Middle East

As we noted recently, BofAML fears "a depeg of the Saudi riyal is the number one black-swan event for the global oil market in 2016," adding that it is "a highly unlikely but highly impactful risk." Given the recent action in Saudi Riyal forwards - the market's best guess at where the oil-ruch nation's currency will trade in the future - the chance of the black swan 'de-peg' is its highest since 2002. Besides this morning's "whatever it takes" moment, which oil markets quickly shrugged off, amid heavy subsidies to keep the people calm and the costs of wars in Yemen (and more in Syria), weak oil revenues leave The Sauds with few options (outside of the load the nation with ever more debt program): It's either stop it with the whole flooding an oversupplied market strategy, or let the peg fall before reserves runs dry.

These developments in terrorism are textbook Hegelian Dialectic, using problem-reaction-solution to justify a greater military presence in Syria and Iraq, despite nearly a decade and a half of fighting jihad, civil war and supporting “frenemies” across the region with arms, training and financial support. The founding fathers warned of this, but could scarcely foresee the cynical nature of today’s police state – where the terrorists created by the state have become the population’s worst nightmare.

As Donald Trump came under fire for claiming that he saw Muslims in New Jersey cheering on 9/11, admitted-non-total-truth-speaker Ben Carson jumped on the bandwagon claiming he too "saw film of it." Now, in yet another embarrassing u-turn 'oops' for the retired (now it all makes sense) neurosurgeon, the Carson campaign told CBS News Monday evening that Carson is "really not" standing behind his earlier statement and that the GOP presidential candidate was thinking of other footage he saw.

"The political left is happy to see people cross borders but would gladly restrict the flow of capital and goods. The political right is happy to see capital and goods cross borders but would gladly build a fence to restrict the flow of people. I’m afraid that the compromise might be to restrict people, capital and goods."

If it doesn’t start a war in the short run, it’s going to guarantee a U.S. bankruptcy in the slightly longer run. All the “hawks” running for president this year (which is to say, almost every candidate) seem oblivious to the fact that, in anything but the briefest conflict, economic power completely trumps military hardware. Simply put, whenever you see a mention of the U.S. Navy and the Spratlys in the same paragraph, you’re seeing a reminder of an open vein helping to bleed America dry. And that’s the best case.

Mass surveillance at home and endless military projection abroad are the twin sides of the same coin of national security, which must simply be maximized as much as possible. Conspicuously missing from President Hollande’s decisive declaration of war however, was any mention of the biggest elephant in the room: state-sponsorship. A senior Western official familiar with a large cache of intelligence obtained this summer told the Guardian that “direct dealings between Turkish officials and ranking ISIS members was now ‘undeniable.’”

"Those who say the United States should have intervened in 2011 to topple Assad are left having to explain either how they could have rallied U.S. public support for an Iraq-like occupation and rebuilding of Syria, or, in the absence of that, how Syria would have avoided Libya’s fate."

"The Islamic State has grown that strong due to the irresponsible policy of the United States," exclaimed Russian PM Dmitry Medvedev this morning, demanding that "really consolidated efforts" are needed to counter ISIS' terrorist threats. This comes just hours after President Obama toughened his rhetoric, vowing that the global coalition formed to destroy ISIS "will not relent," adding, rather oddly, that the group responsible for the Paris terror attacks is "a bunch of killers with good social media."

In a few weeks time the east Mediterranean is about to become a warship and aircraft carrier parking lot, with the Truman and de Gaulle side by side, just as we predicted it would be a month ago when we said that the summer of 2013 naval scenario is unfolding once again, and where another half a dozen (at least) Russian warships are already located in what has all the makings of a historic Gulf of Tonkin redux.

There are so many strands of lies and distortions that it is now almost impossible for Official Washington to disentangle itself from all the false narratives that the neocons and the liberal hawks have spun in support of their various “regime change” strategies. So, the American people are left with the mainstream U.S. news media endlessly repeating storylines that are either completely false or highly exaggerated. Official Washington’s many false narratives about Russia and Syria have gotten so tangled that they have become a danger to the struggle against jihadist terrorism and conceivably a threat to the future of the planet.

"Give me liberty, or give me death!" – Partrick Henry, American Founding Father, 1775

"They value their civil liberties more than they value life. I disagree with that. You want to be free and dead? I’d rather be not free and alive" – Billionaire Hillary Clinton donor Haim Saban, 2015

Painful as it is to admit, the West, especially the United States, bears significant responsibility for creating the conditions in which ISIS has flourished. The recent attacks should be understood as “blowback terrorism”: a dreadful unintended result of repeated US and European covert and overt military actions throughout the Middle East, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, and Central Asia that aimed to overthrow governments and install regimes compliant with Western interests. These operations have not only destabilized the targeted regions, causing great suffering; they have also put populations in the US, the European Union, Russia, and the Middle East at significant risk of terror.

“George W. Bush may think that a war against Iraq is the solution to our problems, but the reality is, it will only serve to create far more,” read a 2003 article on The Onion a week after then-President George Bush launched the Iraq War. While a wide variety of organizations and individuals also rebuked that invasion, the satirical newspaper offered one of the most accurate assessments to date. So accurate, in fact, it all but predicted the rise of the Islamic State.

What do the globalists do when they want to create, reignite and keep their war on terror fought indefinitely?