Obama’s Looming War of Aggression in Syria and the Pathologies of America’s Iran Debate

As the Obama administration manufactures its “case” for military aggression against Syria in the coming days or weeks, we want to highlight an interview that Hillary did with Zeinab al-Saffar when we were in Beirut earlier this summer; the interview is now available on Al Mayadeen’s Web site, see here.  Hillary’s account of how the United States self-servingly demonizes non-Western countries that get in its way seems highly applicable to the current discussion—it hardly merits the label “debate”—about attacking something in Syria, ostensibly because of claims that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against civilians last week in Ghouta, an eastern suburb of Damascus.  The frame for such demonization, Hillary notes, is inevitably driven by and bound up with    

“the United States’ way of going to war.  The United States doesn’t go to war, it says, to protect its interestsThe United States says it’s going to war to ‘liberate’ peoples—whether they’re liberating people in Cuba, Vietnam, Iraq, and prospectively IranAnd the way the American people is conditioned to accept it (and, essentially, world opinion as well) is that American experts put out a narrative about these various countries—whether it’s Cuba, Vietnam, Iraq, or now Iran—they put out a narrative about how repressive that society is, how illegitimate its government is in terms of its domestic politics, and how irrational it is in its foreign policy.  We’ve seen this in country after country that the United States has invaded or tried to invade to overthrow its government.” 

Of course, no one anticipates that President Obama is about to order a U.S.-led invasion of Syria.  But, since Obama’s foolish declaration in August 2011 that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad “must go,” the United States has been committed to the Syrian government’s overthrow.  And the demonization of Syria’s government as repressive, illegitimate, and irrational has proceeded apace, exactly along the lines described by Hillary.  Now the demonization focuses on unsubstantiated allegations of the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons as a justification for the United States to use military force against it—just as concocted claims about Saddam Husayn’s weapons of mass destruction were central to building the case for invading Iraq in 2003.     

Make no mistake, U.S. military action against Syria will be fragrantly illegal (not that President Obama’s senior advisors, most members of Congress, or much of the American public will care).  Nevertheless, the Obama administration is gearing up for precisely such action—and for entirely self-generated reasons.  It was Obama who declared that Assad “must go.”  It was Obama who declared that chemical weapons use was a “red line.”  It was Obama who put himself in a position where he can’t entertain the possibility that Syrian oppositionists used chemical weapons, because that would destroy his administration’s Syria policy.  And because Obama took these ill-considered and illegal positions, he must now use American military power to preserve his “credibility.” 

Obama took these positions, the “credibility” of which he must now defend by engaging in overt aggression, in no small part because American foreign policy elites believe that bringing down the Assad government will undermine the Islamic Republic of Iran.  In her interview for Al Mayadeen, Hillary discusses the evolution of our own thinking about the Islamic Republic, how America should engage it, and what are the real obstacles to a more realistic and effective American posture toward Tehran. 

In particular, she charts the progress from our earlier advocacy of a U.S.-Iranian “grand bargain” (whereby America would “talk Iran into agreeing with American positions on Hizballah, on the nuclear issue, on the Palestinian issue, on a range of things”) to our recognition that “something much more profound and deep” is required—that the United States needs “to come to terms with and accept” a fiercely independent Islamic Republic, in much the same way that President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger came to terms with and accepted the People’s Republic of China in the early 1970s.  She also recounts the attacks we have faced—first from the right, when we were criticizing President George W. Bush’s handling of Iran policy, followed by much of the left, when we began making the same criticisms of Obama’s posture toward Iran.  In this context, Hillary argues that our biggest offense has been to challenge the deeply held American myth “that Iranians were demanding to be liberated by the United States, but not liberated by an American tank, but by the great American ideas and great American values, that everyone wants, deep in their heart, to be secular liberals…if you questioned that in the United States, as we did, you really were vilified.” 

Our experience strongly suggests that the biggest obstacles to genuine revision of U.S. policy toward the Islamic Republic are some fundamental aspects of American political culture.  As Hillary points out, “to accept an Islamist political order, [the United States] would have to give up the pursuit of hegemony, the pursuit of dominance.  This idea that we can use the excuse of what’s called American exceptionalism—that the United States is a unique force for good in the world—to invade other countries to ‘liberate’ them, we’d have to give that up, because we’d have to recognize that there is some legitimacy to other political orders, particularly ones that are Islamist.  And that’s especially relevant in the Middle East that is so important in geostrategic terms.”   

The problem, though, is that “hegemony may be nice in theory—if you could get it, if you could rule the world, that might be a nice idea for some Americans in theory—but you cannot get it in the Middle East, because you are up against Islam.  You cannot do it; you cannot defeat that.  For the United States to have any strategic influence in this vital part of the world, we argue in our book, we have to come to terms with that—just as we could not defeat one billion people in China who wanted to have their independence.  It’s a very similar situation.”

But it seems that United States is not yet ready to come to terms with this reality.  And so, in another vain attempt to get at the Islamic Republic of Iran, America is about to engage in illegal aggression against one of the Middle East’s most avowedly secular governments—a government that, like the Islamic Republic, actually fights the kind of violent (and anti-American), al Qaida-affiliated extremism that some U.S. “allies” work so hard to promote.          

–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett


336 Responses to “Obama’s Looming War of Aggression in Syria and the Pathologies of America’s Iran Debate”

  1. James Canning says:

    Chris Harmer, a senior naval analyst, says US cruise missile strikes on Syria will likely prove counter-productive.

  2. James Canning says:

    And bravo, Leveretts, for noting the stupidity of an American attack on a secular Arab gov’t. As we saw in Libya. And Iraq.

  3. James Canning says:

    Yes, regrettable and foolish declaration by Obama in 2011 that “Assad must go”.

    He should have given strong backing to Russian effort to set up a peace conference, with Iran in attendance.

  4. masoud says:

    There will be less opposition to this war than the Lybian war, while there certainly is the prospect that the situation can degenerate to a point that is at least as bad as the Iraq fiasco.

    In addition to all the usual talking points, we should note how completeley and utterly the anti-war movements in the West have been defeated over the past decade. We need to ask ourselves why this is.

    My answer:
    It makes no sense to oppose the war and support the troops(or for that matter oppose the war, and support the nation). As Bush said: you are either with them or against them. Wider publics will ignore and disregard any mixed messages.

  5. James Canning says:


    Jeffrey Feltman presumably is aware the Syrian gov’t agreed to attend a peace conference, with no preconditions. Iran does not need to pursuade Syrian gov’t on this issue.

  6. Fiorangela says:

    “Make no mistake, U.S. military action against Syria will be fragrantly illegal ***(not that President Obama’s senior advisors, most members of Congress, or much of the American public will care).*** Nevertheless, the Obama administration is gearing up for precisely such action—and for entirely self-generated reasons. It was Obama who declared that Assad “must go.” It was Obama who declared that chemical weapons use was a “red line.” It was Obama who put himself in a position where he can’t entertain the possibility that Syrian oppositionists used chemical weapons, because that would destroy his administration’s Syria policy. And because Obama took these ill-considered and illegal positions, he must now use American military power to preserve his “credibility.” ”

    + + +

    A military attack on Syria will be FLAGRANTLY ILLEGAL.

    The president, the Congress, and the American people may not care, but members of the US military MUST care — or the Nuremberg Principles are meaningless.

    Principle I: “Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.”

    Principle III: “The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.”

    Principle IV: “”The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him”.

    This principle could be paraphrased as follows: “It is not an acceptable excuse to say ‘I was just following my superior’s orders'”.

    + + +

    US Military personnel are NOT moral robots; they do and must have moral agency.

    Moreover, The UN High Commission for Refugees provides availability for a moral choice insofar as the UNHCR offers refugee status to persons facing persecution for consciously objecting to participation in an illegal war.

    + + +

    While American pundits blather about whether or not to support Egypt’s military against supporters of Egypt’s elected leader, Americans are somnolent about the moral status of their own military force.

    The US military exists to protect the American people from foreign AND domestic threats.

    An act by which the Administration and the equally craven US Congress would launch the United States into an illegal war SHOULD BE RESISTED by MILITARY FORCE, including boots-on-the-ground in Washington, DC, if necessary.

  7. masoud says:

    fyi says:
    August 27, 2013 at 5:13 pm

    Feltman was feeling out the Rouhani administration on behalf of the war lobby. The US and Israel have waited until now to unleash their war because they thought that there is a chance they might have an ally in Rouhani.

    If Rouhani were onboard for ‘paying it forward’ yet again, and ‘sitting out’ this confrontation with the Takfiri’s for whatever demented reason, he’d be overruled.

  8. James Canning says:

    Persuade Syrian gov’t

  9. masoud says:

    Has anyone seen Javad Zarif interview on state television? The douchebag thinks the entire situation can be resovled through Iran giving Saudi Arabia security guaruntees.

    Bussed-in-Basiji was right about him.

  10. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    August 26, 2013 at 10:56 am

    I know. I was arguing from the point of view of massive loss of brownie lives. If US had not installed Saddam, if they had not made him attack Iran, if they had not provided him with chemical weapons, if they had let him be overthrown by Iranian military, if and if and if…., then lots of lives could be saved.

    The ruination was brought there by the white man fighting his religious fascist war.

    Though these are strategic failures but it is the brownies that are being killed. That was the point I was making. And the fact that the sickness of the white man can only be kept in check not by being nice to him, but by having nuclear deterrence.

    Though overall, I agree with you.

    As you noted, they are installing Alqaida bases all over Muslim world.

  11. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    August 26, 2013 at 11:02 am

    I agree. Though, I believe Iran would need to develop its own unique socio-politico-economic structure that can be rolled out as a model to the world. Such a process would start by dreaming and imagination. I do not know the status of imagination among the Iranian populace anymore or for that matter among the thinkers. Without imagination, human beings are nothing.

    Also I agree with you on the need for Iranian thinkers to have an informed independent critical multidimensional assessment of western civilization. Without this, Iran can never progress to its full potential. In fact, without this, Iran would be just a Shia mirror image of Wahabism. Let’s hope at least the thinkers in Iran have the humility to atleast accept such a need and if themselves incapable to do such a monumental task, then let their progeny take it up. One can only hope.

  12. Smith says:

    M. Ali says:
    August 27, 2013 at 5:32 am

    I am actually fond of listening to other’s ideas. What I hate, is ad hominem. The same you did. The same thing you said, can be applied to you. What I like is logic. Can you or for that matter, anyone else logically counter my or fyi’s arguments? Because as of now, you have not. All you do is ad hominem. Try to argue with logic.

    And I think you are confused as well. I am not the one who has been making arguments on 20% issue for years here. It is rather an infamous personality here who can not see beyond his white british nose and his mental complex that he is superior to Iranians and therefore he should not “allow” Iran to enrich/learn/defend/live. I do not know why you took the opportunity to attack me on that. My stance has been quite clear and it has not been about 20%. So much so for your “broad minded ness”.

  13. Smith says:

    Empty says:
    August 27, 2013 at 8:13 am

    Thank you for clarification.

  14. James Canning says:

    My daughter and I spent a wonderful week [in Syria] a few years ago and marvelled at the beauty of Palmyra. Whereever we went, we received such delighful hospitality from the Syrian people, and I am filled with sadness at the reports of the deaths of tens of thousands of people in this beauthful country. I also feel a little guilty as my grandfather, Sir Mark Sykes, signed the Sykes-Picot agreement. . .”
    — Christopher Sykes, writing in the Spectator 6 July.

  15. James Canning says:


    You think Saddam Hussein was “installed” by the US as dictator of Iraq?

  16. James Canning says:


    You seem to have difficulty comprehending the fact that Iran’s announcement of intent to treble production of 20 produced a very strong reaction in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries. The civil war in Syria in part is an element of that strong reaction to Iran’s announcement. Sadly.

  17. Smith says:

    Fiorangela says:
    August 27, 2013 at 6:20 pm

    That was a very amusing post. In effect a “politically pro-active” citizen of United States with conscience has given up on her political system/philosophy/ideology and is appealing to the military men for mutiny. Did I read that correctly? Is this the “exceptional” democracy? Is this the “city upon the hill”? Wow.

    No, Madam. That will not happen. Military is structured to fight wars, killing humans and not make peace. The latter is the responsibility of the political system. It is much deeper than that. Nuremberg trials could easily be the other way round, if Germany had won the war. This is what American General Curtis LeMay of world war ii had said:

    “I suppose if I had lost the war, I would have been tried as a war criminal. Fortunately, we were on the winning side.”

    And here is another American by the name of Garry Wills:

    “Only the winners decide what were war crimes”.

    The problem is not “morality”. Not at all. The problem is one race on planet earth thinks that it is better than others. Its ideology, religion, politics, economy etc etc are better than the rest. He thinks he is superior to other sub-humans. He thinks his needs take absolute and deadly precedent over other races lives. He thinks for example it is wrong for Syria or for that matter Kingdom of Potymia or Republic of Kilombolia to aid separatist movements in US or in UK, but it is ok, solely because he is white, to do the same in Syria or in Potymia or Kilombolia. You see, he is supreme. He is the master race. He can rape as he pleases. He is sick. Has been for centuries.

    There is no cure. There is no international law (all written and selectively enforced by the white man as per his wishes). The only option is for nations like Iran to be nuclear armed. In effect, we must live in perpetual fear of mutual destruction because of the sickness of white man. There is no other choice. Your preaching of “morality” has no effect. Absolutely not.

    United States is now a giant version of Umbrella Corporation. You are just an employee in that corporation. The sooner you see these facts the better. Meanwhile prepare to watch more brownie Syrians killed by this corporation. Citizen of a country that was not armed with nuclear weapons for its national defense. Just like all nations which this corporation or those that preceded it have attacked and maimed and raped in the past 500 years in the greatest genocidal wave the universe has ever seen.

  18. Kooshy says:

    Last time that Americans were lying to the world on someone’s WMD, to be creditable they find it necessary to draw some sketches and do a power point presentation in UN.
    This time the Americans and their european clients they know they are so discredited in the eye of the world that they don’t see any made up evidence would help to enhance their case for another illegal genocide.

  19. Fiorangela says:

    masoud says: August 27, 2013 at 6:21 pm
    fyi says: August 27, 2013 at 5:13 pm

    “”Mr Feltman shared the U.N. position that Iran, given its influence and leadership in the region, has an important role to play and a responsibility in helping to bring the Syrian parties to the negotiating table,” U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said.

    . . .

    Feltman discussed with Iranian officials “the worsening situation on the ground in Syria, including the U.N.’s grave concerns about the potential use of chemical weapons and how the U.N. can work together with Iran and other states to end the bloodshed and suffering of the Syrian people,” Haq said.

    Western powers are preparing for a possible attack against Syria to punish Assad for alleged poison gas attacks against civilians.”

    + + +

    Which dovetails (or hawk-tails, as the case may be) nicely with this report by Franklin Lamb for Counterpunch: http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/08/27/forcing-obama-into-prolonged-syrian-war/

    “A Saudi-Zionist discretely coordinated effort, . . . is being led by Bandar protégé, Adel A. al-Jubeir, the current Saudi ambassador and facilitated by Bahrain ambassador Houda Ezra Ebrahimis Nonoo, . . .Long known, for having myriad contacts at AIPAC HQ, and as an ardent Zionist . . .

    . . .according to one Congressional staffer, the organizers, as of 8/26/13 are blitzing US Congressional offices with “ fact sheets” making the following arguments in favor of an immediate sustained air assault. . . .

    . . .Bandar is arguing that Syrian threats to retaliate against Israel is only political posturing because Syria has never and will never launch a war against Israel, has no military capacity to do so and for the reason that Israel could level Damascus and the Baathist regime knows this well.

    In addition, the Prince and his partners insist that Iran will do nothing but complain because it has too much to lose. Iran will not response other than verbally and has no history of attacking the US or Israel and would not risk the unpredictable consequences of a military response by the Republic Guards or even some of its backed militia in Iraq or Syria. “

  20. fyi says:

    masoud says:
    August 27, 2013 at 6:21 pm

    Israel was not involved; this is a Joint Axis Powers-Persian Gulf Arabs undertaking.

    From its inception, in 2010, this was a March of Folly.

    I surmise that Iranians believe that the capability to wage war against the anti-government forces in Syria cannot be eradicated by Axis Powers attacks.

    I also believe since the Axis Powers are going to pay high political costs anyway launching another war of choice – Tonkin Incident or the Japanese one in China – they will do their utmost to kill Mr. Assad and his High Command and other government officials.

    I surmise that Iranians and Syrians also know that and believe that Axis Powers will fail.

    Once the initial air war stops and Mr. Assad shows up; the Axis Powers will have to escalate or stand down.

    I believe that they will stand down.

    But this attack will go in down as a supreme act of folly – at the level of the late Saddam Hussein’s attack against Kuwait.

  21. Pirouz says:

    Wars without UN approval. Unilaterally applied economic sanctions without UN approval.

    What’s the sense of having a UNSC or for that matter UN?

    Looking a lot like what transpired to bring down the League of Nations.

  22. fyi says:

    masoud says:
    August 27, 2013 at 6:25 pm

    He is a diplomat and his task is to float useful peaceful ideas.

    It does not hurt Iran to be on record for Peace and Prosperity.

    It does harm Axis Powers and Persian Gulf Arabs that they stand for war and bloodshed.

    Of course the situation cannot be resolved until the costs of these wars for Axis Powers and their allies go higher than they are now.

    My thesis that Long range nuclear munitions is currency of security in the coming age of barbarism is being yet again established – now in case of Syria.

  23. fyi says:

    Pirouz says:
    August 27, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    UN is dead, just like the Peace of Yalta that was underlying it.

    If Americans were smart, they would have let the sleeping dogs remain sleeping but no, they had to destabilize the entire planet and persist for decades on dismantling – de facto – the institutions the Peace of Yalta.

    Let us see if they and their European allies are going to like the shape of the things to come more.

    They will rue the world that they helped destroy.

  24. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 27, 2013 at 7:10 pm

    Yes, Mr. Canning, EU states are destroying a country because their Emperor told them to do so.

    Do you think the Commons is going to unseat the PM?

    I think not.

    The silver lining in this, of course, is the certain failure of Axis Powers.

    As for Mr. Obama’s failed presidency; his mistake was not to have gone to Tehran.

  25. fyi says:

    Smith says:
    August 27, 2013 at 6:45 pm

    I think attack on Syria has removed the possibility of any deal in 2014 on nuclear file.

  26. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    August 27, 2013 at 8:14 pm

    I agree. So much so for Mr. Rouhani’s wishes. I hope Iran’s nuclear munition factory is working 24/7 and the ICBM components are undergoing final testings for an eventual upcoming test. Syria will now descend into decades of bloodshed. Iran must not be allowed to become Syria. Battlegrounds should be kept outside of Iran’s borders.

  27. fyi says:

    Smith says:
    August 27, 2013 at 8:20 pm

    Yes. Mr. Khamenei stands vindicated.

    I think that the Iranian planners & leaders have surmised that they can live with war in Syria – I sketched the worst scenario for Karl in the previous thread.

  28. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    August 27, 2013 at 8:26 pm

    Not only Mr. Khamenei, but under his leadership, the entire Iranians nation. They voted for a peaceful solution. The Umbrella Corporation disregarded their white flag and choose more more wars.

    Though, Iran will not lose much in Syria, but it is really sad that hundreds of thousands will end up dead in coming years there. In order to satisfy the violent sick urge of the Umbrella Corporation.

  29. Smith says:

    Where is Photi?

    Syria does not have nuclear weapons. It is about to be attacked and maimed. And he is not here to defend his theory that a defenseless 8 year old girl left amongst a prison full of violent pedophiles is perfectly safe as long as she sits still and pretend to be weak and utter words of morality.

    The events are going contrary to his theory. It appears the girl is in mortal danger. Her weakness and high frequency voice uttering advise of morality is actually arousing the desire for sexual violence among the white men in the prison named planet earth. She is about to be raped. Like many before her.

  30. Fiorangela says:

    Smith says: August 27, 2013 at 7:37 pm

    “appealing to the military men for mutiny. Did I read that correctly?”

    No, not mutiny but do precisely what the Department of DEFENSE is supposed to do: protect the American people from foreign invaders.

    Syria is not a threat to the people of the United States.

    An attack on Syria by the United States as is being manipulated and propagandized by foreign aliens — Saudis and Israelis, one of which group has never registered as a foreign agent — IS a threat to the economic and political security of the people of the United States.

    Smith wrote: “Military is structured to fight wars, killing humans and not make peace.”

    If the US military is the best in the world, the least they should be able to do is find the right enemy and eliminate it.

  31. Smith says:

    Fiorangela says:
    August 27, 2013 at 8:47 pm

    Well, the US defense secretary heading the “Department of DEFENSE” has just ordered the military men to take positions around Syria.

    What you are calling is technically mutiny. There can not be two command structures controlling a single military. Either it takes its command from you or from secretary of defense.

    Syria and Israel, though not innocent, are being used as scapegoats for Umbrella Corporation’s deeds. The fact remains that both are minuscule and weak compared to Umbrella Corporation. It is rather the pathological fascination of Umbrella Corporation with these two entities which has spoiled them to this degree. Both at the board level and at employee level.

    It is not the job of the military to designate enemies. It is the job of the political structure in place. Military fights whoever it is ordered to. It has nothing to do with its quality of being “best” or “not best”. Otherwise, you will have a military dictatorship, with Generals running the political structure of the nation. At a technical level, military is a giant human killing machine. It cares not who the enemy is. It will kill whomever it has been ordered to by the executive officer of the Umbrella Corporation.

  32. Richard Steven Hack says:

    fyi: “Israel was not involved”

    Wrong. This entire effort is to benefit Israel in the short-term by removing two direct threats to it in the event of an Iran war. Israel was very much in the planning and instigation of this since day one. Reread Lamb’s report. This entire crisis is to enable Israel to do what it could not do in 2006.

  33. Smith says:

    Fiorangela says:
    August 27, 2013 at 8:47 pm

    Correction of typo in third paragraph: Saudi and Israel …

  34. Fiorangela says:


    It has been my experience that men who kill for a living have a more profound respect for life than others.

    Further, I recall a passage in a book by Ron Suskind: Suskind reflected on the situation of a British intelligence officer who had, at great personal risk, acquired eye-witness testimony that there were NO WMD in Iraq. He rushed to Washington to report this to the Bush administration just days before that Umbrella Corp undertook the corpsing of Iraq. Condoleeza Rice dismissed the information with a wave of the hand. The British officer and US intelligence officers with whom he had communicated were in despair.

    Suskind wrote that the British agent, since retired, was classically educated, and was well aware that fighting men who have been lied to “have been known to storm the castle.”

    An armed man who is trained to kill is a dangerous entity to toy with.

    The Umbrella Corporation is as out-of-control as it is because no other power on earth can hold it to account; it is backed by the enforcement power of the US military, the most heavily weaponized in the world.

    But they too are men and they are moral agents, not robots.

    At Nuremberg, men were hanged for lesser offenses than the US has carried out over the years since Nuremberg. The most egregious criminals think their crime spree will continue indefinitely; that is the nature of an addiction to power and to corruption. The laws of nature always intervene, sooner or later: Newton’s law will not be violated; the very force that sustains the Umbrella Corp in power will be its undoing.

    Deo volente.

  35. Smith says:

    Fiorangela says:
    August 27, 2013 at 9:16 pm

    “It has been my experience that men who kill for a living have a more profound respect for life than others.”

    I do not share your experience. Rather, mine has been that men who SAVE LIVES for a living have a more profound respect for life than others. Killing another human being profoundly changes one’s psyche forever. Almost always for worse. That is why all such killings have to be rationalized and “cleansed” through religion/ideology/Cult systemizations/etc/etc.

    “…since retired, was classically educated…”

    Must have had quite an old education. Times are gone when peasants were summoned to fight wars. Since very early on, beginning with British Empire, they understood that imperial wars can not be won by peasant armies. The peasants by nature usually had a higher moral standards than their kings, so upon discovering the immorality of the King’s war, they would storm the palace [Apparently this is where the education of that British agent ended].

    That is why professional killers were hired by subsequent kings. They used to call them mercenaries (today they are known as contractors). The idea was so successful that the imperial nations from then on, have kept standing militaries, in effect having employing the mercenaries permanently. They are known as professional armies and over the course of the past 500 years have become exceedingly efficient, obedient and brainless. They never storm the castle. They protect it to the end. Since they are part of the castle’s immorality. They have nothing to gain by bringing down the castle, their livelihood depends on it. In your jargon if I am not mistaken, they call them military industrial complex.

    If necessary they will defend the castle against the employees of the Umbrella Corporation too, eg. yourself. Of course that only becomes necessary in extreme cases since the peasant employees also depend on the corporation for their livelihood.

    The history has it that Umbrella Corporation before/during the Vietman war used to also have a peasant army to augment its main imperial professional killer army. But the nature of peasants and their protests during that war, taught UC a lesson that imperialism can no longer depend on mere Umbrella Corporation employees to defend the corporation.

    The employees just wanted their cars choking with bloody gasoline and lots of TV, sex and fast food. Such peasants could not be trusted to advance the interests of the corporation. That is why they dismantled the peasant army and now in US you have the most perfect and the most ruthless human killing machine ever devised in history. It can strike anywhere/anytime across the planet earth, killing million upon million. There will be no castle storming. Rest assured. Umbrella Corporation is safe.

    “The Umbrella Corporation is as out-of-control as it is because no other power on earth can hold it to account; it is backed by the enforcement power of the US military, the most heavily weaponized in the world.”

    The situation can change if Iran and three dozen other brownie/blackie countries go nuclear. Peace will return to earth. Under the assumption that the Umbrella Corporation is rational and not suicidal.

    “But they too are men and they are moral agents, not robots.”

    They are robots. Worse they are murderers/rapists/torturers bonded in a cult and completely loyal to the cabal running the UC.

    “The laws of nature always intervene, sooner or later: Newton’s law will not be violated; the very force that sustains the Umbrella Corp in power will be its undoing.”

    Maybe. Newton’s law does not exist anymore, strictly speaking. It was replaced by General Relativity of Einstein.

  36. Sakineh Bagoom says:

    “There is no reason to doubt all six powers (P5+1) do not want Iran to build nukes. (Not the Iran wants to build them.)”

    Please James , spell it out for us. Wanting or allowing? Which is it? You are an English speaker.

  37. Empty says:


    I agree with Richard Steven Hack. Israel has been very much involved and a key player in the US decision-making apparatus in this war. They are also counting on خودشان را به موش مردگی زدن (a historical tactic on their part) when push comes to shove. They are severely miscalculating things. As you may be well aware, this would be not another nail but the last nail in the metaphorical coffin.

    The “Hezbollah of Syria” and “Basij of Syria” will be in a first hand intensive practical training program, that is for sure. To be honest with you, ten years ago, I could not have imagined a Christian Basiji or a Christian Hezbollahi. Today, you can meet them in person if you’re in the right place and at a right time.

  38. Smith says:

    Empty says:
    August 27, 2013 at 11:18 pm

    Christian Basiji is really a sign if times. That was a good one.

    While Israel is of course involved, but these outposts like Saudi Arabia and Israel are completely dependent on US for their existence. Even their core legitimacy comes from US, let alone their economies, food, weapons etc etc. They can not exist without US, while US can exist and prosper without them. It is hard to believe that this fact is not known by the highest in command in US or for that matter the ordinary citizens.

    Nowadays whenever US does something completely immoral, the American apologists jump in and rationalize this as being because of Israel or Saudi Arabia. Truth could not be farther from reality. These entities can not move an inch without first taking permission of US. It is all smoke screen you see. I remember in school yard, kids used to go around and hit other kids, slapping them and then say: man naboodam, dastam bood taghsir e astinam bood (it was not me, it was my hand and it was the fault of my sleeve). Israel now has become the sleeve. Saudi the hand. Or vice versa.

    The complete responsibility of one’s deeds rests with oneself. One can not blame others for the deeds that one does. Israel and Saudi Arabia are weaklings. The American libertarian and liberals blaming these completely dependent entities for their misdeeds are actually forgetting that both are extensions of United States. They are literally attached to America. Seamlessly.

  39. Smith says:

    Empty says:
    August 27, 2013 at 11:18 pm

    And the reason they need this smokescreen is because they have to prove and rationalize for the world and even to themselves that they are the “good guys”. They are pure. And the immoralities of them can not be attributed to them. But to their hand and sleeve. They are themselves blameless and sinless. How America be this evil. Of course not. It is because of Israel, or Saudi Arabia or Taiwan or South Korea. They are sick. As I have times and again said.

  40. Smith says:

    Fiorangela says:
    August 27, 2013 at 9:16 pm

    This is your CEO basically saying that, you have no other option but to trust the Umbrella Corporation. If you do not, then “we are going to have some problems”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ibc6QSV5ftw


  41. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    August 27, 2013 at 11:50 pm

    Empty says:
    August 27, 2013 at 11:18 pm

    I agree Israel / KSA can’t exist for more than a few weeks without US hegemony; EU countries are politically in same situation and economically are getting very close to a collapse if it was not for their luxury goods export to US. Unlike the time before 90’s their complete subservience on dictates of US is because their economies is completely tied and dependent to that of US and her hegemony on energy markets.

  42. Photi says:

    Smith says:
    August 27, 2013 at 8:34 pm

    Smith, where did i say syria was not going to be attacked?

    And i said nothing about an eight-year-old girl. you are trying to reason by analogy and in the process accusing me of the made up stuff in your analogy.

    You do an awful lot of projection, often accusing people of saying things they are not. It makes it near impossible to debate with you, because in reality you are only conversing with yourself and the preconceptions in your head.

  43. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    The important message this week did not come from Zarif but from Sardar Jazayeri who warned the US that Syria is a red line and any attack will have severe consequences for the White House.

    In general I would say that the old fogeys in Tehran are clueless about what to do with Saudi Arabia. They haven’t even correctly identified the problem.

    Like I’ve said many times before, nothing will change in the region as long as the ale Saud are in power.

    Any real Muslim or any human who cares about his fellow man for that matter- should start thinking about how to send these evil Najdis to hell- faster.

  44. m. ali says:

    isnt it a bit worrying that the Doctor has been out of office for less than a month and we are already fy having a war on our allies?

  45. Unknown Unknowns says:

    My my… the pich-e tarikhi is rife with unknown unknowns.

  46. Karl.. says:

    West say Iran is irrational and couldnt deal with nuclear technology.
    But is it Iran that recklessly start gets hysterical and start war every 2 or so years? The western wars shows who cant deal with their arms in a rational way.

    There is rumours btw that Egypt will reject western warships going to Syria through the Suez Canal.

  47. Karl.. says:


    Are we still going to hear you say “Uk want better relations with” Syria/Iran after UK, most likely, will start bombing Syria? Maybe you even support UK attacks on Syria?

  48. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    August 27, 2013 at 7:15 pm
    That argument makes no sense james,if the saudis had a problem with enrichment it would be with enrichment period and if they had a problem with amounts it would be with the amounts of 5% enriched not the tiny quantity of 20% enriched which the iranians continue to convert into fuel assemblies and which is under safeguards and every gram accounted for,and lastly if they had a problem with all of this then why havent they gone completely apeshit over the arak heavy water reactor that can cook natural uranium into plutonium,the answer is because none of these things really matter to the saudis or anyone else,if they have a problem it is with irans entire nuclear industry,not the 20% with which you have developed an ocd like preoccupation

  49. Empty says:


    Yes. I do do share similar views with you and Kooshy about the relationship between the US and Israel (aka the dog and its tail).

  50. Empty says:

    The 5 sites in Israel that, according to Mehrnews, will be targeted by Syrian forces and her allies in case of attacks on Syria are in the link below:
    http: // http://www.mehrnews.com/detail/News/2124652

    They include Dimona, Zalim military base, a military base in Zirfin(?), a missile launch base in southern part of Tel Aviv, and a missile manufacturing complex to which Syrian missiles take 9 minutes to reach (according to the text).

    Well, if Syria fires tens of missiles and hits even one or two of these targets, I’m prepared to consider Syria the winner of this episode in escalation. Just one or two good hits…I am not too demanding.

  51. Karl.. says:


    How could Syria be the winner? If Syria attack Israel, Israel will meet even bigger bombardment from Israel. I know Syria is more rational than that.

  52. M. Ali says:

    Maybe the war is Obama’s warning to Rohani. He realized that he couldn’t scare Ahmedinijad, but Rohani could probably be scared the way Khatami was scared, after the Afghanistan war

  53. Karl.. says:

    edit: “Syria will meet”

  54. M. Ali says:

    Masoud in this thread mentioned this,

    “, we should note how completeley and utterly the anti-war movements in the West have been defeated over the past decade. We need to ask ourselves why this is.”

    I want to address this. One of the biggest reasons we have had so many wars is due to the so-called anti-war, peace-loving liberals. It is these group of people that assist in villifying a nation so much that it is then easy to sell war to a nation and a world. These liberals have been villying Assad for the last decade or so, specially last three years, paving the way for war.

    It is the same people who would proudly say they were anti-war on Iran, and in the same breathe try to claim the elections was a fraud and the Iranians poor victims of a mullacracy dictatorship.

  55. Fiorangela says:

    In 1978, coincident with the announcement that he had been awarded the Nobel prize, Milton Friedman spoke to a crowded auditorium at University of Chicago. http://www.law.uchicago.edu/audio/friedman101578

    Among other things, he explained that Jewish people are successful because they know how to find and exploit the niches, the loopholes, the gaps in institutions, laws, and systems.

    An unspoken but obvious point is that a minority state such as Israel that seeks to wield superpower is forever dependent upon a larger entity for their success.

    As Chas Freeman (in a speech at Palestine Center, May 2011); Patrick Tyler (in his book, “Fortress Israel”); and on Aug 22, 2013 Max Blumenthal, interviewed by Paul Jay on The Real News have reported, Israel not only exploits niches, loopholes, and gaps in the law, they deliberately violate the laws of “western civilization” in an obviously successful effort to reduce the field they operate in to lawlessness and consequent unaccountability. No Israeli, nor American, has been called to appear before a Nuremberg tribunal, nor even a Rwandan-style Truth and Reconciliation process, to account for their manifold crimes against humanity.

    The Christian/Catholic establishment in the US have been the enablers (willing executioners?) of the impunity that Israel and US administrations have enjoyed. In 2007, Krista Tippet interviewed three experts on the life and thinking of Reinhold Niebuhr, with particular attention to how his perspective speaks to waging war. The experts agreed, with Jean Bethke Elshtain crystallizing the point that Neibuhr believed in the existence of evil — the result of original sin — and that the duty of the Christian is to punish evil. Thus, Elshtain argued, war on Iraq was appropriate and necessary.

    To the limited extent that I am conversant with Neibuhr’s philosophy, I find it wanting. He is over-reliant on Hebrew scriptures for his view of the nature of man — indeed, he equates writings in Hebrew scripture with the penultimate authority on the nature of man and morality. I find that view ignorant: other cultures have far more insightful mythologies that explain the nature of man, and the relationship of man to his environment and to his community. The wisdom and morality of Crazy Horse makes Genesis-Exodus-Leviticus look as primitive and barbaric as it is. Western “civilization” with its reliance on the mythos of Abraham eradicated Crazy Horse and all his family and world and culture.

    Elshtain’s pronouncements that “evil must be punished” misses an essential point: Who defines evil? Such pronouncements operate in a context-free environment; they do not and dare not ask questions such as “WHY is there the beginnings of a civil war in Syria (back in 2011, when Hillary Clinton perceived an opportunity to turn a localized protest into a nation-wide conflagration). People like Elshtain and Clinton dare not ask those questions in part because they cannot (any more than a laptop can be used like an ipad) and in part because they dare not (if they defined evil objectively, they would have to define their own actions as evil).

    They cannot ask such questions because, as Flynt Leverett reflected in a conversation at East West Institute in January 2013:

    “The US embarked on a twenty-year project in the Middle East to remake it with American preferences; to coerce political outcomes. … [This imperial impulse] is both culturally and politically so overdetermined in the United States. Culturally we have thought at least since Woodrow Wilson that unless we can basically make the rest of the world … look like us we can’t really be safe or secure.

    We also think that basically all people deep down really want to live like us so by trying to engineer these outcomes we are doing humanity a favor by doing this. When there’s ample evidence mounting that this is not congruent with reality.”

    I would add that that “overdetermined” cultural mindset is rooted in Christian subscription to the mythos of Hebrew scriptures, which, as King James well understood, made of imperium — the right to rule and enforce by power over life and death — a religious creed, a “divinely” revealed mandate.

    A major element in Neibuhr’s philosophy was the caution against arrogance, but that caution was honored in the breach in both Neibuhr’s activities in urging US engagement in war in Europe in the 1930s, and in Elshtain’s own support for war in Iraq. The committed the same intellectual error (I would say sin) that the US is in the process of committing today against Syria: Assad has been declared “evil” by fiat; we don’t need no stinkin’ evidence; fire those missiles. In 1991, Saddam was declared evil by fiat. They relied on the authority of the Hebrew scriptures to make those judgments.

    As a young man, Francis Bacon surveyed the process by which knowledge is proved; namely, the logical syllogism whose major premise relies on the authority of the Church. Bacon rejected that system of knowledge, the most important revolution in western history. Bacon insisted that nature — reality — was the first authority. Had Bacon’s process of discovering knowledge — truth — been relied upon rather than Elshtain’s/ Niebuhr’s diktat that “evil must be identified and punished,” the Bush administration might have stayed their hand and let the reconciliation process that Jordan’s King Hussein had set in motion, work its way to completion and the (relatively nonviolent) removal of Saddam’s forces from Kuwait. But as Jeffrey Engel has discovered in research in the George Bush archives, in the wake of the end of the Cold War, the Bush administration’s “over-determined” quest was to establish the US as the vanquisher of evil as it imagined it had been in World War II; the invasion of Kuwait offered an opportunity to punish evil, and to assign to the US the right to rule with life and death power. Engel stated that Bush administration decision makers were not in the least concerned with rescuing Kuwaitis from suffering.

    fyi will object to my critique of the notion that man is inherently evil, which Westerners inculcate into their psychological architecture based on Hebrew scriptural notions of original sin. Socrates taught that All men seek the good; to do otherwise is absurd. Which blueprint of human nature has brought more goodness to the world, and which has caused more suffering?

  56. Karl.. says:

    M.Ali & Masoud

    Interesting debate which struck me to, yes what we have now are liberal interventionists, what we had under Bush were right wing neocons. They all have the same goal, just using different paths to that goal.

    Try poiting out for the liberal today their hypocrisy in supporting wmd lies by Obama ala G W. Bush in Iraq…they are all in denial.

  57. Fiorangela says:

    Smith @ Aug 27 12:07 am:

    ““But they too are men and they are moral agents, not robots.”

    They are robots. Worse they are murderers/rapists/torturers bonded in a cult and completely loyal to the cabal running the UC. ”

    = = =

    Does that imply that those hanged at Nuremberg, and Eichmann, were the last warriors in the modern era who were expected to hold to moral standards, and that subsequently, that standard does not apply?

    The warrior Crazy Horse respected his adversary. To be sure, Lakota killed their adversary, but they respected the warrior and did not kill wantonly. Similarly, Lakota did not kill buffalo or deer or elk wantonly, but for food and sustenance. Joseph Campbell studied Native American prayers and rituals of thanksgiving addressed to the animals who surrendered their lives so that Lakota, and Sioux, and Shawnee might live. Those prayers and rituals expressed gratitude to the animal, and a recognition that they were taking a sacred life.

    How dramatically different is that mindset from the Abrahamic cult that ritually sacrifices animals to propitiate a god in a contracted transaction, a bargained-for exchange for the promise of dominance over the lands and lives of other human beings.

    Lakota and their fellows, and the buffalo herds that had sustained them for centuries, were eradicated in transactions by white settlers extending “manifest destiny” and railroads across their lands. Today, deer and other animals are killed by the thousands and their corpses left to rot on American highways, as “the light of the nations” spreads the artificial exchange of capitalism across nature’s landscape.

  58. Photi says:

    Unknown Unknowns,

    Meant to say hi to you the other day when you provided the link to your site. Mashallah for all your hard work. i ALready read a great piece b y Professor Algar about Islamic conceptions of justice, good and evil.

  59. James Canning says:

    M. Ali,

    Khatami was “scared”? I doubt it. And Iran helped the US to overthrow the Taleban in Afghanistan. Idiot neocons and other elements of Israel lobby blocked Khatami’s effort to improve relations with the US.

  60. James Canning says:


    Over dinner in the late 1980s, Milton Friedman asked the table what was the current percentage of Great Russians in the total population of the Soviet Union. I replied that it apparently was just above 50%. Friedman and I agreed this meant the USSR was virtually certain to collapse in coming years. Curiously, Robert Gates at the CIA seems to have been unaware of the importance of this issue.

  61. James Canning says:


    The Saudis and other Gulf countries in fact did react very strongly to Iran’s announcment of intent to treble enrichment to 20. Iran blundered badly.

    The only reason to push for a trebling of 20U production was to test the reaction of P5+1 and the West. Serious blunder.

  62. James Canning says:


    Iran wrecked Hague’s (and Cameron’s) plan to improve relations between the UK and Iran.

    Saudi Arabia and Qatar put a great deal of effort into seeking to convince Bashar al-Assad that he needed to put more distance between Syria and Iran.

    I do not support attacks on Syria, from any country.

  63. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 28, 2013 at 12:58 pm

    So we need to wait until the percentage of European population that are Protestants declines below 35%.

  64. James Canning says:


    There are numerous people in “the West” who support Iran’s domestic unclear power programme including control of nuclear fuel cycle.

    Exlain to me why it was “rational” for Iran to announce its intent to treble production of 20U.

  65. Karl.. says:


    Of course everything is Iran’s fault. YOU will have no problem supporting a war against Iran when that day come, you will say: its “Iran’s fault”.

    How are you going to explain that UK want better relationship with Syria now when Hague and Cameron are about to attack? Are you going to say its “Syria’s fault” here too?

  66. Karl.. says:


    Iran havent had any “intent” to “treble” 20U. And if they had such an intent it would be legal, there is nothing in IAEA principles forbidding a state to “treble” its uranium. Apparently you again insinuate that Iran is building nukes.

  67. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    August 28, 2013 at 1:02 pm
    sorry james you`re going to have to do better than that,just because you say it is so doesnt make it so.I was expecting you to come up with some actual arguments to try and counter all the holes I blew in your 20% theory but instead you just re state it.
    Why would they have a problem with 20% and not with 5%?,that doesnt make any sense,in addition the amount of 20% material iran has stays constant because the iranians are converting it into fuel assemblies,by comparison the 5% stockpile continues to grow,perhaps the saudis like you are fixated on 20% beyond the point of common sense

  68. Ataune says:


    Iran intent was not to test the reaction of p5+1. The clear intent was to have roughly between 100-150 Kilos of a backup 20% EU so a reserve is always available for forging the fuel rods for the [future] reactor[s]. As reminder, this was done after US broke the agreement that she have tacitly had with Iran through intermediaries (Turkey and Brazil). Iran never exeeded the above mentioned ‘threshold’ – later declared by israel to be her redline – and never intended to do so. The latest IAEA report, which just came out, attest to this.

  69. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    August 28, 2013 at 1:11 pm
    Iran was quite within its legal rights to increase production,why it did so was undoubtedly because of the sanctions and military threats of the west,to show the west that these policies would only have the opposite effect to the one intended[is that rational enough for you james],so once again you can blame this situation on the stupidity or perhaps desperation of the west,its not the first time that its actions have brought about the opposite of what was intended

  70. fyi says:

    Sineva says:
    August 28, 2013 at 1:45 pm

    You are wasting their time.

    Mr. Canning knows and agrees that Iran, for the reasons of state cohesion and survival, needs nuclear weapons.

    He also knows that Axis Powers position is the overthrow of the Islamic Republic.

    What he is advocating a diplomatic and technical charade under which Axis Powers can reach most of their goals without having to attack Iran to destroy the Islamic Republic.

    What he fails to understand is that the power to undo nuclear Iran, much less overthrow the Islamic Republic does not exist in international arena.

  71. James Canning says:


    I support Iran’s domestic nuclear power programme, including enriching to 5% or lower.

    There is significant support for this posture in “the West”.

    I do not think Iran would be allowed to build nukes. This simply is not an option.

    A deal with P5+1 needs to be made, even if only a partial deal, and implicit to some extent. Working around the Israel lobby is essential. For Iran.

  72. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 28, 2013 at 2:11 pm

    Dream on.

  73. kooshy says:

    One can argue that today, the entire political, economic and existential security of US and her EU client states in its current form depends on securing the hegemony of US on the Arabian Peninsula as a US satrapy. What this means is that the entire western viability currently is dependent on petrodollars without petrodollars the entire western economies will collapse with it goes the political and military power that comes with these economies. Global demand for the petrodollars, and associated concurrent investment (parking) of excess currency on the western economies, can be maintained as long as KSA and the Arabian Peninsula are completely dominated by the US. There are few strategic tools at US/west disposal that eases up maintaining hegemony on these states including Islam sectarian divide, energy and natural resources, The 2 most important holly sites in Islam, Israel/Arab conflict, Egypt and Pakistan Military’s dependency on west, still with all these tools and assets to maintain the peninsula’s security the western states have a phenomenal need of having multiple bases in and around the peninsula. This is where currently this Gordian nut is, good luck if anyone can untangle that without a world war.

  74. James Canning says:


    I tend to believe the US very stupidly blocked Iran’s application to buy nuclear fuel for the TRR because neocon warmongers in fact wanted Iran to enrich to 20.

    In your view, because Iran was entitled under NPT to enrich to 20, the announcement of intent to treble production of 20U was “rational”. Even if it wrecked Hague’s programme of improving UK relations with Iran.

  75. James Canning says:


    If Iran fails to make a deal with P5+1, there will be more sanctions. Do you think Iran can get by with no oil exports by sea?

  76. James Canning says:

    Is it fair to think that some of those who push for an American attack on Syria, do so with a view toward damaging or wrecking Rouhani’s wish to improve Iran’s relations with the West?

  77. fyi says:

    kooshy says:
    August 28, 2013 at 2:14 pm

    I think that the Iranian proposal to Axis Powers, repeatedly made by Dr. Ahmadinejad during his presidency, was “partnering in the management of the world.”

    This offer was rejected since the aim was always destruction of the Islamic Republic; which Axis Powers’ analysts mistakenly equated with another USSR.

    Now, of course, Axis Powers are escalating to strategic Nowhere in Syria yet again.

    Let them; that is only bound to harm them and their local allies.

    I think Iranian leaders must redouble their public propaganda of Peace, Development, and Islam.

    Axis Powers and their local allies are standing for more war and more bloodshed.

    And people tend to get tired of war and bloodshed after 6 years.

  78. James Canning says:

    How much money was that British company offered, to smuggle a chemical weapon into Syria, to stage an attack (so Syrian gov’t could be blamed)?

  79. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 28, 2013 at 2:18 pm

    The power to blockade Iran does not exits.

    And yes, Iran can survive without exporting any oil; not now but the work is already in progress to reach that aim.

    Iran cannot survive multiple nuclear attacks against her cities; that is metaphysically certain.

  80. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 28, 2013 at 2:20 pm

    Americans do not need anyone to push them; they are too degenerated for that.

    Empirically, what Dr. Rouhani was going to do has now become academic; like the supposed willingness of the late President Kennedy to pull US troops out of Viet Nam.

  81. kooshy says:

    Sorry conclusion got cut off

    In conclusion the only way that there can be a viable and effective antiwar movement in western imperialist states is if, and when, the citizens of these western states in Europe and USA feel a real painful economic collapse and that is only possible when unlike the past 5 years, massive printing of dollars become useless to save these economies, which means when the petrodollars will not have global demand and that will happen if KSA has collapsed and the peninsula is destabilized. I would think before getting to that point the western states will instigate an all-out world war to muddy the theater in order to increase their opportunity to reinstate hegemony.

  82. Ataune says:


    To have its minimal and normal functions my body needs meal 3 times a day. Someone who is pretending to improve his relationship with me is asking me not to eat one of the meals per day so that he is able to befriend me. He’s asking me to choose between my own health and his friendship. Do you think this is a reasonable and logical request? Doesn’t it show that maybe he’s not so keen to improve relationship with me and has other malicious motives? Either you consider Hague as “stupid” for not understanding this simple equation or you consider your audience stupid enough for not understanding the purpose her.

  83. James Canning says:

    @Ataune – – What “meal” do you think William Hague wished to deny Iran, when he proposed for the UK to improve its relations with Iran?

  84. Ataune says:

    Improving her industrial and technological base for example. The way UK herself did one or two hundred years ago.

  85. James Canning says:


    Yes, I do think JFK would not have put US troops into combat in South Vietnam. And his assassination obviously made a huge enlargement of the war possible.

    Iran needs the deal. Do you think Iran can get by without exporting oil by sea?

  86. James Canning says:


    You think the US lacks sufficient ships to stop Iranian exports of oil from the Gulf? Wrong.

  87. Richard Steven Hack says:

    As I said….

    Quietly, Israel Drives US Attack on Syria
    Israeli Spies Claimed Secret ‘Proof’ of Chemical Weapons Attack

    Of course, Obama knows it’s all BS. This is what proves that he was on board with this since day one. All this nonsense about his “reluctance” is just that. His only concern was how to get the war started without tarnishing his Nobel Peace Prize, because of his narcissism.

    The same applies to starting an Iran war – he wants to, he just wants to do it in some way that won’t blow back on him instantly.

  88. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Gareth Porter reveals…

    In Rush to Strike Syria, U.S. Tried to Derail U.N. Probe

  89. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    Masoud, M.Ali, Empty,

    As long as so-called liberal and progressive people in the west just go on marches and sit-ins, write blogs and get their felans pierced, nothing- absolutely nothing- is gonna change.

    Now if they start killing a few of these politicians…you get the picture.

    Apparently they’re to busy with “the comfortable life”.

    Nothing- absolutely nothing- in the world, is as exhilarating as overthrowing an unjust regime…trust me on this one.

  90. Richard Steven Hack says:

    And we all know what Obama’s promises are worth…

    West: Attacks Will ‘Punish’ Syria, Not About Regime Change
    White House Says Regime Change Not Even Considered

  91. Karl.. says:


    “Punish syria” such twisted statement.
    With that logic, I assume palestinians could send some rockets to “punish” Israel too?

  92. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 28, 2013 at 2:50 pm

    The United States has to gather all her naval assets from all over the world to do blockade duty in the Persian Gulf.

    Sure, she has enough ships for that; if she abandons every other area of naval operations.

    But these are all hypotheticals; when that time comes, we shall all witness how that blockade running is going to develop.

    Americans and Europeans are teaching Iran how to be a great power; one has to be grateful to them for such lessons; beating the average chaotic Iranians on the head until some thing resembling strategic sense emerges within the body politic.

    I am specially grateful to EU states for having destroyed – through outright leverage – a 300-year old multi-faceted relationship – it really bolstered the arguments of those such as Mr. Khamenei and Mr. Shariatmadari and discredited the Euro-American classes (largely salary-men).

  93. fyi says:

    Richard Steven Hack says:
    August 28, 2013 at 3:15 pm

    On this I agree with you; Axis Powers have to kill the Syrian High Command as well as Mr. Assad.

    They have committed too much and escalated too much to do otherwise.

  94. Smith says:

    ” …. the citizens of these western states in Europe and USA feel a real painful economic collapse and that is only possible when unlike the past 5 years, massive printing of dollars become useless to save these economies ….”

    Wrong. They are able to enforce such ponzi schemes on the world population because they control all the world’s legal, financial, “moral”, political, propaganda etc etc check points. They are able to do that because of their military power. They have military power because of their vastly superior technology. And they have such sophistication in technology because of they are light years ahead in abstract sciences such as theoretical physics, pure and applied mathematics, bio-sciences etc etc.

    The only shortcut to safeguard one’s survival against them, is to have survivable long range nuclear munitions as fyi has been saying. The technology is 50 years old and within the grasp of most nations and since the white man science has not yet produced a superior weapon eg. antimatter bomb, such a strategy still works.

    But in order to compete with the white man on a civilizational level, would be to produce a society vastly superior in every aspect to the white man society. This would need fundamental work be done in areas such as sociology, philosophy, sciences, law, etc etc.

    Personally I do not think any state would be able to implement a civilizational level endeavor without first securing itself with nuclear weapons. Or the white man will kill every last one of them.

  95. fyi says:

    kooshy says:
    August 28, 2013 at 2:33 pm

    I think that in order to bring about the removal of Al Saud from Arabia, you need to have credible alternative to them.

    Ikhwan were the only remotely credible alternative to them; that was why they had to make sure that the Ikhwan fail in Egypt (and I suppose shortly in Tunisia).

    Unfortunately, Ikhwan disappointed very many Saudi Nationals who were not Wahabi; Mr. Mursi’s performance left many people wondering about him and Ikhwan – even before the overthrow of Ikhwan.

    So, I believe that Al Saud are secure for now and I suspect that this has been also the assessment of many in Iran.

  96. Smith says:

    Photi says:
    August 28, 2013 at 2:20 am

    You are a liar and not worthy of discussion with. The problem with people like you is that you have absolutely no problem with the white man t hold 10,000s of nuclear weapons. But you hold the view that white man should not allow Iran to have even 10 nukes. This is the bottom of discussion with your types. You want things for yourself that you do not want for others. Otherwise I advise you to disarm completely and live without nuclear weapons for the next 70 years while the colored man holds nukes. The bottom line of your logic is that all humans are not equal, you are better than the rest. I abhor such thinking.

  97. James Canning says:

    R S Hack,

    Interesting piece by Gareth Porter that you linked.

    How sure could John Kerry be, that the UN inspectors would not be able to find evidence?

  98. Richard Steven Hack says:

    I see Professor Dan Joyner continues to argue that as long as Obama sends “a few cruise missiles” into Syria, then it’s all right under international law…

    Scratch a lawyer, find an imperialist…

    Now What? Responding to Alleged Chemical Weapons Attack in Syria

  99. fyi says:

    Richard Steven Hack says:
    August 28, 2013 at 3:47 pm

    There is no International Law; what was left of it is being dismantled primarily by Axis Powers.

    They will regret that; they are not Omnipotent.

  100. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 3:35 pm

    Yes, one can run and pass them, that works only if you have time to run as fast, if not then you better think how you can break their legs so they no longer can run, to have time enough to catch up. The only way for that to happen is if one can meaningfully destabilize the peninsula. If that happens the western economies will collapse with that goes all the other might they have.

    As a Shieh county Iran/ Iraq can’t do that fyi is very right you need a credible organized Suni entity that is why the MB pulled down only after an incompetent leader was allowed to run and make the MB discredited.

  101. Karl.. says:

    August 28, 2013 at 3:28 pm

    Yes, remember Libya, where NATO bombed until there were regime change although no such mandate were given in the resolution by the UNSC.

  102. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 3:35 pm

    Smith what is a white men? I consider myself a white man, I am an Iranian man, in your hierarchy of skin colors what color do I get, instead of subverting the focus, isn’t better to use Europeans, Americans, westerners, etc.

    I hope you are not deliberately using a dividing language over and over in this civil forum, to discourage whomever white man likes of “photi” who willingly and without label are and can be joining the struggle against western imperialism.

    Think about your language and tone, it is offensive not only to the white men but to all men.

  103. Smith says:

    Fiorangela says:
    August 28, 2013 at 11:59 am

    “Does that imply that those hanged at Nuremberg, and Eichmann, were the last warriors in the modern era who were expected to hold to moral standards, and that subsequently, that standard does not apply?”

    No. They were not the first and will not be the last. WWII and its conclusion were not about such trivialities such as war crimes and morality. It was about who controls planet earth and its resources, both material and human.

    After almost every military defeat, the victors lynch their victims. This has been going on since eternity. In WWII, the allied decided that it might not be feasible and productive to fight another war within western hemisphere which only weakened the white man while all around other nations were demanding freedom and justice from China to India to Africa to Americas from the clutches of the white man. So they needed a complete victory over Germany and any other western narrative beside that of Anglosaxons. But even that was not enough.

    They needed to make a cult of shoah (ask fyi about it), in order not only to control western world by physical means but also at the level of mind. It became the new religion of the western world. Their holy cow. Nuremberg served that purpose and the original purpose of lynching. West was now “cleansed” of all the killings, and could claim the highest excellence in moral standards, ruling over other primitive races. Nuremberg was just a necessary blood ritual. Sacrifice and all. Other wise, British had done worse crimes in India for example in Bengal, than Nazi could ever dream of. The British starved tens of millions of civilians there pregnant women, children, infants, old men and all during world war II, deliberately. But you never hear about that. Because it was not about war crimes or acceptable moral standards of war methods. It was about domination. Simple as that.

    “The warrior Crazy Horse respected his adversary….”

    There is a fundamental difference between the way the old world (and currently third world fights/) fought and the white man fights. The old world fought battles. Brownies such as Crazy Horse, did not know it then. The white man never fought battles. They fought total war. Such a war is not about defeating an adversary on battle ground. It was about complete annihilation of another race/culture/society.

    The white man then had to cross the unforgiving Atlantic on wooden sails to come to the new world and live in small population surrounded by vastly superior locals in both numbers and knowledge of the new world. Yet the natives were defeated and driven to extinction. This is because they did not have the concept of total war and genocide in their military doctrine. If they had grabbed and killed each and every white man then, and raped every of their woman, something that was in their capability, the white man would be contained in Europe now. That is why on the military level the white man was successful in colonizing the world. Because of his vastly superior savagery.

    Some 500 years ago, white man reached the conclusion that he is holy. While others were seen as animals. This change, I believe had its roots in moral weaknesses of Christiandom and was augmented during crusades. Incidentally Jews were its first victims. But since then they have outmaneuvered the white man.

    “How dramatically different is that mindset from the Abrahamic cult…”

    Easy Madam. The understanding of yours of Abraham is not the only one around. Sacrifice has been a central element of all societies and religions. In Americas, they even had human sacrifices mostly of young women and child variety. As did Europe. Or for that matter rest of humanity. Abraham shifted this sacrifice to specific animals that are used for food. In fact any such sacrifice as per the true religion of Islam (the religion of Abraham/Moses/Jesus/Mohammad), will not be accepted unless it is used for food. Excess killing of animals is a sin. Excess of everything is a sin. We are just a biological system in a large biosphere. We need food to sustain. And we have to rationalize the killing of other biological systems due to our conscious awareness. I think the Abrahamic system is the best. In it even the sacrificial animals become mythical rides in heaven. “Humane” enough. And in Islam sacrifice is not done for dominance. The Islamic concept is different.

  104. Smith says:

    “… what is a white men? I consider myself a white man, I am an Iranian man, in your hierarchy of skin colors what color do I get, instead …”

    I tell the truth. It is bitter. If you can not handle it, stop reading my comments. Russians are white. Do you think the white man accepts them as white? Many Chinese are white but do you think French consider them as white? You exactly know what I am talking about. White man is the cabal running the world. Unfortunately there is no other way to describe him in other words. Otherwise I would have.

  105. Smith says:

    ” Yes, one can run and pass them, that works only if you have time to run as fast, if not then you better think how you can break their legs so they no longer can run, to have time enough to catch up. The only way for that to happen is if one can meaningfully destabilize the peninsula. If that happens the western economies will collapse with that goes all the other might they have.

    As a Shieh county Iran/ Iraq can’t do that fyi is very right you need a credible organized Suni entity that is why the MB pulled down only after an incompetent leader was allowed to run and make the MB discredited. ”

    Saudis will eventually fall in Hijaz. But even if they do, it will not bring down the white man. His roots are power much deeper than you think.

    I also had said, I believe in one of my replies to Mr. Nasser (MIA), that MB was the only counter force to wahabis supported by white man. And that Iran should help MB. I believe that was months ago. I had proposed that Iran ships some 100,000’s of barrels of oil it has lost in export due to sanctions absolutely free of cost to MB in Egypt. One of the criticism of his government was non-availability of fuels on street which was being artificially created by the white man. But in conclusion such a task was not possible because of immaturity in matters strategic, of Iranian public who would have seen such an offering as waste. Anyways, MB is not dead. Such movements only grow with sacrifice. Expect they become a more powerful force across Arab world in coming decades. They even have powerful chapters inside Hijaz.

  106. Smith says:

    Typo correction: Saudis will eventually fall in Hijaz. But even when they do, it will not bring down the white man. His roots of power are much deeper than you think.

  107. fyi says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 4:43 pm

    I knew an American who married an Armenian; his father refused to accept her and her children.

    Likewise, an American woman told me how her father frowned upon the Armenian man whom she was meeting; she said her father would keep on telling her: “Are you going to give me darkie grand-kids?”


    When Armenia was flourishing, these people’s ancestors were barbarians on the periphery of the Roman Empire.

  108. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    August 28, 2013 at 4:58 pm

    It is the sad state of affairs. Though the Armenians themselves are not dark colored. They are white. Caucasian in true sense of the word. The deep complexes of these people of their superiority to others and their contempt for other races, religions and cultures is really shameful.

  109. James Canning says:


    If you are claiming that Slavs are not “white”, you really are getting a bit wild.

    Are Sicilians “white”, in your view?

  110. James Canning says:


    I very much agree: remember Libya. Gross stretching of UNSC resolutions. To achieve “regime change”. And a blunder, in my view.

  111. James Canning says:


    Interesting comments by Carla del Ponte (that the insurgents used the chemical weapons).

  112. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 28, 2013 at 6:33 pm

    Mr. Smith is correct; the racial notions of Protestant America is not solely based on physical features; to be “White” you have to belong to a “White Religion” as well; Orthodox and Catholics and Muslims and Jews come to mind as non-White Religions.

    Harvard University was behind the effort to habilitate Jews into “White”-ness and was successful in that campaign.

    In regards to Sicilians; a mixed race population, they look more like Iranians than they look like the Lombards or the Toscans.

    You have to be there.

  113. fyi says:

    Mr. Smith:

    In regards to Iranians dropping the ball, as it were, in offering MB Government help (in Egypt) – Iranians began by suggesting the idea of Iranian tourists going to Egypt.

    That would have helped Egypt but you saw what happened.

  114. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    August 28, 2013 at 8:28 pm

    Yeah, that was a good initiative. But to tell the truth, MB officially had informed Iran, that they will not be able to provide security to Iranians, which is understandable, they were under alot of pressure from wahabis and the military both anti-Iranian house slave elements. I thought it would have been able to give MB quarter of a million barrel of oil per day for free so that MB could slash fuel prices in Egypt to half and increase their availability. That would have bought alot of good will for Iran in Egyptian populace.

    But MB was really immature too. It was their first time in power. In a sense it is good they were massacred out of power. Now they will go back and learn their lessons and find out who their real friends were/are. They already have won lots of respect for their sacrifice in Arab monarchies. It is only a matter of time now before they will pop up in some unexpected places. In effect they are not only now in Egypt but also will grow in other Arab lands as well.

    But right now Egypt will go back to its old style military dictatorship. And in a while people will start blaming Egyptian military for the bad economy since the Egyptian economic woes are structural and beyond the capability of military to solve. People will be on the streets again. That is a sure thing.

  115. Ataune says:


    I believe its time for you to drop the “realist” position you are displaying and show your true colors.

  116. BiBiJon says:

    Not just Cordesman. Obama is vacillating too

    fyi says:
    August 28, 2013 at 8:12 pm

    Indeed. Cordesman is highlighting the post-Iraq credibility issue. But, even a more devastating angle is the ‘ownership’ issue. Ms Farhi is persuasive:

    “…Obama’s military action will make the Syria tragedy his and no [longer] Iran’s. And in Iran’s post-election environment, in which the country has moved towards national reconciliation — both among the elite and between the government and population — nothing suits the Islamic Republic better than divesting itself from this issue quietly.”

    From http://www.lobelog.com/what-military-intervention-in-syria-means-for-the-us-and-iran/

    Anyways, Obama is decider, and he hasn’t decided yet. Strange, as everybody in his cabinet and in the media seem to have decidedly decided. Did anyone see the indecisive decider on PBS news hour?

  117. kooshy says:


    I often don’t read your comments, just pay attention when you add or change to a new technique, but majority of your arguments are presented in a way that:
    1-Iran is technologically so behind to that of west and Israel that your reader must come to conclude that is impossible for Iran to reach and catch up therefore is domed and is going to be raped.
    2-If that base is established in your reader’s mind your reader must conclude since Iran will not be able to technologically and financially reach to that of west, then the only way to survive and not to get raped is to make a few nukes. Well not many people bought that and some made effective counter arguments.
    3-Since that didn’t win many supporters and didn’t work very well, now you have added a new dimension an offensive but deliberately divertive and divisive dimension to your own concluded “must have nuke” to live argument, that is your new “white man” offense language.

    A few days back Empty made an effective common sense rebuttal to your continued hasbara divisive techniques, but you diverted and thought is gone away. You are wrong from what I have learned bloggers on this forum are better informed than be diverted and divided by trying to scare and convince your readers, arguing that Iran has no other way to survive than to make nukes, or convincing the readers that these guys in their guts (like Al Qaeda extremists) hate white man (Christian protestant man) trying to make your readers to at least suspect and ask themselves why should we white Americans or Europeans help these guys in their struggle against imperialism.

    Just wanted to let you know this is an old technique and wouldn’t work most of the times, especially with people who don’t know how to play the game very well. Stop offending people here base on color of their skins if you truly are against western colonialism and imperialism name it correctly like what it is, other than that you have exposed yourself.

  118. Smith says:

    ” …your continued hasbara divisive …”

    And you are a house slave.

    Those who can think and have the capability to reason with logic already know the truth. You are not among them. And Empty did not rebuttal. Go and read my response to him.

    I do not care about “supporters”. But it is obvious you are keeping a tab on those who agree with me.

    There is no denial that Iran is indeed decades behind the enemies sworn to destroy it. Have no illusions about that.

    The history of white man is very clear. And my stance also has been very clear on it since my first posts. And you are simply a liar when it comes to that.

  119. BiBiJon says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    White man, nukes, ICBM, and threaten to eradicate UK. Got it.

    You are a disgrace to Iran, to Islam, and to this site. Get lost.

  120. Kathleen says:

    Commenter Just just posted this letter from many of the Iraq warmongers sent this letter to Obama pushing for an attack on Syria. Check out who signed.

  121. Smith says:

    BiBiJon says:
    August 28, 2013 at 10:36 pm

    You get lost too, hasabara agent who believes a weakened disarmed Iran is what Israel and US need for their nefarious interests.

    The good news is almost all of you house slaves who are attacking me or have attacked me are old people. Eventually you have to leave Iran to young people due to inevitable disease and death. And almost all young Iranians believe that Iran has to be a nuclear armed nation. The time for your narratives is coming to end due to biological clocks.

  122. BiBiJon says:

    Kathleen says:
    August 28, 2013 at 10:42 pm

    Useful list of names for law suits by Afghan, Iraqi, Lebanese and Syrian orphans.

  123. BiBiJon says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 10:47 pm

    Who needs ICBMs, if you are the best sock puppet Israeli hasbara can produce.

  124. Smith says:

    BiBiJon says:
    August 28, 2013 at 11:02 pm

    Go away fossil hasabara house slave. You do not know even what ICBM is. Go and server your masters like James Canning here who agrees with you.

  125. m. ali says:

    Whats Smiths current obsession with skin color? for someone who dislikes the west, he sure emulates them.

    categorizing the world in colors has nevet been the way iran or muslims act. i dont care how the west sees us, it doesnt mean we have to copy and mirror them.

  126. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 10:47 pm

    “due to biological clocks”

    Are you sure this argument was on the preparation manual made by Menashe Amir, never had heard that one before, but if now is, then I think his “biological clock” is ticking even faster than ours.

    Unlike the Zionist entity Iranians are not raciest, they are a peace loving internationally respectable nation who has no animosity with any legitimate nation that respects Iran’s independence and rights, throughout their history they have contributed to enhance and make available science art and culture to every race. Can you please add that to your manual for the person coming on next shift?

  127. BiBiJon says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 11:14 pm

    Sorry if I hit a raw nerve. Didn’t mean to criticize your abilities too harshly. Take it as training, an opportunity to improve.

    Note to Hasbara department:

    Smith has done a decent job (for a rookie) in bringing down the tone of this sites’ comments. While I recommend further training, I would hate to see a pay cut. If he is a senior sock puppet, then the same strains and stresses that bedevil the highest officials of the apartheid pipsqueak state, are also making him overeager and hence obvious. Sock puppets should not be scapegoats of apartheid’s internal contradictions.

  128. Smith says:

    kooshy says:
    August 28, 2013 at 11:32 pm

    May Allah afflict you with such a pain that you never get respite from. May He send you from this world in disgrace for having initiated this hateful discussion. I can only ask Allah to answer your drivel in His own ways. You are a pathetic person.

  129. Smith says:

    BiBiJon says:
    August 28, 2013 at 11:37 pm

    May you get your due from Allah for accusing me. May your life be full of misery and pain. Oh, Allah, you be my witness that these house negroes are on the side of people that harm Muslims left and right. They talk the goals of murders.

  130. kooshy says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 11:38 pm

    It’s no problem, just change your tag and start fresh as a new person, this time use a different tone and style. Overall talking ICBM, nukes and they can’t catch up I don’t think is a problem, but try not to use the white man stuff, don’t think the racism tone worked too good with this white man’s (Smith) last tag.


  131. BiBiJon says:


    the guy is a rookie.

  132. kooshy says:


    I know it was fun up until when he tried to scare the audience with saying they need to get nukes, but you should also know that they hate white man so when they have the nukes they will use it on the white man including on you, like we need to have them tipped to London now, like that’s the only thing Iran now needs, its typical hasbara linked reasoning technique. Best time to expose them is when they have no way to go back on their stated arguments. Stupid, picking a tag like Smith and saying need to kill white man, if you hate white man why would you pick his name for your own.

  133. Richard Steven Hack says:

    US Officials: Navy Boosts Carrier Presence in Gulf

    “…say it doesn’t suggest the carrier would play a role in any possible strikes in Syria.”

    Yeah, right…

  134. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Turkey on alert, hints at ‘engagement’ with allies on Syria response

    Note the part where Syria points out that last year Turkey actually had Syrian insurgents captured with Sarin nerve gas cannisters in their possession.

    And where did they get them? Libya – as a result of Obama’s LAST “intervention”…

  135. Richard Steven Hack says:

    5 things you should know about Syria’s military

    It won’t be a “cakewalk”… That said, since the US goal is in my opinion limited to degrading Syria’s missile capability (and probably also its air force and air defense capabilities) in order to protect Israel during an Iran war, I expect the US to accomplish that mission more or less. It may take weeks or months but there’s nothing to prevent the US from pulling it off.

  136. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Strike on Syria Would Lead to Retaliation on Israel, Iran Warns

    But if you read the piece, the Iranians don’t say anything of the kind. Iran is not going to directly involve itself militarily in the upcoming Syrian war. That would be unbelievably stupid and would result in an immediate all-out war by the US, NATO, and Israel against Iran – which is precisely what the West wants. Obama would be absolutely delighted to have Iran give him one hundred percent carte blanche to attack Iran without tarnishing his Nobel Peace Prize. Netanyahu would be utterly delighted as well.

  137. Richard Steven Hack says:

    U.K. Said to Examine Short Syria Submarine, Air Ops

    “The U.S. is planning to use Tomahawk cruise missiles against hundreds of Syrian targets, including some of Assad’s elite military units, if a strike is launched.”

  138. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Neither Humanitarian Intervention Nor Self-Defense in Syria: A New Justification for the Use of Force in International Law?

    David Fidler suggests that maybe international law can be expanded to allow for the use of military force against a sovereign state which uses chemical weapons.

    This argument is bogus. See my comment.

  139. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Hezbollah mulling response to Syria strike

    I don’t expect any response from Hizballah. They can’t afford to initiate an attack on Israel if Syria is attacked by the US – that would just hand Israel the justification it needs to initiate another invasion of Lebanon – the goal of the entire Syria crisis. Which I believe Nasrallah knows as well as I.

    And Hizballah can’t do anything against the US or NATO forces arrayed against Syria.

    So Hizballah can’t do anything except possibly up its game inside Syria. The problem with that is it would hand Obama the excuse to attack Hizballah’s forces in Syria and possibly also in Lebanon, which would also play into Israel’s hands.

  140. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Israel calls up reservists, deploys missile defences against Syria

    Allegedly this is a limited call up – but I suspect it is merely the first preparation for taking advantage of the US/NATO attack on Syria to attack Lebanon.

  141. Photi says:

    BibiJon and Kooshy,

    I have enjoyed reading your exchange with Smith tonight, thank you!

  142. Bussed-in Basiji says:

    BibiJon, kooshy,

    Unfortunately IQ 147 (Smith) is a little too smart for his own good. It’s never about how smart you are but whether you are an arrogant racist or not.

    During the war whenever Iraqi soldiers would be captured, they were treated humanely even if 5 minutes prior to that they were shooting at each other.

    Most of them were emotional overwhelmed by this experience and many of them were instantly won over and many stayed in Iran after the war.

    That’s how the Prophet (sawas) treated his opponents and that’s how real Muslims treat their opponents.

    The rest is bulls**t.

  143. A-B says:

    There are a lot of positive signs! – A lot of Western liars backtracking, and now that the ‘shock’ is turning into disgust and not ‘awe’, they are covering up the unraveling of their evil plans by ‘democratic’ and ‘moral’ deliberations.

    Today, I heard UK’s former Ambassador to Damascus on Skynews(!!) saying that a military action should wait until the results of the investigation are reported before taking action; otherwise the Syrian would think that the whole thing was just a [false-flag] operation by the West to find an excuse to attack yet another Arab country. He, CLARIFIED that it is how those, I guess, ‘irrational/emotional’ Syrians would interpret the situation, not that the West would do such a thing!!!

    Yesterday, this … Wolf Blitzer character was pretty much doing the chicken dance on CNN goading the now reluctant Obama to bomb Syria ONLY for Obama not to lose face: You [Obama] promised us a war; who gives a damn who used the chemical weapons? You ARE going to give us a war; we are CNN – the ONLY network that has a hack stationed in Syria. … like Saudis have their cannibals in Syria!! And now that the West’s plans are unraveling; Russia is doing something they should have done earlier; sending at least a signal that they will militarily obstruct the Western senseless aggression.

    I wrote earlier (August 24)
    “So, I guess, if the generic Scandinavian inspector-for-all-weathers would find evidence that the Takfiris actually used chemical weapons, NATURALLY, this infers that chemical weapons were used but there is no conclusive evidence that Syrian ‘regime’ used them! Thus, would UN blame BOTH sides?! And since Russia and China would ‘definitely’ not vote for any UN-sanctioned intervention in Syria; would the US navy, now in place, shoot down a Syrian civilian airliner?!”

    It is interesting that suddenly the Western fascist-imperialists who banged on their pot lids shouting “Assad must go” now don’t want a regime change! Now the question posed by the Western MSM is how to send a ‘message’ to Syria! Well, send a freakin’ e-card, why won’t you?! No, the West just has to kill and destroy – like shooting a civilian airliner.

  144. Fiorangela says:

    Obama and also former senator Byron Dorgan have declared:
    1. Chemical weapons WERE used in Syria
    2. International law proscribes the use of chemical weapons
    3. We must carefully weigh the evidence of who used chemical weapons
    4. If it is determined that the Syrian government used chemical weapons against its own people,
    5. then the international community [Britain, France, Germany & possibly Palau] must come together to punish the Syrian government.

    What’s missing in this argument?

    What if it CANNOT be demonstrated conclusively that the Syrian government used CW against civilians?

    We KNOW CW was used; SOMEBODY did it.

    If not the Syrian government, then who?

    Will the “international community” work as hard to find out who really used CW?
    Will they punish that non-Assad evildoer?
    Is it as important to enforce international law proscribing CW if the rebels that US is financing and cheerleading was the perpetrator? What targets has US planned to punish rebels?
    How about if Israel did it? Does the DoD have plans on the shelf to send cruise missiles to selected targets in Israel to punish them, send a shot across the bow to make Netanyahu understand that he and Israel may not violate international law?

  145. BiBiJon says:

    Hague: Thank god it’s the 21st century

    James, it is rather noticeable that every time William Hague says “use of CW is unacceptable” he adds superfluously “in the 21st century.” Assuming he is not predicting that 22nd century will be a free-for-all, then I guess he is covering his government’s actions in the 20th century.

    Do you have any information on UK’s supply of CW to Saddam, and her Herculean efforts to shield him from UN censure in the closing 2 decades of the 20th century?

  146. kooshy says:

    Gav James

    Just was watching your prime minster on Press TV which for obvious reasons is now banned in UK. It was the live broadcast of the HOC debate on Syria.
    After listening to DC the British PM I thought to myself that the world needs to congratulate the British people, for once again electing a parliament that can place a jerk to lead the UK from #10, do you share my view? But sure not to take it all away from you, we the good god selected exceptional, the Americans have a better track record of electing jerks as our leader than you the Brits do.

  147. fyi says:


    While I do not agree with every statement that Mr. Smith has made, I agree with the thrust of his argument.

    US, EU, Saudi Arabia wish to destroy Iranian strategic autonomy.

    This project failed in Iraq and they moved on to Syria – without any re-examination of the strategic soundness of their project.

    Once US, EU, Saudi Arabia have destroyed the Ba’ath state in Syria, it will be the turn of Iran – at least so their vision goes; under the next US president or the one after that – it matters not who.

    Furthermore, the destruction of regimes in Iran, Syria and I suppose Shia-Kurdish Iraq will leave a big market for Europe to sell her stuff; pushing China out. And added benefit.

    So, until and unless Iranians have credible nuclear weapons to deter these hare-brained machinations; they would continue to be under threat of state destruction or disintegration.

    Iraq and Syria have demonstrated how cause belli could be manufactured by Axis Powers. There is no possibility of détente with Axis Powers without nuclear weapons; you observed what happened to Libya from 2003 to 2011.

    “Lessons for those who see…”

  148. A-B says:

    I just heard the British PM say that the ‘cute little surgical’ attack on Syria he is promoting is in British interest for having “stability” in ME!!! Well, this only makes sense within the frame-work “if [ME] is broken, why fix it?” (i.e. a broken ME is a ‘stable’ ME according to the Imperialist) because “if [modus operandi] is not broken, why fix it?”

    These fascist-racists blatantly treat people of ME like children, if not animals! He says, Assad is “testing the West’s limits”!! And I heard earlier (on Skynews) if the West would ‘give in’ to ‘naughty’ Assad, what signals will it send to the ‘rumbustious’ Eye-raininas with their nuclear ‘toys’!! Absolutely disgusting!

  149. A-B says:


    ‘rambunctious’ Eye-rainians …

  150. BiBiJon says:

    All, and Mr. fyi

    The argument that Iran needs nuclear weapons is wrong and dangerous.

    Iran is after attaining the highest prowess possible in the nuclear technology field as well as a great many other scientific, industrial and technological fields. This jibes with Ganji’s description of SL’s being enamored of science, and it jibes with a proud nation who is undaunted by challenges.

    Of course the knowledge and the materials can be diverted from the nuclear energy, and space programmes to manufacture nuclear tipped ICBMs. The knowledge, equipment and the materials have been available for such diversion for at least a decade, and it has not happened. For the simple reason that Iran has no use for them.

    Iran does not see the West as its enemy. Indeed, one could argue there’s much warmth, and kinship felt by the indo-european Iran, and the West.

    Certain elements in the West, e.g. Tony Blair, have made it their life-long ambition to destroy Iran. Their abject incompetence, however, has only strengthened Iran, and increased her regional influence which she uses to protect herself. One of the enduring pressure points the Blairites have used is the nuclear issue. Tremendous efforts have been expended in international fora, and media on the nuclear issue; specifically, how nuclear energy/technology cannot be allowed to be in the hands of ‘rogue’, politically immature, and civilizationally backward Iran, and by extension, any other developing country.

    Nothing like leaving the NPT, and/or developing nuclear weapons would dignify the Blairite aspersions. With the possible exception of the ‘White man’ theory of international affairs.

    Mr. Smith’s foul-mouthed takeover of GTT’s comment threads is playing into Blairite’s demonic schemes. He, and fyi to the extent he agrees with Smith, are completely wrong.

    WMD, civilizational confrontation, and notions of regional/ethnic/national/religious superiority plays no role in Iranian psyche; none whatsoever. And, indeed, that is precisely why Iran succeeds where Blairites reliably fail.

  151. Rd. says:

    fyi says:

    “From Ambassador Bhadrakumar “

    Your comments on the ‘west’ intent to destroy and disintegrated is well understood and given (and it is not new). As far as your suggestion regarding ‘tactical’ defensive measures (and now the ambassador’s as well), if the west walks back from this abyss, would this be grounds for you to consider the utility of such measures as UN-necessary? [just curious for my own understanding of your observation of the strategic reality, or do you consider such measure as absolute, regardless?). After all, every problem, generally offers many solutions.

    “Even Dr. Cordesmn is having second thoughts:”

    Was it Jeffrey D. Feltman, who had to go to Tehran to ask for permission? Apparently he got a really bad feeling. Time to walk back from the abyss?

    Would it be that, the ‘small’ minded thinking was, if we can get away with a ‘quicky’ in Syria, we have managed to get the eye’s off Egypt. After all, a Destabilized Egypt would be very bad news for the west. Far worse than losing Syria at this point. Is it not? Further, at a minimum, they have created enough hoopla with the hope to gain some footing for the upcoming negotiations. As the Leverett’s have been suggesting all along, a negotiated settlement is the best option for US maintaining some influence in the region. You have to consider, even for the degenerate imperial corporate minded diseases, when it hits their corporate bottom line (petro dollars), ‘they’ too have to play some ball.

  152. fyi says:

    Smith says:
    August 28, 2013 at 9:04 pm

    Turkey, evidently, was helping Mr. Mursi and the MB Government to no avail; please see below:


    I think if there were a common Iranian-Turkish position on Egypt (as well as on Syria) things could have been different.

    But I agree with you, MB put their faith and trust not in Islam but in this or that political machination – both internally and externally.

    They did not take a principled stand on anything – they deserved to loose power.

  153. fyi says:

    BiBiJon says:
    August 29, 2013 at 11:10 am

    While I do personally like and admire many places and qualities in Europe and North America, I must face the fact that Axis Powers is determined to destroy Iranian strategic autonomy.

    The planners might be cold-hearted and hard men who seek Power and Domination for its own sake.

    The political leaders may be seeking personal aggrandizement and gain.

    And then you have the Rank-And-File from among whom most of the analysts are recruited.

    The EU population, I would estimate about 50% – are under the dangerous delusion that they are morally superior to the rest of mankind.

    Euro-Americans – the Rank-And-File – are staunch secularists who oppose and are very un-comfortable with religious-based governance. They are trying to carryout to completion the historically and philosophically bankrupted Englightenment Program.

    And then there is their new Cult of Shoah – which per their 2000-year old obsession with Jews – has granted the Jews the right to have a religion but no one else.

    As you can see, there are multiple overlapping reasons and motivations for Euro-Americans’ aim of destroying Islamic Iran.

    I note here that for 8600 years (the time of Zoroaster according to Ancient Greek and Roman historians) the life on the Iranian plateau has concerned itself with religion and moral conduct.

    Zoroaster was martyred by the damn Turanians in a Religious War – like Zarir – another martyr.

    Euro-Americans cannot alter this.

  154. Karl.. says:


    I dont even watch that stuff anymore, I just get so mad about it.
    It proves however the racism especially in UK, France, US, – the middle eastern people are uncivilized and needs to be punished.

  155. fyi says:

    Rd. says:
    August 29, 2013 at 11:20 am

    I do not believe that the United States will walk back from attacking Syria; they have painted themselves into a corner.

    [Which advances the national interests of Iran as well as allied ethno-religious groups.]

    But let us assume that they do not attack Syria now.

    What of it?

    That only means a single battle in a larger war was not waged because the Barons opposed the King or advised him against a foolish course of action.

    The larger war is still on.

    Just look at EU; their default and consistent position for the last 10 years has been sanctions against Iran.

    Government have come and governments have gone and that has not changed. Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal could use the help that Iran trade would provide to them.

    But that is not to be; the aim remains the destruction of Iranian Power.

    In regards to Syria – no I think this was manufactured by Axis Powers and Saudi Arabia – and Mr. Putin must have been told something about it by Mr. Bandar ibn Sultan – to try to decapitate the Syrian Government. That is why the line about “Chemical Weapons” was put into Mr. Obama’s speech earlier.

    For an analogous reason it is imperative for Euro-Americans to maintain the Iranians Nuclear File from resolution – they need a cause belli when the opportunity presents itself (like in Libya then and Syria now).

    A similar tactic was used when Mr. Bush I made a speech with a few lines about Kosovo in it. It was left to Mr. Clinton to use that and carry out the destruction of Yugoslavia.

    It may not be today, or tomorrow or the next US president or the one after that – who knows; but US and EU have prepared the grounds for war against Iran and they will attack Iran at the first opportunity.

  156. Pirouz says:

    “Fireagra, for foreign policy impotence”
    by Mark Fiore (animated political cartoonist)


  157. nico says:


    Substance/summary of Bandar-Putin meeting.


    Authentic ?

    First published on Hezbollah linked Safir on August 21.

  158. fyi says:

    nico says:
    August 29, 2013 at 12:33 pm

    Probably; must have been supplied by the Russians.

  159. James Canning says:


    Once again you claim the EU seeks “the destruction of Iranian power”. Rubbish. Iran very unwisely has done a great deal to bring on the sanctions, by being needlessly ambiguous about Iran’s nuclear programme.

    Iran would be much more powerful today if it had not “pushed the envelope” on its nuclear programme.

  160. fyi says:


    A commentary with which I agree (in Persian)


    IAEA is instructed to keep the nuclear file open until – in my opinion – Axis Powers are ready to initiate war.

    I have reluctantly come to the conclusion; there is no possibility of a nuclear deal with Axis Powers; they have to keep this going until war can be waged.

  161. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 29, 2013 at 1:04 pm

    As the Persian saying goes:

    “What to believe: the neighbour’s solemn vows or the rooster tail sticking out of his pocket?”

    I stand by what I have written.

    You know the destruction of Iran is off the table when the Iranian Nuclear file is settled within IAEA.

  162. James Canning says:


    Morsi supported the insurgency in Syria. How would Iran have worked with him in that regard?

  163. James Canning says:


    Bibi Netanyahu seeks “regime change” in Iran, or at least a serious smashing of Iran. Many “friends” of Israel seek the same. Sadly, all too often Iran has made it easier for enemies of Iran to seek measures damaging to Iranian power.

  164. James Canning says:


    Iran needs to make at least a tacit partial deal with P5+1. Stop all enrichment to 20. On Iran’s own accord. Etc.

  165. James Canning says:


    I am no fan of Tony Blair, but is there anything specific he has said that causes you to believe he wants to “destroy” Iran?

  166. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 29, 2013 at 1:13 pm

    The time for even a limited deal in 2014 is passed.

    I believe the evidence of Rooster’s Tail.

    You are right in one things; aspects of US-EU War against Iran and Syria is Religious; no doubt.

    800 years ago, the Church concluded that there was no margin in fighting Islam.

    Regrettably, we have to wait for decades before the same understanding penetrates the minds of Protestant Christians and assorted Champions of Israel among the Euro-Americans.

    Iranian planners are well advised not to wait for decades and put their hopes in any sort of wishful thinking.

  167. James Canning says:


    How can destroying a secular government in Syria help dampen the flames of Islamic militancy? This surely cannot make sense.

  168. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 29, 2013 at 1:19 pm

    You are asking the wrong man; you have to ask US and EU leaders.

    Well, at least the Commons has derailed the UK insanity in this instance.

  169. James Canning says:


    I have no information at this time on any supplying of CW to Saddam Hussein’s Irag, by British firms.

    There have been various criminal prosecutions in Britain, of businessmen who supplied parts for weapons systems the UK did not want Iraq to have.

  170. James Canning says:

    I understand that the best-educated national group in the US is the Iranian-American community. I read that 25% of adult Iranian-Americans have post-graduate degrees. Anyone else following this?

  171. masoud says:

    I’ve never found Smith’s postings particularly thoughtful, but that goes for the posting of many others as well. I don’t particularly agree with the points he’s currently making either, but I do in general support the use of ‘white man’ as an epithet in political discussions.

    In the main square in front of city hall in my city there is a statue of Winston Churchill. Accompanying this statue are several information panels glorifying him for leadership in the second world war. Left out are his views on race. his many war crimes and his take on the rights of the ‘white man’ over the other peoples of the world, which rival, when they don’t surpass, the views of Adolf Hitler.

    I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.

    I eagerly look forward to the day we have a world without the White Man, just as we currently have a world without the Prussian Empire.

    To tell the truth though, it may be unfair to out Churchill for special consideration. The sentiment he expressed above was, and is, a common view held by the White Man, all over the world. People are just more polite and euphemistic about it these days. Rather than talk about spreading Christianity, or Civilization to the rest of the world, the favored discourse of the day is about spreading liberal democracy and the ‘Responsibility to Protect’. Everything else is the same.

    I was disgusted to see this particular genocidal maniac resurrected to preside over the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in London last year. And I was ashamed for all the peoples of the world, and for Iran in particular, since it at least makes a claim to be better, to send it’s athletes to march in that opening ceremony. As disgusted as I was, I really can’t say that I was shocked. I had no cause to be. This kind of implicit acceptance of the exceptional nature of the White Man’s deranged belief systems, murders, genocides, and his reinvention of himself as gentle and noble creature is far too common to merit notice.

    It’s not that people are unaware of how awful Churchill was, it’s that people have become acclimated to having his evils scrubbed and sanitized away, and have accepted this reinvented Churchill as an early forerunner and standard bearer of the causes that modern day imperial powers use to justify their pillage of the planet.

    I fully understand why the enemy has embarked on this kind of marketing campaign. The White Man brand just isn’t what it used to be. What I can’t figure out is why everyone else has decided to go along with it. Isn’t it an insult to the sacrifice that millions of people all over the third world have made to rid themselves of these people, to simply allow them to re-brand themselves and proceed with their of war propaganda and cultural onslaught against both the citizens of their own country and the citizens of the world with a fresh slate?

    The war taking place in Syria right now really is the same war that has been going on for centuries. And we really do have a duty to be explicit about what that war is. It’s the war of domination the White Man has declared on the rest of the world.

    Now, if some people out there are uncomfortable being reminded of this history, their path is simple: stop identifying as a White Man, and stop sympathizing with modern day analogues of this constructed and artificial identity. After all, it’s no good to have people stop identifying explicitly was white men, just to have them identify themselves implicitly as white men by thinking of themselves as ‘European’ , ‘Western’, ‘Zionist’, ‘Human Rights Activist’ etc…

    It’s a family political identities that has no place in the modern world.

    So, I don’t support sweeping all this under the rug. Whenever debating about such issues, or with such people, ‘our side’ should be talking about the crimes of the White Man, and cursing him, his legacy and his current undertakings until we’re all blue in the face.

    So by all means, and independent of weather this epithet has been correctly directed at members of this board,

    Fuck the White Man and fuck his House Nigger of a president.

  172. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Your strategic analysis is correct except for the fact that Iran can existentially threaten US/UK and retaliate without nuclear tipped ICBMs. You’re smart enough to understand what I’m saying. Most importantly the US and UK govts know this for a fact.

    And for the record, the rockets we send up to space with various worms and monkeys as passengers are ICBMs they just keep going vertical instead of horizontal- and of course could be pointed at various angles…you get the picture.

    In other words, full deterrence without the costs of having a ICBM nuclear arsenal.

    Anyway arguing in favor of Iranian nuclear weapons is moot after SL’s fatwa banning them. It’s not gonna happen.

  173. masoud says:

    Speaking of Obama, has anyone noticed his hair lately?


    I believe the proper expression is “Oufei”

    I’ll leave it to Empty to translate.

  174. nico says:

    masoud says:
    August 29, 2013 at 2:35 pm

    No, no, no, you understand nothing.
    It is the evil zionists fault !
    The white man only has honedt intention…

    Less ironically.
    Your post is totally factually correct.
    That is the very immoral sin of the US constituencies to have implemented this worldwide racist, clash of civilization policy.
    Truly evil. The true face of satan.
    Worse than nazi and communist projects.

    As I said time and again the Anglo are dominating the world and they are the worst scelerates this planet has seen. Ever.

    Under the guise of sugar coated and sophistic words.

  175. A-B says:

    Karl.. says:
    August 29, 2013 at 11:42 am

    It was really LONG time ago I watched any of these channels; I just happened to come a cross them.

    It gives one perspective though. To my ears what they say is so surreal and anti-human, but then one wonders why this surreality is ‘main stream’? Many MUST believe them, no?

    And the rationalization of this West’s backtracking is interesting to watch.

  176. masoud says:


    So it appears that after some Iranian generals have taken pains to clarify the situation, the White Man is backing down on his threats.

    Could all this have been a result been a result of Rouhani’s irresponsible comments condemning chemical weapons, but declining to point out that the same scam perpetrated against Iran in the late 1980’s was being recycled to target Syria?

    That is the kind of result “Professionalism” and a fake doctorate in Law would buy you. Is it too early to start talking about impeaching this Marmoulak of a President?

  177. nico says:


    I assume this is the real readon behind western backing down.
    That is linked somehow to the previous link I posted regarding the Bandar-Putin meeting…

    “Putin Orders Massive Strike Against Saudi Arabia If West Attacks Syria”

    Again the source is not that reliable as the previous one but it is consistent enough with the events.
    I guess there is psywar behind that as well.

  178. Karl.. says:


    West arent backing down they are just gaining momentum. And of course Russia wont attack Saudi arabia.

  179. nico says:

    Would Rouhani and Medvedev be in office right now in the same time as predident it would be a cakewalk for the scelerates…

  180. fyi says:

    masoud says:
    August 29, 2013 at 3:27 pm

    They used to hunt the Aborigines for amusement in Australia; when they got tired of killing them as a pest that was infesting their lands.

    Now; an industrialized civilization had no use for Dream Walkers – it no longer had any direct experience with nomads and how to live side-by-side.

    But, still, Australia is the one of the few places that Muslims are safe in their person, property and namus – and not in Muslim state.

  181. nico says:

    Karl.. says:
    August 29, 2013 at 3:39 pm

    You have prefered insider information about that ?
    Kind enough to share ?

  182. masoud says:

    M. Ali, Bussed-in-Basiji, Karl and others,

    While it is true that there are two dueling mainstream ideologies of imperialism, that doesn’t explain why movements which have been attuned, aware, and dead set against both those ideologies from the beginning have floundered.

    Bussed-in-Basiji is closest to the mark. The problem is that these movements love who their soldiers are more than they hate what their soldiers do, and victims they target. Some decades ago, American peace groups used to embed themselves with the Sandinista and the Vietcong. Today, they feel an incredible obligation to distance themselves from their own armies victims. Largely this is a result of the strategic defeat of the Soviet Union, and the ensuing moral defeat of left wing forces all over the world. The servile manner in which many of these forces propagandized for the Soviet Union has become a traumatic memory for many of the organizations, one which they are committed never to repeat. In the meanwhile, they also constitute the kernel of virtually all anti war groups all over the world. The result is disaster.

    I don’t think any anti war group is really worthy of the name unless it can campaign for the freedom of Malik Nidal Hassan, and celebrate the deaths of American soldiers overseas.

  183. masoud says:

    nico says:
    August 29, 2013 at 3:35 pm

    I really do wish some of the sources that article quotes were less cartoonish. While I can imagine Banader obliquely offering to give Russia a hand with the Chechens, and Putin not taking kindly to the veiled threat, I can’t imagine Russia threatening Saudi Arabia with missiles in return. A threat like that wouldn’t be taken seriously unless it was made publicly.

    Besides, Bandar’s visit to Russia was more than a week ago, and the apparent climbdown is more recent.

  184. nico says:

    masoud says:
    August 29, 2013 at 4:07 pm

    My take is that you are confused by the timeline.
    The Bandar Putin meeting occured in July.
    During which Bandar tried to win Syria without war and clearly theatened Russia with terrorist attzcks and more uprinding in chechnya.

    Then the chrmical attack occured and the western ramp up.

    Only then Russia could have ordered to raze KSA to ground if Syria were to be attacked.

    Not sure if it is true.
    But I do not discard it outright either.

    I mean. Thes Axus power are tedting Iran and Russia will.
    Rusdia is senfing warship in mediteranean and performed surprise mega drill in July.

    What is more dangerous ?
    Rusdia making a threat now to avoid war ot the Syrian conflict spilling z d morphing into wwiii.

    Besides what Russia has to fear ?
    They are nuclear armed to the teeth and have oil and gas they are selling to evryone.
    A KSA attack could even be a goid budiness model !
    To the contrary losing Syria would be dramatic geopolitically speaking for Russia.

  185. Karl.. says:


    You want proof that west gains momentum? Just check whatever newspaper
    The article about Russia attacking saudi arabia is just a stupid conspiracy theory not worth mentioning at all.

  186. Smith says:

    This discussion board is full of house negroes who will do anything to appease their white masters. Such as bibi and kooshy. These are the people who are the traitors. Who have opened up gates for invaders. The only thing that could have saved Syira was if it had tried to acquire nuclear weapons long way back. Now, it is too late. Now just other states including Iran have to learn lessons from the coming fate of Syria. Only nuclear weapons can deter white men. Hundreds of thousands will die in Syria and that state will never be like it used to be.

    It will be completely destroyed. As I had said my reply to Rehmat, there is no Muslim state that had the capability to send military to Syria. It is all huff and puff. Mostly from hasabara/house negroes trying to exaggerate the power of Iran. Conventionally Iran is completely defenseless compared to white states. Iran’s number has finally come. The battle grounds now will shift inside Iran with all the air strikes, car bombs, suicide bombings and all. Only nuclear weapons can stop the coming rape of Iran by white man. And God’s curse on all house negroes out there.

  187. nico says:

    Smith says:
    August 29, 2013 at 4:36 pm

    I mostly agree with your post.
    But like I said to you some months ago your prose would be much much better would you suppress the drama queen FX.

    As for Iran surely it needs to stop war on Syria right away with threat to close the straight

    And I assume such message was conceyed to axus power.

    Like I said with Russia, now is the time to make threat and play psywar.
    After the Surian war all bet are off.

  188. Smith says:

    fyi says:
    August 29, 2013 at 10:18 am

    Thank you for that post from Ambassador Bhadrakumar.

    As he has written and debunked the house negores here:

    “… However, the most profound lesson coming out of all this as the US begins the countdown of an attack on Syria lies somewhere else: Why Syria, why not North Korea?

    The answer is clear. As CNN’s military analysts are at pains to explain, this is going to be a military operation that incurs no risk of US casualties. The attack on Syria will be staged from the blue sea with cruise missiles – not even aircraft flown by US pilots lest they get shot down.

    The American analysts explain that the Syrian armed forces are already overstretched after two years of fighting the rebels all over the country. They flag how Syria couldn’t even retaliate against repeated Israeli air attacks – something unthinkable just a couple of years ago.

    In sum, Syria has no deterrent power. This is where Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il proved visionary leaders. They have bequeathed to the current leadership of Kim Jong-eun in Pyongyang a deterrent power that will make the Obama administration think not twice but several times over before launching a military strike against North Korea. This is exactly where Bashar’s father, Hafez al-Assad seems to have faltered.

    Now, this becomes a morality play for Iran. Of course, the Iranian regime takes very seriously the “fatwas” handed down by their Spiritual Leader and Supreme Leader not to embark upon a nuclear weapon program. But, is that the wise thing to do?

    After all, we have to be alive first before we can think of observing “fatwas” – even Persians. The point is, the impending US attack on Syria should be a wake-up call for the Iranian regime – alerting it to the existential struggle that lies ahead.

    How can Tehran take Obama’s word seriously anymore? Only this past week, it emerged authoritatively from the US official archival materials that the 1953 coup against Mohamed Mossadeq was a CIA operation; and, that the horrendous chemical weapons attacks by Saddam Hussein’s forces were staged with crucial intelligence inputs from the CIA.

    Has anything really changed under Obama? The Iranian leadership needs to ponder calmly and collectively.

    No matter the outcome of the imminent US attack on Syria, which is bound to have tragic consequences, Tehran should take a momentous decision to safeguard against such aggression. The only way it can do that will be by having the deterrent power that North Korea possesses, which keeps predators away.

    World opinion will understand. The meek also have a moral right to defend themselves – even if they are far from inheriting the earth as God prophesied. Let this be Obama’s finest presidential legacy – a nuclear Iran.

    Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India’s ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001). “

  189. nico says:

    Karl.. says:
    August 29, 2013 at 4:34 pm

    Thanks for your sound analysis, with facts, sources and crystal clear logic.
    I would call on you should I ever feel the need to be enlightened again.
    Meanwhile please come play ball with Mr Canning.

  190. Smith says:

    nico says:
    August 29, 2013 at 4:45 pm

    It is umimportant what you or Masoud or for that matter anyone else thinks about me. I do not care. I only care about truth which I speak unhindered. I only care about security of Shia Iran. Thats it.

  191. Karl.. says:


    If you believe irrational conspiracy theories Alex Jones is a better forum for you.

  192. nico says:


    Surely you were refering to such obvious information.m in your inept comment.

    “Are we going to slide into a major war with Russia on the other side of this and draw Russia into this war as well….this isn’t just a game of hey let’s push a button and blow up some people and tell them they shouldn’t use chemical weapons,” Sen. Rand Paul said during a radio interview with Mofopolitics.com. 

  193. Rd. says:

    So what of the Russian citizens in Syria? Have they all been evacuated?? Aren’t a sizable number of Russians helping with various military training, etc???? or the expectation is the tomohawks will fly no matter what?

  194. Smith says:

    You gotta “appreciate” the old fox and its nefarious and malicious deceptions. After almost three years of conspiring to push for war, it has finally cornered US to fight it and absolving itself by tricky domestic white politics. Now, US has no other choice but to do it on its own. Expect not much from French either. But US in a military sense does not need any of these lilliputian states to dispatch Syria to the next world. US is effectively the fighting machine of the white states. And it will not disappoint them, for sure.

  195. James Canning says:


    North Korea is under no risk whatever of attack by the US, assuming NK itself doesn’t not do something spectacularly stupid.

    Did someone fighting on behalf of Syrian gov’t order the use of CW recently? We don’t know at this point. But Syria would not have been able to build nukes. ZERO chance.

  196. James Canning says:

    assuming NK does not do something

  197. James Canning says:


    You may not like to consider this point, but it does appear that Iran’s own nuclear programme helped to bring catastrophe to Syria.

  198. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Bhadrakumar is another wannabe pundit, who, like Smith, just doesn’t get it.

    As I’ve repeatedly said everywhere, the ONLY thing preventing the US from attacking North Korea is not North Korea’s “dud” nuclear weapons that can’t be delivered or used. It’s North Korea’s million-man army with scores of thousands of artillery, missiles and tanks.

    Pentagon war games estimate fifty thousand US casualties in the first ninety days of a war with NK. THAT is too high a price for the US electorate to pay, and the US government knows it. Sure, they’d LIKE a war with NK. But why start a relatively short “hot war” with NK when you can start a decade-long war with Iran and make even MORE money, while minimizing US losses enough that the US electorate will go along with it just as they did in Iraq and Afghanistan?

    And again, Iran’s leaders have REPEATEDLY stated that they understand that Iran has no “use case” for nuclear weapons and will never pursue them as long as they don’t. Iran could NEVER develop nuclear weapons in time to prevent Iran from being attacked precisely BECAUSE they were developing nuclear weapons. Today, they AREN’T developing them and yet they’re STILL being threatened with attack. Imagine what would happen if they WERE developing nuclear weapons.

    This obvious logic is lost on people who don’t think things through. Fortunately Iran’s leaders HAVE thought it through.

  199. Richard Steven Hack says:

    BiBiJon: And from your article:

    “Defense experts said the deployment of the two warships identified by Interfax could give Assad early warning of cruise missile launches, particularly by submarine, or jam radars or navigation systems although they might never be used for this.

    “What we may be seeing here is an example of gunboat diplomacy rather than a deliberate attempt to interfere directly in any coalition strike militarily,” said Lee Willett, editor of IHS Jane’s Navy International.”

    Exactly. There is NO direct threat from Russia to the US over Syria. Putin is not as stupid as people here.

  200. James Canning says:


    China today is partly hyper-capitalist. Vietnam is going in that direction. South Korea’s economy is at least 40 times the size of North Korea’s economy. Does a “left-wing” movement really mean much these days?

  201. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Further note that all this “back tracking” means nothing.

    All the Syrian insurgents have to do is cause another chemical attack on a par with the most recent. Then we’re back to starting a war again.

    Does anyone really believe the insurgents are doing this ON THEIR OWN? Of course, these attacks are being designed and implemented by the Western and Saudi intelligence agents using the insurgents to carry them out, in order to justify a military intervention.

    Obama has a MANDATE from his masters and Israel to attack Syria, to enable Israel to attack Hizballah in Lebanon, and to attack Iran after those two parties have been rendered ineffective actors against Israel in an Iran war. That is the bottom line.

    How and when it happens is irrelevant.

  202. James Canning says:

    British Parliament has refused to back UK military action against Syria.

  203. James Canning says:

    R S Hack,

    Obama apparently has a clear understanding with Netanyahu that he will not allow Iran to build nukes and Israel will not attack Iran.

    But I agree with you Israel could not attack Iran with Hezbollah sitting atop a large stock of missiles etc.

  204. masoud says:

    Richard Steven Hack says:
    August 29, 2013 at 6:48 pm


    I think I asked you some three years ago when the US will finally attack and destroy Iran once and for all. I believe I also followed up a year and a half after that, asking what you thought of your previous answer, and if you’re opinion on the matter has changed at all.

    I don’t remember exactly what your answers were, but I do remember that were fatalistic, overly emotional, and without reference to the reality of the balance of forces of the middle east.

    Now it seems that Iranian threats are in large part forcing the undefeatable armies the US and Europe to at least back down on their threats to ‘intervene’ in Syria.

    What is your current view? How much longer do you believe you can cling to these fatalistic beliefs of yours?

  205. Rehmat says:

    Inspite of all the “red-line” rhetoric against Bashar Assad regime by the world nuclear powers – on Wednesday, the US-UK-France decided to “delay” the attack on Syria. Why? Because, the three Israeli poodles, Obama, Cameron and Hollande were told by their military generals that Syria is neither Iraq or Libya. Assad regime is supported by country’s powerful military establishment and the public. Furthermore, two nuclear powers, Russia and China – and non-nuclear regional powers, Iran and Hizbullah support Assad regime.

    Israeli Hasbara mouthpiece, The Wall Street Journal, whined on August 28, that American and British lawmakers urged their governments to delay the decision as result of Tehran and Damascus threats to hit Israel if Syria is attacked by foreign powers.


  206. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 29, 2013 at 6:39 pm

    Yes, and European Jews’ insistence on practicing their ancient religions and customs brought about their destruction – after all, they could have converted to Christianity centuries ago – like the Converseros in Spain – and be saved – both figuratively and literally.

  207. Dan Cooper says:

    In any crime, establishing “the motive” is one of the most important aspects of any investigation.

    Now let us analyze the motive and establish who was behind the chemical attack in Syria and more importantly benefited from it.

    There are two fundamental questions:

    1)—What would Assad gain by using chemical weapon and killing more than 400 innocent men, woman and children of his own people?

    2)—What would the enemies of Asad gain by using chemical weapon?

    There is absolutely no motive and no benefit for Asad to use chemical weapon.

    In fact Assad is smart enough to know that he would be digging his own grave if he uses chemical weapons.

    However, there is an extremely strong motive for the oppositions to use chemical weapon and blame it on Assad. This would cross the red line and would involve military intervention by the USA and Europe to remove Assad which is the ultimate aim of the oppositions.

    The case closed.

  208. Pirouz says:

    Masoud-jan, reading your rants today, I’m reminded of a common expression among Marines in the field during the Viet Nam War: “sounds like a personal problem.”

    First of all, I think Professor Juan Cole is correct where he provides a history of what is considered “white” and how that has changed many times during the past 200 years.

    And surely you must have friends that are considered “white” in the present context.

    Back when I permitted racists in my wider social circle (this stopped about 13 years ago and is now zero-tolerance), I used to tell such folks that their problem was they’d never had a close black friend (or whatever color that person was expressing racism towards). Otherwise they couldn’t feel that way.

    I’m fortunate to have grown up and lived in or near San Francisco. We’ve a tradition here of tolerance.

    I’m hoping your personal problem is resolved and you return to more enlightening commentary.

  209. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    August 29, 2013 at 1:19 pm
    Sadly when it comes to the wests actions in the middle east “This surely cannot make sense” is probably the kindest thing one could say about it

  210. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    August 29, 2013 at 1:13 pm
    Those who do not learn the lessons of history…

  211. Empty says:

    Dan Cooper,

    RE: “However, there is an extremely strong motive for the oppositions to use chemical weapon and blame it on Assad. This would cross the red line and would involve military intervention by the USA and Europe to remove Assad which is the ultimate aim of the oppositions.”

    In addition, the testing of chemical weapons in the lab are sanctioned only using animals. The researchers cannot use humans as subject a priori BUT there is no problem observing the “already exposed” group and using various “treatment” methods on them to see the impacts and be able to perfect the “art” of chemical weapons. Till this date, that (and accidental exposure) has been how the US Inc. have been able to extract human health impacts of chemical weapons. As far as they are concerned, the Muslims are excellent guinea pigs. The first round that the US observed this first hand and used the data to perfect its “art” of chemical weapons is outlined in this document with great details: https : //www.fas.org/irp/gulf/cia/960702/72566_01.htm

    Please note that this has been publicly available for decades and it’s not new. Please also note how they extracted detailed weather information, for example, to be able to correlate with the specific chemical used to determine exposure based on wind direction, wind speed, humidity, etc. and how they make recommendations to make the whole thing “more effective”.

    If it were up to me and I had the power, I would transfer every single one of the chemical weapons exposed persons to specialized hospitals in Iran and while we would make detailed observation and investigation (for the purpose of treatment and development of antidotes) I would bar any publication of the data, any conferences about the findings, and any access to any information by western scientist whatsoever.

  212. Empty says:

    …by any western scientist whatsoever, that is.

  213. Nasser says:


    – Bravo! Bravo!! Having such moral courage and an unwavering commitment to truth and justice would get anyone labelled a lunatic. I don’t have anything intelligent to add to your insights except that a part of me wishes to thank the Euro Americans for making it very clear to the Shias that they have a choice of either being armed with nuclear weapons or face genocidal extinction. Only retarded overly moralistic peaceniks or corrupt house negroes amongst the Iranians along with their racist Western partners are trying to obfuscate the truth and arguing against what should be plainly obvious to everyone.

    – And LOL at these delusional “sand dwelling muzzies” claiming themselves to be white! “Please spare us brother. We too are one of you.” Hahaha, some WASP probably almost died of laughter reading that.

  214. Empty says:


    I read the responses quite carefully. If I do not respond to a point, it should not be concluded that either I agree or I do not have a reasonable response. Often times, it is because: 1) I believe I have made the original point as clearly and transparently as I could and I cannot improve on my reasoning and I would be just repeating the same thing if I responded; 2) a mental filter of sort is preventing the person posting a response to see my point; 3) my own mental filter is not letting me see clearly the other person’s point in order to have something different to say. So, I refrain from responding since I think it would not lead to any progress in the argument till one of the conditions above has changed. I said this so that you know if I didn’t respond to your nuclear weapon argument it was because I thought we already made our arguments and counterarguments and we will not make further progress on the points we each raised.

    I still believe you and fyi have not provided convincing evidence how development of nuclear weapons by Iran would serve as a deterrent for Iran. I will put aside my moral objection (only for the sake of the argument here) and just present realities that you and fyi have to address in order to be convincing on this issue. For nuclear weapons (or any weapons of mass destruction) to serve as a deterrent, all three critical conditions must be met:

    1. The quantity, quality, and the delivery system for these weapons must be sufficiently adequate (or adequately sufficient) on the part of the country that develops them as a deterrent. That means not 1 or 2 or 3 of them but 100s or even 1000s. That means, by the time it is discovered, all must be in place and ready to go in less than a few seconds.

    2. There has to be reasonable known vulnerabilities on the part of the target countries, stations, bases, etc. in order for at least 10 to 15 percents of the firings to be successful in order to make it a credible threat as well as a reasonable shield on the part of the country that has decided to develop such weapons for counter attacks.

    3. There MUST be an absolute, known, and verifiable willingness on the part of the country that develops these weapons to use them. No if, buts, and or about it. Willingness to USE THEM even at the cost of obliterating itself, innocent people, and the whole world if it must. Full Stop.

    Even if the Islamic Republic of Iran somehow met conditions 1 and 2, it will never meet condition number 3. It is a Islamic country. That means, so long as it relies on its legitimacy for its Islamic (especially Shi’a) nature on “Ulama-ye Azma” in Qom, Najaf, and Mashahad, it will not meet condition number 3. You have to update your understanding (especially the socio-political and religious aspects) of Iran, its population and people, and its system to fully understand this.

    This is a country that its Nirooye Entezami (the police force) has to obtain approval even for its “riot control” devices and weapons from the Ulama. When the Ulama ruled that taser guns (routinely used in the US) has “eshkal Shar’ei” (cannot be used based on Shari’a), the police force had to rule it out and cancel its orders. When they ruled that the use of high pressure fire hosed water was not allowed because its pressure causes damage to rib cage, Nirooye Entezami could not and cannot use them to disperse demonstrators. These are not something that the government can hide because there are millions of ordinary people who would immediately contact the “Marj’a” to determine the religious legitimacy of these weapons, devices, and approaches.

    I can tell you with great degree of certainty that if the Islamic Republic of Iran ever ended up using such weapons it would be a “lakeh_ye nangi bar damaan_e” Islamic Republic of Iran just as Hiroshima and Nagazagi are forever “lakeh-haaye nangi bar damaan_e” United States of America. Except, there will no longer exist an Islamic Republic of Iran because it did it under the banner of Islam, Quran, Shi’a, and Ahl_e beyt (May Peace Be Upon Them All).

    If I know this, and if all Ulama know this, and if the members of the government know this, if the Valliye Faqih knows this, and if majority of the people in Iran know this, do you not think that the military analysts in the US Inc. also know this? Do you not see how nuclear weapons cannot be taken as a serious deterrent for Iran? Even if you change the political system in Iran, you will still not change the “Shia” and “human” nature of Iranians. Take a serious look at Iran’s thousands of years history and its hundreds of years Shi’a history and its 35 years Islamic republic history.

  215. A-B says:

    Dan Cooper,

    Your reasoning presupposes [moral] Men are Equal before an Objective Law and Reason. However, the Western fascists bend laws to their liking. If you listened to this vile creature of darkness, Cameron yesterday (and his legion in Europe and America; all democratically elected) they argue that exactly what you found illogical IS what implicates Assad; because he, as ‘Middle Easterner’, is by nature irrational; that he deliberately did this ‘audacious’ (idiotic) move (‘blunder’) to “test” the limits of the West. Now he should be disciplined by the stern White Man. In Skynews yesterday I witnessed in disgust what these racists did to Gaddafi (and other ME leaders they don’t like) to justify his elimination; they had a nobody as ‘expert’ to affirm the psychological ‘instability’ in Assad!!

  216. Empty says:

    Shahid Baqbani, martyred in Syria…short video (for Farsi-speaking people – remove spaces for the link to work)

    http: // webzine.mehrnews.com/FullStory/Video/?NewsId=8633

  217. Karl.. says:


    Yes that is nonsense too, its Ron not Rand that is the bright one between those two.

  218. Empty says:

    4 parts (this is part 4 of 4) re; attack on Syria by the US and company (for those who might be interested)…
    http : //www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dcxbRVmxYg

  219. nico says:


    Consmiracy theory.
    You could do better than that…

    The Suppressed Daily Mail ReportIn January 29, 2013, Britain’s most popular Daily Newspaper, in its online versionDailymail.co.uk published an article titled:

    U.S. ‘backed plan to launch chemical weapon attack on Syria and blame it on Assad’s regime’A few days later the article was removed.Archives.org has published the record of the controversial Daily Mail article pertaining to an alleged US sponsored intelligence operation to launch a chemical weapons attack on Syria and blame it on President Bashar al-Assad.

    The original articlehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2270219/U-S-planned-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-Syria-blame-Assad.html
    has been removed from the archives of the Daily Mail. It is nonetheless available at


  220. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Syria’s Readiness for Attack in Question

    Pretty much what I’ve said: they’ll be much harder than Libya, but will still lose against a concerted US/NATO attack. It will be even worse for them if Israel takes a hand which is why I expect Assad to not fire a single shot at Israel until Israel crosses into Syrian territory on the way to the Bekaa Valley.

  221. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Exclusive: Syrian army moves Scud missiles to avoid strike

    Syria KNOWS that the US is aiming to eliminate all Syrian weapons capable of affecting Israel in an Iran war…

  222. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Russia destroys missiles destined for Iran following Western pressure

    So much for the S-300’s…

  223. Rehmat says:


    American Jewish scholar, professor Jacob Neusner and Israeli professor Yeshyahu Leibowictz the great majority of current Jews don’t practice faith of prophet Moses. Their religion is Holocaust.


  224. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Iran Faces Difficulties Accessing Oil Revenues – Report

  225. BiBiJon says:

    Richard Steven Hack,

    What do you think all these media reports signify? Ae the powers that be more ready now than 6 months ago?

  226. fyi says:

    Empty says:
    August 30, 2013 at 3:07 am

    On your number 1, I would say 50-60.

    On your number 2, those are known.

    On your number 3, you are missing the point. With Russia, India, Pakistan, and Israel all within striking distance of Tehran; it makes eminent sense to have the capacity to retaliate against any and all.

    God will not stop a nuclear weapon on its way to Tehran; I am metaphysically certain of that.

    After the 1998 nuclear test of India and Pakistan, Iran should have left the NPT.

  227. fyi says:

    Mr. Khatami made a grave strategic error not doing so.

    Successive governments, from Mr. Rafsanjani until today, never seriously considered eliminating the Oil Export vulnerability of Iran either.

    They lived in a fantasy world in which they pursued détente with Euro-Americans.

    Know this: no one in EU speaks of war with Russia or China; why?

    Because those two states can make life very uncomfortable for EU citizens.

    But for the past 13 years I have watched public journalistic target selections in major EU and US papers.

    I Ulema do not understand this, they should be removed from their positions.

  228. emmanuelle says:

    “Make no mistake, U.S. military action against Syria will be fragrantly illegal”

    you’re bieng funny with the fragrance of the legality? it does stink, so I like the word you chose even better than the one you meant.

  229. James Canning says:


    Russia and China both pursue good relations with the EU. Sadly, Iran does not.

  230. James Canning says:


    If you believe US warmongers would try to set up a chemical weapons “attack” in Syria, to blame it on Syrian gov’t, it seems strange you do not see any reason US warmongers would block Iran’s application to buy replacement nuclear fuel for TRR in order to force Iran to enrich to 20.

  231. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 12:43 pm

    EU is not trying to destroy China or Russia; and for good reasons.

    It is called MAD.

    I suppose when Iran and her allies are safely ensconced behind a wall of nuclear weapons, EU and Iran, as well as the United States, could begin a process of normalization.

    As is, Iranians are powerless to prevent an attack on their allies; in Lebanon, in Syria, in Iraq, in Afghanistan.

    This will not endure.

    [I personally think that the policy of escalation to strategic Nowhere pursued by Axis Powers really helped wake-up Iranians from their strategic slumbers.

    If they were smart, they would have left Iranians alone in 1980 to wonder around for decades in search of their Shia Muslim Utopia.

    But no, they could not leave that one alone; they had to unleash Iraq, followed by Dual Containment, followed by Nuclear File etc.

    I suppose one must be grateful to the Axis Powers for kicking Iran and Iranians repeatedly; despising them, humiliating them an thus waking them up.

    Sort of like reprising of their role in Chin: “Dogs and Chinese are not permitted in this Park.”

    Thank you.]

  232. Ataune says:


    “Russia and China both pursue good relations with the EU. Sadly, Iran does not.”

    Completely wrong. I would say deceitful too. Even Ahmadinejad was seeking normal relations with all countries in the world including US (and obviously excluding the one you yourself villify)

  233. Ataune says:

    “If you believe US warmongers would try to set up a chemical weapons “attack” in Syria…”

    Not US, Saudi and Israeli operatives.

  234. James Canning says:


    Perhaps Ahmadinejad did sincerely seek better relations with the EU, but his pride caused him to help Israel to promote the notion he, and Iran, were “Holocaust deniers”?

    What on earth was Ahamdinejad thinking when Iran announced its intent to treble production of 20U?

    Why so many centrifuges?

  235. James Canning says:


    I strongly opposed western military intervention in Libya. But we need to bear in mind Gaddafi’s utterly idiotic (in PR frame of reference) rantings on TV about exterminating cockroaches etc etc.

    I think Gaddafi would not have been attacked if he had followed the PR advice he was receiving from a number of European diplomats.

    Western military intervention in Libya WAS NOT inevitable. Gaddafi’s blunders did much to bring it about.

  236. Ataune says:


    I told you before, the goal was to produce the back-up fuel rods for TTR, Arak, etc…

    So you are saying it is Israel whi is running the Iran show for EU and US ?

  237. James Canning says:


    I have known a good many Syrians and Lebanese, and Iranians, living in Britain or the US. I cannot rememember a single one who did not regard himself (or herself) as “white”.

    Maybe half a century ago, the situation in UK may have been somewhat diffent on that score.

  238. James Canning says:


    Iran had no need whatever to treble production of 20U to refuel TRR. Huge blunder. Question is why did Ahmadinejad allow it to be announced (intent to treble)?

  239. James Canning says:


    Israel is not “running the show” for the EU, or even the US for that matter. But prominent people in EU and US who support Iran’s domestic nuclear power programme were and are undercut by poor decisions made by Iran.

  240. Ataune says:


    So you are saying that Israel is not runing the show on Iran for EU and US but the policy makers are incapable of runing their own policy on Iran because Israel is not letting them do it (because of poor Iran decisions)?

  241. James Canning says:


    What should “the West” have done regarding Morsi, to “make sense” in your view? Morsi wanted Syrian gov’t overthrown. Do you think “the West” should have told Morsi not to back the insurgents in Syria?

  242. James Canning says:


    Ahmadineajd said the events of 1953 were “waater under the bridge” and no impediment to improvement of relations between Iran and the UK (and US). You agree? Or you prefer to “beat a dead horse”?

  243. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 1:06 pm

    I imagine the majority of analysts among Axis Powers did not anticipate Iranians’ capability or willingness to supply fuel to TRR themselves.

    They estimated that by further despising Iranians and humiliating them a la “Watch your cancer patients die and you cannot do a damn thing about it since we have all that technology” – reprising, as I sated before, the “No Dogs or Chinese allowed in this park” – they would break Iranian resistance.

    Iranians took advantage of this, and went about creating further facts-on-the-ground. By 2010 they had concluded that no acceptable deal with P5+1 was reachable, and thus they needed to take any opportunity they could to advance their nuclear know-how.

    Evidently they had also been willing to pay the excepted retaliation from Axis Powers.

    Where their estimation was incorrect, was in regards to Russia.

    All of these, in my opinion, are acceptable costs; the alternative is the destruction of major Iranian population centers in the coming years and decades.

    Now let us be very clear:

    The traditional method of pacification for the last 2000 years, all over the world, has been mass murder of the civilian/non-combatants.

    There has been numerous documented instances of that within the Iranian plateau over the last 1400 years; many of them having taken place within the current state boundaries of Iran.

    One has to accept this salient historical fact and plan accordingly.

    UK, France, US, Canada have no such historical experiences over the last 1000 years.

    Iran will be a threshold nuclear-weapon state – if not already – and there is nothing that Israel, Axis Powers, Russia, or China can do about it.

  244. Ataune says:


    I think Hage should change his tone and posture vis-a-vis Iran to hope for better relation.

  245. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    This was correct at the time; I do not think that young people in Iran cared much about that either.

    But the situation has now changed; after the start of Economic Siege War against Iran.

    In an analogous manner to the way that the late Marshall Stalin revived the memory of the Napoleonic invasion of Russia and the name of the late Marshall Kutozov; Mr. Khamenie has been mentioning the 1953 Coup as an example of the relentless enmity of US and UK to Iran, Iranian people, and the progress of Iran.

    Mr. Khamenei, in fact, has likewise mentioned the late Dr. Mossadeq by name – in an analogous manner to the late Marshall Stalin’s revival of Kutozov.

  246. Ataune says:


    “Where their estimation was incorrect, was in regards to Russia.”

    Iran is playing, since at least 40 years ago, a balancing game against two of its external rivals in the region, Russia and Anglo-Americans. This act, sparkled by the kind of Aghassi and Amirkabir, was too complex to be played by the last Pahlavi. That’s the main reason he lost both internally and externally. On the other hand the system born from the revolution has all the necessary strength to at least make sure that Iran can play this game of balancing between the East and the West. Today’s Iran seems well capable of improving its path towards self-belief, dynamism and democracy and avoid being being extensively harmed by its adversaries the way Syria or Egypt are.

  247. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 12:49 pm

    “Nico,If you believe US warmongers would try to set up a chemical weapons “attack” in Syria, to blame it on Syrian gov’t, it seems strange you do not see any reason US warmongers would block Iran’s application to buy replacement nuclear fuel for TRR in order to force Iran to enrich to 20.”

    As fyi rightly claimed the Iranian nuclear is only an excuse for the western clash of civilization game.
    As was clearly confessed bu Dennis Ross years ago when he admited that the Iran nuclear file was only a mean to build up a case for war when the time is right.

  248. James Canning says:


    Perhaps Khamenei would do well to draw more attention to how close the US and Iran have been, in the past, to an improvement of relations.

    Obviously, the event of 1953 are “water under the bridge” if the US, or EU, want to seek improved relations with Iran and can act intelligently in pursuing better relations.

    I have a feeling you do not believe Iran can get by without exporting oil by sea. But perhaps the people of the country could accept the huge dislocations?

  249. James Canning says:


    Yes, there are powerful enemies of Iran, who regard themselves as supporters of Israel in being enemies of Iran, in the US, who want to help Israel by forcing war between Iran and the US.

    Issue is why Iran makes it easier for its enemies. Why? Answer obviously has a bit to do with power struggles within Iran.

  250. James Canning says:


    You keep saying it does not matter what Iran does, because in effect Iran’s enemies control the US. Why would Iran help enemies of Iran “control the US”?

  251. James Canning says:


    Is the US a “rival” of Russia in the Middle East? The UK? I think Russia seeks peace and stability in the Middle East. I think the UK does too.

  252. James Canning says:


    I think enemies of Iran in the US caused the blocking of Iran’s application to buy replacement nuclear fuel for TRR, expecting it would force Iran to enrich to 20. I think many of these enemies of Iran in the US welcomed Iran’s announcment of intent to treble production of 20U.

  253. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 1:54 pm

    The only way to seek Peace and Stability in the Middle East is by achieving strategic understanding between Axis Powers, Iran, Russia, and China.

    It could start with Iran and US and later others could be brought in.

    We are decades away from that, in my opinion, years of bloodshed and war are ahead; like the previous decades.

  254. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 1:59 pm

    I think not.

    “Dogs and Chinese are not allowed in this park.”

  255. fyi says:


    Why the various wars will continue…Religious wars go on for a long time


  256. Ataune says:


    “Is the US a “rival” of Russia in the Middle East? The UK?”

    The UK is not in a caliber to be somewhere in the Russian/US game. And obviously Iran is not either. The main difference between Iran and UK is that the former is rising somehow while the latter is declining for sure with no positive prospect in sight.

    It is doubtless that Russia and US are in rivalrity. They are playing this geopolitical game, among other things, for sometimes now. Russia can never be a “friend” of the US neither the other way around. Now that Russia lacks the ideological ascendency of the Communism time its strategic interest lie in sharing the “values” of the Western world, aiming for a one body “West” with US being one shoulder of it and Russia the other. While the Interests of the US resides in having the US the head and the shoulders of this one body while Russia is relegated to the other parts like EU and somehow Japan etc…

  257. James Canning says:

    @Ataune – – The US and Russia have many interests in common, and friendship between the two countries should not be too difficult to achieve and maintain. Even if there are important disagreements here and there.

    American neocons have a strong tendency to try to damage America’s relations with Russia.

    Obviously, US and Russia have common interest in peace and stability in Middle East.

  258. James Canning says:


    Relative economic significance of Britain remains high, as anyone following property prices in London can attest.

    A significant percentage of the richest people on the planet want houses (or flats) in Britain.

  259. Karl.. says:

    Anyone watched how John Kerry squeezed in Iran and Hizbollah in his warmongering speech?

  260. James Canning says:


    All Arab countries offer peace and recognition to Israel WITHIN ITS “1967” BORDERS.

    The real problem is Israel’s insane effort to keep much of the West Bank permanently.

  261. James Canning says:


    Yes, regrettably, John Kerry does tend to spout rather too much along a “pro-Israel” line. We know why this obtains.

  262. Ataune says:


    Then, how do you explain their profound dispute on Syria?

    US is planing to act illegaly, lacking legitimacy and wihtout any empowering credibility for their declared aim and Russia has clearly said that it will veto the UK proposal for resolution. This whole thing is about the post-WWII legal framework under the serious risk of crumbling and the “guaranties” that it somehow provided for the security and peace in the world. And the 2 powers are on 2 different end of the spectrum on that issue and you are saying the neo-cons are the ones that are pushing for the discord. As far as I understand this is the administration own making.

  263. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    ugust 30, 2013 at 1:50 pm
    “Nico,You keep saying it does not matter what Iran does, because in effect Iran’s enemies control the US. Why would Iran help enemies of Iran “control the US”?”


    That is Anglo policy against all who are resisting them.
    Not specially Iran.
    The same goes in Latin America.

    Like UK empire when that little country still meant something.

    Your willfull blindness, tainted by exceptionalism and by realpolitik BS, to western arrogance and thugish behaviour is true sign of your moral complicity and criminal supremacism.

    Obviously you are still instilling that the zionists are the real enemy of Iran while YOU are the kind of real enemy of Iran.

  264. James Canning says:


    I am an “enemy” of Iran, in your view, because I welcome a rich and secure Iran? How peculiar.

  265. James Canning says:


    Almost none of my friends in Britain or the US seek the destruction, or even injury of Iran.

    You appear to believe it does not matter what decisions Iranian leaders take. That the warmongers are in control, and Iran may as well accept the fact its oil exports by sea will be cut off entirely.

  266. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    The real problem is the religious commitment of so many Protestants in US, Canada, an UK to the Jewish Fantasy project in Palestine.

    US, UK, EU, alone or in combination cannot fight and win against Islam; but thousands of people – largely Muslims – will die until this fact sinks into the heads of Axis Powers’ leaders.

    Decades from now, we might be able to get back to something resembling the situation in the Middle East circa 1950.

    May be in 2050?

  267. fyi says:


    Finally a statement from Mr. Canning that actually is accurate:

    “That the warmongers are in control, and Iran may as well accept the fact its oil exports by sea will be cut off entirely.”

  268. James Canning says:


    Germany did not want Britain to fight on the side of France in the First World War. But Germany did a number of things, very ill-advisedly, to bring about British intervention on behalf of France.

    Are you going to argue it did not matter what Germany did? That Britain would have fought on the side of France anyway?

  269. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 1:59 pm
    Why do they have a problem with 20% but not with 5% james?,that part of your argument makes no sense,iran has a huge stockpile of 5%,but only a tiny stockpile of 20% neither can be used to make bombs.The problem is not the amount of enrichment but enrichment itself,I think you know that too

  270. Sineva says:

    fyi says:
    August 30, 2013 at 2:33 pm
    I`m inclined to agree

  271. James Canning says:


    I did not say the warmongers were in control of the US. I very much believe mistakes by Iran have helped the warmongers in their effort to control US policy in the Middle East.

  272. James Canning says:


    You will of course recall that I have said Iran, sadly, helped to bring about civil war in Syria. Not Iran’s intention, to be sure.

  273. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 1:49 pm
    “Nico,Yes, there are powerful enemies of Iran, who regard themselves as supporters of Israel in being enemies of Iran, in the US, who want to help Israel by forcing war between Iran and the US.Issue is why Iran makes it easier for its enemies. Why? Answer obviously has a bit to do with power struggles within Iran.”


    The like of YOU are the true eny of Iran with your unprincipled stance.

  274. James Canning says:


    The six powers have a problem with the 20 simply because Iran for years said Iran would not enrich above 5.

    Then, due to US stupidity (to be kind), Iran was forced to go to 20.

    Then, sadly, Iran anounced intent to treble production of 20. This wrecked William Hague’s intended programme of improving UK relations with Iran.

  275. James Canning says:


    You seem to argue that I should urge Iran to stockpile 20U? Because Iran has a right to produce 20U?

    So, in your view, I should denounce the US and the UK, and encourage Iran to take decisions that injure Iran?

  276. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 2:37 pm

    What brought about the Civil War in Syria – ultimately – was the Fall of Man/Hobut Adam – the crooked timber of mankind etc.

  277. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 2:36 pm

    Ah yes, Iranian mistakes – like nationalizing the oil industry etc.

    The major Iranian mistake has been their devotion to religious orthopraxy for 500 years and the concomitant neglect of empirical sciences.

    Even when they learnt how to cast cannons and make rifles they did not spend any effort learning ballistics, chemistry, metallurgy etc. from Europeans.

    Again, I am pleased that Axis Powers have kicked Iranians hard and awakened them from their slumber.

  278. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 2:29 pm
    “Nico,I am an “enemy” of Iran, in your view, because I welcome a rich and secure Iran? How peculiar.”

    You are exactely of the same kind as zionizt leftist in Israel.
    You veil yourself in reason and progressism.
    But at the end of the day you are a supremacist and a racist all the same.

    You are unprincipled in your stances and refuse to recognize your government criminality.

    As described by Gilad Atzmon such leftist supremacist are the worse of their kind.

    Actually the right wing at least recognize their own racism.
    But the leftist are racist all the same but they are also exceptionalist on top of that.
    Yes YOU are the real enemy of Iran and HYPOCRITE.

  279. Karl.. says:

    Distubring how Kerry squeezed IRan in as a victim of chemical weapons when it was US, UK that provided and supported Saddam during that time.

  280. fyi says:


    Commentary by Mr. Abrams:


    Evidently, it took a month to prepare the provocation….

  281. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 2:43 pm
    “Nico,You seem to argue that I should urge Iran to stockpile 20U? Because Iran has a right to produce 20U?So, in your view, I should denounce the US and the UK, and encourage Iran to take decisions that injure Iran?”

    I expect you to stop blame the victim nd recognize the Anglo criminal policies. Period.

  282. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Empty-jan thanks for your words of wisdom. I tried explaining to some of these so-called experts years ago that Iran has been around for a couple thousand years and that God will continue to protect it against all enemies as it has so far.

    As somebody said: “I am metaphysically certain of this.”

    There is no point “in only caring about protecting Shia Iran” as smithy claims when you don’t adhere to the first rule of Shiaism: “Obey the Vali!”

    Like I said, the rest is bulls**t.

    What these gentlemen don’t want to understand (and I alluded to it in the post addressed to fyi) is that Iran has deterrence and retaliatory means that are not nuclear ICBMs.

    Their nuke argument is moot 1. because we have the deterrence they seek, just not with the their favorite hayvani tool- which in fyi’s case is not a problem because his view is just aping the west in everything- good and evil. But it is a major a problem for young smith who claims to be Shia Muslim and so easily invokes the name of Allah (swt) when cursing others.

    It’s moot because 2. Vali issued fatwa forbidding nuclear weapons. Next subject.

    What can I tell you, just reminds me of Imam Ali (as) and Siffin, Peace of Imam Hassan (as) Imam Hussein (as) at Karbala. Same dudes as then arguing with the vali. In fyi’s case this goes back 40 years and it’s reaching critical with his (our generations) imminent death. But young smith, just like those troops of Imam Hassan (as) khak tu saresh…

    The only thing relevant about smith is whether he has the balls to go to- oh I don’t for example Syria- and put his life and unappreciated massive intelligence on the line for defending Islam.

    Get off your ass young smith and experience the world. I pray for your martyrdom fi sabil-illah!

    The rest is bulls**t

    It’s really not important if felan or felan don’t get that we are strategically deterring the US and UK as we speak, what’s relevant is that the US and UK govt know this and that’s why they have not attacked Iran and will not attack Iran.

    You see despite the very high intelligence and nice analytic skills displayed both gentlemen lack one thing essential for forming a relevant opinion: relevant, real, current information about Iran’s capabilities. No amount of innate intelligence and breadth of historical knowledge can goh-mali this major gap.

    The rest is bulls**t.

  283. fyi says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    August 30, 2013 at 3:39 pm

    Before advising young people to go and get themselves killed in far-off places; I suggest you do so yourself.

    I am sure Mr. Assad could use any help he can get.

  284. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Remember Feltman hearing that we will fight to the last drop of blood from Jenabe Zarif and Dr Rohani is much more effective than from “crazies” like me.

    I’m guessing Feltman shat his pants at that meeting.

    In the end, everyone has to stay within the lines determined by SL. And for the record SL said he liked the interview by Zarif (because hey Iran loves peace, right?).

    The relevant issue is the utter and total moral failure of the so-called left, liberal, libertarian and progressive people in the west. It is because of their incompetence, idiocy and moral cowardice that their governments get away with genocide, murder, torture, theft etc…

    Basically the left-wing in the west are a-holes who if processed into fish food and thrown in the seven seas, would be of greater value to this planet then they currently are- especially the ones in the US. Their moral cowardice, political incompetence and intellectual shallowness is breath-taking. As smith would say: May God curse them.

    Instead of piercing their asses, they should get off of it and take over the governments- and yes maybe some will die and some will get killed. That’s how shit happens throughout human history.

    Imam(r) said that as Muslims we need to rise up against tyranny so God forbid people don’t think Islam is like Christianity! He said we follow the Imams (as) who killed and were killed.

    What I mean is not killing some fourth-world insurgent with an AK as the “brave” western soldiers do- and of course so many of them then commit suicide when they get home. I mean fighting government troops in your home country.

    I don’t know maybe I would pursue “the comfortable life” as well if I was in that situation. Like I said nothing compares to overthrowing an unjust order- nothing. I mean how many hot chicks can you bang and how many Ferraris can you crash before it gets old, right?

    Oh sorry, that was on “reality TV”, not on “reality”.

    “Reality” is that with God’s help we overthrew the Shah who was supported by the mightiest powers we repelled foreign invaders supported by the Americans AND the Soviets who had no bones about using chemical weapons (ironic these days isn’t it) and we rebuilt after the war and lived to tell about it.

    Banging the entire Elite model agency roster while high on all the cocaine from Colombia and all the heroin in Afghanistan and Thailand combined, does not compare to the high we feel after the “reality” we experienced.

    Arzi dige nadaram baradar.

  285. Bussed-in Basiji says:


    Ironic coming from somebody who didn’t get off his ass to defend his own country.

    Too busy pursuing “the comfortable life”, right?

    My advice to you is that you keep silent about this subject.

  286. nico says:


    Who cares ? This is not the name of the game.

    Know what the axis power want ?


    “Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan says the country seeks a regime change in Syria rather than limited strikes on the Arab state.”

    At the end of the day what count is Russian and Iranian deterence and whether they are ready to enter the game directly.

  287. Rd. says:

    Looks like there may be a ‘potential’ to turn this into an opportunity…

    Iran and Turkey should formulate regional solutions to all of the problems in the region together, Iranian Ambassador to Ankara Alireza Bigdeli has said, calling on Turkey to cooperate with his country.

    President Abdullah Gül
    “The solution will be through politics and diplomacy. It should be aimed at forcing politics and diplomacy and opening its door. Russia and Iran should be engaged one way or another,” he added.


    “I see no NATO role in an international reaction to the (Syrian) regime,” Rasmussen told reporters in the Danish town of Vejle, daily Politiken reported.

    Yes, you can say feltman, got a bad feeling when he visited Tehran.

  288. Karl.. says:


    I think its obvious that Turkey cant be trusted, they have no policy they change from day to day and Iran knows this.

  289. James Canning says:


    Interesting comments by Javier Solana that you just linked. “[S]ince Iran’s new president, Hassan Rouhani, took office at the beginning of August, the West, to put it mildly, has not demonstrated sufficient will to explore possible openinings.” Very true, and regrettable.

  290. James Canning says:


    You are arguing Iran is the “victim” because it so ill-advisedly announced its intent to treble 20U production? Who forced Iran to do this?

  291. James Canning says:


    Elliott Abrams is of course a leading neocon warmonger in the US.

  292. James Canning says:


    Where on earth do you get the idea I am a “leftist”? Wrong.

  293. James Canning says:


    I agree Iran gains some benefit from the sanctions etc. Helps offset the losses.

  294. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 5:24 pm
    “Nico,You are arguing Iran is the “victim” because it so ill-advisedly announced its intent to treble 20U production? Who forced Iran to do this?”

    Nonesensical statement.
    Clear proof of your mental disorder and schyzophrenia of the typical leftist supremacist.

  295. Kooshy says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    August 30, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    Here in US we don’t ( no longer ?) have a LEFT we have a bunch of A holes who are liberal imperialists meaning they like the intellectual capacity of being fair but without losing their comfort and luxury at their expense.
    This group since it knows the only way they can keep and maintain their current level of comfort and standard of leaving is only possible when US can maintain her hegemony and imperialism they willingly chose to close their eyes and make an indefendable justifications in support of the ruling class . This is very much similar to what we had in Iran back in 70s or the left in France. correctly it’s been labeled as bankrupt left, or better yet ” corrupted left”

  296. Kooshy says:

    Bussed-in Basiji says:
    August 30, 2013 at 4:16 pm

    Here in US we don’t ( no longer ?) have a LEFT we have a bunch of A holes who are liberal imperialists meaning they like the intellectual capacity of being fair but without losing their comfort and luxury at their expense.
    This group since it knows the only way they can keep and maintain their current level of comfort and standard of leaving is only possible when US can maintain her hegemony and imperialism they willingly chose to close their eyes and make an indefendable justifications in support of the ruling class . This is very much similar to what we had in Iran back in 70s or the left in France. correctly it’s been labeled as bankrupt left, or better yet ” corrupted left”

  297. nico says:

    Kooshy says:
    August 30, 2013 at 5:40 pm

    “This is very much similar to ” …. ” the left in France. correctly it’s been labeled as bankrupt left, or better yet ” corrupted left”

    The left and right in France are corrupt to the bone.
    They agree on all macro policies.
    Such macro policies are never discussed.
    And when it happens that they are ever discussed like the rejected referundum regarding the European Constitution, both parties nonetheless signed in the Lisbon treaty.
    That is called high treason.
    And the political class should be hanged high.

    The only difference between both is their social management.
    As an example the left is for the gender theory while the right is against.

    Truly degenerated political leadership on both sides.

    But with the crisis and the deep western degeneration there is less and less illusion about the state of deep corruption of the current domestic political order.

    Suffice to see the approval ratings.

  298. James Canning says:


    A good argument can be made that the relative decline in the wealth of the American miiddle class over past four decades has a great deal to do with squandering on unnecessary “defence”. By the US. ZERO need for such squandering.

  299. James Canning says:


    You are reluctant to accept a simple fact: Iran blundered badly by announcing intent to treble 20U. Wrecked Hague’s plans of improving Britain’s relations with Iran. And helped clear the way for civil war in Syria.

  300. Ataune says:

    “[Iran] Wrecked Hague’s plans of improving Britain’s relations with Iran”

    Here we go again. I thought you just said that Israel is not running the show regarding relation with Iran. If Hagues plan was to improve relation – and as someone who seems pretty influential with the FCO you can ask Dalton if this was the real plan – so then, how come a line of diplomacy, backed by at least 200 years of history, can be so easily derailed by a bunch of “lunatics” (according to you) in a kingdom who doesn’t have friends but interests ?

  301. Sineva says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 5:24 pm
    Ahhh the west,with its sanctions and threats and it refusal to supply iran with the fuel assemblies for the trr.If 20% enrichment was a problem for the west dont you think it would have bent over backwards to avoid giving iran any excuse to enrich to over 5%?

  302. fyi says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 5:22 pm

    In 1951, when the International Court of Justice at The Hague found in Iran’s favor in the suite that UK’s had brought against Iran, UK had the political cover to claim conformance to “International Law” and negotiate with Iran in good faith.

    She elected to escalate to destroy the sitting Iranian government; first through Economic Siege War and then when that failed, in collaboration with US, through sedition.

    Analogously, the 2007 US NIE had supplied Axis Powers, China, and Russia with the political cover to take a different tack with Iran.

    Instead, just like in 1951, they elected to escalate to where we are now – another Economic Siege War against a sitting Iranian Government.

    [Yes Russia and China have been complicit as well, you have to ask them for their calculations.]

    This time, Iranian Intellegience, Government, and People are not as disorganized as 60 years earlier.

    But the aim to destroy independent Iranian power is identical – in my estimation.

    In 1953, after the Iranians were defeated, the terms of the oil agreement they signed was worse than what was offered to the late Prime Minister Razmara.

    If Iran is defeated this time, she will be de-industrialized by the Axis Powers; the way it was done in Iraq after 1991 and Iranians will be condemned to live the wrecked life of Afghans, Iraqis, Pakistanis, and Syrians.

    These are the stakes for Iranians as I see them.

    There is no possibility of détente and Mr. Solana’s piece essentially indicates.

  303. fyi says:

    Rd. says:
    August 30, 2013 at 5:03 pm

    Turkey, like Pakistan, is in awe of Axis Powers.

    Financially, she is dependent on Axis Powers in a manner even more deeply than former Yugoslavia.

    She is incapable of strategic autonomy; she is the Axis Power’s hand-maiden in Syria – collaborating in a project that has included the massacres of Kurds, Christians and Alawites; the latest massacre being the one in Damascus.

    And this is the Turkish version of the Muslim Brotherhood; we saw the Egyptian version in action this past year.

    Iranian leaders have not grasped the fact that MB are not the same as them; they are retrograde Sunni Muslims who will never collaborate with the Shia Islamic Republic. They are truly dead-ends.

  304. Rehmat says:

    Israel’s war on Iran begins … in Syria

    Pepi Escobar vs Stephen Schlesinger debate at RT.


  305. Richard Steven Hack says:

    Well, that didn’t work, still too many links… Let’s try again without the links all together…

    Some idiots think that Obama “trapped himself” by making Syrian chemical use a “red line”, thinking that Syria would never use them, therefore he would never have to attack Syria.

    First of all, since he declared early on that “Assad must go”, it doesn’t matter what the “red line” is. There IS NO “red line” if the goal is regime change in the first place.

    Second, if Israel wants an Iran war – and they do – then the only way to get one is to get Syria and Hizballah in Lebanon out of the way first. So both regime change and “red lines” are irrelevant. The US and Israel HAVE to attack Syria.

    Third, the real situation is the reverse: Obama made his “red line” commitment because he KNEW that eventually they would have to use the chemical weapons excuse as the reason to attack Syria, because the UN Charter Chapter 7 language the US tried to get into the UNSC Resolutions early one was taken out by Russia and China and/or the Resolutions vetoed. And the provocations that Turkey and Israel then used to try to get Assad to strike back, thus justifying a NATO Charter assault, also did not work because Assad knew he would be attacked if he retaliated.

    The chemical weapons ploy was thus the ONLY one Obama could RELY ON to enable a US/NATO attack on Syria. And that is precisely why the Syrian insurgents were SUPPLIED by either Libya or Saudi Arabia with Sarin gas, AND why the CIA was TRAINING insurgents in handling chemical weapons. Because it was precisely the plan to set up a false flag chemical attack on Syrian civilians in order to justify US/NATO intervention.

    And Obama knew all about it from day one (or at least as soon as it became clear he wasn’t going to get UNSC authority to attack Syria.)

    All this has been PLANNED. It isn’t going to stop now even if Cameron can’t get the British Parliament to agree to an attack at this time.

    Even if Obama decides to back off for the moment, all the people behind the chemical attacks have to do is…another one. Or as many as needed to force the issue.

    Because, again, Obama’s mandate is to start a war with Iran – and to do that he must attack Syria and allow Israel to attack Lebanon. He has no choice.

    Masoud: There is no “balance of forces” in the Middle East deterring the US from attacking Iran. There IS a PROBLEM for ISRAEL attacking Iran before taking out Syria and Hizballah, nothing more. If the US and NATO and Israel can degrade Syria and Hizballah sufficiently, Israel will have no problem attacking Iran and the US will be right there to take over the prosecution of that war almost instantly.

  306. Ataune says:


    I do not believe 3 years is enough time for the “mandate” you attribute to the man to be accomplished. Besides, he is human after all and just a little bit of procrastination and he can be like Blair a wealthy retiree sipping his cocktail on his yacht instead of having his name defamed in every history book. I think he will opt for the second choice and the way he is playing around he know how to accomplish this one.

  307. Ataune says:

    by the second choice, I meant the sipping

  308. Empty says:

    James Canning,

    RE: “Issue is why Iran makes it easier for its enemies. Why? Answer obviously has a bit to do with power struggles within Iran.”

    When different entities in the UK pose opposing opinions re; foreign policy and other issues, you call it a healthy play of democracy. But if the same thing happens in Iran, you call it power struggle. Why is that, James? Have you every examined your own thoughts to try to see how your mind works? Could you understand why people here call you a racist?

  309. fyi says:


    Updated Commentary by Dr. Cordesman – in the light of Mr. Kerry’s refusal to provide solid evidence in his speech today:


    I must admit that I agree with Mr. Hack here; the line about “chemical weapons”; just like the line about Kosovo in Mr. Bush I speech.

  310. Empty says:


    Through first hand experience, I have come to believe that any non-God believing persons active in peace and justice movement are just useless in the struggle. Because they do not believe in God and that there is a life after this world, when push comes to shove (to save their royal behind), they abandon you, their position, and everything they stood for and leave you out in the cold. In these struggles, those who believe in God but not in “maktab_e shahadat”, too, are the other side of the above coin.

    Re; your other point, I think it has not sunk in yet that the whole point in the struggle for God is that “mo’emenin” always win and that God wants to make it clear that they won despite their military toys not because of their military toys. People are too enamored by their military equipment “elaah” to see the hand of “Allah”.

    Re; Iran’s deterrent capability, first and foremost is “Shahaadat” and a willingness to pay the price. As I read and understood, Iran effectively dismantled Iraq’s air force for the rest of the Iraq-Iran war by its “Kamaan 99” operation because of a willingness on the part of pilots to sacrifice their lives and the planes. As I’ve also come to understand now, the US Delta force got lost in Tabas because they did not want to go even into the expense of more modern helicopters but opted for the old ones since they planned on destroying them anyway.

    Thank the Almighty for making our enemy stupid and “kahsis” with their own lives and possessions.

  311. Empty says:

    “khasis” (stingy), that is.

  312. Empty says:


    RE: “I Ulema do not understand this, they should be removed from their positions.”

    How do you remove “reverence” power of Ulama from Shi’a hearts? Britain had tried for centuries but everything they had “reshteh” returned to “panbeh” with Imam Khomeini’s simple “imamat” and the Islamic revolution. They have tried to infiltrate the rank and file of Ulama but let’s just see how their tricks work (again against themselves, that is).

  313. fyi says:

    Empty says:
    August 30, 2013 at 10:56 pm

    Merely a figure of speech; the late Mullah Baqir Majlesi, I suspect, enjoyed enormous amount of reverence.

    And yet he, and his disciple, the late Shah Sultan Hussein Safavi, were complicit in bringing misery to Iranian people – within and without the current boundaries of Iran, for more than 100 years – until the late Aqa Muhammad Khan Qajar restored the state.

    No amount of piety is going to disarm a 10-kiloton nuclear warhead.

    No martyrdom operation can save Tehran from such as attack.

    Iran does not need another Majlesi or another Shah Sultan Hussein.

    That is all.

  314. Unknown Unknowns says:

    fyi says:
    August 30, 2013 at 8:21 pm
    “…And this is the Turkish version of the Muslim Brotherhood; we saw the Egyptian version in action this past year…. Iranian leaders have not grasped the fact that MB are not the same as them; they are retrograde Sunni Muslims who will never collaborate with the Shia Islamic Republic. They are truly dead-ends.”

    A-ha! A statement of yours having to do with Islam that I agree with! I suppose there is a first time for everything :o)

    Except I will add this minor qualifier that the adjective in your phrase “retrograde Sunni” is redundant, because it implies that there are or once were Sunnis who were not retrograde, whereas the entire edifice was founded on the Saqifa coup d’état. The rest is just tragic history.

  315. nico says:

    James Canning says:
    August 30, 2013 at 7:00 pm
    /Nico,You are reluctant to accept a simple fact: Iran blundered badly by announcing intent to treble 20″

    You are the enemy of Iran.

  316. nico says:

    Mr Canning

    You are the philosophical and political brother of Shimon Peres.
    Like Peres blaming the palestinian not wanting peace in one hand and genociding them in the other by denying them their rights.

    As for the 20%.
    You blame Iran “blunder” in one hand and call for peace but in the other hand you fully support and advise the Anglo government to deprive Iran of its rights.

    Yes as the typical Anglo you are Zionist Parent.
    You are a liar a deceptive sophist and a racist supremacist.

  317. nico says:

    But do not think you are deceiving me.
    Your sheer zionidt like stance is clear.

    A d I hope I made it clear to everyone here.

  318. Rehmat says:

    @ Richard Steven Hack

    Don’t you remember, Hizbullah already defeated the Jewish army in 2000 and 2006?


  319. Rehmat says:

    Netanyahu has many other heaches in addition to bringing pro-Israel regime changes in Baghdad and Tehran. He is very much involved in how to get rid of 50,000 unwanted African asylum seekers from Israel.


  320. James Canning says:


    I support Iranian enrichment to 5, and point out Russia and China want Iran to stop enriching to 20. So, rant against Russia and China.

  321. James Canning says:


    For me to point out a serious blunder by Iran is not to make me an “enemy” of Iran. Friends should point out serious blunders.

    Announcing intent to treble 20U production was a very serious blunder. Full stop.