Category Archives: Radical Islam

The Hell with the Pentagon

As the agency which enforces US foreign policy at gunpoint, the Pentagon has always blown.

First of all, there is no such thing as the Defense Department. When has the Pentagon ever defended the country? Pearl Harbor? They did a fine job there, huh?

Obviously the task of the Pentagon is not to defend the US mainland, which is all it ever ought to do anyway.

Its task is to running around the world starting wars and killing people in other countries. Leaving aside whether that is sometimes a good idea (and I think it is,) what’s so defensive about that?

The real name of the Pentagon is the War Department.That’s what it was always called until World War 2, which the War Department won. After that in a spate of Orwellian frenzy, we named an army of aggression an army of self-defense and comically renamed its branch the Defense Department.

It’s like calling cops peace officers. You see anything peaceful about what a cop does in a typical day? Neither do I?

There was a brief glimmer of hope there in WW2 when we finally starting killing fascists and rightwingers instead of sleeping with them, but the ink was barely dry on the agreements before we were setting up the Gladio fascists, overthrowing Greek elections and slaughtering Greek peasants like ants.

Meanwhile it was scarcely a year after 1945 when the US once again started a torrid love affair with fascism and rightwing dictators like we have always done. We were smooching it up right quick with Europe’s fascists, in this case the former Nazis of Germany (who became the West German elite), Greek killer colonels, Mussolini’s heirs, actual Nazis in Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, Jew-Nazis in Palestine, Franco (who we never stopped sleeping with anyway), Salazar, the malign Mr. Churchill, the true repulsive Dutch royalty and disgusting European colonists the world over, who we showered with guns and bombs to massacre the colonized.

In 1945, a war against fascism, reaction, Nazism and malign colonialism had ended, and for some reason America had fought against these things instead of supporting them as usual.

1946, and we were back in old style again, hiring Nazis by the busload for the CIA, overthrowing democratic governments and putting in genocidal dictatorships, becoming butt buddies with fascist swine everywhere.

So you see we have always pretty much sucked. World War 1 was fought amidst one of the most dishonest propaganda campaigns the world had ever seen, the Korean War was a Godawful mess where we turned North Korea to flaming rubble with the population cowering in caves while slaughtering 3 million North Koreans.

The horrific catastrophe called the Indochinese Wars, such as the Vietnam War, the Secret War in Laos and the Cambodian Massacre, where we genocided 500,000 Cambodians with bombs, driving the whole place crazy and creating the Khmer Rogue.

Panama and Grenada were pitiful jokes, malign, raw, naked imperialism at its worst.

The Gulf War was a brief return to sanity but turkey shoots are sickening.

Of course that followed on with the most evil war in US history, the Nazi-like war on aggression called The War on the Iraqi People (usually called the Iraq War), the Afghan rabbit hole which started out sensibly enough but turned into another Vietnam style Great Big Mess.

I suppose it is ok that we are killing Al Qaeda guys and I give a shout out to our boys over there fighting ISIS or the Taliban and Al Qaeda in South-Central Asia, Somalia and Yemen. Some people need killing.

But I sure don’t feel that way about their superiors, the US officers who fund and direct ISIS, Al Qaeda, etc. out of an Operations Center in Jordan with Jordanian, Israeli (!), Saudi, UAE, and Qatari officers.

And it was very thoughtful of the Pentagon to cover up the Ukrainian Air Force shootdown of the jetliner which we saw on the radar of our ships in Black Sea.

And it was nice of the US to relay the flight path of the Russian jet to the Turks 24 hours in advance so they could shoot down that Russian jet and kill that pilot.

One hand giveth and the other taketh away. For every good thing we do in Syria and Iraq, we do 10 or 20 bad things. Pretty much the story of the Pentagon.

Sure if you fought in WW2 or one of the few other decent wars, you have something to be proud of, and I can even say, “Thank you for your service,” but the main thing is that you signed up for the rightwing army of the rich that is dead set against the people and popular rule everywhere on Earth. Sure, it’s a great army, professional, super-competent and deadly, but it’s generally tasked with doing lousy things. Why anyone would sign up for that reactionary nightmare of an institution is beyond me. America needs to level the Pentagon and put in a true People’s Army instead. Like that would ever happen.


Filed under Africa, Americas, Asia, Britain, Cambodia, Caribbean, Central America, Cold War, Colonialism, Conservatism, East Africa, Eurasia, Europe, Fascism, Geopolitics, Germany, Government, Greece, History, Imperialism, Iraq War, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Laos, Latin America, Lithuania, Middle East, Military Doctrine, Modern, National Socialism, Nazism, NE Asia, Netherlands, North Korea, Palestine, Panama, Political Science, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Russia, Saudi Arabia, SE Asia, Somalia, Spain, Syria, Ukraine, US, US War in Afghanistan, USA, Vietnam, Vietnam War, War, World War 1, World War 2, Yemen

Proposal for an Old Left

I am not proposing this myself but instead I am linking to and copying this over from Lord Keynes’ site, 21st Century Social Democracy.

I like Lord Keynes and his page, but I am wondering how his Old Left is different from my Alt Left or Ryan England’s Alt Left. We already know it’s different from Rabbit’s Alt Left.

I am thinking that maybe the Old Left is more concerned with economics and less worried about Cultural Left stuff. I am also thinking that perhaps the Old Left is not as conservative on the Cultural Left than mine and Ryan’s Alt Left. And of course, the Old Left doesn’t seem to want to touch race realism with a 10 foot pole and an 11 foot extension. Not that I blame them.

I don’t identify as Alt Left myself, but this Alt Left Facebook Page seems quite interesting, and free from some of the strange stuff I have seen on the Alt Left:

Alternative Left.

I think there is now a sensible Alt Left that has managed to divorce itself from the more extreme original movement.

It would be nice to have some Old Left (which can also be called the “Realist Left”) Facebook pages or social media forums too.

I am now tempted to try and set up an Old Left Facebook page or something like this.

As I have said before, my prediction is that many Millennials will abandon their SJW cults and Regressive Left nonsense in the coming years, but they will need some new left-wing politics to fall back on.

Lots of sensible Alt Left and Old Left points of view should be available for these people when the time comes so that they are not lost to the Right or Far Right.

So what is the Old Left/Realist Left political program? I would still distance an Old Left position from the sensible Alt Left, but there would probably be a lot of overlap, despite differences. E.g., in some respects, some Alt Left people seem to be much more hostile to the Cultural Left and socially conservative than even I am, for example. But respectful debate should be the order of the day here, not mutual hostility.

An Old Left politics I propose is as follows:

(1) The Old Left is vehemently anti-neoliberal and anti-globalization. It completely rejects neoclassical economics. An Old Left/Realist Left politics supports full employment, Keynesian macroeconomic policies and management of our economies, a high-wage economy, an industrial policy, managed trade in the national interest, a humane welfare state, perhaps even a return to some nationalized industries (this can be a legitimate topic for debate), an end to offshoring of our manufacturing and service jobs to the Third World, and an end to neoliberal vandalism and the sale of our national assets to foreigners.

An Old Left would support Left heterodox Post Keynesian economics and MMT, not Marxism or feeble and intellectually flawed Neoclassical Keynesianism.

(2) An Old Left/Real Left also vehemently rejects Libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism, and all ideological free market capitalism as poisonous and toxic ideologies.

(3) At the same time, the Old Left/Real Left politics vehemently rejects Cultural Leftism: this includes French Poststructuralism, Postmodernism and all their ridiculous and pernicious ideas such as truth relativism, cultural relativism, moral relativism, and divisive and extreme Identity Politics.

Of course, reasonable and sensible civil, legal and equity women’s rights and gay rights are fine, but not Cultural Leftist Identity Politics or endless cults of victimology.

In particular, the Old Left should be critical of Third Wave Feminism. End the witch-hunting which inevitably accompanies Cultural Leftism. Abandon the extreme social constructivism and the “blank slate” view of human beings, because it is simply not true: e.g., there are only two natural genders in genetically normal human beings, male and female, and discouraging encouraging this type of thing is neither healthy nor desirable. End the bizarre Cultural Leftist conspiracy theories that blame all our problems on the capitalist, white-male patriarchy and universal “institutional racism.”

(4) The Old Left should defend free speech and freedom of expression from Cultural Leftist and Politically Correct witch hunts, restrictions and hate speech laws. Free speech is sacred in a free society, and you will achieve nothing by demanding that governments silence people whose opinions you don’t like – except to dismantle more of our freedoms and set yourself up for having your own free speech taken away, especially if right-wing governments start imposing their own restrictions on free speech.

(5) The Old Left would be anti-imperialist and largely non-interventionist on foreign policy but not isolationist. Anyone proposing any intervention in the Third World would require a brutally strong burden of proof, and anything proposed must be legal under international law.

(6) An Old Left politics should be strongly pro-nuclear family and be able to address the serious issue of social breakdown, divorce, and single-parent families with humane policies free from right-wing viciousness or free market economics.

(7) An Old Left politics will end Open Borders and mass immigration and end the bizarre cult of “diversity,” which seems to think that multiculturalism is some great good in and of itself (which it most certainly is not). The Old Left recognizes that most people have a normal and natural wish to preserve their nations as homelands for their national culture and their people. Low-level immigration and reasonable refugee quotas are fine as long as minorities actually do remain a minority of the population and people who wish to stay assimilate and do not bring hostile and incompatible cultures.

(8) An Old Left politics will oppose regressive and illiberal Islamism and Islamization of our societies, promote the strong assimilation of immigrants who are here in the West, and abandon failed multiculturalism.

(9) An Old Left politics should be comfortable with healthy and sensible forms of cultural and civil nationalism.

But at the same time there is room for disagreement and open debate on individual issues and also on issues I have not mentioned instead of the intolerant witch hunting that characterizes the modern Left.

However, there do need to be core principles, as follows:

(1) Rejection of neoliberalism, globalization, neoclassical economics, libertarianism, anarcho-capitalism, and all ideological free market capitalism. Support for left heterodox Post Keynesian economics and MMT.

(2) Rejection of the extreme aspects of cultural leftism, namely, French Poststructuralism, Postmodernism, truth relativism, cultural relativism, moral relativism, SJWism, the cult of diversity, and divisive and extreme identity politics.

(3) rejection of open borders and mass immigration.

If you don’t reject these things, you ain’t Old Left or Alt Left. This is not the movement for you.


Filed under Capitalism, Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Economics, Gender Studies, Government, Immigration, Imperialism, Islam, Law, Left, Libertarianism, Marxism, Neoliberalism, Open Borders, Political Science, Radical Feminists, Radical Islam, Religion, Sane Pro-Woman, Traitors

US Seeks “Safe Havens” in Eastern Syria

From Global Research.

The Americans are getting more and more insane by the day over there in Syria, and it looks like the neocon dream is starting to come true. What is going on here is that the US’s pals, ISIS, Al Qaeda and all of the other groups who more more less share their same philosophy, are starting to get badly beaten on the battlefield. In particular, the situation in Aleppo looks very bad.

That is why John Kerry, Turkey,Saudi Arabia and Qatar just poured weapons into Al Qaeda’s hands and assembled 10-15,000 fighters to flood into Eastern Aleppo. Every day, more and more Al Qaeda type jihadis come in from Turkey.

Not long ago, the Saudis flooded Syria with 3,500 Al Qaeda type jihadis from Turkey. A similar large force of Al Qaeda types is in the Jordanian border where they have been moved from their training camps in Jordan. It is at these camps that US military advisors train Al Qaeda type jihadis for war on Syria.

The weapons come from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the US. The weapons from Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are given to them by the US, whereupon they are then flooded into the Syrian battlefield. So ISIS and the Al Qaeda type groups are all using US weaponry. In addition, the CIA runs large quantities of weapons in via Turkey to its favorite jihadists. It doesn’t really matter who the CIA gives the weapons to. The weapons all end up in something that amounts to an arms bazaar inside Syria where they are distributed to any group that has the money to buy them. It is in this way that the CIA supplies Al Qaeda and ISIS with much of their weapons.

So our Al Qaeda pals are getting beaten on the battlefield by Syria, Hezbollah, Iran and Russia. The US is panicking because its Al Qaeda buddies are losing the war. If Aleppo falls to the Syrian regime, the war may be nearly over for the rebels. Nevertheless, it will probably continue on for as long as the US, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar continue to pour men and weaponry into the conflict. They can feed this thing for many years.

US Seeks “Safe Havens” in Eastern Syria

By The New Atlas
Global Research, August 22, 2016
The New Atlas 22 August 2016

In-depth Report:


Tensions amid Syria’s conflict has escalated with warnings by the United States that it would use force against Syrian aircraft operating over their own territory. The US claims to have aircraft operating over Syrian territory and ground forces below, mainly in and around northeastern Syria near the city of Al-Hasakah. 

CNN in its article, “Top US commander warns Russia, Syria,” would report that:

In the most direct public warning to Moscow and Damascus to date, the new US commander of American troops in Iraq and Syria is vowing to defend US special operations forces in northern Syria if regime warplanes and artillery again attack in areas where troops are located.

Unlike Russian and Iranian forces operating in Syria, US forces have not been authorized by Damascus to enter Syrian territory. US operations in Syria violate Syria’s territorial integrity and constitutes as violation of international law.

And while US military and political leaders attempt to portray this most recent confrontation as a matter of US self defense, in reality it is the fulfillment of longstanding US policy papers that have called for the establishment of so-called safe havens and no-fly-zones (NFZ’s) over parts of Syria as an intermediary step toward regime change, the stated objective of the US government in Syria.

In 2012, the following year of the Syrian conflict’s beginning, a Brookings Institution paper titled, “Assessing Options for Regime Change,” would state:

An alternative is for diplomatic efforts to focus first on how to end the violence and how to gain humanitarian access, as is being done under [Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan’s] leadership. This may lead to the creation of safe-havens and humanitarian corridors, which would have to be backed by limited military power. This would, of course, fall short of U.S. goals for Syria and could preserve Asad in power. From that starting point, however, it is possible that a broad coalition with the appropriate international mandate could add further coercive action to its efforts.

Here, US policymakers are admitting that the use of “humanitarian” concerns is a cynical steppingstone toward more direct military intervention. The unfortunately reality of this strategy, as seen in Libya, is that US “humanitarian wars” end up costing a vastly larger toll in innocent human life than the alleged abuses cited to initiate the war in the first place.

This plan of using humanitarian concerns to incrementally establish a foothold in Syrian territory through safe-havens and NFZ’s would constantly evolve, be updated and revisited throughout the entire duration of the Syrian conflict.

America’s True Intentions in Syria 

More recently, The Brookings Institution’s “Order From Chaos” blog published a post titled, “What to do when containing the Syrian crisis has failed.” Brookings policymakers discuss in it once again the prospects of establishing what would effectively be NFZ’s:

We must also be clever about employing various options for no-fly zones: We cannot shoot down an airplane without knowing if it’s Russian or Syrian, but we can identify those aircraft after the fact and destroy Syrian planes on the ground if they were found to have barrel-bombed a neighborhood, for example. These kinds of operations are complicated, no doubt, and especially with Russian aircraft in the area—but I think we have made a mistake in tying ourselves in knots over the issue, since there are options we can pursue.

Brookings  policymakers also revisit the notion of establishing “safe-havens” claiming:

…we should push the debate about what creating safe havens really means. I don’t think we should start declaring safe havens, but rather try to help them emerge. The Kurds are making gains in Syria’s northeast, for instance, as are some forces on the southern front—so, if the United States, in cooperation with its allies, accelerates and intensifies its involvement on the ground in those areas, safe havens can essentially emerge. An important advantage of this approach is that it doesn’t require putting American credibility on the line, but does help local allies build up and reinforces successes on the ground.

Here, Brookings specifically mentions Syria’s northeast. It should be noted that none of this is being discussed by US policymakers in the context of fighting terrorist organizations like the self-titled Islamic State or listed terrorist organization Jubhat Al-Nusra. Instead, it is clearly within the context of seizing Syrian territory toward the end goal of regime change, with the Islamic State and Al-Nusra merely pretexts for US forces entering and operating within Syrian territory.

Similar attempts to create such safe-havens are in motion in Syria’s south, with British special forces now allegedly operating on the ground to incrementally “accelerate and intensify” Western involvement on the ground.

It is the literal fulfillment of the plans recently laid out by Brookings policymakers.

Displacing US Forces from the Game Board 

With US-supported militants being pushed back in and around Syria’s northern city of Aleppo and prospects of Western-backed militants succeeding elsewhere throughout the country increasingly unlikely, the creation of safe-havens and NFZ’s over parts of Syria directly by Western forces remains a last but desperate option.

Displacing US and British forces on the battlefield with an expansion of forces from among Syria’s allies could finally see these last game pieces in play by the West pushed off the board entirely.

Diplomatic efforts appear to be underway with Syria’s Kurds in particular to encourage them away from what will be a self-destructive geopolitical move made only to Washington’s benefit. Providing alternatives to Western training and support for Kurds and other local forces in the northeast in a genuine fight against the Islamic State and other foreign-backed militant groups operating in Syria could also help eliminate clashes the US may use to cynically escalate the conflict into a direct confrontation with either Syria or Russia (or both).

US strategy in Syria is based on 5 year old plans that even 5 years ago were difficult if not impossible to implement, fraught with risk and even should they succeed, left a long and difficult road ahead of US ambitions in Syria and throughout the region. 5 years later, however, these difficulties and risks have only increased. That the US is still exploring this last and poorest option indicates a bankrupt foreign policy wielded by an increasingly unbalanced world power.

Careful diplomacy and expert strategic maneuvering by Syria and its allies will be required to avert Syria’s conflict from plunging deeper into tragedy, and ironically, may also help the US from tilting over further out of balance.

The New Atlas is a media platform providing geopolitical analysis and op-eds. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.
The original source of this article is The New Atlas
Copyright © The New Atlas, The New Atlas, 2016


Filed under Britain, Eurasia, Europe, Geopolitics, Iran, Islam, Kurds, Middle East, Near Easterners, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, USA, War

Moral Panics: Police Shootings, Race Riots, and Muslim Terrorism

Tulio sums it all up so perfectly. These are just vicious circles that endlessly feed back and loop into each other like a dog chasing its tail. One wonders what the solution is. Provocation, revenge attacks, revenge attacks for the revenge attacks, jumpy cops, belligerent suspects, and worst of all, increasingly frightened and angry people looking for more revenge, paybacks and pre-emptive reactions, it just goes on and on.

Hatfields and McCoys.

Tulio: The Black man shot in Milwaukee was shot by a Black cop. Which makes this race rioting all the more bizarre.

This has all been stirred up by the media. When the media focuses on something and starts a narrative, it can lead to a moral panic. Many Black folks, even ones that have never had any violent encounter with the cops, think they are currently under siege. Even if the statistics show that an innocent Black man being killed by cops is more rare than being struck by lightning. Or that 95% of Blacks die at the hand of other Blacks. It doesn’t matter. The news shows it over and over, and it whips them into a frenzy that feeds of itself.

And then people overreact, and there are race riots and retaliatory cop killings. And then race relations began a downward spiral. Whites turn on the news and see Blacks tearing stuff up, setting buildings on fire and shooting cops, which makes them more racist. Then Blacks see Whites becoming more racist and say, “See that, they hate us! Just like we said all along!” Cops who now have to deal the possibility of being shot on the job may be even more inclined to have hair-trigger responses with Blacks, which then feeds into the notion that cops are out to get Blacks, and then you just have one big clusterfuck spiraling out of control.

While I’m not a racist or a racial separatist, the separatists do make good points. If we didn’t share the same nation, we wouldn’t have to worry about intractable race problems. Or the differences in behaviors and perceptions that cause race problems. Dividing up the country into racial territories is never going to happen, but I see why some people would be in favor of it as a solution to race problems, and it makes completely sense in a lot of ways.

Peace in a multiracial society can be fragile. Everything can be humming along fine, and all it takes is for someone to get shot by a cop, and all Hell lets loose, and you see that this pent-up resentment was there all along under the shallow skin of a “post-racial” nation (yeah right).

Also, Whites are capable of this moral panic as well. In their case, swap cops for Muslim terrorists. Even though the statistical likelihood of being killed by a Muslim terrorist on any given day is probably even less likely than being innocently murdered by a cop, Americans think they are constantly under siege from terrorists and that terrorism is more prevalent than it actually is in reality. We have a presidential candidate that doesn’t even want Muslims stepping foot on US soil, and a large of America that agrees with him. Even though we’re orders of magnitude more likely to be killed by a homegrown mass shooter.

So to whites, there’s a terrorist hiding behind every tree ready to kill you. To Blacks, the nation is full of racist cops that want to shoot you dead over a broken taillight. And it’s not that there aren’t terrorists, or that there aren’t cops with an itchy trigger finger and racial biases. It’s that these scenarios are wildly exaggerated by the media, and 99.9% of the Muslims living in America aren’t bothering anyone. And 99.9% of cops will never shoot an unarmed man that isn’t threatening anyone. But the news will keep harping on the .01% exceptions and brainwash people into thinking it’s the norm by running a narrative. And most people are too dumbed down and gullible to question it.


Filed under Blacks, Crime, Islam, Journalism, Law enforcement, Midwest, Police Brutality, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Social Problems, Sociology, Terrorism, USA, Whites, Wisconsin

The Larger Context of the Al Qaeda Attack on Aleppo

Great new post from Global Research about what’s going on in Syria these days.

The scoop is that the US and its allies have just finished rebranding Al Qaeda as “moderate rebels,” Al Qaeda is armed mostly with US weapons Wonder where those came from? Kerry has been desperately trying to protect al Qaeda from being attacked by Russian and Syrian forces. The US wants al Qaeda included as “moderate rebels” who are subject to the fake truce the US and Russia hammered out in March.

Now that the war has turned decisively in favor of the Syrian government and the rebels are looking to be in rather bad shape, the US is getting desperate.

The focus of all of this excitement is Aleppo. Currently the government occupies the west half of the city, and the rebels have the eastern half. However, the government has the rebels completely surrounded on the east side of the city. That is a desperate situation for the US, as their al Qaeda buddies are now surrounded, and the government may conquer one of Syria’s largest cities. If al Qaeda is defeated in Aleppo, that will be a huge victory for the government. So al Qaeda is now attacking government-held Southwestern Aleppo with a huge force of 5-10,000 men. It is a serious situation. The Syrian government is seriously short on manpower and the jihadis are often suicidal fanatics.

The US and Israel are panicking due to the desperate situation for its al Qaeda allies. The Jewish Lobby is advocating that the US wage military attacks on the Syrian government. You can see these articles authored by Jews out of WINEP (AIPAC). Hopefully this will not happen, but there is risk. There are elements in the CIA, State Department and Pentagon who want to wage war on the Syrian government. They are mostly being held at bay right now by Obama.

The US is also responding to the failure of its regime change plans by advocating splitting Syria up into more than one country. Of course this is a longstanding Israeli goal as documented in the Yinon Plan from 1980. All the states in the region oppose breaking up Syria, so it probably won’t happen, but there is always a risk with sociopaths like Kerry running the show.

Russia is at a crossroads and must make the tough decision of whether to pull out of Syria or escalate. Iran may also now be ready to escalate its involvement. Iran says that the nuclear agreement with the US is worthless because the lifting of the sanctions and access to international banks that the US promised never materialized. We are still holding $300 billion of Iranian funds in our banks. We have basically stolen this money from Iran. It’s highway robbery. The money was supposed to be released after the deal, but the US never did it. Iran was supposed to have access to international banks again after the deal, but the US is not allowing this to happen and is threatening any bank that tries to do business with Iran.

Everything you read below is 100% correct as far as I can tell. And you will notice that this narrative goes completely against the lie narrative that the entire US media is feeding you. You will never hear any of the truths below printed in the US media.

The Larger Context of the Al Qaeda Attack on Aleppo

By Moon of Alabama
Global Research, August 2, 2016
Moon of Alabama August 1, 2016

Al-Qaeda in Syria and associated forces are currently driving a large scale attack from the south-west into Aleppo city. Their aim is to create a new corridor between the Idlib/Aleppo rural areas they occupy and the besieged al-Qaeda controlled areas in east-Aleppo. Between 5,000 and 10,000 al-Qaeda fighters, using U.S. supplied equipment, are taking part in the battle. Formally some of the fighters are “moderates,” but in reality all these groups are by now committed to implement Sharia law and to thereby suppress all minorities. They made some initial progress against government forces but are under fierce attack from the Syrian and Russian air forces.

The Russian General Staff has warned since April that al-Qaeda in Syria (aka Jabhat al-Nusra aka Fateh al Sham) and the various attached jihadi groups were planing a large scale attack on Aleppo. An al-Qaeda commander confirmed such long term planning in a pep-talk to his fighters before the current attack.

This shines a new light on the protracted talks Secretary of State Kerry has had for month with his Russian colleague. The U.S. tried to exempt al-Qaeda from Russian and Syrian attacks even as UN Security Council Resolutions demanded that al-Qaeda and ISIS areas be eradicated. Then the U.S. tried to make an “offer” to Russia to collectively fight al-Qaeda should Russia put its own and Syrian forces under U.S. control. We called this offer deceptive nonsense. All this, it now seems, was delaying talk to allow al-Qaeda to prepare for the now launched attack.

Another step in the delaying, though a failed one, was the re-branding of Jabhat al-Nusra as Fateh al-Sham. Some “Western” media called that a split from al-Qaeda, but in reality it was a merging of al-Qaeda Central and Nusra/al-Qaeda in Syria under a disguising new label. Al-Qaeda’s Qatari sponsors had demanded the re-branding so al-Qaeda in Syria could publicly be sold to “Western” governments and their public as “moderate rebels.” But the sham failed. It was too obvious a fake to be taken seriously. The “Western” support for al-Qaeda will have to continue secretly and in limited form.

The current attack on Aleppo is serious. The Syrian army lacks ground forces. Significant professional ground forces from Iran were promised but never arrived. Iran was still dreaming of an accord with the U.S. and therefore holding back on its engagement in Syria. The Afghan farmer battalions Iran recruited are not an alternative for professional troops. Defending against an enemy that is using lots of suicide vehicle bombs to breach fortifications and death-seeking jihadis to storm field positions is difficult. It demands diligent preparation and excellent command and control.

If this attack can be defeated, the huge losses al-Qaeda will have to take might end its open military-style war. If al-Qaeda succeeds with the attack, the Syrian army will need very significant additional ground forces to regain the initiative.

But no matter how that battle goes, strategically the U.S. is sniffing defeat in its regime change endeavor. It is now proposing to split Syria. Syria and all its neighbors are against this. It will, in the end, not happen, but the damage Washington will create until it acknowledges that fact could be serious. Russia can and should prevent such U.S. attempts of large scale social engineering.

Russia on the other side has now to decide if it wants to escalate enough to create more than the current stalemate. Over time, a stalemate becomes expansive, and it may at any time suddenly turn into defeat. The U.S. negotiation positions so far were obviously not serious. The U.S. delayed to allow for further large attacks on the Syrian government. The alternative for Russia is to either leave Syria completely or to escalate enough to decisively defeat the jihadis. That is not an easy decision.

Today some jihadis shot down another Russian helicopter over Syria. The bloody body of the dead pilot was dragged through the mud by some local nuts and the video thereof proudly presented. If the Russian government needs some public pretext to go back into Syria, it now has it. Also today the Islamic State threatened to attack Russia within its borders. Another good reason to return to Syria in force. Of note is that Russia is already extremely pissed over the unreasonable hostile climate towards it in Washington DC. It will have consequences.

The Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei today acknowledged that the nuclear agreement with the U.S. is a failure. The U.S. did not deliver on its end. Iranian money is still blocked in U.S.-controlled accounts, and no international bank wants to do business with Iran because the U.S. is threatening to penalize them. The conclusion, Khamenei says, is that no deal with U.S. over any local issue in the Middle East is possible and that all negotiations with it are a waste of time. This new public position may finally free the limits the Rouhani government of Iran had put on Iranian deployments to Syria. Why bother with any self-limitation if the U.S. won’t honor it?

How the situation in Syria will develop from here on depends to a large part on Turkey. Turkey is changing its foreign policy and turning towards Russia, Iran and China. But how far that turn away from the “West” will go and if it will also include a complete turnaround on Syria is not yet clear. Should Turkey really block its borders and all supplies to the jihadis, the war on Syria could be over within a year or two. Should (secret) supplies continue, the war may continue for many more years. In both cases, more allied troops and support for the Syrian government would significantly cut the time (and damage) the war will still take. That alone would be well worth additional efforts by Syria’s allies.

Will Tehran and Moscow agree with that conclusion?

The original source of this article is Moon of Alabama
Copyright © Moon of Alabama, 2016


Filed under Asia, China, Eurasia, Europe, Geopolitics, Government, Iran, Islam, Israel, Journalism, Middle East, Military Doctrine, Nuclear Weapons, Radical Islam, Religion, Russia, Syria, Turkey, USA, War

The US Six Part Plan for Dealing with Syria

Found on the Net:

Washington is locked into its Obama-Kerry fantasy strategy of manipulating all six moving parts to

  1. Get rid of Assad,
  2. Marginalize the Salafists,
  3. Wear down ISIL,
  4. Keep Erdogan at bay,
  5. Placate the Saudis by helping them kill Houthis,
  6. Equip the Israelis on the Netanyahu-Liebovitz illusory march to the Euphrates.

The only variation under consideration is the neo-con one of bombing Assad and daring Putin not to start WW III. Both are pipe-dreams that soon will have to be recognized as such.

This is all exactly correct with the exception of Number 6. They Israelis are not trying to steal any more land that’s not in the West Bank or Gaza. The whole Nile to Euphrates thing is a paranoid notion from the anti-Zionists and Arabs. Yes, there are a few Jews who talk about this, but there is no Israeli government plan to conquer any of the land in question.

That’s a six part Rube Goldberg of a foreign policy contraption. I must say, the whole thing is utterly insane. I can’t believe how crazy my government is, but really, it’s always been just about this nuts and deranged for my entire lifetime.

If Washington’s foreign policy was a human, it would be tried and sentenced to Atascadero as a dangerously mentally ill criminal.

And Americans just go right along.

Shaking my head.

Leave a comment

Filed under Democrats, Eurasia, Europe, Government, Islam, Israel, Middle East, Obama, Palestine, Politics, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, US Politics, USA, War

Another ISIS Attack in France!

Two Islamists armed with knives invaded a Catholic Church in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray in Normandy, slitting the throat of an 86 year old priest and taking some nuns hostage. In addition to the martyred priest, a male churchgoer was very seriously wounded in the attack and is fighting for his life. Police surrounded the church. The two attackers came out of the church and were shot dead by police. A third man was arrested outside the church in connection with the attack. The attackers claimed the attack in the name of ISIS.

Jesus, these Islamic global jihad terrorism attacks are coming just about every day now.


Filed under Europe, France, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Terrorism

Two New Attacks by Muslims in Germany Today!


The first one occurred when a suicide bomber blew himself up outside a restaurant at Ansbach Music Festival in Ansbach, a city in Bavaria. The bomber was killed and 12 others were wounded. This definitely looks like a global jihad attack. The attacker was a Syrian refugee whose request for asylum had been turned down last year, but he had a temporary permit to stay. He had been treated twice at a psychiatric hospital for two prior suicide attempts. Police are calling it a potential terror attack for now.

Earlier today, another Syrian refugee attacked people with a machete in Reutlingen. That attack was preceded by some sort of an argument and police ruled out Islamic terrorism. A pregnant woman was killed and two others were wounded in that attack.

Refugees welcome!


Filed under Arabs, Europe, Germany, Immigration, Islam, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Syrians, Terrorism

More on Omar Mateen

Erik Sieven writes:

It might be right to say that the Orlando attack was no Islamist attack. But I don´t buy into the argument, that it can´t be so because Maheen supported different groups like Hezbollah and IS which fight each other.

For example when a Russian with a swastika tattoo yells “Heil Hitler” and “Russia first” and attacks a foreigner in Russia, do you say “no he can´t be a Nazi because he both supports Russian nationalism and Nazis, and those were enemies”. No, of course you say he is Nazi, a dumb one on top, because Nazis hated Russia (well there aren’t really non-dumb Nazis).

Maheen might have been a Islamist, and only because he is too dumb to at least tell apart different Islamist groups he says he supports does´t change anything.

He wasn’t an Islamist. He was barely even a Muslim, and everyone says he was not a practicing Muslim anyway.

Look, global jihadists hate homosexuals and feel that they need to be killed. When you say that Mateen was a global jihadist, then you say that he believed that homosexuals were so evil that they needed to be killed. But this is not what he believed. Why? Because Mr. Mateen was quite gay himself!

Mateen also liked to drink. He spent most of his time in nightclubs and gay bars. That’s not what a global jihadist does. Global jihadists think drinking is a serious crime and think that nightclubs and bars, especially gay bars, ought to be attacked. Or at least those in Muslim countries should be attacked. Now if you say Mateen was a global jihadist, then you say that he attacked this place because it was a nightclub that served alcohol and he believed that those things are evil. But that’s not what he believed at all. Mateen loved to drink and he spent most of his time in nightclubs and bars.

The idea that this boozing, barhopping gay man was some sort of an Islamist is madness. He was not an Islamist. He was barely even a Muslim. That is, he was a Muslim in name only, as secular as they come.

I would say that this was gay on gay crime. Or maybe an extreme case of gay panic on Mateen’s part. I think he was just another mass shooter like James Holmes or Cho.


Filed under Crime, Florida, Homosexuality, Islam, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Sex, South, USA

Orlando Attack Was Not Islamic Terrorism

The more I think about this attack, the less it makes sense  that it was an act of Islamic terrorism or global jihad, and it certainly had nothing to do with ISIS, as the shooter had never been in contact with ISIS. This was a man who at various times said he supported Hezbollah, the Al-Nusra Front and ISIS. He said these things when he got into fights with co-workers. I think he just said those as a way of threatening the co-workers he was arguing with. Sort of like if you are an Italian guy who fights with co-workers all the time and you start threatening to send your cousin Vinnie in Detroit out pay your co-workers a visit.

You can’t support Al Nusra and ISIS and also Hezbollah. ISIS and Nusra hate Hezbollah and consider them deadly enemies. You can’t even support both Nusra and ISIS, as they fight each other.

It was reported that when he was with his father once, he saw two men kissing and became very upset and agitated. Supposedly, this meant he had an extreme hatred of homosexuals as global jihad types do, and this was what motivated the shooting – a global jihad attack on homosexuals, a hated group that global jihad types often kill.

The problem is that this guy did not have any Islamist hatred of gays at all, and that’s because he was gay himself! Yes, Omar Mateen was a practicing homosexual. He was a regular at the bar that got shot up where he often went home with men. He regularly dated men and met up with them on dating applications. The press interviewed one man who said that he had been Mateen’s boyfriend at one point. At one point, Mateen’s father yelled at Mateen and called him a homosexual.

Reports from the gay community indicated that Mateen had recently had sex with a Puerto Rican gay man. The man was HIV positive, but Mateen only learned that after he had sex with the man. So as a result, this guy had major hatred towards Puerto Rican gays. So, in order to vent his hatred at Puerto Rican gay men for an undisclosed HIV positive Puerto Rican gay man having had sex with him, he picked the Latin night at a local gay bar when he knew it would be full of Puerto Rican gay men and shot the place up.

Why Puerto Ricans? Because most Latins in Orlando are Puerto Rican, so when the local gay bar has a Latin night, it’s mostly Puerto Rican Latins who will show up. So Orlando Mateen shot up a bar full of Puerto Rican gays for the reason stated above.

Yes, he pledged allegiance to ISIS, but so what? With the advent of ISIS, any and all nuts have a guaranteed reason for shooting up schools, malls, theaters or wherever. We may well see non-Muslims pledging allegiance to ISIS during their sprees and claiming that they recently converted. All accounts indicate that Mateen was not religious at all and liked to drink and hang out in bars. Also he was a practicing homosexual. He was as un-Islamic as they come. Although he wasn’t much of a Muslim, he had a mean streak and beat up his wife on a regular basis.

He got upset at seeing two men kissing because he was an extreme case of a self-hating gay using reaction formation as a defense. He freaked out when he saw those two men kissing because he hated the gay man in himself. Gay self-hatred, denial of homosexuality and reaction formation are all very common in closeted gay men, so much so that they are almost cliches.

Self-hating gay men can commit violence against other gay men. Some of these serial killers running around picking up gay men in bars and committing sexual murders of them are actually repressed gays themselves. They are killing the hated gay in themselves. This may well have been what was going on here. Mateen, by killing 40+ gay men, was also killing the hated gay man in himself.

Sure, ISIS claimed responsibility, but so what? No evidence emerged that Mateen was ever in contact with ISIS in any way, shape or form. ISIS claims responsibility every time a Muslim stages a mass attack on infidels, no matter the motivation. They also call these killers “ISIS soldiers,” even though in many cases, the attackers had no connection with ISIS whatsoever. In other words, ISIS is claiming all sorts of attacks that they had nothing to do with other than egging people on. No planning, no training, no communication, no nothing.

Just because ISIS claims a mass killing by some Muslim in some non-Muslim country somewhere doesn’t necessarily mean that they had anything to do with it at all.


Filed under Crime, Florida, Hispanics, Homosexuality, Islam, Psychology, Puerto Ricans, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Islam, Regional, Religion, Serial Killers, Sex, South, USA