Dear friends,
I feel that there is a need to clarify a few things here which apparently baffle and perplex many. Since the beginning of this crisis the Saker Community worldwide (literally!) has been crazy busy trying to keep up with the events and make sense of what seems totally insane. I have been working nonstop for the past 2 days now and I ask you to forgive me for being even more curt than usual (nevermind my typos and grammar!). Here we go:
1) Iranian nukes: Iran never had a military nuclear program and Iran will never have one. For two reasons: first, nukes were officially declared “haram” by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But there is also another reason, unless you have a full spectrum of nuclear weapons (like Russia and the USA) your nukes are just targets and not only that, they become ideal targets from a PR point of you: the US and/or Israel can claim that they HAD to use nukes to destroy the Iranian ones. The truth is that Iran does NOT need any nukes and that acquiring them would be a major mistake and would paint a huge bullseye on Iran. I know that Iran has announce that it is now moving out of the international agreement about the Iranian nuclear program, but I don’t believe for one second that they are trying to manufacture nukes. Beside, they have also added that they are still working with the IAEA and that they will resume compliance if US sanctions are lifted.
2) US/Israeli nukes: yes, unlike Iran, they have nukes. But what they lack are good targets. Oh sure, then can (and will) strike at some symbolic, high-visibility, targets and they can nuke cities. But “can” does not mean that this is a smart thing to do. The truth is that Iran does not offer any good targets to hit with nukes so using nukes against Iran will only make the determination of Iranians (and they allies) go from “formidable” to “infinite”. Not smart.
3) Iranian air defenses: they are pretty good, but no match for a determined USAF/USN attack. Yes, if the US attacks there will be much more resistance from air defenses than over Syria, and the US will loose a number of missiles and aircraft. But not enough to stop a determined attack. As I said it a gazillion times, air defenses are a game of numbers. Even if your missiles have a perfect hit ratio (1:1), this will not help you if the enemy has more incoming missiles than your stores. Speaking about stores, yes, air defense units can reload, but only if they are alive to do so in the first place! Thus all the opponent needs to do is fire enough missiles at your battery to make darn sure that your battery is destroyed before it can reload. Okay, this is a gross over-simplification, because in reality batteries can be mobile and batteries protect each other. But you get the idea. Only a totally modern and fully integrated air defense network on all levels (from MANPADs to long range missiles a la S-400/S-500) can deal with all the threats. Iran is not there yet, in spite of having had some major successes on the air defense front.
4) How can Iran win if it gets nuked?: US Americans are cursed with a special mental block: many (most?!) of them sincerely believe that war is an end in itself. It is not. Wars ALWAYS have a POLITICAL objective. This is why the USA has both won each war it fought since WWII AND lost each one too. If you just look at, say, casualty figures or which side suffered most destruction, then you can believe that the USA is a formidable military force. But just look at the 2006 war of Israel against Hezbollah. Both the US and Israel declared that they had “won” – yet it was one of the most abject military failures in history. And for Hezbollah this was a “Divine Victory”. Folks – you need to free yourself from the categories and slogans used by the AngloZionist propaganda machine. Wars are ONLY won when a POLITICAL objective has been reached. Just going on a rampage and killing civilians does NOT qualify, even if western political leaders think it does.
If the US uses nukes it will be a political suicide for the US. Well, okay, murdering Solemani is already a form of political suicide. But using nukes will only precipitate even a much faster collapse of the Empire. Here is the unmentionable truth: nukes are USELESS as war weapons in 99% of all circumstances. Yes, they ARE crucial to the balance of terror (kuz that is what this is) between Russia and the USA and, to a much smaller degree, China. But as a WARFIGHTING instrument, they are quasi useless. Yes, I know, we are all conditioned to believe that nukes are like a magic wand, or a silver bullet, or a Wunderwaffe (pick your metaphor) – but this is a lie.
So will the US and/or Israel use nukes? Probably. They will do that because they are dumb racists who believe only in violence and in their own, messianic and racial superiority, and because when they will realize that all is lost, they will do what ALL western leaders (including Hitler) would do: make the other guy pay.
The Iranians know that. They have lived under that threat for decades. I assure you that they are ready.
5) Will Russia intervene? First things first. There are NO legal/formal obligations between Russia and Iran and last time I checked, no Iranians have volunteered to die for Russia. Next, yes, Iran is an important ally for Russia. But what most folks are missing is that Iran does not need (or want) a direct Russian intervention. There are lots of reasons (including historical ones) to this. But what most folks are completely misunderstanding is that the Iranians are confident that they can win without any Russian (or other) help. I am in touch with a lot of folks from the Middle-East (including Iran) and I can tell you that their mood is one of not only total determination, but one of quiet confidence. Nobody in the region doubts that it’s now over for Uncle Shmuel. I know, this sounds incredible for folks living in the West, but that is the reality in the Middle-East.
Besides, you can be sure that Russia will help Iran, but behind the scenes. First and foremost with intelligence: while the Iranian have an extremely sophisticated intelligence community, it is dwarfed by the much larger Russian one which, on top of being much bigger, also has technical means which Iran can only dream about. Russia can also help with early warning and targeting. We can’t know what is really going behind the scenes, but I am getting reports that the Russians are on full alert (as they were during the first Gulf war, alas – Saddam Hussein did not listen to the Russian warnings).
6) Should Russia declare that Iran is now under Russian protection? Absolutely not! Why? Think of what is taking place as if you were sitting in the Kremlin: the Empire is about to embark on its last war (yes, I mean that, see further below) and the Russian specialists all KNOW that the US will lose, and badly. Why in the world would you intervene when your “main foe” (KGB/SVR/FSB expression for “USA”) is about to do something terminally stupid?
Besides, this is a cultural issue too. In the West, threats are constantly used. Not only to scare the enemy, but also to feel less terrified yourself. In Asia (and Russia is far more culturally Asian than European) threats are seen as a sign of weakness and lack of resolve. In this entire career, Putin used a threat only ONCE: to convince the Urkonazis that attacking during the World Cup would have “severe consequences for the Ukrainian statehood”. But you have to understand that from a Russian point of view, the Ukraine is militarily so weak as to be laughable as an enemy and nobody in his right mind will ever doubt the outcome of a Ukie war with Russia. This is an extreme and exceptional case. But look at the case of the Russian intervention in Syria: unlike their western counterparts, the Russians did not first spend weeks threatening ISIS or anybody else in Syria. When Putin took the decision, they simply moved in, so quietly that THE BEST military in the galaxy never detected the Russian move.
So, IF, and I don’t think that this will happen, Russia ever decided to move in to protect Iran, the US will find out about it when US servicemen will die in large numbers. Until then, Russia will not be issuing threats. Again, in the West threats are a daily occurrence. In the East, they are a sign of weakness.
Now you know why US threats are totally ineffective :-)
7) US force levels in the Middle-East. The US maintains a large network of bases all around Iran and throughout the entire planet, really. The real numbers are secret, of course, but let us assume, for argument sake, that the US has about 100’000 soldiers more or less near Iran. The actual figure does not matter (and the Iranians know it anyway). What is crucial is this: this does NOT mean that the US has 100’000 soldiers ready to attack Iran. A lot of that personnel is not really combat capable (the ratio of combat ready vs support ranges from country to country and from war to war, but let’s just say that most of these 100’000 are NOT combat soldiers). Not only that, but there is a big difference between, say, many companies and battalions in a region and a real armored division. For example, the 82nd AB is an INFANTRY force, not really mechanized, not capable of engaging say, an armored brigade. Here is a historical sidebar: during the first Gulf war, the US also sent in the 82nd AB as the central force of the operation “Desert Shield”. And here is where Saddam Hussein committed his WORST blunder of all. If he had sent in his armored divisions across the Saudi border he would have made minced meat of the 82nd. The US knew that. In fact, Cheney was once asked what the US would have done if the Iraqis has destroyed the 82nd. He replied that the first line of defense was airpower on USN aircraft carriers and cruise missiles. And if that failed, the US would have had to use tactical nukes to stop the Iraqi divisions. That would be one of those instances were using nukes WOULD make sense from a purely military point of view (nukes are great to deal with armor!), but from a political point of view it would have been a PR disaster (vide supra). The same is true today. For the US to engage in any serious ground operation it would need many months to get the force levels high enough and you can be darn sure that Iran would NEVER allow that. Should Uncle Shmuel try to send in a real, big, force into the KSA you can be sure that the Iranians will strike with everything they have!
The bottom line is this: the US has more than enough assets in the region to strike/bomb Iran. The US has nowhere near the kind of force levels to envision a major ground operation even in Iraq, nevermind Iran!
8) What about the Strait of Hormuz? There is no doubt in my mind that Iran can close the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, all the Iranians need to do to close it is say that they reserve the right to destroy (by whatever means) any ship attempting passage. That will be enough to stop all traffic. Of course, if that happens the US will have no other option than to attack the southern cost of Iran and try to deal with that threat. And yes, I am sorry of I disappoint my Iranian friends, I do believe that the US could probably re-open the Strait of Hormuz, but that will require “boots on the ground” in southern Iran and that is something which might yield an initial success, but that will turn into a massive military disaster in the medium to long run because the Iranians will have not only have time on their side, but they will have a dream come true: finally the US GIs will be within reach, literally. So, typically, the US will prevail coming in, only to find itself in a trap.
9) Do the Iranians seek death? This is an important one (thanks to Larchmonter 445 for suggesting this!). The short answer is no. Not at all. Iranians want to live and they do not seek death. HOWEVER, they also know that death in defense of Islam or in defense of the oppressed is an act of “witness to God”, which is what the Arabic word “shahid” is (and why the Greek work μάρτυς “martis” means). What does that mean? That means that while Muslim soldiers should not seek their death, and while they ought to do everything in their power to remain alive, they are NOT afraid of death in the least. To fully understand this mindset, you need only become aware of the most famous and crucial Shia slogan “Every Day Is Ashura and Every Land Is Karbala” (see explanation here). If I had to translate this into a Christian frame of reference I would suggest this “every day is Good/Passion Friday and every land is the Golgotha”. That is to say, “no matter were you are and no matter what time it is, you have to be willing to sacrifice your life for God and for the defense of the oppressed“. So no, Iranians are a joyful people (as are Arabs), and they don’t seek death. But neither do they fear it and they accept, with gratitude, the possibility of having to sacrifice their lives in defense of justice and truth. This is one more reason why threats by terminal imbeciles like Pompeo or Trump have no effect whatsoever on Muslims.
10) So what is really happening now? Folks, this is the beginning of the end for the Empire. Yes, I know, this sounds incredible, yet this is exactly what we are seeing happening before our eyes. The very best which the US can hope for now is a quick and complete withdrawal from the Middle-East. For a long list of political reason, that does not seem a realistic scenario right now. So what next? A major war against Iran and against the entire “Shia crescent” ? Not a good option either. Not only will the US lose, but it would lose both politically and militarily. Limited strikes? Not good either, since we know that Iran will retaliate massively. A behind the scenes major concession to appease Iran? Nope, ain’t gonna happen either since if the Iranians let the murder of Soleimani go unpunished, then Hassan Nasrallah, Bashar al-Assad and even Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will be the next ones to be murdered. A massive air campaign? Most likely, and initially this will feel good (lots of flagwaving in the USA), but soon this will turn into a massive disaster. Use nukes? Sure, and destroy your political image forever and not only in the Middle-East but worldwide.
As a perfect illustration, just check the latest stupid threat made by Trump: “If they do ask us to leave, if we don’t do it in a very friendly basis, we will charge them sanctions like they’ve never seen before ever. It’ll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame”. Folk, this is exactly the kind of stupid language which will deeply offend any Iraqi patriot. This is the kind of language which comes out of an empire in the late stages of agony.
Trump will go down in history as the man who thought he could scare the Iranian and Iraqi people with “tweets”.
Pathetic indeed.
CONCLUSION
I hope that these pointers will be useful, especially when you are going to be hit with a massive Tsunami of US flagwaving propaganda (Trump “we are THE BEST”). Simply put: this is bullshit. Modern wars are first and foremost propaganda wars, and what you see as the output of US ruling elites are just that – “information operations”. Let them wave their (Chinese made) flags, let them declare “United we stand” (for what exactly they stand is never specified) and let them repeat that the US military is the MOST FORMIDABLE FORCE IN THE GALAXY. These are nothing but desperate attempts to control the narrative, nothing else.
Oh, and one more irony: while the GOP controlled Senate is most unlikely to ever impeach Trump, is it not pathetically hilarious that Trump has now, indeed, committed acts ought to have him removed from office? Of course, in the real world, the US Neocon deep-state controls BOTH parties and BOTH parties fully support a war against Iran. Still, this is one of those ironies of history which should be mentioned.
I will resume my work tomorrow morning.
Until then, I wish you call a good nite/morning/day.
The Saker
PS: if you have any follow-up question, please post them in the comment section and I will try to reply to the most relevant ones.
How would this be handled from the point of view of Israel and KSA. Israel is prepping to deal with Lebanon and KSA does not seem to be doing anything, will they get involved or have something up their sleeve.
If you could address the geopolitical strategies of each side.
Only one objection.
The beginning of the end started when Osama bin Laden struck in 2001.
At the time, I doubt even he forsaw the current degridation and collapse that is happening.
If there is any chance for humanity to thrive, the empire must pass.
You really believe this?
That mysterious men in caves in Central Asia, running around in flip-flops, were able to deceive and defeat not just the US Air Force, but the entire US military and all 17 American intelligence agencies at the same time?
Do you also believe three skyscrapers in New York were destroyed by two jet passenger aircraft, as well?
If so, perhaps I could interest you in some beachfront real estate in Wyoming …
You put an awlful amount of faith in the military and inteligence agencies.
I put my faith in Wile E. Coyote and Acme.
What?
What are you talking about?….
Oh, Never mind.
Good luck to you,friend.
Their goal with propaganda right now is to buy time nothing more
Trump Administration needs US casualties before Congress holds session.
Whole world on alert yet US Congress has not called an emergency session?
What does that tell you? They need American deaths so that they can vote to declare war on Iran.
Everything else is noise to divert from this truth. That they want to declare war but do not have enough to do so against Americans will until American body bags show up.
Right now I am following 10 different news sources with a constant barrage of “Iran prepping this or that”
They are building a case for preemptive strike just in case Iran doesn’t take the bait soon enough.
If this drags out a month or 2 without Iranian retaliation and Congress still has not held session to investigate the circumstances of Soleimanis assassination, then the facade starts to crumble.
Seems doubtful that United Snakes warmongers would wait a month or two before attacking Iran. It seems more likely that if Iran doesn’t strike soon, then the United Snakes will become the victim of another false flag attack (like 9/11 was) that will be blamed on Iran. The major news networks (Zionist-controlled) will blame Iran and within 48 hours, Iran will be bombarded. I hope I’m wrong but sadly, this seems like an all-too-real possibility.
Yep. This seems like a good time to lay low. Not take flights, not go to big events… all too sadly most likely outcome to justify war is some innocent people have to be sacrificed.
I believe the US and Israel has been doing just this over the last few weeks – creating events designed to escalate tensions and draw Iran in. There is no reason to believe they will not continue to do so if Iran does not take the bait.
Also, I do not believe the higher ups in the US military is behind this – I think all this is from a closely associated group of US neocons surrounding Trump working in league with Israeli forces to effect an pre-designed end.
yes, I kind of wonder if Trump was surprised by the sudden request to shoot….by Israel obviously – which is so low that its below the surface of the earth.
Monday now and still no news of Congress intending to get briefings on situation.
Pretty obvious this goes far beyond Trump by now.
War with Iran is coming.
Listening to radio talk shows this morning they are getting stupid Americans riled up for it.
Too many stupid Americans seem like they want it.
TheOneThatComments already asked the main question I wanted to ask, but I want to know if Iran is willing to drag Israel and KSA into the conflict or focus just on the US. I don’t see anything for Iran to gain from dividing their focus. It would more practical for them to focus on one enemy. Could the Saudis be convinced to stay out of the conflict as much as they can?
IMO the Saudis are still licking their wounds from the Houthis (and the damage to their oil industry) and would prefer to keep a low profile.
If they ever got the impression Iran was weakened they would. Remember that their preference is terrorist proxies, not their ( pathetic) armed forces. Never underestimate a stupid persons ability to do unthinkably stupid things, trump Saleming himself with this Soleimani thing.
My guess is that with Yemen, M(BS) , ( fully intoxicated by Hollywood “bad*ss military ” propaganda) was just brimming with confidence in his ( madein USA so just as “bad*ss”)military and so wanted some of that glorious footage of saudi “bad*ss” soldiers running around just as he saw in “transformers “.
Reality, as M(bs) has discovered can be a, eh …female dog.
The Saudis are militarily incompetent, even if lavishly equipped. If I were the Iranians, I would see the Saudis as offering up some of the juiciest economic targets (US attacks on Iranian oil infrastructure are a given, why would Iran leave the Arab oil infrastructure intact?) and the Iranians have stated that if they cannot export oil, then nobody in the Gulf will be able to do so. The Saudis are huge strategic liability for the US in a war with Iran.
As for the Israelis, this war against Iran is a result of ISRAELI policy, not American. For all practical purposes, there is no distinction today between US and Israel with regard to this war. The Israelis have been bombing IRGC and PMU targets for months already…they are already in. Besides, Israel is within reach of Iranian missiles, the US homeland is not. Attacking Israel, gives the Iranians the ability to respond in kind when the US begins bombing civilian infrastructure in Iran.
Agreed (re.Q from Corey). There are no separate focal enemies. There is is no distinction between US and Irgun (terrorist organisation that occupies Palestine). But then the question is still: why is Israhell missing in the 10-points assessment by the Saker?
Iran has clearly stated in the past that if they are attacked by the US, they will consider it an attack by all the US’s allies in the region and will respond accordingly. I do not believe the Saudi oil fields will be attacked initially, but only if Iran’s oil flow is interrupted – and then all options are on the table.
If Saudis will allow US to attack Iran from the bases in SA, they will already be both de jure and de facto in war with Iran. There is not much reason for Iran to hold itself back. Plus US is using SA infrastructure for it’s bases’ logistics so there is strong case to destroy as much of it as possible.
And what about Turkey? Can’t see the neo – ottoman faction headed by Erdogan sit quietly and watch Iran, Saudi Arabia or Israel become the dominant power in the gulf area and stealing their prize from under their nose. Especially since Erdogan already intervened in a much less sensitive theater in Lybia, can’t think he will wait it out.
US escalation will only serve to accelerate a Dollar crisis and expedite US collapse, which is ongoing.
American men endorsing war as “necessary” or “good” are dancing over the graves of their own children.
Stupid move.
I am sorry that the data says otherwise. US stock market has done phenomenally well, returning more than 30% last year alone. US treasury bonds, world’s number 1 choice as safe asset have returned 6% or more last year depending on the tenor of the bonds. US dollar has been quite strong against most currencies. Jobs growth in the US has been pretty solid.
There lies the paradox. Up to a range of scenarios things getting fucked up actually helps the US as it s economy has “relatively” better fundamentals. People will move money to US assets to protect their wealth.
Things need to get fucked up so bad against US that EU starts looking comparable from an economic fundamentals perspective. That probability is low. One of the reasons why it is crucial for US to keep divided Western and Eastern Europe. Russia and Germany on friendly terms is death knell to the US. They would not mind losing half their armies to keep that from happening.
This is all smoke and mirrors.
The much touted unemployment rate of 4% is actually around 17%.
The much touted inflation rate of 2% is actually around 10%.
Equity and property prices have been pumped up by tens of trillions in money printing and negative interest rates.
Debt has ballooned to unprecedented levels.
Look at things that actually matter for the real picture.
Bankruptcies. Stagnant wages. Homelessness. Societal collapse.
A collapse on a vastly greater scale has to be expected over the next 12 – 24 months.
Paul’s data showing the disconnect between Main Street and Wall Street is correct and the consequences are obviously very important. However, his conclusion is not exactly supported by the data. The real question here is for how long than this charade be maintained ? We have already seen “more of the same” for a long time, now. Walll Street started destroying Main Street in the 1970’s, and it got much worse after 2007. But who is to say it can’t last until, say, 2027 ?
I believe there are only two, maybe three, possible causes for the inevitable financial collapse, and this also is a clue to the timing. The first cause would be a big exogenous shock, such as the rest of the world no longer accepting the fiat dollar, or significant loss of US infrastructure in a shooting war. The second cause contains the third cause, a shock coming from inside the financial system. Either the mathematics of negative interest rates and/or other tricks of financial engineering contain a built-in disaster, or else the financial world sees the threat of the end-game and they all try to head for the exit door in a panic before the other investors try to crowd the exit.
Sadly, there is one cause we can remove from rational discussion, and that’s the romantic idea that the impoverished and oppressed American masses will rise to their own defense in the next few years. There is no ideology, no leaders, no strategy and no tactics to support that … but over a period of 10-20 years a defense of the American people could be built. Who will start the process ?
That is you believe the date. ”US stock market has done phenomenally well, returning more than 30% last year alone.” Looks like a bubble to me; part of the everything bubble. Why is it that when the Central Bank issues free money CEOs use it to buy back their own stocks. That is not an increase in wealth it is asset-price inflation. Bond yields are falling because investors are buying Treasuries for fear of the worst-case scenario. When bond prices go up bond yields go down.
”Jobs growth in US has been pretty solid.” The figures for jobs growth has been massively overstated. No-one who knows anything knows these figures are bogus.
”People will move money to US assets to protect their wealth.” More fool them. Gold and Bitcoin are a far better bet.
The job numbers are affected by several invented categories. There are “seasonal adjustments” that with the right tweaking of a very small per cent can create a helpful push or pull on the numbers. There is also a “birth/death” model that presupposes more businesses are created (and thus more employment) than go bankrupt in any given period. Much of the new businesses being touted now are individuals acting with self-employment.
The numbers are cooked in other ways. If you are no longer collecting unemployment benefits you are off the unemployed list. If you give up looking for work you are no longer considered unemployed, you are just off the record (except for the overall employment rate which is dropping). Also if one person is working two or three positions, that is counted as two or three people being employed.
The US$ is for now the global reserve currency. The world is essentially in a US$ trap due to the requirement aided by the Saudis to sell oil only in US$ and then to use their surplus dollars to either buy U.S. military goods, or purchase US Treasuries as part of their own foreign reserves.
The only reason people move their dollars to the U.S. is ignorance, the fact that their currency is even worse, and a last chance at sustaining what they believe to actually carry some long term value, but the purchasing power of the US$ has declined considerably over the Federal Reserve era and the ridding of the gold standard. Belief and the US military is all that supports it now.
The World Bank and the IMF also assist the US in their economic hegemony (both are really controlled by US bankster types). They make large loans that cannot be repaid, they then take control of the government finances – “austerity” and “structural adjustment programs” that keep the country perpetually indebted to the U.S.
The government has long ago learned how to cook the numbers. See John Williams Shadow Stats for more information, and Michael Hudson for a larger economic picture.
That picture includes the huge amounts of QE used by the Fed, combined with low interest rates, that permit corporations to buy back their own stocks and pump up their price, while earnings are dismal and debt loads are large. The Fed also purchases and hides away some of the bad debts created by the corporations (again, see Michael Hudson for this).
Andre, thanks for this.
I don’t think it worth spending much time on, but I do wonder about Trump’s process here, assuming he participated in the decision rather than being presented with it after the fact.
I don’t see impeachment being the driver unless and until he makes a move like this. He seems to have been winning, and from that perspective will have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, with this move.
Whereas you are very probably right that the Deep State controls both parties, it may be that Trump serves now as the dispensable president. He’s now committed the USA to an irreversible escalation with Iran, which perhaps no future president will be fool enough to do.
If it goes catastrophically, Trump is the fall guy. Impeachment is already on the table and in the works, with the threat of additional articles / charges being brought. Now you only need 17 Senators to change sides.
Though the Borg may not impeach him for the bipartisan war crimes that they reserve for future presidencies, there may be some narrow basis for impeaching — the 25th amendment, for mental instability, or (more fancifully) ordering the use of tactical nukes, or something unforeseen. Indeed, unless things by some miracle go really well for Trump, they can at least ensure that he is unelectable, if they can ensure an acceptable (or for one term endurable) alternative. Biden, Bloomberg, Warren … and even an ancient Bernie.
it blows my mind that Trump has changed so much. Some may say – ‘The mask is off’ – which is true, but I don’t think this was part of the plan during the campaign. Unless he’s a liar and Satanist like Killery is.
But there’s a saying that explains Trump’s behavior.
Power Corrupts,
And Absolute Power
Corrupts Absolutely
I think maybe this happened…the mask that is a part of every human, their own individual devil inside, came out onto the surface. Israel has a knack for being the worst of the worst…its in their make-up. And they have been egging him on and he’s in a kind of chamber of Israel..Not much else going on.
Devils…I can’t wait to see what will happen to Israel in the coming days. Sorry to have to say.
Read this several times. Saker is taking you on a quick tour of some heady topics and giving factual basis for his POV.
No need to be “spun” and “lied to” and “trolled” on the topics.
You now have a primer to refer to.
Stay calm, meditate, pray, and study how the Iranians are behaving. They are the target. Yet they show studious tranquility.
They understand the Beast that stalks them. They know they are winning. Regardless of whatever the Hegemon does, they understand with certainty that triumph is coming.
Pakistan? It seems to me that the supply to the troops in Afghanistan are also at risk.
Mind-blowing, isn’t it?
US forces in Afghanistan and Syria are landlocked, and are dependent on supply chains that stretch back thousands of kilometers through very hostile territory. Easily cut.
Even US forces in southern Iraq and Kuwait are in jeopardy, as there’s a single point of entry in the Persian Gulf -easily blocked.
The lessons of Stalingrad and Budapest make it very clear that supply via air for surrounded forces is not viable.
How could DoD be so stupid?
I do not believe the DoD had any part in this. This is the result of a very small group of neocons around Trump working with Israeli intelligence. I suspect the US generals are aghast at what is happening, know ing full well the military and political implications.
Victor you can be sure that (removed language,MOD) Kushnerhhad a lot to do with it.
Trump said he wanted out of the ME, the neocons stopped him at least twice already.
American elites are mostly educated at the university of Hollywood pruductions. Remember ‘GI joe retaliation’ agent Orange’s movie counterpart calls a summit of all nuclear armed states. At the summit he declares wars on each and launches nukes. They all launch their nukes at USA. He aborts all his nukes . They do the same in response. That is it, complete denuclearization of the world. I know the movie is sh*t and looks like the of a five year old boy. What in the USA doesn’t these days.
Someone who shares the withdraw opinion may have thought that. Not 5d chess , not even 2d . Not even sophisticated enough to be compared to any board game. What can one expect from ” experts” educated by hollywood.
It is primarily the CIA. IMHO.
Here you can read private comments from persons in the US administration, collected by a personal friend of them, Reza Marashi.
“THREAD: Over the past few days, I’ve spoken extensively with career U.S. government officials as they’ve worked around the clock to try and mitigate the damage from Trump’s ineptitude on Iran. With their permission, I’m sharing a small taste from our lengthy conversations. Enjoy:..”
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1214031169173348352.html
As Dimitri Orlov put it, the soldiers in all those places will experience the policy of ” abandon in place”.
The Snakes are working to (re)open supply lines to Afghanistan through Kazakhstan. I bet that’s why Secretary of Snakes Mike Pompous is about to travel to Kazakhstan.
Kazakhstan would never allow that…they are a Muslim country for starters and would never make a move in today’s environment that would make them appear to support the Americans against the Muslim world.
Pompeo will return home frustrated.
Larchmonter445
This assassination of General Soleimani was obviously a provocation, the US hoping Iran would react overtly with military force, thus giving the US an excuse for a military intervention against Iran. It did not work out that way, as Iranians did not fall into this infantile trap, which will cause the US immense political damage on the international scene.
The Saker is indeed correct. The US does not have enough boots on the ground for a ground operation against Iran. It will thus opt for an aerial campaign. If it does, it will have two options: a combined cruise missile/combat aircraft attack, or a sole cruise missile attack. If the US does apply a combined cruise missile/combat aircraft attack of the type used against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999, then it will lose a heap of aircraft and cruise missiles. To this day the Serbs never officially published the true number of NATO aircraft they shot down, in order to avoid humiliating both the US and NATO. The true number is 137 combat aircraft shot down and 25 helicopters. Besides shooting down that F-117 stealth bomber, the Serbs also shot down one B-2, which the US Air Force allways claimed crashed in the US due to ‘technical’ problems. For the US to use combat aircraft against Iran would be a very foolish mistake, as the Serbs proved back in 1999.
It’s a good thing nukes aren’t real.
https://youtu.be/ejCQrOTE-XA
That’s the reason they won’t be used, or if they are, the explosions will be conventional mixed with radiologic material.
Rest of analysis great, tho.
Please don’t post nonsense like “nukes aren’t real” on this blog
Thank you
The Saker
“Nukes aren’t real”. Really? Try talking to some Japanese who have gone through Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Where on earth do you get your education and information from?
is that because the ancient aliens turned them off after Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
/s
The U.S. has enough nukes to annihilate Iran.
Israel wants to annihilate Iran.
Israel controls U.S. policy in the Middle East.
Ergo, the U.S. will soon annihilate Iran with nukes.
This can only be stopped if a nuclear power informs Israel that they will be annihilated with nukes if the U.S. nukes Iran. Who can do this?
Russia.
Will they do it? I doubt it.
Iran is finished as a livable country and the U.S. will quickly collapse after that because the International Bankers, who are mainly Jewish, will no longer then have any use for the U.S. after Iran is annihilated. The Western world will then come under the complete control of Israel, and the world will wait for the final battle of against the Dragon (China).
Contrary to the Saker’s view, I believe Iran has Nukes and has had them for over a decade. If one follows the scientific partnership between North Korea and Iran, one will notice they move almost in lock-step. I believe the nuclear weapon tested in North Korea in 2011 was one of Iranian design.
North Korea has a strategic situation where declaring nuclear weapons makes sense. Iran has a strategic situation where hiding their nuclear weapons makes the most sense, for some of the same reasons Mr. Saker uses to support Iran having no nuclear weapons.
During the Iraq war, both North Korea and Iran went all in on the nukes, realizing that ultimately their survival depends on it. Another reason Iran never declared is until the last couple years they didn’t have the delivery methods to guarantee their missiles would hit Israel. Israel’s missile defense systems are second only to Russia’s, and many are concentrated in a small area. Iran now has the missiles to guarantee they will score some hits on Israel, and given Israel’s small size and geography, a few hits will do just fine.
Yes, Iran will be finished as a livable country, so will Israel. Ultimately USA is fine with both. Don’t believe the support you see coming from the American Religious Right. Israel is just seen as a prop in their Big Armageddon Play. Ultimately they intend to convert the Jews in the same way they converted the American Indians.
Maybe Iranians don’t see the World trough the same lens as you?
Maybe they actually believe in God, and the existence of Evil and Good, and Faith and Sin?
Maybe they believe that aiming a goal trough sinful means stains the goal, forever ?
Maybe they even don’t think that there is such a thing as “Israel”, an alien and foe land, that could be made “unlivable country”; but they thing that there is indeed an “occupied Palestine”, a brotherly land suffering under foreign yoke, a land that should be liberated, and in the end “made again a livable country” for their native inhabitants ?
J-Dogg,
I agree.
I also respect the Sakers opinion that Iran does not have nuclear weapons, for a variety of reasons, including religious.
However –
From what I understand (and have seen in the public sphere) there is nothing in Islam that prevents the study of an enemies weapons, especially as a defensive measure.
Further, I have not seen anything at all in Islam that prevents nuclear reseach.
Indeed Iran has an advanced civillian nuclear research program (both power generation / fuel processing based and also pure research). This is suprisingly advanced and well developed considering Irans very limited access to certain technology and materials readily available to other nations.
But this is my point – Due to sensitivities in the matter of nuclear weapons and ‘ban’ of thier possession due to ‘Fatwas’ and decrees (which I wont pretend to fully understand, much less explain) the detailed study of enemy weapons of a nuclear nature seems NOT to have been carried out inside Iran.
Nucleear weapons research DOES however appear to have been carried out by (certainly sponsered by) Iran within North Korea and Syria.
There is significant evidence to support this, such as the Syrian reactors and storage sites paid for by Iran and staffed by Iranian and Syrian scientists (some have said North Korean too).
Although the Syrian sites have been destroyed, the transfer of North Korean missile and nuclear power technology (such as centrifuge design) between North Korea and Iran appeared to have contnued until the Civil War in Syria.
Some of this I have presented in earlier comments, including the open-secret of the Balck Sea to the Caspian Sea transit route (via the Sea of Azov and the Volga-Don waterway complex), so I wont repeat myself again.
All ‘evidence’ would suggest that Iran is in possesion of detailed knowledge of the design, production, and operation (including delivery by missile) of nuclear weapons – at least up to the level of previous North Korean designs.
It can be argued till the cows come home if or not Iran actually has a nuclear weapon. My personal opinnion is that they do NOT have a ‘weapon’, as such, but certainly they would have the knowledge (if not materials) to build one should thier ever be any change in religious fatwa / decree, etc.
This idea that Iran would ever get nukes is utter claptrap. I don’t doubt that North Korea could have sold missile technology to Iran, but that doesn’t begin to mean Iran would have bought any Nork nuclear technology, and certainly not nuclear bombs.
The logic against Iran having nuclear weapons is rock solid on every level, as many people have noted many times over, and any informed observer should know these basic facts.
1. Khomeni declared all weapons of mass destruction are forbidden under Islam, not just nuclear bombs. So if the government of Iran were to spit on Khomeni’s grave by disobeying that fatwa, it would destroy the purity of this Islamic Revolution, and thus turn this powerful movement into a corrupt mindless drunkard’s walk. The Iranians are not stupid and, unusually for national leaders, they do not lack principles.
2. On a military level, the Iranians are slowly winning on every front. So of course they want to keep on doing more of what works, and not gamble on any dangerous and unpredictable change of plans. Nuclear war does not play out to Iran’s advantage. Iran only has a few big cities, and it would only take a few nukes to destroy them entirely. BTW, I disagree with Saker’s opinion that Iran could withstand a nuclear attack. The top ten cities contain over 20 million people and most of the technology and industry. 2010 data: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_Iran_by_province Iran could be destroyed, but that would turn the US into Enemy # 1 for the rest of the world, and then the US would be destroyed by non-nuclear means, perhaps even without further war, because the crime and the hatred of the US would be enormous and all peoples would feel an intense need to stop this new Enemy # 1. I suppose this has all been gamed out by DARPA, so it’s not going to happen.
so according to your “logic” Iran will destroy the Islamic holy sites in Palestine and the Palestinian people they have fought for and supported the last 40 yrs?
Your logic is so flawed and murcanized it hurt my brain to read it.
I have to admit, my logic is “murcanized”…thanks for pointing that out.
It is hard for an American to believe a nation would be so ethical as to put themselves at a disadvantage in order to abide by moral principals. Upon further reflection, from what I know about the Iranian people and their leadership, I believe you are right…that Iran is ethical enough to not have nuclear weapons even though it certainly could.
The counter-arguments you have provided also make me think there are certainly strategic advantages to not having nukes in Iran’s situation.
Thank you for addressing my weak argument.
Any body who use nuclear weapons permanently pollutes the area for ever and airborn isotopes do not respect political boundaries…. Oil installations up wind and down wind will become unworkable and the provider of life the ocean will be seething with isotopes too.
Desalination plants cant remove isotopes from nuclear fision….. and the water table too will be polluted plus soils and life organisims in general. Using Nuclear weapons is a negative…. period. and an act of desperation.
The planet will suffer from loss of energy supplies and cost of living for the ordinary citizens regardless of where you live will become unaffordable. we rely too much on oil in daily activities….
Israel will be seriously affected regardless….. If it can even survive as a nation post nuke detonations.
The world will not and can not come under israel control or influence… regardless of beliefs re central bank system and nationalisim eg being jewish whatever. The elites dont do nationalisim or ethnicity …. thats for the 99% to argue and fight over just to divide us all as with other distractions …
The US as already argued by Saker is terminally sick politically and has been – noticeably – for almost 20 years.
The murder of the Iranian General invited by the US to meet in iraq, then murdered by a bragging US political establisment, has to be the most foolish act ever in recent history.
we westies will pay for this blunder and yes extreme violence will be the end result …
Boy have the west totally F#$%ked up like I have never seen before…..
@ ross a,
you appear to be sadly misinformed re nuclear: Hiroshima & Nagasaki were habitable again in about one year.
May I recommend nuclear PhD engineer Robert Zubrin’s book Merchants Of Despair?
We all live in a fog of lies sustained by the 1%s owned fake news MSM.
John Doran.
The Dragon is not China, the Greek word Drakon is basically a meaning for Serpent which is a reference to Satan, there is myth and there is biblical symbolism
If you are referring to Revelation and stuff you are mislead, the Dragon (to level with your term, or the Serpent) gave its power and dominion to the beast (the beast is an it which is a system, not a literal beast of course)
Which system is that? For that you have to go to the Book of Daniel and see the vision given to him, which was the last beast? it was the Roman Empire which was wounded and healed as Roman Catholicism, there, that is your Dragon.
If the beast is a system then what is its mark? well, if the beast is the Roman Catholicism system then you could say it is idolatry and everything that that Catholicism represent.
Look at the Latin America and every colony that was part of the old Catholic Empire (Spain, Portugal, etc), what do you see in these countries? stupidity, corruption, misery, and every other idolater nation is basically cursed by God, look at Africa.
Now look at nations that Protestantism was a thing, they succeed, like Europe in general (not that they are anymore but they were, all the progress they had is because of this)
References:
– King James Bible
– The Two Babylon by Alexander Hislop
– The Divine Programme of the World History
Well, as far connecting the dots (or seeing shapes on the sky), how about this theory:
1. US knows Israel and KSA betrayed it on 9-11
2. US knows that Israel had always pursued “aggressive” intel gathering and ops that put US interests in jeopardy
3. Israel is way too much embedded in American body politic to bring about a change through “normal” channels
4. So three part plan:
4a. Obama admin “protects” Iran (from Israel) temporarily through the nuke deal giving enough time for Iran to build up conventional strength
4b. ISIS is created to give a chance for Iran to control Syria and Iraq militarily (Either Russian interference was unexpected, off-piste move by Vlad or a super smart move engineered by US to throw a bone to Vlad so keeps quiet when the game gets bigger)
4c. US takes out a key Iranian target to provoke Iran into war and letting it take care of Israel (at least damages it enough to make it militarily weak that US fully controls Israel) and obliterates KSA; US divides Israel and Palestine is born. Syria gets its Golan heights back. USA controls KSA and becomes the largest supplier of oil in the world.
5. Voila! 9-11, USS Liberty are avenged at last.
If i am to be totally honest with you mr/mrs Surreal_Number, your dot connecting sounds like those woke Q farts over @ 8kun and their 11d chess bs.. It is not “dot connecting” when you fantazise about maga/miga bollocks and interdimensional 4d chess, it is desperation and/or cognitive dissonans.
Just posted similar one in the previous thread, but here it makes more sense.
First, i think is not smart to atribute actions to ignorance, and even for retjoric sake we need to assume we are dealing with knowledgeable structures taking decisions.
So, if we are looking at a controlled and desired escalation, one of the first thoughts that came to my mind is who is going to replace Suleimani.
Read on the internetz that becoming a martir was something he knew a clear possibility, and even wished.
So his replacement is probably ready.
And, it wouldnt make sense targeting him, before compromising any replacement.
Any thoughts on this?
I suspect this could be true, why would he fly so openly to an unstable country? but there are two probable causes:
– either he thought there was some honor among the enemy; this is a new low (targeting a leader so openly and blatantly), they basically are saying that there is no honor in them, nobody is safe, everything is fair game for them.
– or he knew they would do this as dogs eating their own vomit as they are and decided to die a Martyr, but then he wouldn’t had risked travelling with another important figure so my guess is that it is the first one.
I would like to propose that nuking Iran – maybe totally destroying a few of her largest cities, while leaving her hydrocarbon infrastructure largely intact – could indeed serve a definite political objective: Namely, that of filling every nation on the planet with an abject and servile fear.
Nations around the world would subsequently be quick to comply with every demand the US issues to them, since they know the same fate could befall them. That strikes me as a viable means of maintaining a globalized imperium via brute force.
Please note: I am NOT endorsing this; obviously, it would be hideously immoral. I am merely trying to point out that nuking Iran could indeed serve as an effective means to further an intelligible political objective.
If I am wrong in my thinking here, I would appreciate it if the errors could be pointed out.
It certainly sounds insane, but possible considering how desperate the empire has become. Sort of like how the Nazis dropped all pretenses and started hanging their own citizens on lamp posts as their Reich was collapsing all around them. But as Saker said, that would pretty much be the end. There will be riots even within the US.
Are you sure about that? Why couldn’t the “abject terror” strategy work?
Sure, it would not work against Russia and China. But it could work against everyone else, could it not? What exactly would prevent this from working? What could Russia and China do to prevent this strategy from being carried out without existentially imperilling themselves?
to Nestorian:
To nuke Iran wouldn’t work out as USA (and Israel) might would wish.
The fatal – for USA – point would be that most countries would try to get under the “help umbrella” of Russia and might be China too (depends on its military developments i.e. weapons). Russia would benefit greatly of such a foolish action of USA in terms of political strength worldwide.
Don’t forget that Russia has the most advanced weapons for which USA (and allies) can only dream of. And Russia will nonstop work on more advanced weapons in order to secure its state of any possible aggression. Russia doesn’t seek wars but it will definitely not “work” only on propaganda as USA does (aka “the best and most advanced military in the world”). Moreover, Russia is practically not indebted (approx. about 10 % only).
Doesn’t the answer lie in it being “hideously immoral”?
“totally destroying a few of [Iran’s] largest cities”. For a country of 81 million people, of which almost 3/4 live in cities, you’re talking about over 50 million dead.
It would be impossible to spin such a mass atrocity. It would be as if 90% of the world’s inhabitants had a red pill shoved down their throat. Sure, the US would have a few fearful allies left… the UK, France, Australia, maybe Japan, but every other country in the world would — in the interest of survival — re-align with China and Russia.
A key point worth considering is that while it may be clear to you that it’s an imperium, it is not at all clear to several billion people in this world. It’s an Empire which denies that it is an Empire, and this denial is made credible by a vast media/propaganda apparatus. It’s an illusion of sorts, but there are limits to how much reality can be distorted.
Nuking Iran would make it impossible to maintain that illusion. And this doesn’t even take into account all the blowback that would follow.
So, terminating Iranian population will enable USA government to employ Wallmart trolley pushers to extract Iranian natural resources?
Every country on the planet, down to Luxemburg and San Marino, would institute a crash programme to produce its own deterrent.
Great Analysis Saker. To understand the ME we have to understand 9/11. It is clear that it was a Mossad Operational affair. The Organization (also called Irgun, which seems to be a conglomeration of Bilderberg and le Cercle) which was the brain in the whole thing. It seems that War is on the horizon the military contractors part of the Organization around the world not just in the States went up around December 30 took quite a jump. To learn more about the Organization a good clue is to start with Shmuel Vaknin, brother of Sima Vaknin an intelligence disinformation officer. If people from this blog could help find the true motive of 9/11 he said it involved Sierra Leon, Putin, Nuclear Energy and a few other familiar characters, see Wikileaks email to Stratfor in Mystery Man link. The people involved in the suppose plot can be found at the Internet archive – http://analyst-network.com/ they include foreign policy professors at Columbia and Princeton and are extreme Zionist, Bolton level.
Looking at Twitter profile for some of them they are hard at work.
http://samvak.tripod.com/vakninmysteryman.html
@Saker
Two years ago, it was reported that Soleimani had died in some bombing, either in Syria or Iraq. For 24 hours, we heard and read about it and I clearly recall conversations I had with friends about the ramifications for Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Russia, Syria and Afghanistan. And the US. I am not talking about a Mandela effect.
Funny too, I had never heard of him until then and I started researching who he was from that point on, and learning about Iran and how much it was about life and how against mercantilism it had always been, as a society.
Every trace of those reporting is gone from MSM and Alternative alike and yet… many people remember it because they couldn’t even agree on how to pronounce his name they had never heard until learning he was dead.
We are supposed to believe that Soleimani was killed a few days ago, the same way that we are supposed to believe that building 7 collapsed from collateral fire from 911, Bin Laden was killed by the Obama administration and Baghdadi was taken down by Trump. Funny how all those people have so many lives…
And Iran is making a big show of it with the red flag, the US are being tonitruant and Iraq is having votes to kick US out of the region.
We’re being played
If Soleimani was killed a few days ago, he had many lives. Just like… Bin Laden and Baghdadi. And taxpayers are the absolute suckers in the farce of WAR, WAR, WAR, OIL, OIL, OIL.
There is a big difference.
The US lies. Almost every time. When in doubt, I just have to assume they lie, and I’ll be right 99% of the times.
So, yes, when the US says something we can all quite safely assume it’s a lie.
Iran, however, doesn’t lie. They can remain silent on some topics, but they don’t lie.
And that is because the TRUTH is their most powerful weapon, and it would take only a single lie to destroy that powerful weapon. It’s not worth it to lie for Iran.
When Iran says something, we can all quite safely assume it is true.
@ Christine Marais: this is like me remembering that Japanese newspapers reported Osama Bin Laden’s death in late 2001. It was well know at the time but now there’s no trace of it.
Saker, what do you think Turkey will do as this circus gets rolling? Align more closely with NATO, or leave it? Will NATO fall apart?
(and with luck, the nukes will have been as neglected as the VA hospitals, and will therefore be duds)
So – will we see any S-400s move in to Iran? Does Russia’s nuclear defense policy only relate to protecting Russia herself, or the use of nukes in general? That is to say, in the event of a US/Israeli nuclear launch, would Russia feel compelled to intervene?
More generally – in anticipation of further posts from the Saker Community, where else should we keep our eyes? I’ve got RT and PressTV going as my mains.
MoonofAlabama.org also has excellent analysis & comment section, similar to here.
@ Featherless,
MoonofAlabama can not be recommended by me. His blog has lost some of his most significant commentators (and therefore traffic generators to his blog) by his over use of censorship in the form of comment delete button.
Dare to point out an error in his writings or dare to disagree forcefully with his opinion and watch your comment vanish without even the dignity of a ‘deleted’ note left.
It has happened to me in the past too, so I stopped even visiting his site.
However, it is his blog and he can do what he wants with it,
In comparison, I have noticed that here on the Sakers blog I have not noted the same and ill-advised practice of extreme censorship, and commenters seem to be free to disagre with him. I have only been here a short a while so correct me if I am wrong.
During the short time I have been visiting the Sakers blog I have found the comment section to be amongst the best around and have left several comments here which I know would not have been left up on many other blogs comment sections.
Thanks, I do like Moon and other “alt” blogs – I mean specifically news agencies that have people going round the clock to keep us apprised of developments.
b at Moon can’t tolerate any forceful criticism of his views and his analysis is often extremely one sided, painting an overly rosy picture about the ‘resistance’. I like coming here as I can also fin articles that look at Putin and Hezbollah critically, objective reporting in current events needs also this angle. In any case, people are free to choose what they prefer but I get much more out of this blog both in terms of breadth and depth of analysis.
A big “Thank you..!”, “Noble Bird”.
Highlighting and touching, as usual with your analyses.
I´ll be just “waiting and watching”, hoping the best for all of us.
God bless the “good people out there”…
Kind regards from Buenos Aires, ever.
The Ayatollah is 80 years of age. The next guy may not be as allergic to nukes.
I fear this ignores the fact that even in the 74 years since Hiroshima, nobody has tried this scheme. They’ve certainly looked it over, but in the end the cost of missing a few of the enemy nukes is just too high. And I believe North Korea has another system in mind – they appear to be planning on a relatively small arsenal which relies on the EMP effect. With this almost no expensive “accuracy” is require, nor even re-entry vehicles.
Adding “smart” to the discussion after the string of moronic things recently said and done by Trump is a pretty crazy thing to do!
I must respectfully disagree. That deep facility at Fordow (?) is a tough nut to crack. Also, I’m afraid the Empire has been itching to end the ban on nukes. A penetrating nuke at Fordow followed by a demonstration explosion high over Tehran would tell the world that barbarians are on the loose. Tough-mindedness by the Iranians would become instantly suicidal. Seriously, does either Trump or Netanyahu care how they look in the history books so long as they get what they want?
Opinion time: talk of invading Iran truly is nonsense. What the Apartheid state demands is that the place become neutered. Whether that happens by turning Iran into rubble, or by diplomatic means is irrelevant. With Iran out of the way, Hezbollah will no longer be much of a problem. Lebanon will become part of the Second Kingdom of David/Solomon.
Thanks a lot for these clarifications! Thanks to you and your team of moderators Saker! Now here is my question. You said the US might possibly be able to forcibly open the street of Hormuz if once closed. If I see the coastline from Kuwait/Iraq to Pakistan then I ask myself how difficult it would be to send enough ships to really guarantee a safe passage for all ships from the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and further to the Arabic Sea.
Or do you think the US could get enough soldiers to not only set foot on this long coastline but to hold it?
Another question on the same matter: I remember to have read that Iran possess coastal defense systems similar to the “bastion” systems of Russia. If you think they are there would it be a good idea to use all “dispensable” air defenses to protect them?
I really try to grasp the technicalities of possible scenarios. Does the US have enough missiles to saturate Iran’s air defense systems in one wave and to destroy them along with a meaningful amount of offensive missiles in Iran’s possession in the first wave of an attack? Would be enough missiles still alive on the Iranian side to retaliate? Are US-American missile launchers near enough for Iran to think of a preemptive strike on them?
Perhaps I sound naive :) But I think it will be very important for all of us to understand as much as possible of these things so that we not lose hope when it looks like the US and its moronic “friends” bomb Iran to the ground.
Best wishes
Gunnar
How hard is it for the U.S. to pop a few nuclear emp’s over Iran’s coastal defenses to allow landing craft on shore? How do you defend yourself from a nuclear attack, and still be able to fight off your enemy?
The use of nukes is the only strategy available to the Empire.
Many thanks for your work and all others in the Saker community. This is truly a once in lifetime historical event.
I am ever grateful that I live long enough to see this happening.
Again, many thanks.
Was this an unfortunate choice of words, or are you really happy about this crisis?
I’m pretty sure Endtimers/Rapture folks like Pompeo are in hog heaven about now.
Grateful to witness the beginning of the end of the evil Empire. Hopefully, it ends with a whimper and not a bang.
But if its a bang, then that’s how it will. Nothing we can do about it, but prepare, as well as we can, for the worst time we can ever imagine.
The Americans have been famous since WW2 for having ridiculous ratios of Support troops per Combat soldier. This was true even back during WW2 when the Americans had much more support than the other armies. And that was before the days when it became standard for US bases to include shopping malls and food courts.
On US bases, many functions are now ‘privatized’ and handled by contractors. So, any real counts of deployments would need to account for numbers of Mercenary Contractors (ie, fighters of various types) and Support Contractors.
Mr Saker, you said: “Sure, and destroy your political image forever…”
It doesn’t appear that the Empire cares about its political image. It would rather be feared than admired. For especially the past three decades, the US seems to be following Machiavelli’s playbook: That which you cannot control must be destroyed.
From that perspective, the use of nuclear weapons makes sense, and the only thing preventing their use has been deterrence. The essential question now is, what is deterring the use of nuclear weapons?
@44360
As Hitler said “the only defense against terror is terror”, mutual destruction. Deterring against nukes is having nukes.
Either Iran must have it, or China, Russia must guarantee to back up Iran with their nukes.
US/UK are the only nations foolish enough to use nukes. US have developed short range, medium range and small tactical nukes and are eager to use them against all other nations exclusive China, Russia, NK.
You do realize, of course, that a full fifty percent of ww2 war casualties for America occurred before the poor buggers like the continent. More died before arriving at their destination. Even more died from equipment failure. Then those old men and little boys in Normandy, and the cooks and bottle washers on those Pacific Islands really gave them hell. In both theaters, the elite axis troops were either in Russia or China. The US had a walk through the park basically and cocked that up too. I don’t think they have the nuts for a real fight.
In my opinion you need to acquire half a dozen first-class WW2 history books, then carefully read them.
Indeed, the cynic would perhaps suggest they only joined WW2 in Europe to mop up the winnings after sending the UK (& others) broke on the Lease/Loan Agreements. The push for Berlin was not so much to stop the Nazi trading partner — just as IBM how they did business with early computer technology to manage prison/slave camps of (mainly) European Ashkenazi ‘jews’ etc — but rather to stop the Soviets claiming the main spoils for their long haul heroic efforts. Again, Japan was being squeezed with economic sanctions and baited to attack Hawaii — that little kingdom in the mid Pacific that had been claimed and ‘liberated’ by the USA in earlier era. Sure, in the last years the US threw a lot of men and materials into it … but then they effectively won the world for 1/2 a century. I suspect this time round things are a little more complex and they are ‘evil’empire etc. However, it is foolish to think that the demise of the USA is going to lead to a better brighter world. Once the dust settles the new set of criminals at the will likely usher in a new era of social control and double speak — it just won’t be operating in English.
Well, they have the nuts in the White House, Pentagon, etc. To be charitable, Normandy was another day in the office in The Kursk Salient, Stalingrad, or the taking of Berlin. Not by any means meant to belittle U.S. soldiers who served in Normandy but that’s the truth of the matter.
The Empire is indeed about to go under but most likely this will be a slow unraveling. If you live in America the signs of moral and economic decline are easy to see. For example, I pass large camps of homeless every day. Bombardment of Iran will only make things worse. Such a use of force will not only be inappropriate and ineffective but will also all but assure an escalating disaster. No political objective will be reached by the side of the Empire and all Iran needs to reach its objectives is to survive. Iran will survive and will emerge more determined. Wars are not won by firepower and kill counts alone. If they were the U.S. would have been the clear winner in Vietnam. The U.S. has learned nothing and its Israeli overlords even less.
If the US uses nukes it will be a political suicide for the US. Well, okay, murdering Solemani is already a form of political suicide. But using nukes will only precipitate even a much faster collapse of the Empire. Here is the unmentionable truth: nukes are USELESS as war weapons in 99% of all circumstances. Yes, they ARE crucial to the balance of terror (kuz that is what this is) between Russia and the USA and, to a much smaller degree, China. But as a WARFIGHTING instrument, they are quasi useless. Yes, I know, we are all conditioned to believe that nukes are like a magic wand, or a silver bullet, or a Wunderwaffe (pick your metaphor) – but this is a lie.
So will the US and/or Israel use nukes? Probably. They will do that because they are dumb racists who believe only in violence and in their own, messianic and racial superiority, and because when they will realize that all is lost, they will do what ALL western leaders (including Hitler) would do: make the other guy pay.”
As I posted about this topic in another thread, I think that the idea that America’s use of nukes would be political suicide should be questioned.
-The United States has already used nukes not once but twice and gotten away with it politically: Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
-Secondly, America would likely stage some outrageous False Flag attack on its own citizens (like September 11th) or its troops to manufacture sympathy for itself and justify the use of nuclear weapons.
Don’t think that most Americans wouldn’t be whipped up in a bloodthirsty frenzy and bay for blood after such a False Flag event.
Majority populations in the Anglosphere, Europe, and close allied nations like Japan, Saudi Arabia, and certainly Israel would likely support this crime against humanity.
-Thirdly, the USA could resort to the use of low-yield “mini nukes” that do not have the same catastrophic destructive power in terms of what most people think of when talking about the use of nukes.
In this scenario, mini-nukes would led to the normalization of nuclear weapons use–not merely as a deterrent in a balance of terror–but an integral facet of warfighting.
In fact, the American military–apparently channeling Doctor Strangelove–has even tried to sell the use of mini-nukes as “humanitarian” in that it minimizes civilian casualties because they are often designed to detonate underground as bunker-buster bombs.
Mini-nukes: Still a horrible and dangerous idea
https://thebulletin.org/2018/09/mini-nukes-still-a-horrible-and-dangerous-idea/
In the War of the Worlds, the Martians were brought down by microbes.
Many of the jobless Russian bioweapons techies were hoovered up by Iran when the Soviets collapsed 30 odd years ago. Ken Alibek thought an Ebolapox chimera had been developed. Ebola with smallpox contagion and effects.
Sleeper cells and you have a weapon more deadly than nukes.
Hmmmmmmmm
Another thing: America could slaughter hundred of thousands of Iranians, and most of the American population would either directly or tacitly support it.
Indeed, much of the self-styled Free World would support this mass slaughter–provided that a somewhat credible propaganda justification could be manufactured.
How does one know this?
It has ALREADY happened with the America-led War on Terrorism, where some studies have placed the number of dead in the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people.
Yet this mass crime against humanity is barely admitted–let alone opposed–by the “peace-loving” American people or other democracies. They all have more important things to do like keeping up with what’s trending on social media, the latest shenanigans of celebrities, or following their favorite sports teams.
This is despite the fact that even mainstream media and organizations have admitted these causality levels.
Iraq study estimates war-related deaths at 461,000
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24547256
801,000 dead, $6.4 trillion spent, and no end in sight: the true costs of the Global War on Terror
https://taskandpurpose.com/global-war-on-terror-cost
Paul Craig Roberts on the situation
—————————————————–
Putin Will Restrain Iranian Retaliation
January 4, 2020
Putin Will Restrain Iranian Retaliation
Paul Craig Roberts
A number of intelligent analysts predict Iranian retaliation for Washington’s murder of a high Iranian official who was in Iraq on a diplomatic mission. I understand their logic. However, I wonder.
Putin doesn’t want war. Why should he when Washington’s arrogance is destroying the US and the empire. Even Germany has had enough of Washington because of Washington’s interference in German energy policy and sanctions on companies involved with the construction of the Nord 2 gas pipeline. https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/germany-and-eu-condemn-us-sanctions-on-gas-pipeline/
In France Washington’s puppet, Macron, is showing independence by saying that Russia is part of Europe.
As Putin and China have failed to protect Iran from a US/Israeli attack by forming a defense alliance with Iran, I suspect that Putin will prevent Iran from directly retaliating. As Iran cannot afford to alienate Russia, any retaliation will come from proxies after they make a show of splitting from Iran.
Russia cannot afford for Iran to be in chaos and has no choice but to protect the country. Similarly, Iran is dependent on Russia’s support and cannot ignore Putin. China has energy connections with Iran and would find chaos in Iran disruptive of China’s economy. This means that Iran is not vulnerable like Iraq, Libya, and Syria (prior to the Russian intervention) were. Whether or not there is a formal defense alliance between Russia, Iran, and China, a US/Israeli attack on Iran will one way or the other bring Russia and China into the war. Therefore, Russia and China should formalize the arrangement, because the formality of an alliance would silence the warmonger American Zionist neoconservatives who are advocating for war and also make it clear to Israel that the tiny country would cease to exist. All it would take is one Russian nuke.
As I recently wrote, I suspect that incompetent historians have convinced Putin that alliances are the cause of war, and perhaps they have been in some instances. But weakness, real or perceived, is also a cause of war. The failure of Russia and China to form a defense alliance against Washington/Israeli aggression could turn out to be the cause of the Third World War.
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/01/04/putin-will-restrain-iranian-retaliation/
The Saker (and links provided by the saker) is the only website that truly gives me knowledge about world events. Keep up the great content! Love from Merimbula, Australia 👍
Not surprisingly, the British are supporting America’s war against Iran. So too is Canada in its usual passive aggressive manner.
Britain backs US war drive against Iran
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/01/06/brit-j06.html
Canadian government tacitly endorses US assassination of Iranian general Soleimani
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/01/06/caso-j06.html
Inexorably, the Anglo Evil Empire is hellbent on setting fire to the Middle East–and likely, much of the world.
I suspect the attack on Soleimani, the head of the extraterritorial Quds Force, would be aimed at changing the dynamics outside Iran – in Syria, Lebanon, etc – and not necessarily precursor to direct aggression against the country itself.
I do not know enough about politics and the general situation in Iraq, but that’s clearly part of the calculus.
In fact, the Houthi attack on Saudia Arabia (if it truly happened that way and wasn’t a clever way to boost oil prior to Aramco IPO or even something else) may have rang alarm bells at the CIA and Pentagon. Perhaps this was an escalation too far by Iran, truly threatening the US national security.
So, IMO, this is still all about geopolitics around Iran, not in it, and about maintain both a grip on oil producing countries as well as controlling Eurasia at the rear. Maybe also helps to sell more weapons if you stir the pot/rattle the cage every now and then.
I don’t think there’s a plan to attack Iran in practical terms. De-dollarization will continue to happen as alternative energy is increased (see Tesla and the death of gas cars). So I am more interested the new economic (and this political and thus military) world order that emerges from that. Carbon credits to maintain balance of payments anyone?
now Suleimani is head of the extra-terrestrial Quds Force.
Nils
I like your comment, except Tesla. The only death Tesla is contributing to is the deaths of their drivers via autopilot “errors”. They combine this with free cremation services via their leaky, defective batteries.
On a serious note, de-dollarization isn’t happening bc of alternative energy. It’s happening bc the fiat dollar is nearing the end of is lifespan, as is the US empire, and smart countries are fleeing before the ship sinks. Countries are tired of the u.s. using economic warfare to play a global game of whack-a-mole.
Maybe the US can see the writing on the wall and either has to get ahead of the energy transformation curve or play catch-up to those who don’t.
It’s no secret Trump had a former oil CEO as his Sec of State for some time. The military will need oil for the time being as well so it’s not 1:1 transition yet but rather a shape of things to come.
If energy is produced but not sold in dollars how does the balance of payments via fiat continue? There has to be a method of circulation. Or a unified world government that encompasses both types of countries so the net is zero. I don’t know but it’s clear oil was a major factor in ME strategy along with Mckinders heartland theory. Not sure of US strategy for the future and explanation of current posture, though.
Hi Saker!
Could you expand on the possible retaliation options of Iran against economic targets in the ME? Thinking of oil sites in Saudi Arabia, Koweit, UAE, etc. that could be bombed. Blocking of the straits of Ormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb (by the Houthis). What could be the consequences on the world economy?
Yes Saker, last year we could all say that at least trump hasn’t started a war yet. That all changed on the 3rd of January. What he did certainly is an impeachable offense, but nobody there will recognize it as such because they think he killed a terrorist. I never thought I would see something this stupid in my lifetime.
I agree totally with the post mentioning bio-warfare.
This would make great sense.
However, we are only at the beginning understanding how microbes (virus bacteria, archaea) have interactions if any. We do not know exactly how any of a “released” bio-warfare would “react” in reality.
The risk that it would spread could be very great.
The risk that even Israel wouldn’t be spared of such a “spreading” by bio-warfare, so not intentionally, is also great.
What we for certain know is that USA has lots of bio-weaponry and research centers, even in the Middle of Africa (maybe also in some Eastern European countries), working on such “microbes”. Maybe via other microbes (or for example flying insects) or something like this. Extremely difficult to detect. Something newly created on this bio-warfare front and in order to get rid of it has to be captured and then thoroughly analyzed and/or examined and/or investigated and tested.
This could backfire – not immediately but over time. However, as is well known the Deep State in USA doesn’t care about its population (USA) so if people would die it wouldn’t matter at all.
Hello Saker,
What do you consider a determined attack?
I would assume that it’s an attack that outlasts the defenses, but isn’t Iran well prepared for such a scenario. I mean 40 years of overt and covert operations and threats and sanctions should be cause for Iran to have a considerable stockpile of missiles for their AA units with clockwork like rotation of those and supply routes that are planned for many different scenarios.
So a determined attack would have to be at least two months on a scale greater than 1999 NATO/Serbia.
Can the hegemon deliver that with impunity? How? And if so isn’t that a short term win for the empire? They would have dealt the damage and sowed terror and those arguably are their goals.
Regards
1. We are yet to hear from Putin. What’s your take on this?
2. Do you really think the world will look down upon the US if nukes are used? Their media will simply behave like they are now and turn it around on the Iranians. Ditto for all western MSM.
Thank you and appreciate your analysis.
With those ridiculous and awful threats of Trump, would it not simply be a matter of a false flag by Israel (who else), blame it on Iran and the war is seriously on where Trump might actually continue with war crimes and bomb cultural sites in Iran? It sounds like a scenario already made up a while ago, as most of this must have come from Israel’s rule and manipulation.
This piece is both brilliant and heroic. Many thanks to you.
Thank you for all your hard work and saker site for giving us the latest quality developments and reasoned analysis.
Q….if DT is “neutralised”in some way and USA decides to apologise in some way and offer an “honest” (if at all possible) reset in some way….could that calm it all down so they can stay to protect their oil interests? Various twitter threads saying a lot of USA top people appalled by the idiot DT…better for DT to go than international humiliation of USA of ejection from Iraq?
Magnier article very interesting that hesitation or slackness or reluctance within axis of resistance led to Suleiman being more intentional to keep it going or keep its cohesiveness and so USA saw that as an opportunity and a sufficient reason for their action.
Via RT ..political analyst and journalist Andre Vltchek believes.
“We never saw the US Army depart just because the parliament of the occupied country would vote that it should. So, this is not going to be easy for Iraq to get rid of the US and NATO military,” Vltchek told RT.
Washington is likely to employ “all sorts of tricks” to try and stay in the country, he said. Transferring its forces into the autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan region “as they did in the past” is one way. Still, the situation in the region has changed since the early stages of the 2003 invasion, and the local powers and groups seem to be showing significantly more unity, and the death of Soleimani could end up being a unifying moment.
The whole endeavor to try and expel US troops from Iraq might still flop, former Pentagon official Michael Maloof cautioned, since the country’s politicians – including the caretaker PM who is spearheading the effort now – were very reluctant to actually do so before the US attack.
“Prior to the assassination of General Soleimani, there was dissent within these Shia ranks, and that’s why you had no decision, because for months, there has been discussion of doing just this – possibly removing foreign troops, namely the US in particular, to avoid the very problem we’re having now,” he said.”
If the Americans attempt to unite the kurds against PMUs and others forces in the region what would happen?
By now I don’t put anything past them.
I guess my question is how has this event affected the kurds? What is their potential role in possible coming events? Thanks.
It’s clear that a ground attack is out of the question and if the Americans are to make good on their threats it must necessarily take the form of air attacks, planes and missiles. And you argue that air defense is a question of numbers, a predicament that favours the Americans. Ok, that makes sense, but one question remains with me. If they use air attacks won’t the bases (land and sea) for aircraft and missiles be within range of Iranian missiles? Is Diego Garcia beyond Iranian missile range? Otherwise, surely the Iranians would have anticipated exactly this situation. Do you have an idea of how they aim to deal with it? As always, thank you for your efforts.
Good opportunities : China retakes Taiwan, Russia retakes Ukraine, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Iran retake Palestine , all together and at the same time.
Jimmy Byrnes and Stimson Truman and the fellas at Potsdam thought that they’d use the bomb on Japan to make the Russians more “subdued” or pliable. Stalin said at that time “They’re trying to raise the price”, to an aide. In March of ’44 (while Roosevelt was alive) Groves told people that the bomb was “for Russia”
Alperovitz and others are sources for this.
It didn’t work out, did it?
Rather than “subdued” the Soviet bomb project was given even higher priority, at Potsdam.
Truman did use the bomb to threaten the Red Army that was in part of Iran, and they did leave, but that was before “Joe #1” went bang.
My point is that threats, direct or otherwise, often have effects other than the wishes of the party making threats.
Saker’s essay is appreciated. And I tend to agree with his ideas and perceptions.
I would only add that murdering the diplomatic envoys and diplomats is itself a diplomatic act. It signifies that diplomacy has ended. After that it’s root hog or die. It means the fight is on unless somebody surrenders, and it means that surrender = death. It is reported that this is precisely what the Empire has done, murder diplomats (and I bet not only last Friday!)
No, it’s not the “end of the Empire”. Its a beginning of a World War, long time planned by Zionists. And yes, Israel will use tactical nukes against Iranian objects. As a result of this war they plan to install their “mashiach”, Jew from a tribe of Dan – Antichrist – as a world ruler. He will unite all nations and religions into one and fulfill their dream of a world rule of “chosen tribe” over goyim.
I feel your points on nukes are not taking into account the philosophy/mentality of the anglo zionists. In fact, not taking the philosophy/mentality of the anglo zionist is precisely why the assassination of Soleimani caught many by complete surprise.
The way I analyze the situation of the pros and cons with nukes is as follows:
Nukes are a deterrence because they literally force both sides to “empathize” with each other. Let me explain.
When the USA/Israel have a foe whom they have overwhelming advantage over (e.g they can inflict relatively high damage without paying significant loss of “valuable” (jewish) life, all courtesies and “considerations” of human-to-human resolution go out the window. Everything becomes fair game. Your tribe, your people, your family, it does not matter, all becomes an appropriate target to kill/eliminate until enough people have died that there is no one competent enough to lead your group. If the Palestinians are any indication, you can be starved, tortured, killed, have your organs sold, enslaved, trafficked, it all becomes fair game. They can and will spy on you, kill anyone from your side they have to kill (civilian or not) and certainly drop all the bombs they have to drop to break whatever “threat” you are posing to them, it all becomes fair game. This could be merely my opinion, but I feel this is the “essence” of their philosophy in war.
It’s also worth mentioning they have no problem whatsoever with having their american golem die by the millions if they must. For most of them will be of the wrong DNA and in their minds anyone who doesn’t share their DNA is an animal whose purpose is to serve them anyway.
Also, they would have no problem whatsoever with losing face by nuking iran. Again, their philosophy matters here. For one they believe that the opinion of those who do not belong to their tribe is not important. Secondly, they believe (somewhat rightly) that as long as they conquer in the end, they can program a population to agree with whatever they want. Considering the US nuked Japan wiping out a quarter of a million civilians AND Americans and foreigners today have for the most part “forgotten” this little factoid of Anglo zionist deadliness really gives life to their argument.
I believe they have no problem whatsoever with nuking Iran. Once they do that, and get the iranians to surrender/subjugate, they will simply spend a decade or two making documentaries a la Michael Moore about how horrible it was for the “American government” to do such a thing and how “it should never happen again” blah blah blah, while having added a new colony to their ranks. This pattern of behavior has worked extremely well for them in the past. I don’t see how they would simply give up this strategy now. Also guys: 400,000 dead iraqis and they got their European golems agreeing with their new aggression. Psychology doesn’t lie. They act how they act because it works.
From the Iranian perspective, being seeing this way by their enemy is incredibly dangerous. Their enemy can: 1) Send a million cannon fodders to take out a million of their cannon fodder, iran loses and the empire won’t shed a single tear for any of the life lost. 2)Nuke them into surrendering. 3) Start killing them more indiscriminately and forgoing more and more conventions (e.g the US begins taking care of all of Israel’s enemies such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, PMUs in Iraq,syria etc). The USA has always had the Military advantage, what the Americans have been trying to figure out is just how costly the Iranians would make them pay for their aggression. If the cost of their aggression is a bunch of expendable things (American life, fiat money, temporary oil price hikes, arab life, etc) they will absolutely ramp up their military aggression. On the other hand, as long as the iranians can appear capable of inflicting damage to non-expendable things (Their DNA-approved valuable life, threats to their hegemony, threats to their own comfort), they will be safe(er) than they are right now.
To me this is where nukes come in. Nukes force both sides to consider the possibility that that which they treasure the most (the survival of their culture and their people) can be wiped out and destroyed completely if escalation continues. Forced empathy if you will. Putting aside the real effectiveness of nukes in a doomsday scenario, psychologically they absolutely convey this message and have this effect.
Iran can inflict heavy losses to the Anglo Zionists, but don’t let this fool you. Just because they are not thrilled about losing a few hundreds of billions of dollars and an ocean of American blood fighting their wars does not mean this is not completely acceptable for them.This is not a heavy price to pay because these things (in their eyes) are expendable. As long as the Iranians can’t pose an existential threat to the things the anglo zionists value,they will continue to face an increasingly aggressive US military.
If they find just one drop of leverage to take military confrontation off the table their enemy will be forced to use the more pleasant methods of war such as diplomacy and covert means.
Air defenses are good enough if they enable to shoot the shooter. Take out a Us Airbase/a ship with missiles and the shooting stops…
Re Israeli nukes my brother who used to be a U.S. Fed Officer said that of course they had them but didn’t have final authorization to launch. I didn’t press him on it since he hadn’t yet retired (didn’t want to get him in hot water for revealing info). Just mentioning it in case someone knew something about this. As far as The Russian Federation’s reaction to Soleimani’s assassination, I think they will accelerate their help in fortifying Iran’s defense capabilities.
– C праздником
Great article.
I am particularly interested in the mindset differences of Russia / Iran and US.
Where could one get an insight as to the Russian mindset in general.
I would be grateful if anyone could recommend some articles or a book.
Thanks in advance.
Try Andrei Martyanov’s two books.
Would love to know whats Andrei Martyanov insight and analysis on this?
Any chance of contacting and soliciting him, Saker?
He blogs here: https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/
Have at it!
Although in his latest post he sounds a little weary.
“And so, here we are. I may gather enough will and strength to review some military options but, frankly, it is a fool’s errand since pretty much everyone is going to be writing about it”.
https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2020/01/tell-me-who-your-friends-are.html
Dear Saker,
Re – number 6 (Iran being under Russian protection).
It has been understood by many military analyists that Iran has been under the Russian nuclear umbrella since threats were first made to take out the Bushr Reactor / power station even with Russian scientists, technicians, and engineers being present.
I am unsure of the dates of the first threats to Russian personnel, but it was at least as far back as around 2008.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/sep/25/iran.israelandthepalestinians1
More recently, when Israel obtained advanced convential bunker buster munitions from the US:
https://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-sale-of-5000-bunker-buster-bombs-to-israel-israel-bunker-busters-in-exchange-for-not-striking-iran-2012-12?r=US&IR=T
Russia became more vocal.
Even more recently, the US began releasing details of thier new ‘super bunker busters’ – or more accurately Earth Penetrating Weapons (EPW’s for short), and there was talk of Israel being gifted some at the US taxpyers expence.
EPW’s are designed to be nuclear tipped and were specifically developed for use against Russian/Chinese/Iranian deep underground facilities.
They have been around for a very long time so we can reasonable assume all big players (including Israel) have this technology. This is a report from way back in 2003 to illustrate:
https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.1634531
There is considerable speculation that the US ‘GBU’ series bunker busters were primarily intended to be nuclear equipped, with the larger GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) clearly being intended to have its convential warhead swapped with a very large (megaton yield) neutron type device in times of war for attacking DUMBs such as in Iran and especially the critical Russian ‘Dead mans hand centre’ believed to under the Kosvinsky mountain (and currently impervious to all known US nuclear weapons (including multiple combined high yield nuclear strikes).
There has also been some speculation that the main C&C HQ of Iranian forces in Yemen fell victim to one of these devices some years ago.
There is considerable speculation (from genuine experts) that the bunker buster used was nuclear, but evidence is divided in this matter:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/possible-tactical-nuclear-strike-neutron-bomb-in-yemen/5452876
This video shows evidence of a delayed detonation and the ignition of a massive warhead (the sparking and scintillation caught by the camera apparently is indicative of a neutron bomb):
https://youtu.be/_0n1n-RQv3c?t=19
But back to my point,
There are several media reports of high level Russian personnel warning publically of a Russian responce to any attack on Iran, and even later reports of a quote from a Russian source that, “An attack on Iran would be regarded as an attack on Russia”.
https://www.asiatimes.com/2019/08/article/attack-on-iran-would-be-an-attack-on-russia/
When I have time I will dig out some better references and provide links, but if the translations are correct, the indication is that a nuclear attack on Iran (and likely also a US nuclear attack against China) would illicite a full-scale nuclear responce from Russia against the US – as it would be clear to anyone at that stage the US had crossed the nuclear threshold and Russia be next.
As with all of my comments, I will be happy to be shown to be wrong.
The gun assembly U235 gadget was designed with the idea that it would be used as a bunker penetrating nuke. “It could go through an incredible amount of concrete.” Rhodes’ “Making the Bomb” (somewhere in there.
Presumably the designs have improved since 1945…
I too saw the claims that small nukes have been used. Maybe. But some people know for sure.
Thank you, very insightful as always.
The only worrying thing is that Washington clearly shows signs of ultimate depravity that sees no limits to anything, and that they have embraced the insanity of the thought that ‘if WE don’t get to rule the world, then NOBODY will rule the world, because the whole world will fall with us’.
If that’s your reasoning, and you have no way out, aren’t nukes suddenly a perfect tool?
Saker, you ask, who will be next on the list……………….did you miss the precident? US congress about to pass resolution that Russia is a State sponser of terrorism. Once passed, the next resolution will be to place the Russian military in the sponser of terrorism catigory………………….and then, every Russian solider (esp. the brass) will be ligit taregts anywhere in the MENA, where the US is conducting ATOs
The last major war the US Empire will fight (overseas) was Gulf War Two. I remember the extensive buildup to that. Propaganda, coalition building, UN speeches, ordinary people arguing both sides extensively. There is nothing like that now, just general exhaustion with DC bs.
My question is how could the US domestic situation possibly support a war which will be even greater than Gulf War Two?
If not, then this is over already. The Pentagon won’t bomb Iran without a ground component and one doesn’t exist. No major allies and no army in place.
“My question is how could the US domestic situation possibly support a war which will be even greater than Gulf War Two?”
Very Simple: Another false flag attack like September 11th, only worse.
Public opinion in the USA is already being prepared with the media planting stories about “concerns” regarding Iranians entering the USA, the Los Angeles Police Department fearmongering about possible “terror” threats, and New York mayor Peter DiBlasio uttering similar “terror-ganda” comments.
America will do it.
People here who think otherwise are clueless.
@Tom, Anonymus
Agree. America will do it, out of hate of being in the losers role. The aim is only to “hurt” Iran.
Sadistic destruction of something greater they don’t have, never can get nor obtain. We heard Trump going especially after ancient history sites.
That’s why US don’t need ground troops. All kind of bombs by drones or long distance bombers, to hurt and destroy from a cowards distance destroying cities, infrastructure, ancient sites and murdering educated Iranians.
Its coming from a demoralised Pentagon, infested with liberal ideology and too much money. Trans soldiers, feminist soldiers, gay soldiers, reporting on clima and green co2 bs.
The latest I viewed was a Pentagon report from 2004 saying European cities would be under water in 2020 “if we don’t do something”………………LOL.
Thank you Saker for this “intermission”.
There is how ever one thing I would like your comment on. You state in point 1 that Iran never had and never will have a nuclear program. That Ayatollah Ali Khamenei declared it haram is good argument. Iran would take this seriously. It could be that they would “hide” behind this declaration and run a nuclear program, but in doing so, they would not fool USA or Israel, but they would deceive their Moslem brothers. I believe that one interpretation of the teachings of Mohamod is that you could deceive the un-believers, but it would be haram to deceive faithful Moslems.
But I think that you do not need a full spectrum nuclear program to get an effect of nuclear weapons. If they had the capacity to deliver them to Telavi it would be sufficient. That would raise the bar and make invasion or even an air campaign a too high risk. Just look to North Korea. Even Trump would not risk Seoul. (North Korea could destroy Seoul with conventional weapons also, and that may very well be the reason why invasions has not been attempted even before they developed nuclear weapons.)
For the supporters of the Empire it would make Iran a true rough state. But hey, they already do consider them a rough state! They already do treat them as if they were trying to develop nukes, so what is there to lose? Those who do not already see Iran as a rough state would understand their need to protect themselves.
Frankly, if it were not for the declaration of “haram” (which I actually did not know of until you wrote about it), I would say that the logical thing for Iran to do is to learn from the Kims, and develop nukes. I think that the only way these nukes would be a bullseye was if they were actually used to threaten Israel. If Iran presented an exclusive self-defence doctrine, I think i would be difficult to argue that it was justified to start a nuclear war.
Thank you for this analysis, it really turns one’s perspective around in several dimensions (vis a vis the long game and the major players) – thinking in “5d chess”.
Sacrifices may be required and may be steep.
The important thing is to keep the pressure on.
And to keep perspective towards the end game.
The leaders of the axis of resistance have no need nor desire to telegraph their hand.
The responses of other world leaders, those hosting hegemony bases in particular – other than Erdoğan – are predictably anaemic. Don’t they understand that this is like hitting a foreign dignitary at Frankfurt with a drone from Ramstein? Where is the outrage?
They just want “peace”. But turning the other cheek is the peace of the dead. As this most excellent article enlightens, there can be no peace without justice.
As an addendum to my previous comment, despite the 5d chess and enormous implications,
I have a sickening feeling that the overarching raison d’etre for this entire mess is merely to keep Bibi out of jail.
Maybe it’s only marginally related, but what ever happened since the Houthi attack on the Saudi oil refinery? It supposedly knocked out half of Saudi oil production, equaling some 5% of global oil production for many months. I expected a huge oil price spike but it never really happened. Has this damage already been repaired or was the damage that much less than initially anticipated?
Could the Houthis repeat such an attack, or have the holes in the defense of the Saudi oil industry been plugged by now?
How big is Saudi’s appetite really for a war with Iran?
Well written, respect!
Now it is not about MAGA but MEGA – a fascist megamoron in the W. house… a puppet of zionist criminals, racists and terrorists.
Time for UN to impose sanctions on the USA! Russia and China should give it a try at least!!! I suppose the General assembly would vote in favor of a slap to hegemon’s face…
Not heard anything from UN yet…..not surprising? It is redundant if there is no censure?
Oh, there has been fun and games. Lavrov came for the party and between him and the Chinese envoy, they told the US to sit down and shut up and you did a very bad thing. Imagine the US wanting to make a resolution condemning the Iraqis for breaking into the US embassy after the US took Russian embassies and did not protect the Venezuelan embassy. So, the message was clear – Sit Down and Shut Up!
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/us-slams-russia-china-blocking-un-statement-baghdad-embassy-attack
Wow. Nice work, man. Throw it all up into the air, and I suspect you are right: this is the first public step toward the end of the American Empire. Good riddance.
Nasrallah speech
https://vk.com/feed?w=wall504587942_3642
The Soleimani Assassination: The Long-Awaited Beginning of The End of America’s Imperial Ambitions
https://ahtribune.com/world/north-africa-south-west-asia/iran/3782-end-of-america-imperial-ambitions.html?fbclid=IwAR21QxGSvTtlAfKi_xd-mO8UaCBAwnyryiNXVOdAPAph7a4vwCZ6Zta4vZw
“Donald Trump rode to victory in 2016 on a promise to end the useless wars in the Middle East, but he has now demonstrated very clearly that he is a liar. Instead of seeking detente, one of his first actions was to end the JCPOA nuclear agreement and re-introduce sanctions against Iran. In a sense, Iran has from the beginning been the exception to Trump’s no-new-war pledge, a position that might reasonably be directly attributed to his incestuous relationship with the American Jewish community and in particular derived from his pandering to the expressed needs of Israel’s belligerent Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The blood of the Americans, Iranians and Iraqis who will die in the next few weeks is clearly on Donald Trump’s hands as this war was never inevitable and served no U.S. national interest. It will surely turn out to be a debacle, as well as devastating for all parties involved. And it might well, on top of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya, be the long-awaited beginning of the end of America’s imperial ambitions. Let us hope so!”
All this is quite plausible and quite cogent – so far as it goes – but it neglects the only two significant factors in the equation that matter. Everything else is just detail.
1. The complete Zionist stranglehold over US politics and media, and much else.
2. The abysmal quality of US and western leadership.
US foreign policy is subordinate to the wishes and needs of Tel Aviv.
From their point of view, the past debacles in Iraq, Libya and Syria have been a rip roaring success.
The first two countries have been completely destroyed and bombed back to the Stone Age.
Syria to an only slightly lesser extent.
With the US and its satellites providing the money, the blood, and the dumb goy muscle.
Israel, Adelson, AIPAC, Saban, Singer, want a war with Iran.
And what they want, their Shabbos goy in the White House will deliver.
It doesn’t matter if this is disastrous for Trump in particular and the US in general.
They are just expendable goy stooges put on the earth to cater to the whims of the Chosen People.
They don’t matter.
US leadership in particular is the worst in its history. The same applies in its various satellites and satrapies. Arrogant, venal, corrupt, irredeemably ignorant, delusional, and ideologically driven, swallowing their own endless mendacity and propaganda.
Trying to understand or analyse the behaviour of such people is a fool’s errand. You cannot expect any remotely rational or coherent policies to be adopted by them. You have to think in terms of a monkey playing with a hand grenade handed to it by its Zionist organ grinder.
I think you should put God’s chosen people like “chosen”. It is just a paraphrase according to their own belief.
Zionists support a zionist fraction of the east european jews that originate in Khazaria, which was converted to judaism by their supreme leader in the late 10th century AD.
https://www.lostisrael.com/khazars.htm
I don’t think there is any scientific proof that God chose anyone in particular, but were known to live among us thousands of years ago in all parts of the world .
In the northern religion the name of God is Odin, exactly the same as the egyptian Aten named by Pharaoh Akenaten who changed his name to honour God (Akenaten: there is only one God, and his name is Aten), and in hebrew Aten (connected to Egypt) is the official name of God according to the Babylonian Talmud . All these names are similar when expressed in english.
Odin is known to have instituted the northmen king-lineage Ynglinga, to act as leaders. It was from Aros that the slavic people chose their king whose lineage later became the tsars.
Hi Saker, very interesting post
I want to submit you another machiavellian possibility: what if the real target of Trump is not Iran (or not mainly) but China (as the main geo-strategic rival of US now) and secondly the EU (as a main industrial exporter and economic rival)?
Today USA has a “window of opportunity” to withstand the oil shock from the destruction of the oil infrastructures in the ME and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, thanks to the shale oil; because even if they have to decrease their oil consumption and prices go up, they still produce 12 million bbl/day and still can produce something more (is price are OK), but China today imports more than 11 million bbl/day, mainly from the ME. The oil from the ME is really critical for China but not at all for the USA.
Suppose that Iran retaliates damaging of course some US bases, but also every oil installations and terminals un KSA, Gulf Countries, Kuwait, etc… and shutting-off the Strait of Hormuz with many thousands mines; we are talking about removing may be 30-35 million bbl/day from the market.
Now think about this:
a) What will happen, in few months, to the Chinese economy after they drain their oil strategic reserve and still the ME oil is not flowing, the oil platforms are destroyed and Hormuz still mined?
b) What will happen to the citizens in the hiper-populated Chinese megalopolis when the just-in-time supplies start to fail due to the lack of oil to move cars, trucks, tractors, ships, farm equipment, planes, etc…? How the Chinese government will manage the discontent? could happen many Tiananmen 2.0 but x1000?
c) What will happen to the EU after an oil-shock x1000 times the oil shocks of 1973 or 1980? will the EU survive united in a totally crushing economic depression?
d) What if the USA became a “safe haven” for the wealthy in a crumbling global economy and the gold and precious metals flow again (as in WWII) to the USA
e) The shale oil Ponzi scheme is crumbling and it can take down the whole US financial system, so USA need a huge wealth injection to avoid the crash, and to help the oil frackers, may be the oil at 200$ in the global market could help, and also the money flow to the USA
So USA after the destruction of oil infrastructure and losing many soldiers (may be some hundreds) they can agree in a truce (à la Israel/Hezbollah in 2006), and end the war with a situation more or less similar to the status-quo ante but:
a) The chinese economy destroyed and probably in an internal turmoil that can endanger the unity of the whole country that could be divided in more “manageable” entities. Even if still united after the economic shock China will not be a geo-strategic rival to US Empire during decades.
b) The EU probably dissolve as a consequence of the huge economic crisis, also that means more “manageable” entities in Europe for the US Empire.
c) With all that wealth inside the US financial system it can start a Marshall Plan 2.0 , loans to help rebuild the infrastructures in the ME (except Iran and other “rogue” states), EU, Japan. South Korea and the small countries that once were China, of course always with US bases inside and making then fully indebted to the US Empire. In any case Russia will be isolated and besieged (much more than today)
The idea is to give a full devastating blow to China, but indirectly, without any hostile act of war, and to take a many trillions $ market share without need to compete or fight with a peer country.
I think this could be the real reason the others carrier strike groups (CSG) are not steaming in a hurry to the Persian Gulf now, to help to “protect our troops and allies in the region”. Simply they do not want to protect them.
MAGA using the war, that always have been the way USA was made “great” in the first place (see the history of the Spanish-American war, WWI and WWII), but with a very small amount of american blood spilled.
Could this happen?
Cheers
David
Certainly the Chinese economy will be devastated should war break out before the BRI takes off. Which is one significant impetus to the neocon urge for war – another being that each month the hegemony’s military and economic superiorities are slipping.
You mentioned Tiananmen in passing – be enlightened that what the West knows is mostly a media creation https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VxTNWxvRnBQ
Carrier groups are not going to enter the Persian Gulf anymore, not since the Russians eliminated ISIS outposts from Iran/Caspian Sea, passing over a mountain range with many times the range & accuracy of us cruise missiles (? Kalibr) https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-bombs-syria-u-s-pulls-aircraft-carrier-out-persian-n440731 – the US carrier group made a hasty departure within days of this event, and have not entered since.
@David
In my opinion you hit bulls eye. US is now the worlds biggest oil exporter for a limited period. Any trouble in Hormuz and oil delivery will only hurt China and Europe and benefit US big…….and note ALSO Russia big!
The killings and bombings is as always a profit calculation and money scheme.
But China, Russia, Iran should already know this and we expect them not to sit on the fence with open mouth when US tries to weaken them all in one strategic attack on Iran.
We can forget everything about chocolate drinking Europe. They are worthless for everybody.
now dig deeper, can the US use their oil as is? or do they need other types to mix in so their equipment can handle the grade of oil? The US shale ponzi is a dud in more ways than one as far as i understand.
The refimers use the very heavy Canadian oil (before tar sands they imported Venezuelan Orinoco’s oil) for that mix (shale oil is very light), US only imports a very very small amount of oil from the ME and can be cero without too many problem (for the moment)
Excellent….. and at latest right now TheDonald will be made aware of this window of opportunity.
Chapeau – that would be even 6th dimension chess.
Cheers
Saker, are you familiar with the work of Johann Galtung, who uses an analytic protocol that accurately predicted the Iranian Revolution and the fall of the USSR, almost to the date? He has long predicted the US empire would fall in 2020. https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/d7ykxx/us-power-will-decline-under-trump-says-futurist-who-predicted-soviet-collapse By that he means that the system of allegiance through which the US can get its vassal states to act would collapse. I thought of Galtung when I heard about the assassination, and the way NATO allies are drawing away from the US is one confirmation of his analysis. As a citizen of the US I believe we will never restore our republic as long as the empire is functioning, but I fear the period of facism that Galtung predicts. It seems the misery the US has visited on the world is coming home. (BTW, part of Group 2.)
Iran should not lose their hardly built military facilities, labs and hardly acquired know-hows, just by starting a rage driven retaliation. I am ok with a major retaliation even after a year from now. In the meantime they can use proxies to hurt US on 24×7. However the most important thing is, Iran must deliver a major blow to the u.s. Otherwise they will go down in the same path of the history, went by Gadafi and Libiya.
IMHO, we will soon see the “distributed network” equivalent applied to warfare – “distributed warfare” This will consist of simultaneous attacks on the many US outposts and installations distributed around the world. These will tax even the US’s ability to adequately defend them all. Interesting times ahead.
Great insights as always. I do not believe that the US will be able to invade southern Iran. The US simply has not massed enough forces in the ME for this reactionary blunder. Any landing would be untenable because the Iranians have considerable depth to fall back and reign artillery and ballistic missiles on US troops and their landing ships.
Regardless a direct invasion of Iran – even just to attempt to maintain the Strait of Hormuz open will result – like in 2006 by Hezbollah on the entity – in a massive bombardment of occupied Palestine against the zionazis military, infrastructure and civilian targets. The zionazis could care less about goy US troops – but the occultist oligarchs and the iof (at least the officer class) will never be ready to make the ultimate sacrifice.
The US cannot handle a war – the same way as the iof was no match for Hezbollah in 2006. Iran is now unstoppable and the US has demonstrated itself to be completely under the control of the las vegas kosher nostra. No amount of MSM presstitute propaganda can dig the empire of chaos out of this mess.
USA is not-agreement-capable. For many reasons and one is there are two many actors at war with one another inside USA ruling elites. And when one actor makes the plan – others would try hard to sabotage it by any means wit hzero thought about consequences and costs (nomadic/seafarers/pirates mindset: enviironment is infinitely large to absorb ANY action without consequences).
So i hope that USA will not be able to use medium- and long range missiles against Iran.
I hope that any weapon that from raw technical and physical standpoints has capability to carry nuclear warhead and reach Russian borders would be seen )(the very launch of it) as the nuclear attack of USA against Russia and will trigger immediage M.A.D. response from Russia.
Thus i hope all nuclear attacks of USA against Iran would be bound to shprt-term delivery vehicles only.
And i still hope it will end up in conventional-only war.
After all Trump only needs re-election. He needs a Perl Harbor 2.0.
Something that he can sell to USA people as “America under attack” and be wartime president.
Then after re-election any conventional strike at Iran can be sold to USA public as decisive blow than won the war, and then it can be left behind somehow.
This does not require actual WMD to be used, so i would hope to the last minute it will come short of nukes.
This is a reasonably useful site to track us carrier status; to state the obvious, the us is in no way prepared to mount serious carrier operations:
http://www.gonavy.jp/CVLocation.html
Ok, now China seems to understand that she is the “big prize” in this game, and it is the country that can lose more in a war in the center of the oil exporter countries. She has offered Iraq “military assistance”.
(I think a bit too late)
https://twitter.com/Souria4Syrians/status/1214231245992972290
Oil is King, any society, any military can work without oil, the cars, trucks, tanks, planes, missiles, all work thanks to oil, if no oil, no supermarkets, no deliveries, no fertilizers, etc…any industrial society can exists without oil, and China’s is not an exception.
Trump knows he cannot defeat China militarily, but he can destroy China economically shutting-off all the oil flow.
The center of the american global power has been the oil, always, and now more than ever, because the fracking “miracle” is crumbling badly (Trump knows it) and it is now or never, this strategy cannot be made before because the US was heavily dependent of ME oil, but now the things has changes and US can withstand a huge oil shock much more easily than China or the EU. This is the right time to put the clock of Chinese economy 40 years back, and for many decades.
The US is in a hurry, Trump knows that his country in crumbling and people have 400 million weapons ready to fight if a soviet style economic collapse happen, so he need “overcharge” the system to avoid an american financial crisis.
America never ever, will leave ME (the oil), even under fire they will use all they have, because it is a matter of survival of the U (United) of his name; if US leave the ME, and then after that the US$ stop being the world reserve currency, the US will collapses shortly, and Trump knows it
Cheers
David
China has a huge strategic reserve, and its largest supplier is Russia. That nation has unlimited money, and can outbid anybody if necessary.
The oil imports of China during 2018 came from:
Russia: US$37.9 billion (15.8% of China’s total imported crude)
Saudi Arabia: $29.7 billion (12.4%)
Angola: $24.9 billion (10.4%)
Iraq: $22.4 billion (9.4%)
Oman: $17.3 billion (7.2%)
Brazil: $16.2 billion (6.8%)
Iran: $15 billion (6.3%)
Kuwait: $11.9 billion (5%)
Venezuela: $7 billion (2.9%)
United States: $6.8 billion (2.8%)
United Arab Emirates: $6.7 billion (2.8%)
So ME countries represent around 44%, so almost half of the oil to China imports pass through the Strait of Hormuz, Russia only supply the 15,8%
A country that consumes almost 14 million bbl/day and produce only 3 million bbl/d has not “huge strategic reserves”, and you cannot extract the oil from the reserves from one day to another. No it is not a matter of money, simply you cannot access the oil, the supply route is closed by weapons, and they have to fight the iranians to have oil
I used to think Yeltsin is worst imaginable humiliation a leader can serve to his nation.
Today, looking into Trump’s twitter, I feel a sick relief if those words go together.
At least for this relief i can heartily say thank you to Trump. It f-ng CAN get worse than watering airliner wheel on air.
Iran’s air defences is very good with emphasis on the very. Any U.S attack will be met by a formidable response. The U.S will loose assets very quickly than they can replace.
“Oh, and one more irony: while the GOP controlled Senate is most unlikely to ever impeach Trump, is it not pathetically hilarious that Trump has now, indeed, committed acts ought to have him removed from office? ”
I dunno… it could be a two birds with one stone situation.
Get Trump to start the war they want.
Impeach him for doing what they want.
Continue the war because (circumstances), and just let the blame fall on Trump and have the media run it such that his successor had no choice but to ‘fix’ what he started… of course by more war…
On bases,
Some 30+ years ago I did a safari with friends, got some land-cruisers and did Africa, almost on a daily basis in the middle of no-where not seeing people for days we would pass “USA Army bases” they would be named, they would be manned, and they all had their own air-ports.
We never stopped to chat, we never actually saw any USA jeeps or such on the road, but just the fact that they have bases everywhere all over Africa tell’s you a lot about who owns what.
IMHO its like having in your face ‘safe houses’, where any where in the world the USA is ready to deploy, and have a base well armed to support any problem, any place.
How anyone can have any faith in Trump or Nitwityahoo, or any of that bunch in the White House – I just do not know. Imagine having a President who “tweets”! And who speaks such silly English. Who is without dignity or even self respect – and who is so obviously ruled by you know who.
Poor America! I have neve been to Iran and know no Iranians but, dear God, they seem so much more dignified and sensible.
I am revuolted by that murder and sick of the way our “leaders” in the West behave. Are they all just puppets – of you know who? Have none of them ANY self respect or dignity?
Or simple common sense and intelligence.
I am sick of it all.
Trump is repulsvie – and so is that woman who has ruined Germany and that little fool, Macron. As for Boris!
Dear Saker,
I am an
american Psychiatrist . I have read your recent contributions which much care. There is considerable merit to them. However, I believe there are several points that must be considered that you omit. First, Arnold Toynbee wrote that when a civilization is in decline, the creative constructive element in the society is not involved in government or in social movements. Trump and the current military industrial complex are far from part of that constructive element. As some point, however, just as has been true throughout history, that element will once again take control. They will not allow the Americans to totally destroy their civilization only its excesses. Second, and I think most important, there is a growing movement of international cooperation which underpins the essential strength of our society which is gaining in strength and power and which will prevent madmen from destroying the earth. This is not the Middle Ages when no such force existed.
Oh I enjoyed this read. This sentence made me laugh:
“Trump will go down in history as the man who thought he could scare the Iranian and Iraqi people with “tweets”.”
As usual the Saker nails it. Most of the Pentagon assets in the Persian Gulf are on the territories of allies of Iran. How is that for stupidity. Any war scenario with Iran is nuts and the Pentagon will end up regretting it. This video is a good description of what would happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9b1DG86a4k
Iran can very effectively close the Straits of Hormuz by sinking blockships across it. Nothing the Amerikastanis can do, including capturing the south coast of Iran, will open the Straits for months in that case.