Russia Begins Operations in Syria: End Game for the US Empire?

[Windmill knight]

I feel so elated, happy and also worried because what is happening is very beautiful (the war finally against the ISIS rats) but I am worried of the answer of the others, the Beast.

Hi loreta,

I think all of us have traces of that thought in the back of our minds. But it can be hugely counter-productive.

Our negative emotions (worry, fear) add energy to the forces of evil. That's what happens when we neglect the power of our thoughts. And recall this admonition from C's only a short time ago:

A: For all forum members: Do not lose heart. Just remember that if you do all
you can, yourselves in the future will bridge the gap. You are all potential
transducers of information into chaos.
Let that information be love/truth.

I think that depends on how you define negative emotions. For example, worry and fear can be useful alarms from the self and can save your life or somebody else's, so they can be very positive. On the other hand, feeling happy and at peace because an innocent is suffering is very twisted and negative, don't you think?

In this case, I share loreta's concern of how the 'bad guys' will react, given that they know they have been outmanouvered.

 

[angelburst29]

Russian Ministry of Defence on Airstrikes in Syria
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=6&v=qDAYTAVM8Js

Russia Asks Anti-ISIL Coalition to Share Intelligence
http://sputniknews.com/military/20151006/1028120016.html

The Russian Defense Ministry said Tuesday it had asked military attaches of the anti-ISIL coalition member-countries to share their intelligence on Islamic State militant positions in Syria with Moscow.

“Our data on ISIL deployment areas in Syria is thoroughly analyzed and very precise. But if the defense ministries of the anti-ISIL coalition countries have additional intelligence on terrorists, we ask them to share it with us,” the ministry’s press service cited Col. Gen. Andrei Kartapolov, Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces.

“We will certainly take this information into consideration while planning combat missions of our air group in Syria,” Kartapolov said.

 

[Foxx]

It's a little late, but I sent Putin a birthday message and my thanks for his work against ISIS. Here's the link to send him a message if anyone else is interested: http://eng.letters.kremlin.ru/send

 

[Meg]

I sent one as well. Thanks for the link/reminder Foxx!

 

[luc]

I think that depends on how you define negative emotions. For example, worry and fear can be useful alarms from the self and can save your life or somebody else's, so they can be very positive. On the other hand, feeling happy and at peace because an innocent is suffering is very twisted and negative, don't you think?

In this case, I share loreta's concern of how the 'bad guys' will react, given that they know they have been outmanouvered.

I agree. Maybe in this context a distinction between "instinct" and "emotion" could be useful? There's this from an early session, recently published in book form:

A: Emotions involve wishful thinking, instincts are "gut feelings," psychic in nature, and are stronger. When it is wishful thinking, there is always psychic instinct seeping through which you can access if you use reason and examine your lessons of the past.

[Laura's comment from the book:] This is probably one of the most useful and important things the Cs have ever said in terms of work on the self. I would suggest that the reader read and re-read it and really think about what is being said. It can also help to read Timothy Wilson's book Strangers to ourselves.

Q: (L) Well, for example, the lady at the MUFON meeting on Saturday, her response to Terry's comments on channeled material as being STS, was that we were focusing on the darkness, or negativity, and that people who focus on darkness or negativity experience same. Could you comment on this please?

A: What do your instincts tell you?

Q: (L) My instincts tell me that she is wanting to believe so strongly and emotionally, that the aliens who have been abducting her are good guys, and that somehow she is so laden with an internal guilt complex that she believes that she deserves that kind of treatment, and that anything that is to the contrary, she rejects as wrong and evil.

A: Okay.

Q: (L) And, furthermore, it occurred to me that a person who really focuses on the darkness with the intention of participation is someone who moves away from the light and goes into the darkness, whereas someone who focuses on the darkness with the intention of diminishing it, keeps the light close to their back, and uses it to energize their own light so that they can illuminate the darkness. Is that correct?

A: Okay.

Q: (L) And, that someone who only looks at light, has their back turned to the darkness, not only are they blinded by the light, but they are also casting a shadow behind them.

A: "The Emperor is wearing new clothes."

Q: (L) Am I the one who is thinking the Emperor is wearing new clothes? (F) I would think that anyone who is hung up on the idea that there is nothing but light as long as you are willing to only see light is believing that the Emperor is wearing new clothes. (L) Is Frank correct?

A: Yes.

The way I understand it is that emotions (either negative or positive) can be very misleading, but that "instincts" (aka. higher emotional center?) should be taken very seriously. The tricky part of course is to learn how to distinguish between the two. So if we feel something negative, on the one hand we don't want to dwell on the negativity and "feed it to the outside world", but on the other hand we also want to "sit with it", explore it and learn to distinguish negative (mechanical) emotions that are useless from "instinctive emotions" that try to tell us something important. For this to happen, we need to work on our various programs that distort our perception of the "instinct". FWIW

 

[Cosmos]

A couple of interesting news items, that are connected to eachother I think:

When russia entered syria, Erdogan from turkey had following to say.

Turkey's Erdogan calls Russian airstrikes in Syria 'unacceptable':
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/10/04/turkey-erdogan-calls-russian-airstrikes-in-syria-unacceptable/

Russia just stated following, about false flag attempts from "ISIS" in syria.

IS terrorists may blast mosques in Syria to blame Russia – Defense Ministry:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/10/06/is-terrorists-may-blast-mosques-in-syria-to-blame-russia-defense-ministry/

Now Russia is ready to consider Iraqi request for airstrikes – Upper House speaker:
https://www.rt.com/politics/317764-russia-ready-to-consider-iraqi/

Now Erdogan warns again, maybe because he finds it offensive that if iraq asks for help from russia, that he can not continue to support terrorists in iraq anymore and can not bomb iraq with jets anymore: which is a move from turkey that is against international law.

Erdoğan warns Russia against losing Turkey’s friendship:
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/erdogan-warns-russia-against-losing-turkeys-friendship-.aspx?pageID=238&nID=89473&NewsCatID=510

Thanks, I think this is a useful way to present some important data. After following the (alternative) news for the last days and listening to the latest Sott Talk, some thoughts crossed my mind: First, what are Putin's intentions? What is his goal? I think it's fairly obvious that Putin "integrated" some values on a very deep level and acts upon them. So based on his speeches and interviews, as I understand it, he believes in a lawful system, where there are definite rules that are to be followed by everyone - other than that, everyone should be free and not be interfered with. The fact that he stepped down as president during the Medvedjiev era even though he could have easily changed the constitution with the full support of the people is one example of this. In foreign policy of course, these rules are what we call international law, and Putin stresses its importance all the time. He believes there must be certain rules. And maybe this whole operation that he has pulled off is one huge "standing up for international law" operation. A powerful demonstration to the entire world that international law is still valid, that it won't pay in the long run to violate those rules. That even the global superpower has to adhere to it. Kind of like the good guy on the school yard who has to tolerate the bully all the time, until he brings him down strategically, telling him that he too has to follow the rules, like everyone else, thus sending a signal to the entire school that the rules are still there.

That would also explain why Putin continuously offers the pathocrats a way out to save their face - for example, he doesn't seem to go around and tell everyone "the US created ISIS and never wanted to fight it", instead the official narrative is "you can't fight terrorists by air strikes alone, you need the Syrian army". This offers the empire an explanation to the obvious question as to why they weren't able to defeat ISIS and at the same time forces them to admit the legitimacy of the Assad government. So maybe it's not Putin's game to "give it to the USA", strictly speaking (although he gives them a lot for sure!), but to simply stand up for the rule of law. As with the bully in the schoolyard, all the other nations notice this, notice that international law can and will be enforced if necessary against those who think they are beyond it. This could be extremely important and benefit everyone, including of course Russia. And it's obvious that those governments who scream the loudest now are those who are most violating international law and hope to further undermine it, like the bully's entourage.


Another thing I thought about is the "big miscalculation" the C's talked about. If we look at the timeline:

Classic regime change operation with phony revolution -> False flag chemical attacks -> Call for NATO to no-fly-zone bomb the place

So far, everything went according to plan for the reality-creators. Then Putin's first interruption: preventing the attack with brilliant diplomacy (Assad giving up his chemical weapons). This obviously made the empire very angry. A major stalking of the pathocrats, which may have only heightened their wishful thinking and delusion.

Next, after the initial shock and anger that something didn't go as they wished, I imagine how the pathocrats may have gone on a frenzy, laughing and cheering at their own brilliance, imagining how they will "give it to Russia and the whole world, big time!! Yeah!!" And so they invented ISIS, portrayed it as the devil incarnate in their propaganda outlets, and... walked right into the trap. Like the judo master that he is, Putin used his enemy's own energy to bring him down - the immense fear and hatred of ISIS in the West. The pathocrats were so into their wishful thinking mode that they just couldn't see it coming. And so Putin doesn't need to reveal any "conspiracy theories" about the CIA creating ISIS and such (although it's a side effect that many more people will realize these things), he simply does his thing, and nobody can say anything bad about it - after all, he bombs the devil incarnate! Checkmate. So, maybe this whole ISIS thing was the big miscalculation?

Just some thoughts, fwiw.

Yes, that's just brilliant and how it needs to be done. I can hardly think of a way you could do it better, in this day and age. And it is no wonder that Putin choose that route, since he is a lawyer as well. The other important thing, that makes this strict law and order approach even more genius, is the fact that authoritarians like to have a firm law and order structure, with a firm leader that shows and tell them how things should be done. That explains why so many russians are behind Putins government, probably also quite a number of authoritarians. A good leadership can make so much difference, it's incredible.

 

[herondancer]

The way I understand it is that emotions (either negative or positive) can be very misleading, but that "instincts" (aka. higher emotional center?) should be taken very seriously. The tricky part of course is to learn how to distinguish between the two. So if we feel something negative, on the one hand we don't want to dwell on the negativity and "feed it to the outside world", but on the other hand we also want to "sit with it", explore it and learn to distinguish negative (mechanical) emotions that are useless from "instinctive emotions" that try to tell us something important. For this to happen, we need to work on our various programs that distort our perception of the "instinct". FWIW

This is an interesting way of looking at it. By sitting with our own negativity ("darkness") we acknowledge its existence, but at the same time, not project it on the world. We keep it in ourselves, neutralize it it, so to speak, by transforming it into something useful and growth enhancing. Like a sort of internal composting. :) Alchemy uses similar images.

 

[herondancer]

Next, after the initial shock and anger that something didn't go as they wished, I imagine how the pathocrats may have gone on a frenzy, laughing and cheering at their own brilliance, imagining how they will "give it to Russia and the whole world, big time!! Yeah!!" And so they invented ISIS, portrayed it as the devil incarnate in their propaganda outlets, and... walked right into the trap. Like the judo master that he is, Putin used his enemy's own energy to bring him down - the immense fear and hatred of ISIS in the West. The pathocrats were so into their wishful thinking mode that they just couldn't see it coming. And so Putin doesn't need to reveal any "conspiracy theories" about the CIA creating ISIS and such (although it's a side effect that many more people will realize these things), he simply does his thing, and nobody can say anything bad about it - after all, he bombs the devil incarnate! Checkmate. So, maybe this whole ISIS thing was the big miscalculation?

Just some thoughts, fwiw.

Yes, that's just brilliant and how it needs to be done. I can hardly think of a way you could do it better, in this day and age. And it is no wonder that Putin choose that route, since he is a lawyer as well. The other important thing, that makes this strict law and order approach even more genius, is the fact that authoritarians like to have a firm law and order structure, with a firm leader that shows and tell them how things should be done. That explains why so many russians are behind Putins government, probably also quite a number of authoritarians. A good leadership can make so much difference, it's incredible.

It is brilliant and at the same time, common sense, another point Putin hammers on. Its appeal is world-wide. All normal human beings instinctively know there are rules for living together on civil terms. Even rabid right-wingers understand it. If they could wake up from the neocon's brainwashing of who is really the problem, even if it is just on the level of seeing ISIS for what it is, it's a step forward.

 

[Corvus]

In foreign policy of course, these rules are what we call international law, and Putin stresses its importance all the time. He believes there must be certain rules. And maybe this whole operation that he has pulled off is one huge "standing up for international law" operation. A powerful demonstration to the entire world that international law is still valid, that it won't pay in the long run to violate those rules. That even the global superpower has to adhere to it.

Maybe the international law is more a means how to accomplish the end, and is for that purpose useful. Because it has some good basics and from them the idea of multipolar world can be better built, and based on it Russia intervened for that purpose to weaken the US influence in Middle east.

That would also explain why Putin continuously offers the pathocrats a way out to save their face - for example, he doesn't seem to go around and tell everyone "the US created ISIS and never wanted to fight it", instead the official narrative is "you can't fight terrorists by air strikes alone, you need the Syrian army".

He mentions it indirectly, because maybe he still thinks they can be made to cooperate not being fully aware with what kind of beings he is dealing or in that why gaining more support from people who are beginning to see who is constructive force because of spirit of cooperation, reason and openness.

The other important thing, that makes this strict law and order approach even more genius, is the fact that authoritarians like to have a firm law and order structure, with a firm leader that shows and tell them how things should be done. That explains why so many russians are behind Putins government, probably also quite a number of authoritarians. A good leadership can make so much difference, it's incredible.

It is a normal thing for this world to function, without law in sts world there would be chaos because everyone would do what it wants because most people can t rule themselves or are slaves to their desires or wishes, so the only way to make more positive change is from the top, but that is also of short life as we know and hard to do.

By sitting with our own negativity ("darkness") we acknowledge its existence, but at the same time, not project it on the world.

There is no need to project when the world is very dark place already.

 

[angelburst29]

Putin's popularity in Iraq:

Popularity of 'Putin the Shiite' sky high in Iraq
http://news.yahoo.com/popularity-putin-shiite-sky-high-iraq-093642221.html

Some Iraqis see Moscow -- which has staunchly backed Damascus and Tehran in recent years -- as a more natural ally than the United States, which occupied the country for eight years.

Putin's patented leadership brand of bare-chested antics and cold determination is a also hit in Iraq, where the cult of the strong leader is alive and well 12 years after Saddam Hussein's ouster.

- 'Putinmania' -

On social media, many have already made him an honorary citizen, with one widely circulated joke even detecting phonetic evidence of Iraqi antecedents in the Russian president's name.

It goes like this: Putin's father was an Iraqi grocer from the Shiite south, near Nasiriyah, who introduced figs ("tin" in Arabic) to local markets and thus became known as "Abu Tin".

After World War II, he moved to the Soviet Union, married "a blonde Russian girl" and named their son Abdulamir. That proved a bit of a mouthful for locals who Russianised it into Vladimir.

The apocryphal nature of the story appears lost on some Facebook users, who have embraced "Putin the Shiite" and even replaced their profile pictures with a portrait of the Russian strongman.

"We should give Putin Iraqi and Syrian citizenship because he loves us more than our own politicians," says Mohammed al-Bahadli, a student walking on a street in the Shiite shrine city of Najaf.

"Muslims bomb us because we are Rafidha," says Saad Abdullah, who owns a convenience store in Najaf, employing a term which means "rejectionists" and is used by IS to refer to Shiites.

"Meanwhile Putin, who is an Orthodox man, is defending us.... Maybe he really is a Shiite and we didn't know about it," he says before flashing a huge smile.

Taxi driver Ali al-Rammahi says Putin is the only reason he hasn't already joined the thousands of Iraqis fleeing the country to knock on Europe's doors.

"I thank Putin because he convinced me to stay in Iraq... Hajji Putin is better than Hussein Obama," he says, using the title given to Muslims who have performed the pilgrimage to Mecca.

"Putinmania" has also gripped some of Iraq's politicians, creating some confusion over Baghdad's stance on a Russian intervention.

Hakim al-Zamili, the head of parliament's defence committee and a leader in a Shiite militia that once fought US forces, has suggested Baghdad has decided to request Russian air strikes.

Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi, who is supported by the West, has been more equivocal but has not ruled out enlisting Russia's help.

Moscow recently increased its footprint in Iraq by joining a coordination cell set up in Baghdad to pool intelligence on IS fighters with non-coalition members Syria and Iran.

 

[RedFox]

[..]
I think it's possible that this may be building already, given the events that have been going on in Palestine the last few weeks.
With the possibility of false flags and war with Palestine on the cards, we should all be watchful for events and maybe try and preempt them on Sott/social media to head things off.
Articles on Palestine and the Muslim holocaust should be given some attention fwiw.

Meanwhile
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/10/wave-stabbing-attacks-continues-jerusalem-151008095254483.html

[..]
1600 Palestinians injured

According to the Palestinian Red Crescent, at least 1,600 Palestinians have been injured since October 3.
Eighty-seven have been injured with live ammunition, and 290 with rubber-coated steel bullets.
On Monday, Abdel Rahman Abdullah, a 13-year-old from the Aida refugee camp in Bethlehem, was shot and killed by Israeli forces, prompting further protests and unrest.
Tensions have been mounting since clashes erupted at the al-Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem over access restrictions for Palestinians during Jewish and Muslim holidays

Undercover IDF (death squads) stirring up the trouble.

https://youtu.be/JaWkE47xNug

 

[Eboard10]

BBC just came out with a story that 4 Russian missiles that were directed towards Syria fell on Iranian soil, continuing with their usual agenda of demonising Putin. Of course, as with most of these reports, the information is coming from unnamed US officials.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34479873

Syria crisis: Russian missiles 'fell on Iran'

Four Russian cruise missiles fired at Syria from the Caspian Sea landed in Iran, unnamed US officials say.

It was unclear whether the missiles caused any damage, they said.

On Wednesday, Russia said it had launched 26 cruise missiles at targets in north and north-west Syria. It has reiterated comments made at the time that all reached their targets.

The news came as Nato renewed assurances to defend its allies in view of Russia's "escalation" in Syria.

Nato is boosting its response forces to be able to deploy troops speedily.

The US officials provided no details of where the missiles might have landed.

Iran's Irna news agency reported on Wednesday that an unknown flying object had crashed in the village of Ghozghapan in the Iranian province of West Azerbaijan, said to be under the missiles' flight path.

But conservative media described the reports of missiles landing in Iran as "psychological operations by the US against Moscow".

"Since Russia began its operations in Syria, Western media and officials have launched an all-out assault against Moscow," the Fars New Agency, thought to have close affiliations with Iran's Revolutionary Guards, said.

Moscow denies Western accusations that it has mainly targeted opponents of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, insisting its strikes have hit the infrastructure of the so-called Islamic State (IS) and other militant groups.

IS militants have seized swathes of territory in Syria and Iraq.

The Russian air strikes had "weakened" IS, Syrian Army Chief of Staff Gen Ali Abdullah Ayoub said on Thursday, enabling the army to start a "big attack" to retake towns and villages.

Heavy fighting was reported in areas of Idlib, Hama and Latakia provinces, where a coalition of rebels - including the al-Qaeda-linked Nusra Front - operates.

Government-backed troops had moved into the key Ghab plain area, the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring group said.

Even by just reading the article it's clear that the information given by the unnamed US officials cannot be substantiated and is likely another fabrication. Unfortunately, most people will read the title and maybe the header and this will reinforce their perception of Russia as the bad guys. :(

 

[T.C.]

It is a normal thing for this world to function, without law in sts world there would be chaos because everyone would do what it wants because most people can t rule themselves or are slaves to their desires or wishes, so the only way to make more positive change is from the top, but that is also of short life as we know and hard to do.

This is something that's been on my mind for the last couple of days.

For me, Putin is setting an example. He's setting a standard. And it's a standard of conduct.

But it's not just about how to act as a politician. It's about how to act as a person. And more than that, it's about how to act as a person in our reality.

As you say, Corvinus, laws are a normal thing for this world to function. But there's a lot of talk about laws in esoteric literature, and there are physical laws and natural laws, and there are criminal laws. The C's tell us that even the Lizzies are bound by laws - hence the continuing endeavours of the group and the continuing existence of this forum and sott. Esoteric Christianity tells us that one interpretation of doing the Work is freeing oneself of the laws which govern accidental existence.

Putin is showing us that it is possible to not just navigate reality within the laws that limit us, but to excel! And that it's possible to turn the 'General Law' against itself.

All of us have to strategically navigate reality while confined by certain laws and conventions. But there is always enough room for manoeuvre if we understand the rules of the game. And despite the fact that STS is able to cheat, we can still win!

 

[Corvus]

And despite the fact that STS is able to cheat, we can still win!

If only I had some of that optimism seeing the world around me going to ruins, suffering never ending. Reminds me of that lotr scene of Boromir s death speech.

 

[sitting]

For me, Putin is setting an example. He's setting a standard. And it's a standard of conduct.

All that and more.

I suspect he has a profound appreciation for his mission -- within the context of Russian history. Now a somewhat different version of the 1917 Bolshevik revolution. By the same gang ... financed by the same family. They have gone after true semites, and they will go after the Russians, eventually.

Putin is up against the spiritual descendants of Trotsky. Infesting every country we know. (Including Turkey.)

I believe he believes he's fighting for all of humanity. Hence his conduct and the standard he sets. It's meant as an enduring example for the future. This man SEES far.

He fits in very nicely with what Edgar Cayce had prophesied.

FWIW.