Getting Serious About Syria

The bleeding orifice known as Syria has once again erupted, due to a chemical weapons attack in Douma that took a number of civilian lives, or so it seems.I say this because media has become a weapon in modern warfare, the Sunni Syrian rebels are more than capable of rigging something up and as the self inspecting Iranians would tell you about the pictures and videos they send to the IAEA as 'compliance,' such things are very easy to stage.

President Trump has promised 'a high price' for the attack, referred to Syria's dictator as 'that animal Assad,' (why slander animals?) and actually took the opportunity to cite Putin as responsible. I suppose that was just for domestic politics.

To date there was one very successful air raid on a Syrian regime airbase east of Homs which was crawling with Iranians. Putin reportedly says it was the work of the always effective Israeli air force, but my Lil' Birdies in Israel just gave a wry chuckle when I tried to confirm this. My guess is that it very well might have been, given the Iranian connection, but if it was, the IDF likely had other reasons rather than retaliating for the gas attack. One of them was probably to send a direct message to Iranian President Rouhani, who's been doing some chest pounding lately that Israel is not prepared to let them turn Syria into another Gaza or Lebanon.

Meanwhile, a second guided missile U.S. destroyer, the USS Porter has been sent to the Syrian coast to join the USS Donald Cook, a similar ship already there.

What happens next is anyone's guess.

Needless to say, the whole assortment of isolationist paleo cons, pro-Iran leftists and Israel haters in general are screaming bloody murder. They want us out of Syria yesterday. John Bolton being named National Security Advisor made them particularly insane.

But no matter matter what happened or didn't happen in Douma, pulling out of Syria would be a huge strategic error and a bad mistake. Here's why.

Syria was where ISIS got its start emerging from a group of 'moderate' Sunni rebels who were mostly al-Qaeda, its affiliates like al-Nusrah or other Islamists and salafists. Obama, along with his BFF Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey and Qatar armed, trained and financed these people, bypassing congress in the process.

As he was leaving, our now ex-president was careful to drop the mess into other hands, stating that it would take years to defeat ISIS and take back the territories they help in Syria and Iraq. President Trump said it could be done in a matter of months and did exactly that. Our allies in that effort were the Kurds. The Iraqi army that dropped their weapons and ran from ISIS before were mostly useful in mopping up afterwards.

When Obama was president, he gave the Kurds just enough ammo and supplies to barely hold their own. The Israelis, with long time close connections with the Kurds were able to supply some more. And When Donald Trump came in and put US air, naval and ground forces into the equation, the Kurdish Persh Merga played a key role in destroying ISIS on the ground and driving them out of their Iraqi and Syrian strongholds.

Their reward was to have the Shi'ite Iraqi government steal the oil rich city of Kirkuk, violating the original Iraqi federation agreement and making a Kurdish state even within the federation financially impossible. And for the Turks to attack them and seize Kurdish territory in Syria's northern border region.

Here's the present situation. The Turks have retreated after being 'urged to do so' by Iran's President Rouhani. The U.S. still has about 2,000 ground troops in Syria, mostly embedded with Kurdish forces, which also include Yazedi and Christians as well as civilians.

Aside from the certain bloodbath, if we leave we hand Iran a major victory, a land passage between their colony in Iraq and their colony in Lebanon. And we give them access to the Mediterranean. Also, we would give Iran yet another reason to consider the US an easy foe who is afraid of them.

Finally, it would mean that the Kurds, our true allies would be destroyed.

History gives us numerous examples of what happens to world powers who allow their allies to be neutralized and liquidated. Or even worse, co-opted to fighting on the other side.

Czechoslovakia in 1938 had a strong, well trained and well armed military, excellent border fortifications and protective terrain in the mountain passes and dense forests bordering Germany. They even had a major arms manufacturer in Skoda, comparable to Krup. Hitler could never have attacked the west successfully with that on his borders, because it would have meant a two front war, something he and the Germans dreaded and weren't ready for.

When Britain and France sold out the Czechs, not only did they ensure that Hitler would attack them when he was ready, but that Britain and France were so frightened of war that they would do anything to prevent it. And it also sent a message to Stalin, who had been talking earnestly to Britain and France about an alliance or mutual defense pact to keep the Germans at bay that a non-aggression pact with Hitler was a far better bet.

At the start of the Punic Wars, Carthage allowed its allies in Sicily to be destroyed simply because a war might cost two much money. Sicily's resources and manpower were denied to them, as were its ports, shipyards and its strategic position within easy sailing range of Carthage heading south and close to Rome heading Northeast. While the Carthaginians won (or tied, depending on how you see it) the first Punic War, they lost the others once Rome had a navy. Had they backed their Sicilian allies, Hannibal might have invaded from the south in easy distance to Rome instead of having to leave from Spain, travel the Alps and lose a portion of his men and war elephants in the process before he ever was able to fight in Italy.

There are numerous other examples.

But what about the Russians?

Putin's main interest in Syria is twofold. The main thing for him is the warm water ports at Tarshish and Latakia. Secondary is appeasing his Iranian allies. And when it comes to Iran, Putin's position is by necessity somewhat ambivalent. The U.S. pulling out of Syria is not really in Russia's best interest.

He understands that the Israelis will simply not allow Iran to put missile or air bases in Syria. If a hot war breaks out, Russian personnel will be caught in the middle of it, and if Russia intervenes and is involved in a proxy war on Iran's side, the U.S. will do the same with Israel, and Russia can't afford a war just now. Or really, to alienate Israel, with whom Russia still has relatively cordial relations.

As I pointed out previously, during the Obama years Russia and Israel put together an actual hotline between the Kremlin and it's equivalent in Tel Aviv. The idea was to avoid conflicts and any casualties for Russian personnel. And part of it involved Russia agreeing to turn a blind eye to Israeli attacks on Hezbollah or Iranians or weapons shipments going to these parties as long as no Russians got killed. The agreement has worked well so far. Even though Putin claims the Israelis bombed that air base and Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov called it “a very dangerous development” Putin hasn't done anything about it, nor would it serve him or Russia to do so.

Even less to Russia's liking, President Trump is not Obama and might just decide to fix America's Iran problem once and for all.

So given some access to the ports and actual negotiations with the president on settling the Syria question, Putin would likely be willing to cut a deal...given the alternatives.


As for Syria's ultimate destiny, I'm ambivalent as long as Iran is kept out of the picture, which is vital for U.S. interests. Just rebuilding its infrastructure after the war is going to take billions, which I see no reason for the American taxpayer to shell out...no nation building, please. If anything, Syria should become the new Kurdistan, at least a decent piece of it. They're owed at least that much, at least.

In First Encounter, Trump Dominated Putin As They Met For Hours

For the first time ever, President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin met face to face, and while the meeting was only supposed to last 30 minutes, they talked together for two hours and 16 minutes. And as always, this picture tells a thousand words about how Trump dominated Putin in their initial meeting. I mean, have you ever seen Putin look less than sure of himself before like this?

Even more revealing was President Trump's opening gambit...he asked president Putin, point blank if Russia had interfered in U.S. elections and continued to press him on the subject. Even bringing this up right at the beginning in his first meeting with Putin and putting him on the defensive showed that President Trump was not at all intimidated by the Russian leader. And Putin denied it, according to secretary of state Rex Tillerson, who was in the meeting with his Russian opposite number Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. According to Secretary Tillerson, election interference was at the top of the agenda..and appears to have surprised the Russians.

That said, as President Trump said afterwards,he and Putin had been 'discussing various things and I think it's going very, very well'"


Among the topics, aside from possible Russian interference in our elections, an agreement on a ceasefire in part of Syria was reached, the two agreed that the entire issue of possible Russian meddling in U.S. elections had become a 'substantial hindrance' to the U.S.-Russia relationship.'

Counter terrorism, an issue the U.S. and Russia have in common was also reportedly discussed as was Ukraine.

One other issue that was undoubtedly discussed was North Korea. The Russians and Chinese have been hedging on this one, offering to 'mediate' in exchange for President Trump removing the THAAD anti-missile systems from South Korea, something President Trump refused to do.

What's most important about this? Two things. First, that Russia's Vladimir Putin now understands that he isn't dealing with a lightweight like Barack Hussein Obama anymore, that President Trump is a completely different kind of leader. And second, that both the U.S. and Russia have apparently decided to put the past behind them and work together on issues of mutual concern.

And that's an important realization for the War on Jihad.

Trump Wins The Electoral Vote (And No, Hillary Didn't Win The Popular Vote)

 

Today, the electors of the Electoral College had their official vote, and one candidate lost electoral votes.

That would be Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, who had 4 of her electors peel off and vote for someone else. In Washington, a state Clinton won, she ended up with only eight of the state's 12 electoral votes. Colin Powell received three votes and Native American tribal leader Faith Spotted Eagle received one. Two of Donald Trump's electors, both from Texas peeled off as well,one voting for Ron Paul and another for John Kasich. That gave him a total of 306, far above the 270 he needed. One of them was Christopher Suprun, who now faces prosecution under federal Stolen Valor statutes for claiming he was a 9/11 first responder when he wasn't anywhere near New York or Washington DC on the day in question. Probably just got confused...again.

There were, of course, protesters inside and outside the state capitol buildings where the votes were cast. After going to the trouble of harassing electors for over a month withe-mails, phone calls, and even death threats, they certainly weren't going to stop now. Some of the indoor tantrums were hilarious:




The entire clip on NBC News shows the man in the glasses warning her gently, exactly that way you would speak to a child..'now please sit down, or we'll have to give you a time out.'
When she went nuts, she was removed.

There are other clips of this sort of behavior, but this should suffice.

The part that isn't hilarious at all is the blatant disrespect for our democracy and the American people who voted for Donald Trump. The psychodrama was fueled by the myth of Hillary Clinton winning the popular vote, something the media keeps rehashing, perhaps in hopes people will eventually think of it as a fact. Actually, neither candidate won the popular vote, because neither got over 50% of it.

More to the point, the majority of Americans outside of the city limits of Los Angeles and New York City elected Trump.

As of November 27, according to The New York Times, Hillary Clinton had 62,391,335 votes from all states. She had 1,969,920 votes from the five counties that make up New York City, and 1,893,770 votes from Los Angeles County, California.

Donald Trump had 61,125,956 votes from all states, including 461,174 votes from the five counties that make up New York City, and 620,285 votes from Los Angeles County.

In other words, Hillary beat Trump 3,863,690 votes to 1,081,459 votes in New York City and Los Angeles.

But Trump beat Hillary by 60,044,497 votes to 58,527,645 votes in the rest of the country outside the borders of New York City and Los Angeles. So Hillary’s margin in the popular vote rests ENTIRELY on her margin in two large cities — neither of which was contested by the Trump campaign.

Arguing that Hillary 'won' is like saying that the Cleveland Indians should have won the World Series because they got more runs than the Chicago Cubs.

But wait, it gets better.

Remember Jill Stein's Hillary Clinton backed recount attempt? Originally, it was ordered in the State of Michigan by U.S. District Judge Mark Goldsmith, an Obama appointee, even though Stein had no standing since there was no way a recount would have affected the election. She proceeded to file suit in two other states Trump won, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. And then suddenly, the whole scam ground to a halt, with Goldsmith hurriedly reversing himself and cancelling the recount.

That happened after Trump started gaining votes in all three states...and clear evidence of voter fraud was found in Wayne County affecting over 47% of the precincts in Detroit showing more votes than there were registered voters,which is why Judge Goldsmith was happy to reverse himself and let sleeping dogs lie. Similar evidence was found in Wisconsin (Dane County) and Philadelphia, but since recounts were barely started in Wisconsin or Pennsylvania, we have no clue as to how many votes Trump may have actually gotten.

Jill Stein took the $2 million she scammed off this and went home, but there's also evidence in states Hillary won that Stein never contested. There's also evidence of voter fraud in Chicago and quite a bit of evidence in Clark County (Las Vegas)Nevada, where most of the states illegal migrants live. Trump lost Nevada by only 26,434 votes, but we'll never know if he actually did. Ditto in California, with the highest population of illegal migrants in the U.S., no voter ID laws whatsoever, easily obtained matricula consular cards from the Mexican consulate as the only ID needed to get a driver's license or register a vehicle and automatic voter registration when you do.

California also rarely if ever purges its voter registration rolls. My mother, a devout Democrat got her usual absentee ballot over a year after she passed away at the house I own she lived in that's now rented out to tenants. I could very easily have used it to make her vote for Trump if I lacked a heart.

So the whole narrative that 'Hillary Clinton won the popular vote' is sheer nonsense. Fake news, if you like.

What isn't fake is what the Left has planned. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama could have helped unite the country by simply saying what they already knew...that Donald Trump had won the presidency fair and square, that the American people needed to respect the vote, and that it was time to put the campaign aside and get behind the new president. Instead, they chose to aid and abet further division and try to deligitimize the election.

Even Bill Clinton has gotten into the act. Today, as an elector for New York State, he cast his vote for Mrs. Clinton but couldn't avoid saying, "At the end we had the Russians and the FBI deal – she couldn't prevail against that."

Of course! It was the Russians who forced Hillary and her minions to violate the Federal Records Act multiple times and commit felonies. It was Putin who made her set up those illegal servers to hide her crooked deals concerning the Clinton Foundation and then delete and bleachbit 32,000 emails that were under congressional subpoena. It was Putin who made Hillary put classified material on her private server and then lie about it to congress. The Russians forced the DNC to send all those e-mails bragging about how they rigged the primaries,fed Hillary debate questions and made all those racist, misogynist and anti-semitic remarks. And it was Putin who made Hillary's chief aide Huma Abedin put emails concerning State Department business on an unprotected laptop she shared with her pervert husband and lie about it to the FBI. Now, I know Putin is a fairly strong leader but I had no idea he had such magic powers of hypnotism!

 

Vladimir Putin has modestly denied these magical powers,telling President Obama to provide proof that Russia hacked those  emails of shut up. But I'm sure we can believe Bill Clinton,who never lies, right?

Besides, the media is going with that same narrative.

We'll see what comes next.

Russia's Ambassador Assassinated In Turkey: 'Allahu Akbar!'

Russian Ambassador to Turkey Andrei Karlov was assassinated today by  Turkish special forces officer, 22-year -old Mevlut Mert Altintas. who was part of a security detail. Ambassador Karlov was delivering a speech at an art gallery in the Turkish capital of Ankara when he was shot several times in the back without warning, and then shot at least once more at close range as he lay on the floor. As he murdered the Ambassador, the assassin yelled 'Allahu Akbar' numerous times and quoted a follower of Mohammad, "We are the ones who pledged Bai'a (fealty) to Mohammed on the terms of jihad as long as we live.'' He also said in Turkish," "We die in Aleppo, you die here."

Three more people were wounded when the gunman shot into the crowd.

According to eye witnesses, the killer was captured alive by Turkish security, but it was reported afterwards by the heavily controlled Turkish press that he 'died in a shootout with the police.'

So, what's this all about?

Those keeping track on news in this part of the world may recall that Russia's relations with Turkey and its leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan have been dicey for some time. Russia took exception to Erdoğan's support of ISIS and other Syrian jihadist rebels, and relations cratered in November of 2015 after the Turkish Air Force shot down a Russian fighter jet that had briefly entered Turkish airspace en route from a bombing raid in Syria. After Russia's Putin ordered sanctions on importing Turkish goods and began threatening even harsher retaliation, Erdoğan apologized and relations have slowly improved, but only up to a point. Russia allowed the Turkish military into northern Syria, something that worked for Putin because it freed up manpower for the war in Syria's jihadis and pleased Erdoğan, who wanted to prevent the Kurds from establishing a state there.

But Erdoğan's Islamist heart still beats for the Syrian rebels, and it remains a point of contention that will likely come to a boil once Putin tells Erdoğan to take his military back over the border to Turkey.

The flash point, of course, is the northern Syrian city of Aleppo, where Islamist jihadis are being pushed out of their strongholds in the city. Any time you have this kind of urban warfare, civilians get killed. That's particularly true when jihadis are involved, since they will happily put civilians in danger by using their homes, hospitals and other civilian areas as military outposts. Jihadis will cheerfully use civilians as human shields, especially women and children, and with the aid of our corrupt media will exploit any casualties as 'bleeders,' for propaganda purposes. It's a common tactic, one we've seen used in Gaza and Lebanon among other places. It is simply how they operate.

Just an aside,remember that the majority of these jihadis are 'moderate' Syrian rebels from groups like the al-Qaeda affiliate al-Nusrah and are armed, trained and financially backed by the Obama Administration, Qatar and the Saudis.

The truth, of course is that at this point, the battle of Aleppo is almost finished and the jihadis there have one single objective...to delay things as much as possible so that the next flashpoint, the jihadi occupied city of Idleb near the Lebanese border can be fortified and reinforced.

So with this in mind, let's connect the dots.

Turkey, at this point is pretty much an Islamist dictatorship under the rule of Erdoğan and his AKP Party. He used the recent 'coup' attempt to cement his control over every aspect of Turkish society - the military, the police, the press, the government, the judiciary, you name it. Anyone remotely suspected of opposition to Erdoğan is rotting in Turkey's jails, especially if they were part of investigating or reporting on the many corruption scandals he and his family have been involved in.

Turkish public feeling has been manipulated quite thoroughly against Russia,Putin and Syrian Leader Assad over Aleppo, something that could not have happened without Erdoğan's consent.

Such things make a useful distraction for Erdoğan and his regime from other things going on in Turkey they might prefer Turks not concern themselves with just now. And in view of what Turkey's press has been serving up to them and the predominant Islamist mindset, I wouldn't be surprised if a number of Turks thought that Ambassador Karlov's murder was just what Russia had coming,particularly since Allah was invoked by the killer against the Russian infidels.

The killer himself, Mevlut Mert Altintas is a piece of the puzzle as well. He was no mere policeman,but a special forces officer, a member of Erdoğan's elite security squad. It's significant to me that several Turkish media outlets cited eye witnesses who saw him alive in police custody have all been scrubbed, and we're now being told he was killed in a shootout with police on the gallery's second floor. No witnesses except the police, of course and they're not talking. Neither is Mevlut Mert Altintas,since he's dead and can't be interrogated.

Erdoğan might well be ginning up public opinion to support him if Turkey decides to annex that juicy slice of northern Syria Putin allowed him to access with President Obama's connivance. Erdoğan is also undoubtedly aware of the Obama Administration's ongoing campaign to demonize Putin and Russia, and this could be his opening gambit to get Obama's support for Turkey if Erdoğan decides to challenge Russia.

Putin Gets Slapped Badly - By Iran!!

Russia's Vladimir Putin just suffered a major setback in the Middle East...delivered by no less than Iran's Supreme leader, the Ayatollah Khamenei.

A few days ago, there was a news story out that sent a shock through the foreign policy establishment here in the U.S. and elsewhere, that Russia would now base a squadron of its Tupolev 22M3 heavy bombers and support aircraft in Iran's Nojef airbase. This was, of course, a huge game changer and Russia's Foreign ministry proudly trumpeted the news in world media as a major sign of Russian dominance in the region.

 


Except it wasn't. The whole thing blew up in the Russian's faces, and in a particularly humiliating way.

The deal was arranged by Iran's President Rouhani, who made the mistake of forgetting his place. He summoned the national supreme military council and, without consulting with Khamenei, simply informed them of his decision to make the Nojeh air base available to the Russian air force.

Aside from being angered that Rouhani made this decision without getting an OK from him, Khamenei was reportedly upset that the Russians showed every intent of making the base their permanent turf complete with sophisticate S-300 and S-400 defense systems to protect it. The last thing Khamenei and the ayatollahs want is a base deep in Iran controlled by a foreign country.

Khamenei orchestrated major disapproval from the Majlis, Iran's version of a parliament that actually does the bidding of the Ayatollah Khamenei and his Council of Guardians. It was more than enough to kill the deal and force the Russians out bag and baggage after just three sorties into Syria.

So the Iranian defense ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi announced in a press conference August 22nd that the Russian mission is over for now, that it was always only a temporary use base on a Russian request.

And if that wasn't enough of a slap, Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan insulted the Russians openly for “showing off” over the air base in an “ungentlemanly manner” and a "betrayal of trust."

"We have not given any military base to the Russians and they are not here to stay."

But wait, there's more.

The Russians make a fair amount of badly needed cash selling weaponry to other countries,including Iran. The Ayatollah Khamenei wasn't finished with them yet. He forced President Rouhani to make amends and show who really runs Iran by forcing Rouhani to be photographed posing with an Iranian-made Bavar-373 missile defense system and to tell the press that with this new, home manufactured system, Iran won't need to purchase any more expensive Russian S-300s, "because the Bavar-373 is just as good."

The Ayatollah was not just telling the Russians that Iran wouldn't be buying any more of what they had to sell, but that Iran was going to be further hitting them in the wallet by putting out a competing, less expensive alternative to potential customers.

While I felt I understood why he was doing it, I've written before that Vladimir Putin was making a huge mistake making common cause with Iran. It's the same mistake Stalin made with Hitler,supplying him with oil and other raw materials literally until the day Hitler's armies attacked him.

What Khamenei was reminding Putin that 'You're a useful infidel at present, but you're still an infidel.'

It's as simple as that.

Breaking - US Arming Hezbollah With State-Of-The-Art Missiles

 

The U.S. delivered part of an $8.6 million military aid package to Lebanon today including laser-guided artillery shells and Hellfire air-to-surface missiles. This amounts to a doubling of military aid to Lebanon.

The story from the Obama Administration is that these munitions are to help Lebanon's military defend the country’s eastern border from what the State Department referred to as "violent extremists."

Just one thing...speaking of violent extremists, there's a peculiar thing about Lebanon's Army. Like the rest of Lebanon's military, it is now  totally integrated with Hezbollah. And it has been for years.

The armaments the Obama Administration is giving Lebanon will thus be freely available to  Hezbollah and used against Israel when the time comes.That's why the Israelis made a formal announcement  that if they were attacked from Lebanon again, unlike the last time they would consider it an attack on Israel by Lebanon, not just Hezbollah.

And it even gets worse than that.

Those extremists the Obama Administration  is blathering about?A reasonable person might think that would include Jaish al-Fatah, the Army of Conquest. These are the so-called  'moderates' funded, armed and trained by President Obama in conjunction with Turkey, Qatar and the Saudis. Jaish al-Fatah is primarily composed of 'moderates' like Ahrar ash-Sham, an officially designated terrorist group and  the al-Qaeda offshoot al-Nusrah.And they're right on Lebanon's border in Idlib province.

 

These are the same wonderful folks the Obama administration is complaining about Vladimir Putin conducting air strikes on:

“Greater than 90 percent of the strikes that we’ve seen them take to date have not been against ISIL or al Qaeda-affiliated terrorists,” said State Department spokesman John Kirby.

“They’ve been largely against opposition groups that want a better future for Syria and don’t want to see the Assad regime stay in power.
Al-Nusrah isn't affiliated with al-Qaedah? That's certainly not what they say. Read up on al-Nusrah and Ahrar ash-Sham. You'll quickly find out what kind of future these hard line Islamists want for Syria, and their differences with ISIS could basically be summed up by the phrase 'Who's going to be king of the mountain ?'

And by the way, this is exactly how ISIS was created...out of the Syrian Free Army funded, trained and armed by the Obama Administration, Turkey and Qatar.

What we have here is material aid to terrorism, something that is clearly against U.S. law except when President Obama does it. Even more, we're aiding both sides in this conflict who, whatever their differences hate us and have plenty of American blood on their hands.Our president's actions have already ensured that we lose out either way.

At least Russia's Vladimir Putin seems to know whose side he's on. And he seems to be actually taking on those 'Sunni extremists' and 'al-Qada affiliated terrorists' John Kirby was talking about.

As for me, I have to confess something. When my tax dollars are going to a government that funds groups that would happily murder me and my family let alone my friends in Israel, it is definitely food for thought.

Certainly I never want to hear this president or any of his minions talk about how they 'have Israel's back' when they're arming. training and funding genocidal terrorists.

Israel's Syria Strike Wipes Out Russian Weapons Designed To Prevent US 'No Fly' Zone

The Israeli Air Force conducted a decisive raid over the weekend on Syrian arms stocks warehoused near Damascus and at an airfield in the Dimas area, northwest of the Syrian capital and near the Lebanese border.

The arms targeted were newly-arrived Russian anti-air weaponry, radar and hardware, including advanced, Russian-made S-300 missiles.

Israel's main strategic interest was the planned delivery of these item to Hezbollah in Lebanon, but it also affected an interesting back and forth between Russia and the Obama Administration.

Israel had a tacit agreement with Russia's Vladimir Putin that he would avoid introducing this kind of weaponry into the region, and Israel would avoid strikes on Assad's forces. That fell apart just as the last one did because of the actions of the Obama Administration.


The Obama Administration has decided to establish a 'no fly' zone in Syria to aid the Islamist rebels in their war against Bashir Assad.

Contrary to what's in the linked article, the deal has already been drafted with Turkey according to my sources. The draft agreement allows American warplanes to take off from the U.S. leased Turkish airbase of Incirlik for operations against Syrian planes, assault helicopters or drones entering the no-fly zone. Formerly, only non-combat recon aircraft like unarmed drones were allowed to use Incirlik to fly over Syria. The Turks originally wanted the no-fly zone extended to Aleppo, where the Syrian Army is on the verge of defeating the rebels. Instead, the U.S. insisted on a much narrower area, between one half and three quarters of a mile.That makes little strategic sense unless the primary object is to provide a safe haven for the Islamist rebels close to the Turkish border to train,rearm and regroup.

The Russians have repeatedly told the Obama Administration that any attempt to establish a no-fly zone would be regarded as a direct intervention against their ally Assad and would lead to use of the Russian military to defend the Assad regime in response.When Putin found out about the draft agreement between Turkey and the U.S., he told Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman that all bets were off and responded immediately with a huge Russian shipment of anti-air missiles, radar systems and computer hardware.

The Israelis were left with no choice but to take them out...which also leaves Putin little choice but to bring in the Russian military directly when and if U.S. planes start intervening on behalf of Syria's Islamist rebels.

Russia reacted promptly to the Israeli raid with a formal protest to the UN demanding “that such attacks should not happen again… Moscow is deeply worried by this dangerous development, the circumstances of which demand an explanation.”

Stay tuned.

Three Funerals.. And The End of The Beginning

Today, three young Jewish boys were laid to rest.The bodies of Eyal Yifrach, 19, Gilad Shaar, 16, and Naftali Frenkel, also 16 (HY"D)were buried in Modi'in in a ceremony that was attended by thousands of Israelis in what became a day of national mourning.





The bodies of the three boys, kidnapped by Hamas operatives on June 12 were found in a shallow grave near the Arab village of Halhul, just north of Hebron. According to Israeli forensic experts, they were murdered in cold blood shortly after they were kidnapped and buried hastily as their kidnappers fled. But not too hastily. As one of my sources on the scene let me know yesterday,the killers took the time first before they shoved the corpses into the hole to mutilate the boys' bodies in classic Arab fashion.Israel's Channel Two described the condition of the bodies as 'harrowing'.

This was meant to send a message to the Israelis. So was the attack on the clearly marked ambulance carrying the murdered boys' bodies to Israel to be buried, and the widespread instances of celebration of the 'victory' by Arabs living under the Palestinian Authority. and even in Israel itself.



Nor are children left untouched by this poison.They're being indoctrinated as the next generation of murderers in the name of Allah.







The message, of course, is the same one the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians have been sending ever since Yasser Arafat invented them. To them, or at least to the majority, this is a tribal war to the knife, no holds barred and none of the niceties of civilized behavior apply. They want the Jews ethnically cleansed by whatever means necessary. There is no desire for peace or real negotiation, no farcical 'two state solution' so beloved of the West and what remains of the Israeli Left. And that message is being sent out every day by Hamas, who are at least more honest about the matter and Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah, on whose official Facebook page the image immediately above this paragraph appeared.

After these murders, the message finally may be beginning to sink in with most Israelis, especially given the response from the West. After all, the Palestinians are whom they are, and their brutality is to be expected.But the civilized nations of the West?

The Israelis can't have failed to notice that for all the pro-forma condemnations from the US, the UN and the EU, the underlying message is 'so sad your children got murdered, but you ought to be used to that by now. We're still going to continue funding the new Fatah-Hamas government because they're one big happy family now, so the important thing for Israel is to exercise is restraint. Suck it up.'

To be totally honest about the matter, it is difficult for me to express adequately the way that message makes me feel...that the American government now funds and supports a genocidal group that would celebrate my murder or the murder of my loved ones just as enthusiastically as they're celebrating the murder of those three boys. Three unarmed boys murdered in cold blood, whom Wafa, the PA owned news service referred to as 'three soldiers'. I admit that I still haven't sorted out my feelings on that one, but my thoughts are far from pleasant.

President Barack Hussein Obama, the leader of the country that is supposed to be Israel's strongest ally had nothing to say at all about the matter for three weeks, and finally released a statement pretty much along these same lines once the bodies were found, perhaps because someone in the State Department reminded him it might be a good idea to say something. In contrast, that supposed cold fish, Russia's Vladimir Putin, made several calls to Israeli PM Netanyahu and Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman over the newly installed Jerusalem-Moscow secure hotline during the crisis, and took the time and trouble after the bodies were found to compose a hand written letter to Netanyahu, asking him to express Putin's personal condolences to the boys' families.

Our State Department reacted in a particularly  Kafka-esque fashion. They went out of their way not to blame their new Hamas friends while admitting they were involved. And no, I'm not kidding in the least:

Encouraging restraint from both the Israeli government— livid over the finding of the bodies of the missing on Monday, vowing to exact justice on the perpetrators— and from the Palestinian leadership, some of whom are calling the trial an Israeli conspiracy, and all of whom are bracing for reprisal, State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf told reporters that the US is intimate with intelligence on the case, in part since one of the dead teenagers was American.

"Many indications" suggest the murders constitute a terrorist attack, Harf said. "I'm not saying they're responsible," she said. "But they were involved."

 Hamas involved, but of course, not responsible for what's not necessarily a terrorist attack. Got it ? Maybe it was a three way suicide. Who knows? And those rockets and mortar rounds being fired at Israel's civilians? Meteorites of course!

The Israelis have buried their dead. and now they must decide what to do..and they must make that decision realizing that any action they take will be criticized by the same usual suspects now weeping crocodile tears over three dead Jewish kids whose nation is the only one in the world considered 'illegitimate'. Israel, a nation labeled an 'occupier' without occupying, a country called 'apartheid' where Arabs have more legal and political rights than anywhere in the Middle East and a country to whom very different rules always apply when it comes to defending themselves.

If you need any further proof of that, just imagine the reaction from these same quarters if a team of Israelis had kidnapped and murdered a trio of Arab youths. Of course, in the unlikely event that happened, the families of the Israeli perpetrators wouldn't be talking about how proud they are of the killers. And the Israelis wouldn't be in the streets& ululating and celebrating about their 'victory' or teaching their children how heroic it was to murder Arab children. But flip the coin, and there's no problem with Arabs murdering Jews, bathetic rhetoric aside. There's no mention of 'collective punishment' when Arabs murder 3 Jews simply because they're Jews. At least not with the Obama team, the EU and the UN. And of course, the funding keeps coming regardless, no matter what.

Israel is by no means a perfect nation, but they are, for the most part a moral and a humane one.  And that fact is being cynically used by their enemies to destroy them, bit by bit. Israel cannot allow this to continue, not if they wish to survive as a free people in their own country.

If Israel allows this atrocity to go unanswered, if they allow this to be one more straw that hasn't broken the camel's back ( or it's heart) yet, they will simply invite more of the same.  Whether they want to acknowledge it or not, there is no two state solution no matter what John Kerry or the UN might imagine. As Yasser Arafat said long ago, either Israel or 'Palestine'  is going to survive. and that's why all of Israel's 'sacrifices for peace' all its 'goodwill gestures' , all its attempts to treat the Palestinians humanely and to bend to pressure to the point of almost breaking in half have come to nothing. And none of it means anything next to the Arab envy and lust for Jewish land and blood.

The Jews learned, or should have learned a long time ago that you can't co-exist with Amalek. The only possibility for peace is to destroy his ability to attack you utterly, to take away his bases and his weapons and drive him out if necessary, or at least mark out boundaries and let him know he approaches or tries to cross at his peril. True and lasting peace comes from victory.

Over thirty years ago, Israel, prodded by President Clinton did something no Arab country was willing to do for the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians. They gave them some land to rule themselves in, and later, they did the same thing in Gaza after iron clad assurances by the PA, the EU and the U.S that Gaza would never become a security problem for Israel. And Israel has been paying the price in blood ever since. It's time this horrible war of attrition ended. Long past time. That blood debt cries out for redemption, and that is the only language the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians will understand.

There's something symbolic about the place where these children were buried, Modi'in. It's the place where a farmer who acted as a local rabbi called Mattathias finally decided that enough was enough, refused to bow down to a Seleucid Greek pagan idol and started the Maccabee revolt in 165 CE in Judea.

 

Like the Israelis today, the Jews then were confronted by a powerful nation, a world power  pressuring them to do its will and succumb. They didn't and against all the odds they won their freedom. Modi'in was the place where it all began,and it would be fitting if today's funeral at Modi'in was the spark of a new beginning for Israel.

It will not be easy or painless, simply because the obvious has been delayed so long. Many of Israel's so-called 'friends' will scream bloody murder, but then they were never friends to begin with anyway. Others will understand,and they will count for much more in the end than those who give lip service to 'supporting Israel' but fund a genocidal group pledged to Israel's destruction.

If a nation means anything, it means that it protects its commerce,its borders and its citizens and makes attacks on them so painful and costly that its enemies think twice and forbear. It means there are certain things it simply does not take. It means that a nation and its citizens have the right to stand upright and stop living on their knees.Without that message, a nation means nothing.

And that's the message Israel has avoided since Oslo and must send now...clearly, forcefully and unmistakeably.

Video: When Vladimir Putin Called Sarah Palin

Jimmy Fallon's ratings on the Tonight Show haven't been all that great so far, so his booker decided to bring in a guaranteed ratings machine..Governor Sarah Palin.

Now, being in demand as she always is, the Governor obviously made in clear she wasn't interested in being interviewed, but she was willing to do this comedy skit, in exchange for a plug for her upcoming TV show, "Amazing America" , which premiered last night on the Sportsman's Channel.

The skit's merely fair - the funniest bit has a cameo by the actor playing Barack Obama - but what struck me most was the response Sarah Palin got in solid Blue New York City.

Fallon didn't tell the audience she was going to be in the skit in his intro, and the scream of delight from the audience that greeted her when she came on camera has to be heard to be believed.

Another high point at the end is when Putin says to Sarah Palin that he's thinking about invading Alaska and she tells him why that would be a really bad idea. Again, the audience response is a-m-a-z-i-n-g. And again this is in New York City.

The American spirit isn't dead yet..just starved for leadership.

The Other Foot Drops - Putin Defies Obama On Syria, Rearms Assad

 

Russia's Vladimir Putin if nothing else stands by his allies, a lesson America could profitably learn. In spite of threats from the Obama Administration, Putin is continuing to take his own sweet time to collect Assad's chemical weapons (no more than 5% have been collected thus far)and has been steadily shipping Assad arms that have enabled him to push back the insurgents in much of Syria, an effort that has been aided by the insurgent factions fighting among themselves. No one is even bothering to talk about Geneva III or IV since the Geneva II talks broke down in acrimony.

This one's going to be settled in traditional fashion, by boots on the ground.

In mid-March, Assad's forces, aided by Hezbollah seized the strategic border town of Yabroud, a huge blow to the rebels since it was a major smuggling hub and arms depot. A week after that, the Syrians recaptured Krak des Chevaliers, another rebel strong point near the Lebanese border that the rebels had held for almost two years.

Assad's forces are using longer range Russian Smerch and Uragan rockets to good effect now, as well as MiG 29 jets and Mi-24 attack helicopters, and Putin has continued to supply a steady stream of ammo, weaponry and spare parts to keep Assad's military on the move.

U.S. response to this has been along the lines of Assistant Secretary of State Anne Patterson's during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in Washington on March 26.

“The stability that Russia seeks in Syria will not be achieved by providing planes, tanks, bombs and guns for use against the Syrian people,” Patterson said.

Except, you see, Basher Assad isn't seeking stability so much as victory, which is where stability really comes from anyway. That's something State Department fixtures like Ms.Patterson don't understand.

In any event,the entire Syrian insurgent movement is so scrambled that it's difficult to tell who's who and what side they're on. From that standpoint, President Obama's decision to stay disengaged is probably a wise one now, although things might have beenmvery different if the president hadn't insisted on getting the Muslim Brotherhood so entrenched within the Syrian resistance.. As for Vladimir Putin,he obviously no longer cares what President Obama thinks, and doesn't even seem to be making a pretense of taking him seriously any more.

 

At this point,Assad has pretty much maintained control of the capitol in Damascus and its outlying areas, the Mediterranean coastal areas, most of the Lebanese frontier area, and something like 80% of Aleppo, with the rest surrounded and under siege. The Mi-24s are using 'barrel bombs', oil drums filled with explosives and shrapnel on the remaining rebel areas, The rest of Aleppo will probably fall in the spring.

Assad's next focus after finishing off Aleppo will probably be re-establishing control over the border area that adjoins Turkey, a prime rebel area. Given the headbutting and tension between Assad and Turkey's Tayyip Erdoğan (the Turks shot down a Syrian MiG just last week that they accused of violating their air space)there a distinct possibility that things could escalate further if Assad mounts an offensive in this area, but the fact that neither country can really afford a war at this time might curb any potential hostilities.

Something like 150,000 people have been killed in this 3 year civil war, and perhaps as many as 9 million displaced, a horrible statistic. But this is the Middle East, and to someone like Basher Assad and probably Vladimir Putin, that's just the cost of doing business.

It's the end result that counts.

The Ukraine Folk Dance And What It Really Means

 

The Ukraine exploded this weekend, as Vladimir Putin got backing from the Russian Duma (parliament) to send the troops into Crimea. Russian forces seized the strategic peninsula over the weekend, surrounded a few small Ukrainian military outposts and demanded the Ukrainian troops inside surrender and disarm.

Meanwhile, the Crimea now has its own, pro-Russian government and the new Ukrainian prime minister, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, mobilized the Ukrainian military and said that that Kiev would request international intervention if the Russian military didn't withdraw.

"This is actually a declaration of war to my country. We urge Putin to pull back his troops from this country and honor bilateral agreements," he said. "If he wants to be the president who started the war between two neighboring and friendly countries, he has reached his target within a few inches."

Except Ukraine will have to do without its 10 ship navy in any hostilities. Just a day after he had been appointed head of the Ukraine's navy by interim president Oleksandr Turchynov, Admiral Denis Berezovsky let it be known he was switching sides to the pro-Russian authorities.

"I swear to execute the orders of the [pro-Russia] commander-in-chief of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea," he said, speaking from the Crimean headquarters of the Russian Black Sea Fleet at the Crimean port of Sebastopol.

In any event, it's obvious that what passes for the Ukraine's army is no match for the Russians in any stand up fight if it comes to that. So Turchynov is pretty much limited to hoping for international intervention, especially since Putin is also likely to go after the Eastern Ukraine as well, which is also predominantly native Russian.

President Obama, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and the EU were apparently caught completely off guard by the events in Ukraine. Even the obvious Russian military buildup and the implications of the Russians saying openly that there was ' no basis for dialog' with the Ukraine rebels seems to have escaped them.  President Obama skipped out on a scheduled National Security meeting with his team to attend a film festival, but attempted to play catchup with a phone call  to Russian leader Vladimir Putin after the military incursion, while Secretary Kerry was reduced to threats of 'maybe throwing Russia out of the G-8'. As for the EU, Lady Ashton, its foreign policy chief commented, “This is an unwarranted escalation of tensions. I therefore call upon the Russian Federation not to dispatch such troops, but to promote its views through peaceful means.”

I swear, I could almost hear the Russians laughing at these people from here.No wonder the Kremlin spokesperson replied 'no comment at this time' to bold statements like that!

 

Oddly enough, there  was a certain former vice-presidential candidate who saw things clearly as far back as 2008:



Yes she was certainly mocked for that one,wasn't she? 'Ooh,I can see Russia from my howwwse' said SNL's Tina Fey, creating campaign fodder out of something Governor Palin never said but that was linked to her endlessly. Except the joke was on the country, because not only was Governor Palin the only person on either ticket with any executive experience, she was also the only one of the four with any experience actually negotiating anything with a foreign country. As usual, she was right about Russia as well as pretty much everything else, including President Obama and his behavior.

So where do we go from here?

Those of you whom read my earlier piece on  Russia and Ukraine will recall that there is a centuries old historical dynamic going on here, most of it bad. And the Ukrainian government is not exactly composed solely of democracy loving freedom fighters.There's a distinct fascist element among them that's a long tradition in the Ukraine, especially when it comes to Jews.  Russia's point of view is that they see themselves as protecting native Russian nationals as well as that important Black Sea naval base at Sebastopol. The Crimea, after all, is over 60% native Russian and was actually part of Russia for centuries until less than 60 years ago,when Nikita Khrushchev attached it administratively to Ukraine.

Putin's calculations here are absurdly simple. He sees the U.S. dismantling its military to historically low levels, and he knows that President Obama is weak and indecisive. He knows that the EU is not only militarily weak but dependent on Russia's gas lines during the European winter, and that the EU is also happy to launder money and do other business with the Russian elites.So he knows there's no real danger of either military intervention or real economic consequences by the West

In need of a political distraction on the home front anyway, he once again can be seen by many Russians as a leader standing up for Russia's national interests and defending the Russian people. By taking over Crimea, he salvages full control of Russia's vitally important warm water naval base at Sebastopol and essentially controls the sea traffic in the Black Sea area.And finally, he unloads a financial basket case in need of billions in aid on the EU and the U.S. and saves himself the remaining $12 billion in aid Russia had promised Ukraine...which will remain as a weak, rump nation on his borders in fear of being overrun at any time, just like Georgia.

As they say in those cute ads, it's a no-brainer.

Another advantage for Putin and Russia is one that was handed to him on a platter by President Obama. The entire relationship between Russia and our president has been one of weakness and flexibility, including the ridiculous START treaty, giving Russia access to our most secret technology and President Obama's conduct towards Poland and the Czech Republic. Our allies noticed this and as a consequence, none of them really trust the president and that especially applies to countries that were former members of the old Soviet Evil Empire. Putin ignoring the EU and the president just underlines that message, and what Putin is telling them by his actions in no uncertain terms is that the Americans are retreating, the Western Europeans never cared that much about you anyway and you had better mend fences with Russia and make a deal while you still can.

That, really is the sole national security importance of the Ukraine to America.

Of course, the Ukraine is not a country vital to our national security like Libya..it's not even Muslim, and there are few Islamists for President Obama to protect there, so using our military is pretty much a non-starter (sarcasm off). But sending a clear message to our Eastern European allies that we're abandoning them is a very huge deal.

Rather than diplomatic threats that mean nothing, a different president than the one we have might make significant progress in thwarting this by taking steps to reassure our remaining allies in Eastern Europe that we actually mean to keep the commitments we made to their freedom after the Soviet Union fell. Placing missile defense bases in some of these countries and even token boots on the ground would go a long way towards that, although none of them are likely to agree to take the risk as long as Barack Hussein Obama is president and commander-in-chief.One can hardly blame them. At any rate, unlike Ukraine, the rest of the old Soviet Empire with the exception of Belarus, Romania and Moldova are all members of NATO and could invoke that treaty if Putin decided to move further west, which I doubt.

There are also certain economic steps the president could take. The key one, since the world's banking system still flows through New York would be to ban banks doing business with Russian banks from doing business with American banks. President Bush used that quite effectively to dry up funding for al-Qaeda after 9/11, one of the few things he did that was actually effective. Taking this step would be a major hit for Russia since oil trades are still delineated in US dollars, but since President Obama lacked the stones to do this to Iran, he will almost certainly not pull the trigger on this one when it comes to Russia.

Putin will almost certainly succeed in partitioning Ukraine to his liking, and the current 'crisis' will remain as just one more example of President Obama and his team's serial ineptness when it comes to foreign policy. Oh, wait, he got bin-Laden! Yes, he sure did.

Putin Orders Military Readiness As Crimea Puts Russian Leader In Power

 

Russian leader Vladimir Putin has ordered military readiness exercises and a state of alert in the Russian strategic base of Sebastopol in the Crimea and along the Ukraine's borders:

Sergei Shoigu, the Russian defence minister, said Moscow was "carefully watching what is happening in Crimea" and that measures were being taken to ensure the security of the facilities and arsenals of its Black Sea naval fleet, which is based in the fiercely pro-Russian Crimean city of Sebastopol.

The autonomous eastern peninsula, which is home to a largely ethnic Russian population, is at the centre of tensions over the overthrow of President Viktor Yanukovych, an ally of Moscow, by pro-European protesters at the weekend.

"In accordance with an order from the president of the Russian Federation, forces of the Western Military District were put on alert at 1400 (1000 GMT) today," Interfax quoted Mr Shoigu as saying.

At the same time, Russia's foreign ministry said in a statement today that 'extremists' were "imposing their will" on Ukraine and fomenting tension and unrest.

In the Crimea itself, where the population is 60% ethnic Russian, the local assembly in the Crimean capital of Simferopol is debating holding a referendum to decide whether the Crimea will remain part of Ukraine or return to Russia, which had control of the Crimea until Nikita Khrushchev transferred it to Ukraine administratively within the old Soviet Union back in the 1960's. Numerous clashes between pro-Russian demonstrators and non-Russians, mainly Crimean Tatars who want to remain part of Ukraine are being reported.



And in Sebastopol itself, ethnic Russians have kicked out the city administrator and installed their own mayor, who promptly announced the formation of paramilitary 'self-defense' units to defend the Crimea against the "fascists" in Kiev.

Yesterday, the country's interim president, Oleksander Turchynov called the new Ukrainian parliament to discus "the question of not allowing any signs of separatism and threats to Ukraine's territorial integrity and punishing people guilty of this," according to an official statement while Russia caled on the EU's Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to condemn the rise of "nationalist and neo-fascist sentiment" in western Ukraine and 'anti-Russian' activity.
In reality of course, the Ukrainian parliament has no power to enforce anything and would probably be much better off concentrating on forming a government. Any moves to bring the ethnic Russian population to heel as part of Ukraine would provide the Russians with just the excuse they need to send the tanks in.

Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov continues to say Russia will not intervene militarily in Ukraine, but if the Crimea breaks away with Russian assistance , then he can say that technically, he kept his word. The same is true of eastern sections of the Ukraine where there are also a great many ethnic Russians whom retain their loyalty to Russia. Russia retaking the Crimea would essentially give them control of Ukraine's sea coast on the Black Sea and effective control of the country.

Stay tuned...

Russia Says 'No Basis For Dialogue' Is Now Moving Troops To The Ukraine Border

As I reported earlier, on Sunday, President Obama's NSC Susan Rice came out with some forceful language warning Russia, about sending its military into the Ukraine, saying, “That would be a grave mistake.”

Today, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev responded, both to Rice and to interim Ukrainian President Oleksandr Turchynov's statement about being ready for dialogue with Russia. And here's the full quote, a bit different from what Reuter's reported.

“Today I see no legitimate Ukrainian partners for a dialogue. If people crossing Kiev in black masks and Kalashnikov rifles are considered a government, it will be difficult for us to work with such a government." Medvedev said, as he referred to the new Ukrainian government as “the result of a mutiny.”
and a “real threat to our interests, and to our citizens’ lives and health.”

And unlike Ms. Rice, Russia is backing up its words with action on the ground.

According to my sources, there has been a substantial Russian military buildup on the Ukraine's borders. The ending of the Winter Olympics in Sochi allowed the transfer of units of the Russian forces that were guarding the games. They were flown today to Russian bases at the Ukrainian Crimean port of Sevastopol, where Russia leases a naval base. Russian Air Force transports and special forces are being consolidated at a base located at the Rostov, close to the southeastern Ukrainian town of Donetsk.

A Russian military build up was also seen near Belgorod, just a few miles from the Ukraine border and just to the north of the Ukrainian city of Kharkov. Both areas are have a majority of ethnic Russians in their population and are Russian speaking.

 

The Crimea and the strategic port of Sevastopol were part of the Russian empire from the 18th century until 1954 when Nikita Khrushchev, an ethnic Ukrainian, transferred it to Ukrainian control.
When The Soviet Empire collapsed, the Ukraine kept the Crimea. Russia now leases Sevastopol as a deep-water port for the Russian Black Sea Fleet, but ethnic Russians imported to the area originally a colonists by the Soviets now make up almost 60 per cent of the population.

Russian President Putin, as I explained before, sees this very much as a Russian security issue and definitely in Cold War terms. And his past experience with the Obama Administration's weakness and amateurish behavior has apparently assured him that he will face no real cost for using the Russian military in the Ukraine to bring it back under Russia's control.

At the very least, I expect the Russians to take back the Crimea, which would allow them both to keep their naval base and to essentially make whatever's left of the Crimea landlocked and dependent on Russia's good will.He may also use the Russian military to set up a puppet government in the eastern Ukraine under ousted Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych,(another South Ossetia situation similar to what happened in Georgia) and might even go as far as to occupy the entire Ukraine 'to restore order on Russia's borders.

Absent a serious deterrent stance by the US and the EU, there's no real reason for him not to.

Stay tuned...

The Latest On The Ukraine...

The pro-Western forces in the Ukraine are solidifying their hold on the country, at least so far.

The Ukraine's new opposition-led parliament appointed a pro-Western interim leader, Oleksandr Turchynov, the former Speaker as interim president, with the job of forming a new government to rule the country until May 25, when new elections are to be held. The new government also fired the Ukraine's Foreign Minister Leonid Kozhara, the federal police chief and prosecutor general, and they appear to be in control of most of the country 's basic services, especially in Kiev.

Deposed pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych is still raving about this as a 'coup' but his authority was dealt another blow when his own Regions Party condemned him for issuing "criminal orders" that led to the deaths of 100 protesters.

The country has also taken steps to seek the vital economic aid it needs from the EU and US and appears to be meeting with some success so far.

US Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew told a G20 meeting in Sydney, Australia that America now "stands ready to assist Ukraine as it implements reforms". At the same time EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton will fly to Kiev on Monday for a two-day visit that her office said will aim to work out "measures to stabilise the economic situation" in the Ukraine.

As far as Russia goes, Turchynov said that the country’s new leadership was ready for dialogue with Russia but relations had to be on a “new, equal and good-neighborly footing that takes into account Ukraine’s European choice.”

The US and EU also backed up the new government with some fairly blunt and surprising language.

Today on NBC’s “Meet the Press",President Obama’s National Security Adviser, Susan Rice warned Russia about sending its military into the Ukraine, saying, “That would be a grave mistake.”

“It’s not in the interests of the Ukraine or of Russia or of Europe or of the United States to see the country split. It’s in nobody’s interest to see violence return and the situation escalate.”

Asked whether Russian President Vladimir Putin might see the volatility in Ukraine in a Cold War context–in which East and West battle for influence–Ms. Rice said: “He may, but if he does, that’s a pretty dated perspective that doesn’t reflect where the people of Ukraine are coming from.

“This is not about the U.S. and Russia. This is about whether the people of Ukraine have the opportunity to fulfill their aspirations and be democratic and be part of Europe, which they choose to be.”

Sorry Ms. Rice, but that is exactly how Putin sees it.

Meanwhile British foreign Secretary William Hague was far less aggressive in his language, but at least
tried to sound bold, saying that "any external duress on Ukraine any more than we've seen in recent weeks... it really would not be in the interests of Russia to do any such thing."

Of course, when he was asked what Britain might do if Putin ordered tanks into Ukraine, he waffled and said: "We don't know, of course, what Russia's next reaction will be."

How much steel there is behind this language from America and the EU and what might have been said behind the scenes to Putin, we have no way of knowing.

The remarks Rice made about a split in the Ukraine are interesting. Apparently she and I were thinking along the same lines, with Russia putting together a breakaway zone in the Eastern Ukraine under Yanukovych the way Russia did with South Ossetia and subverting the new government from there. It's certainly a possible scenario, and there are a number of Russian backed militias like Oplot, (“Stronghold”) in places like Kharkiv and Donetsk who back Yanukovych to make it a real possibility, especially with Russian arms and assistance.

Stay tuned...

Revolution! Rebels Take Over in Ukraine

In the course of 24 hours, the Ukraine's destiny has been totally altered.

The deal between the anti-government rebels and the pro-Russian government of President Viktor Yanukovych collapsed, and matters came to a head today.

President Yanukovych has been formally impeached by the Ukraine's parliament and ousted, most of his support has either melted away or defected to the rebels and his flight was blocked when he tried to leave the country. He compared his opponents to the Nazis and accused them of mounting a coup,says he considers the current parliament illegitimate and won't respect its rulings.

"Everything that is happening today is, to a greater degree, vandalism and banditry and a coup d'etat," he said. "I will do everything to protect my country from breakup, to stop bloodshed."

Yanukovych has apparently encamped with what's left of his followers in the eastern part of the Ukraine, where a number of ethnic Russians live and he has more support.According to my sources, he said to be in Kharkhiv, close to the Russian border.

In an iconic moment, the rebels took over Yanukoych's palatial mansion an hour's drive outside Kiev:



It is, as they say, no slum. It includes a private restaurant, a golf course, a garage chock full of boats and luxury cars, and 346 acres ( 140 hectares) of park-like grounds. This in a country where the average monthly wage is around $1,000 per month. People walked through the mansion and the grounds and took shots on Yanukovych's private golf course as rebel soldiers and police collected documents, including the charred fragments of a number of papers that someone apparently tried to burn in a hurry.

The rebels freed former PM Yulia Tymoshenko (pictured above) from prison, where she had languished since in 2011. She addressed an ecstatic crowd of 50,000 in Kiev's Independence Square ( called 'the Maidan' in Ukrainian) in Kiev.

Sitting in a wheel chair because of conditions brought on by her imprisonment, she eulogized the protesters who were killed this week by government forces.

"You are heroes, you are the best thing in Ukraine!" she said of the victims. The death toll in clashes between protesters and police, including snipers who fired into the crowd and simply picked off civilians has now reached 82.

And she urged the protesters to stay in the Square and not to give up their encampment in the square.

"In no case do you have the right to leave the Maidan until you have concluded everything that you planned to do," she said.

She also remarked that she was sure now that the Ukraine would join the EU.

New elections were originally set for May 25, but the rebels want them held earlier, as they no doubt will be in they're held at all.

The key to that is Russia and Vladimir Putin.

As I mentioned before, Putin sees this as a Russian security issue, and the history between Russia and the Ukraine makes it even less certain how he'll react.

Since he has a puppet president on hand in Yanukovych and the 'coup' meme has already been launched, I would not be at all surprised if Putin sent in Russian forces 'to restore order'. He might even have the Ukrainian/Russian population in the Eastern Ukraine declare their independence, ally with Russia and then pick a fight with Western Ukraine,after which the Russians would come in. Remember South Ossetia and Georgia?

According to an official Russian Foreign Ministry statement Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has already been talking to US Secretary of State John Kerry, saying that the peace deal signed yesterday had been violated and "sharply degraded by opposition forces'.

"Illegal extremist groups are refusing to disarm and in fact are taking Kiev under their control with the connivance of opposition leaders," Lavrov said according to the statement.

Putin may very well feel that using the Russian military to recreate his client state in the Ukraine is a pretty risk free endeavor.He almost certainly considers President Obama and Secretary Kerry foreign policy amateurs and weaklings unlikely to do more than issue a nuanced statement or two, and the EU lacks the military capability to stop him even if they possessed the spine or the political will. And if retaking the Ukraine gets a little bloody, that's more to the good from Putin's point of view, because it would be an object lesson to others.

Another factor, of course, is the economic one. Even if Putin holds off on sending the tanks in, He will do his best to co-opt any new government. Because the Ukraine is essentially broke.

Putin had bribed Yanukovych and the Old Guard with a $15 billion bailout last December in exchange for not joining the EU, but the Russians doled it out by the month to maximize their leverage, basically giving Yanukovych just enough cash to pay his security forces and keep the regime going. That bail out is history now.

The Russians will undoubtedly make things as tough for a new democratic Ukraine as possible and attempt to starve them into submission. A new EU-oriented Ukraine is going to pay a lot more for gas, which will be regularly cut off from time to time for whatever reason. Russia will also likely embargo the Ukraine's agricultural products, and Ukrainian nationals working in Russia whose jobs aren't essential will be booted out and sent home. Meanwhile Putin will try to sabotage the country's political process and get a pro-Russian government installed again by means fair or foul.

At this point, the Ukraine has less than $18 billion left in hard currency reserves, and immediate debt repayments coming up of something like $10 billion.

So if the West is serious about an independent, EU-oriented Ukraine (assuming Russia doesn't invade), they're going to need debt forgiveness and restructuring along with a hefty aid package, although this time at least corruption will probably not be the problem it used to be. But any way you slice it, if a new democratic Ukraine survives, they are in for a few tough years.

Stay tuned...

What 's Really Going On In The Ukraine

 

The Ukraine is in the news as violent protests shake the country.What's going on, and why is it important? Here's what you really need to know, as opposed to a lot of what you may be hearing.

Russia and the Ukraine have a history that goes back centuries, and it's pretty much all bad. Like Poland and the Baltic countries, the Ukraine marks the borderline between the Russian culture and western European culture, and to an extent the borderline between Catholicism and Othrodox Christianity, although the Ukraine is mixed in this regard.



Poland, the Ukraine and Lithuania in the Baltic Sea area were all once world powers, and a Polish/Lithuanian alliance actually invaded and took over Russia in the early 17th century. The Russians never forgot it.

The three countries made several attempts over the years to unite as one kingdom, which would have substantially changed the history of Europe and guaranteed their independence, but the underlying suspicions between the three, language and cultural differences and the inherent difficulties in how Poland's Sejm (a gathering of powerful nobles that was one of the first parliaments in Europe) was set up to make real consensus difficult all contributed to the failure of those attempts, and gradually all of these countries wound up under Russia's thumb.

After a brief period of independence after the Russian Revolution, the Ukraine again became part of the Russian Empire in 1919, this time a Soviet one.

The Soviets treated the Ukraine as a colony and essentially plundered it. They severely repressed the Ukraine's language, religion and culture and instituted forced collective farming, and when the Ukrainians were rebellious and continued to resist, Stalin literally seized every bit of food inside the Ukraine including the livestock and seed grain, removed it, sealed the borders and left the population to starve. Anywhere from three to seven million people were starved to death in an atrocity known as the Holodomor.

When the Nazis invaded, for the most part the Ukrainians were avid collaborators, partly because they understandably hated the Russians and saw Hitler's troops as liberators and partly because many Ukrainians shared their ideas about Jews. For all the Ukrainian rhetoric through the years about freedom and human dignity, historically some of the worst and most brutal pogroms against Jews were in the Ukraine. Hetman Bohdan Khmelnytsky, who is still a national hero in the Ukraine destroyed over 300 Jewish communities in the country. And in the early 20th century, vicious pogroms in the Ukraine and elsewhere in Russia were an impetus both for Jewish emigration to America and to Palestine.There are indications even today that not much has changed when it comes to Jews for a number of Ukrainians.

Many Ukrainians fought for Hitler in his SS against the Russians, and they were among the perpetrators of something that occurred at a place in the Ukraine called Babi Yar, a ravine outside Kiev where literally thousands of Jewish men, women and children were machine gunned to death, with the assistance and cooperation of the Ukrainians who participated in the carnage while people from the surrounding area watched, brought picnic lunches and applauded.

Needless to say, when the Red Army retook the area, the Ukrainians were not exactly very high in their esteem, and Soviet policy towards the Ukraine again returned to treating it as a colony and as a vital border area that needed to be held to prevent Russia from being invaded by outside forces again.The Ukrainian SSR was also turned into a major Soviet military outpost and arms manufacturing center in the cold war, and was home to a number of important and strategic military bases. packed with the best weapons systems the Soviets could make.

When the Soviet Empire crashed and burned, the Ukraine went their own way and declared their independence in 1991,but the country still maintained close ties to Russia and remained under Russian influence out of economic necessity.

The first real move towards independence from Russia occurred in 1994, when a rigged election and the subsequent outrage and unrest led to Victor Yushchenko becoming president,who favored closer ties to Europe and EU membership. This strained relations with the Russians (who actually tried to poison Yushchenko to stop him), and led to Russia attempting to blackmail the Ukraine by shutting off natural gas supplies to both the Ukraine and the EU, a must for heating due to the climate.

That ended up finally being settled more or less amicably, but due to political infighting a pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych was elected in 2010, allegedly with covert Russian assistance. Yanukovych turned the Ukraine's focus back towards Russia, arresting politicians who favored closer alliance with the west and in November of 2013, refusing to sign the Ukraine–European Union Association Agreement.

I recount this brief history in order to give you a bit of necessary background so that you understand the dynamics of what's happening now.

Yanukovych's failure to bring the Ukraine into the EU sparked massive protests, which have come to a head now. The majority of the Ukrainian people do not want to be a client state of Russia, and want EU membership.

The Russians, on the other hand, see a Europeanized Ukraine as a threat to their security, which is why Russian leader Vladimir Putin is so exercised about it. His carrot-and-stick performance includes the offer of a badly needed $15 billion aid package if the Ukraine stays out of the EU, and the threat of once again shutting off the gas in the middle of the European winter if the Ukrainians toss out Yanukovych and join the EU.

Yanukovych made a major error with a particularly brutal response to the protests, which involved a number of deaths and included snipers picking off people in the crowds. Many of Yanukovych's police refused to be a part of this and actually joined the protesters, or at least turned over their arms and equipment.

Yanukovych was forced to make a deal with the leaders of the opposition today, which commits him to early elections and reduces his presidential authority, along with granting amnesty to all protesters and firing the minister of the interior, who ordered the brutal response to the protesters and was a major security tool of Yanukovych.

Significantly, it also mandated the release of opposition politician and former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, who has been imprisoned for more than two years, and could very well be the next Ukrainian leader.



Simply put, those are the issues.

The Russians understandably want the Ukraine as a secure border area and checkpoint. While the Russians participated in today's negotiations along with EU diplomats that were designed to calm things down and forestall more bloodshed, the Russians are not endorsing the deal and Putin is almost certainly willing to go to some lengths to retain the Ukraine in Russia's sphere of influence. That might include 'influencing' the next elections,or literally just about anything.

The Ukrainian opposition understandably want to join the EU and obtain a divorce from Russia, and while they were apparently willing to fight for the privilege, it remains an open question of how far the EU is willing to go to support them.

President Obama has essentially been AWOL on the issue.

And that's where things stand. While I agree with erring on the side of freedom, it's vitally important not to get taken in by rhetoric and look at the whole picture when figuring out how to proceed, where our best interests lie and what to do about it.

This, after all, is essentially an ethnic conflict that has been going on for centuries.

Putin Vs. Obama - A Head To Head Comparison

Enough said....

(h/t, Bookworm Room)

Blaming Putin For Being Putin Is Unjustified

Vladimir Putin has been coming in for a great deal of criticism lately from Americans, especially in light of his op-ed in the New York Times.

The op-ed was obviously hand crafted to present Russia and Putin's case in the best light, but isn't that what op-eds are supposed to do?

Here are the main point Putin makes here. Let's look at them one by one:

• A strike on Syria poses a huge risk to escalate the conflict in the Middle East and could destabilize the region.

Absolutely true. Aside from any hostilities between Iran, Hezbollah and Israel (I think the odds are perhaps at least 50-50 here). There's also the risk of establishing another Hamasistan on Israel's borders armed with Assad's weaponry, a very likely scenario given whom the insurgents actually are. And there's also a major risk of destabilizing U.S. client state Jordan,where the Muslim Brotherhood is extremely powerful. King Abdullah has obviously considered this, since he's adamant that no attacks on Assad be launched from Jordan's soil.

• The fight in Syria is not between a democratic opposition and a dictator but a sectarian civil war, with the opposition dominated by Islamist jihadis domestic and foreign with allegiances to al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

He's right again on that one, as I reported here. And just as in Libya, where President Obama's clueless intervention on behalf of the Islamists put weaponry and armaments in the hands of jihadis who then went on to attack neighboring countries, an intervention in Syria risks a similar outcome.

When Putin told British PM David Cameron that the jihadis that beheaded a British soldier in broad daylight in London were no different than the majority of the Syrian insurgents, he was simply stating a fact. Bad as Assad is, these people are infinitely worse.

• From the outset, Russia has attempted to work with President Obama and the UN on a diplomatic solution to the war in Syria. Putin writes "We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not."

From his perspective, Putin is again correct. He's consistent touted a diplomatic solution, but simply refused to sign off on an attack on an ally and client in order to put the Islamists in power.

• Poison gas was definitely used in Syria, but it could just as easily been used by the opposition forces to provoke intervention as by the Syrian Army.

He's right again, as far as I'm concerned. As I reported here, there's no conclusive evidence who used the poison gas first, and in reality, the insurgents were in a position to benefit much more than the Assad regime from a gas attack.

• America has used what Putin terms 'brute force' intervening in a number of countries since 9/11. He cites Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, none of which could be called successes in any sense of the word. Moreover, these sort of interventions send a message to some of the world's bad actors that actually promotes the proliferation of WMDS. As Putin outs it, "The world reacts by asking: if you cannot count on international law, then you must find other ways to ensure your security. Thus a growing number of countries seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. This is logical: if you have the bomb, no one will touch you. We are left with talk of the need to strengthen nonproliferation, when in reality this is being eroded."

Putin's has a point here. While not all U.S. interventions have been so poorly thought out or strategically bungled, lately our record has been pretty poor. Putin undoubtedly also has Kosovo on his mind, where we violated international law to bomb our historic ally Serbia's military installations and civilians to intervene in a sectarian civil war during the Clinton years. Then there was Libya's Khaddaffi, who voluntarily gave up his own WMD arsenal and then was attacked by the West and ended up as an extrajudicial execution victim whose corpse was sodomized. This was a major wake up call to a lot of countries, especially in the Middle East. Certainly the Iranians see it that way.

Putin finishes up by throwing President Obama a bone, saying their working relation is improving, but then comments on President Obama's throw away line on on American exceptionalism, where he stated that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.”

Obviously, President Obama tossed that out as a feel good tidbit, because based on almost every action he's taken since he took office President Obama obviously doesn't believe it himself. Putin finishes by saying: "It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal."

Fine, the line on G-d is a bit stilted coming from a former KGB leader. But while America is exceptional, what President Putin is reminding Americans here is that other countries feel the same way about themselves. It's called nationalism. We've simply gotten a little unused to thinking that way, because it's been a long time since America had a president who considers America's interests first...the way Putin does Russia's.

That's why he's so popular with the majority of Russians.

Is this the start of a new Cold War? Hardly. Vladimir Putin is not our enemy per se. He's merely seeking to derive maximum advantage for Russia. And if we elect a clueless, narcissistic amateur as our commander-in-chief, can we really blame Putin for using that to his country's advantage?

It's like judo, where you manipulate an opponent's strength against him. Putin's good at judo. Barack Obama never even played the game.