If the beginning of 2017 was a time of great hope after the historic defeat of Hillary Clinton, then the last months of the year turned out to be grim, almost threatening. Swamp easily, quickly and completely swallowed Trump, the Anglo-Zionist empire does not just retreat after a humiliating defeat in Syria, but the neocons produce endless threats against the entire planet.
The US administration presented the National Security Strategy, which clearly demonstrated that the empire is in a state of "total paranoia." Maybe not everything is as bad as if Hillary had been elected, but badly enough to ask about the inevitability of a big war in the new year.
Neocons, judging by their statements, hold on sight the following countries:
1. Afghanistan (massive military buildup promised).
2. Syria (threats of attack by the US - Israel - Saudi Arabia, there are attacks on the forces of Iran and Hezbollah in the SAR).
3. Russia (the probability of disconnection from the SWIFT system and the expropriation of Russian assets in the United States, attacks on Russian forces in the SAR).
4. Iran (withdrawal from a nuclear deal, attacks on Iranian forces in the SAR).
5. Donbass (support for full-scale attacks ukronatsistov on New Russia).
6. North Korea (direct and open military aggression, air and sea blockade).
7. Venezuela (military intervention "in defense of democracy, human rights, freedom and civilization").
Actually, there are more target countries, but these are the main candidates for American aggression.
Take Syria, for example. All decision makers in the United States are fully aware of the following facts:
1.IG / an-Nusra (banned in the Russian Federation. - S.D.), etc. are their creatures, and they did everything to save these terrorists.
2. The joint efforts of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah IG / "en-Nusra", etc., were defeated, despite the Anglo-Zionist support.
3. Anglo-Zionist troops are in Syria completely illegal.
However, none of this prevents us from asserting that it is the United States, not Russia, who defeated IG / "al-Nusra", etc. The entire planet knows perfectly well what really happened in Syria, but Uncle Sam issues a decree that black - it is white, the water is dry, and the truth is a lie. But the most amazing thing is that they know that everyone knows this, and they don’t care. Why? Yes, because they deeply believe in four fundamental things:
1. We can buy anyone.
2. Who we can not buy, we will intimidate.
3. Whom we can not intimidate, we will kill.
4. Nothing will happen to us; we live in complete impunity - no matter what happens.
In the American national security establishment, the type of personality burdened with knowledge once completely disappeared. Now another type has completely disappeared - a person with honor / courage / honesty. An example is Tillerson.
It is impossible to prove that Tillerson is an idiot. He argued many times that he was smart and quite talented. Still, he is the doormat of Nicky Haley. She is a real imbecile! However, Tillerson does not even have the primordia of honor / courage / honesty to demand the immediate dismissal of this finished imbecile or, if this does not happen, to leave and really slam the door. But no, he sits and takes humiliation for humiliation. Oh yes, he will retire soon! But when it comes, its value will be zero.
The same with the US military. None of the officers found the honor / courage / honesty to quit in protest at the fact that the US is deep in bed with those who are responsible, at least according to the official conspiracy theory for what happened on September 11. No, the US special operations forces are working day after day with Al Qaeda (banned in the Russian Federation - S. D.) and similar groups. And none of these "patriots" gained the honor / courage / honesty to speak publicly on this topic.
Bearing imbeciles give orders, and deprived cowards mindlessly execute them. Such is the system with which we are dealing. Trump would tweet: "This is not good."
Returning to the seven countries listed above, I will explain how the neocons look at them (see table). A couple of explanations.
Afghanistan: the least controversial. There will be an increase in the number of American troops, the result - a greater number of corpses. It will not lead to anything good, will cost a lot of money, but nobody cares.
Syria: very tempting, but there are great risks that the US Armed Forces will face the forces of Iran and Hezbollah, who have been dreaming of this day for decades and are using the capture or destruction of the American military for political purposes. To be honest, engaging the Iranians or Hezbollah is a scary prospect. Ask the Israelites.
Russia is an option for 1: there are rumors that the United States may disconnect Russia from SWIFT or steal (it is politely called “freeze”) Russian assets and money in the United States. Russians make threatening statements, but very vague. This suggests that Russia may not have a good response. Of course, Putin is a master of strategies, and the guys around him are very smart. Perhaps they have some tricks up their sleeve that I might not know about. But I have a strong suspicion that, unlike me, the US intelligence community is probably well aware of what this may be. I am not an economist, so I regard the risks in this column as “unknown”.
Russia is a variant of 2: the reaction of Russia to the destruction of Turkey by Su-24 in 2015 could well form a belief among American politicians and military leaders that they can do the same and get away with it. Truth be told, they may be right. But they can also be wrong. Now Russia has deployed intimidating air defense systems in Syria that pose a serious threat to American forces. Moreover, if the Russian plane is under fire, and the Russians respond by launching ground-to-air missiles, what will the United States do? Hit the C-400 battery? In aerial collision, the United States will also be in a difficult situation. The F-22 is an excellent aircraft for air superiority. But he has a huge drawback - he was created to defeat the enemy from long positions, firing first before finding him (I mention only F-22, because this is the only American aircraft that can challenge the Su-30CM / Su-35). But if the rules of participation in the conflict state that before firing a Russian plane, the F-22 must issue a clear warning, or if the collision occurs at medium or short distances, the F-22 becomes very vulnerable, especially against Su-30CM / Su-35 . Another big weakness of the F-22 is that, unlike the Su-30CM / Su-35, it does not have a real EW kit (the INEWS system does not count). Neocons are unlikely to be particularly impressed by the risks that Russian forces in Syria represent, and most likely they will want to click the Russians on the nose, thinking that they will swallow. American warlords on earth may have a different opinion, but this does not matter. In this box, I mark risk as “medium”, even if it could potentially lead to a catastrophic thermonuclear war — because I don’t think that the neocons believe that the Russians will escalate (in the end who will go to unleash World War III because it is true ?!). Just think about it: if you were the commander of the Russian grouping in Syria, what would you do if the USA shot down one of your planes (remember that you are a responsible and smart commander, and not a flag-waving maniac)?
In any case, the full-scale demonization of Russia will not stop, so that relations between the two countries will only worsen.
Iran: Trump announced that he wants to withdraw from the nuclear agreement. The technical and legal impossibility of this is not an argument. The United States has long ceased to pretend that they are respecting any right, including international. And since Trump for Israel is Shabbat-goy *, I think it can be assumed that this will happen.
Donbass: Do ukronatsista attack? So they have been attacking for months! They not only did not stop the shelling of Donbass, but also adopted (pseudo) frog jumping strategy, which consisted of locating the armed forces in the neutral zone, seizing defenseless settlements and proclaiming a major victory over Russia. They also retooled, reorganized and regrouped. As a result, ukronatsistov advantage over Novorossia at least 3: 1. But we will look at it through the eyes of the neocons.
The way I see it, in all three cases, the Anglo-Zionists prevail, although option number 2 is the worst, and number 3 is the best. In truth, the neocons do little to lose as a result of the ukronacist attack on Novorossia. You can not say about the Ukrainian people, of course. Let's hope that the ukronatsisty will take up the clarification of the relationship between themselves and that their previous humiliating defeat will keep them from wanting to repeat it. But the attack on the Donbass is very likely.
DPRK: this is a big unknown. It is known about some opponents that they, if necessary, fight to the last person (Iranians, Russians, Hezbollah). But authoritarian regimes have a rather low tensile strength - unless, of course, they manage to convince their own people that they are fighting not for a specific political regime, but for their country. I think no one knows for sure what North Korea will do if it is attacked. But I do not see signs that would suggest that the North Koreans will not resist. One intelligence officer in the region recently wrote to me: “The empty threats to the Trump administration are pitiful. If it was a movie, it would be funny (although, while in *******, I don't want to laugh). It is sad that the central character fits the North Korean propaganda in the best way possible - in every detail even physically it corresponds to their caricature of the evil imperialist arch-capitalist Yankee businessman. It’s like that Hitler was resurrected and began to openly threaten States with destruction (having the opportunity). ”
If this specialist is right, and I have no reason not to believe him, it is reasonable to assume that the possible dislike of the people of North Korea for their ruling elites is much less than their hatred for the United States.
But what my source wrote about the war on the Korean Peninsula.
“Japan will be the main target for several reasons. The main thing is that there are a lot of American bases there, and they will be used to transport additional US troops for combat operations. Another reason is that in North Korea (and in South too) they strongly hate Japan. Even if the war is limited to the peninsula (which will not happen), the global economy will be hit hard, because a huge flow of goods passes through South Korea. To the west of Seoul is “Inchon” - the largest airport in the region, and Busan is among the five busiest ports in the world, surpassing the Japanese. All goods sent from China to the States go through the Sea of Japan. In the event of war, they will have to be redirected. All components for electronic devices prior to their assembly in China are actually manufactured in South Korea. This will become a problem. I have always been surprised at how contemptuous they refer to the “artillery of the Second World War” (which is in service with the DPRK. - SD). These guns killed more people than any other systems. As if there is any difference which system will kill you. ”
If you attack a small and defenseless country, you, in general, can ignore the mistakes. But when you are dealing with a country like the DPRK, neither a reasonable politician nor the commander has the right to take a risk and miscalculate. But delusional imbeciles giving orders, and dishonest cowards, who execute these orders, will they show caution when faced with such a threat ?! Honestly, I do not think. Remember the "easy walk to Iraq"? This term, created by one of my teachers, Kenneth Adelman **, is an amazing illustration of the neocon mindset: pure ideology and cautious remarks. We all know what this “easy walk” cost for Iraqi and American people: significantly more than a million dead (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-deaths-survey/iraq-conflict-has- .. .) for the first and much more than five trillion dollars (http://thesaker.is/the-costs-of-war/) - for the second. Wow, "easy walk" ... The truth is that at the moment no one knows what the outcome of the American attack on North Korea will be.
Venezuela: no matter how hated the American elites are, this country is not an easy target. Excellent target for subversion, but not suitable for invasion. Violence inside Venezuela directly corresponds to American interests, but direct military intervention is most likely not. My contacts tell me that the Venezuelan armed forces are vicious and vicious (and rather corrupt), but these same people argue that the popular will to resist “these Yankees” is so strong that any military intervention will immediately launch a terrible guerrilla war (not to mention consequences for the rest of Latin America). The truth is that the United States may have the strength and resources for military intervention in Venezuela, but they have better options.
To summarize The odds are high that in 2018, the United States:
will escalate the war to Afghanistan;
give up the nuclear agreement with Iran;
support ukronatsistov in their attack on New Russia.
It is very likely that the United States:
shot down a Russian plane in the sky over Syria.
It is unlikely that the United States:
I can not estimate the probability that the United States:
disconnect Russia from SWIFT or freeze Russian assets;
will attack the DPRK.
All my education has always been based on an important central assumption — the adversary is rational. This was basically true during the Cold War. Today I am inclined to believe that psychologists may be better suited by military analysts to predict the actions of the rulers of the Anglo-Zionist empire. Moreover, история teaches that the combination of delusional imbeciles and dishonest cowards is exactly what usually destroys empires. We have clearly seen a good example of this in the collapse of the Soviet empire.
Since Trump was a fiasco, I personally gave up the hope of ever seeing an American president able to make a positive contribution for the good of the people of the United States or the rest of the planet. This burden is now clearly on the shoulders of Russia and China: they must do everything possible to prevent the United States from unleashing even more catastrophic and deeply immoral wars. This is a very difficult task, and to be honest, I'm not sure that they can do it. I hope. This is the best I can say.