It's not the United States versus Assad: it's United States versus Iran

Of Editorial team
The effort of those who curate this Catholic-traditionalist or integral Catholic site is to help understand the facts that happen in the world. We don't give “magisterial definitions”, we don't produce “kill the game”, we hate niche intellectualism and snippets that no one reads. We love current events because by trying to delve deeper into them we believe we can keep our feet on the ground, with realism and pragmatism, avoiding flights of fancy and drifts of various kinds, which seem grotesque to us, such as ecumania to raise cash, the Freemasonmania that sees lodges even in the coffee cup, the conspiracy mania that NEVER sees the facts as they are but NECESSARY with a conspiracy, nostalgia for dead historical eras, that will never return, the “speckling” of Tradition, through hypocritical personalisms. The articles that are reported to us or those that we write are only contributions to the search for the Truth or harsh criticisms of modernity, in the wake of writers, authors, authoritative thinkers who preceded us.
We do it with the style of publicly engaged lay people, therefore journalistic or essayistic e, Obviously, not everything we publish by other authors involves adhering to their thoughts or actions. This is not Pravda nor Osservatore Romano. E’ a free space, sometimes provocative, It's not mainstream, follows a very clear line, which is integral Catholic and identitarian, open to constructive criticism. We know that most of our many readers (circa 2.000 daily on average, but with very high peaks, that reach the 10.000 on some occasions) he knows what he testifies. We know that you can't please everyone and that's part of it “game”. For those who persist in not wanting to understand this guideline: let's deal with it.
Of Tim Black
It's not the United States versus Assad: it's United States versus Iran
Source: Comedonchisciotte
If there is anything that can be indicative of how superficial and provocative the airstrikes against Syria have been, this is the almost desperate refusal of the United States and its allies to take responsibility for the consequences, intentional or not, of attacks.
We were told it was a targeted mission, self-sufficient, and that its objectives have been completely met. Jim Mattis, the United States Secretary of Defense, he called the attacks “isolated” and nothing more than that. Even more revealing, Boris Johnson, UK Foreign Secretary, he said the attacks were limited to preventing the chemical weapons “taboo” from being undermined, stating that “the Syrian war will continue as before”. Read More

Share

The how and why of Populism

Of Umberto Bianchi
The how and why of Populism
Source: Heretically
At the end of a decidedly close electoral contest, the verdict that came out of the polls has, indiscutibilmente, rewarded all those formations that, somehow, they imitate or are themselves considered “populist”. The reference applies to both the League and the Movement 5 position, US President Trump, the transalpina Lady Marine Le Pen, That, in the most recent past for the Forza Italia of the golden times and, really, in very recent times, as if by someone risky, also for Renzi of the original "scrap" version. A term whose meaning has included a bit of everything and its opposite.
But what exactly do we mean by “populism”?? What is the exact political meaning in which this term should be placed, very fashionable nowadays? If we want to refer to the letter of the history of political movements, by “populism” we mean a series of movements that, at the end of the nineteenth century they developed in disparate contexts. In Russia, Populism was represented by the “narodnjki”, whose most authoritative exponents were the colonel and mathematics professor of the Military Academy Pyotr Lavrovič Lavrov, supporter of populism in a socialist key, together with its popularizer and idelogue, the sociologist and literary critic Nikolai Konstantinovič Mikhailovsky, having as its object the emancipation of the peasant masses, starting from the rural/"obscina" community. France instead, began with Paul Deroulede's League of Patriots, che unitasi ad un altro movimento populista di massa, Boulangism (named after Georges Boulanger, charismatic general of the French army) he became an advocate of a radical and revanchist nationalism, always connected to the increasingly widespread discontent of the masses, towards the young French parliamentary republic, much to achieve in 1888-89, after obtaining the support of the monarchists, of significant electoral victories. In the United States it was the People's Party (People’s Party), also known as Populist Party (Populist Party), summarily called "Populists”, which party was established in 1891 in the United States of America which, during the “populist” period, took hold towards the end of the 19th century. Supported by the lower classes, especially by cultivators hostile towards elites in general, had its peak between 1892 and the 1896. Read More

Share

Attack in Syria: World War III postponed again this time…

THE OPINION
Of Giulio Ginnetti
A few days after the Western missile raid in Syria, it appears increasingly clear that it has not undermined the agreement between Trump and Putin to manage the spheres of influence in the troubled Middle Eastern country. What Russia and the United States have in common is the need to reaffirm their primacy on the international level, eroded in recent decades, but to do so in a way that manages differences, according to the agreement signed at the G20 in Hamburg, in July 2017.
Each of the two powers follows its own "national interests". The synthesis National Defense Strategy 2018 signed by US Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, makes it clear that the primary national security concern of the United States is no longer terrorism, but the strategic competition between states. And between Russia and China, the two main actors, with the United States, on international theatre, Trump considers China his most formidable opponent and is seeking an agreement with Putin, to prevent the formation of an anti-American Russian-Chinese alliance.
The target of the raid, which was limited to a spectacular surgical operation, it was therefore not about overthrowing the Assad regime, protected by Moscow, but to strengthen the image of the United States. Trump, convinced French President Macron and British Prime Minister May to carry out a demonstration, without causing damage to Russian forces, obtaining in exchange Moscow's non-interference. Read More

Share

US Secretary of Defense: "Non abbiamo prove che Assad abbia usato armi chimiche"

Grotesque and warmongering Americanism…history repeats itself…but this time they admit it… (n.d.r.)

http://www.oltrelalinea.news/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/130305150918-james-mattis-1-full-169.jpg

After so many biased and one-sided narratives, The US has finally admitted that it has no evidence that Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons. This communication, in conclusion, …

CONTINUE ON:
http://www.oltrelalinea.news/2018/02/17/segretario-della-difesa-usa-non-abbiamo-prove-che-assad-abbia-usato-armi-chimiche/ Read More

Share

“The raid in Syria was a failure”. Israeli intelligence also says so

LAPRESSE_20180414170403_26176266Of Lorenzo De Vita
For Israeli intelligence, the attack in Syria by the United States, France and Great Britain, it doesn't have achieved its goals. “If President Trump ordered it strike only to demonstrate that the US responded to Assad's use of chemical weapons, then this objective has been achieved”. a senior Israeli intelligence official said to Ynetnews. “But if there were other objectives, such as crippling the ability to launch chemical weapons or dissuading Assad from using them again, At that time it is very doubtful that any of these objectives have been achieved“.
Words not too different from those uttered by another Tel Aviv intelligence official. “The statement of 'mission accomplished' and that Assad's ability to use chemical weapons has been fatally affected, they have no basis". And if these statements of the Mossad they have weight, then it is possible that Israel's pressure on the West will once again be very incisive.
The Israeli media has long supported that the attack in Syria by Western forces turned out to be a clear victory for Bashar al Assad. The bombing was very limited and had absolutely no impact. Furthermore, as highlighted by many, the fact that a large part of the cruise missiles launched by Western forces have been shot down, shows a problem with the effectiveness of the attack. Furthermore, according to Israeli officials interviewed, the fact that the raid was announced and that no toxic gases were released from the affected buildings, it would demonstrate that the chemical weapons and components were no longer present in those depots. Basically, the idea is that chemical weapons are elsewhere, not that there never have been. Read More

Share

The American war in Syria? It will be the West's definitive disaster in the Middle East

Report Linkiesta

Image

The American war in Syria? It will be the West's definitive disaster in the Middle East

Pressured by the Saudis and the Pentagon much more than by chemical weapons, Trump threatens intervention. Now he has two options: limited raids are scales (risky) large-scale operation. But more than a new war, it would be necessary to understand the problems of the Middle East. (Of Alberto Negri, LAWS)

Read More

Share

Gaza and Syria: true crimes and alleged crimes

A boy waves a Palestinian flag, at the Israel-Gaza border, during clashes with Israeli troops, at a protest where Palestinians demand the right to return to their homeland, east of Gaza City April 1, 2018. REUTERS/Mohammed Salem TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY
Reporting of Federici Studies Center

While the Trump administration seeks pretexts to attack the legitimate Syrian government, the USA in particular and the West in general turn a blind eye to the crimes of those who give 70 occupied the Holy Land for years.
Gaza: B’tselem’s harsh j’accus
Israel's leadership is gradually admitting a basic question of life and death: Israel's permanent control over millions of Palestinians is impossible without committing war crimes. This is the profound meaning of dominion over another people: it is not “simply” a question of robbing him of his land, to impose a regime made up of masters and subordinates, to deny political rights, or to unfold an endless labyrinth of oppressive bureaucratic rules. It's also a problem of repeated killings.
When the leader of Bayit Yehudi, Naphtali Bennett, in the summer of 2014, when hundreds of Palestinians were killed in the Gaza Strip by Israeli "surgical" bombs, declared in an interview with CNN that “Hamas is committing mass self-genocide”, thus arguing the actual implications of policies based on the use of military force by Israel. He attempted to make the crime acceptable by blaming the victim, but his recognition of the dimensions of the massacre – and even more so its profound meaning – reflected an internalization of reality.

Read More

Share

Trump and the lost role of the USA

Of Sergio Romano
Trump and the lost role of the USA
Source: Corriere della Sera, 8/04/2018
After the collapse of the USSR and the end of Soviet hegemony in Central-Eastern Europe, the United States believed it had won the Cold War. It seemed to me that they made a mistake and that the causes of the collapse were different; but the world, since then, he had to note that there was no important event in which America did not feel called to make suggestions, impose solutions or make judgments. The style could change from one president to another (Barack Obama's style was very different from that of George W. Bush) but America had become, as defined by Madeleine Albright, the "indispensable nation". His wishes were not always granted and his orders followed, but there was no table in international diplomacy without a seat reserved for the United States.
It seems that the picture is changing and that there are now events in which the great North American state is more a spectator than an actor. A few days ago we saw images of three leaders (the presidents of Iran, Türkiye and Russia) who had won the Syrian war and had gathered to divide the spoils. A few months earlier we had learned that the main Chinese political leader had implicitly challenged American power with a constitutional amendment that guaranteed him a sort of imperial annuity. The reasons for the change are numerous.
The wars fought by the United States in recent decades have not helped its military credibility. The crisis of 2008 it demonstrated that alongside the power of Washington there existed on Wall Street another power that the president and Congress were unable to control. It had already happened in 1929, but in times when America did not have the global responsibilities that it had after the end of the Second World War. Since then, globalization has favored the birth of new powers. The more the United States reveals its shortcomings to the world, the more the number of those ready to defy its will grows. Read More

Share
1 3 4 5 6 7