Tuesday 4th of August 2020

china, russia, iran, iraq, vietnam, anywhere, venezuela, cuba, etc...

how good...

Prime Minister Scott Morrison has made a historic visit to the US aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan, in a show of friendship with the United States, as China sends a warship to the vicinity of joint military exercises off the Australian coast.

Mr Morrison made the flying visit on Friday, arriving on the vessel as it was participating in Operation Talisman Sabre, a biennial training exercise involving the US and Australian militaries.


Read more:





The Defence Force is closely tracking a high-tech Chinese spy ship as it makes its way towards Australia ahead of this month's Talisman Sabre war games on the Queensland coast. 

Key points: 
  • The electronic surveillance ship was believed to be north of Papua New Guinea on Saturday night
  • It is believed to have begun its voyage south to Australia late last week 
  • The same class of vessel was spotted monitoring the 2017 Talisman Sabre war games


Multiple military sources have confirmed to the ABC they are preparing for the imminent arrival of the Auxiliary General Intelligence (AGI) vessel, which is expected to closely monitor the massive biennial joint United States-Australian exercises from just outside Australian territorial waters.

On Saturday night, the Type 815G Dongdiao-class electronic surveillance ship was believed to be north of Papua New Guinea, having begun its voyage south towards Australia late last week.


Read more:




our lollipop man on their boat...


Nice trousers before...

the mad men should not provoke former and present victims...

The United States believes that it is so invincible, exceptional and so frightening that no one would ever dare to protest, let alone defend its people against constant humiliation, economic embargos and military threats.

It used to be like this for quite some time. In the past, the West used to bully the world before and after each well-planned assault. Also, well-crafted propaganda used to be applied.

It was declared that things are done ‘legally’ and rationally. There were certain stages to colonialist and imperialist attacks: “define your goals”, “identify your victim”, “plan”, “brainwash your own citizens and people all over the world”, and then, only then, “bomb some unfortunate country back to the stone ages”.

Now, things are slightly different. “The leader of the free world” wakes up in the middle of the night, and he tweets. What comes from his computer, tablet or phone, (or whatever he uses), is spontaneous, unpolished and incredibly dangerous. Similar in substance to what made him wake up in the middle of the night, in a first place.

He does not seem to plan; he shoots off from the hip. Today, as I am writing this essay, he has declared that he has “five strategies for Venezuela”. Go figure. Bravo!

Earlier, as he was about to land outside London, he embarked on insulting the Mayor of the British capital, calling him names. A bit like we used to do to each other, when we were five years old, in the neighborhood playground.

He has been regularly offending Mexico, and of course Iran, China and Russia.

He basically tells the leader of the most populous nation on earth – China – to “be there”, at the G20 Summit, or else.

Whenever he and his lieutenants are in the mood, they get busy antagonizing everyone: Cuba and Nicaragua, DPRK and Venezuela, Bolivia and Syria.

Of course, the main “culprits” are always the ‘biggest bad boys’, Russia and China.

Anyone, at any time, could easily land on the proverbial hit list of President Trump, and hawks of his United States of A. It could be India (which, during ‘good submissive times’ is called by the West the “biggest democracy”, or perhaps Turkey (militarily the second mightiest NATO country). The world had been converted into an entity which appears to be run by a bloodthirsty and unpredictable dictatorship. The world is an entity where everyone is terrified of being purged, imprisoned, starved to death, or directly attacked, even liquidated.

It was always like this, at least in the modern history of the planet. Colonialism, neo-colonialism, imperialism: they have many different faces but one common root. Root that has been often hidden deep under the surface.

But this time it is all in the open, raw and brutally honest.


Both George W. Bush and Donald Trump have one thing in common: they are honest.

Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama were both ‘suave’ presidents. They were loved in Europe, as they knew how to speak politely, how to dine elegantly, and how to commit mass murder in a ‘rational, righteous way’; ‘old-fashioned, European-style’.

The brutal, vulgar ways of W. Bush and Donald Trump, have been consistently shocking all those individuals who are pleased when things are done ‘stylishly’ and ‘politically correctly’; be it a coup or the starvation to death of millions through embargos. Or be it invasions or ‘smart’ bombing (practically, ‘smart’ meaning very far from the inquisitive eyes).

But it is not only the ‘offended sensibilities’ of predominantly European population, that matter.

The danger is that someone might take Donald Trump seriously, and respond accordingly.

In the past, verbal insults similar to those unleashed now by the US President, could easily have led to a war, or at least to the breaking up of diplomatic relationships.

And now?

In case Westerners have not realized it, yet – people all over the world are indignant. I talk to Libyans, Afghans, Iraqis, Venezuelans, Cubans, Iranians: they hate what comes from Washington; hate it with passion. They know that what is being done to them is terrorism, thuggery. But for now, they do not know how to defend themselves. Not yet, but they are thinking.

The entire world now resembles a brutal ghetto, or a slum, where a heavily armed gang controls the streets, and in fact every corner and alley.

At least in the past, subjugated people were able to hide behind decorative words and ideological pirouettes. They were able to ‘save their face’. They were sodomized in the name of ‘freedom’, ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’. Now, a horrible reality is flying directly into all directions: “You will do as you are told!” “It is us who will decide.” “Obey, because we said so”. Entire proud nations are being reduced into states of slaves or even worse – lap dogs.


As everyone is well aware of, even lackeys and slaves often hold grudges. And abused dogs can bite.

Throughout history, slaves rebelled. True heroes came from rebellious and enslaved nations.

This, what we have now on our planet, is not good, not a healthy situation.

The more countries that are being intimidated, the higher the chances are that somewhere, soon, things will let go; collapse.

Only terrible fear, so far, assures that if a Syrian or a Libyan or an Afghan city is leveled to the ground, there is no real retaliation: urban areas in the USA stay intact.

Only incredible patience of the Russian or Chinese leaders guarantees that, so far, even as their economies are being battered by ridiculous sanctions, the two powerful nations do not retaliate and ruin the US financial system (which is only a paper tiger).

Trump dares. He tortures and humiliates more than half of the world, then looks straight ahead and laughs: “So what are you going to do now?”

So far, the world is doing nothing.

Even the proud and mighty Iran is not ‘crossing the line’. As millions of its people are suffering because of insane sanctions, the Iranian navy is not yet engaging the US battleships that are sailing very near its shores.

Even as more and more US bases are being built right next to both Russia and China’s borders, so far there are no substantial military bases being erected by Moscow or Beijing in places such as Nicaragua, Cuba or Venezuela.


All this may change, soon.

And the so much dreaded (by Washington) “domino effect” may actually take place.

Non-Western leaders have also their ‘bad days’ and terrible nights. They also wake up in the middle of the night, and think, want to communicate and to act.

Imagine an Iranian leader, waking up at 2AM, and suddenly feeling overwhelmed by wrath, because Iranian men, women and children are suffering, for no reason, as a result of the perverse sadism being regurgitated by the West. What if he Tweets an insult, too? What if he just orders, on a spur of the moment, to have all those obsolete US aircraft carriers and destroyers that are floating in the vicinity, be sunk? Iran can do it: everyone knows that it can! Technically, militarily, it is easy: those ships are just sitting ducks.

Then what? Will Washington nuke Iran?

Someone may say: The West is killing millions every year, anyway. Better to fight it, in order to stop it, once and for all. Others may join. And then, then what? Will Trump give orders to kill tens of millions, just to maintain control over the world?

What if the US navy vessels bump into a Russian or a Chinese ship, as they almost did in the South China Sea, recently? What if a Russian or Chinese ship sinks, dozens of sailors die. And there is a retaliation? Then what?

What if Syria has enough and begins shooting down Israeli military jets that are bombing it, and attacking North American and European ‘special forces’ that are still located, illegally, on its territory?

The US is engaged all over the world. France and the UK, too. And if you talk to the people in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, you very soon realize what the real feelings towards Washington are!

If you provoke the entire world, something very terrible may happen!

Now, there is an entire coalition of powerful nations, ready to defend themselves, and also defend each other. Militarily, economically, and ideologically.

The world is not a slave of the West, or the United States. It is not a latrine.

This is the new world. Considering the horrors that were spread by the West, for many long years and centuries, Asia, Africa, “Latin America”, the Middle East and Oceania, are unbelievably patient and forgiving. But the USA and Europe should not take this tolerance for granted. They should not provoke its former and present victims.

Now, we (the people from the previously ruined part of the world) are beginning to speak up: about what is being done to us – to China and Russia, to South America and Africa, and the Middle East. With awareness comes courage. With courage comes pride.

Do not misinterpret our kindness. It is not a weakness. Not anymore. Think twice before you speak (or Tweet). Think a thousand times, before you act!

Andre Vltchek is philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He’s a creator of Vltchek’s World in Word and Images, and a writer that penned a number of books, including China and Ecological Civilization. He writes especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”


Read more:


destroying the unipolar domination of the USA with S-400...

A great number of analysts these days would draw attention to the decision that both India and Turkey took to proceed with the purchase of Russia’s state of the art S-400 anti-air systems in spite of unparalleled political pressure Washington applied on both Ankara and New Delhi. Essentially, this decision represents a turning point in the international struggle against the US military dictate. It’s worth mentioning that both India and Turkey were Washington’s allies at some point, and yet they came under colossal pressure from the Anglo-American empire, which has directed all of its efforts at establishing a multi-national military infrastructure, where all proceeds from arms sales go into the pockets of US military contractors.

As it has recently been noted by a Belgian media source: “there is something utterly shameless and rude in the behavior of the US sales representatives (Pompeo and the like) when it comes to pushing military equipment and weapons for the sake of unparalleled greed of the Washington oligarchs with their belligerent hegemonic attitude. They seek to establish a distribution network that puts their customers in a position when they have no choice other than purchasing the constants “upgrades”. All this resembles the deadly grip of an octopus or a swamp, that you just cannot outrun no matter how fast you go.

In addition to this, in order to get a better understanding of the reasons that prompted Ankara to lean toward acquiring the S-400 system from Russia, instead of going with Washington’s Patriot missiles, it must be recalled what the NATO-imposed Washington Collective Defense and Common Security represents and who’s been benefiting from it.

Even if Ankara chose to purchase Patriot missile s via NATO, upon delivery its armed forces wouldn’t have come into direct control of those systems, as those could only be manned by NATO crews operating on a rotational basis left up to the Pentagon. Turkey has already had this sort of experience with its previous purchases from Washington, and at some point its leadership realized that this layout wasn’t ensuring its national security, as it wasn’t designed for this purpose. Essentially, Ankara couldn’t use any of the weapons that it paid for as they could only be used when the Pentagon said so.

Thus, in the course of the last attempted coup in Turkey back in 2016, Tayyip Erdogan was quick to learn that a certain portion of its armed forces were not obeying his orders, as the West wanted him gone one way or another, as he was fed up with Turkey’s role as Washington’s vassal and started pursuing an independent policy beneficial for the state he leads. When Erdogan got into a helicopter to escape the angry mobs, he was notified that it could be downed by the Turkish Air Force or NATO air defense systems deployed across Turkey, as they defied their commander-in-chief and were obeying orders from the Pentagon.

As it has been revealed by the Arab media, Erdogan only managed to escape death due to Russian intelligence agencies, which intercepted encrypted orders setting off the military coup and warned the National Intelligence Organization of Turkey as to what was about to happen. Moreover, among those intercepted messages there was a transmission from military helicopters heading for the hotel in Marmaris, where Tayyip Erdogan was residing at that moment. Al Jazeera argues that the head of the Turkish state managed to escape from the hotel minutes before those helicopters opened fire on it.

In this regard, it is quite noteworthy that US intelligence, including the “omnipotent” NSA did nothing to warn Turkey, even though its monitoring stations are scattered all around the world, so it was fully aware of the assassination attempt and still preferred to keep quiet.

Largely due to these bitter memories, Erdogan is dead-set on ensuring that both his personal security and the security of the state he leads won’t be jeopardized yet again by the shifting allegiance of the troops manning US-made weapons systems paid for by Ankara. And it’s hardly a secret that Russia’s anti-air systems represent the only viable alternative to the systems built by the US. Moreover, in a bid to show its good will, Moscow announced its intention to partially transfer the technologies necessary for the production of the S-400 system together with the shipment of the weapons systems themselves. Additionally, it started discussing the possibility that Turkey would play a part in the joint production of the S-500 anti-air system, as revealed by Tayyip Erdogan last May. This signifies that Moscow has confidence in Ankara, and the shipment of S-400s is much more than just a trade deal.

This development resulted in massive panic within the ranks of US military contractors, as they now run the risk of losing their dominant position within the international arms market to Russia, as other states are not blind and will most certainly follow the example of Turkey and India, who both went through hell and high water to get their hands on S-400s, as Washington used every trick in the book to prevent them from doing so.

Without a doubt, the acquisition of a new generation of Russian radar and air defense systems like the S-400 will destroy the entire system of unipolar domination of the United States. Back in 2015, China made a bet on the S-400, which allows supersonic interceptions at altitudes of up to 23 miles and distances of up to 250 miles. The list of those waiting for a chance to acquire S-400s is comprised of Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Vietnam, and a number of other states.

As it’s been revealed by the Turkish channel T24, it appears that the S-400 system, which caused such tension between the United States and Turkey, will become a game changer in the world of Middle Eastern politics. It seems that the S-400 has become a symbol of an axis of resistance of one’s withdrawal from vassal submission to Washington.

Jean Périer is an independent researcher and analyst and a renowned expert on the Near and Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”


Read more:


donald's undiplomatic skills: looking for biffo...

The Daily Mail reported last week that former British ambassador to the U.S. Kim Darroch said that Donald Trump "set upon an act of diplomatic vandalism” to spite Barack Obama, citing leaked diplomatic cables between 2017-2019. These leaks add to the understanding among critics of the Trump administration that the president's approach to Iran which has included sanctions and now, according to The Daily Mail, personal grievances with the former president, might move the U.S. will “bumble” into war with Iran.

But Khury Petersen-Smith, the Middle East Research Fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington D.C., writes in an article for Counterpunch that “it’s the U.S. that is belligerently threatening Iran, not the other way around. And if a war breaks out, it won’t be because the administration 'bumbled' into one.”

“The fact is when you look at the situation, it's the United States that pulled out of the deal that Iran was complying with, it’s the United States that put thousands of additional troops in the Middle East, the region where the U.S. already has many thousands of troops. It's the United States that has maintained a devastating sanctions regime on Iran,” Petersen-Smith told The Real News Network's Marc Steiner. “It's the United States that came within minutes of attacking Iran recently. You know, it wasn't Iran [to do] that, it was the United States that has an aircraft carrier off the coast of Iran. And I would ask viewers to consider what would happen if Iran, or any other country for that matter, put military muscle off the coast of this country. And so it's really very clearly the United States that is the aggressor if you look at what's actually happening.”

Petersen-Smith observed that Trump and National Security Adviser John Bolton have competing visions for Iran. The U.K. has its own differing vision, as evidenced by Darroch's comments in the leaked cable and Darroch's resignation once those cables went public. Nigel Farrage criticized Darroch while Prime Minister Theresa May said she supported Darroch.

I don't think the Trump restrictions are on the same page. And certainly I don't think Britain and the U.S. are on the same page, right. And the U.S. is also cultivating a whole set of alliances actually at the moment against Iran, working with countries that have long been waging wars in and carrying out other activities in the Middle East in the name of isolating Iran, like Saudi Arabia and the UAE in particular, along with Israel,” Petersen-Smith said. “My point is these countries may not all be clear on exactly what they want, but they are united on an aggressive posture. And it's in that context that we could see military escalation.”

The leaked cables offer more evidence of infighting, Petersen-Smith explained, but the U.S. and a number of its allies remain firmly on the same side when it comes to escalation: “We can look at the kind of goings-on that's revealed by these cables, the different spats between Trump and the various heads of state around the world, actually, but it's really important to step back and look at the big picture, which is that the U.S., Britain, and various U.S. allies, of course Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Israel, et cetera—all of these countries are escalating tensions in the world, and that's really, I think, the big story that we have to pay attention to.”


Read more:




Read from top.


The whole Kim Darroch affair is to show the world that Trump is a nutcase, but that the US allies will go with whatever Trump decides possibly because "it would be in the allies interests" to go with biffo initiated by a mad man. Note: It would have been a different style of performance and lies with Hillary (a mad woman) but WITH THE SAME RESULT: WAR.

US empire-based international order...

Sky News laments erosion of ‘rules-based international order’ but does such a thing really exist?

By Danielle Ryan
The “rules-based international system” is under increasing threat, with laws flouted and “norms” violated at every turn by disobedient members of the world community, warns a preachy Sky News op-ed.

The dire warning, authored by Sky’s foreign affairs editor Deborah Haynes, defines this rules-based order as the “network of accords and institutions” which make up the “framework that helps to ensure security, rights, freedoms and justice” around the world.

Haynes hails the United Nations, the NATO alliance and various international treaties as examples within that framework, but, curiously, the central bogeymen of the piece allegedly eroding this so-called system are all Western adversaries. 

Any truly honest assessment of the world today would acknowledge that this “rules-based international system" of which Haynes speaks is a myth; if it ever did exist, it has been battered ceaselessly by Western powers. The rules-based order is less a functioning system offering “rights, freedoms and justice” and more a tired catchphrase used by Western officials and their media partners to scold countries that refuse to obey their commands. In other words, it exists only in theory, rarely in practice.

Russia is accused by Haynes of having repeatedly attacked “the global rulebook of normal behaviour," but what is normal behaviour? If we are to believe that Western actions are “normal,” then normal has taken an increasingly macabre turn.

Was the 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan — a country still occupied 18 years later —  a win for the rules-based system? If there were any lingering notions about a functioning international order after that, the 2003 invasion of Iraq should surely have put an end to them; oddly, it gets no mention in the article.

Britain’s misdeeds — including its enthusiastic support for that war — are also conspicuously absent from the opus. Speaking of Britain, one wonders do Yemenis, slaughtered and starved by Saudi Arabia, with generous help from London in the form of billions of pounds worth of arms, feel they are the lucky beneficiaries of this rules-based order? 

Maybe Libyans, having had their once stable and prosperous country ravaged by NATO’s 2011 “humanitarian intervention” feel the same? The military bloc’s infamous “humanitarianism” was also on display during its earlier bombardment of Yugoslavia in 1999.

Are the “rights, freedom and justice” touted by Haynes as by-products of this so-called system being offered to Palestinians? When Israel demolishes their homes and schools, tramples over their rights, and uses overwhelming military force to stamp out resistance — while the West turns a blind eye — is it adhering to this normal rules-based behaviour?

This phrase “normal behavior” is nothing more than a Washington talking point. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Iran last year to “act like a normal country, or see its economy crumble.” 

Unfortunately, it has indeed become ‘normal’ for the US to crush under its boot any country which dares to object to its rule, through the use of deadly sanctions and often brute military force. 

The same warnings were recently issued to Venezuela, which is now under a total economic blockade and where experts have assessed that deadly sanctions have led directly to the premature deaths of 40,000 people.

The other thing about the “global rulebook” is that the rules are constantly changing to suit the whims of Western powers. When asked why Washington’s recognition of Israel’s sovereignty over Syria’s Golan Heights was good, but Crimea’s decision to rejoin Russia was bad, Pompeo referred senators to a particular “international law doctrine” which does not exist

Haynes also deplores China’s erosion of freedoms for the people of Hong Kong and mentions ongoing pro-democracy protests in the region as another “symptom” of the unraveling of the rules-based system. Meanwhile, in her own country, one of, if not the most consequential journalist of modern times sits behind bars for the crime of doing real journalism and upsetting the global elites’ applecart.

Ultimately, the screed adds little of value to any discussion about international affairs. Yet, it is still valuable in the sense that it is a great demonstration of the delusion, hypocrisy, and total lack of self-awareness displayed by many Western journalists when attempting to make sense of the world around them.


By Danielle Ryan

Danielle Ryan is an Irish freelance writer based in Dublin. Her work has appeared in Salon, The Nation, Rethinking Russia, teleSUR, RBTH, The Calvert Journal and others.


Read more:



Read from top.




here we go again...

Australia will send a warship, surveillance aircraft and Defence Force personnel to the Persian Gulf to join an international effort to combat Iran's actions in the Strait of Hormuz.

Key points:
  • The US States is leading military efforts to protect shipping routes in the Persian Gulf
  • Australia has spent weeks deciding to join
  • Scott Morrison said it was in Australia's interest to ensure oil tankers could move freely


Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced the move this morning, saying it was in support of US-led efforts to keep the Strait of Hormuz open for shipping.

Mr Morrison said recent disruption to shipping in the region was a threat to Australia's national interests.

Australia has been considering joining the US-led military effort, which also includes the United Kingdom and Bahrain, for weeks.

Tension in the region increased when the UK seized an Iranian oil tanker off Gibraltar, prompting Iran to retaliate by seizing a British tanker in the Persian Gulf.

"Fifteen to 16 per cent of crude oil and 25 to 30 per cent of refined oil destined for Australia transits through the Strait of Hormuz," Mr Morrison said.

"So it is a potential threat to our economy."



Read more;




What a lot of bullshit!... Remember Galipoli... Vietnam, Iraq and the recent waste of time in Syria... 

"Australia has spent weeks deciding to join?" Bullshit plus... Scummo chose his moment as if he had agonised over the decision, but the way it has been expressed shows the decision had been made yonks ago.

thank you, russia, for more reality into politics...

The successes of Russian diplomacy in the Middle East

by Thierry Meyssan

The political changes which have been transforming the Middle East for the last two months are not the result of the destruction of any of the protagonists, but the evolution of the Iranian, Turkish and Emirati points of view. Where the military might of the United States has failed, the subtlety of Russian diplomacy has succeeded. Refusing to comment on the crimes of one party or the other, Moscow is slowly managing pacify the region.

For five years, Russia has been multiplying its approaches in order to re-establish international Law in the Middle East. It has relied in particular on Iran and Turkey, whose manner of thinking it does not really share. The first results of this patient diplomatic exercise are redefining the lines of division existing at the heart of several conflicts.

New balances of power and a new equilibrium are being set up discreetly in the Nile valley, in the Levant and the Arab peninsula. On the contrary, however, the situation is blocked in the Persian Gulf. This considerable and coordinated change is affecting different conflicts which in appearance have no connection with one another. It is the fruit of patient and discreet Russian diplomacy [1] and, in some cases, the relative good will of the USA.

Unlike the United States, Russia is not seeking to impose its own vision on the world. It begins on the contrary with the culture of its interlocutors, which it modifies by small touches at its contact.

The withdrawal of the jihadists and Kurdish mercenaries in Syria

Everything began on 3 July – one of the five founders of the PKK, Cemil Bayik, published an op ed in the Washington Post calling for Turkey to open negotiations by lifting the solitary confinement of their most famous prisoner - Abdullah Öcalan [2]. Suddenly, prison visits for the leader of the Kurdish autonomists in Turkey, forbidden for four years, were once again authorised. This opening was a secret for no-one. The rumour had been disseminated by the Peoples’ Republican Party, who considered it treason. While waiting for clarification, his electors abstained during the municipal election in Istanbul on 23 June, inflicting a severe electoral defeat on President Erdoğan’ candidate.

Simultaneously, combats flared again in the zone occupied by Al-Qaïda in the North of Syria, the governorate of Idlib. This Islamic Emirate has no central administration, but a multitude of cantons assigned to various combatant groups. The population is supplied by European « NGO’s » affiliated with the secret services of their countries, and the presence of the Turkish army prevents the jihadists from attempting to conquer the rest of Syria. Since this situation can not be openly admitted, the NATO Press presents the Islamic Emirate of Idlib as a peaceful refuge for « moderate opponents of Assad’s dictatorship ». Suddenly, Damascus, backed up by Russian air support, began to reconquer their territory as the Turkish army withdrew in silence. The combats were extremely violent, first of all for the Republic. However, after several weeks, the advance was clear, so that if nothing occurs to prevent it, the province could be liberated in October.

On 15 July, the third anniversary of the attempted assassination of which he was the object and the improvised coup d’état which followed, President Erdoğan announced the redefinition of Turkish identity, no longer on a religious, but a national basis [3]. He also revealed that his army was going to sweep the forces of the PKK out of Syria and transfer some of the Syrian refugees to a frontier zone approximately 30 to 40 kilometres deep. This zone more or less corresponds to that in which, in 1999, President Hafez el-Assad had authorised Turkish forces to suppress any Kurdish use of artillery. After having announced that the Pentagon would not abandon its Kurdish allies, US envoys came to Ankara to do just that, and to approve the Turkish plan. As we have always said, it so happens that the leaders of « Rojava », this pseudo autonomous Kurdish state in Syrian territory, are almost all of Turkish nationality. They are therefore occupying the area that they had ethically cleansed. Their troops, of Syrian nationality, sent emissaries to Damascus to ask for President Bachar el-Assad’s protection. Let’s remember that the Kurds are a nomad population which was settled at the beginning of the 20th century. According to the King-Crane Commission and the International Conference of Sèvres (1920), a Kurdistan state is only legitimate within what is currently Turkish territory [4].

It is unlikely that France and Germany will allow Syria to reconquer the totality of the Islamic Emirate of Idlib, and will abandon their fantasy concerning a Kurdistan, wherever it may be (in Turkey, Iran, Iraq or Syria, but not in Germany, where Kurds number a million). They may be forced to do so.

Similarly, despite the current discussions, it is unlikely that, should Syria be decentralised, it would grant the slightest autonomy to the region that was occupied by the Turkish Kurds.

After several years of blockage, the liberation of Northern Syria depends entirely on the change of the Turkish paradigm, fruit of the errors by the United States and Russian Intelligence.

The de facto partition of Yemen

In Yemen, Saudi Arabia and Israël support President Abdrabbo Mansour Hadi, with an aim to exploit the oil reserves which straddle the border [5]. The latter has to face up to the rebellion of the Zaïdis, a school of Chiism. With time, the Saudis have received help from the Emirati, and the Zaïdi Resistance is supported by Iran. This war, fuelled by the Western powers, has provoked the worst famine of the 21st century.

However, unlike the organisation of the two sides, on 1 August, the Emirati coast-guards signed an agreement for transborder cooperation with the Iranian frontier police [6]. The same day, the head of the Yemeni militia, Abu Al-Yamana Al-Yafei - financed by the Emirates (known as the « Southern Transitional Council (STC) », or « Safety Belt », or again « Separatists ») - was assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood of the Islah party, financed by Saudi Arabia [7].

Clearly, the alliance between two crown princes of Arabia and the Emirates, Mohammed ben Salmane (« MBS ») and Mohammed ben Zayed Al Nahyane (« MBZ »), is under pressure.

On 11 August, the militia supported by the Emirates attacked the presidential palace and several ministries in Aden, despite the support of Arabia for President Hadi, who had been sheltered in Riyadh for a long time. The following day, « MBS » and « MBZ » met in Mecca in the presence of King Salmane. They rejected the coup d’etat and called for a display of calm on the part of their respective troops. On 17 August, the pro-Emiratis evacuated the houses of government in good order..

During the week in which the « Separatists » had taken Aden, the Emirates had de facto control over the two coasts from the very strategic detroit of Bab el Mandeb linking the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean. Now that Riyadh has preserved its honour, it will be necessary to give something back to Abou Dhabi.

On the battlefield, the change can only be attributable to the Emirates, who, after heavy suffering, have learned the lesson of this unwinnable war. Prudently, they approached the Iranians before firing a warning shot intended for their powerful ally and neighbour, Saudi Arabia.

Musical chairs in Sudan

In Sudan, after President Omar el-Bechir (dissident Muslim Brother), had been overthrown by demonstrations of the Alliance for Freedom and Change (AFC) and the rise in bread prices had been cancelled, a Military Council of Transition was handed power. Practically speaking, this social revolt and a few billion petro-dollars enabled the country – unknown to the demonstrators - to transit from a Qatari tutorship to another, Saudi tutorship [8].

On 3 June, a new demonstration by the AFC was dispersed in blood by the Military Council of Transition, causing 127 deaths. Faced with international condemnation, the Military Council began negotiations with civilians and came to an agreement on 4 August which was signed on 17 August. For a period of 39 months, the country will be governed by a Supreme Council composed of 6 civilians and 5 military officials, whose agreements do not specify their identities. They will be controlled by an Assembly of 300 members - nominated but not elected – including 67 % of the representatives of the AFC. There is evidently nothing democratic here, and none of the parties is complaining.

The economist Abdallah Hamdok, ex-manager of the UN Economic Commission for Africa will become the Prime Minister. He should obtain the lifting of sanctions on Sudan and reintegrate the country into the African Union. He will bring to trial ex-President Omar el-Bechir in his own country in order to guarantee that he will no longer risk being extradited to The Hague and arraigned before the International Criminal Court.

Real power will be held by « General » Mohammed Hamdan Daglo (alias « Hemetti »), who is not a General, not even a soldier, but the head of the militia employed by « MBS » in order to paralyse the Yemeni Resistance. During this game of musical chairs, Turkey – which has a military base on the Sudanese island of Suakin as a means of encircling Saudi Arabia – has said nothing.

Thus Turkey is accepting to lose in Idlib and Sudan in order to win against the pro-US Kurdish mercenaries. Only this last wager has anything vital for Turkey. It has taken a wealth of discussions for Turkey to realise that it can not win all these games at once, and that it must organise its priories.

The United States against Iranian Oil

London and Washington are pursuing their concurrence, set in motion seventy years ago, to control Iranian oil. Just as during the time of Mohammad Mossadegh, the British Crown intends to be the only decider concerning what belongs to them in Iran [9]. Washington, however, does not want the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq to benefit Teheran (a consequence of the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski doctrine) and means to fix the prices for world energy (the Pompeo doctrine) [10].

These two strategies came together with the seizing of the Iranian oil-tanker Grace 1 in the waters of the British colony of Gibraltar. Iran, in its turn, boarded two British tankers in the straits of Ormuz, pretending – the supreme insult - that the primary was transporting « contraband oil», in other words Iranian oil which was subsidised by London on the black market [11]. When the new British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, realised that his country had gone too far, he had the « surprise » to see the « independent » justice of his colony liberate the Grace 1. Washington immediately issued a mandate to seize it again.

Since the beginning of this affair, the Europeans have been paying for US policy, and protesting without much consequence [12]. Only the Russians are defending international Law - rather than their Iranian ally - as they did concerning Syria [13]. This allows them to maintain a political line which is always coherent.

In this dossier, Iran is demonstrating great tenacity. Despite the clerical about-face of the election of Sheik Hassan Rohani, in 2013, the country has been redirecting itself towards the national policy of the secular Mahmoud Ahmadinejad [14]. Its use of the Chiite communities in Saudi Arabia, Bahreïn, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen could morph into a simple solution. Here too, the long discussions of Astana could demonstrate that what is evident for one has become evident for all.


With time, the objectives of each protagonist have been organised into a hierarchy and are becoming clearer.

In conformity with its tradition, Russian diplomacy, unlike that of the United States, is not attempting to redefine frontiers and alliances. It is working to untie the contradictory objectives of its partners. Thus it helped the ex-Ottoman Empire and the ex-Persian Empire distance themselves from their religious definition - (the Muslim Brotherhood for the former, and Chiism for the latter - and return to a post-Imperial national definition. This evolution is clearly visible in Turkey, but supposes a change of leaders in Iran in order to become operational. Moscow is not seeking to « change the régimes », but to change some aspects of the mentalities.


Thierry Meyssan


Pete Kimberley




Voltaire Network

Voltaire, international edition


Gus' note (with help from Jules Letambour): the language of this piece is sometimes too literally translated. For example "attributable to the Emirates, who, after heavy suffering..." should be read as "attributable to the Emirates, who, after heavy losses". Yet, the gist of this article is correct. Let's hope peace comes despite our idiots (right or left) in Kambra adding their two bob's worth of crap (see article above).


See also:

the united states of niccolò machiavelli…




how it's done... SOTTO I NOSTRI OCCHI — before our eyes (updated - in italian)...


the virtues that hide greed, wars and highway robbery...


liberalism has a fundamental problem...


socialism has an image problem...

and orstraya...


Parachuting from a plane into the sea is a complicated maneuver and not one that the IDF performs regularly, reported the Times of Israel.

The drill, which took place on the nothern Israeli coast, has no connection to recent events and was scheduled as part of an annual training plan.

Tensions between the U.S. and Iran have risen dramatically since the Trump administration pulled out of its nuclear deal with Iran and reimposed economic sanctions, causing Iran’s currency to sharply devalue.

Over the last several weeks, there have been six attacks on oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, which the U.S. has blamed on Iran. Iran has denied involvement.

Last month, the U.S. reportedly urged the British Royal Navy to seize an Iranian oil tanker for alleged European Union sanctions violations. Seemingly in retaliation, Iran then seized a UK-flagged tanker in the Gulf. Gibraltar’s chief minister released the Iranian tanker last week despite eleventh-hour legal efforts on the part of the U.S. to seize control of the Iranian vessel.

The Trump administration has attempted to set up an international security mission to protect maritime shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. So far, only the UK and Israel have agreed to join.

Barbara Boland is The American Conservative’s foreign policy and national security reporter. Follow her on Twitter @BBatDC.


Read more:




Read from top.


I am not sure but it appears that in the news last night about Aussies joining an "international force" in the strait of Hormuz (— sure the Poms, the Jews and the Yanks make up an "international force" for the idiots in Kanbra to join in), some of the stock footage may have that of the Israeli doing some training as above... not the SAS... Who knows. 

up to the eyeballs in potomac sewage...

Trump pushed Australian PM to work with Barr in Russia investigation, report says

The late-afternoon headlines are really piling up. The New York Times is now reporting that Trump similarly encouraged the Australian prime minister to work with attorney general William Barr in an investigation meant to discredit the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller. 

The Times reports:

The White House restricted access to the call’s transcript to a small group of the president’s aides, one of the officials said, an unusual decision that is similar to the handling of a July call with the Ukrainian president that is at the heart of House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry into Mr. Trump. Like that call, the discussion with Prime Minister Scott Morrison of Australia shows the extent to which Mr. Trump sees the attorney general as a critical partner in his goal to show that the Mueller investigation had corrupt and partisan origins, and the extent that Mr. Trump sees the Justice Department inquiry as a potential way to gain leverage over America’s closest allies.

And like the call with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky, the discussion with Mr. Morrison shows the president using high-level diplomacy to advance his personal political interests.

President Trump initiated the discussion in recent weeks with Mr. Morrison explicitly for the purpose of requesting Australia’s help in the Justice Department review of the Russia investigation, according to the two people with knowledge of the discussion. Mr. Barr requested that Mr. Trump speak to Mr. Morrison, one of the people said.


Read more:



Read from top.