A Chama da Ascensão

pesquisar

 
Segunda-feira, 13 / 01 / 20

Messianic nut-case Iran gambit backfires, payback begins

Benjamin Fulford 

Report Sample 

2020/01/13.

 

 
  


 

 

The recent events orchestrated by the U.S. government in Iran have backfired in a major way and the repercussions have only just begun, multiple sources agree.  The worst result has been to force the British and the rest of the Anglo-Saxon world away from their alliance with the U.S. under its current administration, MI6 sources say.  “Whatever happened should never have happened, and the Western powers need to vacate the Muslim world and contain Israel,” the sources say.
 
Even the Israelis are waking up to the dangers of the Evangelical Christian nut jobs they created, Mossad sources agree.

Of course, the rest of the world already views the U.S. as a pariah state, so now U.S. President Donald Trump is totally isolated on the world stage.
Before we go further into the fallout, let us summarize exactly what happened.  Basically, it was yet another attempt to start World War 3 by the Messianic Jewish crazies who, for simplicity’s sake, we will call the Zionists.  This time they orchestrated an escalating series of events in a vain effort to get their long-awaited Armageddon by:
  1. Murdering an American contractor in Iraq and blaming it on the Iranians.
  2. Convincing or blackmailing Trump into a disproportionate response.
  3. Getting their Iranian agents and brainwashed dupes to riot at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.
  4. Forcing Trump to commit a war crime by murdering Iranian General Qasem Soleimani.
  5. Remotely hijacking a Ukrainian airliner and flying it with transponders off towards an Iranian military base to fool the Iranians into shooting it down.  (For those readers who do not yet realize this, in the late 1990’s the U.S. had remote hijacking equipment installed in all civilian airliners, supposedly as an anti-hijacking measure.  This ability has been repeatedly abused for political purposes by the Khazarian mafia).
Now they are trying, and failing, to orchestrate regime change in Iran.  Instead, though, this botched operation has succeeded in waking up a critical mass within the Western intelligence/military community to the fact the U.S. government has been hijacked by a fanatical cult that is trying to start WW3.
 
That is why the UK Defense minister Ben Wallace publicly announced his country was breaking away from its military alliance with the U.S.

 
There has also been a huge pushback by saner minds in the U.S. military-industrial establishment against the end-times fanatics centered around presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and his Chabad cult.  For example, U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper publicly denied claims by Trump that Iran was planning to attack U.S. embassies.

Pentagon sources say, “Despite the rhetoric, Trump has no choice but to pull U.S. troops out of Syraq, and eventually the Middle East.”
The reason Trump has no choice is, among other things, financial.  The U.S. has wasted over 7 trillion dollars on endless war in the region and is now running out of money.  This is the $7 trillion, by the way, that the Japanese were hoping to spend on ending poverty and stopping environmental destruction before the U.S. regime stole it from them.
There was a meeting between a representative of the White Dragon Society (WDS) and a senior Asian secret society leader last week to discuss, among other things, a plan for the bankruptcy reorganization of the U.S.
The plan calls for …

 

 
The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
 
Please Log In or Register to create an account.
 

 

 
The full report (free) will be post on:


this Thursday morning or late Wednesday evening EST.
 




Letters to the Editor


 
January 12, 2020
 
Letter about Flight PS752
 
 
 
Hi Ben,
 
I want to wish you a Happy New Year! I hope 2020 brings a clear vision of peace for the world, though I’m afraid we’re not off to a very good start!
 
I just watched your January 9th interview with Robert David Steele. I wanted to comment on the Ukrainian airliner that was brought down over Tehran the other night.
 
When it happened so soon after the missile launches at U.S. bases in Iraq, people on Twitter, especially Americans, immediately jumped to the conclusion that the downing of the plane was a military operation to stop some Cabal leaders from escaping Iran. Many were asserting that the 63 Canadian passengers were in fact Iranian spies.
 
This upset me, as I was hearing reports from local news concerning the people who had died in the crash, including a grade 10 high school student here in the Greater Toronto Area. Nowadays people don’t trust the media and have seen “crisis actors” for other false flag events.
 
So I started digging on the people featured in this CTV article:
 
 
What I can tell you is that I confirmed quite a few of them. I looked up the family doctors who were working in British Columbia on college websites, the obstetrician in Edmonton, and the dentist in Halifax, and they all had established practices. I also confirmed two tenured professors at the University of Alberta, a secretary working for the Teachers Secondary School Federation (through a friend who said she’d been there at least 5 years), and as well was able to confirm a PhD student in Computer Sciences at the University of Toronto. There was such a variety of professions listed amongst the victims that I highly doubt they were all a bunch of Iranian spies/double agents.
 
Which leaves me with these difficult questions:
 
1. Did the Iranians accidentally shoot down a passenger plane because someone was jumpy? There were lots of commercial flights in the air over Tehran that night, both Iranian and International. They were taking the normal flight routes you would expect.
 
2. There have been credible reports from people with contacts in Iran that the President of Iran has been rounding up supporters of Soleimani since his death. Some had said that Soleimani was becoming a loose cannon, with all his terrorist factions that he was backing to advance his own agenda in the Middle Eastern region. So the theory is that the Iranian president worked out a secret deal with the U.S. military to take out Soleimani, and that the 15 missiles shot at U.S. bases in Iraq were simply a show in order for the Iranian government to save face with its people. Soleimani had many supporters, but there were also many people in Iran that feared and despised him. Therefore the President couldn’t make it look like he was involved in Soleimani’s death.
 
Next, in regards to the Ukrainian airliner…
 
Were there terrorist/cabal targets on the plane that the U.S. military and Iranian government wanted taken out as well? Did they decide it was okay to “sacrifice” a bunch of Canadian citizens on board as collateral damage, including children and babies?! I’d hate to think they could be that coldblooded just to achieve a military agenda.
 
3. This fellow on Twitter found some anomalies in the flight pattern information, including a tail number that had been changed. Some people feel the pictures of the crash scene seem staged. All I can tell you is that there are real people in the Iranian community in Toronto who seem quite distraught about the death of their loved ones. There are principals of local schools and colleges making announcements of the names of students that were killed.
 
 
I find it hard to believe that these 63 Canadians, including a wedding party from Edmonton, agreed to participate in faking their deaths and hiding out in Iran. One was a mother and 10-year-old daughter who were visiting their grandparents, and the husband remains behind in Canada.
 
The other possibility I was wondering about is that maybe there were cabal/terrorists escaping Iran, and they found a way to trick the Iranian military into shooting down the wrong plane, allowing them to escape in the process. It’s been said that in order to shoot the plane down, they would have had to track it right from departure and takeoff, and this commercial plane had been delayed from takeoff for 1 hour for some unspecified reason. Did the evil elite use it as a decoy by changing the tail number on the programmed flight log, etc.?
 
Anyway, it’s been very upsetting. It reminds me a lot of when Korean Airlines Flight 007 was shot down by the Russians in 1983. I was attending a Korean Zen Buddhist temple in Toronto, and I remember how devastated so many people were who had lost relatives, and they were doing many funeral services.
 
In a way, I’d prefer to think it was an accidental shoot-down of the plane, rather than a cold-hearted calculated military operation to take out a few Cabal leaders.
 
I would appreciate your insights, and just thought I’d fill you in with my research “on the ground,” so to speak.
 
All the best, and good luck with your negotiations for world peace!
 
Sincerely,
 
—MB of Mississauga
 
Hi M,
 
To be honest, I do not know what happened with the airliner, but my best guess is Trump ordered it shut down in order to blame the Iranians and distract from the huge mistake he made in ordering the death of General Soleimani.
 
—BF
 
 
 

 
January 12, 2020
 
Fulford interview with Robert David Steele about Iran, WWIII avoided, and 1,000 years of peace
 
 
 
Ben Fulford focuses on the big picture and imminent world peace, with everyone on board except for a tiny handful including the Deep State Zionist core. The assassination of General Soleimani, whether fake or real, is a disaster for the Zionists, and WWIII has been averted. The U.S. corporation appears bankrupt, and the earthquakes in Puerto Rico (home of the “corporation”) are not natural. Zionists are killing Christians to try to destabilize the Middle East. Thierry Maysan’s report on an assassination threat to Trump from Zionists explores the possibility that assassination is theater, but could be a last-ditch effort by Zionists and their neocon sympathizers to start WWIII. The crash of the Ukrainian aircraft leaving Tehran could be connected. Attempts to start WWIII failed, and we’re headed for 1,000 years of world peace. Is Trump a genius or a Zionist puppet? The end result is peace. Jews are protected and safe, and there is no threat to anyone. Truth and reconciliation are the order of the day.
 
 
 
 

 
January 11, 2020
Notice: Planetary meditation
 
 
We are getting many contacts informing us of a planetary meditation on January 11th. The aim is to get enough people thinking about beneficial planetary change to actually make it happen. Whatever your belief system is, please take some time on January 11th to imagine an ideal world and how to make it happen. Thank you.
 
Dear Mr.Fulford:
 
As your loyal follower, I ask you to share this information about the Planetary Meditation that will take place in a matter of days. I hope all is well on your side and that you are healthy and safe. Thank you in advance.
—BB
 
During the course of history, many honorable and brave warriors who loved life gave their life for our freedom, from the Allies in both the first and the second world wars to the brave white-hat operatives around the world. They have fought against enslavement of nations and horrors of concentration camps around the world, but their sacrifice will be in vain if we do not finish what they have started. They have not only been defending our freedom but our right to live as well. This is not the battle for borders or resources; this is the battle for our right to live. We are fighting against annihilation.
 
The means of fighting can vary in shape and form, from violent to non-violent ways. In a matter of days, people around the world will perform a Planetary Mass Meditation called “The Age of Aquarius Activation.” This is one of our nonviolent ways which is followed by physical action.
 
We call upon all of those who wish to do good in the world and see the new dawn rising. Freedom is on the horizon, but until we get there let’s fight relentlessly. In the following links you will see all information that you need to participate in this meditation. Please take a closer look and join our brothers and sisters in unified effort to end the war on this planet that has been destroying billions of lives for centuries. We will meditate together and we will perform physical action together. Thank you for your time and patience. Let’s make 2020 a year that shall never be forgotten.
 
At the three links below, you can read more about the meditation:
 
If you click here, you will see the exact time of the meditation for your location.
 
Here you can see the promotional video that is translated into about 25 world languages, which shows the importance of this meditation:
 
Here you can see an MP3 Guided Version in many different languages:
 
Here is a message for the Age of Aquarius (also translated into many languages):
 
Here is a joint Cobra/Fulford interview regarding the meditation:
 
 

January 11, 2020
 
Letter about vaccination injuries
 
 
Dear Ben,
 
Last three years, I have been your follower via some other websites. (Unfortunately for some reasons, I have not been able to become a paid subscriber.) I appreciate the work you have been doing for humanity.
 
I have some questions for you.
 
Even my country, Finland—as my opinion, based on our family’s personal experience—seems to be a well-corrupted country, at least when it comes to politics, real news, the judicial system, natural health, and medical information. Is there going to be a some kind of purge/cleanup in all EU countries? In Finland too, and in all these areas? Any idea when?
 
Does WDS have something to say about the fact that the medical industry, organizations like CDC, FDA, and WHO, who say vaccinate everybody, and Bill Gates and lawmakers around the world are pushing their dirty and illness-bringing vaccines to all the people, especially to kids? Does WDS have any plans for that? I attached a file as a good example of how dirty vaccines really are.
 
And what do you think about this FDA action? As far as I know, homeopathy has helped many people around the world.
 
Yours sincerely,
—KL, mother of a vaccine-injured child
 
The dark side of the medical industry will definitely face long-awaited justice when this is all over. This battle we face is like fighting an octopus. You can wrestle with one arm, like the “pharmacidical” industry, or you can target the head, which is the owners of the private central banks. We are targeting the head so that all the arms can be stopped at once.
 
I am sorry to hear about the damage to your child. The family of senior members of the current U.S. government has been affected by vaccines and I understand that action is being taken.
 
—BF
 
 

January 7, 2020
 
 
 
Benjamin,
 
It’s been a while since I’ve responded to one of your posts. Before I dig into the latest update, let me preface this with the fact I know you report on things as you hear them, not as they are or we wish they are in real life.
 
Soleimani was a butcher. He is responsible for the deaths of THOUSANDs of people and hundreds of U.S. soldiers. Unlike you, I have seen the attacks the guy has planned on U.S. service members and the raw intel from his activities throughout the Middle East. I also know his death is a severe blow to the regime. I’m not sure who on the Pentagon side is feeding you information, but I can tell you as a matter of fact that we should have taken this guy out in 2009 when we had solid intel where he was in Iraq. We would have saved the world a number of innocent deaths.
 
As far as China is concerned, they have meddled in almost every aspect of American culture, politics, and even entertainment. To say they have aims of turning the U.S. into a communist country is legitimate and focused. I don’t buy the narrative they are “here to help.” Google’s aid to China with technology is nothing short of treason, and all the execs at Alphabet should be tried and shot for their activities in China.
 
You never reference the “Tech Bro’s” and their continued efforts to censor and subjugate the American people via the technology and financial mechanisms, even though they have used the same tactics on you with regard to payments. I would think that topic would be first and foremost in figuring out what and who is pulling the strings.
 
Finally, I don’t see the world trying to “save” the United States, given the fact most of the world is corrupt to the core. Even Europe is corrupt to the core. The only way to truly liberate humanity is to burn down the entire system and put people in charge that understand and practice selfless service. I would imagine that the list of non-corruptible people on this planet is extremely small. Certainly none of them work for the United Nations, as it is the most morally and physically bankrupt organization on the planet, rife with corruption and power-drunk woke-tards.
 
What I see is a concerted effort by the Elite across the planet to divide the world into factions and continue more of the same—debt, slavery, pain, and suffering.
 
Best,
—SM
 
Thanks for that information, S. Many sources did tell me Soleimani was a Zionist agent playing his part to try to start their planned war between Christianity and Islam. The important thing is to not let them fool us into killing each other so that we become weak enough for final enslavement by the Zionists.
 
As far as the tech companies go, I do see them as a problem, since they have been censoring me from Day One. My view is that the tech companies should be either nationalized or regulated like public utilities.
 
The other thing I want to make perfectly clear is that I do not support a Chinese takeover of the United States. My view is that the other Anglo-Saxon democracies—Canada, the UK, Australia, and New Zealand—are in the best position to help restore true Democracy to the United States.
 
Anyway, we must keep fighting until humanity is liberated from these gangsters.
 
—BF
 
 


 

Compiled by http://violetflame.biz.ly from: 

Archives:


 

A Trusty with Privacy Search 
Alternative to Google
startpage.com

Alternative to YouTube
brighteon.com

 
 
 



No religious or political creed is advocated here.

Organised religion is unnecessary to spirituality.

Excellent teachings of the masters have been contaminated by the dogmatic control of these religions.

Discernment yes; judgement does not.
If you use discernment you are free to research with an open mind. 

With discernment it is possible to reach the spirit of the letter of any writing and it is also much easier to listen to the voice of the soul that comes from the heart.
Individually you can be helped to find your Truth that is different of everyone. 


Please respect all credits.

 
Discernment is recommended.
 

All articles are of the respective authors and/or publishers responsibility. 


 



 

Like this! please bookmark. It is updated daily

 


 
 
 
Free counters!

  geoglobe1
 
 
publicado por achama às 15:54
Segunda-feira, 13 / 01 / 20

Perhaps the Middle East is More Stable When the US Stays Away

 By Trita Parsi.

Quincy Institute.

Posted January 10, 2020 by Edward Morgan.

 
.

 

 

It has been a mantra of U.S. foreign policy for a decade or more that, without the United States, the Middle East would descend into chaos. Or even worse, Iran would resurrect the Persian Empire and swallow the region whole.
Yet when U.S. President Donald Trump opted not to go to war with Iran after a series of Iranian-attributed attacks on Saudi Arabia last year and declared his intentions to pull troops out of the region, it wasn’t chaos or conquest that ensued. Rather, nascent regional diplomacy—particularly among Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—and de-escalation followed. To be sure, the cards were reshuffled again in January, when Trump ordered the assassination of Qassem Suleimani, one of Iran’s most important military figures. Courtesy of Trump, the region is once more moving toward conflict, and the early signs of diplomatic progress achieved during the preceding months have vanished.
It is thus time for Washington to answer a crucial question that it has long evaded: Has America’s military dominance in the Middle East prevented regional actors from peacefully resolving conflicts on their own? And in that way, has it been an impediment to stability rather than the guarantor of it?
Following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, U.S. President Jimmy Carter proclaimed a new doctrine: “An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region,” he stated, “will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.” In the context of the Cold War, preventing the Soviets—the main outside force Carter was worried about—from gaining control over the energy-rich region had a strategic logic.
But over time, that logic shifted. In the 1980s, U.S. President Ronald Reagan expanded the doctrine to include threats to the flow of oil originating from inside the region, too. As the geopolitical context changed still further, subsequent presidents found even more ways to justify America’s growing military presence in the Middle East. What started as a policy to prevent others from establishing hegemony over the oil-rich waters of the Persian Gulf morphed into a policy of asserting American hegemony in the region in order to “save” it.
As long as U.S. allies lack the capability or competence to secure the region, the thinking went, Washington would have no choice but to shoulder this responsibility. U.S. President George W. Bush was explicit about that; without an increase in U.S. troop levels in Iraq, he claimed, there would be chaos in the region. He missed the irony, of course, that his invasion of Iraq was the single most destabilizing event in the Middle East of the past decades.
As the scholars Hal Brands, Steven Cook, and Kenneth Pollack wrote endorsing the Carter Doctrine and its continuation, “the United States established and upheld the basic rules of conduct in the region: the United States would meet efforts to interfere with the free flow of oil by force; uphold freedom of navigation; demand that regional powers give up their irredentist claims on other states or face grave consequences; and prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”
This account is accurate enough (although the last rule on the list always exempted Israel), but the story glosses over how the policy also gave cover to U.S. allies for some fairly destabilizing behaviors of their own. That’s an omission Brands makes in a Bloomberg article, too, where he points to Saudi Arabia’s slaughter of the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi to argue that a “post-American Middle East will not be stable and peaceful. It will be even nastier and more turbulent than it is today.” And in the words of U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham in 2018, “If it weren’t for the United States, they’d be speaking Farsi in about a week in Saudi Arabia.”
All this without a nod to the fact that, if anything, the United States’ protection of the Saudi regime has enabled its promotion of terrorism and its destabilizing activities in the region, which have, in turn, prompted further Iranian response.
Assertions about the United States’ pivotal role in the Middle East, no matter how often repeated, have not been proved true. Iran, ravaged by sanctions, corruption, and economic mismanagement, is nowhere near establishing hegemony in the region. Saudi Arabia spends more than five times as much on its military than does Iran; the entire Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)—Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, and the UAE—outspends Iran by a factor of eight. Meanwhile, whereas Iran has no nuclear weapons yet undergoes more inspections than any other country, Israel has a nuclear weapons program with no international transparency whatsoever. Iran may have been adept at taking advantage of U.S. overextension and missteps in the last few decades, but establishing hegemony is a different matter altogether.
Further, the region did not fall into deeper chaos as a result of Trump’s earlier refusal to get into a shooting war with Iran after attacks by Iranian proxies against Saudi oil installations in September 2019. Critics lamented the president’s decision as an abandonment of the Carter Doctrine, calling it a disaster for the GCC and warning that it may even prompt Saudi Arabia to seek nuclear weapons.
Instead, recognizing that the U.S. military was no longer at their disposal, Saudi Arabia and the UAE began exercising the diplomatic options that had always been available to them. For its part, Saudi Arabia stepped up direct talks with Houthi rebels in Yemen as a way to ease tensions with their backer, Iran. The level of violence on both sides declined as a result, and more than 100 prisoners of war were released. In November, the United Nations’ Yemen envoy, Martin Griffiths, reported an 80 percent reduction in Saudi-led airstrikes, and there were no Yemeni deaths in the previous two weeks.
Riyadh also opted to reduce tensions with Qatar, a former ally that had become a nemesis. The Saudi government seemingly ordered its notorious Twitter army to tone down the insults against Qatar and its emir, Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, and some sporting events between the two countries resumed, according to the New York Times.
Saudi officials also claimed that they had quietly reached out to Iran via intermediaries seeking ways to ease tensions. Tehran, in turn, welcomed the prospective Saudi-Qatari thaw and, according to the New York Times, floated a peace plan based on a mutual Iranian-Saudi pledge of nonaggression.
An even stronger change of heart occurred in Abu Dhabi. In July, the UAE started withdrawing troops from Yemen. The same month, it participated in direct talks with Tehran to discuss maritime security. It even released $700 million in funds to Iran in contradiction to the Trump administration’s maximum pressure strategy.
Some of these measures may have been more tactical than strategic. Saudi Arabia may have reduced tensions with Qatar and the Houthis in order to better situate itself for a confrontation with Tehran down the road or to offset international condemnation of its killing of Khashoggi, human rights abuses at home, and brutal tactics in Yemen. The UAE, too, may have felt that a tactical reduction of tensions was warranted.
Nevertheless, as the United States appeared poised to back out of the region, its erstwhile allies’ calculations tilted toward diplomacy. The Saudis and Emiratis simply had no choice but to cease some of their recklessness because they could no longer operate under the protection of the United States. If stability in the Middle East is the United States’ main goal, Washington should have celebrated rather than bemoaned these developments.
In the wake of the U.S. assassination of Suleimani—which some former U.S. officials have called an act of war—the calculations may change once more. According to Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi, Suleimani was in Iraq to bring him Tehran’s response to a message from Riyadh on how to defuse regional tensions, presumably as part of the House of Saud’s renewed interest in diplomacy. The Iraqis, according to him, were mediating between the two rivals, an initiative that has now been thrown into question.
Iran may very well conclude, rightly or wrongly, that Saudi Arabia and the UAE conspired with Washington to assassinate Suleimani and as a result not only end the recent diplomacy but also target Riyadh and Abu Dhabi as part of the revenge for Suleimani’s death. This is yet one more instance, it seems, in which U.S. activities in the region have brought more turmoil than stability.
To be sure, there is no guarantee that recent diplomatic efforts would have been successful. A more responsible Riyadh might not have begotten a more responsible Tehran. But it is noteworthy that diplomacy did not even begin in earnest until Washington clearly demonstrated its unwillingness to entangle itself in a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. And by returning to the region in a show of military force, Trump may once again disincentivize the United States’ allies from taking diplomacy seriously. They may even interpret Suleimani’s killing as a license to resume their recklessness—activities like Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s purported kidnapping of the Lebanese prime minister and ordering of the dismemberment of Khashoggi; Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s imposition of a blockade on Qatar; and the two countries’ further destabilization of LibyaSyriaLebanonSudan, and Yemen.
As in the past, in other words, it seems as if the Middle East’s descent into chaos is more likely with the United States than without it.
 
Trita Parsi is the Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute and author of Losing an Enemy – Obama, Iran and the Triumph of Diplomacy.

 



Compiled by http://violetflame.biz.ly from: 
 
Archives:

 

Alternative to Google
startpage.com

Alternative to YouTube
brighteon.com

 



No religious or political creed is advocated here.

Organised religion is unnecessary to spirituality.

Excellent teachings of the masters have been contaminated by the dogmatic control of these religions.

Discernment yes; judgement does not.
If you use discernment you are free to research with an open mind. 

With discernment it is possible to reach the spirit of the letter of any writing and it is also much easier to listen to the voice of the soul that comes from the heart.
Individually you can be helped to find your Truth that is different of everyone. 


Please respect all credits.

 
Discernment is recommended.
 

All articles are of the respective authors and/or publishers responsibility. 


 

 

Like this! please bookmark. It is updated daily

 


 
 
 
Free counters!

  geoglobe1
 
 
publicado por achama às 04:47
Sábado, 11 / 01 / 20

Perhaps the Middle East is More Stable When the US Stays Away

 By Trita Parsi.

Quincy Institute.

Posted January 10, 2020 by Edward Morgan.

 
.

 

 

It has been a mantra of U.S. foreign policy for a decade or more that, without the United States, the Middle East would descend into chaos. Or even worse, Iran would resurrect the Persian Empire and swallow the region whole.
Yet when U.S. President Donald Trump opted not to go to war with Iran after a series of Iranian-attributed attacks on Saudi Arabia last year and declared his intentions to pull troops out of the region, it wasn’t chaos or conquest that ensued. Rather, nascent regional diplomacy—particularly among Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—and de-escalation followed. To be sure, the cards were reshuffled again in January, when Trump ordered the assassination of Qassem Suleimani, one of Iran’s most important military figures. Courtesy of Trump, the region is once more moving toward conflict, and the early signs of diplomatic progress achieved during the preceding months have vanished.
It is thus time for Washington to answer a crucial question that it has long evaded: Has America’s military dominance in the Middle East prevented regional actors from peacefully resolving conflicts on their own? And in that way, has it been an impediment to stability rather than the guarantor of it?
Following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, U.S. President Jimmy Carter proclaimed a new doctrine: “An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region,” he stated, “will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.” In the context of the Cold War, preventing the Soviets—the main outside force Carter was worried about—from gaining control over the energy-rich region had a strategic logic.
But over time, that logic shifted. In the 1980s, U.S. President Ronald Reagan expanded the doctrine to include threats to the flow of oil originating from inside the region, too. As the geopolitical context changed still further, subsequent presidents found even more ways to justify America’s growing military presence in the Middle East. What started as a policy to prevent others from establishing hegemony over the oil-rich waters of the Persian Gulf morphed into a policy of asserting American hegemony in the region in order to “save” it.
As long as U.S. allies lack the capability or competence to secure the region, the thinking went, Washington would have no choice but to shoulder this responsibility. U.S. President George W. Bush was explicit about that; without an increase in U.S. troop levels in Iraq, he claimed, there would be chaos in the region. He missed the irony, of course, that his invasion of Iraq was the single most destabilizing event in the Middle East of the past decades.
As the scholars Hal Brands, Steven Cook, and Kenneth Pollack wrote endorsing the Carter Doctrine and its continuation, “the United States established and upheld the basic rules of conduct in the region: the United States would meet efforts to interfere with the free flow of oil by force; uphold freedom of navigation; demand that regional powers give up their irredentist claims on other states or face grave consequences; and prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”
This account is accurate enough (although the last rule on the list always exempted Israel), but the story glosses over how the policy also gave cover to U.S. allies for some fairly destabilizing behaviors of their own. That’s an omission Brands makes in a Bloomberg article, too, where he points to Saudi Arabia’s slaughter of the Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi to argue that a “post-American Middle East will not be stable and peaceful. It will be even nastier and more turbulent than it is today.” And in the words of U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham in 2018, “If it weren’t for the United States, they’d be speaking Farsi in about a week in Saudi Arabia.”
All this without a nod to the fact that, if anything, the United States’ protection of the Saudi regime has enabled its promotion of terrorism and its destabilizing activities in the region, which have, in turn, prompted further Iranian response.
Assertions about the United States’ pivotal role in the Middle East, no matter how often repeated, have not been proved true. Iran, ravaged by sanctions, corruption, and economic mismanagement, is nowhere near establishing hegemony in the region. Saudi Arabia spends more than five times as much on its military than does Iran; the entire Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)—Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, and the UAE—outspends Iran by a factor of eight. Meanwhile, whereas Iran has no nuclear weapons yet undergoes more inspections than any other country, Israel has a nuclear weapons program with no international transparency whatsoever. Iran may have been adept at taking advantage of U.S. overextension and missteps in the last few decades, but establishing hegemony is a different matter altogether.
Further, the region did not fall into deeper chaos as a result of Trump’s earlier refusal to get into a shooting war with Iran after attacks by Iranian proxies against Saudi oil installations in September 2019. Critics lamented the president’s decision as an abandonment of the Carter Doctrine, calling it a disaster for the GCC and warning that it may even prompt Saudi Arabia to seek nuclear weapons.
Instead, recognizing that the U.S. military was no longer at their disposal, Saudi Arabia and the UAE began exercising the diplomatic options that had always been available to them. For its part, Saudi Arabia stepped up direct talks with Houthi rebels in Yemen as a way to ease tensions with their backer, Iran. The level of violence on both sides declined as a result, and more than 100 prisoners of war were released. In November, the United Nations’ Yemen envoy, Martin Griffiths, reported an 80 percent reduction in Saudi-led airstrikes, and there were no Yemeni deaths in the previous two weeks.
Riyadh also opted to reduce tensions with Qatar, a former ally that had become a nemesis. The Saudi government seemingly ordered its notorious Twitter army to tone down the insults against Qatar and its emir, Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, and some sporting events between the two countries resumed, according to the New York Times.
Saudi officials also claimed that they had quietly reached out to Iran via intermediaries seeking ways to ease tensions. Tehran, in turn, welcomed the prospective Saudi-Qatari thaw and, according to the New York Times, floated a peace plan based on a mutual Iranian-Saudi pledge of nonaggression.
An even stronger change of heart occurred in Abu Dhabi. In July, the UAE started withdrawing troops from Yemen. The same month, it participated in direct talks with Tehran to discuss maritime security. It even released $700 million in funds to Iran in contradiction to the Trump administration’s maximum pressure strategy.
Some of these measures may have been more tactical than strategic. Saudi Arabia may have reduced tensions with Qatar and the Houthis in order to better situate itself for a confrontation with Tehran down the road or to offset international condemnation of its killing of Khashoggi, human rights abuses at home, and brutal tactics in Yemen. The UAE, too, may have felt that a tactical reduction of tensions was warranted.
Nevertheless, as the United States appeared poised to back out of the region, its erstwhile allies’ calculations tilted toward diplomacy. The Saudis and Emiratis simply had no choice but to cease some of their recklessness because they could no longer operate under the protection of the United States. If stability in the Middle East is the United States’ main goal, Washington should have celebrated rather than bemoaned these developments.
In the wake of the U.S. assassination of Suleimani—which some former U.S. officials have called an act of war—the calculations may change once more. According to Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul-Mahdi, Suleimani was in Iraq to bring him Tehran’s response to a message from Riyadh on how to defuse regional tensions, presumably as part of the House of Saud’s renewed interest in diplomacy. The Iraqis, according to him, were mediating between the two rivals, an initiative that has now been thrown into question.
Iran may very well conclude, rightly or wrongly, that Saudi Arabia and the UAE conspired with Washington to assassinate Suleimani and as a result not only end the recent diplomacy but also target Riyadh and Abu Dhabi as part of the revenge for Suleimani’s death. This is yet one more instance, it seems, in which U.S. activities in the region have brought more turmoil than stability.
To be sure, there is no guarantee that recent diplomatic efforts would have been successful. A more responsible Riyadh might not have begotten a more responsible Tehran. But it is noteworthy that diplomacy did not even begin in earnest until Washington clearly demonstrated its unwillingness to entangle itself in a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. And by returning to the region in a show of military force, Trump may once again disincentivize the United States’ allies from taking diplomacy seriously. They may even interpret Suleimani’s killing as a license to resume their recklessness—activities like Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s purported kidnapping of the Lebanese prime minister and ordering of the dismemberment of Khashoggi; Saudi Arabia and the UAE’s imposition of a blockade on Qatar; and the two countries’ further destabilization of LibyaSyriaLebanonSudan, and Yemen.
As in the past, in other words, it seems as if the Middle East’s descent into chaos is more likely with the United States than without it.
 
Trita Parsi is the Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute and author of Losing an Enemy – Obama, Iran and the Triumph of Diplomacy.

 



Compiled by http://violetflame.biz.ly from: 
 
Archives:

 

Alternative to Google
startpage.com

Alternative to YouTube
brighteon.com

 



No religious or political creed is advocated here.

Organised religion is unnecessary to spirituality.

Excellent teachings of the masters have been contaminated by the dogmatic control of these religions.

Discernment yes; judgement does not.
If you use discernment you are free to research with an open mind. 

With discernment it is possible to reach the spirit of the letter of any writing and it is also much easier to listen to the voice of the soul that comes from the heart.
Individually you can be helped to find your Truth that is different of everyone. 


Please respect all credits.

 
Discernment is recommended.
 

All articles are of the respective authors and/or publishers responsibility. 


 

 

Like this! please bookmark. It is updated daily

 


 
 
 
Free counters!

  geoglobe1
 
 
publicado por achama às 08:42
Sexta-feira, 03 / 01 / 20

Why Israel wants Iran destroyed

By Greg Shupak.

national-justice.com.

Posted January 3, 2020 by Edward Morgan.

 
Israeli interests are served by mutual US-Iranian antagonism.  
Amir CohenReuters

 

 

Much worried commentary is being written these days about the possibility of a US-led war on Iran.
The truth, of course, is there is already a war on Iran. And it is one that very much serves Israeli interests.
The US government is prosecuting an economic war on Iran while intensifying its military posture against the country, increasing land, sea and air positions on the basis of unsubstantiated claims that Iran might someday develop nuclear weapons, is the engine of violence in the Middle East, and is likely to initiate attacks against US “interests” or those of its proxies.
Such maneuvers must be understood in the context of the ways that Iran has functioned as an obstacle to US ruling class goals in the Middle East, a view shared by the Israeli ruling class for its own interests.
US and Israeli planners despise Iran principally because it is an independent regional power. It has a strong military and a foreign policy that includes providing material support for armed Palestinian resistance to Israel and for Hizballah’s defense of Lebanon from US-Israeli aggressions, including the joint invasion in 1982 and the US-backed Israeli assault in 2006.
Iran’s support was crucial to help Hizballah resist the US-backed Israeli occupation of the country.
Though in recent years Israel has come close to attacking Iran militarily and suggested in February that the US do so, it appears that for the moment Israel would prefer that the US not bomb or invade Iran because Hizballah would be able to inflict significant damage on Israel in response.
Instead Israel is hoping that Iran will be subjected to enough socioeconomic asphyxiation that its government will be overthrown or it will be subjected to even greater outside control than it was under the nuclear deal – a deal that Iran has abided by and from which the US pulled out last year.
Iran now says that, if sanctions continue to prevent it from profiting from its natural resources, it will also withdraw from the accord.

Weakening Iran

Weakening Iran, with a view toward regime change, has long been a major Israeli preoccupation, highlighted by such Israeli policies as assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists.
Iran hasn’t been close to having a nuclear bomb for 16 years and there’s evidence to suggest it never had anything resembling one.
Israel’s attacks on Syria are partly about Iran. The Syrian government has partnered with Iran in arming Palestinians and Hizballah. The Syrian Baath Party has its own history — however uneven — of confronting Israel militarily.
Israel, of course, also remains in occupation of Syria’s Golan Heights – whatever Donald Trump might say – and Israel has deepened its colonization there while arming anti-government groups and carrying out fatal bombings of Iranian and Hizballah targets in the country.
Furthermore, the threats against Iran need to be read against the backdrop of the anti-Iran alliance being forged between the US, Israel and several of the pro-US Middle Eastern dictatorships, notably Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
As Adam Entous of The New Yorker points out, the central ambition of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has been “to diminish the Palestinian cause as a focus of world attention and to form a coalition with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to combat Iran, which had long supported Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.”
The leaders of both the UAE and Saudi Arabia have said that they regard Iran as a problem. And both the Emirates and the Saudis are “working together behind the scenes with Mossad” – Israel’s spy agency – against Iran.
Because the measures being taken against Iran are linked to the Palestinian issue, these machinations must also be seen in the context of the “Ultimate Deal,” the proposal for resolving the Palestinian question being put forth by Trump and his son-and-law and adviser Jared Kushner. This “peace package” aims to both permanently extinguish Palestinian national aspirations and neutralize Iran.

Making Palestine disappear

Reports suggest that the proposal involves the “enshrining of Israeli control of disputed territory” as well as denying Palestinian claims to sovereignty, the right of Palestinian refugees to return and offering Palestinians only non-contiguous territory.
The plan involves trying to bribe sectors of Palestinian society into accepting it with funds that the US is hoping will largely come from the US-allied governments in the region. And the UAE and Saudi Arabia, have been pressuring the Palestinian Authority into accepting the ludicrously unfair deal so that the Palestinian issue will disappear and the anti-Iran axis – bringing together the US, Israel and the Gulf states – can be fully consummated.
Another manifestation of this anti-Iran alliance is Israel’s support for the attack on Yemen by a coalition involving the US, Saudi Arabia, the UK, the UAE and Canada – a war that is ostensibly aimed at Iran’s purported Houthiallies and that has left the country suffering the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.
Israel has shared intelligence with members of the coalition. The UAE is understood to have bought military equipment from Israel. And Israeli-manufactured ordnance has been used in the attacks on Yemen.
These sales, alongside the obscene amounts transferred between the US and its Saudi and Israeli clients in weapons deals, underscore that the US-Gulf-Israeli aggression against Iran is not only about politics but also an economic system in which the ruling classes of each country enrich themselves at the expense of the Palestinians and other disenfranchised and exploited peoples.
The prospect of further lucrative ties to Israel no doubt helps explain why the undemocratic governments of the Gulf are racing to, as The Electronic Intifada’s Tamara Nassar puts it, sacrifice the Palestinians for a marriage with Israel — a ceremony at which the US is officiant.
The political and economic assault on Iran, as well as any military attack against it, should one materialize, is not only a war for Iran’s future. It is a war for the entire region.
 
Dr. Greg Shupak writes fiction and political analysis and teaches media studies and English at the University of Guelph-Humber. He is the author of The Wrong Story: Palestine, Israel, and the Media.

 



Compiled by http://violetflame.biz.ly from: 
 
Archives:

 

Alternative to Google
startpage.com

Alternative to YouTube
brighteon.com

 



No religious or political creed is advocated here.

Organised religion is unnecessary to spirituality.

Excellent teachings of the masters have been contaminated by the dogmatic control of these religions.

Discernment yes; judgement does not.
If you use discernment you are free to research with an open mind. 

With discernment it is possible to reach the spirit of the letter of any writing and it is also much easier to listen to the voice of the soul that comes from the heart.
Individually you can be helped to find your Truth that is different of everyone. 


Please respect all credits.

 
Discernment is recommended.
 

All articles are of the respective authors and/or publishers responsibility. 


 

 

Like this! please bookmark. It is updated daily

 


 
 
 
Free counters!

  geoglobe1
 
 
publicado por achama às 07:39
Segunda-feira, 24 / 06 / 19

USA (Israel) x Iran: Readiness and military effectiveness of the Persians surprises the Americans.

USA (Israel) x Iran:

Readiness and military effectiveness of the Persians surprises the Americans.

Source: https://br.sputniknews.com/.

Posted 2019/06/23 in protonmail.ch

Translated from Portuguese.
 
 
.

 

 

Analysis: Iran's military readiness and effectiveness provoke great surprise reaction to US military


The military's readiness of the Iranian military and its immediate and very effective response to the overthrow of a US drone that would have invaded Iran's airspace was a great surprise to the United States because of the speed and effectiveness of the missile attack earth-air, says Ali Reza Rezahah, an analyst in international politics. According to Ali, Iran is ready to give a strong and decisive response and the US must understand that the drone invasion of its airspace is not a joke.



Political analyst Ali Reza Rezahah, a US policy expert and political commentator and columnist at the analytical center of Iran's supreme leader KHAMENEI.IR, commented in an interview with Sputnik Persian about the incident with the North American drone knocked over the Gulf of Oman .

"The main fact in this accident was that Iran has defined a 'red line,' and that 'red line' is border breach and invasion of Iran's territory. Iran has said this many times and warned that any drone or other vehicle reconnaissance or other military aircraft invading the territory of the country would be immediately attacked by anti-aircraft defense systems, "he said.

According to Ali Reza Rezahah, Iran is ready to give a decisive response and the United States must understand that the drone invasion of its airspace is not a joke.

 
 

 
At 00:14 US drone took off from UAE in stealth mode & violated Iranian airspace. It was targeted at 04:05 at the coordinates (25°59'43"N 57°02'25"E) near Kouh-e Mobarak.

 

We've retrieved sections of the US military drone in OUR territorial waters where it was shot down.



Ver imagem no TwitterVer imagem no Twitter
 
 
For more visual detail on the path, location, and point of impact of the U.S. military drone Iran shot down on Thursday, and of the waters over which it was flying, see these maps and coordinates.

 

There can be no doubt about where the vessel was when it was brought down.



Ver imagem no TwitterVer imagem no TwitterVer imagem no TwitterVer imagem no Twitter


 
 


  • Text: For more visual details on the path, location, and point of impact of the US military drone struck by Iran on Thursday [June 20], and the waters over which it was flying, see these maps and coordinates. US troops have often "inadvertently or mistakenly" violated the border, and the Iranian military has always acted very accurately and professionally in such cases, "the analyst said.


He recalls that it is well known that Iran in foreign policy follows well-considered approaches. "The only side that carries out an aggressive and provocative policy is the US," said the expert.



What role did the North American drone have?

The incident of the overthrow of the expensive US drone shows that Iran intends to defend itself in either case.


  • "As for President Trump, in the run-up to the presidential elections, and given the past election campaign under George Bush's" shameful war "reproach in Iraq, it is unlikely that he [Donald Trump] wants to enter into a new war he will not be able to quit afterwards, "the analyst reveals.


Ali Reza Rezahah is of the view that if Donald Trump does not understand this, people of good sense in the US political elite will explain to him in detail.

"The Americans ... did not expect their drone [to cost around $ 220 million a unit] to be overturned, and so quickly. The military readiness and accuracy of the Iranian anti-aircraft defense were a big surprise to the US, "he said.


Iran's strong position in the region shows that the Persian country is capable of conducting swift, powerful and effective defensive military maneuvers, and the US knows this better than anyone else, the analyst says.

The Northrop Grumman Drone RQ-4 Global Hawk is an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) surveillance. The RQ-4 provides broad vision and systematic surveillance using high-resolution synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and long-range infrared / electro-optical / infrared (EO / IR) sensors. It can guard about 100,000 square kilometers of land per day. The Global Hawk is operated by the United States Air Force and Navy. It is used as a high altitude platform for surveillance and security. Its unit cost is US $ 222.7 MILLION. Missions for Global Hawk cover the spectrum of information gathering capacity to support forces in military operations around the world.

"As for the war with Iran, it is necessary to see how Trump can" benefit "her in the last year of her presidential term. On the eve of the US presidential election there are no rational reasons to start this war (other than Israel's interests). A war with Iran will not only be very costly, but it will also lead to catastrophic increases in oil prices, "he concluded.
 

 



Compiled by http://violetflame.biz.ly from: 
 

Archives:
  • https://rayviolet.blogspot.com/search?q=
  • http://violetflame.biz.ly/cgi-bin/blog?tags=

 


previous
 * All Posts
 
 



Please respect all credits.

 
Discernment is recommended.
 

All articles are of the respective authors and/or publishers responsibility. 
 

No religious or political belief is defended here. (Investigate yourself)
 

Individually you can be helped to find your Truth that is different of everyone. 

If you use discernment you are free to research with an open mind. 


More @ http://violetflame.biz.ly and 
https://rayviolet.blogspot.com/




 

Like this! please bookmark. It is updated daily

 


 
 
 
Free counters!

  geoglobe1
 
 
publicado por achama às 05:07
A Luz está a revelar a Verdade, e esta libertar-nos-á! -Só é real o AMOR Incondicional. -Quando o Amor superar o amor pelo poder, o mundo conhecerá a Paz; Jimi Hendrix. -Somos almas a ter uma experiência humana!

mais sobre mim

Agosto 2020

D
S
T
Q
Q
S
S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31

últ. recentes

  • Thank you Mateo, It is fixed.
  • Thank you for reposting my article. However the or...
  • "Hoje é um homem de missão cumprida, engenheirão v...
  • Bacana esse post, vou compartilhar no facebook, cr...
  • O Sathya Sai Baba ainda está entre nós e vive na Í...
  • Olá, obrigado pelo comentário.Sempre que dermos ou...
  • Sempre que dermos ouvidos à voz que vem do coração...
  • Ola Manuel, muita luz para você ,é a primeira vez ...
  • fale alguma coisa,de mim sou poliana miguel
  • Você fala com anjos ,pede um deles mandar uma mens...
  • A "vida real" é uma ilusão Toda a matéria é formad...
  • Bom dia,reparámos que o seu blog faz uso de textos...
  • O Amor é tudo o que existe e na sua mais pura exên...
  • usando uma metafora descrevendo a vida real, e nao...
  • o odio deve-se à permissao do mal andar entre nós,...
  • Obrigado pelas suas palavras. Fiquei a conhecer po...
  • Adoro este artigo. Já tinha conhecimento do assunt...

subscrever feeds

blogs SAPO


Universidade de Aveiro