これは米軍をすくみ上らせるだろう 米軍に死者が出ているらしい

America & Europe
Trump’s lie revealing slowly! Casualties of Ain al Assad is revealing
America & Europe, Iraq, Middle East, News 21 January 2020

ISWNews Analysis Group: US media released just a bit of casualties due to Iran missile attack to Ain al Assad.

Business Insider reported that 11 US soldiers were transfered to hospitals in Germany and Kuwait with concussion symptoms.
On Friday US army claimed that 11 soldiers have concussion, while before it, US president and its terrorist army claim that no American was injured at all!
The Pentagon spokesperson, said that US army statement regarding evacuating 11 US military members to out of Iraq was released a few hours after informed to defense minister. He also claimed that Mark Esper was informed a week later about the casualties and then informed Trump!

P.S. Indeed the casualties are a lot more and this is just the start of revealing the truth.


同じ場所のGoogle mapによる画像。ずいぶん古いです。




ロシアの巡航ミサイルと同程度の精度では? イランの今回使われたミサイルは発射風景を見ると結構大きいように見えますが。少なくとも緯度経度による誘導ミサイルです。




Satellite images show MINOR but PINPOINT damage to US-Iraqi bases from Iranian missile attack, suggesting limited show of force
Commercial satellite imagery of military bases in Iraq targeted by Iranian missile strikes show only minor damage, bolstering theories that Tehran was aiming for a flashy show of force rather than to actually kill US troops.

The Ain Al-Asad military base in Iraq’s Anbar province, as well as another facility outside Erbil, in the Iraqi Kurdistan, found themselves under fire by two volleys of ballistic missiles, fired from inside Iran during the night between Tuesday and Wednesday. Satellite imagery released on Wednesday by the private US company Planet Labs shows only minor damage in both places, mostly to warehouses and equipment storage facilities rather than barracks.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) launched the missiles as revenge for the US drone strike that killed General Qassem Soleimani, one of their top commanders, last week outside of Baghdad. Despite belligerent rhetoric that accompanied the missiles, Iran stood down after just two volleys, claiming its legitimate self-defense objectives were met.

US President Donald Trump likewise declared “all is well,” declined to respond with force, and commended Tehran’s decision as “a good thing for all parties concerned.”

No US or Iraqi soldiers were killed in the strikes. The Pentagon claimed its early warning systems caught the launches, allowing US troops to seek shelter.

The Iraqi government revealed on Wednesday that Iran actually called and warned them of the strike in advance, which they then passed on to Washington. Finland and Lithuania, which also have troops stationed at the two bases, also reportedly said they were informed of the strikes in advance.

All of this has prompted speculation that the Iranian missile strikes were more of a symbolic act than a true escalation of the ongoing conflict between Tehran and Washington. Iran proved it had the capability to kill US troops if it so chose, but deliberately refrained from it, argued former US Marine and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter.
The top US general, however, claimed on Wednesday that his “personal assessment” was that the IRGC was shooting to kill.

“I believe, based on what I saw and what I know, that [the strikes] were intended to cause structural damage, destroy vehicles and equipment and aircraft, and to kill personnel,” Army General Mark Milley told reporters.

Missile strikes on bases housing US troops aimed at damaging America’s ‘military machine’ – Iranian commander
Iran’s assault on bases housing US troops in Iraq was intended to smash American military infrastructure rather than kill soldiers, an Iranian commander told state television. He promised further strikes in the region.

Iran launched a volley of ballistic missiles at two bases in Iraq in the early hours of Wednesday morning, bringing the two countries to the brink of war. However, no American or Iraqi casualties were sustained, and US President Donald Trump responded with economic sanctions instead of military action.

Speaking on Iranian state television on Thursday, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ (IRGC) aerospace commander, Amir Ali Hajizadeh, elaborated on the operation the previos day.

We didn't seek to kill. We sought to hit the enemy's military machine.

Hajizadeh added that expelling American troops from the Middle East would be “appropriate revenge” for the death of IRGC Major General Qassem Soleimani, who the US assassinated in a drone strike at Baghdad airport on Friday.

He said that the attack would be the start of a series of similar strikes across the region.

Trump thanked an “early warning system” for tipping the US military off about the incoming Iranian missiles on Wednesday morning, averting casualties at the bases. However, the Iraqi government confirmed that it received advance warning of the strikes, enabling US troops to take precautionary measures and activate air defense systems. Nevertheless, the missiles struck with pinpoint accuracy, demonstrating the advancement of Tehran’s military technology in recent years.

Earlier in the day IRGC commander Abdollah Araghi also said that Iran would take “harsher revenge soon,” without elaborating further.

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei both stated that the Islamic Republic’s ultimate goal is the removal of US troops from the Middle East.
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 21:09| Comment(2) | 国際・政治












ちなみに2019/10/3 21時現在の500ヘクトパスカルの高度の気流の流れです。ばっちり日本に流れています。チェルノブイリ事故の時と異なり緯度の低いところを流れます。

‘No precedent in human experience’: Study finds nuclear war between India and Pakistan could leave 125 million dead

A nuclear war between India and Pakistan could kill up to 125 million people in just a few days – surpassing the death count of the entire Second World War – and kick off a worldwide environmental meltdown, a new study found.

Published in the peer-reviewed Science Advances on Wednesday, the study forecasted a colossal death toll in the event of such a conflict, which it said could send global temperatures plummeting to levels comparable to the last Ice Age.

“Such a war would threaten not only the locations where bombs might be targeted but the entire world,” the study’s co-author and professor of environmental sciences at Rutgers University, Alan Robock, said.

Each nuclear weapon detonated could wipe out as many as 700,000 people, the study’s computer simulations found, while the explosions could send so much soot and debris into the atmosphere that it would trigger a “nuclear winter,” leading to rapidly falling temperatures, crop failures, and ultimately mass starvation.

“This is a war that would have no precedent in human experience,” said the study’s lead author, Brian Toon, who helped coin the term ‘nuclear winter’ while working with a team of researchers in the 1980s.

Though India and Pakistan currently have around 300 nuclear weapons between them, the study posits that the number could be up to 500 by 2025, the year the researchers theorized the hypothetical war could break out in their computer simulations.

“Hopefully, Pakistan and India will take note of this paper,” Toon said.

‘It will be quick & dirty’: Standoff with India may spark NUCLEAR ARMAGEDDON, Pakistani Kashmir chief says
A small-scale conflict between the two arch rivals could ignite a nuclear war that would kill hundreds of millions, the head of Pakistan’s Azad Kashmir said just days after PM Imran Khan addressed India with similar rhetoric.

Even a limited military conflict could evolve into a nuclear war,” Masood Khan, the president of the Pakistani-controlled part of Kashmir, was quoted as saying by RIA Novosti. Although others would unlikely be involved the confrontation, the consequences would be wide-ranging, he said.

If a war breaks out between India and Pakistan, it will be quick, dirty and deadly. It will be an Armageddon, hundreds of millions will die in South Asia, and 2.5 billion people will be affected by radiation all over the world.
インドとパキスタンの間に戦争が起きれば、それは展開が早く、汚く、致命的なものになろう。 それはハルマゲドンであり、南アジアで数億人、世界中で25億人が放射線の影響を受けるだろう。

Khan, Pakistan’s former envoy to the UN, then struck a milder tone, saying his country is not seeking war, but he wants to predict “a realistic scenario so that international community could intervene and pile pressure on India.”

Senior Pakistani officials ramped up the bellicose rhetoric after India stripped its Jammu and Kashmir state of its decades-old autonomy status, citing the need to quell insurgency and separatism in the Himalayan region.

Last week, Prime Minister Imran Khan warned that a “bloodbath” was brewing in the disputed territory, and hinted that weapons of mass destruction could be employed against India if war breaks out. The fiery remark met little praise in New Delhi, with government ministers and pundits accusing him of “warmongering” and “obsession with Kashmir.”

India’s justification of the Kashmir decision doesn’t sit well with Pakistan as it consistently blames its neighbor for the crackdown on the local Muslim population and infringing on its part of the disputed territory.

India and Pakistan fought two wars over Kashmir in 1947 and 1965, and have engaged in an array of smaller cross-border skirmishes, most recently this February. At the time, the nuclear-armed neighbors came disturbingly close to full-scale war, but mutual diplomatic efforts and goodwill gestures helped defuse the tensions for a while.

※ Dmitry Polyanskiy@Dpol_un氏の2020/1/15のツイート
UNSC discussed #Kashmir in closed consultations. Russia firmly stands for the normalisation of relations between #India and #Pakistan. We hope that differences between them will be settled through bilateral efforts based on the 1972 Simla Agreement and the 1999 Lahore Declaration

初出 2019-08-20 09:44:55 10/3、2020/1/16追記
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 18:30| Comment(1) | 福島原発事故


US-French Tax Truce: Time of One Global Internet is Over, Now We Have at Least Five - Prof
A tariff ceasefire deal struck by American and French presidents on 19 January indicates that both sides realise that there would be no winner in a potential US-France trade war, say European academics, agreeing that taxing Big Tech operating in Europe seems reasonable and remains a sensitive issue for the EU.

US President Donald Trump and his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron agreed Sunday that Paris would put its digital tax on the shelf until 2021 in exchange for a ceasefire on US retaliatory tariffs.

​Previously, France planned to slap levies on Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon (GAFA) in case the EU fails to introduce bloc-wide tax regulations on Big Tech companies. In response to the proposed measure, the Trump administration threatened to levy tariffs by up to 100 percent on $2.4 billion worth of French goods, including Champagne, sparkling wine and cheese.
Taxing Big Tech in EU is a Good Idea

Roland Benedikter, a research professor of multidisciplinary political analysis at the Willy Brandt Center of the University of Wroclaw-Breslau, the idea to tax American tech giants operating in Europe is a step in the right direction.

"We speak in theory now about five internets, not about one", Benedikter observes. "There was the idea that there is one internet globally and it has same rules [for everyone]. But that time was over. Now we have at least five internets: the European internet, that protects privacy and sanctions about behaviour, we have the Chinese internet that puts everything on surveillance, we have the Russian [internet] which is a national independent internet that can be taken off from the global network and we have Washington’s internet that favours business and national profit… And the fifth dimension of the internet is of course Silicon Valley internet".

According to the professor, the French president's initiative resonates with other European leaders: "Europe wants to tax foreign firm, making profit on its own surveillance", he notes. "Macron’s goal is, of course, to increase long-term or medium-term tax revenues".

Citing preliminary estimates, Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire noted last year that the new 3 percent digital tax could raise €500 million ($570 million).

The academic does not think that the tariff row between France and the US will further escalate when the truce is over.

Benedikter suggests that the US apparently realises that "there must be some kind of taxation for firms that have for decades long now taken over proportional profit out of the Internet and tax free roaming throughout the world".

Besides, the professor doubts that the Trump administration "can afford to put up to 100 percent of tariffs on French cheese or wine or whatever or champagne", highlighting that these goods are too popular.

"It's in the interests of Trump to avoid any tariffs on such popular goods as French consumer goods in the United States, at least until the next election is history", he presumes.

'Trump Worships Tariffs, Macron Worships Regulation'

Kevin Dowd, a professor of finance and economics at Durham University Business School, UK, echoes Benedikter by saying that the issue of tax on digital revenues is "a sensitive one for Western Europeans".

"There is a sense, in my opinion a justified one, that US digital firms are paying far too little tax", Dowd remarks.

However, the other side of the coin is that Emmanuel Macron is weaponising the issue to ensure his "grandstanding", according to the British academic.

"[Macron] imagines himself to be Europe’s up and coming leader, as [German Chancellor] Merkel goes into her lame duck period, and he is staking his claim to that leadership. His stance on the digital tax is thus part of a broader pattern. In reality, Macron’s position is weak and his vision of more taxes and more regulation is on the wrong side of history", Dowd believes.

The professor deems that France would not be able to endure US retaliation tariffs as its economy is already in a bad shape. "In any case, tariffs are set by the EU not by France," he highlights, "so, really, Macron should stay out of EU tariff issues and attend to his own domestic problems, of which he has many".

"Agreeing truce for a year allows the issue to go onto the backburner, one hopes for good", he notes.

According to Dowd, there's no bigger winner in the recent deal: "The real issue is that both countries would lose badly if there were an escalation in this trade dispute, which also has to be seen in the broader context of Trump’s escalation of trade barriers with the EU as whole, not to mention those with China too", he says.

Giving their prognoses for the future of the US-French relations, the academics shared opposite stances. While Benedikter deems that the US-French relationship is "on a good track" and that the heads of the two countries managed to overcome personal disagreements, Dowd foresees that French-American economic relations will be tense.

"Both countries are led by presidents who do not understand the benefits of free trade", he underscores. "Trump worships tariffs, Macron worships regulation. This is not a good mix for either country or the world economy".
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 16:41| Comment(0) | 国際・政治

実世界で徘徊老人 続いて ネットで放浪老人












2020年01月21日 日頃からIPアドレスを把握しておいたほうが良い
posted by ZUKUNASHI at 15:28| Comment(0) | デジタル・インターネット

ジャーナリスト? 世界の基準から見たら違うよね


石井氏の書き込みの中に「通俗的エッセイ」と書かれていて、笑える。どっちも通俗的では? 香山リカ氏の次のツイートについて管理人も感じたことがある。

※ 香山リカ @rkayama氏の2019/6/21のツイート

2019年07月21日 今日の放射能備忘録 190

posted by ZUKUNASHI at 15:01| Comment(0) | 社会・経済




※ mko@trappedsoldier氏の2020/1/22のツイート


posted by ZUKUNASHI at 13:18| Comment(0) | 国際・政治