Tuesday, November 22, 2016


More Heads Are Rolling Amongst the "Assad Must Go" Gang!

From an Assafir article.
Explanation of article by Intibah and Ghassan Kadi. 21 November 2016.

There seems to be a Trump equivalent who will take power in France and he's going even further than Trump.  The article,when describing this new person (Francois Fillon), says that he wants  "a coalition between Hezbollah, Iran, the Syrian Army, the Kurds and President Bashar to spearhead an international alliance to stamp out terror and to consider them as legal and serious partners in fighting Daesh, quoting  Fillon, "because they are already fighting Daesh and that if we are really serious to destroy Daesh." 

Francois Fillon expresses a growing trend within French establishment that it should reconsider its relationship with Saudi Arabia which it considers one of the key sources of exporting terrorism to Europe and calls for reconsideration of the relationship with Saudi Arabia and Qatar .

Fillon is considered a pleasant surprise for Russia because he's also calling for a reconsideration of European policy that's pushing Russia towards Asia as he said "when Asia grows economically it will become more likely to play a international military role, and pushing Russia away towards Asia is the outcome of our current policies which ought to change."


Wednesday, November 2, 2016


Clinton and Trump: The Known And The Unknown

By Ghassan Kadi
1 November 2016


Monday, October 24, 2016

Tuesday, August 2, 2016

THE DAILY DAESH D-DAY DILEMMA by Ghassan Kadi 2 August 2016

The Daily Daesh D-Day Dilemma By Ghassan Kadi 2 August 2016 In his latest article, Ghassan is analysing the minds of those involved in the escalating number of Daesh attacks, presenting how past and present Western policies have been ineffective. He ends the article with suggestions on how to turn the flow of events around.


Tuesday, July 19, 2016

Thursday, June 23, 2016


By Ghassan Kadi.
23 June 2016
When we raised the alarm about Christian-Zionists trying to make a foothold into Syria, it was not baseless. Since then, we tried to seek further information from the people we suspected, in the hope that we could prove ourselves wrong and be able to reconcile and work together. There is a wealth of written evidence to this effect, which we won’t need to supply unless warranted.

The reconciliatory attempts failed as “the other party” failed to provide evidence to vindicate itself, and failed to stick to the essence of sound and rational steps towards transparency that can lead to reconciliation.

Before another word is said, it must be borne in mind that it is only up to relevant authorities within the Syrian Government to accept who is allowed entry into Syria and who is not. But when our trusted officials are presented with lies and deceitfully-canvassed recommendations, it becomes incumbent upon good citizens to volunteer the correct information to government officials.

For those who are not familiar with the term “Christian-Zionist”, some interpretation is warranted. There is virtually a countless number of Churches in the West, specifically America, that in one form or another, to a certain extent or another, regard the current State of Israel as the “Kingdom of God” that Jesus spoke about and foretold. As a matter of fact, Ariel Sharon himself was invited to some of those American Churches to give talks.

Certainly not all of those Churches have the same level of allegiance to Israel, some are more overt than others, and some don’t even give it much thought and consideration and they practice Christian-Zionism unwittingly.

Christian pilgrimages to the Holy Land have been around for centuries. Even during the days of the Ottoman Empire, faithful Christians went to Palestine to see where Jesus was born and walked the earth. It would be only right and just to say that at least some faithful Christians continue to go to the Holy Land for that same religious/spiritual experience that their ancestors did. Such faithfuls would go on a divine pilgrimage, one that does not make any political statements, and definitely one that does not make sectarian statements.

However, when alleged pilgrims go to an Israeli open-air museum in Golan, parading on top of captured tanks that partook in the 1973 war of Arabs against Israel, then in those photographs alone, they are making political statements and endorsing the State of Israel. Any person who questions their political affiliation needs a wake-up call and a reality check.

But the statements are not only in photos but also in captions that go with those photos, captions like “God will accomplish great and mighty things!!!!”, implying, without a shadow of doubt, that they view Israel’s military as a blessing from God. Then comes a photo of “pilgrims” on a boat in the “Sea of Galilee” with a caption that reads “Christian boat on Sea of Galilee – Former Muslim Sea Captain leads worship”. This caption, again, undoubtedly, is one that endorses and celebrates religious conversion from Islam to Christianity. This is Daesh with a twist; opposite sides of the same coin. This is the ideology that secular Syria has been fighting against militarily for five and a half years and before that, ideologically, for decades. Daesh can take different shapes and forms and there is the Christian-Zionist form.

Surely, these photos send an eerie shiver down the spine of any Syrian; given that Syria is the target of a covert Israel-lobby-led multinational taskforce against her. But this is not where the shock in seeing these photos ends. These photos appear on the Website of the “Chapel of the Holy Spirit Performing Arts Ministries”. The photos were taken on a church trip that this Church has organised for its members to go to Israel. This is a “non-denominational” church that combines Jewish and Christian beliefs and practices and acts as an umbrella for other churches including the “Church of the Holy Spirit “Anglican””. (See first screenshot). The “Chapel” on its website homepage proudly presents displays of the photos of these joint church trips as if to loudly shout “we support Israel”.

The collaboration between the two is plain to see. Pastor Clancy Nixon is the founder of “The Church of the Holy Spirit “Anglican”” and is named in the first screen shot as the link between the two Churches.

It would be foolish to think that the two Churches are not in sync with each other’s ideologically. They may have certain differences, but given that they work together on organising group visits to Israel, we can only rightfully conclude that they both have similar outlooks about Israel and the Arab-Israeli divide.

The most shocking part of this story perhaps is the fact that a prominent member of the “Holy Spirit Anglican Church”, the church that facilitates for members to go on these “pilgrimages” to Israel, has visited Syria in an official capacity, claiming to be a friend and a supporter.

This person considers that it is perfectly alright and acceptable to be a member of this Church and to visit Syria without making this information about the Church and its alliances known to either personal friends or Syrian government officials.

Now this Church member was one individual only, and even with one member it is difficult to ascertain what the immediate and long term objectives of that visit is. The only obvious thing is “opening the flood gates” for more mysterious, shady characters who are poising, like vultures, waiting for half an opportunity to be able to enter Syria with highly likely Christian-Zionist agendas. As a matter of fact, this person is already planning a group trip for perhaps ten to twenty “pilgrims” who want to visit Syria for some mysterious reason.

How did the initial member manage to be granted entry into Syria one may ask? By lies and deception and capitalizing on honest unsuspecting Syrians. The person omitted to tell Syrian authorities on the visa Application, that the Church is not the regular mainstream Anglican Church Syrian officials are familiar with. The all-important links the Church and its other Christian-Zionist affiliates have were concealed as were the fact that the Church, along with the “Chapel” organised regular trips to Israel. It is highly likely that the “Anglican” brand to the Church masked the need for further scrutiny as to the nature of the Church.

Furthermore, a successful visa application for an American would require referees and naming respectable Syrian patriots and supporters. High ranking officials from the President Hafez Al Assad era (who know nothing about the Zionist links of the Church) were named as referees, and to top it off, there was a further endorsement from Senator Dick Black. This is how the visa was granted, otherwise, would anyone in his/her right mind believe that Dr Bouthaina Shaaban would knowingly meet with anyone who has affiliations with a Church that supports Israel had she been presented with the correct information?

We have all known this person for a number of years now, and we know that this person lied, so how can we feel safe and secure that the ten to twenty would be “pilgrims”, whom we know nothing about, are going to tell the truth?

How can we be sure that some of those photographed parading on the tanks in the occupied Golan do not have parading on the streets of Damascus on their wish list?
Are we going to be naïve enough to sit back and hope and pray that these people are all genuine friends of Syria, or, are we going to be careful like we have always been?

Let us remember here that if anyone visits Israel, he/she cannot be granted entry to Syria. The only exceptions to this are non-Arab Diplomats. Other exceptions, if any, will have to be based on transparency and the final decision left up to the Syrian government.

It is not up to non-Syrians to decide if it is acceptable by Syria to be associated with Israel and support Syria at the same time, even if they claim to have repented. If certain people have their own take on the Arab-Israeli divide, or even if they want to totally support Israel, then it is their business, but for them to try to dictate to us what we should be accepting and tolerating is arrogant and folly.

In retrospect, to say that Syria should welcome anyone who supports her, including those who could be Christian-Zionists, and then to try to impose this view upon others, is quite naïve, irresponsible and dangerous, to say the least.

For anyone to say that this subject is “fait accompli” and should not be discussed further, is not any less short-sighted than one that argues that allowing in Jihadis, in “good faith”, believing that they will be teaching good religion. This attitude displays poor strategic thinking, blurred foresight and lack of wisdom.

Furthermore, no one has the moral right or the rational prowess to muzzle the discussion of the issue of discerning who is truly a supporter of Syria and who is not; especially in the presence of evidence linking culprits with Churches that endorse Israel.

After all, what is the point in fending off some of Syria’s enemies and not others? And who has the right to decide who to leave alone unchecked?

Syria is still under military danger. The danger won’t be over before at least Aleppo is liberated. The last thing Syria needs now is missionaries and Christian-Zionists cloaked as angels. Angels, they are not.

And after the dust settles and those “invaders” are seen by everyone for what they are, decent Syrians who helped them, hosted them, invited them and recommended them will be feeling very sheepish. The sooner they wake up to this, the less future embarrassment they will inflict upon themselves.

Furthermore, let us not forget that admission of guilt (even if totally based on retraction of the act that generated the guilt) and forgiveness are two separate things. In a rational context, admission of guilt is done by the perpetrator, and then forgiveness has to come from the victim, not from the perpetrator him/herself. When a perpetrator says “I am guilty, I have changed my ways”, this should be followed by a plea for forgiveness. But when the perpetrator pleads guilty years later and after being urged to do so and not voluntarily, promises to change his/her ways and on top of it all COMMANDS forgiveness, then this reflects the extremes of arrogance, audacity, delusions of self-grandeur and exceptionalism. 

When decent and genuine people realise that they have done a mistake, they show humility. But people arrogantly say they have done a mistake and immediately pronounce themselves forgiven, by their own decree, then this indicates that they are not sorry at all, that they have no remorse and that they cannot be believed. In this particular instance, the “former Israel supporter” believes that it is okay to say something akin to; “I have supported the enemies of Syria for many years, I have endorsed all the actions of Israel, I took delight in assisting of the pillaging of Syria, directly and indirectly, and now you must forgive me and reward me whether you like it or not because I say so”.

Imagine this scenario in court. A criminal sitting in the accused box, saying to the Judge, “your honour, I admit killing three men, raping their wives and molesting their children. But I have changed, I won’t do this anymore, but retain the right to remain closely associated to friends who wish to continue to be rapists and killers, and I am walking out of here free and you don’t have the right to make a judgment against me”. This is exactly what this self-confessed former-supporter of Israel is saying. What kind of twisted logic is this? What kind of morons would we be if we accept this flawed argument?

Weeding out alleged supporters of Syria, and the Christian-Zionists to be specific, is not about dividing the support base as I have been accused of doing. It is important to identify the bad apples and dump them otherwise they will spoil good apples. We have seen quite a lot of this spoilage over the last five and a half years, and bad apples had to be discarded along the way, and this process is not going to stop, and no one has the right to say that this should stop.

We go back to where we started. The decision of who is allowed to enter Syria and who is not is the task of the Syrian government. The job or any Syrian who cares about the integrity of Syria is to make sure that the Syrian populace and Syrian officials receive the right information about the potential dangers that are associated with any person who seems suspicious. Apart from this activity on Facebook, information will be passed on to high ranking Syrian officials, and it will reach the President himself. In doing this, my role will be accomplished and our trusted leaders will make the right decisions based on the correct information as stipulated by their relevant portfolios and responsibilities.

Now it is appropriate to say, in the words of a dear colleague “speech over”.


29 June By Naassan Turk

Ghassan Kadi's first article about the Christian-Zionism was, despite the commonly known subject of the CZ, a wake-up call to most of us.
I knew about the subject, but it was on a dusty shelf, in a corner of my mind. The situation in Syria made us prioritize subjects and stratify dangers. As a result, we were mainly focusing on the apparent and immediate dangers, the Wahhabism and the evil powers behind it. 

Syria and its allies were isolated, cornered and the main stream media outlets grotesque lies were flooding the minds of the western nations. 

We had no time to think about the masked dangers, the wolves in sheep’s clothing!
Ghassan and Inbtibah with their acute sense of analysis and vision saw the danger lurking within us. I was thousand miles away to have any such thoughts.

Open-minded, loyal to my principles, I started to do some researches and investigations before taking any principled position. My own researches quickly led me to the same conclusion.
Even more, I feel we just scratched the surface with this story. The danger and the sheer size of the threat are beyond belief. It suffices to google few words related to the subject and spend sometimes reading and listening to the sermons and subjects covered in their church gatherings to feel the shiver down every spine.
We all heard about those assassinations of great heroes of the resistance, like Imad Moghniyyeh in Damascus neighborhood. We all know how Mossad spies are roaming the streets of Beirut collecting intelligence and committing assassinations.

These highly skilled spies melt within the crowd. It is extremely difficult for the security forces to detect and uncover them. But, one can imagine that their number is quite limited.
The threat of Christian-Zionism is in another league! When we know that 1 in 4 American Christians is a Christian Zionist consciously or unconsciously work for the Zionist entity!
How can we just turn a blind eye on a threat of such a magnitude? Under the cover of tourists, activists, caring Christians, journalists, etc, we are maybe already flooded by these CZ operatives.

These people don’t shout it! They pretend they are just Christians. Caring and loving Christians. Their strategies are based on deceiving, patient deceiving!

They spend a lot of time and effort in their enterprise. They build trust and reputation and they hypnotize their audience with their sweet words. It becomes difficult, after the audience have made their mind and trusted the CZ person, to take it on and admit that they made a huge mistake by trusting the CZ person.
But, hey Good People, is the pride more important than saving lives and defending the righteous?!
Do not believe me, do not believe Ghassan, but if you pretend to be a patriotic Syrian or a friend of Syria, you should allow yourself to look and find the truth with your eyes!
Jan’s stance is unforgivable because she maintains she did nothing wrong. Even worse, she pretends that keeping a channel with Christian Zionist (as if she’s not) is meant to influence the CZ and make them change their beliefs and become a goon human! 

Pathetic and grotesque! She spent years in this church in a responsibility position. Her friends (this is how she described it to me) organize these trips to Israel (Not the Holy Land as it is clearly appears on the website home page) to exhibit themselves on captured Syrian and Egyptian tanks in previous wars. They slaughter 60 lambs to have a barbecue party, etc…

Ok, let me ask Jan how she would deal with a friend who she knew to be a pedophile and a serial raper if she is trying to lead a campaign for victims of rape and pedophilia?

If anyone of us was supporting such a campaign, wouldn’t we want Jan to speak out and to distance herself from that person? 

Would we be convinced when she says that she knew his family since 12 years and that she’s hoping to guide him to the right track?!!
Senator Black introduced by Jan to the Syrian audience and presented as a great man, man of principles!
Would a man who considers “raping own wife is not a crime!”.
The sub-subject of where Jan stands, while secondary subject compared to the main one of CZ threat in general, it is the deluded audience, especially Syrians, and their unconditional support which is really worrying.

It is great time that they speak out and show where they stand because at this critical time of Syria existence, keeping contact with enemies of Syria and facilitating infiltration would surely result by consequences.
Jan can’t open Syria’s back door to the CZ while she pretended for years to be keeping the front gate!
Please listen to one of these many sermons to understand what we’re talking about:

Listen to the first 6 minutes here for a start:


Sunday, May 15, 2016


By Intibah Kadi 
12 May 2016 My own article published on The Saker about a very sensitive subject but one that needs to be discussed and to be followed by a second related one by Ghassan Kadi


Wednesday, May 4, 2016

THE UNFORGIVING CHOICE; Enemies versus Allies: By Ghassan Kadi 3 May 2016

By Ghassan Kadi, 3 May 2016 (Published in The Saker)

On global account, and especially when it comes to Syria, thanks, a great deal of thanks, must be given to Russia, her people and leadership for the wonderful support.

Thank you President Putin. Thank you so much.

President Putin however, would not have backed a nation which was not strong in her resolve, one that does not have a determined army, and one that does not have a leadership that resonates with what is Russia’s view of a viable and proper leadership and global future.

Had President Assad’s presidency been teetering on the edge of a 51-49% Western-style approval status, and had his leadership of the army and nation been subject to Western-style election promises and eventual broken promises, President Putin would have seen Assad as an unreliable ally and would have totally distanced himself from him.

Had the Syrian Army split up happened in accordance with the Saudi and Qatari financial incitements that only managed to lure a few weak and shameful officers and worked to the extent that the plotters wished, and had the Army with its personnel and hardware got split up in a manner that gave that so-called “Free Syria Army” (FSA) an upper hand over the loyal Army, or at least an equal footing, the history of the “War On Syria” might have taken another direction.

But none of the above was to happen.

In hindsight, the only thing that remotely looked like an “uprising” in Syria five years ago was this FSA, and to as far as the “Anti-Syrian Cocktail” was concerned, the FSA was not alone capable enough to perform the required task. 

Sooner or later however, as it was seen by those who knew well who the enemies of Syria really were, that was bent to change.

This brings us back to the founding articles: “The Anti-Syrian Cocktail”, “The Anti-Syrian Vendetta” and “The Anti-Syrian Politics”.

It was very predictable to foresee back then when those articles were written five years ago, that this whole war against Syria was eventually to turn into a sectarian war, one that was led by Sunni fundamentalists, and one that aims to destroy the nature and fabric of secular Syria.

When the sponsors of the FSA found themselves unable to lure enough recruits from the valiant and determined ranks of the Syrian Army, they immediately spread their recruitment lure further afield; and the inevitable happened as they declared Holy War (Jihad) against Syria.

The rest is now history, but it was foreseeable, and the early articles in the preceding chronicles are honest historical testimonies etched in time.

Along the way during the war, and as the Syrian Army demonstrated more resolve, battle lines had to be reset several times; including those who define who is a friend and who is a foe.

Individual and group reconciliation deals within Syria have seen many Syrian Army deserters come back home to the Army that united them all.

Many Syrian and non-Syrian activists who initially believed the lie that there was indeed a “revolution” in Syria, have sooner or later realized that they have been fooled.

In and around this, many directives and alliances have changed. What is important to note is that the changes in alliances did not take place on the side of Syria as represented by her Government and Army. The changes in alliances are happening on the side of the once formidable “Anti-Syrian Cocktail”. This alone is a telling sign, because only losers have to change tactics and strategies.

Even within Erdogan’s infamous AKP, power was taken away today from Turkish PM Davutoglu by none but his own trusted leader and President Erdogan, because the latter is seeking the ultimate power of a Sultan.

Whilst this is the first sign of a crack within Erdogan’s AKP, similar and perhaps bigger signs have been seen within the ranks of Al-Saud in relation to the crown lineage.

The resilience of the Syrian Army has even put the United States itself at a fork. The US had to decide to choose between traditional allies and an ill-defined and unforeseeable future.

The chronicles presented herein in the previous chapters are a testimony of how certain alliances have grown stronger, as they were foreseen to become stronger, and how others have almost vanished into oblivion.

There is a decisive consequence to choosing friends and adversaries.

“Tell me what friends you keep, and I will tell you who you are”, as an Arabic proverb puts it simply. One would argue that the same applies for one’s choice of enemies; if he/she decides to have enemies.

As Syria was exhibiting both resilience and resistance, and as her friends were united by more than just transient fantasies and ideologies, and as the Syrian Army was scoring more and more victories against all odds, and as Russia eventually took the plunge to side by Syria, and as the “Anti-Syrian Coalition” was already breaking up, decisive decisions had to be made by all parties involved.

The decision of Syria and her allies to remain united became stronger and more determined.
The predicament of the “Anti-Syrian Cocktail” to fragment and fall into the abyss became more inevitable.

When Bandar Bin Sultan promised the Americans that he could wield the new wave of post Al-Qaeda Jihadists, they believed him. After he fell on his sword and not only brought himself to a state of disrepute in the eyes of the USA, but also brought down the whole stature of his kingdom, the USA and in particular, the Obama Administration, was growing tired of the Saudi strategist planning.

It was not until Obama spelt it out and called Saudis and others “free loaders” that the schism became obvious enough to be seen in chapter one in “Geo-Political Analysis For Dummies”, but the writing was on the wall some years earlier.

Before too long, the 28 pages of the 9/11 report will be published. If Saudi Arabia had nothing to hide, it would not be jumping up and down trying to prevent this.

When Saudi Arabia’s Bandar fell out of US favour, and after the death of former King Abdullah, the new and incumbent Saudi administration could have taken the option to distant itself from Bandar’s reign of radicalism, and for it to save its own neck, it could have chosen to tow the American line. But it didn’t.

The decision was taken not because Saudi Arabia suddenly decided to be an independent state of independent decisions, but simply because the new King and his 30 years old Deputy Crown Prince wanted to throw a hissy, a hissy that dictated that they would favour Daesh to the USA.

Driven by the fervour of Muslim fraternity, the Saudis and the Turks made the choice  to favour Daesh against America.

Saudi Arabia and Turkey both think that as far as their alliance with America is concerned, they are indispensable.

They are wrong.

As geopolitical situations change and evolve, what is unchangeable is common interest. When common interests diverge, alliances fall apart.

As the Empire is reeling with coming to terms with Russia becoming a formidable force that has demonstrated in Syria that she is able to successfully achieve military success at a fraction of the cost that brings America total failure, the USA is no longer able to claim an exclusive world leadership status.

Syria has chosen her friends, or should we say that Syria has commanded her friends. Russia took the call and responded in the most formidable manner.

As the enemies of Syria began to lose the war and the “Anti-Syrian Cocktail” began to get dismantled, and as Russia emerged as a new power and broker, Turkey and Saudi Arabia had the chance to reconsider their alliances.

However, between choosing Daesh or the USA, Turkey and Saudi Arabia chose the former. They will need to bear the brunt of this decision.

Many wars of the past have been won or lost on such decisions, and as the “Anti-Syrian Cocktail” continues to crumble, we can see one more nail in the coffin of this infamous and once united alliance, we can only wait to see more of its undoing and unfolding before our eyes.   

Sunday, April 17, 2016



By Ghassan Kadi
16 April 2016



Russian Advanced Weapons for Syria Unrevealed Secrets of Vladimir Putin's Recent Visit Visit to London.
Translation by Ghassan and Intibah Kadi
18 January 2013



Ghassan Kadi's introduction to a media report to The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story
23 October 2013

So now Bandar is threatening of turning away from the USA. Who does he think will support him? A pseudo-nation like Saudi Arabia cannot stand on its own feet. It will sink in its own quagmires of quick sand, and it has a lot of it.
This declaration on the part of Bandar can mean one of two things; utter anger and disappointment with the USA, or telling the USA in particular that he will now be shifting closer to Israel.
Bandar is already an ally of Israel. Will their alliance be overt in the near future? No one knows. But if banking and counting on Israel as his new ally and supporter, he would only be changing seats on the Titanic.
President Bashar said to Al-Mayadin 2 days ago that America does not make friends and cannot be trusted. Bandar is finally realizing that the USA was never his ally and never considered him as a friend. He is still refusing to accept that he was a puppet.
Eat your heart out Bandar. You are nothing more than a puppet.



*Note: This was an aticle written for the membership of the Facebook group The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story. Within the group was a Syrian who expressed very strong, negative views about Russia and with his small following continues to this day to express that

16 November 2013
There have been a lot of speculations recently about the role of Russia in the Levant, especially after the Syrian Chemical Weapons (CW) deal.
The issue has caused quite a bit of controversy ranging from supporters for the whole Russian intervention including that of the CW deal, to utter rejectionists who regard the deal as tantamount to Syrian surrender and a total Syrian sell-out to Russia.
In some instances, the differences escalated to a level that seems to be increasingly becoming divisive even amongst the ranks of the pro-Syrian camp. This can become a serious matter unless debated openly and rationally. At the moment, this issue seems to be ignored, perhaps in fear of creating divisions. The anti-Russian camp is perhaps feeling marginalized because those who do not support this view (who are by the way the majority) are not debating the matter. In an attempt to clear the air and bolstering solidarity, I suggest that we debate this matter and invite those who have different opinions to make their contributions.
There is no doubt that Putin is an aspiring world leader and that he sees that Russia has interests in Syria, but to regard the current Russian role as an act of treachery against Syria is totally and utterly ill-founded and there is no evidence to support. In fact, if anything, the evidence points exactly in the other direction.
To be brief and straight to the point, I will outline in dot point the reasons that make me adopt the “pro-Russian” side (if I can refer to it as such):
a. Russia is regaining and restoring its global role. Its first stand was in Georgia back in 2009.
b. Russia made it clear in the UNSC time and time again that it will veto any anti-Syrian resolution, and it did.
c. Russia made clear to NATO that attacking Syria without a UNSC resolution is a red line that will not be tolerated.
d. Russia has never put boots on the ground in foreign nations, not even in Vietnam. Not helping Syria directly is a Russian tradition.
e. The US thought that Russia was bluffing and launched 2 missiles heralding an all-out attack on Syria in early September. Russia thwarted the attack and destroyed one of the missiles, and hacked into the other one and had it diverted.
f. The Syrian CW’s were already an ageing liability.
g. The purpose of weapons CW’s included is protection. Syria’s CW’s performed without having to be fired. They served their role to the highest expectation.
h. The CW deal was a face-saving exercise for the USA and an attempt to find a political resolution, Russia’s and Syria’s way. It was a deal that America was forced to accept, not the other way around. Never before did the USA huff and puff about attacking a country to back off later until Syria. This is the greatest joint Russian Syrian victory ever, and those who do not see it as it is do not have a proper vision of global politics.
i. Russia and Syria want to go to Geneva II when war on the ground is fait accompli. Even Kerry said to Lavrov recently what is the point in going to Geneva after the Syrian Army scores more victories.
j. If Putin is a con man as his adversaries describe him, Assad is not a fool, neither is Nasrallah.
k. For Russia to step up the global ladder, it needed and found strong regional allies. It support for Syria is because Syria proved to be strong.
l. On the other hand, the US allies proved to be weak and worthless and America found itself having to justify to its own people its support for Al-Qaeda.
m. Even without the 2-missiles saga, that is still largely denied, America was very reluctant to strike Syria. It is a nation that is already bankrupt and engaged in many expensive wars.
n. The Anti-Syrian alliance is breaking up. The Emir of Qatar abdicated and his powerful man Hamad had to go with him. Egypt is out of the grip of the Muslim Brotherhood, Qatar and Turkey. Turkey is witnessing internal turmoil and is having second thoughts about its involvement in Syria. The USA knows it cannot strike Syria. Israel is disappointed that the US is having talks with Iran. It is only Bandar who is still trying to pull a trick out of a hat and hope for a miracle that gives him some bargaining edge in Geneva II. None of this would have happened if the Syrian Army didn’t have enough time to deal with the situation on the ground. Had Russia not vetoed the UNSC resolutions against Syria, history would have taken another course.
o. The US and its allies are in a total loss in Syria. They have lost the ground battle, they are divided, and they have lost their initiative and long-term policy. They simply do not know which way to go.
"Arabi Souri", in a recent article, argued that all of the above is a façade and that it would be impossible to see Saudi Arabia standing on its own without America. I agree with the second part of this statement. Saudi Arabia cannot stand up on its own and America has no allies left in the region except Israel which will not go into an all-out war with Syria to please Bandar.

"Syrian Girl Partisan" goes in her anti-Russian rhetoric to the extent of attacking the wisdom and intelligence of President Assad. This is improper, demoralizing and harmful. Again, Syrian Girl has been a very active pro-Syrian activist and she too has played a big role in spreading the truth about Syria. However, her stand on Russia and on President Assad is quite vicious and needless.

My call to Arabi, Syrian Girl and their anti-Russian camp is to have a debate about this subject if they wish. Thus far, this issue has not been handled properly. As a matter of fact, there has recently been a public display of discord among members.

Just because they do not seem to understand the changes in the geo-political order of the world and the rise of Russia (and the BRICS axis in general), some anti-Russian advocates have made some comments about those who support Russia’s role in Syria and branded them as being irrational and naïve. This has been going on for some time and I was hoping it would simply fizzle away, but it only got worse.

This is inappropriate to say the least and should not continue. Any rational discussion is something that we should welcome on this group and any other group provided that it sticks to rationality and refraining from throwing insults and making personal attacks.

SAUDI FOR DUMMIES By Ghassan Kadi 26 November 2013

By Ghassan Kadi
26 November 2013
Rumours are spreading that Saudi Arabia is planning to have nuclear weapons.
For the benefit of those who do not know much about Saudi Arabia, this short and intensive course, “Saudi for Dummies”, might be helpful.
Almost the entire workforce in Saudi Arabia is foreign. Initially the influx of foreign expertise was meant to be of interim nature. It was meant to help develop the country as the sudden financial development fuelled by the oil wealth was not mirrored in peoples’ levels of education and expertise.
In other words, instead of waiting until Saudi Arabia had its own engineers, doctors, craftsmen etc… it imported them and spent billions of dollars on building universities and sending young Saudi men overseas on government-sponsored scholarships. In the meantime, the country was serviced and developed by foreign experts and workers.
A few decades on, little has changed. Saudis refuse to work, full stop. They all want to be big-shot business men. They will take on professions as pilots, engineers, doctors, and they may have titles that present them as the people who make the decisions in the corporate world, but in reality they are just a façade intended to make Saudi Arabia look and feel good. Behind them, stand teams of foreign advisors who do all the designs, calculations, risk management, project management, etc… and all the Saudi “experts” do is to endorse with their signatures and parade in front of journalists as great national heroes.
Saudis also take the most unrealistic and stupid endeavours. They are currently irrigating wheat with desalinized sea water. Their whole objective is to see the kingdom turn green and the desert bloom at any cost. The photo is of such Saudi wheat field comprised of tens of "central pivots", each totally more than 100 Hectares.
Their arrogance leads them to believe that they can buy anything and anyone, and they will always be able to afford to buy any expertise to construct any dream; feasible or otherwise.
When Juheiman Utaibi claimed to be the Mehdi and occupied the Haram (Mecca’s Shrine) back in 1980, the Saudis had to ask the Turkish government for the design of the buildings as they were built by the Ottomans and the Saudis did not have copies of the design. They used mostly Pakistani troops to recapture the shrine, but of course, it was Saudi generals who paraded themselves later as the victors.
The Saudi army may have state-of-the-art arsenal of tanks, fighter jets, you name it, but the big question is, who is manning them?
Furthermore, the average lifespan of a motor vehicle in Saudi Arabia is 2-3 years after which it gets dumped. One wonders, are they applying those same principles to their military hardware?
Cornered, isolated, beaten and angry, Saudi Arabia now wants to raise the bar and decides to have its own nukes.
How can a failed state, a nation that cannot build a house or fix a flat tyre without the use of foreign expertise build an Atom Bomb?
If the Saudis decide to subcontract Pakistan to do the job, how much control will they have on the whole project?
Most importantly, this decision raises two pertinent questions:
1. Will the Saudis not be giving Iran the excuse to build its own? Who will be able to stop Iran from building a nuke if Israel and Saudi Arabia are nuke-ready and poised to strike it?
2. Why is it that the international community did not respond to the Saudi threats of attaining nukes?
Saudi Arabia has got to realize that the international community pays little or no attention to its huffing and puffing, because the international community knows well that Saudi Arabia is a state without any substance, a flame waiting to burn out.
The bottom line is this. Approximately 2 years ago Saudi Arabia (in an alliance with Qatar) convinced the West that it is a regional power and that it was able to get rid of Bashar Al Assad and replace him with a pro-Western puppet regime that served the interests of Saudi Arabia and the West.
The West was so taken by this scenario to the extent that it agreed to foster Islamists and Jihadists, exactly the same people it is fighting now in Afghanistan and Mali. The West took the gamble and the gamble was on the credibility of Saudi Arabia and specifically prince Bandar. It be must remembered that Bandar lived for over 2 decades in America as an ambassador to his country. He has always portrayed himself to the West as being different from the irrational Saudi royals. He gave about himself the image of a Western-educated shrewd and calculated Saudi royal, someone they can rely on as a true partner, unlike the rest of his clan.
Bandar flunked abysmally and has lost his credibility. Saudi Arabia is now getting marginalized and isolated. The Iran deal has been the latest nail in its coffin. Even if Saudi Arabia is able to clinch a deal with Pakistan to buy an existing mail-order nuke within the next few weeks or so, there is nothing it can do which can make it restore its position of a year ago, let alone change the events on the ground in Syria.