IRAN: OF CONSPIRACIES, CABALS AND COLLUSIONS
If you're a regular reader here, you're already familiar with my usual pattern of doing things: first I talk about general context, then introduce the article or articles of the day which have caught my attention, and which form the fuel for my high octane speculation, which ends the blog.
Today, however, I must state clearly, and up front, that we're dealing with high octane speculation right from the start, even though I haven't stated it yet (other than in the title). To be completely forthright about it, the speculation I am going to indulge in isn't really my own. Rather, it is a summary of that of others who sent in various versions of the following story, along with their own musings. I'm simply summarizing their ideas with a little embellishment of my own. After all, if you're playing continuo as well as concertato, a little ad lib and ornamentation is called for.
In this case, the speculation comes from Mr. G.L.R., and Mr. H.B., and it concerns the following articles:
Mr. H.B. sent this one, and it's clear enough from the title the speculation that is being indulged in some circles in the alternative media, and indeed, Mr. Netanyahu's visit to Mr. Putin, so shortly before the recent Israeli strikes, does raise the question of whether or not Mr. Putin "greenlighted" the operation:
Did Putin Green-Light Tonight's Massive Israeli Strikes On Syria?
This comes, too, at a time when Mr. Putin has stated that no further Russian anti-air missile systems will be shipped to Syria...
Then there's this, from Mr. G.L.R:
Netanyahu: I Told Putin Israel Has Right to Defend Itself in Face of Iranian Aggression
And of course, all of this is going on against the wider context of (1) the Saudi coup, (2) Saudi window dressing, with Prince Mohammed bin Salman's visit to the leader of Egypt's Coptic Christian churches, (3) more window dressing between the (out)house of Saud and Pope Francis, agreeing to open Christian churches in Saudi Arabia, which, given Pope Francis' Marxist proclivities, if I were the Saudis, I'd be looking askance at (you'd be better off talking with Patriarch Kiril III, guys; there are lots of areas for discussion, e.g., he wears a towel on his head too); and finally (4) President Trump's decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal, which means the USA will probably not be send any more bales and pallets of plastic-wrapped money to Tehran in the middle of the night.
Now, as some of these articles make clear, and as I've suggested a few times, sooner or later, Mr. Putin (and for that matter, Mr. Xi), are going to have to choose sides: with Iran, or against it.
But what if, Mr. G.L.R., and Mr. H.B. suggested, we're looking at clues of a much bigger, more carefully-thought out game? Here I have to quit playing continuo, and go over to concertato with a few of my own embellishments. If you've been following the North Korea story, it is very clear that the USA has been quietly conducting a dizzying round of negotiations with that country. It is also equally clear that, to a great extent, the initiative for the coming summit between Mr. Kim and Mr. Trump came from "the nations concerned", i.e., China, Japan, South Korea, and, I imagine, as a strong but hidden background presence, Russia.
One down, so to speak, one (Iran) to go...
In looking at the recent Israeli strikes and the Syrian and Russian responses, as both gentlemen suggested to me, those responses were very muted. And then there was China's response to Mr. Trump's decision to withdraw from Iran by basically increasing its commitment to expand the railroad ties(not to coin a pun) between the two countries. So, stepping back from this we see: Muted response from Russia, increased Chinese expansion in the country, muted response from Syria, Israeli and Saudi insistence that the real problem is Iran, and an American pull-out from the Obama nuclear deal.
In my high octane speculation (which, again, is partly Mr. G.L.R.'s and Mr. H.B.'s), what it appears we might be looking at is a repeat of the North Korean pattern: get all of the involved parties to agree on a solution, and present it to the party in question as a fait accompli. So I have to wonder if, perhaps, the ayatollahs are "on the menu"; if perhaps, for the good of the region and its economic stability, an internationally-coordinated long term effort at "regime change" might be in the offing. After all, the Chinese (and the USA, and the Israelis) are well-known to sneak a "clipper chip or two" into the computers they sell, and construction crews and materials coming from China can always bug the daylights out of anything they build or touch. So, for that matter, can the Russians. So what if the trade, here, is "we'll allow regime change in Tehran, for you backing off Syria," or something like that. In any case, the solution is either regime change, or Tehran must cease, immediately, all sponsorship of Shia terrorism. And, of course, that means on the other side, the (out)house of Saud - in any such internationally-pressed North Korea pattern behind-the-scenes negotiation - will also have to forego its sponsorship of Wahhabist-Suni terrorism.
To be sure, this scenario is crazy, but I cannot help it; every intuition I have gives the impression to me that much more is going on behind the scenes in the region than we're being told, and it smacks of the "North Korea pattern." Of course, Iran is not North Korea. It's in a much stronger position, as a nation. But that's not the regime. Don't forget just a few years ago that there were uprisings in Iran against the regime. Some argue that it was Mr. Obama's hesitation that doomed it. But rest assured, those sentiments simmer under the surface of "the Islamic republic." If these wild speculations have any kernel of truth, then we should, over the next few years, be able to spot the dots as the "North Korea pattern" manifests itself.
It fulfills other deliberately created, and in this case, very false "patterns" too, but that's another blog for another day.
See you on the flip side...
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
“we’ll allow regime change in Tehran, for you backing off Syria,” – Don’t think so.
There is a war on all those countries that don’t use the US dollar for oil & gas. Iran wants to fight the war in Syria so it doesn’t become Syria. Russia wants to fight the war in Syria not in the south Russian republics.
The entire US strategy is to divide and conquer. If Russia, China and Iran stick together they win and they know it. The longer this goes on the weaker the US position becomes. They can’t attack Russia or China directly so they pick the weak link, Iran, to start the next war of destruction in.
Benjamin Fulford, 2018-05-21: (usual caveats on Fulford)
“In public, this dispute can be seen in the biggest open split between European powers and the United States since the end of World War 2. We have the leaders of France, Germany, and the EU openly calling for an end to the post-war European/American alliance. The U.S. side, for its part, has publicly threatened sanctions against European countries.
The immediate trigger was Trump’s decision to leave the Iranian nuclear accord. Of course, anybody who is following what is really going on knows that the Trump decision to leave the Iranian nuclear accord has nothing to do with nuclear weapons and is really about Iran’s announcement that it will sell oil to Europe priced in Euros, not petro-dollars.
While these groups have been fighting for world power for a very long time, what they have in common is a vision of an end time when the world will ‘end’ and then be replaced by something else.
The trick now is to get these various groups to agree to some sort of vision of the future that does not involve Armageddon and the destruction of 90% of humanity. That is what the real fight is about. The financial war over such things as petro-dollars is thus really a war over control of the psychological process of deciding what humanity as a species will do in the future.”
Trump’s Deep State planted the idea that almost everyone believes: Kim Jong Un ‘could, or will’ cancel the upcoming June 12th meeting in Singapore. Trump’s response? “So, what? The current sanctions are and will stay in place until we reach a successful negotiation.”
I think Kim will cancel the Trump meeting. He probably started to understand that U.S. government can’t be trusted, specially now when bloodthirsty Bolton is back in power. And really who can blame him? We all remember what happened to Gaddafi, I’m sure Kim remembers it too.
Another interesting tidbit from the Iraqi analyst: he laughs at Israeli claims to have wiped out “All 40 Iranian military bases in Syria” and added: do you think if Iran had a military outpost in Syria that Iranians would be sitting there like in a Starbucks sipping coffee waiting for Israeli bombs to fall of their heads … you are in for a big surprise (and then he talks about huge underground bases under mountains etc). Possibly bullshit. Possibly not. I don’t know. But it shows how limited and silly some of the analysis in both the alternative and mainstream media can be in the absence of intimate knowledge of the region and its actors, which might hold many surprises.
May Syria regain the Golan Heights … Hail Assad
Can you identify anyone who the Iranians can depend on for help in their quest to defeat Israel? It appears Iran has been abandoned, except for the European leaders who are really, really made at Trump.
Iran has not been abandoned by Russia because Russia never cared for Iran in the first place, nor would any Russian leaders put Iran’s interests above their own.
My guess is that Iran is not in Syria to attack Israel, but to deter Israel from attacking Iran. If Israel messes with Iran, Iran can turn the heat in Syrian Golan heights for example (without itself being directly involved militarily). Same applies to Lebanon.
Russia could not have achieved victory in Syria without Iran organizing and training and leading Shia militias from Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan (not to mention Hizbollah). They do not have boots on the ground and they feel vulnerable with only an air and naval base, so they want Iran out of Syria.
In the end, what may count more than anything else will be how the arab world, esp. Iraq, Syria will think about Iran.
Also, there is more than Islamic stuff going on here. There are many nationalists under Islamic garb hiding in Iran’s armed forces.
Europe will put its own interests above that of Iran obviously. No one expected any help from Europe except “delusional [West-Leaning] nationalists” like Zarif (and other) who still think that Germany will rescue its li’l Aryan babe from the evil semites … not so, Germany is itself beholden to Israel, and will place the interests of Israel and the United States above its own because it is obliged to do so as a vassal state. No one expects help from a vassal state, especially one that was itself emasculated, disarmed, and humiliated by the BOSS (USrael).
Iran is alone and has been throughout history, and can only succeed if it relies on its own devices and resources and people. It takes a lot of time to overcome centuries of slumber and backwardness. I see no choice for Iran but to develop nukes and ICBMs, if it is to survive as a nation. and of course the many other technologies that make nukes obsolete. Iran has had the highest rate of scientific growth of any country on the planet in the last decade or two, but coming from a low-base it will take decades more to catch up.
Iran can also bide its time and wait for Asia to emasculate the West, at which point China and Iran and India will form an alliance that will rule Asia. Russia will likely become a vassal state of the West (Medvedev is back), and the US will decline faster than ever before with Trump’s foolish moves.
It is also a fight between Russia and Germany for control of Iran. When Russia sees Iran leaning towards Germany (i.e. France, Germany, Italy) they feel threatened, because Russia has little to offer to Iran. Germany could position itself ideally in Asia by having Iran as its junior ally, and Iranians would approve of engagement with Europe & Germany, but not with Russia (Russia is still hated in Iran for stealing Iran’s northern territories) … however, Germany will not be allowed by the US to make gains against Israel or against USA.
Not Russia nor any country can effect regime change in Iran, as some pro-Putin hawks believe. Regime change can only come from the armed forces or through some popular uprising (which the West will try to hijack for its own benefit, but Iranians are now well aware of US plans to destroy Iran, Iraq, Syria). Any new regime in Iran, that is not installed by outside countries, will result in a regime that will be even more mindful of Iran’s national interests … and will likely act in a similar way to acquire influence in the region.
The Russian mass media are also very anti-Iran … don’t be fooled by Putin’s words. Russians hate Iranians more than the reverse. The only people who love Russia in Iran are former communist party members who have turned form communist to putinist.
Also, I don’t know if this is correct, but I am listening to a well-connected Iraqi analyst right now on youtube (it is not in English) and he claims that the Syrian morale wrt to Israel has never been higher, and that Syria was able to inflict significant damage on ten different Israeli bases in Israel-occupied-Syrian-Golan-Heights. According to this analyst, Israel had its butt handed to it, and it can expect much harder times in the future in its continued illegal occupation of the Golan Heights.
Let us hope he is right. I would like nothing better than see both Saudis and Israel get their butts handed to them. Perhaps in the not too distant future 🙂
The analysis is interesting but as Dr. Farrell pointed out a re-hash of relatively uninformed conspiracies that fail to take into account soft power, and brash optimism of the American kind about their own capabilities versus those of nations like Iran and their leaders (who are assumed to be dumb).
As for Israel’s operation in Syria, it sounds more a face-saving way for Israel to stop its bombing raids into Syria by declaring victory. And also hitting Hizbollah targets in Syria while claiming those were Iranians sounds again like a way to show that Israel has the upper hand in its fight with Iran, to satisfy the domestic public. More likely than not, Israel was given an ultimatum by Putin … to stop raids into Syria … in exchange Putin will not sell S-300 to Syria. Anyhow, Iran does not have any serious direct military presence in Syria except thru various shia militias. Also, it is not in Iran’s interest to station troops in Syria, when the dirty work can be done by local proxies. Soft power will in the end determine the outcome.
Follow the money.
U.S pulling out of the Iran deal means that the U.S can continue to sell weapons to Iran.
War is a profitable business.
By the way the freeze is back on the Korean peninsula back business as usual. Kim pulled out so we can look forward to more and games not only in the Eastern Mediterranean and Central Asia but East Asia as well. The kettles continues to boil.
Marcos, Kim obviously looked at Trump bailing-out of the Iranian nuclear accord and saw that the US was “non-agreement capable” as noted by The Saker. Another strategic ‘fail’ by Trump (his handlers). Of course, the Korean peninsula ‘thaw’ was probably always a Show, as perpetual war is part of the bankster agenda…
That “Marxist” Pope sure had no trouble turning leftists over the the government in Argentina in the in the 1970s and early 1980s.
Baba Kuhi is a big mountain
of super patriarchy.
Old Testament is still in action
in the fire industry.
And as Luke Skywalker said, “There is more”. The agreement that was not an agreement and why former Sec. of State Kerry rushed to Iran presumably to discuss his non-agreement, representing parties unknown… (Greg Hunter interviews Janda)
Just a long as the conductor isn’t orchestrating a symphony where are all dancing to the neoliberal jive in 5G harmony.
just AS long…
The common denominator here is the only two nations left without a Rothschild controlled central bank.
That’s no accident of chance.
Bingo! And we have a winner!
Thanks WD, you saved me the trouble!
WD, you beat me to it! Obviously, the most-deep motive. (At least human motive…)
“The US pulled out of Iran Nuclear Deal because it’s Too Broke”
by Dmitry Orlov, 11 May 2018
“Here’s a perspective on Trump’s decision to pull out of JCPOA, a.k.a. the Iran Nuclear Deal, that definitely doesn’t get enough airtime. It’s all about money.
Following the Iranian revolution of 1978-79, Jimmy Carter froze Iran’s assets in the US. Ever since then, the US has been holding on to between $100 and $120 billion in Iranian assets, which have been accruing rent and interest. After the JCPOA, which stipulated the lifting of sanctions on Iran, Washington has been doing its best to drag its feet on releasing these assets, but they would have had to be returned to Iran sooner or later… unless the US pulled out of the deal, which it just did.
It is very important to note that these frozen Iranian assets are US dollar-denominated. And what would be the first thing that the Iranians would do upon regaining control of them? Why, of course, they would convert them out of US dollars. This is a requirement written into Iranian law: no US dollars allowed, and nobody in Iran has the power to change that even if they wanted to. According to the Iranians, US officials have pleaded with the Iranians not to liquidate their dollar-denominated assets, but that the Iranians told them that nobody has the authority to change this law.
A sudden liquidation of this size would have punched an irreparable hole in the dollar system, which hinges on the ability to sell huge quanti ties [hah!] of US treasury paper on the international market…”
You may want to look into which parties are by far the biggest holders of US Treasuries before making such silly posts about the US dollar not being able to with stand some hundred billion dollar conversion.
Now, Iran not using the petro dollar to trade oil is an entirely different matter, but that’s not in your post.
Anyhow, burning things to generate energy is over. (No, no one told Trump yet.)
Lost, good to see you again! Right on time. Right on who you ‘back’.
You may not have noticed, in your hurry to reply, that it was not my writing. It was a post by Dmitry Orlov, who is a “well-known Russian-American engineer and a writer on subjects related to ‘potential economic, ecological and political decline and collapse in the United States’, something he has called ‘permanent crisis’. Orlov believes collapse will be the result of huge military budgets, government deficits, an unresponsive political system and declining oil production.” (Wikipedia.) Hardly a novice…
Right, you were quoting with approval.
Now absolutely true, Reagan was a terrible, and criminal, president. While his successors have followed his failed Reaganomics policies.
But, “this it’s all gonna collapse” thing has been repeated for a lot more than the last 45 years.
Nope, I was quoting another viewpoint. You are the one ‘defending the financial realm’. As usual…
As you say the events are “dizzying” but this has one advantage: current and soon-to-be-former Washington vassal politicians in Europe and elsewhere hardly have time to protest their “loyalty” to this or that policy, and justify it to their public opinion (yes, there still is a public opinion of sorts), than that policy is reversed. Just imagine the next big reversal as the outbreak of peaceful relations with Russia; even the most TV/smartphone zombified people might see something wrong as the Mays, Macrons and Trudeaus of this world suddenly change their tune from one minute to the next in order to cling to power…