The Strangelove Effect

[Robert]

Or How We Are Hoodwinked Into Accepting a New World War
New John Pilger article:

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US has ringed Russia with military bases, nuclear warplanes and missiles as part of its “NATO Enlargement Project”. Reneging a US promise to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 that NATO would not expand “one inch to the east”, NATO has all but taken over eastern Europe. In the former Soviet Caucuses, NATO’s military buildup is the most extensive since the second world war.

In February, the United States mounted one of its proxy “color” coups against the elected government of Ukraine; the shock troops were fascists. For the first time since 1945, a pro-Nazi, openly anti-Semitic party controls key areas of state power in a European capital. No Western European leader has condemned this revival of fascism on the border of Russia.
Some 30 million Russians died in the invasion of their country by Hitler’s Nazis, who were supported by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, the UPA, responsible for numerous Jewish and Polish massacres. The UPA was the military wing, inspiring today’s Svoboda party.

Since Washington’s putsch in Kiev – and Moscow’s inevitable response in Russian Crimea, to protect its Black Sea Fleet – the provocation and isolation of Russia have been inverted in the news to the “Russian threat”. This is fossilized propaganda. The US Air Force general who runs NATO forces in Europe – General Breedlove, no less – claimed more than two weeks ago to have pictures showing 40,000 Russian troops “massing” on the border with Ukraine. So did Colin Powell claim to have pictures of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. What is certain is that Obama’s rapacious, reckless coup in Ukraine has ignited a civil war and Vladimir Putin is being lured into a trap.

Following a 13-year rampage that began in stricken Afghanistan well after Osama bin Laden had fled, then destroyed Iraq beneath a false flag, then invented a “nuclear rogue” in Iran, dispatched Libya to a Hobbesian anarchy and backed jihadists in Syria, the US finally has a new cold war to supplement its worldwide campaign of murder and terror by drone.

More here:
http://original.antiwar.com/pilger/...re-hoodwinked-into-accepting-a-new-world-war/

 

[metalman]

The major driving force for NATO expansion is not that America is pressuring states to join NATO, but that these former soviet block countries themselves are pressuring for membership in NATO.

 

[metalman]

"one could easily forget that Russia is and for many centuries has been the largest country in the world and that it acquired its territories by imperialist expansion often accompanied by genocide and ethnic cleansing.
Instead, Putin prefers to see Russia as having been permanently on the defensive, a victim of both Western and Communist machinations: "In a word, we have all the reasons to believe that the notorious policy of containing Russia, which was pursued in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, is continuing to this day."

read more

 

[metalman]

 

[Glaucus]

The major driving force for NATO expansion is not that America is pressuring states to join NATO, but that these former soviet block countries themselves are pressuring for membership in NATO.

This is definitely true. Poland is a great example of this. They have been for years requesting more NATO bases on their soil but for the most part NATO had ignored them.

Also, I'm not sure the US or anyone else would be required to keep a promise they made to the USSR after the USSR no longer exists.

Also, there are reports the Jews in Eastern Ukraine have been harassed for their support of the Kiev government. Perhaps the reports of Kiev's antisemitism is over stated and that the antisemitism of some pro-Russians is understated?

There's actually a lot more wrong with that quote, never mind the article, but most people who care can easily research for themselves.

 

[metalman]

Fisking “Stop the War”

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Fisking “Stop the War”

First of all,"Fisking" is deliberately chosen as a dog whistle to all those who already feel that saying the name Fisk automatically invalidates an argument.
Secondly, who the hell is J.C.? What a curiously truncated byline.

Third,

[...] many millions of anti-government protesters have marched on the streets of British and American cities—and mayors and the police have protected their rights to do so.

Bwahaha ha ha ha ha.

Just try a Maiden style protest in your home town.
You might get lucky and be ignored initially, but if you don't go home in a timely fashion you will be dispersed by force. Wanna express your disent? Go stand in the "Free Speech Zone"!

Now I presume that Mike will be voting for Stephen Harper whenever the elections happen rather than risk voting for someone softer on Russia, because we all know the real danger is Russia, not Stephen Harper.

Before I post the next link I have to say that I disagree with the term useful idiot. I know I've used it and so have others on both sides of the debate and it is really a meaningless epithet. Besides, I don't think Stephen Harper is an idiot, though he IS useful. I also don't think it's fair to call him a useful idiot for the US. There are multiple viewpoints in the US including those who would like to start a war with Russia and those who would rather not. The Obama administration is more on the not so much war side, or war by non-US-military means, at least. But the neo-cons are still advocating taking war to the Russians and the Chinese (perhaps even at the same time if necessary) and Harper is much closer to the neo-cons and the CFR than the current US Whitehouse is. In fact, ever since Obama came in, Harper has been the go-to guy to take the ball around the Whitehouse for the neo-cons - puny as that end-run might be. It's always something they can dangle - look, tiny Canada has more balls than Obama!
Stephen Harper is naturally aligned with the US right wing, he's a Fundy Christian Auxilliary to AIPAC tring to compensate for his non-chosen status by at least being a "good gentile". He's said he'll back Israel no matter what it costs Canada (something you'd expect more from the leader of Israel than the leader of Canada) and he is thouroughy dedicated to supporting any war the neo-cons have picked.

The "Fisking" article is a classic example of "I know you are but what am I" argument - kind of like a rap policy debate. I guess you could fall for it if you had no memory of world events beyond a week ago.

but now - that other perspective.

 

[Robert]

but now - that other perspective.

Until now, the huge external demand for U.S. dollars has allowed it to accumulate enormous debts without defaulting. With Russia, China and the rest of the BRICSA countries (Brazil, India, and South Africa) moving in this direction the U.S. is panic-stricken. It used to be said that the U.S. dollar was backed by the Pentagon. Indeed, plans to decouple from the dollar was a common feature of three countries which experienced the wrath of U.S. foreign policy and military intervention. Libya's Muammar Gaddafi was planning a gold-standard currency for all of Africa; Iraq was planning to quit using the dollar for its oil exports, as was Iran. Sanctions against the latter had as much to do with this plan as any other issue.

You don't hear this aspect discussed on the telly.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

You don't hear this aspect discussed on the telly.

Even when it's discussed people understand it. Surely you've heard people say that it doesn't matter what currency a trade is done in because you just "do the exchange" as if exchange was a unit conversion like inches to centimetres instead of what it really is, a trade - with a buyer that needs USD and a seller that knows it.


Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

 

[Glaucus]

Plenty has been said about NATO encircling Russia over the past few years and that NATO is really out to get Russia. But I think that's a bunch of bullcrap. Aside from the fact that NATO has held off from accepting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO and that they have refrained from developing more bases in the newest members of the alliance in Eastern europe despite pleas from those very nations, NATO has also developed relationships with the Russian military. In fact, some now blame Western nations for Russia's high-tech weaponry and well trained troops.

Germany Helped Prep Russia for War, U.S. Sources Say

“It’s unfortunate that German companies were directly supporting and training Russia’s military even during the attacks against Ukraine,” one senior Senate aide told The Daily Beast. “The U.S. government should call on our NATO allies to suspend all military connections with Russia at this point, until the Russians leave Ukraine, including Crimea.”

The fact is that most Europeans felt Russia wasn't a threat and that Putin could be treated like any other world leader and even do business with him. Despite what Putin claims, there has never been a NATO conspiracy against Russia. In fact, internal Russian politics are all that's needed to understand the motives behind the recent Ukrainian crisis. The Russian economy was faltering and Putin's popularity was going down with it and Putin feared a Maiden style uprising. Now, thanks to Crimea, he's a super hero again. The problem with this strategy is that Ukraine can be annexed only so many times.

 

[Robert]

Plenty has been said about NATO encircling Russia over the past few years and that NATO is really out to get Russia. But I think that's a bunch of bullcrap.

Of course Russia will overplay it but to dismiss it as such indicates that perhaps you are only seeing events through one eye.

Aside from the fact that NATO has held off from accepting Georgia and Ukraine into NATO and that they have refrained from developing more bases in the newest members of the alliance in Eastern europe despite pleas from those very nations

The very fact that you used the word "refrained" to describe NATO's actions should tell you something.
Aside from that, even if NATO's intentions are entirely benign, the fact that it has expanded since the collapse of the Soviet Union gives Russia the opportunity to cry foul.

Both sides are spreading propaganda, all with some trace of truth buried in it, yet you seem to swallow the entirety of the NATO stuff whilst dismissing the entirety of the Russian stuff.
It's a lot more nuanced than that.


But then, you already know all of this.

 

[Glaucus]

Sure it's more nuanced, and there are in fact more than two sides to this story. There is NATO and there is Russia but there is also Poland. And you can argue that NATO wants to expand to erode Russia's influence and that I can argue that Russia wants to restore it's former empire, I can also argue that Poland has experienced Russian influence and has made a conscious decision to align itself with the West and distance itself from Russia. The way I see the Russia vs NATO situation is more as a rivalry - both court nations and the nations and the people decide. Now some nations like Belarus have chosen Russia, and that's fine for them. The Polish and the Checks have chosen the West. I can understand why Crimeans chose Russia and I can understand why Western Ukrainians would choose the EU. And ultimately that's what really matters and if NATO is upset or if Russia is upset that's secondary. Like I said before, I don't really oppose the idea of Crimea joining Russia, but I did oppose the manner in which it was done. Scotland has been talking about full independence for quite some time and has a national referendum later this year. I'm guessing people have a lot to discuss and contemplate, both for and against independence. It's probably not something people should do in haste or under duress, but that's exactly what happened in Crimea. Sometimes the important differences aren't what happens but how it happens.

 

[FluffyMcDeath]

Like I said before, I don't really oppose the idea of Crimea joining Russia, but I did oppose the manner in which it was done.

You mean by referendum?

 

[Glaucus]

You mean by referendum?

Once again you prove to us you're a total moron.