Connect with us




4 reasons the Syrian conflict has grabbed world attention more than Afghanistan

Afghanistan has been at war for nearly 16 years, but the Syrian conflict which has raged since 2011 has captured global attention to a more substantiate degree.




There is no such thing as a good war, but there are occasionally such things as just wars. The Syrian conflict is a variation on the second theme. Syria prior to 2011 was a country at peace, it was a country that was stable, it was a country that was placid. Of course, the Syria of 2011 was imperfect and one only needed to listen to the speeches within the People’s Council of Syria to realise that. One would also realise that if one listened to the authentic voices of patriotic Syrians, but sadly few people in the wider world cared to listen to Syrians while their country was at peace and free of terrorism.

Now though, the world is watching and listening to Syria and they are doing so far more intently than in respect of Afghanistan, in most cases.

Here is a qualitative list of why that is.

1. The Moral Clarity of the Syrian Conflict 

In order for people in the wider world to emotionally define a war as just, one needs to understand the conflict in terms of abstract morality in addition to having knowledge about the nature of the conflict.

In this respect, Syria was a watershed moment for much of the world. While much of the day to day fighting in Syria is complicated, the nature of the conflict itself is incredibly simple both politically and morally.

In Syria one witnesses a Ba’athist government representing a society where all religious confessions are treated equally, where men and women share the same rights, lifestyles and attitudes, where culture is allowed to flourish, where education is widespread and encouraged and where secularism combined with religious traditions exists harmoniously.

Standing in opposition to this Ba’athist government are the largely foreign forces of extremist Salafist/Wahhabist, Sunni supremacy, armed gangs whose use of barbaric violence is promulgated in the name of establishing a society in which Shi’a Muslims and Christians would suffer abuse, torture and death, one in which women would be treated as third class chattel and one in which modernity, secularism and worldly education would be eliminated.

By contrast, in Afghanistan there are no angels, insofar as viable political factions are concerned. The government in Kabul is fractured, ineffectual, corrupt and compromised. It’s primary opponents, various Taliban factions are at times only slightly more anti-modern than many government officials. Against these two main forces are those loyal to the so-called ISIS forces whose barbarity is well known.

Into this fray, many including China, Russia, Pakistan and increasingly Iran are advocating for dialogue between the more moderate elements of the Taliban and the more far-sighted supporters of the Kabul government. It is not a plan which assures a specific identity to the country after a would-be settlement, but it is the only reasonable hope for any lasting peace and stability.

This pragmatic solution to Afghanistan lacks the moral clarity of the solution in Syria which Russia, Iran and other allies of Damascus have implemented. In Syria, Russia, Iran, Hezbollah and other volunteers chose the side of Ba’athism over the side of extremist Sunni terrorism and bigotry.

For me personally, the conflict in Syria is the most clear cut battle between moral good and moral evil since the Great Patriotic War in which the Soviet Union crushed the fascist aggression of Hitler’s German Reich. By contrast, in Afghanistan there is no one occupying the moral high ground.

2. Different Histories 

Syria has always been a civilisation cradle of great cultures and empires. Mesopotamia and the Levant are along with ancient Indus Valley civilisations and ancient Chinese civilisations, the oldest civilised cultures the world has been able to document.

In the Hellenic period, during the Roman Empire and during the Muslim caliphates, Syria and Damascus in particular became a centre of both worldly and spiritual scholarship. From St. Paul’s conversion to Christianity on the road to Damascus to Syria’s vital role as part of Islam’s Golden Age, Syria holds a special history for the world’s major monotheistic religions.

Afghanistan’s history while rich, is often remembered as ‘The Graveyard of Empires’ a place of mighty warriors rather than one of scholarship and religious institutions. While such a paradox betrays the more complex history of Afghanistan, when it comes to historical memory, such paradoxes play a large part in shaping people’s perceptions of a country or culture.

Put another way, one is less horrified when war comes to a place famed for warriors than when it comes to a place famed for ancient monuments, holy sites and scholarship.

3. Different Topography 

The landlocked and mountainous Afghanistan is picturesque but hardly a place known as a tourist resort. By contrast, cities like Aleppo, Latakia and Tartus in Syria have long been places where people from around the world travel in order to admire the historic architecture and breathtaking natural beauty.

Syria’s coasts are among the most inviting on the Mediterranean. When war comes to such a place, it is clear that many people will instantly have a more immediate emotional connection and therefore be more interested in the outcome of a conflict.

This leads to the final reason why the Syrian conflict has attained more international attention vis-a-vis the war in Afghanistan.

4. America Exposed as the Emperor Without Clothes. 

While many anti-war advocates including myself opposed US involvement in Afghanistan from day one, this was certainly not out of any admiration for the Taliban which by almost any objective definition was an extreme and distasteful regime. The fact that the Taliban did in fact shelter and rely on Salafist terrorists as a source of funds and protection was also a further distasteful element of Afghanistan between 1996 and 2001.

Thus, while America’s involvement in Afghanistan was deeply misguided from both the perspective of military logistics and pragmatism, it was not all together the equivalent of taking a blowtorch to a work of fine art.

By contrast, America’s involvement in Syria was indeed taking a blowtorch to the fine art that was and is once again a country which has persevered through the millennia and whose enlightened government is able to combine the heritage of the past with the needs of modernity.

When it became clear that only Syria and her Russian partners had the will and ability to held preserve the ancient Hellenic old city of Palmyra while Barack Obama’s United States waxed lyrical about extremist Salafist terrorists whose ideology was the same as that of ISIS which brutalised Palmyra, it became clear that any claim America had to fighting for morality, civilisation or collective international values was more mythical than the deities the ancient statues were built to worship.


When people look at Syria, they often think ‘that could be my country, those people living in fear could be my family, those streets being rebuild could be those I once walked on as a visitor and would want to walk upon again’.

Syria as a Mediterranean culture will be deeply familiar to almost anyone who grew up in the northern hemisphere throughout which Mediterranean culture has always held a special place both for its impressive history and its inviting landscapes and cultures which are famous for being hospitable to foreigners.

Afghanistan by contrast remains a mysterious and foreboding place to many, including many of its immediate neighbours who view the peace process more as a burden to do with security than an opportunity to do with future cultural and commercial partnerships.

This is not to say that a Syrian life is more valuable than an Afghan life. All lives are equally valuable and the horrors of any war of aggression is a blemish not only on the place where such a war is fought and among those fighting it but to the entire world.

The contrasts between the two countries and cultures does however help explain why the world remains more solidly fixated on Syria.

However, the conflicts do share something else in common: the sooner the US and her allies quietly exit both places, the sooner some semblance of peace will return in each case, but particularly in Syria which unlike Afghanistan in 2001, was at peace with itself prior to 2011.

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

Leave a Reply

Notify of
Daisy Adler
Daisy Adler

Flashback 2016 – Praying for Palmyra: Valery Gergiev, the renowned Russian maestro, leads an orchestra in the ruins of ancient city, after its liberation from ISIS terrorists:

Isabella Jones
Isabella Jones

Something I had not known about this concert also, until President Putin told us, was that the heat was so great that their instruments were affected and the players had great difficulty tuning them and getting them to play well. It’s an additional tribute to their dedicated playing.

Wayne Blow
Wayne Blow

Because of civilised factions working hard to save a great civilisation, from the destructive capitalist forces of the Western so-called civilisations!!!!

Isabella Jones
Isabella Jones

What can any person who even pretends to hold principles and values of high moral standing do but agree with all their heart with this article and it’s expressed desire that America pick up it’s bat and ball and go home. I would like to add though to please remember that, unless you define “civilised” as “pertaining to modern Western” the writer is wrong to say these cultures are the oldest known. The Aboriginal people of Australia are the oldest living culture, although the invading British have left them little of what they had. But these people have a documented… Read more »

John R. Nolan
John R. Nolan

Beautifully put comment on the Aboriginal people of Australia, who, even to this day, are third class citizens, being killed with booze, the tinkling trinkets of the white fellas toys, as we now strive to breed them into a forgotten history. Yes, we could have learnt much from them, their relationship with the land, which none can own, their ability to harmonize with the land, to respect all nature, but, as with every other place the white fella has gone, all we have done is destroy, slaughter, and, as karma goes, soon we will pay for our greed, our ugliness,… Read more »

Isabella Jones
Isabella Jones

Thank you John – and for your own lovely way of expressing what has been done. It’s such a mark of a barbaric savage mind I always think, that it is unable to recognise anything outside it’s own knowledge and culture as having value. It’s the same as the invading Spanish Catholics, destroying all the writings going back thousands of years of the native peoples of the Incas and Andean countries. Now we have so little left of all the knowledge contained in them.. The fascinating rongorongo script of the Easter Island people, only now being recognised as depicting what… Read more »

John R. Nolan
John R. Nolan

The English invaders of Australia, beside introducing incomprehensible levels barbarity, roman catholic destruction of the local culture, their spiritual history, reached a tragic triumph, when, in Tasmania, we actually wiped out an entire race of Australian aboriginals. The white fella, wherever we have gone, introduced war, perversity, drugs, social destruction, slavery, environmental chaos. We, the white fellas, are the curse of this planet, and will shortly pay the price of our arrogance, our greed, our lack of respect for our environment. Historically, whilst introducing invading each nation, we also introduced animals, cats, dogs, rabbits, plants, etc., which have all but… Read more »

Isabella Jones
Isabella Jones

There was something bitterly ironic in your last line John . 🙂 But yes – you are right. Agree with you completely. Not a lot to be proud of. As John Anthony West, the independent, non-Academic Egyptologist says, “we think we’re so smart, with our stripped toothpaste and atom bombs”. The AngloFrancoGermanic derived White Man -he who compromises the so called “West” to day – has in truth never really risen above the level of barbaric savages, because those are the ones the system put in place as rulers, deciders and leaders. There are good ones, decent ones – but… Read more »

John R. Nolan
John R. Nolan

Is it an intrinsic characteristic of the human race, especially the white fellas, that most of our recorded history is of wars, religious, economic and race, where as the Aboriginal people here do not keep too much record of the past, but live for the moment, intent on preserving the land they were given, by God, to protect? What is it, what genetic imbalance filters through our blood, our mental functioning, which cause us to worship violence, suffering? Is this the mark of the beast? Cain was of his father, the devil; is this where we get our beastly characteristics,… Read more »


Since the US drop its support for its terrorist army and they are losing interest, we rarely ear anything anymore in the news about Syria (Canada). Nothing is mention about the progress of the Syrian army and his helpers. If it is not about an US campaign like Mosul, nothing is said in the news.

Guillermo Calvo Mahe

Excellent and important article, I’ve shared it with students of political science, government and international relations.


Pelosi tries to prevent State of the Union address because of shutdown

Nancy Pelosi advised Mr. Trump not to deliver a live State of the Union speech, but the reason may be because she is unwilling to be exposed.

Seraphim Hanisch



Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi tried what is perhaps a new stunt in the ongoing government shutdown saga (we hesitate to call it a “crisis”). She requested that President Trump either reschedule his yearly State of the Union address or – and she said this literally – deliver it in writing to Congress on January 29th, the date the speech is scheduled to occur.

“Sadly, given the security concerns and unless government re-opens this week, I suggest that we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to the Congress on January 29th,” Pelosi wrote in a letter to Trump.

The letter, which can be seen directly by clicking the hyperlink above, tries to essentially make this request the President’s fault because he refuses to take “no wall” for an answer.

The motive behind this attempt is interesting. Politico covered this story originally, and this publication is pretty far to the left and definitely not a Trump fan oasis. Yet in a rare random feat of journalism, the Politico article does appear to give some of the real reason why the Speaker of the House did this.

Publicly, Democrats plan to argue that the parties need to focus on addressing the shutdown, now the longest in U.S. history. They’re also concerned about security staff working through a major national event without being paid.

“This shutdown is ridiculous and the people tasked with protecting him and protecting us are not getting a paycheck,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), the House Rules Committee chair. “So it’s inappropriate to carry on with business as usual.”

But privately, Democrats also don’t want to give Trump a major platform to blame them for the shutdown when Trump’s demand for billions in wall funding has been the main driver, according to a Democratic lawmaker close to leadership. Trump has tried to pin the blame on the shutdown on Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, but public polls shows the public largely blames the president.

The announcement comes as a group of bipartisan House lawmakers in the Problem Solvers Caucus is set to meet with Trump on Wednesday to discuss border security. Trump, frustrated by his inability to secure any additional money for his border wall, has tried to peel off moderate Democrat support as Pelosi and Schumer dig in.

But Democrats are rallying fellow members to stay together. Schumer attended a closed-door caucus meeting with House Democrats just as Pelosi made the announcement on the State of the Union address on Wednesday. Her message was to stay unified in their opposition.

Politico was able to bury this bold-typed point in the rhetoric that “public polls largely blame the president.” However this may not exactly be the case.

There are indications that the 26-day long standoff is going to go the President’s way. While this is admittedly speculative, there seem to be solid factors on the President’s side of the argument that the Democrats do not have. Some are factual, and many are emotional and rhetorical:

  • Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is standing firm, and has not wavered from the commitment to pass nothing that the President will not sign.
  • Some Democrat leaders are beginning to speak about border security – including the wall – as vital needs. This includes this representative from Southern California (!) Representative Katie Hill, who gave this interview on Fox News:

  • Where the argument is pragmatic and information-based, as Representative Hill notes, then the argument becomes quite compelling for a wall.
  • CNN turned down the opportunity to interview Dan Plante, a San Diego area TV reporter, about the border wall there because Mr. Plante said that the new wall that has been installed in that sector is hugely successful.
  • The level of information given by the Democrat opposition leaders, Pelosi and Chuck Schumer is essentially at the level of “no you can’t have it. Because!!” – in other words, septuagenarians acting like four-year olds. Really.
  • Talk show anchor Rush Limbaugh and his huge body of listeners are wildly in favor of the shutdown and everything the President is doing. It is very clear that the shutdown’s length is doing nothing to deter President Trump’s base. And as long as that holds true, he will not move a muscle.
  • President Trump is a businessman, not a politician. He is far more results-driven than the mainstream media can afford to admit. While they characterize him as insane, or a child, or throwing a tantrum, the President doesn’t really care. He knows what he wants, and he is prepared to be patient and wait the Democrats out.
  • The final sign we will offer on this list (though there are more) is that the Russia collusion narrative is back. When things go bad for the media on Trump, they try to pull out Russia. Maybe it is just a bad habit because it seems less and less effective each time it is tried.

The battle lines are tropes versus reality, and politics versus policy. It is too soon to be sure that this will go the President’s way and that the wall will go up, but patience and perseverance are beginning to expose cracks and weaknesses in the Democrat argument. Some of the US certainly does NOT care about a border wall. But those that do have not been shaken by all this – rather, they have been strengthened, plus they have facts on their side.

All the Pelosis and Schumers of the world can do is fret and complain and look like fools, and they seem to be doing exactly that.


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


Peak Stupidity: Deep State and mainstream media push ‘Trump is a spy’ nonsense (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 167.

Alex Christoforou



The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the sheer stupidity of the entire ‘Trump is a Russian spy’ narrative being plastered all over the mainstream media, as neo-liberal shills and neocon war hawks continue to damage the Office of the United States President by insisting on pushing a made up story that a five year old child who waits for Santa Claus to bring Christmas gifts would have a hard time believing.

Meanwhile the real crime and real treason derived from a Comey-Clapper-Brennan Deep State plot to remove a democratically elected Trump from power, is being blacked out from the mainstream, neo-liberal news cycle.

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

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

The Gateway Pundit lists the 35 times the FBI “deviated from standard practice” or committed crimes in an effort to exonerate Hillary Clinton and indict US President Donald Trump..

The FBI leadership under the Obama Administration took many actions that deviated from standard practice [i.e. were corrupt and criminal] in their efforts to exonerate Hillary from her crimes and then spy and frame candidate and then President Trump.  Today current members of the FBI are embarrassed to even turn on their TV’s as a result.

Time magazine of all places reported recently about the many efforts the FBI took related to Hillary exoneration and then the Trump framing.  These corrupt and criminal actions have taken a desperate toll on the current members of the FBI –

In normal times, the televisions are humming at the FBI’s 56 field offices nationwide, piping in the latest news as agents work their investigations. But these days, some agents say, the TVs are often off to avoid the crush of bad stories about the FBI itself. The bureau, which is used to making headlines for nabbing crooks, has been grabbing the spotlight for unwanted reasons: fired leaders, texts between lovers and, most of all, attacks by President Trump. “I don’t care what channel it’s on,” says Tom O’Connor, a veteran investigator in Washington who leads the FBI Agents Association. “All you hear is negative stuff about the FBI … It gets depressing.”

Of course the employees of the FBI are in a funk, their fearless and corrupt leaders, as well as leaders in Obama’s corrupt DOJ, went to extravagant links to exonerate the obvious criminal actions of Hillary Clinton, and then to do all they could to prevent candidate Trump from winning an election.  Then once the election was won by President Trump, they went to unheard of depths of deceit and corruption to attempt to remove him from office.

Here’s a list of the actions the Deep State FBI took in their recent criminal actions surrounding the 2016 Presidential election and since [the first 11 items are from the Time post noted above with comments in brackets] –

1 – Comey breached Justice Department protocols in a July 5, 2016, press conference when he criticized Hillary Clinton for using a private email server as Secretary of State even as he cleared her of any crimes
2 – Comey reopened the Clinton email probe less than two weeks before the election
3 – Andrew McCabe lied to the bureau’s internal investigations branch to cover up a leak he orchestrated about Clinton’s family foundation less than two weeks before the election and had lied for months about it
4 – FBI wasn’t adequately investigating “high-risk” employees who failed polygraph tests (but, in fact, putting them in charge of high-profile investigations, like Peter Strzok who failed his poly). In one instance, an FBI IT specialist with top-secret security clearance failed four polygraph tests and admitted to having created a fictitious Facebook account to communicate with a foreign national, but received no disciplinary action for that.
5 – The FBI’s miss of the Russian influence operation against the 2016 election, which went largely undetected for more than two years (The FBI had the chance to kill this Russian intrusion years before it reached crisis point in the election). Mueller’s Russia probe found that Moscow’s operation against the 2016 election first got under way in 2014, but the FBI failed to address it.
6 – The FBI was getting information it shouldn’t have had access to when it used controversial parts of the Patriot Act to obtain business records in terrorism and counterintelligence cases.
7 – The bureau missed the significance of the damaging 2015 hack of the DNC database [although others argue that the DNC was never hacked – due to the FBI’s lack of investigative process, we may never know what happened.] 8 – The bureau also sat on the disputed “dossier” prepared by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. [Which was then used for the entire case against Trump and anyone near him].
9 – The bureau’s decision to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was influenced by politics.
10 – Text messages between FBI special agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, which were critical of Trump.
11 – Comey broke with Justice Department rules and norms by assuming authority usually held by prosecutors and speaking in public about a case that did not produce criminal charges.
12 – Comey took copious notes and diligently informed others of all interactions with Trump while lying about having had any interactions with Obama, never taking notes or notifying anyone so even after having been warned of Mr. Steele’s motivations, even after having fired him for violating the rules, the FBI continued to seek his information—using Mr. Ohr as a back channel. This surely violates the FBI manual governing interaction with confidential human sources.
13 – FBI guidelines state that unverified information should not be submitted to the FISA court.
14 – They were passive, not proactive. The Obama administration “stood down” and watched these “activities” unravel. At worst, they possibly played a hand in creating circumstances to push the investigation forward into more serious stages that allowed for more intrusive techniques, such as spying. (The FBI is supposed to prevent crime, not watch it happen).
15 – John Brennan, James Clapper, Samantha Power, Loretta Lynch were all briefed by James Comey on the alleged Russian interference into the Trump campaign, yet the Trump campaign was left in the dark.
16 –FBI agents found Abedin deleting classified Clinton emails from her Yahoo account but failed to subpoena her devices. If they had, maybe they wouldn’t have had to reopen the case in 11th hour when NY agents found work emails on the laptop she shared with her perv husband.
17 – The FBI failed to notify Congress of the investigation into the Trump campaign for months rather than quarterly as was practice. [See Comey presentation to House Republicans in March 2017] 18 – The FBI did not pursue criminal charges when Clinton’s email archives were permanently deleted from her private server days after a subpoena for them was issued by a congressional committee investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi.
19 – The IG found that the FBI and DOJ during the MidYearExam probe of Hillary Clinton email server “did not require any witnesses to testify before the grand jury,” despite at least 3 witnesses lying to FBI agents.
20 – “[T]he 
Midyear team did not obtain search warrants to examine the content of emails in Mills’s or Abedin’s private email accounts and did not seek to obtain any of the senior aides’ personal devices.”
21 – IG Report: Nobody was listed as a subject of this [Clinton email] investigation at any point in time (So neither Hillary nor her top aides were formally under investigation by FBI at any time in 2015-2016, but the agents handling the issue thought it was a criminal action).
22 – The IG report indicates a strong pro-Clinton/anti-Trump bias in FBI investigators of Midyear and Operation Russian Collusion but it still went on without personnel changes or actions against the corrupt investigative team.
23 – The IG report found: “The MYE Team did not seek to obtain every device, including those of Clinton’s senior aides, or the contents of every email account through which a classified email may have traversed.”
24 – Manafort interviewed twice before joining the Trump team. If he was guilty of anything why did they allow him to join the Trump team?
25 – In 2008, a questionable person on McCain’s POTUS campaign caught the attention of FBI counterintelligence, and the FBI privately approached McCain. That questionable person was quietly removed from Team McCain but this same sensitivity was not provided to the Trump team.
26 – The corrupt Obama FBI and DOJ used the “salacious and unverified” opposition research called the Steele dossier to open a counterintelligence investigation and obtain warrants but it wasn’t even verified and it was created by the opposition party [DNC]. [Multiple sources] 27 – Unprecedented leaking to the press: 13 different individuals at the FBI were feeding a journalist information.
28 – Dan Bongino asks the question: How did Halper go from being a CIA informant to an FBI informant? And he’s right. It is a DEVIATION FROM THE STANDARD PRACTICE for law enforcement agencies to give up/share their asset.
29 – The “probable cause” arrest of George Papadopoulos is a deviation from the standard practice.
30 – Halper was a CHS (Confidential Human Source). FBI rules prohibit using a CHS to spy on Americans before an official investigation has been created.
31 -Stone and Caputo say they believe they were the targets of a setup by U.S. law enforcement officials hostile to Trump which was before an official investigation which again is a deviation from standard practice.
32 – The FBI interviewed Carter Page in March of 2016 about his Russian ties. Two months later, Comey is briefing the NSC about his concerns about Carter Page. Nothing of any note happened in those intervening months to cause a rise of concerns, so whatever concerns Comey had Comey had them before Page was hired on as an adviser. It was a DEVIATION FROM STANDARD PRACTICE for Comey to not have warned Trump about Page. Comey warns Obama instead who also takes no steps to warn Trump.
33 – Another deviation from the standard practice is to start an investigation without a crime.
34 – Planting the Isikoff article to be used in court to obtain a FISA warrant.
35 – Related to the FBI, it’s important to note that former DNI chief James Clapper limited the IC report for review to only 3 agencies rather than send the report out to all 17 agencies for review. This way he was able to control what was put into the report – another deviation from the standard practice.

This may only be a partial list of FBI abuses and actions taken with deviations from standard practice, if not clear cut crimes.  The gangsters who ran Obama’s FBI, from Mueller to Comey, are so corrupt, current and former agents are now embarrassed to be part of the once storied federal agency.  Quite frankly, it’s doubtful if the FBI can ever be trusted again!

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


Trump’s wish to take the US out of NATO leaves NeoCons seething

The US President has seen the truth of the irrelevance of NATO, but there is enormous resistance to change.

Seraphim Hanisch



Tucker Carlson, Fox News and Russian and American news outlets alike have picked up the story that US President Donald Trump has on numerous occasions, opined that the United States would do well to depart from the North Atlantic Military Organization, or NATO.

This wish caused enormous fury and backlash from those opposed, which, oddly enough include both Democrats and Republicans. Their anger and alarm over this idea is such that the media networks through much of the US are alive with the idea of impeaching the President or bringing 25th Amendment proceedings against him for insanity!

Take a look:

Tucker Carlson, as usual, nailed it.

NATO was formed to make Western Europe secure in the face of a perceived Soviet threat. In 1991, the USSR collapsed and the threat of Ivan the Communist bad guy collapsed with it.

But 28 years later, NATO is still here. And, why?

Well, many “experts” continue to point at Russia as a threat, though after that statement no one seems honestly able to elucidate precisely how Russia would, in fact, threaten any nation, take over it, or conquer the world. Indeed, if anyone seems to understand the perversity of being in charge of the whole world, it seems to be Russia, as expressed by politician and LDPR leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky (see how this is so here).

Zhironovsky observed that China is the other nation that is running at full force, but viewing the problems the US is having with being the leader of the world, China stops short of trying to attain this position itself. The question becomes “What does a nation that rules the world actually do then?”

President Trump appears to be seeing the same question, or some similar variant based on the same theme. NATO serves no constructive purpose anymore. Despite the conflicts in Ukraine and Saudi Arabia and Yemen, Israel and Syria, there simply are no great threats in the world as it stands today. While there are certainly still wars, none of these wars represents an existential threat to the United States.

Why wouldn’t a US leader want out? In fact, there is further no existential threat to Europe from any present war, nor is there a threat from Russia itself. In fact, Russia has been entering into business relations with many European countries who wish to buy cheap and easily available Russian natural gas. Turkey purchased an S-400 antimissile system in addition to its US made Patriot battery.

There would seem to be very little in the way of concrete and reliable reasoning for the alliance to continue.

But the American Deep State and liberal establishment have come together to resist the US President in a truly furious manner, and it is revelatory of the hypocrisy of anti-Trump politics that American liberals, typically the “sing Kum-ba-yah peacenik” crowd, displays paroxysms of outrage and horror that NATO might be disbanded.

As the result of that, the American media is determined to choke off any possibility of one thinking, “well, what if we were to disband NATO?”

Why is this?

Simple. A lot of people make their living by preparing for the Russian “threat”, and it would mean the end of their work, the end of their money, and a great disruption in life. It does not matter that while this is true, these same people could conceivably apply their considerable skill sets to deal with real problems that face a world that no longer has a dipolar alignment, or to help prevent a real problem from arising from real situations, such as the recent and current Islamization of many European cities.

One of the great afflictions of American politics and policy has been that so much of it appears to be focused on “short term” or “no term” matters. We see this with the problems related to border security, the coming advent of AI-based automated processes that may furlough low-skilled workers in tremendous amounts in a short period of time. Rather than solve real problems, the elected representatives and media seem more content to oppose Donald Trump when he, as a businessman ought to do, makes a federal case out of what he sees on the horizon.

The Border Wall, for example, is a highly logical part of a properly handled set of immigration policies. But the very direct behavior of President Trump helped amplify the resentment the Democrats still hold against him for defeating Hillary Clinton in 2016, and so, the Democrats have effectively said “nuts!” to the needs of the nation and they take out their resentment on the nation by refusing to negotiate with the President about how to close the border.

NATO is another example. The alliance served its purpose. It is time for the alliance to end, or to be radically restructured in terms of new goals based in real, and not just flimsy rhetorical, needs.

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


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...


Quick Donate

The Duran
Donate a quick 10 spot!


The Duran Newsletter