Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
March 02, 2016

Kerry's "Plan B" - Attack Syria From Lebanon - With Saudi and Turkish Help

We yesterday described what looks like a Turkish-Saudi plan to raise a Salafi-Sunni militia in north Lebanon to then attack nearby Syrian regions held by the Syrian government. Such a new front of the conflict in Syria would necessarily involve fighting in Lebanon as the Lebanese Shia Hizbollah movement is actively supporting the Syrian government. The plot would destabilize Lebanon, probably throwing it back into the brutal times of the Lebanese civil war.

There was no confirmation of such a plot yesterday, just several signs for it like the ship with weapons from Turkey that was caught by the Greek coastguard on its way to north Lebanon.

The existence of such a plan was confirmed today. We still can no say for sure that the plot is part of a U.S. "Plan B" to achieve a violent "regime change" in Syria, but we know that the U.S. is informed about the plan.

In his Washington Post column today the unofficial CIA spokesperson David Ignatius writes about the Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman:

The young Saudi has sometimes been more bold than wise, as in his war in Yemen, his decision to break diplomatic relations with Iran and his new effort to destabilize a Hezbollah-dominated Lebanon.

Syria is not mentioned in that part of the Ignatius column but any capable Sunni militia in Lebanon, created from Salafist groups in Tripoli and Syrian Sunni refugees in Lebanese camps, would extend itself into Syria and become a threat to the government held western Syria.

Ignatius, as surely also the U.S. government, was informed by the Saudis themselves. The above quoted paragraph continues:

But his role as a change agent is unmistakable. He “wants to transition Saudi Arabia very quickly,” said Adel al-Toraifi, the Saudi information minister, who’s just 36 himself, in a visit to Washington last week.

My hunch is that this plan is too bold to have grown solely in the minds of the Turkish and Saudi regimes. The U.S. is likely not only informed about it but deeply involved. The possibility of such a plan to counter the recent Syrian and Russian successes on the battlefield was first mentioned in a piece published in early February by the Washington Institute, a think tank founded and funded by the Israel lobby.

Last week Secretary of State Kerry mentioned a "Plan B" should the recent cessation of hostilities in Syria fail:

US Secretary of State John Kerry provoked widespread speculation when he referred in testimony before the Foreign Relations Committee last week to “significant discussions” within US President Barack Obama's administration about a “Plan B” in Syria. The speculation was further stoked by a “senior official” who told CBS News that options under consideration included "'military-like' measures that would make it harder for the regime and its allies to continue their assault on civilians and US-backed rebels.”

A violent Salafi militia from Lebanon storming into Syria would certainly be a "'military-like' measures that would make it harder for the regime and its allies".

The author of the last linked text, Gareth Porter, dismissed the chance of a real "Plan B" but had not yet included the Lebanon plot scenario in his considerations. He continued:

Kerry suggested that the US was still a player in the Syrian contest for power. Regarding Chairman Bob Corker’s comment that the Russians had been “accomplishing their ends” in Syria, he argued that the Russians and the Syrian government could take control of Aleppo, but that “holding territory has always been difficult”. Kerry claimed that the Russians could not prevent the opposition from getting the weapons needed to continue the war, as long as the US and its allies were supporting them. He offered no explanation for that claim.

The Turkish-Saudi weapon smuggling into Lebanon is an explanation for the claim Kerry made. Syria and Russia are in the process of closing off the Syrian-Turkish border. If the Saudis can build a weapon pipeline into north Lebanon it will become quite difficult for Syria and its allies to hold the Syrian territory near the Lebanese border.

In a speech yesterday Hizbullah chief Nasrallah discussed the general Saudi threat to Lebanon at length but did not mention the Sunni militia plot:

"Saudi which treats Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Bahrain like that, treats Lebanon the same way," Sayyed Nasrallah concluded, addressing the Saudis: "Your problem is with us, it is not with the country or with the Lebanese..."

Nasrallah is right, but the Saudis will not care when the Lebanese people or their country get hurt due to some nefarious scheme to attack Syria and Hizbullah. Nor will the United States.

There are obvious signs for a plan to use Saudi controlled Sunni militia from Lebanon against the Syrian government and its supporters. The U.S. is, in my view, very likely involved in this plot. But we still do not know if this plan will ever be implemented. The recent Saudi threat to send its army into Syria turned out to be a pure (dis-)information campaign to unsettle the Syrian government's side. The recent revelations about the plot in Lebanon and the "Plan B" may also be pure deception and illusionary to gain some leverage for the coming negotiations.

But the ship the Greek coastguard caught was real and such a plan would have a good chance to create lots of troubles for Syria and its supporters. My advice to the Syrian government and its allies is to prepare now to eventually counter it.

Posted by b on March 2, 2016 at 10:09 UTC | Permalink



"There are obvious signs for a plan to use Saudi controlled Sunni militia from Lebanon against the Syrian government and its supporters. The U.S. is, in my view, very likely involved in this plot."

Absolutely nothing new and quite likely Israel's Netanyahu in agreement and support of "Plan B" ... this Saudi war against Alawites and Shiites has been raging for decades in Lebanon and Syria.

That's what the Hariri assassination was all about, except the Hasrallah nut was tougher to crack by the IDF in 2006.

Israel Ready to Join the Sunni Alliance Against Assad, Syria | Sug. 17, 2015 |
The Saudi-Israeli Alliance and Piggy-back Coup of 2005 | Feb. 25, 2013 |

Posted by: Oui | Mar 2 2016 12:06 utc | 1

Obama 'Connived' with Neocons for a Bashar Replacement | June 16, 2014 |
Obama Meddling in Lebanon Politics – 2009 | June 22, 2013 |

[Ghouta gas-attack was a Saudi/Jordanian/US (or UK) covert operation – Oui]

Posted by: Oui | Mar 2 2016 12:17 utc | 2

Saudi Arabia's Medieval Wahhabism vs. Moderate Sufi

Brother Obama, where art thou? by Pepe Escobar on Sept. 15th, 2012
From NeoCon Policy to R2P Doctrine

    The Saudi regime of King Abdullah had been stirring the sectarian differences in Syria through Wahhabist clerics and funneling funds to mosques and madrasses.

    NeoCon policy got a makeover under the pretense of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine invoked to legitimize the 2011 war on Libya and just morphed into ''responsibility to attack'' (R2A) policy for Syria. The so-called red line on the Assad regime had been crossed a number of times and ahead of the G8 conference in June, president Obama came with a hard statement: Syria Has Used Chemical Arms on Rebels, and Crossed a Red Line. The intense diplomatic effort by John Kerry was a welcome change from Ms Clinton.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 2 2016 12:30 utc | 3

I suggest another interpretation:
Turkish MB send weapons to their MB friends in Lebanon.
Israelis who have cozied up the Greeks lately give the tip about the boat and wait for Asad to return the favor some time.
KSA is having its war of words because its citizens don't make the difference between words and action. Next week when KSA participate with the US to bombing some bad guys in Iraq or Libya, KSA citizens will believe their great army is fighting for the liberation of Jerusalem...

Posted by: Mina | Mar 2 2016 13:51 utc | 4

Or perhaps they're simply finding alternate routes to stock up their mercenaries in Syria with weapons now that the highway, linking Turkey to greater Aleppo, is back under government control?

Stirring trouble inside Lebanon, now when the rebels are in retreat, might be the right idea, to some, but how many european leaders would be on-board? How many more refugees can the EU take in?

Posted by: never mind | Mar 2 2016 14:09 utc | 5

Migrants into Europe? Blame Putin and Russia ... according to war hawk Gen. Philip Breedlove, NATO Commander

Tripoli in North Lebanon has always been a Sunni stronghold causing terror strikes in Beirut and moving weapons into Syria as far as I can remember.

A Precarious Balancing Act: Lebanon and the Syrian Convlict | ISG - 2012 | [pdf]

Posted by: Oui | Mar 2 2016 14:40 utc | 6

Radical groups lure Tripoli youths | Al-Monitor |

See also the terror group Jund al-Sham. Founded around 1991 in Jordan, trained in 1999 in Afghanistan with financial support from Osama bin Laden, it has perpetrated (bomb) attacks since 2004 in Lebanon, Qatar, and fought the Syrian army in Syria from 2005 until March 2014.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 2 2016 14:41 utc | 7


Robert F. Kennedy, Jr explains why it is vital to expel U.S. NGO's, the CIA, and any State Deptartment agents posing as diplomats.

Why the Arabs Don’t Want Us in Syria -

Mosaddegh was the first elected leader in Iran’s 4,000-year history and a popular champion for democracy across the developing world. Mosaddegh expelled all British diplomats after uncovering a coup attempt by U.K. intelligence officers working in cahoots with BP. Mosaddegh, however, made the fatal mistake of resisting his advisers’ pleas to also expel the CIA, which, they correctly suspected, was complicit in the British plot. Mosaddegh idealized the U.S. as a role model for Iran’s new democracy and incapable of such perfidies. Despite Dulles’ needling, President Harry Truman had forbidden the CIA from actively joining the British caper to topple Mosaddegh. When Eisenhower took office in January 1953, he immediately unleashed Dulles. After ousting Mosaddegh in “Operation Ajax,” Stone and Roosevelt installed Shah Reza Pahlavi, whose two decades of CIA sponsored savagery toward his own people from the Peacock throne would finally ignite the 1979 Islamic revolution.

I think is time for the Lebanese government to cut all ties to the US and expel all Americans.

Posted by: Petri Krohn | Mar 2 2016 14:52 utc | 8

"The Saudis are half-men", Bashar al Assad dixit

They only attack poor or fragile countries because they are too coward to attack the strong ones.
Not only that, but they don't dare exposing their own army to failure. So they make use of the fanatics they have trained for decades in their Wahhabi 'cultural centers' worldwide. They also hire mercenaries that they pay with oil money.
Yet the pathetic Kingdom is failing for the simple reason that these countries have powerful and loyal allies and because the world secretly despise that obsolete and corrupted monarchy.
There will be no tears when the rule of the Saudi Arabia royal family will collapse. Let's hope it is soon enough before they destroy the whole region.

Posted by: virgile | Mar 2 2016 14:52 utc | 9

1. Declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization. Check.

2. Concentrate troops near the Hezbollah's country's border. Check.

3. Do away with it.

If they can't get Syria, they'll be fine with Lebanon. After that, Israel is likely to annex the West Bank.

Posted by: Klaus Weiß | Mar 2 2016 14:54 utc | 10

Its just the latest of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate's endless string of wars of death, devastation, and destruction of Islamic countries. Bye, bye Lebanon. He's making a second pass at Libya as well. 3,841 Killed in Iraq During February. Situation Normal for Obama. He's got his orders and he's still delivering. They've probably sweetened his retirement plan if he delivers. It'll be ... gosh, those Turks and Saudis are just out of control. Just following orders, all the way down.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 2 2016 15:28 utc | 11

nevermind @5: many european leaders would be on-board? How many more refugees can the EU take in?

Nuland's answer still resonates: "F*ck the EU!"

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 2 2016 15:59 utc | 12

Al Ahkbar, a Lebanese newspaper near to Hizbullah is also smelling something. Curiously they accuse Qatar more than Saudi Arabia

Via NOW Lebanon
<">"> Pro-Hezbollah daily: Lebanon targeted for “explosion” - Al-Akhbar published a speculative article warning that foreign powers seek to foment a dramatic escalation in the country.

Al Akhbar also claims that Turkey is searching out "Turkmen" in Lebanon for some future operations.


The Sunni leader in Lebanon was Hariri junior, who has a Saudi and a Lebanese passport. But the Saudis hung him out cold after he didn't manage to keep Hizbullah down. His families building business in Saudi Arabia is going down the drain as the Saudis stopped paying for the buildings it is erecting. The company (as others in SA) is near bankruptcy and had to let off workers without pay.

The Ignatius columns get republished in the Lebanese Daily Star. The Saudis tipped him off to make sure that the message is received there.

Posted by: b | Mar 2 2016 16:03 utc | 13

Much of Sy Hersh's "Redirection" from 2006 (!!) discussed Lebanon/Hezbollah/Nasrallah. So operational planning wrt BOTH Syria and Lebanon has a long history.

Interestingly, the article talks about "Dinniyeh Islamists" who sought to establish an Islamic "mini-state" in northern Lebanon. KSA seems to have been involved in that effort.

See article for more.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 2 2016 16:20 utc | 14

I thought this was a bit far fetched even for Superstation95.

It basically says there are 100,000's of sleeping soldiers in Lebanon ready to invade form the south whilst Turkey has a go in the North.

I am sure Vladimir has got this lot sorted and is way ahead of the game.

Posted by: eric bloodaxe | Mar 2 2016 16:25 utc | 15

As always, thanks b, for the heads-up. Quite frankly, this latest scenario of intervention by the U$A, makes my head hurt. Same crap, different week.

Posted by: ben | Mar 2 2016 16:29 utc | 16

This is about sour grapes and the cowardly AmeriKKKan Klansmen pissing into the wind, imo. Yankees are notoriously sore losers and Syria's allies have kicked the crap out of ZATO's Syrian daydreams faster than anyone (except Putin) ever imagined. The Russian intervention transformed Obama's carefully cultivated ter'rists into a pre-lunch snack.
I was struck by the (anonymous) senior US official's use of the term military-like operations (almost certainly Wanker B, Breedlove, or Wanker A, Ash Carter (who's never had an original idea in his life)). I've heard it before.

"We are moving forward in this direction, and there is progress. By way of example, let me highlight the Voronezh missile attack early warning radar station. It is already operational in Armavir, Kaliningrad and Lekhtusi. And I must say that in September this year, during combat-like exercises, it detected launches from the Mediterranean region, and effectively proved its efficiency and reliability."
V V Putin, November 28, 2013.

And, imo, if/when a military wonk/ die-hard has dreamt up a foolproof military plan, the LAST thing they EVER do is leak it to someone with a phone or a typewriter. Also it's probably not a coincidence that the US Ambassador to Russia being spotted in an anti-Putin demo in Moscow, and Putin's announcement that He is taking charge of the US's Syria SNAFU, occurred within days of each other.

The Yankees have run out of sensible ideas, so they've probably decided try some stupid ones...

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 2 2016 16:34 utc | 17

This was all part of plan A, to go after Lebanon next. Benefits of Syria ended up softening up Hezbollah for the final battle. Everything benefits Zionists. I can only see one candidate that has a hell's chance of getting us out. So if there is any possibly of that person winning, we will see an escalation before the election. Or just maybe Obama is tired of being lead by the nose by Bibi and grows a spine.

Posted by: shadyl | Mar 2 2016 16:40 utc | 18

thanks b.. i like @4 minas response..

@8 petri... good idea... hopefully nasrullah has some clout in that direction.

@13 b.. qatar, kuwait, sa, uae - they all mostly operate under the same headchopping cult 'wahabbism'... for anyone to think they can function independently or with a brain of there own is asking too much..and, usa and israel love them for the stupidity/violence they always spread..

Posted by: james | Mar 2 2016 16:46 utc | 19

Hillary Clinton: A Bigger Warmonger Than Bush/Cheney?

Posted by: shadyl | Mar 2 2016 16:47 utc | 20

Going to War against Iraq, for Oil and for Israel: The Lies, Fabrications and Forgeries of the Bush-Cheney Administration

Let us summarize the sad series of events that have led to what American General William Odom has dubbed “the greatest strategic disaster in U.S. history”. We may add that this has also led to a great disaster for the Middle East populations, and it could also prove to have been a disaster for Europe and the world as a whole, if the current mess in that part of the world were to lead to World War III.


Posted by: shadyl | Mar 2 2016 16:49 utc | 21

Plan Bs are a staple for teenagers planning a picnic party with a hired clown, boat, etc.

They aren’t suitable for politics or war. Specially not if announced in public. Funnily enough, Yannis Varoufakis’ line “There is no plan B” (a lie) has been taken up by countless ppl - for ex. Merkel - and in this case by Lavrov.

All it means is that at this moment in time there are no alternatives we will discuss. In two discussions in the French Senate (interrogatory commissions) some puzzlement and dismay at the USA’s step by step -plans A,B,C- approach is hinted at. Sun Tzu did not lay out things in these A-B-C terms!

Imho, Kerry’s plan B is but a weak and insincere public sop to the Saudis and Turks. The US has a habit of being corrupted, coerced, agreeing with, falling in with, foreign powers, factions, influence(s). When things don’t turn out as predicted or hoped, it sort of hangs on, shows some goodwill, tries to keep its ‘allies’ quiet and on board, keep the relationship going, or throws them under a bus. All of these strands meld together creating a confused foreign policy. Think Ukraine for ex.

I can’t speak about the forces on the ground, but imho nothing will happen. Silly temporising talk.


The F Senate interrogations are in the public domain. Striking is that the F MSM - TV specially - is on its own spin and what the *Minister of Defense* no less, actually *states* reveals (ex. Mali) is never reported, completely disregarded. On the internet, yet never mentioned, never discussed. 2 ex.

Posted by: Noirette | Mar 2 2016 16:59 utc | 22

Thanks for the link, Petri Krohn @8

Posted by: Spudski | Mar 2 2016 17:00 utc | 23

Is it possible for Saudi Arabia and other Gulfies plus Turkey and the West to prosecute a proxy war in Syria by supplying billions of dollars and 100's of thousands of paid mercenaries to illegally try and destroy a legitimate UN member state? Of course not. The question is what price are the 'arc of resistance' going to extract from these aggressors? In an earlier comment on another thread I indicated that the Saudi port of Ras Tanara is vulnerable to attack which could destabilize not only Saudi Arabia but the West also "An assault on Ras Tanura, however, would be vastly more serious. As much as 80% of the near 9m barrels of oil a day pumped out by Saudi is believed to end up being piped from fields such as Ghawar to Ras Tanura in the Gulf to be loaded on to supertankers bound for the west". The Saudis would like to preempt any such eventuality by constructing pipe lines through Yemen as this excellent article points out I don't know the logistics of such an attack on RasTanara but it would not cost billions of dollars or the use of thousands of attackers. It could of course be attributed to some rogue grouping. In any event the Saudis would finally get what they deserve.

Posted by: harry law | Mar 2 2016 17:09 utc | 24

Musn't forget the UN by Vanessa Beeley

Posted by: Penelope | Mar 2 2016 18:23 utc | 26


Did you see my Sandy Hook-related comment in the Open Thread?

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 2 2016 18:35 utc | 27

Sunni leader in Lebanon Hariri junior ...

Saad Hariri [Wikipedia]

Government collapse
On 12 January 2011, minutes after Hariri posed for pictures with President Barack Obama in the Oval Office, the opposition parties resigned from the cabinet, as an objection for the inability of the government to take detrimental decisions, causing his unity government to collapse. In fact, Hezbollah and its allies withdrew from the government due to political tensions arose from investigations of the assassination of Rafic Hariri.

Arrest warrant
On 12 December 2012, Syria issued an arrest warrants against Hariri, Future bloc deputy Okab Sakr and Free Syrian Army official Louay Meqdad in accusing them of arming and providing financial support for Syrian opposition groups. Upon this, Hariri released a statement, indicating that Bashar Assad is a "monster". Lebanese judicial sources argued that the arrest warrant would likely be ignored by Lebanon and that since both Hariri and Sakr have parliamentary immunity, they cannot be prosecuted.

On what date did the "uprising" start In Syria in coordination with US Ambassador Ford?

Saad Hariri in Saudi Arabia to seal $3bn deal with Hollande for arms to Lebanon
Saad Hariri and the Saudi Money Riddle

Posted by: Oui | Mar 2 2016 18:44 utc | 28

I believe that the USA continues to set traps for Saudi Arabia and Turkey to weaken them.

After luring Saudi Arabia into the quagmire of Yemen, where Saudis are taking a daily humiliation, the USA is now luring the bellicous Saudi leadership as well as the hysterical Erdogan into another adventure in Syria.

The USA knows very well that Saudi Arabia military is paralyzed by the endless war in Yemen and that Turkey is paralyzed by its endless war against the Kurds.
These countries have no chance whatsoever to get a victory with their ground troops.
Yet the USA is joining Russia in luring them into an armed invasion...
If these countries fall into that trap, their regime will collapse and that's what the USA and Russia is hoping for.

Posted by: virgile | Mar 2 2016 19:12 utc | 29

It's another front on the war by Terror. Why would the evil US empire and it's minions restrict themselves to a couple of fronts, especially now that Russia is in Syria, and winning.
Opening a new war crime front to keep attacking Syria, and hopes of weakening and eventually defeating Hezbollah is the plan.

To limit these revelations to ' negotiation leverage' is LUDOCRIS.

Posted by: tom | Mar 2 2016 19:22 utc | 30

What will you people possibly discuss once Assad is safely ensconced in Damascus as the last enemy of Enlightenment values has been blown to smithereens by Russian bombers as is likely to occur by the end of 2016? I sort of feel sorry for you running out of red meat. Is that why you post silly things about John Kerry having a secret plan for "regime change"? Good lord.

Posted by: Louis Proyect | Mar 2 2016 19:47 utc | 31



Posted by: L Bean | Mar 2 2016 20:15 utc | 32

Some necons don’t recognize hopelessness. This is nothing more than fanciful thinking and peddling fiction. Take your pick.
Is the US not a party to the cessation of hostilities and the UNSC resolution? So, under what pretext will a Saudi Arabia-Turkey mount an invasion clearly in violation of the resolution?

@ b
”My advice to the `Syrian government and its allies is to prepare now to eventually counter it”

Mr. Putin: “Thank you Mr. b for the heads-up but ”We know, we hear and see EVERYTHING.”

That photo (that went viral) of Mr. Kerry and Vicki Nuland meeting with Mr. Putin and Mr. Lavrov remains priceless.

Oh to have been a spider on the wall. Recall Mr. Kerry, at the end of that meeting, making a big U-turn on the US stance Al-Assad must go?

Posted by: likklemore | Mar 2 2016 20:55 utc | 33

Every time I view the image of John Kerry I am reminded of a story told to me by my late mother-in-law. Working at a General Electric plant in the 1950s when Ronald Reagan was the public spokesman for General Electric, he happened to visit the GE plant where my mother-in-law worked. My mother-in-law got to shake the future President of the United States of America's hand. My mother-in-law Ina commented "I had never seen a man wearing rouge and lipstick.

John 'Three Purple Hearts and a ticket home' Kerry is an actor. That someone who has no 'past history' as a citizen of the United States could run for President fits right in with the who the f*#k is Obama, Cruz, Rubio, etc., etc.

“Only 120 days in-country and he puts himself in for a Purple Heart for scratches we wouldn’t bother to report to the corpsman. This guy was punching his ticket and used a loophole [three Purple Heart wounds and you got to leave Vietnam before your required 12 month tour of duty was up] in the regulations to get out early. What a disgrace!"

Posted by: ALberto | Mar 2 2016 21:04 utc | 34

tom says:

Why would the evil US empire and it's minions restrict themselves to a couple of fronts,...

well, you're right, they wouldn't. i mean, like death caps prodding in the dim and muculent, they'll crack the earth wherever.

Posted by: john | Mar 2 2016 21:25 utc | 35

@24 harry law.. interesting conjecture on your part.. i am sure others have thought of it day this dam will burst and a lot of people will breathe a sigh of relief when it does..

@25 jackrabbit.. those links were shared yesterday, but worth repeating especially the one suggestive of malfeasance on israels part - which is how i read it..

@29 virgile.. you might be right.. i somehow doubt it... the usa is making a mess where-ever it goes.. it is not the expression of a country that has a clear and organized agenda, but more like a loose cannon firing randomly and missing mostly.. you could be right, but the lack of organization seems to be a more defined characteristic of usa foreign polity at this point..

@30 tom.. i basically agree with that, but looks like an empire in collapse.. maybe it's wishful thinking on my part to say that and going into decline can last for a long time..

@31 yuk yuk.. obviously things are boring and you thought you'd pay moa a visit.. you're boring as usual..

Posted by: james | Mar 2 2016 21:26 utc | 36

What will you people possibly discuss once Assad is safely ensconced in Damascus...
Posted by: Louis Proyect | Mar 2, 2016 2:47:49 PM | 31

Dunno for sure, but probably the End of Israel, its Palestinian Piece Process, Yinon, and the Garbage Can of History (& Histrionics).

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Mar 2 2016 21:47 utc | 37

I would like to give props to Oui who unlike others who only profer their opinions (like me, sometimes..), always provide links to articles relevant to the discussion. Good job mate!

Posted by: Lozion | Mar 2 2016 22:15 utc | 38

Good grief, it's not enough for Louis Proyect (comment 31) to make a nuisance of himself (or herself) over at that that troll has to invade the comments forums here as well.

As for John Kerry's Plan B, I should think Russia's naval base in Latakia needs reinforcements if it hasn't got them already. Let's hope the Chinese navy can support Russia, Iran and Hezbollah in heading off shipments of weapons and takfiris to Lebanon. All airports in Lebanon need to be reinforced with security staff as well to intercept incoming passengers with false passports.

Posted by: Jen | Mar 2 2016 22:19 utc | 39


Thx! Nice to hear it ... from MoA readers I often see appreciation by tally of retweets of articles.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 2 2016 22:53 utc | 40

Israeli delegation visits Riyadh ...

"Yechezkeli added that the Palestinian issue has been pushed to sidelines and Saudis are eager to boost mutual ties with Israel, further adding: “Americans have abandoned the [Middle-East] region, thus Saudis seek Israeli help and cooperation on whatsoever issues related to Iran and this evidently bolstered their relationship”.

source -

Posted by: ALberto | Mar 2 2016 23:30 utc | 41

Plan B, b, is the federalisation of Syria. In fact, when Putin decided to intervene, I would wager that this was his Plan A. To reclaim all of Syria? Why?

Syria's borders as we know them today are a figment of the imagination of Sykes and Picot. It is a great historical irony that almost 100 years to the day Lavrov and Kerry should convene to agree new boundaries of influence, following Sykes and Picot's coming together in 1916 as representatives of two former powers.

This notion of the US and Russia being in perpetual disagreement on every single issue is inaccurate and irritating. So too the idea that the US, Turkey and Saudis are in permanent cahoots.

If Erdogan wants to act contrary to this new US-Russian agreement and fire up the old empire by channelling weapons to Lebanese insurgents, he'll be confronting both.

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Mar 2 2016 23:37 utc | 42

No peace is possible in Syria and in the region by extension unless Erdogan is removed and the weapons sale to the Saudis comes under embargo.

Posted by: Enrique Ferro | Mar 3 2016 0:11 utc | 43

The Globalists are not going to shelve the Yinon Plan or the PNAC plan or the New American Century Plan, et al. The expansion of Israel in the Middle East requires the balkanization of neighboring states.

Kerry's Plan B aka The Morning After Pill, stands in evidence that they will not quit.

Posted by: fast freddy | Mar 3 2016 0:27 utc | 44

Somewhat off-topic but interesting .....

Posted by: D | Mar 3 2016 0:46 utc | 45

Sunnis comprise only 15 percent of Lebanon population. If such a plot eventually takes place, then Shiite-Christian alliance will simply expel all of the Sunnis out of Lebanon.

Posted by: telescope | Mar 3 2016 0:56 utc | 46

D @45

As I read the names of the people being quoted in the politico dot com piece my conscience asks me, "why aren't these people in prison?"

Posted by: ALberto | Mar 3 2016 1:24 utc | 47

@45 Michael Crowley's article reads like a toned down version of this one (from Feb 29th by Zaid Jilani)....

not that they aren't both saying the same thing.

Posted by: dh | Mar 3 2016 1:44 utc | 48

Some points:

I do not think that Turkey and Saudis need American permission to start some shenanigans. "Washington" is not a uniform entity, DoS, DoD and CIA may have different agendas. I would guess that advanced weapons produced in USA and West Europe are subjected to specific agreements how they can be used (ostensibly, for defense) and the shipment included more anonymized weapons.

Interesting how Greeks developed the idea to inspect that particular ship. An intelligence agency had to give them a tip. Their own? American? Russian? Guelinists?

An insurection in Lebanon is a rather iffy preposition. Already there were some Salafi outbreaks in Tripoli (north) and Tyre (south), and the military made short work of them. You cannot arm thousands quickly in the cities. Arsal and camps with Syrian refugees are perhaps different, but repercussions could be dire for those involved: expelling Lebanese citizens would be politically impossible, but expelling violently Syrian refugees because of an insurrection would be quite popular in Lebanon and defensible abroad. My bet is that the plan was to quietly transport the weapons to Arsal and from there, to Syria which would elegantly stab Assad in the back.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 3 2016 2:20 utc | 49

Clarification: a plan involving a wide insurrection in Lebanon would be rather stupid, and I guess, too much for CIA. OTOH, Erdogan and King Salman showed a distinct taste for adventure but they could be sabotaged by their own underlings (hence, the tip to Greece).

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 3 2016 2:26 utc | 50

The U.S. is, in my view, very likely involved in this plot. But we still do not know if this plan will ever be implemented. ...The recent revelations about the plot in Lebanon and the "Plan B" may also be pure deception and illusionary to gain some leverage for the coming negotiations.

No. Plan B is not an illusion. The stage is being set for Hillary's presidency. Plan B was proposed by parties in the Administration, particularly, in the Defense Department that dissent with the ceasefire agreement proposed by Kerry.

 As documented by a two-part New York Times investigation, then Secretary of State Clinton played the leading role in the White House’s decision to topple Libyan leader Gaddafi in 2011, which led to a terrorist-ridden failed state and a growing bastion of the Islamic State today. Clinton’s campaign statements suggest that she does not support Kerry’s initiatives but instead a replication of the Libyan operation in order to remove Syrian President Assad—a version, it seems, of Carter’s “Plan B.”

It's possible that Hillary is already planning with certain parties in the Obama Administration to prepared for the next phase of the plan for restructuring the Middle East to Neocon specifications.

Hillary may be carving things up in her mind already, but she should take a hint from the Russian press regarding any Plan B machinations in the works.:

So anyone with Plan B aspirations and that includes the Saudis - think nuclear wasteland.

Posted by: Circe | Mar 3 2016 2:47 utc | 51

@29 virgile, ' the USA is joining Russia in luring them into an armed invasion... '

I can see the USA causing trouble - 'just for the fun of it' - but I don't understand your reference to Russia. Could you elaborate, please?

Posted by: jfl | Mar 3 2016 3:12 utc | 52

The following move by the Gulf States might also have something to do with the future implementation of Plan B or the plan that aligns itself with Zionist aspirations for the region for the new American century.

but the decision now to define Hezbollah as a terrorist organization is designed to give the Gulf states more leeway against Hezbollah, as now they will be able to act more aggressively against it since given it is officially defined as a terrorist organization.,7340,L-4773382,00.html

I intentionally decided to link to the Zionist rag that posted this news but it's all over web news: BBC,ABC, Bloomberg you name it.

There's a plan to escalate using Lebanon. Gee, I wonder who helped the Saudis come up with the plan? Those depraved monarchs couldn't put 2 and 2 together. But Israel has been wanting to get rid of Hezbollah for the longest time, hasn't it?

How easily America forgets who really brought down the twin towers - yes-yes the pawns were from Saudi Arabia; they still are.

Posted by: Circe | Mar 3 2016 3:23 utc | 53

@53 circe... someone needs to get real and label saudi arabia and all those headchopping fuckers as a terrorist organization, even if it is religious... it is still a terrorist organization and saudi arabia and all the rest of the gcc's need to be labeled as terrorists regardless of how bad the west need their oil...

lets flip this around and get real... here is an article touching on what nasrallah thinks..

Posted by: james | Mar 3 2016 3:54 utc | 54


In my view the USA and Russia seems to want to destabilize Turkey and Saudi Arabia to trigger a "soft" regime change as their present leaders have become hysterical thus creating chaos in the region.
For Saudi Arabia, the US has encouraged the Saudis to attack Yemen. It was a trap and the GCC fell head first and is now stuck in a humiliating quagmire with no exit. They will soon beg the USA and Russia to help for a face saving exit

For Turkey, the US and Russia have been encouraging the Kurdish awakening and that is creating internal dissensions and political conflicts. The country's economy is weakening by the day and is threatening the ruling party. An eventual Turkish invasion of Syria could well be the final trigger to a regime change.

It seems to me as it goes that Saudi Arabia and Turkey will have no role in Syria's future.

Posted by: virgile | Mar 3 2016 4:59 utc | 56

@telescope | Mar 2, 2016 7:56:18 PM | 46

"Lebanese Sunni Muslims have followers who constitutes 27% of Lebanon's population of approximately 4.3 million, which means they amount to 1,160,000.[1]"


Posted by: virgile | Mar 3 2016 5:01 utc | 57

Change in regional powers linked to civil war in Lebanon

Since 1976, Syrian forces have been in Lebanon to end sectarian and civil strife. The 1982 invasion by Israel complicated the political power vacuum further. The October 1989 Taif Accords, an agreement brokered by Arab nations, particularly Saudi Arabia, that gave Lebanese Muslims a greater share of political power in Lebanon and formalized "preferred relations" between Lebanon and Syria. Syria's internationally recognized role as "the guarantor of Lebanon's security" was also established in these accords.

Hezbollah grew out of the Israeli invasion and occupation as a resistence movement. After the 2005 covert act by interested parties to assassinate Rafic Hariri in Beirut, the western allies and the Gulf monarchies moved to get Assad overthrown. Israel and the West wanted to break the Shiite allianve formed from Teheran-Baghdad-Damascua-Beirut. Due to the Russian intervention and Assad remaining in powers over a war-torn nation, the same alliance of GCC monarchies and Turkey [plus UK and US?] is willing to overthrow the legitimate government in Lebanon. A christian party has changed alliance to break the stalemate and make a new government with the Hizbollah political leaders possible.

The views and acts of the Gulf monarchies can best be followed in their publication Gulf News, quite interesting articles in a series of recent developments.

Lebanon must make crucial choice, Bahrain says

Bahrein is a Shiite majority state run by a ruling Sunni monarch, kept in power by Saudi military intervention with approval of Western powers to protect Saudi oil interests. A lot of the poison towards Iran and Lebanon originates in Bahrain.

No difference between Daesh and Iran-backed groups - UAE

Hizbollah spiritual leader Nasrallah has been on top of the most-wanted list of successive leaders in Israel. Nasrallah's Wiki page has been raped by Israeli digital forces like CAMERA.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 3 2016 5:51 utc | 58

The Lebanese presidential elections – stalemate but never checkmate

    This week [mid-februari], the 36th attempt to elect a new Lebanese president failed, due to a lack of quorum. The president is elected by a majority vote in a parliamentary quorum of two thirds. The country has been without a president for twenty months, since Michel Sleiman’s mandate expired in May 2014.

    There are currently two primary presidential candidates. Both are favourable to Iran and Syria – but the constellation of alliances supporting the two rival candidates now cut across the usual political blocks. The political landscape in Lebanon has since 2005 been polarized between the Sunni-Christian March 14 alliance, supported by Saudi Arabia, France and the United States, and the March 8 alliance, which consists of Hizbullah and its Shi’i and Christian allies, backed by Iran and Syria.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 3 2016 5:51 utc | 59

Hezbollah's pick for president of Lebanon | Al-Monitor |

    Future Movement leader Saad Hariri stirred the pot by nominating Franjieh for presidency after they met secretly Nov. 17 in Paris. Franjieh is a close friend of both Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah — Saudi Arabia’s main rival in Lebanon. Saudi Arabia opposes the Assad regime.

    At the same time Hariri was nominating Franjieh, Hariri’s ally Samir Geagea, head of the Lebanese Forces party, nominated Franjieh’s associate Aoun, a former Lebanese army commander and also a Hezbollah supporter.

    That unique and complicated situation shuffled Lebanon's political cards, temporarily loosening the iron grips of the March 8 and March 14 coalitions, whose rivalry dominated the Lebanese political arena after the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, father of Saad Hariri.

Posted by: Oui | Mar 3 2016 5:52 utc | 60

Jackrabbit @ 27,

Thanks for letting me know about your Sandy Hook post & PCR on the last open thread @ 190. I've answered it there.

Posted by: Penelope | Mar 3 2016 5:53 utc | 61

57 virgile

"Shia Islam in Lebanon has a history of more than a millennium. According to CIA study, Lebanese Shia Muslims constitute 27% of Lebanon's population of approximately 4.3 million, which means they amount to 1,160,000.[1] According to other sources the Lebanese Shia Muslims constitute approximately 40% of the entire population (or 1.6 million out of a total population of 4 million).[2][4]


As you can see, numbers are contradictory. If Shia are 40 percent of Lebanese population, then Sunnis must be around 15 percent. I'll stick with 15 percent for now.

Posted by: telescope | Mar 3 2016 6:39 utc | 62

My hunch is that this plan is too bold to have grown solely in the minds of the Turkish and Saudi regimes. The U.S. is likely not only informed about it but deeply involved. The possibility of such a plan to counter the recent Syrian and Russian successes on the battlefield was first mentioned in a piece published in early February by the Washington Institute, a think tank founded and funded by the Israel lobby.

So the plan is too bold to be conceived by Turks and fat gilded Monarchs still using their stubby fingers and at most the abacus to count? You think? You know your hunch is right, so just come out and say it.

For way too long we’ve been in denial about how much influence Zionists have on U.S. policy. I can't believe that think tank is a Zionist instigator--until Mearsheimer and Walt confirmed it (and so did MJ Rosenberg on HUFFPO; he was an AIPAC employee when it was created); I can't believe Zionists are behind all this organized chaos in the Middle East; I can't believe Zionists created these failed states around them. I can't believe they're exploiting Wahhabi ambitions in their own Greater plan; I can't believe they’ve mastered divide and conquer so artfully.

Believe it.

They even spell it out in the title of the article : The….(remove all words in between)…Chessboard

From the WINEP article: Yet Turkey and Saudi Arabia may not remain passive in the face of major Russian-Iranian progress in Syria. For example, they could set up a new rebel umbrella group similar to Jaish al-Fatah, and/or send antiaircraft missiles to certain brigades. Another option is to open a new front in northern Lebanon, where local Salafist groups and thousands of desperate Syrian refugees could be engaged in the fight. Such a move would directly threaten Assad's Alawite heartland in Tartus and Homs, as well as the main road to Damascus. Regime forces would be outflanked, and Hezbollah's lines of communication, reinforcement, and supply between Lebanon and Syria could be cut off. The question is, do Riyadh and Ankara have the means and willingness to conduct such a bold, dangerous action?

Yeah I’m sure the Russians will appreciate the suggestion to send the rebels antiaircraft missiles. Maybe the Russians will send WINEP something in return.

It’s funny how Zionists create U.S. policy.

Their Arab/Muslim neighbors have been the singular preoccupation since Zionists arrived. I'll bet since the Iron Wall was written by Jabotinsky they’ve been so fixated on a plan to destroy and conquer the entire region around them; they probably built a sprawling complex in the Negev strictly dedicated to that singular obsession: how to destroy the Muslim world around them.

They figured it out: Over a million Muslims killed in these proxy wars where they lit the match, and millions of displaced refugees (and I’m not even including the casualties of their first intervention into the Lebanese war and the subsequent ones or multiple invasions of Gaza or even their previous wars of 48 and 67 and the million displaced Palestinian refugees of the Nakba and ’67 war!). Even those fat, gilded monarchs haven’t figured it out – or they don’t care, as long as they get subjects to rule. Yeah, it’s evil. But do those monarchs really believe they’ll get their Wahhabi dominion with Zionist help? ROFL.

Here’s the thing. Zionists are very concerned with this Russian intrusion into their plan for the region. Zionists think they have it all figured out. But there’s a very simple lesson they haven’t mastered all this time: you play with fire, sooner or later, you get burned. I guess that's why they have all those nukes as insurance.

I don't think Kerry's in on the plan; he's just trying to mop up the mess. He's not unlike another of his predecessors who no doubt thought these Neocon Zionists are batshit crazy, Colin Powell.

Here's an excerpt from an article that appeared in Salon some time ago describing the lead up to the Iraq War:

At the time, I didn’t realize that the expertise on Middle East policy was not only being removed, but was also being exchanged for that from various agenda-bearing think tanks, including the Middle East Media Research Institute, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs.

So WINEP was involved in the Iraq fiasco back in 2002. Zionists are like mad scientists always looking to create the next "Frankenstein" to benefit the cause of Greater Israel.

But the deception and crimes they've gotten away with are staggering.

Posted by: Circe | Mar 3 2016 8:01 utc | 63

Oh, here's the link for the last quote:

History doesn't take very long to repeat itself in the Zionist playbook entitled: History for American Dummies

Posted by: Circe | Mar 3 2016 8:11 utc | 64

"Plan B" is shoot themselves in the other foot.

But “Plan B” is more complicated than that. A report by CNN’s Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr on 26 February leaves little room for doubt that the administration’s cupboard of policy options is actually bare. An unnamed “senior US official” at the Pentagon admitted that “Plan B” is actually “more an idea than a specific course of action”. In other words, the administration’s national security policymakers believe something more should be done in Syria, but they are not at all clear what could be done now.

Posted by: x | Mar 3 2016 12:12 utc | 65

I repeat: Hold fast. That is all..

Posted by: Lozion | Mar 3 2016 17:41 utc | 66

As I said yesterday, this has been the plan all along: degrade BOTH Syria and Hizballah in Lebanon in order to prep for a US/NATO/Israel war with Iran.

Syria must be degraded so that Israel can attack Hizballah in Lebanon through the Bekaa Valley via Syrian territory without having to fight a "two-front" war. Hizballah must be degraded because Israel doesn't want its population hiding in bomb shelters 24 hours a day, destroying the economy and pissing off the electorate, as a result of Hizballah rocket bombardment during an Iran war. Both countries must be degraded, if not destroyed, before Israel can start a war with Iran. This has been the plan since the 2006 Israeli attack on Lebanon failed. At that point, Colonel Pat Lang pointed out that Israel needs to attack Hizballah via the Bekaa Valley. But that requires engaging Syrian forces. So Syria has to go first, then Hizballah, before Israel can attack Iran.

And of course Israeli merely intends to start the Iran war. The real heavy lifting will be done by the US. Anyone who thinks the upcoming US administrations will be against that just don't comprehend the depth of corruption in the US government.

People who think this is only about Israel seizing Lebanese territory are wrong. Israel cannot seize that territory as long as Iran is supporting Hizballah. Israel has clearly made its intention to get Iran off the board during the entire bogus Iran nuclear weapons crisis and before. There can be no doubt the ultimate aim of these maneuvers is to get an Iran war started.

Also, Israel is doing this in concert with the US military-industrial complex which wants a decades-long war with Iran in order to restore windfall profits being lost as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down, not to mention the oil companies who see future opportunities in a destroyed or degraded Iran. There is no question that the "usual suspects" are all in concert once again as they were for the Iraq war.

The important thing is that NONE of this would be going on without the whole-hearted support of President Obama and his administration. All this "conflict in the administration" crap is just spin to keep Obama "looking good" while he does his usual back-stabbing on orders from his military-industrial complex and Israel First masters in Chicago.

So if Turkey invades Syria or another line of attack on Syria emerges from Lebanon, you can be sure that it has official US support direct from the White House. There is no way the US and Israel elites are going to abandon their goals of Mid-East hegemony.

Posted by: Richard Steven Hack | Mar 3 2016 20:47 utc | 67

Comparing to Obama's administration hypocritical discourse about Israel and the Arabs, I think that I prefer Trump's blunt position.

Where Donald Trump stands on Israel and the Jews
GOP frontrunner says he’ll be ‘neutral’ on Israeli-Palestinian conflict, approves of security barrier, but won’t recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital

‘Do they both want to make peace?’
Trump doesn’t want money from Republican Jewish bigwigs
Trump thinks the Iran deal is lousy, but won’t rip it up

Posted by: virgile | Mar 3 2016 21:05 utc | 68

Good news, looks like Baghdad signed an agreement with an Italian firm for the maintenance of the Mosul dam:

Posted by: Lozion | Mar 3 2016 21:39 utc | 69

I would be less alarming about USA and Israel planning a war against Iran. There is definitely an enormous need to maintain a number of hostile states justifying a variety of weapon programs. After all, military is about men doing manly things together, and what are manly things? At times, picking fights, but even better is sitting in you garage working on your manly toys like cars. Well, this is a lonely activity, but designing and trying weapons is very gregarious, and well paid on top of that.

Some weapons make no sense against a nuclear or merely powerful states, namely, anti-missile systems. A powerful state would simply send more missiles than you can intercept, and in the case of arms race, develop cheap spoof versions that can be send along real expensive rockets. So the model enemy is ideally Iran and North Korea. Russia and China justify other weapon programs.

Other manly things that can be done together is war planning, and in particular, as necessary for a SERIOUS LEADER as smoking cigars along with some good brandy or whisky served by voluptuous staff; the latter is somewhat in the past, so now, sadly, war planning is what remains among glorious leaderly pursuits. In case or Iran, a simple arithmetic shows that a war with Iran would require at least three times the resources required for a war with Iraq which was already very much of a stretch. This arithmetic compares the population and area. But Iran is blessed with many mountain ranges separating the major cities from the coast, and somewhat robust state of its military, plus unfortunate proximity to the Strait of Hormuz, plus a connection to Russia through Caspian Sea, a connection that cannot be closed without risking WWIII.

Would USA fear of national survival the war with Iran is definitely doable, but short of that, even neo-cons would be hard pressed to pen a scenario in which the war does not lead to a disaster. But that leaves room for various types of backstabbing short of open direct war, like supplying weapons to "armed opposition" in Syria or egging KSA to whack Yemen. Restarting civil war in Lebanon would fit here as well.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Mar 3 2016 21:40 utc | 70

@67, rsh

The important thing is that NONE of this would be going on without the whole-hearted support of President Obama and his administration. All this "conflict in the administration" crap is just spin to keep Obama "looking good" while he does his usual back-stabbing on orders from his military-industrial complex and Israel First masters in Chicago.

So if Turkey invades Syria or another line of attack on Syria emerges from Lebanon, you can be sure that it has official US support direct from the White House.

I certainly agree there. And Hillary offers the seamless non-transition in 2017.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 3 2016 23:56 utc | 71

@63, circe, '... I didn’t realize that the expertise on Middle East policy was not only being removed, but was also being exchanged for that from various agenda-bearing think tanks ...'

I don't know about 'expertise' but anyone without The Agenda in mind, anyone with anything but the MIC/Israeli interest in mind.

The Agenda is what's good for the MIC, as the only IC left in the US. That'd be death, devastation, and destruction. The Israelis are just the 'creative' department, the promoters ... the American MIC types don't much care where or who, just now. And Colin was among them. You don't get all those stars for promoting visions of peace.

The US government, the deep state, is incapable of changing course. If we ordinary Americans don't do change the course our nation is on, it won't change. And we can all see what's coming.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 4 2016 0:16 utc | 72

Assassination of the top Russian spy in Beirut is pointing definitely Lebanon's direction. It is extremely puzzling why Putin would send his top intelligence officer into a suicide mission. How did he turned up suddenly in Lebanon without any official announcement is beyond me. Lebanon is famous for being spy's hornet nest. It's hard to believe it was a mistake. There is high probability of Israeli Saudi Turkish involvement masterminded by Washington.

Posted by: #AM | Mar 4 2016 6:40 utc | 73

The only source for the assassination yarn above seems to be the Jerusalem Post.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 4 2016 7:30 utc | 74

Russia warns of ‘very long’ war in Yemen

Saudi Arabia has been bombing the country for about a year now in order to restore Hadi and undermine Ansarullah. At least 8,300 people, among them 2,236 children, have been killed and over 16,000 others sustained injuries since the onset of the Saudi invasion.

Riyadh forwarded a resolution to the United Nations last year, calling on the Houthis to withdraw from all the territories under their control.

Churkin complained that the resolution, which Russia abstained from voting on at the time, "is being used essentially to continue the military campaign" by the Saudi forces.

I suppose we can blame Putin for not vetoing the resolution rather than just abstaining, for whatever short-term political benefit ... but it is the USA with its Plans A to Z that is responsible of the death, devastation, and destruction in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Yemen, Palestine ... now Lebanon? soon Egypt? ... Russia proper? China? ... Acting alone or leading from behind the USA and its presidents - Clinton, Bush XLIII, and the figurehead Nobel Peace Prize Laureate - must ultimately must shoulder responsibility for the DD&D + Deceit - the US' serial terrorist wars - that have layed humanity so low over the past twenty-four years.

Posted by: jfl | Mar 4 2016 7:45 utc | 75

Lebanon has been a target for regime change/destabilization since at least 2001, in the same list as Iraq, Libya and Syria that Gen. Wesley Clark described as being put together shortly after 9/11

Posted by: Marxest | Mar 4 2016 17:53 utc | 76


Lebanon hasn't had a functioning regime in decades so there is little to change, they can't even pick up their trash.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Mar 5 2016 0:55 utc | 77

The West has done all it can to prevent a strong united Lebanon since the civil war. Nothing new there, Tel Aviv has made sure of that also though things may change if the Maronites tip over towards the Shia's which is a distinct possibility as they are sell aware of what their brethren had to suffer in Sunni ISIS controlled Syria&Iraq. Since Hariri has lost ascendancy the Saudi influence is waning hence an interesting reshuffling of the board in Lubnan..

Posted by: Lozion | Mar 5 2016 4:14 utc | 78


Clever use of the memory hole in neglecting to even mention that Syria invaded Lebanon in 1976 and occupied the country until 2005. Iran's Hezbollah force has done much to build the nation such as blocking the choice of a president for two years while their adventurism in Syria will certainly keep the Jihadist forces from targeting their base in Lebanon.

Posted by: Wayoutwest | Mar 5 2016 18:42 utc | 79

@ 77 and 79

Have you ever read Robert Fisk's "Pity the Nation - The Abduction of Lebanon" (ISBN 1-56025-442-4)? From your remarks i certainly doubt that you have. And if you haven't, that explains just a little of your ignorance.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Mar 5 2016 19:56 utc | 80

@@ Wayoutwaste

Since you're not replying, a clue: The cited book has 689 pages of narrative and none of your remark even resembles the history contained in that book. Since the book was written by a world class journalist who witnessed those years of Lebanon's civil war, and your authority is non-existant, provides the reason for my remarks; normally I try to avoid calling another stupid, or ignorant, or an imbecile when their voids of knowledge are easily accounted by lack of education or opportunity. You persist in your wilful stupidity as you wish, but your comments here are measured against some of the most skilful human magpies, collectors of bright and shinny bits of information, on the internet. You make absolutely no contribution whatsoever to the subjects here. The only contribution you have provided is the removal of all doubt that you are a fool, a wilful imbecile. Your's and Penelope's piles of poop are of a kind and will get no further response - life is too short to waste on that fools errand.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Mar 7 2016 13:24 utc | 81

The comments to this entry are closed.