Iran Threatens to Hit Babylon the Great Soon

IRGC-led militant leader threatens attacks against US in Iraq soon

By Amir Toumaj | February 26, 2020 | a.toumaj@gmail.com | @AmirToumaj

On 14 February, Akram al-Kabi, the leader of the Iraqi Harakat al Nujaba (HAN) paramilitary group, warned during an address in Tehran that the “resistance” would “certainly” give a “military response” to the US over the deaths of commanders Qasem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis. Kabi said the responses would be “corrosive and unexpected” with the goal of forcing the US to leave Iraq.

Kabi’s threat raises the risk of a limited conflict between the US and HAN. The US may also fight other Iranian-led paramilitary groups, though the IRGC could only deploy HAN against the US. If Kabi does not carry out his threat, he would appear weak.

Formed in 2013 as an Iraqi contingent to fight in Syria, HAN and Kabi answer to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. HAN has sustained operations in Syria and Iraq.

Kabi said that the “Resistance” would have to complement recent anti-US protests in Iraq and an Iraqi parliament solution to force the US exit (as Iraq analyst Bilal Wahab has pointed out, the Iraqi parliament did not have quorum when it passed the non-binding resolution).

Kabi declared that “we have closed all of our public offices in Iraq and are ready for war.” He continued that “to protect Resistance forces we have returned to our security methods during the occupation. The corrosive war will begin at once, and they will not find targets. Just as our roadside bombs, missiles, and bullets targeted their soldiers, today their planes and forces would be targeted.”

The US this month interdicted a shipment of Iranian weapons bound for Houthi insurgents in Yemen that includes a recently produced and previously undocumented surface-to-air (SAM) missile that US officials have called “358.” A Navy spokesman said that these missiles are only exported to IRGC-led proxies.

Kabi added that the “countdown” to the “revenge” operation has begun, and that “we are monitoring all of their [US] air and ground movements including in Ayn al-Asad, K-1, Al-Taji, Al-Matar, Sazer, etc.”

HAN released footage claiming to show a US helicopter within its “reach.”

Still from HAN video, posted on 19 Februay. Top right says “American embassy in Baghdad.”

In 2019, the US added Kabi and HAN, or Movement of the Noble, to its list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists.

Islamic Republic officials have rewarded Kabi for his loyalty and performance on the field. Kabi has declared absolute loyalty to Khamenei, openly saying in 2015 that he would overthrow the Iraqi government if Khamenei ordered him to do so. HAN has been instrumental in IRGC-led operations in Syria and Iraq. During a trip to Tehran in 2016, top Iranian officials publicly greeted him, and state media interviewed him on prime time television (for more, please see FDD’s Long War Journal Iraqi militia leader receives warm reception in Tehran). At a funeral ceremony for Soleimani in Tehran in January 2020, he was in the front row alongside other top Iranian officials and commanders behind Khamenei.

Kabi at front row of funeral ceremony for Qasem Soleimani in Tehran, January 6.

Akram al Kabi, on right, greeting the new Qods Force Commander Esmail Ghaani.

Amir Toumaj is a independent analyst and contributor to FDD’s Long War Journal.

Pakistan’s Positioning for the First Nuclear War (Revelation 8 )

One year of Balakot strikes, and Pakistan’s positioning

Shalini Chawla

Distinguished fellow, Centre for Air Power Studies, New Delhi

Lt GEN Khalid Kidwai (retd), former Director General of Strategic Plans Division, Pakistan, in his speech at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), London, on February 6, blamed India ‘as the critical determinant of the state of strategic stability in South Asia’. In his speech, which was shadowed by an anti-India narrative, General Kidwai held India’s actions responsible for the strategic instability in the region, and asserted repeatedly that Pakistan’s N-programme, positioning, expansion, and most importantly, its full spectrum deterrence, is in response to India’s hegemonic ambitions. General Kidwai’s statements are a reflection of the continuation of Pakistan’s position to fight its own insecurity and vulnerabilities.Its strategy has been to blame India for its nuclear positioning. The fact remains that India’s military announcements have never been in isolation or with an expansionist objective, but in response to Pakistan-sponsored acts of terror. The need to reassert its position by Pakistan has been felt much more strongly after India’s positioning of its redefined intolerance for terror strikes.

On February 26, 2019, the IAF targeted a Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) camp at Balakot in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, after 40 CRPF jawans were killed at Pulwama (J&K) in a terror attack. India’s ‘non-military preemptive action’ against the JeM camp was aimed at countering future terror attacks for which the JeM was reportedly preparing. Pakistan retaliated with offensive air strikes in J&K, which Islamabad claimed were demonstrative strikes indicating Islamabad’s capability and the will to retaliate to India’s military actions.

New Delhi’s position saw a strong shift after the Pathankot terror attack in 2016. The Balakot strikes were critical and challenged Pakistan’s projection of an irrational and low nuclear threshold, which grew with the widening disparities between the two countries. The projection of nuclear threat has remained critical to Pakistan’s nuclear positioning, specifically after General Aslam Beg’s announcement of offensive-defence doctrine in 1989. Pakistan accelerated the sub-conventional war not only in Kashmir, but also in other parts of India (Punjab). Pakistan has maintained a posture of low nuclear threshold with an element of uncertainty. In 2002, General Kidwai, announced the red lines of Pakistan’s N-threshold in an interview to Italian journalists — specifying the space and military threshold, economic strangling and domestic destabilisation. It vaguely drew unlimited boundaries which could potentially include various steps taken up by India in the wake of acute tension or conventional confrontation. The objective of Pakistan’s N-weapons has been to deter any form of Indian military response, and has relied on its first-use doctrine. India’s nuclear objective, on the other hand, is to deter a nuclear war. New Delhi does not see nuclear weapons as weapons of war fighting and has a written No First Use (NFU) doctrine. Pakistani leadership has been convinced that they have managed to deter India with their posture of irrationality. This interpretation came out clearly in President Musharraf’s 2002 statement.Although he did not specify the N-threat in his speech to the army corps union in Karachi, he said he was ready to take a decision and act during the 2002 crisis.

The Balakot strikes challenged Pakistan’s long existent confidence on India’s strategic restraint, which preferred diplomatic options over military retaliation to deal with Pakistan’s continued covert war. While Pakistan was still trying to redefine its strategic moves post Balakot, another major development — revocation of Article 370 — delivered another surprise for Islamabad.

There have been important developments in Pakistan’s positioning in the past year. It has limited options in terms of accelerating covert war, given the pressures from the FATF, severe economic challenges and a budget deficit which has compelled it to borrow from the IMF and other nations. Although the Pakistani leadership has invested ample energy in portraying the Modi government as being run on ‘Nazi ideology’ and raising issues about extremism in India, the fact remains that Pakistan is struggling with a serious challenge and its role in supporting terrorism is globally recognised. The US took a firm stance by slashing military assistance on account of Pakistan’s continued support to militant groups in Afghanistan. Pakistan has been on the FATF grey list since June 2018 and must comply with the 27-point action plan till June 2020.

PM Imran Khan has talked against Islamophobia in multiple forums. Pakistan is cherishing support from Turkey and Malaysia, who have defended its case at the FATF and are committed to a military and strategic partnership. Interestingly, China’s policies in Xinjiang against the Muslims have been given a waiver by Imran Khan.

At the domestic level, the military’s ascendency strengthened even though Pakistan continues to vaunt uninterrupted democratic regimes and elections since 2008. Army chief General Bajwa was the beneficiary of the war hysteria created around ‘India’s aggressive moves’, and managed to extend his tenure by three years, despite the frustration in the military’s top brass, and also a judicial intervention that challenged his extension.

Pakistan’s nuclear brinkmanship projects its desperation to deal with India’s stance and overcome its current challenges.The Balakot strikes demonstrated New Delhi’s resolve to retaliate militarily, using the strategic space above terrorism and below the N-threshold. Evidently, India has crafted a space for conventional war below this threshold in response to Pakistan’s covert war.

A Closer Look At The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

A Look at the Tri-State’s Active Fault Line

Monday, March 14, 2011

By Bob Hennelly

The Ramapo Fault is the longest fault in the Northeast that occasionally makes local headlines when minor tremors cause rock the Tri-State region. It begins in Pennsylvania, crosses the Delaware River and continues through Hunterdon, Somerset, Morris, Passaic and Bergen counties before crossing the Hudson River near Indian Point nuclear facility.

In the past, it has generated occasional activity that generated a 2.6 magnitude quake in New Jersey’s Peakpack/Gladstone area and 3.0 magnitude quake in Mendham.

But the New Jersey-New York region is relatively seismically stable according to Dr. Dave Robinson, Professor of Geography at Rutgers. Although it does have activity.

“There is occasional seismic activity in New Jersey,” said Robinson. “There have been a few quakes locally that have been felt and done a little bit of damage over the time since colonial settlement — some chimneys knocked down in Manhattan with a quake back in the 18th century, but nothing of a significant magnitude.”

Robinson said the Ramapo has on occasion registered a measurable quake but has not caused damage: “The Ramapo fault is associated with geological activities back 200 million years ago, but it’s still a little creaky now and again,” he said.

“More recently, in the 1970s and early 1980s, earthquake risk along the Ramapo Fault received attention because of its proximity to Indian Point,” according to the New Jersey Geological Survey website.

Historically, critics of the Indian Point Nuclear facility in Westchester County, New York, did cite its proximity to the Ramapo fault line as a significant risk.

In 1884, according to the New Jersey Geological Survey website, the  Rampao Fault was blamed for a 5.5 quake that toppled chimneys in New York City and New Jersey that was felt from Maine to Virginia.

“Subsequent investigations have shown the 1884 Earthquake epicenter was actually located in Brooklyn, New York, at least 25 miles from the Ramapo Fault,” according to the New Jersey Geological Survey website.

Pakistan’s Positioning for the First Nuclear War (Revelation 8 )

One year of Balakot strikes, and Pakistan’s positioning

Shalini Chawla

Distinguished fellow, Centre for Air Power Studies, New Delhi

Lt GEN Khalid Kidwai (retd), former Director General of Strategic Plans Division, Pakistan, in his speech at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), London, on February 6, blamed India ‘as the critical determinant of the state of strategic stability in South Asia’. In his speech, which was shadowed by an anti-India narrative, General Kidwai held India’s actions responsible for the strategic instability in the region, and asserted repeatedly that Pakistan’s N-programme, positioning, expansion, and most importantly, its full spectrum deterrence, is in response to India’s hegemonic ambitions. General Kidwai’s statements are a reflection of the continuation of Pakistan’s position to fight its own insecurity and vulnerabilities.Its strategy has been to blame India for its nuclear positioning. The fact remains that India’s military announcements have never been in isolation or with an expansionist objective, but in response to Pakistan-sponsored acts of terror. The need to reassert its position by Pakistan has been felt much more strongly after India’s positioning of its redefined intolerance for terror strikes.

On February 26, 2019, the IAF targeted a Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) camp at Balakot in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, after 40 CRPF jawans were killed at Pulwama (J&K) in a terror attack. India’s ‘non-military preemptive action’ against the JeM camp was aimed at countering future terror attacks for which the JeM was reportedly preparing. Pakistan retaliated with offensive air strikes in J&K, which Islamabad claimed were demonstrative strikes indicating Islamabad’s capability and the will to retaliate to India’s military actions.

New Delhi’s position saw a strong shift after the Pathankot terror attack in 2016. The Balakot strikes were critical and challenged Pakistan’s projection of an irrational and low nuclear threshold, which grew with the widening disparities between the two countries. The projection of nuclear threat has remained critical to Pakistan’s nuclear positioning, specifically after General Aslam Beg’s announcement of offensive-defence doctrine in 1989. Pakistan accelerated the sub-conventional war not only in Kashmir, but also in other parts of India (Punjab). Pakistan has maintained a posture of low nuclear threshold with an element of uncertainty. In 2002, General Kidwai, announced the red lines of Pakistan’s N-threshold in an interview to Italian journalists — specifying the space and military threshold, economic strangling and domestic destabilisation. It vaguely drew unlimited boundaries which could potentially include various steps taken up by India in the wake of acute tension or conventional confrontation. The objective of Pakistan’s N-weapons has been to deter any form of Indian military response, and has relied on its first-use doctrine. India’s nuclear objective, on the other hand, is to deter a nuclear war. New Delhi does not see nuclear weapons as weapons of war fighting and has a written No First Use (NFU) doctrine. Pakistani leadership has been convinced that they have managed to deter India with their posture of irrationality. This interpretation came out clearly in President Musharraf’s 2002 statement.Although he did not specify the N-threat in his speech to the army corps union in Karachi, he said he was ready to take a decision and act during the 2002 crisis.

The Balakot strikes challenged Pakistan’s long existent confidence on India’s strategic restraint, which preferred diplomatic options over military retaliation to deal with Pakistan’s continued covert war. While Pakistan was still trying to redefine its strategic moves post Balakot, another major development — revocation of Article 370 — delivered another surprise for Islamabad.

There have been important developments in Pakistan’s positioning in the past year. It has limited options in terms of accelerating covert war, given the pressures from the FATF, severe economic challenges and a budget deficit which has compelled it to borrow from the IMF and other nations. Although the Pakistani leadership has invested ample energy in portraying the Modi government as being run on ‘Nazi ideology’ and raising issues about extremism in India, the fact remains that Pakistan is struggling with a serious challenge and its role in supporting terrorism is globally recognised. The US took a firm stance by slashing military assistance on account of Pakistan’s continued support to militant groups in Afghanistan. Pakistan has been on the FATF grey list since June 2018 and must comply with the 27-point action plan till June 2020.

PM Imran Khan has talked against Islamophobia in multiple forums. Pakistan is cherishing support from Turkey and Malaysia, who have defended its case at the FATF and are committed to a military and strategic partnership. Interestingly, China’s policies in Xinjiang against the Muslims have been given a waiver by Imran Khan.

At the domestic level, the military’s ascendency strengthened even though Pakistan continues to vaunt uninterrupted democratic regimes and elections since 2008. Army chief General Bajwa was the beneficiary of the war hysteria created around ‘India’s aggressive moves’, and managed to extend his tenure by three years, despite the frustration in the military’s top brass, and also a judicial intervention that challenged his extension.

Pakistan’s nuclear brinkmanship projects its desperation to deal with India’s stance and overcome its current challenges.The Balakot strikes demonstrated New Delhi’s resolve to retaliate militarily, using the strategic space above terrorism and below the N-threshold. Evidently, India has crafted a space for conventional war below this threshold in response to Pakistan’s covert war.

Babylon the Great is Provoking World War 3

US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper played himself in the simulation (Image: GETTY)

World War 3 news: US warned over simulation of nuclear attack on Russia | World | News |

Express.co.uk

He said: “The United States continues a series of command-staff exercises and other drills involving the simulation of limited nuclear strikes, particularly – as it became known recently – on targets in Russia.”

In remarks attributed to him by official Russian news agency Tass, he added: “We condemn such actions because they clearly show that Washington is determined to pursue the path of confrontation and keep lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons.

“The US is embarking on a highly dangerous game instead of focusing on efforts to strengthen the arms control system that would also cover nuclear weapons.”

He added: “As we have stressed on numerous occasions, we would use nuclear weapons only in two exceptional cases – if Russia faces an attack with weapons of mass destruction or an aggression involving the large-scale use of conventional arms that puts the country’s existence at risk.”

Mr Ryabkov stressed: “Allegations saying that we could act based on the ‘escalation for the sake of de-escalation’ principle are just idle talk that has nothing to do with reality.

“This is why we would like to once again draw the attention of our American colleagues to the need to dot all the I’s in their defence planning and once again confirm the well-known formula that has been there since the Soviet era, which says that there can be no winners in a nuclear war and it should never be unleashed.

The exercise simulated a nuclear exchange between the US and Russia (Image: GETTY)

“The United States’ reluctance to confirm the formula gives us more reason to believe that Washington continues drawing up scenarios involving the use of nuclear weapons.”

Discussing the simulation, a US defence official explained: “They attacked us with a low-yield nuclear warhead, and in the course of the exercise we simulated responding with a nuclear weapon.”

The exercise assumed a Russian attack against a NATO target in Europe.

No details were provided about the type of target selected by the US military in retaliation.

In November, a simulation run by US-based think tank RAND considering the outcome of a war with Russia and China offered a gloomy prognosis for Mr Trump, suggesting the US “gets its ass handed to it” in virtually every scenario.

Researcher David Ochmanek said: “We lose a lot of people. We lose a lot of equipment.

“We usually fail to achieve our objective of preventing aggression by the adversary.”

A separate simulation run by researchers at Princeton’s Program on Science and Global Security in September suggested 34 million people would likely die within five hours in the event of the use of one so-called tactical or low-yield nuclear weapon.

A blog post carried on Princeton’s website said: “This project is motivated by the need to highlight the potentially catastrophic consequences of current US and Russian nuclear war plans.

“The risk of nuclear war has increased dramatically in the past two years as the United States and Russia have abandoned long-standing nuclear arms control treaties, started to develop new kinds of nuclear weapons and expanded the circumstances in which they might use nuclear weapons.

“This four-minute audio-visual piece is based on independent assessments of current US and Russian force postures, nuclear war plans, and nuclear weapons targets.

“It uses extensive data sets of the nuclear weapons currently deployed, weapon yields, and possible targets for particular weapons, as well as the order of battle estimating which weapons go to which targets in which order in which phase of the war to show the evolution of the nuclear conflict from tactical, to strategic to city-targeting phases.”

Antichrist warns to unleash Mehdi Army

Iraq’s Sadr warns to unleash Mehdi Army

February 26, 2020 at 3:29 am
The leader of the Shi’ite Sadrist movement in Iraq, Muqtada Al-Sadr, yesterday threatened to return his Al-Mehdi Army into the country.

Addressing what he described as “radical Sunni political leaders who want to return the booby traps,” Al-Sadr said that the Mehdi army was “frozen and not cancelled,” warning it would “return.”

Sadr disarmed his militia after former Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki’s troops — backed by the United States (US) forces — defeated them in Baghdad and southern cities in 2008. His movement has since become a potent force in mainstream politics.

US and Iraqi security officials say Mehdi Army splinter groups still pose a security risk, emerging in the form of Shi’ite militia that Washington says are backed by Iran.

Antichrist suspends protest call over coronavirus fears

Iraq’s Sadr suspends protest call over coronavirus fears – statement

Thomson ReutersTuesday, February 25, 2020 3:51 a.m. EST

BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Populist Iraqi Shi’ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr suspended a call for his followers to hold massive protests against his political opponents due to fears over the spread of coronavirus on Tuesday, minutes after the health ministry urged citizens to avoid public gatherings.

“I had called for million man protests and sit-ins against sectarian power-sharing and today I forbid you from them for your health and life, for they are more important to me than anything else,” he said in a statement.

(Reporting by Ahmed Aboulenein; Editing by Alex Richardson)