Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 8:35 pm EST/EDT
    
    Yes! boycott. This is real action that anyone can do, real resistance. As much self provisioning as possible, reverses the flow.
    - nikov on November 20, 2017 · at 7:48 pm EST/EDT
      
      I posted this on another site, and there, like here I got ONE favorable response. I’m sure the two of us have the ziononazis trembling so hard that millions of yarmulkes are falling to the ground. Let me just say that anyone not financially fighting the ziononazis has the blood of millions on their hands. As the saying goes “money talks and bullshit walks”. Enough bullshit already.
Chas on November 17, 2017 · at 4:17 pm EST/EDT

Whilst I fully agree that the Anglo Zionists are running the USA, Britain and more governments, as well as the western media, can you name these people? Rupert Murdoch is an obvious one with his propaganda machine but who else especially in governments?
- Anonymous on November 17, 2017 · at 8:35 pm EST/EDT
  
  It may be more correct to refer to them as Euro Zionists.
  
  “The origin of the Ashkenazi Jews, who come most recently from Europe, has largely been shrouded in mystery. But a new study suggests that at least their maternal lineage may derive largely from Europe.
  
  Though the finding may seem intuitive, it contradicts the notion that European Jews mostly descend from people who left Israel and the Middle East around 2,000 years ago. Instead, a substantial proportion of the population originates from local Europeans who converted to Judaism, said study co-author Martin Richards, an archaeogeneticist at the University of Huddersfield in England. …”
  
  https://www.sott.net/article/267238-Genetic-study-Ashkenazi-Jews-are-substantially-of-Western-European-origin
- Dr. NG Maroudas on November 18, 2017 · at 6:31 am EST/EDT
  
  @Chas: “can you name these people?”. Good idea, let’s start with the board of Genie Energy: your Ozzy Murdoch is there, as is Yankee Dick Cheney and Limey Lord Rothschild — the most evil trio on Earth. Then there’s Hungarian Georgi Soros who handles the US branch of the Rothschild crime syndicate. Then come lower level operatives — Prime Ministers and Presidents — such as the Bushes and the Clintons in the Oval Office of the Empire, the Windsors and smaller fry such as Blair, Brown and Cameron in the London Office, Sarkozy and Hollande in the Paris Office, and everybody in the Jerusalem Office. That should start your list; but be prepared for that list to grow — we are talking about a huge global organization, a mafia with many “legitimate business” CEOs..
  - chas on November 18, 2017 · at 3:19 pm EST/EDT
    
    I’ve known about Genie Energy for some time. Larry Summers and James Wolesley ex-CIA also on the board of advisors. I’m surprised that no one has joined the dots and seen that after Assad refused to let Genie Energy put a pipeline through Syria, News Corp invented all the propaganda to start a civil war.
Влайко on November 17, 2017 · at 4:27 pm EST/EDT

Dear Saker,

i personally detest any notion of war but must wonder if an attack on Iran by Imperial block would actually speed up the demise of the Empire. I know that human cost on Iranian side would be tremendous but the outcome of that conflict would be definitely much weaker Empire both politically and militarily, not to mention losses that KSA and Israel would take.

I come from nation that bore the brunt of the Empire’s wrath for roughly ten years. Many of my compatriots believe that defeat (we are now internally occupied country with comprador ”elite”) we have suffered is pretty much the final nail in the coffin and that we will not be able to recuperate from it, especially as we are now the fastest dying nation in biological terms in the world, apart from poor Ukrainians. I share this grim sentiment, but i find confort in belief it was not in vane, for we “bought” these ten years for Russians to come up with way to shrug of their occupation and even start to challenge Empire’s world domination. I find that thought soothing while i lament over my nations prospects.

In pretty much same manner, i know that God knows how many poor innocent Iranians who would lose their lives, would be a sacrifice for maybe the first step in the liberation of the entire planet. And i know that some will say that i bare grudge against Iranians for their shameful behavior against my nation in the 90s, but i assure you that is not the case. My orthodox christian religion teaches me that one should suffer insult and transgression without hate, and i try to think and live in that terms.

I truly wonder that it might be Iranians’ turn to suffer horrible losses for the sake of the humanity, for i unfortunately don’t see peaceful way for disintegration of the Empire. Or you think that postponing any conflict would increase the odds in favor of the “Resistance”?

Please share your insight.
Cheers!
- Marko on November 18, 2017 · at 4:31 pm EST/EDT
  
  Влаико, I believe you’re spot on. I’m a Serb too and an unwilling recipient of the Evil Empire’s “love”. This is not going to end well for anyone. During the nineties Iranians sent literally pallets of money to Muslim separatists in Bosnia via Croatia, part of which was used to bring in Muslim crazies all over the world to chop Serb heads.
  
  Iran, not unlike the US, believe they have a Messianic role to play on this Earth. But still, I want Iran to prevail in this final struggle. Perhaps we can reason with Iran. We obviously cannot reason with Americans and their handlers.
Mark J. Bassett on November 17, 2017 · at 5:49 pm EST/EDT

This essay is The Saker at his best. There is one more hopeful aspect to American potential to resist Zionist subversion that was not mentioned: since May 2016, three Marine Corps generals have enacted a kind of soft “coup” over the Federal Government of the U.S. and are currently (according to Benjamin Fulford) making mass arrests of “Khazarian mafia.” Of course, I cannot vouch that those claims are true in the U.S., but for what it is worth, B. Fulford was the first to my knowledge to report the massive revolt and mass arrests within the Saudi monarchy family. Hopefully, the photos of Hillary Clinton and Senator McCain with medical boots on to hide their monitor ankle bracelets are genuine. Let us pray that mercy and justice will prevail over spiritual evil.
Richard Steven Hack on November 17, 2017 · at 5:58 pm EST/EDT

“the US commanders know full well that and they are therefore doing whatever it takes to tell the Neocons “can’t do, so sorry!” (that is the only reason why a US attack on Iran has not happened yet).”

The Sole Reason why the US has not attacked Iran yet is…Israel.

Israel Can Not Afford to allow Hezballah to rain missiles down on it 24×7 for months at a time. This would put most Israelis in bomb shelters 24×7, devastate the Israeli economy, and piss off the electorate meaning Netanyahu and the other war-mongering factions would be ousted at the next election – an outcome they simply cannot afford.

Israel wants a “cheap war” with Iran: with Iran concentrating most of its firepower against a US which does all the heavy lifting. This can’t happen as long as Hizballah in Lebanon is capable of functioning as an effective actor, as well as Syria (assuming Assad would be willing to join Iran in the war, which, while not certain, despite the mutual defense treaty between Syria and Iran, nonetheless cannot be ignored by Israeli war planners.)

The original plan was for Syria’s military to be degraded by a US/NATO air campaign a la Libya. Then Israel’s military forces could cross Syrian territory to attack Hizballah in the Bakaa Valley in Lebanon without worrying about Syria’s military. This would allow Israel to “flank” Hizballah and force Hizballah further north thus taking much of its missile arsenal out of commission as far as hitting all of Israel and possibly destroying that arsenal.

The entry of Russia into the Syria civil war screwed that plan.

But Israel still needs to take out Hizballah First Before starting a war with Iran (or getting the US to start one.)

Also, Israel doesn’t want to be Blamed for starting a war with Iran. This has been true since 2006 when Dick Cheney offered them $30 billion to attack Iran – because the US didn’t want to be blamed for starting another war after the Iraq debacle. This is why Israel attacked Lebanon in 2006 – to get Hizballah out of the way First. But that failed because Israel was not prepared for Hizballah’s ground defenses and Israel failed to commit enough ground troops until the very end of the war.

So the plan NOW is for Israel (with Saudi Arabia as mostly cheerleaders) to get the US to join with Israel in attacking Hizballah in Lebanon or at least support an Israeli attack – preferably the former because Israel could really use another 100 US planes carpet bombing Lebanon because as 2006 proved, Israel can’t do it alone with its air power.

Saudi Arabia is irrelevant except for its ability to pressure the US. Saudi Arabia has no military ability to attack Lebanon at all, and little ability to attack Iran without putting its own oil fields at risk to Iranian missile attack. So Saudi Arabia will Not be starting any wars. It will only be used to help pressure the US into helping Israel attack Lebanon.

There may be an additional goal: Israel may want the US and NATO to attack Syria as well if a pretext can be made that Syria is helping Hizballah during the Israeli attack. Since the US is on board with getting rid of Assad, that is quite possible.

But from the Israeli viewpoint, they don’t care who runs Syria. What matters to them is that Syria’s military be degraded so they can not be an effective actor in an Iran war. The problem for that part of the plan remains Russia.

Russia has no interest in getting into a war with Israel. Russia also has no interest in being seen to support a “terrorist organization” like Hizballah is routinely depicted in the Western media. So it is likely that Russia will stay out of a war between Israel and Hizballah unless it directly affects Syria, although Russia might provide covert support in various ways. If, however, the war directly threatens Syria – such as Israel conducting major military operations against Syria (as opposed to minor bombing raids) or the US and NATO starting to attack Syria, then Russia will have little choice but to directly support Syria, if not Hizballah.

The only question remaining is: How effective will another Israeli attack on Lebanon be? There is no doubt that Israel will commit many more of its ground forces earlier after a major and brutal air campaign. Israel may also cross Syrian territory to attack Hizballah on its flank. Hizballah, on the other hand, is much stronger now than it was in 2006. Its arsenal is bigger and better, its combat troops are larger and much better trained and experienced from the Syria civil war. On the other hand, if the US and NATO commit its air forces to an attack on Hizballah, this will complicate their ability to operate both missiles and on the ground.

So the outcome is very much in doubt. But it only AFTER such an outcome that it is likely the US and Israel will make any direct moves to either remove Iranian forces from Syria or attack Iran directly. If Israel succeeds in defanging Hizballah, then a war with Iran will be imminent. If Israel fails again, as in 2006, it is unclear what the next move would be.

Please stop using capitals – its shouting and breaks moderation policy. Amended this once – any more full of caps will go to trash. Mod
- JJ on November 18, 2017 · at 6:24 am EST/EDT
  
  I hope we do see further posts from this person ….correctly formatted of course.
- Larchmonter445 on November 18, 2017 · at 11:50 am EST/EDT
  
  Some strong points made, but the analysis of Russia not wanting association with Hezballah is not correct. They share missions on the ground in Syria.
  
  What is more important is IRGC relations with Russia. That group, too, is “terrorist” according to US and Israel, its commanders “sanctioned”.
  
  Russia is “all in” Syria, for the next 50 years. It can’t separate out parts of Iran’s reach from Syrian internal dynamics. It also cannot win the Peace in Syria without both groups, and many thousands of Iran’s Shia militias from Iraq and Afghanistan.
  
  So, do shave off Russia from all these ground troops means it would lose the war in Syria. Also, Iranian “terrorists” are the decisive ground forces over in the Iraq-ISIS/AQ war. Russia has a big stake there, too.
  
  Russia won’t fight for any of these entities. But it will support in all forms and by all means their fight against whoever takes them on.
  
  Syria cannot exist without Hezbollah on one flank and Iran on the other.
  Russia would have to commit 100,000 men otherwise and it would be in a direct war, instead of this indirect war with Israel and US. That is not going to happen.
  
  These Shia allies saved the Cross in Syria. The bond with Russia is blood and philosophy. All one has to do is recall the search and rescue of the downed navigator in the jet Turkey shot. It was Hezbollah and General Soleimani from IRGC Quds Force who found the man and brought him back safely in the night inside enemy Turkmen territory. They have fought and triumphed together for two years. That bond is unbreakable.
  - Richard Steven Hack on November 20, 2017 · at 5:31 pm EST/EDT
    
    Russia doesn’t mind supporting Hizballah in Syria because they were invited by Syria. That situation does not obtain in Lebanon. That the IRGC is considered “terrorist” by the West also isn’t relevant for the same reason – they were invited by Syria. Thus Russia can contend that they are not supporting “terrorists”, they are supporting Syria against terrorist. Again, this doesn’t apply in Lebanon against Israel.
    
    Russia will not directly support Hizballah in Lebanon. They might covertly support them with intel, help with logistics, but they won’t use their air support in Lebanon.
    
    Again, if Israel attacks Syria at a large scale, Russia will help Syria. If Israel attacks Iran, or the US attacks Iran, Russia will not directly support Iran in terms of using its military power. It may help via intel, logistics, weapons replacement, etc. But it will not use its air or naval power to directly support Iran because that would mean directly confronting the US military.
    
    Whatever Russia’s “bond” with anyone, geopolitical considerations trump everything. As is often stated, in geopolitics there are no “allies” – only “interests.”
- Richard Steven Hack on November 20, 2017 · at 5:22 pm EST/EDT
  
  Sorry for the caps. I used them as sparingly as possible for extra emphasis on a couple critical words. Most sites don’t mind a couple words capped as long as it isn’t entire sentences, let alone paragraphs.
Rick0Shea on November 17, 2017 · at 7:27 pm EST/EDT

The Axis Of Resistance or SCO – whatever – need a mutual defence pact much like NATO… put Iran, Syria, Lebanon etc under Russia and China’s nuclear umbrella…. until that happens, Russia’s so-called friends will be picked off one by one until they themselves are at the top of list slated for destruction.
nazcalito on November 17, 2017 · at 8:33 pm EST/EDT

I don’t think those in charge would allow such a war to occur. Any war between Saudi Arabia and Iran would disrupt the world oil market, with prices estimated to increase about 500 per cent and foreseeable bad economic consequences. See: https://www.rt.com/business/409905-saudi-arabia-iran-war-oil/
SanctuaryOne on November 17, 2017 · at 9:04 pm EST/EDT

While by no means discounting the above there may be another factor from Mohammed bin Salman’s viewpoint.
I previously scoffed at his 30 year plan to transform Saudi Arabia away from oil and it now appears it was a ‘greed-attractant’ to gather all the competition to one spot and arrest them. I can also scoff at this ‘corruption’ nonsense as it is clearly the false rationale for arrest and a means to subsequent ransom.

It is now suggested that those 201 under house arrest (Saudi style Ritz Carlton Hotel) with their 1800 frozen bank accounts may gain their release by handing over 70% of their wealth -which may net MBS around $500-1000 billion.

https://journal-neo.org/2017/11/17/salmans-shake-up-saudi-maneuvers-are-bad-for-the-american-people/

So no more deficit problem if that works. But there’s yet more money that will come from the IPO sale of part of Aramco, itself worth up to a trillion depending on who you talk to.
But in order to have a successful IPO oil prices must rise much further and there’s no better way to do that than the fear and uncertainty generated by threats of war, or war itself but on a low boil. The latter may be tricky to modulate, especially with neocon and zio loose cannons at large.

Where do Russia and China come into all this, what will they allow or disallow?
vot tak on November 17, 2017 · at 10:44 pm EST/EDT

Follow up of my earlier comment on why I think israeloamerica will not directly attack Iran at this time and probably not Lebanon, either (though less certain about Lebanon due to israel). Rather I think the israeloamericans will pursue an indirect proxy terror strategy instead similar to their war on Syria. The reasoning against a direct attack is likely massive economic disruption and lack of the sort of military preparedness on the part of the usa, and ability on the part of israel. I don’t think saudi arabia is militarily much of a threat to either Iran or Lebanon.

First the economic argument. This article explains the basics:

War between Iran & Saudi Arabia could send oil to $300 per barrel & impoverish the world

https://www.rt.com/business/409905-saudi-arabia-iran-war-oil/

Don’t let the title put you off, it contains some decent discussion.

And these two graphics further show how much the world depends on energy from saudi arabia and the Persian Gulf region.

https://www.evdriven.com/thumbs/large/b/5/d/b5d66e83719eb55acef38f2815e58c648df00a08.jpg

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2014/07/20140713_oil.jpg

Essentially, a regular war between saudi arabia and Iran would result in the disruption of a major portion of the oil many countries depend on. Most of those countries are in the western capitalist block. A disruption this large would cause havoc in their economies.

From the military pov, the usa is not ready for another major war, which against Iran it would be. They could run air strikes and missile attacks, but would not be able to follow up with a ground war. The israelis are much less capable and the saudis are not capable at all.

A war against Lebanon is somewhat different. Both the usa and israel are more able here. The usa lacks the propaganda build up to sell a war at home so not something likely. The israelis may try another go, given their arrogance, but may also not want to risk another defeat. So an iffy prospect. The saudis lack a practical route to reach Lebanon, even if they had a military capable of defeating her. Which they don’t, anyway.

My own view of the current american regime is they are tasked with rebuilding the american military so it can again invade defended countries. This will take several years. Meanwhile, they will keep pushing the sort of proxy terrorist wars they have been doing.

This therefore leaves proxy terrorist war as the israeloamerican current best option against Iran and Lebanon. Such war won’t cause the economic disruption a hot war would. The way the israeloamericans conducted their recent terror wars against Syria, then Iraq, leads one to think these would be used a springboards to implementing similar terror wars against Lebanon and Iran. Since their terror war failed to knock out Syria and Iraq, the israeloamerican fall back strategy is to use a kurdistan in the role planned for Syria and Iraq.

Now as a terrorist recruiter and funder saudi arabia does have a realistic role. It’s something they excel at. The saudis will procure the terrorists, the israeloamericans will direct the terrorists.
- JJ on November 18, 2017 · at 6:17 am EST/EDT
  
  Yup this sounds “reasonable”….unfortunately.
  
  Hmm…only one letter T difference makes reasonable into “D-Treasonable” if you see what I mean…..
Tsar_Bomba on November 17, 2017 · at 11:04 pm EST/EDT

I think Russia and China will also try their best to prevent the empire from striking Iran. In case of an Iranian defeat, the country will be overrun by takfiris who will set their eyes on the Caucuses. The Russians know this and will try their best to prevent Iran from falling into zio-wahhabi hands. Even China knows that with the fall of Iran, China will be deprived of the energy that she needs for her massive economy. So the Chinese will do anything within their limits to prevent Iran from getting destroyed, besides Iran has a major role to play in OBOR and the chinese wont let their trillion renminbi dream get destroyed. The Russians and the Chinese will try their best to mask their support for Iran from the media and the intelligence agencies. So it may seem to the people that Russia and China are not doing enough, but i believe a lot is going on undercover between them.
boris on November 18, 2017 · at 3:48 am EST/EDT

All it takes is just another false flag operation of 911 type. They got away with the first one and the 2nd will be the last one. Do you think that those two Iranians were photoshoped into the picture just by chance, „boarding Flight MH370 with fake passports“: https://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-el-al-expert-iran-likely-involved-in-mh-370/ (he, he, two different guys on the same legs?!)

Well, I would not be surprised if the „Flight MH370“ arrives in NYC with a nuclear payload, pretty soon?! (Physical plane does not have to be involved a CGI version would be quite sufficient.) Of course, Iranians were those who hijacked it (and not the Shaldag unit) and did it and they obtained the nuclear weapon from NK (whom else?!). America under attack… internet down… MSM’s verbal and emotional diarrhea… nuclear retaliation… WW3… depopulation.

I would watch for 2. Kislev (9/1+1), i.e. this Monday!?

For them, it would be just another ritual and guess what role we play in their rituals?!

..
- ormie on November 18, 2017 · at 6:36 am EST/EDT
  
  Thanks for that snippet boris. Aye, the same legs is a give away for sure. Some one else in the replies here mentioned the power of Masonry in world history. Never discount their influence; Zionism – specially “Christian-Zionism” is their baby. What did the man say?: “and the whole world will be deceived…”
  
  The media of today – truly a “wonder”; the man described it as, a “lying wonder”. He also said he came to bring a sword, not peace!
  
  Do you know year dot for Masonry begins 3009 BC?
NATO Blues on November 18, 2017 · at 8:13 am EST/EDT

Investor: So, how sound will my investment in Armco be?
Saudis: Oh, very sound. There’s just the minor issue of who will rule SA before or after the IPO and thus
the oil fields you are investing in. And of course there’s the minor issue of them being obliterated
in a war we are trying to start with Iran. In the first case, the feasibility of your investment capital
and any return thereon will be anyone’s guess, in the second case well, you know… However,
Wall Street desires to handle the IPO and we will probably allow them to, in which case we’re
sure their prospectus will properly advise you on these contingencies.
Investor: Sounds great, when can I purchase the shares?
Saudis: Very soon.
Investor: Oh goodie!!!!!

Postscript: Armco IPO = a massive success with 2 trillion dollars raised.
“Slice”: Sound of knife going into the back of MbS.
“Kaboom”: Sound of the Saudi and GCC state oil fields being bombed into scrap metal and dust.
“Kaching”: Sound of Iranian, Russian, Nigerian and Venezuelan state coffers filling up with cash as they
form a new oil export consortium replacing OPEC as the primary suppliers of petroleum
products worldwide.
“fthfthfhft”: Sound of the red carpet being rolled out by the White House for the Iranian, Russian, Nigerian
and Venezuelan heads of state as a newfound cooperation between these nations is ushered
in due to Washington’s need for petroleum imports.
“ththththt”: Sound of the Saudi, Israeli and GCC state governments crapping their pants!

Postscript.1: The ruble, renminbi, rial and dollar (yes they allowed the U.S. to remain in) share as reserve
currencies and all are usable for trade in petroleum products.
“Whew”: The collective sigh of relief breathed by the world as catastrophe on a global scale is
averted and relative peace and harmony return to Earth.
Izaates bar Monobazeus on November 18, 2017 · at 8:23 am EST/EDT

Hello Saker.

Do you happen to know why Andrew Korybiku calls bin Salman ‘the red prince’..? I only have phone access and my phone is so ancient it can barely open even this website. I can’t write him directly because of this problem.
Rob on November 18, 2017 · at 10:19 am EST/EDT

Thanks for an excellent article, Saker.

Let me add a few thoughts.

First, besides the tantalizing approach as mentioned in the named article in Moon of Alabama, some time again an article was placed in the RSS feed of this blog. I could not find it again, but it was a reconstruction of the foundation of Saudi Arabia. The interesting fact was stated,that of the many tribes the Saudi tribe, aligned with the Wahhabi’s, was put into power by the British under the condition that they would accept the founding of a Jewish state. So, who is surprised by their cooperation?

Secondly, Saudi Arabia has a highly ineffective society, heading for running out of revenues.
About 30% of the people in Saudi Arabia are expats. Of that amount, ca. 15% are highly qualified employees like engineers and doctors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_workers_in_Saudi_Arabia
The rest of the workers are lower qualified.
Having worked for a Saudi based industrial company, I can tell you that things like ‘status’, ‘not losing face’, ‘only the boss may decide’ are in their genes. Some years ago they had a turnaround on a large refinery in the KSA, and they had to wait two days for starting up, because the highest in charge -a Saudi prince,of course- had to say ‘yes’ and the poor man was unreachable and nobody dared to bypass him, resulting in a loss of many millions of dollars.
Ever seen a Saudi doing construction work? All physical work is done by foreigners. Many Saudi households have a ‘household help’ doing all the work, often under slavery-like conditions.
Even their hopeless war in Yemen is mostly fought by foreigners. How sure are we, that the jets doing the bombing are actually flown by Saudi’s? Most of the fighting is done by Pakistani mercenaries.

Add to that the large bureaucracy in the KSA, with lots of useless ‘paper shoving’ jobs, just to keep everybody employed. Just like in the former DDR.

Such a society costs a lot of money. And that starts to hurt, while the revenues are falling down. Not only have the Saudi’s shot in their own foot with getting the oil price down to hurt Russia, the war in Yemen costs many dollars, and their oil reserves are far less favorable than officially stated. They have one very big oil field (Ghadar, in the north east) and many much smaller. The exploitation costs are rising. It costs increasingly more energy and seawater to pump it out. The water cut of Ghadar oil is rising.
So, they are forced to raise revenue. The IPO of Aramco (highly overvalued) is an example of that. The Chinese are interested, but guess what oil payment condition they have.

I guess what we are seeing here is the slow death of the petrodollar. That may have serious consequences. My thoughts are, that attacking Iran has not so much to do with ‘rivalry’, but to carve it out of it’s influence sphere, breaking up the rising Eurasian power, and most of all: to steal their oil and gas and bring it under Anglozionist control.

The question is not whether they want to, but more whether they are able to. The lack of acceptable reason is not that important: they will create one. They will not hesitate to sacrifice thousands of innocent civilians to have one.
Will they succeed? I have serious doubts. It is relatively simple for the Iranian forces to give a massive blow to the KSA: just blow up their ship loading facilities. There are four harbours in the NE of the KSA with loading docks. When they are gone, it will take at least a year to rebuild them, killing the KSA revenues. First, try to find skilled construction workers willing to do the job under such circumstances…

Finally, often enough it is mentioned here that Israel has hundreds of nukes. Since the KSA and Pakistan are friendly nations among each other, how sure can we be that the KSA hasn’t them either?

Cheers, Rob
- Anonymous on November 18, 2017 · at 1:06 pm EST/EDT
  
  well,well team chaos is going for plan b.Not surprising as sleight of hand is the trade mark ,hold many cards but play the minimum required at any one time.
  
  Assad fortitude to keep printing his own money was one of his sins other than the ‘pipe line’ thing.Even mad mullahs and evil putin don’t do that so imagine the cheek of the ‘barrels bomber’.Now that plan to make ‘assad go’ is in ‘pieces on the ground’, time to move on as there are more frogs to boil.
  
  The rebellion in the geo location called America is forcing team chaos to move to a new domicile,what better place than the blackgolden fields .To slay two birds with one stone team chaos drops the ‘Petro dollar’ and print real petrol riyals!..yeah Riyals backed by black gold.No more FED to manage who cares about dollars..the one that says..’in god we trust’ when you own the blackgolden fields.
  
  How many here has gone to SA and seen how ARAMCO is run?….in such places as rastanura,jubail,abgaig, dammam. etc?it is all america inc.it is in team chaos hand now.
Oakfeld on November 18, 2017 · at 12:41 pm EST/EDT

Think time is the key here. The more time passes with low oil prices and the US stepping up oil production even more the more likely the collapse of the KSA is. That in turn, of course, will force the KSA to increase the number of “external events”, but hard to believe that the “leadership” in Riyad will have the time and focus to manage an outright attack on any ally of Iran or Iran itself. Given that, I believe you will see a lot pipelines blasting, car bombs and suicide attacks. But if Iran keeps its cool, it will win (which it would even with an outright attack). Once the storm has passed by we will see the first pillars of the new world structure through the haze of dust. And once that happens we will get to understand that things are not as obvious as they look now. Good and bad do not really exist separately, rather they are two faces of the same personality. cheers Oakfeld
Anonymous on November 18, 2017 · at 12:57 pm EST/EDT

Hmmm, so if the goal is to force the US to intervene, lets look at that question?

First, we might need to modify the question. Perhaps it should state ‘force the US to intervene without Russia also intervening.” As The Saker has often stated, the Russian expeditionary forces in the region are rather small, especially compared to what the US/NATO alliance could bring to bear. But, its also true that Russia has been showing capabilities for forces outside of Syria to have an impact. Kalibre missile strikes and long range attacks from Tupolev bombers being the more prominent examples. There’s also a question of what Russian electronic warfare can do in such a fight, as well as the other item The Saker has previously discussed which is how Russia can use asymetric warfare in such a fight.

Thus, while it may not seem that Russia provides an insurmountable opposition to Anglo-Zion-Wahabist plans in the region, it also seems rather clear that if Russia also intervenes then the advantage gained by US intervention is lost. Especially since if US/NATO has to worry about a wider war, then they might be much less concerned with the Israeli-Hezbollah fight in southern Lebanon.

Yet, lets look at the chances of Israel and KSA getting the USA to intervene in such a war.

First, who holds the power to be the ‘decider’ in the US about such an intervention.
— first, it might rest almost entirely with the Pentagon. Certainly, opposition from the JCS would be a major obsticle to such an intervention. It might be an outright veto capability. Could Congress, the media and the President all combine to force the Pentagon into doing something it does not want to do? That at best is doubtful. Name for me all of the times in the last 30 years or so that the Pentagon has been forced over its strong objections into doing something? I have a hard time thinking of any such instances.

— we do know that the Pentagon has previously rejected an earlier President’s request to go to war with Iran. The Dubya neocons wanted a war with Iran, but the JCS at the time, an Admiral Mullen IIRC, said no.

— we’ve also seen the Pentagon being very, very careful about its interventions in Syria. They have pushed back against the media and politicians on the topic of a ‘no-fly zone’ over Syria, with leaks and some statements from people with high rank warning that this would/could lead to a war with Russia. The Pentagon has been working carefully with some forces inside Syria, and has been launching some airstrikes in Syria. But they’ve also backed off every time it seemed like these actions would lead to a direct confrontation with Russia.

— Its hard to tell where Trump stands on such a war. On one hand, he was very sceptical about ‘regime change’ wars as a candidate. But, when he made a deal with Sheldon Adelson to finance his general election campaign, he also became a strong supporter of Israel since that was a ‘red-line’ condition of Mr. Adelson. Jared, his son-in-law, seems to be close to Israel and KSA, or at least MBS in KSA.

— the US media of course gives only the Israeli-KSA party line.

— Congress is pretty much owned by Israel and KSA between them. And if not, if MBS takes some of the billions of dollars he’s been stealing of late, then any US member of Congress has a for-sale sign around his neck and can easily be bought. There might be a few exceptions, but they are powerless in Congress or could quickly be rendered such.

— However, one of the problems with the last two points is that American voters have been breaking free of their media mind-washing. The Democrats have become 100% pro-war and pro-banker and I’m sure can be easily bought by KSA money if for some reason they have not yet been. And yet, the American voter has been showing signs of no longer following media orders.

— Both corporate political parties have been badly fractured. In the last election, we saw strong opposition campaigns in both parties. Trump’s went on to win the election. Bernie might well have been President if the Democratic Party leadership wasn’t a corrupt swamp that rigged the whole thing against him. And while Bernie was very quiet on military issues and also supportive of Israel, much of his base behind him criticized him for this and at best accepted it as being the best way for him to try to win. The Bannon-Trump movement within the Republicans responded strongly to Trump’s anti-war stances, but also responds to the infantile cries that America must be #1 and for supporting Israel. There is strong popular support in America for ending the wars, and has been for about a decade. Both of the last two Presidents had to pretend to oppose the existing wars in order to be elected.

What does all of this add up to?

The media and Congress would support such a war, but that’s not enough. It would take Trump also coming out in favor of a war for this to happen. And given Trump’s anti-Iran rhetoric, that’s certainly possible.

Any new war in the Middle East would jack up the price of oil. That might be good news for T-Rex and Exxon. But it would be very bad news for the world economy. Trump is very focused on trying to show success on the economic front to his voters, and any wise advisors would tell him that a war in the ME would stop this dead in its tracks, and likely make Trump and his movement a one-term President.

And then there is still the Pentagon. Yes, they love to show off their toys. And yes, any up-and-coming officer views a war as a chance to prove themselves and to quickly rise to the top. But still, the US military has been reluctant to go to war in Syria, at least not the sort of full-on war like Israel and KSA are dreaming about in Lebanon.

And again, if Trump is not leading the way, its highly unlikely that the media and Congress on their own can force a war. They might pass more sanctions against Iran and Hezbollah, but they can not force a war. Especially not if Trump is not out front leading the charge/sales-pitch.

All in all, this seems like another Netanyahoooo and MBS mis-calculation. I don’t think Trump would see enough gain to make it worth risking his presidency and a collapse of the world economy. And I don’t think the Pentagon would be very enthusiastic about the idea. Especially as at this time, Syria would certainly aid Hezbollah, and Iran would as well. The Russians would likely try to stay in the background, but would also be giving their own support …..like for instance Hezbollah getting access to Russian satelite photos and other eavesdropping info that would let Hezbollah have the best intel they’ve ever had while fighting Israel.

One problem is that both Netanyahooooo and MBS seem likely to miscalculate all of this. Netanyahooo thinks he has more control over the US than he really does have. And MBS just seems to be constantly wrong. So, the chances for an Israeli attack on Hezbollah with KSA support do exist. I just don’t think they’ll be able to drag the US into such a war, which means this will turn out worse for Israel and KSA. Hezbollah showed a decade ago that they could defeat then an Israeli attack across the border. And KSA can’t seem to beat anyone in a war, not even tribesmen in Yemen. Where Trump might fail in all of this is that he might not be clear enough and forceful enough with Israel and MBS about the fact that they US won’t join them, which would likely lead to a war where lots of people die before Israel and KSA admit they can’t achieve their goals.
Anonymous on November 18, 2017 · at 1:17 pm EST/EDT

Current US CV locations

CV-68-Nimitz ….. had been on a tour of the Middle east, stopping in Bahrain and UAE in Aug. Now off the coast of North Korea.
CV-69-Eisenhower — Norfolk SY until at least Feb 18
CV-70-Vincent — exercising off of San Diego
CV-71-Roosevelt — recently left San Diego and now off the coast of North Korea
CV-72-Lincoln — exercising off the coast of North Carolina
CV-73-Washington — in Norfolk SY for the next four years.
CV-74-Stennis — recently left Bremerton, WA and now in EastPac.
CV-75-Truman — recently returned to Norfolk following sea trials
CV-76-Reagan — assigned to Yokohama, now off North Korea.
CV-77-Bush — Norfolk, VA having just completed exercises
CV-78-Ford — still tripping and falling over itself, in Norfolk, VA following sea-trials.

If US CV deployments are an indicator of where the US intends to apply force in the near future, then North Korea is the obvious target. The US currently has no CV’s in either the eastern Med or the Arabian sea areas. Eventually, one of the three CV’s currently off the North Korean coast will likely head to the ME. The other closest CV’s are in Norfolk, VA, and I suppose one could be rushed to sea and sent to the eastern Med. But either move would likely take a month or more to get a CV to the ME. And in the past, when the US does threaten serious military operations, they seem to like to have 3 CVs in the area. Right now, that points to NK, while there are 0 CV’s in the ME and it would likely be at least a month before they could even get one CV to that region.
Brad Isherwood on November 18, 2017 · at 1:58 pm EST/EDT

https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1160-james-perloff-on-the-false-flag-heard-round-the-world/
Just one of several studies into the Freemasonic lodge starting wars, revolutions etc since 1700s
Lord Palmerston circa mid 1800s. ..it’s from his Masonic Lodge that Zionism first appears.
Characters like Benjamin Desraeli follow…become Prime minister.
By the way. ..Lord Palmerston is overseeing British gunboat diplomacy pound China and run Opium on the nation to break it.
US 16 years in Dopeistan /Afghanistan confirms the Old Masonic game is continuing in our day.
US military industrial complex is from the Masonic game.
Now then….Is Putin really really Anti Globalist,anti Rothschilds. …or is he A Player in the system**
US needed a war in the 60s. …Korea was boxed after everything rolls back to post WW 2 Occupation zones.
Russia knows the US wants a war…so they play the Game in Vietnam.
US public can no longer tolerate the body bag count…so it’s the exit,…US withdraws…supports ARVN,
Who lose vs the Organized juggernaut facing them.
911 and it’s conspiracy is kick off for Fake War on Terror. …
Putin knows this game…IE. ..Chechnyu wars,South Ossetia.
To some degree, Russia is forced to play…..Certainly Russia’s Military Industrial Complex does.
Putin enters Syrian conflict years later. …Turks grab some piece of Syria,..US Flys around like a Vampire
Sucking Kurd blood and Syrian.
Putin/Lavrov deconfliction agreements give License for Turks,Israel and US to remain….Illegally **
In Syria.
You could make the argument Putin is playing the long game vs Empire.
Myself and others view Putin as a Masonic player connected To Powerfull Jewish Oligarchs/Banking.
Russia Central Bank is still BIS/Rothschilds System.
Maybe that changes in the future….the Masonic game does indeed get Intrigues and outcomes.
They went after Germany in 2 wars…now Germany is cow towed, …Nothing like it’s firmer character.
They** attacked Russia via several formats. …Russia escaped the Bolsheviek and the Communist,
But not the Masonic reach ….
The possibility/probability that the Masonic game is still running is valid…and a concern.
I view Putin and Xi as players in this Old game…
They create alternative track of Enterprise. ….while the ways of the Old game continue.
Struth on November 18, 2017 · at 7:05 pm EST/EDT

“Yes, he (Trump) is a weak man, yes, he is now cornered and has no allies left…”

Perhaps it is the optimist in me but I tend to think Trump is playing a very careful and well-thought-out game. At the moment he is weak politically simply because he has very, very few allies.

The Republican old guard is actively working to keep it that way (spending 150 times the amount to defeat patriots running for republican positions than they do trying to defeat demoncrats, not spending a dime on Trump’s campaign last year, etc).

I feel he may be playing along with his enemies (neo-cons) to play for time and is in reality waiting for other patriots to be elected to congress so he then has real political support. Once this level of support is adequate then and only then will/can he act.
Anonymous on November 18, 2017 · at 8:29 pm EST/EDT

I think it is a mistake to believe that the Israelis control US foreign policy. First pro-Israeli Jewish movers and shakers are interested in the international economy at least as much as they are interested in the Israeli state. A major war against Iran would be very, very risky both for the world economy which is too over-leveraged to risk whatever asymmetrical warfare would take place from a very determined foe. Plus massive numbers of Israelisv would die from massive missile barrages and who knows what else. Plus any threat to the supply to China would be seen as an act of war by China and other Asian countries

Second, the Iran, Russia and North Korea/China issues are manufactured crises make sense only within the Washington context. We have to understand that the reason we have no coherence in US foreign and military policy is because the Deep State is deeply divided and engaged in power struggles that are partly ideological and partly just the usual conflict engaged in by criminal gangs throughout history.

I just don’t see a practical argument for war. The main things all major factions seem to agree on is a need for a strategy of tension in order to sell arms and continue military operations against weak countries and helpless civilians inbthev150 countries US forces are involved in. The martinet class does not want or need a serious war against a well trained and equipped military since US forces are actually quite weak for a variety of reasons. The Saudis might be insane and some factions within Israel and the US might be insane but as I read the tea leaves in Washington the pragmatism seems to have the upper hand at this time. It is important to understand that US politics mainly resembles pro-wrestling.
- Anonymous on November 19, 2017 · at 6:50 am EST/EDT
  
  yeah, reading the tea leaves is important..The U.S as it is called now is impotent, like a dying beast it is biting itself ,there is no open civil war but in actuality no ,one ”power” is in control, it is a mayhem now ,we have to wait till the dust settles on this ‘inner’ battle for supremacy, before we can say definitely,..ok we have an american ‘foreign policy.’.there is none now.There is a foreign policy in’ default’ ,anyway just trying to hold the line…kicking the can down the road sort of.
  
  Now the black golden field is the main prize being soaked after..team chaos may have it in their hand but if they can really ‘own’ it is another thing.Watch out for the gas fields of the nation that subsidises muslim brother hood.Team chaos already owns the poppy fields in afghanistan guarded by nato.
  
  Having jettisoned ‘america’ team chaos may become contend with owning the three fields and we may look forward to peace in MENA…anyway get the popcorn ready just in case the plan blows up.
bored muslim on November 18, 2017 · at 8:40 pm EST/EDT

If Iran is attacked, by the trio(Israel-U.S.-KSA…and NATO and lackeys)., Iran will have but to do one systematic measure, and it will be a world game changer. Simply put, Iran only has to bombard, with its multitudes of ballistic missiles all the oil, natural gas instillations and facilities, ports, fields, refineries, storage facilities all over the Persian Gulf region and beyond, if at all possible.

Essentially, that would bring about a cataclysmic 40-50% drop in world oil and most natural gas to just about everybody.

That, folks would be the death kneel of the ‘Petro-Dollar’. Overnight, the financial system, that the Jews, and Anglo-Zionists have been ever so carefully nurturing would be no more.

Iran has enough ballistic missiles(130,000 +) to wipe out all its economic targets I mentioned just by saturation strikes alone, and no anti-missile batteries are going to make a difference.

So, Iran is safe, but if it is attacked, then expect the Israeli’s/U.S. to want to end hostilities by way of a tactical nuke strike or strikes to sort of cower the rest of the would be countries not toing the line, like Russia and China, It would lead to a vicious, and unprecedently violent war of international implications.

I’m Sunni, Go Iran.
Marc L on November 18, 2017 · at 11:28 pm EST/EDT

The ZioWahabis could, and probably would, start such a war with another false flag attack on the US such as their 9/11. That certainly did the trick of destroying the last pretense of a US Republic and opened the Israeli war for a Greater Israel as outlined in the Yinon Plan and restated by their NeoCon US fifth column in the “Plan for a New American Century”.
Ngoyo on November 19, 2017 · at 2:34 am EST/EDT

The key is what Russia (with China bringing up the rear) does in response to a US attack on Iran. I think Russia will respond in full. A massive attack by the US on Iran would represent a complete failure of deterrence and Russia and Iran would, IMHO, react accordingly. As Saker says I suspect this would include rushing advanced air defense to Iran (additional S-300), helping the Iranians target any US ships in the gulf plus shut down the strait of Hormuz, target US forces in Afghanistan, Qatar etc. A rain of fire on Israel and so on.

Strategically it is even more important for Russia to defend Iran than to defend Syria. A NATO attack on Iran would be an even bigger blunder than the 2003 attack on Iraq. With Russia, China and probably Turkey backing Iran it would be a fatal blunder.
Rico on November 19, 2017 · at 3:15 am EST/EDT

Israelis are doing what they can to ensure their national survival.
..but ‘crazy’ they ain’t.
Now, if Israel should have been created in 1948 is another story altogether.
We don’t have time machines yet.
Another issue…if you think arabs will lurrrve Israel if it allows a fully sovereign Pal. state to form, think again.
Arab muslims are notoriously fickle and anti-Jewish sentiment runs strong in the Koran.
(So does in the Bible btw)
Third and last.
I find it extremely stupid for Westerners (many nominally christians) to support the #1 muslim cause.
The Palestinian one (plus hatred for Israel)
When was the last time muslims supported a christian cause?
never.
High faluting morals will get us nowhere.
Machiavelli wins the day.
Anonymous on November 19, 2017 · at 11:14 pm EST/EDT

Seems to be a nightmare scenario.
Sturm on November 20, 2017 · at 7:56 am EST/EDT

Like an onion, their “real” plan is probably deeper than what it seems on the surface. It’s multi-layered. Committing US forces like it did in the Gulf War 1 & 2 would require a major transgression and UN approval (to legitimize it to the eyes of the world, many who’s already anti-American). Setting off a false flag incident (the likes of Pearl Harbor) to establish a casus belli whilst having so many wise eyes watching may not be easy – especially with Russia/China holding veto.

Let’s look at reality, the Saudis aren’t ready for another physical war with their Yemen campaign in a stall … nor will they ever be ready for a regional war. Even the rabidly insane would have some inkling, opening a multi-front war is a fool-proof recipe for failure. So, the simple short-term immediate gain is money, both from confiscation & blackmail after the MBS purge and the rise in oil prices in anticipation of a war.

The KSA is like a poodle (30mil pop), barking at a great dane (80mil pop). Huge differences in resources, brainpower, manpower and experience. Therein lies the clue. A most probable med-long term plan is to solidify the loose regional/non-regional Mid-East alliance against Iran. The Saudis already have this tool at their disposal – the Islamic Military Alliance (created in 2015). The question then is, would the fish bite? Just like NATO, they can probably do as they please without consequences.

There is this thing with the fish. It has an inherent dislike of kosher baits.

P.S. And of course, this much is obvious. Israel will sit back and laugh gleefully at the stupidity of the Arabs who failed to learn from history. What is interesting is however, KSA as a pillar of (Wahabi) Islam openly embracing Israel. It just shot itself in the foot … and again, Israel gains from this. Just give me a facepalm already.
- Anonymous on November 25, 2017 · at 1:00 pm EST/EDT
  
  At this point, Russia and certainly China would veto any such UN Sec Council resolutions. I get the feeling that the Russians feel like they’ve been fooled by such many times in the past, only to have the US turn around a lie about some limited resolution giving the US the ‘right’ to send troops in and to invade.
  
  I seem to remember a lot of UN squabling before the rape and looting of Iraq. Russia, and back then France, were objecting to US calls for a fig-leaf UN resolution that would have given them to invade Iraq over Saddam’s mythical WMD’s. They watered down the resolution and removed any such language before passing it. Only to then watch the US claim that the resolution gave them the authority to launch a war of aggression against Iraq.
  
  And, as if the Russians needed a reminder, there was Mad Dog’s comments of late that UN resolutions give the US the right to invade and occupy Syria when there has been no such resolution.
  
  So, at this point in time, any such UN resolution seems very unlikely. The US might back a proposed resolution, but the only effect would be to let Nutti Nikki bray and howl and foam at the mouth over how the evil Russians are preventing her Army of God (Christian) from killing lots and lots of people and destroying lots of stuff and thus crashing the world economy by preventing good old Capitalism from replacing all the destroyed stuff with hefty bribes and kickbacks for all involved and a cushy job and think tank for Nutti Nikki where she can be guaranteed future chances to bray, howl and foam at the mouth.
  
  And, in their Islamic Alliance, what the Saudis really have is a bunch of fake allies that say ‘yeah sure’ to whatever the Saudis propose just to keep Saudi money flowing to them. IIRC, some of the countries in that Alliance were a bit surprised to be including in the announcement back when it was made. And the only real military powers in the bunch are Pakistan and Egypt that noticeably don’t provide any real troops or more than vocal support to any of MBS’ many, many, many wars.
dikcheney on November 20, 2017 · at 6:13 pm EST/EDT

The kingdom of Saudi Arabia will descend into chaos. Order will be restored by an audacious Yankee paecemaking force. Another Mddle east state will be asset stripped and off shore accounts grabbed by the zionazis etc.
- Anonymous on November 21, 2017 · at 9:02 am EST/EDT
  
  The first episode of a new podcast on Saudi Arabia’s politics by one of the best tweeters on the subject:
  https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi
  The first minutes are about the history of how the podcast came about, the analysis begins at 3:50.
  
  https://soundcloud.com/arabtyrantmanual/episode-001
Azorka1861 on November 21, 2017 · at 9:40 pm EST/EDT

Opinion – Saudi Arabia: Israel Dream State
Israei is happy to let Riyadh lead the ant-Iran alliance, but not so happy to pay
the political price of real cooperation
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.822797
Mr Reynard on November 22, 2017 · at 12:00 am EST/EDT

Quote:
A ZioWahabi attack on Hezbollah and Iran?

My opinion. A wet dream ?
Abraham on November 23, 2017 · at 8:02 am EST/EDT

Saeker what do you make of this development? Could it be related somehow? From a good source.

https://www.facebook.com/ImperialMilitaryWatch.Analysis/posts/1929674630685898
Stan on November 26, 2017 · at 2:53 pm EST/EDT

Mike Whitney’s “Isis last stand” ask the right questions about the future of Syria. That’s the most important. Blablabla can solve some problems but as the International Community knows Gringos bandits will do what they always do, to spill as much of innocent blood as possible and secure the profits for MIC demons. Don,’t forget support your troops – be good Gringo, don’t think.You’ll sleep better. Holy Michael, defend us in battle….
Sage on November 27, 2017 · at 6:30 pm EST/EDT

‘catastrophic consequences for Iran if it strikes back as it should on attack..so we must hope for an american patriot to arise and from within turn around anglo/zionist policies and so save Iran’

how much sense does that make?

that means that Iran must accept attack and retaliate in such a way as not to make the anglo/zionists really mad or they would really harm Iran. so Iran must be prepared to accept a heavy level of destruction that would make its attackers happy, leaving some part of Iran intact. and what level of destruction would that be?

would the anglo/zionists settle for… what was done to Iraq or Libya? or would they want more than that..a lot more?

how many Iranians would its leadership be prepared to sacrifice…25 million, 40, 50 million?

that argument makes little to no sense to me. Iran may just as well lay down and die
- Sage on November 28, 2017 · at 5:56 am EST/EDT
  
  you did not authorize my last post. sorry! I did not mean to be extreme or off base.
  
  what I meant is that in consideration of the Sampson Option the west is not likely to go ahead with an attack on Iran, unable to gauge what Iran’s re-action would be…that the Sampson Option is probably the real deterrent against such a war happening, not looking for an impossible rise of some unlikely american patriot…messiah really.
  
  I did not intend to be extreme at all but how can one be extreme in the world anymore?
  
  there is no extremity left unexposed or unplumbed. I am not the one assiduously looking for an incredible war that is so extreme and crazy it most certainly will lead to the end of humanity