.
.
.
.
The Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, after the secret Jewish government within the Kremlin agreed to its dissolution for the objectives of the "tribe" based in NY, Israel and London. These are the three main destinations many prominent Soviet Jews headed to once the collapse of the Soviet Union was completed by them. The East European Communist states were allowed to be dissolved from 1989, in a rather disorganized messy fashion, on the direct orders of the Kremlin.
It was considered by the "Tribal Elders" that this outcome would be good for them, and for Israel, since amongst many reasons the Soviet Union gradually became the major weapons supplier to many Arab regimes. Thus its usefulness as a pseudo-Jewish workers paradise run by Jews became less apparent to them, once the needs of Israel came sharply into the fore as priority number one.
The Soviet Union should not have collapsed, but could have continued through slow gradual reasoned, constructive reform, as with Communist China, Vietnam, Angola, Ethiopia, Cuba....and even North Korea, which has not bothered to reform even.
To put it more simply, Communist states where the Jew exercised considerable power ceased to exist after 1991, whilst Communist states with no Jewish communities have continued to exits, some rather successfully or whilst others are still clearly struggling, due significantly to American hostility.
To put it more simply, Communist states where the Jew exercised considerable power ceased to exist after 1991, whilst Communist states with no Jewish communities have continued to exits, some rather successfully or whilst others are still clearly struggling, due significantly to American hostility.
Then in 1992 the secret Jewish government within the Kremlin allowed into Russia, USA economic advisers. They further destroyed the country, and consolidated the position of the Jewish mafia oligarchs.
Russia thus became a Third World country, exporting minerals, and not much else during the 1990's.
The situation was so bad that even the Jewish mafia Oligarchs became concerned, so they appointed another puppet of their's with links to the Rothschild of London to become the next Jewish puppet in the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin.
Since 1991, some Russian strategists naively thought that they could co-exist with the USA on an equal footing, even as friends once the Soviet Union ceased to exist. After all the new Russia would no longer contest, and act as a spoiler in the global scene AGAINST the USA as it had done under the Soviet Union around the globe during the Cold War.
Maybe Russia could even become a good friend of the USA, cooperating at many levels, and in many theaters. After all Imperial Russia and the USA were very friendly between 1860--1917. Imperial Russia sold Alaska to the USA.
But the USA of the 21st century is a very different creature to that of the 19th century.
The USA now has global objectives of Full Spectrum Dominance with does not allow for ANY competitors....and in the case of Russia further inroads into its former sphere of influence in the near far arena's, and the total control of its Siberian minerals.
This basic fact stated above, after 21 years of post Communist rule seems not to have dawned on the leadership of the Kremlin. The Secret Jewish government within the Kremlin is another matter. Thus the Kremlin's response to USA aggression allied to NATO muscle in its natural sphere has been very weak, confused, often seeking to plead with the USA to be more reasonable through regular negotiations/meets and media sound bites, or even cooperating with the USA and its plans for Full Spectrum Dominance in the case of Afghanistan (Which will become/is already a base for ops by the USA against Central Asia/Pakistan--already/Iran--already/China--already, Sinkiang Province).
In the above context, what is happening in Syria, and the demented zombie like desperation to install "al-CIA-duh" displayed by the USA, and to topple the otherwise peaceful, legitimate, Socialist, popular, secular regime of Bashar al-Asad is SIGNIFICANT FOR RUSSIA in the end runs. There after it will be Iran, and then Central Asia, and then RUSSIA, via the Caucasus and through its own Muslim minority of 20%.
But its not all gloom and doom, there is always hope.
The USA despite steady drives by the International Jews to convert it into a Police State, under their total unquestioned control, clearly since 1993 and WTC terrorism....is still a modern, sort of democracy which has significant civilisational norms. The USA now is not mullah Iran under Khomeini ready for limitless war, or Nazi Germany fighting the whole world.
Because of the nature of American society, and its civilisational norms it avoids mass warfare which of course will incur huge human losses. It prefers low intensity, covert ops type creeping warfare, using its gadgets and assets, and technology which does not incur significant human loss to itself. This fact was reinforced retrospectively during the Vietnam war of 1965-75. Gulf 1991 against Iraq was an exception, albeit through an extraordinary and unlikely once in a life time Coalition of the Willing, which ironically also included a brigade of Syrians against fellow Ba'athists Saddam.
The USA hides its Full Spectrum Dominance quest for empire through a variety of subtle means.
The USA goes to extraordinary lengths to avoid direct fighting...... face to face, on a equal adversarial footing.
It buys the enemy, as with the case of the entire top brass of the Iraqi military prior to the invasion of the country in 2003.......where there was a no show by the Iraqi military, Saddam's head of Intelligence.......and the fact that Saddam himself was a CIA trained agent since the 1950's.
The USA controls the "enemy" as with the Taliban via the Pakistan military.
Or gets others to fight for the USA, as duped proxies. NATO, Pakistan military, Indonesian military, Turkish military vis a vi against the destabilization of Syria.....and so on.
Soft power....or NGO power, or color coded people power.
Destabilization of the targeted state through social unrest and terrorism ....Salvador Option...explained in more simplified outline......
here, it is NOW being applied to Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and
before in Iraq by the USA.
Economic
warfare.....sanctions.
Fighting from a good
distance....drones, missiles, air power.
This is the
"Weakness" of the USA which serious Russian strategist must
understand. The USA does not like good hard face to face prolonged conventional
mass warfare which inevitably incurs heavy losses. I do not say this in
derogatory manner, but that this is the nature of a sophisticated society which
still has some civilisational norms.
Thus ...we must ask what
will dissuade the USA from attacking the legitimate and peaceful government of
Damascus, ultimately?
The International
isolation of Saddam and Qaddafi failed them.....nobody stood with Qaddafi or
Saddam publicly. Russia needs to stand with Syria publicly.
Air defense mechanisms failed CIA
Saddam and also failed CIA Qaddafi. Syria needs significant air defense systems
leased to the country ......including the S-300 and S-400 operated by Russian
technical advisers. Russia will spend about $800 billion on new weapons systems
between 2012-2018.......let us see how well these systems work in Syria against
the USA/NATO.
Tokenism is dangerous.
Once the Russian government has decided to defend Syria, it must there after
defend the regime militarily in a significant manner. Let us have 50,000
Russian military personnel in Syria. Let us have Spetznaz in Syria.
This is not shameful
illegal action that must be explained to the international community, but
necessary for the natural defense of Russia in the long term..........better to
meet and defeat the enemy in Syria then to meekly wait for them when they
finally arrive in Russia in the future.
But the rhetoric from
Russia must always be sober and balanced, and not the language borrowed from
the Cold War days.
____________________________
____________________________
Russia
Sending Air, Sea Defenses to Syria
By Andrew E. Kramer at "Pioneer Press" -- via Information Clearing House.
By Andrew E. Kramer at "Pioneer Press" -- via Information Clearing House.
Russia's chief arms exporter said Friday, June 15,
that his company was shipping advanced defensive missile systems
to Syria that could be used to shoot down airplanes or sink
ships if the United States or other Western nations try to
intervene to halt the country's spiral of violence.
"I would like to say these mechanisms are really a good means of defense, a reliable defense against attacks from the air or sea," Anatoly Isaykin, the general director of company, Rosoboronexport, said Friday. "This is not a threat, but whoever is planning an attack should think about this."
As the weapons systems are not considered cutting edge, Isaykin's disclosures carried greater symbolic import than military significance. They contributed to a cold war chill that has been settling over relations between Washington and Moscow ahead a meeting between President Barack Obama and President Vladimir Putin, their first, on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit meeting in the Mexican resort of Los Cabos next week.
His remarks come just days after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton raised diplomatic pressure on Russia, Syria's patron, by criticizing the Kremlin for sending attack helicopters to Damascus, and amid reports that Moscow was sending an amphibious landing vessel and a small company of marines to the Syrian port of Tartus, to provide security for military installations and infrastructure.
George Little, a Defense Department spokesman, declined to comment on Isaykin's remarks.
Alexander Golts, an independent military analyst in Moscow, said the Russians' discussion of weapons shipments "undoubtedly" serves as a warning to Western countries contemplating an intervention.
"Russia uses these statements as a form of deterrence in Syria," he said. "They show other countries that they are more likely to suffer losses."
Throughout the Syrian crisis, Russia has insisted that all its arms sales to the isolated government of Bashar Assad have been defensive in nature and were not being used in the Syrian leader's vicious campaign to suppress the opposition.
Isaykin underlined the point, but in a way that could also be interpreted as a warning to the West against undertaking the military action of the sort that ousted Moammar Gadhafi from power in Libya, something that Putin viewed as a breach of sovereignty that he does not want repeated.
Yet, as news reports of government massacres emerge almost daily from Syria, the prospect of the United States or NATO acting unilaterally has become a more frequently discussed option, particularly given Russia's adamant refusal to authorize more aggressive U.N. action.
Isaykin, a powerful figure in Russia's military industry, openly discussed the weapons being shipped to Syria: the Pantsyr-S1, a radar-guided missile and artillery system capable of hitting warplanes at altitudes well above those typically flown during bombing sorties, and up to 12 miles away; Buk-M2 anti-aircraft missiles, capable of striking airplanes at even higher altitudes, up to 82,000 feet, and at longer ranges; and land-based Bastion anti-ship missiles that can fire at targets 180 miles from the coast.
Military analysts immediately questioned the effectiveness of the air defenses Russia has made available to the Middle East, including Syria, none of which have offered even token resistance to Western forces.
Ruslan Aliyev, an authority on military affairs at the Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow, said that statements by Isaykin and others were issued principally for political effect. Moscow has declined to supply Syria with its most lethal air defense, the S-300 long-range missile system.
"I would like to say these mechanisms are really a good means of defense, a reliable defense against attacks from the air or sea," Anatoly Isaykin, the general director of company, Rosoboronexport, said Friday. "This is not a threat, but whoever is planning an attack should think about this."
As the weapons systems are not considered cutting edge, Isaykin's disclosures carried greater symbolic import than military significance. They contributed to a cold war chill that has been settling over relations between Washington and Moscow ahead a meeting between President Barack Obama and President Vladimir Putin, their first, on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit meeting in the Mexican resort of Los Cabos next week.
His remarks come just days after Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton raised diplomatic pressure on Russia, Syria's patron, by criticizing the Kremlin for sending attack helicopters to Damascus, and amid reports that Moscow was sending an amphibious landing vessel and a small company of marines to the Syrian port of Tartus, to provide security for military installations and infrastructure.
George Little, a Defense Department spokesman, declined to comment on Isaykin's remarks.
Alexander Golts, an independent military analyst in Moscow, said the Russians' discussion of weapons shipments "undoubtedly" serves as a warning to Western countries contemplating an intervention.
"Russia uses these statements as a form of deterrence in Syria," he said. "They show other countries that they are more likely to suffer losses."
Throughout the Syrian crisis, Russia has insisted that all its arms sales to the isolated government of Bashar Assad have been defensive in nature and were not being used in the Syrian leader's vicious campaign to suppress the opposition.
Isaykin underlined the point, but in a way that could also be interpreted as a warning to the West against undertaking the military action of the sort that ousted Moammar Gadhafi from power in Libya, something that Putin viewed as a breach of sovereignty that he does not want repeated.
Yet, as news reports of government massacres emerge almost daily from Syria, the prospect of the United States or NATO acting unilaterally has become a more frequently discussed option, particularly given Russia's adamant refusal to authorize more aggressive U.N. action.
Isaykin, a powerful figure in Russia's military industry, openly discussed the weapons being shipped to Syria: the Pantsyr-S1, a radar-guided missile and artillery system capable of hitting warplanes at altitudes well above those typically flown during bombing sorties, and up to 12 miles away; Buk-M2 anti-aircraft missiles, capable of striking airplanes at even higher altitudes, up to 82,000 feet, and at longer ranges; and land-based Bastion anti-ship missiles that can fire at targets 180 miles from the coast.
Military analysts immediately questioned the effectiveness of the air defenses Russia has made available to the Middle East, including Syria, none of which have offered even token resistance to Western forces.
Ruslan Aliyev, an authority on military affairs at the Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow, said that statements by Isaykin and others were issued principally for political effect. Moscow has declined to supply Syria with its most lethal air defense, the S-300 long-range missile system.
