“The coronavirus arrived in Djibouti. A Chinese man who works in the Free Zone of Pk23 has been quarantined. He came back from his holiday in China and passed out in their office, feeling feverish . Please take care and inform the family”

Pompeo to Iraq: If You Kick Us Out, We Will Bury You

By Mike Whitney, January 21, 2020

The Trump administration is threatening to destroy Iraq’s economy by withholding a critical source of money that is controlled by the Federal Reserve. The threat is a response to the Iraqi parliament’s unanimous decision to end Washington’s 17 year-long military occupation. The Iraqi people and their representatives in parliament are incensed by the recent assassination of Iran’s most revered general, Qassem Soleimani, who was savagely incinerated by a Hellfire missile on the direct orders of Donald Trump. Iraqi prime minister, Adel Abdul-Mahdi, and his supporting MPs believe that the US committed a gross violation of Iraq’s sovereignty by killing a visiting dignitary without first obtaining the government’s permission. This is why the parliament and the prime minister have asked the administration to respect the wishes of the Iraqi people and withdraw all US troops from the country. Read more…

Attempts to Remove Morales’ Memory from Bolivia Will Likely Reinvigorate an Anti-Imperialist Struggle

By Paul Antonopoulos, January 21, 2020

Last Wednesday, the coup government of Bolivia launched a massive military operation claiming to be a pre-emptive strike against the expected violence to occur this Wednesday during Plurinational State Foundation Day celebrations that memorializes the change in the name of the country and the adoption of a new constitution in 2009 under the Presidency of Evo Morales. Heavily armed military personnel on the streets, arrest warrants and the denouncements of deputies who are intimidated by violent groups has just continued under the U.S.-backed coup government in La Paz. Read more…

US Boosts Funding of Tech Companies to Help Anti-Tehran Protests

By Katrina Manson, January 20, 2020

US government-funded technology companies have recorded an increase in the use of circumvention software in Iran in recent weeks after boosting efforts to help Iranian anti-regime protesters thwart internet censorship and use secure mobile messaging.

The outreach is part of a US government programme dedicated to internet freedom that supports dissident pressure inside Iran and complements America’s policy of “maximum pressure” over the regime. Read more…

The Roots of American Demonization of Shi’a Islam

By Pepe Escobar, January 20, 2020

The US targeted assassination, via drone strike, of Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, apart from a torrent of crucial geopolitical ramifications, once again propels to center stage a quite inconvenient truth: the congenital incapacity of so-called US elites to even attempt to understand Shi’ism – thus 24/7 demonization, demeaning not only Shi’as by also Shi’a-led governments. Read more…

Pompeo Claims to Know Nothing, but Can We Believe Him?

By Steven Sahiounie, January 20, 2020

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated in a Friday radio interview that he had not been previously aware that former US Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch had been under surveillance in Ukraine. “Until this story broke, the best of my recollection, I’d never heard of this at all,” said Pompeo. During the interview, Pompeo failed to defend Yovanovitch or to express concern about the alleged stalking of a US diplomat. Read more…

Trump Is the Third President to Lie About Afghan War Success

By Prof. Marjorie Cohn, January 19, 2020

The Bush, Obama and Trump administrations all routinely lied to the American people about the success of the 18-year war in Afghanistan. They exaggerated progress and inflated statistics to create an illusion that that the war was winnable. But after the deaths of 157,000 people at a cost of $2 trillion, corruption is rampant and the carnage continues. Read more…

Remarks on the US/China “Trade Deal”

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, January 19, 2020

The purpose of tariffs is to protect domestic producers from foreign competition by raising the price of imported goods.  What Trump, his administration, and the financial press did not understand is that at least half of the US trade deficit with China is the offshored goods produced in China by such corporations as Apple, Nike, and Levi.  The offshored production of US global corporations counts as imports when they are brought into the US to be sold to Americans.  Thus, the cost of the tariffs were falling on US corporations and US consumers

BREAKING NEWS Ayatollah Khamenei: US disgraced after assassinating top generalNews   /   Saudi Arabia   /   Military   /   France

Friday, 17 January 2020 8:00 AM  [ Last Update: Friday, 17 January 2020 8:23 AM ]

File photo of US troops in Saudi Arabia (Via US Air Force’s Facebook page)

Saudi Arabia has reportedly paid $500 million to begin to cover the cost of US military operating in the Arab country, a US official says.

The payment was made in December 2019, according to the report.

“Consistent with the President’s guidance to increase partner burden-sharing, the Department of Defense has engaged Saudi Arabia on sharing the cost of these deployments, which support regional security and dissuade hostility and aggression. The Saudi government has agreed to help underwrite the cost of these activities and has made the first contribution,” said Rebecca Rebarich, Pentagon spokeswoman.

Last week, President Donald Trump claimed that the Saudis had “already deposited $1 billion in the bank”.

“We’re sending more [troops] to Saudi Arabia, and Saudi Arabia is paying us for it,” Trump said. “I said, ‘Listen, you’re a very rich country. You want more troops? I’m going to send them to you, but you have to pay us.’ They’re paying us. They’ve already deposited $1 billion in the bank.”

Critics, including independent representative Justin Amash, slammed the move, accusing Trump of using American troops as “paid mercenaries.” “He sells troops,” Amash tweeted.

Speaking to MSNBC, Democrat representative Barbara Lee claimed Trump deposited the Saudi money in a personal bank account and said the president is “selling our soldiers as mercenaries to foreign governments.”

Later, Pentagon spokeswoman Rebarich said discussions were ongoing to formalize the contributions.

“Discussions are ongoing” is quite different from Trump’s unequivocal claim that Saudi Arabia had “already deposited $1 billion in the bank.”

The Saudi funds are to cover the overall costs of deploying troops, as well as fighter jets and Patriot missile defense batteries to protect Saudi oil installations, CNN reported.

The deployments began after what the Saudis and Americans claimed were Iran’s attacks on Aramco oil facilities in September 2019. Iran has denied any involvement in the attacks, for which Yemen’s Ansaraullah movement claimed responsibility.

UN ‘unable’ to verify claims Iran was behind Saudi Aramco attacksThe UN chief says the world body’s investigators cannot verify the US and Saudi claims of Iran’s involvement in attacks on Aramco facilities in September.

The military buildup has come despite Trump repeatedly claiming that he wants to reduce the US military commitment in the Middle East.

France to deploy its only aircraft carrier to Mideast

Meanwhile, French President Emmanuel Macron said on Thursday his country will deploy the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier and its battle group to support French military operations in Middle East.

“The aircraft carrier will support Chammal operations (in the Middle East) from January to April 2020 before deploying to the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea”, Macron said at a New Year speech to the French military, according to Reuters.

The deployment comes amid growing tensions between Iran and the United States, which escalated following Washington’s assassination of top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani, in Baghdad.

ARTICLESOURCE: PRESS TV Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia. US military. US military. Donald Trump. Donald Trump. Emmanuel Macron. Emmanuel Macron. Saudi Aramco. Saudi Aramco.

January 15, 2020 12.54pm GMT 

Stig Jarle Hansen, Norwegian University of Life Sciences

Two significant attacks have been carried out by al-Shabaab in recent weeks. On 6 January 2020, the Somali-based terrorist group attacked a Kenyan military base close to the former coastal holiday destination of Lamu. The killing of a US service man and two US contractors in this attack inflicted the first ever American military combat losses inside Kenya.

The target of the assault, Manda Bay base, serves as a forward reconnaissance base for the US and is used for its drone warfare against al-Shabaab. The base is part of the American “train, assist, and enable” strategy for supporting African allies in their struggle against local organisations affiliated with Al Qaeda and Islamic State. It is also home to parts of the US 475th Expeditionary Air Base Squadron.

The other attack was on 28 December when a bomb went off at a checkpoint used by vehicles entering Somalia’s capital Mogadishu from the nearby city of Afgoye. Among the 85 killed in the attack were two Turkish engineers. Al-Shabaab claimed responsibility, saying the target had been a convoy of Turkish and Somali forces.

The two attacks, though different, shared some similarities: both targeted some of the group’s main enemies outside the region, Turkey and the US. Al-Shabaab’s global enemies have figured in its propaganda for more than a decade. Turks and Americans have been targeted before. And as recently as last year a US base in Somalia was targeted.

Al-Shabaab portrayed the Manda Bay attack as a direct response to the US administration’s designation of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The group further claimed that the attack was conducted under the “guidance and direction” of Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.

It is significant that these attacks come at a time when the US – as well as other western countries such as France – are increasingly discussing scaling down their military efforts against African extremist organisations, as well as drawing in new partners to share their burden.

Moving pieces

Scaling back involvement is influenced by the failure to fully defeat any of the jihadist organisations on the continent. It is also informed by the fact that outfits such as al-Shabaab, Mali’s Jama’at Nasr al-Islam wal Muslimin, as well as the Islamic State in West Africa choose local or regional targets. This makes them a smaller threat to European and north American countries.

The third factor is the Trump administration’s insistence on sharing the international security burden among allies, and its reluctance to stage costly foreign interventions.

But the US and France still have each other, which could explain some changes in focus. For example, recent signals of a US scale down in West Africa but not in the Horn of Africa might be because of the French presence in that region. The US’s heavy investment in some countries in the Horn might also make it less willing to scale down its engagement in those countries.

But France’s unpopularity in the region, and the recent French talk of “burden sharing” mirroring the American rhetoric, signals that this solution also faces several dilemmas.

US dilemmas

The two recent attacks highlight three dilemmas the US will face if it pursues a withdrawal strategy. The first is the increasing involvement of international players across the continent.

For example, Turkey has expanded its presence in Somalia while Qatar and the United Arab Emirates have expanded their engagement. The extent of this was reflected recently when Turkish papers as well as sources within Somali security services claimed that the Emirates where behind the 28 December bombing.

Such claims must be seen in the light of foreign rivalry, particularly between the UAE and Qatar.

Declining US involvement in the region will leave a vacuum that others can fill.

Last year, for example, Russian mercenaries were deployed to Mozambique to fight the Islamic State affiliated militias there.

China, which has a naval base in neighbouring Djibouti, might also fill the vacuum in the future.

The second dilemma the US faces is the fact that, although al-Shabaab and other African jihadist organisations don’t launch attacks in Europe and the US, they do target US citizens, interests and investments in Africa.

On the issue of vulnerability the attacks demonstrate how non-military personnel, in this case Turkish engineers, can become threatened by local groups such as al-Shabaab. Some of these non- military activities will continue even if the US end their military efforts.

This is especially true as oil exploration in Somalia and the Horn is about to intensify. In this sense foreign citizens, including US citizens, are in harm’s way also after an American withdrawal.

While foreigners are seemingly the target of the recent attacks, we must avoid concluding that this signifies a “globalisation” of al-Shabaab. The targets of the two attacks are far from atypical. The Manda Bay base is located in the county of Lamu, adjacent to the Boni forest and the Ras-Kamboni forests. This is an old hotbed of al-Shabaab activity, as well as older jihadist groups. It is a region in which the local Muslim population was hurt badly by land reforms during Jomo Kenyatta’s presidency. This was in fact mentioned in al-Shabaab’s statements on the Manda bay attack.

Indeed, the Manda Bay attack underscores the real problem of both US and French engagement in Africa: addressing local conflicts that jihadists can take advantage of. The lack of success in curtailing their activities stems partly from a neglect of local conflict dynamics and civilian protection.

The third dilemma is the humanitarian suffering created by jihadists in the region. This will not end with US withdrawal.

The three dilemmas will not disappear.

• War on Terror
• Kenya
• Al-Shabaab
• Al-Qaeda
• Islamic State
• Jihadism
• Peace and Security
• Global perspectives
• Somalia conflict“

1. “The Idiot

2. The Tribalist

3. The ideal”

I hope you are doing well. Thank you for your support in the past and looking forward to your support this year. A table is 10 tickets.

http://events.liberal.ca/Event/an-evening-with-the-hon-ahmed-hussen-2020-1-31T23.aspx?lang=en

By Prof Michel choossudovsky
Global Research

America’s hegemonic military agenda in the Middle East has reached a dangerous threshold.

The assassination of  IRGC General Soleimani ordered by the President of the United States on January 3, 2020 is tantamount to an Act of War against Iran.

President Donald Trump accused Soleimani  of “plotting imminent and sinister attacks”: “We took action last night to stop a war. We did not take action to start a war…. we caught him in the act and terminated him.”

US Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper described it as a “decisive defensive action” while confirming that the operation ordered by POTUS had been carried out by the Pentagon. “The game has changed” said Esper.  

What the media has failed to acknowledge is General Soleimani’s central role in countering ISIS-Daesh and Al Qaeda terrorists in both Iraq and Syria. 

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force (IRGC) under the helm of General Soleimani consisted in waging a real counter-terrorism campaign against ISIS-Daesh mercenaries, who from the outset were funded, trained and recruited by the US and its allies.

Trump’s action plan to “stop a war” consists in “protecting” America’s ISIS and Al Qaeda affiliated foot-soldiers.

US Extrajudicial Assassinations

While the assassination of General Soleimani constitutes a criminal act on the part of President Trump,  the US practice of extrajudicial assassinations of foreign politicians has a long history.

What distinguishes the assassination of General Soleimani from previous extrajudicial killings, is that the president of the US has formally announced that he gave the order.

This sets a dangerous precedent. It was “overt” rather than “covert”, i.e. a covert operation by the CIA or by a US sponsored Al Qaeda affiliate acting on behalf of Washington.

It is important to note that it was not Trump but in fact Obama who formalized (“legalized”) the practice of extra-judicial assassination (ordered by the president):

And if the president [Obama] can kill anyone, including US citizens, without judicial review, what power does he not have? Any but the most formal distinction between democracy and presidential dictatorship is swept away. (Joseph Kishore, wsws.org, October 31, 2012)

Trump’s Response: More Troops to the Middle East

While the Pentagon announced that it is “sending thousands of additional troops to the Middle East”, a unanimous vote in Iraq’s parliament was reached demanding the immediate withdrawal of all US forces.

The legislation requires the Iraqi government to “end any foreign presence on Iraqi soil and prevent the use of Iraqi airspace, soil and water for any reason”.

Note: Death to  America: refers to the US Government, Not the American People

Backflash: A Digression. The Obama Air Raids (2014-2017)

Concurrently the Iraqi parliament suspended the corrupt 2014 agreement with the Obama administration which invited the US to lead a fake counterterrorism operation directed against the Islamic State (ISIS-Daesh), made up of mercenaries who are funded, trained and recruited by US-NATO, with the support of Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

The decision of the Iraqi parliament is in this regard fundamental. This operation was used by the Obama administration as a pretext to justify a third phase of the Iraq War (1991, 2003, 2014). Initiated in June 2014 by Obama under the disguise of a counterterrorism operation, a new phase of killing and destruction was launched.

Why was the US Air Force unable to wipe out the Islamic State which at the outset was largely equipped with conventional small arms not to mention state of the art Toyota pickup trucks?

From the very outset, Nobel Peace Laureate Barack Obama’s air campaign was NOT directed at ISIS.  The evidence confirms that the Islamic State was not the target. Quite the opposite. The air raids were intended to destroy the economic infrastructure of Iraq and Syria.

Look at the following image which describes the Islamic State convoy of pickup trucks entering Iraq fromn Syria and crossing a 200 km span of open desert which separates the two countries.

This convoy entered Iraq in June 2014.

What would have been required from a military standpoint to wipe out an ISIS convoy with no effective anti-aircraft capabilities?

Without an understanding of military issues, common sense prevails. 

If they had wanted to eliminate the Islamic State brigades, they could have “carpet” bombed their convoys of Toyota pickup trucks when they crossed the desert from Syria into Iraq in June 2014. 

The  Syro-Arabian Desert is open territory (see map right). With state of the art jet fighter aircraft (F15, F22 Raptor, F16) it would have been  –from a military standpoint–  “a piece of cake”, a rapid and expedient surgical operation, which would have decimated the Islamic State convoys in a matter of hours.

But if that had happened, they would not have been able to implement their “Responsibility to Protect” (P2R) bombing campaign over a three year period (2014-2017).

Instead what we witnessed were drawn out relentless air raids and bombings which culminated with the so-called liberation of Mosul (February 2017) and Raqqa (October 2017) by the US led coalition.

And we were led to believe that the Islamic State had the upper hand and could not be defeated by a powerful US led military coalition of 19 countries.

The people of Iraq and Syria were the targets. Obama’s bombing raids were intent upon destroying the civilian infrastructure of Iraq and Syria.

ISIS-Daesh were never the target of US aggression. Quite the opposite. They were protected by the Western military alliance.

US Troop Withdrawal: Yankee Go Home (2020)

While a major US troop withdrawal is unlikely in the foreseeable future,  “America’s War on Terrorism” is in jeopardy. Nobody believes that America is going after the terrorists.

In Iraq and Syria, everybody knows that all Al Qaeda, ISIS-Daesh affiliated entities are supported by US-NATO.

The “Yankee Go Home” process has commenced.  The US is not only being ousted from Iraq and Syria, its strategic presence in the broader Middle East is also threatened. And these two processes are intimately related.

In turn, several of America’s former allies including Turkey, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Egypt have normalized their relations with Iran.

Trump’s Punitive Bombings. Will They be Carried Out?

In recent developments, Trump has warned that if Tehran responds to the assassination of General Soleimani, he will “target 52 Iranian sites” intimating that they would be “HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD.”

Donald Trump wants to hit back. But he has a serious logistical problem on his hands of which he may not even be aware of.

Normally a punitive operation of this nature directed against Iran would be entrusted to USCENTCOM’s forward headquarters in the Middle East located at the Al Udeid Air Force base in Qatar.

“CENTCOM controls US forces based across the Middle East and some of Central Asia – in countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s main headquarters are located in Tampa Florida but it runs its daily combat operations from Al-Udeid air base“

With 11,000 US military personnel, the al-Udeid Air Force base close to Doha is “one of the U.S. military’s most enduring and most strategically positioned operations on the planet”  (Washington Times). It has led and coordinated several major Middle East war theaters including Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003). It was also involved in Syria.

But there is a problem: The forward base of USCENTCOM at the al-Udeid Air Force base is in Qatar. And since June 2017 Qatar has been “sleeping with the enemy”. Qatar has become a staunch ally of Iran.

What both the media, as well as foreign policy and military analysts fail to acknowledge is that US CENTCOM’s Forward Base headquarters at the al-Udeid military base de facto “lies in enemy territory”. And it would seem that POTUS is totally unaware of this situation.

Barely a few months ago, (October 2019), The Pentagon took the decision NOT to move USCENTCOM’s forward base at Al Udeid to another location in the Middle East.

“Qatar has always been an exceptional partner, and this base from which we are operating is a great base, and CENTCOM has no intention of moving anywhere,” said CENTCOM’s deputy commander, Chance Saltzman.

Sloppy intelligence, flawed military planning? Qatar is not an “exceptional partner”. Since June 2017 Qatar has become a de facto ally of Iran.

More recently, they have been discussing the establishment of Iran-Qatar bilateral military ties.

Having decided that Al Udeid (located in enemy territory) could not be moved to another location in the Middle East, the Pentagon then envisaged a scenario of moving Al Udeid air and space operations to South Carolina: “to 7,000 miles away in South Carolina”. It was a simulation. “The temporary switch” lasted only 24 hours.

Lessons Learnt: You cannot effectively “wage war” in the Middle East without a “Forward Base” in the Middle East. This “South Carolina Test” borders on ridicule.

Are US military planners desperate?

Since May 2017, following the break up of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) the Pentagon has NOT BEEN ABLE TO MOVE USCENTCOM FORWARD BASE (including its air force striking capabilities) OUT OF ENEMY TERRITORY (QATAR) to a “friendly location” (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Israel) in the broader Middle East region.

Military analysts now admit that in the case of a conflict with Iran, Al-Udeid would be an immediate target. “The base’s defence system is said to be ill-equipped to defend itself against the low-flying cruise missiles and drones…”

Mr. President: How on earth can you launch your punitive bombings on Iran from the territory of a close ally of Iran? 

From a strategic point of view it does not make sense. And this is but the tip of the iceberg.

While the bombing and missile attacks can be dispatched from other US military bases in the Middle East (see diagram below) as well as from Diego Garcia, US aircraft carriers, submarines, etc, the regional USCENTCOM Forward Base at Al-Udeid, Qatar, plays a key role in the command structure in liaison with USCENTCOM headquarters in Tampa, Florida, and US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) at the Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska.

Source: Statista 

While Qatar and the US have a longstanding bilateral cooperation agreement pertaining to the al-Udeid Air Force base, Qatar has military cooperation agreements not only with Iran but also with Hamas and Hezbollah, all of which are “enemies” of the USA:

The challenge for Washington is that while Qatar hosts al-Udeid, it’s also friendly with the Gaza-based Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), it is close to the Hezbollah’s leadership … [Qatar also] has cozy relations with Iran. Indeed, if Qatar didn’t host America’s largest air base in the Middle East, it would be under pressure from the U.S. to cease much of this behavior.”

And to top it off, Qatar is also friends with Russia. A military technical cooperation agreement pertaining  to air defense was signed with Moscow, immediately following Qatar’s rift with Saudi Arabia in June 2017.

Turkey’s Incirlik Air Force Base 

“A sleeping with the enemy situation” also prevails with regard to Turkey’s Incirlik Air Force base which was established in the 1950s by the US Air Force. Incirlik has played a strategic role in all US-NATO led operations in the Middle East.

With about five thousand airmen, the US Air Force is now hosted in a country (aka Turkey) which is an ally of both Russia and Iran. Turkey and Iran are neighbouring states with friendly relations. In contrast, US and Turkish supported rebels are fighting one another in Northern Syria.

In mid-December 2019, Turkey’s foreign minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu  dropped a bombshell, intimating  “that the United States could be barred from using two strategic air bases [Incirlik and Kurecik]in retaliation to possible US sanctions against his country” regarding Turkey’s purchase of the Russian S-400 missile defence system.

America’s Conventional Warfare Capabilities

For several reasons, US hegemony in the Middle East has been weakened in part as a result of the evolving structure of military alliances.

America’s command capabilities have been weakened. Two of the region’s largest strategic Air Forces bases, namely Incirlik (Turkey) and Al-Udeid (Qatar) are no longer under the control of the Pentagon.

While war against Iran remains on the drawing board of the Pentagon, under present conditions, an all out Blitzkrieg (conventional theater war) involving the simultaneous deployment of ground, air and naval  forces is an impossibility.

While the US does not have the ability to carry out such a project, various forms of “limited warfare” have been contemplated including targeted missile attacks, so-called “bloody nose operations” (including the use of tactical nuclear weapons), as well as acts of political destabilization and color revolutions (which are already ongoing) as well as economic sanctions, manipulations of financial markets and neoliberal macroeconomic reforms (imposed via the IMF and the World Bank(.

The Nuclear Option against Iran

And it is precisely because of US weaknesses in the realm of conventional warfare that a nuclear option could be envisaged.  Such an option would inevitably lead to escalation.

Ignorance and stupidity are factors in the decision making process. According to foreign policy analyst Edward Curtin “Crazy people do crazy things”. 

Who are the crazy people in key decision-making positions?

Trump foreign policy advisers: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, national security adviser Robert O’Brien and Brian Hook, (Special Representative for Iran and Advisor to Pompeo), could “advise” President Trump to authorize  a “bloody nose operation” against Iran using tactical (B61 bunker buster) nuclear weapons, which the Pentagon has categorized as “harmless to civilians because the explosion is underground”.

The bloody nose operation” as designated by the Pentagon, conveys the idea of a military op (using a low yield “more usable” tactical nuclear weapon) which allegedly “creates minimum damage”. It’s a lie: the tactical nuclear weapon has an explosive capacity between one third and 12 times a Hiroshima bomb.

According to the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (July 2019):

Tensions between the United States and Iran are spiraling toward a military confrontation that carries a real possibility that the United States will use nuclear weapons. Iran’s assortment of asymmetrical capabilities—all constructed to be effective against the United States—nearly assures such a confrontation. The current US nuclear posture leaves the Trump administration at least open to the use of tactical nuclear weapons in conventional theaters. Some in the current administration may well think it to be in the best interest of the United States to seek a quick and decisive victory in the oil hub of the Persian Gulf—and to do so by using its nuclear arsenal.

We believe there is a heightened possibility of a US-Iran war triggering a US nuclear strike…

Of significance, the use of tactical nukes does not require the authorization of the Commander in Chief. That authorization pertains solely to so-called strategic nuclear weapons.

Despite the warnings of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, present circumstances do not favor the conduct of a  US “bloody nose” tactical nuclear weapons’ operation.

The US Air Force’s tactical nuclear weapons arsenal is stored and deployed in five non-nuclear European countries including Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Italy, Turkey at military bases under national command.  

According to Hans Kristensen and Matt Korda (Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, 2019 report), the US possesses an estimated 230 tactical nuclear weapons of which 180 are deployed in the five non-nuclear European countries. Some 50 B61 bunker buster bombs with nuclear warheads (gravity bombs) are stored and deployed at the Incirlik air force base which is under Turkey’s jurisdiction. (see table above)

Conclusion:

• A US president committed to war crimes.
• A failing  “War on Terrorism” narrative,
• Weakened military command structures,
• Failing alliances,
• Sleeping with the enemy,
• Unpredictable foreign policy analysts,
• Deception and mistakes.

At this juncture: The US’ most powerful weapon remains dollarization, neoliberal economic reforms and the ability to manipulate financial markets.

WDM congratulates its esteemed readers and families on the New Year 2020, wishing them peace and prosperity.

We call upon all to keep the peace and protect lives. Love your neighbors as you love your families.

WDM

The Editors.

Bomb-blast in Mogadishu today, killing dozens, according to news reports.

BREAKING NEWS

Initial reports indicate that a massacre has just taken place in ExControl Afgoi in Mogadishu. At least 90 persons have just lost lives, according to preliminary reports. It is a mayhem.

الحديث عن الحقيقة إلى السلطة في سياق غير ديمقراطي و قبلى. مقالاات عن المساءلة

Synopsis ملخص

The collapse of Somalia’s Central Government and its status as a failed state presents a unique case and problem to the international community as it constitutes an unprecedented threat to international order as community of nations and to the world  as orderly societies with predictable laws and manners of civilized behaviour.

The author of this book strongly believes that the absence of free press and checks and balance of power had contributed, to the greatest extent, this national and internationally worrisome political situation in that country. This book, Talking Truth to Power in Undemocratic and Tribal Context, Articles of Impeachment, is a collection of a series of short articles written contemporaneously on the current political developments within the frameworks of the efforts being made by now fledgling transitional administrations of the Federal Government of Somalia and its Federal Member States. These are articles of critical analysis and essays on the latest political developments in Somalia. The articles are objective and unbiased take on major political issues of Somalia at moment.

Some of these essays had been recently published execluvely in the author’s personal blog at http://ismailwarsame.blog, attracting considerable readers’ interest, who are now also requesting for the compilation of these essays into a book. The author is responding to their persistent requests. These requests are also an indication that this book would sell well in a competitive book market.

The book could be a good source material for students and teachers learning English as a 2^nd language in their composition papers and reporting skills. The book could also enlighten foreign diplomats and politicians on current political issues in Somalia, and efforts being made by Somalis to re-instate and re-construct their failed state.

By Ismail H. Warsame

HEADS-UP

The Book, HAYAAN, Safarkii Dheeraa ee Wiilka Reer Miyiga, is ready for publication.

The Book covers a lot of previously publicly unknown facts on SSDF, SNM, USC, ETHIOPIA, PUNTLAND, DJIBOUTI, UGANDA, TFG, Adullahi Yusuf, Mengistu Haile-Marian,Seyoum Mesfin, Ismail Omar Geele, Kolonzo Musoka and much more.

Author: Ismail H Warsame at https://ismailwarsame.blog

Taliskii caadaadiska ciidan ee Siyaad Barre, oo dalka ku amar-taaglaynjirey, intayan Xamar ka cayrsan kuwo qaar-qaawan, oo qayd guntan, wuxuu lahaa olalayaal qiq isku qaris ah, oo la mid ah kuwa ay haatan adeegsanayaan ubaxxa kacaanka Muqdisha. 

Balse, intaan adiga laguu sheego-xumayn, iskuday in aad arrimahan u guurgasho. Dedna, dadka la wadaag qiimayntaada.

Talo-xumadii lagusoo jabay ku celcelisay!

Jimce Wanaagsan!