Syrian War Report – December 6, 2017: Tiger Forces Reached Al-Bukamal

An assessment and the perspectives of Donald Trump

by Thierry Meyssan

It would be a serious error to judge President Trump by the criteria of the Washington ruling class, ignoring the History and the culture of the United States. It would also be an error to interpret his actions from the point of view of European thought. Indeed, his defence of the right to bear arms or the racist demonstrations in Charlottesville have nothing to with support for extremists, but exclusively the promotion of the Bill of Rights. Thierry Meyssan explains the train of thought that he represents, and draws up an assessment of his highly important economic, political and military realisations. He also questions the limits of US political thought and the risks of dismantling the « American Empire ».

During the Presidential electoral campaign, Donald Trump promised to respect the rules of the Republican Party. At the time, no-one believed in his capacity to succeed. However, he waged a campaign based on the historical foundations of the Party, long ago forgotten by its politicians, and he eliminated them all. Right up until the announcement of his victory, the opinion polls claimed he was losing, just as today, they claim that he will not be re-elected.

It is now a year since President Trump took office in the White House. It is becoming possible to discern his political ambitions, despite the destructive confrontation in the US between his partisans and his adversaries, detrimental to all.

The facts are all the more difficult to establish since Donald Trump himself masks his principal realisations behind a flood of contradictory declarations and Tweets, and his opposition presents him, via their own medias, as a lunatic.

Before anything else, the division of the United States has never been so pronounced since the Civil War. Both camps demonstrate great violence, and for certain of the protagonists, total dishonesty. In order to understand what is happening, we must first set aside the brutal exchanges between the two sides, and identify what each side represents.

The United States were created both by the « Pilgrim Fathers », in other words the Puritans of the Mayflower, whose arrival is celebrated during « Thanksgiving », together with a crowd of migrants from Northern Europe.

The former were no more than a tiny group, but they had a religious and political project. Their aim was to establish a « New Jerusalem », organised according to the Law of Moses, and to strive for purity. At the same time, they intended to pursue the confrontation between the English and Spanish Empires in the Americas. As for the latter, they sought to find fortune in a land they believed was empty, without inhabitants, without any constraint, and with no more than local government. As a whole, these two groups are described by sociologists as the White Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs).

When the Constitution was being drawn up, the « Founding Fathers » mostly represented the Puritans. Under the influence of Alexander Hamilton, they imagined an anti-democratic text which reproduced the system of the British monarchy, but transferred power from the gentry to the local elites, the governors. This text sparked fury among the North-European migrants, who had given their lives during the War of Independence. Rather than re-writing the Constitution and recognising popular sovereignty, a dozen amendments were added by James Madison, the result constituting the Bill of Rights. These additions guaranteed citizens the right to defend themselves in court against the « Reason of State ». Both of these texts remained valid for two centuries, and gave satisfaction to both groups.

On 13 September 2001, Congress adopted, in haste, an extremely voluminous anti-terrorist Code, the USA Patriot Act. This document, which had been prepared in secret for many years before the attacks on New York and Washington, suspended the Bill of Rights in all circumstances connected to terrorism. From then on, the United States of Republican George Bush Jr. (himself a direct descendant of one of the Puritans of the Mayflower) and Democrat Barack Obama, were governed exclusively according to modern Puritan principles (which now include multiculturalism, distinct rights for each community, and an implicit hierarchy between these communities).

Donald Trump presented himself as the candidate of the North Europeans, in other words, the non-Puritan WASPs. He based his electoral campaign on his promise to give them back their country, which had been confiscated by the Puritans and invaded by Hispanics who refused to integrate their culture. His slogan America First! must be understood as the restoring of the « American Dream », that of finding fortune, at once against the Puritan imperialist project and against the illusion of multiculturalism.

The defence of the Bill of Rights includes the right to demonstrate, including for extremist groups (1st amendment) and that of the citizens to bear arms in order to resist possible excesses of the Federal State (2nd amendment). It is therefore perfectly legitimate for President Trump to have supported the right to demonstrate for the racist groups in Charlottesville, and to have expressed his support for the National Rifle Association (NRA). This political philosophy may seem absurd to non-US citizens, but it nonetheless corresponds to the History and the culture of this country.

The two main powers of a US President are:

– the nomination of thousands of senior civil servants;

– the determination of military objectives.

But it so happens that Donald Trump has only a few dozen loyal supporters with whom to fill these thousands of posts, and the Pentagon already has its own strategic doctrine. Trump therefore has to ascertain the decisions which are capable of swinging the system, and concentrate on them.

Since his arrival at the White House, he has been acting effectively to

– develop the economy and inhibit finance;

– dismantle the « American Empire» and restore the Republic, which is to say General Interest;

– defend the identity of the WASPs, and expel Hispanics who refuse to integrate US culture.

So, Donald Trump has just nominated Jerome Powell at the head of the Federal Reserve Bank. For the first time, the President of this institution will not be an economist, but a lawyer. His function will be to put an end to monetarist policy and the rules which have been current since the defeat of the US in Vietnam and the end of the convertibility of the dollar into gold. He will have to create new rules which will put capital back in the service of production instead of speculation.

Donald Trump’s fiscal reform should eliminate all sorts of exonerations and cause company taxes to fall from 35% to 22%, even 20%. Experts are divided as to which social classes this change will benefit. The only certainty is that, when linked with Customs reform, it will cause many delocalised jobs to lose their cost-effectiveness and quickly lead to the repatriation of a number of industries.

On the international level, he has put a stop to the recruitment of new jihadists and the support that was provided to them by many States – the exceptions are still the United Kingdom, Qatar and Malaya, who continue this policy. However, he has not ended the implication of transnational companies and international senior civil servants in the organisation and financing of jihadism.

Rather than dissolve NATO, as he had initially envisaged, he has transformed it by imposing the abandon of the use of terrorism as a method of war, and forcing NATO to become itself an anti-terrorist alliance.

Donald Trump has also withdrawn the United States from the Transpacific Treaty which was designed to counter China. In a gesture of thanks, Beijing has considerably reduced its Customs costs, which demonstrates that it is possible to replace the previous antagonism between States with cooperation.

As for internal affairs, President Trump has nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, which is the instance charged with exploring the interpretation of the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. He is a magistrate well known for his studies on the original meaning of these texts, and as such, is capable of re-establishing the compromise at the heart of the creation of the United States.

In 1998, Igor Panarin, who was at that time one of the directors of the Russian secret services, predicted civil war and the partition of the United States into six distinct States by about 2010. However, the coup d’Etat of 11 September September 2001 pushed back the deadline. In 2012, journalist Colin Woodard revived Panarin’s data. He noticed that the mobility of US citizens had caused them to group together in eleven separate and co-existing cultural communities, where Afro-Americans did not form a community, but were both integrated and discriminated against in two of these eleven communities.

However, although this assessment is very satisfactory for the electors of President Trump, it is still too soon to know whether it will facilitate the integration of non-WASPs or, on the contrary, provoke their expulsion from the national community. According to the Mexican geopolitician Alfredo Jalife-Rahme, two thirds of the Hispanics in the US who do not speak English live in California, an old Mexican territory. It could be tempting for Donald Trump to solve this cultural and demographic problem by favouring the secession of this State – « Cal-Exit ». In this case, the White House would have to deal with the problems posed by the loss of the show business industry in Hollywood, the software in Silicon Valley and above all, the military base in San Diego. The operation led by the White House and its agencies against Hollywood during the Weinstein scandal seems to indicate that the process is already under way.

The secession of California could begin an ethnic dismantling of the United States until it retreats back to the initial territory of the 13 States which adopted the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights. In any case, this is the long-held hypothesis put forward by Russian geopolitician Igor Panarin.

Thierry Meyssan http://www.voltairenet.org/article198954.html

http://www.voltairenet.org/article197749.html

“THE ART OF WAR”

North Korea in the Great Nuclear Game

by Manlio Dinucci

For Manlio Dinucci, the North Korean Crisis is preventing us from seeing the wood from the trees. To appreciate the true extent of the crisis, we must not be blinkered and focus only on the fact that Pyongyang has the atomic bomb. We must open our eyes to three other facts: 1/ the Great Powers have unbelievable stocks of nuclear weapons; 2/another 35 states are on the point of acquiring them; and 3/confronted by the US strategy, states that possess nuclear weapons are better able to fend for themselves than the parasitic states that do not, where widows and orphans will be bred.

The political-media spotlights are directed at North Korea’s nuclear missile tests. Yet the general context in which these test are taking place is completely obscured. What is this context? An arms race that is gathering pace, that while it maintains a nuclear arsenal capable of wiping out the human race from the face of the Earth, points its heads and high tech carriers that are becoming increasingly sophisticated.

In 2017, the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) considers that North Korea has “fissile material with the potential to produce 10-20 nuclear heads, but there is no evidence available that it has made operational nuclear heads that can be transported by ballistic missiles”. Still going by what the FAS reports, the U.S. has 6,800 nuclear heads of which 1,650 are strategic and 150 are non-strategic, poised for immediate launch. Including the French and British heads (300 and 215 respectively), Nato nuclear forces have 7,315 nuclear heads, of which 2,200 are ready for launch, compared with 7,000 Russian nuclear heads of which 1,950 are ready for launch. Still, going by what the FAS thinks, around 550 US, French and British heads ready for launch, are stationed in Europe in the closest proximity to Russian territory. The analogy would be if Russia had lined up in Mexico a hundred nuclear heads pointed at the U.S. Taking account of the Chinese bombs (270), Pakistani bombs (120-130), Indian bombs (110-120) and Israeli bombs (80), the total number of nuclear heads is estimated at about 15,000. Of course these are approximate figures, almost certainly default. And the race to nuclear weapons continues while the nuclear heads and nuclear carriers are constantly being updated.

Leading the pack is the United States which is constantly running tests on Minuteman III, its intercontinental ballistic missiles and is prepared to replace them with new missiles (the cost of which is estimated at 85 billion dollars). In 2015, Congress approved a plan (the cost of which is estimated at around 1,000 billion) to fortify its nuclear forces with another 12 submarines for attack (each 7 billion), each armed with 200 nuclear heads, and other strategic bombers (550 million each), each armed with 20 nuclear heads. This is the backdrop for replacing the US nuclear bombs B61, stationed in Italy and other European countries, with the new B61-12, weapons for a first strike. The nuclear forces have also been strengthened by the “anti-missile shield” to neutralize enemy reprisal, such as those lined up by the US in Europe against Russia and in South Korea, not against North Korea but in actual fact, against China.

Russia and China are speeding up the modernization of their nuclear forces so that they do not fall behind. 2018 will see Russia lining up a new intercontinental ballistic missile, the Sarmat, with an 18,000 km range, capable of transporting 10-15 nuclear heads that, entering the atmosphere at a hypersonic speed (more than 10 times the speed of sound), manoeuvre so as to dodge the interceptive missiles piercing the “shield”.

In such a situation, where a closed circle of states maintains an oligopoly over nuclear weapons, where the state that possesses them threatens the state that does not have them, it is increasingly probable that other states will seek to obtain them for themselves … mission accomplished. In addition to the nine states that already have nuclear weapons, there are around another 35 states with the capability to build them.

And yet the newspapers and the news pay no heed to this; they set off the alarm on North Korea, condemned as the exclusive source for the nuclear threat. Also left out of consideration is the lesson that in Pyongyang they say they have learnt: Gaddafi – they recall – had totally renounced every kind of nuclear programme, allowing CIA inspection on Libyan territory. However, this did not save him when the USA and Nato decided to destroy the Libyan State. And so they reason in Pyongyang that if this state had had nuclear weapons, no one would have had the courage to attack it. Such a conclusion can also be extracted from other examples: in the present global climate, it is better to have nuclear weapons than not to have them.

Meanwhile on the basis of this dangerous logic, the probability of nuclear proliferation increases. The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, adopted by the vast majority of the United Nations last July, is ignored by all nuclear powers, by Nato members (Italy included) and by their principal partners (Ukraine, Japan and Australia). Fundamentally, there is a large mobilization for insisting that our country is also a party to the Treaty on the Prohibition on Nuclear Weapons and therefore must remove from its territory the U.S. bombs lined up there. The presence of these bombs also violates the Non-Proliferation Treaty which Italy has already ratified. If you lack a political conscience, then at the very least, your basic survival instinct should be triggered.

Manlio Dinucci

Lol, where does this saying come from?

Tell bibi that this time take care because Iran is not a lonely country. Second Iran is not a tiny country like Israhell. Iran is a name of power. If Iran just do pee towards Israhell then whole Israhell will sink in the Mediterranean sea. Israhell will just send four five jets towards Iran believe me after 10mins there will be no Israhell in Palestine. Irani missiles are not dummy. These are fully functional missiles. These missiles are not just made for defence parades but for defence of Irani nation against American and Israhelli evils. Israhelli air defence system will counter 10 or 100 missiles but they cannot counter 10,000 missiles that come towards Israhell.

earlier you pastted, trump will be better president then obama :P

Once from the north after clearing it of your buddies, you had a point?

Yasser Arafat; he is dead and has long rotted … ignore the sod and his words.

Why should the zionist occupation be legitimated? These fascist pigs should be kicked out, bags and baggage like they were in Rhodesia and South Africa.