0 $
2,350 $
4,700 $
2,411 $
COLLECTED IN JANUARY 2020

Iranian-backed Iraqi Militias Sent Reinforcements To Syrian-Iraqi Border Following ‘Israeli Strikes’ On Al-Bukamal

Donate

Iranian-backed Iraqi Militias Sent Reinforcements To Syrian-Iraqi Border Following 'Israeli Strikes' On Al-Bukamal

Click to see the full-size image. ILLUSTRATIVE IMAGE

Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units have deployed large reinforcements near the Syrian-Iraqi border, west of Mosul, the PMU announced via its website on December 8.

According to the released report, the 8th Brigade of the PMU deployed  in the Jazira Al-Hadr area after it had received information that large number of terroirsts were preparing attacks on security forces in the border area. The report once again emphasized that the PMU is deployed along the Syrian-Iraqi border in order to prevent ‘infiltration’ of terrorists.

The ISIS threat in fact remains an important factor impacting the security situation in western Iraq. Despite this, some sources linked the PMU action, the group is widely known for its close ties with Iran, with the recent escalation in the Syrian border area of al-Bukamal. During the past week, supposed ‘Iranian targets’ in al-Bukamal (in general, Iranian-backed Iraqi militias deployed there) were repeatedly bombed by ‘unidentified’ (Israeli) warplanes.

Most likely, the PMU leadership expects that this situation may become a pretext for an increase of the ISIS activity in the region. The terrorist group may try to exploit supposed Israeli strikes to carry out attacks on Iraqi targets along the border. So, the PMU is preparing to repel these attacks.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • World_Eye

    Unidentified Israeli planes? Hmmm?
    So if they were some F-16s Syrian S-300 radars should have seen them on radars!
    So what is going on? The F-35 dilema or?
    Well I presume that Khmeimim air-base should know, the Russians have the S-400 there!
    And that place is very close to Israeli territory, so if the F-35s are visible on the S-400 radars, then Russia should know what exits from Israel and what enters in Syria, if indeed they fly over Syrian airspace, if not from where are they flying over? It cannot be from Turkish airspace at all!
    Jordanian, hmm, I don’t know about that, but I will leave it as possibility?!
    And another one is either North-Eastern Syria or some airbase in Iraq!
    Or another option would be no F-35s involved, instead drones used from N.E. Syria or Western Iraq, again from some US base where the Zionists are there? I really want to know anyones opinion on this ghostly attacks!

    • d’Artagnan

      Most of the attacks originate from Saudi airbases and from US occupied Kurdish areas. They are conducted by drones and so far are pin pricks. Iran is deploying its Bavar 373 with Russian coordination and just a few hours ago Russia intercepted and turned back a Zionist strike package coming in from Jordan after scrambling two SU-35.

    • Redadmiral

      On almost a weekly basis for months SF have been posting “reports of IsraHelli strikes” from opposition sources the most recent of which came from the Deir Ezzor 24 blogspot, which is headed by an ISIS apologist. If there are attacks in and around the New Iraqi/Syrian border crossing at Al Bukamal they are Yanki or ISIS drone attacks. PMU intel has probably gained info that the Yanki lapdogs ISIS have been re-equipped by their IsraHelli masters and tasked with launching a large scale attack against this recently established crossing. This in turn gives the Yanki mic saboteurs another pretext for staying in control of the Omar oilfields. Yanki mic and IsraHelli warmongers working together to create the greatest possible confusion and damage to the Syrian state. It is only a game for these Satanic Monsters.

      • World_Eye

        Sure ok. but why after every attack Israeli gov, comes out with statement and saying 5 or 10 Iranian backed militias are been killed. What you saying on that?

    • Wayne Nicholson

      “So if they were some F-16s Syrian S-300 radars should have seen them on radars!”

      S-300 has a range of 200 km. The Syrian S-300 is defending Damascus well out of range of al-Bukamal. Even the S-400 at Khmeimim doesn’t extend coverage that far. The air defences the Russians have along the M4 are all Pantsir point defence weapons so there are no Syrian or Russian air defences covering al Bukamai.

      You could fly a transport truck over al Bukamai and as long as it was out of sight and out of range of manpads it’s a stealth aircraft.

      • World_Eye

        Yes sure, but from Hmeimim air-base to Tel Aviv straight air line of sight is 400km. Russian missiles of S-400 have the max range of 400 km that’s ok.
        I am not making point in shooting down any jets. I saying that the S-400 radars are capable of detecting and tracking air-targets such as jet from 600 km away, right? You know the specification of the S-400 radars.
        So my point was if Russia has advantage over the F-35 with their S-400 radars, THEY should KNOW what is coming out of Israel, am I right?
        Official specs of S-400 Triumf has once specific targeting ad, in it is advertised that it can track and shot down Stealth air-craft such as F-22 Raptor. And we know that the US stealth is the same as the F-22’s in the F-35. There is no such thing as real stealth on radar! It is only low signature, and for older radar systems it can be hard to be seen and tracked, but for modern S-400 advanced air-radars I believe they can see and track that low signature craft. So that was my point, I was saying that the Russian’s SHOULD know who makes those attacks, if they are coming out of Israel.
        Or they can easily be drones from US-Israeli bases in Iraq, which sound more convincing. I don’t thing the Zionists would fly F-35s across all Syria and bomb targets in Al-Bukamal and they just go back as they are in some Alien Undetectable Flying Ship.

        • Wayne Nicholson

          First where did you get the information that the S-400 can track an F-22 at 600km? The Russians don’t publish that kind of information for obvious reasons. Russia publishes sales literature on the S-400 not specific ranges they can detect specific aircraft …. it would be rather foolish to publish such data.

          Second there is a mountain range between Syria and Lebanon that limits how the S-400 line of sight into Israel as well as the curvature of the earth so are we talking about detecting an object at 600km line of sight or 600 km nap of the earth? The IAF is currently flying down the Bekka valley to avoid Syria’s S-300 then popping up to fire missiles before returning home the same way. They could easily do the same thing from the Ramon airbase flying low through Jordan to attack eastern Syria.

          Third why would Russia stop Israeli attacks on Iranian forces in Syria. the Russians have said time and time again that their air defences are there to support THEIR mission in Syria. Their stated mission is to keep Syria from falling into Islamic terrorists hands, keep the 25,000 Russian Islamic terrorists fighting in Syria from ever returning home and keep Assad in power until the country is able to write a new constitution and have elections.

          Israel is as much an ally of Russia as Syria or Iran is. Israel is a favorite retirement destination for Russian citizens and Russia and israel have partnered on defence projects. Russia isn’t the USA …. they aren’t stupid enough to stick their nose into a beef between Israel and Iran. If they did that they would lose their reputation as an honest broker in the region. Russian diplomacy is the real reason their efforts in Syria have been so successful …. they’ve convinced more Syrian rebels to join the SAA than they’ve killed in Syria.

          • World_Eye

            Types of targets:
            Strategic bombers such as the B-1, B-2,FB-111 and B-52H
            Electronic warfare airplanes such as the EF-111A and EA-6
            Reconnaissance airplanes such as the TR-1
            Early-warning radar airplanes such as the E-3A and E-2C
            Fighter airplanes such as the F-15, F-16, F-35 and F-22
            Strategic cruise missiles such as the Tomahawk
            Ballistic missiles (range up to 3,500 km)

            Everyone knows it.

  • Hasbara Hunter

    Hey ISraHell it seems they are tightening the Noose…

    • d’Artagnan

      You are right. The Zionists want US patsies to start a major war against Iran and keep on provoking it. They reap a whirlwind sooner than later in the region.

      • Vince Dhimos

        Well, if the US and its satellites didn’t retaliate against the attack on Aramco, why would it attack Tehran now?

    • S Melanson

      Yes, this strengthening arc of resistance is what I see as well and I am sure Israel is all to aware of these developments. Trying to weaken Syria has seriously backfired for NetanYahoo and Israel will deal with the consequences of a disastrous foreign policy well after his coming departure from politics to take up residence in a jail cell.

      Netanyahu boasts influence over Trump but it will not change what has come to be – the fiasco in Iraq created opportunity for Iran to extend influence and make available a land bridge from Iran to Syria. Netanyahu’s policy of interference in Syrian affairs in alliance with the US and others has drawn in Russian, Hezbollah and Iranian intervention to prevent another terrorist safe haven failed state repeat with considerable success.

      The US and Israel have created the very situation that Israel feared and have only themselves to blame. I hope post-Netanyahoo will see some sanity return to Israeli policies along with a sobering honest assessment of the security situation, greatly deteriorated by theirs and allies own hands.

      Israeli foreign policy doctrine follows realism (offensive branch) and the offensive application of what is a defensive oriented doctrine is not serving Israel well. I really hope post-Netanyahu that Israel steps back to re-evaluate it’s policy approach and make corrections post-haste before events transpire that makes losers of us all.

      This is the era of mutual security where the security of all nations must be considered in the atomic age regardless of who are right or wrong. Global war will rain down destruction on all nations equally and without mercy regardless of a nations good deeds real or imagined. This fact implores us to find solutions that serve the joint interests of all parties no matter how undeserving since the alternative is mutual destruction.

      Mutual destruction is what I see as the likely outcome of the coming confrontation which is also prophesy in the monotheistic religions. We have the gift of free will and let us use it to chart a different path. That we are to be the masters of our own destiny is what God intended and so let us not abdicate our ability to choose by resigning ourselves to prophesy and instead use the gift as it was intended for it is in this way we truly honour the creator and also ours that were made in God’s image.

      • Karen Bartlett

        Do you think reasoned, not to mention compassionate, decisions will be made by “super powers” which have so far shown no reason or compassion?

        • S Melanson

          Good question. I could argue in a way that appeals to compassion but I doubt that much would come of that. My arguments speak far more to the self interest of those that hold power. I point out that the controllers use nation states like chess pieces and so sacrificing a few nations in a regional nuclear war might be palatable despite risks. But the problems of keeping a regional conflict contained is by now understood as well as the impact on a global scale even a limited nuclear war would have.

          So I emphasize the need for mutual security as it serves joint interests that out of necessity need to be addressed in the nuclear age. The US is putting anti-ballistic missile systems on Russia’s borders that are claimed to be defensive. Well they can also be used offensively in a first strike to destroy launch sites and cripple Russia’s counterstrike ability. This encroachment threatens Russia due to the short time frame to make a decision to respond to a suspected first strike and This greatly increase risk of accidental nuclear war.

          Also this could push Russia to make a pre-emptive strike to eliminate the missile systems on Russian borders and I suspect this scenario would escalate quickly. Thus, Russian security is linked to US security and so it is in their joint interests to consider each other’s interests.

          I would say reasoned decisions that take into account mutual security interests is reasonable to hope for.

          • Karen Bartlett

            We can hope and pray. Imo, Russia would not make a preemptive first strike; that is rather US gov’t-type thinking.Compared to the US, Russia imo has shown the most reason, and compassion, in terms of foreign policy.The “self interest of those that hold power” in the US imo, are short-sighted, and only include the interests of the elite, and do not include the interests of their own people, much less the interests of the world’s people.

          • Karen Bartlett

            Thank you for your reply. I do not understand all the talk about missiles, and military strength from the well-informed men on this site. All I know is what seems to me to be right or wrong from a standpoint of the interests of innocent humanity, i.e. unarmed civilians who don’t make the decisions but who suffer the consequences.

          • S Melanson

            The people are not innocent if they allow themselves to remain ignorant of what their elected leaders do in their name. The citizenry have a responsibility to be reasonably informed and engaged and I commend you for making the effort to be so informed.

            Forums such as this one provide a platform for debate that you will find informative on a diverse range of topics and expressing a diverse range of opinions. I encourage you to keep learning as we all are including me. Of course there are opinions and statements that are in error but that is to be expected in open debate and gives opportunity for you to separate truth from the multitude of perspectives.

            Such discernment is best developed by yourself and yes, I may be able to help point out falsehoods, but I can be wrong too. Best to rely on your own discernmen of what is true and what is not while listening to what others have to say.

          • S Melanson

            The preemptive action could be conventional to take out the missile systems and Putin has warned the US and NATO of such a possibility. However, a conventional strike will start a major war involving nuclear states that could easily escalate. The dissolution of NATO would definitely cool things down on the Russian front as well as an emerging multi-polar world bringing some needed sanity to international relations. So all and all, some very promising developments stand to give us hope for a better tomorrow.

        • jerry

          How do you think the super powers can reason with Iran to stop its aggression?

          With respect to Israel, Iran is driven by theological “holy war” concepts. Not sure there is a “compassionate” way to change Iran’s intentions.

      • jerry

        Of course Israel is aware of Iranian aggression, that’s why it is striking the Iranian attack bases.

  • d’Artagnan

    This is an expected development as Iran will protect its interests in a region being destroyed by US and its Zionist masters. Iran is not likely to walk away from Syria or Iraq, countries linked to it by religion, history and geography. Sooner than later the Zionists will overreach and suffer immensely. Even Russia is getting fed up with US and Zionist arrogance.

    • jerry

      Israel is simply responding to the aggression from Iran. Basic common sense.

  • Karen Bartlett

    Go PMU, go Iran!

  • <>

    All the players are in their places for the final show, the war the will change this world forever. World War 3 is coming, after that there will be no Iran.

    • J Ramirez

      No more Jews ;}

    • Tommy Jensen

      Mutual destruction? According to Kissinger Israel will not exist within 10 years. That was 3-4 years ago. I see Israel and Palestine both played by TPTB for prey in ME.

      • <>

        Who do you support exactly? I can’t understand from your comments.

        • LR captain

          you’re gonna hate this
          remember when i said the Israeli would fall to voting (Palestinians with Israeli citizenship)

          Turns out bibi realized that as well, those communities that he won 112% in had more Jewish immigrants in them from abroad. it seems he was trying to bring in more and more Jewish immigrants to secure himself the election and keep the demographic situation in Israeli favor

          • <>

            We won’t let him win, he will go to jail or the people will start an uprising to remove him from power.

          • LR captain

            why do i get the feeling that when Jewish state becomes corrupt god destroys it and retries 200 years later.

            because Babylon conquered israel when its royal family was fighting on who should sit on throne
            same situations with pompy installing Israeli as a client state.

            Rome conquered Israeli because the Jewish faction that rebelled started to fight each other making them easy pickings.

            lets just hope that is not case this time, and he gets put in front of a firing squad.

    • AJ

      You are gravely mistaken if you believe a big war with Iran will leave Israel unscathed it will be hit big too.

    • J Ramirez

      The only reason I gave you a thumbs up is so you can stick it in your ass ;}

    • S Melanson

      I agree the players are positioning for a showdown with high potential to escalate into a global war. I certainly see the plausibility of an outcome leaving Iran in total ruins but as I see it, it would not be just Iran in ruins, it would be most of the Middle East, including Israel, that will lay in ruins.

      I think you are aware of the scenario I am alluding to – the Samson option – nuclear strike is the only plausible way that Iran is left in total ruins short of massive strikes on Iran by the US and Israel with conventional and even then, it would cripple but not destroy. Retaliation would be assured and I think the grave danger such retaliation poses to Israel is very real.

      Is this what you want? I can understand being resigned to such an outcome as unavoidable – and so, let’s get this over with and see if the sword of Damocles falls away, or comes down upon Israel’s crown ? I caution being resigned to such a fate, as the sword will likely strike down all and so no victor just losers. Is this really the only way out of this?

      I do not see any winners in the upcoming conflict which awaits resolution of the Syrian conflict.

      The axis of resistance are still preoccupied with Idlib and Eastern Syria while Turkey’s final intentions remain to be seen. Eventually, the situation in Syria will be resolved and Turkish intentions will be clarified. Then I expect the confrontation will come that many see as inevitable or fated – as I see it, it will be a duel to the death between Israel and the ‘axis of resistance’ regardless of any initial intentions of a limited war. Israel will go down before it gives up the Golan and the coming showdown will almost certainly be over the Golan.

      You are IDF, you should know the military capabilities that will be arrayed against Israel are much greater in reach and destructive power than in prior conflicts. The forces are also now battle hardened unlike 1973 and in that war, 4th Syrian Armoured division had a clear road open to TelAviv but halted due to standing orders. Although Israel will not be caught surprised, Israel’s lack of strategic depth remains little changed.

      If the 4th Armour breaks through in the coming confrontation, expect this time the tanks of 4th Armour to roll intoTel Aviv as they have learned many lessons since 1973. You may argue such a scenario it is not plausible but the Ben Gurion Doctrine is premised on the plausibility of such a scenario and the Doctrine applies today just as it did then.

      It is plausible and we know what such a scenario will trigger. Can another way be found? I believe there can if there is the will.

      • <>

        I liked what you wrote, even if i disagree with some parts of it. For me and many other Israelis, it’s better to die on our feet then live on our knees and let a nuclear Iran destroy us. No buddy, both sides will pay a heavy price, but it will be alot worse on their side I assure you.

        • S Melanson

          I added in an edit you may not have seen. It is about finding another way than conflict.

          I too would die standing, unbowed and true to who I am. Assume the other side think similarly and so the confrontation looms irregardless of who is right or wrong – if I were to point fingers, it would not be the nations of the ME and that includes Israel.

          Perhaps it will be a lot worse for them as you say, but the cost to Israel brings to mind Pyrrhic victory.

          Avoiding conflict is not impossible and Israel has a history of doing the impossible. The partition plan seemed to me, and many others with a functioning brain, to create an impossible to defend Israeli homeland doomed from the very start. Well the Jews did the unexpected and the impossible, they survived and even carved out a defensible state.

          Israel’s existence among Arab nations viewed as eternal enemies or at least for the foreseeable future – per Ben Gurion Doctrinal thinking. But Israel made peace with enemies we assumed would never make peace (Egypt and Jordan).

          The story of Israel seems to be a story of defying fate, making possible what was thought not possible.

          No reason to stop now.

          • <>

            We have a strong fate that whatever needs to happen will happen, no matter how things are played. The Israeli-Iranian conflict is not about the Palestinians as some may think, it’s about their hate to the state of Israel as an entity, regardless of the West Bank or Gaza. Thus, the conflict can only be solved when one side is defeated and accept being surrendered, or when both sides have so many losses that they sign a peace deal. Right now we are closer to war than peace, the only question that’s left is when.

          • Omega

            We have a strong fate that whatever needs to happen will happen, no matter how things are played.

            True. Israelis have been brainwashed into accepting death. A sad reality that isn’t any different than Islamic Jihad. The deep indoctrination Israelis and Jihadists go through since birth has been effective.

            The Israeli-Iranian conflict is not about the Palestinians as some may think, it’s about their hate to the state of Israel as an entity, regardless of the West Bank or Gaza.

            True, Palestine is only a pretext but neither is it about their hate of Israel. Both the mullahs in Iran and the zealots in Israel have been groomed by the same malthusian degenerates in Europe. They will sit back and enjoy the chaos while you to destroy each other.

          • S Melanson

            I think Iron Zion’s statement regarding fate is the acceptance of what comes to be, but human agency still plays a role as what needs to be done, in the eyes of the Jewish State, gets done and acceptance of the consequences. I strongly disagree with many Israeli policies, especially under Netanyahu which I think have been harmful also to Israel and my debate with Iron Zion it look at this from a different perspective so that what is seen as needed to be done is recognition of mutual security in the region and not just Israeli security.

            This is a major departure from long standing Israeli doctrine but I am arguing on the necessity to avert a coming confrontation that puts every nation in grave danger. Dialog with those that support Israel may be unpopular but the satisfaction of hurling insults and threats will only increase the likelihood of a disastrous war.

            Dialog is not enough on its own. The myths about Jews need to be discarded. They are not homogenous robots indoctrinated to think and act the same and certainly not accepting death – the premise of security doctrine is survival. Perhaps doctrine predicated on survival is taking them to
            the cliff’s edge but many Jews see this, they are not blind. But the politics reveal a highly divided society that has struggled over the shift right even though many Jews oppose hardline government policies.

            Comparison to Jihadists in regard to indoctrination seems somewhat hypocritical. Yes, Israel has assisted terrorists and Haretz has been vocal about this error in judgement. But the Western nations have also created the Jihadists and on a much larger scale. As democracies, why are the people permitting their government to arm and train terrorists that commit atrocities? Could it be due to indoctrination since birth to accept blindly the governments explanations of the good they do abroad while dealing out death to the citizenry of nations that dare to not submit to the supremacy of the US and allies. Can we excuse the indoctrinated public of any accountability for the murderous acts of their democratically elected leaders? If we do, should this not apply equally to the Jewish citizenry of Israeli?

            I do agree with you that it is not about hate for Israel per se but I do not see it either as manipulation by European ‘degenerates’. Iran sees Israel as an illegitimate instrument of US hegemony, acting as a regional enforcer in the ME that opposes Iranian influence in the region. Given the history between the US and Iran, the animosity is no surprise.

            Add to this Iran is part of an axis of resistance to US world dominance along with Russia, China and others. Israeli policy has long advocated a strong alliance with a global power which became after the 6 Day War the United States – this alliance is closely linked with Israeli security strategy that dominates her foreign policy. So Israel has supported US dominance and arguably as many a time acted as the tail wagging the dog.

            Despite claims Israel runs US foreign policy, it does not stand up to scrutiny although I would agree Israel has a great deal of influence, hitting well above the small nations weight. As for European’s grooming Israel and mullahs to fight and destroy each other, you contradict this in a posted reply above that Israel carefully planned and has controlled events to its liking. I point out that I saw the partition plan as setting up Jews to fight the ‘mullahs’ but the odds weighted heavily against any prospect of the newly formed Jewish nation state surviving the conflict.

          • Omega

            What you think of his statement differs from what I think because you’re not aware of the indoctrination Israelis undergo from a young age and throughout their lives. Everything about their propagandist education (at home, in school, at work) is centered around fear. Their kindergarten school books teach them that the “poor little lamb Israel” is surrounded by “big bad wolves”. This goes on in virtually in all aspects of their lives. They are the forever victim and every one is after them; all the time. This is by design. And I don’t blame the average-joe Israeli for that but the ones at the top controlling the state. To contrast further, when Ben-Gurion, supposedly, (I say supposedly because all Israeli “leaders” were/are puppets), wanted a nuclear arsenal for Israel, it caused major commotion among Israelis as they considered it as suicide. It led to the purge of high ranking military officials who opposed it and the entirety of the Israeli atomic energy commission resigned. How did the Israelis end up accepting the idea? They were endlessly bombarded with the mythical story of the suicide of the 960 zealots at Masada (which became Israel’s national symbol) and memories of WW2. It worked. “Never Again”. Many Israelis, especially the religious ones, have accepted the idea of death. If the “Samson Option” isn’t clear enough, I don’t know what is. That is not to say that all Israelis think alike and as you wrote, they are divided – I’ve said this before many times: most want to live in peace and prosperity. They, however, won’t have the last word. My comparison to Islamic Jihadists was strictly about accepting death for whatever cause – not Israel and/or others supporting them.

            I know you mean well. Iron_Zion, however, does not. Just read his comment. It’s bow to us or face death and destruction. Regardless and putting his emotions aside, Israel never had and still does not have a mind of his own. It was created as part of the British Imperial design. Ideologically speaking, it goes to the Venetian oligarchy spreading the idea, through poets, that Northern European royalty were descendants of the “Lost Tribes” – which gave rise to British Israelism and later official British governmental policies for the creation of such state. It was that same ruling class who instigated the two world wars.

            I too don’t believe that Israel runs US foreign policies. My opinion is that the Anglo-Saxon ruling class of Europe (which include Jews) does through the Israel it created. I never said “Europeans” groom Israelis and Mullah to fight. I wrote the “the same malthusian degenerates in Europe” in reference to the Anglo-Saxon ruling class. It’s only when one understand the who created Israel and the relation between the Muslim Brotherhood (tied to British intelligence and the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry) and the mullahs that dots connect. Rouhani didn’t slam Trump for wanting the push the MB as a terrorist organization for any reason.

            Aside from furthering the hegemony of that ruling class, Israel is an experiment – one to test the limited nuclear warfare. This was alluded to by Kissinger and Schlesinger in the 1950s at the London’s Royal Institute for International Affairs and the London International Institute for Strategic Studies. This is where your comment to Hasbara Hunter (which I read) comes into play.

          • S Melanson

            Thank you and I read your response carefully. I think you are correct that there is heavy indoctrination of Israelis from an early age. I grew up in the US and indoctrination was evident in Saturday cartoons including ‘school house rock’ a blatant animated cartoon vehicle for US centric propaganda. So indoctrination is everywhere. In Israel the public pessimism of making peace with Arabs is getting stronger as a result of a hard shift to the right and this plus lifetime indoctrination is a challenge to overcome.

            Israel made peace before and did give up land to do so – Sinai. Sadat was the arch enemy in Begin’s eyes and Begin founded the precursor to Likud with the mantra ‘no land for peace’. Begin did give land for peace and paid a political price for betraying a major party position. Sadat paid with his life, and he knew this as he signed the peace accords. The impossible happened and given the risky path ahead, it needs to happen again.

            The part about testing limited nuclear war is intriguing as I was not aware of this, although the times then were pretty belligerent given Dulles style of brinksmanship and massive increase in size of atomic arsenal. The Cuban Missile Crisis hopefully dispelled notion of trying to control a situation to keep a nuclear war limited – JFK and Khrushchev came to the realization they were losing control and came to a diplomatic solution before things got even more out of hand as it came more than once very very close to nuclear war breaking out despite intentions not to go that far.

            Lastly, the Samson Option is predicated on assessment that Israel is in imminent danger of defeat whether by conventional or nuclear means. I do not see much difference between the Samson Option and US and Russian nuclear doctrine of massive retaliation also known as MAD.

            I will try to research some of the points you make, cheers.

          • Karen Bartlett

            You know what happened to Pres. Kennedy.

          • Omega

            Likewise, thank you for your comment(s). American and Israeli indoctrination share a lot in common (both being the design of the same deep state). It conveys a delusional sense of exceptionality and an imposed/ imagined sense of threat to justify the crimes committed under the umbrella of foreign policy. Others are after us so we must bomb them before they attack us. That said, I am not aware of a similar kind of indoctrination elsewhere.

            I agree that the right-far in Israel is responsible for the lack of peace with the Palestinians and other’s but I (strongly) disagree that Israel ever made peace – at least not willingly. In 1956, Israel refused to leave the Sinai (England and France accepted). It was only after a very lengthy process involving a series of incentives, that Eisenhower managed to force Israel out. The peace treaty between Egypt and Israel in the 1970s, as I said, was part of a geopolitical plan (see link below). Besides, Israel returning lands it stole is anything but an act of good grace – it’s simple justice.

            “What Really Happened in the “Yom Kippur” War?”
            https://www.counterpunch.org/2012/02/22/what-really-happened-in-the-yom-kippur-war/

            The Cuban missile crisis, the US and Russia’s nuclear doctrine and Israel’s Samson Option all share the same degenerate malthusian deep state in common. The Cuban missile crisis was orchestrated to milk the US military-industrial complex. During the Cold War, hundreds of US companies transferred ballistic technology to the USSR – this was uncovered by historian Anthony Sutton (ref.: “Western Transfer of Technology to the Soviet Union”). If I recall correctly, officials linked to the CFR confirmed the information and stated that most historians were too afraid to touch the truth. Israel’s nuclear weapons was also facilitated by Zionist circles in France and England linked to the deep state. Luckily, and as you inferred to, officials on both sides stepped in to prevent the unimaginable.

            Nasser and Saddat were never a danger to Israel – they represented a threat to the Anglo-Americans hegemony in the region. To rewind briefly in order to make a point: when Egyptian leader Mohammed Ali (who had secured the technologies that had made of Europe an advanced continent and who had made allies throughout the region) wanted to take the region out of it stagnation, Britain unleashed war on him via Henry Churchill as Ali threatened the centuries-long British hegemony on the land (British East-India Levant Company). Technically speaking, Ali also threatened the Ottoman Empire. Britain offered the Ottoman Sultan to thwart Ali’s uprising in exchange for a diplomatic post inJerusalem (which fit Britain’s long term plan of partitioning the region and the creation of Israel). The secular likes of Nasser and Saddat were akin to Ali: they represented the prospect of modernization (which gets rid of religious fundamentalism) and threatened the Anglo-Americans. Lets remember how Nasser had overthrown the Muslim Brotherhood (who has always served British, and now Anglo-American, interests). Israel had teamed up with the MB in order to get rid of Nasser in a botched operation where explosives were planted inside American and British offices in the hope to trigger a civil war. Saddat (who vehemently opposed the Ayatollah Khomeini) wasn’t any different. He was a threat to the Anglo-Americans and it should be safe to suggest that the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood and Mossad were behind his assassination.

            On the related topic here, I believe that once the masonic-modeled organizations in the Middle East (Muslim Brotherhood, Fedayeen-e Islam, Zionism, Islamic Mullahs et al.) serving the interests of the Deep State are eradicated; peace will prevailed. Until then, those organizations and their zombified members will continue embracing the idea conflicts, chaos and death.

          • AlexanderAmproz

            Bonjour Omega,

            J’espère que vous allez bien et que vous avez un automne
            aussi beau qu’a Genève…
            Mes pensées vont au Moyen-Orient

            que l’on peut tristement resumer en pensant
            au fameux “Vea Victis” de Brennus en 390 BC

            Dans le meme ordre d’ idée ci dessous un article
            qui confirme mes soupçons de toujours… !

            https://russia-insider.com/en/ww2-war-crimes-churchill-and-americans-were-far-worse-hitlers/ri27969?ct=t(Russia_Insider_Daily_Headlines11_21_2014)&mc_cid=26a01f6eea&mc_eid=b06795de9c

            The WW2 War Crimes of Churchill and the Americans Were Far Worse Than Hitler’s

            “… the inescapable conclusion is that in per capita terms Jews were the greatest mass-murderers of the twentieth century, holding that unfortunate distinction by an enormous margin and with no other nationality coming even remotely close. And yet, by the astonishing alchemy of Hollywood, the greatest killers of the last one hundred years have somehow been transmuted into being seen as the greatest victims, a transformation so seemingly implausible that future generations will surely be left gasping in awe.

          • Omega

            Bonjour Alex; merci pour vos pensées. La situation est précaire au Liban. L’analogie au Vea Victis est à point. Merci également le lien. L’état profond doit être éradiqué une fois pour toutes.

          • Omega

            Bonjour Alex. Malgré la situation précaire au Liban, je vais bien merci. L’analogie au Vea Victis est à point. J’espère que vous allez bien également. Je me souviens de la saison en Suisse comme si c’était hier. Ici, c’est encore chaud mais agréable. Merci pour les liens dans vos deux commentaires. Vivement la fin de l’état profond diabolique.

          • AlexanderAmproz

            Bonjour Omega,
            Un article avec de nombreux liens qui pourraient vous intéresser.
            ==================================================
            https://www.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/article/le-sionisme-bon-pour-israel-219643

            Le Sionisme : Bon pour Israël, Mauvais pour les Juifs ?!

            par JPCiron

            samedi 14 décembre 2019

            L’Historien Israélien Ilian PAPPE affirme que la politique de soutien effréné à Israël du Président Trump fera sûrement du mal aux Juifs de par le monde :

            « Je dis aux Juifs Israéliens : vous pensez aujourd’hui que le Sionisme est bon pour vous car vous êtres les privilégiés. (…) Mais sur le long terme, ce sera mauvais pour vous. (…) Israël n’a rien à voir avec les ”Valeurs Juives”. C’est un état d’idéologie ethnique basé sur le pouvoir et l’oppression. » ref. Article Middle East Monitor (1)

            Ces affirmations ”fortes” méritent un examen, que je fais faire -si je puis dire- au célèbre journaliste Israélien Gideon LEVI (2), au Président d’Israël Reuven RIVLIN, et au ”Pape” du Sionisme Theodor HERZL, outre quelques autres intervenants d’envergure.

            L’interaction des contributions de ces auteurs fait émerger une image originale du Sionisme : un mouvement politique nationaliste ethnoculturel qui opère dans l’ombre du Judaïsme, sans toutefois adhérer à ses Valeurs. Ce qui crée des ”malentendus” et des problématique du type de ceux à peine évoqué.

            Note : le Sionisme Chrétien se distingue du Sionisme Israélien (15).

            JPEG

            « Sionisme et Judaïsme ne sont pas la même chose, mais deux idées différentes et sûrement contradictoires. » (8) (évocation florale)

            « Il y a des Américains non-Évangéliques, des Français non-Catholiques, des Allemands non-Protestants et même des Arabes non-Musulmans. Il y a quelque 1,8 millions de Canadiens d’origine Chinoise et au moins 80.000 Suédois d’origine Serbe. Ils sont tous considérés membres de la nation de l’État dans lequel ils vivent. » (3) (Gideon LEVI) Mais Israël fait exception.

            Ce texte de Gideon LEVI me semble épouser la vision exprimée pour Israël par le Président d’Israël Reuven RIVLIN, en 2015. Cette vision correspondrait au souhait de parvenir à un État Israélien démocratique et équitable pour tous les citoyens. C’est-à-dire un État tel qu’il ressortait des résolutions de l’ONU de 1947, et tel que transcrit dans la Déclaration d’Indépendance d’Israël de 1948 (= aucune différence selon la religion, la race, le sexe, etc) Ref. texte du Ministère des Affaires Étrangères Israélien : (6)

            Le contraire donc d’un État Ethnique. Et le Président RIVLIN insistait sur le risque de ”catastrophe” si Israël prenait le chemin d’un État qui discriminerait les minorités d’aujourd’hui. Voir Article “Israël en danger ?” : (5f)

            C’est pourtant la voie de la discrimination qui a été choisie… Gideon LEVY le confirme : « Il n’existe pas d’Israéliens non-Juifs. » . Voir aussi l’Article sur les “indiens” de Palestine (5g)

          • Omega

            Bonjour Alex. Merci pour le lien. C’est un sujet, très intéressant (mais aussi opaque), que j’étudie depuis plusieurs années (lorsque le temps me le permet). La preuve que le sionisme n’a rien à voir avec le judaïsme s’était fait clairement ressentir avant la deuxième guerre mondiale lorsque les juifs rejetaient le sionisme entant qu’idéologie irréligieuse. Le nazisme (planifié) changea leur ton. Le nazisme et le sionisme sont les pile et le face de la même pièce.

          • AlexanderAmproz

            Bonsoir, bonjour Omega,

            Sur ARTE TV 17 décembre il y a un documentaire sur l’eau et la speculation,
            ca devrait surement concerner nos cousin Israélien ….

            =======================================
            if interested by water question

            tomorrow on “THEMA” ART TV in French or German

            you have a documentary on water speculations on the way in the world….

            ============================================================

            https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/082810-000-A/main-basse-sur-l-eau/

            Main basse sur l’eau

            Main basse sur l’eau

            88 min

            Disponible du 10/12/2019 au 13/06/2020

            Prochaine diffusion le mardi 17 décembre à 20:50

            Le prometteur marché de l’eau s’annonce comme le prochain casino mondial. Les géants de la finance se battent déjà pour s’emparer de ce nouvel “or bleu”. Enquête glaçante sur la prochaine bulle spéculative.

            Réchauffement climatique, pollution, pression démographique, extension des surfaces agricoles : partout dans le monde, la demande en eau explose et l’offre se raréfie. En 2050, une personne sur quatre vivra dans un pays affecté par des pénuries. Après l’or et le pétrole, l’”or bleu”, ressource la plus convoitée de la planète, attise les appétits des géants de la finance, qui parient sur sa valeur en hausse, source de profits mirobolants. Aujourd’hui, des banques et fonds de placements – Goldman Sachs, HSBC, UBS, Allianz, la Deutsche Bank ou la BNP – s’emploient à créer des marchés porteurs dans ce secteur et à spéculer, avec, étrangement, l’appui d’ONG écologistes. Lesquelles achètent de l’eau “pour la restituer à la nature”, voyant dans ce nouvel ordre libéral un moyen de protéger l’environnement. En Australie, continent le plus chaud de la planète, cette marchandisation de l’eau a pourtant déjà acculé des fermiers à la faillite, au profit de l’agriculture industrielle, et la Californie imite ce modèle. Face à cette redoutable offensive, amorcée en Grande-Bretagne dès Thatcher, la résistance citoyenne s’organise pour défendre le droit à l’eau pour tous et sanctuariser cette ressource vitale limitée, dont dépendront 10 milliards d’habitants sur Terre à l’horizon 2050.

            Le prix de la vie

            De l’Australie à l’Europe en passant par les États-Unis, cette investigation décrypte pour la première fois les menaces de la glaçante révolution en cours pour les populations et la planète. Nourri de témoignages de terrain, le film montre aussi le combat, à la fois politique, économique et environnemental, que se livrent les apôtres de la financiarisation de l’eau douce et ceux, simples citoyens ou villes européennes, qui résistent à cette dérive, considérant son accès comme un droit universel, d’ailleurs reconnu par l’ONU en 2010. Alors que la bataille de la gratuité est déjà perdue, le cynisme des joueurs de ce nouveau casino mondial, au sourire carnassier, fait frémir, l’un d’eux lâchant : “Ce n’est pas parce que l’eau est la vie qu’elle ne doit pas avoir un prix.”

            Réalisation : Jérôme Fritel

            Pays : France

            Année : 2018.

          • Omega

            Un autre sujet très intéressant, merci. J’ai noté la date de diffusion. Ça me rappelle d’un livre que j’avais lu au début des années 2000 (“Blue Gold” si je me rappelle bien). Effectivement, l’eau est d’une importance vitale pour les “Israéliens” qui due à géographie en grande partie désertique de la Palestine sont devenus (ou plutôt ont due devenir) expert en désaliénation. Notons aussi qu’ils détournent l’eau destinée aux palestiniens depuis des siècles. Ils n’ont pas non plus essayé de s’accaparer du sud du Liban (qui comme le reste du Liban est très riche en eau) pour rien. Le politiciens libanais quant à eux ne font rien pour préserver la richesse du pays (pollution, etc).

          • AlexanderAmproz
          • Karen Bartlett

            Citizens often don’t know the actual motives of politicians (they all talk a good line) or in whose interests their governments are actually working.Especially now with mainstream media working hand-in-glove with the CIA, in the case of the US. And truly religious Jews in Israel and elsewhere are Anti-Zionist, imo.

          • S Melanson

            I replied to Omega’s comment in response to you. Just as I am interested in Omega’s rebuttal, I am also interested in yours – be as frank and blunt as you want, I prefer honesty over ego massaging.

          • Omega

            With due respect, your depiction of the creation of the Zionist state known as Israel and its “progress” is a gross distortion of both facts and real history. Israel exists because it planned, created and given unconditional political, economical and military support by its Anglo-Saxon-American-Zionist overlords while others around around have been destroyed for decades.

            As far the Partition goes, Zionist Jews never had any intention to share the land. Their aim was and still is to steal the entirety of Palestine. A first partition was envisioned by Lord Peel, who in 1937, suggested to split the land 20% to the Jews (since they were a tiny minority) and the rest to non-Jews (mostly Muslims). It made sense but Zionist Jews realized they would never get the whole cake. It was then that Grün, aka Ben-Gurion, unofficially set in motion the forcible transfer of non-Jews out of Palestine. He had even met with British industrialists in the early 1940s to follow up on the progress. A whole decade of terror was waged in Palestine in the hands of Zionist Jews – blowing up civilian infrastructures, markets full of people using children, attacking British soldiers, etc. It was so bad the British army couldn’t contain them. This lasted until the last months of the British mandate where the same Zionist Jews attacked several hundred Palestinian towns and villages (80+ of which were Christian) before self-declaring independence. Needless to say, Israel played the victim. In 1956, Israel (with the support of England and France), attacked/invaded Egypt in the hope to steal the Sinai. In 1963, Israel surprised attacked Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Gaza and the West Bank to steal lands it couldn’t in 1948 and 1956. Needless to say, Israel has played the victim since then.

            With that in mind, when has Israel made and/or ever wanted peace? In 1938, the aim was to kick all non-Jews out. In 1948, same. In 1956, Eisenhower went to great length to make Israel leave Egypt (who destroyed everything on their way out (billions in damage)). In 1968, Israel stole lands and still have most of it. The war of 1973 was orchestrated by Kissinger for the different parties involved (Israel, Egypt, US) to reach specific objectives. Peace is not profitable to the ruling class. Defense contractors rely on chaos, conflicts and wars. Peace would mean that Israel would have to make concessions (give lands back). What peace? Israel has thrived on enemies – real or imagined.

        • Paul

          You just make those who you stole the land off live on their knees instead. No sense of justice, no understanding of right and wrong. Zionism is wicked.

    • Hasbara Hunter

      Holy shit…Iron there ya are..I’ve finally found ya…where ya at little bugger?…the whole friggin IDF is searchin’ for ya boy because you drove that tank in a ditch…Perhaps it is best to report yourself in the nearest IDF-Station…otherwise you might be persecuted for desertion…

      Or worse…
      https://youtu.be/R6-gUqNPi4I