The Axe Pakistan-Turkey-Saudi Arabia. Muslim countries get together.

 

Just a few weeks ago, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia signed a Nuclear Deal. This was long before President Trump mentioned the possibility of a Nuclear Deal with Saudi Arabia on condition that Saudi Arabia recognized Israel. It did not go through for obvious reasons, at a time when Israel is taking over Muslim Holy sites in Jerusalem. 

Turkey is also a NATO country. Would Article 5 of the NATO agreement be implemented. This can have potentially catastrophic consequences. There are two ways to prevent a disaster. One - getting Turkey out of NATO or two - creating a new agreement for Europe without Turkey by breaking away from NATO.

Whatever happens will have to happen very fast to avoid another World War. The present deal draws the lines between Friends and Foes. We still have to hear from non aligned regional countries that will be massively affected should such a war happen.

The War of Words is what comes before the Physical War

People must understand that the War of Words is what comes before the Physical War, when bombs fly and people die. Any war is a financial affair. In fact, there is always a financial reason for wars to happen. 

At this point in time there are economic rivals fighting to prevail and this is accelerating to the point when there will be a point of no return. We know how wars begin, but we cannot foresee how wars will end. This sort of wars have happened in the past. The Mighty Roman Empire saw the sacking of Rome by invaders. So the success of the so called West is by no means guaranteed.

Going into the not so remote past, we must remember the history of Europe. There was a time when the Moors (Arabic Invaders) and the Turks took over entire regions of Europe by force and kept them under their rule for hundreds of years. The naive belief that demographic changes will occur without consequences is dangerous. Peaceful colonisation will suddenly turn into a more violent expression of colonisation as foreign populations grow in numbers inside the so called West.

Russian Federation/Israel/SouthAfrica: Sanctions don't affect governments. Sanctions affect people

 

When politicians, mass media and activists call for sanctions against countries, they are actually calling for sanctions against ordinary people. Sanctions against Cuba are not just sanctions against the government of Cuba. They will affect ordinary Cubans. The same goes for the sanctions against South Africa in the days of Apartheid. 

When people talk about sanctions against Israel, they are actually talking about sanctions against ordinary israelis, and the same goes for sanctions against the Russian Federation that would affect ordinary citizens. 

 

In the case of sanctions against the Russian Federation, such sanctions have actually benefitted the Russian Federation leading to foreign companies leaving the Russian Federation and creating the space for local, national companies, to prosper. But even so, there is a point of principle. If you apply sanctions against the Russian Federation then the Russian Federation has every right to counterattack and part of the counterattack is the refusal of the Russian Federation to renew agreements regulating gains exports from Ukraine.

It is self-evident that the USA and its acolytes will willingly sacrifice Ukraine that is being used in a war by proxy. The USA does not want Ukraine membership of NATO for very obvious reasons. They know that such membership in application of article 5 of the treaty will engage every single NATO members in a war of unforeseeable consequences. Turkey is using its approval of such membership to blackmail the EU, to force the EU to open its door, and many EU countries are reluctant to open the door to mass Muslim migration into Europe. We already see what is happening across the EU with mass migration levels. France has just experienced yet another series of very harsh events involving lack of integration. Hundreds of millions of EURO lost in just a few days due to riots. Hungary, especially given Hungary's past, is openly reluctant to accept mass migration and accepting Turkey as EU member will open the floodgates. This is something that Hungary does not want.

Sanctions, migration, the threat of an all-out European war are some of the main subjects of the day. When you look at the State of Israel and what it takes to keep the State of Israel alive, you understand why mass migration is rejected vehemently and you can therefore understand Hungary reluctance to mass migration.

When you are fighting a war for survival, you will seek to deprive your enemy of every possible resource. If grains exports stop, so be it. USA and the so called West have been trying to starve the Russian Federation and the Russian Federation is therefore entitled to deprive its enemies of resources that will be used in a war against the Russian Federation.

In a non declared war, the USA, Britain and others are killing Russians. It is funny to see how disagreements within NATO are leading to national political crisis. It is well know that President Biden did not allow British Secretary of State for Defense Ben Wallace MP to stand as candidate to lead NATO. When Benn Wallace MP told Zelensky that Ukraine should be thankful for the support it has received and stated that 'Britain is not Amazon', Ben Wallce MP was expression the feeling of exasperation. USA has not been the greatest supporter of Ukraine. Britain has been the greatest supporter of Ukraine and to do so it has made huge sacrifices. As a consequence of his expressions of exasperation, Ben Wallace MP was chastised by British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. Ben Wallance MP then decided that he will not stay as Secretary of State for Defence, that he is leaving the cabinet in September 2023 and that he will not be standing for re-election in 2024. 

Lets not forget that this particular feud is the icing of the cake on top of several other internal feuds that have plagued the Conservative Party that is now facing at least three by-elections and it is early days. It is only July. A lot could happen before May 2024. The Prime Minister will have to appoint a successor in September 2023. There are rumous relating to an advanced General Election. With so many statements of Conservative MPs that have said that they will not stand for re-election and with the departure of key, very experienced Conservative politicians, Ben Wallace MP's departure combined with by-election losses could yet again trigger a leadership contest or an advanced General Election.

Once again, there is a link between what is happening concerning Ukraine and the state of British politics. There is no denying that after Covid the crisis in Ukraine led to an energy crisis that has severely affected not just Britain but Europe as a whole. The Bank of England has been forced to put up interests several times in a row to try to curb inflation and there have been periodical industrial action across the United Kingdom.

But Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has failed to recognize the fact that when you are facing a potential European war you need to beef up the Armed Forces that have been badly treated for many years. The recent 5.5% salary rise is an insult, especially taking into account that some Members of the Armed Forces earn less than a London bus driver. There is a recruitment crisis. At one point, legislation was passed to invite members of the Commonweath to join the Armed Forces and this did not work. Now, the British government is invited retired members of the Armed Forces and resigning members of the Armed Forces to return to active service. The situation is desperate. Britain has barely 73,000 men and women under the flag and with the absurd conditions in which military personnel have to live in, you have to be an idiot to want to return to active service, and this especially taking into account the fiascos of Afghanistan and Iraq.

 

Einstein on Ukraine: Doing the same over and over again expecting to get different results is the definition of insanity.

 Dear Helen Hayes MP,

Thank for your prompt reply. I must say that in terms of what came first and what happened second, I do disagree with you. Right after the point when the Soviet Union came to an end and Ukraine returned nuclear weapons, everything was alright. Ukraine was facilitating passage of gas and oil from the Russian Federation to the rest of Europe, consuming Russian gas and oil itself and paying for the delivery of gas and oil that it consumed.

The second stage was the time when it became clear that the economic situation was not the best and some Ukrainian oligarchs were shown to be benefitting while the rest of Ukraine was suffering.

The third stage when payments for gas and oil were not made, the Russian Federation asked for payments that were not forthcoming and the political situation become turbulent and made worse by American politicians and EU politicians that saw an opportunity to damage the relationship with the Russian Federation and this we saw on the streets, is on record and it includes records of pseudo demonstrators that were paid to demonstrate.

The fourth stage was the rise of the paramilitaries that with or without authorization of the central government of Ukraine started to alienate ethnic Russians.

The fifth stage was the actual rise of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine when nothing was done to deter paramilitaries and ethnic Russian had to arm themselves and ultimately declared independence. Even at this point in time, they wanted autonomy, but not total separation from Ukraine. It would have been up to the Ukrainian government to tackle the paramilitaries to prevent a civil war.

For years on end, about eight years, the Ukrainian government could have used whatever degree of authority it had to impose the rule of law and prevent the actions of the paramilitaries.

Instead of providing support to bring the situation under control, the West aka USA used Ukraine as part of its anti-Russian strategy. It was done with Iran because Iran at the time was a close ally of the Russian Federation since the Russian Federation provided nuclear fuel for Iranian reactors and it was done in Syria that was also a close ally of the Russian Federation.

Iraq used to be a buffer zone. In fact, Iraq itself was used before against Iran and at the time the West looked the other way when Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran. What happened was that with Iraq out of the way the whole balance in the Middle East changed. Hundreds of thousands of Iraq flee Iraq after the American bombardment and ended up in Turkey, in Lebanon, in Syria – to name a few places. With Iraq out of the way, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel started their quest to fill up the gaps to create a new status quo. What happens in Yemen is very much part of the same game with Britain, Saudi Arabia and USA cooperating with each creating one of the worst human catastrophes because of their conflict with pro-Iranian forces.

So the issues of refugees is not new. It started big way with the disappearance of Iraq and of Libya as buffer zones. Nowadays, the mass media have blamed Belarus from the refugee flood. Let’s not forget that at one point EU was paying Turkey to prevent the waves of refugees desperate to reach Europe.

President Reagan promised Mikhail Gorbachev that with the Berlin Wall gone there would be no further expansion towards the East. Promises that were not fulfilled. Expansion continued apace with the threat of missiles right across the borders of the Russian Federation. What happened with Ukraine was the trigger, but it was not unexpected. The Russian Federation spoke about red lines that were crossed one after another, completely disregarding the concerns of the Russian Federation. Instead of delivering what had been promised, the so-called West – aka USA started to implement sanctions after sanctions and this was rubbing salt in an open wound.

Nothing has changed and the same failing strategies of imposing sanctions go on, antagonizing the Russian Federation ever more.

With regards to energy, despite the conflict in Ukraine, the Russian Federation continues to pump oil and gas towards European countries via Ukraine. Oil prices and gas prices are rising and will keep rising and we will soon see political changes not just in Europe, but most importantly in developing countries that can ill afford the rising costs of energy. This happens at very bad time when we are still recovering after two years of a pandemic that has generated vast financial damages.

We had a choice of bringing about changes via increased trade and development and now we are back again implement the policy of guns. The new German Chancellor speaks about increasing Germany’s defence budget by investing not less than 200 billion Euro. How is this going to work? It is going to pump up debt at the expense of everything else in a country in which there is galloping inflation. Let us remember how we got to this point. In 2017, CDU/CSU with Angela Merkel barely managed to form a coalition. She failed to form a coalition during the first round of negotiations with SPD that refuse to form a coalition. She then tried to form a coalition with FDP and Grünen and didn’t manage to do it. Then, as last resort, she managed to persuade SPD to come onboard again. That was 2017. In the recent Federal Elections, CDU/CSU collapsed from 41% to less than 25% and SPD that didn’t increase its votes was in charge of forming a coalition and did so with FDP and Grünen.  How stable such a coalition will be remains to be seen and energy costs will be a major factor.

If there is growing unemployment, the patience of AG Metal, the biggest union in Germany, will run out and support for SPD that is only represented in 11 of 16 Federal States will collapse meaning the collapse of the German coalition.

Rebuilding the German Armed Forces will not be green. It will require a lot of industrial power mainly based in fossil fuels – coal being the major German resources because Angela Merkel after the Fukushima disaster opted for dismantling German nuclear plants. If Germany becomes unstable – since Germany is the main support of the EU – the EU becomes more unstable.

The situation both in political terms and in geopolitical terms will be solved with more economic activity. Not less economy activity. Sanctions promote less economy activity. Less economic activity promotes unemployment. Unemployment promotes political instability. Political instability that the European continent does not need. You can then cross to France and see what is happening in France. The Socialists after Hollande are out of the game. What is left? Macron and two branches of the so called Far Right.

I haven’t even mentioned the Developing World. Argentina is drowning once again. More than 50 per cent of Uruguayan exports go to China. To name just these two countries, what effect do you think financial issues and the rise of energy prices will have in those two countries? They are not the worst off. Think about the others. In the 1950s and 1960s the collapse of agricultural exports as agricultural prices started to fall led to massive indebtedness followed by massive budget cuts leading to political instability followed by military regimes. Countries live in a cycle of unpayable debt and constant negotiation to refinance debts. How much so-called democratic regimes can take before we are facing another cycle of de facto regimes? In Argentina, there was a cycle of Justicialistas and Radicales. Both of them have proven to be equally ineffective. In Uruguay, the once powerful Partido Nacional and Partido Colorado have only been able to survive by forming a coalition and this is something extraordinary, and this coalition comes after the exhaustion of the so called Frente Amplio that itself is in crisis. What are the political alternatives? Is there a political alternative? What happens in Chile that was once one of the most promising countries of Latin America?

You need to look at the bigger picture. The sooner the present impasse comes to an end, the sooner sanctions are lifted, and trade re-starts in a big way, the sooner we stop talking war and start talking about economic development, the better we all will be.

Look at the big picture. What good came out of the struggle in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and of other military adventures? Is the world a better place because of it? Have you thought about Lebanon and the human tragedy that Lebanon is today?

We keep following the same failed strategies of the US that it itself is a mess with Congress having to pass again and again legislation to increase borrowing to prevent paralysis of the entire Administration and ensuing chaos. Is this the model that we want Britain to follow? Is this the model that we want Europe to follow?

I keep repeating myself and saying that Britain needs its own independent Foreign Policy. We voted for Brexit not to be attached to the designs of the European Union, we talk about trade opportunities, and the first thing we do is to use the same past failed recipes that lead to confrontation, waste, and social chaos.

As Paul Samuelson used to say, the choice is between butter and cannons.

Best regards

Karl Hohenstauffen

Nazanin: British outside Iran, but Iranian in her country of birth

The time to understand the way International Law works is long overdue. To hear a British minister talking about Iran using British citizens as hostages when in fact they are Iranian and hold British citizenship because of double nationality is appalling. 

Such kind of statements completely misrepresent what is actually going on. Iran is duly entitled to deal with its own citizens. While in Iran, British citizens born in Iran are de facto Iranian and not British. 

With regards to obligations Britain has regarding Iran, it is well known that Britain owes monies to Iran, monies that Britain is mandated to pay. This has been going on for ages and it is an issue that has poisoned British/Iranian relationships. Is it due to geopolitics? Is Britain failing to comply with international obligations contracted with Iran because of geopolitical considerations? 

It is thought that if Britain paid its debts Iranian attitudes would change, but what has happened for decades hasn't helped. Iran has been under siege and British history of interventions in Middle East and Asia Minor has made matters a lot worse. Since the fall of the Shah of Iran, USA and Britain have been involved in actions against Iran. They used Irak under Saddam Hussein to wage a chemical war against Iran because Iran dared to claim ownership of its oil resources. They never forgave Iran for daring to stand as an independent country.

When USA and Britain decided to get rid of Saddam Hussein, they created a vacuum that is now being filled up by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran with other countries being affected in the whole process. A mass exodus created by Britain and the USA led to neighbouring countries being flooded with refugees and this completely destabilized the entire region. The conflict in Syria very much started with the so called Arab Spring that both Britain and the USA promoted. The conflict in Yemen is perhaps and without perhaps the biggest tragedy that Britain and the USA actively contributed to create. What happened in Libya, what happened in Egypt, what is happening in Syria, what is happening in Yemen, what is happening in Lebanon and what is about to happen in Jordan could have been avoided. 

A knee-jerk reaction led to the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and this was followed by the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and what happened then is history leading to the mess we are in nowadays.

When we look for an explanation of why Iran could ever want to have nuclear weapons, the explanation is self-evident. Iran would look for nuclear weapons to deter any aggressor. Isn't this the explanation or justification for Britain to have its Nuclear Deterrent. Well, Iran is also entitled to have its Nuclear Deterrent to protect itself for external aggression.

In order to lower tensions, Britain will have to change its attitudes towards Iran. Paying debts could be a first step in the right direction. Britain will have to change its attitudes towards Saudi Arabia to reassure other players in the Middle East and Asia Minor that Britain will not support aggression against Iran and Britain will not be involved in wars by proxy like the ongoing conflict in Yemen. All regime-changing attempts must come to an end. All military interventions on foreign soil must come to an end. All demonizing campaigns by the political establishment and the mass media must come to an end. All economic warfare must come to an end. Normalization of relationships is the best way to prevent cases like the case of Nazanin from ever happening again.

 

Ursula von der Leyen muss weg

 

To say that Ursula von der Leyen was incompetent as German Defense Secretary and has been incompetent as appointed President of the European Commission would be a gross understatement.

She started by making a mess in Northern Ireland and in the Republic of Ireland by going against established EU policies and later backtracking when she was bombarded with criticisms, including criticisms expressed by the German mass media. Shge managed to unite Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland against her.

With regards to the fight against Covid-19, she hasn't been on top of her brief and has stood paralized while EU countries stopped acting as EU countries and went against each other. Austria is leading a group of six EU countries that want to have access to Russian vaccines and Germany has now joined them while France and others remain stuck with rising number of infections, hospitals that cannot cope with the number of cases and rising deaths leading to further quarentine measures.

The latest chapter was the embarrassment during a meeting in Turkey. She allowed herself to be sidelines and later complained saying that she had been sidelined. She doesn't have the guts to act on the spot. Is she really the President of the European Commission? If she is the President of the European Commission she should start acting as the President of the European Commission. If she doesn't have what it takes to be the boss, she should put herself aside and allow somebody else to be the boss.

The office of President of the European Commission is being downgraded, the EU project is being downgraded, and her former boss Angela Merkel is doing no better. Hesitation, gigantic errors of judgment, followed by meaningless apologies that give way to more hesitation, more gigantic errors of judgment, followed by more meaningless apologies. Angela Merkel no longer has what it takes to be leader and voters are turning against CDU/CSU across Germany, election after election. Time for change, but what will replace them? The very authority of the German Chancellor as now former party leader - she had to resign the leadership of CDU to remain in power until the next German Federal Election - is being challenged by members of her own party. She had to come out and threaten members of her own party that were found working with Alternative fur Deutschland in several regions.

To sum up, a mess in Germany and a mess in the European Union. 

EU, Turkey, Greece and other conflicts are clear examples of the mess the world is in

EU, Turkey, Greece and other conflicts are clear examples of the mess the world is in

Conventions on Human Rights? Universal Declarations? Not worth the paper they are written on. Wherever you look, the world is a state of flux. Chaotic situations and golf post that keep changing NATO is no more than the direct consequence of widespread corruption. Dwight Einsenhower alerted about the dangers of the weapons industries becoming all two powerful.

Where there is no conflict, conflicts are created to allow the blood spilling industries to prosper. Look at the Americas, at Africa, at the Middle East and Asia Minor, at Asia itself. Of each conflict the direct consequence is massive flows of displaced populations that are used as pawns. Suddenly, border fences are erected and desperate people end up being killed. 

The present chaos cannot go on forever without causing war between other countries and Europe must get ready for war. This is not going to end up well. The very existence of NATO and of the UN, two organisations born out of World War Two, is being threatened. The Twenty-First Century is not the Twentieth Century and we find outself totally unprepared to deal with new challenges.   

Corona Virus and Immigration: Yet another reason to restrict immigration

Corona Virus and Immigration: Yet another reason to restrict immigration

The headline "Turkey allows 100,000 immigrants to cross into Greece" is not just about sheer politics. It is a health threat. Vulnerable people entering Europe could well be a bomb about to explode. Immigraiton has always been a health risk. Much of the native aborigine people of the American Continent were wipe out by illnesses brought in by Europeans.

People carry diseases wherever they go and the local populations might not be immune to viruses and bacteria brought in by newcomers. International Treaties and Convention on Assylym and Immigration fail to address health issues. What started in China is now spreading to the rest of the world.

Each country has to take measures to protect itself and if necessary treaties and conventions should be amended or rescinded on health grounds. Protecting local populations is top priority. This is about health and also about National Security.

Syria: Russia is building peace for all

Syria: Russia is building peace for all

While USA, Britain and others were bent on regime change in Syria, thus creating the mess that Syria became, Russia was involved - especially authorized by the Syrian government - to restore stability in Syria.

Even today, the British Parliament seems to be more worried about how close Russia and Turkey have become and there is even talk about raising the issue at the next NATO summit. They seem to forget that thanks to Russian mediation in Syria the feared massacres in Syria will not happen. Turkey will have the reassurances it needs that Kurds will not use Syria as a platform to attack Turkey. For the Syrian government, Russia provides the reassurances that Syria will recover control in areas that were occupied by foreign forces.

And what the mass media and many of the political establishments are worried about? They talk about loss of American influence. So what is more important: American influence with the loss of the lives of American soldiers who would be dying for nothing or the restoration of peace in Syria and by extension the potential to restore peace in the Middle East? If peace is restored in Syria, there won't be a platform for Islamic State to attack other countries and this means that everybody in Middle East and Asia Minor and outside the said areas will benefit. US withdrawal was a rational and benefitial measure for all, including those not involved in conflicts. The sooner political estability is restored, the sooner the fighting will stop for the benefit of all. 

Another factor that both some people in the USA and many in the Europe ignore is that Turkey has sufferent the brunt of instability in the Middle East and Asia Minor. Hundreds of thousands of refugees, running away from conflict, ended up in Turkey and this is causing serious problems in Turkey. So the sooner conflict ends, the sooner many if not all of those refugees will be able to return to Syria. What is more, when the conflict in Syria is over many of those who sought refuge in Europe and elsewhere will be able to return to Syria. This way, many difficult issues several European countries are struggling to deal with will be resolved.

So, once again, thanks to the Russian Federation, there is hope for peace in a very troubled part of the Middle East and there is hope of being able to deal with the problems of refugees and the problems massive flow of refugees can and do create.

But the positive influence of the Russian Federation doesn't end in Middle East, Asia Minor, Europe and the USA. The Russian Federation is building up cooperation with African countries and in turn will create a much better environment, an environment for peaceful and democratic developments.

  

Who will benefit from war in Middle East and Asia Minor and who will suffer because of it?

Who will benefit from war in Middle East and Asia Minor and who will suffer because of it?

A brief look at EU oil importers tells us that the Russian Federation produce 28.9 % of petroleum related products consumed in the European Union, followed by Norway with 12%. Around 8.9% comes from Saudi Arabia, 4.6% comes from Iraq, 4.6% comes from Azerbaijan, 6.5% comes from Kazahkstan (to name countries close to the conflict zone). About 20% of oil exports come through the straight that is going to be at the centre of a conflict between Iran and USA.

Depending on reserves and the duration of the conflict, the price escalade could and would force countries to recalculate national budgets across the European Union. The financial Tsunami that would be the direct consequence would lead to extraordinary political extremes across Europe. If you think that Democracy is already fragile, think again. What could happen would send nations towards the political abyss.

This, my friends, is the image of Armageddon and is very much a possibility should there be widespread war in the Middle East and Asia Minor. We are entering Nostradamus territory. 

Now, because of the implication of such conflict, how united will old allies be in this regard? Will economic considerations and the potential serious political repercussions be a reason to challenge old alliances? For the United States of America, such a conflict comes with the territory. The number of military bases spread across Iraq and other neighbouring countries of Iran has both a political and an economic dimension. In order to maintain its image as major Superpower, the United States cannot be seen as walking away from conflict after so many statements about 'consequences'. It comes a time when statements that are not supported with actions become not just an embarrassement but a sign of weakness.

Let's look at another issue that very much involves NATO and it is about Turkey's position as member of the alliance. Turkey recently acquired anti-missile defenses and Russian jets are on the way. Calls by the USA to prevent Turkey from acquiring Russian jets and Russian anti-missile defenses have fallen on deaf ears. President Erdogan is not going to do something that goes against Turkish interests. It is well known that Turkey is moving in to fill up a void created by what happened in Iraq and dealing with its own regional agenda that sometimes collides with the interests of the United States of America. As a member of NATO, Turkey is seen as getting too close to the Russian Federation. What can USA do about it? At the moment, it is all about talking and saying 'if you get this, we will not give you that'. Some people might be asking how reliable Turkey would be if there was a massive regional conflict.

How reliable would other members of NATO be if USA actions go against their crucial interests? Britain has been playing a waiting game not to go against agreements signed with Iran and the same attitude has been adopted by others in Continental Europe. USA has been telling Germany that Germany has to stop buying Russian oil and Russian gas. Easier said than done when 28.9% of energy supplies to the European Union come from the Russian Federation. I reckon that Germany and the rest of the EU will be reluctant to engage or support any actions that could undermine their own national interests.

Going farther East, China has been told by the USA that it has to protect its own ships going through waters that could be in the conflict zone if there is war against Iran and what about Japan? A possible confrontation in Asia Minor and in the Middle East would affect the entire world economy. It can be safely said that everybody will be affected in more ways than one and not just economically but politically. What is the Organisation of the United Nations saying about the possibility of such a conflict? Is the USA going to bypass - once again - the Organisation of the United Nations? 
 

EU: Das Vierte Reich in the making

EU: Das Vierte Reich in the making

Let's not beat around the bush. The purpose is clear for all to see. The rise of a new block that will be on a collision course with China, Russia and the US and presumably also on a collision course with the rest of the World. 

For those who dreamed about a peace project, this is starting to look like a project for war with its own Central Government and its own Armed Forces.

From the Common Market to promote trade between free nations to Military Alliance to prepare for a massive confrontation.

In the old days, European Nations went to war against each other. They won or lost wars, territories were partitioned or taken over depend on who was the winner and this was the way things went for a very long time. Now, we the rise of a blend of Axe and Entente that could have catastrophic consequences for those who belong to the blend of Axe and Entente and for those outside such arrangement. 

For those who believe in present arrangements with NATO as the guarantor of peace and security and not just in Europe but worldwide there is a major crisis in the horizon. As tensions rise in the Middle East and Asia Minor with the withdrawal of European forces from Iraq and elsewhere because of the confrontation of USA and some Gulf nations with Iran, other players will have to make very hard decisions. What will be Turkey's position, for example. During the second war against Iraq, Turkey wasn't very enthusiastic about it. Saddam Hussein was keeping the lid on Kurdish aspirations and the defeat of Saddam Hussein would lead to the de-facto partition of Iraq giving Kurds in Northern Iraq a free hand to help their own people in Turkey and elsewhere.

Whatever the Lib Dems and others can say about the European Union as a supporter peace, Centralised Power and the existence of European Union Armed Forces plus talk about 'uniting to stand up to China, Russia and US' are not about peace. It looks a lot more like preparation for War.

What do Americans think about the arrangement proposed? Let us remember that Isolationism was very much appreciated in the USA after the losses suffered in World War One. The American public didn't want to get involved in European Wars. Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill had to make huge efforts to persuade the American public that the USA had to get involved in World War Two. Had not been for the Japanese attack in Pearl Harbour and the subsequent declaration of war issue by both Germany and Italy against the USA, it would have been extremely difficult to get the USA directly involved in Europe. Sending war materials including ships and tanks was one thing that the American people could accept with the proviso that it was merely a transaction that was going to be paid for. Sending their sons and daughters to die in an European war was quite another.

Now, according to Angela Merkel, the USA is a foe, something that the European Union must stand against. Disagreements in terms of trade are now combined with disagreements in terms of Foreign Policy. But how of Angela Merkel's war-like approach is real. Lets think for a moment about the relationship between Germany and the Russian Federation. The Poles and others are complaining that while EU countries suffer because of sanctions against the Russian Federation there is no clarity in terms of German/Russian relations when it comes to oil and gas. The USA itself has criticised Germany's approach regarding oil and gas acquired from the Russian Federation.

Despite all the aforementioned, public expressions that describe USA, China and Russia as foes are not reassuring. 

 

Nostradamus and the Middle East: Are we on the verge of a major cataclism?

Nostradamus and the Middle East: Are we on the verge of a major disaster? In the 1990s and then again in 2003, the issue was Iraq, and Palestine was an ongoing headache that had become a constant and so there were no unexpected consequences believed to be about to come out of it.

What Western military intervention in Iraq in 2003 opened was a can of worms that is now spreading in every direction reaching Europe with very undesirable effects to the point that political stability in Europe is being seriously undermined.

Despite the fact that the major players, US and Russia are decidedly involved in a series of conflicts, the risk is that those trying to fill up the gaps might unwittingly turn regional issues into something major.

When secondary players become involved, there might be not enough reasons for restraint and as the battle of words takes over the unexpected might happen. There are government and there are populations and government playing the tune for internal audiences in an effort to prevent or to counter internal upheaval are most dangerous since external wars are thought to be - a good way to silence internal opposition or to cover up bad governance.

The South Atlantic War initiated by the Argentinian Military Junta was a desperate attempt by the military to play for time when the military were loosing control. They need something that could unite a very divided Argentina. Whatever can be used to counter internal divisions will be used to try and unite public opinion in favour of governments. 

Kurdish struggle towards statehood goes on. Kurdish populations exist in Iran, Iraq, Turkey and also in Syria and Turkey is the one most affected. Israel and Iran have been at odds for a very long time. Israel favoured the invasion of Iraq and now is pushing the US to see Iran as a valid target and to justify military operations within Syrian territory. While many in the European Union favoured the continuation of a nuclear deal signed up with Iran, US withdrew from the pact and has announced that it would be reduced its military intervention in Syria. Israeli action in Syria and elsewhere justify the level of mistrust of Iranian authorities when Iranians who are fighting against Islamic State are being killed by Israeli jets.

Saudi Arabia and Iran are in a proxy war in Yemen. Qatar is leaving OPEC and is not in good terms with Saudi Arabia. Lebanon and Jordan could be brought into conflict due to Israel military operations in the region. And then there is the relationship between European countries and countries in the Middle East. Germany and France announced an embargo on arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Turkey - a NATO country - threatened France - another NATO country - about French military operations in support of Kurdish fighters in Syria.

Where the initial flash will come from that will trigger a major conflict is everybody's guess but there are plenty of possibilities for disaster to strike. The assassination of a Saudi Arabian journalist in spite of the savagery and callousness shown by the Saudi Arabian Monarchy might be seen as insignificant when it comes to a very difficult balancing exercise.

Britain's attempt to defuse the situation in Yemen has to do with putting an end to a human catastrophe but it has also the aim of reducing the chances of a direct confrontation between Saudi Arabia and Iran. 

We are dealing with a House of Cards. One wrong move and wars will spread in every direction. 

London: The number of victims of Moderate Islam keeps growing

Aysha Frade is one of the latest victims of Moderate Islam. The mother of two was slaughtered yesterday close to the Houses of Parliament where Libtards and Lefttards Members of Parliament and their acolytes continue to promote the so called Religion of Peace.

"We must be more like they are", they say. So maybe we should all drive cars into crowds and stab Police officers in front of the House of Parliament. What do you think? Or we should detonate bombs inside underground trains and on buses. Or we should stab elderly Catholic priests in French churches. Or we should go around raping women and children across Europe. Or we should go around beheading people in the name of Sharia Law. Would such actions make us be as the ones they seek to protect?

The Politically Correct Society protects the enemies of Western Civilisation talking about Human Rights. What about the Human Rights of the victims of Muslim attacks?

And the you have statesmen like President Erdogan saying: Europeans will not be safe on European streets or Turkish newspapers reminding Netherlands that it only has about 40,000 soldiers while there are more than 400,000 Turks living in Netherlands. Aren't such statements a declaration of war against ordinary law abiding European people?

Angela Merkel: What a catastrophic German Chancellor

Angela Merkel: What a catastrophic German Chancellor!

The Guardian as many other media talk about the fury of Angela Merkel as Turkey accuses Germany of implementing 'Nazi-style practices' because Turkish politicians are not being allowed to carry out a campaign in favour of a Turkish constitutional reform in Germany.

The Netherlands and several others countries don't want their territories to be used by Turkish politicians as a political battlefield to extend the powers of President Erdogan.

One should expect then that all EU plans to incorporate Turkey as a member country of the EU would have stalled.

Another aspect of the confrontation is the fact that Turkey is also a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

And there is also yet another issue which is the issue of refugees/economic migrants given that Angela Merkel has been at the forefront of a campaign to persuade Turkey to act as a wall to prevent the passage of millions of migrants on their way to Continental Europe.

Angela Merkel has been an unmitigated disaster. Firstly, she made a very pompous statement saying "All refugees welcome". She didn't even bother to consult with other EU countries that were going to be affected as routes of passage towards Germany. She generated crisis after crisis as other countries were being overrun by a massive influx of migrants and things got ugly not just in the other countries affected but also in Germany.

Germany wasn't prepared to register the huge number of newcomers. Germany didn't have the means to determine who was a genuine refugee and who wasn't a genuine refugee. Germany didn't have the means to support millions of people coming in. No income, no places to stay, not enough services to support such a massive demographic influx.

She tried to force other countries to take refugees. She tried to put in place a deal with Turkey to contain the influx of migrants. She talked about paying people to go back to their countries of origin. She talked about deporting people without even knowing if they were real refugees or merely economic migrants.

Angela Merkel has made the situation of real refugees a lot worse and in the process is turning ordinary people against real refugees. Suddenly, the vocabulary changes and we talk more and more about migrants. In one of her latest interventions, she talks about 'safe countries'. She doesn't have a clue about what is talking about. She could be sending people back to be killed in her desperation to get rid of migrants when the campaign towards Federal Elections in Germany is in full swing already.

A demagogue, an incompetent politician and a very irresponsible German Chancellor who is now been categorised as a Nazi by the very same people she was trying to make a deal to keep migrants out of Germany.

EU-Turkey Deal on Refugees violates International Law and Conventions on Human Rights

EU-Turkey Deal on Refugees 'would contravene International Law'.

Vincent Cochetel, Regional Refugee Coordinator for the Refugee Crisis in Europe for UNHCR, stated that the announced deal with Turkey is a direct violation of International Law.

The deal which includes sending back refugees en mass to Turkey will contravene the right to protection  under European and International Law.

It looks and seems that the desperation of Angela Merkel has reached peak levels when she and other EU leaders are willing and ready to treat people like cattle in exchange for money. Mr Cochetel indicated that 'the collective expulsion of foreigners is prohibited under the European Convention on Human Rights'.

Afghani Militiamen behead Islamic State members and put heads along the road

The picture shows the heads of Islamic fighters killed by Afghani militiamen that counter the brutality of Islamic State with a tooth for a tooth and eye for an eye policy.

Seeing reports about those in Europe that leave their family homes to go and join Islamic State, one wonders if Western tactics to counter Islamic State are not outdated.

If any of those wanting to leave or those who left knew that their families in Europe were going to be interned or killed, would they think about joining Islamic State or want to remain as members of Islamic State?

We are a soft target because our Laws have made us soft target. We give the benefit of Human Rights to those who hold our Human Rights in total contempt.

When the possibility of using Nuclear Weapons against Islamic State was mentioned, I certainly welcomed the idea. Why wasting so many flight hours and bombs when the job could be done in a more efficient manner by dropping the ultimate weapon of mass destruction to wipe them off of the face of Earth?

The planet's population is growing steadily and many innocent people are condemned to starvation so that the scum of Earth can continue to cause widespread misery and fear.

Ottoman Empire Part 2: Next stop? Israel

Turkey is fully supporting Islamic State. This is not just about cheap oil that Turkey is acquiring as it finances and arms Islamic State.

With Saddam Hussein out of the way, with a compromised Syria and a weakened Egypt, Palestine is ripe for the taking.

Turkey knows that the outcome of a direct confrontation with Israel, the only major player that could stop Turkey in the region, would be counter productive. Therefore, it is ready and willing to wage a war by proxy against Israel, a war that could prove to be very popular amongst people that until now have been locked in combat against Islamic State.

With Russia in Syria, Islamic State aka Turkey knows that its chances in Syria are limited and therefore a change of course towards Golan Heights and the Occupied Territories would make many in the Muslim World have a change of hearts. There must be a lot of thinking going on about ways to unite Muslim factions in a Holy War against Jews and incidentally also unite factions of those who live in the so called Western World to make them act as one.

The essence would be to make everyone believe that 'this is not a war between Sunni and Shiite. This is a war against our real enemies'. In more than one way, since the days of Saladin, Sultan of Egypt, internal divisions have always weakened Muslim attempts 'to conquer the world'.

About 23% of the World's population is Muslim. I cannot even begin to imagine what would be possible if Muslims across all continents were to get together with one single purpose. Turkey aka Islamic State is very much looking for a unifying theme. Beheading and killing fellow Muslims couldn't possibly be part of such an approach but we the intensification of external intervention a change of direction looks increasingly feasible.

Saudi Arabia is not even a worthy opponent nor are worthy opponents any of the other Arab States both big and small. What an amazing paradox! Turkey, a NATO member, leading a Muslim Holy War to achieve territorial and political hegemony across Africa, Asia Minor and the Middle East, now on a head on confrontation with Israel.

Syria IS Bombing

Motion to bomb Islamic State headquarters and others installations operated by Islamic State in Syria

I went yesterday to the House of Commons to listen with intent and in situ to all the arguments presented on the Syrian issue.

66 Labour MPs out of 231 Labour MPs supported the government motion - this means in practical terms that the vast majority of Labour MPs supported Jeremy Corbyn's position against bombing Syria. So all the talk by the mass media about a rebellion against Jeremy Corbyn is utter and absolute rubbish.   

1)    The Conservatives presented the case not as war on Syria but as an extension of military operations presently carried out in Iraq despite the fact that crossing into Syria will effectively mean entering into another country without the express authorization of the Syrian government.

2)    In Iraq, air attacks are carried out in cooperation with Iraqi ground forces. In Syria, air attacks will be carried out mainly in Raqqa (a town that is reportedly being used as headquarters by  Islamic State in order to carry operations in Syria and elsewhere).

3)    The motion presented in the House of Commons makes no mention of British ground forces being involved in Syria and it leaves open the question about what kind of effectiveness bombing operations will have without the involvement of troops on the ground.

4)    Trying to deflect the issue of not having British ground forces, or EU ground forces or NATO ground forces ore regional forces from neighbouring countries, the Conservatives gave a figure that was constantly changing mentioning groups that are already fighting in Iraq against both the Syrian government, against Islamic States and against each other (40,000, 50,000, 70,000) and that therefore lack any kind of coordination.

5)    The issue of Turkey and of Saudi Arabia supporting Islamic State was brought up several times and the question about who is supporting Islamic State was insistently made without having any formal reply from the Government that put forward the motion.

Karl Hohenstauffen

Turkey supports Islamic State

Now Turkish President Erdogan said in 1997: "The Mosques are our Barracks, the Domes our Helmets, the Minarets our  Bayonets and the Faithful our Soldiers".

This is the man in charge in Turkey that is attacking Syrian Kurds and Iraqi Kurds who are fighting against Islamic State.

Turkey is a de-facto Terrorist State, a small detail that Frau Angela Merkel, German Chancellor (still), and others choose to ignore.

If Europe makes pacts with Terrorists, Europe will be hit over and over again by Terrorism. Let us remember that those who carried out the attacks in Paris were supported by Turkey because President Erdogan is very much one of them.

Never mind if Saddam Hussein gassed Kurds in Iraq. Erdogan is killing Kurds in Turkey, in Iraq and in Syria and today added another lamentable chapter to his record: he shot down a Russian plane in an unprovoked attack and is also responsible for the killing not only of the pilots but also of those who came to rescue the pilots.

Ever wondered where ISIS gets Toyota trucks and Weaponry?

If Erwin Rommel had had the supply of transport and weapons ISIS seems to be getting, the Afrika Korps would have defeated the Allies in World War Two,

Does Turkey provide supplies for ISIS? Does Saudi Arabia provide supplies for ISIS? Endless supply of fuel, endless supply of transport, endless supply of weapons including anti-aircraft missiles. Where do you people think they come from?

Well, add to this that somebody is buying oil produced by ISIS. Everything points in the direction of the White House that was instrumental in supporting AlQaeda and in the creation of ISIS. The fury regarding Russia military intervention in Syria proves the point since Russia is targeting those US, UK and others support. Do you actually think that without US support a long line of trucks could be moving around without being detected by US satellite capabilities?

The United States of America knows where ISIS is precisely because the USA is supporting ISIS and has been doing so from the very beginning. Everything else is merely playing for the gallery of the naive and brainwashed massed daily fed the usual quota of crap provided by the US State Department and echoes by the useful idiots of the mass media.