It Would Have Been Hilarious, If Not For...

First, Macron today started his elaborate verbal dance. Now, drum roll... drum roll and still rolling and drumming (take a seat)--now UK is suddenly ready to do its due diligence. I kid you not. Theresa May suddenly needs "more evidence" of chemical "attack" in Douma. A rather dramatic turnaround for a government which just weeks ago accused Russia of most likely food-related (if any at all) "poisoning" of Skripals by deadly military-grade chemical "weapon". As Times reports:

Theresa May told President Trump yesterday that Britain would need more evidence of a suspected chemical attack by the Assad regime before joining a military strike against Syria.

Where this world is coming to? But reality is very simple--Russia is not backing down, at least I sense so far no indication of that, and that, in case of Trump giving an order to attack Damascus or Khmeimim (or Tartus), may mean a very simple initial combat combination--Russia will retaliate by sinking first NON-US asset, such as Royal Navy or Marine Nationale's destroyer or whatever those mighty lap dogs will contribute to US military "effort" in "taming" Russia. Let US sort it out after that. Trump, obviously, has no idea what is he dealing with, nor does his immediate circle, populated mostly by draft-dodgers such as Bolton or psychotic former waste management company CFO Haley. Pompeo? I don't know--the guy is, evidently, a classic case of a yes-man and boss' pleaser. Now, this bunch ran themselves, due to Trump's propensity for mindless grandiose gestures and statements, into the strategic dead-end. 

They cannot extricate themselves from this dead-end without losing face or without starting WW III, but then it wouldn't matter anyway. That is unless Moscow accommodates a bare face saving minimum for Trump, who already proved that he is not fit to be the president of the nuclear state, albeit present and former Trumpsters may find solace in the fact that nobody in Washington is. So, here we are with US NATO allies getting a little bit wobbly, since they begin to understand that they may get their asses burned, literally, and stones rearranged already in their own nations just because they bought their own BS and because the guy in the White House (and his "team") thinks he is a great statesman and, probably, is worthy of generalissimo rank. Of course, we can always count in all this pathetic spectacle on Theresa May as scripted doubts-initiator who will take the fall but will, in a sacrifice for the allied "cause", "make" Trump to back down. If that is the case, then there is especially no reason for Putin to have any meeting with these people. 

Macron today, of course, specifically stated that, no matter what, his visit to Moscow is absolutely on and he is coming. That is in the breaks between him assuring Moscow that no "regime's allies" will be targeted or harmed. Hey, we get the script--it is written by amateurs and looks pathetic but the game is on. Nobody made Trump to base his crucial national security global decisions on FOX News reports and twits by deranged US "journos", nobody made UK to stage a moronic spectacle with Skripals. This was and is all of purely domestic sheer idiotic making--so, if Trump is really hell-bent on seeing a REAL war coming and then escalating it to possibly nuclear exchange (can you imagine how real estate prices will drop in Foggy Bottom), he surely qualifies for that. The rest? I think that the guy is simply dangerous and is unfit--he does think that this all is a show-business. I also have a feeling that he is very nervous now because it only now may begin to dawn on him that he may have stepped into a rather serious and stinky trouble. So, here we are, with principled and international law observant UK asking for (let me go, please...) proper investigation in what is a classic false flag by, most likely, Israel, Saudi Arabia and, UK? Is war between Russia and US possible? Absolutely! How probable? Well, I wish I knew what is going on between Russian and American militaries through their channels. I know some in Pentagon are desperate for real fight, after all adrenaline from bombing helpless incompetent Arab militaries or weddings in Afghanistan wears off faster and faster.  Like that proverbial Jeanna, who breaks the clock... Hey, at least Aria song's Jeanna was an honest hard working prostitute--a rather honorable line of work all things considered today. 

Haven't We All Been Through This Before?

Of course we were. This time, however, it may end up really badly and there is a reason Russia deployed newly upgraded Il-38 N with Novella ASW suite to Khmeimim. The pattern is well established: US financed and supported jihadists, well, terrorists, let's drop any pretense here, set up Skripal-type false flag provocation and indignant democratic and humanist USA attacks--this is MO. DJT, certainly, is ready to withdraw from Syria... wait, what? Ah, here it is--also a pattern.

Trump calls out Putin for backing 'Animal Assad' in Syria

You see, it is Putin who supports "animals" in accordance to POTUS, not the United States which has a "stellar" record of supporting Islamic terrorism. But what do we know, really. Reality, of course, is much simpler than some "chemical attack" by desperate "democratic" terrorists in remaining pockets at Ghuta and dawning realization in Pentagon that victory in Syria which has "made in Russia" labels all over it is simply unacceptable for the nation which thinks itself "indispensable" and "exceptional", especially in military field. Obviously that is one of the reasons US generals who are good only at blowing shit up with impunity are so desperate to try Russia. They may yet get their chance. After all, according to POTUS Russia is directly responsible for the latest chemical attack.

But that also puts the issue of this much talked about summit between Putin and Trump in prospective--there is no need for one, since it will be Putin's waste of time and, usually, there is no point negotiating with people who constantly lie, cheat, behave themselves as hysterical maidens and who, certainly, have no idea, top bottom in US establishment, what is the nature of military power and of its application. In other words, the US is not agreement-worthy, no matter who occupies the White House, even if it is reincarnation of  Gandhi. Judging by the published two days ago photos by Russia's Defense Ministry of Raqqa, which is simply flattened by so called anti-ISIS coalition the result is always the same for anyone who dares to disagree. So, the US is getting ready to attack Syria. Russia is getting ready to repulse it. The lines have been drawn.

 

Of Couse It Is, Of Course It Is...

Washington is readying another false flag operation with "chemical weapons". In fact, it announced it two days ago, basically giving its terrorist clients in Syria a green light to stage a "Assad's regime attack" on innocent people. Obviously, no evidence, as usual, will be presented. As RT reports:

The US government failed to provide any further details or proof of such claims, while the State Department’s spokesperson, Heather Nauert, said it was “an intelligence matter.”

Of course it is "intelligence matter", of course it is, supporting Al Qaeda is also "intelligence" (or rather lack thereof) matter. Whatever floats the boat of Washington's warmongers any particular day is "intelligence" matter. Evidence of Russian meddling with US elections? Nope--intelligence matter. Evidence of Assad using chemical weapons? No way--also "intelligence" matter, no matter that is seems more like a fecal one, but no worry--this will stick too. 

The actual insanity in D.C. today is off the chart, it is, in fact, pass 11 and by a lot. D.C. is in a full runaway train mode now and where it is going to crush is anybody's guess, but it will crush. I seldom refer to The National Interest as a source of any serious analysis but at least Nicholas Gvosdev, far from being original in his thought, at least asks some good questions anyone with a half brain should ask:

What does the president want to see happen in Syria? And what price is he willing to pay to achieve it? And what set of circumstances, even if not optimal, is tolerable? Six months into the new administration, we don’t have a clear or consistent answer.

Meanwhile, Iran, Syria and Russia are moving ahead with the third stage of their operation. If the success of that offensive directly and negatively impacts U.S. interests, we seem to have neither the diplomatic leverage to halt it, but haven’t made clear the extent to which we will commit to deter it. Out of that continued uncertainty runs the risk of an accident, the consequences of which no one seems prepared for.

I have news for Gvosdev:  

1. US is doing Israel's (and Saudi) bidding in Syria;

2. Gvosdev's questions while making sense for a normal national government are not applicable for current day US whose power structure is either compromised, sabotaged or paralyzed--all from the inside--and can not be viewed as a rational or cohesive player;   

3. It was always about appearances. US, short of WW III (in which everyone loses), lost in Syria and US doesn't like to lose, especially against the background of those inferior Russkies who turned the whole war in Syria around. 

4. Bar some US European vassals, no serious power in the world views US anymore as a treaty worthy party.   

And, in the end, the concept with which Gvosdev, evidently, is not well acquainted, that is of international law--the US is aggressor in Syria. Moreover, apart from that, US supported there the most heinous jihad forces, which make Gvosdev's appeals to a basic strategic questionnaire a pretentious attempt at finding a real statesmanship where there was and is none for quite a while.  But the most important question still remains unanswered: and what is this proverbial US "national interest" which could be "impacted" by R+6 offensive? Want to know the answer? Don't hold your breath--it is all "intelligence matter".