Countering The Russian Gambit
Jag...@hotmail.com
Months ago I had posted an
. Oil War Scenario.
The Russian gambit called for the Russians
countering a false-flag submarine attack by
Israel upon a US aircraft carrier with a
diplomatic move. The diplomatic move involved
the instantaneous absorption of responsibility
for the submarine attack. That is, Russia would
dispatch immediately, to all embassies world-wide,
the message that the attack had been perpetrated
by a rogue Russian submarine commander, thus
a counter-attack against Iran would be staved off.
Critical to the Russian Gambit is the *delay*
between the torpedo strike and the counter-strike
against Iran. The delay is caused by the indispensable
necessity - for Bush - of beaming to the world pictures
of the smoking aircraft carrier, proving that Iran had
fired the first shot. Such proof would guarantee
support from Americans and allies.
Thus the Counter to the Russian Gambit is the removal
of the *delay*.
A photo op fits the bill. More than this, a Holy day,
or a day of celebration lends an aura of innocent
peacefulness. July the Fourth is a perfect example.
July the Fourth celebrations, with bands and dignitaries
aboard the decks of our fleets would clearly demonstrate
that we are not in a hostile posture - on that particular day.
And it would be a perfect photo op.
The Homeland Security Office had best raise the
Terror Alert to Red on such a day. Our own King
of Terror could enlist his cohorts and cry out
"I am the War President!"
on such a day.
Jag Pop
"Just a gd piece of paper"
- Bush, in reference to the Constitution
-----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------
I have provided the original post
from 12/29/2006
- The Russian Gambit - below.
The Russian Gambit
An Oil War Scenario.
A Russian submarine shadowed the
"US friendly" Israeli submarine. Israeli
submarines had practiced in joint exercises
with US forces, so the fleet in the Arabian
Sea showed nominal concern about the Israeli
submarine at it's perimeter.
Just before dawn on Sunday, January 7th, 2007, the
US fleet was at the closest approach to the Iranian
coast it had been in weeks.
The Israeli submarine struck.
The US aircraft carrier took torpedoes midship
and hell was let loose.
Simultaneously, in the bowels of the Pentagon, the
preset plans were set into motion. It was paramount
that the opportunity be maximized.
If the US immediately let loose with both barrels upon
Iran destruction and casualties on both sides would
fog who the original culprit was. The world would say
the US had been spoiling for a fight and that they, of
course, had fired the first shot. Support at home, in the
US, would be split. To solidify support it was imperative
that the world be shown that the US was the victim of
the treacherous Iranians. A counter-attack would be
temporarily held back.
By plan, filming of the smoking aircraft carrier would be
taken at first light and beamed around the world. Reliable
accounts would be broadcast that a submarine with
an Iranian tracking signature had been the source of
the torpedoes.
Congressional leaders would rush to the White House
as Bush prepared his "Day of Infamy" speech.
But then.
President Vladimir Putin sent dispatches to all embassies
taking responsibility for the attack upon the US aircraft
carrier. He stated that the commander of a Russian
submarine had launched the attack without orders and
authority, that the submarine commander had agreed
to surrender and a rendezvous with a Russian Naval
vessel was imminent.
Bush was temporarily checked.
At this move Bush could not hope to inflame patriotic
fever in support of a retaliatory strike against Iran. The
treachery upon the US ship had been the initiative of
one man, one criminal.
The "Day of Infamy" speech would have to await the
next move.
The Israeli submarine had thrown a match into a tinder box
with the design that once the shooting started war could
not be compromised. But now diplomacy could be set
in motion to cool and control the situation. This was the
real intention of Russia's gambit.
President Vladimir Putin had one other special move that he
waited to play. An accounting could show that the Russian
submarine still had all of it's torpedoes, but more than this,
data captured by the Russian submarine, while it shadowed
the Israeli submarine, would reveal the true source of the
attack. But this move was only hinted at by President Vladimir
Putin and through back channels.
Diplomacy blended the fate of the Russian submarine
commander with security guarantees for Iran and negotiations
for a protocol relating to the disposition of ships approaching
the Strait of Hormuz...
Bush's treachery was temporarily checked.
Jag...@hotmail.com
Of The Counter To The Russian Gambit
I posted (maintained below) "Countering The Russian Gambit".
An oil war scenario portends Israel dropping a match
into a tinder-box to precipitate a proxy war against Iran
by the US.
The Russian Gambit itself called for the Russians
countering a false-flag submarine attack by
Israel upon a US aircraft carrier with a
diplomatic move. The diplomatic move involved
the instantaneous absorption of responsibility
for the submarine attack. That is, Russia would
dispatch immediately, to all embassies world-wide,
the message that the attack had been perpetrated
by a rogue Russian submarine commander, thus
a counter-attack against Iran would be staved off.
The "Counter" to the Russian Gambit is the
elimination of the delay between the false-flag attack
and the counter-attack against Iran. The delay was
was an absolute necessity, as proof, in the form of
pictures of a smoking aircraft carrier, of who fired
the first shot was needed to create legitimacy and
to fire up patriotic support at home for a war against
Iran.
An example of a Counter to the Russian Gambit would
be our July 4th celebrations. Celebrations aboard our
aircraft carriers afford both an instantaneous photo
opportunity and an aura of repose. Clearly, our posture
on such a day is not one of hostility.
The Lieberman Variation
Of The Counter To The Russian Gambit
is, in essence, the passing of the torch.
Dignitaries would be present at the July 4th celebrations
aboard our aircraft carriers. (Noting that July 4th is an
example of a photo-op and others will avail themselves to
Israel.) But which dignitaries?
The field of contenders for President is a clutch of wannabees
mostly without military experience. A candidate who finds
himself in the midst of one of the most important battles
in US history will have his status elevated (maybe he'll
even make Time Magazine's Man of the Year ! -wink-).
To be able to say that he was in constant communication,
advising and appraising, with the President during this
momentous battle would truly be a passing of the torch
from Bush to the candidate.
To make this happen the powers-that-know would have to
steer the candidate to be in the right place at the right
time. Who would they choose? Lieberman? Thompson?
Watch their moves.
Jag Pop
"Just a gd piece of paper"
- Bush, in reference to the Constitution
Jag...@hotmail.com
after the next 9/11. AND BUSH KNOWS IT.
What is coming?
Be afraid, very afraid.
"just a goddamn piece of paper"
- Bush in reference to the Constitution"
> > Bush's treachery was temporarily checked.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Galen Hekhuis
>Libby Freed. No One Will Give A Rat's Ass
>after the next 9/11. AND BUSH KNOWS IT.
>What is coming?
>
>Be afraid, very afraid.
Especially since Bush's numbers are in the toilet. How far behind can
a "terrorist attack" be? One state GOP chairman has even recommended
it.
James McGill
And the assumption is that a "terrorist attack" would at this juncture
be perceived as beneficial to Bush? I'm sure it would be just yet
another failure, and regarded as even more incompetence.
Jag...@hotmail.com
> On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 16:25:22 -0700, Jag_...@Hotmail.com wrote:
> >Libby Freed. No One Will Give A Rat's Ass
> >after the next 9/11. AND BUSH KNOWS IT.
> >What is coming?
>
> >Be afraid, very afraid.
>
> Especially since Bush's numbers are in the toilet. How far behind can
> a "terrorist attack" be? One state GOP chairman has even recommended
> it.
There isn't one fig leaf of respect for this country
left in Bush/Cheney. Not one.
They are the enemy.
Galen Hekhuis
If there's even a one in a hundred chance that it might work, would
not the desperate give it a try?