Here we go. Bombs Away.

No, the US doesn’t deserve the blame Maduro (and Chavez before him) heals on it. Well, maybe we deserve blame for ex president Carter saying an early Chavez election was on the up and up.

The biggest problem with Venezuela’s economy is their refusal to pay their debt, even when restructuring was offered. That meant that future costs of borrowing would sky rocket, and dooming their currency.

The second biggest problem is that they nationalized foreign-owned businesses. That meant that foreign investment would dry up.

The third biggest problem is that the socialist model has replaced markets with central planning, a formula for retarded growth for, well... ever.

The fourth biggest problem is that the government refuses any aid that is not funneled through the government.

US sanctions on Venezuelan officials laundering money are far, far down the list.

 

I won’t argue as to the percentage of Venezuelan collapse caused by government structure vs US pressure. That’s debatable. But the perception is what matters, and the perception is that the US is the enemy whereas Russia, China, and Iran have offered assistance to fill the void. And for the US to get involved down there should the region blow up, will result in a quagmire.

 

Well, Russia, China and Iran are doing a ****** job of assisting them.

 

All 11 Russian battleships supposed to have left Tartus

Hezbollah also supposed to have retreated from their positions

 

The markets see this as positive. I’m not so sure. To me it seems like confirmation that the Russians have concluded Trump will strike so they are simply removing the most vulnerable assets from the theatre. This may in fact in no way restrict their ability to strike back.

 

Now it’s being reported the ships are conducting a drill. No, they are not leaving.

 

Hypothetical scenario and question.
US launches a strike.
Donald Cook is sunk in retaliation.
Russia does not indicate an intention to strike the US mainland. There is no threat to US shores.

Appropriate response?
A. Send in more ships and escalate.
B. Strike Russia proper.
C. Begin a nuclear war.
D. Leave Syria and launch an attack on Iran
E. Pull back and get out of the Middle East.

If there are other options to this scenario, feel free to chime in. Otherwise what would the best action be and why?

 

The US Navy is creating a strike group with hundreds of Tomahawk cruise missiles for a possible attack on Syria.

The USS Donald Cook has already drawn attention to its actions in the eastern Mediterranean where it has reportedly been “harassed” by Russian warplanes.

The USS Carney is also deployed somewhere in Mediterranean, while the USS Porteris somewhere en route to or has already entered it. Another guided-missile destroyer, the USS Laboon is also somewhere near the Mediterranean. These four guided-missile destroyers together can carry up to 240 Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Considering that the USS Georgia and USS John Warner nuclear submarines are also deployed in the region, the US Navy could have about 406 Tomahawks to use for its attack on the Assad government.

On April 11, the USS Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group is set to depart Naval Station Norfolk for deployment in the Middle East and Europe. The strike group includes the guided-missile cruiser USS Normandy and the guided-missile destroyers USS Arleigh Burke, USS Bulkeley, USS Forrest Sherman and USS Farragut. The destroyers USS Jason Dunham and USS The Sullivans will join the strike group later.
If the attack on Syria does not take place in the coming days, the USS Harry S. Truman will further strengthen the US offensive capabilities for a possible large-scale invasion against the Assad government and thus Russian and Iranian forces deployed in Syria.

SF recalls that on April 10, US President Donald Trump canceled his trip to South America. According to White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, he “will remain in the United States to oversee the American response to Syria and to monitor developments around the world.”

It looks like Russia is not happy to see such developments. On April 10, a Russian Su-34 fighter jet armed with what looks like Kh-35 cruise anti-ship missiles was photographed over the Syrian city of Tartus, where the Russian naval facility is located. According to local sources, this was not the only Russian jet armed with Kh-35 cruise missiles flying in the area.

Russia’s envoy to the European Union told Euronews on the same day that “Russia has warned U.S. representatives, publicly as well as through proper channels, over the grave consequences that could arise if these strikes happen and whether deliberately or otherwise Russian citizens are hurt.”

Meanwhile, the UN Security Council failed to approve three draft resolutions on chemical weapons attacks. Russia vetoed a US text, while two Russian-drafted resolutions did not get nine votes to pass.

Russia’s Permanent Representative to the UN Vasily Nebenzya also revealed that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons will send two expert teams to Syria later this week to investigate the April 7 Douma incident, which the US-led bloc seeks to use as a pretext for a military action against Syria.

However, the chances of a military escalation still remain high.
http://thesaker.is/syrian-war-repor...rs-subs-with-hundreds-of-missiles-near-syria/

 

Putin in 2020?

 

I suspect we'll alert Russia prior to the attack so they can take appropriate action to protect their assets. We did that in our first salvo of 58 missiles on that Syrian airbase.

 

Believe me, I'm not a supporter of taking military action in Venezuela, and I'm not a big fan of sanctions imposed just because we don't like the ideology of the regime.

 

They aren't there to assist them.

 

Their interest is oil, just as ours, but we chose the heavy handed approach of sanctions whereas they are taking the long-term strategy of offering credit, trading for wheat and weapons, and bipassing the US dollar as an exchange currency.

 

Uh huh

 

Report from the tweets of Elijah Magnier as of 5 hours ago.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/984140788719325184.html

In few moments will share some information about the forthcoming war in #Syria.
1+/ The US/EU war on Syria is expected in the next 10 hours according to sources in #Syria close to decision makers.

All Syrian troops were ordered to empty their barracks and keep 5% presence only.

2+/ #USA and #EU may target - as expected - the Syrian Air Force (many dislocated and other spread but not flying), the central for command and control, all radars and known anti-air missiles, Ministry of Defence, Presidential Palace and other sensitive Syrian bases.

3+/ The #USA/#EU are drawing the attention t the gathering of forces in the Mediterranean. But information to the #Syrian command confirm gathering of forces and preparation for the strike are expected coming from al-Tanf, al-Hasaka, #Jordan, #Turkey and from the sea.

4+/ #Russia is hassling foreign war ships coming closer opposite the #Syrian coast to inform all these that this is a Russian operational area. However this Russian show of force doesn't change much because missiles can be launched from afar.

5+/ #Russia will deal with fired cruise missiles but not expected to bring down a large number, impossible for any superpower no matter how many anti-air missiles are deployed over a large territory like #Syria and coming from intensive fire power (#USA and #EU).

6+/ #Iran informed #Russia that any #israeli intervention means an #Iranian direct involvement in this war under the agreement of defence w/ #Syria. #Putin informed Netanyahu of the Iranian intension.

S.A. Khaminei met with the leadership of #IRGC and missile force units leaders

7+/ It is clear that #USA and #EU are not waiting for the @UN decision or approval. In #Syria, leadership believes the UN meeting served for stacking forces to gather their units and prepare their bank of objectives.

8+/ #USA and #SaudiArabia are very hurt of what happen in #Ghouta: nothing to do with "fake chemical attack" but due to the end of 20-30,000 jihadists shipped to the north of #Syria. These were the hope of US and Saudi to keep the menace on Damascus: #Russia destroyed this hope.

9+/ If this forthcoming battle on #Syria lasts only one night/day with hundreds of missiles, then it is ok.

But if it lasts more than 2 days, then the situation may go towards a wider unexpected confrontation.

The answer will be in #Daraa #Quneitra where it hurts the most.

10+/
I believe #Russia can't stand alone against this coalition because it is not looking for a wider war (WWIII) and the attack is not on #Russiaterritory.

However, #USA/#EU may attack tonight or tomorrow night. Attacking forces will try to destroy the Syrian Army. However...

11+/
However, in 2013, the #Syria Army was about to be defeated. In 2015, the Syrian Army was cornered in main cities and retrieved from most rural areas.

Those who rebuild the Syrian Army and injected 12,000-20,000 men expressed their readiness to inject 120K men if necessary.

12/12
The more @realDonaldTrump is willing to destroy #Iran's ally, the more influence #Tehran will enjoy in replacing the vacuum needed in #Syriaso a secular non-jihadists government can prevail in the Levant and Takferee and their sponsors are defeated.

Forgive me for the length of my tweets.

I hope the Russian-American continuous contact reaches a compromise and stops the possibility of war on #Syria.

 

Mus,

This apocalyptic talk of nuclear war, etc. is grossly overblown. I also read this article that you posted in the other thread (My 4-year old was on the toilet and wanted me to sit in the bathroom with him, so I was a little bored.), and it's downright crazy. What Trump is most likely to do is fire some cruise missiles and perhaps launch some airstrikes at Syrian military targets. Nobody's going to attack Russian forces (unless they inject themselves into the operation). Nobody's going to strike the Russian mainland. Nobody's going to launch nuclear weapons at anybody or seriously consider doing so.

The attempt to spin this into a Cuban Missile Crisis moment (or in the case of the nut who wrote the article, an Operation Barbarossa moment) is silly talk. And I don't think Putin is dumb enough to treat it as such, and if he does, he'll go down as the most foolish major leader in world history - much dumber than Hitler's biggest blunders of WWII. Martinovich is basically calling for an embargo on the United States and to launch proxy wars against it. Do you seriously think that would end well for Russia? It would probably destroy the regime. Your hero would end up dead or in exile in Iran.

 

While I agree the most likely short term scenario, probably 80% or higher, is what you described, the article referenced is relevant for multiple reasons.

The first reason the article is important is it states the views of Russia’s most influential television personality. It recommends Russia take more aggressive steps against the West. The population is in agreement with this approach and thus more pressure is exerted on Putin to follow through.

Secondly, the article concludes that the West is not capable of compromise and will continue to increase pressure - military, financially, and otherwise - until forcefully confronted. He’s basically telling the audience that war is inevitable and Putin is only doing more damage by appeasing the enemy. He sees the US as a bully that must be confronted.

Here’s is a contrasting read by a Russian analyst. He agrees with the conclusion above that the ultimate conflict between the US and Russia is all but inevitable, however advocates restraint in Syria and counter on another venue where Russia has the advantage.
https://russia-insider.com/en/russia-must-absorb-us-strikes-serve-its-payback-cold/ri23083

 

I believe this is the only functioning Russian carrier. The Admiral Kuznetsov is an aging bathtub held together by scrap. It gets towed home about as often as it sails under its own power. Russia's ability to project its military might anywhere is overrated.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/russian-aircraft-carrier-towed-home-after-break-down/

 

Nigel's take

 

Here is a good article from FP magazine on what they see as the political, military, and scientific apparatus responsible for Syria’s chemical weapons

Caveat -- I think they were also on board with Iraq's chem weapons

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/04/07/syrias-chemical-weapons-kill-chain-assad-sarin/

 

One thing that Trump has been able to do in this theatre already is to eliminate ISIS without regime change in Syria. This is contrary to what we were told by many, starting with Obama, who said that the two were synonymous. Below are some of the examples. They were all wrong. It is probably worth noting that most of these same people were wrong about Iraq as well. Yet none of them are ever called to account for their wrongness.

John McCain and Lindsey Graham wrote in the WSJ that "defeating Islamic State also requires defeating Bashar Assad." Strangely enough, neither has admitted he was wrong. https://www.wsj.com/articles/john-m...-defeat-islamic-state-remove-assad-1412636762

The Brookings Institute (via Kenneth Pollack) argued for "building a new Syrian opposition army capable of defeating both President Bashar al-Assad and the more militant Islamists." https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/2014-08-18/army-defeat-assad

Max Boot claimed any attempt to defeat ISIS was futile unless we first deposed the "Alawite regime in Damascus." Like many at the time, he said we had to have a a no-fly zone across the country to facilitate airstrikes against the Assad government, while boosting aid to the so-called moderate rebels. https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/cleaning-up-obama-syria-mess/

CNN's "expert" Michael Weiss told us Assad supported ISIS with the Syria/Russian air forces effectively acting as ISIS' air force. https://www.thedailybeast.com/russias-giving-isis-an-air-force

Likewise, the NYT claimed "Assad's forces" were "aiding" the Islamic State by "not only avoiding" the group "but actively seeking to bolster their position. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/03/world/middleeast/new-battles-aleppo-syria-insurgents-isis.html

Here, Time explains to us why "Bashar Assad won't fight" the Islamic State. The reality was that, once the flow of arms was dialed back, Assad's forces did focus on removing ISIS (with Russian aid). http://time.com/3719129/assad-isis-asset/

 

How Russia views the Neocons (and a small minority of Americans including myself). Very sobering. Don’t read if you have difficulty sleeping.
http://thesaker.is/what-price-will-mankind-have-to-pay-for-the-collapse-of-the-empire/

 

And here’s are glimpses of what a US “victory” in Syria would look like.

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/ww3/

 

Be careful, President Trump. Link.

 

I'm not sure which rebel factories produced the Sarin gas, but it is good to learn that rebels are now engaged in such industrial undertakings.

 

Has MSM labeled the Washington Times as Putin propaganda spreading fake news yet?

 

Printing something favorable about Putin doesn't make a publication propaganda.

 

On the positive side, Fox has allowed Tucker Carlson to interview multiple voices that oppose US intervention and escalation. Even Sarah Palin has spoken out. In other venues, Pat Buchanan has warned of dangers.

 

The false template everyone accepts is:
A. Assad accused of chemical attacks.
B. Plan attack because of A.

In actuality, this is the template.
A. Plan attack.
B. Accuse Assad of chemical attack to justify A (to public).

Russia has warned the false flag was being planned over a month ago.
Meetings and discussion between France, US, and Saudi Arabia were intense for several months.
Both France and the US have been establishing bases in Syria (totally illegal action) well before the alleged chemical attack.
Human rights atrocities in Yemen are ongoing. Rather than retaliating the Saudis, the US continues to assist them in their bombing and blockade.

 

Boris will love this one --

"Is Russia bluffing with a weak hand in Syria?"

" ..... Russia is, in reality, a weak state and has absolutely no leverage over even its putative allies, much less its adversaries. Therefore, the primary thrust of its Syria campaign has been a media circus designed to create the impression of Great Power manoeuvres.

In both the diplomatic and military sphere, Russia has contrived a number of stand-alone performances, most recently its campaign against and declaration of victory over Daesh in the ERV. From the “Syrian People’s Congress” farce in Sochi to the concert in the Palmyra amphitheatre after a short-lived and dubious victory, headlines around the world seem to agree that Russia is calling the shots in Syria and therefore Moscow has to be dealt with in order to get anything done in the Levant.

Nothing could be further from the truth...."​

https://www.trtworld.com/opinion/is-russia-bluffing-with-a-weak-hand-in-syria--16409