I’ve done a loosish summary/transcript of an interview that Alastair Crooke did with Dimitri Simes, Jr. just two days or so ago. The interview reprises some basic Crooke themes—the divided nature of Israeli society and politics—but it goes further. Some of Crooke’s contentions may even take readers by surprise. So, I’ll preface this transcript with information about Crooke from Wikipedia. You’ll see that Crook, a 30 year MI6 agent, has had vast experience in the Middle East and is well positioned to provide an informed opinion.
It's quite mind-boggling what is happening in Gaza right now. A million Palestinians already evacuating from the north of the strip. Where are they going to? What happens to their land when it is empty? I can't answer the first question, but suspect I know the answer to the second one. As someone memed about the vax effects, it's beginning to look a lot like genocide.
Russia is responding to provocations in Ukraine, claiming that US policy to expand NATO and arm Ukraine is an existential threat.
Hamas is responding to provocations in Gaza, claiming that Israeli policy to expand Israel into the settlements and Palestinian territories is an existential threat.
Many observers perceive the Russian and Palestinian responses as risking WWIII and/or nuclear war.
Who is behind the US and Israeli policies which Russia and Hamas perceive as existential threats?
Informative and enlightening posts Mark. And in spite of years of diplomatic activity with Ross working behind the scenes, from GHWB down through Clinton and Obama, it’s come to this tragic conflagration. Putin says we just don’t listen: we come to the table with a pre-crafted solution and impose it on the parties at loggerheads. No wonder “peace” fails us. For years now, we haven’t even practiced diplomacy, feeling certain the world was our oyster and we could stride the globe at our pleasure. And now, of course, we’ve been toxic to Ukraine, because Nato! and the Neocon thrust to destabilize and now, it is evident, deceive Ukraine into thinking it can win a war against Russia. We’ve let matters slide even further with Israel - here Crooke’s comments are particularly illuminating. The Palestinian question festers still, inside an Israeli society similarly divided and seemingly engaged in a cold civil war. Who was it who said you can only make peace with your enemies? But then, do we want peace?
Just as an addendum, Mercouris delves into Putin’s offer to Israel of Russian mediation, delivered in an address in Tashkent (I think) - Putin says the Americans have failed to deliver and it would be a historic mistake, along the lines of the siege of Leningrad (a/k/a St Petersburg, Putin’s birthplace) to proceed with a similar siege of Gaza. Mercouris at his best: 24 min mark onward…
I can imagine Biden, the guy who added foreign policy gravitas to the Obama ticket in 2008, speaking to this moment by alluding to the siege of Scranton by the Cornpeople.
1. Israel going into Gaza rhymes historically with the Austro-Hungarian punitive expedition into Serbia, summer of 1914, which sparked World War One. (With a diplomatic 'blank check' of support from their ally Germany. Does Israel have a 'blank check' from the USA? It would seem so.) Europeans of the beginning of the 20th century famously (and fatuously) believed that there would never be another general war among the European nations. They actually thought of the machine gun and barbed wire as existing only for the purposes of 'keeping order in the colonial territories'. Contemporary military leaders in the USA and other western countries have a hubristic confidence in their weapons and doctrine, which also reminds me of the European generals and admirals before WW1.
2. The existence and story of the al-Aqsa masjid is based on selective interpretation of the relevant passage in the Qur'an, and not a word for word translation. The Umayyid Caliphs decided to interpret "the farthest place of worship" as meaning Jerusalem, instead of Heaven, in order to have a justification for claiming a religious reason to seize and occupy Jerusalem. They were thinking in geopolitical terms, and they (and their deceased prophet) already had a grudge against the Jews. I cannot think of another religion which lays claim to another religion's holy city. (I don't have a dog in the fight, I don't care per se, but I have made a study of these types of things. Not my circus, not my monkeys, I like to watch the clowns.)
3. I advise everyone to cast off the modern idea that Jerusalem as a religious site can be shared by three separate religions. These three religions have fundamental disagreements baked into them. I suggest one realizes that there are other ways to think, that one does not have to think in the way that one's society typically does. In ancient times a conquering army would quite often enter the losing city's holy temple, and remove the vanquished enemy's 'gods' and take them (the statues or objects of worship) back to their city-state. Some of this was collection of trophies, but some of the thinking was that the defeated people's 'gods' were taken hostage. Our Roman general, Pompey Magnus, took Jerusalem (63 BCE) and went into the Jews' temple and strode right on into the 'holy of holies,' full of curiosity and probably hoping to acquire something that would look nice in his atrium. He was amazed to learn that there was nothing there except some scrolls. If he had thought it would benefit Roman administration of the region, he would have destroyed the temple, as another Roman general later did in 79 CE. Remember that Rome ultimately decided, right or wrong, to destroy Carthage. For Cato the Elder, it was a matter of geopolitics, certainly to wipe out our strongest trading rival, but even more so, it was a matter of eradicating a society that saw things very differently than we Romans did, and worshipped gods that disgusted us, in ways that abhorred us. My point is that you may want to read Herodotus and realize that the Old Ways of thinking are not dead, and that your adversary may be thinking like a Visigoth, or a Mongol, or a Caesar, and not like a Milley.
4. The USA and the UN and other modern entities think in terms of global economics and their diplomatic efforts are generally in support of the sort of economics and trade established in Bretton Woods after WW2. The diplomats and economists and technocrats are not able to understand what they are up against in the 'Middle East.' Very few of them have a solid religious faith or practice, and if they do, it tends to bias them with regard to Israel, Palestine, and Islam. It seems that modern military professionals are also unable to understand what they are dealing with either, probably because they are nearly all secular professionals, or they aspire to go through the revolving door to the corporate world and get rich. They are getting their Tickets Punched, and they don't understand, nor do they try, to understand a religious perspective which believes that is a matter more important than Life or Death, e.g., to possess something like the 'Holy Land' or the 'Temple Mount'. If the professional leadership of the West understood this perspective, they might have done something to prevent or shape developments which are uniting Shia and Sunni Islam's greatest powers for the first time since...one of the Caliphates? The Ottoman Empire?
"The diplomats and economists and technocrats are not able to understand what they are up against in the 'Middle East.' Very few of them have a solid religious faith or practice, and if they do, it tends to bias them with regard to Israel, Palestine, and Islam. It seems that modern military professionals are also unable to understand what they are dealing with either, probably because they are nearly all secular professionals, or they aspire to go through the revolving door to the corporate world and get rich."
Alastair Crooke makes a similar point in his recent video discussion with Dmitri Simes Jr. I would extend the point to include Russia and China...and, frankly, the balance of the non-Western world. Nor is the dissonance merely religious, it is cultural, and as Vladimir Putin recently said, "civilizational". And because our current policy is to enforce our hegemonistic impulses militarily, we are placing the peoples of the world at great risk.
Crooke has been making this point for quite some time, no doubt based on his experience. From listening to him in the past I believe he does have a religious grounding. The problem that he calls lack of empathy is what I call the ideological mindset, which has beset the West since the late Middle Ages. In its origins it's Platonic. It arises from viewing the real world as no more than a set of ideas to be manipulated. That includes human beings. This has become second nature in the West and leads to lack of empathy. But it is also the mindset behind many other world views--the West is far from alone in this regard. Hamas and fundamentalist Zionism are examples among many. I talk about this extensively in my pre-2018 posting.
Well, a lot of us have been making this point for quite some time. :-)
As for me, a specific turning point was George W Bush's inaugural address in 2005 where he said, "... we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. ... Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time. So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world."
I was in mid-career, busy with job and kids, and little interested in politics at the time. But something struck me in that speech that I found deeply troubling, and I've never forgotten it. I was surprised that it would be our policy to affirmatively support regime change... "in every nation and culture..." It didn't seem like the United States I thought I knew and understood.
Yeah, that's such a enigma to me: "...the United States I thought I knew and understood..." I am an ardent James Baldwin fan and his description of the United States are the raw, objective, harsh, painful, etc. facts. It seems that many decades after all his writing and speeching and death, it is finally coming full circle: the end of the US dynasty that has been decades in the making. I'd say Thank God and lets finally get a full horrific view of what the US is about, and then lets decide to give peace a chance!
To perhaps excuse the military strategists, they have matured in a residually Christian culture which carries forward the idea that “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” Christians haven't had a must-not-be-defiled holy site... ever. Not even Rome, then or now.
Would it be fair to say that our faith teaches us that the second Temple was destroyed according to God's will, and there is nothing in our understanding of our duty to God that requires us to help build a third Temple? Likewise, our faith teaches us to reject absolute claims on holy sites, let alone dividing the physical world between dar-al-Islam and dar-al-Harb?
We are to not deny Christ; there is nothing in our scripture about denying entry to a particular physical location in this City of Man, outside of protecting the innocent.
Obviously our Deep State is in a state of deep alarm. Macgregor was saying we really, really don't want a big war. This may be part of a bid to get everyone to de-escalate. I hope.
Will an alliance between a great power (US) and a small nation, Israel (with nuclear weapons) once again draw the great powers into a global cataclysm? President Biden has it under control.
The Mizrahi seem to have the upper hand these days: The "Settlers" are already skirmishing with the Fatah/Sunni bunch in the West Bank. Israel could be facing a three-front war--Gaza to the west, Lebanon (Hezbollah) to the north and, of course, the West Bank to the east.
Reportedly, Israel is running low (as is the US) on weaponry and are having to scrounge up stuff fom here and there. HMmm....kinda like that beleagured entity on the Black Sea.
It seems to me that the war developing between Israel and Palestine today is simply the war that would have happened in 1948, except the Palestinians were in no position (in terms of organized military strength) to fight back. Now they are.
I also believe the Israelis and most of the West are over-estimating the strength of the IDF versus these militia armies. Yes, the Israelis will have a big advantage in the air, but I bet Hezbollah probably has some Russian air defense systems by this point in time- that could be a real surprise to everyone.
Will the US be able to bluff Hezbollah into staying on the sidelines or will the bluff the called. And is it a bluff or not? We live in interesting times.
Ground fighting in MOUT ( military operation on urban terrain) terrain tends to minimize advantages. IDF will suffer greatly if they attack Gaza all out. Friends of mine fought in Fallujah. All the skill in the world doesn’t mean as much.
My belief is that the air wing of the IDF is probably about the most professional. What I've read re Hezbollah's anti-air capabilities--and this could be dated--is that it's good enough to force Israeli planes to fly at higher altitudes and/or greater distances from their targets than they would prefer. So it's something that the IDF has to take into account and it does affect their tactics. At a minimum. That's the fixed wing aspect. With helicopters it could be more dangerous.
That's what I've been wondering. Hamas had to have some idea of the reaction that they would provoke. It's obvious that Hamas has had a great deal of help and resources from outside entities. Hamas may well have a larger, unexpectedly well constructed plan for dealing with the result of their original provocation going forward. Step B, so to speak. Cocksure Israel, long used to dealing with a historically shortsighted Hamas, may not at all understand what they are marching into. Kind of like they didn't see what was coming.
Great point. Provoke and ambush. Draw IDF in and when they are heavily engaged Hezbollah, radicals from Syria, etc. attack. Multi-front war. Hamas pulls the IDF into the urban environment where their advantages are minimized and perhaps it is a plain infantry fight that could be prolonged and costly. Drain their manpower, equipment, ammunition, and morale. If the attack into Israel was sophisticated and required a lot of training and preparation they could very well have the same in terms of defense waiting for the IDF. A repeat of the Ukrainians battering themselves to pieces against the Russian defenses? How much damage can the IDF absorb and still be ready for other attacks from multiple fronts? Of course if we have two carrier air wings in the Eastern Med and at least one in the Indian Ocean then perhaps that will give pause to anyone moving large formations of troops toward Israel. But then how vulnerable are the carriers?
For Hamas it was now or never. With the West Bank settlers on the rampage, no serious peace talks in sight, and no help from their Arab "brothers", they probably realised that there won't be a Palestinian element in Israel within 20 years. Nothing much to lose.
Yeah, I don't get it why Hamas was the chosen one on behalf of the Muslim/Arab world to spark a reaction from Israel based on transitioning the Mosque to a Temple. What does Hamas get out of it? Nothing good so far. Where's the rest of the Muslim/Arab world ready and willing to bail them out? Hezbollah? C'mon man. Gotta be more than that.
There was a theory going around this morning- a rumor perhaps- that Hamas expected to be battling the IDF and other security forces and never expected to face so little armed opposition when they broke through the security fences, and then got carried away in barbarity.
Ashkenazi Is more Labor, and is out of power. They are seen as naive on their views of the Palestinians by the majority now.
Col. Tom Kratman had a similar comment (if I remember correctly) on the Israeli military capabilities. He feels they are over rated, since they only bested 3rd rate armies (Arab). And the Israeli heavy use of reserves reduces their capabilities, due to training, verses professional / full time soldiers.
Russians make up 15% of the Israeli population now.
Ultra orthodox is another faction, I’ve no idea how they figure into Israeli politics. Seem Ashkenazi ethnically.
Swag:
Most kid’s families that were attending the peace rave were richer, more liberal. Their targeting is having a huge impact due to friends and families of the victims and survivors.
Part of the Israel government is trying to downplay the Hamas atrocities. They are afraid of the impact on public opinion. I’ve no idea on the politics behind this inside the government. Who benefits?
Crooke has better connections with Ashkenazi in Israel, and his writing reflects that.
the "D" in IDF does not stand for offensive last I remember. they always call up "reserves" in times like these. Military training is an obligation for all based on their age.
I really like your writing! A huge thank you for links to the events and historical figures and background that I had very little or no knowledge of. I look forward to reading more.
with an election 13 months away I can't imagine Zhou would want to put the US in a role to spark WW3. Zhou' administration passivity lives on IMO. Look at Jake the snakes' Sullivan's hubris driven Mideast comments on September 29th.
I wonder...Everybody is saying that Biden won't risk a Middle Eastern War in the run up to 2024 elections. But why not? With the right spin, why can't the neocons and MSM persuade the low-info American public that it is our patriotic duty to defeat the new Axis of Evil?
If Biden were in command of his role that might be so, but I suspect that there is rather a set of people with their own aims and without the constraints which aiming at reelection places on one. And I imagine some of these are not primarily devoted to duty to a 2nd term for Biden in part, or, they may think the election is in the bag anyway.
You are wrong, the most dangerous religion are the radical secular progressives who want to eradicate the vast majority and no religion be spared. These are the aspirant gods who will usher in OWG and the transhuman future.
It's quite mind-boggling what is happening in Gaza right now. A million Palestinians already evacuating from the north of the strip. Where are they going to? What happens to their land when it is empty? I can't answer the first question, but suspect I know the answer to the second one. As someone memed about the vax effects, it's beginning to look a lot like genocide.
I'm curious...
Russia is responding to provocations in Ukraine, claiming that US policy to expand NATO and arm Ukraine is an existential threat.
Hamas is responding to provocations in Gaza, claiming that Israeli policy to expand Israel into the settlements and Palestinian territories is an existential threat.
Many observers perceive the Russian and Palestinian responses as risking WWIII and/or nuclear war.
Who is behind the US and Israeli policies which Russia and Hamas perceive as existential threats?
Is there a common denominator?
You do know about curiosity, don't you?
Death wish?
Joking. Of course.
Informative and enlightening posts Mark. And in spite of years of diplomatic activity with Ross working behind the scenes, from GHWB down through Clinton and Obama, it’s come to this tragic conflagration. Putin says we just don’t listen: we come to the table with a pre-crafted solution and impose it on the parties at loggerheads. No wonder “peace” fails us. For years now, we haven’t even practiced diplomacy, feeling certain the world was our oyster and we could stride the globe at our pleasure. And now, of course, we’ve been toxic to Ukraine, because Nato! and the Neocon thrust to destabilize and now, it is evident, deceive Ukraine into thinking it can win a war against Russia. We’ve let matters slide even further with Israel - here Crooke’s comments are particularly illuminating. The Palestinian question festers still, inside an Israeli society similarly divided and seemingly engaged in a cold civil war. Who was it who said you can only make peace with your enemies? But then, do we want peace?
Just as an addendum, Mercouris delves into Putin’s offer to Israel of Russian mediation, delivered in an address in Tashkent (I think) - Putin says the Americans have failed to deliver and it would be a historic mistake, along the lines of the siege of Leningrad (a/k/a St Petersburg, Putin’s birthplace) to proceed with a similar siege of Gaza. Mercouris at his best: 24 min mark onward…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4wSoEsMJo6A&list=UUwGpHa6rMLjSSCBlckm5khw&index=1&pp=iAQB
I can imagine Biden, the guy who added foreign policy gravitas to the Obama ticket in 2008, speaking to this moment by alluding to the siege of Scranton by the Cornpeople.
Apparently 60 Min still gives him airtime for that!
1. Israel going into Gaza rhymes historically with the Austro-Hungarian punitive expedition into Serbia, summer of 1914, which sparked World War One. (With a diplomatic 'blank check' of support from their ally Germany. Does Israel have a 'blank check' from the USA? It would seem so.) Europeans of the beginning of the 20th century famously (and fatuously) believed that there would never be another general war among the European nations. They actually thought of the machine gun and barbed wire as existing only for the purposes of 'keeping order in the colonial territories'. Contemporary military leaders in the USA and other western countries have a hubristic confidence in their weapons and doctrine, which also reminds me of the European generals and admirals before WW1.
2. The existence and story of the al-Aqsa masjid is based on selective interpretation of the relevant passage in the Qur'an, and not a word for word translation. The Umayyid Caliphs decided to interpret "the farthest place of worship" as meaning Jerusalem, instead of Heaven, in order to have a justification for claiming a religious reason to seize and occupy Jerusalem. They were thinking in geopolitical terms, and they (and their deceased prophet) already had a grudge against the Jews. I cannot think of another religion which lays claim to another religion's holy city. (I don't have a dog in the fight, I don't care per se, but I have made a study of these types of things. Not my circus, not my monkeys, I like to watch the clowns.)
3. I advise everyone to cast off the modern idea that Jerusalem as a religious site can be shared by three separate religions. These three religions have fundamental disagreements baked into them. I suggest one realizes that there are other ways to think, that one does not have to think in the way that one's society typically does. In ancient times a conquering army would quite often enter the losing city's holy temple, and remove the vanquished enemy's 'gods' and take them (the statues or objects of worship) back to their city-state. Some of this was collection of trophies, but some of the thinking was that the defeated people's 'gods' were taken hostage. Our Roman general, Pompey Magnus, took Jerusalem (63 BCE) and went into the Jews' temple and strode right on into the 'holy of holies,' full of curiosity and probably hoping to acquire something that would look nice in his atrium. He was amazed to learn that there was nothing there except some scrolls. If he had thought it would benefit Roman administration of the region, he would have destroyed the temple, as another Roman general later did in 79 CE. Remember that Rome ultimately decided, right or wrong, to destroy Carthage. For Cato the Elder, it was a matter of geopolitics, certainly to wipe out our strongest trading rival, but even more so, it was a matter of eradicating a society that saw things very differently than we Romans did, and worshipped gods that disgusted us, in ways that abhorred us. My point is that you may want to read Herodotus and realize that the Old Ways of thinking are not dead, and that your adversary may be thinking like a Visigoth, or a Mongol, or a Caesar, and not like a Milley.
4. The USA and the UN and other modern entities think in terms of global economics and their diplomatic efforts are generally in support of the sort of economics and trade established in Bretton Woods after WW2. The diplomats and economists and technocrats are not able to understand what they are up against in the 'Middle East.' Very few of them have a solid religious faith or practice, and if they do, it tends to bias them with regard to Israel, Palestine, and Islam. It seems that modern military professionals are also unable to understand what they are dealing with either, probably because they are nearly all secular professionals, or they aspire to go through the revolving door to the corporate world and get rich. They are getting their Tickets Punched, and they don't understand, nor do they try, to understand a religious perspective which believes that is a matter more important than Life or Death, e.g., to possess something like the 'Holy Land' or the 'Temple Mount'. If the professional leadership of the West understood this perspective, they might have done something to prevent or shape developments which are uniting Shia and Sunni Islam's greatest powers for the first time since...one of the Caliphates? The Ottoman Empire?
"The diplomats and economists and technocrats are not able to understand what they are up against in the 'Middle East.' Very few of them have a solid religious faith or practice, and if they do, it tends to bias them with regard to Israel, Palestine, and Islam. It seems that modern military professionals are also unable to understand what they are dealing with either, probably because they are nearly all secular professionals, or they aspire to go through the revolving door to the corporate world and get rich."
Alastair Crooke makes a similar point in his recent video discussion with Dmitri Simes Jr. I would extend the point to include Russia and China...and, frankly, the balance of the non-Western world. Nor is the dissonance merely religious, it is cultural, and as Vladimir Putin recently said, "civilizational". And because our current policy is to enforce our hegemonistic impulses militarily, we are placing the peoples of the world at great risk.
Crooke has been making this point for quite some time, no doubt based on his experience. From listening to him in the past I believe he does have a religious grounding. The problem that he calls lack of empathy is what I call the ideological mindset, which has beset the West since the late Middle Ages. In its origins it's Platonic. It arises from viewing the real world as no more than a set of ideas to be manipulated. That includes human beings. This has become second nature in the West and leads to lack of empathy. But it is also the mindset behind many other world views--the West is far from alone in this regard. Hamas and fundamentalist Zionism are examples among many. I talk about this extensively in my pre-2018 posting.
Well, a lot of us have been making this point for quite some time. :-)
As for me, a specific turning point was George W Bush's inaugural address in 2005 where he said, "... we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. ... Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time. So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world."
I was in mid-career, busy with job and kids, and little interested in politics at the time. But something struck me in that speech that I found deeply troubling, and I've never forgotten it. I was surprised that it would be our policy to affirmatively support regime change... "in every nation and culture..." It didn't seem like the United States I thought I knew and understood.
Little did I know...
Yeah, that's such a enigma to me: "...the United States I thought I knew and understood..." I am an ardent James Baldwin fan and his description of the United States are the raw, objective, harsh, painful, etc. facts. It seems that many decades after all his writing and speeching and death, it is finally coming full circle: the end of the US dynasty that has been decades in the making. I'd say Thank God and lets finally get a full horrific view of what the US is about, and then lets decide to give peace a chance!
Good points.
Thanks. I find your work quite illuminating and stimulating.
Thank you for the history lesson!
To perhaps excuse the military strategists, they have matured in a residually Christian culture which carries forward the idea that “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” Christians haven't had a must-not-be-defiled holy site... ever. Not even Rome, then or now.
Would it be fair to say that our faith teaches us that the second Temple was destroyed according to God's will, and there is nothing in our understanding of our duty to God that requires us to help build a third Temple? Likewise, our faith teaches us to reject absolute claims on holy sites, let alone dividing the physical world between dar-al-Islam and dar-al-Harb?
We are to not deny Christ; there is nothing in our scripture about denying entry to a particular physical location in this City of Man, outside of protecting the innocent.
https://news.usni.org/2023/10/14/carriers-uss-dwight-d-eisenhower-uss-carl-vinson-deploy-4-strike-groups-now-underway
Obviously our Deep State is in a state of deep alarm. Macgregor was saying we really, really don't want a big war. This may be part of a bid to get everyone to de-escalate. I hope.
Zhou bluffing with elections upcoming or Zhou thinking he'll be ready to use when ready?
Will an alliance between a great power (US) and a small nation, Israel (with nuclear weapons) once again draw the great powers into a global cataclysm? President Biden has it under control.
The Mizrahi seem to have the upper hand these days: The "Settlers" are already skirmishing with the Fatah/Sunni bunch in the West Bank. Israel could be facing a three-front war--Gaza to the west, Lebanon (Hezbollah) to the north and, of course, the West Bank to the east.
Reportedly, Israel is running low (as is the US) on weaponry and are having to scrounge up stuff fom here and there. HMmm....kinda like that beleagured entity on the Black Sea.
It seems to me that the war developing between Israel and Palestine today is simply the war that would have happened in 1948, except the Palestinians were in no position (in terms of organized military strength) to fight back. Now they are.
Put that together with what Bertrand is saying.
and for that we'll move 2 aircraft carrier groups to the eastern Mediterranean.
I also believe the Israelis and most of the West are over-estimating the strength of the IDF versus these militia armies. Yes, the Israelis will have a big advantage in the air, but I bet Hezbollah probably has some Russian air defense systems by this point in time- that could be a real surprise to everyone.
Will the US be able to bluff Hezbollah into staying on the sidelines or will the bluff the called. And is it a bluff or not? We live in interesting times.
Most of those "over-estimating the strength of the IDF" must be confused with the IOF.
Ground fighting in MOUT ( military operation on urban terrain) terrain tends to minimize advantages. IDF will suffer greatly if they attack Gaza all out. Friends of mine fought in Fallujah. All the skill in the world doesn’t mean as much.
My belief is that the air wing of the IDF is probably about the most professional. What I've read re Hezbollah's anti-air capabilities--and this could be dated--is that it's good enough to force Israeli planes to fly at higher altitudes and/or greater distances from their targets than they would prefer. So it's something that the IDF has to take into account and it does affect their tactics. At a minimum. That's the fixed wing aspect. With helicopters it could be more dangerous.
I did not have WWIII in the Middle East on my bingo card for 2023. What a long strange trip it’s been.
Good. Leave it off.
Col. MACGREGOR:
https://rumble.com/v3oehuv-col.-macgregor-on-the-suspicious-circumstances-surrounding-the-attack-on-is.html
No one did. Everyone distracted by Ukraine versus Russia match.
Now we're distracted FROM the Ukraine versus Russia match, Yancy. What are they going to throw to distract us from this one?
That's what I've been wondering. Hamas had to have some idea of the reaction that they would provoke. It's obvious that Hamas has had a great deal of help and resources from outside entities. Hamas may well have a larger, unexpectedly well constructed plan for dealing with the result of their original provocation going forward. Step B, so to speak. Cocksure Israel, long used to dealing with a historically shortsighted Hamas, may not at all understand what they are marching into. Kind of like they didn't see what was coming.
Great point. Provoke and ambush. Draw IDF in and when they are heavily engaged Hezbollah, radicals from Syria, etc. attack. Multi-front war. Hamas pulls the IDF into the urban environment where their advantages are minimized and perhaps it is a plain infantry fight that could be prolonged and costly. Drain their manpower, equipment, ammunition, and morale. If the attack into Israel was sophisticated and required a lot of training and preparation they could very well have the same in terms of defense waiting for the IDF. A repeat of the Ukrainians battering themselves to pieces against the Russian defenses? How much damage can the IDF absorb and still be ready for other attacks from multiple fronts? Of course if we have two carrier air wings in the Eastern Med and at least one in the Indian Ocean then perhaps that will give pause to anyone moving large formations of troops toward Israel. But then how vulnerable are the carriers?
For Hamas it was now or never. With the West Bank settlers on the rampage, no serious peace talks in sight, and no help from their Arab "brothers", they probably realised that there won't be a Palestinian element in Israel within 20 years. Nothing much to lose.
Yeah, I don't get it why Hamas was the chosen one on behalf of the Muslim/Arab world to spark a reaction from Israel based on transitioning the Mosque to a Temple. What does Hamas get out of it? Nothing good so far. Where's the rest of the Muslim/Arab world ready and willing to bail them out? Hezbollah? C'mon man. Gotta be more than that.
There was a theory going around this morning- a rumor perhaps- that Hamas expected to be battling the IDF and other security forces and never expected to face so little armed opposition when they broke through the security fences, and then got carried away in barbarity.
Sunday morning news cycles making Saturday rounds.
That's totally possible as well.
Insightful article about food that explains a lot of Israeli culture:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02757206.2023.2261965
Ashkenazi Is more Labor, and is out of power. They are seen as naive on their views of the Palestinians by the majority now.
Col. Tom Kratman had a similar comment (if I remember correctly) on the Israeli military capabilities. He feels they are over rated, since they only bested 3rd rate armies (Arab). And the Israeli heavy use of reserves reduces their capabilities, due to training, verses professional / full time soldiers.
Russians make up 15% of the Israeli population now.
Ultra orthodox is another faction, I’ve no idea how they figure into Israeli politics. Seem Ashkenazi ethnically.
Swag:
Most kid’s families that were attending the peace rave were richer, more liberal. Their targeting is having a huge impact due to friends and families of the victims and survivors.
Part of the Israel government is trying to downplay the Hamas atrocities. They are afraid of the impact on public opinion. I’ve no idea on the politics behind this inside the government. Who benefits?
Crooke has better connections with Ashkenazi in Israel, and his writing reflects that.
the "D" in IDF does not stand for offensive last I remember. they always call up "reserves" in times like these. Military training is an obligation for all based on their age.
"the Israeli heavy use of reserves reduces their capabilities,"
I've read that many times over the years.
"Russians make up 15% of the Israeli population now."
But 100% of butchers illegally selling pork.
Ultra orthodox Ashkenazi would include elements opposed to the state of Israel as such.
Seems “white meat” is legal per their Supreme Court.
https://www.atlantajewishtimes.com/pork-in-israel-reflects-clash-of-cultures/
A Chinese family my wife knows, worked for an airline, mentioned how they would get illegal pork in Iran. Chinese are big into pork.
Did not know that. Never thought of Israel having the different ethnic groups.
I really like your writing! A huge thank you for links to the events and historical figures and background that I had very little or no knowledge of. I look forward to reading more.
Gavin, I don't allow advocacy for war crimes here.
If you're willing to hold cabinet meetings in the basement of the 3rd most important Muslim Mosque then aren't you already in a "stronger" position?
with an election 13 months away I can't imagine Zhou would want to put the US in a role to spark WW3. Zhou' administration passivity lives on IMO. Look at Jake the snakes' Sullivan's hubris driven Mideast comments on September 29th.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/10/israel-war-middle-east-jake-sullivan/675580/
I wonder...Everybody is saying that Biden won't risk a Middle Eastern War in the run up to 2024 elections. But why not? With the right spin, why can't the neocons and MSM persuade the low-info American public that it is our patriotic duty to defeat the new Axis of Evil?
With the MSM onboard probably won't take much to push "our patriotic duty".
If Biden were in command of his role that might be so, but I suspect that there is rather a set of people with their own aims and without the constraints which aiming at reelection places on one. And I imagine some of these are not primarily devoted to duty to a 2nd term for Biden in part, or, they may think the election is in the bag anyway.
You are wrong, the most dangerous religion are the radical secular progressives who want to eradicate the vast majority and no religion be spared. These are the aspirant gods who will usher in OWG and the transhuman future.