You have this convenient tendency to place everyone you disagree with in the same tent. Some Ukrainian nationalists wanted to wipe the world of anyone who didn't look and sound like them, others just wanted to have a nation of their own, like, you know, pretty much everyone else. If you want to add up the totals killed from internal Soviet conflicts, I'm sure the numbers will be far more damning to Russia than anyone else. And if someone wants to use "Heil" and they actually have a legitimate context for it that isn't Nazi, they should be free to yell it as much as they want, just like Buddhists can print Swastikas on animal cookies.
Military Events in Syria and Iraq Thread #4
- Thread starter Yazata
- Start date
- Status
You have this convenient tendency to place everyone you disagree with in the same tent. Some Ukrainian nationalists wanted to wipe the world of anyone who didn't look and sound like them, others just wanted to have a nation of their own, like, you know, pretty much everyone else. If you want to add up the totals killed from internal Soviet conflicts, I'm sure the numbers will be far more damning to Russia than anyone else. And if someone wants to use "Heil" and they actually have a legitimate context for it that isn't Nazi, they should be free to yell it as much as they want, just like Buddhists can print Swastikas on animal cookies.
you see thats the difference between you and i. You stagger around like a drunk raving about things your ignorant about. i actually have some passing familiarity with eastern european history. I'm polish and i dont necessarily have with ukrainians wanting poles and russians out of ukraine mainly because im aware they ruled it for like 700 years and treated the ukrainians very poorly.
seig heil was uniquely nazi
slava ukraine was not unique to the UPA. you can lie all you want but people will catch you on it.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
Sorry, I do not put them all together, I classify a particular organization. One which has murdered civilian Poles living in Polish villages, simply because they were Poles, all of them, women, children, simply because they were fascists and this was what their ideology told them.
Hardly. The Soviet terror regime was, without caring about nationalities, directed against all people living under their power. So, simply by numbers, Russians will dominate the list of the victims and will have in comparison small numbers among the perpetrators of the crimes. I repeat, the leadership of the Bolshevik Party was predominantly non-Russian, and it was their enemy, the White Movement which was predominantly Russian. The guy who initiated the mass repressions against some nations - Chechens, Crimean Tatars, and Ingushetians - was a Georgian, Stalin. The Georgians as a nation have, then, participated in genocide against Abkhazians and Osetins after the end of Soviet Union.
The Russians as a nation have no genocidal ambitions at all. They admire heroic enemies - and, after the victory, integrate them into their own forces, similar to what the British have done with the Gurkhas. This is the mentality which is necessary for creating empires. Read Tolstoi - Hadshi Murad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadji_Murat_(novel).
Actually, the "Heil" is discredited in Germany, anyone who uses it qualifies himself as a Nazi. And the use of "Slava Ukraine" is the same. You know, during the Maidan, the Bandera fascist gangs, if they saw someone suspected to be pro-Russian, they "greeted" him "Slava Ukraine", and if they did not answer following the Bandera fascist version "Heroyam Slava", they were beating them. This was so common that the pro-Russians invented distortions of the answer, "Kheroyam Sala", the first word being a variant of an invective and the second one wishing them bacon instead of glory (bacon is the archetypal food loved by Ukrainians). So, I simply know what this greeting actually means in Ukraine, how it is actually used.
What I mentioned as not uniquely Nazi was "Heil". "The oral greeting "Heil" became popular in the pan-German movement around 1900" (Source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute quoting Mommsen.) So, a complete analogon with this:
""Glory to Ukraine" first appeared as a motto during the Ukrainian War of Independence, with the second part of greeting being commonly by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glory_to_Ukraine
Both used a greeting already popular in their local nationalist environment, and both invented a particular variant of it as the specific greeting of their organization. As explained above, it is the UPA-specific variant which is the relevant one in Ukraine today: If you don't answer "Slava Ukraine" with the specific UPA part "Heroyam Slava" you risk being beaten by fascist gangs.
Nice try in your attempts to whitewash the Bandera fascists from what they are proud of.
Necessary.
So you never had any realistic fear of a US dominated world - wrong mentality. I agree. That makes sense.
The odd thing is that you apparently have no fear of the consequences of the US (or Russia) having installed a fascist government. The visible explanation for that is your inability to recognize such a government - you can't fear what you don't suspect exists, what you can't see coming.
And that is how you come to omit the oil and gas issues in evaluating the Syrian mess. The corporate capitalist conjoinment with the military power of the State that characterizes fascism plays little role in your evaluation of Syrian events.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
The other ongoing fight during the last weeks was the attempt of the Syrian army to clear the quite big IS pockets in the Syrian desert.
Initially, the Syrian army has cared only about the control of the few streets through the desert. The part of the desert without important streets was left to Daesh control. This allowed Daesh to survive there and from time to time to attack the Syrian forces. (The question how they can survive in the desert is an interesting one, many suspect that the US base in Al Tanf plays a big role there.) Now the Syrian army is cleaning the desert itself. Two maps about what has been reached during the last weeks:
The left one is about the part in the South, East of Suweida, but quite close to what is shown on the map of #760. The right part is East of this, West of the Euphrates, in the South, is the border to Iraq. The points marked there are quite small places, a few houses wit some well or so.
Initially, the Syrian army has cared only about the control of the few streets through the desert. The part of the desert without important streets was left to Daesh control. This allowed Daesh to survive there and from time to time to attack the Syrian forces. (The question how they can survive in the desert is an interesting one, many suspect that the US base in Al Tanf plays a big role there.) Now the Syrian army is cleaning the desert itself. Two maps about what has been reached during the last weeks:
The left one is about the part in the South, East of Suweida, but quite close to what is shown on the map of #760. The right part is East of this, West of the Euphrates, in the South, is the border to Iraq. The points marked there are quite small places, a few houses wit some well or so.
??????????????? The US mentality (as known before 1990) is compatible with ruling a big empire too. They have no genocidal mentality. They have been able not to genocide the Germans and Japanese but made them, instead, their allies. It was only the recent failure to behave differently, and to make, as a consequence, the Russians their enemies - without any necessity.
You seem not to get the point of the distinction between nationalism and internationalism. A world empire requires a corresponding compatible ideology. Fascism has, as the key element, the focus on the superiority of some particular nation/ethnos/race, with others as enemies. So they are unable to control empires in the long run. And, correspondingly, we see that Trump does not care about the things important for the empire - he cares about what counts for the US as a state.
Who cares about your speculations? Feel free to present some evidence for what you think is missed here. Content, please.
no they poles living in ukrainian villages please for the love of god learn some fucking history. it was an attempt to reverse the polonization of western ukraine that started in the Galicia–Volhynia wars and kept going right up until the end of the delugue
bullfuckingshit. One of the big reason for stalin for the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact was to get revenge on poland for its victory in the 1920's polish russian wars in which stalins cock up was directly responsible for helping poland winning. he wanted to exterminate the poles and their nation. or just look at the russifaction after the partitions of poland.
the bandera are not fascist. fascist doesn't mean people who schmelzer doesn't like. it has a specific meaning learn it. slava ukraine and seig heil are not the same. the call and response of seig heil was unique to the nazis the call and responses involved with slava ukraine was started before and continued after the UPA
and again since you cant wrap your head around this. nationalism and fascism are not the samething. all fascist are nationalists but not all nationalist are fascists.
Now you are claiming that Russia has been made an enemy of the US only recently?
So?
1980, not 1990, if you are fixing a date for a change in US "mentality".
He does not care about what counts for the US as a State. He has no such ideological principles.
That will not save the US, any more than his not caring about empire will protect you.
Fascists as a rule cannot well govern their own nations either. Fascists do not make the trains run on time. That does not save anyone from the consequences of fascist domination.
The threat is from the harm they do, not the competence of their governance.
You think that distinction matters to Trump? Trump has no such ideological principles. And he has armies, as well as investments, all over the planet.
Including some with Syrian relevance.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
The ISIS pocket in Suweida shown in the left picture above has now split into two parts along a road:
And there are already the first peace negotiations in the Northern not-yet-pocket.
And there are already the first peace negotiations in the Northern not-yet-pocket.
After the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the end of communism, the US was considered an enemy neither by the Russian government nor by Russian people. And in the official rhetorics from US side there also everything fine.
So.
Change of mentality is a long process.
I feel more comfortable in a world where the US does not have an empire but is only an economically strong nation-state with no ambitions to rule the whole world.
If the trains in many fascist states come late, these are local problems of these states. Why should I care about this? The local people will care. As long as the harm they do is local, it is not problematic. If they appear locally successful, and become heroes of other nations, this would be more problematic.
First, what matters is not if it matters for Trump. Then, for Trump it matters. MAGA is nationalist, not internationalist.
That is no excuse for getting fooled by incoming fascist agitprop.
And then shit happened.
You picked the wrong year, thereby misleading the reader - and I think yourself - about the nature of Reagan's administration.
You will be living in a local State. No one is a citizen of the average world.
MAGA is an empty noise - no more meaning than beating on a lard can with a stick. MAGA does not matter for Trump.
It is certainly not nationalist, or internationalist. Trump, like any Republican, will sell his country to the nearest Russian oligarch or Chinese banker for market access or financing - even the mere promise of market access or financing. How do we know? He just did.
So that's what Syria is about, on that side - oil and gas.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
It was not aimed to be an excuse for something which is anyway only your fantasy. It was an explanation what I think, given in the (quite naive, I know) hope that your guesses about what I think may become a little bit more close to reality.
Indeed. Then really shit happened. Instead of the promised and expected improvement, the living conditions for most Russians became much worse, it was easy to see that the former elite (ok, their sons, the rulers of the Komsomol) grabbed everything in cooperation with the Americans, and even this elite understood that they count nothing and had to submit to US orders. The US deep state fought that now they anyway rule the world so that they have no longer to care a lot about what one has to care about to reach it, and one can simply take the profits from ruling the world, essentially throwing away what has made them strong.
Reagan was yet fighting the Soviet empire, and he has not made big errors in his relations with his allies. I would say even Bush Sen. has not made horrible errors, either in relation to the former allies or to the new allies in Russia. The horrible errors started with Clinton. (Ok, this may be too much projection of my own thinking - it was, last but not least, Clinton time when I became anti-American. I'm ready to concede that some key points had their origin already in Reagan/Bush Sen. time.)
Yes. But I have a choice. At least for those who can offer some not that big investment (thanks, bitcoin) quite a lot of countries are open to your choice. And, as an immigrant, one is not interested in many things which may be important to locals. Would an immigrant care about voting rights at all? Or any rights of political participation? So, fascism vs. democracy is nothing an immigrant cares. He cares a lot about personal freedoms, in particular about those aspects important for himself. If you are, say, gay, you will care about some very specific laws forbidding particular forms of sexual behavior much more than about democracy.
Possible. But as far as I can see up to now, all that he is doing makes some sense in the light of MAGA. Ok, this very much depends on interpretation. The main problem is how to interpret all that provokes an economic war. In an ideal world, economic war is clearly harmful to all participants, so starting it would be stupid. But we live in a very special world, one where the petrodollar predictably will collapse and where this will predictably cause a serious economic crisis. In such a world damaging international trade means one is damaging what will be crushed anyway in that predictable crisis, a sort of peaking a bubble.
This was the point of Putin's reaction to the Western sanctions - to use it as a justification for counter-sanctions in the agrarian sector, which protected the underdeveloped Russian agrarian sector and forced it to develop. In the ideal world of Ricardo's theorem, clearly harmful, but in the actual world useful to prevent Russia from food problems if in some future everything goes wrong with world trade (either because of a global crisis or an extension of sanction war).
If Trump is, additionally, also corrupt is another question, irrelevant to me. Simply because every politician, simply for being a politician, is suspect of doing such things. Without a doubt, Trump is even more suspect of corruption than the average politician, but this is not what I would care about. The point why it makes not much sense to care about this is that it does not really matter. Personally, Trump is rich enough. Usually, that means you have to pay a lot to buy him. Then, what matters is what is important for the deep state faction behind him. This faction would not care about illegal or so, but it would care if its interest would be damaged. So, expect a lot of corruption which harms the globalist faction, but less what harms the nationalist faction.
The thing that is the next important thing beyond personal honesty (which is problematic for all politicians, until one has evidence that somebody is not corrupt) are the interests of the faction behind. This is already some group, it is not that easy to buy it. The IMHO reasonable guess about this faction is that it is mainly nationalist. At least all what he has done up to now is fine for the nationalist faction, but horrible for the globalist one. (One can disagree about what it gives for the Zionist faction.)
And Trump is part of that, the consequence and continuation of such behavior. You missed that because you missed the roots in domestic US politics (the racial stuff, centrally).
Except for his screwing up the fight with the Soviet Empire, by pushing - ready? - Rightwing corporate authoritarian militaristic atavism rooted in ethnic identity,
which caused (as you note) a great deal of misery and led to the current state of affairs.
Except for his damaging of the governments and economies of Central and South American countries, and Mexico, and the Philippines, and so forth, that could have been strong allies.
Except for his manipulations and betrayals in the Middle East, that also destroyed possibilities of alliance with sound and strong governments.
That stuff you call "deep state"? It was Reagan's legacy, the consequences - both celebrated and concealed - of his administration's policies and actions. It was shallow State bad stuff, in the service of depraved and corrupt people, and consequent degradation and corruption of everyone and everything involved. The former Soviets took a big hit - the US took a smaller one, but big enough.
You see the misery in the Soviet aftermath, you don't see the cause, because you can't see fascism.
And so the fact that it makes no sense, except as part of his taking power by deceiving his political base, tells you what MAGA is - a con man's pitch, not a governing ideology.
That's lucky for you. You better hope it stays irrelevant. Where do you plan to live? Trump has global interests, as do many Republicans quite willing to suck up to him, and quite an effective military under his command (if he can keep it).
The Republican Party, including Trump, is not "also" or "additionally", corrupt. They are only corrupt. Corruption is all they do, and corrupt is all they are. That's what fascism is - organized criminal capitalism writ large as a political agenda and gaining administrative control over the military and police, the victory of corruption over government. They are busting out the country - the US - and they have an army with which to turn their attentions elsewhere.
They don't govern, they don't have ideologies or ideas about how the US as a nation should be governed, they have no interest in governing in the future. But they do have a strong, effective, mobile military and police, and a lot of money, and great ambition.
If you think anyone backing Trump - other than deceived voters and cowed politicians - has any serious interest in the US as a nation, is "nationalist" in any way, you're completely lost. You've swallowed the entire Republican propaganda schtick, soup to nuts.
There isn't any "nationalist faction" among the rich and powerful corporate authoritarian capitalists in the US. They are all globalists, one way or another.
And they have interests in the Middle East, regarding which Syria matters to them. Oil and gas you have omitted all along, also whack American religious concerns play in - American Protestant religion has a role in Syria, although oil and gas remains the primary omission so far.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
Despite talks about some local ceasefires or so (quite possible that at the same time, simply in other places, they happen - the situation may be different from village to village) the Syrian army has taken some villages in Lajat, the Northern part of Suweida (inside the almost but not yet pocket):
There are different interest groups in the US elites, some more interested in the US itself doing well, others don't care but care more about world power. This leads to different strategies. It is reasonable that both are in conflict now, and what Trump does is, even if not really in the interest of America, clearly damaging the other, globalist side. This is simply the fact on the ground. Trump has already damaged a lot. A globalist president would need certainly more than 4 years to undo that part of the damage which can be undone. As I have said, trade wars are usually bad, but if anyway a big end-of-petrodollar crisis is in preparation this may be a sort of poking a babble which will burst anyway.
The cause what the weakness of the Soviet site, because of the economic failure of their socialism.
There is nothing about deception if a nationalist movement uses something like "make our nation great again". This is simple what makes a movement nationalistic a preference for such dreams. Instead, for example, "make the people free again".
You think your "you are stupid" is an argument, you err.
There are different interest groups in the US elites, some more interested in the US itself doing well, others don't care but care more about world power. This leads to different strategies. It is reasonable that both are in conflict now, and what Trump does is, even if not really in the interest of America, clearly damaging the other, globalist side. This is simply the fact on the ground. Trump has already damaged a lot. A globalist president would need certainly more than 4 years to undo that part of the damage which can be undone. As I have said, trade wars are usually bad, but if anyway a big end-of-petrodollar crisis is in preparation this may be a sort of poking a babble which will burst anyway.
And Trump became president without any support of some deep state faction. lol.
And the bad behavior of the US, as you pointed out earlier - the "globalists", also known as the "Reaganites".
Not a nationalist movement, of course not. But we were talking about a Republican campaign, Trump's.
When deceiving people into thinking of him as a nationalist, a patriot, somebody who had America First as an ideological standard or guiding principle, he found MAGA useful. Still does. For one thing, in the American context it folds right in to the fascist need for an atavistic ethnic myth (an organizational principle that requires no delivery on promises, and imposes no restrictions on self-dealing and personal aggrandizement). The ethnicity involved is the "white race" as created or generated by slaveholders and slavery between 1800 and about 1850, and that's what the "A - for America" stands for.
You're leaving out the entire Republican Party's fascist "elite" domination - they don't care about "world power" or the US itself doing well, either one. And whatever works as propaganda cover while busting the place out is their strategy.
I think the reason you see this stuff - which is right out in the open, even the key Russian involvement was right there - as some kind of hidden "deep state" behavior, is that you don't know anything about US politics. Whatever is mysterious to you - and you can't name or describe any of Trump's major support, or even recognize its influence - must look to you like it's hidden or deep, shadow or background influences, the kind of thing you are familiar with from Eastern Europe and the Soviets and the like.
You keep putting that in quotes, as if those were my words.
Of course it wasn't an argument. It was an observation - maybe useful as one premise of an argument, in another context. You are lost, in American politics - almost incapable of formulating true statements about anything. And the reason for that is visible in your posting - you are getting your entire frame and analytical approach from the familiar US wingnut media feeds, and they are in the business of deception and confusion.
But even with all of that, you should be able to see the influence of oil and gas on US and Russian involvement in Syria. That's in your neighborhood.
Last edited:
Where's the pro-US bias, Schmelzer? You mean like people who believe people like you should never, ever be allowed to set foot in Alaska for any price, because you already deprive other people of their own territories and have more than enough to visit as is?
What I see here is that Russia and Assad are responsible for 90% of the civilian deaths in ASSAD'S OWN COUNTRY, yet somehow him and Putin are supposed to be seen as protectors of the populace, and the war and destruction is instead blamed on spooky invisible Zionists financing the same terrorists who've spent the last 100 years trying to wipe the Jews out. We've got you constantly ranting about it, we also have a KKK retard with a brain injury who likes to pop in with mindless little bleeps now and then to remind us how stupid he is, and he's always complaining about it, and others occasionally chime in with the same bullshit. I only see a few pro-US posters here and none of them unconditionally like everything the US does. You clearly don't understand what bias is, maybe try traveling outside the USSR for once in your life.
What I see here is that Russia and Assad are responsible for 90% of the civilian deaths in ASSAD'S OWN COUNTRY, yet somehow him and Putin are supposed to be seen as protectors of the populace, and the war and destruction is instead blamed on spooky invisible Zionists financing the same terrorists who've spent the last 100 years trying to wipe the Jews out. We've got you constantly ranting about it, we also have a KKK retard with a brain injury who likes to pop in with mindless little bleeps now and then to remind us how stupid he is, and he's always complaining about it, and others occasionally chime in with the same bullshit. I only see a few pro-US posters here and none of them unconditionally like everything the US does. You clearly don't understand what bias is, maybe try traveling outside the USSR for once in your life.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
There is fighting for the small town Jadal (shown in the map of #760 as a target of airstrikes). It seems it was taken by the Syrian army, but there are claims that in a counterattack taken back. If true, this would be a quite typical behavior during attacks, seen that many times, some small forces attack, try to take it, but if attacked after a short time, so that they were not yet ready to prepare defenses, they immediately retreat, so that such a claim is quite plausible. But the latest news is that Jaddal is under SAA control now. At another place, Hawsh Hammad, there have been advances too. So, the actual map seems to look like this:
Once up to now there has been no confirmation about the cut, I would think there was no cut, thus, they have yet a thin connection with the South.
There is information about fighting in Buser al Harir, the most serious target in this North-Eastern part, it is on the map of #755.
Then, somewhere in this region an FSA group controlling some 11 or so villages, with some 900-1000 fighters, which appeared to be in a local fight with Al Qaida, has simply switched sides, and will now continue to fight Al Qaida on the Syrian side. I have seen a list of names of the villages but not identified them on the map.
Another interesting point in the political arena. Before the start of the operation in Daraa, there have been some quite heavy claims by the US telling Assad not to attack, else there would be some heavy reaction. The argument was quite stupid, namely, it was that Assad should not break the reconciliation agreement. But the agreement was limited from the start for half a year, which was already over. So Assad ignored this and started the attack. So, people were waiting for the promised US reaction. Today there was two news: Russia officially started to participate in the operation on the South, so that today Russian airforce was visible there and participated in the attacks. And there was some claim by the US to their friends on the ground that they should not wait for some direct military support by the US.
CptBork shows much more fantasy in his personal attacks. They are stupid, but at least not as boring.
Once up to now there has been no confirmation about the cut, I would think there was no cut, thus, they have yet a thin connection with the South.
There is information about fighting in Buser al Harir, the most serious target in this North-Eastern part, it is on the map of #755.
Then, somewhere in this region an FSA group controlling some 11 or so villages, with some 900-1000 fighters, which appeared to be in a local fight with Al Qaida, has simply switched sides, and will now continue to fight Al Qaida on the Syrian side. I have seen a list of names of the villages but not identified them on the map.
Another interesting point in the political arena. Before the start of the operation in Daraa, there have been some quite heavy claims by the US telling Assad not to attack, else there would be some heavy reaction. The argument was quite stupid, namely, it was that Assad should not break the reconciliation agreement. But the agreement was limited from the start for half a year, which was already over. So Assad ignored this and started the attack. So, people were waiting for the promised US reaction. Today there was two news: Russia officially started to participate in the operation on the South, so that today Russian airforce was visible there and participated in the attacks. And there was some claim by the US to their friends on the ground that they should not wait for some direct military support by the US.
I do not try to understand all the subtleties of US politics. There may be quite big disagreements about inner policies which are not interesting for me at all. There clearly are other lines of division - the thesis that there is a conflict between British vs. Zionist influence is quite popular.
Complete nonsense. The dictatorship of the Party, namely of the Politbureau, was a quite open one, there have been no other independent power centers. There was the usual fight for power, and a lot of it is always behind the scenes, everywhere. But it was a fight for the power inside the openly known most powerful structure, the communist party. In the US, the power fight is much more complex, because there are different power centers. Some have some legal power, and, different from the Soviet Union, where the Party had no legal power at all, and the formal power was really without real power, in the US they have some power. But there are other power centers which have no legal power at all - lobbies, of the firms as well as British, Zionist and so on. In such a situation, there will be power fight behind the scenes, and they will result in hidden real power. So, the deep state is something different, something not known from the Soviet Union, where the Party was the well-known source of power, with no necessity for some hidden structure behind the scenes. (In some sense, it started as a deep state - one without formal power, given that in the institutions with formal power, the Soviets, other forces could have been elected and have some influence and power. But this was essentially already finished during Lenin's time, and when Stalin took power, the initially quite secondary "general secretary" became the well-known title of the Russian power holder. So, there was no longer anything hidden and deep there.
It contains the same information as your words, which is my point of metaphorically naming this "you are stupid".
CptBork shows much more fantasy in his personal attacks. They are stupid, but at least not as boring.
They don't like what politicians from the other faction of the political elite do and like what the own faction is doing. And they accept every propaganda bs supported by both.
Your attempted analysis omitted the entire Republican Party, it's corporate support, and its operational ideology over the past forty years. That's not a subtlety. That Party currently controls all three branches of the US Federal government.
No, it doesn't.
It misrepresents my posting, in the exact point that I regard as critical - the exact focus of my posting on that subject, the key and central point.
And the misrepresentation is the same one - down to specific terms and phrases, specific fads and current repetitions - that is sold to Trump voters by the Republican media feeds. "You lack information here", "you are ignorant in this matter", "your opinions here have no base in physical reality", etc, is sold to them as arrogant leftwing elites claiming "you are stupid".
Possibly, that is not a coincidence. You could be getting it not so much from mental glitch of your own, as from the same sales pitch that has you amplifying the wingnut obsession with "political correctness", drawing a picture of Trump as a businessman and American nationalist, and so forth.
You bought into the bubble, after all - that is not a matter of subtlety, or hidden forces at work. All that stuff is crude, obvious, and right out in the open all around any American.
So you claim you aren't familiar, personally, with this deep State stuff.
That leaves your other sources - the same ones that provide the rest of your information about US politics.
Ok, that makes even more sense than projection. If you had personal experience, you would probably be harder to fool. Combine that with your complete ignorance of US history and domestic politics, and all of your posting in that arena is explained perfectly. Plus, that explains why you don't assume a deep state you can't see in some cases (Soviet) but do in others (US).
I was wrong, then - and I should have known better: I was just looking for an explanation for this eternally mutating and shapeshifting and mysteriously populated "deep state" you drag into everything, that didn't involve you being gullible in the face of US wingnut media feeds, is all. You are tired of that same factor coming up over and over, and it is a bit boring. But if you insist - - - - .
Meanwhile, for the thread's sake: a little more attention to oil and gas in Syria and Iraq seems overdue. Maybe it could be posted as a hypothetical consideration, something like "if oil and gas issues were involved, this is how they would account for events"?
https://www.juancole.com/2018/06/meeting-leaders-targets.html
Lest we forget Iraq. Buddies with Iran, friendly with Russia, flying US planes into Syrian airspace.
Lest we forget Iraq. Buddies with Iran, friendly with Russia, flying US planes into Syrian airspace.
Schmelzer
Valued Senior Member
The big news of the day is an agreement to give up the whole North-Eastern part, the Lajat area. So the map may now look like this:
Of course, it takes some days between such an agreement and the real takeover. Essentially, it sounds that there was not that much fighting in all this Northern part at all - most villages the Syrian army has taken when the SSA group switched sides, now they are taking much more essentially without much fighting. There was some fighting - but essentially only with the sufficiently small Al Qaida faction there.
The other interesting news is about a conflict in Raqqa between the Arab faction of the SDF and the Kurds.
This changed in 1990 with the dissolution of the Soviet power. The Party lost the power after this, a deep state started to develop and rule, very fast. Then, of course, not only the new oligarchs (who became oligarchs because of family connections with the former and new political leaders), but also those who hated this robbery started to develop deep state political connections, and the secret services became players there too. Then, the whole administrative apparatus became corrupt, and corruption also creates a deep state who distributes the corruption income (of course, low-level corrupt bureaucrats have to pay the higher ones for "tolerating" that corruption). Also note that the Party leadership was also far from open. I do not name them deep state simply there was nothing deep, the Party leaders were known to be the big guys. But in any other relation, they were quite similar.
There is during the last years some shift from deep state rule to legal rule, with Putin trying to transfer the real power to those legal structures which should have this power in a state of law. Fighting the oligarch rule (they did not have any legal power, but de facto almost all power) was the first step toward this. So, there is today much less deep state than 2000, and the deep state structures from Petersburg who have started to control Moscow with Putin are fine today too, but play no longer any role in the real power structure. But this is far from finished.
Of course, it takes some days between such an agreement and the real takeover. Essentially, it sounds that there was not that much fighting in all this Northern part at all - most villages the Syrian army has taken when the SSA group switched sides, now they are taking much more essentially without much fighting. There was some fighting - but essentially only with the sufficiently small Al Qaida faction there.
The other interesting news is about a conflict in Raqqa between the Arab faction of the SDF and the Kurds.
You think it would change something it as the characteristic catchphrase of your endless repetitions I would use something you have said? Ok, I will use "you've been played" for the same zero information from now.
I have gotten a nice impression about it in Germany. Where after reunification the "people's property" was sold to private firms. Everything important managed behind the doors. Essentially the same what started to develop everywhere in the former communist states, except that those who got all the profits and power positions were not the former elites and their families, but the West Germany elites.
That's not what I have said. I have said that in the Soviet Union there was no deep state, except for the initial time when the Soviets defined the official state and the Party, with some secretary in this Party, played the role of the deep state. In Stalin time, this deep state became de facto the official state, up to the end of the USSR.
This changed in 1990 with the dissolution of the Soviet power. The Party lost the power after this, a deep state started to develop and rule, very fast. Then, of course, not only the new oligarchs (who became oligarchs because of family connections with the former and new political leaders), but also those who hated this robbery started to develop deep state political connections, and the secret services became players there too. Then, the whole administrative apparatus became corrupt, and corruption also creates a deep state who distributes the corruption income (of course, low-level corrupt bureaucrats have to pay the higher ones for "tolerating" that corruption). Also note that the Party leadership was also far from open. I do not name them deep state simply there was nothing deep, the Party leaders were known to be the big guys. But in any other relation, they were quite similar.
There is during the last years some shift from deep state rule to legal rule, with Putin trying to transfer the real power to those legal structures which should have this power in a state of law. Fighting the oligarch rule (they did not have any legal power, but de facto almost all power) was the first step toward this. So, there is today much less deep state than 2000, and the deep state structures from Petersburg who have started to control Moscow with Putin are fine today too, but play no longer any role in the real power structure. But this is far from finished.
If Syrian oil would have been the point, there would have been no agreement between Russia and US about fighting IS together with the Euphrat as the dividing line - the Russians would have preferred to fight the Kurds to get the oil East of the Euphrat. If pipelines would be the issue, US would simply go away, or would not have accepted the Iran land bridge via Abu Kamal. Because given Iran has now a land bridge, he could build a pipeline through Syrian, while SA/Qatar cannot, so the actual front line would be a full loss.
- Status