Putin appears preparing to attack Saudi Arabia and Qatar next, Illarionov says

This image from the Russian Defense Ministry shows a Russian Air Force bomb hitting a target in Syria. Khaled Khoja, head of the Syrian National Council opposition group, said at the UN that Russian air strikes killed dozens of civilians, with children among the dead. Photo: AP

This image from the Russian Defense Ministry shows a Russian Air Force bomb hitting a target in Syria. Khaled Khoja, head of the Syrian National Council opposition group, said at the UN that Russian air strikes killed dozens of civilians, with children among the dead. Photo: AP 

2015/11/19 • Analysis & Opinion, Russia

Events of recent days may have obscured what is the most important development of all: Vladimir Putin appears to be preparing for a Russian military strike against Saudi Arabia and Qatar, a move that would dramatically worsen the situation in the Middle East and send oil prices soaring, according to Andrey Illarionov.

Andrey Illarionov, Russian economist and former economic policy advisor to the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin. Currently, a senior fellow in the Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity at the Cato Institute in Washington, DC (Image: Voice of America)

Andrey Illarionov, Russian economist and former economic policy advisor to the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin. Currently, a senior fellow in the Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity at the Cato Institute in Washington, DC (Image: Voice of America)

He argues that Russia’s bombing of targets in Syria, Putin’s success at the G20, “the de facto paralysis of NATO,” Russia’s acquisition of France as an ally, US intelligence sharing with Russia, and proposals for restructuring of Ukraine’s debt distract the world’s attention from Moscow’s preparations for such attacks.

The Moscow analyst says that “the vigilance of the West has been weakened” by this series of events, thus opening the way for Moscow to carry out a strategic operation that it has been hoping to launch against “military, infrastructure and energy sites in Saudi Arabia and Qatar.”

As he typically does, Illarionov presents a careful listing of the evidence he has for his conclusion which if true would highlight some of the dangers involved of including Moscow in any alliance to fight international terrorism because such attacks would almost certainly provoke more of it.

Illarionov calls attention to 15 indicators or steps he suggests show that Putin is planning for such attacks:

  1. Moscow knew that terrorist shot down the plane over Sinai “at a minimum on the third day after” it occurred.
  2. But the Russian authorities did not announce that they knew until “after the conclusion of the G20 summit in Antalya in order to “avoid a practically inevitable discussion in that event of the nature of the possible Russian response to the terrorist action.”
  3. However, “in order not to lose time,” Moscow announced that it was a terrorist act as soon as the Antalya summit was over.
  4. The FSB immediately then put out details that it had not been prepared to release earlier.
  5. Putin said that Russia would do whatever it took “to find and punish the criminals” regardless of when they acted or where they are now.
  6. The Kremlin leader said that he had tasked all of Russia’s force structures to come up with a plan that would deal with all those involved.
  7. Putin declared that Russia “will act in correspondence with Article 51 of the UN Charter which recognizes the right of states to self-defense,” thus cloaking himself in international law for a possible act on particular states.
  8. Already at Antalya, Putin had said that it was necessary to strike at those who “finance terrorist activities,” a group of countries which include Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
  9. The FSB announced in an unprecedented move that it was offering a 50 million US dollar reward to anyone who could provide evidence about the terrorist acts and these links, an amount certainly guaranteed to lead some to provide what they see as evidence of Saudi or Qatar complicity.
  10. Such attacks would be unthinkable, of course, if the US acted in defense of those countries; but that is unlikely. On the one hand, the US is less dependent on oil from there than it was; and on the other, President Barack Obama, compared to his predecessors, is less willing to act in that way.
  11. “The Kremlin’s conviction that the current US Administration is hardly likely to support Saudi Arabia has been essentially strengthened by the refusal of the US and the UK to support not only Saudi Arabia or Ukraine but even France, a member of NATO, in its assessment of the Paris terrorist actions as an act of war and consequently to invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter.”
  12. This refusal contrasts sharply with what happened after September 11, 2001, and prompted French President Francois Hollande to go to Moscow and seek an alliance with Putin.
  13. “The vigilance of the West has been weakened as well by the changes at first glance of the Kremlin’s course,” including the bombing of ISIS targets in Syria and a more positive stance on restructuring Ukraine’s foreign debt, changes that have been amplified by “a massive propaganda campaign of the Kremlin and the Putinintern.”
  14. Consequently, “in the near future, Saudi Arabia (and possibly Qatar) could be declared sponsors of international terrorism and thus one way or another involved in the deaths of hundreds of Russian citizens. Invoking Article 51 of the UN Charger, the Kremlin could carry out an operation of revenge.”
  15. The consequences of such attacks on oil prices are obvious, and the refusal of the US and the UK to invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter for the defense of France marks the de facto paralysis of this organization and in essence an open invitation to the carrying out of new aggression against its other members.”

Edited by: A. N.

Tags: , , , , ,

  • W8post

    “…send oil prices soaring…” that means also more income from the Russian oil…for Russia!

    • http://www.franksrecipes.net Frank

      I think that’s the entire point. Putler has been losing billions in lost oil and gas revenues and the country is nearly bankrupt. They’ve even blown through their “rainy day” fund

      • Dagwood Bumstead

        As I’ve pointed out above, attacking Qatar’s and SA’s oilfields would mean instant retaliation from the Sunni Arab world against the dwarf’s own oil and gas sites. Basically he has only ONE shot at this; SA and Qatar will quickly repair any damage. Remember the speed with which Kuwait’s burning fields were repaired in 1991 after Saddam had set fire to them?
        Furthermore, there are dozens of VLCCs and ULCCs loaded with cheap crude lying at anchor at various locations; most EU countries have stocks to cover at least 3 months of normal consumption. There are also other oil producers who can take up the slack.
        And you can bet your last worthless ruble that SA and Qatar will increase the defences of their oil sites- if, indeed, they haven’t done so already.
        The dwarf really doesn’t want to go there if he knows what’s good for him.

    • dimitri visser

      There are rumours that the FSB is behind the bomb in that airplane. It is almost unbelievable that ISIS is behind this. The US and France are bombing ISIS for a long time, why no US or French airplane ? It all makes sense, FSB is behind the bomb, and now Russia has a reason to attack oil states. Russia is almost bankrupt, war in that region will help Russia a lot with higher oil prices.

      • rgb

        I agree with the rumors that the FSB was behind the bombed airplane and the terrorist attacks in Paris. Putin (Russia) is known to have used these type of methods before. As mentioned by many publications, ‘Who has the most to gain by these acts?’

        ‘Putin said that Russia would do whatever it took “to find and punish the criminals” regardless of when they acted or where they are now.’

        Isn’t these pretty much the same words Putin used after the apartment bombings in Russia back in ’99? Then BOOM, he attacked Chechnya again and brought it under his control.

        • Dagwood Bumstead

          He doesn’t REALLY control Chechnya- Kadyrov does. The FSB and other services such as the GRU have little to no real influence or control over Chechnya and parts of Dagestan. This is a sore point with the FSB top, but the dwarf supports Kadyrov, overruling the FSB. I wonder how much longer the FSB will accept this state of affairs.
          Kadyrov has his own agenda in the Caucasus and it does NOT include Moscow.

          • http://www.franksrecipes.net Frank

            Kadyrov runs Chechnya at the pleasure of the Kremlin. If Putler tires of him, he’ll disappear

          • Dagwood Bumstead

            I don’t think so. Kadyrov has pulled all of his thugs out of the Donbas, back to Chechnya. Why? The war in the Donbas isn’t over, so the only reason that makes sense is that he wanted to strengthen his forces at home.
            Kadyrov can do pretty much as he pleases. The dwarf can’t afford a third war in Chechnya, what with his increasing involvement in Syria and the unfinished war in the Donbas. Syria will slowly but surely demand more and more forces, not to mention cash which is running out. It’s a matter of time before Kadyrov tells the dwarf to get stuffed in my opinion.

          • W8post

            “Syria will slowly but surely demand more and more forces, not to mention cash which is running out.” WHICH Syria do you mean? The ‘Assad’ Syria, the IS[is] or the ‘American’? IS[is[ can hold out a while as long as the oil-stream keeps flowing. BUT, who is buying the oil from IS[is]????
            BY THE WAY, keep an eye on the Kurds!

          • http://www.franksrecipes.net Frank

            There is no evidence that Kadyrov has pulled his people back to Chechnya. In fact, I was talking to a friend in Yepatoria a couple of days ago and she said Crimea is full of Chechyns

  • Forgotten Ghost

    I see Kremlin complicity in these terrorist acts more and more with each passing day. What a vile, petulant band of marauders these criminals are. While I bear no love for either Saudi Arabia or Qatar, it doesn’t take a genius to see that to attack them now is nothing more than a means to bring in profits for Putin and gang. Let’s not forget, Egypt was preparing for an upgrade to the Suez project, which would have made many nations even less dependent on Russian fuel, and lowered the price of oil a bit more. With less tourism (some say the largest source of Egypt’s income) there won’t be enough for them to cotinue the Suez expansion.

    Russia is attacking anyone that might make their oil and gas less expensive. I think it’s time to depose those that bend to Putin’s tactics, and go for the throat of these low class mobsters. To he** with political courtesies, if the world is in flames, there won’t be anyone to offend anyway, so we might as well just crush the sources of the problem and save as much as we can.

    • Czech Mate

      It’s Obama’s FAULT plain and simple. The COWARD Barry was too scared and blind to exterminate the KGB rat but now the rat is threatening us all…

      • Forgotten Ghost

        “Plain and simple” do not occupy the same space as the reality were are in. While it is difficult for a Soviet to understand, there are these niggling little things called “complicated situations” that arise in world politics, time and again. If it were “Barry’s” fault, then we wouldn’t have had Putin causing issues back in 1999, now would we? There are many different levels of participation in many different issues, that give form to the overall state of affairs we live with in the now.
        Putin and his FSB troll factory certainly love to slip in “anti-Obama” propaganda whenever they can, however. The idea behind this tactic is to get people caught up in blaming one little scapegoat based largely on racial prejudice. Not only is President Obama soon to be inconsequential to the world at large, but considering how many Western politicians and wealthy interests from all over this planet have shaped the current situation, he was always far less of a factor than Putin and his allies would like us to believe.

        Of course, those who take the low cost bait of racism and scapegoating are far less consequential as well. There are suitable for nothing but making distracting noise in service of Putin and gang’s agenda, being trolls, and wearing patriotic souvenirs… made in China, usually.

        • Czech Mate

          and your point being?

          I’ll tell you mine: Obama is guilty of losing respect by the russian bully for not using force and punishment for Putin’s criminal crossing of every red line possible.

          It was interesting when he had his speech in my country back in 2009, preaching about the world without nukes and look where we are now: even our region is in a fear from Russian agression thanks to the abysmal foreign policy of this idiot whose ego might be even bigger than Putler’s and that is quite something.

          And with the utterly delusional socialist EU leadership diplayed by action of Merkel and Hollande, common sense countries like us, Poland and Slovakia have no other choice than to rely on a man from White House who will get the Kremlin Napoleon in check.

          • Forgotten Ghost

            My point may not have been clear enough, perhaps I should put it more bluntly.

            Anyone who immediately blames Obama for Putin’s actions fall into one of two categories. Either they are indoctrinated by Putin’s propaganda and serve his regime directly, or they have allowed Putin’s propaganda to influence their view of the world, and indirectly serve his regime in the capacity of what is known as a “useful idiot”.
            Obama has a bigger ego than Putin? Hardly, the man isn’t even that powerful, he’s just a figurehead within a much larger political body. He answers to a lot of people, and their ideas and assertions drive much of what he moves forward with. The EU has placed too much power into the hands of special interests, just like the US has. These special interests not only undermine the production and profit of all nations’ economies, they also undermine security and foreign policy, by steering energy away from what should be clear, rational goals and policies. In the US, it’s AIPAC that has the most influence, as it’s members also have their interests and profits tied into many other projects and goals. If energy is skimmed too often, and from all directions, then the initial priorities of any nation lose that energy, and the inertia is lost. Hard to focus on defense and geopolitical maneuvers when your economy is faltering, because a group of wealthy billionaires corrupted a few legislators and congressmen, letting the billionaires sail through loopholes to avoid taxes, moving funds and production overseas, etc.
            While Obama is far from an ideal president, the real problem with America has been the deathgrip that the ultra-wealthy international interests (hey, like Putin’s club!) have over the governance. If it were all down to the “cowardice” of one man, everything would have been decided and done a long time ago, maybe even several times with different actors. Frankly, the whole world is full of complicit rulers and politicians, that should have either jailed these rich thugs, or let the citizens lynch them by now. The good news is that by suppressing the common people, the production that supports the coffers of the corrupt has suffered immensely. With no cows, there can be no cream.
            And no, this is not Obama’s fault. Has he contributed to a mess? Yes, certainly. Was it already a filthy quagmire before he even got involved? Again, it certainly was, and we have all been saying this for decades. Civilizations may experience sharp puncuations of action, but most of the time it’s slow, tedious and frustrating to get anything done at all. Kind of like war.

          • Quartermaster

            Obama’s weakness and cowardice has played a very large part in allowing Putin to carry out what he has done. Putin was the man who acted, but he has carefully acted in such way that he can gage response and then continue the plan, or modify to get around the reaction. Obama has done little, and that has allowed Putin to run rampant.
            If, in your mind, that’s say Obama is at fault, so be it.

          • Forgotten Ghost

            I find it strange that so many people have to focus all of the world’s problems on individuals that are only a small part of those problems, is all.

            Sure, Obama’s a disappointment. I mean, what the heck was he doing, by daring to allow the leaders of the rest of the free world a chance to step up and do something responsible, right? Everyone knows that only American presidents should be at the wheel, especially the wheels of every other nation. It’s not like staying out of world affairs was something that was being screamed at him constantly. I really don’t like Obama, and never did. However, maybe you can give some insight as to who else might share some of the blame? Other than heads of state, that is.

          • Quartermaster

            Unfortunately, Obama has not been a small part of the problem. He has projected weakness in place of strength, and the Eurotrash leaders have gone along with it, setting the stage for what is happening in Ukraine. Heads of state set the atmosphere for geopolitical activity. If all you do is react, and that poorly as Obama has done, then you get the sort of chaos we see in the world now. Weakness in itself is provocative. Obama has projected weakness because he is a very weak man.

            Having said that, While Bush did not project weakness, he was not judicious in the application of US power. He wildly overstepped the bounds in Iraq, setting in train the events that led to ISIS. Obama has been far worse in that he has not made any real effort to rectify the situation.

          • Forgotten Ghost

            What do you think Obama could have done to project strength, and when would it have been an appropriate time to do so?
            How do you think he could have rectified the situation that Bush got us into (considering that the only two camps on the warmongering issue were those wanting a lot more military aggression, and those wanting everything pulled back in)?
            As for the Western leadership, the only sanctions I saw were against Russia, for their invasion and annexation. Surely this would have left the door open for other UN forces to retaliate, if the worst they faced were similar sanctions? France was not allowed to offer the Mistral, either.

            When you’re dealing with a psychopathic regime, there are no measures short of outright war to oppose them. How do you think that would play out, anyway? The most powerful nations were already over-extended militarily, while Russia had enough toys to do some damage to at least several major targets around the world, including nuclear strikes. Flexing muscle and looking tough wouldn’t have cut it, without some wetwork. Wetwork is still an option, and looking better by the minute, considering the plausible deniability factor has gone through the roof with Putin using IS as a scarecrow.
            In shorter terms, Psychos will do what they’re gonna do, and there’s no use in blaming people that we all know are just puppets anyway. If they’re cowards, illegitimate presidents and whatnot, then why play into the enemies’ tactics and focus our aggression on the scapegoats they push in front of us?

            I prefer to save my rage for the real enemy, the ones causing the chaos directly, and those orchestrating it behind the scenes for their own benefit.

          • Quartermaster

            France didn’t sell the Mistrals to Russia because of the theft of Crimea. France dithered a bit, but in the end the optics of Putin’s theft couldn’t be ignored.

            Obama has projected weakness because he is all talk. remember the “red lines” in Syria? That’s just one example. Another example is the lack of aid for Ukraine. Once it was verified that Russian troops were on the ground, Obama should have ordered lethal aid to Ukraine and had it quietly delivered. Combined with nonlethal aid, Ukraine could have been made quite expensive for Russia.

            One thing I will give Putin, however, is what he is doing in Syria. I don’t like Assad, but both Assads protected religious minorities. If ISIS prevails, that will end. Assad also kept things reasonably stable. ISIS is simply chaos on wheels.

            There is a very large difference between looking tough and being so. Obama doesn’t even know how to look tough, much less be tough. Stronger people, such as Putin see through weaklings like Obama. It isn’t hard to look at how he acts militarily and diplomatically and know what the man is. One can also look at how he acts politically in the US and know he’s an utter idiot. Given the position of the US geopolitically, a US leader that is a weak idiot will result in dangerous conditions. We saw that in the late 1930s, and we are seeing similar conditions now.

          • Forgotten Ghost

            Look, I don’t really care what others think about Obama, I myself refuse to blame him for events that others are responsible for. If you want to stare at his picture and seethe, or look at Putin with admiration, that’s fine. This entire thread of comments started off because someone else piped in to blame everything on Obama when my comment had nothing to do with him, like FSB and Hasbara trolls often do. Maybe you should write a letter to Obama, and give him some pointers for making a mean face, like the ones the IDF uses for scaring little Palestinian kids. Who knows, maybe a good, strong show of toughness could prevent the material gains from being apparent to Putin, and turn him into a cuddle-bunny? Hey, it worked with Ghengis Khan.

          • Quartermaster

            I’m aware of how things started off. I’m also aware of your statements about Obama. You are wrong about Obama, alas, and there is no changing it. I really couldn’t care less about either Putin or the idiot in Washington. I’ve no reason the “seethe” over either one. Putin, at least, is a relatively strong man, while Obama is simply a weakling and coward. Putin is not good for Russia, and Obama isn’t good for the US.

            The bit of snark at the end doesn’t work. If you’re goign to pull that sort of trash, at least come up with something less lame.

          • Forgotten Ghost

            My only statements about Obama have amounted to this;
            “He’s not solely responsible for the Putin problem, and it’s silly to blame him instead of putting forth a bit of effort into deepening your worldview.”
            My snark is deserved, as you have insisted on trying to use me as a platform for blaming Obama. My original comment was not about Obama. Someone else responded to me, bringing up Obama, and making a typical O’Reilly statement. When I rebuffed, you had to chime in as well, trying to convince me that I should be blaming Obama. Obama sucks, fine. Why the heck should you care whether or not I am interested in blaming him?
            You frankly seem to be a Russian troll, because you haven’t been happy that I don’t blame every geopolitical problem on Obama, and you insist that Putin is a “stronger man”. Putin is a short, vicious, unsophisticated little mobster that needs total control over his brainwashed subjects in order to live through the day.

            If YOU want to come at someone with such “trash”, expect to get some back. My snark was a lot less than many would have dished out to you.

          • Quartermaster

            I’m an American, not Russian. I have my opinion on Obama’s weakness and cowardice from direct exposure to the moron. I have not said he is solely to blame, but he carries a very large share of the blame because of his behavior.

            I don’t disagree with you on Putin’s characteristics. He is still the stronger man because of the manner in which he takes action. good or bad, that’s the way things often are. Hitler was a far stronger man than Chamberlain, and we can see where that led.

            You make as much snark as you like. The snark in your post was lame and doesn’t work because of it.

          • W8post

            Even I generally agree with your comment, it’s NOT Obama taking decisions [alone], there is a whole staff behind [him] ‘advising’ him. But, yes, the President takes the final responsibility. (and it looks like that his shoulders are not broad enough to carry that responsibility) Bush (SR & JR) couldn’t care less, the Staff took the decisions and he obliged to his ‘staff’ i.e. Cheney cq Halliburton i.e. the weapon/arms industry…

          • Quartermaster

            Obama was out of his depth the day he filed to run for president. The man is utterly unqualified for anything other than political agitator.

            Both Bushes made their own decisions. Many have accused Bush II of being a dummy and being merely a puppet. he was anything but that. Chaney was often frustrated because Dubya wouldn’t go along with what he wanted. His father was even stronger, even if the decisions were often not good ones. Obama doesn’t hold a candle to either of the Bushes. He does appear to be simply a meat puppet.

        • miguel

          Ghost,

          Congress, both liberals and Republicans, authorized lethal weapons.

          BHO said I do not want to go there and upset vova and overstep Merkel and Hollande being the ringleaders of Europe and them doing their job.

          Syria has had many policies approved by Congress that BHO refuses to implement.

          Many of the same issues in Iraq.

          Blame Bush all you want for Daesh, but I think your wrong.

          He left in 2008, BHO brought with him his Noble Prize speech and refused to squash Daesh and retracted America’s influence both there and Afghanistan.

          By his ideology and Generals left and right giving him ideas to win the war, he backs out and the generals resign because he refuses to allow them to implement a way forward, because it is not in the liberal viewpoint that he and democrats gains support from.

          BHO has a large part of the guilt on his shoulders for policies HE implemented and refused to take the recommended route for solutions.

          Then you have the fall of Libya, and there is a real cause and affect by the Arab Spring he promoted AND his promotion of the Muslim Brotherhood.

          These all had large propaganda value for the radicalized warlords that control the terrorists and want to implement Sharia Law everywhere.

          When people bash BHO they do not do it without cause, and it is not some 55 Savushkina Street ploy.

          There is a real cause and effect process from his policies and guidance as POTUS.
          Add to that his year of golfing – over 365 days while in office.

          Add to that, Did you know he made a great speech in Poland before the Crimean referendum supporting Ukraine, but you know what he claimed as support initially in that speech?
          5 million dollars.

          vova would not get out of bed if he doesn’t launder that amount in a day.

          There are many reasons to criticize BHO, Billary a Secretary of State, and a few of his other ‘Czars’ for the policies and actions that has raised the turmoil level in the world.
          vova is a rabid aggressive dog, like a wolf or any other predator, when he senses weakness and a way he can get one over on ‘the West’ and degrade them he will use it.

          One of BHO’s earlier items was to reduce America’s funding of NASA, guess what that led to?
          Him kowtowing to vova to get American astronauts to ISS.
          Weakness and vova holds America hostage.

          You do know him and Billary pushed the Arab Spring in Libya, but when the ‘rebels’ needed help, or the CIA operatives needed help, they do not pick up the phone when it rings.
          BHO’s policies and what he refused to implement as Administrator of the USA has caused, and escalated, a lot of the turmoil that was going away while Bush was POTUS.

          I will not put ALL the blame on him, but a large part of it falls on his and other Administrators (figureheads) of other European liberal policies that sought to appease vova in his aggressive policies.
          And those do include much of the ME turmoil that is fostered by the RF.

          • miguel

            Small correction – Blame Bush all you want for Daesh, but I think your wrong.

            Should be – Blame Bush all you want for Daesh, but I think you and others with that mindset are wrong.

            Also I encourage you to read a few articles by or about Ion Mihai Pacepa, a Romanian defector who plainly states, and does not sugar coat it, the Kremlin is behind terrorism throughout the Muslim world and he uses it where they can.
            Do not forget also that Saddam, therefore many of those under him, IDOLIZED Stalin.
            Much of the problems in Iraq were promoted by the FSB and its agents.
            That is where Daesh comes from.

          • miguel

            HRC in 2002 –

            ‘In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, includingAl Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
            It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.’

            From – http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp

            It is obvious you, Ghost, are one of those – there was no WMD therefore the coalition of forces should not have removed Saddam from power or gone to war there.
            If there was an imminent threat to the USA, the USA would have gone alone to attack.

            It was from a persistent Iraqi leadership that sought to gain a suitcase nuke or larger, an Iraqi leadership that kicked out UN weapons inspectors, an Iraqi leadership that was very threatening to the USA and the “West”, an Iraqi leadership that had used both bio and chem WMD in the past on its own cities, a Iraqi leadership that set Kuwait afire, an Iraqi leadership who worship Stalin, an Iraqi leadership that regardless of UN sanctions was actively seeking the materials needed for enlarging its CMD and BMD program and enlarging its nuclear and ballistic weapons capabilities, an Iraqi leadership that had many smuggling operations interrupted thankfully due to some blocking of smuggling ships.

            A coalition was sought for a future threat, not an imminent threat and an Iraqi leadership that repeatedly thumbed its nose at the UN and had a couple allies that prevented the UN from kicking the Butcher of Baghdad’s nation out for his repeated violations.

            Saddam had a few years of thumbing his nose at the world in 1998 when he refused to let inspectors in.
            Those few years, he sought weapons, he built bunkers (which were observed by satellite), and he also transferred some of his stockpiles to Syria.

            It is very similar to vova’s hatred of the West for the fall of the USSR and end of Soviet occupied states, the hatred Saddam had for the USA and the Western powers.
            Saddam was going to pay everyone back for ending his Kuwait gambit.
            He posed a serious threat that the world acknowledged they knew not the day Saddam would bomb and spread terrorism worse then Iran, but that it was a reality that it would come.
            And before he had a more deadly arsenal, before he committed and act like 9/11, the decision was made Iraq had to weakened again significantly.
            Nuclear plans were found, active attempts at smuggling contraband were foiled and intercepted, weapons grade WMD were found, an active campaign to threaten the west at all levels (political, media, foreign relations, etc) was active, using and communicating with terrorists were documented, bunkers were buried, manufacturing sites were destroyed and or concreted in.

            These can be all found on the CIA site.

            As you can see from the article linked above, and you can do your own future ground work research, the plans for attacking Iraq were in place and promoted by Democrats during the Clinton era before 9/11.
            It was Saddam’s giving the world the finger, that resulted in justice being carried out against Iraq.
            Not some American politicians secret plan to gain access to Iraqi oil projects.
            BTW, did you know most of those Iraqi oil projects are in Chinese hands now?

            Yes, I blame Liberal and Democratic and Socialist and Antiwar activists for the creation and promotion of the Arab Spring, which ultimately led to the creation of Daesh, and it ends there.

            BHO and Billary sought to act like a turtle and withdraw the head of America from Iraq and Afghanistan, and go on to Syria and Libya and Egypt.
            And that left a vacuum and little leadership inside those countries, which lead to where we are now.
            The Noble Peace speech and other BS supporting Muslim Brotherhood were some terrible judgments they thought they knew better about.
            Daesh was but a twinkle in some guys mind when BHO took office, now it is up to 50k strong and still recruiting through the slums of the world.

            Regardless, your second comment made the insinuation that anyone that blamed BHO’s foreign policy for vova’s actions were either brainwashed or a trollop.
            That is false, and I encourage you to do some more introspection and research.

            His foreign policy strategy, as well as other Socialist Moscow aligned leaders of Europe, and the little red box, non-interventionism, and some other items resulted in the emboldening of vova and his ability to carry out policies that he would not have dared try pre2006.

            And yes, I feel Bush choice of not helping Georgia lead to the vova’s first series of I can do what I want outside of Moscow’s borders but inside Moscow’s sphere of influence.

            Although, I think he partially made that decision due to Democrat’s anti Iraq war stance among the voters and in Liberalist dominated media which were pushing for BHO’s FB campaigning.

            Anyways, attackers of Democrats or BHO are not brainwashed, uninformed, or drinking or serving the Kremlin’s koolaid.
            And it sounds like you have bought a little of the antiWar activist koolaid yourself.

            We should both do some more research, but that second comment of yours I thought needed responding to of BHO critics.

            As well as others that were alleging Bush was guilty, when it was Saddam’s barbarity that encouraged the acceptance of that terrorist lifestyle in Iraq to birth Daesh from AlQueda who he was working directly with as well as others refusal to accept that BHO’s vacuum was an encouragement factor for Daesh in Iraq and Syria.

          • Forgotten Ghost

            My word, you two make all manner of assumptions and just can’t stop. I don’t care if you dislike Obama, Democrats, Liberals, Socialists, or any of it. I had a comment appear to something I posted, which said that it was ALL “OBAMA’S FAULT, PLAIN AND SIMPLE”. I rebutted appropriately, and then you two had to persist in your attempts to convince me that it WAS all his fault, despite going back and saying that you agreed that it was a complicated situation, and there are multiple parties to blame for this mess.

            So, which is it, then? Is it all Obama’s fault, or are there other people to blame for Putin’s aggression?

            “Anyways, attackers of Democrats or BHO are not brainwashed, uninformed, or drinking or serving the Kremlin’s koolaid.
            And it sounds like you have bought a little of the antiWar activist koolaid yourself.”

            Maybe *critics* of BHO are standing on solid, valid principles of reason, but when I recieve multiple replies that home in on my refusal to blame Obama for EVERYTHING, or even Putin’s aggression (hint: it’s in his OWN head!), and label that as being a liberal, a “fan” of Obama, defending him (from something he isn’t solely responsible for?), and now I drink the “antiWar activist koolaid”?
            It’s just freaking silly, man. I don’t care what you think about Obama. I received a reply to a comment in which he wasn’t even mentioned, and my rebuffing the notion in it (look up- you agree with Czech Mate’s first comment?) drew out two more commenters that just won’t let it die.
            THAT is why I suggest that yes, there is a measure of neurosis involved with those that insist on blaming Obama for everything. He’s the easiest target, and he certainly deserves his share of hard criticism, but all I have BEEN saying is that he isn’t the only one to focus on, far from it. Why is that such a difficult concept to grasp? It’s like you’re trying to justify your hatred of Obama and Democrats, which I think is silly, but go ahead and do so if you feel like it. I say “hatred” because despite my repeatedly acknowledging that Obama has been a bad president and that he is *partly* to blame, that just hasn’t been good enough for you two. Have you read through all of this?

            I stand by my statements. I do not blame Obama for Putin’s aggression. I do not solely blame Obama for the state of this nation, or any other. Putin is a punk. Anyone that insists upon blaming Obama for everything, I tend to not take seriously, even on other matters. Anyone that attempts to bring in all kinds of other red herrings, attempting to convince me that Obama is a legitimate focus of even the majority of my ire, or that Putin is admirably strong while he decimates his own people and economy, I will certainly not take seriously, and may even suspect them of being a troll. Did you see where Quartermaster claimed to have been in contact with Obama?
            When a person makes an outrageous statement (CM) and I rebuke, another person (Q) jumps in, claiming to somewhat agree but somehow not being able to accept that agreement, and continues on suggesting that I am loyal to Obama. I say repeatedly that I don’t like the guy, and he deserves some blame, for sure. That’s not good enough, so they (Q) press on, until I ultimately dismiss him for displaying illogical behavior.
            Now, another (you) are attempting to *appear* more reasonable, and offer yet another red herring (Iraqi WMDs), while in defense of what?

            You’re all acting rather strange, frankly.

          • Forgotten Ghost

            That is at least a better list of reasons than “I hate n***ers and mooslims”, and I do agree with much of what you put in your reply.
            I do recall a LOT of rhetoric coming from the republican side (constituents as well) to de-fund NASA, and be “fiscally conservative” well before Obama actually cut funding.

            My main point isn’t that Obama is a good president. My point is and has always been that it does absolutely no good whatsoever to focus the public awarness and anger on one person. Let’s be honest here, Bush DID sit in office while the groundwork was being laid out for the messes we’re in. It doesn’t mean that Cheney, Rumsfeld, and every wealthy friend in between weren’t the bigger players in the corruption that weakened our position by attacking everyone that countered our “ally’s” power in the ME. By not listening to “good advice”, I suspect that our current naive president was avoiding poisonous misdirection, since he had reason to believe that the same personel involved in the illegal wars he inherited probably weren’t going to steer him in any better of a direction (this would be incorrect, but plausible in the mind of a “community organizer”). The whole well was already poisoned, though. Our intelligence services were already vile as he**, the entire MIC in the US was only interested in blowing up innocents for fiat dollars, our military was staffed with a huge number of psychopaths that committed atrocities and bragged about it, while all of those with a conscience and good sense were being silenced, killed, or killing themselves. We ALL inherited a huge mess, made possible by three buildings being demolished, and a large number of Americans being in complete shock over it, allowing the rise of our own brand of tyranny over all. Blame Obama for all of that? The worst things that our nation was ( at least mostly) responsible for occurred before he was even a whisper to this country.

            I do not blame Obama for Daesh, or Bush even. I blame Israel for Daesh, and with Israel, any politician anywhere that supports the Likud. Russia isn’t an enemy of Israel, either… both are playing little games behind the scenes to the benefit of the other, and courting more than simple “agreements”. America and Israel have been slightly less ideal for each other lately, and Russia has been looking better as a large arms, military and fuel source to replace the US.

            I do not like Obama. I am not a democrat. I refuse to simply blame the most convenient idiot at home, while a foreigner is murdering everywhere, and burning the world. I don’t think anything Obama could’ve done up to this point matters, unless we’re talking about him completely selling out America’s citizens with knowledge that he was doing so. Blame him for being an ineffective statesman, and not having the strategic experience to continue the legacy of NATO’s influence? Sure, we can say that every single day, rightfully. What we really need to do is bring to the public forum all of those that are actually pulling the strings, and influencing the heads of state in every Western nation. Once we get a better understanding of who is doing what, and why, we can pass judgement righteously, and with precision.

    • gdod25

      Send your kids a hole.

  • OlenaG

    And Putin is foolish enough to think that Qatar and Saudi Arabia fully staffed with modern Western military equipment are just going to sit there and take it? Putin is going to piss off the Sunni Arab World and bring about his own demise. Putin should be careful what he wishes for…he may just get it.

    • Dagwood Bumstead

      The inevitable result of such stupidity would be a massive assault on Dwarfstan by the Sunni Arab world. Dwarfstan has a long soft underbelly consisting of Sunnis Muslim states such as Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. All the spiritual leaders of Saudi Arabia will call for a jihad against the dwarf. Any $$$ the dwarf gains from rising oil prices will be quickly wiped out by being spent on defending Dwarfstan against massive terrorist attacks that would certainly target and try to devastate its own oil and gas production.
      Don’t forget that Dwarfstan itself has a Sunni population of some 15 million, plus millions of migrants from the Stans. Will Putin Junior i.e. Kadyrov sit back? Hardly. He has his own agenda in the Caucasus and it isn’t to Moscow’s advantage.

  • Being

    Do have Saudi Arabia and Qatar some nukes? Hidden nukes, secret nukes? Any guarantor of territorial integrity+suvereignity?
    Hm, with Kremlin everything is possible and the West will gape as they can the best.

    So more refugees in EU soon.

    Yet Germany has plenty of Euros and Merkel+Junker will print few tousands of millions more.

    • Dagwood Bumstead

      With Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia setting up fences at their borders the flow of migrants is already being reduced. And the pressure on Merkel to take action is increasing daily as more and more Germans realize just how stupid her open door policy is.
      If the demented dwarf attacks Qatar and SA he can expect dozens of terrorist attacks in Dwarfstan itself, not least against his own oil and gas production. His forces in Syria will be wiped out in short order. SA will call on the whole Sunni world to avenge the attacks on the defender of Islam’s holy places Mecca and Medina. He won’t attack either of them if he knows what’s good for him.

      • Being

        So do you think Kremlin really worries Saudi Arabia and Qutar than? Saudi Arabia and Quatar are not China. Well Mecca and Medina are holy places for Islam believers, they can trample to death many people but would they be able to reach Russia?

        I insist that Kremlin nowadays is capable of anything, as nobody makes any border/boundary for them really.

        Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia and Slovenia setting up fences at their borders the flow is just bit obstructed, with 20 000 illegals”refugees” strong in two days, you will see how they will flow again. Let alone in 10 days or 100 days (10 000 illegals per 1 day).

        And doing This Mess to post Yugoslavia states, when these old idiots-politicians-EU leaders Experienced from past How explosive post Yugoslavia states can be, is terrible idiocy, unmorality.

  • Vlad Pufagtinenko

    This is the time for Ukraine to put a final blow to those Putin terrorists.

    • Dagwood Bumstead

      On the contrary! Kyiv should wait patiently, bide its time, build up its army, let Dwarfstan get sucked into a war with the Sunni Arabs. When Dwarfstan is weakened further and fully embroiled in the Middle East and possibly the Stans, THEN liberate the Donbas and Crimea and kick the katsaps out.

      • Vlad Pufagtinenko

        You speak truth Oh wise one. Have a good day.

        • Dagwood Bumstead

          Whether I speak the truth I don’t know. But it makes sense to strike when the opponent is weak, to minimize your own losses. By the end of next year the reserve funds will be empty according to a statement made by Finance Minister Siluanov in the Duma recently. Then what? Slash the state budget even more, cut back on the subsidies to Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and the Crimea again? The dwarf can’t keep spending more on defence and the security services indefinitely- he is making the same mistake as Brezhnev and Co did, spending on the armed forces when the economy is going down the drain. Like Brezhnev, he is involved in senseless wars he can’t win. Collapse is inevitable, and when Dwarfstan starts to visibly crumble is the time to strike, perhaps then being able to liberate the Donbas and Crimea without a shot being fired, nobody killed or wounded.

  • Eeli Saretsalo

    that’s the last straw! your words are meaninless for you not only did you ignore the Green leftist flowerhats being the culprits of this chaos, you Dared to insult Ukraine being a FAILED STATE?! You lost ALL your credibily at that point, and once every has heard your words…then no one will listen.

  • miguel

    Adrian, I see you watch RT or read some other Kremlin sponsored mouthpiece.
    And you bought into the lie and are repeating it.
    FN6 are made in CHINA.
    The Lebanese smuggler said he got them inside Ukraine.
    IF you did not know, there is a war going on in Ukraine and Ukraine does not control its Eastern border, Russia does.
    These weapons are most likely something a RUSSIAN smuggler brought into Donbas and then they facilitated them going to the Middle East.
    Ukraine has NEVER bought a FN6 from China, they were not in the country before EuroMaidan,
    Yes, Ukraine has its smuggling issues, but most all of that has been eliminated in Ukraine in the parts it controls.
    FN6’s were not a part of that.

    So Kremlin’s useful idiot and repeater of lies, you have made yourself known for what you are.

    • miguel

      Adrian,

      Still false.

      There are occupying forces and an open border.
      Although they came from inside the borders of Ukraine, that does not mean they are from the Ukrainian military or technically from Ukraine.
      They have not been spotted or used by the government forces at all.

      https://odessablog.wordpress.com/2015/11/21/a-return-to-syria-and-ukraine-fn-6-manpads/

      Goes a little deeper into the issue.
      But your blatant claim that it IS Ukraine, with government responsibility, that was smuggling weapons to Daesh has yet to be completely proven, and that is what I disagree with you about discussing this and trying to imply that Ukraine (the nation) is a state sponsor of terrorism.
      IF you have more data that proves it, then I will withdraw and say you were right, and be calling to get this proven and get the Congress and Eropean politicians involved.
      But right now it is just an empty connection in an article about some guy that had a business in Ukraine who was a Syrian.
      It is obvious he got them from somewhere from China.
      That middle man would most likely be the FSB or an organized crime group out of Moscow that would have the links to get them into Ukraine.

      All we both have is speculation.
      The article did not link the smuggling ring all the way back to China, and until they do, both you and I could be wrong.

      So your alleging Ukraine is supporting Daesh, and my alleging FSB, or organized crime groups based in Moscow, supplied or facilitated the weapons transfer are just guesses.
      I condemn everyone for printing or discussing this issue and journalists alleging Ukraine is supporting Daesh, until the link all the way back to China is established.
      You think the link stops at Ukraine, I think it goes to Moscow.
      Both of us could be wrong and it links to Libyan arms smugglers, we do not know until they connect the dots back to China.
      And I hope they update the story as more info is available, but I think AP released it prematurely.

  • gdod25

    The US has been beating that dog with a stick trying to start WW3. No thanks.

  • AMERIKANS.ORG

    OR COURSE PUTIN IS PLANNING TO ATTACK SAUDI ARABIA.

    THAT IS HIS MASTER STRATEGY IN THE MIDDLE EAST…..IT IS A WIN WIN FOR MOTHER RUSSIA.

    If the oil fields are destroyed, global oil supply diminishes and the price of oil goes up.

    If he takes over the oil fields, then Russia adds to its supply of oil

    BUT PUTIN IS CAREFULLY TIMING THIS ATTACK TO OCCUR AFTER HIS PLANNED COUP IN THE UNITED STATES……..

    Putin, and his dutiful Double Agent, President Obama are nearing the end of a 30 year conspiracy, designed to have a “MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE” ala Russian KGB, gain control of the White House and Declare Martial Law following a False Flag attack orchestrated by the FSB, blamed on ISIS, designed to provide sufficient political cover for Obama to Suspend our National Elections so he can remain in power rendering aid and comfort to our enemies for years to come.

    This conspiracy is about to bear fruit for Putin, at which point, he will proceed with all his other plans to take over Europe and the Middle East.

    Get ready for a ride.