Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Islamic world reorganizes the strategy in Riyadh

By Lorenzo Maria Pacini | Strategic Culture Foundation |  November 15, 2024

On 11 November, an emergency Arab-Islamic summit on the question of Palestine was held in Riyadh. It was an extremely important event, from which the directives of the coming months for the Middle Eastern Islamic world and beyond will take their course. A shared international strategy emerged, even if contradictions and risks are not entirely absent.

A necessary window for dialogue

On Monday, 11 November, Riyadh invited the 22 countries of the Arab League and the 50 or so states that make up the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to take part in a summit dedicated to the ongoing conflicts in the region. The meeting focused on ongoing conflicts in the region, with a particular focus on Donald Trump’s return to the Oval Office.

At the opening of the summit dedicated to Israel’s wars in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman used the term ‘genocide ’ to describe Israel’s military operations in the Gaza Strip: ‘We call on the international community to assume its responsibility […] by immediately ending Israeli attacks against our brothers in Palestine and Lebanon’.

The assembled Arab and Muslim leaders took the same stance towards Israel, condemning the horrific and shocking crimes committed by the Israeli army in Gaza, denouncing torture, executions, disappearances and outright ethnic cleansing, as stated in the final communiqué of the meeting.

Mohammed bin Salman also called on Israel to ‘respect the territorial sovereignty of the Islamic Republic of Iran” and to ”refrain from attacking its territory’. Most members of the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation will support these very firm statements. Although there are big differences between the countries that have normalised relations with Israel and those that oppose it, starting with the Islamic Republic of Iran. MBS explicitly said that not only the very existence of Palestine is now in question, but also the fate of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the second holiest shrine in Islam after Mecca, a statement reminiscent of the name of the Hamas operation entitled ‘Storm Al-Aqsa’. Evidently, Hamas leaders expected that such an emergency Arab-Islamic summit would convene much earlier, for instance soon after the start of Israel’s ground operation in Gaza.

In this regard, the Crown Prince referred to Iran as a ‘sister republic’, which made the press throughout the Islamic world rejoice, signalling a detente in relations between the two countries. Diplomatic relations were officially reopened in March 2023, after a seven-year blockade, thanks to an agreement brokered by China, and after the infamous 7 October 2023, dialogue resumed and intensified. Iran supports the Palestinian Islamist movement, while Saudi Arabia tries to contain the spread of the conflict.

At the summit, Iran’s First Vice-President Mohammad Reza Aref called Israel’s assassination of the leaders of Palestinian Hamas and Lebanese Hezbollah ‘organised terrorism’, adding that ‘Operations misleadingly described as “targeted killings”, in which Palestinian elites and leaders of other countries in the region are killed one by one or en masse, are nothing but organised terrorism’. Similarly expressed by Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati, who called on the international community to continue sending aid to Lebanon. It should be noted that Mikati spoke a few days ago of ‘interference by Iran’ in Lebanon, an accusation rejected by Tehran.

It is worth noting the simultaneous involvement of Assad and Erdogan. Only recently, such crossovers were impossible. The government in Ankara has spoken increasingly strong and clear words against the extermination that Israel is perpetrating, certainly favouring a round table with the neighbouring Islamic countries, at least from the point of view of positive intentions.

Why only now?

There is almost nothing left of the leadership of Hamas and Hezbollah. This is a fact to be confronted with. Such a summit would have been very different if the leaders of the Resistance were still alive.

The reason for this delay is perhaps the American elections. While the BRICS+ summit in Kazan had paved the way and pointed in a direction of international cohesion in condemning Israel’s actions and the need to restore Palestinian autonomy, it is true that the final placet was missing to move from theory to action.

Donald Trump’s victory must be framed from an Arab-Islamic perspective. Trump is a supporter of right-wing Zionism, that of Netanyahu and certain radicals such as Smotrich, Ben Gvir and Rabbi Dov Lior, who have never shied away from proclamations of massacres, sacrifices and religious destruction. For Zionists, Jerusalem is as important as Al Quds for Islamists (Al Quds is the Arabic name for Jerusalem). In the election campaign, Trump never gave an inch about his pro-Zionist position and support for the government in Tel Aviv. It was he who proposed moving the capital of the Zionist entity to Jerusalem and it was he who ordered the assassination of General Qassem Soleimani. Trump’s election strengthened the prospects for US-Israeli collaboration, so much so that Smotrich immediately declared his intention to attack the Palestinians in the West Bank and blow up the Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Trump has accelerated these processes. The next goal, which he personally supported and financed, is the construction of the Third Temple, an eschatological keystone for the entire American neocon world. The physical destruction of all of Israel’s enemies is not a side effect or minor harm, but a duty inherent in Jewish messianism.

The emergence of the Islamic pole in the multipolar world is acquiring an increasingly recognisable and identifiable form. Of course, there are still many problems to be solved: Saudi Arabia and Turkey do business with the US and Israel, continue to play on opposing sides, and are historically unreliable. The countries of South East Asia still have to define their position with regard to international relations with the West, in order to definitively emancipate themselves and make themselves safe from blackmail and retaliation.

The questions many are asking themselves are various: will the next American president commit himself to ending the ongoing conflicts as he has promised? Or will he be an unconditional supporter of Israel, both in the war and in his plans to torpedo any prospect of establishing a Palestinian state? Saudi Arabia makes any normalization with Israel conditional on the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. The two-state solution is supported by much of the international community as a means to resolve the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Arab and Muslim leaders hold firm to the position, in accordance with UN resolutions and the 2002 Arab peace plan, that Israel must return all territories occupied since 1967.

The Abrahamic agreements are no longer enough. This time, however, the US can no longer decide the entire future of the Middle East on its own, because the chessboard has changed and the new positions taken by the Islamic countries will force Washington to weigh up more elements. Russia and China will not let the multipolar project be compromised. Not even the African countries, where the Palestinian cause is a deeply felt and shared issue of freedom, identity and anti-colonialism, are going to give way in the fight against this historic injustice.

The Muslim population of Islamic countries, seeing the passivity of the rulers, will not tolerate the ongoing extermination and attack on the holy places of their religion much longer.

Probably, only a common war against a common enemy can unite Muslims. And that could happen very soon.

November 16, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, War Crimes | , , , , , , | 1 Comment

There are no “Easy Wars” left to fight, but do not mistake the longing for one

By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | November 15, 2024

Israelis, as a whole, are exhibiting a rosy assurance that they can harness Trump, if not to the full annexation of the Occupied Territories (Trump in his first term did not support such annexation), but rather, to ensnare him into a war on Iran. Many (even most) Israelis are raring for war on Iran and an aggrandisement of their territory (devoid of Arabs). They are believing the puffery that Iran ‘lies naked’, staggeringly vulnerable, before a U.S. and Israeli military strike.

Trump’s Team nominations, so far, reveal a foreign policy squad of fierce supporters of Israel and of passionate hostility to Iran. The Israeli media term it a ‘dream team’ for Netanyahu. It certainly looks that way.

The Israel Lobby could not have asked for more. They have got it. And with the new CIA chief, they get a known ultra China hawk as a bonus.

But in the domestic sphere the tone is precisely the converse: The key nomination for ‘cleaning the stables’ is Matt Gaetz as Attorney General; he is a real “bomb thrower”. And for the Intelligence clean-up, Tulsi Gabbard is appointed as Director of National Intelligence. All intelligence agencies will report to her, and she will be responsible for the President’s Daily briefing. The intel assessments may thus begin to reflect something closer to reality.

The deep Inter-Agency structure has reason to be very afraid; they are panicking – especially over Gaetz.

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have the near impossible task of cutting out-of-control federal spending and currency printing. The System is deeply dependent on the bloat of government spending to keep the cogs and levers of the mammoth ‘security’ boondoggle whirring. It is not going to be yielded up without a bitter fight.

So, on the one hand, the Lobby gets a dream team (Israel), but on the other side (the domestic sphere), it gets a renegade team.

This must be deliberate. Trump knows that Biden’s legacy of bloating GDP with government jobs and excessive public spending is the real ‘time bomb’ awaiting him. Again the withdrawal symptoms, as the drug of easy money is withdrawn, may prove incendiary. Moving to a structure of tariffs and low taxes will be disruptive.

Whether deliberate or not, Trump is keeping his cards close to his chest. We have only glimpses of intent – and the water is being seriously muddied by the infamous ‘Inter-Agency’ grandees. For example, in respect to the Pentagon sanctioning private-sector contractors to work in Ukraine, this was done in coordination with “inter-agency stakeholders”.

The old nemesis that paralysed his first term again faces Trump. Then, during the Ukraine impeachment process, one witness (Vindman), when asked why he would not defer to the President’s explicit instructions, replied that whilst Trump has his view on Ukraine policy, that stance did NOT align with that of the ‘Inter-Agency’ agreed position. In plain language, Vindman denied that a U.S. president has agency in foreign policy formulation.

In short, the ‘Inter-Agency structure’ was signalling to Trump that military support for Ukraine must continue.

When the Washington Post published their detailed story of a Trump-Putin phone call – that the Kremlin emphatically states never happened – the deep structures of policy were simply telling Trump that it would be they who determine what the shape of the U.S. ‘solution’ for Ukraine would be.

Similarly, when Netanyahu boasts to have spoken to Trump and that Trump “shares” his views regarding Iran, Trump was being indirectly instructed what his policy towards Iran needs to be. All the (false) rumours about appointments to his Team too, were but the interagency signalling their choices for his key posts. No wonder confusion reigns.

So, what can be deduced at this early stage? If there is a common thread, it has been a constant refrain that Trump is against war. And that he demands from his picks personal loyalty and no ties of obligation to the Lobby or the Swamp.

So, is the packing of his Administration with ‘Israel Firsters’ an indication that Trump is edging toward a ‘Realist’s Faustian pact’ to destroy Iran in order to cripple China’s energy supply source (90% from Iran), and thus weaken China? – Two birds with one stone, so to speak?

The collapse of Iran would also weaken Russia and hobble the BRICS’ transport-corridor projects. Central Asia needs both Iranian energy and its key transport corridors linking China, Iran, and Russia as primary nodes of Eurasian commerce.

When the RAND Organisation, the Pentagon think-tank, recently published a landmark appraisal of the 2022 National Defence Strategy (NDS), its findings were stark: An unrelentingly bleak analysis of every aspect of the U.S. war machine. In brief, the U.S. is “not prepared”, the appraisal argued, in any meaningful way for serious ‘competition’ with its major adversaries – and is vulnerable or even significantly outmatched in every sphere of warfare.

The U.S., the RAND appraisal continues, could in short order be drawn into a war across multiple theatres with peer and near-peer adversaries – and it could lose. It warns that the U.S. public has not internalized the costs of the U.S. losing its position as the world superpower. The U.S. must therefore engage globally with a presence—military, diplomatic, and economic—to preserve influence worldwide.

Indeed, as one respected commentator has noted, the ‘Empire at all Costs’ cult (i.e. the RAND Organisation zeitgeist) is now “more desperate than ever to find a war it can fight to restore its fortunes and prestige”.

And China would be altogether a different proposition for a demonstrative act of destruction in order “to preserve U.S. influence worldwide” – for the U.S. is “not prepared” for serious conflict with its peer adversaries: Russia or China, RAND says.

The straitened situation of the U.S. after decades of fiscal excess and offshoring (the backdrop to its current weakened military industrial base) now makes kinetic war with China or Russia or “across multiple theatres” a prospect to be shunned.

The point that the commentator above makes is that there are no ‘easy wars’ left to fight. And that the reality (brutally outlined by RAND) is that the U.S. can choose one – and only one war to fight. Trump may not want any war, but the Lobby grandees – all supporters of Israel, if not active Zionists supporting the displacement of Palestinians – want war. And they believe they can get one.

Put starkly and plainly: Has Trump thought this through? Have the others in the Trump Team reminded him that in today’s world, with U.S. military strength slipping away, there no longer are any ‘easy wars’ to fight, although Zionists believe that with a decapitation strike on Iran’s religious and IRGC leadership (on the lines of the Israel’s strikes on Hizbullah leaders in Beirut), the Iranian people would rise up against their leaders, and side with Israel for a ‘New Middle East’.

Netanyahu has just made his second broadcast to the Iranian people promising them early salvation. He and his government are not waiting to ask Trump to nod his consent to the annexation of all Occupied Palestinian Territories. That project is being implemented on the ground. It is unfolding now. Netanyahu and his cabinet have the ethnic cleansing ‘bit between their teeth’. Will Trump be able to roll it back? How so? Or will he succumb to becoming ‘genocide Don’?

This putative ‘Iran War’ is following the same narrative cycle as with Russia: ‘Russia is weak; its military is poorly trained; its equipment mostly recycled from the Soviet era; its missiles and artillery in short supply’. Zbig Brzezinski earlier had taken the logic to its conclusion in The Grand Chessboard (1997): Russia would have no choice but to submit to the expansion of NATO and to the geopolitical dictates of the U.S.. That was ‘then’ (a little more than a year ago). Russia took the western challenge – and today is in the driving seat in Ukraine, whilst the West looks on helplessly.

This last month, it was U.S. retired General Jack Keane, the strategic analyst for Fox News, who argued that Israel’s air strike on Iran had left it “essentially naked”, with most air defences “taken down” and its missile production factories destroyed by Israel’s 26 October strikes. Iran’s vulnerability, Keane said, is “simply staggering”.

Kean channels the early Brzezinski: His message is clear – Iran will be an ‘easy war’. That forecast however, is likely to be revealed as dead wrong. And, if pursued, will lead to a complete military and economic disaster for Israel. But do not rule out the distinct possibility that Netanyahu – besieged on all fronts and teetering on the brink of internal crisis and even jail – is desperate enough to do it. His is, after all, a Biblical mandate that he pursues for Israel!

Iran likely will launch a painful response to Israel before the 20 January Presidential Inauguration. Its riposte will demonstrate Iran’s unexpected and unforeseen military innovation. What the U.S. and Israel will then do may well open the door to wider regional war. Sentiment across the region seethes at the slaughter in the Occupied Territories and in Lebanon.

Trump may not appreciate just how isolated the U.S. and Israel are among Israel’s Arab and Sunni neighbours. The U.S. is stretched so thin, and its forces across the region are so vulnerable to the hostility that the daily slaughter incubates, that a regional war might be enough to bring the entire house of cards tumbling down. The crisis would pitch Trump into a financial crisis that could sink his domestic economic aspirations too.

November 15, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

West Asia reacts to Trump’s dalliance with Zionism

By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | November 14, 2024 

The election victory of Donald Trump in the November 5 election is being perceived in the West Asian region with growing anxiety as presaging the US aligning one hundred percent with the Zionist project for Greater Israel. 

Although Trump has kept out vociferous neocons from his government positions, the same cannot be said for pro-Zionist figures. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claims he has spoken three times with Trump already since the election and they “see eye-to-eye regarding the Iranian threat and all of its components.”

The “components” implies that Netanyahu hopes to get a blank cheque from Trump to accelerate the ethnic cleansing in Gaza, for annexation of West Bank, violent reprisals against Palestinians and, most important, to carry the war right into Iranian territory.  

Three events in as many days this week show the first signs of a backlash building up. On Monday, Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei gave Tehran’s first official reaction to Trump’s election victory. Baqaei took a nuanced line saying, “What matters to us in this region is the United States’ actual behaviour and policies regarding Iran and the broader West Asia.” 

Notably, Baqaei expressed “cautious optimism that the new [Trump] administration might adopt a more peace-oriented approach, reduce regional hostilities, and uphold its commitments.” (Tehran Times) Baqaei also refuted the recent allegation by Washington that Iran was involved in plots to assassinate Trump. He called the Biden Administration’s allegation as “nothing more than an attempt to sabotage relations” between Tehran and Washington by “laying traps to complicate the path for the next administration.” 

Baqaei also held out an assurance to the incoming US administration that Tehran firmly adheres to a nuclear programme for peaceful purposes. He announced that Rafael Grossi, head of International Atomic Energy (IAEA) was due to arrive in Tehran  on Wednesday night. 

Taken together, Baqaei’s remarks suggest that Iran hopes there’s still daylight possible between Trump and Netanyahu. The clincher here would have been the remark that Trump slipped into his victory speech with great deliberation on November 6 that “I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars.” 

Trump was on record during his election campaign that “I don’t want to do damage to Iran but they cannot have nuclear weapons.” Tehran’s consultations with Grossi responds to Trump’s concern. This is smart thinking. Iran’s non-provocative stance would mean there is no alibi for attacking Iran.

That said, however, the “known unknown” still remains — namely, Iran’s retaliation to the Israeli attack on October 26. On November 2, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in a video released by Iranian state media, promised “a crushing response” to Israeli attack. Conceivably, the period till January 20 when Trump is sworn in, is going to be critical. 

Meanwhile, this week witnessed that Iran and Saudi Arabia have given verve to their detente, which is now manifesting as Riyadh’s solidarity and open support for Iran in its growing confrontation with Israel.

Amidst the growing tensions in the region, the chief of staff of Saudi Arabia’s armed forces, Fayyad al-Ruwaili, visited Tehran on November 10 and met with his Iranian counterpart General Mohammad Bagheri. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian spoke on the phone with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on the phone in the context of a summit of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) – Arab League in Riyadh on November 11-12. Iran has extended an invitation to MbS to visit Tehran! 

Two hugely significant highlights of the Riyadh summit have been, first, the Saudi prince’s inaugural address where he warned Israel against hitting Iran. This marked a historic turn by Riyadh toward Tehran-Israeli conflict, and away from US-supported normalisation with Jerusalem.

MbS told the summit that the international community should oblige Israel “to respect the sovereignty of the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran and not to violate its lands.” 

Again, Saudi Arabia accused Israel for the first time of committing “genocide” in Gaza. MbS told the leaders who gathered in Riyadh, that the kingdom renewed “its condemnation and categorical rejection of the genocide committed by Israel against the brotherly Palestinian people…”

Trump has been put on notice that he’s meeting a radically different geopolitical landscape in West Asia compared to his first term as president. The Trump transition team is keeping its cards close, offering NatSec Daily a boilerplate statement that Trump will take “necessary action” to “lead our country” and “restore peace through strength.” But warning bells are ringing. 

The key pillars of Trump’s “maximum pressure” strategy against Tehran — isolating Iran and ramping up economic pressure while  maintaining a credible threat of military force as deterrent — have become wobbly.

On the other hand, the massive Iranian ballistic missile attack on Israel on October 1 and the colossal failure of the Israeli air strike on Iran twenty-six days later convey a loud message all across West Asia that Israel is no longer the dominant military power it used to be — and there is a new sheriff in town. Trump will have to navigate the fallout of both sides of this issue with diminished US diplomatic and geopolitical capital at his disposal. 

Meanwhile, Tehran is also deepening its cooperation with Russia, which adds a giant new Ukraine-sized complexity to Trump’s Iran policy. While in Eurasia, the US has allies, Trump is navigating in West Asia pretty much alone.

The US’ stark isolation comes home dramatically by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s announcement on Wednesday that Turkey, a NATO member country, has severed all ties with Israel. Erdogan disclosed this to journalists aboard his plane after visiting Saudi Arabia. A regional trend to ostracise Israel is visible now and it is destined to expand and deepen. 

The summit in Riyadh witnessed the African Union joining hands with the Arab League and OIC to sign a tripartite agreement on Tuesday to establish a mechanism to support the Palestinian cause, which will be coordinated through the three organisations’ secretariats as a game changer to strengthen their influence in international forums. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan noted that the three organisations will now onward speak with one voice internationally. 

Even as the summit concluded in Riyadh, Crown Prince Salman had a call on Wednesday with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Kremlin readout stated that the two leaders “reaffirmed their commitment to continue the consistent expansion” of Russian-Saudi ties and specifically “stressed the importance of continuing close coordination within OPEC Plus and stated the effectiveness and timeliness of the steps being taken in this format to ensure balance on the global energy market.”

On the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the Kremlin readout noted with satisfaction that “the principled approaches of Russia and Saudi Arabia with regard to the Middle East settlement are essentially identical.”

MbS’ initiative to re-invigorate his conversation with Putin can only be seen against the backdrop of the profound misgivings in Riyadh regarding the Trump-Netanyahu bromance and the spectre of a possible regional war haunting the region stemming out of Israel drawing encouragement from the seamless US support expected through the coming 4-year period for the Zionist cause. 

November 14, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How will ‘Israel’ finance its F-15IA fighter jets deal with Boeing?

Al Mayadeen | November 13, 2024

The Israeli Security Ministry’s recent announcement of an agreement with Boeing to purchase 25 F-15IA fighter jets for $5.2 billion, with funding to be drawn from US military aid, raised several questions, primarily about whether US military aid to “Israel” would cover the latest procurement, the Israeli news website Globes reported Wednesday.

According to the Watson Institute at Brown University, the US provided “Israel” with $17.9 billion in military aid during the first year of the war, significantly exceeding the formal annual aid package of $3.8 billion that Washington has committed to Tel Aviv, the news website highlighted.

It noted that among the $3.8 billion annually in military aid—$3.3 billion allocated for procurement and $500 million for joint air defense projects—along with other grants provided each year.

Globes added that the Israeli Security Ministry has stated that delivery of the F-15IA fighter jets is expected to begin in 2031, with 4-6 aircraft delivered per year through 2035 under the most favorable scenario.

It pointed out that this raises further questions about the financial structure of the deal, particularly as the total investment exceeds the annual US aid to “Israel” by $1.4 billion.

So how will “Israel” finance the F-15IA deal?

The report suggested that payments to Boeing may be structured in installments.

In this regard, Globes cited Moti Besser, who served as a financial advisor to the Israeli occupation forces Chief of Staff and headed the Ministry of Security’s budget division from 1997 to 2000, as saying that “Israel” is unique in that US security aid enables it to commit to long-term contracts based on project milestones.

Besser highlighted that while other parties must pay for defense products upfront before delivery, “Israel has a different model that has been built over the years and allows for funding to be deployed over a long period of time and to take into account existing and future sources.”

He explained that when a $5.2 billion contract is spread out, it doesn’t deplete accumulated aid, but rather aligns with a multi-year funding flow that supports additional procurements.

It is noteworthy that since October last year, the Israeli Air Force has conducted relentless airstrikes in the region, killing more than 43,000 people in the Gaza Strip and more than 3,000 others in Lebanon, in addition to leveling civilian infrastructure.

Israeli aircraft have also been used in repeated assaults on Syria and Yemen, as well as Iran.

In late September, “Israel” received a new US military aid package totaling $8.7 billion.

Ido Nehushtan, president of Boeing Israel, pointed to the long-standing relationship with the Israeli occupation entity and confirmed the company’s commitment to “working with the US and Israeli governments to deliver the advanced F-15IA aircraft through standard military procurement channels.”

November 13, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump’s foreign policy team signals further drift from ‘America First’ to ‘Israel First’

MEMO | November 12, 2024

Illusions harboured by supporters of Donald Trump that his “America First” agenda would prioritise US interests over foreign entanglements have been shattered, as key appointments reveal an “Israel First” policy taking shape. The selection of several key officials, including Michael Waltz as National Security Advisor, whose top campaign donor is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), represents a stark departure from Trump’s previous promises to avoid military interventions in the Middle East.

Trump’s announcement over the weekend that pro-Israel hawks who served under his first cabinet like Mike Pompeo and Nikki Haley would not be reinvited to his cabinet, was greeted with optimism.

“The ‘stop Pompeo’ movement is great but it’s not enough. Right now we need maximum pressure to keep all neocons and war hawks out of the Trump administration” said well-known Trump supporter, Dave Smith on X. “They have had their time at the table and brought nothing but disaster to the world and this country.”

Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr, endorsed Smith’s comment adding, “Agreed💯💯💯!!! I’m on it”

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1855593982958379321

The appointment of Waltz, a combat-decorated former Green Beret and Florida congressman, has shattered the illusion of an “America First” agenda, signalling a victory for the hawkish neoconservative wing of the Republican Party. A wing that Trump strongly criticised during the campaign trail for starting wars in the Middle East.

Waltz has been an outspoken advocate for aggressive military action in the Middle East, recently criticising the Biden administration’s approach to Gaza and Lebanon. He urged Biden to “let Israel finish the job”, even though the Occupation state is under investigation for genocide.

The shift towards a more aggressive foreign policy is further evidenced by Trump’s selection of Rep Elise Stefanik as his choice for UN Ambassador. Stefanik, also heavily backed by AIPAC, has championed numerous pro-Israel initiatives in Congress, including controversial legislation aimed at curtailing boycotts of Israel. Her bill sought to prevent American citizens and companies from providing information to foreign entities that could support boycotts of Israel.

Adding to this hawkish lineup, Trump is expected to name Senator Marco Rubio of Florida as Secretary of State. Rubio, another significant recipient of AIPAC funding, has consistently pushed for more aggressive US involvement in Middle East affairs.

Waltz’s foreign policy vision, recently outlined in The Economist, advocates for a muscular approach to Middle East policy. He has called for putting “a credible military option on the table” regarding Iran and maintaining significant US military presence in the region, positions that stand in stark contrast to Trump’s previous campaign promises of military disengagement from the Middle East.

The appointments represent a dramatic shift from Trump’s campaign rhetoric, which promised to end “endless wars” and prioritise domestic interests. Instead, his selection of multiple pro-Israel hardliners to key foreign policy positions suggests an administration likely to pursue an aggressive interventionist agenda in the Middle East.

These appointments, along with several other notable Zionist figures selected for cabinet positions, are seen as further indication that Trump’s second term foreign policy team will prioritise strong alignment with Israel’s interests over his “America First” doctrine.

November 12, 2024 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | 3 Comments

Iran, Russia, Turkey condemn Israeli atrocities in West Asia

Press TV – November 12, 2024

Iran, Russia, and Turkey have condemned the Israeli regime’s continuous atrocities in the West Asia region, calling for increased international efforts to secure an “immediate and permanent” ceasefire in Gaza.

A closing statement from the three countries following the 22nd international meeting on Syria in the Astana format, held in Kazakhstan’s capital, expressed their “strong condemnation and deep concern over the ongoing mass killings and criminal attacks by Israel in Gaza, as well as Israeli aggression in Lebanon and the West Bank.”

They called on the international community, in particular the UN Security Council, “to secure an immediate and permanent ceasefire and unhindered humanitarian access in Gaza.”

The trio also condemned Israeli military attacks on Syria, deeming such actions as violations of international law.

“[The sides] condemned all Israeli military strikes in Syria. [They] considered these actions as a violation of international law, international humanitarian law, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria, and recognized them as destabilizing and exacerbating tensions in the region and called for the ceasing of these attacks,” the statement said.

The sides acknowledged the negative impact of the escalation of tensions in the region on Syria, underscoring the urgency for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), UN agencies, and all humanitarian actors to develop an emergency response for those who were forced to cross from Lebanon into Syria following the escalation of hostilities in Lebanon.

The Israeli regime has been conducting a genocide in Gaza for over a year, resulting in significant casualties. The regime has recently expanded its military aggression to Lebanon, causing numerous fatalities in the Arab country.

Israel has also conducted repeated attacks on Syria and others in the region as part of its escalated campaign of violence.

Call for Turkey-Syria normalization

The joint statement also stressed the importance of resumed contacts and continuing efforts to normalize relations between Ankara and Damascus.

They stressed the need to combat terrorism, facilitate the safe and voluntary return of Syrians with support from the UNHCR, advance the political process, and ensure that unrestricted humanitarian aid reaches all Syrians, as stated in the joint declaration.

The statement said that the sides “reaffirmed the importance of resuming contacts between Turkey and Syria on the basis of strict adherence to the principles of respect for the unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of both countries.”

They “emphasized the importance of resuming contacts in this format,” it said.

The three parties agreed to hold the next round of the Astana talks on Syria in the first half of 2025.

Initiated in 2017, the Astana format is a series of negotiations aimed at resolving the conflict in Syria.

It involves Russia, Iran, and Turkey as guarantor countries, alongside representatives from the Syrian government and opposition, the United Nations, and observer nations such as Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq.

The Astana process has been instrumental in facilitating dialogue among key stakeholders in the war on Syria, focusing on de-escalation zones, humanitarian aid, and political solutions.

November 12, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Trump must end wars – Dennis Kucinich

RT | November 9, 2024

US president-elect Donald Trump will have his hands full fixing the mess in foreign and domestic policy left by incumbent leader Joe Biden’s administration, according to Dennis Kucinich, two-time Democratic presidential candidate and retired eight-term US congressman.

In an interview with Going Underground host Afshin Rattansi broadcast on RT on Saturday, Kucinich said that the success of Trump’s presidency will depend on his ability to shift the focus of US politics from the “globalist aspirations of the State Department” to problems at home.

The veteran politician welcomed Trump’s victory over Democrat Kamala Harris in this week’s election, saying that it represents a “historic shift” in US politics towards “populism.”

“[The US] has come through a very dark period where the government put this country to the edge of World War III, and people don’t want that,” Kucinich stated, noting that ordinary Americans worry about simple things like paying bills and generally “making ends meet,” which he called “very practical aspirations they have in common with people around the world.” He said Trump’s presidency “will depend on not getting further involved in foreign entanglements.”

“This economy is shaking, the dollar is not in the same position it was in four years ago… the previous administration has not been successful in reviving the economy with all this money for Wall Street but not enough for main street,” he stated. Kucinich added that this happened “precisely” because the Biden administration poured billions into wars “that are not necessary.”

There’s a lot of work Trump will need to do, he is going to be faced with some serious decisions about scaling back the US position in Europe and the Middle East and to try to find a way that we can move past the events that the Biden administration embroiled America in.

Kucinich noted that he expects Trump to be able to extricate the US from global conflicts through his “deal-making finesse.”

“Trump is a deal-maker… a family man concerned about children and grandchildren. He’s not personally interested in seeing the US expand into war, he’s not a globalist in that way,” he stated.

Kucinich also suggested that Trump would be wise to lead the US towards cooperation with the “new world” that is “taking shape in response to disastrous sanctions and wars,” citing BRICS as one of the alignments that the US should consider working with.

You can watch the full interview here.

 

November 9, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Video | , , | Leave a comment

What Comes Next for the Palestinians?

Trump unlikely to oppose Netanyahu’s genocide

By Philip Giraldi • Unz Review • November 6, 2024

Well, it’s over… or is it? Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States backed by a GOP controlled Senate and possibly even a majority in the House of Representatives. And one should not discount the advantage derived from having a largely conservative Supreme Court, but much depends on who Trump appoints to key cabinet positions, a weakness in the first Trump presidency as he tended to select ideologues rather than candidates with relevant knowledge or experience. One hopes, for example, that neither the usual claque of neocons nor establishment characters like Mike Pompeo or Tom Cotton, who have been mentioned as possible candidates for Secretary of Defense, will appear on anyone’s list for high office.

During the lead-up to the presidential campaign, Trump sometimes referred to himself as the most popular politician in Israel, including a conceit that if he were able to run for office in that country he would be able to get elected to the highest offices without any problem. That was, at least in Donald’s mind, an expression of gratitude for how he had done so much for Israel in 2016-2020, including moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, accepting the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights, providing political cover for Israeli actions, and a declaration that the US would not do anything to interfere with military and police actions connected to Israeli settlement expansion on the nominally Palestinian West Bank. Israel also appreciated Trump’s appointment of his lawyer David Friedman as US Ambassador. Friedman proved to be a full time apologist for Israel, not representing or defending American interests. In the recent presidential campaign, Trump spoke frequently to Jewish Republican groups and declared himself to be Israel’s best friend and supporter among US politicians.

The Israeli media has also reported that the present Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu much preferred Trump over Kamala Harris, possibly because the PM has developed what is reported to be a close personal relationship with the Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, who has apparently served often as a conduit to Donald. Netanyahu in fact was the first foreign head of state to telephone personally to congratulate Trump on his repeat victory at 2 a.m. on Wednesday. Netanyahu declared that Trump’s win was “historic” and said it “offers a new beginning for America and a powerful recommitment to the great alliance between Israel and America. This is a huge victory!”

It is generally believed that Netanyahu also apparently harbors some deep suspicion of the Democratic Party in spite of the Biden Administration’s generosity in arms and cash transfers, presumably in part because the Democrats harbor a small but active progressive wing which has been vocal about blocking arms sales to Israel due to its genocide of the Palestinians. The Republicans have no such tendencies apart from a persistent Tom Massie in the House and Rand Paul occasionally saying the right thing from the Senate. And key Republicans like current House speaker Mike Johnson are so in bed with Israel and all its works that he should perhaps consider moving there permanently as the average American gets nothing from the expensive and exceedingly bloody relationship apart from opprobrium from nearly the entire world for complicity in the extermination of the Palestinians. In other words, if one is expecting a return to sanity over what is going on in the Middle East, don’t expect it to come from Donald Trump.

And Netanyahu should be very pleased with the Trump victory for one other important reason, which is how he will be able to deal with an American president. The Wall Street Journal is already reporting from Israeli sources that Netanyahu is definitely expecting a “freer hand” from the new administration to do whatever he wants politically and militarily. Trump’s ego and his personal and spontaneous manner of governing is exactly the kind of relationship Bibi feels most comfortable dealing with. Netanyahu believes he can manipulate Trump and cultivate his personal relationship with the president to include dealing with him directly without worrying about any other players. Netanyahu will be in position to personally flatter, mollify, or confuse Trump even if the president were to surprisingly decide that it would be better if Israel backed off on its aggression. Netanyahu and his allies in the US Congress will be united in convincing Trump that this would be a bad idea.

Bearing in mind that Joe Biden will continue to be president for the next two months and he has demonstrated an infinite capacity to screw things up through his clueless proxies Antony Blinken and Lloyd Austin plus the comic interlude provided by State Department spokesman Matt Miller, who cracked a joke and laughed about the clearly demonstrated Israeli attempt to starve the Gazans to death. But possible Biden missteps notwithstanding, Israel should be on balance very pleased with the election result. Trump is, of course, fully supportive of the slaughter of the Palestinians and is quite willing to deal similarly with the Iranians if they should “spill one drop of American blood” by “spilling gallons of theirs.” His advice to the Israeli government has been that they should “finish the job” on dealing with the Pals not for either humane or political reasons but rather because Israel is getting a bad reputation for its openly espoused massacring of civilians, including in excess of 13,000 children. In a phone call with Netanyahu in October, Trump praised escalation of Israeli military actions in Lebanon. Senator Lindsay Graham, who was on the call, described how “He didn’t tell him what to do militarily, but he expressed that he was impressed by the pagers [and] he expressed his awe for their military operations and what they have done. He told them, do what you have to do to defend yourself.”

Trump is also appreciative of the millions of dollars that went his way during the presidential campaign from Israel’s best friends in the US. The reported $100 million that came from a single donor, casino billionaire Israeli Miriam Adelson, was allegedly in exchange for a Trump agreement to permit Israel’s annexation of what remains of the Palestinian West Bank. The multi-ethnic Arab country called Palestine in 1948 would thereby become the Jewish state of Israel de jure as well as de facto. And the expansion and warmaking with Israel’s neighbors as Netanyahu seeks to establish his country’s military dominance over the entire region will go on, with US garrisons illegally based in Syria and Iraq playing supporting roles. Trump could have removed them as well as carrying out a withdrawal from Afghanistan when he was last in office, but for reasons unknown chose not to, possibly due to pressure from the Israelis.

In short, based on the record in 2016-2020 and recent campaign rhetoric, there is no possibility that President Trump will put any pressure on Israel to cease and desist from what it has been doing in Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza. This is potentially bad news for the Palestinians and Lebanese but it also is not welcomed by the likely majority of Americans who now oppose arming and funding Israeli genocide. It comes on top of Trump’s frequent denunciation of “useless wars” though he most often cites Ukraine in that context, promising to end that conflict “in one day” by virtue of his sheer star power, personal intervention and diplomacy. One hopes that is true, and, of course, Kiev has no powerful domestic lobby apart from the arms industry to object and continue to want to feed the fighting, so it is possible that Russia-Ukraine is actually moving towards some kind of end. Maybe if that fighting ends and sets a good example, someone in Washington will wake up and seek the same type of agreement to calm the Middle East.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.

November 6, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | 1 Comment

Iran-Arab Rapprochement Gains Ground

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – November 6 2024

Israel’s escalation in Gaza and Lebanon has severely hindered U.S. efforts to expand the Abraham Accords by bringing Saudi Arabia into the fold.

When Israel began its brutal war on Gaza following Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, the Arab-Israel peace deal became nearly impossible. Washington, however, did not abandon its efforts to pursue expanding the Abraham Accords by getting Saudi Arabia to sign them. However, Washington’s inability to control Netanyahu’s war has undermined its efforts to convince Saudi Arabia.

Simultaneously, this overall failure has also negatively affected Washington’s ability to drive a wedge between Iran and Saudi Arabia to undo the Beijing-mediated normalisation between the two erstwhile rivals in the Middle East. Instead, this normalisation seems to have found new grounds in the wake of Israeli expansion of the war into Lebanon against Hezbollah. Riyadh, as reports show, categorically denied Israel the leeway it needed to execute its plans to attack Iran’s oil and nuclear facilities. How Saudi Arabia reached this conclusion is an outcome of, among other things, Iran’s active diplomacy.

Iran-Arab Normalisation

According to a recent report in Reuters, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE explicitly gave Washington an ‘enough is enough’ call when they asked it to stop Israel from attacking Iran’s oil and nuclear facilities. Simultaneously, all three of these states have also closed their space for Israeli jets and missiles to cross to attack Iran. As the report mentions,  “the moves by the Gulf states come after a diplomatic push by non-Arab Shi’ite Iran to persuade its Sunni Gulf neighbours to use their influence with Washington amid rising concerns Israel could target Iran’s oil production facilities”.

The fact that Arab states conveyed Iran’s message – and explicitly took Tehran’s side – reveals many things. But, most importantly, it shows their ability to transcend the US-imposed narrow confines of ‘sectarian rivalry’ to follow a radically alternative line of foreign policy – one that prioritises long-term regional goals. In other words, while Arab states may have failed to bring Israel’s war on Gaza to an end, they have certainly succeeded in denying Israel an easy way to impose another war in the region – a war, if it breaks out, will affect Arab states more than the Gaza war.

It has turned out to be a source of confidence for Iran to confront Israel. The Foreign Minister of Iran recently noted Iran’s readiness to respond to any hostile actions by the Zionist regime, stating, “We are not seeking to escalate tensions or war.”

No Anti-Iran Alliance

In terms of regional politics, the Arab states’ refusal to become a party to tensions between Iran and Israel means that Washington – and Israel – will not be able to establish an anti-Iran regional alliance, which was one of the goals of The Abraham Accords. Thanks to the proactive diplomacy of China and Russia, Arab states no longer share with Washington and Israel the anti-Iran enthusiasm that, until recently, defined the very core of Arab geopolitics in the region. This is one of the reasons why the US and Saudi Arabia have not been able to finalize their otherwise ‘history making agreement’.

For one thing, if Saudi Arabia has openly declared its intentions to not engage Iran in a military fight, Washington sees no potential benefit arising out of this pact vis-à-vis the security of Israel and its ability to manipulate regional politics to its advantage and at the expense of its global rivals.

This failure, in many ways, has to do with how Washington behaved in 2019 when Saudi oil facilities came under Houthi attacks. The US failed to ‘protect’ Saudia Arabia – something that created an opening for China to push for an alternative to war.

For the Saudis as well, signing this treaty in the present context has become a lot more complicated than it would have been in a context with no Israeli war on Gaza and no prior Saudi-Iran rapprochement. Riyadh understands that tying its defence deeply with Washington via a treaty means it will have to, for instance, offer its space for the US/Israel to launch strikes on Iran. It would also mean Saudi Arabia exposing itself – once again – to Iran and Iran-backed Houthis. It also means Saudi Arabia going back to the past insofar as its ties with Iran are concerned and insofar as its plans to push for a multipolar order, both in the region and worldwide, are concerned. From the Saudi perspective, this treaty not only offers (an illusion of) protection but also comes with (the very real possibility of) a new phase of military conflict.

Alternatives to Washington

Middle Eastern states having become assertive vis-à-vis Washington’s dictates has also to do with the fact that the US is no longer the only global player in the region. Russia and China are already two major players that these states have deep ties with. Beijing, for instance, reportedly invested US$152 billion in the Middle East and North African (MENA) region between 2013 and 2021.

Russia’s sale of advanced missile and air defence systems to countries like Turkey and Iran showcases its willingness to deepen its defence with the region, presenting itself as an alternative to Washington. The availability of alternatives allows Arab states to better position themselves vis-à-vis Washington.

Will this pattern be permanent in the region? This is a key question. The Middle East, as it stands, is unlikely to see any major internal shift in terms of one state singularly dominating the region. Still, the region itself is surely moving towards a system that has multi-alignment as its central feature. It means Arab states are not necessarily becoming anti-US; it means they are diversifying in ways that give them a lot more leverage to manoeuvre and protect their interests. It means they are becoming stronger both regionally and globally.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

November 6, 2024 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

What Does Trump’s Win Mean For the Middle East?

By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 06.11.2024

Donald Trump has won the 2024 presidential election, but what impact will that have on Middle Eastern nations?

“Donald Trump, of course, makes his own policies, but it is also important to see who he surrounds himself with,” Mehran Kamrava, professor of government at Georgetown University Qatar, told Sputnik.

Kamrava defines Trump as “transactional” in contrast to Joe Biden, who is “ideological” and believes in a “particular world order”.

By “transactional”, Kamrava means Trump is first and foremost a pragmatic deal-maker.

“During Donald Trump’s first term, we saw extremely close relations with Saudi Arabia and Israel,” the pundit noted. “Those were the two pillars of America’s policy in the region, and I think we will continue to see that.”

“I think we’re going to see deeper transactional relationships between the Middle East and the United States, deeper economic relationships, particularly in the Persian Gulf,” he added.

Kamrava said Trump had two solutions to Israel’s war in the Gaza Strip. He could either give Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu full support, or call upon Tel Aviv to wind down the conflict in Gaza and in Lebanon “because it’s not good for business.” He believes the newly-elected president will pick the second option.

The professor also expects Trump to take a more cautious approach to Iran compared to his predecessor. During his first term Trump showed “an aversion to war” in the Middle East, he stressed.

“The Biden administration, in fact, did sleepwalk into a war, into escalatory conflict not just in Gaza and a genocide in Gaza, but then in the West Bank, in Lebanon, and of course, in relation to Iran,” Kamrava said.

November 6, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Betting the Farm on the Imaginary War

The Highway of Death, Iraq War, 1991
By William Schryver – imetatronink – November 4, 2024

It has now been ten years since I first turned my attention to the necessity of prudent financial investments in order to both preserve and hopefully enlarge the modest amount of wealth I had accumulated up to that time. I began by attempting to identify the wisest and most discerning “experts” in the field. This was no easy trick.

Fortunately, in the ten years preceding my late-2014 awakening to the importance of financial and macroeconomic matters, I had spent several years discovering that most of western academia is a sham dominated by highly credentialled ignoramuses. Therefore I was alerted to the likelihood that the so-called “experts” in other fields of study were similarly intellectually impaired, regardless of their seemingly impressive curricula vitae, how many framed certificates hung on their wall, and the size of their “assets under management”.

That said, it became apparent over time that even those I initially identified as reliable “experts” could be well-informed most of the time, and yet still be subject to blind spots that rendered them susceptible to fatal errors which could often nullify their seemingly correct judgment of everything else.

In the context of financial matters, it must be understood that the “Quantitative Easing” and near-zero interest rates that followed on the heels of the so-called “Great Financial Crisis” of 2007-2009 was a tide that floated a great many boats captained by fools whose folly would not be recognized until the consequences of central bank profligacy were revealed several years further down the road.

Even so, most of the investment “gurus” whose analysis I had come to respect managed to successfully navigate the hurricane of price inflation that roared ashore in the wake of the Covid hysteria – a storm that was then followed by the Federal Reserve’s subsequent raising of interest rates in a frantic attempt to stem the inflationary tide.

Then World War Three began.

Of course, even at this point, almost three years into that war, few people recognize it for what it is. Even fewer recognize the degree to which the geopolitical and military parameters of war itself have been radically altered in comparison to what they were during the “American Unipolar Interregnum” that commenced with the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Indeed, the overwhelming majority of Americans believe the “unipolar moment” continues essentially intact and unthreatened. In the highly insulated environs of Wall Street and Silicon Valley, faith in the overwhelming supremacy of American high-tech and military prowess remains almost entirely unshaken, notwithstanding the ever-increasing indications to the contrary – things about which I have been writing for several years now.

Most of the gods of American high-tech and finance, and those who worship them, simply cannot discern the degree to which American power in all its forms has steadily eroded over the course of the 21st century, and that this erosion has accelerated dramatically in recent years.

For most of the western elite and their acolytes, it is still early 1991, and Norman Schwarzkopf is leading a million-man army against the hapless Iraqis in a demonstration of military might that would finally expunge the bitter humiliation of Vietnam from the American psyche.

Such people have religiously embraced the Hollywood fantasies of unassailable American superpower dominance. And given the reality that Ukraine and Israel are considered merely appendages of this assumed American military supremacy, the eastern European and Levantine theaters of World War Three have given rise to extreme examples of an unprecedented tsunami of propaganda I have been wont to call “The Imaginary War”.

This phrase I coined in the early stages of the war in Ukraine has its origins in something allegedly said by an unnamed Israeli general in the aftermath of the 2006 war in southern Lebanon – a war whose ultimate outcome was a decisive strategic defeat for Israel, but which the Israelis subsequently attempted to spin into a great victory. It was in this context that the Israeli general reportedly said, “If you can’t win a real war, win an imaginary one.”

This is precisely the narrative-building approach we have seen in Ukraine over the past two-plus years.

Most Americans, and most people around the world who believe in mainstream western narratives, are convinced that the Russians have been dealt an overwhelming strategic defeat in Ukraine; that the Russian military has been exposed as a poorly trained drunken mob; that Russian military doctrine is imbecilic; that Russian equipment is junk; that Russian military technology is decades behind its western counterparts; that American and other NATO war toys sent to Ukraine have dominated the battlefield, etc., etc.

The same types of things are believed about China, its culture, and its military capabilities.

And, of course, even greater derision is directed towards the Iranians and the North Koreans.

Just today I read a short article from a fairly prominent Wall Street hedge fund CIO, in which he wrote the following paragraph of utterly fictitious (and yet widely believed) nonsense:

Israel sent 100 aircraft for a 2000km flight to attack Tehran. Zero were shot down. First, the IDF took out Iran’s air defenses. Those Russian S-300 anti-aircraft systems can now be found disassembled in large craters through the region (Russia’s newer S-400 system underperformed expectations in Ukraine and the S-500 is in test phase). With Iran’s air defenses offline, Israeli aircraft had their way with whatever targets they chose in Tehran. They skipped over the mullahs this time. Next time who knows. Such is the nature of warfare for those with superior tech.

Never mind that literally ALL of his assertions are demonstrably false – this would-be titan of American finance intends to bet the farm on the fallacious assumptions of the imaginary wars he has convinced himself are actually taking place.

Of course, both the major party candidates for President, almost the entirety of the United States Congress, and much of the sprawling swamp of American government bureaucracy in Washington are similarly convinced of the indomitability of American imperial military might, and they are anxious to teach the current “axis of evil” in Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran a lesson they will not soon forget.

In the end – and it will come sooner than later – the only thing that will not be soon forgotten is how briefly the American unipolar moment endured, and how shockingly and suddenly it all came crashing down.

November 4, 2024 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , , | 1 Comment

Iran slams US deployment of B-52 bombers as ‘destabilizing’

Al Mayadeen | November 4, 2024

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei criticized the United States on Monday, describing its presence in the region as “destabilizing” following its deployment of B-52 bombers in the Middle East.

At a news conference, Baghaei responded to questions about the military buildup, stating, “We have always believed that the presence of America in the region is a destabilizing presence,” adding, however, that this “will not deter (Iran’s) resolve to defend itself.”

The US military announced on Saturday the deployment of B-52 bombers to the Middle East as a warning to Iran, which has pledged to respond to the Israeli aggression that targeted several of its military sites on October 26.

The Pentagon stated that these deployments would occur in the coming months and highlighted the “flexibility of the US military movements around the world.”

“Should Iran, its partners, or its proxies choose to target American personnel or interests in the region during this time, the United States will take every measure necessary to defend our people,” Pentagon spokesperson Air Force Major General Patrick Ryder said in a statement.

Four Iranian soldiers were martyred during the latest assault on Iran, and officials reported limited damage to several radar systems.

Baghaei said that Iran’s retaliation would be “definite and decisive.” He also reaffirmed that Iran supports “all initiatives and efforts” to promote a ceasefire in Gaza and Lebanon, where “Israel” persists with its aggression.

During the news conference, Baghaei reaffirmed that Iran’s official stance against altering its nuclear doctrine and pursuing atomic weapons remains unchanged.

Quoting a recent speech by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Sayyed Ali Khamenei, the Iranian diplomat emphasized that the Islamic Republic would be “equipped with everything necessary to defend” itself.

US, ‘Israel’ will bear the consequences 

On Saturday, Sayyed Khamenei warned that the United States and the Israeli occupation will bear the consequences of their atrocities.

Speaking on National Day of the Fight against Global Arrogance, which commemorates the anniversary of the US embassy takeover by Iranian students on November 4, 1979, Sayyed Khamenei warned of the crushing response Iran would deliver in retaliation to the crimes carried out against the Islamic Republic and the Resistance.

Sayyed Khamenei stressed that Iran’s operations were not “revenge”, but rather “a logical action, an approach aligned with religion, ethics, and Islamic Law, in accordance with international regulations,” confirming that Iranian officials are constantly developing their political and military readiness to confront any hostility.

Elsewhere, he made it clear that Iran will not leave any aggression unanswered.

November 4, 2024 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »