“So this is going to be an interesting thing to see, if they’re trying to indirectly bring on this war with Iran, and abrogate the nuclear agreement with Iran, how many people in the world – I predict none – will follow in our footsteps, and how big a disaster this may be for the United States.”
Well then. Pretty straight forward assessment of the situation.
Good information. Though his description of Mattis, McMaster and Trump and Bannon are skewed, in my opinion. (Not their actions; he has that correct.)
Mattis and McMaster play the role of “strategists”. Where were they ever? Mattis needed two chances to win Fallujah back. That’s his big get in military career.
McMaster won a tank battle in Iraq. Battle of 73 Easting Line. He had 8 tanks. Destroyed 25 Iraqi tanks. 1991. We all saw the Iraqi army. They were third rate, third world, a joke. We plowed sand over them in places. They lined up for single column wipeouts. This is our modern day Patton. Our “Strategist”.
Since those halcyon moments, they have done nothing.
McMaster is a big game talker. Sort of like the Sports experts who know everything that just happened after 14 instant replays in super slow motion. But can’t predict the next play much less understand what is really going on in the huddle.
He wrote a book about Vietnam. He thinks there was a way to win there.
So did Westmoreland, Maxwell Taylor, Abrams, Zumwalt, the best and the brightest, the Rand Corporation, the Hudson Institute and even Deng Xiaoping took a shot at it and lasted two weeks with a massive Chinese incursion.
Ho and Giap were better than 100 McMasters. They won four wars. Japanese, French, US and China.
As for Bannon, he may have a viewpoint, but he is a sultan with no more balls than the Nubian slaves watching the harem. He has no power. I like Bannon. But he is powerless in the oval office. Eclipsed by Jared.
And Trump wants victories, not campaigns. He wants to win fast.
US military can’t win anywhere, much less fast.
They can kill and destroy but not come home with a victory.
Adding 5000 men here, 3000 men there, Marine artillery here, more SEAL team raids there is no victory-conducive strategy. Just tactics.
If they wanted a fast victory for Trump, they should have called Duterte, told him that 4,000 men were coming to help him kill ISIS in Marawi and get it done in 4 hours.
Of course, the CIA sent the ISIS crazies there, so that’s why the US hasn’t offered him any help. They want to kill him and bring back another vassal like Aquino.
There are no strategists in US military. There are killers and wimps. The killers are in the saddle. They are killing in large numbers. But they are using proxies everywhere.
Kurds, AQ, ISIS, Taliban, Haqqani, PMCs and Nazis. The wimps work for promotion and are adverse to risk. Poor attitude to achieve military victories.
As for Syria, we will have more war. From Iraqi border to Jordan border to Turkey border, the US will try to hold onto turf. They will also disrupt the 4 deescalation zones.
And they will strike the Iranian militias and Syrian forces until Russia and China make a major UN move against the US, exposing in depth what the truth of US and terror is doing there and elsewhere.
But in Iraq, the Iraqis already have indicated they want the US to leave when the war is over (Mosul). And the Iranians have copious forces to establish their path through Iraq. One report says 30-50,000 militia are already inside Syria. Probably 150,000 are in Iraq. All battle hardened. Mosul battle began with Iranian militia leading the attack. The Iraqis took months before they stepped in and took over from the militias.
What could be the US “strategy” to win in Syria and win in Iraq and hold bases in both nations? Figure that one out. I repeat, there are no strategies or strategists.
What the US is doing is creating “new” forces. One at al Tanf, is several hundred New Syrian Army, so called. Will be a few thousand in a month or so. The have to move AQ and ISIS troops into this new “rebel” army.
But Russia has already set the template. Any group that does not stand down and leave the battlefield or join the Assad forces to fight terrorists will be killed in place. So, at some point the US proxies will receive the template warning. Then, death by Kalibr or bomber, rockets or missiles. Al Tanf will be a last stand like the Pentagon has made famous in Korea, Vietnam, et al. They will leave Syria in ignominy.
Why haven’t these geniuses won anywhere?
They make every mistake of all empires. Troops far from home, long on the battle field, endless tours of duty, Peter Principle of leadership, generals looking for more stars not victory, incentive to switch from high morale mission to high expenditure substitutes (contractors), special forces targets not strategic targets, use and reliance on technology not warcraft, wrong weapons systems, faulty Intel, ideological dissonance.
The Hegemon is on the roll again. Things will get messed up in Syria if Trump is fooled. He still has not changed his Mission Requirements, though he has empowered the generals with new ROEs. He wants victories, fast. He wants to leave the ME as a war zone won by US and allies.
I believe they feed him BS Intel and sell him on their reputations. He believes them.
When they get bloodied up, as they will, he will change.
By the way, Trump is not a strategist either. He’s a counter-punching tactician. He is a goal setter, but often has no underlying strategy. His tools are his rules of negotiation.
One reason Putin will be impossible for Trump to deal with is Putin wants nothing in a deal with the US other than its changed behavior. The US and Trump don’t even “hear” much less “comprehend” that concept.
Look at the alignments changing in the ME.
Turkey and Qatar with Iran, with Syria, with Russia, with Egypt and with Libya.
US with Israel, with Jordan, with the Gulf and Saudi Arabia.
NATO without Turkey.
EU wanting to deal with Iran.
Where’s the US strategy?
Ten days after the sword dance, what has the US gained?
A weapons deal with SA, but their huge CENTCOM airbase in Qatar is caught in a shitfest. Turkey will likely be sending troops to their own Qatar base to help save the government.
Where’s the US strategy?
Mattis’s Iraq/Fallujah history is somewhat more nuanced than your representation–see:
JAMES MATTIS, A WARRIOR IN WASHINGTON The former Marine Corps general spent four decades on the front lines. How will he lead the Department of Defense?
I agree with your post in general,but there are a couple of points I’ll enlarge on:
“And they will strike the Iranian militias and Syrian forces until Russia and China make a major UN move against the US, exposing in depth what the truth of US and terror is doing there and elsewhere.”
1. Don’t hold your breathe waiting for that UN move. I even find it difficult to understand how those two are able to move upright without a spine.
“But in Iraq, the Iraqis already have indicated they want the US to leave when the war is over (Mosul). And the Iranians have copious forces to establish their path through Iraq. One report says 30-50,000 militia are already inside Syria. Probably 150,000 are in Iraq. All battle hardened. Mosul battle began with Iranian militia leading the attack. The Iraqis took months before they stepped in and took over from the militias.”
2. If used correctly that could really be the “game-changer” answer. There are two ways those forces need to be used. One,a huge number of them should move directly across the Syrian border at Assad’s request.And take on the terrorists in Syria (of all kinds). Aid the SAA to wipe them finally out. And let the US know they are no longer welcome anywhere on the soil of Syria. Their choice being to leave on their feet,or stay permanently in 6 foot plots.And then back up words with actions.
And two,back up the Iraqi government in telling the Kurds there will be no independent Kurdistan.Iran should talk to the Turks and explain how dangerous it would be for an independent Kurdish state to exist. It would be a magnet for the breakup of Turkey.That shouldn’t be a hard sale with Erdogan. And from all sides ,Iraqi ,Turkish,and Iranian,forces together cancel any Kurdish plans for independence. An autonomous Kurdish region in Northeastern Iraq,is more than sufficient to assure Kurdish rights.Russia’s federal subject entities could be a guide for that (Chechnya).Bur unless Turkey,Syria,Iraq,and Iran,want to see their nations dismembered at the US’s wish. They need to “nip this Kurdish state idea in the bud” before it get started.That is one thing those 4 states shouldn’t have much trouble agreeing about.
An excellent video. I think people need to understand about Col. Wilkerson. He is a US patriot. So to expect him to take anyone else side is foolish of us. But he is one of the most honest of the people on that side. And he looks for what would be “best for the US”,not the neo-con warmongers that rule in the West. He unlike almost all in the US is willing to expose the double-dealing and political/military insanity of the US’s positions. Not from the standpoint of being on “our side”. But from the standpoint that its “bad” for “his” country to support that insanity. I admire his honesty. And while I may not always agree with him. I believe he speaks from “the heart”. And so,I put a lot of credence in what he says.
good interviewer – I’m not always fond of the RealNews – I guess because they were Bernie supporters and I hated Bernie from the start – but that guy sure did a good job with the Colonel
The Bilderberg Group has just held its 2017 meeting, from 1 to 4 June, in the United States. Contrary to habit, the 130 participants were not all defending the same project. Quite the opposite – following the speeches by Donald Trump at the Arabo-Islamic-US summit, and at NATO, the CIA and MI6 organised a first-day debate which opposed those who are partisans of the fight against Islamism and those who support it. The point was, obviously enough, either to find a compromise between the two camps, or to acknowledge the dissension without allowing it to destroy the initial objective of the Alliance – the fight against Russia.
[….]
It will take a little time before we know what was said during this meeting, and to understand the conclusions that were reached by the various attendees. However, we already know that London is pushing for a change of paradigm in the Middlde East. If the model of the « Arab Spring » (reproduction of the « Arab Revolt of 1916 » organised by Lawrence of Arabia in order to replace the Ottoman Empire by the British Empire) is abandoned, MI6 hopes to create a new agreement on the basis of political Islamism.
As a result, while Washington has renewed its alliance with Saudi Arabia, and has convinced it to break with the Brotherhood in exchange for 110 billion dollars worth of armament [7], London is pushing for an agreement between Iran, Qatar, Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood. If this project were to be realised, we would experience the abandon of the Sunni/Chiite conflict and the creation of a « croissant of political Islam » encompassing Teheran, Doha, Ankara, Idleb, Beyrouth and Gaza. This new distribution would enable the United Kingdom to maintain its influence in the region.
[….]
The project of « political Islam » consists of uniting the Muslim Brotherhood and the Khomeinists. It would mean that Iran, and even Hezbollah, would have to substitute this problem for the fight against anti-imperialism. If this were come to pass, it would most certainly lead to the withdrawal of Iran from Syria.
[….]
…Iran might follow the ideal of Imam Khomeiny, confusing the end and the means. What was in the beginning an anti-imperialist revolution led by the power of Islam could evolve into a simple affirmation of the political use of this religion.
[….]
The Chinese ambassador, Cui Tiankai, who was scheduled to speak only on the fourth day of the seminar, was… able to evaluate the positions of each member of NATO as from the first day.
On one hand, Beijing is counting on the collaboration of Donald Trump, the opening to the United States of its Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and the development of all its commercial routes. On the other, it is hoping that the Brexit will lead to an economic and financial alliance with London
Can someone tell me why we should not find it odd that Colin Powell’s chief of staff would be so “honest” and frank about the stupidity of US-Anglo foreign policy? All of these so called whistle blowers out of US or UK mil/intel/security are deep insiders: they seem to get on the air all the time, they all seem to have income despite being ostensibly blacklisted, etc. , etc. – don’t you think some of these guys and gals are agents still on the payroll maintaining presence, influence, monitoring and spreading disinfo (a specific times) in the ALT-Media space?
Tremendous interview – thanks for the post!
“So this is going to be an interesting thing to see, if they’re trying to indirectly bring on this war with Iran, and abrogate the nuclear agreement with Iran, how many people in the world – I predict none – will follow in our footsteps, and how big a disaster this may be for the United States.”
Well then. Pretty straight forward assessment of the situation.
Totally excellent interview.
Thanks.
Must share.
Good information. Though his description of Mattis, McMaster and Trump and Bannon are skewed, in my opinion. (Not their actions; he has that correct.)
Mattis and McMaster play the role of “strategists”. Where were they ever? Mattis needed two chances to win Fallujah back. That’s his big get in military career.
McMaster won a tank battle in Iraq. Battle of 73 Easting Line. He had 8 tanks. Destroyed 25 Iraqi tanks. 1991. We all saw the Iraqi army. They were third rate, third world, a joke. We plowed sand over them in places. They lined up for single column wipeouts. This is our modern day Patton. Our “Strategist”.
Since those halcyon moments, they have done nothing.
McMaster is a big game talker. Sort of like the Sports experts who know everything that just happened after 14 instant replays in super slow motion. But can’t predict the next play much less understand what is really going on in the huddle.
He wrote a book about Vietnam. He thinks there was a way to win there.
So did Westmoreland, Maxwell Taylor, Abrams, Zumwalt, the best and the brightest, the Rand Corporation, the Hudson Institute and even Deng Xiaoping took a shot at it and lasted two weeks with a massive Chinese incursion.
Ho and Giap were better than 100 McMasters. They won four wars. Japanese, French, US and China.
As for Bannon, he may have a viewpoint, but he is a sultan with no more balls than the Nubian slaves watching the harem. He has no power. I like Bannon. But he is powerless in the oval office. Eclipsed by Jared.
And Trump wants victories, not campaigns. He wants to win fast.
US military can’t win anywhere, much less fast.
They can kill and destroy but not come home with a victory.
Adding 5000 men here, 3000 men there, Marine artillery here, more SEAL team raids there is no victory-conducive strategy. Just tactics.
If they wanted a fast victory for Trump, they should have called Duterte, told him that 4,000 men were coming to help him kill ISIS in Marawi and get it done in 4 hours.
Of course, the CIA sent the ISIS crazies there, so that’s why the US hasn’t offered him any help. They want to kill him and bring back another vassal like Aquino.
There are no strategists in US military. There are killers and wimps. The killers are in the saddle. They are killing in large numbers. But they are using proxies everywhere.
Kurds, AQ, ISIS, Taliban, Haqqani, PMCs and Nazis. The wimps work for promotion and are adverse to risk. Poor attitude to achieve military victories.
As for Syria, we will have more war. From Iraqi border to Jordan border to Turkey border, the US will try to hold onto turf. They will also disrupt the 4 deescalation zones.
And they will strike the Iranian militias and Syrian forces until Russia and China make a major UN move against the US, exposing in depth what the truth of US and terror is doing there and elsewhere.
But in Iraq, the Iraqis already have indicated they want the US to leave when the war is over (Mosul). And the Iranians have copious forces to establish their path through Iraq. One report says 30-50,000 militia are already inside Syria. Probably 150,000 are in Iraq. All battle hardened. Mosul battle began with Iranian militia leading the attack. The Iraqis took months before they stepped in and took over from the militias.
What could be the US “strategy” to win in Syria and win in Iraq and hold bases in both nations? Figure that one out. I repeat, there are no strategies or strategists.
What the US is doing is creating “new” forces. One at al Tanf, is several hundred New Syrian Army, so called. Will be a few thousand in a month or so. The have to move AQ and ISIS troops into this new “rebel” army.
But Russia has already set the template. Any group that does not stand down and leave the battlefield or join the Assad forces to fight terrorists will be killed in place. So, at some point the US proxies will receive the template warning. Then, death by Kalibr or bomber, rockets or missiles. Al Tanf will be a last stand like the Pentagon has made famous in Korea, Vietnam, et al. They will leave Syria in ignominy.
Why haven’t these geniuses won anywhere?
They make every mistake of all empires. Troops far from home, long on the battle field, endless tours of duty, Peter Principle of leadership, generals looking for more stars not victory, incentive to switch from high morale mission to high expenditure substitutes (contractors), special forces targets not strategic targets, use and reliance on technology not warcraft, wrong weapons systems, faulty Intel, ideological dissonance.
The Hegemon is on the roll again. Things will get messed up in Syria if Trump is fooled. He still has not changed his Mission Requirements, though he has empowered the generals with new ROEs. He wants victories, fast. He wants to leave the ME as a war zone won by US and allies.
I believe they feed him BS Intel and sell him on their reputations. He believes them.
When they get bloodied up, as they will, he will change.
By the way, Trump is not a strategist either. He’s a counter-punching tactician. He is a goal setter, but often has no underlying strategy. His tools are his rules of negotiation.
One reason Putin will be impossible for Trump to deal with is Putin wants nothing in a deal with the US other than its changed behavior. The US and Trump don’t even “hear” much less “comprehend” that concept.
Look at the alignments changing in the ME.
Turkey and Qatar with Iran, with Syria, with Russia, with Egypt and with Libya.
US with Israel, with Jordan, with the Gulf and Saudi Arabia.
NATO without Turkey.
EU wanting to deal with Iran.
Where’s the US strategy?
Ten days after the sword dance, what has the US gained?
A weapons deal with SA, but their huge CENTCOM airbase in Qatar is caught in a shitfest. Turkey will likely be sending troops to their own Qatar base to help save the government.
Where’s the US strategy?
I believe your premises are sound.
Mattis’s Iraq/Fallujah history is somewhat more nuanced than your representation–see:
JAMES MATTIS, A WARRIOR IN WASHINGTON
The former Marine Corps general spent four decades on the front lines. How will he lead the Department of Defense?
MAY 29, 2017 ISSUE
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/05/29/james-mattis-a-warrior-in-washington
He takes killing people seriously and he follows orders. He’ll go down with the empire.
I agree with your post in general,but there are a couple of points I’ll enlarge on:
“And they will strike the Iranian militias and Syrian forces until Russia and China make a major UN move against the US, exposing in depth what the truth of US and terror is doing there and elsewhere.”
1. Don’t hold your breathe waiting for that UN move. I even find it difficult to understand how those two are able to move upright without a spine.
“But in Iraq, the Iraqis already have indicated they want the US to leave when the war is over (Mosul). And the Iranians have copious forces to establish their path through Iraq. One report says 30-50,000 militia are already inside Syria. Probably 150,000 are in Iraq. All battle hardened. Mosul battle began with Iranian militia leading the attack. The Iraqis took months before they stepped in and took over from the militias.”
2. If used correctly that could really be the “game-changer” answer. There are two ways those forces need to be used. One,a huge number of them should move directly across the Syrian border at Assad’s request.And take on the terrorists in Syria (of all kinds). Aid the SAA to wipe them finally out. And let the US know they are no longer welcome anywhere on the soil of Syria. Their choice being to leave on their feet,or stay permanently in 6 foot plots.And then back up words with actions.
And two,back up the Iraqi government in telling the Kurds there will be no independent Kurdistan.Iran should talk to the Turks and explain how dangerous it would be for an independent Kurdish state to exist. It would be a magnet for the breakup of Turkey.That shouldn’t be a hard sale with Erdogan. And from all sides ,Iraqi ,Turkish,and Iranian,forces together cancel any Kurdish plans for independence. An autonomous Kurdish region in Northeastern Iraq,is more than sufficient to assure Kurdish rights.Russia’s federal subject entities could be a guide for that (Chechnya).Bur unless Turkey,Syria,Iraq,and Iran,want to see their nations dismembered at the US’s wish. They need to “nip this Kurdish state idea in the bud” before it get started.That is one thing those 4 states shouldn’t have much trouble agreeing about.
Surprised to see this person used as a resource for information
Wilkerson worked for Bush and is sitting in that infamous photo with Colin Powell at the UN when they said Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.
Is he now to be trusted? Destroying a nation based on lies makes him worthy of being listened too?
An excellent video. I think people need to understand about Col. Wilkerson. He is a US patriot. So to expect him to take anyone else side is foolish of us. But he is one of the most honest of the people on that side. And he looks for what would be “best for the US”,not the neo-con warmongers that rule in the West. He unlike almost all in the US is willing to expose the double-dealing and political/military insanity of the US’s positions. Not from the standpoint of being on “our side”. But from the standpoint that its “bad” for “his” country to support that insanity. I admire his honesty. And while I may not always agree with him. I believe he speaks from “the heart”. And so,I put a lot of credence in what he says.
wow, that’s too bad about the seriousness of the American policy towards Iran – did anyone ever see this video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVCqPAzI-JY
Joan Baez sings in Iranian – We shall overcome
good interviewer – I’m not always fond of the RealNews – I guess because they were Bernie supporters and I hated Bernie from the start – but that guy sure did a good job with the Colonel
Thierry Meyssan has an interesting take, well worth reading. Below is the link and some highlights.
Confrontation at Bilderberg 2017
http://www.voltairenet.org/article196617.html
The Bilderberg Group has just held its 2017 meeting, from 1 to 4 June, in the United States. Contrary to habit, the 130 participants were not all defending the same project. Quite the opposite – following the speeches by Donald Trump at the Arabo-Islamic-US summit, and at NATO, the CIA and MI6 organised a first-day debate which opposed those who are partisans of the fight against Islamism and those who support it. The point was, obviously enough, either to find a compromise between the two camps, or to acknowledge the dissension without allowing it to destroy the initial objective of the Alliance – the fight against Russia.
[….]
It will take a little time before we know what was said during this meeting, and to understand the conclusions that were reached by the various attendees. However, we already know that London is pushing for a change of paradigm in the Middlde East. If the model of the « Arab Spring » (reproduction of the « Arab Revolt of 1916 » organised by Lawrence of Arabia in order to replace the Ottoman Empire by the British Empire) is abandoned, MI6 hopes to create a new agreement on the basis of political Islamism.
As a result, while Washington has renewed its alliance with Saudi Arabia, and has convinced it to break with the Brotherhood in exchange for 110 billion dollars worth of armament [7], London is pushing for an agreement between Iran, Qatar, Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood. If this project were to be realised, we would experience the abandon of the Sunni/Chiite conflict and the creation of a « croissant of political Islam » encompassing Teheran, Doha, Ankara, Idleb, Beyrouth and Gaza. This new distribution would enable the United Kingdom to maintain its influence in the region.
[….]
The project of « political Islam » consists of uniting the Muslim Brotherhood and the Khomeinists. It would mean that Iran, and even Hezbollah, would have to substitute this problem for the fight against anti-imperialism. If this were come to pass, it would most certainly lead to the withdrawal of Iran from Syria.
[….]
…Iran might follow the ideal of Imam Khomeiny, confusing the end and the means. What was in the beginning an anti-imperialist revolution led by the power of Islam could evolve into a simple affirmation of the political use of this religion.
[….]
The Chinese ambassador, Cui Tiankai, who was scheduled to speak only on the fourth day of the seminar, was… able to evaluate the positions of each member of NATO as from the first day.
On one hand, Beijing is counting on the collaboration of Donald Trump, the opening to the United States of its Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and the development of all its commercial routes. On the other, it is hoping that the Brexit will lead to an economic and financial alliance with London
Ha ha. These clowns never stop dreaming up fancy plans for away places while sipping Viagra-laced cocktails. Hilarious!
Can someone tell me why we should not find it odd that Colin Powell’s chief of staff would be so “honest” and frank about the stupidity of US-Anglo foreign policy? All of these so called whistle blowers out of US or UK mil/intel/security are deep insiders: they seem to get on the air all the time, they all seem to have income despite being ostensibly blacklisted, etc. , etc. – don’t you think some of these guys and gals are agents still on the payroll maintaining presence, influence, monitoring and spreading disinfo (a specific times) in the ALT-Media space?