Ghost Dog
Ghost Dog's JournalThe CIA's Dark Prince Doesn't Want War With Iran
... Irans view is now that the U.S. will not launch the full-scale military attack that was previously expected, that the U.S. is increasingly isolated in its actions against Iran among its allies in Europe and even in the U.K., a senior source who works closely with Irans Petroleum Ministry told OilPrice.com last week. At the same time, Iran believes it can lever the U.S. back into a newly renegotiated nuclear deal involving the removal of all sanctions, he added.
Up until a couple of months or so ago, the U.S. was actively considering a full-scale military operation against Iran and was 98 per cent ready for such an all-out attack, according to senior political sources in Washington and London spoken to by OilPrice.com last week. The remaining two percent involved the final movement of men and materiel into attack positions and finalising the technology and software involved, said one. At that point, [John] Bolton [U.S. National Security Advisor] was the dominant voice in [U.S. President Donald] Trumps ear, and this meant moving at least 120,000 troops into position to augment the [U.S.S Abraham Lincoln aircraft] carrier group that was already in place. At about the same point, though, some of the Presidents very close longstanding personal advisers and very senior CIA figures persuaded him that it would be an utter disaster, both militarily and economically, given the scale of the Iranian military and the terrain involved, its ability to launch guerrilla warfare anywhere in the world through its military proxies Hezbollah and Hamas and others, and its ability to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, one of the sources added. In short, it was put to him that such a [full scale] military attack on Iran would lead to consequences potentially of a least the same length as the Afghanistan conflict and of at least the severity of Islamic States peak power, he added...
--- Opposing Bolton and the other hawks in the U.S. are some of the most senior figures in the U.S. intelligence community. One of these, Dan Coats, left his position as Director of National Intelligence U.S. National Intelligence purportedly over differences with others in the Trump administration over Russia and North Korea but also shortly after even he testified to a Senate Committee prior to the withdrawal of the U.S from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) deal that there was no indication that Iran was attempting to develop a nuclear weapon and that Tehran remained in compliance with the deal.
Another notable exception to the pro-attack view, OilPrice.com understands, is the CIAs Head of Iran Mission Center, Michael DAndrea. Known as the Dark Prince for his work in the U.S.s sharp-end counter-terrorism operations after the 9/11 attacks, and even the key figure in organising the elimination of one of Hezbollahs leaders, Imad Mougniyeh, in Damascus, in 2008 when DAndrea was Head of the CIAs Counterterrorism Center (from 2006) he has voiced concerns over such an overt military strategy...
https://oilprice.com/Geopolitics/Middle-East/The-CIAs-Dark-Prince-Doesnt-Want-War-With-Iran.html#
It's Boris Johnson or Caroline Lucas
I agree with this analysis and propose Caroline Lucas for interim PM.
GD
Even if this unlikely job-share took off it could not fly with any success for very good non-party reasons. An interim administration elected simply to extend Article 50 and call an election and/or hold a referendum is not merely interim. Stopgap it may be, but what kind of stopgap it is will decide whether it is publicly acceptable. The Lib Dems seek a restoration of the days before the referendum. They have selected Harman and Clarke not because they are wise but because they are safe.
Safety at a moment like this is regressive. You cannot stand still in a hurricane. We need boldness and daring that is bolder and more daring than Johnson. Johnson claims to represent the future, or at least a future. It may be a bleak intensification of Thatcherism, yet it appears modern in spirit and positive in its claims. As an electoral showdown is looming whatever happens, Johnson and his boosterism must be opposed by a person and a set of arguments that make a better, more credible, higher-energy claim on the future, to mobilise the forces against him in a way that is appealing and not just polarising or, worst of all, reasonable in a Harman and Clarke kind of way.
The only way to stop Johnson, therefore, is with the widest possible alliance of forces who oppose a dangerous rupture with the EU, led by an MP who is backed by Labour. If Corbyn can command such a majority the job should be his. But his very qualities of unbending integrity count against him as an alliance-builder. And his claims to lead the country against a Johnson Brexit have been undermined by the catastrophic error of regarding relations with the EU as a secondary issue that can be weaponised to lever Labour into office, rather than a fundamental call about the nature and direction of the country. I don't know the House of Commons, but everyone seems to agree that Corbyn cannot command the widest possible alliance. In which case he has to ask someone else who can. Someone who can do it for all of us.
There is only one MP who is so qualified: Caroline Lucas. She personifies the commitment to democracy, the desire to unite people and an outstanding record on the environment, and is not tainted by participating in the old regime. She also has the advantage of her weakness: she does not represent a party threat to any of those calculating their own benefit...
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/its-boris-johnson-or-caroline-lucas/?fbclid=IwAR0dpHoJngDnQ7KU3Ve-KdRvE1jbUXdiyVKVj06uhruhHLfGl3HoJWoKpKQ
Government Set To Fall. Monarchy Beware:
Ex-Ambassador Craig Murray, who yesterday pointed out that:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/08/boris-johnson-crosses-the-rubicon-we-must-react-now/
Today writes:
The very appointment of Boris Johnson by Elizabeth Saxe Coburg Gotha was a constitutional outrage. Johnson may have been selected by Conservative Party members, but that is not the qualification to be PM. Johnson very plainly did not command a majority in the House of Commons, proven by the fact that still at no stage has he demonstrated that he does...
... The monarchy will always be an extremely useful institution in promoting the political aims of the upper classes, not least because of the ludicrous media promulgation of its infallibility. When you have former Prime Minister John Major, senior Tories like Philip Hammond and Michael Heseltine, and the Speaker of the House of Commons himself all talking of consitutional outrage, it is plainly preposterous to insist that the monarchy cannot, by definition, have done anything wrong.
The Queen has appointed a Prime Minister who does not have the support of the House of Commons and then has conspired to prevent the House of Commons from obstructing her Prime Minister. That is not the action of a politically neutral monarchy. The institution should have been abolished decades ago. I do hope that all those who recognise the constitutional outrage, will acknowledge the role of the monarchy and that the institution needs to be swiftly abolished...
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/08/the-queens-active-role-in-the-right-wing-coup/
Treacherous situations
Kate Osamor, Labour MP for Edmonton ... wrote: The Queen should look at what happened to her cousin Tino ex King of Greece when you enable a right wing coup! Monarchy abolished! ... Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said he "protested in the strongest possible terms on behalf of my party" in a letter to the Queen and called for a meeting alongside other opposition members of the Privy Council... Senior Labour MP Yvette Cooper said he was "trying to use the Queen to concentrate power in his own hands" while fellow ex-cabinet minister Ben Bradshaw said the move would "drag the monarch into an unprecedented constitutional crisis...
--- The Queen may face more "treacherous situations" in the weeks ahead after being drawn into the "contentious and divisive" Brexit issue, an expert has said.
Mike Gordon, professor of constitutional law at the University of Liverpool, said if MPs launch a successful no-confidence vote in Boris Johnson, to challenge his proroguing of parliament, the monarch could be in a difficult position if the Tory leader refuses to resign. While, if the opposition parties manage to get legislation through parliament to stop a no-deal Brexit, the government could advise the Queen not to give it royal assent and so become law, against accepted convention...
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/labour-mp-says-the-monarchy-could-be-abolished-after-queen-approves-boris-johnsons-plan-to-suspend-parliament-094358752.html
Collapse us if you can, government dares Brexit opponents
Source: Reuters
LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister Boris Johnsons government on Thursday challenged opponents of Brexit in parliament to collapse the government or change the law if they wanted to thwart Britains exit from the European Union...
... Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Brexit supporter who is in charge of managing government business in parliament, dared opponents to do their worst.
All these people who are wailing and gnashing of teeth know that there are two ways of doing what they want to do, Rees-Mogg told the BBC. One, is to change the government and the other is to change the law. If they do either of those that will then have an effect. If they dont have either the courage or the gumption to do either of those then we will leave on the 31st of October in accordance with the referendum result. ...
Read more: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/collapse-us-if-you-can-government-dares-brexit-opponents-idUKKCN1VJ0JT?il=0
Johnsons maneuver gives his political opponents even less time to prevent a chaotic no-deal Brexit before the Oct. 31 withdrawal deadline. But the decision outraged critics and is serving as a unifying force for the disparate opposition...
https://apnews.com/38fce2910afa4af799c77362f84433b3
Controversial Iranian VLCC enters Turkish waters (and hesitates...)
The Iranian VLCC Adrian Darya 1, formerly known as Grace 1, entered Turkish territorial waters this morning and appears to be on course for the port of Mersin...
... The fully laden ship must offload part of its cargo in order to transit the Suez Canal.
Meanwhile, the Stena Impero, which has been detained in Iranian waters since July 19, likely in retaliation for the capturing of the Iranian VLCC earlier, could be freed soon.
Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif promised today to expedite the legal affairs with regards to the UK-flagged tanker.
https://splash247.com/controversial-iranian-vlcc-enters-turkish-waters/
China buying Iranian oil: Trump's two biggest foreign policy headaches converge
...
... I think the two issues have been converging for a while, Ali Vaez, an Iran analyst with the thinktank Crisis Group said.. . The main reason that China initially complied with the US policy and significantly reduced oil imports from Iran was because it hoped it could be a card that bore some dividends in the trade negotiations. As soon as those talks ran into dead lock, China turned around and resumed oil imports from Iran. Efforts to evade the sanctions have so far been limited, Vaez and other analysts watching the issue closely say the messaging is clear: China can make or break the US maximum pressure policy.
Chinas change of tack in turn prompted fresh US sanctions in July targeting the Chinese crude oil importer Zhuhai Zhenrong, which accounts for more than 60% of Chinas trade with Iran, for violating US law by accepting crude oil. Vaez notes, however, that access to Iranian oil is not simply a question of leverage for China, but reflects its long-term strategic aim not to be complicit in US moves it fears may lead to regime change in Iran. China has a complex calculation regarding Iran. It is the only oil-rich country where the US does not have a foothold. From the point of view of Chinas energy needs, Iran is very important, he said. But on the other hand China has bigger fish to fry with the US with trade negotiations and it needs to balance relations with other oil-rich countries like Saudi Arabia.
Sanam Vakil, a senior researcher at Chatham House, believes the subterfuges currently involved reflect a desire by both China and Iran to avoid an overt confrontation over the issue, as Tehran becomes ever more creative about its oil exports. For Vakil, one of the key takeaways has been the Trump administrations inability to manage the overlapping crises it has fuelled. Its unfortunate for US foreign policy that it has so many interconnected crises. Its impossible for the US government to meet all of of its objectives, he said.
Vaez echoes the sentiment, adding that Chinese imports of Iranian oil may also have discrete support in European capitals still committed to keeping the Iran nuclear deal alive despite Washingtons unilateral withdrawal. Im not sure the Trump administration has the bandwidth or the strategic understanding to connect all these dots. Thats why it's been its own worst enemy. Too many of its main files, including North Korea and Iran, are dependent on how the Trump administration treats China. In practice, however, this is an administration which, when offered the opportunity to fight too many fires at same time, will jump at it. ...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/29/why-is-china-hiding-its-oil-tankers-from-us-trackers
US officially launches joint maritime coalition to patrol Gulf waters
https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-officially-launches-joint-maritime-coalition-patrol-gulf-waters
Published date: 28 August 2019 21:26 UTC
The United States launched its joint maritime security initiative in the Gulf, with the support of Australia, the United Kingdom and Bahrain... The US says the initiative is charged with protecting merchant vessels around the Strait of Hormuz - through which a third of the worlds oil passes - following Iran's seizure of a British oil tanker in the Strait last month...
... The US announced its decision to form the protective force in July, days after Iranian forces downed a US drone near the strait... The US has been trying to recruit allies for its maritime security coalition for weeks, but only the UK, Australia and Bahrain have joined. France has declined to take part, as has Germany...
... Australia has sent a warship, surveillance aircraft and an unknown number of troops to assist, while the UK has sent at least two warships. It was unclear what kind of assistance Bahrain may provide.
A civil war state of mind... (Toynbee)
MPs will try to stop him proroguing them. Astonishingly, this unelected prime minister has so far only spent one day in the Commons under their scrutiny, and now, after five weeks away, he will face them for just one week before banishing them for an unprecedented further five weeks. They get just one tight week to rise up and rebel, when surely they will vote in great numbers against the prorogation the Speaker calls a constitutional outrage ... an offence against the democratic process and the rights of parliamentarians as the peoples elected representatives. Johnsons riposte will be, So what? Their vote has no legal standing...
... This aggressive provocation of parliament widens the great Brexit divide into a civil war state of mind. This is the battleground Johnson seeks himself as roguish, freewheeling representative of the peoples will, defender of the referendum versus the Westminster establishment and the elite, as represented by MPs elected to parliament. Explosive, dangerous, unresolvable, David Camerons reckless, Tory-pleasing referendum cut right through the constitution, and now it lies badly damaged...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/28/proroguation-parliament-boris-johnson-brexit
The struggle for power between executive and legislature is not a new one. But the possibility of John Bercow taking the lead in the battle to stop Brexit offers the prospect of a modern-day stand-off, every bit as compelling as the one that took place in the months before the Civil War.
... As speaker, Bercow alone can decide whats permitted by parliamentary precedent, and hes shown himself willing to ignore precedent entirely and to tear up the rules when needed...
... So now will be the time for Bercow to push the nuclear button. Im sure he will bend parliamentary procedure or rip it up, depending on your viewpoint to allow MPs to pass legislation requiring Johnson to seek an extension to Article 50, using a beefed-up version of the Standing Order 24 procedure, allowing for emergency debates. If theres a prospect of revoking Article 50 before 31 October, Bercow will ensure that there is time for such a law to pass... In doing so, we would face a constitutional crisis like no other seen in modern times, with a direct stand-off between the elected government on one side, and the speaker, standing for some (but by no means all), of the House of Commons on the other...
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-parliament-supended-no-deal-queens-speech-john-bercow-a9082651.html
The hard environmental and the social science is in.
Many if not most people living in societies dependant on fragile financial and waste-generating just-in-time production, global distribution and frantic consumption processes will be FUCKED, as you put it, but more because of the nature of such societies and all the other environmental damage rather than climate change itself, in my opinion.
Course Change
A change of course now has the tanker, a VLCC (very large crude carrier), previously on course for Suez, now on course to pass North of Cyprus, heading towards Mersin in Turkey, for example.
A US online journal yesterday reported:
Splash understands US military forces have been practicing taking over the VLCC...
https://splash247.com/john-bolton-reiterates-us-stance-towards-controversial-iranian-vlcc/
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayHometown: Canary Islands Archipelago
Home country: Spain
Member since: Wed Apr 19, 2006, 01:59 PM
Number of posts: 16,881