Syria

 

Like many, I was surprised by the rapid collapse of Syria, although I shouldn't have been. I was partially aware of the underlying causes. After the fact, I learned more and put things in perspective. The bottom line is that when Obama in 2011 directed the CIA to get rid of Assad it was only a matter of time. Initially, it was punishing economic sanctions along with terror attacks by the CIA's mercenary army of al Qaida offshoots. In 2015, Russia which has a naval base in Syria responded to Syria's request and provided military assistance, primarily with a relatively small but effective air force operation. In 2020, the U.S. and its Kurdish proxy forces seized control of the Syrian oil fields and the wheat growing farmland in the north. Without the wheat to feed its people and the oil to finance its defense, Syria was doomed. Syria's only hope would have been to drive the U.S. and its Kurdish proxies out of Syria. What chance was there of that? The U.S./NATO (Turkey)/Israel are overwhelmingly powerful in the Mediterranean, able to project overwhelming force in these oil producing lands. Russia lacks the ability to project significant non-nuclear military power much beyond its borders and lacks significant economic power in any event. Same with Iran. China feared American economic sanctions, hence, withheld economic assistance for Syria. In other words, once the Zionist controlled empire decided to destroy Syria it had the power to do so, illegality notwithstanding.

A significant question is why were Russia and China even involved? Why is Russia with its limited economic resources engaged in geostrategic competition with the American led empire with its vast economic resources, particularly in the Middle East? Why is China trying to supplant the U.S. strategically when its overrated economy is so dependent upon the U.S. controlled global system? Why is the struggle for power so compelling that national leaders abandon all common sense to pursue their power-seeking objectives? Particularly now that we are at the end of the hydrocarbon era rendering the current global economic/financial structure unsustainable? When the first order of business should be national and social survival in the new era? It is well to keep in mind that Syria was somewhat of an obstacle to U.S./Israeli plans to either re-subordinate or destroy Iran which is China's main oil supplier. Therefore, there was a certain short-sighted logic to resisting the empire's plans. It should be noted, however, that engaging in war to protect oil supplies also represents a commitment to unsustainable fossil fuel usage in support of China's manufacturing/export economy. In short, a commitment to unsustainable business as usual as a vehicle for elite power-seeking, rather than the radical social restructuring necessary to avoid environmental catastrophe.

To put current insanity in perspective, "Major portions of the Arabian Peninsula are already exceeding 2°C above pre-industrial and likely headed for a staggering temperature rise over coming decades....Some Parts of the Region, Which is Already Warming at the Same Rapid Rate as the Arctic, Could See up to 9 Degrees Celsius of Warming..." How will people live in a climate that will become too hot for human survival outdoors? "Already, the Middle East favors “artificial environments”: Ski Dubai is an indoor ski resort with 22,500 square meters of indoor ski area. The park maintains a temperature of −1 to 2 °C (30 to 36 °F) throughout the year. Another example: Surfbase will be Dubai’s first all-year-round indoor surfing spot. It is set to open its doors in 2024 or 2025." (Robert Hunziker) In other words, if the burning of fossil fuels alters the environment so that it is unsuitable for human survival, the solution is burn more fossil fuel to enable you to build artificial indoor bubbles (eventually powered by nuclear power?) so that humans can survive indoors similar to Martian or Lunar colonists? Food,etc? For those who think this is a exaggeration, think again. Greenhouse gas levels are currently about 50% above the cyclical highs for the last 800,000 years and increasing rapidly at an accelerating rate at least 150 times greater than the historical natural rate of increase. In other words, wars are being fought to control areas which are rapidly becoming unlivable, and whose oil resources should be left in the ground lest much of the planet becomes unlivable. How short-sighted is that?

Let me conclude by noting that the net carbon zero plans being pushed are a complete fraud, relying upon carbon offsets and other accounting gimmickry as a pretext to initiate changes which will have a negligible effect upon the climate but will advance the elite agenda of totalitarian neofeudal control. This even as actual carbon emissions increase. This even as the empire's war making and other geostrategic activities risk nuclear war. All of this risky power-seeking to gain advantage within a dying system even as these geostrategic maneuvers are counterproductive to achieving a sustainable society and of human survival. Fighting to be in command of a sinking ship even if it means destroying the lifeboats. Are the sociopaths and psychopaths who effectively rule the planet so blinded by ideology and power-lust that they are willfully unaware of the dire reality which confronts humanity on planet Earth? Do the Zionists who hold the balance of imperial power have a do or die commitment to a mythological Greater Israel and a New American (read: Ashkenazi) Century even when failure means we all die? And "success" means that the vast majority live in a dystopian nightmare? What else can we conclude? Mull that over as you contemplate the new year.