Can America Really Rethink Its Approach to the Middle East?

As the P5+1 starts its negotiations with Iran on a comprehensive nuclear deal and President Obama heads to Saudi Arabia next month, there is more than the usual amount of speculation among Western (and other) pundits about the long-term trajectory of American grand strategy in the Middle East and Persian Gulf.  We have argued for years—in our book, Going to Tehran, and in many other publications and media appearances—that America’s longstanding drive for Middle Eastern hegemony is not just quixotic; it is counter-productive.  Pursuing hegemony has actually made the United States weaker, in the Middle East and globally.  Consequently, the United States needs to abandon its destructive quest for hegemony (destructive for large numbers of Middle Easterners as well as for American interests) and realign its relations with important regional powers—most notably the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Of course, the drivers of Washington’s hegemonic ambitions in the Middle East have deep roots in America’s political culture and in the discourse of its foreign policy elites.  But reality is asserting its presence in Americans’ collective political consciousness with ever greater resolution.  In particular, President Obama’s self-inflicted debacle following his declaration of intent to attack Syria after chemical weapons were used there in August 2013 underscored for the whole world (including the American public) that, following strategically failed interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, the United States can no longer credibly threaten the effective use of force in the Middle East.

In the wake of the Syria debacle—the effects of which have only intensified as the Syrian government grows stronger, the opposition grows ever more fragmented, and the rising prominence of al-Qa’ida-like jihadi fighters in opposition ranks becomes undeniable—could America’s foreign policy establishment actually begin to rethink the U.S. approach to the Middle East and Persian Gulf?  To open what we hope will be an ongoing conversation about this question, we want to highlight both an exceptionally interesting piece of analysis and a recent authoritative policy statement.

Earlier this month, Alastair Crooke, our colleague at the Conflicts Forum published a truly provocative (in the best sense of the word) piece in Al-Akhbar, “The Obama Doctrine and a New Equilibrium,” see here and here, about what’s really at stake in America’s evolving foreign policy debate.  We append the text below:

The Obama Doctrine and a New Equilibrium

Alastair Crooke

In David Remnick’s recent interview with President Obama in the New Yorker, Remnick quotes Ben Rhodes, Obama’s deputy national-security adviser for strategic communications, saying that Obama’s “long game” on foreign policy calls for traditional categories of American power and ideology to be reordered—insisting that Washington simply had become “trapped in very stale narratives.”

Rhodes is not specific about what those ‘narratives’ are, nor does he analyse how they came about; but he adds this:  “In the foreign-policy establishment, to be an idealist you have to be for military intervention.”  He continues:  “In the Democratic Party, these debates were defined in the nineties, and the idealists lined up for military intervention.  For the President, Iraq was the defining issue, and now Syria is viewed through that lens, as was Libya—to be an idealist, you have to be a military interventionist.  We spent a trillion dollars in Iraq and had troops there for a decade, and you can’t say it wielded positive influence.  Just the opposite.  We can’t seem to get out of these boxes.”

In short, Rhodes suggests that to be an idealist now has somehow become identified with having to support “humanitarian” military interventionism.  This conflation, he suggests, lies at the core of President Obama’s foreign policy dilemma:  Obama simply does not believe that military intervention is some sort of ‘joystick’ that allows an American President to pull the lever in this direction, or in that, to achieve precisely the outcome which the US desires.  Remnick quotes others who say that Obama sees change more as something organic—the result of invisible long-term dynamics, working to their own pattern and timetable, within society (which he calls “currents”)—rather than being something that can be sculpted into a desirable shape through military hammer and chisel.  The best that a (contemporary) President can do is to spot, and then work with any favourable current, hoping that it may take one in a good direction—but always unsure of the final destination.  Rhodes identifies Obama’s ‘bind’ as understanding this ‘limit to power’, whilst living in the American Beltway world where the imperative of humanitarian interventionism has come to define ‘foreign policy’ idealism.

Obama’s second insight is fundamental.  Carefully wrapped in guarded language, Obama suggests that the problem in the Middle East essentially derives from sectarian conflict:  “It would be profoundly in the interest of citizens throughout the region if Sunnis and Shias weren’t intent on killing each other,” he told Remnick.  “And although it would not solve the entire problem … (with an Iranian solution) you could see an equilibrium developing between Sunni, or predominantly Sunni, Gulf states and Iran, in which there’s competition, perhaps suspicion, but not an active or proxy warfare.”  This is key:  if the problem primarily is one of inflamed historic Islamic animosities, military intervention from the Christian West has no place in it; or, is likely only to polarise it further.  The answer (to much of the tension in the Middle East) Obama clearly says, is that “If you can start unwinding some of that [Sunni-Shi’i hostility], that creates a new equilibrium.  And so I think each individual piece of the puzzle is meant to paint a picture in which conflicts and competition still exist in the region but that it is contained; it is expressed in ways that don’t exact such an enormous toll on the countries involved, and that allow us to work with functioning states to prevent extremists from emerging there.”

The ‘box’—mentioned by Rhodes, but left undefined—from which Obama seeks to escape, however, is made explicit in a further Obama comment:  “With respect to Israel, the interests of Israel…are actually very closely aligned with the interests of the Sunni states.”  To this, we (Conflicts Forum) could add that both European, American and most think-tank elites, too, have very much aligned to the interests of Sunni states (and Israel) – and have unconsciously absorbed and uncritically adopted the narrative of Sunni ‘victimhood’ in respect to the Shi’i ‘resurgence’.  As a consequence, there is considerable anger directed at his Iran policy, which Obama implicitly acknowledges.

Of course, many (particularly humanitarian interventionists) will rush to deny Obama’s central observation.  They will say that ‘sectarianism’ is a bogus ploy designed to cover up, and divert from, the true roots of Middle East conflict, which lie with political failure, societal and economic failures.  And there is some truth to this complaint.  The Sunni ‘awakening’ was essentially an anti-system eruption.  It is also true that the ‘Arab system’ and all alternative national ‘models’ (Gulf, Turkish, Muslim Brotherhood, etc.) are widely and deeply deprecated in Middle East societies.  It is also true that the power-plays by the Muslim Brotherhood, and the reactionary, counter-revolutionary interventions to unseat and destroy the MB, have used sectarianism for their own political purposes.  But nonetheless, sectarianism has been inflamed, and the West has played its part in this—in Iraq, where it promoted firstly Shi’i militia to fight Sunnis, and then launched ‘Awakening’ Councils (Sunni militia) who in many cases attacked the Shi’i—as much as have the actors in the region been responsible for sectarian recrudescence.

The animosities kindled by sectarianism however are psychologically very real. Deep vulnerabilities, fears (and prejudice) lie behind them.  The balance between the Shi’i and Sunni has oscillated many times over the centuries.  Once, much of Syria (then including Lebanon), Iraq and Palestine (and Egypt) were Shi’i.  And people remember.

More recently the entire region from Pakistan to Lebanon has been affected by profound, seismic changes during the course of the last three decades.  As Giandomenico Picco has noted, these began in the late 1970s, in the Pakistan-Afghanistan-Iran triangle, when Saudi Arabia entered the war in Afghanistan, and a bitter Sunni-Shi’i struggle ensued (little noticed by the West)—as Iran backed the Northern Alliance against the Saudi supported Taliban.

It was the Khomeini revolution (February 1979) in Iran however, which convinced the Sunni “world” of an epochal change in the making.  There followed the Iraq-Iran war, a conflict instigated in part to halt a Shi’i resurgence; and then came the 2003 invasion of Iraq.  As Picco notes, “Iran welcomed the U.S. war against Saddam Hussein, seeing it as payback for 1534, an important, sad date in the Shiite narrative.  In that year, Suleiman the First (the Ottoman Sultan) conquered Mesopotamia (modern day Iraq) and ‘the land of the two rivers’ came under the control of the Sunni minority.  Iran felt that the West had inadvertently given them a chance to reclaim Baghdad for the Shiites in a contemporary Iraq where the Shi’i were a majority.  Again, the ancient Sunni-Shiite conflict structured events but was little noticed by the West.”  In the wake of the 2006 war, in which Hizbullah successfully halted Israel’s attempt to destroy the movement, Gulf anxieties soared as Hizbullah and Iran were lionised in the Arab street.  And with these heightened anxieties, so too soared the Gulf anti-Shi’i rhetoric of sectarianism, which has so empowered, and on its own terms legitimized, the Sunni extremists.

President Obama surely is right in his insight that a lowering of sectarian tension—though not in itself a sufficient condition to solve all the region’s many problems—nonetheless may be the key to finding a new geopolitical equilibrium.  But the consequences of ‘equilibrating’ between Shi’i and Sunni power will be profound—if he manages to carry them through.  It will resonate well beyond the Middle East; but for Saudi Arabia and Israel, it will require a fundamental ‘re-set’ of their policies, as their grip over American policy-making, becomes loosened.

For much of the 20th century, successive US Presidents have sought to prevent any single country from dominating the centers of strategic power in Europe and Asia.  The Carter doctrine simply refocused this basic principle of foreign policy specifically onto the Middle East, where no power that was not friendly to the US (or Israel) would be entertained, or permitted.

Events in Syria—particularly the Chemical Weapons Accord—have changed this paradigm:  Russia, partly as a consequence of its Syrian and Iranian diplomacy has re-established itself as a Eurasian ‘power.’  An accord with Iran will unleash another Eurasian economic and political power.  Not only is the Carter doctrine being overturned, but the seminal underlying American thinking—‘for the new (American) century’—is by implication being consigned to the category of ‘stale narrative.’  Eurasia is rising (and it rising on a tide of natural and energy resources).

Recall that it was Zbig Brzezinski who earlier had written in his The Grand Chessboard, “Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the centre of world power.”  [Eurasia here means the Middle East and Central Asia]…it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America:  In that context, how America ‘manages’ Eurasia is critical.  A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world’s three most advanced and economically productive regions.  A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa’s subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania (Australia) geopolitically peripheral to the world’s central continent.  About 75 per cent of the world’s people live in Eurasia, and most of the world’s physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil.  Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world’s known energy resources.”

Well, this is what is happening now:  the structures for containing Eurasia are eroding.  Europeans should take good note too.  They must consider their foreign policy. Do they remain with their relationship heavily weighted towards the US and become ‘peripheral’ to the world’s central continent (in Brzezinski’s words), or should they re-orient towards the new centre of power?

Naturally, Obama already is being accused of ‘losing’ the Middle East to Tehran and Moscow.  But the withdrawal of Britain from India and Pakistan was punctuated with similar cries of ‘sell-out’, and grave warnings of how much the Indians would regret the British passing.  But how obvious Britain’s loss of will, and its need to exit, all seems now.  Now it is the West as whole, and not just Britain or America, that is undergoing a new period of introspection as categories of thought erode, and the World Order shifts in new directions.  The cold truth is that which Obama told Netanyahu and the Senators:  the ideal –“the absolutist benchmark” is not available—“it is not achievable.”

The difficulty here is that the ‘narrative’ of striving for the ‘ideal’ has been so deeply rooted into the American psyche—and then grafted onto the European (and western think-tank) psyche too.  More than two years before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, some figures at the US Council for Foreign Relations launched a confidential project which came to be known as the ‘war and peace studies’, with financial support from State Department.  They foresaw—even then—that the outcome of the expected war in Europe would leave America in a dominant position, economically and politically.  They also warned against America repeating the mistake of the British, by pronouncing an American ‘empire’ (though that is what effectively they were advocating).  Instead of imperialism, America should espouse a narrative of ‘ideals.’  Its ‘Empire’ should be founded not just in military might, but also in a ‘narrative’ of progress, democracy and liberty.  The task, these policy-formulators believed, was how to use America’s unrivaled military, economic, and political power to fashion an international environment conducive to its interests—wrapped in the narrative of progress, democracy and liberty:  In short, a foreign policy pursued in the cause of utopia.

But as one philosopher noted more than two thousand years ago, the ‘hero’ of virtue and the pursuer of a mission civilisatrice ultimately becomes emired in its own ambiguities. Why?  Because, as the CFR researchers were advocating, America had set itself the aim of achieving ‘doing good’ as an object.  Once America came to see ‘the good’ as some ‘thing’ to be attained, it becomes involved in a division from which there is no escape:  between the present in which America is not yet in possession of what it seeks; and the future, in which Americans believe they will get what they desire—a future made present by their efforts to eliminate evil.

From the moment that the ‘idealists’ set their values as objects to be attained, these values lead to delusion and alienation:  Since the more one concentrates on the means to attain ‘progress, democracy and liberty,’ and the more it becomes an abstract, treated as something to be attained by special military techniques (special forces, drones, etc.—remember Samantha Power, the former self-proclaimed “genocide chick”, “promoting democracy whenever and wherever … at the point of a cruise missile if necessary”), the less ‘real’ it becomes.  As it becomes less real, it recedes further into the distance of abstraction, futurity, unattainability.  In short, the more one concentrates on the means to one’s mission, the more the means become elaborate and complex, until finally the mere concentration on shaping the world becomes so demanding that all effort must be concentrated on this—and the end loses its true meaning.  The conclusion of this early thinker was that ‘the good” which is preached and exacted by the moralist and idealist, finally—and paradoxically—may become an evil.

It seems from David Remnick’s account that President Obama intuitively grasps this, and is seeking to orient America away from this pursuit of a mission civilisatrice, in favour of a more limited goal of creating the ‘space’ for positive currents to grow in their own way.  The ‘idealists’—the humanitarian interventionists—(and of course the neo-conservatives) may never forgive him—they will conclude that he is giving way to the ‘evil’ they believe stands in the way of having something (the mission achieved), which one does not have, and which one must constantly be pursuing until, in effect, it becomes unattainable.

We are not sure whether President Obama is really seeking to orient American grand strategy in the greater Middle East and Eurasia toward “creating the ‘space’ for positive current to grow in their own way”—but Alastair’s piece offers a brilliant assessment of what that task entails and how politically and culturally challenging it is for Washington to carry out.

As a public indicator of how the Obama administration’s foreign policy thinking might be evolving, we also want to highlight an important address earlier this week at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington by Deputy Secretary of State William Burns.  For a video and a transcript of the address, “A Renewed Agenda for U.S.-Gulf Partnership,” see here.

–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett


475 Responses to “Can America Really Rethink Its Approach to the Middle East?”

  1. Karl.. says:

    Obama have no balls changing the policies. Problem is Israel and not the gulf states, thats whats drives Obama. Just watch the peace process, its all about what israel wants and therefore = no peace.

  2. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Obama may escalate role in Syrian war


    But senior intelligence officials late last month opened a new path for Obama to increase U.S. involvement in a way that wouldn’t require congressional authorization, could minimize a public backlash and might give Syria’s moderates some breathing room.

    How? By telling Congress that Syria increasingly serves as a base, not just a battleground, for extremist groups looking to someday attack the United States.

    End Quote

    Told you that this crap would end up being the justification for military intervention in Syria…Obama has run out of other excuses – his big “chemical weapons” ploy was shot down by Russia and Syria.

    But it’s all BS. There is no way ANY strikes on Muslims in Syria are going to help the so-called “moderates” (if there are any). And how is Obama going to justify air strikes on insurgents and at the same time drive for Assad to be replaced. In reality, Obama couldn’t care less about replacing Assad – that was just for public consumption and the Saudis. The REAL goal remains damaging Syria’s military enough to enable Israel to attack Hizballah in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon via Syrian territory, in preparation for an Iran war.

    It doesn’t matter what Obama SAYS – all that matters is that the US end up attacking Syria somehow, someway, directly, enough to cripple Syria’s military ability to threaten Israel. That was the goal from Day One of the Syria crisis – and it remains the goal.

  3. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Another reminder of why the US goes to war…

    ‘Windfalls of war’: Companies with spotty records making billions off Afghanistan

  4. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Unfortunately and unusually, this article completely fails the mark.

    Not “brilliant” at all.

    The whole alleged “Sunni-Shia” thing is totally wrong and a lazy repetition of what the old farts in Saudi and other similar states say when they meet westerners.

    The issue is the conflict between a tribal, feudal, monarchical political culture and a republican, mass-mobilized, democratic political culture.

    That’s it. Got it?

    The problem is that the value America’s currency is at the mercy of the tribal, feudal, monarchical bunch.

    US administrations-none of them- can’t ever ditch the bedouins because of this.

    “Space” and “currents” and all the rest is all certified b.s., in my humble opinion.

    And I swear I didn’t plan this:

    Prince Charles in Riyadh a few days ago, doing the freakin Saudi sword dance in full Saudi gear…khak tu saresh

  5. nico says:

    Great article absolutely in line with my previous posts here.
    The westerners are dominated by the US. And the US are after world dominance.
    The US policies after cold war have been neo colonialism by mean of boots and bullets.
    No more no less.
    The so called power competiton in the article (the so called sunni shia devide) reminiscent of Canning story telling is obvious diplomatic BS to cover more sinister western goals.
    Sure the devide may exist.
    Actually is that shia sunni devide western business anyway ?
    That is pure foreign meddling in foreign affairs by the US.
    Should the ongoing shia sunni struggle proceed to its outcome naturally and without foreign intervention and meddling there will be no such fire ingnited every day and so much blood spilled across the ME.

    But no.
    The US like the britons before them are just trying to keep there unnatural, immoral and devious power balance in the ME with all tricks and sticks at their disposal until they are kicked out.

    Sure the US was the only world super power after the cold war.
    Though that was not enough.
    They wanted to be the bloody and criminal unilateral super power…

    But to not avail.
    The power balance is shifting toward east and the west is totally discredited after 20 years of utter dismal moral and foreign political failure.

    But there is no problem for the exceptionalists of the great US “democracy”.
    Who has been held politacally accountable for such failure ?
    Is anyone criticizing them in the MSM in such a speech free country ?
    Sure not.
    There is only one political party with 2 names.
    And plutocrat controllee MSM.
    Ahaha ridiculous.

  6. nico says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:

    “Unfortunately and unusually, this article completely fails the mark.”

    As I stated previously the sunni shia exists.
    However it is used by the stinky sheiks and immoral anglo to cover up their more sinister goals.

    The democratic devide between PG countries is another type of analysis.
    It obviously exists as well and is morally more important.

    The issue with diplomatic lies and sophistic approach a la Canning is that they live of lies and satanic inversion of value as well as double standard (remember the satanic reversed christic cross ?) Which lies and sophistry is of course in line whith their greedy, racist ane tribalist, power hungry and sinister goals.

  7. nico says:

    Another “funny” diplomatic statement in the article is Obama following and pushing “current”
    Sure when there is no democracy and that decision making is not dependent on citizen voting for political clear cut alternative you have to follow “current”…
    Sure their is no choice in the US only one polital party with 2 names.
    And one need then to follow nebulous “current”
    Surely the “current” is not much what the citizen ks thinking.
    Great democracy indeed.

    Enough “yelling fire” M. Bacon ?
    Tell us rather what is YOUR opinion about the GREAT US “democracy”

  8. James Canning says:

    I think it quite wrong to say it was a “self-inflicted debacle”, for Obama not to have attacked Syria with cruise missiles after the Aug. 21st CW event. In fact, it was a good thing for the US.

  9. Karl.. says:

    February 21, 2014 at 3:05 pm

    Just wait until netanyahu comes to the US in march, then the threats against IRan and Syria will get more intense.

  10. James Canning says:

    Provided Iran makes a deal with the P5+1, I think Iran can enjoy improved relations with the EU and the US. Even if this is anathema to Aipac, ADL, and other extremist groups in the US.

  11. nico says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    “Unfortunately and unusually, this article completely fails the mark.”

    You are too harsh.
    The article is not that bad.
    The issue is that in the great US “democracy” you need to cover up your speeches with politicqlly correct statements in order to be heard and be treated a “serious” thinker.
    Say such sunni shia BS is the kind of green card needed to assert a position not in line with the regime.
    Otherwise he would called a useless idealist good enough only to roam blog like this one…
    Though I am sure somewhere the Leveretts qnd Crooke are idealists. (Maybe a little at least)
    They just only cannot show it that much.

  12. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    “I think it quite wrong to say it was a “self-inflicted debacle”, for Obama not to have attacked Syria with cruise missiles after the Aug. 21st CW event. In fact, it was a good thing for the US.”

    Sure it was a geopolitical debacle.
    One that was needed by Obama as a leverage to use against hardliners in the US regime.

  13. Aletho says:

    US M.E. policy is only explained by the understanding that the “drivers” are wealthy powerful Jewish Zionists.

    In this light it all makes sense. The destruction of Iraq, Libya and Syria. The insistence of a perpetual presence of US air bases in Afghanistan to menace Iran. The imposition on Western corporations to sacrifice commerce with Iran.

    It’s all about Israel, and only about Israel. No American goals ave been sought much less achieved despite trillions of dollars dedicated, many tens of thousands of US casualties and untold war crimes committed.

    The most difficult challenge is ending the Zionist occupation of the US, then peace and justice may fall in place readily.

  14. kooshy says:

    I am sorry but BIB is right whoever wrote this article didn’t have clue or don’t understand the history of Shieh and Sunni differences in the region specially in Iraq.

    Iran and Iraq war was not about halting Shieh’s non existing intention to convert Sunnis, but rather it conveniently used this historic difference between the two sects to halt advancement of political Islam spreading further than Iran’s borders

  15. James Canning says:


    I think Obama was very glad he was not forced to hit Syria with hundreds of cruise missiles. Much the same opinion was voiced by David Gardner in the Financial Times Feb. 21st.

  16. Don Bacon says:

    I completely reject the idea that Obama has meaningful thoughts on anything. There has never been any evidence to indicate otherwise.

    So why waste time parsing his words and guessing about his intuitions.

    As far as US policy goes, it has been to exacerbate the hitherto mild Islamic differences with its imperialism, and then wrongfully blame the results on sectarianism.

    And also don’t waste time on Alastair Crooke.

  17. Richard Steven Hack says:

    US Adopts Israeli Demand to Bring Iran’s Missiles Into Nuclear Talks

    Once again Obama appears determined to sabotage any deal with Iran – at Israel’s order.

    Forget what Obama SAYS – see what he DOES.

  18. hans says:

    Just wait until netanyahu comes to the US in march

    Is he coming before or after Jewish Purim,some dangerous times ahead, i think the resistance is fully aware that a sneak attack might just happen. Time to kick your foreign minister from his post. I have said and repeat this loose cannon will not last till the end of year, now that the honeymoon with this government is finished.

  19. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 21, 2014 at 7:23 pm

    It was, that is why almost every Arab Sunni state supported Iraq and only the non-Sunni states supported Iran – with Libya being in the middle.

    It is Sunni Islam that is producing suicide bombers, illegal combatants etc.

    This goes way back; there were 4000 Hafiz-al Quran among the armies that faced Imam Ali.

    They were then and remain now truly Khwarej.

  20. fyi says:


    My mistake; meant to address Mr. Kooshy:

    kooshy says:

    February 21, 2014 at 6:21 pm

    It was, that is why almost every Arab Sunni state supported Iraq and only the non-Sunni states supported Iran – with Libya being in the middle.

    It is Sunni Islam that is producing suicide bombers, illegal combatants etc.

    This goes way back; there were 4000 Hafiz-al Quran among the armies that faced Imam Ali.

    They were then and remain now truly Khwarej.

    As these wars continue, the religious component will become more predominant as newer formulations are stripped of their content.

    The Mad King has beenplaying at religious war also in Ukraine – let us see what happens there; destruction is all that the Mad King offers.

    Significantly, in Ukraine, the German Baron, the French Baron, and the Polish Baron have broken with the Mad King and are trying to dampen the conflict by working with Russia.

    The Mad King has brought Civil War to the door-steps of Russia – I cannot credit that action to a sane policy.

  21. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 21, 2014 at 7:23 pm

    The man cannot think in terms of actions and consequences; it seems to be clear.

  22. Kathleen says:

    This week (I think it was Wed morning) MSNBC’s Morning Joe host Mika Bryzinski and Joe Scarborough were banging on the go get Iran drums. Questioning direct negotiations and Iran’s intentions.

    Another crack in the wall.

    144 Irish educators pledge boycott– as Karmi says, We gave up waiting on governments for help

    Yesterday Academics for Palestine launched in Dublin with the announcement that scores of educators would boycott Israeli institutions– “just as they did with apartheid South Africa,” in the words of Conor McCarthy. It issued the statement below, and posted the press conference, above, which begins with the reading of congratulations from Omar Barghouti and Ilan Pappe and includes statements by the Palestinian author Ghada Karmi and Israeli filmmaker Haim Bresheeth.

  23. James Canning says:


    Obama was concerned that if he failed to hit Syria with a few hundred cruise missiles, after the Aug. 21 CW event, Iran might think he was not serious about ensuring Iran will not build nukes. Clearly, Obama was concerned about consequences of action (or non-action).

  24. James Canning says:

    The Financial Times today has a strong leader calling upon the US to end its foolish embargo against Cuba.

  25. fyi says:


    The late Mr. Khomeini on sanctions:

    منطق حضرت امام(ره) است. ایشان 26 بهمن 1359 در دیدار کفیل و مدیران وزارت نفت می‌فرمایند «من اعتقادم است که اگر ما در محاصره اقتصادی یک ده پانزده سال واقع بشویم، شخصیت خودمان را پیدا می‌کنیم یعنی همه مغزهایی که راکد بودند در آن وقت و نمی‌توانستند فعالیت بکنند، به فعالیت می‌افتند. این طبیعی است که اگر یک نفر آدم یک جایی نشسته و همه چیز او را می‌آورند تقدیمش می‌کنند، این فکرش به کار نمی‌افتد، حتی کاسب هم نمی‌تواند بشود. اگر یک آدمی بود که اول صبح چایش را و نانش را بیاورند، ظهر هم همین‌طور، شب هم همین‌طور، هر احتیاجی هم داشت برآورده کردند، این نمی‌تواند دیگر هیچ کاری بکند، یک مرد فلجی می‌شود… آن روزی که این ملت فهمیدکه اگر ما جدیت نکنیم برای کشاورزی‌مان، جدیت نکنیم برای صنعت نفتمان، جدیت نکنیم برای کارخانه‌های خودمان، از بین خواهیم رفت و کسی نیست که به ما بدهد، وقتی این احساس پیدا شد در یک ملتی که من خودم باید هر چیز می‌خواهم تهیه کنم، دیگران به من نمی‌دهند، این احساس اگر پیدا شد، مغزها به راه می‌افتد و متخصص پیدا می‌شود در هر رشته‌ای… این ابتکارات از برکات محاصره اقتصادی بود… این محاصره اقتصادی را که خیلی‌ها از آن می‌ترسند، من یک هدیه‌ای می‌دانم برای کشور خودمان، برای اینکه معنایش این است که مایحتاج ما را به ما نمی‌دهند، وقتی که مایحتاج را به ما ندادند، خودمان می‌رویم دنبالش… مغزهای اروپایی با مغزهای ایرانی فرقی ندارند جز این معنا که آنها آن طوری تربیت شدند و خودشان را آن جوری درست کردند و ماها را این طوری تربیت کردند. ما را یک موجود مهملی بار آوردند. خب، تا کی ما باید این را تحمل بکنیم که ما یک موجودات مهملی هستیم و باید از ارباب‌‌ها پیش ما برسد… عمده این است که ما باور کنیم خودمان را».

  26. fyi says:


    Dr. Cordesman on Iran, US etc.

    We read in this document how the creation of a nuclear force will protect Iran from threats from US, Israel, Persian Gulf Arabs etc.

  27. James Canning says:


    If Cordesman thinks the US would allow Iran to build nukes, he is seriously delusional.

  28. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 22, 2014 at 3:52 pm

    At the moment US is busy creating endless crisis wherever she can – in Ukraine, in the Middle East etc.

    EU is supporting all this mischief.

    But Axis Powers have nothing to show for all of the last 20 years: worthless dependencies where Yugoslavia used to be, a Shia Crescent where only an isolated Iran used to be, an open wound in Afghanistan, a weak state in Pakistan, and wounded Turkey, a basket-case in Libya, a fractured Ukraine, and a dysfunctional Egypt.

    And an imploded financial economy.

    And a religious war between Anglo-American Protestantism & Judaism on one side and all of Islam on the other side.

    Let us see how US and EU are going to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons if her leaders determine that the security of Iran an the allied people depends on it.

    As for Dr. Cordesman’s essay – as he makes it quite clear, US and EU have made Iranian security specially precarious. The fact is after 1998, Iran had to be nuclear-armed.

    Axis Powers are threatening Iran with death and destruction; well she faces that since 1998.

    Nothing new there.

    My recommendation to you, again, is that there is Mad King reigning in Washington DC and UK no longer can benefit by being on the right side of the Mad King.

    Just look at Ukraine…

  29. Karl.. says:


    The western hate for russians and their dream for western european empire is going really insane in Ukraine for sure. If they can do this against Ukraine, guess what they will do against Iran.
    Now one only hope this will backlash for EU and the US in one way or another, maybe that the nazis is taking power or that Russia in one way or another be the winner after all.

  30. Karl.. says:


    I fully agree also with the nuke comment, its time for states like Iran to break free from US/western dictations.

  31. James Canning says:


    At a London club recently, the Russian ambassador enjoyed a dinner put on by British leaders fostering good realtions between Britain and Russia. A toast was drunk to Putin.

    I am not aware of many people who “hate” Russia. The notion that this is typical viewpoint is rather foolish.

  32. James Canning says:


    I doubt very much that Obama was hoping to foster a crisis in Ukraine.

  33. James Canning says:


    If Iran makes a deal with P5+1, I think the sanctions will be dropped and economic growth in Iran will be enhanced substantially.

    If Iran fails to make a deal with the P5+1, sanctions will remain in place. And get worse if Iran tries to get closer to building nukes.

  34. James Canning says:


    I repeat: Cordesman is delusional if he thinks the US would allow Iran to build nukes. Full stop.

  35. kooshy says:


    For sure Sunnis and Shiehs have differences and disputes that is not deniable but the Iran Iraq was used on fault lines of Persian vs Arab Shieh vs Sunnie by the west to stop prevent kill in the place advancement of Iranian revolution ideas spreading to Arab western client states or Muslim USSR republics , for similar reason the Syrian conflict was flared up to me more than damaging Iran was to flare up and divert Arab awakening going east to gulf, that is why KSA an Qatar so adamantly are paying for it, Syria was not only to damage Iran and the resistance but was also a preventive fire to divert the flames getting to real values. So it was like you want to divert the attention from all western puppets the best way is to start some sectarian conflicts and where other than Syria since she has the thinnest sectarian fault line any where I the region.

    Western agenda is not foreseeing or wanting a full fledged sectarian war between Shieh and Sunnis that’s far too expensive and costly with uncertain dangerous ending. I believe the western countries are hoping and managing for continued balanced state of instability, disputes that prolongs the regions and educational advancement. Otherwise they do it want A hot war but they do not want or allow peace.

  36. kooshy says:

    They do not want a bot war but they also will not allow peace, see the Geneva peace talks

  37. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 22, 2014 at 6:22 pm

    I think you are not grasping the strategic situation.

    Any strategic understanding between the Shia Crescent and Axis Powers – between US and Iran – after August 21, 2013 – entails, with metaphysical certainty, implicit Iranian nuclearization.

    During 2003-2005 period and before end of 2007, a US – Iran understanding without nuclearization was possible.

    That path was not taken by the Axis Powers, Russia, and China.

    The world changed for Iran and the Shia Crescent on 21 August of 2013 when the US program of regime destruction in Iran was revealed without any ambiguity.

    Any reduction in Iranian nuclear capabilities means the destruction of Iran and the Shia Crescent by US or through proxies.

    That is no longer disputable or debatable.

  38. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    February 22, 2014 at 7:49 pm

    I think the Supreme Jurisprudent is not aggressive enough.

    He should designate those fighting in Syria as Khwarej – which they are – and thus enemies of Islam.

    He also should forbid any succor or support given to them by any Muslim.

  39. nico says:

    Further food for thought about the US regime so called “democracy” and “free speech”.
    I rather call it a oligarchy and vicious and perfidious 1984 like “soft” dictature.
    Truly worst than a old style dictature because of the usefull idiots still believing in and supporting the System inderectly through their belief of one exceptionalism and other disgusting rationalization.

    No need to say who here I am pointing to…


    Most interesting quotes :

    “”True facts were easily available to anyone paying attention in the years after 2001, but most Americans do not bother and simply draw their understanding of the world from what they are told by the major media, which overwhelmingly—almost uniformly—backed the case for war with Iraq; the talking heads on TV created our reality. Prominent journalists across the liberal and conservative spectrum eagerly published the most ridiculous lies and distortions passed on to them by anonymous sources, and stampeded Congress down the path to war.

    “The result was what my late friend Lt. Gen. Bill Odom rightly called the “greatest strategic disaster in United States history.” American forces suffered tens of thousands of needless deaths and injuries, while our country took a huge step toward national bankruptcy [and a police state]. Economics Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz and others have estimated that with interest the total long-term cost of our two recent wars may reach as high as $5 or $6 trillion, or as much as $50,000 per American household, mostly still unpaid. Meanwhile, economist Edward Wolff has calculated that the Great Recession and its aftermath cut the personal net worth of the median American household to $57,000 in 2010 from a figure nearly twice as high three years earlier. Comparing these assets and liabilities, we see that the American middle class now hovers on the brink of insolvency, with the cost of our foreign wars being a leading cause.

    “But no one involved in the debacle ultimately suffered any serious consequences, and most of the same prominent politicians and highly paid media figures who were responsible remain just as prominent and highly paid today. For most Americans, reality is whatever our media organs tell us, and since these have largely ignored the facts and adverse consequences of our wars in recent years, the American people have similarly forgotten. Recent polls show that only half the public today believes that the Iraq War was a mistake.”

    Unz covers a number of cases of criminality, treason, and coverups at high levels of government and points out that “these dramatic, well-documented accounts have been ignored by our national media.” One reason for “this wall of uninterest” is that both parties are complicit and thus equally eager to bury the facts.

    Unz is raising the question of the efficacy of democracy. Does the way democracy works in America provide any more self-rule than in undemocratic regimes?

    He offers this example:“Most of the Americans who elected Barack Obama in 2008 intended their vote as a total repudiation of the policies and personnel of the preceding George W. Bush administration. Yet once in office, Obama’s crucial selections—Robert Gates at Defense, Timothy Geither at Treasury, and Ben Bernake at the Federal Reserve—were all top Bush officials, and they seamlessly continued the unpopular financial bailouts and foreign wars begun by his predecessor, producing what amounted to a third Bush term.”

    In an article not long ago, I raised the issue whether Americans live in The Matrix with their perceptions and thoughts controlled by disinformation as in George Orwell’s 1984.

    Unz adds to this perspective. He tells the story of Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky’s plan to transform Russia into a make-believe two-party state complete with heated battles fought on divisive and symbolic issues. Behind the scenes the political elites would orchestrate the political battles between the parties with the purpose of keeping the population divided and funneling popular dissatisfaction into meaningless dead-end issues. In such a system, self-serving power prevails. After describing Berezovsky’s plot, Unz asks if Berezovsky got his idea from observing the American political scene.

    Thinking further about the propagandistic nature of the US media, Unz writes:
    “Individuals from less trusting societies are often surprised at the extent to which so many educated Americans tend to believe whatever the media tells them and ignore whatever it does not, placing few constraints on even the most ridiculous propaganda. For example, a commentator on my article described the East German media propaganda he had experienced prior to Reunification as being in many respects more factual and less totally ridiculous than what he now saw on American cable news shows. One obvious difference was that Western media was so globally dominant during that era that the inhabitants of the German Democratic Republic inevitably had reasonable access to a contrasting second source of information, forcing their media to be much more cautious in its dishonesty, while today almost any nonsense uniformly supported by the MSNBC-to-FoxNews spectrum of acceptable opinion remains almost totally unquestioned by most Americans.”

    Unz’s view of the US media as propagandists for power is consistent with that of John Pilger, one of the last remaining real journalists who refuses to serve power, and with Gerald Celente, who sums up the sordid American media in one word–”presstitutes.” I know from my own media experience that an independent print and TV media no longer exists in the West. The American media is a tightly controlled disinformation ministry.

    Those few Americans who are free of the constraints imposed by dogmas on their ability to think and to process information have a huge responsibility for their small number. The assault on the rule of law began in the last years of the Clinton regime, but the real destruction of the US Constitution, the basis for the United States, was achieved by the neoconservative George W. Bush and Obama regimes. Wars without declarations by Congress, torture in violation of both US and international law, war crimes in violation of the Nuremberg standard, indefinite detention and assassination of US citizens without due process of law, universal spying on US citizens without warrants, federalization of state and local police now armed with military weapons and uniforms, detention centers, “your papers, please” (without the Gestapo “please”) not only at airports but also on highways, streets, bus terminals, train stations, and at sporting events.On May 5 Obama gave the commencement address at Ohio State University. No doubt that the graduates thought that they were being honored by being addressed by the world’s greatest tyrant.Obama told the graduating class, to applause, that their obligation as citizens is to trust the government. Outdoing George Orwell’s Big Brother, Obama said in public to a graduating class of a great university without shame: “You have grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as . . . some sinister entity that’s at the root of all our problems; some of these same voices also doing their best to gum up the works. They’ll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices.”Listen to my propaganda, not to those constitutional experts, legal authorities, and critics of me, the First Black President, who tell you to beware of unaccountable government. Due process is decided by the demands of the war on terror. If there is a war on terror, do you want a fair trial or do you want to be safe? I am going to make you safe by not giving defendants accused of terrorism, who some liberal-pinko-commie judge would set free, a fair trial.Making you safe by enveloping you in a police state is a nonpartisan undertaking. Just listen to Lindsay Graham and Peter King and John McCain. These Republican leaders are demanding the police state that I am providing.

    As my own legal department, The US Department Of Justice, decided, the Dictator, I mean, elected president, has the power to save the country from domestic and foreign terrorists by abrogating the US Constitution, an out-of-date document that binds our hands and prevents us from keeping you, our serfs and minions, I mean our cherished citizens, safe.Trust me. That is your obligation as a US citizen. Trust me and I will make you free, happy, employed sometime later in this century when the Amerikan Empire controls the world.The US Constitution was written by people who opposed Empire. These people were misguided, just like the Roman Republicans who did not understand the need for a Caesar. The American Empire, as the neoconservatives have made clear, is what keeps you free from terrorism. We have to kill them over there before they come over here. And those who are over here will be killed too. We tolerate no dissent. That part of the Constitution is gone, along with the rest of it.

    Now give me my honorary doctorate, another sign of approval of my usurpation.”

  40. nico says:

    As M. Roberts highighlits in his article.
    The sorry US state of affairs is not only a Dubbya making.
    It is a US regime issue that started under Clinton era the end of the cold war and that is still continuing.

    As I stated many times here, my own opinion is that the Clinton presidential terms were the worst.
    Actually he is the one who originally put the US political “rocket” on its degenerate trajectory.
    Truly disgusting policies and high treason from the Clinton administration.
    All corrupted financial and media laws were vetted under his administration.
    Clinton was a true failure, and his Irak “worth it” policy was the clear opening for the Dubbya era wars.
    And the Obama is the continuation of the same.
    Under the so called Alatair Crooke “current”… ahah.

  41. Fiorangela says:

    “Whether the elephants fight or the elephants make love, the grass suffers.”

    Whether a nation is sanctioned (Iran) or subjected to disaster capitalism (Turkey), the nation suffers.

    “It is clear that many ‘Emerging Markets’ are suffering from a withdrawal of the short-term funds that were parked with them as a result of the unprecedented monetary expansion being pursued principally by the US, Japan and China. Now, (following the US Fed’s ‘taper’) ‘hot money’ is being brought home – and EM currencies everywhere are falling. But the drop in the value of its currency has been particularly evident in Turkey (10% versus the US dollar over the last year) which has brought a ‘shock and awe’-type response by the Turkish Central Bank of a rise in interest rates from 7.75% to 12.5% — a rise sufficient possibly to ‘pop’ the Turkish ‘miracle’ and indeed the ‘Turkish (Muslim Brotherhood) model’.

    The Turkish Central Bank had good reason to press the alarm button. Turkey has been highly dependent on this foreign ‘hot money’ to cover its burgeoning current account deficit, totaling $60.8 billion, or roughly 7% of gross domestic product (for the period January to November 2013). To lose this short-term portfolio is not just debilitating; it is potential potentially fatal – both economically, as well as to Erdogan’s political fortunes.

    As one economic commentator has noted, “Turkey cannot fund its enormous current borrowing needs without offering interest rates so high that they will pop the construction-and-consumer bubble that masqueraded for a Turkish economic miracle during the past few years”
    – See more at:

  42. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    February 23, 2014 at 8:31 am

    A few months ago the mayor of Tehran, Mr. Qalibaf, observed that “We have been a developing country for 50 years.”

    Which could equally well be applied to Turkey or to Pakistan.

    In spite of the repeated attempts at regional economic integration for as many decades, these states in the Near East are still dependent on the flow of capital, capital goods, machinery, chemicals, ideas, processes from the Axis Powers and lately China, Japan, and Korea.

    That is, they cannot satisfy one another’s needs in manufactured and industrial goods.

    Which basically means that they cannot one the path they have been for the past 50 years.

    Without industrialization that obviates the need for much of the currently imported goods, these states – Iran included – will become like Ethiopia:

  43. James Canning says:


    The Clinton administrations achieved about a one-third reduction in spending on “Defence”, by the US. Full points for that. GW Bush’s ensuing stupidity threw that gain into thee rubbish bin.

  44. James Canning says:


    I think you are seriously off-base, in thinking the events folowing Aug. 21 CW event in Syria, were a bad thing for Iran.

    Iran surely was glad Obama saw a way to avoid attacking Syria with hundreds of cruise missiles.

    Iran can have a limited domestic nuclear power programme, and TRR. Or, if it insists, no programme.

  45. James Canning says:


    Col. Gaddafi used to say that one of the biggest threats to the EU was unchecked immigration from Africa. He of course was quite right.

    The EU needs stability and economic growth in Africa, including the Muslim countries.

    One infant in ten, in Britain today, has Muslim parents.

  46. James Canning says:


    It was a bad thing for Iran that a moron occupied the White House in 2003-05.

  47. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    February 23, 2014 at 1:16 pm

    Strong technical and industrial self-sufficiency is critical to Iran’s successful path to independence. Regional actors are unreliable partners – Iran must lead if she is to be successful.

  48. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    February 23, 2014 at 1:23 pm

    Your “take it or leave it” view on Iran’s domestic nuclear program is simplistic. Perhaps colored by a sense of mastery!?

  49. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    February 23, 2014 at 1:46 pm

    There are multiple overlapping obstacles; one of which is the absence of robust capital markets in all of these countries.

    No one trusts the state not to pursue damaging policies to the investors; no one can invest without fear in an industrial enterprise when an ad-hoc state council sets the prices regardless of the cost structure of the supply chain – a really really bad form of the socialism.

  50. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    February 23, 2014 at 1:49 pm

    In fact, Axis Powers now publicly acknowledge – through such people as Dr. Seamore – that they cannot eliminate Iranian nuclear capabilities.

    Their policy is now to create a diplomatic track which buys time. The chief purpose of the diplomatic track – just like the one over Palestine – is to maintain the appearance of progress while doing nothing to solve the core issues.

    These nuclear talks will continue until everyone loses interest in them – just like the one that the Americans and later the Quartet orchestrated over the war in Palestine.

    Neither the war over Palestine nor the Axis Powers confrontation with Iran is going to end anytime soon.

    Fortunately for Iran, Axis Powers are also confronting Russia now in Ukraine and are escalating in Syria – again to the Strategic Nowhere.

  51. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 23, 2014 at 1:23 pm

    As I said before, you do not grasp the changed geopolitical landscape since 21 August 2013.

    Until that time, Americans as well as Europeans had been cleverly hiding their true intentions regarding Iran. This was an essential ingredient of their political/diplomatic approach to other states in regards to their confrontation with Iran; assuring other states such as Russia, India, Japan, Korea, South Africa that they were not aiming to destroy the Islamic Republic militarily.

    That ambiguity was destroyed during the events subsequent to August 21, 2013 when the true aims of US and EU became clear: military destruction of Syrian Ba’ath state followed by the military destruction of the Islamic Republic at the first opportune time – just like Libya.

    Those events cannot be unlived and I assume that Iranian leaders and planners have drawn the necessary conclusions.

    Those conclusions, I believe, are quite consistent with the observations of Dr. Cordesman regarding the utility of nuclear weapons to the security of Iran.

    Note that even Dr. Cordesman – who 2 weeks ago glibly was saying that Iran cannot expect to be able to buy weapons even if she gives up her nuclear capability – quite explicitly urges the Axis Powers to at least consider the security needs of Iran (not that they would.)

  52. fyi says:


    A scientific question in Iran:

    One must ask the question: “How” and “Why” of this genetic disease…بیماری-عجیب-کودکان-جیرفتی

  53. James Canning says:


    I think Iran will be able to buy weapons, if it makes the deal with P5+1. Cordesman is wrong on that point, in my view.

  54. James Canning says:


    The “true intentions” of many hundreds of companies in the US and EU, is to make deals in Iran asap, if sanctions are dropped. Rabid “supporters” of Israel “right or wrong”, want to prevent this from taking place.

  55. James Canning says:


    Your belief the sanctions would go away, if Iran fails to make a deal with P5+1, is simply dead wrong.

    The problem with Israel/Palestine is that American politicians trying to force Israel out of the West Bank face termination of their careers. Why? ISRAEL LOBBY.

    Just the opposite situation tends to apply, regarding Iran.

  56. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 23, 2014 at 3:27 pm

    The businessmen are not running US-EU policy; they are irrelevant.

  57. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 23, 2014 at 3:30 pm

    You have not been paying attention to what I have been saying consistently.

    I believe the sanctions against Iran will persist for decades; may be in 2050 they will have been largely rendered irrelevant.

    What I am saying is that the sanctions against Iran will erode as time goes on; mechanisms will be devised to trade with Iran and other states will find cause to support Iran.

    Axis Powers botched the rise of the independent Shia power in the Near East; they will have to live with its consequences for a few more decades.

  58. secular iranian says:

    Chomsky blasts US over sanctions on Iran….calls it surreal

    He sees the actuality of sanctions clearer than most of conscientious Western analysts. Yet he too is unable to see the way it is…the way most Iranian analysts can conceive…the way an astute, well informed empathic historian can envision it.

  59. James Canning says:


    You appear to be arguing Iran can fail to make a deal with the P5+1 and not face a blockade (if it also fails to reduce its nuclear programme).

  60. James Canning says:


    You are mistaken about significance of business and labour lobbies, especially in the UK. BAE alone explains much of British policy in the P Gulf

  61. Fiorangela says:

    cheeky Peter Jenkins —

    A Hopeful IAEA Report on Iran

    “. . .In fact, the report’s only disturbing features are two of the clarifications of intention that Iran has offered pursuant to the JPA – and, almost certainly, these are less disturbing than might at first appear.

    In a letter dated February 8, Iran informed the Agency that it plans to build a 10 MW light water research reactor that will require 20% enriched uranium oxide fuel.

    A reactor of this type would rank low in any nuclear proliferation risk assessment (unless the assessment were produced in Israel, where the norm seems to be to proclaim any nuclear activity in the region a threat to the future of mankind, unless the activity is undertaken by Israelis).

    Still, a putative requirement for 20% enriched uranium fuel cannot be welcome to Western negotiators who embarked on a five-month negotiation with Iran on February18, and who are hoping to persuade Iran to commit to refrain from producing uranium hexafluoride enriched to more than 5% (since the passage from 20% to weapons-grade hexafluoride is quickly made).

    However, the fact that Iran will have had no difficulty predicting Western reactions to the mention of 20% suggests that this “plan” is a newly-minted bargaining counter. This would not be the first time that Iran has used technological advances or stated intentions to acquire a little negotiating leverage to offset the massive leverage that the West has acquired through the imposition of sanctions.

    A similar calculation probably underlies Iran’s declaration to the Agency on January 18 that it has started the site selection process for five additional enrichment plants. Before Western negotiators succumb to heart failure, they should explore the extent to which Iran is sure that it has a practical need for five more enrichment plants, and the extent to which it might be open to alternative arrangements. That is a discussion the Iranian negotiators will enjoy.

  62. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 23, 2014 at 5:58 pm

    All of your considerations could have been relevant prior to 08/21/2013.

    From that date, the world for Iran and indeed the Shia Crescent changed.

    There is no longer any ambiguity left that US will attack Iran at the first opportune moment.

    Cooperation with EU, good relations and all that are no longer possible or probable.

    War remains on the Horizon for Iran; this is the salient accomplishment of Mr. Obama in that he revealed fundamental US policy and its means to the Barons, to the Arabs, to the Russians and the Chinese and – most importantly of all – to the Iranian people.

    Even men such as Dr. Cordesman have finally grasped that US and EU have lost the Iranian people, that none believes the pronouncements and protestations of the leaders of Axis Powers.

    In political/diplomatic terms it means that a final settlement between Iran and Axis Powers is out of the question.

    Axis Powers going through the threat of naval blockade of Iran only means that their time-table for attacking Iran has been advanced.

    For Iranians, it is preferable to have Axis Powers initiate the war when it is less convenient for them (Axis Powers) than when it is.

    This is a small consequence of the events past 08/21/203; there are more as they pertain to Russia, Pakistan, China, India and others.

  63. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    February 23, 2014 at 1:23 pm
    The west does not and never did have a veto on irans nuclear program,the choice for the west is a simple one,to accept it and then to negotiate for some limits in return for removal of sanctions or to maintain their demands of “zero enrichment” and simply watch as it gets bigger and irans japan option and its potential break out time becomes even more credible,the only other option for the west would be the military one,and that despite the threats of “all options on the table” is simply not credible any more,had the west thought the military option had any chance it would have used it,the fact that it didnt and that it has abandoned its “zero enrichment” demand says everything

  64. yk says:

    I think the problem with Americans is that they have knowledge but lack wisdom, they’ve got freedom but are in bondage, they got wealth but are greedy, they have religions but are spiritually empty, they’ve got multiple views but are narrow minded. Their world only exist from the ‘superior’ America narratives. They’ve become irreconcilable with the truth unless with some elements of force which would probably occur through their internal contradictions.

  65. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    February 23, 2014 at 8:16 pm
    James Canning says:
    February 23, 2014 at 5:58 pm


    Allow me to simplify this.

    1. Iranian political apparatus believes that Axis powers will not accept Iran’s independence regardless of nuclear issues, defense development issues, industrial research and development issues.

    2. The view in 1. has been repeatedly reinforced. The evidence for the villainy of Axis powers goes beyond their treatment of Iran. The evidence, in the form of its impact, is spread from Ukraine, to Syria, to Egypt and Tunisia, to Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, then going to UAE, KSA, and regions in Africa – now extending to parts of South America, and the Pacific. The Russian and the Chinese have caught on! That is if they did not know before – an empire is fighting economic collapse by attempting to devour resources, and destabilizing regions.

    3. Iranian political apparatus observes (astutely, I believe) that it is fatuous to dismiss the totality of these bad acts by individually dismissing them as: “Bush was a moron”, “Obama was forced”, …. In more simple terms, as Mr. Bush famously said, “you can fool me once…”

    Given the weight of the evidence accumulating for the past three decades,

    a) Iran’s political system sees no reconciliation with Axis powers, even if, Iran agrees to a limited nuclear power, agrees to limit its defense build up, agrees to limit research in certain areas, agrees to reduce support for resistance movements, ….

    In abundantly plain terms, Iran’s political system believes, for solid reasons, that Axis powers are up to more of the same!

    No amount of “slick salesmanship” can convince an observant and rational actor that Axis powers are changing course.

  66. Don Bacon says:

    Jay says:
    February 24, 2014 at 7:45 am

    I agree.
    Now the US will think: We really need to do a Kyev in Teheran.
    And the “axis” will redouble its efforts to do so.

  67. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Local Truces Aside, the Ingredients for a Long Syrian War Are All Still in Place
    Assad cannot deliver a knock-out blow, the rebels can’t unite, Moscow will not back down and the West lacks a strategy

    Patrick Cockburn has that right – nothing has changed except supposedly the Saudis have sidelined “Bandar Bush” (as Pepe Escobar calls him).

    The problem for Israel – and hence Obama – is that Israel doesn’t want to wait another five or ten years on Syria, just as they don’t want to wait another five or ten years to get an Iran war going. One leads to the other. And neither does the military-industrial complex, who sees their hundred billion a year of Afghan war profits drying up in the next couple years.

    So something needs to break loose in the Syrian crisis that allows Western or Israeli military intervention.

  68. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Saudi ‘seeking Pakistani arms for Syrian rebels’

    As Cockburn points out in his piece, additional weapons will not materially change the situation in Syria, other than to increase to a certain degree Syrian military casualties. Presumably both US, Israeli and Saudi military experts know this.

    However, if the Al Qaeda insurgents start shooting down airliners (they’ve already threatened to do so), Obama may use that as an excuse for military intervention. I suspect that’s WHY anti-aircraft weapons are specifically being considered.

    With Obama clearly supporting more weapons to the insurgents, it’s clear that nothing has changed in Obama’s (Israel’s) ultimate purpose: to degrade the Syrian military so it cannot threaten Israel in an Iran war or to interfere with Israel’s attacking Hizballah in Lebanon via Syrian territory.

  69. James Canning says:


    There are probably thousands of companies in Europe and North America, eager to do business in Iran. Provided sanctions are dropped.

    Granted, there are a number of fanatical supporters of Israeli oppression of the Palestinians, in the US, who think contining bad relations between the US and Iran help Israel get on with its dirty work.

    What does an “independent” Iran even mean, in your opinion? Meaningless phrase, in my opinion.

  70. James Canning says:


    Surely you may tire of claiming the P5+1 will not accept ANY enrichment of uranium by Iran. Nonsense, frankly.

    Issue is how close Iran can try to be, to ability to build nukes quickly. (FYI’s opinion)

  71. James Canning says:


    You continue to harp about Aug. 21 Syrian CW event, without explaining why. Getting rid of Syria CW without a US cruise-missile strike on Syria surely was a good thing, and something Iran applauds.

  72. Kathleen says:

    Aipac’s push in the New York Times for more sanctions, military attack on Iran.

    We know our Reps are going to be under even more Aipac pressure this week and early next week. Please please contact your Reps and say it very clearly we do not want more sanctions against Iran, we do not want a military action against Iran. We want sustained diplomatic negotiations with Iran. Contact your Reps often and encourage others to do the same.

  73. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 24, 2014 at 2:47 pm

    Are you from Liverpool by any chance?

    Or are you just pretending to be dense & daft?

    Which is it?

  74. Karl.. says:


    Isnt that sick? An ethnic group representing Israel want American to go to war for them. And then we hear that its racist to say there is a lobby?!

  75. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    February 24, 2014 at 2:43 pm

    Lots of companies being interested in doing business with Iran has little to do with the discussion. You do understand that, don’t you? After all, lots of companies were interested in doing business with Libya – which is now in ruins. You do get it, right? It is better to say nothing rather than say something unrelated!

    An independent country is a country where foreign, domestic, monetary, social, etc. policies are set by the democratic demands of the people of that country within the framework of the democratic constitution of the said country. You know this, don’t you? Or, do you really not know what an independent country means?!

  76. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    February 24, 2014 at 2:46 pm
    Actually james up until a very short while ago that was the wests demand,what I said,if you actually bothered reading it,was the choice for the west was to accept iranian enrichment and to negotiate some limits or to watch as irans nuclear japan option and its brakeout capability became increasingly credible,you are the one who seems to think the west has a veto on irans nuclear program or that it can just dictate terms under the threat of military force that iran has no choice but to accept.You seem to think iran has no choice in the matter and that the only nuclear program iran can have is the one the west is willing to allow it to have

  77. James Canning says:


    Once again, you refer to Russia and China and “the West”. Meaning? P5+1 comprises SIX countries. They insist Iran limit its enrichment to 5%. Other limits are expected too. As you know very well indeed.

    And yes, P5+1 powers will leave sanctions in place, if Iran fails to make a deal. In my judgment.

  78. James Canning says:


    You appear to lack an understanding of British or American politics, and the role of very large corporations in influencing policy.

    Obviously, Iran should be trying to entice as many western companies as possible, into doing business in Iran. Meaning, Iran needs to get rid of sanctions.

    Col Gaddafi’s abject stupidity brought disaster to him and to his family. He didn’t “have a clue” as to how to respond to the unrest in Benghazi. Sadly for Libya itself.

  79. James Canning says:


    Maybe we need to break the matter down:

    Do you agree it was better to reach a deal for destruction of Syrian CW, rather than have Obama feel obliged to hit Syria with hundreds of cruise missiles?

  80. James Canning says:


    We did have a political connexion to Liverpool, but long ago.

  81. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    February 24, 2014 at 7:44 pm


    you appear to have a complete lack of respect for your own level of intelligence.

    Perhaps you anticipate that your oblique insults of “lack of understanding” elevates your argument.

    Au contraire!

    Your understanding of other people’s understanding needs to be refreshed.

  82. Fiorangela says:

    Dan Joyner posted excerpts and a link to this legal assessment of US involvement in Iraq war on Iran. It was prepared by a student in a course on WMD that Joyner taught —

  83. Fiorangela says:

    from the paper linked above —

    “The decision to ignore Iraq’s use of chemical weapons by the United States
    brings to light many serious questions that have yet to be resolved by the international community. Some of these questions include:

    ~why did the Reagan administration get away with aiding, supplying and
    even allowing the Iraqis to continue their use of chemical weapons against the Iranians?

    ~Is it plausible to argue that American interests are more important than the interests of the Iranian peoples, therefore rendering it acceptable for the U .S.
    to turn a blind eye to use of chemical weapons?

    ~And lastly, why has no one been punished for using illegal war tactics, which
    clearly breach accepted international law?

    These are only some of the unanswered questions still existing today. The United States should be held accountable for their involvement in the Iran – Iraq War
    for many reasons. By focusing primarily on the U.S. government’s decision to ignore
    Iraq’s use of chemical weapons against Iran , this paper will attempt to prove that the U.S. should share in the responsibility of the wrongfully committed act by first,
    providing a brief summary of the primary causes of the Iran – Iraq War, of the U.S.’s role in the war and of Iranian – American relations during the war . It will then move to discus the developments of Iraq’s WMD program and its effect on diplomatic relations between all three countries . And lastly, it will apply the concept of
    shared responsibility to the Iran – Iraq War as a way to explain why it is essential that the United States of American be held accountable for their active involvement in the war”

    Jennifer Kiss did not trace the use of chemical weapons by the U.S. in earlier wars. That might have provided a clue to “why did Reagan administration get away with” supplying chemical weaponry, etc. The short answer is, Because they got away with it in the past.

    The United States used chemical/biological weapons in Vietnam.

    The United States also developed and used chemical weapons — incendiary bombs — against Germany and Japan in World War II. More documentation is appearing that provide evidence that Secretary Stimson recommended to Franklin Roosevelt, and the president issued orders, that the U S Air Force conduct research in more efficient means of destroying the housing of German working-class civilians.

    A paper by the United States National Park Service records the names and activities of designers of “German Village” and “Japanese Village” in the Utah desert at Dugway (less than a hundred miles from the NSA data center near Salt Lake City). Among other things, the paper notes that:

    “The AN-M50 model of incendiary bomb, extensively
    tested at the German Village, accounted for more
    . than 97 percent (by number) of the incendiary
    bombs dropped on Germany by American forces.”

    Dugway was a materials testing site: mockups of German and Japanese workers housing were built, as faithfully as possible to actual construction and furnishings as might be encountered, and strategies for turning the buildings into pyres, then ashes, were devised and rehearsed. Because German housing was so massively framed, it was very difficult to set the structures afire, so the decision was made to devise a method of causing the furnishings to create the firestorm. Accordingly, each apartment in German village contained 19 pieces of furniture, including

    “In the bedroom, the single beds were placed together in pairs, with a crib adjacent, reflective of a young family with an infant.”

    In World War II, the United States developed and made massive use of chemical weapons to kill German civilians, including their infant children in their beds. 600,000 German civilians were incinerated or asphyxiated by the firebombs developed at Dugway, and 75% of Germany’s towns and villages were obliterated.

    The USA has never been called to account for these deliberate crimes against humanity.

    They got away with murder.
    Again, and again, and again.

  84. Sammy says:

    ‘fyi says:
    February 24, 2014 at 3:46 pm
    James Canning says:
    February 24, 2014 at 2:47 pm
    Are you from Liverpool by any chance?
    Or are you just pretending to be dense & daft?’

    James is kind of a counter part of our beloved ‘Lurs’ , may be a bit dumber.
    A ‘Lur’ is asked whether he has any idea of ‘JobuSat’ and he replies , yes one of these new satellite channels :-)

  85. Karl.. says:


    What are you making out of the iran/iraq arms deal?

  86. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    February 24, 2014 at 7:46 pm \\Silly…

    Mr. Obama instigated the Syrian Civil War…

  87. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    “Obviously, Iran should be trying to entice as many western companies as possible, into doing business in Iran. Meaning, Iran needs to get rid of sanctions.”

    James, this sentence- its assumptions, the thing itself, its logical consequences- is where you are fundamentally mistaken.

    It’s very sad that you don’t get it after all this time spent on this forum.

    Take a little break from writing and just think for a while.

  88. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    February 25, 2014 at 2:59 am

    There has never been any distinction, in practice, between civilians and soldiers when it has come to war.

    War means murder and rape and pillage – the late General Sherman was leading an army that committed al manner of atrocities in the South.

    The distinction between civilians and soldiers is one without merit – made by those who like war but are too squeamish otherwise to look at the face of horror.

  89. Don Bacon says:

    Nico & all.

    The $1.3 billion Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline has been shelved by Pakistan, dealing a blow to Islamabad’s efforts to access cheap energy sources to overcome a crippling power crisis.

    “In the absence of international sanctions the project can be completed within three years, but the government cannot take it any further at the moment because international sanctions against Iran are a serious issue,” Pakistani Petroleum Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi said today. (NDTV, 25 February)

  90. fyi says:

    Don Bacon says:

    February 25, 2014 at 10:15 am

    When they are too cold or too hot they could change their minds.

    As is, it is best for Iranians to consolidate their gains to the West of Iran and not worry about Pakistan.

  91. nico says:

    Don Bacon says:
    February 25, 2014 at 10:15 am

    “The $1.3 billion Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline has been shelved by Pakistan”

    Good for them if Pakistani believe it is the best way to develop their country.
    Pakistan is a weak and beggar country just like Egypt.
    They prefer US threat and KSA’s pittance at the cost of political slavery rather than long balanced trade relation as between equals.
    It is not their very fault. They are subject to their own weakness.
    They need to be pitied.

    Next interesting step would be to see how the situation evolves in Afghanistan beyond 2014.

  92. fyi says:


    Dr. Cordesman on Syria:

    [We destroyed Syria and do not know what to do with it…]

  93. Rehmat says:

    Two weeks ago, addressing a delegation of top American Jewish leaders in Jerusalem, Zionist entity’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused all supporters (Jews, Christians, Muslims and Hindus) of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement being Anti-Semites. However, Netanyahu dedicated most of his speech to his Iranophobia.

    “I know it is not fashionable, but we need more pressure on Iran – not less. The goal of the talks with Tehran should be zero centrifuges and zero enrichment, preventing the regime from the capacity to produce a nuclear weapon,” said Bibi.

  94. Rehmat says:


    Would you like to tell “all” that your hero, Anthony H. Cordesman, was called ‘War Whore‘ by Dr. Finkelstein not long ago?

  95. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    “…made by those who like war but are too squeamish otherwise to look at the face of horror.”

    You do understand the supreme irony of particularly you saying this, don’t you?

  96. Fiorangela says:

    fyi says:
    February 25, 2014 at 9:47 am

    “There has never been any distinction, in practice, between civilians and soldiers when it has come to war.
    War means murder and rape and pillage”

    – – –

    Surely you are mistaken, fyi.
    The war that was fought by rehearsing then implementing ways to incinerate the cribs of infants was waged — and here I quote that great statesman & man of god Winston Churchill, “to save Christian civilization.”
    You know, that Christianity founded on the principles of “turn the other cheek,” and “Blessed are the peacemakers,” and “Peter, put down your sword.”
    Or was it “eye for an eye” and god as warlord/real estate agent/chooser of special people? I get so confused ….

  97. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    February 25, 2014 at 1:21 pm

    From the time of the Zoroaster – 8600 years ago – the Prophets have preached to Man to conform to what God wants of Man.

    Man has refused.

    Yet, the Prophetic tradition has been minimally successful in curbing Man’s worst appetites, for sometimes short sometimes longer, durations.

    Without the Prophetic Tradition, situation would have been very much worse; as our Japanese, Chinese, Korean, and Mongolian friends amply have demonstrated throughout their histories.

    When men use the word “Civilization” as though it is a value, it almost always means that they have lost their Faith in God or the Revelations; that they have elevated a mechanism as a substitute for moral order based on the Revelations.

    The late Winston Churchill could have, in a very different universe, that UK was fighting against the forces of Darkness – Jahiliyah – but he was the product of a post-Christian phase and could not think in those terms.

  98. Kathleen says:

    The group Camera’s efforts to close the I/P debate on Cspan’s Washington Journal or any sane positions on Iran has escalated over the last few years

    Hope folks will consider calling into C-Span’s Washington Journal this week during open phones and ask viewers to call their Reps and ask them to vote against any new efforts to push new sanctions against Iran or any legislation that moves the U.S. any closer towards a military confrontation with Iran. We know our Reps will be under tremendous pressure from Aipac attendees towards the end of the week through next week. Remember millions of people watch this program each week. You can influence and encourage many people this way.

    The program runs from 7 a.m. -10 a.m. est
    Washington Journal Phone Numbers

    Our phone lines are typically divided by political affiliation, with a line for callers from outside the United States:
    Democrats: (202) 585-3880
    Republicans: (202) 585-3881
    Independents: (202) 585-3882
    Outside U.S.: (202) 585-3883
    – See more at: link to

  99. Fiorangela says:

    fyi, I’m not persuaded that all prophets are created equal.

    And — were the insights of Zoroaster — “Good thoughts, Good words, Good deeds,” and the notion that one’s lived behavior in this life presaged his fate in the afterlife — is all that revealed ? Or is it, as I believe, reflected by a human mind struggling to make sense of his life and his world, and trying to live with integrity?

    Whichever position you affirm — revealed or inspired — Revelations come to humans through the minds and words of humans. Some are more fully human than others.

    Churchill’s “humanity” was actually a particularity, and that is the point of the crisis. Contending particularities are the breeding ground of hatred, and hatred is essential if one human is to kill another. The U.S. military has perfected the conditioning required to create killing machines. Recently a U S Marine chaplain spoke to a local group and conceded that “our fighting men are returning home morally damaged.” Golly gosh, I wonder how they got that way.

  100. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    February 25, 2014 at 3:39 pm

    Where do your thoughts come from, do you think?

  101. Fiorangela says:

    Where do I THINK the things that I THINK get THUNK?

    Electrical impulses between neurotransmitters in the brain-organ in my head that is fed via sense receptors distributed throughout my body.

    Where do your thoughts come from, do you think?

    A slightly different question: those soldiers who are “morally damaged,” the same ones who were conditioned by government agents acting on behalf of and paid by U.S. taxpayers — how did they become conditioned to kill? What makes their lives so miserable once they are no longer in an environment, under the command of, and surrounded by colleagues who affirm and reinforce their kill-conditioning (as well as supply them with suitable Others to hate, i.e. those whom it is permissible to kill)?

  102. Fiorangela says:

    fyi —

    “The late Winston Churchill could have, in a very different universe, that UK was fighting against the forces of Darkness – Jahiliyah – but he was the product of a post-Christian phase and could not think in those terms.”

    – —

    I’m not inclined to give Winston Churchill credit for that much depth of spiritual awareness.

    He was a rapacious SOB who used, rather than attempted to build his character, on conventional spiritual notions of his day. Churchill never transcended his animal nature; he was still gathering nuts — and killing other people when necessary to steal their nuts — til the day he died.

  103. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    February 25, 2014 at 4:53 pm

    I do not know where my thoughts come from precisely; certainly not all of them originate in I and my insights, such as they are, are non-voluntary acts.

    The electrical impulses of the brain are not Thoughts and Emotions, rather they are cognates thereto.

    Sense receptors receive energy – light, sound, mechanical stresses etc.

    I can state with metaphysical certainty that neither you nor any other human being can trace a plausible conceptual path from photons falling on the retina to the moral issues raised in the Lord of the Rings – or even simpler, to such mundane things as the color “green”.

    What you have written as an explanation is not an explanation at all – it is just scientistic mumbo-jumbo – a clever form of propaganda – that has been promoted by the hyper-rationalist to explain Man, Life, etc.

    And they have failed and will continue to fail but such is the preponderance of their successes in many fields of human endeavor that their mumbo-jumbo finds traction on the minds of men.

    In regards to killing, you do not understand.

    Man is endowed with many capacities that resembles that of God’s, including death and destruction.

    This capacity is innate.

    If you do not like it, take it up with God.

    God is the greatest destroyer:

    The red-giant star Betelgeuse located @ Right ascension: 05 hours 55 minutes 10.3 seconds, and Declination: +07 degrees 24 minutes 25 seconds is about 10.6 Light Years from the Earth.

    It is estimated to explode, becoming a supernovae, sometime within the next million years.

    Once it does, all life on Earth will perish.

    The explosion might yet occur earlier as this star is going to encounter a wall of interstellar dust in the next few thousand years; that might act as a trigger for the supernovae event.

    It is now in God’s hands which makes all of Earth politics truly what it is – an immense exercise of the Fallen Men in absolute futility.

  104. Fiorangela says:

    fyi —

    But in WHICH god’s hands is that supernova cradled — zeus? the god of Zoroaster? the god of Abraham? Does the god who holds the hot potato determine which part of the earth gets fried first? If I pray real hard to make god like me better, can I convince him/her/it to explode the supernova over someone else’s patch of earth?

    PS If you were trying to insult me re pseudoscience etc., don’t waste your keyboard. My relationship with my brain works for me. As long as I don’t poke around in other people’s brainpans, I do relatively little harm.
    – – –

    on another topic, tho still relevant to the destructive force of ideologically driven “fallen” (aka greedy bastard humans) persons:

    Peter Lee reported on precisely whose balls Victoria Kagan Nuland twisted in her/US bid to “support the freedom and liberty-seeking protesters” in Ukraine :

    nb. an interesting pictorial observation about the nature of the protesters in Maidan: none of them had signs; all of them were armed & armored. http slashes aramaxima dot wordpress dot com/2014/02/19/euromaidan-in-ukraine-geopolitics-in-action/comment-page-1/#comment-13
    Apparently sequestration took a bite out of State Department’s color revolution protest-banner budget.

  105. James Canning says:

    Bussed-In Basiji,

    You would do well to state things more clearly. Are you actually arguing there are not hundreds of significant corporations eager to enter the Iranian marketplace?

    Or, are you claiming Iran cannot get rid of the sanctions, so these companies will not be able to enter the Iranian marketplace?

  106. James Canning says:


    I think Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey had more to do with the coming of civil war in Syrian, than Obama.

  107. Fiorangela says:

    “Negotiators conducting nuclear talks with Iran have been clear that they expect the Islamic Republic will abide by any deal. Critics and Iran hawks have hit back, arguing that Iran simply can’t be trusted.

    The latest report by the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, released late last week, bolsters the case of those who called for a degree of optimism about Iran’s promises. It states that Tehran is complying fully with the terms of an interim nuclear deal signed in Geneva in November that requires Iran to halt its most sensitive nuclear work for six months while a final deal is hammered out.”

  108. James Canning says:


    I think you often write riddles. I have difficulty grasping what you are trying to say.

  109. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    February 25, 2014 at 6:02 pm

    And, what is your evidence for this?!

  110. James Canning says:

    Those following events in Ukraine should read Gideon Rachman’s excellent column on that subject in the Financial Times Feb. 25th.

  111. Rehmat says:

    The US-sponsore “Colored Revolution” in Ukraine.

    Last week, a Ukrainian report, several Ukrainian Jews who served in the Israel Occupation Force (IOF) are leading the anti-government protests. Ukrainian media has also accused an Israeli oligarch for providing financial support to the opposition in Ukraine, adding that Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency is one of the instigators of the unrest in the country.

  112. Richard Steven Hack says:

    US Still Sees ‘Military Option’ Against Syria


    Based in Jordan, US troops started funneling Saudi-bought weapons to the rebels, but that’s not the end of the intervention, as the US military is feverishly constructing runways for military aircraft along the Jordan-Syria border, nominally for “reconnaissance aircraft.”

    The plan now seems to be to pretend a war is not in the offing while advancing it every chance they get, hoping that they can get the war more or less under way before anyone has a chance to object.

    End Quote

    Got that right…

  113. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Calls for US Military Intervention in Syria Re-surfacing


    The coup orchestration department is working overtime these days with reports of U.S. attempts to topple governments in Venezuela and the Ukraine. (U.S. meddling in the latter, despite the complexity of the situation – see here and here, was recently confirmed through interceptions of Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, formerly Dick Cheney’s principal deputy foreign policy advisor and married to neocon Robert Kagan, co-founder of the Project for the New American Century.)

    End Quote

    If the latter doesn’t confirm who Obama is working for, I don’t know what does…

  114. Rehmat says:

    The latest zionist media lie is that Mohammad Javad Zarif is being questioned by a large number of Iranian Majlis (parliament) members for condemning Holocaust. It’s the most stupid accusation I have the misfortune to hear from the Iranophobic Mafia in recent months. It’s so stupid that when Rouhani appointed Zarif as country’s new foreign minister, the Jewish Lobby called him a “Holocaust denier”.

    The headline at Reuters read: “At the Columbia event, student Jordan Hirsch, a former Bartley Fellow at The Wall Street Journal, asked Mr. Zarif, “Do you personally believe that six million Jews died in the Holocaust?” “Well, I believe a great atrocity was committed in the Second World War. The question that needs to be asked is, what is the crime committed by the Palestinians in that atrocity? A large number of people died, were murdered, in the Second World War. A large number of them were Jews. That’s a crime. Any crime against humanity must be rejected, and we reject any crime. Genocide is a major crime and we reject it. But this is the question that you do not want me to answer: What was the role of the Palestinians in that? Palestinians have been suffering because of that without having any role in it,” replied Zarif. Watch the video below.

  115. Richard Steven Hack says:

    More proof of the purpose of the Syrian crisis…

    Israeli Warplanes Attack Eastern Lebanon
    Already Under Siege From Syria Rebels, Bekaa Valley Hit by Israel


    Israeli officials refused to confirm the attack, as usual, but did say that they believe there are “efforts to move serious weaponry from Syria to Lebanon” recently.

    End Quote

    Once again, THE PRIMARY purpose of the Syria crisis is to allow Israel to prepare for an IRAN war by attempting to degrade Hizballah’s missile arsenal in Lebanon, by attacking Hizballah in the Bekaa Valley via an invasion through Syrian territory – which presupposes the degrading of Syrian military capability in advance by using the Syrian insurgency as justification for a Western military intervention in Syria.

  116. James Canning says:

    RS Hack,

    Some reports said the missiles were going to Syria from Lebanon. But Israel claims it was stopping missiles from going to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

  117. James Canning says:


    Perhaps I should simply ask you this: do you think hundreds of serious businessmen from “the West”, are trying to dupe the Iranian leadership?

    You go on and on about nonsensical “Axis Powers”. Complete cr*p, in my judgment.

  118. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    February 25, 2014 at 7:45 pm

    You did not answer my question.

    You are entitled to your opinion – that is fine. Pretending that it has some basis in reality is not fine.

    Your question is riddled with logical fallacies.

    How do you know there are “hundreds”? How do you know they are “serious”? What do you mean by “dupe the Iranian leadership”?

    You have posed a question with an embedded answer. How is this for a question.
    When will you stop molesting your neighbors?

    How about this?

    Are there businessmen who are trying to dupe the Iranian leadership? Answer: yes

    Are there businessmen who are sincere about wanting to do business with Iran? Answer: yes

    Do all these businessmen know or approve of the sinister motives of the west? Answer: no

    Do some know or approve or collude? Answer: yes

    See! That is how one asks questions and receives responses when one is sincere.

    In all seriousness, you will do well if you give your own intelligence just enough credit but no more than advisable.

  119. M. Ali says:

    Discussions on businessmen in this context is pointless. They are businessmen, the clue is in the first part of the word, business, meaning their whole title refers to them wanting to do business. There will always be businessmen who would want to work with Iran if its profitable for them, that’s what they do. I bet there are Israeli businessmen who wouldn’t mind doing business with Iran, as I am sure there are Iranian businessmen who wouldn’t mind doing business with Israel.

    It has little to do with the business (har har) at hand. I bet there would also be “hundreds” of businessmen who WOULDN’T want anyone to do business with Iran and it would have nothing to do with politics, but their bottomline. For example, I bet pestachio exporters in USA would hate it if all sanctions are removed, and I strongly doubt it would have anything to do with the kinds of centrifuges Iran would be using.

  120. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Obama Pins Fate of Nuclear Pact on Documents From an Iranian “Curveball”


    But the Obama administration may well believe so strongly in the Iran nuclear narrative it inherited from the Bush administration and in the idea that the sanctions against Iran confer ultimate negotiating leverage on the United States that it sees an Iranian confession as a realistic goal. In any case, the decision to introduce the falsified evidence of the past into the final negotiations is bound to bring them to an impasse unless the United States is prepared to back down.

    End Quote

    That is precisely Obama’s purpose – to sabotage the talks at the last minute and pin the blame on Iran – thereby absolving himself of any blame, which is his primary motivation in most of his actions – the actions of an inveterate liar.

  121. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Yousaf Butt on IAEA conduct complicates Iran nuclear deal

  122. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Israel Bombs Hizballah Missile Convoy on Syria-Lebanon Border

    Another Israeli propaganda piece…but it re-emphasizes that Israel’s primary concern is Hizballah’s missile arsenal as a threat in an IRAN war.

  123. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Official: Iran has studied Israeli strike tactics

  124. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    February 25, 2014 at 5:45 pm

    Mere rhetoric; you are grown woman and it is silly to engage in this type of sophomoric behavior.

    You have heard from things that you will never hear easily or clearly elsewhere; deal with them.

  125. fyi says:

    Richard Steven Hack says:

    February 26, 2014 at 7:37 am

    At any time between 2003 to 2005 or even until late in 2007 Dr. Butt’s recommendations might have found some traction in Tehran.

    We are now too far gone in the opposite direction; international institutions created after World War II in support of Peace of Yalta have been revealed now to be politicized instruments of the Axis Powers and, to a lesser extent, Russia and China.

    Iranian security now crucially depends on the ability of that state to build nuclear weapons; specially after the events in Syria on 08/21/2013 revealed the Axis Powers plans for the military destruction of Syria and Iranian governments.

    What is transpiring now is an exercise in diplomatic process where process is everything and substance is nothing – sort of like the world after Oslo Agreements.

  126. Fiorangela says:

    Here’s what this grown woman knows, fyi:

    I can’t do anything about a supernova. It may explode tomorrow, it may explode a million years from tomorrow. If it explodes tomorrow it will likely mark the end of my biological presence on this planet. I don’t know what will happen on the day after that.

    The fundamental fact of my life is that it comports to laws of nature — variously explained by what others of my species category call “biology,” “neuroscience,” etc. Some processes of nature are as yet undiscovered; most have been discovered only relatively recently.

    The behaviors of others in my species category are far more likely to cause harm to me and to people I love than will a supernova. I can attempt to understand and influence those behaviors. So that’s what I try to do, constrained as I am by the limits of my neurological composition & experience.

    re: “You have heard from things that you will never hear easily or clearly elsewhere; deal with them.”

    If you’re trying to be mystical and mysterious, you succeeded at the latter but not the former. iow, what in the world are you trying to say?

  127. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Don’t ask stupid questions.

  128. humanist says:

    To Richard S. Hack and, Don Bacon

    Re:RSH’s link on Feb.26, 7:41pm

    Ever read the following mind-boggling article posted on August 2012 by Richard Silverstein?

    Since I am ignorant on all technical warfare issues and, in my view, you both comprehend it enough thus I would appreciate your thoughts about the whole case.

    Some of the claims appear to me as being copied from the SciFi books. However if true, it depicts a shocking catastrophe and an invincible Israel capable of bringing about unimaginable havoc on other people.

    Here is the supposedly ‘leaked’ Israeli war plan with Iran:

    The Israeli attack will open with a coordinated strike, including an unprecedented cyber-attack which will totally paralyze the Iranian regime and its ability to know what is happening within its borders. The internet, telephones, radio and television, communications satellites, and fiber optic cables leading to and from critical installations—including underground missile bases at Khorramabad and Isfahan—will be taken out of action. The electrical grid throughout Iran will be paralyzed and transformer stations will absorb severe damage from carbon fiber munitions which are finer than a human hair, causing electrical short circuits whose repair requires their complete removal. This would be a Sisyphean task in light of cluster munitions which would be dropped, some time-delayed and some remote-activated through the use of a satellite signal.

    A barrage of tens of ballistic missiles would be launched from Israel toward Iran. 300km ballistic missiles would be launched from Israeli submarines in the vicinity of the Persian Gulf. The missiles would not be armed with unconventional warheads [WMD], but rather with high-explosive ordnance equipped with reinforced tips designed specially to penetrate hardened targets.

    The missiles will strike their targets—some exploding above ground like those striking the nuclear reactor at Arak–which is intended to produce plutonium and tritium—and the nearby heavy water production facility; the nuclear fuel production facilities at Isfahan and facilities for enriching uranium-hexaflouride. Others would explode under-ground, as at the Fordo facility.

    A barrage of hundreds of cruise missiles will pound command and control systems, research and development facilities, and the residences of senior personnel in the nuclear and missile development apparatus. Intelligence gathered over years will be utilized to completely decapitate Iran’s professional and command ranks in these fields.

    After the first wave of attacks, which will be timed to the second, the “Blue and White” radar satellite, whose systems enable us to perform an evaluation of the level of damage done to the various targets, will pass over Iran. Only after rapidly decrypting the satellite’s data, will the information be transferred directly to war planes making their way covertly toward Iran. These IAF planes will be armed with electronic warfare gear previously unknown to the wider public, not even revealed to our U.S. ally. This equipment will render Israeli aircraft invisible. Those Israeli war planes which participate in the attack will damage a short-list of targets which require further assault.

    Among the targets approved for attack—Shihab 3 and Sejil ballistic missile silos, storage tanks for chemical components of rocket fuel, industrial facilities for producing missile control systems, centrifuge production plants and more.

  129. Karl.. says:

    Interesting, the same guy obama wanted in ukraine has now been chosen by the coup leaders. Almost ridiculous.

    Will US admit the role in the coup some 40 years from now?

  130. Rd. says:

    humanist says:

    “The Israeli attack will open with a coordinated strike, including an unprecedented cyber-attack which will totally paralyze the Iranian regime and its ability to know what is happening within its borders. The internet, telephones, ”

    Is this the same izie whose soldiers cell phones were cracked by Hezbollah back in 06?
    it smells like something still burning over there (izis).. you know they have infiltrated hollywood for some time now…

  131. Rd. says:

    fyi says:

    “Iranian security now crucially depends on the ability of that state to build nuclear weapons; specially after the events in Syria on 08/21/2013 revealed the Axis Powers plans for the military destruction of Syria and Iranian governments.”

    US is also at war(?) with Venezuela, Honduras, Ukraine, amongst others.. but it seems, their best effort is a color revolution of some sort.. certainly in case of S America, they have it in their ability to use a military approach. After all, it is their back yard. And mil option has historical precedence as well. it seems fermenting chaos is their best game. Perhaps the military option will be available in another 10 years or so, once they get their own house in order (if they ever).. for now, looks like somebody broke the leg off their table.

  132. kooshy says:


    Based on your insertions no one should have dared to touched Ukraine since she hosts Russia’s only warm water militry port, besides, economically she is totally and completely dependent on Russia, she is the hub for all Russian gas exports to Europe, as you know that’s why Europeans (Germans) didn’t want to risk upsetting their energy suppliers meaning the Russians.
    But look contrary to what you think with all that Russian nukes pointing to every where and every one
    this mad king of yours is not scared of any nukes she even don’t care for the concern of her allies, says F*** them. In light of that now you got to explain to this board what good a few declared nukes would do for Iran or any one else including Russia who has the largest stockpile of nukes which even has the economic energy leverage on Europe who is the mad king’s financial, economic and military ally.

    One would want to think if there is a NATO war with Russia , which Europeans have to participate where do this subdued states think will get their energy from. For sure not Russia

  133. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    February 26, 2014 at 6:06 pm

    Russia can walk into Ukraine and no one can threaten her with any significant consequence.

    As you have pointed out, EU depends on her gas and could only go so far in sanctioning them.

    At the moment, Poland has no army and Germany will not fight against Russia.

    Now, let us look at Iran:

    She does not have robust armament industry at the level of China, let alone Russia; no one is dependent on her energy resources, and she is not nuclear armed.

    So, Iran, as compared to Russia, is weak across multiple parameters and power.

  134. Dan Cooper says:


    Watch the short video:

  135. kooshy says:

    fyi says:
    February 26, 2014 at 6:20 pm

    “So, Iran, as compared to Russia, is weak across multiple parameters and power.”


    Sorry but again you are dodging the question, the question is not that if Iran is militarily weaker or stronger than Russia or not, obviously military hardware she is weaker. But the question is, even though Russia is a declared nuclear state with the largest stockpile of nukes she still can’t stop, prevent or even threaten to prevent a regime change on her most important protectorate client state. Now considering this ongoing fact, you need to explain how having a few nukes can prevent or stop a regime change in any state including Russia itself which indeed they tried during this last election there. Iran without having a tested stockpile of nukes, or a big protector boss like Russia for Ukraine or US for her client states like UK, Germany or KSA has for 35 years successfully prevented a direct military engagement or a regime change.

    Like I have told you before there you have hole in your theory which don’t add up, in my opinion it’s not about having or using nukes it’s about how you can pay back without nukes if Russia could have destabilized Poland or Germany this wouldn’t have happened, may be mar Putin will find the balls to hearth Europe in a meaningful way then this basters will know if they should care for F*** Europe or not.

    We shall see if in fact the Americans miss read the Russian’s hand or not, but a real separation between big powers works fine for Iran since she can go back to her old game of balancing the powers.

  136. Karl.. says:

    US being hypocrites again.

    Kerry told Russia not to interfere in other state’s affair.

  137. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    I said before that when fyi is confronted with reality regarding his various musings, he dodges and weaves like a weasel.

    The Americans and Europeans staged a coup in the one country that is the Russian front-yard and Russian nukes couldn’t do squat about it.

    It’s about what kind of people you have, not about nukes.

  138. Karl.. says:

    Why drag in nukes in that discussion, nukes are for deterrence in this case the Russian state, not Ukraine.

  139. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    February 26, 2014 at 9:38 pm

    I believe I have explained the matter quite clearly and repeatedly.

    Wars are fought on escalation ladders.

    Should Russia choose to occupy Ukraine with her army and police, the power to push her out does not exist.

    There is snow ball’s chance in Hell of Russia being to destabilize Poland or Germany – that is not even a fantasy.

    NATO (Axis Powers) cannot threaten her with the destruction of her cities.

    Nor with a naval blockade without the risk of waging a nuclear war.

    Thus, war with Russia will remain limited.

    In regards to the old game of balancing power – it was a failure for 150 years; from the time of the late Mirza Taqi Khan.

    Iran, playing her old game of balance of power among the great powers, was invaded during WWI, WWII, her government overthrown in 1953, invaded again in 1980 and the invader supported by all great powers, and now locked in confrontation with the very same great power over her capacity to nuclear weapons.

    The Old Game of Balancing Great Powers is detrimental to Iran and her allies – that game cannot be played as clearly has been the case for over 100 years.

    The only game worth playing is a reach for great power status based on the Shia Crescent.

    مهتری گر به کام شیر در است شو خطر کن ز کام شیر بجوی
    یا بزرگی و عز و نعمت و جاه یا چو مردانت، مرگ رویاروی

    There is no other way….

  140. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    February 27, 2014 at 7:52 am

    Mr. Kooshy does not understand unclear strategy, evidently.

  141. ataune says:


    “The only game worth playing is a reach for great power status based on the Shia Crescent”

    Iranian state is already into a strategy of powerful and sovereign posture since at least 35 years ago… without putting the emphasis on the latter part of your remarks. You don’t need to “go to the roof” and shout to everyone what’s happening in your private environment. This adage clearly applies to state actors too. Sometimes going to the roof might hinder more than help.

    I’m not well into military strategy but I have the feeling that your “escalation ladder” respond poorly to the geopolitical situation in and around Iran. As Karl correctly states nuclear weapons in this day and age are never-to-be-used deterents, since this ultimately yields to mutual and total destruction of the planet. And as Kooshy’s well noticed case on Russia shows, Iran having nukes wouldn’t deter neither US nore any other agressive NWS in trying to weaken the Iranian state.

  142. fyi says:

    ataune says:

    February 27, 2014 at 10:19 am

    You are wrong about the utility of nuclear weapons to Iran but let us leave it at that.

  143. BiBiJon says:

    The rungs on the ladder ain’t equally spaced

    fyi says:
    February 27, 2014 at 10:28 am

    As war escalates between a future nuclear armed Iran, and the US, can you explain at what point Iran threatens nuking something? And, explain what the likely US reaction to such a threat might be? And, if the threat is not carried out, then how it will be looked upon by the rest of humanity?

    Lets say, US has imposed a blockade on Iran. Iran has sunk a few ships. US has escalated by landing troops in Bandar Abbas. ect. Tell us where it is that Iranian leaders can usefully explicitly/implicitly threaten or actually use a nuke.

    Your often repeated position that US would not dare start anything in the first place, leaves unanswered Kooshy’s point: apparently Victoria Nuland didn’t get that memo.

    If you don’t have an answer, admit it, and allow the conversations here be a tad more realistic.

  144. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    February 27, 2014 at 7:52 am

    “Why drag in nukes in that discussion, nukes are for deterrence in this case the Russian state, not Ukraine.”

    Why? because this is exactly the case where you can see how a declared nuclear state is incapable of protecting her “interest” where he has her only warm water port.

    It’s not about invasion and boots on the ground or even sending a few million dollar cruise missiles they are all too expensive and with no good results, the western NATO countries have come to understand invasions are expensive and more importantly their youth and armies are unwilling to fight for a possible obtained hegemony that is why they lose wars left and right (beside invading a Disney land island in Caribbean). So what are cheap replacement solutions for wars to gain the seeking desired hegemony outcome, well, good cheap solutions are Color revolution regime changes (Ukraine), Copes (Honduras), or if not possible proxy terror wars (Syria) you see in these cases all Russian or even American nukes are useless? Mr. Putin can make all the empty threat for using nukes all he wants no one will believe or even think he will ever use them, in mean time they can make a big deal off of a few girls like pussy riots and start a fire within and take him down, do you really think he can use nukes because some “Russians “wants him to go.

    Wars are changed to a social based modern hostility, with the advance of communication technology propaganda of wars and wars of propaganda are more important and economical than actual fighting hot wars.
    Since fighting wars are changed so should our thinking, we should come out of 20th century type of wars. as our hosts have recently indicated the lesson of US’s last few wars is that she no longer is capable (necessary) to fight hot on the ground wars, she realizes that she still poses the most effective control on follow of information in the globe (google, FB, Twitter, Etc.) are their new nukes that can change and get the desire they want without much cost.

    Now you guys want in middle of this type of war with their new weapon Iran makes herself a declared nuclear weapon state and scare the shit out of everybody including a few supporters she have, that’s stupid.

    By the way I do understand your strategy with your nuclear security theory for reasons I have stated all along it has a big hole which you can’t and haven’t been able to patch, for stated above reasons. I bleive as I have understood your ultimate aim and desire is not the security of Iran it rather is her demise and destruction as an Islamic republic do you deny that?

  145. Karl.. says:


    I think its you who missunderstand the whole idea of nuclear MAD deterrence, again its for deterrence on attacks on the states that have nukes. Nothing else.
    There is actually no theories that as you claim, that nukes protect against mere “interests” that states have.

    If states were to be nuked just because they have other interests and lets say the US, the pretty much the whole world would have been nuked by this time. Thats not how this works.

  146. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    February 27, 2014 at 11:27 am

    Thank you for trying to explain these things to Mr. Kooshy; I do not seem to be able to disabuse him of his fantasy notions.

  147. Jay says:

    As challenges and solutions become more intertwined, the risk of empty debate increases!

    Challenges related to dealing with an aggressive alliance, particularly an empire moving in the direction of her economic nadir, is a worthy discussion. However, it appears to me that the discussion of nuclear deterrence is being offered as a solution to the challenge. For this to hold, one must assert, as a minimum, the following positive arguments: a) the effectiveness of the solution offered, and b) the existence of a “safe” and timely route to the implementation of the solution. Optionally, and ideally, one should also demonstrate some level of optimality and future forecast for the proposed solution.

    Kahn and his colleagues were among the most influential in devising and analyzing various nuclear strategies – including MAD. Kahn’s analysis does not support assertion a).

    It is difficult to predict the precise response of Axis powers should Iran begin a secret weapons development program. However, based on recent history, it would seem that the five years to a deliverable weapon would be the most perilous of Iran’s history. Therefore, assertion b) is dubious.

    Furthermore, while Axis powers are engaged in the development of new modes of war at a never-seen-before scale (see for example: ), one would have to question the future value of a race to nuclear arms.

  148. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    February 27, 2014 at 11:27 am

    So now yours and fyi’s new theory of usefulness ids only to protect your borders and you wouldn’t use them to protect your states interest ( that is how you guys thought to came to patch the whole in your theory by cutting the hole off).

    So tell us what is a usefulness of a modern great power if she is incapable and allows to lose her interests and positions and becomes an isolated to her borders like NK, or old USSR or old China, it seems you and your body have a wrong perception of how modern states need to function like old days it’s not about supporting a person or a regime is about national interests and national interests are not limited inside your borders, if you are a great power with declared nukes based on your theory one should scare everyone off so badly that they don’t dare to touch her interests never less invade her inside her borders. Again based on your theory so long without any declared nukes Iran has done the same job as of declared nuclear states likes of Russia, China, and USA etc. again without nukes she has successfully prevented being physically invaded by great powers, so why should she now go and declare having them.

  149. Karl.. says:


    Yes only borders. That states have interests BEYOND their borders have nothing to do with this particular theory (mad). Nukes are not meant to be used everytime someone interefe in your interests.
    And this isnt my ideas this is the theory of mad/deterrence, anyone can google that.
    The whole idea of having nukes is irrational due many reasons imo but the world politics is irrational and in this world nuclear weapons are seen as a detrrence against attacks, and thats why Iran might or might not go nuclear.

  150. Jay says:

    kooshy says:
    February 27, 2014 at 12:16 pm

    The work of Kahn, considered one of the founders of MAD, is instructive. Anyone with a blog can espouse a theory that blows like wind – including myself! MAD does not apply. Not because I say so, but because those people who espoused the theory said so.

  151. nico says:

    kooshy says:
    February 27, 2014 at 11:08 am

    I do not knaw any case where nuclear first strike from tye US would be likely save for the Iran case.

    Actually it could be imagined that in case of military escalation Iran would block the SoH.
    In such case a nuclear first strike from the US is likely.

    It could be said that Irak would not have been invaded with boots on the ground if Irak ever had nukes.
    However Irak could have nonetheless been subject to political destabilization, fomented insurgency and embargo even it was nuclear armed.
    In the latter case it is unlikely Irak would have been able to retaliate with nukes as the other states nuclear arsenal would have detered such scenario.

    It is a matter of cause and effect chain, escalation ladder, proportionate response and deterence.

    At the end of the day if it wants to be independent and safe in such strategic region as the ME, Iran needs to be nuclear armed or at least nuclear ready.
    Actually because such states as the US do consider their dominance aims and material welfare as above the respect of others Natural Rights. And the US would use all aim to achieve that goal and according tl them it would “worth it” even if desguised under pathetic propagandistic excuses

    That needs to be recognized.
    As should the strategic imoortance of oil and access to oil. We are in the oil civilization with more than 90% of todays welfare and material progress originating from hydrocarbon and “cheap” energy.

  152. James Canning says:


    How do I know hundreds of western comnpanies are keen to enter the Iranian marketplace? Easy. I read the Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Times of London, etc etc.

    You probably are ware Obama complained to Hollande that French companies were a bit too keen to enter the Iranian market.

  153. BiBiJon says:

    Jay says:
    February 27, 2014 at 11:57 am

    the world has relied on or resigned itself to a world order based on western hegemony. in equal measure the west has developed a sense of entitlement which is probably unshakable short of a disabusing ww iii.

    to borrow your phrase, “an empire moving in the direction of her economic nadir”, can act on her sense of entitlement, and destroy all vestiges of ‘order’ albeit, unintentionally. or, the west reaches the kind of conclusions that e.g. USSR did: allow a new world order to emerge. As with the USSR, the indispensable ingredient for peaceful change will be the internal politics of allied states, leading eventually to a change in US’ own outlook on the world.

    Where do you think we are on that continuum?

  154. James Canning says:

    The Financial Times reported this week from Iraq, on the substantial difficulties western oil companies have been trying to cope with. Bloated bureaucracy is one of the biggest challenges. Governmental incompetence threatens the increase in oil production Iraq hoped to achieve.

    Perhaps Iran could help Iraq to streamline its officialdom, to foster greater oil output?

  155. ataune says:

    “I read the Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Times of London”

    Are those the only news source you are reading ?

  156. James Canning says:


    Yes Russia could intervene in Ukriane, with its army etc. People close to the Kremlin say this would work against Russia’s own best interests. As things stand today.

  157. kooshy says:

    The question of war and peace in this new era is how to reach your objective at the lowest possible cost, as result modern policy makers with new communication tools at their disposal find it more expensive and self-destructive to engage in a bloody and self-destabilizing ten year war with unknown results, instead is much cheaper, let say if you can buy everyone in Iran’s parliament and stage a few street demonstrations, occupy a famous point of interest like a square for months, kill a few innocent girls here and there and show it to the world on YT and blame it on the seating government, and stage a parliamentary bloodless cope, isn’t this cheaper? to buy the individuals first, make them legitimate oppositions and then take over the affairs of the country. This is how modern wars are staged no need for nukes or any effect of preventing this by having that nukes. If you had the socially penetrated communication and media system US had you could have unseat Obama tomorrow. To prevent this one needs to have a very effective penetrated intelligence system, and more important an effective social based modern communication system. If you want to save your country you need to prepare for this kind of war or a proxy war like in Syria ( which is less likely if you have solid majority on religious/ ethnic divide). How to prevent this kind of wars should be the discussion and not how to make nukes to prevent wars. If Iran had a modern effective penetrated communications/ media that could destabilize France or UK and pull French or Brits to street at her will US or UK would not have dared to stage a color cope in Iran back in 88.

  158. Karl.. says:


    This I fully agree with, very good, as far as overthrowing weak states.
    This naive stance by many states doesnt seems to change, I mean we can go back to 1953 and US still use the same methods. States like Ukraine (too late now), Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Russia needs to be vigilant.
    No wonder western states want to get inside Iran.

  159. nico says:

    kooshy says:
    “The question of war and peace in this new era is how to reach your objective at the lowest possible ”

    Could be correct but is not.
    There are various qualitative level of threat, enmity, unstability and warmongering and how it translates in material terms.
    One cannot compare a qualitative level of confrontation with another one and just say it is universal rule.

    In addition such rule you state is maybe true in relatively stable or “continuous” environment.
    However occurence of major discontinuity should not be discounted.
    (such as the current economic crisis which can only sooner or later in a radical reconfiguration of the global economy as we know it today
    or the oil supply cut to the world from the PG)

  160. ataune says:


    This zero-sum game in Ukraine has been initiated by the “West”.

    But even though I think a military intervention is not necessarily to the detriment of the Russian they dont need to go to this extreme to get the upper hand. Nato thinking was, and still seems to be, that a win-loose game in Ukraine is to her adavantage and choosing the compromise route will favor Russia. But, if Nato pushes too much by closing the door what Russia just need to accomplish is to encourage the resurgence of an existing Russian nationalist political movement in Crimea and from there start separating Crimea from Wast Ukraine and starving them. The wait and see how EU/IMF are failing to financially bail-out their by-products. I believe Russia is right now paving the way to implement just this strategy.

  161. BiBiJon says:

    kooshy says:
    February 27, 2014 at 2:04 pm

    yes, and the UK revoked press-tv’s license.

    A thriving middle class, and an educated population is the guarantor of a sovereign state. Methinks. Plus a cadre of able policy makers.

  162. Rd. says:

    fyi says:
    Another Iranian fantasist:

    “And, in his memoirs Bush wrote [17] that both Israel and Saudi Arabia pressured him to attack Iran, and that when he met with King Abdullah in January 2008, he told him that he was angry with the National Intelligence Estimate of November 2007 that stated that Iran did not have an active nuclear-weapons program. “

    Wonder what would have happened if Iran was actively pursuing a NW back then?

  163. ataune says:

    fyi says:
    Another Iranian fantasist:

    I don’t know why we should give credence to the “analysis” of someone who has obviously a grudge with the political system in Iran. In this article for example he’s quite amateurishly changing the historical trend by ommiting some plain facts with the purpose of providing credibility for his own ideological siding with the “democracy camp”. For these folks, the whole power struggle between political groupings SHOULD be ONLY about “democracy”. They can’t see that a system of governance reflecting the will of the people is not about how a society SHOULD be but about the rule of law.

    Being prisonners of their own ideological thoughts, they don’t grasp the senses of the historical facts. He is so exhtatic about current events in Kiev that even in a so called analytical article, he can’t refrain from personally, although with a wink to his hosts, threathening the “current rulers” of Iran of “overthrow by the mass.”

    Huge ego give usually birth in politics to megalomania.

  164. Rd. says:

    kooshy says:

    “Since fighting wars are changed so should our thinking, we should come out of 20th century type of wars. as our hosts have recently indicated the lesson of US’s last few wars is that she no longer is capable (necessary) to fight hot on the ground wars “

    This new ‘fighting’ already taking center stage. Ukraine is the ground zero. One has to assume Russians were well aware of the potential US/western intend in Ukraine (nuland phone tapping). All the MSM rage is the Russians are coming.. but in reality, there is no reason for Russia to get involved militarily. Given the failed (financial) state of the Ukraine, ( specially the western parts), how are the US/west to save Ukraine?

    US is financially in such dire state, that not only the hot war is out of question, with this Ukraine episode, one has to wonder even if the color revolution may become financially out of reach of US..

    New way of fighting is certainly taking center stage.. so it seems (time will tell) the Russians rather than relying on their nukes, have set the stage to confront US on their own terms.. best way to expose how off-color the US approach is..

    Ultimately, it is the US that has to search for new approach, their nukes, their military approach and eventually, even this color revolution will prove to be failures. Ukraine has the potential to be the showcase.

  165. Kathleen says:

    Is AIPAC trying to stop you from seeing this video?
    Submitted by Ali Abunimah on Thu, 02/27/2014

    AIPAC Threatens to Sue CODEPINK Over Controversial Video Clip

    WASHINGTON – February 26 – On February 25th, an AIPAC member called a CODEPINK staffer threatening legal action in response to a controversial video clip that he alleges was made by the peace group CODEPINK. The video is a satirical version of an AIPAC policy conference promotional video.

    In response, CODEPINK co-founder Medea Benjamin commented, “It is absurd for AIPAC to threaten legal action over such an obviously satirical video. It is interesting that they are reacting so strongly to the clip, though. Perhaps it’s because the content is really an accurate reflection of AIPAC’s dangerous foreign policies. AIPAC does, in fact, advocate for bombing countries such as Iran and Syria; it fails to condemn Israel’s continued building of settlements and its human rights abuses against Palestinians; and it lobbies Congress to send billions of taxpayer dollars to Israel to continue the occupation of Palestine.” She added, “What are they trying to hide by silencing this video?”

    CODEPINK activists have contacted legal representation and are available for interviews.

  166. kooshy says:

    nico says:
    February 27, 2014 at 2:47 pm

    “Could be correct but is not.”

    Nico,Jaan, look this is not rocket since, is simple like this

    Type 1- Go to a bloody hot war with possibility of losing or wining a desired outcome of colonizing with a your own installed viceroy (Iraq)

    Type 2- Stage a color revolution / cope with same possibility of winning or losing with desired outcome of colonizing with your own installed viceroy (Ukraine)

    Type 3- Start a proxy religious or ethnical civil war and support the opposition with possibility of losing or wining with a desired outcome of colonizing with installed viceroy (Syria, Lybia)

    Type 4- Impose sanction or start an arm race to divert states capital in nonproductive channels and try to isolate a country for a hope of uprising against seating system or a government with a hope for a possibility of the change to come your way.(Iran/USSR)

    Which version with possibility of having same odds of winning or losing for same desired outcome do you think is less expensive?
    Which one is more effective to prevent by having nukes?
    If only the most undesirable expensive one is also the one that needs the possibility of using nukes ?
    If so why should even one need to take the nuke route while is possible to continuously chip away part of the whole system.

  167. kooshy says:

    Rd. says:
    February 27, 2014 at 3:57 pm

    I agree with you, if I was Mr. Putin I would even chop of the western part of Ukraine and hand it to US/Europe to finance for life, since that section like the case for Greece is the most expecting with the least productive part of the county with no real strategic value for Russia. Doing this will insure every few years Us and her western European client states will not find an erection to poke at the Russian back yard.

  168. nico says:

    kooshy says:

    I would say the Type 1 (bloody hot war) is the one to be detered by possessing nukes.
    Obviously Type 1 is not unlikely as it occurs somewhat periodically.
    And it occured in 2 countries having common border with Iran in the last decade…
    On top of that the US threaten on a regular basis Iran and Iran has some nasty neighborhood.
    Israel, KSA, Pakistan to number a few.

    As I said in many previous posts, I do not believe Type 1 to be likely in the case of Iran for balance of power reasons between China, Russia and the US as well as Iran conventional military might.
    However that is as far as can be foreseen in the near future and if countries act rationally.
    2 propositions which are quite limitative.

    As stated in the previous post history is not continuous even if it has IMO a direction.
    Worldwide economic crisis and global geopolitical balance may be quite disruptive and change the equation.
    The kind of events which are, by the way, occuring now in slow motion.

    Anyway that is rethorical subject
    Iran made it clear it is after civilian nuclear know how that icidentally gives the Japan option.
    Meaning it is ethically consistent with views about World Free of Nuclear Weapons AND future option to change course if needed.
    To be morally consistent does not mean to be careless.

    IMO it is a wise course of action.

  169. James Canning says:


    The 2007 NIE on Iran was crucially important, in blocking the neocon warmongers’ plan to attack Iran.

    Interesting comment, re: Saudi king.

  170. Jay says:

    BiBiJon says:
    February 27, 2014 at 1:00 pm

    I do not feel equipped to answer your question directly. Yet, perhaps, I can share a few thoughts.

    It is conventional knowledge that empires meet their fate at the bank! They die economically. This is perhaps somewhat true, yet more importantly, empires often rot from within first – the final act of may be from without or within.

    The economic outlook in the US is far from bright – some would say bleak. Massive debt, aging population, declining fraction of working population, deteriorating technological/math/science stance, … US influencers have been busy importing workforce, using labor abroad, importing brains, getting foreigners to finance their debt,… And, above all, US influencers have been busy devouring foreign resources.

    Despite the ongoing efforts to avert this crisis, and due to structural problems related partly to greed, US continues to decline in her economic power. By most estimates, US will experience another economic shock in the next 5 years, and the US will be second to China in economic power by 2020. Like all empires before her, in order to ride through this crisis, the US is developing and deploying every kind of weapon imaginable. Militarizing space, creating drone armies, using cyberwar, preparing for “nanoscale” weapons, … This massive military spending in the midst of massive debt is indicative of the firm belief among US influencers that none of these economic fixes will suffice. War will become necessary!

    There are estimates that the US will be in a significant and widespread war by 2025.

  171. kooshy says:

    “This new ‘fighting’ already taking center stage. Ukraine is the ground zero. One has to assume Russians were well aware of the potential US/western intend in Ukraine (nuland phone tapping). ”

    Rd I even think that the Nuland’s case was porous lay leaked, like in the case of Iran 88 and public asking twitter not to stop her operations while the cope was hoped to happen, showing and proving your capabilities is a show of force to make your opponents think twice and recon with. That us why Japan was nuked back than when no one else had nukes, now you do Facebook revolutions and you announce you can do it just because no one else has face book to do one on you.

  172. kooshy says:

    Pepole of the world including the lazy European parasites, if they care for their own sovereignty, culture, and way of life, they would stay away from using US internet and networking products, instead of investing in nukes they would invest to develop their own media and communication systems.

    I hope we will have more Iranian blogs and bloggers on Iranian networks.

  173. paul says:

    To spend a whole piece discussing Obama’s views on sectarian conflicts, without bringing up his role in stoking those conflicts, both overtly and covertly, is simply dishonest and meaningless.

  174. kooshy says:

    Here is a proof to what I wrote earlier that this country no longer is financially capable, or if her forces are willing to go to a hot war likes of Iraq and Afghanistan, a military force that you are to provide and serve hot food and hot shower once a day on top of Hindokosh or the jungles of Vietnam at the expense of f$400 per gallon to fuel is not a force you will want to go to war with Taliban or Hezbollah, so this bustard AH has learned it the hard way now he no longer want his unbelievably tiny miniscule war instead he says

    “I happen to believe as a matter of leadership, and I learnt this pretty hard from Vietnam, before you send young people to war you ought to find out if there is a better alternative,” said Kerry, who served in the Vietnam War as a young U.S. naval officer.”

    “That is an obligation we have as leaders to exhaust all the remedies available to you before you ask people to give up their lives and that is what we are doing” with Iran, he added.”

    This AH mr. secratery like the one before him still lives in his/her elite American dream land ( the only shining light up in the hill BS that they feed my kid in the school), he don’t want diplomacy, he now knowes he no longer can afford or do a hot militry war, what he really wants is to buy more time, so he may have more chance to get a regime change or any other cheap low cost chance to distablize Iran, so he may have more time and a new chance to change the iranian independent system, he knowes can’t aford is is allowed to have a detante or diplomacy, he knowes he was told by his advisers detante and diplomacy will not bring less engaged militry presence, low cost cheap protection for her client states in the region, he knowes he needs and must secure their stability so he can steal their resources from them and feed to keep alive his parcites in europe with cheap resources of Iran’s nighbours. The funny part and the irony is this AH he really belives this and he thinks he is the world’s robin hood and is doing the good and right thing to do. After all this is the same history that man kind has exprinced all along in man and civilization.

  175. kooshy says:

    Bibi yap if it was me I would make the north western pro-European Union part of Ukraine a land locked country throw it at the Americans and Europeans and tell them now start making your supporters IMF and EU loans every few months to keep them going for a few months before new loans and or (restructuring) becomes due and necessary. After a while doing this already exercised loan sham will be pulling the standard of living down in Western Europe. This by itself eventually and hopefully will bring the youth out in Western Europe and ends up destabilizing the tyrants there.

  176. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    This round goes to you.

    The US and poodles have in fact engaged Iran in all 4 types of war that you mention
    …and lost every one!

    Type 1: Imposed war.

    Type 2: Fitna 88

    Type 3: Ongoing terrorists actions in southeast and west.

    Type 4: Ongoing sanctions regime. SL just released an order on economy of resistance in which he refers to the sanctions regime as “jang-e tahmili-ye eqtesadi”.

    It’s never been about “preventing” Iran from getting nukes. It’s about preventing Iran from getting the Japan option.

    And on this one, the US lost as well.

  177. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Too bad Kirry (that would be the Arabic pronunciation of “Kerry”) doesn’t remember that it was the Vietnamese people who kicked his ass in that war.

    Enough of us crazy mad freaks in Iran who pray every day for the towfiq of kicking America’s ass if it makes a mistake…inshallah!

    All options on the table, baby!

  178. nico says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    “This round goes to you.The US and poodles have in fact engaged Iran in all 4 types of war that you mention…and lost every one!
    Type 1: Imposed war.”

    Kooshy demonstration has one major flaw. In the cost/benefit calculus, I guess the cost and probability of type 1 scenario should not be discarded.

    What was the cost of the “Imposed” war for Iran and Irak ?
    What was the cost of US-Irak wars for the Ifak nation ?

  179. BiBiJon says:

    Ticking away the moments that make up a dull day

    From UU’s album collection

  180. BiBiJon says:

    What was the cost of the “Imposed” war for Iran and Irak ?

    It created a capable adversary, battle hardened military, enduring mistrust, etc.

    What was the cost of US-Irak wars for the Irak nation ?

    The cost is incalculably immense, but recoverable from. US’ international standing, as well as the $trillions spent are not so easily recoverable from.

    As per bob Gates:

    “In my opinion, any future defense secretary who advises the president to again send a big American land army into Asia or into the Middle East or Africa should ‘have his head examined,’ as General MacArthur so delicately put it.”

  181. nico says:

    BiBiJon says:
    “What was the cost of the “Imposed” war for Iran and Irak ?
    It created a capable adversary, battle hardened military, enduring mistrust, etc.”

    There is no direct link as you claim.
    Many countries fought wars. That is not the reason why they are hardened.
    For instance does it apply to the US ?

    “What was the cost of US-Irak wars for the Irak nation ?
    The cost is incalculably immense, but recoverable from. US’ international standing, as well as the $trillions spent are not so easily recoverable from.”

    Recoverable ? Do you deem lost and wasted human lives recoverable ?
    The question I guess should be answered by those millions displaced and murdered.

    You are paraphrasing Mc Arthur. Good enough.
    Let me paraphrase other bastards : “Let’s bring them back to stone age !”

  182. BiBiJon says:

    nico says:
    February 28, 2014 at 8:14 am

    Nico, there is a direct link, IMO. Defending the homeland was a sacred task. Whoever was in charge, and more so, those who fought, gained the admiration of the nation. The pressures of war, combined with the sanctions were the reasons for the creation of the indigenous arms industry, and professionalizing many security institutions which frankly would not otherwise exist today. Comparisons with other countries/armies that have fought wars do not usefully add/detract from what happened to Iran, the Islamic revolution, and her security apparatus’ evolution in the course of 1980-90. Those things were unique to Iran at that particular time, methinks.

    Melodrama is an art form I don’t possess. Not intending to be callous, a unitary state remains in Iraq; She will be able to put past tragedies behind her; Folks will find enough pleasure in nurturing the new borne, to let their agonies of lost brothers and sisters to subside. So, yes, it is recoverable, and fairly quickly, and to a remarkable extent, that emotional recovery has already happened.

    So, if the aim of those who supported, financed and armed Saddam to wage war on Iran, was to weaken the Iranian revolution/state/military, it failed miserably. I guess I count such failures as costs.

    I was not paraphrasing anyone. I quoted the the then outgoing Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, talking to cadets at West point. It is of course just his opinion, just as yours is after all, just an opinion. But, talking to future US military officers, Gates expressed o opinion might have more of an impact on the direction of future military engagements than your opinion, don’t you think?

  183. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    The war was a great blessing for us- as individuals and as a nation.

    Call it “Divine calculus” if you like.

    In fact the reason that US and poodles no longer wage Type 1 war against us is because we successfully deter them- emphasis on the present tense- without active nuclear arsenal.

  184. kooshy says:

    BiBiJon says:
    February 28, 2014 at 9:10 am


    Another important lesson of the Iraq war for Iran was and is, in hard painful way after many years of getting state security protection by the west and sometime by the east or in other ways many decades of ability to survive by balancing and playing the big powers interests against each other, that protection and that game no longer existed. She realized she can only rely on her own economic, political, military, diplomacy capabilities, to me this was the biggest lesson that shocked the 150 year lazy Iranian state bureaucracies

  185. BiBiJon says:

    kooshy says:
    February 28, 2014 at 10:15 am

    Yes, I agree. In an earlier post I used the word “mistrust.” But, you are right. A better word would be ‘self-reliance.’

  186. Kathleen says:

    just got in a comment about Aipac on the Diane Rehm show during the domestic hour. Asking will the Rehm show mention or talk about this conference. Also posted that they were unwilling to give journalist credentials for getting in. phil weiss Remember millions of people listen to this program. Live from D.c. You can get through their lines during the international hour…to bring up the conference and what attendees will be lobbying for. More sanctions against Iran moving us closer to military action being taken against Iran.

    Please call in. Otherwise it is more than likely the Aipac conference will not even be whispered about

    Join the show:
    Find us on Facebook
    Follow us on Twitter

  187. kooshy says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    February 28, 2014 at 12:42 am

    BIB Jaan you are correct but missing a few in between which I will add

    Type 1: Imposed war.

    Type 2: Fitna 88 + Nojeh + Color Revolution of 78

    Type 3: Ongoing terrorists actions in southeast and west. + stirring up the old the Sunni Shieh differences in the region and borders of Iran with knowledge that Shieh main support comes from a Persian state beside Shieh being a minority minority

    Type 4: Ongoing sanctions regime. SL just released an order on economy of resistance in which he refers to the sanctions regime as “jang-e tahmili-ye eqtesadi”. + first by Trying to blockade Iran’s oil export by targeting Iran’s oil installation, that didn’t work making the Amato legislation that didn’t work imposing sanction on world energy use, this sanction not only effect Iran it effects the world since as result the entire word pays more except US since the energy is denominated in her currency which she prints at will.

    But the irony of tyranny is, all that has produced jack shit for the Americans or the Soviets, as matter of fact in my opinion Iran’s revolution of 79 changed the existing world order and the existing balance of power between the power poles (West and East) which arguably existed ever since the 1800’s in-between the British and Russians.

    Payandeh Iran

  188. nico says:

    BiBiJon says
    “There is a direct link, IMO. Defending the homeland was a sacred task.”

    IMO there is no direct linkage.
    Culture of independence and self-reliance are based upon the Iranian regime (no insult intended here) ideology.
    That is not coming from the Iran-Irak war but is something deeper.
    One could argue that there is an inderect link.
    Actually the Iran-Irak war has been used to reinforce Iran national mythos and the term “sacred” defense poves it.
    As a consequence one could argue that such war was not necessary for Iran to achieve self-reliance but was used as a political and cultural lever to radicalize the Iran will.
    That Iran could not have had achieved the same without war is not a proven fact.

    “Melodrama is an art form I don’t possess. Not intending to be callous, a unitary state remains in Iraq; She will be able to put past tragedies behind her; Folks will find enough pleasure in nurturing the new borne, to let their agonies of lost brothers and sisters to subside. So, yes, it is recoverable, and fairly quickly, and to a remarkable extent, that emotional recovery has already happened.”

    You are rather generous with others lives indeed.
    Maybe another war is what is needed with an additional 1 or 2 million deaths for Iran to be even stronger.
    I mean if one should follow your argument.

    “So, if the aim of those who supported, financed and armed Saddam to wage war on Iran, was to weaken the Iranian revolution/state/military, it failed miserably. I guess I count such failures as costs.I was not paraphrasing anyone.”

    Well maybe the plan failed however Iran and Irak payed for that with blood not the Westerners.

    ” I quoted the the then outgoing Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, talking to cadets at West point. It is of course just his opinion, just as yours is after all, just an opinion. But, talking to future US military officers, Gates expressed o opinion might have more of an impact on the direction of future military engagements than your opinion, don’t you think?”

    Mr Gates opinion needs to be taken account.
    As much as McCain and Hillary “bomb bomb” Iran rethoric.

  189. kooshy says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    February 28, 2014 at 12:42 am

    BiB Jaan

    Is just fun to ad they throw everything they had at Iran including (Hillary Clinton’s white house*) kitchen sink, non-worked?

    Foot Note – White house kitchen is an important historic site in American history, this is exactly where Bill Clinton got to enjoy his first Cigar.You can imagine the rest of story.

  190. Karl.. says:

    What is “fitna 88”?

  191. BiBiJon says:

    nico says:
    February 28, 2014 at 12:29 pm

    I’ve had fruitless back and forths with Karl, and ultimately I found the only acceptable answer to him was: “you are right.”

    Part of this may be lost in the language (mine not yours), but “proof” is meaningless in this kind of engagement. You want to deny that 8 years of war did nothing to shore up Iran’s self-reliance, tested and refined her defense strategy, etc. Fine go ahead and deny. But I will not deny that you have a valid point as far as preexisting ethos guided the way thins wound up being forged in the fire.

    Again, if melodramatic discourse requires you to think I said Iraq is better off for having that calamitous tragedy visit her, even if I only claim that tragedy can be recovered from, then fine. To make you feel even better, let me say humbly: YOU ARE RIGHT.

    For additional drama if you want to think I said/suggested Iran’s mettle can be steeled further by another bloody war, even if I meant her improved cohesion/defenses/self-reliance has made all such future aggressions against her impossible, then go ahead, and let me add YOU ARE RIGHT.

    McCain and Clinton have not served as secretary of defense, nor had a front line career in the CIA as Gates has had. I guess this is back to your point about them being “bastards.” Yes, if it tickles your puritanical streak, then Gates is a bastard but surely you can distinguish professional bastards from the garden variety. YOU ARE RIGHT if you want to ignore what gates said to future military officers. For me, however, it indicates that (bastard) Gates is telling lesser bastards that Iraq/Afghanistan style wars should be very very strongly resisted.

    Let me not mince words here when I can simply say: YOU ARE 100% RIGHT.

  192. nico says:

    kooshy says:
    “She realized she can only rely on her own economic, political, military, diplomacy capabilities, to me this was the biggest lesson that shocked the 150 year lazy Iranian state bureaucracies”

    That has been realized by the revolution leadership well before the Iran war.
    In addition that is not proof that millions of deaths during hot war were necessary to learn the lesson.
    The economic warfare alone could have been a lesson.

    Bussed-in Basiji says:

    “In fact the reason that US and poodles no longer wage Type 1 war against us is because we successfully deter them- emphasis on the present tense- without active nuclear arsenal.”

    Maybe that is true in conventional terms.
    However that needs tl be explained.
    I mean you seem to have insider information but not willing to share.
    However my view is that as long as Iran is not able to hit the US soil directly with conventional weapons it is difficult to see how the US would be truly detered by Iran.

    Anyway Iran deter nobody in a nuclear scenario for now.

    Such nuclear scenario is not impossible if Iran block the SoH.
    It could even be supported by China to protect its oil supply which is today conditioned by the US dominance of the region.
    Actually in such case it would be easier for China to support the US than to support Iran…

    But maybe I am wrong and in such case as the closure of the SoH then China will declare war to the US… Well that seem very unlikely…

  193. kooshy says:

    nico says:
    February 28, 2014 at 12:29 pm

    Nico Jaan

    Again this is not rocket science , Independence , freedom , sovereignty, has a cost that is why people like our own BiB puts his life on line and fights for his independence , his values etc. This why nations that want to keep their values are willing to pay the price and maintain a defense to protect their values and not for a minute be regretful of what they are paying for, you are right Iranians paid dearly (with the imposed tyranny they faced there was no other acceptable way) but look what they have achieved , today Iranians can claim they are one of the proudest nations since they stood up and they fought like a true hero and saved their country of being Zalil likes of UK, Germany, France, Korea, Turkey , Japan, and many other client states that don’t have full sovereignty over their affairs and interests.

    The war is correctly called, “Sacred Defense of the Imposed War” meaning when someone imposes a war upon you they want something that you are probably not willing to give up in Iran’s case was her independence, nothing else and she paid the price god bless them Iranian young patriots with a true believable nationalist leadership stood up and saved their country their believes and their values. Nobody and nothing can take this tremendous achievement away from them.

  194. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    February 28, 2014 at 12:55 pm
    What is “fitna 88″?

    Karl someone in the far west tried to impose someone like Merkel on Iran, Iranians were smarter than that, once more they took a shit ( in Persian is Readan) on their plan, ever since that became to be known as Fitne of 88

  195. nico says:

    BiBiJon says:

    “Let me not mince words here when I can simply say: YOU ARE 100% RIGHT.”

    You are advancing your claim of interpretation of historical events and their consequences.
    Such things are highly debatable.
    I countered your arguments with counter arguments which I believe are logically consistent.

    You can ironically dismiss or engage. Up to you.

  196. BiBiJon says:

    nico says:
    February 28, 2014 at 1:47 pm

    You make valuable contributions. Others also make contributions. The reality, unknown, and unproven by all of us is composed of all these contributions and quite a few things none of us has the capacity to imagine/articulate.

    Folks can get into endlessly meaningless games of ‘whats your proof.’

    Today’s Iran is the embodiment of all, and I repeat all, things, events, mistakes, successes that have happened in the past up until today. Some things, such as an eight war, looms larger than some other things.

    Having said that, I’ve benefited from reading your opinions. I have not benefited from your dismissing others’ opinions as lacking ‘proof’ and self-servingly give the impression that your opinions are soooo logical and riddled with proooooofs.

    If you can avoid that kind of crap, then hey, when I have time, of course, will be a pleasure to engage.

  197. James Canning says:

    The Financial Times today has an interesting report from Iran, regarding the bloated public-sector staffing. This problem grew much worse after 2005.

  198. James Canning says:

    Bussed-in Basiji,

    Surely you are aware that John Kerry knows very well indeed that “the Vietnamese” defeated the Americans (Vietnam War).

  199. Jay says:

    BiBiJon says:
    February 28, 2014 at 2:01 pm

    Although I agree with your assertion regarding the impracticability of “proof” here, I wish to advocate the importance of at least two practices:

    a) Modesty. You know what you know, and what you know is far far less than what you don’t know
    b) Evidence. Not necessarily of the scientific kind, but of the historical, social, political, rational, or otherwise.

    In my view opinions are more digestible when they are accompanied by some measure along the continuum of: “it is because I say so …. and ….. here is a series of indicators that point in the direction of ….. and so on”

  200. Karl.. says:


    Thanks, you got any link to get some more info about this group, google didnt really have anything?

  201. nico says:

    BiBiJon says:
    “If you can avoid that kind of crap, then hey, when I have time, of course, will be a pleasure to engage.”

    I state my points. You state yours.
    I feel no need to state how great your point is. However I feel the need to point its demerit.
    The subject of an argument is to confront idea not to be a warm up case.
    If you do not taste such format and need to be assured of the kind of respect you “deserve” every single phrase then actually you maybe need to discuss only with those already sharing your opinion.

    I have no respect for sophistry and so called protocol and politness.
    The greatest respect IMO is to speak logically and consistently.

  202. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    February 28, 2014 at 2:21 pm

    “Thanks, you got any link to get some more info about this group, google didnt really have anything?’

    Yeh- I know whenever I try the search this on the google I end up getting a full Green Screen with wording that reads welcome to Iran desk at Langley and then the screen goes off and becomes all mustardy yellow the color of a used dipper, incidentally did you have the same experience. I don’t know why that is but it seems the Iran desk at Langley needs fresh dippers. Any more unknowns you may want to know Karl?

  203. kooshy says:

    James Canning says:
    February 28, 2014 at 2:19 pm

    “Surely you are aware that John Kerry knows very well indeed that “the Vietnamese” defeated the Americans (Vietnam War).”

    Gav James of all the Nuke enrichment sites

    The only reason one can think of, as why the poor distanced American colonies were defeated in that unfortunate war is, only because her majesties heroic armies didn’t participated in that war, if they did like they should have, I am sure they could have turned things around in less than anyone can ever imagine.

  204. Karl.. says:


    Ok so how do you know about them then?

  205. kooshy says:

    Jay says:
    February 28, 2014 at 2:20 pm

    I agree, but again not everything everyone writes here should be stated as a hard opinion, although there is nothing wrong to have an opinion and state so, but sometimes people write their ideas, views that can be point and opening for discussions so you can build an opinion based on these discussions. There are historical social, political, geographical facts and knowledge that one needs to have to be a participant in a discussion, otherwise becomes too difficult if every post becomes a theses with links to supporting documentations. Like how many documents you need to have to proof that Iran’s self-reliance on her military hardware development is a direct result of Iran Iraq war, like if you don’t have the knowledge that Iran missile development was when Iran was confronted by Iraqi missiles hitting Iranian cities they end up begging for a few from Libya and since they were hard to buy and get, they had no choice but to develop and start making their own, isn’t that a direct result of the war, this eventually became the base for Iran’s space industry.

  206. BiBiJon says:

    nico says:
    February 28, 2014 at 2:35 pm

    Well said.

    Jay says:
    February 28, 2014 at 2:20 pm

    Very well said.

  207. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    February 28, 2014 at 3:00 pm

    “Ok so how do you know about them then?”

    Karl- I didn’t see it since unfortunately at the time I was far away, but the smell of that shit like the one now is coming from Ukraine was all over the world for everyone to smell.

    Could it be that at the time you were wearing Chanel No.5 and couldn’t smell the shit like everyone else did?

  208. Karl.. says:


    Your perfume? Probably.

  209. James Canning says:


    The British PM, Harold Wilson, could see that reunification of Vietnam under the communists did not pose a threat to Britain.

    Idiotic war, in my view.

  210. Jay says:

    kooshy says:
    February 28, 2014 at 3:02 pm

    “…views that can be point and opening for discussions so you can build an opinion based on these discussions”

    Perfectly okay! When I raise a point as an opening, I try to make it clear. Clarity is helpful, don’t you think?

  211. BiBiJon says:

    Anyway Iran deter nobody in a nuclear scenario for now.

    I beg to differ without proof, but with some indicators …

    Right this minute, and any other minute during the past 70+ years since Hiroshima, any NWS could have hit Hamadan, demanded unconditional surrender if Shiraz and Isfahan are not to be nuked.

    So, I have to ask what is deterring them?

    a) Some degree of conscience
    b) Some amount of dread at the reaction of the rest of humanity
    c) What if they don’t surrender, in which case multiply (a) and (b) by 3.
    d) Some element of worry that what is good for the goose will come to haunt the gander.
    e) What if during the 24 hours Iran was given to surrender, she lobs enough missiles in all directions to create oil havoc?

    Basically, the world in which a NWS nukes a NNWS is world gone mad wherein nothing deters anybody, methinks.

    As for China’s involvement in case of war escalating completely out of hand with Iran, then China surely is more likely to do as she has been doing these last 35 years, which is to use her considerable financial influence, and her veto at UNSC to not allow provocations get to a level where Iran feels the need to block SoH. No?

  212. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    February 28, 2014 at 3:18 pm

    “Your perfume? Probably”

    Karl- good manure like that makes a beautiful blossom with heavenly spring scents of independence and freedom, which Iran is the biggest exporter in the world, the essence of Iran’s flowers (Mohammadi Rose Flowers) are the bases for European famous brand fragrances perhaps including Chanel No.5 that you like to wear.

  213. Karl.. says:


    Right but you shouldnt drink the perfume.

  214. kooshy says:

    Just want to make sure you understand that I didn’t meant to say you in Europe are wear Iranian shit to smell good, I was just pointing to nature and base of this industry, never less Iran would still love to export the essence of her flowers to Europe.

  215. humanist says:

    Manufacturing Crisis, The Untold Story of Iran Nuclear Scare by Gareth Porter is a truly powerful and TIMELY book.

    Watch how Gareth introduces the book to a small audience.

    Maybe this is as devastating [or more] as Eric A. Brill’s report on June 2009 Iranian Presidential Election, The arguments in that report were so compelling, soon after its publication, in the corrupted media, the characterizations of that election by ‘egregious fraudulent’, ‘rigged’ etc were altered to ‘contested’, ‘disputed’ and so on.

    Even the notion of ‘Green Revolution’ has now completely faded away from their dialect.

    This book however might effect the warmongering neocons differently. It could cause a tailspin which is brisker and more erratic…. and hopefully, for the good of humanity, will be decisively mortifying.

  216. nico says:

    kooshy says:

    “Young patriots with a true believable nationalist leadership stood up and saved their country their believes and their values. Nobody and nothing can take this tremendous achievement away from them.”

    I can only agree with all you said.
    However I think we are going off the original discussion subject.
    That is whether a nuclear capable Iran might deter Type 1 war in the future and whether it could have detered the Irak-Iran war in the first place, protected patriotic Iranian values/independence and saved all those lives.
    And whether Irak or Afghanistan would have been raped and murdered as they were if they ever were nuclear capable.

  217. Karl.. says:


    Not sure, you need to listen though, dont drink it.

  218. BiBiJon says:

    kooshy says:
    February 28, 2014 at 3:02 pm

    Yes, and having lived long enough to know first hand that a mere 20 years after 60 million souls perished in WWII, we were all growing our hair long and dancing to the Beatles, find myself having to defend a preposterously inhumane claim that people have a way of recovering from incredible tragedies.

    And, that’s not to mention the blue suede shoes and greased back hair styles 15 years earlier.

  219. Rd. says:

    Your glory was taint with humiliation and defeat when south stood up and resist.
    The history of dignity is wide awake. Its writing stories of triumph.

  220. Jay says:

    Parody of AIPAC 2014 – taken down twice by youtube!

  221. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    February 28, 2014 at 3:52 pm

    Karl read the article I linked , we do drink the rose water (Golab) these flowers are made of sacred soil of Iran, for at least 25 centuries we make many different refreshments , many different foods, even we bless our gone love ones with the rose water, we have many, many uses for these flowers, including drinking a brewed heavenly water and sent of Iran. We even have a festival for these flowers like the “October fist” , but above all we bless the world with fresh smell of Iran’s desert flowers by exporting them all over the world.

  222. nico says:

    BiBiJon says:
    February 28, 2014 at 3:30 pm

    Interesting points.
    Let me play my counter arguments.

    “a) Some degree of conscience”
    When such policies as the Iran-Irak war, the Irak “worth it” embargo, the Syrian and Lybian disasters are played out by the western powers, one could wonder at western conscience…
    Surely the public opinion would be shocked by the US nuking Iran.
    However in time of deep economic crisis triggered by the stop of oil flow from the PG with kothing to eat, not car running and all economic activity stopped, again one could wonder what would be acceptable to the public opinion.

    “b) Some amount of dread at the reaction of the rest of humanity”
    See point a)

    “c) What if they don’t surrender, in which case multiply (a) and (b) by 3.”
    See point a)

    “d) Some element of worry that what is good for the goose will come to haunt the gander.”
    The only empirical evidence in the case of Japan provides opposite conclusion.
    However I need to agree that the worldwide geopolitical circumstances that obtained in 1945 are quite different now with more nuclear armed or nuclear ready states.

    “e) What if during the 24 hours Iran was given to surrender, she lobs enough missiles in all directions to create oil havoc?”
    That is a true deterent option.
    However applicable directly to other country than US or Russia which are self-sufficient in oil production. (If the fraking promise is fullfiled)
    Indirectly it would creates economical havoc that would directly impact all nations.
    However in time of geopolitical uncertainty with the global balance of power shifting eastward and the USD mokopoly in jeopardy, the global economic havoc is not excluded anyway.
    That is first and foremost a US-China issue and a the reconfiguration of the globalized economy.
    Thus as I stated previously the mounting of tension in my opinion would be first the result of that phenomenon not the other way round.
    I mean the China-US issue could translate in danger for Iran.
    Surely that is not the case right now but it is brewing for years

    “As for China’s involvement in case of war escalating completely out of hand with Iran”
    See point e)

  223. Karl.. says:


    Ok I admit you win, I have no idea what your trying to do or say.

  224. BiBiJon says:

    nico says:
    February 28, 2014 at 5:08 pm

    Your counter to:

    a) You are equating both different scales, direct/indirect involvement, and legitimated international UNSC approved sanctions with completely unlawful, over the top behavior, such as nuking a country.

    I would say the start of WWIII is precisely when “in time of deep economic crisis triggered by the stop of oil flow from the PG with kothing to eat, not car running and all economic activity stopped.” In other words, if the world did not manage to contain the tensions which then led a blockade, closing of SoH, sinking of ships etc. then yes the world would have gone mad, and I don’t think the scenario lends itself to any rational discourse.

    on (b), (c), see (a)

    d) You’ve answered yourself

    e) It is not a country specific deterrent, it is a weapon of global economic destruction, as you say yourself. In the dire circumstances you describe, there are other alternatives for the declining empire other than destruction of the world. She herself can splinter into mini states and confederations. Other world actors can try and soften the landing for the empire. And, ultimately threat of global nuclear war may deter the desperate emperor at the last moment. One we’ve gone past midnight, frankly, even as an Iranian, my last worry will be for Iran; the whole world is in peril.

  225. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    February 28, 2014 at 5:17 pm


    It is not about me or you wining, that is not my intention being here, I am here because it’s about saying who I am and what I believe and how much I care for it. That is the reason I engage in this discussions.

  226. BiBiJon says:

    humanist says:
    February 28, 2014 at 4:07 pm

    Can’t get enough of Porter

  227. nico says:

    BiBiJon says:

    “e) It is not a country specific deterrent, it is a weapon of global economic destruction, as you say yourself. In the dire circumstances you describe, there are other alternatives for the declining empire other than destruction of the world. She herself can splinter into mini states and confederations. Other world actors can try and soften the landing for the empire. And, ultimately threat of global nuclear war may deter the desperate emperor at the last moment. One we’ve gone past midnight, frankly, even as an Iranian, my last worry will be for Iran; the whole world is in peril.”

    You stated the real important question: are the US ready to face their inevitable economic demise peacefully?
    Surely a “soft landing” would be helped by enough deterence and military power by other countries.
    Whether it is through nuclear weapon or nuclear ready capability or conventional military power is debatable.

    My opinion as previously stated at this juncture is that a nuclear ready Iran is enough to protect against current threat and prepare for possible future threat given
    A) the cost and the danger to openly seek nuclear weapon right now
    B) the imminence of the threat which is not that concrete right now
    C) the likelyhood of globalized economy and world geopolitical desintegration in the years the come with the assiociated threat by then.
    D) the utterly strategic importance of the PG.

    Maybe you do not care about the C)
    Iranian planners and politicians maybe care.

  228. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Israeli patrols vanish along border area (in Lebanon)

    Not sure what to make of this – the theory expressed in the article is that Israel is wary of Hizballah retaliation for the airstrikes. My guess, if that’s true, is that Israel doesn’t want more kidnapped soldiers forcing them to start an attack on Lebanon earlier than they intend. It would be ineffective – just as it was in 2006 – if Israel can’t cross Syrian territory to attack Hizballah in the Bekaa Valley. Israel needs the West to intervene before it can profitably attack Hizballah via Syrian territory.

  229. James Canning says:

    Jim Lobe will be barred entry to Aipac’s annual convention in Washington. AEI hates him too. Tells too much truth in his reporting about the Middle East.

  230. Richard Steven Hack says:

    The Latest Call for Humanitarian War in Syria


    A sober, clear-eyed analysis of the logic of the decisions by the Obama administration suggest that the failure of the peace conference was a programmed outcome. The inescapable conclusion as to why the conference was even held, therefore, is that administration hawks saw the failure of the conference as a valuable public relations weapon to move public opinion in favor of more direct military involvement.

    Before I am accused of being overly cynical or even conspiratorial, a review of the decisions made in the days and weeks leading up to the conference provides more than adequate evidence to support this contention.

    End Quote


  231. M. Ali says:

    I was just thinking. Iran has two strong allies, that being Hezbollah Lebanon and Syria, and he hasn’t let any of the world powers destroy them. But now look at Russia. It blinks and Ukraine is snatched away from her.

    This is why we can’t depend on Russia as an ally. It doesn’t know what its doing.

  232. Karl.. says:

    m ali

    Russia is not an allied to Iran and wasnt to Ukraine neither. Russia letting herself be fooled by US, EU constantly. Just take the decision not to sell the defense system s 300 to Iran. What did russia gain by doing such a move?

  233. BiBiJon says:

    M. Ali says:
    March 1, 2014 at 3:16 am

    I would echo what Karl said above, but add that a more useful way of looking at Russia’s relations is that of self-centered interests. Some of those interests are aligned with ‘East’ Ukrainians, particularly ethnic Russian Crimeans, and Iranians. Where those interests are not aligned, then not only Russia cannot be relied upon for help, Iranians, and Western Ukrainians should consider themselves lucky if Russia does nothing to hurt them.

    Russians typically don’t advertise what they are doing, and almost never seek ‘endorsement’ from their adversaries. But, they do act decisively without fanfare, e.g. Georgia, when they feel action is warranted.

    We’ll probably not know what Russia’s reaction to Ukraine will be, until after the dust has settled. My bet is that Russia does not want civil war in the Ukraine. If Russian interest cannot be protected politically, then Russia will move with overwhelming force and safeguard her interests … without fanfare.

    If Obama has learned any lessens about issuing red lines, he should avoid saying anything too explicit about what should/shouldn’t happen because his red-lines will not be a part of Putin’s decision making.

  234. Karl.. says:


    I agree, overall hopefully Russia wont be fooled to engage military in Ukraine that would hurt them (image wise) more than anyone else.
    The western media, neocons, nato, obama etc act incredibly stupid right now, almost seems that they want a war. As Iran have said many times, west sees everything in zero-sum-games…

  235. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Thanks for the completion of the list. So damn many over the years, can we mention them all in a post?

    When we say that it is the blood of the martyrs that insures us, it’s not propaganda it’s a fact.


    Let’s just say we deter them- nuclear and non-nuclear. We wage war on the “malakoot” level.


    Like I said, Vladi P is all “balls”. Looks like those willy Russians just took over Crimea.

  236. kooshy says:

    Ali here is b’s analysis on MOA
    Turkish intelligence helped with training Tartars in support of a local Crimea ant-Russian coup
    Russian intelligence has thoroughly penetrated the coup-plotters communications (see Nuland tape) and knew what was coming
    Russian aligned forces secured the Crimea and prevented infiltration of more Tartaric units from Turkey
    On the Crimea, as well as in other Russian aligned areas in east Ukraine (Donetsk, Mykolaiv and Dnipropetrovsk), counter coups are establishing separate regions which will ask for Russian support and eventual incorporation into the Russian Federation.
    If all this goes well for the Russians the “western” coup in Kiev will have resulted in the “west” acquiring a bankrupt, dirt poor west Ukraine while Russia will acquire the industry and resource rich east Ukraine and will keep the Crimea as its strategic asset.
    In the context of the war of Syria the coup in the Ukraine was a countermeasure to Russian support for Syria. Unless the Crimea falls to coup forces that countermeasure will have failed.

  237. Jay says:

    kooshy says:
    March 1, 2014 at 9:58 am

    Russia upper house approved the use of force in the Crimea region a few hours ago.

  238. khomeini says:

    To All

    I was annoyed to see Putin’s Russia unable to defend Ukraine from US engineered regime change. How reliable is Russia as a partner for Iran and Syria? It raises serious question. But it seems, Putin has started to recalibrate its hopeless position and finally beginning to play some hard ball. It’s good to see Russia has sent some troops to Crimea region and hopefully will sent more to defend Ukraine against EU-US Nazi tugs. I hope Russia can replay Georgia scenario and integrate east and south of Ukraine into Russian federation.

    However, there is something which is interest to me in regards to Ukraine – I am sure all of you will find it intriguing as well. One of the Ukraine’s parliament member has announced the following regarding NUCLEAR ARSANEL.

    “We’ll regain our status as a nuclear power and that’ll change the conversation. Ukraine has all the technological means needed to create a nuclear arsenal – which would take us about three to six months,” – Svoboda party MP Mikhail Golovko.

    Its extraordinary that an NPT member state can openly threaten to go nuclear and US and EU remain silent. On the other hand US is obsessed about Iran’s civilian nuclear program. This is high quality US hypocrisy.

  239. James Canning says:


    Foolish comments by a single politician, in this case in Ukraine, are not the comments by that country.

    Putin has good reasons to support the territorial integrity of Ukraine. And doing so is part of a longstanding agreement with the UK and the US.

  240. James Canning says:

    The Ukrainian parliament should cancel its foolish legislation that removed Russian as an official language in Ukraine.

    The monument to the Russian general who conquered the Crimea should be restored asap. (Fools smashed it)

  241. khomeini says:

    James Canning says:
    March 1, 2014 at 1:48 pm

    “Foolish comments by a single politician, in this case in Ukraine, are not the comments by that country.”

    You did not understand the meaning of my post. If a Iranian MP had made a similar comment about Iran making nuclear arsenal would US and EU ignore it? Would they call it foolish comment of a MP? would they say it is not Iran’s official policy, so it has to be ignored. I am sure they would not ignore it and instead use it as a smoking gun to prove that Iran peaceful nuclear energy program is not peaceful.

  242. kooshy says:

    khomeini says:
    March 1, 2014 at 12:27 pm
    “How reliable is Russia as a partner for Iran and Syria?”

    As for the Ukraine nuclear pasture to me that sounds like is the “price to pay” that Mr. Obama was warning Mr Putin with yesterday. As far as that goes this should show how desperate the American side is becoming like they never learned from the Cuban missile crises when the American president was peeing I his pants to find a way to communicate with the soviets and at the end was forced to move his misled from Turkey, do they really think this time is going to be different ?

    I think the prize is the Europe that in real term like Victoria said is going to get F***ed.

    Inight of that the stupid Turks no matter the client state they are, never less are making too many strategic mistakes

    Seems like they were actively involved in the Ukraine mess if true Russia will be very concerned and will find necessary to do some strategic damage to Turkey.

    Sorry typing on mobile since in our west side of LA is over 24 hours now that we don’t have electricity talking of Detroit ?

  243. kooshy says:

    Sorry meant to say for Iran the Russians are as reliable as Soviets were , as an Iranian use them when you can but don’t put your savings in their bank , methinks

  244. James Canning says:


    I think you are forgetting that Russia is working with Turkey to get a pipeline for Russian gas to the Balkans. Bypassing Ukraine.

  245. James Canning says:


    Yes, I agree with you that if an Iranian MP said something along the same lines, it would be trumpeted in the US (and elsewhere) as proof Iran is going to build nukes.

  246. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Resolving Nuclear Arms Claims Hinges on Iran’s Demand for Documents

    Another way Obama intends to sabotage the talks: accuse Iran of doing something based on phoney documents which he will not provide to the IAEA or Iran.

  247. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Rouhani says Iran will not acquire nuclear weapons ‘on principle’


    “We are not after weapons of mass destruction. That’s our red line,” Rouhani said. “If Iran was after weapons of mass destruction, it would build chemical weapons. Those are easier to make. It would build biological arms, which are even easier than making chemical weapons.”

    He said Iran’s “beliefs” and commitment to “ethical principles”, not merely the United Nations’ nuclear non-proliferation treaty, prevent it from making a bomb. Iran is a signatory to the NPT and says it will remain committed to its obligations not to build nuclear weapons under the treaty but will not compromise on its right to enrich uranium and produce nuclear fuel.

    “We signed these treaties to show the world we are not after such weapons,” Rouhani told military commanders. “Even if there were no NPT or other treaties, our belief, our faith, our religion and principles tell us not to seek weapons of mass destruction.”

    End Quote

    Must really irritate some people here who don’t understand why Iran doesn’t need nukes and couldn’t use nukes if they had them…

  248. Richard Steven Hack says:

    For those interested in the Ukraine crisis – which frankly I view as off-topic here – Pepe Escobar has a good piece in Asia Times, “Carnival in Crimea”, which demonstrates why Obama is being out-maneuvered by Putin yet again…

    It’s worth reading just for this quote: “The notion that Putin will order a military attack on the Ukraine should be billed to US corporate media’s sub-zoological intellectual quotient.”

  249. Sammy says:

    From MoA :

    Three pre-Iraq war wishes of the sorceress Condoleeza Rice that still hold true: we shall punish France, ignore Germany and forgive Rrrrrussia!!
    So France is sentenced with two sequential cretins in the Palais Elysees with no reprieve in sight.
    Angela Merkel is ignored/overlooked as some hausfrau who juggles EU household finances but must be spied upon so that she doesn’t try to cheat.
    And Russia, sorceress, demanded her Smeagol-looking apprentice Nuland? What can we do, laments Condi, but forgive Russia again and again? More power to Putin!
    After the Sochi meeting between the Russian and Chinese leaders, a joint statement denounced and called for an end to foreign meddling in Ukraine; subtext of which Russia was also not going to stick a finger into the Ukrainian pie.
    But talking reason with Western ideologues is like offering Oreos to the Cookie Monster; the nature of the beast means that it is never enough.
    Ukraine is their new cake to bake. Assorted fruits, nuts and neo-cons threw themselves into the mix and turned the heat up.
    But looks like baking class got the recipe wrong. Soon to get cake all over their faces from Mr Putin.
    Memo to Nuland, Cameron and gang: “You can’t take the heat, stay the f**k outta my Ukrainian kitchen.’’
    Smile, guys, and forgive Russia. Again.
    China will support Russia diplomatically and –if necessary, in case of real hot war – financially. The stakes are very high. Ukraine is just a little cupcake to the West. They can’t wait to get a bite of the mother of all cakes: Russia and then China.

    Posted by: nakedtothebone | Mar 2, 2014 12:47:52 AM |

  250. Sammy says:

    From Mr. Pragma in MoA , a brilliant thinker and analyst…

    ‘NATO will never agree to a seperation or split.’

    They need not because Russia is not seeking to split ukraine.

    But, just for the sake of completeness: Nor did my neighbours wife. And now they are divorced.

    Or, in other words: So what? zatos desires and dislikes are irrelevant. Anyway zato just means “zusa and izrael and their colonies minions and slaves”.

    This weekend will be remembered as the weekend the zusa wannabe-empire began to fall.

    Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Mar 2, 2014 6:33:34 AM | 181

  251. M. Ali says:

    I’m thinking about the developments in Ukraine and I think its possible new lines are being drawn in the next phase of world powers. The fake illusions of partnerships between powers might have to be finally put aside.

    Russia got a hard lesson with Libya. After that, it has been more vigilant, but not vigilant enough. Their support for Syria, while better than Libya, was not enough, and it was Iran that really knew how to back up an ally, not Russia.

    But Russia is probably realizing now that the chess pieces are starting to move closer to their mother country now. Can they still pretend to be big and important, while shuffling their feet when it comes to defending their interest? Can they continue retreating or not standing firm whenever a confrontation with the west seems on the horizon?

    With Ukraine, I hope Russia realizes that they need to be really steadfast. They can protect their territory, and start really backing Iran and strengthening ties with India and China. Big regional players can work together to push out the American influence, but if they start constantly getting scared that supporting another might hurt them, then eventually, they’ll find American influence seeping into their own countries eventually.

    Russia won’t be allowed to get so powerful in the region to completely replace USA. That is, Iran won’t allow USA to be pushed out just so Russia will take control of it, or with China’s neighbors, or with India’s neighbors. But by pushing USA out, countries like Iran, Russia, China, and India, will have a much more independant future.

  252. M. Ali says:

    Ukraine has been a moral boost to the west. They were :-( over not succeding on Syria, but Ukraine has given them a new shot of enthuisim for talking about a revolution in Iran again.

    “With all eyes on the courageous protesters of Independence Square in Kiev, an interesting parallel with Iran simmers under the surface that you can bet is not lost on President Rouhani and Ayatollah Khamenei.”

    Apparently, the article talks about how, currnt businessmen are baiting Iran with juicy investment opportunities, having Iranians drool over the awesome capatalistic future that is just ahead of us, so that when they pull this away from us, if Rohani & co don’t fall in line, we Iranians will suddenly become frenzy and go mad and topple the government.

  253. A-B says:

    Dare I say: ‘History’ is repeating itself? .. * sigh* AGAIN!

    The shameless Western one-trick-pony has become so sloppy it doesn’t care to change the ‘narrative’; heck, it rehashes the same wordings. So, “Russia has to pay” again, says Obomba, like Billary did before him in case of Syria. And as the Western Savages unleashed anti-humans they cultivated (i.e. the Salafi/Takfiri/Wahhabis) in Syria, they unleashed not only Takfiris in Ukraine but also Neo-Nazis. And not-so-ironically these extremist “anti-Semites” are cheered on by American ‘Jews’, like Nuland; another bitch-from-hell like Clinton, Rice x2, Sherman, etc. Is there ANYONE who still believes that these ‘demonstrations’ and ‘revolutions’ are not staged? Is there anyone who has any doubt about the Green ‘revolution’ in Iran? (huh, mr. Pepe?) As I said early on, the Western fascist-imperialist has subjected Iran to the same treatment as Russia and China but to a MUCH MUCH severer degree. And Iran has dealt with it MUCH better than the two giant ‘blobs’. But the Russians (like the ‘Arabs’!), of course, consider themselves too superior to compare with Iranians, because Western/Europoopean racists have decided to demote Iran to lowest of the low. And here we have this guy in the article above shamelessly blaming the racist-cultist savagery that has the marks of Western tribalism written all over it, on people of the region; that it is about ‘sectarianism’ between Sunnis and Shias. No; the West is against Iran and then Shia because that is Iran; like that great Greek Pig of Macedon – that vile anti-Christ and not-so-ironically the poster-boy of Western fascist-imperialists – who ravaged Iran in 330 BC was against Mazdayasna, the religion of Zartosht.

    And, not-so-ironically, the same Western ‘politicians’ – all democratically elected – that reared their ugly heads in Kiev to shamelessly instigate unrest in – I guess ‘sektarian’!! – Ukraine showed their ugly white-trash faces in Tehran wanting to do ‘business’!


  254. James Canning says:


    You actually are angry with Alexander the Great?

  255. James Canning says:


    Condoleezza Rice in 2003 was a dupe or stooge of neocon warmongers. Full stop.

  256. James Canning says:

    Writing in The New York Times today, Steven Erlanger claimed Russia has “annexed” South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Not correct.

  257. James Canning says:

    One reason many Ukrainians want membership in the EU is simply that they see this as the way to decrease corruption and increase per capital income. Poland and Ukraine had similar per capita incomes two decades aqo. Now, Poles have about three times the income of Ukrainians.

  258. A-B says:

    So, IRONICALLY, I tend to agree with Nuland: F**K EU! :-)

  259. kooshy says:

    Do you need more reasons to be proved that this westerners are either hypocrites or they think The rest of the world is dumb here is what they write for you to believe.

    “The EU is also ready to resuscitate efforts to make pipeline adjustments to allow natural gas to be pushed westward toward Ukraine, reducing of Kiev’s overwhelming dependence on Russian gas.”

    The F*ing EU her self is leaving on the Russian gas but never less she is going to help Ukraine reduce her dependency on the gas coming from Russia.

    In these situation my mom used a Persian proverb that was translated as “the blind that is holding the cane for the another blind”

    “كوري كه عصا كش كور دكر شود”

  260. James Canning says:

    Michael Tillotson, writing in The Times (London) Feb. 22nd about Nicholas II of Russia, and events of 1914: “It takes a great man to suffer loss of pride for the sake of his subjects, and Nicholas II lacked that greatness.” How very true.

    Nicholas should “have set survival of Russia as she was, however shakey, ahead of prestige and told the Serbs to simmer down and take what was coming to them.” Very true indeed.

  261. khomeini says:

    Finally Putin is showing himself. He is a strong leader and clearly knows how to kick west’s bottom.

    Trouble have started in eastern Ukraine as well and looks like will follow Crimea’s footsteps. It will be so nice if both east and south Ukraine break and join Russian federation – it will be a slap on US,EU and Kiev’s new Nazi regime.

    Why is Nuland so quite now? Has anybody heard of any statement coming out of her? I bet she is thinking Putin’s Russia f****d both US and EU.

  262. Fiorangela says:

    Metropolitan Opera’s “Prince Igor” was simulcast to theaters in USA on Saturday (encore on Wednesday).

    It’s a wonderful production and a new interpretation of a work that Borodin did not finish (thus many artists have put the pieces together in diverse ways). This interpretation focuses on the psychological evolution of the Prince, from the opening statement, “To unleash a war is the surest way to escape oneself,” through the war that sees his army defeated and his soldiers killed; his delirious recovery from wounds as a prisoner of the Khan; his eventual return to his people as they are besieged by the adversary, to the final scene:

    As we walked out of the theater people asked one another what the final scene meant: Was Igor going to build a cross and have himself crucified? Or was he gathering up the pieces and leading his people to rebuild their state?

    It’s both, I think: the Crucifixion images = Take up thy cross and follow me, as we rebuild our state. He was agreeing to lead in “joyful participation in the sorrows of the world.”

    George Kennan told US leaders that they needed to understand Russian literature to know how to “deal” with the Soviet Union. The people he was trying to reach took a patronizing approach rather than an empathic posture. Today, US elites are even more deeply entrenched in hubris and demonization of all things Russian. What fools.

  263. Fiorangela says:

    PS Echoing the Kiev-Nazi meme is a mistake that plays into the hands of the arrogant USAian elite that engineered the takeover/overthrow of Ukraine. They are thugs and puppets. But Nazism is a propaganda term that’s loaded with emotion calculated to engender hate; it has little relationship to the full context of historic events from which the name emerged. The American people have not been permitted to accurately explore the full context of British-German-Russian-US-zionist conflicts in that era.

  264. Sammy says:

    “Why is Nuland so quite now? Has anybody heard of any statement coming out of her? I bet she is thinking Putin’s Russia f****d both US and EU.”

    It is reported that ‘Fickie Nuland Kagan’ had encapsulated herself in one of the dungeons of the sate department watching Neo-Nazi SM pornos 24/7 and from time to time zuSSan Rice joins her , further details are not revealed.

  265. Karl.. says:

    Anyone read the new obama interview in the Atlantic where Obama calls the iranians racists among other stupid things?

  266. Sammy says:

    ZERO leverage over Russia…..

    …“We hear them talking about political isolation of Russia, economic sanctions possibly against certain Russian entities, also a laughable threat. They have absolutely zero leverage over Moscow considering the fact that Russia could simply turn off the gas to Europe and it would throw the entire continent into an uproar it would create chaos all throughout Europe ,” he noted.

    Draitser went on to say that US actions concerning Russia are symptomatic of Washington’s double-standard and hypocrisy.

    “It’s the height of hypocrisy for the United States to condemn Russia’s actions in east of Ukraine, the statements that you’ve heard from Secretary of State Kerry as well as from Obama himself all indicate that the United States is engaging in what George Orwell famously referred to as ‘doublethink,’ that is holding two contradictory views at the same time and believing both of them.”

    “On the one hand, the United States condemns what it calls an intervention by President Putin and the Russian government into the east of Ukraine, into Russian cultural and historical territory of Crimea, but this is quite interesting considering the fact that this is the United States which engages in serial interventions all over the world on much flimsier pretexts. Let us not forget that there were no American military bases, there were no American citizens under threat in Libya. There were no American military bases under threat in Yugoslavia, in Iraq, in Somalia, or elsewhere and yet the United States found a pretext under the cover of so-called humanitarianism to engage in brutal and bloody interventions in each of those cases and many others.”

    “All of a sudden the United States is up in arms citing international laws, citing the UN Charter and citing territorial integrity and sovereignty which is of course such an absurd and laughable accusation that it really requires incredible amount of self-deception to believe in it,” Draitser stated.

  267. Karl.. says:


    Well what could one say, western approach to Ukraine have been insane, media+politicians, everyone. Absolutely crazy.
    Think this x100 and you have what the west would act like in case of a war with Iran.

  268. M. Ali says:

    Haha, amusing:

    “Meanwhile, Ukraine launched a treason case against its new navy chief after he switched allegiance to the pro-Russian Crimea region.

    Rear Admiral Denis Berezovsky was appointed head of Ukraine’s navy on Saturday and the Kiev government was still claiming its Black Sea fleet remained loyal on Sunday afternoon.

    Appearing before cameras in Sevastopol alongside Sergiy Aksyonov, the pro-Russian prime minister of Crimea’s regional parliament, he said he had ordered Ukrainian naval forces there to disregard orders from “self-proclaimed” authorities in Kiev.”

    So, apparently, new Kiev government appointed a guy to head the Navy, and in less than 24 hours, he claimed that he and Ukraine Navy was siding with Russia.

  269. fyi says:

    Sammy says:

    March 3, 2014 at 4:00 am

    UN Charter, UNSC etc. are no longer relevant; haven’t been so since the demise of the Soviet Union.

    There was an attempt at ad hoc arrangements such as G8, SCO, and G20 which also now have been shown to be devoid of substance.

    Each and every state is on her own until and unless the Axis Powers, Russia, and China agree on the parameters of a new Peace and a new Jus to replace that which was established i1945.

    At the moment, the Axis Powers – a political-military alliance of more than 1 billion people, is arrogantly and degenerately supremely confident of its own preponderance and uninterested in re-negotiating a peace and a jus.

    That will not change probably for another one or 2 decades….

  270. Rehmat says:

    The Zionist-controlled mainstream media has accused Obama administration for forcing Netanyahu to stop the assassination campaign in Iran. One wonders, how could Washington pursued Mossad not targeting Iranian scientists when it couldn’t stop Israel targeting US interests.

  271. Fiorangela says:

    Will US-EU provocations/ coup d’etat in Ukraine backfire such that Russia, China, Iran, Turkey will more closely cooperate?

  272. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    March 3, 2014 at 12:59 pm

    Not Turkey – she is a servant of the Axis Powers and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

    For Iranians, there it is a case of glib satisfaction that Russians failed in their appeasement policy of the Axis Powers and had to intervene in Ukraine.

    Chinese are happy that the Axis Powers have tangled themselves in Eastern Europe and in the Middle East and thus not looking too closely at China.

    This marks the end of the interregnum that started in 1991 and has ended now.

  273. James Canning says:

    “Foreign intelligence officials now lean towards the theory that Mr Putin decided even before the Olympics to remove Victor Yanukovich, the former Ukrianian president, from power . . . ”

    – – Kathrin Hille, writing in the Financial Times today

  274. James Canning says:


    It is worth bearing in mind that Putin strongly disliked the Ukrainian dictator. And there are reports Putin himself wanted him overthrown.

  275. kooshy says:

    Fiorangela says:
    March 3, 2014 at 12:59 pm
    “Will US-EU provocations/ coup d’etat in Ukraine backfire such that Russia, China, Iran, Turkey will more closely cooperate”


    I don’t think one should count on Turkey to cooperate with the other three against western strategic interest and plans. In my opinion for now any possibility of that taking place is zero, on the other hand the other way around actually is ongoing including training for what took place in Ukraine. Turkey’ main problem is financially which she is totally dependent and attached (captured) to the west. Unlike for Iran or Russia any move by Turkey against the western interests will result in her total financial collapse (they will force her immediate financial collapse). In this regard turkey is not in any better shape than Germany, France, even UK.

  276. kooshy says:

    James Canning says:
    March 3, 2014 at 1:21 pm

    “It is worth bearing in mind that Putin strongly disliked the Ukrainian dictator. And there are reports Putin himself wanted him overthrown.’

    Gav James
    Do you, like your regime in London and her foreign secretary prefer and like the new unelected dictators who took over the western Ukraine, are you endorsing what the foreign secretary of UK just did. He just made a visit saluting and recognizing an unconstitutional takeover of an internationally recognized elected government. Shouldn’t the world call that rouge decision by a subservient regime in London endorsing and approving a second (Egypt) cope in a foreign country by an unelected mob in less than a year?

  277. James Canning says:


    The Russian foreign ministry said recently that there is a significant need for constitutional measure to be adopted in Ukraine, prior to elections.

    I obviously have reservations about coups.

    I assume you disapprove of the order to “shoot to kill”, given to the rooftop snipers the Ukrainian dicator deployed in Kiev.

  278. James Canning says:

    Financial Times leader today: “Obama must get real with Netanyahu”. Words of wisdom, in my judgment. But Aipac stooges in the US Congress will ensure it doees not happen.

  279. James Canning says:


    It appears Russia also wanted the Ukrainian dictator overthrown.

    The new government in Kiev blundered badly, virtually immediately, by cancelling the status of Russian as an official language in parts of Ukraine.

  280. Rd. says:

    James Canning says:

    “It is worth bearing in mind that Putin strongly disliked the Ukrainian dictator. And there are reports Putin himself wanted him overthrown.”

    are you suggesting Putin somehow managed to convince the western axis to promote a right wing nazi group to up-rise in Ukraine so Putin can get rid off the uki dictator??? amazingly brilliant… any more ideas?

  281. Fiorangela says:

    James Canning says:
    March 3, 2014 at 1:11 pm

    Thank you for that information, James, and Financial Times.

    The public urgently needs the kind of credible intelligence that only the British can supply.




  282. Rd. says:

    fyi says:

    “Chinese are happy that the Axis Powers have tangled themselves in Eastern Europe and in the Middle East and thus not looking too closely at China.”

    It seems rather ironic. For a good while we had the axis vs Iran, then axis are the pacific power and china took center stage, now it is Russia the bad boy.. presumably, before too long we’ll be back to Iran. seems like some kinda round robin merry go around!!! Perhaps “some” level of coordination amongst the three main opponents?? after all, no point in confronting the US head on.. just slowly wear ’em out.

  283. Karl.. says:


    I dont see west being weared out.
    Although as m ali here said earlier, the ukrainian politics by west make them more hungry to go after Iran.

  284. James Canning says:


    In Egypt there was the initial coup, overthrowing Mubarak, and the subsequent counter-coup, overthrowing Morsi.

  285. Karl.. says:


    Note how he calls the elected president a dictator..amazing those brits.

  286. James Canning says:


    John Lybeck, a Swedish economist, is one of the FT’s sources. He has a background in military intelligence.

    Are you claiming Putin liked the Ukrainian dictator?

  287. James Canning says:


    Are you actually claiming Yanukovich was not a dictator?

  288. Ataune says:


    “Are you claiming Putin liked the Ukrainian dictator?”

    Are you claiming that Yanukovitch, considered the legal President of Ukraine by Russia (and based on any reading of the international and Ukrainian laws by any objective observer), is not in Russia now and haven’t in a press conference asked for help from Russia to counter the putschists in Kiev ?

  289. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    March 3, 2014 at 3:22 pm

    It matters not how Mr. Putin felt about the elected Ukrainian President; what matters is that Axis Powers pushed too far and posed a threat to the security of Russia.

    Why doesn’t UK or France or Spain leave NATO?

    Against which threat is NATO organized?

    A billion people organized in NATO will not be permitted to dominate this planet.

  290. Karl.. says:


    This brit’ is not sane, but after all he supports his leader,

    funny also how this brit refuse to call saudiarabia a dictatorship.

  291. yk says:

    Me think James cracking oh sorry, I mean canning purpose is to disrupt logical exchange on this board. But now I realise that in Britain those in mental asylum are now allowed to access the Internet. Just like the British political leaders. Nevertheless I welcome his views, freedom of speech as the west would say when it suits their purpose.

  292. nico says:

    What the Russians does not matter.
    Whatever the fashion the situation unfold the Anglo benefit from the situation in Ukraine by their constant meddling.
    Just as in NK or in Iran cases the Anglo create rift and radicalize division.
    The Ukraine case is pretty obvious of geopolitical manoeuvering and agression against Russia.

    If the coup works then Russia is weakened and NATO grows with an additonal member.
    The next step being fomenting other coups in ByeloRussia and then in Russia.

    If the coup does not works and Russia reacts heavy handedly then the rift between Western Europe and the Slavic world is deepened.
    That is a typical Anglo oceanic plot to avoid Eurasian integration.
    I mean who would need the US if Western Europe had a strategic alliance with the Slavic world.

    As I said just like the Anglo policy to create rif between China and SK/Japan.
    Or the Anglo plot to politically support, finance and weaponize the radicalization of the shia sunni devide.

    The Iranian leaderz are trie strategists.
    They obviously see that the Anglo world and Nato extension is the primary plotter and enemy.
    They are against good neighborhood between nations.
    They do not respect Independence and self determination.
    They are after political, MSM and cultural dominance and invasion.

    And above all they are the most powerfull.

    Truly the enemy.

    Just like the Iranian nuclear case is played softely but very firmly by Iran leadership, Russia should use soft power and play the Ukraine case softely but very firmly.

  293. kooshy says:

    Bibi I can’t let go of the headline on the guardian Article you linked

    “The crisis in Crimea b>couldlead the world into a second cold war” I suspect this headline’ idea came from our own Gav James was

  294. James Canning says:


    If Putin already was making plans to get the president of Ukraine removed from office, this surely is of interest.

  295. James Canning says:


    Saudi Arabia is a monarchy and also an oligarchy. The king does not have total control of the decision-making.

  296. James Canning says:

    The Times of London reported recently that Prince Bandar bin Sultan will be replaced, as top man on the Syrian civil war situation.

  297. James Canning says:


    Chances of Ukraine becoming a member of Nato are rather low. It would of course be a very bad idea.

  298. James Canning says:


    An example, please, of a “logical exchange” you think I am trying to prevent.

  299. James Canning says:


    Russia was of course logical spot for the ex-president of Ukraine to go to.

  300. kooshy says:

    Gav James

    Is it fair to say that your highness thinks that every elected dictator must be overthrown by a color coup ( Ukraine, Egypt ), and on the contrary the non elected variety (KSA, Bahrain) shouldn’t be touched. Is this the policy of he majesty’s government?

  301. James Canning says:


    Did I indicate I was glad to see the president of Ukraine overthrown? Or Morsi, for that matter?

  302. James Canning says:


    I doubt William Hague was pushing for the overthrow of the president of Ukraine.

    A number of American neocons were, most definitely.

  303. Jay says:

    kooshy says:
    March 3, 2014 at 6:08 pm

    Several posts ago I addressed the view of a belief system that advocates “the eye of the beholder” approach for evaluating jus.

    James is a subscriber to this view. What is done is not as important as “who” does it! After all, some animals are more equal than others.

  304. Richard Steven Hack says:

    M K Bhadrakumar gets it right, as usual…except that Obama doesn’t HAVE a “foreign policy legacy” that’s worth a damn to begin with…

    Ukraine imperils Obama’s foreign-policy legacy

    The Ukraine issue once again demonstrates how the US is a “bull(y) in a china shop” when it comes to foreign (and indeed, domestic policy, consumed only by greed and lust for power over the whole world and everyone, “foreign and domestic” as the oath says.

  305. kooshy says:

    James Canning says:
    March 3, 2014 at 6:35 pm

    “I doubt William Hague was pushing for the overthrow of the president of Ukraine.”

    The honorable Gav James

    After watching his majesty the Royal Highness Prince Wales lap dancing for the king of the Saudi Arabia (I wonder while dancing if any small bills were inserted in his highness belt and if he kept it?) I have no doubt that her majesty’s foreign secretary will in no way get involved in any such an act of overthrow. Gav you can be sure such an idea never crosses my mind.

  306. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Justin Raimondo gives a lot of back story to the Ukraine situation…

    Crimea for the Crimeans

  307. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Almost everything you read in the media about the Ukraine issue is propaganda at this point.

    Russian Defense Ministry dismisses Ukraine ultimatum reports as ‘total nonsense’

  308. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Glenn Greenwald on Twitter points to a piece on how the media are fueling this…

    Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald now

    Good basic sense from @digby56 and @speechboy71 on the American pundit class & Ukraine

  309. Richard Steven Hack says:

    AIPAC Dictates Terms on Future Iran Deal
    Demands Iran Dismantle Civilian Program

  310. kooshy says:

    Richard Steven Hack says:
    March 3, 2014 at 7:16 pm

    Rich, I wouldn’t be worried about Obama’s legacy, the way I read the street sentiment here no one really likes or cares for this AH except a very small minority of reach blacks, he will have or leave no legacy no matter how much more mess-ups he do, it no longer matters, he can dealer every head of states in the world must go no one including his party’s leaders will take him serious he is completely done.

    Let’s start searching for the next AH puppets that are going to be selected and shaved down our throats by our deciders and their instrumental paid media personalities. I can’t wait to get to next election cycle, I always enjoy watching the usefulness of declaration of independence and the constitution kept behind glass boxes.

  311. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Ray McGovern on Obama’s Ukraine screw-up
    Ukraine: One ‘Regime Change’ Too Many?

  312. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Ukrainian troops dispatched in Crimea switch to region’s side – sources

    My prediction: at the end of this, Crimea will be re-united with Russia and the rest of the Ukraine will be an economic and political shambles – and Obama will have major egg on his face…again. And Putin will be laughing.

  313. kooshy says:

    This guy sounds like he is opting to be the Kiev bob asking help from our own ever sanction threatening DC bob

    “So far, Ukrainian armed forces have exercised restraint and refrained from active resistance to the aggression, but they are in full operational readiness,” Ukrainian Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev said.”

  314. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Notice how weasel Canning completely avoided addressing Bahrain.

    Also I recall him singing the praises of Bandar a few years ago and how he has Bandar’s official biography right their on his table next to him…and now very matter-of-fact just reporting that his darling has been booted by the top bitches in Saudi.

    What a weasel…

    Remember Canning, the Prince of Wales and his nane are all prostitutes in the service of ale Saud…in other words the reward was not bills being slipped during Charlie’s lap dance…it was something else being slipped into something else after the lights went out.

  315. M. Ali says:

    Question, if a legal President is ousted, can the President ask for an ally to help them out to retore order? I mean, would it be legally or ethically right for the Ukrainian President to ask Russia to enter its country, remove the new government, and re-install him as President?

    On one hand, this seems to me to be right, for example, if someone kicks me out of my home by force, it seems to make sense to ask my neighbor to come help me to push the new guy out. But on the other hand, would that make Bahrain’s assitance of Saudi Arabia right? Or If Shah of Iran, after being expelled out of Iran, would it have been right of him to get its neighbors, such as Iraq, to help him re-enter the country by force?

  316. Karl.. says:

    m ali

    Remember that the shah nor bahrain was elected compared to the ousted ukrainian president.

  317. Fiorangela says:

    A recent article by —- on Arms Control Law introduced me to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), thence to two articles on the situation in Ukraine.

    Those two SIPRI papers are:

    Reducing risks arising from developments in Ukraine: the role of confidence- and security-building measures


    “The main role of the arms control agreements reached in Europe in the 1990s—along with associated politically binding confidence- and security-building measures (CSBMs)—is to ensure predictability in military behaviour and promote confidence that armed forces exist only for legitimate defensive purposes. Concern has been expressed about whether they still play that role.

    During 2013, members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), as well as Russia and other European states, questioned whether military exercises carried out in close proximity to the shared boundary between NATO allies on the one hand and Russia and Belarus on the other were consistent with the shared objective of making Europe more secure and more peaceful.

    Current military developments, in close proximity to Ukraine, underline the continued relevance of the integrated set of arms control and CSBMs that were put in place in the 1990s.

    Russia is about to begin large-scale training exercises that will last for five days, in which a number of different elements of the Russian armed forces will participate. Russia has been undertaking a thorough and far-reaching reform of its armed forces, and testing the efficiency of the new structures and procedures through exercises is a necessary and reasonable thing to do.

    The Vienna Document on CSBMs, which was revised in 2011, requires states to exchange many different kinds of information, including prior notification of certain military activities. The training exercises that Russia is about to begin fall within the scope of a notifiable activity, and Russia has lived up to all of its obligations regarding transparency.

    If the military activities that are about to begin in close proximity to Ukraine had taken place without notification and without transparency, the potential for misinterpretation and misunderstanding would have been much greater. . . .”


    Preventing a new division of Europe By Dr Neil Melvin

    http slash slash www dot sipri dot org/media/expert-comments/melvin_mar2014

    “The crisis in Ukraine poses the most serious challenge to European security since the end of the cold war, and highlights the urgent need to refashion European security so that it is capable of managing the new environment that has developed in the region. The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is the only actor capable of bringing the current crisis to an end and of building long-term peace and stability in Ukraine and the wider region.

    While the origin of the crisis lies in the confrontation between ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych and an opposition movement protesting against what it saw as a corrupt and illegitimate government, the catalyst for the violence has been the geopolitical struggle for Ukraine that has been played out over recent years between the transatlantic community and Russia.

    Competition between the integration projects of the European Union (EU), in the form of its proposed Association Agreement with Ukraine, and Russia, through its Customs Union, has served to destabilize the delicate east-west balance in Ukrainian foreign and security policy and, thereby, put pressure on the fragile regional, linguistic and ethnic mosaic that makes up contemporary Ukraine.

    The crisis has now spread beyond the borders of Ukraine, following Russia’s military intervention in Crimea on the pretext of its obligation to protect Russian co-nationals. . . .”

    – – –

    There is a profound, if circular, irony in the fact that USAians who seek sound information about USA actions throughout the world can best access such information only through foreign sources, such as SIPRI, because USAian media — as well as the national government of the USA — give favored and biased treatment to the political demands and perspectives of another foreign state.

  318. Fiorangela says:

    Fiorangela says: March 4, 2014 at 8:02 am


    The article on Arms Control Law is by J P Zanders, who joined ACL in 2013

    nb. Should also add that in my little world, C Span is a proxy for All US mainstream media: C Span is bruited as the “best of the best,” the most fair and balanced. While that may be true relative to other MSM outlets on broadcast and cable TV and on radio, simple fact-checking of content by guests on C Span, and a back-of-the-envelope survey of points of view of the overwhelming majority of those guest, indicates that C Span falls short of an honest, and fair-and-balanced, offering of information to the USAian public.

  319. masoud says:

    “The U.S. Debate Over Ukraine Has Everything to Do With Iran”

  320. Karl.. says:


    Loffe? Stupid girl, what does she know about anything? Luckily the comments dont agree with her.

  321. Ataune says:


    This piece in TNR is pure neo-con propaganda. There are two indirect consequences for Iran from the actions underway in Ukraine that I can think of, both favorable to her.

    The fist, tactical, is the fact that Russia’s blunt challenge to the inimical “Western” policies will make it almost impossible to display the so cherished façade of unity among p5+1 by the US Administration. This is a hard negative in the “Western” column, especially when one predict a not so optimistic outcome for the current negotiation under-way with Iran.

    The second, long-term, is based on the manner that Russia responded to what I think can only be described as a coup in Ukraine. She took an approach which is hard and resolute with enduring impact. Unless the “West” is ready to display a humiliating back-down, she has to seriously encamp herself against Russia in a polarized situation for the foreseeable future. This will more than likely affect negatively her relationship with China, putting as well her strategic partnerships in the world in a shakier grounds, inevitably weakening her position in the Iranian equation and further impeding the opportunity for the US to brandish an already discredited military threat.

  322. James Canning says:

    Bussed-in Basiji,

    I was not one of those who celebrated when the president of Ukraine was overthrown.

  323. James Canning says:

    Bussed-in Basiji,

    I did not celebrate the overthrow of Mubarak, simply because I expected it to lead to extensive destruction of art, architecture, historical materials etc etc etc in Egypt.
    And I doubted the most important objective, to my mind, would even be addressed by the new government. (Controlling growth of the populations)

    You apparently think the way forward is a coup in Bahrain. I see that as simply not happening.

  324. James Canning says:


    You seem to claim I hoped for the overthrow of the president of Ukraine, prior to the sniper attacks on demonstrators in Kiev. You are mistaken.

  325. fyi says:

    Ataune says:

    March 4, 2014 at 11:31 am

    I doubt that very much.

    A non-nuclear Iran – largely out of nuclear envy – remains the objective of the Russian Federation.

    Unless Axis Powers do something truly stupid against Russia….

  326. Karl.. says:

    No nuclear program for Iran says netanyahu

    Bet these p5talks will go on forever.

  327. James Canning says:


    “Nuclear envy” is the reason the Russian Federation does not want Iran to build nukes?

  328. James Canning says:


    Netanyahu will just have to accept Iranian enrichment to low levels.

  329. Ataune says:


    Curbing Iran’s “nuclear ambitions” might be Russia’s calculus too as you say, but its not her number one strategic priority nor her absolute red line in my opinion. US seems to be on track to come back to her own playground with Russia and China as adversaries. She is thus trying to de-escalate the direct confrontational posture vis-a-vis Iran and relegating the task of challenging her to regional powers. Russia’s hard move in Ukraine shows that she is well aware of this pattern and considering an escalation with Western powers highly likely. Any such increase in tensions will in my opinion loosen the un-written agreements between the WS on not letting any NWS to knock on their doors. They are already elements in the Ukraine’s de facto government having strong inclination towards re-arming the state. It is obvious that US is well aware of those elements. It’s also certain that some strategic thinkers in the US military are seeing with a favorable eyes scenarios in which Ukraine is challenging Russia with potential nuclear capabilities. In such a scenario Russia clinging to out of date redlines will be unthinkable.

  330. fyi says:

    Ataune says:

    March 4, 2014 at 1:41 pm

    The Americans de-escalated because their plans for war with Syria followed by war with Iran was derailed by the revolt of the peasants in UK – and the European Barons then lined up and hid behind those peasants.

    Even Mrs. Koike, former Defense Minister of that satrapy called Japan, has written:

    “The US, too, should recognize that there are limits to the extent of the subordination that it can ask of an ally. Some wishes really are better left unfulfilled.”

    In regards to Ukraine becoming a nuclear power, pointing weapons at Russia – Russia will invade and occupy Ukraine before that happens.

    I know that NATO was planning on turning both Sevastopol and Odessa into NATO bases – once Ukraine would be firmly in their hands.

    Axis Powers are like the late Napoleon Bonaparte – know one knows when they will be satisfied with what they have gobbled up.

  331. fyi says:


    An analysis of Axis Powers failure in Ukraine:

  332. Ataune says:


    I will go backward in my analysis to make my point understood:

    The result of any direct war initiated by the US against Iran right now, in addition to a quagmire worst than Afghanistan and Iraq, is a durable and severe weakening of the American position vis-à-vis her main rivals, Russia and China. US has therefore realized that she needs to de-engage her aggressive posture in the middle-east, relegating it to her surrogates. This is what mainly initiated the de-escalation well before the actions of a certain Milliband in the UK parliament. Russia’s Putin cleverly and sharply grasped the change in strategy and aligned his assets in a way that allowed her with multitude of options in countering the US moves. The rising of the tension in Ukraine and the amateurish way in which American played their hands have lead Russia to choose to make a hard and open move. This move has brought us into a new place in world affairs where not only the options for the US to escalate against Iran in the near future has diminished significantly but her most potent propaganda tool, i.e. unity among the world leaders, has also lost its luster.

  333. fyi says:

    Ataune says:

    March 4, 2014 at 2:47 pm

    I think you are attributing the Mad King too much rationality.

    What saved Iran – I maintain – was the revolt of the peasants followed by that of the Barons.

    Nothing else.

    I do not think there was anything amateurish about Axis Powers machinations in Ukraine: Germany, Turkey, Lithuania, Poland and Israel were directly involved in overthrowing a sovereign government through their machinations.

    It was all very cleverly done; but they did not anticipate the Russians’ reaction.

    That much is clear.

  334. fyi says:


    What US, EU, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Jordan have accomplished for Syrians:

  335. James Canning says:


    I certainly saw potential problems, from overthrow of president of Ukraine. That is the reason I did not celebrate the overthrow, when it took place.

  336. James Canning says:


    Ukraine’s membership in Nato was HIGHLY UNLIKELY, prior to the overthrow of the president of Ukraine. Full stop.

  337. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    March 4, 2014 at 3:16 pm

    You do not need to convince me but Mr. Putin.

  338. kooshy says:


    In my opinion, observing the quick, well prepared, well pre organized to small details by arming and organizing pro-Russian locals, shows that the Russian’s quick well planned reaction after the planed coup in Ukraine cut the Americans and Europeans with their pants down. Currently and for time to come they have no good option to exercise (besides the laughable canceling of the G8 meeting) as matter of effect if Americans keep pushing they might actually fracture their own allies and alliance especially with Germany.

    Since the Nuland’s clip was released way before the actual coup everyone was expecting and was prepared for a regime change to come, it looks like they were playing a game of bluffing and guessing Texas hold em rather than a chess game. The American’s bluff was called by the Russians that is why they, the Americans are now so upset, they thing they did not get enough for the 5billion (according to Nuland) they have already invested, with an additional just agreed today I billion more, they are cuffing up due for a country that their installed government has no control or even being recognized, Mr. Putin will be happy to keep the situation the way it is at an stand still indefinitely. Have you notice the Brits just offered 10 million , Germans zilch, French nothing, all the Europeans are going to blame the US and make them pay for a bankrupt western Ukraine that the Americans got. Stupid, expect some heads starting to roll in few weeks or months.

  339. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Phil Giraldi on AIPAC and Friends Explain Themselves

    Mostly they seem ticked off that the Ukraine crisis has overshadowed Iran in the media.

  340. Richard Steven Hack says:

    A look at Russian, Ukrainian militaries

    Short version: Ukraine tries anything, they’re toast…

  341. Don Bacon says:

    The new US Quadrennial Defense Review is out, and it illustrates why the US will probably not reach any accommodation with Iran because the continued “threat” of Iran is essential to the Pentagon budget.

    What does the US primarily defend against in the world?

    2014 QDR: — “Challenges to our many allies and partners around the globe remain dynamic and unpredictable, particularly from regimes in North Korea and Iran.”

    Both countries are the gifts that keep on giving to the obscenely high Pentagon “defense” budget, and losing either of them would have a financial impact.

  342. fyi says:

    Don Bacon says:

    March 4, 2014 at 6:05 pm

    US Quadrennial Defense Review is devoid of substance.

    I would not base any concrete conclusions on all that fluff.

  343. James Canning says:


    I think Putin has good information, that the chances of Ukraine’s joining Nato are very very low indeed.

  344. James Canning says:


    Some of those who foolishly push for Ukraine to join Nato, also want Georgia in Nato. And Israel.

  345. M. Ali says:

    “It is not appropriate to invade a country and at the end of a barrel of a gun dictate what you are trying to achieve,” Mr. Kerry said. “That is not 21st-century, G-8, major-nation behavior.”

    Do reporters ever smirk when someone like Kerry says something like that?

  346. M. Ali says:

    On US’s 1 billion aid to Ukraine,

    ”The Russians are major holders of Ukrainian debt,” the senior American official acknowledged. “So in any scenario in which Ukraine is getting financial assistance, some of the money very likely is going to end up in the hands of Russian institutions. I think there is probably no way of avoiding that.”

    Also, Russia has cancelled its discounted gas export rate to Ukraine. So, basically, they would be selling it at a higher price, and the bill would be indirectly paid by US.

    USA can not come to terms that its golden days are over. They can barely financially support their current colonies, much less take on new ones.

  347. Karl.. says:

    m ali
    March 5, 2014 at 3:28 am

    Isnt this western-propaganda concering Ukraine/Russia worse than during the Iraqwar? I think it is.

  348. A-B says:

    I don’t know if one should laugh or cry at the insanity – the ‘international community’ isn’t even trying! So now it is Russia who “has to pay”; whose “assets will be frozen”; “will be subjected to sanctions” by and “will be isolated from” the ‘international community’; “is violating international law” and “is not fulfilling its obligations”; etcetera etcetera. Have they even looked where or ‘what’ Russia is? They could at least Google it!

    It won’t be long before some high-ranking automaton .. sorry ‘official’ in the US administration will slip and say “Of course, they [Russia] have to ship out their entire stockpile under the supervision of the international community.” And then to correct the gaffe say that the sentence was ‘taken out of context’ which was Syria … Iran … Korea … Ukraine …

    However, the true context of this sentence is the ‘international community’ (i.e. the US and the Brits) shipping the entire stockpile of Heroin and Opium out of Kabul to be distributed ‘generously’ to international communities in the real world!!

  349. M. Ali says:

    I wouldn’t say better or worse, but at least, much funnier.

  350. M. Ali says:

    A youtube viral video on Ukraine has now 7 million views.

    Globalresearch has an article on who was behind the video.

    At least they didn’t stage a Neda assasination & video.

  351. A-B says:

    RT: Kiev snipers hired by Maidan leaders – leaked EU’s Ashton phone tape

    So, snipers on rooftops shooting indiscriminately and killing people. This is the EXACT same M/O behind the ‘peaceful’ ‘revolution’ in Syria. And there was apparently reports on how the scumbags from CNN took their time installing their equipments in right place before the ‘demonstrations’ began in Maidan, Kiev. And yes, ‘Neda’ in Tehran … I remember the CNN-Scum with their prepared ‘show’, joking to eat popcorn while watching the constant rerun of ‘greenies’ beating up an aledged ‘bassiji’ (of course according to Western Sectarianists you have to belong to what THEY define you as). Well, the only anti-human sect I see constantly at work is the sect of ‘Britishitism’ and their adherents, the Britishites, who may come as neo-Nazis, Takfiris, Greenies, Mojahed-e Kharr, etcetera etcetera.


  352. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    March 4, 2014 at 7:44 pm

    Israel joining NATO will put constrains on that state.

    And it would cause an undisciplined army to become a professional one.

    It will also force Israel to accept internationally recognized borders and sign a peace treaty with Arabs.

    Israelis do not want to join NATO for the very same reasons.

    Anyway, NATO has assumed the posture that Israel’s enemies are NATO’s; thus giving Israel all the benefits of being a NATO member without being one in fact.

  353. fyi says:

    A-B says:

    March 5, 2014 at 6:23 am

    Yes, the Americans and Europeans have truly and thoroughly degenerated.

  354. Rd. says:

    James Canning says:

    “I certainly saw potential problems, from overthrow of president of Ukraine.”

    if you saw that one, please do tell us what you see with your allies cracking up?

    “Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE pull ambassadors from Qatar”

  355. M. Ali says:

    Rd, that’s very interesting. It seems there is going to be a stormy future ahead for the GCC. Notice that no mention of Kuwait or Oman, meaning that Saudi doesn’t have a strong coliation. Oman has been on cold terms with Saudi Arabia since a long time, so thats not a surprise, but this means that, in addition to Oman, Qatar and Kuwait might be moving furthur away from Al Saud.

    That leaves Bahrain and UAE. Bahrain doesn’t count, since it has become a sort of mini-colony of Saudi Arabia. But UAE in itself might bear some interesting things in the future.

  356. M. Ali says:

    So, where is Qatar heading?

    News from December 2013 is,

    “Qatar’s new Ambassador to Lebanon Ali Bin Hamad al-Marri met Monday with Hezbollah’s deputy leader Sheikh Naim Qassem in a first meeting with a senior party official, signaling an improvement in ties between the two sides strained by the war in Syria.”

    Recently Qatar has also seemed to have moved away their initial policies in Syria.

    “An Arab official from a country that used to be involved in the military support of the Syrian revolution revealed to Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity that regional reasons are behind the current situation: mainly, a unified Turkish-Qatari decision to retreat from the Syrian mud after reaching a conclusion that the political solution might be the best choice, not only for the Syrians but also for the region.”

    And in another article,

    “Qatar’s foreign minister said Wednesday his country and Iran both back a “political solution” to the conflict in Syria despite their support for opposite sides.”

    Iran needs to make the best uses of such situations. Qatar’s mishandling of Syria and Egypt was its desire to be a regional player. Iran can help them with it,because Qatar would never really be a threat to Iran’s role in the region, but they could use Qatar to balance some of Saudi’s influence.

    Iran and Oman have always been on good terms, but this relationship was never fully utilized by Iran. Iran could probably strenghthen its Oman & Qatar relationship, and support them in standing against Saudi Arabia.

  357. fyi says:

    M. Ali says:

    March 5, 2014 at 10:22 am

    All of these states are run by cunning but otherwise stupid men.

    They are not run by visionaries.

    The Arabs of Southern Persian Gulf can invite both Iran and Iraq to join the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council and therefore revolutionize their relationship with Iran and Iraq across political, diplomatic, economic, cultural, financial, industrial, scientific, and military/security domains.

    We need new regimes & dispensations across multiple Muslim polities; as is, Muslims are fighting among themselves or currying favors for the Axis Powers (Pakistan, Turkey, Jordan) and all the while falling behind the rest of world.

    [In Saudi Arabia there are dental offices that are completely staffed by Americans and Europeans; Saudis think them better!]

  358. Karl.. says:

    I think this qatar/saudi thing is not such a big deal as some seems to believe, but sure it would be great if Qatar and Iran get closer but we arent seeing that going on now really.
    funny also how bahrain, saudi could talk to Israel but not Iran..

  359. khomeini says:

    A-B says:
    March 5, 2014 at 9:10 am and to ALL

    This is further commentary to A-B’s post. The leaked tape revealed mind blogging insight into so called free world’s strategy for creating chaos in a country when they do not like the ruling government of that country. Please listen to the tape yourself – RT has posted the tape online.

    Some excerpt from the tape goes like this:

    “New government……all these guys have dirty past…”
    “…people from the street will not leave until real reform will start….”
    “And second, what was quite disturbing, this same Olga [Bogomolets] told as well that all the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and then people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides,”

    “So that she then also showed me some photos she said that as a medical doctor she can say that it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it’s really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don’t want to investigate what exactly happened,”

    This reminds me of the sniper attack on the streets of Tehran following 2009 election unrest. Remember Neda Agha Sultan and her death by a sniper’s bullet ….. hmmmmm ….something to think about …….

  360. Jay says:

    khomeini says:
    March 5, 2014 at 12:41 pm

    Disturbing it is! And, perhaps the tape is instructive. However, note that the majority of this planet’s population has committed to forgotten memory the revelations by Wikileaks, and those of Snowden, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, …. This will be yet another chapter.

    When Karl Rove boasted about creating realities during the Bush years, he was talking about the US military using science to “create reality” for the vast majority and using it to any end they wished. Mr. Obama, aware of this new “war fighting” method before his first election, set out to make its practice routine. Mr. Obama’s first test case was Iran.

    This is the shape of things to come. And, I regret to say that in my opinion this approach will be used without regard to boundaries – to be explicit, it is and it will be used against Americans, Europeans, and everyone else. As one radio host used to say: “nothing here! Move along! Oh, look at that shiny object!”

  361. James Canning says:

    At his press conference yesterday, Putin said the Ukrianian people had tired of having one set of thieves replace another set of thieves, in running their country.
    Astute observation.

  362. James Canning says:


    I am an adamant opponent of Israel’s membership in Nato.

    Your sweeping comment that Nato countries see Israel’s enemies as their enemies, simply is not true. Aipac stooges in the US Congress would like to see this be the case, but it is not.

  363. James Canning says:

    Martin Wolf’s column in the Financial Times today is superb. He addresses what conditions are required for democracy to function in a country. And he suggests that those conditions did not obtain in Egypt, sadly. I of course agree.

  364. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    March 5, 2014 at 1:21 pm

    Not at all; the fact is that Axis Powers – a.k.a. NATO – is doing all it can, short of direct military intervention to destroy Syria and later Iran.

    It already has destroyed 2 other enemies of Israel, Iraq and Libya.

    I admit that there was dissension in the ranks of the Barons; with the German and French Barons opposing the destruction of Iraq. That seems to have been a fluke though.

    NATO (US-EU or NATO) have classified Hezbollah as Terrorist Organization while assisting terrorists in Syria.

  365. James Canning says:


    There long has been a difference of opinion amoung Gulf monarchies, as to how to deal with the Muslim Brotherhood (and, of course, Egypt).

    You may recall that Morsi (and Hamas) support the overthrow of the Syrian government.

  366. khomeini says:

    M. Ali says:
    March 5, 2014 at 10:22 am

    “So, where is Qatar heading?”

    Microscopic Qatar’s bubble of becoming imperial power, similar to imperial England, has finally busted . The bubble busted in a number of phases:

    1) When Qatar sponsored Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt came to power, the microscopic sheikhdom thought that future is here. It thought to itself Qatar-e-stan is set to become regional and, with time, global power. And history will document Qatari emir as the Emperor. Alas!!!, the imperial bubble was pricked by no other than their bed-partners – US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and tag along UAE – when Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt was kicked out from power through a Ukrainian style coup d’état. Even Qatari propaganda tool called Aljazeera could not rescue Morsi and MB.

    2) Saudis were furious at Qatar for backing Muslim Brotherhood, after all MB is a big threat to Saudis. Saudi script has always been to portray itself as a guard of sunnism against evil shia Iran. When MB came to power in Egypt, Saudia Arabia was seriously threatened because there was a strong change that Arab Spring will cause Al-Saud winter and subsequently loose grip on power. Saudis could no longer rally support against MB’s Egypt – it could not label MB as Shia. In other words shia-sunni narrative no longer worked. So, the Saudis had to get ride of Morsi and MB; and they did it brilliantly. Off course this was done with full patronage of United States and its allies – that includes Egyptian Sisi.

    3) UAE followed suit and arrested and imprisoned Al-Eslah (UAE version of Muslim Brotherhood) members – if I am not mistaken 93 in total.

    4) Saudis also installed its puppet “Zabra” of Syria on the Istanbul based SNC. This lead to further weakening of Qatar and its ambitions – political power was swiping through Sheikhdom’s fingers and emir (the won-a-bee emperor) was helpless to stop the deflation of imperial bubble. With Saudis in control of Syria file they did everything possible to side line Qatar; this was in addition of pushing SNC to remain committed to armed terrorism in Syria to weaken infidel shia Iran and its kafir proxy – Alawites of Damascus regime.

    5) Broken hearted, Qatar started to slowly realign its Iran and Syria policy. It made contacts with Basher of Syria in order to restore diplomatic ties – this was reported in the news, I have lost the link. (If someone here has the link please post it on this blog).

    6) All this finally lead to Qatar getting accused of interference in internal affairs of Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Kuwait. Qatar-e-stan is further undermined by its Arab buddies in GCC for moving towards reconciliation with Iran and Syria. Link is posted in Rd. says: March 5, 2014 at 9:34 am.

    In summary, Qatar is heading its way back to Iran’s axis. It is moving slowly but moving.

  367. khomeini says:

    Jay says:
    March 5, 2014 at 1:07 pm

    Oh yes, Wikileaks and Snowden. Well said, I agree, I agree….

  368. James Canning says:

    Peter Jenkins has a great piece at today: “The West’s Ukraine Policy is Furrowing British Brows”.

  369. James Canning says:


    Libya was no threat to Israel at the time of the ill-conceived military intervention by Britain, France and the US. “Destroying” Libya was not the purpose of that intervention – – which I of course opposed.

    Illegal invasion of Iraq did have a great deal to do with “protecting” Israel, but in the sense of enabling further growth of illegal colonies of Jews in the West Bank, further thefts of Palestinian water, etc etc.

  370. James Canning says:


    Jacques Chirac was president of France, when France opposed the idiotic US invasion of Iraq. He had fought in Algeria and knew what a blunder the illegal US invasion would be.

  371. James Canning says:


    The assistance given to insurgents in Syria by “the West”, is NOT a Nato operation.

  372. fyi says:

    khomeini says:

    March 5, 2014 at 1:52 pm

    In regards to “… Qatar is heading its way back to Iran’s axis. It is moving slowly but moving…”

    No, no, no.

    Qatar is an oil well with a flag and a runway for US planes to use for attacking Iran.

  373. James Canning says:


    Friedman’s 2008 claim that you linked, that Russia is in an “untenable” geopolitical position without Ukraine, is simply not ture. In my judgement, of course. I think Russia actually would benefit from Ukraine’s membership in the EU. Which in any event could nto happen for many years. Perhaps decades.

  374. James Canning says:

    Readers of the editorial page of the Financial Times today will notice than almost all of them are supportive of the Russian point of view, regarding Ukraine and poor decision-making by the US.

  375. James Canning says:

    Almost all of the letters to the editor, in the FT today. (correction to above post)

  376. khomeini says:

    fyi says:
    March 5, 2014 at 2:07 pm

    Qatar, just like Oman, has no dispute with Iran. Its policy was politically aligned with Iran before Arab Spring broke out. After the Arab Spring Qatar thought it can do better without Iran – although it never broke strategic contact with Iran. Now that Arab Spring has turned to Arab Winter it is recalculating its policy – just like crazy Erdagon is.

    And if there is US-Iran war, Qatar will not likely allow its US bases to be used in war because if it does it will reduced to desert dust by mighty Iranian missiles.

  377. kooshy says:

    March 5, 2014 at 11:28 am

    I agree not much will change, but still the significant is big since those internal disputes on security and strategic positions are now surfacing and public to the point of recalling ambassadors. But the bigger significance is that the puppet master is getting old with a mild Parkinson disease and incapable of tuning and moving all of her puppets coordinated. So to me the problem are not the puppets but rather is because of the puppet master getting worn out.

  378. fyi says:

    khomeini says:

    March 5, 2014 at 2:23 pm

    Qatar was instrumental in the attempt at destroying Syrian government.

    That attempt failed.

    One has to ask oneself what possible benefit – material or strategic – would befall Qatar in the event of the demise of the Ba’ath State in Syria.

    “Wound Iran” in Syria – that was the sum total of the Arab policy.

    So you have one country that is not led by a stupid man – Oman.

    That is hardly a trend..

    Iran has 2 friends: Her Armed Forces and Her Nuclear Capacity.

  379. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    March 5, 2014 at 2:15 pm

    Tell it to Mr. Putin.

  380. Karl.. says:

    How on earth can US, EU believe that to name one, P5+1, will ever work again when they have insulted Russia like this?
    Could this lead to sanctions begin to fall apart against Iran?

  381. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    March 5, 2014 at 4:14 pm


    Axis Powers and Russia will not break on this.

    What is eroding the sanction against Iran is the realization – since 08/21/2013 – in the international arena that US aims to militarily destroy Iran.

    Americans had reassured many states to go along with their Iran policy of sanctions with the understanding that US did not aim at regime change in Iran forcibly.

    When the Americans’ reassurances were revealed to be false, subsequent to the events in Syria on 08/21/2013, the foundations of the sanctions against Iran began to unravel.

    What is in it for any state – even such satrapies as South Korea and Japan – in the destruction of Iran?

    The unraveling will doubtless take years but the sanctions will no longer be supported by other governments actively….in my view

  382. A-B says:

    @ Khomeini and fyi

    Maybe of interest: Qatar, Iran To Establish Joint Free Trade Zone

  383. Rd. says:

    A-B says:

    “Maybe of interest: Qatar, Iran To Establish Joint Free Trade Zone”

    These are the same policies Iran is ‘trying’ to establish with all its neighbors. these are to minimize conflict by creating economic dependency. ie implementing the 1975 Algiers accord with Iraq. economic ties with turkey despite Turkish misguided FP. economic zone with Azerbaijan. even the gas deal with pakistan, will eventually come around.

  384. Karl.. says:


    You might be right, Russia isnt as childish as west is so they will probably keep on with their policy on Iran, however if west keeps provoking and something big happens I think we can see something big happen for Iran/Russia relationship too.

    This is the result of bad relations, even China wimping out for the west on Ukraine.
    Even Iran is silent.

  385. kooshy says:

    khomeini says:
    March 5, 2014 at 2:23 pm

    In my opinion FYI is correct on this one, Qatar can’t have it both ways she already is an enemy since she is the host for US military command center for the Middle East region, the US base in Qatar territory is on first line of attack by Iran’s land base missiles. In case of a hot war she has no power to tell US what us can and cannot do.
    In my opinion the only allay and partner that Iran can ever count on are the PG Shieh since they can’t have better natural allay then Iran. If you are Iranian don’t count on anyone else on this planet as an strategic asset.

  386. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Phil Giraldi on Designed to Fail
    Negotiations with Iran Become More Difficult


    It is becoming difficult to accept that the Obama Administration, though apparently serious in its desire to come to an agreement over Iran’s nuclear program, is willing to do what it might take to come to a compromise solution. Repeated warnings that talks with Iran are proceeding but fraught with difficulties can be interpreted as so much smoke to conceal what is actually taking place, but there are also signs that Washington is adopting positions that would have to be considered incompatible with any negotiated solution to end the standoff.

    …They are also arguing categorically against Iran’s deployment of any missile with a range greater than 500 kilometers, meaning that they intend to deprive Tehran of any capability to either act offensively against Israel or retaliate against an attack by Tel Aviv.

    End Quote

    As I’ve said all along, the entire purpose of the Syrian crisis is to degrade Syria’s – and Hizballah’s in Lebanon – ability to threaten Israel effectively in an Iran war. Clearly the negotiations being attempted now is in furtherance of the same goal with Iran – crippling Iran’s ability to threaten Israel if attacked by either the US or Israel.

  387. BiBiJon says:

    BTW moon of alabama seems to be down

  388. James Canning says:


    Obama is not seeking “regime change” in Iran. Full stop. Even if this is agenda of Aipac and other extremist “pro-Israel” groups.

  389. James Canning says:


    I think Putin already knows this (that Ukraine will not become a member of Nato in foreseeable future, and that Nato has no designs whatever on Russian naval bases in the Crimea).

  390. kooshy says:

    Karl.. says:
    March 5, 2014 at 5:49 pm


    Russia because of her dispute with US is not going to want Iran openly becomes a NWS, Iran is a next door nighbour of Russia. No state would want limitation on her freedom of possible action on her near abroad. That is the exact reason Israel is so scared of Iran’s nukes or related capability.

    In the same time Russia and China don’t want or will not help to be instrumental for US and her allies to take control on Iran. They have and will continue to try to constantly adjust their policy to keep Iran at a certain level and position Iranian planers are well aware of what and how much they can expect from Russians or China.

  391. M.Ali says:

    It will take a long time for Qatar to kick out US. Bigger powers like Japan and Germany can’t do it, so it won’t be easy for a tiny sheikhdom to give the finger to US.

    But at the same time, Qatar can’t really be a host to US base in the event of a war, all it would take would be just one middle and Qatar’s economy will go to shit. Iran made this clear a few years back saying that it would attack any country that US uses as a base to attack Iran.

    US’s colonies won’t suddenly change sides. Even countries like Iraq or Afghanistan that have moved much closer to Iran in current years can’t give the boot to US. One of the reasons is, of course and we have to admit this, is that Iran is not as financially powerful of an ally as US. Iran shouldn’t expect great and instant results from others but, with patience, it can erode US influence. Which iran is doing perfectly. It doesn’t hold grudges. They don’t turn their back on countries like turkey and Qatar even if they were on the wrong side of history in recent years. And it doesn’t try to pick a fight with Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan, even if they all play host to Iran’s enemies.

    Iran seems to be saying, we’re here guys, take your time. Iran is like the decent man that when the girls get tired of being screwed by the rich bully, will eventually know he is the right man all along for them.

  392. M.Ali says:

    By the way,Dubai is another GCC entity that is actually very warm towards iran. The UAE capital, Abu Dhabi, is more in line with Saudi Arabia but Dubai is extremely open to iran and has been since the current sheikh’s father, sheikh rashid, who was always positive towards iran. Sheikh Mohammad, Dubai’s current leader, is also close to iran, which is out of a necessasity because its economy largely relies on iran import and export. Abu Dhabi, given that its source of income comes from its huge reserves of oil, doesn’t really need iran as a business partner but Dubai does?however since Dubai nearly went bankrupt in the recession, they were bailed out by abu Dhabi and have been forced to bow their head down and not make any noise.

    But even now, if you move a shipment through abu Dhabi for iran, it takes a few days of security check but if you do it through Dubai, it takes an hour or so.

  393. M.Ali says:

    Here is Qatar’s own paper reporting the incident,–envoys%e2%80%99-recall-by-three-GCC-states

    Notice the end of article,
    “On Monday, a UAE court which has jailed dozens of Emirati and 20 Egyptian Islamists sentenced a Qatari physician to seven years in prison after convicting him of raising funds for a local Muslim Brotherhood-linked group, Al-Islah.

    A Qatar rights body on Tuesday slammed the ruling as “unfair”.”

    Such reporting is what’s pissing of Saudi and uae and it seems Qatar is not backing off.

    Another article in the same paper publish a few hours ago has the heading, “Qatar seeks dialogue on Iran N-plan

  394. James Canning says:

    “Though I’m told the Ukraine crisis caught Obama and Putin by surprise, the neocon determination to drive a wedge between the two leaders has been apparent for months. . . ”
    Robert Parry, for Consortium News March 4th

  395. James Canning says:

    M. Ali,

    Germany is not keen for US troops in that country to leave.

    Dubai’s leader often is sharply critical of US foreign policy. Even on CBS News; “60 Minutes” programme.

  396. James Canning says:

    Paul Pillar has an excellent piece today at “Netanyahu’s Anti-Iranian Rant”.

  397. kooshy says:

    Here are two words from mother of all evils

    After Mahmood Hitler, the newest western Hitler is Vladimir Hitler of Russia, this from non-other than our media selected next president of the United Satans.
    “Hillary Clinton likens Russia, Putin in Ukraine to Hitler”

  398. kooshy says:

    It was obvious that EU (Germany) will be forced to cough up the dough bailing out Ukraine, for sure this will pay Ukraine old gas bill to Russia and Russian bank before both Ukraine and Germany can get more gas at new rate. Now Germans for good know what Victoria Nuland’s F*** EU meant.

    “The European Union announced Wednesday it will offer Ukraine at least $15 billion (€11 billion) in aid as the country struggles with dwindling cash and a military standoff with Russia.”

  399. Jay says:

    While AIPAC may suffer from moral myopia, in my view, those who suggest that major elements of US Middle East policy is driven simply by protection of Israel may be suffering from Intellectual myopia.

    Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, Ukraine, and other destructions to come, are part and parcel of a geopolitical chess game. Israel may play a role, but concern for Israelis will never trump the interests of the oligarchs and wealthy influencers. This wave of destruction is the thrashing of an imperial power attempting to assert her dominance in light of her declining economic power and outlook.

    It would be a mistake to believe that the current tactical pause in the drive to dismantle Iran is strategic. Qatar’s moves should also be viewed as tactical. The Iran problem, as the State Dept. folk like to put it, will be resolved by: a) attempts at color revolution of some kind, b) overt military attach should Iran lose leverage, c) the economic demise of the US. The scenario of strategic realignment is also a possible resolution – but, an improbable one at this time.

  400. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    March 5, 2014 at 8:06 pm

    That $ 15 billion is over many years.

    EU policy essentially will result in the de-industrialization of Ukraine; turning it into an agricultural country with no industrial exports. In other words, EU Policy will achieve what the late Adolf Hitler was aiming to accomplish; reducing Slavic people into subordinate people to the Aryans of Northern Europe.

    That will not happen – and Mr. Putin just destroyed that plot.

    Russia will go to war over Ukraine – this is what has been established; Ukraine is not for sale to EU for any price.

  401. kooshy says:

    fyi says:
    March 5, 2014 at 8:24 pm

    I agree
    به قول معروف این تو بمیری از اون تو بمیریها نیست

  402. kooshy says:

    “Israel Seizes Gaza-Bound Iranian Arms
    M-302 Rockets Would Have Put Nearly All of Israel in Range”

    This repetitive Israeli propaganda works like this:

    General Aziz Jaffari commander of the IRGC (who incidentally like all Yazdis is a big easy spender and never is worried if stuff goes to waste and get confiscated) tell his missile procurement command and Quds force command General Ghassem Solimani ( a Kermani another big spender with strong desert tie to Yazd): Why don’t you guys send a ship load of them missiles to our Hamas receivers in the port of call in Gaza, you know now days sending missiles to our Gaza customers and ducking our ships in Gaza is easier than any other port in the world. By the way, please, as usual don’t forget, make sure to mark them missiles made in Iran, as you know if they are not marked made in Iran our friendly Israeli Gaza port patrols wouldn’t let our ship through to port in Gaza.

  403. Jay says:

    kooshy says:
    March 5, 2014 at 9:53 pm

    Reading the headline is enough to establish that the comedy-passed-as-journalism is to follow.
    I don’t read the content because I don’t want to increase their “click” count.

  404. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    March 5, 2014 at 8:24 pm

    The situation remains fluid. Mr. Putin knows the value of the warm water ports, resources, and the geographic position of Crimea. Likewise, Mr. Putin remains concerned with the many NGOs and their influence in Russia, the threat of hired terrorism, and psychological blackmail.

    Mr. Putin’s next move in response to a provocation that is almost certain to take place will tell us more about the unfolding of events to follow.

  405. Karl.. says:


    I didnt mean that Russia would support Iran to get nukes, more that they wouldnt support the sanctions so much anymore against Iran.

  406. Karl.. says:

    Russia seeks stronger ties to Iran report Presstv.

    Also new developments in Ukraine

    Crimean parliament votes to join Russia, hold referendum in 10 days on ratifying

  407. Karl.. says:


    I didnt mean that Russia would support iranian nukes, but that russia wouldnt respect the sanctions against Iran anymore.

  408. Fiorangela says:

    Jay says:
    March 5, 2014 at 8:11 pm

    “While AIPAC may suffer from moral myopia, in my view, those who suggest that major elements of US Middle East policy is driven simply by protection of Israel may be suffering from Intellectual myopia.

    Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, Ukraine, and other destructions to come, are part and parcel of a geopolitical chess game. Israel may play a role, but concern for Israelis will never trump the interests of the oligarchs and wealthy influencers. This wave of destruction is the thrashing of an imperial power attempting to assert her dominance in light of her declining economic power and outlook.”

    Israel, and zionism, has always been an opportunistic player that leverages minority status by attaching to and exploiting niches and weaknesses in superpowers. The system becomes synergistic.

    Stephen Kinzer’s The Brothers: John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, and Their Secret World War offers a useful history of the USA’s design for deviance since the early 20th century.

  409. Rd. says:

    James Canning says:

    “Dubai’s leader often is sharply critical of US foreign policy.”

    Why is it where ever the anglo/sax has its fingers, the stink follows?? I hope you are holding your nose..

    “The former Qatari foreign minister described the regime in Saudi Arabia as “antiquated,” revealing that the U.S. and Britain had asked him to report on the situation in Saudi Arabia, and told him of their intentions to topple the monarchy there, albeit expressed fear of the alternative, which could be the undesirable Islamists. ”

    for fyi;

    Bandar bush apparently disagrees with you on qatar which you call an oil well with flag and bandar calls it;

    “The second is a provocative statement made by Saudi intelligence chief Bandar bin Sultan, who said Qatar was “300 people and a television channel, not a country.”

    All these spats, crises, etc point to one and only one main issue, US has lost its hegemony and various plates are starting to shift.

  410. BiBiJon says:

    Rd. says:
    March 6, 2014 at 9:09 am


    Having drawn a total blank trying to understand the latest goings-on, I find the only explanation as not only external plates are shifting, but even domestic plates inter and intra institutions are cracking up, and moving in non-complementary directions. Citizen billionaires are not just buying elections, they’re buying NGOs, and by extension they are influencing the state department’s various competing ideologies.

    I think the best bet for Iran, is to stay above the quarrels, whether among US/EU/Russia, or among Persian Gulf states.

  411. kooshy says:

    BiBiJon says:
    March 6, 2014 at 9:59 am


    When empires and associated security orders disintegrate, is important to have and keep a strong unified base with desirable strategic importance that her participation, association can tilt the balance.

    The only unified alliance block that Iran can reliably make and claim to have is the shieh alliance, which historically is a solid, strong and very important religious, cultural alliance, which more importantly stretches from borders of China in northern Afghanistan without major interruption all the way to the Mediterranean sea, this alliance has the most desirable climate and plenty of water and energy can be totally food sufficient, than anywhere else in the entire middle east, for this reasons and others she has proved that she can stand to big powers as long as she plays an smart game of playing the powers and their interests against each other which incidentally she has a very valuable historic experience doing that. At this time and point with the expected coming shift in tectonics of economic and political powers, in my opinion support, improvement, and empowerment of this alliance most be the most important Iran security agenda. Doing so will not necessarily requires her need to pledge alliance and associations to any power center, but rather asking for the other way around.

  412. Jay says:

    Fiorangela says:
    March 6, 2014 at 8:59 am

    I agree with your comment regarding the exploitation of niches and opportunistic synergism. I would go further and suggest that these should be considered as key factors in any analysis of policy or action attributed to the power of AIPAC.

  413. Fiorangela says:

    Jay says:
    March 6, 2014 at 10:31 am

    “the exploitation of niches and opportunistic synergism. . . . should be considered as key factors in any analysis of policy or action attributed to the power of AIPAC.”

    Shmuel Rosner on NYTimes opinion page:

    Aipac Is Good for America

    “critics conflate legitimate debates over the fine details of American foreign policy with the big picture. They fail to see that Aipac is fighting a good fight for what it believes to be a first-rate interest:** American global leadership and engagement with the world. When a scary superpower showdown is brewing over Ukraine, it is worth contemplating the role of Aipac and other lobbies that aim to increase American involvement in the world. . . .

    . . .It’s rare for critics to contemplate the possibility that Aipac’s policies might, in fact, be reasonable.

    That’s unfortunate, because they usually are. The leaders of Aipac believed a delayed set of sanctions — deferred for six months to let the talks continue — would send Iran a tough message at a delicate moment and would bolster the United States’ position in the talks. ”

    Rosner saves the groaner for last:

    “It’s understandable that Aipac’s position would come under intense scrutiny and that a conflict-weary public would examine a lobby dealing with foreign affairs. But there are many reasons to applaud it. Aipac, unlike many other lobbies on Capitol Hill, isn’t devoted to bringing financial benefits to a specific interest group, nor is its objective to make its members wealthier.

    The item’s bio-blurb says:

    “Shmuel Rosner is the political editor for The Jewish Journal and a fellow at The Jewish People Policy Institute.”

    JPPI is the Israel-based organization that plans for Israel’s future. Its charter chairman was Dennis Ross. —-

    from Wikipedia:

    “The Jewish People Policy Institute (JPPI; Hebrew: המכון למדיניות העם היהודי‎), is a Non-profit organization with the purpose of promoting and securing the Jewish people and Israel.[1] The institute is a professional policy planning apparatus and a strategic thought process for the Jewish people in the most fundamental subjects concerning the Jewish people. The institute is served by most prominent public figures from the government, the Academy, the private sector in Israel and Jewish communities around the world, who constitute the think tank of this body.

    The JPPI’s viewpoint is all-Jewish and long term, and a cornerstone of its work is the premise that Israel is the core of the Jewish people. Its think tank systematically and professionally examines the challenges, threats and opportunities that the Jewish people is coping with, and develops principles for policies and strategic alternatives. In addition, it may recommend on immediate steps needed to be taken in order to secure the continuity and prosperity of the Jewish people.

    JPPI was founded in 2002 by the Jewish Agency for Israel, and is run as an independent body. It is headed by a board of directors that is now chaired by Dennis Ross, the special adviser for the Persian Gulf Southwest Asia in U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration. Its current President is Avinoam Bar-Yosef.[2”

    I did not try to figure out the linkage between JPPI and JPPPI — The Jewish People Policy Planning Institute.

    feel the synergy

    ** WHOSE “first-rate interest” is not defined.

  414. Jay says:

    Fiorangela says:
    March 6, 2014 at 11:22 am

    I do feel the intense synergy!

    Whose “first-rate interest” will never be defined! By construct, the organization is opportunistic, with an unstated end-justifies-the-means philosophy. It does not represent broad jewish interest or some “jewishness” per se; rather, it harmonizes itself with any niche to increase power and influence.

  415. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    March 6, 2014 at 10:27 am

    See below:

    The Muslim Brotherhood, The Gulen Movement, and the Secularists in Turkey and elsewhere despise the Shia and Iran and Iranians.

    That is, The MB and Gulen-like movements both use the denigration of Shia Islam to indicate who is more Islamic and the Secularist denigrate Iran and Iranians to promote their own fantasies of secular democratic state (in reality, an Army-based state) among Muslim polities.

    There is no common ground yet between Iran and the Shia on the one side and the rest of Muslim World on the other side.

    This will persist for decades and centuries and one must accept that as a semi-permanent feature of environment that the Iranian state and the Shia will find themselves for the next few decades.

    In a way, it almost harkens back to the early days of the Safavid Dynasty…

  416. James Canning says:

    “The [Obama} administration even appears to be willing to accept a permanent agreement
    [between P5+1 and Iran] that doesn’t eliminate Iran’s capability for a quick nuclear breakout.”
    – – David B. Rivkin, Jr., and Lee A. Casey, writing in the Wall Street Journal today
    (“Congress can play a vital role in the Iran talks”)

    I of course disagree.

  417. kooshy says:

    fyi says:
    March 6, 2014 at 12:43 pm

    “The Muslim Brotherhood, The Gulen Movement, and the Secularists in Turkey and elsewhere despise the Shia and Iran and Iranians.’

    Ok so? They do, we don’t need to escalate our religious, cultural and security differences. If you read my comment I didn’t say Iran has to make an alliance with MB or even with Sunni Muslims that will not work and will not happen but Iran also don’t need to add or inflate any possible hostility beyond what differences exist. I said Iran has to lead and increase her inter Shieh alliance, especially in Iraq and with the Alavi sects, meaning to include them in a collective security decision making more than she is doing now

  418. James Canning says:


    Aipac helped the conspiracy to set up the illegal and idiotic invasion of Iraq. And, of course, Aipac encourages continuing growth of the illegal colonies of Jews in the West Bank – – no matter how much damage this does to the national security interests of the American people.

  419. James Canning says:


    Maybe FYI will tell us why 300 Turkish companies are to receive tax benefits if they help to connect Turkey’s gas lines to Iran’s.

  420. fyi says:

    kooshy says:

    March 6, 2014 at 1:08 pm

    I am not disagreeing with you, I wanted to illustrate the depth of mutual prejudice and ignorance obtaining even in the two most advanced Muslim polities as well as the limitations of any cooperation with the other side.

    I think the actions of MB in Egypt and Turkey indicated that there is very little scope for political cooperation with them.

    The Alevi/Alawite, the Druze, the Yazidis, the Ahmadis, the Sikhs, the Babi, and the Baha’i are not fully Islmaic – they are only partially so.

    Put another way, they are only partial Muslims to varying degrees; per their own admission.

    That has to be accepted by the Shia leaders in Najaf and Qum.

  421. James Canning says:


    An overthrow of the Saudi monarchy indeed would very likely produce a government that would foster Islamic militancy. (Granted, this already is taking place in Syria)

  422. James Canning says:

    Gideon Rachman has sensible comments on the Ukraine/Crimea situation, in the Financial Times today.

  423. Karl.. says:

    What US, EU, do against Russia now should be warning for Iran and states alike. But I very much assume Iran follow it closely.

  424. Jay says:

    With US and EU sanctions, and more sanctions threatened to be forthcoming unless Russia relents, it is now Mr. Putin’s move.

    How far will Mr. Putin go? Will he begin direct talks with Ukraine as he has been asked to do?

  425. fyi says:


    Where are the US Liberal Imperialists and the purveyors of Responsibility-to-Protect when they are needed?

  426. fyi says:


    And now in Libya (or what is left of it):

    Clear that Axis Powers cannot create or put in place anything better than what they destroy – it was clear in Iran in 1953 and it is clear here now.

    That is why they will fail; no credible positive future is expected from them.

  427. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    “Aipac helped the conspiracy to set up the illegal and idiotic invasion of Iraq”

    Who are you to speak out what is idiotic and what is not ?
    According to who such war was idiotic and according to which criterion ?
    According to who such campaign is deemed “to be worth it” and be a success/failure.

    What about the military industrial complex.
    What about the boost in growth generated by national spending through debt which benefited the whole economy in US and allies.
    What about those military personnal who benefited with fast rank advancement through wars.
    What about the security complex (NSA, FISA, homeland security…)
    What about those who benefited by the US administration and public focus on terrorism rather than the economic disaster out of the globalization ? Such globalization that benefited the 1% at the expense of the 99%.

    The issue with your kind of immoral thug is that you do not measure such wars as moral issue or even a material issue.
    The only thing that is of import for you is whether the war has been a military success with friendly government in Irak a.d Afghanistan.
    If it was the case you would claim it to be a success…
    Would it be a success indeed ?

    Such wars are not to be measured as being successfull or not.
    Such wars are to be measured as being moral or not.

    Morality as no place in your worldviews.

    Please spare us your idiotic and useless comments.
    Please keep wallowing in your MSM detritus it is where you belong.

  428. nico says:

    M. Canning,

    You should rather read that rather than your usual detritus.

  429. James Canning says:


    You think I do not see the illegal invasion of Iraq as a moral issue? Nonsense. It was one of the greatest crimes of the past century.

    And of course I know that the illegal war was hugely profitable, for certain interests.

  430. James Canning says:


    When Khamenei refers to the “Islamic resistance”, does he mean the Syrian government? Or the Islamic militants trying to overthrow that government?

  431. James Canning says:


    If you think the focus should be on economic crisis, why not mention the fact Venezuela apparently suffers from an inflation rate of 200% or posibly 300%? (Annualized)

  432. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    March 6, 2014 at 3:53 pm

    Note that the increased share of Chinese participation in purchase and development of Libyan oil has correlated with deteriorating security situation in Libya.

    Soon after Shell’s exit in December of 2013, and Chinese bidding on oil development that Shell relinquished, the local warlords “shot up” a few refineries, delivery vehicles, and ports that China intended to utilize.

    Italy remains the largest importer of Libyan oil followed by China. There are indications of a game afoot to divide up Libya. Axis power’s interest is not necessarily coincident with local populations well-being.

  433. James Canning says:


    Regarding the slaughter of civilians in the Central African Republic, some who post on this site say it is not the business of France, or the UK. Or Germany, for that matter.

  434. James Canning says:


    Are you aware that the western oil companies operating in Libya prior to the eruption of the insurgency, did not favor western military intervention? Even after the unrest erupted in Benghazi, the oil companies generally opposed western military intervention.

  435. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    March 6, 2014 at 4:58 pm

    Indeed it is not.

    But it is clear then also that Axis Powers use “Human Rights” as a propaganda instrument.

    Where is Miss Samantha Power?

    She is being scarce.

    The weaknesses of the Muslim states is also quite evident; they cannot do a damn thing to help Muslims in distress.

    The consequence of 800 years of being asleep ….

  436. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Israel Attacks ‘Hezbollah-Affiliated Militants’ in Syria
    Syria: Israeli Forces Fired Tank Shells

    Still trying to get that Syrian war started…

  437. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    March 6, 2014 at 5:02 pm

    The more correct statement adds the nuance that makes clear why major oil companies did not wish for a military solution. They hoped to get a better deal from Qaddafi under pressure – more corruption, more profits, as long as the security is intact. It also needs to be stated that the largest stakeholder at the time – Italy’s ENI – did not have a clear position on military solution.

  438. kooshy says:

    This time the western NATO countries are trying to punch Russia hard in her soft under belly which always was Eastern Europe, Eurasia, and strategically most important neighboring country. As of today we are entering (if we haven’t yet) a escalated stage that for either side backing off means a big strategic loss as well as we will see a few falling governments, in case of western loss and backing off, that includes a US government in her last two years in the office. Betting and risking on such an important strategic gain or loss needs a gambler with huge desperation, recklessness, and or incompetence. Is easy to think who has shown and exercised having all these three qualities in this past decade, I cannot think how Russia may or can afford to back off, I think same is true for Mr. Obama and Kerry specially after their Libyan and Syrian debacles.

  439. Richard Steven Hack says:

    How strong is Ukraine’s army?

    Another estimate indicating they are in no position to piss off Putin…

  440. Richard Steven Hack says:

    U.S. accuses Syria of stonewalling on chemical arms plants

    Still trying to get that Syrian war going…

  441. nico says:

    James Canning says:

    “When Khamenei refers to the “Islamic resistance”, does he mean the Syrian government? Or the Islamic militants trying to overthrow that government?”

    When Obama refers to support for “democracy” does he mean the one in KSA or the way he is helping it in Afghanistan ?
    Well, contrary to your thugish worlviews the means are as much important as the goals.
    The issue is that on all criteria of a Just war the west is bankrupt while Iran support for Syria’s Assad is progressive.
    Or maybe you are sustaining that the situation in Syria wound be better with the Takfiris in power ?
    Or maybe you are supporting the non existent moderate opposition in Syria ?
    Sure the small moderate opposition has been destroyed by Obama and Takfiri friends.

    Your argument is only miserable bickering with no substance.

    James Canning says:
    “If you think the focus should be on economic crisis, why not mention the fact Venezuela apparently suffers from an inflation rate of 200% or posibly 300%? (Annualized)”

    Inflation is an irrelevant economic indicator which describes nothing by itself as a for the economic well being of a population or the economic growth of a country.
    Incidentally, the GDP is not relevant either by itself.
    Economy can only be understood as a set of social, scientific and economic indicators and as a policy for sustainable well being with short term to long term implications.
    Your point only shows you wallowing in your usual MSM detritus orthodoxy and paradigm.
    Remain in the matrix… You are a lost case.

    As for Venezuela I do not know the specifics.
    However I understand that the regime there is representative.
    Are you claiming the opposite ?
    Maybe you suggest the US should implement their economic model in Venezuala through war for the Venezuelians own good ? Sure you are.

    James Canning says:
    “You think I do not see the illegal invasion of Iraq as a moral issue?”

    Sure you are. Actually the MSM recognize that because they cannot otherwise.
    Thus you swallow the detritus as usual.

    Now tell me genius if you consider the Afghan war as a Just war ?
    I do not. And I believe it is a criminal war.
    But that is a joke of mine. I mean no need for you to answer this with your usual play of word and sophistry.
    I fully know that you will find the beeeest sophistic excuuuuse to explain the situation there.

  442. Jay says:

    fyi says:
    March 6, 2014 at 5:11 pm

    “The consequence of 800 years of being asleep”

    I suspect that your statement is shorthand for weak leadership, exploitation, and to some extent, lack of drive.

  443. James Canning says:


    The military adventure of Nato in Afghanistan obviously is open to serious question.
    Poor decisions, right and left. Some noble work, no doubt. Amid the mess.

  444. James Canning says:


    I have favoured a complete pull-out of all US troops from Afghanistan, for years now.

  445. James Canning says:


    Venezuelans obviously are the ones to determine who governs the country. That said, the current outfit is making a major mess of the economy.

  446. James Canning says:


    I have thought from day one that the insurgency in Syria was unfortunate. Understandable, perhaps. But most unfortunate for the country.

  447. kooshy says:

    James Canning says:
    March 6, 2014 at 6:07 pm
    “Venezuelans obviously are the ones to determine who governs the country. That said, the current outfit is making a major mess of the economy.”


    This statement is also true for many of the regimes I’m Western Europe as well as North America , considering recent economic facts this specially is for the régime occupying the Downing Street don’t you think. After all the last years riots in UK was for economic reason as for injustice.

  448. James Canning says:


    The riots last year were simply an opportunity for opportunistic looters.

    I tend to think the UK economy is coming along well enough.

  449. Rehmat says:

    Jewish Navy seizes ‘Iranian rockets’: Really!

    Iranian foreign minister Dr. Muhammad Javad Zarif mocked Israeli story. “An Iranian ship carrying arms for Gaza. Captured just in time for annual AIPAC anti Iran campaign. Amazing Coincidence! Or same failed lies,” Zarif said via his Twitter account.

  450. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    March 6, 2014 at 6:53 pm

    If your answer to Kooshy is that you think UK economy is coming along well enough, you are sadly out of touch. The rising level of social, political, and economic injustice in the UK is no secret – anyone with a laptop and the ability to type google can figure it out.

    The UK is now a second rate democracy that has pinned her hope on the resurrection of American imperial dream. UK is now a place where a natural born citizen can get arrested, be tortured in Bagram, be sent to Guantanamo, be held for years without charges, without a peep from his country, be repatriated to become a human rights worker… Only to be arrested by the bastion-of-democracy british secret service on terrorism charges. What is the charge you ask. He took a trip to Syria more than two years ago. A publicized trip. Wrote about it in the papers.

    You must really wake up and smell the tea – things are not well in the British house. Things are not well.

  451. khomeini says:

    M. Ali says:
    March 5, 2014 at 10:22 am

    Khomeini says:
    March 5, 2014 at 1:52 pm

    More commentary on “So, where is Qatar heading?”

  452. M.Ali says:

    If Qatar plays its cards rights, they could come out a winner. However, the only wayit can succeed is by getting Iran’s help. Qatar can’t support proxies by just sending money, it needs a plan to ensure long term success.

    Qatar and the Egypts MB could have worked closely with iran. But they became too comfortable so fast. Their mishap in Syria and elsewhere screwed them up.

  453. BiBiJon says:

    If you ever had to remove a cast-iron bath tub, you know that the first few blows of the sledge hammer produce no outwardly visible cracks. But, lo and behold, the next blow shatters the darn thing in pieces.

    I’m just wondering how much of that rumored/reported/half-acknowledged Iran bartering 500,000 oil bpd for Russian goods and services, was not a direct result of the goings on in the Ukraine. And, if that was a teaser, then the potentials are written about here: “if Iran were a willing partner, and China were prepared to buy additional Iranian energy, Russia could supply not only S-300s, but newer S-400s and many other weapons.”

    Read more:

    I wonder if Russia is being pushed (deliberately) too far; Pushed to a place where using any diplomatic off-ramp will be too humiliating (by design) to consider. If so, then why?

  454. Karl.. says:


    Problem is rather the ignorance by EU/US in dealing with Russia. They dont seems to be able to deal through dialogue with Russia instead sending planes, fleets etc to russian border. There seems to be nothing that can stop their hatred against Russia at this moment.

  455. Rd. says:

    James Canning says:

    “I tend to think the UK economy is coming along well enough.” For the rich.

    looks like the ink in your type writer must have run out!!! Are you a lil’ low on cash to buy a good ribbon??

  456. Rd. says:

    BiBiJon says:

    “I wonder if Russia is being pushed (deliberately) too far; Pushed to a place where using any diplomatic off-ramp will be too humiliating (by design) to consider. If so, then why?”

    Kissinger had an interesting comment, “ he would never permit the head of state to directly contact another head of state in a crisis.” he said, they both likely have major egos and if they are not able to resolve their differences, then you have no one else to appeal to.

    Seems like he has an observation on political miss-steps by the west.

  457. Rd. says:

    BiBiJon says:

    “If so, then why?”

    To add, even Robert Gates was none too happy (for a cold war warrior) about the US approach and specially his republicans and their big mouths. he seems to feel a bridge too far by the administration.

    Russia is not going anywhere nor is she pushed back. Ukraine is not going anywhere but down. US and EU now have to dig deep and come up with cash to keep the failed state afloat till the pain in unbearable or some adults take charge of FP in US.

  458. fyi says:

    Rd. says:

    March 7, 2014 at 10:12 am

    I doubt that Axis Powers will be able to “dig deep and come up with cash” for Ukraine.

    They lost control of the events and now have locked themselves in a futile struggle with Russia.

    Unitary Ukrainian state was the casualty.

  459. fyi says:

    M.Ali says:

    March 7, 2014 at 7:11 am

    In Egypt and more significantly in Turkey you observed the limitations of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Their performance politically was a disappointment to the Iranians; they lined up with Axis Powers against a fellow Muslim state.

    I think it is safe to write-off MB as far as Iran is concerned; they are not potential allies of Iran.