TURKEY AND THE SHIA MILITIAS. THE DANGER MANY HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT.

Well, once again, the news of the day was based on the topic of emails and political leaders who make rules but don’t live by them. As important as the issue of Hillary’s emails may be, the danger of increased violence in the Middle Eastern Region continues to increase. Since the beginning of the operation to retake Mosul, the fear of further inflaming the sectarian conflict between the Sunni and Shia has been on radar. Could anyone convince the Iranian Puppet Masters of these Shia Militias to limit their involvement? Did Iran even intend on limiting their involvement? Who warned Iran not to let the Shai groups get too involved? The Russians? The US? The Turks?

It now appears, just as some had predicted, the Shia Militias are going to take a leading part in the battle for Mosul? Even if Iraq and Iran attempt to hide this event, the truth will get out. Iraq can claim their Anti-Terrorism Forces are leading the fight and Iran can deny the Shia Militias level of support, but there will be no hiding the truth and the truth is, the Iranian controlled Militias are going to be deeply involved in any successful fight for Mosul.

What will the Sunni nations stand for? The Shia Militias have had their way in Iraq in the past and the long-term repercussions have flamed the hatred of the two groups to new levels. 

Is anyone able to provide any level of checks and balances to this pending disaster?

What will the repercussions be if Shia Militias once again rain revenge on the Sunni citizens of Mosul?

Who will be there to stop it from taking place? Iraq’s government? I highly doubt it. Words. We will hear “words” from the Iraqi leadership, but then again, that is all we have heard from them for the past thirteen years….”words”!

Will the Tsar prevent yet another round of sectarian violence? Ask yourself the most simplistic question. What’s in it for the Tsar? If it makes the West look weak and if it makes the US look even more lost then they already are, then why would he.

Prevention? Is anyone or any nation actually in a position to prevent this Shia Militia event? Yes.

The Turks! The NATO member, Turkey and their Tyrannical leader!

Are the Turks talking to the Russians about the dangers of the Shia Mulitas and Mosul? Yes, and they have been for months. They have been talking not just about Mosul, but the Shia Militias actions in general. By the way, these Militias have been conducting “retaliation / revenge / events for years in Iraq.

Who do the Turks hold responsible for these Shia Militia groups? The Iraqis? Yes.

Why the Iraqis and not the real controlling nation, Iran? Because it’s easier to say Iraq is responsible for letting the groups on Iraqi soil than it is to say Iran controls Iraq. By the way, as a reminder, Iran does control Iraq!

As the email stories coming out of the US continued to mystify the Western world, it was easy to overlook a very serious statement by the Turkish leadership. A buildup of forces on the Iraqi border. This announcement was in conjunction with a continuing threat from Turkey over the issue of the Shia Militias.

The Sultan of the what he hopes is the new, Ottoman Empire, is trying hard to portray himself and Turkey as the defenders of the Sunni faithful in Syria and to some degree Iraq. Most of us realize his real goal is to prevent the Kurds from carving out a state along the Turkish border, but a the idea of a hostile occupation force being sent into Syria and or Iraq is much more supportable in the Sunni world if that bases for that force is saving the Sunni civilians from the crazed Shia Militias.

Can the Turks really afford to come to blows with these Iraqi supported, Iranian controlled Shia Militias?

Well, that depends on what the Sultan and the Tsar have come to terms with?

Notice I didn’t mention the Western / US / influence in this decision?

Does a large part of the world understand the US is preoccupied with one of the embarrassing Presidential Election in decades? Oh yes, and that my friends is even more dangerous then the Ottoman’s Sultan’s threats!

https://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2016/10/30/Erdogan-Turkey-aims-to-reinforce-troops-on-Iraq-border.html

THE TSAR’S POPULARITY IN EUROPE IS ON THE RISE AND WHO IS TO BLAME?

A story from the Tsar’s media puppet, Sputnik news, speaking to the comments of an Italian writer on how Europe is growing fonder of the Russian leader, should not surprise anyone. But, is it true? Is there any indication the Tsar’s popularity in Europe is growing? Actually, let me rephrase that question. Is the Tsar’s popularity in Europe better than the US’s?  Yes. Is that true universally in Europe? Nothing is universal in this world. The fact of the matter is, the Tsar popularity in Europe may very well be about to eclipse Europe’s opinion of US leadership. Just imagine where this conversation may be heading if Donald Trump wins the US Presidential Election? The Tsar may end up being the only leader in Europe that will talk to Trump!

So, let’s accept the fact the Tsar’s popularity is on the rise in Europe and let’s ask ourselves why?

A few months ago, I addressed the issue of weak, progressive leadership in Europe being blamed for the crisis of the human wave that descended upon the Continent. While all these compassionate European leaders where reaching out to waves of people they had no idea who they were or even where they came from, the Tsar was keeping the doors to Russia closed! Was he a villain for doing so? Give him a call and see if he regrets his actions! Putin’s popularity grows for one reason in Europe and it will continue to grow. He represents an attitude of “my people first”! Those in Europe who have a perception of the entire continent becoming unstable for the most part blame the massive waves of people simply walking into their countries. Are these Europeans selfish, heartless or even cruel? That is a matter of perception, but I will tell you the perception battle in Europe is being won by those who feel things are out of control.

In 2017, a series of elections will be held in Europe and I predict that at the end of the day, the liberal governments of Europe will be hard pressed to maintain power. Those who were once labeled “Radical Right” are taking on the perception of concerned citizens.

The swing to the right in Europe is undeniable. How far this swing continues is based upon the world’s ability to stabilize the Middle East and parts of Africa and both of those goals are going to be more and more  difficult to achieve, especially from Progressive, Liberal governments in Europe.

For now, Europe has one leader who gives the people of Europe the perception of placing his citizens first. Yep. You know who that is.

Why is Putin’s popularity growing in Europe? Is it because, as the West / US / says, he has a great propaganda media machine?

Why is it, when governance fails to meet the expectations of the people they are sworn to serve, it’s never their own fault?

The West / US / progressive attitude towards world problems has kicked the can so far down the street that the world has run out of street!

Putin’s media machine is not exclusively responsible for his growing popularity in Europe.

If his growing popularity worries European / US / leaders, they need only look in the mirror for most of the answer as to why it is happening.

The rise of Nationalism in Europe?

Is it going to be seen as a danger to the nations of Europe?

Is it going to be seen as being more dangerous that what is taking place now?

Is that the next movement?

Europe has a long history of repeating mistakes.

They are well on their way!

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201610271046804637-west-mainstream-funerals/

THE OTTOMANS, ARABS, PERSIANS AND THE RUSSIANS AND THE NEXT US PRESIDENT. WHO IS READY FOR THIS ISSUE?

Since the very beginning of the Arab Spring/ Tunisian Virus / I have commented on the changing vision of the Ottomans and their self-proclaimed Sultan…Egodan! (Yep. I still call him that, given I will never travel to Turkey).  

As the US citizens hear of yet another twist in the pathetic Presidential election events, it is a fact that whatever the FBI comes up, and I’m betting it’s something bad for Hillary, the changing environment of the Middle East continues to become more and more dangerous.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, something some readers may not even understand, it’s important to realize the tensions that are building in the Middle East.

Here is a quick cheat sheet version:

The Turks are not going to allow the Kurds, under any banner to negotiate land for support in Iraq or Syria.

The Iraqi government cannot allow the Shia Militias to control the retaken territory, even when Iraq is incapable of providing any level of organized government.

The Russians cannot afford to have the Daesh Terrorist to move back into Syria from Iraq.

The Iranian Government cannot allow Turks to openly defy the Iraqi government by executing military operations on Iraqi land.

The region is a mess and a dangerous mess at that.

Here is the most frightening fact in all madness that is called the Middle East.  Nobody seems to truly be on anyone’s side. Deals are struck without a lick of sincerity.

The Russians don’t care about Assad. It’s about leverage against the West and the Chess game called Eastern Europe.

The Ottomans don’t care about Western perception of their actions, even though they are still, for now, a key member of NATO; an organization the Russians would love to neutralize.

The Rebels fighting the Syrian government can see only one issue; Sunni vs Shia.

The region is a mixture of Superpower tension fused with a very dangerous, ageless sectarian conflict.

Does ether US Candidate have a “plan” for the region?

Even if they do, does the US still have the ability to influence events in the region or is the West just along for the ride?

How many jobs will the next President create?

What will be the future of the US economy?

What will be the makeup of the US Supreme Court in the next five years?

These all sound like very serious issues, but in the end, are they the ones that will determine the future of the US and its status in the world?

Can the US do anything other than watch what happens next in the region?

Is the future of peace in the region not to be decided or even influenced by the US?

Times are changing and the idea of the US once again becoming a bystander in major world affairs may not be too far off.

In January, a new mindset will take hold in the White House.

What will the next administration concentrate on and what will it simply sit back and watch?

The Ottomans, the Persians, the Arabs and the Russians. These are the players on the field. The West / US is quickly being relegated to the sidelines. 

TRUMP CLAIMS “WWIII” IN THE MIDDLE EAST IF HILLARY ELECTED. HOW FAR OFF IS HE?

Well, it’s a commonly known fact that Donald Trump has a talent for saying outlandish things, so making a bold statement about World War Three is not that surprising.  So, if that statement didn’t shock you enough, here is one that might make you tilt your head! Is he really that far off the truth? Could Hillary’s nomination set the wheels in motion for a conflict between what everyone use to call, “Superpowers”?

Yes! The answer is yes, but the answer is “yes” for any US President in any past, present or future election and the same holds true for any head of state who comes to power in Russia, China, India, France, England, Pakistan….you get my drift!  Any leader who assumes power in a nation with nuclear weapons can set the world up for disaster, so technically, Trump was correct! Now, that is not the point he was trying to make, so let’s take a look at what he was really alluding to.

Is there real friction between Putin and Clinton? Yes.

Is it serious, more serious than normal personality conflicts? Yes.

Does that mean a President Clinton would deliberately engage in a conflict with Russia over Syria? Now, that is a good question!

To better understand how this personality conflict could lead to an actual confrontation, let’s take a look at what makes both of these world leader’s tick.

A down and dirty look at Hillary Clinton: (My opinion)

A women who has been driven by her passion to be someone important from an early age.

A women who has endured a marriage to a man who has forced her to stand in his shadow from day one. Look, Bill had the charisma and Hillary never did and never will!

A women who grew to despise the very kind of man she was married to… an Alpha Male that looked at Women as inanimate objects for the sense of his pleasure. Men who reeked of self-confidence and could constantly put anyone on the defensive with just a few well placed, sharp words.   Bill had what she longed for, public trust, but yet, she was the one that gave Bill the opportunity to become President of the US.

Simply put, it’s her turn now and nobody is going to get in her way, especially an Alpha Male. She has endured too much to get to the end of this quest, a quest snatched  from underneath her when her own party turned on her in 2008 and nominated Obama; another Man should couldn’t stand.

A man hatter? Maybe not totally, but her dislike for strong confident men is not hard to spot.

Last but not least, a women who framed Putin as a “Bully” that must be handled firmly.

A down and dirty look at Putin: (My opinion)

A man who is driven by past. A past that saw the nation he served virtually dissolve overnight when he was working for the KGB stationed in Germany. Rumor has it, he feared he couldn’t even get his Wife back home the collapse happened so suddenly.

A man who felt like the West was responsible for destroying the country he had worked his whole life to secure.

An Alpha Male who’s quiet demeanor allows him never to overreact. (Hint… an Alpha Male).

A man who has set a vision for not only his future but the future of his beloved Mother Russia and is not willing to let anyone or anything alter that future.

A man who has survived in the Russian political climate by being paranoid.

A man who see a conspiracy behind every tree!

Last, but most certainly not least, a man who has absolutely no respect for Hillary Clinton and is convinced she has had a plan to limit or even destroy his vision.

Can these two personalities with all their flaws, lead to a confrontation?

As I have said before,  in the history of “civilized man, countless conflicts have their history based upon personality conflicts and unintended consequences.

These two people really don’t like each other and both have personality issues that make them more very likely to overreact at the spur of the moment.

 In the end, a Clinton, Putin struggle is a very dangerous issue.

Could it lead to WWIII? 

She is not the only person that gets to make that decision.

The beginning of each conflict has at least two sides.

“I am Women… hear me roar” vs “ Do not interfere with my plans”.

Now, that is dangerous! 

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S LEGACY  IN THE MIDDLE EAST….MOSUL?

I’ve attached a rather hard hitting sort article that is very representative of the perceptions of the US in Saudi and the much of the Middle East.  If the author’s intent is to show a selfish image of the US President, an image of “I need to end my time in office with a victory against ISIS”, well, this young man really doesn’t understand US politics. It’s always about the “me factor”! Legacy and the items that make up the total picture that is a trademark of political leadership.  So, Yes. That could very well be what the battle for Mosul is all about, from President’s Obama’s viewpoint.

The author’s second point is the topic that should worry US citizens more than just another “legacy” event, with the exception that this particular “legacy” event has US military member’s lives at risk!  Yes, the US President is conducting US policy in a selfish mindset. The author needs to remember, this is the President that worked hard to kill of American Exceptionalism and in doing so,  walked away from being the leader of the free world! It shouldn’t come as a surprise the US President is acting is a selfish fashion.  Now, back to his second point!

Is the support of the US in the battle for Mosul part of a plan to support the Democratic nominee for President? Well, it’s not too difficult to make that argument. A victory, however hollow it would be, against a tangible item, such as a city, in the conflict with the Daesh, from the same administration that Hillary Clinton served under would be spun into a great achievement. Well, that’s if President Obama was willing to share the accolades.

If someone wants to make the events of Mosul a discussion point in the US election and I don’t think they do, then here is the fundamental question that should be addressed. 

Will the recapture of Mosul truly make a difference to the people of the US and if so, please explain how?

I would love to hear the talking heads in DC spin that question, but then again, the American people have to care enough to even ask.

If Mosul is retaken before January, will President Obama take a victory lap? How would that help Hillary Clinton in the next two weeks? I can tell you this, Mosul will not fall in the next two weeks! The slice of success the Hillary camp may be looking for is associating with the administration that started the support for the recapture of Mosul.

Next set of questions:

If she is elected and the battle for Mosul is not over by January, will she continue the support?

Will she knowingly continue a process that will result in pushing the Daesh fighters back into Syria where the Russians will have to deal with them?

Is she willing to deal with the response the Tsar will have to such an event as you can be assured, there will be a reaction to such a plan?

Will the Daesh simply take a loss of Mosul as the final phase of their demise, a theory the pro Obama media in the US continues to try to sell to the US public?

In the end, the original question is the most important.

If Mosul is retaken, how will it benefit the US?

The sad news is the Candidate that is hoping to leverage US involvement in the battle of Mosul knows full well the American people don’t understand and really don’t care.

Sad, but true.

As for the author of this article, sorry my friend, the US has lost the leading part in the battle for world freedom and that is just the way the US President wants it.

https://english.alarabiya.net/en/views/news/middle-east/2016/10/24/OPINION-The-danger-of-Obama-s-last-days-as-President.html

 FIRST 100 DAYS. LET'S LOOK AT THIS TOPIC ONE MORE TIME: 

It’s always entertaining to me when I hear US Presidential Candidates expounding on what their “first hundred days” in office are going to look like. It doesn’t matter what political party the candidate is from, the stance is always the same. “I’m going to really shake things up”. My Administration will do this…or that… and so on and so on! Like most, I’ve never put much stock in anything these folks say. The words over the entry doors of the United States Army’s Sergeant Major Academy at Biggs Army Airfield in El Paso Texas are alien to both US political parties. “Deeds before words”! Hollow promises are just part of the political process and it’s depressing to realize that just about every modern society has come to expect that fact. Not only is it depressing, it is becoming dangerous!

The First One hundred Days:

The concept of The First One Hundred Days has another fatal flaw. Regardless of the “Visions” political leaders have, the rest of the world gets a vote! What does that mean? Who votes? Well, let me explain. Does anyone believe that any nation that is close to changing leadership is not analyzed for possible impacts on other nations?  Why Is Europe’s hair on fire over the possibility of Donald Trump winning the election in the US? What are they “anticipating”? Most of them have gone to great lengths to express their disapproval of Donald Trump and have done so based on some analytical review of his possible actions in the US White House. As another example, take a look at the visual word of the ex-President / Drug Dealer / from Mexico…Mr. Fox! Yes... I said Drug Dealer…trust me on that one! So, my point is this. As much as Donald Trump and or Hillary Clinton may make glamorous statements about what will take place once they are in the White House, what both of them cannot predict is the actions taken by those who oppose the US. Like I said, others get a vote!

What is the Tsar’s plan for “The First Hundred Days” of President Trump?

What is the Tsar’s plan for “The First Hundred Days” of President Clinton?

What are the plans of the Chinese, Iran, and Turkey? Yep, I tossed our NATO partner in there. If you don’t understand why, then you need to work on your world awareness.

Will a President Trump or a President Clinton have time to think about all the promises they made; as if they intended on keeping them anyway!

The elections in the US are in two weeks. The change of leadership doesn’t take place until January 2017.

Will those who don’t like the US wait to make “The First Hundred Days” manageable?

Who is most likely to challenge the new President, something that takes place from time to time?

If you are in the US and you are still listening to the visions of ether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, I would suggest you wonder about what will take place in those first hundred days, or for that matter the next four years?

It’s easy to make pie in the sky promises when you realize the public doesn’t believe you to begin with. It becomes catastrophic when a new President is unprepared for the challenges place in front of them, even before they place their hand on the Bible? Just look back to 2009 if you need an example.

CYBER ATTACKS . "STRONGER TOGETHER", UNLESS YOU ARE AGAINST HER!

WikiLeaks and soon to be President of the US, Hillary Clinton, if you listen to the mainstream media in the US, are starting off on a very bad note. Clinton supporters may not believe it, but the rest of the world equates the banning of Julian Assange by Ecuador’s government as a direct result of his attacks on Hillary’s campaign.  

Would the government of the greatest nation in the free world exert such influence on another nation for the sake of one party’s political campaign? Well, in the past eight years in the US, anything is possible.  

The speed of the US Department of State’s denial, clever use of words in this post, for responsibility of Assange’s blocked internet access was more than suspicious.

Think about the gravity of this accusation. The “Fix” is in so hard by the seated US administration for Hillary Clinton to become the next President that the Department of State demands an individual’s rights to internet access must be denied? Is that not just a little be Orwellian?

So, here comes the other side of this story. Today, the US and parts of Europe suffered a Denial attack on multiple internet access sites. The US press went with the story all the way up to someone mentioning it might be a retaliation for the actions taken by the US on Assange. Good grief, even one of the primary Clinton campaign media support groups, NBC, ran the story for at least a few hours.

Is this it? Is this how the next President of the US is going to react to people exposing issues about her?

“Stronger together”….unless you are against her and then you better watch out!

Oh, by the way. Did anyone notice how fast the US once again tied this whole issue to the Russians? All of a sudden, whenever the Progressive Liberals in the US have something not go their way, “It’s the Russians fault”!

When I was a kid, living in Florida in the early 60s, every time a Hurricane came close to us, my Mother would say, “It’s that Communist Weather Machine the Russians have”!

I wonder how long before Global Warming is a Russian event?

Well. I better stop there before my internet access turns off!

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/u-s-urged-ecuador-act-against-assange-n669271

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/21/technology/ddos-attack-popular-sites/index.html