What happened in Syria???

 On Friday, 6 December, most Arabs heard that Bashar Assad was finished, Hayat Tarir al-Shams was taking over Syria with no opposition, they were not, as many claimed, still al-Qaeda or ISIS, they were reformed (Julani, formerly dressed like a terrorist, put on a suit like Zelenski's), so now they appealed to all Syrians. I checked my (English) sources, and they said Syria was safe, since the Russians were there to protect them.

The US has wanted those Russian Naval Bases in Syria for NATO, and now probably has then. The US has been working on this for a long time. They took all the Syrian oil and a lot of the wheat, leaving Syria with no income. Military officers were paid $30 to $40 a month, the enlisted men about $5, while those in Hayat Tarir al-Shams (or HTS) were getting more than $2,000 a month, and the soldiers and officers in the Syrian Army were promised decent pay if they'd surrender. Most were killed after they surrendered, so they don't need the money, but Bashar Assad's government was overthrown on Saturday, 7 December.

Israel took Southern Syria. Turkey took a chunk of Northern Syria, and demands all the oil property now held by US troops with Kurdish support. Russia have not yet been driven out of Syria, but their position is now very difficult, and they'll probably withdraw and NATO will take their abandoned ports.

***

The Arab League ejected Syria, but the Gulf Arabs promised readmission and money if Syria would cut ties with Russia, the PRC, and Iran.

So, with no money to pay the military, and with Erdogan promising huge sums if they'd surrender, the Syrian military surrendered. Bashar was in the Russian base in Latakia, and it was suggested he go to Russia, so he went on Sunday, December 8.

For now, HTS says a) they have no quarrel with Israel, Israel is welcome to Southern Syria; and b) "Next year in Jerusalem".

Many Syrians are rejoicing, while many others are trying to flee to Lebanon, sure they'll be killed if they stay (and they're probably right).

***

After 19 Arabs perpetrated the hijacking and suicidal crashing of four airplanes, destroying the World Trade Center, General Wesley Clark said he heard someone say that Iraq and six other countries must be destroyed, seven countries in five years.

It took a little longer. In 2001, of course, President Bush, Jr. said the hijackers were all Afghans, so the US attacked Afghanistan. Then, in 2003, he said he'd discovered three more countries were responsible in what the Washington Post says was one of the best State of the Union Speeches ever given: Iran planned, funded, and organised the attack, and the Afghans were helped by Iraq and the DPRK, so the US had offered Saddam the chance to surrender, he had refused, and the US must invade and destroy the terrorist nation Iraq, and then Iran and the DPRK.

A few weeks later, President Bush, Jr admitted he'd missed two more countries responsible for 9/11: Libya and Cuba.

The list of 7 countries to be destroyed were Iraq, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Lebanon, and Iran, and all but Iran have been effectively destroyed. 

Libya had the highest per capita of all the countries in Africa, all from stealing all the US oil under Libyan soil. Now, all that oil goes to the US who share 10% with the UK and 10% with France for helping destroy Libya. The Libyans have nothing but the souk al abid (سوق العبد), that and taking money to put too many desperate people in flimsy boats to try to sail to Europe.

Sudan got a civil war, was broken into two countries, Sudan and South Sudan, both of which are now having civil wars, so two civil wars from one.

Somalia was destroyed by sanctions, as was Lebanon.

And Syria was destroyed by having all the oil and wheat stolen by the US, then sanctions made it just about impossible to do anything.

All that's left now is Iran.

With Syria destroyed, all the Syrian antiaircraft batteries have been destroyed. Before, Israeli planes could not fly directly over Syria, except with a US protective shield: when the Israeli Air Force attacked Iran, they had to fly over Syria, so hundreds of US planes flew below the Israeli planes, so any antiaircraft would hit a US plane, giving the US an excuse to carpet bomb Syria, so Syria did not use their antiaircraft batteries, and Israel managed to attack some Iranian targets. Now, no US shield is needed, Israel can bomb Iran whenever they want.

And the plan is that Iran must be taken out soon, and Trump will either help Israel, or at least make it easy for Israel to destroy Iran.

The "seven countries in five years" starting in 2003 has taken a bit longer than anticipated, six of the seven were destroyed in just 21 years, and the seventh probably has about a year left.

Russia is looking weaker than before after letting Bashar Assad fall, so the US figure NATO can easily destroy Russia without using nukes.

And then the PRC will be all alone, and easily destroyed.

Unless, of course, the BRICS manage to ally militarily and protect each other.

***

Russia are sending a lot of anti-aircraft systems to Iran, so Israeli planes will have to use rockets rather than bombs, and Iran is a very large country, much larger than Syria, so it is not at all clear how effective the Israeli strike made with US support on Iran was. "Devastating, most of the Iranian nuclear programme was completely destroyed," according to Israel and the US. "Minimal damage," according to Iran. And no way of knowing who, if anyone, is telling the truth.

Likewise, the Iranian rocket strike on Israel: "No damage at all," according to Israel. "All intended targets struck and damaged," according to Iran. And, again, no way of knowing.

***

"Fox News" say that Hamas was able to strike Israel on 7 October 2023 and Israel has been unable to destroy Hamas and free all the hostages because President Biden is weak and rather anti-semitic, so he did not give Israel the support they needed to prevent 7 October and to quickly free all the hostages and destroy Hamas, but President Trump is strong, so Hamas will soon be no more, and all hostages will be freed.

Likewise, Russia only dared invade the Ukraine because President Biden was weak, and then he did not give the Ukraine the support they needed to finish the job of crushing Russia, but President Trump will change all that.

President/Candidate Trump said he was not going to continue wasting $trillons on the Ukraine, which does not sound like spending far more to destroy Russia. And it's not clear if Trump believes the story in all the US/UK/EU press that Russia are losing badly in the Ukraine, and with just a little more effort Putin will be deposed and Russia will be no more, the oblasts will be separate, independent, unarmed countries that can't threaten US hegemony. Those actually in the parts of the Ukraine controlled by Russia say Russia are winning the war: people who have checked note that Russia are producing seven times as much artillery as NATO, so even if NATO give the Ukraine all they can produce, it's not nearly enough. But one can't read that in any of the major US/UK/EU media.

***

Net: the world is in a mess, thermonuclear war seems more likely than ever before, and the information in the major US/UK/EU media mostly isn't.

As Tom Lehrer wrote, it's 'So long Mom, I'm off to drop The Bomb'

All the Western media, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, France24, DW, etc., etc., etc. say Israel are just defending themselves in the Ghaza, so ethnic cleansing is their indisputable right under International Law, and Russia are losing badly in the Ukraine, with losses of three armies, more than 1 million men, and a big chunk of Western Russia, and the Ukraine should take Moscow any day now.

So a few $trillion more and we'll finish the job. But the Ukraine need guns and bullets, and without those $trillions, all that we've invested so far will be a big waste and Russia will win.

The US were sure they were winning in Korea, but then the PRC sent in an army with more men than the US forces had bullets. The PRC only wanted to protect the PRC, so they let the US keep South Korea, but North Korea was off limits for the US military.

Then came Vietnam, where the Vietnamese had a lot of help from the USSR and shot down a lot of US planes and took the pilots as POWs.

And now there is Syria, where an Arab friend says that Syria is lost, all are surrendering to the Free Syrian Army, Assad fled to Tehran, and no one has anything that can stop that Free Syrian Army. Russia and Iran have pulled out completely, since they know they are no match for the Free Syrian Army which will have all of Syria in less than 48 hours.

Reading a few more sources, there are the anti-Assad forces under Türkiye, the US supported anti-Assad Kurds, Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly al-Qaeda + Daesh), and some Israeli supported anti-Assad forces, and these anti-Assad forces include Syrian Arab Sunnis, foreign Sunnis from places like the PRC, and the -stans, and the Syrian Kurds.

One obvious point that my friend seems to have missed is that a) Russia are very attached to their Mediterranean naval port in Syria and have no intention of giving it up; b) in spite of the Western media, Russian military production far exceeds that of all of NATO, which is incredibly corrupt, with NATO defence companies paying for sales, with weapons contracts that pay $billions, most of which goes as sales commissions and management bonuses, with very little wasted on actual weapons production. Making sales brings in the big bucks, not making weapons.

Russia have a lot invested in the Ukraine, and it's taking time to bring the Russian forces to bear. They were slow 15 years ago, but eventually salvaged the Assad regime that gave them those Russian naval bases that, if Assad is overthrown, will go to NATO.

So the US is pushing hard in the Ukraine, Georgia, Syria, and Romania, and are shooting ATACMS into Russia, killing Russians, and it's not clear how much longer Russia will put up with this before doing something to stop the attacks on Russia by NATO.

The US/UK/EU say, 'If Russia get annoyed, they'll totally destroy Kiev, but we can live without Kiev. Russia wouldn't dare do anything to any NATO nation since they are terrified of Article 5 which would mean the certain end of Russia.'

Of course, the certain end of Russia was clearly seen by Napoleon, and we all remember his great victory over Russia in 1812. And the certain end of the USSR was seen by the Wehrmacht who had a great victory over Russia in 1944. And if Napoleon and the Wehrmacht could do it, surely it will be an easy victory for the US of A.

And if Russia tries to destroy anything outside the Ukraine, the US will up the ante, and it'll be, 'So long Mom, I'm off to drop the bomb,' as Lehrer wrote back in the '60s.

 

 

 

President-elect Trump

In spite of the US news reporting that St Kamala was ahead and almost certain to win, and in spite of the Democrats planning to harvest votes and have the official State Election Committees (at least in the 9 swing states) say that St Kamala won, somehow, no one is quite sure how, Trump won the election and is now President-elect.

In 2016, Trump had no idea what the role of the elected president is (the role is to read the Teleprompter: the people in charge have decided what they're going to do, and the elected 'president' must give their orders as if those are his own orders, and make it sound like that's the only thing the US can do so all is for the best in America, the best of all possible nations).

When Trump ordered all the US troops out of Syria, none left. Now Trump thinks the US president, as Commander in Chief, can order any general who doesn't follow orders removed from his position pending Court Martial. We might see, or Trump might have learned that his job is just to read the Teleprompter.

***

Trump said, if he'd been president, Russia would never have invaded the Ukraine. There are two ways to take this.

First, in December, 2021, Putin wrote St Biden that Russia would never allow the Ukraine to join NATO. The official US response (no idea who really wrote it) was, 'Russia have no say in the matter. The Ukraine will join NATO and host the largest NATO military base and a huge number of nukes that can take out the entire Russian dead-hand nuclear switch before Russia could possibly respond.'

A few days after receiving this letter in 2022, Putin ordered the 'invasion'. What else could he possibly have done? What leader of a major power could respond to such a letter in any other way?

Had Trump received Putin's letter and written back, 'Under no circumstances will NATO allow the Ukraine to join,' there would have been no 'invasion'.

But the Trump team are now trying to say, 'Putin knew President Biden was weak and could not put up an effective defence of the Ukraine, so he invaded. Putin also knew that Trump was too strong, that any attempt to invade with Trump as president would result in the absolutely certain destruction of Russia, so Putin would never have dared to invade had Trump been president in 2021 and 2022.'

One of Trump's nominees who will 'negotiate' with the Ukraine and Russia said that he will demand an immediate ceasefire by both sides, and will offer to Russia that the Ukraine will not join NATO for 10 years, but Russia must withdraw from the Ukraine. If Russia refuse, NATO will send $trillions in armaments to the Ukraine, enough to make everything already sent seem insignificant, so Russia, facing a strong president, will immediately back down.

Or, in simpler words, Trump's appointees have absolutely no idea what is happening in the Ukraine, no idea what the US should do, and a firm conviction that the US must make sure that the US Defence-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media Complex executives continue to get $trillions in profits from the US taxpayers and printing presses, and what could possibly go wrong?

****

I remember the Cuban Missile Crisis. We lived in a small village, and all our relatives from cities they expected would be destroyed came to stay in the homes of my father and uncle. I had to sleep on the floor, because they got my bed. Everyone was sure we were close to WWIII and nuclear destruction, but it was all fake.

First, the US put nukes in Turkey. The USSR was furious, and said, 'If you don't remove those missiles from Turkey, we'll put nukes in Cuba.' President Kennedy called Khrushchev and said, 'I have to run for re-election and  you don't, so if you'll say the USSR backed down, the US will do everything the USSR wants.' So the Soviet Fleet turned around and retreated back to the USSR, and the Soviets said they removed all the nukes from Cuba as ordered by the US.

Then the US, with Soviet inspectors watching, secretly removed all the nukes from Turkey, but this was classified Top Secret for 20 years. (To this day, no US nukes are in Turkey, now all those nukes are in Türkiye.)

Today, this ain't no Cuban Missile Crisis. President Biden is incapable of making a coherent call to Putin to make an offer. 

And Trump's appointments are a very mixed bag with regard to the Ukraine. Some say we must keep sending even more money to the Ukraine until Russia are completely destroyed and no longer a threat to US hegemony. Other say we must stop sending all that money to the Ukraine and put it to better uses, but not much agreement on what those 'better uses' might be.

Some say that money should help Americans live better lives, while others say we must use the money being squandered in the Ukraine against a weak Russia and use it to a) help Israel ethnically cleanse all Arabs from Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria, and b) destroy Iran and the PRC.

***

It is not clear if WWIII will be postponed until after 20 January 2025, Inauguration Day (for that matter, it's not clear who will be named as president on that day), or if Biden will try to get it over with before he leaves office (in which case, he'll be leaving an office that probably no longer exists).

Since Biden (i.e., the people actually running things while pretending it's Biden) seem to want to go out with a big bang, we're in for six or so exciting weeks.

And, if there is still a world on 21 January 2025, we'll have to see what Trump and his appointees do about WWIII.