Something quite amazing has just happened. Following the terrorist attack in Ankara which killed 34 people and injured another 125, Turkish authorities first declared that they will not accept US condolences. Then the Turks launched a military operation against “Kurdish terrorists in northern Syria“. Turkey then claimed to have neutralized 184 terrorists.
What is not mentioned in those articles is that the target of the Turkish strike was the US-run center for the training and education of PKK militants in Rojava. There are rumors that the Turks gave the US enough warning time to evacuate most of its personnel.
Does that sound familiar?
If it does, it is because it is very similar to what the Iranians did when they hit US bases in Iraq following the murder of General Solemani in a US drone strike.
If the above is true, and rumors are very much “if” and cannot be considered as proven fact, then that means that a NATO member state (Turkey) just attacked a US base and, like Iran, got away with it: the “The Finest Fighting Force in the History of the World” just got whacked hard and humiliated for a second time and could do absolutely nothing to defend itself or even save face.
How big a slap in the face did Uncle Shmuel get this time? According to the Turkish defense minister, Hulusi Akar,
Terrorists’ shelters, bunkers, caves, tunnels, and warehouses were successfully destroyed,” Akar said, adding that “the so-called headquarters of the terrorist organization were also hit and destroyed.” Overall, the Defense Ministry claimed that the strikes hit nearly 90 targets, which it said were connected to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the Kurdish People’s Defense Units (YPG).
Even allowing for some “patriotic exaggeration”, it is pretty clear that Ergodan’s revenge strike was both quite substantial and, apparently, rather effective.
So, what do we have here? A NATO member state all but accused the US of a major terrorist attack against its capital city, and then that NATO member state openly attacked a US-run facility (let’s not call it a base, that would be inaccurate).
Is Erdogan’s claim even credible? Absolutely! Not only has the US already attempted to overthrow and kill Erdogan, who was saved in extremis by Russian special forces (same with Ianukovich), but we also know that the US overthrew General de Gaulle in 1968-1969 and that NATO covert forces were used to stage false flag attacks against NATO allies (especially Italy) in the so-called GLADIO operation.
NATO is not a defensive alliance – it never was – but it is a tool of US colonial domination.
This was always true, hence the famous words spoken in the now faraway 1950s when the first NATO Secretary General, British General Hasting Ismay, bluntly admitted that real the purpose of NATO was to keep the “Russians out, Americans in, Germans down“. Let’s take these elements one by one, starting with the last one:
“Keep the Germans down”: here the word “Germans” is a placeholder for any and all European leaders or countries who want true sovereignty and agency. Translation: enslave the Europeans “Keep the Americans in”: in order to crush any European liberation movement. Translation: place US overlords over all the EU nations. “Keep the Russians out”: make sure that Russia does not liberate Europe. Translation: demonize Russia and do anything and everything to prevent peace on the European continent. If possible, break-up, subjugate or otherwise destroy Russia.
Need proof? How about the undeniable act of war against Germany (and, I would argue, the entire EU) when the Anglos blew up NS1/NS2? Is that not proof enough?
Against that background, we have to ask yourselves: what does it even mean to be a NATO member state in 2022?
The truth is that NATO was a pure creation of the Cold War and that in the real world of 2022 it is a total anachronism. Being a NATO member state really means very little. Not only are some “more equal than others” in NATO, but there are also non-NATO states which are far more “NATOized” than actual NATO members states (I think of Israel or, of course, the Nazi occupied Ukraine). And being a member of NATO does not protect you from anything, not from external attacks and not against internal ones either.
According to Col (Ret) MacGregor, the war in the Ukraine might well bring about the collapse of both NATO and the EU. I very much agree with him. I would say that such a collapse will not so much be the result of embarrassing defeats as it will be due to the deep internal contradictions inside both organizations.
By the way, this is not our topic today, but I think that the CSTO has much of the same problems and contradictions as NATO. So is what we observe a “NATO problem” or a problem of artificial and generally obsolete alliances? I would argue for the latter.
But let’s leave a discussion of the CSTO for another day.
In the case of Turkey this problem is made even worse by a total incompatibility between Islam and the Woke ideology now openly promoted (and enforced) by the US and NATO.
Then there is geography. Turkey has some pretty powerful regional neighbors, including not only Greece or Israel, but also Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Syria and, course, Russia. Can Turkey count on any type of US/NATO “protection” from such powerful neighbors?
Ask the Saudis how much the US/NATO helped them against the Houthis!
Ask the Israelis how much the US/NATO helped them against Hezbollah?
If anything, the Iranian strikes on CENTCOM bases have demonstrated that the US does not have the stomach to take on Iran. In sharp contrast, the Russian and Iranian intervention in Syria defeated the US plans for a “New Middle East” or, shall we say, it did bring about a “new Middle-East”, but most definitely not the one the US Neocons were hoping for!
Add to this is major deterioration in the relationship between the US and MBS’ Saudi Arabia and we get an amazing picture: the USA and NATO (which the US dragged into the region) are gradually becoming irrelevant in the Middle-East. Instead, new “big actors” are gradually filling the void, including Russia and Iran who are now even gradually allowing Saudi Arabia to participate in a much needed regional dialog about the future of the region.
The phenomenal weakness of the US/NATO/CENTCOM is best illustrated by the US reaction to the Turkish strikes: Uncle Shmuel endorsed (no kidding!!!) the Turkish strikes :-)
How absolutely pathetic is that for a wannabe superpower?
Will this process have an impact on the NATO war against Russia?
Well, let’s imagine that Russia would really strike some target inside Poland (which is what the Ukies claimed, as did the Poles until Uncle Shmuel told them to cool it). What would happen next?
Does anybody still remember what happened when Erdogan flew to Mons to beg for NATO protection against Russia (following the downing of a Russian Su-24 over northern Syria by a joint US-Turkish operation, possibly executed without Erdogan’s knowledge, at least that was his claim). What did NATO promise or give the Turks? Absolutely *nothing* (other than “consultations”).
Now the Poles might be delusional enough to think that a US President might order a retaliatory attack on Russia if Russia strikes Poland, but those of us who know the USA and its ruling elites know that this is nonsense. Why? Simply because a US/NATO counter-strike on Russian forces would result in an immediate Russian response.
And then what?
The truth is very stark in its simplicity:
The US/NATO do not have the manpower or firepower needed to take on Russia in a conventional combined arms war. Any use of nuclear weapons will result in an immediate retaliation most likely resulting into a unwinnable full-scale nuclear war.
So here is the deal: whether western politicians understand that or not, military professionals all know the truth – NATO can’t defend ANY of its members against a truly modern military. Why?
Let’s look at what capabilities the US/NATO truly have:
The USN has a superb submarine force (both SSNs and SSBNs) capable for firing large numbers of relatively obsolete cruise missiles (and plenty of SLBMs) A still very capable, if rather old, nuclear triad A quantitative (only!) conventional advantage over Russia Superb (but very vulnerable!) C4ISR capabilities A printing press allowing for the quasi infinite printing of dollars A comprador elite ruling over all the NATO/EU countries The most formidable propaganda machine in history
So what does NATO lack to be a credible military force?
Obviously, “boots on the ground”. And I don’t mean a few subunits from the 101st or 82AB or US special forces or even a so-called “armored brigade” which, in reality, lacks adequate TO&E to qualify as such. I am talking about a “land warfare” force capable of fighting a modern and extremely determined enemy.
[Sidebar: if this is a topic of interest to you, may I recommend my article “Debunking popular clichés about modern warfare” written in 2016 but which is still mostly relevant]
The USA, Israel and the KSA all fell into the same trap: the delusion that by spending billions and billions of dollars on massively over-priced and massively under-performing military hardware will allow you to defeat an enemy assumed to be “less sophisticated”. Hence the need to use:
Proxy forces PMCs PSYOPS Corruption
All of the above are a normal part of any modern war, but in the case of the US/NATO they are not just part of a bigger plan, they are central to any US/NATO operation, thereby dramatically decreasing the true capabilities of the US/NATO. In sharp contrast, countries like Russia or Iran can deploy “boots on the ground”, and very capable ones at that (remember that the Iranians are those who trained Hezbollah!).
What does all this mean practically?
It means that even if the Russians decided to strike at a NATO country, the tensions would go through the roof, but it is highly UN-likely that any US President would allow any action which could result in a full-scale nuclear war! Remember, for Russia, this is an existential war, no less than WWII, whereas no Anglo leader would ever dare launch a suicidal attack on Russian forces which would most likely result in the full obliteration of the US/UK and any other country participating (for example by hosting forward deployed standoff weapons) in such an attack.
Does that mean that we have to anticipate a Russian strike on Poland, Romania or the UK?
No, not at all. In fact, it would be very dangerous for the Russians to only leave a stark choice to the Hegemony: admit defeat or commit suicide. And since the Russians do have escalation dominance (that is to say that they have balanced capabilities from the small-arms fire level to a full intercontinental nuclear war, and with all the stages in between these two extremes) they, unlike the US/NATO. are not stuck between the choice of surrender or suicide.
That being said, it would also be misguided to assume that Russia “would never dare strike a NATO member state”. The Poles might be willing to wager their future and even existence on such a invalid inference, but not the folks at the Pentagon or elsewhere in the decision centers of the Hegemony.
Conclusion:
Douglas MacGregor is right, the NATO war against Russia might very well result in the collapse of both NATO and the EU which, in turn, will place an official “last nail”, into the coffin of an already long-deceased Hegemony which currently still exists only because of its momentum and its propaganda machine.
I would argue that NATO is already falling apart before our eyes, a process which the economic, social, political, economic and spiritual crises which are plaguing the entire EU will only accelerate. And, of course, the most amazing thing about this is that this collapse is not the result of some Machiavellian plan cooked up by the Russians, the Chinese or the Iranian, but a direct consequence of decades of truly suicidal policies: they did it to themselves!
Now, the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians are mostly waiting, watching (probably smiling) and planning for the Hegemony-free multi-polar world they want to bring about, with or without the participation of the USA and Europe.
AndreiClio the cat, ? July 1997 - 1 May 2016 Kira the cat, ? ? 2010 - 3 August 2018 Jasper the Ruffian cat ? ? ? - 4 November 2021
The following is from “Ten Years Hard Labour” by expelled ex-Labour MP Chris Williamson.
Sir Keir also gave Labour’s unconditional backing to NATO, which is a bellicose, expansionist, militarist alliance that should have been disbanded following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. As part of his masturbatory, warmongering delirium, Sir Keir said that he believed Britain’s entering into NATO was on a par with the creation of the NHS. He went to extreme lengths to defend the group. When 11 members of the Socialist Campaign Group (SCG) signed a Stop the War Coalition statement on 18 February 2022 that was mildly critical of NATO in relation to its escalation of the Ukraine crisis, Sir Keir ordered them to remove their names. In another spineless retreat, the 11 cowards failed to stand by the principles that they claimed to uphold, and they tamely withdrew their signatures. A party spokesman said: “With Sir Keir’s leadership there will never be any confusion about whose side Labour is on — Britain, NATO, freedom and democracy — and every Labour MP now understands that.”
The MPs who backed down were Diane Abbot, Tahir Ali, Aspana Begum, Richard Burgon, Ian Lavery, John McDonnell, Ian Mearns, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Zarah Sultana, Mick Whitley and Beth Winter. Sir Keir’s cynical use of the Ukraine crisis as a political weapon to hammer left-wing members was unprecendented in Labour’s history. Never before, not even under Tony Blair, had Labour MPs been so publicly humiliated for promoting peace.
So next time you’re in the polling booth, remember the above and what you’re voting for.It will cost the UK taxpayer £132bn to decommission all the UK’s civil nuclear sites and the work will not be completed for another 120 years, according to latest estimates. Report -- May 2022:
It is highly implausible that the SDF/YPG perpetrated the Istanbul attack. Looks like Erdogan is manufacturing a pretext to attack #Rojava as he has long wanted. Quote Tweet Joshua Landis @joshua_landis · Nov 14 Kurdish-led Syrian SDF denies involvement in Turkey bombing
“Our forces have nothing to do with the Istanbul bombing,” said Mazloum Abdi, the chief commander of the US-allied SDF.
Turkey's airstrikes in Syria and Iraq appear to have been extensive. Their aircraft passed through airspace in Syria effectively controlled by the US. So the US (and indeed UK) are content to see Turkey attack their most important ally on the ground in fighting ISIS.
Reuters story here: reuters.com Turkish air strikes hit villages in northern Syria, SDF says Turkish aircraft shelled two villages populated with internally displaced people in northern Syria, a spokesman for the Kurdish-led Syrian
Not to mention that the areas attacked are democratic, and characterised by the promotion of women's rights and those of all ethnicities in the region known as #Rojava - https://twitter.com/carneross/status/1594457916194570241
*****
What were these anarchist democrats doing playing host to a US military training facility? Ross doesn't appear to be interested in finding out. Like he saw no problem with the YPG apparently using young girls as front line soldiers against ISIS. He even describes them as the 'tip of the spear' (watch from 50:25):
'Nobody has a rank in the YPG, they just have teams, this being a non hierarchical society based on anarchist philosophy. But for a non hierarchical army they seem to have done pretty well
[...]
So this is the tip of the spear of the fight against Isis, and all so young.'
Indeed, even HRW and Amnesty felt obliged to call them out for routine use of child soldiers: 'In the course of the Syrian Civil War, including the years 2014 and 2015, reports by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International stated that militias associated with the autonomous region were committing war crimes, in particular members of the People's Protection Units (YPG).[265][266] The reports from 2014 include reports of arbitrary arrests and torture, other reports include the use of child soldiers.[267][268][269] After the report, the YPG publicly accepted the deficiencies[267] and in October 2015 the YPG demobilized 21 minors from the military service in its ranks.[270] Reports have been comprehensively debated and contested by both the YPG and other human rights organizations.[271][272] In 2018, HRW again accused the YPG of recruiting minors. The YPG responded that if 16- and 17-year-olds are hired, the relatives are notified, but do not have to consent, and the minors are kept away from combat zones.[273] Since September 2015, the YPG have received human rights training from Geneva Call and other international organizations.[274] A September 2020 article from Syria Direct found that the SDF was continuing to recruit child soldiers, despite signing an action plan on July 1, 2019, with the United Nations to "end and prevent the recruitment and use of child soldiers."[275] ' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_Administration_of_North_and_East_Syria#Human_rights
A small price to pay for appealing to the romantic anarchist philosopher in repentant diplomat Carne Ross... Here he is singing Zelensky's praises like a credulous gobshite:
'Zelensky's 10-point peace proposals are well worth a read. He cleverly takes the framing well beyond the usual territorial arguments, which is only one of his points, instead introducing ideas like energy security and ecocide. #Ukraine
[ president.gov.ua Ukraine has always been a leader in peacemaking efforts; if Russia wants to end this war, let it... We respect the rules and we are people of our word. Ukraine has always been a leader in peacekeeping efforts, and the world has witnessed it. And if Russia says that it supposedly wants to end this... ]
The frames are as much about international concerns as national, thus drawing in the interests of other countries, indeed, for instance on food security, the whole world.-' - https://twitter.com/carneross/status/1593591691763748865
Fancy that, he found a way to push all our buttons to get us to do what he wants! And Ross is happy to pass on his string of howling lies.
Two days ago Nicholas Khoo wrote “ Why NZ’s morality narrative on Ukraine doesn’t work”, a much needed counter to the lack of rational thinking in regard to this war. . Khoo’s thesis being: us = good vs. them (Russia) = evil, is simplistic, hypocritical and more importantly, doesn’t work. Now NZ is to “extend support” to Ukraine by training Ukrainian soldiers whilst NATO arms Ukraine, pouring petrol on a conflagration where men are being slaughtered in their tens of thousands, fighting a proxy war against Russia to the last Ukrainian, for what? This illustrates perfectly the moral contortions Nicholas Khoo was dismayed by. We should be fighting, but in the UN for a ceasefire, and an agreement that might bring some sort of solution. Ukraine will “lose” Crimea (it actually belongs to Crimeans who mostly want to be Russian), they will “lose” parts of Donbas - subject to a separatist war since 2014 - and Ukraine will remain neutral. The US and NATO share considerable culpability for this war, a total failure of diplomacy, a bellicose intransigence over years provoking Russia. The US should, according to their own Munro doctrine, withdraw from Europe, and Europe including Russia construct their own security umbrella for that Continent.
Yours faithfully
John K Monro
This was written 16/11/22. I hope NATO or the EU doesn't actually "fall apart" - that suggests a chaotic outcome, and much chaos invariably leads to even more chaos. I hope that the interternal contradictions in both organisations can be sorted rather more rationally - one. that NATO disbands itself, that the US is asked to leave Europe and that Europe can grow in stature by shaking off this abject submission to US hegemonic behaviour. That might ensure a quieter and ultimately more secure outcome in some sort of pan-European stability and security arrangement which would hopefully include Russia. Not that Russia is going to welcome having to work with a fractious and aggressive Europe, but by then Europe might have calmed down a bit when they see how disastrously misguided they've been. As for the UK, you might as well apply to become the US's fifty-first state. Starmer presumably would love to be the first Governor of State of England (I exclude Scotland and Wales as hopefully they will have left the UK by then and Northern Ireland will be part of a greater Irish Republic)
I remind those reading this that the Munro Doctrine does include the quid pro quo of European non-interference in Western Hemisphere affairs a promise of US non-interference in European affairs. This is universally ignored in the political commentariat.
Re: Is NATO falling apart? A published letter in the Wellington Dominion Post
on November 25, 2022, 12:53 pm