Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
November 14, 2017

Revealed - Saudis Plan To Give Up Palestine - For War On Iran

The tyrants of Saudi Arabia developed a plan that sells away Palestine. They see this as necessary to get U.S. support for their fanatic campaign against their perceived enemy Iran.

An internal Saudi memorandum, leaked to the Lebanese paper Al-Akhbar, reveals its major elements. (Note: The genuineness of the memo has not been confirmed. In theory it could be a "plant" by some other party. But Al-Akhbar has so far an excellent record of publishing genuine leaks and I trust its editors' judgement.)

According to the memo the Saudis are ready to give up on the Palestinian right of return. They forfeit Palestinian sovereignty over Jerusalem and no longer insist of the status of a full state for the Palestinians. In return they ask for a U.S.-Saudi-Israeli (military) alliance against their perceived enemy on the eastern side of the Persian Gulf.

Negotiations on the issue were held between the Saudis and the Zionist under the aegis of the United States. Netanyahu and Trump’s "shared personal assistant, wunderkind Jared Kushner", is the point men in these negotiations. He made at least three trips to Saudi Arabia this year, the last one very recently.

The Saudi operations over the last month, against the internal opposition to the Salman clan as well as against Hizbullah in Lebanon, have to be seen in the context and as preparation of the larger plan. To recap:

  • Last week the current front-man of the Palestinians, Mahmoud Abbas, was ordered to Riyadh. There he was told to accept whatever will be presented as U.S. peace plan or to resign. He was urged to cut all Palestinian ties with Iran and Hizbullah:
Since the warnings, which could threaten the new Palestinian unity agreement signed by Fatah and the Iranian-backed Hamas in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian media displayed a rare degree of unity in recent days by coming out against Iran.
  • On November 6 a letter by the Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahoo to Israeli embassies was intentionally "leaked". In it Netanyahoo urges his diplomats to press for full support for the Saudi plans in Lebanon, Yemen and beyond. On the same day Trump tweeted:
Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump - 3:03 PM - 6 Nov 2017
I have great confidence in King Salman and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, they know exactly what they are doing....

(The tweet was heavily promoted by Saudi Twitter bots.)

  • The Saudi tyrant abducted the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Saad Hariri, and declared war on the country. The purpose of this move is to remove or isolate Hizbullah, the Shia resistance of Lebanon which is allied with Iran and opposes the Saudi plans for Palestine.
  • On November 11 the New York Times reported on the U.S. drafting of a "peace plan" but provided little detail. The chance for such a plan to succeed was described as low.

The left-wing Lebanese paper Al-Akhbar has obtained a copy of the plan (Arabic) in form of a memorandum by the Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir to the Saudi clown prince Mohammed Bin Salman (English machine translation):

The document, which is being unveiled for the first time, proves all that has been leaked since President Trump's visit to Saudi Arabia last May on the launch of US efforts to sign a peace treaty between Saudi Arabia and Israel. This was followed by information on the exchange of visits between Riyadh and Tel Aviv, the most important being the visit of the Saudi Crown Prince to the Zionist entity.

The document reveals the size of concessions that Riyadh intends to present in the context of the liquidation of the Palestinian issue, and its concern to get in return the elements of power against Iran and the resistance, led by Hezbollah.

The Saudi foreign ministry memo starts by laying out its strategic perspective:

To face Iran by increasing sanctions on ballistic missiles and reconsidering the nuclear deal, the Kingdom has pledged in the strategic partnership agreement with US President Donald Trump that any US-Saudi effort is the key to success.
Saudi Arabia's rapprochement with Israel involves a risk to the Muslim peoples of the Kingdom, because the Palestinian cause represents a spiritual and historical and religious heritage. The Kingdom will not take this risk unless it feels the United States' sincere approach to Iran, which is destabilizing the region by sponsoring terrorism, its sectarian policies and interfering in the affairs of others.

The Saudi paper describes the issues and process steps towards a deal in five points:

First: The Saudis demand a "parity of the relationship" between Israel and Saudi Arabia. On the military level they demand that either Israel gives up on its nuclear weapons or Saudi Arabia is itself allowed to acquire such.

Second: In exchange Saudi Arabia will use its diplomatic and economic power to push through a 'peace plan' between Israel, the Palestinians and Arab countries along the lines that the U.S. will lay out. Within such a peace plan the Saudis, according to the memo, are willing to make extraordinary concessions:

  • The city of Jerusalem would not become capital of a Palestinian state but be subjected to a special international regime administered by the United Nations.
  • The right of return for Palestinian refugees, who were violently expelled by the Zionists, would be given up on. The refugees would be integrated as citizens of those countries where they currently reside.
  • (No demand for full sovereignty of a Palestinian state is mentioned.)

Third: After reaching an agreement of the "main principles of the final solution" for Palestine between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. (Israel), a meeting of all foreign ministers of the region would be convened to back these up. Final negotiations would follow.

Fourth: In coordination and cooperation with Israel Saudi Arabia would use its economic power to convince the Arab public of the plan. The point correctly notes "At the beginning of normalizing relations with Israel, normalization will not be acceptable to public opinion in the Arab world." The plan is thus to essentially bribe the Arab public into accepting it.

Fifth: The Palestinian conflict distracts from the real issue the Saudi rulers have in the region which is Iran: "Therefore, the Saudi and Israeli sides agree on the following:

  1. Contribute to counter any activities that serve Iran's aggressive policies in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia's affinity with Israel must be matched by a sincere American approach against Iran.
  2. Increase US and international sanctions related to Iranian ballistic missiles.
  3. Increase sanctions on Iran's sponsorship of terrorism around the world.
  4. Re-examination of the group (five + 1) in the nuclear agreement with Iran to ensure the implementation of its terms literally and strictly.
  5. Limiting Iran's access to its frozen assets and exploiting Iran's deteriorating economic situation and marketing it to increase pressure on the Iranian regime from within.
  6. Intensive intelligence cooperation in the fight against organized crime and drug trafficking supported by Iran and Hezbollah."

The memo is signed by Adel al-Jubeir. (But who were the 'advisors' who dictated it to him?)

The U.S. plan for peace in Palestine is to press the Palestinians and Arabs into anything Israel demands. The Saudis will agree to that, with minor conditions, if only the U.S. and Israel help them to get rid of their nemesis Iran. But that is impossible. Neither Israel nor the U.S. will agree to a "parity of relationship" for Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia lacks all elements to become a supreme state in the Arab Middle East. Iran can not be defeated. 

Iran is the at the core of the Shia constituency and at the core of resistance to "western" imperialism. Shia and Sunni aligned populations in the Middle East (ex Egypt) are of roughly equal size. Iran has about four times the number of citizens the Saudis have. It is much older and cultured than Saudi Arabia. It has an educated population and well developed industrial capabilities. Iran is a nation, not a conglomerate of desert tribes like the desert peninsula under al-Saud. Its geographic position and resources make it unconquerable.

To defeat Iran the Saudis started proxy-wars in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and now Lebanon. They needed foot soldiers to win these wars. The Saudis hired and sent the only significant infantry they ever had at their disposal. Their hordes of al-Qaeda and ISIS fanatics were defeated. Tens of thousands of them have been killed on the battle fields in Iraq, Syria and Yemen. Despite a global mobilization campaign nearly all the potentially available forces have been defeated by the local resistances on the ground. Neither the colonial settler state nor the U.S. are willing to send their soldiers into battle for Saudi supremacy.

The grant plan of the Trump administration to achieve peace in the Middle East is high on hopes but lacks all the necessary details. The Saudi's promise to support the U.S. plan if the Trump administration is willing to fight their nemesis Iran. Both leaderships are hapless and impulsive and both of their plans have little chance of final success. They will be pursued anyway and will continue to create an enormous amount of collateral damage. The Zionist entity feels no real pressure to make peace. It is already dragging its feet on these plans and will try to use them to its sole advantage.

Posted by b on November 14, 2017 at 10:42 UTC | Permalink

next page »

"... I have great confidence in King Salman and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, they know exactly what they are doing...."

Yes, exactly what they are told to do by the usual suspects. Stay on script, ... or else!

Posted by: x | Nov 14 2017 10:59 utc | 1

Donald Trump on Twitter (5 h ago):

Donald J. Trump‏

I will be making a major statement from the @WhiteHouse upon my return to D.C. Time and date to be set.

Posted by: arbetet | Nov 14 2017 11:02 utc | 2

This reeks of despair. How long should one give to the clown prince MBS before he achieves the final collapse of Saudi Arabia is the only question I have.

Posted by: Lea | Nov 14 2017 11:13 utc | 3

This did not need a leak, it was clear. The "leak" might as well have been invented from what has transpired anyway.

There is an Arab peace plan from 2002 which Israelis find unacceptable.

Israelis will find this new peace plan unacceptable, too, as it would mean a one state solution - Palestinian struggle for a state would be changed to an equal rights campaign Israelis would find very difficult to counter.

The 'new' plan is too late anyway, Israel cannot directly engage in any war without being existentially threatened themselves, last time proved in Gaza. Hamas might have been forced to allow the Palestinian authority back but they did not give up their weapons.

And neither the US nor Israel can politically afford to lose many soldiers in a ground war. So if Saudi wants to fight against Iran, they have to do it themselves.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 14 2017 11:29 utc | 4

Never ceases to amaze the repeated rhetoric about how Iran is the bogyman, when Saudi Arabia financed the destruction in Syria. Israel fermenting discourse, has been going on for so long, to where the world looks upon it as being the "boy who cried wolf". Israel give up its Nukes? Parity, if you believe in the tooth fairy. Exactly who meddles in others foreign affairs there in the MENA?

Posted by: Eugene | Nov 14 2017 12:29 utc | 5

Seems like this could be a "deliberate pre-emptive leak" - to see what the reactions will be.

The alternative is a potential turn of Saudi Arabia - towards China and Russia.

Either way, the new "owner" of Saudi Arabia will have to make several choices if he wants to do anything at all without running out of cash. Wars are expensive (particulrly if you have to pay mercenaries) and the recent asset seizures will only go so far.

...The actual "plot" mentioned by b seems to have included too many "wish-list" items for the Israelis, for it to be accurate. Although there is definitely a possibility of Saudi and Israeli collusion, Israel for one would prefer the US AND the Saudis to attack Iran. Note that overflying by Israel to attack Iran would probably be over Saudi which makes it into a direct target. The "other" route via Greece would be used on the return (or outward first). Which is why the inclusion of foreign airforces in familiarisation drills in Soutern Israel, actually lends credence to the leak - in spite of what I said earlier.

Posted by: stonebird | Nov 14 2017 12:45 utc | 6

On RT Arabic, article saying that Aoun's aid has been informed that they indeed a war on Lebanon is coming.
In exchange for letting humanitarian business-help reach the Yemenis, they need to kill ppl elsewhere?
But what if the 350,OOO Lebanese leave KSA (and why don't they already do it?)
I believe KSA will suffer of that much more than Lebanon.

Posted by: Mina | Nov 14 2017 12:50 utc | 7

Ppl can get organized from now on: "not in my name"
Withdraw all money from banks, stop consuming. That's the only war they know.

Posted by: Mina | Nov 14 2017 12:51 utc | 8

4) To clarify the situation Israel is in - from tiny Gaza strip -

The incident increased tensions along the southern sector and threatened to disturb the calm that has prevailed there since the end of the traumatic summer of 2014, which left Gaza in ruins and Israel licking its wounds. As of the writing of this article, silence has been maintained. None of the parties are lashing out, despite the casualties from Islamic Jihad and Hamas.

Ever since the tunnel was destroyed, senior Egyptian intelligence officials have set off on a long round of mediation between the parties in an effort to prevent a conflagration from erupting. Both sides are well-aware that the previous round of violence, in 2014, was not planned. Rather, it was the result of a deteriorating situation and the loss of control on both sides. Neither of the parties needs another round of violence like that right now. The IDF has clarified that it did not know that there were excavators or fighters in the tunnel at the time, and that it did not plan to launch a "targeted killing." It simply wanted to destroy the tunnel.

I have been wondering about the Hamas-Fatah reconciliation. Saudi does not want it - if Hamas keeps contact with Iran.

So why it is happening? Israel?

There is no certainty Israel is not interested in a deal with Iran. It might be the safest bet.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 14 2017 12:55 utc | 9

I have been saying that for the last year.

As Obama will be remembered for the Iran nuclear deal, Trump wants to be remembered as the maker of the Arab-Israeli deal to end the state of wear.
Since Trump came to power he has been following a clear strategy of weakening all the parties involved, including Saudi Arabia and Israel!
Syria, Lebanon, Hamas, Fatah, Turkey and Iran are been thrown into deep crisis while Saudi Arabia and Israel are been brought to panic by agitating the "Iran and Shia threat'. Regional leaders reluctant to make concessions are coerced, bribed or quietly removed in all these countries. Local allies such as the Kurds and ISIS have been pampered to move against the reluctant leaders.
Jared is the architect of that strategy. He is in charge of manipulating the Saudis and Israel into a deal that will be then be imposed on the other countries.
Russia is NOT opposed to such a deal, provided it keeps its influence in the region. Therefore Trump is cozying up with Putin to get his collaboration in convincing his allies of the benefits of such a deal.
The hard to break Arabs are Bashar al Assad's Syrians, and the Moslem Brotherhood (Hamas) .
Qatar and Turkey are been blackmailed to put pressure on the Moslem Brotherhood and any opponent to a 'forced' peace deal.

The Saudis are the key to the deal as they will be asked to contribute to the financial compensation Palestinians will ask for to accept the deal. They are also the most eager to humiliate Iran and Turkey.
The train is on track, despite failure to tame Syria that remains a nut hard to crack.

Posted by: virgile | Nov 14 2017 13:05 utc | 10

I'm not convinced that this document is genuine because:

>> as b notes, 'parity' on nukes is a non-starter;

>> discussions with Israel about the Palestinians are unlikely to be phrased as a "final solution" with the severe negative historical connotations of that phrase;

>> this wording is also odd: "rapprochement with Israel involves a risk to the Muslim peoples of the Kingdom" because there is no need to make special reference to "Muslim peoples" when 99.9% of KSA is Muslim.

>> Does KSA really have the wherewithal to bribe the Muslim world?

>> The accusation that Iran engages in "organized crime and drug trafficking" seems planted. I haven't seen such a charge before. The standard accusation (in the US) has been that Iran supports terrorism (meaning Hezbollah) and "destabilizes the region" (meaning they don't bow to US-Israeli-Saudi masters).

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 14 2017 13:07 utc | 11

10 There will be no deal without Iran.

Israel is not stupid. The outcome of the war in Syria is an Iranian base on its border.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Tuesday that a recently announced agreement on the terms of a ceasefire in Syria did not include a Russian commitment to ensure Iran-linked militias would be pulled out of the country.

Lavrov said Iran maintained a “legitimate” presence in Syria, according to the Interfax news agency.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 14 2017 13:13 utc | 12

Trump's Middle East peace initiative still on hold

"What will the initiative include? According to various sources, it will consist of regional negotiations along three channels: Israeli-Palestinian with American mediation, Israeli-regional and international (rehabilitation of the refugee camps and mobilization of the world for a regional agreement). It is possible that the initiative will redefine the concept of “sovereignty” in a way that allows the Israelis and Palestinians to share territory creatively. The initiative may even resuscitate the Palestinian-Jordanian confederation idea. Perhaps even a Palestinian-Jordanian-Israeli configuration is possible."

Posted by: virgile | Nov 14 2017 13:26 utc | 13

Excellent article, thanks. yet I am left somewhat confused, Harir just talk on TV saying: He was running for a fear for his life (hezbollah wants him dead, like they did with his father), he added that Hezbollah is the danger to Lebanon, he added that he is not held by force and will return to Lebanon.

Something feels wrong, don't you have this feeling as well regarding this story?

Posted by: catface | Nov 14 2017 13:29 utc | 14

13 Yes, that is the Israeli dream - Jordan to take over the rest of the West-Bank and Egypt take over Gaza.

Russia says US providing cover for ISIS - add to the BBC article.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 14 2017 13:36 utc | 15

How convenient that you forget the phrase, “ deception thou shalt do war”, when you rationalize Israeli motivations/sensibilities.

Posted by: nudge | Nov 14 2017 13:48 utc | 16

Interesting thread from the former US Amb to Israel under Obama:

and then we have this:

In addition to the Syria agreement, the officials are likely to discuss Iran’s alleged construction of a military base less than 50 kilometers (30 miles) from Israel’s Golan border.

and from Mattis:

“We’re not just going to walk away right now before the Geneva process has traction,” he added.

Posted by: Yul | Nov 14 2017 13:51 utc | 17

@11 follow-up

The leaking of a secret Israeli cable and publishing by an Israeli news organization also seems suspicious.

The past, such blatant Israeli support for an Arab State/Monarch would be the kiss of death, wouldn't it?

The best explanation I can muster for these leaks is this: to further the notion that an attack on Lebanon is imminent so as to distract from the real target of an attack: Qatar.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 14 2017 13:56 utc | 18

Yep. The last sentence of the Reuters article is ominous

One key aim for Washington is to limit Iranian influence in Syria and Iraq, which expanded during the war with Islamic State.

So the US military now works for Saudi?

Posted by: somebody | Nov 14 2017 14:14 utc | 19

So lets see:

Israel gets the Palestinians dumped.
Israel gets somebody else to attack Iran who will be destroyed in return.

Israel: +++ (Palestine, Iran, Saudi)
Saudi: +- (Iran, Saudi)

Only the Saudis could come up with a plan like this /sarc.

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 14 2017 14:24 utc | 20

So lets see: (Updated as I forgot the Hezbollah angle)

Israel gets the Palestinians dumped.
Israel gets somebody else to attack Iran who will be destroyed in return.
Israel gets Hezbollah weakened, allowing takeover of Lebanese oil interests / access for its planned Israel-Cyprus energy route therough Lebanese territorial waters.

Israel: ++++ (Palestine, Iran, Saudi, Lebanon)
Saudi: +- (Iran, Saudi)

Only the Saudis could come up with a plan like this /sarc.

Posted by: Anonymous | Nov 14 2017 14:27 utc | 21

Palestine is a dead duck anyhow, and there won't be any war on Iran because of the extensive US presence (missile targets) in the Gulf. So IMO the idea that Israel would give up its nukes might be the main issue here.
Meanwhile Iran will be working behind the scenes to weaken both Israel and Saudi Arabia, especially in the key KSA Eastern Province where Shi'as predominate and ARAMCO will have new owners. The Persians have been around for centuries and they know how to deal with these matters, as evidenced recently.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 14 2017 14:43 utc | 22

@ 19

Yep, get the Saudis to plonk down billions in weapons that they won't , can't use and take part of that cash to help the Israelis to bomb their Arab brethren.

Posted by: Yul | Nov 14 2017 14:44 utc | 23

The US politicians appear as dummies compared to Iranians, Russians and Chinese.
One may have serious doubts about these expensive and famous US universities that seem to breed political morons.
They all look like vicious children playing dirty and cruel games in a kindergarten

Posted by: virgile | Nov 14 2017 15:00 utc | 24


Israel will not attack Hezbollah (never mind Iran) without the US leading.

Saudi cannot get full support from the US for Yemen, never mind Iran.

Last/not least - whilst Trump has fully bought into Saudi and Israeli aims (they might not be the same), his presidency might end in three years. US (and Russian) interest is to balance the interests of Middle East actors not to become a proxy for one of them.

This here is James Mattis from 2013

“I paid a military security price every day as the commander of CentCom because the Americans were seen as biased in support of Israel, and that moderates all the moderate Arabs who want to be with us, because they can’t come out publicly in support of people who don’t show respect for the Arab Palestinians,” he said Saturday at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado in response to a question about the peace process.


He called the current situation in Israel “unsustainable” and blamed the settlements for harming prospects for peace. The chances for an accord between Israel and the Palestinians, said Mattis, “are starting to ebb because the settlements and where they’re at are going to make it impossible to maintain the two state solution.”

Mattis then described a hypothetical in which 500 Jewish settlers live among 10,000 Arabs, and the implications of where Israel draws the border. He called it a choice between giving up the idea of a Jewish state or becoming an apartheid state.

Saudi is desperate. Israel is not far behind. Whatever they did since 2006 worsened their strategic position.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 14 2017 15:07 utc | 25

The Zionist entity feels no real pressure to make peace.

Making peace, in any shape or form, with the palestinians is antithesis to the zionist mission. Israel's survival, as a jewish state, hinges on this.

The same could also be said about the first point; Israel would never accept a technologically advanced state in the region that could threaten its hegemony. A nuclear Saudi Arabia will never see the light of day.

Posted by: never mind | Nov 14 2017 15:11 utc | 26

Great article; well researched and documented.

I have a theory and I can't back it up but here goes...

I believe that The Donald gave Saudi two choices; go forward with his plan for the new Middle East or he throws his weight and support in with the 9/11 families in their lawsuit against Saud.

The Saudis have so seldom been out front on foreign policy and certainly never played on the front line solo prior to the past couple of years.

I believe that the Donald's plan is to emerge with the 3 strong actors of the US, Israel and SA and everyone else aligned with them and against Iran. It may actually work.

Posted by: Jack | Nov 14 2017 15:29 utc | 27


Of course Israel might appear to be in line with the Saudis
in order to weaken Iran and the pro palestinians.
Then after Iran were vanquished, it would take on the Saudis.

Posted by: CarlD | Nov 14 2017 15:33 utc | 28

Dear B,

Excellent reporting.

I view the agreement, not as a threat to Iran, but as an alliance agreement between three weak actors, Trump, bin Salman and Netanyahu, who need all the friends that they can get. The rhetoric against Iran looks like their traditional positions.

Both Trump and bin Salman are each already in a war for survival with the Globalists (the clique of global elitists, whose members include Soros, Clinton, Tony Blair, Bandar Bush, etc. and who own the U.S. Deep State, the European Union structures, and Western media). Both Trump and bin Salman came to power after the Globalists fight against Russia (for example via the orchestrated drop in oil prices) did serious harm to their respective countries. Both are undoing the Globalist policies. The Globalists will continue to do everything possible to remove them from power.

Netenyahu is also no friend of the Globalists after they tried to rehabilitate Iran with the nuclear deal in order to draw Iran away from Russia. He has also been weakened by the disastrous outcome, for him, in Syria. (Are the Globalists behind the allegations of corruption against him?)

In this context I have difficulty to see that any of these three are in a position, or would be willing to take the risks involved, to launch a war with Iran.

Posted by: dh | Nov 14 2017 15:49 utc | 29

It was on October 1st that Sayed Nasrallah made his attention-getting statement that the Zionist occupiers should go back to the countries they came from, because if the US-Israeli command launched a war on Lebanon there would be no time for the settlers to flee. It was a pretty dramatic escalation of warning, and almost seemed to come out of the blue, but perhaps not, if crazy ideas like the ones in this memorandum were swirling around the region. And they are crazy ideas, all highly dubious propositions.

Jackrabbit @18 makes a point if all this is smoke for the real attack, which is against Qatar. This seems much more plausible. Beirut-based Paul Cochrane laid out this possibility: Behind the Saudi Troublemaking

"... the global powers would vocally oppose such a move but likely not exercise military intervention a la 1991 when Iraq invaded Kuwait. The U.S. troops based in Qatar would just stay in their base; the Trump administration has signaled it has sided with Riyadh, even though the State Department has been more nuanced towards Doha. As for the Turks and the Iranians, they would not want to be brought into a conflagration with Riyadh and the ATQ. That really would tear the MENA apart.

Ultimately, there’s not much to stop a Saudi gas grab. There’s not much desire internationally for yet another Middle Eastern military “adventure” following the debacles in Iraq and Libya, while nobody’s lifted a finger against Saudi Arabia for its war against Yemen. As long as Qatari gas exports remain uninterrupted, the global powers might readily accept a change of management.

Mercouris at the Duran picked this up too, and makes a decent case that Saudi could actually get away with this. It seems to make much more sense than the appalling logistics of trying to attack either Hezbollah or Iran. And by grabbing the Qatari half of the massive gas field shared with Iran, Saudi would have achieved an ironic taste of "parity" with its true enemy.

The question is, how possible is such a move for Saudi Arabia?

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 14 2017 15:59 utc | 30

HAHAHA the jews consider the Al Sauds a joke and they want parity with them? HAHAHAHA Allowed to have nuclear weapons? HAHAHAHA!!! Too funny

Posted by: Fernando Arauxo | Nov 14 2017 16:13 utc | 31

Israel's government would be foolish if it were to engage in a deal that promises them what they already have de facto and demands that they abandon the greatest strategic advantage Israel has; the exclusive regional possession of nuclear weapons.

Posted by: Pnyx | Nov 14 2017 16:16 utc | 32

The most dubious part of the "Saudi plan" is that it may be good for Saudis, in some deluded princely perspective, but there is really nothing of value for USA. Goodies for USA -- Palestinians giving up on the right of return? USA does not consider that right seriously, so value is zero, numerically speaking (zero shows a the result if you are not using exponential notation, 10^-50). Goodies for KSA: the status of "Grand Prince" in Golden Horde.

Golden Horde was a successor state of Mongolian empire that had supremacy over Rus among its various holdings. Rus was split into a number of principalities ruled by princes but one of them was given the function of Grand Prince, and he collected the taxes from all other princes and passing them to the Khan of the Horde. While the power of Grand Prince was considerable, he could be recalled (one way ticket to the capital of the Horde).

KSA imagines having that position in the Arab (or Muslim??) words, of course without the last detail -- obligatory invitation to D.C. with a dinner that may be wholesome, but then again, it may be poisoned. But it is much better to USA to deal with a number of small states that do not cooperate with each other. What if a single change of power in the Kingdom is followed by a request to close all bases? This is a type of bother that is better to prevent from even being contemplated. Mind you, Americans were disinvited from the Kingdom in the past. Trump may trust MbS, but Pentagon does not KSA.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Nov 14 2017 16:39 utc | 33

You forgot to mention Macron's recent surprise visit. For some reason, Macron may be on the hook to them. He was awarded with a military contract (navy vessels) from UAE, KSA ally.

Posted by: Anna | Nov 14 2017 16:47 utc | 34

Macron on the hook? Like a hooker? But that lady has no intention to be restricted in the choice of customers. Over time, she will have a kind word (not just words) for everyone.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Nov 14 2017 16:51 utc | 35

Grieved @30--

It would seem Nasrallah's/Hezbollah's intel reach is quite deep. As someone commented, the plan reeks of desperation; since it's founded on numerous falsehoods, it has no chance of success. I expect the Umma to denounce Saudi's betrayal of Palestine regardless of what their governments say.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 14 2017 16:53 utc | 36

An array of unrealistic, unobtainable goals and a leak. Football analogy: It's a pump fake. Look for the hand off and a running play.

Also see a limited hangout: Warm the Arab public to the concept of totally screwing the Palestinians in Palestine's stolen land (Israel).

Posted by: fastfreddy | Nov 14 2017 17:03 utc | 37

I wrote a couple weeks ago that because of several years of weak chief executive, the power blocks in the US were pursuing their respective interests more independently and openly than ever (which they are); and in Arabia MbS is a power hungry Machiavellian prince who is also naive and thus hard to predict, but who must understand that he will need allies, and those allies will likely have an influence on him, for better or worse (which is also true). I was naturally hoping that his daddy's trip to Russia, as his last state visit, might indicate that the king was trying to open an option for MbS to turn to Russia for support against the CIA/State sponsored factions within SA, which might in turn lead to at least the opportunity for Russia to exert some calming influence on the region over time.

Well, that may have been the king's thought, but obviously his son has been getting his advice from elsewhere. In the US, a most unlikely alliance appears to have formed (at least with respect to the ME). Because of the vitriol existing between the neocons and Trump, and the fact that the office of the president has largely been taken over by the Pentagon (which often but does not always see eye-to-eye with the Zionist/Neocons), it was easy to overlook the growing power and influence of the Zionist worm in the White House, Kushner.

I think Trump never had a strong foreign policy concept in his own mind--mostly boiled down to a quasi-isolationist, so he hasn't fought hard against turning things over to the Pentagon and Kushner. It is now clear that Kushner, the US's own power hungry prince who is eager to prove his chops in an area he has no clue in--international politics--has fallen completely into the loving arms of Israel. It is clear now that the Trump/Kushner plans for SA are entirely a Nuttyahoo wet dream. The visit to SA, where they were persuaded to spend $110B of money they don't really have mostly on huge numbers of THAAD and other missile defense systems and front-line fighters. Next MbS was persuaded to confront Qatar, as any breaks in a united front against Iran must be spanked (notice how all these events keep happening a couple days after a visit from Kushner, who is usually hot off a meeting with his masters in Israel). Then MbS is apparently advised to go all in to remove opposition within the kingdom, which gives Trump glee because it also punishes Hillary's friends, but also commits MbS to the path, and makes him totally reliant on Israel/Kushner for protection (cutting RF's increasing attraction). Now the crude attempt to boil the pot in Lebanon.

So in short order there will be far more missile defenses than Riyadh needs (but exactly what Israel desires). Israel doesn't want to be first in on a direct attack on Iran, but if there is a whole air force worth of planes with Saudi markings just waiting for Israeli/US/Wahabi pilots to take first blood--once it's a regional war on, who will notice who's planes are attacking Iran after that? And MbS (under careful direction) has now set up trigger points from Yemen to Qatar to Lebanon, just waiting until the preparations are done and an event to be blamed on Iran, and away we go. Israel finally gets its wish. The good news is that MbS has likely bitten off more than he can chew by taking on all of his internal opposition at the same time as Iran, and done so in such a heavy handed manner that I doubt he can buy a life insurance policy. And Russia and Iran have maintained a steady and "back seat" approach to their assistance of everyone who seems to need it--and the US and Israel have been so brazen in their duplicity and untrustworthiness--most countries in the area (and the world) don't seem so eager to follow the US lead any more (plus, the Pentagon is still very strong in the US executive, and I don't think they're quite so anxious to tear into Iran). So there is hope this latest Israeli plan to drag the world into war against Iran will melt down just like it did in Syria, but who knows how much damage will be done before it does.

Posted by: J Swift | Nov 14 2017 17:07 utc | 38

@4 somebody

And neither the US nor Israel can politically afford to lose many soldiers in a ground war. So if Saudi wants to fight against Iran, they have to do it themselves.

MBS would have to be absolutely deranged to fight Iran directly. The KSA's regular troops are mostly foreigners from Pakistan and other poorer nations. They are well-equipped but poorly trained. In addition, fighting wars for a country one has no stake in makes for poor morale. They are getting their asses handed to them on a regular basis by the relatively poorly-equipped (but highly motivated) Houthi rebels in Yemen.

It is possible that MBS is wildly deluded but I can't see him facing Iran alone. What is more likely is covert and indirect warfare from the US and Israel with special forces and proxies (like the MEK terrorist group inside Iran and perhaps some Wahhabi fanatics) providing boots on the ground and the whole thing backed up by USAF air power and bankrolled by MBS.

Posted by: Temporarily Sane | Nov 14 2017 17:16 utc | 39

Someone mentioned that 'parity on nukes is a non-starter. That is bullshit. SA already has 85 American B-61 nukes that were delivered to them by Israel at the time when it appeared that McStain's plan of raising an Arab Army out of Turkey would eventually defeat Syria.

No on has ever accounted for those nukes, and I seriously doubt, that once they got their hands on them, that SA would give them back. Matter of fact, video exists somewhere out in the ether of a SA attack on Yemenn in which one of the B-61 nukes was used, it just happens to have 'disappeared'.

I'd say this is a non-starter. The Palestinians though may take a page out of the Zionist playbook, take the money and then just keep fighting, after all, most of world opinion in now firmly with them.

Posted by: William | Nov 14 2017 17:19 utc | 40

From b's report:

"The Saudi tyrant abducted the Prime Minister of Lebanon, Saad Hariri, and declared war on the country. The purpose of this move is to remove or isolate Hizbullah, the Shia resistance of Lebanon which is allied with Iran and opposes the Saudi plans for Palestine."

That's absurd, ridculoous, doesn't make sense at all.

Hariri is a mortal enemy of Hizb, even accused them of assassinations attempts. Saudis keeping Hariri in house arrest gives the control of all Lebanon over to Hizb - a dream come true for them.

Add arresting plotters of 9/11 ponce Talal (also a major sponsor of Clinton/Bush criminal enterprise, CNN lies and Twitter censorship) and ponce Bandar (a butcher of Syria) to the picture and you can see that this all turns conveniently into Russia's advantage. Plus:

Russia, Saudi Arabia sign air defense contracts

And Turkey is already in the fold:

Putin says relations between Russia and Turkey may be considered as fully restored

Posted by: PeacefulProsperity | Nov 14 2017 17:25 utc | 41

>>>> stonebird | Nov 14, 2017 7:45:36 AM | 6

The "other" route via Greece would be used

Which one is that? Over the Caspian Sea, through the Caucasus(Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey or Russia), across the Black Sea, through Bulgarian or Turkish airspace to Greece. That would be available one time only and the fuel loads the aircraft would have to carry would severely restrict the bomb load they could carry. Also, going by previous experience the first time any Iranian SAM batteries locked their radar onto the Israeli aircraft, they'd dump their drop tanks and bomb loads to head out of Iranian airspace ASAP.

Any attempt by Israel to attack Iran would be a disaster for Israel which is why the conspiracy is aimed at getting Hezbollah to launch missiles at Israel and Iran to launch missiles at Saudi Arabia in response to a Saudi attack on Hezbollah. Then the United States could argue that it's intervention against Hezbollah and Iran was legitimate, well at least legitimate enough satisfy the American public and the poodles.

Posted by: Ghostship | Nov 14 2017 17:27 utc | 42

Everything has been going well according to the Putin-Trump plan:

Trump: 'Time to Get Back to Healing a World That is Shattered and Broken'

McCain and the rest of war-mongers (e.g. Lynn de Rothshild) are scared to death by this:

US Senator McCain Slams Donald Trump Over 'Believing in Sincerity' - Sputnik International

Peace is coming to the ME Lebanon’s Maronite Patriarch arrives in Riyadh on first visit

Remaining terror state is in the cross-hairs: US breaks ground for new permanent base in Israel

Posted by: PeacefulProsperity | Nov 14 2017 17:31 utc | 43

FWIW interesting info-crumbs Arrested: Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. His Ties to Las Vegas

This is the same Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal who, together with Bill Gates, owns the Four Seasons Hotel that is located within the 5 top floors of the Mandalay Bay Hotel in Las Vegas.

That would be the same Mandalay Bay Hotel in Las Vegas that was the sight of the deadliest mass shooting in our nation’s history.

The Four Seasons Hotel-within-a-hotel boasts its own private elevators and separate entrance.
His arrest may or may not reveal more ties to the Las Vegas Massacre. But it does reveal that he’s a pretty shady character.

Prince Alaweed’s arrest was the result of King Salman’s decree to create an anti-corruption committee chaired by his son, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

…King Salman decreed late on Saturday the creation of an anti-corruption committee chaired by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman…”

“The allegations against Prince Alwaleed include money laundering, bribery and extorting officials, one official told Reuters, while Prince Miteb is accused of embezzlement, hiring ghost employees and awarding contracts to his own companies including a $10 billion deal for walkie talkies and bulletproof military gear worth billions of Saudi royals.”

Prince Alaweed bin Talal is also Twitter’s second largest shareholder. That would be the same Twitter that allows ISIS, Antifa and anyone who threatens to assassinate our President free reign on their platform but blocks conservative American patriots’ accounts.

Speaking of information flow-the Prince’s investment company, Kingdom Holding Company, is a major shareholder in Time Warner Cable. The same Time Warner cable that owns CNN. Oh- and they also own a major chunk of AOL that owns the Liberal multi-author blogging platform posing as a news source-Huffpost.
Jim Murren, CEO of MGM dumped millions of dollars worth of his stocks in the weeks leading up to the massacre.

That would be the same MGM that owns the Mandalay Bay Hotel. How fortunate that he dumped his stocks before the mass shooting.

MGM Stock Selloff and Saudi Connections to Mandalay Bay Hotel.

CEO Jim Murren circulated an internal memo that stated that he would match donations to CAIR ( a terrorist organization) and the ADL-a very anti-Trump, pro-Islamic organization. He must like Twitter.
The Saudis partnered with the MGM

Reuters reported that back in ’07 Dubai World became partners with MGM.

“Dubai World, the investment holding firm of the Dubai government, will acquire a 9.5 percent stake in MGM Mirage and 50 percent of the casino operator’s CityCenter development project for $5 billion.”

Dubai World referred to the deal as a “long term strategic partnership.”

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal hails from Saudi Arabia.

That would be the same country as the Saudi Royal Air Force-that just happened to be doing some “realistic combat training” in Las Vegas.

From a previous post,

…It may or may not be “routine,” but during the month of August, from the 5th to the 28th, the Saudi Air Force booked an entire tower of “SLS,” a beleaguered Las Vegas hotel. They didn’t stay there to ogle scantily clad Las Vegas women. Arrangements were made to keep all female staff away from them. Some areas were closed to the public and pictures of females were yanked from the walls.

The purpose was for “realistic combat training” and they’re planning on making a habit of it. The Las Vegas Review Journal reported,

“Saudi Arabia’s 10th Squadron Royal Saudi Air Force will be taking part in Red Flag 17-4 at Nellis Air Force Base, according to, a site dedicated to military aviation photography and spotting. Red Flag, combat training involving the air, space and cyberforces of the United States and its allies, will be held Aug. 14-25.

“Depending on the year, the Royal Saudi Air Force will bring 175-210 members to these realistic combat exercises,” S&K said in the 2014 post.”

Who needs a military base when you can rent a hotel? Food’s better too.

Caught up in King Salman’s sweep was the Commander of the Saudi Navy as well as the Minister of the National Guards. No mention yet of the Royal Saudi Air Force.

Posted by: PeacefulProsperity | Nov 14 2017 17:35 utc | 44

Nuclear strike by proxy, Saudi Arabia purchased(or given) nuclear bomb(s). Temporary nuke parity.
The clown prince MbS is the perfect proxy to strike Iran.

Posted by: dognuke | Nov 14 2017 17:43 utc | 45

>>>> Jackrabbit | Nov 14, 2017 8:07:28 AM | 11

I'm not convinced that this document is genuine because:

>> discussions with Israel about the Palestinians are unlikely to be phrased as a "final solution" with the severe negative historical connotations of that phrase;

>> this wording is also odd: "rapprochement with Israel involves a risk to the Muslim peoples of the Kingdom" because there is no need to make special reference to "Muslim peoples" when 99.9% of KSA is Muslim.

You are aware this is a machine translation? So unless you are fluent in Arabic and can translate the original article, your comment has little value just like Liz Sly's and Anne Barnard's reporting from Beirut.

As for "final solution" why would an Arab be concerned since beyond the Mufti of Jerusalem, Arabs played little or no part is the Holocaust. And the position and role of the Mufti of Jerusalem is heavily overstated by Zionists.

>> this wording is also odd: "rapprochement with Israel involves a risk to the Muslim peoples of the Kingdom" because there is no need to make special reference to "Muslim peoples" when 99.9% of KSA is Muslim.

Firstly this could again be down to machine translation but it's more likely to be that 30% of the population of Saudi Arabia are migrant workers so 99.9% of the population are not necessarily Muslims. If you'd bothered to check the CIA World Fact Book, the only honest publication that the CIA produces, you would have known this.

>> The accusation that Iran engages in "organized crime and drug trafficking" seems planted. I haven't seen such a charge before. The standard accusation (in the US) has been that Iran supports terrorism (meaning Hezbollah) and "destabilizes the region" (meaning they don't bow to US-Israeli-Saudi masters).

You obviously haven't be paying attention to the bilge about the Tri-border region in South America. I would guess that this is Kushner's contibution to the ploy - most Americans are deeply infected with a disease known as projection and thus assume their enemies would act as they do because being the exceptional country everybody wants to do what Americans do. In this case with the CIA funding their illegal activities prior to about 2001 with money raised from drug smuggling, Americans assume that is what the Iranians are also doing which is ironic when you understand that the Iranians are fighting an existential war against drugs.

Posted by: Ghostship | Nov 14 2017 18:04 utc | 46,7340,L-5042362,00.html
Greenblatt: no resumption of Israel-Palestinian talks in sight

For sure: Abu Mazen must have told the Saudi Pretender and his senile father: Go and take a hike !

Posted by: Yul | Nov 14 2017 18:06 utc | 47

>>>> PeacefulProsperity | Nov 14, 2017 12:25:14 PM | 41

Oh, a Zionist troll talking bullshit as usual.

Posted by: Ghostship | Nov 14 2017 18:15 utc | 48

>>>> William | Nov 14, 2017 12:19:44 PM | 40

You could include a link or two to justify your staggering claim.

Posted by: Ghostship | Nov 14 2017 18:17 utc | 49

thanks b!

i agree with @20/21 anonymous.. this isn't a saudi plan! (The memo is signed by Adel al-Jubeir. (But who were the 'advisors' who dictated it to him?) )

this is a memo thought up in some neo cons head - whether they are located in israel, or some washington stink tank..

@29 dh.. i agree with much of what you say, but don't you think israel/saudi/usa trio are batshit crazy enough to do something stupid? witness their war on syria.. plenty of stupidity to continue on in the same fashion.

@18/30 jr and grieved... yes - qatar is a thorn in the side of the terrorist state saudi arabia.. nothing like another terrorist state calling you out, lol.. one of them has to be silenced... i doubt the attack is going to be on qatar myself..

@38 j swift.. thanks.. makes sense..

@45 dognuke.. unfortunately that is true and a possibility.. the clown prince is a really unstable dude..

Posted by: james | Nov 14 2017 18:17 utc | 50

It should be born in mind, of course, that this is only MbS plotting. It can't be spoken of publicly in Saudi Arabia, because the Saudi population is strongly pro-Palestinian. But all the media are owned by members of the royal family, so the population is kept in ignorance and quiet. I don't know whether that number of al-Akhbar has been suppressed in Saudi, but this news has sort of got out anyway, as it will be on the social media, which Saudis are dedicated to.

The fourth point is to bribe the public into accepting the plan. That'll cost a lot. And I don't think it will work. Another risk for MbS's power.

Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 14 2017 18:21 utc | 51

>>>> Anna | Nov 14, 2017 11:47:18 AM | 34

Airbus Industries also just received a large order for A-380s from Dubai (Emirates) - since Abu Dhabi pretty much owns Dubai after there financial troubles a few years back. it wouldn't surprise me if this was an MbZ bribe to various European countries to look the other way when things kick off.

Posted by: Ghostship | Nov 14 2017 18:22 utc | 52

Ghostship @46

Military usually want some measure of surprise. If only for this reason, signaling an attack on Lebanon would seem foolish. Unless it was a distraction.

Anyway, we then see a "leaking" of a secret Israeli cable (happens all the time, right?) that supports KSA's anti-Lebanon stance. Hmm... K.

Now we have another leak(!) that implicitly explains Israel's support of KSA as part of a larger "peace deal" (really a "war deal", isn't it?) that includes a betrayal of the Palestinians. Yeah that betrayal makes it totally believable, sure/sarc - but parity on nukes?!?

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 14 2017 18:27 utc | 53

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 14, 2017 9:43:39 AM | 22

Palestine is a dead duck anyhow...

That's what the western MSM with support from Israel, Gulf governments and some Islamists want you to believe. Elsewhere it's still an important issue but US pressure means that many are reluctant to speak out but not Celtic supporters

Posted by: Ghostship | Nov 14 2017 18:29 utc | 54

Tomorrow's leak:

From Lebanese Government affirming Iran's support for Hezb and willingness to arm them with nuclear missiles.

Oh, and they will do the same for the Houthi in Yemen.

And they killed Kennedy.


Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 14 2017 18:35 utc | 55

Re: 40

Video evidence of tactical weapons used in Yemen and other

Posted by: CarlD | Nov 14 2017 18:36 utc | 56

re 40:

please add missing slash

Posted by: CarlD | Nov 14 2017 18:37 utc | 57

related...Alastair Crooke - gambling all on black at the roulette wheel..

"This US-Israeli-Saudi-UAE project is, at bottom, an attempt to overturn reality, no less – it is rooted in a denial of the setback suffered by these states by their multiple failures to shape a New Middle East in the western mode. Now, in the wake of their failure in Syria – in which they went to the limits in search of victory – they seek another spin of the roulette wheel – in the hope of recouping all their earlier losses. It is, to say the least, a capricious hope."

Posted by: james | Nov 14 2017 18:53 utc | 58

It is hard to see how they would go about attackiung Iran unless it is just a quick strike/raid and then they all go home again. For the US, military cargo planes with backloads of US boots neatly packaged in body bags is not acceptable.
Trump wants US to be a major energy exporter, but oil prices must go up to get fracking viable in a big way. A play to bump up oil prices? Another option is Trump and Kushner playing MBS to get Aramco listed in the US and prevent China from puchasing the full offering.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 14 2017 19:08 utc | 59

@50 Thank you james for agreeing with my thoughtful and erudite post but unfortunately it was written by one of the other dh s. I've pretty much retired.

To answer your question....yes I think Israel and Saudis are crazy but maybe not crazy enough to strike Iran without a green light from Washington.

Posted by: dh | Nov 14 2017 19:16 utc | 60

Given the first demand: "First: The Saudis demand a "parity of the relationship" between Israel and Saudi Arabia. On the military level they demand that either Israel gives up on its nuclear weapons or Saudi Arabia is itself allowed to acquire such." This entire plan/proposal IMO is a nonstarter because of this initial and presumably most important (it is #1)requirement and whoever wrote it/approved it knew it.

Posted by: frances | Nov 14 2017 19:52 utc | 61

@dh... that is interesting as i was surprised at the longer post by you.. now it makes sense!

i guess they will have to work on a false flag before they get the green light from washington... iran won't do something stupid.. that is reserved for the clown prince/nutjob duo at this point..

Posted by: james | Nov 14 2017 20:00 utc | 62

@62 A false flag will require a substantial number of US fatalities. Thinking back to the US boat that 'strayed' into Iranian waters some time ago wonder how Donald would handle something similar. Those sailors or whatever they were got soundly humiliated but released unhurt. Hardly a casus belli.

Posted by: dh | Nov 14 2017 20:20 utc | 63

so The Guardians' journalists don't watch the BBC

Posted by: Mina | Nov 14 2017 20:28 utc | 64

@30 Grieved

The problem with this idea is that Turkey has already instituted a blocking action by placing Turkish forces in Qatar in response to the original Saudi threat. While the contingent was small, approximately one thousand men, the message was quite clear - hands off. Any move by the Saudis or their allies risks Turkish retaliation. it’s a no-go zone.

Posted by: pantaraxia | Nov 14 2017 20:28 utc | 65

Regarding the Saudi military, as pointed out, they are out of troops.
They could not get Egyptians to fight in Yemen or Syria, nor could they get the Pakistanis to fight on their side in either war.

They are desperate.

A war on Qatar would be to ignite Turkey and Iran's support for Qatar, and thus the Israeli-US coalition could punish both those nations, a goal the US would enjoy doing.

The aim is to regain Hegemony over the ME. The Russia-Iran-Turkey alliance has pushed the US aside, if not away. Whatever allows the US to hurt Russia by striking Turkey and Iran would be the goal, and Israel would benefit along with the US.

It would be an air war and the US and Israel would win it.

It isn't about Saudi goals and needs. It's about the Hegemon and Jr. Hegemon in Tel Aviv.

Posted by: Red Ryder | Nov 14 2017 20:31 utc | 66


If it remains an air war, the probability is that US/Israel would overwhelm
at the beginning of a combined attack unless defenses are upgraded.

However, if in view of the probability of war, Russia were to rush AA
systems to Syria and Iran, the probability that substantial air forces
would be decimated is high. The US forces would certainly be pummeled
in their bases around the Gulf and their naval forces in the Gulf sunk
with the numerous Iran assets in the region.

Without resorting to nukes, the US is probably not going to win because
it cannot field sufficient boots on the ground in Iran. And remember, the
stakes are high for China to get its fuel from somewhere and the US will
have to take this into account. Depriving China of its needed fuel is no
laughing matter.

They are in Djibouti for a reason.

I believe Israel is trying to chew too big a bone. It will choke.

Posted by: CarlD | Nov 14 2017 21:06 utc | 67

@42 ghostship

This was originally proposed as a "one-off" bombing route. ie. via the Med to cross (at that time Turkey) Now could cross Greek airspace (would need NATO laisser-passer"). Caspian to Azerbaijan. (Has close links with Israel and just tried out an Israeli suicide drone on Armenia for a "client"). From there a short hop to Iran. Fueling over greek airspace.
Return route, nowadays, would be via Saudi Arabia (plus refueling and no need to go any further). It's actually easier than a few years ago.

The second para I agree with.
General opinion.
Palestine. The single state AND the two state solution have probably been junked by Israel. Neither of the alternatives gives an ethnically pure "Jewish" state. So what to do with them? At the moment the Palestinians are being dispossesed (of land, houses), forcibly displaced (at the moment the focus is on the Jordan Valley and Bedouin villages anywhere). They are put in "camps" where they are subject to daily harassment and destruction of living amenities (including water). The desired effect is ethnic cleansing (a la Serbia). Gaza is a humanitarian disaster - under-developed children suffer stunting - and as well the IDF concentrate on children as it is easy to make them submit.

Where could they go? . Jordan - doesn't want them, as they would make up the majority, and put in peril the stability of the country.
Egypt - doesn't want them either.
"Gulf" countries - you must be joking, many are already minorities in their own countries. (Abu Dhabi,)
Leaves the neighbours, Lebanon, Syria and the EU (via Turkey?).
EU - Soros is taking care of that and destroying national unity at the same time.
Lebanon. Over-populated by refugees already.
Syria - Too many displaced persons, plus Palestinian refugee camps.

Maybe Israel imagines the solution is to force them on the latter two countries by means of military action as they won't take them voluntarily.

Posted by: stonebird | Nov 14 2017 21:16 utc | 68

@50, @60

Sorry for using dh. Didn't realize that it was already taken.

I think that the real war, right now, is between the Globalists and Trump/MBS. Trump and MBS are both fighting for their survival. I can't see how attacking Iran would help them, quite the opposite.

@66 The Globalists want Hegemony over the ME. I'm not sure that Trump does. However, the Globalists first priority is to regain control over the U.S. (i.e. impeach Trump), and then continue their war with Russia. I can't see how driving Turkey and Iran into Russia's hands will help them either to tame Russia or to reassert Hegemony over the ME.

Posted by: @29 dh | Nov 14 2017 21:16 utc | 69

I think people here - and the KSA for that matter too - need to know that attacking and invading Iran won't be at the same (lower) scale as attacking and invading Lebanon, Qatar, Syria and even Iraq. These countries are flat and a major part of their territories is desert. Their populations are not that great either - the largest is Iraq with about 35 million.

Iran on the other hand is mostly mountainous (especially in its west and south) and its population reached 81 million some time in October 2017. An attack on Iran from the west is going to need foot soldiers to be effective. Where will Israel, the US or the KSA stump up the armies needed to invade Iran? Using ISIS and al Qaida / Jabhat al Nusra failed.

If an invasion comes from the east, how will Afghanistan (chaotic?) and Pakistan be brought on board to allow their use of airspace for air attacks?

A third option would be to stage air and naval attacks from India. That might be plausible if India under Narendra Modi and the BJP is friendly towards Israel and the US.

Posted by: Jen | Nov 14 2017 21:43 utc | 70

A number of thoughts comes to mind.
1) Divide and conquer
2) The Enemy of my enemy is my friend
3) Do as I say, not as I do
4) You are either with us or with the terrorists
5) Birds of a Fascist feather flock together

As to the "not in my name" shirt and withdrawal from the machine, it won't happen.
Remember the analogy about the frog in the water that will start to boil? No frog would ever do that. It is humans who threw the frog into the pot and watched.
Karma can be a nasty bitch. It has transformed humanity into a frog and the masses will be boiled.
To implement change, people would have to turn off the propaganda hammering down on them from all sides. But that won't happen. People are programmed to believe the lies they are dished out. No de-programming - no change.
Americans and their Fascist alies will have to go through their own collapsing 4th Reich.
And of course: Support your troops. Sell everything and donate the money to the MIC. Because they will come for it anyways. Only in a Fascist country, warriors are elevated over any civil person. This morning at court: people congratulating a father because his son just joined the troops.

Reject anything the parasites in the legislative tell you. Like George Carlin said: "I never believe what the government tells me."
End of story.
Spend as much time as you can with your loved ones. The Motherearthfuckers are about to turn the heat on. And it is already way too hot here.

Posted by: nottheonly1 | Nov 14 2017 21:44 utc | 71

@44 Peaceful Prosperity

From the Sputink piece you linked to:

US President Donald Trump has said that heavy sanctions imposed on Russia should not become a barrier to future friendly cooperation between the two nations, adding that cordial international relations would be likely to help resolve the North Korean threat and many other global issues.

How noble and considerate of Trump. "Vlad, my friend, I know we are waging economic warfare on your people, surrounding your borders with nukes and want to take over and "regime change" your country. But, hey, never mind all that stuff and let us be friends! Then you can help us do to other sovereign nations what we are doing to you."

Touching, very touching It raises the question: What "many other global issues" is Trump trying to solve? Climate change, perhaps? Ending the war in Yemen? Rapprochement with Iran? Curbing corporate and Israeli influence in American elections and foreign policy?

Peaceful are not still holding a candle for this duplicitous shitbag, are you?

Trumpets are the new Obots.

Posted by: Temporarily Sane | Nov 14 2017 21:49 utc | 72

Just my 2 cents but it seems to me the real target has always been Russia, more specifically Gazprom, why not just take control of Qatar and their gas field which is also Irans gas field as well, which correct me if I'm wrong could be completely controlled/exploited from Qatar without anyone having to step foot into Iran, couple this with limited strikes on Irans gas infrastructure in the name of removing their ability to be "evildoers" and before you know it Aramaco, which now controls a third plus of the world's nat gas is listed on the NY exchange and it still only accepts dollars. Wonder what countries that pipeline would pass through...

Posted by: Joe | Nov 14 2017 21:55 utc | 73


What have the british installed wahabist medieval hole in the sand copulators ever really done for Palestine?

Posted by: Seby | Nov 14 2017 22:00 utc | 74

Trump has been busy planning a huge karaoke with his new buddy Duterte. Guns are on option, courtesy of the NRA

Posted by: Mina | Nov 14 2017 22:10 utc | 75

I am a new poster to this board. I've tried twice to post something and the message said it was posted successfully, but it is not visible in the comments section. Is there some mediator process that it has to go through first, or is there something else that I need to do? (I left the email and url boxes empty; could that be the issue?)

Posted by: Tacitus | Nov 14 2017 23:22 utc | 76

The way in which this plays out is almost pre-ordained.

There is no way that a formal, signed document will exist that states that when-you-shaft-Palestine then we-will-attack-Iran.

What will happen instead is that Trump will broker that "understanding" between Israel and Saudi Arabia. A nod and a wink, and maybe even a handshake.

But the Israelis will insist that the Saudis have to do that Palestine-shafting first, and in The Most Public Way Possible so that the House of Saud can't take it back. Trump will say that this is reasonable, and the dumb-ass Saudis will mull over it then say "OK, sure, if the Yanks vouch for you then so will we".

The Saudis will then dump on Abbas.
The USA will then heap congratulations on the Saudis.
The Israelis will shout Yipeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Palestinians will descend into a deep despair.

And then...... [sound of crickets chirping].

Saudi: Hey, when are you going to attack Iran?
Israel: We're working on it. Give us time.
USA: Hey, I thought we had an understanding!
Israel: We do, this takes a lot of planning.
Saudi: What gives, guys?
USA: When are you were going to attack Iran?
Israel: We changed our mind. Bite me.

Let's get real here: the Israelis have a track-record of "agreeing" to a quid-pro-quo, then immediately pocketing the "quid" while somehow, some way, never actually getting around to delivering on the "quo"

The Saudis will shaft the Palestinians.
The Israelis will then shaft the Saudis.
The Americans will fume (in private) but ultimately do nothing and say nothing.

And years later there will be an off-mike recording of Netanyahu boasting about how he f**ked over the Saudis, and gleefully explain that the reason why he could do that is because the Americans are at least as dumb-ass stoooooopid as, well, a Saudi Clown Prince.

I mean, haven't we seen this movie before?

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Nov 14 2017 23:30 utc | 77

tactus - it should go thru, unless you linked to the odd url that doesn't go thru - southfront is one of them going on memory..

Posted by: james | Nov 14 2017 23:31 utc | 78

Sorry if some one has mentioned this already, but Jerusalem belongs neither to the Palestinains or the Israelis. It belongs to Jordan and Jordan is it's designated protector just as the freaks in KSA are the protectors of Mecca and Medena. The NATO countries on orders of Israel have burred the Palestinian cause. But if the children running the US and KSA tried giving the third holiest site in Islam (and likely the most important heritage site in the world) to the Jews so they could blow it up to build a Jewsih temple on top of it ,the back lash among the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world would be immense. Not to mention basically righting off international law in it's entirety. China, Russia and the EU would never allow it.serious

It has been obvious for years that Bibi and the KSA have have been cooking this up but it wasn't till last year they had any one stupid enough in the White House to try and take a run at it. If you want total war in the Middle East this is how you acheave it. The outcome will be a Palestinian state. Whether there will be a Jewish one if this is tried is up for debate.

Posted by: BraveNewWorld | Nov 14 2017 23:34 utc | 79

Wonder what countries that pipeline would pass through...

Posted by: Joe | Nov 14, 2017 4:55:50 PM | 73

It's a source of not only bewilderment, but also amusement, that there are people so dumb/dishonest (delete as applicable) that after all we have seen in the last few years, even just what we have seen in the last few weeks, that still pretend/think/pretend-to-think that this has something to do with pipelines?

Seriously, would all you "It's the pipelines, stoopid!" gobshites kindly just stfu.

A dumber more gullible bunch of eejits would be hard to find

Posted by: Just Sayin' | Nov 14 2017 23:48 utc | 80

Posted by: Tacitus | Nov 14, 2017 6:22:47 PM

Typepad insists on a viable email address - not your real one just a viable one whose mail server will respond to a call. mailinatorDOTcom (remove the DOT & replace with . to visit) is one of many spam dodging sites which will enable a poster to post here, plus let you use it to sign up to all sorts of BBs forums etc. They have a rotating list of email server suggestions. otherwise joblo(or whatever) at gmail will do the trick most times.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 15 2017 0:06 utc | 81

Another plan to get the US to fight another war that benefits zionists, this time against Iran. I wonder who is in the role of Lord Balfour.
I like the idea of an independent religious Jerusalem city, I doubt either party will go for it. The same goes for an Israeli agreement for nuke parity with Saudis or a single open state for Palestinians. While many Palestinians want their own state and even some in Israel want this (including some Shin Bet officials) there are others who say it is too late due to the proliferation of settlements in West Bank. These others (like Miko Peled) say a single state as the only option left. It seems to be a very convoluted (Rube Goldberg?) solution to getting a united front to attack Iran and "solve" the Palestinian issue.

Posted by: Curtis | Nov 15 2017 0:26 utc | 82

@Just sayin, perhaps you could spell it out for me then, but if all you got is name calling maybe you should stfu, kindly that is

Posted by: Joe | Nov 15 2017 0:38 utc | 83

>>>> CarlD | Nov 14, 2017 1:36:09 PM | 56

Video evidence of tactical weapons used in Yemen and other conflicts:

I doubt it, they all look like large conventional explosions to me.

The ones in Ukraine are from a detonation of a large weapons dump while the Saudis managed to hit a rocket manufacturing plant in Yemen that resulted in a very large explosion.

Posted by: Ghostship | Nov 15 2017 0:45 utc | 84

Thanks for the link, CarlD. I think it entirely possible that 'tactical nukes" have been used. I would expect that at some point, a credible, government-tied group will report that these weapons have been used. This will serve to normalize their use in the future. People will feel that since they'd been used already, and we all survived, that using them again will not be so horrifying/dangerous.

More and more I'm thinking that humanity has reached the end of our rope, and we will have deserved it when the trapdoor finally springs.

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 15 2017 0:46 utc | 85

Mina @64. BBC is running that same "video game" story. In fact, on their Middle East News page earlier, they had both this and their "expose" of the US helping ISIL escape arrangement.

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 15 2017 0:57 utc | 86

and the big plan goes on:

get Jerusalem for the Vatican !!!

Posted by: anonimo | Nov 15 2017 1:11 utc | 87

@73 Joe

I hadn't even considered the aspect of that gas trading in dollars. Now there's a resource grab the US could really like.

I'm not actually at the point of thinking anything will happen, anywhere. There are simply no geopolitical advantages in any of the plays being mooted.

But there actually does seem at first glance to be some potentially cost-effective gain in plundering Qatar. Kind of wish no one had thought of it - I'd much rather see a cooperation develop between Iran and Qatar, the way it recently started to look like it might go.

As to your getting trolled, I will say that with what I've seen in the last few years, even with what I've seen in just the last few weeks, there's nothing I've ever encountered anywhere that says it's NOT the pipelines.

Posted by: Grieved | Nov 15 2017 1:42 utc | 88

RE: Daniel | Nov 14, 2017 7:46:39 PM | 85, CarlD | Nov 14, 2017 1:36:09 PM | 56

I agree with Ghostship, no nukes have been used. The thermal signature from a nuclear detonation is unmistakable, it is many, many orders of magnitude greater than produced by a conventional explosive. Not to mention the by-products of fission, which are always produced by a nuke and are always detectable.
You will know when a nuke is used, believe me.

Posted by: Perimetr | Nov 15 2017 2:36 utc | 89

Joe / Grieved
Best to discount nothing. Qatar gas the target? Quite possible. Pipelines for Qatar or in Joes theory, Saudi gas. Again possible.
Most depends on what Trump is behind the facade. The facade is the simple minded buffoon that makes a decision on what he has last seen on Fox news. What he has just pulled off with MBS...
My thoughts on Trump at the moment, what is real and not facade. He wants to return the US to the power is was post WWII and through the cold war era. Manufacturing power ect. The big thing, prevent China from overtaking US economicaly which would also mean overtaking the US in science tech and military. Hence the many meetings with Kissinger earlier, Kissinger meeting Putin ect.
Trump needs to seperate Russia and China. Russia is no threat to the US whereas economicaly China is the only threat the US faces (apart from itself).

Back to making America great again and gas. Saudi Arabia has oil (supposedly) and US has shale gas. Oil and gas are complementary to each oither rather than competitors. Gas prices are basicaly set by oil prices. The main competitors to US shale is Russian gas and Pars, both of which can be piped to where the gas is in demand. In my reading of Trump, which may not be right, Pars would have to be either US controlled/owned or unable to pipe gas.
The option there I guess is joint US Saudi control of pars.

All depends on what Trump is behind the facade.

Thoughts ??

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 15 2017 3:15 utc | 90

Perimetr @89

I would agree that it would be impossible to mistake a powerful hydrogen bomb for any sort of conventional bomb. That's not what is being proposed here, though.

Do you know about the "Davy Crocket" mini-nuke from the 1950s?

Those were even carried in backpacks by the 1950s version of Special Ops soldiers. Since then, fission-fusion hybrid, mini-hydrogen and neutron bombs have been made. As I'm sure you'd agree, military technology is always far beyond what the public is allowed to know.

Like today's B61-12, the Davy Crockets could be dialed to produce explosions of greatly varying power.

The Soviet Union actually developed nuclear bullets!

So, the range of even publicly known nuclear weapons is pretty great. Some of the explosions recorded in the past few years can be clearly seen as INCREASING in power as the explosion progresses. Though not impossible in some sort of thermobaric bomb, that is a signature of many nuclear bombs.

Posted by: Daniel | Nov 15 2017 3:27 utc | 91

Point 1 why would Israel give up its nukes?

Posted by: heath | Nov 15 2017 3:31 utc | 92

I don't buy this at face value. I suspect MBS used the threat of war on Lebanon as a distraction from his counter coup. The possibility of battle with Iran is a fear factor he exploits to stop a revolt against him.

The leaked plan and leaked Israeli wire to its embassies are both quite suspicious. Its possible the Israelis are helping MBS. It's just as possible that MBS' foes in Saudi, or the CIA, are leaking these things to embarrass MBS. All are in fact embarrassing to MBS. I don't know but everything about this is surreal. For all we know MBS' moves are just an aid to finish the counter coup and to drive up oil prices. Saudi needs cash. We should expect the very wealthy Saudi opposition to strike back in the media, and it's possible the intelligence community and state department support different sides here.

Posted by: Alaric | Nov 15 2017 3:36 utc | 93

To enable LNG, Kushner's army [US_I:SA] has been designed to colonize the Syria:Russian: Yemen:Qatar:Iran:Libya (SRYQIL) oil, gas competition, so that LNG can be port to port marketed. All eyes on LNG.

Posted by: LNG man |

Posted by: LNG man | Nov 15 2017 3:41 utc | 94

@92 "Point 1 why would Israel give up its nukes?"

They wouldn't.

The Israelis might be willing to discuss this - maybe - but only if those discussions are "decoupled" from the issue of the Saudis altering the 2003 Saudi Peace Initiative so that Israel gets everything it wants, while the only thing the Palestinians get is their marching orders.

The Israelis will then pocket that neutered Saudi Peace Initiative (in essence, it would become the Netanyahu Land Grab Initiative, with the Saudis in the role of stenographer) and then proceed to endlessly delay, deflect and derail any negotiations towards a Middle East Nuclear Free Zone.

Something for nothing, which MbS ending up holding that Big Ol' Bag Of Nothin'.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Nov 15 2017 3:47 utc | 95

LNG man | Nov 14, 2017 10:41:32 PM | 94

LNG port to port is not competitive with Russian piped gas. From what I can see, US needs to either ensure they have control of alternative piped gas, or try and shut down pipes so they can flog shale LNG.

Posted by: Peter AU 1 | Nov 15 2017 4:11 utc | 96

b's post here is articulate and cogent as ever and I cast no aspersion at him or fellow commenters. However, as far as I'm concerned the KSA-Israel drawing up these "accords" is all a pile of sabre-rattling and poseurism crap.

Anything touched by the KSA is a pile of B.S. e.g. the Qatar ultimatum. Anything said by Israel fits the purpose at the time if it varies with their expansionist/farengi code of conduct.

The only way I see any of this playing out is an interlocking web of extortion that compels the two weaker parties to conform to the will of the stronger, in my opinion Israel.

Who knows if Lebanon will cower under the threat but if the Iranian alliance bares its teeth, let's remember that their reach is likely global and likely already in place at key targets. The stupidity of launching a shooting war in the ME with Iran and Israel involved does not mean that someone will not dance the situation right up to the brink.

It's the Asian thrust we should consider, from China to Turkey via Russia. I would guess, and only guess, that Russia and China would most likely wait it out and pick up the pieces during ending credits, or become minimally involved only to prevent a breakout. Can't assume anything here.

Wouldn't it be interesting if the US/KSA/IZ trio throws everything into beating Iran only to have another player open a play to seize the Pacific? Pretty wild.

Posted by: Stumpy | Nov 15 2017 4:31 utc | 97

Posted by: Stumpy | Nov 14, 2017 11:31:52 PM |

I reckon you're correct Stumpy. Over the years there have been many "amerika will attack Iran" scares - all have passed by without major incident despite the concerns of MoA-ites that "anything could happen in the next two hours"
It is highly likely that eventually some greedy opportunist with a hat size about 4 times larger than his dick measurement will eventually have a crack at taking down Iran, but I don't reckon we're anywhere near that point yet.

As far as 'world peace' & justice for suffering indigenous people goes, today I'm much more concerned about events in Zimbabwe.
Hopefully the military is acting out in order to protect the socialist revolution from greedies & nepotists, and not using the occasion of President Mugabe's age disorders to subvert the revolution by aiding africacom and the world bank oecd mob to boost the amerikan empire's consumption of one of the few remaining independent sovereign entities still surviving on this old rock.

Whatever does happen in Zimbabwe over the next week, few will be paying much interest whilst corporate media distracts so many with tall tales of the dissolute instincts of poor people everywhere.

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 15 2017 5:40 utc | 98


Utter nonsense! Large scale conventional; exploding tightly stacked munitions in a large ammo dump by means of sympathetic detonation. Large quantities of explosives going off must create a mushroom cloud - this is gas dynamics. Afterburning in the rising cloud results from hot oxygen-deficient stythe mixing with air which in return helps sustaining the upward momentum of the plume.

Posted by: Hmpf | Nov 15 2017 7:01 utc | 99

Posted by: Debsisdead | Nov 15, 2017 12:40:03 AM | 98

Look, Mugabe is 93. Have you ever been around anyone that age? It is very likely that he is not in any power, but the people who wake him up.

According to German media, Mugabe's wife made him dismiss the vice chancellor who probably had been doing the real work.

So all the army might be doing is to prevent the family from taking over.

Posted by: somebody | Nov 15 2017 7:06 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.