War Council Convened In Damascus Past Friday To Prepare For Israeli Strike, Iran President Expects War "Between Spring And Summer"

Tyler Durden's picture

Abu Dhabi Media website The National has disclosed some rather disturbing news about peace "prospects" in the middle east. It appears this past Friday saw a war council convene in Damascus, between Syrian president Bashar al Assad, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hizbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah to "devise counterattack plans and assign tasks in the event of an Israeli
offensive on one or all parties
, wrote Abdelbari Atwan, the
editor-in-chief of the pan-Arab newspaper Al Quds al Arabi." And more troublingly, "the Iranian president said he expects war to break out somewhere
between spring and summer of this year
. Meanwhile, the Hizbollah chief
vowed to strike the Israeli capital, its airports and power stations if
Israel dared to attack Beirut’s critical infrastructure."Let's recall that Goldman's most recent 2010 and 2011 WTI estimates call for prices to rise to $90 and $110/bbl, respectively.

More from The National:

“The timing of the meeting, the way it was undertaken and the
ensuing press conference that was held at its conclusion, all point to
a strategic coalition being reinforced. This is the build-up of a new
front that will spearhead the confrontation with the US-Israeli
alliance and whichever Arab countries that may, expressly or
implicitly, be affiliated with it.”“Indeed, we are being exposed to a new discourse here, an unprecedented
sense of self-confidence and an unheard-of preparedness for

What is more troubling for the US is that any potential effort to rekindle a relationship with Iran is now dead and burred, as the new axis seems to involve exclusively Syria.

For its part, the Syrian leadership appears to
have made up its mind to close off the US administration’s “trite and
” flirtation with Damascus and opted for bolstering its tactical
partnership with Tehran.

Surely this is now just another white swan in a sea of black, which has been duly factored in to various asset prices and what not.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Anonymous's picture

All I know is that the Marines run continuous advertisement on my soccer channels. And they also run them in Spanish(!!!!!!) on Fox Soccer Espanol and ESPN Espanyol and GoalTV espanyol. Soccer playing youngsters must be signing up like crazy.

Anonymous's picture

Yeah... this is happening right around the same time as a treasury auction "fail", 10% interest rates, and the "hyperinflation" of 3% core-CPI in the US.

That is... NEVER. So dumb.


Mad Max's picture

Oh, of course.  Never in world history have we seen 10% interest rates, stagflation, or war in the middle east.  And certainly never within just a couple years of each other.  All that nonsense is up there with the easter bunny in the realm of impossibility.

Anonymous's picture

People been talking about ALL THREE for the last 20 years... hell maybe the last 200 years.

Its never the stuff you think, that you have to worry about.

"Conflict" is not particularly economically interesting anymore. The wars are small. The economic apparatus too diverse for it to matter.

Specifically --

Any country that is hostile can immediately be isolated by US power. Not a single plane takes off without the implied consent of the US airforce. In a HARD conflict... there is no country whose entire transportation supply infrastructure cannot be completely halted by the US in under 1 week (if nec).

Nuclear subs are now armed with 1000s of satalite guided cruise missles. They could (in theory) plant thousands of stikes across Iran (or any country) in a matter of hours.

Course... this is all SILLY. Its like talking with 13 year old kids.

Eisenhower -- "there is no alternative to peace".

Going Down's picture


Admiral Mullen In Israel


If a regional confrontation were to break out following a strike on Iran, the US military chief said bluntly, "It would be a big, big, big problem for all of us. I worry a great deal about the unintended consequences of a strike."




An Israeli first strike would be an act of suicide. Even "Zionists" are not stupid.


Grifter's picture

That's what I don't get.  For 2 years now all I've read is that Israel attack = Strait of Hormuz gets gangbanged by Sunburn missiles & we have $300/barrel oil. 

And, China & Russia probably wouldn't take kindly to watching their energy investments go up in smoke, so we get World War III or whatever. 

I agree with your statement 1000%, Mr./Mrs./Miss Down.  Pure suicide.  And pure lunacy on Israel's part if it's seriously being discussed.

hound dog vigilante's picture

Israel considers Iran to be a mortal threat.  So Iran+nukes=certain death for Israel, from their perspective.

Israel does not view a first strike as suicide. Israel views a first strike as necessary for the survival of their nation. Thus, an Israeli first-strike is not only likely, it is inevitable.

Further, Israel has fared very well historically against multilateral arab forces. It will probably not be Israel that takes the worst of the fight... my guess would be that the most hostile arab nations will be hit first and hit hardest. Israel is much better equipped militarily than their arab neighbors. Iran's nukes are the equilizer, which is exactly why Israel will strike before this threat can be realized.

Another arab/israeli war is INEVITABLE.

nonclaim's picture

Inevitable and getting closer, which means we have to stop talking about the "ifs" and prepare for the likely post-fact consequences.

On the other hand, I don't expect a "shock and awe" type of attack. That could be next, though localized, if commandos don't fully succeed in spreading internal (to the Arabs) mayhem first. They don't have to destroy the infrastructure, just enough to paralize with fear (shit, what next?) and entice internal dissent and the tradicional coups.

chet's picture

I agree with much of your characterization, but Israel is smart enough to know that even extended strikes might not take out Iran's nuke research at this point.  Unless Iranians are truly incredibly stupid, their research is spread all over the country and buried as deep as they can manage.

What a strike means is Hizzbullah using whatever they have up their sleeves against Israel.  Could be not much, but who knows?

But the bigger problem is (more) direct Iranian involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan against US forces, a full-on seizure in the oil markets, likely blockades in the gulf, and the like.  That will fray our relationship with the Israelis, the Chinese and the Russians to say the least.

And Iran will be back on track with nukes within 10 years if not less.

chet's picture

"Another arab/israeli war is INEVITABLE"

Also, Iranians aren't Arab.

Anonymous's picture

Right, so what does Israel do when China parks a fleet off her coast, including a few nuclear subs both in the Med. and the Red Sea?

It seems to me that China will fight to keep the Israelis from blocking their access to oil. I don't think they will have a problem turning Israel into a pile of glass beads, not when they own enough US debt to send us into the stone age without a shot being fired.

Suddenly, I see war as a real possibility. I guess it all depends on whether or not Israel can hit China with a nuclear counterstrike. If they can, then China will probably let it go. If they can't, then China has the upper hand.

Can you get away with biting the hand that feeds the hand that feeds you?

Anonymous's picture

China is not going to park a fleet off Israel, get real. That would be tantamount to actual war with the US.

earnyermoney's picture

Any Israeli strike will involve the U.S. Navy. So the Chinese navy will have to deal with the U.S. Navy.

wake the roach's picture

Yep, and just as going down commented about Admiral Mullens warning of "unintended cosequences", its fair to say that along with a global economic meltdown, China becoming involved is a guaranteed and very dangerous unintended consequence.

China would perceive (and in my opinion, correctly) that an attack upon Iran is a direct attack upon the national interests of China itself.

I think an international strike against Israel's illegal nuclear weopons would do much to ease middle east tensions and to promote non proliferation.

Oh, and lets not forget the often overlooked Pakistan too because lets face it, Iran is a much more stable nation but of course, not much oil to be won there.


Missing_Link's picture

An Israeli first strike would be an act of suicide. Even "Zionists" are not stupid.

How so?  What can Syria, Iran, and Hamas really do?

Israel took out Syria's nuke plant a few years back; Syria couldn't do a thing about it.

Hamas can't do anything but fire rockets that usually miss.  Iran could lose a lot of its military and nuclear capabilities in a hurry with a well-planned Israeli air assault.  Israel's military tech is light years ahead of Iran, Syria, and Hamas.

chet's picture

"We'll be in and out of Iraq in a month!  How could those backward-ass nomads possibly make things hard on the old US of A?  What's an 'unintended consequence'?"

Anonymous's picture

A ground war is a different thing entirely than targeted air strikes.

Anonymous's picture

Even then, the war was over in what, a couple weeks? It's the democracy construction/occupation phase that takes forever.

Anonymous's picture

Takes forever? No, it will only take the time to dry up Iraqi oil reserves.

Look at how the US are eager of jumping out of Saudi Arabia, after, what, 50 years of deep cooperation...

assembler's picture

A terrorist regime like Iran, with a nuke on Israel's border, is equally suicide for them. IF it really comes down to that binary choice, a first strike is the better choice. (Of course, the whole world is hoping that is not the endgame here). But consider what your response would be if Al-Qaeda were in control of the government of the country next to yours, and they had sworn to wipe you out, and they were building nuclear weapons...

Anonymous's picture

"terrorist regime"-cute words

caconhma's picture

<Even "Zionists" are not stupid.>

NO. Jews are stupid. This is why they are in trouble for the last 2,400 years. They still wonder why people do not like them.

Anonymous's picture

Interesting point. If the truly are stupid (which is hard to say about anybody) how the hell are they still around and in high places of government etc.

Also. If you look at the top 20 financial firms/Banks on this planet. How many of the CEOs or members of the boards of directors are jews. I haven't counted this but I suspect that the number is big. Just a thought that if they are "silly little girls" like Achnuld would say why the F are they in charge?

no cnbc cretin's picture

Another war, won't fix our economy!

Missing_Link's picture

True.  But I can't say I'd mind if Israel gave Hamas, Syria, and Iran what they've been asking for for so long.

They would not need the USA's help to take on all three.

It would certainly make the world a better place.

Anonymous's picture

What have they been asking for?

How would it make the world a better place?

Sorry, we don't need another Iraq War Part Deux. There is no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, other than the propaganda from the same Zionist shills (such as yourself) that lied to Americans about the WMD's in Iraq.

Israel is a rogue state. The world understands this, only Americans are in the dark.

Anonymous's picture

Oh, and the propaganda coming from Iran itself. Never mind the US Intelligence reports that come to the same conclusion. "Zionist shills"? Riiiight. And the rise of radical Islam is just in our imagination too. Thanks.

Anonymous's picture

The inspectors on the ground in Iran, like the inspectors on the ground in Iraq back in 2002, have been consistent in that Iran does NOT have a nuclear weapons program. Only Israel and its AMEN choir in the United States claim that Iran is developing nukes.

Please present any evidence to the contrary.

Anonymous's picture

No surprise that Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia are the most worried about a war with Iran. Iran have nothing to gain to attack Israel but a lot more to attack someone like Saudi Arabia or Abu Dhabi.

If this happened, China would be cut-off from its main suppliers and the world would experience triple digits inflation overnight.

If you look at a map you can see that Syria can't do much for long time. On the other side Yemen although could also be dangerous for the Saudis as who really knows how many whepons transited there from Iran and from all over Africa?

cougar_w's picture

Head fake.

They've got nothing.

chet's picture

Agree, from Israel's perspective.  They just have more ineffective missile-lobbing from Lebanon. 

From the US perspective, Iran would have a lot of justification to get heavily involved in Iraq and Afghanistan (moreso than they already are), making us miserable.  And who knows what they would do with their oil supply and with traffic in the Gulf.  Of course, Israel would likely go after their oils operations so that might be a moot point.

As US military has pointed out again and again and again in recent years, a strike on Iran in no way helps us right now, and would not be a friendly gesture from our "friends" in Israel.

Anonymous's picture

Here it is....

Why does the US not endorse Nat Gas...

And make Iran irrelevent....

War will not solve anything....

Improving economies will.....


This seems to be nothing but supporting the finances of the defense sector.....and what is blatantly true.....is that war is something that is easier to pull off.....versus rebuilding manufacturing.....


So here it is....

Promote commerce....

Energy independence.....

Tax structure change....

Better exchanges.....

Electric cars and nat gas trucks and trains....

Just do it....


A war will only make non productivity worse....and will seal failure....will put further pressure on taxes....

And is just plain wrong....

Shame on war promoters.....may you burn in hell....


Missing_Link's picture

You use....... too many......  ellipses.........

Natgas is great but it is not........  a silver bullet............

carbonmutant's picture

It also doesn't meet the political agenda of the current administration.

Anonymous's picture


Not only are your "...." annoying, but you're lost to the truth.

The fact is the US has NOT received oil from Iran since The Revolution of '79.

Therefore, this statement: "Why does the US not endorse Nat Gas... And make Iran [irrelevant]...." is sophomoric at best and totally ignorant at worst.

Given how you structured your comment, I can guess, with 100% certainty, that the latter is the fact then the former.

Oracle of Kypseli's picture

When was the last time the US government did the right thing?

Anonymous's picture

That depends on which dyspeptic asshole you ask.

J.B. Books's picture

Just don't draft my boys.

truont's picture

If I didn't know better, I'd say this whole Iran-Israel war was planned or something!

But, that would be silly to say...

MarketTruth's picture

Iran is not stupid and they recently moved certain nuclear facility bits above ground instead of deep inside a mountain. The reasoning is that if they attack said facility the nuclear waste will then spread and contaminate not just Iran, but also other parts of the world including Israel depending on the airstream. This is not to condemn Iran for doing this as it is another factor of how to prepare for war. The Goldstone report tells quite a bit about Israel's tactics and their willingness to break international laws.

Then there are the Mossad terrorists and assassins, which has now lead to UAE not allowing any Israelis into their country or those who look Israeli. Due to Mossad's constant actions, the EU, Britain, Asia, Canada and the USA should put a ban on allowing Israelis from entering the country due to the high risk of spying and secret operations that could very easily lead to more killings.

The USA's House/Senate/Congress should reassess the qualifications of those members who also hold Israel passports. There are many members within the USA government who hold dual allegiance to the USA and Israel and it may make some wonder which side they will take when it matters most.


PS: The USA invasion of Iraq began March 20th, which was an interesting day for reasons i'd prefer not to disclose. Could be an interesting time line give or take a week just as some believe in the Mercury retrograde or other things.

Mad Max's picture

Ironically, burying your nuclear facility deep in a mountain makes it EASIER to attack without harming others.  Ever heard of underground nuclear testing?  You detonate a nuke underground and it creates a nice glassy spherical cavern that is pretty well sealed.  Even if you attack the facility with a big conventional bomb, most if not all of the radioactive contamination (UFl6, etc.) would stay buried or at worst be released fairly slowly.

Anonymous's picture

and moving our ships into pearl harbor resulted in...

merehuman's picture

You mean to say a usa senator or representative can have dual citizenship?

Conflict of interest isnt it? I am surprised that this is legal. Its insane from my point of view.

Do Russians and Chinese have same option or is it just one special country?

America is incredible!

Oracle of Kypseli's picture

Certain countries consider citizenship as an inalienable right. Even if the US forces you to denounce that citizenship in exchange of becoming an American, the  validity of your earlier citizenship is still intact.

Otherwise, the US has to declare that Dutch, Israeli's, Greeks, Peruvians and many others can never become US citizens. (Unconstitutional) The US even allows you to vote in your ex country's elections. something you could not do 20 years ago.  

MarketTruth's picture

Well, many senators and others in high ranking US Gov were not born in Israel and do not have Israeli parents yet yes, many of them hold Israel passports/dual citizenship.

If you are in doubt, do some research as it will be very eye opening to many just who holds dual passports and how they tend to vote on certain issues. Also look at how few have dual citizenship to Asia, Canada or other countries by comparison. This is a very serious issue that should be addressed.


Anonymous's picture

Spring Equinox. Zero degrees Aries (god of war).
Which Uranus (shocks/surprises/"events")will enter around 27 May 2010.

yeah, just saying.

Anonymous's picture

Spring Equinox. Zero degrees Aries (god of war).
Which Uranus (shocks/surprises/"events")will enter around 27 May 2010.

yeah, just saying.