The Events In Iran Vindicate North Korea 100%

The Events In Iran Vindicate North Korea 100%

 

A Russia Truth exclusive article by Adam Garrie

The recent events in Iran, among other things, fully vindicate the security and defence policies of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in every sense. 

Already, recent history has vindicated North Korea’s policy. Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and to an extent Syria were destroyed by western militaries and their terrorist proxies because they did not have the full means to defend themselves, yet North Korea has not been destroyed because it does have the means to defend itself and deter attacks with its nuclear weapons. 

Far from an exotic theory, this is a very obvious matter of fact, one articulated by few world leaders, with the interesting exception of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. 

To further understand why North Korea has been vindicated, one must examine what happens when sovereign minded countries do deals with the west? 

In 2003, Libya agreed to disarm in return for extended business and security ties to the west. The result was the total destruction of Libya less than ten years later and the barbaric murder of its Revolutionary leader Brother Muammar Gaddafi. Gaddafi had often spoken with disappointment, regarding the fact that western business deals never came through in the way he had expected when he agreed to disarm. Still, he remained cooperative and as a reward the US sent savages in to murder him. 

Syria too had softened its traditional policies of scepticism regarding the west in the years immediately preceding the western led proxy war on Syria. The result has been a seven year on Syria by those same western powers and their Takfiri terrorist proxies, most notably ISIS.

In 2015, Iran agreed to the JCPOA, also known as the Iran nuclear deal, in which Iran forfeited its goal of developing a nuclear security deterrent in exchange for business deals with the west.

In 2018, western backed proxies and local traitors now set fire to the streets of Iran, all the while little significant progress has been made in terms Iranian business deals with the west. 

The US continues to sanction Iran, threaten Iran and lie about Iran’s compliance with the JCPOA, even though Russia, China, Germany, France, Britain, the EU as a whole and the United Nations, all agree that the JCPOA is being completely upheld by the Iranian government. 

Contrasting with Libya, Syria and Iran, North Korea has stated that no deals will be considered until its nuclear deterrent is fully functional in respect of being able to do to the US what the US can and often threatens to do to it.

 When Donald Trump stands before the UN threatening to “destroy” the DPRK, it is only natural that Pyongyang will want a stronger rather than a weaker means of defending itself. This is something a child in the schoolyard could understand with ease, yet many so-called intellectuals deceive themselves and in doing so, detach themselves from simple logic.

They are either stupid or cowards, not to publicly admit that the DPRK has been proved right and just about everyone else has been proved wrong.

Furthermore, North Korea has stated that even when it is willing to negotiate on other matters, that its nuclear deterrent is not up for negotiation. 

The precedent set by previous US “business” deals in exchange for disarmament totally vindicates the DPRK’s position. Far from good faith agreements, such deals are nothing more than a chance for the US to buy itself time while a stated enemy weakens itself and then, when sufficiently vulnerable, the US, its dependants and its proxies go to war and topple the state it had done a deal with.

The pattern has been repeated over and over again, but only North Korea seems to understand the nature of this clear pattern. 

Even in respect of a superpower like Russia, the US refuses to engage in arms reduction treaties—all the while amassing forces on Russia’s borders, before turning around and criticising Russia for maintaining the strength of its own armed forces. 

Sometimes one wonders if Washington really thinks the rest of the world is completely stupid? 

That being said, much of the world is matter-of-factly naive. The events in Iran speak for themselves. 

The following are the general developments that arise after a nation does a deal with the US and its partners:

--No tangible economic improvement 

--Continued sanctions and military threats 

--Some genuinely frustrated citizens who blame their own government for America’s broken promises 

--US armed forces and proxy militants/terrorist  trying to start a war in your borders 

North Korea is indeed a more closed society than Iran and this too has been vindicated by recent events. The US and its proxies do not reward countries for openness, but destroy them because of openness. The US sees an open door not as a sign of friendship but as a sign of vulnerability. 

If the US were to truly change (something that seems impossible until declining economic conditions wreak havoc upon the west in earnest), then perhaps North Korea would be more open to the rest of the world, but until then, it must protect itself as it continues to do.

North Korea, having suffered so greatly at the hands of the US and its partners in the 1950s, is more aware than most, of the full extent of barbarity that the US is happy to rain upon countries that it views unfavourably. 

But unlike others, the DPRK has never forgotten those important lessons of the relatively recent past, nor has the Supreme Leadership in Pyongyang neglected to study the pattern that begins with rapprochement with the US and is shortly followed by the total destruction of the smaller party to that initial rapprochement. 

One will never see proxy wars, “colour revolutions” and open sedition on the streets of the DPRK. This is because the DPRK knows how the US plays its game. If one thinks that North Korea is playing a hard game itself—one must remember that this game is only as hard as that which is necessary to hold off a US attack. 

North Korea stands vindicated—others are guilty of being naive and the US, as always, is guilty of being a dishonest broker and perennial aggressor.

Share:

Read More

There Are No “Overreactions” When Fighting Terror and Sedition

There Are No “Overreactions” When Fighting Terror and Sedition

A Russia Truth exclusive article by Adam Garrie

When it comes to securing one’s nation, protecting the people and fighting  terrorism organised by some of the most aggressive states in history—no “reaction” is too tough. There is in fact, no such thing as an overreaction in such situations. 

According to the latest reports from Sputnik, a reliable source which is in no way anti-Iranian, “protests” yesterday became even more charged, with some “protesters” shown attacking a facility belonging to Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. No one with a reasonable mind could believe that attacking the IRGC is an anyway related to any peaceful demonstration over domestic price increases. This was an act of terrorism, if not an act of war. 

If one thinks such words are “strong”, this if of course intentional. A nation can only quash sedition if it does so in such a way that it creates a lasting deterrent against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so that such fiends never attempt such foolish treachery ever again. 

One of the reasons that Chinese cities are among the safest in the world is because China takes all crimes deeply seriously. This is reflected in the sentences that Chinese courts enforce upon such ruthless criminals. Last year, a group of bandits from the United States who were jailed in China for theft, learnt rapidly, just how seriously China takes the criminal activities of lowlifes. 

The only reason they were released was due to the personal intervention of the US President who begged President Xi Jinping for clemency in order to save face. Even Trump later regretted his actions and publically expressed this on Twitter. 

Iran’s soft approach to sedition, as conveyed in President Rouhani’s speech yesterday, could be interpreted both as a sign of confidence in the unity and strength of the state, but it could equally be interpreted as a supremely naïve statement which overlooks the basic principles of how to stop sedition, not just in the immediate term but in the long term. 

In reality, if one’s security forces cracks down hard on a single seditious “protest”--enough for the nation not to be distracted by the event, but enough for would be traitors and foreign enemies to get the message—then such a state will increase the likelihood that such seditious acts or acts of war will never be attempted again in the long term future. This is the priceless value of a deterrent effect.

If one fights against thuggery, seditious mob tactics and against the presence of foreign agents seeking to ignite an insurgency on one’s soil, with the full force of military strength, the enemies will not attempt such methods again. Such an “overreaction” means that one will actually save national exhaustion, resources and ultimately lives in the medium and long term. 

When Brother Muammar Gaddafi learned that his nation was under attack from the terrorist proxies of foreign regimes, he spoke of the need to purify the nation, “street to street…house to house…”. 

 

Sadly, for Gaddafi, he had foolishly disarmed years before which subjected Libya to the onslaught of NATO weaponry that countries like the DPRK are protected from due to their nuclear deterrent.

Iran does not have the material problem of Libya, but it does have a problem of not speaking out forcefully against sedition before it has the chance to inspire the enemies of Iran to sink their teeth in. It is a problem that can and should be fixed.

Already, the US and “Israel” are salivating at the prospect of reinstalling the corrupt heir to the discredited Iranian throne—the Zionist fool Reza Pahlavi, who is cheering on the traitors from his mansion in Beverly Hills, USA.

Iran must put an end not just to the movements of the scoundrels in the street but to future generations of scoundrels, the ambitious of foreign agents and traitors and most importantly the wicked desires of the Zionist and American regimes. 

This is no time to be polite or passive, ultimately many innocent Iranians could become harmed if this blasé attitude continues for much longer.

The only way to do this is to crack down on sedition as China did in 1989.

As I previously wrote,

“During China in the 1980s, an increased number of so-called intellectuals went to academic institutions in the United States where they became seduced by and intentionally programmed by US government operatives keen to see a seditious revolt in the People’s Republic of China--one with the ultimate goal of bringing the regime in Chinese Taipei (aka Taiwan) back to power in Beijing.

Because a readymade regime in Chinese Taipei existed which salivated for power over all of China, the CIA and other aggressive actors did not need to go to the effort of forging a new regime or political model—they simply needed to create agitation among a class of elites in Beijing in order to try and bring down the People’s Republic of China.

Hu Yaobang became the General Secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) in 1982 and by the middle of the decade, he became increasingly seduced by the liberal fantasies peddled by western “educated” academics.

His open flirtations with liberal social ideology proved too much to Deng and other social traditionalists and he was removed from power in favour of Zhao Ziyang in 1987. 

When Hu died in 1989, subversive western orchestrated “protests” among “students” and their academic masters began to foment with Tiananmen Square being a focal point. Rather than put a quick end to the numerically small displays, Zhao Ziyang instead offered sympathy to many of the “protesters”.

Zhao was in many ways one part traitor and one part naive. A man of great experience and with a deeply important political position such as Zhao should have been aware, as others including Deng were, that the “protests” were neither genuine nor spontaneous. He should have realised that the “protests” were an attempt to overthrow the very institutions of the state, paving the way for a pro-western regime. To deny this, as he did, was a sign of both carelessness and a dereliction of duty.

Part of Zhao however did likely feel for the fact that young useful idiots of a western plot essentially volunteered themselves to be on the front line of a proxy war. However, his interventions proved totally insufficient and even had the effect of encouraging the conspirators.

The western orchestrators of the “protests” coordinated them to coincide with the official state visit of Mikhail Gorbachev. A visit which heralded the reconciliation between the two great Communist superpowers, instead became an attempt by the west to embarrass both China and the USSR in the same place and at the same time.

Zhao was finally removed from power in 1989 as China sent out the People’s Liberation Army to cleanse the streets of the western agents and restore order.

The vast majority of the Chinese population was unaffected by the events of 1989, but the ruling elite realised that they needed to take precautions to avoid such western meddling in the future. 

China rapidly recovered because of the ultimately decisive action the government took in putting an end to the “protests” and as a result, China is the unshakable powerhouse that it is today.

Although Iran is smaller than China, the west and “Israel” remain frightened of the prospect of direct military confrontation. They are equally afraid to take on Iran in Syria or Iraq by engaging with the limited number of Iranian anti-terrorist military advisors in the Arab nations.

Because of this, the US and “Israel” have devised a plan to “counter Iran” the sparse details of which have been published in Zionist media.

Like clockwork, “protests” in Tehran and several other Iranian cities broke out simultaneous to the publication of reports on an anti-Iranian agreement made between the US regime and the Zionist entity. Allegedly, the protesters are agitating for economic reform and price controls, but anyone who is not totally naive can see the direct correlation between the reports from Zionist media and the western orchestrated protests in Iran.

This is not the first time the west has attempted to use “protesters” to attempt and destroy the Islamic Revolution. So-called Iranian liberals were mobilised by western and “Israeli” actors in 2011.

In reality these “liberals” are a combination of reactionary monarchists, counter-revolutionary hooligans and useful idiots taking orders from Iranians going back and forth between California and Iran, acting under the same kinds of orders as the Chinese “academics” of the 1980s who conspired against the People’s Republic of China.

It is an open secret that “Israel” pours millions into Iranian groups based primarily in the US whose goal is to destroy the Islamic Revolution and restore the pro-western monarchy whose obscenely gluttonous leaders remain in exile, primarily in the US.

As I write this piece, it has been confirmed that an al-Qaeda linked group of terrorists from Iranian Balochistan have blown up a major oil pipeline in western Iran. This is what happens when traitors are not dealt with—the terrorists rush in.

Iran cannot take any further chances. As China learned, a short but hard crackdown on sedition is necessary in order to avoid the total destruction of the state, its people and society.

Many Iranians will not want to hear this. Many wish to pretend that the protests will simply fizzle out due to their small size and seemingly innocent origins. This attitude however is ultimately one derived from fiction, one which puts the lives of every Iranian man, woman and child in danger.

Western backed so-called “colour revolutions” generally begin with an irritating whimper and end with a blood-soaked bang.

Like China, Iran has it within its power to easily crush the seditious radicals. If Iran is to avoid the fate of Libya and others, it must act swiftly and decisively. The Zionist regime is using the events in Tehran and elsewhere as a test to see how far they can push Iran. The government must not allow the enemy to gain an inch.

It is time for a 1989 Chinese style law and order operation in Iran”.

Since I wrote this, two days ago, the pressing need for such a crackdown is all the more important. Iranian leaders must channel the patriotic rhetoric of Gaddafi and the laser like precision of Chinese officials in 1989, who were fully aware that the happiness of future generations of the people depended on a rapid extinguishing of sedition’s dirty flame. 

Now is not the time to wait, nor is it the time to care what the west thinks. Iran must double down on cultivating its new friendships and let the west rot like a rotten fruit on a wilting branch.

It is time to end all sedition and send a clear message to the aggressors in Tel Aviv and Washington that “None shall pass”!

 

Share:

Read More

Palestine wakes the sleeping giant that is the UN General Assembly - By Adam Garrie

A Russia Truth exclusive article by Adam Garrie.

Palestine wakes the sleeping giant that is the UN General Assembly

By Adam Garrie - 19th December 2017

For decades, discussions about reforming the United Nations have often been more amplified than debates about world peace, poverty alleviation and disease control, which ought to be the primary topics of debate at such a body. 

That being said, it is not difficult to see why so many countries are exasperated with the UN. The UN continues to be dominated by the United States and its allies who sit as permanent members on the Security Council. 

Until 1971, the Security Council was little more than a consummately deadlocked chamber where four countries typically lined up against the lone Soviet Union among the five permeant members who wield veto power. 

This was due to the farcical situation of Chinese Taipei (aka the Republic of China/Taiwan) holding the Chinese seat at the UN, even after the People’s Republic of China became the authentic Chinese state in 1949. 

Today’s typically 3 against 1 deadlocked Security Council is at least slightly more representative than it was in the 1950s and 1960s, when the PRC had no seat at the UN, but as yesterday’s Security Council vote on Al-Quds demonstrates, all it takes is one US veto to effectively shatter the democratic legitimacy of the UNSC. 

Yesterday, the entire Security Council voted to affirm the lack of legitimacy behind Washington’s move to recognise Al-Quds as the Israeli capital. The only problem is that the US invoked its veto power, thus negating the democratic will of the rest of the Security Council.

Subsequent to the US vote, Palestinian Presidential advisor Nabil Abu Rdeneh, slammed the US veto a “provocation”. 

 Palestine has called for an emergency meeting of the UN General Assembly to vote on the same matter. There, the motion rendering Trump’s decision illegitimate will likely pass in a landslide vote.

The events of the past few days make a strong case for Libyan Revolutionary leader Muammar Gaddafi’s argument for total UN reform which would see the General Assembly becoming the highest constituent element of the UN, thus incorporating the current functions of the Security Council, while the UNSC would simply exist as an executive body which would automatically ratify decisions made by a democratic vote in the General Assembly.

Gaddafi spoke before the General Assembly in 2009 and proposed the following reform measure,

“This Assembly is our democratic forum and the Security Council should be responsible before it; we should not accept the current situation. These are the legislators of the Members of the United Nations, and their resolutions should be binding. It is said that the General Assembly should do whatever the Security Council recommends. On the contrary, the Security Council should do whatever the General Assembly decides. This is the United Nations, the Assembly that includes 192 countries. It is not the Security Council, which includes only 15 of the Member States. How can we be happy about global peace and security if the whole world is controlled by only five countries?

We are 192 nations and countries, and we are like Speakers’ Corner in London’s Hyde Park. We just speak and nobody implements our decisions. We are mere decoration, without any real substance. We are Speakers’ Corner, no more, no less. We just make speeches and then disappear. This is who you are right now. Once the Security Council becomes only an executive body for resolutions adopted by the General Assembly, there will be no competition for membership of the Council. Once the Security Council becomes a tool to implement General Assembly resolutions, there will be no need for any competition. The Security Council should, quite simply, represent all nations. In accordance with the proposal submitted to the General Assembly, there would be permanent seats on the Security Council for all unions and groups of countries. The 27 countries of the European Union should have a permanent seat on the Security Council. The countries of the African Union should have a permanent seat on the Security Council.

The Latin American and ASEAN countries should have permanent seats. The Russian Federation and the United States of America are already permanent members of the Security Council. The Southern African Development Community (SADC), once it is fully established, should have a permanent seat. The 22 countries of the Arab League should have a permanent seat. The 57 countries of the Islamic Conference should have a permanent seat. The 118 countries of the Non-Aligned Movement should have a permanent seat. Then there is the G-100; perhaps the small countries should also have a permanent seat. Countries not included in the unions that I have mentioned could perhaps be assigned a permanent seat, to be occupied by them in rotation every six or twelve months”.

If Gaddafi’s plan was implemented, there is no doubt that yesterday’s Security Council motion would have been passed overwhelmingly. Even among traditional US allies, it received votes of support. 

The reason that the UN is in the stronghold of the United States, is because the structure of the Security Council allows certain nations to hold all others at ransom. The fact that the UN is on US soil, is another reason for this unfair advantage. Gaddafi likewise proposed moving the UN to a more globally central and political neutral location. 

Ultimately, the current structure of the Security Council has rendered the UN undemocratic while Gaddafi’s proposals would instantly made the UN a fully democratic body. 

One of the biggest worries in such a situation, is that Russia and China, who typically vote against the US and its allies, would lose their veto power. While fears about surrendering an important privilege which is typically used to prevent aggressive and provocative US drafted resolutions from gaining ascension, is a real fear, it negates something far more important. 

The majority of the world is more sympathetic to the Russian and Chinese positions than that of the United States and its increasingly few allies. Africa, almost all of Asia, southern and parts of Eastern Europe as well as most of Latin America have only suffered due to the neo-imperial tactics of aggressive war profiteering that the US attempts to legitimise with a UN rubber stamp. 

In this sense Palestine has awoken the world to the real potential of the UN which is enshrined in the preamble of the UN Charter but which is systematically absent in the mechanics and procedural rules of the UN’s day-to-day operation. 

While many deride the UN for not being able to back up its pronouncements with actions, this is a view that tends to underestimate the power of a truly global-democratic quorum of nations speaking in a singular voice. 

On the issue of Palestine, the United States has drawn a line between Washington and Tel Aviv on one side and virtually the entire world on the other. 

It was for just such moments that an unbound General Assembly could demonstrate that no matter how wealthy, violent or powerful any nation is, one can still be isolated, rejected and condemned. 

When the General Assembly inevitably votes in favour of justice for Palestine, it will be wise to remember the sage proposals of Gaddafi who understood the power of actual democracy, far more than the imperialists who so frequently preach it in order to cover the trail of blood and tears they have created throughout Asia, Africa, the Middle East  and Latin America.

Share:

Read More