Lavrov’s Paradox

Lost amid the reality we must bathe ourselves in chlorine to avoid upsetting the delicate sensibilities of West Africans is the invisible policy discussion of an illegal war being carried out in Syria.

President Hopey Changey has proclaimed both The War Powers Act, and a 2002 congressional authorization (AUMF) intended against al-Qaeda in Iraq, as the baseline for his legal approach to bombing in Syria.

Apparently, we are to ignore the fact the War Powers Act expired after 30 days, and the AUMF was never granted for Syria.

Of course the actual legal route would require congressional leadership to actually do, well, you know, leadership-type things. Currently neither Senator Turtle, nor the House Crier are willing to interrupt election season -or tanning appointments- to put Syrian authorization measures in front of the peoples representatives for a vote.

lavrov kerry

Unfortunately those pesky details are not lost on Russia, who reminded Secretary Ketchup as such during a recent chat.

Only in 2014’s fundamental change world does our President put constitutional types in a position where we actually end up in agreement with our arch nemesis, Russia.

(CNSNews.com) – Russia is not a member of the U.S.-led anti-ISIS coalition because its military actions are “paradoxical” and not in line with international law, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said this week. He pointed out that the coalition and Russia were arming opposing sides in the Syrian civil war.

Delivering a lecture on Russia’s foreign policy, Lavrov said Russia has been sending “large-scale weapons and military hardware supplies” to the Syrian and Iraqi governments — thereby greatly improving their ability to fight “religious extremists vying for power.”

Meanwhile the U.S.-led coalition was both bombing Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS/ISIL) terrorists and providing armed support “to the opposition forces fighting the Bashar Assad regime alongside the Islamic State,” he said.

Play-Thru-ISIS

“The U.S. considers this support ‘moderate’ and therefore acceptable,” Lavrov continued. “Its purpose is to help the Syrian opposition achieve the potential to overthrow the current regime in Syria. The controversial and paradoxical nature of these actions is obvious, in my view. We have been discussing this with our U.S. counterparts, trying to understand their logic, but have not received any clear explanations so far.”

Lavrov’s comments at Monday’s event in Moscow were made available by the Russian foreign ministry.

Russia, a longstanding ally of Assad, has argued for months that the regime should be a partner in the effort to defeat ISIS, but the U.S. has ruled out any cooperation with a despot whose legitimacy it does not recognize.

For America’s Sunni Arab coalition partners, toppling the regime in Damascus is an important part of the mission, and they intend that the support being given to the rebels to fight ISIS will also better equip them to bring down Assad.

Trying to moderate expectations, administration official say ISIS is the priority, and that the broader civil war needs a political, not military, solution.

“We wholeheartedly agree with the (U.N.) Secretary-General [Ban Ki-moon] that a political solution is absolutely essential to address the root causes of extremism in Syria, and to address the legitimate aspirations and grievances of its people,” U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power told the U.N. Security Council on Tuesday.

In his lecture, Lavrov said Russia supports coordinating with others in the fight against the common threat of terrorism, but those efforts “have to rest on a solid foundation of international law under the auspices of the U.N. Security Council.”

Bombing ISIS positions on Syrian territory without prior coordination with Damascus “does not fit with these principles.”

“[O]ur country is not part of the U.S.-led international coalition,” he said. (read more)

Obama Lay-Z

This entry was posted in Dem Hypocrisy, Ebola Outbreak, Election 2014, Infectious Disease, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Jihad, NATO, Obama Research/Discovery, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Secretary of State, Susan Rice, Syria, Terrorist Attacks, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to Lavrov’s Paradox

  1. 2x4x8 says:

    The History of the Decline and Fall of the American Empire is paved with illegal executive action

    Liked by 3 people

  2. georgiafl says:

    Obama seems to lack normal human feelings and impulses, to lack a normal valuation of human life – from his advocacy of 3rd term abortion to killing infants who survive abortion, to his lack of empathy for wounded and traumatized veterans… He has an almost sociopathic dehumanization.
    Obama’s chief concerns are always criticisms against himself.

    It would not surprise me if Obama’s association with Bill Ayers goes back a long way to the days of the Weather Underground or that he was present at the Brinks robbery, and that he even fired the shot that killed the guard. Muslims are urged in their books to kill infidels, especially Jews as a rite of passage, aren’t they? http://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2014/10/21/brinks-robbery-victims-son-remembers/17673203/

    Ayers has fatherly feelings toward his former followers and adopted the children of one of them.
    His association with Obama and authorship of Obama’s fictionalized ‘autobiography’ is revealing.

    Liked by 1 person

    • John VI says:

      Its not sociopathic. Its Tribalism. If you are not Black, then he doesn’t care. We call it racism now, but since that is a verboten word when describing anyone other than white men, we’ll just change the name but call it the same. Its PC that way!

      And he has stacked as many federal and judicial agencies with people that feel the exact same, regardless of the majority, DEMOCRATIC opinion on the matter. Republicans need to clean house, but they are more afraid of being called racist than they are of having a functioning republic. And Nero Fiddles while Rome burns. ( or catches hemorrhagic fever and keels over coughing up blood, whatever works for ya! 😉 )

      Liked by 2 people

      • Josh says:

        “If you are not Black, then he doesn’t care.” He does not care about the blacks. Make no mistake about this. They are no more than useful idiots to him.

        Like

    • elvischupacabra says:

      Clinical narcissism.

      Like

  3. partyzantski says:

    The pic from IOW, where Obola is a “rapper”…. maybe the sun visor should say “EN-Title-ist”?

    Liked by 1 person

  4. partyzantski says:

    Sergei Lavrov actually has the chops to be POTUS.
    What kind of sick, sad world this is at the present time.

    Like

  5. Scott Angell says:

    Assad is a murderous, hereditary dictator who does not post videos of his atrocities to Youtube ( photos are on display though since one of his police photographers defected). The Caliph is a murderous religious fanatic. Take your pick. Syria is 75% Sunni. Iraq the reverse. Then there are the big regional powers of Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Israel all with the own agendas involved in the conflict. Figure it out and arrange a diplomatic solution and you win the Nobel Peace Prize and deservedly so. Obama has put the US into the mess without a clue as to how we get out. Its a tar baby the US needs to free itself from because there are genuine national security issues in Asia and Europe our military needs to address.

    Liked by 1 person

    • rashomon says:

      They both need style consultants. Not much suggests confidence!

      Like

      • rashomon says:

        Sorry, this comment was in reference to the two sad faces who are apparently running this show.

        Scott, just who would you install to run Syria and it’s, formerly, secular government that allowed Christians, Jews and other minorities to do business and carry on with their lives? I don’t know, but I’m asking what is the price of the “known” — i.e. I know and am accustomed to the idiosyncrasies of this government, but at least I can plan ahead to absorb those costs to my family and business. Now I have no guidelines, nothing to rely on, no base from which to establish normalcy.

        What does this continued disruption — starting with what I would suggest is an Obama manufactured so-called “Arab Spring” brought on by his tour/speeches just following his installation as president — bring to people who need to live in some type of daily routine free from chaos?

        We now have it in the U.S. One crisis after another, coming from all sides of our existence.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Scott Angell says:

          I don’t think there is anyone ‘we’ can install to run Syria. Its way past that now. 200,000 dead in their war in a nation of 25 million. One side has to win and its going to be the Sunni’s eventually because they have the numbers. There will be a bloodbath when Assad’s regime falls because that’s how these affairs end. The only way to avoid it is to let Turkey send its army in to finish off Assad and run the place.

          Like

  6. CarolinaCowboy says:

    Remember our first war with the Muslim was fought without a decoration of war by congress, not did they fund the adventure. US merchant ships were being attacked and Americans being kidnapped Jefferson issued letters of marque and reprisal, which sent a groups of privately owned war ships, that were approved by the government, to make war against the Barbary Pirates. In doing this he sent for the privateers. The privately owned frigates USS Philadelphia, USS President, and the USS Essex, along with the schooner USS Enterprise was America’s first navy to cross the Atlantic. Others would also join and see action as well. Then in 1805 the Marines crossed the desert from Egypt into Tripoli, forced its surrender and free those Americans that had been kidnapped and were made slaves. All without any help from congress.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. mikeH says:

    Folks, I have been saying for quite a while this year that Russia isn’t the Cold War cartoon that was the Soviets. It is different. They follow international law, act according to the interests of the people (by and large) and are one of the most Christian and family friendly countries today.
    It took marrying a Russian woman this year to lift the western propaganda veil. The lie of MH17 is crumbling. The legality of actions in Syria are a paper thin facade. Lavarov is as descent of a person as will ever rise to that level. He is a very straight talker with solid grounding of law and the clear national interest of Russia behind him.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Scott Angell says:

      No, Putin’s Russia is not the USSR, its worse. The USSR was a status quo superpower and, with the glaring exception of its foray into Afghanistan, did not use its own armed forces to extend its borders. The ‘lies’ about MH-17 are being disseminated by Putin and his new ‘disinformation’ team of stooges and fellow travelers. The German BND intelligence service has concluded the aircraft was shot down by Russian backed rebels firing a Russian supplied anti aircraft missile system. The German BND, given German antipathy towards American spying activity against Germany and Germany’s own trade and energy relations with Russia is hardly an American puppet agency. An fair observer might wonder just why Putin continues to deny the obvious save to avoid having to pay compensation to the airline and victims for the downing of the aircraft.

      Virtually every day now we are treated to reports of Russian jets and warships engaging in aggressive actions even violating the airspace and territorial waters of neighboring states. Putin routinely threatens the use of his nuclear arsenal. Angela Merkel believes Putin to be mentally unstable and she should now. She has spoken to Putin more often than any other world leader and does so without the need for translators. Unlike Soviet leaders, Putin has no Politburo to restrain him. He’s a one man show with a rubber stamp Parliament and has complete control over Russian media. He’s the most dangerous man in the world today.

      Like

      • mikeH says:

        You are wrong on a major account in the BND report. They said it was a Ukrainian BUK that was captured. That is a sea change in the “official” version. There are still many more revelations to come. The launcher requires multiple vehicles to bring down a and at that altitude. Even if they had the launcher, they didn’t have the complete system. No, this is a step in the retraction of the story and a minor one.

        http://m.spiegel.de/international/europe/a-997972.html#spRedirectedFrom=www&referrrer=http://www.bing.com/search?q=bnd+mh17+report&a=results&MID

        As far as Putin being the most dangerous man in the world I can only laugh in pity. How many people has he ordered bombed in the last 5 years? Is his body count anywhere in the league of Barry? Thought not. The imperialism is basically 1 sided and I pity your inability to see that.

        Like

        • Scott Angell says:

          The rebels had shot down Ukrainian military aircraft in the days prior to MH-17, yet the launcher photographed only had one missile missing. I don’t know why BND believes it to have been a caputured BUK system but for a number or reasons I don’t believe that. First and foremost you don’t just find qualified operators of such weapon systems on the street or even amongst ex Ukrainian military veterans. I once operated TOW missiles. I wouldn’t care to try and fire one today because that was years ago. A big SAM launcher is even more complex. You have to be current in your training to operate complex weapons like that. The men who fired it were especially since they did not, apparently have the main radar only the launch vehicle radar otherwise they would have known it was a commercial jet at 10,000 meters altitude and not a Ukrainian military transport.

          Like

          • mikeH says:

            That launcher on social media wasn’t part of the NAF. It was Ukrainian and the picture was a month old. If the entire system was functioning, it would leave a telltale sigint trail would it not? Are you curious as to why that evidence hasn’t been brought forward if it was, in fact, as conclusive as claimed? Western intelligence is pulling the same narrative play book as the BGI. Misdirection and accusations over facts. Open your eyes more and you will see it.

            Like

            • Scott Angell says:

              Sometimes governments have to point the finger away from a leader they are going to have to deal with even if they know he was responsible. For the BND to say that Putin was directly responsible, i.e. Russian crew operating a Russian SAM would be, in effect, to say that Putin was a war criminal with whom the German government would be prohibited from dealing with.

              Like

      • partyzantski says:

        Putin is WORSE?
        Google “Holomador” and get back to me on that point.
        Try the same for Katyn Forest. The list is extensive.

        Like

    • czarowniczy says:

      Russia isn’t Communist but it’s still Russia. My long-time view of Russia and its leaders is that their agenda has remained the same since, at least, Peter the Great – only thing I saw changing was the style of government and the modernization of its methods of subjugation of its territories. As to the legalities of US vice Russian actions in Syria I see it as a US defense action in national interests, a Cold War redux with slightly different governments in place.

      Like

      • mikeH says:

        I can’t see how you can think of fabricated evidence of Assad’s use of WMD when it was the opposing side that used them as a legitimate tool of US foreign policy. And that is assuming that our national interest are actually in play with what happens in Syria.

        The truth is we have zero national interests in Syria. Our belligerence towards Syria is about as rational as our belligerence to Saddam.

        Like

        • czarowniczy says:

          I didn’t ,mention the use of chem weapons by whoever but, since you bring it up, Syria and Saddam’s WMD programs had long been linked with the common denominator being – you guessed it – Russia. If Basher didn’t order the use of Sarin on Ghouta (I presume that’s the attack you are referencing) he did everything he could to prevent the UN from getting in and finding any evidence that might have proven who fired the rockets. The Syrian Army bombed/shelled the area that was gassed for over three days before it allowed UN inspectors in. One would presume that were I Bashar and sure that the Sarin-filled rockets were fired by rebels I’d be escorting the UN inspectors in the day after the attack, as they’d requested instead of destroying evidence.
          Despite the shelling the UN inspectors retrieved enough of the Sarin to ascertain its high level of purity exceeded Syrian WMD machine’s ability to make, pointing the Sarin production finger in a more Russianly direction. About the time that Obama’s found out he’s put his foot in his mouth about some BS red line the Russians jump up and volunteer to mediate (Russian for ‘destroy the evidence’) the chem weapon issue and transport/destroy on their own part all of Bashar’s stocks. Win-Win Putin/Obama/Bashar. I don’t hear the Syrians saying the rebels managed to steal any chem weapons from Syrian stocks, using them against Syrian civilians, that are far more technically refined than Syria was capable of making on its own. Didn’t see any of the Russian vehicles that hastily removed the weapons stop by the UN inspectors and ask if they wanted to take a look inside. Just one of life’s big mysteries.
          I’m seeing that you and I define national interests differently. My definition doesn’t end at the 12-mile limit, it goes wherever there are any goings on that could come back and bite the US in its national posterior at some point in the future. Russia is trying to consolidate its position on NATO’s southern flank, it’s already set up in Syria and is well on its way to reestablishing its old military relationship with Egypt. By co-opting Turkey Russia will have free sailing access through the Bosporus and Dardanelles for its fleets, especially its Black Sea fleet. It will also have a number of its gas and oil pipelines (more than it has now) routing through Turkey on their ways to Europe and eventually through ports in Turkey to the West and East. In Egypt it will have guaranteed access, and ability to close access to, the Suez Canal as well as moving its naval porting in the Med farther west. For cherries on the cake it will check Chinese porting plans in the Suez, box in Israel and have influence over the three largest standing militaries in the Mideast – not bad for Obama’s 6 years in office. Russia will also have a naval and military presence in the Gulf through its long-standing joint Russ-Iranian presence. Russia will be able to leverage the Mideast oil trade through its puppets just as the US was once (pre-Obama) capable of. Once that happens the move will be to replace the dollar as the international standard for valuing crude oil and replace it with a basket of currencies the Russians/Iranians control. Iran’s been actively working on that for over ten years now and they are closer than they’ve ever been and Russia and China, to a lesser extent, are all on board. To me that’s national interests – try maintaining our stabilizing international presence when oil goes to $200 or more a barrel and Russia and China control the major sea trade lanes.

          Liked by 1 person

          • rashomon says:

            Am I the only person in this debate that remembers the Syrian’s war with the Muslim Brotherhood when the MB was expelled in the 1963 in favor of a secular government? Those messy borders established by the English and French made little difference to the tribes who had lived in the area for centuries, practicing their own religions with little regard for democracy or tolerance. Again, as I recall, Bashar’s father Hafez fought in the Lebanese civil war on behalf of the Maronites, a wing of the Catholic Church, trying to maintain a more diverse presence in the area.

            Please give me a lesson on why the U.S. should allow Islamists, with all the glory of their tolerance for human rights, should replace the Assad regime? Only a few years ago, our esteemed leaders headed by Hillary Clinton were praising Bashar as a “reformer.” Were we speaking with forked tongue? Did we fall into a Photoshop pit? Does the leadership of the U.N. have something to gain by dumping Assad? Where does the U.S. gain? Pray, tell me.

            Liked by 1 person

            • czarowniczy says:

              As we stand with Obama and our feckless European allies it’s ‘spray and pray’ in the hopes that what would replace him would be better. If we had an American president he’d probably be schmoozing the Turks to invade Kobane, take over Aleppo and start moving the Alawites out and replacing them with a Sunni Turk-Freindly crew but that ain’t gonna happen.
              Hillary didn’t lie – what’s her definition of a ‘reformer’ – was Stalin or Pol Pot a ‘reformer’? I believe Hillary was signaling to Russia our acquiescence to leaving their bud in power, we weren’t going to push his ouster. I believe that also signaled to the Turks that Obama’s plans didn’t parallel theirs.
              Our getting someone in who is more US oriented and less Russian oriented would let us (and the feckless NATO) retain control of the Med and secure Europe’s (NATO’s) southern flank. Right now the EU is heavily dependent upon Russian NG and oil and it’s only going to increase as Europe’s drawn away from exploring for petroleum due to cheap (relatively) and plentiful Russian/Mideast-Russian supplied petro. An effete and dependent Europe with Russia on its eastern and Southern flans (part of its north too) will basically have fallen into Russian thrall. Keeping Europe US oriented is a national interest.
              We also have that pesky US dominated oil bourse I keep talking on about. Right now the US dollar controls the world oil market, one of the things that makes it the world’s reserve currency. Allowing Russia and Iran to turn the Gulf and Eastern Med countries into their own personal oil and NG repositories will allow them to can the dollar as the world’s reserve currency and while the Russians/Iranians reap the benefits we could have a recession that will make the ’08 one look like it had training wheels. Right now we are able too import oil to keep us going but if we have to fall back and rely upon only national sources we are at the mercy of the policy wonks in DC as to how the extraction, refining and distribution of those resources will be carried out. A lot of the petroleum resources in the US are also exported – what do we do. nationalize them? That would go over great in the international market.
              How about Obama’s red line? A few months back we were all up in arms that he set a red line in Syria and, when the Syrians crossed it, he backed down. The US is looking like a huge lumbering eunuch to many of our enemies and nothing breeds ‘attempt’ like contempt. We could have reestablished ourselves as a Reagan-era power by getting Turkey to go in with us, retake its old provinces in Syria and left with our friend Turkey as the big kid on the block. We are showing some of the most baddest bullies on the block that we just ain’t got the walk or the talk any more. National interests? How about how we are perceived as being serious in maintaining our position as a super power? The Dutch and Portugal were super powers once – who’s ‘respectful’ of them now?

              Liked by 1 person

              • rashomon says:

                Thanks, czar. With kudos to the JV, we’ve already lost the dollar and our stance over any “red line” yesterday, today or tomorrow. Our former allies don’t trust us, making for a bad place to negotiate new franchises. Erdogan hasn’t the foggiest as he hates the Kurds, but has little choice as he can’t seem to devise a policy for straddling Europe while installing his Islamists and strengthening his ties in the ME.

                I remember the days of Suslov, Khrushchev and Brezhnev, whose diplomacy resembled bulls in a china shop. Thwack on the side of the head style, but maybe more obvious than our Russian leadership today. Putin may be old KGB, but he’s refined his presentation to be more PC.

                It’s a game, played by the elite and paid for by the bourgeoisie. Sadly, in our “new democracy” fomented by the birth of social justice reparations, there is another very vocal class that simply rumbles around the outskirts, distracting from the serious concerns while collecting big bucks to create minor havoc until called upon to vote. This decade is one of continuing crises crying for a leader. Alas. Zero.

                Like

  8. John Galt says:

    Is that Kerry’s concept of a power tie? He has a “I’d rather be riding a girl’s pink bicycle” wistful look on his face.

    Like

  9. czarowniczy says:

    Let’s peel this back a bit deeper. Russia’s Assad’s partner, Russia has naval facilities in Tartus that, in the last few years, has been used to threaten anti-Assad forces with Russian intervention. Russia went so far as to have a naval flotilla an aircraft carrier visit, the carrier staying for about 4 months. A wee bit later three Russian amphibious assault ships, all full of Russian Marines, stopped by to ‘resupply’. Things have been quiet in Syria, the last almost two years, for teh 30,000-or-so Russian nationals ‘living’ there despite the presence of ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah, Freddy Krueger and a host of lesser actors.
    Back about the 5th the Free Syrian Army captured a smallish Assad-Syrian base at al Harrah in southwest Syria, overlooking the Golan Heights area (remember, the Assad and anti-Assad forces are still fighting?). Inside they found solid evidence that Russian GRU/Spetznaz were in the base collecting signals intelligence on various actors. Hear about that one in the news? Aside from the fact that this was a covert facility, joint Syrian-Russian and apparently housing Iranian specialists as well, it’s outside of the known Russian sigint facilities and shows that the Russians have an active boots-on-ground program of their own going on.
    The legality argument for the Administration’s actions is just the usual smoke and mirrors that all presidents use to cover open areas of undercover activities. While the international law lawyers put on a spectacular legal jargon dog and pony show for the temporarily interested public the real show’s going on behind the stage. The Russians are dead silent about what they are doing yet have both hands up to their ears in the Syria mess, they have deals and threats going on all over. We’re not hearing much on what Assad’s doing vis-a-vis fighting the rebels – we are all too occupied with the Kobane mini-drama. The Assad-rebel war involves a helluva lot more territory than ISIS’s thing in Syria and has serious consequences (especially fro Israel) on its own – yet…
    I’m sure that as Obama dithers and feel his way around the various national aspirations of the players on the ground I’m sure we (includes some NATO partners) have brave men in dark places doing dangerous things there, things the policy makers wouldn’t even dream of doing on their bravest day, providing facts that may or may not be used in determining our next baby steps there. Rest assured though that as we pin-prick our way through the mess the Russian have been on the ground there in active contact with the enemies of their national aspirations for years.

    Like

    • mikeH says:

      I really hate sounding like a RF apologist. I am a vet and wouldn’t have imagined it years ago.

      Syria is key to another Nat Gas pipeline to the EU. Qatar has been instrumental in paying for the anit-Assad forces to get him out of the way. Why? Russia doesn’t want the competition for gas supplies and Assad is in the way. Don’t bother getting preachy about Assad being a bad guy. It is the ME with the muzzies and there isn’t ANYBODY THERE WITHOUT BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS. Nobody. Not one. That is just simply the way that the muzzies roll.

      As to international law, Russian forces were invited by Assad. That is all the legal justification that is needed. They can operate inside Syria if they chose to. You agree that our CIA/JSOC guys are operating there right now. But that is without legal authority.

      Get out of the Russia bad, US good jingoistic thought trap. It is both intellectually lazy and wrong in today’s world.

      Like

      • czarowniczy says:

        I was posting on the NG/petro pipelines the Russians have going through Syria AND Turkey well before ISIS started raising hell. It’s not ‘a’ pipeline, there are several on the ground now and, as soon as the Syrian war’s brought to an end, Russian work on building the HUGE pipeline complex that will carry South Pars NG from Iran/Iraq to Syrian (Russian) ports for shipment to the EU and Latin/South America will go into high gear. Let’s not forget the pivotal role Turkey will play in this, especially as it leans more and more towards Russia as Russia feeds it more and more economic treats. Russia already has a vital oil port in Turkey and pipelines through Turkey to the EU with more in the works.
        Yeah, Russia was ‘invited‘ into Syria by Hafaz al-Assad – after he had conversations with them promising them porting for their Black Seas fleet if they’d help him in his fight against Israel. The Russians had been an important Syrian buddy since the late 40s/early 50s, al Assad’s bringing them in to Tartus in ’71 was a win-win for both of them in many areas, especially in their joint dislike of Israel. Russia also desperately needed the Tartus port and follow-on intel facilities it built not only to cement its growing presence along the vital north African Med coast but to flank NATO and Turkey on the sea and the ground.
        To me it isn’t a matter of legalities it’s a matter of national survival. We can’t go out and fight toe-to-toe with Russia as they are a major power and it could easily escalate into something too big to contain – that’s why for the last nearly 70 years we’ve used proxies. We are back at it in the Mideast and the winner gets billions of dollars in oil and gas sales, gets to control a good part of the world’s energy supplies and perhaps gets to deliver an economic gut-punch to the US by changing the oil standard from the dollar to a currency basket.
        As for my having a certain mindset – both of my grandfathers fought the Russians on the Eastern front in WWI, one was recalled by the Wehrmacht in the late 30s to train pioneers for what was to become Operation Barbarossa and led pioneer troops in the Operation. I spent a good part of the Cold War being trained to fight and destroy Russians on my ancestral homelands in the East so that the nice Western European lands wouldn’t be damaged. My dislike for Russia isn’t taught, it’s genetic. They are what they’ve been for centuries, a nation of serfs led by despots whose sole desire is to expand the Russian Empire (it still is that) as far and wide as they can. They are still a major threat to the US, are still waging a low-level war against us (what makes anyone think they became our shower buddies when the USSR fell?) and look to do us economic harm and diminish our influence worldwide to their benefit. You can feed and pet a skunk all you want but it’s still a skunk.
        US Army-retired

        Liked by 1 person

        • mikeH says:

          I know you are not seeing the war machine of the US very clearly. Israel and Russia have deep relationships. Syria has it’s hands full without a real conflict with Israel. I don’t believe Assad has serious anti-Israel intentions and I also don’t believe Russia would help them with that if he did.

          Finally, I am not going to convince you of anything given your genetic biases. Perhaps you even sympathize with the Ukraine Nazis. I don’t know but I would like to ask if that is the case.

          Like

          • czarowniczy says:

            Perhaps the Israelis weren’t seeing their relationship with Russia clearly either as they had nuclear missiles trained on southern Russian facilities not only because of the threat Russia was to Israel through its military associations with various Mideast countries but Russia’s on-going, centuries old pogroms against Russian Jews. It took the virtual threat of war to make the Russians agreeable to letting Russian Jews emigrate to Israel. I also recall that the Russian military strategists were in the war room with Egyptian and Syrian leaders while their militaries armed with Russian equipment and trained by Russian advisors, attacked Israel. I watched the DoD strip equipment from units to be sent to Israel to replace their battle losses while Nixon and Brezhnev nearly came to blows over some really questionable massive arms shipments (and troop movements) the Russians were making aimed at reinforcing Egypt and Syria. It was direct negotiations between Kissinger and Brezhnev that ended the war before it went international. It was Sadat who finally tossed the Russian out of Egypt after he felt their presence there was for their benefits and not Egypt’s.
            Assad not having serious anti-Israeli intentions? His daddy invited the Russians in wholesale to support his anti-Israeli policies. Bashar al-Assad, 3 April 2014: ”… the violence in Syria is rooted in a bid to break the anti-Israel “resistance axis”. Right off the top of my head the Syrian government’s support for Palestinian terrorist groups over the decades hasn’t slowed one bit under Bashar nor has his works, despite treaties, at remilitarizing the Golan Heights. I haven’t seen him, at any point in his career up to today, holding out an olive branch to Israel, opening up any peace tentacles or even asking for their help in battling his enemies who were close to having him on the ropes.
            My sympathies are with the Ukrainians who survived Stalin’s murderous ethnic cleansing. In 1932 through 1933 some 7-MILLION Ukrainians starved to death in what, up to that point, was the breadbasket of Europe. The Russian state policies killed more Ukrainians in one year than Hitler did Jews in the entirety of WW II. One of my grandfathers was Galician and many Galicians had family members starve in the Ukraine – any wonder the Germans had no trouble in WW II forming and filling anti-Russian divisions (1st Galician/Ukrainian National Army)? How about the Russians who joined and formed ethnic Russian anti-Russian units in the Wehrmacht? More than a few there from the Turkoman Division to the Ostlegionen (over 400,000 members) to my favorite the various Cossack units. They are my favorite as, at Yalta, FDR agreed to ‘repatriate’ all Cossacks who fought with the Germans against Russia to Russia. Later, after FDR and Churchill caved to old Joe, Stalin changed the request to ALL Cossacks and their family members, wives, children, brothers, sisters, mothers fathers ALL whether they’d fought for the Germans of just been related, repatriated where they were all executed or sent to Siberia to die. BTW, that included the FORCED repatriation of Cossack POWs in US POW camps in the United States, whether they’d requested to stay here or not, to Russia.
            My relatives were not Nazi Party members any more than all Russian Cold War military were Communist Party members or all US soldiers are Republicans. We were just carrying on an old European tradition of resisting Russian encroachment on our lives. Some of us are still doing it.

            Like

        • moogey says:

          Thank you for your service. And thank you for posting. The exchange of knowledge, opinion & dialogue are most interesting.

          Like

          • czarowniczy says:

            No sweat, we’re even as I’ve said before – youse guys paid me twice every months and you’re still sending me a check once a month. My pleasure – at times I was amazed that someone actually paid me for the job , it was that much fun, and during the Carter Administration we all had to look at our checks twice to make sure we actually were getting ‘paid’.
            I enjoy a good discussion – just me, the wife and the dogs out here. I’ve learned to agree with anything my wife says and the dogs are apolitical.

            Like

      • rashomon says:

        Good points, mike.

        Like

  10. czarowniczy says:

    An added thought: ISIS is fighting hard to take the gas fields in Syria, major battle going on there (Oh, you didn’t hear about that one in the press, hmmmmm). They’d like to take the fields as it would not only severely disrupt energy generation inside of Syria but add the NG to their sales line that generates much if not most of their operating revenue. We are hearing that ISIS is and has been selling off enough of the oil it pulls from already captured fields to generate some $3-million a day. Wait a minute – if they were selling the oil (as we’re told) at $30 a barrel on the black market that means they’re moving some 100-thousand 42-gallon barrels a day. Hmmm – $30 a barrel, 100,000 barrels for $3-million OK, so they have control over some small refineries and are refining some products for local sales and to fuel their war machine but not 100.000 barrels a day’s worth.
    So how is this oil getting out of the country and into international circulation? I’m ignoring the fact that some of the illegal product is NG for ease of example but still, dealing with selling some 4-million-gallons-plus of product a day while you’re running a full-blown war is daunting, at best.
    Yep, lotsa willing buyers who, at the bargain-basement price of what was 1/3rd of going price, will not only buy what they can get but found ready shippers in both Syrian and TURKISH ports. Rumors are that the Turks even knowing took ISIS oil through their internal distribution lines for transit/sale. Nothing personal. it’s just business.
    One last thought – who’s helping them with their money issues? The buyers don’t generally show up with a trunk full of cash to be handed over to the ISIS money man, the $3-millionish a day has to be stored, accounted for, transferred – all of those things you do with virtual money – on a daily basis. If you are a fundamentalist (moderate) Islamic war machine, bulldozing its way over resistance from established armies as it carves out a caliphate, how do you take care of those nasty little details like depositing cash and paying bills? That generally takes the assistance of banks, big banks. Which ones are readily relieving ISIS of its daily money worries as it burns, pillages and murders its way through the Levant? Are any of them European (Russians don’t even trust their own banks), any US? Virtual money becomes neutral ones-and-zeros once it’s in the system, not like hard cash. Where would you look ? I know a few places but they’ve become the neo-Switzerland as the Swiss have bowed to international pressure to play nice, ain’t gonna find nada.
    So some of that interest in your savings account or profits in your 401k may have been ISIS money at some point, while the gas in your tank which you are now buying at lows we haven’t seen in a long time may have been ISIS bootleg at some point also. What a tangled web…

    Like

    • LetJusticePrevail" says:

      Here’s an interesting tangent to consider:

      If ISIS is selling these resources at such a discounted rate, wouldn’t that position them as the financial competitors of every member of OPEC?

      The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was founded in Baghdad, Iraq, with the signing of an agreement in September 1960 by five countries namely Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. They were to become the Founder Members of the Organization.

      These countries were later joined by Qatar (1961), Indonesia (1962), Libya (1962), the United Arab Emirates (1967), Algeria (1969), Nigeria (1971), Ecuador (1973), Gabon (1975) and Angola (2007).

      http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/about_us/25.htm

      What response to IS has been made by Qatar, for example? One would think that they would have a vested interest in stemming the flow of “cheap” crude, unless they were also profiting from it, either financially (now) or politically, (and financially) later.

      Like

      • czarowniczy says:

        the Saudis are pumping like mad and deflating the market for a number of reasons so ISIS’s profits are not as profitable today (oil is a wee bit over $80 as I write) as they were a few days back at $100 or so. As ISIS isn’t a major player yet they are more of a short term inconvenience. The benefit to ISIS is the inflow of $$$ to sustain their war without begging/extorting other nations in the area. They can buy weapons and supplies without Turkey having to risk getting caught (whoops!) crawling into bed with them, they can transfer funds to international arms brokers just like you pay bills on line.
        I think Qatar’s been kicking in some blackmail funds to ISIS through various fronts but Qatar’s future rests on that monstrous natural gas field it ‘shares’ with Iran. I believe a number of Gulf states are, as they historically have, playing both sides of the fence until a clear winner comes out.

        Like

  11. elvischupacabra says:

    Even John Kerry-Heinz’s fortune wasn’t made by him. No, the late Republican Senator John Heinz still pays for the Botox in John’s mug, the caps on his teeth and the clothes on his back.

    Gigolo poster boy if there ever was one.

    Liked by 1 person

    • czarowniczy says:

      Illegal alien gets Harvard scholarship? We back to discussing Obama again?

      Liked by 1 person

    • czarowniczy says:

      Qatar, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are the ‘home’ to the largest population of Salafi Muslims in the world so having lots of cash coming out of there isn’t unusual. Post-911 when AQ funding was being examined it was found that a large amount of AQ funding was coming out of Saudi Arabia – not so much as government sponsored but government ignored as rich Saudis were voluntarily donating or being extorted. Lots and lots of cash came out of the Salafi-rich areas during the Russian-Afghan war and a large amount went to al-Azzam who was AQ’s founder. I’m sure the rich Salafi, and other sects, Muslim still contribute heavily, for various reasons, just as I’m sure their conduits of cash from the US are still in operation. Gonna be really tough to dry up their funds though, everyone likes money and few care about the sources if it’s coming their way.

      Like

  12. Lee Jan says:

    As I have commented here before, the ebola countries are majority muslim and they are a priority for Obama, rather than the USA.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s