A Syria Deal Could be Done

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
August 23, 2018

John Bolton made some comments this week about a Syria deal with Russia.

This hadn’t been discussed in such frank terms by any high-level official.

The Telegraph:

Donald Trump’s national security adviser yesterday warned Russia there would be no deal on Syria unless Iranian troops withdrew from the country.

The US and Israel have been pressuring Moscow over the matter of Iran’s presence in Syria, where thousands of Iranians are fighting in support of the Bashar al-Assad regime.

However, yesterday’s comments from John Bolton marked the first time Washington had issued such a direct ultimatum.

“We’re going to see what we and others can agree in terms of resolving the conflict in Syria,” Mr Bolton, who is known to be a hawk on foreign policy, told reporters during a visit to Israel. “But the one prerequisite there is the withdrawal of all Iranian forces back in Iran.”

…

Mr Bolton said that Russian President Vladimir Putin, who met President Trump in Helsinki last month, had told the US that Moscow could not compel the Iranians to leave Syria.

“But he also told us that his interest and Iran’s were not exactly the same,” said Mr Bolton. “So we’re obviously going to talk to him about what role they can play.”

Russia is trying to draw a line under the seven-year civil war, despite a looming battle for the final rebel stronghold of Idlib in the north.

Moscow wants the US to withdraw its some 2,000 troops from Syria, support its plan for rebuilding the country and help convince refugees scattered around the world to return home.

The first demand coincides with Mr Trump’s own plans, with the president announcing earlier this year that he would be recalling soldiers from the war as soon as possible.

Though Mr Bolton’s preconditions could now see US troops remain much longer than Mr Trump had planned.

Mr Bolton said yesterday that “the Russians are stuck there at the moment,” which he claimed gave Washington leverage in its talks with Moscow.

“And I don’t think they want to be stuck there,” he said. “I think their frenetic diplomatic activity in Europe indicates that they’d like to find somebody else, for example, to bear the cost of reconstructing Syria – which they may or may not succeed in doing.”

This is all phrased very weirdly by the media. Bolton’s “hard line” is on a single issue, which obviously must happen. There is no way you can make any deal in Syria without removing Iran. So despite Bolton’s purposefully boisterous method of self-expression, this is like a beautiful woman telling you “I will only agree to have sex with you if you buy me fifteen dollars worth of cocktails first.”

A lot of people analyzing this are analyzing it completely wrongly. And there is a whole lot that I am seeing now that I was not seeing before.

This is the big neocon crazy just playing lapdog/maddog for Trump. He is openly saying he wants to work with Russia to fix Syria, and the only demand is one that would be required for any deal whatsoever.

We saw with Korea how Trump applies the Art of the Deal to foreign policy – successfully, he applied it.

And basically the situation is this: you would either have to declare war on Israel, or Israel has to be involved in negotiations – with Bibi being able to walk away claiming some kind of a victory.

I believe that this was the biggest part of the secret discussion between Trump and Putin in Helsinki. I don’t think they sat around talking about goofy nonsense from the media about “hacking.”

Three days before the summit, Bibi Netanyahu came out and said he was comfortable with Assad staying in power in Syria, and had no issue with him.

Two weeks before that, Bibi flew to Moscow to ask the Czar’s permission to bomb Iranian bases in Syria, and apparently got it.

Israel launched a relatively massive strike on Iranian bases in Syria, without directly targeting any Assad regime installations. In fact, clearly taking explicit care to avoid doing so.

This is after Israel, lined up with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the Obama Administration as the instigators of the “civil war” in Syria, which was in fact a bunch of foreign terrorists being funded by said powers to overthrow the Assad regime.

Israeli officials openly expressed support for ISIS.

And many American Jews said the same.

As late as February of this year, Israel was arming ISIS.

So, we’re working backwards here, but this is all lining up and a clear plan is emerging.

Chronologically, it looks like this:

• Beginning in 2011, “The West” (American/Israeli/Sunni alliance) funds terrorists to overthrow Assad
• Whereas every other “Arab Spring” victim fell, Assad, with the help of Iran and Hezbollah, holds out against the terrorist forces
• Turkey serves as ally to Israel and the Gulf States, allowing terrorists and weapons to pour across her Syrian border, with ISIS oil (much of it shipped to Israel from Turkish ports) and “refugees” – which appear suspiciously like an army – flowing the other way
• In August of 2015, Merkel officially acts unilaterally to suspend the Dublin Accords, encouraging millions of migrants (95% of which were military-aged men) to march to Germany through Europe
• In September of 2015, when the terrorists are doing very well, Russia moves in to support the Assad regime, largely crippling ISIS
• In November of 2015, Turkey shoots down a Russian jet
• Shortly after this incident, Erdogan apologizes, and begins to move toward Russia, presumably as a result of some deal between Erdogan and Putin that was not made public
• Obama ups funding to terrorists through “open secret” CIA programs designed to transfer weapons directly to ISIS
• Hillary Clinton runs on a platform of being more aggressive in Syria, effectively campaigning on WWIII with Russia, while Donald Trump runs on the opposite platform, showing support for the Assad regime (while maintaining a hardline against Iran), and wanting to be friends with Russia
• In November of 2016, Donald Trump wins the election and becomes President of America
• Donald Trump pulls funding for CIA terrorist programs, allowing Russia to exterminate ISIS, and restore order to the country
• Iran begins aggressively building bases in Syria
• Israel and the Sunni Gulf states continue funding terrorists, to no avail
• There is an aggressive push by American-based Israeli lobbying groups and the Jewish-run American media to push Trump into further action against Assad, using faked atrocity propaganda; he and the people deny them this
• In January of 2018, Turkey invades Northern Syria, eradicating Kurdish groups that were aligned with ISIS against Assad
• In May of 2018, Trump makes a symbolic gesture toward Netanyahu by moving the American embassy to Jerusalem
• In the same month, Trump nullifies Obama’s deal with Iran, sending the country into crisis
• In June of 2018, Netanyahu flies to Moscow, and immediately upon arriving back in Tel Aviv orders massive strikes on Iranian bases in Syria
• In July of 2018, Netanyahu announces that he’s talking with Assad, and no longer believes him to be a threat – in fact, he now believes he is good for Israel
• Days later, Trump and Putin meet in Helsinki
• Netanyahu continues to make statements in support of Assad, and has several meetings with him
• Putin says it’s time to withdraw US troops, rebuild Syria, and bring the “refugees” back home
• John Bolton comes out and says that the only real concern of the United States is removing Iran from Syria

So then: what it looks like to me is that Putin and Trump have put Netanyahu between a rock and a hard place, and effectively removed the option of removing the Assad regime and allowing Syria to degrade into a Libya-style terrorist chaos state.

Netanyahu’s compensation, beyond what he has already gotten with the symbolic embassy move and general support for the apartheid regime in Israel, is that Iranian bases will be removed from Syria, while Russians will continue to serve as protectorate.

Everything seems to be lined up for a Trump/Putin/Bibi summit where we just finally end this thing.

Iran, of course, is pretty well screwed. But that country has a lot of problems. They have attempted to maintain an extreme Islamic regime, while doing nothing to stem a middle class organizing against them, as they pour their entirety of what is left of their gutted economy into a holy war.

I am sympathetic to Iran’s desire to crush Israel and push the Jews into the sea. But they’ve made a lot of mistakes. And though their goals may be noble, they’ve backed themselves into a corner. Backed themselves into several different corners, in fact.

And the basic fact of adult reality is that with the current level of diaspora Jewish power in both America and Russia, there is simply no way that either Putin or Trump could somehow support an agenda to destroy Israel and push Jews into the sea. It’s a nice fantasy, but that isn’t real life.

Remember the fact that Trump also has to manage the fact that a massive part of his base is the lunatic evangelicals, who believe that the state of Israel is some kind of divinely ordained regime.

The best they can do is stabilize the Middle East and restrict the Israeli and diaspora ability to continue to create terrorist chaos states in the region. They can neuter Netanyahu’s insane agenda and allow him to save face by also neutering the equally insane (though as stated, assuredly noble) agenda to literally wipe Israel off the map.

Pictures of Trump with Netanyahu show that Trump is the dominant personality.

The body language of dominant vs submissive couldn’t be more clear.

Trump is in charge of this relationship.

And Bibi knows that.

There is clearly leverage there, including, but not limited to, the ways that the US could help or hinder the Israeli leader in dealing with his own domestic problems. He is facing a liberal revolt, a bunch of investigations and potential indictments. The embassy move, just for example, was viewed as a massive triumph by his base. And it cost the US nothing other than whatever it costs to build an embassy (which I’m sure Trump got done ahead of schedule and under budget).

The Resonating Effect of These Events

Ultimately, the entire Middle East is simply a bunch of desert savages squabbling with one another in an inane, gross manner. The only reason it ever became a major issue that we all have to be subjected to is the overwhelming power of the diaspora within the West.

Just so, the problem of Israel cannot be solved without dealing with the power of the diaspora.

If Persians and/or Arabs were somehow able to “wipe Israel off the map” tomorrow, we would not be dealing with a better situation in the West. In fact, the six million Jews living in Israel would simply flee to our countries. This is highly undesirable.

Trump and Putin being involved with a deal to solve the Syrian situation would go a very long way toward solidifying a Russian-American alliance. The media could try to criticize it, and they would, but a legitimate deal on Syria would be such a massive win for both Trump and Putin that the fake news media would appear even more deranged than they already do.

This deal would at the very least give Trump the ability to lift the sanctions on Russia. And probably to officially (or semi-officially) recognize Crimea. Though the latter can wait – that bridge isn’t going anywhere – the most immediate issue is the lifting of sanctions and the restoration of diplomatic normalcy.

Syria is the crux of the entire Middle East conflict. And what I have laid out here would neuter both Israel and Iran. The clean-up would just be clean-up.

The Iranian Clean-Up

There would have to be a separate deal with Iran. They wouldn’t have any choice. If I had an office with 25 120 IQ Persian-speakers, I could overthrow the government of Iran over the internet in ten days. The combined intelligence agencies of America and Israel could get it done in a few weeks (they’ve got guys on the ground that I wouldn’t need).

Iran knows this. They made a lot of bad decisions. You can subdue a peasant revolt with bullets, but you cannot subdue an intelligencia-backed middle class revolt against an authoritarian regime with tear gas. And certainly not with bullets.

They have a collapsed economy, which is a direct result of obsessive involvement in a military conflict that the disaffected educated Persian population – much of which is living in a diaspora now, while fueling domestic dissent (this is an organic situation resulting from the nature of the regime, nothing to do with Jews) – feels has nothing to do with them.

The people running this regime, like virtually every leader on the planet sans Donald Trump, do not have any real understanding of the internet. It has been demonstrated that you can use social media to remotely overthrow governments that were a lot more stable than Iran’s current government. During the last round of protests in Iran, participants used VPNs to bypass social media blocks. They already know how to do this. If there was a revolution that got hotter than the last round of protests – which I believe were both a test run and a threat, rather than a real attempt at a coup – what would their options be? Shut off all telecommunications? Shut off electricity completely? You would then have a peasant revolt, on top of the “student protests.” The government would fall quickly and the country would descend into a real civil war, which would then be flooded with Sunni terrorist mercenaries from  East, West and North – presumably with air support from the South.

The good news is: Trump has stated clearly that he is not seeking regime change in Iran, and I believe this. Solving the Syria crisis simply to create a new massive crisis in Iran would be pointless. It would bleed into Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan (just as extremist and/or mercenary occupants of those states would bleed into it), and be a much bigger disaster than any previous Middle East disaster thus far.

Some deal has to be made with the existing regime of Iran. To some extent there is a game of chicken involved here, where Trump would have the ability to, as stated, collapse the country, but, as stated, this would be the biggest disaster since WWII, and Iran knows Trump doesn’t want that.

But I have never seen My President blink first. 

He can give them back their economy, all these deals with Europe, allow the regime to remain in place, in exchange for ceasing aggression against Israel. That will require extreme reforms of their own government, as they have based the entire regime’s existence on the weird assertion that they can fight the entire world because they are an old country – but that is kinda their problem.

The Palestinian Clean-Up

The more complicated situation is the Palestinian situation. Even if Iran agreed not to fund Hamas, you still have the issue of the fact that it is completely impossible to go back to 1967 borders, and there really isn’t much more “Palestinian territory” left, due to the settlements program.

This whole thing is dependent on Netanyahu backing down while maintaining face with his own base. And he can’t really remove a single settlement – or even pledge to stop building them – and do that.

So it’s an incredibly difficult situation that doesn’t have any clear answer.

Ultimately, I don’t think the Syria deal should include any mention of Palestine. However that situation is going to be dealt with, it is both a much more complex and much less relevant element in all of this.

Trump’s goal for the Middle East should be – and I believe is – restoring pre-Bush II normalcy in the region. And the Palestinian thing is obviously a lot older than that – it has simply been intensified by the general chaos surrounding it. Basically, the entire Islamic world understands very clearly that Jews are behind all of the problems, and has used Palestine as a rallying point. If you don’t have Jewish-backed terrorists overthrowing governments everywhere, the Palestinian issue will become much less of a focal point.

Of course, there is the whole issue of the international outrage over Palestine. But that can ultimately serve the ends of eventually pressuring a two-state situation.

Furthermore, fixing the Palestinian crisis wouldn’t really do anything for the much more important domestic situation in the US, or the relationship with Russia. None of the “free Palestine” people are going to become Trump supporters if he manages to free Palestine.

I am also not bothered by the festering leftist anti-Semitism in the West being driven by the Palestinian situation.

Cleaning Up the Rest of It

Al-Sadr just wants to be king of Iraq. He doesn’t appear to be driven by anything other than that. And he appears to have the agency to do so. He’s a highly capable individual with a very clear personal agenda and the apparent capacity to rule the country – and he’s ready to deal.

Erdogan is a bizarre individual who is probably going to end up going over a line at some point with someone he underestimated. But for now, Turkey appears to be playing ball.

Sisi is fine. Egypt is good.

Yemen is just a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. If Iran comes to the table, as they are going to have to (see above), that situation will solve itself. Worst case, they can partition it.

Libya is really Europe’s problem. But they’re not going to solve it. So someone is going to have to throw backing behind a secular strongman who is competent on the level of Gaddafi. Europe, however, should pay for the rebuilding of the country, even if they don’t take the initiative to get it started.

With Afghanistan, the obvious solution is simply to return control of the country to the Taliban. However, I’m pretty sure that is not possible. The Taliban has agreed to come to Moscow for peace talks.

So who knows. Maybe it is possible. The Afghan authority has said they won’t attend the talks.

If the West stopped supporting the Afghan authority and the various terrorist groups in the country, the Taliban would just take it over again. Rapidly. They have wide popular support, and are sort of the natural aristocracy of this particular nation of cave people. They once cleared out the opium fields, and it would certainly be good for America if they did that again. The existing Afghan authority appears to be entirely made-up of opium lords.

The issue with that is simply that due to the Bush-era neocon propaganda, most Americans, if polled, would presumably answer that Osama Bin Laden was the leader of the Taliban. At one point, the majority of Americans believed that Saddam Hussein personally planned and ordered 9/11. So regardless of the fact that Osama Bin Laden was not a member of the Taliban, they have a pretty tainted brand, and “Trump restores Taliban to power” would not be a good look. “Trump allows Putin to restore Taliban to power” would be a less-bad look, however.

As for Europe…

All of this has potential implications on the European migrant crisis.

Assad and Putin have both said that they want the “refugees” in Europe to return to Syria. Trump has said explicitly, in front of Theresa May, that they are destroying Europe.

But there are several problems with this:

1. The migrants do not want to return to Syria
2. The European authorities do not want the migrants to return to Syria
3. Most of the migrants are not even from Syria

I believe the primary objective right now, with regards to the Golden Path, is the solidification of an alliance between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. What Europe is doing with these migrants is outside of the scope of that, presently.

In the longer term, I think that American/Russian endorsements of nationalistic, anti-EU parties will eventually result these parties restoring order and removing these migrants. At least from countries that are not named “Germany” or “Sweden.” Those two countries appear to have a very real death drive.

What I do not want to entertain is fantasies of Russia and America attempting to save Europe from themselves due to some moral imperative. Such a thing has never happened in history, save for in the imaginations of the speechwriters of politicians. There has to be an interest of at least one of our two nations served by any actions taken to pressure Europe in any direction. And right now, both have an interest in collapsing the EU and disbanding NATO. The process of doing these two things would lead to populist governments that remove migrants.

But no, I do not foresee that resolving the Syrian conflict will result in a single migrant returning to Syria from Europe.

I Believe This

I believe what I have written here can and will happen.

I believe that it has to happen.

Of course, my belief in this is irrelevant.

The relevant thing is that it is possible. Everything I have outlined here is within the realm of the possible.