Connect with us

Latest

Video

News

NATO stands behind Trump and his Afghanistan “new strategy” (Video)

NATO agrees with Trump’s ‘Conditions-Based’ Afghanistan strategy.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

567 Views

NATO welcomes POTUS Donald Trump’s “conditions-based” strategy in Afghanistan.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Tuesday, in a statement on the organization’s website…

“I welcome President Trump’s new, conditions-based approach to Afghanistan and the region.”

During an Afghanistan “new strategy” speech delivered yesterday, US President Trump said that the United States will cooperate with Afghanistan as long as Kabul seeks to progress, however, the US help will not be endless.

During his speech, Trump was crystal clear in expressing his confidence that NATO will do exactly what it is told to do, with regards to Afghanistan military support and funding…

We will ask our NATO allies and global partners to support our new strategy, with additional troop and funding increases in line with our own. We are confident they will.

Since taking office, I have made clear that our allies and partners must contribute much more money to our collective defense, and they have done so.

Sputnik News reports

Trump’s strategic guidance for South Asia unveiled on Monday states that US support in Afghanistan is not unlimited and will not serve as a “blank check.” The guidance repudiates nation-building and instead expands the US troops’ authority to target terrorists in Afghanistan.

“Our aim remains to ensure that Afghanistan never again becomes a safe haven for terrorists who would attack our own countries,” Stoltenberg said.

Contrary to previous reports, Trump said the US would not reveal the number of troops or any future military action plans in Afghanistan.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

“NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg” … or Woof-Woof, the US’s Favorite Poodle.

JPH
Guest
JPH

More like a coyote. No insult intended to the honest coyotes in the wild, who have to kill for a living.

Mariaaburr
Guest
Mariaaburr

Clear98i

Google is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
On tuesday I got a Smart new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
!ai38:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobs328CashMediaClear/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!ai38l..,..

Anniesdunbar
Guest
Anniesdunbar

Sky90a

Google is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
On tuesday I got a Smart new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
!ai110d:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobs400CashTopSky/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!ai110l..,….

tapatio
Guest
tapatio

Exactly, NATO is nothing but Washington’s house pet.

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

Europeans have no obligation to send their sons , brothers or husbands to fight and die in American endless war in Afghanistan. Maybe Trump will send one of his sons there. Hello?

seby
Guest
seby

his sons only know how to point guns at defenceless wildlife.

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

It doesn’t matter. If Trump wants to prolong the war in Afghanistan, that’s the US business, not Europe’s. Europe has no beef there.

Shahna
Guest

Then it’s a pity “NATO” got suckered into going there 16 years ago when they went to kill a country because their Saudi Arabian Al Qaeda asset had gone rogue (or so they say).

Now to get out – is another kettle of fish.
But as long as European nations allow America-Only to call the shots – Europe’s sons and daughters will die for the American economy.

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

It’s even direr than that, US is waging wars, and Europe collects the refugees.
Before the war in Bosnia, there were NO Bosniac refugees in Europe.
Before the war in Serbia, there were NO Kosovar refugees in Europe.
Before the war in Afghanistan, there were NO Afghani refugees in Europe.
Before the war in Iraq, there were NO Iraqi refugees in Europe.
Before the war in Syria, there were NO Syrian refugees in Europe.
Now they are counted in millions.

Shahna
Guest

Europe did it to themselves.
They implemented “Austerity” without a future projection of where it would lead. They supported “America’s Wars” with an eye on present profit but a complete lack of regard for what wars do to the country that’s the target. (An unforgivable omission for Europe and esp Germany – they LOST World War2.)

Now they weep because they deliberately made like ostriches and stuck their heads in the sand and all their profit-now, pay-later ‘policies’ have come due. It’s time to pay the bill.

The damn bill ALWAYS comes in.

Shahna
Guest

The tragedy isn’t that the US screwed the EU for it’s own interests – the tragedy is that EU eagerly helped the US do it – with a will.

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

“The tragedy isn’t that the US screwed the EU for it’s own interests…”

You reminded me of the words of John Fowles, an Irish writer, in his book “The Magus”:
“The tragedy was not that one man (Hitler) chose to be evil, but that millions of German people chose to not be good”.

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

Not so much ‘tragedy’ as a high crime – treason. It was entirely avoidable, tragedy usually is not.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

comment image comment image comment image comment image

seby
Guest
seby

Wow. What a surprise. Who would have guessed? Is it really necessary to even report that the board agrees with the ceo?

Shahna
Guest

Here’s what I don’t hear…….
UK, France, Germany saying “We stand behind the US/NATO in Afghanistan.”

Perhaps they should limit their obligatory NATO support to the logistics of supplying chocolate to the Taliban’s American targets? … They do so love their chocolate – for the kids you know.

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

Here’s what I don’t hear…….
UK, France, Germany saying “We stand behind the US/NATO in Afghanistan.”

It’s Stoltenberg, the US home poodle, who said that, not UK, France or Germany. Encore un petit effort and US will find itself on its own, without any allies.

Shahna
Guest

“US will find itself on its own, without any allies”
—————
Then the chances would be good that the Americans could be forced home – she doesn’t like to go to war without the moral support of her “allies.” Might make the folks back home think they’re invaders instead of the good guys defending against the evil doers (simplicity is an educationed requirement)

…. LOOK! Britain, France, Germany, even Denmark and 70 other nations – the “rest of the world is in our coalition” – all agree : “We’re in the right!”

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

US doesn’t need allies, it only wants vassals, the “Beni oui-oui”, who answer Yes to all US diktats. As soon as one dares say “No”, he becomes a foe or worse, a “hitler”.

Shahna
Guest

“US doesn’t need allies, it only wants vassals”
——————-
Yes. But Europe is happy with the Liege/Serf relationship and as long as they prefer it – they will have it.

We aren’t going to get the US to behave like a decent nation by asking and we aren’t going to get the EU to acquire a spine by telling. We have an expression here for naughty children: “Wil nie hoor moet voel.”

It means – if you won’t listen, you will feel.
…And it’s the prelude to a walloping.

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

I am not sure that Hitler ever said ‘no’ to his Anglo-Zionist masters. Are you?

Keith Smith
Guest
Keith Smith

US created AL queada

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

That was Brzezinski’s “doctrine” adopted by all the US administrations after Carter, to use Islamic terrorists for the US purpose. US supported Al-Qaeda not only in Afghanistan in the 1980ies, but also in Chechnya, Libya, Egypt and Syria.

Keith Smith
Guest
Keith Smith

nebraske university usa printing jhadi textbooks and installing them in national curriculum for little kids start of the eighties was one of the most disgusting things the US did

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

Originally spelled: CIADA

Volker
Guest
Volker

NATO means Pentagon! The so called “NATO-Members” are just their servants and/or slaves.

Terry Ross
Guest
Terry Ross

Such an announcement by NATO is about as surprising as the statement that night follows day.

Kentus
Guest
Kentus

Former premier Minister of Denmark got his reward appointed secretary General of Nato.
Remember “Fog of War” Rasmussen?
Then former premier minister of Norway Jens Stoltenberg got his reward (after being scared shitless at the events at Utøya(Bering Breivik)).

The Fog:comment image

The Stoltenberg:comment image

Take Care
Kent

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

You know Kent, you really get the ‘worms beneath the skin.’ It makes mine crawl to see the secret Dorian Gray portraits of these monsters.

stevek9
Guest
stevek9

If NATO is behind it, then you know it’s bad.

Trump: “must seek an honorable and enduring outcome”

Sound anything like ‘Peace with honor’? For those too young to remember … that was Vietnam.

bluewater
Guest
bluewater

US Department of Defense’s estimates have put Afghanistan’s untapped wealth of gold, copper, uranium and other rare-earth minerals at well around $1 trillion to $3 trillion,plus the largest resource of lithium in the world,as well as heroin. That can probably explain Washington’s willingness to continue the war in Afghanistan, which has dragged on for 16 years and has cost the US economy more than $714 billion dollars for the Rothschilds,Goldman Sachs ……Judea Inc If there was any remaining doubt that the infamous Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is back in charge of “foreign policy” TM, Donald Chump dispelled it once… Read more »

Debbie Beane
Guest
Debbie Beane

Yes, and the first time I saw the estimate of Afghan mineral wealth was in the year 2010. What’ve they been doing 7 years hence, if not mining and otherwise stealing the stuff?

bluewater
Guest
bluewater

The TRILLION DOLLAR DRUG TRADE is big business…also we test THE NEW TOYS as also in IRAQ. Lasers that kill a HUMAN and leaves only DUST
NEW DRONES THAT USE A I …….. TO KILL Humans
Also Organs are needed in hospitals for surgery…NOTHING GOES TO WASTE…FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!

AM Hants
Member
AM Hants

Listening to the Channel 5 News Headlines, what was interesting was the way that President Trump was demanding other nations join the US in their Afghanistan quest.

No sign UK will join US Afghan troop surge in wake of Donald Trump u-turn… http://news.sky.com/story/uk-unlikely-to-beef-up-afghanistan-presence-in-wake-of-trump-decision-11000418

I wonder how long it will take him to change his mind and send out the Forces to look after the Poppy Harvest?

Vera Gottlieb
Guest
Vera Gottlieb

Of course NATO would agree to anything remotely resembling possibility of war.

Debbie Beane
Guest
Debbie Beane

Yeah, I’ll bet NATO adores the extended arrangement. Speaking of US only, Sputnik reports “Over Half the $76 Billion Military Aid to Afghanistan Since 2002 Stolen.”
https://sputniknews.com/military/201708141056453160-military-aid-afghanistan-missing/

I must add that an estimated $40 Trillion has “disappeared” since the late 90s. People are working on this — citizens, not currently employed by govt. to my knowledge. US cannot be the only NATO member who enjoys extraordinary Treasury access, while performing NATO stuff.

A few years ago, I read that someone tried to audit NATO. Like US, the task was impossible to perform.

Latest

Fake news media FREAK OUT over Trump and NATO (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 172.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the media meltdown over remarks that U.S. President Trump may have made with regard to NATO, and how neo-liberal war hawks championing the alliance as some sort of foreign policy projection of peace and democracy, are really just supporting aggression, war, and the eventual weakening of the United States.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Top 10 Reasons Not to Love NATO, Authored by David Swanson:


The New York Times loves NATO, but should you?

Judging by comments in social media and the real world, millions of people in the United States have gone from having little or no opinion on NATO, or from opposing NATO as the world’s biggest military force responsible for disastrous wars in places like Afghanistan (for Democrats) or Libya (for Republicans), to believing NATO to be a tremendous force for good in the world.

I believe this notion to be propped up by a series of misconceptions that stand in dire need of correction.

1. NATO is not a war-legalizing body, quite the opposite. NATO, like the United Nations, is an international institution that has something or other to do with war, but transferring the UN’s claimed authority to legalize a war to NATO has no support whatsoever in reality. The crime of attacking another nation maintains an absolutely unaltered legal status whether or not NATO is involved. Yet NATO is used within the U.S. and by other NATO members as cover to wage wars under the pretense that they are somehow more legal or acceptable. This misconception is not the only way in which NATO works against the rule of law. Placing a primarily-U.S. war under the banner of NATO also helps to prevent Congressional oversight of that war. Placing nuclear weapons in “non-nuclear” nations, in violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty, is also excused with the claim that the nations are NATO members (so what?). And NATO, of course, assigns nations the responsibility to go to war if other nations go to war — a responsibility that requires them to be prepared for war, with all the damage such preparation does.

2. NATO is not a defensive institution. According to the New York Times, NATO has “deterred Soviet and Russian aggression for 70 years.” This is an article of faith, based on the unsubstantiated belief that Soviet and Russian aggression toward NATO members has existed for 70 years and that NATO has deterred it rather than provoked it. In violation of a promise made, NATO has expanded eastward, right up to the border of Russia, and installed missiles there. Russia has not done the reverse. The Soviet Union has, of course, ended. NATO has waged aggressive wars far from the North Atlantic, bombing Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Serbia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Libya. NATO has added a partnership with Colombia, abandoning all pretense of its purpose being in the North Atlantic. No NATO member has been attacked or credibly threatened with attack, apart from small-scale non-state blowback from NATO’s wars of aggression.

3. Trump is not trying to destroy NATO. Donald Trump, as a candidate and as U.S. President, has wondered aloud and even promised all kinds of things and, in many cases, the exact opposite as well. When it comes to actions, Trump has not taken any actions to limit or end or withdraw from NATO. He has demanded that NATO members buy more weapons, which is of course a horrible idea. Even in the realm of rhetoric, when European officials have discussed creating a European military, independent of the United States, Trump has replied by demanding that they instead support NATO.

4. If Trump were trying to destroy NATO, that would tell us nothing about NATO. Trump has claimed to want to destroy lots of things, good and bad. Should I support NAFTA or corporate media or the Cold War or the F35 or anything at all, simply because some negative comment about it escapes Trump’s mouth? Should I cheer for every abuse ever committed by the CIA or the FBI because they investigate Trump? Should I long for hostility between nuclear-armed governments because Democrats claim Trump is a Russian agent? When Trump defies Russia to expand NATO, or to withdraw from a disarmament treaty or from an agreement with Iran, or to ship weapons to Ukraine, or to try to block Russian energy deals in Europe, or to oppose Russian initiatives on banning cyber-war or weapons in space, should I cheer for such consistent defiance of Trump’s Russian master, and do so simply because Russia is, so implausibly, his so-inept master? Or should I form my own opinion of things, including of NATO?

5. Trump is not working for, and was not elected by, Russia.According to the New York Times, “Russia’s meddling in American elections and its efforts to prevent former satellite states from joining the alliance have aimed to weaken what it views as an enemy next door, the American officials said.” But are anonymous “American officials” really needed to acquire Russia’s openly expressed opinion that NATO is a threatening military alliance that has moved weapons and troops to states on Russia’s border? And has anyone produced the slightest documentation of the Russian government’s aims in an activity it has never admitted to, namely “meddling in American elections,” — an activity the United States has of course openly admitted to in regard to Russian elections? We have yet to see any evidence that Russia stole or otherwise acquired any of the Democratic Party emails that documented that party’s rigging of its primary elections in favor of Clinton over Sanders, or even any claim that the tiny amount of weird Facebook ads purchased by Russians could possibly have influenced the outcome of anything. Supposedly Trump is even serving Russia by demanding that Turkey not attack Kurds. But is using non-military means to discourage Turkish war-making necessarily the worst thing? Would it be if your favorite party or politician did it? If Trump encouraged a Turkish war, would that also be a bad thing because Trump did it, or would it be a bad thing for substantive reasons?

6. If Trump were elected by and working for Russia, that would tell us nothing about NATO. Imagine if Boris Yeltsin were indebted to the United States and ended the Soviet Union. Would that tell us whether ending the Soviet Union was a good thing, or whether the Soviet Union was obsolete for serious reasons? If Trump were a Russian pawn and began reversing all of his policies on Russia to match that status, including restoring his support for the INF Treaty and engaging in major disarmament negotiations, and we ended up with a world of dramatically reduced military spending and nuclear armaments, with the possibility of all dying in a nuclear apocalypse significantly lowered, would that too simply be a bad thing because Trump?

7. Russia is not a military threat to the world. That Russia would cheer NATO’s demise tells us nothing about whether we should cheer too. Numerous individuals and entities who indisputably helped to put Trump in the White House would dramatically oppose and others support NATO’s demise. We can’t go by their opinions either, since they don’t all agree. We really are obliged to think for ourselves. Russia is a heavily armed militarized nation that commits the crime of war not infrequently. Russia is a top weapons supplier to the world. All of that should be denounced for what it is, not because of who Russia is or who Trump is. But Russia spends a tiny fraction of what the United States does on militarism. Russia has been reducing its military spending each year, while the United States has been increasing its military spending. U.S. annual increases have sometimes exceeded Russia’s entire military budget. The United States has bombed nine nations in the past year, Russia one. The United States has troops in 175 nations, Russia in 3. Gallup and Pew find populations around the world viewing the United States, not Russia, as the top threat to peace in the world. Russia has asked to join NATO and the EU and been rejected, NATO members placing more value on Russia as an enemy. Anonymous U.S. military officials describe the current cold war as driven by weapons profits. Those profits are massive, and NATO now accounts for about three-quarters of military spending and weapons dealing on the globe.

8. Crimea has not been seized. According to the New York Times, “American national security officials believe that Russia has largely focused on undermining solidarity between the United States and Europe after it annexed Crimea in 2014. Its goal was to upend NATO, which Moscow views as a threat.” Again we have an anonymous claim as to a goal of a government in committing an action that never occurred. We can be fairly certain such things are simply made up. The vote by the people of Crimea to re-join Russia is commonly called the Seizure of Crimea. This infamous seizure is hard to grasp. It involved a grand total of zero casualties. The vote itself has never been re-done. In fact, to my knowledge, not a single believer in the Seizure of Crimea has ever advocated for re-doing the vote. Coincidentally, polling has repeatedly found the people of Crimea to be happy with their vote. I’ve not seen any written or oral statement from Russia threatening war or violence in Crimea. If the threat was implicit, there remains the problem of being unable to find Crimeans who say they felt threatened. (Although I have seen reports of discrimination against Tartars during the past 4 years.) If the vote was influenced by the implicit threat, there remains the problem that polls consistently get the same result. Of course, a U.S.-backed coup had just occurred in Kiev, meaning that Crimea — just like a Honduran immigrant — was voting to secede from a coup government, by no means an action consistently frowned upon by the United States.

9. NATO is not an engaged alternative to isolationism. The notion that supporting NATO is a way to cooperate with the world ignores superior non-deadly ways to cooperate with the world. A nonviolent, cooperative, treaty-joining, law-enforcing alternative to the imperialism-or-isolationism trap is no more difficult to think of or to act on than treating drug addiction or crime or poverty as reason to help people rather than to punish them. The opposite of bombing people is not ignoring them. The opposite of bombing people is embracing them. By the standards of the U.S. communications corporations Switzerland must be the most isolationist land because it doesn’t join in bombing anyone. The fact that it supports the rule of law and global cooperation, and hosts gatherings of nations seeking to work together is simply not relevant.

10. April 4 belongs to Martin Luther King, Jr., not militarism. War is a leading contributor to the growing global refugee and climate crises, the basis for the militarization of the police, a top cause of the erosion of civil liberties, and a catalyst for racism and bigotry. A growing coalition is calling for the abolition of NATO, the promotion of peace, the redirection of resources to human and environmental needs, and the demilitarization of our cultures. Instead of celebrating NATO’s 70thanniversary, we’re celebrating peace on April 4, in commemoration of Martin Luther King Jr.’s speech against war on April 4, 1967, as well as his assassination on April 4, 1968.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Turkey prepared to take Syria’s Manbij, won’t let it turn into ‘swamp’ like N. Iraq

Turkey sees the US-backed Kurdish YPG militias as an extension of the PKK and considers them terrorists as well.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT


Ankara has “almost completed” preparations for another military operation in Syria and will launch it if “promises” made by other parties about the protection of its borders are not kept, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said.

Turkey still hopes that talks with the US, Russia and “other parties” will allow it to ensure its security without resorting to force but it is still ready to proceed with a military option and will not “wait forever,” Erdogan said. He was referring to Ankara’s plans for the northern Syrian territories east of the Euphrates River, which it seeks to turn into a “security zone”free of any Kurdish militias.

“We are on our border with our forces and following developments closely. If promises made to us are kept and the process goes on, that’s fine. Otherwise, we inform that we have almost completed our preparations and will take steps in line with our own strategy,” the president said, addressing a group of businessmen in Ankara on Monday.

He did not elaborate on the promises made. However, they are apparently linked to the withdrawal of the Kurdish YPG militia from the Manbij area and the regions along the border with Turkey. “We will never allow a safe zone to turn into a new swamp,” Erdogan said, referring to the northern Syrian territories and comparing them to the northern Iraq, where the militants from the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) – an organization that Ankara considers a terrorist group – have been entrenched for decades.

Turkey sees the US-backed Kurdish YPG militias, which form the backbone of the so-called Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), as an extension of the PKK and considers them terrorists as well. “Our proposal for a security zone under Turkey’s control aims to keep terror organizations away from our borders,” the Turkish president said.

He went on to explain that Ankara does not seek any territorial gains in its military campaigns in Syria but merely seeks to restore order in the war-ravaged country. “We will provide security for Manbij and then we will hand over the city to its real owners,” Erdogan said. “Syria belongs to Syrians.”

Turkey also seeks to establish a “security zone 20 miles [32 kilometers] deep” into Syria, Erdogan said, adding that he already discussed this issue with the US President Donald Trump. “Those who insistently want to keep us away from these regions are seeking to strengthen terror organizations,” he added.

Ankara has been long planning to push YPG units out of the area east of the Euphrates River. Its operation was delayed by the US withdrawal from Syria. However, Erdogan repeatedly hinted that his patience is wearing thin and he is not ready to wait much longer. He warned Trump against backtracking on his pledge to withdraw some 2,000 US forces out of Syria following a suicide attack in Manbij that killed four Americans. If the US president halted the withdrawal, it would mean that Islamic State (formerly ISIS/ISIL) had won, Erdogan argued.

He has also reiterated that Turkey is ready to take over Manbij “without delay.” The US military is currently working on security arrangements with the Turkish forces to create a buffer zone between Turkey and the Kurdish fighters. The Kurds, meanwhile, invited the Syrian government to take over the city and have reportedly begun to leave the area. Turkey has dismissed the reports saying its a “psyop”.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Political Knives Dull Themselves on the Rock of Brexit Article 50

The invocation of Article 50 was undertaken by an act of Parliament. And it will take another act of Parliament to undo it.

Strategic Culture Foundation

Published

on

Authored Tom Luongo via Strategic Culture Foundation:


Theresa “The Gypsum Lady” May went through an extraordinary twenty-four hours. First, seeing her truly horrific Brexit deal go down in historic defeat and then, somehow, surviving a ‘No-Confidence’ vote which left her in a stronger position than before it.

It looks like May rightly calculated that the twenty or so Tory Remainers would put party before the European Union as their personal political positions would be terminally weakened if they voted her out of office.

While there is little stomach in the British Parliament for a ‘no-deal’ Brexit, there is less for allowing Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn to become Prime Minister. And that is the crux of why the incessant calls to delay Brexit, call for a ‘people’s vote’ or, in Corbyn’s case, “take a no-deal Brexit off the table,’ ultimately lead to a whole lot of political knife-fighting and very little substantive action.

The day-to-day headline spam is designed to wear down people’s resistance and make it feel like Brexit getting betrayed is inevitable. That has been the British Deep State’s and EU’s game plan all along and they hoped they could arm-twist enough people in parliament to succeed.

But the problem for them now, since the clock has nearly run out, is the invocation of Article 50 was undertaken by an act of Parliament. And it will take another act of Parliament to undo it.

And I don’t see anyone on the Remainer side working towards that end. That should be your clue as to what happens next.

Why? Because they know they don’t have the time to get that act past Parliament. So, the rest of this is simply a PR campaign to push public opinion far enough to allow for an illegal canceling or postponing of Brexit.

But it’s not working.

According to the latest polls, Brits overwhelmingly want the original Brexit vote respectedLeave even has a 5-6 point lead over Remain.

And, I think Theresa May now realizes this. It is why she invited the no-confidence vote against her. She knew she had the votes and it would give her the ammunition to ignore Corbyn’s hysterical ranting about taking a no-deal Brexit off the table.

Whether she realizes that the only negotiating tool she has with the EU is the threat of a No-Deal Brexit, exactly like Nigel Farage and those committed to Brexit have been telling her for two years is still, however, up in the air.

It looks like she’s finally starting to get it.

The net result is we are seeing a similar outing of the nefarious, behind-the-scenes, power brokers in the public eye similar to what’s been happening in the US with Donald Trump and Russiagate.

May has been singularly unimpressive in her handling of Brexit. I’ve been convinced from the beginning that betraying Brexit was always her goal. Negotiating a deal unacceptable to anyone was meant to exhaust everyone into the position to just throwing up their hands and canceling the whole thing.

The EU has been in the driver’s seat the entire time because most of the British establishment has been on their side and it was only the people who needed to be disrespected.

So, after all of these shananigans we are back to where we were last week. May has cut off all avenues of discussion. She won’t commit to taking ‘no-deal’ off the table to tweak Corbyn. She won’t substantively move on any other issue. This is likely to push her deal through as a last-minute panic move.

Corbyn is still hoping to get new elections to take power, and the majority of MP’s who don’t want to leave the EU keep fighting among themselves to cock up the entire works.

All they are doing is expending pound after pound of political capital beating themselves against their own act of Parliament which goes into effect on March 29th.

By the time that date comes around the frustration, shame and humiliation of how Parliament has mishandled Brexit will make it difficult for a lot of Remainers to hold together their majority as public opinion has decidedly turned against them.

In the past the EU has had that façade of democratic support undermining any change at the political level. With Brexit (and with budget talks in Italy) that is not the case. The people are angry.

The peak moment for Remainers to stage a bipartisan political coup against May should have been the most recent no-confidence vote.

With May surviving that it implies that Remainers are not willing to die politically for their cause.

This should begin to see defectors over the next couple of weeks as they realize they don’t have a hand to play either.

And by May refusing to rule out a ‘no-deal’ Brexit it has finally brought the EU around to throw a bone towards the British. Their admitting they would extend Article 50 is just that. But they know that’s a non-starter as that is the one thing May has been steadfast in holding to.

On March 29th with or without a deal the U.K. is out of the EU. Because despite the European Court of Justice’s decision, Britain’s parliament can only cancel Article 50 at this point by acting illegally.

Not that I would put that past these people, but then that opens up a can of worms that most British MP’s will not go along with. The personal stakes are simply too high.

When dealing with politicians, never bet against their vanity or their pocketbook. In May’s case she may finally have realized she could have the legacy of getting Britain out of the EU just before it collapses.

And all she has to do between now and the end of March is, precisely, nothing.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending