5 Kamikaze Drones Bomb Biden Forces Illegally Deployed in Syrian Al Tanf

ARABI SOURI 

US Biden forces in the Al Tanf in the Syrian desert

5 Kamikaze drones loaded with explosives bombed the American illegal Biden forces deployed in the Syrian Al Tanf area at the joint borders with Iraq and Jordan, strong explosions were heard and smoke was seen rising from the targeted base.

Many sources confirm that between 3 and 5 booby-trapped drones bombed the base, the troops housing units, and the military barracks, the drones came from Iraq and Syria, the sources added. Some sources added that in addition to the drones there was bombing by grad missiles that targeted the illegal base.

Using the map of the Israeli bombing from over the US troops in Al Tanf on the 13th of the month:

There’s no immediate news how many of Biden oil thieves mercenary forces were ‘headached’, the new term used by the Pentagon to describe its casualties among its troops in Ain Asad military base in western Iraq after Iran bombed the base early January last year in retaliation to Trump’s war crime assassinating the Iranian top general Qasim Soleimani in the International Airport of Baghdad while he was on an official visit to Iraq 5 days earlier.

The number of US casualties from this bombing is irrelevant, the Pentagon will never reveal the correct number, it never had in all its previous war and military interventions abroad, the main important point is that there was a bombing and there were casualties. Will the US people ask their ‘democratically elected’ officials what they are really doing in Syria? And not the usual line of ‘exporting democracy and freedoms’ to the countries they’re destroying.

US Army Carried out ‘Military Drill’ with ISIS Affiliate in the Syrian Al Tanf

https://syrianews.cc/us-army-carried-out-military-drill-with-isis-affiliate-in-the-syrian-al-tanf/embed/#?secret=28eaEiFffK

An attack on Biden forces in Syria was anticipated in the wake of the joint Israeli – US bombing of a Syrian airbase housing allied forces near Tadmor (Palmyra) on the 13th of the month. The Resistance Axis vowed to strongly retaliate against the blatant joint war crime that led to the killing of Syrian soldiers and members of the allied forces fighting ISIS in the Syrian desert.

The White House junta of Joe Biden continues the policies of the former war criminal Trump who continued the policies of his predecessor the Obama Biden junta in the war of terror and war of attrition against Syria including the theft of Syrian oilwheat, and other resources, sponsoring the separatist Kurdish SDF terrorists and commanding the terrorists of ISIS, Nusra Front, HTS, and other anti-Islamic Muslim Brotherhood terrorists in the country. Syria is literally on the other side of the planet from the United States of America, has never carried out against or threatened the USA or its people, yet the US consecutive regimes have repeatedly tried to topple the Syrian state driven by instructions they receive from their Israeli lobby masters.

US Forces in Syria Causing Catastrophic Effects on Civilians Held in Rukban Concentration Camp

https://syrianews.cc/usa-forces-syria-cause-rukban-concentration-catastrophic-conditions/embed/#?secret=7EmeJc5VBL

If you want us to remain online, please consider a small donation, or see how you can help at no cost.
Follow us on Telegram: https://t.me/syupdates link will open the Telegram app.

Will Afghanistan turn out to be US imperialism’s “Last Gleaming”?

August 26, 2021

The Saker

[this analysis was written for the Unz Review]

In October of last year I wrote a column entitled “When Exactly Did The AngloZionist Empire Collapse” in which I presented my thesis that the Empire died on 8 January 2020 when the Iranians attacked US bases with missiles and the US did absolutely nothing. Yes, this was the correct decision, but also one which, at least to me, marked the death of the Empire as we knew it.

In that article I made reference to a brilliant book by J.M. Greer’s “Twilight’s Last Gleaming” which I later reviewed here. The main plot of the book is that the US will collapse following a completely unpredictable external military defeat (read the book, it is very well written!).

So my question today is whether the debacle in Afghanistan (not only Kabul!) is such an event or not. Afghanistan is often called the graveyard of empires, but might it even become the graveyard of the last empire?

I will try to answer it below.

First, we are now all bombarded by information from, and about, Afghanistan. Issues like the failure of “country building” are mixed in with bodies falling off US transporters, US Marines sharing one (!) bottle of water with severely dehydrated kids with street whippings. None of that is analytically helpful and it conflates completely different issues. I want to offer a different set of questions which, I hope, might be more helpful:

  • Why has the US decided to leave Afghanistan?
  • Was that the correct decision?
  • Why did Kabul fall so fast?
  • Why did such a truly colossal failure in intelligence happen?
  • How was the evacuation of US forces actually executed?

These are just a few questions, there are many others, especially about what will happen to Afghanistan next, but that is one I think is too early to tackle and an entirely separate issue anyway.

Let’s take these questions one by one next.

Why has the US decided to leave Afghanistan?

I don’t know why or how this decision was taken. But my best guess is that it is due to combination of the following factors:

  • “Biden” came to power while waving the Woke/BLM/CRT/Homo/etc. agenda which I would sum up as the “Wakanda worldview” and not liberalism. But at least officially, Biden is a true, peace loving liberal. Since his policies all prove the exact opposite, he tried to “play nice” and do something “liberal”, at least in appearence (and, no, a woke-freak is not really a liberal at all! And neither is a Neocon “conservative” – these are all lies for the dull).
  • “Biden” also knew that a large part of the Trump base wanted to stop all the wars started by Obama and Co.
  • “Biden” probably thought that if the operation was a stunning success, he would get all the credit, and if it was an abject failure, he would dump it all on Trump (which is exactly what “Biden” did).
  • As for Biden himself, let’s just kindly assume that he has “the right political instincts” to maybe smell an opportunity here and bless what might have looked to him as a “good plan”.

Was the decision to leave correct?

Here, I will catch a lot of flak, but I believe that yes, it absolutely was. In his (actually very bad) speech about the withdrawal, Biden said one very true thing (quoting by memory, so don’t quote this) “those who say that 2 or 5 more years will bring us victory are lying to you” (or something pretty close). Here I agree with him 100% (as far as I can tell, only a real, hardcore Neocon ideologue would openly disagree with this; at least I hope so…).

Not only does the US (or any other country) not have any kind of mandate or responsibility to police the planet, the US is certainly the least competent imperial power ever, in spite of a lot of help from the Five Eyes and its EU lackeys. If you are bad at something, but very good at something else, why persist? The US is a true virtuoso in things like bribing, subverting, economically hurting, politically demonizing, killing undesirable leaders, etc… That is really how the Europeans eventually defeated the North American Native Indians.

[Sidebar: for those whom this thesis might throw into a patriotic rage, I highly recommend the book “The First Way of War: American War Making on the Frontier, 1607–1814” written by Dr. John Grenier. That book won him the Society for Military History’s Outstanding Book Award in American History in 2007; Grenier himself is a retired USAF Lieutenant-Colonel and a United States Air Force Academy, USAFA, CO, associate professor of history. His next book is announced as a “biography of Major Robert Rogers, the “Father of American Special Operations.” Hate me all you want, but read this book anyway!]

The US was founded by and for thugs. Calling them explorers, immigrants, robber-barons or founding fathers makes no difference to their true worldview, their ethos – the seizure of the North American continent was an act of international thuggery on every level. That is, of course, NOT to say good people did not exist then or did not live righteously or, even less so, that anybody in the modern USA has any kind of personal guilt over any of this. Only God can judge them! But unless we forget the true roots of the “American Dream”, we will end up with a “US Nightmare”.

Of course, some US immigrants at the same time did try to create a truly free society, protected from the kind of vicious abuses so prevalent in the Old World! The Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights (aka the “the Charters of Freedom“) are a monument to both the genius and the worldview of some of the founders of the United States. But good intentions and proclamations are only credible when everybody upholds them for everybody and in each case (not the kind “but this is different, we are democracies after all!” western politicians repeat every time they are accused of hypocrisy)

In the USA, generation after generation of the thugs strengthened their grip power while pushing decent people out of the way (even more so after JFK and 9/11 and other recent events). But that was just a show, a mob “going legal” if you wish.

Thugs have guns, of course, and they can beat the crap out of any civilian. But they can’t fight a military. That is why thugs have gangs, not battalion tactical groups in the first place. Furthermore, as soon as they grow in size, the gangs of thugs try to look more respectable (by purchasing PR campaigns about their “philanthropy” is typical) and less violent. Pretty soon they outsource the violence to others, expandable, lower, gangs.

Sound familiar?

If it does – it’s because it is!

All the US “country-building exercises”, “humanitarian interventions” and other “freedom of something [fill the blank here] defense” truly are: the acts of an international conspiracy of thugs to seize the resources of our entire planet or, failing that, at the very least, destroying any country, nation, tribe or leader that would dare disobey the World Hegemon. (“We will destroy your country and bring it back to the stone age” is how Secretary Baker famously put it to Foreign Minister Aziz)

[Sidebar: as somebody who, for my sins, had a short stint in the field of “humanitarian operations” I can personally testify that the rank and file sincere humanitarians never know the true intentions, and even true affiliations(!) of their bosses. I know that for a fact. So I am not calling all US military personnel thugs. Only their bosses. Besides, I did not invent anything very new, I am just only paraphrasing (cached version) the most decorated Marine in U.S. history, Smedley Butler, wrote anyway.]

This entire invasion of Afghanistan has been one colossal drain on US resources, including human, intellectual, diplomatic and, definitely not least, financial ones (while the US taxpayers’ money flowed into Afghanistan. That money then always magically “disappeared”, for one reason or another, but some few locals got very rich. Go figure….). So, while I don’t have any pollyannaish illusions about how peace and freedom-loving the leaders of the USA really are, I think that they had enough streetsmarts (or cleverness? guile?) to figure out that getting out was necessary. Blaming any possible problems on Trump was, of course, the magic wand which, apparently, settled any discussions. (I am still assuming that at least some professional discussions took place; more accurately, I hope that they still do, and with at least some real specialists included; please don’t tell me all the real professionals have been “diversified-out” or otherwise “canceled”; that is a truly scary thought!).

Why did Kabul fall so fast?

First, what did the US actually do in Kabul? Paid some folks, trained others, gave them tons of weapons, etc. That is the usual stuff US Special Forces and a few others do a lot. While some politicians (in that category I include all officers above colonel rank) clearly saw Afghanistan as their next El Dorado, honest, if naive, servicemen probably believed that this kind of “assistance” will somehow give birth to a peaceful, happy, democratic (read “woke”), prosperous and grateful nation. Of course, it never does. As for the actual ratio of greedy “dogs of war”, assorted “intelligence operatives” or “sincere idealists” in Afghanistan, it has absolutely no military relevance to the outcome as these motives are all equally misguided, even if some are at least more naive/sincere/stupid than truly evil.

Remember the Georgian attack on Tskhinval in 08.08.08? Remember that kind of truly galactic nonsense “Analysis: Georgian Army May Be Tough Nut for Russia to Crack” posted by no less than Deutsche Welle (you know, “made for minds”!)? If not, please do read it; it will make you laugh to tears and wonder what “area specialist” wrote this “analysis” (a rebranded wet dream, really, yet somebody got paid, probably well, to do just that)! Truth is that this five-day war really lasted only three days. The Russians had plenty of problems, yet they obliterated the entire Georgian military in 3 days of actual combat. Three! This is all which the concept what “US/NATO-trained” means: a total, and always ineffective, scam.

That mentality, typical of the modern West, apparently believes that that kind of “assistance/training” can yield good results. The entire history of Latin America and all the US failures in Asia irrefutably prove the opposite, but nevermind that. An even worse mistake made by western decision-makers is that their opponents are basically and fundamentally “like all humans”, or “like everybody else”. The issue here is that these elites consider themselves as SO much superior to everybody else (narcissism is at the core of both British imperialism and Judaic exceptionalism; think Churchill or Epstein here and their real bosses!) that they only refer to those as corruptible, hypocritical, cowardly and terminally unprincipled like themselves. It’s a pure projection, of course.

In reality, US decision makers are utterly clueless about the supposed “others” who are “like everybody else” when they inadvertently tangle with any “true believers” of any kind, from saints to demons. Examples include:

  • All nations with a strong martial culture (Russia, Vietnam, Afghanistan, etc.)
  • Truly religious opponents (Iran, Hezbollah)
  • Truly sincere/determined political leaders (Vietnam, Cuba, Russia, China)
  • “Rabid dogs” – by that I mean the harcore, Interahamwe-like, nutcase terrorists which the US initially tries to use, only to eventually and inevitably “get bitten” back (neo-Deobandi and/or Takfiri groups, Ukie Nazis, Israeli Zionists).

In theory, of course, the US has always known that; hence, the British expression about “winning the hearts and minds”. But here is the difference: the Brits were always excellent (I did not say “ethical or kind”) diplomats, and superb intelligence officers (same caveat as before). Finally, you can call the Brits many things, but not “poor soldiers” either. In other words, the British Empire had the means of its foreign policies.

The US does not. No?

Then please tell me when was the last time that the US truly inspired somebody? West Europeans after WWII, and that was nothing but a more or less “friendly” takeover of the continent and the creation of a servile comprador ruling elite).

[Sidebar: those who would “cleverly” retort “Prague 68”, Tiananmen square, the Maidan, Poland or the Baltic pretend-states etc. should immediately stop reading at this point, dismiss all of the above as utter quackery (“Kremlin Propaganda” works too) and go watch some TV. Same advice for those saying “if the entire planet hates us, why do they all – including you – want to come here”? I apologize to the adults in the room]

NASA, Jazz, Rock, Hollywood, US writers, artists and simply kind and sincere US Americans did truly inspire millions worldwide. And the official values of the USA, the Charters of Freedom, truly did inspire millions worldwide. But I have to say that after decades of abominably incompetent Presidents (all after Bush Sr. imho) there is very little left from all this.

NASA? It turned into the current “private space” farce cum embezzlements of billions by smug billionaires getting billions from the state in a supposedly “private” venture.

Jazz and Rock have been effectively replaced by MTV and YT and their insipid woke-ideology (especially for the young – old guys like myself are mostly and happily “stuck” in the 70s and 80s or foreign, non-corporate music).

Hollywood? Peuh-leeeze! Anybody not blind (or brainwashed) already knows that this is just a crude propaganda machine which will put blacks (aka “minorities”) everywhere and anywhere. I think of it as the “Snow Black” mental disorder.

Writers? Okay, yes, there are still a lot of those around in the USA. This has probably something to do with the fact that the target audience of writers is composed of readers, not unblinking screen-gazers. But the problem here is most people read very little, and what they read is mostly worthless intellectual prolefeed anyway.

And in much of the rest of the planet, people are often too poor to read, in English or otherwise. So what I am saying is that while US writers may be very talented, they are either uncontroversial (authors like Stephen King or John Grisham) or they will only appeal to a rather small elite of, shall we say, “daring” people (authors like Stephen Cohen or Charles Murray). Thought-criminals, in Orwell’s brilliant lexicon.

Which leaves “sincere US Americans”. Do they exist? Absolutely, in the millions, all over the USA and all over the planet. The latter often go completely native and are loved by the locals. Also, millions of expats come home and see their own country in a totally different way

[Sidebar: during my college years in the USA – 1986-1991 – I observed something curious: US ex-expats preferred spending time with foreign students (officially called “legal” aliens) than from their non-travelling compatriots whom they often found quite “alien” to their own identity. That even included a few (admittedly not very many) US Americans whose only trip abroad was in uniform and to some US base! And while I initially defined my Zone A from Zone B geographically, I now think of it more as a difference in general awareness and worldview. In other words, something primarily mental]

But the problem is very simple: the US elites are doing a rather effective job silencing people, including US nationals. So what most people in Zone B experience is often very kind, friendly and otherwise great personal relations and even friendships with US Americans, but a belief that these wonderful US Americans either can’t do anything about it, or don’t really know what their leaders are really doing.

It is extremely difficult for any “not in my name” type of voices to be heard when the trans-national US propaganda machine is investing billions into silencing these voices!

Did the voices of Smedley Butler or Stephen Cohen make *any* difference to the US ruling classes other than convincing them to spend even more on imperialistic and messianc (the former always implies the latter) propaganda? This is why I have always maintained that the anti-imperialist struggle is not “just” a national liberation struggle for oppressed nations, but it is also a national liberation struggle for all the peoples (plural) of the USA.

And we all know that most of the people of the USA never had much say into what their so-called “leaders” did, no more than any other Middle-Ages’ serf. Every time they get to vote they get the opposite. I will leave it at that.

Now, coming back to our topic, in 2021 the US truly inspires nobody. Absolutely nobody. That is a sad, but undeniable fact. And that is the main reason why Kabul fell so fast: the “defenses” of Kabul were like the fists of a man with advanced osteoporosis – they lacked a crucial element: faith. No matter how good, effective or otherwise powerful those “fists” really were, or thought/pretended to be, it made no difference: one crucial element was missing and that decided it all.

Any force not moved by true/sincere faith always will end up having a “Saigon embassy” or “Berezina” or “Stalingrad” or “Kursk” moment. The preferred term or historical reference doesn’t really matter here.

As for the US armed forces, most of the (reading) public already knows the truth about why people sign up for the military: some truly go waving the flag and holding their breast, especially after the 9/11 false flag, but most simply want to survive. Yes, and while PMCs are typically motivated by pure greed, the regular US soldier only wants to survive at home and get a job (the other options are becoming a cop (less now!) prison guard or a criminal) or in the frontline trenches. And, as we all know, survival instincts go a long way and make it possible for people to do that which they thought was impossible. But there is a much stronger instinct out there, also forged over time by about 1000 of existential warfare: the spirit of self-sacrifice will always defeat any survival instinct, be it inside a warrior’s heart or on the battlefield.

[Sidebar: those US Americans who today wonder why the US could not win a war since WWII can thank General Patton and his truly silly “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his”. When he declared that, he basically made sure that the US military would never win a war again. BTW – if Zhukov, or any other Soviet marshall general had dared to publicly say such a thing, he would have been immediately accused of sabotage, subversion, collusion with the enemy, treason and summarily executed. In fact, that is exactly what Stalin did with Marshal Tukhachevskii (for other, nonetheless, equally valid reasons). Ditto for Nazi Germany. Or Imperial Japan. No need to approve of these regimes to admit that they knew more about warfare than cigar-smoking megalomaniacs].

So, short answer: Kabul fell because belief always defeats unbelief.

Next, my tiny bit longer answer: Kabul fell because the Empire’s “fists” have crumbled.

Finally, my longer answer will be in the form of a freely translated Russian joke I recently heard (can anybody guess the context? begins with “C”): “People who learn from the mistakes of other are called “smart”; people who only learn by their own mistakes are called “dumb”; and people who do not learn from their own mistakes are called “(US) Americans”.

We can now look at the last two, comparatively simpler questions, together:

Why did such a truly colossal failure in intelligence happen and how was the operation executed?

The failure in intelligence is due to the fact that political conformity is now vital for the bloated US “intelligence community”. I can see that dialog happening everywhere inside and around the beltway:

  • Sir, I am so sorry, but we cannot do that, we simply can’t!!!!
  • What, are you a hidden Trump supporter?!?!?!?!

What the actual order was matters little. Demonizing the opposition is much more important. Hiring unskilled people solely for their ideological purity is also a top priority. Who cares about abilities, which we all know are “equal”, whatever that means, even down to the individual level? Procrustes in his most insane dreams could not have dreamt-up the woke-freaks and their CRT!

That is the kind of paranoia-induced witch-hunts which all actively collapsing regimes undergo. The current collective US insanity is very reminiscent of what, first, Trotskiysts and, later, Stalinists did to the Soviet Union or the Red Guards to China.

It is also true that the US intelligence community was inevitably infected with “Patton’s logic”, and is run by politicians with zero true patriotism.

Take away a country’s intelligence community and you just shot its brains out.

Take away a country’s armed forces, and you just cut off its arms.

And there you have it: the “evacuation” of Kabul/Afghanistan is the only kind of “evacuation” you can expect from a former superpower which has lost both its brains and fists.

By the way, there are strong signs that the US has also lost its “legs”, hence the chaos and the need to suddenly resort to the use of civilian airlines. To clarify – there is nothing wrong with civil augmentation of military assets at all, quite to the contrary! The key word here is “suddenly”, not “civilian”. One of two options is true:

  • The plan, whatever it was, failed
  • There was no plan

In theory, there is a third option: “this is the plan”, but theoretical options are only relevant when they are backed with at least some empirical evidence which in this case it is not. Also, some vaguely stated intention, however sincere, also does not qualify as “plan”. For comparison’s sake, it took the Soviets about 18 months (!) to prepare their withdrawal from Afghanistan. The difference in outcomes is now self-evident.

That is not to say that the Empire will necessarily totally lose all influence in Afghanistan, or anywhere else for that matter. Wrecking a place requires very little skills. Actually, re-building anything typically requires a lot of skills.

As Che Guevara once pointed out, “the true revolutionary is guided by strong feelings of love”. Alas, the word “revolutionary” has been terminally stained with blood; as for “love” and “truth”, they have long lost their true meanings ago (at least in the West). But let me rephrase that this way: “true change requires true, loving, faith”. Better?

The ugly truth is that as long as the United States and Europe are ruled by the current international gang of thugs, the Empire will retain a very significant capability to threaten and attack almost everybody else. And if you count their nukes, they can murder us all.

So yes, the Empire did die on January 8th 2020, and the US died almost an exact year later, on January 6th 2021. But there is plenty of momentum left in both of these two cadavers to keep deep nails inserted into the flesh of most nations out there. However, Not Russia. Not China, and not Iran. Not anymore. The US is also losing control of Central Asia and the Middle-East. That possibility is now even discussed with great concern in Israel and the CENTCOM-occupied countries of the Persian Gulf and Arabian Peninsula.

Now is the time for the US military to get its act together and seriously and carefully prepare more evacuation plans for the entire Middle-East, if not these “evacuation plans” will quickly turn into “extraction plans”, followed by more rooftop/runway nonsense the US is famous for. Does anybody still remember how the US forces left from, say, Somalia, or, maybe, Lebanon? These “evacuations” turned into a panicked “run for your dear life operations”.

Will somebody replace the USA? Please?!

It appears that just like “Biden” farmed-out the Ukraine to the Germans, “he” is now farming-out Afghanistan to the Brits. If so, this is a rather clever intention (the devil will be in the details, in this case, in the planning and execution.) Keep in mind that the Talibans do not control large parts of Afghanistan and that the traditional opposition to the Taliban rule in northern Afghanistan (Panjshir Valley) very much exists and is combat-capable (at least by local standards). As for the son of Ahmad Shah Masoud, just like his father, seems to have strong ties to Britain. Ahmad Masoud Jr. looks very much like his father and has some of his charisma. Does that not all sound familiar too?

In the meantime, a motley pack of rabid EU politicians with imperial phantom pains are also making some noises but can do nothing at all. Putin once referred to these noises as “oinking backing vocals”!

As for the AngloZionist legacy press, it is mostly wailing in despair and horror just at the mention of the possibility that Russia and/or China might actually have some influence, however tiny, in Afghanistan. (Remember “these ragheads/russkuies/goooks/niggers/sand-niggers/injuns/etc. live on OUR land and OUR resources!”). This is what “Manifest Destiny” really is. Or Germany’s “civilizational mission in the East” was. Or the “White Man’s burden”, or the French Mason’s “Universal Values” etc.. Ditto for the Papacy’s splitting of the planet in its now long forgotten (but not by its victims!) 1494 Treaty of Tordesillas) into separate control/exploitation/pillaging sectors, ad majorem Dei gloriam, of course. Modern ecologists, woke activists and militant homosexuals all very much share in that mindset.

The sad but undeniable truth is that the true roots of modern Europe are not in Rome, even less so Athens, but in the Latin Crusades and the subsequent Middle-Ages. The Reform and Renaissance changed nothing, or even made things worse. Neither did 1789 or WWII. The spiritual and philosophical roots of the West are neither Roman, nor Greek, but found amongst those who destroyed Rome and severed it off from the truly civilized world, not only in the Christian East, but worldwide: the Franks.

Imperialism originates in our heads, it is a worldview, a mindset, and that is where it must be eradicated for it to finally vanish.

The mind is where imperialism begins but also where it will end, just like any other human phenomenon. And while I do fear the inevitable chaos before some “future West” or “future Europe” can replace the current ones, I also do believe that, when shown the true cost of their mistakes, all nations will reject imperialism in all its forms.

By creating an instrument of total control (the Internet) the Empire also created the first global resistance to empire community in world history! Not only that, but the US ruling classes turned US schools and admired US academia into both an imbecile/serfs-producing machine and the laughingstock of much of the planet (even in Zone A!). But what the US ruling elites failed to do is to prevent regular, mainstream, US Americans from wanting to know, to learn, to explore and, eventually, to fight for justice. True, as political indoctrination goes, Uncle Shmuel can run circles around the Nazis or the Soviets, but no Uncle Shmuel will ever “fix” our fallen nature or the universe, so our resistance runs deep, even the US and Israel. Yes, it is mostly silenced, but in the depths, it is very much still there.

I don’t believe in any Grand Replacement plans, at least not one focused on “race”. But I do believe in a cultural/civilizational “grand replacement”, which I see as inevitable and already well under way, even in the USA and the EU!

Of course, I don’t know what the future collective West will be like, assuming there ever is one again. But I am confident that the type of imperialism which has its roots in the medieval Papacy (which even Hitler admitted with some admiration) is coming to an end.

Think of it: dreams about becoming the “next Mongol empire” must have been sexy. Or being the next East Roman (aka “Byzantine Empire”) too. And to my infinite regret, sadness and pain, (and location of my own place of birth) most of the rulers of imperial Russia fell for such temptations. And this is also the true, core, reason why the Russian monarch fell in February of 1917.

As for what actually followed this supposed “wonderful” and even supposedly “bloodless” revolution was the worst centuries of mass murder and atrocities in human history. Bravo and thank you, Kerensky (and his western masonic “sponsors”!). The Ukies did not invent their ridiculous “Maidan”! Kerensky and his supporters did. (Gene Sharp – you can see his pietistic quasi-hagiography here (Wikipedia on politics, as usual) – only systematized the study of this field). Thinking Russians can add up and realize that imperialism in any and all its forms, even call it “Capitalism with a human face” if you prefer, is a mortal danger to humanity itself.

In the Soviet times, Russians were promised “Communism” (aka the end of history and heaven on earth, “just” without God); then they were promised “democracy”. Had Russia better elites, all these delusions would not have been replaced with total horror. (Think of the monolog about true horror by Colonel Walter E. Kurtz in the brilliant allegorical movie Apocalypse Now!). The immense costs of WWII for both China and Russia truly brought the reality of imperialism to the Russians and the Chinese people, and they want none of it again. No matter how “pious” the latest pretext may be.

In other words, an overwhelming majority of Russians reject not just the execution but the very principle of imperialism (or the optional use of military force), even if Russia wins! The fact that other nations, experts, pundits either fail to realize this, or try hard to ignore this, has no bearing on that reality (at least amongst Zone B types in Russia, about 95% or more of the total). The “real reality” in 2021 is that actual imperialist delusions in Russia are only held by a small, aging and quickly shrinking group of ignoramuses and/or nutcases. This is not because Russians are somehow “better” than US Americans, Brits, Spaniards or any other imperialists. The difference is that Russians now know, personally, the true costs of Empire.

Awareness of the true costs of empire is a formidable empire-killer (as seen recently in Afghanistan between the clueless GIs and the Afghan warlords). This is why the Empire will do everything it can to deny, obfuscate or otherwise conceal these costs!

Furthermore, once the costs of empire become known by a critical mass of sincerely patriotic people (whatever the country or their political system), the core ideology needed by the empire to justify itself and simply operate becomes gravely endangered.

How bad does it get?

I have an example:

The Soviet “defeat” in Afghanistan: the USSR was never militarily or even economically defeated. Not in Afghanistan. Not by Reagan and his “freedom fighters” (currently declared “evil terrorists”, as opposed to the “good ones” from the Axis of Kindness). Not by SDI. The famous “we won” of the US CIA really should have been “they lost”. Big, big difference.

The USSR was defeated by the CPSU Party Nomenklatura who basically destroyed an entire country to rule over its many leftover chunks, almost none of which actually managed to become a viable state. Put it simply: the Soviet regime died because of its own lies, hypocrisy, inhumanity and, frankly, frequent sheer stupidity. Initially, many soldiers sincerely believed in their alleged “internationalist duty” to “fight US imperialism in Afghanistan” which was quite real. Some were not even informed that they were being sent abroad (the abbreviation “TurkVO2” was used. It meant “the “second” Turkestan military district suggesting a domestic extension/creation of a second TMD. Not a foreign military operation.

Eventually, over time, the painful truth began seeping into the Russian mind. That is how and why the Soviet forces had to be withdrawn. Not because of any particularly intrepid and CIA-run “freedom fighters” or the Stingers (devastating initially, but effective countermeasures were quickly developed and successfully practiced). Again, the US won nothing, the Soviets are the one who lost – they did it to themselves, really!

Again, does it sound familiar? It’s because it is! It just happened with the “Afghan democratic government”, as it will eventually happen to the “Ukrainian democratic government”.

To be unambiguously clear: I think that the Soviet decision to enter Afghanistan was both deeply misguided and inherently immoral (my personal interactions with Soviet officers and participating in a very interesting discussion between a representative of the Northern Alliance and Russian exiles, convinced me of that). The figure of dead, wounded, oppressed or exiled “civilians” is terrible. But the following facts are also undeniable:

  • The Soviets tried hard to stem the influence of those Takfirs which the USA had federated and the KSA paid for. In this battle, the Soviets were first.
  • The Soviets did build a lot of critical civilian infrastructure facilities, they also tried to develop the country economically and educate its people (in the Soviet mold, of course, but better than nothing at all).

Compared to what the US brought to Afghanistan, the Soviets look like both true warriors and true humanitarians. And, remember, we are talking mostly about conscripts here, many poorly trained, poorly supported and even poorly commanded. Yet they did so much better than the supposed “pros” of the “greatest military in history”.

As for what the Russians can do now, they should remember that Afghans will remember both the bad and the good (there is a large Afghan community in Russia) and they can promise to themselves that in the future all Russians will treat all the people of Afghanistan with true, informed respect and extend a sincere hand of friendship. Whether, or which, Afghans will accept that extended hand is their decision to make, nobody else’s (not even Kamala Harris!)

So all that nonsense peddled by Zbigniew Brzezinski (“Russia needs the Ukraine to be a superpower!”) and Hillary Clinton (“Putin wants to rebuild the USSR”) is solely and only an expression of the true phobia which the Western elites, especially in northern Europe, feel towards Putin, Russia, Russians and anything Russian. Makes perfect sense that the European invaders never succeeded in controlling Russia, imperial, Soviet, even “democratic” and least of all, modern Russia

As for the putatively invincible and “superior” western militaries (Sandhust! West Point! Saint-Cyr!), they completely lack the kind of experience Russians have learned for about 1000 years now: ten centuries of warfare, with no geographical boundaries, with expanses more reminiscent of the high seas than central Europe, and with no hope of mercy from their foes (most Russian attackers were hell-bent on exterminate the Russian nation, or culture or religion, mostly all three at the same time). Western ruling classes are terrified of the fact that they cannot defeat Russia militarily, so they pretend the “real Russia” doesn’t even exist.

Instead, there is a “resurgent” Russian-Soviet “Mordor” filled with noble and “diversity” loving “dissidents” who are slowly dying in “Putin’s Gulag!”, the Russian economy is ‘“in shambles” and Russia is just “a gas station masquerading as a country”. These Russkies can’t build shit and they drink vodka all day. Russians might even be an inferior race, since they are so evil and stupid! Most importantly, unless they are “contained” and “deterred” by the West (what a joke!), these Russians hell-bent on war and will invade us and the rest of the “civilized world”

This type of delusional coping mechanism is well known to modern psychology and is really quite common. It is really just a stage of grief, not an analysis of anything real.

The truth is that even the popular Putin had to work hard to defend his personal decision to engage a small, relatively weak military task force into Syria. Even a loyal Putinist like myself initially feared that this might be a huge mistake. It was not, and Putin and his generals were even smarter than I thought at the time (the entire operation is a masterpiece for future military textbooks!).

Had that operation failed, and it was both daring and very risky (in the early phases especially), there would have been hell to pay for Putin, Shoigu and all those who put their moral weight behind it. If somebody in the Kremlin ever thinks again of invading another country, he/she would be reprimanded and demoted, possibly fired or, failing that, “retired up”.

Of course, there are plenty of Russians condemning Putin for not moving forces into the Donbass (besides a few special forces, artillery spotters, forward air controllers and one very effective artillery strike across the border), but these people would have unanimously considered such a Russian military intervention, had it happened, as self-evidently purely defensive strategically (but not operationally or tactically, of course).

Frankly, the Balts and Poles look ridiculous in their narcissistic paranoia. On Russian TV, the western propaganda is immediately translated and aired, to the greatest laughter of the audience! As for the Ukronazis, they only inspire disgust and a firm determination to never allow another attack on Russia coming from the West, or elsewhere for that matter.

But there is no desire for war with any of these guys, even for a war Russia would win in a week or two. In fact, in its current shape, the Ukraine is potentially a deadly toxin for Russia, especially if the Russians ever put their guard down. The very last thing modern Russia needs is to get poisoned/infected by the many Ukrainian toxins…

Conclusions:

  • The Empire has been dead for a while
  • The USA as we have known it is dead too
  • The AngloZionists still have more than enough power to threaten or actually attack any country on earth (with the exception of Russia, China and Iran or/and without committing nuclear suicide; yes, Iran has no nukes, they banned them long ago, but they have a formidable military nonetheless.
  • For the very first time ever, the true costs of empire are slowly “seeping back” into the USA (Marx, Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr. would have been happy to see that) and that has already fundamentally changed the USA as a country.
  • Dead, the old USA is currently rotting in the mogue for all to smell. The old Soviet joke about “capitalism rotting” but the smell of that “rot” smelling “oh so sweet!” is finally proven true. It took longer than expected, but like everything inevitable, it eventually happened in 2021. Now that this stench is impossible to conceal and, boy, does it stink!
  • In spite of that, I fully expect the USA to survive and even prosper with time! Maybe the US will re-emerge as a de-facto confederacy, with a minimal central power and high degree of independence for the states? Pretty much what the Confederates wanted most, but adapted to modern times and their now universally accepted norms (well, except in Israel, of course).
  • No other power (or coalition of powers) will “replace” the USA globally. Why would they? Remember, Russians and Chinese are not only theologians or philosophers culturally, but their national ethos has been deeply affected/infected with Marxism and dialectics which, for all other criticisms of them, were at least taught in Communist schools, however poorly, basically and even wrongly! So, unlike the clueless leaders of the Empire, the Russians and the Chinese fully realize that the Empire was never really defeated, but rather that it defeated itself. Most importantly, the Russians and Chinese understand that if they “replace” the USA, they will end up like the USA. They are far more ambitious, in reality!
  • Regarding Afghanistan, there are numerous local powers already deeply embedded inside the Afghan society, including indigenous ones, which, while not “replacing” anybody will most likely act like they have always in the past (“the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior” and “the thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun” point to the same reality). That means violence, chaos, bigotry, cruelty, and other horrors will continue to take place, maybe not as much or as visibly as before.
  • Currently I see no combination of local or even foreign powers which can bring true, lasting, peace to Afghanistan. But a combo of Iran+Russia+China would be the most effective in providing aid and some measure of control.
  • Logically, this is both a major risk but also a huge opportunity for all the neighbors of Afghanistan which include at least four countries with deep ties with, and knowledge of, Afghanistan: Pakistan, Iran, Russia and China. Of course, unlike some “spokespersons” at DoS, I know that Russia has no border with Afghanistan. I even know that Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan do (even China does!). These countries even have some very good special units which are quite combat capable. But the “stans” all depend on Russia for their survival anyway, and they know it. I fully expect and hope that at least the Russians, Iranians and Chinese get as involved in Afghanistan as soon as possible, if only because of the formidable “cultural intelligence” of their sophisticated intelligence community including operatives and analysts (no, a few words of Pashto combined with a bundle of dollars does not qualify as “intelligence work” – that mindset is only good for bribing). As for the Turks, they have strong “cultural intel” too, enough money and guns to wave around, they are Muslims (albeit not of the Deobandi persuasion) and they will most definitely try hard. I predict that they will fail simply because they are too far geographically and culturally. Also, Turkey does not have the means for a serious, prolonged, operation in Afghanistan.
  • It sure looks to me that the Brits have figured this one first, at least the main elements. No real surprise here (they remain the most skilled intelligence officials in the EU!), hence their Foreign Secretary Raab having to extend a very humiliating (and wholly ineffective) “olive branch” to Russia and China (all while clamoring that Russia wants to invade Europe and China all of Asia). Russia made some noises back, and maybe the Chinese too, but these are simply good diplomatic manners. Neither country will ever accept AngloZionists as a relevant force in Afghanistan. And neither will the Afghans.
  • At this point in time, nobody can truly control, nevermind bring peace to Afghanistan. If the main actors at least stopped running the country on the ground and did absolutely nothing, this would be a great improvement: not doing harm would probably be the best anybody can do. Finally, just like the Ukrainians, let the Afghan choose if they even want a unified country and, if yes, of what type? How could the people of Afghanistan best express their opinion? Let them figure it out.
  • The so-called “Afghan problem” cannot be solved under the current international system and international law. Just like the Ukraine, Afghanistan is widely recognized as a totally artificial country. But how do you fix this? You can’t as long as those who created that international system still control it. A set of new institutions will have to come first before peace comes to Afghanistan. Tragic, revolting, but true.

Will that ever happen? Will Zone B nations be strong, wise and determined enough to create new international institutions? I don’t know.

But if it does not, then our planet is indeed lost until the Second Coming.

The Saker

زمن قاسم سليماني


الخميس 26 آب 2021

 ناصر قنديل

شكل استشهاد الجنرال قاسم سليماني رئيس أركان محور المقاومة، وقائد الجناح العراقي في محور المقاومة ابي مهدي المهندس، عنواناً لزلزال إقليمي ودولي، وداخل كلّ من إيران والعراق ودول محور المقاومة، لم تظهر كلّ تردّداته بعد، وإذا كان الأميركيون قد قرّروا الانحناء أمام عاصفة الردّ الفوري على عملية الإغتيال التي تمثلت بقصف قاعدتهم في “عين الأسد” بالصواريخ من إيران وببيان إعلاني، بصمتهم أمام الردّ في سابقة فريدة في تاريخ الجيش الأميركي، ظناً منهم بأنّ هذا سينهي الأمر عند هذا الحدّ، فهم يكتشفون وسيكتشفون أنّ الزلزال مستمرّ، وتردّداته لا زالت تحكم معادلات المنطقة وستحكمها أكثر فأكثر، فالكثير من الخطط التي خرجت الى العلن بعد العملية كانت خططاً وضعها الجنرال سليماني، وبعضها كانت خطط احتياط لمواجهة سوء تقدير الموقف من الأميركي لموازين الردع وارتكابهم حماقات كبرى تراهن على كسر هذه المعادلات، وجاءت عملية الاغتيال أكبر هذه الحماقات، ولعلّ الأميركيين سيكتشفون في يوم غير بعيد أنّ أفغانستان وفلسطين كانتا ساحتين رئيسيتين لما أعدّه وهيأه سليماني، وأنه صاحب حضور فيهما يصعب حصر تأثيره، وأنه أولاهما بالحضور والمقدرات النوعية والعلاقات المميّزة بكلّ القيادات العاملة فيهما عناية استثنائية بمجرد اطمئنانه عام 2017 لصيرورة الانتصارات في سورية، تتويجاً لعلاقة مميّزة أنشأها ورعاها بين حركتي حماس وطالبان.

الموج الشعبي الهادر الذي خرج في تشييع هذين القائدين في العراق وإيران، أنجز مهمته في إيران مع وصول الرئيس السيد إبراهيم رئيسي الى الرئاسة، وهذا الموج لن يهدأ حتى ينجز مثل ذلك في العراق، وكما دخلت إيران رسمياً زمن الجنرال قاسم سليماني، سيدخل العراق رسمياً زمن القائد أبي مهدي المهندس، والترابط الذي حمله استشهاد القائدين معا يحكم الربط بين مساري التحوّلات في بلديهما، وليس من باب الصدفة تسمية قائد ملف أفغانستان في فيلق القدس الجنرال إسماعيل قآني لقيادة الفيلق خلفاً لسليماني، كما ليست صدفة تسمية الدبلوماسي حسين أمير عبد اللهيان المعاون السياسي لسليماني وزيراً للخارجية في عهد السيد رئيسي، ومع نيل حكومة رئيسي ثقة مجلس الشورى الإيراني، الذي يشكل الجنرال سليماني الأب الروحي للغالبية المسيطرة عليه، تدخل إيران رسمياً في ظلّ رعاية الإمام الخامنئي زمن سليماني، لتبدأ ترجمة الردّ على اغتياله واغتيال رفيق دربه المهندس، والردّ ليس بالضرورة عسكرياً، فالجانب المعنوي من الردّ العسكري قد تمّ، لكن الردّ هو كما قال الإمام الخامنئي وكما أكد السيد حسن نصرالله، بإخراج الأميركيين من المنطقة انطلاقاً من أفغانستان، ومروراً بالعراق وصولاً الى سورية، وربما يكون الأميركيون قد اكتشفوا أو هم سيكتشفون بصمات سليماني وأنفاسه في ما لحقهم في أفغانستان، لكنهم حكماً سيرون بأمّ العين حضوره وحضور المهندس في كيفية خروجهم القادم من العراق.

معادلة كش ملك هي التي تحكم اللعبة الإيرانية مع الأميركيين رداً على الاغتيال، أيّ المضيّ بجملة من الخطوات والإجراءات المعقدة والمتعدّدة الميادين والمبتاعدة جغرافياً لوضع الأميركي في منطقة قرار صعب بين الانكفاء أو الحرب، حيث لا يستطيع اتخاذ قرار الحرب، وهذا ما حصل في أفغانستان، وهذا ما سيحصل مع عبد اللهيان في الملف النووي، وهذا ما سيحصل في العراق مع توصية الانسحاب، وهذا ما يحصل مع سفن المقاومة، وهذا ما سيحصل في سورية، وفي اليمن وفي غزة، وحيث تتحرك إيران ويتحرك محور المقاومة.

وصية سليماني ومشروعه غير منفصلين، لكن مشروعه الذي اقتنع به الروس والصينيون هو آسيا خالية من الوجود الأميركي، لكن مع عرض الخروج المشرف على الأميركيين بتثبيت معادلات استحالة المواجهة أمامهم وجرهم إلى فرص الانسحاب ضمن تفاهمات وتسويات، أما وصيته فهي فرض الخروج المذلّ على الأميركيين، ومشهد أفغانستان يشرح الكيفية، ومشكلة الأميركيين أنهم لم يفهموا بعد لماذا لم تلق عروضهم لتفاهمات ثنائية مع كلّ من إيران وروسيا والصين قبولاً، ولم ينتبهوا انّ ثلاثي آسيا متفق على عدم منحهم فرص الثنائيات والاستفراد، وعازم على إخراجهم من آسيا، وأفغانستان تمنحهم فرص أفضل للفهم إنْ استطاعوا عرض تسويات تضمن انسحابهم بلا أثمان مقابلة، لاستباق ما ينتظرهم من اختناقات في مربعات الخيارات الصعبة بين مواجهة انتحارية وانسحاب مذلّ؟

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

NO VICTORIES? INVENT SOME: BIDEN’S QUEST TO MIDDLE EAST DOMINATION

South Front

You can read this article in German. LINK

The new leadership of the United States is attempting to position itself as the strongman in the Middle East. Or at least make it appear so.

Following the Biden Administration’s first strike on pro-Iranian groups on or near the Syrian-Iraq border, it showed that it can bite. What was left is to show that nothing can hurt it. In recent months, its bases have been under rocket fire. Its convoys have been targeted by IED attacks numerous times. None of these, however, resulted in any significant injuries or deaths.

As such, Washington needs to look further back and one thing stands out – it happened more than a year ago.

The time has come to correct the blemish that is the Iranian ballistic missile strike on the Ain al-Asad base in Iraq in 2020, which happened in response to the US assassination of Iranian Brigadier General Qassem Soleimani.

The strike took place on January 8th, and initially official reports said that it had caused close to no damage. Then it turned out that helicopters had been almost entirely destroyed, and that buildings had been razed. Finally, in the following weeks and months, dozens of soldiers turned out to have had “traumatic brain injuries”.

What really happened? US TV channel CBS made a special documentary on the strikes and released it on March 1st, 2021. The recollection is based on the Pentagon’s version of events and the timeline that the US Defense officials have provided.

On January 8th, hours before the strike all the soldiers knew it was coming and hid to safety. The flights of the Iranian missiles were all tracked by US Central Command. More than 50 aviation units and 1,000 people were evacuated. 16 missiles were launched from 3 different locations, five of which missed. A video was released, taken by an UAV, showing that the base “didn’t receive any significant damage”. All the grainy footage showed was finding an excuse and attempting to change the facts one year later.

The United States is attempting to present it in a way that shows its one strike along the Syrian-Iraqi border as a significant one, while downplaying the most notable strike on its own positions in the last year.

The Biden administration wants to present itself as the strong man, and promises to send more troops to the region. Trump’s troop withdrawal and limited military involvement approaches have been abandoned.

In reality, its convoys are under constant fire in Iraq and its positions are regularly targeted. And they are targeted in such a precise manner, that no human life is taken, except a few exceptions.

Who, exactly is Biden trying to impress?

US Releases Unseen Footage of Iran’s Ain Al-Assad Operation

US Releases Unseen Footage of Iran’s Ain Al-Assad Operation

By Staff, Agencies

More than one year after being targeted, the US Central Command [CENTCOM] declassified the aerial surveillance footage of Ain al-Assad Air Base in Iraq during Iran’s 2020 ballistic missile attacks on that facility as part of the retaliation for the US assassination of top Iranian commander Lt. General Qassem Soleimani.

The never-before-seen footage, shot by a drone orbiting overhead at the time, shows six ballistic missiles hitting the base.

The CENTCOM, which is the top command overseeing the US military activities in the Middle East, provided the video first to CBS News’ “60 Minutes” for a segment that aired this past weekend.

The video starts by identifying five ramps at Ain al-Assad – named Bravo, Charlie, Foxtrot, Valley, and Voodoo – and the number of aircraft positioned at the time of the attack.

The on-screen notes also indicate that there are usually 10 aircraft on the flight-line and that 51 fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters had evacuated the base ahead of the strikes.

The video then moves on to show two missiles hitting “expeditionary air maintenance facilities,” a formal term for “tension-membrane” clamshell-type hangars, on the Bravo ramp. A third missile slams into the Charlie ramp, damaging additional clamshell hangars, as well as offices, living spaces, dining facilities, and latrines.

The fourth missile strikes the Voodoo ramp, hitting more clamshell hangars, as well as a fuel bladder. The last two missiles seen in the footage strike the Charlie and Valley ramps, hitting a rescue operations center, as well as maintenance facilities, a gym, and a dining hall.

It’s not clear what type of drone filmed the video in question, but it is known that a number of US Army MQ-1C Gray Eagles were airborne at the time and that some were kept on station due to fears that a complex ground attack could follow the missile barrage, according to The Drive website.

However, the strikes damaged fiber optic lines connecting ground control stations at Ain al-Assad to satellite terminals, cutting them off from the unmanned aircraft overhead. This may also explain, in part, why only six of the missile impacts are seen in the footage.

US Army Major Alan Johnson, who was at the base during the incident, told “60 Minutes” that intelligence had indicated Iran was preparing to fire as many as 27 missiles at Ain al-Assad.

However, then-US War Secretary Mark Esper had said following the January 2020 attack that 11 Qiam 1s had hit Ain al-Assad, in total.

The CBS News’ program also reported that a total of 16 missiles were ultimately launched at the base, with five failing to function as intended. Approximately 110 US service members were later diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries, but there were no fatalities.

Iranian strategic missile units launched the precision attack, branded ‘Operation Martyr Soleimani’, against US forces at the American-operated section of the Ain al-Assad air base in Iraq in the early morning hours of January 8, 2020.

U.S. RELEASES DRONE VIDEO OF IRANIAN MISSILES STRIKES ON ITS FORCES AT AYN AL ASAD AIRBASE IN IRAQ

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq
A screenshot from the video

The United States released a previously unseen drone video showing the Iranian missile strike on US forces at the Ayn Al Asad Airbase in Iraq which took place on the 8th of January 2020 as a retaliation for the US assassination of the Iranian general Qassem Sulaimani.

How Precise Are Iranian Missiles? Analysis Of Missile Strikes On U.S. Military Base In Iraq (2020):

This video is based on the analysis of Haider Geoanalyst originally appeared on TheSaker.is

Several sources in the past weeks have analyzed the Iranian missile strikes on US forces at the Ayn Al Asad Airbase which took place more than two weeks ago on the 8th of January 2020 as a retaliation for the US assassination of the Iranian general Qassem Sulaimani.

In this analysis, the post-strike satellite imagery is assessed to give us some insights on what happened at the Ayn Al Asad Airbase and to estimate the accuracy of the Iranian missiles.

It is clear, even prior to conducting any analysis, that the Iranian missiles targeted individual structures with a high rate of accuracy. This analysis attempts to estimate the accuracy in terms of how far the missiles landed from their targets. Since the Iranians did not make public the targets they wanted to hit or destroy, it is assumed that the individual missiles were targeting the actual structures they destroyed or the nearest structures to their impact locations.

A term often used in precision guided munitions (artillery shells, smart-bombs, missiles, etc.) is the circular error probability (CEP). This value is not derived from actual warfare statistics but from weapons testing or claims from the weapons manufacturer. Instead of using the CEP, we will attempt to derive our own statistics from the small sample size of missile strikes.

Introduction to Ayn Al Asad Airbase

The US occupation forces between 2003 and 2005 changed the name of the airbase from its original 1980s name of Qadisiyah Airbase to the name of Ayn Al Asad, which in Arabic literally either means “Eye of the Lion” or in this case “Lion spring” due to the hydrological spring which is now located within the perimeter of the airbase. This spring feeds the Wadi al Asadi stream valley located in the northern part of the air base and flows eastwards into the Euphrates River as one of its tributaries. The main part of the base originally had a perimeter length of 21 km, not including other secondary or auxiliary bases located in the surrounding areas. The perimeter was expanded by the Americans to 34 km (Figure 1), giving the base a total area size of approximately 63 km2 and making it the largest military base in Iraq by area size. For comparison, this is almost twice the size of the New York City metropolitan area.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

The base consists of two major runways (a third runway is unpaved), several taxiways, a variety of different facilities and buildings for personnel, equipment, communications, including sports and leisure centers with theaters and swimming pools. The base further has soft and hardened aircraft shelters (hangars). The trapezoidal shaped hardened aircraft hangers were built by Yugoslavian companies across many bases in Iraq in the 80s and are nicknamed “Yugos” by the Iraqis. The two hardened runways have a length of approximately 3,990 m. This is almost 1 km shorter than Iraq’s longest aircraft runway of 4,800 m located at Erbil airport, which is also one of the longest in the world. For further historical and general information on the Ayn Al Asad Airbase, see the following websites here ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Asad_Airbase ), here ( https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/al-asad.htm ) and here ( https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/al-asad-airbase-iraq/ ).

Reports indicate that around 15 to 16 missiles were fired from multiple locations inside Iran, with at least 10 missiles fired from bases in the Kermanshah area. If this is indeed the case and assuming a straight line flight path, the missiles could have traveled a distance of approximately 425 km from Kermanshah until reaching the Ayn Al Asad Airbase (Figure 2).

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Airbase missile strike overview

In recent days, analysts have identified a total of nine separate missile impact strikes within the Ayn Al Assad Airbase perimeter. This does not exclude the possibility of other missile impact sites within the base’s perimeter which have not been identified or published online. Seven strikes (number 1 to 7) are found at the facilities located just above the northern taxiway and runway, which according to the imagery, houses a variety of drones and aircraft, including V-22 Ospreys, MQ-1 Predator drones, UH-60 Black Hawks and even (K)C-130 Hercules aircraft for transport and refueling. Another missile impact (number 8) is located on the taxiway between the two paved runways and impact number 9 is found on a taxiway in the southeastern complex of hardened aircraft hangars.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Site number 1 and 2

Strikes number 1 and 2 are approximately 110 m apart. Crater impact nr. 1 is 28 m away from the destroyed soft non reinforced target (possibly a tent structure). Nr. 1 has a small circular blast followed by a secondary semi-circle pattern. The secondary pattern towards the west also gives away the eastern incoming missile direction. Impact nr. 1 is peculiar since it is not a direct hit, but landed 28 m next to the nearest structure. The question is if the Iranians intentionally targeted this point or is it an accuracy issue (off by 28 m) ?

Strike nr. 2 has a similar sized crater and blast pattern as nr. 1 (approx. 27 to 28 m). So it is highly possible that both strikes were conducted using the same missile, with strike nr. 2 having a more obvious blast circle due to it landing exactly in the middle of a series of built soft structures (possible tents). From the measurements we can conclude that strike nr. 2 is more or less dead center on the 5 soft like tent structures and there is no substantial accuracy error.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Site number 3

Site nr. 3 contains two soft structures (possible tents). The missile’s crater and circular blast pattern is located almost in the center of the left building. If this building was deliberately targeted, the error is no more than 3 m. For comparison, this is the average accuracy of a handheld GNSS (GPS) device or a current smartphone, which is very impressive for a warhead landing at more than 2000 km/h (terminal velocity).

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Site number 4 and 5

Sites 4 and 5 are two building (soft structures) next to one-another each hit with what seems to be similar type of missiles with primary blast radius of 8 to 9 m and secondary circles of around 20 to 22 m. If the center of the buildings were targeted, accuracy errors are 6 and 14 m for site 4 and 5, respectively. Again, we do not know if the Iranians deliberately targeted a certain part of the structures.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Site number 6

Strike 6 is located on the left side of a long metal roof soft structure, similar to a steel open warehouse. The left half of the building shows a primary blast circle of approximately 17 m in radius, with an overall damage radius of approximately 25 m. If we assume that the center of the building was the actual target, then we find an error of 51 m. Again, the question is whether the left side of this building was deliberately struck instead of the central part. It’s possible to assume that the Iranians intentionally targeted the western side of the building, having prior knowledge the blast radius of their missiles and the importance of the western side of the building.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Site number 7

Strike number 7 is the most easterly impact site and is found near the end of the northern runway. The impact is located almost exactly in the middle of four soft aircraft shelters. The post-strike image (taken a few hours after the event) shows V-22 Ospreys and MQ-1 predator drones parked just south of the shelters. The first circular blast pattern has a 15 m radius. The incoming direction of the missile caused the complete destruction of the adjacent shelter just left of the impact point, while the shelter to the right was lightly damaged. If we assume the Iranians were targeting the middle point of the second shelter (taken from left to right) than the accuracy error would be about 18 m. However, it is highly likely that the four soft shelters were targeted as a single unit. If that is the case, then the missile was only 7 m off (accuracy error) from the middle point.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Site number 8

If we assume that the Iranians are not randomly lobbing missiles inside the airbase with CEP errors of 100 to 500 m as some of the so called “think tank” experts presume (or have previously presumed in recent years), then we can assume that site nr. 8 was targeting the taxiway located between the two paved runways as previously shown in Figure 3. In the images below we can see an impact crater hitting the side of the taxiway. The impact is 23 m from the center of the taxiway pavement and we use this distance as a measure of accuracy. A clear circular blast pattern is visible and a directional blast cone indicates the incoming missile direction.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Site number 9

Strike nr. 9 is the second strike on a taxiway and is the most southern impact site situated in a hardened hangar complex. The impact crater is located almost exactly on one of the corner points of a paved T-junction. If the Iranians purposely targeted this exact point, then the accuracy error could possibly be no more than 2 meters. However, if the target was the actual center of the T-junction, then the error is approximately 11 m. Like in site nr. 8, we see a circular blast with a cone like fan shaped pattern giving the incoming missile direction.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Assessment and conclusions

There are different ways to assess the accuracy of these strikes based on the fact that we do not have the exact coordinates the Iranians wanted  to target. It is not very realistic to assume that the Iranians were perfectly able to target the exact coordinates they intended to hit with perfect accuracy. There is however uncertainty in whether the Iranians intentionally missed some of their targets. The abovementioned observations clearly show a pattern of very accurate strikes on individually targeted buildings/structures. There are two most likely scenarios:

  1. The Iranians intentionally targeted and destroyed some targets. Accuracy errors occurred causing some missiles to miss the exact center point of their targets, with other targets being completely missed.
  2. The Iranians intentionally destroyed some targets and intentionally missed some others.

The table shows the estimated range in accuracy for each of the 9 strike locations based on our observations and interpretation. The green numbers are the most likely errors in meters, while red numbers indicating the less likely errors based on our assumptions of what the Iranians intended to target. An average missile target accuracy of 11 m is based on what are the most likely intended targets (or in other words the most likely scenario). The statistical spread of this small sample size (of only 9 strikes) is 8.5 m. So the lower and upper limits of the accuracy, based on the standard deviation, is estimated to range between 2.5 and 19.5 m. The median value, which is somewhat comparable to the CEP, is 7 m. This means that half of the strikes landed within 7 m. Finally, the average blast (damage) circle is estimated at 21 m.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Let’s visualize these numbers and assume that these numbers can be used in circles. The figure shows a MQ-1 predator drone theoretically being targeted. The yellow line indicates the 11 m mean accuracy value. This is where missiles will land on average. The red line gives the 7 m median value where 50 % of the strikes are found inside this circle. The subsequent figure also includes examples of blast circle (average radius of 21 m) locations in respect to the target.

U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq
U.S. Releases Drone Video Of Iranian Missiles Strikes On Its Forces At Ayn Al Asad Airbase In Iraq

Assuming the estimation of the intended targets and measurements are realistic, an Iranian missile accuracy ranging on average between 2.5 and 19.5 m is very impressive to say the least and indicates the use of advanced terminal guidance technology (guiding a missile in its terminal phase). Reports have suggested that the Fateh-313 tactical short range ballistic missile (SRBM) was used in the Ayn Al Asad Airbase attack, with other reports suggesting that the Qiam 1 was also used in the attack, including on Erbil Airport. The Fateh-313 is an upgraded Fateh-110, with an increased missile range up to 500 km. Terminal guidance technologies are most likely to be combined, including inertial guidance systems (INS), GNSS systems and possibly electro-optical guidance.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Canada Knew About Plan to Assassinate Iranian Gen. Soleimani Before It Happened

Canada Knew About Plan to Assassinate Iranian Gen. Soleimani Before It Happened

By Staff, The Canada Files

Canada’s former top military commander says that the US gave Canada a heads-up on its plan to kill top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani, according to his interview with the Canadian newspaper Globe and Mail this past week.

General Jonathan Vance recently retired from his position as Canada’s Chief of Defense Staff, but left with some key information about Gen. Soleimani’s assassination.

In his interview, the Globe and Mail reports him saying that the Pentagon alerted Ottawa on its plans to kill Gen. Soleimani so that it could put in “force protection measures” in case of Iranian counterstrikes.

However, right after the assassination, Canada’s National Defense Minister, Harjit Sajjan, said that the US did not provide Canada with the details of its targeted US drone strike that killed Gen. Soleimani in Iraq.

In an interview with CTV’s Power Play host, Even Solomon, in January 2020, Sajjan said they “didn’t have the exact information for the event that took place” but just that the US indicated it would “take action.”

Yves Engler, a Montreal-based political activist who has authored books on Canadian foreign policy, says he thinks that what Canada had said initially was just a “propaganda line” because “they didn’t want to take any responsibility for complicity in what the US did.”

He says that Gen. Vance spoke about it now because he was stepping down and thus being a little bit more honest. Engler, however, isn’t surprised that Canada did in fact know about the assassination as he says that Canada’s military is “totally tied in with the US military presence there.”

“In Iraq, Iraqis view Canadian military and the US military as pretty interchangeable,” he said.

Canadian and American foreign policy have generally also been quite aligned.

According to a report by the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, Canada’s foreign policy “has been shaped by deep integration with, and dependence on, the United States.” The US department of State also states in a bilateral relations fact sheet that both countries are part of a number of the same international organizations, including the UN, NATO, WTO, G7, G20, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, among others.

In fact, the US and Canada coordinate through the High-Level Policy Review Group, which was launched in 2009 so that both countries could “coordinate actions in response to pressing global issues” and to support each other in “rallying international support for shared goals.”

Engler says he doesn’t think that Canada would want to be directly associated with Gen. Soleimani’s assassination, but believes that Canada has been quite openly aligned with the US government’s campaign to weaken Iran.

He also says that Canada should have done better since they had advanced knowledge of the assassination.

“If they cared about international law, they would have publicly released information and warned Iranians and said that we don’t want to participate in crazy games of assassinating top officials of other countries,” he said.

Instead, foreign affairs minister, Francois-Phillippe Champagne, released a statement emphasizing the safety of Canadian troops in the region, calling for de-escalation and stating that Canada had been concerned about Gen. Soleimani’s Quds Force, whose “aggressive actions have had a destabilizing effect in the region and beyond.”

In a 2018 Parliamentary meeting, Gen. Vance, however, admitted that the “the PMF [Popular Mobilization Forces] and Shia militia forces did help with the destruction of Daesh [Arabic Acronym for ‘ISIS’ / ‘ISIL’].”

Iran’s Parliament speaker, Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, delivered a speech on May 31, 2020 saying that Gen. Soleimani’s assassination is what poses a major threat to international peace and security now.

“When Iran does something that is questionable there is usually a pretty aggressive denunciation from the Canadian government, but in this case [of the assassination], it was either total silence or close to silence,” said Engler, commenting about Canada’s “modest” statement post-assassination.

Gen. Soleimani was the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps’ [IRGC] Quds Force. He and his companions, including top Iraqi official Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, were assassinated in a US drone strike, under the order of US President Donald Trump, when Gen. Soleimani was on an official visit to the Iraqi capital.

Iran shot a barrage of missiles on US military bases in Iraq on Jan. 8, 2020 as a form of revenge for assassinating their top Iranian general.

According to Airforce Technology, the Ain al-Asad air force base was the largest coalition base in western Iraq. The Pentagon announced that over 100 American soldiers suffered traumatic brain injuries as a result of the missile strike at the base.

Canada suspended its military mission in Iraq and moved its troops to Kuwait as a protection measure at the time. Canada’s NATO mission in Iraq provides training for Iraqi forces “to help build more effective and sustainable Iraqi defense and security institutions.”

But Engler believes otherwise.

“Since the US occupation, there have been huge amounts of resources put into trying to build up an Iraqi military force that will advance US interests in Iraq and in the region more generally.” he said. “That’s the objective of training militaries everywhere. Canada and the US don’t train other countries’ militaries just out of the goodness of their heart, [they do it] because it’s useful to have armed men…that are aligned with you in different ways.”

Soleimani geopolitics, one year on

Soleimani geopolitics, one year on

by Pepe Escobar, posted with permission and first posted at Asia Times

One year ago, the Raging Twenties started with a murder.

The assassination of Maj Gen Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), alongside Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the deputy commander of Iraq’s Hashd al-Sha’abi militia, by laser-guided Hellfire missiles launched from two MQ-9 Reaper drones, was an act of war.

Not only the drone strike at Baghdad airport, directly ordered by President Trump, was unilateral, unprovoked and illegal: it was engineered as a stark provocation, to detonate an Iranian reaction that would then be countered by American “self-defense”, packaged as “deterrence”. Call it a perverse form of double down, reversed false flag.

The imperial Mighty Wurlitzer spun it as a “targeted killing”, a pre-emptive op squashing Soleimani’s alleged planning of “imminent attacks” against US diplomats and troops.

False. No evidence whatsoever. And then, Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi, in front of his Parliament, offered the ultimate context: Soleimani was on a diplomatic mission, on a regular flight between Damascus and Baghdad, involved in complex negotiations between Tehran and Riyadh, with the Iraqi Prime Minister as mediator, at the request of President Trump.

So the imperial machine – in complete mockery of international law – assassinated a de facto diplomatic envoy.

The three top factions who pushed for Soleimani’s assassination were US neo-cons – supremely ignorant of Southwest Asia’s history, culture and politics – and the Israeli and Saudi lobbies, who ardently believe their interests are advanced every time Iran is attacked. Trump could not possibly see The Big Picture and its dire ramifications: only what his major Israeli-firster donor Sheldon Adelson dictates, and what Jared of Arabia Kushner whispered in his ear, remote-controlled by his close pal Muhammad bin Salman (MbS).

The armor of American “prestige”

The measured Iranian response to Soleimani’s assassination was carefully calibrated to not detonate vengeful imperial “deterrence”:

precision missile strikes on the American-controlled Ain al-Assad air base in Iraq. The Pentagon received advance warning.

Predictably, the run-up towards the first anniversary of Soleimani’s assassination had to degenerate into intimations of US-Iran once again on the brink of war.

So it’s enlightening to examine what the Commander of the IRGC Aerospace Division, Brigadier General Amir-Ali Hajizadeh, https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1399/10/13/2423366/ told Lebanon’s Al Manar network: “The US and the Zionist regime [Israel] have not brought security to any place and if something happens here (in the region) and a war breaks out, we will make no distinction between the US bases and the countries hosting them.”

Hajizadeh, expanding on the precision missile strikes a year ago, added, “We were prepared for the Americans’ response and all our missile power was fully on alert. If they had given a response, we would have hit all of their bases from Jordan to Iraq and the Persian Gulf and even their warships in the Indian Ocean.”

The precision missile strikes on Ain al-Assad, a year ago, represented a middle-rank power, enfeebled by sanctions, and facing a huge economic/financial crisis, responding to an attack by targeting imperial assets that are part of the Empire of Bases. That was a global first – unheard of since the end of WWII. It was clearly interpreted across vast swathes of the Global South as fatally piercing the decades-old hegemonic armor of American” prestige”.

So Tehran was not exactly impressed by two nuclear-capable B-52s recently flying over the Persian Gulf; or the US Navy announcing the arrival of the nuclear-powered, missile loaded USS Georgia in the Persian Gulf last week.

These deployments were spun as a response to an evidence-free claim that Tehran was behind a 21-rocket attack against the sprawling American embassy in Baghdad’s Green Zone.

The (unexploded) 107mm caliber rockets – by the way marked in English, not Farsi – can be easily bought in some underground Baghdad souk by virtually anybody, as I have seen for myself in Iraq since the mid-2000s.

That certainly does not qualify as a casus belli – or “self-defense” merging with “deterrence”. The Centcom justification actually sounds like a Monty Python sketch: an attack “…almost certainly conducted by an Iranian-backed rogue militia group.” Note that “almost certainly” is code for “we have no idea who did it”.

How to fight the – real – war on terror

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif did take the trouble (see attached tweet) to warn Trump he was being set up for a fake casus belli – and blowback would be inevitable. That’s a case of Iranian diplomacy being perfectly aligned with the IRGC: after all, the whole post-Soleimani strategy comes straight from Ayatollah Khamenei.

And that leads to the IRGC’s Hajizadeh once again establishing the Iranian red line in terms of the Islamic Republic’s defense: “We will not negotiate about the missile power with anyone” – pre-empting any move to incorporate missile reduction into a possible Washington return to the JCPOA. Hajizadeh has also emphasized that Tehran has restricted the range of its missiles to 2,000 km.

My friend Elijah Magnier, arguably the top war correspondent across Southwest Asia in the past four decades, has neatly detailed the importance of Soleimani.

Everyone not only along the Axis of Resistance – Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus, Hezbollah – but across vast swathes of the Global South is firmly aware of how Soleimani led the fight against ISIS/Daesh in Iraq from 2014 to 2015, and how he was instrumental in retaking Tikrit in 2015.

Zeinab Soleimani, the impressive General’s daughter, has profiled the man, and the sentiments he inspired. And Hezbollah’s secretary-general Sayed Nasrallah, in an extraordinary interview, stressed Soleimani’s “great humility”, even “with the common people, the simple people.”

Nasrallah tells a story that is essential to place Soleimani’s modus operandi in the real – not fictional – war on terror, and deserves to be quoted in full:

“At that time, Hajj Qassem traveled from Baghdad airport to Damascus airport, from where he came (directly) to Beirut, in the southern suburbs. He arrived to me at midnight. I remember very well what he said to me: “At dawn you must have provided me with 120 (Hezbollah) operation commanders.” I replied “But Hajj, it’s midnight, how can I provide you with 120 commanders?” He told me that there was no other solution if we wanted to fight (effectively) against ISIS, to defend the Iraqi people, our holy places [5 of the 12 Imams of Twelver Shi’ism have their mausoleums in Iraq], our Hawzas [Islamic seminars], and everything that existed in Iraq. There was no choice. “I don’t need fighters. I need operational commanders [to supervise the Iraqi Popular Mobilization Units, PMU].” This is why in my speech [about Soleimani’s assassination], I said that during the 22 years or so of our relationship with Hajj Qassem Soleimani, he never asked us for anything. He never asked us for anything, not even for Iran. Yes, he only asked us once, and that was for Iraq, when he asked us for these (120) operations commanders. So he stayed with me, and we started contacting our (Hezbollah) brothers one by one. We were able to bring in nearly 60 operational commanders, including some brothers who were on the front lines in Syria, and whom we sent to Damascus airport [to wait for Soleimani], and others who were in Lebanon, and that we woke up from their sleep and brought in [immediately] from their house as the Hajj said he wanted to take them with him on the plane that would bring him back to Damascus after the dawn prayer. And indeed, after praying the dawn prayer together, they flew to Damascus with him, and Hajj Qassem traveled from Damascus to Baghdad with 50 to 60 Lebanese Hezbollah commanders, with whom he went to the front lines in Iraq. He said he didn’t need fighters, because thank God there were plenty of volunteers in Iraq. But he needed [battle-hardened] commanders to lead these fighters, train them, pass on experience and expertise to them, etc. And he didn’t leave until he took my pledge that within two or three days I would have sent him the remaining 60 commanders.”

Orientalism, all over again

A former commander under Soleimani that I met in Iran in 2018 had promised me and my colleague Sebastiano Caputo that he would try to arrange an interview with the Maj Gen – who never spoke to foreign media. We had no reason to doubt our interlocutor – so until the last Baghdad minute we were in this selective waiting list.

As for Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, killed side by side with Soleimani in the Baghdad drone strike, I was part of a small group who spent an afternoon with him in a safe house inside – not outside – Baghdad’s Green Zone in November 2017. My full report is here.

Prof. Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran, reflecting on the assassination, told me, “the most important thing is that the Western view on the situation is very Orientalist. They assume that Iran has no real structures and that everything is dependent on individuals. In the West an assassination doesn’t destroy an administration, company, or organization. Ayatollah Khomeini passed away and they said the revolution was finished. But the constitutional process produced a new leader within hours. The rest is history.”

This may go a long way to explain Soleimani geopolitics. He may have been a revolutionary superstar – many across the Global South see him as the Che Guevara of Southwest Asia – but he was most of all a quite articulated cog of a very articulated machine.

The adjunct President of the Iranian Parliament, Hossein Amirabdollahian, told Iranian network Shabake Khabar that Soleimani, two years before the assassination, had already envisaged an inevitable “normalization” between Israel and Persian Gulf monarchies.

At the same time he was also very much aware of the Arab League 2002 position – shared, among others, by Iraq, Syria and Lebanon: a “normalization” cannot even begin to be discussed without an independent – and viable – Palestinian state under 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as capital.

Now everyone knows this dream is dead, if not completely buried. What remains is the usual, dreary slog: the American assassination of Soleimani, the Israeli assassination of top Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the relentless, relatively low-intensity Israeli warfare against Iran fully supported by the Beltway, Washington’s illegal occupation of parts of northeast Syria to grab some oil, the perpetual drive for regime change in Damascus, the non-stop demonization of Hezbollah.

Beyond the Hellfire

Tehran has made it very clear that a return to at least a measure of mutual respect between US-Iran involves Washington rejoining the JCPOA with no preconditions, and the end of illegal, unilateral Trump administration sanctions. These parameters are non-negotiable.

Nasrallah, for his part, in a speech in Beirut on Sunday, stressed,

“one of the main outcomes of the assassination of General Soleimani and al-Muhandis is the calls made for the expulsion of US forces from the region. Such calls had not been made prior to the assassination. The martyrdom of the resistance leaders set US troops on the track of leaving Iraq.”

This may be wishful thinking, because the military-industrial-security complex will never willingly abandon a key hub of the Empire of Bases.

More important is the fact that the post-Soleimani environment transcends Soleimani.

The Axis of Resistance – Tehran-Baghdad-Damascus-Hezbollah – instead of collapsing, will keep getting reinforced.

Internally, and still under “maximum pressure” sanctions, Iran and Russia will be cooperating to produce Covid-19 vaccines, and the Pasteur Institute of Iran will co-produce a vaccine with a Cuban company.

Iran is increasingly solidified as the key node of the New Silk Roads in Southwest Asia: the Iran-China strategic partnership is constantly revitalized by FMs Zarif and Wang Yi, and that includes Beijing turbo-charging its geoeconomic investment in South Pars – the largest gas field on the planet.

Iran, Russia and China will be involved in the reconstruction of Syria – which will also include, eventually, a New Silk Road branch: the Iran-Iraq-Syria-Eastern Mediterranean railway.

All that is an interlinked, ongoing process no Hellfires are able to burn.

The Empire Has Collapsed

October 28, 2020

The Empire Has Collapsed

by Paul Craig Roberts, cross-posted by permission

Paul Craig Roberts

The Saker has written another interesting article in which he gives us the date of the collapse of the AngloZionist or American Empire:  January 3, 2020, the day when Washington did not retaliate against Iran for Iran’s retaliation against Washington for murdering General Qasem Soleimani.

You can read The Saker’s case and make up your mind:  https://thesaker.is/when-exactly-did-the-anglozionist-empire-collapse/

An equally good case could be made that the American Empire collapsed on September 11, 2001.  This was the day that two symbols of American power—the World Trade Center and the Pentagon—were successfully attacked, according to the US government itself, by an old and dying Osama bin Laden and a handful of Saudi Arabians armed with box cutters.  This unlikely group was able, according to Washington, to overcome the entire intelligence networks of the United States, NATO, and Israel’s Mossad, and deliver the most humiliating blow ever suffered by a ruling Superpower.

It was the day when nothing in the National Security State worked.  US Airport Security failed four times on the same morning, allowing four US airliners to be hijacked. The US Air Force was unable to put fighters in the air to intercept the hijacked airliners, and two of them were flown into the World Trade Center towers and one into the Pentagon itself, while the Great Superpower was unable to defend itself from an old man in a cave in Afghanistan and a handful of young Saudis.

September 11, 2001, was the day that the world realized that the emperor had no clothes.  If Osama bin Laden and a handful of Saudis could defeat the United States, anyone could.

I think The Saker is wrong about Donald Trump. Trump wanted to save American influence by ceasing its fruitless attempts to impose hegemony on the world.  Trump wanted to bring the US soldiers home from the Middle East and to normalize relations with Russia.  This was a major threat to the power and budget of the military/security complex and to the zionist neoconservatives’ desire to use American military power to make the Middle East into Greater Israel.  If 9/11 did not end the American empire, the attack on President Trump from within the government did.  The internal demonization of the American president called to mind the internal conflicts that destroyed the Roman Empire.

I agree with The Saker that the Empire is finished.  Even if Trump wins and manages to be inaugurated, what can he do?  He faces the same powerful forces that stymied his first term. If the crook Biden and the anti-white racist Kamala win, The Camp of the Saints will continue to unfold in the US as the majority white population is demonized, its memorials and history erased, and its power exterminated.

No white American will fight for a government that has demonized him, torn down his statues,  and erased his people’s history.  An army of feminists, transgendered, Hispanic immigrants, disaffected blacks, and displaced Muslims will not fare well against Russian, Chinese, and Iranian forces.  Such a collection is not imbued with pride of country, a requirement for a fighting force.

More than the empire is dead. The country itself is dead.

Trump is trying to resurrect America, but are the people too far gone to respond?  We will soon know.

When exactly did the AngloZionist Empire collapse?

“”the exact moment when the Empire collapsed: 8 January 2020. What happened that day? Following the murder of Major General Qasem Soleimani in a US drone attack (on the 3 of January 2020) the Iranians retaliated by using missiles to attack several US bases in Iraq.” The Saker

ٍSource

When exactly did the AngloZionist Empire collapse?

[this analysis was written for the Unz Review]

I remember one evening in distant 1991, I was sitting with a few friends in the SAIS cafeteria discussing the future of the United States with a few very smart students, including a Pakistani Army Colonel, a US captain who served on aircraft carriers and a Spanish diplomat: we all agreed that “the system” was perfect, so to speak, and that the US would only collapse if a strong external shock would hit it hard. We all agreed that the combination of the best propaganda machine in history, the stupidification resulting from many daily hours of watching the Idiot Tube and, finally, a very effective repression apparatus made for a quasi perfect dictatorship: the one which only gives the illusion of democracy and people power.

Years later, in 2017, I read by J.M. Greer’s brilliant book “Twilight’s Last Gleaming” which I later reviewed here. I would say that this book is one of the best one written on the topic of a future US collapse, even though this is a (very well written) fiction book because it brilliantly illustrates the kind of mindset which can get a supposed superpower in a very bad situation.

To me, this all made perfect sense, but only because I, and my SAIS friends, never even considered the possibility that the US Nomenklatura would commit national suicide and, in the process, bring down the AngloZionist Empire.

Yet this is exactly what happened.

So when did all this begin?

There are many possible answers to this question. Some say with the murder of Kennedy. Others point to Clinton, whose Presidency inaugurated a policy of armed imperialism all over the planet; this administration was also the first one to witness a major “coming out” of the Neocons (many of which had already infiltrated the GOP during Reagan). Then there is 9/11 with the subsequent GWOT. As I said, these are all valid candidates, and there are many more.

My personal view is that the main initiation of collapse was under Barack Obama, a truly exceptionally weak President who would have made an absolutely terrific used cars salesman, but who as a President lost control of his own country and even his own administration. It was under Obama that we saw the vacuum at the top resulting in various agencies (DoS, DoD, CIA, Pentagon, etc.) all developing their own “foreign policies” which resulted in total chaos on the foreign policy front. Needless to say, having harpies such as Hillary Clinton or Susan Rice or Samantha Power involved did not help!

What is it with western women which makes them become even more bellicose than men when they reach a position of power?! Looking at women like Thatcher or Hillary, I wonder if these women are not carefully selected precisely for their nasty character and need to prove themselves as “equal” to men by being even more nasty and murderous than male politicians…

Since his election, it has become very popular to blame Donald Trump for everything which went wrong under his Presidency and, indeed, there is much which ought to be blamed on him. But what so many people overlook is that almost everything which went wrong under Trump began with Obama! When Trumps says that he inherited an awful mess, he is absolutely correct. Not that this absolves him from his own contribution to chaos and collapse!

And, in truth, the biggest difference between Obama and Trump, is that Trump did not start any real wars. Yes, he did threaten a lot of countries with military attacks (itself a crime under international law), but he never actually gave the go ahead to meaningfully attack (he only tried some highly symbolic and totally ineffective strikes in Syria). I repeat – the man was one of the very few US Presidents who did not commit the crime of aggression, the highest possible crime under international law, above crimes against humanity or even genocide, because the crime of aggression “contains within itself the accumulated evil”, to use the words words of the chief US prosecutor at Nuremberg and Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Robert H. Jackson. I submit that just for this reason alone any decent person should choose him over Biden (who himself is just a front for “President” Harris and a puppet of the Clinton gang). Either that, or don’t vote at all if your conscience does not allow you to vote for Trump. But voting Biden is unthinkable for any honest person, at least in my humble opinion.

In the Trump years something absolutely amazing happened: while Trump and his administration were busy destroying the Empire externally, the Dems put all the energy and resources into destroying Trump. However, to paraphrase a quote by the Russian author Zinoviev, “they targeted at Trump but they hit the United States” (Zinoviev’s quote was about the putative anti-Soviets: “Метили в коммунизм, а попали в Россию” which can be translated as “they were aiming at Communism, but they hit Russia”).

What took place next was precisely what my SAIS friends and I could never have imagined: the US ruling elites committed collective suicide.

Suicide is typically executed in three phases: decision to commit suicide, the act of suicide itself, and then death. If we accept that the decision to engage in behavior which can only be described as suicidal was taken sometime during the Obama years, then this begs the question of where we are now. In other words, has the Empire already died or is it still only in agony?

I was asking myself that question the other day when I suddenly realized that I might have determined the exact moment when the Empire collapsed: 8 January 2020.

What happened that day?

Following the murder of Major General Qasem Soleimani in a US drone attack (on the 3 of January 2020) the Iranians retaliated by using missiles to attack several US bases in Iraq. According to the US side, there were only minor injuries, which is very likely since the Iranians warned the US by several backdoor channels what they were planning on doing. This argument was used by Trump and his supporters to say that the Iranian reaction was lame, ineffective and could be completely ignored.

In my opinion, the moment when the Trump Administration made this statement is when the death certificate of the Empire was signed. Why?

First, the low number of US casualties (probably higher than the official one, US troops were evacuated and treated in several countries) is due to only to the fact that Iranians are superb strategists: they realized that killing a lot of US soldiers would force Trump to strongly retaliate, so they chose not to kill them. Instead, they put a gun to their collective heads. How?

Think about it: the Iranian counter-strike showed the entire world something which most people did not realize: Iranian missiles (ballistic and cruise) were much more accurate than previously thought. In fact, they clearly have some form of terminal guidance. Simply put, the Iranians have proven that they can very precisely, deliver a warhead of several hundred pounds of high explosives pretty much anywhere in the Middle East. To give you a visual idea of their current coverage check out this page.

This bears repeating: the Iranians have now proven that they can place several hundred pounds of high explosives anywhere in the Middle-East with a CEP of about 3-5 meters!

Remember the Khobar Towers bombing? Yes, this was a truck bomb with much more explosives than a missile can carry (by at least an order of magnitude), but that truck was also parked far away from the towers! Yet just under 500 people died that day.

There are plenty of similar US military installations in the Middle-East, many buildings housing hundreds of US servicemen. Just imagine what would have happened if the Iranians had decided to take out as many lives as possible and placed a couple of their missiles right on top of, say, 10 such facilities – just imagine the cost in lives!

But the Iranians are smart, and they chose a much wiser course of action: they used their missiles essentially to kick Uncle Shmuel where it hurts, but they mainly demonstrated their ability to create thousands of US casualties in just a few minutes.

Obviously, another, now undeniable, Iranian capability is the ability to instantly destroy any gas/oil facility in the region: wells, processing facilities, terminals – you name it: if it is important and expensive, the Iranians can destroy it.

The Iranians also have the ability to close down the Strait of Hormuz and even to attack USN ships, possibly including carriers.

Last, but certainly not least, this now proven Iranian capability puts every government building in danger, along with any crucial facility (Dimona anybody?).

At this point of the conversation all the well-propagandized flag-waving morons will immediately stand up and declare something along these lines:

“So what?! If these sand-niggers cross the line they know that we can massively bomb them! Heck, we can even nuke them and send them back to the stone age! Let them try and they will see what the wrath of the most powerful nation on earth, with the most formidable military in history, can do to a bunch of semi-literate peasants, LOL! Let see if their “Allah” will save them!”

Apart from all the ignorant cliches typically spewed by this crowd, there is a major analytical error underlying this “logic” (I use the term generously): the Iranians have lived with this threat since 1979 and they are used to it. Not only that, but they know for a fact that these are empty threats. Oh sure, the US can do to Iran what “Israel” did to Lebanon in the course of the “Divine Victory” war of 2006, or what NATO has done to Serbia during the Kosovo war (1998-1999): kill civilians and destroy the country’s infrastructure to punish these civilians for supporting the “wrong” (i.e. not US approved) government. But if Uncle Shmuel does to Iran what Israel did to Lebanon, the result will be the same: the Iranians will rebuild (they are very good at that) and they will bounce back twice as strong. As for their martyrs, the more there will be, the stronger the Iranian people’s resistance (check this article written by an Iranian scholar in excellent English explaining the roots of the unique ethos of Shia Islam).

Last, but also not least, the US Presidents and their aides are quite aware of the current state of the US military: it is a military which simply cannot win even simple conflicts, a military hopelessly gutted by insane liberal ideologies, a military whose entire surface fleet has been made obsolete by hypersonic missiles (which the Iranians also seem to be working on!) and a military whose Air Force spent absolutely obscene amounts of money to create a supposedly “5th generation” fighter which in many ways is inferior to US 4th generation aircraft!

This begs the question of what still works in the US military. In my opinion, the US submarine fleet is still very powerful, and the US nuclear deterrence posture is still solid. Other than that? Meh…

Bottom line: the arguments that the US did not retaliate because it did not care, or that it does not care because “we can nuke them” are typically civilian nonsense which have no connection whatsoever to the real world (just imagine the political consequences for the already highly unpopular US following a nuclear strike, especially on a non-nuclear country!)

Okay, but then why did the US not retaliate?

Simply put, because Uncle Shmuel does not have what it takes to take on Iran. Heck, Uncle Shmuel can’t even take on Venezuela (!), which is an extremely weakened country right on the US’s door step. Frankly, if this or the next President decides that the US needs to “pick up a crappy little country and throw it against a wall just to prove we are serious” then I recommend Grenada. I know, Grenada was basically undefended in 1983 (mainly by a few lightly armed Cuban engineers) and it took the 82nd airborne to rescue the totally defeated and clueless US special forces stuck under fire, but I think that since 1983 the Pentagon had the time to make a some “lessons learned” exercises and that by now the US probably could re-invade this tiny island without repeating one of the worst disasters in military history.

Conclusion

The Empire died on the day the Iranians hit these US facilities and the US did absolutely nothing. In fact, since that date, what have we seen:

  • The Iraqis are slowly but surely kicking the US forces out of Iraq
  • The number of attacks against US forces in Iraq has sharply increased, including against the massive US bunker complex known as “the Green Zone” which now is not “green” at all.
  • The Iranians are merrily continuing to make fun of Uncle Shmuel.
  • The US failed at renewing the anti-Iran sanctions at the UN Security Council and Russia has already declared that she is willing to sell S-400s to Iran. You can also count China in this great weapons market.
  • The US is also in retreat in Syria where anti-US attacks are becoming more dangerous (and regular clashes with ground forces of the Russian task force in Syria are also becoming a potentially very dangerous phenomenon).
  • In Yemen, the Iranian backed Houthis have basically won the war and defeated both the KSA and the US.
  • In Afghanistan, the US and its “coalition of the losers” has stayed even longer than the Soviets and has achieved exactly nothing except a total and most humiliating defeat. The contrast between the performance of the Soviet 40th Army (poorly equipped and averagely commanded) force of conscripts and what the lavishly equipped (but also poorly commanded) US professional force achieved is absolutely amazing on all levels, but the most telling is how much the Soviets actually built in Afghanistan (even facilities that the US still uses every day!). Uncle Shmuel only destroyed everything except the opium trade…

In other words, everything is going exactly according to the announced Iranian game plan to completely kick the US out of the Middle-East. I know, this seems unthinkable right now, but please make the list of all the putatively “unthinkable” things which have since happened and you will see how dangerous it is to assume that something will never happen.

When Georgia attacked the Russian peacekeepers in Tskhinval there were also limited casualties, but Russia immediately counter-attacked defeated in Georgian military in 3 days, and that in spite of being numerically smaller (at least in the initial phases of the counter-attack) and too slow to react (a typical Russian weakness). And the message to “to whom it may concern” sent by the Russian counter-attack was simple: attack a Russian base, or kill Russian soldiers and you will be killed: every time a Russian serviceman has been killed in Syria the Russians retaliate with strong missiles and air strikes. In other instances Russian Spetsnaz units killed selective Takfiri commanders. And everybody “got it”, even the Turks who have not been able to force the Russian to stop shrinking their areas of control in Syria to a small fraction of what it used to be.

Mind you – Russia has no desire to become an Empire or even some kind of superpower (Russians realize how evil any empire is for the country which is supposed to host it: they suffered for over 300 years in this toxic status of “empire” and they had enough! Only dumb Hillary and even dumber Brzezinski still thought that Russia wanted to “rebuild the USSR” when, in fact, Putin’s policies were designed to disengage and separate from the former Russian periphery which only drained immense Russian ressources and never gave Russia anything useful (and nevermind the Warsaw Treaty Organization which was just as ressources-consuming and useless as the periphery). All they want is being taken seriously and treated with respect, not as a superpower, but simply as a major, but truly sovereign, power.

Compare that with the unique blend of stratospheric megalomania, narcissistic self-worship and crass ignorance of the leaders of the US and you immediately see that the Empire is not dying anymore, it is already dead and has been dead for many months now.

What comes next?

Well, the election of course. I submit that under no scenario will the next administration be able to reverse that course and somehow miraculously resurrect the Empire. Empires don’t resurrect. It has been tried in the past (even by Napoleon), it never works. Once empires lose momentum and, especially, their ideological credibility, they are over. Oh sure, a dead body still can emit some heat for a while, some organs, or even cells, can work for a while longer, but dead is dead. Mostly dead bodies bloat and stink, which also applies to dead empires.

This is not to say that the outcome will not matter, it will – but only for the future of the United States themselves. Simply put, the upcoming vote is either a vote for upholding law and order in the US, or for total nihilism. On a deeper level, it is a vote for the US or against it: the Dems all hate this country and its “deplorables”; they also hate almost every aspect of US history (overturned statues are but symbols of this hatred) and they hate what they call “a racist system” in spite of the fact that the real causes of racial tensions in the US have very little to do with the “system” and everything to do with the unique problems of blacks in a culture with mainly European roots.

The Empire is dead. And I hope and believe that its death will mark the rebirth of the United States as a “normal” country (which is what happened to all the other former empires).

Until that happens, we can now at least rest assured that this amazingly evil Empire has finally died, even if very few noticed this.

P.S. While writing this column my thoughts turned to Major General Qasem Soleimani, who was cowardly murdered (he was on a diplomatic mission) by Trump. I imagined what he would have said if somebody had offered him the following deal: Haj Qasem – would you agree to be murdered by the modern Crusaders if your martyrdom would turn out to be the “straw” which will break the Empire’s “camel” back? I think that he would reply with tears of joy in his eyes “Glory be to God for allowing me this immense honor and joy and for allowing me to become a shadid (God’s witness)!” Soleimani was a soldier, the real thing, not a disguised businessman or politician, and he knew that he could die literally every moment of his life. He died as a general in charge of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and of its elite Quds Force. It sure looks to me that Trump in his ignorant arrogance gave Soleimani the best death he could have wished for. May this great man rest in peace!

IRGC commander threatens to target everyone responsible for Qassem Soleimani’s assassination

By News Desk -2020-09-19

BEIRUT, LEBANON (12:00 P.M.) – The commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard said in a statement this week, “the U.S. president believed we will assassinate his ambassador in South Africa in exchange for assassinating Qassem Soleimani, but we tell him that we will target everyone who had a role in the assassination.”

Major General Hossein Salami, Commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, pointed out that his country “monitors the interests of enemies everywhere and they will be a target of our strength if necessary.”

He continued, “I tell Trump that our revenge on Qassem Soleimani is inevitable and realistic. We will avenge Qassem Soleimani with manhood, honor and justice, and this is a serious message.”

The commander of the Revolutionary Guard indicated that his forces pursued the enemy to the Mediterranean and will continue to pursue it everywhere, pointing out that Trump is threatening Iran with an attack a thousand times more powerful, while he was unable to respond to the bombing of the Ain al-Assad base (with Iranian missiles) in Iraq.

He said, “We have equipped hundreds of missiles to destroy everything America possesses in the region if it responded to the bombing of Ain al-Assad, but it did not respond.”

Salami added that the United States is living in political isolation and has failed to extend the arms embargo on Iran.

Related News

Iran’s top security official: Harsher revenge awaits perpetrators of Gen. Soleimani’s assassination

Source

Wednesday, 22 July 2020 4:29 PM 

US Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) (L) talks with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) during a rally with fellow Democrats before voting on H.R. 1, or the People Act, on the East Steps of the US Capitol on March 08, 2019 in Washington, DC. (AFP photo)
Members of the Iraqi honor guard walk past a huge portrait of Iran’s late top general Qassem Soleimani (L) and Iraqi commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, both killed in a US drone strike near Baghdad airport last month, during a memorial service held in Baghdad’s high-security Green Zone on February 11, 2020. (Photo by AFP)

Iran’s top security official says harsher revenge awaits the perpetrators of the attack that killed senior Iranian anti-terrorism commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani and his companions.

In a post on his Twitter page on Wednesday, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Ali Shamkhani said that US President Donald Trump had admitted that the American, upon his direct order, committed the crime of assassinating General Soleimani, the commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), andAbu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) counter-terrorism force, who were two prominent figures of the anti-terrorism campaign.  

“The two Iranian and Iraqi nations are avengers of blood of these martyrsand will not rest until they punish the perpetrators,” read part of the tweet.

“Harsher revenge is one the way,” it concluded.

The two commanders and a number of their companions were assassinated in a US airstrike near Baghdad airport on January 3, as General Soleimani was on an official visit to the Iraqi capital.

Both commanders were extremely popular because of the key role they played in eliminating the US-sponsored Daesh terrorist group in the region, particularly in Iraq and Syria.UN experts calls US drone attack on Gen. Soleimani ‘unlawful’ killingA senior UN human rights investigator says the United States’ assassination of top Iranian commander Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad was an “unlawful” killing in violation of the international law.

In retaliation for the attack, the IRGC fired volleys of ballistic missiles a US base in Iraq on January 8. According to the US Defense Department, more than 100 American forces suffered “traumatic brain injuries” during the counterstrike. The IRGC, however, says Washington uses the term to mask the number of the Americans, who perished during the retaliation.

Iran has also issued an arrest warrant and asked Interpol for help in detaining Trump, who ordered the assassination, and several other US military and political leaders behind the strike.

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said on Tuesday Iran will never forget Washington’s assassination of General Soleimani and will definitely deliver a “counterblow” to the United States.Leader: Iran to deal US ‘counterblow’ for Gen. Soleimani’s assassinationLeader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei meets with visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi in Tehran.

“The Islamic Republic of Iran will never forget this issue and will definitely deal the counterblow to the Americans,” Ayatollah Khamenei said in a meeting with visiting Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi in Tehran.

“They killed your guest at your own home and unequivocally admitted the atrocity. This is no small matter,” Ayatollah Khamenei told the Iraqi premier.

A UN special rapporteur sayshas condemned the US assassination and said Washington has put the world at unprecedented peril with its murder of Iran’s top anti-terror commander.UN expert raps US for arbitrary drone attack that killed Gen. SoleimaniA UN special rapporteur slams the US for refusing to take responsibility for the assassination of General Soleimani in violation of international law.

Agnes Callamard, UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, has also warned that it is high time the international community broke its silence on Washington’s drone-powered unlawful killings.


Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir

www.presstv.co.uk

www.presstv.tv

Washington feared an Iranian attack in the US after Soleimani’s assassination: magazine

Source

By News Desk -2020-07-10

In its report, the publication noted that Iranian-backed forces have not killed anyone on American soil since 1980, to the point that U.S. officials have come to believe that the Iranian leadership will not give orders to attack any American territory, unless it faces an existential threat.

The leaked report on the Joint Intelligence Center in California revealed that “many of the security and intelligence officials in Washington considered Soleimani’s assassination on January 2 to cross the red lines of Iran and a kind of existential threat to its influence in the Middle East and the world in general.

The report stated: “Historically, Tehran and its allies have carried out their reprisals against American interests mostly located outside American territory, but the specific operation that targeted the assassination of Soleimani and the position of the target person in the pyramid of power in Iran, prompted these American officials to warn that Tehran might resort to this.”

“We do not know of any specific and credible threat to the homeland by Hezbollah or parties linked to Iran, but Hezbollah or Iran could conduct operations in the United States against targets similar to those attacked in other places in the west. ”

The Ministry of Homeland Security issued another leaflet warning of Iranian-backed terrorism in response to the assassination of Soleimani, but this bulletin ended in March and was not updated.

Iran’s first response to the Soleimani assassination was carried out against the U.S. forces in Iraq on the evening of January 8th by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Though Iran has warned that their retaliation for the assassination of Soleimani has not ended, it appears, as of now, that they are concentrated on expelling the U.S. forces from Iraq and Syria.

“Mission Accomplished”… How Did Hezbollah Build Its New Equation?

By Charles Abi Nader

“Mission Accomplished”...   How Did Hezbollah Build Its New Equation?
The mission is accomplished (CLICK FOR VIDEO)

It is true that the media of the ‘Israeli’ Enemy and their analysts have expressed astonishment on the film that the Hezbollah media have published recently. The film featured specific goals inside the ‘Israeli’ entity along with a voice commentary belonging to the Hezbollah’s secretary general.  The commentary carried clear messages to the enemy which said that “the mission is accomplished” and that Hezbollah now holds precise missiles that are capable of accurately targeting most of the enemy’s strategic, dangerous and sensitive locations. However, practically, the enemy wasn’t surprised by the message as it was in fact waiting and expecting it. Also, it has put the manner of dealing with Hezbollah as its first priority and within the goals of facing it.

Of course, the enemy’s leadership knew very well that all that Hezbollah has reached concerning its qualified missile capabilities was due to its hard work. Hezbollah has been working and planning hardly and effectively. ‘Israel’ has tried hard to prevent it whether be it in politics, sanctions, diplomacy, and air and missile strikes. However, it seems to have failed in all that. Saying that, how then did Hezbollah build its new equation and what is it based on?

What is the equation based upon?

In practice, Hezbollah’s new equation which goes under the title “mission accomplished” is based upon the possession of specific missiles that are capable of aiming at any target that Hezbollah chooses and at any time it wants. In other words, all of this is present despite the ‘Israeli’ defensive measures. It has become an inevitable destiny.

The enemy has expressed the sensitive and dangerous aspects of the topic from the technical and military points of view through a study conducted by the strategic Begin-Sadat Center. Many foreign and regional media outlets have pointed at this study which was done by “Uzi Rubin” who previously headed the HITZ anti-missile defense project in the Ministry of ‘Security’. Rubin pointed out that “Israel” has put remarkable efforts to thwart the precision project Hezbollah is working on. If it masters it, Hezbollah will then own its special air force, along with an aerial offensive superiority excluding aircraft. This means that the precise missiles will be able to fully and successfully operate and target any location just like any developed bomber.

The credibility of the study that the aforementioned center has published is based on its comparison between Iran’s targeting of Ain al-Assad base in response to the martyrdom of Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, and the dysfunctioning of American capabilities [both missile defense and electronic defense] against the missiles precision and the inevitability of reaching their targets.

The aforementioned center goes on to declare that in practice, the equation of the precise missiles will achieve its purpose in the future. This will be demonstrated in any future war when Hezbollah tries to carry out its own “Operation Focus”. This will be applied using precise missile salvos that will paralyze ‘Israeli’ air bases as soon as the battle begins.  It warned also that the active “Israeli” ‘defense’ comprising the “Iron Dome”, “David’s Sling”, or a very powerful Laser in the future does not guarantee an airtight aerial dam.

And according to the center, “Operation Focus” means  the pre-emptive air strike that ‘Israel’ used to start “the six day war” (1967) on the airports and the Arab air forces. The result was an outstanding air success launching absolute aerial superiority for the ‘Israeli’ air forces and a free support force for the ground forces during the war.

How did Hezbollah build this equation?

Hezbollah built the precise missile equation through a long path of training, planning, learning, and work that is secretive, dangerous and sensitive. This path has resulted in many martyrs and losses in equipment, vehicles and other logistic means and capabilities.  This construction process can be divided into two main phases which are: 

The first phase includes receiving or [manufacturing], transferring and hiding the missiles. This phase was among the most dangerous. It used to take place during the Syrian war which came in parallel with the defensive and offensive military operations that support and back the Arab Syrian army. The sensitive part of this stage was Hezbollah’s commitment not to respond to “Israel” that was trying to target the missiles transfer or the stored ones pending their transfer. This has always been the case as it was in constant search for a reaction to those targetings. Its manner wasn’t to find a pretext for starting a war because in fact it didn’t want one and kept far away from it. On the contrary, it sought and planned to use Hezbollah’s response as an excuse which it would take to the international forums. It also sought to rely on this response to extract decisions from the Security Council which permits the international community to carry out military action under chapter VII of disarming Hezbollah.

So, during the stage of possessing the missiles, Hezbollah was able to maintain its stubborn strategy in patience. Only by confronting this was it able to prove and impose a rule of engagement related to balanced and local responses to any targeting, martyrdom or injury of any of its members in Syria or Lebanon. Outside these areas, Hezbollah abided by the rule of not responding.

The last stage included the appliance of a program that concerns the arrival of a certain amount (its percentage is not clear) of missiles that it possessed to make it precise. This process relied on two directions. The first one has to do with confidentiality at work, in planning and during study and practice. The second one is more practical and is based on acquiring technical and scientific capabilities (acquired after an extended period of time) which it acquired through training, learning, or a number of engineers and technicians. Moreover, the rule of (making the missiles precise) is based on developing and modernizing the dual guidance system. The first one which is organically found on the missile and has to respond and deal with the second. This second one which is the external orientation system is found in the hands of the team which determines the targets and the orientation of the missiles and fixes it on the right path. It also bypasses the enemy’s defense means from counter missiles or from jamming and wasting devices.

After proving that Hezbollah has precise missiles and referring to the credibility of the words of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah “mission accomplished” what will “Israel’s” next strategy for confrontation be in the days to come?

Maybe the coming days will give us the sensitive answer we are pondering upon.

Related

Did Trump just cancel a potential double-war?

Source

Did Trump just cancel a potential double-war?
Just as Hezbollah destroyed the myth of Israeli impunity, Iran destroyed the myth of US impunity.

At this time of writing, it is too early to declare the danger over, but at least three out of five Iranian tankers have made it safely to Venezuela (confirmation from TeleSur and PressTV). Furthermore, while we should never say “never”, it appears exceedingly unlikely that the US would let three tankers pass only to then try to impede the arrival of the other two. So it ain’t over until its over, but as of right now things look way better than last week.

Besides, this is mostly a symbolic issue. While these 5 tankers will make a difference, it won’t be a huge one, especially considering the devastating consequences which the US sanctions, sabotage and subversion have inflicted on Venezuela.

Still, symbols are important, if only because they create a precedent. In fact, I would argue that the latest climbdown by Trump is no different than all his other climbdowns: Trump has had a very consistent record of threatening fire and brimstone before quietly deflating walking away. And since he did that many times now, we have to wonder whether this strategy is effective or not?

One could argue that this strategy could be described by saying that you put the maximum pressure on the other side in the hope that the bluff will entice the adversary to fold. This could be a semi-credible argument where it not for a very simple but crucial problem: so far the other guys have never folded. In other words, Trump’s bluff has been called over and over again, and each time Trump had to quietly deflate.

Some will say that this only proves that Trump is truly a peace-loving President who, unlike his predecessors, does not want to go to war. But then, what about the cruise missile strikes on Syria? What about the murder of Soleimani?

Truth be told, the kindest thing we can say about this strategy (assuming that it is a strategy to begin with, not the evidence of a total lack of one) is that it is tantamount to yelling “fire!” in a crowded movie theater: the fact that Trump did not set any movie theater ablaze hardly justifies his yelling “fire” in such a dangerous environment. The perfect example of this kind of irresponsible behavior is the murder of General Soleimani which truly brought the US and Iran a millimeter away from a real, full-scale war.

Furthermore, while I salute Trump’s climbing down following the Iranian strikes, I also believe that in doing so he hurt the international image of the US. Why? Think about this: this is the first time ever (if I am not mistaken) that the US was the object of a major military strike coming from another state-actor and did not retaliate. In the past and until this Spring, the US always held the view that if anybody dares to mess with it this would result in very serious consequences. Thus the US upheld a world order in which some where a lot more equal than others. Specifically, “others” had to meekly accept US strikes and shut up whereas Uncle Shmuel could strike left and right and expect no retaliation.

By “accepting” the Iranian counter-strike, Trump did essentially place an “equal” sign between Iran and the US. He probably never understood that, but in the region this was understood by all.

Just as Hezbollah destroyed the myth of Israeli impunity, Iran destroyed the myth of US impunity.

Still, I will always prefer the politician who does not start a war (for whatever reason) to one who would. I also have no doubt whatsoever that Hillary would have started one, or even several, wars. But the fact that Hillary would have been even worse than Trump is hardly a reason to start fawning about Trump’s brilliant “5D chess” genius or peace-loving policies…

Trump reminds of a guy pointing a gun a people in the street only to later say “but it was a toy gun, I never meant to really shoot anybody”. This is definitely better than shooting people with a real gun, but this is hardly a sign of maturity or intelligence.

The other problem with this “strategy” (let’s assume for argument’s sake that this is a strategy of some kind): each time the “indispensable nation” and “sole hyperpower” has to climb down, it increasingly looks like a paper tiger. Not looking like such a paper tiger is probably the mean reason behind Michael Ledeen’s famous wordsEvery ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business“. In a strictly evil and imperialistic sense, Ledeen’s strategy makes a lot more sense than what Trump has been doing.

As Marx famously said, “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce“. The outcome of what some now call the “Battle of Macuto Bay” is a perfect example of this: if the Bay of Pigs was the “root case” then the disaster in Grenada was the tragedy and the Battle of Macuto Bay the real farce.

Humor can be a devastating weapon and anybody who has studied the late Soviet Union (in the late Brezhnev years and after) knows how the Russian people ridiculed the Soviet leaders with literally thousands of jokes.

A real imperialist would much rather be hated than ridiculed, and while Trump himself probably does not realize that he is the laughingstock of the planet, his aides and deep state bosses most definitely do and that is very, very dangerous.

Why?

Because the pressure to, once again, “ pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall” increases with each climbdown (see my article “Each “Click” Brings Us One Step Closer to the “Bang!” for a fuller discussion of this).

Besides, finding an even smaller and weaker country than Venezuela will be hard (maybe the Island of Saba? or Grenada again? who knows?). And potentially very dangerous.

The other problem is predictability. Any international system requires that its most powerful actors be predictable. In contrast, when a major international actors acts in what appears to be unpredictable, irrational or irresponsible manner, this puts the entire stability of the system at risk.

This, by the way, is also why it is so disastrous that the US has withdrawn from so many international organizations or treaties: the participation in international organizations and treaties indicate that the US is willing to play by the same rules as everybody else. The fact that the US is ditching so many of its former international obligations only shows that the US has gone rogue and is from now on totally unpredictable.

Finally, there are also lessons for Moscow here, the main one being that when confronted with a determined adversary, the Empire tries to bluff, but eventually folds. True, Moscow has to be much more careful than Tehran simply because the consequences of a US-Russian war would be dramatically worse than even a major conflict in the Middle-East. Yet it is also true that over the past years the Russian armed forces did have the time to prepare for such a conflict and that now Russia is ready for pretty much anything the US could try to throw at her, at least in purely military terms.

In contrast to the military posture of Russia, the political environment in Russia has changed for the worse: there is now a potentially very dangerous “hardline” opposition to Putin which I have christened the “6th column”, as opposed to the liberal and pro-western 5th column. What these two “columns” have in common is that they both will categorically oppose pretty much anything and everything Putin does. The 6th column, in particular, has a seething hatred for Putin which is even more rabid than what the liberal 5th column usually express. Check out this excellent video by Ruslan Ostashko, who prefers the term “emo-Marxists” and who very accurately describes these folks. Whether we think of them as 6th-columnists or emo-Marxists does not matter, what matters is that these folks are eager to act like a soundboard for any and all anti-Putin rumors and fakes. While Putin certainly has his flaws, and while the economic policies of the Medvedev, and now Mishustin, government are a far cry from what most Russians would want, it is also true that these two “columns” are objectively doing the bidding of the Empire, which could present a real problem if the current pandemic-induced economic crisis in Russia is not tackled more effectively by the government.

I have always said that Iran, while being much weaker than Russia, has consistently shown much more courage in its dealings with the Empire than Russia. Furthermore, Iran’s policies are primarily dictated by moral and spiritual considerations (like in the case of Iran’s principled stance on occupied Palestine) while Russian policies are much more “pragmatic” (which is really a euphemism for self-serving). But then, Iran is an Islamic Republic whereas Russia still has to develop some kind of unifying and original worldview.

Conclusion:

For all his innumerable negative character traits and other flaws, it remains true that Trump has not launched a major war (so far). Yes, he has brought the world to the brink several times, but so far he has not plunged the world into a major conflict. How much of the credit for this truly should go personally to him is very debatable (maybe cooler heads in the military prevailed, I think of folks like General Mattis who, reportedly, was the one who stopped the US from seriously attacking Syria and settled for a symbolic strike). Some Russian analysts (Andrei Sidorov) even believe that the US is in no condition to fight any war, no matter how small. Furthermore, most (all?) Russian analysts also believe that the US is fully committed to a full-spectrum information and economic war to try to economically strangle both Russia and China. I think that it would be fair to say that nobody in Russia believes that the relationship with Trump’s US can, or will, improve. The tone in China is also changing, especially since the US has now launched a major anti-China strategic PSYOP. In other words, the US is merrily continuing down its current road which leads it to a simultaneous confrontation with not one, or even two, countries, but with a list of countries which seems to grow every day. So while it is true that in this case Trump appears to have canceled two wars, we should not assume that he won’t soon start one, if only to deflect the blame for his total mismanagement of the COVID19 crisis. Should that happen, we can only hope that all the “resistance countries” and movement will provide as much support as possible to whomever the Empire attacks next.

What does the Empire’s agony mean for the “Jewish state of Israel”?

Source

THE SAKER • MAY 13, 2020 • 2,100 WORDS

Former Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman and the F-35I

First, let’s begin with a few (apparently unrelated) recent news items:

These apparently unrelated news items all have one thing in common: the illustrate how weak and ineffective the US armed forces have become over the past couple of decades. And while, for the sake of brevity, I chose just three examples, the truth is that there are hundreds of similar stories all over the Internet, all pointing to the same reality: most of the US military is in a terminal state of disrepair.

Let’s look at the various services one by one:

  • The USN‘s entire surface fleet is now compromised due to its carrier-centric structure. The USN also lacks modern cruise missiles. Entire classes of surface ships are now either outdated (frigates) or have major design failures (LCS).
  • The USAF flies mostly Cold War jets, often modernized, but all in all, it is an outdated fleet, especially when compared to Russian or Chinese 4th++ and 5th generation aircraft. In fact, the absolute disaster of the F-35 program means that for the first time in its history the US aircraft will be qualitatively outgunned by its likely adversaries. Even US AWACS and other reconnaissance aircraft are now threatened by Russian and Chinese very long range anti-air missiles (both ground and air launched).
  • As for the US Army and Marine Corps, the embarrassing disasters in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere prove that the US ground forces are basically only able to protect themselves, and even that not very well.
  • Then there are the recently created Space Forces which exist only on paper and the US Coast Guard which is basically irrelevant in a major war.

Finally, there is the US Special Operations Command, which is not one of the service branches but only a “functional” and “unified combatant” command, but which is often thought of as a separate branch of the armed forces. These forces always look great on propaganda rolls, but the truth is that these putatively “best in the word” (what else?!) forces have yet to achieve even their first real, meaningful, operational success anywhere (at least to balance out their long history of abject failures, from Desert One, to Grenada, to Afghanistan, to Libya, etc.). And minor firefights against a much inferior adversary do not qualify.

Now let me ask the crucial question: what does that mean for Israel?

Well, first, it means that the “poor” Israelis now have to fly with the F-35 as their flagship fighter. In most cases, I would trust the Israelis to modify/upgrade their F-35’s to get rid of at least the worst “features”, but in the case of the F-35 this is not even theoretically possible due to profound design flaws (for those in need of an “official” refresher on the catastrophic reality of the F-35 program, please read this official US government report which includes 276 “critical” deficiencies). Sooner rather than later, the Israeli F-35s will meet the export version of the Su-35, the much cheaper but high-performing Mig-29M/MiG-35 or even a Russian Su-57 and then they will be hopelessly outgunned (even if the outcome of any air-to-air combat cannot be reduced to comparing aircraft, you need a full and much more complex picture to model possible outcomes). Currently, the Su-35 has only been exported to China, but future potential operators could include Egypt, Algeria and Turkey. As for the MiG-29M/MiG-35, countries such as Egypt and Syria have expressed interest.

Speaking of Syria, so far we have seen several cases of Israeli aircraft intercepted and forced to withdraw by Russian Su-35Ss, and not a single case of the opposite. There appears to be at least one case, though not confirmed officially (yet?) of a Russian Su-35S chasing away an USAF F-22 (once the Su-35 and the F-22 are in close enough proximity, the latter has very few hopes of survival).

Can you guess what else the Israelis are going to eventually meet in the skies over the Middle-East? Possibly an export variant of the MiG-31 or even Russian MiG-31BMs (with their 400km R-37 air-to-air missiles). In fact, the range, speed, radar and weapons of this aircraft would make it possible for Russia to maintain combat air patrols over, say, Syria while operating from southern Russia.

I dwell on these aircraft because in the past, and just like the US, the Israelis have always relied on the following combination of factors to prevail:

  • A surprise attack (more or less justified by a false flag or by preemption)
  • The destruction of enemy aircraft when they are still on the ground
  • Air superiority to protect their rotary-wing aircraft and advancing armor

True, the Israelis still have a large force of modified F-16/15/18 (14 squadrons, over 300 aircraft), but just like their US counterparts, they are rapidly becoming dated. In sharp contrast to the dated Israeli Air Force, Israeli neighbors are all acquiring more and more advanced air defense systems along with EW and battle management systems. In other words, this is a very bad time for Israel to rely on F-35s for the foreseeable future.

Right now, the Israelis are regularly bombing Syria, but with very little result other than the mantric, and no doubt therapeutic, proclamations of Jewish superiority over the Arabs. And, predictably, the Ziomedia watching folks in Israel and the West are very impressed. The Syrians, the Iranians and Hezbollah, not so much…

Just like the US MIC put all its eggs into the F-35 basket, so did the Israelis put all their national security eggs into the eternal willingness and capability of Uncle Shmuel to come and rescue them with money, weapons or even soldiers.

The willingness is still here. But the capability is quickly disappearing!

Furthermore, there are two more countries which are entering a period of severe instability which will also affect the security of Israel: Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

In the case of Turkey, the relationship between the US and Turkey is about as low as it ever has been, and there is a very real possibility that, with US sanctions and threats, the Turks might decide to give up on the F-35 and turn to a Russian aircraft, most likely an export version of the Su-35. While that would be (politically) bad news for the US MIC, it would be absolutely terrible news for the Israelis whose relationship with Turkey is generally rather bad. So far, Turkey is still an obedient member of NATO, with all that entails, but the weaker the AngloZionist Empire becomes, the bigger the chances of some kind of political clash between the US and NATO on one hand, and Turkey on the other.

As for the Saudis, they have already been actively courting Moscow because they have realized that Russia has basically replaced the US as the number one regional power. The total failure of the US to provide meaningful assistance to the Saudis in Yemen and the inability of the US air defenses to protect the Saudi oilfield from Houthi missile strikes has convinced the Saudis that from now on, they need to talk to the Russians directly and often.

source: IISS Military Balance 2020

source: IISS Military Balance 2020

True, the US still does have the appearance of real power in the Middle East. Just take a look at this page from the latest IISS Military Balance. There are still a lot of CENTCOM equipment and personnel in the region. But try to look beyond these fancy graphics and ask yourself: what are these forces doing? what are they actually achieving?

I would submit that most of what they do is to try to impress the locals, make money (by all sorts of military contracts) and, last but not least, they try to protect themselves. And yes, the US’s “footprint” in the Middle-East is still big, but that is also what makes US forces so vulnerable to attacks. The Iranians, for example, have made it clear that they see all these facilities and forces as “targets” which, following the high-precision Iranian missile attacks following the murder of General Suleimani, means that Iran now has the means to inflict major damage on any regional force crazy enough to mess with Iran.

Of course, every time somebody writes that the US or Israel are not invincible, there is always at least one person saying something like “yeah, maybe, but they got nukes and they will use them if they are threatened”. To this my reply is different for the case of US and for the case of Israel.

In the case of the USA, while any first use of nukes will result in a political suicide for the Empire, no US adversary in the Middle-East has the capability to retaliate in kind against the USA.

In the case of Israel, however, things are even much more serious.

First, we need to remember that for obvious geographical reasons, the Israelis cannot use nukes on attacking forces, at least not forces anywhere near the Israeli border. Still, if seriously threatened, the Israelis could claim that another “Holocaust” is about to happen and that the “defense of Jewish blood” leaves them no option but to use nukes on, say, Iranian or Syrian targets. I submit that the worse the damage inflicted by any such Israeli nuclear strikes, the stronger the resolve of the Arabs and/or Iranians will be. That is the problem with deterrence: once it has failed, it has totally failed and there is usually no “plan B”.

Does that mean that a major attack on Israel is inevitable?

No, not at all. For one thing, both the US and Israel can still inflict immense damage against any country, or coalition of countries, which would threaten them (and they don’t need to resort to nukes to achieve this). The fact that neither the US nor Israel can achieve anything resembling a “victory” in no way implies that attacking the US or Israel is easy or safe. Both countries have plenty of conventional military power left to extract a huge price from any attacker.

Secondly, it is precisely because the US and Israel have a lot of military power left that their adversaries will favor a gradual and slow weakening of the AngloZionists over an open confrontation. For example, while it is true that the US did not have the stomach to attack Iran following the Iranian retaliatory missile strike, it is also true that the Iranians carefully “tuned” their response so as not to force the US to strike back. The truth is that right now neither country wants an open war.

The same can be said of Syria and Hezbollah who have been very careful not to do anything which would force the Israelis (or the US) to escalate from the current symbolic/pin-prick attacks to real, meaningful, air and missile strikes.

Right now the US can still print enough dollars to maintain Israel afloat, but we already know that while throwing cheap money at a problem is often very tempting, this does not constitute a sustainable strategy, especially when the actual military capabilities of both the US and Israelis are rapidly degrading. Right now, nobody knows how much longer the last openly racist regime on the planet will last, but it is exceedingly unlikely that the Zionist entity will be able to survive without the Empire to prop it up. In other words, sooner rather than later, the “Jewish state of Israel” will have no better chances of survival than, say, the “Independent State of Kosovo” or, for that matter, the “Independent Ukraine”: they are all the ugly metastases of the Empire which by themselves are simply not viable.

إيران بلغت مستوى جديداً من القوة.. والحرس الثوريّ يكشف عن مخطط أميركيّ لقصف منزل خامنئيّ

المصدر

قال قائد القوة الجو فضائية في حرس الثورة الإيراني، العميد أمير علي حاجي زادة، إن «الغربيين، ولا سيما الأميركيين منهم، غاضبون من نجاح عملية إطلاق قمر نور إلى الفضاء».

وأضاف حاجي زاده أن الغرب أدرك أن «إيران بلغت مستوى جديداً من القوة. ومن الطبيعي أن يتسبب ذلك في إزعاجهم، ولا سيما أن أجهزتهم الاستخبارية لم تكن على علم بالأمر، كما أنه جاء في ظل انشغالهم بأزمة كورونا».

وأكد زادة أن «جميع مراحل صناعة القمر وإطلاقه تمت من دون علم أجهزة المخابرات الغربية. ولهذا فوجئت».

وأضاف خلال لقاء تلفزيوني: «لا يمكن للولايات المتحدة الأميركية ارتكاب أي حماقة ضد إيران… ما يصرّح به المسؤولون فيها للاستهلاك الداخلي لا أكثر».

وأكد أن بلاده «ستعزز قدراتها الدفاعية والعسكرية والفضائية لضمان أمن إيران القومي».

من جهته، أكد المتحدث باسم مجلس صيانة الدستور في إيران، عباس علي كدخدائي، أن «قرار 2231 لمجلس الأمن الدولي لا يمنع إطلاق الصواريخ من جانب إيران بالمطلق»، معتبراً أن «المنع يشمل الصواريخ المصممة لحمل رؤوس نووية».

وكان أمين المجلس الأعلى للأمن القومي الإيراني علي شمخاني قال: «لا يمكن للعقوبات أو التهديدات أو الإغراءات السياسية أن تبطئ حركة إيران نحو تحقيق مصالحها الوطنية ونيل حقوقها الشرعية».

وأعلنت وكالة «إيسنا» الإيرانية في 22 نيسان الحالي عن إطلاق قوات حرس الثورة الإيرانية قمر «نور – 1» الاصطناعي للأغراض العسكرية.

الوكالة أكّدت نجاح حرس الثورة في وضع القمر الاصطناعي في مدار الأرض على بعد 425 كيلومتراً، لافتةً إلى أن ذلك يُعدّ إنجازاً كبيراً وتحولاً جديداً في المجال الفضائيّ لإيران.

من جهة أخرى، قال قائد القوة الجوية للحرس الثوري الإيراني، أمس، إن «الولايات المتحدة كانت تريد استهداف وقصف مقر المرشد الأعلى للبلاد علي خامنئي، عقب اغتيال الجنرال قاسم سليماني».

وقال القائد بالحرس الثوري، إن «أحد تلك المواقع الثقافية والمهمة، هي أنهم أرادوا قصف المقر الرسمي والمكتب ومكان العمل الرئيسي للمرشد الأعلى للثورة الإيرانية بالعاصمة طهران، لكنهم رأوا أن قاعدة عين الأسد أصيبت بصواريخ، وصباح اليوم نفسه تمّ بث برنامج لقاء خامنئي من مكتبه مع حشد من الإيرانيين».

وأضاف زاده أن «أميركا أرادت إيصال رسالة باغتيال سليماني، وهي أننا ضربنا رمز المقاومة، حتى نجعل الخوف والرعب في قلوب قادة المقاومة».

وتابع: «كان لديهم (الأميركان) تأكيد خاطئ بأن إيران لن ترد على اغتيال قاسم سليماني، عندما رأوا أن الناس كانوا يرددون شعار الانتقام، قالوا إن إيران إذا اتخذت إجراء، فسوف نقصف 52 موقعاً ونقطة في إيران».

واشار العميد حاجي زادة إلى انه حينما استهدفنا قاعدة عين الأسد تصوّرنا بانهم سيردون ولهذا الغرض فقد خططنا لاستهداف 400 نقطة تابعة للأميركيين في حال حصول ذلك.

IRGC Was Ready To Hit 400 Targets If US Responded Airstrike on Ain Al-Assad – Aerospace Commader

IRGC Was Ready To Hit 400 Targets If US Responded Airstrike on Ain Al-Assad – Aerospace Commader

By Staff, Agencies

Referring to the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps [IRGC’s] airstrikes on the US occupation airbase of Ain al-Assad in western Iraq, IRGC Aerospace Force Commander Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh said, “If the US responded to our attack on Ain al-Assad, we would be ready to attack 400 American targets.”

Referring to the reactions of US officials to the launch of Iran’s first military satellite into space, Hajizadeh said, “By assassinating Lt. Gen. Soleimani, they wanted to show that they killed a symbol of Resistance, and they were sure that Iran would not respond to their attack.”

“But then they felt somewhat threatened, so they announced that Washington would target 52 cites, including cultural ones, in case Iran targeted US forces,” he added, saying, “But we responded to them by an attack on Ain al-Assad base in Iraq.”

“The day we attacked on Ain al-Assad, we thought the US forces would respond after 20 minutes, so we were ready to attack 400 American targets,” Hajizadeh noted.

“Our plan was to attack 400 US targets if they responded,” he added.

Referring to the successful launch of the first military satellite by IRGC, Hajizadeh also said, “Developed countries have suffered many defeats along the way, but we succeeded in the first step.”

“The Islamic Republic of Iran has developed these capabilities in recent years and with the help of Almighty God we will take the next steps quickly,” he said emphasizing solid-fuel launchers are equipped with the latest technology in the world.

“Today, gaining access to space and using it is not a choice. It is an inevitable necessity and we must find our place in space,” he added.

“We have great achievements in the field of missiles and defense in the world, and today we have successfully entered the space arena. I have to say that the obstacles have been removed from our path and from now on we will move faster,” the IRGC commander underscored.

He also noted that such successes are reminiscent of relentless efforts and brilliant achievements have taken by martyrs such as Hassan Tehran Moghadam and other martyrs.

The IRGC elite force has successfully launched the Noor-1 Satellite by the domestically-built launcher Qassed [messenger] on Wednesday morning and placed it into the orbit at an altitude of 425km. The launch of Noor-1 which is the Islamic Republic’s first military satellite was carried out on the 41st anniversary of the foundation of the IRGC.

Related Articles

المقاومة بين رسائل الخارج وهجوم الداخل

العميد د. أمين محمد حطيط

رغم ما أحدثه كورونا من انشغال عالمي، وما فرضه من حجر على أكثر من 4 مليارات نسمة، ورغم افتضاح عجز أميركا و»إسرائيل» عن التصدّي لهذا الوباء الذي كشف حالة الوهن في بنيتهما الصحية وأظهر المخاطر التي تحيق باقتصادهما، رغم كلّ ذلك وجد الأميركي والإسرائيلي الوقت للتهديد او العدوان على محور المقاومة متوخياً تحقيق أهداف ظنّ أنه قادر على الوصول اليها أو فرضها او مفترضاً أنّ العدو أو الخصم سيخضع له ويدعه يحققها. فما هي تلك الأهداف وكيف كان ردّ محور المقاومة وما النتائج والمرتقب بعدها؟

نبدأ بالموضوع الأول الذي تمثل بالتحرّش الأميركي بالبحرية الإيرانية في الخليج، وهو تحرّش ظنّ الأميركي انّ بإمكانه عبره ان يعطل مفاعيل القصف الإيراني لقاعدة «عين الأسد» الأميركية في العراق، وأن يستغلّ انشغال إيران بمواجهة كورونا، ويظهرها عاجزة عن الردّ، وأخيراً أن يصنع عبر التحرّش والمواجهة خبراً يتداوله الإعلام في ترتيب أوّل ما يحجب إخفاقه الداخلي في مواجهة كورونا، كما يضخم الأخطار الخارجية على الأمن القومي الأميركي، ما يُسكت المناكفات والصراعات الداخلية بين ترامب وحكام الولايات، تلك الصراعات التي فضحت كورونا وجودها وفتحت المجال لتصوّر وقوع الأسوأ على صعيدها..

لكن إيران لم تسكت على التحرّش وتصرّفت بحزم وعلى وجهين، الأول عملاني في الميدان حيث وجّهت زوارقها للتحرّك في محيط قطع الأسطول الأميركي الخامس واقتربت إلى الحدّ الحرج عسكرياً من القطعة البحرية الأميركية، اقتراب له من الدلالات ما يفهمه العسكريون وهي ليست في صالح الهيبة الأميركية. أما الوجه الثاني للردّ الإيراني فقد كان في البيان التحذيري الناري الشديد اللهجة الذي وجّهه الحرس الثوري الإيراني إلى أميركا محذراً قيادتها من «الحسابات الخاطئة». وفي الوجهين دلالة واضحة انّ إيران على جهوزية عسكرية تامة للردّ على أيّ استفزاز او عدوان وأن ليس من شأن كورونا أن يؤثر على هذه الجهوزية اذا اضطرت إيران للجوء اليها ولن تكون عملية قصف «عين الأسد» إلا نموذجاً مصغراً للردّ الإيراني المقبل الذي سيأخذ بعين الاختبار متغيّرات الواقع العسكري الأميركي خلال الشهرين الأخيرين، بما في ذلك نشر الباتريوت في العراق. وبالتالي يعتبر جسّ النبض الأميركي لإيران قد فشل في تحقيق أهدافه وعزّزت إيران معادلة الردع بوجه أميركا مخدومة بقواعد اشتباك أصبحت أميركا تعرف كيف أنّ عليها احترامها.

أما الموضوع الثاني فقد تمثل بالعدوان الإسرائيلي على سورية حيث استهدف سيارة جيب للمقاومة كان على متنها مقاومون عائدون من سورية إلى لبنان، وتمّ العدوان في شكل يثير سؤال مهمّ: هل الإسرائيلي قصد النتيجة بالشكل الذي انتهى إليه الأمر أيّ عدم المسّ بالمقاومين مع تدمير السيارة أو انّ خللاً ما ضيّع على «إسرائيل» فرصة إصابة المقاومين داخل السيارة ما مكّنهم من تركها قبل أن يطلق الصاروخ الثاني؟ فإذا كان الفرض الأول هو الصحيح فانّ ذلك يعني انّ «إسرائيل» تصرّفت مع قيد رادع وخشيت من ردّ المقاومة التي أنذر قائدها «إسرائيل» بأنّ أيّ مسّ بمقاوم سيلقى الردّ المناسب من لبنان أو من سورية داخل أو خارج مزارع شبعا. أما إذا كان الفرض الثاني هو الصحيح فإنه يعني أنّ المقاومين عرفوا كيف ينتقلون وكيف يضيّعون على العدو فرصة النيل منهم.

ولكن ومهما كان من أمر قصد العدو الإسرائيلي، فإنه يستفاد من مجريات الميدان أنّ العدوان جاء ليوجه رسالة إلى المقاومة بأنّ الظروف الصحية الإسرائيلية بسبب كورونا لم تشغل «إسرائيل» عن ملاحقة المقاومة وتتبّع خطواتها في لبنان وسورية وهي رسالة يحتاجها نتنياهو اليوم من أجل القفز فوق المأزق السياسي الشخصي والحكومي الداخلي المتمثل بالعجز عن تشكيل حكومة منذ أكثر من سنة وبعد أكثر من دورة انتخابات نيابية.

بيد أنّ المقاومة لم تدع لنتنياهو فرصة تحقيق أهدافه من العدوان حيث وجّهت له صفعة سريعة أنست الجميع ما حملته المسيرة الصهيونيّة من رسائل وأنتجت إرباكاً في «إسرائيل» فاق كل ما هو متوقع. حيث إنه وفي أقلّ من 48 ساعة من اقتراف «إسرائيل» جريمتها فتحت 3 ثغرات في السياج الإسرائيلي الحدودي وتركت فيها من الآثار ما أفهم «إسرائيل» بأنّ تدمير الأنفاق التي فاخرت بالنجاح في إنجازه، لم يغيّر شيئاً في أهمية وجدية تهديد السيد حسن نصرالله من احتمال توجيه الأمر للمقاومين للعمل القتالي الهجوميّ في الجليل، وهو أمر يرعب الصهاينة على كلّ مستوياتهم.

How Did The Enemy Interpret The Lebanese-Palestinian Border Fence Incident?

كما انّ الرسالة تؤكد بأنّ المقاومة التي نجحت نجاحاً باهراً في عرضها للجيش الصحي في الداخل اللبناني والتي تنخرط بكلّ جدية وفعالية في مواجهة كورونا، انّ هذه المقاومة على جهوزية تامة للعمل العسكري المناسب في مواجهة أيّ عدوان او تهديد او خطر إسرائيلي.

وعليه نرى أنّ الرسائل العسكرية الأميركية والإسرائيلية إلى محور المقاومة استدعت من الردود ما عطل مفاعليها وما أجهض أهداف العدو الذي أرسلها، وبذلك يكون محور المقاومة أكد على ما كان صاغه من معادلات الردع وقواعد الاشتباك التي لا تمكّن الطرف الآخر من ممارسة سياسة اليد العليا ما يعني انّ المقاومة ومحورها أفشلا الاستفزاز وردّا على الرسائل بما يؤلم الطرف الآخر.

بيد أنه إلى هذا النجاح يبدو في الأفق أمر مقلق في لبنان يتمثل بما يبدو أنه يحضّر على الصعيد الداخلي فيه، اذ يبدو انّ أميركا تخطط لشيء خطر تضع هي خطوطه وتقود تنفيذه الذي يوكل إلى أطراف محليّين اشتهروا بحقدهم وبعدائهم للمقاومة وانصياعهم لقرارات أجنبية تمسّ بأمنها وأمن لبنان واستقراره وتعرّض مصالحه للخطر. وهنا نتوقف عند ما تقوم به السفيرة الأميركية في بيروت من تحشيد لهذه القوى ما يعيد إلى الأذهان الانقلاب الذي نفّذته تلك القوى في العام 2005.

وللتذكير بالدور الأميركي في لبنان في تلك الفترة نستعيد ما حصل بعد احتلال العراق ورفض سورية الانصياع للمطالب الأميركية حيث كان القرار 1559 «الناظم للشأن اللبناني أميركياً» والذي أعقبه قتل رفيق الحريري وتشكيل جماعة 14 آذار المسيّرة أميركياً والمعادية لسورية وللمقاومة. وهي الجماعات التي نفذت بتوجيه أميركي انقلاباً سياسياً على مرحلتين الأولى تمثلت بإسقاط حكومة عمر كرامي التي يملك قرارها حلفاء سورية والثاني الحصول على أغلبية نيابية وتشكيل حكومة تعادي سورية، حكومة أرست قواعد تعامل عدائية مع سورية لا زالت نافذة حتى اليوم رغم كلّ التبدّلات.

نذكّر بهذا الماضي حتى نسقطه على الحاضر، حيث إنّ وزير خارجية أميركا جورج بومبيو أطلق في آذار 2019 خطة تغيير الحكومة لإخراج المقاومة منها والتنكّر للأغلبية النيابية واستعادة قرار لبنان كلياً إلى اليد الأميركية بعيداً عن أيّ أثر لمحور المقاومة فيه، وقد حققت خطة بومبيو بعض أهدافها وفشلت في تحقيق الجزء الأهمّ منها وهو عزل المقاومة ومحاصرتها بما يعطل فعاليتها، لذلك جاءت السفيرة الأميركية شيا اليوم في خطة استلحاق لتحقيق ما فاتهم تحقيقه، من أجل ذلك تسعى شيا إلى تشكيل حلف معارض، هدفه إسقاط حكومة دياب التي يصفونها بأنها حكومة اللون الواحد المسيطر عليها من حزب الله. وهي الحكومة التي نجحت بشكل واضح حتى الآن في مقاربتها لأخطر الملفات (الدَّيْن – كورونا – المغتربين).

تقوم أميركا بـ «هجومها» من دون أن يعنيها ما سيتسبّب به إسقاط الحكومة من فراغ سياسي او إشاعة اضطراب مالي واجتماعي وحتى أمني، فالمهمّ لديها كيف تسقط حزب الله حتى ولو سقط لبنان معه. وهنا التحدي الذي يواجه الآن المقاومة وحلفاءها، الذين ينبغي ان يعلموا انّ الوقت الآن ليس للغنج والدلال او تحصيل المكاسب الشخصية، فأميركا تلعب الآن لعبتها الأخيرة التي ليس لديها الوقت الطويل لتنفيذها فهي مهلة لا تتعدّى الأشهر الستة، فإما أن تنجح ويغرق لبنان، او تفشل وينجو لبنان وهي جادّة في خطتها خاصة بعد سلسلة الإخفاقات التي حصدها ترامب في أكثر من اتجاه، وهو يؤمن انّ في نجاحه في لبنان مصلحة له ولـ «إسرائيل» على حدّ سواء. وهنا أهمية المواجهة من قبل المقاومة وحلفائها حتى لا تتكرّر استقالة عمر كرامي عام 2005، ولا محاصرة العماد لحود بعدها ولا الانقلاب السياسي مجدّداً، ولا الفتن وعمليات القتل الممنهج…

*أستاذ جامعي وخبير استراتيجي.

THE RESISTANCE STRIKES THE US WHICH SEEKS A TRUCE IN IRAQ

Posted on  by Elijah J Magnier

By Elijah J. Magnier:

New anonymous organisations in Iraq have threatened to strike US forces if they refuse to withdraw from Iraq. One of these newly emerged organisations released its first video of an attack against a US military convoy transporting vehicles on the road between the Kurdish province of Erbil and the northern Salahuddin province, where the US maintains large military bases.

US Ambassador Matthew Tueller has met with caretaker Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi, expressing the will of his country to begin strategic talks with Baghdad. The US did not disclose that the US diplomat informed Mr Abdul-Mahdi about the US intention to pull out forces from Iraq and his request not to be attacked during the withdrawal of troops. Indeed, the US has already evacuated forces from 6 bases and centres of control in different places in Iraq. This is what prompted the Iraqi Kataeb Hezbollah (Brigades) to ​​announce particularly that the organisation does not intend to strike US forces as long as they completely withdraw from the country. 

However, the Iraqi resistance does not trust the US promises as forwarded to the Iraqi premier. It considers the US is manoeuvring to redeploy forces from the more vulnerable bases to more protected bases. This scepticism has caused new Iraqi resistance to surface, and provoked attacks against US forces in a manner reminiscent of the 1980s “Islamic Jihad” organisation in Lebanon, which was responsible for the kidnapping and killing of US officers and citizens.

The first newly emerged organisation identified itself as “The Revolutionary League” (Usbat al-Thaereen). In its first communiqué, it has shown drone images with excellent resolution of the US embassy in Baghdad in all its details, building, helicopters, movement of personnel and military forces inside.  What is striking is not only the fine details and high-quality of the drone footage but how a drone managed to fly for extended minutes over the most guarded buildings inside the Iraqi capital. Three brigades of the Iraqi army (6, 11 and 17) are deployed in the capital Baghdad along with the anti-terrorist force, the federal police HQ, the Ministry of the Interior and the local police. Most of these are based in the “Green Zone” where the US embassy is. US forces are also deployed at Baghdad airport (not far away) and inside the Embassy.

Not only that, but a second video was also distributed to the press a few days later with drone footage of the most extensive US military base in Iraq, at Ein al-Assad base in the Anbar desert. The video showed weapons stores, forces, buildings, command and control tower and base, hangars, landing and take-off runways and many more details of the entire map of the base. At Ayn al-Assad, the US deploys of the most sophisticated radars, Patriot missiles and other defence systems that are supposed to secure the base.

Moreover, the video had also been shot from outside the base, showing the driving of a car along the walls of the American base in Ain al-Assad, which indicates the ease of movement of the group without regard for the security measures deployed along the road.

The organisation broadcast an enthusiastic song stating its goal of avenging the assassination of Major General Qassem Soleimani and the Iraqi leader Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis. The singer’s dialect indicates that he is not Iraqi, though clearly, the singer is a native Arab speaker.

Another new organisation called “The Islamic Resistance in Iraq – People of the Cave” (referring to Surat al-Kahf in the Quran) issued a video in which it showed an IED exploding in convoy carrying military vehicles and, one minute later, a second powerful IED explosion when the convoy personnel gathered to assess the damage. The convoy is said to be travelling from Kurdistan – Erbil to Salah al-Din Governorate, the Uwaynat region. This attack is a message for the US forces: they will not be able to roam as they wish in Iraq because for them the country is now insecure, as are their military bases.

A statement issued by a third new Iraqi organisation called “Islamic Resistance Factions – Iraq – the fist of guidance” accuses America of preparing to launch an attack against the Iraqi factions, and gives the American and British ambassadors 48 hours to leave, or they will be killed. It was not possible to confirm the authenticity of this  statement. 

It is to be expected that more organisations will emerge in Iraq, enjoying military, media and organisational skills and capabilities. These undoubtfully benefited from the long years of war in Lebanon between Hezbollah and Israel, in Syria against al-Qaeda and ISIS (The Islamic State), and in Iraq against the US during the 2003-2011 invasion and against ISIS following the occupation of a third of Iraq in 2014.

These organisations seek retribution against the US, which assassinated the leader of the “Axis of Resistance” Major General Qassim Soleimani, the field commander in the “Popular Mobilisation Forces” (PMF) Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, and which bombed several bases of the Iraqi army, its federal police and the PMF at the Syrian-Iraqi borders, al-Qaem, and destroyed Karbala Civil Airport. The US breach of the memorandum of agreement signed in 2014 exasperated Iraqi political, military officials and many other resistance groups.

The US Ambassador visited the caretaker Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi to inform him about its decision to leave Iraq and proposes a large meeting next June to agree on the mechanism of withdrawal from Iraq. The ambassador asked Mr Abdul Mahdi to intervene to stop all attacks against American forces while withdrawing and to mediate with Iran to achieve this, because “America is serious about proceeding with the exit from Iraq.”

The Iraqi Hezbollah Brigades, the League of the Righteous (Asaeb Ahl al-Haq), Al-Nujabaa Movement and the Imam Ali Brigades responded to the Iranian request to refrain from opposing al-Kazemi, despite their lack of trust in him and in the US intention to withdraw. These factions promised not to attack the US forces as long as the US shows they are withdrawing their forces from the country. Thus, the emergence of new organisations aims to offer an excuse for these groups, that they are not apparently involved in any attack and that they are “encouraging” the US to leave. These groups are unknown and new on the Iraqi scene. Therefore, it is easy for them to avoid pressure from the officials in Baghdad.

However, the style of these organisations reminds us of the “Islamic Jihad” organisation in Lebanon that emerged in the 1980s, was responsible for the kidnapping of hostages in Lebanon and worked directly under the command of Iran. It was not connected to Lebanese “Hezbollah” at the time.

It seems that the US has not read carefully enough the Iranian messages following the assassination of the Axis of the Resistance leader. When Sayyed Ali Khamenei said: “The price of the assassination of Qassem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis is the US departure from West Asia” this meant that the decision had been taken to force the US out whatever the cost.

Sayyid Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Hezbollah in Lebanon and of the “Axis of Resistance” in Lebanon, Gaza, Syria, Iraq and Yemen, said “every American soldier is a legitimate target”. He wondered, when directing his question to the US following the assassination of Soleimani and Muhandis: “what have you done? Are you aware whose blood you spilt?” His message was clear: “Hezbollah will not stand idle and will target every US soldier.” Sayyed Nasrallah said explicitly: “Iraq is the battlefield”.

Driving the US out of West Asia is the goal. The methods used by the Iraqi resistance will not be different from methods used against Israel in Lebanon, in Syria and Iraq during the past decade. They will be employed until the very last US soldier leaves Iraq.

Proofread by: Maurice Brasher and C.G.B

This article is translated free to many languages by volunteers so readers can enjoy the content. It shall not be masked by Paywall. I’d like to thank my followers and readers for their confidence and support. If you liked it, please don’t feel embarrassed to contribute and help fund it, for as little as 1 Euro. Your contribution, however small, will help ensure its continuity. Thank you.

Copyright © https://ejmagnier.com  2020 

%d bloggers like this: