Will the Trump administration go to war next?

[This analysis has been written for the Unz Review]

Ever since Mr. MAGA made it to the White House, I have been awed by the level of sheer stupidity and, frankly, the immorality of this administration. Obama was almost as incompetent and evil, but Trump truly brought about a qualitative change in what we could loosely refer to as the “average White House IQ.” The best thing I can honestly say about Trump is that stupid can be good. Alas, it can also be extremely dangerous, and that is what is happening now. Just check out these recent headlines:

I have to admit that this last one is my favorite, really! How cool is that? The US threatens a NATO member state with war (that is what “devastating/serious consequences” means in diplotalk).

Pompeo (surely one of the most evil and delusional idiots in the Trump Administration) was probably trying to emulate the role-model of this entire Administration, Bibi Netanyahu, who once even threatened *New Zealand* with war (well, kinda, I know, they did not really mean “real” war, but they did use war language, which, for a politician, is irresponsible at best).

This would all be very funny if not for the fact that it is pretty obvious that the USA is already engaged in a covert military/terrorist campaign against Venezuela and that the fact that the Maduro government has successfully foiled the “Guaidó revolution” (at least so far) only further enrages the likes of Pompeo. Besides, the fact that the US military does not appear to have the stomach for a ground invasion does not at all mean that they cannot trigger a Kosovo or Libya type of bombing and missile campaign against Venezuela.

Will the covert war against Venezuela soon turn into an overt one?

Those who now claim that three Russian S-300 air defense battalions (equipped with the export version of the S-300VM – the “Antey-2500”) or even thousands of Russian-made MANPADS can stop the USA simply don’t understand warfare in general and air-defense operations specifically. What these folks do is to take a few figures about, in this case, the theoretical capabilities of the Venezuelan S-300s and then compute how many aircraft/missiles these systems could shoot down. That is not how air defenses work.

[Sidebar: I won’t write a detailed explanation about this topic here. My friend Andrei Martyanov can do that much better than I, but I will just say that to be truly effective, any air defense system has to be 1) multi-level and 2) integrated. Furthermore, such pseudo-analyses as mentioned above always overlooks the importance of all other factors besides the number and characteristics of the missiles themselves. But in reality, electronic warfare, network integration, signal processing, combat management systems, etc. play an absolutely crucial role in air defenses. Even deceptive measures (such as inflatable “tanks” or wooden “aircraft”) can play a central role in the outcome (as it did in Kosovo and Iraq). The same goes for offensive air operations, of course. Thus no evaluation of a possible US air attack on Venezuela can be made without analyzing US capabilities, training, procedures, etc. The truth is that what military experts call “bean counting” is what only pretend-experts engage in. From a military point of view this is entirely useless and futile]

The sad truth is that absent a multi-level integrated air defense system like Russia has, air defense operations typically turn into a simple numbers game: X number of defensive missiles vs. Y number of attackers. Keep in mind that effective EW (especially SEAD) will *dramatically* reduce the effectiveness of any air defenses. The same applies to whatever number of Su-30 or even Su-35s Russia might deliver to Venezuela.

Now, look at a map and see for yourself: Venezuela is literally in the USA’s backyard (at least in military terms), and the US can bring HUGE numbers of whatever it wants (missiles, bombs, SEAD aircraft, etc.) to the fight. Not only that, but the Venezuelans lack any real counter-attack options, which means that Uncle Shmuel can fire off as many missiles as he wants for weeks and months without ever having to worry about a counter-strike.

It is only political factors protecting Venezuela from an overt US attack, not military factors. The latter are not irrelevant, of course, and I discussed them here. In military terms, Venezuela is a sitting duck which might be able to deter a ground operation, but which can do nothing against US standoff striking capabilities, at least not against a determined US effort. Against a pretend-strike, like what the Israelis and the USA did in Syria, the Venezuelans could probably meaningfully degrade the number of US bombs/missiles reaching their targets. But that is all they can reasonably hope for.

What about Syria?

Well, the AngloZionists sure lost the first phase of this war, but they remain unwilling to come to terms with that fact. So now they have defined-down their objectives from “a new Middle-East” or the “animal Assad must go” to “we will never allow peace to break out in Syria.” Not much of a strategy, but that’s is good enough for the Israelis, and that’s all that really matters to Trump or his masters. I don’t want to cover Syria in detail right now, but the simple fact that Pompeo is issuing threats against Turkey really says it all. The Turkish reaction was quite predictable: Turkish Vice President Fuat Oktay declared that “The United States must choose. Does it want to remain Turkey’s ally or risk our friendship by joining forces with terrorists to undermine its NATO ally’s defense against its enemies?”

Feel the love?!

Yes, these are only words, and Turkey remains under NATO/CENTCOM occupation (CENTCOM, which the Iranians have – quite logically- just declared a terrorist organization!). Still, between the S-400 vs. F-35, the Kurdish issue, the CIA continuous support for Fethullah Gülen or the fact that the (US-controlled) EU never accepted Turkey, all create a potentially explosive background which even a small spark could ignite.

It is equally clear that both the US and Israel will continue to conduct airstrikes, assassinations, support for Takfiri terrorist groups, etc., in Syria for the foreseeable future. Trump’s famous withdrawal from Syria will end up like all his promises: tossed down the memory hole. As for the Israelis, it is absolutely vital (for psychological and ideological reasons) for them to continue to subvert not only Syria but the entire Middle-East. Furthermore, we should *never* forget the Israeli end-goal: to use the USA to destroy any country daring to resist Israeli aggression. On top of that list, there is, of course, Iran.

Simply put: there will be no peace in the Middle-East as long as Palestine is occupied by a gang of racist thugs whose contempt for international law or even basic norms of civilized behavior is as total as their total reliance on deception and violence to subjugate the region and, eventually, our entire planet. Of course, Russia and China will help, as will Iran, but that is unlikely to be enough to achieve a lasting peace (if anything, the latest Israeli statements about annexing even more of Palestine are an indicator of more bad things to come).

The truth is that while the Empire does not have the power to break the will of the Syrian people, it has plenty enough strength left to prevent peace from breaking out in Syria.

Or Iran?

Who knows? It is possible to predict the actions of a rational actor. “Rational” implies a minimal degree of intelligence and sanity. The problem is that we cannot be sure about the intelligence of the folks currently remaining on duty at the Pentagon while we can be absolutely sure that the Israelis are completely insane and delusional (as racists always are). So far, the Israelis have failed to get the US to attack Iran. Clearly, there were some intelligent and sane people at the Pentagon (in the tradition of Admiral Fallon) but how sure can we be that by now they have not all been purged (or corrupted) by the Neocon regime?

[Sidebar: when I speak of the stupidity of the US leaders, I don’t mean that as an insult. I mean that in a diagnostic sense: these folks are simply not very bright. Check out Dmitry Orlov’s excellent “Is the USS Ship of Fools Taking on Water?” for a very good discussion of the increasingly important role stupidity is playing in the actions of the Empire. And Orlov is not the only one thinking this. By now most Russians are pretty convinced that stupidity and gross incompetence is what best characterizes US decision-making. If it wasn’t for the very real risks of war, the Russians would spend their time laughing at the cluelessness of the “indispensable nation’s” leaders…]

When I look at the fact that, at least so far, the US has not dared overt military aggression against Venezuela, I cannot imagine anybody at the Pentagon or CENTCOM having the stomach for a war against Iran. But, again, I am assuming intelligence and sanity, which applies neither to Mr. MAGA nor to the Israelis.

The DPRK? The Ukraine? Libya? Country X?

In strategic analysis, one should never say never, but I submit that the chances of a full-scale US military attack on the DPRK, in the Ukraine, in Libya or against Country X (replace X with whatever country you like) are slim. Frankly, that train has already left the station. Of course, “Country X” is vague enough to remain a possibility at least in theory (maybe some new tiny “Grenada” can be identified to, in Michael Ledeen’s immortal words “throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business” (after all, that is what this great American hero – Reagan – did after the US had to run from Lebanon), but unless the Trump Administration reaches a new level of incompetence, arrogance, and insanity, I don’t see where Uncle Shmuel might decide to “restore democracy” next.

Any guess as to where these “indispensable” folks will restore democracy next?

Conclusion: Venezuela still in the cross-hairs or already under attack?

When dealing with a terminally dysfunctional administration like the Trump Administration (just look at how often people get sacked or resign from it! Check here for the latest case), we have to assume that it is capable of the worst, most illogical, and even catastrophically self-defeating actions. An overt attack on Venezuela would undoubtedly fall into this category. We, therefore, need to set aside all the many statements made by various US officials (whether threatening or appeasing) and look at what the US is actually already doing. When we do that, we see that the US is already engaged in warfare against Venezuela, even if this warfare is mostly covert. Furthermore, this covert warfare has failed, at least so far. However, and even more worrisome, the US has paid very little, if any, political price for its completely illegal aggression against Venezuela. So the real question is not whether the US will decide to launch a full-scale overt military aggression against Venezuela but whether there are any factors which would inhibit the US from crossing the deniability threshold?

I can think of at least one such factor: the inevitable blow-back against any “Yankee” military intervention in the Latin American public opinion and the subsequent and potentially severe consequences for US puppets (à la Bolsonaro for example) and various comprador regimes (in Colombia for example) on the continent. Other than that, my biggest hope is that the debacle in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere will be sufficient to persuade US officials that one more military disaster would not yield any benefits to their interests.

The clock is running and the Neocon gang in the White House has to decide either way – blame it all on somebody else (the Venezuelan people, the Russians, the Chinese, Hezbollah, Iran, Martian extraterrestrials, etc.) and leave or try an overt military intervention and hope that things go better than they always do.

What do you think? Will the Trump Administration go to war and, if yes, where?

The Saker

PS: quick Ukrainian update: neither Poroshenko nor Zelenskii have anything resembling a real program (albeit Zelenskii just released a 10-point “plan” which is simply silly, no point in discussing it now). Since both of them will be US puppets, this is not a big problem: the course of the Ukraine will not change as a result of this election anyway. Poroshenko’s campaign in weak, he is trying to cater to the Russian speaking population (he even goes as far as sometimes speaking in Russian, which is technically illegal for him!), but that is way too late by now: everybody hates him and the regime he represents. Zelenskii, in contrast, has a very dynamic and effective campaign – mostly videos – in which he says stuff which Poroshenko could never say. Most observers, including myself, think that since the 2nd round of voting is a competition of anti-ratings (negative perception) Zelenskii will win. Time is running out for Poroshenko, he better come up with something dramatic, or he needs to run. As for Yulia Vladimirovna, she clearly is in discussions with the Zelenskii people to see if they can form a political coalition in the Rada. I believe that these negotiations will be kept secret until the 2nd tour, at which point a “coalition of Zelenskii supporting factions” will be created in the Rada.

Mairon on April 11, 2019 · at 11:45 am EST/EDT

For some time now, I have been thinking about the similarities between the Nazis and the modern US neocon regime and the ruling Western political (cultural as well) elites in general.
Accusing one’s opponents or anyone you dislike in any way of being ‘Nazi’ or ‘fascist’ has become so widespread these days that those terms have become empty and meaningless. The typical case of Reductio ad Hitlerum has also become a convenient way for lazy or intellectually limited people to avoid an argument debate. Simply labeling opponents as Nazi or liking them to Nazis/Fascists makes it unnecessary to address the actual arguments and prove your point.
Now, the reason I am saying all this is that I want to point out that me comparing the current US governing elite (and Western ones in general) with the Hitler regime is not an intellectual shortcut but an actual attempt to put forward arguments which explain why and how these similarities exist. Therefore, whoever disagrees with me or I dislike is a Nazi or like a Nazi which equals evil is certainly not what I am trying to do here.
A fact is, the Empire which is currently running amock has its roots far before the emergence of Nazi Germany, and its ideology is older, deeper and in many ways, more sinister than the Nazi one.
Without wanting to go into historical detail, here I wish to mention the similarities I think that the neocon regime and Nazi Germany share and which I think are glaring and have special relevance for our present situation.

The first, probably one of the most dangerous similarity is the absolute belief in their own superiority which is at the same time a justification for their actions. This self-righteousness is quite apparent with the US regime today and they are open about it. From this stem two important things: a belief they can act with total impunity and the ‘might is right’ which was the credo of the Nazis.
There is also a sense of ‘mission’ that the Empire (US Neocons and the Zionists) and in their time the Nazis, were on.
A total disregard for international norms, reject of diplomacy (though Hitler did use diplomacy when it suited him, especially when he thought he could achieve with diplomacy what he could not with force at that point).
The willingness to use force to impose their will.
Lack of morality and total disregard for the interests of others.
Mass use of propaganda specifically aimed at dehumanizing their enemies, in both cases Russia, the goal of which in both cases remains the same, the subjugation of Russia and its destruction.

It has to be pointed out, however, there are also significant differences between the Neocons/Zionists and their servants in the Western political and cultural elites and the Nazi German regime.
One of the most obvious perhaps is that the Nazis, intoxicated by the feeling of superiority and military strength did not think it necessary to hide behind slogans. Once they were in the position to enforce their policies, they were open about their goals, even though their worst crimes were always discussed and carried out in secrecy.
The Anglozionists on the other hand, still hide behind the slogans of freedom, democracy, and other humanistic ideals. Their cynicism is stunning and never ceases to amaze (in a negative way) and disgust.
In recent times, the guise is slowly being dropping, the language of the Empire’s leaders increasingly aggressive and menacing. The loss of influence and soft power is followed by belligerent rhetoric and increased propaganda effort, as well as more reckless (and dangerous) foreign policy.

The above leads me to the topic of the article, Venezuela. At a glance, Venezuela appears as a good candidate for becoming the newest member of the Empire’s victim club. Economically ravaged with an influential fifth column and very limited potential to resist militarily.
Then on the other hand, historically, it’s been one of the more developed and wealthy states of Latin America and in recent past, it was one of the leading countries to oppose the Empire and implement socialist ideas as a mean to emancipate the masses who suffered greatly under right-wing, colonial (and neocolonial) regimes.
The very fact the US is currently engaging in covert operations against Venezuela shows (for me at least) their unwillingness to commit to more overt methods. Unlike Iran, which the Anglozionists see as their mortal enemy and toppling the regime in Tehran would for them be a great victory, the rewards in Venezuela are not as nearly as tempting to justify a full-scale military adventure. Yes, it would mean eliminating yet another country which dares to resist, an important victory and would have a symbolical and psychological effect on the rest of the world but beyond that could prove quite costly for the Neocons.
Afghanistan had tremendous geostrategic importance, being at the crossroads of South, Central Asia, and the Middle East. Iraq even more so. Venezuela is an isolated country in a continent now largely controlled by the Empire.
These are the reasons I believe they won’t intervene militarily or invade the country. What they will try to do is to play the long game, increase the pressure, target more sectors with sanctions with the aim of increasing poverty and desperation among the population. They’ll also use their proxy Guaido to cause dissent on the political level, all of which put together will exhaust the Maduro regime.
It’s far less costly and risky than a military adventure and the end result could be the same (toppling of Maduro) but doing so by proxies and through applying economic/political pressure does not risk causing widespread armed resistance like an invasion would do. It also has the propaganda benefit: if Maduro is toppled without any military involvement by the Empire, they can represent is another ‘democratic’ revolution and removal of a tyrant. Potential failure can also be minimized by propaganda efforts, so the neocons won’t lose face.
That being said, I agree with the Saker, if the US does use force, it will likely be an aerial campaign a la 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia. Interestingly, the Empire suffered long-term damage from that intervention and even some of their goons are beginning to question it, not because they feel they did something wrong but purely pragmatic reasons.

Interesting times are ahead.

PS The arrest of Julian Assange comes at a point when the Empire is re-conquering Latin America, certainly no coincidence.

71 Comments

Anonymous on April 11, 2019 · at 12:27 am EST/EDT

The most dangerous thing that Russia could provide to Venezuela is crates of AK-47’s. The USA has enough air superiority to strike targets in Venezuela. But, as we’ve seen in the London Blitz and with every air campaign ever since, all that does is make the people getting bombed really, really mad.

It takes boots on the ground to change a country. And the fantasy boots on the ground that the incompetent regime changers were dreaming about in Colombia and Brazil all seem to have disappeared. The rich 20% in Venezuela who comprise the “opposition” to the elected government don’t want to leave their air conditioned homes and go play army out in the jungles.

Wherever Uncle Sam manages to press gang some boots from, they will be facing a Venezuelan people who’ve been enjoying a better system for almost 30 years now. The older generations will remind the younger of what it was like when that rich 20% stole all the money. Whoever comes in as the boots on the ground will be facing a population willing to fight. And those that won’t fight will likely be sympathetic to the resistance. That can be deadly as an urban guerilla force. That’s where those crates of AK-47’s come in to the picture. Create lots of caches, in urban areas, out in the jungle, wherever the Yankee or the Yankee’s minions aren’t likely to find them.

The defense of Venezuela depends on lots of brave, determined people. Yeah, the Yankees can blow some stuff up. When the power goes out in the USA, mobs of looters form and its a civic emergency to get the power back on and the looting of the capitalist pigs stopped. Thus, the Yankees probably thought that taken the power grid down would cause chaos in Venezuela. But it didn’t. I’m not anywhere near there, but the reaction seems to be more along the lines of “Stay Calm and Carry On” like the posters in the London subways and bomb shelters used to say. But with that mass of brave and determined people, who have capable numbers of AK-47’s available, and by election day people will be comparing Trump’s war to Vietnam.
- one minion on April 11, 2019 · at 9:06 am EST/EDT
  
  Just as a clarification and point of interest, those ‘Keep Calm’ posters were designed and some printed during WW2 but none were ever distributed or appeared in bomb shelters or on the tube (subway). Ordinary folks under bombardment didn’t, in fact, need that kind of instruction. The posters only became a ‘thing’ about 10 years ago, along with the deliberate promotion of rising militarism in general.
Larchmonter445 on April 11, 2019 · at 12:42 am EST/EDT

War? The small wars CENTCOM conducts are the limit. Proxies are mandatory.

Venezuela required troops from other nations to fight for the US stooge. That seems more and more unlikely.

What they will go for is more sabotage, making the economy scream, then a few attempts at assassination. They tried it with drones last year. So they’ll do it again.

Syria is beginning another four or five years of insurgent warfare, the US using ISIS and AQ which still number many tens of thousands. Of course, most of these fighters are in Idlib and the Russians and Syrians have begun heavy operations on selected target towns. The number of terrorist fighters could be as large as 40,000-50,000.

If the Israelis begin their development with settlements in the Golan, then war could break out between the IDF and Syrians/Hezbollah.

As for Afghanistan, the US will never withdraw. Same with Iraq. Never.
They use both of the wars to fight Iran, and to contain Russia and China. Why would they leave?

Ukraine could be a flash point, but the US and NATO know the Russians won’t go into Ukraine unless Russia itself is attacked.

Without a major False Flag event staged to drive Russia from the Middle East, I don’t see a war coming.
Not necessary. They are at war with Russia and at war with China already. The advantage the US has financially and with trade manipulation provides a war against both Russia and China. The US pursuit of total control of the oil industry would create devastation to Russia export income. Why fight a purely military war?

Will the US join Israel on some mad campaign in Syria-Lebanon and the Mediterranean?

Perhaps, but war in those regions means loss of aircraft, loss of manpower and a risk of escalation to tactical nukes.

The calculus of pain, loss and costs make the Generals and the White House very skeptical. What is in it for the US? It helps Israel somewhat to join in such a war. But most certainly, to win that war would take a miracle.

The problem with a military confrontation and warfare is one side has to win and the other side has to lose. The US knows that it will take enormous losses if it tries to win a wet dream war concocted by Bibi. Friendship only goes so far. The losses that will be inflicted by the other side on the US and Israel will be enormous. No one goes into such a fight knowing they will have losses of ships, subs, planes, bases, and thousands of troops either dead or wounded. Such a local war would have a few days duration. Beyond that, it will swiftly go nuclear and total devastation to the planet will occur. So for a 48 hour period of war, the price is 1000x too high.

You see, warfare now is about missiles, not fighting on the ground. Who has the highest value targets in the Middle East theater? The US Navy, the CENTCOM, the IDF and Israel itself. The target rich environment for Kalibre missiles from Russia, hypersonic missiles from Russia, missiles of all sizes from Iran, and rockets and missiles from Hezbollah mean the most static targets of the US and Israel will be pulverized.

I don’t see this war happening. It does not mean it won’t. But the costs are beyond imagination.

Pygmies kill elephants with blow darts. Let that be a lesson. Missiles are the main means of warfare of the future, especially any war against Russia and Iran in the ME. Reciprocal firepower will devastate the US assets and Israel will be vastly diminished if they start a war against the Resistance in Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Iraq.
- Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 8:59 am EST/EDT
  
  “As for Afghanistan, the US will never withdraw. Same with Iraq. Never.
  They use both of the wars to fight Iran, and to contain Russia and China. Why would they leave?”
  
  It wouldn’t matter if they don’t leave – if they are all dead.
  
  What NATO has been doing in Syria, Russia and China (and perhaps Pakistan and Iran if diplomacy serves) could do much better and more easily in Afghanistan.
  
  In Syria, NATO had to find an army of angry, discontented, violent men and then pay them, arm them, supply them and give them orders. The terrorists had to fight against the Syrian people and its army.
  
  In Afghanistan, the USA and its accomplices have illegally invaded an independent sovereign nation and declared its previous rulers, the Taliban, to be terrorists – in their own country! Naturally not only the Taliban but most free Afghans who have not been bribed (and stayed bribed) hate the invaders and do their best to harm them. Weapons, ammunition and supplies can flow in freely across several borders. Who knows, nasty accidents could even happen to American aircraft and helicopters. (With the recent safety record of Boeing and Lockheed, would anyone be surprised if a few American planes just disappeared?)
- Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 9:01 am EST/EDT
  
  “The problem with a military confrontation and warfare is one side has to win and the other side has to lose”.
  
  Unless it goes thermonuclear, in which case both sides (and everyone else) lose.
- Boz From Oz on April 11, 2019 · at 10:11 am EST/EDT
  
  One thing that has not been mentioned in all of this war talk, is the Forex currency wars that crash countries and economies.
  When the boyz decide the U.S dollar is not worth the paper it’s not printed on, the decline will be rapid and jaw dropping all at the same time.
  Try financing all those 800 bases and aircraft carriers with a worthless currency. The U.S really isn’t exceptional after all, economic mother nature is a bitch really.
- Simon Chow on April 13, 2019 · at 11:54 am EST/EDT
  
  “As for Afghanistan……why would they leave? IMO, they would leave like the way like they left Lebanon. So far the Taliban, for some reasons, did not use the “Beirut solution”. And I hope they would never use it and that the Americans would be wise to leave soon.
- krollchem on April 14, 2019 · at 2:55 pm EST/EDT
  
  The real question is what happens when the US starts running out of oil for it’s war machine!
  
  Currently US proven oil reserves are about 39 billion barrels, with a depletion (use) rate of 4.3 billion barrels per year. This may be increased somewhat via new inflated “discoveries” in the Permian basin and use of the Russian developed “pulsed plasma technology” (for non-carbonate plays).
  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
  
  Besides the US still imports oil, especially heavy oil to dilute the high API light oil/condensates from the tight oil fracking PONZI game. Saudi oil is being depleted (Twilight in the Desert), and there are sanctions on Venezuela and Iran heavy oil. Ironically, Russia is gaining from the high demand for Ural heavy oil.
  https://www.fort-russ.com/2019/04/u-s-sanctions-against-venezuela-and-iran-have-actually-benefited-russia/
  
  America is desperate and will do something insane an a few years and will be joined by the European neocolonial powers that are also running out of oil. It is no wonder that these European powers support the looting of Venezuela.
- Den Lille Abe on April 16, 2019 · at 2:12 am EST/EDT
  
  A bloody good comment Larchmonter 445, very well putt
Johnno on April 11, 2019 · at 12:51 am EST/EDT

I don’t think Trump will risk war until after he’s guaranteed a 2nd term. Then there’s nothing to stop him. The American people will just react by waiting four years where they’ll hop from the red square to the blue square and believe that will solve their problems as usual. The Left likely doesn’t care, just so long as they can have their abortions and scream at their own skin colour and wave a rainbow flag. So long as Trump heads off they’ll be pleased as punch and everything will be forgotten because their team is in the commander’s chair and will continue the wars.
Auslander on April 11, 2019 · at 1:22 am EST/EDT

Minisitrep Orcland

In regards to the ‘presidential elections’ in the failed state of Orcland, the ‘president’ will be whoever Foggy Bottom chooses. End of discussion. At the moment, the chief contenders besides the sitting ‘president’ are a comedian and a ruthless and corrupt ‘business’ lady. If the comedian wins he will be in a worse position than even the gentleman sitting in the Oval Office in DC, incapable of action and only capable of reactions to the varying winds of fate and rapacious desires of himself and others for yet more spoils of two already despoiled countries.

The situation on Novorossiya has not changed, the daily ‘wastage’, the casualties amongst the soldiers and nearby civilians along the lines, is ever present. ‘Wastage’ is another hideous term brought to us via TPTB a hundred years ago from that unsinkable but steadily foundering aerodrome, England, and their in decline at that time but still powerful ally, at that time, Paris. The term ‘wastage’ was promulgated to describe the loss of roughly 5,000 Brit soldiers a day during the ‘quiet’ times between senseless and every more deadly attacks against Germany along the fetid sore that was the lines of contact in that fratricidal war, a war that commenced in late summer of 1914 and is ongoing to this day.

For those who wish an all out attack by the forces of Novorossiya against their antagonists, this will not happen. The killings of Motorola, Givi and Zak were just that, killings of successful commanders who were killed in a hopeless attempt to cripple the armies of Novorossiya. It did not work, there is no commander in this day and age who can not be replaced while his predecessor is being carried away on a stretcher. The guiding hands and guarantors of Novorossiya are playing the long game, patiently waiting for the orcs to self destruct which they will do, albeit this much sought after happenstance will not come to pass tomorrow.

By this time, all the chaff has run from Novorossiya, those who remain are deeply supportive of this budding country. To give an example, of all those refugees and evacuees we got on in late summer and fall of ’14, women and children only, every husband has been wounded at least once and more than one has been wounded twice and more. Each and every one of those husbands healed and went right back to the fight. Of the many children we got out, nine who have reached their majority have stopped their educations on said majority and gone to serve. Three of them have been wounded, too, and gone right back to the fight.

While there are no doubts that Novorossiya will survive and eventually prosper, it will be a long and hard struggle and fight. Many a father and son, and yes, daughter and wife, will fall in this nasty ‘little’ war, but in the end victory will be theirs. We long for that day for more reasons than I can write, but we are absolutely positive that day will come. It can not come soon enough for us, but it will come.

Auslander
Author

An Incident On Simonka https://saker.community/product/an-incident-on-simonka-a-novel-by-r-h-auslander-pdf-ed/

Never The Last One https://saker.community/product/never-the-last-one-a-novel-by-r-h-auslander-pdf-ed/ A deep look in to Russia, her culture and her Armed Forces, in essence a look at the emergence of Russian Federation.
- Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 9:07 am EST/EDT
  
  “At the moment, the chief contenders besides the sitting ‘president’ are a comedian and a ruthless and corrupt ‘business’ lady”.
  
  For quite some time I was in doubt as to whether you were referring to Ukraine or the USA.
  
  Eventually I decided that Donald Trump doesn’t quite qualify as a comedian, as his jokes are unintentional.
  
  “Orcland” is ambiguous too.
  - ed on April 11, 2019 · at 4:34 pm EST/EDT
    
    Foggy bottom is the locale of the US State Dept in Wash DC.
- Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 9:11 am EST/EDT
  
  “The guiding hands and guarantors of Novorossiya are playing the long game, patiently waiting for the orcs to self destruct…”
  
  With pleasing symmetry, just as the guiding hands of Russia and China are playing the long game, waiting for the USA to self-destruct. (It’s already well under way).
Serg on April 11, 2019 · at 2:55 am EST/EDT

We are in the last stages of an Empire, it’s about to collapse like countless did before it. Everything is spiralling out of control.

The US threw the kitchen sink at Venezuela and it’s still standing, and it’s in their back yard. Their impotent efforts in Syria could be brushed off to distance, though even then it was pretty clear that the US is losing it’s mojo. With Venezuela, it’s clear for all to see, they don’t have the might they pretend they still have. The rhetoric certainly hasn’t lessened, quite the opposite, they have ratcheted it up to all-powerful, omnipotent levels, it’s the neutered cat who thinks he can still roar like a mighty lion and bend things to his will.

A huge sign of weakness and loss of control is infighting, the last people someone loses power over, are his immediate allies. Turkey being the prime example, having been a NATO ally from the very beginning. I am convinced the US is somehow involved in the coup attempt of 2016, it failed. They attacked Turkey economically, it failed. They threatened sanctions because of their S400 purchase, it failed. They threatened to pull the F35 deal because of the S400 purchase, failed again. There were mafia-esque veiled threats uttered against Turkeys membership in NATO over that same S400 purchase, Turkey still won’t budge. Not to mention that same strategy failing against Germany and the Nord Stream II pipeline, which represent a spectacular failure for the US, as Germany is among the most subservient bootlicking vassal slaves, hanging from the empires belt like simple tools.

Turkey seems to have all intentions to see this deal through, if the US sees it’s threats till the bitter end, NATO is as good as done. NATO is, without Turkey, which represents the second biggest military within the alliance (even after Erdogan purged huge parts of it as a result of the coup), nothing but a paper tiger. If the Russians tripped, fell and hit their head so hard, they somehow develop a lust for conquest, the rest of NATO-Europe wouldn’t be able put up a fight for more than a few weeks against the Russian military without US help, even then, not much could be done without nukes. Luckily for the dimwitted Europeans, this version of Russia only exists in their deranged heads.

The bottom line is, the US is losing it’s grip on power everywhere you look. At this point, a brief mention of the Saudi threat of abandoning the Petrodollar. The mere utterance of defiance from the Saudis is cause for alarm in the White House.

The US can still do a lot of damage, but long gone are the days of simply snipping their fingers to get their way.
Mihail on April 11, 2019 · at 4:31 am EST/EDT

President Trump has the flair of a bovine and is almost as intelligent
Anonymous on April 11, 2019 · at 4:45 am EST/EDT

the past 60odds years is the future.,so yes there will be more blood letting of the children of the ‘lesser gods’.

it is so outdated and boring to read ,”us is failing,eu is breaking,resistance is winning,china&russia winning,syria is saved”outlooks in the internet.,reality is…. ,venezuelan,syrians,palestinians,iranians,libyians,iragis,afgahanistanis,n.koreans and countless other ”children of lesser gods” are still suffering very badly and the future looks grim, as the finance,trade,communication & transport,food & fuel , has become mechanism of WAR., ….so please, no humans should bet themselves on the shoulder till…NOone is suffering.

it ia ”hunger game” out there ….have a nice day.
- Anonymous on April 11, 2019 · at 7:18 am EST/EDT
  
  As long as the ” Yankee ” dollar is accepted for bribes around the World. This madness will continue. Like watching Sisyphus day in and day out. It’s the biggest weapon the Empire maintains. Once it falls it will be left to the rest of us to try and put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
  
  They should call it ” MIGA “. Make Israel Great Again.
Anonymous on April 11, 2019 · at 7:28 am EST/EDT

Of course the US is goIng to attack Venuzuela. Of course it is going to attack North Korea, and Iran, thinking to stretch Russia, wrack it. But is is all about Palestine and eschatology.
Nathan Donaldson on April 11, 2019 · at 8:01 am EST/EDT

Venezuela is obviously the country to go to war with if they are thinking straight. It could be a quagmire, but the risk is symmetrical. An attack on Iran easily spirals out of control into a general war across the Middle East, a loss of most of the world’s exported oil at least for a time, and a crippling of the global economy—then maybe WWIII.

It will happen soon: the end of the fracking/shale boom is in sight & once it’s gone the world oil market will be too tight for a disruption caused by a military attack.
Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 8:22 am EST/EDT

“Will the Trump administration go to war next?”

There seems to be a typo in the headline.

Surely it should read

“Where will the Trump administration go to war next?”
- Anonymous on April 11, 2019 · at 4:27 pm EST/EDT
  
  @ Tom Welsh
  
  Both the above title and your title are fine – it is only that they ask two slightly different questions.
  
  “Will the Trump administration go to war next?” is asking, whether Trump’s administration’s next major step will be a war (presumably, a big one).
  
  “Where will the Trump administration go to war next?” is presuming that Trump has already fought a war, and is now asking, where will his next one be.
Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 8:25 am EST/EDT

‘How cool is that? The US threatens a NATO member state with war (that is what “devastating/serious consequences” means in diplotalk)…’

That is very cool indeed. Because then the rest of NATO would be legally bound to declare war on the USA.

I would enjoy seeing that. (Although, as I live in a NATO member state that has nuclear weapons, maybe not. Although they are supplied by the USA and therefore probably inert without permission from Washington. Althgouh…)
- Anonius on April 11, 2019 · at 1:07 pm EST/EDT
  
  Interesting scenario, but I would be extremely surprised if any of the vassals would actually try that. On the other hand, with all the talks about F35’s and the US being able to monitor their movements without special effort, as the F35 is said to report it’s functions the moment the pilot starts the engine. So, long story short, I wonder about other weapons or equipment in vassals’ possession.
Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 8:27 am EST/EDT

“This would all be very funny if not for the fact that it is pretty obvious that the USA is already engaged in a covert military/terrorist campaign against Venezuela…”

And Syria and Iran and Yemen and Somalia and Russia (and probably China).

As well as occupying Afghanistan and Iraq. And having recently destroyed Libya.
Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 8:36 am EST/EDT

“…Uncle Shmuel can fire off as many missiles as he wants for weeks and months…”

That, in turn, makes a large assumption: that Uncle Shmuel has unlimited numbers of those missiles. As far as I know, that’s not the case. They only order as many as they think they are likely to need, plus no doubt some margin.

https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2018/05/22/the-us-is-running-out-of-bombs-and-it-may-soon-struggle-to-make-more/

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-running-out-of-hellfire-missiles-because-isis-2017-11?r=US&IR=T

https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2018/05/29/why-the-us-should-stock-up-on-tomahawks/

“The Tomahawk cruise missile is one of the most effective and highly utilized weapons in the U.S. arsenal ― and we have decided to stop producing them.

“Last month, the U.S. Navy placed its final order for 100 replacement Tomahawks, citing a new cruise missile under development as the reason for closing the production line. Well and good, but the new missiles are not expected to be available until 2030”.
- Outlaw Historian on April 11, 2019 · at 12:28 pm EST/EDT
  
  I share your objection to that assumption. Same goes for the ability to conduct in-air refueling operations and the quantity of available strike aircraft as I doubt an aircraft carrier will be risked anywhere nowadays given anti-ship missile availability. The Bolivarian Navy has two attack submarines that could provide a very unexpected surprise to an invasion task force.
Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 8:41 am EST/EDT

It’s also important to remember that the people in the Pentagon are professionals, and they surely still have some influence.

Don’t you think their main concern is with Russia and China? Most of us appreciate that any war between the USA and Russia and/or China would have to be started by the USA. But who can tell what the US government might do? Can even the Pentagon people be absolutely certain?

So they will not be super keen on wasting large numbers of missiles – which may not be replaceable until 2030 (meaning later) – on an irrelevant sideshow that has no military necessity and very little benefit for the USA.

Just as a gunslinger advancing cautiously down Main Street to duel with a dangerous enemy would be unlikely to waste his precious bullets on, say, a young boy who bad-mouths him or a lady who empties a chamber pot on his head.
- Larchmonter445 on April 11, 2019 · at 12:40 pm EST/EDT
  
  “the people in the Pentagon are professionals”
  
  Professional Whats?
  
  The Pentagon has not fought, planned, organized, joined any war that led to a professional finish.
  
  Compare the Russian operations in Syria with any of the seven large wars and the fifty or so smaller adventures of SOCOM over the last 20,30,40,50, years.
  
  The whores in the Pentagon are on the Big Teat of huge budgets, cost overruns, corporate insider trading, and platinum parachute careers as hucksters for the war machine corporations.
  
  They have $11 Trillion missing, and another $12 Trillion gone somewhere in the past. They have 17 accounting systems that no one can use to audit them.
  
  Because a few rational men and women in uniform exist does not mean they have any influence pro or con as to the wars they make and operate.
  
  They are not professional at their core. They are mostly just careerists who sop up money and kill people and destroy cities. The Mafia had more professionalism in its structure and operations (pre-Gotti).
  
  Go through the four-stars and check their careers and accomplishments.
  
  Most of them would be jeep drivers at best for Bradley, Ike and Marshall.
  
  The US military is massive. That’s what fools people into thinking the personnel are professionals.
  
  They are parade ground generals and colonels.
  
  Syria exposed them once and for all.
  
  The Russians are the professionals.
  Hezbollah are the professionals.
  Even the Tiger unit of the Syrian Army are led by professionals.
  And of course, the IRGC and Generals are professionals.
  
  I’ll even go back to the 80’s and El Salvador. Joaquin Villalobos and the FMLN were superior professionals to all that the US had.
  
  Cuba when General Ochoa led the forces in Angola and Nicaragua were an excellent military.
  
  And none were better than General Giap and the North Vietnamese.
  
  So across six decades we have ample proof that the US military is not professional in substance and performance. Fly overs above football games and NASCAR races not withstanding.
  
  Libya just went “hot”, and the US military ran for the hills and withdrew from the scene. Says a lot about what they are at the core.
  
  They are basically “mad aerial bombers”.
  
  I’ll point out one other fact. The Russians, Chinese and some other friends conducted two weeks of the most massive war games exercises last year, Vostok 2018.
  
  They cover vast territories and integrated operations.
  The exercise involved around 300,000 Russian soldiers, including 6,000 airborne troops, over 1,000 warplanes, helicopters and drones, about 36,000 armor, and 80 combat and support ships. To ensure full transparency, the Russian Defense Ministry invited 87 observers from 57 countries to the event.
  
  The Russians were joined by 3,200 Chinese troops and 900 Chinese tanks and armoured vehicles, as well as troops from Mongolia.
  
  There were also simultaneous naval exercises in the Sea of Japan, the Bering Sea, and the Sea of Okhotsk.
  
  NATO and the US have never mounted anything comparable. Yet they scale up to five times the Russian military.
  
  When the US and NATO answered with their own “big show”, Trident Juncture, it involved some 50,000 personnel. It was labeled the alliance’s largest exercise since the Cold War. Non-NATO members Finland and Sweden also participated in the exercise.
  
  Compare and contrast those facts.
  - Grieved on April 11, 2019 · at 11:08 pm EST/EDT
    
    And of course Trident Juncture ended with a Norwegian frigate literally sinking itself, as well as numerous vehicle accidents on icy roads, and leaving behind a national disgust at how the soldiers had relieved themselves everywhere, leaving the mess for other people to clean up.
    
    Your point is well taken, that it takes not just armies but the organization and supply of those armies to fight a war. It was apparent that NATO was a failure at this even before these exercises, but I imagine it was very useful for the generals of the world to study the latest evidence of it.
    
    And good comment by the way, about the true soldiers of the world, versus the long-standing incompetence – and let’s just call it cowardice – of the Pentagon.
    
    And greetings :)
  - Taras 77 on April 14, 2019 · at 4:28 pm EST/EDT
    
    Here is a fine example of parade ground professionals and “security experts;” I would say board room professionals, not so good at auditing, or maybe they just do not feel they need to care about the numbers, the billions and prob trillions will always be there for them to draw out more fantasy expenditures.
    
    Keane, alexadner, townsend, rogers have their fat fingers in a number of ventures.
    
    This merry band of trough feeders is one is pushing for nuc technology for the saudis, guaranteed to render a boat load of loot for them as well as for kushner:
    
    http://ip3international.com/team/
Edward on April 11, 2019 · at 9:56 am EST/EDT

I have been wondering the same thing. Trump has appointed the worst people in his administration. He seems to place no value in professionalism and is 100% about PR and cronyism. The White House can’t accomplish anything because nobody there is a professional. Trump doesn’t even seem to think: “I don’t know anything about X and so I had better be cautious”. He seems more willing to act off his ignorant impulses. It is like having Archie Bunker run the country from a barstool. Bolton seems to be able to control the information reaching Trump, which makes me worried. The whole country is paying a heavy price for Adelson’s $20 million bribe.
Anonymous on April 11, 2019 · at 10:04 am EST/EDT

“… as total as their total reliance on deception and violence to subjugate the region and, eventually, our entire planet.”

And don’t forget their total reliance and dependency on the free USA $$$funding direct from the Fed and taxpayer which largely gets clipped and circled straight back into the pockets of the usual US suspects in and around the Houses. It is a sewage system of criminal connivance and money laundering which suits the military industrial congregational complex. Period.
peter mcloughlin on April 11, 2019 · at 10:11 am EST/EDT

Countries pursue aims that do ‘not yield any benefits to their interests.’ Tragically, this is only discovered retrospectively: when it is too late. Power (manifested as interest) has been present in every conflict of the past – no exception. It is the underlying motivation for war. Other cultural factors might change, but not power. Interest cuts across all apparently unifying principles: family, kin, nation, religion, ideology, politics – everything. We unite with the enemies of our principles, because that is what serves our interest. Power is the cause of war.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
Anonymous on April 11, 2019 · at 10:12 am EST/EDT

Isn’t Venezuela’s oil a good enough reason to attack it?
- hans on April 13, 2019 · at 1:29 pm EST/EDT
  
  i think it’s gold is what they are really after
Craig Mouldey on April 11, 2019 · at 11:03 am EST/EDT

Everything this empire does is evil. Look at the countries they have destroyed! And they are determined that the entire world bow to them. They are thieves, murderers and liars, constantly accusing others of things they alone are doing.
Having said that, I am particularly concerned with their latest determination to send NATO ships into the Sea of Azov. I don’t think Russia will permit it and nor should they. NATO is taunting Russia, hoping for a reaction. It would not surprise me if they tried to make a scene there as a distraction, and then attempt to take Kaliningrad.
It amazes me that they are pursuing this course, knowing what the consequences could be.
Susan on April 11, 2019 · at 11:20 am EST/EDT

My thoughts on US empire have changed in the last couple of years. I believe the arms industry is making so much money, as is the oil industry that they dont really want the real deal with Russia or China. The MIC wants more money, lets be honest about America. They dont care about anything but money and things. Picking on the little countries all over the world is easy, and a huge money maker for Boeing Lockheed Exxon Raytheon, they then spread their money to the politicians who are then owned. It has always been this way and with Trump it may just collapse. Trump is like a cartoon character who is a tornado spinning and sucking everything in destroying it and spitting it out. He is the the result of American greed and corruption. He is America. 60 percent of the country is terrified of looking in the mirror. The other 40 percent just want to be more like him
The military budget he is asking for, will pretty much gut the country. Our schools our roads our whole infrastructure is collapsing. Most of the dams in the US are well beyond their life spans. Add to that climate disasters that never get cleaned up. Mexico Beach, Paradise, NJ shore, Puerto Rico, New Orleans. Toxic disasters where ever the oil, chem,and military are. We are failing from the inside out.
Look who owns our media, they work tirelessly to keep the citizens ignorant, and the citizens would much rather spend there days at discount stores with stuff made by slave labor. This all keeps the MIC and the oil industry rolling in dough.
The thing is that in the mic there is massive greed they just have to have more, so they start cutting corners. Boeing is the latest example but the military failures are becoming all the more obvious as well. Our food system and healthcare systems are failing as well.
It is bleak here homeless people and vets every where on the streets with cities literally sticking them on planes and flying them out of their state! Shutting down parks so they dont move in.
The list goes on and on. I believe we are already so rotted from the inside that going after somebody like Iran could just topple us over.
The only real hope I have is people in the country are starting to notice will they notice in time? And do something.
We in my town are having a tax day anti military protest! People are starting to put it together that the DOD is taking any and all money
Dick Lenning on April 11, 2019 · at 11:24 am EST/EDT

If Trump authorises war, Venezuela is the most likely target for logistics reasons, and because Venezuela’s military is far weaker than Iran’s, or North Korea.

That said, I think the soonest a war against US forces will happen in Syria, because Iran has relatively easy logistics to send proxies to attack US forces near Iraq, and on Jordan’s border.
Mairon on April 11, 2019 · at 11:45 am EST/EDT

For some time now, I have been thinking about the similarities between the Nazis and the modern US neocon regime and the ruling Western political (cultural as well) elites in general.
Accusing one’s opponents or anyone you dislike in any way of being ‘Nazi’ or ‘fascist’ has become so widespread these days that those terms have become empty and meaningless. The typical case of Reductio ad Hitlerum has also become a convenient way for lazy or intellectually limited people to avoid an argument debate. Simply labeling opponents as Nazi or liking them to Nazis/Fascists makes it unnecessary to address the actual arguments and prove your point.
Now, the reason I am saying all this is that I want to point out that me comparing the current US governing elite (and Western ones in general) with the Hitler regime is not an intellectual shortcut but an actual attempt to put forward arguments which explain why and how these similarities exist. Therefore, whoever disagrees with me or I dislike is a Nazi or like a Nazi which equals evil is certainly not what I am trying to do here.
A fact is, the Empire which is currently running amock has its roots far before the emergence of Nazi Germany, and its ideology is older, deeper and in many ways, more sinister than the Nazi one.
Without wanting to go into historical detail, here I wish to mention the similarities I think that the neocon regime and Nazi Germany share and which I think are glaring and have special relevance for our present situation.

The first, probably one of the most dangerous similarity is the absolute belief in their own superiority which is at the same time a justification for their actions. This self-righteousness is quite apparent with the US regime today and they are open about it. From this stem two important things: a belief they can act with total impunity and the ‘might is right’ which was the credo of the Nazis.
There is also a sense of ‘mission’ that the Empire (US Neocons and the Zionists) and in their time the Nazis, were on.
A total disregard for international norms, reject of diplomacy (though Hitler did use diplomacy when it suited him, especially when he thought he could achieve with diplomacy what he could not with force at that point).
The willingness to use force to impose their will.
Lack of morality and total disregard for the interests of others.
Mass use of propaganda specifically aimed at dehumanizing their enemies, in both cases Russia, the goal of which in both cases remains the same, the subjugation of Russia and its destruction.

It has to be pointed out, however, there are also significant differences between the Neocons/Zionists and their servants in the Western political and cultural elites and the Nazi German regime.
One of the most obvious perhaps is that the Nazis, intoxicated by the feeling of superiority and military strength did not think it necessary to hide behind slogans. Once they were in the position to enforce their policies, they were open about their goals, even though their worst crimes were always discussed and carried out in secrecy.
The Anglozionists on the other hand, still hide behind the slogans of freedom, democracy, and other humanistic ideals. Their cynicism is stunning and never ceases to amaze (in a negative way) and disgust.
In recent times, the guise is slowly being dropping, the language of the Empire’s leaders increasingly aggressive and menacing. The loss of influence and soft power is followed by belligerent rhetoric and increased propaganda effort, as well as more reckless (and dangerous) foreign policy.

The above leads me to the topic of the article, Venezuela. At a glance, Venezuela appears as a good candidate for becoming the newest member of the Empire’s victim club. Economically ravaged with an influential fifth column and very limited potential to resist militarily.
Then on the other hand, historically, it’s been one of the more developed and wealthy states of Latin America and in recent past, it was one of the leading countries to oppose the Empire and implement socialist ideas as a mean to emancipate the masses who suffered greatly under right-wing, colonial (and neocolonial) regimes.
The very fact the US is currently engaging in covert operations against Venezuela shows (for me at least) their unwillingness to commit to more overt methods. Unlike Iran, which the Anglozionists see as their mortal enemy and toppling the regime in Tehran would for them be a great victory, the rewards in Venezuela are not as nearly as tempting to justify a full-scale military adventure. Yes, it would mean eliminating yet another country which dares to resist, an important victory and would have a symbolical and psychological effect on the rest of the world but beyond that could prove quite costly for the Neocons.
Afghanistan had tremendous geostrategic importance, being at the crossroads of South, Central Asia, and the Middle East. Iraq even more so. Venezuela is an isolated country in a continent now largely controlled by the Empire.
These are the reasons I believe they won’t intervene militarily or invade the country. What they will try to do is to play the long game, increase the pressure, target more sectors with sanctions with the aim of increasing poverty and desperation among the population. They’ll also use their proxy Guaido to cause dissent on the political level, all of which put together will exhaust the Maduro regime.
It’s far less costly and risky than a military adventure and the end result could be the same (toppling of Maduro) but doing so by proxies and through applying economic/political pressure does not risk causing widespread armed resistance like an invasion would do. It also has the propaganda benefit: if Maduro is toppled without any military involvement by the Empire, they can represent is another ‘democratic’ revolution and removal of a tyrant. Potential failure can also be minimized by propaganda efforts, so the neocons won’t lose face.
That being said, I agree with the Saker, if the US does use force, it will likely be an aerial campaign a la 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia. Interestingly, the Empire suffered long-term damage from that intervention and even some of their goons are beginning to question it, not because they feel they did something wrong but purely pragmatic reasons.

Interesting times are ahead.

PS The arrest of Julian Assange comes at a point when the Empire is re-conquering Latin America, certainly no coincidence.
- Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 12:44 pm EST/EDT
  
  Quite right, Mairon. I notice in particular that the accusation of “appeasement” has been a standard political jibe since 1939.
  
  Yet nowadays the nation that is by far the most frequently appeased is the USA. And for the same reason as Nazi Germany – a clever combination of diplomacy, threats and actual violence. (“Shrecklichkeit”).
  - Mairon on April 11, 2019 · at 1:30 pm EST/EDT
    
    The growth of Imperial hubris has greatly accelerated since the collapse of the USSR. It perhaps reached its zenith during the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia, which was a message to the world by the Empire ‘we are in charge and can do anything we like’. Since then the power of the Empire and the collective West is in steady decline.
    Coming back to Nazi parallels, another thing worth mentioning is that they too were not capable, nor interested, in upholding agreements that they signed, just like the US today. It’s not always good to draw historical parallels so we cannot really speak of appeasement today compared to the interwar era. Russia and China did attempt and still do, to reach some sort of an arrangement with the Empire. We’ve seen perfectly well on the example of Trump’s election how any attempt to even talk to Russia will end up.
    Russia and China are well aware of it. I am in favor of developing a strategy of asymmetrical response to the Empire’s aggression. Russia has made some attempts at doing this, most notably de-dollarization, while China continues with its strategic initiatives such as Belt and Road and Made in China 2020 which really scare the West. China’s attempts indeed have the potential to challenge Western global monetary and financial hegemony in the long run, as well as their control of international trade. Russia should make more determined efforts in this direction.
Outlaw Historian on April 11, 2019 · at 12:06 pm EST/EDT

With Assange’s arrest, The Outlaw US Empire will now go to war against its own constitution, and escalate the war on its own citizenry, which a theatre of war being omitted.
Pamela Storer on April 11, 2019 · at 12:07 pm EST/EDT

What is especially worrying is that Netanyahu just won the election in Occupied Palestine.
This was a tough one for him, he is under investigation for criminal activities, he has made some bad mistakes lately. He even had to go to Moscow for a photo shoot shaking hands with Putin to help his cause.
But, by hairs breadth, he did it.
And this, for someone like him, wont be salutary. It will, I suspect, puff him up with arrogance; with “I can do anything I want” which will be sued to push his court jester, Trump, even further.
America’s foreign policy is “whatever Nuttyahoo wants, Nuttyahoo gets”.
Which is especially worrying just now, in light of all other factors mentioned here.
Lumpenkönig on April 11, 2019 · at 12:12 pm EST/EDT

Saker wrote:

“Zelenskii, in contrast, has a very dynamic and effective campaign – mostly videos – in which he says stuff which Poroshenko could never say.”

Perhaps Zelenskii is copying Trump’s campaign style. Trump also made many promises to the bottom 90% of the population that he never intended to keep. Instead of “America First!” Zelenskii could yell “Ukraine First!” and “Let’s make the Ukraine Great again!” That should win him some votes.

The link below shows a hat that Zelenskii can pass out to the crowds along with cookies:

Make Ukraine Great Again

Of course no matter who gets elected, I am more interested in learning what will happen in the Ukraine when the current contract with Gasprom expires in 2020. Isn’t Nordstream 2 in operation? When will Russia turn off the gas that flows to the Ukraine? Germany won’t complain, as the German elites will profit from charging the other European countries large transit fees.

Saker: The Empire will not invade Venezuela for a while. It is busy securing the oil in “liberated” Sudan….

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-11/sudans-military-topples-president-omar-al-bashir-after-swift-takeover-capital
SallysDad on April 11, 2019 · at 12:23 pm EST/EDT

It would not surprise me if Russia pursues some kind of arrangement with the UK and France to avoid a nuclear exchange if all hell breaks lose with the US. If the US starts a war, do they really want to sacrifice London and Paris just so they can stand united with their trusted partner the US? What will they gain from that? Absolutely nothing.
There is no sense or need for Europe to be dragged into the self immolation of the US.
- Tom Welsh on April 11, 2019 · at 12:48 pm EST/EDT
  
  I sure as hell hope so, because I live in England. A small defenceless country whose leaders have moronically painted a huge target on it by hosting US air bases and thermonuclear weapons.
  
  https://metro.co.uk/2017/08/11/want-to-survive-nuclear-attack-this-map-shows-where-you-need-to-move-6845692/
- Larchmonter445 on April 11, 2019 · at 12:49 pm EST/EDT
  
  Here’s the problem for the vassals, UK and France, (et al): they are the launch pads for any war against Russia. And therefore, they cannot “stand down”. They will be obliterated, also.
  
  Besides, the UK will be all in to destroy Russia. They have been for hundreds of years.
  
  France is led by stupid people. Only separating from the US alliance as De Gaulle did for a short time might save their sorry asses.
Ralph Conner on April 11, 2019 · at 1:12 pm EST/EDT

If the Zionazis can’t recruit cannon fodder, there will be no hot war. They need to maintain plausible deniability or, they’ll loose their cadre of useful idiots – the MSM public. Trump & Co. may be insane. But the operational end of the MIC is anything but – they like survival.
Alexander on April 11, 2019 · at 1:38 pm EST/EDT

I greatly fear that the many distinguished commentators here are fighting the last war. What I fear is that the next, coming war, will resemble what the US (probably) is doing to V’zuela, but worse. We all know that a city could be reduced to chaos in a second if its internet connections are taken down. All countries know this and also know that it wouldn’t necessarily have to be a state actor who would do this.

I personally find this prospect more alarming than a nuclear war, after which at least I am dead.
- sean the leprechaun on April 11, 2019 · at 3:20 pm EST/EDT
  
  Personally, a month, year, or many years with out ‘cell phones’ would mean people might have to talk to each other……………in person………even read up on communicating, with, say, smoke signals. Really, chaos without cell phones……..as a form of population control? Absolutly! Can you imagine the line up of millenials looking for a tall building or bridge to jump off.
Anonymous on April 11, 2019 · at 1:49 pm EST/EDT

In my opinion, and this is just my opinion,

Trump won’t start any new wars during his first term. This will guarantee he loses the next election. If though, God Forbid, he is elected a second time, I believe the chances of him starting a war against Iran or Venezuela or Syria (or perhaps all three) is extremely high.

There will continue to be sanctions and the usual bluster for roughly the next year and a half until the next election gets underway, and there might be a few small false flags. But nothing major, because Trump doesn’t have the balls to start any wars during his first term. But if he gets back in there for a second term, then his terminal stupidity, arrogance, and cowardice is almost guaranteed to be combined with some false flag big enough to cause a huge conflagration and millions of deaths in yet another series of unnecessary and useless wars.

Which is why, Trump needs to be removed immediately. He can’t be allowed to serve a second term. Even if his replacement is also a warmonger (almost guaranteed) if we’re lucky, it will at-least be someone with more tact and less subservient to Israel like Obama.
B.F. on April 11, 2019 · at 3:42 pm EST/EDT

Will the Trump Administration go to war ? The unfortunate impression is that the US Government does not have a clue what it has to do. It tried something with North Korea, and Kim did not back down. It then switched to Iran. However, Iran is a powerful adversary. We now have Venezuela. It became a victim of attempted regime change, just like Iran. It overcame the attempt. So far regime change has not succeeded in Iran and Venezuela. I think that the US Government is still analyzing the geopolitical situation, aware that a potential military intervention would have severe political repercussions, starting a chain reaction of discontent in Europe. The EU countries are already starting to say ‘no’. This ‘no’ will increase in ‘volume’. We are approaching a time when the US can conclude that it cannot trust it’s European NATO allies any more. We could well see an anticlimax, the US backing down on any military activities against either Iran or Venezuela. However, it will depend on the neocons and their rationale, if they have any.
Vertov on April 11, 2019 · at 4:48 pm EST/EDT

A recent opinion’s poll here in Brazil showed that 79% of the population are against a military intervention in Venezuela. Among Bolsonaro voters the opposition drops to 76%, still a huge majority. So we can safely say that a war against Venezuela would mean a huge crisis in Brazil, something that the Empire might not want to face right now.
Randy Brady on April 11, 2019 · at 5:36 pm EST/EDT

Will the U.S. go to war and where? If one is to base his/her answer on history, the answer is yes. War is inevitable. The U.S. has a long and timely track record of making a mess of things in other countries and then leaving. And the convenience of stand-off long range missile attacks smells sweet to U.S. officials. They have demonstrated for many years their love of bombing people and nations.

The attack has to be on Venezuela. To hell with Russian and Chinese investments there. It is to rich a target to ignore, regardless of consequences. Destroy the Venezuelan infrastructure, and send in the oil companies.

To add to this mess, start up the Muslim Tafkiri/Wahaabist/ISIS/al-Nusra nut-bars, and shut down the One Belt One Road initiative. There is much “plausible deniability” in this scenario.

Europe might make noise over the above nonsense. But what of it? That noise is for a cut on weapons and oil sales. The point is, allow China, Russia, and Iran to make plans, investments, etc., and then destroy it. That’s the game that is in play. Let others spend and build. It is so much easier to destroy.

The purpose of people like Elliot Abrams, John Bolton, Bibi Netanyahu, Trump, etc., is to create the impression that they are nuts, and will go to any lengths, including nuclear war, to establish hegemony. How do you fight crazy? With nukes?

It is demonic. But hey, who believes in demons? It’s just a literary device, right?

War has always come. It is the human condition at its most vile.
Brad on April 11, 2019 · at 6:47 pm EST/EDT

As devil’s advocate then … It would be helpful if the Saker could operationalize the continuous use of ‘stupid’ in relation to US administration members in terms of the specific goals he thinks the United States is failing at because stupid. For example, if their goal is to diminish the ability of states like Iran, Syria and Venezuela to sell their oil (and only then to sell at a discount) with that being part of a larger strategic objective of controlling the supply and direction of oil … then perhaps as first steps go the United States is achieving its objectives.

As for the S300s in Venezuela, all that is necessary is that it cost the United States more than it’s willing to pay in downed jets (because politics). Every single US jet downed is big news and bad news from the US public relations and stock market (Lockheed Martin etc) point of view. It is likely the US would attack Venezuela if and only if their casualties are near zero and their downed jets are near zero. Given this, how will the S300s fair? Will they be able to ‘hurt’ the hegemon sufficiently in terms of (say) 3 plus jets downed? So, do you see an overt war on the horizon?

In Syria, what if the US strategy is simply to keep Syria in ruins, unable to rebuild and importantly unable to access it’s eastern oil and unable to drill for the enormous proven reserves underground yet untapped? Then isn’t the United States successfully accomplishing its objectives? Hasn’t the Syria fiasco made Israel’s grab for the Golan Heights impossible to counter?

What if the objective in Iran is simply to continue on indefinitely with sanctions and depressing its ability to sell its oil and where it can sell its oil? And the calling part of its military terrorists is related to this same objective?

What if the United States apparent military ineptitude misunderstands the objective. What if the United States (and its relevant personnel) are not so much stupid but evil, not clueless but malevolent?
- Jacques Cuse on April 12, 2019 · at 10:33 am EST/EDT
  
  You give them way too much credit. But if what you say is true it will in the end be totally anti productive. Many, including traditionally very pro-American countries, are slowly turning away from the USA. Alone the US are not going to pull off their sinister plans as easily (or at all) as in the post WWII period of nothing but goodwill.
Srbalj on April 11, 2019 · at 7:56 pm EST/EDT

“What do you think? Will the Trump Administration go to war and, if yes, where?”
No. Trump will not go to war anywhere & it is not Trump or any US president that truly makes that decision. That decision is made by the diverse range of interest groups that hold dominant influence over any given US administration. Trump’s administration is far more complex than any commentator ever suggests, first the myth he was self-financed, peddled by his supporters, is one of the most ridiculous myths about Trump. Second was that he was ever an anti-interventionist (see anti-imperialist) candidate – indeed, he only strongly supported intervention in Libya, on no less a media platform as Alex Jones idiotic Infowars. Trump was brought into the Whitehouse by a combination of highly embedded Pentagon insiders, members of the Scottish Rite of Freemansory, the Christian Evangelical community – who also helped bring another “stupid” persona into the White House, George W Bush, & the notorious hard right of the Israeli lobby. His opposition is generally the Wall Street & Silicon Valley liberal establishment that do not like Trump’s stated America First patriotism that even rhetorically, undermines their globalist agenda to essentially transform the world into a set of de-nationalised trading & economic blocs with a North Atlantic superstate at its head. Why will Trump not go to war? Because his backers know the game is up, after Iraq & Afghanistan the US has demonstrated that it can not fight a conventional ground war against guerilla insurgents. The US has also demonstrated that its air power is limited to achieving only chaos, which is fine when that is required, as in Libya, but when needed to actually control a pat of the world physically, chaos will not do. Now, with Russia send in a small but symbolic military detachment to Venezuela, the guantlet has been thrown down, Syria was not a one off, Russia (& China) are ready to resist the US where their own vital interests are at stake, & increasingly these vital interests are also global. A war for the US would mean overnight dissolution of the empire, & they know it.
- Srbalj on April 12, 2019 · at 12:42 pm EST/EDT
  
  I would also add that Trump’s apparent “stupidity” & daily (even hourly) inconsistencies & glaring paradoxes are not a product of his incompetence or lack of backbone or both – these qualities or lack thereof are totally irrelevant. It is the nature of the diverse interests that brought Trump into the White House, added to his opponents that wish to destroy him in order to make a point to his backers who really runs the country – basically Wall St banks as averse to the Pentagon/Military Industrial Complex that Trump represents. The US can not fight another major war & will not risk it, were the US truly prepared to take on Russia, or China, or Iran, they would have been attacked by now. It would only take one major battle defeat against any of these to bring down the US empire over night. People who do not understand this frankly have no idea how this world actually functions. The US hits soft targets, soft targets only, period. But of course the US would very much like Russia, China & Iran & the rest of the world that it would attack them. And so the US builds up for a war it will never actually fight. The real risk now, where US militarism is concerned, are peripheral skirmishes designed to prevent a growth of influence by any of these supposed “rougue” states. But even here the risk is not great, hence the US has never dared directly attack Russian forces in Syria (Wagner mercenaries are not regulars) bt cowardly like prompted Turkey to do it. When Erdogan proved reluctant to repeatedly attack Russia in Syria the CIA attempted to assassinate him. The US does not dare directly attack Iranian forces either in Iraq or Syria, but cowardly like has Israel do it for them. This is the real picture, the US military is absolutely aware that it can not exercise control over the world in a coercive manner the way they once did. It is far more likely that this inability of the US empire to re assert itself will lead to a growing political/social crisis in the US homeland itself.
Lumpenkönig on April 11, 2019 · at 10:21 pm EST/EDT

The USA could only go to war if China grants it permission. The US military would have to ask China to ship the spare parts needed for the tanks and airplanes – Paid for in US treasury bonds, of course!
darkmoon on April 12, 2019 · at 12:09 am EST/EDT

Proliferation of human greed/arrogance and perseverance of institutional inertia is the main cause of the dilemma humanity finds itself in.
Institutions have inertia, large instituations moreso. The churches are a fine example of such inertia and the consequences. That is basically the driving factor for the demise of empires, instead of changing and splitting off vassals or satellites, most empires want to exert control – until they are an overblown, rigid husk.
The Anglo-empire has a huge legacy of inertia, some of the latest examples are the pentagon and its massive blackhole, the whole FEMA affair and the ridiculous spying programs.
Being aware of the overstrech, they begun to recruit expendable fodder to erode the territory of the “opponent”. But this is a rather desperate and ultimately worthless strategy if they have no trump in the end. Because it relies heavily on bought troops and intelligence/air support. If you cut even one of those pillars off, it will collapse.
I suspect the empire has a desperate trump, probably an engineered retrovirus, which will be released on the height of a crisis in the mideast or the kashmir region, coinciding with a major attack on the worldwide communication infrastructure. I doubt it would be successful, it will probably end in the US getting annihilated by MIRVs.
On the other hand, it could all be bluster and just a feeding program for the militarist US economy.
amarynth on April 12, 2019 · at 7:32 am EST/EDT

What do you think? Will the Trump Administration go to war and, if yes, where?

My opinion on this is that the US has to go to war, somewhere, as an economic mechanism. There is just no way that their military-industrial complex can survive on only weapons sales in a time when Turkey and others are not buying their weapons. I think that Trump and his cohorts will continue this process of probing here and there, and the objective here is to find that place that is soft enough to easily make war against and hope somebody shoots back.

The American public is being actively prepared for such a war situation. Even in small gardening blogs that I follow, the term Victory Garden is being used more and more. The American public will most probably buy whatever scenario is given to them as pretext for war. There is just too much talk of ‘our enemies’ even among the more enlightened. The American public believe that they have enemies. Even the situation on the Southern border is attached to the word ‘invasion’. That word right there is war talk, no matter how one thinks about the actuality of the situation. I mean, there are other words – incursion, encroachment, forced entrance, intrusion … and these are not war talk. Compare for example: “intrusion of migrants on our Southern border” vs “Invasion on our Southern border”.

We see Pompeo and Bolton being belligerent and punitive, no matter where they go, or who they are talking to. We see Trump being belligerent when it is his turn to say something. We see announcements of troop withdrawals (Syria and Afghanistan), but in reality these are just for internal consumption. Is it really happening? The incessant sanctions are focused to deprive others of necessary defensive spending. The method is open bribery and coercion – “Buy these weapons from us and we will reduce the sanctions” or Become a vassal and allow us to develop your country and we will reduce the sanctions (This is probably what is happening in North Korea).

I don’t think we can ‘pick a place for war’ at this stage. That decision would be made according to the ‘enemy de jour’ and the circumstances at the time – event driven. They don’t really care about loss of life, they care about loss of life that they can be held accountable for.

Trump has declared the next war zone – we should not forget the Space Force (just incase there is a need for another war arena for the future). We see NATO bringing South American countries into the alliance (Colombia and lots of talk with others).

With Trump’s second term, he will have nothing to lose and can go to war where it is decided to go to war, with impunity. We also cannot underestimate what the re-election of Netanyahu did for the war lobby – and what Trump did to get Netanyahu re-elected.

We know Russia is armed to the teeth and we know that China is arming and preparing. We cannot say any longer that the Russian weapons are purely defensive, but I have little knowledge here – just seems to me if one can shoot one in defense, one can shoot one in offense as well. We also know that these two countries are buying gold at the rate of knots. I follow a series of Chinese op-eds – their talk is mild usually but also devastating. A few weeks ago, there was this sentence that made me sit up and take notice (from memory and perhaps not exact) – “One should not forget that China is also a nuclear power”.

So my vote will be that the US will go to war during Trump’s 2nd term against whoever is a handy ‘enemy’ at the time. Probably against a country or a few countries that refuse to bow to being vassals. I think all the sanctions and belligerence and breaking of treaties and imposition of tariffs are economic attempts at “softening up” whoever can be “softened up”.

There are more issues at work here. The debt / GDP ratio of the world is such that the global debt exceeds the global GDP. This cannot continue in my view. We need a war or we need a debt jubilee. Probably, thinking of the US mindset, such a thing will cause them to lose face, so, they will choose war. Trump is trying to kick-start development and manufacturing in the US. What is most likely to lead to a fast kick-start? A war will do it very nicely. Nothing better to get a bunch of patriots and nationalists to work than to tell them their country is at risk from ‘… choose the enemy …’.

‘Deniability threshold’? I think we’ve passed that one already with Venezuela. The cat is out of the bag and nobody in the US Admin cares about deniability. What needed to be denied before, is now a matter of belligerent pride.

There are no visible attempts that one can see from this US Admin at peace-making.
To the contrary, all that we see are belligerence and war-making.

Anyway, that is how I would debate this one. The future will tell.
Matthiew on April 12, 2019 · at 10:20 am EST/EDT

I don’t think Trump will go to war during his first mandate. In the meantime Russia and Israel is cementing their alliance, which is extremely important in terms of what Trump will or may do next.

A good article by Andrew Korybko called “Putinyahu’s Rusrael”. It documents where Russia under Putin stands vis a vis Israel. Proves that Israel and Russia are allies beyond any doubt in the middle east and that Putin can be called probably one of the most pro-“Israeli” people, rather than so called “5D Chess player” or “Anti-zionist” crusader. Korybko even calls the Yinon plan as “Yinon-Putin Plan”

Good read.

https://eurasiafuture.com/2019/04/12/putinyahus-rusrael/
Mark Hadath on April 12, 2019 · at 3:47 pm EST/EDT

I believe the likelihood of a US attack on any significant adversary is very low. i don’ t think the US has the military strength or will to do so regardless of who the president is. I truly think the Russian-Chinese-Iranian alliance is now too strong. Putin and Xi have outmanoeuvred the US and now a US military counter-attack will not succeed. I think it highlights the incredibly crucial and overlooked factor of time. Time is heavily on the side of the Russian-Iranian-Chinese alliance. Very week, every month, every year that goes by makes the Anglozionists weaker and the Eurasians stronger. The Mueller investigation failed, many other attempts by the US deep state to drag Russia into a war has failed and will continue to fail. In this scenario the Anglozionists will continue to sabre rattle for a long time, but in reality I think the US ruling elite will direct more fury at their own working class, stealing from them everything they can. In my opinion civil war in the United States is the most likely outcome for the next ten to twenty years.

The situation is still dangerous no doubt, but I think Putin has successfully made Russia safe.
Richard Steven Hack on April 12, 2019 · at 5:02 pm EST/EDT

As should be obvious by now, war against Iran is being limited by…Israel.

Israel can not afford to start or allow the US to start a war with Iran until Hezbollah’s missile arsenal has been degraded. If Israel should attack Lebanon or Iran, Hezbollah is likely to rain an estimated 6,500 missiles a day on Israel – all of Israel – for at least a period of thirty days, and possibly longer (or a lesser, but still impressive amount, for longer – depending on actual missile launcher numbers, reloading time, camouflage against Israeli air attack or counter-battery fire, etc., etc. This would result in the Israeli population being in bomb shelters 24×7 for the duration, which would cause the economy to evaporate and the electorate getting ticked off and voting out the ruling party in the next election.

The problem for Israel is that it cannot remove Hezbollah by itself without suffering the same effects. Therefore, it is only with US assistance that it can even contemplate attacking Lebanon, let alone Iran. And the problem there is convincing Trump to start another major war against a country (Lebanon) which is (nominally) not a US enemy. Convincing Trump to attack Iran would probably not be hard. Convincing someone as ignorant of the Middle East as Trump to attack Lebanon is a bit harder.

This is why the US neocons are ramping up sanctions and rhetoric on Hezbollah, and also selling weapons to Lebanon’s military. They hope to convince Trump to join Israel in attacking Hezbollah or somehow get another civil war going in Lebanon (which is improbable at this point.) The problem is the history of US involvement in Lebanon is not exciting – the Marine barracks bombing is still fresh in the Pentagon’s mind, as is Israel’s defeat in 2006. And with assessments of both that Hezbollah is far stronger now than it was in 2006, convincing the Pentagon to convince Trump to attack Hezbollah is going to be a hard sell, even if convincing Trump wouldn’t be. Only if Israel can somehow do an end run around the Pentagon and get Trump Jr. to convince Trump to attack Hezbollah is it likely to happen – and then of course it’s going to be difficult to prevent Pentagon push-back, which may well make Trump waver in his commitment.

So until Israel and the neocons can solve this Gordian knot, Lebanon and Iran are both likely to remain safe.
เป็ด on April 12, 2019 · at 11:25 pm EST/EDT

ทรัมป์จะทำวงครามกับอิหร่านแน่นอนเพื่อขจัดเสี้ยนหนามออกไปเพื่อการสร้างมหานครอิสราเอล – ระเบียบโลกใหม่

Google translation,MOD:Trump will definitely make an indigo band with Iran to eradicate it for the creation of the Israeli city – a new world order.
Simon Chow on April 13, 2019 · at 12:01 pm EST/EDT

Saker, I think the next US war would be against China. Not just China is a threat but the whole of east Asia. What better solution to neutralise the threat than to beat up China in a conventional war and ruin east Asia in the process. That’s very likely why there is increasing provocation over Taiwan and the South China Sea.

Venezuela is just an irritant and of no strategic value, except for its oil and gas. But the world is already moving beyond reliance on hydrocarbons.
Anonymous on April 13, 2019 · at 10:43 pm EST/EDT

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/04/12/to-be-or-not-to-be-a-zionist/

A couple of eye opening sentences I this article which should not be missed by anyone who wants to understand the potential of Trump at War.

Worshipped like a god. All restraint gone.
https://www.edenfantasys.com/dildos/ on April 23, 2019 · at 1:06 am EST/EDT

For a time I wondered why Trump appointed war mongers to his Administration. Now, finally, I understand. Trump is a war monger. Well it was worth a try. We knew what Hillary was. Will Trump confine himself to sanctions, blockades and dirty tricks? We know now that Trump will do whatever Bibi wants him to do. So it is reasonable to expect that Trump will attempt to destroy Iran. And Hezbollah. And whats left of Syria and Iraq. And Russia? And China? Nobody would do something that stupid you say? Stupid has no limits. We have people who believe there is no such thing as boys and girls. That countries should not have borders. That the entire white race is evil. If people were not stupid we would all be living in peace and prosperity.
TellTheTruth-2 on April 28, 2019 · at 2:44 am EST/EDT

Bush Jr told us Americans love a war President when he ratings shot up after Iraq and Trump knows that and my predictions is the “timing” for Iran will be early summer 2020, just before the elections.
F Gerard Lelieveld on May 08, 2019 · at 9:35 pm EST/EDT

I read the article (came back to the Saker after many years) and read nearly all of your excellent comments.

Though the Russians are probably right that stupidity is the driving motivation behind American actions in the Middle-East, perhaps there is a reason:
For Israel it would solve their water problem if they could control the water resources in northern Syria. Redirect Lake Assad and the irrigation works over there to Israel. A huge project.

I suppose after the depopulation of northern Syria and that the Syrians must suffer from war fatigue, now is the time the Israeli army settles there. But you have to have an excuse. A war with Iran would be a great excuse. The Israeli army could move there and pretend to come help the Americans there to fight Iran. Establish a base for that war in the whole area from the mediterranean to Iraq.

I mean, a war with Iran is pretty pointless, but pretending to be at war has great benefits.
So that would be my answer.

Good night.