This weekend, Hillary went on MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Parry  to discuss President Obama’s address—delivered, ironically enough, on the eve of the thirteenth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks—laying out his administration’s “strategy” for dealing with the Islamic State.  Listening to the speech, we thought it confirmed that political and policy elites have essentially learned nothing from a thirteen-year trajectory of hugely counterproductive foreign policy choices—choices made ostensibly in response to 9/11.  In her segments (see videos above or here, here, and here), Hillary sought to explain why this is the case:

“There are two sets of people that the president has around him.  One is a set of people who made their way among powerful domestic constituency groups, and [the other are] are people who made their way through the party.  This isn’t just a Democratic Party thing; the same thing happens on the Republican side…Then, on the so-called ‘expert’ side, you have people from the CIA and the Pentagon, the Department of Defense.  They are not there to provide facts, to provide information.  Remember, in 1947 both the Department of Defense and the CIA were created—after World War II—not to provide the president with facts, but to provide the president with a basis for power projection.  And this is what both parties fall into, both [post-9/11] presidents across the board fall into.

Remember, President Bush started his presidency with wanting to have a ‘humble’ foreign policy (if we can remember that).  What happens is that both of these presidents, President Bush and President Obama, are captured by their parties and a bipartisan commitment to American dominance, to American hegemony, to power projection.  Then they are fueled by ‘information’ coming from the CIA and the Pentagon, that are there for that purpose, for power projection, not to give simple facts or to inform.”

These dynamics are an important driver for many of the disastrously self-damaging foreign policy decisions American presidents have made in the post-Cold War period.  For, as Hillary explains, once a president is “captured and paralyzed by the bipartisan buy-in for dominance,” he is left “without another option.” 

In fact, as Hillary notes, “there is another option, there is a diplomatic way forward, there is conflict resolution.  [Obama] could be not just going to Saudi Arabia and having regional governments that are totally dependent on us for their security—he could have Iran at the table, he could have the Syrian government at the table.  These things are never said to the American public, but they are essential for conflict resolution.  He could go to the United Nations and not just give a speech, but get the Russians to buy in” for a legitimate international effort at conflict resolution.

But that’s not what Obama will do.  Instead, he has Secretary of State John Kerry say that having Iran at the table would be “inappropriate” until Tehran accepts the fatally flawed premises of Washington Syria policy and stops supporting the Assad government.  Moreover, Obama is asking for—and getting—bipartisan support for more U.S. assistance to so-called “moderate” Syrian oppositionists—who, as Hillary points out, “are the rebels who kidnapped Steve Sotloff and sold him to ISIS to be beheaded.  So you have bipartisan buy-in for that.”

Obama’s speech on the Islamic State provides damning testimony as to how little he has done to challenge the foreign policy orthodoxies embodied in the “bipartisan commitment to dominance” described by Hillary.  In his initial presidential campaign, Obama seemed, to some extent, to run against those orthodoxies, which have done so much to weaken America’s international position since it came out of the Cold War as the most powerful state in history.  Now, the public presentation of his Islamic State “strategy” makes all too clear just how thoroughly Obama has embraced them.

–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett



  1. Pouya says:

    It is simply amazing to me how many times Obama has criticized Democratically elected Madura of Venezuela, Democratically elected Morsi of Egypt (who is rotting in jail), and Democratically elected Al-Maleki and that they should all be removed one way or another. Yet, he has said absolutely nothing of General Al-Sisi of Egypt, The Saudi Pince and others.

    It seems that it is a crime when one fails to form a broad coalition but it is not a crime to mass murder people.

  2. M.Ali says:

    I don’t know why America doesn’t prop up new dictators anymore. Have they actually believed in their own bullshit into thinking that their military actions are ACTUALLY good for us?

  3. Sammy says:

    Interesting post in MoA :

    Cheney and his future anonymous Energy Policy Committee met with the Afghan Taliban in Houston in 1997, while George Bush was Governor of Texas. The Taliban were put up on a NY penthouse near the UN (which did not recognize them, nor Afghan Ambassador Hamid Karzai), while Cheney’s crew (e.g. Enron) pushed the Taliban to grant them a pipeline concession to India.

    At some point in July 2001, now VP Cheney’s State Department junior ambassador is alleged to have lost her patience (Nuland’s ‘F*ck UE’ moment) and told the Taliban, “You can either have a carpet of gold, or a carpet of bmobs.”

    To their credit, the Taliban told the b*tch to bring them mint tea, and put on a shawl.

    Planning and logistics for the US invasion began in August 2001, which if you know ANYTHING about US Military, could not POSSIBLY have begun in November without that advance logistics.

    After Karzai was pushed through the Loya Jirga to Chief Executive by immense pressure and baaksheesh directly from Cheney, Karzai nevertheless awarded the fabulous Aynak and Hajigak strategic reserves to China and India respectively. The famous US ‘Surge’ was ordered by Cheney in rage and retaliation (executed by Obama), then Clinton is on the record bribing Karzai with $5B diverted from US humanitarian aid funds, (which Karzai lost in Dubai R/E speculation then Clinton had to rush back and back-stop Bank of Kabul with $3.5B more, to prevent an audit that would have revealed her betrayal to the American people.)

    But to Karzai’s credit, even though Cheney’s EPC group wrote the Afghan Hydrocarbon and Strategic Minerals Laws IN ENGLISH and in NOVEMBER 2001 (before the new ‘Afghan Government’ even existed!), then Hillary bribed him with $8.5B (of which she received $50M and Karzai paid off her $-35M bankrupt presidential campaign, e.g. 1% standard water carrier fee) to Karzai’s everlasting credit, he nevertheless awarded the Aynak copper to China, and Hajigak iron & coking coal, as well as the Oil & Gas concessions, to India.

    Ha, ha. Everyone in the world knows how corrupt US Mil.Gov is, and their words are LIES.

    So OEF-A was already planned BEFORE September 11th, then ‘September 11th’ was really about destroying Congressional records of Rumsfeld’s $2.3 TRILLION IN MISSING FUNDS malfeasance stored at the Pentagon, with backup files at WTC 7. There must have been a lot of smoking guns, skeletons in closets, a lot of betrayal and treason in those files, to slam a cruise missile into the Pentagon at just the right spot, and ‘pull’ WTC7 with a demolition team, knowing, according to German and Israeli advance intel, that a diversion attack was coming.

    It was the SAUDIS, and NOT the Afghans, who slammed two planes into the WTC as purely a diversion. The classic ‘bitch slap’ before the rape at the Pentagon. Planned by, funded by, executed by, Saudi Royals. This is all documented fact, and now look where we are today.

    Oil was $15 a barrel under Clinton, then shot to $147 after Cheney’s Holy Oil Wars, and remains around $100 today, castrating the US economy, 92,000,000 jobless or homeless or both, giving the Saudis ONE BILLION DOLLARS A DAY FOR THE PAST TEN YEARS in excess oil profits above ~$25 a barrel Prince Bandar publicly stated would be a ‘reasonable price’.

    It’s also documented fact the Saudi Royals are sponsoring ISIS, and publicly declaring on their media in Riyadh that they are doing so, (whether they personally are or not), because Iraq just had the temerity and lack of humility and foresight to announce in July they were back to pre-war oil production levels and ‘ready to go to 8MBPD, a hot dagger in Riyadh’s TRILLION DOLLARS IN EXCESS OIL PROFIT HOT MONEY SLOSHING ENDLESSLY AROUND THE WORLD schema.

    The Iraqi Gov’s must not be too bright, and now Uncle Kerry-Kohn says they ‘have to go’.

    Photo-documentation has also surfaced showing John McCain meeting with Abu Bakr during a covert trip into Syria while on an ‘inspection tour’, promising to fund ‘moderate’ mercs, and pretending he didn’t know who the people in the room were, as if that’s not laughable.

    It’s all happening in plain view now, because we are SHEEP, and they know it. Panetta just lost ONE TRILLION DOLLARS on his shift. Nada. Mil.Gov just awarded $SEVEN BILLION to Spook Central WADC-NOVA for a New Global Intelligence Putsch. Nada. NOBODY SAYS A WORD, because that boy CIA plant in Russia and his Mossad ally Greenwald have everyone cringing in fear.

    Subzero in Kiev in just 65 days from now, and they have no heating gas.

    Tick tock.

    Posted by: ChipNikh | Sep 13, 2014 10:21:59 PM | 126

  4. Pirouz says:

    There are valid military reasons for including Iran and Syria in the coalition against ISIL. I really can’t see why these two valuable elements of a potential ground force partnership are being excluded.

    My guess is American strategists are seeking a maximalist yield in the region, out of the opportunities provided as an indispensable leader in a war a war against ISIL, as rendered by the might of U.S. airpower.

    We’ve attained American preferences in the makeup of the new Iraqi government out of this, and next is greater effort towards regime change in Syria and the regional rollback of Iran. How realistic this maximalist pursuit proves out to be, we’ll just have to see. Myself, I’m skeptical.

    My concern is that this more manipulative approach will prolong the war against ISIL, providing it with lengthened, armed opportunities. I’m particularly concerned of potential terror strikes against Europe.

    I’m also disappointed that, without the inclusion of Syria, there will be no UNSC resolution in support of the war. The war against ISIL will be not be a GHW Bush type of war (Bush actually included Assad the elder’s Syria in DESERT STORM.)

    Wars are tricky, risky affairs that are difficult to predict. There are usually a host of surprises. As another observers has us recall, you can never have too many allies in a war. But here we are, dismissive of Russia, China, Syria, Iran and Iran’s regional military allies in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon.

    BTW, can anybody recall a historical war where two uncoordinated, competing and hostile coalitions waged war against a common enemy? I’m at a loss. Usually a common enemy in a war brings countries and coalitions onto the same side, effecting a means of conflict resolution– sometimes temporary, sometimes lasting. Here we have an example where even this has failed to bring about a change in American policy, even though we have the the DESERT STORM (Syria) and initial phase of OEF-A as prime examples where Syria and Iran were capable of a realignment.

  5. Sammy says:

    @Pirouz my dear American friend , spread the truth until it is too late…

    by Preston James

    Want to know why everything in America seems to have become so dysfunctional? Why we have few decent political candidates and why all the electronic voting is manipulated? Why nothing ever seems to get resolved by our Politicians. Why America, formerly the wealthiest most prosperous nation in the world, has been progressively asset stripped and seen its standard of living progressively reduced, with Labor Unions and the Middle Class shrinking by the day?

    Why most American heavy industry and manufacturing has been exported and there are few new good paying jobs available while the large multi-national Corporate Profits are at an all time high? And why America keeps entering into perpetual, un-winnable foreign wars that are illegal, Unconstitutional, unprovoked, undeclared and exceedingly indecent and inhumane? Wars which only help the Defense Contractors, Banksters and Politicians share Big Profits gained illegally from the American Taxpayers and borrowed against their Children’s futures?


    There has been a continuing stream of Psyops deployed against the American People by the Hidden, True Leaders of America ever since their Covert Takeover in 1913.

    These Psyops have been used to manipulate the American Masses to support crazy, destructive USG Policies and legislation which directly harms America by undermining America as a Constitutional Republic and diminishing the quality and standard of living for “We the People.”

    It is time to fully identify and expose this Hidden Entity and the actual Perps responsible for these Psyops and bring their Continuing Stream of Psyops against the American People to a complete end.

    If America is to survive as a nation this Entity and their Psyops must be fully exposed and dis-empowered. Yes, the Entity responsible for this continual stream of deployed Psyops must be completely exposed and dis-empowered.

    This means in practical terms that those individuals responsible must be identified, indicted and fully prosecuted.

    If these Perps are serving as agents of espionage for a foreign based entity (which many are), they must be Fully Prosecuted for Treason and in many cases Sedition also, if they are Dual or Triple Citizens. Note: these crimes of Treason and Sedition, as well as foreign based Espionage against America are Capital crimes, meaning that the Perps can be executed upon conviction.

    This powerful Secret Entity which has been creating and dispensing this continual stream of Psyops upon “We the People” since 1913 is known by insiders as the Secret Shadow Government (SSG). The SSG is also known as the “Invisible USG” that controls “Visible USG” which is mostly ceremonial.

    This entity, the Secret Shadow Government (SSG) is comprised of super-elite deviants who view themselves as “above the law” in every way imaginable. And they are evil beyond imagination. When their true acts of cruelty and torture become fully exposed (and they will) most members of the public will reel in shock, some will develop symptoms of PTSD. Here is the best description of the Secret Shadow Government (SSG) as it exists today in its derivative form after numerous expansions during and after each major American War.(1)…

  6. fyi says:

    Pirouz says:

    September 14, 2014 at 6:10 am

    Iranians declined the offer to be part of this anti-ISIS since their price is strategic settlement and Axis Powers are unwilling to supply that.

    So they have stated that they will pursue their own aims by their own means at their own time.

    There is no sense of panic or distress in Iran; like Syrian Government, they are methodically going about the business of destroying their enemies.

    Furthermore, for Iran, it is better that Christians fight Sunni Muslims.

  7. James Canning says:

    George W. Bush was duped by warmongers using false intel “stovepiped” directly into the White House, thus avoiding CIA scrutiny and challenge.

  8. James Canning says:

    I strongly doubt the merits of continuing the effort to oeverthrow the Syrian government. Philip Giraldi, who is in a position to know, says he is aware of no American intelligence official who does not think overthrowing Assad will only lead to greater chaos. (American Conservative, Sept. 5)

  9. Fiorangela says:


    Catagnus & his knights of the round table see themselves as “warriors not killers” who are “instruments of US national policy.”

    Does that mean that Catagnus and his merrie band take upon themselves the responsibility of full moral agency and accountability, as defined at Nuremberg, such that “warriors” who participate in an illegal war, as in Iraq, may not rely on the claim they were “just following orders” but may be held fully liable, and punished by imprisonment or death, for crimes committed in carrying out their role as “instruments of US national policy?”

    If Bush and Cheney should be/could be charged with crimes against humanity with respect to the invasion of Iraq, Catagnus has put himself and all “warriors” in that same category.

    And according Melissa Harris Perry, “it’s not just warriors, it’s an American thing” —

    ” “That particular idealism and that sense of intervening on behalf of those who are incapable of protecting themselves against evil, that’s a little bit of hyperbole, but it’s also a very deeply American way of thinking about our role in the world. “

    The major problem Harris-Perry, and Sir Catagnus and his knites/nits seem unwilling to confront is a rational definition and identification of evil. Apparently, Israeli settlers pouring gasoline down the throat of a 16-year old Palestinian and setting him ablaze while torturing him is not “evil;” and the most sophisticated military in the region bombarding stone-and-bottle-rocket armed Gazans with white phosphorus & DIME is not an “evil” that summons Catagnus’s Crusaders, but staging a hi-tech beheading event that may or may not be financially supported by US allies is so evil that all the king’s horses & all the kings men must rally to the call.

    I hope Hillary kicked that dude under the table. Hard.

  10. Fiorangela says:

    for James —

    Behind the Sinking of the Lusitania — Patrick Buchanan

    “In 1907, Britain launched the Lusitania, “the greyhound of the sea,” the fastest passenger ship afloat. In 1913, Churchill called in the head of Cunard and said Lusitania would have to be refitted for a war he predicted would break out in September 1914.

    The Lusitania, writes Windchy, was “refitted as a cargo ship with hidden compartments to hold shells and other munitions. By all accounts there were installed revolving gun mounts.”

    On Aug. 4, 1914, after war was declared, Lusitania went back into dry dock. More space was provided for cargo, and the vessel was now carried on Cunard’s books as “an auxiliary cruiser.”
    Churchill visited the ship in dry dock and referred to Lusitania as “just another 45,000 tons of live bait.”

    When war began, German submarine captains, to save torpedoes, would surface and permit the crews of cargo ships to scramble into lifeboats, and then they would plant bombs or use gunfire to sink the vessels.

    Churchill’s response was to outfit merchant ships with hidden guns, order them to ram submarines, and put out “Q-ships,” disguised as merchant ships, which would not expose their guns until submarines surfaced.

    German naval commanders began to order submarines to sink merchant ships on sight. First Sea Lord Sir John (“Jackie”) Fisher said he would have done the same.

    Churchill, seeing an opportunity to bring America into Britain’s war, wrote the Board of Trade: “It is most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hope especially of embroiling the United States with Germany. … We want the traffic — the more the better — and if some of it gets into trouble, the better still.”

    Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan wanted to warn Americans not to travel aboard British ships. But President Woodrow Wilson, writes Windchy, “said that American citizens had a right to travel on belligerent ships with impunity, even within a war zone,” a defiance of common sense and an absurd interpretation of international law.

    On May 1, 1915, Lusitania set sail from New York. As Windchy writes, the ship “secretly carried munitions and Canadian troops in civilian clothes, which legally made it fair game for (German) U-boats.

    “After the war, Churchill … admitted that the Lusitania carried a ‘small consignment of rifle ammunition and shrapnel shells weighing 173 tons.’ New York Customs Collector Dudley Malone told President Wilson that ‘practically all her cargo was contraband of various kinds.’”

  11. James Canning says:

    On McLaughlin Group (PBS TV in America) last week, John McLaughlin showed a film clip of the Syrian deputy foreign minister, pledging cooperation with any country wanting to fight Isis. (McLaughlin.com)

  12. James Canning says:


    I am keenly aware of the use of the Lusitania to bring about American intervention against Germany in the First World War.

    The great German Chancellor, Bismarck, said that because the US was English-speaking and thus closely tied to Britain, American was a likely participant with Britain in any major war on the European continent.

    One more reason Germany blundered badly, strategically, by building the hugely expensive High Seas fleet.

  13. Tuyzentfloot says:

    I’m not comfortable with the arguments about the value of having a more inclusive iraqi government. They could be fleshed out more. Ok so one should expect a Shia government to do pro-Shia things , but they have some freedom in to what extent they antagonize or include the Sunni. They do have reasons not to antagonize them, and if you look at the relationship between Sunni tribes and ISIL , there’s a spectrum and it’s not static. That means the Iraqi government may well be able to shift alliances in its favor with the right policy. So I think there is some sense to the argument that a more sunni-friendly government makes a difference.
    I can see that the ‘inclusiveness’ argument been overstated, and that it reflects a natural tendency of imperial micromanagement. But it can make a difference.
    Maybe it’s much less important than getting Turkey to crack down on the border and to change the policy towards Assad. But I wouldn’t ignore it. Maybe the difficult position of the Iraqi government is itself in part a consequence of earlier US interference,that can be. Has the US been withholding funds in recent years in order to get some things done, and has this had an impact on relations with Sunni tribes? I don’t know.

  14. kooshy says:

    According what Iranian officials have said in past few days including Mr. Larijani head of parliament, Admiral Shamkhani secretary of SNSC and Mr. Amirabdolahian deputy foreign minster in charge of Arab and African affairs, all three have said It is inconceivable and not “serious” fighting terrorism by joining a coalition that is leaded by US and her various European and Arab clients since as everyone knows US and her various partners in this coalition are the same group who have created this ISIL, ISIS, Daesh by the work of their own specially militia ops and inelegance services and financed by their Arab oil producing clients.

    Joining US and the coalition of her clients will not only give Iran a bad name it will degrade Iran to the level of US satrapy client states likes of UK, Egypt, Turkey, KSA, France, etc. Just for this reason alone, that white hair man on the hospital bed with a big smile will not let that to happen. Iranian and the shieh fighters thanks to the very effective early mobilization by the religious leaders (marjah) in Iran and Iraq have effectively isolated this new US plan meaning ISIL in the (non-shieh) Sunni Arab deserts regions of eastern Syria and north western Iraq, they have not been able to effect the shieh not all that much that is the reason no one in Iran, Lebanon, Syria or southern Iraq is panicking.

    According to what I have read, although mostly are doubtful but regardless all Iranian officials with good hearth are wishing a lot of success for US and her coalition of clients to hold back ISIL effecting security of client sates like Turkey, Jordan, SKA, Persian gulf mini states. This game is for US to play not Iran. I would say it will take another ten years or so and many more strategic loses for US and her European clients to accept an strategic loss, the final end will come a much, much higher price that they have been anticipating all along.

  15. fyi says:

    Tuyzentfloot says:

    September 14, 2014 at 5:27 pm

    You do not understand; Sunnis in Iraq are not interested in accommodation; they “know” that they are entitled to rule Iraq. No Shia-dominated government can alter that.

  16. Empty says:

    Only the 1st segment with Hillary and the lady went a bit deeper and addressed some underlying issues. The other segments, not so much. Too many people and limited time did not allow for the statements made to be challenged. That the US is financing the very terrorists that traded the Americans came out was good.

    Related: “US govt warned Sotloff’s parents of prosecution if they paid ransom” from: http://rt.com/usa/187728-sotloff-parents-ransom-prosecution/

    “Barfi also said that he was at a separate meeting with State Department officials, one of whom mentioned the “material support” law several times and made it “clear” that ransoms to terrorists could result in criminal prosecutions. The Obama administration follows a strict policy regarding such payments. Viewing it as a form of material aid to terrorist organizations, such money transfers could be considered a violation of federal laws.”

    When will Obama administration itself be prosecuted then? Do as I say not as I do, hey?!

  17. Neil M says:

    The Official Version of 9/11 is my favourite soap opera. There was so much patriotic bathos, so much secrecy, so many contradictions and so much unconvincing spin. NORAD’s failure to fulfill its primary role, on the only occasion it was ever called upon to do so, was as remarkable for the questions it begged as the fact that none were satisfactorily answered and nobody in the USG was responsible or accountable. The sub-prime crisis was just a bigger and better 9/11 redux for which the USG was, once again, neither responsible nor accountable.

  18. kooshy says:

    Who thought you need one of these in an American university, is the campus police in us expect to get IED, but why they feel so threaten from who ISIL coming to campus or rather is our very own students who are not and “don’t feel secure in their own persons” who now are so fed-up with their own police state which makes the police to think preemptively?

    Police Armored Vehicle Is Unwelcome in California College Town

  19. Khomeini says:

    EU officially admits buying oil from ISIS

    watch the video in the link:

  20. Nasser says:

    Sergey Karaganov writes “Western delusions triggered this conflict and Russians will not yield”

    “It is a miscalculation because Russia is far stronger, and the west far weaker, than many imagine. The west that Russia now faces is not the self-confident alliance that proclaimed itself victor of the cold war. It is a directionless gaggle, beset with economic insecurities and losing sight of its moral convictions. America and its allies once held the future in their hands, but at the beginning of this Asian century they have let it slip through their fingers. Their crowning accomplishment was globalisation – and they are destroying it, with economic sanctions they incoherently describe as instruments of self-defence.

    These sanctions will hurt ordinary Russians, but they are helping to rouse our country from its slumber. True, Russia is smaller than the Soviet Union was, and a romantic belief in the free market has led it to take some wrong turns. The country’s elite, enjoying the consumerist pleasures afforded by new wealth, had long been at rest. But President Vladimir Putin has studied the lessons of history and harbours no illusions about the west. Russian citizens, unlike the disillusioned Soviets who were never far from hunger, know what they are ready to struggle for. Our country is finding its place…

    But that was before the west rediscovered the politics of Versailles and decided Russia had to be stopped at all costs. With encouragement, these foreign powers imagined, the new bourgeoisie would revolt against Mr Putin. Instead, they are rallying around him.
    State propaganda plays a role, but Russians have access to western media via the internet and the more of it they see the more they unite around the Kremlin. This is no time for denial: westerners need to understand how their governments made a potential foe out of what was once an aspiring ally. Russia will not yield. This has become a matter of our nation’s life and death.”


    Comment: I imagine Chinese and Iranian planners already breaking out in celebratory dances.

  21. kooshy says:

    Must Watch

    Ayatollah Khamenei’s interview leaving hospital, saying his entertainment in hospital was listening to American official’s double talk on their fight against ISIL, and warning them that Iraq and Syria are not Pakistan that they can bomb as they wished, he said if they did they will encounter the same outcome as what they received in Iraq in past ten years, hope someone will translate the video with.


  22. Fiorangela says:

    Khomeini says:
    September 15, 2014 at 5:13 am

    Didn’t Marc Rich make a large part of his fortune by selling oil during the 1973 – oil embargo that came about after US gave aid to Israel in the Yom Kippur war?

    Bill Clinton pardoned Rich in one of the last acts of his presidency

  23. kathleen says:


    The MSM doing it again except for MHP. Fueling the images of the beheadings. Do not provide a wider perspective about Bremmer disbanding the Iraq army fueling tensions and violence in Iraq (no Al Queada in Iraq before invasion) helping create ISIS. No mention anywhere of U.S. brutal behavior in Abu Gharib, Gitmo, black sites. No incentive to connect the dots.

    More said now than after 9/11 about alleged Saudi funding of both groups. Ron Susskind wrote about this in his must read book “the Price of Loyalty” over 10 years ago. No mention of other ways of dealing with this quagmire…seems committed to digging in deeper.

    So respect Melissa Harris Perry’s wisdom for having Hillary on her program to widen the scope for the American public but MHP said the most absurd thing on her program this week. Suggested Condi “mushroom cloud” take over NFL’s commissioner position. As if Condi “mushroom cloud” knows anything about standing up for innocents. She is a perpetrator of violence against innocent Iraqi people. WTF would “mushroom cloud” know about protecting innocent people. Connect the dots Melissa. Etan Thomas made such great points on Sunday about a “selective focus” on violence. Melissa was unwilling to listen to examples about fundamentalist.

  24. Khomeini says:

    Translation of Khamenei’s interview – For link to video see kooshy says: September 15, 2014 at 9:58 am

    Khamenei’s comments on US and ISIS begins at 7:42

    I was listening what Americans were saying in regards to fighting ISIS. What was really entertaining for me was that both foreign minister of America and the spokeswoman said that they will not invite Iran for anti-ISIS coalition.
    First of all, it is better for us [Iran] not to join US in their wrong actions. It is an honour for us that we [Iran] are not part it; for us [Iran] it is not a disappointment.

    Second, I saw that all of them [US secretary of state and the spokeswoman] were lying. This is because form the start of ISIS crisis Americans, through US ambassador in Iraq, asked our [Iranian] ambassador in Iraq to for Iran-US coordination against ISIS. Our [Iran’s] ambassador dismissed it. Some of our officials also did not have anything to say regarding this [US-Iran coordination against ISIS].

    I was against it and did not want a cooperation on this issue with it [US] because how can we cooperate with those [US] whose hands are contaminated, their intentions are contaminated.

    The same foreign minister [John Kerry] personally asked Zarif [Iran’s foreign minister] for Iran to cooperate with US regarding the issue [anti-ISIS fight]. Dr Zarif rejected it. His [John Kerry] representative, the lady, also asked Araqchi [Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister and senior negotiator for Iran-P5+1 negotiation] for Iran’s cooperation on this issue. He[Araqchi] also rejected it.

    After they rejected it and we quickly said we [Iran] will not cooperate with them [US], now they say we [US] do not want to bring Iran into the [anti-ISIS] coalition.
    Before they gathered 30-40-50 countries for anti-Syria coalition but could not do a damn thing to Syria. Same in the case of Iraq. They do not want to take any serious action against it [ISIS]. The movement that broke the back of ISIS was not actions of Americans – the Americans know this very well; ISIS knows this very well, and people of Iraq also know this very well. It was the people Iraq, Iraqi Army and the armed people of Iraq – who had learned how to strike ISIS- were the ones that struck [ISIS]. After this it is they [Iraqi Army and armed Iraqi people] who will strike more and we will see that.

    America with this action wants to do in Iraq and Syria what it does in Pakistan where despite having a government and strong army it goes in and attacks inside Pakistan. They [US] should know if they do that [strike Iraq and Syria] they will face the same problems they faced in Iraq during the last 10 years. It was entertaining for me to watch these events [American statements].

  25. James Canning says:


    Bravo, re: idiocy of L. Paul Bremer III, aka “Jerry” Bremer, in disbanding the Iraqi army when George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, et al., agreed before the US invasion was launched, that the Iraqi army would be kept intact to maintain order.

  26. James Canning says:


    Karaganov seems to think the Russian Federation is somehow put into jeopardy if Ukraine’s ties to the EU get too strong. I think this is simply not true.

  27. James Canning says:


    Most Sunnis in Iraq do not see it as feasible for them to re-establish a dictatorship run by Sunnis.

  28. James Canning says:


    Do you agree that the great Germany Chancellor, Bismarck, showed his keen sense of history when he said Germany could not expect to engage in a major war with Britain and not anticipate the US would end up in that war fighting on the side of Britain?

  29. James Canning says:

    Neil M,

    Do we agree that Saddam Hussein destroyed most of Iraq’s WMD in 1991 yet concealed this fact from the outside world for many years?

  30. James Canning says:

    Ed Luce has a fine piece in the Financial Times today, challenging the wisdom of Obama’s anti-Isis campaign.

  31. Fiorangela says:

    James Canning says:
    September 15, 2014 at 1:18 pm

    Yes, I agree, but what has that got to do with the price of turnips?

    The British empire fell because it engaged Germany in a conflict that Herbert Hoover warned the English was not in their interest, was not a threat to them unless they inserted themselves in the imbroglio. The British insisted on goading Germany — the senseless, and unsupported, pact with Poland.

    Germany may have been destroyed, but so was the British empire — FDR had twin goals (or maybe three — maybe he hoped Hitler would destroy Communist Russia, as Hitler was passionate to do) — FDR was determined to crush Hitler, and determined that the British empire would NOT expand. FDR achieved those two stated goals.
    Today, a case can be made that Germany is stronger than Britain. The US, successor to the British empire, is making the same hubristic mistakes as the Mother Country.

    By the way, in my opinion, the Ed Luce piece was insipid — same schtick different day. A journo’s gotta make a living, ideally, without telling that much truth that he loses his job.

    “Origin,” a participant on Pat Lang’s blog, who is, most likely, not dependent on his writing for his livelihood, confronts certain realities about ISIS: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2014/09/should-brer-bear-be-takin-a-tear-in-the-brirpatch-wit-brer-rabbit-origin.html

    Origin wrote that “a new, true state is forming”–

    “it appears there will be multiple competing threads seeking control and a charter membership, including some in Turkey, Syria, Jordan, and KSA. Every new competitor for a founder status just increases the likelihood that a Caliphate will soon emerge as a real state with all of the functional features of a “Westphalian” state except for agreed-upon borders because the Caliphate meme extends to a dream of worldwide Islamic domination.” [I disagree on that last point — the “meme” may be to “worldwide domination,” but I think even ISIS dreamers wake up to reality now and again.]

    Origin continues:

    “The meme of the Caliphate is just too basic and fundamental within Islamic history, memory, and thought for it to be dismissed and to be “contained”, “degraded”, and “defeated” within the present historical context. . . . No western policy or strategy will be able to stop this process because the idea has reached maturity within the mental genes of too many young Sunnis to be derailed.”

    Origin observed that while Obama identified ISIS as a “terror organization that, therefore, cannot be a state,” the President failed to note that

    “Israel started as a terrorist movement and, in many ways, continues to be a terrorist state as it continues to use terrorism against its Palestinian and other opponents.”

    It may be the case that zionism’s 15 minutes of fame are up.
    Exit British empire, enter USA empire.
    Exit zionist entity, enter ISIL.
    Exit USA empire, enter Khomeinist pan-Islamism, with Iran & KSA burying, or at least sheathing, the hatchet.

    The times they are a’changing.

  32. James Canning says:


    Britain was “goading” Germany, prior to Germany’s partition of Poland?

    Both world wars last century were in effect insane civil wars. Within Europe.

    All colonial empires would have come to an end, war or no war. Arguably, the Russian Federation is the last European empire.

  33. James Canning says:


    I think Isis poses very little threat to Israel. Israel’s larger problem is its own dysfunctional politics. In my view.

  34. Fiorangela says:

    James Canning says:
    September 15, 2014 at 6:42 pm — “I think Isis poses very little threat to Israel.”

    but does Israel pose a threat to ISIS, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, etc?

    Moon of Alabama September 15, 2014 http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/09/syria-the-southern-attack-on-damascus.html

    The New “Regime Change” Plan – Attack Damascus From The South

    There are serious active preparations for a new attack on Damascus. Anti-government forces, including the Al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, have been trained and equipped in Jordan and are now moving into their starting position in Quneitra governate in south-west Syria. (A similar plan in spring 2013 was only partially executed and later aborted,)

    Quneitra governate is a strip next to the Israel occupied Golan heights with a southern border to Jordan and a north western border with Lebanon.

    The anti-government forces cooperating for this operation are
    –the Syrian Revolutionaries Front (SRF), which is backed by the United States, assisted by the Islamic Front, backed by Saudi Arabia, and

    –al-Qaeda’s Jabhat al-Nusrah which just received some $20 million from Qatar.

    These forces infiltrated from Jordan through Daara and then up north-westward along the border with Israel. This movement, during which some UN observers were kidnapped by these forces, was

    –supported by Israeli artillery strikes against Syrian units that tried to prevent it.

    The sole border station between Israel and Syria is now in the hands of the anti-government forces. The Israeli military is also providing medical support to these anti-government forces.

    The UN has pulled out all peacekeepers from the Syrian side of the Golan height demarcation line.”

  35. Dan Cooper says:

    Nation of Cowards

    What else can you fairly call a people who attack a population of refugees confined to a small space surrounded on every side by fences and machine-gun towers, a population with nowhere to run? No, that is not put strongly enough. Not just attack, but use the latest and most ferocious weapons from the American arsenal to slaughter more than 2100 people, including more than 500 children, destroying along the way a major portion of the housing, businesses, and institutions of a poor people.

    The definition of a coward is not the traditional military one of a soldier who won’t fight. No, that’s far too simplistic and self-serving.

    The genuine meaning of the word, the meaning that warrants our full sense of revulsion and contempt, is someone who attacks someone far weaker than themselves. A large man who beats a woman or a child with his fists or a policeman who clubs a handcuffed prisoner – that is the accurate and meaningful definition of the word. And the people of Israel responsible for Operation Protective Edge are as sadly perfect examples of genuine cowards as you can find in the world.

    What remarkable courage it takes – outfitted as the IDF is with Kevlar armor, the latest intelligence gadgets, satellites, radios, support of every imaginable kind, and immensely powerful weapons (they even get hot pizzas delivered as they pause in their gruesome work) – to shoot people who cannot run away, are often poorly fed and clothed, and who mostly have no weapons. And the courage of the Israeli pilots who make bombing runs over homes, schools, apartments, and stores from the safety of their supersonic fighters is surely remarkable.

    They remind me of the American pilots who shot and incinerated countless retreating Iraqi soldiers in the (engineered) First Gulf War while the television broadcasts caught their gleeful shouts of “Wow, it’s just like shooting fish in a barrel!”

    Yes, Americans are the only comparable example of Israel’s cowardice, the Americans who literally enable Israel’s savagery but also themselves have given the world the best part of half a century of savagery abroad, the deaths of literally millions of civilians in half a dozen countries – deaths by carpet bombing, napalm, missiles, white phosphorus, various poisons, and the razor-like shards of cluster bombs.

    The United States, like Israel, is never called to account for the worst record on the planet of mass killing and destruction. You simply cannot name a contemporary criminal enterprise or a so-called terrorist organization which has a record so steeped in horrors as those two.

    Wholesale death inflicted with utter disregard for international law and custom has become standard policy for both countries.

    Yes, there are always excuses for mass murder, the weasel words such as communists or terrorists or dictators and weapons of mass destruction (Americans ironically being the only people on earth who actually used them, twice, on civilians) –

    all of them having no more real meaning than Stalin’s chilling wreckers, a word he used to signal his creatures that it was time for a new bloody purge. In some cases those purged were simply people Stalin did not like or of whom he felt jealous, but in most cases of the millions smashed or consigned to hell on earth, the only motive was to terrify a population into submission, and that is exactly what Israel’s motive is for its periodic massacres of Palestinians and Lebanese.

    Anyone of moderate intelligence who reads and thinks must know Israel is in no danger from anyone, least of all the Palestinians who have no organized army, no navy, and no air force, not to mention very little of anything else.

    Israel is armed to the teeth with conventional and non-conventional weapons, it leans back arrogantly into the arms of super-power America and plays the victim in a land it victimizes, and it functions as a garrison state whose major purpose is to hold down and make miserable millions of people who happen not to be Jewish, all the while hoping they will one day pick up and leave.

    It is absurd to say Israel’s security is endangered by anyone, and especially by the hopeless, lifetime prisoners of Palestine.

    Turning a blind eye to the Holocaust three-quarters of a century ago was an unforgivable thing, but in at least one very real sense, it is now even more culpable the way the West turns a blind eye to Israel’s horrors.

    The Holocaust was perpetrated in great secrecy, and there was no Internet or international media equipped with satellites to tell the world what was happening.

    There was no United Nations or other international organizations watching. Today, what Israel does is everywhere to be seen. People in America eat their suppers watching Israeli jets bombing homes. Without much effort you can find images of Palestinian children with portions of their heads missing. And we all saw the Israelis from Sderot sit in lawn chairs on a bluff in the evening breeze laughing and applauding as women and children writhed in agony far below much like ants being stepped on.

    What else can you fairly call a people who attack a population of refugees confined to a small space surrounded on every side by fences and machine-gun towers.


    By John Chuckman

  36. Neil M says:

    James Canning says:
    September 15, 2014 at 1:26 pm

    Neil M,

    Do we agree that Saddam Hussein destroyed most of Iraq’s WMD in 1991 yet concealed this fact from the outside world for many years?

    No, we cannot. Here’s why.

    It is patently obvious that Saddam was coerced into destroying the components of his military apparatus which might make a future attack on Iraq too ‘risky’ for US-UK. He was in no position to object, his defense forces having been severely weakened over a lengthy period. It is highly offensive to (obliquely/dishonestly) suggest that Saddam embarked on this course “secretly.”

    Secrecy wasn’t an option. Logic, alone, should tell you that his destruction program was supervised, monitored and recorded by the entities responsible for the coercion. And it was these same entities, not Saddam, who “concealed this fact from the outside world for many years.”

  37. kooshy says:

    An important Part of Ayatollah Khamenei’s interview with regard to US and coalition against ISIL, after leaving hospital today, this very same decision made by Ayatollah Khamenei is the exact reason that an strategic cooperation between US and Iran will be impossible, (this was true and correct since beginning of IR and will not and cannot be changed any time soon) which most analyst don’t understand or ignore to recognize. But one must understand this very same principal is what has made and given the identity to IRI.

    حضرت آیت‌الله خامنه‌ای، سپس به منظور نشان دادن دروغگویی آمریکایی‌‌ها برای مبارزه با داعش، جزئیاتی را از پشت پرده‌ این ماجرا بیان کردند. ایشان گفتند: در همان روزهای سخت حمله‌ داعش به عراق، سفیر آمریکا در عراق طی درخواستی از سفیر ما در عراق می‌خواهد که ایران و آمریکا جلسه‌ای برای مذاکره و هماهنگی در خصوص داعش داشته باشند. رهبر انقلاب اسلامی گفتند: سفیر ما در عراق، این موضوع را به داخل کشور منعکس کرد که برخی مسئولان هم با این جلسه مخالفتی نداشتند اما من مخالفت کردم و گفتم در این قضیه ما با آمریکایی‌‌ها همراهی نمی‌کنیم زیرا آنها نیت و دست آلوده‌ای دارند و چگونه امکان دارد که در چنین شرایطی ما با آمریکایی‌‌ها همکاری کنیم.

    Translation : his exlency ayatolah kahamenie to show the American’s lies on their claim fighting ISIL realeased(uncovered) some of the behind the seen details of this episoed. He said in those very early days of ISIL havey attack on Iraq US ambasador in Iraq requested a meeting with our ambasador for consultation, cordenation and cooporation between Iran and US on fighting ISIL, leader of islamic revloution continued: our ambasador reported the US ambasador’s requested to higher autorities (inside the government) some of our officials were not aginst it, but I was aginst it ( a meeting between Iran and US on the problem of ISIL) I told them on this issue we will not work ( cooperate} with the Americans, because (on the issuue of fighting terorism) they have dirty hands and dirty(illicit) intentions, thefore under such a conditions ( their bad intentions, conducts and name ) how could it be possible for us to cooportate with them. Corectly Iran refuses to work with US (on regional issues) to avoid getting a bad namefrom US policies, this is the trap iran is avoiding.

    Ayatolah Khamenie who I have heard has a great sense of humor, was making fun of the US official’claimes, he said while I was in hospital I was entertaing my self, listening to American officials lying. May god saves him.

  38. M.Ali says:

    It is very important that the Shias give no help to USA. Let them be hated by both Sunnis and Shias, and any other sect in the middle east. USA jumps from one side to the other like the prostitute she is, and there is no reason why everyone should suddenly rush to them, whenever they beckon.

    “Iraqi Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr has threatened to target US forces if they return to Iraq.

    In a statement written in Arabic and posted on his website, Sadr said:

    “The black house has decided to attack our Iraqi holy lands — this decision is apparently based upon its regret to pull out superficially from Iraq in the first place.

    “I say to you (Americans) if you came back, we will come back to you and the victory will be for us.”

    Sadr also warned the Iraqi government not to seek help from the US saying, “seeking the help from the oppressors, over the oppressed is forbidden. “

  39. Karl.. says:

    Cameron is so dirty, using all kinds of acts to stop scotish independence.

    I suspect that his side will win though.

  40. Khomeini says:

    To add to what M.Ali says: September 16, 2014 at 8:51 am

    The link below lists the positions of key players in regards to US lead anti-ISIS campaign.


  41. Kathleen says:

    MHP ask good questions of her guest who she admits know far more than her about these issues but then consistently interrupts before they are even close to finishing a thought or sentence. She needs to take lessons from Joy Reid (Reid report) and Ed Schultz who ask pertinent questions of their quest and then allow them to finish their thoughts and then ask reasonable questions.

    Ed has had Colonel Wilkerson on three times over the last two weeks, last night Rachel Maddow had retired Colonel Andrew Bacevich on. Hillary, Wilkerson, Bacevish, Phyllis Bennis only guest on MSM news outlets questioning the wisdom of U.S. attacks on Iraq.

    No one mentioning the U.S. U.K. invasion of Iraq and hundreds of thousands of deaths, injuries, millions displaced. No MSM host bringing up U.S. torture, killings in Abu Gharib, Gitmo, black sites. No one willing to consider connecting the bloody dots. Both sides have used gruesome images to stir support for more killing.

    No one mentioning the make up of IS. Bremmer’s releasing of Saddam’s Baathist army and the growth of IS.

  42. fyi says:

    Kathleen says:

    September 16, 2014 at 11:03 am

    What gave rise to ISIS was Axis Powers war to destroy the Syrian Arab Republic.

    I think ISIS is now a threat to all Sunni Friends of US but US is still trying to use the political cover of fighting against ISIS into destroying SAR.

    Mr. Obama is only prolonging the agony of Syria – Axis Powers will not and cannot win in Syria nor in Iraq.

    But their Hubris prevents them from comprehending the limits of their power.

  43. fyi says:

    M.Ali says:

    September 16, 2014 at 8:51 am

    Fully agree; God willing, ISIS will destroy all the enemies of Shia – who happen to be friends of US.

    Until and unless Axis Powers are willing to settle with Iran strategically, Iran should not collaborate with them on any tactical matters; we all saw what happened when Iran decisively helped US in Afghanistan back in 2001 – she was declared to be an enemy of US and subject to destruction.

    Nothing has changed since 2001; Iran remains the enemy and will remain so.

    Note that the relationship between USA and Saudi Arabia is more than 80 years old.

    There is snow ball’s chance in Hell that US would assume policies that would be against Saudi Arabian interests.

  44. fyi says:


    Dr. Cordesman on US strategy against ISIS:


  45. James Canning says:


    The moron in the White House (George W. Bush) was being manipulated by neocon warmongers when he included Iran in the foolish “Axis” of “Evil”. This manipulation had a good deal to do with efforts to help Israel retain the West Bank and suppress Palestinian nationalism.

  46. James Canning says:


    I agree with you that the ill-considered effort to overthrow Bashar al-Assad had much to do with the rise of Isis.

  47. James Canning says:


    American air strikes on Isis forces within Iraq of course are not “attacks on Iraq”.

    Those who were concerned these air strikes might provide an opening for warmongers to urge US intervention in the vicious civil war, obviously had (and have) reason to be concerned.

  48. James Canning says:

    Neil M,

    You appear to suggest Iraq did a good job of making the outside world aware, from late-1991, that Iraq had destroyed most of its WMD. Correct?

  49. James Canning says:


    Do we agree that Saddam Hussein in fact destroyed most of Iraq’s WMD in late 1991?

  50. James Canning says:


    You ask if Israel poses a “threat” to Isis. I think Israel’s periodic slaughter of Palestinians benefits Isis.

  51. James Canning says:


    You asked what relevance is there, to the German Empire’s building, prior to 1914, of a wholly-unnecessary High Seas fleet. This spending undermined the national security of Germany. I think the relevance is obvious.

  52. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 16, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    And one must ask what possible relevance to World War II is in the fact that US, Russia, and China are all working on hypersonic bombs.

  53. Nasser says:


    “…God willing, ISIS will destroy all the enemies of Shia – who happen to be friends of US.”

    – Do you feel that the ideology of Da’ash has greater potential for harming GCC interests than that of Ikhwan?

    If Israel were in Iran’s shoes they would certainly do all they could to promote the utter lunatics amongst their enemies.

  54. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    September 16, 2014 at 1:42 pm

    ISIS does not have an ideology; that requires the ability to think.

    They are applying the “Rulings of Islam” – احکام اسلام – as they understand them and that is why no one among the Sunni Doctors of Religion has been able to rebut them by appealing to Sharia or Islamic Tradition.

    There is nothing that stands between Ikhwan and ISIS – their differences are matters of degree and not in kind.

    All of this must be contrasted with the Shia who have taken the late Plato’s advice and decided to go to experts in (religious) Truth (the Shia Doctors of Religion) in order to settle the Religious Truth of this or that proposition or proposal.

    However, the Shia have not been immune either; it has only been the success of the late Mr. Khomeini’s ideas of “Islamic Governance” and his break with Islamic Tradition after the Islamic Revolution in Iran that has protected Iranians and other Shia from the worst manifestation of trying to mindlessly apply these so-called “Rulings of Islam” – احکام اسلام.

    The success crucially depends on having the Doctors of Religion safely and out of public’s view – discuss the Religious Truths of Islam – rather than 3 men going into a room and deciding that everyone else in not Muslim.

    [Which brings me back to the central point that I have tried to make: “Accept that everyone is a Muslim and move on.”]

    But even in Iran, the Islamic Disaster is a mild form of the ISIS-like disease; had there been no Khomeini we would have had Shia Jihadists – no doubt.

    I mean, let us not kid ourselves; this ayatollah was publicly praising the “Islamic Justice” of Taliban a few months before 9/11/2001 attacks on US – being oblivious to the massacres of the Shia in Afghanistan or the murder of the Iranian diplomats.

    ISIS and the Arabs are not the only fools in this world.

  55. James Canning says:


    I am not sure what you question is. Are you asking why China, Russia and the US all are researching higher-tech nukes?

    I think it is obviously ironic that the German Empire undermined its own national security by building an unnecessary High Seas fleet.

  56. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 16, 2014 at 2:37 pm

    The military establishments of the leading powers in Europe, prior to 1914, were developing war plans and weapons without civilian political oversight or discussion.

    The militaries of US, China, and Russia are likewise today developing capabilities and plans without any serious oversight as to what those plans and capabilities are going to imply for their security of that of others.

    Why does the United States, or Russia, or China need to deliver a bomb to any where on this planet within 30 minutes?

    Are people of South Africa going to invade Russia?

    Are Iranians planning a war with China?

    Is Chile going to attack US?

    Why is ling-range nuclear munitions now the coin of state security?

    Who is responsible?

  57. Fiorangela says:

    James Canning says:
    September 16, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    “You asked what relevance is there, to the German Empire’s building, prior to 1914, of a wholly-unnecessary High Seas fleet. This spending undermined the national security of Germany. I think the relevance is obvious.

    = = =

    England was so financially decrepit thru & after WWI that FDR had to lend them bullets to shoot at Germany in WWII. Not certain England ever repaid the lend/lease.

  58. fyi says:

    Fiorangela says:

    September 16, 2014 at 3:02 pm

    That was never repaid.

    US liquidated the British Empire instead – check the book “The Last 100 Days of the British Empire”

  59. James Canning says:


    Are you arguing it was worth it, to the German Empire, to destroy itself in order to wound the British Empire?

  60. James Canning says:


    Jealousy on the part of the German Emperor was a significant element in the strategic blunder to build the High Seas fleet.

  61. James Canning says:


    The German military was not under the control of the German parliament. In Britain, the PM prior to 1914 would much rather have spent available funds on social programmes etc rather than on warships. Civilians in Britain were in control of military and naval spending.

  62. James Canning says:


    I DEPLORE the spending on nukes, by the US, Russia and China. DEPLORE. Full stop.

  63. kooshy says:

    Gav James what do you think?

    In my opinion if the Scots move on to become an independent state, it would be very hard and probably not worthy keeping the other two little states in the new meaningless not functional union, so I think the union will be dissolved in a few years in same way as the old commonwealth BS that never worked.

  64. Dan Cooper says:

    The New “Regime Change” Plan – Attack Damascus From The South

    By Moon Of Alabama

    There are serious active preparations for a new attack on Damascus. Anti-government forces, including the Al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, have been trained and equipped in Jordan and are now moving into their starting position in Quneitra governorate in south-west Syria.


  65. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    SL’s interview


    “As for the issue of the medical process, one point is that I would like to thank the physicians and those who were involved in the medical process. Well, this is a clear and definite duty. They really carried out the task in a perfect way. However, what is more important than this word of thanks is that I am really proud of our physicians. I am proud that our dear Iran is at this level of medical capability.

    It is necessary for our people to really feel proud of this large number of physicians – including surgeons, internists, all those who people who offer medical services and nurses. Thankfully, we have this great source of wealth: this great source of human wealth in one of the most fundamental and vital areas of the life of a society and individuals which is the area of health.

    I see how dutiful, knowledgeable and skilled these people are. Of course, I knew this before. That is to say, I have always had such an outlook towards our medical society. But when one is treated by these physicians, one’s information about them becomes certainty. When we are treated by these people, we tangibly feel that we have a great source of wealth comprised of our dear physicians. And I hope that Allah the Exalted will reward all of them.

    “I would like to raise a point which is not related to the issue of hospitalization and my health condition. During the past two, three days, I had a source of entertainment which was listening to the statements of the Americans on the issue of DAESH [ISIS] and fighting against it. They made absurd, hollow and biased statements. One of the issues which was really a source of amusement for me was that the American secretary of state and the girl who stands there and talks, openly said, “We will not invite Iran to the coalition against DAESH”. First, what honor is greater than the fact that America is disappointed with us and does not want us to participate in a wrong collective task. This is a source of pride for us, not a source of regret.

    Second, I witnessed that all of them are lying. Since the first days that the issue of DAESH arose, the Americans asked our ambassador in Iraq – through their ambassador – to organize a meeting and reach an agreement on the issue of DAESH. Our ambassador relayed this inside the country and some of our officials were not against it. But I was against it and said, “On this issue, we will not cooperate with America particularly because their hands are dirty. How can we cooperate on this issue with those whose hands and intentions are dirty?”

    Later on, the same secretary of state – who had said in front of the camera and in front of the eyes of all the world that they do not want Iran to cooperate with them – requested Dr. Zarif that Iran cooperate with them on this issue, but Dr. Zarif turned this down. The secretary of states’ deputy too – the woman whom you know – had requested Mr. Araghchi that Iran cooperate with them. Both Dr. Zarif and Mr. Araghchi turned down their requests. After they turned down their requests and after we openly said that we will not cooperate with them, they said, “We do not want to involve Iran”.

    Earlier they formed a so-called global coalition against Syria with great fuss and uproar. They gathered 30, 40, 50 countries, but they could not do a damn thing against Syria. The same is true of Iraq. They do not intend to take serious action there either. The action that was taken against DAESH and that broke its back was not taken by the Americans. They themselves and DAESH militants too know this very well. The people of Iraq too know this very well.

    The Americans know that it was the people of Iraq, the Iraqi Armed Forces and the popular forces who perfectly understood how to fight against DAESH. They have fought it and they have dealt serious blows to it so far. From now on too, they will continue to deal such blows. They will see this.

    With this move, America wants to find an excuse to do the same thing to Iraq and Syria that it is doing to Pakistan. They enter Pakistan without any permission despite the existence of a well-established government and a strong army – the Pakistani army is a strong army – and they bomb wherever they want. If they do this, they will be faced with the same problems that they were faced with in Iraq for the last 10 years.

    The point is that hearing these statements in my hospital bed was a source of entertainment.”

  66. Neil M says:

    James Canning says:
    September 16, 2014 at 1:18 pm
    Neil M,
    You appear to suggest Iraq did a good job of making the outside world aware, from late-1991, that Iraq had destroyed most of its WMD. Correct?</I?

    No. Those are your smoke and mirrors. Please refrain from trying to put them in my mouth. Saddam, being a national leader, had no national interest in advertising the fact that he'd been tricked and coerced into transforming Iraq into a sitting duck.

    James Canning says:
    September 16, 2014 at 1:21 pm
    Do we agree that Saddam Hussein in fact destroyed most of Iraq’s WMD in late 1991?

    No. 1991 is only incidentally relevant. The relevant date is the day on which Iraq tabled the dossier of its WMD destruction program at the UN; the day on which the Americans stole it in order to deceive the (weak-kneed) “outside world” into believing that their intentions toward Iraq were not cowardly, dishonest and self-indulgently genocidal and kleptomaniacal.

  67. M.Ali says:

    This statemennt of Khameini is worrying,

    “Since the first days that the issue of DAESH arose, the Americans asked our ambassador in Iraq – through their ambassador – to organize a meeting and reach an agreement on the issue of DAESH. Our ambassador relayed this inside the country and some of our officials were not against it. ”

    It irritates me that there are STILL officials in our government that would want to help USA. This white-wannabe aspect of our country in some people needs to be completely erased.

  68. BiBiJon says:

    M.Ali says:
    September 17, 2014 at 3:37 am

    I think any government/country is stronger in the long term by the multiplicity of the attitudes/voices within it.

    If a voice is “completely erased,” and consequently a discussion/debate never had, much a less a different avenue ever tried, what assurance, confidence would there be that the alternative approach is truly the best approach?

  69. fyi says:

    Dan Cooper says:

    September 16, 2014 at 6:53 pm

    It is a fantasy.

    The time for Regime Change in Syria is passed.

  70. A-B says:

    WOW! Now, [the shocked and sick] Cameron and and the rest of the Anglo-American cabal all call ISIS “monsters” that can’t be Muslims! You hear that Mr. C? Don’t I recognize this from somewhere (June 21, 2014 at 6:28 pm and August 6, 2014 at 4:21 am)?! “Further” I said “the Western psycho’s have deliberately recreated a nightmarish REALITY in Libya, Syria and Iraq, worse than all the zombie-holocaust-slasher-apocalyptic FANTASIES they feed their brain-dead movie-goers. Thus, they’ve made the ME a theme-park [e.g. FALLUJAH] for their deranged psycho’s – be they soldiers in their armies or the ISIS terrorists – to act out their perversions.”

    So, am I instructing these people?? What am I; a freemason of 34½th degree??! And who is this ‘WARRIOR’ in the third video above who is SOO much better than the ISIS he describes as “evil”, “killers”/“thugs”; Marvin the Martian from the 24½th century?? I mean, he is SOOO modern and scholarly and at the same time SOOO ‘ancient’!!!

    **** Sorry for the offensive language ****

    This brings me back to Kissinger, the ‘Butthead’, who in the interview re. his book ‘World Order: delusions of a shameless mass murdering psycho’ reprimands Obama’s modern way of killing by drones; he [Obama] doesn’t do it with ‘style’, as this POS did back in the day! Well, as his equally deranged mass murdering buddy Zbig the ‘Beavis’ would say [in the MTV show Beavis & Butthead] as Cornholio: I need TP for my bunghole [Butthead]! :-)


  71. fyi says:

    Neil M says:

    September 17, 2014 at 1:26 am

    I agree with you; the whole WMD was a pretext for the weak minds of people in US; for the most part, to convince them to support destroying Iraq.

    Iranian leaders understood that US was hell-bent on attacking and destroying Iraq and they told that to the Foreign Minister of Iraq who was visiting Tehran at the time.

    [He looked like a decent sort of chap, always wondered what happened to him.]

    Each failure of such policies, generates its own reactions in the international system – Long Range Nuclear Munitions becoming the ultimate method of safe-guarding one’s sovereignty.

    US & UK destroyed Iraq – and they wish to do the same thing to Iran – without a doubt.

  72. Sammy says:

    Winter in Kiev


    …They are using an old scheme, but with different actors. It is now Ukraine instead of Poland, and Islamist radicals from the Arab region, especially the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, whose militants are being pushed out to the Russian North Caucasus.

    The scheme which Washington is using for gas is not new either — the goal is to prevent the emergence of the southern pipeline bypassing the Ukraine, thus stalling the Southern Stream project and replacing it with the South Pars (a gas pipeline project from Iran) through Iraq (which will soon also start production of gas); Syria; and onward to Southern Europe.

    The intent is to use this pipeline for transporting the gas from Qatar from the Gulf’s North Field, which is a part of the Southern Pars. The implementation of this project will take two years, provided that Washington is successful in changing the ruling regime in Iran, and getting rid of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and returning Baghdad to the sphere of its influence.

    These are the goals of senior American leaders rolled out during the closed meeting mentioned earlier and of the NATO summit in Wales, although not all members of the Alliance have been informed about the details of the new US thrust “against Russia through the Middle East”.

    That is why the US Air Force is heavily bombing the ISIS mercenaries in Iraq, squeezing them out towards Russia and aiming to reignite the hotbed of the terrorist and separatist Islamist rebellion in North Caucasus.

    Russian liberal “fifth columnists” will be used at some point “to fight in the battle” in order to destabilize the situation in Moscow and St. Petersburg as the strongholds of the current Russian regime. And they think that Washington is playing a smart game: the main task during the first stage is to remove President Putin and his inner circle replacing them basically with any other, not necessarily pro-Western, figures.

    And only then it will be possible to take care of the necessary “modification” of the new Russian government “without Putin.” All in all, a very similar approach is being used for Tehran as well: the “fifth column” in the center of the country and ethnic conflicts in the outskirts.

    All of this may require a lot of time which is scarce – the winter is coming and Europe needs gas. Disagreement have already surfaced in the EU when they were voiced in Brussels on 8 September for the first time since the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis. This is why the US are forced to ask for help from their ally, Saudi Arabia, following the old Reagan scheme.

    To get help, just like before, America will have to sign a large-scale deal with the Saudis. Under Reagan, it was a question of supplying sophisticated weapons to the Saudi kingdom, but the matter at stake now is regime change in Iran, main rival of the Saudi Arabia in the region; removal of Bashar al-Assad to accommodate Riyadh; and constraining the power of the Shiites in Iraq, also to please the Saudis.

    Saudi Arabia will not join the “game for a fall in energy prices” under different conditions, as happened 30 years ago. But in any case, the deal is directed against the current governments of Russia and Iran.

    Obama’s support for the coup in the Ukraine, which has resulted in a serious defeat for the West, makes Washington urgently want to find ways of mobilizing all its allies to confront the emerging axis of Moscow – Tehran – Beijing. In this sense, there is certain logic in the decision of the White House to urgently revive the somewhat recently stalled relations with their Middle Eastern partners.

    We are experiencing the time when, according to the Americans, even small differences should be set aside and efforts should be joined to oppose their geopolitical rivals – Moscow and Tehran.

    To achieve this, the Al-Saud royal family, after its failures in Lebanon and Syria, will have to prove again its important role to the rest of the Muslim world. They now need victory, and Iraq and Syria fit this goal as no other. A shift in the politics of Bagdad’s government towards reconciliation with the Sunnis and away from Iran is already taking place.

    Only a victory over Damascus would be a valuable prize for Riyadh, restoring its leading role among Arab countries and allowing further implementation of regional projects — from creating a Jordanian-Palestinian federation, to forming an anti-Shiite axis from the Arabian Peninsula to Pakistan.

    In this regard, Damascus is a desirable prize, not only in terms of politics, but economics. Thanks to its unique geographic location, Syria could become a key player in oil and gas supplies to Europe. The agreement on the construction of the Iran-Iraq-Syria gas trunk line was signed by the parties in July 2012.

    Coincidentally, Syria became a major obstacle for the implementation of the gas pipeline project from Qatar’s North Field to Europe, which would have allowed another player – Qatar – to undercut Russia’s Gazprom via a sharp increase in the cheap Qatar gas to Europe.

    Damascus, for various reasons, did not give consent for the construction of a gas pipeline from Qatar through its territory to Turkey and the Mediterranean coast and onward transit to Europe. While Assad remains in power, no construction of a gas trunk line to Syria’s Mediterranean coast from Qatar is possible…

  73. James Canning says:


    The US is not encouraging Islamic militancy in the North Caucasus. Silly notion.

  74. James Canning says:


    I too liked Tariq Aziz, the Iraqi foreign minister before US invasion of Iraq in 203. I thought it a travesty he was put in prison. He is a Chaldean Christian.

  75. James Canning says:

    Neil M,

    I see you concede that Saddam Hussein destroyed most of Iraq’s WMD in late 1991. And that he did nothing to let this fact become known in the outside world.

  76. James Canning says:

    Neil M,

    Your belief Saddam Hussein would have used WMD against American troops, if he had them available, is wildly mistaken.

  77. James Canning says:


    The object of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 WAS NOT TO “DESTROY” Iraq. The programme was to set up a government friendly toward Israel and the US, that would greatly increase Iraqi oil production.

  78. James Canning says:


    The British government have said that the destiny of Northern Ireland is a matter for the people of Northern Ireland. You’re predicting union with the Republic of Ireland?

  79. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 17, 2014 at 1:43 pm

    I did not mean Mr. Aziz; rather the much younger man who was trying to stop US plans.

  80. A-B says:

    yes, that’s why I call ‘them’ one-trick-pony; that they are pathetically predictable; that Liars are unimaginative especially when they’ve passed the point-of-no-return, and why exposing them is to mock them.


  81. Sammy says:

    A-B says:
    September 17, 2014 at 3:06 pm

    Yes A-B , always brilliant comments and observations from you.
    The next months will be very crucial in my opinion , as multiple scenarios are spinning out of control.
    One thing I know for sure is that the SL as well as Putin are well aware of all ploys hatched by the Anglo-Zionists ( an expression which is used by the Saker and which I adopted ) in our region and in East Europe.
    The ‘good’ thing is that the fascists are bankrupt and their current actions are showing clear signs of insanity and abstruseness .
    If tomorrow the voting machines in Scotland are not manipulated , then we should expect a significant boost for anti-fascism movements around the world.
    Hopefully good days ahead…

  82. James Canning says:


    Tariq Aziz was also trying to avoid a US invasion of Iraq. He had informed the CIA Iraq had destroyed its WMD. The Office of Special Plans in the Pentagon did its best to prevent this information from being brought to the attention of George W. Bush.

  83. A-B says:

    Note on the Wikipedia entry on Marvin the Martian: this is really uncanny only if I could stop ROFLMAO!


    Marvin hails from the planet Mars, but is often found elsewhere. He is often accompanied by his dog “K-9”, and sometimes by other creatures (one gag, first used in Hare-Way to the Stars (1958), being candy-sized “Instant Martians” that become full-size on addition of drops of water).

    Marvin wears a Roman soldier’s uniform, with basketball shoes. The style of these shoes resembles the Chuck Taylor All-Stars brand name, considered to be the “generic” or “standard” basketball sneaker. His head is a black sphere with only eyes for features. The curved crest of his helmet appears, with the push-broom-like upper section, to comically resemble an ancient Greek hoplite’s or a Roman Centurion’s helmet. The appearance of the combination of Marvin’s head and helmet allegedly led to Bugs Bunny thinking he was a “bowling ball wearing a spittoon” in one Looney Tunes animated short. Marvin speaks with a soft, nasally accent, and often speaks technobabble. The helmet and skirt that surround him are green and his suit is red (in a few of the original shorts, his suit was green). He is also known for his trademark quotes “Where’s the kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom!”, “Isn’t that lovely?”, and “This makes me very angry, very angry indeed.”

    On numerous occasions, Marvin has tried to destroy the Earth with his “Illudium Q-36 Explosive Space Modulator” (sometimes pronounced “Illudium Pu-36” or “Uranium Pu-36”).[3] Marvin always laboriously over-pronounces the name of the device, which resembles a mere stick of dynamite, in order to avoid any possibility of confusing it with some other similar form of explosive technology.[4] Marvin attempts to destroy the Earth because, he reasons, “it obstructs my view of Venus”; he has been trying to destroy the Earth for more than two millennia, suggesting that members of his species, and possibly martian creatures in general, have extremely long lifespans. The original reference to “Uranium Pu-36” changed to “Illudium PU-36” in subsequent cartoons [1]. Marvin is consistently foiled by Bugs Bunny. He has battled for space territory, Planet X, with Daffy Duck, a.k.a. Duck Dodgers in the 24½th Century.



  84. kooshy says:

    “If tomorrow the voting machines in Scotland are not manipulated , then we should expect a significant boost for anti-fascism movements around the world.”

    The regime in London is not inviting/ allowing any international observers to monitor the referendum, it will be hard to imagine the vote wouldn’t be massaged, Brits, historically are well recognized for propagandizing/manipulating voting outcomes.
    This is Being on home turf wouldn’t be too tough BBC can and will do it like a cake walk.

  85. James Canning says:

    Sage advice from Richard Williams, in The Times (London) Sept. 8th: “Isis has set a trap. We must not fall into it”. (Col. Williams is a former commander of the SAS.)

  86. BiBiJon says:

    Flynt was on RT http://rt.com/shows/crosstalk/188344-syria-iran-isis-war/

    And SCO nixes Iran joining ;www.turkishweekly.net/news/172084/iran-39-s-bid-to-join-sco-cannot-be-considered-at-the-moment-mfa.html

  87. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 17, 2014 at 4:03 pm

    Naji Sabri was the last Foreign Minister of Iraq under the Ba’ath rule.

    Mr. Aziz deserves to be executed.

  88. Amir says:


    And he says Iraq isn’t giving a blank check to other countries to bomb any target on Iraqi soil, and he says although there might be differences, Iraq respects Syrian sovereignty and would try to work with Assad, and he says more!

  89. Karl.. says:

    Iran should support this cause by Scotland.
    Any weakening of UK is good for world peace.

  90. A-B says:

    Re. the Scotch so-called independance

    Well, this is, I’m afraid, only an illusion. Scotland will never be independent; not from City of London; not from the queen-bitch; not from the abomination that is EU. And if she even dares to aspire for autonomy, she will be punished as Argentina or Iceland. Where can they go? NOWHERE! Further, if we are principally against secessions – the British imperialist’s only M/O ‘divide and rule’ that they so fanatically pursue in the so-called ME and want particularly for Iran, the quintessential Nation – then why should an ‘independent’ Scotland be a good thing? There is no nation in Europe to begin with, anyway. The devious Brits seem actually to exploit this referendum, creating the illusion of democracy and that you can decide your destiny. And Scotland is ideal in this PR campaign as a vital part of the United Kingdom. I.e. if the Brits, the quintessential Imperialists, can do it to itself, then go for it Catalonia; go for it Venice; go for it Kurds; etc. Just kill yourself, the old imperialist is too tired to do it by itself. This is how ‘they’ demonstrated their ‘awesome’ power to the Rest: if Anglo-Zio’s could do what they did in 9/11 to the US (and kill their own) then imagine what they can do to the Other. Well, now we don’t have to imagine; we KNOW!


  91. Karl.. says:


    ” And Scotland is ideal in this PR campaign as a vital part of the United Kingdom”

    UK dont want Scotland to leave of course and UK dont care if Iran is against the referendum, that wont stop UK acts on Iran to break apart them in the future.

  92. fyi says:


    Interviewee of Daryl Kimball, Executive Director, Arms Control Association


    We read:

    “…. Then, the P5+1might allow Iran, by the year 2021 or so,”

    “..and allow them to begin to upgrade centrifuges while keeping”


    “…Over time, Iran might be allowed..”

    No wonder there is no agreement possible; Axis Powers, Russia and China are approaching Iran as a semi-sovereign state.

    A nowkar….

  93. Kathleen says:

    Just watched the second segment of Melissa’s table. She gave far more time to the “warrior” perspective. Bennis and Laverett barely got any words in. Then she goes onto to do a third “warrior” segment. Sure wish MHP would allow Bennis, Leverett perspectives more time. At the same time she is one of the only MSNBC host having non warrior and very will educated on the issues on her program. Although Ed Schultz has had Colonel Wilkerson on, Rachel Maddow dipping her toes in by having Colonel Andrew Bacevich on. Cnn’s Wolf Blitzer had Danielle Pletka (huge war pusher) on his program with Peter Beinart (I believe totally supported invasion of Iraq) on…Yikes.

  94. Kathleen says:

    After Kerry’s impressive (so well spoken after travelling all over the middle east trying to build a coalition) Although clearly pushing for more war and a back door into assassinate Assad. I watched CSpan 3 and former Ambassador to Syria for the Obama administration Robert Ford testify about IS. Talk about who is pushing for more military intervention. Reading about Ford and his warmongering role with the Coalition provisional Authority in Iraq and his push for military intervention in Syria it is sad to think that this is who is advising Obama etc on Syria etc. He could be Feith or Rumsfeld, Cambone. Why is Obama listening to such an individual?

    Then up came Ben Cannable from the Rand Corporation’s Senate testimony in regard to IS. Clearly these two are not working for the interest of the U.S. Who can share what they know about these two war pushers?

  95. James Canning says:


    Do we agree the P5+1 will accept Iranian enrichment of as much uranium as needed to fuel Iran’s own nuclear power plants?

  96. James Canning says:


    Regarding the horrific civil war in Syria, a key failing on the part of the US happened in 2008 when the US failed to pressure Israel to make the deal on offer from Syria. For peace. Instead of making peace with Syria, Israel went on yet another murderous rampage in Gaza.

  97. James Canning says:


    I take it we agree that Tariq Aziz kept the CIA informed re: Iraqi WMD and the destruction of such WMD by Iraq in 1991 (and subsequently).

  98. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 18, 2014 at 1:19 pm

    I do not think so; latest US position has been 1500 Gen-1 centrifuges.

    The entire proposal of P5+1 is this:

    “As Iran destroys her albeit nascent nuclear industry, some sanctions may be removed over time – say 25 years.

    And since IAEA and P5+1 have not been able to discovered any evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons program, many sanctions will remain in place until Iran confesses to having had such a weapons program.”

    Iranians should ignore P5+1 and go about developing their nuclear industry.

    They will never get anything out of US, or EU and what they can get out of Russia or China is never to be relied upon.

  99. nahid says:

    Dear fyi
    what do you think of this interview

    ادعای بازی «مصدقی» در مذاکرات هسته‌ای را صادق نمی‌دانم/ مذاکرات بیش از آنکه شبیه «ملی شدن صنعت نفت» باشد، به سمت «کمپ دیوید»ی شدن می‌رود!


  100. fyi says:

    nahid says:

    September 18, 2014 at 3:17 pm

    Dear (I I may?) Miss Nahid:

    I agree with almost everything in that post.

    There a few minor points that I will share:

    The Camp David negotiations took place because Israelis wanted it; US Government was and is powerless to force them into anything that they do not want to do.

    Which implies that the current negotiations with P5+1 has the approval Israel; regardless of their public posture.

    The nationalization of Oil Industry was a mistake since as the author notes, Iran was incapable of running that industry; Iran is quite capable of building and developing her nuclear industries on her own.

    The disposition of the oil industry in Iran did not have any bearing on the continued existence of the Iran as a coherent and unitary state. But the existence and expansion of Iranian nuclear industry are essential – in my view – to the continued existence of Iran.

    The late Mr. Kashani was also responsible for the 1953 Coup against the nnationalist government of the late Mr. Mossadeq. On the other hand, the late Mr. Mossadeq had his autocratic shortcomings – تک رو – like so many others from central Iran.

    The P5+1 approach and in particular US, is based on establishing precedents – they want to make Iran agree to never enriching uranium to 20% or to never build a reprocessing plant or something or other.

    Their aim is to do what Mr. Ahmadinejad often stated; getting more and more items with zero cost out of Iran until “…eventually they are going to ask for concession of animal rights as well”.

    In my view, sanctions have been a God-send to Iran and their removal should not be considered as a great benefit to Iran; those who tried to eviscerate the internal social fabric of Iran are now going to permit Iranians to sell their oil and buy their goods – to their own benefit.

    It is a stupid deal if Iranian leaders take it.

    It means surrender.

    Iranians have been desirous of re-establishing and re-asserting their state power as of the old days.

    And the late Gen. De Gaul stated: “To be a great country, you must act like one.”

    Well Iran is acting like a great country and this is the price…

  101. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 18, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    Both Mr. Aziz and Mr. Sabri were informing US Government.

    US did not care about Truth; they just wanted to destroy the Ba’ath state in Iraq.

  102. James Canning says:


    You conflate “US” with neocon warmongers, and you ignore the fact the CIA was highly skeptical about Iraq’s possession of WMD. And you ignore the role of the Office of Special Plans at the Pentagon, which literally conspired to dupe George W. Bush or otherwise manipulate him into invading Iraq.

  103. James Canning says:


    The neocon warmongers wanted to destroy the secular government of Iraq. And how truly idiotic for them to want to do so.

  104. James Canning says:


    You apparent belief Iran needs to expand its nuclear programme in order to remain in existence as a state, is ludicrous. In my judgment.

  105. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 18, 2014 at 4:22 pm

    Dismantle your nuclear weapons and leave NATO and then come here and make such comments.

  106. Nasser says:

    fyi says:

    “It is a stupid deal if Iranian leaders take it.

    It means surrender.”

    – I am afraid it is far worse than that. Surrender at least means that peace will follow, but on your enemy’s terms. But if Iran yields it would be tantamount to willingly accept the Libya scenario to be replayed.

    Iran does not have an option of surrender. Neither does Russia.

    Most Iranians won’t believe this, but the truth is that no amount of concessions will satisfy the West.

    The Western aim is to ultimately engineer social and state collapse in those countries. Their success against the Soviets during the Cold War makes them very confident they can do this a second time.

    But apparently Western strategists don’t believe in the sage saying: “Build your enemies a golden bridge to retreat across” and so I don’t believe their siege war would succeed.

    As Sergey Karaganov writes in his recent article: “It is a miscalculation because Russia is far stronger, and the west far weaker, than many imagine. The west that Russia now faces is not the self-confident alliance that proclaimed itself victor of the cold war. It is a directionless gaggle, beset with economic insecurities and losing sight of its moral convictions…

    But President Vladimir Putin has studied the lessons of history and harbours no illusions about the west. Russian citizens, unlike the disillusioned Soviets who were never far from hunger, know what they are ready to struggle for. Our country is finding its place…

    A small minority of my compatriots oppose Moscow’s hard line. Twenty years ago it was the reverse: a minority opposed rapprochement with the west. But that was before the west rediscovered the politics of Versailles and decided Russia had to be stopped at all costs. With encouragement, these foreign powers imagined, the new bourgeoisie would revolt against Mr Putin. Instead, they are rallying around him.”

  107. James Canning says:


    I am confident that if Iran makes a deal with P5+1, there will be sustained effective pressure to remove the sanctions fairly quickly.

    I think Israel in fact does not want a deal between P5+1 but does not want to be seen as blocking such a deal.

    Iranian nuclear dispute facilitates continuing growth of illegal colonies in the West Bank. This is HUGE benefit, in eyes of Netanyahu.

  108. James Canning says:


    Sergei Karaganov set out clearly the delusions of many Russians. He is simply badly mistaken to believe a prosperous Ukraine with economic ties to Russia and the EU, is a bad thing for Russia.

  109. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    September 18, 2014 at 4:24 pm

    Yes, I agree with you; I did not elaborate on “Surrender not an option” since I did not wish to belabor points that I had made very often before on this forum.

  110. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 18, 2014 at 4:25 pm

    I think if UK releases 1.5 billion pounds impounded by UK for the last 6 years, it might increase the confidence in Iran about the viability of the idea that sanctions will be rapidly dismantled.

    As the Persian saying goes: “Two hundred words are not worth a half deed.”

    UK does not have to breach Dollar and Euro sanctions – she can just drive a truck load of money to the Iranian Embassy.

  111. Nasser says:

    Fyodor Lukyanov writes: “Battle Against West Gives Russia New Purpose”


    “The [Soviet] state later went even further by announcing its willingness to forego any delineation of each side’s sphere of geopolitical influence, eventually ceding the majority of Eastern Europe to NATO control. Gorbachev’s approach will long be remembered as the most outstanding example of political idealism — as will the consequences that followed.”

    “Today, although the “Chinese path” is off the table, Russian leaders still have a strong desire to somehow correct Gorbachev’s decision, which they believe led this country into a dead end. And the thing that everyone can agree on, from the ultra-left to the ultra-right, is that Russia needs self-sufficient modernization more than it needs Gorbachev style accommodation with the West.”

  112. Nasser says:

    Here’s to hoping: “However, Britain’s demise will not be universally mourned. Britain is fairly widely loathed across continents for its brutal colonial record, for its slyness or deviousness (couched in irritating self-righteousness), for its preachy character (despite its scant regard for morality), for its panache to punch above its weight (from under American wings, of course) and for the sheer zest with which it explodes into violent acts against alien peoples who did no harm to it directly or directly.”


  113. BiBiJon says:


    If you wish for UK to break up, then don’t feel peeved at those who scheme for the same in Iran. Personally I wish the best for Scots and the UK. And, encourage them to wish the best for Iran, and anybody else.

    We say cat can’t reach the meat so it meows the meat stinks anyway; a little like “sanctions are a god send.” Iran is a mature, fast industrializing country. It needs no stinking sanction for further indigenous progress.

    Sanctions are bad for the US. According to the Guardian: “Alibaba’s sales for 2014 are estimated at $420bn (£257bn), dwarfing Amazon and eBay which had a combined turnover of $90bn in 2013.” Why? Because of sanctions.

    Obama’s dilemma is his lack of conviction. His lack of conviction = do whatever to keep the Israel/Saudi Lobby at bay until he leaves office. Truth of the matter is that on Syria, or on Iran, or on Russia he mistakenly perceives solutions as optional, because he regards these countries as unimportant to his ME strategy, much less to his global strategy. He just doesn’t want to expend any capital on what he thinks are unimportant issues.

    Iran and Russia cannot afford to think of the US as unimportant. Whether through confrontation, withholding cooperation, or through appeasement it is in their interests to get the US to change course.

    Nuclear weapons are of no use to anyone. And there are far less expensive ways to shoot your international credibility and security in the foot if one is hell bent on doing so.

  114. Karl.. says:


    You really believe UK would be nicer to Iran just because they didnt support Scotland? This is proposing that Iran should be subserviant the west, as you say, not only Scotland but the econony and ties with the west is vital according to you so Iran better be nice to the west because they are so important and powerful, seems to be your conclusion. Am I right?

  115. BiBiJon says:


    Assuming you just want clarification ….

    Supporting Scotland means supporting there to be a referendum, and supporting the result of that referendum, whatever it may be. To have an agenda of weakening the UK, by angling for it to break up, which means supporting one faction of Scots vs the other faction is the kind of agenda-driven interference in others’ internal affairs which of all people, Iranians should stay away from.

    UK will do what UK will do. There’s no need to piss off all of the English, and half of the Scots, and then hope you’ve really achieved something worthwhile.

    To say sanctions are not a necessary condition for Iran’s indigenous social/scientific/technological progress, is not the same thing as ” ties with the west is vital.” However, if you like to know my opinion as to whether or not ” ties with the west is vital” then I think not. After all Iran has held her own very nicely these last 35 years with no, or at best very tenuous ties to the West.

    To regard the United States as important because of her GDP, the size of its military, the number and depth of her alliances, her international influence, etc is to have a modicum of respect for reality.

    Confronted by that reality, Iran and Russia should “through confrontation, withholding cooperation, or through appeasement” try to get the US to change course, at the same time as they try to press for their own interests. There is time for being “nice” and there is a time for being “confrontational.” Timing is everything and requires a calculating mind, not dogma, or obstinacy.

  116. Karl.. says:


    Yes that cleared up the most thanks, however is it not in the interest to weaken the UK for Iran in your opinion?

  117. BiBiJon says:

    Karl.. says:
    September 19, 2014 at 8:43 am

    No, it is not in Iran’s interest to see any legitimate entity ‘weakened.’ It creates discord, and can lead to dangerous confrontations. As an example, all those who prematurely were celebrating the Weakening of the Syrian state, are now reduced to going from “we don’t have a strategy” to having the united remorsefuls’ strategy to deal with ISIS in as little as a week.

  118. Karl.. says:


    Surely you dont compare UK stable situation with Syria? What discord are you are you talking about that could have happend here?

  119. Karl.. says:

    ..besides, UK create discord in Iran today with sanctions to name one, why should Iran be any nicer back?

  120. fyi says:


    Transcript of “Squaring the Iranian Nuclear Circle: Defining Uranium Enrichment Capacity and Other Key Issues” at the Arms Control Organization


    [In my opinion, the key statement is the observation by Mr. Walsh that the United States cannot deliver on sanction relief.]

  121. BiBiJon says:


    I don’t know other than discord in one place always winds up being negative for everywhere else. It is true UK is engaged in coercive actions towards Iran which have gained the UK less than nothing, but which has given Iran to show her resilience, 20,000 centrifuges, etc.

  122. James Canning says:


    What the US would be able “to deliver” in terms of sanctions relief, is obviously related to the extent of lobbying etc we can expect (by many major corporations)if a deal between P5+1 and Iran is achieved. And a great deal of highly effective lobbying would ensure.

  123. James Canning says:


    Surely you can see that the people of Estonia had good reason to seek the security of Nato membership. Ditto Latvia. And Lithuania. Etc etc etc.

  124. James Canning says:


    I think that money will be released if Iran makes a deal with P5+1 I can’t recall just now what the precise issue is.

  125. James Canning says:


    Again you argue that an Iran much richer and stronger will have “surrendered”. Silly notion, in my view.

  126. Nasser says:

    James Canning,

    They have only made themselves more insecure.

    They have gained about as much security as Poland did before WWII from British war guarantees.


  127. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 19, 2014 at 1:11 pm

    Do we then agree that US cannot deliver on any sanction relief worth a damn to Iran?

  128. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 19, 2014 at 1:17 pm

    There is a trust deficit that Axis Powers, Russia, and China have to address.

    Due to the asymmetry of power, they do not see a need to that and will not make any good-will gestures towards Iran.

    As I have stated before many times, Iran is on her own and the P5+1 forum is at the dead-end.

  129. Karl.. says:


    Iran could however be much stronger if it was not for these destabilizing efforts by the UK. No point being nice to the bully, he will then just keep beating you down.

  130. BiBiJon says:


    I don’t see non-interference in others affairs as being “nice.” I see it as normal, neutral, sensible, provident even, but treacly? No.

  131. Nasser says:

    For a good laugh read this from Mr. Keck from The Diplomat

    “China Created ISIS, Too

  132. James Canning says:


    When you say the P5+1 will not make any “goodwill gestures” toward Iran, I think you mean they are not willing to foster any notion in Iran that Iran need not make a deal.

  133. James Canning says:


    I said Iran can reasonably expect very substantial sanctions relief, if Iran makes a deal with the P5+1. There will literally be thousands of lobbyists, lawyers, PR people, et al., pressing to open up the Iranian marketplace asap.

  134. James Canning says:


    You are wildly mistaken. Poland’s problem in 1939, was being squeezed between two hostile and expansionist powers, with no country able to assist it.

    Obviously, this is not what obtains with Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, et al. They are completely secure, in my view.

  135. Rehmat says:

    Contrary to Zionist media propaganda that John Kerry didn’t invite Iran to join American ‘allies’ to fight ISIS. In fact, Kerry did ask his Iranian counterpart Dr. Zarif, who declined his country’s support for Obama’s military actions in both Iraq and Syria.

    Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei described the US officials’ allegations about fighting the ISIL as hollow and biased, and said the US disappointment at Iran’s partnership in its incorrect and illegal coalition was an “unrivaled honor” for Tehran.


  136. Persian Gulf says:


    “Iran and Russia cannot afford to think of the US as unimportant. Whether through confrontation, withholding cooperation, or through appeasement it is in their interests to get the US to change course.”

    Looks like if you were among the very first Muslims, you would have suggested the same approach regarding the two empires at the time. With that approach we wouldn’t have had a country named I.R.Iran today to discuss.
    My guess is you have never experienced that life can be tough sometimes.

    “Nuclear weapons are of no use to anyone. And there are far less expensive ways to shoot your international credibility and security in the foot if one is hell bent on doing so.”

    The argument about uselessness of the nuclear weapons is a losing preposition even in the medium term. But say it many times, you might really believe it as you have started to do here.

  137. BiBiJon says:


    thanks for reading.

  138. kooshy says:

    With 45% yes vote for an independent Scotland, plus the 2013 riots, and the ongoing northern Ireland separation IRA rift, if would be a shame if anybody claims there still exist a United Kingdoms. Regardless whatever the results of the referendum vote was, is true and a fact that there no longer exist a United Kingdom, if that helps Iran or not or anyone else that don’t matter and not the issue on hand, the fact and the issue is UK in reality no longer exist and is no longer a major economic, military power worthy of a permanent UNSC seat.

    Now if that is impossible to change (taking Permanent UNSC seats away from unworthy powers like UK and France) in my opinion that really no longer matters as much consequential as it was years before, that is because, UNSC is getting weaker, due to its permanent members becoming more and more polar again (North West vs. East + South) therefore as a consequence they are reducing and canceling each other’s world order power. To me this is good news for the rest of the world, yes there would be a period of instability, but that is a natural consequence of any world order change.

  139. A-B says:

    Yes, if the Scottish referendum would have hurt the Brits it would be more than welcomed. Ideally, to weaken ANY or all of the gang of P5+1 should be Iran’s priority; heck, it is Iran’s resistance that wrecked the West’s plans (according to which Iran should have succumbed already) so that they were FORCED to reschedule and went after the ruskies – GOOD!! But as, IMO, Scotland cannot be independent – allowed to vote by the Brits or not – the referendum was of no consequence; just that it gave the Brits the opportunity to – as usual – humiliate their opponents: ‘Braveheart’ got his ass whopped again! Las Malvinas referendum-farce was much more important for the British Piracy Inc., to annoy Argentina and South America. Again, there are no ‘nations’ in Europe and these tribal enclaves, or postcard-country wannabe’s like Catalonia, are just perfect for what I’ve always called the Tribal-Racist imperialists. IMO, the only Nation worth the name in Europe was/is/would be Germany; rest is eurotrash. Now, imagine what would happen if an Independent Germany ….

    However, secession in Syria, Iraq, etc. is MUCH more critical, not least in how beneficial it would be for the epitome of racist-tribalism – and the Anglo-Zio’s creations and darlings – the two abominations ‘Israel’ and Saudi-Wahhabia; both of which MUST VANISH for the sake of true NATIONS in the region. Some people still think ISIS was not the brainchild of the West; when Beavis’s mass-murdering alter ego, Zbig, boasts having created and supported the ‘mistakes’ Pol Pot/Khmer Rouge and Talebees. Well, the Billary Witch – the next US president – ‘regrets’ creation of the Talebees (while they are offered HQ in Qatar) but have no qualms – repeating the ‘mistakes’ by – supporting ‘moderate rebels’, AKA ISIS, in Syria!!

    As I said before, the Anglo-Zio-American imperialism follow two maxims:
    “If [the M/O] is not broken, why fix it?” after all
    “If [the ME] is broken, why fix it?”


  140. Karl.. says:


    So is having its own foreign policy, econonmy, leadership, still UK have sanctions on Iran trying to turn upside down all those issues for Iran.

  141. Sammy says:

    Makes perfect sense :


    “As an Armenian that has watched the US aid and abet jihadis and nazis since the 1990’s that have enabled an Apocalypse upon my people and other Christians in the Middle East, and upon Muslims that will not submit to the 7th century, I am nauseated and horrified at the evil of the West and especially the US.

    Ancient communities and history, thousands of years old, are being decimated and scattered to the wind.

    All my life I have studied and loved history, ancient and medieval, and watch as the West marches across the world, leaving destruction in its wake. This has broken any faith I had in the West or in its people.

    Why is the West so destructive? I’ll tell you why. The West is in the process of destroying its own history, and itself. It is driven by self hatred. It hates anything or anyone that looks like what it came from. That is why it has slated the Orthodox Christians, among others, for destruction. That is why Russia is again under attack by the West. No Russian diplomacy will placate the West and the sooner that Russia gives up on the West the better it will prepare for the onslaught.

    The West sees in jihadis what they themselves are. They both use the same strategy: savagery and chaos.

    The West will lead the world into another great catastrophe unless the East can coalesce into a sufficiently strong alliance that can draw a line that the West will dare not cross.

    The only hope I have left is in the East.

    Posted by: Arius | Sep 19, 2014 3:44:20 PM | 13”

  142. nico says:

    Persian Gulf says:
    September 19, 2014 at 10:52 pm

    “Looks like if you were among the very first Muslims, you would have suggested the same approach regarding the two empires at the time. With that approach we wouldn’t have had a country named I.R.Iran today to discuss.
    My guess is you have never experienced that life can be tough sometimes.”

    Like the late General De Galle said, if you want to be a great country then you needs to act like one.
    How many great countries today?

  143. Sammy says:

    In recent weeks ( especially after event in East Europe ) I have observed a literally explosion of brilliant articles and comments in the alternative media scene.
    Although I am quite skeptic about zerohedge , the following extensive analysis is among the best and in my humble opinion a must read : ( I have quoted around 40 % of the whole article )


    ‘The Tower Of Babel Comes To Paris: The Folly Of Obama’s “War” On ISIS’

    …In fact, the leaders of Iraqi Shiite militias allied with Iran such as Asaib Ahl al-Haq (“League of the Righteous”), Kata’b Hezbollah and the Madhi Army have warned that US soldiers would be targeted. In this regard, the nemesis of Washington’s first occupation of Iraq, firebrand Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, leaves nothing to the imagination:

    Failing the threat of unrest keeping US troops off Iraqi soil, Sadr warned that they could find themselves once again a target of his allied militias, declaring “if you come back, we will be back too.”

    The Mahdi Army largely disbanded after the US pullout, but Sadr has kept ties with its leadership, threatening regularly to bring them out of retirement if the US tries to return to the country in a military role. With the ISIS war looking to do exactly that, they could quickly be another foe for the US in its ever-expanding conflict.

    Mr. Sadr’s ingratitude might seem a trifle grating – after all among the infidel heads that ISIS would love to sever, his would surely rank high on the list. But actually his seemingly impudent remonstrations say it all – namely, that there is no longer an Iraqi nation or Iraqi army and no possibility that it can function as an ally on the ground in destroying ISIS.

    What is left in the ancient land of Mesopotamia is only what was there before the last European empires still standing in 1916 drew lines on a map and declared it a nation – that is, sectarian enclaves and obstreperous militia that are more than able to defend their own territories, but do not want to be rescued by the Washington war machine.

    And that’s why the chirping cherubs on the CNN War Channel get it so wrong night after night. They are pleased to report that Washington’s allies in Baghdad and Erbil have answered Obama’s call to arms, but have not figured out that this has nothing to do with degrading or defeating ISIS.

    Stated differently, the Kurdish militias will doubtless effectively and ferociously defend Iraqi Kurdistan east and north of the Tigris river, but when it comes to the upper Euphrates valley where the Islamic State is actually embedded, there is a considerable problem. Namely, that Turkey considers most of the Kurdish militias which operate there – such as the PKK affiliated groups – to be terrorists and mortal enemies.

    Likewise, the Shiite militias would be completely toxic in the Sunni lands where Obama’s bombers will need boots on the ground to accomplish anything except wanton destruction and hellacious blowback. In fact, it is not at all clear that they are any less barbaric than the ISIS fighters. As the New York Times noted, under a surely understated file called “Shiite Militias Post Challenge For US in Iraq”, militia justice is simple. As one fighter explained,

    “We break into an area and kill the ones who are threatening people,” said one 18-year-old fighter with Asaib Ahl al-Haq, a Shiite militia that operates as a vigilante force around Baghdad.

    In fact, the Shiite militias have been no less ruthless in Sunni neighborhoods than have the ISIS killers in the territories they occupy. As the NYT further noted,

    At the end of July, a report from the research and advocacy group Human Rights Watch said it had documented the killings of 109 Sunni men – 48 in March and April, and 61 between June 1 and July 9 – in the villages and towns around Baghdad. Witnesses, medical personnel and government officials blamed Shiite militias for all of them, and “in many cases witnesses identified the militia as Asaib Ahl al-Haq,” the report said.

    Well, that leaves Washington’s favorite delusion – the Free Syrian Army(FSA) – as the only available boots. At the end of the day there is no place else to go. Certainly, the peripheral Arab nations are not candidates.

    Qatar, for instance, is aligned with the Muslim brotherhood and is therefore proscribed by Egypt and the Saudis. Besides, Qatar’s overwhelming objective is putting a natural gas pipeline though Syria – something that Assad has decisively rejected in deference to his Russian patrons, but which for a price the Islamic State would likely embrace in a heartbeat. So it is not even clear which side the Qataris are on.

    Likewise, the UAE has no soldiers – just money – while Egypt has a lot of the former but none of the latter.

    And, yes, there is a roadblock with the so-called moderate rebels and FSA, too. Notwithstanding that the House GOP has already approved $500 million of funding so long as each and every fighter first submits a fitness and suitability report card to the House Armed services committee, it turns out that like Leroy, the reluctant running back of football lore, FSA doesn’t even want the ball.

    As widely covered in the middle eastern press but hardly mentioned in Washington, most of the rag-tag remnants of the moderate rebel alliance have announced a truce with ISIS on the grounds that their real enemy resides in Damascus, not Raqqah.

    The Free Syrian Army has announced that it will not sign up to the US-led coalition to destroy Islamic State (IS) militants in Iraq and Syria. The group’s founder, Colonel Riad al-Asaad, stressed that toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is their priority, and that they will not join forces with US-led efforts without a guarantee that the US is committed to his overthrow…

    The announcement comes a day after a ceasefire was signed between another rebel group, the Syrian Revolutionary Front (SRF), and IS fighters in Damascus. The details of the truce agreement, published by Arabic news site Orient Net, showed that the two sides had agreed not to target each other. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that IS and the SRF had agreed that Assad’s government and the forces allied to it are the principal enemy.

    If there appears to be a pattern here, there is. Washington is trapped in a strategic cul-de-sac. Without troops on the ground in the 40% of Syria occupied by the Islamic State, US drones, tomahawks and bunker busters will simply turn these Sunni villages and cities into Gaza-On-Euphrates – that is, a wasteland which will breed ISIS fighters prolifically rather than degrade and destroy the jihadist threat.

    But fielding a moderate rebel fighting force in Syria depends on eliminating the Assad regime first – an obviously fraught undertaking. It would result in not simply a two front war – with the Shiite Crescent and ISIS at the same time–but for all practical purposes a three front war, including Russia.

    Perhaps the amateur warriors running the show in the Obama White House have not noticed, but their foolish campaign against Russia over the Ukrainian civil war is a direct threat to the only thing that keeps the Russian economy alive – its gas and oil exports to Europe. At the same time, elimination of the Assad regime would almost surely compound that threat by opening up a new gusher of competition for the European energy market in the form of a pipeline through Syria and Turkey for transport of Qatar’s now stranded but massive deposits of natural gas.

    So to the nameless coalition of the willing, add an existentially motivated champion – Russia – of the status quo in Damascus. Indeed, were Obama to actually recognize that the route to regime change in Raqqah is through Damascus first, the resulting thunderous confrontation at the UN Security Council would be one for the ages. Putin would be banging his shoe in behalf of the sanctity of sovereign borders in Syria, while the Obama Administration would be reduced to saying that the international rules allegedly at issue in the Ukrainian civil war apply always and everywhere… except when Washington finds them inconvenient.

    At the end of the day, of course, the White House will flinch – there will be no overt campaign to militarily eliminate the Assad regime, and therefore no boots on the ground, either. The peace candidate from the school of Saul Alinsky will become the Curtis Lemay of the 21st century. He will attempt to bomb back to the stone age a freakishly retrograde regime that would prefer to be there anyway…

  144. Jay says:

    As you may be aware, David Sanger is a CIA embedded reporter at the NYT. He often reports on the dreams and aspirations of his bosses, presenting the “trial balloon” in NYT as news.

    Here is his latest:


    When the West says “we don’t want war”, they mean “we want you to surrender”!

  145. Sammy says:

    BTW , the above article was by David Stockman and you can find the same on his blog :


  146. fyi says:

    Sammy says:

    September 20, 2014 at 7:55 am

    Yes, the Iraqi state that the English created is finished and a new state is being born.

    I do not think we know the outcome of this war, likely after a few decades we could be looking at something resembling Lebanon.

    The Free Syrian Army does not exist; what we have are anti-government forces that live off of the population in Syria and control this village or those neighbourhoods.

  147. fyi says:

    Jay says:

    September 20, 2014 at 8:16 am

    Mr. Khamenei stated Iran’s non-negotiable condition this past July.

    However, he left 2 items left for negotiations: duration and the nature of sanction relief.

    That was, Iran would not insist on a rigid time table to get to that number of SWUs and Iran would not insist on the immediate removal of all sanctions.

    Nevertheless, P5+1 rejected that offer; the aim of P5+1 had remained the elimination of Iranian nuclear industry and its reduction to a toy program at which Iranians – like little children that they are – could play.

    The P5+1 wish to get back to status quo ante of 2007 – intending to get what they could not get at the fields of battle in Syria and in economic war against Iran.

    Well, since Iran was not defeated and she stared down the barrel of the gun 3 times over the last 12 years and since she now knows her destruction is the paramount aim of Axis Powers, she need not and should not concede to these “fair & reasonable” demands of P5+1.

    The negotiations are in effect dead.

    Iran should resume building Arak to its original specifications and start building Darkhowin reactor.

  148. kathleen says:

    Why is it that the fact that Iran signed the NPT, has the right to enrich uranium up to 20% for peaceful purposes and that Israel continues to refuse to sign the NPT and the Chemical Weapons Agreement never comes up anywhere in the MSM or in negotiations?

    Also what is all of the hullabaloo about the U.S. supplying Syrian rebels with arms such a massive deal when the U.S. has all ready been doing this for several years?

  149. Karl.. says:

    About p5 talks
    What happens after the current Iranian president? US think this opportunity will be forever? With my sparse knowledge of nuclear issues, I hardly believe it will take this long, west obviously dont want it solved.

  150. Persian Gulf says:

    Nasser says:
    September 18, 2014 at 4:24 pm

    “Most Iranians won’t believe this, but the truth is that no amount of concessions will satisfy the West.

    The Western aim is to ultimately engineer social and state collapse in those countries.”

    Obviously, at the time most Iranians understood that West’s aim is to destroy the IR you were in the opposite camp knowingly undermining the basic principles of Iran’s institutions. You have miserably failed to rise to the occasion at the very critical moment of Iran’s contemporary history. The Islamic Republic would be fool to take people like you serious. That the actions of people like you could easily bring us to a Syria scenario is the testament of your honesty in suggesting what Iran should or should not do. Apparently, it wasn’t an act of political naivety or unconsciousness.

  151. Amir says:

    Persian Gulf says:
    September 20, 2014 at 12:19 pm
    Could you elaborate on this a bit more?

  152. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    September 20, 2014 at 12:02 pm

    I think Iranian leaders are always ready for strategic settlement with US; it is US that is indifferent to that and is not interested.

    US is still acting like the Godfather and her leaders are addicted to zero-cost foreign policy.

    Mr. Rouhani and Mr. Zarif hoped to convince US and EU that it is in their own best interests to settle with Iran.

    US, EU, Russia, and to a certain extent China took the Rouhani-Zarif initiative as a sign of Iranian weakness and increased their demands on Iran.

    US, EU, Russia, China, India are not prepared to accept the rise of the new Shia/Irani power in the Middle East – a power that they themselves helped so much to create.

    So, even after the departure of Mr. Rouhani from office, I should expect the next Iranian president to express interest in strategic settlement with Axis Powers; just as Mr. Ahmadinejad, Mr. Khatami, and Mr. Rafsanjani had done earlier.

    Depending on the success of the Shia Crescent, on the military and economic battle fields, Iranian leaders may come to believe that they no longer require strategic settlement with US.

    I think that may become more clear over the next decade…

  153. Karl.. says:


    “US, EU, Russia, China, India are not prepared to accept the rise of the new Shia/Irani power in the Middle East – a power that they themselves helped so much to create.”

    I would say its US only here pretty much, they arent prepared to recognize Islamic republic, the p5 talks that will never end is a proof of that imo.

    You think there will be any change after the supreme leader leaves?

  154. kooshy says:

    “BTW, I was informed yesterday that in the Mosul Dam operation the principal ground forces on the “friendly side were Al-Quds Iranian troops not Pesh Merga and they had the benefit of adjusted US CAS.”


    به گزارش رسا، علیرضا زاکانی با اشاره به تأثیر ایران در تحولات منطقه گفت: اگر حاج قاسم چند ساعت دیرتر به بغداد می‌رسید، بغداد سقوط می‌کرد

  155. James Canning says:


    Assuming sanctions relief will be forthcoming, P5+1 will implicitly be accepting a much richer and stronger Iran (provided a deal is achieved limiting Iran’s nuclear programme).

  156. James Canning says:


    The US in fact has been keeping heavy weapons from being provided to the “moderate” insurgents in Syria.

  157. James Canning says:


    The EU and the US ARE NOT trying to “destroy” Iran. (Some powerful elements of the Israel lobby would like to see Iran get a good bashing, however.)

    Your notion that an Iran with a limited nuclear programme somehow has been “destroyed”, is plain silly.

  158. James Canning says:


    What is this “surrender” you claim David Sanger wishes to see? An Iran much richer and far stronger, due to getting rid of the sanctions?

  159. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 20, 2014 at 2:04 pm

    There is no trust in Iran regarding the intentions of the United States; her record of the state destruction over the last 20 years speaks for itself; the last one being Libya.

    Mr. Khamenei has stated the deal Iran is willing to make.

    If P5+1 are not willing to take it so be it.

    That decision has already been made by the Iranians that they can live with the consequences of the failure of negotiations.

  160. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    September 20, 2014 at 2:08 pm

    Why would you Brits get rid of sanctions if it is making you richer and stronger?

  161. fyi says:

    Mr. Cannings:

    Your fellow country man, Ambassador Jenkins, uses the word “surrender” in this article; please pay special attention to this fine Englishman’s usage:


  162. fyi says:

    My apologies:

    Here is the correct URL


  163. Karl.. says:

    Ghani wins AFghan election but teams up with pro-american candidate.

  164. M.Ali says:

    Power sharing deals never work.

  165. Sammy says:

    Quotes from Jack Lew , according to the Jerusalem Post the second most influential ‘JEW ‘ in the world , after Bibi of course :

    …The Treasury Department, which administers and enforces the sanctions, monitors the numbers carefully. And when you consider the ongoing sanctions that remain in place, the temporary, targeted, and reversible sanctions relief is extremely limited—totaling an estimated $7 billion. To put that into context, during the same six month period, Iran will lose roughly $30 billion in oil sales alone from the sanctions that remain in place.

    Put simply, this relief will not enable Iran’s economy to recover from the deep economic damage inflicted by the sanctions program. The bulk of this relief does not come from suspending sanctions on economic activity like manufacturing or exports. It comes from the measured release of Iran’s own funds that are now impounded in overseas banks. The fact is, because of years of sanctions enforcement, Iran has about $100 billion locked up in overseas banks. The interim agreement allows Iran to access $4.2 billion of these funds.

    I want to underscore that Iran’s access to this limited relief is neither immediate nor instantaneous. It will be provided in separate installments on a rolling basis over the six-month period of the Joint Plan, and it will only flow if Iran demonstrates week by week that it continues to comply with its agreement to freeze and rollback its enrichment program.

    Other measures amount to less than $2 billion — the limited suspension of sanctions on the export of plastics, the import of parts for Iran’s automotive sector, and tuition assistance for students studying abroad. And the core architecture that makes the program work, oil and financial sanctions, remains in effect fully.

    If at any point Iran fails to fulfill its commitments under the Joint Plan, the money will stop, and the suspended sanctions will snap right back into place. And when the six-month deal expires, so does the relief.

    The bottom-line is: Promises are not enough—Iran must meet its obligations. This is not a case of trust and verify. This is a case of verify everything.

    No matter what, Iran’s economy will continue to feel severe economic pressure from our ongoing sanctions regime. For example, our oil sanctions that remain in place have forced Iran’s oil exports to drop by more than 60 percent over the last two years. And we will continue to enforce them.

    All told, the crushing sanctions have deeply damaged economic conditions in Iran. There are four key indicators that tell the whole story: first, last year the economy shrunk by 6 percent and it is expected to shrink again this year; second, the value of its currency, the rial, has plummeted, having lost about 60 percent of its value against the dollar; third, the unemployment rate is over 15 percent; and finally, the inflation rate is about 30 percent, one of the highest in the world.
    The economic sanctions have crippled Iran’s economy on many fronts.

    Claims that Iran’s economy is undergoing a recovery because of the Joint Plan of Action are just plain wrong. After the election of President Rouhani last June, and well before the Joint Plan took effect, there was a slight drop in the country’s very high inflation rate and small improvements in other economic indicators. This was due to a wave of public optimism that greeted the election of a new president, the appointment of a more capable economic team, and the hope that a deal to lift sanctions would soon materialize.

    But the slight improvements in these indicators only mean that a badly wounded economy is not getting worse. It does not mean the economy is getting better. And it certainly does not mean that the Joint Plan has led to a recovery.

    Further, if Iran fails to reach a deal with us, business and consumer confidence will quickly erode as will many of the gains the economy has seen over the last few months.

    Iran’s economy suffered a serious blow from sanctions, and the impact of sanctions is not being reversed. Iran’s economy remains in the same state of distress that brought the government to the table in the first place. Imagine how any economy would feel, if, by a recovery, it meant leveling off at the bottom of a recession. That is what is happening in Iran today.

    There is no question that the relief provided under the six-month plan will not steer Iran’s economy to a real recovery. It is a drop in the bucket. In fact, there will be a net deepening of the impact of sanctions when you consider the new damage that will be inflicted like the $30 billion in additional lost oil sales.

    What this relief will do is give the people of Iran and their leaders a small taste of how things could improve if they were to take the steps necessary to join the community of nations. This is a choice for Iran to make. If it wants to pull its economy out of the deep hole it is in, it must remove any doubt that its nuclear program is peaceful and come to a comprehensive agreement with the international community. Until then, we will remain steadfast in our enforcement of U.S. and international sanctions.

    Now, when I say we remain firm in our enforcement of sanctions, these are not just words, we are talking about action. For instance, shortly after the Joint Plan went into effect, we moved against more than 30 Iran-related entities and individuals around the globe for evading U.S. sanctions, for aiding Iranian nuclear and missile proliferation, and for supporting terrorism. As President Obama recently said, if anyone, anywhere engages in unauthorized economic activity with Tehran, the United States will—and I quote—“come down on them like a ton of bricks.”

    I have personally delivered that message to hundreds of business and banking executives in America and around the world, and we are in regular contact with our international partners—including Israel—to sustain the pressure on Iran’s government.

    On top of that, our enforcement officials at the Treasury Department who have been responsible for crafting and implementing this historic sanctions regime have been traveling around the world and putting their expertise and unremitting effort to bear to keep Iran isolated.

    Even though I have said this before, it bears repeating: Iran is not open for business. Have no doubt, we are well aware that business people have been talking to the Iranians. We have been very clear that the moment those talks turn into improper deals, we will respond with speed and force. Anyone who violates our sanctions will face severe penalties. Our vigilance has not, cannot, and will not falter.

    In closing, let me say, this is a time of great uncertainty. But during difficult times like these, the bonds between the United States and Israel do not grow weaker, they grow stronger.

    The U.S.-Israel relationship, which is rooted in our shared story of people yearning to be masters of their own destiny, is as vibrant as ever. And that vibrancy is very much on display here. As I look out across this room, I am reminded of how every year hundreds of young people come to this conference from every corner of the United States. They travel to our nation’s capital because of their boundless hope, their sense of duty, and their unshakeable belief that the future can be brighter, better, more prosperous and more secure. And I am confident that by all of us working together, we can make that happen…

  166. Karl.. says:

    M Ali

    Question is why? Is it obama that force this upon them?

  167. Sammy says:

    How to understand the Talmud :


    “A goy insisted that a Talmudist explain to him what the Talmud was. The sage finally consented and asked the goy the following question: ‘Two men climb down a chimney. When they come to the bottom, one has his face covered with soot, the other is spotless. Which of the two will wash himself?’

    “‘The one who is dirty,’ answered the goy. ‘No, for the one who’s dirty sees the others’ clean face and believes he is clean too. The one who’s clean sees a dirty face and believes his is dirty too.’ ‘I understand!’ the goy exclaimed. ‘I’m beginning to understand what the Talmud is.’

    “‘No, you have understood nothing at all, the rabbi interrupted, for how could two men have come down the same chimney, one dirty and the other clean?’”[

  168. Amir says:

    Persian Gulf says:
    September 20, 2014 at 12:19 pm

    I mean, seriously, what you say is very grave! Could you please tell me what do you mean by that? I’m frequently reading lines like the one you have quoted, on websites like rajanews and mashregh… Am I missing something here?
    And one more question, if it’s not too much: how did you know about his previous interests and intentions?
    I’m in need of guidance and it would be unfair to deny me that.

  169. James Canning says:


    Mitchell Pitnick in the Lobelog piece you linked says Obama is not seeking total Iranian “surrender”. Nor is China, Russia, Germany. Many aggressive “supporters” of Israel in Washington do of course seek to block a deal with Iran by demanding too much.

  170. James Canning says:

    Plitnick, Mitchell.

  171. James Canning says:


    I think the sanctions against Iran do a good deal of economic damage to the EU and the US.

  172. James Canning says:


    Obama and his generals were reluctant to intervene in Libya. Obama may have feared “state destruction” would be the unwelcome outcome of western military intervention in that country’s civil war.

  173. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 21, 2014 at 12:21 pm

    You do not understand the strategic ramifications of Axis Powers failures; from Kosovo to ISIS to Ukraine – that they cannot build anything remotely comparable to what they destroy – let alone anything better.

    In the mean time, their failures are fully revealed for others to enjoy and exploit – the last one being ISIS.

  174. Persian Gulf says:

    Amir says:
    September 21, 2014 at 10:37 am

    I don’t know what you read elsewhere. I also don’t read the papers you referred to and can’t tell you anything about their claims. and I don’t think the aftermath of Iran’s 2009 election, and its uncountable damages, is a vague one.

    You better ask him. He is obviously a genius. probably too much to find himself in a total embarrassment.
    People like him had, in a worst case scenario, the option of being silent and not undermining the very system he is now lecturing how to draft her policies. I think you can forgive a young man/woman for the inflicted damages. That can’t be applied to a grown man with world politics experiences, as he shows here, that is fully conscious of every move he makes.
    That’s all I can tell you.

  175. Persian Gulf says:

    fyi says:
    September 21, 2014 at 12:41 pm

    without even wasting one’s time to read his crap, I can tell that his writing is a sickening one, as always. It’s amazing that one can make a living with his narrative. I doubt he believes his own writing. it must be tough for him to fake out the way he always does.

  176. fyi says:


    Interview with Mrs. Tuchman on Iranian Nuclear Negogiations


  177. masoud says:

    News is reporting that iran is ‘receptive’ to demands to disconnect rather than dismantle it’s centrifuges.

    God only knows what that means.

    A couple of weeks ago Iran announced that it was installing a news centrifuge, and uncharecteristically also announced its designed capacity, 24 swu. Now, 24×80000 centrifuges the us is pushing for is disturbingly close to the 200000 swu needed to fuel Bushere. Another nasty deal might be in the works. Let’s pray it fails.

  178. Amir says:

    Persian Gulf says:
    September 21, 2014 at 12:57 pm
    Have some mercy! What you said has struck a chord with me. Those news outlets I mentioned profess to tread the path of Emam and revolution. You said acting upon what Nasser suggested could eventually turn Iran into Syria; it’s not a joke. Could you please tell me what should be done instead? Or what is incorrect in his statements?

  179. Karl.. says:


    Probably mean Iran put on hold the nuclear industry for this or that many years, I have seen that demand by west before.

  180. James Canning says:


    China and Russia insist Iran limit its nuclear programme. Surely you are aware of this.

  181. James Canning says:


    Are you arguing that Serbia should have been allowed to attempt t crush Muslim insurgency in Kosovo? No matter how bloody?

  182. James Canning says:


    I do not agree with you that “the West” created Isis.

  183. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    September 21, 2014 at 12:18 pm

    Then, why don’t the Brits follow your advice and stop sanctioning Iran?!!

  184. Persian Gulf says:

    Amir says:
    September 21, 2014 at 1:38 pm

    I think you got the point wrong. Is it hard for you to imagine a Syria scenario, let alone the huge credibility and economical damage to the country, if the post 2009 turmoil were going to go out of control? How can the ones knowingly fueling that turmoil can be taken serious for anything? I thought the trust deficit is quite obvious.

  185. Amir says:

    Oh! I’m sorry. I suppose you know something about his intentions of which I’m unaware. I for one didn’t understand the situation could get out of hand back then. I didn’t go to any demonstrations but now I think I’ve made a huge mistake by standing aside while I must have taken the side of “nezaam”.

  186. kooshy says:

    With what just was agreed to in Afghanistan I see Iran and US + Pakistan have reached an agreement to a balance of their powers at least in that country, for Iraq I don’t see Iranian agreeing to share power with Americans there (unlike Afghanistan this kind of power sharing agrement in Iraq was not avilable from the beginning / 2003 on, besides I don’t see any mutual accommodating agreements coming or necessary in majority shieh countries).

  187. James Canning says:


    Britain will be happy to end sanctions against Iran, if Iran makes a deal with the P5+1.

  188. fyi says:

    Karl.. says:

    September 21, 2014 at 1:43 pm

    Negotiations have completely and utterly failed.

    So now each side is reverting back to their propaganda war – US claiming, without attribution, that she has made a face-saving offer (an old one as you observed) and Iranians have rejected that.

    Iranians, on the other hand, again without attribution, have said that they are “studying” the last US offer.

    Since ISIS is a threat to all states in the Middle East except Iran & Israel and since Axis Powers are loath to fight ISIS and Shia Crescent at the same time, there is no compelling reason for Iran any longer to compromise.

    This will go back and forth as public diplomacy becomes more visible but no deal is in the work; there is not even enough time any longer to negotiate the details between today and 24th of November.

    The P5+1 have never let an opportunity to miss and opportunity to miss an opportunity with Iran pass.

  189. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    September 21, 2014 at 4:00 pm

    I find it revealing that you are not capable of applying the same logic to Britain that you insist Iran must follow!!

  190. Empty says:


    The ’88 election (or 2009 election) was correctly called a “fitna” because, at the time, a lot of ambiguity and doubt was spread to create anarchy and chaos. The plan for this had been laid a few years earlier in the US and funds had been allocated for that purpose and all the scenarios you witnessed.

    Those who were closely following the events knew of the plot and deception and it was quite evident that Mousavi and Karrubi had been “tagged” to perform an act (I think they did not know this at the time) and they were fools to follow the advice of the traitors who surrounded them. As a result, they brought the whole country to a state of collapse. Those who followed the so-called “green movement”, too, were “extras” or “siahi lashkar” for these theatrics. Were it not for Ayatollah Khamenei’s leadership, the whole country would have been similar in state to Syria and Iraq.

    It is understandable if some people acted because of ignorance and the fact that they didn’t really know what was going on. What is not excusable is after all things became clear, the culprits should have realized and admitted their mistakes and apologized for aiding and abetting the enemy. If they still insisted on their past thoughts and actions, 3 disturbing scenarios are possible:

    1) They still don’t get it. This means they do not have the mental capacity to understand and evaluate things correctly therefore they should not be in positions of power and decision making due to their mental incompetence.

    2) They in fact knew what they were doing. They are traitors (“kha’en”) and must be put on trial and face whatever just sentencing that comes to them.

    3) They realize they were mistaken but are too arrogant and fools to admit their mistake and are acting like cowards and in the process dragging behind them some leftover deceived people (fortunately, there are very few).

    I think perhaps it is not as important for people who are on the sideline to be mistaken still but not so for those who are trying to come back to any position of power in Rohani’s administration. They should be kicked out.

    *please note that my post is not directed at one of the commenters on this site as I believe he, at some point, did admit he had made a mistake (if I am not confusing him with someone else, of course). My comment is a general one regarding those who insist on having people in government posts who were knowingly or unknowingly involved in ’88 “fitna”.

  191. Amir says:

    Empty says:
    September 21, 2014 at 10:30 pm

    All I could say is I was wrong and I lacked foresight. I’ll stick to the path of “velaayat”. I’m not sure if my repentance would be accepted but at least I’ll try to bring some friends and colleagues back into the fold of “nezaam”. Also I have decided to wholeheartedly devout myself to research, in a basic science (I think I have said enough).

  192. M.Ali says:

    “Two Chinese warships have docked at Iran’s principal naval port for the first time in history, Iranian admirals told state television on Sunday, adding that both countries would conduct four days of joint naval exercises.”

    Not that I trust the Chinese, but they ARE more trust-worthy than the Russians.

  193. M.Ali says:

    “In a letter spearheaded by Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), the senators expressed grave concern over “troubling” reports that the administration is considering a deal that would allow Iranian nuclear centrifuges to be “disconnected” instead of “dismantled.”

    This seems like Bazari Techniques 101.

    Shop Owner #1 gives a high price and claims that it is heavily discounted.
    Shop Owner #2 comes into the picture five minutes later, in the middle of the negotiations saying, “What? You gave him such a low rate??? We will lose money on this!”
    The deal is done, and customer goes out thinking he got a great price.

    I hope Zarif is not falling is not falling for this crap. Kerry telling him, “Look at what a great deal I have given you! I’m getting screwed back home for being so flexibility with Iran and giving such a fantastic deal for you guys. I bet when I get home, I’ll be fired for being so soft with you guys…”

  194. M.Ali says:

    “Despite a ten per cent margin of victory for the ‘No’ campaign in the Scottish referendum, some supporters of the ‘Yes’ camp are pointing to videos which they claim show evidence of vote rigging.

    Scotland voted to stay in the United Kingdom after voters rejected independence by a margin of 55% to 45%. The pro-independence campaign claimed 1,617,989 votes but was defeated by the ‘Better Together’ campaign which obtained 2,001,926 votes. The turnout was 84.5%.

    However, almost as soon as the vote count began last night, some were pointing to alleged examples of tampering.

    In the first example, bundles of referendum papers are seen on top of a table designated for ‘No’ votes and yet when zoomed in, the top paper on two of the bundles clearly shows an X marked in the box for ‘Yes’.

    The second clip shows a man at a desk in a polling station writing on a piece of paper. Some claim this proves he is filling in referendum cards, although he could just as easily be tallying up votes.

    The third example is a little harder to explain. It shows a woman at a polling station counting votes. She takes one paper from the ‘No’ pile and places it in the ‘Yes’ pile before taking at least two cards from the ‘Yes’ pile and placing them in the ‘No’ pile.

    Police in Glasgow are also investigating at least ten cases of vote fraud where people turned up to vote only to find that their names had already been crossed off the list, suggesting other people were voting multiple times.

    “Last night police officers were present at the count to remove the ballot papers and keep them as evidence,”reports the Daily Mail. “The papers were from 10 different boxes across Glasgow, and not concentrated in one area.”

    While these videos by no means offer concrete evidence of vote fraud, they do feed into the sentiment that the British establishment was so panicked by the prospect of a ‘Yes’ vote, a likelihood which grew which after polls narrowed earlier this month, that it would go to any lengths to prevent Scotland from gaining independence.

  195. Sammy says:

    And I always thought that RaSSmuSSen and Co. are a bunch of brain retard :


    …This is a letter from the commander-in-chief of the FSA, Salim Idriss and dated January 17, 2014. It reads: “I hereby inform you that this ammunition sent by the chiefs of staff to leaders of the revolutionary military councils of the Eastern Region must be distributed in accordance with what was agreed upon: two-thirds to the warlords of the el-Nosra front, the remaining third to be distributed between the military and the revolutionary elements in the fight against the bands of IEIL (Islamic Emirate in Iraq and the Levant). We thank you for sending us the proof of delivery of all ammunition, specifying the quantities and qualities, duly signed by the leaders and warlords in person, so we can forward them to the Turkish and French partners. “In other words, two NATO powers (Turkey and France) have delivered ammunition for two thirds to the Al-Nosra Front (classified as a member of al-Qaeda by the Security Council) and one third to the FSA so that it can fight against the “Islamic Emirate”, headed by one of its senior officers. In fact, the FSA has disappeared on the ground and the munitions were therefore intended for two-thirds to al-Qaeda and one third to the “Islamic Emirate”.

    With this dual role device, NATO will be able to continue to launch its hordes of jihadists against Syria while claiming to fight them.

    However, when NATO has installed chaos everywhere in the Arab world, including its Saudi ally, it will turn the “Islamic Emirate” against the two great developing powers, Russia and China. That is why these two powers should intervene now and nip in the bud this private army being constituted and trained by NATO in the Arab world. Otherwise, Moscow and Beijing will soon have to confront it on their own soil.

  196. James Canning says:

    Najmeh Bozorgmehr has an interesting report in the Financial Times today: “Investors hope nuclear deal will open door to more business”.

  197. James Canning says:


    Nato did not “install” the chaos in Libya. Overthrow of Gaddafi did of course created opening for the chaos that ensued.

  198. James Canning says:


    Britain sees the economic damage done to the EU and the US as a result of sanctions against Iran. Britain sees even more damage would flow from war in the Gulf if no deal is achieved and Iran fails to limit its nuclear programme.

    In other words, sanctions are the choice fostering a lower level of damage. Iran, on the other hand, has made choices increasing the economic damage its incurs.

  199. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 22, 2014 at 1:44 pm

    War is never cheap; Axis Powers started on that path back in 2007 for certain; they had the political cover not to od so.

    The aim has been and will always been the destruction of the Iranian strategic autonomy.

    Let them go to war, that will not alter the strategic situation for them; it actually would make it worse.

    And they know it.

    Iran should ignore P5+1 and start building Darkhovin.

  200. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    September 22, 2014 at 1:40 pm

    Why would Britain not limit her demands and make a deal with Iran? Britain would be richer. No?

  201. Nasser says:


    Even Gary Samore now agrees that no deal with Iran is possible and sure regrets taking on Russia before Iran was settled with.

  202. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    September 22, 2014 at 6:15 pm

    I think Mr. Saleme’s final comments were very interesting; that US is moving towards “Strategic Linkage” with Iran.

    This is in fact a hopeful direction that if it continues, will bring US to the position of the late Lt. General William Odom.

    Recall that the late General Odom accepted explicitly that Iranians could build nuclear weapons if they so wished.

  203. Nasser says:


    Dear God how I despise these Euro trashes. Since Iran can do little to hurt them directly at the present I only hope these clowns get into some gas dispute with the Russians as winter approaches.

  204. Nasser says:

    fyi says: September 22, 2014 at 8:29 pm

    Never going to happen.

    As they say; Hope is not a strategy

  205. Nasser says:


    As you yourself have pointed out, the Americans will never choose Iran over their nearly century long relationship with the Saudis. We only need to look at their continued insistence on Assad’s departure to confirm this view.

    I say again, if 9/11 couldn’t convince the Americans to reconsider their ties with the Shias and away from the Wahabis, nothing possibly can.

  206. Nasser says:


    “They [Iranians] probably don’t see the rise of ISIS as an existential threat; they see it as one more sign of the political disintegration of the Sunni Arab world, now split into three bitterly hostile camps—the Saudi/Egypt/UAE axis, the Muslim Brotherhood/Qatar/Gaza axis with Turkish backing, and the pool of crazies like ISIS and Al-Qaeda. With the U.S. in retreat and the Sunni splits deepening, Iran’s hard core revolutionaries have every reason to feel emboldened and no reasons to make serious concessions to the U.S.”

    – Not sure Iranian planners see it that way but I actually agree with this Iran hating author.

  207. M.Ali says:

    I’ve been thinking about this and I think ISIS has been indirectly one of the best things to happen to Iran. I just hope shrewd politicians in Iran can take the best advantage of it.

    Iran shouldn’t wipe out ISIS, but push them away from the areas they support, so that the group is moved towards another area. This guys pose no real threat to Iran, because they won’t ever be able to gain even the most minimum support from Iranian civillians. But they have support from the civillians of any other Sunni country. ISIS is now moving towards Egypt. Let them. The mass refugees in Turk will become a problem for them.

    So be it.

    And there is no threat of them holding huge areas of land, because they don’t have the political maturity to be able to pose as a challenge to Iran. They would be as scary as Taleban controlled Afghanistan was to Iran. they would be busy with their internal fighting and screwing up the countries they are in, and making plans to attack useless, insignificent targets in the west, which would just make the west have a harder time in convincing its voters that the real bad guy are the Iranians.

    Not that what they think is important to us anyway.

    But this opportunity can be easily screwed up if we have self-hating Iranian politicians who are hoping they’d get invited to Obama’s dinner party in the white house.

  208. M.Ali says:

    Question Time:

    The Yemeni Houthis have taken over the capital. How much does this strenghten Iran’s influence? I dont know much about this issue, and I think I read before that the Houthis shias are different than Iran’s.

    Second question, do you think Iran has had any role in this?

  209. Karl.. says:

    Letting US bomb your country, this is what you get.

  210. fyi says:

    M.Ali says:

    September 23, 2014 at 3:11 am

    Like Taliban before them (and Saudi Arabia & its religious police even earlier), ISIS has demonstrated that mindless adherence to what a brick layer would consider to be Islamic Tenets – احکام اسلام – is road to ruination.

    Potentially, it could strengthen the arguments of those in Iran who firmly oppose the Nekbat Islami there.

    In regards to ISIS, Iranians should consider making a cease-fire deal with it and help it move south against Saudi Arabia.

  211. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    September 22, 2014 at 9:53 pm

    Yes, you are right.

    As you know, there were days of celebrations and jubilations in the cities of UAE after the 9/11/2001 attacks on the United States. Young college women would come to class giggling about the attacks.

    Yet, Mr. George Bush, in effect, trampled on the blood of his fellow country men as well as others who had died on that day and went to UAE and used it as a platform to harangue Iran.

    Deplorable and dishonorable.

    When I say they have degenerated, I am not using hyperbole, they have.

    “Die for some one who will tear a shirt for you” as the Persian saying goes; – in this case, Tehranis did held a vigil for the dead… Americans were oblivious to that – they thought that their geopolitical games are more worthy than the requirements that Honor imposes on everyone, including them.

  212. M.Ali says:

    Fyi, can you give your take on Houthis? As a Sunni Iranian, I’m in a strange position that stronger Shia abroad actually is better for me and my community than stronger Sunni powers.

  213. fyi says:

    M.Ali says:

    September 23, 2014 at 10:52 am

    One should not entertain any illusions or wishful thinking about Yemen or Houthis.

    There is no (unitary) state in Yemen; just a number of tribes competing for the control of the resources and the government machinery created there by the English. The farther one goes outside of Sa’ana, the weaker is the influence of the government.

    The Houthis are not Imamai Shia; I do not believe that there is any religious influence of Iran on them. They are just the meanest amongst the tribes in Yemen.

    The former President, Mr. Saleh, was a Zaidi Shia – just like the Houthis – what is transpiring in Yemen in helpful to Iran in so far as it thwarts the machinations of Saudi Arabia.

    This will not be a repeat of the Islamic revolution in Iran; there is no structure, intellectual or governmental, that could in any way shape or form cause one to be optimistic about the future of that country.

    Yes, Saudi Arabia has been defeated there – that is about all you can say.

  214. Karl.. says:

    Anyone here belive US would have attacked if there were some groups in Russia or China?
    Isnt the answer nuclear weapons here again?

  215. Nasser says:

    M.Ali says: September 23, 2014 at 3:11 am


    I actually regarded the Ikhwan to be a greater threat to Iran’s regional position than ISIS.

    Note how Israel too always tries to promote the crazies within their opponents.

  216. Nasser says:

    fyi says: September 23, 2014 at 11:22 am

    The Saudis have been harming Iran and murdering Shias in Syria, Iraq, in Bahrain, in Afghanistan, in Pakistan, in Iranian Balochistan; absolutely cost free. And there are still idiots in Iranian government who desire better relations with these animals!

    Iran should make trouble for the Saudis wherever and however they can.

    The Houthis don’t have to be spiritual brothers for Iran to get involved. The meaner they are the better.

    (I agree that a hudna with ISIS would be very desirable and it would be even better if their attentions could be directed south towards Saudi Arabia. Problem is, ISIS and Naqshbandi Army command council is filled with former Baathist officers whose singular obsession is with Iran. So time is not ripe for that.)

  217. Nasser says:


    Mr Smith was right, the cargo cult is very strong among many Iranians. These idiots don’t realize that white European Christians bombing Sunni Arabs is the best possible political gift for Iran. Instead they talk of “common enemies,” what fools!

  218. Sammy says:

    We knew this of course , the good old petro-dollars of kSSa and Qatar : ( also see the charts )


    …Turkey’s financial position is one of the world’s great financial mysteries, in fact, a uniquely opaque puzzle: the country has by far the biggest foreign financing requirement relative to GDP among all the world’s large economies, yet the sources of its financing are impossible to trace. I have analyzed sovereign debt risk for three decades – including stints as head of credit strategy at Credit Suisse and head of debt research at Bank of America – and have never seen anything quite like this.

    At around 8% of GDP, Turkey’s current account deficit is a standout among emerging markets. It is at the level of Greece before its near-bankruptcy in 2011. Where is the money coming from to cover it?

    A great deal of it is financed by short-term debt, mainly through borrowings by banks.
    Little of this appears on the Bank for International Settlements tables of Western banks’ short-term lending to other banks, which means that the source of the bank loans lies elsewhere than in the developed world. Gulf State banks are almost certainly the lenders, by process of elimination…

  219. James Canning says:


    General Odom of course was correct, that Iran has technical ability to build nukes.

  220. James Canning says:


    Britain sees that Iran must make a deal of some sort, limiting its nuclear programme. So, Britain accepts the damage caused by sanctions against Iran, in hopes of avoiding much worse damage.

  221. James Canning says:


    Please give an example of the “loss of strategic autonomy” you claim the EU is demanding of Iran. Specific example, please. In my view, “strategic autonomy” is so mushy a concept it is meaningless.

  222. Nasser says:

    Sammy says: September 23, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    Thank you for the link. Good attempt to explain how and why Turkey turned into the Pakistan of the Mediterranean.

  223. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 23, 2014 at 1:36 pm

    Iran supports Palestinians to the hilt at great cost to herself.

    Iran supports and supported Shia in Lebanon.

    Iran supports and supported the Syrian Arab Republic.

    These are examples of Iranian exercise of strategic autonomy.

    The other, more prominent one, has been the establishment of Iran as a threshold nuclear-weapon state – essential for her continued survival.

    All of this has been achieved at the face of active and at times deadly opposition by US, UK, France, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Russia, India, and China.

    Iran has acted as a powerful country…

  224. fyi says:

    Sammy says:

    September 23, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    The fault also is Iran’s.

    Her leaders, for 35 years, held the modern private sector in shackles, pursuing their fantasies of “Islamic Just Society” – no doubt influenced – yet again – by the fantasies of the European socialists of the 19-th century.

    For had the successive Iranian government had encouraged capitalist development in Iran, they could have been able to help cover some of the current accounts deficit of Turkey and thus lessen her vulnerability of machinations of Arabs or Euro-Americans.

    Iranians, instead, chose to be honorably poor never realizing that money can advance their cause as well; domestically as well as internationally since patronage is the essence of politics.

  225. fyi says:

    Nasser says:

    September 23, 2014 at 1:12 pm

    The fall of Al Saud will immediately be followed – in my opinion – by civil war among the various tribes for the control of oil, money and power; it would be 4 times worse than what is transpiring in Libya now and it will probably take decades to settle.

    None of the Middle Eastern states excepting Iran, Israel and Turkey consist of an ethnos – in the sense of the late Lev Gumilev.

    [In North Africa, Morocco has an ethnos.]

    Therefore, none of them are states and pretending it to be otherwise obfuscate the reality from our views.

  226. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    September 23, 2014 at 1:33 pm

    Iran sees that Briton must make a deal of some sort, limiting its demands on Iran’s nuclear rights. So, Iran accepts the damage caused by sanctions imposed by Britain, in hopes of avoiding much worse damage.

  227. James Canning says:


    I asked you to provide a single example of the “strategic autonomy” you claim the EU is demanding Iran give up.

    I think many European diplomats welcome support for the oppressed Palestinians.

  228. James Canning says:


    I you think Iran will incur less damage to its economy by refusing to limit its nuclear programme, I think you are quite mistaken.

  229. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 23, 2014 at 3:04 pm

    EU, and indeed India, US, Russia, and China are asking Iran to give up the strategic autonomy of building and fielding nuclear weapons if her leaders assess that is in Iran’s best interest – “Supreme Reason of the State”.

    Will not happen.

  230. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    September 23, 2014 at 3:06 pm

    I you think Britain will incur more damage to its economy by refusing to limit her demands on Iran, I think you are quite mistaken.

  231. Rd. says:

    Jay says:

    “I you think Britain will incur more damage to its economy”

    From ft;

    UK mortgage approvals fall in August
    Recovery fails to lift UK public finances
    Balls’s deficit boldness fails to impress
    Cameron opens up fiscal ‘Pandora’s Box’

    just to name a few…


    good reading james/..

  232. Nasser says:

    Sergey Karaganov continues to impress. Truly, another excellent piece!


    I am sure Russia will disregard some of his advice such as those regarding Iran and continue (in futility) to try and separate EU from US at least for a while longer but I feel his analysis of overall trends are spot on. This is such a welcome development not just for Iran and China but for the entire “non West,” the real but voiceless international community.

  233. Jay says:

    Rd. says:
    September 23, 2014 at 4:47 pm

    I was so busy entertaining myself and providing James symmetrical responses to his imperious euro-centric responses I did not even bother to notice the “I you”!

  234. ataune says:


    I read the article you linked to and I do agree that the analysis sounds to be correct on most of the issues regarding Russia’s interests. I don’t think the author is overwhelmingly emphasizing the “look to the East” – Iran included -strategy, although he mentions it at the end. Rather the overall tone is centered on the advise to manage Ukraine crisis in a way to find a wedge between different European powers and the Anglo-Americans, which I also think is the best strategy for Russia. I don’t believe though that Iran should concern herself with these matters excessively. The circumstances have produced a turn of events that if managed with care by IRI will be extremely beneficial to Iranian overall interest even if Russia choose to continue the same path towards Iran she is following inside P5+1. And it looks to me that the ones on the helm are wise enough to have grasped this.

  235. fyi says:

    ataune says:

    September 23, 2014 at 10:25 pm

    I agree.

  236. Kathleen says:

    U.S. publicly in Syria. More killers killing killers. Libya in shambles, Iraq in shambles, Syria in shambles…Gaza in shambles. Is that the U.S. Israeli agenda?

    Leveretts were pushing for U.S. Assad direct negotiation several years ago. Based on I believe 50% of the Syrian population supporting Assad. Now hundreds of thousands dead, injured, displaced. Sure seems like a deadly pattern that the U.S. pushes. No need to wonder why people in those regions believe that a New Crusade is going on. How many Muslims have been killed by the U.S. taking the “containment” lid off?

    No mention on main stream outlets of innocent Syrians now being killed by U.S. missiles etc . Never a mention of how many Iraqi people killed, injured, displaced as a direct consequence of the U.S. invasion.

    Are U.S. warmongers (Feith, Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Kristol and war team) winning? Syria was on the PNAC, Clean Break team’s hit list. Is this new U.S. direct tactic in Syria a back door attempt to take Assad out?

  237. Karl.. says:


    Its more, just today we got this:

    If Obama was white he would be condmned to hell for this. Bush is like a school girl to this warcriminal named Obama.

  238. James Canning says:


    Some of those who support US attacks on Isis targets in Syria, indeed hope this will lead later to attacks on Syrian army etc. I think such attacks would be foolish.

  239. James Canning says:


    Are you arguing that war in the Gulf would do less damage to the economy of the EU, than is caused by the sanctions against Iran?

  240. James Canning says:


    China believes war in the Gulf would cause more economic damage than is caused by the sanctions against Iran. (For that matter, China does benefit to some extent, from those sanctions.) Is China’s view “Eurocentric”?

  241. James Canning says:


    Israel indirectly helped to bring about civil war in Syria, by failing to make peace with Syria in 2008. In my judgment.

  242. James Canning says:


    Interesting that you define Iran’s “strategic autonomy” as possession of nukes. This means that, in your view, Iran does not have “strategic autonomy”.

  243. James Canning says:


    To clarify, are you arguing that Iran should keep the sanctions in place, and incur more of them?

  244. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 24, 2014 at 1:52 pm

    You asked me the following:

    “… provide a single example of the “strategic autonomy” you claim the EU is demanding Iran give up”.

    I have done so as well as provided you with examples of where Iran had exercised her strategic autonomy.

    I believe your rhetorical response to be pathetic.

  245. James Canning says:


    I asked you to provide an example of the “strategic autonomy” you claim the EU is demanding Iran give up. You instead gave instances of what you believe represent “strategic autonomy” by Iran. Give one example of a position taken by Iran you claim the EU demands Iran give up.

  246. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 24, 2014 at 2:17 pm

    I have already answered you.

  247. James Canning says:


    Do I take it you are claiming the EU demands Iran stop giving support to the Palestinians? This is not true.

  248. James Canning says:

    Sir John Sawers, head of MI6, told the Financial Times recently that revolutionary change in the Muslim world is impossible to manage and will normally end up making thins worse for western interests and values. (FT Sept. 20/21). I of course agree. Obama should pay close attention to Sir John’s insight.

  249. Jay says:

    James Canning says:
    September 24, 2014 at 1:42 pm

    You are spewing nonsense because you know you were caught being “imperial”.

    I simply demonstrated to you that your own line of argument suggest Britain is being irrational. Having recognized that, you are kicking up a lot of dust hoping people won’t notice the mess!

  250. fyi says:

    James Canning says:

    September 24, 2014 at 2:47 pm

    EU wants Iran to stop supplying Palestinians with military aid.

    EU desires Iran to dismantle Hezbollah.

  251. Karl.. says:

    obama gets more extreme by every day
    as I said before, all these wars just make it easier for taking more aggressive stance against Iran but also other states like Russia, Syria etc.
    There is so demonstrations against US in the world today in the west.

  252. Karl.. says:

    no demonstrations^

  253. Nasser says:

    As one commentator to the article notes: “What’s good for the goose, is good for the gander”


  254. Karl.. says:

    The queen in the UK seems quite like a nasty dictatorship

  255. James Canning says:


    The issue is whether Iran will be able to get rid of the sanctions if it makes a deal with the P5+1. You have in effect argued Iran should keep the sanctions in place in order to be able to help the Palestinians and Hezbollah.

    I do not think the EU is demanding Iran stop helping the Palestinians and Hezbollah.

    One might argue, however, that providing weapons to the Palestinians is not doing them a favour.

  256. James Canning says:


    I think it obvious that Britain and the EU would be damaged economically by war in the Gulf. And obvious that such damage would be greater than what is incurred as a result of sanctions against Iran.

    Where is the “mess”? Simple logic.