Syriaously??
- Thread starter MHz
- Start date
http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/254437-trump-to-withdraw-significant-troops-from-afghanistan
US President Donald Trump has decided to pull a significant number of troops from Afghanistan, a US official has told AFP, but the Afghan presidency on Friday brushed off concerns the drawdown would affect security.
Reports suggested as many as half of the 14,000 troops in the war-torn country could be leaving.
The surprise move stunned and dismayed foreign diplomats and officials in Kabul who are involved in an intensifying push to end the 17-year conflict with the Taliban, which already controls vast amounts of territory and is causing "unsustainable" Afghan troop casualties.
"If you're the Taliban, Christmas has come early," a senior foreign official in the Afghan capital told AFP on the condition of anonymity.
"Would you be thinking of a ceasefire if your main opponent has just withdrawn half their troops?"
Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid would not comment about the troop withdrawal when contacted by AFP. But a senior Taliban commander welcomed the decision.
"Frankly speaking we weren't expecting that immediate US response," the official told AFP from an unknown location in northwest Pakistan.
"We are more than happy, they realised the truth. We are expecting more good news."
It is not clear if US peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad or the Afghan government had been warned of Trump's plans in advance.
But a spokesman for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani downplayed the effect of any pullout.
"If they withdraw from Afghanistan it will not have a security impact because in the last four and half years the Afghans have been in full control," presidential spokesman Haroon Chakhansuri said via social media.
Reports suggested as many as half of the 14,000 troops in the war-torn country could be leaving.
The surprise move stunned and dismayed foreign diplomats and officials in Kabul who are involved in an intensifying push to end the 17-year conflict with the Taliban, which already controls vast amounts of territory and is causing "unsustainable" Afghan troop casualties.
"If you're the Taliban, Christmas has come early," a senior foreign official in the Afghan capital told AFP on the condition of anonymity.
"Would you be thinking of a ceasefire if your main opponent has just withdrawn half their troops?"
Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid would not comment about the troop withdrawal when contacted by AFP. But a senior Taliban commander welcomed the decision.
"Frankly speaking we weren't expecting that immediate US response," the official told AFP from an unknown location in northwest Pakistan.
"We are more than happy, they realised the truth. We are expecting more good news."
It is not clear if US peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad or the Afghan government had been warned of Trump's plans in advance.
But a spokesman for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani downplayed the effect of any pullout.
"If they withdraw from Afghanistan it will not have a security impact because in the last four and half years the Afghans have been in full control," presidential spokesman Haroon Chakhansuri said via social media.
http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/254437-trump-to-withdraw-significant-troops-from-afghanistan
US President Donald Trump has decided to pull a significant number of troops from Afghanistan, a US official has told AFP, but the Afghan presidency on Friday brushed off concerns the drawdown would affect security.
Reports suggested as many as half of the 14,000 troops in the war-torn country could be leaving.
The surprise move stunned and dismayed foreign diplomats and officials in Kabul who are involved in an intensifying push to end the 17-year conflict with the Taliban, which already controls vast amounts of territory and is causing "unsustainable" Afghan troop casualties.
"If you're the Taliban, Christmas has come early," a senior foreign official in the Afghan capital told AFP on the condition of anonymity.
"Would you be thinking of a ceasefire if your main opponent has just withdrawn half their troops?"
Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid would not comment about the troop withdrawal when contacted by AFP. But a senior Taliban commander welcomed the decision.
"Frankly speaking we weren't expecting that immediate US response," the official told AFP from an unknown location in northwest Pakistan.
"We are more than happy, they realised the truth. We are expecting more good news."
It is not clear if US peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad or the Afghan government had been warned of Trump's plans in advance.
But a spokesman for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani downplayed the effect of any pullout.
"If they withdraw from Afghanistan it will not have a security impact because in the last four and half years the Afghans have been in full control," presidential spokesman Haroon Chakhansuri said via social media.
http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/...ition-has-job-to-finish-despite-us-withdrawal
The international coalition fighting Islamic State (IS) in Syria "has a job to finish" despite US President Donald Trump's "very serious" decision to withdraw American troops from Syria, the French defence minister said Friday.
"The decision taken by the US president changes things pretty radically," Florence Parly told RTL radio.
"President Trump says Daesh (an alternative name for IS) is dead, but we believe today that while the territory controlled by the caliphate is no longer what it was in 2014 (...) if it has been reduced to near nothing, there remains however a pocket where jihadists have bunkered down," she said.
"We consider that the job must be finished," she said, adding that failing to do so could mean IS groups might regroup.
Parly also suggested that implementing the withdrawal of 2,000 US soldiers from Syria should be discussed amongst the allied coalition, adding that "you can't withdraw troops from one day to another".
France has aircraft in the region, along with long-range artillery in position along the Iraqi-Syrian border.
Washington says France has also deployed special forces inside Syria, though France has never acknowledged this.
http://12160.info/page/lindsey-graham-says-if-trump-pulls-3-000-troops-out-of-afghanista
Lindsey Graham says if Trump pulls 3,000 troops out of Afghanistan, "we are setting in motion the loss of all our gains and paving the way toward a second 9/11.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHh3bsrB9bE&list=UUaV101EM1QayFkP0E7zwXCg&index=2
Syrian War Report – Dec. 20, 2018: U.S. Is Withdrawing Troops From Syria
This is the one that shows the troops going home will be replaced with 'private contractors' which would be x-ISIS members now becoming covert terrorists that will blow things up here and there with civilians being the targets. The Kurds have been an Israeli asset so without a full blown defection that will not have changed. What will have changed is Syria's ability to track who comes and goes from Jordan. The new HQ.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20181122-saudi-arabia-uae-send-troops-to-support-kurds-in-syria/
Saudi Arabia and the UAE have sent military forces to areas controlled by the Kurdish YPG group in north-east Syria, Turkey’s Yenisafak newspaper reported.
The paper said the forces will be stationed with US-led coalition troops and will support its tasks with huge military enforcements as well as heavy and light weapons.
Quoting the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the newspaper reported that a convoy of troops belonging to an Arab Gulf state recently arrived in the contact area between the Kurdish PKK/YPG and Daesh in the Deir Ez-Zor countryside.
This comes at a time when Ankara is preparing to launch an expanded military operation with the Free Syrian Army against the Kurdish PKK group in the northeast of Syria.
http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/...ition-has-job-to-finish-despite-us-withdrawal
The international coalition fighting Islamic State (IS) in Syria "has a job to finish" despite US President Donald Trump's "very serious" decision to withdraw American troops from Syria, the French defence minister said Friday.
"The decision taken by the US president changes things pretty radically," Florence Parly told RTL radio.
"President Trump says Daesh (an alternative name for IS) is dead, but we believe today that while the territory controlled by the caliphate is no longer what it was in 2014 (...) if it has been reduced to near nothing, there remains however a pocket where jihadists have bunkered down," she said.
"We consider that the job must be finished," she said, adding that failing to do so could mean IS groups might regroup.
Parly also suggested that implementing the withdrawal of 2,000 US soldiers from Syria should be discussed amongst the allied coalition, adding that "you can't withdraw troops from one day to another".
France has aircraft in the region, along with long-range artillery in position along the Iraqi-Syrian border.
Washington says France has also deployed special forces inside Syria, though France has never acknowledged this.
https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/69894/mattis-is-out-and-blackwater-is-back-we-are.html
Mattis' resignation comes amid news that President Donald Trump has directed the drawdown of 2,000 U.S. forces in Syria, and 7,000 U.S. forces from Afghanistan, a U.S. official confirmed to Military Times, a story first reported by the Wall Street Journal.
This month, in the January/February print issue of the gun and hunting magazine “Recoil," the former contractor security firm Blackwater USA published a full-page ad, in all black with a simple message: “We are coming.”
Is the war in Afghanistan — and possibly elsewhere ― about to be privatized?
If Blackwater returns, it would be the return of a private security contractor that was banned from Iraq, but re-branded and never really went away. By 2016 Blackwater had been re-branded several times and was known at the time as Constellis Group, when it was purchased by the Apollo Holdings Group. Reuters reported earlier this year that Apollo had put Constellis up for sale, but in June the sale was put on hold.
Blackwater’s founder and former CEO Erik Prince has courted President Donald Trump’s administration since he took office with the idea that the now 17-year Afghan War will never be won by a traditional military campaign. Prince has also argued that the logistical footprint required to support that now multi-trillion dollar endeavor has become too burdensome. Over the summer and into this fall Prince has engaged heavily with the media to promote the privatization; particularly as the Trump administration’s new South Asia Strategy, which was crafted with Mattis, passed the one-year mark.
Prince has no connection to the current Constellis group; if Blackwater does return to operations, it is not clear what, if any tie, Prince would have to the endeavor.
Constellis, which had maintained a footprint at Camp Integrity by the Kabul Airport through its previous iteration as “Academi” has leased land at the facility to hold another 800 personnel, Military Times learned.
Syrian War Report – Dec. 20, 2018: U.S. Is Withdrawing Troops From Syria
This is the one that shows the troops going home will be replaced with 'private contractors' which would be x-ISIS members now becoming covert terrorists that will blow things up here and there with civilians being the targets. The Kurds have been an Israeli asset so without a full blown defection that will not have changed. What will have changed is Syria's ability to track who comes and goes from Jordan. The new HQ.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20181122-saudi-arabia-uae-send-troops-to-support-kurds-in-syria/
Saudi Arabia and the UAE have sent military forces to areas controlled by the Kurdish YPG group in north-east Syria, Turkey’s Yenisafak newspaper reported.
The paper said the forces will be stationed with US-led coalition troops and will support its tasks with huge military enforcements as well as heavy and light weapons.
Quoting the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the newspaper reported that a convoy of troops belonging to an Arab Gulf state recently arrived in the contact area between the Kurdish PKK/YPG and Daesh in the Deir Ez-Zor countryside.
This comes at a time when Ankara is preparing to launch an expanded military operation with the Free Syrian Army against the Kurdish PKK group in the northeast of Syria.
http://www.naharnet.com/stories/en/...ition-has-job-to-finish-despite-us-withdrawal
The international coalition fighting Islamic State (IS) in Syria "has a job to finish" despite US President Donald Trump's "very serious" decision to withdraw American troops from Syria, the French defence minister said Friday.
"The decision taken by the US president changes things pretty radically," Florence Parly told RTL radio.
"President Trump says Daesh (an alternative name for IS) is dead, but we believe today that while the territory controlled by the caliphate is no longer what it was in 2014 (...) if it has been reduced to near nothing, there remains however a pocket where jihadists have bunkered down," she said.
"We consider that the job must be finished," she said, adding that failing to do so could mean IS groups might regroup.
Parly also suggested that implementing the withdrawal of 2,000 US soldiers from Syria should be discussed amongst the allied coalition, adding that "you can't withdraw troops from one day to another".
France has aircraft in the region, along with long-range artillery in position along the Iraqi-Syrian border.
Washington says France has also deployed special forces inside Syria, though France has never acknowledged this.
https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/69894/mattis-is-out-and-blackwater-is-back-we-are.html
Mattis' resignation comes amid news that President Donald Trump has directed the drawdown of 2,000 U.S. forces in Syria, and 7,000 U.S. forces from Afghanistan, a U.S. official confirmed to Military Times, a story first reported by the Wall Street Journal.
This month, in the January/February print issue of the gun and hunting magazine “Recoil," the former contractor security firm Blackwater USA published a full-page ad, in all black with a simple message: “We are coming.”
Is the war in Afghanistan — and possibly elsewhere ― about to be privatized?
If Blackwater returns, it would be the return of a private security contractor that was banned from Iraq, but re-branded and never really went away. By 2016 Blackwater had been re-branded several times and was known at the time as Constellis Group, when it was purchased by the Apollo Holdings Group. Reuters reported earlier this year that Apollo had put Constellis up for sale, but in June the sale was put on hold.
Blackwater’s founder and former CEO Erik Prince has courted President Donald Trump’s administration since he took office with the idea that the now 17-year Afghan War will never be won by a traditional military campaign. Prince has also argued that the logistical footprint required to support that now multi-trillion dollar endeavor has become too burdensome. Over the summer and into this fall Prince has engaged heavily with the media to promote the privatization; particularly as the Trump administration’s new South Asia Strategy, which was crafted with Mattis, passed the one-year mark.
Prince has no connection to the current Constellis group; if Blackwater does return to operations, it is not clear what, if any tie, Prince would have to the endeavor.
Constellis, which had maintained a footprint at Camp Integrity by the Kabul Airport through its previous iteration as “Academi” has leased land at the facility to hold another 800 personnel, Military Times learned.
This is what Trump tweeted about himself and Syria, last night.
"I’ve done more damage to ISIS than all recent presidents....not even close!"
"Me!" ... "Mine!" ... "I've!"
It's all about HIM!
War's over! Bone Spurs SINGLEHANDEDLY defeated ISIS!
"I’ve done more damage to ISIS than all recent presidents....not even close!"
"Me!" ... "Mine!" ... "I've!"
It's all about HIM!
War's over! Bone Spurs SINGLEHANDEDLY defeated ISIS!
Just America's part, there is still the anti-christ and Rome corrupting the EU elite so that God himself, . . . cough, can come and designate, 'his people' as having earned the right to run 'the place' until further notice. If it appears they are fuking up big time that is just because their ways are so much higher than 'your minion-like ways'. Clear enough??
Do not exit the drama theater before the credits start rolling.
I follow a different guidebook but here is a vid that covers some popular (unbiblical) views.
End Times Warning: 'War of Gog and Magog..Every Prophetic Player Is on Stage'
http://en.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13971001000805
The Russian Army is planning to set up a military base near the US-run base in Al-Tanf region in Southeastern Homs near the border with Jordan, field media activists reported on Saturday.The activists in Syria's Desert reported that a number of Russian military vehicles along with military hardware and pre-fabricated rooms have been dispatched to the Syria Desert in Southeastern Syria.
They further said that a number of Syrian soldiers have been accompanying the Russian convoy.
The sources went on to say that the Russian convoy was sent to Zaza strategic region between Syria Desert and the small towns of Eastern Qalamoun along the Damascus-Baghdad international highway almost 50 km away from the US-run Al-Tanf base.
In the meantime, Arabic Sky News pointed to the Russian convoy, and said that the Russian forces are planning to build a military base in the region.
The commander of Maqawir al-Thowrah terrorists announced that his forces will soon leave Al-Tanf for Northern Syria after the US President announced withdrawal of forces from Syria.
A militant commander at Al-Tanf disclosed earlier today that the United States will withdraw troops from its military base in the Southeastern Syrian town of Al-Tanf, near the Jordanian border.
The Russian Army is planning to set up a military base near the US-run base in Al-Tanf region in Southeastern Homs near the border with Jordan, field media activists reported on Saturday.The activists in Syria's Desert reported that a number of Russian military vehicles along with military hardware and pre-fabricated rooms have been dispatched to the Syria Desert in Southeastern Syria.
They further said that a number of Syrian soldiers have been accompanying the Russian convoy.
The sources went on to say that the Russian convoy was sent to Zaza strategic region between Syria Desert and the small towns of Eastern Qalamoun along the Damascus-Baghdad international highway almost 50 km away from the US-run Al-Tanf base.
In the meantime, Arabic Sky News pointed to the Russian convoy, and said that the Russian forces are planning to build a military base in the region.
The commander of Maqawir al-Thowrah terrorists announced that his forces will soon leave Al-Tanf for Northern Syria after the US President announced withdrawal of forces from Syria.
A militant commander at Al-Tanf disclosed earlier today that the United States will withdraw troops from its military base in the Southeastern Syrian town of Al-Tanf, near the Jordanian border.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-21/psychoanalysing-nato-diagnosis
Authored by Patrick Armstrong via The Strategic Culture Foundation,
In previous essays I argued that NATO tries to distract our attention from its crimes by accusing Russia of those crimes: this is "projection". NATO manipulates its audience into thinking the unreal is real: this is "gaslighting". NATO sees what it expects to see – Moscow's statements that they will respond to medium range missiles emplaced next door are re-jigged as the "threats" which justify NATO's earlier act: this is "confirmation bias". And, finally, NATO thinks Russia is so weak it's doomed and so strong that it is destroying the tranquillity of NATOLand: this is a sort of geopolitical "schizophrenia". (I must acknowledge Bryan MacDonald's marvellous neologism of Russophrenia - a condition where the sufferer believes Russia is both about to collapse, and take over the world.)
I wrote the series partly to amuse the reader but with a serious purpose as well. And that serious purpose is to illustrate the absurdities that NATO expects us to believe. NATO here being understood as sometimes the headquarters "international staff", sometimes all members in solemn conclave, sometimes some NATO members and associates. "NATO" has become a remarkably flexible concept: Libya was a NATO operation, even though Germany kept out of it. Somalia was not a NATO operation even though Germany was in it. Canada, a founding NATO member, was in Afghanistan but not in Iraq. Some interventions are NATO, others aren't. The NATO alliance today is a box of spare parts from which Washington assembles its "coalitions of the willing". It's Washington's beard.
NATO and its members are inexhaustible sources of wooden language and dishonesty. Take Washington's demand that Iran get out of Syria while US forces stay there. Syria has a recognised government, that government invited Iran in; no one invited the USA and its minions in. A child could see the upside down nature of this: it's a housebreaker demanding the host evict the guests and hand over their bedrooms. This, apparently, is what NATO calls the "rules-based order". Here's the American official insisting it's all legal: "our forces are there under a set of legal and diplomatic documents... "; but he only mentions one and it's an American one. Putin is condemned for saying "Whatever action a State takes bypassing this procedure are illegitimate, run counter to the UN Charter and defy international law". We are expected to solemnly nod our heads rather than contemptuously laugh when unilateralism is meretriciously named "rules-based". These inversions of reality are routinely fed to us by NATO and its mouthpieces.
A very recent revelation of NATO's gaslighting is the Integrity Initiative (such a gaslighting name!) busy trolling away with a couple of million from the British taxpayer. Its remit, apparently, includes infiltrating political movements of an ally and it "defends democracy against disinformation" by smearing its own political actors with disinformation. Does Russia do this? Well there's RT and Sputnik and "Russians" did spend nearly $5000 on Google and $7000 on Facebook fixing the US election. And almost one dollar on Brexit ads. And one should never forget the insidious effect of Masha and the Bear. But don't dare laugh at these preposterous assertions: the BBC earnestly assures us that humour is Putin's newest weapon. Against this mighty effort, there can be no vigilance too strong! The only way to protect our values is to trash them: defend freedom of thought by secretly planting fake stories, defend democracy by smearing the opposition as Russian stooges. Pure gaslighting, defended by projection and confirmation bias: "This kind of work attracts the extremely hostile and aggressive attention of disinformation actors, like the Kremlin and its various proxies".
NATO hyperventilates about "Russia’s military activities, particularly along NATO’s borders". Only in NATO's counterfeit universe could this be imagined; in the real world Russia's military is inside its own borders. Once again, the proper response is a contemptuous sneer rather than solemn head nodding.
NATO collectively and severally manifests a detachment from reality. Its website is full of pious assertions about being a defensive alliance that brings stability wherever it goes, replete with valuable values. And it always tells the truth. The reality? No rational person would regard Moscow's concern about a military alliance creeping ever closer as "aggressive". There is less stability in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan than before NATO entered them. Fooling around in Yugoslavia, Georgia and Ukraine have sparked actual shooting wars. NATO's activities in Syria (illegal by any standards of international law, be it remembered) has not brought stability. More civilians killed, Raqqa obliterated, hospitals methodically destroyed. All "tragic accidents" of course; but don't look here! look at Russia! Only in its imagination is NATO a bringer of stability. As to its values, they're mutable - it's good to break up Yugoslavia, invade Iraq and Afghanistan and destroy Libya but Crimeans taking the opportunity to return to Russia is a heinous crime. NATO's so-called values are whatever NATO does. And as to NATO's promises: well it did expand, didn't it? (Here's NATO's official weasel-wording: "Personal assurances from individual leaders cannot replace Alliance consensus and do not constitute formal NATO agreement". And suddenly its narrative jumps to President Clinton. Wrong POTUS, actually; NATO's caught gaslighting again.) Its intervention in Libya was very far from what the UN resolution approved: it was an armed intervention against the government on false pretences.
Here's what NATO's so-called "stability projection" has actually produced: riots in France, partly connected with the influx of "migrants" coming from the Libya that NATO destroyed. But, we supposed to believe it has nothing to do with NATO, it's Putin! Only an idiot could believe that.
NATO had a purpose when it was formed, or at least it thought it did. It is true that, at war's end where the Soviet Army stood "elections" were held and socialist or communist parties came to power and stayed in power. (Austria being an exception). There were at least two ways that one could understand this extension of Soviet power. One was that they were the actions of an expansionist hostile power that fully intended to go all the way to Cape Finisterre if it could and, if not prevented, would. In such an case the Western Allies would be fully justified in forming an defensive alliance to deter Soviet expansion. Another possible interpretation was that, after such a hard victory in so fearfully destructive a war, Moscow was determined that never again would its neighbours be used as an assembly area and start line for the forces of another Hitler. Such an interpretation would call for quite another approach from the Western Allies. We all know which of the two interpretations was followed by. I have speculated elsewhere that Reinhard Gehlen may have had a strong influence on that decision. But, for whatever reason, the NATO alliance was founded on that first assumption and it shaped the world in one direction rather than another.
Since the USSR broke up, taking with it NATO's original raison d'être, NATO members, sometimes under the NATO flag and sometimes not, have helped break up Yugoslavia and Serbia, invaded Afghanistan, Iraq (twice), Syria, destroyed Libya, incited a war in Georgia, carried out a coup d'etat in Ukraine and participate in the civil war there. That's not stability. And, where NATO has set foot, it stays. KFOR is still bringing "peace and stability" in Year 19 and Kosovo is home to a huge US base. Afghanistan is in Year 15. Iraq is in Year 14. Syria is Year 4 and set to run forever. Ironically Latvians, Estoniansand Lithuanians are back in Afghanistan; different flag, same place. That's not stability either.
And still the wooden language rolls out. But turn off your brain when you read it.
If NATO were a human individual on the couch, a case could be made that it is living in a fantasy world in which everything is reversed.
Authored by Patrick Armstrong via The Strategic Culture Foundation,
In previous essays I argued that NATO tries to distract our attention from its crimes by accusing Russia of those crimes: this is "projection". NATO manipulates its audience into thinking the unreal is real: this is "gaslighting". NATO sees what it expects to see – Moscow's statements that they will respond to medium range missiles emplaced next door are re-jigged as the "threats" which justify NATO's earlier act: this is "confirmation bias". And, finally, NATO thinks Russia is so weak it's doomed and so strong that it is destroying the tranquillity of NATOLand: this is a sort of geopolitical "schizophrenia". (I must acknowledge Bryan MacDonald's marvellous neologism of Russophrenia - a condition where the sufferer believes Russia is both about to collapse, and take over the world.)
I wrote the series partly to amuse the reader but with a serious purpose as well. And that serious purpose is to illustrate the absurdities that NATO expects us to believe. NATO here being understood as sometimes the headquarters "international staff", sometimes all members in solemn conclave, sometimes some NATO members and associates. "NATO" has become a remarkably flexible concept: Libya was a NATO operation, even though Germany kept out of it. Somalia was not a NATO operation even though Germany was in it. Canada, a founding NATO member, was in Afghanistan but not in Iraq. Some interventions are NATO, others aren't. The NATO alliance today is a box of spare parts from which Washington assembles its "coalitions of the willing". It's Washington's beard.
NATO and its members are inexhaustible sources of wooden language and dishonesty. Take Washington's demand that Iran get out of Syria while US forces stay there. Syria has a recognised government, that government invited Iran in; no one invited the USA and its minions in. A child could see the upside down nature of this: it's a housebreaker demanding the host evict the guests and hand over their bedrooms. This, apparently, is what NATO calls the "rules-based order". Here's the American official insisting it's all legal: "our forces are there under a set of legal and diplomatic documents... "; but he only mentions one and it's an American one. Putin is condemned for saying "Whatever action a State takes bypassing this procedure are illegitimate, run counter to the UN Charter and defy international law". We are expected to solemnly nod our heads rather than contemptuously laugh when unilateralism is meretriciously named "rules-based". These inversions of reality are routinely fed to us by NATO and its mouthpieces.
A very recent revelation of NATO's gaslighting is the Integrity Initiative (such a gaslighting name!) busy trolling away with a couple of million from the British taxpayer. Its remit, apparently, includes infiltrating political movements of an ally and it "defends democracy against disinformation" by smearing its own political actors with disinformation. Does Russia do this? Well there's RT and Sputnik and "Russians" did spend nearly $5000 on Google and $7000 on Facebook fixing the US election. And almost one dollar on Brexit ads. And one should never forget the insidious effect of Masha and the Bear. But don't dare laugh at these preposterous assertions: the BBC earnestly assures us that humour is Putin's newest weapon. Against this mighty effort, there can be no vigilance too strong! The only way to protect our values is to trash them: defend freedom of thought by secretly planting fake stories, defend democracy by smearing the opposition as Russian stooges. Pure gaslighting, defended by projection and confirmation bias: "This kind of work attracts the extremely hostile and aggressive attention of disinformation actors, like the Kremlin and its various proxies".
NATO hyperventilates about "Russia’s military activities, particularly along NATO’s borders". Only in NATO's counterfeit universe could this be imagined; in the real world Russia's military is inside its own borders. Once again, the proper response is a contemptuous sneer rather than solemn head nodding.
NATO collectively and severally manifests a detachment from reality. Its website is full of pious assertions about being a defensive alliance that brings stability wherever it goes, replete with valuable values. And it always tells the truth. The reality? No rational person would regard Moscow's concern about a military alliance creeping ever closer as "aggressive". There is less stability in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan than before NATO entered them. Fooling around in Yugoslavia, Georgia and Ukraine have sparked actual shooting wars. NATO's activities in Syria (illegal by any standards of international law, be it remembered) has not brought stability. More civilians killed, Raqqa obliterated, hospitals methodically destroyed. All "tragic accidents" of course; but don't look here! look at Russia! Only in its imagination is NATO a bringer of stability. As to its values, they're mutable - it's good to break up Yugoslavia, invade Iraq and Afghanistan and destroy Libya but Crimeans taking the opportunity to return to Russia is a heinous crime. NATO's so-called values are whatever NATO does. And as to NATO's promises: well it did expand, didn't it? (Here's NATO's official weasel-wording: "Personal assurances from individual leaders cannot replace Alliance consensus and do not constitute formal NATO agreement". And suddenly its narrative jumps to President Clinton. Wrong POTUS, actually; NATO's caught gaslighting again.) Its intervention in Libya was very far from what the UN resolution approved: it was an armed intervention against the government on false pretences.
Here's what NATO's so-called "stability projection" has actually produced: riots in France, partly connected with the influx of "migrants" coming from the Libya that NATO destroyed. But, we supposed to believe it has nothing to do with NATO, it's Putin! Only an idiot could believe that.
NATO had a purpose when it was formed, or at least it thought it did. It is true that, at war's end where the Soviet Army stood "elections" were held and socialist or communist parties came to power and stayed in power. (Austria being an exception). There were at least two ways that one could understand this extension of Soviet power. One was that they were the actions of an expansionist hostile power that fully intended to go all the way to Cape Finisterre if it could and, if not prevented, would. In such an case the Western Allies would be fully justified in forming an defensive alliance to deter Soviet expansion. Another possible interpretation was that, after such a hard victory in so fearfully destructive a war, Moscow was determined that never again would its neighbours be used as an assembly area and start line for the forces of another Hitler. Such an interpretation would call for quite another approach from the Western Allies. We all know which of the two interpretations was followed by. I have speculated elsewhere that Reinhard Gehlen may have had a strong influence on that decision. But, for whatever reason, the NATO alliance was founded on that first assumption and it shaped the world in one direction rather than another.
Since the USSR broke up, taking with it NATO's original raison d'être, NATO members, sometimes under the NATO flag and sometimes not, have helped break up Yugoslavia and Serbia, invaded Afghanistan, Iraq (twice), Syria, destroyed Libya, incited a war in Georgia, carried out a coup d'etat in Ukraine and participate in the civil war there. That's not stability. And, where NATO has set foot, it stays. KFOR is still bringing "peace and stability" in Year 19 and Kosovo is home to a huge US base. Afghanistan is in Year 15. Iraq is in Year 14. Syria is Year 4 and set to run forever. Ironically Latvians, Estoniansand Lithuanians are back in Afghanistan; different flag, same place. That's not stability either.
And still the wooden language rolls out. But turn off your brain when you read it.
POLITICAL - NATO promotes democratic values and enables members to consult and cooperate on defence and security-related issues to solve problems, build trust and, in the long run, prevent conflict.
MILITARY - NATO is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes. If diplomatic efforts fail, it has the military power to undertake crisis-management operations. These are carried out under the collective defence clause of NATO's founding treaty - Article 5 of the Washington Treaty or under a United Nations mandate, alone or in cooperation with other countries and international organisations.
Has post-USSR NATO ever peacefully resolved a dispute? Anywhere? Any time? It's always military power. What did Article 5 (an attack on one is an attack on all) have to do with NATO's war on Libya? Did it attack one of them? How about Serbia? One can argue that someone in Afghanistan attacked the USA but who did in Iraq? As to "democratic values", well, it will be amusing to watch NATO's reactions to Ukraine President Poroshenko trying to avoid the election. And nobody likes to mention the pack of organ harvesters and drug runners NATO gave a whole country to.MILITARY - NATO is committed to the peaceful resolution of disputes. If diplomatic efforts fail, it has the military power to undertake crisis-management operations. These are carried out under the collective defence clause of NATO's founding treaty - Article 5 of the Washington Treaty or under a United Nations mandate, alone or in cooperation with other countries and international organisations.
If NATO were a human individual on the couch, a case could be made that it is living in a fantasy world in which everything is reversed.
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil;
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness;
that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Delenda NATO est!that put darkness for light, and light for darkness;
that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
https://www.investmentwatchblog.com...-and-afghanistan-has-been-stunning-to-behold/
The reaction to the news that US troops are coming home from Syria and Afghanistan has been stunning to behold.
https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/12/r...isis-does-not-trust-us-withdrawal-from-syria/
MOSCOW, Russia – The presence of United States forces in Syria does not contribute to a political and diplomatic solution to the crisis in the Arab country, spokesman for the Russian presidency Dmitry Peskov said.
“The presence of the US forces on the Syrian soil does not help reach the political and diplomatic settlement. Of course, the involvement of Washington in the relevant talks under the UN bumbershoot, the harmonious work of the US officials with [UN Envoy for Syria Staffan] de Mistura in the interests of this settlement would contribute to reaching this final goal,” Peskov told Russia’s Channel One.
According to Peskov, the main efforts around Syria at the moment are focused on forming the commission that will rewrite the country’s constitution, which for the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, can be completed early next year.
US President Donald Trump’s claims that Moscow, Damascus and Tehran would be unhappy with the withdrawal of US forces from Syria, as they would have to fight without such support, however the Russian presidency spokesman recalled that the The United States has operated illegally in Syria and several areas under US control have been hit by humanitarian disasters and terrorist weapons.
The spokesman also recalled that the US forces were “always withdrawing from some places,” like Afghanistan and Iraq where the US troops remain stationed for years.
Russia is not prone to overestimating the role of the United States in defeating Daesh [ISIS] in Syria, Peskov also said.
According to the spokesman, the United States’ chaotic and unpredictable decision-making is causing discomfort and concern in international affairs.
“Stability and predictability is what Russia is looking for in all directions of its foreign policy. Stability and predictability are what all countries welcome. And when stability gives way to unpredictability, surprise and such, I would say, chaos in certain decisions, it causes both discomfort and concern in international affairs. This applies not only to Russia, this applies to all countries,” he said.
Peskov elaborated that Moscow still had no clear understanding of Washington’s further steps in Syria and wanted more information about the planned withdrawal of US troops, announced by President Donald Trump earlier this week.
“The opinion is as follows, first, we need to understand how, when, where the Americans go, this is not yet clear. Second, we need to understand what the next phase is, nobody knows this either. Third, Russia, in fact, is the country that legitimately, under international law and at the request of Syria, assisted Syrians in freeing their country from international terrorism.”
The reaction to the news that US troops are coming home from Syria and Afghanistan has been stunning to behold.
https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/12/r...isis-does-not-trust-us-withdrawal-from-syria/
MOSCOW, Russia – The presence of United States forces in Syria does not contribute to a political and diplomatic solution to the crisis in the Arab country, spokesman for the Russian presidency Dmitry Peskov said.
“The presence of the US forces on the Syrian soil does not help reach the political and diplomatic settlement. Of course, the involvement of Washington in the relevant talks under the UN bumbershoot, the harmonious work of the US officials with [UN Envoy for Syria Staffan] de Mistura in the interests of this settlement would contribute to reaching this final goal,” Peskov told Russia’s Channel One.
According to Peskov, the main efforts around Syria at the moment are focused on forming the commission that will rewrite the country’s constitution, which for the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, can be completed early next year.
US President Donald Trump’s claims that Moscow, Damascus and Tehran would be unhappy with the withdrawal of US forces from Syria, as they would have to fight without such support, however the Russian presidency spokesman recalled that the The United States has operated illegally in Syria and several areas under US control have been hit by humanitarian disasters and terrorist weapons.
The spokesman also recalled that the US forces were “always withdrawing from some places,” like Afghanistan and Iraq where the US troops remain stationed for years.
- Advertisement -Russia is not prone to overestimating the role of the United States in defeating Daesh [ISIS] in Syria, Peskov also said.
According to the spokesman, the United States’ chaotic and unpredictable decision-making is causing discomfort and concern in international affairs.
“Stability and predictability is what Russia is looking for in all directions of its foreign policy. Stability and predictability are what all countries welcome. And when stability gives way to unpredictability, surprise and such, I would say, chaos in certain decisions, it causes both discomfort and concern in international affairs. This applies not only to Russia, this applies to all countries,” he said.
Peskov elaborated that Moscow still had no clear understanding of Washington’s further steps in Syria and wanted more information about the planned withdrawal of US troops, announced by President Donald Trump earlier this week.
“The opinion is as follows, first, we need to understand how, when, where the Americans go, this is not yet clear. Second, we need to understand what the next phase is, nobody knows this either. Third, Russia, in fact, is the country that legitimately, under international law and at the request of Syria, assisted Syrians in freeing their country from international terrorism.”
https://www.rt.com/uk/446898-john-pilger-rt-interview/
Investigative journalist John Pilger has called out the “grotesque absurdity” of those in the Western media who hype the so-called threats from Russia and China to Cold War levels, in an interview with RT’s Going Underground.
Pilger told RT’s Afshin Rattansi that he finds it “difficult to believe” how some journalists “should go along, should allow themselves to be indulged by the British government at a time when there is a litany of lies about Russia, about China — about so many issues that endanger us.”
“I've never known such a grotesque absurdity as the elevation of Russia and China and the perceived enemies to the kind of Cold War status they had when I was a child,” he said.
Investigative journalist John Pilger has called out the “grotesque absurdity” of those in the Western media who hype the so-called threats from Russia and China to Cold War levels, in an interview with RT’s Going Underground.
Pilger told RT’s Afshin Rattansi that he finds it “difficult to believe” how some journalists “should go along, should allow themselves to be indulged by the British government at a time when there is a litany of lies about Russia, about China — about so many issues that endanger us.”
“I've never known such a grotesque absurdity as the elevation of Russia and China and the perceived enemies to the kind of Cold War status they had when I was a child,” he said.
Every map I see has me under a red sky and your part of the country under a blue sky. Sky looks the same, might be a bit warmer than usual, how about you, is the sy a different blue? . . . . cough. Maybe I should just turn the sound back up and quit trying to 'channel the tv'.