Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and  bastardization of classic Unix

American Imperialism, Transnational Capitalist Class and Globalization

"Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business,"  ~Michael Ledeen  (an early 1990s speech.[27])

News Neoliberalism as a New form of Corporatism New American Militarism Super Imperialism Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA America and the Neoliberal Imperial Project American Exceptionalism
The Grand Chessboard Wolfowitz Doctrine "Fuck the EU": State Department neocons show EU its real place Neoconservatism US Department of Imperial Expansion Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite Looting pays dividends to empire
Technological imperialism War and Venture Capitalism Predator state Civil war in Ukraine Media domination strategy Transnational Corporations never let a good crisis go to waste  
Republics warlike and unscrupulous Empires Then and Now - PaulCraig Disaster capitalism The Iron Law of Oligarchy The Deep State Humor Etc

Note: Partially based on Wikipedia article American imperialism (which avoids discussion neoliberalism as the "imperial method used for the building modern US empire).

Introduction

The "American Exceptionalism" is geo-political trap the USA now experiencing. This is a unique brand of nationalism and after September 2001 thee jaws of American imperialism: intelligence agencies, military and financial oligarchy are too tight for the country to leave this (potentially self-destructing) path. So it looks like the USA will continues its international power projection and unique financial imperialism in foreseeable future no matter what are internal costs. Leon Trotsky saying is fully applicable to the current decline of the American imperialism, the process started in 2008   "We will leave, but we will slam the door so hard the world will shudder," Trump presidency is clearly start of slamming the door.

Leopard can't change its spots. The same is true for the USA. It is metropolis for a large "neoliberal" empire governed from Washington and to some extent form London as the second most important financial center of the empire.  It is attached to neoliberalism and death of neoliberalism means the death of this empire.  The USA dominance is maintained mostly not by  force of arms but by installing and cultivating comprador elites ("regime change/color revolutions)  and financial mechanism, due to the role of dominant role of the USA Treasury, USA banks and two controlled by the USA international financial institutions (IMF and the World Bank)  in the world financial system. This mechanism involves in many cases converting and then keeping the country in the status of a debt  slave (to IMF or both IMF and private banks; Greece and Ukraine are notable examples)

Probably in a hundred years or so there will be discussion about whether the USA imperialism was totally harmful or at least somewhat beneficial for the vassal nations. Like discussion about Roman empire and British empire.

American imperialism is the economic/financial (as well as  military and cultural) dominance of the United States over other countries. It is based on neoliberalism, so it more properly can be called "neo-imperialism"

Neoliberalism and associated with it a new type of empire (the USA neoliberal empire)  was not an accident, it was a development that while started in the USA took roots in many countries, including such diverse as  Chile (Pinochet), GB (Thatcher), China (Deng Xiaoping was a neoliberal reformer),  Russia (Yeltsin gang), and many other countries. Since the late 1970s, a shift of economic activity from the production of goods and non-financial services to finance has been adopted as mean to escape diminishing return on capital.  The oil crisis of the 1970s was probably another factor in the decision of the elite (and it was decision, a conscious choice, not an accident) to switch to neoliberal policies. 

"American empire" consists of vassal states and colonies. Vassal state that have some degree of independence is essentially a codename for NATO. All other states are colonies. An international financial elite (Davos crowd) which BTW consider the USA and NATO as a enforcer, a tool for getting what they want, much like Bolsheviks considered Soviet Russia to be such a tool. The last thing they are concerned is the well-being of American people.

During its history which starts around 70th (with the first major success the Pinochet's coup de etat in Chile, which was supported by the USA), neoliberalism undergone several stages of development:

The implosion of the entire global banking/mortgage industry in 2008 has essentially delegitimized neoliberalism central mantra about self-regulating market (which was a fake to begin with) and thus made it far less attractive as an economic and social model which the U.S. has been pleased to espouse as the royal road to prosperity for decades.

The implosion of the entire global banking/mortgage industry in 2008 has essentially delegitimized neoliberalism central mantra about self-regulating market (which was a fake to begin with)  and thus made it far less attractive as an economic and social model which the U.S. has been pleased to espouse as the royal road to prosperity for decades.

Also the neoliberal Pax Americana and the neoliberal version of global capitalism are increasingly contested by China, with the help of India, Russia, and Brazil (Carl Schmitt’s War on Liberalism The National Interest )

In different ways, Xi Jinping’s China, Vladimir Putin’s Russia and Narendra Modi’s India represent an alternative economic model, in which free markets and state capitalism are blended under strong executive rule.

In other words 2008 signified the "end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end" of Washington Consensus, if we use Churchill's words. But in now way it means that period of neoliberal revolutions came ot the end. Inertia and the level of technological and cultural dominance of the USA and its allies (G7) is such that even after bankruptcy as an ideology, neoliberalism continues to its world expansion and claims new victims among "resource nationalists" or simply "not neoliberal enough" regimes. After 2008 Libya, Syria and Ukraine were successfully "regime changed". I think Ukraine, which was a neoliberal state even before EuroMaidan is a special case and much of EuroMaidan events were connected with the desire to "put Russia in place" by Washington (and its European poodles) as well as century old Germany desire to expand its market and dominance into Ukraine.   

If we assume that Marxism as a political philosophy was dead around 1960-1970 when it became evident that working class does not represent the new dominant class able to take power and govern in a new social system as well as the fact that Communist Party political dominance is unable to secure higher standard of living for people then advanced capitalist societies,  and never will, and that The Iron Law of Oligarchy  is applicable to the USSR even more, not less that to any Western country. Still it took 20 years for the USSR to collapse after the USA elite bought part of The USSR nomenclature and organized a quite coup installing puppet neoliberal Yeltsin regime (sold as a "victory of democracy" to lemmings by Western propaganda machine). Using neoliberal advisors from Harvard (aka "Harvard mafia") it instituted "shock therapy" which instantly pushed 90% of population of the  xUSSR region into object poverty very and also enriched beyond imagination few multinationals who were will full support of Yeltsin regime to steal assets and natural resources for pennies on dollar (using Russian fifth column as an intermediary). Essentially looting of the USSR area was one of key factors which ensured recovery and quick growth of the USA economy in late 90th which was interrupted only by the dot-com crysy of 2000.

I would assume that neoliberalism is probably twice more resilient the communism, so 50-60 years since it became clear that the economic doctrine of neoliberalism is a pseudoscientific joke and its political doctrine is an eclectic mix masking financial slavery masked with the smokescreen of propaganda about "entrepreneur class" and "shareholder value"  the first sign of decay might be a reasonable estimate ot its eventual lifetime.  Much depends on the dynamics of the price of oil, as globalization and thus forces of neoliberalism are inherently dependent on cheap hydrocarbons. High prices or relative scarcity that affects transcontinental trade might damage neoliberalism and undermine the fifth column that support it in.

Also high cost of hydrocarbons means "end of growth", and neoliberalism financial scheme based on cheap credit. It might implode in the environment of slow, or close to zero growth.

That means that consistent price of oil, say, over 120 is a direct threat to neoliberal project in the USA. Even with prices over $100 the major neoliberal economics  entered the stage of "secular stagnation". It also makes the US military which is the largest consumer of oil in the USA much more expensive to run and increase the costs of  neoliberal "wars for regime change", essentially curtailing neoliberal expansion. Or at least making it more difficult. The same is true about financiering of color revolutions, which as a new type of neoliberal conquests of other countries, also require some cash, although not at the scale of "boots on the ground".

It is possible to lower the oil price, as happened at the end of 2014, but the question is how long this period will last. 

At this point ideology of neoliberalism as an ideology is completely discredited and its fake nature is evident to large part of global elite (which probably never have any illusions from the very beginning) as well, which is more dangerous, large part of middle class. It still is supported by pure military and financial power of the USA and its allies as well as technological superiority of the West in general. So only postulates of neoliberalism, especially as for free market absolutization, started to be questioned.  And partically revised (increased financial regulation is one example). This form of neoliberalism with the core ideology intact but modified one of several postulates can be called post-neoliberalism.

The USA still remains the most powerful country in the world with formidable military, and still behave as a word hegemon and the only source of justice ignoring US and other International organization, unless it if convenient to them. But as Napoleon noted "You can do anything with bayonets, but you can't sit on them". Running aggressive foreign policy on a discredited ideology and relying on blunt propaganda is a difficult undertaking as resistance mounts and bubble out in un-anticipated areas (Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk in Ukraine are recent example, when neoliberal color revolution, which was performed by few thousands trained by the West far right militants, including openly neo-fascist squads, led to civil war in the country).

Still, unfortunately, Libya, Syria  and Ukraine, were not probably a swan song of muscular enforcement of neoliberal model on other countries. While sponsored by the USA and allies anti-Putin putsch in Russia (aka white revolution") failed, events in Libya and Ukraine prove the neoliberalism sill can launch and win offensives (aka color revolutions). At the cost of plunging the country into economic and political chaos including civil war.  

Rule of financial oligarchy also gradually comes under some (although very limited) scrutiny in the USA. Some measures to restrict appetites of financial oligarchy were recently undertaken in Europe (bank bonuses limitations).

HFT and derivatives still remain off-reach for regulators despite JP Morgan fiasco in May 2012 in London branch. Trade loss was around two billions, decline of bank value was around $13bn (The Guardian) At this stage most people around the world realized that as Warren Buffett's right-hand man Charlie Munger quipped in his CNBC interview Trusting banks to self-regulate is like trusting to self-regulate heroin addicts. At the meeting of the Group of 20 (G20) heads of states in the spring of 2009, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced the death of “the Washington Consensus” — the famous list of market-liberalizing policy prescriptions that guided the previous 20 or 30 years of neoliberal expansion into third world countries  (Painter 2009).

Prominent economists in the United States and elsewhere pointed out that after decades of reform, market-liberalizing policies had not produced the promised benefits for either economic growth or social welfare of countries were those policies were applied (Stiglitz 2002, 2006; Rodrik 2006). These criticisms further undermined the legitimacy of neoliberal governance, exactly the same way as similar criticism undermined socialist model of the USSR and Eastern Europe. The problem is that while socialist experiment could be compared with the Western countries capitalism achievement, here there is no alternative model with which to compare.

Still a backlash directed at the USA is mounting even from the former loyal vassals. Even the UK elite starts to display the behavior that contradict its role of the obedient US poodle. The atmosphere is which the USA is considered "guilty" of pushing though the throats of other countries a utopia that harmed them is a different atmosphere for the US oligarchy that the role of it accustomed to.  Now the US oligarchy has found itself in USSR nomenklatura shoes and eventually might be called to answer for their global actions which similar to Opium Wars of the British can be called Dollar Wars.

Everybody is now aware of the substantial costs that the modern financial system has imposed on the real economy, especially in developing countries,  and no amount of propaganda and brainwashing can hide this simple fact.

Standard of living was rising slowly and after 2008 mostly stopped to rise and started to detiorate reflecting higher energy prices and the level on indebtness of many countries (Greece, Spain, Portugal, Bulgaria, Ukraine, etc).   So the key promise of neoliberalism that "trickle down" from super rich will be enough to sustain better standard of living for all proved to be a confidence game.

It is questionable that the "financial innovations" of the last three-four decades can compensate for those huge costs and that they warrants those costs. Shocks generated within the financial system and transformation of economies imposed by international financial oligarchy as the core of neoliberal elite, implies that the rule of financial oligarchy creates negative externalities for societies and that some types of financial activities and some financial structures should be treated like an organized crime (in other words as purely parasitic, extortionist type of players).

Still this stage preserves several attributes of previous stage and first of all push for globalization and aggressive foreign policy. While economic crisis of 2008 destroyed legitimacy of ideology of neoliberalism, neoliberalism as an ideology continue to exists as a cult, much like communism as an ideology continues to exist, despite the failure of the USSR. And being phony ideology from the very beginning, a smokescreen for  the revanchism of financial oligarchy, it still can be promoted by unrelenting propaganda machine of the same forces which put it into mainstream albeit with les efficiency.  

So far no viable alternatives emerged, and inertia is still strong, as strong as G7 block with the USA as the head of the block. Like in 20th failure of neoliberalism led to rise of nationalism, especially in Europe (France, Hungary, Ukraine). In some countries, such as Ukraine, the net result of neoliberal revolution was establishing a far right regime which has uncanny similarities to the régimes which came to power in 30th such as Franko regime in Spain.  The phase of neoliberal dominance still continues, it is just the central idea of neoliberalism, the fake idea of self-regulating markets that was completely discredited by the crisis of 2008. Actually it was discredited before during Great Depression, but the generation that remembered this lesson is now extinct (it looks like it takes approximately 50 years for humanity to completely forget the lessons of history ;-).

Latin America, once paragon of a neoliberal revolution (Chile, Argentina, Mexico, etc), is now dominated by left-wing governments elected on explicitly anti-neoliberal platforms. Around the world, economists and policymakers now come to consensus that excessive reliance on unregulated financial markets and the unrestrained rule of financial oligarchy was the root cause of the current worldwide financial crisis. That created a more difficult atmosphere for the USA financial institutions to operate abroad. Several countries are now trying to limit role of dollar as the world currency (one of the sins Saddam Hussein paid the price).

Also internal contradictions became much deeper and the neoliberal regime became increasingly unstable even in the citadel of neoliberalism -- the USA. Like any overstretched empire it became hollow within with stretches on potholes ridden roads and decaying infrastructure visible to everyone. Politically, the Republican Party became a roadblock for any meaningful reform (and its radical wing -- the tea party even sending its representatives to Congress), the Party that is determined to rather take the USA the road of the USSR, then change its ideology. All this points to the fact that neoliberalism as an socio-economic doctrine is following the path of Bolshevism.

But its media dominance of neoliberalism paradoxically continues unabated. And this is despite the fact that after the crisis of 2008, the notion that finance mobilizes and allocates resources efficiently, drastically reduces systemic risks and brings significant productivity gains for the economy as a whole became untenable. We can expect that like was the case with Catholicism in middle ages and Bolshevism in the USSR, zombie phase of neoliberalism can last many decades (in the USSR, "zombie" state lasted two decades, say from 1970 to 1991, and neoliberalism with its emphasis on low human traits such as greed and supported by military and economic power of the USA, is considerably more resilient then Bolshevism). As of 2013 it is still supported by elites of several major western states (such as the USA, GB, Germany, France), transnational capital (and financial capital in particular) and respective elites out of the sense of self-preservation. That means that is it reasonable to expect that its rule in G7 will continue (like Bolshevism rule in the USSR in 70th-80th) despite probably interrupted by bursts of social violence (Muslim immigrants in Europe are once such force).

In the US, for example, income and wealth inequality continue to increase, with stagnating middle-class earnings, reduced social mobility, and an allegedly meritocratic higher education system, generously supported by tax exemptions, has been turned into the system whose main beneficiaries are the children of the rich and successful. Superimposed on this class divide is an increasingly serious intergenerational divide, and increases level of unemployment of young people, which make social atmosphere somewhat similar to the one in Egypt, although the pressure from Muslim fundamentalists is absent.

More and more neoliberalism came to be perceived as a ruse intended to safeguard the interests of a malignantly narcissistic empire (the USA) and of rapacious multinationals. It is now more and more linked with low-brow cultural homogeneity, social Darwinism, encroachment on privacy, mass production of junk, and suppression of national sentiments and aspiration in favor of transnational monopolies. It even came to be associated with a bewildering variety of social ills: rising crime rates, unemployment, poverty, drug addiction, prostitution, organ trafficking, and other antisocial forms of conduct.

While ideology of neoliberalism is by-and-large discredited, the global economic institutions associated with its rise are not all equally moribund. For example, the global economic crisis of 2008 has unexpectedly improved the fortunes of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), an organization long famous for the neoliberal policy conditions attached to its loans that served to incorporate countries into a global neoliberal economic system. In 2008, a cascade of financial crises in Eastern Europe and Iceland fattened the IMF’s dwindling loan portfolio.

World Trade Organization (WTO), the key US-used and abused universal opener of markets to US corporations and investments is in worse shape then IMF, but still is viable too. The Doha round of negotiations is stalled, mostly due to irresolvable disputes between developed and developing countries. Consequently, the current crisis of neoliberalism raises many important questions about the future path of the current international institutions promoting the neoliberal order. But still Russia joined WTO in 2012 which means that this organization got a new lease of life.

Nonetheless, that "neoliberalism in name only" is still a powerful global "brand" which the U.S. seeks to maintain at all costs for macro geopolitical reasons (The Great Crash, 2008: A Geopolitical Setback for the West , Foreign Affairs)

The financial and economic crash of 2008, the worst in over 75 years, is a major geopolitical setback for the United States and Europe. Over the medium term, Washington and European governments will have neither the resources nor the economic credibility to play the role in global affairs that they otherwise would have played. These weaknesses will eventually be repaired, but in the interim, they will accelerate trends that are shifting the world's center of gravity away from the United States.

A brutal recession is unfolding in the United States, Europe, and probably Japan -- a recession likely to be more harmful than the slump of 1981-82. The current financial crisis has deeply frightened consumers and businesses, and in response they have sharply retrenched. In addition, the usual recovery tools used by governments -- monetary and fiscal stimuli -- will be relatively ineffective under the circumstances.

This damage has put the American model of free-market capitalism under a cloud. The financial system is seen as having collapsed; and the regulatory framework, as having spectacularly failed to curb widespread abuses and corruption. Now, searching for stability, the U.S. government and some European governments have nationalized their financial sectors to a degree that contradicts the tenets of modern capitalism.

Much of the world is turning a historic corner and heading into a period in which the role of the state will be larger and that of the private sector will be smaller. As it does, the United States' global power, as well as the appeal of U.S.-style democracy, is eroding.

Hegemony of the USA and its allies

The USA was and probably will remain the center of neoliberalism and firmly established as most important and the most powerful promoter of the doctrine (in some case, like with Serbia, Iraq and Libya, on the tips of bayonets).

After the dissolution of the USSR the US elite felt that "everything is permitted" and essentially started to pursue global Roman style imperial policy. The USA military forces are active over most of the globe: about 226 countries have US military troops, 63 of which host American bases, while only 46 countries in the world have no US military presence. This is a projection of military power that makes the Roman, British, and Soviet empires pale in comparison. In his 1919 essay, "The Sociology of Imperialisms," Joseph Schumpeter wrote of Rome during its years of greatest expansion.

There was no corner of the known world where some interest was not alleged to be in danger or under actual attack. If the interests were not Roman, they were those of Rome's allies; and if Rome had no allies, then allies would be invented. When it was utterly impossible to contrive such an interest-why, then it was the national honor that had been insulted.

The fight was always invested with an aura of legality. Rome was always being attacked by evil-minded neighbors, always fighting for a breathing-space. The whole world was pervaded by a host of enemies, and it was manifestly Rome's duty to guard against their indubitably aggressive designs.*

As G. John Ikenberry, professor of geopolitics at Georgetown University noted in Foreign Affairs:

The new grand strategy [initiated by the Bush administration]…. begins with a fundamental commitment to maintaining a unipolar world in which the United States has no peer competitor. No coalition of great powers without the United States will be allowed to achieve hegemony. Bush made this point the centerpiece of American security policy in his West Point commencement address in June: "America has, and intends to keep, military strengths beyond challenges-thereby making the destabilizing arms races of other eras pointless, and limiting rivalries to trade and other pursuits of peace."

…The United States grew faster than the other major states during the decade [of the 1990s], it reduced military spending more slowly, and it dominated investment in the technological advancement of its forces. Today, however, the new goal is to make these advantages permanent-a fait accompli that will prompt other states to not even try to catch up. Some thinkers have described the strategy as "breakout," in which the United States moves so quickly to develop technological advantages (in robotics, lasers, satellites, precision munitions, etc.) that no state or coalition could ever challenge it as global leader, protector and enforcer ("America's Imperial Ambition," Foreign Affairs, October 2002).

Perhaps one of extreme expressions of this neo-Roman imperial policy became that book by The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives by Zbigniew Brzezinski. This is how Brzezinski views the (supposedly sovereign) nations of Central Asia (sited from Amazon review by "A Customer" Jan 3, 2002 as pawns in a greater game for geopolitical domination:

The quote "... the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (The Grand Chessboard p.40) is probably the most revealing. Just ponder the meaning of these statements in a post-9-11 world:

To most Americans the people of the world and other nations are just that -- people, just like us, with a right to self-determination. To Brzezinski, they are merely pawns on a chessboard. At the same time, despite the fact that the analogy are not perfect, Rome fell, Napoleon fell, Hitler fell, USSR fell. Countries with too aggressive foreign policy ultimately self-destruct, because they over-extend their own countries resources to the point when people wellbeing drops to the levels of some colonies. The USA have over million people with the security clearance. So in a way it is becoming a copy-cat of the USSR. And while the US military is busy fighting for oil interests all around the world, those wars were launched by borrowing money and it's unclear who will pay the bills.

Neoliberalism beginning as ideology start was pretty modest. It was never considered a "right" ideology, ideology for which people are ready to fight and die. It was just an "ideology of convenience", an eclectic mix of mutually incompatible and incoherent mosaic of various ideologies (including some ideas of Trotskyism and national socialism) that served as useful tool to counter communist ideology. This is the tress of Friedman pretty weak opus "Capitalism and Freedom" -- which can be considered to be close analog of Communist Manifesto for neoliberalism. It also was useful for fighting some Keynesian excesses. Only later it become favorite ideology of financial oligarchy.

So in fight against "Godless communism" which does not respect private property and used "all-powerful" state, it idealized private property ownership, the role of "free" (as in free shooting) market and stressed the necessity to control the size of the government. As a tools to fight communist ideology those were reasonably effective tools. But at some point this deeply flawed, but useful for the specific purpose framework went out of control and became the cult of the deified markets and explicitly stated the necessary of diminishing the role of the state to minimum to ensure the high level of inequality the new neoliberal elite strived for (note not optimizing for a given historical conditions and technology available, but unconditionally diminishing to the point of elimination). Reagan famous phase "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem." is a perfect example of how to "Throw out the baby with the bath water". But the meaning is more sinister: it meant "throw out of the water middle class".

That happened when financial oligarchy understood that a tool created for fighting communism is perfectly suitable for fighting elements of "New Deal". And it proved to be pretty effective in dismantling of set of regulations of financial sector that were the cornerstone of "New Deal". That was a very smooth ride "deregulatory" ride until 2008. But after 2008 the USA (citadel of neoliberalism) faces the set of problems that at least on the surface look similar to the problem that USSR faced before its disintegration, although the USA still have much more favorable conditions overall and disintegration is not among the current threats. Among them:

Still there are important difference with Marxism: despite extremely flawed to the point of being anti-scientific neoliberal ideology is still supported by higher standard of living of population in selected Western countries (G7). If also can rely on five important factors:

  1. Military dominance of the USA and NATO. There are very few countries in the globe without explicit or implicit USA military presence.
  2. Financial dominance of USA and its allies. The role of dollar as world currency and the role of USA controlled global financial institutions such as World Bank and IMF
  3. Technological dominance of USA and G7. Continuing brain drain from "Third world" and xUSSR countries to G7 countries.
  4. Cultural dominance of the USA (although this is gradually diminishing as after 2008 countries started of assert their cultural independence more vigorously).
  5. Ideological dominance, neoliberalism as yet another major civic religion

Military dominance of USA and NATO

The American society and the U.S. armaments industry today are different then it was when Dwight Eisenhower in his farewell speech (Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation) famously warned Americans to beware the "military-industrial complex." See also The Farewell Address 50 Years Later. The major opponent, the USSR left the world scene, being defeated in the cold war. That means that currently the USA enjoy world military dominance that reminds the dominance of Roman Empire.

The USA now is the world's greatest producer and exporter of arms on the planet. It spends more on armed forces than all other nations combined -- while going deeply into debt to do so.

The USA also stations over 500,000 troops, spies, contractors, dependents, etc. on more than 737 bases around the world in 130 countries (even this is not a complete count) at a cost of near 100 billions a year. The 2008 Pentagon inventory includes 190,000 troops in 46 nations and territories, and 865 facilities in more than 40 countries and overseas U.S. territories. In just Japan, the USA have 99,295 people who are either members of US forces or are closely connected to US. The only purpose is to provide control over as many nations as possible.

Funny but among other thing the Pentagon also maintain 234 golf courses around the world, 70 Lear Jet airplanes for generals and admirals, and a ski resort in the Bavarian Alps.

Military dominance of the USA and NATO were demonstrated during Yugoslavia bombing and then invasion of Iraq. It's clear the Yugoslavia bombing would be out of question if the USSR existed.

Neoliberalism and militarism

Under neoliberalism, markets are now fused with the logic of expansion and militarization is the most logical was of securing expansion, improving global positions, and the ordering of social relations in a way favorable to the transnational elite.

Under neoliberal regime the United States is not only obsessed with militarism, which is shaping foreign policy , but wars have become real extension of the politics, the force that penetrates almost every aspect of daily life. Support of wars became a perverted version of patriotism.

As Henry A. Giroux noted in his interview to Truth-out (Violence is Deeply Rooted in American Culture), paradoxically in the country of "advanced democracy" schools and social services are increasingly modeled after prisons. Four decades of neoliberal policies have given way to an economic Darwinism that promotes a politics of cruelty.

Police forces are militarized. Popular culture endlessly celebrating the spectacle of violence. The Darwinian logic of war and violence have become addictive, a socially constructed need. State violence has become an organizing principle of society that has become the key mediating force that now holds everyday life together. State violence is now amplified in the rise of the punishing state which works to support corporate interests and suppress all forms of dissent aimed at making corporate power accountable. Violence as a mode of discipline is now enacted in spheres that have traditionally been created to counter it. Airports, schools, public services, and a host of other public spheres are now defined through a militarized language of "fight with terrorism", the language of discipline, regulation, control, and order. Human relations and behaviors are dehumanized making it easier to legitimate a culture of cruelty and politics of disposability that are central organizing principles of casino capitalism.

The national news became a video game, a source of entertainment where a story gains prominence by virtue of the notion that if it bleeds it leads. Education has been turned into a quest for private satisfactions and is no longer viewed as a public good, thus cutting itself off from teaching students about public values, the public good and engaged citizenship. What has emerged in the United States is a civil and political order structured around the criminalization of social problems and everyday life. This governing-through-crime model produces a highly authoritarian and mechanistic approach to addressing social problems that often focuses on the poor and minorities, promotes highly repressive policies, and places emphasis on personal security, rather than considering the larger complex of social and structural forces that fuels violence in the first place.

The key reference on the topic is the book The New American Militarism (2005) by Andrew Bacevich. Here is one Amazon review:

In his book The New American Militarism (2005), Andrew Bacevich desacralizes our idolatrous infatuation with military might, but in a way that avoids the partisan cant of both the left and the right that belies so much discourse today. Bacevich's personal experiences and professional expertise lend his book an air of authenticity that I found compelling. A veteran of Vietnam and subsequently a career officer, a graduate of West Point and later Princeton where he earned a PhD in history, director of Boston University's Center for International Relations, he describes himself as a cultural conservative who views mainstream liberalism with skepticism, but who also is a person whose "disenchantment with what passes for mainstream conservatism, embodied in the present Bush administration and its groupies, is just about absolute." Finally, he identifies himself as a "conservative Catholic." Idolizing militarism, Bacevich insists, is far more complex, broader and deeper than scape-goating either political party, accusing people of malicious intent or dishonorable motives, demonizing ideological fanatics as conspirators, or replacing a given administration. Not merely the state or the government, but society at large, is enthralled with all things military.

Our military idolatry, Bacevich believes, is now so comprehensive and beguiling that it "pervades our national consciousness and perverts our national policies.

" We have normalized war, romanticized military life that formally was deemed degrading and inhuman, measured our national greatness in terms of military superiority, and harbor naive, unlimited expectations about how waging war, long considered a tragic last resort that signaled failure, can further our national self-interests. Utilizing a "military metaphysic" to justify our misguided ambitions to recreate the world in our own image, with ideals that we imagine are universal, has taken about thirty years to emerge in its present form.

It is this marriage between utopians ends and military means that Bacevich wants to annul.

How have we come to idolize military might with such uncritical devotion? He likens it to pollution: "the perhaps unintended, but foreseeable by-product of prior choices and decisions made without taking fully into account the full range of costs likely to be incurred" (p. 206). In successive chapters he analyzes six elements of this toxic condition that combined in an incremental and cumulative fashion.

  1. After the humiliation of Vietnam, an "unmitigated disaster" in his view, the military set about to rehabilitate and reinvent itself, both in image and substance. With the All Volunteer Force, we moved from a military comprised of citizen-soldiers that were broadly representative of all society to a professional warrior caste that by design isolated itself from broader society and that by default employed a disproportionate percentage of enlistees from the lowest socio-economic class. War-making was thus done for us, by a few of us, not by all of us.
  2. Second, the rise of the neo-conservative movement embraced American Exceptionalism as our national end and superior coercive force as the means to franchise it around the world.
  3. Myth-making about warfare sentimentalized, sanitized and fictionalized war. The film Top Gun is only one example of "a glittering new image of warfare."
  4. Fourth, without the wholehearted complicity of conservative evangelicalism, militarism would have been "inconceivable," a tragic irony when you consider that the most "Christian" nation on earth did far less to question this trend than many ostensibly "secular" nations.
  5. Fifth, during the years of nuclear proliferation and the fears of mutually assured destruction, a "priesthood" of elite defense analysts pushed for what became known as the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA). RMA pushed the idea of "limited" and more humane war using game theory models and technological advances with euphemisms like "clean" and "smart" bombs. But here too our "exuberance created expectations that became increasingly uncoupled from reality," as the current Iraq debacle demonstrates.
  6. Finally, despite knowing full well that dependence upon Arab oil made us vulnerable to the geo-political maelstroms of that region, we have continued to treat the Persian Gulf as a cheap gas station. How to insure our Arab oil supply, protect Saudi Arabia, and serve as Israel's most important protector has always constituted a squaring of the circle. Sordid and expedient self interest, our "pursuit of happiness ever more expansively defined," was only later joined by more lofty rhetoric about exporting universal ideals like democracy and free markets, or, rather, the latter have only been a (misguided) means to secure the former.

Bacevich opens and closes with quotes from our Founding Fathers. In 1795, James Madison warned that "of all the enemies of public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other." Similarly, late in his life George Washington warned the country of "those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty."

Financial dominance

With dollar role as the primary world reserve currency the USA still rides on its "Exorbitant privilege". But there are countervailing forces that diminish dollar importance, such a euro. Financial dominance under neoliberalism became the primary tool of ensuring the control over the nations. See Neocolonialism as Financial Imperialism

US and Western banks dominate the globe with New York and London as two world financial centers.

Things little changed after 2008 despite the fact that the US economy in entered a deep debt crisis, which is amplified by the level of destruction of real economy by offshoring and outsourcing achieved under the umbrella of neoliberalism during previous four decades. While the USA remains the sole super power its imperial problems now reached such a level that they may start to affect the foreign policy. Troubles of organizing an invasion in Syria are probably symptomatic. It proved to be more difficult undertaking that similar invasion of Iraq a decade earlier.

Economic troubles have important side effect: the ideological dominance, achieved by the USA during 1989 till 2008 is now under attack. There are a lot of skeptic and in a way neoliberalism goes the way of Marxism with the major difference that there were probably some sincere followers of Marxism at least during the first 30 years of its development.

Centrality of transnational financial flows (including emerging countries debt) and financial oligarchy in neoliberal regime

Since the late 1970s, there was a radical shift of economic activity from the production of goods and non-financial services to finance with the rapid growth since then of the share of financial profits in total corporate profits. Also reflective of this process of "financialisation of the Economy" was the explosive growth of private debt as a proportion of gross domestic product, and the piling of layers upon layers of claims with the existence of instruments like options, futures, swaps, and the like, and financial entities like hedge funds and structured investment vehicles.

With financialisation, the financial masturbation -- speculation directed on making money within the financial system, bypassing the route of commodity production, increasingly became the name of the game. Using Marxist terminology the general formula for capital accumulation, M-C-M', in which commodities are central to the generation of profits, was replaced by M-M', in which money simply begets more money with no relation to production.

This is related to the reason which brought on the financialization of the economy in the forefront: beginning with the sharp recession of 1974-75, the US economy entered a period of slow economic growth, high unemployment/underemployment and excess capacity. That happened after around 25 years of spectacular ascent following the second world war. So financialisation was thought a s a remedy to this "permanent stagnation" regime. And for a while it performed this function well, although it was done by "eating the host".

Finance under any neoliberalism-bound regime can be best understood as a form of warfare, and financial complex (typically large Western banks as locals are not permitted, unless specially protected by remnants of the nation state) as an extension of military-industrial complex. Like in military conquest, its aim is to gain control for occupying country of land, public infrastructure, and to impose tribute putting the country in debt and using dominance of dollar as world reserve currency. This involves dictating laws to vassal countries (imposing Washington consensus, see below) and interfering in social as well as economic planning using foreign debt and the necessity to service the foreign loans as a form of Gosplan.

The main advantage of neoliberalism in comparison with the similar practice of the past is the conquest is being done by financial means, without the cost to the aggressor of fielding an army. But the economies under attacked may be devastated as deeply by financial stringency as by military attack when it comes to demographic shrinkage, shortened life spans, emigration and capital flight. Actually following s successful attack of neoliberalism and conquest of the country by neoliberal elite Russian economy was devastated more then during WWII, when Hitler armies reached banks of Volga river and occupies half of the country.

This attack is being mounted not by nation states alone, but by a cosmopolitan financial class and international financial institutions such as World bank and IMF with full support of major western banks serving as agencies of western governments. Finance always has been cosmopolitan more than nationalistic – and always has sought to impose its priorities and lawmaking power over those of parliamentary democracies.

Like any monopoly or vested interest, the financial "Trojan horse" strategy seeks to block government power to regulate or tax it. From the financial vantage point, the ideal function of government is to enhance profits via privatization and protect finance capital from the population to allow "the miracle of compound interest" to siphon most of the revenue out of the country. Some tiny share of this revenue is paid to compradors within the national elite. In good years such tactic keeps fortunes multiplying exponentially, faster than the economy can grow. This "paradise for rentiers" last until they eat into the core and cause deindustrialization and severe debt crisis. Eventually they do to the economy what predatory creditors and rentiers did to the Roman Empire.

Technological dominance

The globalist bloc of Western countries led by the USA achieved hegemony in the end of the twentieth century because it managed to become the center of technological progress and due to this acquired a commanding influence over industrial production and social life around the world, including the ability to provide rewards and impose sanctions. One or the reason of technical backwardness of the USSR just before the dissolution were technical sanctions imposed by the West via COCOM. As most of global corporations belong to G7 this lead to "natural" technological hegemony of this block. As Thatcher used to say "There is no alternatives", although she meant there is no alternatives to neoliberalism, not to Western technology from G7 nations. Only recently Asian countries started to challenge this status quo in some areas.

Global corporation managed to create a situation in which the same goods are used in most countries of the globe. Western brand names dominate. American and European airliners, Japanese, American and German cars, Korean and American smartphones, Chinese and American PCs, etc.

China became world factory and produces lion share of goods sold under Western brands.

Dominance in Internet and global communications

The debate about the USA dominance in internet and global communications reemerged in June 2008 due to revelations make about existence of the Prism program and similar program by British security services. For example, Jacob Augstein used the term "Obama's Soft Totalitarianism" in his article Europe Must Stand Up to American Cyber-Snooping published by SPIEGEL. The NSA's infrastructure wasn't built to fight Al Qaeda. It has a far greater purpose, one of which is to keep the USA as the last superpower.

The USA has capabilities of intercepting of lion share of global internet traffic and with allies tries to intercept all the diplomatic communication during major conferences and trade talk in direct violation of Vienna protocols. Latin American countries were one of the recent victims of this activity during trade talks with the USA. There were reports about snooping on UN personnel communications in NYC.

Here is an interesting comment of user MelFarrellSr in The Guardian discussion of the article NSA analysts 'willfully violated' surveillance systems, agency admits (August 24, 2013):

Here's the thing about the NSA, the GCHQ, Yahoo, Google, Microsoft, et al...

We all have to stop commenting as if the NSA and the GCHQ are in this thing on their own; the reality is that no one was supposed to know one iota about any of these programs; the NSA and the GCHQ began and put in place the structure that would allow all internet service providers, and indeed all corporations using the net, the ability to track and profile each and every user on the planet, whether they be using the net, texting, cell, and landline.

We all now know that Google, Yahoo, and the rest, likely including major retailers, and perhaps not so major retailers, are all getting paid by the United States government, hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money, our money, to profile 24/7 each and every one of us..., they know how we think, our desires, our sexual preferences, our religious persuasion, what we spend, etc.; make no mistake about it, they know it all, and what they don't currently have, they will very soon…

These agencies and indeed all those who are paid by them, will be engaged over the next few weeks in a unified program of "perception management" meaning that they will together come up with an all-encompassing plan that will include the release of all manner of statements attesting to the enforcement of several different disciplinary actions against whomever for "illegal" breaches of policy...

They may even bring criminal actions against a few poor unfortunate souls who had no idea they would be sacrificed as one part of the "perception management" game.

Has anyone wondered why, to date, no one in power has really come out and suggested that the program must be curtailed to limit its application to terrorism and terrorist types?

Here's why; I was fortunate recently to have given an education on how networks such as Prism, really work, aside from the rudimentary details given in many publications. They cannot, and will not, stop monitoring even one individuals activity, because to do so will eventually cause loss of the ability to effectively monitor as many as 2.5 Million individuals.

Remember the "Two to Three Hop" scenario, which the idiot in one of the hearings inadvertently spoke of; therein lies the answer. If the average person called 40 unique people, three-hop analysis would allow the government to mine the records of 2.5 million Americans Do the math; Internet usage in the United States as of June 30, 2012 reached a total of over 245,000,000 million…

The following link shows how connected the world is… http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats2.htm

We should never forget how the Internet began, and who developed it, the United States Armed Forces; initially it was known as Arpanet, see excerpt and link below…

"The Internet may fairly be regarded as a never-ending worldwide conversation." - Supreme Court Judge statement on considering first amendment rights for Internet users.

"On a cold war kind of day, in swinging 1969, work began on the ARPAnet, grandfather to the Internet. Designed as a computer version of the nuclear bomb shelter, ARPAnet protected the flow of information between military installations by creating a network of geographically separated computers that could exchange information via a newly developed protocol (rule for how computers interact) called NCP (Network Control Protocol)."

http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa091598.htm

There is no government anywhere on the planet that will give up any part of the program…, not without one hell of a fight...

Incidentally, they do hope and believe that everyone will come to the same conclusion; they will keep all of us at bay for however long it takes; they have the money, they have the time, and they economically control all of us...

Pretty good bet they win...

That includes industrial espionage:

EntropyNow:

Or industrial espionage?

Absolutely. See EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT report dated 11 July 2001 (Note it was before the 9/11 attack in the US).

7. Compatibility of an 'ECHELON' type communications interception system with Union law

7.1. Preliminary considerations
7.2. Compatibility of an intelligence system with Union law

7.2.1. Compatibility with EC law
7.2.2. Compatibility with other EU law

7.3. The question of compatibility in the event of misuse of the system for industrial espionage
7.4. Conclusion

EntropyNow -> StrawBear

The fact that they snoop on us all constantly, that's the problem. I agree that the indiscriminate surveillance is a problem. However, with such vast powers in the hands of private contractors, without robust legal oversight, it is wide open to abuse and interpretation. I believe we need to pull the plug and start again, with robust, independent, legal oversight, which respects fundamental international human rights laws In the US, the NDAA is a law which gives the government the right to indefinitely detain US citizens, without due process, without a trial, if they are suspected to be associated with 'terrorists'. Now define 'terrorism'?

Section 1021b is particularly worrying, concerning "substantial support." It is wide open to interpretation and abuse, which could criminalize dissent and even investigative journalism. See Guardian's excellent article by Naomi Wolf, 17 May 2012::

As Judge Forrest pointed out:

"An individual could run the risk of substantially supporting or directly supporting an associated force without even being aware that he or she was doing so. In the face of what could be indeterminate military detention, due process requires more."

In an excellent episode of Breaking the Set Feb 7 2013 Tangerine Bolen (Founder and Director, Revolutiontruth) stated that 'Occupy London' was designated a 'terrorist group" officially. There are independent journalists and civil liberty activists being targeted by private cyber security firms, which are contractors for the DOD, they are being harassed and intimidated, threatening free speech and liberty for everyone, everywhere. As Naomi Wolf concludes:

"This darkness is so dangerous not least because a new Department of Homeland Security document trove, released in response to a FOIA request filed by Michael Moore and the National Lawyers' Guild, proves in exhaustive detail that the DHS and its "fusion centers" coordinated with local police (as I argued here, to initial disbelief), the violent crackdown against Occupy last fall.

You have to put these pieces of evidence together: the government cannot be trusted with powers to detain indefinitely any US citizen – even though Obama promised he would not misuse these powers – because the United States government is already coordinating a surveillance and policing war against its citizens, designed to suppress their peaceful assembly and criticism of its corporate allies."

MadShelley

It seems to me that potential terrorist threats come in two sorts: the highly organised and funded groups that could commit catastrophic destruction, and the local schmucks that are really just old-fashioned losers-with-a-grudge adopting an empowering ideology.

The first group would be immensely cautious with their communications, and fall outside this sort of surveillance. The second group, if Boston and Woolwich are any evidence, are not effectively detected by these measures.

It appears very clear to me that this is runaway state power, predictably and transparently deflected with cries of "terrorism". And, perhaps most worrying, that definition of terrorism is now as wide as the state requires. Anything that embarrasses or exposes the evils of our states, including rendition, torture, and all manner of appalling injustice, is classified as a matter of 'national security', which must not be exposed lest it aid the enemy.

I know Orwell's name gets tossed around too much... but Jesus! I really hope we're not bovine enough to walk serenely into this future.

General_Hercules

...The NSA's infrastructure wasn't built to fight Al Qaeda. It has a far greater purpose, one of which is to keep the USA as the last superpower and moral authority for the rest of the time humanity has in this world.

All this muck is hurting bad. Obama is having a tough time from all sides. All the moralists think he is a villain doing everything he promised to change. All the secret society members think he is a clown who has spilled out every secret that was painstakingly put together over decades....

Cultural dominance

The temples of neoliberalism are malls and airports ;-). And they are build all over the glone is a very similar fashion. A drunk person accidentally transfered from New Jersey to, say Kiev and put in one of mjor malls can never tell the difference :-).

English became the major international language. Both language of technology and commerce. Much like Latin was before.

In developing countries goods are sold at considerable premium (up to 100%) but generally everything that can be bought in the USA now can be bought say in Kiev. Of course affordability is drastically different, but for elite itis not a problem. That create another opportunity for the top 1% to enjoy very similar, "internationalized" lifestyle all over the globe.

Hollywood films dominate world cinemas. American computer games dominate gaming space. In a way the USA culturally is present in any country. It was amazing how quickly remnants of communist ideology were wipes out in the xUSSR countries (Globalization, ethnic conflict and nationalism Daniele Conversi - Academia.edu):

Contrary to the globalists or ideologues of globalization (Steger 2005), both Marxists and liberals have highlighted the ' pyramidal ' structure underlying globalization. This metaphor applies well to cultural dissemination.

An elite of corporate, media, and governmental agencies sits at the pyramid' s top level, small regional intermediary elites sit immediately below, while the overwhelming majority of humans are pushed well down towards the pyramid' s bottom. In the realm of ' global culture ' , this looks like a master-servant relationship with much of the world at the boot-licking end. Whether such a relationship really exists, or is even practical, this metaphorical dramatization can nevertheless help to understand collective self-perceptions. The consequences in the area of ethnic conflict are significant. Such a hierarchical structure makes it impossible for global exchanges to turn into egalitarian relationships based on evenly balanced inter-cultural communication and dialogue.

On the contrary, cultural globalization is not reflected in a genuine increase of inter-personal, inter-ethnic and inter-cultural contacts. As I shall argue, in most public areas ' cultural globalization ' really means the unreciprocated, one-way flow of consumerist items from the US media and leisure machine to the rest of the world.

This top-down distribution ensures that a few individuals and groups, nearly all in the USA, firmly establish the patterns of behaviour and taste to be followed by the rest of mankind. Is this congruent with the view that there is a form of ' global centralization ' in cultural-legal matters leaning towards Washington, DC? As for a supposed ' global culture ', the symbolic capital would ideally be located in Hollywood, rather than Washington.

In fact, the term ' Hollywoodization ' insinuates a media-enforced hierarchical structure with immediate symbolic resonance. It also offers a more cultural, perhaps less sociological, focus than the Weberian concept of bureaucratic ' McDonaldization ' (Ritzer 1996).

Competing terminologies include ' Disneyfication ' / ' Disneyization ' , with its stress on extreme predictability and the infantilization of leisure (Bryman 2004), 'Walmarting ' as the streamlining of the retail sector (Fishman 2005, Morrow 2004), or earlier Cold War terms like ' Coca-Colonization ' (Wagnleitner 1994). We previously saw how the term ' McGuggenization ' has been used to indicate art-related cultural franchising and other forms of Americanization in the Basque Country (McNeill 2000).

All these equally refer to socio-economic trends originated in the USA and are hence forms of Americanization. However, ' Hollywoodization ' has broader implications for ethnic relations and nationalist conflicts.

In practice, Hollywood-inspired simplifications have become the daily staple for millions of peoples around the world in their leisure time. In the area of ethnicity, ' Hollywoodization ' has been elevated to the only known reality and the unique source of information about the outside world for increasing numbers of people, not only in the USA. Thus, the world is more likely to get its stereotypes of the Brits from US movies like The Patriot or Saving Private Ryan than via British productions.Similarly, most of the world is likely to see Scotland through the lenses of US-made Braveheart , as the larger public can barely afford any access to Scottish cultural productions.

This monopoly of global stereotyping and ethnic imagery has serious implicationsf or the spread and continuation of ethnic conflict.

The tools of primary socialization were once under firm control of the family, either nuclear or extended. They were subsequently assumed by the state in the industrialization ' phase ' , notably with post-1789 mass militarization and compulsory schooling (Conversi2007, 2008).

Under neo-liberal globalization, primary socialization has been seized by unaccountable cash-driven corporations and media tycoons. This has further reduced the space of inter-generational transmission and family interaction. If a community can no longer socialize its children according to its culture and traditions, then the very bases of local, regional, and national continuity are all visibly at stake. This threat to a group's survival is often seized upon by patriots and ethno-nationalists, whose political programs are founded on providing a new sense of social cohesion and security – even if the targets are often hapless and unprotected minorities.

That is partly how nationalism and xenophobia have expanded in tandem with globalization. Ethno-nationalism not only persisted through change, but is perceived by many as a response to the growth of globalization, providing a prêt-à-porter hope for national resistance and resilience. By depending on Hollywood as unique conveyor of ' globalization ', inter-ethnic interaction is inevitably undermined. In some instances, international communication has practically evaporated.

... ... ...

I have described, and subsequently dismissed, the profit-oriented ideology that globalization, intended as Mcdonaldization and Hollywoodization, can contribute to better international understanding. On the contrary, it has ushered in a process of planetary cultural and environmental destruction, while hampering inter-ethnic communication and fostering human conflict. The notion of cultural security, so central to international relations and peaceful coexistence, has undergone unprecedented challenges.

...Insofar as cultural globalization is understood as uni-dimensional import of standardized cultural icons, symbols, practices, values, and legal systems from the United States, it can simply be re-described as Americanization (rather than Westernization in the broad sense), or ' globalization by Americanization ' (Hilger 2008). This is of central importance for the study of ethnic conflict.

In fact, the outcome is scarce hybridization, amalgamation, and metissage . Rather than providing an inter-cultural bridge, this unilateral drive has often eroded the basis for mutual understanding, impeding inter-ethnic, inter-cultural, and international interaction. Given the current vertical, pyramidal structure of the ' cultural world order ' , the opportunity of distinctive groups to communicate directly and appreciate each other's traditions has decreased, except in the virtual area of long-distance communication. For an increasing number of individuals, an American mass consumer culture remains the only window on the world. Hence, to know and appreciate one ' s neighbours has become an ever-arduous task. To recapitulate my point, wherever cultural globalization appears as synonymous with Americanization, it engenders conflicts on a variety of levels.

Because the process is one-way and unidirectional, the result is unlikely to be a fusion between cultures or, evenless, the blending of ethnic groups. Contrary to the globalist utopia, the imposition of more and more American icons means less and less possibility for direct inter-ethnic encounter and communication among nations. Together with the collapse of state legitimacy, this substantially contributes to the spread of ethnic conflict and nationalism.

Incorporation of "globalist" parts of national élites as second class citizens of the transnational ruling class

Another aspect of cultural power of neoliberalism is that it accepts national elites (on some, less favorable then "primary" elites conditions) as a part of a new transnational elite, which serves as the dominant class. By class, following classic Marxism we mean a group of people who share a common relationship to the process of social production and reproduction, positioned in the society relationally on the basis of social power.

The struggle between descendant national fractions of dominant groups and ascendant transnational fractions has often been the backdrop to surface political dynamics and ideological processes in the late 20th century. These two fractions have been vying for control of local state apparatuses since the 1970s.

Trans national fractions of local elites swept to power in countries around the world in the 1980s and 1990s. They have captured the "commanding heights" of state policymaking: key ministries and bureaucracies in the policymaking apparatus - especially Central Banks, finance and foreign ministries - as key government branches that link countries to the global economy.

They have used national state apparatuses to advance globalization and to pursue sweeping economic restructuring and the dismantling of the old nation-state–based Keynesian welfare and developmentalist projects.

They have sought worldwide market liberalization (following the neoliberal model), and projects of economic integration such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, and the European Union. They have promoted a supra-national infrastructure of the global economy, such as the World Trade Organization, as we discuss below.

In this new, transnational social system transnational corporations are intermixed with nation-states which they have special privileges. And the state itself now serves not the people of the country (which historically were upper classes) but primarily service the interests of the transnational corporations (and, by extension, narrow strata of "comprador" elite, much like aristocracy of the past). It is now extension and projection of corporate power ("What is good for GE is good for America"). Both the transactional elite (and first of all financial oligarchy) and transnational corporation enjoy tremendous privileges under such a regime (corporate socialism, or socialism for the rich). Like Bolshevik state was formally dictatorship of proletariat but in reality was dictatorship of the elite of an ideological sect called Communist Party (so called nomenklatura), transformed nation-states like the USA, GB, France, Russia, etc now to various degrees look like dictatorships of transnational elite (transnational bourgeoisie like Marxist would say ;-) while formally remaining sovereign democratic republics. Like with Communist Parties in various countries that does not excuse antagonism or even open hostilities.

That does not eliminates completely the elites competition and for example the EU elite put a knife in the back of the US elite by adopting the euro as completing with the dollar currency (so much about transatlantic solidarity), but still internalization of elites is a new and important process that is more viable that neoliberal ideology as such. Also for any state national elite is not completely homogeneous. While that is a significant part of it that favor globalization (comprador elite or lumpen elite) there is also another part which prefer national development and is at least semi-hostile to globalism. Still the comprador part of the elite represents a very important phenomenon, a real fifth column of globalization, the part that makes globalization successful. It plays the role of Trojan horse within nation states and the name "fifth column" in this sense is a very apt name. This subversive role of comprador elite was clearly visible and well documented in Russian unsuccessful "white revolution" of 2011-2012: the US supported and financed project of "regime change" in Russia. It is also clearly visible although less well documented in other "color revolutions" such as Georgian, Serbian, and Ukrainian color revolutions. comrade Trotsky would probably turn in his coffin if he saw what neoliberal ideologies made with his theory of permanent revolution ;-).

Propaganda victory of neoliberalism over Marxism and New Deal capitalism

As professor David Harvey noted in his A Brief History of Neoliberalism neoliberal propaganda has succeeded in fixating the public on a peculiar definition of "freedom" that has served as a smoke screen to conceal a project of speeding upper class wealth accumulation. In practice, the neoliberal state assumes a protective role for large and especially international corporations ("socialism for multinationals") while it sheds as much responsibility for the citizenry as possible.

The key component of neoliberal propaganda (like was the case with Marxism) was an economic theory. Like Marxism it has three components

For more information see

Ideological dominance, neoliberalism as yet another major civic religion

There is no question that neoliberalism emerged as another major world civic religion. It has its saints, sacred books, moral (or more correctly in this case amoral) postulates and the idea of heaven and hell.

Neoliberalism shares several fundamental properties with high demand religious cults. Like all fundamentalist cults, neoliberalism reduces a complex world to a set of simplistic dogmas (See Washington Consensus). All of society is viewed through the prism of an economic lens. Economic growth, measured by GDP, is the ultimate good. The market is the only and simultaneously the perfect mechanism to achieve this goal. Neoliberalism obsession with materialism have become normalized to the degree that it is hard to imagine what American society would look like in the absence of these structural and ideological features of the new and militant economic Darwinism that now holds sway over the American public. The mantra is well known: government is now the problem, society is a fiction, sovereignty is market-driven, deregulation and commodification are the way to a bright future, and the profit is the only viable measure of the good life and advanced society. Public values are a liability, if not a pathology. Democratic commitments, social relations, and public spheres are disposables, much like the expanding population of the unemployed and dispossessed. Any revolt is the threat to the neoliberal regime of truth and should be dealt with unrestrained cruelty. The market functions best with minimal or no interference from government or civil society and those who don't agree will be taken by police to the proper reeducation camps. All governments with possible exception of the US government should be minimized to allow unrestricted dominance of global corporations. The genius of neoliberalism as a cult, was its ability to cloak the US pretences of world hegemony in an aura of scientific and historical inevitability. Which again makes it very similar and in a way superior to Marxism as a cult. The collapse of the Soviet Union was the supreme, heaven sent validation of Margaret Thatcher's claim that there was no alternative. There is only one blessed road to prosperity and peace and outside it there is no salvation, nor remission from sins.

The great economic historian Karl Polanyi observed, "The idea of a self-adjusting market implied a stark utopia." And neoliberalism was a stunning utopia of economic determinism, one even more ambitious than that of Marx.

With all the big questions thus settled, history appeared to be at an end. There was one and only one route to prosperity and peace. All that was required was to make sure the model was correctly applied and all would be well. We all settled into our assigned roles. Capitalists retreated to the role of technocrats, eschewing risk themselves while shifting and spreading it throughout society. The rest of us were relegated to the roles not of citizens, but of consumers. Using our homes as ATMs, we filled our lives with Chinese-made goods, oblivious to the looming environmental and social costs of a runaway, unregulated consumer-driven society. Only a marginalized few questioned the basic economic structure. It was the era of homo economicus, humans in service to the economy.

Now that perfect machinery lies in pieces all around us and the global economic free fall shows no signs of ending any time soon. The fundamental reasons underlying the collapse aren't all that difficult to discern. Central to the whole neoliberal project was the drive to rationalize all aspects of human society. Relentless efforts to cut costs and increase efficiency drove down the living standards of the vast majority, while the diminution of government and other non-commercial institutions led to increasing concentration of wealth at the very top of society. As high paying jobs in the industrial and technical sectors moved from developed countries to low wage export-based economies in the developing world, capacity soon outstripped demand and profits in the real economy began to sag. Not content with declining earnings, wealthy elites began to search for investments offering higher returns. If these couldn't be found in the real economy, they could certainly be created in the exploding financial sector.

Once consigned to the unglamorous world of matching those with capital to invest with those with enterprises seeking to grow, finance became the powerful new engine of economic growth. No longer stodgy, bankers and brokers became sexy and glamorous. Exotic new financial instruments, called derivatives, traded on everything from commodities to weather.

This speculative frenzy was supported by a central bank only too happy to keep credit extremely cheap. Debt exploded among consumers, businesses and government alike. Creating new debt became the source of even more exotic investment vehicles, often bearing only the most tenuous of connections to underlying assets of real value, with unwieldy names such as "collateralized debt obligations" and "credit default swaps."

All the debt and the shuffling of fictional wealth hid the underlying rot of the real economy. It was a house of cards just waiting for the slight breeze that would send it all crashing down. And a collapse in housing prices in 2008 laid bare the economic contradictions.

The fundamental contradiction underlying much that confronts us in the age of crises is an economic and social system requiring infinite growth within the confines of a finite planet. Any vision seeking to replace neoliberalism must take this contradiction into account and resolve it. The overriding market failure of our time has nothing to do with housing. It's the failure to place any value on that which is truly most essential to our survival: clean air and water, adequate natural resources for the present and future generations, and a climate suitable for human civilization.

No such new vision is currently in sight. That this leaves everyone, neoliberals and their foes alike, in a state of uncertainty and doubt is hardly surprising. The seeming triumph of neoliberalism was so complete that it managed to inculcate itself in the psyches even of those who opposed it.

We find ourselves unsure of terrain we thought we knew well, sensing that one era has ended but unsure as to what comes next. We might do well to embrace that doubt and understand its power to free us. Our doubt allows us to ask meaningful questions again and questioning implies the possibility of real choice. Removing the intellectual straitjacket of neoliberal orthodoxy opens up the space necessary to reconsider the purpose of an economy and its proper role in a decent human society and to revisit the old debate over equity versus efficiency. It calls into question the assumption most central to homo economicus; that all humans act only to maximize their own interests.

It seems clear that the world emerging over the coming decades will look quite different from the one we now inhabit. Of necessity it will evolve in ways we can't fully understand just yet. Old battle lines, such as the ones between capitalism and socialism, will likely fade away. Both of those models arose in a world of abundant and cheap fossil fuels and within the confines a planet with a seemingly endless capacity to absorb the wastes of our conspicuous consumption. New battle lines are already beginning to take shape.

The Revolution is Upon Us The Age of Crisis and the End of Homo Economicus Logos

I think that like is the case with Marxism, the staying power of neoliberalism is that propose the religion picture of world with its "creation history", saints, and way of salvation. In a way it plays the role similar to the role of Catholicism in middle ages (aka Dark Ages). The greed of catholic clergy in Middle ages (trade in indulgencies) is a match of the greed of neoliberals( with financial derivates replacing indulgencies ;-). It is equally hostile to any attempts to analyze it, with the minor difference that heretics that question the sanctity of free market are not burned at the stake, but ostracized. It support "new Crusades" with the same mechanism of "indulgences" for small countries that participate.

The level of hypocrisy is another shared trait. The great irony is that the USA, the world's leading proponent of neoliberalism (with the US President as a Pope of this new religion), systematically is breaking the rules when it find it necessary or convenient. With high deficit spending and massive subsidizing of defense spending and financial sector, the United States has generally use a "do as I say, not as I do" approach. And with the amount of political appointee/lobbyists shuttling back and forth between business and government, Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" looks more and more like a crushing fist of corporatist thugs. It involves dogmatic belief that the society is better off when ruled by a group of wealthy financiers and oligarchs, than by a group of professional government bureaucrats and politicians with some participation of trade unions.

The USA also dominates the cultural scene:

The United States' position as the leading maker of global culture has been basically unchallenged for the last century or so, especially in the Western world. Yet the economic power of the Western world is waning even as new nations, with new models of economic and social life, are rising. Might one -- or several -- of these nations like China, India or Brazil become new centers of global culture?

I believe that the answer to this question for the foreseeable future is "no." While the U.S.'s cultural prominence is partially related to its political, military and economic power, such power is not the only cause of America's global cultural hegemony. Rather, the U.S. offers a unique convergence of several factors, including economic opportunity, political freedom and an immigrant culture that served as a test bed for new cultural products.

Let me offer a brief account of the rise of the American film industry to suggest the way political, economic and immigrant forces shaped American cultural hegemony. In the U.S., the film industry started as commercial enterprise largely independent of state control. Movies had to adapt to market conditions to earn profit for their producers. In order to achieve this goal, American movies needed to appeal to a diverse population made up of both native-born and immigrant citizens.

As a consequence, filmmakers had to make movies that could appeal to international audiences simply to meet domestic demand. This fact helped the American film industry become globally preeminent well before the U.S. became a superpower. In other words, while U.S. military and economic power strengthened the position of the U.S. movie industry as globally dominant, that position was not dependent on U.S. military and economic power. Instead, American producers had a competitive advantage in global markets that was later cemented in place by the U.S. post-war economic and military hegemony in the West.

After the dissolution of the USSR, the USA became natural center of the "neoliberal religion" a dominant force in the new world order (the world's only superpower). And they used their newly acquired status against states which were not "friendly enough" very similar to Catholicism with its Crusades, launching a series of invasions and color revolutions against "nonbelievers" in a globalist neoliberal model. The level of plunder of Russia after the dissolution of the USSR looks like a direct replay of Crusades with the siege of Constantinople as primary example (despite stated goals, Crusades were by-and-large a monetary enterprise of the time with fig leaf of spread of Catholicism attached). This period of neoliberal crusades still continued in 2013, sometimes using various proxy to achieve "the regime change" by military means.

As we already refereed to neoliberalism as a cult an interesting question is whether neoliberalism can be viewed new "civic religion". The answer is unconditional yes, and I think that like Marxism before it should be considered to be yet another civic religion. It has it's set of holy books, Supreme being to worship, path to salvation and set of Apostils. Like communism before it propose humanity grand purpose and destiny.

Approliving:

Theistic and civic religions are also similar in that they both offer visions of humanity's grand purpose and destiny.

There are also significant differences between theistic religions and civil religions. Theistic religions explicitly rely on claims of divine authority for their validity, while civil religions rely on reason and the interpretation of commonly-accepted historical knowledge. Followers of theistic religions stress the importance of faith in times of adversity, while followers of civil religions tend to have a more pragmatic attitude when reality casts doubt on their beliefs.

Civil religions are more like big social experiments than actual religions because their central claims are much more falsifiable, and their followers show evidence of holding this perception (e.g. references to "the American experiment"; the voluntary abandonment of Communism throughout Eurasia when it became clear that it wasn't working).

Communism bears so much resemblance to Christianity because, as you mentioned last week, the Western imagination was thoroughly in the grip of Christianity when Communism emerged. Communism is similar to Christianity out of practical necessity: had it not been based on the Christian template, Communism probably would have been too intellectually alien to its Western audience to have ever taken off. Luckily for the founders of Communism, they were also subjected to this Christian cultural conditioning.

With all this in mind, and given that religion is evolving phenomenon, I think that civil religion is actually a distinct species of intellectual organism which has (at least in part) evolved out of religion.

Like Marxism, neoliberalism is first and foremost a quasi religious political doctrine. But while Marxism is aimed at liberation of workers , a political doctrine neoliberalism is aimed at restoring the power of capital. Neoliberalism originated in the rich countries of Anglo-Saxon world (GB and USA) so along with open despise of poor, it always has a distinct flavor of despise for peripheral countries. In global politics, neoliberalism preoccupies itself with the promotion of four basic issues:

As such, neoliberalism, in its crudest form, is crystallized in the Ten Commandments of the 1989 Washington Consensus (policy of debt slavery set for the world by the US via international financial institutions). While pushing the democracy as a smoke screen, they implicitly postulate hegemony of the financial elite (which is a part of "economic elite" that neoliberalism defines as a hegemonic class). Financialization of the economy also serves as a powerful method of redistribution of wealth, so neoliberalism generally lead to deterioration of standard of living for lower quintile of the population and in some countries (like Russia in 1991-2000) for the majority of the population. This is done largely via credit system and in this sense neoliberalism represents "reinters paradise". Neoliberal globalization was built on the foundation of US hegemony, conceived as the projection of the hegemony of the US capital and dollar as the dominant reserve currency. As such it is critically dependent of the power and stability of the US and the financial, economic, political and military supremacy of the US in every region. For this purpose the USA maintains over 500 military bases (737 by some counts) and over 2.5 million of military personnel.

But there are also important differences. Unlike most religions, neoliberalism is highly criminogenic (i.e., having the quality of causing or fostering crime). It is more criminogenic in countries with lower standard of living and in such countries it often lead to conversion of a "normal", but poor state into a kleptocratic state (Yeltsin's Russia is a good example) with the requisite mass poverty (Global Anomie, Dysnomie and Economic Crime Hidden Consequences of Neoliberalism and Globalization in Russia and Around the World). Unfortunately architects of this transformation (Harvard Mafia in case of Russia) usually avoid punishment for their crimes. Corruption of the US regulators which happened under neoliberal regime starting from Reagan is also pretty well covered theme.

While economic crisis of 2008 led to a crisis of neoliberalism, this is not necessary a terminal crisis. The phase of neoliberal dominance still continues, but internal contradictions became much deeper and the regime became increasingly unstable even in the citadel of neoliberalism -- the USA. Neoliberalism as an intellectual product is practically dead. After the crisis of 2008, the notion that finance mobilizes and allocates resources efficiently, drastically reduces systemic risks and brings significant productivity gains for the economy as a whole became untenable. But its zombie phase supported by several states (the USA, GB, Germany), transnational capital (and financial capital in particular) and respective elites out of the sense of self-preservation might continue (like Bolshevism rule in the USSR in 70th-80th) despite increasing chance of facing discontent of population and bursts of social violence.

Cornerstone of neoliberal regime, the economic power of the USA is now under threat from the rise of Asia. This is one reason of mutation of neoliberalism into aggressive neoconservative imperialism that we witness in the USA.

While intellectually neoliberalism was bankrupt from the beginning, after 2008 believing it in is possible only by ignoring the results of deregulation in the USA and other countries. In other words the mythology of self-regulating "free market" became a "damaged goods". In this sense, any sensible person should now hold neoliberal sect in contempt. But reality is different and it still enjoy the support of the part of population which can't see through the smoke screen. With the strong support of financial oligarchy neoliberalism will continue to exists in zombie state for quite a while, although I hope this will not last as long as dominance of Catholicism during European Dark Ages ;-). Still the US is yet to see its Luther. As was noted about a different, older sect: "Men are blind to prefer an absurd and sanguinary creed, supported by executioners and surrounded by fiery faggots, a creed which can only be approved by those to whom it gives power and riches".

Like communism in the USSR it is a state supported religion: Neoliberalism enjoys support of western governments and first of all the US government. Even when the US society entered deep crisis in 2008 and fabric of the society was torn by neoliberal policies it did not lose government support.

US was an imperial nation driven by annexation of territories from the very beginning

The USA has a history of "plain vanilla" (British style) imperialism, based on annexation and occupation of territories since the presidency of James K. Polk who led the United States into the Mexican–American War of 1846, and the eventual annexation of California and other western territories via the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsden purchase. The term is most commonly used to describe the U.S.'s status since the 20th century (Empire - Wikipedia):

The term "American Empire" refers to the United States' cultural ideologies and foreign policy strategies. The term is most commonly used to describe the U.S.'s status since the 20th century, but it can also be applied to the United States' world standing before the rise of nationalism in the 20th century. The United States is not traditionally recognized as an empire, in part because the U.S. adopted a different political system from those that previous empires had used. Despite these systematic differences, the political objectives and strategies of the United States government have been quite similar to those of previous empires. Krishna Kumar explores this idea that the distinct principles of nationalism and imperialism may, in fact, result in one common practice.

In "Nation-states as empires, empires as nation-states: two principles, one practice?" she argues that the pursuit of nationalism can often coincide with the pursuit of imperialism in terms of strategy and decision making. Throughout the 19th century, the United States government attempted to expand their territory by any means necessary. Regardless of the supposed motivation for this constant expansion, all of these land acquisitions were carried out by imperialistic means. This was done by financial means in some cases, and by military force in others. Most notably, the Louisiana Purchase (1803), the Texas Annexation (1845), and the Mexican Cession (1848) highlight the imperialistic goals of the United States during this "modern period" of imperialism.

The U.S. government has stopped pursuing additional territories since the mid 20th century. However, some scholars still consider U.S. foreign policy strategies to be imperialistic. This idea is explored in the "contemporary usage" section.

... ... ...

Stuart Creighton Miller posits that the public's sense of innocence about Realpolitik (cf. American Exceptionalism) impairs popular recognition of US imperial conduct since it governed other countries via surrogates. These surrogates were domestically-weak, right-wing governments that would collapse without US support.[30] Former President G.W. Bush's Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, said: "We don't seek empires. We're not imperialistic; we never have been."[31] This statement directly contradicts Thomas Jefferson who, in the 1780s while awaiting the fall of the Spanish empire, said: "...till our population can be sufficiently advanced to gain it from them piece by piece".[32][33][34] In turn, historian Sidney Lens argues that from its inception, the US has used every means available to dominate other nations.[35] Other historian Max Ostrovsky argues that the term hegemony is better than empire to describe the US' role in the world but finds that hegemony is likely to be an intermediate stage between states system and empire.[36]

... ... ...

In his book review of Empire (2000) by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Mehmet Akif Okur posits that since the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the US, the international relations determining the world's balance of power (political, economic, military) have been altered. These alterations include the intellectual (political science) trends that perceive the contemporary world's order via the re-territorrialisation of political space, the re-emergence of classical imperialist practices (the "inside" vs. "outside" duality, cf. the Other), the deliberate weakening of international organisations, the restructured international economy, economic nationalism, the expanded arming of most countries, the proliferation of nuclear weapon capabilities and the politics of identity emphasizing a state's subjective perception of its place in the world, as a nation and as a civilisation. These changes constitute the "Age of Nation Empires"; as imperial usage, nation-empire denotes the return of geopolitical power from global power blocs to regional power blocs (i.e., centered upon a "regional power" state [China, Russia, U.S., et al.]) and regional multi-state power alliances (i.e., Europe, Latin America, South East Asia). Nation-empire regionalism claims sovereignty over their respective (regional) political (social, economic, ideologic), cultural, and military spheres.[43]

Annexation was the crucial instrument in the expansion of the USA after it won independence. The United States Congress' ability to annex a foreign territory is explained in a report from the Congressional Committee on Foreign Relations,

"If, in the judgment of Congress, such a measure is supported by a safe and wise policy, or is based upon a natural duty that we owe to the people of Hawaii, or is necessary for our national development and security, that is enough to justify annexation, with the consent of the recognized government of the country to be annexed."

Even prior to annexing a territory, the American government usually held tremendous political power in those territories through the various legislations passed in the late 1800s. The Platt Amendment was utilized to prevent Cuba from entering into any agreements with foreign nations, and also granted the Americans the right to build naval stations on their soil.[39] Executive officials in the American government began to determine themselves the supreme authority in matters regarding the recognition or restriction of [39]

When asked on April 28, 2003, on al-Jazeera whether the United States was "empire building," Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld replied "We don't seek empires, we're not imperialistic. We never have been."[40] And this denial is typical for "Empire of Lies" as some researchers call the USA. Historian Donald W. Meinig says the imperial behavior by the United States dates at least to the Louisiana Purchase, which he describes as an "imperial acquisition-imperial in the sense of the aggressive encroachment of one people upon the territory of another, resulting in the subjugation of that people to alien rule." The U.S. policies towards the Native Americans he said were "designed to remold them into a people more appropriately conformed to imperial desires."[41]

Writers and academics of the early 20th century, like Charles A. Beard, discussed American policy as being driven by self-interested expansionism going back as far as the writing of the Constitution. Some politicians today do not agree. Pat Buchanan claims that the modern United States' drive to empire is "far removed from what the Founding Fathers had intended the young Republic to become."[42]

Andrew Bacevich who is a an influencial writer about the US empite with his book American empite (2002) argues that the U.S. did not fundamentally change its foreign policy after the Cold War, and remains focused on an effort to expand its control across the world.[43] As the surviving superpower at the end of the Cold War, the U.S. could focus its assets in new directions, the future being "up for grabs" according to former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz in 1991.[44]

In Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, the political activist Noam Chomsky argues that exceptionalism and the denials of imperialism are the result of a systematic strategy of propaganda, to "manufacture opinion" as the process has long been described in other countries.[45]

Thorton wrote that "[…]imperialism is more often the name of the emotion that reacts to a series of events than a definition of the events themselves. Where colonization finds analysts and analogies, imperialism must contend with crusaders for and against."[46] Political theorist Michael Walzer argues that the term hegemony is better than empire to describe the US's role in the world;[47] political scientist Robert Keohane agrees saying, a "balanced and nuanced analysis is not aided...by the use of the phrase 'empire' to describe United States hegemony, since 'empire' obscures rather than illuminates the differences in form of rule between the United States and other Great Powers, such as Great Britain in the 19th century or the Soviet Union in the twentieth.".[48] Emmanuel Todd assumes that USA cannot hold for long the status of mondial hegemonic power due to limited resources. Instead, USA is going to become just one of the major regional powers along with European Union, China, Russia, etc.[49]

International relations scholar Joseph Nye argues that U.S. power is more and more based on "soft power", which comes from cultural hegemony rather than raw military or economic force.[69] This includes such factors as the widespread desire to emigrate to the United States, the prestige and corresponding high proportion of foreign students at U.S. universities, and the spread of U.S. styles of popular music and cinema. Mass immigration into America may justify this theory, but it is hard to know for sure whether the United States would still maintain its prestige without its military and economic superiority.

Military and cultural imperialism are interdependent. American Edward Said, one of the founders of post-colonial theory, said that,

[…], so influential has been the discourse insisting on American specialness, altruism and opportunity, that imperialism in the United States as a word or ideology has turned up only rarely and recently in accounts of the United States culture, politics and history. But the connection between imperial politics and culture in North America, and in particular in the United States, is astonishingly direct.[51]

International relations scholar David Rothkopf disagrees and argues that cultural imperialism is the innocent result of globalization, which allows access to numerous U.S. and Western ideas and products that many non-U.S. and non-Western consumers across the world voluntarily choose to consume.[52] Matthew Fraser has a similar analysis, but argues further that the global cultural influence of the U.S. is a good thing.[53]

Nationalism is the main process through which the government is able to shape public opinion. Propaganda in the media is strategically placed in order to promote a common attitude among the people. Louis A. Perez Jr. provides an example of propaganda used during the war of 1898,

"We are coming, Cuba, coming; we are bound to set you free! We are coming from the mountains, from the plains and inland sea! We are coming with the wrath of God to make the Spaniards flee! We are coming, Cuba, coming; coming now!"[39]

Chip Pitts argues similarly that enduring U.S. bases in Iraq suggest a vision of "Iraq as a colony".[ While territories such as Guam, the United States Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa and Puerto Rico remain under U.S. control, the U.S. allowed many of its overseas territories or occupations to gain independence after World War II. Examples include the Philippines (1946), the Panama canal zone (1979), Palau (1981), the Federated States of Micronesia (1986) and the Marshall Islands (1986). Most of them still have U.S. bases within their territories. In the case of Okinawa, which came under U.S. administration after the Battle of Okinawa during the Second World War, this happened despite local popular opinion.[56] As of 2003, the United States had bases in over 36 countries worldwide.[57]

How America built its empire

How America built its empire The real history of American foreign policy that the media won't tell you - Salon.com

When you talk about the effectiveness of American imperialism, you highlight the fact that part of the reason it's so effective is because it has been able to be largely invisible, and it has been invisible, you point out, through, I think, two mechanisms, one, that it trains the elites in other countries in order to manage affairs on behalf of American imperialism, and also because it disseminates, through popular media, images of America that in essence -- I'm not sure you use this word exactly -- indoctrinate or brainwash a population into allowing them to believe that America is instilled with values that in fact it doesn't have, the ability of imperialistic forces to supposedly give these values to the countries they dominate.

I mean, that is a kind of a raison d'être for economic and even military intervention, as we saw in Iraq, in planning democracy in Baghdad and letting it spread out across the Middle East, or going into Afghanistan to liberate the women of Afghanistan. That, as somebody who spent 20 years on the outer edges of empire, is a lie.

The other day I wrote Perry Anderson, the subject of the following interview, to ask what he thought of the foreign policy debates, such as they are, among our presidential aspirants. Logical question: Anderson, a prominent scholar and intellectual for decades, has just published "American Foreign Policy and Its Thinkers," a superbly lucid account of U.S policy's historical roots and the people who shape policy in our time.

"Current candidates' f/p talk leaves me speechless," came Anderson's terse reply.

Perfectly defensible. Most of what these people have to say-and I do not exclude the Democratic candidates-is nothing more than a decadent, late-exceptionalist rendering of a policy tradition that, as Anderson's book reminds readers, once had a coherent rationale even as it has so often led to incoherent, irrational conduct abroad.

Born in London in 1938-during the Munich crisis, as he points out-Anderson has been a presence on the trans-Atlantic intellectual scene since he took the editor's chair at the then-struggling New Left Review in 1962, when he was all of 24. Eight years later NLR launched Verso, a book imprint as singular (and as singularly influential) as the journal.

Anderson has headed both at various intervals for years. His own books range widely. My favorites are "Zone of Engagement" (1992) and "Spectrum" (2005), which collect essays on an amazing range of 20th century thinkers. To them I now add the new foreign policy book, which I count indispensable to anyone serious about the topic.

I met Anderson, who has taught comparative political and intellectual history at UCLA since 1989, at his home in Santa Monica this past summer. Over a fulsome afternoon's conversation in his admirably spartan study, he impressed me again and as readers will see for themselves, but the counterarguments are generously given and always rewarding.

The transcript that follows is the first of two parts and includes a few questions posed via email after we met. It is otherwise only lightly edited. Part 2 will appear next week.

"American Foreign Policy and its Thinkers" is well timed, given the unusual prominence foreign policy now assumes in the American political conversation. How would you describe your approach? What distinguishes the book from so many others? How should one read it? What's the project?

The book tries to do two things. One is to cover the history of American foreign policy, from around 1900 to the present, tracing the gradual construction of a global empire. This first really came into view as a prospect during the Second World War and is today a reality across all five continents, as a glance at the skein of its military bases makes clear. The Cold War was a central episode within this trajectory, but the book doesn't treat just the U.S. record vis-á-vis the USSR or China. It tries to deal equally with American relations with the Europe and Japan, and also with the Third World, treated not as a homogenous entity but as four or five zones that required different policy combinations.

The second part of the book is a survey of American grand strategy-that is, the different ways leading counselors of state interpret the current position of the United States on the world stage and their recommendations for what Washington should do about it.

The "big think" set, in other words-Kissinger, of course, Brzezinski, Walter Russell Mead, Robert Kagan. And then people such as Francis Fukuyama, whom I consider a ridiculous figure but whose thinking you judged worth some scrutiny. How did you choose these?

From the range of in-and-outers-thinkers moving between government and the academy or think-tanks-who have sought to guide U.S. foreign policy since 2000, with some intellectual originality. Kissinger isn't among these. His ideas belong to a previous epoch, his later offerings are boilerplate. Fukuyama, who sensed what the effects of office on thought could be, and got out of state service quite early, is a mind of a different order. The figures selected cover the span of options within what has always been a bipartisan establishment.

You make a distinction between American exceptionalism, which is much in the air, and American universalism, which few of us understand as a separate matter. The first holds America to be singular (exceptional), and the second that the world is destined to follow us, that the trails we've blazed are the future of humanity. You call this a "potentially unstable compound." Could you elaborate on this distinction, and explain why you think it's unstable?

It's unstable because the first can exist without the second. There is, of course, a famous ideological linkage between the two in the religious idea, specific to the United States, of Providence-that is, divine Providence. In your own book "Time No Longer" you cite an astounding expression of this notion: "However one comes to the debate, there can be little question that the hand of Providence has been on a nation which finds a Washington, a Lincoln, or a Roosevelt when it needs him." That pronouncement was delivered in the mid-1990s-not by some television preacher, but by Seymour Martin Lipset: chairs at Harvard and Stanford, president of both the American Sociological and the American Political Science Associations, a one-time social democrat.

What is the force of this idea? A belief that God has singled out America as a chosen nation for exceptional blessings, a notion which then easily becomes a conviction of its mission to bring the benefits of the Lord to the world. President after president, from Truman through to Kennedy, the younger Bush to Obama, reiterate the same tropes: "God has given us this, God has given us that," and with the unique freedom and prosperity he has conferred on us comes a universal calling to spread these benefits to the rest of the world. What is the title of the most ambitious contemporary account of the underlying structures of American foreign policy? "Special Providence," by Walter Russell Mead. Year of publication: 2001.

But while a messianic universalism follows easily from providential exceptionalism, it is not an ineluctable consequence of it. You mount a powerful attack on the idea of exceptionalism in "Time No Longer," but-we may differ on this-if we ask what is the more dangerous element in the unstable compound of the nation's image of itself, I would say exceptionalism is the less dangerous. That may seem paradoxical. But historically the idea of exceptionalism allowed for an alternative, more modest deduction: that the country was different from all others, and so should not be meddling with them-the argument of Washington's Farewell Address [in 1796].

A century later, this position became known as isolationism, and as the American empire took shape, it was all but invariably castigated as narrow-minded, short-sighted and selfish. But it could often be connected with a sense that the republic was in danger at home, with domestic ills that needed to be addressed, which vast ambitions abroad would only compound. Mead terms this strand in American sensibility Jeffersonian, which isn't an accurate description of Jefferson's own empire-building outlook, but he otherwise captures it quite well.

We don't ordinarily apply the term "exceptionalist" in the same breath to America and to Japan, though if there is any nation that claims to be completely unique, it is Japan. But the claim produced a drastic isolationism as a national impulse, both in the Tokugawa period [1603-1868, a period of severely enforced seclusion] and after the war. Does that support the point you're making?

Exactly. Historically, exceptionalism could generate a self-limiting, self-enclosing logic as well as the gigantic expansionist vanities of the Co-Prosperity Sphere and the "Free World" [narrative]. In the American case, the two strands of exceptionalism and universalism remained distinct, respectively as isolationist and interventionist impulses, sometimes converging but often diverging, down to the Second World War. Then they fused. The thinker who wrote best about this was Franz Schurmann, whose " Logic of World Power" came out during the Vietnam War. He argued that each had a distinct political-regional base: the social constituency for isolationism was small business and farming communities in the Midwest, for interventionism it was the banking and manufacturing elites of the East Coast, with often sharp conflicts between the two up through the end of thirties. But in the course of the Second World War they came together in a synthesis he attributed-somewhat prematurely-to FDR, and they have remained essentially interwoven ever since. The emblematic figure of this change was [Arthur H.] Vandenberg, the Republican Senator from Michigan [1928-51], who remained an isolationist critic of interventionism even for a time after Pearl Harbor, but by the end of the war had become a pillar of the new imperial consensus.

Mainstream debate today seems to have constructed two very stark alternatives: There is either engagement or isolation. In this construction, engagement means military engagement; if we are not going to be militarily engaged we are isolationists. I find that absolutely wrong. There are multiple ways of being engaged with the world that have nothing to do with military assertion.

True, but engagement in that usage doesn't mean just military engagement, but power projection more generally. One of the thinkers I discuss toward the end of my book is Robert Art, a lucid theorist of military power and its political importance to America, who argues for what he calls selective-expressly, not universal-engagement. What is unusual about him is that in seeking to discriminate among engagements the U.S. should and should not select, he starts considering in a serious, non-dismissive way what would typically be construed as isolationist alternatives, even if ending with a fairly conventional position.

How far do you view the contemporary American crisis-if you accept that we are living through one-as, at least in part, one of consciousness? As an American, I tend to think that no significant departure from where find ourselves today can be achieved until we alter our deepest notions of ourselves and our place among others. I pose this question with some trepidation, since a change in consciousness is a generational project, if not more. Our leadership is not remotely close even to thinking about this. I'm suggesting a psychological dimension to our predicament, and you may think I put too much weight on that.

You ask at the outset whether I accept that Americans are living through a crisis. My reply would be: not anything like the order of crisis that would bring about the sort of change in consciousness for which you might hope. You describe that as a generational project, and there, yes, one can say that among the youngest cohorts of the U.S. population, the ideologies of the status quo are less deeply embedded, and in certain layers even greatly weakened. That is an important change, but it's generational, rather than society-wide, and it's not irreversible.

At the level of the great majority, including, naturally, the upper middle class, the image you use to describe the purpose of your last book applies: you write that it aims "to sound the tense strings wound between the pegs of myth and history during the hundred years and a few that I take to be the American century. It is this high, piercing tone that Americans now have a chance to render, hear, and recognize all at once. We have neither sounded nor heard it yet." That's all too true, unfortunately. The most one can say is that, among a newer generation, the strings are fraying a bit.

I tend to distinguish between strong nations and the merely powerful, the former being supple and responsive to events, the later being brittle and unstable. Is this a useful way to judge America in the early 21st century-monumentally powerful but of dubious strength? If so, doesn't it imply some change in the American cast of mind, as the difference between the two sinks in?

That depends on the degree of instability you sense in the country. In general, a major change in consciousness occurs when there is a major alteration in material conditions of life. For example, if a deep economic depression or dire ecological disaster strikes a society, all bets are off. Then, suddenly, thoughts and actions that were previously inconceivable become possible and natural. That isn't the situation so far in America.

Can you discuss the new accord with Iran in this context? I don't see any question it's other than a breakthrough, a new direction. What do you think were the forces propelling the Obama administration to pursue this pact? And let's set aside the desire for a "legacy" every president cultivates late in his time.

The agreement with Iran is an American victory but not a departure in U.S. foreign policy. Economic pressure on Iran dates back to Carter's time, when the U.S. froze the country's overseas assets after the ousting of the Shah, and the full range of ongoing U.S. sanctions was imposed by the Clinton administration in 1996. The Bush administration escalated the pressure by securing U.N. generalization of sanctions in 2006, and the Obama administration has harvested the effect.

Over the past decade, the objective has always been the same: to protect Israel's nuclear monopoly in the region without risking an Israeli blitz on Iran to preserve it-that might set off too great a wave of popular anger in the Middle East. It was always likely, as I point out in "American Policy and its Thinkers," that the clerical regime in Tehran would buckle under a sustained blockade, if that was the price of its survival. The agreement includes a time-out clause to save its face, but the reality is an Iranian surrender.

You can see how little it means any alteration in imperial operations in the region by looking at what the Obama administration is doing in Yemen, assisting Saudi Arabia's wholesale destruction of civilian life there in the interest of thwarting imaginary Iranian schemes.

This next question vexes many people, me included. On the one hand, the drives underlying the American imperium are material: the expansion of capital and the projection of power by its political representatives. The American mythologies are shrouds around these. On the other hand, the issue of security has a long history among Americans. It is authentically an obsession independent of capital-American paranoia dates back at least to the 18th century. I don't take these two accountings to be mutually exclusive, but I'd be interested to know how you reconcile these different threads in American foreign policy.

Yes, there has been a longstanding-you could say aboriginal-obsession with security in the United States. This can be traced as an independent strand running through the history of American dealings with the outside world. What happened, of course, from the Cold War through to the "war on terror" was a ruthless instrumentalization of this anxiety for purposes of expansion rather than defense. At the start of the Cold War you had the National Security Act and the creation of the National Security Council, and today we have the National Security Agency. Security became a euphemistic cloak for aggrandizement.

The United States occupies the better part of a continent separated by two immense oceans, which nobody in modern history has had any serious chance of invading, unlike any other major state in the world, all of which have contiguous land-borders with rival powers, or are separated from them only by narrow seas. The U.S. is protected by a unique geographical privilege. But if its expansion overseas cannot be attributed to imperatives of security, what has driven it?

A gifted and important group of historians, the Wisconsin school [which included the late William Appleman Williams, among others], has argued that the secret of American expansion has from the beginning lain in the quest by native capital for continuously larger markets, which first produced pressure on the internal frontier and the march across the continent to the Pacific, and when the West Coast was reached, a drive beyond into Asia and Latin America, and ultimately the rest of the world, under the ideology of the Open Door.

A couple of good scholars, Melvyn Leffler and Wilson Miscamble, one a liberal and the other a conservative, have identified my position with this tradition, taxing me with a belief that American foreign policy is essentially just an outgrowth of American business. This is a mistake. My argument is rather that because of the enormous size and self-sufficiency of the American economy, the material power at the disposal of the American state exceeded anything that American capital could directly make use of or require.

If you look at the First World War, you can see this very clearly. East Coast bankers and munitions manufacturers did well out of supplying the Entente powers, but there was no meaningful economic rationale for American entry into the war itself. The U.S. could tip the scales in favor of the British and French variants of imperialism against the German and Austrian variants without much cost to itself, but also much to gain.

The same gap between the reach of American business and the power of the American state explains the later hegemony of the United States within the advanced capitalist world after the Second World War. Standard histories wax lyrical in admiration of the disinterested U.S. generosity that revived Germany and Japan with the Marshall and Dodge Plans [reconstruction programs after 1945], and it is indeed the case that policies crafted at the State and Defense Departments did not coincide with the desiderata of the Commerce Department. The key requirement was to rebuild these former enemies as stable capitalist bulwarks against communism, even if this meant there could be no simple Open Door into them for U.S. capital.

For strategic political reasons, the Japanese were allowed to re-create a highly protected economy, and American capital was by and large barred entry. The priority was to defend the general integrity of capitalism as a global system against the threat of socialism, not particular returns to U.S. business. The importance of those were never, of course, ignored. But they had to bide their time. Today's Trans-Pacific Partnership will finally pry open Japanese financial, retail and other markets that have remained closed for so long.

I'd like to turn to the origins of the Cold War, since I believe we are never going to get anywhere until these are honestly confronted. You give a forceful account of Stalin's reasons for avoiding confrontation after 1945 and Washington's reasons for not doing so. But should we attribute the outbreak of the Cold War to the U.S. without too much in the way of qualification?

We can look at the onset of the Cold War on two levels. One is that of punctual events. There, you are certainly right to pick out the ideological starting gun as Truman's speech on Greece in 1947, designed the "scare hell" out of voters to win acceptance for military aid to the Greek monarchy. In policy terms, however, the critical act that set the stage for confrontation with Moscow was the flat American refusal to allow any serious reparations for the staggering level of destruction Russia suffered from the German attack on it. The most developed third of the country was laid waste, its industry and its cities wrecked, while Americans suffered not a fly on the wrist at home-basking, on the contrary, in a massive economic boom. There was no issue Stalin spoke more insistently about than reparations in negotiations among the Allies. But once the fighting was over, the U.S. reneged on wartime promises and vetoed reparations from the larger part of Germany-far the richest and most developed, and occupied by the West-because it did not want to strengthen the Soviet Union and did want to rebuild the Ruhr as an industrial base under Western control, with a view to creating what would subsequently become the Federal Republic.

Can you put Hiroshima and Nagasaki into this context?

Prior to this came Truman's decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan. He did so, of course, to shorten the war, and partly also because the Pentagon wanted to test its new weapons. But there was a further reason for the obliteration of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was urgent to secure a Japanese surrender before the Red Army could get close to the country, for fear that Moscow might insist on a Soviet presence in the occupation of Japan. The U.S. was determined not to let the Russians in, as they could not stop them from doing in Germany. So if we look just at events, you can say the starting points were the use of atomic bombs in Japan and the refusal of reparations in Germany. In that sense, those who argue that the Cold War was an American initiative-the Swedish historian Anders Stephanson, who has written most deeply about this, calls it an American project-are justified in doing so.

So these are your "punctual events."

Exactly. On the hand, if we look at the structural origins of the Cold War, they don't lie in these punctual events, but in the radical incompatibility between American capitalism and Soviet communism as forms of economy, society and polity. Revisionist historians have pointed out quite properly that Stalin was defensive in outlook after the war, determined to erect a protective glacis in Eastern Europe against any repetition of the Nazi invasion of Russia, but otherwise acutely conscious of Soviet weakness and superior Western strength.

All of that is true, but at the same time Stalin remained a communist who firmly believed that the ultimate mission of the world's working class was to overthrow capitalism, everywhere. His immediate stance was defensive, but in the much longer run his expectation was offensive. In that sense, U.S. policies toward the USSR were not needlessly aggressive, as revisionists maintain, but perfectly rational. The two systems were mortal antagonists.

Let's move to the topic of social democracy. I did a lot of my learning in developing countries and have a sense that Washington's true Cold War enemy was social democracy as it spread through Western Europe and all the newly independent nations. What's your view of this?

Strong disagreement, so far as Europe is concerned. If you look at the whole period from 1945 through to the present, you could argue that, on the contrary, European social democracy was Washington's best friend in the region. NATO was the brainchild not of the Pentagon but of Ernest Bevin, the social-democratic foreign secretary in Britain. Attlee, his prime minister, then split his own government by cutting the health service to fund rearmament for the American war in Korea. In France, the most ruthless crackdown on labor unrest after the war came from Jules Moch, the Socialist interior minister.

Think, too, of the Norwegian social democrat who Washington put in charge of the U.N. as its first secretary general, Trygve Lie, an odious collaborator with McCarthyism inside the United Nations. This was the period in which Irving Brown of the A.F.L., working closely with local social democrats, was installed in Europe by the C.I.A. with funds to divide and corrupt trade unions everywhere. He was still active in plotting against Allende [the Chilean social democratic president] in the '70s. As to more recent years, who was Bush's most ardent European ally in the war on Iraq? Not any conservative politician, but British social democrat Blair.

There were exceptions to this dismal record, but few and far between. Not by accident, they generally came from neutral countries that stayed out of the Cold War. In Sweden, Olaf Palme was a courageous opponent of the American war in Vietnam, detested by the U.S. for that reason. In Austria, Bruno Kreisky took an independent line on the Middle East, refusing to fall in with Western support for Israel-itself governed in those years by another social democratic party-and so was scarcely less disliked by the U.S.

But the dominant pattern has always been craven submission to Washington.

Well, I was thinking more of figures like Mossadeq, Arbenz and Allende-maybe the Sandinistas, too.

Their fate is certainly relevant, but there you are talking of a different political phenomenon-nationalism in the Third World, typically though not invariably of the left. You could add Lumumba in the Congo, Goulart in Brazil, Bosch in the Dominican Republic and others to the list. Not all were figures of the left, but from the Cold War onward the U.S. regarded nearly all serious attempts at nationalization of local resources as a threat to capital and worked to subvert or overthrow those who undertook them. A good part of my book is devoted to this front of imperial operations.

I've often wondered what the fate of Cuba would have been if Castro had been properly received in Washington in 1960. Could he have become something like a social democrat?

Excluded, if only because of the side of the Cuban Revolution that distinguished it from both the Chinese Revolution and from the outcome of Russian Revolution after Lenin, which was genuine internationalism. It had to be internationalist because it was a small island close to the United States, not a huge country far away, so it needed revolutionary solidarity within Latin America, which it couldn't hope for as long the continent was populated by assorted clients of the United States, most of them dictators. So even if, counterfactually, Eisenhower or Kennedy had rolled out a tactical red carpet for Fidel, there would have still have been insurmountable conflict over all these Latin American regimes propped up by the United States. The Cubans would have never said, if you put up with us, you can do what you want anywhere. Think of the fact they sent troops [in 1975] even to Angola-where they had no regional connection at all-to save it from a U.S.-backed invasion by South Africa.

Do you see any inflections in the development of American foreign policy over this period?

There is an underlying continuity in the long arc of the U.S. imperium that extends from FDR to Obama. But one can distinguish successive phases in this arc. You have the period that runs from Truman to Kennedy, the high Cold War. Then comes Nixon, the only American president with an original mind in foreign policy. He was intelligent because he was so cynical. He wasn't taken in or mystified by the enormous amount of rhetoric surrounding the lofty U.S. mission in the world. He was therefore more ruthless, but also genuinely innovative in a whole series of ways, the most important of which was to capitalize on the Sino-Soviet split.

The next phase runs from Carter through Reagan to the elder Bush, which sees a reversion to the earlier forms of foreign policy during the Cold War. The fourth phase, of humanitarian intervention, from Clinton through the younger Bush to Obama.

I once thought Carter was an exception in this line, but have since been persuaded to think again.

If you're interested in Carter, there's a good chapter on him in the huge "Cambridge History of the Cold War" by a scholar sympathetic to Carter, which captures the ambiguities and contradictions of his presidency quite well. He did, of course, talk a lot about human rights at the beginning of his tenure, and appointed Patricia Derian, who genuinely believed in them but was quite powerless, to an assistant position in the State Department. But one has to remember that at the outset he appointed Zbigniew Brzezinski as national security adviser, on whom he relied throughout his presidency.

Brzezinski was in many ways brighter than Kissinger, in later years an overrated showman not particularly interesting as a thinker. Brzezinski's cold, brittle mind was a good deal sharper. He was also as much, if not more, of a hawk than Kissinger had been. His masterstroke was funding religious and tribal resistance to the Communist regime in Afghanistan well before any Soviet troops were there, with the clear-cut and entirely successful aim of making the country the Vietnam of the USSR. There followed the Carter Doctrine, which put the U.S. into the military emplacements in the Gulf, where it remains today, while the president was toasting the Shah as a close personal friend and pillar of human rights. To top it off, with Brzezinski at his elbow again, Carter patronized and protected Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, keeping them at the U.N. as the legitimate government of Cambodia, as part of the deal with China for its attack on Vietnam.

In the Middle East, the peace treaty between Sadat and Begin is generally credited to Carter. Its precondition, however, was the double rescue of Israel and of Egypt by Nixon and Kissinger in the 1973 war, which put both countries into the palm of the American hand. What was the regional upshot? Sadat ditched the Palestinians and became a well-funded U.S. client, Begin secured an ally on Israel's southern flank and the Egyptians got the tyranny of Sadat, Mubarak and now Sisi for the next 40 years. Yet to this day Carter gushes over Sadat, a torturer whose memory is loathed by his people, as a wonderful human being. What is nevertheless true is that with all his weaknesses-and worse-Carter was a contradictory figure, who, once he was ousted from office, behaved more decently than any other ex-president in recent memory. Today, he's almost a pariah because of what he says on Israel. One can respect him for that.

Turning to Europe for a moment, I often feel disappointed-I don't think I'm alone in this-at the hesitancy of the Europeans to act on what seems to be their underlying impatience with American primacy. Is this an unrealistic expectation?

Impatience isn't the right word. The reality is rather its opposite. Europe has become ever more patient-a better word would be submissive-with the United States. After 1945, Western Europe was far weaker in relation to America than the E.U. today, which is larger than the U.S. in both GDP and population. But think of three European politicians-in France, Germany and England-in the first 15 years after the war. You had a great statesman in De Gaulle; a very strong, if much more limited leader in Adenauer, and a weak ruler in Eden. But the striking thing is all three were quite prepared to defy the United States in a way that no subsequent politician in Europe has ever done.

Eden launched the Suez expedition against Nasser [in late 1956] without informing Washington - the Americans were livid, Eisenhower beside himself, fearing that it would stoke popular anti-imperialism across Africa and Asia. So the U.S. brought the expedition to an abrupt halt by triggering a run on sterling, and Eden fell. But there was an aftermath. The French premier at the time was Guy Mollet, the Socialist who was an accomplice of Eden in the attack on Egypt, with, himself, a terrible record in Algeria. When the idea of a Common Market came up shortly after the Suez debacle, though he was personally favorable to it, he faced a lot of opposition in France - as there was, too, in Germany. Adenauer, who was quite willing to make commercial concessions to France to smooth the path for the undertaking, gave Mollet a political reason for the Common Market. Look what happened when you fought at Suez, he told him. None of our countries is strong enough to resist the U.S. on its own. Let's pool our resources and then we can do so.

Adenauer was loyal enough to the West, and a staunch anticommunist, but Germany, not America, was what counted for him. As for De Gaulle, he famously pulled France out of the military command of NATO, and defied America with éclat virtually throughout.

Since then, there has been nobody like this. If we ask why, I think the answer is that all these people were formed before the First and Second World Wars broke out, in a period in which major European states had as much weight as the United States on the international checkerboard, if not more. They were not brought up in a world where American hegemony was taken for granted. All of them were involved in the two World Wars, and in the Second De Gaulle had good reason to be distrustful of the U.S., since Roosevelt was long pro-Vichy and wanted to oust him as leader of the Free French.

We could add, incidentally, a couple of later politicians, who fought in the second conflict. One was the English Tory prime minister, Edward Heath, the only postwar ruler of Britain who never made the trip to simper on the White House lawn, receiving an audience and paying tribute, that would become a virtual ceremony of investiture for any new ruler around the world. The other was Helmut Schmidt, a veteran of Operation Barbarossa [the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941] who scarcely concealed his disdain for Carter. These were latecomers from the past. Their successors have grown up under U.S. paramountcy and take it for granted. This is America's world. It is second nature for them to defer to it.

You describe a generational difference in sensibility. But what about the EU?

If the generational declension is one big change, another is what has become of the European Union itself. On paper, it's much more powerful than any of the individual countries. But so far as any coherent foreign policy is concerned, it's institutionally paralyzed by the number of states that make it up-originally six, now 28-and the labyrinthine nature of their dealings with each other. None of them has any complete autonomy of initiative. A staggering amount of time is wasted in endless summits behind closed doors, agendas prepared by bureaucrats, tremulous fear of any public disagreement. No serious international statecraft can emerge from this.

During the countdown to the war in Iraq, there were large street demonstrations in not a few countries, which Dominique Strauss-Kahn-no less-described as a European Declaration of Independence. Schröder [Gerhard, the German chancellor from 1998-2005] announced that Germany could not accept the war, and Chirac [Jacques, the French president, 1995-2007] blocked a U.N. resolution endorsing it. Were these bold acts of independence? Far from it. The French envoy in Washington told Bush in advance: You already have one U.N. resolution saying Saddam must comply with inspections, which is suitably vague. Don't embarrass us by trying to get another resolution that is more specific, which we'll have to oppose. Just use that one and go in. No sooner, indeed, was the attack launched than Chirac opened French skies to U.S. operations against Iraq. Can you imagine De Gaulle meekly helping a war he had said he opposed? As for Schröder, it was soon revealed that German intelligence agents in Baghdad had signaled ground targets for "Shock and Awe." These were politicians who knew the war was very unpopular in domestic opinion, and so made a show of opposing it while actually collaborating. Their independence was a comedy.

That was a dozen years ago. What's the position today?

Edward Snowden's break with the illegalities of Obama's government revealed that it was not only spying on European as well as American citizens en masse, but tapping the phones and communications of Merkel, Hollande and other pillars of Atlantic solidarity. How have these leaders reacted? With an embarrassed smile, before the next warm embrace with the Leader of the Free World. Has one single European government dreamt of offering asylum to Snowden? Not one. Under Merkel, indeed, it now emerges that German intelligence itself was illegally spying on Germans at the behest of the U.S., and passing on the information it gathered to the CIA. There are no consequences to such revelations, except to those who reveal them. The level of abjection passes belief.

Let's put the Ukraine crisis in this context. It is, after all, what prompted me to raise the question of European passivity in the trans-Atlantic relationship. Here, it seems to me, the Europeans are furious with Washington for encouraging Kiev toward a patently dangerous confrontation with Russia. Animosity has been evident since Vicky Nuland's infamous "'F'the E.U." remark just before the coup last year. And now we see Merkel and Hollande more or less pushing the U.S. aside in favor of a negotiated settlement-or "seem to see," in any case. What's your view here?

Why should Washington object to European attempts to reach a stand-off in the Ukraine, so long as sanctions in Russia remain in place? Berlin and Paris are not going to defy it. Any real settlement is for the time being out of reach, but if one were materialize, they would be convenient sherpas for it. The E.U. as such hardly matters: Its reaction to Nuland's dismissal [of them] was to turn the other cheek.

Patrick Smith is Salon's foreign affairs columnist. A longtime correspondent abroad, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune and The New Yorker, he is also an essayist, critic and editor. His most recent books are "Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century" (Yale, 2013) and Somebody Else's Century: East and West in a Post-Western World (Pantheon, 2010). Follow him @thefloutist. His web site is patricklawrence.us.

More Patrick L. Smith.

The Making Of Global Capitalism The Political Economy Of American Empire

The Making Of Global Capitalism The Political Economy Of American Empire Sam Gindin, Leo Panitch

Amazon.com

Hans G. Despain on October 7, 2012

Powerful Political Economy

Panitch and Gindin argue that market economies have never existed independent of nation states. The state was necessary for the genesis of capitalism, and the state was, and still is, necessary for its historical development and continuous reproduction. Nonetheless, Panitch and Gindin argue there is significant autonomy, or historical "differentiation," between the economy and the nation state. There are economic structural tendencies manifest from the logic of capital and the functioning of the market-system. At the same time nation states can affect these structural tendencies in remarkable ways.

In this sense, there has never been "separation" between capitalist reproduction/development and the state, but there is "differentiation" which has radically significant effects. There is a symbiotic relationship between the state and capitalistic reproduction/development.

This is a book of economic history. But is also a book of economic theory. The economic history is rich and interesting, aimed at explaining the historical emergence of global financial capitalism. While the history Panitch and Gindin offer is rich and interesting, the theory is still richer and even more intriguing.

Their history is primarily aimed, (1) at explaining the emergence of the "informal American empire" (what makes this empire "informal" is the hegemony is accomplished primarily through economic strategy, policy, and diplomacy; and less through military might and political coercion) and (2) demonstrating the historical shifting relationship (from decade to decade since the World War I) between workers, business, finance, and the state.

Their theoretical concern is threefold;

  1. (1) offer a theoretical explanation of the crisis of 2007-8;
  2. (2) offer guidance toward the direction the future the "informal American empire" has for guiding the economies of world; and
  3. (3) to understand the "informal American empire" as a set of beliefs, doctrine, and ideology of how to organize modern societies (workers, business, finance and the state) and the global order (both political [e.g. UN, NATO, etc.] and economical [World Bank, IMF, WTO) for the (ideological) common good.

Although Panitch and Gindin accept that capitalistic development is uneven and unstable, it is crucial to their thesis that each crisis is unique depending upon the particular relationships and alliances forged between workers, business, finance, and the state. In this sense, the crisis of 2007-8 is necessarily unique and the solutions or economic fiscal policies necessary for recovery necessarily different from previous crises.

The highlights of their economic global history include that there have been four! major historical global crises, the long depression in the 1870, the Great depression of 1930, the Great recession of 1970s, and the Great financial crisis of 2007-09.

According to Pantich and Gindin, the 1970s is an economic watershed moment which separates "two Golden ages" of American capitalism.

It may be quite strange to many readers to call 1983 - 2007 a Golden Age. But in fact when looking at the economic data of the period it was quite literally a Golden Age, with millions of Americans and Global financiers and business leaders becoming impressively wealthy. Moreover, the levels of production (GDP) and productivity during the second Golden Age generally outperform the levels of production and productivity during the first Golden Age. Nonetheless the distribution of this wealth is radically narrow and concentrated within primarily finance, while political power concentrated toward "free-trade" orientated states, and away from workers and industrial production. Moreover, Pantich and Gindin maintain that workers are generally weaker during the second Golden Age, finance is strengthen and trumps over production processes, which is more or less conventional wisdom of this period of modern history. Less conventional is their thesis that the state, in particular the American domestic fiscal state and global "informal American empire," greatly strengthened post-1973-83 crisis.

It is not clear the direction the post-2007-09 crisis will take the global economy and American capitalism. What is clear is that the symbiotic relationship between workers, business, finance, and the state, and the global order (U.S. Treasury, IMF, World Bank, WTO, UN) is once again shifting. Pantich and Gindin's book offers to the reader a far

Jeb Sprague on November 8, 2014

Fascinating & important book, yet suffers from nation-state centrism & ignores novel social dynamics of Global Capitalism era

Panitch and Gindin's epic and fascinating book has the goal of tracing what the authors describe as the central role of the informal "American empire" and U.S. capital in the formation of the contemporary global capitalist system. I published a review in the journal Critical Sociology (Vol. 40, No. 5. P. 803-807) earlier this year that expands further on the importance of this work but I also have some criticisms, of which I paste some of below:

Whereas the authors emphasize the role of longstanding national and international dynamics, they overlook the numerous studies that have shown how novel transnational dynamics have come about even as historic residue remains (see for example Harris, 2013; Murray G, 2012; Robinson, 2003, 2004, 2014). Other than briefly denying the usefulness of the idea, the authors say little about the good deal of work on transnational class relations, for example in regards to the different fractions of the transnational capitalist class (as detailed in the works of Baker, 2011; Robinson, 2003, 2008; Harris, 2008; Sklair, 2001; Carrol, 2011; Murray J, 2013). Panitch and Gindin argue that theories of a TCC (transnational capitalist class) lead us to overlook uneven development between "nation-states" and the "economic competition between various centers of accumulation" (p. 11).... Yet while capital tends to concentrate in particular built up spaces, this corresponds, as a number of studies have shown, less and less to the strict restrictions of national space. Functionally integrated circuits of production and finance, and other networks, for example, have come to cut through various geographic scales (including national space) (Dicken, 20112; Robinson, 2010). Whereas local, national, regional, and international dynamics remain legion and substantial, many decisive economic, social, and political processes have become transnationally oriented....

The role of the state and its different policies is a clear focus of Panitch and Gindin's book. At times the authors do refer to the role of state elites, but often the authors can reify the state, describing the state as if it acts on its own and of its own accord. We need here to understand more clearly the class nature of the state, how specific social groups operate through state apparatuses as a site of struggle. Rather than individuals of the capitalist class serving directly in the state, it is governing political groups that normally do this. As relatively autonomous these political groups and state elites maintain legitimacy in the eyes of the electorate, even as they overwhelmingly operate in the "collective" interests of capital. This relative autonomy is conditioned by a number of dynamics, such as prevailing socioeconomic conditions, the balance and struggle of social forces, and the position or character of the state. In those instances where Panitch and Gindin do write about state elites and political groups, these groups are presented as essentially the traditional nation-state governing elite who often operate in the interests of domestic capitalists. While these groups may fight among themselves or wrestle with domestic classes to carry out policies that are internationally geared, these political elites, as Panitch and Gindin describe them, do not veer far from the mold of their nation-state predecessors. The authors never recognize the fundamental changes that are taking place, through which state apparatuses, most importantly the U.S., are being utilized to reproduce conditions for circuits of global capital accumulation.

The authors pass over quickly some theories of the state that they disagree with, giving a straw person description of a "supranational global state" (p. 11) and citing an article by Philip McMichael (2001) that similarly misexplained ideas on the emergent transnationalization of state apparatuses and rise of transnationally oriented technocrats and elites who operate through state apparatuses (as discussed by Jayasuriya, 1999, 2005; Liodakis, 2010; Robinson, 2004, 2012; Sprague, 2012). I would argue for example that transnationally oriented state elites and technocrats believe that to develop they must insert their national states and institutions into global circuits of accumulation. They need access to capital, and capital is in the hands of the TCC. However, state elites must still appeal to their home audiences. They still interact with a variety of social groups and social classes, some more transnationally oriented and others with a more national orientation. Because of this, even as ties between state elites and TCC fractions deepen, national rhetoric and national state policies occur that are in apparent contradiction with TCC interests. In this way, political leaders attempt to maintain national political legitimacy while deepening practices of a global nature. However, as these state elites become entangled with and dependent upon processes of global capital accumulation they increasingly transition from taking part in national or international processes to transnational processes.

In regards to law, Panitch and Gindin argue that "Americanized internationalized law" has supplanted local international investment laws in much of the world. Here the authors obscure how transnational legal frameworks have come about through coalitions and the support of various interests and social forces. The mere adoption of laws for instance (even when heavily influenced by U.S. state elites) does not explain how they are implemented or modified. Nor does it explain the different interests behind these changes.

The authors emphasize the role of the "informal U.S. empire," with globalization "imbricated in the American empire," a system "under continuing US leadership," with the country maintaining its "imperial responsibilities for the reproduction of global capitalism" (p. 330). Yet they never clearly explain what is global capitalism, globalization, or the difference between the international and the transnational. This is because their conceptions of class, capital, and the state don't help us to understand the fundamental changes taking place. While they provide an extensive and critical historical overview in pointing out the leading role of the U.S. state and its policies in reproducing today's "system of class power and inequality" (p. 330), they don't recognize how this has occurred through fundamentally new dynamics of the global epoch.

While the authors help us to better understand the key role of the U.S. government and its policies during the late twentieth and early-twenty-first centuries, they do so through an outdated theoretical scope that never gets at the deep changes occurring. Rather than the U.S. nation-state empire and those operating through it creating conditions beneficial for closely aligned internationally active domestic capitalists, more and more we can see how transnationally oriented elites operating through the most powerful national state apparatus (headquartered in Washington) are promoting conditions for circuits of global capital accumulation and in the interests of TCC fractions.

While this book is well worth your time reading, for getting a deeper understanding of contemporary political economy I suggest Global Capitalism and the Crisis of Humanity clearer picture of what is at stake and who are the main institutional actors in the historical drama and capitalistic tragedy we call modern human history.

Top Visited
 Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

Home 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2003

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section

[Jul 29, 2021] Collapsing empires are generally troublemakers, using behind the scenes subterfuge to replace their lost economic and military muscle

Jul 29, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com


1 play_arrow

messystateofaffairs 10 hours ago

Collapsing empires are generally fulla**** troublemakers, using behind the scenes subterfuge to replace their lost economic and military muscle. See Britain as a recent example, America is in the making. Once non aligned sovereign nations know what to look for there is a lot they can do to deflect external interference, but unfortunately most of them don't know how to run their own house.

Doctor TimE. 11 hours ago

I might say that America withdrawing from it's war against Nord Stream 2 Project, and it's withdraw from its 20 year war in Afghanistan, will MARK the end of the U.S. Empire; as it's response to CoVid-1984 Marked the end of it's Narrative of standing for Freedom against Fascism.

RedSeaPedestrian 11 hours ago remove link

Nice to see the West's feeble attempts at a color revolution in Belarus have failed as well. Not that they won't stop trying.

BTW, this man has an extremely punch-able face. Norman L. Eisen

https://community.ebay.com/t5/The-Soapbox/Color-Revolutions-Used-Tor-Topple-Foreign-Leaders-Used-By/td-p/31217235

mike_1010 12 hours ago (Edited)

The problem for USA is that its empire needs to pay, rather than be an economic burden for the country.

Imperialism can't be just about politics. It has to make economic sense too. Or else, it's not sustainable in the long run.

This is something Trump understood and openly said so. He wanted some economic benefit for USA from its empire and not just costs and burdens.

The way the British empire worked in the past was through empire-wide protectionist rules and laws and trading restrictions that favored UK at the expense of the rest of its empire. UK was the center of industry and manufacturing. And the rest of the empire was its market and a source of commodities and raw materials. So, the whole empire was set up and worked for the benefit of UK.

But USA doesn't have any such control over its empire. Because countries allied with USA are free make their own rules and laws and trade agreements for their own benefit. So, they are often competitors with USA, rather than working for the benefit of USA. Which makes mockery of US imperialism. There is no economic benefit in it for USA.

USA needed to scuttle this gas pipeline not only to benefit its own gas producers and exporters but also to make Europe's economy less competitive with that of USA, so that Europe would become a market for US companies rather than their competitor. Because otherwise, US presence in Europe is like a military subsidy for Europe that enables Europe to compete more and better with USA in the economic sphere.

Such imperialism makes no economic sense at all. And if it doesn't make sense, then eventually it will fall apart. Because economics trumps politics in the long run.

USA is borrowing money like crazy to sustain its imperialism. Which is only delaying the inevitable falling apart of its empire. And neither Trump nor Biden have been able to change this situation.

Edward Quince 11 hours ago

You clearly have no idea how american imperialism works if you think it has not reaped a double-digit-trillion dollar windfall for the people in charge.

It has been EPICALLY financially beneficial for the American aristocracy. Unfortunately, that is the only group of people the warfare state cares about. Everybody else, including the American tax donkey and its cannon fodder trash class can go **** themselves and keep supplying cash and blood.

BannedCamp 7 hours ago remove link

Everybody else, including the American tax donkey and its cannon fodder trash class can go **** themselves and keep supplying cash and blood.

+1, what brainwashed americans don't realize is their overlord class hates them even more than the people their military has bombed back to the stone age. over the last 75 years. Any american would be more welcome into Vietnam or Serbia than Rumsfeld, Cheney or Bush's house.

Joiningupthedots 8 hours ago

It would be better served calling the alliance the Anglo-Saxon Alliance.

As the dominant cohort in the American demographic "browns out" so America begins to destabilise and fragment.....ignore the Libtards this is what is actually happening.

As the tensions increase so does the fragmentation.

America has not money or technical ability to attempt to maintain an empire anymore (printing and issuing your Fiat doesnt count).

Within the context of European history the Atlantic Alliance is but a mere blip on the time line continuum.

America has burned brightly for a few decades but the whale oil has run out.

Look on the positives though......

Jvvvvvsaria will collapse along with it and some semblance of normality will return to the entire Middle East

messystateofaffairs 10 hours ago

The collapse of the dollar as a reserve currency will signal the final coup de grâce of the zioanglo empire.

BT 10 hours ago

How the mighty has fallen. Iranian black tar will be next to blow up in US's face and China might add some feather to it.

aiinvestor 12 hours ago

The rationale reflects the twisted Machiavellian mentality of the Americans and their supporters in Europe – Poland and the Baltic states, as well as the Kiev regime in Ukraine. Such mentality is shot-through with irrational Russophobia. The ridiculous paranoid claims against Russia are of course an inversion of reality.

Job well done, another propaganda piece released. Nice +20°C weather in Moscow today, enjoy the weekend.

Vivekwhu 11 hours ago

Which bit is propaganda, dear? I know the truth hurts, but you have to face reality. Why exactly did the US try to stop the pipeline being built between Russia and Germany? Does your ilk really claim to serve German/EU energy interests than they do? See the degree of delusion suffered by the violent, expansionist and supremacist US?

rtb61 12 hours ago

Yeah, major growth in renewables made it all rather pointless and the US was just being an arrogant **** for no reason, all rather pointless. Pushing a pointless issue and well the Ukraine, just a corrupt waste of time and money, the best way to punish Russia for the USA force them to take back the Ukraine, it is all so funny, the reality.

The UK is fooling around with trying to start a war in the Ukraine but the Ukraine is not willing. Next time the UK tries to cross the border near Sevastopol they are likely to leave with a new hole in the bow of that ship.

The USA will be shifting focus to South America and stupidity and corruption still reign in the US so you can bet it will be as stupid as messy as possible and take decades. Better to do nothing than allow corrupt forces in the USA to make a complete hack of it, to feed their greed.

Eddielaidler 8 hours ago remove link

The United States dithers while grousing. It's almost as if there is no more capacity to compete without strongarm tactics. I'm not sure it matters since we no longer have talent for innovation in a broad sense. Bezos goes to space while we could be building an east west aqueduct. We could be Kicking 5G arse. Instead we import slave labor from the south for political reasons and soon we will be identifying and eliminating our own Kulaks just like good old uncle Joe.

yojimbo 8 hours ago

Since the 70s when gas transit from the USSR to the west first started, Moscow has not used gas as a weapon. It is an ineffective weapon - people get cold but you lose revenue. It's only useful when someone is already not paying the bills (Ukraine), or stealing the gas (Ukraine).

Moribundus 12 hours ago

"After much arm-twisting, bullying and foghorn diplomacy towards its European allies" Note: They ain't no allies, they'r puppets. USA is master of puppets in EU

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Committee_on_United_Europe


play_arrow
Rudolph 3 hours ago

Russia will never never trust America again. China will never never trust America again. EU will never never trust America again. Arabs, Africans, Asians will never never trust America again. America is ruled by a group of Satanic imbecile moron billionaires and their lawyers.

elec9999 6 hours ago (Edited) remove link

Now ukraine has been neutured. Any offensive movements by them well result in gas being turned off, checkmate on ukraine. Way to go zelensky, time after time we see cia pawns being used then discarded when plans fail yet there is never any shortage of countrymen willing to sell out their country:

BannedCamp 7 hours ago

The people in charge of the US are truly psychopathic, but that's okay. Whatever gas the EU won't buy from Russia will go to China and soon Japan & South Korea instead.

[Jul 29, 2021] The 2015 poll in the US about a potential bombing campaign against Agrabah due to severe human rights violations

Jul 18, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
Constantine , Jul 18 2021 8:38 utc | 103

Posted by: Bemildred | Jul 18 2021 7:48 utc | 99

Wholesale suport is indeed imperial propaganda, but the overt or tacit support by large segments of the citizenry is a fact. And this is to be expected after such an extensive indoctrination with notions of extreme messianic chauvinism, ethno-supremacism and conspicuous absence of negative consequences (such as horrific losses, near economic collapse, devastation of the imperial homeland etc.)of such policies.

Again, as you correctly pointed, the popularity of the regime is mostly centered on the more affluent classes. Still, there is also sufficient support from the lower segments of the society to ensure that criminal policies, almost always harmful to parts of the citizenry too, continue without significant opposition.

One of the most telling examples of this attitude was the 2015 poll in the US about a potential bombing campaign against Agrabah due to severe human rights violations. If I recall the numbers correctly, in favor were 32% of Reps questioned and 18%of Dems. Against were 16% of Reps and 37% of Dems (although the DNC liberals have become far more hawkish since). In short, 48% of polled Republicans and 55% of Democrats had a definite view in support of or in opposition of a bombing campaign against a country that exists in the toon film "Aladdin". Not insignificant at all, especilly since there is far more support for aggressive action - that includes regime change and sanctions - against existing countries that have been systematically demonized by the Anglo-American regime.

[Jul 21, 2021] Civilized nations' efforts to deter Russia and China are starting to add up

Jul 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Lysander , Jul 17 2021 11:31 utc | 2

...WaPo columnist George Will then asserts:

Henry Kissinger has said, not unreasonably, that we are in "the foothills" of a cold war with China. And Vladimir Putin, who nurses an unassuageable grudge about the way the Cold War ended, seems uninterested in Russia reconciling itself to a role as a normal nation without gratuitous resorts to mendacity. It is, therefore, well to notice how, day by day, in all of the globe's time zones, civilized nations are, in word and deed, taking small but cumulatively consequential measures that serve deterrence.

If arrogance were a deadly disease, George Will would be dead.

George Will has been an ass clown since I first had the displeasure of watching him in the 1970s. Age has not brought an ounce of wisdom. Nevertheless, this total lack of self reflection and ability to project American sins on others is unfortunately not unique to our man George. It seems a habit throughout the entire US political spectrum. The ability to view, for example, the invasion of Iraq as perfectly normal behavior, while viewing any resistance to US/Israeli dominance as beyond the pale is the character of the decaying American superpower. George Will is but one manifestation of it. It was once infuriating. But now it's simply like listening to the ravings of a schizophrenic. More pathetic than anything else.

Dao Gen , Jul 17 2021 11:35 utc | 3

What do you expect from George Swill? He is a pathetic, disoriented refugee from his home in Victorian England, when barbarism never set for a single instant on the British Empire.
Donbass Lives Matter , Jul 17 2021 11:45 utc | 4
There's a way to get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth from the mainstream news media. Just look at their propaganda and ask yourself, "Why do they want me to believe this particular lie?" If you can figure that you, you will have the truth.
alaff , Jul 17 2021 11:52 utc | 5
Well, you know, the white man's burden...
The funny thing is that they seriously consider themselves a "superior race", while behaving like wild barbarians.
Such opinions/articles of "Western civilized people" cause only a condescending smile, nothing more. So let's let George Will entertain us.
Midville , Jul 17 2021 11:57 utc | 7

I find it pretty bizzarre how western media obsessively try to portray the Defender incident as a some sort of "victory" for "civilized nations".
What exactly is the victory here? The fact that Russia only resorted to warning fire and didn't blow up the ship?

Perimetr , Jul 17 2021 12:16 utc | 11

Decades of propaganda masquerading as news has led most "educated" Americans into a Matrix of false narratives. Should you dare mention election fraud or question the safety of COVID vaccines in the presences of anyone who considers the NY Times and Wash Post as the "papers of record", they will be happy to inform you that you are "captured" by false news. Dialogue with these true believers has become almost impossible. We are the indispensable, civilized nation, don't you understand basic facts?

My sister, who is truly a good-hearted person, unfortunately keeps CNN and MSNBC on most of the day in her small apartment, and lives for The NY Times, which she pours over, especially the weekend edition. She knows that Putin is evil and Russia is a bad place to live, etc etc. I got rid of my TV ten years ago and started looking elsewhere for my information. I live in a rural area of a Red state, she lives in Manhattan. We have to stick to topics that revolve around museums, gardening, and food.

Ayatoilet , Jul 17 2021 12:50 utc | 16

This is precisely the type of arrogance that has led to US leaving Afghanistan with their pants down - having spent untold Trillions of dollars and having nothing to show for it. And soon, leaving Iraq and Syria too. It reminds me of how the US left Vietnam and Cambodia.

The 'White' establishment in Washington and across the US military industrial complex, has an air of superiority and always seem to feel that they can subjugate via throwing money at people! This in effect turns everyone they deal with into Whores (yes, prostitutes). Its fundamentally humiliating, and sews the seeds of corruption - both economic and moral. Then, they are shocked that there's a back clash!

The Taliban succeeded not with arms - but by projecting a completely different narrative of "Morality (i.e. non-corruption), honor, and even intermingled nationalism with their narrative". They projected a story that suggested that new Afghan daughters would not turn into Britney Spears or porn stars.

And, believe it or not, the Chinese see themselves as having been fundamentally humiliated by the West and couch their efforts as a struggle for their civilization (its not ideological or even economic) - they are fighting for honor and respect.

Western Civilization (and western elite) on the left and right are fundamentally materialistic. They worship money, and simply don't understand it when others don't. When they talk about superiority, they are basically saying the worship of money rules supreme. You sort of become dignified in the west if you have a lot of wealth. They want to turn the whole world into prostitutes. Policy and laws are driven by material considerations.

Now, I am not saying that spirituality or religion is good; and in fact, the Chinese are not driven by religious zeal (they are, on the whole, non-religious). What I am saying is that - no matter how its expressed - be it through religion, through culture, through rhetoric, etc. - all this back clash is really a struggle for respect, 'honor' and thus a push back to Western Arrogance, and the humiliation it has caused. The West simply doesn't understand that there are societies - especially in the east, that value honor over other things.

When Trump calls other people losers, he is basically saying he is richer, they are poorer. In his mind, winning, is all about money. When people write articles about the superiority of a civilization - they are implicitly putting other people down. That's not just arrogant, its rude and disrespectful. Its basically like a teenager judging their parents. How dare a newly formed nation (the US), judge or differentiate or even pretend to be superior to the Chinese, Persians etc.?

Our foreign policy (and rhetoric) in the West has to completely change. We have to be really careful, because, (honestly), it won't be very long before these other (inferior) civilizations actually take over global leadership. Then how will we want to be treated? Don't for a second think these folks can't build great gadgets that go to Mars! Oh, did China just do that? Does Iran have a space program? Did they just make their own vaccines? Once they start trading among themselves without using the USD greenback, we are finished.

We need them, they don't need us.

Et Tu , Jul 17 2021 13:07 utc | 18

Some notable recent achievements of 'civilised' nations include:

-Illegal invasion and bombing of multiple non-aggressor nations
-Overthrowing of democratically elected Governments
-Support of extremist and oppressive regimes
-Sponsoring of terrorism, including weapon sales to ISIS
-Corruption of once trusted institutions like the UN and OPCW

Oh, the civility...

Petri Krohn , Jul 17 2021 14:05 utc | 26

HOW DID RUSSIA BECOME THE ENEMY?

...when all she did was offer slight resistance to Western aggression? The key event was the August 2013 false-flag gas attack and massacre of hostages in Ghouta in Damascus.

What really angered the West was the Russian fleet in the Mediterranean that prevented the NATO attack on Syria. (You will not find a single word of this in Western media.) This is why Crimea needed to be captured by the West. As revenge and deterrence against the Russian agression.

I wrote about these events in 2016:

The standoff was first described by Israel Shamir in October 2013:

"The most dramatic event of September 2013 was the high-noon stand-off near the Levantine shore, with five US destroyers pointing their Tomahawks towards Damascus and facing them - the Russian flotilla of eleven ships led by the carrier-killer Missile Cruiser Moskva and supported by Chinese warships.

Apparently, two missiles were launched towards the Syrian coast, and both failed to reach their destination."

A longer description was published by Australianvoice in 2015:

"So why didn't the US and France attack Syria? It seems obvious that the Russians and Chinese simply explained that an attack on Syria by US and French forces would be met by a Russian/Chinese attack on US and French warships. Obama wisely decided not to start WW III in September 2013." Can Russia Block Regime Change In Syria Again?

In my own comments from 2013 I tried to understand the mission of the Russian fleet. This is what I believed Putin's orders to the fleet were:

  1. To sink any NATO ship involved in illegal aggression against Syria.
  2. You have the authority to use tactical nuclear weapons in self-defense.

I am sure NATO admirals understood the situation the same way. I am not sure of the American leadership in Washington.

Billb , Jul 17 2021 14:15 utc | 28

Insulting language aside, the narrative they are trying to create is that there is an anti-Russia, anti-China trend developing and that those sitting on the fence would be wise to join the bandwagon.

This will be particularly effective on the majority of folks who barely scan headlines and skim articles. Falun Gong/CIA mouthpiece Epoch Times is on board with this, based on recent headlines.

Petri Krohn , Jul 17 2021 14:44 utc | 33

Democracy grows in darkness

Wikipedia has a list of reliable and unreliable sources . "Reliable" are those sources that are under the direct control of the US regime. Any degree of independence from the regime makes the source "unreliable." WaPo and NYT are at the top of the list of reliable sources.

This is the diametric opposite of how Wikispooks defines reliability. Reliability of sources is directly proportional to their distance *from* power.

At A Closer Look on Syria (ACLOS) we only trust primary sources.

Andres , Jul 17 2021 14:58 utc | 35
Civilization vs Uncivilization

Makes me remember the cornerstone work from former Argentine president DF Sarmiento, who dealt with "Civilization or Barbarism" in his book "Facundo". Of course, his position was the "civilized" one.

Those "civilized" succeeded in creating a country submitted to the British rule, selling cheap crops and getting expensive manufactures, with a privileged minority living lavishly and a great majority, in misery.

Also, their "civilized" methods to impose their project was the bloody "Police War"

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerra_entre_la_Confederaci%C3%B3n_Argentina_y_el_Estado_de_Buenos_Aires#Segunda_guerra_contra_el_Chacho

Same language used now, for the same undisclosed intentions.

lysias , Jul 17 2021 15:10 utc | 36
In Russian, to be uncivilized (nekulturny) is a bad thing.
Mar man , Jul 17 2021 16:14 utc | 44

This article is fundamentally about propaganda and "soft power".

Soft power in foreign policy is usually defined when other countries defer to your judgement without threat of punishment or promise of gain.

In other words, if other countries support your country without a "carrot or stick" approach, you have soft power.

For years, the US simply assumed other "civilized" of the western world would dutifully follow along in US footsteps due to unshakeable trust in America's moral authority. The western media played a crucial role by suppressing news regarding any atrocities the western powers committed and amplifying any perceived threats or aggressions from "enemies".

Now, with the age of the internet, western audiences can read news from all over the world and that has been a catastrophe for western powers. We can now see real-time debunking of propaganda.

In the past, the British would have easily passed off the recent destroyer provocation as pure Russian aggression and could expect outrage from all western aligned countries. The EU and US populations could have easily been whipped into a frenzy and DEMANDED reprisals against Russia if not outright war. Something similar to a "Gulf of Tonkin" moment.

But, that did not happen. People all over the world now know NOTHING from the US or British press is to be trusted. People also now know NATO routinely try to stir up trouble and provoke Russia.

So, Americans and even British citizens displayed no widespread outrage because they simply did not believe their own government's and compliant media's side of the story.

US and British "soft power" are long gone. No one trusts them. No one wants to follow them into anymore disastrous wars of aggression.

Western media still do not understand this and cannot figure out why so many refuse western vaccines or support the newest color revolutions.

We simply do not believe it.

librul , Jul 17 2021 17:04 utc | 55

This site appears to be the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/deceiving-the-public


They cast Germany as a victim or potential victim of foreign aggressors, as a peace-loving nation forced to take up arms to protect its populace or defend European civilization against Communism.

I remember a tv history program that had interviews with German soldiers.
I recall one who had seen/participated in going from village to village in the USSR
hanging local communist leaders. He said they had been taught that by doing this
they were "protecting civilization".

fx , Jul 17 2021 19:01 utc | 68

Arrogance is not a deadly disease or even a hindrance for mainstream presstitutes; it is a job qualification, making them all the more manipulable and manipulative. And so, as with Michael Gordon, Judith Miller, Brett Stephens and David Sanger (essentially all of them pulling double duty for the apartheid state), people will die from their propaganda, but they will advance.

Max , Jul 17 2021 19:48 utc | 72

Name a democracy that isn't a suzerainty.

Name a leader with moral courage and integrity among suzerainties (private plantations). Nations without integrity and filled with Orcs (individuals without conscience), can't be civilized. They're EVIL vassals of Saruman & Sauron, manipulated by Wormtongue.

"The true equation is 'democracy' = government by world financiers."
– J.R.R. Tolkien

Henry Kissinger, in his interview with Chatham House stated, "the United States is in a CRISIS of confidence... America has committed great moral wrongs." What are U$A's core values?

According to a CFR member :
"How lucky I am that my mother studied with JRR Tolkien and CS Lewis and WH Auden and that she passed on to me a command of language that permits me to "tell the story" of the world economy in plain English. She would have been delighted that I managed to show that the evil Gollum from Tolkien's tales lives above the doorway in the Oval Office, which he certainly does. I saw him there myself. He may have found a new perch over at The Federal Reserve Bank as well."
– Excerpt From, Signals: The Breakdown of the Social Contract and the Rise of Geopolitics by Dr Philippa Malmgren

The Financial Empire has ran out of LUCK. "In God We Trust"

Why Mordor Failed... Sauron's hegemonic collapse holds potent lessons

"A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves and traitors are not victims but accomplices."

Tuyzentfloot , Jul 17 2021 21:08 utc | 78

I thought moral superiority was the official position of NATO. The explicit intent is to weaponize human rights and democracy . So it is not merely the mundane 'our group is better' or the somewhat nostalgic western form of moral superiority, it's weaponized moral superiority.

Erelis , Jul 17 2021 21:27 utc | 79

George Will looking good I tellya. Anybody know who does his embalming?

Doesn't Will's article reek of Nazi propaganda against the Russians as a mongrel Asiatic uncivilized people? Of course to attack the Chinese as uncivilized? China uncivilized? 5,000 years of continuous culture? The Russians and Chinese must join up with civilization. Unfortunately at least in the West race is only about skin color. It certainly wasn't the case with the original Nazis. Will's piece is blatantly racist out of the tradition of Nazism.

Rob , Jul 17 2021 22:41 utc | 83

American exceptionalism's finest spokesman -- George F. Will

circumspect , Jul 18 2021 1:38 utc | 88

Oxford and the Ivy League. The training grounds for the Anglo American deep state and the cheerleaders of the empire. Expect nothing more of these deeply under educated sudo intellectuals.

Tom_Q_Collins , Jul 18 2021 5:00 utc | 95

Posted by: Ayatoilet | Jul 17 2021 12:50 utc | 16

Plenty of people who work for the MIC and in various policy circles/think tanks have plenty "to show for it" where all these wars are concerned. Many billions of dollars were siphoned upwards and outwards into the bank accounts and expensive homes of the managerial and executive classes (even the hazard pay folks who actually went to the places "we" were bombing) not just at Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Booz Allen, etc. but plenty of lesser known "socioeconomically disadvantaged" Small Businesses (proper noun in this context) companies who utilized the services of an army of consultants to glom onto the war machine. In most cases of the larger firms, Wall Street handled the IPOs long ago, and these companies have entire (much less profitable) divisions dedicated to state and local governments to "diversify" their business portfolios in case the people finally get sick of war. But that rarely happens in any real sense because the corporate establishment "legacy media" makes sure that there's always an uncivilized country to bomb or threaten....and that means the "defense" department needs loads of services, weapons, and process improvement consultants all the time. War is a racket; always has been, always will be.

Tom_Q_Collins , Jul 18 2021 5:03 utc | 96

In what ways is the USA like Darth Vader's Galactic Empire in Star Wars?

Constantine , Jul 18 2021 7:33 utc | 98
Posted by: Mar man | Jul 17 2021 16:14 utc | 44

Unfortunately, it seems that truly large segments of the population in the developed western countries and especially in the Anglo-sphere believe the propaganda emanating from the imperial mouthpieces. The US citizenry is a case study in manipulating the public.

Indeed, the DNC liberals are effectively the vanguard of the pro-war movement, espouse racist Rusophobia and conitnue Trump's hostility to China. The so-cslled conservatives follow their own tradition of imperial mobilization behind the Washington regime: Chin,Latin America, the very people who berated the 'Deep State' now paise its subversive activities against the targeted left-wing governments.

As for the moribund left - it would be better described as leftovers - it is often taken for a ride as long as the imperial messaging is promoted by the liberal media. The excuses for imperialism are a constant for many of them (even as they call themselves anti-imperialists) and the beleaguered voicesfor the truth are far and few. The latter often face silencing campaigns not just from the establishment hacks, but from their own supposed ideological comrades, who are, of course, in truth nothing of the sort.

All in all, despite the consistent record of manipulative propaganda and utter criminality the imperial regime never loses the support of the critical masss of the citizenry.

Bemildred , Jul 18 2021 7:48 utc | 99
All in all, despite the consistent record of manipulative propaganda and utter criminality the imperial regime never loses the support of the critical masss of the citizenry.

Posted by: Constantine | Jul 18 2021 7:33 utc | 98

Maybe 50% of the people here bother to vote, in IMPORTANT elections. Can be a lot less if the election is not important. The only people still engaged politically here at all are the people with good jobs. The American people have given up. And there are a lot of angry people running around, with guns. Claiming the citizenry here support the government is imperial propaganda. Why do you think they like mercenaries and proxies so much? And this is all in great contrast to when I was young 50 years ago.

[Jul 21, 2021] Russia And Germany Win War Over Nord Stream 2

Notable quotes:
"... Two world wars were fought to keep Germany down. The stated purpose of NATO is to keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down. ..."
"... IMO US didn't cause NS2 friction because it thinks it benefits Russia, but exactly because it benefits Germany too much. ..."
"... You know, NATO, "Keep the Germans down..." and all that. US must not permit it's vassals to become too economically stronger than their master. They want to drag everyone they can down with them (and in shitter US goes) so they can still be king of the hill (or ad least shitter bottom). ..."
"... The most important point to know is that US hegemony in Europe is predicated on fear and hostility between Germany and Russia. ..."
"... There are many limitations to European strategic autonomy -- and the EU embodies those limits in many ways -- but the case of NS2 demonstrates an independent streak in German strategy. It amounts to a zero sum loss for Washington. ..."
"... Lebanon does illustrate the incredible reach of the Empire. A leverage so long that every door leads to self immolation. Your mention of the current spyware scandal is right on point. These are instruments of absolute power. ..."
"... While Trump is certainly no representative of humanity, it just as certainly doesn't look like his rise was in the playbook of the dominant faction of the oligarchy. Trump really seems to fit the mould of a Bonapartist, though recast in the context of contemporary America. This would indicate that the imperial oligarchy is in crisis, which itself could lead to fractures in the empire, and among the empire's vassals in particular. ..."
Jul 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Russia And Germany Win War Over Nord Stream 2

The sanctions war the U.S. waged against Germany and Russia over the Nord Stream 2 pipeline has ended with a total U.S. defeat.

The U.S. attempts to block the pipeline were part of the massive anti-Russia campaign waged over the last five years. But it was always based on a misunderstanding. The pipeline is not to Russia's advantage but important for Germany. As I described Nord Stream 2 in a previous piece :

It is not Russia which needs the pipeline. It can sell its gas to China for just as much as it makes by selling gas to Europe.
...
It is Germany, the EU's economic powerhouse, that needs the pipeline and the gas flowing through it. Thanks to Chancellor Merkel's misguided energy policy - she put an end to nuclear power in German after a tsunami in Japan destroyed three badly placed reactors - Germany urgently needs the gas to keep its already high electricity prices from rising further.

That the new pipeline will bypass old ones which run through the Ukraine is likewise to the benefit of Germany, not Russia. The pipeline infrastructure in the Ukraine is old and near to disrepair. The Ukraine has no money to renew it. Politically it is under U.S. influence. It could use its control over the energy flow to the EU for blackmail. (It already tried once.) The new pipeline, laid at the bottom of the Baltic sea, requires no payment for crossing Ukrainian land and is safe from potential malign influence.

Maybe Chancellor Merkel on her recent visit to Washington DC finally managed to explain that to the Biden administration. More likely though she simply told the U.S. to f*** off. Whatever - the result is in. As the Wall Street Journal reports today:

The U.S. and Germany have reached an agreement allowing completion of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline, officials from both countries say.

Under the four-point agreement, Germany and the U.S. would invest $50 million in Ukrainian green-tech infrastructure, encompassing renewable energy and related industries. Germany also would support energy talks in the Three Seas Initiative, a Central European diplomatic forum.

Berlin and Washington as well would try to ensure that Ukraine continues to receive roughly $3 billion in annual transit fees that Russia pays under its current agreement with Kyiv, which runs through 2024. Officials didn't explain how to ensure that Russia continues to make the payments.

The U.S. also would retain the prerogative of levying future pipeline sanctions in the case of actions deemed to represent Russian energy coercion, officials in Washington said.

So Germany will spend some chump change to buy up, together with the U.S, a few Ukrainian companies that are involved in solar or wind mill stuff. It will 'support' some irrelevant talks by maybe paying for the coffee. It also promises to try something that it has no way to succeed in.

That's all just a fig leave. The U.S. really gave up without receiving anything for itself or for its client regime in the Ukraine.

The Ukraine lobby in Congress will be very unhappy with that deal. The Biden administration hopes to avoid an uproar over it. Yesterday Politico reported that the Biden administration preemptively had told the Ukraine to stop talking about the issue :

In the midst of tense negotiations with Berlin over a controversial Russia-to-Germany pipeline, the Biden administration is asking a friendly country to stay quiet about its vociferous opposition. And Ukraine is not happy.

U.S. officials have signaled that they've given up on stopping the project, known as the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and are now scrambling to contain the damage by striking a grand bargain with Germany.

At the same time, administration officials have quietly urged their Ukrainian counterparts to withhold criticism of a forthcoming agreement with Germany involving the pipeline, according to four people with knowledge of the conversations.

The U.S. officials have indicated that going public with opposition to the forthcoming agreement could damage the Washington-Kyiv bilateral relationship , those sources said. The officials have also urged the Ukrainians not to discuss the U.S. and Germany's potential plans with Congress.

If Trump had done the above Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi would have called for another impeachment.

The Ukrainian President Zelensky is furious over the deal and about being told to shut up. But there is little he can do but to accept the booby price the Biden administration offered him:

U.S. officials' pressure on Ukrainian officials to withhold criticism of whatever final deal the Americans and the Germans reach will face significant resistance.

A source close to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that Kyiv's position is that U.S. sanctions could still stop completion of the project, if only the Biden administration had the will to use them at the construction and certification stages. That person said Kyiv remains staunchly opposed to the project.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration gave Zelensky a date for a meeting at the White House with the president later this summer , according to a senior administration official.

Nord Stream 2 is to 96% ready. Its testing will start in August or September and by the years end it will hopefully deliver gas to western Europe.

Talks about building Nord Stream 3 are likely to start soon.

Posted by b on July 21, 2021 at 17:13 UTC | Permalink

corvo , Jul 21 2021 17:23 utc | 1

Did Merkel also get Biden to promise that neither he nor any of his clients (AQ, ISIS, etc. etc. etc.) would perpetrate any "unfortunate incidents" or "disruptions" on NS 2?

And would any such promises be worth the breath that uttered them?

Down South , Jul 21 2021 17:42 utc | 2
But it was always based on a misunderstanding. The pipeline is not to Russia's advantage but important for Germany

I'm afraid it is you who doesn't understand. Two world wars were fought to keep Germany down. The stated purpose of NATO is to keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down.

They weren't trying to block NS2 to keep Russia out but to keep Germany down,

Abe , Jul 21 2021 17:44 utc | 3
I beg to differ. IMO US didn't cause NS2 friction because it thinks it benefits Russia, but exactly because it benefits Germany too much.

You know, NATO, "Keep the Germans down..." and all that. US must not permit it's vassals to become too economically stronger than their master. They want to drag everyone they can down with them (and in shitter US goes) so they can still be king of the hill (or ad least shitter bottom).

That is why there is also pressure for all western countries to adopt insane immigration, LGBT, austerity policies and what not. What a better way to destroy all these countries, both economically and culturally, or adleast make them far more worse than US, it is only way US can again become "powerhouse", like after WW2.

psychohistorian , Jul 21 2021 17:46 utc | 5
Does this represent a fracturing of the EU? or maybe a change in direction?

What b is pointing out about how if it were Trump....only means that the bullying approach by empire didn't work and now we are seeing face saving bullying and backpedaling like crazy in some areas.

I roll my eyes at this ongoing belief that Trump represented humanity instead of all or some faction of the elite....as a demigod it seems.

Hoyeru , Jul 21 2021 17:54 utc | 6
the "facts" as you state them are not quite right.

1. China is ruthless. They waited until the last possible second to sign a deal with Iran, thus ensuring they are getting the best possible price for Iran's oil, basically robbing Iran blind. The poor Iran didn't have a choice but to agree. Even today, Putin will NOT say how much China is paying for gas on Siberia pipeline and a lot of people think China is robbing Russia blind on the deal. A second Siberia line without a NS2 will put Russia is very bad negotiation position and China in very good one, giving them the advantage to ask for any price of Russia and get it.

2. Merkel is leaving anyway in September and thw Green party that will be taking over HATES RUssia with passion. The NS2 is far from done deal, it needs to be insured. Plus it will fall under the EU 3rd energy package making sure Germany doesn't use it 100% . The NS2 will never be 100 usable, the Green party will see to that. AT best it will be only 50% usage.

And so on and so on. Funny how in today's world, we all have different facts. My facts are different than YOUR facts. My facts are just as relevant as your facts.

librul , Jul 21 2021 17:55 utc | 7
A most worthwhile read:
What is more, the most dangerous potential alliance, from the perspective of the United States, was considered to be an alliance between Russia and Germany. This would be an alliance of German technology and capital with Russian natural and human resources.

The article explains a lot, more than just Germany or Russia.

https://newcoldwar.org/stratfor-chiefs-most-blatant-coup-in-history-interview-from-dec-2014/

Interview was from done a few months after the US coup in Ukraine.

Arch Bungle , Jul 21 2021 17:56 utc | 8
Posted by: Down South | Jul 21 2021 17:42 utc | 2

They weren't trying to block NS2 to keep Russia out but to keep Germany down...

Germany would be 'down' no matter how much financial power it accumulates - i.e regardless of NS2. The imperial garrison at Rammstein AFB will make sure of that. What the Americans fear is the symbolic meaning of NS2 in terms of geopolitical influence for Russia. The loss of maneuverability against Russia that results from a key vassal not being able to move in complete obedience to Uncle Sam's wishes.

Max , Jul 21 2021 17:58 utc | 9
The pipeline construction battle has been won, not the energy flow war.

The Financial Empire is most likely resorting to some CHARADE to find an excuse to later stop the gas flow through Nord Stream 2. Empire's bullying was clearly exposed through sanctions and it LOST the battle of stopping the pipeline construction. So it moves to the next battle to find an excuse to stop the gas flow. Empire's evil intent is visible in these words, "the U.S. also would retain the prerogative of levying future pipeline sanctions in the case of actions deemed to represent Russian energy coercion, officials in Washington said."

The Financial Empire has worked hard over the last century to prevent Germany from allying herself with Russia. It wants to control energy flowing in Eurasia and its pricing. The war will be only won when the Financial Empire is defeated and its global pillars of power DISMANTLED.

"The 'heartland' was an area centered in Eurasia, which would be so situated and catered to by resources and manpower as to render it an unconquerable fortress and a fearsome power; and the 'crescent' was a virtual semi-arc encompassing an array of islands – America, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Japan – which, as 'Sea Powers,' watched over the Eurasian landmass to detect and eventually thwart any tendency towards a consolidation of power on the heartland."

Has the Financial Empire stopped interfering in other regions?

karlof1 , Jul 21 2021 18:15 utc | 10
Curious. Late yesterday Sputnik published this article with a decidedly different message:

"US, Germany Threaten Retaliatory Action Against Russia in Draft Nord Stream 2 Accord - Report...."

"As the US and Germany have reportedly reached a deal on the Nord Stream 2 project, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday, citing the obtained draft text of the agreement, that it would threaten sanctions and other measures if Russia tried to use energy as a 'weapon' against Ukraine , though it did not specify what actions could provoke the countermeasures.

"According to the report, in such a case, Germany will take unspecified national action , a decision that may represent a concession from Chancellor Angela Merkel, who had previously refused to take independent action against Moscow over the gas pipeline that will run from Russia to Germany." [My Emphasis]

The article continues:

"On Tuesday, Ned Price, a spokesman for the US State Department, told reporters that he did not have final details of an agreement to announce, but that 'the Germans have put forward useful proposals, and we have been able to make progress on steps to achieve that shared goal, that shared goal being to ensure that Russia cannot weaponize energy ."

" The US was hoping for explicit language that would commit Germany to shut down gas delivery through Nord Stream 2 if Russia attempted to exert undue influence on Ukraine . Germany, on the other hand, has long rejected such a move, stating that such a threat would only serve to politicize a project that Merkel stresses is solely commercial in nature." [My Emphasis]

The overall motive appears to be this:

"The accord would also commit Germany to use its influence to prolong Ukraine's gas transit arrangement with Russia beyond 2024, possibly for up to ten years . Those talks would begin no later than September 1, according to the news outlet." [My Emphasis]

So, here we have the Outlaw US Empire meddling in the internal affairs of three nations--Germany, Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine cannot afford Russian gas as it has no rubles to pay for it. Thus if Ukraine has no money to buy, then why should Gazprom be obliged to give it away freely? What about other European customers who rely on gas piped through Ukraine; are they going to see what they pay for get stolen by Ukraine? And what happens when the pipelines breakdown from lack of maintenance since Ukraine's broke thanks to the Outlaw Us Empire's coup that razed its economy? Shouldn't the Empire and its NATO vassals who invaded Ukraine via their coup be forced to pay for such maintenance? And just who "weaponized" this entire situation in the first place?

Mar man , Jul 21 2021 18:21 utc | 11
From my understanding, NS 2 was mutually beneficial for Germany and Russia. As noted, Germany desperately needs energy and relying on the outrageously priced and unreliable US LNG was not a viable option.

Russia benefits also.
1.No more high transit fees Russia pays Ukraine. I imagine some of that was finding its way into US pockets after 2014.
2.Ukraine supposedly helped itself to plenty of stolen gas from the pipeline. That will stop.
3.Ukraine was occasionally shutting down the pipeline for political reasons until Russia paid the ransom. Not anymore.

So, Russia and Germany were both highly motivated to finish the pipeline ASAP.

Down South , Jul 21 2021 18:31 utc | 12
Arch Bungle @ 8
Germany would be 'down' no matter how much financial power it accumulates - i.e regardless of NS2.

The imperial garrison at Rammstein AFB will make sure of that.

Putin not too long ago (can't find the article now) said he was prepared to help Europe gain its independence should they wish to do so, Rammstein or no Rammstein.

What the Americans fear is the symbolic meaning of NS2 in terms of geopolitical influence for Russia. The loss of maneuverability against Russia that results from a key vassal not being able to move in complete obedience to Uncle Sam's wishes.
What they fear should this deal go ahead is a Germany/Russia/China Axis that would control the world island and thus the world.
Hoarsewhisperer , Jul 21 2021 18:33 utc | 13
I was convinced that the US of Assholery had lost its infantile anti-NS2 'battle' in September 2020, after watching an episode of DW Conflict Zone in which Sarah Kelly interviewed Niels Annen, Germany's Deputy FM. Annen came to the interview armed to the teeth with embarrassing facts about US hypocrisy including, but not limited to, the fact that USA, itself, buys vast quantities of petroleum products from Russia each year.

The interview is Google-able and, apart from pure entertainment value, Sarah is much easier on the eye than Tim Sebastian...

A.L. , Jul 21 2021 18:34 utc | 14
@Hoyeru | Jul 21 2021 17:54 utc | 6

1. China is ruthless. They waited until the last possible second to sign a deal with Iran, thus ensuring they are getting the best possible price for Iran's oil, basically robbing Iran blind.

Hmmm... I seem to remember Iran shafting China on the south Pars gas field when it looked like the JCPOA was looking likely...

If this memory of mine was correct (it may not be) then you really can't blame China for a little commercial payback.

In any case it was shown as soon as JCPOA Mk.1 was passed Iran RAN, not walked, to smooch up to the west for business, not China, not Russia. So if its just business for Iran then its just business for China.

There's no loyalty discount without loyalty.

robin , Jul 21 2021 18:38 utc | 16
I agree with Down South 2 and Abe 3.

In our eagerness to expose the empire's shortcomings in a quick 'gotcha!' moment we shouldn't rush head first into false premises. To suggest Dear Uncle Sam is concerned with anything other than his own navel is naive. He's the man with the plan. He knows that down the road, Oceania's eastern border won't run along the Dnieper but right off the shore of Airstrip One.

Stonebird , Jul 21 2021 18:59 utc | 17
As has been mentioned before, the NN2 pipeline gives Germany leverage over Russia , not the other way around.

US => Germany => Russia.
Which is now plan b for the US. If then they can use their leverage over Germany to steer it in any direction it wants to vs. Russia.

This will probably be followed by "targeted" sanctions on specific Politicians, Bankers and Heads of industry. They only need to propose such sanctions individually for them to have an effect. Using Pegasus for inside information to Blackmail those it wants to.
*****

Example of a sanctions racket :

Similar to the potential sanctions on any Lebanese Politian or Group Leaders if they get Oil from Iran, Russia or China. The Lebanese population be damned.

"Apparently US Treasury has informed the government of Lebanon, that if any Oil products from Iran make it into Lebanon, in any way; the government of Lebanon and all its members will be sanctioned. This includes the Central Bankers"

Just in case you didn't understand how the crisis in the country is manufactured.

Pegasus again:

"leaks on the targets of Israeli spy program Pegasus, show hundreds in Lebanon including the elected leadership of every party, every media outlet, & every security agency, have been targeted by clients in 10 countries; all belonging to the Imperialist camp.

But it is very easy to guess by looking at who are the external imperialist forces active in Lebanon. USA/UK/France/Turkey/Germany/Canada/Israel/Qatar; that's eight. Plus Saudi Arabia."
*******

PS. Lebanon; This comes as a response to Sayyed Nasrallah stating in his last speech that if the State in Lebanon is not able to provide fuel, he will bring it at the expense of Hizbullah from Iran, dock it in the port of Beirut, and dared anyone to stop it from reaching the people.
*****

Germany will only be the latest victim as the Mafia-US "protection" racket is ramped up.

Lysander , Jul 21 2021 18:59 utc | 18
Both b and the many commenters raise excellent points. Yes, the US wants to hurt both Russia and Germany. And yes the US *definitely* fears close cooperation between Moscow and Berlin. But the main take home lesson is that the US failed despite enormous efforts to block NS2. Russo-German cooperation is inevitable and the world will be better for it.
Passer , Jul 21 2021 19:02 utc | 19
Posted by: Hoyeru | Jul 21 2021 17:54 utc | 6

>>a lot of people think China is robbing Russia blind on the deal

Why would be Russia building Power of Siberia 2 and 3 to China then? Or selling LNG too? You don't have much knowledge on the topic, the way it looks. A giant gas plant was built near the border with China, the second biggest gas plant in the world, because the gas for China is rich in rare elements, thus turning Russia in of the the biggest producers of strategic helium, not to mention extracting many other rare elements. China gets gas that has been cleaned of anything valuable from it, with the exception of the gas itself.

>>merkel is leaving anyway in September and thw Green party that will be taking over

The latest polls show clear lead for CDU/CSU. And it looks like its too late.

>>the NS2 will never be 100 usable, tthe Green party will see to that. AT best it will be only 50% usage.

Do you even follow what has been going on? Germany is free not to buy russian gas, that is, to be left without gas if this is what it wants.

Do you see how nat gas prices exploded in Europe recently? Do you know why is that? Because Russia refuses to sell additional volumes via Ukraine's network. It is a message to finish the issues with NS 2 pipeline faster and then everything will be fine, there will be plenty of space for new gas volumes, and the gas price will drop.

robin , Jul 21 2021 19:12 utc | 21
@ A.L. 14

It is the UNSC resolutions of 2006, 2007 and 2010 which have laid the backbone for the incremental diplomatic, economic and material warfare against Iran. Without them, there would be no narrative framing Iran as an outlaw nor justification for crippling sanctions. That Iran should even be subjected to the JCPOA is in itself an objective injustice.

Each of these resolutions could easily have been blocked by the two permanent members of the UNSC we go to much lengths on this forum to depict as selfless adversaries of the Empire. All they had to do was raise a finger and say niet. In other words, by their actions, these two members placed Iran in a very disadvantageous trading position.

So, did they profit from this position of strength?

karlof1 , Jul 21 2021 19:24 utc | 23
It seems few care, but Sputnik followed its article from yesterday I linked to @10 with another that features an interview with Glenn Diesen . It reiterates:

"According to the draft deal, obtained by Bloomberg, Washington and Berlin would threaten sanctions and other retaliation if Russia 'tries to use energy as a weapon against Ukraine', with Germany being obligated to take unspecified actions in the event of Russian 'misbehaviour' . [My Emphasis]

The article then turns to the interview:

"Professor Glenn Diesen of the University of South-Eastern Norway has explained what is behind the US-Germany row is." [That last "is" appears to be a typo]

I suggest barflies pay close attention to Dr. Diesen who's the author of an outstanding book on the geoeconomics of Russia and China, Russia's Geoeconomic Strategy for a Greater Eurasia . I judge the following Q&A to be most relevant:

"Sputnik: The Biden administration waived sanctions on the firm behind the gas project, Nord Stream 2 AG, and its chief executive, Matthias Warnig. At the same time, Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated in June that the pipeline project was a Russian tool for the coercion of Europe and signaled that the US has leverage against it. What's behind Washington's mixed signals with regard to the project? How could they throw sand in Nord Stream 2's gears, in your opinion - or are Blinken's threats empty?

"Glenn Diesen: The mixed signals demonstrate that the completion of Nord Stream 2 was a defeat for the US. Biden confirmed that he waived sanctions because the project was near complete. Sanctions could not stop the project [link at original], rather they would merely continue to worsen relations with Berlin and Moscow. The best approach for Washington at this point is to recognise that Nord Stream 2 is a done deal, and instead Washington will direct its focus towards limiting the geo-economics consequences of the pipeline by obtaining commitments from Berlin such as preserving Ukraine's role as a transit state [Link at original].

"The US therefore waives sanctions against Nord Stream 2, yet threatens new sanctions if Berlin fails to accept US conditions and limitations on Nord Stream 2. Blinken's threats are loaded with 'strategic ambiguity', which could be aimed to conceal that they are merely empty threats . However, strategic ambiguity is also conducive to prevent Berlin from calculating the "costs" and possible remedies to US threats. Furthermore, ambiguity can be ideal in terms of how to respond as it is not a good look to continuously threaten allies." [Emphasis original]

The professor's closing remarks are also very important regarding Merkel's successor. Where I disagree is with the notion that the Outlaw US Empire has geoeconomic leverage over the EU--military yes, but the Empire is just as uncompetitive versus the EU as it is versus China.

A.L. , Jul 21 2021 19:25 utc | 24
@robin | Jul 21 2021 19:12 utc | 21

So, did they profit from this position of strength?

Of course they did, let's be real. China and Russia are not going to be the all benevolent saviors of the world, they never were, never will.

They will always serve their interests first and foremost. Sometimes, they do get suckered into UNSC resolutions like those you spoke of. Sometimes, there're backroom horse trading that we're not privy to and little countries are just chips on the table...

The best we can hope for is that they can behave with more integrity than currently shown by the incumbent anglospheric bloc in their re-ascendancy.

Either we ditch the UNSC system or everybody get nukes, because i can't see the current UNSC members willing ditch their own, ever.

Prof , Jul 21 2021 19:30 utc | 26
Lysander is correct. The most important point to know is that US hegemony in Europe is predicated on fear and hostility between Germany and Russia.

Types of interdependence between Germany and Russia, eg. NRG security, are a direct threat to US dominance over Europe as a whole.

There are many limitations to European strategic autonomy -- and the EU embodies those limits in many ways -- but the case of NS2 demonstrates an independent streak in German strategy. It amounts to a zero sum loss for Washington.

c1ue , Jul 21 2021 19:47 utc | 28
Way too much confusion over what Nord Stream 2 really means.

1) Russian gas transiting Ukraine had already fallen from 150 bcm to the high 90s/low 100s before Nord Stream 2 goes online. Even after NS2 goes online, a significant amount of Russian gas will still transit via Ukraine.

2) Energy demand generally increases over time, not decreases. Russian gas exports aren't increasing in a straight line, but keep in mind that there are significant new competitors now and in the process coming online. These include Azerbaijan as well as the ongoing pipeline struggle through the Black Sea/Turkey/Eastern Med.

I never believed there was any chance of NS2 not completing; the only question was when.

robin , Jul 21 2021 20:00 utc | 30
@ Stonebird | Jul 21 2021 18:59 utc | 17

Lebanon does illustrate the incredible reach of the Empire. A leverage so long that every door leads to self immolation. Your mention of the current spyware scandal is right on point. These are instruments of absolute power.

What we need now is a worldwide Me Too movement to denounce this leverage. Taking that first step would require a lot of courage for any blackmailed individual, but the one little breach could lead to a flood of world citizens just about fed up with the Empire's shit.

William Gruff , Jul 21 2021 20:12 utc | 32
psychohistorian @5

It pains me that I do not remember exactly who it was, but one of the more erudite posters here mentioned some time ago that Trump seemed more like a Bonapartist figure than a fascist or a typical and simple representative of a faction in the oligarchy. While Trump is certainly no representative of humanity, it just as certainly doesn't look like his rise was in the playbook of the dominant faction of the oligarchy. Trump really seems to fit the mould of a Bonapartist, though recast in the context of contemporary America. This would indicate that the imperial oligarchy is in crisis, which itself could lead to fractures in the empire, and among the empire's vassals in particular.

It is unwise to downplay the significance of Trump coming to power in 2016, regardless of what feelings one may have about the individual himself. The conditions that led to the rise of Trump not only persist, but have intensified. Those conditions cannot be resolved by mass media gaslighting and social media censorship, which actually seems to be having an effect more like holding the emergency relief valve on a boiler closed; it quiets an annoying sound, but causes the underlying issue to grow more severe.

Basically, further splits in the EU are inevitable. It is the timing of those splits that is difficult to predict, but the accuracy of that prediction hinges upon the accuracy of our assessment of events occurring now. Interestingly, Trump is still part of these unfolding events.

Christian J. Chuba , Jul 21 2021 20:33 utc | 34
Fracturing NATO and the West hmmm ... If Germany gains any independence from U.S. coercion they are 'fracturing Europe'. Bad Germany.

Germany must forever remain a vassal state of the U.S. by allowing the U.S. to use another vassal state to control their energy supply. And who says we don't believe in freedom. Neocons are such vile creatures. Always twisting words but remember, whenever they say something, the exact opposite is true.

schmoe , Jul 21 2021 21:00 utc | 37
One issue underlying this fiasco is I believe that the neocons / Atlantic Council were 100% certain that Russia did not have the expertise to lay pipelines at the required depths, and once Allseas was facing sanctions, the project would never be completed.

**********************************************************

Re: China/Russia deal

I believe that the exact pricing formula for Power of Siberia is confidential, but this much is known:

"The price of Russian gas supplies to China increased in the second quarter of 2021 for the first time since deliveries started via the Power of Siberia pipeline in 2019, but daily delivery volumes fell in April, Interfax reported on Sunday.

Russian gas giant Gazprom GAZP.MM has said it supplied China with 3.84 billion cubic metres of gas via the Power of Siberia pipeline in its first year of operation.

Citing Chinese customs data, Interfax said the price of gas increased to $148 per thousand cubic metres, rising from $121 in the first quarter, and reversing a downward trend."

**********************************************************************************

Also, Victoria Nuland informed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today about Biden's cave to Russia. That must have been brutal for her. Regardless, nice to see a rare display of sanity from s US administration.

Baron , Jul 21 2021 21:16 utc | 39
@librul | Jul 21 2021 17:55 utc | 7

The primary and only objective of the US Foreign policy vis-a-vis Europe since WW2 has been to prevent Russia and Germany (now read the German run EU project) coupling up, that's it, nothing else matters on Europe.

The completion of N-2 presents a serious blow tho this aim, the new pipeline is a must for Germany, it must get finished, without it Germany's supply of energy would have been almost fully controlled by the Americans who have either direct or indirect authority over every major source of hydrocarbons except for Venezuela and Russia, the latter only partly, the Ukrainian pipeline is fully in their sphere of influence.

Energy fuels everything from private dwellings to major corporations, it's together with labour and technology the most important ingredient in every economy. To lose control of it would have been a catastrophe for Germany, in particular if one takes into account the secret treaty between Germany and the Allies (read the US) from 1949.

"On 23 May 1949, the Western Allies ratified a new German constitution, known as the "Basic Law" or Grundgesetz. However, two days prior, a secret state treaty - Geheimer Staatsvertrag - was also signed to grant complete Allied control over education and all licensed media, press, radio, television and publishing houses until the year 2099. This was confirmed by Major-General Gerd-Helmut Komossa, former head of German Military Intelligence in his book, "Die Deutsche Karte" or The German Card".

Has anyone read the Komossa's book in full?

karlof1 , Jul 21 2021 21:18 utc | 40
schmoe @37--

What's interesting about Power of Siberia-1 is that the gas is being stripped -- refined at the newly completed Amur Gas Plant -- of its components prior to being piped into China. I don't know if Germany's petrochemical industry will be deprived in similar manner with NS2.

CD Waller @36--

Nothing in the energy production realm is carbon neutral. ROSATOM has mastered the fuel cycle which means most if not all toxic waste will now be burned for energy. New reactors do NOT use water as coolant. Clearly you need to update what you know about nuclear power.

Jackrabbit , Jul 21 2021 21:31 utc | 41
The Russian 'victory' is very narrow and mostly consists of the patience and determination to follow-thru while consistently being derided/attacked by Western media, pundits, and politicians:
  1. Since Russia/Gasprom owns NS2 100% (paying for half the construction cost outright and financing the rest), there was never much need to stop construction, only to stop/limit consumption. The 'trick' was to find a way to accomplish US/NATO goals that would not make German leaders look like puppets.
  2. Biden's approach looks good compared to Trump's heavy-handed approach. As they are BOTH spokesman of the Empire's Deep State, we can surmise that this is merely good cop / bad cop theatrics.
  3. This USA-GERMAN agreement makes Germany appear to voluntarily support EU/NATO - a good thing(tm) that most Germans will accept without question. But behind the scenes, it's unlikely that there was ever any real choice, just a mutual desire to fashion a 'smart' policy that didn't undermine German political leaders.
  4. Germany can now be pressured to support USA-Ukraine belligerence - if they don't they will be portrayed as not living up to their obligations to US/NATO/EU/Ukraine as enshrined in this agreement.
  5. If Russia retaliates against German purchase reductions in any way they will be labeled as a politically-driven, unreliable supplier. That will 'invite' sanctions and spark efforts to force EU/Germany to eliminate all Russia goods from their markets.
  6. Russia and China are likely to be increasingly linked in Western media/propaganda. Deficiencies of one or the other will apply to BOTH.
The next few winters in EU will be very interesting.

!!

karlof1 , Jul 21 2021 21:44 utc | 43
Baron @39--

Thanks very much for mentioning Komossa's book!! Here's a very short but illuminating article about book and author . There appear to be copies available for downloading, but I've yet to find one.

karlof1 , Jul 21 2021 22:40 utc | 48
Jackrabbit @41 incorrectly says Russia owns NS2 100% It's owned by Nord Stream 2 AG, and here's its website listing its financial investors, while its shareholders/owners are global. The company is located in Zug, Switzerland. Here we are told who the financial companies are :

"In April 2017, Nord Stream 2 AG signed the financing agreements for the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project with ENGIE, OMV, Royal Dutch Shell, Uniper, and Wintershall. These five European energy companies will provide long-term financing for 50 per cent of the total cost of the project."

As with the first string, Russia doesn't own it 100% nor did it finance it completely; rather, its stake was @50% It appears both Nord Streams will be managed from the same location in Zug. I hope the company produces a similar sort of book to record its accomplishment as it did for the first string pair, which can be found and downloaded here .

Jackrabbit , Jul 21 2021 22:55 utc | 50
karlof1 @Jul21 22:40 #48

This Deutsche Welle (DW) explainer details NS2 ownership and financing :

Who is paying for it: Russia's energy giant Gazprom is the sole shareholder of the Nord Stream 2 AG , the company in charge of implementing the €9.5 billion ($11.1 billion) project. Gazprom is also covering half of the cost. The rest, however, is being financed by five western companies: ENGIE, OMV, Royal Dutch Shell, Uniper and Wintershall.
Emphasis is mine.

<> <> <> <> <>

Nord Stream 2 AG is a German company that is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Russia's Gazprom. The German subsidiary has borrowed half of the construction cost but is 100% owner of the NS2 project.

!!

Jackrabbit , Jul 21 2021 23:07 utc | 53
From karlof1's link to Nord Stream 2 AG's Shareholder and Financial Investors page makes it clear that NordStream 2 AG is a subsidiary of Gazprom international projects LLC, which is, in turn, a subsidiary of Gazprom. Under "Shareholder" there is only one company listed: Gasprom.

PS I was mistaken: Nord Stream 2 AG is a Swiss company, not a German one.

!!

schmoe , Jul 21 2021 23:20 utc | 56
Jackrabbit @ 41

I am no sure if this is that plausible:

"4. Germany can now be pressured to support USA-Ukraine belligerence - if they don't they will be portrayed as not living up to their obligations to US/NATO/EU/Ukraine as enshrined in this agreement.

If Russia retaliates against German purchase reductions in any way they will be labeled as a politically-driven, unreliable supplier. That will 'invite' sanctions and spark efforts to force EU/Germany to eliminate all Russia goods from their markets."

Germany has been portrayed as not living up to its NATO obligations one way or another since about 1985, and with respect to NS 2, since 2018. They do not seem fazed - maybe a Green win would change that. If the USA-Ukraine get (more) belligerent, Germany might be less likely to insist on Ukraine gas transit after 2024.

Jackrabbit , Jul 21 2021 23:20 utc | 57
The Russian government owns a majority of Gazprom. As majority owner they can be said to control the company and with that control comes an inescapable political dimension.

For the purposes of this discussion: the Russian government has biggest stake in the financial success of Nord Stream 2. That "success" depends on gas sold, not simply the completion of NS2 construction.

!!

[Jul 05, 2021] I am seeing more of is pressure to take the vaccine in US even though the infection numbers are going down in most states

Why there is so much social pressure if the idea of "herd immunity" became a fiasco after emergence of Delta variant, which like South African variant can infect vaccinated people and thus can spread in vaccinated population (although not as quickly as in unvaccinated population). What government medical bureaucrats like Fauci are hiding ?
Jul 05, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
psychohistorian , Jul 5 2021 5:50 utc | 74

I am retired in the US so I only see some of the working world through others eyes. What I am seeing more of is pressure to take the vaccine in US even though the infection numbers are going down in most states.

I have shared before that I have a cousin, my age, that got one of the mRNA vaccines and now has some sort of blood cancer. I believe this is related to the mRNA vaccines and that more cases like my cousin will occur and eventually it will effect an "important" someone who the MSM can't suppress the connection to the vaccines and the flood gates of related cases like my cousin will open....can you imagine what the blowback will be??.....the jaded in me says they are planning on that blowback to keep the chaos/fear/manipulation level high.....its all China's fault/snark

What is the final straw that will bring the barbarian shit show to a halt? Inquiring minds want to know. What will finally break through the brainwashing?

[Jul 05, 2021] Financial imperialism as the method of control of vassals has drawbacks --- it work as long as neoliberal ideology dominates. With the collapse of neoliberal ideology it has limited shelf life

There is also technological imperialism. As long as key technologies (for example CPU production) are controlled by the USA the project of power via sanctions is possible and viable. But the USA demined this regime due to the greed of neoliberal elite which offshored a lot of production to China and Taiwan.
Jul 05, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
Max , Jul 4 2021 17:12 utc | 14

Is your nation sovereign (independent) or a suzerainty (controlled)? Who wants to make us all, whether we be nations or individuals, ENSLAVED? Name a democracy that isn't a suzerainty.

Today slavery is less about people owning other people, instead, it is about exploiting and controlling them. The Financial Empire wants to build a global empire by capturing various regions, privatizing their assets and controlling them using financial mechanisms. Its CONTROL elements are:

-- MEDIA -> Mind. Control individual's & society's information and RICHNESS of thinking. The media enables matrix & servitude.

-- MARKETS -> Money. Control individual's REACH of influence & impact by controlling their money supply and its value. Majority (90+%) of money is created by private banks controlled by the Global Financial Syndicate. This enables it to consolidate assets with its kleptocrats and power with its elites (financial, political, bureaucrats, business,...).

-- MIS (Military Intelligence Service) -> Might. If the individual/society/elites wants to be independent and have marshaled enough resources to build a good RESISTANCE then they're constrained or eliminated by intelligence agencies, coup masters or use of force.

However, the foundation of this Financial Empire is based on lies, myths, deceits, frauds, ... What is its Achilles' Heel?

"It is not possible to found a lasting power upon injustice, perjury, and treachery. These may, perhaps, succeed at first, and limp along on hope for awhile with a flourishing appearance. But time betrays their weakness, and they eventually fall into ruin of their own designs."
– Demosthenes

Prof , Jul 4 2021 21:00 utc | 42

Read this on the semiconductor "iron curtain" the US is erecting against China:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/04/technology/tech-cold-war-chips.html

The analysis is typically poor.

But it shows the fundamental contradictions of global capitalism: on the one hand, the internationalization of division of labor as an aspect of technological advancement; on the other hand, divisions and rivalries between states and the monopolistic ambitions of technological leaders, which act against cooperation, mutual gain and ultimately human and social development for all.

This is why capitalism has to be overthrown and eradicated. It is anti-development for the poor. And its fundamental dynamics of geopolitical division pave the way for world war.

steven t johnson , Jul 5 2021 0:01 utc | 56

Piotr Berman@54 advocates compromising with imperialism. Sadly, imperialism doesn't return the favor. The operation of the imperialist world system inevitably leads to economic crises, which cannot be resolved by a good policy, because it's the system that is crazy. The system makes the people running it go nuts, not the overlords being crazy that cause things to go nuts. World economic crises, including the inability to cope with world systemic threats like climate change, inevitably afflict the poor worse. Reforms will not take away this disparity in effect. Most of all, of course, war, threats of war, fears of war, arms races, interventions, economic sieges are indispensable to the normal function of the imperialist world system.

You can't win a rigged game. Telling people they should play anyhow because it's the only game in town, makes no sense.

When the end of the road comes into view, it's too late. Insisting on mile markers till the catastrophe is not wisdom.

[Jul 03, 2021] States that have joined the Neoliberal US Empire, have forfeited their sovereign rights on foreign and domestic policies to those of the United

Jul 03, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

vetinLA , Jun 17 2021 17:52 utc | 26

State

fyi@20 stated;

"In effect, those that have joined the Liberal US Empire, have forfeited their sovereign rights on foreign and domestic policies to those of the United State. You can see it all over Europe but also among Muslim countries as well as in East Asia."

In fact, there is NOTHING "liberal" about the U$ empire, and it's conduct with the rest of the world.

https://search.yahoo.com/search?p=liberal+definition&fr=yfp-t-s&fp=1&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8

[Jun 22, 2021] The Imperial Pottery Barn rule: "What cannot be owned must be broken"

Highly recommended!
Jun 22, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

robin , Jun 22 2021 19:33 utc | 14

Posted by: Down South | Jun 22 2021 18:01 utc |

They say madness is doing the same thing over and over again and each time expecting a different result.

There's nothing mad about this strategy. If it doesn't make sense, your premise is probably wrong.


Think of it as the Imperial Pottery Barn rule :

"What cannot be owned must be broken"

Weaver , Jun 22 2021 19:50 utc | 18

Robin, "the Imperial Pottery Barn rule" is an extremely good analogy. I'm going to have a hard time citing you if I ever use that. I've also seen US foreign policy described as "rubblization," with regard to Syria especially.

[Jun 12, 2021] Putin warns US may regret using dollar as sanctions weapon - Nation - postguam.com

Jun 10, 2021 | www.postguam.com

President Vladimir Putin said Russia doesn't want to stop using the dollar as he accused the U.S. of exploiting the currency's dominance for sanctions and warned the policy may rebound on Washington.

Russia has to adopt other payment methods because the U.S. "uses its national currency for various kinds of sanctions," Putin said late Friday in St. Petersburg at a videoconference with representatives of international media organizations. "We don't do this deliberately, we are forced to do it."

Settlements in national currencies with other countries in areas such as defense sales and reductions in foreign-exchange reserves held in dollars eventually will damage the U.S. as the greenback's dominance declines, Putin said. "Why do U.S. political authorities do this? They're sawing the branch on which they sit," he said.

me title=

Putin spoke a day after Russia announced it will eliminate the dollar from its oil fund to reduce vulnerability to sanctions, a largely symbolic move as the switch in holdings will take place within the central bank's reserves. Russia has tried with limited success to shift away from the dollar for years amid international sanctions over Putin's 2014 annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in eastern Ukraine, as well as for alleged cyber attacks, election meddling and espionage operations.

The Russian leader's comments came ahead of his first summit meeting with U.S. President Joe Biden in Geneva on June 16. While he praised Biden as one of the world's most experienced leaders, Putin said he expects no breakthrough in relations with the U.S. at the talks.

And he offered a warning at Friday's meeting for the U.S., based on what he said was his own experiences "as a former citizen of the former Soviet Union."

"The problem with empires is that they think they can afford small errors and mistakes," which gradually accumulate, Putin said. "There comes a time when they can no longer be dealt with. And the U.S., with a confident step, a confident gait, a firm step, is walking straight along the path of the Soviet Union."

[Jun 12, 2021] Scrap Sanctions Warfare! by Oliver Boyd

Looks like UNZ commenters are not fans of the US government :-)
Jun 09, 2021 | www.unz.com

Sanctions are the "gentlemanly" neo-imperial language of gunboat diplomacy, never better expressed than the attempts of the British government in the early 1950s to discipline a newly democratic Iran. First the British Labour Government, then a Conservative government under a splenetic Churchill, tried to put a halt to the runaway popularity of Mohammed Mossadegh, prime minister of Iran, and his policy to shut down the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and nationalize Iran's own oil. The British sabotaged their own company, refused to distribute the oil, and did everything else they could to impoverish Iran. This was only after the AIOC had refused to budge from its insistence on taking practically all of the profits and to refrain from treating Iranian oil workers as subhuman. Ironically, the British needed AIOC money to finance their own program of industrial nationalization and the welfare state. As is so often the case, the "sanctions" merely hardened anti-imperial sentiment, and were succeeded by a joint US-UK directed regime-change coup d'etat

None of this need suggest a diminution in the importance of national sovereignty. Sovereign nations should be free to trade with whomsoever they choose, to protect which domestic industries they consider worthy of protection. That is their right. They also have the right to enter into trade agreements with others for the purpose of regulating the conditions of trade between them, provided that they enter into such agreements without duress, bribery or punishment.

Questions of Definition

The Council for Foreign Relations (CFR) explains that sanctions have become one of the most favored tools for governments to respond to foreign policy challenges. The term sanctions can refer to travel bans, asset freezes, arms embargoes, capital restraints, foreign aid reductions, and trade restrictions, and represent efforts to coerce, deter, punish, or shame entities that are considered by those who wield them to endanger their interests. They are generally viewed as a lower-cost, lower-risk course of action in calculations that balance diplomacy against war. Yet sanctions can be just as devasting in terms of loss of human life. They may be particularly attractive in the case of policy responses to foreign crises in which national interest is considered less than vital, or where military action is not feasible.

Sanctions that blanket entire populations generally do most damage to poorer and more vulnerable social strata, who lack the means to avoid or compensate for their consequences. The USA has more than two dozen sanctions regimes. Some target specific countries such as Cuba and Iran, others target specific categories of person or institution or even specific named individuals. Sanctions have been used in efforts of counterterrorism, counter-narcotics, nonproliferation, democracy and human rights promotion, conflict resolution, and cybersecurity. They are frequently applied as a form of punishment or reprisal for behavior in which it is alleged that the target has engaged and of which the applying entity disapproves.

In the case of the UN Security Council sanctions resolutions must pass the fifteen-member council by a majority vote and without a veto from any of the five permanent members: the United States, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom. The most common types of UN sanctions, binding for all member states, are asset freezes, travel bans, and arms embargoes. The UN relies on member states for enforcement, with all the idiosyncrasies and abuses that this entails. The council-imposed sanctions against Southern Rhodesia in 1966 were intended to undermine Ian Smith's white supremacist regime and were followed in 1977 by another set of comprehensive UN sanctions against apartheid South Africa. They have been applied more than twenty times since 1990 against targeting parties to an intrastate conflict, as in Somalia, Liberia, and Yugoslavia in the 1990s.

The European Union imposes sanctions as part of its Common Foreign and Security Policy. They must receive unanimous consent from member states in the Council of the European Union, the body that represents EU leaders. The EU has levied its sanctions more than thirty times. Individual EU states may also impose harsher sanctions independently within their national jurisdiction.

The USA resorts to economic and financial sanctions more than any other country. Presidents may issue an executive order that declares a national emergency and invokes special powers to regulate commerce for a period of one year, unless extended by the president or terminated by a joint resolution of Congress. Most of the more than fifty states of emergency declared by Congress remain in effect today. Congress may pass legislation imposing new sanctions or modifying existing ones.

In 2019, the United States had comprehensive sanctions regimes on Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Sudan, and Syria, as well as more than a dozen other programs targeting individuals and entities (currently some 6,000). Existing U.S. sanctions programs are administered by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), while other departments, including State, Commerce, Homeland Security, and Justice, may also play an integral role. The secretary of state can designate a group a foreign terrorist organization or label a country a state sponsor of terrorism, both of which have sanctions implications. State and local authorities may also contribute to enforcement efforts.

The practice of sanctions received a significant boost with the formation of the World Trade Organization, which recognizes the legitimacy of sanctions as a response to the failure of parties in a trade dispute to reach agreement on satisfactory compensation. A complainant may ask the Dispute Settlement Body for permission to impose trade sanctions against the respondent that has failed to implement. The complainant's retaliatory response may not go beyond the level of the harm caused by the respondent. The complainant should first seek to suspend obligations in the same sector as that in which the violation or other nullification or impairment was found, unless the complainant considers it impracticable or ineffective to remain within the same sector The complainant is allowed countermeasures that are in effect and would in other circumstances be inconsistent with the WTO Agreement. In other words, the result is that a complainant responds to one trade barrier with another trade barrier, contrary to the liberalization philosophy underlying the WTO. Such measures are nearly always harmful for both the complainant and the target. Although such retaliation requires prior approval by the DSB 1, the countermeasures are applied selectively by one Member against another. The suspension of obligations is temporary and the DSB is obligated to maintain a review of the situation for as long as there is no implementation. The suspension must be revoked once the Member concerned has fully complied with the DSB's recommendations and rulings.

In a 2019 decision the WTO allowed China to impose trade sanctions on $3.6 billion of American goods on the grounds that the USA had not followed WTO rules in the way it imposed duties on what it regarded as unfairly cheap Chinese goods. The ruling concluded a case that China brought against the USA in 2013 that stemmed from levies placed on more than 40 Chinese goods. At issue were subsidies that the USA accused China of providing to its companies so that they can sell goods more cheaply overseas.

The case touched on some of the deep politics of neoliberalism for which the WTO is supreme icon, and which make the very notion of sanctions problematic as evidenced in frequent criticisms of the WTO . These are that free trade benefits developed countries more than developing countries; that countries should trade without discrimination means a local firm is not allowed to favor local contractors, giving an unfair advantage to multinational companies and imposing costs for local firms; ; it is important that nations be allowed to assist in the diversification of their economies and not be penalized for favoring emerging industries; free trade is not equally sought across different industries "" notably, both the US and EU retain high tariffs on agriculture, which hurts farmers in developing economies; principles of free trade often ignore environmental considerations, considerations of labor equity and cultural diversity.

After 9/11 "" still one of the least understood events in modern history "" and amidst the subsequent US invasions of the sovereign countries of Afghanistan and Iraq, and de-stabilization of many others (including Libya, Syria, Ukraine), the USA set about disrupting what it deemed the financial infrastructure supporting terrorists and international criminals, (but not including the USA itself). The Patriot Act awarded Treasury Department officials far-reaching authority to freeze the assets and financial transactions of individuals and other entities suspected of supporting terrorism, and broad powers to designate foreign jurisdictions and financial institutions as "primary money laundering concerns." Treasury needs only a reasonable suspicion""not necessarily any evidence""to target entities under these laws. The centrality of New York and the dollar to the global financial system means these U.S. policies are felt globally. Penalties for sanctions violations can be huge in terms of fines, loss of business, and reputational damage. Sanctions regimes today increasingly impact not merely the primary targeted countries or entities but also those who would do business with such countries or entities.

Questions of Effectiveness

Sanctions have a poor track record, registering a modest 20-30 percent success rate at best, according to one source, Emily Cashen, writing for World Finance in 2017. According to leading empirical analyses, between 1915 and 2006, comprehensive sanctions were successful, at best, just 30 percent of the time. The longer sanctions are in place, the less likely they are to be effective, as the targeted state tends to adapt to its new economic circumstances instead of changing its behavior.

Examples of "successful" applications of sanctions (always judged from the very partial viewpoint of those who impose them) are said to include their role in persuading the Iranian leadership to comply with limits to its uranium enrichment program. But if this was "success," why then did the USA break its agreement with Iran in 2018? And why was there an agreement in the first place if Iran had never had nuclear weapons nor was likely to produce them on its own account without serious provocation. Sanctions are also said to have pressured Gadaffi in handing over the Lockerbie suspects for trial, renouncing the nation's weapons of mass destruction and ending its support for terrorist activities. But then, if that was "success," why did NATO bomb Libya back to the stone age in 2011?

Sanctions that are effective in one setting may fail in another . Context is everything. Sanctions programs with relatively limited objectives are generally more likely to succeed than those with major political ambitions. Furthermore, sanctions may achieve their desired economic effect but fail to change behavior. Only correlations, not causal relationships, can be determined. The central question is one of comparative utility: Is the imposition of sanctions better or worse than not imposing sanctions, from whose viewpoint, and why? Best practices are said to combine punitive measures with positive inducements; set attainable goals; build multilateral support; be credible and flexible: and give the target reason to believe that sanctions will be increased or reduced based on its behavior.

In cases where the targeted country has other trading options unilateral measures have no real impact or may be counterproductive. Sanctions against Russia over Ukraine may have simply helped to push Russia closer to its eastern neighbors, notably China. To bypass sanctions Russia has shifted its trade focus towards Asia. Asian non-cooperation with the sanctions helps explain why Russia was expecting to grow its trade with China to $200bn by 2020. For several countries in western Europe, the sanctions had a double-edged sword. Russia is the European Union's third largest commercial partner, and the EU, reciprocally, is Russia's chief trade partner, accounting for almost 41 percent of the nation's trade prior to the sanctions. In 2012, before the Ukrainian crisis began, the EU exported a record €267.5bn ($285bn) of goods to Russia. Further, US sanctions against Russia increasingly and patently had nothing to do with Ukraine and everything to do with US interest in exploiting its imperial relationship with West European vassal states to grow its LNG (liquefied natural gas) market in competition with Russia, and by doing everything possible to obstruct "" and to coerce European nations into helping it obstruct "" Russia's Nord Stream 2 oil and gas pipeline that will bring cheap Russian oil to Europe without passing through Ukraine. The very opposite of principles of globalization and free trade.

The USA can afford to be aggressive in sanctions policies largely because (for the time being, and that time is getting shorter by the day) there is no alternative to the dollar and because there is no single country export market quite as attractive (for now and even then, one must wonder about China) as the USA. Sanctions that are effective in one setting may fail in another. Context is everything. Sanctions programs with relatively limited objectives are generally more likely to succeed than those with major political ambitions. Furthermore, sanctions may achieve their desired economic effect but fail to change behavior. Only correlations, not causal relationships, can be determined. The central question is one of comparative utility: Is the imposition of sanctions better or worse than not imposing sanctions, from whose viewpoint, and why? Best practices are said to combine punitive measures with positive inducements; set attainable goals; build multilateral support; be credible and flexible: and give the target reason to believe that sanctions will be increased or reduced based on its behavior.

Sanctions and Human Misery

Since the early 1990s, the US, Europe and other developed economies have employed sanctions on other nations more than 500 times , seeking to assert their influence on the global stage without resorting to military interventions. Yet military interventions tend to happen in any case suggesting that in some cases the sanctions are intended to "soften up" the target prior to armed conflict). The economic stranglehold of stringent sanctions on Iraq after the successful allied invasion of 1991 caused widescale malnutrition and prolonged suffering, and a lack of medical supplies and a shortage of clean water led to one of the worst humanitarian crises in modern history. Sanctions all but completely cut off the oil trade. Iraq lost up to $130 billion in oil revenues during the 1990s, causing intense poverty to many Iraqi civilians. Prior to the embargo, Iraq had relied on imports for two thirds of its food supply. With this source suddenly cut off, the price of basic commodities rose 1,000 percent between 1990 and 1995. Infant mortality increased 150 percent, according to a report by Save the Children, with researchers estimating that between 670,000 and 880,000 children under five died because of the impoverished conditions caused by the sanctions. Then US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright notoriously excused this horrendous slaughter as "worth the price ." During the Gulf War, almost all of Iraq's essential infrastructure was bombed by a US-led coalition, leaving the country without water treatment plants or sewage treatment facilities, prompting extended outbreaks of cholera and typhoid.

Targeted sanctions can be equally devastating. The de facto boycott on Congolese minerals, for example, has led to the loss of more than 750,000 jobs in the nation's mining sector. The loss of income resulting from this mass redundancy has had a severe impact on child health in the nation, with conservative estimates recording a 143 percent increase in infant mortality. Despite an international shift away from comprehensive sanctions, this Congolese suffering indicates targeted measures are still not free from ethical quandaries.

Application of sanctions became more popular at the end of the first cold war because previously targeted nations could negotiate for relief with the oppositional superpower. In the succeeding era of greater enthusiasm for sanctions it became clear that they could have dire consequences for civilian populations, and this helps account for increased popularity of targeted sanctions.

Sanctions of Spite: Syria and the Caesar Act

There are many current examples of the murderous horror of the impact of sanctions by "civilized," usually western powers, especially when their targets are poorer countries such as Venezuela and Syria. Not untypically, some of the behaviors that the imperialists seek to change are themselves the consequence of past imperial aggression.

The secular regime of Bashar Assad in Syria has faced a ten-year existential threat from the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda affiliates, ISIS and other jihadist entities supported by an array of global and regional actors including the USA, UK, and other NATO members, Israel, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the UAE. Whatever the regime's defects they are at the very least comparable and in some cases dwarfed by those of many of Syria's opponents in the Arab world. The significance of genuine popular support for Assad , demonstrated in numerous polls, has been marginalized by western mainstream media. The regime's survival, with air support from Russia and ground support from Hezbollah and Iran, is extraordinary by any measure. Yet the USA has continued to interfere in the affairs of Syria with a view to its continuing impoverishment and destabilization by allowing Turkey to occupy large areas of the north west and populate these with jihadist emigrees; funding Kurdish forces to secure Syria's oil resources on behalf of the USA, and for maintaining prisons and camps for ISIS supporters, by maintaining its own military bases; and permitting a constant succession of Israeli bombing attacks on what Israel claims are Iranian-backed militia or Syrian Arab Army militia working in collaboration with Iran; and approving further Israeli incursions into the Golan Heights.

Defeat of ISIS and recovery of non-Kurdish areas outside of Idlib by the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) took place in conditions of considerable economic challenge, exacerbated by US-imposed sanctions against both Syria and its neighbor Lebanon. This had a corrosive impact on relations among top regime figures. Bashar al-Assad's billionaire first cousin and richest man in Syria, Rami Makhlouf, complained in early 2020 of regime harassment and arrests of employees. Until then, the Makhlouf family enjoyed exclusive access to business opportunities and monopolies on hotels, tobacco, and communications, partly camouflaged by a philanthropic empire that assisted many Syrians through the conflict . Some $30 billion of the country's wealth, representing 20% of all deposits in Lebanese banks, was trapped by Beirut's financial implosion, exacerbated by the unprecedented explosion "" possibly accidental, possibly sabotage "" in the city's harbor area on August 4. Syrian businessmen needed Beirut's banks to conduct business abroad, and to evade sanctions. A regime crackdown on money transfer companies made matters worse by creating a dollar shortage , depriving thousands of families who were dependent on foreign remittances. Before the explosion, purchasing power of the Syrian pound was already worth 27 times less than before the start of the conflict.

Deteriorating economic conditions ravaged Syria's surviving pretensions to socialist principle. In the first decade of Bashar's rule, there had been big gains in healthcare in terms of available beds, hospitals, and nursing staff. But by now there were 50% fewer doctors, 30% fewer hospitals. Before the conflict, 90% of pharmaceutical needs were filled by Syrian factories. By 2018 those factories which remained had trouble getting raw materials and replacement parts for equipment because of sanctions. Before the conflict there was improved land irrigation and food security. In 2011, abject poverty stood at less than one percent, rising to 35 percent by 2015. The percentage of those facing food insecurity had fallen from 2.2% in 1999 to 1.1% in 2010. Now, 33% lacked food security. One third of homes were damaged or destroyed, 380,000 killed and 11 million displaced since 2011.

Economic conditions were worsened by ever tightening economic sanctions and US enforcement of the so-called Caesar Act from June 2020 (named after a faked human rights scandal in 2015). The Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act sanctioned the Syrian government, including President Bashar al-Assad, for alleged war crimes. The purposes were to cripple Syria for the purposes of regime change, while luring Russia further into the Syrian quagmire. The Act targeted 39 individuals and entities, including the president's wife, Asma. Anyone doing business with the regime, no matter where, was potentially vulnerable to travel restrictions and financial sanctions. The Caesar Act smeared the Syria Central Bank as a "˜money laundering' institution and sought to render it impossible for Syrian companies to export and import from Lebanon. It made it difficult or impossible for Syrians abroad to transfer money to family members. The Act contributed to devaluation of the Syrian pound which tumbled from 650 Syrian pounds to one US dollar in October 2019 to 2600 to the US dollar in summer 2020.

The Caesar Act (alongside legal initiatives in Europe designed to charge senior administration officials with war crimes) were designed to stymie reconstruction, hit the construction, electricity, and oil sectors, and cripple the Lebanese private companies that would otherwise lead reconstruction efforts. Sanctions prevented non-U.S. aid organizations from assisting reconstruction. An opposition leader predicted it would result in " even greater levels of destitution, famine, and worsening criminality and predatory behavior " and would precipitate regime change, migratory flight, excess deaths, and youth deprivation. In a climate of regulatory confusion, sanctions often encourage over-compliance. Prospects of reconstruction investment funds from Russian companies were negatively impacted . Blumenthal ascribed responsibility for the Caesar sanctions initiative to a "years-long lobbying campaign carried out by a network of regime-change operatives working under cover of shadowy international NGOs and Syrian-American diaspora groups." The country had already suffered severe US and EU economic sanctions. A 2016 UNESCO report found that sanctions had brought an end to humanitarian aid because sanctions regulations, licenses, and penalties made it so difficult and risky (Sterling 2020). In 2018, United Nations Special Rapporteur, Idriss Jazairy, observed that sanctions impacted negatively on

"agricultural inputs and outputs, medicines, on many dual use items related to water and sanitation, public electricity and transportation, and eventually on rebuilding schools, hospitals and other public buildings and services, are increasingly difficult to justify, if they ever were justifiable "

After 500,000 civilians returned to Aleppo following its liberation in 2016, US sanctions and UN rules prohibited reconstruction. Returnees were allowed "shelter kits" with plastic but rebuilding with glass and cement walls was not allowed because "˜reconstruction' was prohibited.

In brazen acknowledgment of US support for the HTS terrorists of Idlib, the Caesar Act exempted Idlib province, as well as the northeast areas controlled by US troops and the SDF. It designated $50 million for "˜humanitarian aid' to these areas. Other US allies pumped in hundreds of millions of dollars more in aid, further exacerbating pressure on the Syrian pound and substantially increasing prices for all commodities in regime-controlled areas.

Syria experts Joshua Landis and Steven Simon critiqued the logic of US sanctions policy, arguing that the:

"best-designed sanctions can be self-defeating, strengthening the regimes they were designed to hurt and punishing the societies they were supposed to protect."

They recalled the destruction of Iraq's middle class in the 1990s, when US sanctions killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis:

"Their effect was gendered, disproportionately punishing women and children. The notion that sanctions work is a pitiless illusion." .

Several European nations (Italy, Poland, Austria, Greece, Hungary) indicating unease with the continuing stagnation of US and EU sanctions policy, restored tacit contacts with Damascus. While the EU was an important source of humanitarian aid for internally displaced people in Syria and for displaced Syrians abroad, it continued to refrain from dealing directly with Damascus or from support for reconstruction efforts, on the grounds of continuing instability.

Conclusion

Under indubitably wise international leadership, acting within a framework of equitable political power among nation states whose sovereignty is sacrosanct, then perhaps sanctions policies might sometimes be strategically appropriate. These conditions clearly do not apply. The increasing weaponization of sanctions is a powerful contribution to a crumbling world order, one that invokes the grave danger of over-reaction by an aggrieved victim, in a context of intense economic and military competition between rival nuclear powers.

Oliver Boyd-Barrett is Professor Emeritus at Bowling Green State University, Ohio, and at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. He is an expert on international media, news, and propaganda. His writings can be accessed by subscription at Substack at https://oliverboydbarrett.substack.com.

MarkU , says: June 8, 2021 at 11:44 am GMT "¢ 1.6 days ago

A comprehensive roundup of the sanctions-based aggression being imposed on the world by the bankster dominated west. I really don't think the majority of citizens have a clue what is being done by their rulers, nor any idea of the sheer hatred being fostered by those actions. The time for waking up is well overdue, the west has been sucked dry by those same policies (especially the US) and the fall is imminent.

onebornfree , says: "¢ Website June 8, 2021 at 4:40 pm GMT "¢ 1.4 days ago

"The increasing weaponization of sanctions is a powerful contribution to a crumbling world order, one that invokes the grave danger of over-reaction by an aggrieved victim, in a context of intense economic and military competition between rival nuclear powers."

Fact: "War is the health of the state" [Randolph Bourne]- meaning, the "business" of governments is always war- war on its citizens, war on other nations, it never ends.

Tom Marvolo Riddle , says: June 9, 2021 at 6:56 am GMT "¢ 18.8 hours ago

Invade the world, invite the world. Economic cold war vs. 1/3 of the world's landmass and population. Seemingly purposeful hollowing out of it's middle class, the abolition of educational/societal standards to placate the demands of wokeness and the replacement of it's historical population with an eclectic mix of third world strivers, corrupt east asians and south american day laborers. Oh, and an increasingly debt centric economy.

The USA is obviously a very prudent country which focuses on it's own long term survival first and foremost. I expect it to do quite well in the coming years.

GMC , says: June 9, 2021 at 7:19 am GMT "¢ 18.5 hours ago
@beavertales

My good friend in Canada says that it seems to be a "BioSecurity Fascist State" forming also. And it's not against Cuba , it's against the populace of Canada. Worse than anything in the US.

V. K. Ovelund , says: June 9, 2021 at 1:04 pm GMT "¢ 12.7 hours ago

Sanctions strike hard at the very essence of positive international relationship "" trade.

U.S. economic sanctions are insulting, provocative, corrosive and largely ineffective. However, trade is hardly the essence of positive international relationship.

Claude Frédéric Bastiat was simply wrong. If instead of his special pleading, he had said, "When soldiers cross borders, goods will not," then he might have come nearer the truth; but Bastiat instead reversed cause and effect, which is why ideologically committed free traders continue to celebrate his ill-supported, ahistorical epigram to this day: "When goods do not cross borders, soldier will."

Britain traded massively with Germany right up until Britain attacked Germany in 1914. Germany traded even more massively with the Soviet Union right up until Germany attacked the Soviet Union in 1941. Were it not for Japanese trade with China, the Mukden Incident that, in 1931, opened the conflict that developed into World War II in Asia""well, it probably would not have occurred. In short, the trade premise that underlies your article needs to be revisited.

bayviking , says: June 9, 2021 at 2:49 pm GMT "¢ 11.0 hours ago

Sanctions is war. US wars are always cloaked behind our alleged love for democracy and freedom, but alleged friends beginning with Saudi Arabia and impacting every country South of our border, prove we are liars, interested only in preserving the best interests of our wealthiest citizens.

The purpose of US foreign policy is to enhance the profits of global US Corporations regardless what the consequences are to local targeted populations. The US has extraordinary power over the EU, but the Russian pipeline is evidence that EU support is cracking.

Shame on the USA for failing to respect the national sovereignty of other nations big and small. Our constitutional form of government is not a model example of the fruits of democracy and freedom, as both are crippled by original design, for profit prisons and schools, toll roads, and the moral hazards imposed by misguided religious fanatics who impose their will on a disinterested public.

Rev. Spooner , says: June 9, 2021 at 4:21 pm GMT "¢ 9.4 hours ago

Winston Churchill was a great one for blockades. Churchill, the MoFker is responsible for 5 million deaths. During the 2nd World War he shipped grain from India to Britain and left the Indians to starve. Five million Bengalis and east Indians died of starvation. Let's hope when the tide turns all this is forgotten and forgiven.
The war against Japan was instigated by blocades.
The war against Iran is the next.

Blade , says: June 9, 2021 at 5:46 pm GMT "¢ 8.0 hours ago

Syria policy has nothing to do with oil or Assad being a dictator. It is a continuation of Israel's policies. The whole purpose of these wars is to establish an independent Kurdish state so that the pressure on Israel could be reduced and states in the region could be destabilized. While the US was busy trying to fight Israel's wars in ME, China has become a strategic threat with no signs of slowing down the process of overtaking the US as the dominant superpower of the world. Despite all the damage these policies have caused, even the so-called conservatives in the US keep repeating nonsensical ideas like "Kurds deserve a state." Not realizing that there is no such thing as "deserving a state" or that this just a zionist project that offers nothing to the US.

Regarding China, sanctions should be used more not less, unless the US wants to be the secondary power. However, they are not needed with other countries. In ME, the US should wash its hands off Israel and let the most moral army of the world protect their own country. That country is a huge liability and problem for the US, it offered the US nothing other than selling American military secrets and earning 1.5 billion Muslims' disdain. To counter Russia and Iran, the US should double down on cooperating with Turkey, increase investments and military support so that Turks can be more active in Central Asia and Afghanistan as well. This is the smartest and the most efficient way for the US to achieve its goals in Asia and ME. Which would be slowing China's growth, Russia's creeping in the South, and Iranian activity in Arab ME.

However, the US basically does the opposite of everything it should. Turning neutral/unfriendly with Turkey is one of the dumbest things the US foreign service could do, considering the fact that Turks are the historical enemies of all three of China, Russia, and Iran, and they did exactly that? Why? For Israel whose feelings were hurt by Erdogan of course. Currently, the US government is a hostage to vocal minorities and interest groups. Therefore, its relative decline will not stop unless actual Americans with no double allegiances step up and take back their government.

nsa , says: June 9, 2021 at 8:44 pm GMT "¢ 5.0 hours ago
@beavertales

Canada is a pathetic American colony, selling their resources cheap in return for being allowed to have a few crappy hockey teams and access to degenerate American entertainment. The Brits tell them to murder white Germans, they do it. The Americans tell them to murder Afghans, they do it...

Zina , says: June 9, 2021 at 10:50 pm GMT "¢ 2.9 hours ago

The US government is a menace to all, including the US population. All US presidents are war criminals, and sanctions are only one aspect of their endless criminality.

Beagle , says: June 9, 2021 at 11:31 pm GMT "¢ 2.3 hours ago

Sanctions are the modern day adaptation of siege warfare. It's essentially a "˜starve them out' approach to foreign policy. Theoretically, one presumes, the goal is to cause enough instability to harm the targeted regime. But I can't think of a single time they have succeeded at anything but causing mass suffering to those at the bottom of the power pyramid.

In the case of sanctions on Iraq and the subsequent corrupt Oil-For-Food Program, the sanctions became a vehicle to transfer billions of dollars to oligarchs and their pet politicians" as usual.

[Jun 06, 2021] US Troops Die for World Domination, Not Freedom Consortiumnews

Notable quotes:
"... CaitlinJohnstone.com ..."
"... Please Support Our Spring Fund Drive! ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... War is a Racket ..."
"... Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix ..."
"... Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone ..."
"... Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers ..."
"... This article was re-published with permission. ..."
"... The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of ..."
Jun 06, 2021 | consortiumnews.com

US Troops Die for World Domination, Not Freedom May 31, 2021 Save

On Memorial Day, Caitlin Johnstone says it's important to block the propaganda that helps feed a steady supply of teenagers into the imperial war machine.

Airman placing U.S. flags at military graves, May 27. (Arlington National Cemetery, Flickr)

By Caitlin Johnstone
CaitlinJohnstone.com

V ice President Kamala Harris spent the weekend under fire from Republicans, which of course means that Kamala Harris spent the weekend being criticized for the most silly, vapid reason you could possibly criticize Kamala Harris for.

Apparently the likely future president tweeted "Enjoy the long weekend," a reference to the Memorial Day holiday on Monday, instead of gushing about fallen troops and sacrifice.

That's it, that's the whole entire story. That silly, irrelevant offense by one of the sleaziest people in the single most corrupt and murderous government on earth is the whole entire basis for histrionic headlines from conservative media outlets like this :

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3R3ZWV0X2VtYmVkX2NsaWNrYWJpbGl0eV8xMjEwMiI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJjb250cm9sIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1398784636193488897&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fconsortiumnews.com%2F2021%2F05%2F31%2Fus-troops-die-for-world-domination-not-freedom%2F&sessionId=8c4db816a251b9ec8a405c5ae95098e3aa132642&theme=light&widgetsVersion=82e1070%3A1619632193066&width=550px

Harris, the born politician, was quick to course correct.

"Throughout our history our service men and women have risked everything to defend our freedoms and our country," the veep tweeted . "As we prepare to honor them on Memorial Day, we remember their service and their sacrifice."

https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?visual=true&url=https%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F1059031867&show_artwork=true&maxwidth=860&maxheight=1000&dnt=1&utm_campaign=wtshare&utm_medium=widget&utm_content=https%25253A%25252F%25252Fsoundcloud.com%25252Fgoing_rogue%25252Fus-troops-die-for-world-domination-not-freedom&utm_source=caitlinjohnstone.com

Listen to this article.

Which is of course complete bullshit. It has been generations since any member of the U.S. military could be said to have served or sacrificed defending America or its freedoms, and that has been the case throughout almost the entirety of its history. If you are reading this it is statistically unlikely that you are of an age where any U.S. military personnel died for any other reason than corporate profit and global domination, and if you are it's almost certain you weren't old enough to have had mature thoughts about it at the time.

Please Support Our Spring Fund Drive!

Whenever you criticize the U.S. war machine online within earshot of anyone who's sufficiently propagandized, you will invariably be lectured about the second World War and how we'd all be speaking German or Japanese without the brave men who died for our freedom. This makes my point for me: the fact that apologists for U.S. imperialism always need to reach all the way back through history to the cusp of living memory to find even one single example of the American military being used for purposes that weren't evil proves that it most certainly is evil.

But this is one of the main reasons there are so very many movies and history documentaries made about World War II: it's an opportunity to portray U.S. servicemen bravely fighting and dying for a noble cause without having to bend the truth beyond recognition. The other major reason is that focusing on the second World War allows members of the U.S. empire to escape into a time when the Big Bad Guy on the world stage was someone else.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3R3ZWV0X2VtYmVkX2NsaWNrYWJpbGl0eV8xMjEwMiI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJjb250cm9sIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1399109694334046211&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fconsortiumnews.com%2F2021%2F05%2F31%2Fus-troops-die-for-world-domination-not-freedom%2F&sessionId=8c4db816a251b9ec8a405c5ae95098e3aa132642&theme=light&widgetsVersion=82e1070%3A1619632193066&width=550px

From the end of World War II to the fall of the U.S.S.R., the U.S. military was used to smash the spread of communism and secure geostrategic interests toward the ultimate end of engineering the collapse of the Soviet Union. After this was accomplished in 1991, U.S. foreign policy officially shifted to preserving a unipolar world order by preventing the rise of any other superpower which could rival its might.

A 1992 article by The New York Times titled " U.S. Strategy Plan Calls For Insuring No Rivals Develop ," reporting on a leaked document which describes a policy known as the Wolfowitz Doctrine after then-Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Paul Wolfowitz, reads as follows:

"In a broad new policy statement that is in its final drafting stage, the Defense Department asserts that America's political and military mission in the post-cold-war era will be to insure that no rival superpower is allowed to emerge in Western Europe, Asia or the territory of the former Soviet Union.

A 46-page document that has been circulating at the highest levels of the Pentagon for weeks, and which Defense Secretary Dick Cheney expects to release later this month, states that part of the American mission will be 'convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests.'

The classified document makes the case for a world dominated by one superpower whose position can be perpetuated by constructive behavior and sufficient military might to deter any nation or group of nations from challenging American primacy."

This is all U.S. troops have been fighting and dying for since the Berlin Wall came down. Not "freedom", not "democracy" and certainly not the American people. Just continual uncontested domination of this planet at all cost: domination of its resources, its trade routes, its seas, its air, and its humans, no matter how many lives need to risked and snuffed out in order to achieve it. The U.S. has killed millions and displaced tens of millions just since the turn of this century in the reckless pursuit of that goal.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/26O-2SVcrw0?enablejsapi=1&autoplay=0&cc_load_policy=0&iv_load_policy=1&loop=0&modestbranding=1&fs=1&playsinline=0&controls=1&color=red&rel=0&autohide=2&theme=dark&

And, as Smedley Butler spelled out 86 years ago in his still-relevant book War is a Racket , U.S. military personnel have been dying for profit.

Nothing gets the gears of industry turning like war, and nothing better creates chaotic Wild West environments of shock and confusion during which more wealth and power can be grabbed. War profiteers pour immense resources into lobbying , think tanks and campaign donations to manipulate and bribe policy makers into making decisions which promote war and military expansionism, with astounding success . This is all entirely legal.

It's important to spread awareness that this is all U.S. troops have been dying for, because the fairy tale that they fight for freedom and for their countrymen is a major propaganda narrative used in military recruitment. While poverty plays a significant role in driving up enlistments as predatory recruiters target poor and middle class youth promising them a future in the nation with the worst income inequality in the industrialized world, the fact that the aggressively propagandized glorification of military "service" makes it a more esteemed career path than working at a restaurant or a grocery store means people are more likely to enlist.

Without all that propaganda deceiving people into believing that military work is something virtuous, military service would be the most shameful job anyone could possibly have; other stigmatized jobs like sex work would be regarded as far more noble. You'd be less reluctant to tell your extended family over Christmas that you're a janitor at a seedy massage parlor than that you've enlisted in the U.S. military, because instead of congratulating and praising you, your Uncle Murray would look at you and say, "So you're gonna be killing kids for crude oil?"

And that's exactly how it should be. Continuing to uphold the lie that U.S. troops fight and die for a good cause is helping to ensure a steady supply of teenagers to feed into the gears of the imperial war machine. Stop feeding into the lie that the war machine is worth killing and being killed for. Not out of disrespect for the dead, but out of reverence for the living.

Caitlin Johnstone is a rogue journalist, poet, and utopia prepper who publishes regularly at Medium . Her work is entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking her on Facebook , following her antics on Twitter , checking out her podcast on either Youtube , soundcloud , Apple podcasts or Spotify , following her on Steemit , throwing some money into her tip jar on Patreon or Paypal , purchasing some of her sweet merchandise , buying her books Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix , Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

This article was re-published with permission.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News .


Em , June 1, 2021 at 09:52

Instead of annually memorializing those dead youth, who were, in one way or the other, coerced to go off to foreign lands to kill or be killed, by other youth, in the name of a piece of dead symbolic cloth, wouldn't it be a better idea to honor them, while alive in the prime of living (the world over) by affording them the means to learn, leading by example, to discover for themselves – how to think critically as to what the real options are, collectively as well as individually, for survival and thriving.

CNfan , June 1, 2021 at 04:06

"Global domination" for the benefit of a predatory financial oligarchy.

Peter Loeb , June 1, 2021 at 09:11

Read William Hartung's "Prophets of War " to understand the dynamics.

Peter in Boston

Thom Williams , May 31, 2021 at 20:12

Re: CorsortiumNews, Joe Lauria, Caitlin Johnstone, Realist, & Rael Nidess, M.D.

Thank you all for speaking your truth in this dystopian human universe so apparently lacking human reason and understanding. As is so wisely introduced and recognized herein, the murderous depravity of the "Wolfwitz Doctrine" being and remaining the public policy formulation of our national governance, both foreign and domestic, is a fact that every U.S. citizen should consider and understand on this Memorial Day.
As Usual,
EA

Realist , May 31, 2021 at 17:27

Well stated, perfectly logical again on this subject as always, Caitlin. You out the warmongers for their game to fleece the public and rape the world all so a handful of already fat, lazyass but enormously wealthy and influential people can acquire, without the slightest bit of shame, yet more, more and more of everything there is to be had. You and General Butler.

Will this message get through, this time? Maybe the billionth time is the charm, eh? Can the scales suddenly fall from the eyes of the 330 million Americans who will then demand an immediate end to the madness? On the merits, it's the only conclusion that might realise any actual justice for our country and the rest of the world upon whose throat it keeps a knee firmly planted.

Sorry, nothing of the sort shall ever happen, not as long as the entire mercenary mass media obeys its corporate ownership and speaks nothing but false narratives every minute of every day. Not as long as the educational system is really nothing more than a propaganda indoctrination experience for every child born in the glorious USA! Not as long as every politician occupying any given office is just a bought and paid for tool of the Matrix with great talents for convincing the masses that 2 + 2 = 3, or 5, or whatever is convenient at the time to benefit the ledgers of their plutocrat masters.

What better illustrates the reality of my last assertion than the occupancy of the White House by Sleepy/Creepy Joe Biden who, through age alone, has been reduced to nothing more than a sack of unresponsive meat firmly trussed up with ropes and pulleys that his handlers pull this way or that to create an animatronic effect apparently perfectly convincing to the majority of the American public? Or so they say, based upon some putative election results.

Truly, thanks for the effort, Caitlin. I do appreciate that some have a grasp on the truth. I look forward to its recapitulation by yourself and many others to no effect on every Memorial Day in the USA. It would be unrealistic of me to say otherwise.

Rael Nidess, M.D. , May 31, 2021 at 12:54

Kudos for being one of a very few to mention the central driving ethic behind U.S. foreign policy since the demise of the USSR: The Wolfowitz Doctrine. As central today as it was when first published.

[Jun 01, 2021] Shades of dementia: Bidden claims that human rights R us.

May 31, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Bacon , May 31 2021 0:12 utc | 29

Believe it or not, the president says that human rights R us.

Hear that, BLM? Women? Asian Americans? Hispanics? homeless? heavily indebted students? . . the list goes on.

Biden said so, May 30, 2021

"I had a long conversation -- for two hours -- recently with President Xi, making it clear to him that we could do nothing but speak out for human rights around the world because that's who we are. I'll be meeting with President Putin in a couple of weeks in Geneva, making it clear that we will not -- we will not stand by and let him abuse those rights." . . here

..reminds me of Aeschylus: "In war, truth is the first casualty."

[May 30, 2021] How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States by Daniel Immerwahr

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... No other book out there has the level of breadth on the history of US imperialism that this work provides. Even though it packs 400 pages of text (which might seem like a turnoff for non-academic readers), "How to Hide an Empire" is highly readable given Immerwhar's skills as a writer. Also, its length is part of what makes it awesome because it gives it the right amount of detail and scope. ..."
"... Alleging that US imperialism in its long evolution (which this book deciphers with poignancy) has had no bearing on the destinies of its once conquered populations is as fallacious as saying that the US is to blame for every single thing that happens in Native American communities, or in the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, etc. Not everything that happens in these locations and among these populations is directly connected to US expansionism, but a great deal is. ..."
"... This is exactly the kind of book that drives the "My country, right or wrong" crowd crazy. Yes, slavery and genocide and ghastly scientific experiments existed before Europeans colonized the Americas, but it's also fair and accurate to say that Europeans made those forms of destruction into a bloody artform. Nobody did mass slaughter better. ..."
Feb 19, 2019 | www.amazon.com
4.6 out of 5 stars 50 customer reviews Reviews

Jose I. Fuste, February 25, 2019

5.0 out of 5 stars Comprehensive yet highly readable. A necessary and highly useful update.

I'm a professor at the University of California San Diego and I'm assigning this for a graduate class.

No other book out there has the level of breadth on the history of US imperialism that this work provides. Even though it packs 400 pages of text (which might seem like a turnoff for non-academic readers), "How to Hide an Empire" is highly readable given Immerwhar's skills as a writer. Also, its length is part of what makes it awesome because it gives it the right amount of detail and scope.

I could not disagree more with the person who gave this book one star. Take it from me: I've taught hundreds of college students who graduate among the best in their high school classes and they know close to nothing about the history of US settler colonialism, overseas imperialism, or US interventionism around the world. If you give University of California college students a quiz on where the US' overseas territories are, most who take it will fail (trust me, I've done it). And this is not their fault. Instead, it's a product of the US education system that fails to give students a nuanced and geographically comprehensive understanding of the oversized effect that their country has around our planet.

Alleging that US imperialism in its long evolution (which this book deciphers with poignancy) has had no bearing on the destinies of its once conquered populations is as fallacious as saying that the US is to blame for every single thing that happens in Native American communities, or in the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, etc. Not everything that happens in these locations and among these populations is directly connected to US expansionism, but a great deal is.

A case in point is Puerto Rico's current fiscal and economic crisis. The island's political class share part of the blame for Puerto Rico's present rut. A lot of it is also due to unnatural (i.e. "natural" but human-exacerbated) disasters such as Hurricane María. However, there is no denying that the evolution of Puerto Rico's territorial status has generated a host of adverse economic conditions that US states (including an island state such as Hawaii) do not have to contend with. An association with the US has undoubtedly raised the floor of material conditions in these places, but it has also imposed an unjust glass ceiling that most people around the US either do not know about or continue to ignore.

To add to those unfair economic limitations, there are political injustices regarding the lack of representation in Congress, and in the case of Am. Samoa, their lack of US citizenship. The fact that the populations in the overseas territories can't make up their mind about what status they prefer is: a) understandable given the way they have been mistreated by the US government, and b) irrelevant because what really matters is what Congress decides to do with the US' far-flung colonies, and there is no indication that Congress wants to either fully annex them or let them go because neither would be convenient to the 50 states and the political parties that run them. Instead, the status quo of modern colonial indeterminacy is what works best for the most potent political and economic groups in the US mainland. Would

This book is about much more than that though. It's also a history of how and why the United States got to control so much of what happens around the world without creating additional formal colonies like the "territories" that exist in this legal limbo. Part of its goal is to show how precisely how US imperialism has been made to be more cost-effective and also more invisible.

Read Immerwhar's book, and don't listen to the apologists of US imperialism which is still an active force that contradicts the US' professed values and that needs to be actively dismantled. Their attempts at discrediting this important reflect a denialism of the US' imperial realities that has endured throughout the history that this book summarizes.

"How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States" is a great starting point for making the US public aware of the US' contradictions as an "empire of liberty" (a phrase once used by Thomas Jefferson to describe the US as it expanded westward beyond the original 13 colonies). It is also a necessary update to other books on this topic that are already out there, and it is likely to hold the reader's attention more given its crafty narrative prose and structure Read less 194 people found this helpful Helpful Comment Report abuse

David Robson, February 26, 2019
Why So Sensitive?

5.0 out of 5 stars Why So Sensitive?

This is exactly the kind of book that drives the "My country, right or wrong" crowd crazy. Yes, slavery and genocide and ghastly scientific experiments existed before Europeans colonized the Americas, but it's also fair and accurate to say that Europeans made those forms of destruction into a bloody artform. Nobody did mass slaughter better.

The author of this compelling book reveals a history unknown to many readers, and does so with first-hand accounts and deep historical analyses. You might ask why we can't put such things behind us. The simple answer: we've never fully grappled with these events before in an honest and open way. This book does the nation a service by peering behind the curtain and facing the sobering truth of how we came to be what we are.

Thomas W. Moloney, April 9, 2019
This is a stunning book, not to be missed.

5.0 out of 5 stars This is a stunning book, not to be missed.

This is a stunning book, not to be missed. If you finished Sapiens with the feeling your world view had greatly enlarged, you're likely to have the same experience of your view of the US from reading this engaging work. And like Sapiens, it's an entirely enjoyable read, full of delightful surprises, future dinner party gems.

The further you get into the book the more interesting and unexpected it becomes. You'll look at the US in ways you likely never considered before. This is not a 'political' book with an ax to grind or a single-party agenda. It's refreshingly insightful, beautifully written, fun to read.

This is a gift I'll give to many a good friend, I've just started with my wife. I rarely write reviews and have never met the author (now my only regret). 3 people found this helpful

P , May 17, 2019
Content is A+. Never gets boring/tedious; never lingers; well written. It is perfect. 10/10

4.0 out of 5 stars Content is A+. Never gets boring/tedious; never lingers; well written. It is perfect. 10/10

This book is an absolutely powerhouse, a must-read, and should be a part of every student's curriculum in this God forsaken country.

Strictly speaking, this brilliant read is focused on America's relationship with Empire. But like with nearly everything America, one cannot discuss it without discussing race and injustice.

If you read this book, you will learn a lot of new things about subjects that you thought you knew everything about. You will have your eyes opened. You will be exposed to the dark underbelly of racism, corruption, greed and exploitation that undergird American ambition.

I don't know exactly what else to say other than to say you MUST READ THIS BOOK. This isn't a partisan statement -- it's not like Democrats are any better than Republicans in this book.

This is one of the best books I've ever read, and I am a voracious reader. The content is A+. It never gets boring. It never gets tedious. It never lingers on narratives. It's extremely well written. It is, in short, perfect. And as such, 10/10.

Sunny May 11, 2019
Excellent and thoughtful discussion regarding the state of our union

5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent and thoughtful discussion regarding the state of our union

I heard an interview of Daniel Immerwahr on NPR news / WDET radio regarding this book.

I'm am quite conservative and only listen to NPR news when it doesn't lean too far to the left.

However, the interview piqued my interest. I am so glad I purchased this ebook. What a phenomenal and informative read!!! WOW!! It's a "I never knew that" kind of read. Certainly not anything I was taught in school. This is thoughtful, well written and an easy read. Highly recommend!!

[May 28, 2021] Biden aministsration is building a coalition to challenge China. It wants to neutralize Russia. Nord Stream 2 is an element of contention

May 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Max , May 19 2021 21:16 utc | 26

@ Old man of the sea | May 19 2021 20:46 utc | 22

One can't blame everything on Israel. Yes, it is part of five eyes, more like SIX eyes.

Biden (JB) is building a coalition to challenge China. JB's administration wants to neutralize Russia. Nord Stream 2 is an element of contention and by making a concession JB is making Germany and Russia happy. Agree, that its completion will be a "huge geopolitical win for Putin". Let's see when Nord Stream 2 becomes fully operational. Time will tell.

Russia's main focus is De-Dollarization, stability in Russia and in its neighborhood.

China's announcement about Bitcoin led to it dropping by 30%. What will China, Russia, Turkey and Iran announcement about the U$A dollar do to its value and the market? When will China become the #1 ECONOMY?

THE MOST DANGEROUS DECADE: 2018-2028

Stonebird , May 19 2021 21:42 utc | 29

Old man of the sea | May 19 2021 20:46 utc | 22

The US is now the largest provider of LNG, so there is relatively little more financial advantage to be gained from a direct confrontation with Germany or Russia. Political maybe, but the dedollarisation is starting to take hold. (Aside; even Israel depends on the strength of the dollar to continue, like musical chairs, when the music stops there will be precious few chairs left ). The Gas/Oil lobbies in the US who are behind the sanctions may have some other trick up their sleeve, but the deflation of Zelensky in Ukraine, and the opening up of a steal-fest of Ukrainian assets might compensate.

***
Note that the West has closed Syrian Embassies so as to stop Syrians voting for Assad. They steal it's oil, and Syria is still next to Israel and doing relatively well in spite of tanker bombings, and missiles. It is also possible that, as you say, there is a price for non-interference in Israel itself.

[May 28, 2021] Liz Cheney Faces Chopping Block As GOP Braces For Chaotic Week

It is always good when neocons are demoted. Warmongering neocon pigs should be removed.
May 09, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

"She's done as a member of leadership. I don't understand what she's doing," one former House GOP lawmaker told The Hill of Cheney's ongoing attacks on former President Trump. " It's like political self-immolation. You can't cancel Trump from the Republican Party; all she's done is cancel herself. "

Cheney has repeatedly attacked Trump for 'inciting' the Jan. 6 'insurrection' despite telling supporters to protest peacefully and then go home following the breach of the Capitol.

GOP leaders hope that purging Cheney from the leadership ranks will move Republicans beyond their civil war over Trump" one that's raged publicly since the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol" and allow the party to unite behind a midterm campaign message that President Biden and the Democrats are too liberal for the country. - The Hill

"There are still a few members that are talking about things that happened in the past, not really focused on what we need to do to move forward and win the majority back next year," according to Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA), the minority whip. "We're going to have to be unified if we defeat the socialist agenda you're seeing in Washington."

A victory by Stefanik would mark a symbolic shift back towards Trump by leading Republicans - as the former president remains highly engaged this election cycle and has threatened to politically obliterate any remaining GOP opposition.

"By ousting her, what we're saying is: We are repudiating your repudiation of the Trump policies and the Trump agenda and her attacks on the president," according to Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), adding " President Trump is the leader of the Republican Party. And when she's out there attacking him, she's attacking the leader of the Republican Party ."

Cheney has already survived one challenge to her leadership post, in February, after she infuriated conservatives by voting to impeach Trump for inciting the Capitol rampage on Jan. 6. With the backing of Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), she easily kept her seat as conference chair, 145 to 61 by secret ballot.

With McCarthy and Scalise fed up with Cheney and now backing Stefanik, the 36-year-old New Yorker is expected to prevail in Wednesday's contest" a would-be victory for leaders who have failed to unite the conference behind a post-Trump strategy in the early months of the Biden administration. - The Hill

... ... ...

Cheney isn't the only House Republican facing backlash for taking on Trump. Earlier in the week, Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), one of seven Republican senators who voted this year to convict Trump, was booed and called a traitor at the Utah GOP state convention, where he narrowly beat back an effort to censure him.

On Friday, the Ohio Republican Party Central Committee voted to censure Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R-Ohio), Cheney and the eight other House Republicans who backed Trump's impeachment in January. The Ohio GOP also formally called for Gonzalez's resignation.

... ... ...

Catullus 51 minutes ago

I don't care if Trump runs again just as long as these gross establishment Republicans are thrown out on their asses

JoeyChernenko PREMIUM 39 minutes ago (Edited)

Romney is a real traitorous worm. Did you hear him say Biden is a good man with good intentions when the Utah crowd was booing his worthless hide? And we need to make sure the Bush dynasty remains out of power.

Anath 51 minutes ago remove link

the cheney family is pure evil. that is all.

chinese.sniffles 52 minutes ago

Why Would Wyoming choose Chenney, after all that evil that **** brought upon America. If there was no ****, Obama would never get elected.

chunga 47 minutes ago remove link

Cynics suspect primaries are also rigged.

Basecamp3 PREMIUM 50 minutes ago

Comstock is a traitor that never read the Navarro Report which goes into detail of how the election was stolen. Also, ousting Cheney has zero risk. She is stupid, weak, and her own constituents hate her.

overbet 50 minutes ago

which has caused some GOP leaders to fear alienating female Republican voters, particularly educated suburbanites who will be key votes in the 2022 elections.

The female republicans I know are smarter than that. All of them

Grave Dancer 22 38 minutes ago remove link

Liz's sociopath dad **** got hundreds of thousands killed based on a total fraud lie of a war. And Liz has a problem with Trump because he tweets some unfiltered stuff once in a while? Freaking kidding me? ay_arrow

GhostOLaz 37 minutes ago

Don't blame Liz, she has a legacy of treason to protect, Daddy removed the only secular anti Communist govt in the middle East which protected Christains and religious minorities...

gaaasp 20 minutes ago (Edited)

Women could wear pants and not be burkahed up in Syria and Libya and Iraq before Bush/Clinton/Obama/Trump sent troops.

chunga 49 minutes ago

I don't want to give up on the process but the GOP has a lot of work to do.

nmewn 39 minutes ago

The thing about "us" is, when we find them we jettison them. Cantor was another one. She voted to impeach an outgoing President who's trial she knew would be held AFTER he was out of office and again just an average American citizen holding no federal office at all.

She is either incompetent, stupid (or both) or a cancer the GOP can live with excised from the body.

Make_Mine_A_Double 40 minutes ago

Peggy Noonan really came out the closet in this weekend's WSJ with editorial of Liz Chaney against the House of Cowards.

They are 2 of the same. We've had these demsheviks in the ranks for decades. Noonan takes it in the anoose at dem cocktail parties and is Team Mascot for the RINOs.

Tucker finally exposed that filth Luntz. McCathry is actually living with him in one of his apartments - I assume it's not platonic in nature.

This is why Trump could never even the bottom of the swamp....g.d. RINOs need to purged with the extreme prejudice.

the Mysterians 40 minutes ago

War pig.

in deditionem acceptos 48 minutes ago

Liz will survive the vote. Too much graff from the MIC to get her out. McCarthey could of got her out in Feb if he wanted. Wonder what honey pot he's dipping into?

A Girl In Flyover Country 43 minutes ago

She won't survive the Wyoming voters, though.

Cogito_ergosum 52 minutes ago (Edited)

She is protecting her dad who was part of the inside gang that carried out the... demolition of the twin towers on 911...

Flying Monkees 37 minutes ago (Edited)

BS. The tribe's fingerprints were all over 9/11 as documented in extensive detail by Christopher Bollyn.

JoeyChernenko PREMIUM 53 minutes ago

Don't any of these evil families ever just fade into oblivion? Bush, Cheney, Clinton, Obama, etc.

beavertails 50 minutes ago

Extending and pretending there are choices when there aren't any. The MIC got this. The "Prez" is just show to sell ads and steal, I mean raise fiat from the gullible.

[May 28, 2021] Obama's follow-up to "Dreams from My Father" will be "Sins of My Mother"

May 19, 2021 | www.unz.com

Wokeness is just a detail, not the biggest one by any means, of a vast socio-economic collapse of neoliberalism.

chris , says: May 14, 2021 at 7:13 am GMT • 5.8 days ago

What wokeness does mandate for my son (who is studying biology) to be told in his class that he is the carrier of "white guilt" even though his ancestors never interacted with blacks, let alone blacks in the USA.

Obama's follow-up to "Dreams from My Father" will be "Sins of My Mother"

Stephen Paul Foster , says: Website May 14, 2021 at 10:58 am GMT • 5.7 days ago

" [C]orporate "America" which is now flooding all its advertisements with the "correct" races in total disregard to that race's real percentage of the population "

Yes, for corporate America, the U.S. demographic is composed mainly of young, beautiful, smart looking "black folks" with a few flabby, pasty white dullards to heighten the contrast.

[May 28, 2021] Dedollarization is a serious threat to the US neoliberal empire

May 23, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Max , May 23 2021 15:45 utc | 7

How can one ignore all the noise in the media to focus on the crux of the situation, implications, and the future outcomes?

One can only understand the impact of events better and envision the future by exploring plausible scenarios and identifying signals which over time will enable one to size up the probabilities of outcomes.

INTERNATIONAL -- MONETARY IMPERIALISM

Geopolitical relationships are frosty & flammable. All the narratives can be summed up into a few SCENARIOS:

The probabilities of these scenarios will be defined by the following SIGNALS:

Any new scenarios & signals? What probabilities would one assign to various scenarios? What will be the construct of scenarios and signals at the national level?

The Dollar Empire likes to initiate a conflict during Olympics when they are held in its adversaries:

  1. 2008, Georgia conflict
  2. 2014, Ukraine conflict
  3. 2022, ?

[May 28, 2021] Nuances of the right to vote and Liz Cheney

Both Liz Cheney and Mitt The Bitch Romney are examples of the filthy neocons...
Notable quotes:
"... [in case of Cheney] The war monger doesn't fall far from the tree. ..."
"... Amazing how the liberal news outlets are now supporting a Cheney. But they know more war equals more rating ..."
May 09, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

Mike Rotsch 10 minutes ago

. . . which has caused some GOP leaders to fear alienating female Republican voters, particularly educated suburbanites who will be key votes in the 2022 elections.

When I first met my wife, she told me women shouldn't have the right to vote. It was instant love.

A Girl In Flyover Country 59 minutes ago

[in case of Cheney] The war monger doesn't fall far from the tree.

Rise21 42 minutes ago remove link

Amazing how the liberal news outlets are now supporting a Cheney. But they know more war equals more rating

yochananmichael 51 seconds ago

its time for the republicans to rid itself of chicken hawk warmongers like Cheney.

He father disbanded there Iraqi Army which was supposed to provide security, causing an insurgency and 5000 dead American boys and countless maimed.

vic and blood PREMIUM 4 minutes ago

Cheney's benefactors have erected massive billboards all over the state, 'thanking her for defending the Constitution.'

She has an incredible war chest, and sadly, money and advertising decides a lot of elections.

[May 24, 2021] Knowing what is going on in Germany right now is helpful to understanding the strange goings on in the USAi and its dreams of eternal empire

May 24, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , May 24 2021 3:19 utc | 111

Strange news of the fatherland... knowing what is going on in Germany right now is helpful to understanding the strange goings on in the USAi and its dreams of eternal empire. It ain't clear sailing yet for NS2!

Here is the story from Wolfgang Streeck in New Let Review.

An excerpt to tease your attention:

If your country is part of an international empire, the domestic politics of the country that rules yours are your domestic politics too. Whoever speaks of the Europe of the EU must therefore also speak of Germany. Currently it is widely believed that after the German federal elections of 24 September this year, Europe will enter a post-Merkel era. The truth is not so simple.

In October 2018, following two devastating defeats in state elections in Hesse and Bavaria, Angela Merkel resigned as president of her party, the CDU, and announced that she would not seek re-election as Chancellor in 2021. She would, however, serve out her fourth term, to which she had been officially appointed only seven months earlier.

Putting together a coalition government had taken no less than six months following the September 2017 federal election, in which the CDU and its Bavarian sidekick, the CSU, had scored the worst result in their history, at 32.9 percent (2013: 41.5 percent). (Merkel's record as party leader is nothing short of dismal, having lost votes each time she ran. How she could nevertheless remain Chancellor for 16 years will have to be explained elsewhere.) In the subsequent contest for the CDU presidency, the party's general secretary, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, appointed by Merkel only in February 2018, narrowly prevailed over two competitors.

After little more than a year, however, when Merkel publicly dressed her down for a lack of leadership, Kramp-Karrenbauer resigned and declared that she would not run for Chancellor in 2021 either. A few months later, when von der Leyen went to Brussels, Kramp-Karrenbauer got Merkel to appoint her minister of defense. The next contest for the party presidency, the second in Merkel's fourth term, had to take place under Corona restrictions; it took a long time and was won in January 2021 by Armin Laschet, Prime Minister of the largest federal state, North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW). To prevent the comeback of an old foe of hers, Friedrich Merz, Merkel allegedly supported Laschet behind the scenes.

While Laschet – a less-than-charismatic Christian-Democratic middle-of-the-roader and lifelong Merkel loyalist – considered the party presidency to be a ticket to the CDU/CSU candidacy for Chancellor, it took three months for this to be settled. As CDU/CSU politics go, the joint candidate is picked by the two party presidents when they feel the time has come, under four eyes; no formal procedure provided.

Thus Laschet needed the agreement of Markus Söder, Prime Minister of Bavaria, who didn't keep it a secret that he believed himself the far better choice. In the background, again, there was Merkel, in the unprecedented position of a sitting Chancellor watching the presidents of her two parties pick her would-be successor in something like a semi-public cock-fight. After some dramatic toing-and-froing, Laschet prevailed, once more supported by Merkel, apparently in exchange for his state's backing for the federal government imposing a 'hard' Covid-19 lockdown on the entire country...

...There will also be differences on the Eastern flank of the EU, where Baerbock, following the United States, will support Ukrainian accession to NATO and the EU, and finance EU extension in the West Balkans. That she will also cancel North Stream 2 will be a point of contention in a Baerbock/Scholz government.

Laschet will be more inclined towards France and seek some accommodation with Russia, on trade as well as security; he will also hesitate to be too strongly identified with the US on Eastern Europe and Ukraine. But then, he will be reminded by his Foreign Minister, Baerbock, as well as his own party that Germany's national security depends on the American nuclear umbrella, which the French cannot and in any case will not replace. (my emphasis)


[May 12, 2021] Crumbling infrastracture

This is what happing in empires in decay...
May 12, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
vk , May 12 2021 22:23 utc | 66

Bridge in the USA was literally falling:

Bridge over Mississippi river closed for repairs after inspectors discover MAJOR CRACK, river transport grinds to a halt

I thought the "crumbling infrastructure" was just an internet joke or a lobby thing (American Society of Civil Engineers sounds like a the name of a DC lobby firm). Never thought it was de facto happening in USA.

[May 12, 2021] No doubt the US/UK deep state, now more than ever, are busy trying to sow conflict and division in Eurasia

May 12, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Canadian Cents , May 13 2021 0:38 utc | 76

An interesting read from Pepe Escobar at Saker's site, related to the comments by Max @24 and JB @25:
https://thesaker.is/insider-view-the-tragedy-of-the-us-deep-state/

No doubt the US/UK deep state, now more than ever, are busy trying to sow conflict and division in Eurasia, to divide-and-rule Mackinder's "World Island" and hence the world.

[May 07, 2021] A blistering critique of the US Imperialism, the current US leadership and its EU vassals

May 07, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , May 7 2021 19:40 utc | 28

Lavrov "stating facts" at the virtual UNSC meeting is also a blistering critique of the Outlaw US Empire and its EU vassals. Here is the beginning of the meat portion of his speech that continues for another ten paragraphs:

"The core tenets of international law enshrined in the UN Charter have withstood the test of time. Russia calls on all states to unconditionally follow the purposes and principles of the Charter as they chart their foreign policies, respecting the sovereign equality of states, not interfering in their internal affairs, settling disputes by political and diplomatic means, and renouncing the threat or use of force. This is especially important at the current stage in the difficult process of forming an international multipolar system. At a time when new centres of economic growth, financial and political influence are gaining strength, it is necessary to preserve the internationally recognised legal basis for building a stable balance of interests that meets the new realities.

"Unfortunately, not all of our partners are driven by the imperative to work in good faith to promote comprehensive multilateral cooperation. Realising that it is impossible to impose their unilateral or bloc priorities on other states within the framework of the UN, the leading Western countries have tried to reverse the process of forming a polycentric world and slow down the course of history.

"Toward this end, the concept of the rules-based order is advanced as a substitute for international law. It should be noted that international law already is a body of rules, but rules agreed at universal platforms and reflecting consensus or broad agreement. The West's goal is to oppose the collective efforts of all members of the world community with other rules developed in closed, non-inclusive formats, and then imposed on everyone else. We only see harm in such actions that bypass the UN and seek to usurp the only decision-making process that can claim global relevance."

I thought this one of his best arrows, although others were equally sharp and on target:

"By the way, as soon as we suggest discussing the current state of democracy not just within states but on the international stage with our Western colleagues, they lose interest in the conversation."

And Lavrov's facts are not out of line with global opinion as revealed by the info supplied @26 above.

[May 03, 2021] Some other countries of the world just aren't swallowing Bidan and his handlers worshipping of all things non-white..

May 03, 2021 | www.unz.com

Defender , says: April 30, 2021 at 8:51 am GMT • 18.6 hours ago

Some other countries of the world just aren't swallowing Bidan and his handlers worshipping of all things non-white..

https://www.youtube.com/embed/CBS8TYLO_A0?feature=oembed

BorisMay , says: April 30, 2021 at 1:38 pm GMT • 13.8 hours ago
@Chris Moore to eternal servitude as debt slaves.

*** Please Note: Russia is not weak considering that it has the ability to nuke America in to ashes within 30 minutes, or any other bunch of idiots that chooses to step over her red lines. Okay the US has 350 million people compared to 150 million Russians, but the US is irrevocably divided and Russia is fully united even the Muslim minority is united with the State in Russia. A divided house can not stand no man can serve two masters. On top of that the US has no moral values whereas Russia is a Christian country where marriage is between a man and a woman, by State law. Biden can fly all the queer flags he likes but he still leads a divided nation with a corrupt State comprised of dual passport holders, amoral materialists and deluded mentally challenged idiots like Waters and Pelosi.

[May 03, 2021] US generals to the Director of DNA: Either supply the facts or shut up

May 03, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Stonebird , Apr 28 2021 18:38 utc | 18

These folks have had it with the constant stream of baseless propaganda U.S. intelligence is spilling over the world:

Dear Director of National Intelligence,

we, the the 4-star Generals leading U.S. regional commands all over the world, are increasingly concerned with about the lack of evidence for claims you make about our opponents.

We, as true believers, do not doubt whatever judgment you make about the harmful activities of Russia, Iran and China. However - our allies and partners do not yet subscribe to the bliss of ignorance. They keep asking us for facts that support those judgments

Unfortunately, we have none that we could provide.

You say that Russia thought to manipulate Trump allies and to smear Biden , that Russia and Iran aimed to sway the 2020 election through covert campaigns and that China runs covert operations to influence members of Congress .

Media reports have appeared in which 'intelligence sources' claim that Russia, China and Iran are all paying bounties to the Taliban for killing U.S. soldiers. Fortunately no soldier got hurt by those rumors.

Our allies and partners read those and other reports and ask us for evidence. They want to know how exactly Russia, Iran and China are doing these things.

They, of course, hope to learn from our experience to protect their own countries.

Currently we are not able to provide them with such information. Your people keep telling our that all of it is SECRET.

We therefore ask you to declassify the facts that support your judgments. *

Sincerely

The Generals

----
PS: * Either that or shut the fuck up.

Look, The generals and the intelligence agencies haven't won a war for a long time. So now they will fight each other . At least ONE of them will win this time ! Success.

[May 03, 2021] Will Whites Support A Globalist American Empire That Picks Fights Abroad And Wars Against Them At Home by James Kirkpatrick

Looks like an attempt to redirect anger against neolibel elite into racial antimosity does nto work well. A least for this UNZ commentariant. They are not folled by woke nonsense.
In any case it looks like the USA is a divided country.
May 03, 2021 | www.unz.com

Chris Moore , says: Website April 28, 2021 at 1:15 am GMT • 3.1 days ago

Never underestimate the insanity of Zionists, be they full Jews, half-Jews, or soulless Jew-wannabes like Joe "I am a Zionist" Biden. We're in unprecedented territory -- an empire run by Zoglodytes. They'll run it into the ground sooner or later, but just how quickly and at what cost to the humanity is anyone's guess.

Of course, none of it would be possible but for the Anglo-elites doing deals with ((bankers)) in search of post-Imperial easy-living. In fact, that's probably what caused WW2.

Today, gangsters from every creed, race and religion want in on the Zionist action, and happily signal to their criminal lodestar that they're "all in" with virtually unlimited aid, wars and diplomatic support in Congress for the Jewish state.

The New World Order. How do you like it, whitey? You just had to listen to the gold-plated promises of the Jew confidence man. The streets will be paved with gold, right?

White Elephant , says: April 28, 2021 at 8:54 am GMT • 2.8 days ago

Bottom line?

If you're white and in the armed forces/police, you're a moron.

The fact is Americans are nothing but the Jew's bitch, killing for them. There isn't one American, who's defended their country, well, you'll have to go back to the war of independence for that. Every, serving member of the armed forces is a mercenary, paid by the US taxpayer, to kill fire Israel as they establish greater Israel.

So STOP looking at your armed forces as heroes. They aren't, not one, single one! See them for what they are, braindead, brainwashed, fighting machines, WHO DON'T FIGHT FOR YOU! And that's what's worrying. Throughout history every armed force has been turned against its own nation and its just a matter of time with the US. THEY WILL use them against you, to push nationwide vaccination.

The armed forces, like the police, are your enemy and I strongly suggest that if you know anyone in them, or a friend whose family members are in them, tell them to leave ASAP before they institute martial law. Remember, the armed forces don't serve you, so leaving them is doing the people good while staying within is causing them harm.

KenH , says: April 28, 2021 at 4:22 pm GMT • 2.5 days ago

I'm suspicious of Biden's planned withdrawal from Afghanistan. The troops will probably get reassigned to the Middle East or the Polish Border. Trump's "withdrawal" from Syria just amounted to shipping those troops to Iraq.

The Biden administration is a revolutionary one. It is not American and doesn't pretend to be. Like Lenin's early revolutionary Bolshevik government it is comprised of mostly Jews and racial/ethnic minorities who are antagonistic towards the majority population and its history and traditions.

I believe that the Jews, radical blacks and others who are really in charge of the Biden administration have no plans to relinquish power in 2024 even if they lose the election. Since the courts refused to provide a legal remedy for battleground states breaking their own elections laws to massively increase Democrat mail-in ballots then they will just do it again unless Republicans can win the gubernatorial elections in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. But that might not be possible with mail-in ballot schemes that were illegally put in place.

beavertales , says: April 28, 2021 at 6:45 pm GMT • 2.4 days ago

Will whites support a globalist regime that picks fights abroad and wars against them at home? The mood of the country is comparable to East German during the 1980's. Resignation and apathy. The last election was a fraud, the media are liars, the courts are political, privacy and free speech aren't being protected, and half the country declares it hates the other half.

Go ahead, try to conjure a false flag to rally Team America

Stan , says: April 28, 2021 at 7:34 pm GMT • 2.3 days ago

There are no signs whites are about to repudiate the Evil Empire. Trace Adkins, Gerald McRaney are on tv advertisements imploring whites to provide financial support to the fools who came back crippled from fighting in Israel's wars.

Nostradamus , says: April 29, 2021 at 2:51 am GMT • 2.0 days ago

"Will Whites Support A Globalist American Empire That Picks Fights Abroad and Wars Against Them At Home?"

The answer is YES, they will.

Why?

Because they've been zombified by 150 years of corporate media whose only purpose is to use subliminal messages 24/7 to control them. Worse of all, they pay monthly fees in order to be zombified!

Wait for the next false flag attack against the US "Interests" at home or abroad and you'll see how the zombies behave.

TG , says: April 30, 2021 at 4:09 am GMT • 23.3 hours ago
@antibeast

Yes, but I would not call the elites "Yanks".

Elites, oligarchs, plutocrats, super-rich, whatever, but don't slime the Yankees.

And while I agree with much of this, don't forget that in the late 1960's the elites imported Mexicans to specifically replace blacks. And then cried a river of tears at how blacks were mysteriously losing ground!!!!

Oh and also: nobody NEEDS cheap labor to run factories. History has shown that without cheap labor factories run perfectly well. It's just that the elites need cheap labor to stay elite

slorter , says: April 30, 2021 at 5:49 am GMT • 21.6 hours ago

The real enemy of the American working class and middle class all of them is neoliberalism ! Coupled with a two party plutocracy that disenfranchises the same Americans who desperately need a more equitable society! Nothing to do with Russia or China we caused it all by ourselves!

Anonymous [397] Disclaimer , says: April 30, 2021 at 6:15 am GMT • 21.2 hours ago

Whites will support a globalist empire. They will also support overseas wars and wars against them at home.

Priss Factor , says: Website April 30, 2021 at 7:09 am GMT • 20.3 hours ago

This is why there needs to be White Liberation from Jewish Supremacism. But Jewish Power tries to preempt this by making a big stink about 'white supremacism'.

No more white support for Jewish supremacist tyranny over Palestinians and mass murder of Arabs/Muslims. If, after 2020, any white person still harbors sentimentality about Jewish Power, he or she is cuck-roach. Useless and worthless.

Ray Caruso , says: April 30, 2021 at 8:19 am GMT • 19.1 hours ago

Currently, an indebted, belligerent, imperialist U.S. is being propped up by naïve, well-meaning whites.

These "well-meaning whites" are the enemy. "Well-meaning whites" have always been the greatest enemy of Whites. A lot of people here consider Jews to be our greatest enemies. But why are they here in such huge numbers and why are they in control? It started with the Powdered-Wig Gang (a.k.a. the Founding Fathers) giving them citizenship on the basis of their shit "Enlightenment" ideology, which held that religion was merely a private matter and of no importance. No country at the time gave Jews citizenship save Poland, which had fallen under their sway and paid an exceedingly high price for it. Then France followed the American example when they had their own powdered-wig revolution.

The tragedy of the US is that nearly every fair-skinned, non-Jewish individual who has any influence here is a "well-meaning White". Generations of brainwashing have done that. Their latest bit of tomfoolery is the belief "Uncle Tim" Scott, a dim, charmless, venal, ugly black mediocrity, will be their savior. By the way, the first time I laid eyes on Uncle Tim, I said myself, "They're going to want to make that fellow president." That's no reason to brag, however, because "well-meaning whites" are nothing if not predictable.

"Well-meaning whites" have no common sense and can't learn from experience. They could not conceive the idea "diversity" is the problem. "Diversity" elected Joe Biden, through bloc-voting by non-Whites and by she-boons in black-dominated counties bringing in suitcases of fake ballots, but guess what: as far as "well-meaning Whites" are concerned, "diversity" in the form of "Uncle Tim" Scott is the solution.

What it comes down to is that if Whites want the White race to survive, then "well-meaning whites", who can accurately be called "liberals", have to go. Whites cannot afford to be sentimental about "well-meaning whites".

animalogic , says: April 30, 2021 at 8:39 am GMT • 18.8 hours ago
@xyzxy the Zio-western imperialists decided ( ie "backed down") not to risk crossing them.
Incidentally JK I don't disagree with this position --
"Rather than feeling anger or shame at this national humiliation, instead I feel something like schadenfreude against them -- along with righteous indignation on behalf of the countless patriots used up and spat out by a System unworthy of their sacrifice."
But perhaps you could spare a few words & emotions for the poor bloody average Afghans who have died in their 100's of 1000's in this vicious, stupid war.
A lack of sympathy for & indeed basic knowledge of, other peoples is part of the reason the US constantly gets stuck in these ridiculous wars. (Had they the "leaders" we have now , the Vietnam War would probably have limped to a halt sometime in the late 80's).
jsigur , says: April 30, 2021 at 8:43 am GMT • 18.7 hours ago

Hmm. Kirkpatrick doesn't seem to realize that 911 was sort of an official beginning to the elites domestic threat problem? There was never a reason to enter Afghanistan because Afghanistan never attacked us and nor did Osama Bin Laden.
As long as ppl believe the official story there will always be a reason the American citizen can support for invading middle east countries
Like the holocaust, it is a lynch pin lie that is the pre-requisite for all sorts claims and behaviors that without them would otherwise not give validation

Paul Greenwood , says: April 30, 2021 at 10:52 am GMT • 16.6 hours ago

I doubt Russia has any regard for Turkey – it has a very long history of wars against them and knows just how treacherous they are.

Russia alone is powerful enough to end life in USA

USA has lost Europe already- Merkel is aligning with China

Americans think Russian gas binds Germany rather than export markets like China and the fact EU needs semiconductors and Asia is where they are produced

No one takes USA seriously any more it is peripheral as in 19th century. You forget Europeans cannot travel to US and frankly fear to do so anyway

USA is disintegrating and is in run-off

Jimmy le Blanc , says: April 30, 2021 at 11:16 am GMT • 16.2 hours ago
@KenH

Biden is just privatizing the war. The mercenary companies and NGOs are writing up their contracts right now.

Jake , says: April 30, 2021 at 11:29 am GMT • 16.0 hours ago
@antibeast

This cannot be said nearly enough. WASP culture is WASP elites hating all 'other' whites and pretending not to hate a few non-WASP white groups when they (the WASPs) can use them against the whites they most hate or fear at the moment. WASPs discard all groups they use as soon as they no longer need them to wage some type war against still other whites.

The Scotch-Irish are probably the best example of what WASPs think of even those who serve them most ruthlessly.

Miro23 , says: April 30, 2021 at 11:44 am GMT • 15.7 hours ago

The mood of the country is comparable to East German during the 1980's. Resignation and apathy.

The last election was a fraud, the media are liars, the courts are political, privacy and free speech aren't being protected, and half the country declares it hates the other half.

Go ahead, try to conjure a false flag to rally Team America.

It does look like resignation and apathy – which is sort of logical – given that all centers of power are in the hands of the totalitarians (same as in the old East Germany).

The totalitarian Communist East German regime actually collapsed when it became caught up in the mass demonstrations of neighbouring countries (Poland Feb. 1989 and Hungary the following month). The Communists didn't have the political will/ability to suppress demonstrations on this scale and ceded power. Two points here are 1) that the public in each country overwhelmingly opposed the government 2) each country was ethnically united (Poles in Poland, Hungarians in Hungary and Germans in East Germany) and viewed their oppression as sourced externally (the Soviet Union).

The US looks different, since the population is split both politically and ethnically. So if anything is going to happen (unlikely) then it's either a civil war, a military coup or a world war (nuclear) removing most major American cities + Israel.

anonymous [349] Disclaimer , says: April 30, 2021 at 12:22 pm GMT • 15.1 hours ago
@anonymouseperson c accountants uncovering the depths of Israel and its fifth column's theft of many tens of billions of our war matériel and of our most guarded military secrets, which were then sold to China in concert with the Greenspan/Goldman Sachs plan to transfer of our industrial intellectual assets and over 50,000 factories to China in preparation for a new order based on joint Israeli-Chinese technocratic hegemony.

My point is that the uninterrupted, elaborate efforts at 9/11 concealment legally constitute, by themselves, sufficient proof of the Pentagon's complicity and guilt in 9/11 and, therefore, make it an alien occupation force that serves Israel, its fifth column, and no other. A war completing the "Bolsheviks" effective extermination of white Christian Russia at the same time as exterminating white Christian America appears to be the objective of International Jewry, whom alone Joe Biden and his Pentagon answer to.

Rich , says: April 30, 2021 at 1:17 pm GMT • 14.2 hours ago
@anonymouseperson

When I was in the US Army, I never met anyone who signed up to 'fight for the Anglo-Zionist empire'. We were there for a variety of reasons, no job, to get training, money for college, adventure or maybe running away from a crazy girlfriend. As the grandson of immigrants, I was probably the most patriotic, the rest of the guys, not so much. Young men will always join the military, whether the military oppresses its people or not. How many Irishmen served in the British military when they had few civil rights back home? In the military, a young White man can learn a trade, learn military tactics, earn money for college and become a real asset to his community. You can also get killed or maimed, but at 18 or 19, we didn't think about that.

lavoisier , says: Website April 30, 2021 at 4:16 pm GMT • 11.2 hours ago

Will Whites Support A Globalist American Empire That Picks Fights Abroad and Wars Against Them At Home?

If they are members of Congress, the military leadership, the police, the FBI, the NSA, the CIA, the MSM, or the leadership of either political party the answer is clearly a resounding YES!!

Brooklyn Dave , says: April 30, 2021 at 5:23 pm GMT • 10.1 hours ago

I believe a large percentage of whites in America have a Stockholm syndrome of some kind going on. The title of the article has rolled two very separate issues into one. As far as continuing to support wars abroad that aren't benefiting the average person of whatever color is not an issue that can be specifically directed at Marxist oriented regimes such as that of Obama/Hillary and now Sleepy Joe & Camel Toe. One can never forget the years of the faux conservative Bushlet regime. Whites as a group more overtly support the military than do other racial groups (even though blacks and Hispanics make up a large percentage of our military). They are very reluctant to criticize American foreign policy as unpatriotic and somehow react to military interventions as if they were a sporting event.

Their concept of patriotism is very puerile. Many never ask the question of who benefits? (bankers, weapons manufacturers and Zionists). As far as the war on whites is concerned, here is where the Stockholm syndrome comes more into play. Our people have been psychologically beaten into submission by accepting whatever the Marxist intelligentsia throws at them.But there is also a cultural flaw primarily among Northern European Protestant whites which consists of being perceived as NICE. Stop being NICE, especially to people who wish you dead. Is this some sort of perversion of Christianity? Maybe. Rather than throwing the whole Gospel message out the window, a recalibration of one's Christianity needs to happen as well. The churches have not been our friend either.

[May 03, 2021] Why George W. Bush Was a Horrible President

Notable quotes:
"... By Lambert Strether of Corrente. ..."
"... Don't deny W his agency. As I followed the horrors, from Vietnam to Iraq to Syria to Central America and elsewhere, the full list that was visible anyway, of the W regime, it sure seemed clear to me that W played the bumbling yuk very well. ..."
"... the dumb cluck thing was mostly an act. he was deliberately talking that way not only to paint himself as stupid, but also because those in power assume we must be spoken to as children (they've studied president speeches since JFK have decreased from high school level to 6th grade in complexity, word usage etc). ..."
"... In our kayfabe duoparty system, it also gave the "opposing" side the "W is a Chimp" talking point to harp on (dress rehearsal for the same stuff against tRUMP). ..."
"... Abu Ghraib was not an anomaly, Con Son Island served the same purpose during the Vietnam War. When I was young I was proud to be an American Citizen, we had the Bill of Rights, the Military was controlled by Civilians and their oath was to defend the Constitution from "All Enemies Foreign and Domestic.". I have been horrified, ashamed and deeply saddened by what has happened in the US over the last half Century or so. ..."
"... I view the 2008 election as the major failing-to-turn-back-when-we-had-the-chance point. Obama could have undone Bush's worst policies, but instead he cemented them into place forever. ..."
"... Our elites are both stupid and evil, but Bush is more stupid and Obama is more evil ..."
"... you are 40 years off the mark-It was Reagan who's brand of avuncular fascism, celebrating stupidity as a virtue who paved the way. ..."
"... albrt: I agree with your take. Obama campaigned as an anti-war candidate (at least wrt Iraq). He then proceeded to "˜surge' into Afghanistan and added Libya, Syria, and Yemen, to the regime change mix. Never a thought given to prosecuting the war criminals: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Tenet, Feith, Wolfowitz, Powell, et al; much less even consider a truth and reconciliation commission. ..."
"... Obama was equally complicit in this never ending horror show and, I am hopeful, history will hold him equally accountable. ..."
"... Is it not written that Margaret Thatcher's true legacy was Tony Blair? If that is true, then the true legacy of Dubya is Obama. ..."
"... As far as harm that George W. Bush did and launched (illegal/immoral wars, domestic surveillance, tax cuts for the wealthy"¦.) Bush should take the award. ..."
"... When Obama deliberately and with malice aforethought turned all the admitted (and in fact proudly self-avowed) war-criminals and criminals-against humanity loose, free and clear under "look forward not back", he routinised and permanentized the up-to-that-very-minute irregular and extra-constitutional novel methods of governance and practice which the Cheney-Bush Administration had pioneered. Obama deliberately made torture, aggressive war, etc. "legal" when America does it and "permanent" as long as America is strong enough to keep doing it. ..."
"... The Greatest Disappointment in History. No-one else comes close, in terms of the sheer numbers of people globally who he let down. The Bait and Switch King, The Great Betrayer. After the nightmare of Bush we got him and his "˜eloquence', pulling the wool over the dazzled sheeple's eyes while he entrenched the 1% and the neocon MI complex, his paymasters, and sponsors for his entry into the overclass. ..."
"... Lambert, you forgot this one" Biden presents Liberty Medal to George and Laura Bush Instead of a war crimes trial at the Hague, Biden gave him a (family bloging) medal! ..."
"... A Clean Break: A New Strategy For Securing the Realm ..."
"... It's really sickening to see George W being "rehabilitated" and made to look like some kind of a senior statesman, when he should be hauled off to the Hague to spend the rest of his life in prison for war crimes. For me, his election in 2000 was mostly the beginning of the end of the rule of law in this country. As a result, the U.S. has Guantanamo, the Patriot Act, in addition to all the other events mentioned, and don't forget he tried to privatize Social Security. ..."
"... and welfare "reform", the crime bill. Talk of privatizing SSI made commonplace acceptable. Repeal of Glass Steagall. They were going to do to healthcare what oBLAM succeeded at, 20 years before him but got sidelined by Lewinsky's blue dress stains. Clintoon is a criminal and so is his spouse, and he did his share of damage everywhere. people who think otherwise might be looking back with nostalgia on a simpler (pre 9.11) time. ..."
"... Jeff Wells wrote some interesting essays in the Bush years, though many of his connections were a bit too far out, even for me. He had some striking collateral evidence for his concept of High Weirdness in high places "" sex abuse, torture and magick figuring prominently, juxtaposed with political skulduggery, and financial crimes and misdemeanours. The Gannon/Guckert affair, the Franklin ring and Gary Caradori were the sort of thing that laced his quite penetrating analyses of events. Facts were jumping off points for speculations, but given our lack of facts his imaginings were a nourishment of sorts, though often very troubling indeed. ..."
"... People have been brain washed by the glossed over history of the US they are taught. It gives people a false belief of our past. The phrase American Exceptionalism comes to mind. It is a myth. The real history is out there but you have to search it out. From it's beginning continuing to today our government is responsible for bad behavior. ..."
"... We Americans have this thing called exceptionalism which among other things creates the idea that our government is more virtuous than others. ..."
"... We are not at Hitler/Stalin/Mao standards ""yet"" but who's to say that could never happen here? One of the bafflements of the 20th century was how a civilized people descended into the dark barbarism of Nazi Germany. ..."
"... Noam Chomsky observed some thirty years ago that if the Nuremberg standards were applied to all the post-war American Presidents, then all of them would hang. ..."
"... We have such a dismal record. Little George was the most audacious of all our criminal presidents, but he has plenty of company. My question is now, looking back, why was the USA incapable of organizing a peaceful world after WW2? I start there. 1945. ..."
May 03, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Posted on April 25, 2021 by Lambert Strether

By Lambert Strether of Corrente.

Recently, the political class has been working hard to rehabilitate George W. Bush into an elder statesman, no doubt to continue the liberal Democrat conversion of suburban Republicans, with headlines like " George Bush reborn as the nation's grandfather " (the London Sunday Times, but you know it will migrate over here), " George W Bush is back "" but not all appreciate his new progressive image " (Guardian), " Bush calls on Congress to tone down "˜harsh rhetoric' about immigration " (CNN), and "George W Bush reveals who he voted for in 2020 election "" and it wasn't Biden or Trump " (the Independent. Bush wrote in Condaleeza Rice, who Exxon once named a tanker for). I could go on. But I won't. These stories from major outlets seem to be erasing early coverage like " The 7 worst moments of George W. Bush's presidency " (WaPo, 2013), " The blood on George W Bush's hands will never dry. Don't glorify this man " (The Guardian, 2017), " Reminder: George W. Bush Is Still Very, Very Bad " (Vice, 2018), " Seth Meyers: Don't Let Trump Make You Forget How Awful George W. Bush Was " (Vanity Fair, 2020), and " We Shouldn't Have to Remind People George W. Bush Was a Terrible President : (Jacobin, 2020). That's unfortunate, because George W. Bush (hereafter "Bush"; the "W" distinguishes him from his spook Yankee patrician Dad, oil bidnessman George H.W. Bush). As with so much else that is fetid in the miasmic air of our current liberal Democrat dispensation, Bush's rehabilitation begins with the Obamas, in this case Michelle Obama, in this iconic photo:

(The backstory: " Michelle Obama Reveals What Really Happened During Her Sweet Exchange With George W. Bush ," and "Michelle Obama: George W. Bush is "˜my partner in crime'[1] and "˜I love him to death' ").

Bush became President in the year 2000. That was "" let me break out my calculator "" 2021 "" 2000 = 21 years ago. It occurs to me that our younger readers, born in 2000, or even 1990, may not know how genuinely horrid Bush was, as President.

I was blogging even back then, and I remember how horrid Bush was; certainly worse than Trump, at least for Trump's first three years in office, until the Covid pandemic. To convey the full horror of the Bush years would not a series of posts, but a book. The entire experience was wretched and shameful.

Of the many horrors of the Bush years, I will pick three. (I am omitting many, many others, including Hurricane Katrina , the Plame Affair , Medicare Part D, the Cheney Energy Task Force , that time Dick Cheney shot an old man in the face , Bush's missing Texas Air National Guard records , Bush gaslighting the 2004 Republican National Convention with terror alerts, and on and on and on. And I didn't even get to 9/11, " You've covered your ass ," WMDs, and the AUMF. Sorry. It's exhausting.) I'm afraid my recounting of these incidents will be sketchy: I lived and blogged in them, and the memories of the horror well up in such volume and detail that I lose control of the material. Not only that, there was an actual, functioning blogosphere at that time, which did great work, but unfortunately most of that work has succumbed to link rot. And my memory of events two decades ago is not as strong as it could be.

The White House Iraq Group

Here I will rely on excerpts from Colonel Sam Gardiner's (PDF) "Truth from These Podia: Summary of a Study of Strategic Influence, Perception Management, Strategic Information Warfare and Strategic Psychological Operations in Gulf II" (2003), whose introduction has been saved from link rot by the National Security Archive and a full version by the University of Leeds . I would bet, long forgotten even by many of those who blogged through those times. ("Gulf II" is what we refer to as the "War in Iraq.") Quoting from the full version:

You will see in my analysis and comments that I do not accept the notion that the first casualty of war is truth. I think we have to have a higher standard. In the most basic sense, Washington and London did not trust the peoples of their democracies to come to right decisions. Truth became a casualty. When truth is a casualty, democracy receives collateral damage.

Seems familiar. (Gardiner's report can be read as a brilliant media critique; it's really worth sitting down with a cup of coffee and reading it all.)[2] More:

My research suggests there were over 50 stories manufactured or at least engineered that distorted the picture of Gulf II for the American and British people . I'll cover most in this report. At the end, I will also describe some stories that seem as if they were part of the strategic influence campaign although the evidence is only circumstantial.

What becomes important is not each story taken individually. If that were the case, it would probably seem only more of the same. If you were to look at them one at a time, you could conclude, "Okay we sort of knew that was happening." It is the pattern that becomes important. It's the summary of everything. To use a phrase often heard during the war, it's the mosaic. Recognizing I said I wouldn't exaggerate, it would not be an exaggeration to say the people of the United States and UK can find out more about the contents of a can of soup they buy than the contents of the can of worms they bought with the 2003 war in the Gulf.

The White House was, naturally, at the center of the operation:

One way to view how the US Government was organized to do the strategic communications effort before, during and after the war is to use the chart that was used by the Assistant Deputy Director for Information Operations. The center is the White House Office of Global Communications, the organization originally created by Karen Hughes as the Coalition Information Office. The White House is at the center of the strategic communications process"¦.

Handy chart:

And:

Inside the White House there was an Iraq Group that did policy direction and then the Office of Global Communications itself.

Membership of the White House Iraq Group:

So, in 2020 Bush's write-in vote for President was Condi Rice, the [x] Black [x] woman who helped run a domestic disinformation campaign for him in 2003, to sell the Iraq War to the American people. Isn't that"¦. sweet?

Of course, I was very naive at that point. I had come up as a Democrat, and my first real political engagement was the Clinton impeachment. Back in 2003, I was amazed to discover that there was a White House operation that was planting fake stories in the press "" and that I had been playing whackamole on them. At a higher level, I was disturbed that "Washington and London did not trust the peoples of their democracies to come to right decisions." Now it all seems perfectly normal, which is sad.

Torture at Abu Ghraib

There are a lot of images of our torture prison in Iraq, Abu Ghraib. This one ( via ) is not the most famous , but to me it is the most shocking:

What kind of country sets dogs on a naked prisoner? Well, my kind of country, apparently. (Later, I remember discussing politics with somebody who came from a country that might be considered less governed by the rule of law than my own, and they said: "Abu Ghraib. You have nothing to say." And they were right.)

For those who came in late, here's a snapshot (the detail of the story is in fact overwhelming, and I also have pity for the poor shlubs the brass tossed into that hellhole[3].) From the Los Angeles Times, " Few have faced consequences for abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq " (2015):

[A] 44-year-old Al Jazeera reporter named Salah Ejaili, said in a phone interview from Qatar that he was arrested in 2003 while covering an explosion in the Iraqi province of Diyala. He was held at Abu Ghraib for 48 days after six days in another facility, he said.

"Most of the pictures that came out in 2004, I saw that firsthand "" the human pyramid where men were stacked up naked on top of each other, people pulled around on leashes," he said in the interview, with one of his attorneys translating. "I used to hear loud screams during the torture sessions."

Ejaili says he was beaten, left naked and exposed to the elements for long periods, and left in solitary confinement, among other acts.

"When people look at others who are naked, they feel like they're animals in a zoo, in addition to being termed as criminals and as terrorists," he said. "That had a very strong psychological impact."

The plaintiffs also say they suffered electric shocks; deprivation of food, water and oxygen; sexual abuse; threats from dogs; beatings; and sensory deprivation.

Taha Yaseen Arraq Rashid, a laborer, says he was sexually abused by a woman while he was cuffed and shackled, and also that he was forced to watch a female prisoner's rape.

Ejaili said that his face was often covered during interrogations, making it difficult for him to identify those involved, but that he was able to notice that many of the interrogators who entered the facility wore civilian clothing.

His attorneys, citing military investigations into abuses at Abu Ghraib and other evidence, say the contractors took control of the prison and issued orders to uniformed military.

"Abu Ghraib was pretty chaotic," said Baher Azmy, legal director for the Center for Constitutional Rights, which brought suits against CACI and L-3 Services. "They were involved in a conspiracy with the military police to abuse our clients.""¦. Eleven U.S. soldiers were convicted in military trials of crimes related to the humiliation and abuse of the prisoners.

(So Abu Ghraib is a privatization story, too. Oddly, whoever signed the contract never ended up in court.) All this seemed pretty shocking then. But now we know that the Chicago Police Department ran a torture site at Homan Square while Rahm Emanuel, Obama's Chief of Staff, was Mayor , so perhaps this is all perfectly normal too.

Warrantless Surveillance and the Destruction of the Fourth Amendment

Here is the wording of the Fourth Amendment :

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers , and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If our legal system had the slightest shred of integrity, it would be obvious to the Courts, as it is to a six-old-child, that what we laughingly call our "personal" computers and cellphones contain "paper," not in the tediously literal sense of a physical material made from wood fibre, but in the sense of content . Bits and bytes are 20th Century paper, stored on silicon and hard disk platters. Of course a warrant should be needed to read what's on my phone, ffs.

That Fourth Amendment common sense did not prevail is IMNSHO due in large part to Bush's program of warrantless surveillance, put in place as part of the Global War on Terror. Here again, the complexity is overwhelming and took several years to unravel. I'm afraid I have to quote Wikipedia on this one :

A week after the 9/11 attacks, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF), which inaugurated the "War on Terror". It later featured heavily in arguments over the NSA program.

Soon after the 9/11 attacks President Bush established the President's Surveillance Program. As part of the program, the Terrorist Surveillance Program was established pursuant to an executive order that authorized the NSA to surveil certain telephone calls without obtaining a warrant (see 50 U.S.C. § 1802 50 U.S.C. § 1809). The complete details of the executive order are not public, but according to administration statements, the authorization covers communication originating overseas from or to a person suspected of having links to terrorist organizations or their affiliates even when the other party to the call is within the US.

In October 2001, Congress passed the Patriot Act, which granted the administration broad powers to fight terrorism. The Bush administration used these powers to bypass the FISC and directed the NSA to spy directly on al-Qaeda via a new NSA electronic surveillance program. Reports at the time indicate that an "apparently accidental" "glitch" resulted in the interception of communications that were between two U.S. parties. This act was challenged by multiple groups, including Congress, as unconstitutional.

The precise scope of the program remains secret, but the NSA was provided total, unsupervised access to all fiber-optic communications between the nation's largest telecommunication companies' major interconnected locations, encompassing phone conversations, email, Internet activity, text messages and corporate private network traffic .

Of course, all this is perfectly normal today. So much for the Fourth Amendment, good job. (You will note that the telcos had to be in on it; amusingly, the CEO of Qwest, the only telco that refused to participate, was charged and convicted of insider trading, good job again.) The legal aspects of all this are insanely complex, but as you see from my introduction, they should be simple.

Conclusion

Here's a video of the Iraqi (now in Parliament) who threw shoes at Bush (who got off lightly, all things considered):

https://www.youtube.com/embed/OM3Z_Kskl_U

We should all be throwing shoes at Bush, seriously if not literally. We should not be accepting candy from him. We should not be treating him as an elder statesman. Or a "partner in crime." We should not be admiring his paintings. Bush ran a bad, bad, bad administration and we are living with the consequences of his badness today. Bush is a bad man. We are ruled by bad people. Tomorrow, Obama!

NOTES

[1] Indeed.

[2] For example, I vividly remember playing whack-a-mole as a blogger with the following WMD stories: Drones, weapons labs, WMD cluster bombs, Scuds, nuclear materials from Niger, aluminum tubes, and dirty bombs. They one and all fell apart on close inspection. And they were only a small part of the operation, as Gardiner shows in detail.

[3] My personal speculation is that Dick Cheney had a direct feed from the Abu Ghraib torture chambers to the White House, and watched the proceedings live. Some of the soldiers burned images of torture onto CDs as trophies, and the prison also had a server, whose connectivity was very conveniently not revealed by the judge in a lawsuit I dimly remember being brought in Germany. So it goes.

flora , April 25, 2021 at 6:46 pm

Does anyone believe that W, son of H. W. Bush, H. W. son of Senator Prescott Bush, would have been been pres without that familial lineage and its important govt connections? The pity is W wasn't smart enough to grasp world politics and the US's importance as an accepted fulcrum in same beyond his momentary wants. imo. Brent Scowcroft and others warned him off his vain pursuits. The word "squander" come to mind, though I wish it did not.

flora , April 25, 2021 at 7:43 pm

See for example Kevin Phillips' book American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush . ( Kevin Phillips is a great modernist American historian, imo, who saw the rise of Nixon before anyone else.)

Teejay , April 27, 2021 at 10:16 am

" saw the rise of Nixon"? Phillips worked on the '68 campaign.

JTMcPhee , April 25, 2021 at 8:12 pm

Don't deny W his agency. As I followed the horrors, from Vietnam to Iraq to Syria to Central America and elsewhere, the full list that was visible anyway, of the W regime, it sure seemed clear to me that W played the bumbling yuk very well.

He did what he set out to do, no doubt with careful guidance from that sh!t of a father (magically turned into a laid-in-state "statesman") and mother-of-string-of-pearls, and of course Cheney and the rest of the corpo-gov policy gang.

The Consent Manufacturers are whitewashing an evil man and his slicker but equally evil successor and his glamorous spouse.

Helluva job, Georgie! Full marks for kicking the world a long way down a dark road.

anon y'mouse , April 26, 2021 at 12:24 pm

the dumb cluck thing was mostly an act. he was deliberately talking that way not only to paint himself as stupid, but also because those in power assume we must be spoken to as children (they've studied president speeches since JFK have decreased from high school level to 6th grade in complexity, word usage etc).

see Pelosi's daughter's film of his campaign trail. He's no Angel Merkel, but sly enough for politics in this country and most third world corruptocracies.

In our kayfabe duoparty system, it also gave the "opposing" side the "W is a Chimp" talking point to harp on (dress rehearsal for the same stuff against tRUMP).

Tom Stone , April 25, 2021 at 6:49 pm

Abu Ghraib was not an anomaly, Con Son Island served the same purpose during the Vietnam War. When I was young I was proud to be an American Citizen, we had the Bill of Rights, the Military was controlled by Civilians and their oath was to defend the Constitution from "All Enemies Foreign and Domestic.". I have been horrified, ashamed and deeply saddened by what has happened in the US over the last half Century or so.
And it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

ambrit , April 25, 2021 at 7:00 pm

You actually "˜blogged' back when we had to use punch cards to program our PCs? How oh how did you clamber on up out of "the Well" so many times a week? I am somewhat convinced that the Hollerith Cards Protocol was the origin of the Twitter 140 character limit.

I also "lived through" the "˜Reign of "W""˜ and see it as a Time of Prophecy. Most of the things we are now staring down the barrel of were effectuated then.

I may be foilly, (may be? who am I kidding,) but I view the 2000 election as a major turning point of American history.

albrt , April 25, 2021 at 7:20 pm

I view the 2008 election as the major failing-to-turn-back-when-we-had-the-chance point. Obama could have undone Bush's worst policies, but instead he cemented them into place forever.

Our elites are both stupid and evil, but Bush is more stupid and Obama is more evil.

drumlin woodchuckles , April 26, 2021 at 12:08 am

So was the 1963 " election at Dealey Plaza". Very pivotal.

Susan the other , April 26, 2021 at 1:56 pm

I go with JFK's assassination too. But little George is a close second.

Paul Whalen , April 26, 2021 at 6:42 am

you are 40 years off the mark-It was Reagan who's brand of avuncular fascism, celebrating stupidity as a virtue who paved the way.

Jason , April 26, 2021 at 6:59 am

All the pomp and circumstance surrounding the personage of the President serves to conceal the people behind the scenes who vetted and groomed said president, and actively advise him while in office. It's in this way that a Jimmy Carter may be viewed as a gentle soul so far as presidents go, but he was actually vetted by Brzezinski on behalf of the CFR goons. Once in office he was then advised by Brzezinski and Volcker, among other assorted lunatics. And he gladly took their advice the entire time. That's how he came to be president in the first place. And so it goes.

Ashburn , April 26, 2021 at 4:29 pm

albrt: I agree with your take. Obama campaigned as an anti-war candidate (at least wrt Iraq). He then proceeded to "˜surge' into Afghanistan and added Libya, Syria, and Yemen, to the regime change mix. Never a thought given to prosecuting the war criminals: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Tenet, Feith, Wolfowitz, Powell, et al; much less even consider a truth and reconciliation commission.

Obama was equally complicit in this never ending horror show and, I am hopeful, history will hold him equally accountable.

km , April 25, 2021 at 7:19 pm

Is it not written that Margaret Thatcher's true legacy was Tony Blair? If that is true, then the true legacy of Dubya is Obama.

Tom Doak , April 25, 2021 at 7:43 pm

That gives W too much credit. Obama continued the legacy of Cheney.

John Wright , April 25, 2021 at 9:58 pm

Could you explain your view that Obama and Trump are "worse than that" (Bush-Cheney).?

As far as harm that George W. Bush did and launched (illegal/immoral wars, domestic surveillance, tax cuts for the wealthy"¦.) Bush should take the award.

Obama did push for military action in Libya, but at least held back from Syria.

The administrations after Bush "kicked the can down the road" but he initiated the events they simply continued. And Trump did attempt to pull troops back from Bush initiated wars. How is Trump worse than Bush? What are your metrics?

drumlin woodchuckles , April 25, 2021 at 10:04 pm

I am just a commenter here, but I would say that . . .

When Obama deliberately and with malice aforethought turned all the admitted (and in fact proudly self-avowed) war-criminals and criminals-against humanity loose, free and clear under "look forward not back", he routinised and permanentized the up-to-that-very-minute irregular and extra-constitutional novel methods of governance and practice which the Cheney-Bush Administration had pioneered. Obama deliberately made torture, aggressive war, etc. "legal" when America does it and "permanent" as long as America is strong enough to keep doing it.

He did some other things like that which I don't have time to mention right now. Maybe others will beat me to it.

Most of all, by slickly conning or permitting to self-con numbers of people about "hope and change" to come from an Obama Administration, he destroyed all hope of hope. He destroyed hope itself. Hope is not a "thing" any more in this country, thanks to Obama.

He may also have destroyed black politicians' dreams of becoming America's " Second Black President" for several decades to come. Been there, done that. Never Again. But since I am not Black, that is not my problem. That is something Black America can thank Obama for, if they decide to wake up to the fact of that reality.

Of course , if the Evil Countess Draculamala becomes President after Biden, then I guess I will be proven wrong about that particular observation.

tegnost , April 25, 2021 at 10:47 pm

Bush was the set up guy, Obama was the closer

norm de plume , April 26, 2021 at 6:51 am

The Greatest Disappointment in History. No-one else comes close, in terms of the sheer numbers of people globally who he let down. The Bait and Switch King, The Great Betrayer. After the nightmare of Bush we got him and his "˜eloquence', pulling the wool over the dazzled sheeple's eyes while he entrenched the 1% and the neocon MI complex, his paymasters, and sponsors for his entry into the overclass.

Last, does any single person with the possible exception of Hillary Clinton, bear so much responsibility for the election of Trump?

quackery , April 26, 2021 at 7:57 am

When Obama campaigned for president he claimed he wanted to get rid of nuclear weapons. Instead, he upgraded the nuclear arsenal.

Mr Grumpy , April 26, 2021 at 10:28 am

It is ironic that the far right views Obama as the antichrist but they benefited from all of his policies.

Cat Burglar , April 26, 2021 at 11:19 am

Remember that Obama voted in favor of FISAA, the bill that immunized Bush and his flunkies from prosecution for their felony FISA violations, as a senator, not long before the presidential election. It was impossible to make myself vote for him after that.

Hotei , April 25, 2021 at 11:53 pm

Excellent documentation of that lineage here: http://www.obamatheconservative.com/

Norm Norton , April 26, 2021 at 11:14 am

"Is it not written that Margaret Thatcher's true legacy was Tony Blair?" If that is true, then the true legacy of Dubya is Obama."

And for Obama, Trump!

upstater , April 25, 2021 at 7:42 pm

Lambert, you forgot this one" Biden presents Liberty Medal to George and Laura Bush Instead of a war crimes trial at the Hague, Biden gave him a (family bloging) medal!

Jason , April 25, 2021 at 7:51 pm

Thanks Lambert. I'd add that the intelligence being sent to the "White House Iraq Group" was being manufactured by the Office of Special Plans (OSP) which was set up and run by Douglas Feith and Paul Wolfowitz. Following Feith's history and connections alone is a fruitful endeavor for those so inclined.

Among other things, Feith co-authored, along with Richard Perle and David Wurmser, the A Clean Break: A New Strategy For Securing the Realm paper prepared for the prime minister of a certain foreign country. This is back in 1996. Around the same time the PNAC boys were formed by Kagan and Kristol and started selling the same policy prescriptions vis a vis Iraq to the pols and public here.

Feith was also fired from the NSC back in the early 80's for passing classified information to some little country. Fast forward to his OSP days and, lo and behold, his employee Larry Franklin is convicted of the same thing, along with Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman of AIPAC.

That's just a taste of the malfeasance.

John , April 25, 2021 at 8:26 pm

I guess sometimes people need to be reminded that water is wet. The Buddhists say that ignorance is the root poison. True dat. Especially in Amrika.

JTMcPhee , April 25, 2021 at 8:56 pm

This stuff has gone on forever. What amount of ventilation is needed to blow this kind of dung out of the Augean stables of geopolitics? Not much chance of that anyway, given all the incentives and and interests"

Is it luck that Putin and Xi might be a little less monstrous?

Elizabeth , April 25, 2021 at 10:20 pm

It's really sickening to see George W being "rehabilitated" and made to look like some kind of a senior statesman, when he should be hauled off to the Hague to spend the rest of his life in prison for war crimes. For me, his election in 2000 was mostly the beginning of the end of the rule of law in this country. As a result, the U.S. has Guantanamo, the Patriot Act, in addition to all the other events mentioned, and don't forget he tried to privatize Social Security.

His eight years as president, for me, was a horror show. What really bothers me is that he got away with all of it "" and now he's hailed as an eminence gris. I can't help but think that his rehabilitation is to remind us all of how bad Orange Man was "" Obama was just as bad because he cemented everything W did "" and more.

Thanks for the horrible memories.

Joe Hill , April 25, 2021 at 11:02 pm

I understand you disagree with the policies of Mr Bush, but war crimes?

Please describe what charges would be brought against him if you were to prosecute at a war crimes tribunal.

Yves Smith , April 26, 2021 at 3:23 am

That is an assignment, which is a violation of our written site Policies. This applies to reader comments when you could easily find the answer in less than 30 seconds on Google rather than being a jerk and challenging a reader (or even worse, me derivatively) on bogus grounds.

https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/28000/amr510972011en.pdf

Robert Gray , April 26, 2021 at 1:57 am

> For me, [W's] election in 2000 was mostly the beginning of the end of the rule of law in this country.

At this moment I'm writing it is still early days for this thread: there are only 24 comments. In these comments are named many bad people. However, one name that does not (yet) appear is "˜Clinton'. W was a monster as president (and likely remains a monster as a human being) but surely Billy Jeff needn't yield to him in his contempt for the rule of law.

Yves Smith , April 26, 2021 at 2:29 am

I loathe Bill Clinton but nothing he did approaches the Iraq War in the level of damage to the US and many foreign countries"¦.starting with Iraq.

Robert Gray , April 26, 2021 at 3:52 am

Quite right, of course. My comment was specifically in regard to his disdain for and abuse of the rule, and rôle, of law in the American polity, e.g., his perjury > disbarment. Sort of like the famous photograph of Nelson Rockefeller who, while serving as VP, was captured giving the finger to a group of protestors; Clinton also oozed that kind of hubristic impunity.

Alex Cox , April 26, 2021 at 12:01 pm

Regarding Clinton, the damage he caused to his own country and the world was substantial. The destruction of Yugoslavia caused considerable mayhem "" in addition to bombing and breaking apart a sovereign nation, it enabled "liberals" to feel good about war again, and paved the way for the invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.

And the damage done by NAFTA was enormous "" in terms of leading to deaths of despair in both the US and Mexico I suspect NAFTA has a higher domestic "body count" than any of the subsequent forever wars.

anon y'mouse , April 26, 2021 at 12:33 pm

and welfare "reform", the crime bill. Talk of privatizing SSI made commonplace acceptable. Repeal of Glass Steagall. They were going to do to healthcare what oBLAM succeeded at, 20 years before him but got sidelined by Lewinsky's blue dress stains. Clintoon is a criminal and so is his spouse, and he did his share of damage everywhere. people who think otherwise might be looking back with nostalgia on a simpler (pre 9.11) time.

little known covered up crime from his ARK days is the selling of HIV tainted blood (taken from prisoners) to Canada, among other things.

yet another who had credible rape allegations. which damages our image at home and abroad.

tegnost , April 25, 2021 at 10:36 pm

Total Information Awareness https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/preemption/tia.html

Adm. John Poindexter"¦ https://www.nytimes.com/1990/04/08/us/poindexter-is-found-guilty-of-all-5-criminal-charges-for-iran-contra-cover-up.html
yep, that one"¦

drumlin woodchuckles , April 26, 2021 at 12:14 am

I read that for the very briefest time, somebody or other was selling Total Information Awareness memorabilia with the Total Information Awareness symbol on it. I wish I had thought to buy a Total Information Awareness mug.

I imagine knockoffs and parodies exist, but I am not sure the real thing is findable any more.

Darius , April 25, 2021 at 10:43 pm

After Dennis Rader, the Wichita serial killer, murdered someone, the cops always found his semen on the floor next to the mutilated victim. He got sexual pleasure out of gruesome murder. This is how I always pictured Cheney's attitude toward torture. Well. I tried not to actually picture it.

Kevin Carhart , April 26, 2021 at 12:06 am

Bush also whipped votes for Kavanaugh, during the cuddly years.

https://theweek.com/speedreads/798796/george-w-bush-reportedly-working-phones-kavanaugh

Colonel Smithers , April 26, 2021 at 4:26 am

Thank you, KC.

Kavanaugh accompanied Bush fils on his state visit to the UK. Even then, Kavanaugh was being touted as a future Supreme Court judge.

The Rev Kev , April 26, 2021 at 3:48 am

Talk about your target rich environment. Where do you even start? Where do you begin? A serial business failure, draft dodger, military deserter, drunk driver "" and all that was before he became President. A man so incurious about the world "" just like Trump "" that he never even owned a passport until he actually became President and who never knew that Islam (prior to the Iraq invasion) , for example, was just not one religion but was divided into Sunni and Shia in the same way Christianity is divided into "" mostly "" Protestant and Catholics. But to me he was always the "Frat Boy President". His family always protected him from his many flaws and he never had to grow up like his father had to in WW2. Even as President he never grew into the job, again, just like Trump.

Lambert gives a few good reminders but there were many others and these are just the top of my head. He cared little for the US Constitution and called it nothing more than a goddamn scrap of paper. He officially made the US a torture nation, not only by pretending that US laws did not apply in Guantanamo bay but also aboard US Navy ships for which laws definitely did apply. As part of a movement to make America an oil-fueled hegemony for the 21st century, he invaded Iraq with the firm intention on invading Iran next so that Washington would have a firm grip on the fuel pump of the world. As he said "" "America is addicted to oil." He dropped the ball on 9/11 through over-obsessing on Iraq and in the immediate aftermath sent jets around the country "" when all jets were grounded "" to fly Saudi royalty back to Saudi Arabia before the FBI could interrogate them about all their knowledge of the attack. All this to hide his very deep connections with the Saudis.

I could go on for several more paragraphs but what would be the point? For the neocons he was a great fronts-man to be followed by a even greater one. I sometimes think that if Biden was a "˜real' Republican, then he would have been a great vice-president for Bush. And now the establishment and their trained seals in the media are trying to make him out as "America's Favourite Uncle" or something so that when he dies, he will have the same sort of funeral as John McCain did. And I predict that tens of thousands of veterans around the country will then raise their glasses to him "" and then pour the contents on the ground.

Colonel Smithers , April 26, 2021 at 4:22 am

Thank you, Lambert.

W's rehab continues in the UK MSM, not just the Independent. The worst offenders are probably the Grauniad and Channel 4, both Blairite.

The rehab mirrored the rise of Trump. His lack of interest in war upset these preachy imperialists.

Using Michelle Obama to facilitate the rehab brought id pol into the equation and made it easier. It was remarkable how often the above photo is used in the neo liberal and neo con media.

The Rev Kev , April 26, 2021 at 5:43 am

Thank you, Colonel. That foto is remarkable and I suspect that the origins for the idea for it may lay on the other side of the pond as it seemed so familiar-

https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3110070/netflixs-crown-shows-how-princess-diana-chose-her-own

drumlin woodchuckles , April 26, 2021 at 5:36 am

There is a blog called Rigorous Intuition 2.0. Many of its blogposts are about the Bush period and Bush related subjects and events. ( Many others are not). The sections on 9/11, Iraq, and Katrina probably have the highest percent of Bush-related blogposts, in case one is interested.

norm de plume , April 26, 2021 at 7:26 am

Jeff Wells wrote some interesting essays in the Bush years, though many of his connections were a bit too far out, even for me. He had some striking collateral evidence for his concept of High Weirdness in high places "" sex abuse, torture and magick figuring prominently, juxtaposed with political skulduggery, and financial crimes and misdemeanours. The Gannon/Guckert affair, the Franklin ring and Gary Caradori were the sort of thing that laced his quite penetrating analyses of events. Facts were jumping off points for speculations, but given our lack of facts his imaginings were a nourishment of sorts, though often very troubling indeed.

Tony massey , April 26, 2021 at 1:58 pm

Who needs to make shit up during those years?
The facts"¦the shit he actually did, was glossed over or simply forgotten.
If shit was made up about his sorry ass i didn't bother checking, Sir.
I just assumed it was true.
Bushies destroyed the country. If there's a country in 100 years they'll be paying for those years.
And then came obama and big Mike

jackiebass63 , April 26, 2021 at 6:14 am

People have been brain washed by the glossed over history of the US they are taught. It gives people a false belief of our past. The phrase American Exceptionalism comes to mind. It is a myth. The real history is out there but you have to search it out. From it's beginning continuing to today our government is responsible for bad behavior.

Some scholars like Noam Chomsky write about our real history. Unfortunately most people don't read this material. They are content with our glossed over shining star version of US history that unfortunately continues to be taught in our educational system , starting in elementary school continuing through a 4 year college education. Our system of government is so corrupted , I don't believe it can be fixed.

Jason , April 26, 2021 at 7:17 am

Arguing over degrees of presidential evil. Perfect.

farmboy , April 26, 2021 at 8:03 am

Nixon was rehabbed so he could open China, Kissinger got to keep his mantle. W portrayed by Josh Brolin pretty good take. Nice to see dunking on GW, but the cycle of rehabilitation is due. The question is can he do some good or is there too much mud on his boots. Can't see W as a new Jimmy Carter. Glossing over history begins the moment it's made. Makes me miss LBJ

Carlos Stoll , April 26, 2021 at 9:23 am

Between 1998 and 2000, under the rule of Saddam Hussein, about 1000 prisoners from Abu Ghraib prison were executed and buried in mass graves. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prison How many Abu Ghraib prisoners did the US army execute?

The Rev Kev , April 26, 2021 at 9:48 am

Tell me again how many Iraqis were killed by the US Army because they were doing their own version of "Red Dawn"? And that tens if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis would still be alive if Saddam was simply left in place. Here is a video to watch while you have a little think about it-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfvFpT-iypw (17:46 mins)

Phil in KC , April 27, 2021 at 8:02 am

We Americans have this thing called exceptionalism which among other things creates the idea that our government is more virtuous than others. It's a useful idea in that it calls us to be different and better than the average nation, and certainly different and better than a cruel dictatorship. But it's also a dangerous idea because too many of us actually believe it to be true. Our atrocities are different in kind, but the scale is the same.

We are not at Hitler/Stalin/Mao standards ""yet"" but who's to say that could never happen here? One of the bafflements of the 20th century was how a civilized people descended into the dark barbarism of Nazi Germany.

Deschain , April 26, 2021 at 10:55 am

"(I am omitting many, many others, including Hurricane Katrina, the Plame Affair, Medicare Part D, the Cheney Energy Task Force, that time Dick Cheney shot an old man in the face, Bush's missing Texas Air National Guard records, Bush gaslighting the 2004 Republican National Convention with terror alerts, and on and on and on. An I didn't even get to 9/11, "You've covered your ass," WMDs, and the AUMF. Sorry. It's exhausting.)"

You left out the housing bubble and the GFC!

Mr Grumpy , April 26, 2021 at 10:58 am

Agree with all the criticism of Bush, Cheney, Obama. On a lighter note, my father-in-law is a high tech oil prospector in W Texas, much of it in Midland, overlapping in time with W. Both members of the Petroleum Club (been there once, very stuffy) and worked out at the same gym. Naturally, my wife asked if he had ever seen W naked. Her dad wouldn't answer, but did turn beet red. We take this as confirmation.

Phil in KC , April 26, 2021 at 12:24 pm

Noam Chomsky observed some thirty years ago that if the Nuremberg standards were applied to all the post-war American Presidents, then all of them would hang. Chomsky could not have imagined the future sequence of presidents from that point forward, but certainly they did not break the chain of criminality. My point is that Bush is not unique in the type of crimes, just the enormity of them. But I also believe he set new standards (lower) for shamelessness. Remember his smirk?

But also remember Obama joking about killing people.

John Wright , April 26, 2021 at 3:25 pm

Remember the comedy skit in which GWB "looked" for Iraq WMD's in the Oval office as part of the White House Correspondent's dinner?

Anyone with any sense of decency would have refused to do this skit, but Bush apparently followed his handlers' advice to get some laughs. That the USA was led by someone of such limited talent for 8 years speaks volumes. Years ago, a New York Times reader wrote that Hillary Clinton is a "well-connected mediocrity".

That comment may be true for ALL of the recent political candidates, from both parties, for a great many years.

LBJ was definitely not mediocre (civil rights/war on poverty), and would be viewed far more favorably, maybe as great, if he had pulled out of Vietnam rather than escalating. Carter in his post presidency has much to recommend. Post presidency Bush is painting his portraits rather than having any retrospective regrets for the harm he did.

Susan the other , April 26, 2021 at 2:27 pm

We have such a dismal record. Little George was the most audacious of all our criminal presidents, but he has plenty of company. My question is now, looking back, why was the USA incapable of organizing a peaceful world after WW2? I start there. 1945. How did our ideology become so inept? And everything I have read about our failures over the years is contrasted with what might have been. We have operated under a system that could not function without extraction. There was always a sell-by date on the cover; one that we tried to ignore. There's no doubt in my mind that it has finally failed completely. Ignominiously. But we have also learned and come to admit certain realities. The most important one is that there can be no more war; civilization cannot survive a modern war. So, ironically, our advanced warfare might well bring a peaceful world without world war. And our advances in science (mostly militarily inspired) will help us now survive.

Sue inSoCal , April 26, 2021 at 4:56 pm

Lambert, thank you for this piece. I won't repeat what others have opined. I've had a real problem with Michelle Obama being the rehabilitation cheerleader leader for Dubya. Imho, we lost all of our rights under the odious Patriot Act, which was pre-written. Russ Feingold was the lone Senate holdout. And I recall Byrd's ire and rant at the tome they had no time to read, but he caved. It went downhill from there. The links below, (apologies, I don't know how to fashion a hot link..) are about Bush's crimes and Amnesty International's exhaustive investigation of them.

I don't have the citation anymore, and I've knocked myself out trying to find it. But there exists a UN human rights commission memo suggesting (?) Obama to do a number of things: hold Bushco accountable for war crimes etc, as well as address what is termed as "systematic racism" in incarceration (and more). I had printed it out a number of years ago and can't find it.)
I'm not buying that Bush fils is any elder statesman. He and his cronies used torture, extreme rendition, hired mercenaries and completely destabilized the Middle East. We still don't have our rights back, and I'm betting the Patriot Act will never go away. (Nor will data mining under the guise of "targeted advertising" and sold to..the military.) The NYT's link is how Obama elected to rug sweep and just move ahead! I look forward to Lambert's take on the Obama administration..

https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/28000/amr510972011en.pdf

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/us/politics/12inquire.html

techpioneer , April 26, 2021 at 4:56 pm

Finally, someone has the courage to point out the obvious. An excellent article, well researched and nicely nuanced.

I'm disappointed with the remedy proposed, however. Throwing shoes is not enough; it's merely symbolic. The potential crimes committed here, including lying us into war, the extent of torture committed, and practices that violate international military norms and intelligence require a transparent and impartial investigation. One possible venue is the International Criminal Courts in the Hague.

I've been told many times that sunlight can be an effective deterrent against disease.

[May 03, 2021] Why Barack Obama Was a Horrible President

Notable quotes:
"... By Lambert Strether of Corrente . ..."
"... Bloggers on the Bus ..."
"... while on the other hand ..."
"... while on the other hand ..."
"... while on the other hand ..."
"... correct the record ..."
"... I am omitting not prosecuting bankers for accounting control fraud, the HAMP debacle, the mortgage settlement debacle, destroying a generation of black wealth with his housing policies ..."
"... it was VP at BOH ..."
"... I could go on, like many of us, but what’s the point. ..."
"... ‘fresno dan April 27, 2021 at 6:46 am’ ..."
"... ‘Obama in Flint epitomizes the man’ ..."
May 03, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Posted on April 26, 2021 by Lambert Strether

By Lambert Strether of Corrente .

Our political class does not believe that Barack Obama is a candidate for rehabilitation (“ revered by liberals, moderates and even some Republicans “) despite recently pivoting to a consensus that his response to the Great Financial Crash was not all it could be . Even today, it’s almost impossible, get anybody to the left of Joe Lieberman ( Obama’s mentor ) to say that Obama was a bad President. d As Matt Stoller writes in The Boston Review :

Even today you cannot get a single elected left-wing politician to say that Obama was a bad president. Think about that. We cannot have an honest discussion of what it meant to use power when Democrats were in charge, so the language of dissension is polluted with incoherent nonsense. All the grand philosophical musing and Democratic Socialists of America study groups do not matter when not a single elected official outside the Republican Party can make the simple, obvious point that Obama’s policies straight up made things worse.

This was not some capitalist plot. There was a lot of dissent within the Democratic Party about whether it was a good idea to do what Obama did. I was part of a network of people who tried to fight against the foreclosure nonsense and opposed Obama’s handing Puerto Rico over to hedge funds [ here ]. We lost. And the people who made public explanations about these fights lied to cover up for Obama’s bad choices. They lied because some of them are frauds, but also because it was painful not to; Democratic voters and many left-wing voters were and still are deeply hostile to any criticism of Obama. He is beloved; according to Gallup polling, 95 percent of Democrats have a favorable view of him. To the extent there is skepticism, it is framed in ways that avoid admitting that his actions systemically ruined millions of lives.

Well, I’m happy to call Obama a bad President, because he was. Of the many horrors of the Obama years, I will pick three. (I am omitting not prosecuting bankers for accounting control fraud , the HAMP debacle, the mortgage settlement debacle, destroying a generation of black wealth with his housing policies , the kill list disposition matrix , whacking a US citizen with a drone strike and no due process , ObamaCare and not single payer, the ObamaCare website collapsing on launch (with nobody held accountable), not closing Gitmo , the Afghanistan surge , enabling Google’s monopoly on search , creating the conditions for Trump .) All three are chosen to show continuties with the Bush Administration, rather than differences. Again I will beg your indulgence for sketchiness, since 2021 â€" 2008 = 13 years ago, and I’m operating mostly from memory, despite having blogged through those years, just as I blogged through the Bush years. As with Bush, a full accounting would be book-length. Or perhaps there should be a podcast, which would take hundreds of episodes. (Hmm. Not a bad idea. The podcast would have the same title as this post.)

Legitimizing Warrantless Surveillance

You will remember Bush’s program of warrantless surveillance from the post on Bush. The battle against it was conducted under the confusing banner of “FISA Reform†(that is, the battle framed not that Bush’s actions destroyed the Fourth Amendment, but that the process of FISA authorization was not properly followed). Nonetheless, the blogosphere of that time played a big role in that battle (I was there, albeit peripherally) which Eric Boehlert describes well in his book Bloggers on the Bus . Here is a long excerpt (the legislation in the first sentence is FISA Reform). I’ve added the highlighting:

So, where was Obama on “FISA Reform� That depends. From Politifact :

In October 2007, Obama spokesman Bill Burton issued this unequivocal statement to the liberal blog TPM Election Central: “To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies .â€

Key segments of the Democratic base â€" enjoying substantial influence in the run-up to the Democratic presidential primaries â€" were pleased. “This is the kind of leadership we need to see from the Democratic candidates,†MoveOn spokesman Adam Green said at the time.

Obama clinched the Democrat nomination on June 4, 2008. Nomination safely in hand, he changed his mind on “FISA Reformâ€[1] in July:

In October, Obama had vowed to help filibuster an update of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that gave telecommunication companies that had cooperated with President Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program immunity from lawsuits.

The Senate voted Wednesday on the bill updating FISA â€" which had a provision to shield telecommunications companies that had cooperated in the surveillance. Obama joined the 68 other senators who voted to send the bill to the president’s desk.

No filibuster! Putting Fourth Amendment issues aside, if you think that granting corporations retroactive immunity for multiple felonies is a really bad idea from the standpoint of the [genuflects] rule of law, then Obama’s flip-flop â€" let’s just go ahead and call it a betrayal â€" is a bad act by a bad President. (On the bright side, Obama’s pivot looks like an inflection point: Where Democrats won the loyalty or at least the alliance of the intelligence community, which worked so for them in 2016-2020.)

Legitimizing Torture

You will also remember torture under the Bush administration , and there was plenty of it, more than merely Abu Ghaib .[1] One would think that a professor of Constitutional Law â€" as his supporters constantly reminded us Obama was, albeit without mentioning his non-tenure track status â€" would favor prosecuting war crimes , particularly war crimes committed on a political opponent’s watch, in service of a war that professor putatively opposed. No such luck. From ABC’s “The Week†on January 10, 2009 (10 days before Inauguration Day[2]). Watch the weaseling!

STEPHANOPOULOS: The most popular question on your own website is related to this. On change.gov it comes from Bob Fertik of New York City and he asks, “Will you appoint a special prosecutor ideally Patrick Fitzgerald to independently investigate the greatest crimes of the Bush administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping.â€

OBAMA: We’re still evaluating how we’re going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth. And obviously we’re going to be looking at past practices and I don’t believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards . And part of my job is to make sure that for example at the CIA, you’ve got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don’t want them to suddenly feel like they’ve got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering (ph).

STEPHANOPOULOS: So, no 9/11 commission with Independence subpoena power?

OBAMA: We have not made final decisions, but my instinct is for us to focus on how do we make sure that moving forward we are doing the right thing . That doesn’t mean that if somebody has blatantly [nice qualifier] broken the law, that they are above the law. But my orientation’s going to be to move forward .

STEPHANOPOULOS: So, let me just press that one more time. You’re not ruling out prosecution, but will you tell your Justice Department to investigate these cases and follow the evidence wherever it leads?

OBAMA: What I â€" I think my general view when it comes to my attorney general is he is the people’s lawyer. Eric Holder’s been nominated. His job is to uphold the Constitution and look after the interests of the American people, not to be swayed by my day-to-day politics. So, ultimately, he’s going to be making some calls, but my general belief is that when it comes to national security, what we have to focus on is getting things right in the future, as opposed looking at what we got wrong in the past .

Stephanopolous really should have said “I’ll take that as a ‘no.'†And how is there an “other hand†to “I don’t believe that anybody is above the law� Fast forward to the administration Obama created the conditions for, and we see the results. From the Atlantic, “ Obama’s Legacy of Impunity for Torture “, on the nomination of “ Bloody Gina “:

The 44th president, Barack Obama, bears a measure of responsibility for the recklessness of his successor, in particular Trump’s decision to appoint Gina Haspel, the Central Intelligence Agency’s deputy director, to run the agency itself. Haspel oversaw a black site during the Bush era where at least one detainee, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, was tortured*.

Haspel also then played a role in a decision to destroy recordings of CIA detainees being tortured.

The Obama administration’s actions helped entrench a standard of accountability that stretches from beat cops to CIA officials, one in which breaking the law in the line of duty is unpunishable, but those suspected of a crimeâ€"particularly if black, Muslim, or undocumentedâ€"can be subjected to unspeakable cruelty whether or not they are ultimately guilty.

In a country where a CIA official like Haspel can destroy evidence in order to obstruct a federal investigation, and not only escape prosecution but rise to become the head of the agency, it is no wonder that the president and his allies behave as though the possibility of the law catching up to them is not merely remote, but a kind of absurdity.

So, thanks to Obama, we’ve legitimized torture, and a torturer became the head of the CIA. That was a bad act by a bad President.

Implementing Dick Cheney’s Energy Plan

President Bush, in the second week of his administration, charged his Vice-President, Dick Cheney, with heading up an Energy Task Force . Larry Schweiger describes the result in “ The Climate Crisis and Corrupt Politics: Overcoming the Powerful Forces that Threaten our Future “:

So we have Cheney and Obama working together to create fracking. Obama is, in fact, proud of this:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/YDfHH8zAIUU

“That was me, people.†Setting the Earth on fire for money. Come to think of it, signing the Paris Accords while on the other hand making the US the world’s number one oil producer is a lot like supporting the rule of law while on the other hand “looking forward and not back†when laws are broken, and a lot like promising to filibuster a bill granting retroactive immunity to lawbreaking corporations while on the other hand not doing so.

Conclusion

We are ruled by bad people and have been for years. Madison, of course, expected this, but his system seems to have broken down Federalist 51 :

But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

No longer is ‘the interest of the man … connected with the constitutional rights of the place†(that is, of the office). If that were true, Bloody Gina would not have headed the CIA. It’s not even clear that the government can “control itself,†or “control the governed,†except by propaganda and violence, as our continuing public health debacle shows. I don’t know what the answer to this is, but I do think it begins with the recognition that we are ruled by bad people. Simply replacing “bad people†with “good people†does not have a record of success, since the “good†quickly become “bad.â€[3] How to rebuild our political economy so that we seem to be governed by angels even though we are not is a question that I cannot answer. But it is a question increasingly before us.

NOTES

[1] One of the more amusing aspects of the Bush Administration’s approach to torture was watching them devise euphemisms for it: “ enhanced interrogration ,†“rough treatment,†and “severe tactics.â€

[2] So many happy people.

[3] For example .

njbr , April 26, 2021 at 7:41 pm

If only we were a perfect people with a perfect government with perfect elected leaders making perfect policy.

So much room for failureâ€"a target rich environment for writers.

Who the eff’ would be your perfect president to suit your perfect dreams?

Obamaâ€"not perfect but certainly better than those who came before or after.

Could “Jesus Christ†be elected?

Katiebird , April 26, 2021 at 7:54 pm

Did you read this post (just asking).

(Please delete if my rudeness is unacceptable but I am curious)

ChrisAtRU , April 26, 2021 at 8:36 pm

You’re in the right here, and too polite about it … ;â€")

If I didn’t know better, I’d say our not-so-esteemed OP was trying to correct the record .

#IYKWIM

ChuckTurds , April 27, 2021 at 6:45 am

The OP serves as a fantastic example of the Obomba apologists. The old ‘yeah but imagine if the other guy got elected’ BS. As if that ‘worse’ potential outcome absolves all the wrong doing committed by the actual president.

Alfred , April 26, 2021 at 8:08 pm

“No longer is ‘the interest of the man … connected with the constitutional rights of the place†(that is, of the office). â€

It’s not about perfection. It’s about the complete co-option of power granted by election to liars who basically say, “Whaddya gonna do aboudit?â€

Spring Texan , April 26, 2021 at 8:20 pm

It’s not about perfection, it’s about NOT DOING ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE THINGS and doing and condoning torture.

Alfred , April 26, 2021 at 8:28 pm

ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE THINGS. Yeah, it’s not about perfection, just tone it down a little, FHS. Is that the right tone now?

JTMcPhee , April 26, 2021 at 9:09 pm

Might be so â€" so many of My Fellow ‘Muricans are all happy that it seems to appear that possibly it might be the case that due consideration may be given to exploring what should or could be done to put a frame around some conceptual elements of what could eventually gel into the skeleton of an approach to making some well-considered and gradual changes to the way bidness is conducted in the Empire.

Clear enough?

Got to keep that powder dry…

Charlotte Ritchie , April 26, 2021 at 8:24 pm

If only we had: universal health care like every single other developed country; if only we had a $15 or higher, living wage; if only we had a massive infrastructure project; if only college grads weren’t drowning in student debt; if only we were ending all of our Mideast wars; if only we had paid family and medical leave; if only we had tried to stop climate change; if only we had strong unions and excellent labor policy, etc.
IF ONLY OBAMA had even tried to implement some of these policies! I agree with this author and others of similar views. Obama had more charm than any president, probably ever, but he was a bad president!

JTMcPhee , April 26, 2021 at 9:14 pm

He might still have a second career (after knee-knocking with filthy-rich people) as a televangelist. Some of them are equally slick, using the same rhetorical trickery and symbol manipulation, and they sure drag in the (is it tax-free?) megabucks!

dcblogger , April 27, 2021 at 9:57 am

Obama was the first Democratic President with commanding majorities in the House and Senate. He could have been great. He had a unique opportunity to take meaningful action on Global Warming, something he was elected to do. Instead he increased production of fossil fuels. History will NOT be kind to Obama.

urblintz , April 26, 2021 at 9:19 pm

“Jesus Christ†could never be elected.

He’d be accused of anti-semitism…

by “liberal†Democrats.

BenLA , April 26, 2021 at 11:20 pm

So true,
Can you imagine the hit pieces they would through at jc?
LOL
COMMIE JESUS
haha, too funny

fresno dan , April 27, 2021 at 6:26 am

BenLA
April 26, 2021 at 11:20 pm
https://www.eatliver.com/socialism/

Equitable > Equal , April 28, 2021 at 9:48 am

Nailed it

cocomaan , April 27, 2021 at 8:55 am

Honestly, I’m not seeing much of a difference between GWBush and Obama, in Lambert’s post. War, extra legal killings and black sites, surveillance, bailing out finance, etc.

John Wright , April 27, 2021 at 12:55 pm

The loss of life (assuming there is some USA citizenry moral concern about the deaths/injuries of non-US citizens from the USA initiated wars) and the large expenditure in resources (by some estimates 6 trillion dollars in Afghanistan/Iraq) make the damage Bush did far worse.

The 6 trillion dollars represents a lot of hydrocarbons dug/pumped up and converted into CO2 and could have been diverted into USA infrastructure or world betterment..

Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

“Population-based studies produce estimates of the number of Iraq War casualties ranging from 151,000 violent deaths as of June 2006 (per the Iraq Family Health Survey) to 1,033,000 excess deaths (per the 2007 Opinion Research Business (ORB) survey).â€

A million Iraqi deaths is about 3% of their population corresponding to about 10 million deaths in the USA’s larger population if a foreign power invaded the USA and behaved similarly.

And the Iraq war was promoted by Bush and cohorts.

I continue to see a LOT of difference between Bush’s actively pursued cumulative damage and Obama’s “kick the can down the road†damage.

There is a LOT of difference in the “cumulative damage balance sheets†of Bush vs Obama.

Neither is admirable, but the prime mover/instigator Bush was far worse.

NotTimothyGeithner , April 27, 2021 at 9:09 am

Since you are comparing Obama to the Christian Messiah, could you offer evidence of his near perfection or is this a you have to take it on faith kind of thing?

Darius , April 27, 2021 at 9:16 am

OK liberal. More perfect would be one who wasn’t so servile to organized money. Also, Lambert left out Obama’s “pivot†to the deficit while unemployment raged. I wanted to tear my hair out. Obama’s biggest crime was his embrace of austerity in the midst of a depression. That’s why Trump was elected.

NotTimothyGeithner , April 27, 2021 at 10:58 am

One reason Obama has to be defended with such ludicrous arguments is the couple of times he wasn’t praised but was actually criticized he did the less wrong thing. Look at our current President, his supporters never bring up the one good thing he did which was force Obama to take a still cowardly stand on gay marriage. They won’t credit Biden with it because shows how accountability works. Biden put Obama on the spot, and Obama was forced to react. Biden didnt offer excuses about secret negotiations. Obama’s desire for celebrity could have been used to make him a reasonable President, but his followers wanted to go to brunch.

Michael Fiorillo , April 27, 2021 at 12:27 pm

It was David Geffen and other wealthy gay Democratic donors who forced Obama’s hand on gay marriage. Not to discount what Biden did â€" one of the few honorable things in a very long career â€" but it was the money that spoke loudest.

lyman alpha blob , April 27, 2021 at 10:51 am

Better than those who came before or after?!?! Don’t you think that’s an awfully low bar?

I mean it’s arguably better to be executed by electric chair than being flayed alive, but I’d still choose neither.

km , April 27, 2021 at 11:29 am

I know, I know, we gotta be realistic and elect smooth war criminals.

Lambert Strether , April 27, 2021 at 11:48 am

> Who the eff’ would be your perfect president to suit your perfect dreams?

Eff DR?

Hyenox , April 27, 2021 at 11:54 am

Obama was not perfect but he sang ‘Amazing Grace’ at a black church so I guess that makes everything OK but he was a convincing fraud and maybe a better salesman than Trump.

KD , April 26, 2021 at 8:32 pm

What if you had a two party system in which each party grandstands on certain issues when out of power and then when elected, did the same damn thing?

Acacia , April 26, 2021 at 8:34 pm

Thanks for this. It’s a substantial entrée for a discussion that is long overdue in many circles (I.e., why Saint Obama was never saintly). I have a question:

No longer is ‘the interest of the man … connected with the constitutional rights of the place†(that is, of the office). If that were true, Bloody Gina would not have headed the CIA.

If the US govt were to conform to this Madisonian vision, would the CIA even exist?

JTMcPhee , April 26, 2021 at 10:04 pm

SOMEbody has to be the “rough men who keep us safe in our ignorant beds at night,†am I right? But there’s “always†been “state security†people who are programmed, apparently in the womb, to come out wanting to emulate Beria and Wild Bill Donovan and the Dulles brothers and Prescott Bush (who “allegedly†orchestrated attempt to remove FDR by a military coup, hoping a really respected Marine General, twice Medal of Honor recipient, would lead the coup and the new “government.†https://allthatsinteresting.com/the-business-plot I haven’t looked, but I wonder if the CIA archives have anything on the subject…

And that General, Smedley Butler, turns out to be a Class Traitor and whistleblower, who published and lectured on the subject of “War Is A Racket:â€

War Is A Racket

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside†group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few â€" the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.

Again they are choosing sides. France and Russia met and agreed to stand side by side. Italy and Austria hurried to make a similar agreement. Poland and Germany cast sheep’s eyes at each other, forgetting for the nonce [one unique occasion], their dispute over the Polish Corridor…. https://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

The whole screed is worth reading and studying, including the prescription for how to rein in the looters.

km , April 27, 2021 at 11:32 am

Keep in mind that after the War of 1812, the United States was never invaded, even though for much of its history, it had almost no standing army to speak of and a weak navy.

Yet somehow, the United States survived the Age of Imperialism unscathed, and the fact that we lacked a CIA, an NSA or a Pentagon to tell us that Freedom is Slavery and War is Peace or that we have always been at war with Eastasia didn’t seem to bother us much.

Librarian Guy , April 27, 2021 at 1:27 pm

Not entirely accurate. Don’t forget that in March, 1916, General Pancho Villa ran a quick incursion into Columbus, New Mexico, killing 18, including 8 US soldiers. The Villa forces actually suffered worse casualties under submachine gun fire, but looted a bit, including weapons.

The ultra-imperialst faux “progressive†Woodrow Wilson was encouraged to retaliate and, of course, did so, sending a large force under Pershing into Mexico. Obviously USA empire really expanded beyond “Manifest Destiny†indigenous killing and displacement earlier, under McKinley, and obviously the theft of half of Mexico leading to “New Mexico†did lead to blowback of this kind even a century ago.

The Wikipedia page is pretty solid on the events. In fact, I was previously unaware of a later Mexican troop incursion into Texas in May of ’16. Sometimes the aggrieved bite back. Wiki link at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancho_Villa_Expedition

ian , April 27, 2021 at 6:40 pm

Is it a screed if it is true and on-point?
I think he called it perfectly.

Telee , April 26, 2021 at 9:00 pm

Don’t forget that Obama tried to cut Social Security with the appointment of Erskin Bowles and Alan Cranston to the †cat food commission,†two politicians who were opposed to social security. Then he bailed out the banks with trillions and no conditions while not helping people stay in their homes led to 9 million losing their homes and this hit blacks the hardest. Meanwhile his justice department didn’t investigate let alone indict any banker for fraud so Obama established the principle that the perpetrators of loan fraud leading to the mortgage crisis are too big to jail. Yes, that’s right, he gave perpetrators of felonies which led to the near collapse of the whole economic system legal immunity! Many of the foreclosed homes were acquired by asset managers who now rent them out.
Yes, and his ACA did not include a public option in spite of campaign promises. The irony here is while he refused to provide a public option to private insurance, there is now a private option to public health insurance, Medicare. Under his watch, private insurance ( Medicare Advantage) has now attracted 40% of the 60 million who qualify for Medicare. So while a majority of Americans want some kind of government health insurance or Medicare for all, we’ll probably end up with the private scam, Medicare Advantage for all. That’s real progress for for profit health insurers. At the same time he promised the pharmaceutical companies that the government would not use its purchasing power to negotiate the price of medicines.
And he promised to let workers gain union representation via a card check but didn’t do it in 8 years.
The hope and change rhetoric amounted to nothing but another betrayal.

Dean , April 26, 2021 at 10:06 pm

But he did all that with style an in a palatable anodyne way.

Darius , April 27, 2021 at 9:21 am

Don’t forget his telegenic family. Such a nice man.

Librarian Guy , April 27, 2021 at 1:30 pm

Like Barack and Michelle’s wonderful friend Li’l Bushy the 2nd, who they tried (half successfully) to politically rehabilitate.

Some of TPTB will assure you that despite his clownish show as Prezinet, George the Lesser is truly kind and even, despite all appearances, “intelligentâ€. Evidently the Obamas feel the same way.

Sue inSoCal , April 27, 2021 at 3:26 pm

Lambert, thank you for this. I shall not argue with you! At all! Criticism of Obama is not acceptable, I have found. My description of him has always been “Bush Lite.†Does anyone recall those little whispers between W and Obama during the transition? I’ve always been skeptical about just “going forward.†Bygone crimes will be bygone crimes. Big crimes. Crimes against humanity. As for the banks, I believe that had a couple of bankers gone to jail for fraud, we may not have ended up with a Trump, because he may not have felt as untouchable.
Finally, as Telee notes, I’m sure what we’ll get as Medicare For All will indeed be the odious Medicare Advantage. No one else has mentioned that or cares to discuss it. I’ve raised the issue on Tarbell. (Crickets.) I doubt we’ll ever rid ourselves of the blood sucking, fraudulent corporate medical complex.

James Dodson , April 27, 2021 at 7:50 pm

agree with you i became disabled again 2002 , medicare advantage was and is a fraud .never signed up FOR IT. last week or 2 weeks ago . people leaving the ( advantage plan ) going back to the real MEDICARE .

Steve Adams , April 28, 2021 at 2:15 am

Dropping mine next go around. You basically gain nothing as hospital administrators have gone during Covid-19 to where the money is, killer intubated mechanical ventilators and ditched the highly effective Hyperbaric oxygen therapy. If this were China they would have been shot already and their organs harvested.

Alternate Delegate , April 26, 2021 at 9:13 pm

Please add to charge sheet:

â€" Selecting “Bankruptcy Bill†Biden as his VP

â€" Betraying workers after promising to pass card check union organizing ( Employee Free Choice Act )

ambrit , April 26, 2021 at 9:51 pm

And to think that I was once taken to task for describing our “Saintly Diverse Chief Executive†of years gone bye as a glorified Lawn Ornament of disreputable Antebellum Southern extraction.
I bring this up as a reminder of how the “times†can change.
It is also a reminder of just how much “soft power†Obama had available to him in the beginning of his term. That he threw that all away is the real crime.
To cut the man some slack, averse as I am to do so, I will observe that he was enmeshed from the beginning in the Clinton Triangulated Democrat Party.

Michaelmas , April 26, 2021 at 10:02 pm

Lambert S: I am omitting not prosecuting bankers for accounting control fraud, the HAMP debacle, the mortgage settlement debacle, destroying a generation of black wealth with his housing policies

You’re wrong to omit those things and you’re too kind to Obama. What happened in 2008 was nothing less than a coup by Wall Street and the financial predator class.

If one goes into the archives as far back as 2005-6, one can find the smarter minds on Wall Street figuring out how they weren’t going to have a replay of FDR and the New Deal when the financial collapse came this time around.

That’s why Bernanke was installed at the Fed in February 2006, and that’s why Obama got more money for his presidential campaign from Wall Street than any previous presidential candidate in history. Wall Street knew what was coming and wanted a front man.

The fact that Obama simultaneously came from their own class â€" his grandmother, who essentially raised him, was president of the Bank of Hawaii â€" and was half-black, so that the masses of American mopes could buy into that and any critics of the coup that he fronted for could be deflected and vilified with cries of “racist, racist,†made Obama ideal.

It was a coup by the financial criminal class, in which they not only evaded punishment but also continued their pillaging and immiseration of the vast mass of Americans. Obama fronted for it.

Michael , April 26, 2021 at 10:29 pm

I agree this was one of the greatest failures of any president ever.
He “unwittingly†destroyed rising black wealth by failing to act. More black misleadership.
By turning a blind eye, he ushered in the institutionalization, from top to bottom, of residential real estate fraud as a legitimate business. The magnitude of today’s unpaid rents fall directly on the man’s shoulders.

I could go on, like many of us, but what’s the point.

BTW, it was VP at BOH

Michaelmas , April 27, 2021 at 12:27 am

it was VP at BOH

Yeah, you’re right.

I could go on, like many of us, but what’s the point.

What’s the point? Well ….

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/payback-s-a-bitch

Kurtismayfield , April 26, 2021 at 10:53 pm

And he got paid very, very well after he left. Which was the whole point of every decision he made.. to get the post bribe.

Darius , April 27, 2021 at 10:54 am

Obama was the consummate courtier. He’s hard-wired to court the favor of the king. Part of his problem as president was the role reversal. He didn’t know what to do with the idea that now people we’re supposed to kiss his butt, not the other way around. He sure did try though with people like Jamie Dimon and Mitch McConnell.

Basil Pesto , April 27, 2021 at 12:45 am

you’re too kind to Obama.

Not something I suspect Lambert is used to hearing!

Telee , April 27, 2021 at 10:02 am

Obama did a great job in exacerbating inequality in the US. The rich have more than recovered from the 2008 debacle while the bulk of the people have still not caught up to pre 2008 levels of income.

Elizabeth , April 26, 2021 at 10:47 pm

Lambert, for all the reasons mentioned in your post, and more too numerous to be mentioned here as a terrible president, his “Terror Tuesdays†was what shook me. His meeting with John Brennan on each Tuesday to decide which “terror†suspect to have droned next was something I’m not likely to ever forget. This went beyond how any civilized, decent human being would act. His statement that, “I’m really good at killing people†was probably the only truth he told.

I never voted for Obama because I thought he was a fraud from the beginning. This country has had horrible presidents since Clinton,(I’m sure there were some before him) but I think Bush/Obama were two of the worst this country has had and have done everlasting damage to â€" in my lifetime. Another thing that struck me about Obama from the beginning was that he had “dead eyes†â€" flat, emotionless eyes..

Acacia , April 27, 2021 at 12:26 am

I also felt he was a fraud from day one. The signs were there, and the alternative media did report on the boatload of donor money he received from Wall St, the health insurance lobby, et al. (I guess we could think of it as a down payment on the Martha’s Vineyard estate), but good liberals voted for him anyway.

Regarding “Terror Tuesdaysâ€, I wonder how many drone strikes Obama approved by phone from the ninth hole of the golf course.

LowellHighlander , April 27, 2021 at 9:29 am

Acacia, thanks for pointing to the alternative media’s reporting on Obama’s taking a boatload of donor money from Wall Street. It was in CounterPunch â€" which, if I remember correctly, was another one of those media entities disparaged by the spooks at “ProporNot†â€" where I read an illuminating article by Ms. Pam Martens. I read this in hard copy, and I believe the edition I read was from February 2008. [And I hope you, Ms. Smith, don’t mind that I plugged a like-minded writer, but I think she should be recognized.] Ms. Martens noted how Obama took advantage of coding of industries (back then, it was the “SIC†code) to dupe the public into thinking that he was not taking Wall Street money. Worked like a charm, as Ms. Martens more-or-less predicted.

I should also say that, as a Veteran, I was quite dismayed by many in the anti-war movement (in which I was active back then, in the Imperial Capital) who fell for Obama, instead of backing Cynthia McKinney. When Obama said he was only against “dumb warsâ€, I instantly interpreted that as a loophole through which a blind person could drive a Mack truck, and yet so many in the movement fell for it. It was a lonely time, to be sure.

km , April 27, 2021 at 11:34 am

I also sensed that Obama was a fraud from the beginning, or if not a fraud, that he would prove to be weak and easily manipulated. I never voted for him, not in 2008 or in 2012.

But people wanted to believe in the man, and for eight years, too many people made excuse after pathetic excuse for the man. Even today, the excuses continue, because people want to badly to believe.

John Wright , April 27, 2021 at 11:55 am

Another gift to Obama was that he was able to claim he was opposed to the Iraq War.

He wasn’t a US Senator at the time, so he did not have to vote yay/nay.

His opposition was limited to a critical speech, which was used as evidence of his opposition of the war.

Obama was an orders of magnitude better conman than Trump. Many in America believed that Trump was a conman, but Obama largely avoided this description.

I know people who still believe Obama wanted and tried to do the right things but was prevented by the “evil†Republicans.

Adolph Reed described Obama’s future behavior very early.

from https://willshetterly.medium.com/adolph-reed-was-the-first-writer-to-see-who-obama-was-991fc1504d19

“Adolph Reed was the first writer to see who Obama was. In 1996, Reed wrote about him in The Village Voice:â€

“In Chicago, for instance, we’ve gotten a foretaste of the new breed of foundation-hatched black communitarian voices; one of them, a smooth Harvard lawyer with impeccable do-good credentials and vacuous-to-repressive neoliberal politics, has won a state senate seat on a base mainly in the liberal foundation and development worlds. His fundamentally bootstrap line was softened by a patina of the rhetoric of authentic community, talk about meeting in kitchens, small-scale solutions to social problems, and the predictable elevation of process over program â€" the point where identity politics converges with old-fashioned middle-class reform in favoring form over substance. I suspect that his ilk is the wave of the future in U.S. black politics, as in Haiti and wherever else the International Monetary Fund has sway. So far the black activist response hasn’t been up to the challenge. We have to do better.â€

albrt , April 26, 2021 at 11:06 pm

If the title said “Barack Obama was a Horrible President†I would agree and the text would support the headline.

But this post and yesterday’s post purported to tell us why we have horrible presidents. So why do we?

Personally, I think it is because the United States is in the process of collapsing. The horribleness of our presidents both confirms that the collapse is happening and ensures that the collapse will continue until the United States no longer exists, probably less than a decade from now.

But I would be very interested in other views on why our presidents are so horrible.

Acacia , April 27, 2021 at 12:36 am

Our vaunted republic has been taken over by a duopoly of corporatists. They carefully vet and choose Presidents from their network of cronies, while pretending it’s the choice of the people. E.g., what else are the superdelegates for? Result: a series of horrible leaders. Trump was an exception in that he slipped around the usual process of vetting and show democracy, like a rat that entered a fancy restaurant via the service entrance, and for that he had to be annihilated.

Jason , April 27, 2021 at 5:47 am

The exception that recently said his greatest accomplishment in office was the corporate tax cuts. Trump merely used their fraudulent ways in his own interest. He out-frauded the frauders by recognizing their game and one-upping them. Yay. As for the rest of us?

Trump was surrounded by and gladly operated in the same morass of financial and corporate shysters and Israel-firsters that the previous administrations were inundated with.

Jason , April 27, 2021 at 6:01 am

Adding, I’d like to preempt right now any thought that this is in any way a defense of Obama, who I despise. It’s simply a reminder that Trump is an absolute con too (obviously).

Punxsutawney , April 27, 2021 at 12:25 am

Let’s not forget Mr. TPP here, who put more energy into trying to sell the democracy destroying TPP and ISDS than he did trying to get the public option into the ACA. Not that they had any intention of doing so. Standing just a stones throw from the outsourced grave of my wife’s career and lecturing us on how wonderful it was going to be, and how we should stop complaining and take our medicine. But what do I know, I’m just an F’n retard. The administration’s term, not mine.

And then there was austerity, the cat food commission, and no doubt his administration’s failures economically helped set the stage for Trump.

WobblyTelomeres , April 27, 2021 at 10:14 am

You left out the Panama Treaty. He did a cake walk on that one. See https://panamapapers.org/

Jackman , April 27, 2021 at 1:03 am

Personally, I think the worst thing Obama did was to rob those who suffered from his dreadful economic policies from the dignity of being able to understand why they had failed, why they suddenly had a lot less, or nothing. All his charm and eloquence was marshaled to make sure that people would never identify the true villains of their collapsing personal narratives. And the media was only too happy to comply, as Obama fluently escorted millions into self-loathing and despair, with nary a shred of hope. Of course, the absence of a single banker conviction was all part of that narrativeâ€"they didn’t do anything wrong, it’s just more complicated than you think, because, well, because you don’t have the sophistication of an investment banker to really understand, and maybe if you went to a better college, or a college at all…… It all created the carcass of civil society that Trump so effectively weaponized with resentment and anger.
And then of course we were all forced to listen to the endless excuses of our friends and colleagues, often good people who had worked hard to elect him, and knew exactly what he had promisedâ€"after all, he’s an effective speaker, no?â€"and now were forced into wild and tortured tales of why he couldn’t, or wouldn’t, or shouldn’t, do all those great things he had said he believed in.
I thought I hated Bush, but I didn’t vote for him, and knew he was a bad guy. But the Obama betrayal? That hit deep, deeper than Bush. He twisted so many of my friends and relatives into raving fools. He normalized nearly every Bush atrocity, and still walks the earth like a great man.
I remember when Bernie first hit the campaign trail in 2015 and began to point very directly to the 1%. You could feel the electricity surge through the population like a lightning bolt, hitting places that had lain dormant for decades. The power of narrative is everything. Obama was the worst, an absolutely abominable President.

Big Tap , April 27, 2021 at 2:41 am

Also Obama opened up the Arctic to oil exploration, full assault on the press by threatening to use the Espionage Act, campaigning to end wars but created around 3-4 new conflicts (bombing of Libya, Syria, and Yemen), and used more armed drones than George W. Bush did.

Lee Too , April 27, 2021 at 2:02 pm

“Obama fluently escorted millions into self-loathing and despairâ€.

This is beautifully said.

I am very late to this discussion, but would like to add that I think of Obama as an example of the Dunning-Krueger effect. That is, he was/is an intellectual flyweight â€" and not so much “educated†as “groomed†â€" and this ENABLED him to be so satisfied with himself.

Brunches with Cats , April 27, 2021 at 2:57 am

The article and comments provide sufficient evidence that Obama was well beyond your (Rose) garden-variety fraud. The clarifying moment for me was his speech in Hiroshima, delivered with heart-rending sincerity and conviction (I was getting choked up even though I could never stand the sound of his voice), all while putting the finishing touches on his $1 trillion nuclear weapons modernization plan. An article in The Diplomat called it irony, “a missed opportunity.†I call it the epitome of cold, calculating evil.
https://thediplomat.com/2016/05/obamas-hiroshima-speech-a-missed-opportunity/

P.S. “President†shouldn’t be capitalized (especially not this one), unless it’s used as a title directly before the executive person’s name.

everydayjoe , April 27, 2021 at 5:00 am

No sitting US President or ex President deserves the Nobel peace price. That says a lot..having said that, Obama’s book also shows the inner workings of his world view…he was conflicted too many a times.

tegnost , April 27, 2021 at 9:42 am

He paid lip service to his conscience.
He resolved all of his conflicts in the same way, in the service of money.
No violence to the social order allowed.
Violence to all the people being screwed by the social order?
…well that’s ok, they need to learn to get in line…

WobblyTelomeres , April 27, 2021 at 3:39 pm

He paid lip service to his conscience that which a sociopath thinks people with consciences have.

FIFY!

The Rev Kev , April 27, 2021 at 5:39 am

Back in 2008 I thought that America had finally caught a break in having Obama come into office as by that stage, George Bush was getting to be downright clownish with his Presidency. The first warning though was just after he had been elected when it came out that his campaign had gotten two advertising awards. It was at that point I remembered the articles trying to warn people that Obama was not who people though he was which I had just assumed at the time were Republican screeds. It did not take long after that for him to show his true colours. The number of crimes that he did, the looting that he allowed are mentioned here in some detail but I thought to take a 10,000 foot view of his Presidency.

When Bill Clinton was President, he really allowed neoliberalism to take over America by having the media and defence corporations to consolidate, removing laws that had been in place since the days of FDR, etc. and it took Wall Street less than a decade to steer America into a ditch because of all this. But during the time following you had George Bush as President who let loose the dogs of the neocons in an attempt to secure American hegemony for the rest of the 21st century but which actually revealed America’s limitations of power and which taught other nations how to fight back against America. Between the destruction of the middle class, the disruption in the world as America caused chaos in one country after another, the militarization of the police, etc. all set rifts into motion at home. So in 2008 the stage was set.

What was critically needed was a reformist President who would bring back law and order to America and the rest of the world. Who would reverse course on the destruction of the world through climate change. Who could develop mature relations with such countries like Russia, China, Cuba, Iran, etc and come to some sort of diplomatic accommodation. One who could take advantage of public feeling and tame Wall Street and put the bankers back in their box. America desperately needed a change of direction before it steered right into the coming iceberg fields. Instead you got Obama who doubled down on the worse of America and put his foot down on the pedal with every fiber of his exceptional soul. The rifts in American now became chasms which resulted in Trump being elected followed by Biden who is now doubling down on everything in an attempt to make America great again.

The one best chance for America to get back on course and reform itself and you had Obama come in and help betray Americans instead to the worse of their own kind â€" and all for his own personal wealth and aggrandizement. History will judge him harshly.

fresno dan , April 27, 2021 at 6:46 am

The Rev Kev
April 27, 2021 at 5:39 am
https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/under-obama-democrats-suffer-largest-loss-in-power-since-eisenhower/
President Obama entered the White House with his party touting a 60 seat majority in the Senate and 257 seat majority in the House. Democrats now hold a 48* seat minority in the Senate and 194 seat minority in the House â€" a net loss of 12 and 64 seats respectively.
In 2009, President Obama’s party controlled both chambers of 27 state legislatures. Eight years later, Democrats control both chambers in only 13 states.
=====================================
Inadvertent…or intended? At best, startling incompetency.

The Rev Kev , April 27, 2021 at 9:03 am

‘fresno dan
April 27, 2021 at 6:46 am’

Actually it was worse than that, dan. Under Obama, the Democrats lost nearly 1,000 State legislator seats as well. Democrat party finances had collapsed too which was why Hillary was able to go in and buy it up before the 2016 elections-

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/1/10/14211994/obama-democrats-downballot

Dwight , April 27, 2021 at 12:43 pm

And now we hear so many complaints about the electoral college, but nothing about how much further Obama put us from the 2/3 of state legislatures necessary to change it. Assuming we even want or need to to do that â€" I think Democrats need to make their case in every state, and Obama purposefully undermined that by rejecting the 50-state strategy.

miningcityguy , April 27, 2021 at 9:50 am

Adolph Reed saw Obama for what he was early in Obama’s career. In 1996 Reed wrote in the Village Voice: †In Chicago, for instance,we’ve gotten a foretaste of the new breed of foundation-hatched black communitarian voices; one of them, a smooth Harvard lawyer with impeccable do-good credentials and vacuous â€" to repressive neoliberal policies, has won a state senate seat on a base mainly in the liberal foundations and development worlds.â€

Michael Fiorillo , April 27, 2021 at 10:25 am

“… you had Obama come in and help betray Americans…â€

Because that’s what he was hired to do.

A quick glimpse at his political career in Chicago, to say nothing of Adolph Reed’s prescient assessment in 1996 (!), should have revealed his duplicity and narcissism. Then, taking Lieberman as his mentor upon entering the Senate should have also told us everything we needed to know.

On a personal level, I can’t bear the sound of his voice, or the banality of his “soaring†rhetoric.

km , April 27, 2021 at 11:36 am

At least you got wise. Lots of people just kept doubling down.

Sound of the Suburbs , April 27, 2021 at 4:32 pm

When the US needed an FDR it got an Obama.

drumlin woodchuckles , May 1, 2021 at 5:36 am

And he will just laugh, as he counts his money.

jackiebass63 , April 27, 2021 at 6:18 am

Presidents are elected on their message to voters. For Obama it was hope and change. Trump won on make America great again. These are great slogans because they say nothing. It is left up to the voter to interpret what it means. I’m a life long registered Democrat.I didn’t vote for Obama either time. This was because I observed Obama during his time in the senate. Obama wasn’t my idea of a real democrat. He was a Wall Street democrat. They are really what used to be called moderate Republicans. As long as monkey trumps everything, we won’t have a government that represents the people.

Jason , April 27, 2021 at 6:38 am

Obama in Flint epitomizes the man. Flint needed Federal aid to help clean their drinking water. Giving these deplorables money they don’t deserve is against elite priorities and would set a bad precedent. Cue Obama, who gladly goes and puts on not one â€" but two â€" separate performances where he delights in faking taking a sip of water. He has the audacity to say “This is not a stunt†as he’s in the middle of performing his show for the people of Flint. He then repeated his performance backstage for a smaller media audience. All of this was done eagerly, without a hint of remorse or conscience.

I’ve actually gotten a few Obamaphiles to at least stop and think for a moment upon viewing his disgusting display in Flint.

The Rev Kev , April 27, 2021 at 6:57 am

‘Obama in Flint epitomizes the man’
Yeah, I think that you have it there. He actually showed what was in his soul in Flint.

Darius , April 27, 2021 at 11:03 am

He did tell them, “I see you.†That’s what liberals say when they’re about to screw you.

Steve Ruis , April 27, 2021 at 8:38 am

I made a similar list to this one, but mine was much longer, when Mr. Obama left office. One disaster you left off, understandable because of your economic and political focus, was, well, Arne Duncan. After writing my first draft, I found I had added the former Secretary of Education’s name to the list three times. The failure of the Obama administration to defend and support public education is a lasting smear on our society.

And his lack of effort to directly help Black people, for fear of seeming to have a bias was also unsupportable. What President doesn’t have a bias or two or twenty?

Jason , April 27, 2021 at 8:57 am

Obama’s Scandals List:

https://obamascandalslist.blogspot.com/2009/10/table-of-contents.html

I believe this was put together by Hugh, who comments frequently at Ian Welsh’ site.

km , April 27, 2021 at 11:38 am

Interesting, as Hugh comes off as a Team D homer.

Jason , April 27, 2021 at 11:48 am

We’re all interesting people.

Librarian Guy , April 27, 2021 at 1:36 pm

I love Welsh’s site, and yes, Hugh is very big on US “humanitarian†interventions. Those swarthy complexioned people living abroad don’t know what’s good for them, but Hugh is very confident that the empire does, despite the historical record.

Jason , April 27, 2021 at 4:21 pm

I don’t like his “humanitarian interventionist†mindset either.

This is a damn good list.

michael hudson , April 27, 2021 at 9:19 am

Well, I always refer to the Obama Depression, from 2008 onward, and we are still in it. There was no recovery. All the GDP growth since 2008 has accrued to only 5% of the population. (Pavlina Tscherneva’s charts)
But we need to go beyond Obama. The problem is the Democratic Party itself. THEY produced him, and Joe Lieberman tutored him on just whom to serve. And he locked in the DNC’s right-wing control (while dismantling local Democratic politics in red states).
In that sense he really was a Republican. But it’s necessary to trace how he wrecked the Democrats.

Darius , April 27, 2021 at 9:31 am

Obama was embarrassed by economic stimulus. His was supposed to be the presidency that established centrist neoliberal austerity and show everyone how great it is. Everyone who mattered, that is. It wasn’t supposed to be cleaning up after a depression. So he had to be dragged into action and almost immediately “pivoted†to the deficit. That eventually gave us Trump.

Noone from Nowheresville , April 27, 2021 at 12:41 pm

Obama was an inspiring 1 percenter. If I recall, the Kennedys were early promoters as well.

Republican / Democrat? Seriously why do we care these days? If Lambert wrote this article from the perspective of the top 5% of the global elite looking at the executive, legislature, and judiciary successes and failings at the federal / state / international levels, how dramatically different would this article be? What would the score cards for Democrat v. Republican look like? How would they overlap and compliment one another?

I suspect Clinton, Bush and Obama would be considered highly excellent executives / politicians if one’s grading standards use the top 5%’s objectives and goals as the guidelines.

We like to say special interests and bribes are the “reason.†If only there were “good†politicians… There are extremely good politicians. Look at all the changes that have happened to our society in the last few decades and how they are accelerating with only minor bumps in the road to said changes.

Until we accept that the political class is part and parcel of the top 5% and treat them as true adversaries, societal changes at a global level will continue on its death cult course.

Just think… if we were to lose half of the global population how that would rise the standard of living. It would certainly solve a lot of global problems even if it created others. Yeah, I really do believe that there are people in positions of power thinking that way.

John Hacker , April 27, 2021 at 10:06 am

Good morning,
I remember before his 100 days were up, he dismantled the grassroots coalition that gave him the Presidency. He is alive, his family are alive. I do not know what i would do. America is a scary place. Sun’s nice in Miami.
Pusillanimously,
John

drumlin woodchuckles , May 1, 2021 at 5:31 am

His personal ambition was to become America’s first billionaire ex-president.

His ambition for his daughters is to elevate them up into the Bush Class. . . . . the High High High global gentry. Martin Luther King’s dream, no doubt.

And Black America , in its millions, is beside itself with worshipful humble servile pride in their Obama.

Donald , April 27, 2021 at 10:07 am

Add Yemen to the list. There was zero excuse for this. Yes, they wanted to reassure the Saudi “ regime†( we never call our scumbag allied governments “ regimesâ€) after the Iranian agreement ( which was one good thing Obama did). But obviously the war would be be long massive crime and that was true from the start. I once saw a YouTube link where John Kirby, a State Department spokesman, was explaining to a Russian reporter that Saudi bombing of civilians was due to an imprecision in the targeting process, while Russian bombing in Syria was a crime. I never get over how amazingly hypocritical people are on this. Of course, our own bombing of Fallujah, Mosul, and Raqqa was every bit as destructive as anything the Russians did in Aleppo.

I found that most liberals I spoke to online and in real life in 2016 didn’t know about Yemen and when I told them, with one or two exceptions they brushed it off or assumed there was some good reasons for it or even used the “ placate the Saudis†justification. Everything has to be run through a partisan filter before judging it as right or wrong. And if Obama was responsible, it couldn’t be that bad.

Michael Carano , April 27, 2021 at 10:53 am

Let us not forget foreign policy: Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Honduras. Even though his Cuba and Iran policy were hits in between the second base and center field, he still only batted below 150 and continually left runners on base.

Susan the other , April 27, 2021 at 11:49 am

It seems like an eternity since Obama took office. Hope and change. I’m forever amazed at how much we learn and change as a community in such short periods of time. We should have a tab, like the Top Ten ideas of the year. Since Obama’s pathetic debacle the country has changed so much it’s hard to even make a list. We are no longer naive politically, we are no longer naive economically, we are watching the military like doves; we are not in denial about our unexceptionalism, we are serious about our overconsumption and the environment, and we don’t seem to even care about political promises; we are now demanding the things we need â€" we know everything went to hell. So maybe it’s hopelessness and change. Because if you have hope you just keep hanging on to the same old crap. When Obama proved to be ineffective, when he wept during his SOTU and asked the electorate to “demonstrate†more for social equality, when he caved to the banks and ruined every spark of hope in America, America did indeed change. Powerful voices came through the fog (think NC here) and there’s no going back.

Phil in KC , April 27, 2021 at 11:53 am

He lost me when he appointed Geitner for Treasury. I shouldn’t say “lost me†so much as “showed me his true character.â€

He was so arrogant that he thought his charm and brilliance would win over rank and file Republicans in the House and Senate. Failed.

He did that one big thingâ€"the ACAâ€"but let Congress mangle and distort the thing so badly. He could have lowered the age of eligibility for Medicare to 55 but for Joe Lieberman, who decided against it.

In retrospect, a Romney win would have been a better outcome in 2012. As we know, Romney is not the “strict conservative†he presented to the Tea Party in order to gain their favor. He would have governed as a New England liberal Republican, ala Rockefeller, perhaps. Instead, we got four more years of neo-liberal mush.

But most damning: “No one is above the law, but on the other hand . . .â€

LawnDart , April 27, 2021 at 12:13 pm

Obama’s words were not simply empty of meaning, their misuse created a vacuum that drew in angst, hopelessness and rage.

I don’t know whom to hold more in contempt, the man or those who enabled him.

LawnDart , April 27, 2021 at 6:29 pm

And I’ll note that directing his DOJ to work hand-in-glove with private equity to shut down the OCCUPY movement appears nowhere on this list.

In light of the recent J6 “coup,†what’s the alternative should peaceful protest no longer be possible?

Sound of the Suburbs , April 27, 2021 at 5:04 pm

I used to live on the surface.
I didn’t really have time to analyse anything in detail, and I got my information from the mainstream media.
Bill Clinton was a good President, and the Republicans were behaving terribly trying to remove him from office.
New Labour were really going to change things in the UK, I thought this was just what the UK needed.
The Iraq war seemed sensible enough; Saddam Hussein was a terrible leader and needed to be removed.

Then I had more time to look at things in more detail.
The more you scratch away at the surface and look underneath, the worse it gets.
The image of Bill Clinton that I had received from the mainstream media gave no indication of some of the awful legislation he passed.
I was firmly behind New Labour when they were in office, but I am now pretty sure they were not who I thought they were.
I was still pretty near the surface when Barack Obama came into office and things did look very hopeful.
I won’t be surprised by any revelations now.

Sound of the Suburbs , April 27, 2021 at 5:17 pm

Ignorance is bliss, but I can’t get back to the surface now.

Anthony K Wikrent , April 28, 2021 at 10:47 am

During Obama’s Presidency, I used to argue that Obama’s terrible policies were not the result of his being malicious or evil, but because he was thoroughly trained and indoctrinated in neo-liberalism. This explains Obama’s awful economic policies, but it does not explain, to my satisfaction, the first two examples Lambert uses â€" surveillance, and torture.

As I have sought for a solution to the problems USA and the world faces, I have since come to also realize that elites are trained â€" not just in USA but all over the world â€" to be ruthless and vindictive. That is how they rise to the top of any organization they are in. I think part of this is captured by Ian Welsh’s argument that managers are taught to make all decisions using cost-benefit analysis to some degree. I think a very large part of it is captured by Thorstein Veblen’s analysis of the ruling Leisure Class. Marxist analysis, I have concluded does not offer much in the way of understanding the psychology of sociopathy that characterizes elites. Veblen offers many insights on this, Marx does not. This is why Marxists cannot explain why actual socialism or communism failed to change human nature, but Veblen can. All other analysts of elites psychopathology since Veblen, including Wolin and Hedges, basically restate what Veblen already wrote a century and a quarter ago.

Another conclusion I have reached from all this searching, inquiring, and pondering, is that the principles of civic republicanism offer workable solutions out of this accelerating vortex of catastrophe. First, civic republicanism demands that the rights and needs of community be given equal, and sometimes greater, weight, than individual liberty, while at the same time demanding the creation and maintenance of institutions devoted to preserving individual liberty. In essence, civil republicanism recognizes and accepts that there are some really bad parts of human nature, and that governments must be instituted to guard against the effects of these. Socialists and communists are just plain wrong in their belief that changing or eliminating property relations and who owns the means of production will result in a better human nature.

Second, civic republicanism demands an active promotion of “the good.†Now, of course, you can debate what “the good is†at any given moment, or for any given society, but this is exactly why public education grounded in classics such as Plato, Euripides, Plutarch, Milton, Shakespeare, is indispensable to self-government and the maintenance of liberty. But to see what I mean about an active promotion of “the good†just look at the life and achievements of Benjamin Franklin, especially the various voluntary, charitable, and political institutions he helped establish and create.

Looking at Obama, I think that is the key element that was missing: the personal determination, which was never inculcated in him through his thorough education in neoliberalism, to do good. Cost benefit analysis was drilled into him, but not a wide-ranging examination and understanding of doing good.

In the end, how a society behaves will be determined by what the members of that society believe. In USA, we have discarded civic republicanism â€" aided and abetted by a wrong-headed leftist insistence that racism and empire were baked into the USA from the beginning â€" and replaced it with the neoliberal insistence that only markets are the true and just arbiter of human affairs, not humans themselves.

drumlin woodchuckles , May 1, 2021 at 5:22 am

The reason you dare not condemn Obama in public is because his worshipful millions of black worshippers will call you racist and will Wokemail and Wokestort you to †take your racist racism against Obama back, you racist.â€

Don’t believe it? Try it and see.

I remember reading about how the black racist comedian Trevor Noah played the racist card against people noting Obama’s corruption. I can’t find the referrence now on my search prevention engines.
So I will just send along this other link about the racist comedian Trevor Noah’s documented racism in another context.
https://thebrag.com/trevor-noah-controversial-remarks-indigenous-women/

[Apr 29, 2021] Crisis in American expertise- Washington has a dangerous destructive pattern of willful ignorance on Russia by Natylie Baldwin

Notable quotes:
"... Bernie Sanders in 2016, the self-described democratic socialist "showed little interest or knowledge about US-Russia relations and the attendant dangers of a new cold war." Instead, Sanders was ultimately content to mimic the juvenile and Manichean "democracies versus authoritarians" model of international relations. ..."
"... in the Obama era, as mediocre academics like Celeste Wallander were given positions on the National Security Council, and an ideologue like Michael McFaul was bizarrely appointed as ambassador. ..."
"... Under Biden – who caved to pressure from the foreign policy blob to not appoint Rojansky – the advisers who are in place or in line, including Jake Sullivan , Antony Blinken , Madeleine Albright/Hillary Clinton adviser Wendy Sherman, the German Marshall Fund's Karen Donfried , and State Department nominee Victoria Nuland represent more of the same dangerous ineptitude and strident thinking. Many of these advisers, like their predecessors, have little on-the-ground experience with contemporary Russia. ..."
"... Neoconservative ideologue Nuland, of course, is a slightly different case in that she has put her boots on the ground in the region. Unfortunately, that experience includes facilitating the dangerously divisive 2014 coup in Ukraine, without which Crimea would still be in Ukraine and the Donbass would be at peace. Competent officials would have warned Obama and Biden that the Maidan would lead to consequences like these. ..."
"... importantly, this 'perceived enemy' and its corresponding narrative sells... it enriches the military complexes, CIA etc. Even if it sounded unbelievable and outrageous, they will still be regurgitated and at best, given a new guised repackaging ..."
"... the author assumes that the mistakes made by advisors to Obama and others were because of incompetence, when in fact it should be seriously considered they were actually quite deliberate and planned ..."
"... the job was NOT to deliver facts to the public; the job was to tell the public how to think and what to believe; ie. anti-Russia propaganda. ..."
Apr 29, 2021 | www.rt.com
The rejection of Matthew Rojansky's candidacy as a Russia adviser to Joe Biden represents an escalation, and not a departure, from a pervasive bipartisan American pattern of dangerous ignorance about Russia in the post-Soviet era.

It was reported last week that Joe Biden's government would not be hiring Rojansky, of the Kennan Institute think tank, to help form policy towards Russia. Though the analyst is known as a moderate realist regarding Russia issues – in other words, he is not a virulent anti-Moscow ideologue – he was considered too controversial to be allowed a hearing during White House deliberations on policy regarding the world's largest country.

Rojansky's sin? Unlike many of the current crop of foreign policy officials, he actually has some expertise and experience on the subject.

While the scholar's fate may be a glaring and extreme example of an anti-Russia mindset in Washington that is counterproductive, it represents only a new low, and not a change from a pervasive bipartisan pattern in the post-Soviet era.

Those who aspire to, or attain, the most powerful executive position in the United States have shown a disturbingly willful ignorance of Russia. I learned from a former State Department official that, in response to a renowned Russia expert attempting to brief presidential candidate Bernie Sanders in 2016, the self-described democratic socialist "showed little interest or knowledge about US-Russia relations and the attendant dangers of a new cold war." Instead, Sanders was ultimately content to mimic the juvenile and Manichean "democracies versus authoritarians" model of international relations.

Similarly, an American business executive told me that, during a lunch with him and other leaders of commerce at the US Embassy in Moscow in 2012, then-Vice President Joe Biden showed no interest in his interlocutors' suggestions that it was in the US' best interests to partner with Russia after they offered social, economic, and strategic justifications for their view.

Biden seemed to see the meeting as an opportunity to lecture on his position rather than to learn or seek insight on Russia.

Moreover, once a US president is in power, the advisers that are appointed to counsel the commander in chief about Russia have been less than impressive from the 1990s onward. Condoleezza Rice served as an expert in the George Bush Senior administration and was wrong about the impending collapse of the Soviet Union. During her stint as secretary of state in the second term of the junior Bush administration, her Russian counterparts who spent significant time with her made the observation that Rice was "a Soviet expert, and not a Russia expert."

There was little improvement in the Obama era, as mediocre academics like Celeste Wallander were given positions on the National Security Council, and an ideologue like Michael McFaul was bizarrely appointed as ambassador.

According to investigative journalist Gareth Porter, advisers to Obama were so utterly incompetent that those serving in the administration really didn't think Russia had the ability or inclination to counter Washington's provocative actions in Syria, and therefore they did not plan for that possibility. This incompetence was also highlighted by Obama's public comments to the Economist in 2014, in which he claimed that Russia didn't make anything, immigrants didn't go there, and male life expectancy was 60 years – three claims that anyone with actual expertise on Russia should have easily known were false.

In fact, at that point, Russia was the second most popular migration destination in the world, after America itself, while average lifespans have been converging with those of the US over the past decade. As for manufacturing, Obama said these words at a time when the US, for instance, was totally reliant on Russian rockets for access to space, having retired its own unreliable Space Shuttle fleet. If he had access to a competent adviser on the subject, would he have made these mistakes?

Under Biden – who caved to pressure from the foreign policy blob to not appoint Rojansky – the advisers who are in place or in line, including Jake Sullivan , Antony Blinken , Madeleine Albright/Hillary Clinton adviser Wendy Sherman, the German Marshall Fund's Karen Donfried , and State Department nominee Victoria Nuland represent more of the same dangerous ineptitude and strident thinking. Many of these advisers, like their predecessors, have little on-the-ground experience with contemporary Russia.

Neoconservative ideologue Nuland, of course, is a slightly different case in that she has put her boots on the ground in the region. Unfortunately, that experience includes facilitating the dangerously divisive 2014 coup in Ukraine, without which Crimea would still be in Ukraine and the Donbass would be at peace. Competent officials would have warned Obama and Biden that the Maidan would lead to consequences like these.

It takes a special kind of hubris for the US political class to keep thinking they can get away with this level of sloppiness in understanding the world's other nuclear superpower – a country so massive that it straddles two major continents and is the sixth largest economy in terms of purchasing power parity – without serious consequences. At what point will God's providence run out?

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

Natylie Baldwin is author of "The View from Moscow: Understanding Russia and U.S.-Russia Relations," available at Amazon. She blogs at http://natyliesbaldwin.com/ .

See also

ewel Gyn 9 hours ago 9 hours ago

"Washington has a dangerous & destructive pattern of wilful ignorance on Russia in post-Soviet era" It is not just wilful ignorance per se. Without a 'perceived enemy', the narrative for Russia will fall apart. Ditto China, Iran, N Korea et al.

But importantly, this 'perceived enemy' and its corresponding narrative sells... it enriches the military complexes, CIA etc. Even if it sounded unbelievable and outrageous, they will still be regurgitated and at best, given a new guised repackaging, but with the antiquated contents remaining intact.

dotmafia 6 hours ago 6 hours ago
Good article, but, the author assumes that the mistakes made by advisors to Obama and others were because of incompetence, when in fact it should be seriously considered they were actually quite deliberate and planned. In the example of Obama's remarks to The Economist, the job was NOT to deliver facts to the public; the job was to tell the public how to think and what to believe; ie. anti-Russia propaganda.
Levin High 8 hours ago 8 hours ago
It used to be said that you couldn't be fired for buying IBM, now days in the US you seem to be hired for blaming Russia.
apothqowejh 9 hours ago 9 hours ago
The US State Department is packed with idiots, political appointees, ideologues and globalist nut jobs. Their lack of anything remotely like competence is as astonishing as the CIA's full on embrace of evil.
wowhead1977 4 hours ago 4 hours ago
The cabal in America always want to blame Russia. I'm a American citizen and have no problem with Russia. These so called sanctions on other countries is a control tactic that most Americans didn't vote for. This race baiting tactic is from The Fabian Society play book. Wolf in sheep's clothing is the Fabian Society logo.

We must realize that our Party's most powerful weapon is racial tension. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races, that for centuries have been oppressed by the Whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party ... In America, we will aim for subtle victory. While enflaming the color people minority against the Whites, we will instill in the Whites, a guilt complex for the exploitation of the color people.

We will aid the color people to rise to prominence in every walk of life, in the professions, and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the color people will be able to intermarry with the Whites, and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause." ~ Israel Cohen - Fabian Society Founder

[Apr 27, 2021] Gauleiter: Swedish Filmmaker Exposes Biden Corruption In Eastern Europe And Ukraine

Apr 27, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Norwegian , Apr 25 2021 14:19 utc | 9

Must see video

Gauleiter: Swedish Filmmaker Exposes Biden Corruption In Eastern Europe And Ukraine

Norwegian , Apr 25 2021 14:34 utc | 11

@Norwegian | Apr 25 2021 14:19 utc | 9

Btw, I think the filmmaker is Finnish, not Swedish. This is judging from his dialect and the video contents.

@jared and @Lelush : Thank you

[Apr 27, 2021] The United States Extensive Knowledge of the 1976 Planned Military Coup in Argentina " Strategic Culture

Notable quotes:
"... While the released documents portray the U.S. as having knowledge of the coup as opposed to intervening overtly or covertly, the aftermath shows U.S. involvement was considerable. ..."
Apr 27, 2021 | www.strategic-culture.org

While the released documents portray the U.S. as having knowledge of the coup as opposed to intervening overtly or covertly, the aftermath shows U.S. involvement was considerable.

Last March, on the 45 th anniversary of Argentina’s descent into dictatorship, the National Security Archive posted a selection of declassified documents revealing the U.S. knowledge of the military coup in the country in 1976. A month before the government of Isabel Peron was toppled by the military, the U.S. had already informed the coup plotters that it would recognise the new government. Indications of a possible coup in Argentina had reached the U.S. as early as 1975.

A declassified CIA document from February 1976 describes the imminence of the coup, to the extent of mentioning military officers which would later become synonymous with torture, killings and disappearances of coup opponents. Notably, the coup plotters, among them General Jorge Rafael Videla, were already drawing up a list of individuals who would be subject to arrest in the immediate aftermath of the coup.

One concern for the U.S. was its standing in international diplomacy with regard to the Argentinian military dictatorship’s violence, which it pre-empted as a U.S. State Department briefing to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger shows. “An Argentine military government would be almost certain to engage in human rights violations such as to engender international criticism.â€

After the experience of Chile and U.S. involvement in the coup which heralded dictator Augusto Pinochet’s rise to power, human rights violations became a key factor. Kissinger had brushed off the U.S. Congress’s concerns, declaring a policy that would turn a blind eye to the dictatorship’s atrocities. “I think we should understand our policy-that however unpleasant they act, this government is better for us than Allende was,†Kissinger had declared .

Months after expressing concern regarding the forthcoming human rights abuses as a result of the dictatorship in Argentina, the U.S. warned Pinochet about its dilemma in terms of justifying aid to a leadership which was becoming notorious for its violence and disappearances of opponents. “We have a practical problem to take into account, without bringing about pressures incompatible with your dignity, and at the same time which does not lead to U.S. laws which will undermine our relationship.â€

In the same declassified document from the Chile archives of 1976, Pinochet expresses his concern over Orlando Letelier, a diplomat and ambassador to the U.S. during the era of Salvador Allende and an influential figure among members of the U.S. Congress, stating that Letelier is disseminating false information about Chile. Letelier was murdered by car bomb in Washington that same year, by a CIA and National Intelligence Directorate (DINA) agent Michael Townley.

However, the Argentinian coup plotters deepened their dialogue with the U.S. over how human rights violations would be committed. Aware of perceptions regarding Pinochet’s record, military officials approached the U.S. seeking ways to minimise the attention which Pinochet was garnering in Chile, while at the same time making it clear to U.S. officials to “some executions would probably be necessary.â€

Assuming a non-involvement position was also deemed crucial by the U.S. To mellow any possible fallout, the coup plotters were especially keen to point out that the military coup would not follow in the steps of Pinochet. One declassified cable document detailing U.S. concern over involvement spells out how the U.S. Ambassador to Argentina Robert Hill planned to depart the country prior to the coup, rather than cancel plans to see how the events pan out. “The fact that I would be out of the country when the blow actually falls would be, I believe, a fact in our favor indicating non- involvement of Embassy and USG.†The main aim was to conceal evidence that the U.S. had prior knowledge of the forthcoming coup in Argentina.

While the released documents portray the U.S. as having knowledge of the coup as opposed to intervening overtly or covertly, the aftermath shows U.S. involvement was considerable. The Chile experience, including the murder of a diplomat on U.S. soil, were clearly not deterrents for U.S. policy in Latin America, as it extended further support for Videla’s rule. The Videla dictatorship would eventually kill and disappear over 30,000 Argentinians in seven years, aided by the U.S. which provided the aircraft necessary for the death flights in the extermination operation known as Plan Condor.

[Apr 27, 2021] Is the age of permanent war finally over

Apr 27, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

BY AKRAINER MONDAY, APR 26, 2021 - 18:17

Recent events in the world have given me great hope that we might finally emerge from the century of permanent war. The Great Reset agenda seems to be losing steam and those in charge of implementing it are losing conviction (with the exception, perhaps, of the very top echelon in power). At the same time, the ranks of people who are opposed to it and are willing to take a stand, appear to be swelling.

Since the very start of the great pandemic of 2020, something about the public health response didn't feel right. It was clear from the measures that were enacted and from measures that were not enacted that their purpose had little to do with public health. Instead, they seemed to further a different agenda. Soon we learned that this was all connected to World Economic Forum's hugely ambitious "Fourth Industrial Revolution" or the Great Reset. But the agenda and the steps taken seemed rushed, panicked and frankly, hopeless.

Many of the solutions and technologies that would have to be rolled out and ready to use turned out to be non-existent or only in conceptual stages of development. As months went on, the events proved this impression correct as we saw the authorities muddle through, destroying their own credibility in the process. In a very recent interview, Dr. Rainer Fullmich sated as follows: "We have a whistleblower and she told us that the original plan was to roll this out in 2050. But then those who are involved with this got greedy and pulled things forward to 2030 and then to 2020 and that's why so many mistakes are happening."

I do not believe that the people involved with this got greedy – I believe they understand the fragility and imminent demise of the financial system which is their key mechanism of control over all the levers of influence in society. The implosion of that system would also jeopardize their position of power. So they rushed the Great Reset right off the back of the 2020 pandemic to try to front-run the collapse and take an iron-fisted control of things ahead of the unfolding crisis. From their various documents and white papers, it is also evident that they had anticipated the public pushback.

Conjuring a big new war

As I wrote last August , they have "surely planned diversions to misdirect our grievances One of the greatest means of diversion are wars. We must therefore guard against believing that our enemies are the Russians, the Chinese or whomever the logic of divide-and-rule would pit us against." Over the last few weeks we've seen a sharp escalation of hostilities in Ukraine between the Kiev government and the Donbas region. The situation became so tense that many learned observers saw a military conflagration as inevitable. On 6th April, SouthFront.org published an article, titled, " War Between Russia and Ukraine is Inevitable. " Over the weekend I had the pleasure of listening to Tom Luongo's podcast with Alexander Mercouris – two among the most learned geopolitical analysts. While Mercouris was more optimistic about the situation, Tom Luongo expected that the war would break out.

If we judged by historical precedents, I would entirely agree with Luongo. However, I think we are living in a different era today. In the run-up to the previous two world wars, leaders of the key powers (Russia, France, Germany, etc.) were quite naive about the scheming of the British diplomacy and intelligence services which led the way to both those wars. Wittingly and unwittingly, they played along and sleepwalked into those conflicts (OK, Hitler didn't quite 'sleepwalk' into war but he had clearly badly misunderstood the British game and thought he could sue for peace after only limited military engagements).

Today, it is clear that the leaders in Russia, China and certain other nations are remarkably sophisticated, that their understanding of the great geopolitical chessboard is crystal clear, and that they know exactly who their true enemies are. They have also understood that giving their adversaries a war would mean giving them a lifeline. It seems to me that they have made it an imperative priority not to give them that war.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=NakedHedgie&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfX0%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1379363346017816579&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fthenakedhedgie.com%2F2021%2F04%2F26%2Fis-the-age-of-permanent-war-finally-over%2F&sessionId=b52e8c930b17868aac4400ee1c59bd3f9e8253de&siteScreenName=NakedHedgie&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ff2e7cf%3A1618526400629&width=550px

Russia's build-up of an overwhelming military force on its border with Ukraine was therefore not a preparation for war. To the contrary, it was a move to prevent one from erupting. As Victor David Hanson recently wrote , " Wars often arise from uncertainty. When strong countries appear weak, truly weaker ones take risks they otherwise would not ." Thus for now, the Ukraine tensions have abated - but had they faced a weak and indecisive Russia, the leadership in Kiev and their Western backers might have made a very different gamble and today the war might already have started. The cabal that's been dominating the western world for the past two centuries is rapidly running out of time and out of options.

Their plans for the one world government are now in tatters and without a new world war, the best they can hope to achieve is to carve out a geopolitical block and erect a new iron curtain around it. The most likely candidate for that block is Western Europe consisting of the old colonial powers and their satellites. However, even this consolation prize will not be viable. As the Soviet experience has taught us, even with an iron fist and heavy-handed repression, the edifice can sustain itself at best for a few decades. But as populations awaken, and awakening they are, the sun will finally set on their system, probably for good.

The new world dawning

What's left for the awakened masses to do is to build a better world on the ruins of the old system. Here is what I wrote last March in an earlier blog post :

"We are witnessing the manifestations of old systems collapsing. And while some of those manifestations appear fearsome, keep in mind Confucius ' counsel:

A seed grows with no sound. But a tree falls with huge noise. Destruction has noise but creation is quiet. This is the power of silence grow silently .

Destruction is all around us creating great noise, but you carry a seed that grows silently within you. Things that emerge from seeds are worthy of our reverence. If we cultivate them with attention and love, they can grow beautiful and majestic. Dostoevsky said that beauty would save the world. That beauty is us – you and I – our children, our parents, our friends, all of us. We can't see what all these seeds will become, but it should be easy to believe – nature's creations are always so beautiful."

Just the other day while on a hike, I came across a scene that captured this idea metaphorically:

As we know, the better the seeds are nourished, the more beautiful, more robust and more fruitful they become. The most important nutrient we need to build a better tomorrow is knowledge and today we have that nutrient in greater abundance than we have ever had before. It is incumbent upon us to use it, digest it, learn and apply ourselves to create the best version of the future that we can muster.

It may just be that this crisis we are living through is a precious gift and that we who are privileged to witness humanity at this juncture are fortunate in ways we can't yet fully grasp. We must embrace this and do our very best with it and pass it on to our children and their children.

Alex Krainer - @NakedHedgie is the creator of I-System Trend Following , founder of Krainer Analytics and publisher of TrendCompass reports, based in Monaco. He worked as a market analyst, researcher, trader and hedge fund manager for over 25 years. He wrote " Mastering Uncertainty in Commodities Trading ," rated by Financial-Expert.co.uk as #1 book on their list of " The 5 Best Commodities Books for Investors and Traders ." In March 2021 he published " Alex Krainer's Trend Following Bible ." His second book, " Grand Deception: The Browder Hoax " was twice banned on Amazon by orders of swamp creatures from the U.S. Department of State. He writes at ISystem-TF.com and occasionally also on his blog, TheNakedHedgie.com . His views and opinions are not always for polite society but they are always expressed in sincere pursuit of true knowledge and clear understanding of ideas that matter.

[Apr 24, 2021] Blinken's Winking and Nodding to the Neocons -- Strategic Culture

Apr 24, 2021 | www.strategic-culture.org

Biden's Western Hemisphere foreign policy is not much different from that of Obama's, Wayne Madsen writes.

Like proverbial bad pennies, the neocon imperialists who plagued the Barack Obama administration have turned up in force in Joe Biden's State Department. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has given more than winks and nods to the dastardly duo of Victoria Nuland, slated to become Blinken's Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, the number three position at the State Department, and Samantha Power, nominated to become the Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

Nuland and Power both have problematic spouses who do not fail to offer their imperialistic opinions regardless of the appearance of conflicts-of-interest. Nuland's husband is the claptrappy neocon warmonger Robert Kagan, someone who has never failed to urge to prod the United States into wars that only benefit Israel. Power's husband is the totally creepy Cass Sunstein, who served as Obama's White House "information czar" and advocated government infiltration of non-governmental organizations and news media outlets to wage psychological warfare campaigns.

True to form, Blinken's State Department has already come to the aid of Venezuela's right-wing self-appointed "opposition leader" Juan Guaido, whose actual constituency is found in the wealthy gated communities of Venezuelan and Cuban expatriates in south Florida and not in the barrios of Caracas or Maracaibo.

Blinken and his team of old school yanqui imperialists have also criticized the constitutional and judicially-warranted detention of former interim president Jeanine Áñez, who became president in 2019 after the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) government of President Evo Morales was overthrown in a Central Intelligence Agency-inspired and -directed military coup. The far-right forces backing Áñez were roundly defeated in the October 2020 election that swept MAS and Morales's chosen presidential candidate, Luis Arce, back into power. It seems that for Blinken and his ilk, a decisive victory in an election only applies to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, not to Arce and MAS in Bolivia.

It should be recalled that while Blinken was national security adviser to then-Vice President Biden in the Obama administration, every sort of deception and trickery was used by the CIA to depose Morales in Bolivia and President Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela. In fact, the Obama administration, with Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, claimed its first Latin American political victim when a CIA coup was launched against progressive President Manuel Zelaya of Honduras. Today, Honduras is ruled by a right-wing kleptocratic narco-president, Juan Orlando Hernández, whose brother, Tony Hernández, is currently serving life in federal prison in the United States for drug trafficking. For the likes of Blinken, Power, Nuland, and former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice, who currently serves as "domestic policy adviser" to Biden, suppression of progressive governments and support for right-wing dictators and autocrats have always been the preferred foreign policy, particularly for the Western Hemisphere. For example, while the Biden administration remains quiet on right-wing regimes in Central America that are responsible for the outflow of thousands of beleaguered Mayan Indians to the southern U.S. border with Mexico, it has announced that Trump era sanctions on 24 Nicaraguan government officials, including President Daniel Ortega's wife and Nicaragua's vice president, Rosario Murillo, as well as three of their sons – Laureano, Rafael, and Juan Carlos – will continue.

Biden's Western Hemisphere foreign policy is not much different from that of Obama's. Biden and Brazilian far-right, Adolf Hitler-loving, and Covid pandemic-denying President Jair Bolsonaro are said to have struck a deal on environmental protection of the Amazon Basin ahead of an April 22 global climate change virtual summit called by the White House. A coalition of 198 Brazilian NGOs, representing environmental, indigenous rights, and other groups, has appealed to Biden not to engage in any rain forest protection agreement with the untrustworthy Bolsonaro. The Brazilian president has repeatedly advocated the wholesale deforestation of the Amazon region. Meanwhile, while Biden urges Americans to maintain Covid public health measures, Bolsonaro continues to downplay the virus threat as Brazil's overall death count approaches that of the United States.

Blinken's State Department has been relatively quiet on the Northern Triangle of Central America fascist troika of Presidents Orlando of Honduras, Alejandro Giammattei of Guatemala, and Nayib Bukele of El Salvador. Instead of pressuring these fascistas to democratize and stop their genocidal policies toward the indigenous peoples of their nations, Biden told Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador that he would pump $4 billion into supposed "assistance" to those countries to stop the flow of migrants. Biden is repeating the same old American gambits of the past. Any U.S. assistance to kleptocratic countries like those of the Northern Triangle has and will line the pockets of their corrupt leaders. Flush with U.S. aid cash, Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador will be sure to grant contracts to greedy Israeli counter-insurgency contractors always at the ready to commit more human rights abuses against the workers, students, and indigenous peoples of Central America.

Biden is also in no hurry to reverse the freeze imposed by Donald Trump on U.S.-Cuban relations. Biden, whose policy toward Cuba represents a fossilized relic of the Cold War, intends to maintain Trump's freeze on U.S. commercial, trade, and tourism relations with Cuba. Biden's Homeland Security Secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, a Jewish Cuban-American expatriate, is expected to reach out to right-wing Cuban-Americans in south Florida in order to ensure Democratic Party inroads in the 2022 and 2024 U.S. elections. Therefore, even restoring the status quo ante established by Barack Obama is off-the-table for Biden, Blinken, and Mayorkas. The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the Cuban-American and ethically-challenged Democrat Bob Menendez, has stated there will be no normalization of pre-Trump relations with Cuba until his "regime change" whims are satisfied. Regurgitating typical right-wing Cuban-American drivel, Mayorkas has proclaimed after he was announced as the new Homeland Security Secretary, "I have been nominated to be the DHS Secretary and oversee the protection of all Americans and those who flee persecution in search of a better life for themselves and their loved ones." The last part of that statement was directed toward the solidly Republican bloc of moneyed Cuban, Venezuelan, Nicaraguan, and Bolivian interests in south Florida.

While Blinken hurls his neocon invectives at Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Cuba, he remains silent on the repeated foot-dragging by embattled and highly unpopular right-wing Chilean President Sebastian Pinera on implementing a new Constitution to replace that put into place in 1973 by the fascist military dictator General Augusto Pinochet. The current Chilean Constitution is courtesy of Richard Nixon's foreign policy "Svengali," the duplicitous Henry Kissinger, an individual who obviously shares Blinken's taste for "realpolitik" adventurism on a global scale.

While Blinken has weighed in on the domestic politics of Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba, he has had no comment on the anti-constitutional moves by Colombian far-right authoritarian President Ivan Duque, the front man for that nation's Medellin narcotics cartel. It would also come as no surprise if Blinken, Nuland, and Power have quietly buttressed the candidacy of right-wing banker, Guillermo Lasso, who is running against the progressive socialist candidate Andrés Arauz, the protegé of former president Rafael Correa. Blinken can be expected to question the results of the April 11 if Lasso cries fraud in the event of an Arauz victory. Conversely, Blinken will remain silent if Lasso wins and Arauz cries foul. That has always been the nature of U.S. Western Hemisphere policy, regardless of what party controls the White House.

[Apr 19, 2021] Why now -- Trey Gowdy on Biden's move to pull troops from Afghanistan

This was Bush racket. Invasion on false pretenses to establish a foothold and get to former USSR republic. This move was initially a big success (and Putin helped by using his influence on Northern Alliance) but later backfire. In other words this was typical imperial policy.
Apr 19, 2021 | www.youtube.com

Gary Buchanan , 3 days ago

This time, let's don't leave all our equipment and ammunition for them to use against us.

Julie Monarch , 3 days ago

Shut the door! That's how you stop them from coming.

R. Dillon , 3 days ago

I would guess 2 things, 1. He's hoping if he ends the war then none of the terrorists that just snuck in won't attack. 2. He plans on starting a war elsewhere.

Cris Renner , 3 days ago

Please, get them out of office, before they do anymore damage!!!

Clarence Spangle , 3 days ago

"Obama may have gotten (U.S. soldiers) out wrong, but going in is, to me, the biggest single mistake made in the history of our country." -- Donald J. Trump

Ratpatrol Renegade , 3 days ago

Afghanistan's a racket. We're rebuilding their country instead of America. Power plants hospitals and schools that they're never going to use

[Apr 19, 2021] Biden's Russia-China Tactic Is To Wage War AND To Ask For Cooperation. It Will Fail

Apr 19, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Clueless Joe , Apr 17 2021 19:04 utc | 12

The policies of the Biden administration towards Russia and China are delusional. It thinks that it can squeeze these countries but still successfully ask them for cooperation. It believes that the U.S. position is stronger than it really is and that China and Russia are much weaker than they are.

It is also full of projection. The U.S. accuses both countries of striving for empire, of wanting to annex more land and of human rights violations. But is only the U.S. that has expanding aspirations. Neither China nor Russia are interested in running an empire. They have no interest in planting military bases all over the world. Though both have marginal border conflicts they do not want to acquire more land. And while the U.S. bashes both countries for alleged human rights issues it is starving whole populations (Yemen, Syria, Venezuela) through violence and economic sanctions.

The U.S. power structures in the Pentagon and CIA use the false accusations against Russia and China as pretense for cold military and hot economic wars against both countries. They use color revolution schemes (Ukraine, Myanmar) to create U.S. controlled proxy forces near their borders.

At the same time as it tries to press these countries the U.S. is seeking their cooperation in selected fields. It falsely believes that it has some magical leverage.

Consider this exchange from yesterday's White House press briefing about Biden asking for a summit with Putin while, at the same time, implementing more sanctions against Russia:

Q What if [Putin] says "no," though? Wouldn't that indicate some weakness on the part of the American administration here?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I think the President's view is that Russia is on the outside of the global community in many respects, at this point in time. It's the G7, not the G8. They have -- obviously, we've put sanctions in place in order to send a clear message that there should be consequences for the actions; the Europeans have also done that.

What the President is offering is a bridge back. And so, certainly, he believes it's in their interests to take him up on that offer.

The G7 are not the 'global community'. They have altogether some 500 million inhabitants out of 7.9 billion strong global population. Neither China nor India are members of the G7 nor is any South American or African country. Moreover Russia has rejected a Russian return into the G7/8 format:

"Russia is focused on other formats, apart from the G7," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in a brief statement ..

Russia has no interest in a summit which would only be used by the U.S. to further bash Russia. Why should it give Biden that pleasure when there is nothing that Russia would gain from it. Russia does not need a 'bridge back'. There will be no summit.

... ... ...

If Biden wants cooperation with Russia or China he needs to reign in the hawks and stop his attacks on those countries. As he is not willing or capable of doing that any further cooperation attempts will fall flat.

The U.S. has to learn that it is no longer the top dog. It can not work ceaselessly to impact Russia's and China's military and economic security and still expect them to cooperate. If it wants something it will first have to cease the attacks and to accept multilateral relationships.

Posted by b on April 17, 2021 at 17:53 UTC | Permalink

"It can not work ceaselessly to impact Russia's and China's military and economic security and still expect them to cooperate"
You have to understand the USA. They're doing it against Europe on a daily basis, and it actually works... Get them confused why it doesn't always work against others.

Mao Cheng Ji , Apr 17 2021 19:17 utc | 15

It's interesting what's happening right now (in the past hour or so).

First: Russian and Belorussian news about the arrest of leaders (or key participants) of an attempted military coup in Belarus, planned by the US security services.

Then, 30 minutes later: the Czechs expel 18 Russian diplomats, accusing them of spying and of connection to some explosion back in 2014.

I could've been skeptical about the details of the first story, but the second one seems to confirm it. The second story appears to be an obvious attempt to squeeze the first one out of the news. And who else could order the Czech government to do this with a 30 minute notice?

oglalla , Apr 17 2021 19:27 utc | 18

Wouldn't Oceania rulers love to print more of their own currency to buy up all the paper rights to industrial output without having to invest in the factories or anything else! They love this kind of business model.

"The secret of success is to own nothing but control everything."

Because of what's at stake and how little I trust Oceania, I confess I no longer have an opinion about global warming. Even if many of its scientists are *earnest*, who obtained, processed, and stored the data before they started building models? Those institutions are capable of anything.

[Apr 19, 2021] Biden's Sanctions Leave Russia's Stocks and Bonds in Stalemate

Apr 19, 2021 | finance.yahoo.com

The U.S. has leveled sanctions on Russia over election interference and cyberattacks, including barring U.S. financial institutions from buying new domestically issued Russian government debt.

The Biden Administration went where Presidents Obama and Trump had not, barring U.S. financial institutions from buying new domestically issued Russian sovereign bonds. The move excluded the secondary market, though. Anyone can still trade the so-called OFZs already in circulation. And it was matched by a substantial carrot: a dovish speech on Russia by Biden, floating a potential summit with Putin this summer.

The market had feared worse, says Vladimir Tikhomirov, chief economist at BCS Global Markets in Moscow. The ruble is still down 4%, and stocks 3%, since Russia stoked tensions a month ago by massing troops on Ukraine's border. That is despite buoyant oil prices that should benefit Russia. "Everyone was discussing direct punishment of Russian companies or a cutoff from SWIFT," he says, referring to the backbone for global financial transactions. "The actual sanctions turned out to be relatively mild."

Global investors have been fleeing the OFZ market without any push from the White House. Foreigners' share of outstanding bond holdings have fallen to 20% from about a third last summer, notes Aaron Hurd, senior currency portfolio manager at State Street Global Advisors.

Political risk still depresses the value of Russian assets by 15%, Tikhomirov estimates. That is reasonable considering Biden's options for escalating sanctions, says Daniel Fried, an Atlantic Council fellow who was the State Department's sanctions coordinator under Obama. "He could move into the secondary debt market, restrict state-owned energy companies' ability to raise capital, or go after the money hidden by Putin and his cronies," he says. "It could get to be a pretty tight squeeze."

To close the political risk gap, Putin needs to at least restore calm with Ukraine, risking domestic political face after a month of hyping the alleged threat from Russia's southern neighbor. The coming week offers two opportunities for Putin to move toward Biden's proffered stable relationship, Tikhomirov says. He could sound friendly in an annual state of the nation address scheduled for April 21, and he could turn up (virtually) for the global climate summit Biden has called on April 23-24.

These may be far overshadowed by Alexei Navalny, the Russian opposition leader who is on hunger strike in a maximum-security prison outside Moscow. Navalny-allied doctors said April 17 he could "die within days" without outside medical intervention. Backing off from its merciless treatment of Navalny would also look like an embarrassing climb-down from the Kremlin's point of view.

Hurd expects a stalemate where Russian assets could nudge higher as oil prices remain firm and the Central Bank of Russia raises interest rates. Putin will make few concessions with his party facing parliamentary elections in September, he predicts. Washington will be constrained by the European Union's reluctance to stiffen anti-Russian measures. "The ruble could still go higher from here, but we remain tentative over the next six months," he says.

Putin has essentially accomplished the goal he set after his 2014 invasions of Ukraine, a self-sufficient Russia that can pursue its perceived security interests without worrying what the rest of the world thinks, says Yong Zhu, portfolio manager for emerging markets debt at DuPont Capital Management.

Government debt amounts to a mere 18% of gross domestic product, and in a pinch can be serviced domestically. That keeps yields too low to pay for the country's geopolitical turbulence, he concludes: 10-year Russian domestic bonds pay about 7% annually, compared with 9% for Brazil or South Africa. "Russia doesn't really need anything beside the iPhone," Zhu quips.

Self-reliance has also spelled isolation from the capital and talent that could lift Russia to its proper place in global innovation and growth. But Putin and his regime seem to like it that way.

[Apr 19, 2021] You have to be careful around them

Apr 19, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

NotBob , Apr 17 2021 19:24 utc | 16

robert@3 :

While I agree with 99% of your post, there is one point that I think needs to be keeping in mind. While the populace of this particular manure-hole certainly has its equal share of dumb creatures, the people running things cannot be so easily dismissed. The problem as I see it is they have a great deal of a certain kind of intelligence, as someone said "smart, but not wise". They are educated, but insane. The cream of the crop that has gone sour. In my travels I would often ask people what they actually thought of "Americans". An Indonesian man responded " soft, but cunning. You have to be careful around them."

If these cunning, insane, power hungry creatures were simply dumb and not truly evil, we might be in less of a shit show (nod to psychohistorian) than we are.

Ruben Chandler , Apr 17 2021 22:23 utc | 42

@ NotBob | Apr 17 2021 19:24 utc | 16

Aleister Crowley of all people summed up these kind of people:

A cunning combination of rat and ape.

Biswapriya Purkayast , Apr 18 2021 0:55 utc | 63

After 20 years of regular interaction with Amerikastanis online and in real life, I have realised that they live in a parallel universe in which Hollywood is the arbiter of truth. They genuinely believe that anything they choose to imagine is the truth just because they imagine it.

A couple of days ago when the Imperialist States admitted its "Russia Bounty" story was concocted, the people who had shrieked to the skies about it last year had a chance to apologise. Did they? They ignored it. It did not happen because they chose to believe it didn't.

[Apr 14, 2021] Biden's Presidency Will Be Destroyed By His Foreign Policy

Apr 14, 2021 | turcopolier.com

Posted on April 8, 2021 by Larry Johnson

Dementia Joe and his coterie of enablers have embarked on a foreign policy that is likely to result in a new war that will endanger America and further a growing perception that the United States is weak and divided. There are three troublesome flashpoints (Ukraine, China and Iran) that could explode at any time and catapult our nation into a costly, deadly military confrontation. Topping the list is the Ukraine.

The corrupt dealings in Ukraine over the last four years by Joe and Hunter Biden leaves them completely compromised and subject to coercion, even blackmail. With this as a backdrop the decade long effort by the United States to weaken Russia's influence in eastern Ukraine has been revived with Biden's arrival in the White House.

Let me first introduce you to some essential facts:

30,442 total views, 9,078 views today

Pages: 1 2 This entry was posted in As The Borg Turns , Borg Wars , Larry Johnson , Russia . Bookmark the permalink . ← No platform for the Left here China Joe Biden is the enemy of the constitution → 32 Responses to Biden's Presidency Will Be Destroyed By His Foreign Policy
  1. Pat Lang Pat Lang says: April 8, 2021 at 9:54 pm

    LJ

    Try to remember to turn the page counter on. Reply

  2. Avatar Ishmael Zechariah says: April 8, 2021 at 10:50 pm

    Larry Johnson,
    If the Ukraine blows so will Syria! Then the situation might transition from nemesis to tisis in short order. Here is a strangely appropriate analysis with just one word blanked out.
    In the years ahead, _____________ will assuredly find itself in new international crises involving nations or groups that have powerful leaders. In some cases, these leaders may have a special, dangerous mindset that is the result of a "hubris-nemesis complex." This complex involves a combination of hubris (a pretension toward an arrogant form of godliness) and nemesis (a vengeful desire to confront, defeat, humiliate, and punish an adversary, especially one that can be accused of hubris). The combination has strange dynamics that may lead to destructive, high-risk behavior. Attempts to deter, compel, or negotiate with a leader who has a hubris-nemesis complex can be ineffectual or even disastrously counterproductive when those attempts are based on concepts better suited to dealing with more normal leaders.
    https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/MR461.pdf
    We, too, pray for sanity.
    Ishmael Zechariah Reply

  3. Avatar Walrus says: April 8, 2021 at 11:22 pm

    Larry, I unfortunately agree with your observations and conclusion.

    I would add that in my opinion, the Russians are a lot more determined, as are the Chinese and Iranians, then the generally self absorbed younger generations in the West. "Woke" culture has no answer to sunken warships, downed aircraft and body bags. Do the SJWs want to die for LBGTIQ rights in Russia or another of their pet obsessions de jour? I don't think so.

    My concern for President Biden and America is that, if Ukraine attacks, unless President Putin succeeds in delivering a very short, sharp and successful lesson to Ukraine there is not going to be a clear path forward to a negotiated armistice. If that doesn't happen through bad luck, the fog of war, etc. Then I don't think Biden has the intelligence to get us out of the mess.

    If you add to that the possibility that Zelensky may demand American support "or else" when he starts to lose then we are in very very dangerous territory. If I were the Chinese, I would just stand back and watch. Taiwanese independence is a meaningless concept without American military backing and I'm sure the Taiwanese know it.

    The wild card to me is what is Israel's attitude? Is it possible that they might be a moderating influence for a change? Reply

    • Avatar Thomas says: April 9, 2021 at 8:08 pm

      Oh, yeah .!!!!!! The country that shoots women and children who get too close to the fence they have constructed in PALESTINE on other people"s land will be the moderating party. Or maybe Mad Dog Bolton.

      Try getting real, and come up with real world situations. Not some fantasy of killers acting like kittens. The Russians seem more balanced in responding to such provocations than the U.S. & it's gang of follower- puppets. How long would any of the these follower-puppets be able to go toe to toe with Russia in all-out-war situation. I'd bet less than 24 hours, probably far less. Or as a Chinese General once asked: would you want to give up Los Angeles to save Tiwan? The U.S. doesn't seem to have any sort of reliable anti-missile defence system. Would Ole Uncle Joe really like to get into such pissing contest so early on in his term of presidency? Maybe I am wrong, but from what I have seen so far, he just seems to be throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks. In this game, if one blunders, the walls vanish, an the lights go out. Reply

  4. Avatar Andrei Martyanov says: April 9, 2021 at 12:42 am

    Russia moves cannon boats and amphibious vessels from Caspian Sea to the Black Sea, but in reality these combatants are perfect for operations in shallow waters and that means Azov Sea and Ukraine's South-Western flank. These ships can form both a surface group capable of dispatching anything Ukraine may have on Azov Sea, plus form excellent tactical amphibious group which can land a battalion or two of marines and support them with fire from the sea, both artillery and MLRS. Of course, there are other forces Russia has there but it is a good way to give Caspian Flotilla a chance for yet another combat deployment, after its missile ships spearheaded first salvos of 3M14 cruise missiles at ISIS targets in Syria in 2015. Here are some of those ships:
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Caspian_Corvette_Astrakhan_2.jpg

    Russia has an overwhelming firepower in the Black Sea proper and whatever the US is sending there is primarily for ISR purposes in case Ukies go bananas and decide to attack Donbass in death by cop scenario. The US will not interfere in any meaningful way other than supplying Ukies with recon data. Reply

  5. Avatar Peter Reichard says: April 9, 2021 at 6:28 am

    It is bigger than Biden or even the Military Industrial Complex. The establishment foreign policy apparatus transcends political parties and has a continuity that survives changes in administrations. It is obsessed with Russia. It opposed not just communism but Russia itself so when the Berlin wall fell for it the Cold War never ended and it successfully pursued the the break up and looting of the Russian Empire and the relentless eastward march of NATO. Putin pushed back on this resulting in him being demonized by the orchestrated Western media. Trump for all his faults had at least a halfway rational view of these matters but now the Borg is back and spoiling for a fight. I never cease to be amazed by the stupidity of these people, their apparent lack of understanding of the importance of Ukraine and Sevastopol in Russian history and their inability to read a map or know the basics of military operations to see the obvious indefensibility of Ukraine's eastern border. The danger now is that Ukraine's leaders will overestimate the support they think they have from the United States and start something they can't stop. This has the feel of 1914. Reply

    • Avatar Thomas says: April 9, 2021 at 9:00 pm

      Or the Georgian/Russian of 2008 when Georgia attacked on Russian territory. President Bush was talking tough, saying he would send aid to Georgia on warships. But the rules governing ships entering the Bosferus proscribed such stuff, aND Bush ended doing nothing. The Russians quickly neutralized the Georgian forces and pushed deeper into Georgia where they currently remain. The odiot who started the mess was forced out of Georgia & was afterwards appointed a governor or some such in Ukraine. But I think that too went bad. Such is the level of governance in Ukraine. Reply

  6. Avatar john kliss says: April 9, 2021 at 6:35 am

    The last 5 Ukros killed were killed by mines. The contact line has many zones where minefields are employed by both sides. It appears some were killed in their own minefield according to local reports. Civilians in the LPR and DPR have been killed by incoming fire, most recently a 5 year old boy. Of course OSCE is worthless except as a "bean counter"; who fired what and where is too much to record.. Reply

  7. Avatar JohninMK says: April 9, 2021 at 7:09 am

    Another good analysis there LJ.

    US defence attache with a group was up at the front yesterday as well as the comic.

    Ukraine really has its back up against the wall financially. This year with big interest payments due and no way to get the funds as the IMF seems to hit its limit on their 'we're never getting it back' budget. Their only steady source of funds is ironically Russia with the gas transit fees guaranteed at $7B total over the next four years, much of which will go to the EU and IMF as interest payments. After that the gas fees will drop to zero as the gas transits move to TurkStream and NS2. With nothing to pay Russia, apart from the little mentioned oil transit fees, Russia may stop shipping gas/coal/electricity for local consumption as well. At that point either Ukraine crashes or someone else has to pick up the bill.

    Although Kiev will lose dramatically there are very good reasons why Kiev would push the button. Will they ever again have this PR opportunity to play the innocent victim? Reply

  8. Avatar BillWade says: April 9, 2021 at 7:51 am

    Earlier this morning I saw a pic of Zelenskiy visiting the front, behind him was a makeshift field tent with a sign on it, the sign is in Ukrainian but translates as "Vietnam". Is Biden serious about backing Zelenskiy, I guess we'll find out soon enough. Reply

  9. Avatar jonst says: April 9, 2021 at 8:34 am

    wondering if anyone can point me to a fairly, anyway, reliable, (assuming one exists) 'war games scenario' document on an attempted invasion of Taiwan by China. Intuitively, it would seem a difficult challenge, especially given China's lack of any appreciable experience in seaborne invasion. Thanks in advance for any help anyone can provide, and my apologies upfront LJ if you deem this offtopic. Reply

    • Avatar Yeah, Right says: April 9, 2021 at 7:58 pm

      Not meaning to be a smart-alec about it, but why assume that an invasion has to be "seaborne"?

      In WW2 the Royal Navy had total control of the waters around Crete. So the Germans simply went over the top of them and invaded the island from the air.

      It was very definitely touch and go for a while until German paratroopers managed to capture an airfield, and from that point it was all over.

      No idea how well defended Taiwanese airfields are, but the PLA would only need to capture one and, again, the final result will not be in doubt. Reply

      • Avatar jon stanley says: April 10, 2021 at 9:49 am

        well, the quick answer to your question would be 'fine, alter my initial question to include war games scenarios on airborne attacks on Taiwan. The glib answer might be, Taiwan is not Crete. And the Chinese PLA are not the Wehrmacht. Who, by the time of the Crete attack had built up a record that included many successful airborne attacks. I see no such history with the PLA. That, by no means rules it out. But, in any event, I can't imagine the PLA would role the dice, SOLELY, on an airborne attack. They would have to have a seaborne plan of attack, in case Plan A failed. So, in any event, I would be still be in search of that war games scenario. Reply

  10. Avatar Seamus Padraig says: April 9, 2021 at 8:38 am

    Absent any new evidence, I am going to continue to assume that this is really about Nordstream II. The Biden Junta are probably planning on having their Ukrainian cat's paw make a lunge at DNR/LNR, forcing the Russians to intervene directly. Ukraine, of course, is not actually a full NATO member, so no Article 5 will be triggered. Instead, Washington just self-righteously hollers 'Russian aggression!' and demands that Merkel immediately shut down Nordstream II -- the Russian pipeline into Germany -- just before it's ready to go online.

    And then, as a lush reward for their undying loyalty, the Germans get to import frack-gas and oil all the way from the US at four or five times the market rate. Problem solved! Reply

    • Avatar Terence Reeves-Smyth says: April 9, 2021 at 12:52 pm

      you are correct – the Ukraine state does not really want the return of the Donbass region let alone Crimea as it would result in a complete change in the balance of power in the Ukraine with the Russian-speaking population being able to form the government, as it had done pre 2014. They really want to push the Germans into stopping Nord Stream 2 by provoking Russia Reply

  11. Avatar Some Dude says: April 9, 2021 at 9:11 am

    Struggling to understand how a Ukraine with such supposedly strong ties to National Socialists of a century ago managed to end up with a Jewish comedian as President. Reply

  12. Avatar J says: April 9, 2021 at 10:20 am

    Larry, Colonel,

    Here's a backgrounder from the Ukraine military veterans of the Ukraine's 93rd Brigade's point of view. This was the period of 2014-2015.

    93: the Battle for Ukraine – first days of the war
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cMBPN3rjXU

    93: the Battle for Ukraine – around Donetsk Airport
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AtszHyy8rY Reply

  13. Avatar J says: April 9, 2021 at 11:28 am

    Here's the viewpoint of Ukraine Army's snipers who are primarily composed of volunteer housewives. While to D.C. and Moscow, it's part of their sphere of political chess, however to those on the front lines, it is survival and protection of their loved ones.

    The Female Fighters of Ukraine's Forgotten War
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGVc4HPhanc Reply

  14. Avatar Ed Lindgren says: April 9, 2021 at 11:57 am

    Almost half a century ago, I took a course in the German language as a refresher during the summer session at my local junior college. The woman who taught the course was a native Ukrainian. She told the class a little about her background.

    When the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union, she was in her mid- to late-teens. She had an intense dislike (hatred) of the Russians and took a job working for the German military government of occupation as an interpreter. She said they had welcomed the Germans as liberators from the oppression of the Soviet Communists.

    Later, when the Red Army juggernaut was rolling west through Ukraine, she realized that it would not be good for her long-term prospects to remain at home. She chose to move west with the retreating German army. Subsequent to the end of the war in Europe, she rattled around for awhile in displaced person camps, and ultimately made her way to the United States.

    I have no reason to doubt the veracity of her story. This was my first introduction to the enmity between the Russians and the Ukrainians. Reply

  15. Avatar Deap says: April 9, 2021 at 7:32 pm

    Biden is a tin-hat emperor moving tin soldiers in his bathtub at play time. Surrounded by self-selected idiots who make him dangerous as hell. This is what his "return to decency" looks like? May he be struck down deaf and dumb. Reply

  16. Avatar Deap says: April 9, 2021 at 7:42 pm

    Two front war – Russia moving into Ukraine at the same time China moves on Taiwan. They put their wet fingers up to the wind to see which way the Biden operation blows.

    And they could not escape the conclusion this was the time to strike if there is any fortuitous time to strike. Biden and his new team muddle deeply into reckless ineptitude. And Kamala Harris doesn't have anything to wear. Reply

    • Avatar Yeah, Right says: April 10, 2021 at 3:22 am

      An odd thesis. The Russians are signally very, very strongly that they do not want the Ukraine to start a war by attacking the rebels in Donbass.

      They could not be more explicit if they sent a hypersonic cruise missile through Zelensky's office window with a sign on it that reads "Don't start something you won't even live to regret".

      They very clearly do not think that this is "the time to strike", nor even that they think there is a "fortuitous time" for them to go to war with Ukraine.

      If Ukraine strikes first then, sure, they'll strike back. But I fail to see how anyone can come to the conclusion that the Russians are provoking this when it is very clearly the Ukies and their promoters in the White House who are pushing these buttons.

      Similarly with Taiwan.

      The Chinese are not provoking this. They made their red lines clear to everyone as far back as Nixon's trip to China i.e. if the USA sticks to a one-China-policy then the mainland will refrain from using force against Taiwan.

      But the USA is not sticking to the one-China-policy. Recent US diplomatic moves look exactly like what it is: maneuverings to prepare for when the Taipei government declares independence.

      Which is crazy.

      But in both cases the USA may well provoke a conflict and then dump their patsies like a discarded toy.

      Which would be beyond crazy. It would be an outcome so loopy that there isn't even a word to describe it. Reply

      • Avatar Eol says: April 10, 2021 at 3:20 pm

        Thank you for setting it straight.. it seems pretty evident Russia does not want a war but is sure as hell ready to finish this business if a war is pushed on to them and pushed on to them by the Americans. Ukraine has been armed by the U.S , funded by the IMF, and cheered by NATO. They will not do a single thing without their owners permission. Reply

  17. Avatar BillWade says: April 10, 2021 at 11:06 am

    Hunter's dad and his administration is making Trump look like the greatest statesman that ever lived. Reply

  18. Avatar J says: April 10, 2021 at 12:20 pm

    Back in December 2020 Putin had an expanded meeting with his Defense Ministry Board. In it he laid out several items and agendas to be carried out by the Military Staff.
    http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/64684

    The recent reinforcements by the Russian MOD to counter NATO along the Ukraine border region, it appears that the MOD has deployed the incorporation of their (RChBD) capabilities into their Military Field Hospitals. And it appears that Putin has authorized deployment of their Iskander near the Ukraine border. The Iskander is multi-faceted, EMP, fuel air explosive, as well as thermonuclear. Back in 2015 Putin authorized nuclear employment should they be needed.
    https://coffeeordie.com/russian-field-camps/
    https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/russian-ground-troop-units-and-iskander-ballistic-missiles-identified-at-ukrainian-border-by-janes
    https://eng.mil.ru/en/structure/forces/ground/structure/rhbz.htm
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K720_Iskander

    March 24th saw Ukraine's Zelensky virtually declaring war against the Russian Federation. One can not rule out Zelensky using the trade deals with Doha and use the direct flights between Kiev and Doha to smuggle in Jihad's from Syria and Libya to fight in Donbas. Zelensky on March 3rd in a joint press conference with the European Council President in Kiev stated that the retaking of Crimea from Russia was now Ukraine Official Policy.
    https://asiatimes.com/2021/04/ukraine-redux-war-russophobia-and-pipelineistan/ Reply

  19. Avatar J says: April 11, 2021 at 10:42 am

    Colonel,

    Speaking of 'foreign policy', question is who will win out -- D.C. or Tel Aviv?

    'The model' is headed to D.C. to try and convince our IC's head-cheeses that the Iran JCPOA isn't such a good deal, and Tel Aviv is trying to get him an audience with his high-arsed the 'King', China Joe. If D.C. swallows 'the model's' spiel, then they're bigger suckers than they already appear to be.

    Mossad chief said heading to Washington in bid to block US return to Iran deal
    https://www.timesofisrael.com/mossad-chief-said-heading-to-washington-in-bid-to-block-us-return-to-iran-deal/ Reply

    • Avatar Deap says: April 11, 2021 at 12:30 pm

      Assume this Mossad meeting will take place between Kackling Kamala who will be channeling Obama-Jarrett; or will it be Stinking Liar Susan Rose channeling Obama-Jarrett? But the Big Guy will be out to lunch. Reply

  20. Avatar English Outsider says: April 12, 2021 at 10:08 am

    Mr Johnson – this was posted today by a commenter on Dr North's blog.

    https://nos.nl/nieuwsuur/artikel/2376246-audio-tapes-of-thousands-of-overheard-conversations-a-reconstruction-of-the-mh17-disaster.html Reply

[Apr 09, 2021] If invading the neighbors, or any other country for that matter, is the reason for mistrust, when the US should enjoy no of it whatsoever, because there is not a single country on this planet that's invaded and destroyed more countries than the US has

Apr 09, 2021 | www.unz.com

Joe Paluka , says: April 8, 2021 at 8:19 pm GMT • 1.1 days ago

@AH14

" US military is still fairly competent "

I don't know what weed you're smoking but it has really scrambled your brains. The ability to show up on the parade grounds and go around the world showing fancy overpriced toys does not equate to fighting ability. The US hasn't faced a real army in a conventional war since Vietnam. The US is great at fighting banana republics, but if facing a real military like Russia (who believe me have all the drones that the US has and the ability to neutralize those of the enemy) would run for their safe spaces and hide.

[Apr 02, 2021] America Is Back- Collides With A Multipolar Reality

Apr 02, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Patroklos , Apr 1 2021 20:35 utc | 26

The World Health Organization recently published its report on the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus which has caused the Covid-19 pandemic. Most scientist agree that the virus is of zoonotic origin and not a human construct or an accidental laboratory escape. But the U.S. wants to put pressure on China and advised the Director General of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom, to keep the focus on China potential culpability. He acted accordingly when he remarked on his agency's report:

Although the team has concluded that a laboratory leak is the least likely hypothesis, this requires further investigation, potentially with additional missions involving specialist experts, which I am ready to deploy.

The U.S. State Department fetched the pass and ran with it. It asked its allies to sign on to its Joint Statement on the WHO-Convened COVID-19 Origins Study which requests more unhindered access in China:

The Governments of Australia, Canada, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Israel, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, the Republic of Korea, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America remain steadfast in our commitment to working with the World Health Organization (WHO), international experts who have a vital mission, and the global community to understand the origins of this pandemic in order to improve our collective global health security and response. Together, we support a transparent and independent analysis and evaluation, free from interference and undue influence, of the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this regard, we join in expressing shared concerns regarding the recent WHO-convened study in China, while at the same time reinforcing the importance of working together toward the development and use of a swift, effective, transparent, science-based, and independent process for international evaluations of such outbreaks of unknown origin in the future.

The most interesting with the above statement is the list of U.S. allied countries which declined to support it,

Most core EU countries, especially France, Spain, Italy and Germany, are missing from it. As is the Five-Eyes member New Zealand. India, a U.S. ally in the anti-Chinese Quad initiative, also did not sign. This list of signatories of the Joint Statement is an astonishingly meager result for a U.S. 'joint' initiative. It is unprecedented. It is a sign that something has cracked and that the world will never be the same.

The first months of he Biden administration saw a rupture in the global system. First Russia admonished the EU for its hypocritical criticism of internal Russian issues. Biden followed up by calling Putin a 'killer'. Then the Chinese foreign minister told the Biden administration to shut the fuck up about internal Chinese issues. Soon thereafter Russia's and China's foreign ministers met and agreed to deepen their alliance and to shun the U.S. dollar. Then China's foreign minister went on a wider Middle East tour. There he reminded U.S. allies of their sovereignty :

Wang said that expected goals had been achieved with regard to a five-point initiative on achieving security and stability in the Middle East, which was proposed during the visit.

"China supports countries in the region to stay impervious to external pressure and interference, to independently explore development paths suited to its regional realities ," Wang said, adding that the countries should " break free from the shadows of big-power geopolitical rivalry and resolve regional conflicts and differences as masters of the region ."

Wang's tour was topped off with the signing of a game changing agreement with Iran:

Suffice to say, the China-Iran pact deeply is embedded within a new matrix Beijing hopes to create with the Arab states of the Persian Gulf and Iran. The pact forms part of a new narrative on regional security and stability.

The "U.S. led rules based international order" is finally finished . Russia and China buried it :

Countries in Asia and further afield are closely watching the development of this alternative international order, led by Moscow and Beijing. And they can also recognise the signs of increasing US economic and political decline.

It is a new kind of Cold War, but not one based on ideology like the first incarnation. It is a war for international legitimacy, a struggle for hearts and minds and money in the very large part of the world not aligned to the US or NATO.

The US and its allies will continue to operate under their narrative, while Russia and China will push their competing narrative. This was made crystal clear over these past few dramatic days of major power diplomacy.

The global balance of power is shifting, and for many nations, the smart money might be on Russia and China now.

The obvious U.S. countermove to the Russian-Chinese initiative is to unite its allies in a new Cold War against Russia and China. But as the Joint Statement above shows most of those allies do not want to follow that path. China is a too good customer to be shunned. Talk of human rights in other countries might play well with the local electorate but what counts in the end is the business.

Even some U.S. companies can see that the hostile path the Biden administration has followed will only be to their detriment. Some are asking the Biden gang to tone it down :

[Boeing] Chief Executive Dave Calhoun told an online business forum he believed a major aircraft subsidy dispute with Europe could be resolved after 16 years of wrangling at the World Trade Organization, but contrasted this with the outlook on China.

"I think politically (China) is more difficult for this administration and it was for the last administration. But we still have to trade with our largest partner in the world: China," he told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Aviation Summit.

Noting multiple disputes, he added: " I am hoping we can sort of separate intellectual property, human rights and other things from trade and continue to encourage a free trade environment between these two economic juggernauts. ... We cannot afford to be locked out of that market. Our competitor will jump right in."

Before its 737 MAX debacle Boeing was the biggest U.S. exporter and China was its biggest customer. The MAX has yet to be re-certified in China. If Washington keeps the hostile tone against China Boeing will lose out and Europe's Airbus will make a killing.

Biden announced that "America is back" only to be told that it is no longer needed in the oversized role that it played before. Should Washington not be able to accept that it can no play 'unilateral' but will have to follow the real rules of international law we might be in for some interesting times :

Question: Finally, are you concerned that deteriorating international tensions could lead to war?

Glenn Diesen: Yes, we should all be concerned. Tensions keep escalating and there are increasing conflicts that could spark a major war. A war could break out over Syria, Ukraine, the Black Sea, the Arctic, the South China Sea and other regions.

What makes all of these conflicts dangerous is that they are informed by a winner-takes-all logic. Wishful thinking or active push towards a collapse of Russia, China, the EU or the U.S. is also an indication of the winner-takes-all mentality. Under these conditions, the large powers are more prepared to accept greater risks at a time when the international system is transforming . The rhetoric of upholding liberal democratic values also has clear zero-sum undertones as it implies that Russia and China must accept the moral authority of the West and commit to unilateral concessions.

The rapidly shifting international distribution of power creates problems that can only be resolved with real diplomacy. The great powers must recognize competing national interests, followed by efforts to reach compromises and find common solutions.

Russia's president Vladimir Putin has repeatedly asked for a summit of leaders of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council:

Putin argued that the countries that created a new global order after World War II should cooperate to solve today's problems.

"The founder countries of the United Nations, the five states that hold special responsibility to save civilisation, can and must be an example," he said at the sombre memorial ceremony.

The meeting would "play a great role in searching for collective answers to modern challenges and threats," Putin said, adding that Russia was "ready for such a serious conversation."

Such a summit would be a chance to work on a new global system that avoids unilateralism and block mentality. As the U.S. is now learning that its allies are not willing to follow its anti-China and anti-Russia policies it might be willing to negotiate over a new international system.

But as long as Washington is unable to recognize its own decline a violent attempt to solve the issue once and for all will become more likely.

Posted by b on April 1, 2021 at 17:52 UTC | Permalink

Very thought provoking b, I wish time off brought me back firing on all cylinders like this!

No doubt vk will chime in here better than I but it surely cannot be a matter of "if America decides". There are historical forces at work in this financialized phase of late capitalism that are not grasped by the US leadership, let alone factored into intelligent policy debates. Biden is an arch-lobbyist for the vested interests which compel the US's unilateral and interventionist foreign policy. I'm quite sure he is incapable of 'deciding' anything (not just mentally but institutionally). But the underlying dynamic of world-historical change is beyond him and his whole country. The die was cast long ago when the Soviet Union fell and the US couldn't help themselves. Junkies for unilateralism since 1989, they will keep shooting up until they OD (Boeing notwithstanding...). I suspect they will end up like the schizoid UK, psychologically unable to accept increasing and humiliating losses of empire until it hits the bottom of the dustbin of History.

[Apr 02, 2021] To be fair, the neocon's feel that way about everyone - they embrace the role of paranoid imperialist because that's a relatively accessible way to get funded in the DC policy world

Apr 02, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

ptb , Apr 2 2021 17:35 utc | 63

@59 etc

To be fair, the neocon's feel that way about everyone - they embrace the role of paranoid imperialist because that's a relatively accessible way to get funded in the DC policy world. The striking thing is the hubris - they're just going to fight everyone all at the same time and it will somehow be okay in the end, no cost to them.

librul , Apr 2 2021 17:44 utc | 65

@Posted by: ptb | Apr 2 2021 17:35 utc | 63

"To be fair, the neocon's feel that way about everyone"

Did you consider the article linked to @59?

Michael Hudson quote from the article, for your consideration.
(take it or leave it)


The Americans want war. The people that Biden has appointed have an emotional hatred of Russia. I've spoken to government people who are close to the Democratic Party, and they've told me that there's a pathological emotional desire for war with Russia, largely stemming from the fact that the Tzars were anti-Semitic and there's still the hatred about their ancestors: "Look what they did to my great-grandfather." And so they're willing to back the Nazis, back the anti-Semites in Ukraine. They're willing to back today's anti-Semites all over the world as long as they're getting back at this emotional focus on a kind of post 19th-century economy.
chu teh , Apr 2 2021 18:09 utc | 68

oldhippie | Apr 2 2021 13:40 utc | 20

"...And this is because Zbig [Brezinski] is a Polish aristocrat with lost family estate on outskirts of Lvov. Any fool knows emigre info is useless and emigre aristocrat most useless of all."

Brezinski's keyboard was hacked before age 3; its output foreordained by unknown sources he mis-owned as "self". A well-oiled robot producing brilliant compositions of high-quality, effective communication promoting madness and contagious ruin of non-aristos.

AriusArmenian , Apr 2 2021 18:16 utc | 71

Ghost Ship: That same Nazi scum that the OSS/CIA brought into the US after WW2 was also involved in the assassinations of JFK, MLK, RFK, and probably Malcolm X.

In the last several years the CIA and other intel agencies have cemented their control of the US that is now a fascist rogue state that is marching the American people into a war with peer powers. As usual the American people will believe US elites telling them the war is started by a foreign power. Americans around me are blind as bats. And they think I'm dumb for not taking experimental mRNA vaccines.

Rob , Apr 2 2021 18:17 utc | 72

@ptb (63) "...they're just going to fight everyone all at the same time and it will somehow be okay in the end, no cost to them."

Correct, there will be no personal physical cost to them, as in getting maimed or killed in a war. But on the other side of the ledger, the profits that flow to the MIC are massive, and many, if not most of the neocons are in some way connected to it, either by consultancy, think-tank positions, corporate board positions, TV sinecures, etc. In other words, they are cashing in big-time on their political views and policy recommendations.

[Apr 02, 2021] The profits that flow to the MIC are massive, and many, if not most of the neocons are in some way connected to it, either by consultancy, think-tank positions, corporate board positions, TV sinecures, etc.

Apr 02, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Rob , Apr 2 2021 18:17 utc | 72

@ptb (63) "...they're just going to fight everyone all at the same time and it will somehow be okay in the end, no cost to them."

Correct, there will be no personal physical cost to them, as in getting maimed or killed in a war. But on the other side of the ledger, the profits that flow to the MIC are massive, and many, if not most of the neocons are in some way connected to it, either by consultancy, think-tank positions, corporate board positions, TV sinecures, etc. In other words, they are cashing in big-time on their political views and policy recommendations.

[Apr 02, 2021] The Pending Collapse Of The -Rules-Based International Order- Is An Existential Threat To The US - ZeroHedge

Apr 02, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Scott Ritter via GlobalResearch.ca,

For decades, America styled itself the 'indispensable nation' that led the world & it's now seeking to sustain that role by emphasizing a new Cold War-style battle against 'authoritarianism'. But it's a dangerous fantasy.

It seems a week cannot go by without US Secretary of State Antony Blinken bringing up the specter of the 'rules-based international order' as an excuse for meddling in the affairs of another state or region.

The most recent crisis revolves around allegations that China has dispatched a fleet of more than 200 ships, part of a so-called 'maritime militia', into waters of the South China Sea claimed by the Philippines. China says that these vessels are simply fishing boats seeking shelter from a storm. The Philippines has responded by dispatching military ships and aircraft to investigate. Enter Antony Blinken, stage right:

"The United States stands with our ally, the Philippines, in the face of the PRC's maritime militia amassing at Whitsun Reef," Blinken tweeted . "We will always stand by our allies and stand up for the rules-based international order."

Blinken's message came a mere 18 hours after he tweeted about his meeting in Brussels with NATO.

"Our alliances were created to defend shared values," he wrote . "Renewing our commitment requires reaffirming those values and the foundation of international relations we vow to protect: a free and open rules-based order."

Our rules, our order

What this actually means, of course, is that the order is rules-based so long as it is the nation called America that sets these rules and is accepted as the world's undisputed leader.

Blinken's fervent embrace of the 'rules-based international order' puts action behind the words set forth in the recently published 'Interim National Security Strategy Guidance', a White House document which outlines President Joe Biden' s vision "for how America will engage with the world."

While the specific term 'rules-based international order' does not appear in the body of the document, the precepts it represents are spelled out in considerable detail, and conform with the five pillars of the "liberal international order" as set forth by the noted international relations scholars, Daniel Duedney and G. John Ikenberry , in their ground-breaking essay , 'The nature and sources of liberal international order', published by the Review of International Studies in 1999.

The origins of this "liberal international order" can be traced back to the end of the Second World War and the onset of a Cold War between Western liberal democracies, helmed by the United States, and the communist bloc nations, led by the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China. The purpose of this order was simple – to maintain a balance of power between the US-led liberal democracies and their communist adversaries, and to maintain and sustain US hegemony over its liberal democratic allies. This was accomplished through five basic policy 'pillars': Security co-binding; the embrace of US hegemony; self-limitation on the part of US allies; the politicization of global economic institutions for the gain of liberal democracies; and Western "civil identity."

All five are emphasized in Biden's interim guidance, in which the president openly advocates for "a stable and open international system." It notes that "the alliances, institutions, agreements, and norms underwriting the international order the United States helped to establish are being tested."

The faltering empire's flaws and inequities

Biden also observed that the restoration of this international order "rests on a core strategic proposition: The United States must renew its enduring advantages so that we can meet today's challenges from a position of strength. We will build back better our economic foundations; reclaim our place in international institutions; lift up our values at home and speak out to defend them around the world; modernize our military capabilities, while leading first with diplomacy; and revitalize America's unmatched network of alliances and partnerships."

All five of Duedney's and Ikenberry's policy 'pillars' can be found embedded in these – and other – statements contained in the guidance.

There is a defensive tone to Biden's guidance, which notes that "rapid change and mounting crisis" have exposed "flaws and inequities" in the US-dominated international system which "have caused many around the world – including many Americans – to question its continued relevance."

Here Biden runs into the fundamental problem of trying to justify and sustain a model of economic-based global hegemony which was founded at a time when the existence of a Western liberal democratic "order" could be justified as a counter to the Soviet-led communist bloc. The Cold War ended in 1990. The 'international rules-based order' that was created at the behest of the US to prevail in this conflict continued, however. It seems that the US wasn't simply satisfied with preventing the spread of communism; its raison d'être instead transitioned from being the leader of an alliance of liberal democracies, to being the global hegemon, using the very system devised to confront communism to instead install and sustain the US as the undisputed dominant power in the world.

This trend began in the immediate aftermath of the end of the Cold War, where the US had the opportunity to pass the baton of global leadership to the United Nations, an act that would have given legitimacy to the notion of an 'international order'.

This, however, proved a bridge too far for the neo-liberal tendencies of the administration of President Bill Clinton, who continued the Cold War-era practice of using the UN as a vehicle to promote US policy prerogatives at the expense of the international 'order'. Clinton's Secretary of State Madeleine Albright helped coin the term "indispensable nation" when defining America's post-Cold War role in the world (it is notable that Blinken recently praised Albright in a tweet , noting that "her tenacity & effectiveness left the US stronger & more respected globally," and adding "she's a role model for me & so many of our diplomats." )

The arrogance and hubris contained in any notion of a single nation being "indispensable" to the global order is mind-boggling and is reflective of a disconnect with both reality and history on the part of those embracing it.

The myth of indispensability

The unsustainability of the premise of American 'indispensability' was demonstrated by both the events of September 11, 2001, and the inability of the US to deal with its aftermath. Had the US embraced and acted on President George H. W. Bush's notion of a "new world order" in the aftermath of the Cold War, it would have found itself as a vital world leader working in concert with a global community of nations to confront the scourge of Islamic fundamentalist-based terrorism. But this was not to be.

Instead, the 'indispensable nation' was exposed as a fraud, with many in the world recognizing the US not as a power worthy of emulation, but rather as the source of global angst. This rejection of America's self-anointed role as global savior extended to many Americans too, who were tired of the costs associated with serving as the world's police force.

Indeed, this exhaustion with global intervention, and the costs accrued, helped create the foundation of electoral support for Donald Trump's rejection of the "rules-based international order" in favor of a more distinct "America first" approach to global governance. What gave Trump's policy so much "punch" was the fact that not only did many American citizens reject the "rules-based international order," but so did much of the rest of the world.

Repairing the damage done by four years of Trump has become the number one priority of the Biden administration. To do this, both Biden and Blinken recognize that they simply cannot return to the policy formulations that existed before Trump took office; that ship has sailed, and trying to sell the American people and the rest of the world on what many viewed as a failed policy construct (i.e., unilateral, uncontested American hegemony) was seen as an impossible task.

Instead, the Biden administration is seeking to reinvent the original premise of the 'rules-based international order' by substituting Russian and Chinese 'authoritarianism' in place of Soviet-led communism as a threat which liberal democracies around the world willingly and enthusiastically rally around the US to confront.

"Authoritarianism is on the global march," Biden's guidance observed, "and we must join with like minded allies and partners to revitalize democracy the world over. We will work alongside fellow democracies across the globe to deter and defend against aggression from hostile adversaries. We will stand with our allies and partners to combat new threats aimed at our democracies" and which "undermine the rules and values at the heart of an open and stable international system."

Biden concluded his essay in dramatic fashion. "This moment is an inflection point," he noted. "We are in the midst of a fundamental debate about the future direction of our world. No nation is better positioned to navigate this future than America. Doing so requires us to embrace and reclaim our enduring advantages, and to approach the world from a position of confidence and strength. If we do this, working with our democratic partners, we will meet every challenge and outpace every challenger. Together, we can and will build back better."

No longer the world's undisputed No.1

While postulated as a statement of American strength, Biden's concluding remarks actually project not only the inherent insecurity of the US today, but also its root causes. The fact that the US needs to "reclaim our enduring advantages" implies that we lost them, and illustrates that these so-called advantages are not nearly as enduring as Biden would like to think. "Building back better" is an admission of weakness, a recognition that the notion of an 'indispensable nation' is an artificial construct; most nations no longer accept America as the world leader.

The reality is that the US is one of the most powerful nations in the world. That position, however, is no longer uncontested; China has emerged as the equal of the US in many metrics used to measure global power and influence, and superior in some. Moreover, China operates effectively in a multi-polar global reality, recognizing that the era of the American singularity is over. Russia, India, Brazil, and the European collective all represent polar realities whose existence and influence exists independent of the US.

The US, however, cannot function in such a world. While there is a growing recognition among American politicians that the post-Cold War notion of the US being the sole-remaining superpower has run its course, the only alternative these politicians can offer is the attempt to return to a bi-polar world which has the US at the head of its liberal democratic 'partners', facing off against the forces of 'authoritarianism'. This vision, however, is unrealistic, if for no other reason that the world no longer views Western liberal democracy as 'good', and authoritarianism as 'evil'.

This reality is evident to much of the rest of the world. Why, then, would US policy makers embrace a formulation doomed to fail? The answer is simple – the US, as it exists today, needs the 'rules-based international order' to remain relevant. Relevant, as used here, means globally dominant.

US politicians who operate on the national level cannot get elected on platforms that reject the 'indispensable' role of the country, even if many Americans and most of the world have. US economic dominance is in large part sustained by the very systems that underpin the 'rules-based international order' – the World Trade Organization and the World Bank. US geopolitical relevance is sustained by Cold War-era military alliances.

An unviable, unsustainable future

An American retreat from being the 'indispensable' power, and a corresponding embrace of a leadership role based upon a more collegial notion of shared authorities, would not mean the physical demise of the US – the nation would continue to exist as a sovereign entity. But it would mean an end to the psychological reality of America as we know it today – a quasi-imperial power whose relevance is founded on compelled global hegemony. This model is no longer viable. The fact that the Biden administration has chosen to define its administration through an ardent embrace of this failed system is proof positive that the survival of post-Cold War American is existentially connected to its ability to function as the world's 'indispensable nation'.

American exceptionalism is a narcotic that fuels the country's domestic politics more than global geo-political reality. The 'rules-based international order' that underpins this fantasy is unsustainable in the modern era and makes the collapse of the "exceptional" United States inevitable.

Watching the Biden administration throw its weight behind a US-dominated 'rules-based international order' is like watching the Titanic set sail; it is big, bold, and beautiful, and its fate pre-ordained.

lay_arrow

2banana 37 minutes ago remove link

We are just about to see how that is going to work out in the Ukraine.

It seems a week cannot go by without US Secretary of State Antony Blinken bringing up the specter of the 'rules-based international order' as an excuse for meddling in the affairs of another state or region.

TimeHasCome 29 minutes ago

I live near a huge military base and every night since the inauguration of Dementia Joe there has been cannon fire and mortar fire every night . This nut is going to get us in a war.

TimeHasCome 29 minutes ago

I live near a huge military base and every night since the inauguration of Dementia Joe there has been cannon fire and mortar fire every night . This nut is going to get us in a war.

kanoli 31 minutes ago

The rules-based international order requires US approval or national approval to put troops on the ground in another country. The US troops in Syria are there illegally, Mr. Blinken. Is the rules-based international order only for the other countries?

TBT or not TBT 14 minutes ago

"Syria" is a place on a map, but demonstrably is no longer a sovereign country able to manage its own territory. Dozens of factions and foreign powers operate in its former territory.

Apollo Capricornus Maximus 10 minutes ago

rules based international order = laser guided joint direct attack munitions

End Times Prophecy 25 minutes ago

The international criminals against humanity, WMD using, international mass murderer, repeated international declarations of war , international terrorists, permanently Oath of Office breaching and violating subversive, seditious, traitors and more are blathering about being a part of a rules-based international order?

Clearly these maniacs are an exceptionally extreme danger to themselves and the entire World and more.

Chain Man 3 minutes ago (Edited)

The US should have a law (lol) that no politicians can make any money other than his regular pay when coming into office plus his pay from their elected position (on going tabs on income while in Office.). Don't like it don't run !

The problem with being a leader is you have to get involved in the Nations problem most of the time, then the USA gets charged with being the problem. Leave um the hell alone if they screw with us blow um away. End the Foreign Aid and we will end their smart *** crap.

Just work with the foreign Nations we can screw these drawn out treaties

[Apr 02, 2021] Mearsheimer is an interesting cat. His whole conception of international relations seems to be that it is necessarily zero-sum, and that the general model is that of US regional hegemony, as in the Monroe Doctrine in the 19th century and the frankly neocolonial relationship that exists today

Apr 02, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

ptb , Apr 2 2021 21:40 utc | 104

@86 Re: John Mearsheimer

Mearsheimer is an interesting cat. His whole conception of international relations seems to be that it is necessarily zero-sum, and that the general model is that of US regional hegemony, as in the Monroe Doctrine in the 19th century and the frankly neocolonial relationship that exists today. (and he makes no attempt to dress it up as anything other than the brute power relations). His thesis is that there must be a conflict, and that the US will successfully get all of China's neighbors to join the US in opposing the rise of China. Importantly, if you go back to look at talks he gave and how they've evolved in the last 15 years, Mearsheimer included Russia in his "anti-China balancing coalition" list, up until 2013-2014. More recent talks have him leaning essentially on Japan, Australia, and India, with South Korea and ASEAN determined to avoid picking sides as Mearsheimer would have it, and most of central Asia, plus Iran and Pakistan, already on the Chinese side.

I also take issue with Mearsheimer's singular focus on the regional-hegemony model, although I think it does provide good insights into the thinking behind US policy. But in reality, there have been long stretches of history, European history in particular, where there was in fact a balance of power on the regional level, not to mention on the global level.

Besides that, with significant numbers of nuclear weapons, the historical analogies of the first half of the 20th century pretty much go out the window. No decisive war between superpowers is possible, except by accident, and in that case it will not be decisive in the way he means. It's all proxy conflict from the 1950s on. And when it comes to proxy conflict, the clear imperative for third parties, from the history of the last 70 years, is to avoid becoming a proxy battleground.

[Mar 31, 2021] The US-China meeting in Anchorage took place 75 years almost to the day of the Winston Iron Curtain speech in Fulton, Missouri

Blinken is no Churchill
Mar 31, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
Baron , Mar 31 2021 21:40 utc | 27

The US-China meeting in Anchorage took place 75 years almost to the day of the Winston Iron Curtain speech in Fulton, Missouri. Just as the latter signalled a break point in the uneasy, war forced cohabit of the West with the communist Soviet Union, so too the Anchorage will enter the history as the break point in the US hegemony threatening collaboration of the West and China.

Since WW2, no other nation, not even Russia, has confronted the US so firmly and so publicly as did Yang Jiechi, one of the ruling member of the Chinese Politburo when he said that "the United States does not have the qualification to speak to China from a position of strength'.

That was a slap in the face the Americans will have to respond to, and it's in the nature of the response one will find whether the American Governing elite is prepared to share power or go for a confrontation.

[Mar 31, 2021] Neocons and doublethink

Mar 31, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Norwegian , Mar 31 2021 22:08 utc | 30

@Michael Weddington | Mar 31 2021 21:40 utc | 28

They are true believers. Almost everyone in the US is.

I find this hard to believe. They believe they are exceptional and at the same time denounce "white supremacy"? That is some serious doublethink.

[Mar 30, 2021] Blinken calls warmonger Madelaine Albright his "role model"

Mar 30, 2021 | odysee.com



Channel profile picture @Dwaine.Castle852 2 hours ago

I hope that someone sends her a pair of the Nike Satan sneakers. Perhaps with the blood of a few children inside. Channel profile picture @Tsigantes 2 hours ago

'role model' ?
We are warned....for what "it's worth" !

[Mar 30, 2021] Delusions of neocon Blinken

The real question is not about his neocon delusions, which are pretty predictable, but about the ability for the USA project global dominance in the decade to come.
Blinken is a marionette. And pretty much second rate even in that.
Notable quotes:
"... Let's consider this headline for a moment: "Blinken Accuses China of Trying to Undermine US-Dominated World Order." Blinken provides us with a definition of that "world order" in his own words cited in the article: "'... preserve the rules-based international order, in which we have all invested so much over the past 75 years , and which has served our interests and values well'." [My Emphasis] ..."
Mar 30, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
karlof1 , Mar 30 2021 17:08 utc | 28

Let's consider this headline for a moment: "Blinken Accuses China of Trying to Undermine US-Dominated World Order." Blinken provides us with a definition of that "world order" in his own words cited in the article: "'... preserve the rules-based international order, in which we have all invested so much over the past 75 years , and which has served our interests and values well'." [My Emphasis]

Clearly, he's referring to the rules put in place by the UN Charter. But as we at this bar all know, it's the Outlaw US Empire for whom Blinken works that's the #1 criminal when it comes to violating the UN Charter which is why it's "served our interests and values well."

Now when we turn to reality, it become very clear that China seeks to uphold the UN Charter--it's one of the foundational members of the newly established Friends of the UN Charter Group that the Outlaw US Empire will certainly snub because of the reality of its actual relations to that Act and Organization .

Indeed, what is being said by the very formation of that Group is a big NO!! to the Outlaw US Empire's attempt to say it abides by the system it's continuously violated for the past 75+ years. Yet, it's also clear that NO!! isn't being shouted out by global media enough, particularly when Outlaw US Empire officials give such an excellent opportunity to be rebuffed and ridiculed for their lies.

We have many good writers here who could take Blinken's words and turn them into an indictment of himself and the nation he represents. That implies that writers for global publications are just as good but need to examine the framing of their articles. Peace won't come to our planet unless the Outlaw Bully Nation is daily accused for what it is and does.

NATO is a distinct minority yet it holds the world captive in a terroristic manner. It's well past time to stop groveling and kow-towing and to stand-up and call out the bullshitters for what they are since being nice isn't getting us anywhere.

[Mar 28, 2021] Bidens missteps so early on are a very worrying indicator that his foreign policy team is worse than just being malign. They are incompetent. Thats a very dangerous combination.

Mar 28, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

PlutoniumKun , March 27, 2021 at 8:25 am

To go back to a previous BTL discussion on Patrick Cockburns recent article in Counterpunch, Bidens missteps so early on are a very worrying indicator that his foreign policy team is worse than just being malign. They are incompetent. Thats a very dangerous combination.

I don't think the Russians, Chinese, or most other major countries (apart from Europe) had a fundamental problem with Trumps approach. They understood him, and were quite happy to ignore his bombast and threats and focus instead on what was happening in the real world. But things are different for someone like Biden, and I'm very surprised nobody in his team seem to realise this. When he talks on the record, its assumed that it is a reflection of a real policy. At first, I thought maybe he was just doing the usual new guy in power thing of talking tough to set the ground for later compromises (the opposite of Obama, who appeared very weak to other leaders, and then just looked indecisive when his policies turned more hardline). But that does not seem to be the case so far.

I've no idea what the final outcome will be, but I do think that this is one of those points in history where things take a very sharp and irreparable change in direction. Obviously, things have been brewing for years, but the ineptness of US foreign policy seems to have created a strategic Russian/China alliance which will force many countries to make some very hard choices about which side of the fence they are on.

On a related note, I woke up this morning to find that a speech by Lawrence P. Wilkerson, who is associated with the conservative paleoconservatives is getting very wide circulation in China (you know this has to be officially approved otherwise it disappears very rapidly on WeChat. He makes a claim that the CIA back in the early '00's intended to use the Uigurs as a sort of proxy army to destabilise China. For all sorts of reasons, I would doubt that, but it is now widely believed among Chinese people, even those who have no liking for the CCP. The notion that the Uigurs are a sort of third force within China, and as such need to be destroyed now seems to be very deeply embedded in Chinese thinking, and the interference by 'official' western NGO's are undoubtedly making things much worse for them.

pjay , March 27, 2021 at 9:41 am

"[Wilkerson] makes a claim that the CIA back in the early '00's intended to use the Uigurs as a sort of proxy army to destabilise China. For all sorts of reasons, I would doubt that, but it is now widely believed among Chinese people, even those who have no liking for the CCP."

Just curious as to what your reasons would be for doubting this. The CIA has been doing precisely this all over the world for over 70 years. There is a clear pipeline between the Uighurs in China and the CIA-supported "rebels" in Syria. The expatriate Uighur organizations that are integral to the Western propaganda apparatus is supported and amplified by the NED and other CIA fronts, as your last sentence implies. This is not to deny the historical Uighur desire for autonomy in Western China, nor to defend Chinese policies toward them. Rather, it is to acknowledge the CIA's use of ethnic tensions to sow chaos and division in non-conforming nations *everywhere*.

PlutoniumKun , March 27, 2021 at 10:32 am

Its unlikely because:

1. The US has had little to no success in its many attempts to establish an intelligence foothold in China. There is zero evidence, direct or indirect, that it has had any successful contact with Uigur groups directly, although contacts via others, such as the Pakistani or Turkish intelligence agencies are possible. If there was even the tiniest amount of evidence of such a link, the Chinese would be broadcasting it from the skies, and not just re-messaging out tired CT stuff. Chinese intelligence is far ahead of the US in that region, so they would certainly know if something like that was happening.

2. Uigur groups in general such as we know about them tend to be as virulently anti Western as anti Han Chinese. All evidence suggests that the brand of Islam that has been belatedly introduced into those regions is essentially second hand Wahhabism (traditionally, they were never all that religious).

3. Any such attempt could be easily countered by China – simply by dumping Uigur radicals into Afghanistan to bolster the Taliban, or anywhere else that would create trouble. The fact that they haven't done this strongly suggests that the Chinese themselves see no link.

4. US military intelligence is often a misnomer, but even the CIA can't be stupid enough to think that fostering another islamic state on the borders of Afghanistan is anything but a terrible idea.

Of course, no doubt some mid ranking CIA officer may have circulated some report saying more or less 'hey, maybe we can use those Uighurs or whatever they are called'. But thats an entirely different thing from suggesting that there have been active links and a strategy for using them to destabilise the borders of China. The reality is that the US has been entirely unsuccessful in any attempts (when they've been made) to undermine China via internal Chinese ethnic or religious groups.

Incidentally, the reliability of Wilkerson (who I actually quite like and who says some interesting things), on that topic can be measured by his statement that the invasion of Afghanistan was motivated by an attempt to stop the Belt and Road Initiative. It's quite impressive intelligence if that was the case as the invasion predated the Belt and Road Initiative by more than a decade.

David , March 27, 2021 at 10:57 am

Yes, I think the important point is your last one. It's not out of the question that on a rainy afternoon in Virginia some junior CIA analyst amused himself by sketching out such an idea, and one day the product may leak and be presented as "proof." But for the reasons you give, the political leaders who would have to approve the scheme would turn it down, even if it were physically possible. I doubt it would be, actually: from what little information is publicly available, the US seems to be having little or no luck penetrating that area.

pjay , March 27, 2021 at 11:48 am

Thanks for the systematic reply. I appreciate each of your points, and pretty much agree with the first one – including your comment about Turkish intelligence. But regarding the others, the fact that we are talking about anti-Western Wahabist radicals does not mean the CIA (or elements of the CIA or other military/intelligence operations) would hesitate to weaponize them if possible. We did this in Afghanistan, Bosina, Kosovo, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Chechnya etc. Indeed, we seemed to *welcome* the fostering of an Islamic State in Eastern Syria, because the various jihadists were a means to destroy the Syrian government. When the goal is to foster chaos and destruction in order to *undermine* an existing state, the calculus of unleashing the head-choppers is different than if we were actually interested in fostering stability in the region. I admit that such a strategy might sound insane to *us*, but Einstein's definition of insanity seems to rule our National Security Establishment.

David , March 27, 2021 at 1:28 pm

Not PK, but I would suggest these cases are not only different from each other, but also different from the Uigurs. Essentially, there was a war going on in all of these cases, and the US (and they were scarcely the only ones) decided to try to get a bit of influence by arming one or more of the factions. This is a tactic which is as old as arms themselves, and has a pretty spotty record of success, if that. Its advantage is that it is low-key and doesn't require a massive presence (the classic case is the Soviet Union and the Chinese flooding Africa with AK-47s and copies in the 1960s and 1970s). But the cases you mention are very disparate. In Bosnia there do seem to have been some (illegal) CIA deliveries to the Muslims in violation of the embargo, but these were very small scale and in any event the Muslims were one of the major parties to the conflict, as well as constituting the de facto government in Sarajevo, because the other ethnicities had withdrawn. Likewise, and in spite of preening memoirs and films, the US influence in Afghanistan was quite small : the mujahideen were already forming in the 1970s, and the only contribution the US really made was to supply anti-aircraft missiles, which complicated the Russians' existence quite a bit. But actually fomenting and arming an insurgency next to one of the three or four major powers on the planet, with highly skilled intelligence services? There is stupidity and there's downright insanity.

upstater , March 27, 2021 at 7:33 pm

I the 1950s, the CIA and MI6 trained and armed the "Forest Brothers" in the Baltics. Neutral Sweden and Finland were across hundreds of km of water. Land access was through Soviet territory or satellites. There was no significant international trade or commerce in the area at the time. Yet they had tens of thousands of well supplied (for that era) resistance fighters that took a decade for the USSR to stomp out.

To suggest that today's CIA is incapable of stirring things up in a well-connected Xinjiang when thousands of foreigners travel there, tons of business shipments and international flights and road transport is a mystifying statement. Particularly after CIA's decades of experience managing jihadis all across North Africa, Mideast and Central Asia, more than a few being Uigurs.

And suggesting that the only thing the US supplied the Afghan jihadis were Stinger missiles is far off the mark. It was a multi-billion dollar per year operation conducted by the US with collaboration of the ISI and Saudis. All those tens of thousands of jihadis didn't arrive by camels and make slingshots.

I agree "There is stupidity and there's downright insanity" in fomenting troubles in Xinjiang. The US has already passed that test. Many times.

Yves Smith , March 27, 2021 at 10:06 pm

*Sigh*

We are three generations past the 1950s. Not a relevant example.

The US is not even remotely as good as you'd have to believe to accept this theory. For starters, we don't begin to have enough people with native level language competence, much the less willing to live there long enough to be trusted. They'll take our arms, but our directives?

It is in the interest of the CIA to take credit for all sorts of things where their role was non-existent to marginal because funding.

PlutoniumKun , March 27, 2021 at 2:20 pm

David put it so much better than I could.

I can't claim any great knowledge or insight into the region, but the notion that the Uighurs were part of a grand CIA strategy, or that they have had sufficient influence in the region to manipulate them into opposing China, just doesn't pass the smell test. Unfortunately, like the notion that Covid is spread on frozen food, so far as I can tell it is now considered 'a fact' by most Chinese, inside and outside the country. As a result, even Chinese who strongly dislike their government are not at all bothered by reports coming out of the region.

For what its worth, I knew an English guy who lived for a few years in Urumqi with his Chinese wife about 15 years ago. He was virulently anti-muslim and didn't much like the non-Chinese locals he met, but I remember at the time that said that what he saw around him convinced him that things were going to end very badly for the Uighurs, the Chinese were just waiting for the opportunity to wipe them out. I was in Tibet at that period (I was fortunate to get a visa on the last year solo traveller were allowed in) and witnessed the way Tibetans were openly abused on the street by Chinese soldiers. Even Tibetans said that the Uighurs got it worse.

drumlin woodchuckles , March 27, 2021 at 5:53 pm

The US government and privately motivated US citizens have no credibility on this issue. That means if anyone is going to raise it, it will have to be someone other than America or Americans.

That doesn't change the fact of Great Han Lebensraum genocide-policy against the Uighurs on the part of the Chinese Communazi Party. And Chinese statements about their Lebensraum genocide against Uighuria are just as much hasbara as Israeli statements about antiPalestinianitic persecution in the Occupied West Bank.

And if that purely-private opinion of a mere U S citizen makes any Great Han hasbarists ( or might I say . . . Hansbarists) on this thread mad, then that makes me happy.

Fern , March 27, 2021 at 6:14 pm

Your friend was English; I have not seen this attitude on the part of Chinese friends or Chinese I've talked with. I was traveling on a domestic flight in China a number of years ago and found myself sitting on a plane next to a random Chinese soldier -- a memorably tall, handsome young man. He spoke English well enough to have a discussion (the relaxed atmosphere and the need to pass the time does wonders when it comes to breaking down language barriers). Major Uighur terror attacks and unrest had been in the news (around 2009), so I asked him what he thought about it. He said that he grew up in Xinjiang. His parents were Han Chinese who had first come to Xinjiang during the cultural revolution to build some local infrastructure/improvement project (he described it to me but I don't remember the details). They saw their goal as improving conditions in the region. Of course, the government wanted to solidify Chinese presence in that region of their country, but I heard no hint of anger or derision toward the Uighur. He said he was very concerned that the Uighur people were happy and he hoped China could find a way to mend the relationship. He said that growing up, there were many mixed Chinese/Han marriages and that "people say" that mixed Han/Uighur marriages produced the most physically beautiful children. I didn't see any evidence of the malignant racism you describe on the part of your English friend.

Strong central governments vs violent separatist movements tend to create lasting problems. Growing up in a border state over 100 years after our own civil war, I grew up with the fact that many people had still not let go of that resentment. Southerners still maintained a sense of grievance back then. The Maryland state song that I learned as a child is only now being decommissioned by the state legislature. One stanza refers to the "Northern scum".

This week's WaPo headline: "Maryland poised to say goodbye to state song that celebrates the Confederacy".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/maryland-state-song-repealed/2021/03/22/7a88fda4-89e8-11eb-bfdf-4d36dab83a6d_story.html

drumlin woodchuckles , March 27, 2021 at 10:40 pm

If your Han Chinese interlocutor's feelings are widely shared among the ruled-over rather than ruling-over ordinary majority of Han citizens, then it would appear that it is the MonoParty RegimeGovernment ruling over China which is Communazi, not the people as such.

Regardless, it will be up to countrygovs which have moral standing in this area to comment or not, not the US anymore. At least for now.

Probably the Uighurs have it even worse than Tibetans because Uighuria is very inhabitable by Han settlers whereas Tibet is high and dry enough that ( I have read), that lowland-adapted Hans have trouble physically coping over time with the lower oxygen levels at Tibet altitude.
If that is so, then the High Tibetan Plateau at least would not provide Lebensraum for millions of Han Settlers in any case, so why clear the Tibetans off the plateau and out of existence? Not so much need, in Tibet's case.

Keith Newman , March 27, 2021 at 2:43 pm

@PlutoniumKun
I have no knowledge about points 1 to 3, but totally disagree with point 4.
The hubris and desire of the US alphabet agencies to meddle is remarkable. A current example is the CIA support of jihadis in Syria that the US military itself is fighting against.
Interesting caution re Wilkerson – do you have a link?

The Rev Kev , March 27, 2021 at 10:03 am

Here is a link to an article talking about that talk PK. Having a coupla thousand Uygurs in Syria gaining combat experience for use later who knows where was probably proof enough for China of western intentions. Just think of the other Jihadists who have been used in places like Libya and the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war and the Chinese would be drawing their own conclusions-

https://archive.ph/lMHQy#selection-2325.214-2325.220

[Mar 28, 2021] Russia and China Are Sending Biden a Message- Don't Judge Us or Try to Change us. Those Days Are Over

Mar 28, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

It was the preamble to Putin's most important message in years to what he called the American "establishment, the ruling class". He said the US leadership is determined to have relations with Russia, but only "on its own terms".

Although they think that we are the same as they are, we are different people. We have a different genetic, cultural and moral code. But we know how to defend our own interests.

And we will work with them, but in those areas in which we ourselves are interested, and on those conditions that we consider beneficial for ourselves. And they will have to reckon with it. They will have to reckon with this, despite all attempts to stop our development. Despite the sanctions, insults, they will have to reckon with this.

This is new for Putin. He has for years made the point, always politely, that Western powers need to deal with Russia on a basis of correct diplomatic protocols and mutual respect for national sovereignty, if they want to ease tensions.

But never before has he been as blunt as this, saying in effect: do not dare try to judge us or punish us for not meeting what you say are universal standards, because we are different from you. Those days are now over.

tegnost , March 27, 2021 at 11:16 am

Re Germany
I doubt the US has ever been ok with Nordstream II ..

drumlin woodchuckles , March 27, 2021 at 3:16 pm

One domino falls on another which falls on another, etc. But one has to push the first domino over.

I hope the Germans build Nordstream II and then III and IV and as many as they like. It will prevent the US gas industry from selling any LNG to Europe. That will keep the price of NatGas in America nice and low. That will keep luring electro-grid power-makers away from coal. Hopefully it would finalistically and irreversibly exterminate the power-grid thermal-coal industry in America.

JTMcPhee , March 27, 2021 at 12:18 pm

The meme is that "Biden called Putin a killer." Looking at the video, Biden just answered "yes" to that snake Stephanopolous's opening, "So you know Vladimir Putin, do you think he's a killer?" Same thing with "Will you make Putin pay a price?"

Maybe I've just missed it, but I haven't seen any place where the Gerontocrat in Chief has emitted those gaffes heard 'round the world from his own volition, rather than in the kind of setup that ABC News put up there to spin the pedals of the Narrative Bicycle that Putin authorized meddling in the US electoral games

But there it is.

drumlin woodchuckles , March 27, 2021 at 3:18 pm

Apparently Biden was either too senile or too inherently stupid to realize what gangrenous filth the subhuman Clintonite scum Stephanopoulis is, was and always will be. And put his stupid senile foot into Stephanopoulis's clever little bear trap.

SOMK , March 27, 2021 at 2:14 pm

Europe and Germany appear to be disappointingly wishy washy over Russia, they seemed happy to play poodle and follow the lead of the UK in expelling Russian diplomats after Theresa May falsely claimed that the presence of Novichok indicated a "state actor", a standard the US with its various drone assassinations (such as of Qasem Soleimani) is never held to. I suspect German attitudes to US foreign policy are driven mostly by concerns over exports, knowing full well the US propensity to link trade with supporting their foreign policy, the US remains the sole biggest destination for German exports (from what I can tell via google at a little over 8% total exports, in and around $110 billion per annum) and in the absence of the Euro being the global reserve currency I would imagine for the time being they (and by extension Europe as a whole) will remain somewhat reluctant foreign policy poodles to the US, so long at least as the new cold war remains cold.

Equitable > Equal , March 27, 2021 at 6:38 pm

It's a bit difficult for Germany to 'Step up' when the majority of their clout is derived from their close association with the US. While they have strong backing from some of Europe, they do not have the strong backing of a number of key members since the introduction of uneven austerity measures in 2009 which means without the US, they would not be able to portray themselves as leaders

[Mar 28, 2021] GWB was not as bad as some people thought -- because through his (admittedly awful) recklessness in Iraq and elsewhere he was inexorably driving the American Empire into failure and eventual dissolution.

Mar 28, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Pavel , March 27, 2021 at 10:36 am

Alex Cockburn (RIP) once commented that he didn't think GWB was as bad as some people thought -- because through his (admittedly awful) recklessness in Iraq and elsewhere he was inexorably driving the American Empire into failure and eventual dissolution. (My paraphrase, mind you.)

Dog, I detested GWB and remember the huge anti-war march in London that day. And had tears in my eyes at 2AM in a Tokyo hotel watching Obama being inaugurated. But St Barack if anything extended W's wars -- along with fellow warmongers Hillary and Biden, of course. Trump conversely tried to remove troops from Afghanistan only to have the Permanent War Party (Dems & Repubs) deny him the chance.

Well, as the post points out, Biden's foreign policy advisors are definitely the B Team but seem to have the hubris of the A Team. A bad combination.

As for the new Russia-China axis, I recommend Pepe Escobar's writings; he has been following this for some time.

Anyway, please excuse the rambling -- I meant to praise LowellHighlander for his final sentence. (^_^)

Keith Newman , March 27, 2021 at 2:33 pm

@Pavel
Sorry, but what does "dog" mean?

marku52 , March 27, 2021 at 2:51 pm

"God" for the non religious

LowellHighlander , March 28, 2021 at 12:17 am

Thank you, Pavel.

[Mar 28, 2021] How the U.S. is able to dictate to the rest of the world

Mar 28, 2021 | systemicdisorder.wordpress.com

Mar 3

The United States government is able to impose its will on all the world's countries. The rest of the world, even some of the strongest imperialist countries of the Global North, lie prostrate at the feet of the U.S. What is the source of this seemingly impregnable power? Which of course leads to the next question: How long can it last?

The U.S. moves against any country that dares to act on a belief that its resources should be for its own people's benefits rather than maximizing profits of multinational corporations or prioritizes the welfare of its citizens over corporate profit or simply refuses to accept dictation in how it should organize its economy. The military is frequently put to use, as are manipulation of the United Nations and the strong arms of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF). But sanctions are a frequently used tool, enforced on countries, banks and corporations that have no presence in the U.S. and conduct business entirely outside the United States. The U.S. can impose its will on national governments around the world, using multilateral institutions to force governments to act in the interest of multinational capital, even when that is opposite the interests of the country itself or that country's peoples. And when a country persists in refusing to bend to U.S. demands, sanctions imposing misery on the general population are unilaterally imposed and the rest of the world is forced to observe them.

In short, the U.S. government possesses a power that no country has ever held, not even Britain at the height of its empire. And that government, regardless of which party or what personality is in the White House or in control of Congress, is ruthless in using this power to impose its will.

This power is most often wielded within an enveloping shell of propaganda that claims the U.S. is acting in the interest of "democracy" and maintaining the "rule of law" so that business can be conducted in the interest of a common good. So successful has this propaganda been that this domination is called the "Washington Consensus." Just who agreed to this "consensus" other than Washington political elites and the corporate executives and financial speculators those elites represent has never been clear. "Washington diktat" would be a more accurate name.

Much speculation among Left circles exists as to when this domination will be brought to an end, with many commentators believing that the fall of the U.S. dollar is not far off and perhaps China will become the new center of a system less imperialistic. On the Right, particularly in the financial industry, such speculation is far from unknown, although there of course the downfall of the dollar is feared. In financial circles, however, there is no illusion that the end of dollar supremacy in world economics is imminent.

There are only two possible challengers to U.S. dollar hegemony: The European Union's euro and China's renminbi. But the EU and China are very much subordinated to the dollar, and thus not in a position to counter U.S. dictates. Let's start here, and then we'll move on to the mechanics of U.S. economic hegemony over the world, which rests on the dollar being the global reserve currency and the leveraging of that status to control the world's multilateral institutions and forcing global compliance with its sanctions.

Europe "helpless" in the face of U.S. sanctions

A February 2019 paper published by the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, discussing the inability of EU countries to counteract the Trump administration's pullout from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the multilateral nuclear deal with Iran, flatly declared the EU "helpless" : "In trying to shield EU-based individuals and entities with commercial interests from its adverse impact, European policy-makers have recently been exposed as more or less helpless."

The legislative arm of the EU, the European Parliament, was no more bullish. In a paper published in November 2020, the Parliament wrote this about U.S. extraterritorial sanctions : "[T]his bold attempt to prescribe the conduct of EU companies and nationals without even asking for consent challenges the EU and its Member States as well as the functioning and development of transatlantic relations. The extraterritorial reach of sanctions does not only affect EU businesses but also puts into question the political independence and ultimately the sovereignty of the EU and its Member States."

No such open worries are going to be said in public by the Chinese government. But is China better prepared than the EU? Mary Hui, a Hong Kong-based business journalist, wrote in Quartz , "China is actually far more vulnerable to US sanctions than it will let on, even if the sanctions are aimed at individuals and not banks. That's because the primary system powering the world's cross-border financial transactions between banks, Swift, is dominated by the US dollar." We'll delve into this shortly. As a result of that domination, Ms. Hui wrote, "the US has outsize control over the machinery of international transactions -- or, as the Economist put it, 'America is uniquely well positioned to use financial warfare in the service of foreign policy.' "

Grand Place, Brussels (photo by Wouter Hagens)

In 2017, then U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin threatened China with sanctions that would cut it off from the U.S. financial system if it didn't comply with fresh United Nations Security Council sanctions imposed on North Korea in 2007; he had already threatened unilateral sanctions on any country that trades with North Korea if the United Nations didn't apply sanctions on Pyongyang.

https://c0.pubmine.com/sf/0.0.3/html/safeframe.html

So neither Brussels or Beijing are in a position, at this time, to meaningfully challenge U.S. hegemony. That hegemony rests on multiple legs.

The world financial platform that the U.S. ultimately controls

The use (or, actually, abuse) of the two biggest multilateral financial institutions, the World Bank and the IMF, are well known. The U.S., as the biggest vote holder and through the rules set up for decision-making, carries a veto and thus imposes its will on any country that falls into debt and must turn to the World Bank or IMF for a loan. There also are the U.S.-controlled regional banks, such as the Asian Development Bank and Inter-American Development Bank, that impose U.S. dictates through the terms of their loans.

Also important as an institution, however, is a multilateral financial institution most haven't heard of: The Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, known as SWIFT. Based in Brussels, SWIFT is the primary platform used by the world's financial institutions "to securely exchange information about financial transactions, including payment instructions, among themselves." SWIFT says it is officially a member-owned cooperative with more than 11,000 member financial institutions in more than 200 countries and territories.

That sounds like it is a truly global entity. Despite that description, the U.S. holds ultimate authority over it and what it does. U.S. government agencies, including the CIA, National Security Agency and Treasury Department, have access to the SWIFT transaction database. Payments in U.S. dollars can be seized by the U.S. government even when the transaction is between two entities outside the U.S. And here we have a key to understanding.

Beyond the ability of U.S. intelligence agencies to acquire information is the status of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency, the foundation of the world capitalist system of which SWIFT is very much a component and thus subject to dictates the same as any other financial institution. What is a reserve currency? This succinct definition offered by the Council on Foreign Relations provides the picture:

"A reserve currency is a foreign currency that a central bank or treasury holds as part of its country's formal foreign exchange reserves. Countries hold reserves for a number of reasons, including to weather economic shocks, pay for imports, service debts, and moderate the value of its own currency. Many countries cannot borrow money or pay for foreign goods in their own currencies -- since much of international trade is done in dollars -- and therefore need to hold reserves to ensure a steady supply of imports during a crisis and assure creditors that debt payments denominated in foreign currency can be made."

https://c0.pubmine.com/sf/0.0.3/html/safeframe.html

The currency mostly used is the U.S. dollar, the Council explains:

"Most countries want to hold their reserves in a currency with large and open financial markets, since they want to be sure that they can access their reserves in a moment of need. Central banks often hold currency in the form of government bonds, such as U.S. Treasuries. The U.S. Treasury market remains by far the world's largest and most liquid -- the easiest to buy into and sell out of bond market[s]."

If you use dollars, the U.S. can go after you

Everybody uses the dollar because everybody else uses it. Almost two-thirds of foreign exchange reserves are held in U.S. dollars. Here's the breakdown of the four most commonly held currencies, as of the first quarter of 2020:

That 62 percent gives the U.S. government its power to not only impose sanctions unilaterally, but to force the rest of the world to observe them, in conjunction with the use of the dollar as the primary currency in international transactions. In some industries, it is almost the only currency used. To again turn to the Council on Foreign Relations explainer:

"In addition to accounting for the bulk of global reserves, the dollar is the currency of choice for international trade. Major commodities such as oil are primarily bought and sold using U.S. dollars. Some countries, including Saudi Arabia, still peg their currencies to the dollar. Factors that contribute to the dollar's dominance include its stable value, the size of the U.S. economy, and the United States' geopolitical heft. In addition, no other country has a market for its debt akin to the United States', which totals roughly $18 trillion.

The dollar's centrality to the system of global payments also increases the power of U.S. financial sanctions. Almost all trade done in U.S. dollars, even trade among other countries, can be subject to U.S. sanctions, because they are handled by so-called correspondent banks with accounts at the Federal Reserve. By cutting off the ability to transact in dollars, the United States can make it difficult for those it blacklists to do business."

Sanctions imposed by the U.S. government are effectively extra-territorial because a non-U.S. bank that seeks to handle a transaction in U.S. dollars has to do so by clearing the transaction through a U.S. bank; a U.S. bank that cleared such a transaction would be in violation of the sanctions . The agency that monitors sanctions compliance, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), insists that any transaction using the dollar comes under U.S. law and thus blocking funds "is a territorial exercise of jurisdiction " wherever it occurs, even if no U.S. entities are involved. Even offering software as a service (or for download) from United States servers is under OFAC jurisdiction.

Two further measures of dollar dominance are that about half of all cross-border bank loans and international debt securities are denominated in U.S. currency and that 88 percent of all foreign-exchange transactions in 2019 involved the dollar on one side. That forex domination has remained largely unchanged; the figure was 87 percent in April 2003.

Dollar dominance cemented at end of World War II

The roots of the dollar as the global reserve currency go back to the creation of the Bretton Woods system in 1944 (named for the New Hampshire town where representatives of Allied and other governments met to discuss the post-war monetary system as victory in World War II drew closer). The World Bank and IMF were created here. To stabilize currencies and make it more difficult for countries to reduce the value of their currencies for competitive reasons (to boost exports), all currencies were pegged to the dollar, and the dollar in turn was convertible into gold at $35 an ounce. Thus the dollar became the center of the world financial system, which cemented U.S. dominance.

By the early 1970s, the Nixon administration believed that the Bretton Woods monetary system no longer sufficiently advantaged the United States despite its currency's centrality within the system cementing U.S. economic suzerainty. Because of the system of fixing the value of a U.S. dollar to the price of gold, any government could exchange the dollars it held in reserve for U.S. Treasury Department gold on demand.

Rising world supplies of dollars and domestic inflation depressed the value of the dollar, causing the Treasury price of gold to be artificially low and thereby making the exchange of dollars for gold at the fixed price an excellent deal for other governments. The Nixon administration refused to adjust the value of the dollar , instead in 1971 pulling the dollar from the gold standard by refusing to continue to exchange foreign-held dollars for gold on demand. Currencies would now float on markets against each other, their values set by speculators rather than by governments, making all but the strongest countries highly vulnerable to financial pressure.

The world's oil-producing states dramatically raised oil prices in 1973. The Nixon administration eliminated U.S. capital controls a year later, encouraged oil producers to park their new glut of dollars in U.S. banks and adopted policies to encourage the banks to lend those deposited dollars to the South . But perhaps "encourage" is too mild a word. The economist and strong critic of imperialism Michael Hudson once wrote , "I was informed at a White House meeting that U.S. diplomats had let Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries know that they could charge as much as they wanted for their oil, but that the United States would treat it as an act of war not to keep their oil proceeds in U.S. dollar assets."

Restrictions limiting cross-border movements of capital were opposed by multi-national corporations that had moved production overseas, by speculators in the new currency-exchange markets that blossomed with the breakdown of Bretton Woods and by neoliberal ideologues, creating decisive momentum within the U.S. for the elimination of capital controls . The ultimate result of these developments was to make the dollar even more central to world trade and thus further enhance U.S. control. Needless to say, bipartisan U.S. policy ever since has been to maintain this control.

U.S. sanctions in action: The cases of Cuba and Iran

Two examples of U.S. sanctions being applied extraterritorially are those imposed on Cuba and Iran. (There are many other examples, including that of Venezuela.) In the case of Cuba, any entity that conducts business with Cuba is barred from doing business in the U.S. or with any U.S. entity; foreign businesses that are owned by U.S. companies are strictly prohibited from doing any business with Cuba. Any company that had done business in Cuba must cease all activities there if acquired by a U.S. corporation. Several companies selling life-saving medical equipment and medicines to Cuba had to cease doing so when acquired by a U.S. corporation.

Meanwhile, U.S. embassy personnel have reportedly threatened firms in countries such as Switzerland, France, Mexico and the Dominican Republic with commercial reprisals unless they canceled sales of goods to Cuba such as soap and milk. Amazingly, an American Journal of Public Health report quoted a July 1995 written communication by the U.S. Department of Commerce in which the department said those types of sales contribute to "medical terrorism" on the part of Cubans! Well, many of us when we were, say, 5 years old might have regarded soap with terror, but presumably have long gotten over that. Perhaps Commerce employees haven't.

The sanctions on Cuba have been repeatedly tightened over the years. Joy Gordon, writing in the Harvard International Law Journal in January 2016, provides a vivid picture of the difficulties thereby caused:

"The Torricelli Act [of 1992] provided that no ship could dock in the United States within 180 days of entering a Cuban port. This restriction made deliveries to Cuba commercially unfeasible for many European and Asian companies, as their vessels would normally deliver or take on shipments from the United States while they were in the Caribbean. The Torricelli Act also prohibited foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies from trading with Cuba. The Helms-Burton Act, enacted in 1996, permitted U.S. nationals to bring suit against foreign companies that were doing business in Cuba and that owned properties that had been abandoned or confiscated after the revolution. Additionally, the Helms-Burton Act prohibited third-party countries from selling goods in the United States that contained any components originating in Cuba. This significantly impacted Cuba's major exports, particularly sugar and nickel.

[T]he shipping restrictions in the Torricelli Act have increased costs in several ways, such as Cuba sometimes having to pay for ships carrying imports from Europe or elsewhere to return empty because they cannot stop at U.S. ports to pick up goods. Shipping companies have partially responded by dedicating particular ships for Cuba deliveries; but in most cases, they tend to designate old ships in poor condition, which then leads to higher maritime insurance costs."

The United Nations estimates that the cost of the embargo to Cuba has been about $130 billion.

However distasteful we find the religious fundamentalist government of Iran, U.S. sanctions, which are blunt weapons, have caused much hardship on Iranians. The same restrictions on Cuba apply to Iran. The Iranian government said in September 2020 that it has lost $150 billion since the Trump administration withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal and that it is hampered from importing food and medicines.

The Trump administration's renewed sanctions were imposed unilaterally and against the expressed policies of all other signatories -- Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia. With those governments unable to restrain Washington, businesses from around the world pulled out to avoid getting sanctioned. EU countermeasures were ineffective -- small fines didn't outweigh far larger U.S. fines, European companies are subject to U.S. sanctions and favorable judgments in European courts are unenforceable in U.S. courts.

Sascha Lohmann, author of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs paper, wrote :

"Well ahead of the deadlines set by the Trump administration and absent any enforcement action, major European and Asian companies withdrew from the otherwise lucrative Iranian market. Most not­a­bly, this included [SWIFT,] which cut off most of the more than 50 Iranian banks in early November 2018, including the Central Bank of Iran, after they again became subject to U.S. financial sanctions. [T]he exodus of EU-based companies has revealed an inconvenient truth to European policy-makers, namely that those companies are effectively regulated in Washington, D.C. [T]he secretary of the Treasury can order U.S. banks to close or impose strict conditions on the opening or maintaining of correspondent or payable-through accounts on behalf of a foreign bank, thereby closing down access to dollarized transactions -- the 'Wall Street equivalent of the death penalty.' "

The long arm of U.S. sanctions stretches around the world

The idea that sanctions can be the "Wall Street equivalent of the death penalty" is not a figment of the imagination. Two examples of sanctions against European multinational enterprises demonstrate this.

In 2015, the French bank BNP Paribas was given a penalty of almost $9 billion for violating U.S. sanctions by processing dollar payments from Cuba, Iran and Sudan. The bank also pleaded guilty to two criminal charges. These penalties were handed down in U.S. courts and prosecuted by the U.S. Department of Justice. The chief executive officer of the bank told the court "we deeply regret the past misconduct." The judge overseeing the case declared the bank "not only flouted U.S. foreign policy but also provided support to governments that threaten both our regional and national security," a passage highlighted in the Department's press release announcing the settlement.

Why would a French bank agree to these penalties and do so in such apologetic terms? And why would it accept the preposterous idea that Cuba represents any security threat to the U.S. or that a French bank is required to enforce U.S. foreign policy? As part of the settlement, Reuters reported , "regulators banned BNP for a year from conducting certain U.S. dollar transactions, a critical part of the bank's global business." And that gives us the clue. Had the bank not settled its case, it risked a permanent ban on access to the U.S. financial system, meaning it could not handle any deals denominated in dollars. Even the one-year ban could have triggered an exodus of clients in several major industries, including oil and gas.

Viñales Valley, Pinar del Rio province, Cuba (photo by Adam Jones adamjones.freeservers.com)

This was completely an extraterritorial application of U.S. law. An International Bar Association summary of the case noted, "the transactions in question were not illegal under French or EU law. Nor did they fall foul of France's obligations under the World Trade Organization or the United Nations; no agreements between France and the US were violated. But as they were denominated in dollars, the deals ultimately had to pass through New York and thus came under its regulatory authority."

It does not take direct involvement in financial transactions to run afoul of the long arm of U.S. sanctions. A Swiss company, Société Internationale de Télécommunications Aéronautiques (SITA), was forced to agree to pay $8 million to settle allegations that it provided blacklisted airlines with "software and/or services that were provided from, transited through, or originated in the United States." Among the actions punished were that SITA used software originating in the U.S. to track lost baggage and used a global lost-baggage tracing system hosted on servers in the United States. Retrieving baggage is a service most people would not consider a high crime.

Can the EU or China create an alternative?

Dropping the widespread use of the dollar and substituting one or more other currencies, and setting up alternative financial systems, would be the logical short-term path toward ending U.S. financial hegemony. The German public broadcaster Deutsche Welle, in a 2018 report , quoted the German foreign minister, Heiko Maas, "We must increase Europe's autonomy and sovereignty in trade, economic and financial policies. It will not be easy, but we have already begun to do it." DW reported that the European Commission was developing a system parallel to SWIFT that would allow Iran to interface with European clearing systems with transactions based on the euro, but such a system never was put in place. In January 2021, as the new Biden administration took office, Iran dismissed it entirely , Bloomberg reported: "European governments have 'no idea' how to finance the conduit set up two years ago, known as Instex, and 'have not had enough courage to maintain their economic sovereignty,' the Central Bank of Iran said in comments on Twitter."

It would seem that Teheran's dismissal is warranted. The European Parliament, in its paper on U.S. sanctions being imposed extraterritorially , could only offer liberal weak-tea ideas, such as "Encourage and assist EU businesses in bringing claims in international investor-state arbitration and in US courts; Complaints against extraterritorial measures in the [World Trade Organization]." Such prescriptions are unlikely to have anyone in Washington losing sleep.

What about China? Beijing has actually created a functioning alternative to the World Bank and IMF, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank . Just on the basis of the new bank representing a bad example (from Washington's perspective), the U.S. government leaned heavily on Australia and other countries sufficiently firmly that Canberra initially declined to join the bank despite its initial interest, nor did Indonesia and South Korea, although all three did later join. There is a possibility of one-sidedness here, however, as China has by far the biggest share of the vote , 27 percent, dwarfing No. 2 India's 7 percent, giving Beijing potential veto power. And with US$74 billion in capitalization (less than the goal of $100 billion set in 2014), it can't realistically be a substitute for existing multilateral financial institutes.

China has also set up an alternative to SWIFT, the Cross-border Interbank Payment System (CIPS), a renminbi-denominated clearing and settlement system. CIPS says it has participants from 50 countries and regions, and processes US$19.4 billion per day. But that's well less than one percent of the $6 trillion SWIFT handles daily. The Bank of China, the country's central bank, is on the record of seeking an alternative to the dollar system so that it can evade any U.S. sanctions. "A good punch to the enemy will save yourself from hundreds of punches from your enemies," a 2020 Bank of China report said. "We need to get prepared in advance, mentally and practically."

The report said if Chinese banks are deprived of access to dollar settlements, China should consider ceasing the use of the U.S. dollar as the anchor currency for its foreign exchange controls.

That is easier said than done -- China holds $1.1 trillion in U.S. government debt issued by the U.S. Treasury Department. That total is second only to Japan, and Beijing's holdings comprise 15 percent of all U.S. debt held by foreign governments. The South China Morning Post admits that China holds such large reserve assets of U.S. debt "largely due to its status as a 'safe haven' for investment during turbulent market conditions." Although Beijing seeks an erosion of dollar dominance and fears that U.S. economic instability could result in another world economic downturn, its use of the safe haven is nowhere near at an end. "While it is clear that China is keen to lessen its dependence on US government debt, experts believe that Beijing is likely to continue buying US Treasuries, as there are few risk-free low cost substitutes," the Morning Post wrote.

Coupled with the restrictions on renminbi conversion, Chinese institutions are today far from a position of challenging current global financial relations. The U.S. investment bank Morgan Stanley recently predicted that the renminbi could represent five to 10 percent of foreign-exchange reserves by 2030, up from the current two percent. Although that would mean central banks around the world would increase their holdings of the Chinese currency, it would not amount to any real threat to dollar dominance.

No empire, or system, lasts forever

The bottom line question from all of the above is this: Will this U.S. dominance come to an end? Stepping back and looking at this question in a historical way tells us that the answer can only be yes, given that there has been a sequence of cities that have been the financial center. Centuries ago, the seat of a small republic such as Venice could be the leading financial center on the strength of its trading networks. Once capitalism took hold, however, the financial center was successively located within a larger federation that possessed both a strong navy and a significant fleet of merchant ships (Amsterdam); then within a sizeable and unified country with a large enough population to maintain a powerful navy and a physical presence throughout an empire (London); and finally within a continent-spanning country that can project its economic and multi-dimensional military power around the world (New York).

No empire, whatever its form, lasts forever. But knowledge of the sequence of capitalist centers tells us nothing of timing. Each successive new financial locus was embedded in successively larger powers able to operate militarily over larger areas and with more force. What then could replace the U.S.? The European Union has its effectiveness diluted by the many nationalisms within its sphere (and thus nationalism acts as a weakening agent for the EU whereas it is a strengthening agent for the U.S. and China). China's economy is yet too small and retains capital controls, and its currency, the renminbi, isn't fully convertible. U.S. Treasury bills remain the ultimate safe haven, as shown when investors poured into U.S. debt during crises such as the 2008 collapse, even when events in the U.S. are the trigger.

There are no other possible other contenders, and both the EU and China, as already discussed, are in no position to seriously challenge U.S. hegemony.

Here we have a collision of possibilities: The transcending of capitalism and transition to a new economic system or the decreasing functionality of the world capitalist system should it persist for several more decades. Given the resiliency of capitalism, and the many tools available to it (not least military power), the latter scenario can't be ruled out although it might be unlikely. Making any prediction on the lifespan of capitalism is fraught with difficulty, not least because of the many predictions of its collapse for well over a century. But capitalism as a system requires infinite growth , quite impossible on a finite planet and all the more dire given there is almost no place on Earth remaining into which it can expand .

Although we can't know what the expiration date of capitalism will be, it will almost certainly be sometime in the current century. But it won't be followed by something better without a global movement of movements working across borders with a conscious aim of bringing a better world into being. In the absence of such movements, capitalism is likely to hang on for decades to come. In that scenario, what country or bloc could replace the U.S. as the center? And would we want a new center to dictate to the rest of the world? In a world of economic democracy (what we can call socialism) where all nations and societies can develop in their own way, in harmony with the environment and without the need to expand, and with production done for human need rather than corporate profit, there would no global center or hegemon and no need for one. Capitalism, however, can't function without a center that uses financial, military and all other means to keep itself in the saddle and the rest of the world in line.

Yes, the day of U.S. dethronement will come, as will the end of capitalism . But the former is not going to happen any time soon, however much millions around the world wish that to be so, and the latter is what we should be working toward. A better world is possible; a gentler and kinder capitalism with a different center is not.

[Mar 26, 2021] Biden foreign policy is counterproductive and can only lead to more isolation.

Mar 26, 2021 | www.unz.com

bayviking , says:

waw , says: March 25, 2021 at 9:25 pm GMT • 23.3 hours ago

The sooner America collapses, the safer the rest of the world will be, excluding the Ashkenazi

[Mar 26, 2021] At this point, why should Taylor lament that Mexican-American soldiers proudly display the Mexican flag? Why not, when the US flag represents nothing abroad but 'twerking', Zionist supremacism

Edited for clarity; racial slurs are removed... Paradoxically recently due to summer riots the attitude toward Zionism among the US public slightly improved, as least as far as domestic policies are concerted...
Mar 26, 2021 | www.unz.com

Priss Factor , says: Website March 25, 2021 at 6:04 am GMT • 1.6 days ago

American Renaissance has done important work, but it is ultimately useless because it pulls its punches or willfully misses what should be the main target: Zionist Supremacist Power. Take Jared Taylor's commentary of the US military in the video below. It's pure Pat-Condell. He blames everything but will not name the power behind the mess. Shhhh about the Zionists.


https://www.bitchute.com/embed/03vYmvgpmBQi/

At this point, why should Taylor lament that Mexican-American soldiers proudly display the Mexican flag? Why not, when the US flag represents nothing abroad but 'twerking', Zionist supremacism, Wars for Israel, mindless animus toward Russia, ridiculous paranoia about China, nonstop hatred toward Iran, complete nonsense about Venezuela, BLM stupidity, and global dissemination of globo-homo ludicrousness? Americanism meant something when Anglo-Americans(and those properly Anglo-Americanized) ruled the nation with pride and confidence. Then, Americanism was based on the Great Compromise: A move toward a more merit-and-rule-based on the part of Anglo-Americans who took the land from the Indians, brought blacks in chains, and encouraged mass-immigration to develop the land. In return, non-Anglos would acknowledge the Anglo-foundation of America and try to be Good Americans. That compromise is no longer relevant because the US is now totally Zionist-supremacist, meaning the New Americanism is predicated on just about everyone and everything revolving around the question of "Is it great for Zionists?" If Zionists want it, they get it eventually. No wonder the First and Second Amendments are now hanging by a thread. Zionists don't like the Constitution now that they got total power.

Other than Zionists, Jared Taylor should be blaming his own Wasp kind. Why did they hand over power to the Zionists almost completely? That was the beginning of much of the rot since. Taylor bitches about blacks, Mexicans, and etc. not being properly patriotic in the new order, but who created the new order? Zionists spearheaded the making of New America, but Wasps just played along. If Wasps are such worthless cucks to Zionists, why should it be surprising that nonwhites would no longer respect whites? Of course, given that most nonwhites would find it odd if Zionists told them, "Americanism = Zionist Greatness", Zionists encourage the next-best-thing, which is anti-whiteness or 'scapewhiting'(scapegoat whitey for everything), as it unites all nonwhites with Zionists in the War on Whiteness. War on Whiteness or WOW is great for Zionists as it morally shames and paralyzes whites into having no pride and prestige, which translates into having no will and agency. Filled with shame and 'white guilt', whites become mired in mode of redemption, the terms of which are decided by Zionists who advise Total Support for Zion, More Wars for Israel, More Diversity, and More Globo-Homo(proxy of Zionist Power).

The source of the problem is the Zionist-White relations. When whites handed over power to Zionists, Zionists made the key decisions, and those have been premised on whatever-necessary-to-secure-Zionist-power. #1 priority for Zionists is then White Submissivism to Zionist Supremacism. If Taylor will not discuss Zionist Power, it's like complaining about the smoke without mentioning the fire. Also, does it make sense for whites to bleat about blacks, browns, yellows, and etc. when whites themselves cravenly collaborate with Zionist Power? Whites, especially the elites, don't stand for what is good for America as a whole. They suck up to Zionists and support Zionist identity & Zionism. When whites act like that, why should nonwhites be good American patriots? Whites have led the way in betraying the original Americanism. In some ways, nonwhites, such as blacks into black power and Mexican-Americans into Mexican pride, are more admirable because, at the very least, they are tribal-patriotic about their own kind. In contrast, whites have betrayed both White Power and Traditional Americanism. They are now allergic to anything white-and-positive but also utterly lack a general sense of Americanism. White 'liberals' love to virtue-signal by supporting blacks, diversity, & globo-homo, AND white 'conservatives' love to cuck-signal by waving the Israeli Flag & yapping about how Israel is "America's best, greatest, closest, and dearest ally." Both groups fail at simple generic patriotism based on rules and principles. For white 'liberals', blacks are higher than other groups, and for white 'conservatives' it's Zionists-uber-alles.

In the current order, Zionists encourage nonwhites to wave their own identitarian flag AGAINST whiteness while encouraging whites to wave the Zionist flag. In a way, one might say this Zionist strategy is foolish. After all, if nonwhites are made to be anti-white and if whiteness is made to be synonymous with support-for-Israel and praise-of-Zionists, might it not lead to nonwhites being anti-Israel and anti-Zionist as well? After all, if whiteness = love-for-Zionists whereas non-whiteness = anti-whiteness, wouldn't it lead to non-whiteness = anti-Zionistness since whiteness is so closely associated with cucking to Zionists?

Zionists bank on two factors in this strategy. They figure (1) nonwhites are too dumb to connect the dots or (2) even if nonwhites connected the dots and became more critical of Israel & Zionist Power on account of whiteness = support-for-Zion, it will draw whites even closer to Zion as white-knight-defenders of Israel against the rising tide of darkies. We see scenario 2 play out with both Mitt Romney and Jared Taylor. They hope that powerful Zionists will like them more if they stand with Zionists against the 'antisemitic' darkies.

It's like Zionists encourage Ilhan Omar to be anti-white while white conzos beat their chests as noble defenders of Zionists from 'Anti-Semites'.

[Mar 22, 2021] Biden Picks a Pointless Fight with Russia - Eunomia

Mar 22, 2021 | daniellarison.substack.com

The Russian government is responding angrily to Biden's derisive comments about Putin:

The Kremlin has reacted angrily to US President Joe Biden's remarks that Russian leader Vladimir Putin is "a killer," calling the comment unprecedented and describing the relationship between the two countries as "very bad."

U.S.-Russian relations have been deteriorating steadily over the last ten years, and it always seemed unlikely that Biden would improve them. Now there will be even less of a chance that Biden can work constructively with his Russian counterpart. The president's blunt answer to a rather silly question from George Stephanopoulos has further damaged the relationship to neither country's benefit. Anatol Lieven observed recently that this is a "completely unnecessary confrontation with Russia" at a time when the U.S. needs Russian cooperation on some important issues. Lieven cites U.S. reentry into the JCPOA and extricating U.S. forces from Afghanistan as his examples of issues where Russian cooperation could be very valuable, but he could have added new negotiations on future arms control agreements as well. Making progress on any one of these becomes much more challenging when our president is gratuitously insulting theirs. For an administration that prides itself on practicing diplomacy, they have a funny way of showing it.

[Mar 22, 2021] Nephew has described the destruction of Iran's economy as "a tremendous success," and lamented during a visit to Russia that food was still plentiful in the country's capital despite mounting US sanctions.

Mar 22, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Mao , Mar 21 2021 16:06 utc | 14

The Joseph Biden administration has named Richard Nephew as its deputy Iran envoy. As the former principal deputy coordinator of sanctions policy for Barack Obama's State Department, Nephew took personal credit for depriving Iranians of food, sabotaging their automobile industry, and driving up unemployment rates.

Nephew has described the destruction of Iran's economy as "a tremendous success," and lamented during a visit to Russia that food was still plentiful in the country's capital despite mounting US sanctions.

Nephew's appointment to a senior diplomatic post suggests that rather than immediately returning to the JCPOA nuclear deal, the Biden administration will finesse sanctions illegally imposed by Trump to pressure Iran into an onerous, reworked agreement that Tehran is unlikely to join.

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/08/biden-iran-envoy-starving-civilians-pain-sanctions/

jayc , Mar 21 2021 17:56 utc | 23

Mao #14

Grayzone's report is fascinating in a "banality of evil" kind of way.

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/08/biden-iran-envoy-starving-civilians-pain-sanctions/

Nephew's "simple framework" for "sanctions to perform their expected function" reads like a torturer's manual (replace "target state" with "prisoner"):

- identify objectives for the imposition of pain and define the minimum necessary remedial steps that the target state must take for pain to be removed

- understand as much as possible the nature of the target, including its vulnerabilities, interests, commitment to whatever it did to prompt sanctions, and readiness to absorb pain

-develop a strategy to carefully, methodically, and efficiently increase pain on those areas that are vulnerabilities while avoiding those that are not

-monitor the execution of the strategy and continuously recalibrate its initial assumption of target state resolve, the efficacy of the pain applied in shattering that resolve, and how best to improve the strategy

etc

farm ecologist , Mar 21 2021 18:10 utc | 25

Kudos to Alan Macleod and MintPressNews (cited above by b) for providing further evidence of how the US and its allies don't care about human suffering and death as long as they are able to further their political goals. A previous article in this series uncovers this striking bit of disregard for human life in the 2020 Annual Report of the US Department of Health (sic) and Human Services:


Combatting malign influences in the Americas: OGA (Office of Global Affairs) used diplomatic relations in the Americas region to mitigate efforts by states, including Cuba, Venezuela, and Russia, who are working to increase their influence in the region to the detriment of US safety and security. OGA coordinated with other U.S. government agencies to strengthen diplomatic ties and offer technical and humanitarian assistance to dissuade countries in the region from accepting aid from these ill intentioned states. Examples include using OGA's Health Attaché office to persuade Brazil to reject the Russian COVID-19 vaccine, and offering CDC technical assistance in lieu of Panama accepting an offer of Cuban doctors.

Translation: Deaths in Brazil are skyrocketing, but at least we prevented them from using that damned Russian vaccine.

[Mar 21, 2021] Blinken, like his boss, is a complete moron.

Mar 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Mar 21 2021 3:55 utc | 181

Blinken, like his boss, is a complete moron. He blew it with his patronising threatening 'rules based order' drivel because he has no expertise. Blinken has been doing this for a decade or two: Syria, Libya, Turkey, Afghanistan, Iran, and on and on. He has the form of a killer, the mind of a killer and the intentions of a mass murderer. He has proven the latter and is the type of global ambassadorial psychopath that one should meet with once and then never meet again.

The USA has lost its mind and every day that passes proves that point.

This bar deserves broader analysis of other quarters of the planet and no more references to the Guardian or NYT.

Mao , Mar 21 2021 5:58 utc | 186

Three Takeaways from China-U.S. Alaska Meeting

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3isU3mpx8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCtMl_0h6P4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHAbhZovh2E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NszIE48KE_Y

Mao , Mar 21 2021 5:58 utc | 187

Posted by: willie | Mar 20 2021 15:31 utc | 116

A majority of american ambassadors are rich businessmen and women,who have not the slightest idea what diplomacy is about.

Stop Letting Rich People Buy Ambassadorships
President Biden could score a quick win by dismantling the donor-to-ambassador pipeline.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/18/opinion/biden-ambassadors-donors.html

Biden under pressure to tap fewer political ambassadors than Trump, Obama
Donors are growing impatient as Biden delays naming coveted ambassador posts.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/15/biden-political-ambassadors-476050

curmudgeon , Mar 21 2021 6:52 utc | 190
I know that the United States and its leaders are determined to maintain certain relations with us, but on matters that are of interest to the United States and on its terms. Even though they believe we are just like them, we are different. We have a different genetic, cultural and moral code. But we know how to uphold our interests. We will work with the United States, but in the areas that we are interested in and on terms that we believe are beneficial to us. They will have to reckon with it despite their attempts to stop our development, despite the sanctions and insults. They will have to reckon with this.

The author provides basic but essential definition of conflict resolution. The USians either don't understand or defy it.
oldhippie , Mar 21 2021 7:25 utc | 192

James @ 170

Your link to statement by Blinken & Sullivan is propaganda as you say. It is also an expression of how deeply limited and very stupid these two are. They have no idea what just hit them.

[Mar 21, 2021] Kagan's vision ans a typical neocon blideness

Mar 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Mar 20 2021 0:11 utc | 68

emersonreturn @64--

I'm in the middle of Armstrong's essay and am at the first reference to Kagan's vision:

"What should that role be? Benevolent global hegemony. Having defeated the 'evil empire,' the United States enjoys strategic and ideological predominance. The first objective of U.S. foreign policy should be to preserve and enhance that predominance by strengthening America's security, supporting its friends, advancing its interests, and standing up for its principles around the world .'

It's absolutely clear that Kagan has no clue as to the reality of what is actually the objective of the Neoliberal Parasites running the Outlaw US Empire; for aside from "advancing its interests," the Parasites have zero motivation to do any of that as their sole ambition/goal is to vacuum up all the wealth they can and leave a shell just as they planned and failed with Russia, but have succeeded elsewhere. And as for principles, the reality is it has none, nor does it have any friends, just vassals and victims. This analogy by Armstrong's excellent:

"The U.S. is sitting on a dragon and it daren't get off or the dragon will kill it. But because it can't kill the dragon, it must sit on it forever: no escape. And dragon's eggs are hatching out all around: think how much bigger the Russian, Chinese and Iranian dragons are today than they were a quarter-century ago when Kagan & Co so confidently started PNAC; think how bigger they'll be in another....

"But the more sanctions, the stronger Russia gets: as an analogy, think of sanctions on Russia as similar to the over-use of antibiotics – Russia is becoming immune."

And tying it all up is this excellent summation:

"Has there ever been a subject on which people have been so wrong for so long as Russia? How many times have they said Putin's finished? Remember when cheese was going to bring him down? Always a terminal economic crisis. A year ago they were sure COVID would do it. A U.S. general is in Ukraine and Kiev's heavy weapons are moving east but, no, it's Putin who, for ego reasons – and his "failing" economy – wants the war. Why do they keep doing it? Well, it's easy money – Putin (did we tell you he was in the KGB?) wants to expand Russia and rule forever; therefore, he's about to invade somebody. He doesn't, no problem, our timely warning scared him off; we'll change the date and regurgitate it next year. In the meantime his despotic rule trembles because of some-triviality-of-the-moment. These pieces write themselves: the anti-Russia business is the easiest scam ever. And there's the difficulty of admitting you're wrong: how can somebody like Kagan, such a triumphantasiser back then, admit that it's all turned to dust and worse, turned to dust because they took his advice? Much better to press on – it's not as if anybody in the lügenpresse will call him out or deny him space. Finally, these people are locked in psychological projection: because they can only envisage military expansion, they assume the other guy is equally obsessed and so they must expand to counter his expansion. They suspect everybody of suspecting them. Their hostility sees hostility everywhere. Their belligerence finds belligerence. The hyperpower is forever compelled to respond to lesser powers. They look outside, see themselves and fear; in their mental universe the USA is arrogantly strong and fearfully weak at the same time."

The Walking Dead is finally becoming a metaphor for the Outlaw US Empire, its policies, and what it terms values--which aren't values but vices. But TWD was fiction and was thus capable of reforming itself. The Empire's goals and polices are essentially the same as in 1940 and even further back to 1913, and haven't changed very much, being just as illegal and immoral then as now. What's different are the "Dragons" which didn't exist in 1918 or 1944, and the Parasites have almost total control that's finally seeing domestic pushback.

Jackrabbit , Mar 20 2021 2:17 utc | 87

karlof1 @Mar20 0:11 #67

It's absolutely clear that Kagan has no clue as to the reality of what is actually the objective of the Neoliberal Parasites running the Outlaw US Empire.

Why do you give him the benefit of the doubt?

Are we really to believe that Kagan, and others like him, talk of these things for DECADES and yet aren't aware of the ramifications?

IMO it is absolutely clear that he knows the neoliberal reality as well as the neocon and neocolonial realities.

But we are supposed to avoid cynicism and be polite so as to not be thought a malcontent?

=

@karlof1 The need for more cynicism is a theme of mine (which I've written about at moa many times) so please don't respond in a knee-jerk way.

!!

[Mar 21, 2021] The preservation of the US financial hegemony is the key for the survival of the US imperialism

Mar 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

psychohistorian , Mar 21 2021 3:19 utc | 175

@ michaelj72 | Mar 21 2021 2:46 utc | 173 who provided the Yang quote

"
"The United States uses its military force and financial hegemony to carry out long arm jurisdiction and suppress other countries,"
"

I continue to not understand why China is coy about connecting PRIVATE financial hegemony to the US when they assuredly know it is the global private finance folk that are the enemy. I don't know why they play into the meme that if the US were brought to heel then the financial hegemony would magically stop.

All Yang had to do was put the word private before financial hegemony and the message would have been much clearer and stronger message to the world struggling under the private finance jackboot, IMO

To me

rules based order = dog whistle for global private finance, property and unfettered inheritance

[Mar 21, 2021] The attempted by Blinken U.S. dimplomatic assault was a home run for the Chinese side

Blinken and Bush are as boorish and rude, perhaps even more condescending than pompeo and Trump - But it is hard to choose between the lesser of two american evils. So in just a matter of weeks, the US just antagonized both Russia and China. The US is getting very bold,
Mar 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
chet380 , Mar 19 2021 19:16 utc | 1

Secretary of State Blinken's meeting with the Chinese foreign minister in a shabby Alaskan hotel was another diplomatic train wreck :

"The alternative to a rules-based order is a world in which might makes right and winner takes all and that would be a far more violent and unstable world," Blinken said.

The 'rules based order' means 'do what we say' and is of course unacceptable. Here is how the Chinese replied:

What China and the international community follow or uphold is the United Nations-centered international system and the international order underpinned by international law, not what is advocated by a small number of countries of the so-called "rules-based" international order.

and

I don't think the overwhelming majority of countries in the world would recognize that the universal values advocated by the United States or that the opinion of the United States could represent international public opinion, and those countries would not recognize that the rules made by a small number of people would serve as the basis for the international order.

When Yang was chided by Blinken for making a too long opening statement in response to Blinken's accusations Yang replied:

The Chinese side felt compelled to make this speech because of the tone of the U.S. side.

Well, isn't this the intention of United States, judging from what – or the way that you have made your opening remarks, that it wants to speak to China in a condescending way from a position of strength?

So was this carefully all planned and was it carefully orchestrated with all the preparations in place? Is that the way that you had hoped to conduct this dialogue?

Well, I think we thought too well of the United States. We thought that the U.S. side will follow the necessary diplomatic protocols. So for China it was necessary that we made our position clear.

So let me say here that, in front of the Chinese side, the United States does not have the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength . The U.S. side was not even qualified to say such things even 20 years or 30 years back, because this is not the way to deal with the Chinese people. If the United States wants to deal properly with the Chinese side, then let's follow the necessary protocols and do things the right way.

And this which was apparently left out of State Departments transcript:

History will prove that if you use cutthroat competition to suppress China you will be the one to suffer in the end.

The attempted U.S. assault was a home run for the Chinese side :

Many netizens on China's social media said Chinese officials were doing a good job in Alaska, and that the U.S. side lacked sincerity.

Some even characterized the talks as a "Hongmen Banquet", referring to an event that took place 2,000 years ago where a rebel leader invited another to a feast with the intention of murdering him.

Posted by b on March 19, 2021 at 18:53 UTC | Permalink

The Chinese emphasis on most of the world rejecting a US-directed 'rules-based order' instead of honouring the UN Charter and settled international law is of supreme importance aand must be re-emphasized ad nauseum.

Jezabeel , Mar 19 2021 19:17 utc | 2

I'm glad China says what every country should have been saying for the last 40 years. The US is a liar and always has been.

Sadde , Mar 19 2021 19:22 utc | 3

What a bunch of amateurish megalomaniac idiots. It was an exhibition of a total lack of tact, self-perception, decency or any equilibrium. The Chinese's confident offensive resulted in a rapid emotional dive from a state of megalomaniac bravado to shaky self-confidence. In comparison they made even Trump look like a cultivated gentleman.

Canadian Cents , Mar 19 2021 19:28 utc | 5

To translate from Orwellian Western Newspeak to english:

'Rules-based order' means 'Our rules for you that we don't have to follow and can change anytime we like.'

'International order' means 'Western-ruled-world order.'

'International community' means the US-led Western community and vassal states. Western media spouts this all the time.

'Rules-based' is the modern day incarnation of Americans/British throwing around the phrase 'treaty', 'treaty-based' in colonial days. Different words, same con.

powerandpeople , Mar 19 2021 19:37 utc | 7

USA provided a transcript of both US Govt & China Govt speakers.

I thought this a little unusual, as foreign miminstries like to publish their own transcripts so that they control the authentic translation of their words, free from the opposing parties editing or mis-translation.

"cutthroat competition" may be an arguably alternative translation of "strangle" in the China readout "those who seek to strangle China will suffer in the end."

I was waiting for the China verbatim translation to check the fidelity of the USA translation.

https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/wshd_665389/t1862641.shtml
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/wshd_665389/t1862643.shtml


But there is only an unquoted report, which is the meeting, but without quotation marks to distinguish between the authors voice and the Officials voice.

Verbatim would be better.

Maybe the USA had reciprocal concerns about the verbatim accuracy of the China transcript.

But its on video anyway, so???

dave constable , Mar 19 2021 20:22 utc | 27

My translation of "The Brothers Karamazov" has one of Dostoevski's brothers saying, "Each man creates Satan in his own image."

Blinken is Secretary of State for USA, head of the US State Department.
He mentioned in his nomination hearing, & makes allusion in this meeting with China, to a genocide in Xinjiang.
Foreign Affairs magazine article reports US State Department legal office saying they have no evidence for a genocide in Xinjiang.
Is Blinken in touch with his department?

uncle tungsten , Mar 19 2021 20:59 utc | 35

b Posted:

"The alternative to a rules-based order is a world in which might makes right and winner takes all and that would be a far more violent and unstable world," Blinken said.

The 'rules based order' means 'do what we say' and is of course unacceptable. Here is how the Chinese replied:

What China and the international community follow or uphold is the United Nations-centered international system and the international order underpinned by international law, not what is advocated by a small number of countries of the so-called "rules-based" international order.

Say it to uncle sam. Say it every time they meet. The bankruptcy of the "rules based order" gang of five or six is a failure.

For all its apalling faults the UN and established international courts are the place to go. Suck it up uncle sam.

ak74 , Mar 19 2021 21:31 utc | 40

"The alternative to a rules-based order is a world in which might makes right and winner takes all and that would be a far more violent and unstable world," Blinken said.

LOL.

You really have to wonder if the Americans believe their own bullshit about their hollowed "Rules Based International Order"?

The violent and unstable world is ALREADY here thanks to ... this very same American "Rules" Based Order.

Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Serbia, Somalia--these are just a few of the countries America has either invaded, bombed, or supported moderate jihadi Head-Choppers against to destabilize in the past generation.

Two decades of US "war on terror" responsible for displacing at least 37 million people and killing up to 12 million
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/09/09/cost-s09.html?view=print


Perimetr , Mar 19 2021 22:55 utc | 55

Re Sadde @3 " What a bunch of amateurish megalomaniac idiots. It was an exhibition of a total lack of tact, self-perception, decency or any equilibrium. "

Seems like just the other day I was reading the same description about Pompeo lol. And yet somehow this is much worse, as we have a clearly demented, recently installed "president" who can't make it up a flight of stairs or give a press conference, who has the nuclear football following him around 24/.7.

Been nice knowing y'all.

karlof1 , Mar 20 2021 0:30 utc | 74

Here's Sputnik 's initial report on the Alaska meet. Not much reference to commerce. Here's an excerpt:

"Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who accompanied Yang to the talks, told CGTN that their side had made clear to the Americans that China takes its sovereignty very seriously and warned them not to 'underestimate China's determination to defend its territory, to defend its people, and maintain its righteous interests.'

"Washington has criticized China's security policies in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, where Western-backed separatist forces have created chronic unrest, as well as its longstanding claim to rule Taiwan, an autonomous island ruled by the Republic of China that lost the civil war in mainland China in 1949, when the socialist People's Republic of China was formed. The US technically recognizes Beijing's claim to be the sole legitimate representative of China, but in reality is the primary backer of the Taiwanese government. Beijing says all of these are internal matters and not of Washington's concern."

Very little's reported of the Outlaw US Empire's response. This little bit doesn't bode well:

"US State Department officials noted they did not see the Alaska summit as the beginning of a new mechanism or dialogue."

I see that as a confession that they aren't agreement capable since they can't even continue a dialogue.

[Mar 21, 2021] Populism and illusions of American exceptionalism

Mar 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

ld , Mar 19 2021 22:20 utc | 48

James @28

contrived moulded whatever the case I leave this excerpt. I feel it hits the head.

Here's what journalist Joe Bageant wrote in 2007:

Much of the ongoing battle for America's soul is about healing the souls of these Americans and rousing them from the stupefying glut of commodity and spectacle. It is about making sure that they -- and we -- refuse to accept torture as the act of "heroes" and babies deformed by depleted uranium as the "price of freedom." Caught up in the great self-referential hologram of imperial America, force-fed goods and hubris like fattened steers, working people like World Championship Wrestling and Confederate flags and flat-screen televisions and the idea of an American empire. ("American Empire! I like the sound of that!" they think to themselves, without even the slightest idea what it means historically.) "The people" doing our hardest work and fighting our wars are not altruistic and probably never were. They don't give a rat's bunghole about the world's poor or the planet or animals or anything else. Not really. "The people" like cheap gas. They like chasing post-Thanksgiving Day Christmas sales. And if fascism comes, they will like that too if the cost of gas isn't too high and Comcast comes through with a twenty-four-hour NFL channel.

That is the American hologram. That is the peculiar illusion we live within, the illusion that holds us together, makes us alike, yet tells each of us we are unique. And it will remain in force until the whole shiteree comes down around our heads. Working people do not deny reality. They create it from the depths of their perverse ignorance, even as the so-called left speaks in non sequiturs and wonders why it cannot gain any political traction. Meanwhile, for the people, it is football and NASCAR and a republic free from married queers and trigger locks on guns. That's what they voted for -- an armed and moral republic. And that's what we get when we stand by and watch the humanity get hammered out of our fellow citizens, letting them be worked cheap and farmed like a human crop for profit.

Genuine moral values have jack to do with politics. But in an obsessively religious nation, values remain the most effective smoke screen for larceny by the rich and hatred and fear by the rest. What Christians and so many quiet, ordinary Americans were voting for in the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004 was fear of human beings culturally unlike themselves, particularly gays and lesbians and Muslims and other non-Christians. That's why in eleven states Republicans got constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage on the ballot. In nine of them the bill passed easily. It was always about fearing and, in the worst cases, hating "the other."

Being a southerner, I have hated in my lifetime. I can remember schoolyard discussions of supposed "nigger knifing" of white boys at night and such. And like most people over fifty, it shows in my face, because by that age we have the faces we deserve. Likewise I have seen hate in others and know it when I see it. And I am seeing more of it now than ever before in my lifetime, which is saying something considering that I grew up down here during the Jim Crow era. Fanned and nurtured by neoconservative elements, the hate is every bit equal to the kind I saw in my people during those violent years. Irrational. Deeply rooted. Based on inchoate fears.

The fear is particularly prevalent in the middle and upper-middle classes here, the very ones most openly vehement about being against using the words nigger and fuck. They are what passes for educated people in a place like Winchester. You can smell their fear. Fear of losing their advantages and money. Fear there won't be enough time to grab and stash enough geet to keep themselves and their offspring in Chardonnay and farting through silk for the next fifty years.

So they keep the lie machinery and the smoke generators cranking full blast as long as possible, hoping to elect another one of their own kind to the White House -- Democratic or Republican, it doesn't matter so long as they keep the scam going. The Laurita Barrs speak in knowing, authoritative tones, and the inwardly fearful house painter and single-mom forklift driver listen and nod. Why take a chance on voting for a party that would let homos be scout masters?

(Dear Hunting with Jesus: Dispatches from America's Class War, chapter 2)

[Mar 21, 2021] How do we change a nation state that has so thoroughly morphed into an advertising and marketing phony, aided and abetted by so many deluded morons?

Mar 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

vetinLA , Mar 20 2021 5:24 utc | 98

Many great observations tonight, but all, beg the question; How do we change a nation state that has so thoroughly morphed into an advertising and marketing phony, aided and abetted by so many deluded morons?

[Mar 21, 2021] Going to be a lot of very confused people at Foggy Bottom. They may never have experienced this degree of contempt before.

Mar 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Yeah, Right , Mar 19 2021 22:08 utc | 46

This is interesting. Apparently both the Russians and the Chinese have concluded that Biden intends to use "CornPop" faux-macho posturing as his foreign policy, and they have both decided that "f**k that, let's nip this in the bud".

Because it looks like they have decided they have had a gut-full of US "exceptionalism" and are quite determined to say so. To anyone, but especially to the Americans.

Going to be a lot of very confused people at Foggy Bottom. They may never have experienced this degree of contempt before.


karlof1 , Mar 19 2021 22:10 utc | 47

ak74 @39--

I about fell on the floor when I read Blinken's words, my first thought being "this klutz has zero knowledge of history since 1588 and just admitted as much. In China, Blinken would never achieve any position of power.

The decadence of the Outlaw US Empire's government is like so many prions turning brain tissue into a swiss-cheese-like mass and then boasting about how finely tuned are its cognitive abilities. And when Harris is installed, we'll have a genuine novice in charge--The Blind leading the Blind.

It's no wonder the Chinese sought an audience with Lavrov ASAP.

[Mar 21, 2021] The Americans have completely lost the culture of negotiation. If there are no elementary human manners, then what kind of agreements can we talk about?

Mar 21, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Ian2 , Mar 20 2021 1:53 utc | 85

The Americans have completely lost the culture of negotiation. If there are no elementary human manners, then what kind of agreements can we talk about? A sad picture. And dangerous. A madman with nuclear weapons (and chemical weapons, by the way) is not the best option for a reliable negotiating partner.

alaff | Mar 19 2021 20:44 utc | 32:

And Bio-weapons.

[Mar 09, 2021] Sanctions and the loss in $31Bn for Venezuela was designed to and in fact did hurt the poorest of the poor and the working 'middle' class in that country.

Mar 09, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

_K_C_ , Mar 9 2021 23:35 utc | 32

Posted by: Bobby | Mar 9 2021 18:40 utc | 10

Because the $31Bn (which is probably understated) would primarily have gone to the lower classes in which the U.S. caused humanitarian disaster is most prevalent. Rich, formerly colonial Venezuelan families don't give a shit. The and their ex-pat kids live most of the year in Miami or Vancouver or Madrid. The white upper class in Venezuela is the exact group from which Mr. Random Guy-do emanates and who he represent. They live in gated communities including in the hills around Caracas and their stores are likely fully stocked (as reported by Max Blumenthal last year). However, they are a small minority compared to the indigenous peoples who these sanctions are DESIGNED to hurt. The bank accounts of the colonials are safe while a small number, relatively speaking, of pro-Chavista/Maduro operatives are completely cut off by the Empire.

Same thing in ANY country that the USA is sanctioning. Have a look at Biden's Iran envoy's statements about everyday Iranian people.

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/03/08/biden-iran-envoy-starving-civilians-pain-sanctions/

In response to online criticism, Nephew has claimed that "the main target" of the sanctions regime he designed was "the oligarchs." But his book on "The Art of Sanctions" tells another story.

Nephew fondly recalls how he structured sanctions to sabotage Iranian economic reforms that would have improved the purchasing power of average people. The Obama administration destroyed the economic prospects of Iran's working-class majority while ensuring that "only the wealthy or those in positions of power could take advantage of Iran's continued connectedness," he wrote. As "stories began to emerge from Iran of intensified income inequality and inflation," Nephew pronounced another success.

As he made clear, the rising inequality "was a choice" that Washington "made on the basis of helping to drive up the pressure on the Iranian economy from internal sources." Nephew went on to claim credit for October 2012 protests brought on by the devaluation of Iran's currency.

So these sanctions and the loss in $31Bn for Venezuela was designed to and in fact did hurt the poorest of the poor and the working 'middle' class in that country.

michaelj72 , Mar 10 2021 0:44 utc | 38

thanks to profk at #13 for the link .

here's a snippet, about Venezuela and the US supported/directed economic terrorism, which has obviously caused much economic mayhem and dislocation, humanitarian disaster, and a large number of deaths (I have seen figures up to hundred thousand or more, from the food and medicine sanctions etc. Not to mention England stealing Venezuela's gold. I would imagine the real death toll is quite a bit larger)

https://newleftreview.org/sidecar/posts/smarter-empire

"......Subversion in Venezuela, by contrast, might not require as much 'engagement'. In Cuba the government is stable and the opposition isolated. In Venezuela, by contrast, the Maduro government faces a deep economic crisis (dramatically and intentionally exacerbated by US sanctions) and major public discontent. Betting on Maduro's vulnerability, Biden continues to recognize the self-appointed 'president' Juan Guaidó. Under Obama, Biden courted Guaidó ally Leopoldo López – a so-called political prisoner arrested for inciting violent protests that killed dozens of people – who is now calling for Biden to lead a renewed international effort to topple Maduro. US support for the far-right forces of Guaidó and López is intended to prevent a deal between Maduro and the more pragmatic elements of the opposition. Such a deal might alleviate Venezuela's economic crisis, but it could leave Maduro in power and thus derail the US's regime change agenda.

In late 2018 Biden complained that Trump's 'intensified sanctions on Venezuela have been clouded by sabre-rattling' and 'clunky sloganeering'. At that time, those intensified sanctions had already killed an estimated 40,000 civilians, with an unknown number of additional deaths after Trump imposed harsher measures in 2019. But the goal of regime change had not succeeded. Trump's crime in Venezuela was not his lethal denial of food and medicine to the population, but rather his 'faulty execution' of the policy. This critique informs Biden's current roadmap for Venezuela, which hinges on refining the sanctions to inflict maximum political damage. Secretary Blinken argues that sanctions must be honed 'so that regime enablers really feel the pain', while González favours a 'smart' use of 'multilateral sanctions' over Trump's go-it-alone programme...."

[Mar 06, 2021] Biden's -Nothing Will Fundamentally Change- Promise Extends To His Foreign Policy

Mar 06, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Laguerre , Mar 4 2021 18:27 utc | 1

"America is back" claimed Joe Biden to no ones amusement. But the world has changed after four years of Trump and after a pandemic upset the world. The U.S. position in this world and its role in it have thereby also changed. To just claim one is back without adopting to the new situation promises failure.

As candidate Joe Biden promised that there would be no changes.

Joe Biden to rich donors: "Nothing would fundamentally change" if he's elected

Former Vice President Joe Biden assured rich donors at a ritzy New York fundraiser that "nothing would fundamentally change" if he is elected.

Biden told donors at an event at the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan on Tuesday evening that he would not "demonize" the rich and promised that " no one's standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change ," Bloomberg News reported.

That Biden statement destroyed the illusion of those who had hoped that he would lift the standard of living for the average Amercian.

Biden stayed true to his words at the fundraiser. There will be no rise in the minimum wage. The $2,000 checks he promised to all voters will now be only $1,400 checks. They will also be heavily means tested . Those who made more than $80,000 in 2019 but lost their income in 2020 will get no check at all.

Even as they hold the White House and the House and Senate majorities the Democrats are unable or unwilling to deliver basic progress. This will likely cost them their House majority in 2022 and the presidency in 2024.

Biden's "nothing will fundamentally change" attitude extends into foreign policy.

Secretary Pompeo @SecPompeo - 0:29 UTC · Dec 21, 2019
Today, the #ICC prosecutor raised serious questions about the ICC's jurisdiction to investigate #Israel. Israel is not a state party to the ICC. We firmly oppose this unjustified inquiry that unfairly targets Israel . The path to lasting peace is through direct negotiations.
---
Secretary Antony Blinken @SecBlinken - 1:34 UTC · Mar 4, 2021
The United States firmly opposes an @IntlCrimCourt investigation into the Palestinian Situation. We will continue to uphold our strong commitment to Israel and its security, including by opposing actions that seek to target Israel unfairly.

With that, and with its lack of punishment for the Saudi clown prince, the Biden administration has blinked on human rights which it had emphasized in earlier statements .

That nothing will change is also expressed in two policy papers the Biden administration released yesterday. The early emphasis on human rights, which distinguished it from the Trump administration, is already gone.

The common theme is now 'democracy' as if that were not just a form of government but a value in itself.

The White House published an Interim National Security Strategic Guidance (pdf). The paper is dripping with ideological LGBTQWERTY librulism. Its central claim is that 'democracy' is under threat:

At a time when the need for American engagement and international cooperation is greater than ever, however, democracies across the globe, including our own, are increasingly under siege . Free societies have been challenged from within by corruption, inequality, polarization, populism, and illiberal threats to the rule of law. Nationalist and nativist trends – accelerated by the COVID-19 crisis – produce an every-country-for-itself mentality that leaves us all more isolated, less prosperous, and less safe. Democratic nations are also increasingly challenged from outside by antagonistic authoritarian powers. Anti-democratic forces use misinformation, disinformation, and weaponized corruption to exploit perceived weaknesses and sow division within and among free nations, erode existing international rules, and promote alternative models of authoritarian governance. Reversing these trends is essential to our national security .

It then singles out China:

We must also contend with the reality that the distribution of power across the world is changing, creating new threats. China , in particular, has rapidly become more assertive. It is the only competitor potentially capable of combining its economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to mount a sustained challenge to a stable and open international system. Russia remains determined to enhance its global influence and play a disruptive role on the world stage. Both Beijing and Moscow have invested heavily in efforts meant to check U.S. strengths and prevent us from defending our interests and allies around the world. Regional actors like Iran and North Korea continue to pursue game-changing capabilities and technologies, while threatening U.S. allies and partners and challenging regional stability. We also face challenges within countries whose governance is fragile, and from influential non-state actors that have the ability to disrupt American interests.

To fight China the U.S. will (ab)use its allies:

We can do none of this work alone. For that reason, we will reinvigorate and modernize our alliances and partnerships around the world. For decades, our allies have stood by our side against common threats and adversaries, and worked hand-in-hand to advance our shared interests and values. They are a tremendous source of strength and a unique American advantage, helping to shoulder the responsibilities required to keep our nation safe and our people prosperous. Our democratic alliances enable us to present a common front, produce a unified vision, and pool our strength to promote high standards, establish effective international rules, and hold countries like China to account.

Good luck with that. Neither the European U.S. allies, nor the Asian ones, have any interest in following the U.S. into a confrontation with China. It is their greatest trading partner and they do not perceive it as an ideological or security threat.

A speech Secretary of State Anthony Blinken gave yesterday touches on the same points. It is headlined A Foreign Policy for the American People

The main theme is again 'democracy':

The more we and other democracies can show the world that we can deliver, not only for our people, but also for each other, the more we can refute the lie that authoritarian countries love to tell, that theirs is the better way to meet people's fundamental needs and hopes. It's on us to prove them wrong.

So the question isn't if we will support democracy around the world, but how.

We will use the power of our example. We will encourage others to make key reforms, overturn bad laws, fight corruption, and stop unjust practices. We will incentivize democratic behavior.

But we will not promote democracy through costly military interventions or by attempting to overthrow authoritarian regimes by force. We have tried these tactics in the past. However well intentioned, they haven't worked. They've given democracy promotion a bad name, and they've lost the confidence of the American people. We will do things differently.

The "lie that authoritarian countries love to tell, that their's is the better way to meet people's fundamental needs and hopes" is targeted at China. But that China did and does much better than the U.S. to meet its people's needs and hope is not a lie. The pandemic has again demonstrated that.

The last quoted paragraph has seen some positive attention on social media. But it is based on a falsehood. The U.S. has not once used military means to 'promote democracy'. Not ever. It has used war to gain markets and power, to destroy its competition. The neo-conservatives have claimed to be motivated by 'democracy promotion'. But that was always just a pretext to hide the real reasons for waging war. Iraq became democratic not because the U.S. wanted it to be that. In fact, after invading Iraq the the U.S. pro-consul Paul Bremer tried to prevent universal elections in Iraq. Only the insistence of Ayatollah Sistani on a universal vote led to a somewhat democratic system in Iraq.

Blinken is, just like Pompeo before him, focused on China:

And eighth, we will manage the biggest geopolitical test of the 21st century: our relationship with China.

Several countries present us with serious challenges, including Russia, Iran, North Korea. And there are serious crises we have to deal with, including in Yemen, Ethiopia, and Burma.

But the challenge posed by China is different. China is the only country with the economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to seriously challenge the stable and open international system – all the rules, values, and relationships that make the world work the way we want it to , because it ultimately serves the interests and reflects the values of the American people.

That there is no change from the Trump to the Biden administration in hostility to China is disappointing only for those who had expected some:

Pang Zhongying, a specialist in international relations at Ocean University of China, said Beijing would be disappointed with the Biden administration's approach to "continue and even elevate" the tough policies of the Trump era and to strengthen alliances to deal with China.

"There does not seem to be any change yet in the serious tensions in China-US relations," he said. "I think there may be some frustration in Beijing that after more than 40 days [of the new administration] they have not seen any change but there is actually more pressure from the US."

Beijing will manage the conflict and it is likely to see it as a chance.

The U.S. failure to adopt to new circumstances will accelerate its demise. The U.S. empire was a historical abnormality and its twilight is near :

[The Realist professors of International Relations David Blagden and Patrick Porter] observe America's "position as 'global leader' is premised on a set of impermanent and atypical conditions from an earlier post-war era", but " the days of incontestable unipolarity are over, and cannot be wished back ". The result is that "overextension abroad, exhaustion and fiscal strain at home, and political disorder feed off one another in a downward spiral, cumulatively threatening the survival of the republic".

The US empire is, then, at an impasse. Its moral and political justification of overseeing a global order of universal liberal democracy -- the closest real-world equivalent to the Kantian perpetual peace that has both motivated and eluded liberal idealists for the past two centuries -- is now beyond its capabilities to maintain.
...
How does this end for America? Biden and the presidents after him will be forced to make a hard choice: whether to retrench to a smaller and more manageable empire, or to risk a far greater and more dramatic collapse in defence of global hegemony.

Biden has made his choice. Nothing will fundamentally change under him. He is thereby likely to repeat all of Trump's foreign policy failures. There will be no new JCPOA with Iran nor will there be any win for the U.S. in the Middle East. North Korea will continue to test bombs and missiles. The U.S. will continue to be stuck in Afghanistan. The Chinese-Russian alliance will strengthen. U.S. allies will further distance themselves from it.

We can not yet know what, at what point will cause the collapse of U.S. hegemony. But we are coming more near to it.

Posted by b on March 4, 2021 at 18:04 UTC | Permalink

Did anybody expect anything else?

Bemildred , Mar 4 2021 18:28 utc | 2

Frankly, Biden's speech to the grand poobahs sounded more like a plea for understanding than a promise, and if you take what the policy paper says at face value it suggests that "Biden" understands that we have to change to compete. It is also an admission that they have presided over a period of decline in Uncle Sugar land, so of course they don't want to dwell on that. I think Biden is worried the "owners" wom't let him do anything.

And it is totally appropriate that Biden is the guy up there trying to deal with this mess, because he as one of the prime intigators or the present situation, going back 40 years.

Prof K , Mar 4 2021 18:43 utc | 3
Patrick Porter's book, The False Promise of Liberal Order, is good.

But, his realist critique of vulgar liberal propaganda for US imperialism doesn't locate the source or material roots of US grand strategy.

Realist theory understands power, hegemony and balancing only in terms of military power. That is the only currency of power in realist thinking, because realism rests on a state centricity which insists on the autonomy of the state from any social or economic factors. Military power is thus all that remains.

This theory obviously fails to explain the real history of US foreign policy, which has used militarism and other tools in support of strategic economic interests on a global scale, primarily in the South. The military balance of power is by and large only an expression of the economic balance of power and the class interests of ruling classes derived from it.

Porter and other realists point out the contradictions of liberal theory and practice but fail to provide a scientific explanation for consistent US policies.

dsfco , Mar 4 2021 18:54 utc | 4
"The Chinese-Russian alliance will strengthen."

There is a partnership currently but it's not yet an alliance. The rationale for one is very strong. Russia needs China or it will be overwhelmed by a hostile US and fairly hostile Europe. China needs Russia to save it from a resource embargo by US and allies. Together they will form a huge power bloc in Eurasia combining their respective territories with joint influence over Central Asia. Other countries in Asia like South Korea, Vietnam and India will see bloc and decide to stay neutral or side with the China-Russia bloc.

As compelling as this vision is it hasn't happened yet. It takes time sure but there must be reluctance from within the countries and other challenges. Which side is dragging its feet more? It would be interesting to understand why things aren't moving faster.

Canadian Cents , Mar 4 2021 19:02 utc | 5
As Ron Paul observed in Biden's Syria Attack: An Actual Impeachable Offense :

When President Biden says "America is back," what he really means is "the war party is back." As if they ever left.

The neocons just shifted their attention to the other side of the same coin.

eps , Mar 4 2021 19:25 utc | 6
As compelling as this vision is it hasn't happened yet. It takes time sure but there must be reluctance from within the countries and other challenges. Which side is dragging its feet more? It would be interesting to understand why things aren't moving faster.
Posted by: dsfco | Mar 4 2021 18:54 utc | 4

A guess: PRC having vastly greater economic power thinks its share of influence should be greater. Russia having vastly superior military power & technology, disagrees. For example the Chinese government might like access to the most advanced Russian military technology; the Russians having been invaded many times from both East & West, probably take the long view.

[Mar 06, 2021] We've Gone To A Liberal Form Of John Bolton -- Rand Paul Blasts Biden's Foreign Policy

Mar 06, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

This week the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a confirmation hearing for Wendy Sherman, nominated by the Biden White House to serve as deputy secretary of state.

The career diplomat answered the usual questions on how she views United States posture toward American rivals and official enemies like Russia, China, and Iran. Once again it was Sen. Rand Paul who had the most direct pushback and biting criticism against an administration that seems bent on returning to the foreign adventurism and unilateral military interventionism of the Obama and Bush years.

"We've gone to a liberal form of John Bolton," Paul said of President Biden during his turn to question Sherman. Paul is especially outraged over Biden's Syria strike without consulting Congress last week.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/8HanUqh_-CE

During the above exchange with Wendy Sherman, Paul in his concluding remarks had blasted away at Biden's vision of the world, citing past failed Democratic-led military interventions in places like Libya, Yemen, and Syria.

"I think we've gone to a liberal form of John Bolton with your new boss and that's something I'm really concerned with," Paul said.

"All I will say is that we're bombing now again in Syria without Congressional approval and we're sending more convoys in there without Congressional approval . It's a messy war - it's been going on forever, there's nothing good that's going to come out of our involvement," Paul explained in his statement.

"People say 'well US lives are at risk' ... yeah because we put'em there . We put them in the middle of a civil war that's largely over but can continue if we keep putting troops into there... to put our troops as a 'trip wire' to get involved in a further escalation of this war."

And that's when the Republican Senator from Kentucky blasted President Biden on his Syria stance and general interventionist foreign policy:

"I hope that we'll be sane voices and I hope that you'll be one of those," he said addressing Sherman.

"But I don't have a great deal of confidence that we've actually gone away from John Bolton, I've think we've gone to a liberal form of John Bolton with your new boss, and that's something I'm very concerned with ."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1367631736591421442&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fweve-gone-liberal-form-john-bolton-rand-paul-blasts-bidens-foreign-policy&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px

Sherman in response had tried to claim that the Biden admin is not trying to get more deeply involved in the Syria conflict, but maintained the 'countering ISIS' stance that the Pentagon has used for years to argue it must continue the occupation of the northeast portion of the country.

[Mar 06, 2021] Not agreement capable

Mar 06, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Mar 6 2021 0:38 utc | 62

arby #56

Are you gonna believe what I tell you or are you gonna believe what you see, comes to mind.

I believe what I see and I don't see the USA doing any bridge building, even in its own country where bridge infrastructure is in serious decay.

I repeat: These are not normal people in charge. They have lost their minds.

Maybe once a long time ago the USA diplomatic corp was supported by elected officials that set out to make allies based on mutual respect. But those days are long gone. The only bridges the USA builds is munition supply channels, be it by air or by sea. They destroy physical and metaphorical bridges in every nation they occupy.

The USA builds walls and barriers and obstruction: at home at the Mexican border, in the capital state, by economic sanctions illegally applied throughout the world, by destroying its home regulatory system to keep poisoned citizens from seeking judicial or regulatory redress for pollution and human suffering.

I see a mendacious, failed state surrounding its elected officials and financial institutions and even suburbs with walls and barriers. Then they attack people who criticise them in moderately peaceful ways. That is who they are, that is what I see.

[Feb 26, 2021] "Engagement with the world" and a "restoration of the pre-Trump era" was Biden's platform. Don't ask me why but this made him more popular. He was literally the VP in the most interventionist Presidency in US history.

Feb 26, 2021 | www.unz.com

Not Only Wrathful , says: February 26, 2021 at 11:13 am GMT • 15.4 hours ago

Biden has been a major disappointment for those who hoped that he'd change course regarding America's pathological involvement in overseas conflicts

Who hoped that? He didn't run on such a platform. "Engagement with the world" and a "restoration of the pre-Trump era" was his platform. Don't ask me why but this made him more popular. He was literally the VP in the most interventionist Presidency in US history.

... People like Giraldi sometimes seem like plants put in place to discredit anti-interventionism by trying to make it synonymous with anti-semitism.

Robjil , says: February 26, 2021 at 11:58 am GMT • 14.7 hours ago

Biden is a Israel firster like Pelosi. He has been one for a long time. He is an American laster like many presidents since 12.13.1913.

https://covertactionmagazine.com/2021/02/13/bought-and-paid-for-bidens-long-history-pandering-to-the-israeli-lobby/


In the late 1980s, Rannie Amiri, an independent commentator on political affairs, challenged then-Senator Joe Biden on his stance toward the Israel-Palestine conflict following a campus speech that Biden gave, asking him:

Rather than succumb to the influence of various lobbying groups in Washington, such as AIPAC [American Israel Public Affairs Committee -- which promotes the views of Israel's right-wing Likud Party], and the untold amount of money they use to dictate policy, wouldn't it be more prudent to examine the real effects that collective punishment, daily humiliation, and countless civilian casualties inflicted by the Israelis have on an occupied population, and use that understanding to formulate a more rational approach toward the Palestinians?

Here is Biden response to that:

At the end of the exchange, Biden turned, put his arm around Amiri's shoulder, and addressed the audience.

If this was not such a fine, articulate, and sincere young man, and he implied that my vote had been bought, I would give him a swift kick in the ass.

The audience roared in applause, and Amiri sat back down to his chair defeated. However, a friend rose up to defend him, telling Biden: "If my father heard you say such a thing, I believe he would have done the same to you first."

The tribal stupidity of the people who support Israel first is beyond words. Who would think in the 20th and the 21th century we would be led by primitive thinking of tribal fantasies from thousands of year ago?

Most of the us in the west did not know that this has been going on for so long since we have been deluded with the term "free press" to describe our press in the west. We are slowly waking up to reality with some "freedom" here and there on the internet like this site.

Sick of Orcs , says: February 26, 2021 at 12:39 pm GMT • 14.0 hours ago

So, Biden has been a major disappointment for those who expected that he might change course regarding America's pathological involvement in overseas conflicts while also having the good sense and courage to make relations with countries like Iran and Israel responsive to actual U.S. interests.

You're giving the morons way too much credit, Sir. It's doubtful even 5% of voters know or care about geopolitics, and probably less than 1% who voted based on fraudsident biden's foreign policies.

For 5 years it was nonstop Trump-hatred from the ((( lügenpresse ))) even as Trump did weasel jared's bidding. Stevie Fking Wonder could see the election was rigged.

The USA is kaput, the supreme joke spineless

The ((( Underminers ))) are a c ** t-hair away from total control.

The Free United States must part ways with the devils in DC. Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, the Dakotas and Montana for starters.

Realist , says: February 26, 2021 at 1:53 pm GMT • 12.8 hours ago

Biden's Journey: Change Is Imperceptible

That's how it is with the two sides of the Deep State coin, Republican/Democrat heads they win, tails you lose. It's been that way for decades.

[Feb 25, 2021] Most Americans consider Kissinger a war criminal too, and informed Americans know that Zbignue Brzenski has lost all credibility. He was a cold war era Anti-Russian. He has said little if anything relevant since the collapse of the USSR.

Feb 25, 2021 | www.unz.com

No Friend Of The Devil , says: February 23, 2021 at 3:45 am GMT • 2.8 days ago

Most Americans consider Kissinger a war criminal too, and informed Americans know that Zbignue Brzenski has lost all credibility. He was a cold war era Anti-Russian. He has said little if anything relevant since the collapse of the USSR.

Informed Americans would prefer a doplomatic relationship with their neighbors south of the border. It would be much more economically and environmentally sustainable to have a cooperative agreement with Venezuela, rather than the KXL advocates north of the border, that Biden thankfully banned. It may be the only thing tbat he ends up doing correctly. I hope not. I did not vote for him, Trump, or anyone else. Biden, Blinken, and Austin speak about wanting to go back to the JCPOA and START, but whether they are willing to give up their policy errors of force through sanctions, and falsely blaming Iran for the attack on the Irbil Iraq airport will probably determine whether they can do this successfully or not. Everyone is sick of the bullshit from the American government, including American citizens! The government does what they Globzi investors demand from them. They really do not give a damn about anyone else. Everyone is just a means to an end to them, and unkess someone is exceptionally wealthy, they are an irrelevant pain in the ass to the government, unless they are willing to sell out their own interest in order to elevate the corrupt government.

Andrea Iravani

Sirius , says: February 23, 2021 at 9:25 am GMT • 2.5 days ago
@Spanky

That's true. As a barometer of establishment thinking, Foreign Affairs is indeed useful. I would just make a distinction of using it to understand establishment thinking versus using it as a source for good policy, which is evidently questionable if its editors still think Robert Kagan has anything useful to propose.

[Feb 25, 2021] As the unofficial voice of U.S. foreign policy, Foreign Affairs turns up in some interesting places. And, after maintaining a subscription for many years, I would argue that it provides a fairly reliable chart of where the U.S. elite plan to steer the American ship of state.

Feb 25, 2021 | www.unz.com

Spanky , says: February 22, 2021 at 10:49 pm GMT • 3.0 days ago

@Sirius e Council on Foreign Relations quest for a New World Order through global cooperation, ending borders of trade and immigration, and continuing America's military role: ready to intervene anywhere in the world if necessary.

https://freddonaldson.com/2020/12/08/biden-picks-kissingers-policy-stalwarts-to-direct-u-s-foreign-policy-another-vietnam/

Everyone keeps talking about the elites who rule over us -- do you want to know who they are?

[Feb 24, 2021] The Art Of Being A Spectacularly Misguided Oracle

Feb 24, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

librul , Feb 23 2021 13:37 utc | 208

Hey, Hey, Hey!

It appears that Pepe Escobar reads the comments at MoA
and may even appreciate drinking games.

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/02/open-thread-2021-014.html?cid=6a00d8341c640e53ef026bdebe2482200c#comment-6a00d8341c640e53ef026bdebe2482200c


Neocons never collide with reality
they just rewrite around it.

Have I got a drinking game for you !

The Neocon Reality Check Game

Zoom connect to a party of friends
and simultaneously read through the
linked Neocon article together.

A Superpower, Like It or Not
Why Americans Must Accept Their Global Role
By Robert Kagan
March/April 2021

Pepe read the article, I can't speak to how many times he played the game.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/escobar-art-being-spectacularly-misguided-oracle

Escobar: The Art Of Being A Spectacularly Misguided Oracle


Peace is Forever War

Now let's move to another oracle, a self-described expert of what in the Beltway is known as the "Greater Middle East": Robert Kagan, co-founder of PNAC, certified warmongering neo-con, and one-half of the famous Kaganate of Nulands – as the joke went across Eurasia – side by side with his wife, notorious Maidan cookie distributor Victoria "F**k the EU" Nuland, who's about to re-enter government as part of the Biden-Harris administration.

Kagan is back pontificating in – where else – Foreign Affairs, which published his latest superpower manifesto. That's where we find this absolute pearl:


That Americans refer to the relatively low-cost military involvements in Afghanistan and Iraq as "forever wars" is just the latest example of their intolerance for the messy and unending business of preserving a general peace and acting to forestall threats. In both cases, Americans had one foot out the door the moment they entered, which hampered their ability to gain control of difficult situations.

So let's get this straight. The multi-trillion dollar Forever Wars are "relatively low-cost"; tell that to the multitudes suffering the Via Crucis of US crumbling infrastructure and appalling standards in health and education. If you don't support the Forever Wars – absolutely necessary to preserve the "liberal world order" – you are "intolerant".

"Preserving a general peace" does not even qualify as a joke, coming from someone absolutely clueless about realities on the ground. As for what the Beltway defines as "vibrant civil society" in Afghanistan, that in reality revolves around millennia-old tribal custom codes: it has nothing to do with some neocon/woke crossover. Moreover, Afghanistan's GDP – after so much American "help" – remains even lower than Saudi-bombed Yemen's.

[Feb 21, 2021] I will direct you to the latest spew from the Atlantic Council entitled "The Longer Telegram: Toward A New American China Strategy". It makes for farcical reading, and an interesting thought game it to substitute the US in any instance China is mentioned, and vice versa

Feb 21, 2021 | www.unz.com

rgl , says: February 12, 2021 at 5:04 pm GMT • 8.3 days ago

"The world has moved on." – the character 'Roland' in Stephen King's The Dark Tower. (an excellent series, btw)

Change is constant. It is inevitable. It is an ever-flowing river. America however, does not ascribe to this truism. America has *not* moved on. It does not change or adapt. It simply continues to fervently believe it is it's right to rule the world. Simply put, the days and decades where a single country 'rules the world' – like the Mongol, Byzantine, Romans, French, and British empires before, are gone. The Americans are nonetheless very slowly coming to realize this historical point, and they are desperately trying to reverse the trend. To absolutely no avail. They cannot escape history. The American empire will die the same death as all empires did before it. Maintaining empire, and peace 'at home' becomes unsustainable. The costs are simply too great.

It is ludicrous that a country founded on genocide and slavery, at war during 90% of it's existence demands the rest of the world look to it's 'beacon on the hill' as a viable option for humanity. It is laughable.

I read the hope inherent in the comments section to this piece. It is unfounded. Why do I say this? I will direct you to the latest spew from the Atlantic Council entitled "The Longer Telegram: Toward A New American China Strategy". It makes for farcical reading, and an interesting thought game it to substitute the US in any instance China is mentioned, and vice versa. Nonetheless, it is a plan by the movers and shakers to re-establish American global dominance. It is a disgusting piece of work. Much like America itself.

[Feb 19, 2021] I'm curious as to how Russia will regulate Western Big Tech platforms licensed to operate within Russia if they violate the terms of the agreement outside its borders, as Twitter did recently to a Russian group outside of Russia.

Feb 19, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Feb 17 2021 22:43 utc | 39

psychohistorian @27--

Thanks for the FYI. That's not at all an unexpected assault on a method for the people to redress grievances, not that it was actually acted upon since the Executive has a very nasty habit of not obeying the law.

I'm curious as to how Russia will regulate Western Big Tech platforms licensed to operate within Russia if they violate the terms of the agreement outside its borders, as Twitter did recently to a Russian group outside of Russia. Perhaps Russia will make an extraterritorial law such that if Twitter, for example, unjustifiably freezes an account as it does daily it will lose its rights to operate within Russia. As for the individual user, IMO its dumb to sign onto a service that you know practices censorship and shares private data with governments and other entities--either you value your own privacy or it will be stolen from you. With luck, quantum computing and its encryption algorithms will destroy all efforts at data collection; but those days are a ways off and will likely first become available on Chinese devices which the West will ban.

karlof1 , Feb 17 2021 23:24 utc | 46

I wonder what our Aussie barflies have to say about this :

"Facebook to ban Australian users from reading and sharing news in response to government's Big Tech bill."

That's right! FB Australia is going to ban its users from discussing a legislative proposal by the Australian government that would regulate Aussie FB.

If that's how they choose to operate, more nations will ban them. And again I ask why have anything to do with an organization that censors basic content.

Debsisdead , Feb 17 2021 23:41 utc | 47

re karlof1 #46

Google promised the same about two weeks ago as the Murdoch controlled Oz legislature is pushing to ensure that if big tech carries links to articles in news sites such as Murdoch's Daily Telegraph or Fairfax's Sydney Morning Herald they, big tech, will have to kick back a proportion of the advertising revenue they make.
Despite it being murdochian the claim has some merit, but no monopoly is going to acquiesce to such a small population as Australia's so Google, FB, Twitter etc, will just ban all news links to Oz sources.

The Oz conservatives are likely to do their usual "damn the voters, full speed ahead" as long as nothing else crops up to make this too on the nose.
This if it happens will be a win win for the Oz population as they will revert back to sourcing their own news and sharing it with others free of big tech's control & censorship. It will be an interesting time, although the monopolies will be pushing shock horror tales about it outside Oz. There is no chance of it happening in amerika as BidenCorp is a big tech puppet, but it could happen eventually as the fishwraps still retain considerable power over the amerikan political structure.

karlof1 , Feb 17 2021 23:58 utc | 48

Debsisdead @47--

Thanks for your reply! I recall one of the Cold War talking points was that the Free Flow of Information was Vital to democratic governance and was a major reason why the USSR and Warsaw Pact was so backwards as they stifled all information flows through censorship and other means. VoA Trumpeted that constantly. Such hubris is going to encourage the world's nations to come together to control what are clearly becoming outlaw organizations.

[Feb 10, 2021] Pax Americana

Feb 10, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

jsn , February 7, 2021 at 3:24 pm

Pax Americana:
US clandestine agencies, and the State Department and Pentagon to varying degrees, have been involved in non-stop regime change efforts towards the global integration of populations and resources in this system of private, capitalist control. Mostly successful since WWII, these efforts began with Greece in 1948, followed by Syria in 49, Albania from 49-53, Iran in 53, 54 Guatemala, Syria again in 56, Haiti in 57, Indonesia 57, Laos 58-60, Cuba 59-present, 59 Cambodia, 60 Ecuador, 60 Congo, 61 Dominican Republic, 62-64 Brazil, 63 Iraq, 63 South Vietnam, 64 Bolivia and Brazil, 65 France, 65 Indonesia again, 66 Ghana, 67 Greece again, 70 Costa Rica, 71 Bolivia again, 73-75 Australia, 73 Chile, 74 Portugal, 75 Angola, 75 Zaire, 76 Argentina, 76 Jamaica, 79-89 Afghanistan, 79 Seychelles, 80-92 Angola again, 80-89 Libya, 81-87 Nicaragua, 82 Chad, 83 Grenada, 82-84 South Yemen, 82-84 Suriname, 87 Fiji, 89 Panama, 91 Albania again, 91 Iraq, 93 Somalia, 99-2000 Yugoslavia, 2000 Ecuador again, 01 Afghanistan again, 02 Venezuela, 03 Iraq again, 04 Haiti again, 07 to present Somalia again, 11 Libya again, 12 to present Syria for a third time, 14 Ukraine, Brazil again in 16 and Bolivia and Ecuador in 2018. Ongoing destabilization efforts are underway in Venezuela, Iran, Russia and China.

Susan the other , February 6, 2021 at 8:12 pm

I thought Christine Lagarde had her nerve saying the US had an exorbitant privilege by owning the reserve currency. After WW2, according to a better view of our goals, the United States wanted a Pax Americana.

We wanted to actually police the world and bring all boats up with a rising tide of prosperity via free trade. We had been too frustrated by tariffs imposed on our goods by the old empires, specifically the British Empire for too long. It makes some sense that we willing bought everyones manufactured goods and went into a big deficit to do so because holding the reserve currency we made money on loans and financial services to make up for it. All the while controlling foreign military dust ups.

And for a while, through the 50s, we manufactured all sorts of things. Interesting to learn that the funding from having the reserve currency paid for the military. (and for the FIRE industry too)

It makes sense knowing this because the military and finance can get anything they ask for from the budget. Nothing is too much. Because the money coming in, as protection money for our military, more than covers it. But when it comes to sufficient social spending, there has never been enough.

The Empire always neglected its home base. Other countries do not operate that way.

So Ms. Lagarde, I'd hardly call that exorbitant. It was simply two separate economies.

[Feb 10, 2021] Well, Great Britain's performance in the first half of the 20th century has hardly inspired America to treat it with much respect: Well, move forward a half century and sub 'US' for 'GB' in your entire comment. Look familiar?

Feb 10, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

ObjectiveFunction , February 7, 2021 at 7:51 am

Well, Great Britain's performance in the first half of the 20th century has hardly inspired America to treat it with much respect:

1. Excepting their heroic 1940 defense of Britain, and beating an overextended (and mainly Italian) army at Third Alamein, they were either thrashed or bled white in every major battle of both world wars, relying on US armies/navies and materiel to prop them up. For all the eloquent theorizing, Britain's strategies were visibly self-serving, beyond its power, or outright quixotic, not to mention criminally incompetent (Somme, Bengal, soft underbelly, etc.)

2. Their vast colonial empire was becoming a crazy quilt of gigantic monocropped plantations and mines, increasingly nonviable as functional societies, and the locals knew it.

3. The US, Germany and Russia had all eclipsed Britain as industrial powers and had overtaken it as an innovator as well, although it remained strong in this sphere with an influx of Eastern Europeans.

.So to the emerging American technocratic elites, by 1945 the Mother Country must have seemed a mere shell: still supercilious, but myopic, exhausted and consistently unable to walk its talk.

(apologies to my British friends)

Prof. Hudson, many thanks for another good read, although I do continue to feel you view China through very rose colored glasses. Harmony and fairness are rather different concepts, but I'm eager to hear more from you on this topic in the future.

HotFlash , February 7, 2021 at 3:46 pm

Well, Great Britain's performance in the first half of the 20th century has hardly inspired America to treat it with much respect:

Well, move forward a half century and sub 'US' for 'GB' in your entire comment. Look familiar?

[Feb 10, 2021] American empire and fear of communism

Feb 10, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Dftbs , February 6, 2021 at 11:28 am

As always Professor Hudson is great, thank you for sharing this. I would note that it goes very well with the subsequent post on the site, dealing with negative rates.

I'd quibble ever so slightly with two things, the first the historical vacuum with regards to the Soviet Union and communism as a historical force which shaped the contours of this American system. The submission of the British Imperial system to the American one was driven by the fear of communism, not necessarily Soviet Communism but even the domestic sort. The American distaste for the overt imperial structure of the UK wasn't driven solely by economic sadism or democratic character, but the fear of communism as the vanguard of anti-imperialism: America and the UK as best of allies, but leave the Suez alone or Nasser will go commie.

The 2nd quibble is that the American collapse in this regard is already well underway. While I love professor Hudson's historical analysis I disagree with his economic determinism. The notion that the system whose creation he described was guided by actions bounded by the rules of economics. And that the next stage of historical development will follow those rules just in different contexts. As opposed to understanding that those rules are largely artifice.

Beneath the economic collapse, the conundrum the US finds itself in is that of its ruling class. As opposed to the British ruling class which understood that submission to the American system would protect their ancient privileges. The American ruling class can't find the same concordat with China. The Chinese are communist, and as Jack Ma's case demonstrated to the world recently. They aren't intimidated by the myths around wealth that sheepishly guide Americans.

So those same rules that governed balance of payments and modified American behavior throughout the Cold War don't apply today. They only applied then because they reinforced the interests of the American ruling class. As a matter of fact they subverted those very rules quite easily, note the talk of negative interest rates on the site today.

The Chinese BRI initiative seems less about generating profit for China and more about exposing the inadequacy of the current dollar system.

Professor Hudson correctly notes that the US is powerless against this. It can only act via proxy and those have been neutralized, see Syria. And that both Russia and China now are just trying to manage American decline and avoid the only American option left, nuclear war.

rosemerry , February 7, 2021 at 4:23 am

I often wonder if the "threat of communism" was genuine, as if there could not be cooperation among states with different systems of government. This is seen in the continued hatred of Russia in the last thirty years when it is no longer communist-in fact I think that Pres. Putin seems to be a far more Christian leader than any in the USA or other Western powers!!!
The arrogant attitude to Russia in the recent development of vaccines, when derision and skepticism a few months ago are replaced by amazement and acceptance now that the "West" has realized that the sputnik V seems to be among the best vaccines available. The USA does not yet seem to realize that the Russian defense (yes it IS for defense) is actually effective, unlike the US aggressive actions.

Dftbs , February 7, 2021 at 8:35 am

I think it was genuine if you were "Lord something or other" or a Dulles brother. That's not to say the world would've suffered from it. Simply those predecessors of our current tormentors may have suffered from it.

I think the interesting thing is that, for the US, that ship has sailed. There is submission to it, but no cooperation with it; and I doubt there ever will be again.

jrkrideau , February 7, 2021 at 9:46 am

This is seen in the continued hatred of Russia in the last thirty years when it is no longer communist

I often get the impression that Western, US in particular, politicians and political analysts have failed to grasp that the USSR has collapsed and that one part of it, the Russian Federation is now a capitalist country.

We also have to remember that the USA elite always needs an external enemy to blame. The loss of the USSR must have been traumatic and they have substituted the Russian Federation in its place.

Dftbs , February 6, 2021 at 3:50 pm

As always Professor Hudson is great, thank you for sharing this. I would note that it goes very well with the subsequent post on the site, dealing with negative rates.

I'd quibble ever so slightly with two things, the first the historical vacuum with regards to the Soviet Union and communism as a historical force which shaped the contours of this American system. The submission of the British Imperial system to the American one was driven by the fear of communism, not necessarily Soviet Communism but even the domestic sort. The American distaste for the overt imperial structure of the UK wasn't driven solely by economic sadism or democratic character, but the fear of communism as the vanguard of anti-imperialism: America and the UK as best of allies, but leave the Suez alone or Nasser will go commie.

The latter is that the American collapse in this regard is already well underway. While I love profesor Hudson's historical analysis I disagree with his economic determinism. The notion that the system whose creation he described was guided by actions bounded by the rules of economics. And that the next stage of historical development will follow those rules just in different contexts. For instance does China

[Feb 10, 2021] Wad the US entry into WW1 a bailout of Wall Street?

Feb 10, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Nels Nelson , February 6, 2021 at 11:31 am

I am curious to know Professor Hudson's thoughts on the role U.S. banks (i.e. J.P, Morgan) played in the US entry into WW1 and the creation of the Creel Committee propaganda campaign.

With Russian withdrawal from the eastern front giving Germany the ability to transfer resources to the western front, it became highly probable that Germany would win the war and US banks would suffer considerable losses.

In other words was US entry into WW1 a bailout of Wall Street.

Yves Smith , February 7, 2021 at 1:32 am

World War I and the end of the Gold Standard due to the inability to ship gold greatly diminished the power of the House of Morgan. JP Morgan had been the conduit for foreign capital into the US. He was trusted as a vetter of promising investments. That role became less important and less profitable after the US became a creditor nation. World War I accelerated that process.

[Feb 06, 2021] American Exceptionalism Is Back, except... by Michael Every

Feb 06, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

FEB 05, 2021

By Michael Every of Rabobank

"American Exceptionalism is Back", except...

"Oh say, can you see! By Dawn's early light; a pro-dollar trade; that puts the bears to flight?" Bloomberg Daybreak this morning boldly states "American exceptionalism is back" (baby). Apparently better-than-expected data and corporate earnings and the prospects of fiscal stimulus show the USA is still the global standout after all. As a result, bearish USD trades touted for the first month of the year need to suddenly be unwound: EUR is now back below 1.20, AUD is clinging to 0.76, and JPY is past 105.50, while as an EM proxy, MXN is back to 20.38 at time of writing vs. 19.55 on January 21.

... ... ...

President Biden has called on the military in Myanmar to relinquish power after their recent coup. What happens when they refuse? A signature criticism of the Obama foreign policy team was its refusal to match US rhetoric (e.g., "pivot to Asia") with any substantive action (e.g., in the South China Sea or Syria). The new team gave interviews before assuming office saying they had learned these lessons. So what options with teeth does the US have for the generals in Naypidaw to back their demand? Sanctions are meaningless for a group who rarely travel abroad and whom can look to China for support if needed, despite their coolness towards Beijing to date.

This underlines the need for any top dog (or cat) to build up a pack (or clowder). Here again we see problems. Many articles have been written about the new US administration's call for the EU to stand alongside it to create new global frameworks favourable to the West (and by extension for USD) and not China (and CNY); and about how the EU is not willing to step up to that plate because of French exceptionalism and German Merkel-cantilism. Macron now says the EU should not gang up on China with the US : " This kind of common front against China risks pushing Beijing to lower its cooperation on issues like combatting climate change, and exacerbating its aggressive behaviour in Asia, including in the South China Sea, " he says. So will the US response then have to be Trumpian and EUR negative, like last time? If not, then what exactly?

Of course, the previous administration had been building bridges to India, which has its own issues with China. However, this relationship is still in its early stages, and India has traditionally looked to Russia for muscle, a role Moscow would be happy to play again. In that regard, the White House backing large anti-government protests in New Delhi against an agricultural reform programme ostensibly to the US's liking, and criticizing the government for cutting off the internet to try to disrupt them, is unlikely to help build bridges: indeed, India has already drawn comparisons to the events of 6 January in the US Capitol, showing the US is not as exceptional as it likes to project it is. These kind of shifts can matter, even if this is just one small step on a much longer journey (and USD trend channel).

Meanwhile, the Aussie government (which has also never and will never target house prices, "just land, bricks, mortar, etc.") might be wondering what the US will help do about a report that a Chinese company is planning to build a new city on a Papua New Guinea island near Australia's northern border . 'New Daru City' allegedly includes an industrial zone, seaport, business and commercial zone, along with a resort and residential area. Will Canberra regard this as a market-driven response to the well-known Chinese demand for lifestyle residences in the vibrant cultural hub that is the PNG hinterland, or as a Bond-villain project to develop a port just 200km from their Northern Territory? The PNG Prime Minister himself says he is "unaware" of this proposal(!) Yes, this may well not come to pass; but one can again see the paving stones being prepared for alternative paths for currencies like AUD, USD, and CNY (to say nothing of PNG's Kina) to travel over the course of the 2020s.

Meanwhile, the US can at least rely on the UK, as usual, where yesterday saw regulators ban China's CGTN TV news service, and the Telegraph also reports that three Chinese spies posing as journalists have just been expelled from the country. Somehow, along with the whole BNO passports issue, this is not likely to help ensure the "golden era" of Sino-British relations promised under previous UK leadership.

But will it ensure a golden era of Bido-BoJo relations? That is another path as yet untrod.

Happy Friday! "We love it so much, I think you do too."

[Feb 05, 2021] Cornel West called Barack Obama black mascot for Wall Street which was correct.

Feb 05, 2021 | www.ineteconomics.org

If you go back under Eisenhower, the wealthiest segment of the population, the wealthiest corporations paid 91% income tax. What you saw, and I learned much of this from Ralph Nader who was turned into a pariah consciously, is that they pushed out the real liberal wing of the Democratic party. Ralph himself wrote I think 24 pieces of legislation, consumer protection, the mine and safety act, the clean water act. This was all Nader. But it was pushed through by liberal senators, Proxmire, Fulbright and others, Wellstone, maybe being one of the last. All of these people were pushed out of the Democratic party and replaced with these full liberal, I would call them full liberals figures like Obama, figures like Clinton, who spoke in that traditional feel, you're paying language of the Democratic party but serve the interest of Wall Street. Cornel West called Barack Obama black mascot for Wall Street which was correct.

[Feb 05, 2021] Head Of Strategic Command Warns Nuclear War With Russia, China -A Real Possibility- - ZeroHedge

Feb 05, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

The head of US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) warned that a nuclear war with Russia or China is a "real possibility" and is calling for a change in US policy that reflects this threat .

"There is a real possibility that a regional crisis with Russia or China could escalate quickly to a conflict involving nuclear weapons, if they perceived a conventional loss would threaten the regime or state," Vice Adm. Charles Richard wrote in the February edition of the US Naval Institute's monthly magazine .

Charles A. Richard, the 11th commander of US Strategic Command

Richard said the US military must "shift its principal assumption from 'nuclear employment is not possible' to 'nuclear employment is a very real possibility,' and act to meet and deter that reality."

The STRATCOM chief said Russia and China "have begun to aggressively challenge international norms and global peace using instruments of power and threats of force in ways not seen since the height of the Cold War."

Richard hyped up Russia and China's nuclear modernization, calling for the US to compete with the two nations. When it comes to China's nuclear weapons, the US and Russia have vastly larger arsenals. Current estimates put Beijing's nuclear arsenal at about 320 warheads, while Washington and Moscow have about 6,000 warheads each .

Even if Beijing doubles its arsenal over the next decade, as the China hawks are predicting, it will still be small compared to Washington's. The US would have to eliminate a good amount of its arsenal to convince Beijing to participate in arms control agreements.

Since STRATCOM is the command post that oversees Washington's nuclear arsenal, its commanders are always overplaying the risk of nuclear war and asking for more money to modernize the stockpile. But with the US prioritizing so-called "great power competition" with China and Russia and an increased US military presence in places like the South China Sea , the Arctic , and the Black Sea , the threat of nuclear war is rising.

[Feb 03, 2021] Former Navy SEAL- The Miseducation Of Antony Blinken - ZeroHedge

Jan 29, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Kenny MacDonald via The Libertarian Institute,

On January 19th, the US Senate held confirmation hearings for Joe Biden's Secretary of State nominee Antony Blinken. Blinken has a reputation on both sides of the aisle for being exceptionally qualified for the job of America's top diplomat, which is surprising considering he was on the wrong side of every major foreign policy blunder of the last 20 years ; Iraq, Libya, and Syria .

When Senator Rand Paul asked Antony Blinken what lessons he has learned from his disastrous foreign policy record in Libya and Syria, Blinken replied that after "some hard thinking" he's proud that he has done "everything we possibly can to make sure that diplomacy is the first answer, not the last answer, and that war and conflict is our last resort."

Of course war is the last resort. Even the most hawkish war criminals would agree that war is the last resort. But the question is, war is the last resort to accomplish what? If war is the last resort to get a country to fully capitulate to Washington's demands then eventually the US will be at war with everyone. To Blinken, war as the last resort can only be understood in the same way a mugger considers shooting his victim as a last resort to stealing their wallet.

Via the AP

Blinken displayed his hubris a few minutes later when he said, "The door should remain open" for Georgia to join NATO under the justification of curbing Russian aggression .

Rand Paul informed Blinken, "This would be adding Georgia, that's occupied [by Russia], to NATO. Under Article 5, then we would go to war ."

Senator Paul is right. According to Washington, Russia has been occupying 20 percent of Georgia since 2008. Under the principle of collective defense in Article 5 of NATO, the US would be obligated to treat Russia's occupation of the country of Georgia the same way the US would treat a Russian occupation of the US state of Georgia. That sounds like a recipe for war. But don't worry, peaceniks, Antony Blinken has assured us that war is the last resort!

Blinken's framing of the issue exposes his disingenuous approach. Russian aggression is a term used by Washington insiders to describe a Russian reaction to western aggression. Blinken knows that the 2008 war between Russia and Georgia was not Russian aggression, he calls it that because it suits his agenda and the American press is dependably ignorant enough to not ask questions.

In the 2008 war, Georgia was the aggressor against the South Ossetians, a people who are ethnically distinct from Georgians, and who have never -- not even for one day -- considered themselves a part of Georgia. The Ossetians have a history of Russian partiality ; they were among the first ethnic groups in the region to join the Russian Empire in the 19th century and the USSR in the 1920s. Today, ethnic Ossetians straddle both sides of the current Russian border, and they are more aligned with the Russian government than with the Georgian government.

When Georgia gained sovereignty from the former Soviet Union in 1991, South Ossetia declared its independence. In response, Georgian forces invaded South Ossetia, initiating an armed conflict that killed more than 2,000 people . In 1992, a ceasefire agreement was signed in Sochi between Georgia, Russia and South Ossetia, which created a tripartite peacekeeping force led by Russia. Although the international community never acknowledged South Ossetia's independence, they have enjoyed political autonomy since the 1992 Sochi agreement.

The Sochi agreement held up until Georgia's ultra-nationalist President Mikheil Saakashvili came to power in the 2003 western-backed bloodless " Rose Revolution " coup-d'etat. The pro-western President Saakashvili advocated joining the EU and NATO, and insisted on asserting Georgian rule over South Ossetia. U.S. President George Bush supported the new Georgian president's effort to bring Georgia into NATO, which for Russia would mean bringing a hostile military up to its border. In 2006, President Saakashvili offered South Ossetia autonomy in exchange for a political settlement with Georgia. A referendum was held, and the South Ossetian people overwhelmingly reaffirmed their desire for independence from Georgia.

In August, 2008, After exchanging artillery fire with South Ossetia, Georgia invaded South Ossetia's capital city of Tskhinvali, killing 1,400 civilians and 18 Russian peacekeepers . Georgia's attack triggered a Russian invasion into South Ossetia and Abkhazia (another breakaway region) to restore stability and protect peacekeeping forces.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1354066564375601152&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fformer-navy-seal-miseducation-antony-blinken&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Russia is by no means innocent -- they used disproportionate force attacking targets inside Georgia -- but only a Russophobic shill would conclude that this war was somehow caused by Russian aggression. The idea that Russia had no business intervening is laughable. Under the 1992 Sochi agreement , Russia took charge of a peacekeeping coalition to help prevent exactly the scenario that happened in the summer of 2008.

If George Bush had succeeded in bringing Georgia into NATO, the United States may have been dragged into war with Russia in 2008. Antony Blinken claims that NATO membership deters Russian aggression, but does he really believe that Russia would have been deterred from intervening to protect its own peacekeeping force? Does Blinken believe that Georgia -- backed by the U.S. military -- would have acted more cautiously in South Ossetia, or is it more likely they would have been bolder?

It's undeniable that it is in Russia's best interest to have pro-Russian countries on its borders. But pretending as if Russia is going to march into Tbilisi and reabsorb the entire country of Georgia into Russia is a level of paranoia that should disqualify anyone from having an opinion on the subject. The military conflict in Georgia is about the two breakaway regions and their right to self determination. Russia's self interest happens to align with the wishes of the people in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. By supporting Georgia, America -- the champion of democracy and self determination -- has adopted the position that South Ossetians didn't really mean to repeatedly choose independence when given the option. This is a situation where America's professed values are diametrically opposed to its policy of countering Russian influence everywhere on the map.

Antony Blinken should pause to consider if America's policy objectives are worth fighting a war for. Is it worth confronting Russia in South Ossetia? Was it worth confronting Russia over Crimea and the Donbas in Ukraine ? Is it a good idea to withdraw from the INF Nuclear Treaty and the Open Skies Treaty ? Should we have spent the last 30 years marching NATO -- a military alliance hostile to Russia -- right up to the doorsteps of Russia ? Is any of this really making us safer?

Blinken has bought into his own propaganda. To Blinken, regardless of the stubborn details of history, every conflict on Russia's border is simply Russian aggression. Washington's solution is the expansion of NATO, which Russia describes as " NATO encirclement. " This is an unacceptable military threat to Russia, who has a deep distrust of western intentions due to a long history of western invasions into Russia. Antony Blinken still lives in a bipolar world in which the United States and Russia are existential threats to each other's existence. Every conflict and every alliance is only viewed through the lens of the New Cold War crusade against Russia. This maniacal crusade could thrust America in the unthinkable abyss of nuclear war.

Rand Paul got his answer, Antony Blinken learned nothing from all his mistakes! The danger isn't merely resorting to war too early, the danger is in sticking our noses in conflicts that we have no business being in. War should be the last resort to defending America's people and it's homeland from foreign invasion; it should not be the last resort to enforcing America's utopian vision on the world, and it certainly shouldn't be the last resort to prevent an ethnic group in the South Caucasus -- that almost no American has ever heard of -- from the right to self-determination.

Kenny MacDonald is a former Navy SEAL and Afghanistan War veteran. He is currently pursuing a bachelor's degree in history. Youtube Channel . Medium . Facebook .

[Feb 03, 2021] On the Cusp of the -Blue Terror- by Alan Sabrosky

Feb 03, 2021 | www.unz.com

Anonymous [420] Disclaimer , says: February 2, 2021 at 12:43 am GMT • 4.9 hours ago

The Fate of Empires by Sir John Glubb:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=TheFateofEmpiresbySirJohnGlubb&t=brave&ia=web

Sir John Glubb's essay on the rise and fall of empires is a must read. As this quote from his work shows, empires throughout history have had an extraordinary pattern of lasting an average of 250 years from rise to fall.

Assyria: 859 B.C. – 612 B.C. 247 years
Persia: 538 B.C. – 330 B.C. 208 years
Greece: 331 B.C. – 100 B.C. 231 years
Roman Republic: 260 B.C. – 27 B.C. 233 years
Roman Empire: 27 B.C. – A.D. 180 207 years
Arab Empire: A.D. 634 – A.D. 880 246 years
Mameluke Empire: A.D. 1250 – A.D. 1517 267 years
Ottoman Empire: A.D. 1320 – A.D. 1570 250 years
Spain: A.D. 1500 – A.D. 1750 250 years
Romanov Russia: A.D. 1682 – A.D. 1916 234 years
British Empire: A.D. 1700 – A.D. 1950 250 years
United States: A.D. 1776 – A.D. ???? ??? years

Some more quotes from this essay:

Feminism isn't working out too well today. It didn't work out for 10th century Arabs either:

In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab Empire, the women demanding admission to the professions hitherto monopolised by men. 'What,' wrote the contemporary historian, Ibn Bessam, 'have the professions of clerk, tax-collector or preacher to do with women? These occupations have always been limited to men alone.' Many women practised law, while others obtained posts as university professors. There was an agitation for the appointment of female judges, which, however, does not appear to have succeeded. Soon after this period, government and public order collapsed, and foreign invaders overran the country. The resulting increase in confusion and violence made it unsafe for women to move unescorted in the streets, with the result that this feminist movement collapsed.

One half of America's population at the other half's throat? Yeah, the Byzantines have been there and done it already:

In the fourteenth century, the weakening empire of Byzantium was threatened, and indeed dominated, by the Ottoman Turks. The situation was so serious that one would have expected every subject of Byzantium to abandon his personal interests and to stand with his compatriots in a last desperate attempt to save the country. The reverse occurred. The Byzantines spent the last fifty years of their history in fighting one another in repeated civil wars, until the Ottomans moved in and administered the coup de grâce.

What do the new overlords do when they take control of a ravaged empire? Civilised Persian officials found out when the barbaric Mongols took the empire they had let fall by the wayside:

When the Mongols conquered Persia in the thirteenth century, they were themselves entirely uneducated and were obliged to depend wholly on native Persian officials to administer the country and to collect the revenue. They retained as wazeer, or Prime Minister, one Rashid al Din, a historian of international repute. Yet the Prime Minister, when speaking to the Mongol II Khan, was obliged to remain throughout the interview on his knees. At state banquets, the Prime Minister stood behind the Khan's seat to wait upon him. If the Khan were in a good mood, he occasionally passed his wazeer a piece of food over his shoulder.

I'm not American, but I feel like crying as I put this together. Anyway, America will do its best to buck the 250 year trend.

Resartus , says: February 2, 2021 at 2:03 am GMT • 3.6 hours ago
@Anonymous antines spent the last fifty years of their history in fighting one another in repeated civil wars, until the Ottomans moved in and administered the coup de grâce.

Can't forget the American Indians, the South American Indians etc never stopped fighting each other once Europeans showed up .
Many Tribes did little more than welcome better weapons (firearms) to continue their genocide against neighboring Tribes .
No matter how much the Left talks about the plight of the First Peoples, they paid attention to the outcome and are pushing much the same internal conflicts

gay troll , says: February 2, 2021 at 2:34 am GMT • 3.1 hours ago

We have a problem. The U.S. government is supposed to be of, by, and for the people. But it has held itself unaccountable for decades while systematically stupefying, demoralizing, and impoverishing the public through popular culture. Does a republic always turn to an empire, a democracy to a tyrant, and a tyrant into pieces? The world needs globalism, but it does not need monoculture. When the U.S. regime collapses it may be different this time. This time we have the internet. The whole world watches everything.

Juri , says: February 2, 2021 at 4:26 am GMT • 1.2 hours ago

I also predict the 1917 outcome. Worst outcome the Trump presidency was knowledge that Red America is incapable to organize on the grassroot level, unite and fight back . So the Blue can do whatever they want .

There are 2 issues remain. Elite infighting may make Government dysfunctional. New democrats like the Squad want to push old Swamp Things out and fill Government positions with their supporters.

Financial system blows off and massive economic disaster with chaos makes country ungovernable.

[Jan 29, 2021] 6 Warning Signs from Biden's First Week in Office OffGuardian

Jan 29, 2021 | off-guardian.org

6 Warning Signs from Biden's First Week in Office The "progressive" candidate praised as a "woke bloke" seems to be carrying on where all his authoritarian Imperialist predecessors left off Kit Knightly

It's been a busy first week for the 46th President of the United States, there are the 20,000 troops occupying the capital city to organise, as well as the totally unprecedented show-trial of his immediate predecessor.

You know, usual democracy type stuff.

On top of that, Biden has now signed at least 37 executive orders in his first week . The record for any President, and more than the previous four presidents combined.

What do these orders, or any of his other moves, tell us about the future plans of the recently "elected" administration? Nothing good, unfortunately.

1. VACCINATION PASSPORTS

I still remember people claiming the introduction of vaccination passports (or immunity passes or the like) was just a "conspiracy theory", the paranoid fantasy of fringe "covidiots". All the way back in December, when they were getting fact-checked by tabloid journalists who can't do basic maths .

These days they are rebranded as "freedom certificates" which are "divisive, politically tricky and probably inevitable" .

Many countries are already preparing to roll it out, including Iceland the UK and South Africa . Biden's "Executive Order on Promoting COVID-19 Safety in Domestic and International Travel" adds the US to this list:

International Certificates of Vaccination or Prophylaxis. Consistent with applicable law, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of HHS, and the Secretary of Homeland Security (including through the Administrator of the TSA), in coordination with any relevant international organizations, shall assess the feasibility of linking COVID-19 vaccination to International Certificates of Vaccination or Prophylaxis (ICVP) and producing electronic versions of ICVPs.

2. CABINET APPOINTMENTS

Biden's cabinet is praised as the "most diverse" in history, but will hiring a few non-white people really change the decades-old policies of US Imperialism? It certainly doesn't look like it.

His pick for Under Secretary of State is Victoria Nuland , a neocon warmonger and one of the masterminds of the Maidan coup in Ukraine in 2014. She is married to Robert Kagan , another neocon warmonger, co-founder of the Project for a New American Century and senior fellow at the Brookings Institute and one of the masterminds behind the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The incoming Secretary of State, Antony Blinken , is also an inveterate US Imperialist, arguing for every US military intervention since the 1990s, and criticised Trump's decision to withdraw from Syria.

Biden's pick for Defence Secretary is the first African-American ever appointed to this role, but former General Lloyd Austin is hardly going be some kind of "progressive" voice int his cabinet. He's a career soldier who retired from the military in 2016 to join the board of Raytheon Technologies , an arms manufacturer and military contractor.

As "diverse" as this cabinet may be in skin colour or gender there is most certainly no "diversity" of opinion or policy. There are very few new faces and no new thoughts.

So, it looks like we can expect more of the same in terms of foreign policy. A fact that's already been displayed in

3. IRAQ

Despite heavy resistance from the military and Deep State, Donald Trump wanted to end the war in Iraq and pledged to pull American troops out of the country. This was one of Trump's more popular policies, and during the campaign Biden made no mention of intending to reverse that decision.

Then, on the very day of Biden's inauguration, ISIS conducted their deadliest suicide bombing for over three years , and suddenly the situation was too unstable for the US to leave, and Biden is being forced to "review" Trump's planned withdrawal .

The Iraqi parliament has made it clear it wants the US to take its military off their soil , so any American forces on Iraqi land are technically there illegally in contravention of international law. But that never bothered them before.

4. AFGHANISTAN

Turns out the US can't withdraw from Afghanistan either. Last February Trump signed a deal with the Taliban that all US personnel would leave Afghanistan by May 2021.

Joe Biden has already committed to "reviewing" this deal . Sec. Blinken was quoted as saying that Biden's admin wanted:

to end this so-called forever war [but also] retain some capacity to deal with any resurgence of terrorism, which is what brought us there in the first place".

As a great man once said , nothing someone says before the word "but" really counts. The US will not be withdrawing from Afghanistan, and if there is any public pressure to do so, the government will simply claim the Taliban broke their side of the deal first, or stage a few terrorist attacks.

5. AND SYRIA

Far from simply continuing the on-going wars, there are already signs Biden's "diverse" team will look to escalate, or even start, other conflicts.

Syria was another theatre of war from which Donald Trump wanted to extricate the United States, unilaterally ordering all US troops from the country in late 2019.

We now know the Pentagon ignored those orders. They lied to the President , telling Trump they had followed his orders but not withdrawing a single man. This organized mutiny against the Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces was played for a joke in the media when it was finally revealed.

There will be no need for any such duplicity now Biden is in the Oval Office, he was a vocal critic of the decision to withdraw , claiming it gave ISIS a "new lease of life". Indeed, within two days of his being sworn in a column of American military vehicles was seen entering Syria from Iraq .

6. DOMESTIC TERRORISM

We called this before the inauguration . They made it just too obvious. Before the dirty footprints had been cleaned from Nancy Pelosi's desk it was clear where it was all going.

Within 24 hours of being sworn in as president, Biden had ordered a "review of the threat posed by domestic terrorism" .

As usual, the press are laying down the covering fire for this. Talking heads have been busily comparing MAGA voters to al Qaida in television interviews. The Washington Post and New Yorker Journal have cut-and-paste pieces about this supposed threat. Politico published an article titled "Biden vowed to defeat domestic terrorism. The how is the hard part" , which outlines what Biden could do:

Direct the Justice Department, FBI and National Security Council to execute a top-down approach prioritizing domestic terrorism; pass new domestic terrorism legislation; or do a bit of both as Democrats propose a crack down on social media giants like Facebook for algorithms that promote conspiracy laden posts.

That last part is key. The "crack down on social media" part, because the anti-Domestic Terrorism legislation will likely be very focused on communication and so-called "misinformation".

Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez has publicly called for a congressional panel to "rein in" the media :

We're going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so you can't just spew disinformation and misinformation,"

And who will be the target of these crack downs and new legislations? Well, according John Brennan (ex-head of the CIA and accomplished war criminal), practically anybody:

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=kit_knightly&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1352007118392582148&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Foff-guardian.org%2F2021%2F01%2F27%2F6-warning-signs-from-bidens-first-week-in-office%2F&siteScreenName=kit_knightly&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

They're casting a wide net. Expect "extremist", "bigot" and "racist" to be just a few of the words which have their meanings totally revised in the next few months. "Conspiracy theorist" will be used a lot, too.

Further, they are moving closer and closer toward the "anyone who disagrees with us is literally insane" model. With many articles actually talking about "de-programming" Trump voters. The Atlantic suggests "mental hygiene" would cure the MAGA problem.

Again AOC is on point here, clearly auditioning for the role of High Inquisitor, claiming that the new Biden government needs to fund programs that "de-radicalise" "conspiracy theorists" who are on the "spectrum of radicalisation" .

*

As I said at the beginning, it's been a busy week for Joe Biden, but you can sum up his biggest policy plans in one short sentence: More violence overseas, less tolerance of dissent and strict clampdowns on "misinformation".

How progressive.

[Jan 29, 2021] Meet Antony 'Blinkered' Biden's Choice for America's Top Diplomat -- Strategic Culture

Jan 29, 2021 | www.strategic-culture.org

Blinken does not seem to have repented from his fundamentalist belief in American imperial goodness, notwithstanding his appeal for "humility".

Barring an earthquake in Washington, Antony Blinken is set to become the new U.S. Secretary of State and America's top diplomat. The youthful and telegenic Blinken (58) takes over from Mike Pompeo who was America's representative to the world under the last Trump administration.

The contrast could not be more stark. In place of Pompeo's thuggish, rough-edged style, Blinken has the appearance of consummate diplomat. He's fluent in French owing to a European education, he's urbane and sophisticated and comes from a family which has diplomacy in its genes. His father was an ambassador to Hungary and an advisor to President John F Kennedy. An uncle was ambassador to Belgium.

Blinken has Hungarian and Russian Jewish ancestry. His mother remarried a Polish-American Jewish survivor of the Nazi holocaust. During his confirmation hearing in the Senate this week, Blinken told the story of how his stepfather escaped from a Nazi death march in Bavaria and was eventually rescued by an American tank driven by an African-American officer.

That story has shaped Blinken's worldview of America's prestige and international role. He's a proponent of U.S. military interventionism with a presumption of moral duty. He's an advocate of America working with European allies and upholding the transatlantic alliance – in contrast to Trump's boorish America First sloganeering. Understandably, Blinken is imbued with an unshakable belief in "American exceptionalism" and "manifest destiny" as a world leader.

The Senators at his confirmation hearing this week swooned as Blinken spoke. He's certain to be confirmed as the new Secretary of State in the coming days. That's because he is seen to be perfect for the task of restoring America's international image which has been so badly tarnished under Trump and his grumpy gofer Pompeo. The Europeans will lap up Blinken and his transatlantic romanticism.

Blinken has said that America's foreign policy must be conducted with "humility and confidence", which may sound refreshingly modest. But it's not. Underlying this "quiet American" is the same old arrogance about U.S. imperial might-is-right and Washington's presumed privilege of appointing itself as the "world's policeman".

If Blinken's record is anything to go on, his future role as America's top diplomat is foreboding.

Previously, he was a senior member in the Obama administrations serving as national security advisor to both the president and Joe Biden who was then vice-president. Blinken rose to become deputy Secretary of State in the final years of the second Obama administration. In those roles he was a key player in a series of foreign interventions which turned out to be utterly disastrous.

He was a big proponent of U.S. military intervention in Libya in 2011 which led to the toppling and murder of Muammar Gaddafi. That intervention along with other NATO powers has left a ruinous legacy not only for Libya but for North Africa, the Mediterranean and Europe.

Blinken was also a point-man in Obama's intervention in Syria where the U.S. (and other NATO powers) supplied weapons to anti-government militants. The so-called "rebels" were in fact myriad terrorist groups affiliated with Al Qaeda and other extremist Islamists. Up to half a million people have been killed in the decade-long Syrian war and much of that blood is on America's hands from its de facto support for terror gangs. Maybe Blinken genuinely thought he was supporting "pro-democracy rebels". But even if we give him the benefit of doubt, the upshot is still a disaster of American interventionism.

Another catastrophic consequence of Blinken's policymaking is Yemen. Under his direction, the Obama administration backed the Saudi war on its southern neighbor beginning in March 2015 and continuing to this day. Yemen has become the worst humanitarian crisis in the world with millions facing starvation amid Saudi aerial bombardment carried out with U.S. warplanes and logistics.

The new Biden administration has indicated it will withdraw military support for Saudi Arabia in its war on Yemen. But that doesn't absolve the U.S., and Blinken in particular, for having created the horrendous quagmire from which it is belatedly trying to extricate itself from.

What's rather perplexing, however, is that Blinken does not seem to have repented from his fundamentalist belief in American imperial goodness, notwithstanding his appeal for "humility". During his Senate hearings, he showed little regret about America's illegal bombing of Libya and its arming of jihadists in Syria.

He described the world with the conventional brainwashed American ideology as being a place where China, Russia, Iran and North Korea are enemies that must be confronted. He also told Senators he was in favor of increasing supplies of lethal weaponry to the Ukraine and its rabidly anti-Russian regime in Kiev. Recall that it was the Obama administration which instigated a coup d'état in Kiev against an elected president in February 2014. The new regime was and is dominated by far-right nationalists who laud past links to Nazi Germany. If Blinken has his way the war against ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine will escalate and could ignite a bigger confrontation between Russia and the U.S.

One of the hallmarks of the U.S.-backed regime in Kiev is its espousal of Neo-Nazi traditions and in particular antisemitic hatred.

Given Antony Blinken's own Jewish ancestry and his own intimate connection to the Nazi holocaust, you do have to question his competence if he becomes America's foreign policy leader. His boss President Joe Biden has fondly lionized Blinken as a "superstar" of diplomacy. Superficially perhaps, he has finesse and intelligence. But in much the same basic way of adhering to American imperialism, Blinken is as crude and thuggish as his predecessor Pompeo. He just projects a more plausible look and sound, which is most desirable as a moral cover for America's criminal imperialism.

Blinken is known to self-deprecate his "insatiable habit" for making up bad puns. For example, on one occasion when he was addressing an audience on policy regarding the Arctic, he began by joking he would be "breaking the ice". Given his ability to pursue destructive dead-end policies, he might therefore appreciate the moniker "Secretary of State Tony Blinkered".

[Jan 29, 2021] Speaking about rich families who own the world. There is one unique feature of german oligarchy, they don't change.

Jan 29, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

rico , Jan 29 2021 19:24 utc | 32

Speaking about rich families who own the world. There is one unique feature of german oligarchy, they don't change. More than half of the hundred richest families now have already been rich before ww1. They made the crazy history of last century possible. Please just go for a second in the perspective they have.

[Jan 28, 2021] What Biden Wars Will Actually Look Like by Caitlin Johnstone

Jan 28, 2021 | consortiumnews.com


CaitlinJohnstone.com

T here's a news story about a U.S. military convoy entering Syria being shared around social media with captions claiming that President Joe Biden is already "invading" Syria which is getting tons of shares in both right-wing and left anti-imperialist circles.

The virality of these shares has inspired clickbait titles like " Joe Biden Invades Syria with Convoy of U.S. Troops and Choppers on First Full Day as President ," which are being shared with equal virality.

But if you read the original report everyone jumped on, accurately titled "U.S. military convoy enters northeast Syria: report," you don't have to read too far to get to this line :

"Other local media report that such maneuvers are not unusual as the U.S. often moves transfers equipment between Iraq and Syria."

So, while this is a movement of troops between illegitimate military occupations which have no business existing in either country, it is nothing new and would have been happening regardless of which candidate had won the last U.S. presidential election.

Another inaccurate narrative that's gone completely viral is the claim that Biden is sending more troops to Iraq. This one traces back to a single Twitter post by some Trumpy account with the handle "@amuse" who shared a Jerusalem Post article with the caption "BREAKING: President Biden is considering reversing Trump's drawdown in Iraq by adding thousands of troops to combat growing terror threats in the region as evidenced by Thursday's attack near the U.S. embassy."

If you read the actual JPost article titled " Baghdad bombing could be the Biden admin's first challenge " you will see that it contains no such claim, and if you were to search a bit you would find @amuse claiming that they were sharing something they'd learned from "sources" in D.C. instead of accurately summarizing the contents of the article.

Unless you know this person and know them to be consistently trustworthy, there is no valid reason to believe claims allegedly said by alleged anonymous sources to some openly partisan anonymous account on Twitter.

But the bogus tweet was amplified by many influential accounts, most notably by Donald Trump Jr with the caption "Getting back into wars on the first full day. The Swamp/War Inc. is thrilled right now."

Its virality then caused it to work its way outward to dupe many well-meaning anti-imperialists (myself included until I looked into it) who are vigilant against Biden's notorious warmongering , and now there's a widespread narrative throughout every part of the ideological spectrum that Biden is escalating warmongering in both Syria and Iraq.

It is entirely possible – probable even – that reliable warmonger Joe Biden will end up sending more U.S. troops to Iraq and Syria at some point during his administration. But if the antiwar community keeps staring at the movement of ground troops with hypervigilant intensity, they won't be paying enough attention to the areas where the more deadly aspects of Biden's hawkishness are likely to manifest.

Trump's base has been forcefully pushing the narrative that the previous president didn't start any new wars, which while technically true ignores his murderous actions like vetoing the bill to save Yemen from U.S.-backed genocide and actively blocking aid to its people, murdering untold tens of thousands of Venezuelans with starvation sanctions, rolling out many world-threatening Cold War escalations against Russia, engaging in insane brinkmanship with Iran , greatly increasing the number of bombs dropped per day from the previous administration, killing record numbers of civilians , and reducing military accountability for those airstrikes.

Jan. 28, 2019: The Trump administration's U.S. National Security Advisor John R. Bolton, left, and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin announce sanctions of the Venezuela oil company PDVSA. (The White House, Wikimedia Commons)

Trump may not have started any "new wars," but he kept the old ones going and inflamed some of them. Just because you don't start any new wars doesn't mean you're not a warmonger.

Rather than a throwback to "new wars" and the old-school ground invasions of the Bush era, the warmongering we'll be seeing from the Biden administration is more likely to look like this. More starvation sanctions. More proxy conflicts. More cold war. More coups. More special ops. More drone strikes. More slow motion strangulation, less ham-fisted overt warfare.

It is certainly possible that Biden could launch a new full-scale war; the empire is in desperate straits right now, and it could turn out that a very desperate maneuver is needed to maintain global domination. But that isn't the method that it has favored lately.

The U.S. empire much prefers nowadays to pour its resources into less visible acts of violence like economic siege warfare and arming proxy militias; the Iraq invasion left Americans so bitter toward conventional war that any more of it would increase the risk of an actual antiwar movement in the United States, which would be disastrous for the empire.

So rather than tempt fate with the bad publicity of flag-draped coffins flying home by the thousands again imperialism is now served up with a bit more subtlety, with the military playing more of a backup role to guard the infrastructure of this new approach.

It appears clear that this would be the Biden administration's preferred method of warmongering if given the choice.

The incoming Secretary of State Tony Blinken now advocates replacing the old Bush model of full-scale war with "discreet, small-scale sustainable operations, maybe led by special forces, to support local actors." Biden's nominee for CIA Director William Burns urged caution in the lead-up to the Iraq invasion and later expressed regret that he didn't push back against it.

Rather than picking bloodthirsty psychopath Michele Flournoy for defense secretary as many expected, Biden went with the less cartoonishly evil Raytheon board member Lloyd J. Austin III. All this while depraved coupmonger Victoria Nuland is being added to the administration and the murderous Venezuela coup is folded into its policy.

Antiwar protest in San Francisco, Aug. 29, 2013. (Steve Rhodes, Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Too much of the antiwar community is still stuck in the early 2000s. The Western war machine just doesn't generally kill that way anymore, and we need to adjust our perspectives if we want to address the actual murderousness as it is actually showing up. If you keep looking out for obsolete ground invasions, you're going to miss the new form of warmongering completely.

Trump supporters who claim to oppose war missed this completely throughout the entirety of his presidency, confining the concept of "war" solely to its most blatant iterations in order to feel like their president was a peacemaker instead of a warmonger.

One of the few positive developments that could potentially arise from the Biden administration is helping such people to recognize acts of violence like starvation sanctions as war, since they will be opposing Biden and that is how this new administration will be manifesting much of its murderousness.

The political/media class likes to keep everyone focused on the differences between each president and his immediate predecessor, but we can learn a whole lot more by looking at their similarities. Biden's warmongering is going to look a lot like Trump's -- just directed in some different directions and expressing in slightly different ways -- despite all the energy that has been poured into painting them as two wildly different individuals.

Once you see beyond the partisan puppet show, you see a single oligarchic empire continuing the same murderous agendas from one sock puppet administration to the next.

Caitlin Johnstone is a rogue journalist, poet, and utopia prepper who publishes regularly at Medium . Her work is entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking her on Facebook , following her antics on Twitter , checking out her podcast on either Youtube , soundcloud , Apple podcasts or Spotify , following her on Steemit , throwing some money into her tip jar on Patreon or Paypal , purchasing some of her sweet merchandise , buying her books Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

This article was re-published with permission.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.


[Jan 27, 2021] There will be adjustments at the margin, reconsiderations of method. There will be no consideration whatsoever of America's hegemonic objectives -- of the imperial project.

Jan 27, 2021 | consortiumnews.com

In a matter of hours, Biden's key national security people -- Antony Blinken as secretary of state, Avril Haines as director of national intelligence, and Lloyd Austin as defense secretary -- gave us a remarkably fulsome idea of what we are in for these next four years.

Haines and Austin, neither of whose records are to be admired, are at bottom functionaries who were nominated and swiftly confirmed because they do what they are told and do not think too much -- always a career-advancer in Washington.

It is instead Blinken, who is said to enjoy some kind of "mind-meld" with Biden, that we must consider carefully. (Such a meld must be odd terrain.)

Blinken's Senate testimony last Tuesday sprawled over four hours. It is best to scrutinize his remarks while seated in a chair with sturdy armrests, ideally to calm one's nerves with a pot of chamomile tea.

Seen or read as a whole, those four hours gave us an extraordinary display of how empire works and how it prolongs itself. One by one, Blinken's senatorial interlocutors told him in so many words, "Son, this is what you need to say if you want our confirmation. We want you to endorse our commitment to aggression, to unlawful interventions, to 'regime change' ops, to merciless sanctions, and altogether to the empire. But you must make it look nice. Make it look thoughtful and complicated and considered."

July 14, 2016: Vice President Joe Biden, right, and Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken. (Air Force, Christopher Hubenthal)

I am convinced, having endured the entire C–Span recording, that what I watched was sheer ritual. Blinken won the Senate's support and now succeeds the shockingly bovine Mike Pompeo at State. He will do so, however, with the élan and faux sophistication our nakedly bankrupt foreign policy now requires if the American pantomime is to be sustained another four years.

Among Blinken's many rather sad-to-witness "Yes sirs," two standout: his finely chiseled endorsement of Pompeo's reckless assassination a year ago of Qassem Soleimani, Iran's revered military commander ("Taking him out was the right thing to do"), and his approval of the Trump administration's decision to send lethal arms to the manically corrupt regime in Kiev ("Senator, I support providing that lethal defensive assistance to Ukraine," when the Obama administration, from which he comes, did not.)

Late last year, Blinken appeared on "Intelligence Matters," the podcast run by Michael Morrell, the coup-mongering former deputy director at the Central Intelligence Agency and now -- of course -- a regular commentator on the televisions news networks. In their exchange, the two took up the question of our "forever wars" and Biden's well-advertised commitment to ending them. Here is a snippet from Blinken's remarks:

"As for ending the forever wars, large-scale deployment of large, standing U.S. forces in conflict zones with no clear strategy should and will end under his [Biden's] watch. But we also need to distinguish between, for example, these endless wars with large-scale, open-ended deployment of U.S. forces with [sic], for example, discreet, small-scale sustainable operations, maybe led by special forces to support local actors. In ending the endless wars we have to be careful not to paint with too broad a brushstroke."

This is what we are in for these coming years, the hyper-rational irrationality of the middling technocrat. There will be adjustments at the margin, reconsiderations of method. There will be no consideration whatsoever of America's hegemonic objectives -- of the imperial project.

Blinken's testimony reflected these bitter truths start to finish.

Changes to the Iran Deal

July 14, 2015: President Barack Obama, with Vice President Joe Biden, announcing the signing of the Iran-nuclear agreement. (White House)

Of the various questions the new secretary of state took up during his confirmation hearings, Iran is the most pressing. Senator Bob Menendez, Blinken's interlocutor in this case, insisted that yes, the U.S. wants to rejoin the 2015 accord governing Iran's nuclear programs, but only if this includes prohibitions against Tehran's "destabilizing activities" and a missile program that Iran justly considers essential to its security.

An honest, clear-eyed diplomat who wanted to get somewhere with Tehran would have rejected the very frame of Menendez's line of inquiry, with its references to "support for terrorism" and "funding and feeding its proxies." But Blinken read his cues and tucked right in:

"The president-elect believes that if Iran comes back into compliance we would, too, but we would use that as a platform to seek a longer, stronger agreement and also, as you have pointed out, to capture these other issues, particularly with regard to missiles and Iran's destabilizing activities. This would be the objective."

This is sheer charade. Blinken knows as well as anyone else that the added conditions the Biden regime will require before rejoining the agreement -- an end to Iran's ballistic missile programs and its support for the Syrian government against Islamists and the illegal U.S. incursion -- effectively cancel all chances that the U.S. will rejoin the accord.

I predicted in this space shortly after Biden was elected that he and his foreign policy people only pretended to be serious about reviving the nuclear agreement with Iran. Blinken's testimony confirms this.

Over the weekend The Times of Israel , citing Channel 12 television, reported that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is sending Yossi Cohen, chief of Mossad and a close confidant, to Washington to "set out terms" for any revival of the nuclear deal. Israel purports to "set out terms," and Biden will receive this spook? This is getting completely unserious. Completely.

On China, Russia, and Venezuela: Blinken was putty in the hands of the Foreign Relations Committee's across-the-board hawks. A two-fronted new Cold War across both oceans -- Sinophobia and Russophobia all at once -- is to be our reality these next four years.

Over the weekend, to be noted, the American Embassy in Moscow had the gall to broadcast routes protesters could take to demonstrations in various Russian cities to dispute Alexei Navlany's arrest . A good start.

Marco Rubio, the coup-loving senator from Florida, wanted to know if Blinken thought the U.S. should continue backing Juan Guaidó, the buffoon Rubio and Pompeo puffed up as Venezuela's "interim leader" as part of a failed coup operation a couple of years ago. Blinken:

"I very much agree with you, senator, first of all with regard to a number of the steps that were taken toward Venezuela in recent years, including recognizing Mr. Guaidó and seeking to increase pressure on the regime . We need an effective policy that can restore Venezuela to democracy, and how can we best advance that ball? Maybe we need to look at how we more effectively target the sanctions that we have ."

Grim, grim times lie ahead if Blinken runs State as he promised the Senate he would.

There are those among us who look for shafts of light. People I greatly respect (some, anyway) thought it was good news when Biden named William Burns, a career foreign service officer, to head the CIA. At last diplomacy, not unlawful interventions!

Over the weekend, there were reports that Biden will review -- not more at this point -- the designation of Yemen's Houthis as terrorists, a label Pompeo affixed as he emptied his desk last week. Finally, we will stop supporting the Saudis' savagery!

People believe what they need to believe these days, I find, and belief overrides cognition in many such cases. I caution these people. At bottom Blinken demonstrated for us that no one who purports to alter our imperial course will ever be allowed to hold high office. For people such as Blinken, it is merely a question of wielding influence without having any.

This is where Americans live -- in a crumbled republic no longer capable of changing.

Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune , is a columnist, essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century . Follow him on Twitter @thefloutist . His web site is Patrick Lawrence . Support his work via his Patreon site .

John Allen aka Ol' Hippy , January 26, 2021 at 12:16

I'm 66, almost 67, and will, most likely, never see any real peace from the US government. A big portion of the economy is based on imperialist actions and the manufacture of conflicts around the globe mainly to keeps the arms makers in business. Or simply, war. And no, there is no nation willing to risk the wrath of the US government by trying to halt this insane posture of aggression, it's just too big and has a momentum all its own. Biden will continue unabated this absurd, insanely expensive machine to its eventual implosion in the near future. All the parts of the fall of the economy are in place, all that's needed is some ill defined tipping point to be crossed. Perhaps, a war with Iran?

[Jan 27, 2021] Blinken rose to become deputy Secretary of State in the final years of the second Obama administration. In those roles he was a key player in a series of foreign interventions including Libya and Syria which turned out to be utterly disastrous

Jan 27, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Jan 26 2021 18:47 utc | 17

Looks like continuity will be the rule with Blinken now confirmed as Sec of State if Finian Cunningham's assessment is correct :

"Blinken has said that America's foreign policy must be conducted with 'humility and confidence', which may sound refreshingly modest. But it's not. Underlying this 'quiet American' is the same old arrogance about U.S. imperial might-is-right and Washington's presumed privilege of appointing itself as the 'world's policeman'.

"If Blinken's record is anything to go on, his future role as America's top diplomat is foreboding.

"Previously, he was a senior member in the Obama administrations serving as national security advisor to both the president and Joe Biden who was then vice-president. Blinken rose to become deputy Secretary of State in the final years of the second Obama administration. In those roles he was a key player in a series of foreign interventions which turned out to be utterly disastrous."

The once upon a time manufactured aura of Virtue projected by the Outlaw US Empire that was swallowed by so many naïve nations has vanished with nothing other than its stark ugliness as a replacement. Refusal to see that reality is what Xi just referred to again as "arrogance" which puts Blinken into the same ideological camp as Pompeo. As Global Times notes , if the Outlaw US Empire's attitude's not going to change, than why should China's as Pompeo's constant lying is replaced by Psaki's:

"When White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki responded to a question Monday about US-China relations, she said that 'China is growing more authoritarian at home and more assertive abroad,' adding that China 'is engaged in conduct that hurts American workers, blunts [US] technological edge, and threatens [US] alliances and [US] influence in international organizations.' She also noted that Washington is 'starting from an approach of patience as it relates to [its] relationship with China.'"

The editor's response to such inanity:

"Psaki's statement shows that the Biden administration's view and characterization of China is virtually identical to those of the Trump administration. Psaki stressed that 'We're in a serious competition with China. Strategic competition with China is a defining feature of the 21st century,' reflecting that the Biden administration only cares about a "new approach" to holding China accountable."

And Psaki's words are the same as Blinken's, which were the same as Pompeo's and Trump's. In other words, the hole digging by the Outlaw US Empire in its relations with the rest of the world will continue, which will cause further deterioration of its domestic Great Depression 2.0. Yesterday I posted a comment that highlighted Putin's expounding on the further enhancement of the educational component of Russia's Social Contract that is impossible for Navalny's backers to match. On the previous thread, a good comparison was made between the Yeltsin years and the ongoing drowning of the Outlaw US Empire. The Reset that's in the works isn't the one envisioned by Global Neoliberals like Klaus Schwab of the WEF/Davos crew. It's what Xi spoke of yesterday that I commented upon and Escobar reported on today. The Winds of Change are blowing again, but there's a gaping hole in the USA's wind sock so it can't see in which direction it's blowing.

james , Jan 26 2021 18:52 utc | 18

blinken is bad news.. i think that is very obvious from a superficial read on him.. the usa can't get out of the ditch it has made for itself.. nothing is gonna change...
michaelj72 , Jan 27 2021 0:51 utc | 89


'liberal interventionism' has always been the hallmark of the US Liberal Class and its foreign policy Establishment, especially since at least Wilson's jumping into WWI.

Has the US ever not intervened in Latin America whenever it felt like it or thought its "interests" were at stake?

I think Caitlan J. has a good grasp on what to expect from the Biden war mongering crowd that has recently moved into DC once again:

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2021/01/24/what-bidens-warmongering-will-actually-look-like/

"....Trump's base has been forcefully pushing the narrative that the previous president didn't start any new wars, which while technically true ignores his murderous actions like vetoing the bill to save Yemen from U.S.-backed genocide and actively blocking aid to its people, murdering untold tens of thousands of Venezuelans with starvation sanctions, rolling out many world-threatening Cold War escalations against Russia, engaging in insane brinkmanship with Iran, greatly increasing the number of bombs dropped per day from the previous administration, killing record numbers of civilians, and reducing military accountability for those airstrikes....

....Rather than a throwback to "new wars" and the old-school ground invasions of the Bush era, the warmongering we'll be seeing from the Biden administration is more likely to look like this. More starvation sanctions. More proxy conflicts. More cold war. More coups. More special ops. More drone strikes. More slow motion strangulation, less ham-fisted overt warfare...."

---

Simply put, more small scale wars/ops mostly by proxy, more support for local wankers (like Guaido in Venezuela, who has incredibly little popular support), and more of these killing sanctions, which are especially pernicious to the civilian populations in vulnerable countries like Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Nicaragua and Venezuela, etc.

[Jan 27, 2021] The USAi general that needs to be recalled is CENTCOM chief Gen. Kenneth McKenzie Jr.

Notable quotes:
"... Almost immediately after taking command at CENTCOM in March 2019, McKenzie launched his campaign of political manipulation. By requesting additional forces to contain a supposedly urgent Iranian threat, McKenzie triggered the dispatch of an aircraft carrier strike group and a bomber task force to the Middle East. A month later, he told reporters he believed the deployments were "having a very good stabilizing effect," and that he was in the process of negotiating on a larger, long-term U.S. military presence. ..."
Jan 27, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Jan 27 2021 0:10 utc | 84

The USAi general that needs to be recalled is CENTCOM chief Gen. Kenneth McKenzie Jr.

The grayzone writer, Gareth Porter explains:

A four-star general who previously served as director of the Joint Staff at the Pentagon, McKenzie is regarded as the most politically astute commander ever to lead Middle East Command, according to journalist Mark Perry. He has also shown himself to be exceptionally brazen in scheming to defend his interests.

Almost immediately after taking command at CENTCOM in March 2019, McKenzie launched his campaign of political manipulation. By requesting additional forces to contain a supposedly urgent Iranian threat, McKenzie triggered the dispatch of an aircraft carrier strike group and a bomber task force to the Middle East. A month later, he told reporters he believed the deployments were "having a very good stabilizing effect," and that he was in the process of negotiating on a larger, long-term U.S. military presence.

As a result of his maneuvering, McKenzie succeeded in acquiring 10,000 to 15,000 more military personnel, bringing the total in his CENTCOM realm to more than 90,000. The rapid increase in assets under his command was revealed in a Senate hearing in March 2020.

I am reminded of the excellent Rolling Stone report on General Stanley McCrystal.

Now, flipping through printout cards of his speech in Paris, McChrystal wonders aloud what Biden question he might get today, and how he should respond. "I never know what's going to pop out until I'm up there, that's the problem," he says. Then, unable to help themselves, he and his staff imagine the general dismissing the vice president with a good one-liner.

"Are you asking about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal says with a laugh. "Who's that?"

"Biden?" suggests a top adviser. "Did you say: Bite Me?"

From the start, McChrystal was determined to place his personal stamp on Afghanistan, to use it as a laboratory for a controversial military strategy known as counterinsurgency. COIN, as the theory is known, is the new gospel of the Pentagon brass, a doctrine that attempts to square the military's preference for high-tech violence with the demands of fighting protracted wars in failed states. COIN calls for sending huge numbers of ground troops to not only destroy the enemy, but to live among the civilian population and slowly rebuild, or build from scratch, another nation's government – a process that even its staunchest advocates admit requires years, if not decades, to achieve. The theory essentially rebrands the military, expanding its authority (and its funding) to encompass the diplomatic and political sides of warfare: Think the Green Berets as an armed Peace Corps. In 2006, after Gen. David Petraeus beta-tested the theory during his "surge" in Iraq, it quickly gained a hardcore following of think-tankers, journalists, military officers and civilian officials. Nicknamed "COINdinistas" for their cultish zeal, this influential cadre believed the doctrine would be the perfect solution for Afghanistan. All they needed was a general with enough charisma and political savvy to implement it.

The journalist Michael Hastings was later killed when his car committed a high speed crash and burned. McCrystal was later defrocked by O'bummer. Here is another Rolling Stone related report dated 15 November 2020 by Tessa Stuart.

Grayzone reporter Gareth Porter should avoid any high tech vehicle that is so easy to hack.

[Jan 27, 2021] The Truth Behind Russia's Navalny Protests by Mark Episkopos

Jan 27, 2021 | nationalinterest.org

There is no singular "opposition" for Washington to support -- no unified alternative ideology, least of all one palatable to the West, to replace the current Russian state and institutions.

me title=

[Jan 27, 2021] Jailed Kremlin foe Navalny being used by West to destabilise Russia- Putin ally - Reuters

Jan 27, 2021 | www.reuters.com

Jailed Kremlin foe Navalny being used by West to destabilise Russia: Putin ally

By Reuters Staff

3 MIN READ

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Jailed Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny is being used by the West to try to destabilise Russia, a prominent hardliner and ally of President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday, saying he must be held to account for repeatedly breaking the law.

Slideshow ( 2 images )

Navalny was remanded in custody for 30 days last week after returning from Germany where he had been recovering from a nerve agent poisoning. He could face years in jail for parole violations and other legal cases he calls trumped up.

Nikolai Patrushev, secretary of the Security Council, called for Navalny to face the full force of the law in comments that offered a glimpse into the mood inside Russia's security establishment after tens of thousands of Navalny's supporters protested against his jailing on Saturday.

"He (Navalny), this figure, has repeatedly (and) grossly broken Russian legislation, engaging in fraud concerning large amounts (of money). And as a citizen of Russia he must bear responsibility for his illegal activity in line with the law," Patrushev told the Argumenty i Fakty media outlet.

ADVERTISEMENT

me title=

"The West needs this figure to destabilise the situation in Russia, for social upheaval, strikes and new Maidans," Patrushev said, in a reference to the 2014 revolution in Ukraine that ousted a Moscow-backed president.

When asked about Patrushev's comments, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said it was up to a court to make further decisions in the opposition politician's case and that it was not a matter for the Kremlin.

Navalny faces a court hearing on Feb.2.

RELATED COVERAGE

G7 calls for peaceful Navalny protesters to be released by Russia

Police detained more than 3,700 people on Saturday as protesters called on the Kremlin to release Navalny. The Kremlin said the protests were illegal.

Peskov on Tuesday said there could be no dialogue with illegal protesters, accusing them of behaving aggressively and of using what he called unprecedented violence against the police.

He said incidences of police violence against protesters, some of which were captured on video, were far fewer and being investigated.

ADVERTISEMENT

me title=

In a sign that Russian authorities may crack down hard after the protests, the Kommersant newspaper on Tuesday cited unnamed security sources as saying they may open a criminal investigation that would treat the demonstrations as "mass unrest".

The West has called for Navalny's release, but the European Union has said it will refrain from fresh sanctions on Russian individuals if Moscow releases Navalny after 30 days.

[Jan 27, 2021] Kremlin urged to freeze payments from 'foreign agents' such as US state media outlets over claims they fund info war in Russi

Jan 27, 2021 | www.rt.com

News outlets and campaign groups that get cash from overseas could be prevented from spending money in Russia under proposals put forward by an influential Moscow think tank.

RT obtained a copy of the proposal, addressed to Interior Minister Vladimir Kolokoltsev on Wednesday. Developed by Anton Orlov, director of the Institute for the Study of Contemporary Politics, the draft regulations would effectively ban groups that are registered as "foreign agents" from making financial payments to individuals.

Orlov claims in his statement that one such organization has been demonstrated to have "organized unauthorized street political actions in Russian cities." He added: "At the same time, representatives of the organization disseminated information on social networks and in the media that they were ready to pay the fines of citizens received as a result of committing offenses at these events."

It is unclear how this would affect the ability of these groups to pay their staff in Russia.

ALSO ON RT.COM 'Register and keep working': Russia's 'foreign agents' law protects from outside meddling, doesn't infringe on anyone, Putin says

A number of organizations have been labeled as foreign agents under government rules, because they receive significant proportions of their funding from abroad, predominately from Western governments. Among them are US state-run media outlets Voice of America and RFE/RL, as well as the opposition-leaning Moscow-based Levada Center.

READ MORE Influential Russian senator Klimov accuses foreign spooks of helping to organize weekend protests in support of Navalny Influential Russian senator Klimov accuses foreign spooks of helping to organize weekend protests in support of Navalny

In March last year, President Vladimir Putin defended the law, comparing it to equivalent measures in the US and arguing that it "exists simply to protect Russia from external meddling in its politics."

"Nobody's rights are being infringed on here whatsoever. There is nothing that runs counter to international practice," he added.

One of the country's most senior parliamentarians, Senator Andrey Klimov, told Rossiya-1 news channel on Sunday that the street protests organized in support of jailed opposition figure Alexey Navalny last weekend had been orchestrated from outside the country. "The Senatorial Commission has reason to believe that all these activities are clearly traced to the actions of foreign states, and it is all happening with the assistance of foreign specialists," he told the broadcaster.

A number of organizations have been labeled as foreign agents under government rules, because they receive significant proportions of their funding from abroad, predominately from Western governments. Among them are US state-run media outlets Voice of America and RFE/RL, as well as the opposition-leaning Moscow-based Levada Center.

READ MORE Influential Russian senator Klimov accuses foreign spooks of helping to organize weekend protests in support of Navalny Influential Russian senator Klimov accuses foreign spooks of helping to organize weekend protests in support of Navalny

In March last year, President Vladimir Putin defended the law, comparing it to equivalent measures in the US and arguing that it "exists simply to protect Russia from external meddling in its politics."

"Nobody's rights are being infringed on here whatsoever. There is nothing that runs counter to international practice," he added.

One of the country's most senior parliamentarians, Senator Andrey Klimov, told Rossiya-1 news channel on Sunday that the street protests organized in support of jailed opposition figure Alexey Navalny last weekend had been orchestrated from outside the country. "The Senatorial Commission has reason to believe that all these activities are clearly traced to the actions of foreign states, and it is all happening with the assistance of foreign specialists," he told the broadcaster.

Dachaguy 3 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 09:57 AM

America used their weaponized dollar to fund mercenaries in Syria and we all saw the result of that. Russia has a duty to prevent that type of attack against Russia. America's Achilles' Heel is the US dollar, so cutting off its use by foreign agents to fund nefarious activities is a good place to start.
Count_Cash 3 hours ago 27 Jan, 2021 10:44 AM
Not enough - its time to send the diplomatic note to western countries that Russia considers itself under attack by Western powers through an info war. Then it should close all foreign media and campaign groups over night. It cannot be the case that enemy spying posts and combatants are allowed on Russian soil during conflict!

[Jan 26, 2021] Alexei Navalny Russia Baiting- Biden Brings Back Business as Usual OffGuardian

Jan 26, 2021 | off-guardian.org

oe Biden enters the White House with an entourage of faces very familiar to OffGuardian, and many of those readers who have been with us since the beginning.

Glassy-eyed Jen Psaki is once again taking the White House press briefings. Victoria "Fuck the EU" Nuland is going to be secretary of state, and Samantha Power is hoisted back onto a platform from which she can berate the rest of the world for not following America's "moral example" by bombing Syria back to the stone age.

It was the machinations of these people – along with Biden as VP, John Kerry as Secretary of State and of course Barack Obama leading the charge – that lead to the coup in Ukraine, the war in Donbass and – indirectly – the creation of this website. For it was our comments on the Guardian telling this truth that got everyone here banned, multiple times.

So, for us, pointing out cold-war style propaganda is like slipping back into a comfy pair of shoes.

A good thing too, because with this coterie of neocon-style warmongers comes another familiar friend: the propaganda war on Putin's Russia. Throughout the media and on every front, all within hours of Biden's inauguration.

Now, anti-Russia nonsense didn't go away while Trump was President – if anything it became deranged to the point of literal insanity in many quarters – but it definitely quietened down in the last 12 months, with the outbreak of the "pandemic".

No more! Now we're back to good old-fashioned cold-war craziness. The media tell us that Russia was a "spectre that loomed over Trump's presidency" , that one of the Capitol Hill rioters intended to "sell Nancy Pelosi's laptop to Russia" and other such brazen hysteria.

Of course underneath the standard pot-stirring propaganda to keep the "new cold war" on the boil, there is the Navalny narrative. An incredibly contrived piece of political theatre that may even evolve into a full-on attempt at regime change in Moscow.

For starters, three days before Biden's inauguration, Alexei Navalny (having supposedly only just survived the poison the FSB placed "in his underpants" ), returned to Russia. Where he was promptly arrested for violating the terms of his bail .

He knew he would be arrested if he returned to Russia, so his doing so was pure theatre. That fact is only underlined by the media's reaction to his 30 day jail sentence.

Yes, that's thirty DAYS, not years. He'll be out before spring. Even if he's convicted of the numerous charges of embezzlement and fraud, he faces only 3 years in prison.

Nevertheless, already the familiar Russia-baiters in the media are comparing him to Nelson Mandela .

On the same day as Biden's inauguration, the European Parliament announced that Russia should be punished for arresting Navalny, by having the Nordstream 2 pipeline project closed down . (Closing this pipeline down would open up the European market to buy US gas, instead of Russia. This is a complete coincidence).

And then, the day after Biden's inauguration, the European Court of Human Rights announced they had found Russia guilty of war crimes during the 5-day war in South Ossetia in 2008. The report was subject to a gleeful (and terrible) write-up by (who else?) Luke Harding. (Why they waited 13 years to make this announcement remains a mystery)

It doesn't stop there, already Western pundits and Russian "celebrities" are trying to encourage street protests in support of Alexei Navalny. An anonymous Guardian editorial states Navalny's "bravery needs backing" , whatever that means.

All of this could mean Biden is "forced" to "change his mind" and pull out of the re-signing of the anti-nuclear weapons treaty . Ooops.

But are there bigger aims behind this as well? Do they hope they can create another Maidan but this time in Moscow? That would be insane, but you can't rule it out.

One thing is for sure, though; they work fast. Less than two days in office, and we've already got a new colour revolution kicking off. Speedy work.

Reply

captain spam , Jan 25, 2021 7:33 PM

As McFaul said recently, we must combat Putin! His support for traditional Christian family values is an absolutely intolerable threat to the liberal international order!! What we desperately need is non stop gay anal sex for everybody, especially children, non stop free abortions for sluts, and as many child trannies as possible!!! We must force through this progressive enlightened agenda everywhere!!!!

Bob , Jan 25, 2021 4:15 PM

The overthrow crew is back in business. They will continue chipping away at the old USSR. Belarus seems pretty ripe, though under Trump CIA failed at the overthrow earlier this year. But with Victoria Nuland and gang in there we will see a real push to dismantle Russia and China. Also watch for Islamic terror in Xinjiang in Western China with CIA sponsored Uygher militants. Jan 24, 2021 6:18 AM

For people who prefer information to propaganda, a little ethnographic insight into the reality of life in Russia, courtesy of Dr Jeremy Morris:

Cheesed off, but not because of sanctions. Immiseration, elite disconnect and neoliberal convergence. | Postsocialism

NORMAN R PILON , Jan 24, 2021 4:13 AM

If it's a CIA only operation, Russians are obviously incredibly gullible and impressionable, and in surprisingly huge numbers (and this is only one brief snapshot of what apparently is happening across 11 time zones):

https://twitter.com/i/status/1352910616604925953

Yup, I'd say there's at least a couple of dozens of people who came together in that show of discontent toward a government that, if not exactly among the ranks of this particular riff-raff, is hugely popular.

And then there are these CIA trained Russian provocateurs caught on video:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1352993359116312576

captain spam , Jan 23, 2021 10:27 PM

Navalny has heroically returned to Russia after the dastardly Putins hapless goons Novichoked his tea/ water bottle/ underpants* delete as appropriate. But at least we are now seeing the truth emerge from completely impartial and wholly credible CIA funded sources like the Victims Of Communism Foundation. Now we know the horrific facts about 300 million Weegers and 500 million Georgians being turned into soap and lamp shades. We must nuke Putins dacha immediately. Show him we mean business. Its a typical underhand trick of the evil Vlad, genociding millions of people without leaving any evidence. Further proof of his guilt, if any were needed.

Charlie , Jan 23, 2021 8:08 PM

Just running a theory by you all, was the Ukraine colour revolution a response to Russian push-back on the WMD narrative in Syria and Obama's red line that failed the sniff test (that's bleach, not chloride gas)? Mess in our back yard and we'll mess in yours. If so Putin handled it very well, all things considered, ended up more secure than before, in spite of everything.

slorter , Jan 23, 2021 8:21 PM Reply to Charlie

America,s aim after the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1990 was to split Russia apart gut it and subdue it! Playing silly buggers on Russia's border would have happened no matter what! The globalists want complete control! Georgia Chechnya are other examples of globalist interference. China is getting the same treatment.

niko , Jan 23, 2021 8:01 PM

Duck and cover the Russians are coming! Prelude to false flag cyberterrorism and the dark winter? Whatever comes next, we need to start fighting the real enemy.

"Whether the mask is labeled fascism, democracy, or dictatorship of the proletariat, our great adversary remains the apparatus -- the bureaucracy, the police, the military. Not the one facing us across the frontier of the battle lines, which is not so much our enemy as our brothers' enemy, but the one that calls itself our protector and makes us its slaves. No matter what the circumstances, the worst betrayal will always be to subordinate ourselves to this apparatus and to trample underfoot, in its service, all human values in ourselves and in others." -Simone Weil

Charlie , Jan 23, 2021 7:51 PM

Did anyone catch that interview Aaron Mate did with Luke Harding? Think it was while Aaron was still with the real news. Poor old Luke thought he was talking to a confirmed Democrat and Aaron took his piece of shit book on Russia 2016 to pieces, well worth a look if it's still up.

Guy , Jan 23, 2021 7:44 PM

"But are there bigger aims behind this as well? Do they hope they can create another Maidan but this time in Moscow? That would be insane, but you can't rule it out."

The Western media propaganda machine IS insane . Jealousy in big bold letters because Russia , Russia seems to be doing quite well economically ,regardless of Western media machinations.

Victor G. , Jan 24, 2021 2:09 PM Reply to Guy

Mercuns would love to rerun Maidan. I don't think they have the numbers in Rooskia though. Division, internal conflict, confusion that will have to do for the short term.

dr death , Jan 24, 2021 3:42 PM Reply to Victor G.

indeed but burger-on-a- bagel land has got plenty of its own now
the thrashing bankrupt golem is about to have its own yeltsin 'moment'..

just lining up the ducks
now where did I put that novichok, I mean icing sugar, I mean mrs mays concealer.

[Jan 25, 2021] Again and again America commits naked aggression against distant countries while shouting "Democracy!" Totally fake, pure propaganda, making Goebbels look like a child.

Jan 25, 2021 | www.unz.com

Ann Nonny Mouse , says: Website January 25, 2021 at 1:54 am GMT • 1.0 days ago

I see occasional mentions of Goebbels, and his words about propaganda, like this from you, Hoppy.

But Goebbels was just a baby in his mother's arms relative to our voter "democracy" for which, unlike the original Athenian democracy, which beyond general assembly had representatives elected by lot, has representatives elected by voters who are already victims of propaganda.

The word "democracy" as used today it itself pure propaganda. Again and again America commits naked aggression against distant countries while shouting "Democracy!" Totally fake, pure propaganda, making Goebbels look like a child.

[Jan 25, 2021] An American neoliberal ideological project

Jan 25, 2021 | www.rt.com

McFaul cautions against what he refers to as "Putin's ideological project" as a threat to the neoliberal international order. Yet he is reluctant to recognize that the neoliberal international order is an American ideological project for the post-Cold War era.

With no sign of US returning to fold, Russia is preparing to withdraw from 'Open Skies' treaty - Foreign Ministry READ MORE: With no sign of US returning to fold, Russia is preparing to withdraw from 'Open Skies' treaty - Foreign Ministry

After the Cold War, neoliberal ideologues advanced what was seemingly a benign proposition – suggesting that neoliberal democracy should be at the center of security strategies. However, by linking neoliberal norms to US leadership, neoliberalism became both a constitutional principle and an international hegemonic norm.

NATO is presented as a community of neoliberal values – without mentioning that its second largest member, Turkey, is more conservative and authoritarian than Russia – and Moscow does not, therefore, have any legitimate reasons to oppose expansionism unless it fears democracy. If Russia reacts negatively to military encirclement, it is condemned as an enemy of democracy, and NATO has a moral responsibility to revert to its original mission as a military bloc containing Russia.

Case in point: there was nobody in Moscow advocating for the reunification with Crimea until the West supported the coup in Ukraine. Yet, as Western "fact checkers" and McFaul inform us, there was a "democratic revolution" and not a coup. Committed to his ideological prism, McFaul suggests that Russia acted out of a fear of having a democracy on its borders, as it would give hope to Russians and thus threaten the Kremlin. McFaul's ideological lens masks conflicting national security interests, and it fails to explain why Russia does not mind democratic neighbors in the east, such as South Korea and Japan, with whom it enjoys good relations.

Defending the peoples

States aspiring for global hegemony have systemic incentives to embrace ideologies that endow them with the right to defend other peoples. The French National Convention declared in 1792 that France would "come to the aid of all peoples who are seeking to recover their liberty," and the Bolsheviks proclaimed in 1917 "the duty to render assistance, armed, if necessary, to the fighting proletariat of the other countries."

The American neoliberal international order similarly aims to liberate the people of the world with "democracy promotion" and "humanitarian interventionism" when it conveniently advances US primacy. The American ideological project infers that democracy is advanced by US interference in the domestic affairs of Russia, while democracy is under attack if Russia interferes in the domestic affairs of US. The neoliberal international system is one of sovereign inequality to advance global primacy.

READ MORE Putin says American presence in Afghanistan is beneficial to Moscow's interests, rubbishes claims of 'Russian bounties to Taliban' Putin says American presence in Afghanistan is beneficial to Moscow's interests, rubbishes claims of 'Russian bounties to Taliban'

McFaul does not consider himself a Russophobe, as believes his attacks against Russia are merely motivated by the objective of liberating Russians from their government, which is why he advocates that Biden "distinguish between Russia and Russians – between Putin and the Russian people." This has been the modus operandi for regime change since the end of the Cold War – the US supposedly does not attack countries to advance its interests, it only altruistically assists foreign peoples in rival states against their leaders such as Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin etc.

McFaul and other neoliberal ideologues still refer to NATO as a "defensive alliance," which does not make much sense after the attacks on Yugoslavia in 1999 or Libya in 2011. However, under the auspices of neoliberal internationalism, NATO is defensive, as it defends the people of the world. Russia, therefore, doesn't have rational reasons for opposing the neoliberal international order.

McFaul condemns alleged efforts by Russia to interfere in the domestic affairs of the US, before outlining his strategies for interfering in the domestic affairs of Russia. McFaul blames Russian paranoia for shutting down American "non-governmental organizations" that are funded by the US government and staffed by people linked to the US security apparatus. He goes on to explain that the US government must counter this by establishing new "non-government organizations" to educate the Russian public about the evils of their government.

The dangerous appeal of ideologues

Ideologues have always been dangerous to international security. Ideologies of human freedom tend to promise perpetual peace. Yet, instead of transcending power politics, the ideals of human freedom are linked directly to hegemonic power by the self-proclaimed defender of the ideology. When ideologues firmly believe that the difference between the current volatile world and utopia can be bridged by defeating its opponents, it legitimizes radical power politics.

Consequently, there is no sense of irony among the McFauls of the world as US security strategy is committed to global dominance, while berating Russia for "revisionism." Raymond Aaron once wrote: "Idealistic diplomacy slips too often into fanaticism; it divides states into good and evil, into peace-loving and bellicose. It envisions a permanent peace by the punishment of the latter and the triumph of the former. The idealist, believing he has broken with power politics, exaggerates its crimes."

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Ghanima223 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:36 AM

In short, the tables have turned since the end of the Cold War. It is no longer communist ideologues that try to export revolution and chaos while the western world would promote stability and free markets. Now it's western ideologues that are trying to export revolutions and chaos while clamping down on free markets with Russia, as ironically as it sounds, being a force for stability and a strong proponent for the free exchange of goods and services around the world. The west will lose just as the USSR has lost.
US_did_911 Ghanima223 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 01:01 AM
The Dollar is the only fake reason that still keeps US afloat. The moment that goes, it loss will be a lot worse then of USSR.
US_did_911 Ghanima223 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 12:58 AM
That happened not exactly after the end of the cold war. It was about even for a decade after that. The real u-turn happened after the 9/11 false flag disaster.
Amvet 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 10:00 AM
Foreign dangers are necessary to keep the attention of the American people away from the 20 ton elephant in the room--the fact that 9/11 was not a foreign attack. Should any of the main stream media suddenly turn honest and report this in detail, things will get interesting.
King_Penda 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:11 AM
I wouldn't worry too much. At the same time Biden will be purging the US military of any men of capability and replacing them trans and political appointments. The traditional areas where the military recruited it's grunts are falling as they are waking up to the hostility of the state to their culture and way of life. The US military will end up a rump of queerss, off work due to stress or perceived persecution and fat doughballs sat in warehouses performing drone strikes on goats.
Fjack1415 King_Penda 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 01:20 PM
Yes, you point to a paradox. While the globalists are using the US as their military arm for global domination, they are at the same time destroying the country that supports that military. Perhaps the US military will be maintained by dint of its being the only employer for millions of unemployed young men in the American heartland, doughballs or not.
Ghanima223 King_Penda 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:39 AM
Ideologues will always be more concerned with having political reliable military leadership as opposed to actually qualified leaders. It took the Russians 2 decades to purge their own military of this filth of incompetent 'yes' men within their military.
UKCitizen 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:09 AM
'The Liberal International Order' - yes, that seems a fair description. Led by what might be termed 'liberal fundamentalists'.
far_cough 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 07:01 AM
the military industrial complex and the various deep state agencies along with the major corporations need russia as an adversary so that they can milk the american people and the people of the western world of their money, rights, freedoms, etc etc...
roby007 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:54 AM
I'm sure Biden will pursue "peaceful, productive coexistence" just as his friend Obama did, with drones and bombs.
Paul Citro 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:16 AM
I hope that Russian leaders fully realize that they are dealing with a country that is the equivalent of psychotic.
Fjack1415 Paul Citro 1 day ago 23 Jan, 2021 01:26 PM
True, the ruling party and MSM mouthpieces and their readers and followers are now truly INSANE. Beyond redemption. Staggering in the depth and power of the subversion of so many people, including many with high IQs (like my ex girlfriend and housemate in the US).
Anastasia Deko 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 10:57 AM
US security strategy is committed to global dominance
Absolutely. Biden has filled up his admin with "progressive realists," which when it comes to foreign policy, is just a euphuism for neocons and their lust for world empire. So expect an unleashing of forces in the coming two years that will finally humble America's war machine.
tyke2939 Anastasia Deko 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 01:07 PM
They are desperate for a war with someone but it must be someone they can beat convincingly. It certainly will not be Russia or China and I suspect Iran will be a huge battle even with Israel s backing. More than likely they will invade some country like Venezuela as Syria has Russia covering its back. What a dilemma who to fight.
9/11 Truther Anastasia Deko 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 11:24 AM
The "American war machine" has been humbled from Saigon, Vietnam 1975 to Kabul, Afghanistan.
Salmigoni 2 days ago 22 Jan, 2021 09:25 AM
They are not really liberals. They are blood thirsty parasitic neoconservative fascist war mongers working for the Pentagon contractors. General Eisenhower warned us about these evil people. A lot of Americans still do not get it.

[Jan 24, 2021] Towards US -Hyper-interventionism- in the Middle East- Biden's Secretary of State Nominee Anthony Blinken by Daniel McAdams

Notable quotes:
"... Not surprisingly, Blinken is a favorite of the AIPAC-bankrolled Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which, as Phil Giraldi reported , Tweeted that Blinken would be part of a " superb national security team. The country will be very fortunate to have them in public service." ..."
"... We have Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) to thank for at least bringing up the fact that Blinken has blundered from foreign policy disaster to foreign policy disaster – which only gets you promoted in Washington DC. In Blinken's confirmation hearing, Paul reminded Blinken of his addiction to intervention in the Middle East and how that has worked out for everyone. ..."
"... Yes, Senator Paul is right. "Regime change" doesn't work. It kills or destroys the lives of the most vulnerable. The poor and the innocent. The US enemies may occasionally find themselves on the wrong end of a noose or a knife rape , but it is the civilians who always suffer when they are "liberated" by Washington. ..."
"... Buckle up, as incoming Senate Majority Leader Schumer advised, there's a whole lot of interventionism in the queue. There's a whole lot of death and destruction to be unleashed by Biden, Blinken, and their gang of " humanitarians ." ..."
Jan 23, 2021 | www.globalresearch.ca

By Daniel McAdams Global Research, January 23, 2021 Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity 21 January 2021

While the saccharine continues to ooze from the mainstream media for the incoming Biden Administration, the real iron fist of what will be the Biden foreign policy is starting to materialize. As if on cue, major bombings in Baghdad – by ISIS remember them? – have opened the door for the Biden Administration to not only cancel President Trump's troop drawdown from Iraq but to actually begin sending troops back into Iraq.

Is this to be Iraq War 4.0? 3.7? 5.0? Anybody's guess.

If Biden uses this sudden – and convenient – unrest in Iraq as a trigger to return US troops (and bombs), it should not surprise anyone. As Professor Barbara Ransby points out in this video , Biden did much more to make the disastrous 2003 attack on Iraq happen than just vote "yes" on the authorization to use force. As Professor Ransby reminds us, Biden used the full power of his position as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to ensure the Senate approved George W. Bush's lie-based war on Iraq. Biden prevented any experts who challenged the "Saddam has WMDs and he's about to use them" narrative from being heard by Members of Congress, guaranteeing that only the pro-war narrative was heard.

As much as Bush or Cheney, Biden owns the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, which killed a million Iraqi civilians. And he may well be taking us back.

One figure in the Biden Administration who will play a pivotal role in returning the US to its hyper-interventionism in the Middle East is Secretary of State nominee Anthony Blinken . As a Biden Senate staffer in 2003, he helped the then-Foreign Relations Committee Chairman put together a pro-war coalition in the Democratic Party to support President Bush's Republican push for invasion.

Later on Blinken was Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor, where he successfully made the case that destroying both Libya and Syria were fantastic ideas. Both countries drowned in the Obama Administration's "liberation" bloodbath and neither country has recovered from the "democracy" brought by Washington, but being a neocon foreign policy ideologue means never having to say you're sorry.

And Blinken isn't.

Not surprisingly, Blinken is a favorite of the AIPAC-bankrolled Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, which, as Phil Giraldi reported , Tweeted that Blinken would be part of a " superb national security team. The country will be very fortunate to have them in public service."

We have Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) to thank for at least bringing up the fact that Blinken has blundered from foreign policy disaster to foreign policy disaster – which only gets you promoted in Washington DC. In Blinken's confirmation hearing, Paul reminded Blinken of his addiction to intervention in the Middle East and how that has worked out for everyone.

Paul reminded the Secretary of State nominee that his only criticism of the Syria "regime change" plan was that the US did not successfully overthrow Assad. But the US was using jihadist proxies to overthrow the secular Assad , so what does this say about Blinken's judgement?

"The lesson of these wars," said Paul , is that 'regime change' doesn't work!"

Paul added:

Even after Libya you guys went on to Syria wanting to do the same thing again it's a disaster.

You got rid of one 'bad guy' and another 'bad guy' got stronger.

Yes, Senator Paul is right. "Regime change" doesn't work. It kills or destroys the lives of the most vulnerable. The poor and the innocent. The US enemies may occasionally find themselves on the wrong end of a noose or a knife rape , but it is the civilians who always suffer when they are "liberated" by Washington.

Buckle up, as incoming Senate Majority Leader Schumer advised, there's a whole lot of interventionism in the queue. There's a whole lot of death and destruction to be unleashed by Biden, Blinken, and their gang of " humanitarians ."

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

[Jan 22, 2021] Neoliberal international order needs Russia as enemy to galvanize West

Notable quotes:
"... Consequently, there is no sense of irony among the McFauls of the world as US security strategy is committed to global dominance, while berating Russia for "revisionism." ..."
Jan 22, 2021 | www.rt.com

By Glenn Diesen , Professor at the University of South-Eastern Norway, and an editor at the Russia in Global Affairs journal. Follow him on Twitter @glenndiesen

Donald Trump's efforts to reduce the ideologically driven base of US foreign policy fuelled great resentment among those who believed it betrayed Washington's leadership position in the so-called "liberal international order."

Now that power has changed, will the pendulum swing in the opposite direction, with Joe Biden's administration applying a radical ideological foreign policy?

A recent article by Michael McFaul, once Barack Obama's ambassador to Russia and a noted 'Russiagate' conspiracy theorist, indicates what such an ideological foreign policy would look like. McFaul's article, 'How to Contain Putin's Russia', makes a case for a containment policy.

Containment: learning from the past or living in the past?

To advance his argument, McFaul quotes George Kennan, the author of the Long Telegram and architect of erstwhile US containment policy against the Soviet Union. McFaul suggests that Kennan's advocacy for a "patient but firm and vigilant containment" against the revolutionary Bolshevik regime 75 years ago remains as valid as ever.

It would have made more sense to quote Kennan when he condemned NATO expansionism and predicted it would trigger another Cold War. As Kennan noted: "there was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves."

Kennan continued to express disbelief over the rhetoric by the misinformed US leadership, presenting "Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe. Don't people understand? Our differences in the Cold War were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime." Kennan then went on to correctly predict that, when Russia would eventually react to US provocations, the NATO expanders would wrongfully blame Russia.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden hopes for 5-year extension of New START nuclear treaty while seeking to demonize Russia for 'hacking, meddling & bounties'

Ideologues often have nostalgia for the Cold War, when the bipolar power distribution was supported by a clear and comfortable ideological divide. The Western bloc represented capitalism, Christianity, and democracy, while the Eastern bloc represented communism, atheism, and authoritarianism. This ideological divide supported internal cohesion within the Western bloc and drew clear borders with the adversary.

The liberal international order has attempted to recast the former capitalist-communist divide with a liberal-authoritarian divide. However, the ideological incompatibility between American liberalism and Russian conservatism is less convincing. For example, McFaul cautions against Putin's nefarious conservative ideology committed to "Christian, traditional family values" that threatens the liberal international order.

The new ideological divide nonetheless advances neo-McCarthyism in the West. McFaul presents a list of European conservatives and populists that should be treated as American conservatives, purged from political life as enemies of the liberal international order and thus possible agents of Russia. Hillary Clinton even suggested that the Capitol Hill riots were possibly coordinated by Trump and Putin – yes, Russiagate is here to stay. The solution, for McFaul, is for American tech oligarchs to manipulate algorithms to protect populations from Russian-friendly media.

An American ideological project

McFaul cautions against what he refers to as "Putin's ideological project" as a threat to the liberal international order. Yet he is reluctant to recognize that the liberal international order is an American ideological project for the post-Cold War era.

READ MORE: With no sign of US returning to fold, Russia is preparing to withdraw from 'Open Skies' treaty - Foreign Ministry

After the Cold War, liberal ideologues advanced what was seemingly a benign proposition – suggesting that liberal democracy should be at the center of security strategies. However, by linking liberal norms to US leadership, liberalism became both a constitutional principle and an international hegemonic norm.

NATO is presented as a community of liberal values – without mentioning that its second largest member, Turkey, is more conservative and authoritarian than Russia – and Moscow does not, therefore, have any legitimate reasons to oppose expansionism unless it fears democracy. If Russia reacts negatively to military encirclement, it is condemned as an enemy of democracy, and NATO has a moral responsibility to revert to its original mission as a military bloc containing Russia.

Case in point: there was nobody in Moscow advocating for the reunification with Crimea until the West supported the coup in Ukraine. Yet, as Western "fact checkers" and McFaul inform us, there was a "democratic revolution" and not a coup. Committed to his ideological prism, McFaul suggests that Russia acted out of a fear of having a democracy on its borders, as it would give hope to Russians and thus threaten the Kremlin. McFaul's ideological lens masks conflicting national security interests, and it fails to explain why Russia does not mind democratic neighbors in the east, such as South Korea and Japan, with whom it enjoys good relations.

Defending the peoples

States aspiring for global hegemony have systemic incentives to embrace ideologies that endow them with the right to defend other peoples. The French National Convention declared in 1792 that France would "come to the aid of all peoples who are seeking to recover their liberty," and the Bolsheviks proclaimed in 1917 "the duty to render assistance, armed, if necessary, to the fighting proletariat of the other countries."

The American liberal international order similarly aims to liberate the people of the world with "democracy promotion" and "humanitarian interventionism" when it conveniently advances US primacy. The American ideological project infers that democracy is advanced by US interference in the domestic affairs of Russia, while democracy is under attack if Russia interferes in the domestic affairs of US. The liberal international system is one of sovereign inequality to advance global primacy.

READ MORE Putin says American presence in Afghanistan is beneficial to Moscow's interests, rubbishes claims of 'Russian bounties to Taliban'

McFaul does not consider himself a Russophobe, as believes his attacks against Russia are merely motivated by the objective of liberating Russians from their government, which is why he advocates that Biden "distinguish between Russia and Russians – between Putin and the Russian people." This has been the modus operandi for regime change since the end of the Cold War – the US supposedly does not attack countries to advance its interests, it only altruistically assists foreign peoples in rival states against their leaders such as Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin etc.

McFaul and other liberal ideologues still refer to NATO as a "defensive alliance," which does not make much sense after the attacks on Yugoslavia in 1999 or Libya in 2011. However, under the auspices of liberal internationalism, NATO is defensive, as it defends the people of the world. Russia, therefore, doesn't have rational reasons for opposing the liberal international order.

McFaul condemns alleged efforts by Russia to interfere in the domestic affairs of the US, before outlining his strategies for interfering in the domestic affairs of Russia. McFaul blames Russian paranoia for shutting down American "non-governmental organizations" that are funded by the US government and staffed by people linked to the US security apparatus. He goes on to explain that the US government must counter this by establishing new "non-government organizations" to educate the Russian public about the evils of their government.

The dangerous appeal of ideologues

Ideologues have always been dangerous to international security. Ideologies of human freedom tend to promise perpetual peace. Yet, instead of transcending power politics, the ideals of human freedom are linked directly to hegemonic power by the self-proclaimed defender of the ideology. When ideologues firmly believe that the difference between the current volatile world and utopia can be bridged by defeating its opponents, it legitimizes radical power politics.

Consequently, there is no sense of irony among the McFauls of the world as US security strategy is committed to global dominance, while berating Russia for "revisionism."

Raymond Aaron once wrote: "Idealistic diplomacy slips too often into fanaticism; it divides states into good and evil, into peace-loving and bellicose. It envisions a permanent peace by the punishment of the latter and the triumph of the former. The idealist, believing he has broken with power politics, exaggerates its crimes."

If you like this story, share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Jan 22, 2021] Blinken who looks like more dangerous variant of Pompeo

Notable quotes:
"... "Blinken acknowledged that the US must set an example at home on what it preaches abroad. He also stressed the need for "humility". But he insisted nonetheless that the US' global leadership "still matters" since the world is incapable of organising itself "when we're not leading," as some other country may usurp America's lead role impacting "our interests and values", or, simply, chaos may follow! ..."
"... At any rate, Blinken has pledged to "revitalise American diplomacy" and address the challenges of "rising nationalism, reseeding democracy, growing rivalry from China, and Russia and other authoritarian states, mounting threats to a stable and open international system and a technological revolution that is reshaping every aspect of our lives, especially in cyberspace." ..."
Jan 22, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jen , Jan 21 2021 0:50 utc | 114

James @ 36 and onwards:

I would not set too much store by Plato's political philosophy. For Plato, the political ideal was a society of three layers: philosopher kings who rule, guardians (the military), producers / workers.

Ideally philosopher kings would be trained from childhood, adolescence or young adulthood onwards to be rational and to think in terms of what is best for society as a whole. They would be trained to be selfless and to shun the pursuit of material wealth.

There are many criticisms that can be made of Plato's ideal society. One such criticism among others is that philosopher kings / rulers may have a very narrow idea of what is best for society as a whole and may lead their people into trouble with, erm, "noble lies" (in whatever form the propaganda and the cultural conditioning take - and when does a "noble" lie cease to be "noble" and become just plain outright manipulation and falsehood?) if they confuse their own interests with the interests of society, when the reality is that their interests as philosopher kings and the interests of the rest of society are far apart.

The irony I've just uncovered is that the present system of government that exists in the US looks a little too much like Plato's ideal.

james , Jan 21 2021 3:42 utc | 134

@ Jen | Jan 21 2021 0:50 utc | 114... thanks jen... i was waiting to find out from juliania, but i appreciate your take on this which seems fairly informed... i know nothing about all of it, but it was an interesting idea cross purposing bidens inaugurations speech with platos idea of a or the noble lie... the problem with ideals, is they are hard to live in reality, thus they remain ideals only.. it sems philosopher kings and political leaders rely heavily on ideals to make a pitch to the public.. not everyone is receptive to them though... thanks for your input!

M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

Blinken's diplomatic cart will have a bumpy ride

"Blinken acknowledged that the US must set an example at home on what it preaches abroad. He also stressed the need for "humility". But he insisted nonetheless that the US' global leadership "still matters" since the world is incapable of organising itself "when we're not leading," as some other country may usurp America's lead role impacting "our interests and values", or, simply, chaos may follow!

Now, that's an extraordinary boast so soon after the Capitol Riots whose leitmotif was Chaos in capital "C". Blinken made a laughable claim. But it also betrays delusional thinking.

At any rate, Blinken has pledged to "revitalise American diplomacy" and address the challenges of "rising nationalism, reseeding democracy, growing rivalry from China, and Russia and other authoritarian states, mounting threats to a stable and open international system and a technological revolution that is reshaping every aspect of our lives, especially in cyberspace."

[Jan 22, 2021] Blinken is an unrepentant, unapologetic openly zionist

Jan 22, 2021 | www.unz.com

Mustapha Mond , says: January 22, 2021 at 12:52 am GMT • 1.2 hours ago

@follyofwar hat Trump did not, and for which Trump deserves credit: NOT attacking Iran; NOT starting a war in the Donbass region of Ukraine; and NOT escalating the attack on Syria to the point where Syria collapses and Al-Nusra and ISIS terrorists take over (which is what Israel has openly said they would prefer to Assad!) And I am NOT a 'Trumper', think he was a disgusting zionist boot-licker, and that he didn't do diddly squat of what he promised to do for the average American, but sure kissed Wall Street's bottom. The problem is, Bidet may be worse, if his past is any indication.

Regardless, the next four years are gonna be ugly, really ugly, foreign policy-wise, I'm afraid ..

[Jan 22, 2021] Blinken who looks like more dangerious variant of Pompeo has pledged to "revitalise American diplomacy" and address the challenges of "rising nationalism, reseeding democracy, growing rivalry from China, and Russia and other authoritarian states, mounting threats to a stable and open international system and a technological revolution that is reshaping every aspect of our lives, especially in cyberspace."

Jan 22, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jen , Jan 21 2021 0:50 utc | 114

James @ 36 and onwards:

I would not set too much store by Plato's political philosophy. For Plato, the political ideal was a society of three layers: philosopher kings who rule, guardians (the military), producers / workers.

Ideally philosopher kings would be trained from childhood, adolescence or young adulthood onwards to be rational and to think in terms of what is best for society as a whole. They would be trained to be selfless and to shun the pursuit of material wealth.

There are many criticisms that can be made of Plato's ideal society. One such criticism among others is that philosopher kings / rulers may have a very narrow idea of what is best for society as a whole and may lead their people into trouble with, erm, "noble lies" (in whatever form the propaganda and the cultural conditioning take - and when does a "noble" lie cease to be "noble" and become just plain outright manipulation and falsehood?) if they confuse their own interests with the interests of society, when the reality is that their interests as philosopher kings and the interests of the rest of society are far apart.

The irony I've just uncovered is that the present system of government that exists in the US looks a little too much like Plato's ideal.

james , Jan 21 2021 3:42 utc | 134

@ Jen | Jan 21 2021 0:50 utc | 114... thanks jen... i was waiting to find out from juliania, but i appreciate your take on this which seems fairly informed... i know nothing about all of it, but it was an interesting idea cross purposing bidens inaugurations speech with platos idea of a or the noble lie... the problem with ideals, is they are hard to live in reality, thus they remain ideals only.. it sems philosopher kings and political leaders rely heavily on ideals to make a pitch to the public.. not everyone is receptive to them though... thanks for your input!

M. K. BHADRAKUMAR

Blinken's diplomatic cart will have a bumpy ride

"Blinken acknowledged that the US must set an example at home on what it preaches abroad. He also stressed the need for "humility". But he insisted nonetheless that the US' global leadership "still matters" since the world is incapable of organising itself "when we're not leading," as some other country may usurp America's lead role impacting "our interests and values", or, simply, chaos may follow!

Now, that's an extraordinary boast so soon after the Capitol Riots whose leitmotif was Chaos in capital "C". Blinken made a laughable claim. But it also betrays delusional thinking. At any rate, Blinken has pledged to "revitalise American diplomacy" and address the challenges of "rising nationalism, reseeding democracy, growing rivalry from China, and Russia and other authoritarian states, mounting threats to a stable and open international system and a technological revolution that is reshaping every aspect of our lives, especially in cyberspace."

[Jan 22, 2021] The Future of War in Biden's America Consortiumnews

Jan 22, 2021 | consortiumnews.com

H ard as it is to believe in this time of record pandemic deaths, insurrection, and an unprecedented encore impeachment, Joe Biden is now officially at the helm of the U.S. war machine. He is, in other words, the fourth president to oversee America's unending and unsuccessful post-9/11 military campaigns.

In terms of active U.S. combat, that's only happened once before, in the , America's second-longest (if often forgotten) overseas combat campaign.

Yet that conflict was limited to a single Pacific archipelago. Biden inherits a global war -- and burgeoning new Cold War -- spanning four continents and a military mired in active operations in dozens of countries, combat in some 14 of them, and bombing in at least seven.

That sort of scope has been standard fare for American presidents for almost two decades now. Still, while this country's post-9/11 war presidents have more in common than their partisan divisions might suggest, distinctions do matter, especially at a time when the White House almost unilaterally drives foreign policy.

So, what can we expect from Commander-in-Chief Biden? In other words, what's the forecast for U.S. service-members who have invested their lives and limbs in future conflict, as well as for the speculators in the military-industrial complex and anxious foreigners in the countries still engulfed in America's war on terror who usually stand to lose it all?

Many Trumpsters, and some libertarians, foresee disaster : that the man who, as a leading senator facilitated and cheered on the disastrous Iraq War, will surely escalate American adventurism abroad. On the other hand, establishment Democrats and most liberals, who are desperately (and understandably) relieved to see Donald Trump go, find that prediction preposterous.

Clearly, Biden must have learned from past mistakes, changed his tune, and should responsibly bring U.S. wars to a close, even if at a time still to be determined.

In a sense, both may prove right -- and in another sense, both wrong. The guess of this long-time war-watcher (and one-time war fighter) reading the tea leaves: expect Biden to both eschew big new wars and avoid fully ending existing ones.

At the margins (think Iran), he may improve matters some; in certain rather risky areas (Russian relations, for instance), he could worsen them; but in most cases (the rest of the Greater Middle East, Africa, and China), he's likely to remain squarely on the status-quo spectrum. And mind you, there's nothing reassuring about that.

Sgt. John Hoxie watches 82nd Airborne Division's All American Week celebration May 18, 2009. Hoxie returned to Fort Bragg for the first time since he was injured during a 2007 deployment to Iraq. (U.S. Army/Flickr)

It hardly requires clairvoyance to offer such guesswork. That's because Biden basically is who he says he is and who he's always been , and the man's simply never been transformational. One need look no further than his long and generally interventionist past record or the nature of his current national-security picks to know that the safe money is on more of the same.

Whether the issues are war, race , crime , or economics , Uncle Joe has made a career of bending with the prevailing political winds and it's unlikely this old dog can truly learn any new tricks.

Furthermore, he's filled his foreign policy squad with Obama-Clinton retreads, a number of whom were architects of -- if not the initial Iraq and Afghan debacles -- then disasters in Libya, Syria, West Africa, Yemen, and the Afghan surge of 2009. In other words, Biden is putting the former arsonists in charge of the forever-war fire brigade.

There's further reason to fear that he may even reject Trump's "If Obama was for it, I'm against it" brand of war-on-terror policy-making and thereby reverse The Donald's very late, very modest troop withdrawals in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia.

Yet even if this new old hand of a president evades potentially existential escalation with nuclear Russia or China and offers only an Obama reboot when it comes to persistent low-intensity warfare, what he does will still matter -- most of all to the global citizens who are too often its victims.

So, here's a brief region-by-region flyover tour of what Joe's squad may have in store for both the world and the American military sent to police that world.

The Middle East: Old Prescriptions for Old Business

It's increasingly clear that Washington's legacy wars in the Greater Middle East -- Iraq and Afghanistan, in particular -- are generally no longer on the public's radar. Enter an elected old man who's charged with handling old business that, at least to most civilians, is old news.

Odds are that Biden's ancient tricks will amount to safe bets in a region that past U.S. policies essentially destroyed. Joe is likely to take a middle path in the region between large-scale military intervention of the Bush or Obama kind and more prudent full-scale withdrawal.

As a result, such wars will probably drag on just below the threshold of American public awareness, while avoiding Pentagon or partisan charges that his version of cutting-and-running endangered U.S. security. The prospect of "victory" won't even factor into the equation (after all, Biden's squad members aren't stupid), but political survival certainly will.

Here's what such a Biden-era future might then look like in a few such sub-theaters.

"Wars will probably drag on just below the threshold of American public awareness."

The war in Afghanistan is hopeless and has long been failing by every one of the U.S. military's own measurable metrics, so much so that the Pentagon and the Kabul government classified them all as secret information a few years back.

Actually dealing with the Taliban and swiftly exiting a disastrous war likely to lead to a disastrous future with Washington's tail between its legs is, in fact, the only remaining option. The question is when and how many more Americans will kill or be killed in that "graveyard of empires" before the U.S. accepts the inevitable.

U.S. Army helicopter pilots fly near Jalalabad, Afghanistan, April 5, 2017. (U.S. Army, Brian Harris, Wikimedia Commons)

Toward the end of his tenure, Trump signaled a serious, if cynical, intent to so. And since Trump was by definition a monster and the other team's monsters can't even occasionally be right, a coalition of establishment Democrats and Lincoln-esque Republicans (and Pentagon officials) decided that the war must indeed go on. That culminated in last July's obscenity in which Congress officially withheld the funds necessary to end it.

As vice president, Biden was better than most in his Afghan War skepticism , but his incoming advisers weren't , and Joe's nothing if not politically malleable. Besides, since Trump didn't pull enough troops out faintly fast enough or render the withdrawal irreversible over Pentagon objections, expect a trademark Biden hedge here.

Syria has always been a boondoggle , with the justifications for America's peculiar military presence there constantly shifting from pressuring the regime of Bashar al-Assad, to fighting the Islamic State, to backing the Kurds, to balancing Iran and Russia in the region, to (in Trump's case) securing that country's meager oil supplies.

As with so much else, there's a troubling possibility that, in the Biden years, personnel once again may become destiny. Many of the new president's advisers were bullish on Syrian intervention in the Obama years, even wanting to take it further and topple Assad.

Furthermore, when it comes time for them to convince Biden to agree to stay put in Syria, there's a dangerous existing mix of motives to do just that: the emotive sympathy for the Kurds of known gut-player Joe; his susceptibility to revived Islamic State (ISIS) fear-mongering; and perceptions of a toughness-testing proxy contest with Russia.

When it comes to Iran, expect Biden to be better than the Iran-phobic Trump administration, but to stay shackled "inside the box."

First of all, despite Joe's long-expressed desire to reenter the Obama-era nuclear deal with Iran that Trump so disastrously pulled out of, doing so may prove harder than he thinks. After all, why should Tehran trust a political basket case of a negotiating partner prone to significant partisan policy-pendulum swings, especially given the way Washington has waged nearly 70 years of interventions against Iran's politicians and people?

In addition, Trump left Biden the Trojan horse of Tehran's hardliners, empowered by dint of The Donald's pugnacious policies. If the new president wishes to really undercut Iranian intransigence and fortify the moderates there, he should go big and be transformational -- in other words, see Obama's tension-thawing nuclear deal and raise it with the carrot of full-blown diplomatic and economic normalization. Unfortunately, status-quo Joe has never been a transformational type.

Keep an Eye on Africa

Djiboutian soldiers, Oct. 31, 2019. (U.S. Air Force, J.D. Strong II)

Though it garners far less public interest than the U.S. military's long-favored Middle Eastern playground, Africa figures significantly in the minds of those at the Pentagon, in the Capitol, and in Washington's influential think-tanks.

For interventionist hawks, including liberal ones, that continent has been both a petri dish and a proving ground for the development of a limited power-projection paradigm of drones, Special Operations forces, military advisers, local proxies, and clandestine intelligence missions.

It mattered little that over eight years of the Obama administration -- from Libya to the West African Sahel to the Horn of East Africa -- the war on terror proved, at best, problematic indeed, and even worse in the Trump years.

There remains a worrisome possibility that the Biden posse might prove amenable yet again to the alarmism of U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) about the rebirth of ISIS and the spread of other al-Qaeda-linked groups there, bolstered by fear-mongering nonsense masquerading as sophisticated scholarship from West Point's Combating Terrorism Center, and the Pentagon's perennial promises of low-investment, low-risk, and high-reward opportunities on the continent.

So, a savvy betting man might place chips on a Biden escalation in West Africa's Sahel and the Horn of East Africa, even if for different reasons.

American Special Forces and military advisers have been in and out of the remote borderlands between Mali and Niger since at least 2004 and these days seem there to stay. The French seized and suppressed sections of the Sahel region beginning in 1892, and, despite granting nominal independence to those countries in 1960, were back by 2013 and have been stuck in their own forever wars there ever since.

American war-on-terror(izing) and French neo-colonizing have only inflamed regional resistance movements, increased violence, and lent local grievances an Islamist resonance. Recently, France's lead role there has truly begun to disintegrate -- with five of its troops killed in just the first few days of 2021 and allegations that it had bombed another wedding party. (Already such a war-on-terror cliché .)

Don't be surprised if French President Emmanuel Macron asks for help and Biden agrees to bail him out. Despite their obvious age gap, Joe and Emmanuel could prove the newest and best of chums. (What's a few hundred extra troops between friends?)

Especially since Obama-era Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her then-favored errand boy, inbound national security adviser Jake Sullivan, could be said to have founded the current coalition of jihadis in Mali and Niger.

That's because when the two of them championed a heavy-handed regime-change intervention against Libyan autocrat Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, thousands of his Tuareg fighters blew back into that region in a big way with more than just the clothes on their backs. They streamed from post-Gaddafi Libya into their Sahel homelands loaded with arms and anger.

It's no accident, in other words, that Mali's latest round of insurgency kicked off in 2012. Now, Sullivan might push new boss Biden to attempt to clean up his old mess.

Jake Sullivan, second from left, as deputy chief of staff to the secretary of state, with his boss Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama, Nov. 20, 2012. (White House, Pete Souza)

On the other side of the continent, in Somalia, where Trump began an 11th-hour withdrawal of a long-failing and aimless U.S. troop presence (sending most of those soldiers to neighboring countries), there's a real risk that Biden could double-down in the region, adding soldiers, special operators, and drones.

After all, if Trump was against it, even after exponentially increasing bombing in the area, then any good Democrat should be for it, especially since the Pentagon has, for some time now, been banging the drum about Somalia's al-Shabaab Islamist outfit being the biggest threat to the homeland.

However, the real selling point for Biden might be the fantasy that Russia and China are flooding into the region. Ever since the 2018 National Defense Strategy decisively shifted the Pentagon's focus from counterterror wars to "great power competition," or GPC, AFRICOM has opportunistically altered its own campaign plan to align with the new threat of the moment, homing in on Russian and Chinese influence in the Horn region.

As a result, AFRICOM'S come-back-to-the-Horn pitch could prove a relatively easy Biden sell.

Russian Bears & Chinese (Sea) Dragons

Chinese President Xi Jinping, left, with Russian President Vladimir Putin during visit to Moscow for state visit, Xi Jinping. (Kremlin)

With that new GPC national security obsession likely to be one Trump-era policy that remains firmly in place, however ill-advised it may be, perhaps the biggest Biden risk is the possibility of stoking up a "new," two-theater, twenty-first-century version of the Cold War (with the possibility that, at any moment, it could turn into a hot one).

After making everything all about Russia in the Trump years, the ascendant Democrats might just feel obliged to follow through and escalate tensions with Moscow that Trump himself already brought to the brink (of nuclear catastrophe). Here, too, personnel may prove a key policy-driver.

Biden's nominee for secretary of state, Anthony Blinken, is a resident Russia hawk and was an early " arm-Ukraine " enthusiast. Jake Sullivan already has a tendency to make mountains out of molehills on the subject, as when he described a minor road-rage incident as constituting "a Russian force in Syria aggressively attack[ing] an American force and actually injur[ing] American service members."

Then there's the troubling signal of Victoria Nuland, the recent nominee for undersecretary of state for political affairs, a pick that itself should be considered a road-rage-style provocation. Nuland has a history of hawkish antagonism toward Moscow and is reportedly despised by Russian President Vladimir Putin. Her confirmation will surely serve as a conflict accelerant.

Nevertheless, China may be the lead antagonist in the Biden crew's race to risk a foolhardy cataclysm. Throughout the election campaign, the new president seemed set on out-hawking Trump in the Western Pacific, explicitly writing about "getting tough" on China in a March 2020 piece he penned in Foreign Affairs .

Joe had also previously called Chinese President Xi Jinping " a thug ." And while Michèle Flournoy may (mercifully) have been passed over for secretary of defense, her aggressive posture toward Beijing still infuses the thinking of her fellow Obama alums on Biden's team.

As TomDispatch regular Andrew Bacevich pointed out last September, a Flournoy Foreign Affairs article illuminated the sort of absurdity she (and assumedly various Biden appointees) think necessary to effectively deter China.

She called for "enhancing U.S. military capabilities so that the United States can credibly threaten to sink all of China's military vessels, submarines, and merchant ships in the South China Sea within 72 hours." Consider that Dr. Strangelove -style strategizing retooled for an inbound urbane imperial presidency.

Endgame: War as Abstraction

Historically, foreign-policy paradigm shifts are exceedingly rare, especially when they tack toward peace. Such pivots appear almost impossible once the immense power of America's military-industrial complex, invested in every way in endless war, as well as endless preparations for future Cold Wars, has reached today's grotesque level.

This is especially so when each and every one of Biden's archetypal national security nominees has, metaphorically speaking, had his or her mortgage paid by some offshoot of that war industry. In other words, as the muckraking novelist Upton Sinclair used to say : "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

Count on tactics including drones, commandos, CIA spooks, and a mostly amenable media to help the Biden administration make war yet more invisible -- at least to Americans. Most Trump-detesting, and domestically focused citizens will find that just dandy, even if exhausted troopers, military families, and bombed or blockaded foreigners won't.

More than anything, Biden wishes to avoid overseas embarrassments like unexpected American casualties or scandalous volumes of foreign civilian deaths -- anything, that is, that might derail his domestic agenda or hoped-for restorative leadership legacy.

That, unfortunately, may prove to be a pipe dream and leads me to two final predictions: formulaic forever war will never cease boomeranging back home to rot our republican institutions, and neither a celestial God nor secular History will judge Biden-the-war-president kindly.

Danny Sjursen is a retired U.S. Army officer and contributing editor at antiwar.com . His work has appeared in the LA Times , The Nation , Huff Post , T he Hill , Salon , Truthdig , Tom Dispatch , among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . His latest book is Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War . Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet . Check out his professional website for contact info, scheduling speeches, and/or access to the full corpus of his writing and media appearances.

This article is from Tom's Dispatch .

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

[Jan 21, 2021] Watch- Rand Paul Challenges New Secretary Of State Over Regime-Change In Syria - ZeroHedge

Jan 21, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

Watch: Rand Paul Challenges New Secretary Of State Over Regime-Change In Syria BY TYLER DURDEN THURSDAY, JAN 21, 2021 - 10:19

Via AlMasdarNews.com,

Senator Rand Paul recently challenged the new Secretary of State nominee Anthony Blinken on his history of pushing regime change in the Middle East and North Africa:

"Regime change in the Middle East has led to chaos, instability and more terrorism," Sen. Paul argued.

"Like Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton you've been a supporter of military intervention in the Middle East from the Iraq war to the Libyan war to the Syrian civil war..." he introduced in his Tuesday questoning of Blinken.

Sen. Paul began his argument by questioning Blinken's role in the NATO intervention of Libya in 2001 and his support for the US military invasion of Iraq in 2003, which the Kentucky congressman said was a major disaster that paved the way for a stronger Iran.

The congressman argued that Blinken continued to push regime change in Syria, which he said was a significant blunder, especially with the amount of money spent training "moderate rebel forces" .

Sen. Paul said the administration of former President Barack Obama spent $250 million (USD) on training 60 rebels [as part of the DoD side; the CIA program was much more expansive], which he said was a waste of money.

He would go on to question why Blinken would support the Syrian opposition groups on the ground, as he pointed out the most powerful fighters are those from the jihadist groups like the Al-Nusra Front .

"Even after Libya you guys went on to Syria wanting to do the same thing again... it's a disaster. The lesson of these wars is that regime change doesn't work!" Paul said.

"You got rid of one 'bad guy' and another 'bad guy' got stronger," Paul added while lambasting the US strategy of going after Iran while Iraq is still weakened by Bush's regime change war there.

"Maybe we shouldn't be 'choosing' governments in the Middle East," Paul continued.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

Watch the full exchange here:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/_i5ynePhmnk

Blinken claimed in response that he wasn't supportive of a full-scale 'Iraq-style' regime change war in Syria while vaguely claiming that he's done "deep thinking" and reflection on the issue . Blinken never repudiated the policy of regime change in the Middle East, however.

Sen. Paul then shifted his attention to NATO, which he said Blinken was trying to strengthen for the purpose of combatting Russia. The senator said Blinken's policy on NATO would lead to war with Russia, which the latter responded would have the opposite effect.

Antony Blinken upon his nomination for Secretary of State in the new administration, via Reuters

Paul concluded by saying that regime change needs to end because it is involving the US in long wars that are costly to the military.

The Luftwaffe 8 hours ago

We will see a new major war started by this administration within two years

Cloud9.5 7 hours ago

We have to do something to reduce the population.

Leather-Dog 7 hours ago

You mean in addition to the 103.5% effective covid vaccine?

RiverRoad 7 hours ago

On duckduckgo.com search > "Med Cram".
On You Tube: Dr. Seheult's med school video lecture "Vitamin D and Covid 19: The Evidence for Prevention and " (5.3m views)
Vitamin D3 is sold over the counter.
Karma is coming for Covid.

eatapeach 7 hours ago

Hopefully it's also coming for the thieving liars who pushed this cheap PsyOp (Pompeo is one, Fauci is another).

bigjim 3 hours ago

I guess Bibi mis-spelled Rand's email address on the memo.

boattrash 2 hours ago

103.5%... that sounds like the voter turnout in all the blue cities.

rastanarchocapitalist 7 hours ago

If one could take all the people in the world and cram them into a city as dense as Tokyo, it would cover the area of Rhode Island.

BaNNeD oN THe RuN 5 hours ago

BS
Tokyo pop density=16121.8 /sq.mi.
Rhode Island = 1045 sq.mi.

At that density RI would hold 16.8 million people.

At the average annual population growth rate of the last century there will be 1 sq.m. of land per person in only 750 years. That includes all mountains, frozen tundra, jungles and deserts... now "get off my lawn".

bearwinkle 6 hours ago

Sure, that's why Xiden is allowing millions of immigrants to invade our borders.

aloha_snakbar 7 hours ago

I thought it might be like today...

Hatterasjohn 7 hours ago

Anyone crazy enough to join ,or be in the military , is out of his friggin mind.

BarnacleBill 7 hours ago

Or likes killing civilians. Don't overlook the psychopaths.

headslapper 7 hours ago

and that will be the end of the US.

RiverRoad 7 hours ago

How about the Regime Change just effected right HERE in the good old USA?

Im1ru12 4 hours ago

Exactly - "Maybe we shouldn't be 'choosing' governments in the Middle East," Paul continued

That's what they do - they just did it here

starman99 7 hours ago

(((Anthony Blinken)))

USAllDay 7 hours ago

I'd take Assad over Biden.

9.1ontherichterscale 7 hours ago (Edited)

Assad has more integrity in his shoe than Biden has accumulated in the past 50 years.

Armed Resistance 7 hours ago

If the deep state hates Assad, then I know he must be legitimately a good guy deep down.

9.1ontherichterscale 7 hours ago

BINGO!

Brutlstrudl 6 hours ago

It seems that after each election, the USA becomes more of a contrarian indicator

SERReal1 7 hours ago

I agree. At least Assad puts his country first and gives the finger to the Deep State.

BaNNeD oN THe RuN 5 hours ago

Plus a secular government that respects the rights of all religious minorites. Sets a bad example for all the intolerant apartheid states in the region.

Hopefully the "Assad Must Go" curse gets the entire Biden Administration sooner rather than later.

aloha_snakbar 8 hours ago

Who cares...Uncle Scam lost the tiny bit of credibility he had on 01/20/2021. RIP America....

eatapeach 7 hours ago

I care. Here's yet another Israel-first douchenozzle getting put in a very, very high position. And acting like it'd be any different with Trump at the helm is severe folly. (Pompeo)

FluTangClan 6 hours ago

Sorry bro but anyone with eyes hasn't thought the US credible for more than a century.

4Celts 7 hours ago

Paul concluded by saying that regime change needs to end because it is involving the US in long wars that are costly to the military.

Pardon , but the " cost " to the military shouldn't be the top/only argument. What happened to morally/ ethically wrong ?

SwmngwShrks 7 hours ago

"All wars are Bankers' wars." -Smedley Butler

white horse 7 hours ago

Moral is dead long ago, replaced by new fake moral called humanitarianism.

DonGenaro 7 hours ago

You're an astute observer - few detect such "tells"

Feck Weed 5 hours ago

Consider the audience

FringeDweller 5 hours ago

Fair point.

Lord JT 5 hours ago

He mentioned that it creates more terrorism, and that the incoming regime may be even worse than the previous.

Unknown User 8 hours ago

Biden will start a war, or two, or three...

Why-Am-I-Banned 6 hours ago

Maybe the best thing that could happen to free us all finally is an all out war with Russia, we aren't going to see a revolution to get rid of the corruption the population is lazy and scared of doing without.

Maybe forced into mutual assured destruction is truly the only way to get rid of the deep state...

Russia lost approx 250 million via communism over decades, maybe we need to just swallow the poison pill and get it over with.

Not all of us will die, and definately no one is going to listen to the deep state leaders after the dust clears...

FluTangClan 6 hours ago

Cho Bai Den fol peace!

wick7 5 hours ago

It's amazing how Democrats flipped overnight to being pro war once Obama started new wars. They were mad when Trump was signing peace deals. Lol.

You_Cant_Quit_Me 8 hours ago

He's right. One disaster after another. Who has Assad attacked? If small countries want the US to back off then they must develop nuclear weapons. When was the last time the US attacked a country with nuclear capabilities?

JRobby 7 hours ago

Bust Blinken's balls until he quits like a little rat trying to naw through steel cables

gespiri 7 hours ago

The only way to stop these wars is to send the people (and their kids) who are pushing for it in the first place to the front lines.

rastanarchocapitalist 7 hours ago

Or make the state obsolete by transitioning to a private law society.

RedDog1 7 hours ago

Remember how Gaddafi surrendered his nukeprogram to Bush, a few years later Obama/HRC invaded...resulting in Gaddafi being lynched?

eatapeach 7 hours ago

Iran and NK and Syria remember, for sure. Wish we all remembered the USS Liberty when shaping foreign policy.

LooseLee 4 hours ago

Remember Libya has no central bank?

Pandelis 3 hours ago (Edited)

you really believe that bs ... it is much more than that ... at the end is about the land and the people ... money can be printed out of thin air and there is nothing libya (or iraq, iran etc.) central bank can do about it ...

bring on dr. fraucistein to explain it all to us ... maga!!

roach clipper 6 hours ago

Assad placed his country too close to Is ra hell

manofthenorth 8 hours ago

Sorry guys but we have been played like a second hand fiddle.

It is ALL BS.

THEY don't give a **** about US

LetThemEatRand 8 hours ago

I assume Paul has figured out by now that being a murderous psychopath is a job requirement in DC. It's the first question in the job interview. "Do you enjoy death and destruction for profit and personal power?"

littlewing 7 hours ago

Remember when Trump bombed Syria and all of a sudden everyone in DC loved him for 15 minutes.

Talk about the big reveal.

aloha_snakbar 7 hours ago

The same Rand Paul who was criticizing Trump in the eleventh hour? That one?? They are all swamp creatures and seriously make me want to vomit...

pro·le·tar·i·at 7 hours ago

The apple rolled away from the tree.

Leather-Dog 7 hours ago

Paul, I like you, you seem to care a little bit. However, if they haven't cared in the last forever, they are definitely not going to start now. They just regime changed ourselves with almost no substantial resistance, you think they will care about Syria?

StanleyTheManly 5 hours ago

He puts on a show to care once in a while.

He didn't stand for the truth when it counted.

Goat of Steverino 7 hours ago

GREAT RAND, BUT WHERE WERE YOU ON BIG TECH CENSORSHIP AND ELECTION FRAUD?

Bank_sters 7 hours ago

He's cucked.

Ted Baker 6 hours ago

What is this obsession with Russia? Russia is a peaceful country who defends its people. How difficult is that to understand?

ReadyForHillary 6 hours ago

Russia isn't down with the NWO.

Dinaric 7 hours ago

(((Blinkin))) is all you need to know.

9.1ontherichterscale 7 hours ago

Does anyone honestly believe that if Biden was honest and had any degree if integrity that he would be president at this moment in U.S. history? That boy is a 50 year swamp critter A thoroughly reliable member of the compromised fraternity. Same for Nancy.

freakscene 7 hours ago

Remember the video of younger Biden telling some voter that he graduated top of his class, with honors????

None of which were true.

littlewing 7 hours ago

His degree is from University of Phoenix.

Now all colleges are that. haha

Invert This, Media Matters Monkeys 7 hours ago

Ironically, he wants to set up a comity for Integrity In Government.

freakscene 7 hours ago

Yeah. Thats hysterical!!

Saturday Night Live material - if they had any spine.

BarnacleBill 7 hours ago

Which they don't. Come on, man!

StanleyTheManly 5 hours ago

Yep. They needed someone with zero integrity.

yeketerina velikaya 7 hours ago

You know who's been right all along?

Tulsi Gabbard.

Right on big tech

Right on Kamala

Right on pardoning Assange and Snowden

Right on the uniparty and false flags in Syria

Right on Queen of Warmongers Hillary and DNC

Right on the MSM

Right on securing the elections/ballot harvesting

She's the real deal and would have delivered on these things but never had a shot.

Armed Resistance 7 hours ago

She was wrong on gun control. Very wrong! And that's a non-negotiable.

Why-Am-I-Banned 6 hours ago

Don't worry real gun control is coming and so much more you didn't ask for...

rastanarchocapitalist 7 hours ago

She should have been Trump's vp choice.

StanleyTheManly 5 hours ago

You know....I think you're right. I hadn't thought of that.

StanleyTheManly 5 hours ago

I like Tulsi. She seems like a genuine person with integrity that really cares about the country. BUT I disagree with her on quite a few issues. Maybe she'll come around.

littlewing 7 hours ago

The steal was sealed when the Supreme Court refused to hear the Texas case.

Greasy John Roberts wrecked America.

Max21c 7 hours ago

The steal was sealed when the Supreme Court refused to hear the Texas case.

True.

Vichy John Roberts went full Quisling and brought back Jim Crow laws. The Supreme Court endorsed election fraud, supported the coup d'etat, forced Trump from power, helped usher in a new era for the banana republic of Jim Crow laws...

phillyla 7 hours ago

John Roberts is compromised 8 ways to Sunday. Trump should have had him impeached and removed from the bench

El Chapo Read 7 hours ago

If you thought Trump was surrounded by Red Sea Pedestrians with an agenda, research the ethno-religious background of Biden's cabinet picks.

Shalom!

SassyPants 7 hours ago

Every administration is. Trumps son in law and advisor is as well. Please see the entire picture for a change.

snatchpounder PREMIUM 7 hours ago

How about closing all military bases overseas and dismantling the MIC and oh **** it an old demented neocon is playing president for a few months, scratch that.

rastanarchocapitalist 7 hours ago

The crack up boom of the FRNs may force that one day

snatchpounder PREMIUM 7 hours ago

I think it'll happen sooner rather than later, the chances are good based on the demented old pedophile being selected president and his retards at the fed.

rastanarchocapitalist 4 hours ago

In the long run, that might be a good thing if we return to honest money but you can be sure they'll try to kick the can for another 50 years with some form of new fiat or erasing a couple of zeroes of our current notes.

Hopefully the masses will just say know but I wouldn't put much faith in that.

RedNemesis 6 hours ago

Parents, do not let your smart, winning kids into the armed services. The MIC will grind them out with PTSD, brain injuries, and lost limbs. There is no 'patriotism' or allegience to the Deep State.

Why-Am-I-Banned 6 hours ago

Maybe the best thing that could happen to free us all finally is an all out war with Russia, we aren't going to see a revolution to get rid of the corruption the population is lazy and scared of doing without.

Maybe forced into mutual assured destruction is truly the only way to get rid of the deep state...

Russia lost approx 250 million via communism over decades, maybe we need to just swallow the poison pill and get it over with.

Not all of us will die, and definately no one is going to listen to the deep state leaders after the dust clears...

Max21c 6 hours ago (Edited)

Maybe the best thing that could happen to free us all finally is an all out war with Russia..

Maybe we should instead just launch a sneak attack on Alpha Centauri instead. Skip the small fry like Russia and China. In a few generations we shall know whether our Earthling space torpedoes hit Alpha Centauri. This of course should be debated by the people and approved by a plebiscite per ballot referendums. Then the space war bill sent to the Earthlings Politburo for their approval. It'll take around a decade or more to design and build the space torpedoes... then 100 years plus for travel time and the same to get the data back from the mothership...

Plus we can have both a Cold War and a Hot War with Alpha Centauri... under the leadership of an Earthling appointed or elected by the Earthlings Council and elevated to the rank of Don Quixote with the accompany title of Primal inter Pares

We just need more right thinking smart people to join the cult and become enlightened to the prospects of a new 100 years war with other planets...and maybe some small wars with planetoids...asteroids and comets...

We can establish of house of OverLords composed of only the best Astrologers to help pick out which planets to attack & destroy...based upon whether they have offended our star charts or the zodiac calls for war... In addition we can establish a lower house of UnderLords composed of mad scientists and Generalissimos and crazy Spy Chiefs... and maybe some nutty press types from the official media and puppet press to lead us in the Two Minutes Hate against the Alpha Centauri folks, the space peoples, and the flying saucer people...

Maghreb2 5 hours ago

CIA already had plans for all this under the Stargate Program. After Ike's treaty with various alien species the MIC began its descent into madness and universal conquest.

surroundedbyijits 6 hours ago

A war like that might "free" you, because the Russians will kick your ***.

balz 7 hours ago

Each time I see this "Office of the President Elect" picture thing, I get nauseous.

Fake office for a fake president who wasn't elected in the first place.

BLOTTO 8 hours ago

Like nothing happened back here at home.

Max21c 6 hours ago

Blinken may prove out to be more slick and savy than Dumbo Pompeo the flying cartoon elephant but he's still a fawking neanderthal and a ******. Maybe an elite ****** but he's still a ******. Blind, deaf, and dumb is still blind, deaf, and dumb even with all the powers of the secret police at their disposal.

Ms No PREMIUM 7 hours ago

Rand is sick too. He goes on about how these things are bad specifically because they strengthened Iran? How about liberty crushing mass murder?

"Sen. Paul said the administration of former President Barack Obama spent $250 million (USD) on training 60 rebels [as part of the DoD side; the CIA program was much more expansive], which he said was a waste of money."

So your mad they steal money while creating terrorists? Or are you mad that they don't tell you what they do with the rest? They abduct children from war zones to make them. Maybe the indoctrination and rape children's homes are expensive. They have screwed the entire planet.

There is something wrong with him too. He is another limited hangout

silverlinings00 7 hours ago

He's all bark no bite like Elizabeth Warren. Trotted out to show a feigning resistance.

Insert farm animal here 4 hours ago

Poor Rand is going to have a tough and lonely battle over the next few years. Let's wish him well, he'll be going it alone for sure.

the_pencil 2 hours ago

It seems odd that no one has allied themselves with him in the same manner as McCain & Graham.

Pareto 6 hours ago

Another life long bureaucrat talking about his resume. And fails to answer a simple question. Woop there it is. That's why they hated Trump. Because somebody off the street had better answers than 25 years of experience.

bikepathwalkerjogger 5 hours ago

Every single time!! --

Blinken was born on April 16, 1962, in Yonkers, New York , to Jewish parents, Judith (Frehm) and Donald M. Blinken , the former United States Ambassador to Hungary . [1] [2] [3] His maternal grandparents were Hungarian ****. [4] Blinken's uncle, Alan Blinken , served as the American ambassador to Belgium

Garciathinksso 5 hours ago

Rand Paul, one of the few good ones left. Good Luck with Biden and his war hawks!

NumbNuts 6 hours ago

These same people are attempting a regime change in the United States too. From Freedom to Fascism.

Helg Saracen 6 hours ago

The Americans lost perspectives and actually real freedom when Woodrow Wilson sold US to international banksters in 1913, now this scam just ends and a new scam begins. You haven't figured it out yet. By the way, fascism is Italian National Socialism. No offense.

frank further 6 hours ago

Then what was German National Socialism, if not fascism?

/

/

BluCapitalist PREMIUM 6 hours ago (Edited)

They are not attempting. They have done it. They have perfected their craft over the last 70 years in other countries and they brought it home to keep their criminal organization going.

urhotdogs 6 hours ago remove link

They didn't attempt, they did it! Took a little over 4 years but had to stoop to massive election fraud and changing state laws on the fly. It was coordinated throughout all levels of government down to states and courts and SCOTUS.

bunkers 5 hours ago

Communism

bunkers 5 hours ago

Maybe not.

WhiteHose 6 hours ago

Russia Russia Russia! They never stop! BTW, wheres scumbag Hunter?

starman99 7 hours ago

(((Anthony Blinken)))

rkb100100 7 hours ago

Yea we know the cabinet is full of heeb's.

brown_hornet 7 hours ago

Is he in the boat with Winken and Nod?

GatorMcClusky 7 hours ago

Good one.

Mount Massive 7 hours ago (Edited)

There is a reason Russia has spent the last 2 months ramping up testing of its mil hardware including hyper-vel ICBM's and SLBM's. - Xiden

SelectedNotElectedBiden 7 hours ago

Rand will be the only Senator to give the Dems a hard time. Sad since it should be payback for EVERY Republican Senator.

freakscene 7 hours ago

Cruz will be fun to watch too. They excel being outnumbered.

Ms No PREMIUM 7 hours ago

If they wanted Rand out of that spot he would have been gone a long time ago.

Bob Lidd 5 hours ago

Does anyone think the US policy in the middle east will change with 10 of biden's

appointees being jewish .......??

The "greater israel" will continue no matter the cost to the American tax cattle.......

((((blinken))) ..........

ReadyForHillary 7 hours ago

The neocons are back!

Max21c 7 hours ago

The neocons are back!

Does not matter. They could not win before and they shall not win now. They're ineffective, inept, and incompetent. They won't be able to fix the messes and disasters they've created for themselves. At best they might be able to sick the secret police on a few people at home and drop some bombs or missiles abroad. But for the most part it's some more of the same. Evil is as evil does. They're not going to be able to work themselves out of the fix they've got themselves into or figure it out. They're toast. They're bad people and they're toast. Washingtonians may have absolute power but they've had absolute power all along...and they still can't fix the disasters they've caused.

Northern Exposure 6 hours ago (Edited)

Oh thank God!

If we're not looking for a new pointless war to start or jumping into an existing one then this isn't the America that I know and love!

</sarc>

karzai_luver 7 hours ago

Where is the BUFFALOBILL dude storming the Senate to drag this blinken criminal scum out and do justice for his wanton murder of thousands?

Shut down this freak show.

I would rather have BUFFALOBILL and his idiots running the place than these feckless people's representatives.

Tony , have you learned your lesson?

Senator - screw you and your people I will think it over.

Alexander 7 hours ago

Silence republicans! Yes we stole the election using widespread mail in ballots, yes your state governments changed the rules to allow us to count these mail in ballots more quickly, yes there were far more votes in this election than any other ever. ANDDDD... NO we will not look into the validity of this election becuase muh capital rioting grandma threatened sweet little socialist AOC.

Now give us your children to fight a war in syria.

artless 7 hours ago

Barack Obama. Neocon to the core. Biden is no different. Gonna do us some "liberating" again. And from the left there will be silence as thousands of poor, short brown people are killed as "collateral damage".

Welcome back America to what you do the best. Destroy lives. Any over/under on how many days it takes Biden to start killing folks and hence become a war criminal like pretty much all his predecessors? I might like a piece of that action.

SassyPants 7 hours ago

Republicans are neocons, democrats are neoliberal. You're basically right, just left out half the problem.

pods 7 hours ago

Can't bitch about foreign actions in our elections when we pick other governments.

Invert This, Media Matters Monkeys 7 hours ago

Pick ???? Surely you jest !

pods 7 hours ago

We choose sides right?

We picked the CIA stooge in Venezuela.

Not sure about your question.

Maybe "kinetically pick" would be better?

Invert This, Media Matters Monkeys 7 hours ago

Sorry, I didn't read your post properly. I didn't see "other" governments.

rwe2late 7 hours ago

you either forgot the sarc tag

or failed to notice such as V. Nuland hand-picking leadership in Ukraine,

or the Trump picking of Guiado for Venezuela.

Invert This, Media Matters Monkeys 7 hours ago

Poor eye sight is my best and only excuse.

SelectedNotElectedBiden 7 hours ago

Where is Hunter?

Invert This, Media Matters Monkeys 7 hours ago

The Big Guy made him the Advance Minister of Foreign Extortion.

headslapper 7 hours ago

The faces change but the song remains the same. What a waste of energy this government is. Resources thrown down the toilet to make the Ruling class more wealthy. Why do we even pay attention. We all need to have a look in the mirror. Myself included of course.

Armed Resistance 7 hours ago

So now that you've looked in the mirror, what are you going to do about it? Send a strongly-worded letter? Or are you ready to actually step up. As morally wrong and demented as the radical left is, at least you have to admire them in the sense they actually step up to the plate to get sh!t done. It's immoral, but effective.

Canadian Dirtlump 7 hours ago

Lest we forget the same bearded butchers that Chris Stevens flew into ben gazi with (al Quaeda inter alia aligned ) who were funded and trained by the West were the same ones who flew from ben gazi to the incirlik nato base to try to do the same thing in syria.

The only reason it didn't work was because of the SAA, Hezbollah and of course the ultimate backstop Russia. I'm thankful for this.

mikka 7 hours ago

Imagine Russian or Chinese parliament publicly debating regime change in USA.

Uncle_Cuddles 7 hours ago (Edited)

Debating? China has ALREADY done it here.

joew8989 7 hours ago

Rand will continue to fight the good fight, when you live a life based on principal, that's what you do. We will always need more people like him. That's what built this country, not the parasites at the helm now.

ItsTooHotForThis 6 hours ago

Paul voted to confirm the electors. His challenge to the new Sec. of State means nothing.

Garciathinksso 5 hours ago

his argument was based on State's right issue, in case you care

bunkers 5 hours ago

It doesn't matter WHY, he voted with traitors, only, that he did.

SillyTheEnemy 6 hours ago (Edited)

This is literally the only guy we have in the senate who even remotely gives a ****. Yet the amount of **** that is going to happen to us when biden heats up the war in Syria is immeasurable. F*ck me

hardright 6 hours ago

Rand Paul is wasting his time.

If he wants to make a difference he should be lobbying Russia to send more troops into Syria.

surroundedbyijits 6 hours ago

And arranging imports of the Russian vaccine. Less likely to kill you and more effective than the only 45% effective Pfizer ****.

BluCapitalist PREMIUM 6 hours ago

This guys eyes look exactly like the vampires in the movie 30 days of night. Am I in a simulation? Why do these people actually look like fictional villains? I mean Whitmer, Newsom, this new fat, unhealthy, mentally ill assistant "health secretary"? Did I do something really wrong? Am I in hell and don't know it? No. I am here on earth and psychopaths are real and evil is real.

duckandcover 1 hour ago

they're just a little scared and overwhelmed. You might be too

WhiteHose 7 hours ago

Look at this Blinken twit! F you pal! And....wheres HUnter??? Diddling his brothers minor niece? Again? Still?

0h 7 hours ago

2021-01-21 If you go here https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/ you can send an email. I just sent: "Joe, you know he won."

LorDampNuts 7 hours ago

I know you are an idiot.

Misesmissesme 7 hours ago

First Ron and now Rand. I think the club just lets them in as the token Don Quixote. They have been the only voices of reason for the last 25 years or so, but they are only tilting at windmills. Nothing is going to change until something forces them to change. The war mongering and corruption will just roll right along while the MIC and congress get richer by the minute.

The unrelenting droning of brown people in foreign lands that are ill-equipped to fight back will commence in 3,2,1...

SassyPants 7 hours ago

Leaving the Republican Party would be the first best step.

ejmoosa 7 hours ago (Edited)

We put too much on one man and one man alone to change things.

Faced with judges and a House and A Senate against him the task before Trump was Herculean.

Add to that 2/5ths of the states with governors also against Trump and it's even worse.

What you need to do is get involved in your local politics and take control back of your Cities and County Commissions, as well as your state governments.

Had Trump held control of the House and the Senate and we had sitting on Courts people who put the Constitution first FOR the people rather than using it against them, things would be a lot different today.

The choice is yours.

Time to play 7 hours ago

It's good to see that Rand, is starting to think more like his father!

north_hand_demon 7 hours ago

So he's controlled opposition, too?

Lyman54 7 hours ago

Pretty early to be smoking crack isn't it?

otschelnik 7 hours ago

With Cookies Nuland as Blinken's deputy, you've got the neocon family business installed at Foggy Bottom. Robert (Victoria's huband), Fredrick, and Kim each with their own pro-war think tank, and a list of supporters which constitute the "A-list" of the USSA's merchants of death. Northrup-Grumman, UTX, Raytheon, Lockheed....

9.1ontherichterscale 7 hours ago

Winken, Blinken and Nod.

That's the administration we got now.

silverlinings00 8 hours ago

Careful Rand, we wouldn't want you to get another "visit" from a neighbor while you're mowing the lawn.

Pdunne 3 hours ago (Edited)

Biden's biggest Cabinet mistake will ultimately be Blinken.

Like Obama picked H Clinton with disasterous consequences Biden picks Blinken.

JackOliver4 4 hours ago

Rand Paul says " Assad is a terrible person " !!!

Dr Assad is a HERO !!

Rand Paul is either completely misinformed or just another useless politician afraid to speak the TRUTH !

A COWARD !

Hessler 4 hours ago

Assad may be a good person at heart but he is not qualified to run a state. He should be a doctor or something.

JackOliver4 4 hours ago

And Joe Biden is ??

OR Boris Johnstone ??

Helg Saracen 4 hours ago

It is up to the Syrians to decide, not you. You already paid for the genocide of the Syrian Christians in the "fight against the tyrant Assad." I've seen all kinds of idiots and hypocrites, but you are their king.

Hessler 4 hours ago (Edited)

Why did not Assad anticipated the Zionist invasion even though the Snowden document reveled the CIA/Mossad works in the making in 2006 ??

If he did anticipated an invasion why he did not do anything to safeguard his nation and it's people ?

Why every men, women and child capable to lift and shoot was not given and an ordinance and proper training ?? Israel has that. Why can't Syria ?

Syria is a part of Greater Israel. They have been marked for genocide the day Israel was created, what haste did Mr. Assad showed to safeguard his country against their genocidal maniacs psychopaths ??

I will never forgive those who inflicted the terrible atrocities on the children and women and Mr. Assad has a blame to share.

mark3383 3 hours ago

Assad risked his life and continues to do so every day, trump recently bragged he thought about "taking him out". he's a true hero more than you or I will ever be

steve2241 5 hours ago

Rand Paul doesn't understand. Blinken follows the path that Israel tells him to. Middle East instability benefits Israel. The fomenting of Sunni-Shia conflict kills Israels' enemies, the muslims, without Israel having to lift a finger. Syria is no longer a threat to Israel. Mission accomplished.

Hessler 4 hours ago (Edited)

You're wrong on two accounts. First, there's no ****te/Sunni conflict. What goes in Miiddle East is entire different than what is portrayed here. The locals know but how many of them get interviewed on live TV or get a airtime on a prime time desk ? Those are reserved for the chosenites who spew BS about Arabs and Muslims 24/7.

****te/Sunni fiction as broadcasts in the west is nothing but a ploy to wash the hands of the responsibility and pin the blame on the victims.

Second, Syria is now a bigger threat to Israel than it was in Pre War era. Battle Hardened troops, better organization, training with Russian/Iranian Military, better equipment, talented strategists and when you fight a war like that for that long you tend to grow a bigger set of balls.

JackOliver4 4 hours ago

Syria wants the GOLAN back - I would say they are a threat to ISRAEL !!

Sick Monkey 5 hours ago

Speaking of war didn't Rand Paul vote to accept the illegitimate electors. I like Paul he seems to have a level head but you voted to put the commies in power. Like you said in your speech "there are repercussions". Those who took a stand against this coup must be kept in power as they put skin in the game. That's a rare and precious gift to us the people. In the year 2021 it's as good as gold.

Taffer 5 hours ago

Exactly, hence my previous comment below.

mark3383 3 hours ago

trump lost the election because he allowed million of fraud votes to be counted and never said or did anything about it in the year leading up to it. he 's the one that lost it. no one else

Sinophile 6 hours ago

"War Pigs"----Black Sabbath

Generals gathered in their masses
Just like witches at black masses
Evil minds that plot destruction
Sorcerers of death's construction
In the fields the bodies burning
As the war machine keeps turning
Death and hatred to mankind
Poisoning their brainwashed minds
Oh lord yeah!

Politicians hide themselves away
They only started the war
Why should they go out to fight?
They leave that role to the poor
Yeah!

Time will tell on their power minds
Making war just for fun
Treating people just like pawns in chess
Wait 'til their judgement day comes
Yeah!

Now in darkness world stops turning
Ashes where the bodies burning
No more war pigs have the power
Hand of God has struck the hour
Day of judgement, God is calling
On their knees the war pig's crawling
Begging mercy for their sins
Satan laughing spreads his wings
oh lord yeah!

surroundedbyijits 6 hours ago

Circuses. Theatre for the plebes. Not one bit of foreign policy is decided or affected by debates or hearings in the Legislative branch. They're all following a script, some of them act like they aren't in on the joke.

Cloudcrusher 6 hours ago

Psychosis the denial of reality. The military industrial complex is make believe. It's military industrial congress, Congress is in charge they alone are to blame know one else. The sooner everyone starts living in reality the better off will be. You want to win the war of words better start with reality. Or your going to get a another kind of war one where only the strong survive.

Max21c 6 hours ago (Edited)

Watch: Rand Paul Challenges New Secretary Of State Over Regime-Change In Syria

Meaningless inside the beltway for the record drool-n-dribble... Rand Paul just wants to pad his resume, bio, and gain some street cred claims...

TahoeBilly2012 6 hours ago

When do the new wars start? Dems can't wait. Blame them on Covid or something, they will buy it.

vspam 7 hours ago

Biden will go to war with Iran and turned thr ME into a fireball. The mainstream media will cheer him on under the banner of peace and unity

Max21c 7 hours ago

Diablo Corona

Washingtonians are for the most part the spawn of Satan.

DC= the Devil's City... they are evil... Washingtonians are just pure rotten evil...

Washington DC ... Devil's City

Washington DC .... Devil's Crown

The evil ones cannot change their evil ways... they're too far gone... the evil ones cannot be redeemed...

Max21c 7 hours ago

Paul concluded by saying that regime change needs to end because it is involving the US in long wars that are costly to the military.

Too late. Washington is toast. It's just a question of when Washingtonians lose in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, et cetera. They already made a mess of things and they do not have the brains to fix it. Same with their inabilities as regards nonproliferation, North Korea, et cetera. They don't have what it takes to figure it out and work it out and nobody is going to fix it for them because they're assholes regardless of which cabal of Ivy League assholes or ******* elites are in power.

ThomasEdmonds 7 hours ago

Paul isn't supposed to question a Zionist's motives..

aloha-snackbar 7 hours ago

if the youth said no to war and moms said not my child and burned down the recruitment/death centers then war would end...

tunEphsh 7 hours ago

Thank goodness that Paul told the idiot Blicken to lay off regime change. Obama-Biden made a mess of the middle east and caused a refugee crises which is still with us. Instead of being named secretary of state, me thinks Blicken should be put in jail for acts in the Middle East which killed hundreds of thousands of people.

moneybots 7 hours ago

The EU has become a mess because of regime change.

freakscene 7 hours ago

Of course he should. But that would require sanity.

yerfej 7 hours ago (Edited)

Simple way to stop all this insane venturism and nation building it to MANDATE that every aysshole like Blinken have a spouse or child or sibling or relative ON THE GROUND fighting in one of these shyyytholes. These elites love this crap because THEY never pay a personal price, no they have farmed that out to the "commoners" who supply the bodies. The filthy elites are good at leveraging everyone else to fulfill their fantasies while paying no price.

Occams_Razor_Trader 7 hours ago

You've seen the videos of Chelsea and Malia on tour in Kabul? Yeah?

yerfej 7 hours ago

More like Eeyore pontificating from her 20 million dollar penthouse about how she is so not into money, or Maglia dancing around stoned like a "social justice warrior".

Flynt2142ahh 7 hours ago (Edited)

The senate needs more Rand Paul types - and they dont have to be in the Republican party...This would force actual accountability of uniparty folks and these appointees. We need less murkowski and collins

phillyla 7 hours ago

I am going to harp on this

in 2014 Matt Bevin challenged McConnell in a Senate Primary

He was gaining momentum

Then Rand endorsed McConnell

Bevin lost McConnell got re-elected

Bevin was later elected Governor of KY so he had the votes

Rand Paul Broke my heart

Leguran@premium PREMIUM 7 hours ago

We need use the Progressive's signage: He is not my President.

LostMyGunsInABoatingAccident 7 hours ago

You can't necessarily call it an "American" policy.

America lost control of it's policy long ago.....

Mount Massive 7 hours ago

Here comes another war, and this time, it will spiral out of control. In two years or less, I expect the US to be in a major conflict and/or hit at home. Sigh....Leftist

Invert This, Media Matters Monkeys 7 hours ago

Pelosi just took Rand aside and said, wait and see what your neighbor on the other side of you has to say about this.

9.1ontherichterscale 7 hours ago

Rand is in the senate. nancy runs the house. That would be Schumer's job.

Invert This, Media Matters Monkeys 7 hours ago

Pelosi seems to be running the show and is the face of the party

WorkingClassMan 8 hours ago (Edited)

Rand Paul, the lone voice of sanity in a rubber-stamp corrupt government.

If you or someone you care about is either in or thinking about joining this nation's military...please don't. Let these antiwhites fight their own wars. They hate you and don't trust you because you're White and they hate you owning guns, but they'll put a gun in your hand and point you at their and Isn'treal's enemies without hesitation.

fudge punch 8 hours ago

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

AVmaster 3 hours ago

"Regime change in the Middle East has led to chaos, instability and more terrorism,"

Uhhh, yea...

... Thats what they WANTED!

Duh!

Scipio Africanuz 3 hours ago

Thank you Senator Paul..

For your candor..

The challenge of US Foreign Policy, is akin to a heroin addiction. It's bad for the country, but all attempts to cure the country of addiction to imperialism has failed, including our energetic efforts over the years..

Too many people benefit from the ruination of the country as it engages in squandering lives, honor, power, reputation, and treasure, in maintaining a facade of illusory power, at the expense of the true power of the country..

Put simply Senator, at this point, we don't believe any entity on earth can cure the US of the addiction to depravity save nature, which cure is more preferable to that of the Entity whose decision is not subject to appeal..

Now Senator, you may not believe in God Almighty and thus, swat away the simple insight but God does not require your belief to act..

Over His creation..

The only cure, if sense and rationality don't prevail, is exactly what we don't desire to know and why?

Because we've seen it before, applied to different societies with similar mentality over the course of human history and Senator, it's never palatable..

Anyhow, probation is till summer, to allow folks do intensive introspective contemplation, enough to acquire prudent humility and if they don't, well..

Cheers...

Ckierst1 2 hours ago

I believe the Senator is a Christian.

Pdunne 4 hours ago

Blinken is a bald faced liar and is already working with Ms Nuland on more regime changes.

Venezuela and Syria need to get ready for more robust attacks.

Dzerzhhinsky 2 hours ago

Control the oil, you control the world.

the_pencil 2 hours ago

Oil was the cause of every war for the past century.

Posa 4 hours ago

A ridiculous exchange. Sen Paul seems to take at face value the Liberal-NeoCon claim that Regime Change is good-intentioned attempt to democratize the Middle East.

Hardly. Regime Change was always designed to a) install Israeli supremacy in the region ("Operation Clean Break"); and b) secure US Global Uni-polar dominance (the Wolfowitz Doctrine) as part of the Brezezinski "Grand Chessboard". That's the intention... this exchange demonstrates how out of it Rand Paul is; and what a nasty weasel Blinken is.

Ckierst1 2 hours ago

That's not what Sen. Paul said. He doesn't agree with regime change. That's what he said.

PaulDF 5 hours ago

To which the Biden appointee replied, "You know, the thing!"

mark3383 3 hours ago

cmon man!

duckandcover 2 hours ago

do your job!

Taffer 5 hours ago

Rand Paul's opinion and $6 will get him a latte at Starbucks.

Hessler 6 hours ago (Edited)

Foreign policy is never gonna change no matter who's in change because the way system is setup.

The lifestyle (our way of life) pertaining to the western model of civilization (our values) needs unlimited supply of money to be supported. The money that can't be made by legal means, hence the continues war that needs to be maintained overseas while also starting new ones as requirement arise.

And since this is a continues state, so accompanies it continues propaganda, lies, false flags, deception and manipulation of facts and truth. LYING IS IN VERY GENES OF THE WHITE CHRISTIAN WEST. They have been doing it for so long that they have almost mastered the "the art of lying" the zenith of which is to project your own flaws and crimes on to the subjects you carried it out on. One thing you can always be sure of, they will never admit their crimes unless there's no other way. And that they will be accusing their opponents of the same things they would be doing.

War underpins their society, nation and civilization.

steve2241 4 hours ago

The problem is that the U.S. is abusing its position as printer-in-chief of the Reserve Currency of the world. With that fake money, it can intervene in the affairs of nations throughout the world - a capability that no other country enjoys. Take away its reserve currency and watch how quickly middle eastern strife ends - and the nation of Israel, too.

apparently 6 hours ago

will the left and their mindless supporters be comforted to know that their guy promotes these "endless wars"? will they be happy to sacrifice their sons and daughters for desert real-estate whose oil we don't want?

Paul was being way too polite. He should simply say: "I'm not voting to confirm this war monger" then get up and leave the room.

Hessler 6 hours ago

If you think it's about the oil, you really don't understand the world you inhabit.

apparently 6 hours ago (Edited)

I don't think it's about oil but I'm struggling to name a single US interest in sand-wars. maybe you can? yes, yes, military/industrial complex, blah, blah, but why the middle east? please enlighten us.

Hessler 5 hours ago (Edited)

It's to rebuild the world in the image of the west and Islam is the biggest hampering in the way. Like other religions, it can't be altered or dominated so the only way is to completely destroy it. This is why Israel was setup by the Anglos at a strategic location in the heart of the Arab world to engage them into perpetual war and destroy them.

That's about it.

And whenever a war on a civilization is waged, there are always monetary benefits. Oil, MIC, Political donations come into play here. But that's just a sideshow. And with a civilization as big as Islamic, benefits also tend to be massive.

apparently 5 hours ago

no evidence that the arab spring was against islam. why aren't we doing regime change in indonesia? why did joe just reverse the Muslim travel ban?

do you understand anything about the world you live in?

Hessler 5 hours ago (Edited)

A lot actually. We are concentrating on the core of the Islamic civilization for when the core collapses, the outer layers collapses with it. It's the core that holds the entire thing together, hence we concentrate on Middle East and not on Indonesia.

Arab spring was to sow chaos and turmoil. By the way of deception.....Jewish moto

It is not that Israel establishes America's foreign policy. It is that the basic world view produced by WASP culture is naturally aligned with Jewish thought in most ways, especially in terms of Empire: ruling the world.

InflammatoryResponse 5 hours ago

it was not a muslim travel ban. it was a ban on places that didn't have adequate infrastructure to verify who was travling.

duckandcover 1 hour ago

where is the last place, core or not core, that Islam religion and Muslim culture has been eradicated by any means? Yugoslavia? India? Not seeing it. Culture eats strategy for breakfast. Your argument does not hold.

starman99 5 hours ago

(((THEM)))

Groucho 5 hours ago

No of course not. Nothing to do with what George Kennan called "the greatest strategic material prize in world history".

Hessler 5 hours ago

And whenever a war on a civilization is waged, there are always monetary benefits. Oil, MIC, Political donations come into play here. But that's just a sideshow. And with a civilization as big as Islamic, benefits also tend to be massive.

apparently 2 hours ago

by now, we should be weary (and wary) of "it's all a sideshow" arguments.

it simply asserts greater knowledge (never disclosed) and terminates the thread.

as for the grand anti-islam plan... how's that going in western europe?

Groucho 5 hours ago

No of course not. Nothing to do with what George Kennan called "the greatest strategic material prize in world history".

JackOliver4 4 hours ago

It is ALWAYS about the OIL - thats why IRAN and VENEZUELA are being weakened by crippling sanctions !!

THAT"S how the ZIO/US does it - SANCTIONS first - WAR 2nd !

Doesn't work anymore since RUSSIA stepped in !

nocturnal66 7 hours ago

Just ask if this 100 year plus war is to create "greater Israel" . It all documented. Enough already with the lies. Just admit it.

Occams_Razor_Trader 7 hours ago

WWE- fake fights have begun again in earnest .....................

Paul Ryan could fake a punch as good as John Boehner ............

Max21c 7 hours ago (Edited)

"Maybe we shouldn't be 'choosing' governments in the Middle East," Paul continued.

The Washington establishment imposed their chosen ruler Joe Schmo Biden to rule over America.

jesus_loves_you 7 hours ago

H a n g t h e m a l l

Aquamaster 7 hours ago

Should we have a contest to see who can pick the first country Biden will send troops to?

Lyman54 7 hours ago

DC !

SERReal1 7 hours ago

You win!

WTFUD 7 hours ago

Blinken Heck , don't worry ya'll, Nuland (Nudelman's) back to steady the ship with a fab new chocolate chip cookie recipe that the terrorists will adore.

littlewing 7 hours ago

And they aren't even trying to hide it.

fzrkid 7 hours ago

Rand can say whatever he wants and it changes NOTHING

Armed Resistance 7 hours ago

Who is still planning on filing taxes? At the very least, turn your back on the system-right? Upvote for not filing, downvote for I just want to avoid conflict-I'm filing.

brown_hornet 7 hours ago

But, we are getting a return.

No paying next year though.

rwe2late 7 hours ago (Edited)

Doesn't matter if it is a disaster for the peoples invaded and for domestic liberty in the USA.

It's considered "worth it" by those in power

to protect the financial supremacy of the dollar,

promote the regional military supremacy of Israel,

and continue the war profiteering of the MIC.

north_hand_demon 7 hours ago

So what? Your cushy lifestyle and mine is a direct result of hegemony. Get over it.

rwe2late 7 hours ago (Edited)

Celebration of a "cushy lifestyle" gained by plunder and murder is not for everyone.

To revel in it, one requires a special insensibility.

DonGenaro 7 hours ago (Edited)

This fence-sitter did virtually NOTHING to stop the steal.
Now he's whining about having to lie in bed his cowardice helped make.
Many MORE thousands will soon be massacred by these war-mad psychopaths.
This POS is DEAD TO ME.

littlewing 7 hours ago

Rand is smart, he knew no matter what Xiden was going to be installed.

HominyTwin 7 hours ago

He's smart. A bunch of idiots, after a good breakfast at IHOP, were herded into the capital by govt informants to break stuff for the cameras, and then herded right back out in time for a hearty dinner at Golden Corral. They did sacrifice their lunch for exactly nothing, though. Congrats. He stayed away from all that nonsense.

9.1ontherichterscale 7 hours ago

That's about the size of it, in retrospect.

zulu127 7 hours ago

regime change needs to end because it is involving the US in long wars that are costly to the military.

Wrong! "regime change needs to continue because it is involving the US in wars that are profitable to the military.

ableman28 4 hours ago

Part of the problems is that neither the democrats or republicans are primarily in favor of DEMOCRATIC governments in the middle east. When Egypt FREELY ELECTED the Muslin Brotherhood to power in Egypt the US fell all over itself to help unseat them, using every technique we can.....currency debasement, food aid manipulation, tacit encouragement to strongment (military) that we feel are controllable, etc. etc.

The US was never in favor of one man one vote in South Africa during apartheid and explained this convenient hypocrisy as an unfortunate necessity.

Supporting regime change is entirely, ENTIRELY, different than supporting democracy. The US has a very very very long history of supporting the former and claiming it was the latter when in fact it wasn't. Democracy means letting the chips fall where they may. In countries whose ruling leadership is oppressive to its people and for which we have a long history of support its very unlikely that any democratic election would bring us new friends. It would, in every case, bring to power people who opposed the old government and by association US.

People playing to the stands here in the US are smart enough to know this. But maintaining the correct political position for domestic consumption also trumps doing the right thing in anywhere else.

International politics is a pure expression of national interest. Our national interest is economic outside the US. That part of socialist or marxist theory is spot on.

Hessler 4 hours ago

Insightful, thanks!

LooseLee 4 hours ago

'Disaster' is the MO, Rand. Please, get real or get lost.

Musum 5 hours ago

Senator Rand Paul recently challenged the new Secretary of State nominee Anthony Blinken on his history of pushing regime change in the Middle East and North Africa

Pointless and hopeless. The only way to end America's endless wars is to deal with the guys in small hats.

Hessler 5 hours ago

Small hats were employed by the English speaking protestants for their ulterior motives, world view, global ambitions which were in alignment with the chosenites.

You can't solve the Jewish problem without solving the problem of western civilization.

Fire_Hog 5 hours ago

The real problems are the 3 letter intelligence agencies, not religion.

Musum 4 hours ago

Are you naive or misdirecting? Offices are occupied by people.

train rider 6 hours ago

Deep thinking and reflection...what about our military personnel and contractors...why are we putting them in danger with these interventionist kockamamie screw balls coming up with these strategies...meanwhile innocent civilians keep getting maimed and killed.

We have no business over there, let the countries decide for themselves what they want etc. we need energy idependence...greta can go fly a kite...keep reducing emissions with tech we have.

nocturnal66 6 hours ago

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yinon_Plan

LorDampNuts 7 hours ago

It is very sad that paul's neighbor does not have a more lethal right hook.

TheZeitgeist 7 hours ago

Sen. Paul began his argument by questioning Blinken's role in the NATO intervention of Libya in 2001

So...only off by a decade. I think ZeroHedge drops these snafus into the copy just to see if anyone actually reads the stuff.

freakscene 7 hours ago (Edited)

Its skimming material at best. Reading all the way through went out the window when ZH become a CNN sponsor.

:)

littlewing 7 hours ago

When Ron Paul was calling out Bernanke you would see they were alone in the room.

There is no debate, its all a fraud. Saw the vote on election theft and it was their aides voting for them.

StanleyTheManly 7 hours ago

Give me a break, Rand Paul. YOU KNOWINGLY voted for this by not standing for our elected President.

You're a traitor. Shut up and sit down.

TRON Paul 7 hours ago

PRESIDENT PAUL!

PRESIDENT PAUL!

PRESIDENT PAUL!

wmbz 7 hours ago

War is a business, and "we" are big business. Matter no how many completely innocent people get blown away. What matters are the spoils. We were warned over and over again about the MIC yet here we are.

Profit always wins over peace, no money in it.

totally unwise 7 hours ago

Today, wars aren't meant to be won

they're meant to bring chaos

Chaos

Calling Maxwell Smart and agent 99

Where's that shoe phone ?

freakscene 7 hours ago

I guess, good for Rand? Thats about all he can do.

Dog Will Hunting 7 hours ago

Oh, that Rand Paul. I wondered where he was hiding this whole time peels back Trump's saggy *** cheeks to find the good doctor

in_xanadu_did_kubla_khan 8 hours ago

Achoo: Hey, Blinkin

Blinkin: Did you say Abe Lincoln?

Achoo: No! I said, HEY, BLINKIN!

createnewaccount 8 hours ago

If we can't have Giant Meteor maybe a global helter skelter of 'regime change' will be a good consolation prize.

Lt. Frank Drebin 8 hours ago

I voted for Giant Meteor, but the Dominion voting machines switched my vote to turd sandwich.

Holding My Breath 7 hours ago

A big upvote for sarcasm (or is it utter stupidity?)

createnewaccount 4 hours ago

Uh oh!

https://www.livescience.com/13738-trouble-detecting-sarcasm-dementia-sign.html

Herdee 7 hours ago

The Military/Industrial Complex needs endless foreign wars and imaginary enemies so that the money won't be spent at home helping Americans. Such as infrastructure projects. The goal from within is to destroy the American middle class and turn the United States into a third world country. Clinton, Bush, Obama and Trump all served the crooks.

littlewing 7 hours ago

Uh then why didn't Trump start wars?

Bear 11 minutes ago

Like father like son ... insight and wisdom

Arizona1234 26 minutes ago

China Joe and the mentally ill Marxist that run his crap show already started a multi Trillion dollar endless war. The War on the weather they call Climate Crisis. It's the one where we loose and wind up praying to find the small potato to make it through the day, and then hope to find a few dry sticks for the fire to cook it. Where you will have to make the small fire at night so that mentally ill #AOC carbon police can't easily see the smoke.

Maltheus 1 hour ago

It's taken less than 24 hours, after Biden's inauguration, for ISIS to magically make an appearance again. They're not even pretending anymore.

Tom Angle 2 hours ago

I think I had heard all I want to hear from Rand Paul after.

boattrash 2 hours ago

Gawdamit Rand, we like you and everything, but the Coup you should be focused on is HERE, even if it means you should spit in your hands, hoist the black flag and start slittin throats.

Sincerely,

The American People

Dzerzhhinsky 3 hours ago

If the US can steal Syria, it means it will be able to build a pipeline, steal Iranian gas and sell it to Europe.
The US needs something to give its financiers and controlling energy supplies to Europe would go a long way to paying off the debt.

learnofjesuits 4 hours ago

vatican's wars

Hessler 3 hours ago

Puritans burred the Vatican so deep underground that if even the nuke detonates there, if won't make a shockwave on the ground

TemporarySecurity 4 hours ago

Perfectly fine for anybody in the executive to lie through their teeth.

Say one thing in the hearing and do what they always do once confirmed. Our post Constitutional government needs to fail.

tangent 4 hours ago

Ran Paul's ability to talk as if they are not simply being outright bribed for their positions is impressive. I suppose the new CCP SoS will take the positions of the CCP, which is the one paying him the most money for those positions.

richnhappy 4 hours ago

Just read confessions of an economic hit man, by john perkins, all you need to know. The playbook sounds like what china is doing in the us now, distract the masses with the middle east ****show.

Seditious 4 hours ago

We have had just one president so far this century that has not used American blood and treasure to destroy a nation. He was a rogue billionaire that got taken out by every other billionaire that wanted to stay in the club. The American people are going to have to figure out that they will have better results solving this nations problems at the Bezos, Walton, Zuckerberg and Dorsey homes than they will going to the Capitol in Washington DC.

The Child sacrifice murders committed by these people don't occur in some hidden room at a pizza parlor. They occur on public roads under semitrailers marked Amazon Prime and Walmart that wouldn't be allowed on the roads of nations that we used to call the third world.

I suppose the only big question is, who's child dies tomorrow?

Maghreb2 4 hours ago

You could look it at that way. I'd say he was a hairs breadth from starting world war III with Iran and China and was removed by a stroke of bad luck from Wuhan and the old establishment asserting their authority through corruption.

Trump might be remembered fondly for actually lowering the number of small conflicts but the U.S war machine is bigger than any one president and his closeness to Israel show what camp he was in. Only God or a few insiders can really judge what his ultimate aim was but he wasn't the man who pulled the first shot of the first world war. Damn well loaded the gun and gave it to the Israelis in my opinion.

Seditious 4 hours ago

During Obama's time in office we had a year in which the United States dropped bombs in more nations than they did in any single year during WW2.

Bezos, Walton's and others spill our blood domestically. Biden will spill our blood overseas to keep some other billionaires happy.

Maghreb2 5 hours ago (Edited)

I'll play devils advocate even though I like the guy. His father thought things like that were a good idea as an alternative to imperial invasion.

steve2241 4 hours ago

Based on your comment, I take it you REALLY like Blinken! Yes?

Fire_Hog 5 hours ago

The same thing happened in Egypt when Obama pushed for and got quick elections when the only organization that could field candidates was the Muslim Brotherhood. The result was very predictable.

The Brotherhood took over and the result was so bad that the people finally rebelled against Morsi's government. This lead to Al Sisi who was better than Morsi. I question whether the situation improved by letting the Muslim Brotherhood take control.

Maghreb2 4 hours ago

People? Thought that was the military?

WatchnSee 5 hours ago

"regime change doesn't work" "Maybe we shouldn't be 'choosing' governments in the Middle East,".... nor in the USA. Time will tell.

Hessler 6 hours ago (Edited)

Don't worry Mr. Paul, these white men in the suits are the leaders of the terrorists groups. It's hardcoded in their genes, they don't know any other way of earning a living.

Mancolo 6 hours ago

Lessons? I don't need your stinking lessons. I've got friends to pay off.

Pvt Joker PREMIUM 7 hours ago

I like the US policy of Perma War and Regime change. The more troops over there , the less troops over here.

Scornd 7 hours ago

I dont understand the complaints.

You voted for this.

MCDirtMigger 6 hours ago

By 'you', do you mean Dominion?

littlewing 7 hours ago

District of Criminals

that's all they are.

I am bailing out forever now.

Just looking at them and their actions is self harm.

Max21c 7 hours ago (Edited)

District of Criminals

Diablo Corona

Washingtonians are for the most part the spawn of Satan.

DC= the Devil's City... they are evil... Washingtonians are just pure rotten evil...

Washington DC ... Devil's City

Washington DC .... Devil's Crown

The evil ones cannot change their evil ways... they're too far gone... the evil ones cannot be redeemed...

LorDampNuts 7 hours ago

Keep sending your donations to Stop the Steal, Trump has a plan and will be sworn in by April when it warms up. Free Chumptard hat with every $100 donation.

Occams_Razor_Trader 7 hours ago

I'd donate a hunny for you to flush your head in a toilet ...............

foxenburg 7 hours ago

plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

Rammbock 7 hours ago

Republicans are great actors

Kotwica 44 7 hours ago

This guy speaks truth, but, no one gives a flying fu<k.

Ajax_USB_Port_Repair_Service_ 7 hours ago

Attention Secret Police: We've got one for you!

freedommusic 7 hours ago (Edited)

Whatever these folks say is irrelevant. They are all sitting on foreign soil. The UNITED STATES CORPORATION is a foreign Municipal entity owned by China claimed in the recent bankruptcy settlement. POTUS said when he was leaving. Go ahead, take it. The buildings, the chairs, statues, it's all yours . Anyone who steps outside of that foreign jurisdiction will be entering American soil and subject to the Laws of the United States Constitutional Republic and prosecuted for treason and sedition.

DC is now a Chinese embassy.

I wonder how much food they have stocked up in there? I would presume the military would uphold a blockade and prevent the exchange of trade from occurring into a surrounded hostile territory of the enemy.

YOU WANT IT

YOU GOT IT

HAVE A NICE DAY

SERReal1 7 hours ago

Where was Rand in calling out the election fraud?

Now he is acting all tough again on the deep state creatures.

9.1ontherichterscale 7 hours ago (Edited)

He wants to stay in office. No way is going to touch the third rail. None of them will.

rkb100100 7 hours ago

This is part of a Punch and Judy show put on for retards.

leodogma1 7 hours ago

And yet not one peep of this Quislings tie's to the Chinese Communist party of Evil !

Southern Discomfort 7 hours ago

I'm sure it will be blamed on an action taken by Trump and the only cure will be intervention. Maybe Joetard can set up a new cabinet level position to seek out opportunities for new wars.

More-Cowbell 8 hours ago

The show must go on. As if these asz clowns ( all of them ) matter.

north_hand_demon 8 hours ago

Whatever. Your cushy lifestyle, and mine, exists because we're the dominant imperial power on the planet. Might makes right. Paul knows it too; this is just virtue signaling.

artless 7 hours ago (Edited)

And in your statement lies the real problem with the vast majority of people in this country.

Yeah I edited the lame ad hom line after I read a few comments. But perhaps it is long due that rather than simply accept things as the way they are and calling any opposition to it the thoughts of a ten year old, it might be high time to actually try to make a change in how people think and ultimately behave.

LooseLee 4 hours ago

Said like a card-carrying Zio.

[Jan 21, 2021] Sometimes you drain the swamp sometimes the swamp drains you

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... "We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved", ..."
"... "We will never give up. We will never concede, it just doesn't happen." ..."
"... " Biden's America Would Be A Dystopian Hellhole ", ..."
"... Trump has not signed the Insurrection Act. ..."
"... 'trust the plan' is a never ending story psyop ..."
"... 'best is yet to come' .. ..."
"... to beam back to the mothership. ..."
"... the humans are out to get them ..."
"... it happening you watch just donate ..."
"... without symptoms. ..."
"... Amnesty run by US State Department representatives, funded by convicted financial criminals, and threatens real human rights advocacy worldwide. ..."
"... Yes yes yes – as if we didn't fucking know! ..."
"... YOU MEAN TO DESTROY THE NHS AND YOU WILL REPEAT THIS OVER AND OVER AND OVER UNTIL IT IS DONE! ..."
Jan 21, 2021 | off-guardian.org

THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF CAPITULATES

The Trump Era is over after the incumbent announced in the day after Wednesday's storming of the US Capitol that "My focus now turns to ensuring a smooth, orderly and seamless transition of power", which was widely interpreted by friends and foes alike as the tacit concession that he previously promised never to provide a little more than 24 hours prior during his speech at the Save America Rally .

At that event, he literally said that "We will never give up. We will never concede, it doesn't happen. You don't concede when there's theft involved", yet completely changed his tune following the day's tumultuous events and after mysteriously "going dark" for over 24 hours, during which time some speculate that he was forced by his enemies in the permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (" deep state ") to give up the fight.

BETRAYING HIS BASE

This totally devastated his supporters who elected him primarily for the purpose of executing his chief promise to "drain the swamp" that all of them so deeply despise. They truly believed that he could irreversibly effect significant long-term change to the way that America is run, something which Trump himself also sincerely thought he could do as well, but he ultimately lacked the strength time and again to take the decisive steps that were necessary in order to do so.

Thus, he ended up getting swallowed by the same "swamp" that he attempted to drain, which is licking its lips after feasting on the political carcass that he's since become as a result of his capitulation. For as much hope as he inspired in his supporters and the respect that many of them still have for him, most of them are profoundly disappointed that he gave up and didn't go down fighting.

That's not to say that the vast majority of them expected him to forcefully resist Biden's impending inauguration, but just that they never thought they'd see the day where he publicly capitulated after carefully cultivating such a convincing reputation among them as a fighter who literally said a little more than 24 hours prior that "We will never give up. We will never concede, it just doesn't happen."

This prompted an ongoing soul-searching process among the most sober-minded of them who aren't indoctrinated with the cultish Q-Anon claims that Trump still has a so-called "master plan" that he's preparing to implement after this latest "5D chess" move. It's over, the Trump Era has ended, and the "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) movement that he inspired is now at risk of being declared a " domestic terrorist " organization in the coming future.

TRUMP'S MOST FATAL POLITICAL MISCALCULATION

" Biden's America Would Be A Dystopian Hellhole ", like the author predicted a few months ago, and all of Trump's supporters know that. Some had already resigned themselves to its seeming inevitability after his efforts to legally reverse the contested results of the latest elections failed for a variety of reasons that most of them attribute to the "swamp's" corruption, but they nevertheless remained as positive as possible after having believed that their hero would go down with them to the end.

None ever thought twice about his promise to "never give up, never concede", and they even expected him to have to be escorted from the White House on 20 January, yet his tacit concession is forcing many of them to re-evaluate their views about him in hindsight. Not only is he going out with a whimper on the "deep state's" terms, but he never fully "drained the swamp".

Trump's most fatal political miscalculation is that he thought that he could change the system from the "inside-out" after symbolically -- yet importantly, not substantively -- taking control of it as America's first modern-day "outsider" President. He immediately switched from an "outsider" to an "insider" shortly after his inauguration by capitulating to the "deep state's" demands that he fire former National Security Advisor Flynn, which was his "original sin" that paved the way for all that would later follow.

Trump the self-professed "deal-maker" thought that he could strike a "compromise" with his enemies through these means, but all that he did was embolden them to intensify their fake news-driven efforts to oust him and continue sabotaging him from within through many of the same "swamp" creatures that he naively continued to surround himself with.

RINOS + MSM = TRUMP'S DEFEAT

The most reviled among them in the eyes of his base is "Javanka", the popular portmanteau of Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner and his daughter Ivanka. He continued listening to these "Republicans In Name Only", or RINOs as many MAGA members describe them, as well as many others such as those who still sit in Congress but pretended to be his friend just to win re-election.

Furthermore, the influence that his former reality TV career had on him resulted in Trump remaining obsessed with how his enemies might malign him in the Mainstream Media (MSM) for any decisive moves that he took to smash the "deep state". This weakness of character proved to be his greatest personal flaw since he should have followed his instincts instead of submitting to the egoistic desire to be "liked" by his foes.

So influenced was he by the MSM that his enemies were able to employ the most basic "reverse-psychology" tricks to manipulate him into "playing it safe" in his struggle against the "deep state". They fearmongered since even before he entered office that he'd turn into a so-called "dictator", yet he never seriously contemplated any such authoritarian moves in that direction despite always having the possibility of utilizing the immense powers vested in him by the Constitution to do so if he sincerely wanted.

His MAGA supporters passionately pleaded that he should have turned into his enemies' worst nightmare by declaring at least limited martial law in response to the decades-long Hybrid War of Terror on America finally going kinetic last summer after Antifa and "Black Lives Matter" (BLM) orchestrated nationwide riots to oust him.

TRUMP'S THREE GREATEST FAILURES

Bewildering his base, Trump also failed to revoke Article 230 despite now-proven fears that it would empower Big Tech to censor him and his supporters , nor did he thwart the Democrats' mail-in ballot and Dominion voting system schemes which they argue ultimately led to them stealing the election.

Just as concerning was his decision to not stop the Democrat Governors from locking down their populations for political reasons under the convenient pretext of COVID-19. The author addressed all of these issues in his analysis published shortly after the election about why " The Anti-Trump Regime Change Sequence Is Worthwhile Studying ". Trump could have legally exercised near-"dictatorial" powers to avert all of this and thus save America as his supporters see it, yet time and again he failed to gather the strength needed to do so due to his deep personal flaws.

THE HYBRID WAR ON AMERICA IS OVER

While Trump was unquestionably victimized by the "deep state" during his entire time in office, he's no longer as much of a martyr as he used to be after suddenly giving up the fight following Wednesday's storming of the US Capitol. He surrendered to the shock of his base, was subsequently swallowed by the "swamp", and is now being mercilessly destroyed in an ominous sign of what awaits the rest of the MAGA movement in the Biden-Kamala era.

Had he gone down fighting to the end and "never gave up" like he promised, then it would be an altogether different story, but instead his over-hyped "deal-making" instincts got the best of him at the very last minute and he foolishly thought that he could save himself by capitulating to their demands. The "deep state" is now showing their "thanks" by censoring him from social media and pushing for his impeachment.

The MAGA movement always believed that the country has already been at "war" for years even though most couldn't articulate the hybrid nature of it like the author did in his piece last summer about how " The Hybrid War Of Terror On America Was Decades In The Making ".

They truly felt that Trump shared their threat assessment after he was viciously attacked by the "deep state" from the second that he stepped onto the campaign trail, but it turned out that he underestimated the threat even though his enemies never did. To the "deep state" and their public Democrat proxies, this was always a "war" in its own way, which they never shied away from expressing.

The supreme irony is that while Trump lambasted the "weak Republicans" in his Save America Rally speech, he himself ultimately epitomized that very same weakness by later surrendering.

THE "DEEP STATE" WON

His opponents know no limits and believe in classic Machiavellian fashion that "the ends justify the means", whereas he thought that he could play by the rules -- and not even all of them as was early explained by pointing out his refusal to employ the near-"dictatorial" powers vested in him by the Constitution -- and still come out on top.

His naïveté will go down in history since it's what's most directly responsible for him failing to fully recognize the seriousness of the "deep state's" no-holds-barred war on him and the rest of America.

As a born-and-raised New Yorker, Trump perfected the art of slick talking, so much so that he even managed to dupe his base into believing that he shared their threat assessment about the decades-long Hybrid War of Terror on America. They fell for this charade since they desperately wanted to believe that there was still some hope left.

There isn't, though, since the war is over and the "deep state" won once and for all. The " Great Reset "/" Fourth Industrial Revolution " brought about by World War C is barreling forward at full speed ahead, and practically every domestic accomplishment that Trump has to his name will likely be reversed by Biden-Kamala during their first year in office, especially since the "deep state's" Democrat proxies control all branches of government now (remembering that the Supreme Court's supposed "conservative supermajority" really just consists of RINOs as was proven by their refusal to hear his team's convincing election fraud cases).

After " Analyzing The MAGA Movement's Democratic Security Failure " on Wednesday, it's clear that whatever "master plan" he and/or the MAGA movement might have had backfired and was actually exploited by their opponents.

THE REAL "MASTER PLAN"

In fact, the only real "master plan" was that of the "deep state", which effectively thwarted every one of Trump's moves and ultimately turned his supporters' "last hurrah" of a mostly peaceful rally into the nail that'll now be hammered into the MAGA movement's coffin.

It's extremely suspicious that the US Capitol was so poorly defended despite there being an ongoing session of Congress on such an historic day and after weeks of preparation to ensure the site's safety ahead of Trump's long-planned Save America March.

It's even more baffling that some of the police officers removed the barricades and even opened the doors to some of the protesters, which in hindsight suggests that the "deep state" wanted to tempt the most "overly passionate" among them (to say nothing of suspected provocateurs) into storming the site as the pretext for what followed.

The whole point in passively facilitating this scenario through the masterful exploitation of crowd psychology was to lay the basis for a comprehensive nationwide crackdown against the MAGA movement on the grounds that it's now "proven" to be a "domestic terrorist" group.

That explains the push behind impeaching Trump less than two weeks before he himself acknowledged just the other day that he'll be leaving office after ensuring the "transition of power".

Had he not surrendered, then he probably would still be a martyr to most of the MAGA movement, but now he's just a palace hostage awaiting his highly publicized political execution as the opening salvo of the "deep state's" Democrat-driven reprisals against his supporters in the name of "defending against domestic terrorism". That, not whatever Q-Anon imagines, is the real "master plan", and it succeeded.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Trump was swallowed by the "swamp" because he lacked the strength to drain it. Every MAGA member needs to accept this harsh truth no matter how painful it might be. Time and again, he failed to muster up the strength needed to meaningfully fulfill what many sincerely believed to be his destiny.

This was due to his fatal political miscalculation of transforming from an "outsider" into an "insider" in a doomed-to-fail attempt to change the system from within. He continued relying on RINOs despite their proven unreliability. Trump's obsession with how his foes portrayed him in the MSM also led to him never seriously countenancing the use of the near-"dictatorial" powers vested in him by the Constitution to save America.

He pathetically surrendered after the "deep state's" "master plan" succeeded, and now he can't even go down in history as a martyr.

Originally published on One World Press Jan 20, 2021 2:08 PM

Trump was part of the show nothing more nothing less. They had the goods on him for decades. He made Izzrail grate again. That was about it. Notice Jizzlaid Maxwell, the Mossad kiddy victim procurer watching her mark in the background of the video below from 92 as the king of bankruptcy eyes the broads and "struts" his stuff.

Meanwhile Kill Bill Gates gets to poison Planet Sheeple and nobody ever questions his association with Mossad kiddy porn snuff director, Epstein or Kill Bill's sojourns on Pedovore Island. Anyone remember the CIA Operation Brownstone"? It's global and it's Satanic.

King of Bankruptcy and King Pedovore
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUDr_c2PalI&ab_channel=TODAY

Kill Bill and King Pedovore

https://www.youtube.com/embed/fg4nK4u8vuU?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent 0 0 Reply

Malatok , Jan 20, 2021 2:10 PM Reply to Malatok

https://www.youtube.com/embed/AUDr_c2PalI?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

Jams O'Donnell , Jan 13, 2021 6:47 PM

How could Trum 'drain the swamp' when he lives in the swamp. contributes to the swamp and essentially is part of the swamp.

This story is sh!te. Trump is a swamp dweller.

Trump is just the same as all the other oligarchs and would be oligarchs. He is a rich, privileged, white entrepreneur. His propaganda campaign in which he claimed to be on the side of the poor and unemployed whites is just about the biggest lie which has been swallowed wholesale since Goebbles was whitewashing the Nazi regime.

How you fools here can fall for this tripe has me absolutely beat.

Aethelred , Jan 13, 2021 10:17 AM

Trump in his political ineptitude resembles Jimmy Carter, an idealist incapable of wielding power. Neither man had the gumption, nor the charisma (much the same thing) to win over the apparatchiki. Both vain and selfish men (like all politicians), neither inspired sufficient love nor fear to gather support, unlike Reagan or Clinton, both of whom exuded calm confidence. Trump differs from Carter in that Trump's social incapacity manifests in bombast, and Carter's in staged humility. Neither could convince the ruling classes, and so were ushered away.

The elevation of Biden, an aged hack, is a signal the republic is finally overturned. The feds not only can convict but now can elect and govern through a ham sandwich.

Blather , Jan 13, 2021 8:21 AM

Does the author know how to read Trump's speech or is he so BIAS as not to see?

Trump DID NOT capitulate. Read careFOOLY. It can go both waze.

ZenPriest , Jan 12, 2021 8:50 PM

Trump was never going to drain the swamp. He was a clown put in place by America's masters, to keep an endless supply of material for their media and to stir up hatred among citizens.
It's funny because citizens should be uniting against the puppeteers. Or they would be if they knew they even existed, or knew they were being played.

S Cooper , Jan 13, 2021 2:47 AM Reply to ZenPriest

"Quite a number already know this. That number keeps growing with each passing day. Got Debs?"

https://www.youtube.com/embed/rsL6mKxtOlQ?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent&listType=playlist&list=FLnnoDlrP9jUXGwJPoM_f7sg

https://www.tumblr.com/search/v%20debs

captain spam , Jan 12, 2021 7:32 PM

F**k Twitter.
#Boycott Twitter.

niko , Jan 12, 2021 7:24 PM

"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help." Remember that line? That was Ronnie Raygun back in 1986, with one of his (or his ghost writers') versions for 'draining the swamp' then, getting government off our backs, and blah, blah, blah. Agitprop thrown the masses so the corporate state could get down to bizzness as usual in dispossessing 'we the people' by rolling back government programs for social welfare and building up wealth and power for elites via the MIC and Wall Street (complementary to Iron Bitch Thatcher's neoliberal programs for a greater fascism in Britain).

Hardly anything original, such marketing ads. Politricking fronts of the ruling class have been campaigning before and after getting into office with noble lies of populism covering for their brands of treachery as long as the fraudulence of capitalist democracy and representative government have been around. In the post-WWII era of Pox Americana, the U$ CEOs for the Fortune 500 routinely have disguised their institutional role in managing the empire under cover of brands of reform that keep promising power to the people with one hand while taking it away with the other.

But when it comes to the greatest show on earth, it's the words attributed to P.T. Barnum that there's a sucker born every minute (or at least every election season) which ring truest. So now we've got the ringmasters retiring the Donald and installing good ole Creepy Joe to 'build back better' on behalf of the Great Reset. That's after Swamp Thang has played his part as dictator of distraction overseeing such achievements as the greatest robbery of the commons in human history and launch of technofascism under Operation Warp(ed) Speed, all thanks to a global coup with which he's been entirely complicit. And his manufactured base of true believers still carry on with the covidiocy as much as the controlled opposition of the faux left.

The more things change, the more they stay the same (only worse!).

Chris , Jan 12, 2021 5:14 PM

The Q group are patriots with access to a quantum computer able to untangle timelines from a possibility/probability vortex.
Their movement was designed to awaken many individuals with key roles to play in the real Operation Warpspeed.

The majority of these folks had some connection to the military or other branches of government including the police.

Chris , Jan 12, 2021 7:34 PM Reply to Chris

In 2012 nearly all technology, ancient or more modern, was suddenly rendered non functional.
The Mayans were obviously dead right with their calender.
The race was on to gain absolute supremacy in the prediction game.
All major stakeholders have access to quantum computing, but the US has the upper hand.
The true value of quantum computers lies not in the task of pure number crunching, but in its ability to predict probabilities of complex situations.

The quantum computer exposes the most probable timelines and delivers the results in numerical form that correspond to actual events and dates/times .

Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 3:43 PM

"The only kinds of fights worth fighting are those you're going to lose, because somebody has to fight them and lose and lose and lose until someday, somebody who believes as you do wins."
― I.F. Stone

Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 12:42 PM

President Trump has declared a State of Emergency in the District of Columbia.
White House

Waldorf , Jan 12, 2021 2:00 PM Reply to Laurence Howell

Not reported anywhere else that I can see.

Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 7:00 PM Reply to Waldorf

Try the Whitehouse website

Moneycircus , Jan 12, 2021 2:20 PM Reply to Laurence Howell

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-approves-district-columbia-emergency-declaration/

Strange that it is reported by overseas news outlets, ignored by domestic.

Strange also that U.S. Capitol Police officer commits suicide days after riots Saw something he didn't oughta? Stepped out of the thin blue line?

Cyd , Jan 12, 2021 3:01 PM Reply to Moneycircus

Witness protection?

Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 12:21 PM

To everyone that believes in the rule of law congratulations President trump has won.

Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 7:03 PM Reply to Laurence Howell

Correction, President Trump has not signed the Insurrection Act.

My error.

REvail , Jan 13, 2021 5:18 PM Reply to Laurence Howell

OW look the fruitcakes and cult follower spent another new moon being juiced , Trump has not signed the Insurrection Act. BUT BUT BUT
Cult of BIG disclosure keep watching.donate huge Arrests and stay tuned keep watching
it happening – keep watching- it happening soon, BIG disclosure huge Arrests . it Happening soon psyop AND distraction

Simple simon and Q nonsense told another lie to the sheep

Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 12:16 PM

President Trump has signed the Insurrection Act.

YouDontCareAboutGrandma , Jan 12, 2021 12:47 PM Reply to Laurence Howell

Proof? And don't link to Simon Parkes' YouTube channel. He's provided no evidence whatsoever for his claims. He says he talks to aliens and "Q" on the telephone.

REvail , Jan 13, 2021 5:20 PM Reply to YouDontCareAboutGrandma

comment is above

Sgt_doom , Jan 12, 2021 3:04 PM Reply to Laurence Howell

Please stop spreading Q-propaganda -- they originate out of Asia and are a silly, cartoonish disinfo outlet of the CCP!

Sgt_doom , Jan 12, 2021 3:07 PM Reply to Sgt_doom

When a serious traceroute is done on the Q lines it tracks back to a Filipino Maoist group.

Moneycircus , Jan 12, 2021 10:12 AM

Capitol Riot: 10 Questions -- James Tracy's Memory Hole Blog

https://www.youtube.com/embed/mEyUmL0_KR0?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

Sgt_doom , Jan 12, 2021 6:59 AM

Gosh, evrn more baffling and scarey and reminescent of 1963, never seen footage of the murder of Ms. BABBIT showing collusion between police and antifa agitators, taken by an independent Japanese reporter!

https://youtu.be/5nvqvvsqJ_s

.
!nd this is the real plan begun almost 50 years ago:

https://21stcenturywire.com/2016/12/31/us-middle-class-still-suffering-from-rockefeller-kissinger-industrial-transfer-scheme-to-china/

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/americas-china-class-fights-trump

Great article but consider how many thousands of people the Islamist extremist, Erdogan of Turkey, had to fire and imprison, to dismantle the positive Deep State structure Attaturk put in place to keep that country secular? Functioned admirably for many years.

DimlyGlimpsed , Jan 12, 2021 1:06 AM

Dems enthusiatically voted from Bill Clinton, Obama, Hillary and Biden. All corrupt and compromised. Repubs voted for Bush Jr., Romney, and Trump. All corrupt and compromised. Both accuse the other of corruption, dishonesty and hypocrisy. Both are right, of course.
Reality, though, is not possible to perceive when limited to a diet of mainstream news. Neither is it a trivial task to navigate the rough seas online disinformation.'
Unless one is privy to big-picture high-level (and secret) information, one is left to attempt to identify and assemble a complex jigsaw puzzle using one's own sleuthing and intuition skills.
Common people without inside knowledge can still interpret the world, however. War is evil, and those who advocate war have been seduced by evil. Kindness and generosity are among the highest values. On the other hand, those who are selish and cruel pollute our world. Etc,, etc.
Let us keep in mind that the most evil cloak themselves in the garb of peace, kindness and generosity, in order to dine on sheep who wishfully and willfully refused to judge behavior rather than be seduced with addictive slogans. Let us also keep in mind that no leaders can remain in power without the compliance of the rest of us.
Any of should be able to recognize Joe Biden as evil. His "track record" is one of corruption, budget cutting, war and authoritarian legislation. And Trump? One of the great mysteries of human civilization is that Trump, the ultimate swap creature, was elected by promising to "clean the swamp".

Julia , Jan 12, 2021 8:52 AM Reply to DimlyGlimpsed

I literally want to copy and paste this comment and send it to as many people as I can. You capture it precisely.

Sgt_doom , Jan 12, 2021 3:11 PM Reply to DimlyGlimpsed

That is fairly accurate but Trump did push back against America's China Class and the CCP -- more than you can say for commies like the Bidens, Obamas, Clintons, Bushes, etc.

REvail , Jan 12, 2021 5:35 PM Reply to Sgt_doom

Trump's America First Hoax: Trump is an Israeli agent. He put #Mossad asset #JaredKushner in charge of infiltration of US Intelligence and Defense. Bidens are Chinese agents? Charles Kushner (Jared's father), is an agent of #AnbangInsurance, a Chinese Communist front group.

Jams O'Donnell , Jan 13, 2021 6:54 PM Reply to REvail

All US presidents, vice-presidents, chiefs of staff, etc are Israeli agents, or more accurately, are in effect the same thing.

Jams O'Donnell , Jan 13, 2021 6:53 PM Reply to Sgt_doom

"commies like the Bidens, Obamas, Clintons, Bushes, etc."

If you think that the above mentioned capitalist clowns are "commies", then you really, REALLY, need to get an education, because clearly you don't know your arse from your elbow.

Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 3:46 PM Reply to DimlyGlimpsed

"Trump, the ultimate swap creature " I do not think you have any idea what the 'swamp' is to make such a claim.

Otherwise, a great post.

Lost in a dark wood , Jan 12, 2021 12:40 AM

Note: I drafted this as a response, but the person is not worthy of a reply, so I'll post it here instead.
--

I've always said that Q is a deep-state operation. It's the NSA, military intelligence, etc. It's just a different deep state to the CIA/MI6 deep state. And I've always said that people should at least know what "the plan" is. They should know what it is because it's by far the most coherent explanation for what is happening now, and for what has happened over the last four years.

A couple of years ago I thought a deal had been struck between the opposing factions, and it was all going to be wound down. But I changed that view after the Covid911, attempted colour revolution. The overwhelming view on this site, from contributors and posters, was that Trump would fall in June 2020. I was one of only a handful of people saying Trump would survive.

I can't predict the details of what's happening now, but I think Trump will survive this because:
a) he has the ammunition
b) it would make no sense to go this far and not see it through
c) even though it seems to be going to the precipice, it still fits a coherent plan

For some time now, the best rolling updates have been provided by X22 Report:
https://rumble.com/c/X22Report

Lost in a dark wood , Jan 12, 2021 2:35 AM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

I've only recently started following Simon Parkes, but in his latest update he claims to have spoken to the real Q. Of course, as anybody who's been following Q posts would know, this would breach the "no outside comms" principle.

https://www.simonparkes.org/post/11th-january-third-update

Moneycircus , Jan 12, 2021 10:20 AM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

I'm not at all impressed. Appeared on the scene coincidental with Gen McInerney and all the misinformation about "hammer and scorecard" which was a blatant distraction from clear and convincing evidence of election fraud.

Parkes does far too much, "I could have told you beforehand but then I'd have had to kill you."

REvail , Jan 12, 2021 5:37 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Your on the ball wow from 1 psyop to another Now your following simon charlatan parkes.
HE gets excepted into the Q nonsense and trump Savior psyop and becames one of there star leaders over night.
Do you not do basic checks on who you start to worship?? or do they have to say code words like Q and trump maga and its like there chosen to lead you.

Sgt_doom , Jan 12, 2021 3:13 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Negative, far too silly and cartoonish and tracks back to a Filipino Maoist group directed by the CCP!

Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 7:34 PM

We've been manipulated into fighting against each other over trivial differences to divert us from the fact that we're all in the same boat.

Lost in a dark wood , Jan 11, 2021 6:33 PM

Andrew Korybko: "That, not whatever Q-Anon imagines, is the real "master plan", and it succeeded."

Okay, I'm trying to figure this out. With regard specifically to this thread, are we allowed to post direct links to Q posts? For instance, Q has stated explicitly that there is no "Qanon" (#4881). Instead, there is Q and there are anons. I personally think this is debatable, and that Qanon is a collective name for a highly amorphous movement and method of enquiry. Furthermore, that movement and method predates Q and was to some extent co-opted by Q. The movement will also outlive Q, though it may retain the name. As a movement, Qanon stands in opposition to the hierarchical, hive-mind vacuity of the Rationalists and Neo-Platonists. In short, Qanon is Blakean. Welcome to Jerusalem!

We do not want either Greek or Roman models if we are but just & true to our own imaginations, those Worlds of Eternity in which we shall live forever; in Jesus our Lord.
– William Blake
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Milton_(excerpts)/Preface

Sophie - Admin1 , Jan 11, 2021 7:25 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Oh please

Lost in a dark wood , Jan 11, 2021 7:40 PM Reply to Sophie - Admin1

So what happened to my other posts?

Lost in a dark wood , Jan 12, 2021 9:17 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Q Alerts is back up so I'll try again. The following is a critical part of "the plan".
--

Q (Oct 17, 2020):
I'm going to bring the whole diseased, corrupt temple down on your head. It's gonna be Biblical.
Enjoy the show!
https://qalerts.app/?n=4884

https://www.youtube.com/embed/LUsLDzXWUU4?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

Marion Reynolds , Jan 11, 2021 6:01 PM

Please – can we have more of Andrew Karybko. I've seen him on Peter Lavelle. For such an acutely well informed young chap about international politics, he demonstrates an equally rigorous understanding about Trumps psyche.

Loverat , Jan 12, 2021 6:28 PM Reply to Marion Reynolds

Andrew Korybko is probably one of the best geo-political analysts I've come across and his depth of knowledge across all continents shines through. A very warm and engaging person.

He runs a site called OneWorld Press. Recently accused by mainstream media and The Daily Beast of being GRU agents. Well if it is, they are most measured and balanced in the history of intelligence services.

Lost in a dark wood , Jan 11, 2021 5:18 PM

The best is yet to come.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ozWZYbYfkp4?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

REvail , Jan 11, 2021 11:50 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Your be saying that on the way to the concentration camps!!!
'trust the plan' is a never ending story psyop
Similar to the 'best is yet to come' ..
you trumpsters have your own Down Syndrome language.
WWG1WGA, another bunch of devotees similar to a cult who will not except there guru is a oppressor

mikael , Jan 11, 2021 1:09 PM

Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."Reinhold Niebuhr

Pardon moi for the lenght.

I dont know whats with people this days, the shere avalange of bollocks is baffling, the inability to conect the dots to what was, the past, to the present is making me think there must be something, hehe, with the narrative, or should we say in this uh . conpiracy tinfoil hat wearing days, in the tap water, and the rethotic, about Trump, I have my issues, and I have never been quiet about them, but then to whine about things when most of it have been inplace before Trump came into the WH, incl children in gages to wars, Obamalama started more wars than any other American president ever, with Hitlary the Beast from Little Rock beside, after Her husband stole Social sec and now, witch could be massive, is completely eradicated out of existence, and the sactions, etc, most of them are just continuations of existing systems, we can always blame Trump for something, but please, do know the difference and dont just throw bollocks because of the people whom wanted change, when Obamalama said it, you belived, and what happened, again, he pissed upon you all, and have since laughed all the way to the bank, the economic crashes, the insane austeritys, the bailins and outs, you name it to color revolutions.
This isnt to defend Trump, for me, He was more an castrat, singing but otherwise balless, but also tied, unable to move, and been relentlessly attacked by those that defenses the past witch in no way was better.

Then we have the eh .. storming?, and if you look at videos, what sticks out is, what storming, some gass clouds, yea, means what, an Cop throving an gass can, but take an look for your self, it was never in any way what the MSM wants you to belive, and the army of people crawling all over the sites wants you to persive, along with profanitys about people whom did suported Trump, because they hoped for change, you cant attack them, maybe for been a bit naive, but one thing shal be the thing Trump did, exposed them all, in an way witch is unpresedented despite His flaws, nobody have done that in this level, He exposed them all, and if you havent gotten it yet, you have an problem, nobody else, incl the people whom did their duty as free citizens of the USA, did the protesting.
Rioting, again, what riot, the worst thing I can come up with, after watching some videos, is minore, a window, probably by the AntiFags/BLMs/eh leftards?, and one man whom ran off with an piece of the furiture, nothing else, and if I drag that further, maybe the stormers should have wiped their shoos off before entering the Hill, stepping on the fine carpets on the floor in the hallway, what an horrible crime, right.
What storming, do you see anything, do enlighten us.

So, I know I am pushing the attention span to the limit.
BUT, I have thru the years found out that Americans, not that I want to call em stupid, but regarding world poltics, more infantile, naive, brainwashed to such an extent thru the decades/centurys of propaganda, where the various Gov always have had an enemy, it have variated, from muslims etc to what it have become to day, domestic terrorism aka conservatives whatever that means, and not only in the MSM but also thru an army of so called Alternative MSM, witch have feed upon this narratives and played upon this, but overall, gone the same erant as the Gov wanted them to go, and witch have resulted in wars upon wars, and stil some want more wars, like the broad attack line on Iran, just to give you one ex to the strangling of others, like western sahara to the Palestinians.
Then we have the new enemy, in mainly the so called alternative ugh .. rightwinged? whatever whom sommehow manages to blame everything on socialism, yea, apart from the weather because thats Putins fault, despite that, I found Putin to be an scoundrel, the Russian Gov rotten to its core, that dont mean I hate Russians but there will always be those that cant differentiate at all.
Whom is the "enemy" Americans, socialism, China, Russia, Iran, huh.

I have saxed this from P. L. Gonzalez.
Social media networks, payment processors, airlines, hotels, streaming services, and online vendors are strangling people based on ideology but TPUSA is still complaining about "socialism." Burn your money or donate it to TPUSA, it's the same thing.

Yup, briliantly summarised everything in some few lines, and why, do you refuse to see them when they are right infront of your very own eyes, and yet, you blame some imaginary enemy witch have nothing to do with this coup, its an class war, its the oligarcs, the robber barons, witch have an army of buttspreaders in the capitol Hill to their abuse, and this bitches do whatever they are told, do notice how the RepubliCONs threw you under the buss, is that to the Chines fault.

So, I hope the Americans whom stil have some parts of their bran fuctional, can notice the difference, in Norway we have the same problem, but we are an so called socialistic nation, but we are held hostages by the same pack of scums that is plundering your nation and resources, and have nothing but contempt for everyone of us, and an Gov that do whatever they want and whom are we then to blame, the Hottentots, Maoris, communism is an tool for social unrest, and when they have done their job, thrown under the buss, because the PTB wants us to fight each others, as long we do, they will win.
Unite and you have an chanse, if not, well, I am old, and my life span expectanse isnt that long anymore and I will not have to live in the totalistaian regime that comes, but the sole reason for me to even bother, is for our children, and their children.
And to all of you whom went to the protest, you have my deepest respect.
It truly is an war, against the dark forces.
You all need to take an stand.
Be the light.

peace

Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 3:53 PM Reply to mikael

We have the same problem worldwide. Singling out and scorning the Americans is simply divisive. It has always been the People against the Oppressors. The Americans are people and have Oppressors bearing down on them like the rest of us. There is a cancer that needs to be removed lest it devour us all.

Chris , Jan 11, 2021 10:57 AM

The overtone of Korybko's writing is excessively defeatist. When the "Deep State" applies such overt tools to steal the U.S. election, imposes censorship, labels millions of American citizens as potential "domestic terrorists", silences the still incumbent U.S. President, resorts to provocation, deprives Americans of essential liberties through Covid, curfews or other bogus emergencies, then it means that the establishment behind the "Deep State" is scared. Scared not as much of Donald Trump as scared of You – the People. I know it since I live in a central European country with a very bitter experiences with dicatorship. When the power starts to resort to an open forgery and uses coercion or force it reveals its weakness, not strength. Its power derives only from the passive attitude of majority of population, nothing more. What this so called 'liberal elite' in America hopes for is to return to the good old days, when the whole Middle America remained voiceless, silent, isolated, without any leadership or political representation. Now it is their objective to 'legally' separate the 'progressive America' from the 'populist' one and they might even inspire separation, violence or secessionist moves to achieve it. But MAGA movement must not play this delusional vision of retreat to entrench in false sense of local security. That's what the 'Deep State' wants to achieve – to herd the popular opposition into their home arrests and their privacy soon to be possibly separated by walls, sanitary wards, wired fences or a new Indian reservation. Americans would never win their Independence by acting in defense only, by retreating to 'wait and see' tactics as Korybko suggests. What must be done is to recapture Your state institutions that have been stolen and turned into a travesty of American political tradition. Before that happens a common awareness is needed that those who appear to rule as a new 'government' are just a tiny bunch of criminals who try to impress the whole world that their power has no limits, that they monopolised the mass media and economy, that they are invincible. Do not let this delusion of 'Deep State' victory to dominate Your outlook. Yes, I agree that Trump failed as a leader in a time of crisis but MAGA (or however we call it) but all the people who really care for America need to maintain representation, authority and leadership. They shouldn't accept a comfortable fantasy that sooner or later the 'Deep State' would crumble under its own weight and then by some miracle a new movement would be born. If Trump indicates that 'its only the beginning' then his supporters should join him in any action he offers. All Republican politicians, conservative or libertarian societies, local communities, state legislatures or any other active group must be engaged in this action. Struggle for political freedom always involves risk and mistakes. Trump certainly made a lot of them. But it is the People who are sovereign, not any office, institution or technological dicatorship. When the Constitution, the congressional debate and civil liberties are ruined by 'elite' it is the responsibility of the People to act in emergency to restore law, order and liberty. The 'Deep State' perfectly understands that after the four years of Trump and the emergence of trumpism as a social-political fact there can not be any turning back to the business as usual. Not under normal and peaceful circumstances. That's why they are so frightened and act in panic. That's why they impose health and security 'emergencies' to incapacitate the population, to make it superfluous and useless. We saw it in totalitarian regimes.
The world needs the U.S. not as an imperial power but as an example of well established social contract, human liberty and hope for a better future. The European 'elites' are in revolt against their people too but here we won't have a chance for any anti-establishment president to support us. That's why in Europe we still believe that not all has been lost in America.

Laurence Howell , Jan 11, 2021 12:17 PM Reply to Chris

Lt. General Thomas Mcinerney,

"special forces imbedded in Antifa rioters have Nancy Pelosi's laptop"

Panic in DC would ban understatement.

Bring it on

Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 2:56 PM Reply to Laurence Howell

laptop always the laptop it on the laptop he/she left the laptop at
it etc etc et was found there# etc etc etc bullshit
laptop psyop used as much as the immaculate passport psyop found at the scene of crime in a burning inferno it aimed at idiots

Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 7:24 PM Reply to Asylum

Laurence Howell , Jan 12, 2021 10:37 AM Reply to Asylum

Are you saying that Hunter Biden's laptop and the released information that it contains is of no value?

Conflating 911 with the current conspiracies is not helpful. This would need an article of longer length and written by an unbiased observer which you are not.

Instead of saying etc. etc. bullshit, why not explain why this is your position?
Or does this not fit in with your soundbite posting?

Jacques , Jan 11, 2021 9:41 AM

Historically speaking, the problem with the "deep state" is essentially that the current system has corrupted itself to a point where it is so far from what is claimed, or perhaps appears to be, that there is no way to fix it from within by rebuilding it, by "draining the swamp".

Klaus "Cockroach" Schwab et al understand this, hence the Great Reset, a new vision for the future. Of course, they want a future for themselves, but that's another story.

Even if Trump were entirely sincere in his effort to "drain the swamp", he had nothing to offer apart from some vague anachronistic concept of Making America Great Again. What the fuck is that supposed to mean anyway, eh? The only thing he had behind him was populism which in itself is an empty concept.

Like it or not, a change will only come if people formulate a new philosophy, ideology, and if the new ideology is proposed and embraced on a broad scale. Ideally in a non-violent fashion.

Right now, there is fuck all, people are still stuck on all sorts of left-right bullshit dichotomies, (fake) democracy, the games that have been played for decades if not hundreds of years.

If you ask me, it would be nice if the ideology of the future was loosely based on Hayek's spontaneous order.

Thom1111 , Jan 11, 2021 3:03 PM Reply to Jacques

If Trump can pull something off this week or early next, the new plan is already waiting in the wings. It's called Nesara/Gesara. It's a new economic system not based on a debt based system.

rechenmacher , Jan 12, 2021 3:45 PM Reply to Thom1111

Heard that one before. Fraud.

Thom1111 , Jan 12, 2021 7:09 PM Reply to rechenmacher

It's a real framework plan, it's just whether it can be implemented is the question.

Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 3:57 PM Reply to Jacques

"Like it or not, a change will only come if people formulate a new philosophy, ideology, and if the new ideology is proposed and embraced on a broad scale. Ideally in a non-violent fashion."

Sure. So we the people have had centuries or more to figure the answer out. Repeating the dilemma is not enlightening. Idealism has no voice with tyrants.

ZenPriest , Jan 11, 2021 8:53 AM

All this talk of the 'deep state' yet no one can name them. Lol.

Thom1111 , Jan 11, 2021 3:04 PM Reply to ZenPriest

you must have been born yesterday. In America it's the alphabet agencies but obviously all runs back to Rothschild and the Vatican.

gordan , Jan 11, 2021 7:48 PM Reply to Thom1111

eustace mullins
book

the curse of canaan

old names
very old
and new ones

written in the 1980s
still up to date

ZenPriest , Jan 12, 2021 2:44 PM Reply to Thom1111

If you think it stops at the Vatican and Rothschilds, maybe you were born yesterday.

Thom1111 , Jan 12, 2021 7:11 PM Reply to ZenPriest

well actually no, it goes off planet or interdimensionally if you want to go that deep.

Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 4:02 PM Reply to ZenPriest

https://www.corbettreport.com/?s=deep+state

Start here.

ZenPriest , Jan 12, 2021 5:02 PM Reply to Igby MacDavitt

Corbett is owned like almost everyone else. Gives you everything but the source.

Joerg , Jan 11, 2021 8:50 AM

ARCHBISHOP VIGANÒ: OPEN LETTER TO DONALD TRUMP, WARNS ABOUT 'GREAT RESET' PLOT TO 'SUBDUE HUMANITY,' DESTROY FREEDOM
https://counterinformation.wordpress.com/2021/01/10/archbishop-vigano-open-letter-to-donald-trump-warns-about-great-reset-plot-to-subdue-humanity-destroy-freedom-2/

Ashley , Jan 11, 2021 6:11 AM

In Covid-19 Period, Honest online career from home, Now A Days Scam is every where but don't worry , every one is not a cheater, very reliable and profitable site. Thousands peoples are making good earning from it. For further detail visit the link no instant money required free signup and information ­­­­𝚠­­­­𝚠­­­­𝚠­­­­.­­­­𝚓­­­­𝚘­­­­𝚋­­­­𝚜­­­­𝟷­­­­𝟼­­­­.­­­­𝚝­­­­𝚔­­­­

Researcher , Jan 11, 2021 2:13 PM Reply to Ashley

Look. Your spam filter, didn't catch the SPAM.

Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 2:59 PM Reply to Researcher

but it does catch certain comments funny that

aspnaz , Jan 10, 2021 11:47 PM

The 6 January protest march clearly shows that the majority of Trump voters had already given up on Trump so did not join the protest. There was originally talk of a possible one million people attending, it didn't get anywhere close. If half the nation was still behind Trump, this was a very puzzling showing.

Trump just did not have what it takes, or was not really trying, to ruthlessly cut out the cancer of corruption in government. History will show that he was a weak leader who allowed the deep state to distract him to the extent that he never did anything of note other than to reveal, through no action of his own, how extreme is the corruption that he had promised to drain.

The Democrat distractions, paid for by their oligarch owners, showed the world that extreme corruption is running the USA. Even the most loyal Democrats must be puzzled by the current purges and threats of extreme centralised thought control, the arrogance of the swamp now that it has gotten rid of the peoples' man.

To his credit, I am still willing to believe that Trump tried to do the right thing.

Although the author is trying to place Trump as a coward who resigned, going back on his word, I think this is not how his original supporters see him. From what I can see, the majority of his original supporters still support him and see him as a figurehead, but they recognise that he doesn't have the skills to do the job. He is not a coward, he did not cave in, he recognised, probably because of the low protest numbers, that he did not have what is takes to continue the fight, he could see that his base had already given up on him. He is still a figurehead in the patriot movement. He may have lost the far right, but he still has a lot of centre-ground supporters.

MaryLS , Jan 11, 2021 4:47 AM Reply to aspnaz

I disagree with your claim that the majority of supporters had already given up on him. It was the middle of the week. People have jobs. It was a significant turn out. People understand what is at stake. I would not place the blame for failure on Trump. He is amazing in so many ways.

Carmpat , Jan 12, 2021 8:39 AM Reply to MaryLS

I just don't understand here how anybody can believe Trump was sincere in wanting to change anything: he's a narcissistic bully in it for his own benefit and that of his offspring. Fighting corruption??? Come on!

Igby MacDavitt , Jan 12, 2021 4:06 PM Reply to Carmpat

The mere fact that hundreds and hundreds of treasonous actors throughout government and business have been clearly and openly revealed through the process started by Trump is a damn good start.

S Cooper , Jan 11, 2021 5:53 AM Reply to aspnaz

"What is going in DC right now is like what went on at Jonestown after Jim Jones went crackers. Except instead of cyanide laced Kool-Aid they are going to use 'Doc' Billy Eugenics EUTHANASIA DEATH SHOT to off the 'faithful'. If only Billy and they would just off themselves and leave the rest of the World out of it."

" EUTHANIZE the World! Corporate Fascism and Eugenics forever."

S Cooper , Jan 11, 2021 4:24 PM Reply to S Cooper

"Time now for Na n zi Pelosi, Chuckie 'Upchuck' Schumer and all the rest of the war criminal gang of CORPORATE FASCIST FABIAN EUGENICISTS to beam back to the mothership. They see insurrections, rebellions and conspiracies everywhere. They believe the humans are out to get them . They are going full Jim Jones. "

https://giphy.com/gifs/alien-they-live-john-caenter-3og0IUd5D9Y77EXtRK

S Cooper , Jan 11, 2021 6:40 PM Reply to S Cooper

"Also Nasty Na n zi should lay off the hooch. It is beginning to have a deleterious and harmful effect upon the sad thing's cognitive faculties and behavior."

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:35 PM

I *Hope* they name the next Carrier after him – USS Donald J. Trump – CVN 83

😉

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:38 PM Reply to Sgt Oddball

- Nickname: – 'Big Don'

Voxi Pop , Jan 10, 2021 9:57 PM

https://worldchangebrief.webnode.com INSURRECTION ACT "PROBABLY" SIGNED –
Military In Control of the US, Under Commander In Chief Trump/
Updates Will Follow Throughout The Day

Cal , Jan 10, 2021 9:56 PM

.

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 9:26 PM

"Captain America's been torn apart,
Now he's a court jester with a broken heart,
He said, "Turn me around and take me back to the start",
"I must be losing my mind!" Are you blind?!
– I've seen it all a *Million Times* "

James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 9:02 PM

Situation Update Jan 8th – Trump fighting from secure location, did NOT concede
https://www.hangthecensors.com/487773.html?fbclid=IwAR2Na1XhGeff0jKFmZWBWrQnd5hjKgFEsSqwJOjQIqZFFkzN7flG-FcGG_s

Sukma Dyk , Jan 10, 2021 8:50 PM

You are going to be very surprised. See what happens.

David Meredith , Jan 10, 2021 9:08 PM Reply to Sukma Dyk

I was just about to post a comment saying: It's not over yet, but you beat me to it! Well done.

John Smith , Jan 11, 2021 6:17 PM Reply to Sukma Dyk

Why the secrecy? If you know summit then spill.

Jacques , Jan 10, 2021 8:49 PM

I don't know what Trump's intentions were, and I couldn't care less.

From where I'm standing, it appears that he was elected on a wave of populism, which seemed to be an alternative to the "liberal democracy" fakery, the swamp. An interesting presentation of that was here ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA50BE7d1X8 ). IMHO, Bannon kicked Frum's butt in that debate.

It would appear that populism was a big enough threat for the "swamp" to unleash four years of a hate campaign against Trump, possibly, probably culminating with COVID. Hard to believe that it was a coincidence.

Be it as it may, and allowing for the possibility that this or that or the other thing has been staged this way or that way, Trump's presidency has certainly set things in motion, woken up people. Had somebody more slick been elected, the transition to the dystopia that seems to be in the pipeline would probably have been less noticeable, perhaps not noticeable at all. With the shitshow that has been going down since last February, all of a sudden there is a public debate. Perhaps misinformed, perhaps mislead, but there is a debate nevertheless. Will it result in something positive? Hard to say, hopefully.

Bottom line, Trump's presidency has been historically a good thing.

YouTube_censors_unfortuna , Jan 11, 2021 10:05 AM Reply to Jacques

Covid19 was decided in 2010 and earlier.

Jacques , Jan 11, 2021 10:37 AM Reply to YouTube_censors_unfortuna

So what? What sort of relevance does it have to what I said?

First understand the bigger picture, then worry about details.

Carmpat , Jan 12, 2021 8:43 AM Reply to Jacques

Covid 19 was DECIDED? But of course, yes, it's just a detail .. lol

Researcher , Jan 10, 2021 8:45 PM

Turns out the Viking Guy aka QAnon Shaman aka Jake Angeli aka Jacob Anthony Chansley aka Actor and self proclaimed "Super Soldier" pals around with Bernard Kerik and Rudy Giuliani when he takes time off from memorizing the latest NSA script:

Lost in a dark wood , Jan 10, 2021 9:42 PM Reply to Researcher

Oh look, a photo at some sort of book-signing type event. I'll file it alongside the one of Oswald and Mother Teresa.

Researcher , Jan 10, 2021 11:32 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Where's the book? Nowhere. Not a book signing.

Freemason handshake tho, Lost_In_Your_Tiny_Mind

Lost in a dark wood , Jan 11, 2021 4:37 PM Reply to Researcher

BTW: if that's what Bernard Kerik looks like when he's "palling around", you definitely wouldn't want to fall out with him!

James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 10:10 PM Reply to Researcher

Haven't you figured out yet that QAnon is an intelligence agency psyop based in the type of magical thinking that will get you killed and lose the nation? If not, you really aren't qualified to participate in what is currently hitting us. The enemy has your number. This is obviously a photo op staged by the security state to feed the false narrative created around QAnon.

Researcher , Jan 10, 2021 11:23 PM Reply to James Meeks

Can you read? Read what I wrote again. Read it enough times until you understand.

QAnon = Q Group NSA

Nothing is hitting you except the Democrats and Republicans together against the citizens. That's not new.

Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 6:30 PM Reply to Researcher

S Cooper , Jan 11, 2021 10:25 PM Reply to Asylum

"If there was a non WAR RACKETEER CORPORATE FASCIST in SHAM DEMOCRACY USA for whom to vote and the REPUBLICRATS did not FAKE the counts and rig the SHAM elections WE THE PEOPLE might. Where is a Eugene Victor Debs when the world needs one?"

"Soon that is not going to be an issue, however. There will be no need for SHAM ELECTIONS after Billy EugenIcs and the CORPORATE FASCIST FABIAN EUGENICISTS cull all the untermenschen and useless eaters with their EUTHANASIA DEATH SHOT."

https://www.deviantart.com/redamerican1945/art/Eugene-V-Debs-Republican-Democratic-Party-674343047

https://www.youtube.com/embed/rsL6mKxtOlQ?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent&listType=playlist&list=FLnnoDlrP9jUXGwJPoM_f7sg

REvail , Jan 11, 2021 11:42 PM Reply to S Cooper

it was a compliment and joke on others who still be lie ve in what you eloquently posted

S Cooper , Jan 12, 2021 12:23 AM Reply to REvail

"Just can not give up the opportunity for a good lead up (segue'). In good faith and in all seriousness, thanks for providing it."

Cmiller , Jan 12, 2021 5:27 AM Reply to Researcher

Masonic handshake

Dayne , Jan 10, 2021 8:40 PM

Peasants in 19th-century Russia clung to a notion of the Czar as a benevolent, fatherly figure. Even when he rained misery and oppression down on them, it was only because he was "misinformed", "surrounded by bad guys", etc.

It makes sense: Those were desperate, illiterate people living in misery. Hoping against hope was all they had. But why would anyone in 2021 think of Trump in essentially the same way is beyond me. An entrenched military-industrial-media-psychiatric-intelligence system, hundreds of years in the making and with untold trillions in funding, just stood by as a Robin-Hood-type hero and people's champion rose to take the Oval Office? Sorry. Trump might as well sprout wings and fly.

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:10 PM Reply to Dayne

Thanx for your comment, Dayne – I've been trying to put this into words, and as I'm autistic, I could frankly, literally *Sperg'-out* over this, right now

- TL:DR version is this, tho': – Ever wonder why 'Populism' is such a dirty word for the establishment and their MSM bullhorn? – The argument I've heard thus far generally goes like the South Park underpants gnome's plan for world domination: – Phase 1: Popular Uprising (aka: 'Civil Unrest') Phase 2: ? . Phase 3: Fascist 'Strongman' Dictatorship – Why is that?

- Also that we're *Too Stoopid*(/ie: Self-Absorbed) – Like the Mud-Pickin' peasants in Monty Python' Holy Grail

- I would suggest 2 reasons for this:

- 1.) The Davostanis (Global Banksters/Oligarchs) never *merely* back the *winning horse* in the race, – In fact they back *every* horse that they *allow* to run (ergo: Trump was an Establishment-groomed *Stalking Horse* )

- 2.) The Davostanis (again), have *long since* seen to it that *most everyone*, from birth onwards, is psychologically conditioned, first with childhood myths and fairy-tales about Charming Princes and Fair Princesses, then with religio-spiritual 'adult' myths and fairy-tales about (In Judeo-Christian terms) Messianic, White-Knight champion/rescuer types who, if *we would only* put our lives and our *Utmost Faith* in their holy, heaven-sent hands, would *Save Us All* from all the terrible, terrible *Mess We've All Made* for ourselves down here on Earth, by collectively *Shitting The Bed*

*Obviously*, this is *All* just so much *Childish Nonsense*, and, more to the point, a *Writ-Large Con-Job*

- Cutting to the chase: – The 'Great-Man' theory of history is *Bunk* – Always *Has Been*, always *Will Be*

If you're still "Holding Out For A Hero", I invite you to stare *Long And Hard* into the nearest available mirror, *Take A DEEP Breath*, and then go out and *Elect Yourself* to the office – *Better Yet*, elect your family, elect your friends, elect your neighbors, elect *Everyone*

- And then let's *Do This Shit* – *Together*!

James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 10:23 PM Reply to Dayne

It could have something to do with the fact that Biden is backed by every billionaire member of the Davos gang of criminals getting ready to use this event, coupled with medical martial law, to stage the "great reset" scheme. A wet dream of Malthusian eugenecists like Faucci & Gates, since it includes a drastic reduction in world population aka genocide of the elderly, vulnerable, poor and non compliant. This Globalist Technocracy will be led by un-elected bankers and corporate CEO's effectively ending any form of Democracy planet wide. MSM mockingbirds are completing the programming of the public to make Casey's statement to Reagan ring true" We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is wrong."

janmarsh , Jan 10, 2021 8:16 PM

Insurrection Act signing brought forward.
Scroll down to 10th. January update:
https://www.simonparkes.org/

Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 3:31 PM Reply to janmarsh

Ow look Simon one trick pony parkes been laughed at and ridiculed and busted for his many many many many lies and it happening you watch just donate psyop
gets excepted into the Q nonsense and trump Savior psyop and became s one of there leaders!!!

doesn't anyone go back 5 years and do basic check on thsoes they watch and then make idols of them.

fools follow fools

Mike , Jan 10, 2021 8:15 PM

Trump was never going to be Ameica's hero. He was played to depict America as a fascist, racist, neo-nazi country that needs to be saved by the Left aka Joe Biden/Kamala Harris. The Left can now "save us all" from the "damage" caused by the MAGA movement and Trump. They can do this through heavily increased mass surveillance and what is essentially imprisonment, to make sure that we don't fall victim to the "domestic terrorism" that is represented by Trump and his fan base.

David Meredith , Jan 10, 2021 9:10 PM Reply to Mike

saved by the left? The left has been selling out the US to the globalist agenda for the last 20 years (in power or out). Trump is not finished restoring America to a country that doesn't sell out to China.

S Cooper , Jan 10, 2021 9:32 PM Reply to David Meredith

"Left-Center-Right" seems that paradigm is a tad askew. It is more like a top to bottom pyramid [scheme/racket]. The CORPORATE FASCIST OLIGARCH MOBSTER PSYCHOPATH SLAVE MASTERS sitting on their gold platinum thrones at the very top of the tower/pyramid and all their prole slave victims, WE THE PEOPLE (HUMANITY) in the mud at the base. The PSYCHOS will say or do anything to get the prole slaves at each others throats. IF WE ARE FIGHTING AMONG OURSELVES WE ARE NOT FIGHTING THEM."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/rsL6mKxtOlQ?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent&listType=playlist&list=FLnnoDlrP9jUXGwJPoM_f7sg

https://www.tumblr.com/search/v%20debs

Mike , Jan 10, 2021 11:12 PM Reply to David Meredith

Well, being saved by the left was a sarcastic comment. And Trump is clearly done with "restoring America" because it was never his to restore, let alone him conceding to the left after the Capitol "riots".

falcemartello , Jan 11, 2021 3:53 AM Reply to David Meredith

@ David
The left is as left as my right GONAD

Martin Usher , Jan 10, 2021 10:12 PM Reply to Mike

Biden/Harris "the left"? Surely you're joking? These two are conservatives, in another timeline they'd be Republicans. What they have going for them is they, like many Americans, believe in the Constitution of the United States, about what the country is and what its trying to acheve. It strives to build "a more perfect union".

This the fundamenal error many people made about the Deep State. I've no doubt that there's a fom of Deep State out there, an ingrained conservative streak in the bureaucracy, because there is in all bureaucracies. But the real Deep State is all of us, its every last person who believes in the system, in the American form of democracy and the principles upon which the nation was founded. There are innumerable personal interpretations of exactly what this means but the sum total is the United States.

Trump, MAGA and the modern GoP represent 'capture', the idea that the capture of the state can be turned to personal profit. In doing so Trump and his enablers degraded the notion of what the US is and why it exists. This is what's caused the backlash, its not 'the left' or 'socialism'.

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:54 PM Reply to Martin Usher

"Biden/Harris "the left"? Surely you're joking?"

- The proverbial 'Overton Window' has, at this point, collapsed to a quantum singularity, about a nothingth of a planck length wide

- Prepare for *Teh Great Suck*!

Peanut butter wolf , Jan 10, 2021 8:11 PM

You seriously think Trump was genuinly elected? All the points you make show obviously he was a puppet and psy-op of the deepstate from the very beginning.
The deepstate won because they never had an enemy, they created him from the start, with or without him knowing we dont know, but anyone on that level is on a need to know basis anyway. It's clear that his every move is steered with the goal to bring down rogue antiestablishment sentiments.

And it worked very well. Radical left antiestablishment is suddenly prodemocrats and radical right antiestablishment is totally disillusioned and just became domestic terrorists.

David Meredith , Jan 10, 2021 9:12 PM Reply to Peanut butter wolf

you spelled Biden incorrectly on your fourth word in.

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 10:57 PM Reply to Peanut butter wolf

- *Divide and Conquer* Churn, same as it ever was

BTW, My condolences for MF Doom

Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 3:07 PM Reply to Sgt Oddball

ironic dont you think a artist MF Doom who is known for wearing a mask gets sacrifices sorry dies on the usual astro constellation
zzzzzzzz

Thom1111 , Jan 11, 2021 3:15 PM Reply to Peanut butter wolf

Trump wasn't supposed to win in 2016. The deep state probably wanted liberal Jeb Bush or Rubio or Cruz in there. Trump destroyed all the competition in the GOP primaries. Remember, Trump wasn't picked by the deep state to be their guy. He financed his own campaign. He was a major burr in their saddle. The Trump phenomenon is real and he proved it with a landslide victory that was stolen.

Martin Usher , Jan 12, 2021 6:16 PM Reply to Thom1111

What 'landslide'? The numbers tell a very different story. Trump should have won a second term but he didn't because of two things, one being the grass roots efforts of Democrats to motivate voter groups despite systematic road blocks being placed in those groups' path and the other -- a important one -- being that there's quite a lot of life long Republicans out there that cannot stand Trump.

Trumpism is like a cult in many ways. One feature is that those who 'believe' find it difficult to come to grips with the fact that they might hold a minority view. They're used to being embattled, that's a signature feature of such groups (they're always fighting for something against an implacable enemy, preferably an unseen one) but its just inconceivable that they're really a fringe group. The events of last Wednesday have probably done more to promote Democrat candidates than anything else this cycle; fortunately for the most part the election was over so all they lost were the two Senate seats.

PS -- May I draw your attention to an old Beatles song -- "Revolution"? (I'd also suggest an even old song "Trouble Coming" from the Mothers of Invention.)

Voz 0db , Jan 10, 2021 7:58 PM

Under the CURRENT MAIN SYSTEM – The Monetary System – there is no "drain the swamp"!

James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 10:29 PM Reply to Voz 0db

Then you're going to love the technocrats "social credits" scheme such as China currently imposes on it's population.

Voz 0db , Jan 11, 2021 10:43 AM Reply to James Meeks

China developed that system with the HELP of the Western Corporations, so that in a near future the tech will be deployed in the western Plantations. OPERATION COVIDIUS is just the 1st of many operations that will create the FEAR & PANIC conditions among the herds of modern western moron slaves, that will make it really easy for THEM to deploy that tech.

Why do you think China was the chosen one to practice a "city lockdown" during EVENT 201 planning?

Why do you think China was on the news of western countries while they were executing the lockdown and then no more China news?

China is also under the Shadow of the SRF & Billionaires at least for now. The only thing China is trying to achieve is to shift the POWER of the SRF into Chinese Families, nothing more.

maxine , Jan 10, 2021 7:48 PM

What has Off-G come to? .One must be truly mad to imagine that D. tHRUMP
"SINCERELY" thought ANYTHING EVER, let alone "changing the way America is run" .He's incapable of comprehending what the word "SINCERITY" means .Sorry the author has lost his hero.

wardropper , Jan 10, 2021 8:24 PM Reply to maxine

OffG publishes articles and anybody who wants to can comment on them.

It does not push, or imagine, any group philosophy other than to support us all in a deep distrust of what the mainstream media ram down our throats every day, and to give us space to express our personal disgust in our own way.

We are not going to imagine what you would like us to imagine merely on your say-so either, although you are quite free to tell us what your personal recommendations are.

OffG has never been pro-Trump, and we are all aware that the alternative is far from being any better.

Perhaps you would like to tell us what is really bugging you, given that you have never been under any pressure even to show up here At the very least, you could stay on topic:
So, what about the swamp, and who you think is most likely to succeed in draining it ?

Carol Jones , Jan 10, 2021 8:53 PM Reply to wardropper

Hear Hear!

Gezzah Potts , Jan 10, 2021 10:26 PM Reply to wardropper

Spot on W👍

YouTube_censors_unfortuna , Jan 10, 2021 7:40 PM

Trump's racist fan base supported America's bogus War of Terrorism against blameless Muslim countries, did they not? What goes around, comes around.

James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 10:40 PM Reply to YouTube_censors_unfortuna

I think you are getting fan bases mixed up. Trump inherited these conflicts from Bush, Iraq 2002 invasion & Obama's 2015 invasion of Syria and it was Trump that threatened to end the propping up of the endless war industry. In fact that played the major role in why Trump had to be removed at all costs including selling treason and vote rigging as Democracy to be defended against "domestic terrorists".

YouTube_censors_unfortuna , Jan 11, 2021 9:45 AM Reply to James Meeks

Did America's white patriots oppose the demonisation of Muslims as being terrorists who did 9/11 or did they participate in this US government fiction?

Thom1111 , Jan 11, 2021 3:17 PM Reply to YouTube_censors_unfortuna

No, at least half of the patriots are and were aware that 9/11 was an inside job.

Geoffrey Skoll , Jan 10, 2021 7:25 PM

Right! The Donald was too weak and too stupid. A smarter president got shot for his troubles, but the rulers knew they didn't have to resort to that against the Donald. He was obsessed with his mirror. All those meeting between Ike and JFK, what do you think they were talking about?

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 11:01 PM Reply to Geoffrey Skoll

- Please also note the *Extreme* copypasta, every other sentence, in the article – Who *Actually Is* this guy?

DM: , Jan 11, 2021 12:22 AM Reply to Sgt Oddball

A fifty-center.

Lisa , Jan 10, 2021 7:09 PM

Fuck Trump and his knuckle dragging moron supporters. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_P-0I6sAck

Mr Y , Jan 10, 2021 7:21 PM Reply to Lisa

Now tell us what *you* like.

David Meredith , Jan 10, 2021 9:14 PM Reply to Lisa

hey, my knuckles don't drag – how dare you suggest such a thing.

James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 10:44 PM Reply to Lisa

Sounds like you came to Off Guardian thinking it was the Guardian and expected to find a group of like minded consumers of security state propaganda in a Trump bashing fest.

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 11:02 PM Reply to Lisa

"Oook, Oook, Oook!!! "

*Flings Monkey-Poop *

sue , Jan 10, 2021 6:55 PM

A premature judgement. Time will tell.

MANUEL , Jan 10, 2021 6:55 PM

Do u relly guys think Trump was a hope for all pf us? I am still amazed that people(including off-guard) still thinks in terms of left vs right, good vs bad, and all that narrative. I am afraid that nnarrativ has never been true. It is part of the game of "the matrix" to keep us entertained in shows programmed for tth masses, division, polarizaiomn, saviours and "heros". In my opinion it is time for a deep shift. Continuing to hope that some guy will save us all, it is just seeing a tree but not being able to see the woods. While some keep waiting for somebody to save us, they are moving forward with their plans really fast. But no problem guys. Sooner or later the rrality will knock on you door, and you will have to decide if you are going to be a slave or a free human. And it will be all about what you decide. No american hero or any messiah will do it for you.

Sophie - Admin1 , Jan 10, 2021 9:50 PM Reply to MANUEL

We have warned against accepting the Left/Right paradigm many times. This is NOT an editorial and therefore is not 'the voice of OffG'.

Some visitors here need to up their sophistication level to the point they understand we publish a SPECTRUM of dissident opinion that we consider merits discussion or a wider audience, without necessarily agreeing with all of it.

Sgt Oddball , Jan 10, 2021 11:15 PM Reply to Sophie - Admin1

"Some visitors here need to up their sophistication level to the point they understand we publish a SPECTRUM of dissident opinion "

- Yep, well that's as may be, but Andrew Korybko's position is *Lame As All Hell* – Every establishment talking point *Covered* – just from the 'Contrarian' side

- Trump was an 'Outsider' who 'Became' an 'Insider'?! – Aww Puh-lease! – He was a *Stalking Horse

- "He didn't have the *'Strength'* to 'Drain The Swamp'(tm)"??!?! – *No-One* *Indivudal* in all Creation could've

- Do you think we're *Children*?!

Asylum , Jan 11, 2021 3:26 PM Reply to Sgt Oddball

been on this site a whole while now not seen any articles discussing trump failures

James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 11:06 PM Reply to MANUEL

We are all aware that we are the playthings of the rich and powerful but all you're doing is stating what most of us already know. What is your solution? So tell us please what you are doing to that makes you feel free and not a slave? Are you living off the grid? Not using currency? What is it you're doing that makes you different from those of us you claim are not facing reality? I think many people, myself included, who have no love for Trump see that he is being denounced by every billionaire member of the Davos gang of criminals as a threat to world order and the economy while they shut down the planet with medical martial law and create an authoritarian Globalist Technocratic dictatorship ending Democracies worldwide and targeting "domestic terrorists" who oppose them.

George Mc , Jan 10, 2021 6:35 PM

The steps on how to destroy all of the services, public and private though focussing on the NHS:

Seize on a moderate flu variant. Build it up to be the blackest death since the black death. Seize on all the old people who die anyway and claim their numbers as an indication of the carnage. For anyone still hesitant, introduce hypocritical emotional blackmail about "the most vulnerable" in our society to shame everyone into the game On the basis of those appropriated death figures, endlessly circulate fear porn – enhanced by the fact that the symptoms of this apocalyptic virus are indistinguishable from the regular flu or even the common cold. Get everyone to steer clear of everyone else. Close down all "inessential" work plus communal gathering places to ensure everyone is isolated before the droning monolithic message you are pumping out. Introduce even more draconian measures for anyone who "has" the bug – effectively barring them even (especially) from care work. Prioritise the new bug cases so that they have access to hospital facilities – while anyone with other (real) illnesses are barred to "protect" them! This fills up the hospitals with hypochondriacs with the common cold. Introduce the notion that some may carry the bug without symptoms. Introduce a new test which can determine who has the symptomless bug. On the basis of those magical symptomless bug test kits, bar the essential workers from supporting the vulnerable – in order to "protect the vulnerable"! Constantly report on how the NHS is collapsing – which it is, being filled up with folks with the cold and turning everyone else away, and also being deprived of essential workers who tested positive for the symptomless bug. Just stand back and watch it all collapse whilst continuing to report on it with increasing horror!

George Mc , Jan 10, 2021 6:41 PM Reply to George Mc

PS the list is not exhaustive. I didn't even touch on the phony Left/Right divide.

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL , Jan 10, 2021 7:18 PM Reply to George Mc

EXCERPTS FROM THE AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORTS INTO COVID-19 AND CARE HOMES.

A must read.

The Department of Health and Social Care . adopted a policy, that led to 25,000 patients, including those (known to be) infected (with Covid-19, and also those who were) possibly infected with Covid-19 (but) had not been tested, being discharged from hospital into care homes between 17 March and 15 April -- exponentially increasing the risk of transmission to the very population most at risk of severe illness and death from the disease. (This, while being denied) access to testing, (being denied) personal protective equipment, (while having) insufficient staff, and limited (and confusing) guidance.

(As expected) care homes were overwhelmed.

http://www.preearth.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=1184

James Meeks , Jan 10, 2021 11:10 PM Reply to AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Amnesty International is US State Department Propaganda Amnesty run by US State Department representatives, funded by convicted financial criminals, and threatens real human rights advocacy worldwide.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/amnesty-international-is-us-state-department-propaganda/32444

DM: , Jan 11, 2021 12:30 AM Reply to George Mc

Who the hell down-voted this. I want a name, address, and employment details.

Teresa , Jan 10, 2021 6:27 PM

No, the entire "game" hasn't played out yet. Hold back on your final conclusions for now. Watchful waiting at the moment.

Moneycircus , Jan 10, 2021 6:21 PM

Computah sez. I mean computer is science, right? And you gotta trust the science Just Google it, OK?

So, AI sez BABY FILTER!

https://www.youtube.com/embed/qUm2KWPmnHg?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

George Mc , Jan 10, 2021 6:04 PM

The tackiest of plays unfolding with the most tedious predictability: "And the NHS can't take much more as .."

Yes yes yes – as if we didn't fucking know!

YOU MEAN TO DESTROY THE NHS AND YOU WILL REPEAT THIS OVER AND OVER AND OVER UNTIL IT IS DONE!

[Jan 20, 2021] The USA has been an Empire since the Mexican War when it annexed California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Since WWII a World Empire and after the fall of the USSR, a Hegemon

Notable quotes:
"... The existential contradictions of a multi-polar world, climate change and internal unrest are unresolvable by neoliberals and neoconservatives (they are the cause). Both political parties in the USA have gone crazy because they can't deal with it. The chickens have come home to roost. ..."
Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

VietnamVet , Jan 20 2021 3:34 utc | 82

The USA has been an Empire since the Mexican War when it annexed California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and Utah. Since WWII a World Empire and after the fall of the USSR, a Hegemon. Basically since 1990 the top 10% of Americans became a global protection racket, resource extractor and human exploiter.

The existential contradictions of a multi-polar world, climate change and internal unrest are unresolvable by neoliberals and neoconservatives (they are the cause). Both political parties in the USA have gone crazy because they can't deal with it. The chickens have come home to roost.

The Biden/Harris Administration will fail. They cannot hold the North American USA Empire together; let alone, subjugate Russia, China or Iran. The Pandemic is unlikely to be controlled by vaccines by themselves, the virus is endemic in the Americas and is mutating.

Joe Biden will not provide healthcare for all or a functional national public health service needed to control coronavirus. The pandemic debacle, slow vaccine distribution, the storming of the Capitol are not solely Donald Trump's fault, they are systemic and can only be addressed by restoring government by and for the people.

To avoid this, the Elite will force Americans into lockdowns, get tens of trillions of dollars direct deposited, and Russia will be blamed for everything.

The US postal service can't deliver the mail. The Google Map of DC is a sea of red closures. The US government has fallen and all the king's men cannot put it back together again.

[Jan 20, 2021] Biden is an attempt to put the mask back on the monster so that the woke, "resistance" crowd will continue to not care about the unabated slaughter abroad

Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

William Gruff , Jan 20 2021 21:14 utc | 77

Too many people letting their wishful thinking override their wisdom, just like when Obama was enthroned. I will admit that I was fooled back in 2008 as well, thinking "This time things are finally different!" , though in my defense I will say that the "Reality Distortion Field" built around BHO by the mass media was far more believable than the one they have scraped together for Biden.

Biden being installed will thus buy the empire a "grace period" in which other countries (EU mostly) will happily buy into America's next war effort. As with the post-Bushlette era decorated with the Obama figurehead, the empire will take advantage of this "grace period" to escalate its violence.

After all, that is why they want someone like Biden in the White House in the first place. If the imperial establishment were at all interested in global de-escalation then they would have gone forward with it when Trump demanded troops out instead of playing shell games to keep the empire's wars on a low boil. Trump's belligerent noise-making made it impossible for the empire to escalate its wars. The empire needs someone who is willing to put a nice "progressive" spin on mass murder in order to get buy-in for a renewed round of slaughter.

The empire will not waste this opportunity. They have been waiting four years for it. There will be more war.

_K_C_ , Jan 20 2021 21:26 utc | 84

Posted by: William Gruff | Jan 20 2021 21:14 utc | 77

Agree with most of this as well as your other post earlier in the thread.

Biden is an attempt to put the mask back on the monster so that the woke, "resistance" crowd will continue to not care about the unabated slaughter abroad. I mean, when you really look at it, they (and the corporate mainstream "liberal" media) rarely criticized Trump's foreign policy and often cheered it, albeit without ever openly praising him, per se. We saw the occasional article about the ethnic cleansing in Yemen that Trump greatly aided and abetted, but everyone including the NYT was completely behind his war on Venezuela and attempt to create war with Iran. The media got a bit up in arms when Kashoggi was murdered - because of course he was then a journalist - but even that died down quite quickly while Trump continued feting the Israelis and Saudis.

The coming hot wars will be fought with all of the record breaking arms that Trump sold in the Middle East and Southeast Asia.

All of that having been said, I'll repeat a point I've made since we started talking about the election: Trump didn't "start any new wars" because there wasn't much left to do after Obama and Bush set the world on fire and the Iranians (and Venezuelans) showed restraint when attacked - both physically and economically. Trump and his Zionist handlers would have loved it if the USA had ended up in a war with either of those countries and I have no doubt that if he was elected to a 2nd term, we'd have seen one or both transpire. With Biden, same thing as the first thing about Trump - There isn't much left to destroy that the USA could actually get away with and I suspect he will continue the existing wars for however long he (or Kopmala) is in office.

[Jan 20, 2021] The differences between the two monopoly parties in the USA are entirely domestic and are nothing but the size of the crumbs given to the people who think they are free

Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

gottlieb , Jan 20 2021 20:09 utc | 59

It's an Empire with a revolving-door Emperor called a President or Prime Minister. The facts are fixed around the policy. We're obviously headed back toward a more 'can't we all get along' empire, after four years of a guy who thought he was an actual emperor, instead of a bobble-head. The differences between the two monopoly parties in the USA are entirely domestic and are nothing but the size of the crumbs given to the people who think they are free.

[Jan 20, 2021] IMO Biden will do as he is told. His white house chief of staff is a powerful and skilled player and is quite experienced in working with Biden. Joe could well be diverted to give solid focus on the home front while the rats he has appointed continue their global piracy and belligerence. I figure that is why they ran the old fool.

Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Jan 20 2021 21:39 utc | 93

james #64

bottom line kadath.. the usa will be an ongoing slavish servant to israel.. that much is clear as day... which way it goes - syria or iran - none of the saber rattling will stop.. israel doesn't want it to stop! neither does the american duopoly! the people might, but they don't get a say and generally are not interested in foreign policy..

IMO Biden will do as he is told. His white house chief of staff is a powerful and skilled player and is quite experienced in working with Biden. Joe could well be diverted to give solid focus on the home front while the rats he has appointed continue their global piracy and belligerence. I figure that is why they ran the old fool.

Four days ago Ron Klain released his memo explaining immediate actions.

On January 21, the president-elect will sign a number of executive actions to move aggressively to change the course of the COVID-19 crisis and safely re-open schools and businesses, including by taking action to mitigate spread through expanding testing, protecting workers, and establishing clear public health standards.

On January 22, the president-elect will direct his Cabinet agencies to take immediate action to deliver economic relief to working families bearing the brunt of this crisis.

Between January 25 and February 1, the president-elect will sign additional executive actions, memoranda and Cabinet directives. The president-elect will fulfill his promises to strengthen Buy American provisions so the future of America is made in America. He will take significant early actions to advance equity and support communities of color and other underserved communities. He will take action to begin fulfilling campaign promises related to reforming our criminal justice system. The president-elect will sign additional executive actions to address the climate crisis with the urgency the science demands and ensure that science guides the administration's decision making. President-elect Biden will take first steps to expand access to health care – including for low-income women and women of color. He will fulfill his promises to restore dignity to our immigration system and our border policies, and start the difficult but critical work of reuniting families separated at the border. And, President-elect Biden will demonstrate that America is back and take action to restore America's place in the world.

As noted above, this list is not comprehensive. More items and more details will be forthcoming in the days ahead.

Time will tell how the other appointees in the administration align with Klain and the extent of the savage power struggle that is soon to manifest.

[Jan 20, 2021] Biden Administration's 'New' Foreign Policy Is The 'More Of The Same' Old One

Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Jan 20 2021 14:03 utc | 10

The USA is now the proverbial Whale in a Swimming Pool: it is big, powerful and impressive - but can't hide its moves anymore and has little to none margin for any maneuver.

The American Center-wing is ossifying, or, in Cold Warrior terminology (Arthur Schlesinger Jr.), is losing its "vitality". It is entering a stage where it must "burn the village in order to save it".

mrm , Jan 20 2021 14:11 utc | 11

... it seems the answer is that Germany plays the role in Europe that the US plays in the world and both are satisfied with that role even though neo-liberalism, austerity and war-mongering are leading us to inhumanity and disaster.
Lucci , Jan 20 2021 14:18 utc | 13
Like i said before elsewhere Biden would capitalize on what Trump has put forth and take the infamy and blame for instead of moving in the opposite directions of whatever Trump criticized for in foreign policy. That means be it trade war with China, renege on climate deals, strong arming NATO and EU countries, or giving everything Israel wants nothing stop Biden from maintaining what has been put in place.
At most they'll just make excuse on why they had to maintain the policies they themselves criticized Trump for without changing direction.
Norwegian , Jan 20 2021 14:43 utc | 15
There will be absolutely no change in policy towards Israel

That is obviously correct: Joe Biden: "I Am A Zionist. You Don't Have To A Jew To Be A Zionist" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uo-UXZ-1ups

Zanon , Jan 20 2021 14:44 utc | 16
Extreme leftist madness goes on: Washington Post : Blacklist Fox News 'as We Do with Foreign Terrorist Groups' https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2021/01/18/wapo-pushes-to-bar-fox-news-as-we-do-with-foreign-terrorist-groups/
Norwegian , Jan 20 2021 14:45 utc | 17
He said Joe Biden's strong conviction was that the Nord Stream 2 pipeline is a "bad idea" and that the administration would use "every persuasive tool" to convince partners, including Germany, to discard the project.
That is pretty much a declaration of war against countries in Europe. Stay away,
vk , Jan 20 2021 14:50 utc | 18
America's disarray is its own woes, not other countries' opportunity The Financial Times lives in a world where the USA doesn't have more than 2,000 operational nukes, doesn't control the financial system (SWIFT), doesn't issue the universal fiat currency (Dollar Standard), doesn't have a big fucking navy, doesn't enjoy absolute ideological hegemony etc. etc.

Trump's 4-year effort to contain China was unwise, unrealistic: Global Times editorial Well, that's what happens when you hire a right-wing ideologue as your main advisor (Steve Bannon): you do policy based on a delirious utopia and get smacked by reality.

pnyx , Jan 20 2021 15:07 utc | 19
...Tronald's foreign policy has been a disaster, even if he has supposedly not sparked a new war. Let's not talk about all the secret operations, multiplied drone attacks, state terrorist assassinations, etc. And the new administration is now continuing this...
bevin , Jan 20 2021 15:07 utc | 20
"How exactly are they "ossifying"?" Jackrabbit@14

They've stopped thinking, become utterly predictable.

They just go through the motions. They know that they can't win-achieve their long held objectives-but they can't stop repeating themselves, including their past errors. They are not allowed to. The US ruling caste-servants of the ruling class- are only allowed to operate within very narrow boundaries. They aren't allowed to take radical measures when faced with new crises- they are confined within ever diminishing political circles. The duopoly has become an obvious One Party system. And its politics are those of the Gilded Age-150 years old and still going strong.

The only solution to America's problems is defeat so complete that it cannot be denied even by the least perceptive. Anyone with money to spare should be buying popcorn futures.

Eighthman , Jan 20 2021 15:08 utc | 21
...Biden is an elderly figurehead. Trump's mistake was being openly bullying and vulgar instead of underhanded. Already, the EU ( as cowardly vassals ) are falling into line on Iran and Russia.
Larry Paul Johnson , Jan 20 2021 15:11 utc | 22
...Paul Craig Roberts is correct. There has not been a regime change, there has been a revolution and treating policies of this "president" as if he is more than a figurehead being run by oligarchs is foolish in the extreme.
Jackrabbit , Jan 20 2021 15:39 utc | 24
bevin @Jan20 15:07 #20
They've stopped thinking, become utterly predictable.

One could say this about the American people who have been herded into two camps so that the Center can rule. Here's an example: One of Biden's first executive actions is to include undocumented residents in the Census. This will please the Left immensely and outrage the Right. But the Census is conducted every 10 years and it was completed in 2020. So Biden's action is actually meaningless. How many people will actual notice this? Very few.

dh , Jan 20 2021 16:04 utc | 25
@24 Some people in Central America have noticed.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/honduran-migrants-us-guatemala-crackdown-1.5877244

William Gruff , Jan 20 2021 16:16 utc | 26
It is funny/sad to see the Post Trump Stress Disorder victims are already rationalizing and making excuses for the war that the establishment drones they voted for will be starting, and those drones are not even sworn in to office yet. They know that they voted for war yet their plastic, Hollywood "identities" are so intertwined with their assumed self-evident moral superiority that they are compelled to defend the evil they are responsible for even before it is committed. For them, doing nothing crudely is far worse than murdering millions accompanied by lofty and emotive platitudes.
AntiSpin , Jan 20 2021 16:49 utc | 27
Joe Biden's Cabinet Is on Loan From Corporate America An interview with David Dayen 12/8/20 https://www.jacobinmag.com/2020/12/david-dayen-american-prospect-joe-biden-cabinet

Beware of the Hawk: What to Expect from the Biden Administration on Foreign Policy
https://covertactionmagazine.com/2020/11/08/beware-of-the-hawk-what-to-expect-from-the-biden-administration-on-foreign-policy/

Biden Administration Betrayals of Working Americans
By Leonard C. Goodman
https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/democrats-and-ruling-by-fear/Content?oid=85065430 -

Why They're Denying You Healthcare And Financial Support During A Pandemic
by Caitlin Johnstone
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/12/20/why-theyre-denying-you-healthcare-and-financial-support-during-a-pandemic/

Biden Goes To Bat For BlackRock, Stays Vague On Direct Aid To Struggling Americans
https://www.dailyposter.com/p/biden-goes-to-bat-for-blackrock-stays

Biden and the Democrats Could Change Everything. But They Won't Try
by Ted Rall | January 7, 2021
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/ted-rall/94642/biden-and-the-democrats-could-change-everything-but-they-won-t-try

The Biden Democrats Already Show They Learned Little from Trump's Loss
by Richard Wolff | December 24, 2020
https://www.alternet.org/2020/12/biden-democrats/

Biden's Foreign Policy History and What it Portends for his Presidency
By Jeremy Kuzmarov January 11, 2021
https://covertactionmagazine.com/2021/01/11/exclusive-series-bidens-foreign-policy-history-and-what-it-portends-for-his-presidency/

Biden's Transition Team is Filled With War Profiteers, Beltway Chickenhawks, and Corporate Consultants
by Kevin Gosztola 11/14/20
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/11/14/bidens-transition-team-war-profiteers-chickenhawks-corporate-consultants/

Biden's Pentagon Transition Team Members Funded by the Arms Industry
by Dave DeCamp – 11/11/2020
https://news.antiwar.com/2020/11/11/bidens-pentagon-transition-team-members-funded-by-the-arms-industry/

Biden's Victory Does Not Guarantee a Progressive Agenda. We Must Fight for It.
by Marjorie Cohn 11-23-20
https://truthout.org/articles/bidens-victory-does-not-guarantee-a-progressive-agenda-we-must-fight-for-it/

Meet the Filthy Rich War Hawks That Make up Biden's New Foreign Policy Team
"I expect the prevailing direction of U.S. foreign policy over these last decades to continue: more lawless bombing and killing multiple countries under the cover of "limited engagement," – Biden Biographer Branko Marcetic
by Alan Macleod November 13th, 2020
https://www.mintpressnews.com/filthy-rich-war-hawks-make-joe-biden-foreign-policy-team/273039/

More Humane Cages? Prospects for Immigration Justice Under Biden Appear Dim
by Adrienne Pine | November 18, 2020
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/adrienne-pine/93930/more-humane-cages-prospects-for-immigration-justice-under-biden-appear-dim

Neera Tanden – Reduce US Deficits by Raiding the Economies of Countries We Have Destroyed:
Neera Tanden, Biden's Pick for Budget Office: Now Is Not the Time To 'Worry About Raising Deficits and Debt'
by Robby Soave
https://reason.com/2020/11/30/neera-tanden-biden-omb-debt-deficit/
She once suggested that if Americans care about the deficit so much, maybe we should make Libya pay for it.
| 11/30/2020
( Ariana Ruiz/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom )

Neera Tanden and Antony Blinken Personify the 'Moderate' Rot at the Top of the Democratic Party
by Norman Solomon 12/29/20
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/norman-solomon/94514/neera-tanden-and-antony-blinken-personify-the-moderate-rot-at-the-top-of-the-democratic-party

Obama & the Democrats Sending Mixed Messages about the Catfood Commission
By Carl Bloice 10-14-12
https://www.laprogressive.com/catfood-commission/

Progressives Made Trump's Defeat Possible -- Now It's Time to Challenge Biden and Other Corporate Democrats
by Norman Soloman 11/7/20
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/norman-solomon/93753/progressives-made-trumps-defeat-possible-now-its-time-to-challenge-biden-and-other-corporate-democra

Someone Should Ask Ursula Burns If She Supports Child Labor in Africa
by Thomas Neuburger | 12/30/20
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/thomas-neuburger/94527/someone-should-ask-ursula-burns-if-she-supports-child-labor-in-africa

The Dark Past of Biden's Nominee for National Intelligence Director
by John Kiriakou 12/31/20
https://consortiumnews.com/2020/12/29/john-kiriakou-the-dark-past-of-bidens-nominee-for-national-intelligence-director/

The REAL Joe Biden
"The Chinese Uyghur Dark Legend and Washington's Campaign to Counter Chinese Economic Rivalry"
by Stephen Gowans 10/25/20
https://gowans.blog/2020/10/25/the-chinese-uyghur-dark-legend-and-washingtons-campaign-to-counter-chinese-economic-rivalry/

Top 10 Reasons to Reject Blinken
by David Swanson
https://davidswanson.org/top-10-reasons-to-reject-blinken/

Who Is Michèle Flournoy, Biden's Rumored Pick for Pentagon Chief
by Thomas Neuberger 11/11/20
https://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2020/11/who-is-michele-flournoy-bidens-rumored.html

Why Biden Will Keep the U.S.-Imposed Cold War Rolling
by Vijay Prashad| 11/19/20
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/vijay-prashad/93949/why-biden-will-keep-the-u-s-imposed-cold-war-rolling

Why Progressives Should Care About Biden's Pick for Commerce Secretary
by Zena Wolf 1/7/21
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/zena-wolf/94644/why-progressives-should-care-about-bidens-pick-for-commerce-secretary

Why Senators Must Reject Avril Haines for Intelligence
by Medea Benjamin | 12/30/20
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/medea-benjamin/94528/why-senators-must-reject-avril-haines-for-intelligence

Will the Senate Confirm Coup Plotter Victoria Nuland?
by Medea Benjamin 1/15/21
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/medea-benjamin/94817/will-the-senate-confirm-coup-plotter-victoria-nuland

No, Joe, Don't Roll out the Red Carpet for Torture Enablers
by Medea Benjamin and Marcy Winograd 12/22/20
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/medea-benjamin/94425/no-joe-don-t-roll-out-the-red-carpet-for-torture-enablers#comment

Norwegian , Jan 20 2021 16:55 utc | 28
'This Is What 80 Million Votes Looks Like': Biden Inauguration EMPTY (PICS)
Down South , Jan 20 2021 17:05 utc | 29
Zanon @ 16

I'm not surprised. You only have to watch this segment from Tucker Carlson to understand why. https://youtu.be/M0l7xH5zbIg

Paul , Jan 20 2021 17:06 utc | 30
Trump ripped the mask off US foreign policy and exposed it for what it is - ugly Zionism and outrageous Jewish supremacy. Trump did many foreign policy changes previous incumbents and their handlers wanted to do but were constrained by the optics and international opinion.

I agree the Biden administration will continue the same tired old foreign policy, only with the mask back on. Of course the media won't notice the similarities, but the public will. No matter how fervently the managers tinker with the edges it is events that drive changes and change people.

lex talionis , Jan 20 2021 17:08 utc | 31
Blue is the new red! All hail the Bidet administration! Dermocracy (депмократия) dies in the dark!
juliania , Jan 20 2021 17:32 utc | 32
I just listened to President Biden's speech. It was a good one, even a great one. Thinking about what Plato means by the 'noble lie' it was a noble speech, and there wasn't much of a lie about it.

I just wish he were a younger man.

psychohistorian , Jan 20 2021 17:33 utc | 33
b finished the posting with
"
While Trump had continued the wars the U.S. waged when he came into office he did not start any new ones. Since Joe Biden first entered the Senate 47 years ago he has cheered on every war the U.S. has since waged. It would be astonishing to find four years from now that he did not start any new ones.
"

Prepare to be astonished. Biden isn't going to start any new wars for the same reason that Trump didn't......MAD

Humanity has been in the MAD phase of the civilization war we are in since the Obama era push back in Syria.

Biden's chest beating will not be as "impressive" as Trump's but the trajectory is the same.

karlof1 , Jan 20 2021 17:34 utc | 34
The new chief says to tighten the circle of wagons, but those accused of besieging the Outlaw US Empire's wagon train stopped attacking and moved on long ago. Meanwhile, supplying the wagon train continues to take resources away from dealing with very real domestic problems. The upshot is China will continue to pull away and increase its lead geoeconomically, and together with Russia will continue to solidify and strengthen the Eurasian Bloc. Very soon, the EU is going to be faced with a very stark choice--to join the Eurasian Bloc and thus stave-off economic atrophy or continue to allow its brand of Neoliberal Parasites to eat and risk rupture, perhaps not in 2021 but before 2030.

The key is that the false narrative that was initiated in 1945 and bolstered in 1979 continues to be treated as gospel despite its path to certain ruin. I noted there were no questions asked about the international call for a Bretton Woods 2.0 that would end dollar hegemony and Petrodollar recycling, while removing the one source of coercion behind its illegal sanctions.

The only possible target of opportunity I see is Venezuela as the frack-patch is about to fold-up shop and fuel prices cause domestic inflation to soar -- Here in Oregon, gas prices have gone up 50cents/gal since the first of the year--25%. The oil being the obvious target now the the lower-48 has definitely peaked.

Lucci , Jan 20 2021 17:38 utc | 35
@Jackrabit 24

|One could say this about the American people who have been herded into two camps so that the Center can rule.|

There's no center or centrist in USA there's only elite capitalist oligarchs who is neocons through and through at the core.

james , Jan 20 2021 17:40 utc | 36
@ 32 juliania... you are the eternal optimist! there is something admirable about that!.. however you have to contend with a lot of cynical people who think like it's business as well, as b's post notes..... you might not like to hear this, but nothing is going to change under biden... big wheels set in motion and biden is not interested in the least in changing any of it... neither was trump as some of his fanbots are coming to see too... political speeches are just so much b.s... juliania - as the saying goes, talk is cheap, it is actions that count.... watch peoples actions, not their talk... biden can talk a good line, but that has nothing to do with his actions... top of the day to you!
dh , Jan 20 2021 17:42 utc | 37
@34 Invading Venezuela and 'taking the oil' won't be easy though there is a possibility Colombia will help out. Which means the total disruption of South America. More economical to just buy the stuff.
Per/Norway , Jan 20 2021 18:00 utc | 38
"It is funny/sad to see the Post Trump Stress Disorder victims are already rationalizing and making excuses for the war that the establishment drones they voted for will be starting, and those drones are not even sworn in to office yet. They know that they voted for war yet their plastic, Hollywood "identities" are so intertwined with their assumed self-evident moral superiority that they are compelled to defend the evil they are responsible for even before it is committed. For them, doing nothing crudely is far worse than murdering millions accompanied by lofty and emotive platitudes."

Posted by: William Gruff | Jan 20 2021 16:16 utc | 26

Tnx for expressing this in a much nicer and polite way then i would have written. And yes, yes it is sad/amusing to watch NPC`s turn into pretzels to explain away their cognitive dissonans ,utter foolishness and stupidity.

dh , Jan 20 2021 18:03 utc | 39
@37 On the subject of gas prices perhaps it might be a bad time to cut off Canadian supply?

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/keystone-xl-may-sold-scrap-203840567.html

[Jan 20, 2021] Biden will technically be President , so it's time to ask ourselves what kind of world are we in for?

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... If not for the "new normal" we 100% would guarantee a new war – or a restarted old war – within a year. As it stands, we're only 60% sure they'll be some kind of military intervention sometime soon (Venezuela wouldn't be a surprise). ..."
"... The real crackdowns are going to be domestic. There is a huge push to take "domestic terrorism" seriously , and that will go hand-in-hand with increased purges of social media (again with "Russian disinformation" playing a major role). ..."
"... I wonder if the military occupation was designed to disguise the total lack of support, given the evidence of election fraud. You couldn't get more emptiness and virtual absence of reality if the military conducted the installation in a bunker in the dying days of the Reich. ..."
"... Another poster said it looked like a junta in a minor banana dictatorship. Spot on. It was a military installation visually and in a political sense for there were no people. ..."
Jan 20, 2021 | off-guardian.org

This particular inauguration is going to look a lot different from all the others – the twin bogus narratives of coronavirus and the "attempted coup" on January 6th have forced, FORCED, capitol city into an almost Martial Law-like standing.

A heavy troop presence as your leader is sworn in is one of the hallmarks of legitimacy, you understand. And not even slightly a sign of power being seized illegitimately.

That said, Biden will technically be "President", so it's time to ask ourselves – what kind of world are we in for?

For one thing, it's possible they are preparing to sideline the covid "pandemic" narrative , as the mayor of Chicago and governor of New York have both said that lockdowns need to end, and a report has been published saying lockdowns don't work.

Internationally it's likely to be business as usual. If you look at his cabinet choices, from Victoria Nuland to Samantha power , we have a LOT of warmongers who bleat about America's "responsibility to protect". While politicians and pundits are already rebuking Trump & Johnson for failing in US/UK's "moral leadership" of the world, or praising Biden for his plans to "counter Russian disinformation".

If not for the "new normal" we 100% would guarantee a new war – or a restarted old war – within a year. As it stands, we're only 60% sure they'll be some kind of military intervention sometime soon (Venezuela wouldn't be a surprise).

The real crackdowns are going to be domestic. There is a huge push to take "domestic terrorism" seriously , and that will go hand-in-hand with increased purges of social media (again with "Russian disinformation" playing a major role).

The big question is whether the inauguration will go off smoothly, or they'll try another manufactured incident to sell that agenda.

How do you think President Creepy Uncle Joe is going to shape our world? How long before, for whatever reason, Kamala Harris replaces him? Will the pandemic be "solved"? Will we have a new war? Discuss below.

Jan 21, 2021 2:24 AM

Washington DC was empty except for the troops. Windblown streets. Jason Goodman did his walkabout could not even get a distant view of the Capitol. It's as if no one voted for Biden: no supporters even tried to attend the inauguration. You would have expected someone a few diehards who hadn't heard about the military occupation.

I wonder if the military occupation was designed to disguise the total lack of support, given the evidence of election fraud. You couldn't get more emptiness and virtual absence of reality if the military conducted the installation in a bunker in the dying days of the Reich.

Another poster said it looked like a junta in a minor banana dictatorship. Spot on. It was a military installation visually and in a political sense for there were no people.

An inauguration of the leader of a nation cannot be legitimate if the people play no part .

Celebrities cheered with exaggerated leering grins and lockjaw, tongues lolling in a vain caricature of support from the class of paid actors.

The term 'State Actor' has a new meaning today. The Corporatist Media could not recognise its own banality. This was like the USSR Actors' Union huddling and fawning around Secretary General Brezhnev as the Soviet Union teetered to collapse.

Social cretinism is the best one can say about this sorry debacle but I fear it is something much, much worse.

Crowdsource the Truth 2

https://www.youtube.com/embed/jowNNrASaFQ?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent 1 0

Disillusioned Peasant , Jan 21, 2021 2:38 AM Reply to theobalt

Agreed, Trump was used as a puppet to shame anybody who questions the narrative or resists the deep state. He was asked to be a cartoon, a ridiculous exaggeration of a "traditionalist" or "nationalist" to forever tarnish that stance. He was basically the Alex Jones president .the ultimate controlled opposition. A clown.

I'm so embarrassed I fell for it in 2016. Of COURSE he was phony. Jan 21, 2021 1:39 AM

The snake as a new head. It's still the same snake. It still crawls on it's belly and it still spits the same lies on behalf of the masters who stand behind the curtain. We could still hear Bush Sr when Clinton spoke ; We could still hear Bush Jr when Obama spoke. Red and Blue are the same colour.

It was refreshing in parts to have an American president who didn't try to contrive a narrative that would justify invading another country or contrive yet another cell of 'radicalised' terrorists. No explosions on home soil intended to be taken as an attack from foreign soil. Nothing in four years.

It was all the more surprising as many believed that Trump was and is a great real estate dealer and TV celebrity who has manufactured his charisma from arrogance and ignorance. He has never been celebrated for much beyond his business acumen in the real estate area and TV. This wasn't exactly an erudite man. Former presidents of different ages were and were capable of putting it on paper in their memoirs. Trump was the sign of the times ; a Twitter president. His reign was punctuated by the occasional flexing of Uncle Sam's muscles with threats and a go -ahead-punk-make-our-day approach to public speaking. Yet still no threats of war. This was an odd four years. That odd = peace says more about the US than Trump though. So, what was his role ?

In 2001 we had the Twin Towers. The most dramatic mass murder and the destruction of the laws of Physics and Logic all in one day. Soon after we had the destruction of personal freedom and the creation of domestic terror. It had been suggested by Philip Zelikow three years earlier that a 'searing event such as a terror attack' would be a useful and effective tool in transforming the future by breaking away from the past in no uncertain terms. It would be the event that nobody dare question, and that would be perfect for creating a real fear within the people of the west that such a disaster could occur any time without warning. All they needed was the right salesman to address us.

And so the Patriot Act was born. The surveillance of everyone in their streets, in other towns and their homes was pushed through as a public health measure and a matter of national security. If you protested you were a ' 9 /11 denier' and 'unpatriotic'. If we went too long without evidence of this terror then somewhere would be bombed and the bomber would be 'neutralised' before we would ever learn who was behind it. It took time to become a 'new normal' but it became the 'new normal'. Complain- you were a 'dangerous' conspiracy theorist; in some states it was considered grounds to label you under the mental health act. Just for asking questions. This was how to protect democracy- by tyranny.

So, two decades on we were ready and primed.

Gates and his cohort billionaire 'philanderers' had been beavering away for decades creating more subtle forms of terror. No bangs; no smoke; no mess. These 'missiles' were microbes and the control groups had been observed closely. From mice, to bats to black people to gay people. Once the results /data became big enough numbers, the bomb factory went to work behind the closed doors of 'Cancer Research ' facilities.

We all know now about the hypothetical exercises 'imagined' by the Gates 'Good Club' ; nightmares of being unprepared etc. They penned in 2030 as target date for the endgame. . A date that will have seen the human race enslaved or culled by their terrorism.

Liability would have been taken off the table, giving them free reign. All involved sank their pennies into the manufacturing of these little bombs. And all Academic Institutions, MSM platforms, and pharmaceutical industries were funded by Gates and Co. Then Monsanto and it's subsidiaries were purchased the same way, and the same immunity from prosecution granted from the damaging synthetic /poison crops and food.

So, 2020, was Trump's last stand. He had his '9 /11'. He had domestic bio terrorists. Then the rest of the world had it. We had the same threats to national security and the same 'need' for a new version of a Dystopian Patriot Act.

This wasn't about ISIS or Al -Qaeda and their radicalised lunatics. Trump had found a new group of Bogeymen. China. He would have sounded a bit paranoid if Russia was blamed for something again. Besides, everyone knows that all SARS- type or flu-like viruses are made in China quicker and cheaper. And the US should know that by looking in their many, many stockpiles in their own Biological War labs they pretend are trying to cure cancer.

Trump decided to refer to the Covid 19 virus as 'The Chinese disease '. Fang Ling Fauci had told him to on behalf of Wong Sing Gates.

He went on to call himself a 'war time president' ( there you go- he got one).

He invoked the Defence Production Act, an old Cold War law which allows the Executive Branch to control and redirect the production and distribution of scarce materials deemed "essential to the national defense. " In an executive order dated March 18th, 2020.

To add another layer to the movie the troops were brought in and all medics were now 'heroes on the front line'.

The script went global. It began in the country that Gates had composed such a hypothetical scenario- America. Hence the 'Chinese Disease'. It was the new war on terror minus the James Bond bad guy Bin Laden.

So Trump ushered it in right on time. It didn't win the election( we were told). Instead, it won it for Obama's man, Biden.

Biden and Obama were the most vehement advocates of Monsanto, Sterilisation, and Social Technology ( eugenics ; social cleansing). Obama was made a very wealthy man for his services to the Gates agenda, pharma and GM / Frankenfood. He was surprisingly racist as well as elitist. Tom Vilsack was their frontman. Biden has already called him out of retirement.

So, given the 'war-on-(bio)-terror ' that was born in the USA and sold worldwide, there was no place for Trump. His job was to let the the 'enemy' in, warn us of the possible 'war ahead' and leave it to Gates. But Trump seemed to have spotted that and didn't seem too keen on the narrative. So, come on down Barack O Biden. The timing's right.. Jan 20, 2021 11:40 PM Reply to Ben

Do not be bamboozled, in SHAM DEMOCRACY USA there is only one party, THE REPUBLICRATS (the WAR RACKETEER CORPORATE FASCIST political racket so corrupt it needs two aliases).

"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."

~ Frederick Douglas, 1857

Schmitz Katze , Jan 20, 2021 10:44 PM

„That said, Biden will technically be "President", so it's time to ask ourselves – what kind of world are we in for? –
The real crackdowns are going to be domestic.-
Will the pandemic be "solved"? „

It will only be solved when people have had enough of it. The deep state got rid of Trump (for the timebeing-) under the guise of a pandemic. For them and their minions in MSM, government and academia it´s a gift that keeps on giving, with never ending corona mutation fearporn.
It´s totalitarianism, it´s dystopia under under the guise of – domestic-safety.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4hBCBdutUE

[Jan 20, 2021] Pompeo's twitter has become full of China hysterics

Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Norwegian , Jan 18 2021 11:12 utc | 78

@Passer by | Jan 18 2021 1:26 utc | 52

Pompeo's twitter has become full of China hysterics. A snake becomes crazy when it is wounded and nears its demise.

What POMPEO Does After TRUMP Administration https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv-DG8l_wqU

[Jan 20, 2021] One area Biden's team will be challenged is in defending the use of Depleted Uranium munitions as the Serbian legal assault vs NATO begins and as Outlaw US Empire Stormtroopers try to get their own compensation for exposure to various toxins.

Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Jan 20 2021 20:20 utc | 62

One area Biden's team will be challenged is in defending the use of Depleted Uranium munitions as the Serbian legal assault vs NATO begins and as Outlaw US Empire Stormtroopers try to get their own compensation for exposure to various toxins. Both efforts will hopefully aid other nations in their quest to hold the Outlaw US Empire accountable for the crimes it committed against many millions of innocents. One outcome is already certain: Opposition to those millions seeking justice will serve to further degrade the international standing of the Outlaw US Empire and make it harder for vassals to justify their adherence to such a monster.

[Jan 20, 2021] The USA doesn't pay for oil or gas. It takes over the mining company, demands the project be funded by local or national borrowing from USA banks with sovereign guarantees, sells the product to a separate US company that pays peanuts to the miner and then onsells for a major markup (transfer pricing). Its called modern day stealing of other countries resources.

Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Jan 20 2021 21:02 utc | 70

dh #45

@42 I'm sure Maduro would take dollars.....or gold. Of course buying Venezuelan oil from an evil brutal socialist dictator would be a major climb down.

The USA doesn't pay for oil or gas. It takes over the mining company, demands the project be funded by local or national borrowing from USA banks with sovereign guarantees, sells the product to a separate US company that pays peanuts to the miner and then onsells for a major markup (transfer pricing). Its called modern day stealing of other countries resources.

Look at the report on keystone that you cited at #39 where

The Canadian province that invested $1.1 billion of taxpayers' money in the controversial Keystone XL project is now considering the sale of pipe and materials to try to recoup some funds.

"If the project ends, there would be assets that could be sold, such as enormous quantities of pipe," Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said in a press conference Monday.

Meanwhile the directors and shareholders got their fat checks and dividends from the municipal loan funds ;)

The USA will not pay in gold until it is on its knees - it simply will not pay. See how the USA 'bought' Tik Tok: blatant extortion/theft. The same as was done to Japan's high tech in the 60's 70's or whenever. Thieves.

[Jan 20, 2021] After looting the xUSSR space there are no countries left to be looted by the US where to recoup Pentogon costs. In this sense the decline of the empire is inevitable

Jan 20, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

passerby , Jan 20 2021 21:03 utc | 71

In the end, it's all about money. And the US has an army that costs more than can be plundered from the countries it occupies.
The US military costs about a trillion every year. There are no countries left to be conquered by the US where that kind of treasure can be looted.

[Jan 19, 2021] The Two Faces of Empire Consortiumnews

Notable quotes:
"... CaitlinJohnstone.com ..."
"... The New York Times ..."
"... This article was re-published with permission. ..."
"... The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News. ..."
Jan 19, 2021 | consortiumnews.com

By Caitlin Johnstone
CaitlinJohnstone.com

T he Biden/Harris inauguration event is going to be a star-studded celebration spanning an unprecedented five days, a giddy orgy of excitement at a murderous oligarchic empire having a new face behind the front desk after promising wealthy donors that nothing will fundamentally change .

This comes at a time when Americans are now reporting that they trust corporations more than they trust their own government or media, when pundits are gleefully proclaiming in The New York Times that "CEOs have become the fourth branch of government" as they pressure the entire political system to smoothly install Biden, when the leading contender for the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division is an Obama holdover who went from the administration to working for both Amazon and Google, and when Americans are being paced into accepting an increasing amount of authoritarian changes for their own good.

And this manic celebration and increasing brazenness of corporate power are of course overlaid atop an unceasing river of human blood as the globe-spanning empire continues to smash any nation which disobeys it into compliance so as to ensure lasting uncontested planetary hegemony.

But hey, at least they voted out fascism.

... ... ...

Caitlin Johnstone is a rogue journalist, poet, and utopia prepper who publishes regularly at Medium . Her work is entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking her on Facebook , following her antics on Twitter , checking out her podcast on either Youtube , soundcloud , Apple podcasts or Spotify , following her on Steemit , throwing some money into her tip jar on Patreon or Paypal , purchasing some of her sweet merchandise , buying her books Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

This article was re-published with permission.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

DH Fabian , January 18, 2021 at 12:03

Yes, nervous middle classers pray Joe Biden will be their salvation. The rest of us know why "business as usual" will continue. The only real difference between Biden and Trump is that Biden is more likely to start a catastrophic war (as his record clearly indicates).

Jeff Harrison , January 17, 2021 at 23:17

Good points. Since Americans don't see any consequence to their government's outrageous behavior, everything's outstanding (there are real benefits to those two oceans)! And it will remain outstanding until someone shoves our bad behavior in our faces (which could really happen. The Russians and Chinese are arming themselves to defend themselves from the US. That's a lot cheaper than having to support a major offensive capability) or our brokeness blows our economy to hell. You might want to read up on what happened to Sparta ..

[Jan 19, 2021] Neoliberal Democrats are part of the problem not the part of the solution

Jan 19, 2021 | twitter.com

No, I am not excited for the inauguration of a man who: Wrote the crime and bankruptcy bills, voted for the Iraq War, took more money from Wall Street than Trump, and told a room of rich donors that "nothing will fundamentally change." Democrats are part of the problem too.

[Jan 19, 2021] I am especially proud to be the first president in decades who has started no new wars

Jan 19, 2021 | www.rt.com

banallwars 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 04:32 PM

What a lie. The bombs being dropped from the U.S. made jets the Saudi pilots fly over Yemen killing civilians leaves blood all over his hands not to mention shaking the hand of the Saudi that murdered a journalist before selling him weapons to kill Yemen's civilians.
Waryaa Moxamad 48 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 05:36 PM
1) False flag chemical attack on Syria. 2) killing Soleimani in a sovereign country he was invited to 3) Guaido 4) Bolivia. 5) continuing the wars predecessors started.

Who is being fooled that U.S. presidency has any say in America's imperialism?

Debra***** Waryaa Moxamad 40 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 05:46 PM
Who really pushed for General Soleimani to be killed and has the most personal and intense vendetta against Soleimani? Mike Pompeo. Trump did not give the Pentagon and CIA all the wars they wanted, especially in Syria. Now the Pentagon and the CIA have their puppet, Corrupt Biden, who will do what they command him to do. I would expect in one year to see another massive war. Where? Syria. The US mothers will cry when their sons come home in coffins. The Hez in Lebanon will not back down, and they will enter Syria again. Trump did not want young American boys coming back in coffins!!!!!!!

[Jan 19, 2021] Few sights in Washington are more familiar than an intellectual urging "total war" from the safety of the keyboard

Highly recommended!
In a way neocon jingoism serve as a smoke scree to sitrct "depolables" from the decline of the standard of living under neoliberalism.
Jan 19, 2021 | www.nybooks.com

Orthodoxy of the Elites - by Jackson Lears - The New York Review of Books

By 2016 the concept of "liberal democracy," once bright with promise, had dulled into a neoliberal politics that was neither liberal nor democratic. The Democratic Party's turn toward market-driven policies, the bipartisan dismantling of the public sphere, the inflight marriage of Wall Street and Silicon Valley in the cockpit of globalization -- these interventions constituted the long con of neoliberal governance, which enriched a small minority of Americans while ravaging most of the rest.

Jackson Lears is Board of Governors Distinguished Professor of History at Rutgers, Editor in Chief of Raritan, and the author of ­Rebirth of a Nation: The Making of Modern America, 1877–1920, among other books. (January 2021)

[Jan 19, 2021] Biden's Nominee for CIA Director by John Kiriakou

Jan 19, 2021 | consortiumnews.com

January 11, 2021 Save

If there must be a CIA, I feel better with Bill Burns being in charge of it.

William Burns in 2014 as U.S. deputy secretary of state. (State Department)

By John Kiriakou
Special to Consortium News

P resident-elect Joe Biden has finally named a new CIA director, one of the final senior-level appointees for his new administration. Much to the surprise of many of us who follow these things, he named senior diplomat Williams Burns to the position. Burns is one of the most highly-respected senior U.S. diplomats of the past three decades. He has ably served presidents of both parties and is known as both a reformer and as a supporter of human rights.

Burns is currently the president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, an important Washington-based international affairs think tank. He served as deputy secretary of state under President Barack Obama and was ambassador to Russia under President George W. Bush and ambassador to Jordan under President Bill Clinton. He was instrumental in the negotiations that led to the Iran Nuclear Deal and spent much of his career focused on the Middle East Peace Process. Burns joined the Foreign Service in 1982.

Please Contribute to Consortium
News ' Winter Fund Drive

When he made the announcement of Burns' appointment, Biden said,

"Bill Burns is an exemplary diplomat with decades of experience on the word stage keeping our people and our country safe and secure. He shares my profound belief that intelligence must be apolitical and that the dedicated intelligence professionals serving our nation deserve our gratitude and respect. The American people will sleep soundly with him as our next CIA Director."

The message from Biden is clear: The CIA will not be led by a political hack like Mike Pompeo, a CIA insider like John Brennan, or someone associated with the CIA's crimes of torture, secret prisons, or international renditions like Gina Haspel. Instead, the organization will be led by someone with experience engaging across a negotiating table with America's enemies, someone experienced in solving problems, rather than creating new ones, someone who has dedicated much of his career to promoting peace, rather than to creating war.

Rank & File Response

The question, though, is what will be the response from the CIA's rank-and-file to Burns' appointment? I can tell you from my 15 years of experience at the CIA that there will be two reactions. At the working level, analysts, operators, and others will continue their same level of work no matter who the director is. Most working level officers don't even care who the director is. It doesn't matter to them. They never encounter the director and policies made at that top level generally don't impact them on a day-to-day basis.

At the senior levels, the leadership levels, CIA officers will be of two minds. Some will welcome Burns and his professionalism. They'll welcome a director who doesn't attract adverse press because of a past history of committing war crimes or crimes against humanity. (Even if they supported those crimes when they were being committed, press attention is always unwelcome.) They'll welcome a director who didn't head secret prisons overseas. They'll welcome a director who wasn't in charge of Guantanamo. They'll welcome a director who wasn't in charge of maintaining a secret "kill list."

Others will resent Burns, though, as they resented an earlier outsider, Admiral Stansfield Turner. Turner had been appointed by President Jimmy Carter to "clean up" the CIA. Turner then fired fully a third of the CIA's operations officers, some just months away from qualifying for retirement. He was universally reviled after that, and he never regained the trust of agency personnel.

That's not Burns' style. He's not a military officer who demands fealty. He's a diplomat, a negotiator. The CIA has to be cleaned up. Its policies have to be reformed. If there must be a CIA, I feel better with Bill Burns being in charge of it. At the very least, we should give him enough time to at least get started.

John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism officer and a former senior investigator with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John became the sixth whistleblower indicted by the Obama administration under the Espionage Act -- a law designed to punish spies. He served 23 months in prison as a result of his attempts to oppose the Bush administration's torture program.

bobLich , January 12, 2021 at 09:29

Some paragraphs found in this article.

hXXps://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/01/12/brns-j12.html?pk_campaign=newsletter&pk_kwd=wsws

As a top-level State Department official through the administrations of Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama, Burns is implicated in virtually every crime of US imperialism over the past three decades, including the war in Iraq, the US-NATO attack on Libya, the military coup that drowned the Egyptian Revolution in blood, and the US intervention in Syria.

After such a career, as the saying goes, Burns knows where all the bodies are buried. Now he is assigned to head an agency that is probably responsible for more killing, torture and mass suffering than any other on the planet: the CIA.

A preview of what to expect from a Burns-led CIA was given during an interview with National Public Radio's Mary Louise Kelly on "US Global Leadership" held June 19, 2019 at the Truman Center for National Policy in Washington, DC. In the extended conversation, Burns defended the US and NATO-led coup in Libya which ended with the grisly murder of Muammar Gaddafi, followed by an ongoing civil war, the torture and killing of refugees and the return of slave-markets.

"It was right to act in Libya in the way that we did," Burns said. While the US government might have "got some assumptions wrong," he expressed no regrets, saying that he still thought Obama's "decision to act was unavoidable."

Anne , January 12, 2021 at 14:15

I would agree with your estimation some one, anyone who can think, believe, say etc that what we did in Iraq, Libya (I don't doubt Serbia), Syria is "rightful" has a heinously distorted mind (pretty much everyone in DC, in the MICIMATT) And Biden has revealed himself – again – as a subject of the corporate-capitalist-imperialist plutocratic ruling elites (and one with his hand forever stuck out)

Mikhail , January 12, 2021 at 22:31

In addition:

see: rt.com/usa/512136-biden-cia-director-william-burns-russia/

Scott Ritter and Melvin Goodman seem to agree with John:

See: rt.com/op-ed/512276-biden-burns-cia-chief/

See: counterpunch.org/2021/01/12/burns-at-the-cia/

[Jan 19, 2021] Galloway- Looking forward to Joe Biden's first 100 days, it's impossible to believe he'll actually be in charge by George Galloway

Jan 19, 2021 | www.rt.com

George Galloway George Galloway

was a member of the British Parliament for nearly 30 years. He presents TV and radio shows (including on RT). He is a film-maker, writer and a renowned orator. Follow him on Twitter @georgegalloway

19 Jan, 2021 18:23 It's hard not to wonder if Joe Biden will even last his first 100 days in office... but those arguing his mind isn't sound enough shouldn't expect a swift exit, because since when was that a disqualifier?

... ... ...

The madness of Donald Trump had nothing on his Republican predecessor and fellow-impeachee Richard Nixon. So disturbing were the last days of Tricky Dicky, it came as a relief to America and the world when he resigned – even though it was famously said his successor Gerald Ford couldn't chew gum and walk in a straight line at the same time. Bovine he may have been, but a mad-cow he wasn't.

The Raging Bull Donald J Trump – grotesque, bizarre, unbelievable – had the misfortune to go quite mad in the age of cable news and social media. His narcissistic predilections always bordered on personality disorder. But his natural braggadocio stormed him to victory in 2016 in a backlash against the super-smooth professorial presidency of Barack Obama, with Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton riding shotgun.

Under Obama, the Clintonite deindustrialisation of America became almost complete . China was presented with America's lunch. And in no less than nine conflicts across the globe Obama was 'nation-building' in other people's countries while his own country was falling apart. But a dark storm was gathering

If only the Democrats had not started out by trying to steal Trump's election in a flurry of pussy-hats and fake Russiagate hoaxes. If only they hadn't striven might and main to railroad the Electoral College into betraying their mandate and – in the case of Nancy Pelosi – make a thinly disguised call for "uprisings throughout the country." If only they hadn't spent countless millions and two whole years of a four year-term with the Mueller Inquiry and the cockamaney theorem that the man who confronted Russia from Ukraine and the Baltics through the wrecked INF and Open Skies treaties to the killing fields of the Levant was, in fact, an agent of Vladimir Putin. If only, if only

ALSO ON RT.COM President Biden now you've got rid of that ghastly Mr Trump, it's time the US and UK rekindled our 'special relationship'

As it happened, the descent into madness of Trump was complete by the end. The coronavirus he derided at first, before predicting it would disappear in the warm weather of spring, before pondering whether bleach up the bahookie might not be an option as a cure. The Tammany Hall skullduggery of election day, practiced over a century in places like New York, rolled out across the country. The political suicide of only half-making a revolution on January 6 dug his own grave. Nobody ever beat a candidate who polled over 75 million votes before. But Sleepy Joe Biden did.

And he did it hardly ever leaving his basement home studio, where he painfully struggled to read an autocue even with an earpiece shrieking the words to him. When he did speak, it was often gibberish that would have made Ronald Reagan blush. He oftentimes plainly didn't know where he was, what office he was running for, which woman was his sister and which was his wife.

When Boris Yeltsin was rattling down, the world endlessly amused itself at the sight of Russia on its back, legs akimbo with thieves picking its pocket. With Joe Biden, though, the political class and its media echo-chamber merely look the other way.

Despite Democratic Party control of all levels of Federal power, it seems unlikely we are about to witness an FDR or a JFK barnstorming 100 days. It seems fair to wonder if Sleepy Joe will even see out a hundred days in office. It is, however, certain that if he is in office he will not be in power. Because power has already passed to the cavernous uncertainty of Vice President Kamala Harris.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Mark Conley 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:44 PM

Thanks for reminding the world that the president of the USA including his puppet elected office bearers has absolutely no power whatsoever. Well said. Thus you have answered your own observation at the end. The future is indeed dark and uncertain with the only certainty that nothing good can be expected from any USA government. Thus the onus is on the peaceful majority to do what is necessary.
Atilla863 42 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:15 PM
One thing is certain in the new leadership - the debt will go on growing, perhaps reaching 40+ T dollars before the next elections. While this trend continues - the Chinese will be laughing all the way running to their banks as their economy records fortune after fortune proportional only inversely to the rate at which America recedes into superpower sunset.
JJ_Rousseau 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:18 PM
I'm surprised at George Galloway's comments, as he is a former MP in British politics. Kamala in charge? Don't make me laugh. The cabal is in charge, as they have been since Woodrow Wilson. Before actually, as Garfield was assassinated for shedding light on the banker machinations. Garfield knew that control of the nation's money was control of the nation. The coup of America is complete. The POTUS is only the spokesman for the cabal, nothing else
5th Eye 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:08 PM
An election stolen is a stolen election.
KarlthePoet 5th Eye 13 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:43 PM
Biden will be much easier to control and manipulate by the Jewish Banking Cartel, which ultimately controls the US government and Wall Street. Trump was too unpredictable and would have made it difficult for them to achieve their historical hope. "The Jews energetically reject the idea of fusion with other nationalities and cling firmly to their historical hope of World Empire." - Dr. Max Mandelstamm ***We should always listen to the doctors.
Skeptic076 5th Eye 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:13 PM
Not stolen.....50 states certified, 60 plus courts found nothing fraudulent, and the electoral votes were confirmed by the House and Senate, with the Senate led by Pence. So, as the world knows and anyone who knows election laws, the election was one of the most legitimate ever held in the US.
KarlthePoet 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:10 PM
The Jewish Banking Cartel is ultimately in control of the US government and Wall Street. They've been in control for decades. Now they've obviously teamed up with the Jewish Big Tech companies like Facebook and Google in order to gain even more control. Controlling the money, money system, and the minds of the masses has been their goal. Two Jewish controlled companies control over $9Trillion of American's wealth. (BlackRock Inc. & Goldman Sachs) They've finally achieved their goal. The cartel is now in control of a country that is completely out of control. Karma!
Daffyduck011 KarlthePoet 38 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:18 PM
Ashkenasty banking cartel.
JJ_Rousseau KarlthePoet 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:29 PM
It's not only the banking cabal, it's the media (which the same gang own, of course). This cannot happen without a complicit media. This is a very old strategy
Blackace180 7 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:49 PM
He'll be impeached multiple times, along with his family. Removed and jailed. People need a reminder of just how messed up Obama/Biden was and it is coming. The caravans are already on the way and gas has jumped 55 cents a gallon since the election, for no reason other than it is Biden. People will run the nutcracker right out of office, hopefully before the country collapses from his nutcracker policies.
White Elk 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:45 PM
The press-elected.
Xilla White Elk 33 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:23 PM
How did the press elect him?
Franc 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:28 PM
Xilla/Herrbifi, you're not welcome here. We all know what your goals are, and we all know you're just here to make a pointless mess.
5th Eye 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:18 PM
An Italian bureaucrat once said, "Everything is changed, so that it remains the same." It will be exactly like that under Biden to legitimate his regime.
The_Chosenites 51 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:06 PM
Since both Trump and Biden are proud zionists, the only thing I am certain of is Israel and the Jewish community have won another election and we'll see many jewish politicians elevated to positions of power in the Biden administration. Biden best do what's best for Israel if he knows whats good for him and his health.
KarlthePoet The_Chosenites 16 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:40 PM
Maybe when Kamala becomes President she can get advice from her Jewish husband, who is a lawyer. What a coincidence.
Enki14 9 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:48 PM
That Henry Kissinger, long time shadow government puppet endorsed demented biden is a clue as to what might happen as they know in 2 years the masses will reinstate conservatives and in 4 years another trumpster. We may see sweeping changes, with some huge blowback.
The_Chosenites Enki14 4 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:53 PM
Kissinger has had a bed in the oval office for many a President, he must have been installed by the Chosennites to stay in office forever. Presidents come and go, but Kissinger remains to pull the strings. Goldman Sach's et al rule the roost.
Daniel Fernald 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:42 PM
Biden's 100 days are interesting. It's exactly 100 days from January 20 to May 1, which is the communist May Day.
Skeptic076 Daniel Fernald 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:44 PM
Used to be the American May Day as well, you know? Interesting if you research why it is not anymore.
Michael Knight 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:46 PM
Impossible to believe he'll be in charge????? That's probably because he won't be!

RCBreakenridge Mike Freeman 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:28 PM
Mike, seriously? What echo chamber are you living in? How can you look at Biden and not understand that he's little more than a life-size cardboard cutout of the man that used to be Obama's puppet? He'll be in office as long as they can continue to stand him up for photo ops and he continues to do exactly what he is told. As soon as either of those conditions falter, Nancy and friends will roll out the 25th amendment, show him the door and lead KH to the presidents chair. But make no mistake, the only choices Sleepy Joe will be making are to do as he is told.

[Jan 19, 2021] Trump was a desperate "Murica must have the biggest dick" imperialist massively triggered by the US decline and trying to save the US Empire. Like a rabid dog that is wounded, he attacked anything that moves, including those who helped him get into power.

Jan 19, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Passer by , Jan 19 2021 21:57 utc | 36

Posted by: teri | Jan 19 2021 21:31 utc | 33

>>Today, the Trump administration filed an appeal against the UK decision not to extradite Assange. I must imagine that means that Trump has no intention of pardoning Assange.

Trump was a desperate "Murica must have the biggest dick" imperialist massively triggered by the US decline and trying to save the US Empire. Like a rabid dog that is wounded, he attacked anything that moves, including those who helped him get into power.

Anyone who thought that he will help the likes of Russia or Assange does not understand the psychology of elite US WASPs.

These people thought that they and the US should rule the world and that they are the cream of the cream. Anything denying them that would lead to crazed reactions, hysteria, rabid animalistic behavior, and snarling and gnashing of teeth at anything that moves.

Simply put, their decline caused them to go rabid. A rabid dog attacks anything that moves, whether friendly or not. Unfortunately for the likes of Russia and Assange.

[Jan 19, 2021] Which US President Was Worse -- Obama, Or Trump by Eric Zuesse

Dec 26, 2020 | www.strategic-culture.org

On December 17th, Gallup headlined "Biden Inherits a Battered U.S. Image Abroad" .

The Pew surveys have found the same thing: In almost all countries surveyed, other than Poland, public approval of America's leadership plunged when Trump replaced Obama, and that low approval stayed down throughout Trump's Presidency.

However, also on December 17th, the great investigative journalist David Sirota headlined at his "The Daily Poster" blog, "End The Austerity Loop" , and he documented that President Obama's response to George W. Bush's policies that had crashed the U.S. economy (and actually the entire world's economy) had actually been to institute a bailout of the megabanks ( "broker-dealers" ), and -- as soon as it was passed by Congress -- Obama's Administration refused to help the people who had been evicted from their homes as a result of what Wall Street had done . Obama said instead that all of the federal money had already been spent and he wouldn't authorize increasing the federal debt even more than he already had authorized in order to bail out Wall Street.

Of course, Congress was also culpable in all of these Robin-Hood-in-reverse policies ( protecting Wall Street while abandoning Main Street ), but the ultimate leadership was at the top, and it was a policy of sheer hypocrisy. Trump has merely been hypocritical in a different way, and espousing a different set of excuses for his failures.

The article in the Spring 2011 Review of Banking & Financial Law , by Tae Yeon Kim, "Pay It Back (TARP Developments)" , described the situation as follows:

The purpose of Title XIII ("Pay it Back Act") of the DoddFrank Act, according to Senator Michael Bennett, was to "rebuild the credibility of our financial system, save taxpayers billions of dollars, and finally move to end the TARP"12 by "prevent[ing] further government spending, recaptur[ing] taxpayers' investment in financial institutions, and ensur[ing] that repaid funds are used for deficit reduction."13 Under Title XIII, TARP funding authorized under the EESA was reduced from $700 billion to $475 billion.14 Also, no additional TARP funds can be spent on any program initiated after June 25, 2010; any money repaid to the TARP fund must be used for deficit reduction only.15 Title XIII amends the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. The Treasury must allocate the sale of obligations and securities, as well as fees paid by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Federal Home Loan Banks to the General Fund of the Treasury ("General Fund").16 The funds must be "dedicated for the sole purpose of deficit reduction" and "prohibited from use as an offset for other spending increases or revenue reductions."17 Similarly, TARP funds provided to a state under ARRA and rejected by the Governor or by the State legislature, or funds withdrawn or recaptured by the head of an executive agency not obligated by a State or local government, will be rescinded and deposited in the General Fund.18 Once in the General Fund, the money will be "dedicated for the sole purpose of deficit reduction" and "prohibited from use as an offset for other spending increases or revenue reductions."19 Section 1306 further provides that discretionary ARRA appropriations that have not been obligated as of December 31, 2010 shall also be rescinded and deposited in the General Fund for the sole purpose of deficit reduction.

On 18 February 2011, National Public Radio headlined "TARP Watchdog Says Foreclosure Plan Is Failing" and reported that

Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the massive federal bank bailout program, or TARP, is stepping down from his post in March. He says the Obama administration's program to prevent foreclosures is broken, and that many of the people it's supposed to be helping are now "in a far worse place than they would have been had this program not existed."

The megabanks had gotten their federal help, but foreclosures and boarded-up windows and storefronts were appearing everywhere and were lowering the surrounding property-values, so that both lower and middle-class real estate were getting progressively worse and more run-down. The TARP Bailout Program saved the megabanks but not their victims; and here is why, as explained even by a conservative, pro-corporate, source:

The Problem With the TARP Program for Homeowners

Why didn't more people take advantage of the HAMP and HARP programs? This would have pumped billions into the economy and helped millions of homeowners avoid foreclosure.

The problem was the banks. They cherry-picked applicants and refused to consider those with lower equity. Banks were too wary of risk to allow the programs to work.

These were the same banks, who just a few years before, were giving out loans to anyone because they were making money on the investments that were created from the loans.

There was no risk to the banks, as all these loans were guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac . Banks didn't want to be bothered with the paperwork involved with homeowners who had mortgage insurance .

On 25 July 2016, a mortgage-industry website headlined "Obama administration presents a look at life after HAMP" and acknowledged "that there's more work to be done." (That was putting it mildly.)

The Obama Administration did nothing whatsoever to reduce those foreclosures . In fact, there was even less prosecution of financial and other white-collar crimes than there had been under Bush .

The admirers of President Trump are equally deceived -- no less deceived than the admirers of Obama had been. Trump promised to "drain the swamp" and did none of that .

In foreign policies, Trump continued Obama's wars (including aggressive sanctions), such as against Syria, and against Russia, and against Iraq, and intensified Obama's war against China and against Iran and against Venezuela -- all of these being against countries that had never threatened to invade the U.S., and so all of them were (and are ) actually wars of aggression, not of defense.

Americans are profoundly deceived to accept such people as leaders, instead of to reject them as liars and as traitors.

Most Americans -- and many people throughout the world -- prefer one or the other of those two American Presidents on the basis only of political prejudices, but the actual differences between Obama and Trump were more stylistic than substantive .

President Trump, at the end of his Presidency, is polling, among the American public, both as one of the worst Presidents ever and as one of the best Presidents ever , and this is a reflection of the astoundingly sharp partisan divide now between Democrats and Republicans. Pathetically few Americans recognize that both of the two Parties represent only the billionaires -- not the American people . This pervasive miscomprehension, by the public, results because the billionaires control not only the Government, they also control the press -- they shape the population's perceptions, so as to make this aristocracy (America's billionaires) acceptable to the public, directing the public's rage to be against the opposite Party, instead of against the billionaires themselves , who actually control the country .

Consequently, Democratic Party voters think that that Party is their Party, and Republican Party voters think that that Party is their Party. However, in reality, both Parties are controlled by America's hundreds of billionaires -- not by the Party's voters. Obama represented the Democratic Party's billionaires, and Trump represented the Republican Party's billionaires (other than the ones who, in 2020, disliked Trump so much that they donated instead to the Biden campaign or to one of its PACs). This is a Government of the people, by the billionaires, and for the billionaires. It's no democracy , whatsoever, and the U.S. Constitution has been covered-over, by the U.S. aristocracy's Supreme Court's rulings, to become, by now, merely a parchment document, which 'means' whatever the (majority of) the U.S. aristocracy's Supreme Court say that it means. Although those jurists are paid by the public, they don't represent America's Founders, and they don't represent the American people. They represent -- and protect the interests of -- America's billionaires. They were chosen because that is what they had been doing before they had been chosen. If they hadn't been doing this, they wouldn't have been chosen. That's today's American reality.

[Jan 19, 2021] President Biden's Corruption Already Pervades His Administration -- Strategic Culture

Notable quotes:
"... "A month after the election, Biden's nominations make clear that the president-elect is most focused on trying to fulfill his ..."
"... to donors that nothing fundamentally changes. And yet, that tacit admission may have stunned those who keep hearing from liberal and progressive groups in Washington that, in fact, the left has been notching monumental victories in Biden's cabinet appointments ..."
"... What little organized left political infrastructure exists in Washington is largely valorizing or publicly defending swamp creatures who at minimum deserve a loyal opposition. The ..."
"... being done by a small handful of under-resourced groups to mount a real opposition is getting trampled by a culture of obsequiousness. This culture of acquiescence gives swamp creatures a free pass ..."
"... Despite Tanden's ..."
"... push for Social Security cuts ..."
"... , Beltway liberal groups whose mission is to defend Social Security ..."
"... . Despite Tanden having her organization ..."
"... rake in cash ..."
"... from Wall Street, Amazon, billionaires and ( ..."
"... ) foreign governments, a Ralph Nader-founded, all-purpose consumer advocacy group ..."
"... CAP as "one of our key partners in the fight to tax corporations and the rich, rein in monopoly power, tackle government corruption, and much more." Despite Tanden ..."
"... a union at CAP, ..."
"... union leaders ..."
"... in Washington lauded her. ..."
"... American Prospect ..."
"... "a President Biden would be in the business of confronting Mr. Putin for his aggressions, not embracing him. Not trashing NATO, but strengthening its deterrence, investing in new capabilities to deal with challenges in cyberspace, in outer space, under the sea, A.I., electronic warfare, and give robust security assistance to countries like Ukraine, Georgia, the Western Balkans ..."
"... "a President Putin would be in the business of confronting Mr. Biden for his aggressions (in Syria, or elsewhere), not embracing them. Not trashing the Warsaw Pact, but strengthening its deterrence, investing in new capabilities to deal with challenges in cyberspace, in outer space, under the sea, A.I., electronic warfare, and give robust security assistance to countries like Canada, Mexico, and other nations that are near the U.S. ..."
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Bernard Schwartz, ..."
"... a former Vice Chairman and top investor in Lockheed Martin ..."
"... (which is by far the largest seller to the U.S. Government, and also the largest seller to most of America's allied Governments), is one of Joe Biden's top donors. CNN headlined, on October 24th, ..."
"... "Biden allies intensify push for super PAC after lackluster fundraising quarter" ..."
"... , and reported that, "Bernard Schwartz, a private investor and donor to the former vice president's campaign, said he spoke with Biden within the last two weeks and encouraged him to do just that." It's not for nothing that throughout Biden's long Senate career, he has voted in favor of every U.S. invasion that has been placed before the U.S. Senate. ..."
Jan 19, 2021 | www.strategic-culture.org

President Biden's Corruption Already Pervades His Administration Eric Zuesse December 8, 2020 © Photo: REUTERS/Joshua Roberts

That didn't take long. He's not even in office, and he has already surrounded himself, as the incoming President, with individuals who derive their wealth from (and will be serving) America's top defense contractors and Wall Street. The likelihood that these Government officials will be biting the hands that feed them is approximately zero. Great investigative journalists have already exposed how corrupt they are. For that to be the case so early (even before taking office) is remarkable, and only a summary of those reports will be provided here, with links to them, all of which reports are themselves linking to the incriminating evidence, so that everything can easily be tracked back to the documentation by the reader here, even before there are any 'Special Prosecutors' (as if those were serving anyone other than the opposite Party's political campaigns, and, ultimately, the opposite Party's billionaires).

First up, is the independent investigative team of David Sirota and Andrew Perez. On December 4th, they bannered "The Beltway Left Is Normalizing Corruption And Corporatism" , and reported that "A month after the election, Biden's nominations make clear that the president-elect is most focused on trying to fulfill his promise to donors that nothing fundamentally changes. And yet, that tacit admission may have stunned those who keep hearing from liberal and progressive groups in Washington that, in fact, the left has been notching monumental victories in Biden's cabinet appointments ."

Liberal (that's to say Democratic Party) U.S. media hide the corruptness of Democratic politicians, and conservative (that's to say Republican Party) U.S. media hide the corruptness of Republican politicians; and, so, the public today are getting corrupt leaders whichever side they vote for. No mainstream 'news' media report what independent investigative journalists such as Sirota and Perez report. Authentically good journalists use as sources -- and link to in their articles -- neither Democratic nor Republican allegations, but instead are on the margins, outside of the major media, and so rely on whistleblowers and other trustworthy outsiders, not on people who are somebody's paid PR flacks, individuals who are being paid to deceive. As Sirota and Perez state: " What little organized left political infrastructure exists in Washington is largely valorizing or publicly defending swamp creatures who at minimum deserve a loyal opposition. The good work being done by a small handful of under-resourced groups to mount a real opposition is getting trampled by a culture of obsequiousness. This culture of acquiescence gives swamp creatures a free pass ." It's all some sort of mega-corporate propaganda -- 100% billionaire-supported on the conservative side, 100% billionaire-supported also on the liberal side, and 0% billionaire-supported for anything that is authentically progressive (not dependent, at all, upon the aristocracy).

That independent reporting team focused on Biden's having chosen an economic team which will start his Administration already offering to congressional Republicans an initial Democratic Party negotiating position that accepts Republicans' basic proposals to cut middle class Social Security and health care benefits in order for the Government to be able to continue expanding the military budgets and purchases from the billionaire-controlled firms, such as Northrop Grumman -- firms whose entire sales (or close to it) are to the U.S. Government and to the governments (U.S. 'allies') that constitute these firms' secondary markets. (In other words: those budget-cuts aren't going to be an issue between the two Parties and used by Biden's team as a bargaining chip to moderate the Republicans' position that favors more for 'defense' and less for the poor, but are actually accepted by both Parties, even before the new Administration will take office.) Obviously, anything that both sides to a negotiation accept at the very start of a negotiation will be included in the final product from that negotiation; and this means that during a Biden Presidency there will be reductions in middle-class Social security and health care benefits in order to continue, at the present level -- if not to increase yet further -- Government spending on the products and services of such firms as Lockheed Martin and the Rand Corporation (firms that control their market by controlling their Government, which is their main or entire market).

Sirota and Perez focus especially upon one example: Neera Tanden, whom Biden chose on November 30th to be the White House Budget Director, and who therefore will set the priorities which determine how much federal money the President will be trying to get the Congress to allocate to what recipients:

Despite Tanden's push for Social Security cuts , Beltway liberal groups whose mission is to defend Social Security lauded her think tank . Despite Tanden having her organization rake in cash from Wall Street, Amazon, billionaires and ( previously ) foreign governments, a Ralph Nader-founded, all-purpose consumer advocacy group praised CAP as "one of our key partners in the fight to tax corporations and the rich, rein in monopoly power, tackle government corruption, and much more." Despite Tanden busting a union at CAP, two national union leaders in Washington lauded her.

Next up: One of the rare honest non-profits in the field of journalism is the Project on Government Oversight, POGO, which refuses to accept donations from "anyone who stands to benefit financially from our work," and which states in its unique "Donation Acceptance Policy" that, "POGO reviews all contributions exceeding $100 in order to maintain this standard." In other words: they refuse to be corrupt. Virtually all public-policy or think-tank nonprofits are profoundly corrupt, but POGO is the most determined exception to that general rule.

On 20 November 2020, POGO headlined "Should Michèle Flournoy Be Secretary of Defense?" and their terrific investigative team of Winslow Wheeler and Pierre Sprey delivered a scorching portrayal of Flournoy as irredeemably corrupt -- it ought to be read by everybody. It's essential reading throughout, and its links to the evidence are to the very best sources. So, I won't summarize it, because all Americans need to know what it reports, and to be able to verify, on their own (by clicking onto any link in it that interests them), any allegation that the given reader has any question about. However, I shall point out here the sheer hypocrisy of the following which that article quotes Flournoy as asserting: "It will be imperative for the next secretary to appoint a team of senior officials who meet the following criteria: deep expertise and competence in their areas of responsibility; proven leadership in empowering teams, listening to diverse views, making tough decisions, and delivering results." (Of course, that assertion presumes the given 'expert' to be not only authentically expert but also honest and trustworthy, authentically representing the public's interest and no special interests whatsoever -- not at all corrupt -- which is certainly a false allegation in her own case.) She had urged the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and had participated in planning and overseeing both the war against Syria, and the coup that destroyed Ukraine (and none of those countries had ever invaded, or even threatened to invade, the United States); and, so, for her to brag about her "delivering results" is not merely hypocritical, it is downright evil, because she is obviously proud, there, of her vicious, outright voracious, record.

Her business-partner, Tony Blinken, has already received Biden's approval to become his Secretary of State, and the first really good investigative journalist that American Prospect magazine has had, Jonathan Guyer, headlined on November 23rd, "What You Need to Know About Tony Blinken" , and what Guyer reports is just what any well informed reader would expect to see for a business partner of Flournoy's.

Guyer's report closes by making passing reference to a CBS 'news' puff-piece for Blinken. In that CBS puff-piece , Blinken says, "a President Biden would be in the business of confronting Mr. Putin for his aggressions, not embracing him. Not trashing NATO, but strengthening its deterrence, investing in new capabilities to deal with challenges in cyberspace, in outer space, under the sea, A.I., electronic warfare, and give robust security assistance to countries like Ukraine, Georgia, the Western Balkans ." What would Americans think if Russia were to have retained its Warsaw Pact, and "a President Putin would be in the business of confronting Mr. Biden for his aggressions (in Syria, or elsewhere), not embracing them. Not trashing the Warsaw Pact, but strengthening its deterrence, investing in new capabilities to deal with challenges in cyberspace, in outer space, under the sea, A.I., electronic warfare, and give robust security assistance to countries like Canada, Mexico, and other nations that are near the U.S. "? Guyer pointedly noted that "The [CBS News] podcast was sponsored by a major weapons maker. 'At Lockheed Martin, your mission is ours,' read an announcer." Tony Blinken's mission is theirs. These people get the money both coming and going -- on both sides of the "revolving door." Today's American Government is for sale to the highest bidders, on any policy, domestic or foreign. 'Government service' is just a sabbatical to boost their value to the firms that will be paying them the vast majority of their lifetime 'earnings'. This is the reality that mainstream U.S.-and-allied 'news' media refuse to publish (or, especially , to make clear). Only an electorate which is ignorant of this reality can accept such a government.

Back on 26 January 2020, I had headlined "Joe Biden Is as Corrupt as They Come" and documented the reality of this, but America's mainstream media were hiding that fact so as to decrease the likelihood that the only Democratic Party Presidential candidate whom no billionaire supported , Bernie Sanders, might win the nomination. Perhaps now that it's too late, even those 'news' organizations (such as CNN, Fox, CBS, NBC, ABC, New York Times , Washington Post , PBS, and NPR) will start reporting the fact of Biden's corruptness. Where billionaires control all of the mainstream media, there is no democracy -- it's not even possible , in such a country

As far back as 25 October 2019, I had headlined "Biden Backer -- Former Lockheed Leader -- Convinces Joe Biden to Sell-Out" , and reported that

Bernard Schwartz, a former Vice Chairman and top investor in Lockheed Martin (which is by far the largest seller to the U.S. Government, and also the largest seller to most of America's allied Governments), is one of Joe Biden's top donors. CNN headlined, on October 24th, "Biden allies intensify push for super PAC after lackluster fundraising quarter" , and reported that, "Bernard Schwartz, a private investor and donor to the former vice president's campaign, said he spoke with Biden within the last two weeks and encouraged him to do just that." It's not for nothing that throughout Biden's long Senate career, he has voted in favor of every U.S. invasion that has been placed before the U.S. Senate.

Near the end of the Democratic Party's primaries, on 16 March 2020, CNBC headlined "Megadonors pull plug on plan for anti-Sanders super PAC as Biden racks up wins" , and reported that Bernard Schwartz had become persuaded by other billionaires that, by this time, "Biden could handle Sanders on his own." They had done their job; they would therefore control the U.S. Government regardless of which Party's nominee would head it.

Biden -- like Trump, and like Obama and Bush and Clinton before him -- doesn't represent the American people. He represents his mega-donors. And he is staffing his Administration accordingly. He repays favors: he delivers the services that they buy from him. This is today's America. And that is the way it functions.

[Jan 19, 2021] US expands sanctions against Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, targeting ships Russian firms working on vital pan-European projec

Jan 19, 2021 | www.rt.com

46 Follow RT on RT Outgoing US President Donald Trump has delivered his "parting gift" to the Moscow-led Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, with newly announced sanctions targeting a pipe-laying vessel and companies involved in the multinational project.

The specialist ship concerned, named, 'Fortuna,' and oil tanker 'Maksim Gorky', as well as two Russian firms, KVT-Rus and Rustanker, were blacklisted on Tuesday under CAATSA (Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) as part of Washington's economic war on Moscow. The same legislation had been previously used by the US to target numerous Russian officials and enterprises.

Russian energy giant Gazprom warned its investors earlier on Tuesday that Nord Stream 2 could be suspended or even canceled if more US restrictions are introduced.

ALSO ON RT.COM Gazprom warns investors that Nord Stream 2 could be canceled as Trump announces more US sanctions in 'parting gift'

However, Moscow has assured its partners that it intends to complete the project despite "harsh pressure on the part of Washington," according to Kremlin press secretary Dmitry Peskov. Reacting to the new package of sanctions on Tuesday, Peskov called them "unlawful."

Meanwhile, the EU said it is in no rush to join the Washington-led sanction war on Nord Stream 2. EU foreign affairs chief, Josep Borrell, said that the bloc is not going to resist the construction of the project.

"Because we're talking about a private project, we can't hamper the operations of those companies if the German government agrees to it," Borrell said Tuesday.

Nord Stream 2 is an offshore gas pipeline, linking Russia and Germany with aim of providing cheaper energy to Central European customers. Under the agreement between Moscow and Berlin, it was to be launched in mid-2020, but the construction has been delayed due to strong opposition from Washington.

ALSO ON RT.COM One more European firm caves to US pressure on Nord Stream 2 project – media

The US, which is hoping to sell its Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) to Europe, has hit the project with several rounds of sanctions over scarcely credible claims that it could undermine European energy security. Critics say the real intent is to force EU members to buy from American companies.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

46 Follow RT on RT Trends:

Fatback33 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:20 AM

The group that owns Washington makes the foreign policy. That policy is not for the benefit of the people.
DukeLeo Fatback33 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:06 PM
That is correct. The private banks and corporations in the US are very upset about Nord Stream - 2, as they want Europe to buy US gas at double price. Washington thus introduces additional political gangsterism in the shape of new unilateral sanctions which have no merit in international law.
noremedy 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:22 AM
Is the U.S. so stupid that they do not realize that they are isolating themselves? Russia has developed SPFS, China CIPS, together with Iran, China and Russia are further developing a payment transfer system. Once in place and functioning this system will replace the western SWIFT system for international payment transfers. It will be the death knell for the US dollar. 327 million Americans are no match for the rest of the billions of the world's population. The next decade will see the total debasement of the US monetary system and the fall from power of the decaying and crumbling in every way U.S.A.
Hanonymouse noremedy 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:37 PM
They don't care. They have the most advanced military in the world. Might makes right, even today.
Shelbouy 3 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 12:25 PM
Russia currently supplies over 50% of the natural gas consumed by The EU. Germany and Italy are the largest importers of Russian natural gas. What is the issue of sanctions stemming from and why are the Americans doing this? A no brainer question I suppose. It's to make more money than the other supplier, and exert political pressure and demand obedience from its lackey. Germany.
David R. Evans Shelbouy 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:58 PM
Russia and Iran challenge perpetual US wars for Israel's Oded Yinon Plan. Washington is Israel-controlled territory.
Jewel Gyn 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:34 AM
Sanctions work both ways. With the outgoing Trump administration desperately laying mines for Biden, we await how sleepy Joe is going to mend strayed ties with EU.
Count_Cash 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:20 AM
The US mafia state continues with the same practices. The dog is barking but the caravan is going. The counter productiveness of sanctions always shows through in the end! I am sure with active efforts of Germany and Russia against US mafia oppression that a blowback will be felt by the US over time!
Dachaguy 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:24 AM
This is an act of war against Germany. NATO should respond and act against the aggressor, America.
xyz47 Dachaguy 42 minutes ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:20 PM
NATO is run by the US...
lovethy Dachaguy 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:04 PM
NATO has no separate existence. It's the USA's arm of aggression, suppression and domination. Germany after WWII is an occupied country of USA. Thousand of armed personnel stationed in Germany enforcing that occupation.
Chaz Dadkhah 3 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 12:19 PM
Further proof that Trump is no friend of Russia and is in a rush to punish them while he still has power. If it was the swamp telling him to do that, like his supporters suggest, then they would have waited till their man Biden came in to power in less than 24 hours to do it. Wake up!
Mac Kio 3 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 12:34 PM
USA hates fair competition. USA ignores all WTO rules.
Russkiy09 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:33 PM
By whining and not completing in the face of US, Russia is losing credibility. They should not have delayed to mobilize the pipe laying vessel and other equipment for one whole year. They should have mobilized in three months and finished by now. Same happens when Jewtin does not shoot down Zio air force bombing Syria everyday. But best option should have been to tell European vassals that "if you can, take our gas. But we will charge the highest amount and sell as much as we want, exclude Russophobic Baltic countries and Poland and neo-vassal Ukraine. Pay us not in your ponzi paper money but real goods and services or precious metals or other commodities or our own currency Ruble." I so wish I could be the President of Russia. Russians deserve to be as wealthy as the Swiss or SIngapore etc., not what they are getting. Their leaders should stand up for their interest. And stop empowering the greedy merchantalist Chinese and brotherhood Erdogan.
BlackIntel 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:27 PM
America i captured by private interest; this project threatens American private companies hence the government is forced to protect capitalism. This is illegal
Ohhho 3 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 12:15 PM
That project was a mistake from the start: Russia should distance itself from the Evil empire, EU included! Stop wasting time and resources on trying to please the haters and keeping them more competitive with cheaper Russian natural gas: focus on real partners and potential allies elsewhere!
butterfly123 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 01:58 PM
I have said it before that part of the problem is at the door of the policy-makers and politicians in Russia. Pipeline project didn't spring up in the minds of politicians in Russia one morning, presumably. There should have been foresight, detailed planning, and opportunity creation for firms in Russia to acquire the skill-set and resources to advance this project. Not doing so has come to bite Russia hard and painful. Lessons learnt I hope Mr President!
jakro 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:37 AM
Good news. The swamp is getting deeper and bigger.
hermaflorissen 4 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 11:49 AM
Trump finally severed my expectations for the past 4 years. He should indeed perish.
ariadnatheo 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 03:06 PM
That is one Trump measure that will not be overturned by the Senile One. They will need to amplify the RussiaRussiaRussia barking and scratching to divert attention from their dealings with China
Neville52 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:01 PM
Its time the other nations of the world turned their backs on the US. Its too risky if you are an international corporation to suddenly have large portions of your income cancelled due to some crazy politician in the US
5th Eye 2 hours ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:03 PM
From empire to the collapse of empire, US follows UK to the letters. Soon it will be irrelevant. The only thing that remains for UK is the language. Probably hotdog for the US.
VonnDuff1 1 hour ago 19 Jan, 2021 02:10 PM
The USA Congress and its corrupt foreign policy dictates work to the detriment of Europe and Russia, while providing no tangible benefits to US states or citizens. So globalist demands wrapped in the stars & stripes, should be laughed at, by all freedom loving nations.

[Jan 17, 2021] The pot calling the kettle black: Liz Cheney forgot about Bush II administration crimes

Liz Cheney who probably got her position due to her father might well overplayed her hand.
Jan 17, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

MhOOMan 5 hours ago remove link

Below is a list of which House Republicans voted to impeach Trump on Wednesday.

[Jan 17, 2021] "79% of Americans think the US is falling apart" those not accounted for are possibly homeless or illiterate and don't have the opportunity of putting their view forward

Highly recommended!
In the reality the USA is not falling apart. It is neoliberalism that is falling apart and this is just how common people feel during the collapse of neliberalism.
Jan 17, 2021 | www.rt.com

OneHorseGuy 1 day ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:17 PM

"79% of Americans think the US is falling apart" those not accounted for are possibly homeless or illiterate and don't have the opportunity of putting their view forward.
RTaccount 1 day ago 15 Jan, 2021 02:22 PM
There will be no peace, no unity, and no prosperity. And there shouldn't be.
TheFishh RTaccount 1 day ago 15 Jan, 2021 03:38 PM
The US regimes past and present have worn out their bag of tricks. A magician is a con-man. And the only way they can entertain and spellbind the crowd with their routines is if everyone just ignores the sleight of hand. But people are starting to call the US out for the tricks it is pulling, and that's where the magician's career ends.
SJMan333 23 hours ago 16 Jan, 2021 01:02 AM
America as a whole is now reaping the fruits of its decades of exceptionalism complex. Through its propaganda machine, Americans as individuals and collectively as a society, have been brainwashed into believing that laws, rules and basic human decency do not apply to themselves. These are only sweetened poisons for them to shove down the throats of other lesser countries, especially those in Africa, Latin America, Middle East and Asia ((bluntly put, non-white countries)) when it suited America's global resource thievery and daylight wealth grabbing. Habitualized into bullying every other countries with no resistance, Americans are now showing their ugly faces on each other. The same exceptionalism delusion "the laws apply to you, not me'' is driving every American (except the colored Americans probably) to blame all the ills of the country on everyone else except himself. Nancy Pelosi advocated total lock-down but treated herself to a total grooming in a hair saloon is just one example. For the sins it has committed over the decades, I guess the time is right for USA to have a dose of its own medicine. Except in this case, America never thought it necessary to develop an antidote.

[Jan 17, 2021] 'America is back'- Biden fills State Department slots with more Obama vets, including Ukraine 'coup plotter' Victoria Nuland

Jan 17, 2021 | www.rt.com

'America is back': Biden fills State Department slots with more Obama vets, including Ukraine 'coup plotter' Victoria Nuland 16 Jan, 2021 22:18 Get short URL 'America is back': Biden fills State Department slots with more Obama vets, including Ukraine 'coup plotter' Victoria Nuland Victoria Nuland is shown greeting Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in 2015. © Reuters / Mikhail Palinchak 9 Follow RT on RT President-elect Joe Biden is getting the old interventionist-foreign-policy team back together, including Ukraine coup engineer Victoria Nuland, signaling a hardline Russia stance as he fills out top posts in the State Department.

"These leaders are trusted at home and respected around the world, and their nominations signal that America is back and ready to lead the world, not retreat from it," Biden said on Saturday in a statement announcing his picks to fill top positions under his nominee for secretary of state, Anthony Blinken.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden signals US return to full-on globalism and foreign meddling by picking interventionist Anthony Blinken as secretary of state

Like Blinken, the five latest State Department picks are veterans of the Obama-Biden administration. Nuland , a neoconservative who was named undersecretary for political affairs, goes all the way back to former President Ronald Reagan's administration and was a foreign policy adviser to former Vice President Dick Cheney.

Other new re-hires include: Wendy Sherman, deputy secretary of state, who led the Obama-Biden administration's negotiating team on peace talks with Iran; Brian McKeon, deputy secretary for management and resources, who was a national security adviser to then-Vice President Biden; Bonnie Jenkins, undersecretary for arms control and international security, who previously coordinated nonproliferation programs; and Uzra Zeha, undersecretary for civilian security, who formerly was charge d'affaires at the US Embassy in Paris.

READ MORE US foreign aid agencies paid for Kiev street violence - ex-US agent Scott Rickard US foreign aid agencies paid for Kiev street violence - ex-US agent Scott Rickard

After four years of President Donald Trump's 'America First' policy, including efforts to wind down foreign interventions and broker peace deals, Biden's declaration of "America is back" portends a sharp contrast in foreign policy. He said his latest nominees will "use their diplomatic experience and skill to restore America's global and moral leadership."

Nuland, who studied Russian literature at Brown University, wrote last summer in Foreign Affairs of how "a confident America should deal with Russia " with a more "activist" policy, including "speaking directly to the Russian people about the benefits of working together and the price they have paid for (President Vladimir) Putin's hard turn away from liberalism." She added, "Washington and its allies have forgotten the statecraft that won the Cold War and continued to yield results for many years after."

Nuland perhaps was using such "statecraft" when, as assistant secretary of state in December 2013, she handed out cookies to protesters at Kiev's Maidan Nezalezhnosti square who were demanding the resignation of President Viktor Yanukovich. An audiotape leaked in February 2014 showed that her involvement in the uprising went well beyond cookies, as she spoke with US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt about plotting to replace Yanukovich with Washington's chosen opposition leader, Arseny Yatseniuk, and about involving the UN to "f**k the EU" by pushing through a US-preferred Ukraine policy.

ALSO ON RT.COM Nuland's biscuits again: Maidan midwife's plan for US policy on Russia is dumb, delusional and dangerous

Ironically, Nuland's appointment comes just as politicians in Washington fret over this month's storming of the US Capitol by pro-Trump protesters, which some called a coup attempt.

"I knew it wasn't a real coup because Victoria Nuland wasn't handing out cookies," Cato Institute senior fellow Doug Bandow said of the Capitol assault. "She'll be back overthrowing governments in the Biden administration, so it remains a valid standard."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1348047492227756034&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F512763-biden-appoints-nuland-sherman%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

In light of Nuland's hawkish history, 25 anti-war groups have jointly called for the Senate to reject confirmation of her nomination as undersecretary for political affairs.

"Victoria Nuland is returning to the State Department," one commenter wrote on Twitter. "The United States is returning to the former Soviet republics with great strides. A fierce struggle with Russia begins."


[Jan 15, 2021] Will the Senate Confirm Coup Plotter Victoria Nuland- -

Notable quotes:
"... By Medea Benjamin. cofounder of ..."
"... CODEPINK for Peace ..."
"... , and author of several books, including ..."
"... Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran ..."
"... . @medeabenjamin; Nicolas J. S. Davies, an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of ..."
"... Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq ..."
"... . @NicolasJSDavies; and Marcy Winograd of Progressive Democrats of America served as a 2020 Democratic delegate for Bernie Sanders,and is Coordinator of ..."
"... CODEPINK CONGRESS ..."
"... . @MarcyWinograd ..."
"... Foreign Affairs ..."
Jan 15, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Will the Senate Confirm Coup Plotter Victoria Nuland? Posted on January 15, 2021 by Yves Smith

Yves here. Biden's nominees have skewed towards the awful, particularly on the foreign policy front. But his plan to install Victoria "Fuck the EU" Nuland at State is a standout. For those of you new to this site and not familiar with Nuland's sorry history, this post gives an overview of her role in fomenting the coup in Ukraine and in putting relations with Russia on a Cold War footing. The authors encourage readers to call their Senators and urge them to vote against her nomination.

And before you get unduly excited by Biden nominating Gary Gensler to the SEC, I would much rather have seem Gensler at Treasury. Gensler demonstrated at the CFTC that he's effective and dedicated to combatting abuses by Big Finance. However, his best shot at making the SEC feared and respected again is to appoint a tough head of enforcement, so keep an eye out for that pick.

The problem that Gensler will have at the SEC is that it is the only Federal financial services industry regulator that is subject to Congressional appropriations, rather that living off its fees and fines (the SEC collects far more than Congress allows it). And Democrats, like Joe Lieberman, then the Senator from Hedgistan, have been if anything more aggressive than Republicans in threatening the SEC and in keeping it budget-starved.

I had said to Lambert that if Biden wanted to be Machiavellian, the way to pretend to reward Elizabeth Warren while actually sandbagging her would be to make her SEC chair. Let's hope that isn't his logic for appointing Gensler.

By Medea Benjamin. cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace , and author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran . @medeabenjamin; Nicolas J. S. Davies, an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq . @NicolasJSDavies; and Marcy Winograd of Progressive Democrats of America served as a 2020 Democratic delegate for Bernie Sanders,and is Coordinator of CODEPINK CONGRESS . @MarcyWinograd

Photo Credit: thetruthseeker.co.uk Nuland and Pyatt planning regime change in Kiev

Who is Victoria Nuland? Most Americans have never heard of her because the U.S. corporate media's foreign policy coverage is a wasteland. Most Americans have no idea that President-elect Biden's pick for Deputy Secretary of State for Political Affairs is stuck in the quicksand of 1950s U.S.-Russia Cold War politics and dreams of continued NATO expansion, an arms race on steroids and further encirclement of Russia.

Nor do they know that from 2003-2005, during the hostile U.S. military occupation of Iraq, Nuland was a foreign policy advisor to Dick Cheney, the Darth Vader of the Bush administration.

You can bet, however, that the people of Ukraine have heard of neocon Nuland. Many have even heard the leaked four-minute audio of her saying "Fuck the EU" during a 2014 phone call with the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt.

During the infamous call on which Nuland and Pyatt plotted to replace the elected Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovych, Nuland expressed her not-so-diplomatic disgust with the European Union for grooming former heavyweight boxer and austerity champ Vitali Klitschko instead of U.S. puppet and NATO booklicker Artseniy Yatseniuk to replace Russia-friendly Yanukovych.

The "Fuck the EU" call went viral, as an embarrassed State Department, never denying the call's authenticity, blamed the Russians for tapping the phone, much as the NSA has tapped the phones of European allies.

Despite outrage from German Chancellor Angela Markel, no one fired Nuland, but her potty mouth upstaged the more serious story: the U.S. plot to overthrow Ukraine's elected government and America's responsibility for a civil war that has killed at least 13,000 people and left Ukraine the poorest country in Europe.

In the process, Nuland, her husband Robert Kagan, the co-founder of The Project for a New American Century , and their neocon cronies succeeded in sending U.S.-Russian relations into a dangerous downward spiral from which they have yet to recover.

Nuland accomplished this from a relatively junior position as Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs. How much more trouble could she stir up as the #3 official at Biden's State Department? We'll find out soon enough, if the Senate confirms her nomination.

Joe Biden should have learned from Obama's mistakes that appointments like this matter. In his first term , Obama allowed his hawkish Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Republican Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and military and CIA leaders held over from the Bush administration to ensure that endless war trumped his message of hope and change.

Obama, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, ended up presiding over indefinite detentions without charges or trials at Guantanamo Bay; an escalation of drone strikes that killed innocent civilians; a deepening of the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan; a self-reinforcing cycle of terrorism and counterterrorism; and disastrous new wars in Libya and Syria .

With Clinton out and new personnel in top spots in his second term, Obama began to take charge of his own foreign policy. He started working directly with Russia's President Putin to resolve crises in Syria and other hotspots. Putin helped avert an escalation of the war in Syria in September 2013 by negotiating the removal and destruction of Syria's chemical weapons stockpiles, and helped Obama negotiate an interim agreement with Iran that led to the JCPOA nuclear deal.

But the neocons were apoplectic that they failed to convince Obama to order a massive bombing campaign and escalate his covert, proxy war in Syria and at the receding prospect of a war with Iran. Fearing their control of U.S. foreign policy was slipping, the neocons launched a campaign to brand Obama as "weak" on foreign policy and remind him of their power.

With editorial help from Nuland, her husband Robert Kagan penned a 2014 New Republic article entitled "Superpowers Don't Get To Retire," proclaiming that "there is no democratic superpower waiting in the wings to save the world if this democratic superpower falters." Kagan called for an even more aggressive foreign policy to exorcise American fears of a multipolar world it can no longer dominate.

Obama invited Kagan to a private lunch at the White House, and the neocons' muscle-flexing pressured him to scale back his diplomacy with Russia, even as he quietly pushed ahead on Iran.

The neocons' coup de grace against Obama's better angels was Nuland's 2014 coup in debt-ridden Ukraine, a valuable imperial possession for its wealth of natural gas and a strategic candidate for NATO membership right on Russia's border.

When Ukraine's Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych spurned a U.S.-backed trade agreement with the European Union in favor of a $15 billion bailout from Russia, the State Department threw a tantrum.

Hell hath no fury like a superpower scorned.

The EU trade agreement was to open Ukraine's economy to imports from the EU, but without a reciprocal opening of EU markets to Ukraine, it was a lopsided deal Yanukovich could not accept. The deal was approved by the post-coup government, and has only added to Ukraine's economic woes.

The muscle for Nuland's $5 billion coup was Oleh Tyahnybok's neo-Nazi Svoboda Party and the shadowy new Right Sector militia. During her leaked phone call, Nuland referred to Tyahnybok as one of the "big three" opposition leaders on the outside who could help the U.S.-backed Prime Minister Yatsenyuk on the inside. This is the same Tyanhnybok who once delivered a speec h applauding Ukrainians for fighting Jews and "other scum" during World War II.

After protests in Kiev's Euromaidan square turned into battles with police in February 2014, Yanukovych and the Western-backed opposition signed an agreement brokered by France, Germany and Poland to form a national unity government and hold new elections by the end of the year.

But that was not good enough for the neo-Nazis and extreme right-wing forces the U.S. had helped to unleash. A violent mob led by the Right Sector militia marched on and invaded the parliament building , a scene no longer difficult for Americans to imagine. Yanukovych and his members of parliament fled for their lives.

Facing the loss of its most vital strategic naval base at Sevastopol in Crimea, Russia accepted the overwhelming result (a 97% majority, with an 83% turnout) of a referendum in which Crimea voted to leave Ukraine and rejoin Russia, which it had been a part of from 1783 to 1954.

The majority Russian-speaking provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk in Eastern Ukraine unilaterally declared independence from Ukraine, triggering a bloody civil war between U.S.- and Russian-backed forces that still rages in 2021.

U.S.-Russian relations have never recovered, even as U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals still pose the greatest single threat to our existence. Whatever Americans believe about the civil war in Ukraine and allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election, we must not allow the neocons and the military-industrial complex they serve to deter Biden from conducting vital diplomacy with Russia to steer us off our suicidal path toward nuclear war.

Nuland and the neocons, however, remain committed to an ever-more debilitating and dangerous Cold War with Russia and China to justify a militarist foreign policy and record Pentagon budgets. In a July 2020 Foreign Affairs article entitled "Pinning Down Putin," Nuland absurdly claimed that Russia presents a greater threat to "the liberal world" than the U.S.S.R. posed during the old Cold War.

Nuland's narrative rests on an utterly mythical, ahistorical narrative of Russian aggression and U.S. good intentions. She pretends that Russia's military budget, which is one-tenth of America's, is evidence of "Russian confrontation and militarization" and calls on the U.S. and its allies to counter Russia by "maintaining robust defense budgets, continuing to modernize U.S. and allied nuclear weapons systems, and deploying new conventional missiles and missile defenses to protect against Russia's new weapons systems "

Nuland also wants to confront Russia with an aggressive NATO. Since her days as U.S. Ambassador to NATO during President George W. Bush's second term, she has been a supporter of NATO's expansion all the way up to Russia's border. She calls for "permanent bases along NATO's eastern border." We have pored over a map of Europe, but we can't find a country called NATO with any borders at all. Nuland sees Russia's commitment to defending itself after successive 20th century Western invasions as an intolerable obstacle to NATO's expansionist ambitions.

Nuland's militaristic worldview represents exactly the folly the U.S. has been pursuing since the 1990s under the influence of the neocons and "liberal interventionists," which has resulted in a systematic underinvestment in the American people while escalating tensions with Russia, China, Iran and other countries.

As Obama learned too late, the wrong person in the wrong place at the wrong time can, with a shove in the wrong direction, unleash years of intractable violence, chaos and international discord. Victoria Nuland would be a ticking time-bomb in Biden's State Department, waiting to sabotage his better angels much as she undermined Obama's second-term diplomacy.

So let's do Biden and the world a favor. Join World Beyond War , CODEPINK and dozens of other organizations opposing neocon Nuland's confirmation as a threat to peace and diplomacy. Call 202-224-3121 and tell your Senator to oppose Nuland's installation at the State Department.

John A , January 15, 2021 at 7:44 am

Nuland has also been declared persona non grata by Russia, so she would not be able to go with Biden, were he to visit Moscow. Russian foreign minister Lavrov, actually refused to shake her hand when she attended a US-Russia meeting with Kerry. She is poison to any attempt to peaceful relationships.

Susan the other , January 15, 2021 at 11:28 am

Yes, I remember that meeting clearly. Can't cite the network, but it covered her closely – body language only. I wonder where Biden stood on that act of diplomacy given his own corruption, and also what John Kerry's thinking is about now. John Kerry's stepson was in cahoots with Hunter Biden. It looked like Kerry brought her along for some rehabilitation and Lavrov was having none of it. Instead he went directly to the delegation from Ukraine and they stood in a circle all with their backs turned to Vicky who had no choice but to wander over to the coffee table and pretend she wasn't totally uncomfortable. Totally excluded. How can she recover from that?

The Rev Kev , January 15, 2021 at 9:10 am

If there is one thing that Russia hates it is fascists and that is because of the enormous damage caused by them in WW2. We call those invaders Nazis but the Russians seem to call them fascists. I sometimes wonder if it is part of their mother's milk this hatred. For people like Nuland to help topple the government of a large, bordering country like the Ukraine and install people that were literally fascists was too much for the Russians. These were fascist of a very low order that had the old 1930s routines down pat, including the torchlight parades. And there was Nuland, handing out cookies to the rioters, many of whom had been trained in rioting tactics in Poland and were being paid about $100 a day by the US if I recall correctly. Of course Nuland was not alone as there was also a Representative from the EU also handing out cookies. The only equivalent that comes to mind is a violent revolution in Canada using professional rioters and having diplomatic representatives from the Russian Federation and China handing out donuts to the rioter. I wonder what Washington would say about a stunt like that.

lyman alpha blob , January 15, 2021 at 9:32 am

Nuland is a disgusting human being. Since she is a right winger, regardless of what party may be listed on her voter ID, I don't think Bettridge's law applies here at all.

So glad all these 'woke' people put good old Uncle Joe back in office. Wonder how many realized they were supporting people being burned alive by actual Nazis in doing so?

From an actual journalist, Robert Parry – https://consortiumnews.com/2014/05/10/burning-ukraines-protesters-alive/

clarky90 , January 15, 2021 at 3:46 pm

So the USA now has literally placed, "literal fascists" in power?

Literally ..

Mark Gisleson , January 15, 2021 at 10:26 am

More war is not the answer to any of the problems facing us.

Carolinian , January 15, 2021 at 11:35 am

Thanks for this. Our "learned nothing/forgot nothing" Bourbon restoration will be led by one of the dimmer Bourbons who couldn't even set up a good grift in Ukraine without boasting about it and then angrily denying it. Should the press finally, improbably turn on him it should make for some fun news conferences. But perhaps he'll merely be moving to the White House basement from his Delaware basement.

Encephalitis Lethargica , January 15, 2021 at 12:47 pm

CFTC's budgets are also set through congressional authorization and appropriations. Yes, the CFPB is not subject to Congressional appropriations, but for good reasons. However, all financial regulation can be overturned by the Congressional Review Act.

As for the article, citation needed. Sort of a laundry heap of questionable material. Make no mistake, the Russo-Ukrainian War is a real war. Uniformed Russian armored infantry of 331st regiment of the 98th Svirsk airborne division dropped into Ukraine territory on 24 August 2014. From 25 to 27 August, Russian troops in civilian clothing, backed up by an armored column [not in disguise] took Novoazovsk. This is about Russia not being able to station 25,000 troops in Crimea as they had under Yanukovych. US troop levels in Europe have been at their lowest for the last 20 years. The US would like to [nay, needs to] keep it that way. However, the erosion of territorial integrity is a touchy subject in Europe given the lasting peace of the post-war period in a place where the wars have a pre-fix like "Hundred Years".

President Arseniy Yatsenyuk is of Jewish origin so the claims of coordination with Nazi sympathizers is dubious. Not even going to get the boycotted unconstitutional Crimean referendum.

As for WW III, Obama's defense department made it a priority to recover all the MANPADS, such as the Chinese-made FN-6 [via Qatar], Russian-made Strela-2's and Igla-S's [via Libya] from the FSA without so much as a thank you from the Russian Air Force. [Turkey, on the other hand, armed the FSA with Stinger's.] It should be noted that the Syrian conflict's death toll, in just four years, surpassed the 19-year death toll in all the Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq war theatres combined.

Think about this way: who needs NATO and the EU more to maintain his power structure, Joe Biden or Vladimir Putin. Isn't it clear Americans don't care, and American business does not look to compete in Russian anytime soon. The geography is wrong. But Putin must find a way to engender ethnicities who do not like the Russian Empire, who had been cleansed by Stalin. One way is to sell energy below cost to the republics and buy in back from political allies in the form of electricity. Something upon which the EU frowns. [Personally, I did not care for the way Putin early on systematically and indiscriminately starved Chechen civilians for years. It was cruel on a level unseen outside of the Rwandan genocide. More importantly, it was the Russian Federation abdicating its authority by not providing for its own citizens and not letting NGO's fill the calorie gap. I'd like to think had Putin's admin not been so wobbly the first few years, he might've let the Red Cross feed the children.]

John Steinbach , January 15, 2021 at 4:35 pm

There is overwhelming documentation of Yatsenuk's collaboration with Svboda & other fascist organizations in forming the coup government. For example: https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/analysis-u-s-cozies-kiev-government-including-far-right-n66061

Russia was never going to permit a US orchestrated coup in Ukraine without resistance. The idea that Putin needs NATO more than Biden does seems unreasonable.

steelyman , January 15, 2021 at 11:02 pm

Talking about "citations", perhaps you could supply the readership of this site with some credible citations and links for a few of the far fetched claims you're making here. Most of this comment reads like pro-Ukrainian propaganda.

Matthew G. Saroff , January 15, 2021 at 1:30 pm

I heard about Gary Gensler, Samantha Power, and Victoria Nuland, and I immediately thought, "The good, the bad, and the ugly."

Gensler surprised everyone when he was at the CFTC by doing his job, and doing it well, and his running the SEC is a good thing.

Samantha Power is an aggressive war monger, and in her position at USAID, she will likely have her fingers in regime change pie, since USAID is part of the deep state regime change apparatus..

Nuland is just a pro-Nazi nut though.

Jack Parsons , January 15, 2021 at 9:39 pm

About NATO and the Ukraine war:

I've long suspected that NATO has existed since 1991 to allow the US/EU axis to control Middle-Eastern and African resources. For example, the Rammstein military hospital is where every Gulf War soldier was airlifted for major treatment and convalescence.

Also, there is a huge international trade in opium. It's grown in Afpak and shipped out in every direction. I suspect that a fair amount of that flows through Ukraine and Crimea. If you look at a topo map of Crimea, there's a lot of seashore that could be good "smuggler's coves". Following this line of argument, Russia grabbing it from Ukraine was a gimme to Russia's gangsters. This, as well as the "Pipeline Wars", gives Russia a strong reason to encircle Ukraine.

[Jan 14, 2021] A central rule of a color revolution is to avoid an "orderly transition". The new regime must have a revolutionary mandate instead of a democratic one. Only then can it operate outside the constitution and outside the law.

Jan 14, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Petri Krohn , Jan 13 2021 23:08 utc | 51

How to Un-Trump Four Years of Trump?

A central rule of a color revolution is to avoid an "orderly transition". The new regime must have a revolutionary mandate instead of a democratic one. Only then can it operate outside the constitution and outside the law.

The plan here is to declare not only Trump illegitimate but his whole administration illegitimate. The new regime can then undo all of Trump's executive decisions. There is no need to "stuff" the Supreme Court with extra judges. Simply declare Trump's appointments null and void.

[Jan 14, 2021] Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, etc. are enemies because they do not open their economies to be under the control of the West or where the West can get a greater share of profits

Jan 14, 2021 | www.theamericanconservative.com

kouroi • 7 days ago

What deterrent has Mr. Bandow on his mind for Europeans? One that goes against the NPT? The type that Iran has been pummeled economically for the past 20 years? And for which North Korea has been practically cordoned and now lives in quasi-autarchy? I have read this type of idiocy that encouraged S. Korea and Japan to acquire nuclear weapons. How is this supposed to work and be explained to the world at large? Oh, we need to all acquire nuclear weapons now because...? But we'll continue to sanction Iran and N Korea for the same things because...?

I guess that is the corollary of 20 years of repeating the mantra "rules based international order". Mr. Bandow, in terms of nuclear proliferation (which the US presently breaches by bringing its nukes on the territory of other states, plus other shenanigans done in conjunction with Japan concerning plutonium), it is the NPT that is the rule... Stick with it, and don't pretend that it doesn't apply to you and your allies.

Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, etc. are enemies because they do not open their economies to be under the control of the West or where the West can get a greater share of profits (most for the elites and some for the battered pension plans that were for years betting on 7% return on investment). Therefore military is another instrument to open that oyster up. All the rest is BS created to have people marshalling under the flag...

Theo • 7 days ago

Interesting article. As Trump has once proposed. The US leave NATO and withdraw their troops from Europe and take their nukes with them. That would lead to disbanding NATO . Many Germans would be glad. The transatlanticists in the German government don't represent the majority of the German people. Germany could have her own nukes. Trump was all for it. I have never understood the agression against Russia. If a country doesn't intend to invade and conquer another country a blown up military isn't necessary in my opinion. To deter other countries from attacking a country needs a few nukes and it's safe. Isn't it? North Korea is the best example. Libya, Syria and Iraq who gave up their nuclear weapons program were all invaded and destroyed. But NATO being disbanded remains wishful thinking. The MIC needs the proceeds.

Joe Black • 7 days ago

The US presence in NATO and Europe has been detrimental to Europe for atleast 10 years possibly 20 or longer. It has allowed European nations to indulge in follies that prudent, self aware nations responsible for their own defense and their own future would take very seriously and both national interests and security/defense interests. Lets take a few examples of Europes follies:
1) France wants all EU nations to federal their militaries into a continental military. Federalize means that individual EU nations would lose sovereignty over their militaries. It also means that the most powerful nations in the EU (ie France and Germany) would have overwhelming influence/control over Brussels decisions regarding its continental armies just as France and Britain have overwhelming control over regulation, immigration, trade, finance, etc.
2) European nations do not consider open borders and uncontrolled migration as continental - domestic security issues. Brussels-Germany-France-Sweden overwhelmingly support open borders and mass immigration plus they use Brussels to bully less powerful poorer nations to accept immigrants without any compensation, as well as threatening to take EU voting rights from countries like Hungary or Poland.
3) In another issue concerning open borders and mass immigration, Brussels-Germany-France-Sweden completely ignore terrorist acts, car bombings, infiltration of radical islam, infiltration of radical subversive anarchistic individuals and groups, honor killings, human trafficking/child brides, knifings, grooming gangs, assaults, violent crime, murder, etc.
4) Europe follows the US in still engaging Russia as a cold war enemy.
5) Europe has gone full fledged gender neutral / gender equal society. Everyone believes in equality of opportunity but with Equality of Opportunity comes Equality of Responsibilities. If men must serve in the military then so much women or there is no Gender Equality. Furthermore, radical subversive leftist belief is that men must be made weaker and less masculine to make women appear stronger. Sorry but you cannot defend a continent on Feminist-Cultural Marxist Theory.
6) Europe has allowed its birthrate to fall drastically below replacement (2.1). In many European countries their birth replacement rate is close to 1.0, 1.2, 1.5 etc. Europe cannot defend itself if it has no people to staff a military.
I will not judge Europe. Europe must plan for its own future but many EU nations and NATO members think they can indulge in any utopian theory because the US will come to save them from the responsibilities of their ill conceived societal experiments. The US should be an invisible partner and force every nation to take responsibility for how much sovereignty they are willing to relinquish to Brussels and take responsibility for their nations culture, its progeny, its defense and its national interest.

MPC • 7 days ago • edited

In the end it all comes down to China. If the Europeans are not willing to move towards cutting off China, and were I in Europe's position I'm not sure if I would be, NATO is worthless to the US. You really would be better off thinking more about security integration with Latin America or an alliance with a remilitarized Japan.

Europe's day as the prime concern for the US has passed and rather than dinking around in some Latvian forest we need to be practicing naval exercises in the Western Pacific.

Fayez Abedaziz • 7 days ago

This criminal organization should be disbanded and it's leader, the U.S., should be dragged into world courts and tried for continuing crimes against humanity.
Nothing good ever came from these creeps, the Europeans and the American ones across the world, unless y'all think world 1 and the other fun one, 2 and...oh, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and other places these mobsters caused so much misery and death are cool.
Meanwhile, Russia and China laugh.
I'm laughing with 'em.

Paco • 2 days ago


celebrating the return of the consensus that Americans must forever pay for the continent's defense.

Wrong, Americans must forever pay for occupying foreing lands. Go home, and take with you those traitor burecrats that sigh with relief to the fact of being occupied, then you might be able to take care of your people and spend your ridiculous "defense" budget to renew your degraded infrastructure.

[Jan 14, 2021] Trump as populist

Is there anything more pathetic than competition between two political mafias hiding as some sort of disagreement over principle?
Notable quotes:
"... Absolutely his instinct to rebalance the economic relationship with China was correct. But he's too stupid to do it in a way that actually benefits or improves the US long term. Every once in a while with him there was hint of a good instinct but he never followed through because his base instincts always win out. ..."
"... The cries of censorship are asinine. Real censorship of diverging opinions was accomplished decades ago. Banning Donald trump from twitter isn't censorship. They didn't ban the POTUS account (they did delete tweets when he tried to use it), they banned his personal account because he's an asshole who broke the rules. Republicans have been telling me about the sanctity of property my whole life. Now they change their minds? ..."
Jan 14, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
Lex , Jan 13 2021 23:25 utc | 55

It's all just farts in a jar. The trajectory was set decades ago and the political oligarchy and gerontocracy aren't going to let go of that trajectory. Trump was only a "populist" insofar as it was a means for him to be popular. In reality, he's a dishonest, craven asshole. If he was a populist he would have responded to Covid way differently. What he is, however, is a nationalist. Those are dangerous because they don't think clearly.

Absolutely his instinct to rebalance the economic relationship with China was correct. But he's too stupid to do it in a way that actually benefits or improves the US long term. Every once in a while with him there was hint of a good instinct but he never followed through because his base instincts always win out.

The cries of censorship are asinine. Real censorship of diverging opinions was accomplished decades ago. Banning Donald trump from twitter isn't censorship. They didn't ban the POTUS account (they did delete tweets when he tried to use it), they banned his personal account because he's an asshole who broke the rules. Republicans have been telling me about the sanctity of property my whole life. Now they change their minds?

The empire is in terminal decline. Trump doesn't change it. Biden doesn't change it. Who controls Congress doesn't change it. Because all of them are beholden to the declining empire and/or they believe in America's myths (they are nationalists). A failed color revolution run by people who don't want to accept an election result just says real loud that the empire is falling.

[Jan 13, 2021] Biden has surrounded himself with dual allegiance appointees in the critical security agencies so that he cannot achieve peace or make progress with any of his (foolishly) perceived enemy nations. He will find it almost impossible to negotiate in any meaningful way with Iran or China or Russia or Iraq

Jan 13, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Jan 12 2021 20:43 utc | 20

The apartheid settler gang is beneath contempt. It blocks supply of vaccines for covid to the Palestinian people and blockades their trade and freedom of travel and navigation. Like the USA they have totally filled up with hubris and lost their way in the world.

Biden has surrounded himself with dual allegiance appointees in the critical security agencies so that he cannot achieve peace or make progress with any of his (foolishly) perceived enemy nations. He will find it almost impossible to negotiate in any meaningful way with Iran or China or Russia or Iraq or Syria or pretty much any other nation that is invaded by his armies or sanctioned by his idiot decisions or threatened by Israel's belligerence.

The tensions have been incredibly heightened in many nations due to the coronavirus transmission within their populations and the persistent suspicion that it has a USA origin. Any USAi pretense of negotiating in good faith in these circumstances is virtually impossible. All the more so when reactionaries lead both Israel and USA.

Biden is right when he says nothing will change. His ally in the middle east, Israel, has an arsenal of formidable power sufficient to command an uncomfortable peace in any circumstance. Yet it has no integrity to clinch a deal with anybody such is the universal distrust of their intentions. Time and again this illegal settler state has mauled every neighbor in a most grievous way. Every week they attack Syria with missiles! The aggrieved neighbors will not forget or forgive the treachery. That is just how it is.

There are no statesmen in the USA or Israel with the nous or capacity to find a way out.

fyi , Jan 12 2021 21:48 utc | 29

Mr. karlof1

US is still digging herself in the religious war against Islam.

She cannot offer anything to Iranians any longer - Mr. Trump's war against Iran had eviscerated whatever US or EU had to offer to Iran.

US cannot even end the war in Palestine; she does not have that power.

fyi , Jan 12 2021 21:49 utc | 30
Mr. steven t johnson

Israelis are not Western, they are Eastern European and Middle Easterners for the most part.

They lack the culture of Western Europe.

[Jan 13, 2021] I believe due to strategic failure of maximum pressure to subdue Iran and more importantly due to US' own strategic necessity to keep China and Russia away from ME, US and EU will want to decouple or even prevent Iran from a mutual strategic necessity or alliance with China or and Russia it might be possible US will adopt a new posture toward Iran.

Jan 13, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kooshy , Jan 12 2021 20:23 utc | 18

Few observations on Biden, Iran and the nuclear deal.
I don't know if US will or will not return to implement it's obligations under the UNSC 2231, nor I know if US Jewish lobby will allow that. But for sure Iran will not renegotiate for new terms or a new deal on nuclear program secondly under no circumstances Iran will negotiate (with anyone) her conventional military capabilities or her policies and alliances toward her allies in the region since these are real matter of national security for Iran. But also there are signs from Biden that should be considered. Firstly almost all Biden's national security team are diplomats with experience negotiating with Iran that could be a signal on policy change, secondly I believe due to strategic failure of maximum pressure to subdue Iran and more importantly due to US' own strategic necessity to keep China and Russia away from ME, US and EU will want to decouple or even prevent Iran from a mutual strategic necessity or alliance with China or and Russia for that reason IMO it might be possible US will adopt a new posture toward Iran. I also believe Iran's foreign policy in ME is basically based on her long term interests and security with her regional alliances, multipolarity, and stability in her region, therefore any proposal by US or EU to agitate this policy will be rejected or not adopted by Iran.

uncle tungsten , Jan 12 2021 20:43 utc | 20

The apartheid settler gang is beneath contempt. It blocks supply of vaccines for covid to the Palestinian people and blockades their trade and freedom of travel and navigation. Like the USA they have totally filled up with hubris and lost their way in the world.

Biden has surrounded himself with dual allegiance appointees in the critical security agencies so that he cannot achieve peace or make progress with any of his (foolishly) perceived enemy nations. He will find it almost impossible to negotiate in any meaningful way with Iran or China or Russia or Iraq or Syria or pretty much any other nation that is invaded by his armies or sanctioned by his idiot decisions or threatened by Israel's belligerence.

The tensions have been incredibly heightened in many nations due to the coronavirus transmission within their populations and the persistent suspicion that it has a USA origin. Any USAi pretense of negotiating in good faith in these circumstances is virtually impossible. All the more so when reactionaries lead both Israel and USA.

Biden is right when he says nothing will change. His ally in the middle east, Israel, has an arsenal of formidable power sufficient to command an uncomfortable peace in any circumstance. Yet it has no integrity to clinch a deal with anybody such is the universal distrust of their intentions. Time and again this illegal settler state has mauled every neighbor in a most grievous way. Every week they attack Syria with missiles! The aggrieved neighbors will not forget or forgive the treachery. That is just how it is.

There are no statesmen in the USA or Israel with the nous or capacity to find a way out.

groucho , Jan 12 2021 20:45 utc | 21

Did I hear someone say something about "the tail wagging the dog" ?

Dr. George W Oprisko , Jan 13 2021 0:30 utc | 50

A new JCPOA will obviously have to eliminate all sanctions. But that might not be enough. Iran might want compensation for the economic damage done, compensation from the UK, France, and Germany as well as the US. Moreover, Iran will want to keep its now much larger stockpile of low-enriched uranium. It might want an even larger stockpile, and the right to enrich to 20%, which it is now doing. A breeder reactor and a plutonium stockpile would be nice, too.

But there are even other demands that might be made: reduction or removal of US/NATO/Israeli forces in the Gulf; reduction or elimination of Israeli nuclear weapons.

That train left the station.

In the past 5 years Iran re-configured it's economy into an autarcic fully industrialized, food secure, and diversified economy. It now earns more from the sale of manufactures and foods than from petroleum. It now manufactures AfraMax tankers, general cargo vessels, and naval vessels. It manufactures cars and trucks, and railroad rolling stock. It built hydro and irrigation schemes. It launches satellites into orbit.

Iran is now pressing ahead with the Arak heavy water reactor.

Khameni just banned import of NATO vaccines, and ordered the country to be vaccinated with Iran's own vaccine.

Khameni and the hard liners will not permit Iran to rejoin or to negotiate any agreements with the "Great Satan". Their line will be the US must show itself to be agreement capable by rejoining the JCPOA and removing any and all sanctions while paying damages too.

Iran will increase the amount of assistance given the Houthis. Trump's declaration of the Houthis as terrorists, benefits the resistance by solidifying their adherence to it. The Houthis must now "go for broke" or surrender. They will not surrender.

The harsh reality is Biden/Harris will be occupied at home suppressing the MAGA crowd. Since this group is 74 million strong, and mostly white, in a country trying to make them second class citizens, will be quite a challenge that. The jury is still out on that one.

Then there is the not so small matter of US oil production dropping like a stone from 12 mmBbl/day to 7 by July with further drops in the following 12 months. This coupled with and likely due to bankruptcies of a large number of producers going forward.

Will be an interesting year.

INDY

[Jan 11, 2021] William Burns is Biden's new CIA Director nomination with with State Dept career and DC Thinktank experience.

Jan 11, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

imo , Jan 11 2021 14:17 utc | 119

William Burns is Biden's new CIA Director nomination with with State Dept career and DC Thinktank experience.

Might have better constructive peer-peer dialogue potential with Russian Foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov. Now whence little Gina 'Abu Ghraib stinker' Haspel?

But, what about global opium and heroine supplies? Gulp, ...!

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/11/politics/william-burns-cia-director-nomination/index.html

[Jan 11, 2021] Clinton broke Reagan's promise and expanded NATO eastwards, he dismantled the Glass Steagall act which led to a malignant hypergrowth of the banking sector, and he was the who introduced the telecommunications act in 1996 which allowed for the concentration of corporate media in the hands of the few.

Notable quotes:
"... Clinton hollowed out his own country in order to completely remove all constraints (financial, mediatic, military). He doesn't get called out for it nearly enough in my opinion. ..."
"... Clinton was a particular type of low-class, sybaritic evil but he didn't have a strong USSR to contend with. Instead he had the drunken traitor Yeltsin dance for him like a bedraggled starving bear. ..."
Jan 11, 2021 | thesaker.is

Serbian girl on January 08, 2021 , · at 7:42 am EST/EDT

"So when was this golden age? Under Reagan? Well, this is when the dismantling of the inner core of the empire began."

Beg to differ. Reagan understood how to administer the US empire. He knew the risks of overstretching it. He made the promise to the Soviets not to encroach on their sphere of influence. He defended the high interest rates which strengthened the USD and which kept the banking sector in check.

All of that went to hell with Bill Clinton:
He broke Reagan's promise and expanded NATO eastwards, he dismantled the Glass Steagall act which led to a malignant hypergrowth of the banking sector, and he was the who introduced the telecommunications act in 1996 which allowed for the concentration of corporate media in the hands of the few.

Bill Clinton basically turned the empire into a rapacious and uncontrollable animal. (Funny how noone here is talking about imprisoning him )

There is a silver lining to Bill C's blood-soaked administration. It was while he was in power, that the Russians finally awoke from their 1990s stupor. They began to understand the mortal danger they were facing, and they patriotically chose Putin to lead them in 1999.

Ken Leslie on January 08, 2021 , · at 8:05 am EST/EDT

– Reagan was a disgusting Russophobe and Serbophobe who proclaimed 10th April (the founding of the Independent State of Croatia) a national holiday in California as governor. Not surprising given that his was the most RC government ever – he also colluded with the Polish anti-Christ to destroy the USSR. In the process he encouraged the German Nazis (see visit to Bitburg) who then destroyed Yugoslavia.

– He brought the world to the brink of a nuclear holocaust that was prevented by a vigilant Russian officer (in 1983?).

– He turbo-charged the power of corporations and decimated social structures and the rights of the working class (the Americans are paying for this now).

This is not to say that the scumbag Clinton was good – after all he was trained at Georgetown – that seminary for American murderers.

Serbian girl on January 08, 2021 , · at 9:33 am EST/EDT

Thanks for this Ken. Good to know who Reagan really was!

To get back to your point about the "dismantling of the empire" Reagan, for all his personal awfulness and recklessness (and subversiveness) was still more restrained than Clinton. Clinton hollowed out his own country in order to completely remove all constraints (financial, mediatic, military). He doesn't get called out for it nearly enough in my opinion. I guess it's personal, after what he did to us.

Ken Leslie on January 08, 2021 , · at 11:07 am EST/EDT

Oh, I have nothing but hatred and contempt for that criminal, trust me.

Ken Leslie on January 08, 2021 , · at 11:49 am EST/EDT

Clinton was a particular type of low-class, sybaritic evil but he didn't have a strong USSR to contend with. Instead he had the drunken traitor Yeltsin dance for him like a bedraggled starving bear. Never again!

[Jan 11, 2021] "We are all Taiwanese now" stunt is Pompeo's act of petty spite for getting outfoxed in the Hong Kong colour revolution play.

Jan 11, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

LittleWhiteCabbage , Jan 11 2021 15:19 utc | 128

@84:
As sometimes said: don't sweat the small stuff.
This "We are all Taiwanese now" stunt is Pompeo's act of petty spite for getting outfoxed in the Hong Kong colour revolution play.
Empire's useful idiots were let loose to trash the hapless city, fired up by the Western propaganda machinery.
Now Beijing is putting the stock on those pompous minions with the National Security Law, and their foreign masters can't do nuffin' except squeal human rights and apply some nuisance sanctions.
The West fails because it looks at China through ideological lenses and sees Communists, who can fall back on 5000 years of statecraft to push back at interlopers.
Beijing's moves can be likened to two classic strategies.
1. Zhuge Liang fools the enemy to fire all their arrows at straw men, which become ammunition against them.
2. The Empty City strategy. Invaders take over an ostensibly abandoned city, only to be trapped inside.
Global Times is cantankerous and sometimes risible, but even a broken clock is right, twice a day.
So when it says that crossing Beijing's red line on the Taiwan issue is not in the island's best interests, the incoming BiMala administration should take note.

[Jan 10, 2021] Top adviser signals Biden would keep troops in Syria as leverage

Jan 10, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Passer by , Jan 10 2021 23:21 utc | 64

Posted by: Circe | Jan 10 2021 23:07 utc | 61

There you go

Top adviser signals Biden would keep troops in Syria as leverage

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/05/biden-blinken-syria-oil-obama-red-line-kurds-assad.html#ixzz6jBp9f4aY


Joe Biden hits the president over Syria troop withdrawal in Iowa speech

https://eu.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2019/10/16/joe-biden-donald-trump-syria-troop-withdrawal-turkey-kurds-foreign-policy-iowa-caucuses-2020/4002281002/

Biden Says Would Keep Small U.S. Troops Presence In Afghanistan, Iraq

https://gandhara.rferl.org/a/biden-says-would-keep-small-u-s-troops-presence-in-afghanistan-iraq-/30833114.html

[Jan 09, 2021] The American Empire has fallen, though Washington may not know it yet -- RT Op-ed

Jan 09, 2021 | www.rt.com

The American Empire has fallen, though Washington may not know it yet Nebojsa Malic Nebojsa Malic

is a Serbian-American journalist, blogger and translator, who wrote a regular column for Antiwar.com from 2000 to 2015, and is now senior writer at RT. Follow him on Twitter @NebojsaMalic 9 Jan, 2021 11:58 Get short URL The American Empire has fallen, though Washington may not know it yet The sun sets on the US Capitol (FILE PHOTO) - and on the American Empire. © REUTERS/James Lawler Duggan 359 Follow RT on RT Wanting to turn back the clock and restore the American Empire to what it was before Donald Trump's presidency is a fool's errand. It's already a thing of the past – and the storming of the US Capitol was just the last straw.

Don't take my word for it, though. "If the post-American era has a start date, it is almost certainly today," argued none other than the head of the Council on Foreign Relations – the foremost think tank advocating for the Empire in Washington – after Wednesday's storming of the Capitol by several hundred Trump supporters protesting the certification of the election for Biden.

"No one in the world is likely to see, respect, fear, or depend on us in the same way again," lamented CFR president Richard Haas.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346920408386129922&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fop-ed%2F511963-american-empire-capitol-resistance%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Sure enough, as Haas was saying this the NATO secretary-general tweeted about the "shocking scenes" in Washington and demanded that Joe Biden's election "must be respected." British and French leaders followed suit , as did the Organization of American States. Turkey "expressed concern." Canada and India chimed in.

Even Venezuela got into the act, condemning "acts of violence" in Washington and "political polarization" in the US, while expressing hope that Americans "can blaze a new path toward stability and social justice."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346941567374774275&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fop-ed%2F511963-american-empire-capitol-resistance%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Keep in mind that the US has refused to recognize Venezuela's elected president or parliament, attempting for the past two years to install an unelected 'interim president' instead and call it democracy. While the Trump administration has led this effort, the Democrats – now poised to have absolute power in the US – have been fully on board.

Likewise, the only time the Republican establishment and the Democrat 'Resistance' banded together in near-unison was to override Trump's veto of the NDAA military funding bill, which contained a provision that would block him or any future president from withdrawing troops from overseas endless wars without prior congressional approval. The commitment to the Empire runs deep in the Washington 'swamp', as Trump used to call it.

"We are seeing images that I never imagined we would see in this country – in some other capital yes, but not here," said Haas.

ALSO ON RT.COM Do you realize now what you have done? US gets the kind of 'democracy' it championed overseas

This unwitting admission of 'American exceptionalism' basically says it's fine for US-backed activists to storm parliaments in "regimes" that Washington dislikes and wants to change, but when Americans rebel against their own government they believe is acting illegitimately, that's beyond the pale.

While what happened Wednesday was not actually a "color revolution," the visuals were certainly similar enough for the world to take notice. It would be wrong, however, to blame the Capitol "insurrection" for the demise of the American Empire, when it was merely the last domino to fall.

Again, don't take my word for it – here's Ishan Tharoor, a columnist for the notoriously pro-establishment Washington Post, declaring on Thursday that for "many abroad," the vision of the US as a shining city on a hill with global moral influence and authority "has already died a thousand deaths."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1347289344281890820&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fop-ed%2F511963-american-empire-capitol-resistance%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

For some of these people, Tharoor argued, this narrative was "always an illusion to obscure the Washington-engineered coups and client military regimes." Indeed.

Democrats and their neocon allies have spent the past four years blaming Trump's 'America First' policy, lamenting that he was acting unilaterally, antagonizing "allies" and creating a "leadership vacuum" in the world. Those are the talking points of the incoming administration as well.

Except they've clearly forgotten the events of January 2020, when Trump ordered the drone assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. There were no protests from US "allies" – or should we say vassals? Instead, they fell in line with amazing alacrity.

ALSO ON RT.COM Exposing empire: How Soleimani's killing put paid to myths the US told itself and others

Trump actually embraced the American Empire, he simply dispensed with the polite fictions it had used to dress up as something else over the years.

Ironically, it was the mobilization of the entire US political establishment to get rid of Trump – starting with 'Russiagate' and the impeachment circus over the phone call to Ukraine, with nationwide riots about "racial justice" and the politically weaponized coronavirus lockdowns along the way – that did the lion's share of exploding the myths that maintained US hegemony, both at home and abroad.

Remember the 'Deep State' that was supposedly a Trumpian conspiracy theory? Yet its existence was confirmed in the impeachment hearings, a former CIA director openly praised it, and the eventual revelations of a FBI plot to frame General Flynn removed any vestiges of doubt.

The mainstream media's war on Trump, later joined by social media platforms – censorship of the legitimate and accurate Hunter Biden laptop story just before the election being just the most egregious example – also played out for the world to see. In the end, they banned Trump from every social media platform while he was still in office, even as he said he would leave peacefully.

ALSO ON RT.COM 'Turning point in the battle for control': Edward Snowden, others warn of consequences to Trump's Facebook ban

Basically, the entire US establishment was so consumed by the desire to burn Trump at the proverbial stake, they chopped up the scaffolding that held up the Empire to use as firewood.

In a speech recently, Joe Biden vowed to "rebuild, reclaim America's place in the world" as a country that will "champion liberty and democracy once more." That's a daunting task, on par with putting the genie back into the bottle, un-spilling milk, or putting Humpty Dumpty back together again.

Ironically, the only thing that could repair American prestige in the world might be to patch up the American Republic, almost broken by the four years of 'Resistance' to Trump. But as that would entail some self-awareness and soul-searching, it remains, shall we say, highly unlikely.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Jan 09, 2021] Is this the beginning of the end of the American Empire- - caucus99percent

Jan 09, 2021 | caucus99percent.com

The United States has by far the largest military in the world, but Vietnam proved that sometimes that's not enough. An empire needs other nations submit or at least cooperate.
That becomes difficult when you're extremely unpopular . That's where America is today.

In 20 of the 29 countries and areas that Gallup has results for so far in 2020, approval ratings of U.S. leadership are at new lows or they tie the previous lows.

Median approval across the 29 countries and areas stood at 18% in 2020, down from 22% for this same group in 2017. On its face, this decline is not good news for the next U.S. administration, but even worse news is the number of allies on the list of countries where approval dropped to historic lows: Ireland (20%), the United Kingdom (15%), Denmark (14%), Switzerland (10%), Germany (6%) and Iceland (5%).

This doesn't necessarily mean anything to the American Empire if the leadership of those nations are still in our pockets. However it does create a window of opportunity to get out from under our thumb.
Judging by what happened this week, that appears to be exactly what's going on.
First there was the judge in the UK ruling against extraditing Assange .

More importantly, there's the developments with the Nord Stream pipeline .

In Germany, the Climate and Environmental Protection Foundation approved by the parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern will take risks of the U.S. sanctions against contractors of Nord Stream 2 as Deutsche Welle reported.

The foundation will deal with the purchase of equipment and construction materials to carve out other contractors from the possible U.S. sanctions.

This is a big deal because it allows Russia access to hard currency, and ensures their ability to withstand our sanctions. While at the same time it weakens the right-wing governments in Poland and Ukraine. The American Empire loses its leverage in Eastern Europe.
This isn't the first time Europe stood up to US sanctions. Europe created Instex a few years ago to avoid sanctions on Iran. However they were never truly serious about using it.
This time it appears Europe is serious, it's not just a symbolic act.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Hg-XE9wgXjc

But the big surprise was when the EU decided to part ways with our Venezuela policy .

The European Union has dropped its recognition of Juan Guaidó as Venezuela's interim president after he lost his position as head of its parliament.

Josep Borrell, the EU's foreign affairs chief, referred to him in his latest statement as one of the "political and civil society actors striving to bring back democracy to Venezuela", after controversial incumbent Nicolás Maduro took control of the Venezuelan National Assembly at last December's disputed elections.

But the European Commission explained that it was a decision taken collectively by EU governments.

This isn't exactly a bold brave stand. It's more like a reluctant admission of reality.
But what it does do is it opens the door to diplomacy with the actual government of Venezuela.
The reality is that the members of the Coalition For A Coup have been quietly slipping out the backdoor for months.

However, the press statement issued by the US State Department and GAC is notable because of the dwindling number of ally countries that are now "committed to the restoration of democracy in Venezuela." What used to be a long list of more than 50 nations is now down to just 19

As for Guaido, it's just embarrassing that the governments of the world continue to recognize him as anything but a grifter , fraud , and imperialist puppet .

I'm starting to think the government of Venezuela might actually survive. It's hard to say because the American media lies so much about the situation there. Remember about six years ago the right-wing media said Venezuelans were eating rats and zoo animals? If that was true they'd all be dead by now.

Going forward we could be looking at virtually the entire continent of South America (except for Brazil) shifting to the left and outside the reach of the American Empire.
Next month the Ecuador election in which the Socialist candidate is leading in the polls.
The following month Peru gets their chance to elect someone good.
And later in the year it's Chile's turn , where a communist mayor is leading in the polls.

[Jan 09, 2021] American exceptionalism hurt by violent Capitol debacle, expect Biden to push aggressive foreign policy in bid to repair damage by Fyodor Lukyanov

Jan 09, 2021 | www.rt.com

Fyodor Lukyanov , the editor-in-chief of Russia in Global Affairs, chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, and research director of the Valdai International Discussion Club How could something like this happen in Washington? It was assumed that, despite all its social and political problems that have worsened in recent years, America was different and far more robust than we are now seeing. A habit of being special

The rule of thumb was, 'there is America and there are others'. With the others, shortcomings are natural and to be expected, even if many of them are well-established democracies. But America is a different story, because by default, the US is a role model that was supposed to remain the democratic icon forever.

Exceptionalism is foundational for America's political culture. This type of self-identification was the cornerstone on which the nation and society were built a couple of hundred years ago. That's how Americans are raised. And you will run into this phenomenon everywhere.

When asking his supporters gathered by the Capitol building to go home, President Donald Trump said, "You are special." People from the more liberal political camp have even deeper convictions about the US being exceptional and therefore under an obligation to bring light into the world, as they see it.

That's why everybody is shocked – how could this have happened? The reaction was followed by a wave of explanations as to why the clashes near and inside the Capitol building only looked like similar events in other countries, but in reality, they were something entirely different. Here is a comment from the CNN website, "Sure there are superficial similarities... but what's happening in America is uniquely American. It is that country's monster."

Such restlessness is understandable. If we look at exceptionalism in the context of the world order that we've had in recent decades, we see that after the end of the Cold War, the US has held the unique position of the sole global hegemon. No other power in world history has ever reached this level of dominance.

Besides massive military and economic resources, America's exceptionalism has also been relying on the idea that this nation sets the tone for the global worldview. This authorized America to certify systems of government in other countries and exert influence in situations that it believed required certain adjustments. As we all know, this influence took different forms, including direct military intervention.

We are not going to list the pros and cons of such a world order in this article. What's important is that one of the key aspects of this order is the belief in the infallibility of the global leader. That's why American commentators and experts are so worried about the Capitol Building events and Trump's presidency in general hurting the international status of the US.

Boomerang effect

Generally speaking, post-election turmoil is not a rare occurrence. After all, the US itself has encouraged the new political tradition that has emerged in the 21st century. In recent times, in certain places, election campaigns haven't ended after the votes were counted and the winner is announced. Instead, Washington often encouraged the losing side to at least try to challenge the results by taking to the streets. Indeed, resistance was part of the US Declaration of Independence after all.

Western capitals consistently emphasized the legitimacy of such actions in situations when people believed that their votes had been 'stolen'. Washington was usually the lead voice in these declarations. Granted, this mostly applied to immature democracies with unstable institutions, but where are all those unshakable, solid democratic countries today? The world is experiencing so much instability that nobody is exempt from major shocks and crises.

Information overload

There is another reason why traditional institutions are losing their footing. They were effective in a solidified informational environment. The sources of information were either controlled or perceived as trustworthy by the majority.

Today there are problems with both. Technological advances boost transparency, but they also create multiple realities and countless opportunities for manipulation. Institutions must be above reproach if they are to survive in the new conditions. It would be wrong to say that they are all crumbling. They are, however, experiencing tremendous pressure, and we can't expect them to be perfect.

Looking for a scapegoat

The US is not better or worse at facing the new challenges. Or, rather, it is better in some areas and worse in others. This would all be very normal if America's exceptionalism didn't always need affirmation.

Situations in which the US appears to be just like any other country, albeit with some unique characteristics, are a shock to the system. In order to stay special, America looks where to place the blame. Ideally, the guilty party should be someone acting in the interests of an outside power, someone un-American.

This mechanism is not unknown to Russians from the experience in our country – for a long time now, Russian elites have been keen to blame outsiders for their own failures. But America's motivation today is even stronger; there is more passion, because simply covering up the failures is no longer enough – America wants to prove that it is still perfect.

Russia says American system 'archaic' & not up to 'modern democratic standards' after rioters raid Washington's Capitol building

Democrats are taking back the American political landscape. For the next two years (until the 2022 mid-term elections), they will have all the power – in the White House and Congress. Trump's supporters have seriously scared the ruling class, and the Capitol building debacle during the last days of his presidency has created a perfect pretext for cleaning house. Big Tech companies are at their disposal (so far).

Internal targets

Target number one is Trump himself. They want to make an example out of him, so that others wouldn't dare challenge the sanctity of the political establishment. But Trump will not be enough, something must be done about his numerous supporters. The awkward finale of his presidency opens the door for labeling his fans as enemies of the republic and democracy.

The Democrats will do everything within their power to demoralize their earnest opponents. This won't be hard, since the Republican Party itself is a hot mess right now. Trump has alienated almost all his supporters from the party leadership, but he is still popular among regular voters.

Demonstrative restoration of order and democratic fundamentals will also be used to reclaim the role model status. The reasoning is clear – we successfully neutralized the terrible external and internal threats to our democracy, so now we have regained the right to show the world how one should deal with the enemies of said democracy. The 'summit of democracies' idea proposed by Joseph Biden is starting to look like an emergency meeting for closing the ranks in a fight against enemies of progress.

Foreign targets

And this brings us back to the foreign policy issue, because it's not difficult to predict who will be enemy number one. Putin as an almighty puppeteer of all undemocratic forces in the world (including Trump) has been part of the rhetoric for a few years now. Hillary Clinton said it when giving a campaign speech in Nevada in August 2016, and Nancy Pelosi echoed the sentiment after Trump supporters stormed the Capitol Building. Of course, China is a close second on the enemy list created by the Democratic leadership, but there are some economic restraints there.

America's inevitable strife to reclaim its exceptionalism will clash with the current tendencies in global development. All aspects of international affairs, from economy to security, to ideology and ethics, are diversifying. Attempts to divide the world along the old democracy vs. autocracy lines, i.e. go back to the agenda prevalent at the end of the 20th to the beginning of the 21st century, are doomed, because this is not the way the world is structured now.

But attempts will be made nevertheless, and we can't rule out some aggressive 'democracy promotion'. Even if it's just to prove that the embarrassing Trump episode was nothing more than an unfortunate accident. This, by the way, could become a short-term unifying factor for the diverse members of the Democratic Party, some of whom represent the old generation, while others are energetic young proponents of left-wing politics.

We can conclude that the world will not really benefit from the new presidency, even if respected foreign policy professionals return to the White House now that Trump is leaving. It might stabilize America's frenzy in international affairs that we are all used to by now, but a new wave of ideology will neutralize the potential advantage (if it even existed, which is debatable).

America's resolve to prove to the world that it's not like others will encounter the large-scale 'material resistance', which will make a dangerous situation even worse. At least with Trump we knew that he didn't like wars, and he didn't start any new ones. Biden's credit history is very different.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Jan 07, 2021] As Pelosi said about similar protests in Hong Kong: "It is a beautiful sight to behold."

From comments: "The lady martyr, a 14 year air force veteran will be a rallying cry to bring down the corrupt swamp. As Pepe says, the deplorables will become the ungovernables. The real red necks from the intermountain west were not represented. They will be there next time and angry."
Notable quotes:
"... Since the global private finance elite can't start a global war they have to resort to manufactured civil warfare to keep the masses under control and brainwashed against the private finance TINA. ..."
"... The election was stolen. The fraud was blatant, in your face. The election process, the only peaceful means for a transfer of power according to the wishes of the electorate is seen as fatally undermined by a significant portion of the electorate. ..."
Jan 07, 2021 | www.speaker.gov

psychohistorian | Jan 7 2021 5:59 utc | 2

Here's what Steve Bannon's MAGA war-room had to say on today's events..."...What people need to understand is that there's a growing sense among the Deplorables that they've been betrayed not only by their political leaders, but the very institutions that were designed theoretically to protect their liberties."

Who by the way knew that members of Congress have gas masks under their seats ?

Tear gas was deployed in the Capitol rotunda, so the order came down for lawmakers to ready gas masks that are stored under their seats. Allred helped some his colleagues take out their masks as Arizona Rep. Ruben Gallego, a Marine Corps veteran, provided instruction.

"When you put your mask on, breathe slowly or you'll hyperventilate," Gallego said, according to Allred.

There surely is a lot of hyperventilating right now. Trump is accused of inciting violence.

It doesn't read like that . In fact Trump spoke out against violence and called on the people to leave peacefully only to get censored by the blue tick monopoly:

If this was the nakedcapitalism web site I would have no question about what the TINA referenced (private finance) but in this posting I am not so sure that is so clear.

How can America have an epiphany moment about the mythological left/right when top/bottom is the reality that TINA should be all about?

Since the global private finance elite can't start a global war they have to resort to manufactured civil warfare to keep the masses under control and brainwashed against the private finance TINA.

A shit show civil war to keep focus off the real TINA of global private finance......and b wants to call that style.....

Down South | Jan 7 2021 6:36 utc | 8

The election was stolen. The fraud was blatant, in your face. The election process, the only peaceful means for a transfer of power according to the wishes of the electorate is seen as fatally undermined by a significant portion of the electorate.

SCOTUS washed their hands of it.

So if their votes don't count and the highest court in the land won't remedy the situation then the only alternative is either dissolve the union or a radical overhaul of the union. Personally I don't think the latter will ever happen.

The only question is will the dissolution of the union be peaceful or violent!

gm | Jan 7 2021 6:52 utc | 13

Full text of Trumps speech at Jan 6 2021 DC Save America rally:

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-save-america-rally-transcript-january-6

[~75 min long speech--no added color commentary or spin]

I'm sure video of his full speech can also be found with a little searching on internet.

[Jan 07, 2021] Victoria 'F--k the EU' Nuland to make a comeback in Biden's cabinet media -- RT USA News

Jan 07, 2021 | www.rt.com

Home USA News Victoria 'F**k the EU' Nuland to make a comeback in Biden's cabinet – media 6 Jan, 2021 13:28 / Updated 15 hours ago Get short URL Victoria 'F**k the EU' Nuland to make a comeback in Biden's cabinet – media FILE PHOTO. Victoria Nuland during her visit in Kiev, Ukraine. ©Serg Glovny / Global Look Press 81 Follow RT on RT Joe Biden has reportedly tapped Victoria Nuland, a devoted Russia hawk with a disdain for EU members and a suspected Russiagate peddler, to take the third-highest job in his State Department.

Nuland will be nominated for the position of under secretary of state for political affairs, the US media said on Tuesday with Politico being the first to drop the scoop. It's the highest-ranking post in the department after the secretary and deputy secretary. During the Obama administration, Nuland served as assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs, and was a key official in formulating and implementing his Russia policies. She also served as US envoy to the UN under George W. Bush and advised Vice President Dick Cheney on foreign policy.

The news that the vocal Russia hawk was returning to the White House was understandably met with loud cheering by the fans of Pax American on both sides of the Atlantic. Critics were dismayed and somewhat horrified, considering her record.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346491717550272513&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F511687-nuland-tapped-biden-administration%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346750192884842497&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F511687-nuland-tapped-biden-administration%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Arguably the most publicly known episode of Nuland's Obama tenure came in 2014, when a tape of her conversation with then-ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt was leaked. It happened shortly after Ukraine's democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovich was ousted in a wave of street protests culminating in an armed coup, which happened with much encouragement from Washington.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346504009813778434&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F511687-nuland-tapped-biden-administration%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Nuland and Pyatt were discussing who among the coup leaders should be in the upcoming Ukrainian government, which indicated that Washington played a much bigger role in the crisis than it publicly admitted. The infamous " F**k the EU" remark came as Nuland expressed frustration with European nations, who were reluctant to lend legitimacy to the benefactors of the events, and said UN officials could be called in to help "glue this thing" instead.

The EU's skepticism at the time could have been due to the fact that President Yanukovich was expelled under a threat of violence just hours after Germany and Poland helped seal a power sharing agreement between him and the opposition leaders, serving as guarantors of the deal. Her return as a senior diplomatic official is likely to get on a few people's nerves in Europe, which is ironic considering how the Biden administration is supposed to rebuild alliances damaged by the Trump presidency.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden 'should pick OBAMA as AG,' paving the way for him to later ascend to Supreme Court, former White House lawyer says

While flying private in the world of academia and think tanks during the Trump years, Nuland maintained her confrontational attitude to anyone challenging US dominance. Her recipe for dealing with Russia, as outlined in Foreign Policy magazine last summer, is more sophisticated weapons, permanent NATO bases on the Russian border (which will require abolishing a key Russia-NATO agreement) and deniable cyber operations against Moscow.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-3&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346703206013935620&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F511687-nuland-tapped-biden-administration%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Nuland also played a peculiar part in US domestic affairs, possibly having a hand in the promotion of the notorious Steele dossier. The collection of opposition research and rumors was used by the FBI to justify surveillance of the Trump campaign and fueled the endless flood of claims that the incumbent president was somehow a Russian stooge.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-4&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346546653403222020&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F511687-nuland-tapped-biden-administration%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

An FBI memo released last year revealed that Fusion GPS head Glenn Simpson "and others were talking to Victoria Nuland at the US State Department" about the file. The firm looked into Donald Trump for the Hillary Clinton campaign and retained retired British intelligence agent Christopher Steele for the job.

In multiple interviews, Nuland insisted that her role with the dossier was very limited because it dealt with domestic politics. "[Steele] passed two to four pages of short points of what he was finding, and our immediate reaction to that was, 'This is not in our purview,'" she told CBS News in 2018, adding that she advised him to go to the FBI. Some skeptics believe her role in launching the Steele dossier may have been much more significant.

ALSO ON RT.COM Ex-CIA congressman says disputing election results helps America's enemies STEAL ELECTIONS – just what the CIA always did!

Nuland is one of many Obama-era officials tapped by Biden to serve again with him at the helm. In addition to her, the latest reported batch includes Wendy Sherman, the former under secretary of state for political affairs, Jon Finer, who had various roles under Obama, and Amanda Sloat, ex-deputy assistant secretary for Southern Europe and Eastern Mediterranean affairs.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Jan 06, 2021] The whole point of US and Western MSM obsession with demonizing Russia is to divert public attention away from the crisis of neoliberalism at home

Jan 06, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 , Jan 6 2021 18:43 utc | 3

Point on! Trump was never 'the Russians' bitch'. He was the whore of the Russian émigrés mafia that had relocated to the US in south Queens in New York City. A major difference!

Jen , Jan 6 2021 20:01 utc | 17

Of course the whole point of US and Western MSM obsession with demonising Russia and China, and castigating those like Trump (for not going far enough to oppose either one or the other nation, or both), is to divert public attention away from govt failings at home and to push the public into supporting regime change against both Russia and China.

B's post should be read as a companion piece to his previous post on China as an existential threat to the US, as an example of a nation that achieved stability, peace and enough prosperity for most of its people by pursuing an alternate political and economic ideology in the space of 40 years. An ideology that moreover challenges the ideology that the West has followed for the past 500 years, and the assumptions on which that ideology is based. Despite Western attempts to destabilise, break up and impoverish Russia in the 1990s, in order to steal its energy and mineral resources, that nation managed to bounce back to some level of stability and economic security. In addition Russia and China signed a friendship treaty in 2001 and are committing to a closer political ans economic relationship.

All this serves to marginalise the Anglosphere nations and to deny the US, the UK and their elites the opportunity to plunder these nations and their allies for their natural resources.

uncle tungsten , Jan 6 2021 20:25 utc | 21

Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 #3

Point on! Trump was never 'the Russians' bitch'. He was the whore of the russian emigrée mafia that had relocatet to the US in south Quens in New York City. A maijor difference!

Exactly that, thank you. The mafia that manages the D party are of Mediterranean roots and are totally pi$$ed of with the Russians.

Enough of this polite avoidance of the reality of the USAi gangland - it is a mafia state. The D 'reformist' squad just blew their best chance to start the reformation. They will be neutered well before another chance arises.

Jackrabbit , Jan 6 2021 20:28 utc | 23

Trump appeased . . . NOT is only half the story.

AFAICT Russiagate's neo-McCarthyism and Trump's supposed friendliness toward Putin was a set up prior to Trump negotiations with Putin at Helsinki.

"I'm your only friend ... and your last best hope ..." is a powerful pitch - especially when it is accompanied by generous offers of aid and support. And perhaps it would've worked if it had come years before.

So now we have a new Cold War - with both Russia and China.

!!

[Jan 06, 2021] Biden Taps Architect of 2014 Ukraine Coup for State Department by Dave DeCamp

Notable quotes:
"... Foreign Affairs ..."
Jan 06, 2021 | news.antiwar.com

Victoria Nuland, wife of neoconservative Robert Kagan, is expected be nominated for under secretary of state for political affairs

According to a report from Politico , Joe Biden's transition team is expected to nominate Victoria Nuland to be the under secretary of state for political affairs for the incoming administration's State Department.

Nuland, who is married to neoconservative Robert Kagan, is known for her role in orchestrating the 2014 coup in Ukraine while she was the assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasian affairs in the Obama administration.

A recording of a phone call between Nuland and then-US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt was leaked and released on YouTube on February 4th, 2014 . In the call, Nuland and Pyatt discussed who should replace the government of former Ukrainian Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovych, who was forced to step down on February 22nd, 2014.

The US-backed coup sparked the war in eastern Ukraine's Donbas region and led to the Russian annexation of Crimea. Both regions have a majority ethnic-Russian population who rejected the nationalist, anti-Russian post-coup government that even had neo-Nazis in its midst .

In a 2020 column for Foreign Affairs titled, "Pinning Down Putin," Nuland said Russian President Vladimir Putin "seized" on the 2014 coup and other "democratic struggles" to "fuel the perception at home of Russian interests under siege by external enemies." She also cited the war in the Donbas and annexation of Crimea as examples of Russian aggression, as most in Washington do.

Currently, Nuland is a fellow at the Brookings Institution and works for the Albright Stonebridge Group. She is also a board member of the National Endowment for Democracy , a US-taxpayer funded nonprofit that funds "pro-democracy" movements across the world.

Nuland worked in the Bush administration from 2005 to 2008 as the US ambassador to NATO. From 2011 to 2013, she served as the spokesperson for Barack Obama's State Department, and from 2013 to 2017, Nuland was the assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasian affairs.

Politico also reported that the Biden administration is tapping Wendy Sherman to work directly under Secretary of State-designee Anthony Blinken. Sherman worked in the Obama administration's State Department and played a crucial role in negotiating the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

[Jan 06, 2021] Americans Only Care About Themselves. Their Rulers Only Care About World Domination, by Caitlin Johnstone

Jan 06, 2021 | caitlinjohnstone.com

Ever since November third the American political/media class have been keeping Democrats fixated on Trump's post-election shenanigans with garment-rending urgency, now going so far as to call for yet another oxygen-sucking impeachment as he's on his way out the door while millions of Americans are struggling just to meet their basic needs.

You wouldn't know it from the dominant chatter, but Trump's impotent attempts to reverse the election results don't rank anywhere remotely near the top ten worst things this president has done while in office, which include vetoing attempts to end the world's worst mass atrocity in Yemen, escalating world-threatening cold wars with both Russia and China, murdering untold tens of thousands of Venezuelans with starvation sanctions, pushing Iran to the brink of war by assassinating its top military commander, expanding the "war on terror" and rolling back airstrike regulations designed to protect civilians.

US political discourse hasn't reflected the fact that Trump's foreign policy has been far more atrocious than anything he's done domestically–and certainly anything he's done since November–because news media coverage does not reflect this fact. News media coverage does not reflect this fact because western news media regard imperialism and mass military slaughter as normal US presidential stuff, and do not regard brown-skinned foreigners as human.

I point this out because it's good to note, as Trump leaves office, that he spent his entire administration advancing murderous imperialist agendas which spilled very real blood from very real human beings while mainstream America barely even noticed. Their attention was drawn instead to endless narrative theater which had no impact whatsoever on the concrete actions taken by the US government's executive branch. Their gaze was kept fixated on meaningless political drama while the war machine marched on unseen.

Americans are famously uninterested in the rest of the world, to such an extent that you can only get them to watch a British sitcom if it's remade with American actors and they don't know that having your nation's flag flying all over your neighborhood isn't normal. The story of Kanye and Kim's divorce is going to generate more news media views than the entirety of the Yemen war since it began. This lack of interest in war and foreign policy is mighty peculiar, seeing how the people who run their country make it their primary focus.

Americans only care about America while their rulers only care about the rest of the world. This is entirely by design.

Americans fixate on America while ignoring the rest of the world not because they are genetically prone to self-obsessed navel gazing, but because their attention is being constantly and deliberately manipulated away from the stage upon which their government is perpetrating monstrous acts.

The nationless alliance of plutocrats and government agencies who drive the US government's foreign policy cannot have the common riff raff interfering in their affairs. Immense amounts of energy have gone into preventing the rise of an antiwar movement in the hub of the empire like the one which began shaking the earth in the sixties and seventies, with propaganda playing a leading role in this suppression. The US is far too important in the operation of the empire-like power alliance which sprawls across the earth to permit its inhabitants to interfere in its operations by using the power of their numbers to force their nation's wealth and resources to be used at home. So propaganda is used to hold their attention inside America's borders.

"The danger for American elites is not that the U.S. may become less able to accomplish geopolitical objectives. Rather, it is that more Americans might begin to question the logic of U.S. global hegemony," writes @RichardHanania>

In an excellent Palladium essay published last month titled "China's Real Threat Is to America's Ruling Ideology", Richard Hanania argues that the example China sets as a nation rising to superpower status by relatively peaceful and lawful means is deeply threatening to the orthodoxy promoted by western imperialists. If the world in general and Americans in particular were to become more conscious of how a civilization can succeed and thrive without waging endless wars in the name of "freedom" and "democracy", they might begin calling for such an order themselves.

"While most Americans will never experience a ride on a Chinese bullet train and remain oblivious in differences in areas like infrastructure quality, major accomplishments in highly visible frontiers like space travel or cancer treatment could drive home the extent to which the U.S. has fallen behind," Hanania concludes.

"Under such conditions, the best case scenario for most Americans would be a nightmare for many national security and bureaucratic elites: for the U.S. to give up on policing the world and instead turn inward and focus on finding out where exactly our institutions have gone wrong."

In other words, China's rise threatens to reverse the carefully-engineered dynamic which has Americans looking inward while their government points its attention outward. If Americans begin turning their gaze internationally and use the power of their numbers to force their government to heal and nurture their crumbling nation, it would spell the end for the imperialists. But it could also be the beginning of a peaceful and harmonious world.

CAROLYN L ZAREMBA / JANUARY 6, 2021

It is an erroneous generalization to say "Americans only care about America". Which Americans? If you are talking about the ruling class of the United States, even they don't care much about America, only their bank accounts and their stock portfolios. Witness their indifference to the thousands of deaths from Covid-19 through a lack of lockdowns, testing and contact tracing. Witness their demanding that schools and factories remain open, probably to kill as many of the working class as possible while these wealthy goniffs drink champagne on their private islands.

I am born and reared in the United States, and I hate the government of my country of birth. I have hated them since the 1960s. I am an internationalist. Nationalism is a 19th century idea that is past its prime. Ultra nationalism is fascism. All Americans do not support fascism. Many of us are Marxists.

And when you use the term "American", you should be clear that you mean the United States, and not Canada, Mexico, Panama, Brazil or Ecuador, among others.

STANLEY N LAHAM / JANUARY 6, 2021

When Vladimir Putin said that the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of post WWII was the dissolution of the USSR, he was right on the button. What unraveled next was story of unparalleled greed and hubris in the United States in believing the world was its spoils for winning the Cold War.

From Eastern Europe to Asia and South America it went on a rampage like an elephant in a tea house making and breaking governments, bombing and dismembering viable states, creating chaos in order to come in and establishing its new Pax Americana. From Yugoslavia to Libya to Syria, Sudan, Yemen, Honduras etc, it either promoted downright Coup d'États or mercilessly bombed destroying people and infrastructure to achieve its agenda unopposed by a weak Russia and a Warsaw Pact that had gone to its grave. And in so doing caused the greatest mass migration of refugees to Europe the likes of which the world had never seen since WWII.

Yet all this was conceived and effectuated not in secret rooms but openly declared as official policy. In the mid nineties a new political doctrine that would guide policy was announced in the form of "Project for a New American Century" which is nothing less than Manifest Destiny on steroids and on a global scale. This was soon followed by its military doctrine of "Full Spectrum Dominance" over all countries of the earth. Well when the drunk Boris Yeltsin realized belatedly what was afoot, he literally ceded control of the Russian Federation to Putin in 2000 who went about repairing the social, economic and military disaster his country had become,

Starting in Syria in 2014, Vladimir Putin started challenging the American Empire that can no longer project the military supremacy it enjoyed for nearly two decades and this has enraged its planners. The demonizing of Russia is for having stopped dead in its tract the military supremacy of the US and the demonizing of China for having stopped its economic one and challenging the supremacy of the dollar.

CAROLYN L ZAREMBA / JANUARY 6, 2021

Putin was quite right. The only brake on the brazen greed for power of the United States was the huge land mass of the Soviet Union. That brake was removed when Gorbachev waved the white hankie and surrendered. The rest is nightmare.

ROUNDBALL SHAMAN / JANUARY 6, 2021

"Americans are famously uninterested in the rest of the world Americans only care about America while their rulers only care about the rest of the world. This is entirely by design."

In a sense, you can't blame Americans for being so shallow-visioned. From birth, Americans are taught that they belong to "The Exceptional Nation". Well, if you are Exceptional, that must mean everyone else ISN'T Exceptional. So why in the world would Americans care about those unimportant outsiders?

Add to that the fact that most people are innately selfish anyway and just naturally don't care about anyone or anything much but themselves. The World beyond USA borders is just some kind of unimportant black hole that doesn't count for anything. Or so the belief goes. Generation to generation.

And add to that fact what does any of this have to do with big shiny pickup trucks, cold beer, and American football? Those are the three dominant religions in America and have been for a long time. Why would Americans care about anything else? There's only so many hours in the day, you know?

"The nationless alliance of plutocrats and government agencies who drive the US government's foreign policy cannot have the common riff raff interfering in their affairs."

Where things seem to headed the nationless alliance of plutocrats and government agencies who drive the US government's foreign policy cannot have the common riff raff AROUND AT ALL. Various scenarios in play for that outcome.

We need to live each day as if it is our last. Because one way or another, The Last One is getting closer. Do cattle at the stockyards realize that they are in a stockyards and their brothers and sisters go into that big building and don't seem to come out? Will we?

EDWARD HACKETT / JANUARY 6, 2021

You have completely summed up the central points of American thinking. Don't wear a mask or social distance because that interferes with my right to be an idiot.

We get the best government money can buy. When will we stop electing celebrities and old white men? Someday there will be a book called "The Decline and Fall of America". I hope someone is around to read it.

S.A. HOGAN / JANUARY 6, 2021

Dear Caitlin (with typos fixed),

I'm afraid I must take offense when you paint things with a broad brush–which is almost invariably a no-no, the stuff of which prejudice is made–and say "Americans care only about America."

While our media may encourage an ethnocentric, myopic viewpoint of the world, the cure is to A. explore the viewpoints of other countries, and B. get out there...

NEWTON FINN / JANUARY 6, 2021

"Americans fixate on America while ignoring the rest of the world not because they are genetically prone to self-obsessed navel gazing, but because their attention is being constantly and deliberately manipulated away from the stage upon which their government is perpetrating monstrous acts." Not entirely correct. Because of the basic decency of the American people, their imperial government is compelled to use its MSM mouthpiece to sell wars to them in explicitly moral terms.

First, their attention is relentlessly focused ON a specific foreign stage. Then, the leader of that foreign country is demonized as a new Hitler. Finally, the responsibility of the exceptional nation is asserted to protect the citizens of that foreign country from their demonic leader. This longstanding propaganda strategy of R2P (responsibility to protect), previously described by Caitlin and Diana (the other Johnstone), provides strong evidence that the character of the American people, as Caitlin indicates, is no worse than that of other nations.

Indeed, is it not precisely the morality and decency of American citizens which are manipulated by their government and MSM to provide sanction and support for evil deeds?

JOHN DAY / JANUARY 6, 2021

America got shot with an animal tranquilizer dart in November 1963. I'm praying for her to wake up and stand.

JWK / JANUARY 6, 2021

As is always the case, governments being the ideal environment for psychopaths, they eventually are saturated with them. The longer they are around, and the more resources they have, the worse they get. America is peaking, I wonder what nation takes their place?

FRED GROSSO / JANUARY 6, 2021

Good discussion Caitlin. I only add that America could never do the things you suggest it needs to do with Trump and his goons in charge. With the Democrats we have a slim chance. I did not support Clinton in 2016 as I saw her a a hawk, and I found Biden to be a weak choice, but at least one we could work with, just barely. We have a lot of work ahead of us.

KHATIKA / JANUARY 6, 2021

How could things be any worse than the US coming in and bomb you back to the stone age killing millions. Let people take care of their own problems or at least have them solved regionally. The number one problem today is people determined on telling others how to live their lives.

EDWARD HACKETT / JANUARY 6, 2021

Much of what you say about America's lack of involvement with foreign affairs is correct. If you asked the average American citizen where is Yemen? You would get a blank stare...

SOLLY / JANUARY 6, 2021

No need for a long essay on the subject. Americans are violent, egotistic, egoistic, ignorant and greedy.

EDWARD HACKETT / JANUARY 6, 2021

In many cases you are correct, but I think that analysis applies more to our governing class than to the man in the street. The average American is consumed with earning a living and watching TV. They have little knowledge of the world at large nor do they have any interest in learning about the greater world.

Many of your criticisms could be directed to people around the world. We Americans don't have a corner on your listed qualities but we are certainly in the top 10 of those that share our worst qualities.

MR OBVIOUS / JANUARY 6, 2021

We are a empire in decline riding on power and might derived from the WW2 victory and addicted to a system that is totally inadequate for the present. Like any dying behemoth do not get close as the thrashing around is extremely dangerous. We will change if modern civilization is so fortunate to survive.

ZARD / JANUARY 6, 2021

'A nation with a collective, room-temp IQ' : "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public" ~ H.L. Mencken

left（ZOG）right =Divide and Conquer

STEPHEN MORRELL / JANUARY 6, 2021

Here is one of the most insightful recent conversations on the rise of China and the decline of the US empire which will never reach the mainstream, between Michael Hudson and Pepe Escobar:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/IquO_TcMZIQ

JIMMY ROBERTS / JANUARY 6, 2021

I think Caitlin's post on the current state of American society was a Curate's egg : good in parts only. She is absolutely correct to draw attention to US capitalism's desire to impose its dominion over the entire world by ANY means, including war, if necessary.

Trump has confined himself to launching trade wars against US capitalism's rivals – Russia, China, and the EU trading bloc. But the US military has kept up its murderous blood-letting in the Middle East and in Yemen, where the prize is control over the region's oil and gas reserves.

Caitlin is, however, way off beam in her assessment of the "average" American, who, she believes, is only interested in American affairs, flag-waving, and TV. This pessimism simply does not correspond with reality. American cities have been ablaze with revolt for the last 2 years, in response to US police murders of innocent people, and especially black people. These mass demonstrations reflect a revolutionary state of mind amongst wide layers of American working class people, especially the youth of America who correctly see no future for themselves in capitalist America.

... ... ...

A Stalinist China is most definitely not to be admired, or emulated. I can assure Caitlin that she would not be allowed to run her platform in Beijing. On the contrary, she would probably be put in jail for "deviationism," which is Stalinist doublespeak for refusing to repeat, parrot fashion, every word that emanates from the mouths of the Chinese billionaire, fake "Communist" leaders...

ROBERT L PHILLIPS / JANUARY 6, 2021

I very much agree with most of what the author states, but I agree that holding China and it's authoritarian regime up as anything to emulate is wrong. But that nation is indeed racing past the United States in many technological areas.

I tend to agree with her assessment of 'most Americans,' however, as the vast majority could not pass a basic current events quiz, don't know who Julian Assange is, and readily welcome ever stricter controls over the populace due to their fears of – anything and everything, including CV19. Not all, but the majority.

KEITH HAYES (K-DOG) / JANUARY 6, 2021

j'accuse

Americans I am one but do you think I have a choice? Most of the people I know. Ok to be honest, all of them, consider themselves well informed... Dissing people who live in a cultural wasteland is not a good use of time. As a great man once said: 'Forgive them father, they know not what they do.

CAITLIN JOHNSTONE (AUTHOR) / JANUARY 6, 2021

I made it clear that Americans are the victims of imperialist propaganda brainwashing. My American husband who co-wrote this article says stop being so precious about your nationality.

ANNA QUAY / JANUARY 6, 2021

As a Brit I hear you. This political ignorance is certainly not confined to America. I would go as far as to say it extends to all of the English speaking countries of the world. Oh, I would also suggest that you can throw in most of Europe, then add Asia into the mix. It is an affliction that affects humanity.

It is borne from years of being ruled by a hierarchy. We have a slave mentality and it is only individuals who are awake. Collective groups of people usually belong to some organisation and therefore by the nature of their organisation simply follow the doctrine/dogma or ideology of that organisation.

RON CAMPBELL / JANUARY 6, 2021

Once again Ms Johnstone hits it out of the park with an article that brings goosebumps to this old man. The United States government is completely corrupt and its world-wide killing sprees are way worse than anything that Mr. Hitler ever did. No morals and no ethics and no empathy are the hallmarks of its nature that need to be done away with ASAP. Thank You Ms Johnstone for you honest assessment of the United States Monster.

CAITLIN JOHNSTONE (AUTHOR) / JANUARY 6, 2021

Prosecution of Child-Sex Traffickers Plummeted Under Trump https://www.courthousenews.com/prosecution-of-kiddie-traffickers-plummeted-under-trump/

[Jan 06, 2021] U.S. Foreign Policy Blob Knows The Real Threat From China - Has Ideas Of How To Defeat It

Jan 06, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

U.S. Foreign Policy Blob Knows The Real Threat From China - Has Ideas Of How To Defeat It

Andrew Bacevich points to an interesting essay by Richard Hanania about the "threat" from China as perceived by the U.S. establishment.

China's Real Threat Is to America's Ruling Ideology

The author says that China, even as it is growing and has passed the U.S. economically, is not an enemy of the U.S. and no danger to U.S. or others' security:

While China is not blameless, one could reasonably make the argument that, from an international perspective, it has had easily the most peaceful rise to great power status of any nation of the last several hundred years.
...
Perhaps, as the McMasters of the world claim, this is all because Beijing is biding its time in hopes of world domination. Alternatively, China may be an inwardly focused civilization that, while it may have disputes with its neighbors, is not on a mission to fundamentally remake the world. While it would naturally prefer rules that favor it and resists any principles that would legitimize regime change supported from abroad, Beijing does not seek to fundamentally replace the U.N. or rewrite international law. Its strategy has mostly sought stability and growth within the rules of the system developed by Western democracies in the aftermath of the Second World War. While its current position of strength is recent, it has not yet broken from this precedent.

Nor does it, as far as is known, plan to do so.

Various U.S. influenced political scientists have claimed that democratization and liberalization is a necessary precursor for peace and economic growth. That ideological argument was used to seek and kill various 'dictator' dragons abroad. China has proved them to be wrong. And therein lies the real danger to the U.S. establishment.

China's development over the last 40 years proves that it is not necessary to wage wars in foreign countries to be secure and to prosper. For U.S. ideologues that is a bad example that should not exist:

If universal democratization is not the ultimate endpoint of history -- or even an imperative for development, peace, and prosperity -- how can the American role in the world be justified? What will it say about the American system if the U.S. is no longer the wealthiest and most powerful nation in the world, having been surpassed by a country that became the dominant power in East Asia without even paying lip service to democratic ideals?

Ultimately, Americans themselves might begin asking themselves difficult questions about how well they have been served by their own system, including the sacrifices in blood and treasure they are regularly asked to make abroad.

That would be really bad as the monetary fodder in the trough the national security establishment is feasting from would suddenly be seen as an unnecessary waste. That is the real danger to the blob:

Ultimately, the danger for American elites is not that the U.S. may become less able to accomplish geopolitical objectives. Rather, it is that more Americans might begin to question the logic of U.S. global hegemony . Perhaps not every state is destined to become a liberal democracy, and nations with very different political systems can coexist peacefully, as many countries in East Asia do. Maybe the U.S. will not always be at the frontier of military and economic power, and the country that overtakes it may have completely different attitudes about the nature of the relationship between government and its citizens.

While most Americans will never experience a ride on a Chinese bullet train and remain oblivious in differences in areas like infrastructure quality, major accomplishments in highly visible frontiers like space travel or cancer treatment could drive home the extent to which the U.S. has fallen behind. Under such conditions, the best case scenario for most Americans would be a nightmare for many national security and bureaucratic elites: for the U.S. to give up on policing the world and instead turn inward and focus on finding out where exactly our institutions have gone wrong.

What then is the U.S. establishment going to do?

The U.S. rose to global supremacy on the back of two world wars which destroyed the industrial capacities of its main competitors while the wars hardly touched its own country. Could it arrange for a comparable event, by maybe instigating a conflict between Japan and China, that would again lead to a major destruction of global production capabilities while the U.S. stays on the sidelines?

Letting Japan, South Korea and Taiwan(!) have their own nuclear weapons , as another writer proposes, may be a way to get there:

What to do [about China]? There is one way to square the circle. The Biden administration should reconsider reflexive U.S. opposition to "friendly proliferation."
...
Taiwan is in greatest need of such a weapon, but developing one would be highly destabilizing, since Beijing would be tempted to preempt the process. The alternative would be for Washington to fill Taiwan's need, with a profound impact on Sino-American relations. Proliferation would not be a good solution -- but it might be the least bad one.

No doubt, a nuclear-armed China would react badly to better-armed neighbors, but it is no happier with a more involved United States.
...
It is easier to know what not to do with China than what to do. Don't go to war. Don't stage a new cold war. Don't sacrifice core values and basic interests. Don't make the issue all about Washington. Don't waste money and credibility on overambitious, unsustainable attempts at containment. Don't attempt to dictate to the PRC.

But what to do? The United States should think creatively about new approaches to old problems. One way to do so is to stop hectoring partners and preventing them from doing what they want to do. Including, perhaps, developing nuclear weapons.

I expect that this and other such ideas will soon proliferate.

Posted by b on January 5, 2021 at 19:19 UTC | Permalink

namulith , Jan 5 2021 19:30 utc | 1

Total madness!
Michael Droy , Jan 5 2021 19:32 utc | 2
Fortunately the Taiwanese are smart enough not to use nuclear weapons.

Seems to me that China threatens mostly Big American companies - Google Facebook etc, and therefore the US stock market valuations that depend on huge growth expectations remaining credible.

james , Jan 5 2021 19:40 utc | 3
thanks b... the idea to stop when digging a ditch for yourself is not something the usa has ever demonstrated in my memory.. it would be nice if the usa could change its approach on the world stage, but at this point i give it very low odds.. instead the usa will be forced to adjust to a different reality, much like all the innocent people in the usa left behind by a system that is broken.... the usa is becoming what it has failed to address and becoming a failed state... it seems like it is now on one of those china bullet trains to reach this failed state destination, as no other options are likely to be explored here forward...

i am presently reading a book by linda mcquaig given to me for christmas - the sport and prey of capitalists - .... essentially the capitalist template used in the usa the past 40 or more years is being pushed onto canada - privatization and allowing big finance firms like blackrock into the halls of canuck political power to decide the direction that we have to privatize our public institutions... again - we are back to the conversation that @pshycohistorian likes to focus on - public, verses private finance... these financial monoliths are dominating the landscape of the west... i don't know how we move forward and put them to rest... i suspect a financial collapse is the only way, and i am not convinced that the new system will be better then the last... the predators, although a small percentage on the planet, are especially focused on there desire for financial power and dominance.... is china headed in the same direction?? or russia?? i can't tell... as for canada, the future looks grim if one was to just read this book i refer to...

gottleb , Jan 5 2021 19:41 utc | 4
Agree 100%. We can't expect the USA to suffer its own Shock Doctrine can we? The American Fantasy of World Savior is too engrained in Establishment thought to give up its American Exceptionalist, Unitary Super Power, Plunder for Profit, in the name of FREEDOM all while doing Blankfein's God's Work without a fight.

Imagine the horror, the horror I tell you, of American Introspection at the nation's utter failure at everything it pretended at.

Mao Cheng Ji , Jan 5 2021 19:45 utc | 5
Isn't it going to be forbidden, in a couple of week, for any country to have nuclear weapons?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Prohibition_of_Nuclear_Weapons

As for China, I believe it's conclusively demonstrated the superiority of its sociopolitical model. Growing economy, growing prosperity, growing influence in the world, no wars.

Jackrabbit , Jan 5 2021 19:50 utc | 6
"... Has Ideas Of How To Defeat It [China] "

Just ideas? Or maybe they have plans that they are already implementing?

Seems like the latter to me. But then I've been saying (repeatedly) that everything changed in 2013-14 when USA realized that the Russia-China Alliance had teeth.

!!

vk , Jan 5 2021 20:00 utc | 7
Some Chinese commenter here please help me, but, if I'm not mistaken, China has a doctrine that in the US thinktankland they call "China's Peaceful Development Doctrine". In Chinese the call it the "Celestial Ascension" [Doctrine] or something like that. And yes, it requires socialism in order to make sense (the demonstration as to why the doctrine is socialist is too long to put it here, but it is).

So, the author from the Paladium Magazine is reinventing the wheel here, as China makes no secret of its global doctrine.

I maintain my opinion that nukes eliminate the prospect of another Kondratiev Cycle being forced on a world war. Nukes not only destroy infrastructure - it also destroy land and air themselves. It subtracts space from capitalism.

powerandpeople , Jan 5 2021 20:09 utc | 8
Funny how USA always has a geopolitical move or suggestion that invites death and destruction to two or more other countries very far from US shores.

Must be profitable.

Nuclear bombs are passe. There is no 'day after' first use.

Missiles, drones, precision muntions,advanced jamming etc are the new army, navy, and airforce rolled into one.

All that is left is peace and cooperation.

But in reference to China and Taiwan - or any other pairing, for that matter - who would benefit from it?

Putting it another way, who would no longer benefit from it?

Caliman , Jan 5 2021 20:12 utc | 9
"If universal democratization is not the ultimate endpoint of history -- or even an imperative for development, peace, and prosperity -- how can the American role in the world be justified?"

Good question; but note that the question itself assumes that "universal democratization" HAS in fact been the point of our imperial endeavors around the world. As can be seen from our close and personal relationships with the Gulf monarchies, the Egyptian tyrant, the SE Asia wars, and many many other examples to mention over the decades past, this is manifestly not true.

The truth is that "universal democratization" and the so-called "rules-based order" post ww2 have ever only been a narrative justifying (first) imperial anti-socialism and (now) anti-localism. The truth is that what they are deathly afraid of is losing the all-important NARRATIVE. Because, as the article points out, once the narrative of the savior nation is lost, how can the expense in lives and treasure and thereby the feeding of the Mil-Sec-Think Tan Complex) possibly be justified.

karlof1 , Jan 5 2021 20:23 utc | 10
Given the gigantic problems facing the Outlaw US Empire that are detailed in the links I've posted today on the week-in-review thread, I'll add this interview that mostly covers its current domestic turmoil. Furthermore, given the massive skewing of economic data over the past 30 years, those sitting in DC haven't a clue as to the severity of the domestic crisis. From the interview:

"Colin Cavell: Failing to address the massive problems of unemployment and lack of jobs, failing to address the massive wealth gap between rich and poor, failing to ensure adequate healthcare to millions, failing to protect the American public during the course of the current Covid-19 pandemic, failing to address the festering racial divisions, especially with regards to the criminal justice system, and failing to instill a unified trust in the governing apparatus and ruling economic class, then, yes, Biden will preside over a collapsing economy, a divided country, and a distrustful citizenry, and thus open the door to either another term for an older Trump or some other demagogue or outright fascist to 'restore order'."

And all that's primed to worsen more before it improves any. And the international situation vastly differs from that of the Great Depression years with Fascism rising in Europe and Asia. Hudson in his talk and the Keiser's guest both mention the chasm opening economically between China and the Empire--they're heading in opposite directions as we've been discussing here for months. If the mainland got any inkling that Taiwan was going to be given nukes, it would be occupied the next day. Japan and RoK both want to be rid of their occupier which is preventing them from gaining economically by further engaging with China. And the same can be said for the EU. The bottom line is no nation shares the interests of the Outlaw US Empire excepting perhaps Poland and Ukraine--not even Occupied Palestine.

The Parasite has almost devoured its Host, and in the process has disarmed it. Those sitting in DC can't see that fact because the Parasite controls their collective brains, so we get treated to idiotic essays like the one at Foreign Policy b linked above. Obama chose to feed the Parasite in 2009 instead of having it executed. And that's why we are in deep bantha pudu today.

Stonebird , Jan 5 2021 20:26 utc | 11
I think the main problem are the two different approaches taken by the US or Chinese, which are diametrically different. The Chinese seem to use a " Cumulative " approach, while the US is based on what I call " Winnowing " as a state. Take their respective attitudes towards the poor.

First the Chinese; Cumulative , we are all in this together . If everyone has a "job" be it ever-so lowly, selling food on a street corner for example, then for the Chinese this is a "plus". The person is more or less responsible for his own well being, is not a burden on the State for handouts, and could be (potentially) taxable etc. The object being that ALL Chinese then become positive factors in the society. They are also more motivated because they have a "place" in society. The recent case of Jack Ma and an IPO is not the opposite, but he was trying to get ahead by means that would have led to more unemployment - on the back of the Chinese Government. He was not adding to the cumulative good of the country. Only his own riches. (The Chinese do have billionaires and riches - but are constrained by Corporate credit ratings as explained on a previous - very interesting - thread. Thanks to: psychohistorian | Jan 5 2021 2:08 utc | 162. The MoA Week In Review - OT 2021-001)

The US. The attitude is to beat out the chaff leaving only the "kernel ". To " Winnow " the population leaving only the top. ie the poor are sidelined, they become a problem for the Government (needing support, food etc.). A net negative value to US society. (The Rich also get handouts from the Fed. as free money has become an habitude, but that is an another way of winnowing out the chaff - as others do NOT get the trillion dollar handouts) The poor have no "place" in a society that has rejected them and so are less motivated. They must fend for themselves and are expected to obey. If they do not there are always the police to enforce obedience.

"Cumulative = win-win", and "Winnowing = Only the top win".

Mike from Jersey , Jan 5 2021 20:41 utc | 12
It always gets me when the American press says that there can't be peace without "democracy" and "liberalization."

Huh ... try 20 million dead in America's wars since WW II.

And as for "democracy," living in America I would love to see some of it.

karlof1 , Jan 5 2021 20:45 utc | 13
Stonebird @10--

Your "Winnowing" differs little from Zero-sum. The big problem is the Outlaw US Empire's initial storyline is greatly at odds with Zero-sum. As I've written many times at MoA, The Constitution's Preamble that's taught to all citizens says the government's purpose is to "form a more perfect Union...," and what's happening now--for several decades in reality--is the exact opposite. US politicians and business magnates from the Guilded Age knew very well that the way to keep the peace was for everyone to perceive they had a stake in the system. Neoliberalism's Zero-sum throws that rationale under the bus, which in turn has generated the current domestic turmoil. The one thing Trump failed to do was to promise to all Americans they'd have a stake in the system, which is essentially what Hitler and Mussolini told their masses. Trump intoned and shouted MAGA, but did nothing to show that he was serious about doing so. That's why he failed. And that's why the D leg of the Duopoly will also break. It's that break we must act upon when it occurs.

uncle tungsten , Jan 5 2021 20:48 utc | 14
Caliman #8

I think the oligarchic death cult that manages USAi affairs is not the slightest bit interested in "universal democratization": just scan the homeland to see that. The death cult is only interested in wealth accumulating their way. Every year they go into a demented trance screaming about the evil of taxes. Whenever a crisis emerges or a bill goes to the House they scramble to append as many 'tax relief measures' as they can.

The USAi oligarchy and their death cult regulate as many US political candidates as possible to destroy any chance of a government introducing a universal education or universal health system that will need taxes to supply it. Look at what just happened with the #forcethevote attempt to get medicare for all to commence in the USAi. It was the best opportunity in a century to implement it and the only possible advocates totally ignored the initiative.

They became the FraudSquad instead: they used the M4All advocacy to get elected and then ignored their electorate.

Something like %70+ of the people approve of this and the best advocates bowed to the oligarchy death cult and have been since the day they were elected.

So what might the oligarchs think of Chinese people with their resounding support for the Communist Party of China? They will hate them with every bone in their body, they will be furious that this country resists and denies them a chance to plunder it - yet again. The oligarchic death cult will be extremely angry that a single country presents an excellent and achievable system of government and financial management and community betterment to all the other nations on earth.

The oligarchy death cult will do anything to destroy them. And they have the perfect compliant tool in the Biden Harris Presidency.

Paul Damascene , Jan 5 2021 20:50 utc | 15
b - insightful perspectives.
But while I'd agree that China's threat to US ruling ideologies features foreign relations as the leading edge of conflict, the danger of a good alternative may be even greater as it concerns domestic policies.

If a reckoning comes for US ruling elites, the prosecution may begin with the offshoring of US jobs, broad-based prosperity, manufacturing and strategic infrastructure development. Indeed Trump's greatest threat might have been drawing a dotted line if not a solid one to the culprits.

Exhibit B becomes the Chinese model's successes in poverty eradication, general rises in broad-based prosperity, stunning growth in STEM capacities and jobs with futures and now, obviously, competence in public-health crisis management.

The next phase may be litigating the hollowing out of the MIC itself through the corruption of the national defense by a revolving door of staff officers, lobbyists, tankies, bureaucrats and legislators for-profit, for-show, for-corruption.

An additional phase, should the human race survive it, may be tribunals -- such as those of the Reign of Terror, in the event of revolution, or, in the event of war, along the lines of war-crimes tribunals under Chinese / Russian direction, once a suitable city in the smoldering ruins of the continental US equivalent to Nuremberg in German can be found.

m , Jan 5 2021 20:51 utc | 16
It's not so much the American people but the people of the "blob" themselves who increasingly question American exceptionalism. That's why they become ever more crazy and aggressive. They compensate their (unconscious) self-doubts with fanatism.
Lucci , Jan 5 2021 20:55 utc | 17
USA upcoming false flag ?
http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_89502.shtml
William Gruff , Jan 5 2021 20:58 utc | 18
The empire may be considering arming and provoking its vassals near China into nuclear war, but America would never consider anything so terrible as trying to cripple China with biological weapons! That would be just crazy!

Wouldn't it?

Prof K , Jan 5 2021 21:07 utc | 19
There are several levels of analysis here that are being muddled by theoretical ignorance.

The liberal theory says that political democracy and free markets create economic growth, responsible government, mutual gains from trade, economic interdependence, and a zone of peace, reinforced and cemented by multilateral institutions. The liberal zone of peace is threatened, though, by authoritarian regimes with state-run economies, and the former need to contain and overthrow the latter.

Realist theory starts with the state and the state-system, which is anarchic and thus produces conflicts over the balance of power. Defensive realists say that a prudent grand strategy would focus solely on territorial integrity and sovereignty, because any aggressive actions only produce balancing. Offensive realists say that hegemony is the only source of security and that great powers should go to war and wage the arms race to achieve it.

Marxists say that none of these dynamics are distant from the class relationships and competitive dynamics of capitalism and so both liberal and realist arguments turn out to be a crude apologia for imperialism -- for the class-based strategies of dominant states.

With this in mind, we can turn the US' China problem. As the article says, China poses no threat to the US state, nation and territory, so the defensive realist argument for containing China is groundless. Likewise, China's economic growth and stability in the absence of liberal democracy also undermines liberal arguments about the conditions of war and peace in the world. Finally, the balancing of China and Russia against US primacy strategies has undermined offensive realist fantasies of hegemony.

So, what is actually driving US aggression vis-a-vis China?

The only answer is that the long-term material interests of the American capitalist class are threatened by the emergence of a superior competitor, namely, China.

This is true in several respects, most of which I can't cover here.

But, China is building dense global relationships, and positioning itself as a central node of economic growth, technological prowess, social stability, manufacturing power, consumer demand, green innovation, and multilateral reliability.

The US is in deep trouble as a result. As the world becomes more China-centric, the major economic powers will stop funding US trade and government deficits. This will reduce the value of the dollar and diminish the global roles of the Treasury Dept and Federal Reserve, and of Wall Street. The US will fail to meet its debt obligations and the standard of living will plummet as debt-financed consumption winds down. The USG will face fiscal dilemmas, all of which pose serious problems: cut social programs and risk riots; cut the military and risk the empire; raise taxes and risk capital flight and economic stagnation. Given the dynamics of American domestic politics, these dilemmas will not be solved.

These are the underlying material fears of the US ruling class and they EXPLAIN the real drive to containment and war with China.

In short, Marxism is a better science of world politics than are liberalism and realism.

Hal Duell , Jan 5 2021 21:16 utc | 20
Nuclear Japan? Maybe. Nuclear South Korea? Maybe. It could be argued that both already are by virtue of the U.S. occupation of both.
Nuclear Taiwan? I don't see that happening, and any attempt to do so would offer China the perfect excuse to formally reabsorb that Chinese island.
Dork , Jan 5 2021 21:39 utc | 21
American paranoia over China (and Russia) seeking to usurp the US and take over as world hegemon is pure paranoia and projection. It's the western model of the world that considers it normal and desirable to have one country or ideology ruling the entire globe.

China has no history of using its power to force the world to accept it as sole ruler. The reason the US and the west are so paranoid about China et al is because they give themselves the "divine" right to force their ideology onto others, first with Christianity, a monotheistic religion that has converting the heathens, savages and infidels to its screed at the center of its philosophy, and then with liberalism + capitalism (now neoliberal rentier capitalism) and they, falsely, assume every country and ideology is like that.

American and western European foreign policy is a study in Psychological Projection 101. When imperialists like Porcine Pompeo and Lurch Kerry accuse other states of aggressive behavior, violating sovereignty and so forth, they are actually talking about their own country's actions.

psychohistorian , Jan 5 2021 21:49 utc | 22
In the US, now that corporations are people, and since the corporations and tools of finance are privately owned, the concept of democracy is a lie or myth if that offends you.

That is why I keep dragging the ideology discussion to the reality of public/private finance.

It comes down to risk management decisions about the allocation of scarce resources. In the West now those risk management decisions have a ROI skew which includes a profit component that does not exist in China risk management decisions.

We are in a civilization war because the West will not show well in a social system merit comparison...and the elite know this....hence the ongoing shit show to control the narrative.

rolland rouillard , Jan 5 2021 21:54 utc | 23
First off all....there is a difference between WAR and PIRACY
I did not see any bomb landing on US ground or soldier.
Second....free trade agreement is responsible for China economic succes.

Finally...bring back the production on US GROUND...that will kill China

WE are the one responsable...Stop blaming others.

steven t johnson , Jan 5 2021 22:10 utc | 24
Prof K@18 has a very optimistic scenario where China becomes the safe haven for capital and then other countries stop using the dollar as the world currency and t-bills are passed over in favor of the RMB and investors will prefer investing in Shanghai stock market because their money will be more liquid thereand something something will happen so that they (whoc?) won't finance US trade deficits. I don't understand this last, as it is entirely unclear in what sense US trade deficits are being financed. In fact, actual trade deficits aren't being financed. But then the balance of payments isn't just trade in goods, but financial services and US stock markets and yes, government treasuries are also part of that.

It is entirely unclear to me how socialist China, where as of now the ren min bi is not freely convertible, where the government has enormous influence on import and export of capital and capitalists are not only not guaranteed bailing out by the Reserve Bank but regulations are much more onerous than in the US especially with enforcement by prison sentences even for the wealthy...it is unclear to me how this China can replace the US as safe haven, at least while remaining some sort of socialist country at all, even in a NEP-is-the-road-to-socialism kind of way. Further, the US role as the safe haven was not just historically due to it's relative victory (as compared to its capitalist rivals,) in WWI and WWII, but due to its military power. The US pursues a policy of rule or ruin, and ruins selected easy targets on a regular basis (since Bush the senior at the latest,) just to keep the point vivid in everyone's minds. The dollar is not founded on US economic production/productivity but on blood. It is impossible to imagine today's China becoming a capitalist policeman guarding the gates of the bazaar and collecting backsheesh, so to speak. The Chinese capitalists would have to really take over and seriously re-organize Chinese society to do this.

This all sounds pie-in-the-sky at best, I think. Except that's prettifying the ideal, I think. I don't believe a reformed capitalist world system is even possible. Capitalists ultimately depend on their states in their rivalries. There inevitably comes a point when the states must resolve conflicts with wars. The pursuit of a multipolar world is a pursuit of a world safe for war, not a pursuit of peace.

Cyril , Jan 5 2021 22:31 utc | 25
@b

Letting Japan, South Korea and Taiwan(!) have their own nuclear weapons

The link is to an article by Doug Bandow, titled "America's Asian Allies Need Their Own Nukes". Bandow recommends "friendly nuclear proliferation".

This is how far the US has decayed: that a respected journal like Foreign Policy should publish such insanity.

And yes, it's totally insane. The US is not the only country capable of proliferation. The day after Taiwan gets nuclear weapons, so will Mexico and Hezbollah. The day after that , so will many other countries. It's impossible to foresee all the consequences of irresponsible proliferation, but one outcome is the most likely: doomsday for humanity.

Robert Browning , Jan 5 2021 22:36 utc | 26
It won't be the Muslims who destroy Israel, it will the Chinese and the Chinese will will do it without firing a shot.
blues , Jan 5 2021 22:42 utc | 27
-// Another veteran diplomat, Victoria Nuland, will be nominated [by Biden] for the role of under secretary of State for political affairs, one of the people said. //-

Politico

karlof1 , Jan 5 2021 22:57 utc | 28
Lets look at what China plans to do over the next 5 years . The article provides a very broad explanation then links to some specifics at the bottom, the item about the Yangtze River Economic Belt being most important. I found this bit of reporting highly important:

"More specifically, these days the government uses the five-year plans to reinforce and complement the market dynamic by providing regulation and guidance. That includes providing the legal and social framework, such as issuing monetary and fiscal policies, providing public goods and services, such as building high-speed rails, and correcting for market failures like pollution."

There's a vast difference in focus between China and the West--China's sharply focused on its development in ways the West isn't whatsoever, and it makes certain its citizenry knows that and everyone's working as a team--every job has its own value and is important. The best explanation I have is that China is doing while the West is watching and not doing; therefore, China continues to grow ahead of those standing watching with their jaws agape.

China outnumbers the Outlaw US Empire by more than one billion people. That's a huge team working together to advance their nation and themselves. Within the Empire, at least 30% of the labor force is idle and not even counted for unemployment purposes since they aren't actively looking for non-existent jobs while about 24% of the active labor force is unemployed. That's 54% of your human capital that's not being used at all to better themselves and their nation. Honestly, which one has the better outlook?

The enemies of the USA reside within it. Yeah, I've said that before and the evidence continues to prove I'm correct.

Leftraru , Jan 5 2021 23:05 utc | 29
All of this makes me think about the greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century according to Vladimir Putin: The fall of the Soviet Union. Not because of the shrink of the Russian Empire, but for the loss of an equal to the USA in the international stage. That would make the remaining superpower to have some sort of delusional sense of destiny, as seen in Fukuyama's 'End of History'.
How the situation evolves in a timeframe of 5-10 years in the future is hard to evaluate given the many factors that will influence the outcome but IMO, the only thing that can be taken for granted is the further the USA gets weaker, the more dangerous it becomes for the future of Humanity.
My first post at MoA, keep on with the good work :)
c1ue , Jan 5 2021 23:14 utc | 30
I would add that the threat China poses isn't just ideological - it is operational.
The US derives enormous benefit from the US dollar as reserve currency; from the USD as alternative savings vehicle of choice by foreigners against their own currency; by all manner of favorable international institutions like the World Bank and IMF.
Secondly, China isn't some bare assed Middle Eastern terrorists or Central Asian mountain tribes. It has more people, it will or already has a larger economy and it is proceeding apace with technology development.
This is very different than Russia or even the Soviet Union, for example.
The West was always far bigger, wealthier and productive than the Soviet Union - this enabled all sorts of strategies like outspending on defense, buying job lots of puppet politicians in vassal states, etc.
This won't work with a China that is a bigger supplier as well as all of the other size-related advantages already noted.
Can the American oligarchs stand being 2nd fiddle in the medium term? Certainly in the long term? Would their domestic and foreign empires hold up?
karlof1 , Jan 5 2021 23:35 utc | 31
Sputnik publishes its own analysis , which relies rather heavily on Beijing-based American commentator Thomas Pauken who has his own credibility issues as readers will discover at the article's conclusion.
Dr. George W Oprisko , Jan 5 2021 23:41 utc | 32
Putin and Xi have made it very clear....

WWIII will last 20 minutes....

Russians will become martyrs... The population of the NATO countries will be fried and burnt to a crisp...

What is so difficult about understanding that???

As for Taiwan.....

Were it to begin a Nuke program, would be invested and occupied within 24 hours, while USN ships lay at the bottom of their berths. That is, sunk.

INDY

Clueless Joe , Jan 6 2021 0:04 utc | 33
"democratization and liberalization is a necessary precursor for peace and economic growth"
Well, anyone with any notion of history before 1800 knows this is absolute bullshit and those aren't linked at all.
spudski , Jan 6 2021 0:17 utc | 34
Bang on, Clueless Joe @31.
nocovery , Jan 6 2021 0:18 utc | 35
The affairs of humans are paltry compared to the vast changes that are taking place in nature: the Sixth Mass Extinction resulting from our destruction of habitat and the stability of the climate system. As methane has begun erupting from the enormous stores in the Arctic, accelerating the forcing and ice melt, we continue on our merry way oblivious to the fate that awaits us in the near future. Faster than expected, abrupt climate disruption is nature's revolution to clear the earth of the invasive species -- humans.
Paul , Jan 6 2021 0:32 utc | 36
Here is some constructive China/US analysis from Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University and republished on John Menadue's Australian site:

https://johnmenadue.com/europe-and-chinas-year-end-breakthrough/


S , Jan 6 2021 0:58 utc | 37
The United States should think creatively about new approaches to old problems. One way to do so is to stop hectoring partners and preventing them from doing what they want to do.

Unless, of course, they want to become friends with China -- this should be prevented at all costs!

S , Jan 6 2021 1:04 utc | 38
America's fantasy that China will soon collapse like the Soviet Union did is based on arrogance and ideology, not facts and reason (RT, Tom Fowdy, January 4, 2021).
Debsisdead , Jan 6 2021 1:21 utc | 39
amerika's corrupt and undemocratic system of government will bring itself undone long before it could succeed in any attempt to disrupt China's system.
The stupid two party both the same just tell different lies farce is tearing the population apart, that's not going to get better it will get much much worse. In fact I suspect the 'prez-elect' is desperately hoping that the rethugs win both senate seats in Georgia as that provides him with a way to avoid following up on his vague minutely left of center campaign promises.

He may be outta luck cos at this stage with about 25% counted the Dems have a lead in both races. Still that's mostly urban electorates and as I understand 'urban' has become amerikan code for unwhite, so if the dems are trying to fluff this contest it will be by Dems failing to turn out the rural african american vote that saves creepy joe from embarrassment. We shall see cos the state dems may not agree to that.

Anyway the lack of a shared dialog between amerikans is getting worse as we see even here at moa where some of these fools come over all hysterical about quite minor issues. You get that when it is barely possible to pull a cigarette paper between dem & rethug policies on the big stuff, so all that is left are the same deliberately selected emotive issues such as abortion & capital punishment that both parties have been encouraging the citizens to obsess over for the last 60 years.

Those fools will go into a civil war over the emotive, totally irrelevant to living in a functioning society, issues which have been beaten up & propagandised for so long, and that will be the end of the threat to the rest of the world amerika poses.

S , Jan 6 2021 1:28 utc | 40
@steven t johnson #23:
I don't believe a reformed capitalist world system is even possible. Capitalists ultimately depend on their states in their rivalries. There inevitably comes a point when the states must resolve conflicts with wars. The pursuit of a multipolar world is a pursuit of a world safe for war, not a pursuit of peace.

Ergo, we must pursue a socialist multipolar world.

rico rose , Jan 6 2021 1:33 utc | 41
An USA wich is not leader of the world is not possible. This is the central myth. Growing toward that or beeing it. But without that there is no imaginable USA. I come for myself to the conclusion, a multipolar world will cause breakup. As unit of one country it is just not agreement capable.
Canadian Cents , Jan 6 2021 2:56 utc | 42
In 1941, during WWII, Harry Truman wanted a brutal and prolonged conflict in order to inflict as much death and destruction in Europe as possible, declaring:

"If we see Germany winning, we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and in that way let them kill as many as possible."

The US - or at least its ruling elite as expressed by one of its key leaders and subsequent president - wanted the brutal war to continue for as long as possible, so that as many Russians and Germans as possible would be killed, (with other Europeans, including Jews, as inevitable collateral casualties in that process,) so that the US could then step in at the very end to dominate war-destroyed Europe.

Following the same playbook, the US warmongering/plundering elite would love it if they could pit Russia vs. China, Europe vs Russia, India vs. China, Japan vs. China, etc. So long as Eurasia is divided instead of cooperating with itself, the US remains the hegemon. Even better if a destructive war breaks out over there, that the US would sustain from over here, and step in as the noble saviours at the last minute to plunder the spoils.

-

The threat of the example that China happens to provide is not just about preserving America's ruling ideology ("universal democratization", "democracy", "freedom", etc.,) but also about preserving US-led geopolitical hegemony and US-led plutocracy.

The US-spouted ideology is a tool for its hegemony that in turn is a tool for its plutocracy to continue to enrich itself through plunder.

Any example of a country that serves its people, let alone one that does so without foreign wars and regime change subversion, cannot be allowed by a plutocracy that sustains itself through wars, subversion, parasitism, and plunder.

That means, unfortunately, we in the West will continue to be force-fed a barrage of propaganda from our establishment media so that people can't perceive that example, (and are even made to reject it as evil,) lest they start questioning the corrupt, plutocratic system they live in.

James joseph , Jan 6 2021 3:11 utc | 43
Been thinking about what u said, rr 39..
Canada waits with baited breath... the burned out remains of empire's creche, negotiating for commerlcial union with their long traditional north-south continental neighbors. Perhaps the midwest could share in monopolizing grains ...
Or the sea coasts with the fisheries..... otherwise, i don't see it.
I think we are going to collapse to local economy, and maybe build bacl to anational economy, after some time. I don't know when.
Blues guy , Jan 6 2021 3:16 utc | 44
@ nocovery | Jan 6 2021 0:18 utc | 33:

Your Brainwashing is complete, you have swallowed the green pill and happily pay your carbon taxes and live in the fear artificially inserted into your sub/conscious having trusted proven liars and and having failed to verify things for yourself or trust your own senses. All thinking is filtered through your gree-coloured glasses.

You have swallowed wholly the manufactured-for-the-masses groupthink propaganda and espouse it from the core of your very soul, shout it from the mountaintops. Be the chickenlittle that you are and just come out and say, it will be cathartic and will feel good - THE SKY IS FALLING!

You and your ilk are fools, and are dangerously fascistic, climate fatalist totalitarians and you will not be satisfied until any and all opposing views/data/freedom of thought are outlawed.

bystander04 , Jan 6 2021 3:53 utc | 45
many comments mention "oligarchs" - and their power, nationally and internationally. I see a serious danger of the "Oligarchic Internationale" (a wordplay on the marxist 19th. century "Workers Internationale" with their slogan "Workers of the world, Unite! I say that for the very few MoA readers who are too young or not educated in history or economy, apology to the most MoA readers). The Oligarchs of the world (be it USA, China, Russia, Israel, and from wherever they may creep) are de facto already in an "Internationale" type organization - they say silently "Oligarchs of the World - Unite!" and they don't want a big war , which would upset the status quo. They will try to keep it for themselves and their offspring with very forceful means - Internationally enforced. Smaller proxi-wars may happen, but no WW 3, in my laymen's opinion.
denk , Jan 6 2021 4:24 utc | 46
In a nutshell...
Chinese survival vs gringo hegemony.

pssst,
There's this dirty little secret,
FUKUS is very safe ! ;-)
https://apjjf.org/2014/12/36/Vince-Scappatura/4178/article.html

Grieved , Jan 6 2021 4:42 utc | 47
@39 rico rose and #41 James joseph - and others.

I've been pondering lately this one question: what is the point of even having a country if the advantages to the ordinary citizen of having a country are no longer maintained?

In the US, if we can't get the federal government to act on behalf of the people, maybe the only answer is to discard that government. In the USA, this can be done, lawfully and peacefully (although with high drama, for sure) by the States acting in agreement to dissolve the Union.

The United States acts under a certain hindrance by having two levels of government, but this is also a great treasure as well. The top layer of government can go away, and the people will still have a sovereignty-based government to live under, and to be represented by, and to engage with.

So here's a proposal from each State to the Federal establishment: you discorporate, we keep all our monies, and all federal properties within our borders convey to us. You fuck off: we'll get by without you somehow; don't worry about us - and adios .

~~

And rico rose, your point about the multi polar world is very important I think. When you say "a multipolar world will cause breakup" , I suggest that a multipolar world will better allow breakup. It's kind of the same thing, the same result from two different ends: from one end, the Demonstration Effect from the rest of the world including China showing to the US populace that there is a much better way to live, and from the US end, the general dissatisfaction growing among that populace as the federal government continues to be useless.

It could take a short decade at most, I reckon, for the rest of the world to be so impressive that US media can't hide it from the people any longer, and for US oligarchy to be so lawless and ravaging that the people simply can't take it anymore.

In a softer world that follows the example of Asia, and especially given the natural borders of North America anyway, there is no great threat from armed invasion to any of the States, even if each one were to stand alone. Many states would form new unions, but even so, the citizenry in place in each state possesses the firepower to resist any invasion, I suggest.

So if there's no defense to be provided for, all that's left is the welfare of the citizens to be provided for. And 2020 has shown dramatically that, while the federal government has abandoned that sense of provisioning, the States and their people still care passionately about this very thing.

~~

Apparently the calls for "secession" are arising again in the US, or so I've heard. It's a crude concept at the moment, and there is no right of secession. But there is every right to amend the Constitution, by a 3/4 majority of the States, and to dissolve the present Union, in order to create a "more perfect" arrangement.

Fnord13 , Jan 6 2021 4:57 utc | 48
@43 Bystander04

China has many billionaires, but I don't think they have the degree of power over the Chinese government and society implied by the term "oligarch". Jack Ma may be the richest man in China, but that hasn't stopped the Chinese government from quite effectively cutting him down to size.

https://globalnews.ca/news/7555623/jack-ma-alibaba-china-billionaire/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-launches-antitrust-investigation-tech-giant-alibaba-n1252325

VietnamVet , Jan 6 2021 5:02 utc | 49
The pandemic is the final nail into the coffin of the Western Empire. Asia and South Pacific nations functioned as they should and their public health systems are controlling the virus but must enforce quarantines on the infected world to continue their ascension.

It is now a multi-polar world. The exploitative capitalism of the West intentionally destroyed democracy and good governance to increase profits. Reality has bitten back. The remains of the former public health system are corrupt and incompetent as exemplified by Dr. Anthony Fauci. The virus basically spread unhindered in the USA and UK. The difficulty is that in times of stress human being revert to tribal beliefs. The reality of the change in power dynamics will be denied by Western decision makers. The truth is that if the West cannot control a virus, it will never address the existential crises; climate change, rising inequality and perpetual war.

Mankind will only survive if it learns how to live on a finite planet in peace.

Arch Bungle , Jan 6 2021 5:03 utc | 50

I expect that this and other such ideas will soon proliferate.

Nice pun.

So, in short, they've run out of ideas and decided to go full retard.

I can already see the shape of 2021 to come. It's going to be a shitshow on an interplanetary scale.

Bluedotterel , Jan 6 2021 5:18 utc | 51
Posted by: nocovery | Jan 6 2021 0:18 utc | 33

No worry, Nature will take care of itself after we humans have disposed of ourselves. I deplore our general destruction of the environment we live in and the misuse/abuse of resources, but humans are not as strong as we think we are. We may cause considerable damage to the mega fauna and flora, and severely damage ecosystems, but our current war against the planet is one we cannot win and should not even be trying to (capitalism and its God Mammon, again). Life will go on with or without us. Evolution is a fact of life, whether our religions, corporate board rooms, genetics manipulation corps or biological weapons departments understand that or not.

Adam , Jan 6 2021 6:25 utc | 52
@nocovery
Faster than expected, abrupt climate disruption is nature's revolution to clear the earth of the invasive species -- humans.

We're not an invasive species, but I broadly agree. The best thing to happen to the beautiful planet in the last million years would be the extinction of the smart pest, Homo S. Too bad I won't be around to enjoy a people free Earth.

KamMan , Jan 6 2021 6:41 utc | 53
I usually read MoA in the morning, yet today it late pm. Your article reminded me of an earlier article read this morning re USA and China Wages comparison. Here is the article pay particular attention to the graph. Pretty much sums it up in that China have an expansionist economy while the USA has (with exception to the Financial rubbish posing as assets) a contraction economy. Globalisation and Austerity from Reagan_nomics/Thatcher_nomics from the "70's have lead the west into the debt ridden marsh we are in now. Yet the lesson of an expansionist economy (which all western economies have done in the past) escapes the thinking of those who supposedly matter. Personally I think the world needs a lot more "Musk's (creating massive employment in making new tech cars and rockets plus solar) and a lot less Bezios's and Jack Maa's (Alibaba china) (Using others products and screwing them on margins to increase his wealth)
https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/2021/01/05/michael-pascoe-wages-graph-globalisation/
Stonebird , Jan 6 2021 8:51 utc | 54
karlof1 | Jan 5 2021 20:45 utc | 12


I agreee that the US is almost easier to define. Zero-sum or winnowing, both are reductive traits. ie the population gets sidelined.

However, I also think that part of "our" problem is that the comments and viewpoint, are generally all "western-centric" and not enough attention is paid to the fundamental differences in attitudes. Chinese are being "gifted" with US preoccupations to show that they are basically the same as those of the US itself. ie. The US is right-superior in its attitudes and so others STILL try to copy-steal-follow it. Something that is becoming visibly not true. Which is why my comment also mentioned the "cumulative" Chinese attitude. It being probably more important to understand why China is on the ascendant.

Note that "Democracy", "communism" or whatever, all have the same stated object of population input and therefore good for the masses. It is when their lofty ideals are no longer seen to be true, (and are not true in practice?) that the edifice cracks. (Ie, part of the USSR collapse corresponds with the rise of the Nomenklatura of only 750'000 people with the right to vote etc. It worked as long as it worked, but fell through when the mass realised they were NOT getting their part somewhere)

Sorry, Very short reply, as I have problems with internet to resolve, with a bit of luck and perseverance I may be able to continue later today.

Jams O'Donnell , Jan 6 2021 9:24 utc | 55
Posted by: Grieved | Jan 6 2021 4:42 utc | 47

Exactly right. The second largest problem in the world just now is the Government of the US. Breaking up the US would effectively get rid of the problem. Then we could deal with climate change more effectively.

The current hatred and division between red and blue, the lack of effective health services, the deterioration of infrastructure, the future demise of dollar power and thus lack of funding for the military all give me cause to hope that break up will happen. Lets all do our best to make it so.

c1ue , Jan 6 2021 9:26 utc | 56
@Canadian Cents #42
It shouldn't surprise you; Truman was closely associated with the Pendergast political machine (Kansas City mob).
His Attorney General was closely involved in serious corruption in the IRS and DOJ-Tax division.
He dropped the bomb and was a nasty person in general.
Aule , Jan 6 2021 11:57 utc | 57
Meanwhile, Assange is denied bail. Something tells me that, even if not extradite, they plan to hold him in prison indefinitely - if not American, British would do just as well.
BM , Jan 6 2021 12:41 utc | 58
Wow! When did MoA give up all rationality? The US has long since dug its own grave and long since guaranteed its unviability as a superpower. Everything from here is downward, as long as it clings to the mad idea of supremacy. And the longer it continues to deny reality the bigger and more brutal the bang when it finally collapses - or it disappears in its own nuclear conflagration.

The US produces virtually nothing, except over-priced and disfunctional weapons. Everything else that it has is stolen. It does not have the capability to reverse that trend - that horse has long since bolted and disappeared over the horizon. Unlike the US, countries like China and Russia create genuine wealth through their own productive efforts, and they have the military and economic means to ensure that the US cannot strangle them. The economic advantages of China and Russia will only increase compared to the US, and everything the US is doing to sabotage their efforts only makes them stronger and the US weaker.

Nuclear weapons to Taiwan??? Only SuperMorons could entertain the notion for more than 2 seconds (and there are plenty such supermorons at the Foreign Policy Institute, that's part of what got the US to this status in the first place). If the US gives nuclear weapons to Taiwan they will be giving nuclear weapons directly to China. China would know about it before it happens, and long before they could be operational Taiwan would cease to be Taiwan and would be a province of Mainland China. Not to see that China has that capability - and the resolution to carry it out - is sheer idiotic blindness.

Even if Taiwan could install such nuclear weapons before China takes over, where would they hide them? The stupidity of thinking a tiny one-point nation on China's borders can seriously threaten the entirety of nuclear-armed China - in alliance with Russia - defies fantasy. Doing so requires not "superior weapons" (which the US does not have anyway, that prize belongs to China's ally Russia) but superior idiocy and superior self-deception.

The US is on a bullet train to self-destruction. Stopping that train is impossible without making changes in the past that were not made - unless it gives up 100% of its ambitions to supremacy and becomes a minor self-sufficient village minding its own business. That is its only chance.

Instead of waffling about and navel-gazing over such tiresome fantasies of the US exceptionalists, MoA would do much better to concentrate on the serious issues that confront the world today - like confronting the damage wreaked on society worldwide by the hyper-unbalanced madness of covid policies; the direction of political changes in Europe; the ever continuing instability in the Middle East; signs of latent possible resurgence of society in Latin America (cf Bolivia etc); containment of the US madness; etc.

BM , Jan 6 2021 12:48 utc | 59
So here's a proposal from each State to the Federal establishment: you discorporate, we keep all our monies, and all federal properties within our borders convey to us. You fuck off: we'll get by without you somehow; don't worry about us - and adios.
Posted by: Grieved | Jan 6 2021 4:42 utc | 47

Sounds good to me! One specific form of the "village" alternative I mentioned above, in another name.

lizzie dw , Jan 6 2021 13:28 utc | 60
I have wondered how we can go to war with actual bombing and stuff like that with China because many many items that we use every day are purchased from factories in China, having been manufactured there by, it seems to me, "American" (now, of course, multinational) companies. Think apple. Or Ralph Loren. Or any item at the Dollar Store. Have you looked at the labels on your purchases? In addition, we buy all kinds of medicinal products from China. And socks. The US and China are intertwined in many ways.

I thought the MAGA theme of Pres. Trump was to lessen the immense difference in trade amounts - we buy tons of stuff from China but they do not buy that much from us - by imposing tariffs on good imported from China and demanding that "American" companies agree to manufacture in the US again. I thought, well, fat chance.

It is a problem. I am not a "better red than dead or dead than red" or whatever it is, but I cannot see the point of blowing up the world because we can't be the king of it.

Pres. Trump never struck me as a war monger although he has been surrounded by them.

BM , Jan 6 2021 13:33 utc | 61
Posted by: Prof K | Jan 5 2021 21:07 utc | 19

Well said Prof K, you hit the nail on its head.

BM , Jan 6 2021 14:26 utc | 62
A superlative article from Alistair Crooke:

America's Epiphany Moment

The big 'domino' has fallen: Red America; and Brexit is a second. Does anyone believe that this American epiphany; this exploding of American delusions, will leave Europe untouched? Or, that other states will not observe it too, and understand from it that the past need to submit their own cultures to European moral scrutiny is over?

Christian J. Chuba , Jan 6 2021 14:44 utc | 63
We claim our enemies fear us for the same reason that we actually fear China. Experts say, Russia 'invaded' Ukraine because Putin was terrified about having an example of a free and prosperous country on their border and Russians would ask themselves, why can't we have that?'

Talk about projection.

Even so, why can't we coexist?
Most Americans don't travel, Neocons can do what they do best, just lie about other countries and say that China is a starving mess and we are #1. Who in the U.S. would know, who in the MSM would bother to find out otherwise. No set of facts would convince us otherwise.

China could voluntarily decide to go to their own graduate schools and stop going to the U.S. because it's a waste of time and money.
Neocons: 'we banned Communist Chinese students protect our valuable IP'

China could surpass our economy to the point where hovercraft is commonplace.
Neocons: 'Communist China is destroying their environment, our kerosene scooters and trucks are the best thing in the world'

The average fool in the U.S. would never know how backward we had become (or maybe are, I don't travel either)
I guess that is too passive, Neocons have to justify their paycheck.

Mao , Jan 6 2021 14:48 utc | 64
The Degradation of American Democracy -- And the Court

Foreword by Michael J. Klarman

[...] Freedom House, which researches and advocates for democracy around the world, lowered the United States on the organization's scale of zero to 100 measuring political rights and civil liberties from ninety-four in 2010 to eighty-six in 2017. The decline in the United States' rating exceeded that of other Western democracies.

...

More than thirty years ago, political scientist Francis Fukuyama, reflecting on a wave of democratization that had swept the world beginning in the 1970s, concluded that liberal democracy had become inevitable -- the logical endpoint in the evolutionary trajectory of the modern state. However, over roughly the last fifteen years, Freedom House has recorded erosion in levels of freedom in once-strong democracies such as Hungary, India, the Philippines, Poland, and Turkey. Governments in these countries have shut down independent media, assailed and incarcerated independent journalists, packed courts and bureaucracies with their supporters, dismantled independent institutions of civil society, and vilified racial and religious minorities to distract attention from problems they cannot solve.

Many Americans cannot imagine the erosion of their own democracy. The United States has the longest-standing constitution in the world, a strong middle class, high levels of wealth and education, and deeply entrenched democratic institutions and mores. Yet the United States is not immune from world trends of declining democratization. In addition to the developments already noted, research shows that younger Americans are much less committed to democracy than their elders are. Among Americans born in the 1980s, only twenty-nine percent believe that living in a democracy is "essential," as compared with seventy-one percent of those born in the 1930s.

This Foreword examines the recent degradation of American democracy, seeks explanations for it, and canvasses the Supreme Court's contribution to it.

https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/134-Harv.-L.-Rev.-1.pdf

Arch Bungle , Jan 6 2021 15:49 utc | 65
Posted by: Mao | Jan 6 2021 14:48 utc | 64

The title


The Degradation of American Democracy -- And the Court

Could more honestly be written:


The Degradation of the American Illusion of Democracy -- And the Court

Unless by "American Democracy" we are referring to something defined more by its illusory nature than its reality.

Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 , Jan 6 2021 16:11 utc | 66
ANSWER TO: "vk | Jan 5 2021 20:00 utc | 7 ":

In Chinese the call it the "Celestial Ascension" [Doctrine] or something like that. And yes, it requires socialism in order to make sense (the demonstration as to why the doctrine is socialist is too long to put it here, but it is).

Having studied Chinese language and history in Europe and China for years since 1972 and practiced as a teacher, interpreter and guide, I have never come accross any Mainland or Táiwan Chinese text or person who have used the expression "Celestial Ascention" in the Chinese language to describe what's been goin on the last fourty years. WHere have You picked up this belief, Herr Jan?

vk , Jan 6 2021 16:22 utc | 67
@ Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 | Jan 6 2021 16:11 utc | 66

Heard it from a Brazilian scholar who once told me, a long time ago (don't even remember the exact term). Never heard it ever since.

But my point is: China's geopolitical doctrine is not secret/cryptic. You only have to know where to find it (and, preferably, know how to read Chinese). China never hid the fact it is socialist (Market Socialism with Chinese Characteristics is the official name of the system) and never hid the fact that it has a geopolitical doctrine that is in accordance with its system (i.e. also a socialist geopolitical doctrine).

Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 , Jan 6 2021 16:23 utc | 68
Dear Jan ;
As for the expression "Celestial ascention" (vk | Jan 5 2021 20:00 utc | 7), this mai be av mistranslation of various chinese expressions for "natural rise" ('tiānrán shēngqilai' or 'qiántiān-dìngde shēngzhǎng' both meaning "coming naturally". Many other possibilities, byt the semi.religious or semi-imperial associatons of "celestial" are definitely never heard in CHina nowadays. s
c1ue , Jan 6 2021 16:40 utc | 69
@Tolled As #68
You should be aware that black has many views which are literally unique.
It is also clear that few, if any, of them are based on first hand knowledge or experience.
"Socialism with market characteristics" is something Deng brought in - it certainly was not CCP ideology before that.
Having visited China many times as a fluent speaker starting in the early '80s, the difference between the present day ideology and the past is stark.
But not to someone who has never been there and doesn't have good discernment in secondary sources to boot.
vk , Jan 6 2021 16:43 utc | 70
@ Posted by: Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 | Jan 6 2021 16:23 utc | 68

Maybe the Brazilian scholar was too creative.

Either way, the consecrated term in English is a surprisingly good translation ("China's Peaceful Development/Rise/Development Doctrine"), which is also colloquially called "win-win". But the doctrine is actually much more complex than that term suggests.

Gm , Jan 6 2021 17:07 utc | 71
One should google the background of that Richard Hanania person.

Supposedly he is currently a postdoc fellow at Columbia University, and alredy serves as President of some 4 letter institute/stink tank tere that was just set up in 2020[!!].

Before that he got a PhD (political sci) from UCLA (2017-2019?);

before that he got a JD from U. Chicago.

Quite the pedigree. Three top private or out-of-state high tuition schools in expensive cost of living places. Likely his education was *state-sponsored*.

But which State? CIA? Mossad? Who's paying his bills?

gm , Jan 6 2021 17:19 utc | 72
#71 was me [grrr. Cellphone auto-correct]
rico rose , Jan 6 2021 17:27 utc | 73
@47 grieved yes, I like federalism as the basic concept because it works in booth directions if needed. Towards unity but keeping the option of separation. Why not having California as member of the Paris declaration alone. It opens the door for development for problems to early to call. The negotiation process staying open for undecided parts. That is what multipolar means in the core and I guess the only hope for the USA as a nation.
Germany is similar structured. The central government is only allowed to work from own power in defence and foreign relations. For almost everything else it have to use the organs of 15 strong states. Also the source of statehood is coming from them. It is a bit covered right now by EU and covid but there are deep contradiction inside of Germany. If EU, also because of German influence a federation, fails maybe not the old country come up again. I see big chance of totally different structures.
karlof1 , Jan 6 2021 17:51 utc | 74
Stonebird @54--

Global Times article , "US politics in reality 'more interesting than House of Cards ,' entertains Chinese amid pandemic," is absolutely fascinating and revealing--essentially, Chinese are roaring with laughter at the Emperor without clothing. This long excerpt helps explain:

"'Nobody knows more about trending on Weibo better than me,' an internet user mocked Trump via a Weibo comment, adding that 'Weibo would face huge losses after Trump steps down' since the entertainment will largely subside .

"Chinese experts said Americans or other Westerners might not understand why Chinese people are just curious about but don't admire US democracy, but instead treat it as a variety show which is much more interesting than House of Cards . In fact, Chinese people are pretty familiar with the US election and most of them can objectively observe and compare it with the Chinese national conditions.

" House of Cards is the most famous US TV series viewed in China that has helped many Chinese people learn about how US politicians struggle and vie for power. Now Chinese people might learn that the scriptwriters of this TV series have actually underestimated how much drama really occurs in US politics.

"Some experts of US studies said that in House of Cards , Chinese audiences have learned that US politicians have a very vague bottom line. As long as they can make gains, they will betray anyone. In reality, Trump has just proven that there is no bottom line at all, as he empowers his family members in the White House as much as he wants, and uses presidential authority to pardon many people with close connections to him.

" House of Cards tells the audience that mainstream media outlets are influential and can impact politics, but in reality, Trump shows that he can use social media networks to undermine the influence of mainstream media and the conservative new media can even consolidate Trump's base by selling anti-intellectual information or conspiracy theories."

"Some experts of US studies said that in House of Cards , Chinese audiences have learned that US politicians have a very vague bottom line. As long as they can make gains, they will betray anyone. In reality, Trump has just proven that there is no bottom line at all, as he empowers his family members in the White House as much as he wants, and uses presidential authority to pardon many people with close connections to him.

" House of Cards tells the audience that mainstream media outlets are influential and can impact politics, but in reality, Trump shows that he can use social media networks to undermine the influence of mainstream media and the conservative new media can even consolidate Trump's base by selling anti-intellectual information or conspiracy theories." [My Emphasis]

So the longstanding rule that Truth is Stranger than Fiction is again being proven true in China. Most importantly, the chaos within the Outlaw US Empire is serving as education for Chinese and other people globally showing quite graphically the absolute dysfunction of its political system.

I haven't watched House of Cards or Game of Thrones , but I did just recently watch a considerable portion of The Hunger Games . Combine reality with their stories and we'll need to adjust our evaluation of Hollywood propaganda. Add the persecution of Julian Assange for revealing capital crimes--something he'd be rewarded for doing in China--into this mix and there's no way the Neoliberal West is ever going to win Chinese hearts and minds; rather, the opposite's occurring at a rapid pace.

michael , Jan 6 2021 18:35 utc | 75
Cool.
I hope Vlad is preparing diplomatic cables that in such a case he will friendly proliferate to Syria, Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba.
Canadian Cents , Jan 6 2021 19:27 utc | 76
c1ue @56, thanks, knew that Truman unnecessarily dropped the atomic bomb on civilians twice, but didn't know those other details about him. The point is, given the foreignpolicy.com writer that suggests "creatively" encouraging seeding "friendly proliferation" of nuclear arms to Taiwan, South Korea, Japan with the expecation that that would induce China to "react badly to," it seems that the same sociopathic/psychopathic tendencies as Truman expressed are still very much present in the US ruling foreign policy elite.

Along with the WWII example, the US induced and sustained a brutal war in Afghanistan in 1979 for its own hegemonic/plutocratic interests:

In 1979, the US began to covertly foster Wahhabi extremism in Afghanistan (another case of "friendly proliferation") to, in the words of Zbigniew Brzezinski, "induce" a brutal war in order to inflict on "the USSR its Vietnam war," at the casual expense of thoroughly destroying the country and society of the people of Afghanistan for decades.

Robert Gates, the former Defense Secretary under George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and former CIA director under George H. Bush and Ronald Reagan, stated in his 1996 memoirs "From the Shadows" that American intelligence services began to aid the opposing factions in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet deployment in 1979.

That confirms what Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Adviser to Jimmy Carter and also an adviser to Barack Obama, stated in a 1988 interview:

"According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979."

"But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention."

"That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap [..] The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war [..]"

- Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, foreign policy advisor to Barack Obama, in Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998

There's a country run by sociopathic/psychopathic elements that has a pattern of inducing conflicts and brutally destructive wars to disrupt constructive cooperation and development.

Stonebird , Jan 6 2021 20:08 utc | 77
karlof1 | Jan 6 2021 17:51 utc | 74

The truth is out - Hollywood only makes "tele-reality shows" with a bit of extra gloss on them for export. The Chinese have the right idea.

I should have realised that since we have been living the "Twitter era", that variety has become our spice of life, and Shakespeare's "all the worlds a stage" was just a realistic appraisal that we would become a comedy skit. I like the idea, I never did appreciate melodramas or horror films either....

PS. Biden apparently doesn't "tweet", so will we regress to "silent movies"? He can at least do some of the actions. Keystone cops anyone?

Yeah, Right , Jan 6 2021 22:04 utc | 78
So it doesn't occur to this idiot that if the USA engages in "friendly proliferation" then both Russia and China will do the same?

This is the central problem with American foreign policy "experts" - they are so shallow that they never consider that every action they propose will lead to a reaction from those that they target.

Here, consider this vapid statement: "No doubt, a nuclear-armed China would react badly to better-armed neighbors, but it is no happier with a more involved United States."

F**k me.

Look, dude, this is very simple: if the USA gave nukes to (say) Taiwan then China would consider that all niceties are out the window and will look to give nukes to some country on the USA's doorstep.

You know: Cuba, or Venezuela. Or both.

How smart would that "least bad solution" look then?

[Jan 06, 2021] Biden Taps Victoria "F-ck The EU" Nuland For Key National Security Post

Why the protégé of Cheney Nuland? Why now? Did Biden completely succumbs to Alzheimer? Does Biden administration strive to be as dysfunctional, neocon-dominated and destructive as Obama administration?
Jan 06, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

Politico reports Tuesday that President-elect Joe Biden is tapping former senior Obama administration foreign affairs officials to serve in his cabinet.

Most notably among them is neocon Victoria Nuland, who has just been tapped as Biden's state department undersecretary for political affairs.

Writes Politico : "Another veteran diplomat, Victoria Nuland, will be nominated for the role of under secretary of State for political affairs, one of the people said. Nuland also previously served in the Obama administration, as assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian Affairs."

Recall that in this capacity she ran point for Obama's regime change "democracy promotion" efforts in Ukraine . In 2014 leaked audio clip posted to YouTube caused deep embarrassment for the State Department amid accusations the US was coordinating coup efforts using the ongoing "Maidan Revolution" to oust then President Viktor Yanukovych.

In that leaked phone call Nuland told US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt "F*ck the EU" - for which she was later forced to apologize. Here's some of the audio for a little trip down memory lane.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/L2XNN0Yt6D8

She had also been instrumental in her prior postings at the State Department in Obama's disastrous Libya intervention.

After the Obama administration she's been part of various think tanks, including the hawkish Brookings Institution, where she's been a fierce critic of Trump's supposed "appeasement" of Putin. She's also argued for deeper military intervention in Syria .

Politico in its description of the incoming Obama-era officials underscores they are hawks on Russia :

Nuland and [Wendy] Sherman, who entered academia and the think tank world after leaving the Obama administration, have been outspoken critics of President Donald Trump's foreign policy -- particularly his appeasement of Russian President Vladimir Putin .

On the National Security Council, former State Department official Jon Finer will be named deputy national security adviser, the people said, reporting up to incoming national security adviser Jake Sullivan. Finer, a former journalist, joined the Obama White House as a fellow in 2009 and served in various roles throughout Obama's tenure, including as a foreign policy speechwriter for Biden and a senior adviser to then-deputy national security adviser Blinken. Finer had been working in political risk and public policy at the private equity firm Warburg Pincus, which was co-founded by Blinken's father, since leaving government in 2017.

The key NSC role of senior director for European Affairs will go to Amanda Sloat, a Brookings Institution fellow ...

... ... ...

As is the unfortunate norm in the Washington beltway, the Liberal hawks under Obama simply went to who's who of neocon think tanks like Brookings, and have now been called back in revolving door fashion for pretty much a return to Obama era foreign policy (and its disasters ).

[Jan 06, 2021] You could not make this up...

Jan 06, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

Democrycy 7 hours ago

You could not make this up...

BREAKING: Biden to nominate Victoria Nuland as Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1346542671339409408

russian_troll_farm 7 hours ago

F the EU Nuland

buff24seven 6 hours ago

the same Victoria Nuland that said Obama State Dept. informed FBI of reporting from Steele dossier. wow you cant make this stuff up.

ThePub'Lick_Hare 5 hours ago

Not the "Cookie Monster" surely!

Mentaliusanything 1 hour ago

You wait for Hillary to be called up... and the Gangs all here.

What Idiot said there is no Honor amongst thieves

[Jan 06, 2021] An Aggressive China Policy Is a Recipe for More Endless Wars by Daniel Larison

Jan 06, 2021 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Posted on January 2, 2021

From The American Conservative :

Robert Farley explains why the U.S. can't end endless wars if it pursues an aggressive China policy:

The problem is straightforward: Any effort to characterize China as an existential threat to the United States necessarily implies a level of conflict that will (as it did during the Cold War) provide justification for US intervention anywhere in the world. The solution for a less interventionist foreign policy is not to play up the threat of Beijing in the hopes the US will stop intervening elsewhere, but rather to carefully rethink what constitutes a threat to US core values, and what the United States must sacrifice to meet that threat.

The open-ended wars that the US has been fighting for the last two decades were the result of exaggerating a relatively small, manageable threat (i.e., terrorist attacks) into a major global menace that required massive resources and frequent military interventions in many different countries. One can only imagine how much worse things will be if the US replaces its militarized overreaction to terrorism with a militarized overreaction to the Chinese government. A hard-line China policy not only increases the likelihood of conflict between the US and China in East Asia, but it is also likely to encourage more interference in the affairs of other countries that have close relations with China.

If a U.S.-China rivalry follows the pattern of other great power rivalries, that would involve trying to subvert client governments through proxy wars and coups and sometimes intervening directly to overthrow those clients. Policymakers would predictably claim that peripheral countries are actually vitally important and must be "defended" or pulled into our orbit. Hawkish pundits would write articles about "who lost Malawi" and explain why it was absolutely "crucial" to American security that we prop up a dictator in Uzbekistan. The US would wage wars for "credibility" and refuse to end them for the same reason.

One could argue that rivalry with China need not be global and could be confined to East and Southeast Asia, but the tendency with these sorts of policies is towards expansion. Kennan's original idea of containment was never intended to justify waging wars of choice in Asia, but it was almost immediately expanded to apply everywhere even when no real U.S. interests were at stake. A China policy that sought to "contain" China would almost certainly expand in the same way. If someone thinks there can be an intense rivalry with another major power but that it won't become heavily militarized, I refer you to the record of U.S. foreign policy for the last seventy years. All of this has happened before, but it doesn't have to keep happening.

Constant meddling and interventionism are driven by an overly expansive definition of U.S. interests, threat inflation, and a strategy of pursuing global dominance. The meddling and interventionism won't lessen if Washington identifies a different adversary to obsess over. The only things that might change will be the names of the countries that the U.S. sanctions and bombs.

If we want a more peaceful and less interventionist foreign policy, we have to challenge and reject the assumptions that lead the U.S. to interfere in conflicts that have little or nothing to do with us. The first steps in doing that involve rightly identifying what our vital interests are and accurately assessing the threats to those interests. If we do that, we will recognize that China poses much less of a threat to the U.S. than China hawks claim, and we will see that increasing hostility towards China is not in the interests of our country or the interests of our major allies.

Bureaucrat • 4 days ago • edited

Shocking how so few realize that the same people on the right and left think confronting China via a zero-sum approach can be consistent with their support for reducing U.S. military and foreign interventionism. These folks preaching withdrawal from Middle East, Pivot to Asia, or "Rebalancing" crowds are active foreign interventionists by any other definition.

On that note I'm curious which sources of foreign policy information/podcast/writers out their have a sensible approach to China. I do follow some leftist anti-imperialist voices for perspective, but unfortunately they are far too forgiving of Beijing (think Grayzone or the Qiao Collective), but everyone else to the right of these avowed Marxists are even worse, parroting the same hawkish anti-China narrative as Washington's foreign policy blob.

kouroi Bureaucrat • 4 days ago

From my reading of things, China is a nationalist country with a formal communist ideology and the facto regular economy, with private and state ownership, but with a relatively muscular regulatory state (not captured by the Ownership class) that ultimately has the decisive power on things. Massive problems with corruption, which is a constant through Chinese history. The corruption is so apparent because the state actually tries to do something about it, whereas in the US the corruption is legalized and formalized.

As any country, China has its problems that should not be dismissed. Also not exaggerated either. If one dreams of democracy in China, one needs to be very realistic about it. The extremely long tradition (2000 years) of a bureaucratic/meritocratic state in China, from the beginning can take the air from any democratic attempts, never mind half backed ones like the US Polity). It is not the Communist Party Rule that is necessarily the biggest problem standing in the path of a more democratic China.

Another great problem on a greater opening and relaxing of China is the US imperialist attacks. China is under greater attacks and not because of Trump. That was coming. China is developing more and more and is reaching escape velocity. Also, it has consistently refused to relinquish a greater share of its economy profits to the US Oligarchy and US pension funds that will be tanking in the foreseeable future given the gap between their outlays and their returns... In the current climate, with the US the far greater evil, I am more than willing to cheer for China and its president (2019 saw about 140,000 corruption cases in China acted upon, from confiscations, firings, imprisonment, to the occasional death sentence... Go China! What is the tally in the US? just check on the suffering of whistleblowers...)

[Jan 04, 2021] For friends of globalist faction of neoliberal oligarchy everything, for enemies the law

Jan 04, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

"Obama Official Ben Rhodes Admits Biden Camp is Already Working With Foreign Leaders: Exactly What Flynn Did" [ Glenn Greenwald ]. "Any doubts about how customary it is for such calls to be made by transition officials were unintentionally obliterated on Monday night by former Obama national security official Ben Rhodes, who is almost certain to occupy a high-level national security position in a Biden administration. Speaking on MSNBC -- of course -- Rhodes, while amicably chatting with former Bush/Cheney Communications Director turned-beloved-by-liberals-MSNBC-host Nicolle Wallace, admitted in passing that ' foreign leaders are already having phone calls with Joe Biden talking about the agenda they're going to pursue January 20 ,' all to ensure 'as seamless a transition as possible,' adding: 'the center of political gravity in this country and the world is shifting to Joe Biden.'" • Presumably the FBI should be interrogating Rhodes about his guilty knowledge. Anyhoo, I'm so old I remember when IOKIYAR was current in the blogosphere: "It's OK If You're A Republican." But now IOKIIOG: "It's OK If It's Our Guy."

Billpreston , November 10, 2020 at 2:20 pm

Logan Act? What Logan Act?

Obama Security Adviser Admits Biden Is Already Talking With Foreign Leaders; A Breach Of The Logan Act

zagonostra , November 10, 2020 at 2:34 pm

>David Sirota – "That was enough to barely defeat Trump.."

I'm getting confused, was Trump officially defeated. If not why are all these folks making these kinds of statements without any qualifications, none, zip. He could have said "most likely" or some other qualifier. Am I missing something here? Let the legal process of contesting the election play out for Pete's sake.

ex-PFC Chuck , November 10, 2020 at 7:42 pm

In the words of the late, great Yogi Berra, "It ain't over til it's over."
https://kunstler.com/clusterfuck-nation/fore/

[Jan 03, 2021] Will Biden's Administration Simply Represent a Third Obama Term

Notable quotes:
"... The Biden administration, staffed with Obama veterans , may be in effect a third Obama term. Biden may seek a détente with China on some issues. But Democratic foreign policy elites as well as Republicans view China more harshly than they did four years ago. The most likely scenario, then, is an attempt to restore Obama's trilateral strategy of building the biggest possible coalition of allies against China. ..."
"... Democratic foreign policy elites are much more Europhile and Russophobic than their Republican counterparts. ..."
Jan 03, 2021 | nationalinterest.org

Under Barack Obama, the containment of China -- the "pivot to Asia" -- took the form of what might be called trilateralism, after the old Trilateral Commission of the 1970s. According to this strategy, while balancing China militarily, the United States would create trans-Pacific and trans-Atlantic trade blocs with rules favorable to the United States that China would be forced to beg to join in the future. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was intended as an anti-Chinese, American-dominated Pacific trade bloc, while the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) sought to create a NATO for trade from which China would be excluded.

Obama's grand strategy collapsed even before the election of 2016. TTIP died, chiefly because of hostility from European economic interests. In the United States, the fact that the TPP treaty was little more than a wish-list of giveaways to U.S. finance and pharma interests and other special-interest lobbies made it so unpopular that both Hillary Clinton and Trump renounced it during the 2016 presidential election season.

Trump, like Obama, sought to contain China , but by unilateral rather than trilateral measures. The Trump administration emphasized reshoring strategic supply chains like that of steel in the United States, unwilling to offshore critical supplies even to allies in Asia and Europe and North America. This break with prior tradition would have been difficult to pull off even under a popular president who was a good bureaucratic operator, unlike the erratic and inconsistent Trump.

The Biden administration, staffed with Obama veterans , may be in effect a third Obama term. Biden may seek a détente with China on some issues. But Democratic foreign policy elites as well as Republicans view China more harshly than they did four years ago. The most likely scenario, then, is an attempt to restore Obama's trilateral strategy of building the biggest possible coalition of allies against China.

An emphasis by the Biden administration on alliances may succeed in the case of the U.S.-Japan-Australia-India "Quad" (Quadrilateral alliance). The UK may support America's East Asian policy as well. But Germany and France, the dominant powers in Europe, view China as a vast market, not a threat, so Biden will fail if he seeks to repeat Obama's grand strategy of trilateral containment of China.

Democratic foreign policy elites are much more Europhile and Russophobic than their Republican counterparts. In part this is a projection of domestic politics. In the demonology of the Democratic Party, Putin stands for nationalism, social conservatism, and everything that elite Democrats despise about the "deplorables" in the United States who live outside of major metro areas and vote for Republicans. The irrational hostility of America's Democratic establishment extends beyond Russia to socially-conservative democratic governments in Poland and Hungary, two countries that Biden has denounced as "totalitarian."

In the Middle East, unlike Eastern Europe, a Biden administration is likely to sacrifice left-liberal ideology to the project of maximizing American power and consolidating the U.S. military presence, with the help of autocracies like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Any hint of retrenchment will be denounced by the bipartisan foreign policy establishment that lined up behind Biden, so do not expect an end to any of the forever wars under Biden. Quite the contrary.

Michael Lind is Professor of Practice at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of the University of Texas at Austin and the author of The American Way of Strategy. His most recent book is The New Class War: Saving Democracy from the Managerial Elite.

[Jan 02, 2021] Russiagate has dual purpose: depose Trumpvia color revolution and to initiate a new McCarthyism. Both goals were evnetually achieved

So neoliberals managed to take revenge for their 2016 fiasco...
May 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jackrabbit , May 10 2020 16:52 utc | 14

Norwegian @ May10 14:22
Russiagate has been an obvious coup attempt from the beginning

jinn @ May 10 15:20

That is not at all obvious... you have to be extremely gullible to believe any of it is real.

IMO Russiagate was about initiating a new McCarthyism.

And Trump's Deep State selection was about re-igniting nationalism in response to the Russia-China alliance which was recognized as a threat to the Empire in 2013-2014 with Russia's blocking of US action in Syria and Ukraine.

I've been saying this for years.

!!

jinn , May 10 2020 16:54 utc | 15
There was nothing mysterious about "Russiagate." It was a transparently false narrative designed, by the most incompetent election campaign team in history, to excuse their shocking inability to defeat one of the weakest and most discredited Presidential candidates there has ever been.
_________________________________________________

Yeah that is what we are asked to believe, but the problem is how did this incompetent election campaign keep the ball in the air for more than 2 years?

They did not invent the Flynn lied to FBI story and they did not invent the Trump obstructed justice stories. And they did not create any of the silly stories about contacts with Russians. There is no doubt the Hillary supporters sat on the sidelines and cheered all the nonsense that was unfolding in the Russiagate narrative but the storyline that they were cheering for was all created by Trump and his lackeys.


[Jan 02, 2021] Tulsi Gabbard slams COVID relief bill as a 'slap in the face' to Americans - YouTube

Jan 02, 2021 | www.youtube.com


liveltoob , 6 days ago

She voted against the bill because she's smart and she actually reads things

Joseph Klimchock , 6 days ago

Congress has failed the American people again and again. They do almost nothing, we might actually be better if they did NOTHING!!!!!

Shawn Cornell , 1 week ago

One of the few dems that talks sensibly. That's why the communist dems kept changing the rules to keep her out of the debates.

EAZY-E Zero , 5 days ago

Respectfully, Tulsi Gabbard could have been a better candidate than Joe Biden. That's just my opinion.

Jn Stonbely , 3 days ago

Bravo Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard for putting it to the "Demagogue" Party for their deviousness, lies, and clearly ; anti-American behavior !


Kai Chinn , 6 days ago

I like Tulsi, she actually has a head on her shoulders and actually cares about the American People! Aaaaand, she is not hard on the eyes either! :)

boonarga , 6 days ago

Gabbard represents what Democrats were before they became evil.


chiefordnance , 4 hours ago

As a Republican Tulsi was the only Democrat I was rooting for, the Democrats destroyed her because she wasn't part of their agenda.


Brian Hariprashad , 2 days ago

She embodies what a true good democrat is idk what's up with the rest of the party, she has my vote


What Is Your Worldview? - Creation or Evolutionism? , 6 days ago

In a world of [neo]liberalism, it is the VICTIM that gets punished, not the criminals.

[Jan 02, 2021] PATRICK LAWRENCE- Trump's Foreign Policy Explained Consortiumnews

Notable quotes:
"... International Herald Tribune ..."
"... Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century ..."
"... The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News. ..."
Jan 02, 2021 | consortiumnews.com

rump the New Yorker was a stranger in a strange land, having nothing of the sensibility of the insular, self-serving swamp-dwellers in Washington and no grasp whatsoever of the power of the Deep State, whose ire he quickly aroused. Trump was a terrible statesman, too seat-of-the-pants, but what was to him dealmaking was at bottom diplomacy, an activity Washington has little time for.

Why did Trump surround himself with people who opposed him and not infrequently sabotaged those few foreign policy ideas one can approve of -- constructive ties with Russia, an end to wasteful wars, peace in Northeast Asia, sending "obsolete" NATO into the history books? What were H.R. McMaster, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, and numerous others like them but of lesser visibility doing in his administration?

I am asked this not infrequently. My reply is simple: It is not at all clear Trump appointed these people and at least as likely they were imposed upon him by the Deep State, the permanent state, the administrative state -- whatever term makes one comfortable. Let us not forget, Trump knew nobody in Washington and had a lot of swivel chairs to fill.

We must add to this Trump's personal shortcomings. He is by all appearances shallow of mind, poorly read (to put it generously), of weak moral and ethical character, and overly concerned with appearances.

Put these various factors together and you get none other than the Trump administration's nearly illegible record on the foreign policy side.

Trump is to be credited with sticking to his guns on the big stuff: He held out for a new-détente with Russia, getting the troops out of the Middle East and Afghanistan, making a banner-headline deal with the North Koreans. He was scuttled in all cases.

Complicating the tableau, the prideful Trump time and again covered his impotence by publicly approving of what those around him did to subvert his purposes. A year ago, the record shows, Pompeo and Mark Esper (then the defense secretary) concocted plans to assassinate Qasem Soleimani, the Iranian military leader, flew to Mar–a–Lago, and presented Trump with a fait accompli -- whereupon Trump acquiesced as the administration and the press pretended it was White House policy all along.

Now We Come to Iran

Hassan Rouhani, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, addresses the 74th session of the United Nations General Assembly's General Debate, Sept. 25, 2019. (UN Photo/Cia Pak)

Pulling out of the Iran nuclear accord a year into his administration was among the most destructive moves Trump made during his four years in office. It was afterward that the shamefully inhumane "maximum pressure" campaign against Iranians was set in motion.

Trump's intention, however miscalculated, was the dealmaker's: He expected to force Tehran back to the mahogany table to get a new nuclear deal. As secretary of state, Pompeo's was to cultivate a coup or provoke a war. It was cross-purposes from then on, notably since Pompeo sabotaged the proposed encounter between Trump and Rouhani on the sidelines of the UN GA.

Now we have some context for the recent spate of Iranophobic posturing and the new military deployments in the Persian Gulf. We have just been treated to four years of a recklessly chaotic foreign policy, outcome of a war the Deep State waged against a pitifully weak president who threatened it: This is the truth of what we witness as Trump and his people fold their tents.

Trump the dealmaker a year ago now contemplates an attack on Natanz on the pretext Iran is not holding to the terms of an accord he abandoned two years ago? The only way to make sense of this is to conclude that there is no sense to be made of it.

Who ordered the B–52 sorties and the Nimitz patrols? This question promises a revealing answer. It is very highly doubtful Trump had anything to do with this, very highly likely Pompeo and his allies in hawkery got it done and told the president about it afterward.

Trump is out in a few weeks. The self-perpetuating bureaucracy that made a mess of his administration -- or a bigger mess than it may have been anyway -- will remain. It will now serve a president who is consonant with its purposes. And the eyes of most people who support him will remain wide shut.

Patrick Lawrence, a correspondent abroad for many years, chiefly for the International Herald Tribune , is a columnist, essayist, author and lecturer. His most recent book is Time No Longer: Americans After the American Century . Follow him on Twitter @thefloutist . His web site is Patrick Lawrence . Support his work via his Patreon site .

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Ed Rickert , December 31, 2020 at 10:06

A first rate analysis of the inconsistent and inchoate policies of Trump as well as an acute assessment of his psychology, notably his weakness when challenged. Equal cogent is Lawrence's trepidation and concern over the policies and potential actions of the administration that is to replacement Trump. Thank you for your thoughtful work.

Pierre Guerlain , December 31, 2020 at 06:51

I would just like to have a linkto the sources for Pompeo hoodwinking Trump for the assassination of Soleimani.

Linda , December 30, 2020 at 18:42

Thank you, Patrick, for this very clear article summarizing Trump's clumsy attempts at making peace with other countries (a campaign offering to voters) and the Deep State's thwarting of those attempts. My friends and I intuitively knew the people taking roles around the Trump presidency were put there by the "system". Trump had been made into a pariah by the Press, his own Republican Party, and shrieks for 'Resistance' by Hillary Democrats in the millions across the country even before he was inaugurated. There was no 'respectable' person in Washington DC who would dare help Trump make his way in that new, strange land. Remember one of the Resistanace calls to the front? . "Become ungovernable!!!!" Tantrums, not negotiations, have become the norm

So long, any semblance of Washington DC respectability. It was nice to think you were there at one time.

Jerry Alatalo , December 30, 2020 at 16:52

Dear readers and supporters of Consortium News around the Earth,

Please pass the following important message along to the genuine war criminals United States President Donald Trump and United Kingdom Prime Minister Boris Johnson:

"Do the right & moral thing for once in your hideous, miserable & pathetic lives, – and free genuine peacemaker Julian Assange."

***

Please consider making the (1st ever in history) establishment of genuine Peace on Earth the absolute overwhelming #1 New Year's Resolution worldwide for 2021. The quality of life for future generations depends on the good actions of this generation.. Thank you.

Peace.

Patrick Lawrence , December 30, 2020 at 14:32

I thank these commentators, a couple of whom read these pieces regularly, and all others who've taken the time this year gone by to put down their thoughts. I read them always and almost always learn things from them. Blessings to all and wishes for a superb new year! -- Patrick.

Lee C Ng , December 30, 2020 at 14:02

I agree 100% with the writer. Example; if Bolton, probably pushed into the administration by the Deep State, didn't sabotage Trump's talks with the N. Koreans in Vietnam, we might've had a peaceful settlement on the Korean peninsular by now. And it's no surprise that Trump on several occasions prevented the success of US-China trade talks – it was more than likely he was forced to do so. Trump wasn't a politician, much less a statesman. But he wasn't an orgre either, despite the hostility of the corporate press towards him (and I'm no fan of Trump).

Biden will represent better the real forces behind all US administrations – the forces responsible for the over 200 wars/military interventions in its 242 years of Independence.

Jeff Harrison , December 30, 2020 at 00:19

Thank you, Patrick, you have made some sense out of a nonsensical situation. "We have just been treated to four years of a recklessly chaotic foreign policy, outcome of a war the Deep State waged against a pitifully weak president who threatened it: This is the truth of what we witness as Trump and his people fold their tents." What is it that the Brits call their Deep State? It's something like the civil service but it's actually called something else.

You called Donnie Murdo a deal maker. Donnie Murdo is a New York hustler. His "negotiation" style only works when his interlocutor must make a deal with him. If his interlocutor can walk away, he will and Donnie Murdo will go bankrupt. The real problem is that the US doesn't need a deal maker – we have people for that. The Prezzy & CEO is frequently called that, the chief executive officer. But that's an administrative title. He is also frequently called the commander in chief but that really only applies if we are at war which we should be at as little as possible. What the prezzy really is supposed to be is a leader. If Donnie Murdo were, in fact, a leader, John Bolton would have been taking a commercial flight back to the US after his little stunt in Vietnam. But he didn't. So the question isn't what could Donnie Murdo do in the next three weeks, it's what can Donnie Murdo's henchmen do in the next three weeks?

Casper , December 29, 2020 at 18:19

One of the other personal things about Donald Trump, was that he had no skill nor experience in leading and manipulating a bureaucracy. He had basically directed a family business and his personal publicity machine. To the extent that Trump hotels had thousands of employees, Trump hired managers to do that. It would appear that the Trump family business largely concentrated on making of new deals for new hotels.

Thus, Donald Trump arrived in Washington completely unprepared to be the leader of a bureaucracy and completely unskilled at being able to get it to do what he wanted it do do.

I'm not a Joe Biden fan, but he's been in Washington since the 1970's. He's seen the bureaucracy from the Senate point of view for 40 years, then got at least a view of what it was like to try to direct it from watching as Veep. I still suspect the real power lies with the military command, and has since the 1950's, but this administration is going to come in with at least some skills in terms of trying to get a government to do what it wants.

PEG , December 29, 2020 at 17:46

Perfect article – and epitaph on Trump's foreign policy record.

Anne , December 29, 2020 at 14:00

Indeed, Patrick, they (the eyes of most of the electorate) will remain shut, eyelids deftly closed Only other peoples commit barbaric, heinous war crimes, invade other cultures completely without cause, bomb other peoples to death, devastation, loss of livelihood, home water supply We, the perfecto (along with one other group now ensconced – illegally, but apparently western acceptably – in the ME) people do what we do because, well, we are perfecto and thus when we commit these barbarisms, they aren't such. And are, it would seem, totally ignorable. Wake me in the morning style .

Truly, the vast majority of those – whatever their skin hue, ethnic background – who voted for the B-H duo are comfortably off, consider themselves oh so bloody "liberal" (do they really know what that means, in fact? Or don't they care?), so to the left of Attila the Hun (which obviously doesn't mean much, Left wise) .and what the MICMATT does to other people in other societies matters not flying F .After all, aren't they usually of "swarthy" skin hue and likely not western and of that offshoot religion of the one gawd, the third go around?

The west (US, UK, FR, GY etc ) really and truly need to develop a Conscience, a real morality, humanity but I fear that that is all too late

[Jan 02, 2021] Idea of 'exceptionalism' encouraged US to quit treaties makes Americans think they can ignore rules Russian foreign minis

Jan 02, 2021 | www.rt.com

Idea of 'exceptionalism' encouraged US to quit treaties & makes Americans think they can ignore rules – Russian foreign ministry 2 Jan, 2021 15:00 Get short URL Idea of 'exceptionalism' encouraged US to quit treaties & makes Americans think they can ignore rules – Russian foreign ministry © Sputnik / Russian Foreign Ministry 22 Follow RT on RT

By Jonny Tickle In recent years, the US has gone crazy with its idea of 'American exceptionalism' and Washington has taught its people that the country does not need to follow any rules and can disregard international agreements, Moscow claims.

Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, made the claim on Thursday to YouTube channel 'Izolenta live.'

"It's a nuclear power that has gone wild with the idea of its own exceptionalism, withdrawing from lots of documents, treaties, international organizations," she said.

ALSO ON RT.COM Russia ready to 'fight off' Western attempts to seize its assets in $50bn battle with oligarchs over collapsed Yukos oil empire

Zakharova also believes that Washington has "encouraged its population to think that they don't owe anybody anything" and "they should not obey anyone," up to and including international law.

However, she noted that the White House may one day decide to return to various deals sidelined in recent years, presumably referring to the incoming president, Joe Biden.

READ MORE When in Russia Get yourself a dose of Sputnik V, Foreign Ministry tells US envoy who asked Santa for VACCINE When in Russia Get yourself a dose of Sputnik V, Foreign Ministry tells US envoy who asked Santa for VACCINE

Since the incumbent at the White House, Donald Trump, came to power in 2017, Washington has reduced its participation in international organizations. In 2018, the US withdrew from UNESCO and from the UN Human Rights Council (HRC). A year later, Trump pulled his country out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), and in 2020 the country left the Open Skies Treaty. Furthermore, on February 5, a fortnight after Biden is due to take office, the US will depart from the New START nuclear arms reduction treaty unless the Kremlin and the new president's team quickly come to an understanding.

Last month, at his annual press conference, Russian President Vladimir Putin chided the US for pulling out of treaties that Russia is fully supportive of, noting that there could be an "arms race" if Biden doesn't agree to an extension of START.

"We heard the statement by the president-elect that it would be reasonable to extend the New START. We will wait and see what that will amount to in practical terms. The New START expires in February," Putin pointed out.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

[Jan 02, 2021] Senate Overrides Trump Veto Of Defense Bill - ZeroHedge

Jan 02, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

Senate Overrides Trump Veto Of Defense Bill BY TYLER DURDEN FRIDAY, JAN 01, 2021 - 15:15

Meeting for a rare New Year's Day session, the Senate voted 81-13 on Friday to override President Trump's veto of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which Trump said "fails to include critical national security measures, includes provisions that fail to respect our veterans and our military's history, and contradicts efforts by my Administration to put America first in our national security and foreign policy actions."

A two-thirds majority was needed to override the veto - which would mark the first in Trump's presidency. The NDAA authorizes over $740 billion in military programs and construction, as well as 3% pay raises for US troops. It also contains a provision to rename military bases named after Confederate generals .

Trump also wanted to force a repeal of Section 203 protections for social-media companies enjoy due to their constant editorializing of user content, however lawmakers refused to include the provision.

The rare January 1st session comes as the new Congress is set to be sworn in on Sunday.

On Wednesday, the Senate voted 80-12 to begin an official debate on overriding the veto, proving that Congress can act with lightning speed when properly motivated.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said on Tuesday that the NDAA is crucial to national defense, and to "deter great power rivals like China and Russia." The bill "will cement our advantage on the seas, on land, in the air, in cyberspace and in space," he added.

During Trump's time in office, he has vetoed eight other bills - several of them focused on foreign policy and national security issues, according to the Wall Street Journal .

The fight over the NDAA also underscored broader tensions over national-security issues between congressional Republicans and Mr. Trump. On foreign policy and national-security issues, many Republicans have readily bucked Mr. Trump during his presidency even as they have stood by him on many other issues.

For instance, the Trump administration's recent effort to cut troop levels in Afghanistan in half , to roughly 2,500, by Jan. 15, has alarmed some Republicans. The NDAA requires the administration to submit to Congress a comprehensive assessment of the withdrawal before it can use funds to pull out troops. -WSJ

In addition to creating a commission to assess changes to bases, displays, monuments, symbols and other paraphernalia related to Confederate commanders, the bill limits the president's ability to use emergency military construction funds for other purposes . It also restricts employees or former employees from the military-industrial complex to work directly for the Chinese government or government-controlled companies.

Banned Banana 56 minutes ago

Dwight Eisenhower warned us about this 60 years ago, and we have done exactly nothing.

RasinResin 50 minutes ago

When you comb through who is doing what, you realize it's just politicians supporting monopolistic companies. Lawyers in essence, always have been, and always will be the problem. Just ask Shakespere.

Orange Man Rad 53 minutes ago (Edited) remove link

McConnell is on a suicide mission for the GOP as a political party. I'm guessing he could careless as he won't be running for reelection. I always knew he was a swamp creature that hated Trump. He never once publicly defended Trump in 4 years. I will be changing my party affiliation to Independent on January 7th. I'm waiting until then so it has maximum impact after the scumbags throw Trump under the bus. Good riddance GOP.

Right Wing-Nut 48 minutes ago

Excellent presentation on:

How Big Government Really Works

It fully explains why China Mitch is fine being Minority Leader. Follow the money!!

Obake158 40 minutes ago

Don't change your party affiliation, do what I did and go to your town hall and unregister to vote. There is absolutely no point in participating in this sham of a system. Voting for muppet A or muppet B is silly when both sides are played by the same interests. All you do by giving your consent to be ruled is create a mandate that the agent of corruption uses to lord over you. I am 100% done playing with their system and by their rules. Politicians are a verminous class of filth. They need to be purged, swapping a rat for a snake for a maggot is what voting results in. Think of a single politician that represents you and your interests and that you look up to. I haven't been able to say anything good about a politician since Ron Paul was active, they are all treason scum.

techengineer 15 minutes ago

The Republican Establishment is disgusting.. A damn disgrace.. We can't get rid of the rotten bastards without turning it over to even worse Democrats..

Bernout Sanders 43 minutes ago remove link

For those of you keep asking "but why doesn't Trump do more?" - this is your answer.

Could Trump have expanded the use of the Executive Order into clearly unconstitutional territory and hope the Supreme Court would support this? Perhaps.

When it comes to legislation, though, sadly there are less than 10 (and perhaps less than 5) Republican Senators worth a hill of beans.

I mean, look at Utah. Solidly Republican, elect the sorriest GOP Senator and carpetbagger Mittens, and even their decent Senator, Mike Lee, is militantly pro-immigration.

Until Republicans start primarying SOB RINO's like Democrats do in their caucus, there will never be any change.

AboveAverageIdiot 27 minutes ago

Senators who voted to sustain Trump's veto of defense bill:
Booker (D)
Braun (R)
Cotton (R)
Cruz (R)
Hawley (R)
Kennedy (R)
Lee (R)
Markey (D)
Merkley (D)
Paul (R)
Sanders (I)
Warren (D)
Wyden (D)

yerfej 27 minutes ago

The endless wars continue. What the phyuyk is wrong with a country that can't stop starting wars yet never has the balls to finish them? Oh its just a facade for ayssholes to line their pockets.

dustnwind 43 minutes ago

"Amazing how fast Congress can act when properly motivated..."

Yes motivated by special interests, lobbyists and perks. Someday R voters might realize that R politicians were just as involved in the voter scams to neuter(2018) and remove Trump as the democrats. Any appearances to the contrary are simply theater to retain the voter base Trump had.

vasilievich 21 minutes ago

The mood in this country seems to be poisonous. In this little county of ours, population about 220,000, the food bank is moving into larger premises. Also there will be a residence for those in need, available only to women and children.

I think it's doubtful that this sort of thing can go on without consequences, some of which may be dramatic.

I had family in Europe which lived through something similar, the result of which was a world war.

aliens is here 29 minutes ago

When comes to fudging over the people, congress wastes no time doing it.

GreatUncle 29 minutes ago

The politicians on all sides support the censorship and cancellation culture through big tech editing.

Handful of Dust 28 minutes ago

The Republicans had complete control of both houses during Trump's first two years and did ZERO for the working middle class American.

Jon_noDough 7 minutes ago

Can't give the citizens more than a pittance for Covid relief but no limits to military industrial swamp complex...

Baronneke 8 minutes ago

"National Offense Authorization Act " is a more appropriate name as the US was never attacked after ww2 so no need to Defend. The 5-6 last US presidents on the other hand are all war criminals and have attacked (including sanctions) countless countries since the end of ww2. Far over 700 Billion Dollars to the DOO. Just crazy !!

HoodRatKing 4 minutes ago (Edited)

The US is in BUSINESS, one of their top businesses is SELLING ARMS...

I can't of course discuss their other lucrative businesses in Asia & Afghanistan...

JaWS 5 minutes ago (Edited)

I understand that Cocaine Mitch will be visiting the spa in the near future.

[Jan 01, 2021] JOHN KIRIAKOU- The Dark Past of Biden's Nominee for National Intelligence Director by John Kiriakou

Jan 01, 2021 | consortiumnews.com

F ormer acting CIA Director Mike Morell, who has disingenuously argued for years that he had nothing to do with the agency's torture program, but who continued to defend it, has taken himself out of the running to be President-elect Joe Biden's new CIA director.

The decision is a victory for the peace group Code Pink, which spearheaded the Stop Morell movement, and it's a great thing for all Americans. Now, though, we have to turn our attention to Biden's nominee to be director of national intelligence (DNI), Avril Haines.

Haines is certainly qualified on paper to lead the Intelligence Community. A longtime Biden aide, she has the president-elect's confidence. But that's not good enough. Haines is exactly the kind of person who shouldn't be in a position of authority in intelligence. She is the kind of neoliberal intelligence apologist whom so many of us have opposed for so many years. Don't just take my word for it, though. Look at her record .

Haines first began working for Biden when she served as deputy general counsel of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when Biden was its chairman. When Biden became vice president in 2009, Haines moved to the State Department, where she was the assistant legal adviser for treaty affairs. After only a year, she moved to the White House, where she became deputy assistant to the president and deputy counsel to the president for national security affairs, the National Security Council's chief attorney.

That's quite a position. What it means was that her job was to legally justify President Barack Obama's decisions on such intelligence issues as drone strikes and whether to release the CIA Torture Report. She served there under CIA Director John Brennan. Obama apparently liked the job she did for him because in 2013, he named Haines deputy director of the CIA (DD/CIA).

Haines was the first woman to be named DD/CIA, and she served again under Brennan, who proved time and again that he was no fan of congressional oversight . Haines's attitude was similar to Brennan's: The CIA was going to do what it was going to do, and she would make no apologies for it.

There were three controversial areas where Haines made a name for herself and for which she should have to answer in a confirmation hearing: The CIA's refusal to release the Senate Torture Report and the decision to hack into the Senate Intelligence Committee's computer system; the CIA's decision to not punish those officers who carried out the hack and who killed and tortured prisoners beyond even what the Justice Department said was permissible; and the government's drone program, in which hundreds, perhaps thousands, of civilians were killed.

Drone "pilots" launch an MQ-1 Predator unmanned aerial vehicle for a raid in the Middle East. (U.S. military)

Haines' Torture Cover-Up

You may recall that in December 2014, the Democratic staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee released a heavily redacted version of the executive summary of the committee's torture report, the result of years of investigation using primary-source CIA documents. The executive summary was about 525 pages long, just a fraction of the nearly 6,000-page complete report. And the release of the 525 pages was the result of protracted negotiations between the committee and the CIA.

In the end, the public heard a few details of what the CIA's prisoners underwent at secret prisons around the world. But the full story was never made public. It likely never will be. And that's thanks to Avril Haines.

Earlier that year, then-Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein took to the Senate floor in a very unusual display and accused CIA Director Brennan of spying on her committee's staff members. Specifically, Feinstein said that CIA officers had hacked into the Senate's computers to see what it was that committee investigators were focusing on.

The hacking was unprecedented, and Feinstein referred it to the Justice Department for prosecution. Attorney General Eric Holder, however, chose not to pursue the case. Brennan took responsibility for ordering the hacking and he made no apologies for it. But his top aide, his assistant, his legal adviser through the episode was Avril Haines. She has never explained her decisions in support of the hack.

Furthermore, it was Haines who overruled the CIA's inspector general and who decided not to punish those CIA officers who hacked into the committee's computers, or those CIA officers who had gone over and above what the Justice Department had authorized in its "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" program, killing and maiming prisoners.

In the end, not only were no CIA officers punished, but the leaders and most prominent officers in the torture program were promoted, in some cases into some of the most sought-after positions in the CIA. I know this to be true. I worked for them.

Haines and Drones

One area in which Haines has not received a great deal of media coverage has been her role in the drone program . When Haines was the National Security Council's top lawyer, Brennan was the keeper of the so-called kill list. It was Haines who took phone calls in the middle of the night asking her for legal authority -- permission -- to launch missile attacks from drones. She has never answered for her actions.

Now is the time for Americans to put down their collective foot on Biden's national security appointees. Morell was utterly inappropriate for a senior position in the Biden national security apparatus. Haines is, too. She has, very simply, committed crimes against humanity. I'm under no illusions that Biden is a progressive or that he will differ greatly from previous Democratic presidents on national security.

But I do believe that wrong is wrong. Avril Haines is exactly the kind of person we don't want running the Intelligence Community. This is the moment for opponents of her nomination to lobby senators on the Intelligence Committee. There's still time to defeat her.

John Kiriakou is a former CIA counterterrorism officer and a former senior investigator with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. John became the sixth whistleblower indicted by the Obama administration under the Espionage Act -- a law designed to punish spies. He served 23 months in prison as a result of his attempts to oppose the Bush administration's torture program.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.


Cadogan Parry , December 30, 2020 at 21:51

The Intercept (26-June-2020) reported Haines' consulting for controversial data-mining firm Palantir. Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel is also an investor in Carbyne, co-owned by the late Jeffery Epstein and members of the Israeli political and intelligence establishment. Ties between Palantir and Carbyne were cemented when it opened a center in Israel in 2013. Hamutal Meridor, Palantir Israel's current head, served as senior director of Verint, with deep ties to Unit 8200. Verint was previously implicated in being one of two companies hired by the NSA to put a backdoor into US telecommunication systems and popular applications, ensuring it's immediate access.

Charlotte Sheasby-Coleman , December 29, 2020 at 21:21

I urge all who have read this article to watch "Silenced", a James Spione film about John Kiriakou, Thomas Drake and Jesselyn Radack -- whistleblowers who paid a very high price for their honesty and integrity (hXXp://silencedfilm.com). Mr. Kiriakou gave up a lucrative job and almost two years with his family for sharing the truth. His voice needs to be heard now . Avril Haines' record of ignoring tremendous human rights violations makes it clear that she should not hold a position of power in the intelligence community of the upcoming administration.

Anonymot , December 29, 2020 at 19:31

Mr. Biden is a male clone of Mrs. Clinton who is a mouthpiece for the CIA/MIC/WallSt. She is still the person who controls the Democrat National Committee (DNC) via Tom Perez and they control and advise old Joe. Joe is merely the puppet at the end of the inner organization's strings. They are all yes-men/women in the service of the shadow's mindset.

We will have another Obama puppet show.

After 4 years of the unique societal insanity ward that destroyed a maximum of the little remaining democracy, including the directorship and key personnel of every Washington bureau, there is little improvement to expect under the Biden Harris clone team. In the stupid intelligence area that Trump damaged even more deeply than is publicly known, Brennan and Clapper are back as Biden advisors.

Once again, the eagles have died, replaced by beagles sniffing out more war, more oil, and more empire.

[Jan 01, 2021] Our aggressive and violent ally. An updated repost. Part 2 of 2 by JOHN MENADUE

Dec 29, 2020 | johnmenadue.com

Declining empires never decline gracefully. And neither will the US empire – addicted as it is to a belief in its 'exceptionalism' and its grounding in aggression both at home and abroad. Add to the mix that 70 million people voted for Donald Trump and 70% of Republican supporters believe that the election was stolen by the Democrats. A sick country! Joe Biden will smooth a few rough edges but won't do much more.

Yesterday I discussed US 'exceptionalism' and that the US is almost always at war. Today I discuss the US domestic sickness- a failing democracy, inequality, racism and violence.

It is a myth that democracies like America will behave internationally at a higher level of morality. Countries act in their own interests as they perceive them. We need to discount the noble ideas espoused by Americans on how they run their own country on the domestic front and look instead at how they consistently treat other countries. Consider how the Kurds are being treated. They led the fight against ISIS but are now largely abandoned by the US and other 'allies'. The scrapping of the alliance with them is made the more dishonourable by the US/Saudi alliance with the resulting tragedy in Yemen.

The US claims about how well they run their own country are challenged on so many fronts. Alongside great wealth and privilege, 43 million US citizens live in poverty, they have a massive prison population with its indelible racist connotations, guns are ubiquitous and they refuse to address the issue. Violence is as American as cherry pie. It is embedded in US behaviour both at home and abroad.

The founding documents of the US inspire Americans and many people throughout the world. "The land of the free and the home of the brave" still has a clarion call. Unfortunately, those core values have often been denied to others. For example, when the Philippines sought US support it was invaded instead. Ho Chi Minh wanted US support for independence but Vietnam was invaded.

Like many democracies, including our own, money and vested interests are corrupting public life. As some have described it, 'Democracy' in the US has been replaced by 'Donocracy', with practically no restrictions on funding of elections and political lobbying for decades. House of Representatives electorates are gerrymandered and poor and minority group voters are often excluded from the rolls. The powerful Jewish lobby, supported by fundamentalist Christians, has run US policy off the rails on Israel and the Middle East. The powerful private health insurance industry has mired the US in the most expensive and inefficient health services in the world

The US has slipped to number 21 as a 'flawed democracy' in the Economist's Intelligence 2016 Democracy Index. (NZ was ranked 4 and Australia 10). It noted that 'public confidence in government has slumped to historic lows in the US.' Trump is pushing the US into becoming a failed state. His executive power is largely unchecked by a crippled Congress. The Supreme Court is stacked

Many democracies are in trouble. US democracy is in more trouble than most. With over 40% of Americans still prepared to vote for Donald Trump it tells us a great deal about the pervasive sickness.

But our risky dependence on the US cannot be avoided or excused by laying problems at the door of Donald Trump alone. Malcolm Fraser warned us about a dangerous ally long before Donald Trump came on the scene. US obsession with war and with overthrowing or undermining foreign governments goes back over a century. So does domestic gun violence,inequality and racism.

Donald Trump excesses are not likely to significantly move American policies from what has become the norm over two centuries.

Hugh White has pointed out, the US has in effect now given up looking after anyone but itself – "America first" – which makes it very dangerous for a country to be joined at the hip with the US, with or without Donald Trump. It could, of course, be argued that Trump is just being honest and saying what US presidents have always done, looking after their own interests even if they refuse to admit it.

A major voice in articulating American extremism and the American Imperium is Fox News and Rupert Murdoch who exert their influence not just in America but also in the UK and Australia. Fox News supported the invasion of Iraq and is mindless of the terrible consequences. Rupert Murdoch applauded the invasion of Iraq because it would reduce oil prices. Fox and News Corp are leading sceptics on climate change which threatens our planet. News Corp underpins American imperialist intentions. The New York Times tells us that outside the White House, Rupert Murdoch is Trump's chief adviser. God help us!

In the past as in the Vietnam war, the good sense of the American people turned the tide. It is now a moot point whether the US can turn the tide again. The sickness is now more entrenched by Fox News and other moneyed extremists.

But it is not just the destructive role of News Corp in the US, UK and Australia. Our media, including the ABC and even SBS, is so derivative. Our media seems to regard Australia as an island parked off New York. We are saturated with news, views, entertainment and sit-coms from the US. It is so pervasive and extensive, we don't recognize it for its very nature. The last thing a fish recognizes is water. We really do have a 'white man' media'. We see it most obviously today in its paranoia over China.

One outcome of the declining comparative US economic power is that the US will ask its allies to do more. We saw the influence of US budgetary pressures in its launch of the pivot to the Pacific. It was designed in part to help the US extricate itself from the Middle East, but also to reduce defence expenses in the budget.

Despite continual wars, often unsuccessful, the overthrow or subversion of foreign governments and declining US economic influence, US hegemony and domination of Australian thinking continues. Despite all the evidence, why do we continue in denial?

One reason is that as a small, isolated and white community in Asia we have historically sought an outside protector, first the UK and when that failed, the US.

We are often told that we have shared values and common institutions first with the UK and now with the US. But counties will always act first in their own interests as Australian farmers are finding as a result of Trump's dealing with China.

We continue to seek security from our region through a US protector rather than, as Paul Keating put it, security within our own region. Our long-term future depends on relations in our region and not reliance on a dangerous and distant ally.

Another reason why we are in denial about the American Imperium, is, as I have described, the saturation of our media with US news, views and entertainment. We do not have an independent media. Whatever the US media says about tax cuts for the wealthy, defence or climate change it inevitably gets a good run in our derivative media.

A further reason for the continuing US hegemony in Australian attitudes is the seduction of Australian opinion leaders over decades who have benefitted from American largesse and support – in the media, politics, bureaucracy, business, trade unions, universities and think-tanks. Thousands of influential Australians have been co-opted by US money and support in travel, 'dialogues', study centres and think tanks. That is real 'foreign influence'.

China is a beginner in this soft power game.

How long will Australian denial of US policies continue? When will some of us stand up? Are our political leaders right in their assessment that any questioning of the threats posed by our interpretation of the benefits and obligations of the US alliance will lose them an election?

In so far as China is any sort of distant threat it would be much less so if we were not so subservient to the US. The great risk of war with China is if we continue to act as a proxy for the US.

What will we do if the US decides to follow the advice of some of its senior generals and use tactical nuclear weapons in North Korea? Their use would engage the US/Australian facilities in Central Australia a fact that would not escape the notice of China

There is also a great risk that we could be drawn into a US-led attack on China without our knowledge or agreement.

We are a nation in denial that we are 'joined at the hip' to a dangerous ,erratic and risky ally. Apart from brief isolationist periods, the US has been almost perpetually at war. The greatest military risk we run is being led by the nose into a US war with China.

Our record is clear. We have allowed ourselves to be drawn into the futile wars of the UK and the US time and time again. We are used to acting at the direction of our imperial masters. We have become culturally addicted to being told what to think and do. We have forfeited our strategic autonomy while parroting on about our sovereignty

print
John Menadue
Website

John Menadue is the publisher of Pearls & Irritations. He has had a distinguished career both in the private sector and in the Public Service.

[Dec 30, 2020] The Unaccountable Nation by Danny Sjursen

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Then the exceptionalist-triumphalist power inevitably runs off-the-rails, and -- especially when it feels threatened or insecure -- lashes out in fits of aggressive military, economic, religious, or racial chauvinism. This cycle tends to replay again and again until the empire collapses, usually through some combination of external power displacement and internal exhaustion or collapse. ..."
Mar 16, 2020 | www.truthdig.com
Exceptionalism, triumphalism, chauvinism. These characteristics define most empires, including, like it or not, these United States . The sequence matters. A people and national government that fancies itself exceptional -- an example for the rest of the world -- is apt to assert itself militarily, economically, and culturally around the globe. If that self-righteous state happens to possess prodigious power, as the U.S. has since the Second World War, then any perceived success will lead to a sense of triumphalism, and thus put into motion a feedback loop whereby national "achievement" justifies and validates that conception of exceptionalism.

Then the exceptionalist-triumphalist power inevitably runs off-the-rails, and -- especially when it feels threatened or insecure -- lashes out in fits of aggressive military, economic, religious, or racial chauvinism. This cycle tends to replay again and again until the empire collapses, usually through some combination of external power displacement and internal exhaustion or collapse.

Such imperial hyper-powers, particularly in their late-stages, often employ foot soldiers across vast swathes of the planet, and eventually either lose control of their actions or aren't concerned with their resultant atrocities in the first place. On that, the jury is perhaps still out. Regardless, the discomfiting fact is that by nearly any measure, the United States today coheres, to a remarkable degree, with each and every one of these tenets of empire evolution. This includes, despite the hysterical denials of sitting political and Pentagon leaders, the troubling truth that American soldiers and intelligence agents have committed war crimes across the Greater Middle East since 9/11 on a not so trivial number of occasions. These law of war violations also occurred during the Cold War generation -- notably in Korea and Vietnam -- and the one consistent strain has been the almost complete inability or unwillingness of the U.S. Government to hold perpetrators, and their enabling commanders, accountable.

Enter the International Criminal Court (ICC). First proposed , conceptually, in 1919 (and again in 1937, 1948, and 1971), in response to massive war crimes and human rights violations of the two world wars, the Hague-headquartered court finally opened for business in 2002. With more than 120 signatory member states (though not, any longer, the U.S.) the ICC has the jurisdiction to prosecute international violations including "genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression." A compliment, rather than a replacement, to sovereign national justice systems, the ICC is designed to be the "court of last resort," obliged to exercise jurisdiction only when a nation's courts prove unwilling or unable to prosecute such crimes.

All of which sounds both admirable and unthreatening (at least to reasonably well-behaved states with accountable, responsive justice systems), but to the contemporary American imperial hyper-power, the very existence of the ICC is viewed as a mortal threat. Matters demonstrably came to a head this past week when an ICC appeals court reversed a lower-level decision and allowed its special prosecutor -- whose visa Washington has already revoked -- to simply open an official investigation into alleged war crimes committed in Afghanistan by all three major parties to the conflict: the Taliban, U.S., and U.S.-backed Kabul-based Afghan government. This decidedly mild decision, which only allows a multi-directional inquiry , unleashed an immediate firestorm in Washington.

The reflexive reactions and responses of current and former Trump officials was both instructive and totally in line with decades worth of bipartisan U.S. disavowal of the very notion of international norms and standards. Trump's recent hawkish national security adviser, John Bolton -- now an MSNBC-DNC darling for his apparent critique of the president in a new memoir -- has spearheaded opposition to the ICC since its inception, has asserted that the ICC is "illegitimate," and that the U.S. Government "will not sit quietly," if "the court comes after us." After the most recent ruling, Secretary of State (and former director of the very CIA that is likely to be implicated in said war crimes investigation) Mike Pompeo declared the ruling a "truly breathtaking action by an unaccountable, political institution masquerading as a legal body," adding, threateningly, that "we will take all necessary measures to protect our citizens from this renegade, unlawful, so-called court."

On that latter point, Pompeo is neither wrong, nor espousing a policy -- no matter how aggressive or rejectionist -- unique to Donald Trump's administration. Here, a brief bit of all but forgotten history is in order. In 1998, the UN General Assembly voted 120-7 to establish the ICC. The United States, in good company with a gaggle of criminally compromised states -- China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Yemen, and Qatar -- voted against the measure. Two years later, however, President Bill Clinton unenthusiastically signed onto this foundational Rome Statute , but with some dubiousness and the requisite American exceptionalist caveat that he "will not, and do not recommend that my successor, submit the treaty to the Senate for advice and consent until our fundamental concerns are satisfied."

Then came the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This tragedy turned (for then ascendant neoconservatives) opportunity for expanded U.S. military global assertiveness, ensured that Clinton's successor -- one George W. Bush -- wouldn't even consider ICC treaty submission to the Senate. Rather, in May 2002, Bush sent a note to the UN Secretary General informing him that the most powerful and influential country in the world no longer intended to ratify the Rome Statute or recognize any obligations to the ICC (which officially opened for business only two months later ). Never simply a morality tale of Republican villainy, Bush's disavowal didn't explain the half of it.

Far more disturbingly, a stunningly euphemistic American Service-members' Protection Act of 2001 amendment, first introduced just 15 days after the 9/11 attacks, to the Supplemental Appropriations Act for Further Recovery From and Response to Terrorist Attacks on the United States, was already under consideration in Congress. With broad bipartisan majorities, that legislation -- which authorized the U.S. president to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court" -- passed in the House a couple weeks after Bush sent his note to the UN, and the Senate just two weeks later. President Bush then signed this authorization for, up to and including military, force into law on August 2, 2002. Much of the world was appalled and international human rights organizations took to – quite appropriately – calling it the " Hague Invasion Act ." It remains in force today.

The timeline is instructive and itself tells a vital part of the story. Democrats and Republicans alike had chosen to "preempt" -- an internationally prohibited precedent that Bush would later invoke to invade Iraq -- the not yet in force ICC with this bill. They did so, I'd assert, because they knew a salient dirty secret: the U.S. was about to unleash martial fury across the Greater Middle East. In the process, inevitably, American troopers and intelligence spooks would push the limits of acceptable wartime behavior, and thus be vulnerable to international prosecution by the soon effective ICC.

This was unacceptable for an exceptionalist, triumphalist nation, about to undertake chauvinist actions the world over. That unilateral, world-order-be-damned national position held, and still holds, sway in the intervening 18 years. So, for all the Trump administration's coarse obtuseness in response to the opening of the latest ICC Afghan investigation, this is, at root, not (as the mainstream media will inevitably now claim) a Donald phenomenon.Three administrations, and multiple guard-changing Congresses, chose to not to touch the infamous Hague Invasion Act or realign the U.S. with the ICC or the spirit (or even the pretense) of international law.

The cast of elite characters, many still politically influential, who voted for the Hague Invasion Act is nothing short of astounding. The bill passed the House by a margin of 280-138, and counted such "yea" votes as House Intelligence Committee Chair -- top Trump opponent and Russiagate investigator -- Democrat Adam Schiff. Notably, especially in this ongoing electoral cycle, then Vermont Representative Bernie Sanders opposed the measure.In the Senate , an even larger portion of Democrats joined current Speaker Mitch McConnell (and most of his Republican caucus), to vote for the Act. These included such past and present notables as former Secretaries of State John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, current Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and, then Foreign Relations Committee Chair, and now Democratic presidential frontrunner, Joe Biden. His vote, naturally, should come as scant surprise since even in early Senate committee hearings four years earlier, ranking minority member Biden was at best tepid, and at worst quite skeptical of the ICC – even finding unlikely points of agreement with the later Hague Invasion Bill's sponsor, and longtime unilateralist hawk, Republican Senator Jesse Helms.

Still, the swift, frenetic response of senior Trump officials to ICC decision is telling. I suspect that Pompeo and Bolton know the inconvenient truth – that U.S. national security forces have committed crimes in Afghanistan (and elsewhere) and that the U.S. Government hasn't ever truly held these select perpetrators sufficiently accountable. Contra Pompeo, Bolton, and other Trump officials' ardent public assertions, the U.S. military and intelligence community are, in fact – due to being demonstrably "unwilling or unable to prosecute such [war] crimes" – the perfect candidates for ICC investigation, and if evidentiary appropriate, prosecution. The U.S. has a historically abysmal record either of restraining or punishing wartime violations.

The rarely recounted record is an extensive as it is appalling:

Add to that the disconcerting fact that the U.S. crossed a rather macabre tipping point in 2019, whereby, for the first time, the American military and its Afghan allies killed more civilians than the Taliban, and this brings us full circle to an alarming present reality. The very figures who championed and supported the wildly chauvinistic "Hague Invasion" Act seem set to hold sway over, and in Biden's case serve as candidate for, the Democratic Party.In November, that faction will likely, then face off against a Trump team that vehemently opposes even a basic investigation into alleged American criminal misbehavior in the Afghan theater of its ongoing forever wars.

All of which demonstrates, once and for all, that human rights, and international law or norms were never of genuine interest to the United States. None of this will play well on the "Arab," or even broader global, "Street," and will – just like U.S. abuses at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo – actually increase worldwide "terrorism" and anti-Americanism. None of which matters to, or greatly concerns, a Washington elite lacking even a modicum of self-awareness.

Because empires, like the United States, which peddle in exceptionalism, triumphalism, and chauvinism are, historically, the world's true rogue states .

Danny Sjursen is a retired U.S. Army officer and a contributing editor at antiwar.com . His work has appeared in the LA Times, The Nation, Huff Post, The Hill, Salon, Truthdig, Tom Dispatch, among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . His forthcoming book, Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War is now available for pre-order . Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet . Check out his professional website for contact info, scheduling speeches, and/or access to the full corpus of his writing and media appearances.

Danny Sjursen / Truthdig

[Dec 30, 2020] Prof John Mearsheimer - US Foreign Policy under President Biden

Dec 30, 2020 | www.youtube.com

IIEA

Professor Mearsheimer discusses the foreign policy agenda of the President Biden administration. He shares his insights on the likely continuities as well as differences between the Biden administration's policies and the policies pursued by President Trump over the past four years.

About the Speaker: John J. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, where he has taught since 1982. He graduated from West Point (1970), has a PhD in political science from Cornell University (1981), and has written extensively about security issues and international politics. Among his six books, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (2001, 2014) won the Joseph Lepgold Book Prize; and The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (with Stephen M. Walt, 2007), made the New York Times bestseller list.

His latest book is The Great Delusion: Liberal Ideals and International Realities (2018), which won the 2019 Best Book of the Year Award from the Valdai Discussion Conference, Moscow.

In 2020, he won the James Madison Award, which is given once every three years by the American Political Science Association to "an American political scientist who has made a distinguished scholarly contribution to political science." Recorded on the 17th of November 2020

Matthew Jackson , 1 day ago (edited)

His predictions here are coming true right now. I would also add that the polarization of politics in the US will have continued unpleasant domestic social ramifications. Do I want to stay and endure it ? Trump did try like hell to back the US out of long standing losing wars in the middle east. Nobody appreciates this though.

Lowen Blade , 1 month ago

It's delusional to think PRC could be "contained," but neocons just don't get it.


rollo clevich , 1 week ago

Mearsheimer expects the Dems to give up on the mindless saber-rattling directed at Russia for the last four years. He may be right, the D's were likely cynically providing "boob bait for the bubbas." Taking a tough line vs China is more unlikely given that PRC is so closely tied to the Silicon Valley and Wall Street plutocrats who are the real base of the Democrat Party.

[Dec 29, 2020] The Demise of American Exceptionalism by David Bromwich

Notable quotes:
"... Perils of Dominance ..."
"... standard maxim ..."
"... bear any burden ..."
"... David Bromwich is Sterling Professor of English at Yale University. He is the author of ..."
Dec 29, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

Before our national self-inquest on Donald Trump has run its course, we will be prompted to remember again that the world exists. President-elect Joe Biden's appointments at the departments of defense, state, and the national security council are likely to include some combination of Michele Flournoy, Jake Sullivan, Anne-Marie Slaughter, and others of the globalization group around Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. These people believe in the rightness of a world with the United States at its center, deploying commercial strength, trade agreements, diplomatic suasion, and military alliances in a judicious synthesis. Armed intervention, preferably multilateral, is held in reserve. They take on trust the global politics of neoliberalism. For them, the Trump presidency, though unanticipated, was merely a disagreeable hiatus. They have never stopped planning for their return.

SPONSORED CONTENT

How To Entirely Empty Your Bowels Each Morning (1 Min Routine) Your Gut Reboot

[Photos] The Most Dangerous Place Where You Should Never Swim Is Actually In New Jersey Tie Breaker

[Photos] Marisa Tomei Gave The Crew A Little Extra Graduatez

They did not study the catastrophe of Vietnam, and they have not learned from it. As Gareth Porter showed in Perils of Dominance , that war, whose atrocities the world remembers more vividly than Americans do, was protracted not from morbid credulity regarding the domino theory but rather a primitive fear of losing face. It was carried forward through presidencies in both parties with a maximum of deception. The War in Afghanistan has similarly extended over three presidencies; and yet, to the neoliberal establishment, Afghanistan in 2020 is a good deal like Vietnam in 1971. It must not be "abandoned." A recent New York Times story praised some generals for "tempering" the rashness of Donald Trump's attempt to withdraw once and for all.

For reasons of personality that hardly bear looking into, Trump in foreign policy represented a break from the militarized globalism the United States had adopted with the fall of the Soviet Union and the coming of a unipolar world. The laboratory for this approach was the Yugoslavia intervention commandeered by Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. The madness under the idealism was revealed in the bombing, invasion, and occupation of Iraq in 2003. That seems a long generation ago, to the short memory of Americans. Even more thoroughly forgotten has been the Libya War -- President Obama's disastrous bid to show support for the Arab Spring -- with all the destruction it wrought: the civil war that followed, the swollen mass migrations from North Africa to South Europe, the opening of slave markets in Libya itself. After Libya came Syria, in which the United States supported an Al Qaeda offshoot in another humanitarian cause. After Syria came the Obama-Trump support for the Saudi obliteration of Yemen.

The United States has long faced the peculiar choice -- messianic on both sides -- of serving the world as an exemplary nation or as an evangelical one. The former image was best drawn by Abraham Lincoln when he said that the proposition "all men are created equal" was meant as "a standard maxim for free society," which would be "constantly approximated" in the United States itself, "constantly spreading and deepening its influence, and augmenting the happiness and value of life to all people of all colors everywhere." By contrast, the evangelical image was epitomized by John Kennedy's eloquent and dangerous inaugural address: "we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Lincoln's standard maxim meant the force of our example. Kennedy's bear any burden meant the force of our weapons.

me title=

7.2M 2.4K Meet the Seawolf The 1 Submarine the Navy Wants to Keep Ultra Secret

me scrolling=

me width=

A new Cold War with Russia was dragged onto center stage in 2013–2014. The process began at the Sochi Olympics and was locked in by the American reaction to the Russian reaction to the coup in Ukraine. The neoliberal elite is deciding, at this moment, whether to prefer Russia or China as the number-one U.S. enemy on the horizon. But must we have one? "Faith in a fact can help create the fact," said William James. A named expectation of trouble creates the conditions for that trouble. And yet, informed citizens today in the United States, in China, and in Russia all know that such a return to the inveterate habits of the old Great Powers would be supremely irresponsible. Our most dire confrontation now is with the natural world, which, in the form of climate change, is taking its revenge on humanity for a century of abuse.

SPONSORED CONTENT

[Photos] At 56, Laura Ingraham Has Never Been Married And Now We Know Why Graduatez

[Photos] Behind Her Fame, Milana Vayntrub Has Some Secret Now Out In The Open Penguin M.D.

[Photos] 35 People That Forgot to Check The Background Before Taking Photo Penguin M.D.

If the fires and floods of the last many years, in Australia and California, in Prague and Houston, have nothing to say to you, it is not clear what planet you are fit to live on. The best thing the policy elite could do, for the United States and the world, would be to put themselves out of business. Begin a series of international agreements to cooperate in slowing the progress of climate change, and in anticipating and defending against the worst of its effects. Practically speaking, as a matter of course, this will require a new ethic of international cooperation. Not war, not even an enhanced trade war, and not with China and Russia most of all.

David Bromwich is Sterling Professor of English at Yale University. He is the author of American Breakdown:

[Dec 28, 2020] Our aggressive and violent ally

Dec 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Paul , Dec 28 2020 2:04 utc | 75

Some interesting facts and figures by distinguished former Australian diplomat and public servant John Menadue:

https://johnmenadue.com/our-aggressive-and-violent-ally-an-updated-repost-part-1-of-2/

I can't wait for part 2.

[Dec 27, 2020] This year found a spectacularly bad ex President put his thumb on a primary

Dec 27, 2020 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Pat , December 25, 2020 at 6:26 am

2020 just keeps getting crappier. This is the year when I have had to bow down and accept that there is some line in the sand which past means that it doesn't matter how spectacularly wrong you have been you still get treated as some sort of expert. You would think the fact that Kissinger and Albright not being pariahs would have made that clear long ago, but no I still clung to the belief that actions have consequences.

This year found a spectacularly bad ex President put his thumb on a primary to give the nomination to a racist misogynistic geezer with cognitive issues whose entire time as a public official was as a bank bagman who fought to destroy the middle class, criminalize being a poor minority, increase the police state, indemnify banks and major corporations from criminal acts, and force bad neoliberal economic policies on other countries by force.

That is when he wasn't selling access for profit, lying whenever possible and plagiarising others work. When this "paragon" won we got retreads from the spectacularly bad ex president's administration along with suggestions for positions for CEOs known for destroying well run and ethical corporations leaving shells in their place. But the best is the return of Summers, whose history of hubris and failure should have made him hard pressed to get a job as a night gas station attendant.

The only response anyone should see to this "advice" was: "If Summers is against this and fears its effect on the economy that can only mean the economy must need that payment to not only be that large but be two or three times larger. Forget how mean and cruel his attitude is about Americans in need, except to say perhaps it is long past time to strip him of all income and most of his savings in order to keep the economy from getting overheated so he can learn what the economy actually looks like." But no he is still accorded some respect.

Carla , December 25, 2020 at 8:11 am

Oh, Pat actions only have consequences for the little people.

How many times and in how many ways do our dear leaders have to demonstrate this before we get it?

[Dec 27, 2020] Any such place declares its "sovereignty" or part of someone else's sphere of influence immediately gets Iraned or Venezuelaed with extreme prejudice until the survivors come crawling back to their masters.

Dec 27, 2020 | www.unz.com

Anonymous [423] Disclaimer , says: December 26, 2020 at 10:05 pm GMT • 2.8 hours ago

The Deep State is unwilling to let go of any vassal state, military base, or even sovereign countries it does not "own" or have any reasonable interest in running from its vast de facto empire, places where nobody even speaks English, practices "free market capitalism," is not deep into narco terrorism or can refrain from decapitating every Christian or non-Jihadi home-grown raghead they cross paths with. The Deep State would sooner see such places leveled to the ground than remove them from their stamp album. So, no freakin' way an outfit like that is gonna allow Oklahoma or Nebraska or even Guantanamo Bay, Hong Kong or Taiwan to flit away free from the "union" as an act of love. Any such place declares its "sovereignty" or part of someone else's sphere of influence immediately gets Iraned or Venezuelaed with extreme prejudice until the survivors come crawling back to their masters.

[Dec 24, 2020] Reckless Threats and 'Restoring Deterrence' by DANIEL LARISON

Dec 24, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

DECEMBER 23, 2020

When hawks in the U.S. and Israeli governments talk about "restoring deterrence," what they really mean is that they want to commit acts of aggression but present them as defensive actions.

The president made more reckless threats against Iran today:

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1341862955604975617&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Fstate-of-the-union%2Freckless-threats-and-restoring-deterrence%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

me title=

When the president illegally ordered the assassination of Soleimani in January of this year, administration officials eventually lined up behind the excuse that it was intended to "restore deterrence" against rocket attacks from Iranian-backed Iraqi militias. Even though these attacks have continued throughout the year much the same as before, we are back to the same old tired issuing of threats of military action in response to attacks that would not be happening if it were not for the president's own reckless actions. As the anniversary of the Soleimani assassination approaches, we are once again drifting towards an avoidable and unnecessary conflict.

Were it not for the president's "maximum pressure" campaign, U.S. forces in Iraq would face far fewer risks than they do today, and conflict between our governments would be much less likely. Had it not been for the president's decision to order the illegal and provocative attack that killed Soleimani and an Iraqi militia leader, tensions between the U.S. and Iran would not be as great as they are now. Trump's approach to Iran for the last two and a half years has been to pick a fight and then blame the other side for responding to his provocations. Far from deterring attacks from Iranian-backed militias and the Iranian military itself, the Trump administration has been provoking and inviting them. It is mostly a matter of luck that this has not yet triggered a larger conflict.

For its part, the Israeli government is also raising the temperature by sending one of its submarines through the Suez Canal to signal its readiness to respond to retaliation for its murder of Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh:

An Israeli submarine has embarked for the Persian Gulf in possible preparation for any Iranian retaliation over the November assassination of a senior Iranian nuclear scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, Israeli media reported.

The above-water, fully visible Israeli deployment into the Suez Canal and then the Red Sea was a rare move that was reportedly carried out with the acquiescence of Egyptian authorities and was seen as a clear warning to Iran that Israel was preparing for battle as hostilities continue to rise.

The deployment of the Israeli submarine is described as a "message of deterrence," but it is in fact the result of an ill-advised and illegal attack inside Iran. Had the Israelis not carried out a terrorist attack on Iranian soil, they would not now be worried about possible retaliation. This gets at a basic problem with the hawkish framing of our news coverage related to Iran and the constant misuse of the concept of deterrence by both the U.S. and Israeli governments.

First Panel, TAC's 7th Annual Foreign Policy Conference What Does 2020 Mean For Foreign Policy 00:07 / 01:00 3

When hawks in the U.S. and Israeli governments talk about "restoring deterrence," what they really mean is that they want to commit acts of aggression but present them as defensive actions. Blowing up Soleimani had nothing to do with deterring future attacks, and we can see that it has failed to deter them. Murdering Fakhrizadeh definitely had nothing to do with deterring anything. It was just a gratuitous killing that the Israel government did because they could. Now both the U.S. and Israel find that they have to make additional shows of force and issue new threats to ward off possible responses to these earlier aggressive acts. Instead of making them more secure, these aggressive acts have exposed Americans and Israelis to greater risks than they faced earlier on.

In light of reports that the president has asked for military options for attacking Iran and reports that Israel has been preparing for such an eventuality, we have to take the possibility of a U.S. or joint U.S.-Israel attack on Iran seriously. There is absolutely no justification for such an attack, but that is no guarantee that it won't happen. It needs to be emphasized that none of this would be happening if the Trump administration had not taken the reckless and destructive step of reneging on the JCPOA and launching an economic war on Iran. Whatever happens in the next few weeks can be traced back to that, and the president is responsible for the consequences.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter .

[Dec 24, 2020] 'Forward Defense' Has Nothing to Do with Defense -

Dec 24, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

he Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) recently released a lengthy report that predictably advocates for an aggressive and activist foreign policy that they euphemistically dub "defending forward." Like the British imperial "Forward Policy" that it calls to mind and resembles, so-called forward defense seeks to justify interventionism and open-ended warfare in far-flung parts of the world in the name of national security. The essays included in the report warn against "retrenchment" and repeatedly attack advocates of foreign policy restraint in dishonest and misleading ways, and they sound all the usual alarms about the supposed perils of extricating the U.S. from its many unnecessary foreign wars. These arguments are neither new nor particularly interesting, but they can't be ignored because of the significant influence that their purveyors continue to have in Washington and in the Republican Party in particular. If we are going to build a foreign policy of peace and restraint, these arguments have to be answered and discredited.

Panetta sets the tone for the document right away: "More than ever, Americans must go abroad to remain secure at home." This is the interventionists' axiom from which everything else follows, so it is important to start by explaining how wrong it is. To the extent that American security is threatened by other states and terrorist organizations, a forward policy invites more attacks and challenges and exacerbates the dangers it is supposedly combating. Our militarized engagement in many parts of the world is simultaneously destabilizing and provocative, and it makes us far more enemies than we would have otherwise.

me title=

Forward deployments make U.S. troops targets, and those deployments then become ends in themselves. Putting these troops in harm's way for decades isn't making Americans any safer, and the "war on terror" has led to the metastasization of terrorist groups on two continents. The forward "defense" that interventionists believe is so critical to our security is at best a redundant waste of lives and resources. At worst, it is sowing seeds for future attacks on Americans and our allies, and it is doing so at enormous expense. Sending troops to the other side of the world is not necessary to keep Americans safe at home. "Defending forward" has nothing to do with defense and everything to do with power projection and domination.

H.R. McMaster joined FDD shortly after being fired from his position as National Security Advisor, and in the last two years he has been attacking restrainers and promoting aggressive policies in a number of prominent articles. His contribution to the FDD report is a previously published Foreign Affairs article called "The Retrenchment Syndrome." As the title suggests, McMaster sees advocates of restraint (or "retrenchment hard-liners" as he calls them) as suffering from a dangerous malady, and his only prescription is more foreign entanglements. I have previously answered McMaster's arguments here , but I will add a few more remarks. McMaster wrongly accuses restrainers of "national narcissism," but he demonstrates no ability to understand the views of his domestic opponents or the thinking of the foreign adversaries whose motives he claims to know. He supports U.S. dominance and power projection in the world, and so he assumes that other major powers must have the same goal, but this is just an alibi for pursuing the aggressive policies that he already favors.

Misunderstanding and misrepresenting the views of restrainers is a running theme in the report. Mark Dubowitz and Jonathan Schanzer are some of the worst offenders. They can't stop themselves from dubbing Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer "realists-cum-isolationists," which is as insulting to them as it is wildly inaccurate. Both of those scholars favor a strategy involving offshore balancing, and Mearsheimer is rather hawkish on China, but they want to reduce the U.S. military footprint in the Middle East and that is unacceptable to FDD. That is why they are branded with the i-word. Dubowitz and Schanzer also mock the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft for supposedly not understanding the foreign policy views of John Quincy Adams, but this just shows how eager they are to distort the views of non-interventionists both past and present. Their contribution is long on accusations of isolationism without offering any evidence, but then this is the point of the isolationist smear. It is never meant to describe, only to distort and vilify, and they resort to this because they are afraid to engage restrainer arguments on the merits.

Like some melodramatic villain from a superhero movie, they declare, "History, unfortunately, is a forever war." One gets the impression that they do not really regard this as misfortune, but rather see it as an opportunity. Yes, history is full of conflicts, but there is far more to our history than warfare, and one thing we should have learned from all those conflicts is how pointless and unnecessary most of them have been. At the very least, we should know to steer clear from aggressive policies that make such conflicts more likely. The Trump administration Iran policy that FDD has championed for years has done just that, and that is one of many reasons why we should regard their recommendations with suspicion.

First Panel, TAC's 7th Annual Foreign Policy Conference What Does 2020 Mean For Foreign Policy 00:06 / 01:00 1

Their account of the recent past is no better than their tedious comparisons with the 1930s. They write, "Al-Qaeda launched the 9/11 attacks despite America's best efforts to steer clear of Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, where al-Qaeda was and is based." This is mind-boggling revisionism, conveniently ignoring that the attacks were carried out in large part in response to the continued U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia and U.S. support for the despotic government there. Dubowitz and Schanzer point to the clearest example of disastrous blowback in modern U.S. history and then have the gall to say that this example supports their argument for keeping U.S. forces permanently deployed in other countries where they aren't wanted.

Not surprisingly, the consistent misreadings and distortions of history are some of the biggest flaws in the report. Bradley Bowman and Clifford May rattle off historical "facts" about wars throughout history that elide far more than they reveal. For instance, they speak of "Persian-Roman wars" running from the battle of Carrhae between the Roman Republic and the Parthians to the battle of Nineveh in the seventh century between the Byzantines and the Sasanians. That lumps together many different regimes and dynasties in very crude fashion, and it also misleads the reader into thinking that conflict was incessant when it was not.

While there were many wars between these two powers over the course of seven hundred years, these two states were at peace with each other for the vast majority of that period of time. Indeed, for most of Byzantine history, the emperors in Constantinople were wary of engaging in open warfare and sought to avoid it as much as possible because of the cost and the potential for disaster. This strategy did not invite aggression, and it succeeded in allowing the empire to husband its resources and preserve its strength. One could say that the Byzantines usually practiced responsible statecraft. That is one reason why their empire managed to endure for as long as it did.

Treating war as being essentially unavoidable, Bowman and May belittle restrainers for "stunning ignorance" in calling to end U.S. involvement in its foreign wars today. This amounts to little more than mindless fatalism in accepting that the U.S. is bound to be at war much more often than not. But constant warfare and the strategy that undergirds it are both choices. Vietnam was completely avoidable for the U.S. and also entirely unnecessary for U.S. security, just as our current wars are all wars of choice. Conflict may be an ineradicable part of the human condition, but it doesn't follow that any particular conflict has to happen or that we are fated to participate in it when it does.

There may always be some conflict somewhere (though there has been much less of it in recent decades), but nowhere is it written that a major power has to be at war all of the time, much less in multiple places around the globe. The empires that have engaged in constant warfare have tended to suffer bankruptcy and ruin. Many of these states were governed by men who also believed that peripheral interests were worth fighting over, and they ultimately exhausted themselves in fruitless conflicts.

The U.S. is unusual among great powers in history in that it is relatively separated from its rivals by great distance, but it still chooses to entangle itself in the affairs of distant regions instead of taking advantage of our favorable geography. While modern technologies have reduced the importance of that advantage, they have not eliminated it. America is, in fact, extraordinarily secure from foreign threats, and so it becomes necessary to inflate these threats and overstate the capabilities of other states to make the case for a "forward" policy.

Writing for The New Republic , Jacob Silverman sums up the report very well:

That is the purpose of "Defending Forward": to contort the English language to convince a war-weary public that there is no alternative but to continue the status quo of "forward defense-in-depth military deployments," as Leon Panetta, the former CIA director and defense secretary, euphemistically calls them. But the FDD publication succeeds only in reminding us that, after 19 years of a catastrophic, immoral, illegal war on terror, America's hawks are simply out of answers.

The U.S. has been following something like a "forward defense" strategy for decades. The results have been almost twenty years of expensive failed wars that have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. The U.S. desperately needs to change its strategy and practice restraint in its use of force and the deployment of its armed forces. America does not need to police and dominate the world to be secure, and the sooner we all realize that the better it will be for our country and for the rest of the world. ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter .

email

[Dec 23, 2020] China Russia listed as main rivals in new US maritime strategy aimed at shaping 'balance of power for the rest of the centu

Dec 23, 2020 | www.rt.com

Conversation 244 Comments Please read the RT Community Commenting Rules here Log In


Sort by Best

Ghanima223 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 03:27 AM

All power is in the end economic. The US can build 500 warships, the Chinese can easily match that, but unlike the US, they also can pay for it.
Tor Gjesdal Ghanima223 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 06:14 PM
No, hehe, all Powers are not all in the end economic. We can be good at economicing life some of us, but Most have no clue about all the real Powers.
KlausR922 Ghanima223 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 09:43 AM
Russia and China do not have enough fleet to populate the oceans around the US but have more immigrants in the US. Instead, attracting foreign funds or investors (even through mixed marriages) destabilizes their own economies. This suggests, however, that the 'balance of power' remains to the advantage of the US. In fact, if we are all capitalists, what is the significance of this balance?
Jewel Gyn 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 03:21 AM
"the two most significant threats to this era of global peace and prosperity," Look at yourself in the mirror. US is without doubt the biggest threat to global peace and prosperity. The only reason countries are silent is because of your military and economic might. But it won't be for long...
GorillaBalls Jewel Gyn 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 08:59 AM
USA is building useless junk more fitting to the times of Neanderthals and definitely obsolete in the 21st century with borrowed money. Nothing mighty about that.
GorillaBalls Jewel Gyn 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 08:54 AM
USA no longer has a mighty economy. Has the world's biggest debt mountain instead along with a permanently concussed military by Iran!! Clown.
Iwanasay 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 04:07 AM
This report says it all, the US objective is to dominate the world, not be a part of it, it also proves that the US is military dictatorship where politicians are only elected to channel huge sums of taxpayers money into the Pentagon and military industry purse. Hurry up China and Russia, form a military alliance and bankrupt the US as it wastes more & more against non-existent enemies
Fjack1415 Iwanasay 1 day ago 21 Dec, 2020 01:25 PM
Yeah, the Star Wars strategy supposedly used by Pres. Reagan to bankrupt Soviet Russia, now can be used against the US. The US needs to spend about ten times what Russia or China spend in order to achieve the same result (if that) and what is more, it is borrowed money.
GorillaBalls Iwanasay 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 09:27 AM
Joetex America is obsolete already.
Dachaguy 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 03:13 AM
Balance? The US has no interest at all in balance. The US focus is domination. It's what the Project for a New American Century was all about.
liana sammartino Dachaguy 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 09:05 AM
and that domination in this century will evaporate....
Isiah Steele Dachaguy 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 08:00 AM
Except, China and Russia and the rest of the real free world has their own plans for the future without the US!!!!
shadow1369 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 05:55 AM
Us regime calls its own relentless aggression 'assertive policy', and accuses anybody who resists their global tyranny a 'threat to peace'. Nothing new.
GorillaBalls 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 05:37 AM
USA has been saying the same thing and has been spending the most money on its military but the reality is it has never won a war with a major military beyond own shore.
Joetex GorillaBalls 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 07:04 AM
All wars the US has fought have been beyond its own Shores including WWI and WWII, which by the way were victorious.
GreenPizza804 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 05:03 AM
"Our actions in this decade will shape the maritime balance of power for the rest of this century." they think Russia and China don't have any plan to this ?
Joetex GreenPizza804 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 06:56 AM
It's to late Trumps Trillion Dollar Plan in 2018 went to Mostly Navy and Space Force. And Already is more Advanced than China and Russia Combined.
shadow1369 GreenPizza804 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 06:02 AM
In the Project for a New American Century, the US version of Mein Kampf, the warmongers preached 'full spectrum dominance'. They remind me of the last days of the nazis, deploying non existant armies to fend off the fast approaching allied powers. Any pretence of US global hegemony was destroyed in Syria.
wawya 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 05:36 AM
The USA is the greatest threat to all countries yet masquerades as a friend to many. Make no mistake, it is an ally only when it suits. China has asperations on having a blue water navy but is a fair way off. Russia, apart from its SSN & SSBN boats is very much a green water navy. The Americans are kidding themselves.
Mickey Mic 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 05:30 AM
Let's not forget, the central banks can't operate with the current market status, hence, the delay in Nancy's relief tactics. War is imminent for the survival of banking cartels, Trump denied the banks wars, so cheat Trump out of office was is the highest demand for the Federal Reserve banking system. They needed a compromised President to bend to their will, Joe was picked for the Job due to his corrupt career and dysfunctional mentality . Bernie was cheated (No charges) Trump has been surrounded by disloyal shape-shifting swamp monsters, his proof of voter Fraud is meaningless in the land of oil & vinegar. Biden was illegally installed to launch wars & secure the final stages of the Wuhan virus (Forced Vaccinations). Let's face it, Biden's choices for Cabinet positions line directly with Hillary Clinton's friends, he is not in charge to make any choices on his own. He is supplying an empty shell to fill the oval office for the shadow Gov. The majority of US leadership thinks they'll be safe inside Cheyenne Mountain to protect their own sacred seed from destruction. PS: From the counterfeit Supreme Court, to the Masonic lodges better known as the "House of senators & Congressman"...Lurks a perpetual centrifugal motion to consume their greedy desolation.
Galaxy31 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 03:32 AM
As US looses global dominance, the more desperate it becomes. This time though, it doesn't look it will work, but unfortunately because of this desperation, it may end up tragically for all of us human beings.
GorillaBalls Galaxy31 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 05:27 AM
"The US Navy will adopt a more 'assertive' approach to China and Russia, according to the country's new maritime strategy, which says that actions taken in the next decade will determine power dynamics for the rest of the century." Making big talk about the future with 20th century and OBSOLETE aircraft carries that can be quickly sent to the bottom with a few comparatively much cheaper hypersonic carrier killer missiles those tubs are DEFENCELESS against.
straightasarrow69 Galaxy31 18 December, 2020 18 Dec, 2020 05:15 AM
America spends more on their military than the next 10 nations combined. More engineers graduate in China every year than exist in the whole of America. America believes it needs to manufacture enemies to prop up its main export, death and destruction. This further explains why some American politicians have stated, "if an Israel did not exist we would have to invent one." Birds of a feather. Time to diversify Americas economy. China, Russia, and America are brothers.

[Dec 21, 2020] Agenda 2021- Resist the U.S.-EU-NATO Axis of Domination

Dec 21, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

BY AJAMU BARAKA

Facebook Twitter Reddit Email

The ascendancy of neoliberal forces to the executive branch of the U.S. state represents a development that potentially will be even a more dangerous period of aggression from the U.S. white supremacist settler state and its white supremacist colonial European allies.

Why is this so? The primary agenda of the right-wing neoliberal forces represented by the Biden Administration is to reassert U.S. global leadership by reconsolidating a common U.S.-European capitalist program of domination that was disrupted with the "America first" positions of the Trump Administration.

The Biden Administration is animated by the belief that the objective logic of overall Western hegemony is tied to finding a way for more effective collaboration around a common imperialist agenda. This belief is shared by Angela Merkel of Germany, and despite some contrary public declarations from French President Macron on issue of European independence, Macron sees an effective Western alliance as critical, even if it is under U.S. leadership once again.

The racialist character if these appeals are obvious to those of us who operate from a critical anti-colonialist frame that centers race and violence as the essential elements of the rise of the Pan-European white supremacist colonial/capitalist patriarchal project. The commitment to continued white colonial/capitalist global hegemonic dominance is clear. Biden's objective to revive a U.S. hegemonic role over the Western project of collective domination must be seen as a race project.

Trump's plan from the beginning of his administration was to complete the Obama pivot to Asia, but those efforts were undermined by the domestic political obstacles he faced in just trying to gain full control of the Executive Branch. And while Trump was eventually successful in winning over elements of the U.S. and European ruling classes to a more aggressive stance against China, his short-sighted, erratic "America first" policies and his inability to consolidate effective power over the U.S. state were a destabilizing force for the continued hegemony of the Western colonial/capitalist project.

The U.S.-EU unity project with its NATO military wing in the service of collective imperialism and under U.S. leadership is the neoliberal corrective strategy to Trump.

Biden's Intersectional Imperialism is Exposed

Obama represented the last stage of what Gramsci called a passive revolution where oppressive state mitigates the influence of antagonistic groups through "gradual but continuous absorption."

The U.S.-EU race and class project of unity adopted by the Biden Administration will face serious political and economic challenges. The clumsy attempt to utilize Obama's soft power ideological mystifications in the present circumstances of capitalist crisis together with a deep legitimation crisis will result in abject failure by the Biden administration on both the global and domestic levels.

First among the challenges facing the incoming administration is the competing economic interests among Western capitalists. The abrogation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA) with Iran by the Trump Administration and the reimposition of sanctions that required economic disengagement from Iran by many European firms, was a major fissure in the Atlanta alliance.

The lost revenues by European firms as a result of economic disengagement with Iran and the efforts to undermine the Russian NORD stream two pipeline that alienated significant elements of German capital are just two of the issues that will weigh on the trust factor in U.S. political leadership going forward.

Moreover, there are two interrelated contradictions of this unity strategy that the Northern neoliberal capitalist class must confront but will be unable to resolve: first, the impact of the capitalist crisis exacerbated by COVID that has unleashed forces disruptive to the capitalist order from both the left and the right. And secondly, the attempt by the left and social democratic movements and nations to develop, however tentatively, from the obviously failed neoliberal capitalist model.

The U.S.-EU Unity Process Requires a Countervailing Peoples Unity Process

The strategic challenge for the left in Northern countries is countering these efforts with a coherent anti-capitalist, internationalist, anti-imperialist, anti-white supremacist and pro-socialist popular movements and structures.

But in the U.S. and Europe, that is easier said than done. Along with the ideological and organizational fragmentation of the left, one of the main issues that undermines the ability for the left to cohere in the U.S. and Europe is the cultural and ideological influences of white supremacist ideology.

The inability to reject the fiction of a "Europe" and its civilizational superiority has thoroughly corrupted the worldviews and politics of Western leftism. In the face of the U.S/EU/NATO attacks and subversion on Syria, Libya to Venezuela and Bolivia, instead of anti-imperialist solidarity, the left engaged in torturous abstract "discussions" around the merits and mistakes made by these various Southern nations, not recognizing the arrogant white supremacist positionality of that approach.

Anti-imperialist marginalization is reflective of the shift in the consciousness not only of the public in various Western nations but of the putative left as well. Even among Black liberationist forces in the U.S., who have traditionally had internationalism and anti-imperialism at the center of their worldviews and politics, a strange U.S.-centrism has emerged. This tendency along with an ironic embryonic racial chauvinism that elevates a distinctive "African American" construction of so-called global anti-blackness as an intractable ontological phenomenon, has created serious ideological and political challenges for anti-imperialist coalitional work.

Yet, those challenges must be met by African/Black left and left forces in general. It is impossible for forces in the U.S. and Europe to avoid their unique responsibilities situated at the center of the colonial empires, to the peoples of the world who have the knee of collective imperialism on their necks.

Bringing this discussion closer to the territory referred to as the United States, anti-imperialism, and the struggle against U.S. chauvinism among the left must be taken up as an area of struggle. For African/Black revolutionaries, and indeed for the working and laboring classes, our gaze must extend beyond our local and national realities. Not because those realities are unimportant but because we are unable to understand local realities without understanding the full constellation of class, race and material forces that shape those structural realities nationally and locally.

Mobilizing our forces to confront and defeat the Pan-European project is not a call to abstractionism. The organizational challenge is to answer the question of how does local work, that is, building a real, concrete internationalism, look.

It is not enough to position ourselves in solidarity with the victims of U.S. imperialism. The base-building work that we engage in must reflect that mutual connection with the colonized.

That is why the Black internationalist stance is not some exotic addition to radical organizing but must be seen as fundamental to our movement building work. Understanding that we are immersed in a system of exploitation and oppression that is global, even though it has local manifestations, is critical for us to effectively address that perennial task of determining "what must be done" to advance our forces.

Confronting that question of what is to be done has become even more crucial today amid the irreversible decline of the capitalist order. And while we commit to building a mass movement of the exploited and oppressed, we must take account of some troubling developments over the last four years.

The unveiling of the left patriots who were concerned with "our democracy" and who enthusiastically propagated the talking points of neoliberalism while remaining silent on U.S. imperialism, and entered the intra-bourgeois class struggle as junior partners to neoliberal right, revealed once again that if the left is not prepared to defeat whiteness and the U.S./EU/NATO Axis of Domination, it will join as the tail to the neoliberal right in the cross-class white supremacist fascist project led by neoliberals.

Our survival demands that we remain "woke" to that possibility and plan accordingly.

Ajamu Baraka is the national organizer of the Black Alliance for Peace and was the 2016 candidate for vice president on the Green Party ticket. He is an editor and contributing columnist for the Black Agenda Report and contributing columnist for Counterpunch magazine.

[Dec 21, 2020] America s Ongoing Imperial Scam by Karen Kwiatkowski Karen Kwiatkowski

Notable quotes:
"... World War II remains the go-to conflict for commemoration almost 80 years after America entered the fray. It marks the last time the U.S. Congress did its constitutional duty and actually declared war before sending America's young men off to kill and die on foreign fields. ..."
"... All subsequent " wars , " from Korea and Vietnam, to the Iraqs (1991, 2003, 2014), Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and a host of military deployments on every continent around the world were waged at the pleasure of the sitting president, amply funded by the Congress, yet conveniently never rose to the level of a declared war. ..."
"... So-called overseas contingency operations, or little wars, have seen their funding go " off-book ," as the Pentagon budget now covers just its routine expenses -- wars are paid for on top of that budget, so long as the Congress can be convinced by their Pentagon liaisons. And they nearly always are. ..."
"... Veterans, Memorial, Independence, or even just Tues days -- replete with military flyovers at football games amidst an age of pandemic -- have become empty gestures. VA hospitals across the country had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21 st century, and it is there today that many of our Vietnam veterans -- of another little war mainly designed to entertain Pentagon fantasies at their expense -- rot, for lack of a better word. ..."
"... What purpose then, does obligatory national celebration -- in prose or pageantry -- of veterans actually serve in year 20 of intractable and hopeless wars? Clearly, veterans and their families are the only ones who truly sacrificed anything. Those negotiating massive defense contracts -- including built-in clauses covering delays, flaws, and implicit corruption -- won't even sacrifice surplus profits for the good of the country. ..."
"... Money isn't blood, and stock prices can't compensate limbs (to the tune of 1,645 single or multiple amputee veterans between 9/11 and 2015). ..."
"... The war machine is largely about money (for select elites) and creating new and expanding markets (benefitting the same) -- the modern veteran's primary function is simply that of "patriotic" bait for the public. In fact, trotting out idealized veterans rationalizes and justifies MIC -corruption -- trading on the good will that most American have for those who served (even if the government they s erv ed was lying about why) is increasingly unworkable . ..."
"... As for difficulties in military recruitment, I often think that the reason the minimum wage remains so low is to make the military more attractive than "parking cars and pumping gas" which now is defined as the gig economy. ..."
"... It is time that we return to using the more appropriate reference to the Department of War, rather than use euphenic, Dept of "Defense?" ..."
"... "God bless the troops"? How about America, especially now that the voting system has become so corrupted? Joe Biden doesn't give a rat's ass about the troops, especially if the troops are SUPPOSEDLY fighting to "spread freedom and democracy". ..."
"... Sadly there's no hope biden and his chicken hawks will do anything but continue business as usual for the merchants of death. We know congress won't say anything other than pass on more Amerikan tax payers cash to endless wars:-( ..."
Dec 21, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

Biden ends speeches now with "God Bless the Troops," writes Karen Kwiatkowski. H e should respect their sacrifices with a more honorable foreign policy.

On Memorial Day, Joe Biden, accompanied by his wife Jill Biden, at Veterans Memorial Park, Wilmington, Delaware, May 25, 2020. (Adam Schultz, Biden for President, Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

By Karen Kwiatkowski
Special to Consortium News

O ne week after the most attention-demanding election of our lifetimes, another Veteran's Day came and went. For the occasion, presumed President-elect Joe Biden laid a wreath at the Korean War Memorial in Philadelphia; whilst yet-to-conceded incumbent President Donald Trump held a ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery.

Both channeled and invoked the great reverence Americans still hold for veterans of the bygone Second World War and more complicated Korean conflagration. Only some 300,000 of the men, and women, who fought in the former are still living. No doubt we will continue to hear how many succumbed to Covid-19 in the past year, and whose fault that is.

Yet, in his official statement , Biden added a personal touch -- his son Beau's service in Iraq -- and a "personal commitment:" "I will never treat you or your families with anything less than the honor you deserve." If he really means it, rebalancing U.S. war-making authority and ditching the dated Second World War analogies would be a good start.

World War II remains the go-to conflict for commemoration almost 80 years after America entered the fray. It marks the last time the U.S. Congress did its constitutional duty and actually declared war before sending America's young men off to kill and die on foreign fields.

A veteran greets Vice President Mike Pence in Bedford, Virginia, ahead of the D-Day 75th anniversary, June 6, 2019. (White House, D. Myles Cullen)

All subsequent " wars , " from Korea and Vietnam, to the Iraqs (1991, 2003, 2014), Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and a host of military deployments on every continent around the world were waged at the pleasure of the sitting president, amply funded by the Congress, yet conveniently never rose to the level of a declared war.

Little Wars & Presidencies

We should consider these wars linked to the presidents themselves, or -- perhaps more accurately -- to their executive staffs, and the Department of Defense. War policy-making power has almost completely shifted from the people ' s representatives (House and Senate) to unelected appointees often recruited from think tanks -- these funded by an array of organizations interested not in peace, but in accessing tax dollars, and gaining revenues at home and abroad.

Biden's incoming national security team is chock-full of them. War spending, even in the absence of any notable war, is so compelling that for years, a Congress often unable to come up with a budget ensured the flow stayed strong to the Pentagon -- and its cousin, the CIA -- through continuing resolutions.

Please Contribute to Consortium News
During its 2020 Winter Fund Drive

So-called overseas contingency operations, or little wars, have seen their funding go " off-book ," as the Pentagon budget now covers just its routine expenses -- wars are paid for on top of that budget, so long as the Congress can be convinced by their Pentagon liaisons. And they nearly always are.

This obscene spending for military weapons, training, gifts to allies, technology enhancement -- for everything from cyberwar, surveillance, data collection, AI, robotics -- as well as for standard "pocketbook" weapons systems like the F-35 fighter and aircraft carriers, represent the Military Industrial Complex's (MIC) mainstay.

Consider a disturbingly accurate recent diagnosis of the current situation:

" the U.S. Presidents and their aides are quite aware of the current state of the US military: it is a military which simply cannot win even simple conflicts a military whose Air Force spent absolutely obscene amounts of money to create a supposedly " 5th generation " fighter which in many ways is inferior to US 4th generation aircraft!"

It is against this larded and incompetent backdrop -- of economic dependencies for a war machine directed by men and women who've never fought a declared war, and scant understanding of what defending the nation ought look like -- that Americans await an inbound president who now feels obliged to add the patriotic tick " May God protect our troops " at the tail end of speeches.

Empty Gestures

Veterans, Memorial, Independence, or even just Tues days -- replete with military flyovers at football games amidst an age of pandemic -- have become empty gestures. VA hospitals across the country had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21 st century, and it is there today that many of our Vietnam veterans -- of another little war mainly designed to entertain Pentagon fantasies at their expense -- rot, for lack of a better word.

Ultimately, these sacrifices, all part of a larger Washingtonian game, hardy matter to anyone but Vietnam alumni's wives, kids -- and this generation's numbers now also dwindle.

What purpose then, does obligatory national celebration -- in prose or pageantry -- of veterans actually serve in year 20 of intractable and hopeless wars? Clearly, veterans and their families are the only ones who truly sacrificed anything. Those negotiating massive defense contracts -- including built-in clauses covering delays, flaws, and implicit corruption -- won't even sacrifice surplus profits for the good of the country.

Money isn't blood, and stock prices can't compensate limbs (to the tune of 1,645 single or multiple amputee veterans between 9/11 and 2015).

The war machine is largely about money (for select elites) and creating new and expanding markets (benefitting the same) -- the modern veteran's primary function is simply that of "patriotic" bait for the public. In fact, trotting out idealized veterans rationalizes and justifies MIC -corruption -- trading on the good will that most American have for those who served (even if the government they s erv ed was lying about why) is increasingly unworkable .

Military r ecruitment has long been a challenge, partly because Americans increasingly see through the systemic scam, and are left wondering whether it's such a great deal after all. Despite the Pentagon's massive data collection efforts and widespread access to high school and college students, recruitment is becoming more and more difficult.

The latest army and air force recruiting approach involves convincing economically-insecure parents to encourage their kids to get out of their basements, and pursue dreams of playing soldier in the woods or flying video game-like drones. In an era where more young people live at home for longer, this approach may appeal to parents, but it's also a tell.

Despite repeated and routine public deference to veterans, the truth is out. There are just too many truth bombs available from potential recruits' family and friends; too much outrage at the increasingly exposed police militarization in America's streets -- many of their new hires practicing what they learned patrolling Baghdad or Kandahar, policing Baltimore and Kansas City.

There's scant solace in knowing top defense contractors rake in untold billions, whilst too many American families slip further through the cracks, unsure of whence their next thousand will come. And here's a truth uncomfortable for far too many privileged and polite liberals so ready for a quiet return to a Biden-induced normalcy: both Trumpism and left-leaning progressivism was partly fueled by that shared realization.

Our veterans, too, have a solid sense of this truth -- a truth that's often painful, embarrassing and sometimes shameful. The Pentagon has little intrinsic interest in helping veterans, except to the extent that veterans, individually or collectively, can both execute and justify profitable business-as-usual foreign policies -- which are increasingly crass, contradictory, and unconstitutional affairs.

To truly honor our troops and veterans, Biden's bunch should be brutally honest about what Washingtonian " war" is, and should respect the very real sacrifices of the "other 1 percent" who actually serve -- by demanding a more honorable and restrained foreign policy. That's going to require more action than obligatory utterance, and admission of a final hard truth:

The imperial scam we've kept calling a republic these past 70 years is collapsing, and it will take all of us -- veteran and civilian alike -- to ensure a soft landing.

Karen Kwiatkowski, Ph.D, is a farmer, teacher, and retired USAF lieutenant colonel, who spent years working in the Pentagon. She was a notable critic and whistleblower in the run-up to the 2003 Iraq invasion . Karen was featured in the acclaimed documentary, "Why We Fight" (2005), writes regularly for Lewrockwell.com , and has had her work published in Salon, The American Conservative, and the Huffington Post, among others. She is a senior fellow at the Eisenhower Media Network (EMN), an organization of independent veteran military and national security experts.

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.

Please Contribute to Consortium News During its 2020 Winter Fund Drive Donate securely with PayPal' here .

Tags: American Empire forever wars Imperialism Karen Kwiatkowski Veterans

DickNOz , December 17, 2020 at 20:45

US military spending will ultimately bankrupt the US when the US dollar loses its reserve currency status. in the 1990's over 90% of countries kept asset in the US dollar, now it is less than 60% and declining. Also, the amount of corruption and waste in military spending is stratospheric. Russia produces military requirements within a government controlled manufacturing structure, and produce better systems on a tenth of what the US spends. The US develops its military as an alternative to diplomacy and uses it to enforce hegemonic aims upon allies and adversaries alike. Russia is preparing for war to hopefully prevent war.

The US should support the troops by bringing them home; not by empty platitudes on veterans day. Ask yourself what the dead troops in Vietnam and the Mideast really die for?

Bart Hansen , December 17, 2020 at 18:06

As for difficulties in military recruitment, I often think that the reason the minimum wage remains so low is to make the military more attractive than "parking cars and pumping gas" which now is defined as the gig economy.

robert e williamson jr , December 17, 2020 at 17:54

The media is the blame for many things not the least of which is over using titles and such in their endless drivel.

That I notice no one twists the arm of those who volunteers for military service and these days that is the only way one enlists to serve in the military.

Same with cops, they volunteer for their jobs, then whine about every little criticism of the actions, and brother there are tons to criticize. Shooting any;l unarmed individual in the back when there is no threat to the officer is a military "free fire" tactic. Wiki it and you will see the American public never really understood it was used in Vietnam to send a message to civilians who were suspected of aiding the enemy.

Chuck Yager has a comment there about his role in WWII.

Now suddenly after the end of the draft if you have served in any of the conflicts since Vietnam you are immediately a hero in the eyes of Americas blind MSM and those who refuse to learn enough about what is really happening to know the difference between shit and shine-olla.

I would remind everyone that it takes between 6 and 10 non-combatant military members to keep combat troops at the ready.

Firemen and EMTs are the closest thing we have to everyday heroes in my opinion.

The young hope to increase their career chances by serving and they are approached while still in high school to volunteer, a practice that needs to stop.

Anyone who knows vets know damned well they get little from the VA, system that if combined with the ACA would both save money and increase the quality of their care.

But here is some sage advice instead of taking issue with every statement folks make try and think about why we all are in this mess.

It is the result of the government doing what it wants to do instead doing what Americans think need to be done. Remember our government is supposed to be working for us and right now it is exactly the opposite of that.

This is our common problem. Our Common problem. FULL STOP!

Volunteers are enabling the idiots in D.C. by ensuring the military has the manpower it needs. We never needed to go to Iraq but far too many exceptional Americans are willing to own the fact they they have been duped.

Maybe this will mean something to you, I was duped once when I got drafted, no more for this ole guy. Fool me once and that is enough.

If we all are truly "in this together" then we have very important work to do to clarify foreign policy and correct all the misconceptions about just exactly what is the proper course of action. The MICIMATT is not doing this. Never have and never will.

You want to be a real hero start working to end the mangling of young bodies and civilians the spending of trillions of dollars in order to make the rich richer.

We all have big problems because of our government and our government needs to be brought to accountability.

I'm pretty tired of this "we" business. War has outlived and usefulness what so ever, we are on a dying planet, wise up, wake up and put up.

Julie , December 17, 2020 at 13:10

An italian magistrate, Carlo Palermo, who escaped a bomb attack for investigating the connection between mafia, masonry, State, and C.I.A., discovered that such a plot had started and was known since world war II, by U.S., and other countries, which nowadays are ready to grab the global power.

See:

http://antimafiaduemila.com/home/primo-piano/81286-carlo-palermo-racconta-il-governo-criminale-planetario.html

http://antimafiaduemila.com/home/primo-piano/81355-mafie-eterodirette-carlo-palermo-spiega-il-doppio-livello.html
http://carlopalermo.net/ (to be transated from italian)

Tom Moore , December 17, 2020 at 13:05

It is time that we return to using the more appropriate reference to the Department of War, rather than use euphenic, Dept of "Defense?"

Richard Coleman , December 17, 2020 at 12:26

"God Bless the Troops", huh? Well here's a little known fact for ya Joe: the VA medical program doesn't include DENTAL! Never did as far as I know. Don't vets have teeth!? Isn't dental care about the single most expensive (and unaffordable) routine medical expense most Americans as well as vets face? How about "blessing" them with that? Of course M4A would resolve this, but you're not with that either, are you Joe?

You know where you can stuff your "blessing" don't you, Joe?

Carlton Meyer , December 17, 2020 at 12:07

Biden's son took the service route for the wealthy and politically ambitious. Navy lawyers sit thru two easy weeks of OCS to learn to salute and wear uniforms. Then he deployed to a very safe camp in Iraq for a few months, safer than working in Baltimore, where he did legal stuff from nice office. Then comes home to tell war stories.

vinnieoh , December 17, 2020 at 11:46

During the first several years of Bush's illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq I wrote many letters to the local paper, and a multitude of elected representatives. I was of course outraged over the whole affair, first and most importantly because we were committing mass murder in pursuit of a collection of bald-faced lies. But I knew that all and assembled had drunk a full draught of the Kool-Aid, and arguments I would make along those lines would fall on permanently deaf ears.

So, I composed a long and very detailed letter to my then US Congressional Representative Ted Strickland detailing the abuse and disregard our soldiers were enduring to carry out this campaign: the "stop-loss" policies (remember?), the multiple rotations and deployments, the lack of protective gear. I also threw in, because I could just not help myself, the remark that "It is not possible to garner honor and glory in pursuit of a dishonorable policy."

I actually got a personal response from Mr. Strickland, a supposedly "progressive" or at least "liberal" (ca. 1990's) politician. A one-liner that went something like this: "I can not, at this time, take any action that would endanger the safety of our troops." That was the whole purpose of my plea to you, you fucking incompetent asshole.

Cyber , December 18, 2020 at 13:22

The US mass-murdered millions of Third-World peoples in its foreign wars, since the end of WW II, incurring minimal losses. Even an inflated figure of US losses would not be anywhere near 300,000!

John Moffett , December 17, 2020 at 08:26

Great article Karen. I am encouraged by the difficulty in recruiting people to go into the military. Keeping wages low and college expenses high seems to me like a heartless attempt to force some young adults from poor families into considering military service. I would love to see a national movement to educate kids about the horrors of war, and the unscrupulous MIC tactics (including video games) to entice new recruits.

Hank , December 17, 2020 at 07:09

"God bless the troops"? How about America, especially now that the voting system has become so corrupted? Joe Biden doesn't give a rat's ass about the troops, especially if the troops are SUPPOSEDLY fighting to "spread freedom and democracy".

If you don't have REAL democracy at home then what you are "spreading" abroad CAN'T be democracy, but tyranny! Biden and others always seem to invoke the "troops" because they know this resonates with many Americans who have a knee jerk reaction to "supporting" the troops. What he realistically could have said was "God bless the troops in molesting yet another nation". He could care less about the troops as they are deployed to serve the rich man's agenda. And after stealing an election(at least to THIS point in time!) those dead soldiers must be turning in their graves after supposedly giving their lives to protect democracy!

SPQR70AD , December 18, 2020 at 09:24

but the US has spread "democracy" all over the world by fixing elections and putting in their guy now they did it in the US

Cyber , December 18, 2020 at 13:28

"Democracy" either by fixing votes in client countries OR by installing puppet regimes through murderous bombings/invasions like in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

Truth , December 18, 2020 at 13:31

"Democracy" by bombings and invasions too.

jo6pac , December 16, 2020 at 19:19

Sadly there's no hope biden and his chicken hawks will do anything but continue business as usual for the merchants of death. We know congress won't say anything other than pass on more Amerikan tax payers cash to endless wars:-(

[Dec 20, 2020] Continuation of neocons wars for Full Spectrum Dominance is the ultimate goal of the Coronavirus putsch

Notable quotes:
"... The neocon criminals have managed to take over foreign policy in the U.S., leveraging money power from their bankster backers. ..."
"... Their latest gambit is the Coronavirus putsch ..."
Dec 20, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

james , Dec 18 2020 20:28 utc | 1

it seems the purpose of the usa media is in large part to keep the masses riled up over cheering or booing for team red or team blue... speaking of which, i haven't seen one of the cheerleaders here lately...

Haassaan , Dec 19 2020 0:48 utc | 20

Yes, this RussiaGate story will flame out, just like all the rest, but ultimately these stories aren't about Trump, but about setting the stage for the Biden Administration to attack Russia. It doesn't matter that they are all lies, what matters is that the big pile of lies as a whole creates a false reality in which anti-Russian propaganda is so overwhelming that nobody in the west can see outside of the delusion.

norecovery , Dec 19 2020 1:51 utc | 22

The neocon criminals have managed to take over foreign policy in the U.S., leveraging money power from their bankster backers. The latter is a tiny group of oligarchs and their network of highly-paid promoters that are motivated to force U.S. hegemony onto the world. They now have control over the U.S. Congress, Intelligence Agencies, and the MSM, and are increasingly exerting censorship over social media.

Their latest gambit is the Coronavirus putsch using bio-warfare agents to undermine small-scale economies and autonomy, while imposing vast corporate ownership of property.

Worldwide compliance is the goal using a wide range of military, financial, and media control measures to crush dissent. The pharma-promoted vaccinations that are questionable at best reinforce those controls and are part of the plot. We are witnessing a worldwide COUPS ATTEMPT, UBER-Fascism that exceeds all historical examples. Will it succeed?

Fyi , Dec 19 2020 2:35 utc | 26

Mr. Norecovery

Euro-Americans, hiding behind the so-called Neo-con facade, failed in their goals in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.

They succeeded in Libya, however.

Americans will have sunk more than 8 trillion dollars before the next decade is out for their venture against Islam.

They have been stopped because of Iran and the Shia Muslims.

The way things are going, Americans are going to be stopped in East Asia with the coming China-Taiwan War as well.

ak74 , Dec 19 2020 4:59 utc | 32

"Yes, he killed foreigners. But no U.S. president will ever be indicted for that. It is seen as a part of the job."

Yes, committing war crimes and "crimes against peace"--the supreme international crime as asserted by the Nuremberg Tribunal--is fundamental to the job description of being America's War-Criminal-in-Chief.

The fact that Americans and citizens in other self-styled "democracies" deny this uncomfortable reality, or support these war crimes, says a lot about their own criminality.

Debsisdead , Dec 19 2020 7:39 utc | 34

@m #33 said

""Lock him up!" It's amazing how often the two political camps in the USA are mirror images of each other."

Sure the scumbag politicians shout "Lock 'em up" at their opponents but that is just the usual divisive partisan nonsense, they spout knowing that they have no intention of locking anyone up. Why? because they know better than anyone that they have pulled exactly the same illegal immorality as the other 'side' and the last thing needed is any such precedent.

By spreading that unfulfilled tosh they hope to negate the popular movement which needs to happen if amerikans are ever going to extricate themselves from the fate of all empires that once were, a millenia of misery e.g watch what is currently happening in england.
If actual ordinary amerikans have a chance of saving what can be preserved it is on to them as citizens to hold the entire ruling elite to account. this must be done regardless of any claimed political affiliation or claimed 'neutrality'.

Anyone who spends more than about 30 minutes objectively assessing the stunts amerika has been pulling since 1945 (much before really, but let's just use 1945 as a cutoff) sees that it is amerika which has been the force for just about all the evil in our world. A handful of sops to the faint-hearted bourgeoisie, eg. finally acknowledging the evil of apartheid South Africa right as the racist's downfall becomes inevitable doesn't excuse a thing. All such stunts demonstrate is the greed driven amorality of amerika's elite.

If they spouted in the 60's, 70's & 80's that allowing the apartheid government of South Africa to continue was a pragmatic call to prevent a bloodbath, yet a much needed change did occur in the early 90's with no bloodbath, blind Freddie can see they got it wrong then just as they are getting it wrong now about apartheid Occupied Palestine.

Yet they still continue, Why? The only conclusion can be that both gangs the dims & the rethugs are going where there is a dollar to be made, just as happened with South Africa.

Insisting that all 3 arms of amerikan government be taken out of the picture regardless of whatever gang the claim allegiance to is not 'more of the same'.
If it occurred it would be an indication that all non-elite amerikans have lost faith in the farcical, allegedly loyal, but in fact only to themselves, congress people, senators, prezes & vice prezes and judges that regularly behave towards 99% of amerikans so contemptuously that the corporate owned media have to expend so much resources distracting Jo/Joe Citizen from.

It won't make much difference to me in my lifetime but it will to my offspring. If amerikans don't sort this out for themselves, my kids or more likely my grankids will have to do the job.

History teaches us that no matter how bloody things can get when a population stands up to its masters, just going with the flow until the boil comes to a head and is then 'lanced' by outside forces, is much worse for everyone. The hardest hit being the citizens of the once domineering nation.

Amerikans have the best knowledge of who the crooks are, if they won't sort the problem because they have been distracted into more partisan tosh such as "they all cry lock 'em up" ; it is they ordinary amerikans, who will finish up paying the piper.

[Dec 20, 2020] Et tu, Brutus?

Dec 20, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Dec 19 2020 13:39 utc | 40

Et tu, Brutus?

Pompeo Claims Russia is 'Pretty Clearly' Behind Major Hack Attack on US

[Dec 17, 2020] The deep state just cannot get over losing Russia to Putin and nationalism after they had turned it into their playground in the 1990s. They are hot to trot to take out Russia and make it bend the knee, whatever the risks are.

Highly recommended!
Dec 17, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Hoyeru , Dec 16 2020 19:24 utc | 1

Since when has USA needed evidence? They blamed Saddam for years that he had "weapons of mass distraction". And back in 1990, they created the famous "Iraq solders took babies out fo incubators " lies. Some of us have lived longer than 30 years and we remember all the lies USA has said.

All part of the plan to cut Russia from the SWIFT in 2021. Once Biden becomes a president, he will call on all "democracies" to stand up to Russia. He and other "Western democracies" will hold a joint meeting sometime in 2021 where they will "condemn Russia for all the malign things Russia has done" and will press Belgium to cut Russia fro the SWIFT.

Whats wore, instead of doing anything, Russia is just sitting and watching them instead of warming Europe that this will mean Europe will freeze their collective asses next winter when they won't be able to get Russia gas. Even Iran is warning Russia that they will be cut off from the SWIFT...

Roger , Dec 16 2020 19:39 utc | 3

@Hoyeru,

I have to agree with you, the deep state just cannot get over losing Russia to Putin and nationalism after the thought that they had turned it into their playground in the 1990s. They are hot to trot to take out Russia and make it bend the knee, whatever the risks are. Would not put it past them to pull the SWIFT option, although that would have huge implications for the Europeans who buy so much oil and gas from Russia.

It could end up as an own goal, as the Europeans join the Russian payments network and start paying in Euros convertible directly into Rubles (especially with Nordstream 2 in place). The Indians and Chinese are already setup for payments in local currencies. Right now China needs Russia as an ally, so they would also probably re-source oil imports to take more from Russia.

Russia has already made itself self sufficient in food etc., and has been working on payments in local currencies. They are not stupid, and see such a move coming.

[Dec 13, 2020] The most unfortunate aspect of these large scale disruption and regime change operations exploit actual grievances and truly indigenous civil society reform movements, thereby compromising even the most authentic efforts by the people

Highly recommended!
Money quote: "First thing to do when 'unrest rears its ugly head' is shut down external communications and kick out any of the Five Eyes operating an embassy in your country. It happnens so often."
Dec 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Merlin2 , Dec 12 2020 22:35 utc | 15

The most unfortunate aspect of these large scale disruption and regime change operations exploit actual grievances and truly indigenous civil society reform movements, thereby compromising even the most authentic efforts by the people. Not only that but this casts serious doubt on both authenticity and goals of all kind of demonstrations and civil unrest, even in more developed countries, including ostensibly First World.

Take the HK demonstrations for example - how much of it was real, genuine unrest caused by this or that more heavy handed China policy? truth is we don't know because by definition, the exploitation of such protest movements - almost always led by supposedly disaffected youth - includes a very sophisticated propaganda handbook that seeks to effectively "erase" the controlling hands behind the scenes.

Or, even the BLM movement - a lot that happened with these protests seem to jive with the instruction manuals per the ARK. Notice how these could be turned on and off - in this or that city, made to appear organic, when in fact those invisible hands from behind directed much of the action.

Another aspect that is very noticeable for both the HK and BLM movements is the way they were directed at some very specific issue that most people would have a hard time disagreeing with - on its face. Be it political "freedom", new "rules", new "taxes" and/or police brutality - there are numerous commonalities - too many to dismiss as mere coincidences.

At the same time, much care seems to have been taken to not allow these protests to be directed at the actual ruling class, the 1%, the elites, big finance and the corporatocracy. I always thought it was kind of funny the way these BLM protesters somehow were not there when Bernie sanders ran his campaign, even though Bernie had their grievances near the top of his list on the official platform (police brutality, uneven criminal justice system and prison reform were huge issues for him). Yes, there were plenty of black youths who voted with the Sanders movement in the primary (the one that was basically a fraudulent one, due to outright vote flipping, as was exposed by several credible analysts). But the BLM protests only came into being following the one GF killing and were directed mostly against police in large cities, and, of course against anything the federal government could try and do.

Now that Biden is all but declared as 'elect", those protests have died down (except for a few flare-up points like Portland, where they seem to have taken permanent residence). Funny that....must be that the "defund the police" was successful and black people no longer suffer from unequal law enforcement.....so all is well now.....

david , Dec 12 2020 23:29 utc | 18

Sometimes I thought something like this happened in Libya. Libyan army cleared this town, that city, next town, moving east to west, then just before Benghazi, we get our consent manufacturing message that Gaddafi said there would be a slaughter in Benghazi. So NATO just had to attack, to save Benghazi.

After Libya was smashed, turns out a whole gang of British "diplomats & SAS" were in Benghazi.

james , Dec 12 2020 19:01 utc | 2

thanks b! informative... this ARK is not noahs or boris's... who is behind this grand scheme?? it seems the idea of keeping lebannon and syria in a state of tension is the goal.. whose purpose does this serve? it seems like an agenda written in tel aviv, or is it washington?? who is behind all this?? it seems clear enough that the goal is to coddle israel... take this money and make sure israel continues to dominate in the middle east and all other countries are destabilized basket cases... these are sick people behind all this.. that much is very clear... who would spend money like this??

the really shocking thing is the UK gov't is in on it, but don't want it to appear this way.. the people in the UK sure are a weird lot.. i think they are weirder then the people in the USA!

Jen , Dec 12 2020 19:33 utc | 6

James @ 2:

ARK (Analysis Research Knowledge) has a website and its founder, former British diplomat Alistair Harris has a LinkedIn account you can look up on Google or whatever search engine you normally use. The company is based in Dubai.

Among ARK's various activities in Syria was managing the Facebook page and probably other PR for the White Helmets. The propaganda surrounding Bana Alabed and other Syrian children seems to be of a type similar to White Helmets propaganda - designed to appeal to people's emotions, particularly women's emotions - so there is a possibility all this rubbish was being generated by the same organisation.

In the end the target audience for all this propaganda is us, as our support is needed to justify an eventual US or NATO invasion of Syria and Lebanon.

Trauma2000 , Dec 12 2020 19:09 utc | 3

First thing to do when 'unrest rears its ugly head' is shut down external communications and kick out any of the Five Eyes operating an emmbasy in your country. It happnens so often. Kick Out the Five Eyes (I live in one of them). Media Communications (the industry I work in) is the publicly acceptable term for Information Program, Propaganda, Information Warfare. It's all the same thing, with Event Management being the sister of and information program.

I've worked in both areas; external media communications programs and event coordination and management , often dovetailing the two and switching between roles in order to 'maximise stakeholder value' for the benefit of the client. Who is the client..? If the client isn't obvious then Follow the money. It is always the person paying the bill. Follow the money people... follow the money and you will understand the objectives of even the most obtuse communications programs.

As an aside, with all the hundreds of billions of dollars of weapons being pumped into the MENA, 'no one in Government' is able to 'shut down the wars. It's a joke, Government can track your spending down to the last cent and hit you up with a fine for 'incorrect tax return' but they 'can't follow the hundreds of billions of dollars' in weapons that gets flown around the world. Follow the money people. Follow the money and you'll catch the culprit.

[Dec 12, 2020] Former Special Forces Officer Warns Of 'Color Revolution Tactics' Used Against Trump - ZeroHedge

Dec 12, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Color revolution tactics that have been used against foreign leaders are now being used by President Donald Trump 's opponents to oust him, a former special forces officer has warned.

"A color revolution is a tactic to affect regime change," the officer, who asked to remain anonymous, told The Epoch Times.

"What I see happening is a Marxist insurgency that's using a color revolution to affect regime change."

The 2019 Transition Integrity Project , according to the officer, is an indicator that the events of this year's presidential election were "transparently orchestrated" by "Marxist elements within the Democratic Party and their Marxist allies in foreign governments."

"It may not have fallen out just as they wanted, because anytime you carry out an operation like this, the enemy will get a vote. But the plan was we will not concede the election. The goal here was never the presidency, " the officer said.

"The goal of the opposition was to fundamentally change the country. They are attacking the efficacy of the Constitution."

To achieve their goal, the anti-Trump opposition focused their main effort on affecting the election, the officer said.

Some of the most notable color revolutions took place amid turmoil sparked by disputed elections. In 2004, mass protests in Ukraine following allegations of a fraudulent presidential election, which initially showed pro-Russia Viktor Yanukovych as the winner, led to a new vote won by Viktor Yushchenko, the candidate backed by the European Union and the United States.

The officer said the tactics used by the anti-Trump opposition can be found in the Special Forces' guide for overthrowing a government.

"What you're getting from me, this is supported in all older unconventional warfare doctrines," the officer said.

"You could go to our manuals and pull from them the information I'm telling you. This isn't from someone who's a rabid Trump supporter. This is what's happening ."

me title=

The officer then talked about how President Barack Obama used his eight years in office to "seed his political allies all through the institutions," created an "underground" or "shadow government" supported by legacy media and rioters.

"With the president being unable to get his own people into the administration, we effectively had a third administration of Obama," the officer said.

"So we come to what we have today: The underground are the elements within the government. We saw how they opposed the president, how they tried the impeachment ."

"The press is the auxiliary on the outside. The only thing we're missing is a real guerrilla force, and we would be mistaken to think that's just Antifa or Black Lives Matter. There are professional revolutionaries within those movements."

[Dec 12, 2020] Biden puts lipstick on another pig.

Dec 12, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

uncle tungsten , Dec 11 2020 21:42 utc | 12

John Kerry is playing a con game with USA psuedo green sycophants to go to war with Russia to save the environment. And they love him.

The announcement drew praise from many professional climate activists and groups, perhaps assuming that Kerry was taking his lead from Bernie Sanders, who has for years been saying the same thing. Executive Director of the Sunrise Movement, Varshini Prakash said his statement was an "encouraging move," while 350.org's Bill McKibben, predicted Kerry would be an excellent climate czar. Yet, as media critic Adam Johnson argued, Kerry's proclamation should deeply concern progressive activists and will likely lead to expanding the already bloated military budget.

Kerry is a founding member of the Washington think tank, the American Security Project (ASP), whose board is a who's who of retired generals, admirals and senators. The ASP also hailed the appointment of their man, explaining, in a little-read report, exactly what treating the climate as a national security threat entails. And it is nothing like what Sanders advocates.

For the ASP, climate change constitutes an "accelerant of instability" and a "threat multiplier" that will "affect the operating environment," and notes that Kerry will have three priorities in his role as President Biden's right-hand man. What were those three priorities? Making sure people in the Global South could eat and have access to safe drinking water? Reparations? Disaster relief or response teams? Cutting back on fossil fuel use? Indeed not. For the ASP, the primary objectives were:

A huge rebuilding of the United States' military bases,
Countering China in the Pacific,
Preparing for a war with Russia in the newly-melted Arctic.

Biden puts lipstick on another pig.

[Dec 11, 2020] There is no 'Russian secret war' on the US, but WaPo fantasy risks Biden starting a very real one by Nebojsa Malic

Notable quotes:
"... Last but not least, Exhibit D is the assertion that the "Democratic National Committee's computers were raided by Russian military intelligence to disrupt the 2016 election." That is another assertion, based on allegations listed in indictments by special counsel Robert Mueller. As a federal judge helpfully reminded Mueller in another 'Russiagate' case, which the government later dropped, allegations made in indictments aren't statements of fact. ..."
"... If the phrase "consistent with" jumps out at you here, that's no accident. Notice there is no actual evidence offered for any of these claims, only an insinuation that these alleged attacks would be "consistent" with what the US spies, anonymous sources and mainstream media think might be Russian objectives. That's exactly the claim made by the infamous January 2017 "intelligence community assessment," which the media falsely attributed to "17 intelligence agencies" instead of a hand-picked team involved in spying on the Trump campaign at the time. ..."
"... Now, the Post editors may be privileged people, living comfortably off of Jeff Bezos's Amazon fortune even as their country collapses under pandemic lockdowns. However, it would be a mistake to write off this editorial as a mere product of their vivid and feverish imaginations. After four years of Russiagate hysteria that even the Trump administration has internalized, this kind of rhetoric is actually dangerous . ..."
Dec 11, 2020 | www.rt.com

Airplanes paint the sky in the colors of the Russian flag during a Kremlin flyover, June 24, 2020 © Nina Zotina via REUTERS 3 Follow RT on In a normal world, the Washington Post claiming the existence of a Russian 'secret war' against the US based on far-fetched conjecture and debunked conspiracy theories would be a laughing matter. We don't live in such a world.

Democrat Joe Biden, anointed by the US mainstream media and Silicon Valley as the next president, "must call out Putin's secret war against the United States" when he assumes office, the Post's editorial board argued this week.

But this "secret war" exists only in their feverish imagination. Each and every one of the things they list as examples of it consists of assertions based on insinuation at best, or has otherwise been debunked as outright fake news.

Exhibit A is the "mysterious attacks" that supposedly "targeted" US diplomats and spies in Cuba, China, Australia and Taiwan. This 'Havana Syndrome' was blamed on Russia last week in a coordinated media campaign, but the "scientific" paper it was based on carefully avoids actual attribution, saying only that the vague symptoms were "consistent" with a posited microwave weapon.

This is an evolution of the original story, which claimed that Russia had used "sonic weapons," not microwave ones. Even the New York Times later admitted that the headaches, sleep deprivation and other problems were more likely caused by the loud chirping of Cuban crickets.

Who caused 'Havana syndrome'? With latest research naming no culprit, MSM rushes to declare Russia 'microwave' exposure mastermind

Exhibit B is another doozy, the infamous "Russian bounties" story. The New York Times claimed in June that some money captured from local mobsters in Afghanistan was somehow proof that Russia was paying the Taliban to kill US soldiers – again, not on the basis of actual evidence, but on conjecture that this was "consistent" with what the CIA and US military said were Russian objectives.

Thing is, neither the US intelligence community nor the Pentagon were ever able to confirm the story, having investigated it for months. It just so happened that it was brought up just as the DC establishment sought to torpedo President Donald Trump's plan to pull out of Afghanistan and end the 20-year war that has long since forgotten its purpose.

Exhibit C is the "looting of valuable hacking tools" from the cybersecurity firm FireEye, announced earlier this week. FireEye itself never named the culprit, with its CEO Kevin Mandia only saying it was "consistent with a nation-state cyber-espionage effort."

That didn't stop the Post from claiming that "spies with Russia's foreign intelligence service" are "believed" to have hacked FireEye, citing "people familiar with the matter." Well there you go, anonymous and unverifiable sources asserted it, therefore it must be true!

Last but not least, Exhibit D is the assertion that the "Democratic National Committee's computers were raided by Russian military intelligence to disrupt the 2016 election." That is another assertion, based on allegations listed in indictments by special counsel Robert Mueller. As a federal judge helpfully reminded Mueller in another 'Russiagate' case, which the government later dropped, allegations made in indictments aren't statements of fact.Another nail in Russiagate coffin? Federal judge destroys key Mueller report claim

If the phrase "consistent with" jumps out at you here, that's no accident. Notice there is no actual evidence offered for any of these claims, only an insinuation that these alleged attacks would be "consistent" with what the US spies, anonymous sources and mainstream media think might be Russian objectives. That's exactly the claim made by the infamous January 2017 "intelligence community assessment," which the media falsely attributed to "17 intelligence agencies" instead of a hand-picked team involved in spying on the Trump campaign at the time.

Keep in mind that these are the same spies and media that never saw the demise of the Soviet Union coming, and have been predicting Russia's impending collapse any day now – for the past 20 years. So much for their actual knowledge of Russian goals or thinking.

Speaking of 'Russiagate,' the Post has been on the leading edge of that conspiracy theory from the start. It won Pulitzers for pushing it on the American public. It also played a key role in smearing Trump's first national security adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn, so he would be fired – and later cheered his railroading by Mueller. At least they're consistent , so to speak.

Now, the Post editors may be privileged people, living comfortably off of Jeff Bezos's Amazon fortune even as their country collapses under pandemic lockdowns. However, it would be a mistake to write off this editorial as a mere product of their vivid and feverish imaginations. After four years of Russiagate hysteria that even the Trump administration has internalized, this kind of rhetoric is actually dangerous .

That's because the Post is literally in bed with what Trump called the Washington "swamp," the entrenched US political establishment. What they print is what that establishment thinks and wants Americans to believe. With Joe Biden in the White House, the objectives of that establishment and the official US government would be, to use their own phrase, consistent .

Which is why the Post's "secret war" fantasy is, shall we say, highly likely to become an actual shooting war with Moscow. As the US and Russia have enough nuclear weapons between themselves to destroy the world several times over, that can't possibly be good for Amazon's bottom line. Someone ought to tell Bezos.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Nebojsa Malic is a Serbian-American journalist, blogger and translator, who wrote a regular column for Antiwar.com from 2000 to 2015, and is now senior writer at RT. Follow him on Twitter @NebojsaMalic

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

[Dec 11, 2020] Is The Media Burying The Russiagater Swalwell Story

Dec 11, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

We often discuss media coverage and accuracy on developing legal and political controversies. Much of this discussion recently has focused on the bias shown by the media in the last four years. I have worked for the media as a legal analyst and columnist for years, but I have never before seen this raw and open bias in major media. At the same time, academics are rejecting the very concept of objectivity in journalism in favor of open advocacy.

This morning, Fox News called out all of the networks for zero coverage of the bombshell story from Axios that Rep. Eric Swalwell may have had a close relationship with a suspected Chinese spy who fled to China a few years ago. Many of us were struck by the lack of coverage, particularly given the position of Swalwell on the House Intelligence Committee and his former bid for the presidency. It was particularly striking when the media is now reluctantly covering the Hunter Biden story after a long blackout before the election. Yet, the most stark comparison is with the exhaustive coverage given the highly analogous story involving an alleged spy, Maria Butina, who had an affair with a high-ranking figure in the National Rifle Association.

Swalwell is alleged to have had a close relationship with Chinese national, Fang Fang or Christine Fang, who not only raised money for him but placed at least one intern in Swalwell's congressional office, according to Axios . Bizarrely, Swalwell has refused to confirm or deny that he had an intimate relationship with his office claiming that such an answer could compromise classified information. Even that ridiculous comment did not prompt ABC, NBC, or CBS to cover the story. Obviously, Fang and the Chinese already know if she had a sexual relationship with Swalwell. The only people in the dark are the voters.

Swalwell himself explained why this is news.

The congressman was one of the most vocal voices calling out a June 2016 meeting that President Trump's son, Donald Trump Jr., with Natalia Veselnitskaya, who was accused of being an asset for the Russian government.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1082792198096277504&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fmedia-burying-swalwell-story&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Swalwell declared on MSNBC in January 2019:

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

" Stated plainly, the President's son met with a Russian spy. We now have the best evidence of that in our minority report the Democrats put out that Ms. Veselnitskaya was going all over the world and bumping into Dana Rohrabacher, which is a sign of a spy, someone who tries to create a coincidence encounter, and now we know that she was working at the behest of the Russian government. "

Not even the utter hypocrisy of Swalwell's position or the lunacy of his classification claim was enough to generate minimal coverage. There is also no interest in Swalwell remaining on the intelligence committee given his ill-considered relationship.

Swalwell says that he cooperated with the FBI and cut off ties with Fang, who fled to China years ago. There is no indication that he compromised classified information, but such assets are used to often influence powerful leaders or acquire useful background information on other leaders.

MSNBC and other news outlets could not get enough of that story about Trump Jr. but has an effective blackout on the same allegation of Swalwell not just "bumping" into a spy but carrying on a long relationship and even allowing her to raise money for him and help put an intern in his congressional office.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

Yet, the greatest contrast is with the NRA story which was endlessly covered. Even when NRA moved to address the relationship between Butina and 57-year-old Republican activist named Paul Erickson. Hundreds of stories ran on every deal and media explored whether a Russian activist influenced powerful figures or shared information .

The FBI Director just gave a public speech on the extensive and growing espionage efforts of China. Yet, the success of planting an agent with Swalwell and a couple of other politicians has been given virtual Hunter Biden treatment. Where a host of legal expert called for charges for treason and other crimes against Trump Jr., there is nothing but crickets when a liberal Democrats members is accused of far more extensive contacts with a Chinese spy. Why?


PrintCash 6 hours ago (Edited)

Does a bear poop in the woods?

Its the sole purpose and desire of the ultra partisan types in the media to control the narrative, control the messaging, control your life. It's what they LIVE for.

Hikikomori 6 hours ago

Swalwell was accusing Trump of colluding with Putin while at the same time Swalwell was screwing a ChiCom spy - you couldn'tmake this up.

Floki_Ragnarsson 6 hours ago

Right out of a Tom Clancy novel.

Lord Raglan 5 hours ago remove link

Swalwell was boinking the Chi-Com Honey Pot in 2015 and maybe earlier, before Trump even announced his run and yet it is all Trump's fault.

There is no lie that is too malignantly preposterous for people on the Left.

Flankspeed60 4 hours ago

The Chinese are not actually our enemy here. When you go to Yellowstone, you're warned not to feed the bears. Same for dragons. Hang raw meat on a clothesline, and expect all the downwind carnivores and blowflies to show up. In our case, corrupt politicians made themselves readily accessible to any and every gomer with large bundles of cash. Even real-life whores are more discerning in their choice of johns than the low-life bacterium we elected to congress-it is THEY AND THEY ALONE who are to blame for selling this country out. The Chinese have nothing but contempt for these dregs, and no one should blame them for paying relative pennies for solid gold bars in return. In fact, our government does exactly the same to countless other countries, so the stampeding hypocrisy of our government in crying 'foul' simply reeks. The Chicoms would most likely shoot, and have shot their own corrupt sell-outs for far less than the crimes committed by our treasonous scumbags. And, until we adopt similar measures against our worthless SOB's, our Swamp will simply continue to get deeper and slimier............

precarryus 4 hours ago

Yet Swill-well says Adam Schiff and Pelosi were aware of his activities, implying ... ...(Surprised?

American2 5 hours ago remove link

Perhaps Peter Strozk can be the defense's rock-solid moral character witness at Eric Swalwell's federal trial.

surf@jm 5 hours ago

The Chinese own Hollywood and the media.....

The Chinese were the main force for the Russia collusion horsehockey through their political whores in congress....

Schroedingers Cat 5 hours ago

Hillary, Brennan, Obama, Chris Hayes, Maddow, Comey, Zucker and many other swamp state freaks are responsible for Russiagate.

The CHinese CCP are definitely up to no good but let's not excuse traitors and chalk it up to Chinese spies. Swalwell is 100% responsible for his own behavior. They ALL ARE. Chinese spies can't corrupt real American Patriots.

Son of Captain Nemo 5 hours ago

Last I checked so was Joe and Hunter Biden along with China?...

And Hunter is doing great things with his money buying under age prostitutes in Ukraine and China making vids of it while sucking on a crack pipe... While the young ladies "suck" something else "off"!!!

Willie the Pimp 6 hours ago remove link

The media? No such thing. CIA propaganda.

John Couger 3 hours ago

This slimy piece of excrement attacked our president for 4 years over the Russia hoax all while being compromised by the communist Chinese

BinAnunnaki 4 hours ago

The Presstitute media is an extension of the Democratic Party.

Cobra Commander 4 hours ago remove link

Precisely. Why pay money to be misinformed? Biden up by 17 in Wisconsin, Hunter laptop media blackout, panning away from ANY mention of voter and election fraud.

OCnStiggs 6 hours ago

"Swallowell" is a lying, prevaricating, stupid POS.

The very first thing they do to you when you get a high security clearance is brief you on people and techniques used to compromise you. Period. Dot. This ****** either skipped the brief or ignored it. Simply associating with people who might be a compromise threat is unlawful. Ignorance is no excuse.

Just sayin'.

Cobra Commander 4 hours ago

Penalties for Inaccurate or False Statements (security clearance)

United States Criminal Code (title 18, section 1001) provides that knowingly falsifying or concealing a material fact is a felony which may result in fines of up to $10,000, and/or 5 years imprisonment, or both.

If you have a security clearance, you agree to report all foreign contacts and relationships. When you submit your clearance request, you attest that all is true, correct, and complete to the best of your knowledge.

Intentionally submitting false information on a clearance request or renewal is subject to criminal prosecution.

Cobra!

[Dec 01, 2020] After Trump's Lies, the Establishment's Tripe and Self-Deception -

Dec 01, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

or Donald Trump, truth is a matter of convenience, with facts entirely optional and plenty of space allowed for make-believe. Yet in American public life, our current president is far from being the sole purveyor of fictions and falsehoods. The very institutions that citizens count on to distinguish between fact and fable engage in their own forms of mythmaking. While they may steer clear of telling outright lies, they dispense no small amount of drivel, concealing actual truth behind a veil of illusion.

Allow me to offer an illustrative example in the form of a recent column by the Washington Post's David Von Drehle, a seasoned journalist now installed in that paper's stable of political commentators and called upon twice weekly to reflect on the fate of humankind.

me title=

The title of Von Drehle's essay poses a question: "Joe Biden says America is back. Back to what?" Von Drehle then proceeds to spell out his own answer to that what. Yet in doing so, he packages his views in a specific historical context. It's that context that is instructive.

Let us acknowledge that the Biden team is no more likely to take its cues from some garden-variety pundit than from members of the outgoing administration. Van Drehle's policy recommendations -- that Biden should "end the mollycoddling" of Saudi Arabia, insist that China "play by the rules," and knit "the Americas into a hemisphere of happiness" -- carry about as much weight with the incoming administration as do Mike Pompeo's opinions, i.e. next to none whatsoever.

Yet this is not to say that Von Drehle's column is just so much hot air. From his perch at the Post, he is a small, but not inconsequential player in a grand project to which members of the foreign policy establishment swear fealty. The aim of that project is to salvage and rejuvenate claims of American Exceptionalism that Donald Trump mangled and trashed nearly beyond recognition.

The establishment's preferred version of exceptionalism emphasizes not America as exemplar -- that's for sissies -- but America as the instrument chosen by God or Providence to direct history itself. Pumping new life into this hoary old notion requires persuading Americans today that before Trump screwed things up, the United States had history well in hand, with the world taking its cues from Washington.

me title=

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.426.0_en.html#goog_738456037 Ad ends in 15s

Von Drehle purports to believe that such a world actually existed. Furthermore, he believes that a sufficiently savvy U.S. president can restore that world -- all that's required is assertive American leadership. Nor is he alone in entertaining the prospect of going "back" to that triumphal time, before Trump appeared on the scene and messed everything up. Indeed, take Biden's rhetoric at face value and our next president may well share in this fantasy.

So of considerably greater significance than Von Drehle's policy prescriptions is the historical wrapping in which they arrive. It's history with a specific and carefully selected time horizon. For Von Drehle (and probably for Biden), the history that matters begins with the end of World War II, a moment that ostensibly inaugurated "seven decades of bipartisan [foreign policy] consensus." Providing a foundation for that consensus was a "win-win view of America's role in the world." Generations of postwar leaders, according to Von Drehle, understood that "the long-term interests of Americans were best served by the gradual expansion of peace and prosperity worldwide." The result was "an expansive, internationalist approach" to basic policy. This, in sum, is the past that Von Drehle is selling as a roadmap to a happy future.

Now such assertions may not qualify as bald-faced lies in a Trumpian sense, but taken together they amount to a fairy tale. The postwar bipartisan consensus was never more than partial and tentative at best. When put to the test -- with Vietnam as the most vivid example -- it gave way. Nor did the Cold War and the accompanying nuclear arms race reflect a win-win view of America's role in the world. The Cold War was a zero-sum game, pitting us against them -- "better dead than Red," remember?

As for the United States promoting the gradual expansion of peace and prosperity worldwide, that claim is difficult to square with Washington's marriages of convenience with sundry dictators, involvement in numerous coups and assassination plots, and the U.S. penchant for killing people in faraway places, unmatched by any other nation on the planet. Since 9/11 in particular, war and disorder rather than peace and prosperity have been America's principal exports. All of this predated Trump.

Von Drehle is eager for the United States to resume "its rightful place in the world order" as "the friend of freedom and the scourge of tyrants." Forget just for a second that the United States befriended a long list of tyrants: Batista, Somoza, Marcos, Noriega, the Shah of Iran, Mubarak of Egypt, and, until 1990, Iraq's Saddam Hussein. Of greater relevance to the present moment is this question: who or what assigns nations their rightful place in the world order? This is not a matter upon which columnists in the employ of the Washington Post are inclined to reflect, preferring to assume that history's decision is irreversible: we are Numero Uno. Period. Full stop. Been that way forever.

Yet this is a form of madness, as utterly detached from reality as Trump's insistence that he won Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Von Drehle is peddling tripe. He pays no price for doing so. In some respects, doing so defines the essence of his job. In a couple of days, he will produce another column, further embellishing the nation's achievements as friend of freedom and scourge of tyrants, as will his various counterparts at the Post, the Times, the Wall Street Journal , and other prestige outlets.

They will collaborate in minimizing the moral ambiguity that permeates America's past. They will shrug off crimes or lock them away in a box labeled "Sorry. Didn't Mean To." They will inhibit learning and bury truth.

And they will get away with it.

Andrew Bacevich is president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and TAC's writer-at-large.

cjl • 6 hours ago • edited

I'm not sure that "they" can continue to "get away with it." The US financial situation is not good. The US government is dysfunctional, and US society as a whole, the combination of capital and people, is no longer particularly competitive. No matter what Biden, et al, think they are going to do with respect to leading the world, it's not clear that the world will pay any attention, or that the the US can even afford it.
It's a tragic, in the classic sense, situation, as almost everything that has weakened the US empire has been self inflicted.

YT14 cjl • 4 hours ago

How dare you criticise Biden et al who are such world-class geniuses, lol. Do you question his ability to stop the tide, like King Canute?

kouroi • 6 hours ago

All true. To see a better reflection of America, maybe one should read Serghei Lavrov's interviews and press conferences:
https://thesaker.is/foreign...

or see how the Chinese are trolling Australia in the aftermath of the scandal of the Aussie special forces killing (with intent) scores of civilians (probably far less than the US troops) in Afghanistan - just as a fast track on how Americans are regarded outside their border...

While Mr. Von Drehle sees and praises Dorian Gray, the world at large watches with fascination another patch of horror coming up on his portrait...

Vhailor • 5 hours ago

I totally agree with Bacevich. There is really nothing that generates global more resentment than this kind of American hubris, American arrogance:

The establishment's preferred version of exceptionalism emphasizes not America as exemplar -- that's for sissies -- but America as the instrument chosen by God or Providence to direct history itself.

disgustoo • 4 hours ago

"Yet this is a form of madness, as utterly detached from reality as Trump's insistence that he won Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Von Drehle is peddling tripe. He pays no price for doing so. In some respects, doing so defines the essence of his job. In a couple of days, he will produce another column..."

As will Andrew J. And you can be sure Bacevich will use any topic at hand to slip in as many backhands against President Trump as he can muster. Once a RINO, always a RINO. But despite all the snide slurs against the President here & elsewhere, Bacevich's preferred candidate, stately Joe Biden may soon dignify the Oval Office (maybe); & then Andrew can spend the next four years defending him, just like Von Drehle.

Let'sGo • 2 hours ago

This website is for the grandest losers.

alan • 2 hours ago

America HAS NO memory, particularly regarding the heinous aspects of its past. Who remembers the Indian removals, Chinese and Japanese exclusion acts, or the Philippine insurrection?

John Achterhof • 41 minutes ago • edited

As success and comfort displace esteem and integrity and corruption turns pervasive the virtuous order of society is overturned: independent, principled, talented spirits are typically encountered only well away of the mainstreams of media while middling obsequiousness and venality rise above their betters in pubic view.

Jaded_Prole • 25 minutes ago • edited

Tripe, deception and corrupton are what one can expect from corporate governance no matter which wing s dominant. We haven't seen the worst of it yet, though we are getting there faster than we thought.

chris chuba • 21 minutes ago

I agree w/Bacevich. I love how R's and D's pretend they are different.

'The America First policy is gone' scream the Laura Ingraham's as she (and the other Republican Hawks) lament a possible decrease in hostility with China and Iran. The Democrats pronounce, 'America is back, now we are really going to get tough with Russia and do regime change in Venezuela right!'

Here is the new boss, same as the new boss. We will continue to waste our treasure and energy harming other countries and neglect ourselves until we are spent.

[Dec 01, 2020] Bomb Libya and take its oil- Biden budget chief pick Neera Tanden agreed with Trump - The Grayzone

Dec 01, 2020 | thegrayzone.com

Editor's note : US President-elect Joe Biden nominated Neera Tanden, a close ally of Hillary Clinton and president of neoliberal DC think tank the Center for American Progress, on November 29 to serve as director of his administration's Office of Management and Budget. Tanden is notorious on Twitter for her aggressive attacks on the left.

In response to the nomination, The Grayzone is reprinting this June 20, 2016 report by Ben Norton.

"Unless we take the oil from Libya, I have no interest in Libya," Donald Trump declared in an April 2011 interview on CNN's "Newsroom."

The U.S. government was considering military intervention in the oil-rich North African nation at the time. Trump said he would only participate if Washington exploited Libya's natural resources in return.

"Libya is only good as far I'm concerned for one thing -- this country takes the oil. If we're not taking the oil, no interest," he added.

NATO claimed its U.S.-backed bombing campaign was meant to protect Libyans who were protesting the regime of longtime dictator Muammar Qadhafi. Micah Zenko, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, used NATO's own materials to show that this was false.

"In truth, the Libyan intervention was about regime change from the very start," Zenko wrote in an exposé in Foreign Policy in March.

Trump was not the only figure to propose taking Libya's oil in return for bombing it, however. Neera Tanden, the president of the pro-Clinton think tank the Center for American Progress, proposed this same policy a few months after Trump.

"We have a giant deficit. They have a lot of oil," Tanden wrote in an October 2011 email titled "Should Libya pay us back?"

"Most Americans would choose not to engage in the world because of that deficit. If we want to continue to engage in the world, gestures like having oil rich countries partially pay us back doesn't seem crazy to me," she added in the message, which was obtained and first published by The Intercept .

neera tanden libya oil email

Liberal hawkishness

Tanden is a close ally of Hillary Clinton, and is frequently named as a likely chief-of-staff in a Hillary Clinton White House. The Center for American Progress, which Tanden leads, was founded by John Podesta, a key figure in the Clinton machine.

Podesta is the chairman of Hillary's 2016 presidential campaign, and he previously served as chief of staff under President Bill Clinton. With his brother Tony, John also co-founded the Podesta Group, a public affairs firm that has lobbied for Saudi Arabia , among other countries.

Tanden has expressed hawkish views, although in a statement to Salon she strongly opposed being described as hawkish. The New York Times has described Hillary Clinton as more hawkish than her Republican rivals , although it still endorsed her for president.

The Center for American Progress president invited hard-line right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to speak in Washington, D.C. in November, after he had spent months aggressively trying to jeopardize the Iran nuclear deal.

Tanden does not comment on international affairs much, but her tweets provide some insight into her hawkish views, which do not reflect the official policy of the Center for American Progress.

In September 2013, when the Obama administration was preparing to bomb Syria, she tweeted support, writing, "On Syria, while I don't want to be the world's policeman, an unpoliced world is dangerous. The US may be the only adult in the room left."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=BenjaminNorton&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=374251840323334144&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fthegrayzone.com%2F2020%2F11%2F30%2Ftrump-neera-tanden-libya-oil%2F&siteScreenName=TheGrayzoneNews&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Just over a week later, the administration backed off of its plans, in response to enormous backlash -- and in fear that it would end up with another Libya on its hands.

During the lead-up to the war in Libya, Tanden expressed support for military intervention. She suggested that Americans should be "chanting" for Qadhafi's ouster.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=BenjaminNorton&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=39456866715181056&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fthegrayzone.com%2F2020%2F11%2F30%2Ftrump-neera-tanden-libya-oil%2F&siteScreenName=TheGrayzoneNews&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Days after the NATO operation was launched, she wrote , "To liberal friends worried re Libya, is there better reason 4 use of US power than 2 protect innocent civilians from slaughter by a madman?"

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=BenjaminNorton&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-3&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=52565661326643201&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fthegrayzone.com%2F2020%2F11%2F30%2Ftrump-neera-tanden-libya-oil%2F&siteScreenName=TheGrayzoneNews&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Less than a month later, Tanden conceded , "This whole Libya thing doesn't seem to be working out so well."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=BenjaminNorton&dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-4&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=60933317385662464&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fthegrayzone.com%2F2020%2F11%2F30%2Ftrump-neera-tanden-libya-oil%2F&siteScreenName=TheGrayzoneNews&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Like many liberal figures who supported the NATO bombing of Libya, she stopped talking about the country between 2011 and 2014, while it was roiled by violent chaos and extremism.

These tweets came before the October email in which Tanden suggested taking Libya's oil in return for bombing it. Trump made the same proposal several months before, in April.

After this article was published, Tanden stressed in a statement to Salon that her views do not reflect those of the Center for American Progress, which did not take a position on Libya.

She claimed being labeled "a hawk is a ridiculous caricature," adding, "I opposed the Iraq war from the beginning." Tanden noted that the Center for American Progress "was among the first think tanks to lay out concrete plans for ending the war in Iraq." She also said that she does not support putting U.S. troops in Syria.

"CAP is a think tank," Tanden stressed, referring to the organization by its acronym. "We have internal discussions and dialogues all the time on a variety of issues. We encourage the deliberation of ideas to spur conversation, push thinking and spark debate. We do this in meetings, on phone calls and yes, over e-mail. One internal e-mail exchange among colleagues -- which was leaked to another organization -- or a few tweets does not constitute a published, official policy position."

Salon never once stated that Tanden's views reflect the Center for American Progress' official policy, but Tanden accused Salon of implying this.

Leftist critics have long lambasted the Democratic Party's militaristic foreign policy, arguing it is not much different than the GOP's. This exploitative idea proposed by both Trump and Tanden lends further credence to the argument that, when it comes to the U.S. empire, the Democratic and Republican parties are much more similar than their adherents make them out to be.

A strange mix

At the time of his April 2011 CNN interview, Trump was considering running as a Republican in the 2012 election. His nationalistic rhetoric then was very consistent to that of today.

Trump lamented that the U.S. was "just not respected" and had become "a laughing stock throughout the world." He hoped that he could reverse this supposed trend, just as he now promises to "make America great again."

Trump's proposal on Libya was consistent with his views on Iraq. He declared at the American Conservative Union's 40th Conservative Political Action Conference, in 2013, that the U.S. should "take" $1.5 trillion worth of Iraq's oil to pay for the illegal war.

In his presidential campaign today, Trump has made similar proposals. His foreign policy is a strange mix of skeptical non-interventionism and hawkishness.

In the 2011 CNN interview, Trump expressed skepticism about the rebels in Libya. "They make the rebels sound like they're from 'Gone With the Wind,' very glamorous," Trump said. "I hear they're controlled by Iran. I hear they're controlled by al-Qaeda."

The rebels had very little to do with Iran. Iran did express support for the opposition to Qadhafi's dictatorship, but it staunchly opposed Western military intervention, which it warned was hypocritical, neocolonial in nature and motivated by Libya's large oil reserves.

By no means were all of the rebels extremists, but there were al-Qaeda-linked elements in the opposition to Qadhafi. Human rights groups documented atrocities committed by extremist rebels, including ethnic cleansing of black Libyans .

After the NATO war toppled Qadhafi, the country was thrown into chaos. Rivaled forces, including extremist groups such as Ansar al-Sharia and eventually ISIS, seized control of swaths of the country, and weapons from Qadhafi's enormous cache ended up in the hands of extremist groups throughout the region. To this day, large parts of Libya are not under the control of the internationally recognized government.

Disastrous Libya war

Hillary Clinton played the leading role in rallying up U.S. support for the NATO war. Reports have since shown that the Pentagon was skeptical of U.S. involvement at the time, but, under the leadership of Secretary of State Clinton, the Obama administration portrayed it as a humanitarian mission.

President Obama insisted at the beginning of the intervention, "Broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake." The State Department likewise said "President Obama has been equally firm that our military operation has a narrowly defined mission that does not include regime change."

Then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates later told The New York Times, "I can't recall any specific decision that said, 'Well, let's just take him out,'" referring to Qadhafi.

Micah Zenko, the Council on Foreign Relations scholar, showed this to be false. "This is scarcely believable," Zenko rejoined in his detailed report . "Given that decapitation strikes against Qaddafi were employed early and often, there almost certainly was a decision by the civilian heads of government of the NATO coalition to 'take him out' from the very beginning of the intervention."

"The threat posed by the Libyan regime's military and paramilitary forces to civilian-populated areas was diminished by NATO airstrikes and rebel ground movements within the first 10 days," he explained. "Afterward, NATO began providing direct close-air support for advancing rebel forces by attacking government troops that were actually in retreat and had abandoned their vehicles." The military intervention continued for more than seven months.

Rebel forces went on to brutally murder Qadhafi, sodomizing him with a bayonet. When then-Sec. Clinton heard that he had been killed, she rejoiced in front of TV cameras, joking, "We came, we saw, he died!"

In April, Obama singled out U.S. support for the NATO war in Libya as the worst decision of his presidency.

Zenko warned that the "intervention in Libya shows that the slippery slope of allegedly limited interventions is most steep when there's a significant gap between what policymakers say their objectives are and the orders they issue for the battlefield."

"Unfortunately, duplicity of this sort is a common practice in the U.S. military," he added.

Interestingly, Trump himself cautioned in an interview on Fox News' "Fox & Friends" in March 2011 that U.S. intervention in Syria would be a "slippery slope."

"It is a slippery slope and more and more, you realize that we're over there fighting wars to open up these governments and they would have opened up themselves," Trump said, expressing skepticism about U.S. military involvement very early on in the war.

Clinton called for the exact opposite in Syria. She would go on to oppose diplomacy and insist the U.S. should support the "hard men with the guns."

DNC hack

Trump's unusual mix of anti-interventionist and exploitative foreign policy views are highlighted in the Democratic National Committee's alleged opposition research.

A hacker broke into the computer network of the DNC and leaked its opposition research on Trump. A 210-page document that appears to be this report highlights Trump's past remarks on Libya, Syria, Iraq and more.

Also revealed in the report is that Trump bragged that he "screwed" Muammar Qadhafi with an unfair business deal.

U.S. media outlets immediately blamed the DNC hack on the Russian government. Soon after, however, they quietly backed away from the hasty conclusions they made based on what progressive media watchdog Fairness in Accuracy and Reporting pointed out was incredibly flimsy evidence.


BEN NORTON

Ben Norton is a journalist, writer, and filmmaker. He is the assistant editor of The Grayzone, and the producer of the Moderate Rebels podcast, which he co-hosts with editor Max Blumenthal. His website is BenNorton.com and he tweets at @ BenjaminNorton .

[Dec 01, 2020] Biden pick for OMB director has a Steele dossier problem

Dec 01, 2020 | www.washingtonexaminer.com

P resident-elect Joe Biden's pick to run the Office of Management and Budget has a history of defending British ex-spy Christopher Steele's discredited anti-Trump dossier.

Years of controversial claims about the Trump-Russia controversy, particularly about the dossier funded in part by Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign, presents one of several obstacles for Neera Tanden, a longtime Democratic operative, to achieve Senate confirmation next year.

A significant question that remains is how the two Senate runoff races in Georgia shake out in January, with control of the upper chamber hanging in the balance. Tanden is sure to meet stiff opposition from Republicans, who will be led by Sen. Mitch McConnell, whom Tanden derisively tweeted in August 2019, "Stacey Abrams just called McConnell 'Moscow Mitch.' Love it."

In selecting Tanden on Monday, Biden described the president of the left-wing Center for American Progress as "a leading architect and advocate of policies designed to support working families." Tanden worked on Bill Clinton's successful run in 1992 and Barack Obama's successful presidential run in 2008. She was also an adviser on Hillary Clinton's successful Democratic primary effort in 2016 and the failed general election run that November.

Not mentioned in her Biden transition team biography was the role Tanden played in promoting unsubstantiated claims throughout the Trump-Russia controversy.

Tanden launched the "Moscow Project" in 2017, and after Buzzfeed published Steele's dossier in January 2017, Tanden's think tank released a statement saying, "The intelligence dossier presents profoundly disturbing allegations; ones that should shake every American to the core." Tanden went on to defend the Steele dossier repeatedly on Twitter, attacking those who critiqued the FBI for relying on its claims to obtain Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act authority against former Trump campaign associate Carter Page and implying that critics of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation were doing Russia's bidding.

"Make Chris Steele the next James Bond," Tanden tweeted in January 2017.

In a tweet about Rep. Devin Nunes's FISA memo in February 2018, which criticized the FBI's surveillance of Page and its use of the dossier, the Washington Examiner's Byron York noted that "no FISA warrant would have been sought from the FISA Court without the Steele dossier information." Tanden responded by saying, "Even if this is true, hasn't the dossier been mostly proven to be true? It's amazing how comfortable the likes of Byron York are happy to run interference for Russians intervening in our elections." Tanden followed up with another tweet claiming that the "dossier has been mostly established as right."

Tanden's "Moscow Project" also released a flawed critique of the Republican FISA memo, with Tanden defending the FBI's surveillance. In addition, Tanden tweeted in April 2018 that the dossier was "started with funding by a GOP megadonor."

Although the conservative Free Beacon had hired the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, it said in October 2017 that it "had no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier." It later emerged that Steele was not commissioned by Fusion GPS (and did not begin compiling his dossier) until Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias hired Fusion.

"What parts of the dossier have been disproven?" Tanden tweeted in January 2019. "I will wait."

DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's December 2019 report and subsequent declassifications undermined Steele's claims in the dossier. Horowitz said the Trump-Russia investigation concealed exculpatory information from the FISA court, and he criticized the Justice Department and FBI for at least 17 "significant errors and omissions" related to the FISA warrants against Page and for the bureau's reliance on Steele. Declassified footnotes show the FBI knew Steele's dossier may have been compromised by Russian disinformation . Horowitz said FBI interviews with Steele's main source, U.S.-based and Russian-trained lawyer Igor Danchenko, "raised significant questions about the reliability of the Steele election reporting."

FBI Director Christopher Wray called the FISA findings "utterly unacceptable" this year and concurred with the DOJ's conclusions that at least two of the four FISA warrants against Page amounted to illegal surveillance.

Nearly all the FISA signatories -- Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates , Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein , fired FBI Director James Comey , and fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe -- indicated under oath they wouldn't have signed off on the surveillance if they knew then what they know now, and a declassified FBI spreadsheet showed the lack of corroboration for Steele's claims.

Other Russia-related claims Tanden has made could present sticking points during her confirmation process.

She tweeted on Oct. 31, 2016, that President Trump was a Russian "puppet" in part because there was a "Trump server connected to Russian bank" and tweeted again in December 2016 that Trump may have gotten "talking points from the server at Trump Tower connected to Russia."

The claim that a Russian Alfa Bank server was secretly communicating with a server at Trump Tower, also pushed by Steele, emerged in 2016, but Horowitz noted the FBI "concluded by early February 2017 that there were no such links," and the Senate Intelligence Committee's August report did not find "covert communications between Alfa Bank and Trump Organization personnel." Jake Sullivan, Biden's pick for national security adviser, also pushed the refuted Alfa Bank claim in 2016.

The week after Trump's victory, following reports that Russian cyberactors had targeted a number of state election systems, Tanden mused, "Why would hackers hack in unless they could change results?" The next day, she pushed back against criticism she received, tweeting, "Funny, I don't remember saying Russian hackers stole Hillary's victory." There is no evidence that Russian hackers changed any votes in 2016.

"Mueller found Russian interference in the election. He also found Trump coordinated with Russia. These are facts," Tanden tweeted in October.

Although Mueller's investigation concluded in 2019 that the Russian government interfered in a "sweeping and systematic fashion," the report "did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

After the report's release, Tanden tweeted that "Mueller has failed the country" and "Adam Schiff > Robert Mueller." Earlier this year, Schiff released dozens of House Intelligence Committee witness interviews that showed Obama's top national security officials testified they hadn't seen direct evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.

[Dec 01, 2020] Biden's pick for budget director once championed funding social spending by MAKING LIBYA PAY for regime-change bombing campaign

Dec 01, 2020 | www.rt.com

Self-proclaimed President-elect Joe Biden has chosen a budget director, Neera Tanden, who once argued the US should ease funding shortages for left-wing social programs by making countries like Libya pay for being bombed. Biden's transition team on Monday announced its nominations for the six people selected to fill key economic roles in the incoming administration, led by former Federal Reserve Bank Chair Janet Yellen as treasury secretary. Tanden, a Hillary Clinton loyalist who currently heads the Center for American Progress, will be director of the Office of Management and Budget if Biden's media-declared election victory withstands legal challenges from President Donald Trump.

This crisis-tested team will help lift America out of our current economic downturn and build back better -- creating an economy that gives every single American a fair shot and an equal chance to get ahead. https://t.co/F6JMBHUgVx

-- Biden-Harris Presidential Transition (@Transition46) November 30, 2020

However, critics have already recalled an example of her unusual budgeting philosophy. In a 2011 email that was made public by WikiLeaks, Tanden said Libya should be made to pay for the bombing campaign that helped to topple Muammar Gaddafi's government, which would help balance the US domestic budget.

"We have a giant deficit, they have a lot of oil," Tanden said. "Most Americans would choose not to engage in the world because of that deficit."

If we want to continue to engage in the world, gestures like having oil-rich countries partially pay us back doesn't seem crazy to me.

[Nov 28, 2020] During the campaign it was an unconvincing display of the leopard desperately trying to change its spots; now it is clearly business as usual by Binoy KAMPMARK

Nov 28, 2020 | orientalreview.org

Nov 27, 2020

Biden's Promise- America Is Back(wards) – OrientalReview.org

With President Donald Trump all but conceding to the transition team that will take over after January next year, interest now shifts to President-elect Joe Biden's choices for cabinet. On the national security front, the imperial-military lobby will have reasons to be satisfied. If Trump promised to rein in, if not put the brakes on the US imperium, Biden promises a cocktail of energising stimulants.

While campaigning for the Democratic nomination, Biden tried to give a different impression. Biden the militarist was gone. "It time to end the Forever Wars, which have cost us untold blood and treasure," he stated in July 2019. Pinching a leaf or two out of Trump's own playbook, he insisted on bringing "the vast majority of our troops home – from the wars on Afghanistan and the Middle East". Missions would be more narrowly focused on Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Support would also be withdrawn from the unpardonable Saudi-led war in Yemen. "So I will make it my mission – to restore American leadership – and elevate diplomacy as our principal tool of foreign policy."

This was an unconvincing display of the leopard desperately trying to change its striking spots. During the Obama administration, the Vice-President found war sweet, despite subsequent attempts to distance himself from collective cabinet responsibility. These included the current war in Yemen, the assault on Libya that crippled the country and turned it into a terrorist wonderland, and that "forever war" in Afghanistan. In 2016, Biden claimed to be the sage in the administration, warning President Barack Obama against the Libyan intervention. An impression of combative wisdom was offered. He had "argued strongly" in the White House "against going to Libya," a position at odds with the hawkish Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, who insisted on something a bit more than going to Libya. After the demise of Muammar Gaddafi, what then? "Doesn't the country disintegrate? What happens then? Doesn't it become a place where it becomes a – petri dish for the growth of extremism?" So many questions, so few answers.

The Iraq War is another stubborn stain on Biden's garments. His approval of the invasion of Iraq has been feebly justified as benign ignorance. As he explained to NPR in September last year, he had received "a commitment from President [George W.] Bush he was not going to go to war in Iraq." Bush looked him "in the eye at the Oval Office; he said he needed the vote to be able to get inspectors into Iraq to determine whether or not Saddam Hussein was engaged in dealing with a nuclear program." Then came the invasion: "we had a shock and awe". For Iraqis, it was a bit more than shock and awe.

With the warring efforts of the US in Iraq turning sour, Biden entertained a proposal reminiscent of Europe's old imperial planners: the establishment of "three largely autonomous regions" for each of Iraq's ethnic and confessional groups, governed by Baghdad in the execrable policy of "unity through autonomy". Not exactly an enlightened suggestion but consistent with previous conventions of dismemberment that have marked Middle Eastern politics.

In considering Biden's record on Iraq, Spencer Ackerman of The Daily Beast was clear in describing an erratic, bumbling and egregious performance. "Reviewing Biden's record on Iraq is like rewinding footage of a car crash to identify the fateful decisions that arrayed people at the bloody intersection."

Biden's Promise Now, we forward ourselves to November 2020. The Trump administration has given a good cover to the incoming Democratic administration. Considered putatively wicked, all that follows the orange ogre will be good. In introducing some of his key appointments, Biden's crusted choices stood to attention like storm troopers-elect, an effect helped by face masks, solemn lighting and their sense of wonder. "America is back," declared Biden. A collective global shudder could be felt. The Beltway establishment, mocked by Obama's Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes as "the Blob," had returned.

In the cast are such figures from the past as former Deputy Secretary of State and former Deputy National Security Adviser, Tony Blinken. He will serve as Secretary of State. National Security adviser: former Hillary Clinton aide and senior adviser Jake Sullivan. Director of National Intelligence: Avril Haines ("a reliable expert leading our intelligence community," remarked CNN's unflinching militarist Samantha Vinograd of CNN, herself another former Obama stable hand from the National Security Council). Secretary of Defence: most probably Michèle Flournoy, former Under Secretary of Defence for Policy.

Blinken, it should be remembered, was the one who encouraged Biden to embrace the antediluvian, near criminal project of partitioning Iraq. This does not worry The Guardian, which praises his "urbane bilingual charm" which will be indispensable in "soothing the frayed nerves of western allies, reassuring them that the US is back as a conventional team player." He is a "born internationalist" who likes soccer and played a weekly game with US officials, diplomats and journalists before joining the Obama administration.

Johannes Lang, writing in the Harvard Political Review, is a touch sharper, noting that Blinken "is a committed internationalist with a penchant for interventionism." The two often go together. As Blinken recently told The New York Times (members of the UN General Assembly, take note), "Whether we like it or not, the world simply does not organize itself."

Flournoy and Blinken have been spending time during the Trump years drawing sustenance through their co-founded outfit WestExec Advisors, a consulting firm promising to bring "the Situation Room to the Board Room." Revolving door rhetoric is used unabashedly: We knew power; we can show you how to exploit it. Having served in a presidential administration, these individuals are keen to use "scenario development and table-top exercises to test ideas or enhance preparedness for a future contingency". The consultants are willing to give their clients "higher confidence in their business decisions," as Flournoy puts it, in times of "historic levels of turmoil and uncertainty around the world".

The Flournoy set have also been the beneficiaries of the US defence funding complex, fronting think tanks that have received generous largesse. In a report for the Center for International Policy, Ben Freeman notes that, "Think tanks very considerably in terms of their objectives and organization, but many think tanks in Washington D.C. share a common trait: they receive substantial financial support from the US government and private businesses that work for the US government, most notably defense contractors." Flournoy's own Center for a New American Security now ranks second to the RAND Corporation in the cash it gets from defence contractors and US government sources.

Biden's Department of Defense agency review team, tasked with informing what is hoped will be a "smooth transfer of power," has its fair complement of those from entities either part of the weapons industry or beneficiaries of it. According to In These Times , they make up at least eight of the 23 people in that team. Think tanks with Biden advisory personnel include the militarily minded Center for Strategic and International Studies, which boasts funding from Raytheon, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Lockheed Martin Corporation and General Dynamics Corporation.

America – at least a version of it – is back, well and truly. The stench of wars continuous, and interventions compulsive, is upon us.

[Nov 27, 2020] American imperialism will not only continue under Biden. It'll just wear the mask of respectability again as it continues to cause chaos across the world

Nov 27, 2020 | www.rt.com

By Tom Fowdy , a British writer and analyst of politics and international relations with a primary focus on East Asia While Joe Biden is a more civil representation of the US than Donald Trump, he won't significantly change the foreign policy of the outgoing president. America will still be hyper-aggressive, but in a more courteous way. " America is back! " said Joe Biden this week, as he prepares to take over as president. It's a sentiment that has, of course, been championed by liberals, but what exactly does it mean? And did America ever really go away?

If you ask any critic of Donald Trump, the answer is quite obvious. They will point to his erratic behaviour, his negation of alliances, his apparent abrogation of leadership and the damage he has done to America's standing around the world. Biden, of course, has pledged to end all of that, vowing to steer the US back to dignity and respect, to be a country admired rather than loathed and to promote 'American values' abroad, which Trump downplayed with his ' America First ' doctrine.

Also on rt.com Trump has 2 months left to attack Iran, and here's why he might

For liberals , Biden's victory has been packaged as a supposed ' catch all ' solution to America's international problems, which apparently have been caused exclusively by Trump. The current president isn't representative of a broader pathology within America's socio-economic order, but simply a bad smell which will eventually pass on. Therefore, " America is back ."

But this denies the bigger problem at hand, that America never really went away. Trump was not a coincidence, an accident or a mere mistake, he was a physical manifestation of what America truly is and a continuation of what it has always done, albeit in a blunt and unpleasant package.

Biden is not such a contemptible individual, but he merely represents America with a 'mask on,' a kinder and more humane version of the same thing, the same America which has waged war and caused chaos around the world for centuries.

Trump is a living, breathing manifestation of the country's vices, who makes many Americans feel uncomfortable. As a mega-rich, privileged and egotistical individual, he not only highlighted the deep inequality of the US and its system, he treated all his opponents and rivals with utter disrespect, cheated in his dealings with others and using a form of gangster-like extortion as his primary mode of diplomacy.

For example, he regularly tried to deliver one-sided, preferential terms for the US by strangling other countries with one-sided tariffs, sanctions and threats of annihilation, including nations that are supposed to be allies. Rivals were to be crushed mercilessly. It was ' law of the jungle ' politics, tactics derived from his real-estate days. It is no wonder America's image suffered.

On a personal level, Biden is not like Trump and, of course, he vows not to be. He is not inherently dislikeable, yet that is precisely the point: the system he represents is very much the same thing. It will be just as aggressive to the world, which is in America's DNA, but in a less obvious, callous manner. And, so, it is hard to argue America is back, because it never went away.

Also on rt.com The world now sees that there's no exceptionalism or grandeur in American democracy but only chaos & a sense of injustice

Let's pause and question why Trump was despised , including by the so-called ' never Trumpers. ' It wasn't for malign actions across the world, it was because of ' him ' as a person. The US establishment, for one, only ever truly criticized Trump's foreign policy when it was not ' aggressive ' enough, such as his attempt to make peace with North Korea . When he threatened to " totally destroy " the country, there was silence. Similarly, his cold war approach to China received no criticism, only bipartisan support.

Thus the 'issue' with Trump was not so much what he did, but how he did it. Objections to the president never represented complaints about the US system as a whole, but that he simply did not ' live up ' to it. America First was disliked because it focused on naked self-interest for the US and did not try to market its cause as something virtuous and heroic, which the longstanding legacies of wars, bombings, meddling in other countries and other interventions have all been marketed as.

In pre-Trump America, the Iraq war (which Biden supported) was not a brazen attempt to control oil, but a ' fight for freedom ' against evil. And, yet, by normal US standards, George W. Bush is considered acceptable, while Trump is the problem.

Given this, Biden represents a ' reset ' to the apparent normal, where America doesn't act so obviously like a charlatan but 'pretends' it is the good guy and is worthy of respect. Trump's brazen America First doctrine, which was so blatant in its intentions, will be replaced again with the righteous zeal of US exceptionalism that masks its interests behind bleeding-heart altruism.

And this is what Biden means by " America is back ." He is kinder, but not softer, he is more likeable, but not trustworthy, he is more respectable, yet no less treacherous and more tolerable, yet just as ruthless, and this is how it has always been. Trump did not diminish America, he showed us what it really is and ever more tactfully will it continue.

[Nov 26, 2020] Who's kidding who?

Nov 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

donten , Nov 26 2020 17:15 utc | 14

Biden: 'America Is Back,' 'Ready To Lead World'

USA won't even take care of its own people, and the world does not need a wannabe King of the Hill. Get ready for a complete tragedy...

Flournoy, Haines, and Haspel, who's kidding who?

[Nov 26, 2020] Trump vs Biden- Will the Future Belong to the Patriots or the Globalists

Nov 26, 2020 | off-guardian.org

t is an undeniable fact that the republic has entered one of the most dangerous crises of its short existence. This is not only due to the disputed election results of November 3 rd , but also to a multitude of other factors beyond American borders, including the global financial crisis which a certain pandemic has unleashed upon the world, and slide towards a major world war between great powers that has accelerated chaotically in recent years.

As unpopular as it might be to state in polite society, as of this writing it is still impossible to state with 100% certainty that Joe Biden will in fact be inaugurated on January 20, 2021. The simple reason for this is that verifiable evidence of vast partisan vote fraud tied to the highest echelons of British Intelligence have mounted with every passing day with Dominion voting systems most recently accused of erasing 2.7 million Trump votes across the nation , and giving 220 000 pro-Trump votes to Biden in Pennsylvania (along with hundreds of other vote counting anomalies and technology glitches across all major swing states).

These and other major signs of mass vote fraud have giving rise to reasonable questions of the validity of the official results which will be taken to the courts as Gen. Michael Flynn's Attorney Sidney Powell eloquently laid out recently.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/SFCXPw1t17o?feature=oembed TRUMP, BIDEN AND THE ONCOMING MELTDOWN

By now most people reading this are aware (or should be aware) that the trans Atlantic financial system has been set to melt down under a $1.5 quadrillion derivatives time bomb being held together by a mix of wishful thinking, hyperinflationary money printing and vast unpayable securitized debts waiting to default. It should also come as no surprise that the Great Reset Agenda designed to coordinate the "post-COVID world order" has nothing to do with any actual pandemic, and everything to do with imposing a new bankers' dictatorship onto the nations of the earth.

If you are uncertain about these claims, I invite you to read my recent study "What the Great Reset Architects Don't Want you to Know About Economics".

Both Trump and Biden profess to support American leadership to the world going into this storm, but both men operate on very much opposing paradigms of what this means, and what foreign policy tradition should be activated.

Where Biden has championed the idea that "America should lead the world" in opposition to the dangerous rise in "authoritarianism, nationalism and illiberalism" giving the reigns of foreign policy over to a team packed with hawkish representatives of the Military Industrial Complex, Trump has done something different.

On November 9 the incumbent president fired Mark Esper (possibly to subvert a planned coup) and instated General Christopher Miller to the position of Defense Secretary who has called for a total end to the 19 year Afghan war stating :

we are not a people of perpetual war. It is the antithesis of everything for which we stand and for which our ancestors fought. All wars must end."

Having vocalized his desires to return the USA to its traditional protectionist, non-interventionist agenda repeatedly over four years, Trump famously characterized the battle at hand as one of "patriots against the globalists."

And yet, despite these facts, many apparently intelligent people have celebrated that the "bad orange man" has finally been ousted and normality may once again occur.

Hogwash.

In an April 2020 Foreign Policy article , Joe Biden called for the re-assertion of American leadership of the world order stating that "for over 70 years, the United States under democratic and republican presidents, played a leading role in writing the rules" of the world order. Predicting the two possible scenarios that will befall the world should the USA continue to "abdicate our leadership" as Trump has done, Biden says that either: 1) Someone else takes America's place as global hegemon that doesn't "advance our interests and values or 2) "No one will and chaos will ensue".

But wait a minute!

Shouldn't there be a third option in Biden's crystal ball? What about the option of a world defined by sovereign nations working in win-win cooperation and mutual self interest? Sadly, from a zero-sum mind that can only think in "balance of power" terms, this third scenario cannot exist.

The paradox for such little minds, however, is that the very essence of America's emerging from WWII in a leading position that Biden praises is entirely premised on the understanding that the world is more than a zero-sum system.

THE FORGOTTEN MULTI-POLAR TRADITIONS OF THE USA

From the drafting of the UN Charter in 1941, the formulation of the Bretton Woods system in 1944, to the UN Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, there is no doubt that there is very little that America has not directly influenced.

While this leadership is undeniable and often objectively destructive as sin, it is too easily forgotten that the UN Charter, as outlined by Franklin Roosevelt was premised on the belief that America must never become an empire but merely help those in need by providing the means of industrial development. This was essentially understood as the internationalization of the New Deal which included social safety nets, bank regulation, productive work guarantees and infrastructure projects to all other nations aspiring independence across Africa, Asia and the Americas or struggling the heal from the destructive effects of the war.

FDR's vision for the IMF/World Bank mandates were never to reconquer poor nations under a new system of debt slavery and conditionalities, but to extend productive credit for long term megaprojects that were in the common aims of mankind and which angered Churchill immensely.

Most importantly, this vision was premised on the need for a trust-based U.S.-Russia-China alliance that never would have permitted the emergence of a bipolar Cold War.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/3VRRQO1bRjQ?feature=oembed

Working alongside such anti-imperial co-thinkers as Republican leader Wendell Willkie, Vice President Henry Wallace, economist Harry Dexter White, confidante Harry Hopkins, Asst. Secretary of State Sumner Welles and Attorney General Robert Jackson (to name a few), this small but powerful group of patriots representing both parties, worked vigorously to ensure not only that the Wall Street/City of London Frankenstein Monster of Nazism would be put down but that Churchill's vision of a restored British Imperial system would not succeed.

THE TRUE SPIRIT OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Unlike the earlier "League of Nations" which intended to destroy all national sovereignty in the wake of WWI, the United Nations was always meant to become a platform for dialogue, and economic multilateral trust-building much more in harmony with the multipolar alliance now sweeping the world (and scaring the hell out of the thing that controls Joe Biden).

If this is hard to believe, let me cite article one :

To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and

To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.

These principles were expanded even further to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948 which re-iterated the founding principles of America's Declaration of Independence- extending those unalienable rights to all mankind as FDR envisioned stating in its preamble :

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

These were the ideas that were meant to give life to the "Four Freedoms" first enunciated by President Roosvelt in 1941 and re-asserted by his anti-imperial Vice President Henry Wallace in 1942.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/_p2TQaUf3pQ?feature=oembed

Now admittedly this positive American foreign policy outlook which launched the post-war age is a far cry from anything the world has come to recognize in the USA since the emergence of the Cold War and especially since the murder of John F Kennedy who had done much to resist America's full takeover by this newly revised British Empire (which some have chosen in recent years to label "the deep state").

Much like the US Constitution itself, these principles largely remained ink on parchment as a new age of Cold Warriors, Rhodes Scholars and Fabians directed from British Intelligence created NATO , divided the world among the lighter skinned haves and darker skinned have nots while unleashing a system of endless wars onto the earth under a new Pax Americana.

These are the forces like Lord Mark Malloch Brown and George Soros who together have poured billions of dollars into promoting the post-nation state order using anti-UN Charter doctrines like Responsibility to Protect (R2P), overthrowing governments with color revolutions and running a current coup against President Trump .

Today a small window is still open for a renewal of the forgotten traditions of the American republican traditions that were upheld by such leaders as John Quincy Adams, Lincoln, Grant, Garfield, McKinley, Harding, FDR and JFK. President Trump has clearly taken a stand in opposition to the reconquest of the republic by the deep state and it remains to be seen if the American people have the fortitude to do everything in their power to organize themselves in defense of the republic and civilization more generally.

Originally published at Strategic Culture .

Antonym , Nov 24, 2020 4:12 AM

"OR"
There are also middle ways: my ideal would be a real United Nations without dominant bullies, capable of reigning in globalist MNCs, governments or religions.
Population numbers will have to weight in much more for voting power and no SC privileges for amassing nuclear bombs.

Melvin Logan , Nov 23, 2020 1:08 PM

This essay includes McKinley as a defender of "Republican traditions," and of course it's hard to argue against that position, seeing as how McKinley was a tool of the Big City corrupt political system. That he fraudulently used the sinking of the "Maine" to declare war on Spain, and then put down an insurgent revolt by natives of the Philippines by allowing U.S.soldiers to garott them, is simply in the tradition of Republicans. We agree.

Doctortrinate , Nov 22, 2020 9:41 PM

who will the future belong to ?

not to those, who repeatedly ignore the past.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xQOekCIEEhc?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

Paul Vonharnish , Nov 23, 2020 1:02 AM Reply to Doctortrinate

Excellent scripting in the court scene. I remember seeing this film when it was first released. Made goose bumps
The public has been drummed down to the point where they refuse to question what props up the fake wigs on the court jesters

Doctortrinate , Nov 23, 2020 5:02 AM Reply to Paul Vonharnish

yes, It was an eclectic time examination post experimentation perhaps .and there was room for it, uncrowded by the weight of obligation – keeping it at distance was comfortable even held the sense that the destructive order was being outrun, until..the reconditioning ascent of a harpy and it's handbag,

those wigs.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/U1wcDiOuo6Q?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

Binra , Nov 23, 2020 11:52 AM Reply to Paul Vonharnish

The cess-pit beneath our seeming foundation, is become a source for self-righteous vengeance – coming into our very private chambers after we seemed to 'save face' or raise it over and against the hateful in conquest.

The presumption to be free of the evil that one has set ones face against is the generating of the 'cess-pit' as something to be eradicated, lidded over, cancelled, such as to preserve the 'order' that runs above its denial.

Self-revulsion as a concept, can be opined about, but human self-hatred is a hell indeed if not a final fact.

The revealing of us to ourselves can be the dis-illusioning of what we thought to be and truly believed but was never true – even though lived.
or the tarrying in such illusion as the exploiting of its underlying themes of 'getting' for a self set apart from the life it represents.

richard , Nov 22, 2020 9:02 PM

"THE TRUE SPIRIT OF THE UNITED NATIONS
Unlike the earlier "League of Nations" which intended to destroy all national sovereignty in the wake of WWI, the United Nations was always meant to become a platform for dialogue, and economic multilateral trust-building much more in harmony with the multipolar alliance now sweeping the world "

Oh really? hear are some U.N. quotes:

"To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism, and religious dogmas." – Brock Adams, Director UN Health Organization

"A world government can intervene militarily in the internal affairs of any nation when it disapproves of their activities." – Kofi Annan, U.N. Secretary General

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an "extraterrestrial" invasion], whether real or *promulgated* [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this *scenario*, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation."
David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

"The UN is but a long-range, international banking apparatus clearly set up for financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One-World revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power.
"The depression was the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market .The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank."
Curtis Dall, FDR's son-in-law as quoted in his book, My Exploited Father-in-Law

"The planning of UN can be traced to the 'secret steering committee' established by Secretary [of State Cordell] Hull in January 1943. All of the members of this secret committee, with the exception of Hull, a Tennessee politician, were members of the Council on Foreign Relations. They saw Hull regularly to plan, select, and guide the labors of the [State] Department's Advisory Committee. It was, in effect, the coordinating agency for all the State Department's postwar planning."
Professors Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter, writing in their study of the CFR, "Imperial Brain Trust: The CFR and United States Foreign Policy." (Monthly Review Press, 1977).

"The most powerful clique in these (CFR) groups have one objective in common: they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the U.S. They want to end national boundaries and racial and ethnic loyalties supposedly to increase business and ensure world peace. What they strive for would inevitably lead to dictatorship and loss of freedoms by the people. The CFR was founded for "the purpose of promoting disarmament and submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government."
Harpers, July l958

Paul Vonharnish , Nov 23, 2020 12:47 AM Reply to richard

Hello richard: Excellent listing of verifiable quotes. Thanks!
The establishment of the United Nations has done more to dis-unite the world than any other singular effort. Yet civilians are still looking for some daddy authority to straighten out the sticky fuzz they found in their navels

Dave Patterson , Nov 23, 2020 3:49 AM Reply to Paul Vonharnish

I don't know, I think the US going around the world for the last 100+ years bombing anyone who threatened their capitalist hegemony can pick up a pretty good share of the blame for an unstable world

paul , Nov 22, 2020 6:02 PM

Neither will win. As always, the only real winners will be a certain Levantine minority. Heads they win, tails you lose.
The great mock battle to choose Israel Puppet 46 will play out over the next few weeks as pure theatre, with Creepy Joe picking up Trumpo's somewhat tarnished crown in due course. For all the difference it makes. Creepy Joe will be marginally even more of a puppet than Trumpo.
The court challenges are going nowhere. Some have already been dropped or dismissed, and the rest soon will be, irrespective of vote rigging and ballot stuffing on an epic scale. Likewise, there will be no attempt to reverse the current outcome at the electoral college next month. Nothing's going to happen. Nada. Zilch. It's all pure kabuki.
Clowns and court jesters like Alex Jones or Giuliani will caper about making an exhibition of themselves, peddling their vitamin supplements and lining their pockets.
Trump will squeeze whatever cash he can from his gullible base to pay off his campaign debts. But none of this is serious. Trumpo has gone AWOL. He is not holding any public events. The lawsuits have been dropped. He is not putting any of his own money into them. The electoral college delegates will not go rogue to keep him in power. Georgia is gone. He is not going to flip Michigan or Pennsylvania.
Trumpo deserved to lose, whether he actually did or not. He abandoned his base the minute he was elected, and served out his time as a Zio Shill.
He built a grand total of 4 miles of his Big Beautiful Wall. Some of it has already fallen down. That only leaves 1,996 miles for the Beaner Illegal Immigrant Hordes to walk through. Obomber deported far more illegal immigrants than Trumpo, 1.1 million v. 800,000. His idea of draining The Swamp was to appoint Bolton, Abrams, Pompeo, Haspel, and half of Goldman Sachs to all the senior posts in his administration. The same goes for Bringing The Troops Home. None will actually be withdrawn from Afghanistan, despite the latest announcement. Like Rebuilding The Infrastructure.
Trumpo is a con man, a Bunko Artist. He achieved nothing. Because he never intended to. He never even tried. He was just another Mitt Romney.
Trumpism will just provide him with a meal ticket for some time to come. He needs to find another $400 million from somewhere to pay off his debts. The GOP will go full on Zionism, Globalism, Faggots, Trannies, Globo Homo, Open Borders, Amnesties.
One of Trumpo's last of many favours for Israel is to pardon the traitor and Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard. He will soon be on his way home to a hero's welcome in Kosherstan.
Biden's new administration will be virtually 100% kosher, apart from a few token black/ gay/ trannie/ vagina/ shabbos goys.
Chief of staff, Attorney General, Treasury, all Chosen Folk.
Trumpo was never more than a Zionist puppet, just like Wilders, Orban, Salvini, AFD, Duterte. All 100% Faux Right Controlled Opposition created by the Chosen Folk.

Jean Wilson , Nov 22, 2020 7:57 PM Reply to paul

Thanks Paul, for that excellent description of Trump and what we can expect from Biden until he leaves/dies and we have Kamala. The policies will remain virtually unchanged as the President is irrelevant.

Researcher , Nov 22, 2020 5:58 PM

Bankers have been running the world for centuries, not empires, not presidents, not parties, not nations.

They provide nation states with two (or more) parties with seemingly oppositional values, but who are controlled behind the scenes by the same banking cabal. Trump is working with the cabal, just as closely as his predecessors, Obama, Bush, Clinton etc., to create the illusion of opposition, the illusion of difference, the illusion of choice and the illusion of hope.

Just as the election was obviously stolen, so too it was planned to create internal conflict and violence. Both parties play the game of electioneering to obfuscate the theft of civil rights and assets from the populace without opposition. The media enhances the process of obfuscation. The voters are too busy fighting amongst themselves to see the outright theft of their real assets.

There are no individuals or groups who attain positions of power in any government or nation who oppose the banking cartel that rules the world, owns and controls all the largest corporations, security state apparatus, the militaries and defense sectors of all nations.

There are no heroes coming to anyone's rescue. No white hats, no black hats. They are all agents of the cryptocracy, because the goal has always been the enslavement of humanity, and that goal was attained long ago and has never wavered.

The New World Order was achieved with the formation of the United Nations as a front for the cryptocracy (banking cartel) to further its objectives through the cooperation of governments individuality and collectively controlling their populations.

Whether our enslavement was achieved using a kindler, gentler slavery called "capitalism", based on the consumption of poorly made goods exploiting cheap labor by corporate entities majority owned and controlled by the cryptocracy, in faux democracies, using the fake two party system, or whether slavery was achieved by force through communism where an appearance of state ownership obfuscated cryptocracy ownership and control, so wages could be lowered and people more tightly controlled, both political systems were a sham. Both systems were always controlled by the same cryptocracy; the banking cartel.

The cryptocracy ruled the capitalist West and the communist Eastern bloc with ease.

Researcher , Nov 22, 2020 6:06 PM Reply to Researcher

Just as all political parties are false enemies who work together behind the scenes, so too is the enmity between nation states and the supposedly opposed political and nation state blocs and alliances.

Opposition is created as a facade and pretext to facilitate immensely profitable skirmishes, occupations, hot wars, cold wars and civil conflicts. These methods of manufactured conflict accomplish control and ownership for the cryptocracy of large tracts of land with rare earth minerals and energy reserves as well as the labor and industry of large and small populations plus access to the taxes and wealth of all nation states.

These faux oppositional forces whether they be internal or external, create an illusion of a divided, hostile and fractured world for the unknowing and distracted public, who have had their history altered and rewritten, indoctrinated with propaganda in a Prussian model of education as 'learning by rote' instead of learning through exploration, reason, logic, invention and experimentation. As such, 'educated' populations have become another tool of the controllers where they are largely ignorant of the inextricable links between politics, energy, economies, the monetary system, wars, governments, crime, industry and human enslavement.

The false appearance of separation of these issues into compartmentalized subjects, compartmentalized thinking, are further enhanced and driven through sound bites using the cryptocracy owned corporate media.

Binary choices, compartmentalized issues, and supposed random events are sold to humanity to corral thinking, coerce conformity, limit options and choices within illusory paradigms where full spectrum dominance is fulfilled. Subsequently, all resources on earth including populations can be easily exploited for the purpose of profiteering, while simultaneously inflicting unnecessary misery and suffering through the leverage of usury and forced taxes within the monetary system.

Researcher , Nov 22, 2020 6:10 PM Reply to Researcher

The banking cartel (BIS, IMF, World Bank) own the major energy corporations, green and carbon based and that is why there has been a decades long push for carbon control and capture, using climate change pseudo science and propaganda as a way to control and limit our individual, national and collective energy consumption and output.

Since energy is the real currency that runs the world, and energy is also the way which we as humans and living creatures survive, innovate, create and function – as electrical and energetic beings – the cryptocracy believe that all energy, including our physical and neuronal bodily functions be wholly controlled by them, and them only. The cryptocracy already control our external energy and power systems and grids, and all oil, coal, gas, wind, hydro, nuclear, solar and hydrogen, which fuel human and economic activity.

The cryptocracy are not content to let us decide our own fates, occupations, business dealings, economies, health or lives using our inherent freedom as thinking, sentient and independent beings who are born free. They seek to further enslave our every thought, function and action through the technocracy and the biometric control and data grid they have built around us for the last century.

In the beginning of the 20th century, the banking cartel through their control of the chemical industry, extended their model of human slavery to include profiteering from destroying people's health, by controlling genetic and epigenetic expression through increased toxic exposure to external radiation, a poisoned and altered food chain, deficient soil, a poisoned fluoridated water supply, increased exposure to carcinogens, endocrine disruptive chemicals and unnecessary vaccines that wrought irreversible, long term negative effects.

The medical industrial complex and vaccine industry sought to claim credit for the eradication of diseases that had already been quelled through proper sanitation, plumbing, better nutrition and improved living conditions.

The control grid of populations through the economic system, military industrial complex, monetary system, faux governments, and the medical industrial complex has merged into a totalitarian model of complete control of all human behavior, health and bodily functions using faux pandemics, where governments coordinate terror operations against the citizenry.

The bankers are transitioning away from the current monetary, economic Ponzi scheme using the US petro dollar fractional reserve banking system, which could only function for a limited time, in a debt expansionary environment, underpinned by constant economic expansion and population growth.

Researcher , Nov 22, 2020 6:13 PM Reply to Researcher

A number of factors including increased standards of living, women entering the workforce, contraception and immunocontraception and cultural changes have inhibited population growth in developed nations, so that expansionary model has reached its 'limits of growth'. Governments have been hiding the lack of population growth using immigration. They've been hiding the contracting economic activity in developed nations by creating fake financial products and accounting frauds, banking fraud, rigged market indices and markets. The cryptocracy knowing this economic model would eventually collapse at their discretion, created unseen enemies to unite us against, be it a fictional virus, or fictional global warming, the result being a coordinated, top-down authoritarian monitoring, control of populations, economies and individuals.

The bankers, governments and industrialists are forcing humanity to transition to a technocracy controlled economy based on humans as capital, the collection, collation and control of all organic and non organic resources on earth including our biometric data and behavioral obedience, while they simultaneously enforce a liquidation of assets phase.

We are their assets and we are being liquidated.

At the end of every transitory economic cycle or created currency or financial crisis, the banking cartel and their minions facilitate a global catastrophe, whether that's a planned war between nations, civil unrest or a manufactured terror event. This serves as a cover for the harm that their planned economic transition (and failure) creates. These planned failures of economic systems created by the cryptocracy provide additional profits for the banking cartel where real assets are stripped from citizens in the form of savings, land, property, assets, businesses and redistributed by force, upwards to the oligarchs and cryptocracy.

That is the purpose of the lockdown and the faux pandemic. A continued and further redistribution of the global wealth of the majority of citizens to the 0.01% so that bankers, industrialists and governments who already control our food and energy supply, can force the majority into compliance with the vaccine program. The vaccine program creates a legal and cost efficient liquidation of the majority of humanity and the biometric enslavement of the remaining youth who manage to survive, while transitioning to the new economic model of a global digital currency based on physical human enslavement, human data management, with central command control using Artificial Intelligence.

Jean Wilson , Nov 22, 2020 8:07 PM Reply to Researcher

Thank you Researcher. Brilliant writing!

Lost in a dark wood , Nov 22, 2020 4:41 PM

No wonder the CIA hates Trump!

https://thehill.com/policy/defense/361227-us-begins-bombing-taliban-opium-plants-in-afghanistan
US begins bombing Taliban CIA opium plants in Afghanistan
11/20/17
The U.S. military has begun bombing opium production plants in Afghanistan as part of a new strategy targeting Taliban revenue, a top general said Monday. "Last night, we conducted strikes in northern Helmand [Province] to hit the Taliban where it hurts, in their narcotics financing," said Gen. John Nicholson, commander of the NATO-led Operation Resolute Support in the country.
--

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/11/21/merkels-germany-tells-trump-not-to-bring-troops-home-from-afghanistan/
Merkel's Germany Tells Trump Not to Bring Troops Home from Afghanistan
21 Nov 2020
The German government has come out in opposition to President Donald Trump's plan to bring American troops home from Afghanistan, arguing that putting an end to America's longest war would be too "hasty".

sharon marlowe , Nov 22, 2020 6:03 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

What has happened to people? If the U.S. says it is bombing an opium production plant, that means they're lying. First thing I think of is who did the U.S./CIA/Trump want killed and why? But you interpret it as Trump trying to stop the opium business of the CIA?

And then you follow it with Trump, after four years of bombing Afghanistan, is somehow being pressured by Germany to continue bombing Afghanistan?

This is pro-Trump propaganda.

wardropper , Nov 22, 2020 7:03 PM Reply to Lost in a dark wood

Frankly, I don't think we have any idea what the CIA thinks of Trump.

Researcher , Nov 22, 2020 7:32 PM Reply to wardropper

They must think he's the greatest actor on earth, since apparently some who understand the bankers are in league with and controlling governments, the UN, WHO and the WEF against humanity, yet they also believe that Trump is standing up for the Constitution against the banking cartel, the military and the vaccine industry.

Except he isn't and hasn't.

By declaring a fake emergency and continuing that emergency, while creating OPERATION WARP SPEED, he handed the country over to the military, PhRMA and FEMA.

He has no intention of handing it back to the citizens and he's had every means and every opportunity.

I think a great majority of people are simply in denial on the left and the right because they don't want to believe they've spent their entire lives being conned by bankers, politicians and oligarchs using cheap tricks, third rate acting, fake science and obvious monetary fraud and gangster governments.

The veil of their human enslavement has been lifted off their faces and they still refuse to see the obvious truth.

Instead they hide behind masks, false enemies and the lies they tell themselves. It'd be sad if it wasn't so pathetic.

wardropper , Nov 22, 2020 7:58 PM Reply to Researcher

I agree with all that, but the CIA is not renowned for advertising what it 'thinks'

Moneycircus , Nov 22, 2020 11:08 PM Reply to wardropper

The CIA does not 'think'. It was set up by Wall Street and the bankers as the muscle of Wall Street and the bankers


paul , Nov 24, 2020 12:58 PM Reply to Kit Knightly

Trumpo deserves to be put on trial and executed after a suitably fair trial if only for his actions in Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Palestine and elsewhere. For the murder of General Soleimani and 30 others, for all the children who have died in those countries as a result of US economic terrorism and actual terrorism on his watch. It doesn't matter if he failed to control others who were allowed to pursue their own agenda. A commander who loses control of his troops is fully liable when they run amok.
Their is very little to be said in his favour. We have come very close to war on a colossal scale on several occasions over the past two years as a result of his actions. The fact that this did not come to pass and disaster was avoided in no way goes to his credit. This should be attributed to the Grace of God or my lucky rabbit's foot. And the fact that Russia, China, and even Iran and North Korea have incomparably better and more responsible leadership than we do.
Western leadership, Obama, Clinton, Trump, Sarkozy, Macron, Merkel, May, Cameron, Johnson, is the worst in its history. Arrogant, venal, corrupt, irredeemably ignorant, delusional and ideologically driven.
So can anything positive at all about Trump's legacy?
Biden may be even worse.
Clinton, rabid and deranged, and even more dishonest, certainly would have been.
But we deserve something better than the choice between a dogshit sandwich or a catshit sandwich.
Trump has at least exposed the MSM for what it is, and forced the deep state to take off the mask of sham democracy and reveal its true ugly face.
But it's not much of a legacy for four years.

John Goss , Nov 22, 2020 1:08 PM

The Second World War was the turning point here in the UK and in the US, When the war finished there was a Labour Party which was actually a Labour Party. For some years before that the US Democratic Party had been and was a Democratic Party, When paper ballots mitigated against fraud Franklin D, Roosevelt was elected for an amazing 4 terms. He died days before the end of the war having introduced welfare reforms that endeared him to people.

It has been pretty much downhill since then, ending up with Keir Starmer at the head of the Labour Party and Joe Biden at the head of the Democratic Party. Need I write more?

el Gallinazo , Nov 22, 2020 3:19 PM Reply to John Goss

Problem>reaction>solution. The Great Depression in the USA was triggered by the banksters being instructed to create a vast credit bubble in the 20's with their fractional reserve system (being able to lend 9 fake dollars for every one they actually owned) and then instructed to withdraw credit very rapidly, creating a cascade of defaults.. That is a historical fact easily researched.

This article's view of recent history is among the most superficial I have ever read. I do not believe in democracy being an Agorist, because democracy is a trick of the predator class. When I see a government which does not enforce its rules through the barrel of a gun and cages, I may be tempted to re-evalute my views. Still waiting however. That said, the one thing that I agree with in this article is that Trump won the election handily based on legal and valid votes and the apparent Biden win was based on huge fraud. One should never underestimate Sydney Powell, even with her sweet Georgia Plantation accent. She may be the first competent snd trustworthy hire Trump has ever made in the last four years, and one may ask why this is. On one level, the fraud was designed to put Biden in the White House. On a deeper level, it was designed to rip the country apart. I would recommend that the American people rushing to the giant box stores (which are permitted to stay open while the various governors' blatantly illegal EO's have shut down their mom and pop competitors) to buy toilet paper for the coming Darkest Winter of the fake scamdemic, would be wise to load up also on beer and popcorn so they can watch this shitshow on their giant plasma TV's from the sofa.

Melvin Logan , Nov 23, 2020 1:34 PM Reply to el Gallinazo

The notion of "fraud" in the election is a charade. Research the Dominion voting system and you will discover that Ms. Powell, despite the high regard she has attained, is blowing smoke. Her entire case against Dominion from Chavez to German vote counting is a fat joke. On her, and on us. Why is she doing this? We will find out in due time.

[Nov 26, 2020] That Nobel "War" Prize created the perfect cocktail of Benadryl+Marezine that send the herd of moron slaves, practically all over the world, into numbing mode!

Nov 26, 2020 | off-guardian.org

Voz 0db , Nov 22, 2020 6:37 PM Reply to Blake Jones

They LOVED Barack ' The Terrorist Warmonger ' Obama!

Where have you been?!

Theobalt , Nov 22, 2020 8:08 PM Reply to Voz 0db

When every girl in my entourage was melting over Obama, the first thing I did after saying "hey wait a minute" was to read a book about what he had been up to in Chicago (knew it) then it has been "we'll bail them for 70 billion, then 700, then 1.4 tril," (always decreasing speech volume) then "we are going to decrease troops in Afghanistan, then more troops, then more troops (always decreasing in speech volume)

Voz 0db , Nov 22, 2020 11:16 PM Reply to Theobalt

That Nobel "War" Prize created the perfect cocktail of Benadryl+Marezine that send the herd of moron slaves, practically all over the world, into numbing mode!

He was, and still is, the perfect jester.
And is being very well compensated for it.

Theobalt , Nov 23, 2020 2:38 AM Reply to Voz 0db

That's mostly because black lives matter so much

[Nov 25, 2020] How Joe Biden Plans to Make The American Empire Great Again

Nov 25, 2020 | www.mintpressnews.com


hroughout his campaign, Joe Biden railed against Donald Trump's 'America First' foreign policy, claiming it weakened the United States and left the world in disarray.

He pledged to reverse this decline and recover the damage Trump did to America's reputation. While Donald Trump called to make America Great Again, Biden seeks to Make the American Empire Great Again.

Among the president-elect's pledges is to end the so-called forever wars – the decades-long imperial projects in Afghanistan and Iraq that began under the Bush administration.

Yet Biden – a fervent supporter of those wars – will task ending them to the most neoconservative elements of the Democratic party and ideologues of permanent war.

Michele Flournoy and Tony Blinken sit atop Biden's thousands-strong foreign policy brain trust and have played central roles in every U.S. war going back to the Clinton administration.

In the Trump era, they've cashed in, founding Westexec Advisors – a corporate consulting firm that has become home for Obama administration officials awaiting a return to government.

Flournoy is Biden's leading pick for secretary of defense and Blinken is expected to be national security advisor.

Biden's foxes guard the henhouse

Since the 1990s, Flournoy and Blinken have steadily risen through the ranks of the military-industrial complex, shuffling back and forth between the Pentagon and hawkish think-tanks funded by the U.S. government, weapons companies, and oil giants.

Under Bill Clinton, Flournoy was the principal author of the 1996 Quadrinellial Defense Review, the document that outlined the U.S. military's doctrine of permanent war – what it called "full spectrum dominance."

Flournoy called for "unilateral use of military power" to ensure "uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources."

As Bush administration officials lied to the world about Saddam Hussein's supposed WMD's, Flournoy remarked that "In some cases, preemptive strikes against an adversary's [weapons of mass destruction] capabilities may be the best or only option we have to avert a catastrophic attack against the United States."

Meet the Filthy Rich War Hawks That Make up the Joe Biden Foreign Policy Team Meet the filthy rich war hawks, including Susan Rice and Michele Flournoy, that make up the foreign policy team of President-elect Joe Biden. MintPress News | Alan Macleod | Nov 13

Tony Blinken was a top advisor to then-Senate foreign relations committee chair Joe Biden, who played a key role in shoring up support among the Democrat-controlled Senate for Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq.

As Iraq was plunged into chaos and bloodshed, Flournoy was among the authors of a paper titled "Progressive Internationalism" that called for a "smarter and better" style of permanent war. The paper chastised the anti-war left and stated that "Democrats will maintain the world's most capable and technologically advanced military, and we will not flinch from using it to defend our interests anywhere in the world."

With Bush winning a second term, Flournoy advocated for more troop deployments from the sidelines.

In 2005, Flournoy signed onto a letter from the neoconservative think tank Project for a New American Century, asking Congress to "increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps (by) at least 25,000 troops each year over the next several years."

In 2007, she leveraged her Pentagon experience and contacts to found what would become one of the premier Washington think tanks advocating endless war across the globe: the Center for a New American Security (CNAS).

CNAS is funded by the U.S. government, arms manufacturers, oil giants, Silicon Valley tech giants, billionaire-funded foundations, and big banks.

Flournoy joined the Obama administration and was appointed as under secretary of defense for policy, the position considered the "brains" of the Pentagon.

She was keenly aware that the public was wary of more quagmires. In the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, she crafted a new concept of warfare that would expand the permanent war state while giving the appearance of a drawdown.

Flournoy wrote that "unmanned systems hold great promise" – a reference to the CIA's drone assassination program.

This was the Obama-era military doctrine of hybrid war. It called for the U.S. to be able to simultaneously wage war on numerous fronts through secret warfare, clandestine weapons transfers to proxies, drone strikes, and cyber-attacks – all buttressed with propaganda campaigns targeting the American public through the internet and corporate news media.

Architects of America's Hybrid wars

Flournoy continued to champion the endless wars that began in the Bush-era and was a key architect of Obama's disastrous troop surge in Afghanistan. As U.S. soldiers returned in body bags and insurgent attacks and suicide bombings increased some 65% from 2009 and 2010, she deceived the Senate Armed Services Committee, claiming that the U.S. was beginning to turn the tide against the Taliban.

Even with her lie that the U.S. and Afghan government were starting to beat the Taliban back, Flournoy assured the senate that the U.S. would have to remain in Afghanistan long into the future.

Ten years later – as the Afghan death toll passed 150,000 – Flournoy continued to argue against a U.S. withdrawal.

That's the person Joe Biden has tasked with ending the forever war in Afghanistan. But in Biden's own words, he'll "bring the vast majority of our troops home from Afghanistan" implying some number of American troops will remain, and the forever war will be just that. Michele Flournoy explained that even if a political settlement were reached, the U.S. would maintain a presence.

In 2011, the Obama-era doctrine of smart and sophisticated warfare was unveiled in the NATO regime-change war on Libya.

Moammar Gaddafi – the former adversary who sought warm relations with the U.S. and had given up his nuclear weapons program – was deposed and sodomized with a bayonet.

Flournoy, Hillary Clinton's State Department, and corporate media were in lockstep as they waged an extensive propaganda campaign to deceive the U.S. public that Gadaffi's soldiers were on a Viagra-fueled rape and murder spree that demanded a U.S. intervention.

All of this was based on a report from Al Jazeera – the media outlet owned by the Qatari monarchy that was arming extremist militias to overthrow the government.

Yet an investigation by the United Nations called the rape claims "hysteria." Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch found no credible evidence of even a single rape.

Even after Libya was descended into strife and the deception of Gadaffi's forces committing rape was debunked, Michele Flournoy stood by her support for the war.

Tony Blinken, then Obama's deputy national security advisor, also pushed for regime change in Libya. He became Obama's point man on Syria, pushed to arm the so-called "moderate rebels" that fought alongside al-Qaeda and ISIS, and designed the red line strategy to trigger a full-on U.S. intervention. Syria, he told the public, wasn't anything like the other wars the U.S. had waging for more than a decade.

Despite Blinken's promises that it would be a short affair, the war on Syria is now in its ninth year. An estimated half a million people have been killed as a result and the country is facing famine,

Largely thanks to the policy of using "wheat to apply pressure" – a recommendation of Flournoy and Blinken's CNAS think tank.

https://cdn.iframe.ly/PqnRfT3?playerjs=1&click_to_play=true


When the Trump administration launched airstrikes on Syria based on mere accusations of a chemical attack, Tony Blinken praised the bombing, claiming Assad had used the weapon of mass destruction sarin. Yet there was no evidence for this claim, something even then-secretary of Defense James Mattis admitted.

While jihadist mercenaries armed with U..S-supplied weapons took over large swaths of Syria, Tony Blinken played a central role in a coup d'etat in Ukraine that saw a pro-Russia government overthrown in a U.S.-orchestrated color revolution with neo-fascist elements agitating on the ground.

At the time, he was ambivalent about sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, instead opting for economic pressure.

Since then, fascist militias have been incorporated into Ukraine's armed forces. And Tony Blinken urged Trump to send them deadly weapons – something Obama had declined to do.

Trump obliged.

The Third Offset

While the U.S. fuelled wars in Syria and Ukraine, the Pentagon announced a major shift called the Third Offset strategy – a reference to the cold war era strategies the U.S. used to maintain its military supremacy over the Soviet Union.

The Third Offset strategy shifted the focus from counterinsurgency and the war on terror to great power competition against China and Russia, seeking to ensure that the U.S. could win a war against China in Asia. It called for a technological revolution in warfighting capabilities, development of futuristic and autonomous weapons, swarms of undersea and airborne drones, hypersonic weapons, cyber warfare, machine-enhanced soldiers, and artificial intelligence making unimaginably complex battlefield decisions at speeds incomprehensible to the human mind. All of this would be predicated on the Pentagon deepening its relationship with Silicon Valley giants that it birthed decades before: Google and Facebook.

The author of the Third Offset, former undersecretary of defense Robert Work, is a partner of Flournoy and Blinken's at WestExec Advisors. And Flournoy has been a leading proponent of this dangerous new escalation.

In June, Flournoy published a lengthy commentary laying out her strategy called "Sharpening the U.S. Military's Edge: Critical Steps for the Next Administration".

She warned that the United States is losing its military technological advantage and reversing that must be the Pentagon's priority. Without it, Flournoy warned that the U.S. might not be able to defeat China in Asia.

While Flournoy has called for ramping up U.S. military presence and exercises with allied forces in the region, she went so far as to call for the U.S. to increase its destructive capabilities so much that it could launch a blitzkrieg style-attack that would wipe out the entire Chinese navy and all civilian merchant ships in the South China Sea. Not only a blatant war crime but a direct attack on a nuclear power that would spell the third world war.

At the same time, Biden has announced he'll take an even more aggressive and confrontational stance against Russia, a position Flournoy shares.

As for ending the forever wars, Tony Blinken says not so fast.

The end of forever wars?

So Biden will end the forever wars, but not really end them. Secret wars that the public doesn't even know the U.S. is involved in – those are here to stay.

In fact, leaving teams of special forces in place throughout the Middle East is part and parcel of the Pentagon's shift away from counterinsurgency and towards great power competition.

The 2018 National Defense Strategy explains that "Long-term strategic competitions with China and Russia are the principal priorities" and the U.S. will "consolidate gains in Iraq and Afghanistan while moving to a more resource-sustainable approach."

As for the catastrophic war on Yemen, Biden has said he'll end U.S. support, but in 2019, Michele Flournoy argued against ending arms sales to Saudi Arabia.

Biden Signals a Desire To End the Yemen War. Here's Why Yemenis Aren't Buying It Joe Biden has a real chance to add ending one of the twenty-first century's most violent conflicts: the war in Yemen. MintPress News | Ahmed Abdulkareem | Nov 13

Biden pledged he will rejoin the Iran deal as a starting point for new negotiations. However, Trump's withdrawal from the deal discredited the Iranian reformists who seek engagement with the west and empowered the principlists who see the JCPOA as a deal with the devil.

In Latin America, Biden will revive the so-called anti-corruption campaigns that were used as a cover to oust the popular social democrat Brazilian president Lula da Silva.

His Venezuela policy will be almost identical to Trump's – sanctions and regime change.

In Central America, Biden has proposed a 4 billion dollar package to support corrupt right-wing governments and neoliberal privatization projects that create even more destabilization and send vulnerable masses fleeing north to the United States.

Behind their rhetoric, Biden, Flournoy, and Blinken will seek nothing less than global supremacy, escalating a new and even more dangerous arms race that risks the destruction of humanity. That's what Joe Biden calls "decency" and "normalcy."

Feature photo | Graphic by Antonio Cabrera for MintPress News

Dan Cohen is a journalist and filmmaker. He has produced widely distributed video reports and print dispatches from across Israel-Palestine. Dan is a correspondent at RT America and tweets at @ DanCohen3000 .

[Nov 25, 2020] A military fiasco of the United States might be needed in order to bring "cruise missile liberals" to understand the need of of abandoning Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine

Nov 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

One Too Many , Nov 25 2020 6:24 utc | 93

This is nothing new, the war machine keeps going and going. I actually found an individual that has the same outlook on stopping the behavior of the United States as I do. International lawyer Christopher Black in this interview had the following to say.

A Biden Administration Will Be Dominated by More U.S. Aggression

Question: What in your view needs to change in order to make U.S. foreign conduct abide by international law and therefore enhance the prospects for world peace?

Christopher Black: It will require a revolution in the United States to do that, an overthrow of the economic powers that control the machinery of the state, but there is no prospect of that happening. There is really no effective opposition to these policies in the U.S. The peace movement is weak and fragmented, dominated by the "cruise missile liberals". The voices of reason have no power, no real influence among the masses of the people which are dominated by a sophisticated propaganda machine known as the "media". Censorship is increasing and the few critical voices that exist are being silenced.

It will take, in my view, a military defeat of the United States in order to bring about the conditions necessary for the required changes. And, perhaps that will happen, as China has stated time and again, that if Washington decides to take direct control of their island of Taiwan and the Americans interfere or if they are attacked in the South China Sea, they will defeat the U.S. But such a war would have world consequences and would cause realignments of power not only in the USA, if we all survive it.

Line Islands , Nov 25 2020 11:05 utc | 103

Biden is a tent revival for the aptly named "cruise missile liberals" and some of the more shadowy neo-conservative forces in retreat and determined to bring democracy building home after their colonial expeditions extinguished it at home, hastening the rise of America's own Saddam in Trump. Biden's own instincts may be decisive, however, and he was against war in Libya while also in favor of splitting Iraq. The dementia rumors are nonsense; Biden is a canny and often mendacious operator, and while I think Trump is a fascist and quite possibly a Russian mafia sub-boss, Biden may well be the restoration of more homegrown, American mafia rule. An argument that Giuliani has made in so many words, standing as he does on the Russian side and yelling into the shifting parapolitical winds.

William Gruff , Nov 25 2020 11:59 utc | 104

Line Islands @102

It's not really that complicated for China. They have no interest in or need to strike the American mainland. That would only be necessary if they were seeking global hegemony like the US, which they are not. Their strategic nuclear capabilities are strictly deterrence. All China has to do is survive the coming conflict arising from the Thucydides Trap that the US and China are caught in with minimal damage to their industrial capacity, infrastructure, and population.

That I specified "survive" and not "win" is not a mistake. The default outcome if nothing is done is that China ascends to uncontested sole global economic superpower status. That is not necessarily their intention but rather the natural outcome of China continuing the development of their domestic human capital and quality of life for 1.4 billion people. China doesn't have to take the fight to the US to end up on top, and the US has no choice but to somehow turn back the economic clock in China to keep its position as global imperial hegemon. Color revolution attempts, trade war, and bioweapon attacks have all failed the empire miserably, so all the US has left is to go kinetic.

The "US aircraft carrier force projection model" is effectively nullified by China, but those assets are still protected by America's delusional reality exclusion zone: "Destroying our carriers is unthinkable! No one would ever dare do that!" . That defense will prove inadequate against China's variety of "carrier killer" missiles.

As for America's stealth aircraft, China's defenses will likely be a surprise to many in the American empire. Furthermore, America's only stealth aircraft with sufficient range to reach China's mainland on anything other than a one way suicide mission would be the B-2 bomber, of which America only has 21. Those 21 will not last long in a kinetic conflict. Quite a few will likely simply be destroyed on the runway in Diego Garcia while the survivors will get to find out how well China's nifty new quantum radar works. The F-22 and F-35 would require refueling to get from carrier stand-off distance to the mainland and refueling again to get back, with America's aerial tankers needing to loiter within range of China's air defenses... not a good battle plan for the empire. Those stealth aircraft will not shift the advantage in the empire's favor, and attrition will be much higher than expected among them.

It must be repeated that China doesn't need to destroy the United States. They are not playing the board game "Risk" after all. China just needs to defeat the American empire's military force projection capabilities in their own neighborhood, and China already has that capacity right now. Every day that elapses shifts the advantage further into China's favor, so the empire needs to act while they still have the ability to do so. Trump's unwillingness to do more than bark loudly and his resistance to going kinetic is why the imperial elites had to fraud the elections so openly to get a more compliant figurehead into office ASAP. That the empire couldn't wait another four years means that we will see "interesting times" (yeah, even more interesting than the preceding twelve months!) real soon now.

Bemildred , Nov 25 2020 13:29 utc | 111

"A cornered dog will bite, even if it is obvious that it cannot win."

So will I, so what?

"It was never China's nor Iran's intention to "corner" the empire. That is simply the situation that America finds itself in now that its economy is in "late capitalism" decline. It is really not even anyone's fault, not even Trump or Reagan or any of the other usual suspects."

I agree, but again, so what? I'm not concerned with who is morally correct, I'm mainly concerned with whether there is going to be a big war and what happens if there is, that's not a moral question. I've been waiting around 40 years to watch our collapse, and I still think there is enough that is/was good here to be worth hoping for a soft landing. That's probably better for the rest of the planet too, but it's arguable.

Neither Iran of China is cornered, they are well-prepared, well-supported by "partners", and on their home turf. WE are not ready. We are vunerable. But we are not cornered either, nobody is going to come over here and interfere while we fight among ourselves.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 25 2020 13:10 utc | 109

oldhippie , Nov 25 2020 13:34 utc | 112

What scares me about Blinken and Sullivan is the career trajectory. Both had completely unearned and unreasonable success every step of their lives. There is never any explanation for this manner of success but family connections. Neither has done anything of note other than to occupy positions of power.

Sullivan is all of 43 years old, has been a mover and shaker since his twenties. Any who have never read Halberstam's Best and Brightest might look at that now. We are in for a shit show. Biden is not going to do anything but take his meds and take a lot of naps. Already he is not to be seen. The crew named so far will steamroller Kamala, she is no more than a figurehead.

Likely she won't even stay in the room when it gets serious. Best possible outcome is that kids who have never done anything but suck up won't know what to do when they are left in charge with no adult supervision. Or there will be shadowy figures in background who steady the rudder.

More likely is war.

William Gruff , Nov 25 2020 13:45 utc | 114

Bemildred @111

Yes, it is not a moral question, it is an economic one. Wars have never been about morality.

That said, China has for a number of years now been preparing for a minimally damaging escape from the Thucydides Trap, and by "minimally damaging" I mean for the US as well. As I said above the Chinese are not at all interested in hurting the US.

The plan is to "spring" the Thucydides Trap in the South China Sea and hopefully confine most of the damage to that area. If successful then the empire gets its soft landing (albeit with significant amounts of military materiel and personnel sacrificed) and humanity moves beyond the Trap.

I have my fingers crossed that the plan works.

Piotr Berman , Nov 25 2020 14:31 utc | 116

@ PB 75
visible costs of vassaldom . . costs of American presence....decreasing the national security. . .participating in sanctions
Yes, plus a primary reason . . .Cost of buying US military junk like F-35. Foreign military sales is a mainstay of the US economy.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Nov 25 2020 3:43 utc | 83

When you add the numbers, "military junk" has notable prestige -- with matching prices, but the total loot of American companies is probably many times larger. For example, Trump waged a series of trade wars to perpetuate negligible taxation of "technology giants" like Google or Amazon. "Intellectual property" was a stumbling block in the trade war with China, with dire consequences for soy growing farmers in USA (and a boon to their colleagues in South America). Then there is pharma. It seems that the really big companies are comfortable being in relative shadow behind arms makers, and discourse on security threats and needs --because Russian use trolls to interfere with elections, we (all countries that cherish what is good and precious) need new generations of nukes, planes, ships and toilet seats. However illogical, it is more noble sounding than preventing the likes of Apple from more than nominal taxation.

[Nov 25, 2020] A complete schism from reality by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Because people are a lot more likely to click, read and share information which validates their pre-existing opinions and follow people who do the same, social media is notorious for the way it creates tightly insulated echo chambers which masturbate our confirmation bias and hide any information which might cause us cognitive dissonance by contradicting it. Whole media careers were built on this phenomenon during the years of Russiagate hysteria, and we see it play out in spheres from imperialism to Covid-19 commentary to economic policy. ..."
"... Someone benefits from this dynamic, and it isn't you. As we've discussed previously, we know from WikiLeaks documents that powerful people actively seek to build ideological echo chambers for the purpose of propaganda and indoctrination, and there is surely a lot more study going into the subject than we've seen been shown. Splitting the public up into two oppositional factions who barely interact and can't even communicate with each other because they don't share a common reality keeps the populace impotent, ignorant, and powerless to stop the unfolding of the agendas of the powerful. ..."
"... It's just people manipulating you away from your natural, healthy inclination toward peace. Get out of your echo chamber, look at the raw information instead of the narratives, and stop letting the sociopaths manipulate you. ..."
"... Hate is the only thing that holds the American Empire together. Without its Two Minutes of Hate, America will break up apart into a million pieces. ..."
Nov 25, 2020 | caitlinjohnstone.com

This Is Your Brain On Echo Chambers -- Right Calls Biden A Xi Puppet As He Packs His Cabinet With China Hawks – by Caitlin Johnston

... ... ...

This complete schism from reality, where you've got an incoming administration stacked with Beltway insiders who want to attack Chinese interests running alongside an alternate imaginary universe in which Biden is a subservient CCP lackey, is only made possible with the existence of media echo chambers. It's the same exact dynamic that made it possible for liberals to spend four years shrieking conspiracy theories about the executive branch of the US government being run by a literal Russian agent even as Trump advanced mountains of world-threatening cold war escalations against Moscow in the real world.

You see this dynamic at work in conventional media, where plutocrat-controlled outlets like Breitbart are still frantically pushing the Russiagate sequel narrative that Hunter Biden's activities in China mean that his father is a CCP asset. You also see it in social media, where, as explained by journalist Jonathan Cook in an article about the documentary The Social Dilemma , "as we get herded into our echo chambers of self-reinforcing information, we lose more and more sense of the real world and of each other."

"We live in different information universes, chosen for us by algorithms whose only criterion is how to maximise our attention for advertisers' products to generate greater profits for the internet giants," writes Cook.

Because people are a lot more likely to click, read and share information which validates their pre-existing opinions and follow people who do the same, social media is notorious for the way it creates tightly insulated echo chambers which masturbate our confirmation bias and hide any information which might cause us cognitive dissonance by contradicting it. Whole media careers were built on this phenomenon during the years of Russiagate hysteria, and we see it play out in spheres from imperialism to Covid-19 commentary to economic policy.

Someone benefits from this dynamic, and it isn't you. As we've discussed previously, we know from WikiLeaks documents that powerful people actively seek to build ideological echo chambers for the purpose of propaganda and indoctrination, and there is surely a lot more study going into the subject than we've seen been shown. Splitting the public up into two oppositional factions who barely interact and can't even communicate with each other because they don't share a common reality keeps the populace impotent, ignorant, and powerless to stop the unfolding of the agendas of the powerful.

You should not be afraid of your government being too nice to China. What you should worry about is the US-centralized power alliance advancing a multifront new cold war conducted simultaneously against two nuclear-armed nations for the first time ever in human history. There are far, far too many small moving parts in such a cold war for things to happen in a safely predictable manner, which means there are far, far too many chances for something to go very, very wrong.

Whenever someone tells you that a US president is going to be "soft" on a nation the US government has marked as an enemy, you are being played. Always, always, always, always. It's just people manipulating you away from your natural, healthy inclination toward peace. Get out of your echo chamber, look at the raw information instead of the narratives, and stop letting the sociopaths manipulate you.

By Caitlin Johnstone , an independent journalist based in Melbourne, Australia. Her website is here and you can follow her on Twitter @caitoz

USA-MA BIN LADEN / NOVEMBER 25, 2020

America desperately needs its Two Minutes of Hate against other countries like a meth addict needs his next hit.

Hate is the only thing that holds the American Empire together. Without its Two Minutes of Hate, America will break up apart into a million pieces.

Deep down, Americans know that – and that is why they so readily engage in these spittle-flecked campaigns.

Welcome to the Orwellian world of America where the same American Empire that bombs, invades, sanctions, regime changes, encircles, or colonizes multiple nations around the world whines like a triggered little snowflake that poor innocent war criminal America is being "threatened"!

Truly pathetic.

CHRISTIAN J. CHUBA / NOVEMBER 24, 2020

There are many good websites (in addition to this one of course). I'd always tell someone, just look to see what speaks to you my list some are 'out there' I'll summarize.

  1. https://www.antiwar.com/ – Kind of like a drudgereport for decent people on world events. They go through the effort of summarizing AP and other official news outlet stories rather than mindlessly link to them. Just hearing the same stories minus the slavish propaganda will deprogram many people.
  2. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/author/ppillar/ – Ron Pillar, I'm a groupie. Does investigative journalism, along the lines of Cailtlin.
  3. https://thegrayzone.com/ – Max Blumenthal contributes here, U.S. imperialism in South America.
  4. https://www.mintpressnews.com/ – M.E., Yemen, if your friend is very sensitive to anything that insinuates that Israel is not the celestial city he might be offended.
  5. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/author/daniel-larison/ – If your friend has a conservative bent, foreign policy restraint. This Larison is passionately against our atrocities in Yemen but polite about it.
  6. https://southfront.org/ – Ah .. on our State Dept list of Russian disinfo. Discuss military conflicts, sympathetic to the countries at the receiving end of our attention.
  7. http://thesaker.is/ – Saker was an intel guy from the 'other side' during the Cold War, values decency, Orthodox Christian, only site that regularly publishes speeches from Nasrallah, does military analysis, arrogant but I always feel like I learned something.
  8. http://www.moonofalabama.org – anonymous analyst, German Intel guy, writes very well. I put him last because he has been on a pro-Trump binge lately. I think they are secret lovers. Given what he normally writes about I have no idea what he sees in him.
CAITLIN JOHNSTONE (AUTHOR) / NOVEMBER 25, 2020

"I listen to the entire political spectrum, from Republican warmongering corporatists all the way to Democratic warmongering corporatists!"

[Nov 25, 2020] Bidens's "Cruise missile liberals" will bring "democracy builking" back to the homeland. That should scare most of US people, if we judge by thier results in Ukrain, Syria and Libya

Highly recommended!
Nov 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Line Islands , Nov 25 2020 11:05 utc | 103

Vicky left fake democracy promotion was always about expanding and sustaining controlled from Washinton global neoliberal empire. It is a part and parcel of Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine implementation. So it will lean to further drop of the standard of living on the majority of US people.

Biden is a tent revival for the aptly named "cruise missile liberals" and some of the more shadowy neo-conservative forces are in retreat and determined to bring democracy building home after their colonial expeditions extinguished it

[Nov 25, 2020] America desperately needs its Two Minutes of Hate against other countries like a meth addict needs his next hit

Notable quotes:
"... Hate is the only thing that holds the American Empire together. Without its Two Minutes of Hate, America will break up apart into a million pieces. ..."
Nov 25, 2020 | caitlinjohnstone.com

USA-MA BIN LADEN / NOVEMBER 25, 2020

America desperately needs its Two Minutes of Hate against other countries like a meth addict needs his next hit.

For Democrats and their ilk, Hate Russia was their unifying and mobilizing ideology. For Republicans and their ilk, Hate China is their unifying and mobilizing ideology.

Hate is the only thing that holds the American Empire together. Without its Two Minutes of Hate, America will break up apart into a million pieces.

[Nov 25, 2020] Biden's foxes guard the henhouse

You can't find better smarter neocons to pursue the Full Spectrum Dominance Doctrine to the total decimation of the standard of living of ordinary Americans ;-)
Nov 25, 2020 | thegrayzone.com

Since the 1990s, Flournoy and Blinken have steadily risen through the ranks of the military-industrial complex, shuffling back and forth between the Pentagon and hawkish think-tanks funded by the U.S. government, weapons companies, and oil giants.

Under Bill Clinton, Flournoy was the principal author of the 1996 Quadrinellial Defense Review, the document that outlined the U.S. military's doctrine of permanent war – what it called "full spectrum dominance."

Flournoy called for "unilateral use of military power" to ensure "uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources."

... During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Biden declared, "In my judgment, President Bush is right to be concerned about Saddam Hussein's relentless pursuit of weapons of mass destruction"

As Iraq was plunged into chaos and bloodshed, Flournoy was among the authors of a paper titled "Progressive Internationalism" that called for a "smarter and better" style of permanent war. The paper chastised the anti-war left and stated that "Democrats will maintain the world's most capable and technologically advanced military, and we will not flinch from using it to defend our interests anywhere in the world."

... In 2005, Flournoy signed onto a letter from the neoconservative think tank Project for a New American Century, asking Congress to "increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps (by) at least 25,000 troops each year over the next several years."

[Nov 25, 2020] Biden NSA Pick Called Steele Dossier 'Perfectly Appropriate' - Newsmax.com

Nov 25, 2020 | www.newsmax.com

Joe Biden's national security adviser pick defended the anti-Trump dossier in 2018 as "perfectly appropriate."

Many news outlets have declared Biden the president-elect. Newsmax has yet to project a winner, citing legal challenges in several key battleground states.

Jake Sullivan, who worked for Biden when he served as vice president in the Obama administration and as a senior foreign policy adviser to Hillary Clinton during her presidential race in 2016, made the comments on a podcast interview with David Axelrod, the chief strategist for Obama's presidential campaigns.

"I mean, I believe that it is perfectly appropriate and responsible if we get wind, or if people associated with the campaign get wind, that there may be real questions about the connections between Donald Trump, his organization, his campaign and Russia that that be explored fully," he said at the time, The Daily Caller reported.

https://274b4c66c3248245933d19a14f4d7121.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html

Sullivan worked for Clinton when a law firm representing her campaign hired an opposition research firm to investigate Trump's possible ties to Russia. The firm hired Christopher Steele, the author behind the dossier alleging a "well-developed conspiracy of cooperation between the Trump campaign and Russian government."

Special counsel Robert Mueller later found those claims to be unfounded during his probe into Russian interference in the election, writing in his report "the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."

Related Stories:

[Nov 25, 2020] ELECTION 2020- What President Biden Won't Touch Consortiumnews

Nov 25, 2020 | consortiumnews.com

ELECTION 2020: What President Biden Won't Touch November 24, 2020 Save

Considering the think-tank imperialists in the bunch Biden is naming to direct U.S. foreign policy, Danny Sjursen expects little to change in the essence of the war-state.

Military aircraft streaming red, white and blue during the welcoming ceremony for President Donald Trump, May 2017, King Khalid International Airport, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. (White House, Andrea Hanks)

By Danny Sjursen
Tom's Dispatch

I n this mystifying moment, the post-electoral sentiments of most Americans can be summed up either as "Ding dong! The witch is dead!" or "We got robbed!" Both are problematic, not because the two candidates were intellectually indistinguishable or ethically equivalent, but because each jingle is laden with a dubious assumption: that President Donald Trump's demise would provide either decisive deliverance or prove an utter disaster.

While there were indeed areas where his ability to cause disastrous harm lent truth to such a belief -- race relations, climate change, and the courts come to mind -- in others, it was distinctly (to use a dangerous phrase) overkill. Nowhere was that more true than with America's expeditionary version of militarism, its forever wars of this century, and the venal system that continues to feed it.

For nearly two years, We the People were coached to believe that the 2020 election would mean everything, that Nov. 3 would be democracy's ultimate judgment day. What if, however, when it comes to issues of war, peace, and empire, " Decision 2020 " proves barely meaningful?

After all, in the election campaign just past, Donald Trump's sweeping war-peace rhetoric and Joe Biden's hedging aside, neither nuclear-code aspirant bothered to broach the most uncomfortable questions about America's uniquely intrusive global role. Neither dared dissent from normative notions about America's posture and policy "over there," nor challenge the essence of the war-state, a sacred cow if ever there was one.

U.S. presidential debate, Sept. 29, 2020.

That blessed bovine has enshrined permanent policies that seem beyond challenge: Uncle Sam's right and duty to forward deploy troops just about anywhere on the planet; garrison the globe; carry out aerial assassinations; and unilaterally implement starvation sanctions . Likewise the systemic structures that implement and incentivize such rogue-state behavior are never questioned, especially the existence of a sprawling military-industrial complex that has infiltrated every aspect of public life, while stealing money that might have improved America's infrastructure or wellbeing. It has engorged itself at the taxpayer's expense, while peddling American blood money -- and blood -- on absurd foreign adventures and autocratic allies, even as it corrupted nearly every prominent public paymaster and policymaker.

This election season, neither Democrats nor Republicans challenged the cultural components justifying the great game, which is evidence of one thing: empires come home, folks, even if the troops never seem to.

The Company He Keeps

As the election neared, it became impolite to play the canary in American militarism's coal mine or risk raising Biden's record -- or probable prospects -- on minor matters like war and peace. After all, his opponent was a monster, so noting the holes in Biden's block of Swiss cheese presumably amounted to useful idiocy -- if not sinister collusion -- when it came to Trump's reelection. Doing so was a surefire way to jettison professional opportunities and find yourself permanently uninvited to the coolest Beltway cocktail parties or interviews on cable TV.

George Orwell warned of the dangers of such "intellectual cowardice" more than 70 years ago in a proposed preface to his classic novel Animal Farm . "At any given moment," he wrote, "there is an orthodoxy that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is 'not done' to say it Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness."

And that's precisely what progressive paragon Cornel West warned against seven months ago after his man, Sen. Bernie Sanders -- briefly, the Democratic frontrunner -- suddenly proved a dead candidate walking. "Vote for Biden, but don't lie about who he really is," the stalwart scholar suggested . It seems just enough Americans did the former (phew!), but mainstream media makers and consumers mostly forgot about the salient second part of his sentiment.

Cornel West speaking at a house party for Sen. Bernie Sanders in Des Moines, Iowa, Jan. 15, 2020. (Gage Skidmore, Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0)

With the electoral outcome now apparent -- if not yet accepted in Trump World -- perhaps such politeness (and the policing that goes with it) will fade away, ushering in a renaissance of Fourth Estate oppositional truth-telling. In that way -- in my dreams at least -- persistently energized progressives might send President Joe Biden down dovish alternative avenues, perhaps even landing some appointments in an executive branch that now drives foreign policy (though, if I'm honest, I'm hardly hopeful on either count).

One look at Uncle Joe's inbound nieces and nephews brings to mind Aesop's fabled moral: "You are judged by the company you keep."

Think-Tank Imperialists

One thing is already far too clear: Biden's shadow national security team will be a distinctly status-quo squad. To know where future policymakers might head, it always helps to know where they came from. And when it comes to Biden's foreign policy crew , including a striking number of women and a fair number of Obama administration and Clinton 2016 campaign retreads -- they were mostly in Trump-era holding patterns in the connected worlds of strategic consulting and hawkish think tanking.

In fact, the national security bio of the archetypal Biden bro (or sis ) would go something like this: she (he) sprang from an Ivy League school, became a congressional staffer, got appointed to a mid-tier role on Barack Obama's national security council, consulted for WestExec Advisors (an Obama alumni-founded outfit linking tech firms and the Department of Defense), was a fellow at the Center for New American Security (CNAS), had some defense contractor ties , and married someone who's also in the game .

It helps as well to follow the money. In other words, how did the Biden bunch make it and who pays the outfits that have been paying them in the Trump years? None of this is a secret: their two most common think-tank homes -- CNAS and the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) -- are the second- and sixth-highest recipients, respectively, of U.S. government and defense-contractor funding . The top donors to CNAS are Northrop Grumman, Boeing, and the Department of Defense. Most CSIS largesse comes from Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Raytheon.

How the inevitable conflicts of interest play out is hardly better concealed. To take just one example, in 2016, Michèle Flournoy, CNAS co-founder, ex-Pentagon official, and " odds-on favorite " to become Biden's secretary of defense, exchanged emails with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) ambassador in Washington. She pitched a project whereby CNAS analysts would, well, analyze whether Washington should maintain drone-sales restrictions in a non-binding multilateral " missile technology control " agreement. The UAE's autocratic government then paid CNAS $250,000 to draft a report that (you won't be surprised to learn) argued for amending the agreement to allow that country to purchase American-manufactured drones.

Michèle Flournoy, at right, on front of WestExec Advisors homepage.

Which is just what Flournoy and company's supposed nemeses in the Trump administration then did this very July past. Again, no surprise. American drones seem to have a way of ending up in the hands of Gulf theocracies -- states with abhorrent human rights records that use such planes to surveil and brutally bomb Yemeni civilians .

If it's too much to claim that a future Defense Secretary Flournoy would be the UAE's (wo)man in Washington, you at least have to wonder. Worse still, with those think-tank, security-consulting, and defense-industry ties of hers, she's anything but alone among Biden's top prospects and nominees. Just consider a few other abridged resumes:

Tony Blinken, on left, with President Barack Obama, on WestExec Advisors homepage. Tony Blinken , [named secretary of state on Monday] a longtime foreign policy adviser, to serve as secretary of State; frontrunner for national security adviser: CSIS; WestExec (which he co-founded with Flournoy); and CNN analyst. Jake Sullivan , [named national security adviser on Monday]: the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace ("peace," in this case, being funded by 10 military agencies and defense contractors) and Macro Advisory Partners, a strategic consultancy run by former British spy chiefs. Avril Haines [named director of national intelligence on Monday]: CNAS-the Brookings Institution; WestExec; and Palantir Technologies , a controversial, CIA-seeded, NSA-linked data-mining firm. Kathleen Hicks , probable deputy secretary of defense: CSIS and the Aerospace Corporation , a federally funded research and development center that lobbies on defense issues.

An extra note about Hicks: she's the head of Biden's Department of Defense transition team and also a senior vice president at CSIS. There, she hosts that think tank's "Defense 2020" podcast. In case anyone's still wondering where CSIS's bread is buttered, here's how Hicks opens each episode:

"This podcast is made possible by contributions from BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and the Thales Group."

In other words, given what we already know about Joe Biden's previous gut-driven policies that pass for "middle of the road" in this anything but middling country of ours, the experiences and affiliations of his " A-Team " don't bode well for systemic-change seekers. Remember, this is a president-elect who assured rich donors that "nothing would fundamentally change" if he were elected. Should he indeed stock his national security team with such a conflicts-of-interest-ridden crowd, consider America's sacred cows of foreign policy all but saved.

Biden's outfit is headed for office, it seems, to right the Titanic, not rock the boat.

Off the Table: A Paradigm Shift

President Barack Obama meeting with his national security team, April 25, 2011. Michèle Flournoy, as under secretary of defense for policy. is on the president's right, seated against wall. (White House, Flickr, Pete Souza)

In this context, join me in thinking about what won't be on the next presidential menu when it comes to the militarization of American foreign policy.

Don't expect major changes when it comes to:

One-sided support for Israel that enables permanent Palestinian oppression and foments undying ire across the Greater Middle East. Tony Blinken put it this way: as president, Joe Biden "would not tie military assistance to Israel to things like annexation [of all or large portions of the occupied West Bank] or other decisions by the Israeli government with which we might disagree." Unapologetic support for various Gulf State autocracies and theocracies that, as they cynically collude with Israel, will only continue to heighten tensions with Iran and facilitate yet more grim war crimes in Yemen. Beyond Michèle Flournoy's professional connections with the UAE, Gulf kingdoms generously fund the very think tanks that so many Biden prospects have populated. Saudi Arabia, for example, offers annual donations to Brookings and the Rand Corporation; the UAE, $1 million for a new CSIS office building ; and Qatar, $14.8 million to Brookings. America's historically unprecedented and provocative expeditionary military posture globally, including at least 800 bases in 80 countries , seems likely to be altered only in marginal ways. As Jake Sullivan put it in a June CSIS interview : "I'm not arguing for getting out of every base in the Middle East. There is a military posture dimension to this as a reduced footprint."

Above all, it's obvious that the Biden bunch has no desire to slow down, no less halt, the " revolving door " that connects national security work in the government and jobs or security consulting positions in the defense industry. The same goes for the think tanks that the arms producers amply fund to justify the whole circus.

In such a context, count on this: the militarization of American society and the "thank-you-for-your-service" fetishization of American soldiers will continue to thrive, exhibit A being the way Biden now closes almost any speech with "May God protect our troops."

All of this makes for a rather discouraging portrait of an old man's coming administration. Still, consider it a version of truth in advertising. Joe and company are likely to continue to be who they've always been and who they continue to say they are. After all, transformational presidencies and unexpected pivots are historically rare phenomena. Expecting the moon from a man mostly offering MoonPies almost guarantees disappointment.

Obama Encore or Worse?

Tony Blinken, at right, as deputy national security advisor, with President Barack Obama, Sept. 19, 2014. (White House, Pete Souza)

Don't misunderstand me: a Biden presidency will certainly leave some maneuvering room at the margins of national security strategy. Think nuclear treaties with the Russians (which the Trump administration had been systematically tearing up) and the possible thawing of at least some of the tensions with Tehran.

Nor should even the most cynical among us underestimate the significance of having a president who actually accepts the reality of climate change and the need to switch to alternative energy sources as quickly as possible. Noam Chomsky's bold assertion that the human species couldn't endure a second Trump term, thanks to the environmental catastrophe, nuclear brinksmanship, and pandemic negligence he represents, was anything but hyperbole. Yet recall that he was also crystal clear about the need "for an organized public" to demand change and "impose pressures" on the new administration the moment the new president is inaugurated.

Yet, in the coming Biden years, there is also a danger that empowered Democrats in an imperial presidency (when it comes to foreign policy) will actually escalate a two-front New Cold War with China and Russia. And there's always the worry that the ascension of a more genteel emperor could co-opt -- or at least quiet -- a growing movement of anti-Trumpers, including the vets of this country's forever wars who are increasingly dressing in antiwar clothing.

What seems certain is that, as ever, salvation won't spring from the top. Don't count on Status-quo Joe to slaughter Washington's sacred cows of foreign policy or on his national security team to topple the golden calves of American empire. In fact, the defense industry seems bullish on Biden. As Raytheon CEO Gregory Hayes recently put it , "Obviously, there is a concern that defense spending will go way down if there is a Biden administration, but frankly I think that's ridiculous." Or consider retired Marine Corps major general turned defense consultant Arnold Punaro who recently said of Biden's coming tenure, "I think the industry will have, when it comes to national security, a very positive view."

Given the evidence that business-as-usual will continue in the Biden years, perhaps it's time to take that advice from Cornel West, absorb the truth about Biden's future national security squad, and act accordingly. There's no top-down salvation on the agenda -- not from Joe or his crew of consummate insiders. Pressure and change will flow from the grassroots or it won't come at all.

Danny Sjursen is a retired U.S. Army officer and contributing editor at antiwar.com . His work has appeared in the LA Times , The Nation , Huff Post , T he Hill , Salon , Truthdig , Tom Dispatch , among other publications. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . His latest book is Patriotic Dissent: America in the Age of Endless War . Follow him on Twitter at @SkepticalVet . Check out his professional website for contact info, scheduling speeches, and/or access to the full corpus of his writing and media appearances.

This article is from Tom's Dispatch .

[Nov 25, 2020] Another Look At Joe Biden's Foreign Policy Team

Nov 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Sakineh Bagoom , Nov 24 2020 16:37 utc | 1

The choices the incoming president Joe Biden has made so far are not great at all. The people he so far selected are staunch interventionists who will want to continue the wars they have started during their previous time in office.

Tony Blinken will become Secretary of State. (It was probably thought to be too hard to get Senate confirmation for the similar bad Susan Rice.) In 2013 the Washington Post described his high flying pedigree :

Blinken is deputy national security adviser to President Obama, who has also invoked the Holocaust as his administration wrestles, often painfully, with how to respond to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons. One of the government's key players in drafting Syria policy, the 51-year-old Blinken has Clinton administration credentials and deep ties to Vice President Biden and the foreign policy and national security establishment in Washington. He has drawn attention in Situation Room photos, including the iconic one during the May 2011 raid of Osama bin Laden's compound, for his stylishly wavy salt-and-pepper hair. But what sets him apart from the other intellectual powerhouses in the inner sanctum is a life story that reads like a Jewish high-society screenplay that the onetime aspiring film producer may have once dreamed of making. There's his father, a giant in venture capital; his mother, the arts patron; and his stepfather, who survived the Holocaust to become of one of the most influential lawyers on the global stage. It is a bildungsroman for young Blinken -- playing in a Parisian jazz band, debating politics with statesmen -- with a supporting cast of characters that includes, among others, Leonard Bernstein, John Lennon, Mark Rothko, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, Abel Ferrara and Christo.

The man is a war mongering psycho:

Blinken surprised some in the Situation Room by breaking with Biden to support military action in Libya, administration officials said, and he advocated for American action in Syria after Obama's reelection. These sources said that Blinken was less enthusiastic than Biden about Obama's decision to seek congressional approval for a strike in Syria, but is now -- perhaps out of necessity -- onboard and a backer of diplomatic negotiations with Russia. While less of an ideologue than Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (a job for which he was considered), he not surprisingly shares her belief that global powers such as the United States have a "responsibility to protect" against atrocities.

He has since shown no remorse about those foreign policy failures:

Blinken maintains that the failure of U.S. policy in Syria was that our government did not employ enough force. He stands by the false argument that Biden's vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq was a "vote for tough diplomacy." He was reportedly in favor of the Libyan intervention, which Biden opposed, and he was initially a defender and advocate for U.S. support for the Saudi coalition war on Yemen. In short, Blinken has agreed with some of the biggest foreign policy mistakes that Biden and Obama made, and he has tended to be more of an interventionist than both of them.

Jake Sullivan will become National Security Advisor. He is a Hillary Clinton figure :

If you can't quite place Jake Sullivan, he's was a long-serving aide to Hillary Clinton, starting with her 2008 race against Barack Obama, then serving as her deputy chief of staff and director of the State Department's Office of Policy Planning when Clinton was Obama's secretary of state. (...) In 2016, during her failed presidential campaign, Sullivan once again teamed up with Clinton, and he was widely expected to have been named to serve as her national security adviser or even secretary of state had she won.

Since 2016, and since the creation of NSA, Sullivan has emerged as a kind of foreign policy scold, gently -- and sometimes not so gently -- criticizing those who reflexively oppose American intervention abroad and who disparage the idea of American "exceptionalism." Indeed, in an article in the January-February issue of The Atlantic, "What Donald Trump and Dick Cheney Got Wrong About America," Sullivan explicitly says that he's intent on "rescuing the idea of American exceptionalism" and presents the "case for a new American exceptionalism".

Sullivan send classified documents to Hillary Clinton's private email server. He wrote to her that Al Qaida is "on our side in Syria." He also hyped fake Trump-Russia collusion allegations.

It is yet unknown who will become Secretary of Defense. Michèle Flournoy is the most named option but there is some opposition to her nomination :

[B]ackers of Michèle Flournoy, his likely pick for defense secretary, are trying to head off a last-minute push by some left-leaning Democrats trying to derail her selection, with many progressives seeing her nomination as a continuation of what critics refer to as America's "forever wars."

I expect that the progressive will lose the fight and that either Flournoy or some other hawkish figure will get that weapon lobbyist position.

Progressives also lost on the Treasury position. Biden's nomination for that is Janet Yellen who is known to be an inflation hawk. She is unlikely to support large spending on progressive priorities.

As usual with a Democratic election win the people who brought the decisive votes and engagement, those who argue for more socialist and peaceful policies, will be cut off from the levers of power.

In three years they will again be called upon to fall for another bait and switch.

Posted by b on November 24, 2020 at 16:32 UTC | Permalink

There are so many creatures that the swamp holds. Don't be surprised by what comes next.

gottlieb , Nov 24 2020 16:54 utc | 4

The entire project for Democrats in this election cycle was to get rid of Trump. There was never any vision for the future or a presentation of policy to gain voters. It was all "Trump is an existential threat and the only priority is to defeat him at the polls." Bernie Sanders made this all quite clear as he again led his legion of lemmings off a cliff and into an ocean of Neoliberal/neoconservative Forever Empire.

But hey, it's all worth it to get rid of The Man With The Golden Toilet.

Meanwhile, yeah, it's back to future with more of the same as far as the eye can see. Which, with an economy in shambles, and a populace with a death wish, might not be as long as one thinks.

Geoff , Nov 24 2020 17:03 utc | 6

At the very least "gravitas" will have been restored to its venerable and "sacred" institution. And a good portion of the american population can heave a huge sigh of relief, and go about their business of profound ritualistic conformity.

Gravitas restored by an aging old man, potentially on the verge of dementia, which is a sad condition by any measure. A collection of Human beings about as bereft of solutions of philosophy of spiritual comprehension as possible, at this point in human history. We all have an enormous amount to look forward to!

Josh , Nov 24 2020 17:08 utc | 7
It's a veritable who's who of the same criminals who instigated and executed the covert (and sometimes overt) military and economic aggressions across several regions of the globe, to include North Africa, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe.
Josh , Nov 24 2020 17:11 utc | 8
Furthermore,
https://journal-neo.org/2020/11/23/the-murky-foreign-actors-behind-us-election-fraud/
The same faction tried to pull the exact same nonsense last time, but some rather serious elements of the intelligence, military, and security services elected to not allow it (via real time monitoring and enforcement).

[Nov 25, 2020] Biden might walk away from a confrontation with China

Nov 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Nov 25 2020 0:52 utc | 73

US-based companies doing business in/with China are also very pleased at the prospect that Trump's draconian trade restrictions will soon be lifted:

"US multinationals aim to clear away a stumbling block, the Trump administration's protectionism and anti-globalism, to push forward their international plans, in particular their exploration of the Chinese market, experts said. They made the comments in response to news that New York business leaders signed a letter urging the Trump administration to start the power transition to the incoming Biden administration.

"They also predicted that many of the prejudicial and disruptive policies launched by the Trump administration against China, like sanctions on Huawei and tariff hikes, will be corrected once Biden becomes the new US president.

"More than 160 top US executives have signed a letter pressing the Trump administration to acknowledge Joe Biden as the president-elect and begin the transition to the new administration, according to a report by The New York Times. Most of the executives come from US multinationals including Mastercard, Visa, Condé Nast, WeWork and American International Group.

"Many top executives from US financial companies have signed the letter, including David Solomon, chief executive of Goldman Sachs and Jon Gray, Blackstone's president."

Such an attitude might sway Biden away from a confrontation first policy with China since the overall balance of power has changed greatly since he was Vice-President. Perhaps the Neocons will finally learn Peace is more profitable than war.

Don Bacon , Nov 25 2020 1:57 utc | 79

@ karlof 73
Trump's draconian trade restrictions will soon be lifted

wiki: The trade war has negatively impacted the economies of both the United States and China. In the United States, it has led to higher prices for consumers and financial difficulties for farmers. In China, the trade war contributed to a slowdown in the rate of economic and industrial output growth, which had already been on a decline. Many American companies have shifted supply chains to elsewhere in Asia, bringing fears that the trade war would lead to a US-China economic 'decoupling'. In other countries the trade war has also caused economic damage, though some countries have benefited from increased manufacturing to fill the gaps. It has also led to stock market instability. Governments around the world have taken steps to address some of the damage caused by the economic conflict.//

As on war, and many other issues, the corrupt US Congress has allowed "executive privilege" to enact measures and programs that would never be allowed in a real "democratic" country, governed by citizens with availability to a free press.

Edward Abbey: "Democracy--rule by the people--sounds like a fine thing; we should try it sometime in America."

[Nov 25, 2020] Biden's getting the Obama band back together again for an encore performance celebrating nostalgia for a never-was golden age

Nov 25, 2020 | www.rt.com

The incoming Biden administration's cabinet carries a strong whiff of deja vu, and that's no accident – the uninspiring president-elect is staking everything on evoking a lost utopia that never existed under ex-president Obama.

The Biden campaign's rule of thumb for his cabinet appointments seems to be to channel the Obama administration – with an extra helping of wokeness where possible. This has seen him float Pentagon veteran and dyed-in-the-wool megahawk Michele Flournoy as the first-ever female Secretary of Defense and former DACA czar Alejandro Mayorkas as the first Latino-Jewish head of the Department of Homeland Security.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden signals US return to full-on globalism and foreign meddling by picking interventionist Anthony Blinken as secretary of state

There's also the rumor he's planning to pick Obama's former Fed chair Janet Yellen as the first-ever female Treasury Secretary – but even if she's not the lucky lady, fellow former Clinton adviser Lael Brainard could get the nod, or one of two black candidates – one of whom happens to be gay. Whoever he picks, they'll be a "first" – and, given their institutional history as reliable servants of the ruling class under Obama, a dependable source of more-of-the-same fiscal policies.

Lest all this wokeness turn off the Republicans who defected to Biden out of distaste for President Donald Trump's determination to upset the military-industrial applecart, the presumed president has also brought back ex-Secretary of State John Kerry, who'll be returning to Washington to serve as a 'climate czar' on the National Security Council. While Kerry would be the first person to hold such a position, which will allow him to skip a Senate confirmation that could be unfriendly given the chamber's Republican control, Kerry's time at the head of the State Department saw the Obama administration continue digging the US deeper into its portfolio of ill-advised wars. And Kerry was the man who signed the Paris Climate Accords on behalf of Washington in 2016, a treaty President Donald Trump wasted no time removing the US from. He should go down plenty smooth indeed.

Most of the Biden picks were second-stringers during the Obama years and thus haven't quite become household names yet. This is likely to be a point in their favor – if the history of would-be Secretary of State Antony Blinken is any indication, Biden has good reason for picking relative unknowns. A report from the American Prospect revealed Blinken had spent the post-Obama years getting rich quick at consulting firm WestExec – which coincidentally (or not) was co-founded by would-be Pentagon chief Flournoy after her most recent stint at the Pentagon. The firm focuses on "helping new companies navigate the complex bureaucracy of winning Pentagon contracts" – suggesting a Biden presidency won't just deliver a fatter Pentagon budget, but new wars to go with it.

ALSO ON RT.COM Michele Flournoy might be breaking a glass ceiling as Pentagon chief, but even feminists aren't buying

It's no surprise, then, that Washington-watchers are sinking into deja vu. Biden was elected as the "anti-Trump," a return to some vague fantasy of "normalcy" . Except the nostalgia for the Obama era that helped shoehorn Biden into office earlier this month was based on a wholly synthetic reimagining of the eight years in which the career politician served as vice president.

Obama may have inherited George W. Bush's financial crisis in 2008, born of rapacious investment banks that mistook people's life savings for free chips from a casino, but the " recovery " he claimed as his own never bothered to lift up most working- and middle-class Americans . Many of these lost their homes, and if they didn't, their children "failed to launch," in no position to strike out on their own. The younger generation were either mired in student debt or merely unable to afford even the cheapest 'starter homes' due to an absence of living-wage jobs open to young adults entering the workplace.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden puts Homeland Security in hands of Alejandro Mayorkas, the Cuban-American lawyer who championed citizenship for immigrants

Biden made it clear repeatedly in the run-up to this month's election that he had no interest in feeling these people's pain. "I have no empathy for it – give me a break," he said, complaining that millennials had been given everything by his own generation, the Baby Boomers. In reality, those "whiners" so loathed by the president-to-be made 20 percent less than Biden's generation at the same age at best – assuming they were lucky enough to have a job at all. Back when it was still considered acceptable to trash Biden, most establishment outlets raked him over the coals for such tone-deaf comments. But such negativity was memory-holed when the Democrats crowned Biden their pick to run against Trump – speaking ill of the anointed one got progressives labeled Trump supporters or Nazis or worse.

Those whose rose-colored glasses let them see Biden as the second coming of Obama forget that "Bush in a black-man suit" turned two wars into seven, allowed Citibank – one of the worst offenders of the 2008 financial crisis – to shape his cabinet, and passed a mockery of "universal healthcare" that forced the lower-middle-class to purchase health insurance they couldn't afford or shoulder a tax penalty they also couldn't afford. Biden has promised to reignite the war in Syria, veto the actual universal healthcare policy that is Medicare for All, and ensure nothing will fundamentally change for his fat-cat Wall Street donors – and those donors seem to be picking his cabinet just like they did his boss' in 2008.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

ALSO ON RT.COM Familiar faces: Biden picks Obama's Secretary of State John Kerry as his climate czar & finds job for ex-CIA deputy Avril Haines

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

82

Robin Olsen 13 hours ago 23 Nov, 2020 10:23 PM

Restarting the war in Syria will take a major false flag that is bullet proof in order to get Russia to withdraw...not one false flag chemical attack staged by Obama and Biden actually worked in the past. Trump's failed too. The world is onto America's false flag strategy...To get Americans behind another 20 years of forever wars is also gonna take significant false flag. Americans will fall for it, they always do...but no one else will...not this time. Without international support he cannot restart anything, the British are not enough to counter Russian interference and I don't think Bojo will survive the next election anyways.
HypoxiaMasks 17 hours ago 23 Nov, 2020 06:17 PM
With any luck he will bless us with Hillary, Comey, Brennan, the corpse of McCain and as an added bonus Lil Bush and both Obamas
DukeLeo HypoxiaMasks 9 hours ago 24 Nov, 2020 02:50 AM
Biden has not officially been pronounced winner in the elections, and he already has picked a neocon team. What a big surprise. Makes you wonder how many people who voted for him really knew what they were doing.
Ibmekon 17 hours ago 23 Nov, 2020 06:34 PM
When Trump got into power he soon overtook Obama record of 26171 bombs in 2016. Trump since 2015 has dropped over 133,000 bombs . Trump tried to get troops out - the MIC just sent them back in. Joey Biden and new secretary of state are committed to keep the troops out occupying countries around the world - which requires the bombs to keep falling, one every 12 mins. Because nobody actually wants the USA military in their country (apart from a few well bribed military/religious dictators) We have no number for those murdered - the USA refuses to keep any count.

[Nov 25, 2020] Biden is to the extreme right of Trump on the issue of the US's endless neocolonial wars. And Biden is already laying the groundwork for the deconstruction of Social Security, work he began as VP to Obama. That makes Biden to the extreme right of Trump on foreign domestic issues...all thanks to the "blue no matter who" crowd.

So what Biden is trying to achieve is to stem the collapse of neoliberalism and with it the global US-controlled neoliberal empire.
Notable quotes:
"... IMO, all three of the turn-of-the-century free-market-neolibral model, the hypothetical Trump(ish) nationalist model, and the revised technocratic-neoliberal schemes, are fatally flawed. Despite the political rhetoric of US Republicans, there's no real prospect of an even mildly leftist (i.e. inclusive, egalitarian, and internationalist) alternative anytime soon in the US. I suspect the same is true in most neoliberal countries. ..."
Nov 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
S Brennan , Nov 24 2020 17:14 utc | 10

The man is a war mongering psycho:

Blinken surprised some in the Situation Room by breaking with Biden to support military action in Libya, administration officials said, and he advocated for American action in Syria after Obama's reelection. These sources said that Blinken was less enthusiastic than Biden about Obama's decision to seek congressional approval for a strike in Syria, but is now -- perhaps out of necessity -- onboard and a backer of diplomatic negotiations with Russia. While less of an ideologue than Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations (a job for which he was considered), he not surprisingly shares her belief that global powers such as the United States have a "responsibility to protect" against atrocities.

He has since shown no remorse about those foreign policy failures:

Blinken maintains that the failure of U.S. policy in Syria was that our government did not employ enough force. He stands by the false argument that Biden's vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq was a "vote for tough diplomacy." He was reportedly in favor of the Libyan intervention, which Biden opposed, and he was initially a defender and advocate for U.S. support for the Saudi coalition war on Yemen. In short, Blinken has agreed with some of the biggest foreign policy mistakes that Biden and Obama made, and he has tended to be more of an interventionist than both of them.

Jake Sullivan will become National Security Advisor. He is a Hillary Clinton figure :

If you can't quite place Jake Sullivan, he's was a long-serving aide to Hillary Clinton, starting with her 2008 race against Barack Obama, then serving as her deputy chief of staff and director of the State Department's Office of Policy Planning when Clinton was Obama's secretary of state. (...) In 2016, during her failed presidential campaign, Sullivan once again teamed up with Clinton, and he was widely expected to have been named to serve as her national security adviser or even secretary of state had she won.

Since 2016, and since the creation of NSA, Sullivan has emerged as a kind of foreign policy scold, gently -- and sometimes not so gently -- criticizing those who reflexively oppose American intervention abroad and who disparage the idea of American "exceptionalism." Indeed, in an article in the January-February issue of The Atlantic, "What Donald Trump and Dick Cheney Got Wrong About America," Sullivan explicitly says that he's intent on "rescuing the idea of American exceptionalism" and presents the "case for a new American exceptionalism".

Sullivan send classified documents to Hillary Clinton's private email server. He wrote to her that Al Qaida is "on our side in Syria." He also hyped fake Trump-Russia collusion allegations.

It is yet unknown who will become Secretary of Defense. Michèle Flournoy is the most named option but there is some opposition to her nomination :

[B]ackers of Michèle Flournoy, his likely pick for defense secretary, are trying to head off a last-minute push by some left-leaning Democrats trying to derail her selection, with many progressives seeing her nomination as a continuation of what critics refer to as America's "forever wars."

I expect that the progressive will lose the fight and that either Flournoy or some other hawkish figure will get that weapon lobbyist position.

Progressives also lost on the Treasury position. Biden's nomination for that is Janet Yellen who is known to be an inflation hawk. She is unlikely to support large spending on progressive priorities.

As usual with a Democratic election win the people who brought the decisive votes and engagement, those who argue for more socialist and peaceful policies, will be cut off from the levers of power.

In three years they will again be called upon to fall for another bait and switch.

As I said over at Ian Welsh's blog

"this is brought on by the "blue no matter who crowd" who can't understand that guaranteeing their vote at the outset without extorting any firm quid pro quo a priori guarantees that [working people] can be safely ignored. And yet, almost everybody here [reminder, posted at Ian's] argued for just that and will the next time and the next.

Why will something like that happen

If the polls are to be believed, Biden is the most popular Democrat of all time and by a large margin. If polls are to be believed, the DNC denying the Sanders wing was the smartest thing the DNC has ever done. If polls are to be believed, Biden strode through battle unscathed while lessor Democrats were squashed. The DNC was right, the Sanders people are fools, if polls are to be believed. The immense Biden vote proves once and for all, that any who diverge from DNC dictata should be ignored for all time.

That was the message sent in 2020"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Biden is to the extreme right of Trump on the issue of the US's endless neocolonial wars. And Biden is already laying the groundwork for the deconstruction of Social Security, work he began as VP to Obama. That makes Biden to the extreme right of Trump on foreign & domestic issues...all thanks to the "blue no matter who" crowd. Meanwhile, the election "make 'em scream" ploy Pelosi employed will toss millions off federal extensions of unemployment midnight 31 Dec 2020 until congress reconvenes.

And for all those who claimed Trump to be evil incarnate, worse than Hitler...in a few weeks, facts will show those people to be clownish frauds.

ptb , Nov 24 2020 18:20 utc | 25

yep. sad. Yellen for Treasury is interesting, and a crucial position to watch. Mnuchin basically ran the Trump administration's economic policy, as far as there was one.

One of the watchwords of the coming era is the "Great Reset", i.e. a limited shift in the direction of a technocratic planned economy. In a way, this began after 2008 when the FED intervened in stock and bond markets to such a degree that its interventions became the dominant driving force. With that, "market forces" couldn't plausibly remain a reflection of free competition as the theory postulated. The fact that this measure had to be taken (i.e. markets had to be overtly "fixed"), is an implicit admission that the thesis of the free-market purists, the dream of the Reagan-Clinton era, has been falsified.

The proposed solution, at least the version coming from the high business class (and exaggerated further still by right-wing critics of Great Reset) seems like a recipe to worsen the problem of "regulatory capture" above all else. I.e. the agents and beneficiaries of the neoliberal era making an effort to adapt, without giving up the benefits of the prior economic regime. Likelyhood of fixing inequalities is nil. The emphasis is on reinforcing the stability of the system, holding on to power, perhaps competing with threatening alternatives from the "outside", although that would seem to be a second priority.

Trump did put up a facade of a nationalist alternative, which had the effect of acknowledging the inequalities and failures of the neoliberal system, but offering an equally harmful solution. Besides that, if you look at who was making economic policy in the past 4 years (Treasury Dept), the nationalist facade was false, as far as domestic economic matters were concerned.

IMO, all three of the turn-of-the-century free-market-neolibral model, the hypothetical Trump(ish) nationalist model, and the revised technocratic-neoliberal schemes, are fatally flawed. Despite the political rhetoric of US Republicans, there's no real prospect of an even mildly leftist (i.e. inclusive, egalitarian, and internationalist) alternative anytime soon in the US. I suspect the same is true in most neoliberal countries.

So Biden comes into this moment, with a clear mandate -- from the sponsors -- to reinforce the status quo. He brings Yellen into this moment in a the crucial position.

Lex , Nov 24 2020 19:08 utc | 38

Of course Biden's foreign policy team and the policy itself will be shit. As it was for the trump admin, the Obama admin, the Bush II admin, the Clinton admin, the Bush I admin, the fucking Reagan admin, then there's carter and Nixon. Look, I can take this back all the way to Washington. Biden's not special. It's always been an empire; trump did nothing to dismantle it; but now it's a failing empire.

And don't try the "Trump's instincts were dashed by the deep state". Dude constantly bragged about how much he spent on the DoD. If he could find a way to personally profit from the empire he would have.

karlof1 , Nov 24 2020 22:25 utc | 62

Here's an interview given by acclaimed Canadian International Law lawyer Christopher Black who is rather pessimistic given the team members and its chief. While I disagree on a few minor points, I agree with his overall assessment:

"The Americans proclaim they are all for competition but we know that means only when it puts them in the superior position; and to maintain their position they are willing to threaten and attack the world if necessary; and there are a myriad of domestic problems in the USA which they have no way out of, since the two ruling parties have no solutions to offer, except war."

I would disagree with war being a solution; rather, it exacerbates many already existing problems. However, war would make revolution more likely. Since it's highly unlikely the Empire could make the "Moderate Rebel" ploy work again, to escalate in Syraq as Biden's nominee wants would require a direct assault by Imperial Stormtroopers, and that would be a huge domestic error during the continuing pandemic.

oldhippie , Nov 24 2020 23:32 utc | 65

Mark2 @ 63

Your buddy was born in Havana and grew up in Miami's Cuban hole. And he's Jewish. I'll eat my hat if the family was not personal friends/business partners with Meyer Lansky and Myer Schine. Wonderful, Homeland Security has been given to the Mafia.

Expect more of same from Biden.

vk , Nov 24 2020 23:42 utc | 67

It reminds me very much Khrushchev's government. He went in guns blazing, accusing Stalin as outdated and promising a whole new paradigm (economic and geopolitical). He failed miserably in both. He was toppled in 1964 and substituted by a figure of the "establishment", Leonid Brezhnev, who basically restored what existed during Stalin and effectively gave up making the USSR better. The first proletarian State would disintegrate soon.

Not saying Yellen-Biden will be the American Brezhnev - they are much lesser historical figures than he was - but pay attention to the pattern.

Trisha , Nov 25 2020 0:00 utc | 68

Should come as no surprise that where it matters, Biden is Trump wearing a smiley face, just like Pelosi is Trump in a wig. Actually, considering actual body count and misery inflicted on vast populations, Biden's record is WORSE than Trump.

[Nov 25, 2020] Trump Blasts World's Most Overrated General After Mattis Urges Biden To Eliminate America First Policy

Nov 25, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

_arrow

leosden , 4 hours ago

And that coming from Trump who put APARTHEID Israel first

and did more for that racist country than he did for America.

whether underground , 5 hours ago

Exactly. And biden will for sure, 110% COMPLETELY END any idea of putting Americans first in anything other than shackles. F all of them.

Mr Poopra , 5 hours ago

People still think Biden will actually assume office? If Trump won't win in the courts, he's going to burn the entire thing down on his way out. Full Declass coming. Swamp creatures tremble!

SurfingUSA , 4 hours ago

Problem is the agencies are openly defying him on declass (and have been). Would have to send in U.S. marshals.

CJgipper , 4 hours ago

trump will do nothing. he should have already done the declassifications.

FingerInTheDarkness , 4 hours ago

Dropping the Biden laptop after most of the mail in ballots were already in the mail is all you really need to know. Biden was installed. The only question is what to do next? He will come for the guns and he will force the poison shots. Options are few.

cankles' server , 4 hours ago

He's already tried the declass route regarding Russia hoax and was thwarted by swamp creatures.

"Means and methods" will be the mantra for obstructionists.

FingerInTheDarkness , 4 hours ago

Just like he declassified the JFK stuff, err wait a damn minute. We been had!!!

eatapeach , 3 hours ago

Even if it's released, you can bet Israel's complicity in the murder/coup will be omitted, despite the fact that Jack Ruby (Rubinstein) was a Mossad asset and AIPAC got the massive benefit of NOT having to register as a foreign agent.

Dragonlord , 5 hours ago

I am more amazed that the left love wars more than Trump and thats after the former accused the latter of starting WWIII

Herodotus , 5 hours ago

They made sure that Goldwater was defeated so that they could build up the war there and insure that 58,000 Americans would die in Vietnam.

Fizzy Head , 4 hours ago

...Once they had JFK out of their way.

BarnacleBill , 4 hours ago

For as long as Americans honour the 58,000 invaders more than the 2,000,000 victims of the invaders' activities, there is no hope for the USA. And no respect, either. Sorry! I wrote this post (link below, "The war against women") eight years ago, and it's still sadly relevant.

https://barlowscayman.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-war-against-women.html

Everybodys All American , 5 hours ago

You really have to wonder about an American generals loyalties when they do not like or recommend an America first policy. Who exactly is the guy Gen. Mattis working for?

Rich Stoehner , 5 hours ago

Mattis is working for a globalized cartel of ho-mos.

Dapper Dan , 4 hours ago

Who is Mattis working for?

He did work for Elizabeth Homes briefly.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2019/8/31/20839873/james-mattis-book-theranos

it's about the money. Always has been always will be

'Holmes'

highwaytoserfdom , 4 hours ago

What you talking about Elizbeth..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stdi-1tIUhM

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/07/02/theranos-founder-elizabeth-holmes-fraud-case-mattis-kissinger-murdoch-are-possible-witnesses/

frontierland , 3 hours ago

"America First" was a con. What we got is a 'J3w5 First' foreign & domestic policy.

Biden's isn't hiding his ''J3w5 First' foreign & domestic policy.

The only difference between the two are stylistic, the goal is the same.

Haboob , 3 hours ago

The difference is how they operate.

Trump wants peace through business and Mattis wants peace through war?

frontierland , 3 hours ago

Peace has nothing to do with it.

Trump conned White America with his pro-White dog-whistles, a tactic developed by his mentor Arthur Finkelstein. The establishment doesn't like this approach as it woke the sleeping giant, White America, while delivering no pro-White policies... Which made White America self-aware, with expectations raised, awake and pissed off with Trumps failure to deliver.

The "Left" arm of the neoLiberal establishment prefers an honest, open anti-White approach... The long, slow-boil of White America.

Seal Team 6 , 4 hours ago

Mattis also threw in a dig at Trump's coronavirus response, noting "The pandemic should serve as a reminder of what grief ensues when we wait for problems to come to us."

Really now? It seems to me that the US did exactly what Mattis says by the Obama administration helping to fund the level 5 Wuhan lab, along with the French and the neo-marxist government in Canada.

Does anyone in the MSM ever ask any of these turds questions that are actually relevant, or do they give them an open mike to fabricate history however they like?

Max21c , 4 hours ago

Mattis is a product of the Deep State and an agent of the Deep State. He's been brainwashed by the Deep State and his loyalties are to the Pentagon Gestapo and CIA and Deep State. His loyalties are not to the American nation, American citizenry, Constitution and Bill of Rights. He works for and sides with the secret police and state security apparatus.

d_7878 , 4 hours ago

Ron Paul: "Trump Does The Bidding of the Deep State".

https://www.nationalmemo.com/ron-paul-trump-does-the-bidding-of-deep-state

Record Wealth Disparity and trump gives the rich 100% expensing for their planes because they need moar.

[Nov 24, 2020] Will the Biden Team Be Warmongers or Peacemakers- - CounterPunch.org

Notable quotes:
"... U.S. cabinet positions are positions of power that can drastically affect the lives of millions of Americans and billions of our neighbors overseas. If Biden is surrounded by people who, against all the evidence of past decades, still believe in the illegal threat and use of military force as key foundations of American foreign policy, then the international cooperation the whole world so desperately needs will be undermined by four more years of war, hostility and international tensions, and our most serious problems will remain unresolved. ..."
"... Medea Benjamin is ..."
"... of CODEPINK for Peace, and author of several books, including Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the US-Saudi Connection . Nicolas J. S. Davies is a writer for Consortium News and a researcher with CODEPINK, and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq ..."
Nov 24, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

NOVEMBER 11, 2020 Will the Biden Team Be Warmongers or Peacemakers? BY MEDEA BENJAMIN - NICOLAS J. S. DAVIES Facebook Twitter Reddit Email

Photograph Source: Steve Jurvetson – CC BY 2.0

Congratulations to Joe Biden on his election as America's next president! People all over this pandemic-infested, war-torn and poverty-stricken world were shocked by the brutality and racism of the Trump administration, and are anxiously wondering whether Biden's presidency will open the door to the kind of international cooperation that we need to confront the serious problems facing humanity in this century.

For progressives everywhere, the knowledge that "another world is possible" has sustained us through decades of greed, extreme inequality and war, as U.S.-led neoliberalism has repackaged and force-fed 19th century laissez-faire capitalism to the people of the 21st century. The Trump experience has revealed, in stark relief, where these policies can lead.

Joe Biden has certainly paid his dues to and reaped rewards from the same corrupt political and economic system as Trump, as the latter delightedly trumpeted in every stump speech. But Biden must understand that the young voters who turned out in unprecedented numbers to put him in the White House have lived their whole lives under this neoliberal system, and did not vote for "more of the same." Nor do they naively think that deeply-rooted problems of American society like racism, militarism and corrupt corporate politics began with Trump.

During his election campaign, Biden has relied on foreign policy advisors from past administrations, particularly the Obama administration, and seems to be considering some of them for top cabinet posts. For the most part, they are members of the "Washington blob" who represent a dangerous continuity with past policies rooted in militarism and other abuses of power.

These include interventions in Libya and Syria, support for the Saudi war in Yemen, drone warfare, indefinite detention without trial at Guantanamo, prosecutions of whistleblowers and whitewashing torture. Some of these people have also cashed in on their government contacts to make hefty salaries in consulting firms and other private sector ventures that feed off government contracts.

– As former Deputy Secretary of State and Deputy National Security Advisor to Obama, Tony Blinken played a leading role in all Obama's aggressive policies. Then he co-founded WestExec Advisors to profit from negotiating contracts between corporations and the Pentagon, including one for Google to develop Artificial Intelligence technology for drone targeting, which was only stopped by a rebellion among outraged Google employees.

– Since the Clinton administration, Michele Flournoy has been a principal architect of the U.S.'s illegal, imperialist doctrine of global war and military occupation. As Obama's Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, she helped to engineer his escalation of the war in Afghanistan and interventions in Libya and Syria. Between jobs at the Pentagon, she has worked the infamous revolving door to consult for firms seeking Pentagon contracts, to co-found a military-industrial think tank called the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), and now to join Tony Blinken at WestExec Advisors.

– Nicholas Burns was U.S. Ambassador to NATO during the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Since 2008, he has worked for former Defense Secretary William Cohen's lobbying firm The Cohen Group, which is a major global lobbyist for the U.S. arms industry. Burns is a hawk on Russia and China and has condemned NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden as a "traitor."

– As a legal adviser to Obama and the State Department and then as Deputy CIA Director and Deputy National Security Advisor, Avril Haines provided legal cover and worked closely with Obama and CIA Director John Brennan on Obama's tenfold expansion of drone killings.

– Samantha Power served under Obama as UN Ambassador and Human Rights Director at the National Security Council. She supported U.S. interventions in Libya and Syria, as well as the Saudi-led war on Yemen . And despite her human rights portfolio, she never spoke out against Israeli attacks on Gaza that happened under her tenure or Obama's dramatic use of drones that left hundreds of civilians dead.

– Former Hillary Clinton aide Jake Sullivan played a leading role in unleashing U.S. covert and proxy wars in Libya and Syria .

– As UN Ambassador in Obama's first term, Susan Rice obtained UN cover for his disastrous intervention in Libya. As National Security Advisor in Obama's second term, Rice also defended Israel's savage bombardment of Gaza in 2014, bragged about the U.S. "crippling sanctions" on Iran and North Korea, and supported an aggressive stance toward Russia and China.

A foreign policy team led by such individuals will only perpetuate the endless wars, Pentagon overreach and CIA-misled chaos that we -- and the world -- have endured for the past two decades of the War on Terror.

Making diplomacy "the premier tool of our global engagement."

Biden will take office amid some of the greatest challenges the human race has ever faced -- from extreme inequality, debt and poverty caused by neoliberalism , to intractable wars and the existential danger of nuclear war, to the climate crisis, mass extinction and the Covid-19 pandemic.

These problems won't be solved by the same people, and the same mindsets, that got us into these predicaments. When it comes to foreign policy, there is a desperate need for personnel and policies rooted in an understanding that the greatest dangers we face are problems that affect the whole world, and that they can only be solved by genuine international collaboration, not by conflict or coercion.

During the campaign, Joe Biden's website declared, "As president, Biden will elevate diplomacy as the premier tool of our global engagement. He will rebuild a modern, agile U.S. Department of State -- investing in and re-empowering the finest diplomatic corps in the world and leveraging the full talent and richness of America's diversity."

This implies that Biden's foreign policy must be managed primarily by the State Department, not the Pentagon. The Cold War and American post-Cold War triumphalism led to a reversal of these roles, with the Pentagon and CIA taking the lead and the State Department trailing behind them (with only 5% of their budget), trying to clean up the mess and restore a veneer of order to countries destroyed by American bombs or destabilized by U.S. sanctions , coups and death squads .

In the Trump era, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reduced the State Department to little more than a sales team for the military-industrial complex to ink lucrative arms deals with India, Taiwan , Saudi Arabia, the UAE and countries around the world.

What we need is a foreign policy led by a State Department that resolves differences with our neighbors through diplomacy and negotiations, as international law in fact requires , and a Department of Defense that defends the United States and deters international aggression against us, instead of threatening and committing aggression against our neighbors around the world.

As the saying goes, "personnel is policy," so whomever Biden picks for top foreign policy posts will be key in shaping its direction. While our personal preferences would be to put top foreign policy positions in the hands of people who have spent their lives actively pursuing peace and opposing U.S. military aggression, that's just not in the cards with this middle-of-the-road Biden administration.

But there are appointments Biden could make to give his foreign policy the emphasis on diplomacy and negotiation that he says he wants. These are American diplomats who have successfully negotiated important international agreements, warned U.S. leaders of the dangers of aggressive militarism and developed valuable expertise in critical areas like arms control.

William Burns was Deputy Secretary of State under Obama, the # 2 position at the State Department, and he is now the director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. As Under Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs in 2002, Burns gave Secretary of State Powell a prescient and detailed but unheeded warning that the invasion of Iraq could "unravel" and create a "perfect storm" for American interests. Burns also served as U.S. Ambassador to Jordan and then Russia.

Wendy Sherman was Obama's Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, the # 4 position at the State Department, and was briefly Acting Deputy Secretary of State after Burns retired. Sherman was the lead negotiator for both the1994 Framework Agreement with North Korea and the negotiations with Iran that led to the Iran nuclear agreement in 2015. This is surely the kind of experience Biden needs in senior positions if he is serious about reinvigorating American diplomacy.

Tom Countryman is currently the Chair of the Arms Control Association . In the Obama administration, Countryman served as Undersecretary of State for International Security Affairs, Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs. He also served at U.S. embassies in Belgrade, Cairo, Rome and Athens, and as foreign policy advisor to the Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps. Countryman's expertise could be critical in reducing or even removing the danger of nuclear war. It would also please the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, since Tom supported Senator Bernie Sanders for president.

In addition to these professional diplomats, there are also Members of Congress who have expertise in foreign policy and could play important roles in a Biden foreign policy team. One is Representative Ro Khanna , who has been a champion of ending U.S. support for the war in Yemen, resolving the conflict with North Korea and reclaiming Congress's constitutional authority over the use of military force.

Another is Representative Karen Bass , who is the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and also of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Human Rights, and International Organizations .

If the Republicans hold their majority in the Senate, it will be harder to get appointments confirmed than if the Democrats win the two Georgia seats that are headed for run-offs , or than if they had run more progressive campaigns in Iowa, Maine or North Carolina and won at least one of those seats. But this will be a long two years if we let Joe Biden take cover behind Mitch McConnell on critical appointments, policies and legislation. Biden's initial cabinet appointments will be an early test of whether Biden will be the consummate insider or whether he is willing to fight for real solutions to our country's most serious problems.

Conclusion

U.S. cabinet positions are positions of power that can drastically affect the lives of millions of Americans and billions of our neighbors overseas. If Biden is surrounded by people who, against all the evidence of past decades, still believe in the illegal threat and use of military force as key foundations of American foreign policy, then the international cooperation the whole world so desperately needs will be undermined by four more years of war, hostility and international tensions, and our most serious problems will remain unresolved.

That's why we must vigorously advocate for a team that would put an end to the normalization of war and make diplomatic engagement in the pursuit of international peace and cooperation our number one foreign policy priority.

Whomever President-elect Biden chooses to be part of his foreign policy team, he -- and they -- will be pushed by people beyond the White House fence who are calling for demilitarization, including cuts in military spending, and for reinvestment in our country's peaceful economic development.

It will be our job to hold President Biden and his team accountable whenever they fail to turn the page on war and militarism, and to keep pushing them to build friendly relations with all our neighbors on this small planet that we share.

Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and author of several books, including Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the US-Saudi Connection . Nicolas J. S. Davies is a writer for Consortium News and a researcher with CODEPINK, and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq

[Nov 24, 2020] Grading candidates for Biden's foreign policy team- William Burns -- Nonzero

Nov 24, 2020 | nonzero.org

By Robert Wright and Connor Echols , Nov 22 2020

Background: Burns, a career diplomat who has served as ambassador to Russia and as deputy secretary of state, gets particularly high marks for cognitive empathy -- understanding the perspectives and motivations of international actors.

For our grading criteria, click here .

Military restraint (B)

Few if any contenders for foreign policy positions in the Biden administration surpass Burns when it comes to appreciating one tenet of progressive realism: military interventions have a way of leading to bad things. In a ten-page memo Burns wrote to Secretary of State Colin Powell, then his boss, during the runup to the Iraq War, he laid out a cornucopia of possible unintended consequences, including some that became all too real. (Like: Iran feels threatened and acts accordingly.)

Even highly surgical uses of violence, Burns recognizes, can have blowback. Last year he wrote that, during the Obama administration, as "drone strikes and special operations grew exponentially," they were "often highly successful in narrow military terms" but at the cost of "complicating political relationships and inadvertently causing civilian casualties and fueling terrorist recruitment."

So it's not surprising that Burns has often pushed for non-military solutions to foreign policy problems. Still, he has supported dubious interventions -- such as America's joining allies in arming Syrian rebels, a policy hatched while Burns was deputy secretary of state in the Obama administration.

In retrospect, it's not shocking that this policy only succeeded in amplifying the killing and chaos, given the conflicting agendas of our allies and the divergent aims of the various rebel groups -- not to mention the aforementioned inherent unpredictability of military action. Yet, even with years of hindsight, Burns confined his criticism of this proxy intervention to matters of timing and execution. In his 2019 book The Back Channel , he said we should have given more aid to the rebels earlier. But Burns does, at least, get credit for considering Obama's public demand for regime change ("Assad must go") unwise, and for having initially hoped for more open-ended negotiations than that demand permitted.

Cognitive empathy (A)

Burns is adept at seeing the perspectives of international actors, as demonstrated in particular by his views on Russia. He has a history of dealing effectively with the country, and he takes Moscow's interests seriously. Unlike many in the foreign policy establishment, Burns doubts the wisdom of NATO expansion -- including its early phases but especially its later ones. When the US "pushed open the door for formal NATO membership for Ukraine and Georgia," he has said , "I think that fed Putin's narrative that the United States was out to keep Russia down, to undermine Russia and what he saw to be its entitlement, its sphere of influence."

Burns believes that, though Putin clearly sees the US as an adversary, he doesn't see the US-Russia relationship in purely zero-sum terms; Putin is capable of seeing "those few areas where we might be able to work together. He is capable of juggling apparent contradictions."

Burns is very aware -- as many US officials over the years have not been -- that hectoring foreign countries about how they should behave can be counterproductive. "I've always felt we get a lot further in the world with the power of our example than we do with the power of our preaching," he said in a New Yorker interview. "Americans can sometimes... be awfully patronizing overseas."

Respect for international law (B)

Burns is generally a strong advocate of international law. And in the course of his career he has often had occasion to invoke it -- as when, in 2014, he said disputes over islands in the South China Sea should be resolved via adjudicatory mechanisms outlined in the Law of the Sea Convention. (Had he not been speaking for the US government, he might have added that, regrettably, America itself has not ratified that convention.)

Unfortunately, Burns seems to have adopted the habit, widespread in the foreign policy establishment, of being more fastidious in applying international law to adversaries than to the US. In The Back Channel he offers some practical criticisms of America's 2011 intervention in Libya, but he doesn't note that when the mission shifted from defending imperiled civilian populations to overthrowing the regime, it arguably violated the letter of the authorizing UN resolution and certainly violated its spirit. Similarly, his discussion in that book of Obama's arming of Syrian rebels evinces no concern about the fact that this intervention, according to common legal reckoning , violated the UN Charter.

Support for international governance (A)

Burns certainly supports international governance of a progressive sort -- agreements and institutions that address climate change and arms control, for example, and the inclusion of labor and environmental provisions in trade agreements. And he has been deeply involved in multilateral problem solving, such as the Iran nuclear deal.

But what sets Burns apart from your typical progressive supporter of international governance is his understanding of the need to expand it beyond these traditional areas. He recognizes, for example, that if work in artificial intelligence and genetic engineering proceeds without restraint in a context of intense international competition, bad things could happen. So he wants to "create workable international rules of the road" in these areas, and he wants the US State Department to "take the lead -- just as it did during the nuclear age -- building legal and normative frameworks."

Universal engagement (A-)

As a quintessential diplomat, Burns believes that the U.S. should be open to relations with any country willing to talk. He is especially emphatic about the importance of maintaining diplomatic and economic engagement with China; he criticizes those who "assume too much about the feasibility of decoupling and containment -- and about the inevitability of confrontation. Our tendency, as it was during the height of the Cold War, is to overhype the threat, over-prove our hawkish bona fides, over-militarize our approach, and reduce the political and diplomatic space required to manage great-power competition." And Burns recognizes one of the biggest payoffs of engagement with China: to "preserve space for cooperation on global challenges."

Burns eschews a Cold War not just with China but with authoritarian states more broadly. He is refreshingly skeptical of proposals -- fashionable in neoconservative and some liberal circles -- to form a "league" or "concert" of democracies that would fight "techno-authoritarianism."

Burns doesn't seem to have expressed the degree of skepticism about America's promiscuous use of economic sanctions that a progressive realist might like. But he gets points for at least recognizing the inconsistency of their application. "We focus our criticism on Maduro, in Venezuela, who richly deserves it, and then pull punches with Mohammed bin Salman, in Saudi Arabia," he said in a New Yorker interview.

Burns also recognizes that the foreign policy establishment's obsession with Iran is, well, obsessive. Tehran has "an outsized hold on our imagination," he says . Yes, he believes, Iran poses threats to American friends and interests, but those threats are manageable, in part because, contrary to a common American view, Iran is "not 10 feet tall."

Miscellaneous

(1) After leaving the government, Burns became president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. That's a highly and rightly respected position. But it should be noted -- since any good progressive realist wants to root out the influence of the military industrial complex -- that Carnegie has taken money from Northrup Grumman ( as well as from such foreign countries as Taiwan and the United Arab Emirates and from NATO).

(2) Burns deserves credit for seeing that the foreign policy establishment, confronted by Trump's jarringly disruptive policies, is in danger of mindlessly retreating to pre-Trump policies that in fact need sharp revision. Recounting (and embracing) the bipartisan opposition to Trump's abrupt withdrawal of military support for Kurds in Syria, he adds , "If all this episode engenders, however, is a bipartisan dip in the warm waters of self-righteous criticism, it will be a tragedy We have to come to grips with the deeper and more consequential betrayal of common sense -- the notion that the only antidote to Trump's fumbling attempts to disentangle the United States from the region is a retreat to the magical thinking that has animated so much of America's moment in the Middle East since the end of the Cold War." This magical thinking, he continues, involves "the persistent tendency to assume too much about our influence and too little about the obstacles in our path and the agency of other actors."

Overall grade: A-


Illustration by Nikita Petrov .

[Nov 24, 2020] 'Manipulative BULLS--T'- Glenn Greenwald defends calling NBC a CIA mouthpiece, mocks accusation of 'endangering journalists'

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Greenwald earlier this week said NBC "has always existed to disseminate US government, CIA and corporate propaganda." ..."
"... NBC also helped the CIA sell the Iraq War on its Meet the Press program, and sister network MSNBC was "ground zero for mindless CIA stenography of the most unhinged Russiagate conspiracy theories," he said. ..."
"... The C.I.A. owns anyone of any significance in the media. -William Colby. Former Director of the CIA. In 1974, the Rockefeller Commission was established to investigate shennanigans carried out by the Agency. President Ford fired William Colby and replaced him with George Herbert Walker Bush. Why? Because Gerald Ford thought that Colby was being too honest with the Commission about CIA wrong doings. ..."
"... Interestingly, Gerald Ford was often referred to as "The CIA's Best Friend in The Senate", which would explain his old appointment to the Warren Commission. It was Ford who ordered JFK's bullet wound in the back to be raised six inches up to his neck, thus allowing Arlen Specter to float his "Magic bullet Theory" ..."
"... As is not generally known, Bush I was lifetime CIA and became I believe the first CIA President. There is a little known picture of a young Bush standing outside the Texas Book Depository on the day of the assassination. ..."
"... The CIA controls the media in subtle ways. Blacklists for instance. I have experience after one of my buddies fell for the spiel of an agent provocateur. Never trust anyone, always assume they could be CIA and assess what damage they can do to you (and your associates) before you interact with them. Misleading them would be best. ..."
"... As shocking as it may sound, Glenn is stating the obvious. Even AFP and Reuters are CIA mouthpieces. Look up Operation Mockingbird. Look up "propaganda multiplier" by the Swiss policy research. ..."
"... Interesting that nobody even tried to deny it, they just come up with the same line they used to attack Wikileaks for telling the truth: exposing this might put out operatives at risk. ..."
"... Perilous Environments because the CIA is probably manipulating another of its regimes change, to very undemocratically put someone they control into office. Surely you remember Poroshenko? ..."
"... Operation Mockingbird was a secret CIA effort to influence and control the American media. The first report of the program came in 1979 in the biography of Katharine Graham, the owner of the Washington Post, written by Deborah Davis. Davis wrote that the program was established by Frank Wisner, the director of the Office of Policy Coordination, a covert operations unit created under the National Security Council. ..."
"... Reporters who work for the CIA are not spies, because the CIA is a lying agency, not a spying agency. If a terrorist accuses you of being a CIA agent, you can honestly reply that the CIA is the terrorist's friend. ..."
"... The CIA wants the world to believe that China, Russia and Iran are the leading state sponsors of terrorism, and that those seeking the overthrow of Syria's Bashar al-Assad are freedom fighters, not terrorists... ..."
Nov 22, 2020 | www.rt.com

Independent journalist Glenn Greenwald torched accusations that he endangered reporters by saying NBC News spouts CIA propaganda, saying he only spoke of a well-known fact, and the effort to shame him was "manipulative bulls**t."

"Profoundly sorry for endangering the lives of NBC executives and TV personalities by spilling the extremely well-kept secret of their close working relationship with the CIA," Greenwald tweeted sarcastically on Saturday. His message showed a picture of a headline about NBC's 2018 hiring of ex-CIA chief John Brennan as an NBC and MSNBC contributor.

Greenwald's retort came in reply to reporter Sulome Anderson, who accused him of endangering journalists who work in places where any CIA affiliation is "life-threatening." Greenwald earlier this week said NBC "has always existed to disseminate US government, CIA and corporate propaganda."

"This crosses a line," Anderson said. "Like some of his proteges, Glenn is endangering journalists working in perilous environments by telling his massive following that they are mouthpieces for US intelligence."

Greenwald said on Saturday that NBC has a "long-standing role" in spouting CIA propaganda, as evidenced by its hiring of Ken Dilanian, who was accused of sharing stories with the CIA press office prior to publication while working as a Los Angeles Times reporter. NBC also helped the CIA sell the Iraq War on its Meet the Press program, and sister network MSNBC was "ground zero for mindless CIA stenography of the most unhinged Russiagate conspiracy theories," he said.

"If you don't want to be known as a CIA outpost, then don't be one," Greenwald tweeted. He added that NBC hired "John Brennan, Ken Dilanian and every other operative puked up by the security state. People already know."

Anderson has written at least two opinion pieces on Lebanon for NBC in recent months. She has been critical of Hezbollah, designated a terrorist group by the US government, but also has interviewed some of its fighters.

Anderson, who said she is "morally opposed" to journalists working as intelligence agents, may have good reason for her sensitivity about alleged CIA ties. Her parents were both journalists who covered Lebanon's 15-year civil war, and she said her father was kidnapped by terrorists.

"They tortured him again and again for years, calling him CIA," she said Saturday on Twitter. "'I am not a spy,' he would scream. 'I am a reporter.' It never stopped them."

Anderson acknowledged journalists being used as intelligence-agency assets, but said such cases are rare. "Time and again, American hostages – journalists and otherwise – have been falsely called spies, tortured and killed," she said. "I have been in many situations where I've had to convince the very dangerous men I am with that I am not a spy. My saving grace has always been that I am not."

Greenwald came to international fame by breaking the Edward Snowden NSA whistleblower story in 2013. He later co-founded the Intercept but quit the outlet last month after saying editors there suppressed his coverage of Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden.

fezzie035fezzm 19 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 11:52 PM

The C.I.A. owns anyone of any significance in the media. -William Colby. Former Director of the CIA. In 1974, the Rockefeller Commission was established to investigate shennanigans carried out by the Agency. President Ford fired William Colby and replaced him with George Herbert Walker Bush. Why? Because Gerald Ford thought that Colby was being too honest with the Commission about CIA wrong doings.

Bush, as the new Director, stonewalled the hearings and put the lid on any information coming out, which would explain why CIA Headquarters in Langley was named after Bush. Colby is no longer among the living. Let's just say that he didn't die from "natural causes".

Interestingly, Gerald Ford was often referred to as "The CIA's Best Friend in The Senate", which would explain his old appointment to the Warren Commission. It was Ford who ordered JFK's bullet wound in the back to be raised six inches up to his neck, thus allowing Arlen Specter to float his "Magic bullet Theory"

JOHNCHUCKMAN fezzie035fezzm 1 hour ago 22 Nov, 2020 05:48 PM
Yes, Colby was an unusually frank man at times. He also told us about the ghastly Operation Phoenix in Vietnam, a CIA run assassination scheme of village leaders and prominent men. They killed 30 or 40 thousand people by sending in belly-crawling special forces guys to enter villages at night and cut throats.

As is not generally known, Bush I was lifetime CIA and became I believe the first CIA President. There is a little known picture of a young Bush standing outside the Texas Book Depository on the day of the assassination. You'll find it on my site Chuckman's Words in Comments on Wordpress. Its title to search is: A REMARKABLE DULL LITTLE PHOTOGRAPH OF GEORGE H W BUSH WITH EXPLOSIVE SUGGESTIONS. Sorry, but RT doesn't like links.

Of course, Colby himself may have been assassinated. He had a very odd boating accident.

Ally Hauptmann-Gurski 20 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 11:14 PM
The CIA controls the media in subtle ways. Blacklists for instance. I have experience after one of my buddies fell for the spiel of an agent provocateur. Never trust anyone, always assume they could be CIA and assess what damage they can do to you (and your associates) before you interact with them. Misleading them would be best.
Enorm 22 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:01 PM
NBC operatives don't have an opinion. They follow da money,. I feel sorry for folks glued to propaganda TV.
Oregon Observer Enorm 21 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:41 PM
WikiLeaks and other investigative outfits have looked at the conglomerates over the years and over half of them are CIA "assets"...
Chris Cottrell 22 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 08:25 PM
Are they spies? Probably not. Are they tools of the CIA even if unwittingly, yes.
Oregon Observer Chris Cottrell 21 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:43 PM
Most ARE spies in every sense of the term. They look for specific information that they pass onto their handler(s). It bears noting that the FBI and the 10,000 or so outfits that contract with them and NSA and DHS and the pentagon and the various state Fusion programs are as bad or worse and every stinking one if those outfits recruits reporters.
fakiho2 21 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:28 PM
As shocking as it may sound, Glenn is stating the obvious. Even AFP and Reuters are CIA mouthpieces. Look up Operation Mockingbird. Look up "propaganda multiplier" by the Swiss policy research.
shadow1369 fakiho2 6 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 12:30 PM
Interesting that nobody even tried to deny it, they just come up with the same line they used to attack Wikileaks for telling the truth: exposing this might put out operatives at risk. My response to that is good, time to have these roaches taken out.
Edward698 18 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 01:43 AM
You can bet on Glenn to tell you the truth unlike the main stream media which fed us with lots of non sense on Syria. Read his interview with "Democracy now": .... Glenn Greenwald on "Submissive" Media's Drumbeat for War and "Despicable" Anti-Muslim Scapegoating By Democracy Now! ....

GLENN GREENWALD: Well, first of all, that clip is unbelievable. It is literally one of the three most important military officials of the entire war on terror, General Flynn, who was the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. He's saying that the U.S. government knew that by creating a vacuum in Syria and then flooding that region with arms and money, that it was likely to result in the establishment of a caliphate by Islamic extremists in eastern Syria -- which is, of course, exactly what happened.

They knew that that was going to happen, and they proceeded to do it anyway. So when the U.S. government starts trying to point the finger at other people for helping ISIS, they really need to have a mirror put in front of them, because, by their own documents, as that extraordinary clip demonstrates, they bear huge responsibility for that happening, to say nothing of the fact that, as I said, their closest allies in the region actually fund it.

Debra Edward698 14 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 05:37 AM
The US was not only counting on their ISIS creation to destabilize Syria in the hope of an Assad exit but also to decimate the Hezbollah. I credit the Hezbollah for saving Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq, but they suffered heavy, heavy losses. "So when the U.S. government starts trying to point the finger at other people for helping ISIS, they really need to have a mirror put in front of them, because, by their own documents, as that extraordinary clip demonstrates, they bear huge responsibility for that happening, to say nothing of the fact that, as I said, their closest allies in the region actually fund it."
frankfalseflag 19 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 12:08 AM
** "Glenn is endangering journalists working in perilous environments by telling. . ." ** . . Perilous Environments because the CIA is probably manipulating another of its regimes change, to very undemocratically put someone they control into office. Surely you remember Poroshenko? ...
pogohere 21 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 10:16 PM
Operation Mockingbird was a secret CIA effort to influence and control the American media. The first report of the program came in 1979 in the biography of Katharine Graham, the owner of the Washington Post, written by Deborah Davis. Davis wrote that the program was established by Frank Wisner, the director of the Office of Policy Coordination, a covert operations unit created under the National Security Council.

According to Davis, Wisner recruited Philip Graham of the Washington Post to head the project within the media industry. Davis wrote that, "By the early 1950s, Wisner 'owned' respected members of The New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles."

Davis also writes that Allen Dulles convinced Cord Meyer, who later became Mockingbird's "principal operative," to join the CIA in 1951.

The Taliban Won the War 7 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 12:28 PM
It is true and it is an undisputed fact that all Western governments use Journalists, aid workers and so called human relief organisations as cover for espionage, undercover and dark operations. Not just that, they also use exchange teachers and students, they use priests and pastors. They use anything and anyone that can hid
Isiah Steele 8 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 11:45 AM
The Motion Picture Industry of Hollywood, too are CIA! Propagates: war and constant US Military dominated narratives.
Sergio Weigel 16 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 03:31 AM
I'm pretty sure that most journalists don't know, or don't wanna know, the dirty open secret that editorial lines of most outlets are indeed determined or influenced by the CIA. The trouble is their working conditions. There are far more journalists than job openings, and they already earn badly. In order to keep the job, they just play ball, and as humans are, they make themselves believe that what they were doing was just right. Cognitive dissonance, and the result is outrage and defensive anger when someone points out their hypocrisy. That is also why they avoid to even read alternative media, they don't have their noses pointed to it. In a way, we can pity them. Then again, why become a journalist these days?
shadow1369 Sergio Weigel 7 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 12:43 PM
I used to think maybe 'journalists' were simply misled, but the narrative on too many stories, from 9/11 to Iraq, from Syria to the ukraine, from the Skripals to Navalny, was so ludicrous that a five year old could see through the lies. Nope, they know full well that they are lying, and do so regardless. A great example was when some bbc l!cksp!ttle was interviewing a general about events in Syria. Somehow they got the wrong guy, or he had not been properly briefed, because his responses were factual and balanced. After trying to challenge him, the interviewer finally said 'Don't you realise this is an informatioon war'.
Debra 4 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 03:11 PM
This is another warning for people: Over the last two years Facebook has been advertising for viewers to join Facebook groups. Many political groups on Facebook are set up by CIA and FBI agents. Facebook is full of agents, and that is why the ones in Michigan were caught in their attempted coup against the Michigan governor...
Quick Draw 22 hours ago 21 Nov, 2020 09:46 PM
Just NBC?
imnotarobot22 16 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 03:05 AM
google 'Udo Ulfkotte' ex editor of the Frankfurter Allgemeine - he'll tell you about it.
Richard Burden 2 hours ago 22 Nov, 2020 05:07 PM
Reporters who work for the CIA are not spies, because the CIA is a lying agency, not a spying agency. If a terrorist accuses you of being a CIA agent, you can honestly reply that the CIA is the terrorist's friend.

The CIA wants the world to believe that China, Russia and Iran are the leading state sponsors of terrorism, and that those seeking the overthrow of Syria's Bashar al-Assad are freedom fighters, not terrorists...

[Nov 23, 2020] Neocon chickenhawks are back in power

Full spectrum dominance theorists are dusted off and put in key positions in new administration. Instead of punishment and jail terms Russiagaters got promotion.
Nov 23, 2020 | www.rt.com

Biden signals US return to full-on globalism and foreign meddling by picking interventionist Anthony Blinken as secretary of state

Joe Biden has named Anthony Blinken – an advocate for isolating Russia, cozying up to China and intervening in Syria – as secretary of state, cementing a foreign policy built on military forays and multi-national motivations.

Biden, the nominal president-elect, announced his selection of Blinken along with other members of his foreign-policy and national-security team, which is filled with such veteran Washington insiders as John Kerry, the new climate czar and formerly secretary of state in the Obama-Biden administration.

READ MORE: Biden supporters rush to defend reported Sec-of-State pick Antony Blinken, who 'got rich off corporate consulting'

Blinken, a long-time adviser to Biden and deputy secretary of state under President Barack Obama, has been hailed by fellow Democrats and globalists, such as retired General Barry McCaffrey, as an experienced bureaucrat with "global contacts and respect." Enrico Letta, dean of the Paris School of International Affairs, called Biden's choice the "right step to relaunch transatlantic ties."

He was even praised for a 2016 appearance on the Sesame Street children's television program, where he explained to the show's 'Grover' character the benefits of accepting refugees.

While some critics focused on how Blinken " got rich working for corporate clients " during President Donald Trump's term in office, the new foreign-affairs chief's neoconservative policy recommendations might be cause for greater concern. He advocated for the Iraq War and the bombings of such countries as Libya and Yemen.

ALSO ON RT.COM Michele Flournoy might be breaking a glass ceiling as Pentagon chief, but even feminists aren't buying

Blinken is still arguing for a resurgence in Washington's military intervention in Syria. He lamented in a May interview that the Obama-Biden administration hadn't done enough to prevent a "horrific situation" in Syria, and he faulted Trump for squandering what remaining leverage the US had on the Bashar Assad regime by pulling troops out of the country.

"Our leverage is vastly even less than it was, but I think we do have points of leverage to try to effectuate some more positive developments," Blinken said. For instance, US special forces in northeast Syria are located near Syrian oil fields. "The Syrian government would love to have dominion over those resources. We should not give that up for free."

Blinken also sees Biden strengthening NATO, isolating Russia politically and " confronting Mr. [President Vladimir] Putin for his aggressions."

ALSO ON RT.COM The return of the Obama 'adults' in a Joe Biden administration is likely to spell ruin for America

As for China, Blinken has said Washington needs to look for ways to cooperate with Beijing. Reinvesting in international alliances that were weakened by Trump will help the Biden administration deal with China "from a position of strength" as it pushes back against the Chinese Communist Party's human-rights abuses, he said.

[Nov 23, 2020] Administrations change but Full Spectrum Dominance Doctine and the desire to portect and emand global neoliberal empire controlled from Washinton is intact. It will eventually banrupt the country much like was the case with the British Empire

Highly recommended!
Neocons still dominate both the State Department and NSC. That's bad.
Nov 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Top Biden Advisors Flournoy & Blinken Promise More Secretive 'Permanent War' Policy - Zero Hedge

Authored by Dan Cohen via TheGrayZone.com,

Throughout his campaign, Joe Biden railed against Donald Trump's 'America First' foreign policy, claiming it weakened the United States and left the world in disarray. "Donald Trump's brand of America First has too often led to America alone," Biden proclaimed.

He pledged to reverse this decline and recover the damage Trump did to America's reputation. While Donald Trump called for making America Great Again, Biden seeks to Make the American Empire Great Again .

Joe Biden: "Tonight, the whole world is watching America. And I believe at our best, America is a beacon for the globe. We will lead not only by the example of our power, but by the power of our example."

Among the president-elect's pledges is to end the so-called forever wars – the decades-long imperial projects in Afghanistan and Iraq that began under the Bush administration.

"It's long past time we end the forever wars which have cost us untold blood and treasure," Biden has said.

Yet Biden – a fervent supporter of those wars – will delegate that duty to the most neoconservative elements of the Democratic Party and ideologues of permanent war .

Michele Flournoy and Tony Blinken sit atop Biden's thousands-strong foreign policy brain trust and have played central roles in every U.S. war dating back to the Bill Clinton administration.

During the Trump era, they've cashed in through WestExec Advisors – a corporate consulting firm that has become home for Obama administration officials awaiting a return to government.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

Flournoy is Biden's leading pick for Secretary of Defense and Blinken is expected to be the president's National Security Advisor.

Biden's foxes guard the henhouse

Since the 1990s, Flournoy and Blinken have steadily risen through the ranks of the military-industrial complex, shuffling back and forth between the Pentagon and hawkish think-tanks funded by the U.S. government, weapons companies, and oil giants.

Under Bill Clinton, Flournoy was the principal author of the 1996 Quadrinellial Defense Review, the document that outlined the U.S. military's doctrine of permanent war – what it called "full spectrum dominance."

Flournoy called for "unilateral use of military power" to ensure "uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources."

https://www.youtube.com/embed/ivFFZ95EQvY

This video report was originally published at Behind The Headlines . Support the independent journalism initiative here .

As Bush administration officials lied to the world about Saddam Hussein's supposed WMD's, Flournoy remarked that "In some cases, preemptive strikes against an adversary's [weapons of mass destruction] capabilities may be the best or only option we have to avert a catastrophic attack against the United States."

Tony Blinken was a top advisor to then-Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Joe Biden, who played a key role in shoring up support among the Democrat-controlled Senate for Bush's illegal invasion of Iraq.

During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Biden declared, "In my judgment, President Bush is right to be concerned about Saddam Hussein's relentless pursuit of weapons of mass destruction."

As Iraq was plunged into chaos and bloodshed, Flournoy was among the authors of a paper titled "Progressive Internationalism" that called for a "smarter and better" style of permanent war . The paper chastised the anti-war left and stated that "Democrats will maintain the world's most capable and technologically advanced military, and we will not flinch from using it to defend our interests anywhere in the world."

With Bush winning a second term, Flournoy advocated for more troop deployments from the sidelines.

In 2005, Flournoy signed onto a letter from the neoconservative think tank Project for a New American Century, asking Congress to "increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps (by) at least 25,000 troops each year over the next several years."

In 2007, she leveraged her Pentagon experience and contacts to found what would become one of the premier Washington think tanks advocating endless war across the globe: the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). CNAS is funded by the U.S. government, arms manufacturers, oil giants, Silicon Valley tech giants, billionaire-funded foundations, and big banks.

Flournoy joined the Obama administration and was appointed as under secretary of defense for policy, the position considered the "brains" of the Pentagon. She was keenly aware that the public was wary of more quagmires. In the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, she crafted a new concept of warfare that would expand the permanent war state while giving the appearance of a drawdown.

Flournoy wrote that "unmanned systems hold great promise" – a reference to the CIA's drone assassination program. This was the Obama-era military doctrine of hybrid war. It called for the U.S. to be able to simultaneously wage war on numerous fronts through secret warfare, clandestine weapons transfers to proxies, drone strikes, and cyber-attacks – all buttressed with propaganda campaigns targeting the American public through the internet and corporate news media.

Architects of America's Hybrid wars

Flournoy continued to champion the endless wars that began in the Bush-era and was a key architect of Obama's disastrous troop surge in Afghanistan. As U.S. soldiers returned in body bags and insurgent attacks and suicide bombings increased some 65% from 2009 and 2010, she deceived the Senate Armed Services Committee, claiming that the U.S. was beginning to turn the tide against the Taliban: "We are beginning to regain the initiative and the insurgency is beginning to lose momentum."

Even with her lie that the U.S. and Afghan government were starting to beat the Taliban back, Flournoy assured the senate that the U.S. would have to remain in Afghanistan long into the future: "We are not leaving any time soon even though the nature and the complexion of the commitment may change over time."

Ten years later – as the Afghan death toll passed 150,000 – Flournoy continued to argue against a U.S. withdrawal: "I would certainly not advocate a US or NATO departure short of a political settlement being in place."

That's the person Joe Biden has tasked with ending the forever war in Afghanistan. But in Biden's own words, he'll "bring the vast majority of our troops home from Afghanistan" implying some number of American troops will remain, and the forever war will be just that. Michele Flournoy explained that even if a political settlement were reached, the U.S. would maintain a presence.

Michele Flournoy: "If we are fortunate enough to see a political settlement reached, it doesn't mean that the US role or the international community is over. Afghanistan without outside investment is not a society that is going to survive and thrive. In no case are we going to be able to wash our hands of Afghanistan and walk away nor should we want to. This is something where we're going to have to continue to be engaged, just the form of engagement may change."

In 2011, the Obama-era doctrine of smart and sophisticated warfare was unveiled in the NATO regime-change war on Libya.

Moammar Gaddafi – the former adversary who sought warm relations with the U.S. and had given up his nuclear weapons program – was deposed and sodomized with a bayonet.

Flournoy, Hillary Clinton's State Department, and corporate media were in lockstep as they waged an elaborate propaganda campaign to deceive the U.S. public that Gadaffi's soldiers were on a Viagra-fueled rape and murder spree that demanded a U.S. intervention.

Fox News: "Susan Rice reportedly told a security council meeting that Libyan troops are being given viagra and are engaging in sexual violence."

MSNBC jumped on the propaganda bandwagon, claiming: "New reports emerge that the LIbyan dictator gave soldiers viagra-type pills to rape women who are opposed to the government."

So did CNN.

As the Libyan ambassador to the US alleged "raping, killing, mass graves," ICC Chief Prosecutor Manuel Ocampo claimed: "It's like a machete. Viagra is a tool of massive rapes."

All of this was based on a report from Al Jazeera – the media outlet owned by the Qatari monarchy that was arming extremist militias in Libya to overthrow the government.

Yet an investigation by the United Nations called the rape claims "hysteria." Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch found no credible evidence of even a single rape.

Even after Libya was descended into strife and the deception of Gadaffi's forces committing rape was debunked, Michele Flournoy stood by her support for the war: "I supported the intervention in Libya on humanitarian grounds. I think we were right to do it."

Tony Blinken, then Obama's deputy national security advisor, also pushed for regime change in Libya. He became Obama's point man on Syria, pushed to arm the so-called "moderate rebels" that fought alongside al-Qaeda and ISIS, and designed the red line strategy to trigger a full-on U.S. intervention. Syria, he told the public, wasn't anything like the other wars the U.S. had waging for more than a decade.

Tony Blinken: "We are doing this in a very different way than in the past. We're not sending in hundreds of thousands of American troops. We're not spending trillions of American dollars. We're being smart about this. This is a sustainable way to get at the terrorists and it's also a more effective way."

Blinken added: "This is not open-ended, this is not boots on the ground, this is not Iraq, it's not Afghanistan, it's not even Libya. The more people understand that, the more they'll understand the need for us to take this limited but effective action ."

Despite Blinken's promises that it would be a short affair, the war on Syria is now in its ninth year. An estimated half a million people have been killed as a result and the country is facing famine.

Largely thanks to the policy of using "wheat to apply pressure" – a recommendation of Flournoy and Blinken's CNAS think tank.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1141440589143126021&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Ftop-biden-advisors-flournoy-blinken-promise-more-secretive-permanent-war-policy&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

When the Trump administration launched airstrikes on Syria based on mere accusations of a chemical attack, Tony Blinken praised the bombing, claiming Assad had used the weapon of mass destruction sarin. Yet there was no evidence for this claim, something even then-secretary of Defense James Mattis admitted: "So I can not tell you that we had evidence even though we had a lot of media and social media indicators that either chlorine or sarin were used ."

While jihadist mercenaries armed with U..S-supplied weapons took over large swaths of Syria, Tony Blinken played a central role in a coup d'etat in Ukraine that saw a pro-Russia government overthrown in a U.S.-orchestrated color revolution with neo-fascist elements agitating on the ground.

At the time, he was ambivalent about sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, instead opting for economic pressure.

Tony Blinken: "We're working, as I said, to make sure that there's a cost exacted of Russia and indeed that it feels the pressure. That's what we're working on. And when it comes to military assistance, we're looking at it. The facts are these: Even if assistance were to go to Ukraine that would be very unlikely to change Russia's calculus or prevent an invasion."

Since then, fascist militias have been incorporated into Ukraine's armed forces. And Tony Blinken urged Trump to send them deadly weapons – something Obama had declined to do.

But Trump obliged.

The Third Offset

While the U.S. fueled wars in Syria and Ukraine, the Pentagon announced a major shift called the Third Offset strategy – a reference to the cold war era strategies the U.S. used to maintain its military supremacy over the Soviet Union.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

The Third Offset strategy shifted the focus from counterinsurgency and the war on terror to great power competition against China and Russia. It called for a technological revolution in warfighting capabilities, development of futuristic and autonomous weapons, swarms of undersea and airborne drones, hypersonic weapons, cyber warfare, machine-enhanced soldiers, and artificial intelligence making unimaginably complex battlefield decisions at speeds incomprehensible to the human mind. All of this would be predicated on the Pentagon deepening its relationship with Silicon Valley giants that it birthed decades before: Google and Facebook.

The author of the Third Offset, former undersecretary of defense Robert Work, is a partner of Flournoy and Blinken's at WestExec Advisors. And Flournoy has been a leading proponent of this dangerous new escalation .

In June, Flournoy published a lengthy commentary laying out her strategy called " Sharpening the U.S. Military's Edge: Critical Steps for the Next Administration ."

She warned that the United States is losing its military technological advantage and reversing that must be the Pentagon's priority. Without it, Flournoy warned that the U.S. might not be able to defeat China in Asia: "That technological investment is still very important for the United States to be able to offset what will be quantitative advantages and home theater advantages for a country like China if we ever had to deal with a conflict in Asia, in their backyard."

While Flournoy has called for ramping up U.S. military presence and exercises with allied forces in the region, she went so far as to call for the U.S. to increase its destructive capabilities so much that it could launch a blitzkrieg style-attack that would wipe out the entire Chinese navy and all civilian merchant ships in the South China Sea . Not only a blatant war crime but a direct attack on a nuclear power that would spell the third world war.

At the same time, Biden has announced he'll take an even more aggressive and confrontational stance against Russia , a position Flournoy shares: "We need to invest to ensure that we maintain the military edge that we will need in certain critical areas like cyber and electronic warfare and precision strike, to again underwrite deterrence, to make sure Vladimir Putin does not miscalculate and think that he can cross a border into Europe or cross a border and threaten us militarily."

As for ending the forever wars, Tony Blinken says not so fast: "Large scale, open-ended deployment of large standing US forces in conflict zones with no clear strategy should end and will end under his watch . But we also need to distinguish between, for example, these endless wars with the large scale open ended deployment of US forces with, for example, discreet, small-scale sustainable operations, maybe led by special forces, to support local actors In ending the endless wars I think we have to be careful to not paint with too broad a brush stroke."

The end of forever wars?

So Biden will end the forever wars, but not really end them. Secret wars that the public doesn't even know the U.S. is involved in – those are here to stay.

In fact, leaving teams of special forces in place throughout the Middle East is part and parcel of the Pentagon's shift away from counterinsurgency and towards great power competition.

The 2018 National Defense Strategy explains that, "Long-term strategic competitions with China and Russia are the principal priorities" and the U.S. will "consolidate gains in Iraq and Afghanistan while moving to a more resource-sustainable approach."

As for the catastrophic war on Yemen, Biden has said he'll end U.S. support; but in 2019, Michele Flournoy argued against ending arms sales to Saudi Arabia .

Biden pledged he will rejoin the Iran deal as a starting point for new negotiations. However, Trump's withdrawal from the deal discredited the Iranian reformists who seek engagement with the west and empowered the principlists who see the JCPOA as a deal with the devil.

In Latin America, Biden will revive the so-called anti-corruption campaigns that were used as a cover to oust the popular social democrat Brazilian president Lula da Silva.

His Venezuela policy appears little different from Trump's – sanctions and regime change.

In Central America, Biden has presided over a four billion dollar package to support corrupt right-wing governments and neoliberal privatization projects, fueling destabilization and sending vulnerable masses fleeing north to the United States.

Behind their rhetoric, Biden, Flournoy, and Blinken will seek nothing less than global supremacy , escalating a new and even more dangerous arms race that risks the destruction of humanity. That's what Joe Biden calls "decency" and "normalcy."

naughty.boy , 14 hours ago

deep state will bankrupt the USA with forever wars.

Distant_Star , 14 hours ago

Yes. As a bonus neither of these Deep State wretches has even seen a shot fired in anger. They are too "important" to be at risk.

[Nov 23, 2020] Biden to Name Russia Hoaxer, CNN Analyst Tony Blinken Secretary of State

Nov 23, 2020 | www.breitbart.com

Former Vice President Joe Biden is reportedly set to announce this week that Tony Blinken, who supported the idea of "Russia collusion," would be his Secretary of State.

Bloomberg News reported Sunday evening:

President-elect Joe Biden intends to name his longtime adviser Antony Blinken as secretary of State, according to three people familiar with the matter, setting out to assemble his cabinet even before Donald Trump concedes defeat.

In addition, Jake Sullivan, formerly one of Hillary Clinton's closest aides, is likely to be named Biden's national security adviser, according to two people familiar with the matter. An announcement is expected Tuesday, the people said.

Blinken, who served as deputy secretary of state and deputy national security advisor under President Barack Obama, has also been a New York Times opinion writer and a "global affairs analyst" for CNN. In that capacity, he supported the "Russia collusion" hoax.

As Breitbart News reported in 2017, Blinken told CNN: "The president's ongoing collusion with Russia's plans is really striking, intentional or not." He said that Russia had sown doubt about American elections and institutions.

(Subsequently, an investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller found no evidence of any collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.)

Blinken also apologized earlier this year to left-wing anti-Israel radical Linda Sarsour, regarded by many critics ( even on the left) as an antisemite, after the Biden campaign tried to distance itself from her views.

He is also married to Evan Ryan, a former aide to then-First Lady Hillary Clinton. Ryan worked for Clinton at a time when Clinton's chief of staff, Margaret Williams, acknowledged accepting a campaign donation from entrepreneur Johnny Chien Chuen Chung.

Chung said that the donation was meant to help Clinton pay for Christmas receptions for the Democratic National Committee at the White House, in exchange for "VIP treatment for a delegation of visiting Chinese businessmen," according to the Los Angeles Times .

Biden is expected to name several potential Cabinet nominees in the coming days.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). His newest e-book is The Trumpian Virtues: The Lessons and Legacy of Donald Trump's Presidency . His recent book, RED NOVEMBER , tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak .

[Nov 23, 2020] The Trump trap: Biden's own rhetoric has cornered him into carrying on Trump's foreign policy

Nov 23, 2020 | www.rt.com

Scott Ritter Scott Ritter

is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ' SCORPION KING : America's Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.' He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf's staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter 21 Nov, 2020 13:52 Joe Biden thinks he can save America and the world from four years of Donald Trump. Instead, Biden will find himself in a foreign policy trap where his tough guy rhetoric compels him to finish what Trump started.

If one listens to Joe Biden and his closest national security advisors, all it will take to undo four years of Trump-era foreign policy is a few dozen strokes of the pen. According to the plan, the presumptive president-elect will sign off on a series of executive orders which reverse the course charted by Trump, returning America back to the path of greatness derived from undisputed global leadership that had been the trademark of the Obama years, when Biden reigned as vice president and Barack's right-hand man.

Rejoining the Paris Climate Accord, the Iran nuclear agreement and the World Health Organization are all actions Biden can take as soon as he takes office. Reversing Trump's troop withdrawal from Afghanistan and halting the redeployment of US forces from Germany are also high on Biden's 'to do' list. However, simply reversing a decision made over the course of the past four years does not reset the clock; for example, the world has moved on regarding climate change, with nations like China taking the lead in promulgating plans for reaching a "carbon zero" posture by 2060. Biden claims he can do this by 2050, but American domestic political reality, shaped by an economy fine-tuned by Trump and inherently resistant to the kind of economic change that would need to occur to make the Biden climate change plan viable, may have something to say about that timetable.

The Iran deal

The Iran nuclear deal finds Biden trapped by his own hardline rhetoric, setting conditions that are as unrealistic as they are unobtainable (for instance, requiring Iran to renegotiate key aspects of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, as a pre-condition for the US rejoining that pact). Iran's foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, recognizing the bad position Biden's mouth has placed its owner in, has wisely noted that Iran can return to its JCPOA commitments simply by Biden signing an executive order cancelling the Trump sanctions. This is one executive order Biden likely will not sign, because it requires him to certify the JCPOA as being good as written, something he has already articulated against.

ALSO ON RT.COM Israel lovers Pompeo and Trump are burying Palestine as they know Joe Biden won't have the power to dig the nation up again Afghanistan withdrawal

One of the first decisions Biden will be compelled to make upon assuming the presidency is how to proceed on the issue of US troops in Afghanistan. If the Trump reductions are completed as planned by January 15 (a big 'if', given the proclivity of the US military to lie to Trump about actual troop deployments), Biden will be pressured by the Pentagon to immediately redeploy up to 5,000 troops in order to create the force structure the Pentagon believes necessary to ensure stability while Afghanistan transitions to peace. This, of course, would kill the peace plan the US has in place with the Taliban, setting the stage for even more 'forever war'.

Regime change and more war

Other regional issues jump out – the ongoing effort to oust Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela, and the ongoing Saudi-led war in Yemen, to name two. Biden's anti-Maduro rhetoric is every bit as strong as Trump's, meaning there is little chance of a policy re-direct on this front. Likewise, if Trump fulfils threats to name the Houthi rebels in Yemen as a terrorist organization, it will be difficult for Biden politically to reverse that decision, or else be doing the bidding of Iran. Yemen will become another example of a 'forever war' living up to its name.

Awkward in Europe

Another issue Biden will be called upon to deal with is the ongoing American redeployment of troops out of Germany. Trump has committed to sending thousands of these redeployed troops to Poland, a move Biden will have difficulty reversing. In the end, Biden will be pressured to not only halt the withdrawal of US forces from Germany, but also find fresh troops to replace those headed for Poland. But such a commitment must be measured in relation to the ongoing controversy over the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline connecting Russia with Europe. Trump has put in place sanctions designed to halt the pipeline from being completed; Biden is likewise opposed to the pipeline reaching fruition. Getting Germany to commit to taking in US troops while blatantly interfering with German economic sovereignty is a balancing act Biden may not be up to carrying out.

Arms control deadlock

Likewise, Biden has indicated that he would be inclined to sign an extension to the soon-to-expire New START Treaty. Russia has long insisted that future arms control agreements must consider missile defense issues. The Trump administration has just tested a missile interceptor integral to the Aegis Ashore anti-missile system deployed in Romania and Poland in an anti-intercontinental ballistic missile configuration. The likelihood of Russia agreeing to any new arms control measures without a commitment on the part of a Biden administration to reduce and/or eliminate European-based missile defense systems is zero. So, too, is are the odds of a Biden administration doing away with missile defense in Europe. The result is an expensive arms race at a time when the US can afford it least.

ALSO ON RT.COM US' successful ICBM intercept test brings us closer to a nuclear war and proves Moscow's concerns were well grounded No thaw in the new Cold War

Finally, Biden inherits a policy posture toward both Russia and China which is as hostile a relationship as has existed since the Cold War. Russia's force posture in Europe is such that NATO would need to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to be in a realistic position to take on the Russian military in any conventional ground war in Europe. Moreover, it is unlikely Europe will agree to either the formal endorsement of such an objective, or the economic commitment needed to underwrite it. Complicating matters further is that China and Russia have reacted to the aggressive policies of the US, which pre-dated the Trump era, by considering the possibility of a formal alliance against what they term "western hegemony." Such an alliance would complicate any effort on the part of a Biden administration to back up the president-elect's pusillanimous rhetoric with actual muscle, since any conflict in Europe would automatically trigger a Pacific response, and vice versa.

China's dominance

Regardless of anything else, perhaps the biggest challenge facing a Biden administration will be in dealing with the consequences of Trump's decision to withdraw from the Obama-era Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), an abortive free trade agreement designed to keep China out while promoting American economic leadership. China, together with 14 other Asia-Pacific nations, recently signed what amounts to the world's largest free trade agreement. The signatories to this agreement, known as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), include the 10 countries comprising the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), along with China, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, and Australia, and together account for around 30 percent of global GDP. The RCEP cements China's status as the dominant economic power in the Asia-Pacific regions, and represents a stunning reversal of fortune for the US, whose precipitous withdrawal from the TPP in 2017 paved the way for China's stunning diplomatic coup.

READ MORE Trump won, regardless of the election outcome because Trumpism is here to stay Trump won, regardless of the election outcome because Trumpism is here to stay

The collapse of the TPP, when combined with the economic crisis brought on by the Covid-19 pandemic, made the RCEP attractive to nations who looked to trade with China as the only viable means of rebuilding their stricken economies. The RCEP helps solidify the regional geopolitical objectives of the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative by opening the economies of the Asia-Pacific region to Chinese-funded development projects. The diplomatic victory of China in bringing the RCEP to fruition represents a stunning defeat for the US, which had been seeking regional support in its ongoing trade war with China. Moreover, given the linkage between economic and security issues, the fact that major regional allies such as Japan, South Korea, New Zealand and Australia have so decisively joined their economies to China's undermines ongoing US efforts to build a regional coalition designed to contain and eventually roll-back China's presence in the South China Sea. While President-elect Joe Biden has reached out to Japan and South Korea in an effort to reassure them of his administration's commitment to their security, a future Biden administration is ill-positioned to counter the economic influence China has locked itself into through the RCEP. From an economic perspective, the US 'pivot to Asia' has been effectively halted, with the Asia-Pacific nations now firmly in China's court.

From Europe, to South America, the Middle East, Southwest Asia, and on to the Pacific, President Joe Biden will be inheriting a world transformed by four years of Trump policies. While Biden has indicated that he is inclined to reverse many, if not all, of the Trump foreign policy "disasters" as soon as practical after assuming office, the reality is that he will find his hands tied by the combined impact of his own aggressive rhetoric, which in many instances paralleled the policies undertaken by Trump, or the fact that the geopolitical situation that exists today does not permit a return to the foreign policy of yore.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


[Nov 23, 2020] The Coronavirus Pandemic Has Killed America's Reputation for Competence

Mar 23, 2020 | foreignpolicy.com
Washington's reputation for expertise has been one of the greatest sources of its power. The coronavirus pandemic may end it for good.

... that's not the only damage the United States will suffer. Far from making "America great again," this epic policy failure will further tarnish the United States' reputation as a country that knows how to do things effectively.

For over a century, the United States' outsized influence around the world rested on three pillars. The first was the its awesome combination of economic and military strength. The United States had the world's largest and most sophisticated economy, the world's best universities and research centers, and a territory blessed with bountiful natural resources. These features eventually enabled the United States to create and maintain military forces that none of its rivals could match. Taken together, these combined assets gave the United States the loudest voice on the planet.

The second pillar was support from an array of allies. No country every agreed with everything Washington wanted to do, and some states opposed almost everything the United States sought or stood for, but many countries understood that they benefited from U.S. leadership and were usually willing to go along with it. Although the United States was almost always acting in its own self-interest, the fact that others had similar interests made it easier to persuade them to go along.

A third pillar, however, is broad confidence in U.S. competence. When other countries recognize the United States' strength, support its aims and believe U.S. officials know what they are doing, they are more likely to follow the United States' lead. If they doubt its power, its wisdom, or its ability to act effectively, U.S. global influence inevitably erodes. This reaction is entirely understandable: If the United States' leaders reveal themselves to be incompetent bunglers, why should foreign powers listen to their advice? Having a reputation for competence, in short, can be a critical force multiplier.

[Nov 22, 2020] Biden's transition team is filled with war profiteers, Beltway chickenhawks, and corporate consultants by KEVIN GOSZTOLA

Nov 14, 2020 | thegrayzone.com

An eye-popping array of corporate consultants, war profiteers, and national security hawks have been appointed by President-elect Joe Biden to agency review teams that will set the agenda for his administration. A substantial percentage of them worked in the United States government when Barack Obama was president.

The appointments should provide a rude awakening to anyone who believed a Biden administration could be pressured to move in a progressive direction, especially on foreign policy.

If the agency teams are any indication, Biden will be firmly insulated from any pressure to depart from the neoliberal status quo, which the former vice president has pledged to restore. Instead, he is likely to be pushed in an opposite direction, towards an interventionist foreign policy dictated by elite Beltway interests and consumed by Cold War fever.

[Nov 22, 2020] Gates Stands By Statement That Biden Has Been Wrong On Nearly Every Major Foreign Policy Question - Video - RealClearPolitics

Nov 22, 2020 | www.realclearpolitics.com

Gates Stands By Statement That Biden Has Been Wrong On Nearly Every Major Foreign Policy Question Posted By Tim Hains
On Date May 13, 2019

Gates Stands By Statement That Biden Has Been Wrong On Nearly Every Major Foreign Policy Question

https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.426.0_en.html#goog_451601550

Robert Gates, who served as defense secretary for the Obama administration, paused for a moment and said "I don't know" in an interview Sunday when asked if he thinks former VP Joe Biden would be a good president.

CBS's "Face The Nation" host Margaret Brennan asked Gates if he stood by a statement from his memoir that Biden has "been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades." Recommended

about:blank

https://c5x8i7c7.ssl.hwcdn.net/vplayer-parallel/20200902_2348/videojs/show.html?controls=1&loop=60&autoplay=0&tracker=e1abce3c-e73e-49fb-b4ea-8d734917d8cc&height=227&width=402&vurl=%2F%2Fa.jsrdn.com%2Fvideos%2Fdgv_rcp%2F20201121152807_5fb92b76e773e%2Fdgv_rcp_trending_articles_20201121152807_5fb92b76e773e_new.mp4&poster=%2F%2Fa.jsrdn.com%2Fvideos%2Fdgv_rcp%2F20201121152807_5fb92b76e773e%2Fdgv_rcp_trending_articles_20201121152807_5fb92b76e773e_new.jpg

me title=

MARGARET BRENNAN: I was rereading your memoir before we sat down to talk and you said in your memoir, Joe Biden is impossible not to like.

Quote: "He's a man of integrity, incapable of hiding what he really thinks, and one of those rare people you know you could turn to for help in a personal crisis. Still, I think he's been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades."

Would he be an effective commander-in-chief?

ROBERT GATES: I-- I don't know. I don't know. I-- I think I stand by that statement. He and I agreed on some key issues in the Obama administration. We disagreed significantly on Afghanistan and some other issues. I think that the vice president had some issues with the military. So how he would get along with the senior military, and what that relationship would be, I just-- I think, it-- it would depend on the personalities at the time.

MARGARET BRENNAN: He's a peer of yours. Does that mean you're older?

ROBERT GATES: Yes.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You think he's right for this moment?

ROBERT GATES: I think I'm pretty busy and pretty active but I think-- I think having a President who is somebody our age or older, in the case of Senator Sanders, is- I think it's problematic. I think that you don't have the kind of energy that I think is required to be President. I think-- I'm not sure you have the intellectual acuity that you might have had in your sixties. So, I mean it's just a personal view. For me, the thought of taking on those responsibilities at this point in my life would be pretty daunting.

Watch the full interview:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/aUWvITlpKd4



[Nov 22, 2020] The truth about the Dem patchy honchos

Nov 22, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

J W , Nov 21 2020 9:19 utc | 52

American libs are just as fundamentally imperialist as the right, and their obsession with IdenPol garbage is just a smokescreen to pretend that they aren't.

[Nov 22, 2020] Biden's Deep State -

Nov 22, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Biden's Deep State

by Tyler Durden Sat, 11/21/2020 - 17:00 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Steve Brown via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

Philosopher Hannah Arendt once wrote about the banality of evil , and there's never been a more banal bunch than the foreign policy and security state crew Barak Obama surrounded himself with for eight years beside the possible exception of Bush's own Neocons .

Now after three years screaming about "Russian collusion" it appears the Evil Empire is about to regain its lost ground, championing new wars and more interventionist expansionism with a much greater role for the US military in the world.

Let's name names.

Pentagon

For the defense chief post, the Washington Post has portrayed the banal face of Michele Flournoy as the pick to 'restore stability' to the Pentagon , an entirely false assertion. Recall that Fluornoy promotes unilateral global US military intervention, and advocated the destruction of Libya in 2011. By the military-industrial revolving door , Flournoy enabled many Corporate weaponry contracts amounting to tens of millions. Likewise Fluornoy is on the Booz-Hamilton board, where the swamp cannot get any deeper. As if this wretched example of an agent-provocateur for war and destruction were not bad enough, Biden is reportedly considering Lockheed-Martin banal kingpin Jeh Johnson for the DoD position, too.

Lockheed director Johnson was employed by Rob Reiner and Atlantic editor arch-Neocon David Frum to run the Committee to Investigate Russia which mysteriously blew up as soon as the Mueller Report was released. Jeh Johnson has continued to warn of "Russian interference" in the US presidential election until now. Biden's anointing as president-elect has ended that. As Homeland Security head, Johnson authorized cages for holding immigrant children. He also supported the assassination of General Suleimani, and has voiced support for US wars in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

State

From Libya to Syria, Yemen, Ukraine and beyond, the banality of evil is perhaps best personified by Susan Rice – apparently Biden's premiere pick for Secretary. Rice was an abject failure at the United Nations, but all seems forgiven, probably at the behest of Biden's donors. After her failure at the UN, Obama kicked Rice upstairs to be his National Security Advisor, a position that does not require Senate approval.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

An obvious war hawk in the mold of the Democrat's donor class, a Rice appointment could reinforce the liberal mantra that women can be just as good at interventionism as men, and ensure full re-establishment of the Neoliberal agenda in Washington. John Kerry has been flagged as a potential for State (again) too, but at age 77 and subsequent to the failure of the JCPOA Kerry is an unlikely pick.

Another potential pick among the banal Daughters of Darkness is Victoria Kagan-Nuland , architect of the 2014 debacle in Ukraine (among other things). Outed at State in an embarrassing act of what she called impressive statecraft and other embarrassing incidents, Nuland seems an unlikely choice. But Kagan-Nuland is as banal as banal can be, and Biden may somehow wish to reinforce his solidarity with the JTF and his donor class, on Israel.

National Security Advisor

Banality is certainly the mark of the beast here, in the form of Tony Blinken. Well in with Michele Flournoy (above) Blinken typifies the type of banality the Deep State engages in to promote its evil, with Blinken as successful as any other Deep State actor. A major hawk on Russia and war hawk in general, Blinken is an apologist for Israel . Blinken is a war hawk on Afghanistan and Syria too, and Blinken was directly involved in CIA operation Timber Sycamore . Oh, the banality.

Another model of banality is Leon CIA Panetta who so far claims that cruising the Monterey peninsula is more fun that being in Washington. But we know that's false and Panetta would be a logical pick. Besides being a hawk on everything, and laughing about the fact he has no idea how many wars Obama's America was fighting – because he lost count – Panetta is simply another sycophant for evil like Hannah Arendt portrayed in her study of Adolf Eichmann.

CIA

Banal of the banal is of course Mike Morell. This incredibly vacuous excuse for a human being has been hate-mongering for years. Beside his blatant pandering support for another banal and brutal warmonger – Hillary Clinton – Mike Morell is one Neoliberal who still maintains that Saddam Hussein actively aided and abetted al Qaeda with regard to the 911 attacks. But Morell simply and ultimately represents the banality of evil, just as Arendt depicted Adolf Eichmann, but in Morell's case succinctly summarized here by Ray McGovern .

United Nations

Outing the banality of the banal would be incomplete without mentioning Jen Psaki . Although a potential pick for White House Communications Director, why not promote an accomplished liar to a venue where accomplished lying really matters?

Conclusion

There is no indication that the United States as an entrenched warfare state will ever change its course until forced to. Mr Trump was incapable of enforcing that change. Sidelined by Russiagate psychosis , as a Beltway Neophyte and his own worst enemy at times, that sank Trump's agenda. The actions of Mr Trump now – to end the wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen -- should have been undertaken in earnest and without compromise years ago. Point being that Mr Trump's new appointments to the Pentagon – and let's hope CIA – will hopefully blunt the efficacy of Biden's bad actors going forward.

Regardless, characters the same or similar to the ones listed above will definitely infest Washington's infernal Beltway cesspool once again via Joe Biden make no mistake. And they will be meaner and nastier than ever before! Guaranteed.


Creative_Destruct , 2 hours ago

And the same old swamp slime (Morell, et al) waits eagerly to burst back in through the doors of power. New boss, same as the old(er) boss(es). Uuuuuuggh.

EndofTimes , 5 hours ago

Obama's 3rd Term. Swamp will grow like a tumor. These demons are shaking with excitement to get into office and fulfill the desires of the founders of the UN. Kill off America and establish a global government

truth or go home , 4 hours ago

Biden is 100% deep state puppet. He will say and do whatever they tell him to.

Dominion = Scytl = CIA = Deep State = Swamp

CIA threw the election. Trump team caught them.

Trump has already cut the CIA off at the knees. Getting ready to fill up Guantanamo again...

Giant war going on inside the gov right now - Biden enjoying the limelight before he is retired to his rocking chair.

CatInTheHat , 5 hours ago

NICE JOB Biden voters!!

You MORONS electing Obama 2.0 on STEROIDS is WHY we got a Trump in the first place

To Hell In A Handbasket , 4 hours ago

The USSA electorate are idiots, and divided idiots at that. You got Trump because the electorate was desperate, and you got Biden because the other half was desperate. That adds up to a desperate population. Your enemy is not voters from the other side of the Uniparty. Please get off the GOP vs DEMOCRAT horse$h1t.

Bay of Pigs , 3 hours ago

Quite an impressive list of Neoliberal globalist ****bags.

SabOObas , 3 hours ago

The establishment demonizes Trump for 4 years.

The sheeple voted to put the guy with 40 years of corruption under his belt in office, because the establishment said its good for you.

Jgault , 2 hours ago

It is always the small man, the inept man, the insecure man who has a need to demonstrate to the world his bravado with reckless and senseless gestures.

Biden and his brothel of advisors he surrounds himself with have perhaps the worst track record of international policy since Jimmy Carter, absolute proven failures and disasters in Ukraine, Syria, Lybia, and Egypt. This is the group that laid the intellectual groundwork for what would become the largest refugee crisis and humanitarian disaster in nearly 50 years.

Laughably, now the MSM is doing a complete 180 in their editorial view of troops in Afghanistan and Syria...what a shock!

Lacking foresight, insecure, lacking ethical standards and being given the ability to order troops, how could this possibly go wrong?

Trump was the first President in 30 years not to provoke any new millitary interventions, yet the world criticized him for his style. Let's see how long it takes for the world to start looking back to a more stable past.

ReadyForHillary , 3 hours ago

The Democrat party is the WAR party.

RumbleGuts , 4 hours ago

Another article that doesn't realize red and blue are the same team. Make no mistake, big baby bonespurs is in deep with the deep state. Think epstein. ;-)

Someone Else , 2 hours ago

Mike Morell, the most evil man to ever draw a breath, as CIA Director?

A Biden Presidency can never be allowed to happen.

flawse , 2 hours ago

There will not be a Biden presidency. There is obviously some other plan.

DebbieDowner , 3 hours ago

This author's last paragraph fails to acknowledge that the CIA and FBI has not obeyed Trump's (or any President's) orders in quite some time. Now is the time for someone to finally make a change and it took such a massive plan to expose them all to drain the swamp.


play_arrow 2
Little Johnny Jewel , 5 hours ago

Caitlin Johnstone covered this a week ago

swampy war mongerers

[Nov 20, 2020] Why Biden Will Keep the US-Imposed Cold War Rolling

Nov 20, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

Trump's Isolationism Masks Sinister Alliances

Was Trump an isolationist? Not really, though it's easy to see how he got this reputation, at first glance of his foreign policy.

He had an aggressive posture against Cuba, Iran, and Venezuela, with his illegal sanctions policy against these countries. He demonstrated total fealty to the Israeli project to annihilate Palestine. His "trade war" against China is sold as a way to rebuild the U.S. economy, but it is also about maintaining U.S. power; for what other purpose could instruments such as the Millennium Challenge Corporation and América Crece be used when they have been designed to advantage U.S. companies around the world?

Trump certainly attacked the Western military alliance system, trying to force NATO members to spend more on their military. But at the same time, Trump developed other military alliances: one of these, first developed by George W. Bush in 2007, is the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad, which draws Australia, India, and Japan into a military alliance against China. At the same time, Trump drove an agenda in Latin America -- through the Lima Group (established in 2017) -- to create an alliance against Venezuela.

Why Biden Is Not a Multilateralist

The liberal media portrays Biden as a multilateralist -- but the evidence for this speculation on the president-elect's foreign policy is problematic, to say the least.

Biden wants to rebuild the Western military alliance system that Trump has eroded. An indication of Biden's enthusiasm was an early phone call to French President Emmanuel Macron, to suggest that the United States is back as a player in Europe. This is not an advance toward a multilateral world order, but rather a return to the old alliance system where the United States (with its Canadian and European allies) attempts to dominate the world system by the use of its military, diplomatic, and economic power.

Further evidence offered for Biden's multilateralism is his commitment to return the United States to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (or the Iran deal) and the 2016 Paris Agreement.

Why does Biden wish to return the United States to its commitments toward Iran? Obama entered this deal because the Europeans were desperate for a source of energy after the United States and France destroyed access to Libyan oil in NATO's 2011 war and hurt access to Russian natural gas because of the Ukraine conflict in 2014. Obama agreed to the Iran deal because the Europeans were desperate, not to line up with the demands of international law; Biden will give the Europeans this gift, welcomed by the Iranian people, in order to cement the Western alliance system. Meanwhile, Biden continues to talk about suffocating the Iranian people.

On climate, during the negotiations that resulted in the Paris deal during Obama's presidency, the United States watered down the text of the agreement, preventing a truly multilateral deal that would have accepted Western responsibility for a century of fossil fuel use. Again, there is no major commitment to save the planet in Biden's pledge to return to the Paris Agreement; the main agenda is to strengthen and subordinate the European countries to the U.S.-led alliance system.

Primacy Remains the U.S. Goal

The U.S. State Department's Policy Planning Staff wrote in the early years of the Cold War, "To seek less than preponderant power would be to opt for defeat. Preponderant power must be the object of U.S. policy." This desire for primacy remains the explicit U.S. policy. Trump, in his four years as president, did not depart from this policy. Nor has Biden in his five decades in public office. They might differ in their tone or in their strategy, but not in the pursuit of this goal. Biden's adviser Charles Kupchan has written a new book called Isolationism , which offers a clichéd view of U.S. foreign policy, and then concludes, "[T]he United States must reclaim its exceptionalist mantle"; this means that the United States must continue to seek primacy.

This goal of primacy has made it difficult for the U.S. elites to come to terms with the fact of the slow attrition of U.S. power since the illegal war on Iraq (2003) and the credit crisis (2007). Failure to acknowledge that the world will no longer tolerate one single superpower has led the United States to impose a warlike situation against China. This begins with Obama's "pivot" to Asia in 2015, and intensifies with Trump's "trade war."

Cold War on China Looms

Since 2015, not one U.S. Silicon Valley CEO has made a robust statement for comity between the United States and China. Apple's Tim Cook held a meeting with Trump in August 2019 merely to allow Apple to better compete with Samsung, which was not hit by the U.S. tariffs. There was no broad statement about Trump's "trade war," with which Cook seemed quite pleased.

Silicon Valley firms know that on certain technological developments -- such as 5G, robotics, GPS, and soon microchips -- Chinese firms have clearly produced next-generation technologies, and in many cases have leapfrogged over their U.S. counterparts. Silicon Valley companies are quite happy for the U.S. government to put the entire weight of the state against Chinese firms. This includes using the security apparatus to accuse Huawei of being involved in Chinese government espionage. It is a curiosity that none of the Silicon Valley firms worry about privacy per se, because -- according to the Edward Snowden revelations -- the National Security Agency uses the PRISM program to collect data freely from Silicon Valley internet firms; but the U.S. uses the privacy and espionage arguments to try to hurt Chinese tech firms and protect the intellectual property and market advantages of Silicon Valley. Since this is the real cause of the trade war, there is every likelihood -- and Biden has said so -- that a Biden administration would continue to prosecute the trade war.

In 2013, the Chinese government set up the One Belt, One Road (now Belt and Road Initiative, or BRI) to extend its commercial links across the world. The Obama administration responded in 2015 with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a platform to break China's commercial ties along the Pacific Rim. Trump jettisoned the TPP and went for a more direct trade war. To counter the trillions of dollars that China will mobilize for the BRI, the United States used the Millennium Challenge Corporation (set up in 2004) and América Crece (2019) to funnel billions of dollars to countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. All of this is a desperate attempt to undermine China and maintain U.S. primacy.

The United States is not yet prepared to acknowledge the changed world situation. This will take time. Short of that, it is important for people to speak up against an escalation of hostilities.

This article was produced by Globetrotter.

Vijay Prashad's most recent book is No Free Left: The Futures of Indian Communism (New Delhi: LeftWord Books, 2015).

[Nov 19, 2020] Why the Military Establishment Backed Biden

Nov 19, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

By Chloe Rafferty Global Research, November 18, 2020 Red Flag Australia 10 November 2020 Region: USA Theme: Intelligence In-depth Report: U.S. Elections

https://apis.google.com/u/0/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&count=true&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca%2Fwhy-military-establishment-backed-biden%2F5729822&gsrc=3p&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en.Q1xYtA4iqvc.O%2Fam%3DwQE%2Fd%3D1%2Fct%3Dzgms%2Frs%3DAGLTcCPKs8DxrNe3iASWYEotlIa2jibGLg%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1605760168054&_gfid=I0_1605760168054&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca&pfname=&rpctoken=14519820 47 US

The US military establishment will breathe a sigh of relief at Joe Biden's victory in the presidential election. Nearly 800 former high-ranking military and security officials penned an open letter in support of the Democratic candidate during the campaign. A who's who of former generals, ambassadors, admirals and senior national security advisers -- from former Secretary of State Madeline Albright to four-star admiral and Bush-era Deputy Homeland Security Advisor Steve Abbot -- backed Biden as the best bet to revive US power. A month earlier, 70 national security officials who served in Republican administrations threw their weight behind Biden (the list soon grew to 130), arguing that, on foreign policy, Trump "has failed our country" .

Why was Biden the war criminals' candidate of choice? The foreign policy chaos and controversy of the Trump years were a symptom of a global superpower in relative decline, with no real strategy out of the quagmire.

The US empire is at a turning point. It is the world's undisputed superpower; its reach is global, both militarily and economically . The US has been the world's largest economy since 1871, and its military has close to 800 installations in 80 countries around the world. But today, it is facing a growing economic rival in China, and several lesser powers challenging its ability to call the shots in every corner of the globe, most notably Iran and Russia.

The War on Terror, launched by the administration of George W. Bush , resulted in the invasions of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. It killed more than a million people and cost upwards of US$2.4 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. For the people of the Middle East, it was a massacre. For US empire, it was a disaster. The destabilisation of Iraq led to the expansion of Iranian influence across the region, rather than the regime change in Tehran the Pentagon dreamed of. The intervention in Iraq was meant to secure US dominance. It instead exposed the weaknesses and limits of US power right at the moment when China's dramatic economic expansion was beginning.

Tensions between the US and China have been increasing for years. Since its accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001, China has built its economic power, its diplomatic power and its military power, while the US became bogged down in endless wars and suffered economic crisis and depression with the 2008 financial crisis.

Barack Obama's "pivot to Asia", with its plan to increase US naval forces in the Asia-Pacific, was a signal that the US ruling class wanted to contain and encircle China. Obama's then classified Air-Sea Battle doctrine was an effort to create an operational plan for a possible military confrontation. Leaked cables made public by WikiLeaks reveal that Australia was in lockstep with US imperial strategy. In conversation with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2009, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd confirmed Australia's willingness to "deploy force if everything goes wrong". But Obama's strategy was too little too late for containment. China became more aggressive in pressing claims in the South China Sea while beginning to close the enormous gap in military capabilities with the United States, engaging in the most rapid peacetime arms build-up in history.

Under Trump, these tensions further increased. Trump's confrontational rhetoric and trade war were a sharp break from the decades-long US strategy of integrating China into the international liberal order. Since the Republican administration of Richard Nixon -- who in 1972 became the first US president to visit Beijing -- the US ruling class thought it could ensure global supremacy by incorporating China into the world system. For a while, it appeared to work. China became the world's sweatshop and a key site of investment for US companies such as Apple and General Motors. But the strategy could be mutually enriching for only so long. Today, China is leveraging its meteoric growth to challenge the United States' leadership in the Asia-Pacific.

Obama's signature containment strategy was the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The TPP would have been the largest free trade deal in history, lowering tariffs and other non-tariff barriers to trade between eleven Pacific countries and the US. Its goal was to lock out China and further integrate Pacific countries with the US economy. Obama's Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said that the TPP was "as important as another aircraft carrier".

But just a few years later, Donald Trump tore up the TPP. The move was at odds with the consensus among the US economic and military elite, but the new president had his own ideas about how to contain China. Trump railed against the US trade deficit, accused Beijing of currency manipulation and, as Obama did, of stealing technology from US companies. In the 2019 State of the Union address he said, "We are now making it clear to China that after years of targeting our industries and stealing our intellectual property, the theft of American jobs and wealth has come to an end".

By August this year, Trump had slapped tariffs on $550 billion of Chinese goods, with a targeted campaign against tech giant Huawei, which had been tipped to overtake Apple in global phone sales. While Republican and Democratic politicians have backed a hardline approach to China, Trump's erratic protectionist approach to trade has alienated large sections of the capitalist class otherwise happy with domestic tax cuts and deregulation. A Bloomberg Economics report, released before the pandemic gripped the country, estimated that the escalating tariffs on China would cost the US economy $316 billion by the end of this year.

More worryingly for the US establishment, Trump adopted a dismissive attitude towards US allies, particularly the European Union. Trump prided himself on his ability to cut deals with other nations that favoured the US. He signalled that the multilateral approach to trade was over when he tore up the TPP, and followed that by applying tariffs on German cars, Canadian steel and French luxury goods. For much of the US elite, these moves have simply created a void that Beijing is attempting to fill with its own free trade deals and the $1 trillion Belt and Road initiative, which aims to incorporate more than 138 countries into trade routes and production chains centred on China.

The International Monetary Fund, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the UN and other international institutions project US dominance by drawing allied nations behind US leadership. Trump's presidency delegitimised or sidelined those institutions as he focused on an "America first" posture. The military establishment believes that this has threatened, rather than strengthened, US power -- although there is now an acknowledgement that those institutions failed to keep China in check, something a Biden presidency will also grapple with.

The war criminals hope that Biden will restore political legitimacy to the office by rehabilitating the liberal ideology that manufactures consent for American imperialism, pitching US aggression as necessary to "make the world safe for democracy" and defending the "rules-based liberal world order". Above all, the US establishment hopes that Biden will restore relationships with US allies and construct a coalition of nations to confront China, after a disastrous four years that called into question US global leadership. As the National Security Leaders for Biden open letter bemoaned: "Our allies no longer trust or respect us, and our enemies no longer fear us".

Biden has a proven record as a hawkish proponent of US empire. For decades, he served on the Senate foreign relations committee. He was an early proponent of the expansion of NATO to project US influence into the former eastern bloc after the fall of the USSR. He backed US intervention in the Balkan war, supported the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, voted for the war on Iraq in 2003 and, as vice president, backed the US intervention in Libya.

There is consensus within the US ruling class over the need to "get tough" with China. The military establishment expects Biden to turn the screws. On the campaign trail, he accused Trump of "getting played" by Chinese President Xi Jinping, whom he called a "thug". This is consistent with Democratic Party practice in the Congress, which is to criticise Trump for not being tough enough. Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, for example, accused Trump of "selling out" by cutting a trade deal with China. Schumer also spearheaded legislation to implement bans on Huawei when Trump appeared to back down.

Since his first days in Congress, Biden has also made a name for himself as a staunch supporter of the apartheid state of Israel. According to Israeli publication Haaretz , Biden is said to have a "real friendship" with Israel's far-right president, Benjamin Netanyahu. He was vice president when the US signed a $38 billion military aid deal with Netanyahu, which the State Department called the "single largest pledge of bilateral military assistance in US history". So while Trump pushed pro-Israeli rhetoric far to the right, abandoning any pretence of support for Palestinian statehood, Biden put his money where his mouth is when it came to propping up Israeli apartheid in Palestine.

On Afghanistan, Biden may prove to be to the right of Trump. As vice president, he supported an enduring US military presence in the country. Trump, by contrast, shocked the US military when he announced on Twitter that he wants all troops out by Christmas. In contrast, Biden in an interview with Stars and Stripes , a military newspaper, said he would maintain a troop presence in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Anti-imperialists need to judge Biden by his blood-soaked record in Congress and by the company he keeps. The bulk of the US military establishment has backed Biden precisely because they think his multilateral approach will restore credibility to US interventions. It's for this reason that Forbes magazine senior contributor Loren Thompson predicted last month: "A Biden presidency would be more likely to use US military forces overseas than President Trump has been".

Global capitalism is facing a profound crisis that is reshaping international relations and putting pressure on the fault lines of existing conflicts. Open imperialist rivalry will be a feature of the coming period, along with wars over regional disputes. There is no length to which the US ruling class won't go to safeguard its position as global superpower. And Joe Biden is the commander-in-chief. He is now the most dangerous man in the world.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Credits to the owner of the featured image

The original source of this article is Red Flag Australia Copyright © Chloe Rafferty , Red Flag Australia , 2020

[Nov 19, 2020] Biden's beholden to big money defense industries Sanders' brother

Nov 19, 2020 | www.rt.com

While probably "less aggressively nasty" than Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden is still a "conventional politician," but it won't be easy for him to dismiss his party's progressive wing, Larry Sanders told RT's Going Underground.

Brother to US Senator Bernie Sanders and the Green Party Spokesperson on Health and Social Care (England & Wales), Larry Sanders told RT's Going Underground host Afshin Rattansi that while Biden was not his "choice" for president, he prefers him over the current incumbent, President Donald Trump.

... ... ...

As a fixture of the establishment, Biden will follow the interests of corporate money and the military-industrial complex rather than anybody else's, Sanders noted.

"Biden is a conventional politician, he is beholden to big money, he is beholden to defense industries,

joe_go 13 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 07:03 AM

If no one in America went to vote the country would still look the way it looks today. The big money and military industry would run the country the way it runs it when people vote and think it matters.
Spirgily_Klump 20 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 12:46 AM
Do you know after Biden was out of the VP office the Chinese communist party had donated $70 million to one of his foundations at the University of Pennsylvania from which Joe drew a salary of over $900,000 per year? With his benefiting from the hundreds of millions his family took in from foreign powers and persons how can he gain the security clearance necessary for the presidency? The president needs the highest clearance. Even an applicant to the CIA get polygraphed.
shadow1369 Spirgily_Klump 9 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 11:00 AM
Just one of many skeletons jangling in Bidet's closet, they will be used by his controllers to keep him on track.
Iwanasay 19 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 01:22 AM
It doesn't matter who is in power, America's destiny has been chosen by other behind the scene faces
RedDragon 15 hours ago 19 Nov, 2020 05:27 AM
All USA presidents are beholden to big money entities, inclusive incoming Biden presidency. Trump is beholden to the Jewish money powers etc..

[Nov 18, 2020] Turns out war-enablers and war-profiteers are kosher so long as they're "woke" warmongers!

Nov 18, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

Max Boot's Revenge: Biden's 'A-Team' in Their Own Words

by Maj. Danny Sjursen, USA (ret.) Posted on November 17, 2020

Beware savvy, sophisticate liberals bearing gifts of evasive and ethically empty prose. Having, for my sins, spent a few weeks reading just about everything on offer from what unrepentant neocon zealot – and born-again Washington Post columnist – Max Boot dubbed Joe Biden's foreign policy "A-Team," I can vouch for the new transition team's vapidity and verisimilitude. Put another way, Boot's favored Biden Posse – the Iran nuke channeling , P4 (Tony Blinken, Avril Haines, Jake Sullivan, and Nicholas Burns) +1 (Michèle Flournoy) – have a rare gift for typing tons but saying little.

Worse still, what they do let slip drips with subtext of status quo-hawkishness – Biden's shadow team of five ground hogs spotting their shadows and predicting four more years of warfare winter. Moreover, these aren't just any Washington lowland creatures – they're being groomed , respectively, for national security adviser, director of national intelligence, a senior diplomatic role, possible secretary of state, and probable secretary of defense.

Only you're not supposed to look under the lid of Biden's national security transition team, because, well uh, Trump was worse, and there's, like, lots of ladies in the lineup. No really, "serious" people are saying that . With straight faces. And clear consciences. With no consequences. What a world!

This column's immediate genesis, though, was Glenn Greenwald 's vicious and vital responsive -evisceration of MSNBC contributor – and self-described "thriver on chaos" – Mieke Eoyang's recent nonsense Newspeak tweet . Here's her attempt to silence through shaming – and signaling by buzzword:

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=Antiwarcom&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1327300779183644672&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Foriginal.antiwar.com%2F%3Fp%3D2012341368&siteScreenName=Antiwarcom&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

[Nov 18, 2020] A small but important correction in terminology: when they say "Joe Biden's Foreign Policy Team" they actually means "Citibank's foreign policy Team"

Notable quotes:
"... Citibank's foreign policy Team would be much more accurate wouldn't it ? ..."
Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

dave , Nov 17 2020 20:08 utc | 33

"Joe Biden's Foreign Policy Team"

Citibank's foreign policy Team would be much more accurate wouldn't it ?

That's like saying Obomber or Bush had their own foreign and economic policy.

... ... ...

[Nov 18, 2020] China will be a problem for Biden, as he can't pursue rapprochement without being labeled as China stooge and bought politician

Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

ptb , Nov 17 2020 22:04 utc | 60

If the Chinese decide to really mess with the Biden administration, I'd imagine they would do something like build a road or even a pipeline in Afghanistan, even though it is completely unnecessary, simply to force the US to stay longer. Doesn't seem like their style, though.

In regards to Russia, same as most of the last 100 years, really. If anything big happens at all, it would be Putin retiring. In that case, CNN will have wild fantasies about Boris Yeltsin 2.0, while in reality Russian oligarchs may have some kind of trial moment to figure out whether his successor can continue to enforce a balance or not, which is a big question. Team Biden brings nothing to the table in that situation other than talking sh#t and creating confusion. The EU on the other hand could, but it's looking less and less likely. Especially as they will likely be immersed in a post covid political crisis and renewed challenge from right wing parties.

Last but not least, look for Biden to be nominated for Nobel Peace Prize before lunch on his first day in.

[Nov 18, 2020] One thing permanent in Washington swamp is the continuity of the USA neocon foreign policy

Female chickenhawks are generally more reckless then their male counterparts.
Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Down South , Nov 17 2020 18:44 utc | 3

here will be much pressure from the liberal hawks to finish the war they had launched against Syria by again intensifying it. Trump had ended the CIA's Jihadi supply program. The Biden team may well reintroduce such a scheme.

Susan Rice has criticized Trump's Doha deal with the Taliban. Under a Biden administration U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan are therefore likely to again increase.

One possible change may come in the U.S. support for the Saudi war on Yemen. The Democrats dislike Mohammad bin Salman and may try to use the Yemen issue to push him out of his Crown Prince position.

Biden and his team have supported the coup attempt in Venezuela. They only criticized it for not being done right and will probably come up with their own bloody 'solution'.

After four years of Russiagate nonsense, which Susan Rice had helped to launch, it is impossible to again 'reset' the relations with Russia. Biden could immediately agree to renew the New START treaty which limits strategic nuclear weapons but it is more likely that he will want to add, like with Iran's nuclear deal, certain 'amendments' which will be hard to negotiate. Under Biden the Ukraine may be pushed into another war against its eastern citizens. Belarus will remain on the 'regime change' target list.

Asia is the place where Biden's policies may be less confrontational than Trump's:

China would heave a big sigh of relief if Biden picks Rice as his secretary of state. Beijing knows her well, as she had a hands-on role in remoulding the relationship from engagement to selective competition, which could well be the post-Trump China policies.

For the Indian audience, which is obsessive about Biden's China policy, I would recommend the following YouTube on Rice's oral history where she narrates her experience as NSA on how the US and China could effectively coordinate despite their strategic rivalry and how China actually helped America battle Ebola.

Interestingly, the recording was made in April this year amidst the "Wuhan virus" pandemic in the US and Trump's trade and tech war with China. Simply put, Rice highlighted a productive relationship with Beijing while probably sharing the more Sino-skeptic sentiment of many of America's foreign policy experts and lawmakers.

All together the Biden/Harris regime will be a continuation of the Obama regime. It's foreign policies will have awful consequences for a lot of people on this planet.

Domestically Biden/Harris will revive all the bad feelings that led to the election of Donald Trump. The demographics of the election show no sign of a permanent majority for Democrats.

It is therefore highly probable that Trump, or a more competent and thereby more dangerous populist republican, will again win in 2024 .

Obama-Biden 3.0 as Pepe Escobar put it with an added twist


The Rotten Alliance of Liberals and Neocons Will Likely Shape U.S. Foreign Policy for Years to Come


Jackrabbit , Nov 17 2020 18:51 utc | 4

Was/is Trump so different?

Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, Elliot Abrams, Nikki Haley, etc.

!!

psychohistorian , Nov 17 2020 18:55 utc | 5
Thanks for the posting b

I do not agree with the assumption that the new administration (either Biden or Trump) will start more wars, as you call them. I posit that Trump would have had his war if it were possible but we are in a MAD phase of a civilization war and Biden will be just as neutered as Trump.

We are not going back to Obama 3.0. That ship sank when Russia stymied Obama empire in Syria. We are in a brave new world that is unfolding before our eyes....the future is all around us but just not evenly distributed.

lysias , Nov 17 2020 18:58 utc | 6
The elite certainly acts as though Trump is that different.
Kadath , Nov 17 2020 19:06 utc | 7

The Atlantic council this morning ("The way forward for transatlantic sanctions") is already discussing new sanctions the Biden Administration will bring in against Russia over the failed revolution in Belarus and the Navalny fraud. I'm amazed at how self-congratulating these fools are, they truly are blind both to the problems the US is facing and how the US is creating new international crisis that will destroy the nation.

H.Schmatz , Nov 17 2020 19:14 utc | 8

I can not understand why you insist here that Trump ended jihadist´s support in Syria, when it was these past days that we knew by US envoy there, Jeffries, that the troops not only were not decreased, by augmented.

Anyway, I guess we can conclude that if not directly, jihadists support continues through Turkey, as we have witnessed in the past conflict in the Caucasus.

... ... ...

Down South , Nov 17 2020 19:15 utc | 10

An article in Foreign Policy from a Bush era neo-con tells you what to expect:

Russia under Putin poses an existential threat to the United States and other countries of the West, Russia's neighbors, and his own people. Biden seems to understand that, not least because he has been the target of Russian interference in the 2020 election, including a disinformation campaign tied to Russia that was designed to smear him and his son Hunter.

Earlier this year, Biden wrote, "To counter Russian aggression, we must keep [NATO's] military capabilities sharp while also expanding its capacity to take on nontraditional threats, such as weaponized corruption, disinformation, and cybertheft." He continued: "We must impose real costs on Russia for its violations of international norms and stand with Russian civil society, which has bravely stood up time and again against President Vladimir Putin's kleptocratic authoritarian system." In an interview with CBS News' 60 Minutes before the election, Biden said he considered Russia "the biggest threat to America right now in terms of breaking up our security and our alliances."

These instincts are sound, and Biden likely will appoint officials who think the same way he does when it comes to Putin's Russia.


The problem is Putin.
Jackrabbit , Nov 17 2020 19:21 utc | 14

The more articles and postings that I see that bemoan the Deep State restoration (horror!) and return of business-as-usual (horror!), the more I think that we are being set up for an eventual Trump win.

Recent history tells us that Republican Presidents do BIG WARS (invoking Republican's claim to patriotism and a strong military) and Democratic Presidents do small, covert wars.

Why else would Trump fight an EMPIRE-FIRST establishment that he largely agrees with (as demonstrated by his actions while President)?

... ... ...

Anne , Nov 17 2020 19:27 utc | 16

Mr Wabbit - as I've written before (here and elsewhere): there is NO really existing difference between the which colored face(s) hang out in the WH (or in Congress) because they all belong to the same political stratum and, essentially, hold exactly the same positions, worldviews, attitudes, perspectives. All (aside from a tiny handful on occasion) support the MICIMATT, are intrinsically part and parcel of it. All get to fatten their bank accounts, get to revolve twixt this post and that in the MIC/TT/MA. At base most if not all (Blue/Red, it matters not at all) work for/along with/are part of the corporate-capitalist-imperialist plutocratic ruling elite.

Thus the warmaking will NOT stop without serious and continuous effort on the part of a large part of this country's population - and that isn't likely to happen: lots of folks earn their nice livelihoods in the MICIMATT industry; and most - overwhelmingly most - of the US population do not give a fuck what this country does to any other around the world, so long as a) doesn't affect them; b) their pension plans benefit; c) they can go back to sleep. How many even know where Syria, Libya, Iran, Ukraine ARE????

And they do not care - except when there is the occasional blowback - which is viewed as (what else?) terrorism, not simply retaliation. The real terrorism being projected, inflicted by guess which nations?

Kevin Gosztole on Grayzone; Patrick Lawrence on Consortium News; Danny Sjursen on Anti-war - all pieces give one despair, sheer and utter despair at the so-called electoral "choices" we had and the reality of the continuation of the imperial war machine, run by the utterly, completely grotesque, barbaric usuals (whatever their bloody sex, skin hue).

jayc , Nov 17 2020 19:28 utc | 17

While lecturing the world over "international norms", the deliberate obliviousness over the astonishing rolling humanitarian disasters initiated by the USA is beyond disturbing.

https://consortiumnews.com/2020/11/16/a-convergence-of-calamities/

Yul , Nov 17 2020 19:29 utc | 18

Watch out for Eliot A Cohen and what Phil Geraldi coined as "Kaganate of Nulandia" ilks in that FP Team. In Obama's first year we had Dennis Ross at the WH and Jeffrey Feltman at Turtle Bay whilst the R2P women were at Foggy Bottom : we got the Arab Spring followed by the demise of Ghaddafi and the havoc in Syria.
Who will Susan Rice put in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs to give the middle finger to Abu Mazen?

Don Bacon , Nov 17 2020 19:32 utc | 21

While The Dem party is strongly anti-Russia, connected at it is to the Atlantic Council and NATO, the probable next SecDef Flourney is throwing down the gauntlet on China.
...from TaiwanNews:

Flourney assessed that China is starting to believe it can achieve a quick strike that would disable all U.S. defenses in the region, paving the way for an invasion of Taiwan. "China's theory of victory increasingly relies on 'system destruction warfare' -- crippling an adversary at the outset of conflict, by deploying sophisticated electronic warfare, counterspace, and cyber-capabilities," wrote Flourney.
To boost deterrence capabilities, Flourney asserts that the U.S. must modernize and strengthen its forces in the region to raise the cost of "Beijing's calculus." Such is the buildup that Flourney is advocating, that it would enable the U.S. military to "credibly threaten to sink all of China's military vessels, submarines, and merchant ships in the South China Sea within 72 hours" . . here

This is quite a change from the current administration, which has followed the Taiwan Relations Act in stressing that the break-away province is responsible for its own defense, with no mention of US support. In fact the US does not have a mutual defense treaty with this Chinese province. Normally these treaties only include countries of course, and while Taiwan claims to be a country of course it isn't.
Laguerre , Nov 17 2020 19:50 utc | 26

On the question of war, it's no secret that Biden is likely to prove more hawkish than Trump, though Biden himself is a diplomatic man. However the world has changed since the days of Obama. The Middle East has ground to a stalemate, and there are no objectives to achieve by putting in more troops or air-strikes. Trump just tried and failed to bomb Iran. The military advice to Biden won't be different.

With regard to the "pivot to Asia", I doubt that the Chinese are much afraid of a US attack.

vk , Nov 17 2020 19:51 utc | 27

...Abstracting the factor of a new party naturally being inclined to reinitialize all the wars abandoned or paralyzed by the previous party at a first glance...

1) Venezuela: I would bet Biden should have learned from Trump's mistake, but fact on the field is the Southern Caribbean nation is a too appetizing target for him to to revisit it and do a real invasion with Colombia through the land as an auxiliary;

2) South China Sea/Taiwan: Susan Rice's little story is touching, but the Western-backed Asian MSM (SCMP, Asia Times etc.) is already preparing the psychological/ideological field for a hot war between China and the USA there, which means they were already briefed by Biden's team it will happen;

3) Afghanistan: at the heart of Central Asia (Heartland) + CIA opium = a matchstick will rule over the Cocytus before the USA abandon its occupation of that country;

4) Yemen: the war pays for itself as the Saudis are recycling USDs into American weapons, so I think inertia will prevail. When the Saudis say it's over, it's over;

5) Syria: game's over for the Americans there. The Russians imposed a no-fly zone to NATO/USA. Most they can do is to prop up Turkey (which they don't like right now) to fund terrorists in Idlib to try to drain the Russian coffers a little bit more but the Kremlin can push the nuclear button anytime if it really comes to that point (if ever);

6) Belarus: it was more a German affair than an American affair. Doesn't apply;

7) Ukraine: unfinished business will probably lead to another ramping up over the Dnieper, but the Donbassians have the geographical advantage and will never lose their territory as long as they have full-fledged support from Russia;

8) Russia: the problem here is the USA is in a position it has to choose - Russia or the European Peninsula? Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer has already stated Germany's unconditional loyalty to the USA is directly linked to the continuation of NATO. If NATO's gone, then the European Peninsula may become a second Southeast Asia.

Circe , Nov 17 2020 19:56 utc | 29

If ... Tom Cotton is the Republican nominee, a Dem Presidential victory in 2024 will make Biden's 2020 landslide look like the small mound of sand sliding into the bottom half of an hourglass.

Welcome back Georgia, Arizona and hello Texas!

dave , Nov 17 2020 20:08 utc | 33

"Joe Biden's Foreign Policy Team"

Citibank's foreign policy Team would be much more accurate wouldn't it ?

That's like saying Obomber or Bush had their own foreign and economic policy.

The only reason DC puts on this shit show is to protect the owners from accountability.

No matter who the "president" is there will be more war, sanctions, and coup attempts because that's what the money/power cult needs to obtain more power and control.

These assholes successfully perpetrated a coup of the US government, why would they worry about which flunky gets (s)elected ??

*forgot to include fraud in my list, sorry.

karlof1 , Nov 17 2020 20:17 utc | 35

Patrick Lawrence poses the same basic question as b in this article , with his title giving its contents away:

"Hillary Clinton at the UN? Whether or not Biden appoints her, things are getting very brazen and very bitter, very fast."

Lawrence opines:

"Let us now send this conscienceless liar to the UN to make sure the world knows we're all for international cooperation so long as all others submit to our dictates and don't get in our way when we invade other countries, foment coups or otherwise breach international law.

"I confess to longstanding animosity toward the odious Clinton. In truth she is merely the apotheosis of what we've known for some time about the incoming regime's character.

"Biden's army of foreign-policy transition advisers -- 2,000 in number -- is chock-a-block with warmongers, Russophobes, Sinophobes, Iranophobes, exceptionalists, puppets of apartheid Israel, humanitarian interventionists, and others promising nothing but trouble. We've known this for some time."

Lawrence did some great digging to complement the work done by other investigators. The following is excellent:

"The Democratic 2020 platform published on the eve of Biden's nomination last summer, intended to bring Bernie Sanders' supporters on board, included these commitments on the foreign-policy side:
•"Bringing our forever wars to a responsible end."
•"Rationalizing the defense budget."
•Ending covert "regime change" operations in favor of "more effective and less costly diplomatic, intelligence, and law enforcement tools."
•"Right-sizing our counterterrorism footprint."
•Scaling back U.S. involvement in Afghanistan in favor of "a durable and inclusive political settlement" with a residual role for special operations forces.

"Didn't President Donald Trump attempt to achieve various of these objectives? Didn't hawks in his administration and at the Pentagon vigorously and illegally subvert these attempts? Didn't the mainstream press cheer on these subversions while lambasting Trump daily for jeopardizing "national security" as he tried (however inconsistently) to bring troops home, settle up in Afghanistan, negotiate with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, and other such things?...

"Those who expected the Biden regime to give Americans a thoughtful, informed, post-exceptionalist foreign policy -- and I am not among these people -- are in for too many disappointments to list over the next four years. Let us consider a few of the more consequential."

Lawrence goes on to detail why there'll be no peace in Eurasia and no reduction in the Imperial Budget. I agree 100% with his summation:

"One principle will guide the Biden regime's foreign policies. Biden is a man of empire and those around him empire's lieutenants. This will determine all of what is to come."

Realistically that means the Outlaw US Empire will continue to drown as it spins around and slowly descends down the toilet bowl. Nowhere in anyone's analysis of this issue is there any mention of the fact that great domestic strength and vitality are a prerequisite for any attempt at Imperial Dominance, and nowhere in Bidenland is there any policy proposal to rehabilitate that fact. Sure, all sorts of hawks will populate the Pentagon and continue at the State Dept, but they might as well be doves since the Empire's industrial base can no longer support an aggressive Imperial Policy. Then there's the Human Capital that's in just as dire a condition as the Industrial Plant. Biden in many respects faces the same set of problems Trump was confronted with and allowed to fester/worsen. Plus, half the nation is dead-set against him and his regime, perhaps even more so than with Trump since there'll be no constant BigLie Media smearing.

The gap between the Outlaw US Empire and those nations it's chosen to demonize as competitors and worse continues to grow daily. The RCEP is only one manifestation. A second is the continuance of BRICS, which just held a Summit. If Biden launches an attack against Iran, he'll suffer a massive defeat for the same reasons as Trump. Same with North Korea. Same as with the South China Sea. Same as with Taiwan. Same as with Syria. And I'd say the last bullet within the Color Revolution gun available for use in Eurasia was recently fired to no effect. Latin America is rebounding again. In almost every respect, the Outlaw US Empire is weaker now than in 2017 when Trump took over. IMO, Biden's #1, most important and difficult job will be domestic since his donors will insist they be allowed to continue to eat away at the vitals that are the fundamental basis of support for the Empire--Following in the footsteps of Rome.

DFC , Nov 17 2020 20:53 utc | 40

Thanks b

Russia will be the main target of the new US regime, expect to see the russian underbelly in flames in the Caucasus, in Central Asia and of course in Ukraine and Syria.

The russian regimen change project will be at full speed, economically, politically, domestic and external insurgencies, all in order to bleed to death the Bear that they see as a cultural, military, industrial and natural resources rival that has to be fully destroyed and reduced to smithereens, divided in corrupt satrapies much smaller and easy dominate "à la ukrainien" or georgian, to extract, on the cheap, all their natural resources with nice fees for the Biden family or many others american plutocrats. Win-win situation.

One of the pieces to "bleed the beast" project was the Pashinyan sororite hiper-corrupt regime, who sell large amounts of weapons to the jihadis in Syria to kill russians and syrians soldiers, this was the last straw for the russkies with them:

https://southfront.org/pinch-me-moment-of-armenian-media-reveals-corruption-and-chaos-in-defense-ministry/

The only option to Russia, of course is to pay the US with the same coin

Circe , Nov 17 2020 20:55 utc | 41

So the DoD just announced that Trump is drawing down troops in Afghanistan and Iraq to 2500 for each by January 15th 2020, and there are about 5,000 private military contractors in each which will probably increase to compensate. Easy call for Trump.

Nothing gained. Nothing lost.

William Gruff , Nov 17 2020 20:56 utc | 43

US State Department budget

2016: $53.4 billion
2020: $44.12 billion

Good job, Trump! Nice cut of that regime change budget!

Who wants to bet that Harris and the dead guy try to hike this budget for 2021 back up above its levels in its glory days of color revolutions?

NemesisCalling , Nov 17 2020 21:17 utc | 46
@36 BNW

Yes, I saw McConnel plead to be able to stay and "finish" Afghanistan. Such a tired show now. The same ol' tune, spoken a thousand times on that senate floor.

But to your point, not all Republicans are non-interventionists. There are many, many RINOs amongst them who actually loathed the idea of Trump as POTUS in 2015, so much so that it took the groundswell of support for DJT that these RINOs relented and hopped aboard the Trump-train.

Now that he has lost, they want to revert back to their prior and favored position as controlled opposition to the Dem establishment. It will at first be subtle, with feigned support for outgoing POTUS, but gradually, they will cease mentioning him at all.

It remains to be seen whether the constituents in these RINOs' districts will not see through the subterfuge.

As I have mentioned before, I think they will come for the RINOs if they disembark the Trump-train. They are sowing wind.

Kooshy , Nov 17 2020 21:19 utc | 47

As we move forward resistance to American hegemony becomes stronger, more broad and a more viable counterbalance to the western hegemony on world affairs. This is while US and her allies have and are becoming weaker and therefore more unbalanced. Political and economic unbalance as seen during the pandemic is much more difficult and costly for developed
nations as would be for the third world.
As has been seen in past few years this shifting power balance will naturally make the losing power, more reactionary and more violent to preserve and restore her power, both domestically and externally.

As this giant corpse start decaying her parasites start chowing more and demanding more to save themselves, which makes this dying giant even more unpredictable, and perhaps more reactionary and violent regardless who's the president and in power, Trump or Biden has not and will not make any change difference for the Deep state policies.
Fortunately this is, and has been, the trajectory we are on for some time now, and IMO this is unstoppable, no matter who and how much propaganda is leveled inside and outside of west.

Malchik Ralf , Nov 17 2020 21:30 utc | 50
All three, together with Joe Biden, promoted the 2003 war on Iraq

I seem to recall that Bush was President back then...Biden and his appointees might have gone along with it, as did many American politicians.

Framarz , Nov 17 2020 21:31 utc | 51
Biden has said that he will re-instate the nuclear agreement with Iran but with 'amendments'.

Wishful thinking by Biden and his faction, if he get into white house at all. The greatest obstacle for any US president to get back to JCPOA is the general disqualification of US governments to be part of any international agreement.
Obama signed, Trump teared in pieces, Biden signing again (are we in a Kindergarten?), who is going to guarantee that the next republican president (in 4 years?) doesn't tear it in pieces again or even the to-be president Kemala Harris (in 2 years?) doesn't trigger the snap back as a friendly pay back gesture to the Zionist Apartheid regime for getting the job as president?

Although Rouhani government has sent strong signals that they are ready for a new round of negotiation, with less then 9 months to the next elections in Iran, almost no chance that the next winner come from technocrat camp, theocracy not ready to support technocratic efforts for new negotiations and finally wide popular resistance to continue the JCPOA even in the current format. It would be more then a wounder to encounter JCPOA 2.0

jinn , Nov 17 2020 21:38 utc | 53

What occupies the fantasies of the populace does matter to the oligarchs who run the show. If it didn't matter to the elites they would not spend so much time and energy trying to shape those fantasies...
The elites are going to support the politicians that are most accomplished and adept at bolstering the fantasy of the two party system and American democrazy. There is no doubt that Donald Trump is the salesman of the year for the smoke the elites are blowing up your ass. There is no other politician that could get 150 million americans sucked into the fantasy.
And what that means is they will do whatever they can to make sure trump gets another four more years.

_K_C_ , Nov 17 2020 21:40 utc | 54

Can't say I disagree with much of this when taken at face value, but I'd appreciate some backing to this assertion, for which it's quite uncharacteristic of b not to provide right up front.....if true.

Biden and his team have supported the coup attempt in Venezuela. They only criticized it for not being done right and will probably come up with their own bloody 'solution'.

I should note, and most MoA readers will agree, that it's nearly impossible to find any Western media organization - including erstwhile progressive outlets - who don't agree with the alleged status quo that Maduro is a "dictator" and "has to go."

Even when Venezuelans in Venezuela were asked about who they'd rather see become president the questions and answers were couched in this implicit "truth".

So what WOULD a Biden administration do differently? All's I can find of substance is that they'd use sanctions in a more precise manner, not the blunt force instrument that Trump has applied - and - that they would grant temporary protected status to Venezuelans wishing to flee (I'd bet there's a good mix of the Mestizo and Moreno poor, as well as the trust fund descendants of the colonial elite) to the United States whereas Trump refused or dragged his feet to the point that it didn't matter.

I think, then, that the decisions made will be less to do with Biden being a bad man (which, like Trump, he is), but instead all grounded in the accepted "reality" that "Maduro must go" and there must be a "peaceful democratic transition" (back to right-wing colonialist descendants from whom (some of) their stolen land and oil leases were stolen back under Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution. This falsehood has been cemented as truth and reality across both sides of the U.S. political spectrum as well as that of the UK, Canada and France: Maduro = Commie Dictator and Brutal Humanitarian Abuser. There is absolutely ZERO way that Joe Biden would go against it in any meaningful way. He'll just do it a little less roughly and mean spiritedly as Trump and Bush before him had done (no coups and fewer sanctions under Obama).

This is a good article on the intricacies of the politics of food (and resources - a good history lesson all the way around and recommended - written in June of 2018 and looking back not only on the Chavez years, but the colonial history that preceded him. I think it's required reading for anyone who wants to get into a debate or discussion (here or elsewhere) about Chavez and Maduro.

AriusArmenian , Nov 17 2020 22:19 utc | 65

Trump is war monger lite compared to Biden that is war monger/criminal heavy. Greater chaos is coming inside and outside the US while liberals go back to sleep comfortable that another Obama like admin is in charge.

My prediction: in the next four years it will be near impossible to paper over the objective collapse of the US Empire of Insanity.

Jackrabbit , Nov 17 2020 22:56 utc | 73

Miami Herald on an issue important to many of its readership:
Joe Biden said he 'confronted' Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro. Is that true?

Biden's campaign said he "was among the first Democratic foreign policy voices to recognize Juan Guaidó as Venezuela's legitimate leader and to call for Maduro to resign."


Even socialist Sanders, who refused to call Maduro a "dictator", is anti-Maduro:
Sanders called Maduro a "vicicious tyrant" and said there should be "international and regional cooperation for free elections in Venezuela so that the people of that country can make -- can create their own future."

!!
michaelj72 , Nov 17 2020 23:34 utc | 78

there's plenty of countries in the world where the US will continue and/or try to regime change legitimate governments.

some of these were already started by Mr. Hope and Change, and will continue or be ramped up by Mr. Sleepy/Rice/Flournoy - like Ukraine, a perfect pretext to irritate Russia with. And poor Venezuela, which both current and past administrations have attempted to strangle to death

Some of these came to fruition under Pompeo/Haspel/Trump like Armenia (2018); and some like Belarus have survived, so far.

some where successfully changed under Trump, like Brazil.

some were temporarily regime changed, like Bolivia (2019), but are now back in the hands of the real Socialists and indigenous peoples.

some were successfully carried out under Obama, like in Honduras and Paraguay.

The chinese finally learned and took action in Hong Kong which is now essentially out of the regime change column. Iran will never be regime changed either, nor Syria.

And some like Lebanon are still in play.

I expect economic sanctions/warfare to be increasingly used by this incoming democratic administration as much as the outgoing republican.

The way for all this nefarious and despicable activity by the US and the West to end is....??

Don Bacon , Nov 17 2020 23:37 utc | 79

Trump just didn't have the same amount of low hanging fruit that Obama did . . .like Ukraine and Syria
low hanging fruit: a thing or person that can be won, obtained, or persuaded with little effort.

Let's be clear that Obama's "fruit" turned out to be rotten apples (losses in Ukraine* & Syria**), plus Mr Hope & Change foolishly sent 70,000 more troops to Afghanistan, destroyed one of the leading countries in Africa (Libya) for no reason, threatened Iran every fortnight with his "all options on the table" BS then did an 'agreement' with Iran that was easily overturned,. .the list goes on.

*NATO wanted Russia's only warm-water port in Crimea, and didn't get it.
**Russia stepped in to prevent US-supported regime change

Venom , Nov 17 2020 23:43 utc | 80

All of the linear and conventional predictions about the next administration's foreign policy will be proven wrong, because they neglect the near-fatal deterioration of the US economy and its social fabric in the last 4 years. In short, any return to the pre-Trump status quo is simply impossible. That ship sailed forever.
What is pretty much guaranteed, however, is significant and irreversible ratcheting up of economic tension between America and the rest of the world. The approach may undergo some finessing, but substance will not only remain but acquire additional urgency. The US is in desperate need of reducing its current account deficit, and that can't be accomplished without more threats, more brinkmanship, and more unilateral impositions. You can say goodbye to any prospect of international harmony, it won't happen. Sure, Democrats may attempt softening of rhetoric at first, but it will be proven counterproductive and abandoned rather quickly.
The only reason the Deep State brought Biden back to political life, is because he is one of the few remaining old Cold Warriors capable of achieving normalization of relations with Russia. It's of overarching importance at this point, as without it nothing really works for America and all possible geopolitical equations simply fall apart right away. It's also pretty clear that because Biden's mental and physical condition is in rapid decline, such normalization will be proceeding at breakneck speed. Expect Biden-Putin summit in first 6 months of the inauguration, ostensibly to sign new Start Treaty or prolong the old one. After that, "the dialogue" will kick into overdrive.
All in all, modeling next 4 years of US foreign policy based on op-ed articles in American MSM is just silly. These are written not to enlighten but to obfuscate. Expect secret entreaties to Moscow literally within hours of January 20, 2021.

Don Bacon , Nov 17 2020 23:48 utc | 81

There may be some small cookies thrown Russia's way, but that country as a serious threat must remain. The 500,000 person US ground force, modernly equipped, depends upon it. There is no other justification, only a "dangerous" Russia.

Prof K , Nov 17 2020 23:49 utc | 82

Look at Zionist-imperialist bitch Susan Rice berating the UN General Assembly for its overwhelming vote in 2012 on according Palestine non-member observer status:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2012/11/29/sot-us-un-amb-rice-on-palestine-resolution-obstacle-to-peace.untv

Here is the UN announcement on the 'overwhelming' vote:

https://www.un.org/press/en/2012/ga11317.doc.htm

Don Bacon , Nov 17 2020 23:55 utc | 83

Just as the US must have enemies, because there's so much money in it, it must also (for the same reason) continue to have Israel calling the signals in the Middle East.

_K_C_ , Nov 18 2020 0:04 utc | 85

By "low hanging fruit" (or poisoned apples), what I meant was from the PR angle. Situations in those places - by the CIA's making or not - were being reported in the West in such a manner so that they were more easily than usual sold as "humanitarian interventions" to "help democracy flourish" and the like. Whereas Bush had his 9/11 and fake WMD threats from Saddam, Obama had the "organic" "grassroots" uprisings in Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Tunisia and other places which would be used as excuses to go in and steal gold, wreck nations who were a threat to the Franco or American post-colonial control structures, and otherwise instill chaos, which is one major goal of EVERY U.S. intervention - especially in the ME.

But yeah, what was done to Libya, Syria and the Ukraine is unforgiveable. I'm just saying that TPTB when Trump was in office didn't have the easy, made-for-humanitarian intervention news stories to excuse the next round of destruction. That's one reason they had to try so hard with Iran - going as far as designating their military and its leaders as terrorists and all that shit so they could bomb Soleimani while he was on a diplomatic mission. Can't have an outbreak of peace, now, can we? That is, unless it's a carefully scripted PR version of "peace" such as what we saw recently with the gulf monarchies and Israel.

Haassaan , Nov 18 2020 0:58 utc | 90

redictions for the Biden Regime...let us see.

Gonna have to say target numero uno has got to be Syria. Finishing off Syria, and chasing the Russians home will be the lynchpin to the rest of Biden's Middle East Policy. Once Syria is collapsed into chaos and ethnic cleansing, Lebanon/Hezbollah become much easier to deal with. Iran becomes further isolated and it's ability to project power seriously reduced. The whole point of JCPOA IMO was a delaying tactic, keeping Iran on the back burner while Iranian Proxies and Regional Influence are mopped up.

I expect the Mighty Media Wurlitzer of Pro-War Propaganda will soon begin spinning up and focusing on the brutality inflicted on the moderate head-choppers by the Assad Regime...another chemical weapons attack anyone?

The Russian presence in Syria is actually quite precarious, despite their military gains they don't project power very efficiently beyond their borders. The Biden Regime will therefore turn up the heat, possibly with a No-Fly Zone over both Idlib and Southern Syria/Al Tanf in conjunction with a well armed proxy offensive backed by air-support. DNC Dems/Deep State/NeoCon believe Russia to be bluffing and will either back down or be rolled over in short order.

arby , Nov 18 2020 1:02 utc | 91

Strange IMO.
Most everyone here is talking like it will be business as usual on foreign policy.
I am not so sure. I think that Covid19 has pricked the phony bubble created after the 08/09 collapse. I know the stock market is right back and everything looks fine but I think there is deep rot beneath.
Couple that with a lot of draws in their latest endeavours and I doubt that the machine can keep operating with such confidence/arrogance.

_K_C_ , Nov 18 2020 1:12 utc | 95

Do you also remember how the 2000 presidential campaign played out? Gore was characterized by the MSM, straight up, as an "interventionist" while Bush - eager to distance his own foreign policy from the Balkan wars and Clinton/Gore tried to walk a fine line between isolationism (of which he was accused) and non-interventionism.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush announced that he would pursue a "distinctly American internationalism" in foreign policy (Bush i999a), largely in contrast to the liberal internationalism of the Clinton administration. He initially sought to have a foreign policy that placed greater emphasis on American national interests than on global interests.
(look up George W. Bush and "classical realism")

So what do Trump and Bush II have in common? How about Trump and Obama? I'll tell you: The preceding administration of the opposite political party had a history of military interventions that were quite unpopular with the public, which was looking for a change. And guess what Obama said when he first stepped into office. That's right - he'd pursue a retrenchment based foreign policy dedicated to fighting existing terror threats in places and places near where the previous administration had already placed American troops - AND to wrap up the already existing wars. From the Atlantic's retrospective:

It wasn't supposed to be this way. Although Obama never presented himself as a pacifist candidate, his 2007-2008 presidential campaign was predicated in part on the promise to end the war in Iraq and properly prosecute the war in Afghanistan. In March 2008, he declared of Iraq, "When I am commander in chief, I will set a new goal on day one: I will end this war." Later that year, he listed his first two priorities for making America safer as "ending the war in Iraq responsibly" and "finishing the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban." The president also promised a foreign policy that relied more on diplomacy and less on military might in his first inaugural address, telling his audience that "our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint." Well before the tumult of the Arab Spring and its aftermath, Obama famously offered to extend a hand to those willing to unclench their fist. (there are links embedded there)

Here's what Brookings has to say:

I do not mean to overstate. Obama's presidency will not go down as a hugely positive watershed period in American foreign policy. He ran for election in 2007 and 2008 promising to mend the West's breach with the Islamic world, repair the nation's image abroad, reset relations with Russia, move toward a world free of nuclear weapons, avoid "stupid wars" while winning the "right war," combat climate change, and do all of this with a post-partisan style of leadership that brought Americans themselves together in the process.[1] He ran for reelection in 2012 with the additional pledges of ending the nation's wars and completing the decimation of al Qaeda. Six years into his presidency, almost none of these lofty aspirations has been achieved.[2] There has not been, and likely will not be, any durable Obama doctrine of particular positive note. The recent progress toward a nuclear deal with Iran, while preferable to any alternative if it actually happens, is probably too limited in duration and overall effect to count as a historic breakthrough (even if Obama shares a second Nobel Prize as a result).

And before you start to think that Trump said much different, here's a blurb from your own article:

"We will stop racing to topple foreign regimes that we know nothing about, that we shouldn't be involved with," Trump said. "Instead, our focus must be on defeating terrorism and destroying ISIS, and we will."

Hence, there hasn't been a President for the last 50 years that has campaigned on, or entered office with a PUBLIC plan to engage in foreign regime change activities. But nearly every one of them, especially since Ronald Reagan, have had "excuses" crop up for "humanitarian interventions" and that includes Bush II and Obama. The so-called Arab Spring began in earnest in mid- to late 2010 and Syria and Libya were in mid to late 2011 during their peak, at which point the U.S. and France got involved under the auspices of "humanitarian intervention."

So more than 3 years into his first term, Obama still hadn't "started any new wars." Three years is an incredibly short period of time when looking at history, even the history of the United States. Trump's only been in office for about 3 years and 9 months. Nothing like the Arab Spring has happened so far while he's been there. That is indisputable. What is also indisputable is that Trump DID try to spark a war by assassinating General Soleimani. Whether there was any plan AT THE TIME to end up invading Iran (a total fool's errand as you know well), I doubt, but the goal of that assassination was to prevent an organic, non-U.S. brokered peace between Iran and Saudi Arabia, which at the very least was a threat to Trump's precious arms sales, but also very much in line with his Zionist friendly Israel policy. At worst, who knows, but you can't make an unchallenged assumption that Trump and his advisors had fully thought through all possible Iranian retaliation options and concluded that there was no way the assassination would cause Iran to do something so bad that a new war was justified regardless of the cost. Sorry, but you just can't.

Yeah, yeah, Trump hasn't started any "new wars" but his rhetoric and public facing stated foreign policy goals were virtually the same as Obama's. Trump just didn't get any 9/11s, Eastern European or Middle East uprisings that would have been sufficient for him or ANY previous president to attempt to justify "humanitarian interventions" abroad. As I've said for a while, if he had a second term, there would have been a new war - even if it was the "deep state" and CIA who created the astroturf casus belli.

Prof K , Nov 18 2020 1:34 utc | 98

...Trump has also unleashed a mass proto fascist movement, which is based amongst the lowest scum of the working class, various billionaire factions, and the white suburban middle class and small business owners.

These genies will not go back into their bottles. Neoliberal hegemony is shattered.

All of this is the result of the 1% sucking the blood of the working class for the past four decades. 2008 was the spark. Covid was the explosion.

I see this every damn day in the US, even in a wealthy liberal city. The social fabric has largely fallen apart. Living in the US is daily suffering, dashed hopes, sadness, and rage. It is awful.

Biden won't have any room for major wars abroad. He might try to rebuild liberal alliances but he won't have any capacity to overthrow Asad or Maduro or to reverse the objective trends of global capitalism. How can he reboot US primacy if China and Asia account for 90 percent of world economic growth?

Covid has revealed the US as a paper tiger with little institutional capacity to manage itself or the world. It is in fact a threat to the world.

Biden and his neoliberal coterie will act like arrogant pricks. They are arrogant pricks. But we can laugh at them. They have a limited shelf life.

Lex , Nov 18 2020 1:36 utc | 99

Well of course it will be awful. There has never been an administration in American history that hasn't been awful on foreign policy. We've always been an empire.

Biden will find a world different than the one he remembers from four years ago. The blustering incompetence of the Trump administration was the world's cue to move on. And the empire now has a lot of issues in the home territory that need immediate and drastic attention.

Few empires survive long after being forced to turn inward after a long period of expansion. We're beyond things that can papered better with a glorious little war.

Biden likely takes power with a collapsed health care sector and a real economy of misery for most. He'll have a federal government riddled wholly unqualified ideologues in a country that went ahead and delegitimized it's own elections for one man's vanity. Where half the country doesn't believe in the virus that crushed the health care system and wrecked the economy. It will all be terrible because the US has reached the historical point where terrible describes all the options.

[Nov 18, 2020] Biden Administration will no doubt suffer the same fate if it seeks to reject or challenge Israel's ability to manipulate and virtually control key aspects of U.S. foreign policy. by Philip Giraldi

Notable quotes:
"... There is some pushback in Washington to Israeli dominance, but not much. Recent senior Pentagon appointee Colonel Douglas Macgregor famously has pointed out that many American politicians get "very, very rich" through their support of Israel even though it means the United States being dragged into new wars. ..."
Nov 18, 2020 | www.unz.com

That Israel would blatantly and openly interfere in the deliberations of Congress raises some serious questions which the mainstream media predictably is not addressing. Jewish power in America is for real and it is something that some Jews are not shy about discussing among themselves. Jewish power is unique in terms of how it functions. If you're an American ( or British ) politician, you very quickly are made to appreciate that Israel owns you and nearly all of your colleagues. Indeed, the process begins in the U.S. even before your election when the little man from AIPAC shows up with the check list that he wants you to sign off on. If you behave per instructions your career path will be smooth, and you will benefit from your understanding that everything happening in Washington that is remotely connected to the interests of the state of Israel is to be determined by the Jewish state alone, not by the U.S. Congress or White House.

And, here is the tricky part, even while you are energetically kowtowing to Netanyahu, you must strenuously deny that there is Jewish power at work if anyone ever asks you about it. You behave in that fashion because you know that your pleasant life will be destroyed, painfully, if you fail to deny the existence of an Israel Lobby or the Jewish power that supports it.

It is a bold assertion, but there is plenty of evidence to support how that power is exerted and what the consequences are. Senators William Fulbright and Chuck Percy and Congressmen Paul Findlay, Pete McCloskey and Cynthia McKinney have all experienced the wrath of the Lobby and voted out of office. Currently Reverend Raphael Warnock, who is running against Georgia Loeffler for a senate seat in Georgia demonstrates exactly how candidates are convinced to stand on their heads by the Israel Lobby. Warnock was a strong supporter of Palestinian rights and a critic of Israeli brutality. He said as recently as 2018 that the Israelis were shooting civilians and condemned the military occupation and settlement construction on the Palestinian West Bank, which he compared to apartheid South Africa. Now that he is running for the Senate, he is saying that he is opposed to the Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement due to what he calls the movement's "anti-Semitic overtones." He also supports continued military assistance for Israel and believes that Iran is in pursuit of a nuclear weapon, both of which are critical issues being promoted by the Zionist lobby.

There is some pushback in Washington to Israeli dominance, but not much. Recent senior Pentagon appointee Colonel Douglas Macgregor famously has pointed out that many American politicians get "very, very rich" through their support of Israel even though it means the United States being dragged into new wars. Just how Israel gains control of the U.S. political process is illustrated by the devastating insider tale of how the Obama Administration's feeble attempts to do the right thing in the Middle East were derailed by American Jews in Congress, the media, party donors and from inside the White House itself. The story is of particularly interest as the Biden Administration will no doubt suffer the same fate if it seeks to reject or challenge Israel's ability to manipulate and virtually control key aspects of U.S. foreign policy.

The account of Barack Obama's struggle with Israel and the Israeli Lobby comes from a recently published memoir written by a former foreign policy adviser Ben Rhodes. It is entitled The World As It Is , and it is extremely candid about how Jewish power was able to limit the foreign policy options of a popular sitting president. Rhodes recounts, for example, how Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel once nicknamed him "Hamas" after he dared to speak up for Palestinian human rights, angrily shouting at him "Hamas over here is going to make it impossible for my kid to have his fucking bar mitzvah in Israel."

Rhodes cites numerous instances where Obama was forced to back down when confronted by Israel and its supporters in the U.S. as well as within the Democratic Party. On several occasions, Netanyahu lecture the U.S. president as if he were an errant schoolboy. And Obama just had to take it. Rhodes sums up the situation as follows: "In Washington, where support for Israel is an imperative for members of Congress, there was a natural deference to the views of the Israeli government on issues related to Iran, and Netanyahu was unfailingly confrontational, casting himself as an Israeli Churchill . AIPAC and other organizations exist to make sure that the views of the Israeli government are effectively disseminated and opposing views discredited in Washington, and this dynamic was a permanent part of the landscape of the Obama presidency."

And, returning to the persistent denial of Jewish power even existing when it is running full speed and relentlessly, Rhodes notes the essential dishonesty of the Israel Lobby as it operates in Washington: "Even to acknowledge the fact that AIPAC was spending tens of millions to defeat the Iran deal [JCPOA] was anti-Semitic. To observe that the same people who supported the war in Iraq also opposed the Iran deal was similarly off limits. It was an offensive way for people to avoid accountability for their own positions."

Many Americans long to live in a country that is at peace with the world and respectful of the sovereignty of foreign nations. Alas, as long as Israeli interests driven by overwhelming Jewish power in the United States continue to corrupt our institutions that just will not be possible. It is time for all Americans, including Jews, to accept that Israel is a foreign country that must make its own decisions and thereby suffer the consequences. The United States does not exist to bail Israel out or to provide cover for its bad behavior. The so-called "special relationship" must end and the U.S. must deal with the Israelis as they would with any other country based on America's own self-interests. Those interests definitely do not include funding the Israeli war machine, assassinating foreign leaders, or attacking a non-threatening Iran while continuing an illegal occupation of Syria.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [email protected] .

[Nov 18, 2020] When any Washington Swamp creature talks about "threats to US national security" in reality they are talking about threats to the USA global hegemony

Highly recommended!
Threat inflation is like Apple pie among Washington swamp national security parasites
Notable quotes:
"... The US security state, with its huge military forces and techno-industrial base, and no diplomatic need nor capability, REQUIRES (fake) "security threats" in order to exist. ..."
"... Those appointed "threats" are currently, probably not changing soon, in some order of "threat-size" . . . ..."
Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Don Bacon , Nov 17 2020 22:23 utc | 66

Applying any logic to the "threats" against the US "national security" AKA world hegemony becomes much simpler with recognizing two simple facts:

1. The US security state, with its huge military forces and techno-industrial base, and no diplomatic need nor capability, REQUIRES (fake) "security threats" in order to exist.

2. Those appointed "threats" are currently, probably not changing soon, in some order of "threat-size" . . .

China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Venezuela, & African "terrorists" -- did I miss anyone?

[Nov 18, 2020] A short summary of Trump achivements: Good -- a cut of State department regime change budget; Bad -- extra 149 billion to MIC via Pentagon budget

Highly recommended!
Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

William Gruff , Nov 17 2020 20:56 utc | 43

US State Department budget

2016: $53.4 billion
2020: $44.12 billion

Good job, Trump! Nice cut of that regime change budget!

Who wants to bet that Harris and the dead guy try to hike this budget for 2021 back up above its levels in its glory days of color revolutions?

Geronimo Black , Nov 17 2020 21:24 utc | 49

2016 Dept of Defense budget $585.3 billion
2020 Dept of Defense budget $665.0 billion +
2020 OCO (imperialist war operations) 69.0 billion

Is this added $149 billion in defense spending a "peace president" dividend I wonder?

[Nov 18, 2020] Chinese reaction on Pompeo recent "talking points" about China, issued by State Department

Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Nov 18 2020 20:12 utc | 13

Here's China's unofficial response via this Global Times editorial . I wish I could reproduce the art at the editorial's header as it's very spot-on:

"There is no new wording in the report, which can be seen as a collection of malicious remarks from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other anti-China US politicians and senators. Right now, only a little more than 60 days are left for the current US administration. An official from the State Department explained that the report is not meant to constrain the next US administration. But the fact is the Department of State fears that the Biden administration will adjust US-China relations, and the release of the report is part of their efforts to consolidate the current extreme anti-China path.

"But most Chinese scholars who have read the report believe it is an insult to Kennan by labeling the report as Kennan-style. Kennan, then US charge d'affaires in Moscow, sent an 8,000-word telegram to the Department of State detailing his views on the Soviet Union. At least, there was no special political motive in Kennan's report. But the latest report is trying to leave a legacy for the extreme anti-China policy adopted by the Trump administration and fawning on Pompeo, which is evil in essence .

"The impulsive and capricious governing style of Donald Trump leaves sufficient room for politicians like Pompeo to give free play to their ambitions. The Department of State has become the governmental organ that has the most serious clashes with China, outperforming the CIA and the Department of Defense.

"Diplomats are supposed to be communicators, but Pompeo and his team have chilled the communication atmosphere with China. In the China direction, today's US Department of State can close its door.

"Surrounded by such deep hostility and prejudice toward China and the wild ambition of the secretary of state, how could the Department of State's Office of Policy Planning make out anything objective about China? Their observation ability, cautious attitude toward research, and sense of responsibility for history have been severely squeezed. They are just currying favor from their seniors and manipulating extreme paths, pretending to be 'thoughtful....'

"Chinese diplomatic and academic circles look down upon the Pompeo team, which lacks professionalism, and acts like a group of gangsters suddenly taking official positions. They not only have messed things up, but also hope to build their nonsense as legacy. Pompeo's choice of opportunists like Miles Yu as advisor in particular has increased Chinese people's doubts over the 'amateurism' and 'immorality' of the Pompeo team's China policy....

"The US' China policy is very much like 'drunk driving' internally while on the international stage it's like sailing against the current." [My Emphasis]

There's not much more to add aside for asking barflies to read the entire editorial.

[Nov 18, 2020] Pompeo besides being neocon and is a fanatic, crackpot 'Christian'

As any warmonger he is a fake Christian
Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
TominAZ , Nov 18 2020 19:54 utc | 5
Pompeo, if not shamed out of politics soon, will be as bad or worse than Trump, because besides being nuts is a fanatic, crackpot 'Christian'.

Dave , Nov 18 2020 19:56 utc | 6

7-10 each sound fine but given the record of recent US leaders I wouldn't expect them to be implemented with the good of mankind in mind.
karlof1 , Nov 18 2020 19:59 utc | 7
I posted this to the Biden thread, but it belongs here.

RT op/ed analysis of Pompeo's China containment policy plan, "The Elements of the China Challenge" :

"Although it is hardly atypical of the President Trump administration, the document is significant because it represents yet another attempt by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to immortalize his Cold War confrontation between the US and China, bind the succeeding administration to it and most strikingly, institutionalize anti-Beijing ideas into American bureaucracy.

"The push against China by the Trump White House is not designed to be a passing phase, but a permanent and defining change of direction, for which this entire term in office has sought to prepare. This document aims to be a blueprint for long-term ideological struggle and a series of aspirations for maintaining hegemony, an affirmation of priority and a statement that things cannot " go back to normal ". But it makes no guarantee that the US can ever adequately understand China, or that it will succeed in its aims.

"The reference to George F. Kennan in pitching this document is appealing given the historical parallels, but it is not an exact fit and this, in turn, helps shine a light on Pompeo's own ignorance of China. It might be described in one simple sentence: China is not the Soviet Union and the ideological stakes are not quite the same." [Emphasis Original]

While I'd agree that differences in ideology exist between China and the Outlaw US Empire, it is the Empire that's constructed upon and is living the Big Lie inherent within Neoliberalism, while China continues to perfect its already very efficient system of Collective Libertarianism through its revamped Democratic Centralism. The really big fundamental difference is that China has absolutely no need to lie to its people, whereas the exact opposite's true within the Neoliberal West. After a lengthy period of public input, the government meets and eventually publishes its 5-year plan of development, which is contained within an even larger plan that's also been devised with public input and once put together is also published for public consumption. And since 2010, all plans have existed within China's UN 2030 Development plan, which is also available to the public. In a great many respects. China is a more open society than the Outlaw US Empire. Why? Because it doesn't need to lie to its citizens because it fights against the corruption that provides the reason for such lies--China has no Financial Parasitism it must mask from its citizens whereas the Outlaw US Empire is drowning in a massive sea of corruption that is killing it. Clearly, Pompeo wants that to continue.

[Nov 18, 2020] What is 'intellectual laziness'- Insisting 19-year wars are in America's interest

Nov 18, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

While Trump's record is far from a non-interventionist's dream, Trump helped bring attention to America's incoherent foreign policy, stating that "great nations do not fight endless wars." Now that the election results point toward a Biden presidency, the hawks were already gearing up to reassert themselves less than a day after the media announced Joe Biden to be the projected winner of the 2020 presidential race.

The Heritage Foundation, one of Washington's most well-known conservative and conventional hawkish think tanks, called the phrase "endless wars" a tool of "political sloganeering" rather than a "serious critique of continued U.S. involvement in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Somalia." It attached a piece by Dakota Wood at The National Interest, defending the last 20 years of war abroad.

In his piece, "The Myth of Endless Wars," Wood, a researcher at Heritage, tells us that U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Somalia is not really endless, but rather that the government "has enduring interests that must always be addressed." Wood argues that the United States must keep troops abroad indefinitely to wield influence and dominate with the use of force to protect American security and economic interests:

Indeed, this is not some "endless war" as some claim, but a shift in U.S. military posture that accounts for changes in the security and diplomatic environments, national policy objectives, and the efforts of enemy elements and their sponsors as they pose threats to the United States and its interests.

Wood's contention is that when the United States fails to complete a mission, moving the goalposts is acceptable in order to justify continued foreign intervention and occupation. It's hard to see how this non-falsifiable argument doesn't qualify as endless.

Wood's argument blatantly disregards blowback from failed American interventions. Nation-building proponents regularly tout post-World War II Germany as an example of America's ability to export democracy. In reality, democracy building and reconstruction in Germany would have occurred with or without American occupation. In fact, the goal was never to install democracy in Germany , and many foreign aid efforts – such as the Marshall Plan – was not a significant factor in Western Europe's postwar recovery. Pointing to Germany as a U.S. success ignores the larger context that democracy was a result of political evolution rather than importation.

Furthermore while he acknowledges that the continued U.S. military presence in Germany required by the postwar NATO mission to meet the threat of the Soviet Union -- which is now gone -- he maintains "that things change, the force that is there continues to have value but for a different purpose."

Many of the justifications for remaining in the Middle East today are centered around cleaning up messes the U.S. government created. From arming and training the Mujahideen in Afghanistan that eventually formed the Taliban, to supporting and aiding anti-Assad fighters in Syria that eventually sided with ISIS, or creating the conditions in Somalia that led to the rise of al-Sabaab, these actions led to escalated violence that justifies continued U.S. intervention to this day. The longer Uncle Sam attempts to dictate outcomes anywhere outside its own borders, the messier the situations will become, and the easier it will be for interventionists to say troops must stay.

Wood's article accuses those who use the term "endless wars" of "intellectual laziness," yet he fails to develop or extrapolate on many of his key points. For instance, Wood repeatedly alludes to vague American security and economic interests when he stresses the importance of troops abroad, without defining any of them. Maybe because some of these interests only apply to the corporate or political elite rather than national security – like protecting Syrian oil fields as President Trump claimed in 2019. It's much easier to defend American intervention by glossing over the reality that vital national security interests are not at risk if U.S. troops acting as security guards aren't protecting Syrian oil fields.

Interventionists accuse restrainers of simplistically arguing for withdrawal without considering the repercussions. Those of us who want to end endless wars have indeed weighed the costs and benefits of continued occupation. The bottom line: the American people have not benefited from these wars of choice or American military hegemony.

The post-9/11 wars through fiscal year 2020 have cost the United States $6.4 trillion, according to Brown University's Costs of War Project . The U.S. military has lost over 7,000 servicemembers and an estimated 8,000 contractors, and has sustained tens of thousands of injuries across Iraq and Afghanistan theaters. According to their numbers, projected healthcare costs for American veterans over the next 40 years could reach $1 trillion.

Meanwhile, the project estimates that more than 801,000 people around the world have died directly from war violence, including more than 335,000 civilians who lost their lives as a result of the fighting. Additionally, the U.S.-led Global War on Terror has created conditions for an estimated 37 million refugees.

The U.S. has not achieved anything in these endless wars that could possibly outweigh these costs. The Taliban is stronger now than at any other point since 2001. In the Afghanistan Papers published by The Washington Post , military leaders and White House officials confessed that they had no idea what they were trying to accomplish in Afghanistan and that the mission was unsuccessful. The mission is now as murky as ever, after a Post article reported that U.S. Special Operations forces are secretly aiding the Taliban against ISIS. A member of the elite Joint Special Operations Command counterterrorism task force told the Post , "What we're doing with the strikes against ISIS is helping the Taliban move." So now the United States has come full circle by helping the enemy they have been fighting for the last 19 years.

Other measures of success, such as political freedom, women's rights, and poverty rates have not greatly improved either. The countries Wood specifically mentioned in his article -- Afghanistan , Iraq , Syria , and Somalia -- continue to rank as the least free countries on global freedom indices in terms of political rights and civil liberties.

All this is to say that America's military hegemony has not brought peace, stability, or freedom to the world, and in most cases has had the opposite effect. Restrainers want to protect American national security and U.S. citizens, but acting as the world's police and throwing money and lives at failing strategies must end. The burden of proof should fall on those who want America's military dominance to persist. They must rationalize their reasons for engagement and be transparent and forthright with their intentions.

The American people no longer believe the lies propagated by the Bush Administration and so many others after 9/11 . The United States does not face an existential threat from terrorists, and they don't hate us because "we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world." The sooner people like Wood understand this reality, the sooner we can end the endless wars. Written by
Nickie Deahl Share Copy Print Related Posts UAE and Israeli settlers find common ground in Jerusalem by James M. Dorsey

Rivalry for religious control of Al Aqsa Mosque and the site of the First Jewish Temple involves multiple risks for Mr.

[Nov 17, 2020] 'Back at the head of the table'- A look at Biden's foreign policy agenda

Nov 17, 2020 | www.france24.com

US president-elect Joe Biden's approach to diplomacy is diametrically opposed to that of the outgoing Donald Trump, known as he was to levy undiplomatic salvos at foreign leaders via social media. But one shouldn't expect a wholesale revamp in substance when the veteran Democrat takes office in January. FRANCE 24 takes a closer look at Biden's foreign policy agenda.

ADVERTISING

The former US vice president brings a wealth of foreign policy experience, expertise and, not insignificantly, genuine interest in global affairs to the White House. The Democrat served as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee , readily making trips to Iraq and Afghanistan to gather the facts on the ground, prior to spending eight years as President Barack Obama 's right-hand man from 2009 to early 2017.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Monday reflected fondly on her regular meetings with VP Biden under Obama. "He knows Germany and Europe well. I remember good encounters and conversations with him," Merkel said as she underlined Biden's "decades of experience in foreign policy" and "very warmly" congratulated him on his election win.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, US VP Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, laugh during a State Luncheon in Merkel's honour at the State Department in Washington on June 7, 2011.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, US VP Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, laugh during a State Luncheon in Merkel's honour at the State Department in Washington on June 7, 2011. © Manuel Balce Ceneta, AP Photo

The transatlantic conversation is indeed likely to mellow amid a promised early flurry of multilateral moves on Biden's part that dovetail with key European priorities and reverse the sorts of Trump manoeuvres that boggled European capitals.

Biden has said his foreign agenda would "place the United States back at the head of the table, in a position to work with its allies and partners to mobilise collective action on global threats". The operative word there may be "table" -- Biden recognises there should be one. After four years of "America First", with the erratic Trump toppling proverbial roundtables with an iconoclastic flourish, Biden will be conspicuous about putting the pieces back together.

ADVERTISING

me allow=

me name=

Repairing, bolstering alliances

"For 70 years, the United States, under Democratic and Republican presidents, played a leading role in writing the rules, forging the agreements, and animating the institutions that guide relations among nations and advance collective security and prosperity -- until Trump," Biden wrote in a Foreign Affairs piece last spring that reads like a foreign policy manifesto . "If we continue his abdication of that responsibility, then one of two things will happen: either someone else will take the United States' place, but not in a way that advances our interests and values, or no one will, and chaos will ensue. Either way, that's not good for America."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1325115731684503552&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.france24.com%2Fen%2Famericas%2F20201110-back-at-the-head-of-the-table-a-look-at-biden-s-foreign-policy-agenda&siteScreenName=FRANCE24&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Biden says he will rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement "on day one" and, "in his first 100 days in office", he will convene a global summit on climate to press the world's top carbon-emitters to join the US in making national pledges more ambitious than the ones they made in the French capital back in 2015.

On the campaign trail, the president-elect also pledged to rejoin the World Health Organization on his first day in office -- after Trump eschewed and quit the Geneva-based institution in the midst of the Covid-19 global public health crisis. "Americans are safer when America is engaged in strengthening global health," Biden reasons.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1280603719831359489&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.france24.com%2Fen%2Famericas%2F20201110-back-at-the-head-of-the-table-a-look-at-biden-s-foreign-policy-agenda&siteScreenName=FRANCE24&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

During his first year in office, the president-elect has also pledged to host "a global Summit for Democracy to renew the spirit and shared purpose of the nations of the Free World". The gathering's stated aim is to obtain commitments toward fighting corruption, countering authoritarianism, notably through election security, and advancing human rights globally.

Biden has also pledged to rejoin the United Nations Human Rights Council.

As a presidential candidate, Biden stumped for renewing America's support NATO , calling his country's commitment to the 70-year-old political and military alliance "sacred, not transactional", in contrast to his predecessor's vision of the body as a protection club with dues.

"NATO is at the very heart of the United States' national security, and it is the bulwark of the liberal democratic ideal -- an alliance of values, which makes it far more durable, reliable, and powerful than partnerships built by coercion or cash," the lifelong transatlanticist wrote. Cue the sigh of relief in Baltic capitals.

Countering 'Russian aggression'

Naturally, part of Biden's argument for bolstering NATO is the message it will send Moscow . "To counter Russian aggression, we must keep the alliance's military capabilities sharp while also expanding its capacity to take on nontraditional threats, such as weaponised corruption, disinformation, and cyber-theft," Biden explained in Foreign Affairs.

He was vice president in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine, sinking ties between Moscow and Washington to a post-Cold War low.

Observers note that Washington has not been complacent with Moscow in the intervening years, imposing sanctions on Russia during Trump's term in office even as the man behind the desk in the Oval Office seemed keen to look the other way. But under Biden, the mixed message of friendliness to Vladimir Putin conveyed by Trump -- who declined to address such affronts as the bounties Moscow allegedly put on the heads of US troops in Afghanistan -- will likely be a thing of the past.

"We must impose real costs on Russia for its violations of international norms and stand with Russian civil society, which has bravely stood up time and again against President Vladimir Putin's kleptocratic authoritarian system," Biden has pledged.

Despite his wariness of Moscow, Biden has promised to pursue an extension of the New START Treaty, which his campaign called "an anchor of strategic stability between the United States and Russia" and use that nuclear arms reduction agreement as a foundation for future arms control arrangements.

Coalescing allies to confront China

Biden sees China , meanwhile, as the most pertinent threat to US interests long-term, a stance that enjoys rare relative bipartisan agreement in Washington, meaning the shift on relations with Beijing will primarily be one of tone and method.

Biden has slammed China for stealing US firms' technology and intellectual property and for giving its state-owned firms an unfair advantage with subsidies.

Instead of addressing US concerns unilaterally as Trump has, Biden has proposed building a coalition of allies to confront China where the nations disagree (unfair commercial practices, human rights abuses) and to engage in cooperation where it is needed (climate issues, global public health, nonproliferation, not least vis-à-vis North Korea).

"On its own, the United States represents about a quarter of global GDP. When we join together with fellow democracies, our strength more than doubles. China can't afford to ignore more than half the global economy," wrote Biden in Foreign Affairs. "That gives us substantial leverage to shape the rules of the road on everything from the environment to labour, trade, technology, and transparency, so they continue to reflect democratic interests and values," he reasoned.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1325803750657814528&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.france24.com%2Fen%2Famericas%2F20201110-back-at-the-head-of-the-table-a-look-at-biden-s-foreign-policy-agenda&siteScreenName=FRANCE24&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

The Delaware Democrat has blasted Trump's propensity for designating imports from the European Union and Canada, America's "closest allies", as national security threats, damaging long-entrenched relationships with "reckless tariffs".

"By cutting us off from the economic clout of our partners, Trump has kneecapped our country's capacity to take on the real economic threat," he wrote, pointing to China.

No more 'forever wars' in the Middle East

Biden has pledged to "re-enter" the Iran nuclear deal, "negotiated by the Obama-Biden administration alongside our allies and other world powers" -- namely France, Germany, the UK, the EU, China and Russia. He credits the accord with having blocked Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and blames Trump's decision to cast it aside for prompting Iran to rekindle its nuclear ambitions and adopt a more provocative stance. Biden has pledged to rejoin the agreement "if Tehran returns to compliance" and use "hard-nosed diplomacy and support from our allies to strengthen and extend it, while more effectively pushing back against Iran's other destabilising activities".

Meanwhile, the former vice-president has also said he would "end our support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen".

Then-Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., right, huddles with then-Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., left, on Capitol Hill in Washington during the committee's hearing on Iraq on January 31, 2007.
Then-Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., right, huddles with then-Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., left, on Capitol Hill in Washington during the committee's hearing on Iraq on January 31, 2007. © Susan Walsh, AP Photo/File

Although he has said Trump's unilateral approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has made the two-state solution for Israel that Biden backs more difficult, he has said he would keep the embassy Trump moved to Jerusalem in 2018 where it is. Biden has welcomed the normalising of relations the Trump administration helped negotiate between Israel and Gulf states in recent months.

The Democrat has pledged to sustain "an ironclad commitment to Israel's security". He has also cautioned the country over its treatment of the Palestinian territories, saying earlier this year , "Israel needs to stop the threats of annexation and stop settlement activity because it will choke off any hope of peace."

In terms of US military commitments in the region, Biden has advocated bringing home the vast majority of American troops in the Middle East and Afghanistan, in favour of narrowing the focus to Al-Qaeda and Islamic State group. He wants to end the "forever wars" the US has waged in the region.

Daily newsletter Receive essential international news every morning

Subscribe

"We must maintain our focus on counter-terrorism, around the world and at home, but staying entrenched in unwinnable conflicts drains our capacity to lead on other issues that require our attention, and it prevents us from rebuilding the other instruments of American power," he wrote in Foreign Affairs.

No hard-border Brexit

It would be a misnomer to count Brexit as among Biden's hot-button policy issues. Indeed, while Trump ally Boris Johnson and his Conservative leadership in London once looked forward to negotiating an "ambitious" post-Brexit trade deal with the US, neither Biden's campaign website's outline of his foreign policy priorities nor the former vice president's quasi-manifesto in Foreign Affairs makes any mention of the United Kingdom per se or its divorce proceedings from the EU. What is clear is that Biden is not poised to cater to the so-called "Special Relationship" at any cost.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/BCr6XReU9vQ?feature=oembed

"We can't allow the Good Friday Agreement that brought peace to Northern Ireland to become a casualty of Brexit," the president-elect, a noted Irish-American, tweeted in September . "Any trade deal between the US and UK must be contingent upon respect for the Agreement and preventing the return of a hard border. Period."

Not quite Twitter diplomacy as Trump might conduct it, but the president-elect's sentiment won't have escaped Downing Street's attention as it turns the page on Europe.

[Nov 17, 2020] -Imperialism In Pumps-- Greenwald Johnstone Go Off As Media Gushes Over Presumed Biden Pick For SecDef -

Nov 17, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

"Imperialism In Pumps": Greenwald & Johnstone Go Off As Media Gushes Over Presumed Biden Pick For SecDef by Tyler Durden Mon, 11/16/2020 - 18:30 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Independent commentator Caitlin Johnstone is raining on the parade of Liberals and Progressives who are hailing "barriers being broken" merely because Joe Biden is expected to pick a woman for the top Pentagon post in a historic first, blasting the spectacle as "Imperialism in Pumps" given presumed top choice Michele Flournoy hails from deep within the heart of the hawkish military-industrial complex .

"President-elect Joe Biden is expected to take a historic step and select a woman to head the Pentagon for the first time, shattering one of the few remaining barriers to women in the department and the presidential Cabinet," the Associated Press reported gushingly this weekend.

Michele Flournoy, via The Boston Globe

Apparently the "politically moderate" Flournoy is being viewed favorably by "political insiders" and career Pentagon officials.

But as a reminder here's what "moderate" means in establishment NatSec-speak :

Seen as a steady hand who favors strong military cooperation abroad , Flournoy, 59, has served multiple times in the Pentagon, starting in the 1990s and most recently as the undersecretary of defense for policy from 2009 to 2012. She serves on the board of Booz Allen Hamilton , a defense contractor...

Johnstone is unscathing in her attack on the media and Liberal cheerleading :

This word "moderate" which the AP news agency keeps bleating is of course complete nonsense. Standing in the middle ground between two corporatist warmongering parties does not make you a moderate, it makes you a corporatist warmonger. Flournoy is no more "moderate" than the "moderate rebels" in Syria which mass media outlets like AP praised for years until it became undeniable that they were largely Al Qaeda affiliates ; the only reason such a position can be portrayed as mainstream and moderate is because vast fortunes have been poured into making it that way.

She highlights the nauseating spectacle of MSNBC and others attempting to frame it as a great achievement for feminism:

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

"White progressives training their fire on women and women of color who are under consideration to lead the nat sec departments makes me deeply uncomfortable about their allyship for those communities," tweeted MSNBC contributor Mieke Eoyang. "Especially when the nat sec community is dominated by white men."

It's only going to get dumber from here, folks.

Let's clear this up before the girl power parade starts: the first woman to head the US war machine will not be a groundbreaking pioneer of feminist achievement. She will be a mass murderer who wears Spanx. Her appointment will not be an advancement for women, it will be imperialism in pumps.

Glenn Greenwald also pointed out the obvious in terms of what's really going on here, deriding "the neoliberal scam of exploiting identity politics" .

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1327356211017158657&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fimperialism-pumps-greenwald-johnstone-go-media-gushes-over-presumed-biden-pick-secdef&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Greenwald came under attack for so much as daring to question Flournoy's potential appointment on the mere basis that one supposedly can't possibly question the choice when "barriers are being broken" (and nevermind that a woman, Gina Haspel, currently runs the most powerful spy agency in the world).

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1327358116728541185&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fimperialism-pumps-greenwald-johnstone-go-media-gushes-over-presumed-biden-pick-secdef&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Greenwald wrote of this tactic: "It belongs as a Hall of Fame exhibit showing why Democratic Party neoliberals and militarists are indescribably deceitful and repulsive."

[Nov 17, 2020] If Biden's Serious About Bringing Back Diplomacy, He Should Make These Appointments - FPIF

Nov 17, 2020 | fpif.org

During his election campaign, Biden has relied on foreign policy advisors from past administrations, particularly the Obama administration, and seems to be considering some of them for top cabinet posts. For the most part, they are members of the "Washington blob" who represent a dangerous continuity with past policies rooted in militarism and other abuses of power.

These include interventions in Libya and Syria, support for the Saudi war in Yemen, drone warfare, indefinite detention without trial at Guantanamo, prosecutions of whistleblowers and whitewashing torture. Some of these people have also cashed in on their government contacts to make hefty salaries in consulting firms and other private sector ventures that feed off government contracts.

As former Deputy Secretary of State and Deputy National Security Advisor to Obama, Tony Blinken played a leading role in all of Obama's more aggressive policies. Then he co-founded WestExec Advisors to profit from negotiating contracts between corporations and the Pentagon, including one for Google to develop artificial intelligence technology for drone targeting, which was only stopped by a rebellion among outraged Google employees.

Since the Clinton administration, Michele Flournoy has been a principal architect of the U.S.'s illegal, imperialist doctrine of global war and military occupation. As Obama's Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, she helped to engineer his escalation of the war in Afghanistan and interventions in Libya and Syria. Between jobs at the Pentagon, she has worked the infamous revolving door to consult for firms seeking Pentagon contracts, to co-found a military-industrial think tank called the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), and now to join Tony Blinken at WestExec Advisors.

Nicholas Burns was U.S. Ambassador to NATO during the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Since 2008, he has worked for former Defense Secretary William Cohen's lobbying firm The Cohen Group, which is a major global lobbyist for the U.S. arms industry. Burns is a hawk on Russia and China and has condemned NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden as a "traitor."

As a legal adviser to Obama and the State Department and then as Deputy CIA Director and Deputy National Security Advisor, Avril Haines provided legal cover and worked closely with Obama and CIA Director John Brennan on Obama's tenfold expansion of drone killings.

Samantha Power served under Obama as UN Ambassador and Human Rights Director at the National Security Council. She supported U.S. interventions in Libya and Syria, as well as the Saudi-led war on Yemen . And despite her human rights portfolio, she never spoke out against Israeli attacks on Gaza that happened under her tenure or Obama's dramatic use of drones that left hundreds of civilians dead.

Former Hillary Clinton aide Jake Sullivan played a leading role in unleashing U.S. covert and proxy wars in Libya and Syria .

As UN Ambassador in Obama's first term, Susan Rice obtained UN cover for his disastrous intervention in Libya. As National Security Advisor in Obama's second term, Rice also defended Israel's savage bombardment of Gaza in 2014, bragged about the U.S.'s "crippling sanctions" on Iran and North Korea, and supported an aggressive stance toward Russia and China.

A foreign policy team led by such individuals will only perpetuate the endless wars, Pentagon overreach and CIA-misled chaos that we -- and the world -- have endured for the past two decades of the War on Terror.

Making diplomacy "the premier tool of our global engagement."

Biden will take office amid some of the greatest challenges the human race has ever faced -- from extreme inequality, debt and poverty caused by neoliberalism , to intractable wars and the existential danger of nuclear war, the climate crisis, mass extinction, and the Covid-19 pandemic.

These problems won't be solved by the same people, and the same mindsets, that got us into these predicaments. When it comes to foreign policy, there is a desperate need for personnel and policies rooted in an understanding that the greatest dangers we face are problems that affect the whole world, and that they can only be solved by genuine international collaboration, not by conflict or coercion.

During the campaign, Joe Biden's website declared, "As president, Biden will elevate diplomacy as the premier tool of our global engagement. He will rebuild a modern, agile U.S. Department of State -- investing in and re-empowering the finest diplomatic corps in the world and leveraging the full talent and richness of America's diversity."

This implies that Biden's foreign policy must be managed primarily by the State Department, not the Pentagon. The Cold War and American post-Cold War triumphalism led to a reversal of these roles, with the Pentagon and CIA taking the lead and the State Department trailing behind them (with only 5 percent of their budget), trying to clean up the mess and restore a veneer of order to countries destroyed by American bombs or destabilized by U.S. sanctions , coups and death squads .

In the Trump era, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reduced the State Department to little more than a sales team for the military-industrial complex to ink lucrative arms deals with India, Taiwan , Saudi Arabia, the UAE and countries around the world.

What we need is a foreign policy led by a State Department that resolves differences with our neighbors through diplomacy and negotiations, as international law in fact requires , and a Department of Defense that defends the United States and deters international aggression against us, instead of threatening and committing aggression against our neighbors around the world.

As the saying goes, "personnel is policy," so whomever Biden picks for top foreign policy posts will be key in shaping its direction. While our personal preferences would be to put top foreign policy positions in the hands of people who have spent their lives actively pursuing peace and opposing U.S. military aggression, that's just not in the cards with this middle-of-the-road Biden administration.

But there are appointments Biden could make to give his foreign policy the emphasis on diplomacy and negotiation that he says he wants. These are American diplomats who have successfully negotiated important international agreements, warned U.S. leaders of the dangers of aggressive militarism, and developed valuable expertise in critical areas like arms control.

William Burns was Deputy Secretary of State under Obama, the No. 2 position at the State Department, and he is now the director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. As Under Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs in 2002, Burns gave Secretary of State Colin Powell a prescient and detailed but unheeded warning that the invasion of Iraq could "unravel" and create a "perfect storm" for American interests. Burns also served as U.S. Ambassador to Jordan and then Russia.

Wendy Sherman was Obama's Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, the No. 4 position at the State Department, and was briefly Acting Deputy Secretary of State after Burns retired. Sherman was the lead negotiator for both the1994 Framework Agreement with North Korea and the negotiations with Iran that led to the Iran nuclear agreement in 2015. This is surely the kind of experience Biden needs in senior positions if he is serious about reinvigorating American diplomacy.

Tom Countryman is currently the Chair of the Arms Control Association . In the Obama administration, Countryman served as Undersecretary of State for International Security Affairs, Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs. He also served at U.S. embassies in Belgrade, Cairo, Rome, and Athens, and as foreign policy advisor to the Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps. Countryman's expertise could be critical in reducing or even removing the danger of nuclear war. It would also please the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, since Tom supported Senator Bernie Sanders for president.

In addition to these professional diplomats, there are also members of Congress who have expertise in foreign policy and could play important roles in a Biden foreign policy team. One is Representative Ro Khanna , who has been a champion of ending U.S. support for the war in Yemen, resolving the conflict with North Korea, and reclaiming Congress's constitutional authority over the use of military force.

Another is Representative Karen Bass , who is the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and also of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Human Rights, and International Organizations .

If the Republicans hold their majority in the Senate, it will be harder to get appointments confirmed than if the Democrats win the two Georgia seats that are headed for run-offs (or than if they had run more progressive campaigns in Iowa, Maine, or North Carolina and won at least one of those seats).

But this will be a long two years if we let Joe Biden take cover behind Mitch McConnell on critical appointments, policies, and legislation. Biden's initial cabinet appointments will be an early test of whether Biden will be the consummate insider or whether he is willing to fight for real solutions to our country's most serious problems.

Conclusion

U.S. cabinet positions are positions of power that can drastically affect the lives of millions of Americans and billions of our neighbors overseas.

If Biden is surrounded by people who, against all the evidence of past decades, still believe in the illegal threat and use of military force as key foundations of American foreign policy, then the international cooperation the whole world so desperately needs will be undermined by four more years of war, hostility, and international tensions -- and our most serious problems will remain unresolved.

That's why we must vigorously advocate for a team that would put an end to the normalization of war and make diplomatic engagement in the pursuit of international peace and cooperation our number one foreign policy priority.

Whomever President-elect Biden chooses to be part of his foreign policy team, he -- and they -- will be pushed by people beyond the White House fence who are calling for demilitarization, including cuts in military spending, and for reinvestment in our country's peaceful economic development.

It will be our job to hold President Biden and his team accountable whenever they fail to turn the page on war and militarism, and to keep pushing them to build friendly relations with all our neighbors on this small planet that we share.

Medea Benjamin is the cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace, and the author of several books, including Kingdom of the Unjust: Behind the US-Saudi Connection and Inside Iran: the Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran .

Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK, and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq .

[Nov 16, 2020] Regretfully, US liberals now out-hawk conservatives in eagerness for aggression war -- RT Op-ed

Nov 16, 2020 | www.rt.com
Get short URL

Daniel Kovalik teaches International Human Rights at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, and is author of the recently-released No More War: How the West Violates International Law by Using "Humanitarian" Intervention to Advance Economic and Strategic Interests. You might have noticed something curious following Biden's apparent election win – liberal politicians and media are sounding the alarm that Trump may use his remaining months in office to draw down our troops from Afghanistan.

For example, the New York Times ran a piece on November 12 claiming that " both in Kabul and Washington, officials with knowledge of security briefings said there was fear that President Trump might try to accelerate an all-out troop withdrawal in his final days in office " before the more "responsible" Biden can take over and try to stop or at least slow this. It is clear now that it is the liberal establishment, and the Democratic Party, which is more wedded to war than their counterparts across the aisle, and that should be disturbing to people hoping for progressive change with the incoming Administration.

First of all, we must start with this discussion with the undisputed fact that our leaders do not know, and have not known for some time, what the US' goals and strategy in Afghanistan even are. One would be forgiven for not knowing, or for forgetting this fact because the incontrovertible evidence of it – the so-called " Afghanistan Papers " – received scant and only momentary attention when they were exposed last year by the Washington Post.

ALSO ON RT.COM George Galloway: Kiss of death – The winner of the most coveted Henry Kissinger endorsement is... Joe Biden

As these documents, consisting of interviews with hundreds of insiders responsible for prosecuting the war show, the American public was intentionally lied to about the alleged " progress " of this war, even as our leaders were unsure what " progress " meant.

As the Washington Post noted, the US government never even decided who it was really fighting there: " Was al-Qaeda the enemy, or the Taliban? Was Pakistan a friend or an adversary? What about Islamic State and the bewildering array of foreign jihadists, let alone the warlords on the CIA's payroll? According to the documents, the US government never settled on an answer ." Almost to a person, everyone involved in this morass agreed that the billions of dollars spent, and thousands of lives lost, have been in vain. It has all been a colossal waste.

Now, however, we are being told to panic that Trump may end this disastrous conflict. For example, the quite liberal and almost blatantly pro-Biden news outlet, National Public Radio (NPR) ran segments all last week about female soccer teams in Afghanistan. The message of these segments was clear – these soccer teams are (allegedly) proof of women's advances in Afghanistan as a result of the US' intervention since 2001, and these advances are in jeopardy if Trump ends this intervention.

Such manipulative stories of course obscure the real fact that the US has been undermining women's rights in Afghanistan since it began intervening there in 1979, and Afghanistan still ranks at the very bottom of all countries for women's rights. But there is no doubt that such stories will warm the hearts of many Biden supporters to continue war there.

ALSO ON RT.COM The US military is NOT a feminist organization: It can't protect women's rights abroad as it can't protect its own female soldiers

Meanwhile, it is not only Afghanistan which is the focus of the liberal enthusiasm for war. Thus, as the Grayzone has reported , Dana Stroul, the Democratic co-chair of the Congressionally-appointed Syria Study Group, recently outlined the plans for even deeper US intervention in Syria – an intervention which Trump has at least paid lip service to ending.

Specifically, Stroul emphasized that " one-third of Syrian territory was owned via the US military, with its local partner the Syrian Democratic Forces, " that this territory happened to be the richest in Syria in terms of oil and agriculture, and that the US would intensify its intervention in and against Syria to keep its control of this territory and its resources. Of course, taking over other nations' resources is a violation of international law, including the Geneva Conventions prohibition against "plunder," but that seems to be of no concern.

The liberal media is also elated by the prospect of a Biden White House being more aggressive in its foreign policy towards both Russia and China.

As CNBC explains , " Now there is likely to be a change in the air when it comes to U.S.-Russia relations. At the very least, analysts told CNBC before the result that they expected a Biden win to increase tensions between Washington and Moscow, and to raise the probability of new sanctions on Russia...Experts from risk consultancy Teneo Intelligence said they expected more cooperation between Biden and Europe on global issues such as 'countering China, Russia' ."

While one might think that increased tensions with two major nuclear powers would not be a welcome development, years of the false Russiagate narrative have groomed liberals for such tensions.

ALSO ON RT.COM Trump's Pentagon shuffle suggests either no more wars or just one with Iran

Incredibly, Trump has been portrayed as being soft on Russia, even as he backed out of a major anti-proliferation treaty (The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty) which had been signed with the Kremlin back in 1987, and even as he sent the largest contingent of US troops (20,000) in a quarter of a century to train with European soldiers on the Russian border. I must note here that the converse – Russia's sending tens of thousands of troops to the border with the US – is simply inconceivable and would indeed be seen in Washington as an occasion for war. I, for one, am quite alarmed to think of what a Biden policy of "getting tougher" with Russia would look like, and what kind of catastrophe it could bring about.

Regretfully, I now live in a country in which liberals outflanking conservatives in terms of their tolerance and even eagerness for aggression and war, especially when that aggression and war is being led by officials who, as I'm sure we will see in the new Biden Administration, happen to be women or people of color. For the first time recently, I have seen the concept of "intersectional imperialism" being used to describe this situation, and I believe this to be a very real phenomenon; to be but another means of making war that much easier to swallow for broad swaths of the American public.

The irony, of course, is that the bombs dropped by the US in war, no matter who happens to be in charge of the US government at the time, disproportionately fall upon women and children of a darker skin hue, and they maim and kill just as much as those dropped by old white male Republicans. Sadly, few seem to understand or care about this.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

benalls 31 minutes ago 16 Nov, 2020 10:27 AM

It's not the "left" or "right", republicans or democrats, but a new American movement,,,, CBM,,, wich usually means 'silent but deadly' but in this case it stands for "CEO's Bonus Matters" . The movement congressional members from Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing vowed to support. Its time for us to grab our shields, helmets, and frozen water bottles and travel to a new neighborhood to loot and burn. Israel has given Harris and JOJO their instructions.

razzims 49 minutes ago 16 Nov, 2020 10:10 AM
same ol empire of chaos and their eternal war. no matter which party wins election
HypoxiaMasks 1 hour ago 16 Nov, 2020 09:42 AM
Other than the Bush and lil Bush, every war from the beginning of the 20th century was started with a Democrat president. Tell me again how the Republicans are the party of war
MarkG1964 5 minutes ago 16 Nov, 2020 10:54 AM
The democrats and republicans are two wings on the same bird.

[Nov 16, 2020] Video- Joe Biden Was Firmly Behind The 2003 Iraq War. Extensive War Crimes - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Nov 16, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

Worth the Price? Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War is a documentary short reviewing the role of then-Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) in leading the United States into the most devastating foreign policy blunder of the last twenty years.

Produced and directed by Mark Weisbrot and narrated by Danny Glover , the film features archival footage, as well as policy experts who provide insight and testimony with regard to Joe Biden's role as the Chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in 2002.

Featured experts:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/vhcuei8_UJM

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

[Nov 16, 2020] Joe Biden's Victory Is Still a Loss for Humanity- -Good News for Corporations, Cops, War Profiteers and Banks- - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Nov 16, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

The possibility of eased sanctions with Iran, while extremely important, is not guaranteed and will be offset by Biden's own commitment to imperialist plunder in the region. One cannot forget that Biden helped the Obama administration increase U.S. wars from two to seven. In eight years, Biden assisted in the coup of Honduras , the overthrow of Libya , and the ongoing proxy war in Syria . Biden's commitment to the WHO should not negate his firm opposition to any single-payer model of healthcare and the large sums of money he receives from the very healthcare industry which has ensured the U.S. is without a public health system all together.

"Biden helped the Obama administration increase U.S. wars from two to seven."

Biden and the Democratic Party are joint partners with the GOP in the facilitation of the ongoing Race to the Bottom for the working class. Wall Street donated heavily to Biden with full knowledge that his administration will continue to support the right of corporations to drive down wages, increase productivity (exploitation), and concentrate capital in fewer and fewer hands. Boeing's CEO stated clearly clear that his business prospects would be served regardless of who won the election . Prison stocks rose after Biden announced Kamala Harris as his vice president . On November 4th, Reuters announced that the lords of capital were quite pleased that no major policy changes were likely under the new political regime elected to Congress and the Oval Office.

Biden will inevitably rule as a rightwing neoconservative in all areas of policy. His big tent of Republicans and national security state apparatchiks is at least as large as Hillary Clinton's in 2016. Over 100 former GOP war hawks of the national security state endorsed Biden in the closing weeks of the election. Larry Summers, a chief architect of the 2007-2008 economic crisis, advised his campaign . Susan Rice and Michele Flournoy are likely to join Biden's foreign policy team -- a key indication that trillions will continue to be spent on murderous wars abroad.

The question remains whether Biden can effectively govern like prior Democratic Party administrations. American exceptionalism is the Democratic Party's ideological base, but this ideology is entangled in the general crisis of legitimacy afflicting the U.S. state. Biden's ability to forward a project of "decency" that restores the "soul of the nation" is hampered by his attitude that "nothing will fundamentally change" for the rich. Biden also lacks charisma and talent. While millions were ready to vote for anyone and anything not named Donald Trump, four years of austerity and war under a president with obvious signs of cognitive decline is guaranteed to sharpen the contradictions of the rule of the rich and open the potential for further unrest on both the left and the right of the political spectrum.

"Biden's big tent of Republicans and national security state apparatchiks is at least as large as Hillary Clinton's in 2016."

To maintain social peace, Biden will use the Oval Office to consolidate its corporate forces to suffocate left wing forces inside and outside of the Democratic Party. The graveyard of social movements will expand to occupy the largest plot of political territory as possible. A "moderate" revolution will be declared for the forces of progress in the ruling class. Perhaps the best that can be summoned from a Biden administration is the advancement of consciousness that the Democratic Party is just as opposed to social democracy and the interests of the working classes as Republicans. Plenty of opportunities exist to challenge the intransigence of the Democrats but just as many obstacles will be thrown in the way of any true exercise of people's power.

The 2020 election is yet another reminder that social movements must become the focus of politics, not the electoral process. This is where an internationalist vision of politics is especially important. Social movements in Bolivia returned their socialist party to power after a year living under a U.S.-backed coup. Massive grassroots mobilizations in Cuba, Vietnam, and China contained the COVID-19 pandemic in a matter of months. Ethiopia and Eritrea have agreed to forge peace rather than wage war. The winds of progress have been blowing toward the Global South for more than a century. The most progressive changes that have ever occurred in the U.S. have been a combined product of the mass organization of the U.S.' so-called internal colonies such as Black America and the external pressures placed on the U.S. empire by movements for self-determination abroad.

The 2020 election has come and gone. What we know is that Biden is a repudiation of revolutionary change. Humanity will suffer many losses even if more of the oppressed and working masses become aware of Biden and the DNC's hostile class interests. Trump was rejected by a corporate-owned electoral process just as Clinton was rejected in 2016. Politics in the U.S. remain confined to the narrow ideological possibilities offered by neoliberalism and imperial decay. Oppressed people must create and embrace a politics that take aim at the forces of reaction currently pushing humanity to the brink of total destruction. The only way this can happen is if Biden and the rest of the Democratic Party become the primary target of the people's fight for a new world.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Danny Haiphong is co-coordinator of the Black Alliance for Peace Supporter Network and organizer with No Cold War. He and Roberto Sirvent are co-authors of the book entitled American Exceptionalism and American Innocence: A People's History of Fake News–From the Revolutionary War to the War on Terror (Skyhorse Publishing). His articles are re-published widely as well as on Patreon at patreon.com/dannyhaiphong. He is also the co-host with BAR Editor Margaret Kimberley of the Youtube show BAR Presents: The Left Lens and can be reached on Twitter @spiritofho, and email at [email protected].

[Nov 16, 2020] Elephants in the Room- Why Do America and Britain Commit War Crimes- Neoliberalism and Predatory Capitalism - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Nov 16, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

Elephants in the Room: Why Do America and Britain Commit War Crimes? Neoliberalism and Predatory Capitalism Part II By Rod Driver Global Research, November 15, 2020 Region: Europe , USA Theme: History , US NATO War Agenda

4

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?action=&app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df286d0d0d026c64%26domain%3Dwww.globalresearch.ca%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.globalresearch.ca%252Fffec9dcb26e204%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=112&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca%2Felephants-room-why-do-us-britain-commit-war-crimes%2F5729454&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=false&show_faces=false

https://apis.google.com/u/0/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&count=true&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca%2Felephants-room-why-do-us-britain-commit-war-crimes%2F5729454&gsrc=3p&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en.6Uw6xjIGoH8.O%2Fam%3DwQE%2Fd%3D1%2Fct%3Dzgms%2Frs%3DAGLTcCOCpwZBnKr4AHjJwpr6PLObYk6mnA%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1605493047764&_gfid=I0_1605493047764&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca&pfname=&rpctoken=21533511 7

"I spent 33 years being a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. I helped make Mexico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in.

I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American Sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see that Standard Oil went its way unmolested. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism."(1) (Major-General Smedley D. Butler, 1931 , US Marine Corps)

Read Part I:

Elephants in the Room: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War II

By Rod Driver , October 29, 2020

***

Once people understand the extent of the crimes of the US and British governments, the next question they ask themselves is 'Why?'

The quote above shows clearly that US war and economic exploitation are two sides of the same coin. Military aggression by rich nations often supports the economic interests of a small number of the world's wealthiest and most powerful people and corporations. Decisions about wars and decisions about how the world's trading system is structured are each made by a small number of powerful people.

This includes not only politicians, but also senior executives in industry, particularly banking, oil, mining, food and weapons. Most of these people live in the world's advanced nations, particularly the US. I shall use the phrase 'Western elites' to refer to these people. Some of these elites have gone to extraordinary lengths to try to make sure that their position of power and wealth in the world is maintained. In 1948 the US had only 6% of the world's population but 50% of the world's wealth. A US official stated at the time that their aim was "to maintain this position of disparity"(2). As will become clear throughout these posts, the views of US planners have changed little in the last 70 years.

Control of Resources and Trade

What is important in the minds of Western elites can be summed up by the phrase 'control of resources and trade'. This is a shorthand way of summarising a number of connected ideas. Resources include things like land, oil, minerals, crops and human labor. Rich countries want poor countries to allow global corporations to extract and process these resources, and to take them overseas, without too much interference from national governments, whatever the downsides for local people. Rich countries also want poor countries to have economic systems that will allow global corporations to dominate trade, buying and selling in order to make substantial profits, without being too restricted by local laws. Again, this applies even where there are downsides for local people.

Western elites therefore want leaders in other countries who will implement the 'right' economic system. This means a particularly exploitative version of capitalism, sometimes called neoliberalism or predatory capitalism, including widespread privatisation, weaker regulations for big companies, and decreases in government expenditure, known as austerity. (These economic policies will be discussed in more detail in later posts). The global financial and trade system is manipulated deliberately and systematically to create this outcome. This might sound like a conspiracy, but it does not really work that way. Provided everyone just plays their part (corporate executives and bankers pursue profit, politicians make laws that favor corporations, and trade negotiators from rich countries try to create trading agreements that benefit their corporations), the rich get richer and the poor stay poor.

Blocking Independent Development

If leaders in other countries want to determine their own economic systems, this is known as independent development. This does not mean that a country cuts itself off from the rest of the world, or does not engage in trade. It simply means that the leaders of a country refuse to implement neoliberal economic policies that allow corporations from rich countries to dominate their economies, to plunder their resources, or to exploit their people. Western elites have tried very hard to block independent development, because it limits their control. Leaders who object to being exploited by rich nations can be overthrown and replaced, often causing devastating consequences for their people, particularly the poor. The new leaders are often referred to as US clients. They usually cooperate with the US because this helps them gain power and wealth in their own country. Getting these rulers into power can be quite tricky. Techniques range from manipulating elections right up to full-scale military invasion.

US Dominance

The US in particular has two other key goals. It wants to maintain a global financial system based around the US dollar, and it would like to ensure that no other country becomes strong enough, either militarily or economically, to be a rival. In 2018 the US announced that its main focus was no longer on the 'war on terror', but would focus on "inter-state strategic competition"(3), meaning Russia and China.

Whenever the reasons for a war are discussed in the mainstream, there is a tendency to look for a single explanatory factor. In practice there tend to be a cluster of factors, often connected to each other, that all push in the same direction. As well as the reasons discussed above, there are plenty of big corporations that frequently benefit from war. This includes the weapons industry, financial companies, private military contractors (mercenaries), oil and minerals companies, and more recently many companies that win contracts to participate in the reconstruction process in war zones.(4)

The Importance of Oil

Oil in the Middle East has been described as

"a stupendous source of strategic power and one of the great material prizes in world history."(5)

Without oil, most advanced economies would grind to a halt. Of all the resources that American leaders want to control, by far the most important is oil. Their control of oil is not so much about wanting it all for themselves. It is more about being able to deny it to others.(6) Anything that a country cannot produce for itself, but needs badly, can be used as a means of control. A shortage of oil for a country such as China would make life very difficult for them. This is the main reason that the major wars of the 21 st century have been in oil rich regions. Specific motives relating to recent wars will be discussed in later posts.

How Do We Know The Real Reasons For British and US Wars

Until 2006 it was difficult to know what politicians and government decision-makers were really saying to each other about their reasons for wars and other activities. The government kept many files secret in order to hide their crimes. In the UK we had to wait for 30 years (this has now been reduced to 20 years) until some of these files became declassified. During that period, we had to rely on the word of politicians and journalists for information. The declassified files show that politicians often lie, particularly about their reasons for war, and that mainstream media are not sufficiently questioning.(7) Time and again, the mainstream media would show clips of Prime Ministers and Presidents saying 'We want peace', while those same individuals were responsible for major wars. The files also show that Politicians use concepts like 'national security' or 'official secrets' to cover up their crimes.

In 2006 a man named Julian Assange set up a new organisation called Wikileaks. This enabled whistleblowers (people who witness criminal or unethical activity, usually by their employers) to make information available to the public without their identity becoming known. Millions of documents were given to Wikileaks exposing widespread war crimes by the British and US governments, and widespread criminal activity by other governments and big companies. All of these documents are available online and can be examined by anyone.(8)

Key Points

US and British wars are about control of trade and resources in other countries.

Of all the resources that the US wants to control, oil is the most important.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Rod Driver is a part-time academic who is particularly interested in de-bunking modern-day US and British propaganda. This is the second in a series entitled Elephants In The Room, which attempts to provide a beginners guide to understanding what's really going on in relation to war, terrorism, economics and poverty, without the nonsense in the mainstream media.

This article was first posted at medium.com/elephantsintheroom

[Nov 16, 2020] Progressive House Democrats urge Biden against Defense chief with contractor ties - TheHill

Nov 16, 2020 | thehill.com

© Aaron Schwartz

A pair of progressive House Democrats is urging President-elect Joe Biden not to nominate a Pentagon chief who has previously worked for a defense contractor.

"Respectfully, and in full agreement with your past statements, we write to request that the next secretary of Defense have no prior employment history with a defense contractor," Reps. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) wrote in a letter to Biden released Thursday.

Pocan is the co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and Lee is the caucus's chairwoman emeritus.

[Nov 16, 2020] From the Revolving Doors of the Pentagon to the Biden Administration - Antiwar.com Blog

Nov 16, 2020 | www.antiwar.com

From the Revolving Doors of the Pentagon to the Biden Administration

Code Pink Posted on November 16, 2020

From CodePink :

Dear Friend,

Do you want someone on the board of a company connected to the brutal Saudi war in Yemen to serve as the next Secretary of Defense?

President-elect Joe Biden is expected to select notorious war-hawk Michele Flournoy , who supported the wars in Iraq, Libya and Syria when she worked at the Pentagon and is on the board of military IT contractor Booz Allen Hamilton, as his candidate for Secretary of Defense. Contact your Senators right now and tell them: no weapons industry war-hawks in the President's cabinet!

Flournoy's career has been marked by the unethical spinning of revolving doors between the Pentagon and consulting firms that help businesses procure Pentagon contracts. In 2018, she joined the board of Booz Allen Hamilton, an IT company that played an important role in Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's 2015 drive to consolidate power. Booz Allen employs dozens of retired American military personnel to train the Saudi Navy and provide logistics for the Saudi Army. They deny helping the Saudi war in Yemen, and if you believe that

This is urgent: President-elect Biden could officially select his choice for Secretary of Defense as early as Thanksgiving and we can't let his foreign policy be dictated by a former Pentagon official who sits on the board of a company connected to MbS and the brutal war in Yemen. Since all cabinet members must be approved by the Senate, we are starting our petition to the Senate NOW to oppose the appointment of Flournoy or any candidate in bed with the military contractors. Contact your Senators now!

It's true – we probably won't like anyone appointed to Secretary of Defense. But we must firmly oppose the fundamental conflict of interest that occurs when the official selected to oversee the Defense Department is beholden to the same companies that stand to gain enormous profit under their tenure. We oppose Michele Flournoy and any candidate for Secretary of Defense with ties to revolving doors of the Pentagon because when the military contractors calls the shots, we get:

With this new administration and new progressive voices in Congress – Cori Bush and Jamaal Bowman, for example – we have a real chance to prioritize peace over war. We already have efforts in the works to finally end U.S. support for the war on Yemen, slash the Pentagon budget, de-escalate the growing conflict with China, and advocate for a New Good Neighbor Policy in Latin America. But these campaigns for peace, especially the work to end the war in Yemen, could be in serious trouble if Michele Flournoy, or anyone who shuffles between the revolving doors of the Pentagon and military contractors, is appointed to lead the Department of Defense. Tell Congress: Americans don't want someone who has supported the war in Yemen running the US military! Don't support Michele Flournoy or any candidate with ties to military companies as Secretary of Defense!

We knew we'd have to hit the ground running with a Biden presidency, and it looks like our first urgent call to action is here. Contact your Senators now!

Towards a weapons-free world,

Angela, Ann, Ariel, Carley, Caty, Cody, Danaka, Emily, Farida, Jodie, Kelsey, Koohan, Leila, Leonardo, Maxine, Mary, Medea, Michelle, Nancy, Paki, Teri, and Yousef

[Nov 15, 2020] 'Forever war' returns- Biden's Pentagon team puts the military-industrial complex back in command - reports -- RT USA News

Nov 15, 2020 | www.rt.com

'Forever war' returns: Biden's Pentagon team puts the military-industrial complex back in command - reports 14 Nov, 2020 17:28 / Updated 11 hours ago Get short URL 'Forever war' returns: Biden's Pentagon team puts the military-industrial complex back in command - reports Joe Biden and MIchele Flournoy © Reuters / Jonathan Ernst and Yuri Gripas 705 1 Follow RT on RT Despite campaign-trail overtures to progressives, a Joe Biden presidency seems to spell a return to normalcy in the most time-honored American way: by placing the military-industrial complex in charge of the country's defense.

Joe Biden's campaign message focused almost entirely on Donald Trump, and on Biden's supposed ability to "unify" a polarized electorate and "restore the soul of America." Since he claimed victory last week, Biden's prospective administration has begun to take shape, and the reality behind the rhetoric has started to emerge.

On matters of defense, restoring America's "soul" apparently means placing weapons manufacturers back in charge of the Pentagon.

ALSO ON RT.COM The return of the Obama 'adults' in a Joe Biden administration is likely to spell ruin for America

Biden announced his Department of Defense landing team on Tuesday. Of these 23 policy experts, one third have taken funding from arms manufacturers, according to a report published this week by Antiwar.com .

A knot of hawks

Leading the team is Kathleen Hicks, an undersecretary of defense in the Obama administration, and an employee of the Cen­ter for Strate­gic and Inter­na­tion­al Stud­ies (CSIS), a think tank funded by a host of NATO governments, oil firms, and weapons makers Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Atomics. The latter firm produces the Predator drones used by the Obama administration to kill hundreds of civilians in at least four Middle-Eastern countries.

Hicks was a vocal opponent of President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw a number of US troops from Germany, claiming in August that such a move "benefits our adversaries."

Two other members of Biden's Pentagon team, Andrew Hunter and Melissa Dalton, work for CSIS and served under Obama in the Defense Department.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden has defeated Trump. Meet the new boss same as the old boss

Also on the team are Susanna Blume and Ely Ratner, who work for the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). Another hawkish think-tank, CNAS is funded by Google, Facebook, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin. Three more team members – Stacie Pettyjohn, Christine Wormuth and Terri Tanielian – were most recently employed by the RAND corporation, which draws funding from the US military, NATO, several Gulf states, and hundreds of state and corporate sources.

Michele Flournoy is widely tipped to lead the Pentagon under Biden. Flournoy would be the first woman in history to head the Defense Department, but her appointment would only be revolutionary on the surface. Flournoy is the co-founder of CNAS, and served in the Pentagon under Obama and Bill Clinton. As under secretary of defense for policy under Obama, Flournoy helped craft the 2010 troop surge in Afghanistan, a deployment of 100,000 US troops that led to a doubling in American deaths and made little measurable progress toward ending the war.

'Forever war' returns

President Trump, who campaigned on stopping the US' "forever wars" in the Middle East and remains the first US president in 40 years not to start a new conflict, has nevertheless also staffed the Pentagon with hawkish officials. Recently ousted Defense Secretary Mark Esper was a top lobbyist for Raytheon, while his predecessor, Patrick Shanahan, worked for Boeing. Trump's appointment this week of National Counterterrorism Center Director Christopher Miller as acting secretary of defense, coupled with combat veteran Col. Douglas MacGregor as senior adviser, looked set to buck that trend, given MacGregor's vocal opposition to America's Middle Eastern wars.

ALSO ON RT.COM Trump's anti-ISIS envoy admits he MISLED president about US troop numbers in Syria to keep them there

Yet Miller and MacGregor may not be in office for long, if Trump's legal challenges against Biden's apparent victory fail. Should that happen, Biden's progressive voters may be in for a rude reawakening when the former vice president returns to the White House.

Many of these progressives were supporters of Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primaries, while others likely held their nose and voted for Biden out of opposition to Trump. Reps. Barbara Lee (California) and Mark Pocan (Wisconsin), two notable progressives, wrote to Biden on Tuesday asking him not to nominate a defense secretary linked to the weapons industry.

Lee and Pocan cited President Dwight D. Eisenhower's 1961 farewell address, in which he warned of the "disastrous rise" of the "military-industrial complex."

Given Biden's fondness for Flournoy, whom he tapped in 2016 to head the Pentagon under a potential Hillary Clinton administration, the former vice president appears unconcerned about curtailing the influence of the armaments industry.

The industry apparently roots for Joe, too. As Donald Trump surged ahead of Biden on election night, stocks in Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and the Carlyle Group all plummeted. Only when counting in swing states stopped and resumed, giving Biden the advantage, did they climb again.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1324897860429750273&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F506737-biden-pentagon-team-military-industry%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Should a Biden administration make good on running mate Kamala Harris' post-election promise to return to regime-change operations in Syria, these firms and their supporters in the Pentagon stand to make a killing.

However, anti-war leftists, progressives, and Bernie Sanders supporters may soon realize that voting for a Democrat who supported the Iraq War, instead of a Republican who called it "the worst single mistake ever made in the history of our country," might just benefit the military-industrial complex more than the "soul of America."

[Nov 15, 2020] Meet the Filthy Rich War Hawks That Make up the Joe Biden Foreign Policy Team by Alan MacLeod

Nov 15, 2020 | www.mintpressnews.com

Biden's war room

Many of the president-elect's potential picks for foreign policy positions -- including Susan Rice and Michele Flourney -- have onlookers worried. "With a Biden administration, we can expect a continuation of the Middle East wars and possible escalations in places like Syria. Biden could be better than Trump on Iran and Yemen, but judging by his potential cabinet picks, that should not be expected without significant pressure from antiwar activists and lobbyists in Washington," Dave DeCamp , assistant news editor of AntiWar.com told MintPress . "His administration will likely be more successful than Trump at expanding the empire, with a more diplomatic and coherent approach at building alliances to face Russia and China."

Rice, who was the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and National Security Advisor under Obama, has amassed a fortune of around $40 million . After leaving office, she was given a spot on the board of Netflix, being paid $366,666 as a base salary. On top of that, she was given $2.3 million worth of the company's stock. However, it is her husband, former ABC News executive producer Ian O. Cameron (whose father was a super-wealthy industrialist), who is the prime source of her wealth. She was a key driver in U.S. action in Libya, and also successfully lobbied Obama to place harsher sanctions on North Korea and Iran.

Flournoy, meanwhile, was Under Secretary of Defense for Policy from 2009 to 2012 in the Obama administration under Secretaries Robert Gates and Leon Panetta. After "serving the country," she received lucrative consulting contracts, joined corporate boards, and began her own security think tank, WestExec Advisors. By 2017, she was making a reported $452,000 annually.

"Certainly the possible selection of Michele Flournoy and other WestExec advisors people is concerning," Biden biographer Branko Marcetic told MintPress .

This isn't just because of their corporate/financial ties, though of course that's alarming -- can we be sure that people whose private sector career involved leveraging their government experience and contacts to help multinationals secure favorable business conditions will have their intentions calibrated toward good policy and not to their private sector career?"

"Biden claims he wants an end to the Yemen conflict, but again, words are only so much. It's highly likely that he will have Michele Flornoy as his Secretary of Defense who was one of the voices that stated that weapons should continue to be sold to Saudia Arabia (during the Yemen conflict), under certain conditions, as they have a right to protect themselves. This speaks volumes," said Mariamne Everett of the Institute for Public Accuracy . Rice and Flournoy, she added, were vocal supporters of the disastrous Iraq War, which does not bode well for those concerned with peace.

Marcetic agreed, noting that, while in office, Flourney was "a major liberal interventionist hawk who not only wants U.S. troops deployed all over the world, but has also publicly advocated for the U.S. to majorly exploit its fossil fuel reserves for global dominance," something which would be a "disaster for containing climate catastrophe."

Biden's Foreign Policy Team Hints at War with China, Conflict with Russia An analysis shows Joe Biden's potential foreign policy would closely mirror that of the Pentagon under President Trump. MintPress News | Alan Macleod | Mar 31 Back in the game

The recycling of old faces (many of them considerably richer than before) into the new administration suggests that there will be few breaks from the past on policy, and more in the way of continuation. Biden himself has largely acknowledged this, tweeting , "When I'm speaking to foreign leaders, I'm telling them: America is going to be back. We're going to be back in the game." To many suffering under U.S. sanctions or hiding from U.S. bombs, these words will likely not comfort them . DeCamp suggested that there will be no great difference in policy between Trump and Biden administrations:

Despite Trump being painted as an 'isolationist,' his administration has actually expanded NATO, shored up the support of some Asian countries to counter China, and significantly increased Washington's military footprint in the Pacific. Biden will continue this as he made clear in recent phone calls with Asian leaders and his tough talk on China's claims to the South China Sea during the last presidential debate."

Flournoy meets with Afghan Army personnel during a tour of the Kabul Military Training Center Aug. 7, 2010. Photo | DVIDS

Everett offered a similar analysis, suggesting that, with pro-Israel zealots like Rice advising him, the Biden administration would "expand" on what Trump had done in Palestine as well. Meanwhile, for Latin America, his foreign policy team intends to revive the so-called "anti-corruption drives" of the Obama era, which ultimately overthrew an elected government in Brazil and paved the way for the ascendency of far-right figure Jair Bolsonaro.

Marcetic suggested that Biden would attempt to rejoin many of the international treaties and organizations that the Trump administration had undermined or pulled out of, including NATO and the Paris Climate Agreement.

I expect the prevailing direction of U.S. foreign policy over these last decades to continue: more lawless bombing and killing multiple countries under the cover of "limited engagement," continuing genocidal sanctions against countries like Iran and Venezuela, ongoing treatment of Latin America as an American fiefdom, and militarism and conflict continuing to be the dominant organising principle of U.S. foreign policy, rather than, say, co-operation and stopping climate change," he added.

Independent journalist Caitlin Johnstone recently mockingly wrote that Biden will have "the most diverse, intersectional cabinet of mass murderers ever assembled." If representation is important, it is because it helps assure that people from all walks of life will have a seat at the negotiating table. However, judging by Biden's wealthy picks, it appears that yet again, no one will be representing the great majority of working-class Americans.

Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent . He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

[Nov 15, 2020] "What Syria withdrawal- There was never a Syria withdrawal," Jeffrey said

Notable quotes:
"... "Un hombre sin honor." ..."
Nov 15, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"What Syria withdrawal? There was never a Syria withdrawal," Jeffrey said.


" ... even as he praises the president's support of what he describes as a successful "realpolitik" approach to the region, he acknowledges that his team routinely misled senior leaders about troop levels in Syria.

"We were always playing shell games to not make clear to our leadership how many troops we had there," Jeffrey said in an interview. The actual number of troops in northeast Syria is "a lot more than" the roughly two hundred troops Trump initially agreed to leave there in 2019. Defense One

-------------

"We?" Who are "We?"

State Department people? Well, certainly some of those were involved.

But ... IMO it would not have been possible to deceive or mislead the WH and specifically the Commander in Chief without the active cooperation of CENTCOM, the JCS and OSD.

If they had not been participating in the lying, it would have been obvious in any number of interactions with President Trump that the president's understanding of troop numbers in Syria was not correct and that he was being deceived by "we." (whoever that was). That revelation evidently did not happen. The NSC staff should have detected the lack of truth in reported numbers. That it did not tells me that at least some of the NSC staff were disloyal to Trump. Obvious? Yes, but that is worth re-stating.

James Jeffrey is quite proud of his achievement in maintaining a "realpolik" stalemate in Syria, one that stymies both Russia and the Syrian government.

IMO opinion he is revealed by his own words as a treacherous back stabber. "Un hombre sin honor." pl

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/11/outgoing-syria-envoy-admits-hiding-us-troop-numbers-praises-trumps-mideast-record/170012/

Polish Janitor , 14 November 2020 at 10:55 AM

This is exactly the result of Trump's lack of interest in fulfilling his original promise of ending the "forever wars" in the middle east. This is exactly the result of putting opelny-Democrat Jared Kushner (a lifelong member of Chabad-Lubavich network) and his ilk in charge of the middle east geopolitics.

It also clearly proves that the State Dep. is a monsterous autonomous entity with its own permanent objectives and agendas, independent of the WH. No matter what Trump wanted to achieve in the ME, the so-called Blob (or as Col. Lang here has coined as the "BORG") do what they will. You have to also remember that back in '17, career diplomats and high-ranking State Dep. officials sounded the alarm that Rex Tillerson was down-sizing the Department so much and that it was contrary to American interests abroad etc...fast forward to today, it would not have mattered how much down-sizing Tillerson actually managed to do, they (people like Jeffries) were still able to pursue their own agenda and undermine Trump's original promise of ending the forever wars in the middle east.

The liberal elites managed to 'allegedly' manipulate the election against a sitting president in favor of an highly unappealing candidate in Joe Biden. In all honesty, does anyone think the Blob/Borg would NOT undermine the president's agenda and follow their own permanent objectives aboard?

The Twisted Genius , 14 November 2020 at 11:10 AM

Trump should be furious about this. He should be firing everyone involved in the deception. Those involved don't belong in ANY administration. Was convincing Trump that he was getting the Syrian oil part of this despicable con? As you mentioned last night, this deception is probably also going on in Afghanistan. This is a clear sign of a totally dysfunctional nation security apparatus... Trump's national security apparatus. Could Trump find no one he could trust to carry out his orders? Or did he just not even care? He certainly wasn't up to the task.

However, our troop level in Syria has been widely and openly reported to be above the 200 level since Trump's initial announcement of a total pull out in December 2018. I thought it was odd when shortly after that it was announced that more troops were being sent in to facilitate the withdrawal of the 2,000 plus troops already there. We did reduce the level somewhat, but then we brought in mech infantry with their Bradleys to secure the oil fields and later more to counter the Russian patrols in northeast Syria. And isn't counting whatever we have in Tanf.

Fred , 14 November 2020 at 11:32 AM

TTG,

"He should be firing everyone involved in the deception"

He just fired Esper. "Trump's national security apparatus." You mean America's natonal security apparatus, the one that gave us LTC Vindman and that crew of Ambassadors, and the 'whistlebolower' Chief Justice Robert's wouldn't let any senator name nor ask questions about during the impeachment. You remember all that don't you? I'm sure the same cast of characters Biden would bring back if he succeeds in the rigged election would never do that to him.

JM Gavin , 14 November 2020 at 11:45 AM

COL(R) Mark Mitchell stated the following recently, regarding the duties and responsibilities of the SECDEF in response to POTUS directives. The comments were in regard to Acting SECDEF Miller (a longtime friend and colleague of Mitchell), but apply to any Cabinet or sub-Cabinet post:

"He [POTUS] may make decisions that other people disagree with. They have two options: they can do what he directs them to do, or after they've offered their advice, if they find it illegal, immoral, unethical, unadvisable, they can step down," retired Col. Mark Mitchell, who most recently served in the Pentagon as the principal deputy assistant defense secretary for special operations/low-intensity conflict.

Mitchell added that he resented the implication at the defense secretary should be expected to stand up to the president, or in his way, as the duly elected commander in chief.

"You either carry out your lawful orders or you resign," he said. "We don't get the option to 'stand up to him.' "(End of quote)

Unfortunately, President Trump made many poor personnel decisions, and selected people who believed they had the duty and right to work against the President from within the Administration. This has driven me nuts for the last four years, as I have watched senior civilian and uniformed leaders actively undermining the Commander-in-Chief. They weren't subtle about it. For whatever reason, they mostly got away with it.

To be clear, I am not writing this as a Trump supporter. As a career military professional, I have a duty to support the Commander-in-Chief, and obey lawful orders from the Commander-in-Chief.

It is very easy to play shell games with the BOG caps in the war zones.

JMG

Deap , 14 November 2020 at 11:53 AM

Looking forward to a reprise of Trump's former starring role in The Apprentice, and finally uttering yet again his immortal words: You're Fired!

The final days of Trump's first term are going to be awesome. Banish the Borg. BAMN. Put Biden's fingerprints on any re-hiring.

Typically a new CEO will ask for everyone's resignation, and select and cull according to new needs and new directions. Something Trump should have done, but he too was the apprentice in this office when his term began.

Nothing to stop Trump from doing this now in reverse, and finally cleaning out the dross that was dedicated to his administration's destruction. Better late than never. Our country deserves nothing less. These insider traitors deserve to have their termination for cause permanently be part in their career resumes.

j , 14 November 2020 at 12:33 PM

It appears that POTUS Trump once his re-election is affirmed, urgently needs to fire a large percentage of top-level ranks at the Pentagon, fire the CENTCOM CC and his staff, fire the JCS, close down the NSC until it's thoroughly bleached, and charge all of them under the UCMJ. Bust them down to slick-sleeves and show them the door. How many back-stabbing Vindman types remain within the NSC? They need to be fired and prosecuted under the UCMJ as well.

Robert G Spenser , 14 November 2020 at 01:29 PM

As a citizen I am having great difficulty not concluding that the US is showing all the signs of decline like the late Roman Republic.

James Jeffrey along with the rest of the herd that have run one agitprop disinformation scheme after another since the 2016 election are like the roman senators that had the intent to save the Republic but fatally weakened it by killing Caesar at its very center, in the Senate.

Biden's people are openly calling for even more internet censorship and continuing to rush out inherently dangerous mRNA vaccines without proper testing - and may force us to take it. Groups are starting to create a database of Trump supporters to enable censoring them where they work and live - what is this other than terrorism against half the voting population? If just five percent of the 70M that voted for Trump moves together in resistance then the new regime herd will be holding a tiger by is tail and with the election showing the people are split right down the middle I fail to see how we can avoid even much worse chaos the next four years. The American Republic is disintegrating while the herd is having a romp and thinks it is winning while they are its assassins.

I am sick at heart of this and fear for the future of my children whose standard of living opportunities are in free-fall.

JM Gavin , 14 November 2020 at 02:34 PM

Robert G Spenser,

As the saying goes:

Good times create soft men.

Soft men create hard times.

Hard times create hard men.

Hard men create good times.

Rinse, wash, repeat until your civilization starts to outsource the hard men.

JMG

Fredw , 14 November 2020 at 04:06 PM

We are shocked, SHOCKED! that military bureaucrats are acting in the same ways that they always have. Come on now. The job of president is to get all these people to work in concert to an extent adequate for getting things to come out mostly in our favor. None of this is unique to Trump. Nearly every president in my lifetime has had to learn to deal with these aspects of the military. Jimmy Carter trusted them to plan a rescue mission. They used navy pilots for a mission over the desert! With no extra to enable adaptation to events! Ronald Reagan sent a battleship to Lebanon and then found out the brass wouldn't take the risk of actually using it for anything. Not to mention the superbly uncoordinated near simultaneous invasion of Grenada. John Kennedy accepted a duplicitous projection of events for the bay of pigs. Bill Clinton got caught in Somalia. George W. got sucked into a strategically unplanned invasion of Iraq. Obama was told that an 18-month escalation would resolve Afghanistan. He believed it! Boy were they shocked when he actually enforced the deadline. This is not a criticism of any of those presidents. It is normal, however bizarre that may sound. My point is that they mostly get bit once and learn not to trust the military's own estimates of what they can or should do. Then they begin to do the job more adequately. They learn to pay attention to goals and to manage their resources. Trump does not seem capable of this kind of learning. The last months of an administration are not the time to suddenly discover the nature of the organizations you are leading. And in any case, there is no time left for learning how to get actual results.

Deap , 14 November 2020 at 04:54 PM

JFK never should have unionized the government workforce.

Pits existential self-interests against patriotic national interest, should these interests become in conflict. FDR warned against doing this. More attention needs to be paid to this fundamental national turning point.

What ills were cured by this act (EO) and has the cure become worse than the perceived disease. Must like term limits in California - the cure was 100 times worse than the original disease.

Entrenched political personalities come and go; entrenched and corrupted political systems are forever, because in the process they learned to self-perpetuate.

Much like HAL in the movie 2001.

Deap , 14 November 2020 at 04:57 PM

Name your favorite EO to strike down with an counter-mand EO, before a sitting president leaves office:
1. Anchor baby citizenship triggering chain migration
2. Unionized government workforce

Deap , 14 November 2020 at 05:27 PM

2016: Democrat Game Plan:

1. Use Democrat's standard politics of personal destruction to attack and harass any Trump appointments; make working for the Trump administration so undesirable none dare even ask for consideration.

2. Tie up the President's time with endless personal attacks, lies and investigations, so Trump has no time as elected Chief Executive to oversee and clean up valid government operations;

3. Take advantage of Trump's exclusively private sector experience to lull Trump into thinking entrenched government BORGs are loyal government employees, who serve only to help Trump carry out his Executive Office duties;

4. Leak like crazy; make things up if necessary that ensure the Trump administration narrative appears chaotic and dysfunctional. Claim anonymous sources that undermine positive functioning within Trump administration. Make everyone suspicious of everyone else.

5. Obliterate any recognition for the remarkable Trump administration accomplishments that occurred, regardless of all of the above.

6. Pout relentlessly because regardless of the above, the President and the GOP Senate appointed over 200 new federal judge and 3 new SCOTUS members.

7. In full public view, tear up the SOTU address listing remarkable administration accomplishments mouthing - these are all lies -- laying down the gauntlet for all out war.

8. Gin up pandemic hysteria to fill in any and all loopholes not yet covered by all of the above.

Democrat skullduggery may have effectively destroyed an temporal administration, but Trump Judiciary appointments are the equivalent of a very welcomed forever.

President Trump, you are missed already. But I suspect in short order it is you, who will not miss the office. You are enshrined forever - #45 as President of the United States of America. History will treat you far kinder than your current fellow citizens.

You broke up the Democrat plantation. You exposed the dark underbelly of the body politic. Mission accomplished. There is no going back.

J , 14 November 2020 at 07:27 PM

DHS head Chad Wolf is another anti-Trump in sheep's clothing that Trump needs to get rid of ASAP.

https://nypost.com/2020/11/13/dhs-boss-chad-wolf-defies-trump-order-to-fire-cyber-chief-chris-krebs/

james , 14 November 2020 at 08:21 PM

this sounds like the definition of a traitor to me - jeffery.... on the other hand one could say he is working for wall st and the mil complex and has done a good job... which is it??

Yeah, Right , 15 November 2020 at 12:24 AM

I don't understand this. Trump is the Commander in Chief, at any time he could have asked a straight-up question: How. Many. Troops. Do. We. Still. Have. In. Syria?

I find it astonishing that the military leadership would tell a lie to their Commander in Chief when the question itself leaves no wriggle-room.

Heck, Trump could has asked for a list of every single one of those brave 200 boys, and even if it included Name, Rank, and Serial Number that would still fit on a single letter-sized printout.

I can't understand how Jeffrey's and his band of "we's" could get away with this unless Trump wasn't paying any attention at all.

turcopolier , 15 November 2020 at 12:26 AM

Yeah, right

Yes. He trusted people as I would never have done.

Mike C , 15 November 2020 at 12:33 AM

Questions for the committee:

What legal recourse if any is there against Jeffery or his fellow travelers?

How might Trump "put a kink in the hose" to hobble a potential Biden admin from putting us back into these quagmires?

I'm not at all surprised to see MSM sniping now at Col. Macgregor.

[Nov 14, 2020] The return of the Obama 'adults' in a Joe Biden administration is likely to spell ruin for America by Scott Ritter

Nov 14, 2020 | www.rt.com

Scott Ritter Scott Ritter

is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of ' SCORPION KING : America's Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.' He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf's staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter 13 Nov, 2020 19:09 Get short URL The return of the Obama 'adults' in a Joe Biden administration is likely to spell ruin for America © REUTERS/Yara Nardi 128 1 Follow RT on RT The US establishment, and the world, has spent the last four years trying to adapt to the disruptive policies of a childish president. Now the Democrats' 'adult' leadership team will return. Watch out, folks.

To those watching the drama unfolding in Washington, DC around the stalled efforts on the part of nominal President-elect Joe Biden in forming a transition team, the parallels are eerily familiar: a bitterly contested election between an establishment political figure and a brash DC 'outsider', a controversial outcome delaying the implementation of the transition between administrations, and an openly condescending atmosphere where the incoming team postured as comprising a return to 'adult' leadership.

That time was December 2000, when a Republican team led by President-elect George W. Bush stood ready to install a cabinet composed of veteran spies, diplomats, and national security managers who had cut their policy teeth during the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. With Colin Powell as secretary of state, Donald Rumsfeld as secretary of defense, George Tenet as director of central intelligence, and Condoleezza Rice as national security advisor, the foreign policy and national security team that Dubya surrounded himself with upon assuming the presidency was as experienced a team as one could imagine.

READ MORE Trump's Pentagon shuffle suggests either no more wars or just one with Iran Trump's Pentagon shuffle suggests either no more wars or just one with Iran

And yet, within two years of assuming their responsibilities, this team of 'adults' had presided over the worst terrorist attack in American history, and the initiation of two wars (in Afghanistan and Iraq) that would forever change both the geopolitical map of the world and America's role as world leader.

Twenty years later, the roles have reversed, with an experienced team of veteran 'adults' hailing from the eight-year tenure of President Barack Obama preparing to transition the US away from four tumultuous years of the presidency of Donald J. Trump. While Biden has not finalized his foreign policy and national security team, there is a consensus among experienced political observers about who the top contenders might be for the 'big four' foreign and national security policy positions in his administration.

While there is no doubting the experience and professional credentials of these potential nominees, they all have one thing in common: a proclivity for military intervention on the part of the US. For anyone who hoped that a Biden administration might complete the task begun by President Trump of leading America out of the 'forever wars' initiated by the 'adults' of the administration of George W. Bush, these choices represent a wake-up call that this will not be the likely outcome.

Moreover, a potential Biden cabinet would more than likely complement the existing predilection on the part of the president-elect for military intervention, pointing to a foreign and national security policy which not only sustains the existing conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere, but increases the likelihood of additional military misadventures. The Biden team will almost certainly seek to shoehorn the president-elect's aggressive "America is back" philosophy into a geopolitical reality that is not inclined to accept such a role sitting down.

So who's likely to fill what role?

Secretary of State

The hands-on favorite here is Susan Rice, who served as both national security advisor and US ambassador to the United Nations under Barack Obama. Biden knows her very well, and they have a great working relationship. With a history of promoting US intervention in Syria and Libya, Rice would more than likely support any policy suggestions concerning a re-engagement by the US in Syria in an effort to contain and/or overthrow Bashar al-Assad, and would be reticent to withdraw US forces from either Afghanistan or Iraq.

She would also most likely seek hardline 'confrontational' policies designed to 'roll-back' Russian influence in Europe and the Middle East, as well as China's claims regarding the South China Sea. Rice would seek to strengthen the military aspects of NATO to better position that organization against Russia in Europe, and China in the Pacific.

A Rice nomination could run afoul of a Republican-controlled Senate, where a source close to the current Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, has noted that a " Republican Senate would work with Biden on centrist nominees " but would oppose "radical progressives" or ones who are controversial among conservatives.

While Rice is not a "radical progressive," the Republicans continue to condemn her actions while serving as the US ambassador to the UN in response to the 2012 terrorist attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that left four Americans – including the US ambassador to Libya – dead. This controversy prevented her from becoming secretary of state during Obama's second term, and one can expect a very contentious Senate hearing if she is nominated, with no guarantee that she would pass.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden administration will find it hard to integrate itself in a world changed by Trump Secretary of Defense

An equally qualified, but far less controversial, woman is the likely nominee for this position. Michele Flournoy, if nominated and confirmed, would become the first female secretary of defense in the history of the US. Given her extensive resume, which includes several previous appointments in senior policy positions in the Department of Defense during both the Clinton and Obama administrations, she would provide an experienced hand in the management of the Pentagon.

Flournoy once famously told the New York Times that " warfare may come in a lot of different flavors in the future. " In her previous postings in the Pentagon, she took a hardline stance against both Russia and China, encouraged military intervention in Libya and Syria, and sustained military operations in Afghanistan. Her proclivity to seek military solutions to challenging foreign policy issues would reinforce the similar inclinations of Biden. With Flournoy at the helm of the Pentagon, America can expect to experience a full menu of war "flavoring."

ALSO ON RT.COM George Galloway: Kiss of death – The winner of the most coveted Henry Kissinger endorsement is... Joe Biden Director of the CIA

While the above two positions represent the ostensible heads of US foreign and defense policy, the reality is that the US has become increasingly reliant upon the covert action capabilities of the Central Intelligence Agency when it comes to influencing diplomatic and military outcomes. While news reports have on occasion lifted the veil of secrecy surrounding covert CIA activities, allowing Americans and the world a small measure of insight into their scope, scale and effectiveness, the reality is that the vast majority of the work of the CIA remains classified, revealed only decades after the fact, if at all.

As the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and later as vice president, Biden is intimately familiar with these covert activities, and of the potential of the CIA to impact American foreign and national security policy. One of the names being bandied about for the role of director is Michael Morell. He is a retired career CIA officer, having worked his way up the ranks over the course of a 33-year career, finishing in 2013 having twice served as the acting director under President Obama.

Morell would no doubt manage the agency in a professional manner. He is a CIA man, seeped in the dark arts. Insight into how this experience might manifest itself in a Biden administration was provided through comments Morell made about Syria while appearing on PBS in 2016. " What they need is to have the Russians and Iranians pay a little price ," he said. " When we were in Iraq, the Iranians were giving weapons to the Shia militia, who were killing American soldiers, right? The Iranians were making us pay a price. We need to make the Iranians pay a price in Syria. We need to make the Russians pay a price ."

By "paying a price," Morell meant "killing." Russians and Iranians, he said, should be killed " covertly, so you don't tell the world about it, you don't stand up at the Pentagon and say 'we did this.' But you make sure they know it in Moscow and Tehran ."

ALSO ON RT.COM Back in the USSR: Don't tell Russiagaters, but Biden visited Moscow eight years before Trump, told hosts he was 'sorry to go home' National Security Advisor

If state, defense and the CIA are the three principal tools available to Biden in the conduct of foreign and national security policy, the person responsible for making these three players – along with a host of other departments and agencies – come together as a single team falls to the national security advisor. Here, Biden seems to be leaning toward another experienced hand, Antony Blinken.

Blinken's resume includes stints at the State Department and National Security Council during the Obama administration. Like the other potential nominees, Blinken possesses the kind of experience necessary to hit the ground running. As someone who knows and is well known by all the major policy players that could populate a Biden administration, including the president-elect himself, Blinken would be able to coordinate policy formulation and implementation in a seamless fashion.

Therein, however, lies the rub – Blinken would serve as a facilitator of interventionist policy positions that he is inherently inclined to agree with. Like Biden's other potential nominees, Blinken supported the Obama interventions in Syria and Libya, two events that serve as a litmus test for ascertaining potential interventionist scenarios in the future.

Whereas a national security advisor should insulate the presidency from the more focused, hardline policy proposals put forward by state and defense, and provide balance when it comes to considering covert action proposals from the CIA, Blinken would function more as a superhighway of interventionist policy options between these entities and a president whose own background can be defined as never having seen an opportunity for US intervention that he didn't like.

As things stand today, one cannot predict the composition of a Biden cabinet with absolute certainty; it is likely that one or more of the potential candidates listed here will fall by the wayside, their path blocked by the unpredictability of a Senate confirmation at the hands of a hostile Republican Party.

But the predilection for military intervention and covert action will define any Biden-led cabinet, regardless of exactly who ends up seated there. In the end, the likelihood that this iteration of 'adult' leadership ends up getting America embroiled in excessive interventions that further disrupt the global geopolitical balance in the US's disfavor while costing its people precious blood and treasure is high.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


[Nov 14, 2020] 'Forever war' returns- Biden's Pentagon team puts the military-industrial complex back in command - reports -- RT USA News

Nov 14, 2020 | www.rt.com

'Forever war' returns: Biden's Pentagon team puts the military-industrial complex back in command - reports 14 Nov, 2020 17:28 / Updated 5 hours ago Get short URL 'Forever war' returns: Biden's Pentagon team puts the military-industrial complex back in command - reports Joe Biden and MIchele Flournoy © Reuters / Jonathan Ernst and Yuri Gripas 450 Follow RT on RT Despite campaign-trail overtures to progressives, a Joe Biden presidency seems to spell a return to normalcy in the most time-honored American way: by placing the military-industrial complex in charge of the country's defense.

Joe Biden's campaign message focused almost entirely on Donald Trump, and on Biden's supposed ability to "unify" a polarized electorate and "restore the soul of America." Since he claimed victory last week, Biden's prospective administration has begun to take shape, and the reality behind the rhetoric has started to emerge.

On matters of defense, restoring America's "soul" apparently means placing weapons manufacturers back in charge of the Pentagon.

ALSO ON RT.COM The return of the Obama 'adults' in a Joe Biden administration is likely to spell ruin for America

Biden announced his Department of Defense landing team on Tuesday. Of these 23 policy experts, one third have taken funding from arms manufacturers, according to a report published this week by Antiwar.com .

A knot of hawks

Leading the team is Kathleen Hicks, an undersecretary of defense in the Obama administration, and an employee of the Cen­ter for Strate­gic and Inter­na­tion­al Stud­ies (CSIS), a think tank funded by a host of NATO governments, oil firms, and weapons makers Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and General Atomics. The latter firm produces the Predator drones used by the Obama administration to kill hundreds of civilians in at least four Middle-Eastern countries.

Hicks was a vocal opponent of President Donald Trump's plan to withdraw a number of US troops from Germany, claiming in August that such a move "benefits our adversaries."

Two other members of Biden's Pentagon team, Andrew Hunter and Melissa Dalton, work for CSIS and served under Obama in the Defense Department.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden has defeated Trump. Meet the new boss same as the old boss

Also on the team are Susanna Blume and Ely Ratner, who work for the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). Another hawkish think-tank, CNAS is funded by Google, Facebook, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin. Three more team members – Stacie Pettyjohn, Christine Wormuth and Terri Tanielian – were most recently employed by the RAND corporation, which draws funding from the US military, NATO, several Gulf states, and hundreds of state and corporate sources.

Michele Flournoy is widely tipped to lead the Pentagon under Biden. Flournoy would be the first woman in history to head the Defense Department, but her appointment would only be revolutionary on the surface. Flournoy is the co-founder of CNAS, and served in the Pentagon under Obama and Bill Clinton. As under secretary of defense for policy under Obama, Flournoy helped craft the 2010 troop surge in Afghanistan, a deployment of 100,000 US troops that led to a doubling in American deaths and made little measurable progress toward ending the war.

'Forever war' returns

President Trump, who campaigned on stopping the US' "forever wars" in the Middle East and remains the first US president in 40 years not to start a new conflict, has nevertheless also staffed the Pentagon with hawkish officials. Recently ousted Defense Secretary Mark Esper was a top lobbyist for Raytheon, while his predecessor, Patrick Shanahan, worked for Boeing. Trump's appointment this week of National Counterterrorism Center Director Christopher Miller as acting secretary of defense, coupled with combat veteran Col. Douglas MacGregor as senior adviser, looked set to buck that trend, given MacGregor's vocal opposition to America's Middle Eastern wars.

ALSO ON RT.COM Trump's anti-ISIS envoy admits he MISLED president about US troop numbers in Syria to keep them there

Yet Miller and MacGregor may not be in office for long, if Trump's legal challenges against Biden's apparent victory fail. Should that happen, Biden's progressive voters may be in for a rude reawakening when the former vice president returns to the White House.

Many of these progressives were supporters of Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primaries, while others likely held their nose and voted for Biden out of opposition to Trump. Reps. Barbara Lee (California) and Mark Pocan (Wisconsin), two notable progressives, wrote to Biden on Tuesday asking him not to nominate a defense secretary linked to the weapons industry.

Lee and Pocan cited President Dwight D. Eisenhower's 1961 farewell address, in which he warned of the "disastrous rise" of the "military-industrial complex."

Given Biden's fondness for Flournoy, whom he tapped in 2016 to head the Pentagon under a potential Hillary Clinton administration, the former vice president appears unconcerned about curtailing the influence of the armaments industry.

The industry apparently roots for Joe, too. As Donald Trump surged ahead of Biden on election night, stocks in Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and the Carlyle Group all plummeted. Only when counting in swing states stopped and resumed, giving Biden the advantage, did they climb again.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1324897860429750273&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F506737-biden-pentagon-team-military-industry%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Should a Biden administration make good on running mate Kamala Harris' post-election promise to return to regime-change operations in Syria, these firms and their supporters in the Pentagon stand to make a killing.

However, anti-war leftists, progressives, and Bernie Sanders supporters may soon realize that voting for a Democrat who supported the Iraq War, instead of a Republican who called it "the worst single mistake ever made in the history of our country," might just benefit the military-industrial complex more than the "soul of America."

[Nov 13, 2020] Neocons Poised to Join New Government by Phil Geraldi

Notable quotes:
"... It would not be overstating the case to suggest that the neoconservative movement has now been born again, though the enemy is now the unreliable Trumpean-dominated Republican Party rather than Saddam Hussein or Ayatollah Khomeini. ..."
"... The transition has also been aided by a more aggressive shift among the Democrats themselves, with Russiagate and other “foreign interference” being blamed for the party’s failure in 2016. ..."
"... The unifying principle that ties many of the mostly Jewish neocons together is, of course, unconditional defense of Israel and everything it does, which leads them to support a policy of American global military dominance which they presume will inter alia serve as a security umbrella for the Jewish state. ..."
"... That change has now occurred and the surge of neocons to take up senior positions in the defense, intelligence and foreign policy agencies will soon take place. In my notes on the neocon revival, I have dubbed the brave new world that the neocons hope to create in Washington as the “Kaganate of Nulandia” after two of the more prominent neocon aspirants, Robert Kagan and Victoria Nuland. ..."
"... A Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton protégé, Nuland openly sought regime change for Ukraine by brazenly supporting government opponents in spite of the fact that Washington and Kiev had ostensibly friendly relations. Her efforts were backed by a $5 billion budget, but she is perhaps most famous for her foul language when referring to the potential European role in managing the unrest that she and the National Endowment for Democracy had helped create. The replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with Moscow over Russia’s attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea. ..."
"... A lot of the neocons are Russian Jews who grew up in households that were Bolshevik communists. They're idea of spreading democracy goes back to Trotsky who tried to spread communism through the Soviet Union. Their hatred toward Russia dates back to their ancestors feudal days under the Tsars and the pogroms they suffered and the ice pick Trotsky got to the head. ..."
"... Obama's deep state lied, people died: https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/11/outgoing-syria-envoy-admits-hiding-us-troop-numbers-praises-trumps-mideast-record/170012/ ..."
"... I've never quite figured out the "neocon" ideology, beyond the fact that neocons seem devoted to the sort of status quo present in Washington, D.C. during the three administrations prior to Trump. Military adventurism, nation-building, and interventionist foreign policy, all based on nebulous concepts which are applied unevenly around the world. ..."
"... The Neocon movement seems to have morphed into nothing more than a club for bullies trying to one up each other. ..."
"... "It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way." ..."
"... Neocons don't really prefer war, so much as they prefer overseas "engagements" that may look like war and smell like war. All that's missing in neocon military operations is a defined end state. ..."
Nov 13, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Donald Trump was much troubled during his 2016 and 2020 campaigns by so-called conservatives who rallied behind the #NeverTrump banner, presumably in opposition to his stated intention to end or at least diminish America’s role in wars in the Middle East and Asia. Those individuals are generally described as neoconservatives but the label is itself somewhat misleading and they might more properly be described as liberal warmongers as they are closer to the Democrats than the Republicans on most social issues and are now warming up even more as the new Joe Biden Administration prepares to take office.

To be sure, some neocons stuck with the Republicans, to include the highly controversial Elliott Abrams, who initially opposed Trump but is now the point man for dealing with both Venezuela and Iran. Abrams’ conversion reportedly took place when he realized that the new president genuinely embraced unrelenting hostility towards Iran as exemplified by the ending of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and the assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad. John Bolton was also a neocon in the White House fold, though he is now a frenemy having been fired by the president and written a book.

Even though the NeverTrumper neocons did not succeed in blocking Donald Trump in 2016, they have been maintaining relevancy by slowly drifting back towards the Democratic Party, which is where they originated back in the 1970s in the office of the Senator from Boeing Henry “Scoop” Jackson. A number of them started their political careers there, to include leading neocon Richard Perle.

It would not be overstating the case to suggest that the neoconservative movement has now been born again, though the enemy is now the unreliable Trumpean-dominated Republican Party rather than Saddam Hussein or Ayatollah Khomeini.

The transition has also been aided by a more aggressive shift among the Democrats themselves, with Russiagate and other “foreign interference” being blamed for the party’s failure in 2016. Given that mutual intense hostility to Trump, the doors to previously shunned liberal media outlets have now opened wide to the stream of foreign policy “experts” who want to “restore a sense of the heroic” to U.S. national security policy. Eliot A. Cohen and David Frum are favored contributors to the Atlantic while Bret Stephens and Bari Weiss were together at the New York Times prior to Weiss’s recent resignation.

Jennifer Rubin, who wrote in 2016 that “It is time for some moral straight talk: Trump is evil incarnate,” is a frequent columnist for The Washington Post while both she and William Kristol appear regularly on MSNBC.

The unifying principle that ties many of the mostly Jewish neocons together is, of course, unconditional defense of Israel and everything it does, which leads them to support a policy of American global military dominance which they presume will inter alia serve as a security umbrella for the Jewish state. In the post-9/11 world, the neocon media’s leading publication The Weekly Standard virtually invented the concept of “Islamofascism” to justify endless war in the Middle East, a development that has killed millions of Muslims, destroyed at least three nations, and cost the U.S. taxpayer more than $5 trillion. The Israel connection has also resulted in neocon support for an aggressive policy against Russia due to its involvement in Syria and has led to repeated calls for the U.S. to attack Iran and destroy Hezbollah in Lebanon. In Eastern Europe, neocon ideologues have aggressively sought “democracy promotion,” which, not coincidentally, has also been a major Democratic Party foreign policy objective.

The neocons are involved in a number of foundations, the most prominent of which is the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), that are funded by Jewish billionaires. FDD is headed by Canadian Mark Dubowitz and it is reported that the group takes direction coming from officials in the Israeli Embassy in Washington. Other major neocon incubators are the American Enterprise Institute, which currently is the home of Paul Wolfowitz, and the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at John Hopkins University. The neocon opposition has been sniping against Trump over the past four years but has been biding its time and building new alliances, waiting for what it has perceived to be an inevitable regime change in Washington.

That change has now occurred and the surge of neocons to take up senior positions in the defense, intelligence and foreign policy agencies will soon take place. In my notes on the neocon revival, I have dubbed the brave new world that the neocons hope to create in Washington as the “Kaganate of Nulandia” after two of the more prominent neocon aspirants, Robert Kagan and Victoria Nuland.

Robert was one of the first neocons to get on the NeverTrump band wagon back in 2016 when he endorsed Hillary Clinton for president and spoke at a Washington fundraiser for her, complaining about the “isolationist” tendency in the Republican Party exemplified by Trump. His wife Victoria Nuland is perhaps better known. She was the driving force behind efforts to destabilize the Ukrainian government of President Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovych, an admittedly corrupt autocrat, nevertheless became Prime Minister after a free election. Nuland, who was the Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, provided open support to the Maidan Square demonstrators opposed to Yanukovych’s government, to include media friendly appearances passing out cookies on the square to encourage the protesters.

A Dick Cheney and Hillary Clinton protégé, Nuland openly sought regime change for Ukraine by brazenly supporting government opponents in spite of the fact that Washington and Kiev had ostensibly friendly relations. Her efforts were backed by a $5 billion budget, but she is perhaps most famous for her foul language when referring to the potential European role in managing the unrest that she and the National Endowment for Democracy had helped create. The replacement of the government in Kiev was only the prelude to a sharp break and escalating conflict with Moscow over Russia’s attempts to protect its own interests in Ukraine, most particularly in Crimea.

And, to be sure, beyond regime change in places like Ukraine, President Barack Obama was no slouch when it came to starting actual shooting wars in places like Libya and Syria while also killing people, including American citizens, using drones. Biden appears poised to inherit many former Obama White House senior officials, who would consider the eager-to-please neoconservatives a comfortable fit as fellow foot soldiers in the new administration. Foreign policy hawks expected to have senior positions in the Biden Administration include Antony Blinken, Nicholas Burns, Susan Rice, Valerie Jarrett, Samantha Power and, most important of all the hawkish Michele Flournoy, who has been cited as a possible secretary of defense. And don’t count Hillary Clinton out. Biden is reportedly getting his briefings on the Middle East from Dan Shapiro, former U.S. Ambassador to Israel, who now lives in the Jewish state and is reportedly working for an Israeli government supported think tank, the Institute for National Security Studies.

Nowhere in Biden’s possible foreign policy circle does one find anyone who is resistant to the idea of worldwide interventionism in support of claimed humanitarian objectives, even if it would lead to a new cold war with major competitor powers like Russia and China. In fact, Biden himself appears to embrace an extremely bellicose view on a proper relationship with both Moscow and Beijing “claiming that he is defending democracy against its enemies.” His language is unrelenting, so much so that it is Donald Trump who could plausibly be described as the peace candidate in the recently completed election, having said at the Republican National Convention in August “Joe Biden spent his entire career outsourcing their dreams and the dreams of American workers, offshoring their jobs, opening their borders and sending their sons and daughters to fight in endless foreign wars, wars that never ended.”

Polish Janitor , 13 November 2020 at 11:34 AM

It should be noted that the return of "neocons" does not mean the return of people like Wolfowitz, Ladeen, Feith, Kristol who are more "straussian" than "liberal/internationalist", but those like Nuland, Rice, Sam Powell, Petraeus, Flournoy, heck even Hilary Clinton as UN Ambassador who are CFR-type liberal interventionist than pure military hawks such as Bolton or Mike Flynn.

These liberal internationalists, as opposed to straussian neocons, will intervene in collaboration with EU/NATO/QUAD (i.e. multilaterally) in the name upholding human rights and toppling authoritarianism, rather than for oil, WMDs, or similar concrete objectives. In very simple terms, the new Biden administration's foreign policy will be none other than the return to "endless wars" for nation-building purposes first and last.

fakebot , 13 November 2020 at 11:43 AM

The name Kagan is the Russianized version of the name Cohen. He was going to be McCain's NSA had he been elected. They pulled a stunt with the Bush admin to make Obama look weak by pushing Georgia into war with Russia in 2008. Sakaasvili, the president of Georgia, was literally eating his own tie:

https://cdn1.img.sputniknews.com/img/102445/69/1024456927_0:98:1000:639_1000x541_80_0_0_d2bb118481dc653ec7d2a8b170b8f6bf.jpg

A lot of the neocons are Russian Jews who grew up in households that were Bolshevik communists. They're idea of spreading democracy goes back to Trotsky who tried to spread communism through the Soviet Union. Their hatred toward Russia dates back to their ancestors feudal days under the Tsars and the pogroms they suffered and the ice pick Trotsky got to the head.

I don't think they have that much influence. They pushed a lot of nonsense in the late 70/early 80s about how the Taliban were George Washingtons and here we are today, they're worst than the Comanche. The last time I saw Richard Perle make a TV appearance, he was crying like a baby. Robert Novak, the prince of darkness, was a Ron Paul supporter. The only ones really kicking around are Bill Kristol and Jennifer Rubin, but Kristol was almost alone when he was talking about putting 50,000 boots on the ground in Syria. Rubin is a harpie who only got crazier and crazier. Kagan had his foot in the door with Hillary only because of his wife. Those two might get back in with Biden on Ukraine, but Biden would do well to keep them at a distance.

Mark K Logan , 13 November 2020 at 11:57 AM

Thanks.

The lone bright spot is Biden's stated intention of restoring the JCPOA. And, I guess, the pending defenestration of Pompeo The Great.

I suspect the condition of the US economy and the massive deficits will assist in discouraging rash actions elsewhere. Have to wait and see.

Fred , 13 November 2020 at 12:36 PM

Obama's deep state lied, people died: https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/11/outgoing-syria-envoy-admits-hiding-us-troop-numbers-praises-trumps-mideast-record/170012/

It's great when career professionals sabotage the elected president's foreign policy.

JM Gavin , 13 November 2020 at 01:00 PM

I've never quite figured out the "neocon" ideology, beyond the fact that neocons seem devoted to the sort of status quo present in Washington, D.C. during the three administrations prior to Trump. Military adventurism, nation-building, and interventionist foreign policy, all based on nebulous concepts which are applied unevenly around the world.

It seems now that there is a new breed of neocons, unified by opposition to Trump's messaging, but not much else. Odd to find people like Samantha Power, John Bolton, Jim Mattis, and Paul Wolfowitz marching together in perfect step.

The Beaver , 13 November 2020 at 02:49 PM

Mr Geraldi

A good perspective by Philip Weiss on the same subject. Eliot A Cohen must be communicating a lot with the Kagan brothers , Dennis Ross and Perle to see who can be parachuted either to the WH or Foggy Bottom.

https://mondoweiss.net/2020/10/neoconservatives-are-flocking-to-biden-and-lets-forget-about-the-iran-deal/

BrianC , 13 November 2020 at 03:08 PM

@JM Gavin

I've never quite figured out the "neocon" ideology

The revolutionary spirit (see E. Michael Jones' work). From communism to neoconservatism it's ultimately an attack on the Beatitudes and Christ's Sermon on the Mount. "The works of mercy are the opposite of the works of war" -- Servant of God Dorothy Day

Mark K Logan , 13 November 2020 at 03:23 PM

JM Gavin,

Sir,

I hold the Cold Warriors like Scoop a species distinct from those of the post-USSR era. The current version started at the end of the cold war. We felt like kings of the world after Gulf War 1 and the shoe seemed to fit.

The HW Bush administration pondered how best to use this power for good. I've read some things which report there was a debate within the administration on whether to clean up Yugoslavia or Somalia first. They got Ron to "do the honors" for the invasion of Somalia at Oxford: About 20 minutes in. https://www.c-span.org/video/?35586-1/arising-ashes-world-order

That was played as part of the pep-talk on the Juneau off the coast of Somalia. Stirring stuff.

In some small way I never stopped sipping that Kool Aid. It's hard to stand by and watch unspeakable evil go down when you have the power to stop it...or think you do. Time will tell if the Neocons are capable of perceiving the limits of force. Certainly had some hard lessons in the last few decades.

EEngineer , 13 November 2020 at 03:57 PM

@JM Gavin

Hogs lining up for a spot at the trough? The Neocon movement seems to have morphed into nothing more than a club for bullies trying to one up each other.

Dan , 13 November 2020 at 04:35 PM

I think its generally shocking that Trump or the republicans didn't make a bigger issue of Biden's history of supporting disastrous intervention, especially his Iraq War vote. Maybe they felt like its not a winning issue, that they would lose as many votes as they gain by appearing more isolationist. But overall, Trump favoring diplomacy over cruise missiles should have been a bigger point in his favor in the election.

jerseycityjoan , 13 November 2020 at 04:52 PM

It is distressing to read that we will have people in the government who are looking for a fight. That is especially true in view of China's aggression in recent years and the responses we will have to make to that. I think we will have more than enough to do to handle China. What do the neocons want to do about China?

Here is an article about China that really startled me and made me realize how much of a threat is was becoming. The Air Force chief of staff talks about the challenges of countries trying to compete militarily with us in ways that have not occurred for awhile. Here are two quotes that really got me:

"Tomorrow's Airmen are more likely to fight in highly contested environments, and must be prepared to fight through combat attrition rates and risks to the nation that are more akin to the World War II era than the uncontested environments to which we have since become accustomed," Brown writes."

And

"Wargames and modeling have repeatedly shown that if the Air Force fails to adapt, there will be mission failure, Brown warns. Rules-based international order may "disintegrate and our national interests will be significantly challenged," according to the memo."

https://www.airforcemag.com/brown-air-force-must-speed-up-change-or-face-harsh-consequences/#.X02DjeMiZQM.mailto

The article doesn't say we will have another arms race but that is an obvious response to China's competition with us. I thought all that was done and gone. I do not want to resume it. I don't want another period of foreign entanglements, period. We still haven't paid for the War Against Terrorism. I look into the future and all I see is us racking up bills that we have no ability to pay. And then there is the human cost of all this, I don't want to even think about that.

turcopolier , 13 November 2020 at 05:40 PM

jerseycityjoan

"I thought all that was done and gone. I do not want to resume it." Childish. "Only the dead have seen the end of war."

JM Gavin , 13 November 2020 at 05:54 PM

EEngineer,

Snouts in the trough accounts for a certain amount of neocons, I'm sure. There is, however, a unifying vision beyond that which puzzles me, given the very different political orientations of various neocons. Neocons are found in academia and the media as well. Those types are less dependent on taxpayer dollars in exchange for their views (they'll get whatever tax money gets pushed their way in grants, etc regardless).

I find Polish Janitor's "straussian" and "liberal/internationalist" flavors of neocon intriguing, as I hadn't considered that before.

JMG

JM Gavin , 13 November 2020 at 05:59 PM

COL Lang's quote from Plato reminds me of another (from Cormac McCarthy): "It makes no difference what men think of war, said the judge. War endures. As well ask men what they think of stone. War was always here. Before man was, war waited for him. The ultimate trade awaiting its ultimate practitioner. That is the way it was and will be. That way and not some other way."

Neocons don't really prefer war, so much as they prefer overseas "engagements" that may look like war and smell like war. All that's missing in neocon military operations is a defined end state.

JMG

JM Gavin , 13 November 2020 at 06:10 PM

Mark K. Logan,

I concur with your thoughts about standing by as evil occurs. We just have a habit of jumping into complex situations we don't understand, and making things worse. I suspect you feel the same way.

The military misadventures during my career (Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Syria) were marked by our own black and white thinking. The more successful adventures (Colombia, Nepal) were marked by our appreciation (to a certain extent) of the complex nature of the environments we were getting involved in...and the fact that we weren't involved in nation-building in the latter two locales. There were viable governments in place, and we weren't trying to replace them.

JMG

Deap , 13 November 2020 at 06:53 PM

Here is another Biden clip that should have been exploited too - way back when - when the media was a little more trusted, but no less pompous. However, Biden The Plagerizer had it coming.

Now tell me America is not the Land of Opportunity, when one can continuously shoot themselves in the foot and then rise from the dead yet again, and again: https://rumble.com/vb3c09-resurfaced-video-of-joe-biden-should-destroy-him.html?mref=23gga&mrefc=2

Though I am warming more and more to Trump Media becoming the real soul of America. Plus someone, in time. will need to pick up Rush Limbaugh's empire. America needs a counter-weight to fake news more than it needs the keys to the White House, with all its entangling webs, palace intrigues, chains and pitfalls.

Godspeed President Trump. If someone with as few talents s Biden can rise like Lazarus, just think what you can do with your little finger. No wonder the Democrats want Trump destroyed; not just defeated in a re-election. We have your back, Mr President.

TV , 13 November 2020 at 07:03 PM

Mark Logan:
Iran celebrates "Death to America" as a national day.
So let's give them a path to nuclear weapons.

Deap , 13 November 2020 at 07:11 PM

Ex-CIA analyst, Mich Rep. Elissa Slotkin refuses to back Pelosi for Speaker - anyone know her? https://www.newsmax.com/politics/elissa-slotkin-nancy-pelosi-democrat-house/2020/11/13/id/996905/ She wants more mid-West, and less Calif and NY, as the new face of the Democrat Party.

Fred , 13 November 2020 at 07:14 PM

Mark,

"It's hard to stand by and watch unspeakable evil go down when you have the power to stop it...."


I hear Trump is evil/Hitler/worse. I wonder if anyone who thinks that is true has the power to rig an election, or thinks they do?

jerseycityjoan , 13 November 2020 at 07:50 PM

Colonel,

You are right of course.

Are the people of America up for another arms race and a more or less cold war with China? I think the Chinese will give us a lot more trouble than the Soviets ever did.

And yet we allow their students to come here and learn all we know and their elites to bring their dirty money here and we give them green cards and citizenship and protect the money they took from the Chinese people. Not so smart on our part.

I am very concerned about all of this.

Serge , 13 November 2020 at 07:57 PM

What is the next theater of war that Biden's new friends will involve us in? I noticed lots of Cold War era conflicts are heating up lately, Ethiopia Morocco Armenia being recent examples. IS in Syria/Iraq is still castrated due to the continued mass internment of their population base in the dozens of camps, but they have established thriving franchises in Africa and their other provinces continue to smolder.

[Nov 13, 2020] Biden is ab old, semi-senile, but still very dangerous neoliberal political shark, who was instrumental in the creation of Russiagate hoax and prosecution of General Flynn

Nov 13, 2020 | www.amazon.com

During a July 19, 2020 appearance on Operation Freedom, General Mclnerney, referring to his original March 19, 2017 interview about TFIE HAMMER, stated:

What we didn't know 011 that date in March 2017 was that's what was presented to President Obama on the 5th of January [2017] just before he left office when they opened the investigation and he directed the FBI to look into and the reason why the FBI sent two people over to interview General Flynn. Aid that information 011 the Kislvak memo came from HAMMER. It wasn't a normal NSA document.

Aid that's why Sally Yates wasn't aware of it until the president mentioned it and said put the appropriate people. That's a dog whistle to put our special team on. Aid so, Biden was sitting in that meeting. Biden. Biden has got Russian collusion all over him along with President Obama.

This could not have happened unless Obama was letting it happen. So that's why we've got to get John Durham's grand juries going and going on in a hurry, so the Anerican people know how corrupt the entire Democratic party is, but also the media...

...The Obama Administration cabal waged a criminal campaign against General Flynn, including attempting to frame General Flynn with Logan Act violations when General Flynn had done no such thing. Peter Strzok's hand-written notes suggest that it was Vice President Joe Biden who came up with the idea of prosecuting General Flynn for Logan Act violations. General Flynn, the incoming National Security Adviser, had cut no deals or suggested any deals to Russian Ambassador Kislvak, as they well knew.

Biden knew 'damn well' about spying on Trump campaign- Rep Nunes - YouTube

Director Comey's announcement that the FBI was investigating whether President Trump had connections to the Kremlin, issued less than 24 hours after the conclusion of General Mclnerney's radio interview, proved that Admiral Lyons and General Mclnerney, with information from Fanning and Jones of The Anerican Report, were right 011 target -- THE HAMMER is the key to the coup.

A the FBI used to say, "There are no coincidences."

They had stolen the keys to the kingdom, and they wanted to keep their weapon.

Strzok and Page were aware of, and texting about, Dennis Montgomery. Both Strzok and Page were intimately involved with the Russian Collusion Hoax. Both Strzok and Page were key participants in the coup d etat -- a coup d etat against a duly-elected United States president. This act of treason had never been seen before in America.

Regardless of whether Strzok and Page had Iranian family members or grew up in Iran, their oath as public servants was to the United States Constitution. The actions of Strzok and Page were the actions of an enemy.

In An Act Of Treason Ancl Sedition, The FBI and DOJ Buried Evidence Of Obama, Brennan, And Clapper's Illegal Use Of THE HAMMER For Domestic Spying

[Nov 13, 2020] With Biden at the helm, both Democrats and those Republicans (like Mitt Romney) who do not support Trump can push for further neoliberal, military and other activity against Russia in eastern Europe and Transcaucasia (Abkhazia, South Ossetia). They might also try to resurrect their war in Syria and ensure Syria can never get the Golan Heights back.

Nov 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jen , Nov 11 2020 22:34 utc | 106

Karlofi @ 93:

"... Now I'm posing this as a serious question. What does the Duopoly gain from Biden that it can't get from Trump?"

Surely the money pump that was dispensing largesse to the post-Maidan regime in Ukraine via the contacts that regime has with the DNC (Crowdstrike, the Atlantic Council and the media who take the Atlantic Council's money, like Bellingcat for example) before 2017, and which must have dried up while Trump was President, will start up again should Biden last long enough past his inauguration. After all, you know he did indeed push former Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to sack his Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin for continuing to investigate the activities of Mykola Zlochevsky and his company Burisma Holdings (at which Hunter Biden was on the Board of Directors) and even boasted about it.

With Biden at the helm, both Democrats and those Republicans (like Mitt Romney) who do not support Trump can push for further neoliberal, military and other activity against Russia in eastern Europe and Transcaucasia (Abkhazia, South Ossetia). They might also try to resurrect their war in Syria and ensure Syria can never get the Golan Heights back.

H.Schmatz , Nov 11 2020 22:50 utc | 115

@Posted by: Jen | Nov 11 2020 22:34 utc | 105

But if Atlantic Council is onlyy a DNC tool, how do you explain that under YTrump administration and Pompeo SoS it was Atlantic Council fellow Franak ViaÇorca who helped organize the Belarusina color revolution, to the extent that now he figures in his Twitter account as Tikhanovskaya´s personal advisor?

karlof1 , Nov 11 2020 23:01 utc | 117

Jen @105--

Thanks for your reply! IMO, there wasn't much drop-off in Color Revolution activity under Trump, and he followed fairly closely the National Defense Directives against both Russia and China. Perhaps its the blatant rejection of treaties since Biden has vowed to rejoin/renegotiate, particularly New START. Maybe it's resistance to a currently secret policy ploy like the Great Reset or Biden's announced very different approach to the pandemic or some other secret schism we're not privy to yet. I don't doubt the vote result here in Oregon since our system is extremely hard to violate in any massive manner--it was an emotional contest thus the high turnout. The joined Media Narrative is cause for concern for it signals another BigLie, and to go through that effort means a rather important motive.

vk , Nov 12 2020 2:30 utc | 151

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 12 2020 1:34 utc | 143

The history of the last three decades show that Republican's wage major wars while Democrats wage small and/or covert wars (liberal interventions) and regime changes. Republicans will never relinquish the patriotic mantle that allows them to trump (pun intended) the left's aspirations.

I don't think this holds water. What I see is a clear pattern of decline:

1) George H. W. Bush directly invades Iraq with legitimate American forces. It a full-fledged invasion, the first war declared for explicitly economic purposes by the USA. Nobody finds it weird or contests it, because the USA had just emerged victorious from the Cold War and is now the sole superpower;

2) Bill Clinton, in order to not rub American supremacy on everybody's faces, invades Somalia and annihilates Yugoslavia with legitimate American forces behind a UN flag. He wins Yugoslavia but doesn't manage to do a Communist Nürnberg Trial, and loses in Somalia. The first chink in the armor of the sole hegemon;

3) George W. Bush wins through electoral fraud (Florida). 9/11 happens with his blessing. He then has to do a kabuki in order to blame it all on Iraq and Afghanistan. Even then he doesn't earn the UN's blessing. He invades Iraq and Afghanistan with legitimate American forces and wins in Iraq. He takes Iraq's oil reserves, but the objective doesn't solve America's economic problems. Afghanistan turns into a swamp. He fails to invade Iran and fails to bomb North Korea. He loses against Russia in Georgia. The USA still is able to invade other countries and destroy them with legitimate American forces, but with much more difficulty and not always achieving what it wants. For the first time since the beginning of the End of History invasions are halted before they even begin;

4) Obama has to begin his government with a mammoth USD 1.1 trn unconditional bailout to America's big banks and other companies. He tries to make a profit from the occupation of Iraq by recalling American troops and substituting them with drones and mercenaries (Blackwater). Afghanistan continues to drain the coffers. Russia rises. China rises. He pathetically tries to invade Syria with auxiliaries (ISIS) and fails utterly (Russia even imposes a no-fly zone to NATO/USA). Invasions are then further scaled down to color revolutions (Ukraine, etc.). South China Sea is lost without even a fight. Ukraine is partitioned by Russia after the color revolution and NATO loses the Black Sea forever;

5) Trump cannot even begin a new war. He contents himself with color revolution in Latin America, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Belarus and other Central Asian countries. For the first time since the End of History, a POTUS tries to be friends with a previous enemy nation (North Korea and Russia). For the first time, a color revolution is reverted in Latin America (Bolivia), while a clandestine invasion of Venezuela also fails.

So, the pattern here is clearly one of decline. At the beginning of the End of History (1991), the USA can invade anyone with its regular forces, legally and with the blessing of the UN and NATO - and wins all those conflicts. Then, it begins to lose or at least not completely win - but still do the whole thing legally, with regular forces and with blessings. Then it still is capable of invading and winning - but not legally and not with the blessing of even the main NATO allies (France and Germany); also, even when it wins, it is clear it was not what the Empire needed to stay afloat. Then, it has to abandon any prospects of invasion by regular forces, having to resort to color revolutions and clandestine auxiliaries (terrorist armies). Then it is not even capable of doing those color revolutions successfully anymore (except in Latin America - the Empire's historical little bitch, so it doesn't really count).

The conclusion we can reach here is that Trump didn't initiate any new war for the simple fact he couldn't: the Empire is overstretched, its resources dwindling.

With Biden, I think we'll witness this process deepening, but in another key:

Biden Outlines Plans to Reset U.S. Foreign Policy After Trump

"Political wisdom holds that Americans, the American public, doesn't vote on foreign policy," he said in New York, speaking before a crowd that included some former diplomats. "But I think that's an old way of thinking. In 2019 foreign policy is domestic policy in my view. And domestic policy is foreign policy."

With Biden, we can see for the first time in American history the USA officially admitting it is an empire. The American people will be directly involved and voting and supporting for foreign policy, i.e. invasions and interventions. Domestic policy will fuse with foreign policy, in a typical imperial metamorphosis. There will be no going back, it will be a war of annihilation between the USA (I'm here including its provinces) and the rest of the world. As the famous Soviet epic once said, it will be a battle not for glory, but "for life on Earth".

Jackrabbit , Nov 12 2020 2:52 utc | 156

vk @Nov12 2:30 #150

I don't think this holds water. What I see is a clear pattern of decline:

You are waaay too optimistic.

Republicans Bush Sr. and GWBush each sent hundreds of thousands of troops into battle.

Democrats Clinton and Obama conducted small and/or covert wars.

Trump hasn't started a "major war" but he has laid the groundwork for it with his:


It is simply wishful thinking to expect that there will not be a war (probably major war) during a Trump second term.

Biden might also take USA to war but Trump's patriotic MAGA nationalists would cheer a war if Trump is President.

!!

[Nov 10, 2020] Biden relies on foreign policy advisors from the Obama administration. Yhey are members of the "Washington blob" and will provide continuity with past policies rooted in militarism and other abuses of power

Nov 10, 2020 | dissidentvoice.org

During his election campaign, Biden has relied on foreign policy advisors from past administrations, particularly the Obama administration, and seems to be considering some of them for top cabinet posts. For the most part, they are members of the "Washington blob" who represent a dangerous continuity with past policies rooted in militarism and other abuses of power.

These include interventions in Libya and Syria, support for the Saudi war in Yemen, drone warfare, indefinite detention without trial at Guantanamo, prosecutions of whistleblowers and whitewashing torture. Some of these people have also cashed in on their government contacts to make hefty salaries in consulting firms and other private sector ventures that feed off government contracts.

– As former Deputy Secretary of State and Deputy National Security Advisor to Obama, Tony Blinken played a leading role in all Obama's aggressive policies. Then he co-founded WestExec Advisors to profit from negotiating contracts between corporations and the Pentagon, including one for Google to develop Artificial Intelligence technology for drone targeting, which was only stopped by a rebellion among outraged Google employees.

– Since the Clinton administration, Michele Flournoy has been a principal architect of the U.S.'s illegal, imperialist doctrine of global war and military occupation. As Obama's Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, she helped to engineer his escalation of the war in Afghanistan and interventions in Libya and Syria. Between jobs at the Pentagon, she has worked the infamous revolving door to consult for firms seeking Pentagon contracts, to co-found a military-industrial think tank called the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), and now to join Tony Blinken at WestExec Advisors.

– Nicholas Burns was U.S. Ambassador to NATO during the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Since 2008, he has worked for former Defense Secretary William Cohen's lobbying firm The Cohen Group, which is a major global lobbyist for the U.S. arms industry. Burns is a hawk on Russia and China and has condemned NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden as a "traitor."

– As a legal adviser to Obama and the State Department and then as Deputy CIA Director and Deputy National Security Advisor, Avril Haines provided legal cover and worked closely with Obama and CIA Director John Brennan on Obama's tenfold expansion of drone killings.

– Samantha Power served under Obama as UN Ambassador and Human Rights Director at the National Security Council. She supported U.S. interventions in Libya and Syria, as well as the Saudi-led war on Yemen . And despite her human rights portfolio, she never spoke out against Israeli attacks on Gaza that happened under her tenure or Obama's dramatic use of drones that left hundreds of civilians dead.

– Former Hillary Clinton aide Jake Sullivan played a leading role in unleashing U.S. covert and proxy wars in Libya and Syria .

– As UN Ambassador in Obama's first term, Susan Rice obtained UN cover for his disastrous intervention in Libya. As National Security Advisor in Obama's second term, Rice also defended Israel's savage bombardment of Gaza in 2014, bragged about the U.S. "crippling sanctions" on Iran and North Korea, and supported an aggressive stance toward Russia and China.

A foreign policy team led by such individuals will only perpetuate the endless wars, Pentagon overreach and CIA-misled chaos that we -- and the world -- have endured for the past two decades of the War on Terror.

Making diplomacy "the premier tool of our global engagement."

Biden will take office amid some of the greatest challenges the human race has ever faced -- from extreme inequality, debt and poverty caused by neoliberalism , to intractable wars and the existential danger of nuclear war, to the climate crisis, mass extinction and the Covid-19 pandemic.

These problems won't be solved by the same people, and the same mindsets, that got us into these predicaments. When it comes to foreign policy, there is a desperate need for personnel and policies rooted in an understanding that the greatest dangers we face are problems that affect the whole world, and that they can only be solved by genuine international collaboration, not by conflict or coercion.

During the campaign, Joe Biden's website declared, "As president, Biden will elevate diplomacy as the premier tool of our global engagement. He will rebuild a modern, agile U.S. Department of State -- investing in and re-empowering the finest diplomatic corps in the world and leveraging the full talent and richness of America's diversity."

This implies that Biden's foreign policy must be managed primarily by the State Department, not the Pentagon. The Cold War and American post-Cold War triumphalism led to a reversal of these roles, with the Pentagon and CIA taking the lead and the State Department trailing behind them (with only 5% of their budget), trying to clean up the mess and restore a veneer of order to countries destroyed by American bombs or destabilized by U.S. sanctions , coups and death squads .

In the Trump era, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reduced the State Department to little more than a sales team for the military-industrial complex to ink lucrative arms deals with India, Taiwan , Saudi Arabia, the UAE and countries around the world.

What we need is a foreign policy led by a State Department that resolves differences with our neighbors through diplomacy and negotiations, as international law in fact requires , and a Department of Defense that defends the United States and deters international aggression against us, instead of threatening and committing aggression against our neighbors around the world.

As the saying goes, "personnel is policy," so whomever Biden picks for top foreign policy posts will be key in shaping its direction. While our personal preferences would be to put top foreign policy positions in the hands of people who have spent their lives actively pursuing peace and opposing U.S. military aggression, that's just not in the cards with this middle-of-the-road Biden administration.

But there are appointments Biden could make to give his foreign policy the emphasis on diplomacy and negotiation that he says he wants. These are American diplomats who have successfully negotiated important international agreements, warned U.S. leaders of the dangers of aggressive militarism and developed valuable expertise in critical areas like arms control.

William Burns was Deputy Secretary of State under Obama, the # 2 position at the State Department, and he is now the director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. As Under Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs in 2002, Burns gave Secretary of State Powell a prescient and detailed but unheeded warning that the invasion of Iraq could "unravel" and create a "perfect storm" for American interests. Burns also served as U.S. Ambassador to Jordan and then Russia.

Wendy Sherman was Obama's Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs, the # 4 position at the State Department, and was briefly Acting Deputy Secretary of State after Burns retired. Sherman was the lead negotiator for both the1994 Framework Agreement with North Korea and the negotiations with Iran that led to the Iran nuclear agreement in 2015. This is surely the kind of experience Biden needs in senior positions if he is serious about reinvigorating American diplomacy.

Tom Countryman is currently the Chair of the Arms Control Association . In the Obama administration, Countryman served as Undersecretary of State for International Security Affairs, Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs. He also served at U.S. embassies in Belgrade, Cairo, Rome and Athens, and as foreign policy advisor to the Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps. Countryman's expertise could be critical in reducing or even removing the danger of nuclear war. It would also please the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, since Tom supported Senator Bernie Sanders for president.

In addition to these professional diplomats, there are also Members of Congress who have expertise in foreign policy and could play important roles in a Biden foreign policy team. One is Representative Ro Khanna , who has been a champion of ending U.S. support for the war in Yemen, resolving the conflict with North Korea and reclaiming Congress's constitutional authority over the use of military force.

Another is Representative Karen Bass , who is the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus and also of the Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Human Rights, and International Organizations .

If the Republicans hold their majority in the Senate, it will be harder to get appointments confirmed than if the Democrats win the two Georgia seats that are headed for run-offs , or than if they had run more progressive campaigns in Iowa, Maine or North Carolina and won at least one of those seats. But this will be a long two years if we let Joe Biden take cover behind Mitch McConnell on critical appointments, policies and legislation. Biden's initial cabinet appointments will be an early test of whether Biden will be the consummate insider or whether he is willing to fight for real solutions to our country's most serious problems.

Conclusion

U.S. cabinet positions are positions of power that can drastically affect the lives of millions of Americans and billions of our neighbors overseas. If Biden is surrounded by people who, against all the evidence of past decades, still believe in the illegal threat and use of military force as key foundations of American foreign policy, then the international cooperation the whole world so desperately needs will be undermined by four more years of war, hostility and international tensions, and our most serious problems will remain unresolved.

That's why we must vigorously advocate for a team that would put an end to the normalization of war and make diplomatic engagement in the pursuit of international peace and cooperation our number one foreign policy priority.

Whomever President-elect Biden chooses to be part of his foreign policy team, he -- and they -- will be pushed by people beyond the White House fence who are calling for demilitarization, including cuts in military spending, and for reinvestment in our country's peaceful economic development.

It will be our job to hold President Biden and his team accountable whenever they fail to turn the page on war and militarism, and to keep pushing them to build friendly relations with all our neighbors on this small planet that we share.

Facebook Twitter Reddit Email Medea Benjamin is cofounder of CODEPINK for Peace , and author of several books, including Inside Iran: The Real History and Politics of the Islamic Republic of Iran . Nicolas J. S. Davies is an independent journalist, a researcher with CODEPINK and the author of Blood On Our Hands: the American Invasion and Destruction of Iraq . Read other articles by Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies .

This article was posted on Monday, November 9th, 2020 at 4:28pm and is filed under Joe Biden , Militarism , Neoliberalism .

[Nov 10, 2020] Biden has a long history of being deeply culpable in human rights abuses

Nov 10, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

Biden has a long history of being deeply culpable in human rights abuses. Our instinct may be to jubilantly proclaim that the suffering for vulnerable population will now end, but that wouldn't be the case for, say, civilians in war zones. Biden's decision to actively advocate for the disastrous war on Iraq and the crime bill, which imprisoned millions of African-Americans, are rightly notorious.

Biden certainly also did not embolden Obama's more peaceful and internationalist inclinations, which he demonstrated in his speech to the Muslim world and opposition to the Iraq war, when he served as his vice-president. As the Guardian [2] reported about 2016, the last year of the Obama administration, "the ( ) administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that's three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day." Under Obama/Biden, ten times more drone strikes were authorized than under Bush, and the US joined the coalition to bomb Yemen, which has exacerbated a famine that had killed 84.701 by November 2018.[3]

Biden has never seriously reflected on the lives there were wrecked and the traumas that were imposed during the post-9/11 wars, and there is no sign that he will deescalate US foreign policy in 2021. But there is hope: In opposition to Trump, movements to bolster domestic human rights in the US have been invigorated. The heroes of the last four years – the Dreamers, as well as the BLM, anti-detention and Sanders activists – will not go away. Can their call for moral transformation take on global dimensions?

None of our doubts about Biden should diminish our recognition of the racist horrors of the Trump years. Some of his supporters claim that "Trump never started a war", and submit this statement as proof that Trump is less damaging to the world than a centrist Democrat only tell (or know) half the truth. The trend in US foreign policy has been to drop more and more bombs since 09/11 – and the Trump administration, which was packed with notorious Islamophobes, represented the sad, recent pinnacle of a trendline that will hopefully not be continued under the Biden administration. In Afghanistan, warplanes dropped 7,423 bombs and other munitions in 2019, which was the highest number since the Pentagon began tracking how many bombs it drops in 2006.[4] Consequently the US, and its allied Afghani forces, killed more than the Taliban within 2019.[5] Trump would have certainly further undermined international humanitarian law in war zones. After all, he pardoned a war criminal as an intentional symbolical gesture,[6] and advocated for bombing the families of terror suspects, which is, of course, a crime per the Geneva Convention.

If the past years have shown anything, it is how important it is to limit the war powers of presidents no matter who is in office. The next in line usually turned out to be worse in important respects when it comes to questions of war and peace. The only antidote is holding Biden accountable on foreign policy, starting today.

[Nov 10, 2020] NATO Declares Biden White House Will Finally Confront -Assertive Russia- -

Nov 10, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

NATO Declares Biden White House Will Finally Confront "Assertive Russia"

by Tyler Durden Tue, 11/10/2020 - 04:15 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

With Joe Biden declared president-elect by a chorus of major networks in unison on Saturday, the same mainstream media has suddenly dropped any notion of 'Russian interference' in the election which for years had received wall to wall coverage.

Over the weekend an MSNBC host went so far as to declare without evidence "This might be the cleanest election we have ever had." And conveniently apart from the 'sudden' unprecedented leap in vaccine development and with markets soaring on the news, the foreign policy "wins" are conveniently pouring in even before Biden enters the White House on January 20.

As a case in point NATO's official message of congratulations to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris underscored that a Biden White House will finally be able to confront "assertive Russia" according to a statement by Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg.

Jens Stoltenberg via EPA

"I warmly welcome the election of Joe Biden as the next President of the United States. I know Mr. Biden as a strong supporter of NATO and the transatlantic relationship," Stoltenberg's written statement began .

And here's where the NATO chief referenced "assertive Russia" and the "rise of China":

"We need this collective strength to deal with the many challenges we face, including a more assertive Russia, international terrorism, cyber and missile threats, and a shift in the global balance of power with the rise of China," Stoltenberg stated .

The suggestion is of course that Trump didn't exercise enough "strength" - though it seems hard to make this argument especially in the case of China.

And it's further long been pointed out that US-Russia relations have actually been at a low point in recent history under Trump , given the Trump administration withdrawal from key weapons treaties like the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, Open Skies, and with New START set to expire early next year.

There's also the attempts to block completion of the Nord Stream 2 Russia to Germany gas pipeline, which has included targeted sanctions against Western companies helping to construct it. The Trump State Department has also done much to open up weapons sales to Ukraine.

about:blank

me title=

Recall too that not only has Trump throughout his presidency demanded European allies do more in terms of shouldering their fair share of the burden of defense spending for which they are "delinquent", but has repeatedly called the Cold War era alliance "obsolete" and at some points even hinted the US could withdraw.

But his ultimate purpose in this appeared geared toward strengthening the organization into a true alliance and not merely Washington carrying the burden of major spending.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

We detailed last month that top NATO officials appeared to be openly rooting for a Biden victory following four years of Trump being a thorn in the side of Brussels. This is true enough, but in terms of Russia one could easily argue Trump has been a greater hawk in terms of ignoring European demands that key nuclear and weapons treaties be extended . 07564111 , 5 hours ago

ROFL .. idiot Stoltenberg thinks he is immortal.

cankles' server , 3 hours ago

Wasn't NATO literally designed for war?

teutonicate , 3 hours ago

NATO Declares Biden White House Will Finally Confront "Assertive Russia"

"the foreign policy "wins" are conveniently pouring in even before Biden enters the White House on January 20."

The only reason any foreign power would prefer to work with Biden is that they know he is a wimp, that he is corrupt and can be bought (as proven by his history with China) and that for he will not look out for American interests (as opposed to theirs).

You see, Democrats define anything that takes down America as a win - including there own contrived victories that will never materialize.

www.germanica.org

Roacheforque , 4 hours ago

Biden would sit in his underwear and do what he's told to do, like any proper corpse. That's why the dead (and blue-bots) voted for him.

LevelHeadedMan , 4 hours ago

As we say in Russia;

Собака лает, а караван идёт.

The dog barks, yet the caravan moves on.

It means we will keep assembling more and more nukes while this idiot continues bleating.

SMC , 3 hours ago

You have a lot of support from normal, productive Americans.

LevelHeadedMan , 3 hours ago

Thank you. We like regular Americans too!

richard_engineer , 1 hour ago

As an American, I think Russia has been legitimate in its attempts at peace while USA has been continuously trying to provoke Russia. I think that the bolsheviks you kicked out are trying to get revenge and use America as their pawn.

Seriously man, I'm legitimately afraid that Russia would launch a pre-emptive attack if further cornered by USA & NATO. I live in Sacramento, CA - do you think this city would be targeted by nuke?

I imagine Russia would focus on the defensive nukes placed in Europe first, and then likely to target many large cities in USA & Europe. Russia has a lot of nukes so I imagine it would launch full-scale attack to completely disable the opponent from future attack.

EuroPox , 5 hours ago

So after Trump is sworn in on 20th January, NATO is finished. There is no way back from this.

No1uNo , 5 hours ago

I support the sentiment, my fear is they've mobilised so much resources to constantly attack Trump, I don't see those attacks ending only escalating. If you can see a way that the CFR, Trilateral Commission, Atlantic Council, Soros NGO's etc all get disbanded and some serious jail time thrown at them - then yes their pet projects will suffer. Without that Trump needs to be very careful outside of the White House.

EuroPox , 5 hours ago

Trump could not take down the DS until everyone could see what was happening. The last 4 years have been all about this election - this is how people will finally SEE what has been happening. There never were going to any arrests in the first term. Now there will be 4 years to take down the DS... and another 4 years after that. No need to rush, one step at a time will get us there.

Thurmonster , 3 hours ago

Riiiight.

philipat , 5 hours ago

LOL. And not a single example provided of Russia's "assertive" behavior towards Europe. And I for one can't think of ANY yet I can think of many provocations against Russia by NATO. And, of course, if NATO provokes Russia too hard and war does break out, Europe will be on the front line and could, if Russia so wished, be reduced to rubble in short order. I can't imagine why the Europeans would want to do this to themselves but there we have it. At least it would mark the end of the awful EU!

East Indian , 5 hours ago

Russia has stealthily crawled to place itself just next to NATO's boundaries! Isn't enough?

acementhead , 5 hours ago

And not a single example provided of Russia's "assertive" behavior towards Europe.

Come on man They're (Russia) building a pipeline to sell gas to Germany. How dare they, that gas belongs to the US oligarchs.

xpxhxoxexnxixx , 1 hour ago

Isnt it funny that the MSM and Dems are completely fine glossing over the fact that half the country voted against Biden. It's as if they think we're all united simply because of the outcome. It's no wonder why we have the country we do, and why the dems continue to squeak by year after year. There is no desire for them to understand the American people- they simply figure 'we'll get just enough votes to do what we want' 100% of time. There is no desire for them to actually want to work with others to improve the country. And year after year we believe it simply in the 'name of democracy'- as if that actually means anything. So Trump is the red flag commie garbage man to them, and literally anyone else is freedom. If you ever see the MSM or social media start to talk about why we have a literal divide in this country, I think i'll call it quits here on Earth. But it'll never happen.

GoldenDebt , 5 hours ago

These evil F-ers want nuclear war. Trump did it right. I suspect Trump was going to forge a new peace, demonrats didnt want that. They want to kill us all with a nuke war. Democrats are pure evil.

Jerzeel , 5 hours ago

More like the usual gang want to beat up again on some **** hole country.

Fireman , 5 hours ago

NATO, North Amerikan Terror Organ, that limp appendage dangling from the Pedophile Politburo in Natostan capital of USSA's flaccid vassal Brussels, seat of the infamous albeit collapsing EUSSR wants to be the global gangster sidekick of the Pentacon thugs but just doesn't want to pay to play. Will the Germans get suckered for a third time into a global war for their anglozionazi bankster masters and the Washing town thugocracy? Nah...they finally seem to have figured it and STASI agent "Erika" out as the I$I$ "backed" Saudi Mercan IOU petroscrip toilet paper dollah gets flushed from the global Ponzi sewer of the Potemkin Village (idiot) Mercan "economy" of slaughter for the profit of the zero 1%.

Meanwhile the Dark Winter of financial collapse is upon US, on both sides of the Atlanticist swamp, as the detritus of USSA'S Middle East judaic wars rapes, decapitates and pillages its way across a seething Europe betrayed by the hag in Berlin and her Soros puppet master. Syria is where the anglozionazi beast and Pentacon Murder Inc. finally bit off more than they could chew in their serial judaic wars of terror and the rest of humanity sees it for what it is. All the emasculated pedophile pawns in Natostan huff and puff at Mr. Bear's doorstep but that is all these Brownstoned cretins will ever do. It is all over bar the inevitable bankrupt collapse of €urolandia and the long awaited civil war reloaded in Slumville, USSA. Bismarck was right more than a century ago, the only future Germany has and Urupp by default is in the warm embrace of Mr. Bear and his vast supply of energy and resources as USSA vainly squeezes gas from the "shale miracle" BS and hubris bloated turds in the stinking Washing town swamp as the brand new cadaver in chief, Creepy Joe and his Camel get ready to torch Slumville in the mother of all dumpster fires.

Onward to Leningrad with Onkel Adolf and the dancing fool of Natostan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3m0oUpRf3Q

Patmos , 4 hours ago

We need this collective strength to deal with the many challenges we face, including a more assertive Russia...

Which is code for:

The EU is poorly run and incredibly weak, having to rely on other nations for resources and subsidies, so please help us because the glory of Europe has pretty much completely faded. -signed, little bitch Jens

Is-Be , 4 hours ago

"Mr. Gorbechov, you have my word that we will not advance one inch towards Russia."

They are not worthy of their ancestors. Real Northman are bound by their oaths.

Even Loki could not break his.

NorwegianKing , 5 hours ago

Jens Stoltenberg is a Quisling.

Alice-the-dog , 2 hours ago

So the extreme aggression of NATO is going to be used to attack the nonexistent Russian aggression?

Fabelhaft , 1 hour ago

The plan ... is to minimize Putin and or his philosophy of 'Russian resources for Russia', to the point that the Russian people will vote his method out and gladly surrender control of their goods to the West. Then, be good servile Russians. Oh, and another thing, a big thing, the West hates Russia's Cross. The Cross has to go, also.

Somewhat Unisex , 4 hours ago

The whole Russia tensions are nauseating.

Russia has a GDP similar to South Korea.

But the MIC always needs a boogeyman I suppose.

libfrog88 , 3 hours ago

NATO is so full of ****. They are the ones provoking Russia all the time. They need to justify their worthless existence and it is costing far too much.

nanook007 , 4 hours ago

Yes of course......parasite globalist warmongers love the democrat pedophile hair sniffer.

overmedicatedundersexed , 5 hours ago

"War is Peace.".some democrat leftist.

Stringer99 , 5 hours ago

Nato like many other organisations needs a threat, real or imaginary to exist. The US spends more on weapon systems than the next 16 countries combined. Their usual reason is things like 9/11. The same forces behind 9/11 include the same nato puppet masters and connected think tanks who also profit from Nato funding. Its just another business model involving trillions of dollars funded by taxpayers. Whether its the arms industry or big pharma, fear is their currency of control.

TheySayIAmOkay , 4 hours ago

Great. When does ISIS funding kick back into full gear?

Bobby Farrell Can Dance , 4 hours ago

These Northern Atlantic Terrorists Orcs took out 2 secular leaders (Qaddafi, Saddam) and tried taking out a third (Assad), and they wonder why radical Islam is filling in the void? How the hell are these sub humans ever in charge of making such decisions? NATO HQ should be wiped off the map.

They also made the refugee problem worse.

Haboob , 5 hours ago

Russia is no longer the USSR so why "confront" them.

Simpson , 5 hours ago

Resource rich country.

SadhakaPadma , 5 hours ago

its not case...you cant milk taxpayers for 750 bilions usd a year withouth enemies and threat...so Military industry created terrorists camps and as it failed..now they wanna encyrcle china and russia and spread ******** about them...danger is if you provoke around these borders the war might come even as accident as Putin warned..its all only softwares...

SadhakaPadma , 5 hours ago

DESPITE the all Trump faults he gave humanity four more years...HIlary would go nuclear...same apply with Biden.

dog breath , 5 hours ago

Gaslighting is strong with EU. Trump wants NATO military spending to be 2% of GDP. Germany wants gas pipeline with Russia. This is direct contradiction to this NATO ******* propaganda.

minoas , 1 hour ago

They won't be happy until they kill us all in a nuclear war. Russia is not a threat to Europe. China does not send it's troops around the world overthrowing governments. Encircled by US bases, it has built a small island off it's coast to protect it's seas lanes while we have nearly a thousand military installations around the globe if we count our covert ones. Russia and China is athreat to world hegemony by the US. That is their crime

Tom Angle , 1 hour ago

Who sponsored a Neo-Nazi coupe on the Russian border? Who continually holds war games on the Russian border? Who does Russian natural gas keep who warm in the winter? Who creates and sponsors terrorists to make way for a pipeline to Europe? Who builds bio labs on Russian borders? So who is assertive?

MoreFreedom , 2 hours ago

Translation: Stoltenberg says he's glad Biden is president because that means they'll all pocket more US taxpayer money, and the US taxpayer is the sheep. There's money to be made in NATO deals and deployments, provided the US pays for it.

Theremustbeanotherway , 2 hours ago

In the UK, our politicians are corrupt beyond redemption.

Our legal system is becoming corrupt beyond redemption.

The current senior personnel in our armed forces are pansies and incapable of defending our nation and only capable of attacking the indigenous population.

The current senior personnel in our police forces are bent out of shape determined to victimise the indigenous population.

We are still under the cosh of the Bolsheviks in Europe intent on promoting war.

Most of the population of the UK are incapable of seeing through the BS and lies - I now know what it is like to be held hostage in an asylum!!

Old Captain Hindsight , 5 hours ago

NATO outing themselves as enemies of the people?

It is funny watching all of these idiots jump the gun.

jnojr , 41 minutes ago

Maybe Joe Biden can get a Nobel Peace Prize even faster than Barack Obama did?

Promethus , 1 hour ago

I started in the US military during the cold War. It is so sad that people like me no longer recognize this country and look to Russia as a bulwark of Christianity and western civilization.

Stay strong Russia. The USA and western Europe have abandoned God and now are reaping what they sewed..

[Nov 10, 2020] Biden -- A War Cabinet

Nov 10, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

Nov 2, 2020

"Let's bring decency and integrity back to the White House." I can't count the number of times I have heard and read this phrase uttered by U.S. expats here in Paris, France. As one of many American expats living here, of course I share in the desire for an end to a Donald Trump presidency. But at what cost? And will a Biden presidency -- which promises a return to "normalcy" -- really merit the sigh of relief that so many think it will? Below I summarise some of the most troubling information I have uncovered about some of the most likely foreign policy picks for key positions in a Biden cabinet.

Susan Rice for Secretary of State

Susan Rice, who was also reportedly being considered for the role of Biden's Vice President, served as United States Ambassador to the United Nations and as National Security Advisor, both under the Obama administration.

While Benghazi has been the focus of much criticism of Rice, she has received virtually no scrutiny for her backing of the invasion of Iraq and claiming that there were WMDs there. Some of her statements:

"I think he [then Secretary of State Colin Powell] has proved that Iraq has these weapons and is hiding them, and I don't think many informed people doubted that." (NPR, Feb. 6, 2003)

"It's clear that Iraq poses a major threat. It's clear that its weapons of mass destruction need to be dealt with forcefully, and that's the path we're on. I think the question becomes whether we can keep the diplomatic balls in the air and not drop any, even as we move forward, as we must, on the military side." (NPR, Dec. 20, 2002)

"I think the United States government has been clear since the first Bush administration about the threat that Iraq and Saddam Hussein poses. The United States policy has been regime change for many, many years, going well back into the Clinton administration. So it's a question of timing and tactics. We do not necessarily need a further Council resolution before we can enforce this and previous resolutions." (NPR, Nov. 11, 2002; requests for audio of Rice's statements on NPR were declined by the publicly funded network.)

She has also been criticised extensively for her record on the African continent, which judging by the following quote at the beginning of the 1994 Rwandan genocide seems to have been to adopt a "laissez faire" attitude : "If we use the word 'genocide' and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the November [congressional] election?"

Susan Rice's past rhetoric also includes choice generous words for African dictators . One great example is former prime minister of Ethiopia, Meles Zenawi, a man who ordered security services to open fire on protestors during its controversial 2005 election, has a track record of imprisoning journalists , used food aid as a political tool and stole land in south Ethiopia. In her speech at his funeral, Susan Rice described him as "brilliant" and a "close friend ".

Although Rice has often been portrayed as someone who is anti-Israel , her mild criticisms pale in comparison to her staunch record and discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

In a speech given at the AIPAC Synagogue Initiative Lunch back in 2012, Rice boasted about vetoing a UN resolution that would deem Israeli settlements on occupied Palsestinian land as illegal, and further characterized the Goldstone Report as "flawed" and "insisted on Israel's right to defend itself and maintained that Israel's democratic institutions could credibly investigate any possible abuses." Her position has changed little since then, as recently as 2016, she proclaimed that "Israel's security isn't a Democratic interest or a Republican interest -- it's an enduring American interest."

Tony Blinken for National Security Adviser

Tony Blinken is also an old member of the Obama administration, having served first as VP Biden's National Security Advisor from 2009 to 2013, Deputy National Security Advisor from 2013 to 2015 and then as United States Deputy Secretary of State from 2015 to 2017.

Blinken had immense influence over Biden in his role as Deputy National Security Advisor, helping formulate Biden's approach and support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"For Biden ", he argued , "and for a number of others who voted for the resolution, it was a vote for tough diplomacy." He added "It is more likely that diplomacy will succeed, if the other side knows military action is possible."

The two of them were responsible for delivering on Obama's campaign promise to get American troops out of Iraq, a process so oversimplified and poorly handled that it led to even more chaos than the initial occupation and insurgency.

Blinken seems to be of the view that it is upto the US, and only the US, to take charge of world affairs : "On leadership, whether we like it or not, the world just doesn't organize itself. And until this [Trump] administration, the U.S. had played a lead role in doing a lot of that organizing, helping to write the rules, to shape the norms and animate the institutions that govern relations among nations. When we're not engaged, when we don't lead, then one or two things is likely to happen. Either some other country tries to take our place – but probably not in a way that advances our interests or values – or no one does. And then you get chaos or a vacuum filled by bad things before it's filled by good things. Either way, that's bad for us."

Blinken also appears to be steering Biden's pro-Israel agenda, recently stating that Biden "would not tie military assistance to Israel to any political decisions that it makes, period, full stop." which includes an all out rejection of BDS , the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions Movement against Israel's occupation of Palestine.

Michèle Flournoy for Secretary of Defence

Michele Flournoy was Under Secretary of Defense for Policy from 2009 to 2012 in the Obama administration under Secretaries Robert Gates and Leon Panetta.

Flournoy, in writing the Quadrennial Defense Review during her time as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy under President Clinton, has paved the way for the U.S.'s endless and costly wars which prevent us from investing in life saving and necessary programmes like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal. It has effectively granted the US permission to no longer be bound by the UN Charter's prohibition against the threat or use of military force. It declared that, "when the interests at stake are vital, we should do whatever it takes to defend them, including, when necessary, the unilateral use of military power."

While working at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a "Top Defense and National Security Think Tank" based in Washington D.C., in June 2002, as the Bush administration was threatening aggression towards Iraq, she declared , that the United States would "need to strike preemptively before a crisis erupts to destroy an adversary's weapons stockpile" before it "could erect defenses to protect those weapons, or simply disperse them." She continued along this path even in 2009, after the Bush administration, in a speech for the CSIS : "The second key challenge I want to highlight is the proliferation – continued proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, as these also pose increasing threats to our security. We have to respond to states such as Iran, North Korea, who are seeking to develop nuclear weapons technologies, and in a globalized world there is also an increased risk that non-state actors will find ways to obtain these materials or weapons."

It is extremely important to note that Flournoy and Blinken co-founded the strategic consulting firm, WestExec Advisors, where the two use their large database of governmental, military, venture capitalists and corporate leader contacts to help companies win big Pentagon contracts. One such client being Jigsaw, a technology incubator created by Google that describes itself on its website as "a unit within Google that forecasts and confronts emerging threats, creating future-defining research and technology to keep our world safer." Their partnership on the AI initiative entitled Project Maven led to a rebellion by Google workers who opposed their technology being used by military and police operations.

Furthermore, Flournoy and Blinken, in their jobs at WestExec Advisors, co-chaired the biannual meeting of the liberal organization Foreign Policy for America. Over 50 representatives of national-security groups were in attendance. Most of the attendees supported "ask(ing) Congress to halt U.S. military involvement in the (Yemen) conflict." Flournoy did not. She said that the weapons should be sold under certain conditions and that Saudi Arabia needed these advanced patriot missiles to defend itself.

Conclusion

If a return to "normalcy" means having the same old politicians that are responsible for endless wars, that work for the corporate elite, that lack the courage to implement real structural change required for major issues such as healthcare and the environment, then a call for "normalcy" is nothing more than a call to return to the same deprived conditions that led to our current crisis. Such a return with amplified conditions and circumstances, could set the stage for the return of an administration with dangers that could possibly even exceed those posed by the current one in terms of launching new wars.

Mariamne Everett is an intern at the Institute for Public Accuracy currently living in France.

[Nov 10, 2020] Neoliberal Dems, Russia and neo McCarthyism campaign in the USA in 2016-2020

Nov 10, 2020 | www.unz.com

Realist , says: November 10, 2020 at 5:15 pm GMT • 4.1 hours ago

Third, on the international front, we can expect even more hysterical Russia bashing (the Dems all hate Russia with a passion, especially since they have brainwashed themselves for four years that "Putin" had "attacked" the US elections). But there is really nothing the US can do to Russia, it is way too late for that. So I would expect even more hot air than from the Trump Administration, and probably not much more action, although that is by no means certain, since a braindead nominal President like Biden would not have Trump's intelligence to understand that a war against Russia, China or Iran would end in a disaster: Dems always start wars to try to convince the public that they are "tough" (Dukakis in his M-1 tank).

The Dems don't hate Russia it is used as a bogeyman to re direct the populace anget at the neoliberal social system .

Russia, China, Iran and all the rest of the world probably can't believe their good fortune the US is destroying itself.

Biden will not be in control of the US, or any part of it he will be in the corner pissing his pants. The Deep State will be calling the shots.

[Nov 10, 2020] The war is over Global Capitalism triumphs! -- RT Op-ed

Nov 10, 2020 | www.rt.com

This article was originally published by Consent Factory .

By C. J. Hopkins , award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His dystopian novel, ' Zone 23 ', is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. His essays and other works can be found at, and he can be reached via, cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org . OK, so, that was not cool. For one terrifying moment there, it actually looked like GloboCap was going to let Russian-Asset Hitler win.

Hour after hour on election night, states on the map kept turning red, or pink, or some distinctly non-blue color. Wisconsin Michigan Georgia Florida. It could not be happening, and yet it was. What other explanation was there? The Russians were stealing the election again!

But, of course, GloboCap was just playing with us. They're a bunch of practical jokers, those GloboCap guys. Naturally, they couldn't resist the chance to wind us up just one more time.

Seriously, though, while I enjoy a good prank, I still have a number of liberal friends, many of whom were on the verge of suffering major heart attacks as they breathlessly waited for the corporate media to confirm that they had successfully voted a literal dictator out of power. (A few of them suffer from IBS or other gastrointestinal disorders, so, in light of the current toilet-paper shortage caused by the Return of the Apocalyptic Plague, toying with them like that was especially cruel.)

But, whatever. That's water under the bridge. The good news is, the nightmare is over! Literal Hitler and his underground army of Russia-loving white supremacists have been vanquished! Decency has been restored! Globalization has risen from the dead!

... ... ..

Meanwhile, the GloboCap propaganda has reached some new post-Orwellian level. After four long years of "RUSSIA HACKED THE ELECTION!" now, suddenly, "THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ELECTION FRAUD IN THE USA!"

That's right, once again, millions of liberals, like that scene in ' 1984' where the Party switches official enemies right in the middle of the Hate-Week speech, have been ordered to radically reverse their "reality," and hysterically deny the existence of the very thing they have been hysterically alleging for four solid years and they are actually doing it!

... ... ///

Marian1637 7 hours ago

I can not comprehend that democrats do not blame Putin for Biden winning!

Reilly 3 hours ago

Very funny, bravo! Nothing like a bit of slapstick, with a dose of reality also in the middle of a waking nightmare about to happen. ;))

DeoGratias 4 hours ago

One correction : it is not GloboCap it is GloboComs. The objective of communism is to create two classes of a society : rulers and workers. Thus GloboCaps are GloboComs.

Winter7Mute 5 hours ago

A reliable way to make people believe in falsehoods is frequent repetition, because familiarity is not easily distinguished from truth. Authoritarian institutions and marketers have always known this fact. I'm not even sure if most journalists or reporters know what their even talking about, when writing these articles.

Vidarr Kerr 5 hours ago

There is such a thing as Too Much Sarcasm.

EarthBotV2 Vidarr Kerr 4 hours ago

I disagree. The liberazi "thinks" with the gut -- as in "What does your gut tell you?"...

[Nov 09, 2020] Joe Biden is no empty sheet, may well return to warmongering polices waged by US before 2016 former OSCE vice-presiden

Nov 09, 2020 | www.rt.com

There's a 'good chance' that the US will return to the policy of foreign wars under Joe Biden, which will make its reconciliation with the EU impossible, Willy Wimmer, former vice-president of the OSCE, warned.

The main reasons why the Americans voted for Donald Trump four years ago were their tiredness of constant wars waged by their country and collapsing economy and infrastructure in the US, Wimmer told RT.

Trump has kept his promise and didn't start any new foreign conflict, but that may well change if a member of the Democratic Party is in the White House, former Vice President of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Parliamentary Assembly said.

Joe Biden isn't an empty white sheet – he represents the Democratic Party, who in the 1990s destroyed the Charter of the UN.

The German political veteran recalled the US-led NATO bombing of Yugoslavia under Democratic President, Bill Clinton, in 1999. He also pointed out that "in the presidency of [Barack] Obama, Biden was Vice President and he was in absolute accordance with Obama's drone wars and the wars in the Middle East, therefore there's a good chance that Joe Biden continues in the same way as the Democratic Party did it in the 1990s and under Obama" before 2016.

"And going back to before 2016 means going back to war" for the US, Wimmer argued.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden administration will find it hard to integrate itself in a world changed by Trump

Relations between Washington and Brussels have deteriorated under Trump over his demands for the EU nations to make larger financial contributions to NATO as well as political and economic pressure on the block to stop dealing with Russia and China.

Hopes that things would improve under Biden will be dashed, "as long as the US and NATO don't return to the Charter of the UN," the 77-year-old, who also served as State Secretary to Germany's Defense Minister, said.

However, he pointed out that it remains a question if the current US economy, which was heavily hit by the coronavirus, would even allow Biden to return to the aggressive policy, which the Democrats used to pursue.

Unlike German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, who already congratulated Biden over beating incumbent Trump in the US presidential election, Wimmer believes that others "should be very-very careful with congratulations."

ALSO ON RT.COM European leaders congratulate Joe Biden, after media count declares him victorious in US presidential election

The Democratic candidate declared himself the winner on Saturday after several major television networks projected that he was on a path to take more than 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency after four days of tense vote counts in several battleground states.

"It's quite unusual that the result of an election is announced by a news agency or a news channel. We're used in all our countries, which belong to the OSCE, that we have Election Committees, who announce results. And this hasn't been done yet in the US," he pointed out, describing the events surrounding the American election as "unbelievable."

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Nov 08, 2020] After Trump, Throw Out the Old Foreign Policy Establishment, Too - FPIF

Notable quotes:
"... Andrew Bacevich, a TomDispatch regular , is president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft . His most recent book is The Age of Illusions: How America Squandered Its Cold War Victory . ..."
Nov 08, 2020 | fpif.org

After Trump, Throw Out the Old Foreign Policy Establishment, Too

Americans can't ignore the world beyond their borders, but the last thing they need is to embark upon a fresh search for distant monsters to destroy.

By Andrew Bacevich , October 28, 2020 . Originally published in TomDispatch .

Print Friendly, PDF & EmailPrint

Shutterstock

The so-called Age of Trump is also an age of instantly forgotten bestselling books, especially ones purporting to provide the inside scoop on what goes on within Donald Trump's haphazard and continuously shifting orbit. With metronomic regularity, such gossipy volumes appear, make a splash, and almost as quickly vanish, leaving a mark no more lasting than a trout breaking the surface in a pond.

Remember when Michael Wolff's Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House was all the rage? It's now available in hardcover for $0.99 from online used booksellers. James Comey's Higher Loyalty also sells for a penny less than a buck.

An additional forty-six cents will get you Omarosa Manigault Newman's " insider's account " of her short-lived tenure in that very White House. For the same price, you can acquire Sean Spicer's memoir as Trump's press secretary, Anthony Scaramucci's rendering of his tumultuous 11-day stint as White House communications director, and Corey Lewandowski's " inside story " of the 2016 presidential campaign.

Bibliophiles intent on assembling a complete library of Trumpiana will not have long to wait before the tell-all accounts of John Bolton, Michael Cohen, Mary Trump, and that journalistic amanuensis Bob Woodward will surely be available at similar bargain basement prices.

All that said, even in these dismal times genuinely important books do occasionally make their appearance. My friend and colleague Stephen Wertheim is about to publish one. It's called Tomorrow, the World: The Birth of U.S. Global Supremacy and if you'll forgive me for being direct, you really ought to read it. Let me explain why.

The "Turn"

Wertheim and I are co-founders of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft , a small Washington, D.C.-based think tank. That Quincy refers to John Quincy Adams who, as secretary of state nearly two centuries ago, warned his fellow citizens against venturing abroad "in search of monsters to destroy."

Were the United States to do so, Adams predicted, its defining trait -- its very essence -- "would insensibly change from liberty to force. " By resorting to force, America "might become the dictatress of the world," he wrote, but "she would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit." While his gendered punchline might rankle contemporary sensibilities, it remains apt.

A privileged man of his times, Adams took it for granted that a WASP male elite was meant to run the country. Women were to occupy their own separate sphere. And while he would eventually become an ardent opponent of slavery, in 1821 race did not rank high on his agenda either. His immediate priority as secretary of state was to situate the young republic globally so that Americans might enjoy both safety and prosperity. That meant avoiding unnecessary trouble. We had already had our revolution. In his view, it wasn't this country's purpose to promote revolution elsewhere or to dictate history's future course.

Adams was to secretaries of state what Tom Brady is to NFL quarterbacks: the Greatest Of All Time. As the consensus GOAT in the estimation of diplomatic historians, he brought to maturity a pragmatic tradition of statecraft originated by a prior generation of New Englanders and various slaveholding Virginians with names like Washington, Jefferson, and Madison. That tradition emphasized opportunistically ruthless expansionism on this continent, avid commercial engagement, and the avoidance of great power rivalries abroad. Adhering to such a template, the United States had, by the beginning of the twentieth century, become the wealthiest, most secure nation on the planet -- at which point Europeans spoiled the party.

The disastrous consequences of one European world war fought between 1914 and 1918 and the onset of a second in 1939 rendered that pragmatic tradition untenable -- so at least a subsequent generation of WASPs concluded. This is where Wertheim takes up the story. Prompted by the German army's lightning victory in the battle of France in May and June 1940, members of that WASP elite set about creating -- and promoting -- an alternative policy paradigm, one he describes as pursuing "dominance in the name of internationalism," with U.S. military supremacy deemed "the prerequisite of a decent world."

The new elite that devised this paradigm did not consist of lawyers from Massachusetts or planters from Virginia. Its key members held tenured positions at Yale and Princeton, wrote columns for leading New York newspapers, staffed Henry Luce's Time-Life press empire, and distributed philanthropic largesse to fund worthy causes (grasping the baton of global primacy being anything but least among them). Most importantly, just about every member of this Eastern establishment cadre was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). As such, they had a direct line to the State Department, which in those days actually played a large role in formulating basic foreign policy.

While Tomorrow, The World is not a long book -- fewer than 200 pages of text -- it is a tour de force . In it, Wertheim describes the new narrative framework that the foreign-policy elite formulated in the months following the fall of France.

He shows how Americans with an antipathy for war now found themselves castigated as "isolationists," a derogatory term created to suggest provincialism or selfishness. Those favoring armed intervention, meanwhile, became "internationalists," a term connoting enlightenment and generosity. Even today, members of the foreign-policy establishment pledge undying fealty to the same narrative framework, which still warns against the bugaboo of "isolationism" that threatens to prevent high-minded policymakers from exercising "global leadership."

Wertheim persuasively describes the "turn" toward militarized globalism engineered from above by that self-selected, unelected crew. Crucially, their efforts achieved success prior to Pearl Harbor. The Japanese attack of December 7, 1941, may have thrust the United States into the ongoing world war, but the essential transformation of policy had already occurred, even if ordinary Americans had yet to be notified as to what it meant. Its future implications -- permanently high levels of military spending, a vast network of foreign bases stretching across the globe, a penchant for armed intervention abroad, a sprawling "national security" apparatus, and a politically subversive arms industry -- would only become apparent in the years ahead.

While Wertheim is not the first to expose isolationism as a carefully constructed myth, he does so with devastating effect. Most of all, he helps his readers understand that "so long as the phantom of isolationism is held to be the most grievous sin, all is permitted."

Contained within that all is a cavalcade of forceful actions and grotesque miscalculations, successes and failures, notable achievements and immense tragedies both during World War II and in the decades that followed. While beyond the scope of Wertheim's book, casting the Cold War as a de facto extension of the war against Nazi Germany, with Soviet dictator Josef Stalin as a stand-in for Adolf Hitler, represented an equally significant triumph for the foreign policy establishment.

At the outset of World War II, ominous changes in the global distribution of power prompted a basic reorientation of U.S. policy. Today, fundamental alterations in the global distribution of power -- did someone say "the rise of China"? -- are once again occurring right before our eyes. Yet the foreign-policy establishment's response is simply to double down.

So, even now, staggering levels of military spending, a vast network of foreign bases, a penchant for armed intervention abroad, a sprawling "national security" apparatus, and a politically subversive arms industry remain the taken-for-granted signatures of U.S. policy. And even now, the establishment employs the specter of isolationism as a convenient mechanism for self-forgiveness and expedient amnesia, as well as a means to enforce discipline.

Frozen Compass

The fall of France was indeed an epic disaster. Yet implicit in Tomorrow, The World is this question: If the disaster that befell Europe in 1940 could prompt the United States to abandon a hitherto successful policy paradigm, then why have the serial disasters befalling the nation in the present century not produced a comparable willingness to reexamine an approach to policy that is obviously failing today?

To pose that question is to posit an equivalence between the French army's sudden collapse in the face of the Wehrmacht's assault and the accumulation of U.S. military disappointments dating from 9/11. From a tactical or operational perspective, many will find such a comparison unpersuasive. After all, the present-day armed forces of the United States have not succumbed to outright defeat, nor is the government of the United States petitioning for a cessation of hostilities as the French authorities did in 1940.

Yet what matters in war are political outcomes. Time and again since 9/11, whether in Afghanistan, Iraq, or lesser theaters of conflict, the United States has failed to achieve the political purposes for which it went to war. From a strategic and political perspective, therefore, the comparison with France is instructive, even if failure need not entail abject surrender.

The French people and other supporters of the 1930s European status quo (including Americans who bothered to pay attention) were counting on that country's soldiers to thwart further Nazi aggression once and for all. Defeat came as a profound shock. Similarly, after the Cold War, most Americans (and various beneficiaries of a supposed Pax Americana ) counted on U.S. troops to maintain an agreeable and orderly global status quo. Instead, the profound shock of 9/11 induced Washington to embark upon what became a series of "endless wars" that U.S. forces proved incapable of bringing to a successful conclusion.

Crucially, however, no reevaluation of U.S. policy comparable to the "turn" that Wertheim describes has occurred.

An exceedingly generous reading of President Trump's promise to put "America First" might credit him with attempting such a turn. In practice, however, his incompetence and inconsistency, not to mention his naked dishonesty, produced a series of bizarre and random zigzags. Threats of " fire and fury " alternated with expressions of high regard for dictators (" we fell in love "). Troop withdrawals were announced and then modified or forgotten. Trump abandoned a global environmental agreement, massively rolled back environmental regulations domestically, and then took credit for providing Americans with "the very cleanest air and cleanest water on the planet." Little of this was to be taken seriously.

Trump's legacy as a statesman will undoubtedly amount to the diplomatic equivalent of Mulligan stew . Examine the contents closely enough and you'll be able to find just about anything. Yet taken as a whole, the concoction falls well short of being nutritious, much less appetizing.

On the eve of the upcoming presidential election, the entire national security apparatus and its supporters assume that Trump's departure from office will restore some version of normalcy. Every component of that apparatus from the Pentagon and the State Department to the CIA and the Council on Foreign Relations to the editorial boards of the New York Times and Washington Post yearns for that moment.

To a very considerable degree, a Biden presidency will satisfy that yearning. Nothing if not a creature of the establishment, Biden himself will conform to its requirements. For proof, look no further than his vote in favor of invading Iraq in 2003. (No isolationist he.) Count on a Biden administration, therefore, to perpetuate the entire obsolete retinue of standard practices.

As Peter Beinart puts it , "When it comes to defense, a Biden presidency is likely to look very much like an Obama presidency, and that's going to look not so different from a Trump presidency when you really look at the numbers." Biden will increase the Pentagon budget, keep U.S. troops in the Middle East, and get tough with China. The United States will remain the world's number-one arms merchant, accelerate efforts to militarize outer space, and continue the ongoing modernization of the entire U.S. nuclear strike force. Biden will stack his team with CFR notables looking for jobs on the "inside."

Above all, Biden will recite with practiced sincerity the mantras of American exceptionalism as a summons to exercise global leadership. "The triumph of democracy and liberalism over fascism and autocracy created the free world. But this contest does not just define our past. It will define our future, as well." Those uplifting sentiments are, of course, his from a recent Foreign Affairs essay .

So if you liked U.S. national security policy before Trump mucked things up, then Biden is probably your kind of guy. Install him in the Oval Office and the mindless pursuit of "dominance in the name of internationalism" will resume. And the United States will revert to the policies that prevailed during the presidencies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama -- policies, we should note, that paved the way for Donald Trump to win the White House.

The Voices That Count

What explains the persistence of this pattern despite an abundance of evidence showing that it's not working to the benefit of the American people? Why is it so difficult to shed a policy paradigm that dates from Hitler's assault on France, now a full 80 years in the past?

I hope that in a subsequent book Stephen Wertheim will address that essential question. In the meantime, however, allow me to make a stab at offering the most preliminary of answers.

Setting aside factors like bureaucratic inertia and the machinations of the military-industrial complex -- the Pentagon, arms manufacturers, and their advocates in Congress share an obvious interest in discovering new "threats" -- one likely explanation relates to a policy elite increasingly unable to distinguish between self-interest and the national interest. As secretary of state, John Quincy Adams never confused the two. His latter-day successors have done far less well.

As an actual basis for policy, the turn that Stephen Wertheim describes in Tomorrow, The World has proven to be nowhere near as enlightened or farseeing as its architects imagined or its latter day proponents still purport to believe it to be. The paradigm produced in 1940-1941 was, at best, merely serviceable. It responded to the nightmarish needs of that moment. It justified U.S. participation in efforts to defeat Nazi Germany, a necessary undertaking.

After 1945, except as a device for affirming the authority of foreign-policy elites, the pursuit of "dominance in the name of internationalism" proved to be problematic. Yet even as conditions changed, basic U.S. policy stayed the same: high levels of military spending, a network of foreign bases, a penchant for armed intervention abroad, a sprawling "national security" apparatus, and a politically subversive arms industry. Even after the Cold War and 9/11, these remain remarkably sacrosanct.

My own retrospective judgment of the Cold War tends toward an attitude of: well, I guess it could have been worse. When it comes to the U.S. response to 9/11, however, it's difficult to imagine what worse could have been.

Within the present-day foreign-policy establishment, however, a different interpretation prevails: the long, twilight struggle of the Cold War ended in a world historic victory, unsullied by any unfortunate post-9/11 missteps. The effect of this perspective is to affirm the wisdom of American statecraft now eight decades old and therefore justify its perpetuation long after both Hitler and Stalin, not to mention Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, are dead and gone.

This paradigm persists for one reason only: it ensures that statecraft will remain a realm that resolutely excludes the popular will. Elites decide, while the job of ordinary Americans is to foot the bill. In that regard, the allocation of privileges and obligations now 80 years old still prevails today.

Only by genuinely democratizing the formulation of foreign policy will real change become possible. The turn in U.S. policy described in Tomorrow, The World came from the top. The turn needed today will have to come from below and will require Americans to rid themselves of their habit of deference when it comes to determining what this nation's role in the world will be. Those on top will do all in their power to avert any such loss of status.

The United States today suffers from illnesses both literal and metaphorical. Restoring the nation to good health and repairing our democracy must necessarily rate as paramount concerns. While Americans cannot ignore the world beyond their borders, the last thing they need is to embark upon a fresh round of searching for distant monsters to destroy. Heeding the counsel of John Quincy Adams might just offer an essential first step toward recovery. Share this:

Andrew Bacevich, a TomDispatch regular , is president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft . His most recent book is The Age of Illusions: How America Squandered Its Cold War Victory .

[Nov 08, 2020] How Foreign Nations View the 2020 Election - The National Interest

Nov 08, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

Russia has consistently stressed its willingness to work with either candidate -- late last month, the Kremlin's press secretary Dmitri Peskov rebuffed suggestions that Moscow prefers the incumbent: "it would be wrong to say that Trump is more attractive to us."

But Russia's political commentary sphere has proven more polarized. Some cite Biden's readiness to extend the New START treaty without additional conditions as evidence that Biden is someone that the Kremlin can do business with; others have expressed concern over the Democratic candidate's "Russophobic" cabinet picks and predict that, under a Biden presidency, Washington's policy of rollback will escalate to an unprecedented level. But there is also an overarching belief that Washington's Russia policy is so deeply embedded across U.S. institutions that not much is likely to change in U.S.-Russian relations.

As Peskov put it, "there is a fixed place on the altar of US domestic policy for hatred of Russia and a Russophobic approach to bilateral relations with Moscow." Still other commentators are interested in the process as much as the outcome, drawing attention to ongoing mass unrest and allegations of electoral misconduct in order to argue that Washington has forfeited its moral authority to lecture others on proper democratic procedure and the orderly transition of power.

[Nov 08, 2020] Giuliani says Philadelphia Democrats voted from the grave, says he'll prove fraud in court -- RT USA News

Nov 08, 2020 | www.rt.com

Giuliani says Philadelphia Democrats voted from the grave, says he'll prove fraud in court 8 Nov, 2020 13:56 / Updated 8 hours ago Get short URL Giuliani says Philadelphia Democrats voted from the grave, says he'll prove fraud in court Rudy Giuliani speaks to reporters in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, November 7, 2020 © Reuters / Eduardo Munoz 476 Follow RT on RT President Donald Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, said that he's "up early working" on fraud cases in Pennsylvania. Giuliani claims that Joe Biden's win there was crooked, and the state GOP too has demanded an audit of the vote.

"@realDonaldTrump election night 800,000 lead was wiped out by hundreds of thousands of mail in ballots counted without any Republican observer," Giuliani tweeted on Sunday morning, a day after Associated Press called Pennsylvania and the entire election in favor of Joe Biden.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1325410570703679489&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F506097-giuliani-dead-voters-pennsylvania-fraud%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

"Why were Republicans excluded?," he continued, before asking his followers to "tweet me your guess, while I go prove it in court."

Like his boss, Giuliani has insisted that Biden's apparent victory was the result of fraud. Republican observers say they were denied access to counting centers, which allowed staff inside to do "bad things" with the ballots, in Trump's words. At least one postal worker has claimed that he was ordered to backdate mail-in ballots, while the Trump campaign has alleged that droves of dead people voted in Philadelphia, and that staff there illegally counted late-arriving mail ballots.

Giuliani called the "Philadelphia Democrat machine" "brazen," and claimed that the late heavyweight boxer Joe Frazier and actor Will Smith's grandfather both voted in previous elections in the city after their deaths.

"I bet Biden dominated this group," he tweeted. "We will find out."

Just an example of how brazen the Philadelphia Democrat machine is.Former heavyweight champion Joe Frazier voted in the 2018 election. He died on 11/7/18.Will Smith's grandfather voted in 2017, 2018. He died in 2016.I bet Biden dominated this group. We will find out.

-- Rudy W. Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) November 8, 2020

Biden beat Trump in Pennsylvania by around 40,000 votes, or 0.6 percent of the total vote, though a small number of ballots remain to be counted. Though Republicans in the Keystone State have not outright called Biden's win fraudulent, State House Speaker Bryan Cutler called on Friday for Governor Tom Wolf to launch a "full audit" of the vote there before certifying the result.

In a letter to Wolf, Cutler cited the widespread use of mail-in ballots without signatures, the exclusion of Republicans from polling places, and the extension of the mail-in deadline as "issues that cannot be overlooked."

ALSO ON RT.COM Trump files lawsuit alleging in-person votes in Arizona might have been 'incorrectly rejected' due to poll workers' actions

Based on how the vote was run in Pennsylvania, "no matter who wins, you're going to have 50 percent of the population, no matter which side, that is not going to have faith in the result," State Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman told reporters on Friday.

Quizzed by reporters about her handling of the vote, Pennsylvania's Secretary of State, Kathy Boockvar said that she had done everything "to make sure every voter, every candidate and every party has access to a fair, free, safe and secure election."

[Nov 08, 2020] Biden has vowed to regain the world's respect for the Outlaw US Empire, which begs this question: When did the world actually respect it?

Nov 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

karlof1 , Nov 8 2020 21:29 utc | 57

Biden has vowed to regain the world's respect for the Outlaw US Empire, which begs this question: When did the world actually respect it? "Leaders" who uttered the word respect were paid to do so as it was painfully clear for those at the top levels of governments that after WW2 what was the USA was now the Outlaw US Empire since it had no compunction violating International Law and thus its own fundamental Law--a nuclear armed outlaw is something you fear, not respect. And even before WW2, FDR had to make clear his foreign policy toward those in the Western Hemisphere was to be that of a Good Neighbor, not Loan Shark. Again, the Loan Shark is feared, not respected. So, what respect is it that Biden seeks to regain since none has existed for over a century? We'll need to wait and see what he does immediately after he's sworn in on 20 January for he must first show respect for the Constitution he'll swear to defend and uphold, and that means obeying the edicts of International Law as directed by the UN Charter which is part of said Constitution. IMO, that would need to be a mandatory first step if he wants to gain respect. Otherwise, he'll signal the USA will remain the Outlaw US Empire.

[Nov 08, 2020] Weak presidents serve a purpose, which is to allow their handlers in the CIA/deep state to work unimpeded

Nov 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Walter , Nov 8 2020 13:36 utc | 2

Viewing Biden as a cannula to insert Harris and all that would imply, I ask how such a weak person as Harris might seek to increase consent for her rule. Mrs Thatcher sought this, as did Bush 43, Truman with Korea, and as many others have classically done, by making a war and a victory. It does seem sure that the "election" has failed materially to achieve the basic goal of creating consent. In the example of Thatcher, Robert Green tells us that in the Belgrano affair the war went very nearly to atomic explosives. One is inclined, in the matter of atomics, to speculate on how many times luck will prevent nukewar. Of course Korea also came quite close to nukewar too, and remains there.

The glorious (if hypothetical so far) Harris War may not go well, as Martyanov tells us, the US has in fact lost military supremacy, and the weak unconsented Harris is not liable, I judge, to have the strength or understanding to avoid defeat.

Defeat, at this stage of empire, may be akin to the wizard of oz being seen to be a fake. Indeed, Harris herself seems to be a fake "black" and also a fake champion.

When empires lose wars and are seen to be insane, the several satrapies begin to depart. Only today, they say, Germany decided not to buy F35's... Therefore, considered as a whole from this moment in History, it seems to me that we shall have a glorious atomic defeat, will all that follows.

That would seem to satisfy the Deagle prediction of a mere 54 million persons in USA circa 2025.

William Gruff , Nov 8 2020 16:56 utc | 32

When discussing weak people in the White House, don't forget the Bush Baby. Weak presidents serve a purpose, which is to allow their handlers in the CIA/deep state to work unimpeded. What this means is that Harris has no bearing on whether the US will go kinetic again. That decision will be up to committees in the CIA/deep state. Unfortunately, the CIA is a distillation of the very most violently psychotic and delusional freaks from American society, which is itself a society that produces more than its share of violently psychotic and delusional freaks.

That's not good.

lulu , Nov 8 2020 19:26 utc | 48

Neoliberal fascists continue the purge of the real Left and give us a small taste of what will happen under a Biden presidency

Posted by: killwallstreet | Nov 8 2020 13:37 utc | 3
------------------------------------------------------

Neoliberals and Neocons are both supporters of the Empire! The only difference is Neocon don't hide their Empire agenda behind some nice words/slogans like the Neoliberals.

Mao once said he'd prefer to deal with the right party.

oldhippie , Nov 8 2020 21:16 utc | 56

Gruff @ 32

No. CIA is a distillation, no, a perfectly straightforward committee of old WASP families. Are WASP families all those other adjectives? Yes.

[Nov 08, 2020] There is stong continuity of EMPIRE policy. Biden, Harris, Trump, Hillary, Obama, GWBush, Clinton all did or will do what the Deep State EMPIRE managers want them to

Nov 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Jackrabbit , Nov 8 2020 15:19 utc | 17

Walter @Nov8 13:36 #2

I ask how such a weak person as Harris might seek to increase consent for her rule.

I think you are failing to see the continuity of EMPIRE policy. Biden, Harris, Trump, Hillary, Obama, GWBush, Clinton all did or will do what the Deep State EMPIRE managers want them to. Harris is no any more prone to war-making than any of her predecessors and will not take risks that the Deep State have not thoroughly examined.

[Nov 08, 2020] The logic of finance is impregnating in every facet of American life and politics. The USA is consolidating itself more and more as an exclusively financial superpower.

Nov 08, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

vk , Nov 8 2020 14:31 utc | 8

China not amused:

Drop illusions over China-US relations, but don't give up efforts: Global Times editorial

--//--

'President-Elect' Joe Biden Pledges to 'Make America Respected Around the World Again'

This confirms my hypothesis that stated the liberals didn't like Trump merely because he's vulgar - not because of his policies.

This is the "confidence thesis", which states that the sole factor for the success of any given liberal system (not socialism - socialism is failed by design...) is merely the people in it to make it work and trust blindly it will work. Guess where this thesis is dominant? The financial sector.

The logic of finance is impregnating in every facet of American life and politics. The USA is consolidating itself more and more as an exclusively financial superpower.

[Nov 08, 2020] The Challenge for Joe Biden Reese Erlich

That's an extreme level of naivety. Biden is beholden to the military-industrial complex probably more then Trump.
Nov 08, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

November 07, 2020

If he's smart, the likely President-elect will stop the unpopular endless wars and use the money to help our domestic economy.

...Lunch Pail Joe was supposed to win back the support of white, blue-collar workers who had defected to the Republicans. Campaign organizers said he would energize Black and Latinx voters. But there wasn't much of a shift among non-college educated men. And those folks who did go Democratic largely voted against Trump, not for Biden. It's as if Biden had undergone an enthusiasm bypass.

Trump's populist appeal has strong racist and misogynist elements, but also reflects a genuine anger at economic inequality and endless wars. If Biden simply returns to mainstream Democratic Party governance, it won't satisfy the Democratic Party base nor those Trump supporters with legitimate complaints.

So what is to be done?

Biden will have his hands full reversing Trump's disastrous domestic policies. But he can also make serious changes in US foreign policy.

Biden can implement progressive and popular policies during his first 100 days in office, in many cases, programs that he already promised and which don't require Congressional approval. These include:

Stop the war in Yemen : This years-long conflict, which benefits no one but the oil-rich rulers of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, has killed more than 100,000 people and caused the preventable deaths of 113,000 children . Biden could immediately freeze weapons sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, forcing them to stop bombing civilians and withdraw their troops. It would be one step toward ending unpopular, endless wars.

Earlier this year, Democrats and anti-interventionist Republicans in the Senate voted to invoke the War Powers Act to stop funding the Yemen war. It was vetoed by Trump.

To his credit, Biden supported the war powers resolution. His campaign spokesperson Andrew Bates told The Washington Post , "Vice President Biden believes it is past time to end US support for the war in Yemen and cancel the blank check the Trump Administration has given Saudi Arabia for its conduct of that war."

Lift Trump's unilateral oil blockade of Cuba and restore normal diplomatic relations: Trump has gone further to economically attack Cuba than any other President. He cut off much of Cuba's oil supplies from Venezuela by applying sanctions against international shipping companies. This, combined with a halt in foreign tourism, has wrecked the Cuban economy. Public transport doesn't have enough gasoline; trucks can't bring produce from the countryside.

The people of Cuba pose no danger to the US. During the later part of Barack Obama's presidency, people from the US freely visited Cuba, to the benefit of both countries.

During the campaign, Biden said , "As President, I will promptly reverse the failed Trump policies that have inflicted harm on the Cuban people and done nothing to advance democracy and human rights."

With a stroke of the pen Biden could lift the oil embargo, re-open US visits to Cuba, and fully staff the Embassy in Havana, which is now operating with a skeleton crew.

Rejoin the Iran nuclear accord: Trump unilaterally withdrew from the internationally binding Iran nuclear accord and imposed harsh economic sanctions on the Iranian people. This policy of "maximum pressure" has failed to change Iranian domestic or foreign policy. Biden should immediately rejoin the accord and lift all sanctions related to nuclear issues.

In September, Biden wrote , "If Iran returns to strict compliance with the nuclear deal, the US would rejoin the agreement as a starting point for follow-on negotiations." He added that the new administration would lift the "disgraceful" ban that prohibits Iranians and people from other Muslims nations from entering the US.

But Biden's promises were couched in bellicose, Cold War rhetoric about Iran's alleged threats to the US. Democratic and Republican hawks will certainly pressure Biden to take a hard line against Iran. But both countries would benefit from re-implementing the accord and lowering tensions.

End attacks on China: Trump initiated a trade war against China. He tried to ban Chinese technology from being used in the US and even sought the arrest of a top Chinese corporate executive. But, of course, China retaliated. Trump's policy against China has been a massive failure, with the US losing nearly 300,000 jobs as of September 2019.

China poses no military threat to the people of the US. China has one military base outside its territory; the US has about 750. China now has also developed the world's second largest economy and competes successfully with US corporations. The trade war is aimed at promoting US corporate profits at the expense of Chinese competitors.

With executive action, Biden could end the trade war quickly. Unfortunately, Biden has "drunk the Kool-Aid" when it comes to China. He said , "My focus will be on rallying our friends in both Asia and Europe in . . . joining us to get tough on China and its trade and technology abuses."

Biden must shift policies on China as part of recognizing that the world has changed a lot in recent years.

Joe Biden is a mainstream Democrat who supported many of the foreign policy disasters of past presidencies. He backed the occupation of Afghanistan and the 2003 Iraq War, and he strongly supports Israel against the Palestinians.

But today, the US is considerably weaker, wracked by recession, and politically divided. People are fed up with endless wars. Regional powers such as Turkey, Russia, and Iran are exerting influence in areas formerly under US domination.

If he's smart, Biden will recognize the new reality, stop US interventions, and use the money being spent on foreign wars to help our domestic economy. I'm confident he will make some promised changes but progressives will have to build grass roots pressure to make the changes we really need.

Foreign Correspondent appears every other week. Reese Erlich is an adjunct professor in International Studies at the University of San Francisco. Follow him on Twitter , @ReeseErlich; friend him on Facebook ; and visit his webpage .

[Nov 08, 2020] Biden administration will find it hard to integrate itself in a world changed by Trump

Nov 08, 2020 | www.rt.com

The world Vice President Biden knew at the end of the Obama administration no longer exists. In four years, President Trump reshaped the geopolitical reality around the globe, making Biden's dreams of "normalization" impossible.

If the press reports are true, it appears that much of the world joined the roughly 50 percent of Americans who celebrated the news that Joe Biden had passed the Electoral College threshold of the 270 votes needed to become president-elect. While America struggles to find a path where Biden will be able to restore domestic tranquility to a deeply divided nation, the world will likewise need to get to grips with how it will respond to an administration whose thinking is rooted in a world that no longer exists.

The geopolitical reality that existed in 2016, following eight years of the Obama administration, has been radically transformed after four years of a Trump administration which broke with virtually every previously held diplomatic norm, tradition, and precedent. It was not just US policy that had been altered – the world also changed, forced to adapt to Trump's unconventional approach toward international affairs. A Biden administration which seeks to recreate the world that existed in 2016 will find itself ill-prepared to deal with the harsh new realities of a post-Trump world.

READ MORE Trump was a symptom of American decline that Biden is unlikely to reverse Trump was a symptom of American decline that Biden is unlikely to reverse

Repairing the US economy will be a top domestic priority for a Biden administration, and this cannot be without consideration being given to the contentious state of US-China relations. Policies seeking to bring an end to the ongoing US-China trade war will collide with Biden's tough rhetoric regarding China's military presence in the South China Sea and elsewhere. It is hard to see how either can be done in isolation, meaning the status quo inherited from the Trump administration will likely remain for some time to come.

Hollow climate rhetoric

Joe Biden has promised that he would re-enter the Paris Climate Accord immediately upon assuming the presidency. When the Trump administration formally withdrew the US from the Paris Accord on November 4, 2020, Joe Biden responded by tweeting "Today, the Trump Administration officially left the Paris Climate Agreement. And in exactly 77 days, a Biden Administration will rejoin it."

Re-entering the Paris Climate Accord will not pose much of a problem – the US never treated it as a treaty, with then-president Obama bypassing constitutional requirements for Senate advice and consent by simply signing an executive order. But is unlikely that Biden will be able to get Congress to fund a multi-trillion-dollar initiative at a time when the US economy is reeling from the economic downturn brought on by the Civd-19 pandemic. In short, Biden's plan to rejoin the Paris Accord is little more than political theater with no chance of meaningful success.

Repairing the Iran deal or not

Another "day one" priority for Biden is to rejoin the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal). President Trump precipitously withdrew from this Obama-legacy agreement in May 2018 (another agreement enshrined not as a treaty, but rather through executive order). Biden has committed to rejoining the deal "once Iran returns to compliance," and then use the JCPOA as the basis upon which to negotiate a broader and longer-lasting deal with Iran.

One of the first challenges confronting a Biden administration is to navigate the issue of what constitutes "returning to compliance." It was the US, not Iran, that withdrew from the JCPOA, and today the JCPOA framework continues to exist, sans America. As such, the first step that must be taken is for the US to rejoin without pre-conditions. Then and only then would Iran consider the possibility of resuming negotiations about any post-JCPOA agreement.

However, some of Biden's key foreign policy advisers appear to have re-thought their position on Iranian sanctions , which would be lifted if the US rejoined the JCPOA. There is a feeling that the Trump policy of "maximum pressure" might be on the verge of paying dividends. Void of any up-front commitment regarding future nuclear policy, ballistic missiles or regional interference, there is a feeling in the Biden camp that keeping sanctions in place might be the best policy option vis-a-vis Iran.

ALSO ON RT.COM Biden has defeated Trump. Meet the new boss same as the old boss Rollback on Israel?

Further complicating any future Biden Iran policy will be how a Biden administration deals with the issue of troop withdrawal from Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, and the Trump Arab-Israeli "peace offensive" which has seen several Gulf Arab States normalize relations with Israel as part of an effort to solidify an anti-Iranian coalition in the Persian Gulf. It is highly likely that Biden will seek to solidify the US military presence in the region, thereby threatening the peace agreement with the Taliban, and provoking pro-Iranian militias in Iraq. Likewise, Biden will seek to use the US military presence inside Syria as a means of strengthening US-Kurdish ties. In short, a Biden administration will find itself rapidly bogged down in the forever wars in the Middle East, with no plan on how to either win or get out.

US-Israeli relations during the Obama administration were at an all-time low, primarily because of Israel's handling of the issue of Palestinian rights and statehood. With the Trump administration all but writing Palestine out of any Arab-Israeli framework for peace, the Biden administration will be immediately confronted by the issue of how to re-engage on the issue of Palestine , knowing that in doing so it could upset the trajectory of Arab-Israeli normalization that had been begun under Trump.

Turkey and NATO

Likewise, the issue of Turkey looms large . Turkey's involvement in Syria, Libya, Iraq, and now Azerbaijan has changed the geopolitical landscape in the eastern Mediterranean Sea, the Levant, and the southern Caucasus in the four years since the Obama administration. Any effort to aggressively confront Turkey would need to be taken in conjunction with Biden's plans to "repair" America's relationship with NATO and the rest of Europe. This is especially the case regarding Turkey's contentious relations with both France and Greece.

NATO itself is a major issue confronting a Biden administration. Biden has said he will renew good relations between the US and its NATO allies strained by four years of the Trump administration. But what does this mean exactly? Will Biden keep US the forces in Germany that Trump had begun to withdraw? And what will Biden do about US forces in Poland? Does Biden's pledge to "get tough" with Russia extend to doubling down on demanding new elections in Belarus? Providing more lethal aid to Ukraine? Further encouraging Georgian membership in NATO? What will Biden's policy be regarding intermediate-range missiles in Europe following Trump's withdrawal from the 1987 landmark INF Treaty? The reality is Trump has left a potential Biden administration a tangled mess in Europe, where any policy initiative in one area raises a host of problems in another.

READ MORE Caitlin Johnstone: Don't fool yourself, your Biden vote was not a 'vote against fascism' Caitlin Johnstone: Don't fool yourself, your Biden vote was not a 'vote against fascism'

How to be tough on Russia

And then there is the issue of Russia. Biden spent his entire campaign promoting how "tough" he was going to be on Russia , and in particular its president, Vladimir Putin. Two major decisions that will be confronted by a Biden administration early on, however, would require more finesse than muscle. The most pressing will be the extension of the Obama-era New START treaty, set to expire on February 21, 2021 – exactly a month and one day after President Biden would be sworn into office. Russia has indicated that it is ready to extend the New START treaty without preconditions, and it is likely that a Biden administration would seek to do just this in order to preserve the last reaming arms control framework between the US and Russia. The next step, however – negotiating a follow-on treaty – requires an atmosphere of trust that, on the surface at least – appears to be lacking on the part of a new Biden administration, especially if it is simultaneously seeking to appear "tough."

Another problem is that of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, connecting Russia with Europe. The Trump administration has put in place strong sanctions designed to kill the project. Germany, a critical NATO ally and one of the nations with which a Biden administration would logically be seeking to repair relations (especially after the particularly contentious relationship between Trump and German Chancellor Angela Merkel), has taken umbrage over what it deems to be US interference in its sovereign economic interests.

When Biden was vice president under Obama, he called the Nord Stream 2 project "a bad deal for Europe." Every indication is that Biden continues to embrace this stance. Even if Biden were to soften his position on Nord Stream 2 as an olive branch to Germany, however, it would not mean that Biden would be willing to soften the US policy on sanctioning Russia over Ukraine. The fact is, Biden does not much care for Putin, and it is hard to see how the kind of personal relationship that preceded most meaningful US-Russian diplomatic breakthroughs could be engendered, let alone prosper.

There are many other critical foreign policy challenges facing a potential Biden administration, including the issue of North Korean nuclear weapons, Venezuela, the war in Yemen, and the growing ISIS presence in Africa, to name but a few. A Biden administration would most likely seek to bring into its ranks foreign policy and national security experts who had been weaned on eight years of the Obama administration. But the world these experts left in 2016 no longer exists. Moreover, these experts have been virtually shut out from any advisory role during the Trump administration. A new Biden foreign policy team will be seeking to rebuild relations with a world based upon an outdated game plan, creating the potential for a disconnect between expectations and results that could further strain America's relationship with the global community.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.


[Nov 08, 2020] Most Russians Are Anxious About Biden, but the Kremlin May Prefer Him

Nov 08, 2020 | foreignpolicy.com

The prevailing view is that a victory for Biden would be bad for Russia, because a Democratic administration is expected to impose new economic sanctions on Moscow as punishment for its bad behavior -- first and foremost, for its interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. This view is widely shared by pro-Kremlin pundits, senior officials and the executives of state-owned enterprises, and is even promoted by the few remaining independent Russian media outlets such as the Bell newsletter, a daily staple in the information diet of the Russian upper-middle class.

A more nuanced view on Biden is held by some people working on U.S. issues in the Russian government. A president who is not tainted by suspicion of being a Russian asset -- and who knows how to organize a normal process for national security discussions -- will be able to restore some guardrails to the U.S.-Russia relationship and prevent further deterioration, those people argue. A President Biden would not be able to pay close attention to Russia, since he and his senior advisers will be overwhelmed by domestic issues and otherwise focusing on China. But a possible new Democratic administration appears to be open to retaining some pillars of the arms control regime and discussing rules of competition in cyberspace. And it could be more clear-eyed -- and therefore skeptical -- about the side effects and efficiency of sanctions as the United States' major tool in Russia policy. Much will depend on who is put in senior positions such as secretary of state and national security advisor, and on the midlevel bureaucrats controlling the Russia portfolio.

After U.S.-Russian relations nearly hit rock bottom on Trump's watch, nobody in Russia believes that four more years of Trump could be good for Moscow. If Trump is reelected, the only silver lining will be the even deeper level of disarray in the Western alliance and U.S. disengagement from its partners that a second Trump term would likely bring. For the Kremlin, schadenfreude over the gradual demise of Pax Americana would simply sugarcoat the risks and downsides of Trump remaining in the White House.

Alexander Gabuev is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Moscow Center. Twitter: @AlexGabuev

[Nov 07, 2020] The Task before -Sleepy Joe- is to put Liberal America Right Back to Sleep - Dissident Voice

Nov 07, 2020 | dissidentvoice.org

The Task before "Sleepy Joe" is to put Liberal America Right Back to Sleep

by Jonathan Cook / November 6th, 2020

At birth, all of us begin a journey that offers opportunities either to grow – not just physically, but mentally, emotionally and spiritually – or to stagnate. The journey we undertake lasts a lifetime, but there are dozens of moments each day when we have a choice to make tiny incremental gains in experience, wisdom and compassion or to calcify through inertia, complacency and selfishness.

No one can be engaged and receptive all the time. But it is important to recognise these small opportunities for growth when they present themselves, even if at any particular moment we may decide to avoid grasping them.

When we shut ourselves into the car on the commute to work, do we use it as a moment to be alone with our thoughts or to silence them with the radio or music? When we sit with friends, do we choose to be fully present with them or scroll through the news feed on our phones? When we return from a difficult day at work, do we talk the issues through with family or reach for a glass of wine, or maybe bingewatch something on TV?

Everyone needs downtime, but if every opportunity for reflection becomes downtime then we are stagnating, not growing. We are moving away from life, from being human.

Dried-out husk

This week liberal Americans reached for that glass of wine and voted Joe Biden. Others did so much more reluctantly, spurred on by the fear of giving his opponent another four years.

Biden isn't over the finishing line quite yet, and there are likely to be recounts, court challenges and possibly violence over the result, but he seems all but certain to be crowned the next US president. Not that that should provoke any kind of celebration. The rest of the world's population, future generations, the planet itself – none of us had a vote – were always going to be the losers whichever candidate won.

The incumbent, Donald Trump, miscalculated, it seems, if he thought dismissing his opponent as "Sleepy Joe" would be enough to damage Biden's electoral fortunes. True, Trump was referring to the fact that Biden is a dried-out husk of the machine politician he once was. But after four years of Trump and in the midst of a pandemic, the idea of sleeping through the next presidential term probably sounded pretty appealing to liberals.

Most of them had spent their whole political lives asleep, but four years ago they were forcibly roused from their languor to protest against Donald Trump. They grew enraged by the symptom of their corrupted political system rather than by the corrupt system itself. For them, "Sleepy Joe" is just what the doctor ordered.

But it won't be Biden doing the sleeping. It will be the liberals who cheerlead him. Biden – or perhaps Kamala Harris – will be busy making sure his corporate donors get exactly what they paid for, whatever the cost to the rest of us.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1324632219609157634&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fdissidentvoice.org%2F2020%2F11%2Fthe-task-before-sleepy-joe-is-to-put-liberal-america-right-back-to-sleep%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=500px

Anger and blame

In this analogy, Trump is not the opposite of Biden, of course. He represents stagnation too, if of a different kind.

Trump channels Americans' frustration and anger at a political and economic system they rightly see as failing them. He articulates who should be falsely blamed for their woes: be it immigrants, minorities, socialists, or the New World Order. He offers justified, if misdirected, rage in contrast to Biden's dangerous complacency.

But however awful Trump may be, at least some of those voting for him are grappling, if mostly unconsciously, with the tension between stagnation and growth – and not of the economic kind. Unlike most liberals, who dismiss this simplistically as "populism", some of Trump's supporters do at least seem to recognise that the tension exists. They simply haven't been offered a constructive alternative to anger and blame.

Ritually disappointed

Unlike the liberals and the Trumpists, many in the US have come to understand that their political system offers nothing but stultifying stagnation for ordinary Americans by design , even if it comes in two, smartly attired flavours.

They see that the Trump camp rages ineffectually against the corporate elite, deluded into believing that a member of that very same elite will serve as their saviour. And they see that the Biden camp represents an ineffectual rainbow coalition of competing social identities, deluded into believing that those divisions will make them stronger, not weaker, in the fight for economic justice. Both of these camps appear resigned to being serially – maybe ritually – disappointed.

Failure does not inspire these camps to seek change, it makes them cling all the more desperately to their failed strategies, to attach themselves even more frantically and fervently to their perceived tribe.

That is why this US election – at a moment when the need for real, systemic change is more urgent, more evident than ever before – produced not just one but two of the worst presidential candidates of all time. We are looking at exactly what happens when a whole society not only stops growing but begins to putrefy.

Enervating divisions

Not everyone in the US is so addicted to these patterns of self-delusion and self-harm.

Large swaths of the population don't bother to vote out of hard-borne experience. The system is so rigged against them that they don't think it matters much which corporate party is in power. The outcome will be the same for them either way.

Others vote third party, or consciously abstain in protest at big money's vice-like grip on the two-party system. Others, appalled at the prospect of Trump – and before him the two Bushes, and before that Ronald Reagan – were forced once again to vote for the Democratic ticket with a heavy heart. They know all too well who Biden is (a creature of his corporate donors) and what he stands for (whatever his corporate donors want). But he is slightly less monstrous than his rival, and in the US system those are the meaningful electoral options.

And among Trump's supporters too, there are many desperate for wholesale change. They voted for Trump because at least he paid lip service to change.

These groups – most likely a clear electoral majority – could redirect the US towards political, social, even spiritual growth, if they could find a way to come together. They suffer from their own enervating divisions.

How should they best use their numerical strength? Should they struggle to win the presidency, and if so should it be a third-party candidate or should they work within the existing party structures? What lesson should they draw from the Democratic leadership's sabotaging – twice over – of Bernie Sanders, a candidate offering meaningful change? Is it time to adopt an entirely different strategy, rejecting traditional politics? And if so, can it be made to work when all the major institutions – from the politicians and courts, to the police, intelligence services and media – are firmly in the hands of the corporate enemy?

Terrible reckoning

There is no real way to sleep through life, or politics, and not wake up one day – usually when it is too late – realising catastrophic mistakes were made.

As individuals, we may face that terrible reckoning on our death-beds. Empires rarely go so quietly. They fall when it is time for their citizens to learn a painful lesson about hubris. Their technological innovations come back to haunt them, as ancient Rome's lead water-pipes supposedly once did. Or they over-extend with ambitious wars that drain the coffers of gold, as warrior-kings have discovered to their cost through the ages. Or, when the guardians of empire least expect it, "barbarians" – the victims of their crimes – storm the city gates.

The globe-spanning US empire faces the rapid emergence of all these threats on a planetary scale. Its endless wars against phantom enemies have left the US burdened with astounding debt. Its technologies, from nuclear weapons to AI, mean there can be no possible escape from a major miscalculation. And the US empire's insatiable greed and determination to colonise every last inch of the planet, if only with our waste products, is gradually killing the life-systems we depend on.

If Biden becomes president, his victory will be a temporary win for torpor, for complacency. But a new Trump will emerge soon enough once again to potentise – and misdirect – the fury steadily building beneath the surface. If we let it, the pendulum will swing back and forth, between ineffectual lethargy and ineffectual rage, until it is too late. Unless we actively fight back, the stagnation will suffocate us all.

Facebook Twitter Reddit Email Jonathan Cook , based in Nazareth, Israel is a winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books). Read other articles by Jonathan , or visit Jonathan's website .

This article was posted on Friday, November 6th, 2020 at 2:00am and is filed under Democrats , Donald Trump , Elections , Joe Biden , Republicans , United States .

[Nov 07, 2020] Alliance of Liberals, Neocons Set to Shape US Foreign Policy

Nov 07, 2020 | ronpaulinstitute.org

Alliance of Liberals, Neocons Set to Shape US Foreign Policy written by marshall auerback and james carden wednesday september 2, 2020

The emergence in recent weeks of a coalition of neoconservative Republicans and former US national-security officials who have thrown their support behind the Democratic candidacy of Joe Biden is an ominous development to those who believe US foreign policy should be guided by the principles of realism and military restraint, rather than perpetual wars of choice.

In early June, a group of former officials from the George W Bush administration launched a political action committee (PAC) in support of Biden's candidacy. The group, 43 Alumni for Biden , boasts nearly 300 former Bush officials and is seeking to mobilize disaffected Republicans nationwide.

The mobilization appears to be having an impact: More recently, "more than 100 former staff of [the late US senator John] McCain's congressional offices and campaigns also endorsed Biden for president," according to NBC News , as well as dozens of former staffers from Senator Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign.

That Republican support comes in addition to the more than 70 former US national-security officials who teamed up and issued a statement urging Biden's election in November.

Citing what they believe is the grave damage President Donald Trump has done to US national security, the group does include some mainstream Republicans like Richard Armitage and Chuck Hagel, but also features notable neocon hardliners like Eliot Cohen, John Negroponte and David Kramer, who, perhaps not incidentally, played a leading role in disseminating the utterly discredited Steele dossier prior to Trump's inauguration.

These are not merely grifters or desperate bids for attention by unscrupulous and avaricious Beltway swamp creatures. Though there are those too: the so-called Lincoln Project , helmed by neocon operative Rick Wilson, which is an outside group of Republicans (including former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Steele) devoted to defeating Trump in November.

As historian David Sessions recently tweeted , "Basically nobody in liberal circles is taking seriously the consequences of the fact that the exiled cadre of the Republican Party are building a massive power base in the Democratic Party."

The merger between Democrats and neocons is not merely confined to the world of electoral politics; it is already affecting policy as well.

Over the summer, in response to The New York Times' dubious "Russia bounty" story , Democratic congressman Jason Crow teamed up with Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney (daughter of former US vice-president Dick Cheney) to prohibit Trump from withdrawing troops from Afghanistan.

Republicans and Democrats in the Senate and the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee also collaborated to pass an amendment that imposed restrictions on Trump's plan to withdraw troops from Germany , showing, if nothing else, that the bipartisan commitment to the new cold war is alive and well.

It is noteworthy that while there has been considerable pushback to economic neoliberalism within the Democratic Party in recent years, thanks, mainly, to the candidacy of Bernie Sanders, the advocacy of reformers like Elizabeth Warren and the increasing popularity of economists like Stephanie Kelton , the same cannot be said for foreign policy.

Biden has evinced an openness to being "pushed left" on social and economic policies if he is elected president, but on external affairs he still largely operates within the standard Washington foreign-policy playbook.

If anything, on foreign policy Democrats have moved rightward in recent years, having fallen not only under the spell of "Russiagate" but also increasingly under the influence of neocons and other former Bush officials who have pushed that discredited narrative for their own ends.

The Democrats have also displayed a rather supine obeisance in regard to the country's intelligence community, in spite of a multiplicity of well-documented lies or half-truths that would at the very least justify some skepticism about their claims or motivations.

Nobody should be surprised.

The neocons had been signaling their intention to flee the Republicans as early as 2016 when it was widely reported that Robert Kagan had decided to endorse Hillary Clinton for president and speak at a Washington fundraiser alongside other national-security fixtures worried about the alleged isolationist drift within the Republican Party.

Indeed, the Democrats welcomed the likes of Kagan and fellow neocon extremist Max Boot with open arms, setting the stage for where we are today: a Democratic presidential nominee running to the right of the Republican nominee on foreign policy.

Missing: whither the progressives?

Over the past few US election cycles, progressive Democrats have increasingly challenged the party's prevailing neoliberal bias on domestic economic policy. Equally striking, however, is that they have been delinquent in failing to provide an alternative to the hegemonic influence of militarists and interventionists growing within their party regarding foreign policy.

As it stands today, the so-called progressive foreign-policy alternative is really no alternative at all. To the contrary, it evokes Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa's seminal work, The Leopard , whose main character, Tancredi, sagely observes to his uncle , "If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change."

So it is with much of what passes for a genuine foreign-policy alternative: The rhetoric slightly changes, the personnel certainly change, but in substance, the policy status quo largely remains.

Consider a recent interview with the socialist Jacobin magazine featuring Matt Duss, a foreign-policy adviser to Senator Bernie Sanders. Duss, who seeks to articulate the foundations of a new "progressive" foreign policy, told the Quincy Institute's Daniel Bessner:

"We have neither the right nor the ability to transform other countries, but we should do what we can to protect and expand the political space in these countries for local people to do that work. We can also provide funding or resources for American civil society actors to work in solidarity with their international counterparts ." [emphasis ours]
That sounds anodyne enough, but in reality, it is nothing but a form of liberal imperialism. Historically, seemingly benign initiatives conducted under the aegis of local people backed by so-called democracy-building programs have often planted the seeds for more malign military intervention later.

Who makes the decision as to which local people to support? How does one (purportedly) protect and expand that political space? We have seen how well that worked out in Afghanistan, Iraq, or, indeed, in the mounting human tragedy that is Syria today.

Comments like that of Matt Duss amount to this: "We don't have the right to transform other countries but we're going to try anyway." Forswearing pre-emptive military action (wars of choice) isn't enough. Change will only come about when US foreign policy adheres to the principles of the UN Charter, and above all, the ancient Westphalian principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. American policymakers need to learn that less is more.

That used to be a guiding principle of Democrats, for example, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's " good neighbor policy " that repudiated intervention in the domestic affairs of Latin America.

Of course, as subsequent events such as World War II illustrated, there may be a point at which external assistance/intervention in other parts of the world might become necessary; but the United States should not perpetually arrogate to itself the role of sole judge and jury in determining when that line should be crossed, no matter how benign its intentions might appear.

The broader point is that explicating a foreign policy somewhat less hawkish and merely paying lip service to international law that transcend the norms established by the Bush-Cheney neocons isn't enough.

That is the foreign-policy equivalent of the Republican-lite economic agenda embraced by " New Democrats " such as Bill Clinton, Robert Rubin, Barack Obama and Timothy Geithner, whereby the Democrats internalize the Republican Party's market-fundamentalist paradigm, but simply promise to implement it more fairly, rather than do away with it altogether.

That appears unlikely to change under a future Biden administration. As American Conservative editor Kelley Beaucar Vlahos has noted , "Democratic interventionists and Blob careerists now [sit] at the right hand of [Biden] like [Antony] Blinken, Nicholas Burns, Susan Rice, Samantha Power and Michele Flournoy , who has been touted as a possible secretary of defense.

"They would sooner drag the country back into Syria, as well as position aggressively against China if the military pushed hard enough and there was a humanitarian reason to justify it."

Nowhere in Biden's foreign-policy ambit do we find mainstream figures warning about the dangers of a new cold war with Russia or China, nor to the broader problems posed by America's overall propensity toward militarism. In fact, Biden does just the opposite .

The shape of things to come?

With the notable exceptions of a few anti-war Democrats like Barbara Lee, Tulsi Gabbard, Ro Khanna and Jeff Merkley, the opposition party has spent much of the Trump era turning itself into the party of war.

Meanwhile, one could envisage a future where the Republicans, under the influence of "national conservatives" such as Josh Hawley, Rand Paul, or even Trump advisers such as retired Colonel Douglas Macgregor (recently nominated to be US ambassador to Germany), becomes the party of realism and restraint abroad.

To the limited extent that President Trump has been guided by any kind of restraint (which has been capricious at best ), it has paid dividends for the United States. In the Middle East, for example, given that the United States is now largely energy-self-sufficient, it no longer needs to play policeman in that part of the world.

Fair Use Excerpt. Read the rest here .

[Nov 07, 2020] The problem is that the US rose to global hegemony amongst a backdrop of huge industrial and manufacturing power; that's changed

Nov 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Muslim_Dude , Nov 7 2020 16:04 utc | 81

1. The phrase 'Make America Great Again' implicitly acknowledges that America which is supposedly, 'the greatest country in the world', is not great and hence needs its 'greatness' restored.

The problem is that the US rose to global hegemony amongst a backdrop of huge industrial and manufacturing power. Whilst the Europeans were fighting each other on their continent in WW2, US manufacturing was booming.

Then in the 70s US courts said factories were liable to huge lawsuits for environmental and medical problems caused by them hence the resultant 'outsourcing' or transfer or labour to countries with cheaper labour costs such as China, Vietnam, Bangladesh etc.

2. This de-industrialization of the US or at least decimating of its manufacturing leads to systemic unemployment in the long run. The US is lucky in that it can still flourish with the reserve dollar, a status it enforces with its global imperial power. However with the Sino-Russian block seeking to end dollar hegemony the questions are:

- How long will dollar hegemony last for?
- At what pace will it decrease?
-To what point does the US economy experience decline until it substantially impacts the US itself?

3. The same sort of 'patriots' and right-wingers in the early 2000s who would have cheered on a US war in the early Bush era and before are now often the most opposed to war. Not on grounds of altruism but because it doesn't benefit the US, or they themselves see no tangible benefits whilst the US experiences socio-economic decline.

This trend of economic decline is only going to continue and with it US power.

The US is hardly interested in flexing its - still considerable - muscles in Libya. That theatre is between the Turks, Arabs and Russians. The US is hardly much of a party in the tension between Greece and Turkey over their EEZ claims.

This is now replicating itself in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict where the US has little power and the main external actors are the Turks and Russians and some others.

Expect this sort of trend to continue whereby regional actors and others will decide on regional 'solutions' (arrangements) free of the US.

4. As for the US internally, it will experience some sort of internal decline and it will either:

a: Change itself fundamentally.
b: Experience cessation or 'semi-cessation'. The latter meaning that the states will have a new deal with the centre, whereby the 'US' can still exist but the states can opt out of things they don't like.
c: Civil war or internal conflict, think post-George Floyd riots X 10 amidst the background of far greater poverty in the future.

P.S. In terms of right-wing militias, the military if anything has indicated it is slightly 'anti-Trump' (the hero of the right-wing militias). The military is a civic-nationalist, racially inclusive organisation whose current head of the air force is a black man. This is why in some quarters of the internet some US right-wingers who aware of this are not so confident about default US backing of any right-wing

[Nov 07, 2020] U.S. Foreign Policy is a Failure, Whoever's President

It is not a failure. It is struggle for Full Spectrum Dominance, whoever is the President.
Nov 06, 2020 | www.counterpunch.org

The world recognizes what U.S. elites don't: the utter, total American failure to contain Covid-19 has damaged U.S. standing and will do so until the virus is controlled. Meanwhile, regional powers, China and Russia, cooperate and share resources, particularly vaccines. Cuba provides treatments, but the U.S. turns up its nose at Cuban medicine, even if it means more American covid patients die – this, though Cuba's pharmacopeia for this plague appears superior. China sends doctors and medicines across the globe. Russia opts for sane herd immunity – through vaccination. These countries act like adults. Not a good look for the U.S.

The Obama regime's deplorable trade and military "pivot to China," along with its sanctions against high-ranking Russians and Russian energy, financial and defense firms and the Trump regime's provocations, sanctions and insults aimed at both countries have now born fruit: There is talk of a military alliance between China and Russia. Both countries deny that such is in the offing, but the fact that it is even discussed reveals how effectively U.S. foreign policy has created enemies and united them. Even if they would have drawn closer anyway, China and Russia cannot ignore the advantage of teaming up in the face of U.S. hostility. A more idiotic approach than this hostility is scarcely imaginable. Remember, not too long ago the U.S. had little problem with its chief trading partner, China, and there were even reports some years back of actual military cooperation in Syria between the U.S. and Russia. All that is gone now, dissolved in a fog of deliberate ill-will.

So what are some of the absurd U.S. policies that have reaped this potential whirlwind? An utterly unnecessary trade war with China, with tariffs that were paid, not by China, but by importers and then passed on to American consumers. There is the Trump regime's assault on China's technology sector and its attempt to lockout Huawei from the 5G bonanza. Then there are the attacks on Russian business, like its deal to sell natural gas to Germany, attacks in which the U.S. insists Germany buy the much more expensive U.S. product to avoid becoming beholden to Russia. And of course, there are the constant mega-deals involving sales of U.S. weapons to anyone who might oppose China, Russia, North Korea or Iran.

Aggravating these economic assaults, the U.S. navy aggressively patrols the South China Sea, the Black Sea and more and more the Arctic Ocean, where Russia has already been since forever. Russia has a lengthy Siberian coast, making U.S. talk of Russia's so-called aggressive posture there just plain ludicrous. And now a NATO ally, Turkey, stirs the pot by egging on Azerbaijan in its war against Armenia, which has a defense treaty with Russia. Azerbaijan is famous for the oil fields of Baku.

Never has it been clearer that the U.S. deploys its military might to advance its corporations' interests, international law be damned. As General Smedley Butler wrote of his military service way back in the early 20 th century, he was "a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank Boys to collect revenues in," and on and on. Nothing has changed since them. It's only gotten worse. Indeed now we're in a position where it is Russia that abides by international law, while the U.S. flouts it, instead following something bogus it calls the "rules of the liberal international order."

The biggest and most consequential U.S. foreign policy failure involves nuclear weapons. Here the Trump regime has outdone all its predecessors. It withdrew the U.S. from the Intermediate Range Nuclear treaty, which banned land-based ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and certain missile launchers and which it first signed in 1987. It withdrew from the Open Skies Treaty, inked in 1992. That agreement allowed aircraft to fly over the signatories' territory to monitor missile installations.

Trump has also made clear he intends to deep-six the 2010 New Start Treaty with Russia, which limits nuclear warheads, nuclear armed bombers, intercontinental ballistic missiles and missile launchers. The Trump regime has made the ridiculous, treaty-killing demand that China participate in START talks. Why should it? China has 300 nuclear missiles, on a par with countries like the U.K. The U. S. and Russian have 6000 apiece. China's response? Sure we'll join START, as soon as the U.S. cuts its arsenal to 300. Naturally that went over like a lead balloon in Washington.

And now, lastly, the white house has urged nations that signed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons – which just recently received formal UN ratification – to withdraw their approval. The U.S. spouted doubletalk about the TPNW's dangers, in order to head off international law banning nuclear weapons, just as it has banned – and thus stigmatized – chemical weapons, cluster bombs and germ warfare. Doubtless the Trump regime's panic over the TPNW derives from its desire to "keep all options on the table" militarily, including the nuclear one.

What is the point here? To make the unthinkable thinkable, to make nuclear war easier to happen. The Pentagon appears delighted. Periodically military bigwigs are quoted praising new smaller nuclear missiles, developed not for deterrence, but for use. Indeed, scrapping deterrence policy – which has, insofar as it posits no first use, arguably been the only thing keeping humanity alive and the planet habitable since the dangerous dawn of the atomic era – has long been the dream of Pentagon promoters of "small, smart nuclear weapons" for "limited" nuclear wars. How these geniuses would control such a move from escalating into a wider nuclear war and planetary holocaust is never mentioned.

Before he assumed office, Trump reportedly shocked his advisors by asking, if we have nuclear weapons, why can't we use them? Only someone dangerously ignorant or profoundly lacking in basic human morality could ask such a question. Only someone eager to ditch the human-species-saving policy of no-first-strike nuclear deterrence but willing to risk nuclear extinction could flirt with such madness. Later in his presidency, Trump asserted that he could end the war in Afghanistan easily if he wanted, hinting that he meant nukes, but that he did not incline toward murdering 10 million people. Well, thank God for this shred of humanity.

Some assume a Biden presidency would chart a different course, but they may be counting their chickens before they're hatched. Biden has made very hostile noises about Russia, China and North Korea and has surrounded himself with neo-con hawks. He has so far made no promise to return to the nuclear negotiating table for anything other than START. Would he try to resuscitate the INF and Open Skies treaties? Would he end Trump regime blather aimed at scotching TPNW? Maybe. Or he may have imbibed so much anti-Russia and anti-China poison that he, like Trump, sees the absence of treaties as a green light for nuclear aggression.

Biden's official Foreign Policy Plan says that he regards the purpose of nuclear weapons as deterrence, thus endorsing this at best very flawed compromise for survival. That he, apparently unlike Trump, abjures a nuclear first strike is a huge relief, but how long will it last? The Pentagon has been very persuasive over many decades of center-right rule and there is no reason to assume that it will suddenly adopt a hands-off policy with Biden just because he favors nuclear deterrence. Some military-industrial-complex sachems regard the no-first-use principle as a mistake. Also, remember, Obama okayed a trillion-dollar nuclear arms upgrade. Biden was his vp. What about that? This is no minor, petty concern. Russia is armed to the teeth with supersonic nuclear weapons and China has concluded from U.S. belligerence that it better arm up too. We are in dangerous waters here. Let's hope they don't become radioactive.

Eve Ottenberg is a novelist and journalist. Her latest book is Birdbrain . She can be reached at her website . New from
CounterPunch CounterPunch+
Member Area

Weekend Edition
November 06, 2020
Friday - Sunday RICHARD D. WOLFF
Why Capitalism Was Destined to Come Out on Top in the 2020 Election EVE OTTENBERG
U.S. Foreign Policy is a Failure, Whoever's President JEFFREY ST. CLAIR
Roaming Charges: the Fog of Bores ROB URIE
Two Capitalist Parties Compete, Humanity Loses KIM SCIPES
The AFL-CIO's Foreign Policy Program: Where Historians Now Stand RON JACOBS
The Election and the Empire PAUL STREET
An Omaha Stake in the Heart of Orange Satan? Early Reflections on the Election ROBERT HUNZIKER
A Troubling Discovery in the Arctic JOSEPH NATOLI
Nothing Sacred RAMZY BAROUD
Macron's Incitement: 'Crisis in Islam' or French Politics? DEAN BAKER
Donald Trump and Being Deplorable ROGER HARRIS
Leveraging the Ruling Class's Loss of Legitimacy JOSEPH SCALIA III
Terra & Demos: A Unified Ethics for Conservation and the Human Quest DANIEL LAZARE
At Breaking Point: Why the Constitutional Crisis Will Only Get Worse MANUEL GARCÍA, JR.
Death-Grip by Fungal Ideas JOHN FEFFER
U.S. Democracy: the Four-Year Rule? NICK PEMBERTON
It's Not Populism, It's Voter Suppression RICHARD C. GROSS
Aftermath DANIEL BEAUMONT
Prison, the Plague, Writing and Exile: an Interview With Aslı Erdoğan AJAMU BARAKA
Confronting Bipartisan Repression and the US/EU/NATO Axis of Domination Beyond Election Day ROBERT FANTINA
Amy Coney Barrett: the Latest Supreme Court Travesty PRABHAT PATNAIK
India's Move Toward a De Facto Unitary State LOUIS PROYECT
The Origins of Commercial Capitalism REBECCA GORDON
In a Looking Glass World, Our Work is Just Beginning OLIVIA ALPERSTEIN
Ending the Nuclear Age PRABIR PURKAYASTHA
Why Google is Facing Serious Accusations of Monopoly Practices ROBERT KOEHLER
Trump Talk TOM MOUNTAIN
Western Civilization? SUSAN BLOCK
RIP Betty Dodson, Sex Revolutionary NICKY REID
Democracy as Mental Illness: Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Cross 2020 ERIK MOLVAR
Killing Fields: the Seamy Side of Idaho's Wildlife Agency FRANCES MADESON
Arsonist of Three Black Louisiana Churches Sentenced to 25 Years in Prison B. R. GOWANI
Trump and the US CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI
When Trump Takes Advice DAVID YEARSLEY
Bach the Poll Worker JOHN KENDALL HAWKINS
Invasion of the Mental Snatchers ED SANDERS
Oi-Joy Teeter Totter: a Glyph November 05, 2020 PATRICK COCKBURN
Trump's Bid to Stop the Count Risks Turning America into an 'Illiberal Democracy' like Turkey VIJAY PRASHAD
U.S. is Doing Its Best to Lock Out China From Latin America and the Caribbean DAVID ROSEN
Police Violence: a Crisis of Masculinity? KATHLEEN WALLACE
Thanks Obama! LEIA BARNETT
A Call to Reclaim Our Awareness for the Wild SUSIE DAY
That's Not Gangster, That's Love: Eddie Conway and Jose Saldaña Talking KENN ORPHAN
Trump Was Never the Real Problem DOUG JOHNSON HATLEM
Biden Appears to Have Won, Why He Must be Primaried in 2024 CounterPunch Administration Editorial Mailing Address

CounterPunch delivered to your inbox.

Get news updates from CounterPunch Sign Up

[Nov 07, 2020] A tried and trusted mechanism to "unite" the people is some designated foreign enemy. Given the xeiai of neoliberlaisn , it is all the more imperative for the US ruling class retain the some level of legitimacy and restore the essential authority of governing power. Tt can therefore be expected that American foreign policy will become more aggressive and militaristic in the next four years.

Nov 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Down South , Nov 6 2020 19:22 utc | 117

What is patently clear is how bitterly polarized and divisive US domestic politics have become. This is due to the historic failing of the two-party system which has, over decades, left whole swathes of the population, in particular the majority working class, alienated from the political class. There is irreparable distrust and distortion among the American populace. To the point where it would seem impossible for any nominal winner of the election to be able to command a mandate.

A tried and trusted mechanism for galvanizing is to "unite" the people by rallying them around the flag against some designated foreign enemy. Given the increasing unwieldy, fractious nature of American society, it is all the more imperative for the US ruling class to impose some level of coherence in order to restore the essential authority of governing power. With this paramount need to shore up a sense of authority, it can therefore be expected that American foreign policy will become more aggressive and militaristic in the next four years.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/11/06/american-election-is-not-a-reset-for-better-global-relations/

[Nov 07, 2020] If we accept that USA armed aggressions (they are not 'wars', as declared by Congress) are primarily economic, designed to sell weapon systems and create conditions for US business enterprise (and businesses of the piglet followers of the big sow)then illegal armed aggressions no longer make sense.

Nov 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

powerandpeople , Nov 6 2020 22:38 utc | 153

William Gruff @16

"The PNAC gang (Biden/Harris is their front) will now "shirtfront" Russia and "get in their face".

They will escalate until they succeed at their plans.

Trump's escalations were almost entirely symbolic and meaningless, but the PNACer's escalations will be kinetic.

When Iran is once again forced to retaliate against the empire and missile-strikes some US assets, the PNAC people will escalate and respond with ten times the violence"

The Middle East has changed dramatically with missile, antimissile, and drone tech advances in recent years.

In addition, Iran can now buy missile componentry directly from China (and perhaps indirectly from North Korea). Or missiles themselves. Russia is in a 'strategic alliance' with Iran. That must be borne in mind.

And Russia (in particular) has been relentless in insisting that genuine disputes must be solved diplomatically between the parties involved.

Conditions are right for gradual normalisation of the Gulf area, and restorations of normal trade and restoration of relations. (Russia has certainly greased this track.) Iran hinted that they must accept certain unpalatable realities, and then we saw Saudi etc formal re-establishment of relations.


If we accept that USA armed aggressions (they are not 'wars', as declared by Congress) are primarily economic, designed to sell weapon systems and create conditions for US business enterprise (and businesses of the piglet followers of the big sow)then illegal armed aggressions no longer make sense.

The risk far exceeds any immediate, yet alone long term benefit.

Immediate conditions multiply the unviability - Covid's economic effects, and US business being temporarily slowed down in China due to Mr. Trumps actions. The cost to US consumers of US tariffs paid by US importers of goods sourced from China doesn't help the US cost of living.

The US is printing money as never seen in history - as have many countries. Is this the 'social credit' system? Will it 'work'? The experiment is massive, and there is risk aplenty.

Risk compounded on risk? Is this what American people want from their government, whoever it is? The hell it is!

Forget linking 'kinetic' with Russia. Sure, bluff and posturing from USA, as they are stuck in a echo loop of their own making. And the only decent leader capable of pushing through the echo chamber was carefully excluded from Presidential contention.

Trump is also capable of the breakthrough, although through high risk strategies.

On the face of it, his day is done, he came close to 'getting on with it', but not close enough.

And most critically of all, the recent experience of the US Military - whose analyses I suspect are more sober than most realize - will surely demand advice of caution over rushes of blood to political heads.

Everything is changing.

Some things incrementally, slowly, others quickly.

The pressure, in general, is to peace and trade. But the pressure is built up due to the US policy change 'fault line' sticking. Eventually it will release, and there will be an abrupt move forward.

[Nov 07, 2020] The coming internal political instability uncertainty and infighting will weaken and keep the beast busy for coming years, which by itself should provide opportunity for the rest of world to participate in world affairs.

Nov 07, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Kooshy , Nov 6 2020 21:02 utc | 137

The current outcome of this election, a stalemate, is perhaps the best possible outcome for rest of the world, not only is showing the world how corrupt, outdated and illegitimate the US' electoral college system is, but this near evenly divided election result will creates a space for the rest of the free and sovereign world to take a breath from continues US assault on them.

Elections results that are determined by courts and lawyering do not have legitimacy or mandate for at least half the voters in US and very doubtful to the rest of the world. This was the best outcome possible, for those In the world seeking to become free from American claws.

The coming internal political instability uncertainty and infighting will weaken and keep the beast busy for coming years, which by itself should provide opportunity for the rest of world to participate in world affairs.

Kooshy

[Nov 06, 2020] Biden- A War Cabinet? by Mariamne Everet

Nov 06, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

"Let's bring decency and integrity back to the White House." I can't count the number of times I have heard and read this phrase uttered by U.S. expats here in Paris, France. As one of many American expats living here, of course I share in the desire for an end to a Donald Trump presidency. But at what cost? And will a Biden presidency – which promises a return to "normalcy" – really merit the sigh of relief that so many think it will? Below I summarize some of the most troubling information I have uncovered about some of the most likely foreign policy picks for key positions in a Biden cabinet.

Susan Rice for Secretary of State

Susan Rice, who was also reportedly being considered for the role of Biden's Vice President, served as United States Ambassador to the United Nations and as National Security Advisor, both under the Obama administration.

While Benghazi has been the focus of much criticism of Rice, she has received virtually no scrutiny for her backing of the invasion of Iraq and claiming that there were WMDs there. Some of her statements:

"I think he [then Secretary of State Colin Powell] has proved that Iraq has these weapons and is hiding them, and I don't think many informed people doubted that." (NPR, Feb. 6, 2003)

"It's clear that Iraq poses a major threat. It's clear that its weapons of mass destruction need to be dealt with forcefully, and that's the path we're on. I think the question becomes whether we can keep the diplomatic balls in the air and not drop any, even as we move forward, as we must, on the military side." (NPR, Dec. 20, 2002)

"I think the United States government has been clear since the first Bush administration about the threat that Iraq and Saddam Hussein poses. The United States policy has been regime change for many, many years, going well back into the Clinton administration. So it's a question of timing and tactics. We do not necessarily need a further Council resolution before we can enforce this and previous resolutions." (NPR, Nov. 11, 2002; requests for audio of Rice's statements on NPR were declined by the publicly funded network.)

She has also been criticized extensively for her record on the African continent, which judging by the following quote at the beginning of the 1994 Rwandan genocide seems to have been to adopt a "laissez faire" attitude : "If we use the word 'genocide' and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the November [congressional] election?"

Susan Rice's past rhetoric also includes choice generous words for African dictators . One great example is former prime minister of Ethiopia, Meles Zenawi, a man who ordered security services to open fire on protesters during its controversial 2005 election, has a track record of imprisoning journalists , used food aid as a political tool and stole land in south Ethiopia. In her speech at his funeral, Susan Rice described him as "brilliant" and a "close friend ".

Although Rice has often been portrayed as someone who is anti-Israel , her mild criticisms pale in comparison to her staunch record and discourse on the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

In a speech given at the AIPAC Synagogue Initiative Lunch back in 2012, Rice boasted about vetoing a UN resolution that would deem Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land as illegal, and further characterized the Goldstone Report as "flawed" and "insisted on Israel's right to defend itself and maintained that Israel's democratic institutions could credibly investigate any possible abuses." Her position has changed little since then, as recently as 2016, she proclaimed that "Israel's security isn't a Democratic interest or a Republican interest -- it's an enduring American interest."

Tony Blinken for National Security Adviser

Tony Blinken is also an old member of the Obama administration, having served first as VP Biden's National Security Advisor from 2009 to 2013, Deputy National Security Advisor from 2013 to 2015 and then as United States Deputy Secretary of State from 2015 to 2017.

Blinken had immense influence over Biden in his role as Deputy National Security Advisor, helping formulate Biden's approach and support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"For Biden ", he argued , "and for a number of others who voted for the resolution, it was a vote for tough diplomacy." He added "It is more likely that diplomacy will succeed, if the other side knows military action is possible."

The two of them were responsible for delivering on Obama's campaign promise to get American troops out of Iraq, a process so oversimplified and poorly handled that it led to even more chaos than the initial occupation and insurgency.

Blinken seems to be of the view that it is up to the US, and only the US, to take charge of world affairs : "On leadership, whether we like it or not, the world just doesn't organize itself. And until this [Trump] administration, the US had played a lead role in doing a lot of that organizing, helping to write the rules, to shape the norms and animate the institutions that govern relations among nations. When we're not engaged, when we don't lead, then one or two things is likely to happen. Either some other country tries to take our place – but probably not in a way that advances our interests or values – or no one does. And then you get chaos or a vacuum filled by bad things before it's filled by good things. Either way, that's bad for us."

Blinken also appears to be steering Biden's pro-Israel agenda, recently stating that Biden "would not tie military assistance to Israel to any political decisions that it makes, period, full stop," which includes an all out rejection of BDS , the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions Movement against Israel's occupation of Palestine.

Michèle Flournoy for Secretary of Defense

Michele Flournoy was Under Secretary of Defense for Policy from 2009 to 2012 in the Obama administration under Secretaries Robert Gates and Leon Panetta.

Flournoy, in writing the Quadrennial Defense Review during her time as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy under President Clinton, has paved the way for the U.S.'s endless and costly wars which prevent us from investing in life saving and necessary programs like Medicare for All and the Green New Deal. It has effectively granted the US permission to no longer be bound by the UN Charter's prohibition against the threat or use of military force. It declared that, "when the interests at stake are vital, we should do whatever it takes to defend them, including, when necessary, the unilateral use of military power."

While working at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a "Top Defense and National Security Think Tank" based in Washington D.C., in June 2002, as the Bush administration was threatening aggression towards Iraq, she declared , that the United States would "need to strike preemptively before a crisis erupts to destroy an adversary's weapons stockpile" before it "could erect defenses to protect those weapons, or simply disperse them." She continued along this path even in 2009, after the Bush administration, in a speech for the CSIS : "The second key challenge I want to highlight is the proliferation – continued proliferation of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, as these also pose increasing threats to our security. We have to respond to states such as Iran, North Korea, who are seeking to develop nuclear weapons technologies, and in a globalized world there is also an increased risk that non-state actors will find ways to obtain these materials or weapons."

It is extremely important to note that Flournoy and Blinken co-founded the strategic consulting firm, WestExec Advisors, where the two use their large database of governmental, military, venture capitalists and corporate leader contacts to help companies win big Pentagon contracts. One such client being Jigsaw, a technology incubator created by Google that describes itself on its website as "a unit within Google that forecasts and confronts emerging threats, creating future-defining research and technology to keep our world safer." Their partnership on the AI initiative entitled Project Maven led to a rebellion by Google workers who opposed their technology being used by military and police operations.

Furthermore, Flournoy and Blinken, in their jobs at WestExec Advisors, co-chaired the biannual meeting of the liberal organization Foreign Policy for America. Over 50 representatives of national-security groups were in attendance. Most of the attendees supported "ask(ing) Congress to halt U.S. military involvement in the (Yemen) conflict." Flournoy did not. She said that the weapons should be sold under certain conditions and that Saudi Arabia needed these advanced patriot missiles to defend itself.

Conclusion

If a return to "normalcy" means having the same old politicians that are responsible for endless wars, that work for the corporate elite, that lack the courage to implement real structural change required for major issues such as healthcare and the environment, then a call for "normalcy" is nothing more than a call to return to the same deprived conditions that led to our current crisis. Such a return with amplified conditions and circumstances, could set the stage for the return of an administration with dangers that could possibly even exceed those posed by the current one in terms of launching new wars.

Mariamne Everett is an intern at the Institute for Public Accuracy currently living in France.

[Nov 06, 2020] Is Mike Pompeo the Worst Secretary of State in History by DOUG BANDOW

Nov 05, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Home / Articles / Realism & Restraint / Is Mike Pompeo The Worst Secretary Of State In History?

With his laughable attempts at diplomacy and general hawkishness, he's certainly in the runnings for the honor. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo speaks at a press conference at the State Department in Washington, DC, on October 21, 2020. (Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/POOL/AFP via Getty Images) |

12:01 AM

Is Mike Pompeo the worst secretary of state ever? He's been awful, no doubt. However, there are 69 other contenders for that title.

Among modern secretaries, Colin Powell was misused by George W. Bush, who defrauded the country in selling the tragically misbegotten invasion of Iraq. Madeleine Albright, her mindset permanently stuck in Adolf Hitler's world, stands out for her enthusiastic embrace of war for others to fight. Alexander Haig achieved little beyond claiming to be in charge in the wake of the assassination attempt against Ronald Reagan. William Rogers was overshadowed by National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger, who eventually took the latter's position.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13045197114175078?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13045197114175078-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&rid=www.theamericanconservative.com&width=838

Going back a bit further, Robert Lansing helped maneuver the U.S. into World War I, one of the dumbest, most counterproductive moves in American history. The earlier one looks, the more circumstances diverge, making any comparative judgment more difficult.

Still, about the best that can be said of Pompeo is that he has not gotten America into any new wars, despite his best efforts. Most often he has played the anti-diplomat, determined to insult, hector, demand, insist, dictate, threaten, harangue, and impose. But never persuade. The results speak for themselves: the administration's record lacks any notable successes that benefit the U.S, the supposed purpose of an "America First" foreign policy. There was a bit of good, a lot of bad, and some real ugly.

A solid good was President Donald Trump's most important diplomatic initiative: his opening with North Korea. Pompeo took over in March 2018, with the first summit already planned. That initiative faltered the following year at the second summit in Hanoi, which was Pompeo's responsibility.

Alas, the secretary lost points by apparently doing nothing to disabuse the president of the belief that Pyongyang was prepared to turn over its entire arsenal with the hope that Washington would look favorably upon its future aspirations. That was never going to happen, especially after the allied double-cross of Libya, which yielded its missiles and nascent nuclear program, and after Trump dumped the nuclear accord with Iran, demanding that Tehran abjectly surrender its independent foreign policy. The North can easily imagine similar mistreatment, by this or a future administration.

me title=

00:36 / 00:59

Washington has also pursued better relations with India, which is a positive. As elsewhere, however, concern about human rights violations is almost entirely absent from Pompeo's portfolio unless it operates as a weapon against an adversary. The secretary cheerfully holds the coat of allied dictators as they jail, torture, and murder. Such is the case with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has abetted if not aided rising religious persecution.

The Abrahamic accords between Israel and Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates were a tepid good. Improved relations between Arabs and Israelis are useful, though strengthening two authoritarian regimes is not. The Bahraini Sunni monarchy sits atop a Shia population with the backing of the Saudi military, while the Emirates, nicknamed "Little Sparta," by the Pentagon -- as if that's a compliment -- has used its military to commit murder and mayhem against Yemen in a war of political aggression and economic exploitation. The related negotiations with Sudan have been worse, using an unjust terrorist state designation to force recognition of Israel, which will undermine the democracy that has yet to be fully born after last year's popular revolution.

Examples of bad are far more common. For example, Pompeo has worked to thwart the president's evident desire to exit "endless wars." Nineteen years of nation-building in Afghanistan is enough. The U.S. does not belong in the Syrian civil war. Iraq and its neighbors are capable of and should deal with whatever remains of the Islamic State.

The secretary has played an equally malign role in Europe, undercutting his boss -- and, not incidentally, the American people -- by working to spend more on, and place more troops in, the continent, even as Trump pushed the Europeans to do more on their own defense. This is an inane strategy: Washington should cut defense welfare to states with the capability to protect themselves and allow them to decide how to proceed.

Much the same policy has played out with America's relationship to South Korea. Japan has escaped most of that pressure. Yet consider the defensive capabilities against China for Japan and the region if Tokyo spent not 1 percent of GDP on its military, but 2 or 3 percent. And why shouldn't it do so, instead of expecting Americans to do the job for it?

The secretary turned human rights into a political weapon, sacrificing any credibility on the issue. He tears up while criticizing Iran but kowtows to the Saudi royals, who are far more brutal killers. He is horrified by the crimes committed by Venezuela's Maduro regime, but spreads love to Egypt's Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who has punished the slightest criticism, and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who is turning Turkey into an autocracy. Pompeo actually introduced a new initiative in support of unalienable rights with the support of countries like Saudi Arabia and other assorted tyrannies.

Then there is the ugly. Using sanctions to try starve the people of Syria and Venezuela in order to force their governments to yield to America is not just immoral but ineffective. Both regimes have survived much and are not inclined to surrender.

At least Venezuela is a matter of geographic interest to Washington. Syria has never mattered to U.S. security and Pompeo should have backed the president's effort to bring home all American troops. Today, U.S. and Russian troops are clashing there over the administration's bizarre and illegal seizure of Syrian oilfields. Also inexplicable is reinforcing six decades of failure by tightening sanctions on Cuba; the private business community there has suffered badly as a result, reducing what was becoming a sharp challenge to the political authorities during the waning days of the Obama administration.

The fixation on Iran, which appears to come more from Pompeo than Trump, can best be explained as turning Mideast policy over to Saudi Arabia and Israel. The result of abandoning the nuclear accord has been nothing short of catastrophic. The Iranians have refused to negotiate. Instead they ramped up nuclear reprocessing, interfered with Gulf tanker traffic, attacked Saudi oil facilities, and attacked U.S. bases and the embassy in Iraq. Far from reestablishing deterrence, as claimed, the secretary was left to whimper and whine that he might have to close America's embassy in Baghdad.

Pompeo has taken the lead in the administration's shameful policy toward Saudi Arabia, aiding it in its war of aggression against impoverished Yemen. That nation has been at war within and without for most of its existence. Riyadh decided to invade to restore a puppet regime to power, turning typical internal discord into a sectarian war in which Tehran was able to bleed the ineffective Saudi armed forces, which were armed and aided by the Pentagon. In this way, the secretary has made the American population into accomplices to war crimes.

Even more foolish geopolitically, Pompeo has matched Albright's retreat to World War II clichés with a stroll back into the Cold War. Russia is an unpleasant actor but doesn't threaten American security. Europe is capable of defending itself. Alas, constantly piling on sanctions without providing an off-ramp ensures continued Russian hostility and a tilt toward China in that burgeoning struggle. How does this make any sense for America?

Finally, Pompeo has been his blundering, maladroit, offensive self in seeking to launch an American-led campaign against the People's Republic of China. Beijing poses a serious challenge, but not primarily a security issue. No one believes that the PRC plans to launch an armada across the Pacific to conquer Hawaii. The issue is Washington's willingness to pay the cost to forever treat Asia-Pacific waters as an American lake.

As for other issues, the U.S. needs work in concert with friendly powers. Pompeo has done his best to drive away potential partners: for instance, the G-7 refused his demand to call COVID-19 the Wuhan Virus and even allies such as South Korea have remained far more measured in their relations with China, determined not to turn their large neighbor into an enemy. In what promises to be a long and complicated relationship, genuine and serious diplomacy, which obviously lies beyond Pompeo's limited capabilities, is required.

On the personal side, he appears to have abused his position for both personal and ideological advantage. For example, so committed to showing his fealty to Riyadh, he declared an "emergency" to thwart congressional opposition and rush munitions to the Saudi military so it could kill more Yemeni civilians. He then sought to impede a departmental investigation, pressuring and firing the inspector general. What prompted his determination to so avidly assist a ruler who is ostentatiously vile, reckless, and even criminal is one of the greatest mysteries of his tenure.

Tragically, Pompeo proved to be one of the greatest obstacles to the best of the president's international agenda. In a speech delivered last year in which he claimed to be implementing the Founders' foreign policy vision, he denigrated diplomacy and its successful fruits, such as opening up both Cuba and Iran to potentially corrosive outside influences, which is the most likely strategy to induce change over the long term. This approach would be more in sync with Trump's desire to deal with countries such as North Korea and Iran.

Indeed, left to his own devices, Pompeo would likely have America at war with Iran and perhaps beyond -- Venezuela, China, and/or Russia. His belligerence serves the American people badly. As does his consistent campaign, conscious or not, to thwart the president's brave but incompetent attempts to escape largely braindead practices enforced by what Ben Rhodes termed "the Blob," the foreign policy establishment that dominates the field.

The secretary has forgotten that his job is not to push his personal ideological line. Rather, it is to advance the interests of the American people, with a special emphasis on defending their lives, territory, liberties, constitutional system, and prosperity. In this, he has failed consistently. Maybe he isn't the worst secretary of state in history. But surely he is one of the worst.

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is the author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire .

[Nov 06, 2020] What we see is salami slicing sanctions (SSS) where the west adds small slices here and there that do add up, the latest being on suppling microelectronics to the Russian aviation industry.

Nov 06, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL November 6, 2020 at 12:04 pm

And this is also another opportunity of all the other stuff the US could have demanded their allies should do as well as the USA that they haven't done because it would have caused extreme autof/kery, sic banning the sale of airliners, engines, electronics etc. Russia could simply have pulled its titanium supply. Guess who's share prices would tank first and all the consequences?

As we have pointed out here before, while the US is exhorting u-Rope to 'take on for the team,' mega-corps (though weakening) like GE has arrange full localization of its turbine (power/mineral extraction) business with a local Russian partner. Yes. GE, Microsoft and others told the White House to f/k off. Not in public.

What we see is salami slicing sanctions (SSS) where the west adds small slices here and there that do add up, the latest being on suppling microelectronics to the Russian aviation industry. This is to hobble Russia's investment in its current rebuilding of its civil airliner industry or what's left of it. These sanction are a dick move precisely because they are easy and get support from both american political parties.

We have also covered on this blog many times before, cutting Russia off from the Joy of Sex West, they've cut their own markets off (retail/food produce etc.) which Russia has in turn finally massively self-invested for domestic products and also up market equivalents. That's cost u-Rope billions not only in lost sales, but in future sales share that will not return to where it once was.

So, cutting off western microelectronics for aircraft looks even more weak p*ss considering Russia's state strategic program of Russianizing its aircraft programs despite the obvious up front cost. Russia was doing this anyway because it was obvious which way the wind was blowing. Either they get on with it or they will be forced to do it.

The west is running out of any meaningful sanctions they can enact without causing futher blowback. How stupid is that? It's the product of thirty years of 'Do Something' policy however dumb or short sighted because the West has to be seen to do something. The concept of Leave it Alone has never crossed their minds. It really is an ad dick tion! 😉 Just don't expect to finding them in a self-help group admitting to all the nasty s/t they've done and as part of their step program, reaching out and apologizing for any of it. Neither them nor their media supporting hamsters.


[Nov 06, 2020] In 1940, the United States Decided To Rule the World - Antiwar.com Original

Nov 06, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

In 1940, the United States Decided To Rule the World

by David Swanson Posted on November 06, 2020

Stephen Wertheim's Tomorrow, The World examines a shift in elite U.S. foreign-policy thinking that took place in mid-1940. Why in that moment, a year and a half before the Japanese attacks on the Philippines, Hawaii, and other outposts, did it become popular in foreign-policy circles to advocate for US military domination of the globe?

In school text book mythology, the United States was full of revoltingly backward creatures called isolationists at the time of World War I and right up through December 1941, after which the rational adult internationalists took command (or we'd all be speaking German and suffering through the rigged elections of fascistic yahoos, unlike this evening).

In fact, the term "isolationist" wasn't cooked up until the mid-1930s and then only as a misleading insult to be applied to people who wished for the US government to engage with the world in any number of ways from treaties to trade that didn't include militarism. Anti-isolationism was and is a means of ridiculously pretending that "doing something" means waging war, supporting NATO, and promoting the "responsibility to protect," while anything else means "doing nothing."

There were distinctions in the 1920s between those who favored the League of Nations and World Court and those who didn't. But neither group favored coating the planet with US military bases, or extending even the most vicious conception of the Monroe Doctrine to the other hemisphere, or replacing the League of Nations with an institution that would falsely appear to establish global governance while actually facilitating US domination. Pre-1940 internationalists were, in fact, imperfect US nationalists. They, as Wertheim writes, "had the capacity to see the United States as a potential aggressor requiring restraint." Some, indeed, didn't need the word "potential" there.

What changed? There was the rise of fascism and communism. There was the notion that the League of Nations had failed. There was the serious failure of disarmament efforts. There was the belief that whatever came out of WWII would be dramatically different. In September 1939, the Council on Foreign Relations began making plans to shape the postwar (yet permawar) world. The Roosevelt White House into 1940 was planning for a postwar world that held a balance of power with the Nazis. Ideas of disarmament, at least for others, were still very much a part of the thinking. "Weapons dealer to the world" was not a title that it was ever suggested that the United States strive for.

Wertheim sees a turning point in the German conquest of France. Change came swiftly in May-June, 1940. Congress funded the creation of the world's biggest navy and instituted a draft. Contrary to popular mythology, and propaganda pushed by President Roosevelt, nobody feared a Nazi invasion of the Americas. Nor was the United States dragged kicking and screaming into its moral responsibility to wage global permawar by the atrocious domestic policies of the Nazis or any mission to rescue potential victims from Nazi genocide. Rather, US foreign policy elites feared the impact on global trade and relations of a world containing a Nazi power. Roosevelt began talking about a world in which the United States dominated only one hemisphere as imprisonment.

The United States needed to dominate the globe in order to exist in the sort of global order it wanted. And the only global order it wanted was one it dominated. Did US planners become aware of this need as they watched events in Europe? Or did they become aware of its possibility as they watched the US government build weapons and the US president acquire new imperial bases? Probably some of each. Wertheim is right to call our attention to the fact that US officials didn't talk about militarily dominating the whole globe prior to 1940, but was there ever a time they talked about dominating anything less than what they had the weapons and troops to handle? Certainly the voices had not all been monolithic, and there was always an anti-imperialist tradition, but did it ever give much back to those it had dispossessed until after WWII when airplanes and radios developed a new sort of empire (and some colonies were made states but others more or less liberated)?

The US government and its advisers didn't just discover that they could rule the world and that they needed to rule the world, but also that -- in the words of General George V. Strong, chief of the Army's War Plans Division -- Germany had demonstrated the "tremendous advantage of the offense over the defense." The proper defensive war was an aggressive war, and an acceptable goal of that was what Henry Luce called living space and Hitler called Lebensraum . US elites came to believe that only through war could they engage in proper trade and relations. One can treat this as a rational observation based on the growth of fascism, although some of the same people making the observation had fascistic tendencies, the problem with Germany seems to have existed for them only once it had invaded other nations that were not Russia, and there is little doubt that had the United States lived sustainably, locally, egalitarianly, contentedly, and with respect for all humanity, it could not have observed a need for permawar in the world around it -- much less gone on observing it for 75 years.

In early 1941, a US political scientist named Harold Vinacke asked, "When the United States has its thousands of airplanes, its mass army, properly mechanized, and its two-ocean navy, what are they to be used for?" Officials have been asking the same right up through Madeline Albright and Donald Trump, with the answer generally being found to be as self-evident as other patriotic "truths." By summertime 1941, Roosevelt and Churchill had announced the future organization of the world in the Atlantic Charter.

If hypocrisy is the compliment that vice pays to virtue, there remained some virtue in US society and its conception of foreign policy at the time of WWII, because a major focus of postwar planners was how to sell global domination to the US public (and incidentally the world, and perhaps most importantly themselves) as being something other than what it was. The answer, of course, was the United Nations (along with the World Bank, etc.). Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles described the design of the United Nations thus: "what we required was a sop for the smaller states: some organization in which they could be represented and made to feel themselves participants." In Roosevelt's words before the creation of the U.N., all nations but four, in a future global organization, would merely "blow off steam."

Roosevelt also proposed that the existence of such a phony organization would allow it to declare war instead of the US Congress, meaning that a US president would be able to launch wars at will -- something like what we've seen for the past 75 years with NATO occasionally having filled in for a malfunctioning United Nations.

Roosevelt believed that the United States signed up for global policeman when it defeated Hitler. Neither Roosevelt nor Wertheim mentions that the Soviet Union did 80% of defeating Hitler, after having done about 0% of creating him.

But surely the job of world cop can be resigned, no matter how one got into it. The question now is how. The financial and bureaucratic and media and campaign-corruption interests all work against dismantling the permawar military, just as does the ideology of anti-"isolationism." But it certainly cannot hurt to be aware of the dishonesty in the ideology and of the fact that it was not always with us.

David Swanson is an author, activist, journalist, and radio host. He is executive director of WorldBeyondWar.org and campaign coordinator for RootsAction.org . Swanson's books include War Is A Lie and When the World Outlawed War . He blogs at DavidSwanson.org and WarIsACrime.org . He hosts Talk Nation Radio . This originally appeared at WorldBeyondWar.org .

[Nov 06, 2020] Did the Iraq War Cause the Great Recession?'

Highly recommended!
Iran war might be too much for the US economy
Apr 07, 2013 | marknesop.wordpress.com

Moscow Exile ,

April 7, 2013 at 12:46 am
Western hypocrisy revealed 10 years after the event in today's Independent: "Tony Blair and Iraq: The damning evidence" . And they go on and on about those wicked, evil Russians and their tyrannical leader causing death and destruction Syria by their "support" of the Assad government whilst the West arms the "freedom fighters" there.

[Nov 04, 2020] Neocons flock to Biden- It's All About Jewish Values by Kevin MacDonald

Nov 04, 2020 | www.unz.com

Neocons Flock to Biden: It's All About Jewish Values KEVIN MACDONALD OCTOBER 30, 2020 1,300 WORDS 24 COMMENTS REPLY Tweet Reddit Share Share Email Print More Bill Kristol, 2011. Credit: Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 3.0

Probably the least surprising news you will hear in this election season, from Philip Weiss, " Neoconservatives are flocking to Biden (and let's forget about the Iran deal."

Neoconservatives are flocking to the Biden campaign. The DC braintrust that believes in using US military power to aid Israel in the Middle East has jumped parties before– to Clinton in '92, and back to Bush in 2000– and now they're hopping aisles to support Biden, with Bill Kristol leading the way.

Last night on an official Biden campaign webinar led by "Jewish Americans for Biden", and moderated by Ann Lewis of Democratic Majority for Israel, two prominent neocon Republicans endorsed Biden, primarily because of Trump's character posing a danger to democracy. But both neocons emphasized that Biden would be more willing to use force in the Middle East and reassured Jewish viewers that Biden will seek to depoliticize Israel support, won't necessarily return to the Iran deal and will surround himself with advisers who support Israel and believe in American military intervention.

Eliot Cohen, a Bush aide and academic , echoed the fear that Israel is being politicized. "A lot of Jews made a big mistake by taking something I was in favor of, moving the embassy to Jerusalem and obsessing about that," he said. But there was huge political risk in that: if the United States is internally divided, at war with itself, and "Israel has become a partisan issue, which it should never ever be . That's not in Israel's longterm security interest."

Biden will reverse that trend by appointing strong supporters of Israel, Cohen said.

"Joe Biden has a long record as a friend of Israel. I think we're both quite familiar with the kinds of people who will go into a Biden administration and I think we feel very comfortable that they will have a deep and abiding concern for Israel which is not going to go away."

Edelman also said that Trump has created many "dangers" in the region by not being aggressive:

"By withdrawing or threatening to withdraw US forces, by repeatedly not replying or dealing with Iranian aggression in the Persian Gulf or against Saudi oil infrastructure, he's created a sort of vacuum that is being filled in Libya by Russia and by Turkey "

Biden will work with allies and be ready to use U.S. military in the region– or as Edelman said, "to play."

"The region is a mess," Edelman said. "And yet the president continually says he wants the U.S. to withdraw from the region. The reality is that the withdrawal of US power form the region has helped create this morass of threats."

He cited three war zones in which the U.S. or proxies' bombing is essential to U.S. security, Libya, Yemen and Syria.

In Syria, "The Trump administration pulled out and said, we don't want to play here," Edelman said.

"Other forces are going to fill the vacuum created by the absence of US leadership and they won't be benign forces," Edelman said. Iran, Russia, or Turkey will come in and create a "vortex of instability that can potentially come back to haunt us" -- with terrorist attacks or the disruption of energy markets.

Cohen and Edelman opposed Obama's Iran deal, and both predicted that Biden will be hawkish on Iran.

In other words, Trump has failed the Israel Lobby because he has tried to pull our US forces from the Middle East and, although he has laid down sanctions against Iran, he has not gone to war. Of course, these are the people who promoted the ongoing disaster of the Iraq war. They are probably right that Russia and Turkey would benefit from US pulling out completely (Libya??), but where are legitimate US interests in all this? Trump ran on ending Middle East wars and getting out of the region–the original reason the neocons jumped ship (in addition to fears of a nascent Orange Hitler). Despite being president he has been unable to do so. He has been strongly opposed by the foreign policy establishment and the Pentagon -- a testament to the extent to which the US security establishment is Israel-occupied territory.

Lurking in the background of the attitudes of Cohen and Edelman is the idea that Biden would tame the forces on the left that have been so critical of Israel in recent years. With Biden they get it all: Strongly pro-Israel even to the point of initiating a war with Iran, taming the anti-Israel voices on the left (Kamala Harris with her Jewish husband s not among them), and perhaps a Senate led by Israel operative Chuck Schumer. Meanwhile the Republican Party would default to the Chamber of Commerce and the remaining neocons, and the hope of a nationally competitive GOP, much less a truly populist GOP, would die. Bill Kristol loves the prospect of a long-term Democrat domination.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1322199336340594688&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Farticle%2Fneocons-flock-to-biden-its-all-about-jewish-values%2F&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=500px

And of course, all of these bellicose proposals are cloaked in a veneer of "Jewish values" -- not so ironic if one assumes, as is certainly the case, that promoting war for specifically Jewish interests is indeed a Jewish value.

Cohen spoke about Jewish values. He and his family belong to an orthodox synagogue and have raised four children with a religious education. "I've tried to live my life by Jewish values. One thing that's very important for Jewish Republicans. Obviously the issue of Israel is important, it's the only Jewish state, it's important to look after it and for it to thrive, but what is our approach to politics?" Jews don't believe that you Render unto God the things that are God and render unto Caesar the thing that are Caesar's and therefore not take issue with a politician's character "so long as they do what we want them to do." He said, "That's not the Jewish way." In the Book of Samuel, the king engages "in despicable behavior," and the prophet storms into his bedroom. "We believe that character matters." And this election is about character.

Okay, Trump is not a saint. But given that Biden is up to his eyeballs in scandal doesn't bother Cohen at all -- despite overwhelming documentation. So we are not supposed to care that the Biden family raked in millions by using Biden's influence to alter US foreign policy or that China could easily blackmail him into doing their bidding on trade and military issues. So in the end, it's really about what Cohen, Edelman, Kristol, et al. think is good for Israel (Jennifer Rubin and Max Boot jumped the GOP ship even before Trump was elected). Again, count me unsurprised.

And of course, the other thing is that neocons have always been on the left within the Republican Party. One might say they have attempted to not only make Israel a bi-partisan issue (their first priority) but also promoting the liberal/left social agenda, such as replacement-level non-White immigration, as a bipartisan issue -- both values strongly promoted by the mainstream Jewish community. They jumped ship mainly because Trump was promising to undo the liberal/left social agenda as well as disengage from foreign wars and US occupation of the Middle East. During the 2016 campaign, some of the strongest denunciations of Trump came from neocons (" Jewish Fear and Loathing of Donald Trump: Neocon Angst about a Fascist America" ).

If you haven't seen it, Carlson's interview with Bobulinski is damning, and the documents he refers to have been thoroughly authenticated.

https://www.dailymotion.com/embed/video/x7x4b9v

BCB232 , says: October 31, 2020 at 11:31 am GMT • 4.0 days ago

Trump kisses plenty of Kosher ass but he's a wildcard to them. Clearly, Biden can be controlled.

anarchyst , says: October 31, 2020 at 1:13 pm GMT • 3.9 days ago

Trump has been dealing with jews all of his life and knows what they are like. This is a double-edged sword for jews as he is wise to their dishonest criminality and double-dealing and is able to work around their machinations and dishonesty.
This s why (some) jews hate him. If he wanted to, he could expose them for what they truly are
To Trump's credit, he has his own security detail interspersed within his Secret Service protection team making possible harm or actions against him difficult if not impossible. A good thing

El Dato , says: October 31, 2020 at 2:48 pm GMT • 3.8 days ago
@Anon

Only if Jordan gets to have a sea port on the Med in exchange. That's a fair deal.

El Dato , says: October 31, 2020 at 2:51 pm GMT • 3.8 days ago
@BCB232

Yeah, we need more info about how Prez Kamala sees this issue.

Phibbs , says: October 31, 2020 at 4:34 pm GMT • 3.8 days ago

I truly believe that Jews are the strongest assets Satan has. They are constantly forcing us super-stupid Gentiles into wars for Israel. We have Gentile-American soldiers (Jews don't serve) facing off against my white Christian brothers, mainly to be a counter-balance to Iranian forces in the country who are battling U.S.-backed terrorists. Jews hate Russians because they are white Christians and they actually hate us white-Christians in America, too. (For now, we are simply useful idiots for them.) It is time that we Gentiles wake up and kick every single last Jew out of this country before the Jews get us all killed!

Jus' Sayin'... , says: October 31, 2020 at 5:10 pm GMT • 3.7 days ago
@Anon

Payback would be fair play. Israel forestalled its defeat in 1973 by threatening to start a nuclear war. https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2002/09/16/Yom-Kippur-Israels-1973-nuclear-alert/64941032228992/ . It would be poetic justice if war mongering Israel were to be eliminated in a full scale nuclear war.

L. Guapo , says: October 31, 2020 at 5:11 pm GMT • 3.7 days ago

DJT has done a good job of separating the J wheat from the chaff so to speak. Unfortunately, it's the chaff that seems to have all the power money and influence. For now.

conatus , says: October 31, 2020 at 7:28 pm GMT • 3.6 days ago

Who paid for all this peace in the Middle East?
American tax money was used to
De-stabilize Iraq
De-stabilize Libya
De-stabilize Syria

Only Iran is left as a major power in the Middle East.

Let's get the draft going to get our brave boys and girls(and LGBTQ) fighting to maintain peace in the Middle East.
We ALL need to give until we can give no more.
Maybe draft exemptions for the Ivy League, someone has to tell us what to do.

Ricko , says: October 31, 2020 at 8:09 pm GMT • 3.6 days ago

Jewish promoted Critical Race Theory believes and teaches that systemic racism is the main reason why blacks commit criminal acts. Therefore the response to the disparity between White and Black crime is to alter the standards, i.e., change White expections of the Black community. Because to say to Black Americans that they must alter their behavior to meet the current standards is racist.

Samuel Krasner, the Jewish DA in Philadelphia, is aboard with this. He decriminalised shoplifting in his jurisdiction. And we now have shoplifters walking out of stores with armfuls of stolen goods whilst smiling in the cameras and saying, 'I can't be prosecuted.'

Then there is this unbelievable piece of BS legislation from Virginia: "Virginia legislature passes bill preventing cops from stopping cars with no headlights, brake lights, etc."

https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/virginia-passes-law-that-prevents-enforcement-of-equipment-violations/

When Virginia state legislator who sponsored the bill, Patrick Hope, was asked about this by a reporter from The Daily Press he responded by saying he didn't know that police were no longer allowed to stop vehicles for not having their lights illuminated.

Patrick Hope sponsored a bill without actually knowing what was in it! If you think at this stage that Patrick Hope is a hopeless idiot he gets worse.

When the importance of working brake lights on vehicles was mentioned to Hope he said: "The brake lights -- I'm not concerned about that as a safety issue -- but I can certainly see how headlights could be of concern ."

A Virginia state legislator is dumb enough to believe that brake lights have no importance whatsoever to road safety in his state.

The modern United States? You couldn't f ** king make it up! By the way, who are the majority people driving defective cars in Virginia? Blacks and other newly arrived minorities, of course.

Would the local authorities in any part of Israel decriminalise shoplifting for a minority demographic in their area? Not likely. How about Samuel Krasner, would he recommend that crime be legalised for minorities in the state of Israel? No, he wouldn't. He's not stupid. He would not do anything that would destroy his native country.

Would an utter idiot like Hope be allowed to introduce insane life endangering legislation in Israel? No, his Jew financial backers would not allow that.

But, Trump or no Trump, all this is coming to your local area of America very soon.

It's amazing. It's astounding. A cursory look shows there are Jews behind every act of destruction against White America and its founding culture.

The Jews are driving the de-educating of American youth, they've staffed 90% of the media with lying, immoral and shameless journalists and installed unintelligent and easily corruptible politicians in both US political parties.

As we see with Hope, the Jews have made possible state legislators who are so stupid that they are probably suffering from mental health issues. What's very sad is that there's hardly a peep from the great American public against them.

The Jews who first suggested making anti-semitism a crime in the West actually said to their comtemperies at the time that it was just a "pipe dream." They never actually thought in their wildest dreams that Western people and politicians would accept the lie that anti-Jewishness was systemic in the West and needed laws to counteract it.

But, unbelievably for them, they easily got their anti-Semitism legislation enacted. And then, enboldened, they drove ahead with Holocaust denial and all the other BS.

Now, as we see with the headlights, brake lights and the decriminalising of shoplifting for Blacks, the Jews have become viciously emboldened. They've learned that European provenanced Whites will accept any and all Bull S ** t that is thrown at them.

Shame on all Americans for sitting idly by whilst the tiny Jew demographic urines on all that your forefathers built and fought for.

If your descents are Islamist slaves policed by Blacks in the latter half of this century (all ruled from on-high by the Jews) they'll deserve it. They'll deserve it because their fathers and grandfathers were idle and lazy cowards who sat on their butts while the great inheritance which they were bequeathed was pulled out from under them.

BTW: Who had secured a vantage point in New York in September 2001 from which to watch the planes fly into the buildings? And who then danced and cheered energetically as the planes hit the buildings and killed 2,977 people?

Surely, you might think, it was Arabic Islamists, or Pakistanis, or some other race of Muslims.

You'd be wrong if you thought this.

The correct answer is "five Israelis". Yes, it was five Jews who danced and sang as 2,977 Americans were murdered in cold blood.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12768362.five-israelis-were-seen-filming-as-jet-liners-ploughed-into-the-twin-towers-on-september-11-2001/

Verymuchalive , says: November 2, 2020 at 8:53 am GMT • 2.0 days ago
@Lot el. Cursed with the loss of thousands of American lives resulting from such actions. Cursed with the loss of tens of thousand of non-American lives from such actions. All this for a shitty little country with which America doesn't even have a defence treaty.

Our Steadfast Ally ? The USS Liberty, Jonathan Pollard and the Israeli selling of American defence technology to China immediately spring to mind. There is no defence treaty between America and Israel. Israel is not America's ally. Rather it is a parasite on the American body politic. Either Americans rip the parasite off their body, or it will eventually kill America.

[Nov 03, 2020] Election Day- One Thing's for Sure, an Interventionist Will Win - Antiwar.com Original

Nov 03, 2020 | original.antiwar.com

Election Day: One Thing's for Sure, an Interventionist Will Win

by Dave DeCamp Posted on November 03, 2020

The 2020 presidential election is here. Americans are turning out in record numbers to vote, with pre-election voting surpassing two-thirds of the number of all ballots cast in 2016 . The country is divided, and the two major-party candidates are presented as starkly different options. But one thing Donald Trump and Joe Biden have in common is their admiration for the US empire, and both candidates have plans to keep the war machine chugging along.

Comparing the foreign policy of a second Trump term to a new Biden administration is tough. There are certain areas where Trump is marginally better, and there are areas where a Biden administration could be better.

Afghanistan is one place where Trump seems superior to Biden. Although Trump dropped a record number of bombs on Afghanistan in 2018 and 2019 , the US-Taliban peace deal signed in February paved the way for a complete US withdrawal by Spring 2021. The timing of the withdrawal means Trump could reverse the plan after being elected for a second term, but he seems committed to ending this one war. Biden, on the other hand, said in an interview with Stars and Stripes in September that he cannot promise a full withdrawal from Afghanistan and that he favors keeping a small troop presence in the country.

Biden said the same for Syria and Iraq in the Stripes interview, two other countries Trump has said he would like to get out of. Regarding Syria, Trump failed miserably to follow through on a withdrawal and decided to stay in the country to "secure" the oil . Besides the criminality of occupying a sovereign country to steal its resources, the small US occupation force risks confrontation with Russia. With Syrian President Bashar al-Assad being a favorite enemy of the Democratic establishment, it's possible the number of US troops in the Syria could increase under a Biden administration.

In Iraq, the US recently announced its plan to draw down troops from 5,200 to 3,000 . Trump says he wants a full withdrawal from the country , where US troops are no longer welcome since the assassination of Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani. Iraq's parliament voted unanimously to expel US troops after Trump's enormous provocation towards Iran that brought the region to the brink of a major new war. Trump's Iran policy clashes with his desire to withdraw from Iraq. It's likely the Iran hawks driving the "maximum pressure" campaign would not want to give up bases in Iraq, which could serve as a launchpad for attacks against Iran.

Iran is one area where Biden could be much better than Trump. The "maximum pressure" campaign against the Islamic Republic has been disastrous and shows no sign of waning. Biden has said he would work with Iran to restore the 2015 Iran nuclear deal , a foreign policy achievement of the Obama administration.

Recent comments from Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) suggest Biden will face pressure from both Republicans and Democrats to try to make a tougher deal with Iran. Menendez said Biden should seek an agreement that further restricts Iran's nuclear and military capabilities, something Tehran would never agree to before sanctions relief. Biden will also face pressure from Israel to be tough on Iran.

Some believe Biden is the most pro-Israel presidential nominee ever from either side of the aisle. President Trump has arguably been the most pro-Israel president of all time, recognizing Jerusalem as the country's capital, recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, changing US policy to no longer consider Jewish settlements in the West Bank illegal, and the so-called "Vision for Peace" that would essentially formalize apartheid rule over Palestinians.

Biden says he opposes Israeli annexation of the West Bank, but there's no reason to believe he would reverse any of Trump's policies, like moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, something Biden said he would not change . As far annexation, the Israelis have decided to hold off on annexing portions of the West Bank allocated to them in Trump's plan and are going back to the slower, more politically palatable form of annexation, through settlements , something Biden would probably not interfere with.

Perhaps the worst stain on the Trump administration is the war in Yemen. President Trump chose to continue this genocidal war in April 2019, when he vetoed a war powers resolution passed by Congress that called for an end to US military involvement in Yemen. The president did it again in July 2019, when he vetoed three separate resolutions that would have banned US arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Experts agree , if the US cuts off support for the Saudis in Yemen, the war would quickly come to an end.

Joe Biden has repeatedly said he would end US support for the war in Yemen. "Under a Biden-Harris administration, we will reassess our relationship with the Kingdom, end US support for Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen, and make sure America does not check its values at the door to sell arms or buy oil," the former vice president said in a statement on the anniversary of Jamal Khashosggi's death.

President Trump also significantly escalated the war against al-Qaeda in Yemen and carried out more ground and air operations in the country than the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama combined. Trump also broke records in Somalia. The first seven months of 2020 saw more US airstrikes on the African country than under Bush and Obama combined. With virtually no opposition in Washington to the drone war against al-Shabab in Somalia, the Biden administration would likely continue the campaign.

There's no telling which candidate would be worse on Russia and China. Despite every liberal news outlet saying otherwise, President Trump has been extremely hawkish on Russia . One area where Biden outshines Trump with respect to Moscow is arms control treaties. The Trump administration has withdrawn from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty , which banned medium-range missiles, and the Open Skies Treaty , which allowed unarmed aerial surveillance between its signatories.

The New START is the last nuclear arms control treaty between the US and Russia and will expire in February 2021. Russia has repeatedly offered to extend the agreement for five years with no preconditions, but the Trump administration is demanding more and seems to be intentionally sabotaging the vital treaty . If the New START expires, there will be no constraint on the US and Russia's nuclear arsenal for the first time in decades, setting up a new nuclear arms race, something the Trump administration seems prepared for . Biden's policy plan says he will pursue the extension of New START and use it as a foundation for new arms control treaties. Despite being better on arms control, Biden would still be a Russia hawk. In an interview with 60 Minutes in October , Biden identified Russia as the greatest national security threat to the US and said China is Washington's greatest competitor.

In the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, the Trump administration's hawkish China policies have been thrown into hyper-drive. The US has increased its military presence in the Indo-Pacific, frequently sending warships into the South China Sea and flying spy planes near China's coast . Although they got bogged down in the Middle East, the Obama administration started the "pivot to Asia," and a Biden administration would likely continue boosting the US military presence in the region.

One of the Trump administration's most embarrassing failures is its Venezuela policy, which Trump appointed washed up neocon Elliot Abrams to run. Since January 2019, the US has recognized Juan Guaido as the president of Venezuela, despite Nicolas Maduro still holding power in Caracas. Guaido's coup attempts were utter failures , and the crippling economic sanctions on the country have done nothing but made the civilian population suffer . Democrats criticize Trump for his Venezuela policy, not for the harm it does to the people, but because it failed to depose Maduro .

Another disgraceful thing about the Trump administration is the attempt to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for exposing US war crimes. On the campaign trail in 2016, Trump praised WikiLeaks for exposing corruption in the DNC. After Assange was arrested in the UK, Trump said he knew "nothing" about WikiLeaks .

The British judge presiding over Assange's extradition case is expected to make a decision in January 2021. This author has little faith that Joe Biden would drop the charges against Assange since he has previously likened the WikiLeaks founder to a "hi-tech terrorist." It's clear Biden does not consider Assange to be a journalist.

Unfortunately, the issues listed above are far down on the list of priorities for Americans today. Throughout the pandemic, the civil unrest, and the antics surrounding the election, the drones have continued to buzz, the bombs continued to fall, and the sanctions continued to strangle economies. While these crimes committed by the empire are just background noise to the subjects living within the 50 states, they are absolutely everything to the people affected.

It's tough to blame Americans for their lack of awareness of their country's murderous foreign policy. The corporate press ignores the atrocities going on overseas and amplifies the skirmishes on the streets of the US between people with opposing political views. It's easy to keep people unaware of the mass-murder funded by their tax dollars on the other side of the world while they are fighting with each other.

The lack of concern over US foreign policy was put on stark display by the two presidential debates. The two men auditioning to control the military of the largest empire in the history of the world didn't even have to tell the voters what they plan to do with it. The best the candidates could muster up was some tough talk on Russia and China, and Biden criticized one of the few good things Trump did in his term – meeting with North Korea's Kim Jong-un.

For these reasons, it is more important than ever for independent media outlets like Antiwar.com to continue to shine a light on the crimes of the empire, even when so few care. We can guarantee that no matter who wins on Tuesday, we will cover their foreign policy critically. And if by some freak chance Libertarian Party candidate Jo Jorgensen wins, we will not rest until she fulfills her plan to withdraw US troops from every foreign country.

While our staff might celebrate Trump's declarations to bring the troops home and is hopeful Biden would end the war in Yemen, we are under no illusions. The major-party options this year are this: An incumbent president who campaigned on ending "endless war" but has only escalated them or a lifelong politician who led the charge in the Senate to give George W Bush his invasion of Iraq and now lies about it . Antiwar.com needs your help to cover the interventionist foreign policy of whichever candidate wins on Tuesday. Consider making a donation today , and spread the word. Tell your friends and family about us and help make Washington's imperialist wars part of the national conversation.

Dave DeCamp is the assistant news editor of Antiwar.com and is based in Richmond, VA. Follow him on Twitter @decampdave .

Facebook Twitter WhatsApp Reddit LinkedIn Tumblr Email Print

https://www.facebook.com/v3.1/plugins/like.php?app_id=0&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df3e2c2259f2fc38%26domain%3Doriginal.antiwar.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Foriginal.antiwar.com%252Ff80f25bbbd739c%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&href=https%3A%2F%2Foriginal.antiwar.com%2Fdave_decamp%2F2020%2F11%2F02%2Felection-day-one-things-for-sure-an-interventionist-will-win%2F&layout=button&locale=en_US&ref=addtoany&sdk=joey&width=90

[Nov 03, 2020] Podcast- Empire Has No Clothes, The Origins of U.S. Supremacy with Stephen Wertheim

Nov 02, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com
|

4:59 PM

DANIEL LARISON

On this edition of Empire Has No Clothes, Matt, Kelley, and Daniel speak to Stephen Wertheim, deputy director of research and policy at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. He discusses his new book, Tomorrow, the World , the rise of American global supremacy, and why that idea is now breaking down. We also talk about the foreign policy presidential debate that wasn't and the upcoming election.

Listen to the episode in the player below, or click the links beneath it to subscribe using your favorite podcast app. If you like what you hear, please give us a rating or review on iTunes or Stitcher, which will really help us climb the rankings, allowing more people to find the show.

[Nov 02, 2020] What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change-

Nov 02, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change? worldblee , Oct 31 2020 17:02 utc | 1

Pepe Escobar is as pessimistic about a Harris (Biden) administration as I am. The incoming foreign policy team would be the return of the blob that waged seven wars during the Obama/Biden administration:

Taking a cue from [the Transition Integrity Project], let's game a Dem return to the White House – with the prospect of a President Kamala taking over sooner rather than later. That means, essentially, The Return of the Blob.

President Trump calls it "the swamp". Former Obama Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes – a mediocre hack – at least coined the funkier "Blob", applied to the incestuous Washington, DC foreign policy gang, think tanks, academia, newspapers (from the Washington Post to the New York Times), and that unofficial Bible, Foreign Affairs magazine.

A Dem presidency, right away, will need to confront the implications of two wars: Cold War 2.0 against China, and the interminable, trillion-dollar GWOT (Global War on Terror), renamed OCO (Overseas Contingency Operations) by the Obama-Biden administration.

The Democratic White House team Escobar describes (Clinton, Blinken, Rice, Flournoy) would be an assembly of well known war mongers who all argue for hawkish policies. The main 'enemies', Russia and China, would be the same as under Trump. Syria, Venezuela, Iran and others would stay on the U.S. target list. U.S. foreign policy would thereby hardly change from Trump's version but would probably be handled with more deadly competence.

But Escobar sees two potential positive developments:

In contrast, two near-certain redeeming features would be the return of the US to the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal, which was Obama-Biden's only foreign policy achievement, and re-starting nuclear disarmament negotiations with Russia. That would imply containment of Russia, not a new all-out Cold War, even as Biden has recently stressed, on the record, that Russia is the "biggest threat" to the US.

I believe that Harris (Biden) will disappoint on both of those issues. The neoconservatives have already infested the Harris (Biden) camp. They will make sure that JCPOA does not come back :

Last night on an official Biden campaign webinar led by "Jewish Americans for Biden", and moderated by Ann Lewis of Democratic Majority for Israel, two prominent neocon Republicans endorsed Biden, primarily because of Trump's character posing a danger to democracy. But both neocons emphasized that Biden would be more willing to use force in the Middle East and reassured Jewish viewers that Biden will seek to depoliticize Israel support, won't necessarily return to the Iran deal and will surround himself with advisers who support Israel and believe in American military intervention.

Eric Edelman, a former diplomat and adviser to Dick Cheney, said Trump's peace plan has fostered an open political divide in the U.S. over Israel, ...

Eliot Cohen, a Bush aide and academic, echoed the fear that Israel is being politicized. ...
...
Cohen and Edelman opposed Obama's Iran deal, and both predicted that Biden will be hawkish on Iran.
...
"There will be voices" in the Biden administration that seek a return to the Iran deal, but the clock has been running for four years, and we're in a different place, he said. And "it will be hard [for Biden] not to use the leverage that the sanctions provide in part because Iran is not abiding by a lot of the limits of the nuclear agreement They're about three, maybe four months away from having enough fissile material to actually develop a nuclear weapon."

For lifting the sanctions against Iran the Harris (Biden) administration will demand much more than Iran's return to the limits of the JCPOA. Iran will reject all new demands, be they about restricting its missile force or limiting its support for Syria. The conflict will thereby continue to fester.

The other issue is arms control. While a Harris (Biden) administration may take up Putin's offer to unconditionally prolong the New-START agreement for a year it will certainly want more concessions from Russia than that country is willing to give. Currently it is Russia that has the upper hand in strategic weapons with already deployed hypersonic missiles and other new platforms. The U.S. will want to fill the new 'missile gap' and the military-industrial complex stands ready to profit from that. The New-START prolongation will eventually run out and I do not see the U.S. agreeing to new terms while Russia has a technological superiority.

Domestic policies under a democratic president will likewise see no substantial difference. As Krystal Ball remarked, here summarized from a Rolling Stone podcast:

But even with a Biden win, Ball doesn't think it will mean much for policy.

"My prediction for the Biden era is that very little actually happens," says Ball. "Democrats are very good at feigning impotence. We saw this in the SCOTUS hearings as well. They're very good for coming up with reasons why, 'oh those mean Republicans, like we want to do better healthcare and we want left wages, but oh gosh, Mitch McConnell, he's so wiley, we can't get it done.'"

'Change' was an Obama marketing slogan to sell his Republican light policies. A real change never came. The Harris (Biden) administration must be seen in similar light.

I therefore agree with the sentiment with which Escobar closes his piece :

In a nutshell, Biden-Harris would mean The Return of the Blob with a vengeance. Biden-Harris would be Obama-Biden 3.0. Remember those seven wars. Remember the surges. Remember the kill lists. Remember Libya. Remember Syria. Remember "soft coup" Brazil. Remember Maidan. You have all been warned.
Posted by b at 16:45 UTC | Comments (183) I have been trying to set the expectations for my deluded Democratic, pro-tech industry, pro-security state friends and colleagues who think they are forward-thinking progressives but actually just hate Trump as emblematic of non-college educated blue collar types they prefer not to associate with. Biden himself said it, "Nothing will change," and Obama deported many more people in his first term than Trump has to pick but one issue. There will be no M4A, little change in foreign policy, no major stimulus for workers, etc. But since the face in the White House will have changed, they will convince themselves that America has changed and it was all thanks to them...

One major change I expect to see is that BLM protests will fade into the background if Harris/Biden is elected. Without the need to pressure an administration the elites want to get rid of, there won't be the funding and energy to sustain it. But America will continue on the same downward trajectory and the same divisions will still exist with no remediation in sight.

Michael , Oct 31 2020 17:18 utc | 2

Great and accurate summary! Thank you.

Given our future circumstance I've been pondering bumper stickers that will help me get pulled over by the Stasi. Two come to mind immediately:

Wars R US! Biden 2020!
and from a photo on some recent web page

Defund the Elite!

Laguerre , Oct 31 2020 17:25 utc | 3
Really, so what? You have a choice between chaotic anarchic corruption, and organised professional corruption. Is it not better to have the calm, predictable, version - at least you know what you're getting. In any case I am not sure Biden would be able to go back to launching new wars so easily. The US gives the impression of being over-stretched as it is.
ToivoS , Oct 31 2020 17:25 utc | 4
It seems clear that Biden will win. This means that the possibility of a serious military confrontation with Russia is more likely than it would be with a Trump win. In any Biden cabinet Michelle Flournoy will have a major voice. She would have likely become Hillary's Secretary of Defense. In August of 2016 Flournoy wrote a major foreign policy article advocating a 'no fly' zone over Syria. That would have meant that the US military would have been obliged to prevent the Russia airforce from operating in Syrian skies (even though, the Syrian government had invited the Russians to be there). No one really knows if Flournoy would have been given authority to carry out such insanity had Hillary won, but the consequences of such insane policy are easy to imagine.

But without much doubt, a Biden administration will have Susan Rice and Michelle Flournoy in very high policy positions. Given that Biden is rapidly descending into dementia and Kamala Harris seems utterly clueless, US government foreign policy will very likely be led by a Rice/Flournoy collaboration in the coming years. Of course, China has become a much bigger player in the last four years. Maybe those fools around Biden will be distracted by China and they avoid war with with Russia. In either case it looks like very dangerous times ahead.

NemesisCalling , Oct 31 2020 17:25 utc | 5
Trump was always for me about controlled demolition of the empire.

Putin will not tolerate another ramping up of hostilities in the MENA.

I believe, just as in 2016, open military confrontation with Russia hangs in the balance.

It is believed here and elsewhere that Russia and China are working hand in hand and lockstep to thwart the empire.

They may be trade allies but they are not bed fellows.

Russia will always do what is in its own interest and will be beyond reproach from China come a last-minute attempt for it to talk down hostilities btw Ru and U.S.A.

I hope those peddling the narrative that all is theater and a mere globalist game to keep the peons entertained are correct.

But I fear the stupidity and egoism of man far more than I do their love of money and life of luxury.

steven t johnson , Oct 31 2020 17:31 utc | 6
The JCPOA's "snap back" provisions etc. prove that Obama never intended JCPOA as a long term agreement in the first place. The issue was always how long it would suit, not how long it would take for the US to. Nor is the US going to forego it's support for a colonial assault on the Middle East, aka Israel, any more than England will give up Gibraltar.

That said, there really is a policy debate between attacking Russia first or attacking China first or simultaneously attacking both. The thing is, the conflict will continue after any election. Since the Democratic Party isn't a programmatic party but a franchise operation of Outs, there will be zero unanimity within the Democratic Party and not even a clean sweep of the national government will resolve the dispute, which will be waged with exactly the same panic-mongering, paranoid cries of treason, barely subdued hysteria at the prospect of the lower races overtaking the God-given rights of the US government to exercise imperium (right to punish, particularly with death, originally) over humanity, and so on. The same ignorant vicious halfwits who were convinced Clinton Foundation was worse than the Comintern infiltrating innocent America made assholes of themselves. They'll just do it again over Biden, but with different made up excuses.

Domestically, there will be real differences, albeit some will still consider them entirely minor. There will be less emphasis on military officers masquerading as civilian officials; more emphasis on actually having competent officials who are even confirmed by the Senate; somewhat larger infrastructure investment; somewhat less deliberate destruction of government capacity to deliver services; slightly greater emphasis on keeping money valuable by limiting government spending, with smaller increases in military spending, slightly greater taxes, and only limited support to state governments going bankrupt, bankrupt unemployment and pension funds; a few restrictions on mass evictions; no separation of families in ICE prisons; open appeals to racism will cease. There will not however be any Medicare expansion, nor will there be a radically progressive federal income tax, not even a new bankruptcy law, nor will there be even political reforms like direct popular election of the president or even reform of the judiciary. There may be a minimum wage increase to $15 per hour.

One note: The idea that any president will honor any deal to step down or that a president can be forced down is refuted by history thus far. All theories that Biden is scheduled to be terminated are silly. Or worse, attempts to race bait Harris (note the ones who like to call her by her first name.) The influence exercised by Obama in getting Biden the nomination shows that if Biden is in any sense a puppet, he's Obama's puppet. Fixating on Harris instead is foolish even as some sort of amateur conspiracy mongering. No matter what Obama thinks, the inauguration will sever all puppet strings.

Laguerre , Oct 31 2020 17:36 utc | 7
Posted by: ToivoS | Oct 31 2020 17:25 utc | 4

Can't say I'm convinced by all these threats of wars. They didn't do a No-Fly Zone in Syria when they could, e.g. 2013. The reason it was not done is that it was too difficult to do, and required too vast a military investment. Situation remains true today. You'll find most of Biden's prospective wars fall in the same category.

Kiza , Oct 31 2020 17:40 utc | 8
The US self-declared "progressives" are horribly dumb people, no matter their degrees and "intellectual" professions. Stupidity is the illness (weakness) of the societal immunity system. The Blob of the parasitic class is the pestilence that thrives on the immune weakness of the US society. Not happy with mine, then find a better metaphor.

I repeat myself from before, US presidents change, US policy (Mayhem Inc.) does not. Nether on Russia, Syria, Iran, Venezuela ..., nor on China. If Trump loses, I will miss only the potential duel at the OK Corral between Trump and the Blob/Swamp. If Trmp wins, I am buying popcorn.

erik , Oct 31 2020 17:51 utc | 9
Just, oh my goodness to #6. What a turgid, contradiction filled ramble
c1ue , Oct 31 2020 17:51 utc | 10
@Laguerre #7
I would argue the failure of a "no-fly" zone in Syria was more due to united UN (Russia and China) opposition plus the Russia airbase in Tartus rather than any policy changes in the US.
Jackrabbit , Oct 31 2020 17:55 utc | 11
More pearl-clutching for Trump .

It's everywhere. And matched by Democratic Party ineptitude, fake "resistance", and generally lax attitude (spurred by a false sense of security due to polling numbers that can't be relied upon).

That's why I'm predicting a Trump landslide - including winning the popular vote.

The Deep State wants a 'Glorious Leader' type that can lead the country against Russia and China.

God help us.

!!

Laguerre , Oct 31 2020 17:56 utc | 12
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 17:51 utc | 10

Not a policy change, more that the military will have advised against it, the same problem that has always prevented an attack on Iran.

jo6pac , Oct 31 2020 17:59 utc | 13
KB has it right the demodogs will have better PR but nothing will change. The only thing I hope they do is fully throw the u.s. govt behind stopping the virus and even that will be hard do to many stupid people.

Trumpster and the swamp all he did was change the cruel animals in it and biden will change it back to the other cruel animals that were there before.

Down South , Oct 31 2020 18:00 utc | 14
It is hard to tell what will change if the Democrats win because they have flip flopped on policies so many times that you don't know what they really stand for.

Are they going to ban fracking or not?
Are they going to end the oil industry or not?
Are they going to pack the Supreme Court or not ?
Are they going to implement the Green New Deal or not ?
Are they going to encourage immigration or not ?
Are they going to tear down the Wall?
Are they going to defund the police or not?

Other than #OrangeManBad what do they actually stand for ?
Jonathan Pie lays it out quite nicely
https://youtu.be/IdnHfYbr1cQ

The one issue that is critical is that it is clear than Biden will not make it full term. His mental faculties are deteriorating rapidly. He might just make it over the goal post line but just barely.

Therefore the real question is what will Kamala Harris do?

Russia has a lead in strategic weapons that the US will not be able to catch up with. Hence the US emphasis on nuclear weapons to bridge the gap. Russia has successfully thwarted the empire on several occasions. How will the empire struck back ? (So as not to lose credibility with allies and vassals alike)

There are too many unknowns.

Down South , Oct 31 2020 18:06 utc | 15
Another look at what a Biden win may mean by Philip Giraldi.

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/10/29/disappearing-america-progressives-want-a-revolution-not-just-change/

Malchik Ralf , Oct 31 2020 18:08 utc | 16
They are going to reduce government subsidies for fracking
And encourage the oil industry's ongoing retooling to other energies
They are going to expand the SCOTUS to 13 seats in keeping with the number of Circuit Courts
They are going to implement environmental legislation and policies
They will hopefully try to adopt a comprehensive policy on immigration and naturalization
They will abandon The Wall project as pointless
They will review the role of the police in dealing with situations where a social worker or a psychologist (with police escort) might better be able to handle the situation

Kamala Harris will keep an active and high profile as she is being groomed to run in 2024


ptb , Oct 31 2020 18:20 utc | 17
I agree that trajectory in foreign policy will be the same. I think a Trump administration would tend to entrench into the bureaucracy the xenophobic nationalists. This is in contrast to the neoliberal nationalists that make up the Democrat side of the foreign policy clique. In practice the latter ends up carrying water for the neocons, so the difference from the global perspective, the perspective of those on whom the bombs fall, is academic.

Domestically, however, I don't think we can say there's no significant difference. At some point far down the road, there will be a more meaningful internal political struggle in the US. Talking about when the $$ printing power runs out, so several presidential cycles from now at the very earliest, maybe many decades away.

The out-groups targeted by xenophobic nationalism will shift by then - either black or hispanic people will necessarily be included into the Republican party, and the divide may be more a matter of religion or nationality than race, but the overall idea will be the same.

No matter the details, it would be better to go into that conflict without giving the right-wingers a big head start. I think we should admit that Trump does accelerate the process. Maybe readers outside the US take some pleasure in the chaos produced by this, but for anyone actually planning to live within the US, who also objects to unrestrained nationalism, there actually is a pretty high price to pay for peeling off the mask of phony benevolence off of the de-facto imperialist foreign policy.

Down South , Oct 31 2020 18:25 utc | 18
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-30/biden-aides-see-warning-signs-in-black-latino-turnout-so-far
Mark2 , Oct 31 2020 18:29 utc | 19
'b' half the truth isn't the truth, no doubt you'l get round to the other half. It's conspicuous !
In these times focusing on what might happen if we get Biden, is biased.
What in your view might happen if we get trump ?
Given his track record.
Much more relevant I feel.
c1ue , Oct 31 2020 18:30 utc | 20
@Malchik #16
Well, kid, I will guarantee that 2/3rds of what you say will happen with a Biden win, won't happen.
I am particularly struck by your assertion that "super predator" Biden and "Lock 'em up" Harris will do anything to rein in police misbehavior. That is pure fantasy.
As for fracking: the subsidies were primarily by banksters in the form of loans and have long since ended. Nobody believes fracking is going to be a profitable business for at least a decade.
vk , Oct 31 2020 18:32 utc | 21
The only objection I have with supporting Trump's reelection from a non far-right viewpoint is that you would essentially be supporting an anti-democratic process: Trump is certainly going to lose the popular vote. Deserving or not, Biden does represent the absolute majority of adult America. By supporting Trump, you're essentially speaking in the name of the interests of a small redneck aristocracy (of circa 77,000 in size, according to the 2016 election results) in the Rust Belt and Western Pennsylvania. You are supporting white supremacy those rednecks undoubtedly support - wanting you or not.

In my opinion, it's time for the non far-right of the USA to start thinking seriously (specially if you're one of the twelve socialists in the country) in Third Party vote. Yes, you won't pick up the fruits immediately, but at least you're build up a legacy for the generations to come to try to change the landscape.

Now, of course, very little will change with Biden-Harris. But this has a good side, too: it shows the American Empire has clearly reached an exhaustion point, where the POTUS is impotent to the obstacle posed by China-Russia. Putin has already publicly stated he doesn't care who's next POTUS; China has already stated what the USA does or decides won't mean shit. Maybe the rising irrelevance of the POTUS is good in the greater scheme of things - or, at least, it gives us new, very precious, information about the core of the Empire.

Jackrabbit , Oct 31 2020 18:35 utc | 22
Is b really suggesting Trump is more peaceful than Biden?

The notion that Trump is fundamentally different than Biden or Hillary or Obama or Bush is specious. They are all on Team Deep State, which serves the monied class.

And the pretense that the Deep State is divided or partisan is equally laughable.

Strange that so many smart people fall for the shell game behind the 'Illusion of Democracy'. Is it so difficult to see the reshuffling of deck chairs and entertaining diversions that pass for "US politics"?

!!

Bemildred , Oct 31 2020 18:35 utc | 23
Biden will bring fresh blood to the Presidency, just you watch.

But seriously, things have been changing very rapidly all of my life, and accelerating as we go. I don't see that the political/managerial classes here are up to the job of managing that change, have shown any aptitude for it or understanding of it in the past either. They remain focussed on their depraved personal ambitions and demented interpersonal disputes. So no change in the midst of lots of change is what I expect, time to keep an eye out and consider ones options.

dh , Oct 31 2020 18:37 utc | 24
@14 Will they fund a task force to deliver a preliminary report on reparations?
Down South , Oct 31 2020 18:47 utc | 25
vk @ 21
By supporting Trump, you're essentially speaking in the name of the interests of a small redneck aristocracy (of circa 77,000 in size, according to the 2016 election results) in the Rust Belt and Western Pennsylvania. You are supporting white supremacy those rednecks undoubtedly support - wanting you or not.

Jesus but that is an ignorant comment. Michael Moore explained 4 years ago why Trump will win the election (2016)
https://youtu.be/vMm5HfxNXY4
div> @vk #21
You said:
The only objection I have with supporting Trump's reelection from a non far-right viewpoint is that you would essentially be supporting an anti-democratic process: Trump is certainly going to lose the popular vote.

The United States has a Constitution and was designed as a Republic.
"Democracy" as in majoritarian rule was explicitly designed against by the Founding Fathers.
Thus your criticism is utterly irrelevant. Until the Electoral College system is changed by Constitutional Amendment, or the United States of America is overthrown by a revolution, all this talk about "majoritarian demos rule" is purely partisan nonsense.
Note also that the 48 states which are "first past the post" are all disenfranchising the minority views. I 100% guarantee that a European style ranked vote system would see far more minority votes be submitted than the present systems.
Deserving or not, Biden does represent the absolute majority of adult America. By supporting Trump, you're essentially speaking in the name of the interests of a small redneck aristocracy (of circa 77,000 in size, according to the 2016 election results) in the Rust Belt and Western Pennsylvania. You are supporting white supremacy those rednecks undoubtedly support - wanting you or not.
Wow, thanks for showing your "deplorables" views. Anyone against the "right" and "proper" Democrat sellouts to pharma, tech and enviro must be rednecks. It is precisely this view that galvanized the vote against HRC in 2016.

Posted by: c1ue , Oct 31 2020 18:50 utc | 26

@vk #21
You said:
The only objection I have with supporting Trump's reelection from a non far-right viewpoint is that you would essentially be supporting an anti-democratic process: Trump is certainly going to lose the popular vote.

The United States has a Constitution and was designed as a Republic.
"Democracy" as in majoritarian rule was explicitly designed against by the Founding Fathers.
Thus your criticism is utterly irrelevant. Until the Electoral College system is changed by Constitutional Amendment, or the United States of America is overthrown by a revolution, all this talk about "majoritarian demos rule" is purely partisan nonsense.
Note also that the 48 states which are "first past the post" are all disenfranchising the minority views. I 100% guarantee that a European style ranked vote system would see far more minority votes be submitted than the present systems.
Deserving or not, Biden does represent the absolute majority of adult America. By supporting Trump, you're essentially speaking in the name of the interests of a small redneck aristocracy (of circa 77,000 in size, according to the 2016 election results) in the Rust Belt and Western Pennsylvania. You are supporting white supremacy those rednecks undoubtedly support - wanting you or not.
Wow, thanks for showing your "deplorables" views. Anyone against the "right" and "proper" Democrat sellouts to pharma, tech and enviro must be rednecks. It is precisely this view that galvanized the vote against HRC in 2016.

Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 18:50 utc | 26

c1ue , Oct 31 2020 18:55 utc | 27
@JackRabbit #22
You said
The notion that Trump is fundamentally different than Biden or Hillary or Obama or Bush is specious.

That's not actually true.
Biden has 47 years of track record to rely on.
HRC, ditto.
Bush is umpteenth generation Bush in government (100 years plus).
Obama was groomed through Harvard, community organization and Senate position as a servant of the oligarchy.
Trump is a billionaire and 2nd generation wealthy, but he neither shares the views of the oligarch classes - his historical behavior is clear proof of that - nor is he predictable as the other 4 are.
If presented with a neocon view - all 4 of the above would 100% agree.
Trump? 85%.
That is a difference albeit absolutely not world changing.
Hoyeru , Oct 31 2020 18:56 utc | 28
Pure BS.
Giving health care to 20 million poor Americans ain't nothing to sneeze at. Adding pre existing conditions save millions of lives. That's why the right despises Obama so much. How dare he give money to those free loaders!

lets show what the republicans have done for poor Americans besides taking more needex money from them and giving it to their rich buddies.
and No, Democrats cannot do anything if they don't control the Congress. They should have done it 2 years ago but since all they were doing was scream RUSSIAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! at the top of their lungs,the people turned their backs on them.
Bullshit article.

David , Oct 31 2020 18:57 utc | 29

The Democrats are not going to end fracking. It is doomed to collapse without their help. A Wall Street Journal study revealed a remarkable fact that few Americans know; From 2000-2017 fracking companies spent $280 billion more to extract fracked oil and gas than they received in revenue. Fracking is nothing more than a massive Ponzi scheme predicated on the constant issuing of debt and stock. Fracking wells deplete quickly. There is a constant need for more expensive drilling. The remaining areas that will be fracked have less productive wells. Much of the debt fracking companies have issued is back loaded while the well's production is front loaded. There simply isn't going to be enough revenue generated to meet debt obligations. What made the scheme possible was the artificially low interest rates created by the Federal Reserve. There was a demand for yield that drove investment into debt of dubious quality. A crash is inevitable.
c1ue , Oct 31 2020 19:03 utc | 30
@Bemildred #23
You said:
Biden will bring fresh blood to the Presidency, just you watch.

I am curious why you think so.
Biden is nothing, if not a creature of habit (of obedience to his corporate masters).
Biden likely NSC: Tony Blinken. Deputy Secretary of State and Deputy NSC under Obama.
Susan "Bomber" Rice?
John Kerry?
Sally Yates? The one who signed the FISA warrants based on the Steele Dossier (based on 2 drunkard Russians in Malta mad at being fired)
Michael Bloomberg?
Jamie Dimon?
The only "fresh blood" in this group is the teenage blood they inject to try and remain young.
Elizabeth Warren, were Biden to appoint her as Treasury Secretary, *would* constitute fresh blood.
The likelihood of the Senator from MBNA appointing her to that position is zero.
I would love to be wrong in that instance, but it ain't gonna happen.
Mark2 , Oct 31 2020 19:06 utc | 31
What is trumps legacy so far ?
Let's call that -- - 'The Crimes Of Donald Trump'
Well he has legitimised cold blooded murder.
Ditto racism.
Run roughshod over national laws and conventions. -- Invading an embassy. Assange, koshogie murder, white helmit chlorine attack false flag. Funding and arming by US of Isis.
Corporate mansloughter by virus.
Interference in numerous country's internal politics.
Allowing Israel to interfer take over US politics.
The above are a few that comes to mind.

Have we done away with law and order ?

Feel free to add to my 'Crimes of Donald Trump' list.
In a word normalisation.

ToivoS , Oct 31 2020 19:08 utc | 32
Laguerre | Oct 31 2020 17:36 utc | 7

I hope you are right that the US will avoid war in Syria because they would lose. I was, on the other hand, very impressed that Flournoy was advocating that no fly zone in August of 2016. It was on the basis of her article at that time I fled the US Democratic Party. I knew it was bad before, but it suddenly became clear how Hillary would lead us int WWIII.

Jackrabbit , Oct 31 2020 19:10 utc | 33
c1ue @Oct31 18:55 #27

We've talked at moa about how policy doesn't change much between Democrat and Republican Administrations. And we've talked about the Illusion of Democracy.

That each President has a different personality as well as different priorities and challenges during their time in office doesn't indicate any fundamental difference in how we are governed.

!!

Jackrabbit , Oct 31 2020 19:13 utc | 34
Mark2 @Oct31 19:06 #31

Yes, Trump is normalizing the 'Rules Based Order' in which financial and military power dictates what should be.

!!

circumspect , Oct 31 2020 19:16 utc | 35
And Hillary Clinton wants to be Secretary of Defense in a Biden administration. Not only would the world be in trouble I could see her using the DOD internal hit teams to go after her domestic enemies. They will make 8 years of Bush junior look like a Disneyland vacation. It will be similar to the many unsolved murders of Weimar Germany.
Bemildred , Oct 31 2020 19:17 utc | 36
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 19:03 utc | 30

That was sarcasm, I knew it was going to cause trouble, sarcasm never works on the web unless you add a /sarc tag or something, I guess I feel a bit perverse today.

But to be serious, any attempt to predict what comes next here must rely on the idea that the future will be like the past, we extrapolate in other words, from various trends that we pick out. We can expect Biden to remain who he has been in the past, politicfally he's a hack, what we know of Harris does not suggest any principles to speak of either, so I feel more like I want to pay attention to what's coming than trying to predict what they is going to do or not do. That likely depends on "contingencies" just as in the past.

jayc , Oct 31 2020 19:18 utc | 37
#23 - "I don't see that the political/managerial classes here are up to the job of managing that change, have shown any aptitude for it or understanding of it in the past either."

This is a highly relevant observation. For some time the character and intellectual scope of the political/managerial sectors in the West have been noticeably mediocre, and will likely continue as such for the foreseeable future. The necessary reforms of capitalism were vetoed decades ago, ensuring that productive energies would gradually dissipate. For the last decade all the West has had to offer the rest of humanity is neoliberal austerity, colour revolutions, and armament contracts. This is a journey towards an eventual hollowed-out self-imposed isolation, a process the political/managerial sectors are actively encouraging and supporting without realizing it at all.

Piero Colombo , Oct 31 2020 19:18 utc | 38
Interesting to see how the kayfabe vocabulary of Dim propaganda infects everyone's thought and speech. Including b's:

"'Change' was an Obama marketing slogan to sell his Republican light policies."
Republican my eye. Democrat policies, period. A party founded, maintained and run to implement the ruling class empire and war agenda, just like the Repucrats.
As if Obama was some kind of exception. Ditch this language.

Piero Colombo , Oct 31 2020 19:20 utc | 39
Hoyeru @28

"Giving health care to 20 million poor Americans ain't nothing to sneeze at".

On the contrary, it would be a very good thing, to be applauded.
But when, o when, is it ever gonna happen? We've been waiting for it too long.

dfnslblty , Oct 31 2020 19:27 utc | 40
usa is the major unknown;
China and Russia don't need to physically war - they are winning at PR around the globe.
Even tiny Cuba has greatly better creds!
usa needs to be a people who truly and consistently respect their allies.
Which comes back to usa being the major unknown.
'Cept for warmongering.
Don Bacon , Oct 31 2020 19:30 utc | 41
The blob from the swamp wants to be heard with Why Those 780 Top National Security Leaders Support Biden . .think 'Get Russia.'
"All of us who spent careers in the military were raised on the notion that you lead by example, and President Trump has been the antithesis of that in dealing with this pandemic," said Charles "Steve" Abbot, former commander of the U.S. Sixth Fleet and deputy Homeland Security Adviser. "Instead of taking steps that I would call 'Crisis Management 101,' President Trump shirked his duty to the nation by failing to provide the central leadership necessary to get our arms around the problem, and he continues to mislead the entire nation about this terrible threat. The result of that failure of leadership was that his administration committed an unrelenting string of missteps, and the American public has lost trust in what the president tells them."

The sixth Fleet is Europe, so "this terrible threat" must be Russia, which is the natural enemy of the DNC/AtlanticCouncil/NATO unlike Trump the 'Putin-lover.'
And more on anti-Russia, from the article:
President Trump's former national security adviser John Bolton said earlier this year that Trump had repeatedly raised the issue of withdrawing the United States from NATO, and warned of "a very real risk" that Trump would actually follow through in a second term.

Nicholas Burns, former U.S. Ambassador to NATO and the number three official at the State Department, put it this way: "Every modern president since Harry Truman has viewed our commitment to democratic allies around the world as sacrosanct, because for half a century those alliances have been a key source of American power." He noted that a dissolution of NATO is at the top of Russian President Vladimir Putin's wish list. "Under President Trump we have walked away from that global leadership, and, as a result, trust in the United States has plummeted even among our closest friends. That's done enormous damage."

Bemildred , Oct 31 2020 19:35 utc | 42
This is a journey towards an eventual hollowed-out self-imposed isolation, a process the political/managerial sectors are actively encouraging and supporting without realizing it at all.

Posted by: jayc | Oct 31 2020 19:18 utc | 37

I've been sort of fascinated by that for some time, back when I was young we were still smart enough to know we had to compete with the USSR, and that we therefore had to develop our human capital. And we did pretty well for a couple decades, but then after VietNam they stopped doing that and choose the present "system" instead. Thus abandoning their long-term ability to compete, the source of their power in the first place. Banana republics do not compete well. Decadent.

But you have to give credit to the Russians and the Chinese too, their achievements are impressive by any standard. Our enemies, the ones who have survived, have all proved their mettle.

pnyx , Oct 31 2020 19:50 utc | 43
Can be, can be, no expectations in Biden / Harris. Nevertheless, Tronald is definitely not the lesser evil. His foreign policy is also heading for a clash with China, and things are not going well with Russia either. The warmongering anti-Iran axis has his support, the war in Yemen continues, he won't leave Syria alone, his extremely Israel-friendly attitude increases the danger of war. Everything that is suspected of being left-wing in South America is strangled.

In addition, he has an encouraging effect on all the fascists of the world, his disastrous ecological policy, his negative influence on the treatment of the Corona crisis, his general dislike of multilateral organizations and treaties on which the weaker states of the world are compulsorily dependent. Overall, he exerts an extremely negative influence on the entire globe. He should be disposed of.

He will lose the elections, but what happens then is open.

Maureen O , Oct 31 2020 19:57 utc | 44
In 2009, Biden tried very hard to convince Obama not to surge 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan. Obama listened to the generals not his VP.
steven t johnson , Oct 31 2020 20:11 utc | 45
The claim that support for minority rule isn't purely partisan BS is yet another lie. The moral principle in countermajoritarianism like the Founders' is that democracy cannot be allowed to threaten property. Except of course property before democracy, before liberty, before humanity is a vile and disgusting tenet that shames everyone so lost to common decency. The defense that a piece of parchment, a law, makes things moral and righteous and that even opposition is somehow wrong is an offense against common sense. By that standard, the Thirteen, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were the end of freedom in America!

It's one thing to have a mind deranged by rabid hate of your perceived social superiors, but to openly uphold vulgarity is merely snobbery inverted. It is a mean and small minded vice, always, and never a virtue. The Access: Hollywood tape was proof of vulgarity but to defend it as not being proof of a crime but as a positive good is vicious. Vicious is not a synonym for "bad ass." Or if it news, then "bad ass" is a horrible insult.

And, speaking of deranged minds, Wilson was felled by a stroke and Reagan was felled by Alzheimer's, yet they did not fall from power. Quite aside from the question of how anyone could decide who is battier, Trump or Biden, Biden will never be replaced by Harris for incapacity short of a coma.

Linda Amick , Oct 31 2020 20:20 utc | 46
I agree wholeheartedly with the concluding paragraph
Oriental Voice , Oct 31 2020 20:31 utc | 47
A very cogent analysis by b. But I believe the return of the Blob may not be as ominous as feared.

The dangerous component of the Blob's collective fantasy is the confrontation against China and Russia. As late as 4, 5 years ago the prevailing sentiment among Americans, the masses and the elites alike, was one in which The Empire's might was still considered unquestionably dominant and unchallenged. There was penchant for dressing down both China and Russia, and the clumsy maneuvers of the Blob's operators (Obama/Clinton/Bolton/Rice et al) were wholeheartedly supported even if contemptuously regarded for their clumsiness. That sentiment has evaporated, especially after Chinese and Russian military parades as well as American's numerous own infrastructure project failures along with abject performances of Boeing jets and Zumwalt class destroyers. The COVID19 pandemic adds salt to injury.
There is an issue with self confidence now, up and down the hierarchy within the American society, perhaps with the lone exception of Trump's rednecks.

So, the Blob may return with a vengeance but their political capital may be rather meager. They will be all mouth and little substance, as would Trump's prospective second term.

Steve , Oct 31 2020 20:33 utc | 48
I've tuned out of thesilly circus of the US election since the day Biden became the Democratic Party flag bearer.
alaff , Oct 31 2020 20:48 utc | 49
I do not always agree with the opinion of the Saker, but in this matter I tend to support him and can only quote from one of his recent articles :

And, in truth, the biggest difference between Obama and Trump, is that Trump did not start any real wars. Yes, he did threaten a lot of countries with military attacks (itself a crime under international law), but he never actually gave the go ahead to meaningfully attack (he only tried some highly symbolic and totally ineffective strikes in Syria). I repeat – the man was one of the very few US Presidents who did not commit the crime of aggression, the highest possible crime under international law, above crimes against humanity or even genocide, because the crime of aggression "contains within itself the accumulated evil", to use the words of the chief US prosecutor at Nuremberg and Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Robert H. Jackson. I submit that just for this reason alone any decent person should choose him over Biden (who himself is just a front for "President" Harris and a puppet of the Clinton gang). Either that, or don't vote at all if your conscience does not allow you to vote for Trump. But voting Biden is unthinkable for any honest person , at least in my humble opinion.

I am surprised by people who are of the opinion that half-dead Biden, suffering from obvious dementia, is better. If only not Trump.
In 2016, Hilary, in fact, openly stated that she was going to use the so-called 'nuclear blackmail' against the Russian Federation. And there was no guarantee that this crazy old witch, having become president, would not have pressed the very button that launched nuclear missiles at Russia. Four years ago, the choice was between an insane sadistic misanthropist who could actually start a nuclear war, and a "dark horse" businessman with the illusory prospect of some improvement in relations between the two strongest nuclear powers. I do not want to drag in religion and the intervention of higher powers here, but it may not be at all accidental that Trump snatched victory from the witch. Maybe we avoided a nuclear war.

Yes, now both options are bad. But of the two evils, it is better to choose the lesser, which, of course, Trump is.


two near-certain redeeming features would be the return of the US to the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal, which was Obama-Biden's only foreign policy achievement, and re-starting nuclear disarmament negotiations with Russia. That would imply containment of Russia, not a new all-out Cold War , even as Biden has recently stressed, on the record, that Russia is the "biggest threat" to the US.

What? Funny. I thought it was Obama (read Democrats) who started this new Cold War. Just to remind - It was Obama who made the decision to deploy missiles in Poland and Romania, which are a direct threat to Russia. It is Obama & Co who are responsible for the Ukrainian coup, which, in fact, became a trigger for the total deterioration of relations between Russia and the West. It was Obama who began the unprecedented expropriation of Russian diplomatic property in the U.S. and the expulsion of russian diplomats. It was under Obama that "the doping scandal" was organized against Russia. And so on and so on...
Trump just continued what Obama had started. It is strange that Pepe Escobar does not understand this.

Mark2 , Oct 31 2020 20:50 utc | 50
Off topic
Boris Johnson announces Britain will be going into its second fake total lockdown this coming Thursday.
Mark Thomason , Oct 31 2020 20:52 utc | 51
If Iran and/or Venezuela get their oil back on the market, that will cause an oil price crash that would "end fracking." It can't survive oil much under $50/barrel over a long term.

An oil price crash would also effect the larger energy market, making solar and wind less competitive, even though their direct competition is really coal rather than oil.

Huge and powerful constituencies don't care about Iran or Venezuela, but care very much about oil prices staying high. They make common cause now, and will under Biden too.

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 20:53 utc | 52
Well, having given deep consideration to the question and the current advanced state of malady in the USA - I will leave it to Vic as he has summarised the position with minimum fuss - here.

Enjoy this sharp witted, all encompassing 4 minute rant from inside the asylum. I would shout the bar for all with this one.

JohnH , Oct 31 2020 20:58 utc | 53
Biden is an old man. He is a tired man, if not now, then in six months. He has already told wealthy donors that nothing will change. He has no record of leadership. He has no record of achievement, unless you count floating to the top. He will be the establishment's model 'status quo, do-nothing Democrat.

Biden will preside as a figurehead legitimizing the shenanigans of the blob, Wall Street, and the US Chamber of Commerce, and Big Oil. Heck, I doubt that he will even override many of Trump's executive orders, except for the token bone thrown to his delusional supporters.

Harris will be as much a figurehead as Biden. She is utterly unprepared. While she is likable enough, she lacks gravitas and "credibility," which, she will be convinced, can be established only by bombing a few wogs back to the Stone Age.

Both will serve as placeholders until Trump 2.0 arrives in 2024. Elites will sufficiently sabotage the economy until then to assure that Trump 2.0 with neocon values is elected in 2024.

james , Oct 31 2020 21:11 utc | 54
thanks b... i appreciate you highlighting pepe's article... i enjoyed it.. terms like "Kaganate of Nulandistan", " The Three Harpies" and etc...

i still like the dynamic between joe rogan and glenn greenwald discussion on this same topic from the link debs left yesterday -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0rcLsoIKgA&feature=youtu.be

the usa is an approaching train wreck and no amount of persuading one side or the other is going to change any of this... the world is moving on and rightfully so... no one wants to get down into this... the swamp and fake news is permanent at this point...until the whole system implodes - this is what we have in store.. vote for trump or biden - it matters not... one is a slower motion move then the other - but the end result is the same... there is no way out... sorry... on the other hand it is beautiful and sunny here where i live... life goes on outside this political circus called the usa presidential election..

lysias , Oct 31 2020 21:17 utc | 55
77,000 voters may have decided the outcome of the 2016 election, but they were not the only ones who voted for Trump. 63 million voters did.
Per/Norway , Oct 31 2020 21:20 utc | 56
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 18:50 utc | 26
I do not agree with you on 99.8% of wordly affairs BUT this comment you wrote is pure gold!!
Even on the other side of the Atlantic ocean @ the western edge of Europe us reading types know the difference.
And it annoys me just as much as it seems to annoy you how few people know that the US of terror is a republic and NOT a democracy😂🥴
steven t johnson , Oct 31 2020 21:27 utc | 57
By the way, people who are truly interested in seeing the Democratic Party removed as an obstacle to a true people's party (no one else here wants a workers' party) the very best way to split the national party would be a clean sweep of House, Senate and Presidency followed by enough treasonous shenanigans by Trump to arouse mass resistance. (Genuinely treasonous as in subverting the republic by force, fraud and violence, not in the half witted definition of dealings with foreigners so popular around here.) Biden et al. would split the Democrats rather than enact a popular program---which would be left because the when the masses begin to move they always march left.

Also by the way, Bloomberg is continuing his bid for a hostile takeover of the Democratic Party, aping the media version of Trump's hostile takeover of the Republic (NOT A DEMOCRACY!) Party.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 31 2020 21:27 utc | 58
"Change' was an Obama marketing slogan to sell his Republican light policies. A real change never came."

I was calling Obama "Bush Lite" during his first campaign. Anyone who read his foreign policy platform would have to agree. And the *only* reason he negotiated the JCPOA was because he needed at least one foreign policy win for his eight years - and he knew it would be torn up by whoever came after him, either Clinton or Trump. But he needed it for his own narcissistic view of his "legacy".

People forget that Obama wrote the leaders of Brazil and Turkey in 2010 prior to their negotiation with Iran for a deal, listing the points of a deal he would accept. Clinton pooh-poohed the idea that those leaders could get a deal. After a marathon negotiation session, they got it. The US then dismissed the deal 24 hours later, prompting Brazil's leader to release the Obama letter to establish that Obama was a liar.

"Change You Can Believe In" - "Make America Great" - only morons believe in campaign slogans - or the people who utter them.

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 21:28 utc | 59
Pardon me b !
"The other issue is arms control. While a Harris (Biden) administration may take up Putin's offer to unconditionally prolong the New-START agreement for a year it will certainly want more concessions from Russia than that country is willing to give."

Russia has made it abundantly and repetitively clear that they are not doing INCREMENTAL DEFEAT any more - there are no concessions to make - they no longer do supine acceptance of UKUSAi rights to dominate, subvert or belligerently mass arms at their advancing borders.

Why would any country concede to the incessant belligerence of the west? They must have lead in their drinking water to be that dumb!

The concession must come from the aggressor, the colour revolution fomenter, the incessant smearer and hate propagandist - the west.

A Harris/Biden Presidency lacks those attributes (perhaps lacks any attributes of goodwill) and a Trump Presidency is no different.

The narcissistic personality disorders run the USA - the asylum inmates are in charge, not the elected leaders. And the elected leaders are morons or wholly captive klutzes.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 31 2020 21:34 utc | 60
Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 31 2020 17:36 utc | 7 They didn't do a No-Fly Zone in Syria when they could, e.g. 2013. The reason it was not done is that it was too difficult to do

Obama tried *six times* to start a war with Syria. First he submitted *three* UNSC Resolutions with Chapter 7 language in them. Russia and China - burned by the US over Libya - vetoed those. Then Obama was within hours of launching an attack on Syria in August, 2013. He only stopped when he got push-back from Congress and then Putin outmaneuvered him by getting Assad to give up his chemical weapons. Then in fall, 2015, Obama was talking no-fly zone yet again. Putin again outmaneuvered him by committing Russian forces to Syria. Then sometime in 2016 - I forget the exact month - there was a news article saying Obama was having a meeting on that Friday to discuss no-fly zone yet *again*. That Tuesday or Wednesday, the Russia Ministry of Defense issued a statement that anyone attacking Syrian military assets would be shot down by Russia. On Friday, Obama pulled back and said there wouldn't be a no-fly zone.

So it was Russia, primarily, that was the reason Obama didn't not succeed *six times* trying to start a war with Syria.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 31 2020 21:36 utc | 61
Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 17:51 utc | 10

Correct (for once).

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 21:41 utc | 62
Bemildred #23

"Biden will bring fresh blood to the Presidency, just you watch."

YES. thank you for the clarifying statement, as that is exactly what I expect too. Harris /Biden blood spattered globe again. Or a Trump spattered equivalent. No socialism for the USA.

gottlieb , Oct 31 2020 21:42 utc | 63
We went from snarling Cheney Wars to shiny happy Obama wars to snarling Trump wars now back to shiny happy Biden wars to... Forever War is obviously bi-partisan.

But perhaps with Great Depression 2.0 coming this Dark Winter in order to stave off civil war and/or revolution they'll throw resources to much needed infrastructure projects, diminish to a slight degree the supremacy of the for-profit healthcare industry through a laughable but better than nothing 'public option' and make some baby steps toward avoiding climate catastrophic.

The change is marginal. And probably meaningless. Hope is just another word for nothing left to lose.

vk , Oct 31 2020 21:53 utc | 64
@ Posted by: lysias | Oct 31 2020 21:17 utc | 56

Those 77,000 - purely because of location - overcame 3 million+ votes. That's the equivalent of giving those 77 thousands the right to vote 40 times each.

Are you in favor of censitary vote?

--//--

@ Posted by: c1ue | Oct 31 2020 18:50 utc | 26

Yes, but at the end of the day, Hilary Clinton got 3.6 million votes more than Donald Trump.

You're telling everybody you're in favor of censitary vote in opposition to one person, one vote, just because you don't want an ideological enemy of yours to win. This is still liberal - but you would have to dig to the early liberal thinkers (Locke, Tocqueville etc.) to find such reactionary and elitist opinion.

Even by liberal standards today censitary vote is already considered outdated/reactionary. Concretely, you're defending the interests of a blue collar elite of the north-midwest, who number on the dozens of thousands, in detriment to more than half the voting population. It is what it is: you can't fight against mathematics.

--//--

@ Posted by: Down South | Oct 31 2020 18:47 utc | 25

So what? Fuck Michael Moore. If Michael Moore told you to jump off a cliff, would you do it? He's not the guardian of the absolute truth, he's just a random guy with an opinion.

Michael Moore can defend a mythical blue collar America how much he wants to - it doesn't change the fact this America doesn't exist anymore. America is, nowadays, the land of the petit-bourgeois, the land of the small-medium business-owners (a.k.a. zombie business-owners) , of the New York financial assets owning middle class "coastal elites", of the influencers, of Kim and Chloe Kardashian, of Starbucks, Amazon and Apple, of the billionaire tied to Wall Street. That's the true America, want it.

America will never be blue collar again. The insistence of turning America blue collar again will destroy the American Empire. They will be the Gorbachevs of the USA.

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 22:11 utc | 65
Richard Steven Hack #61


Obama tried *six times* to start a war with Syria. First he submitted *three* UNSC Resolutions with Chapter 7 language in them. Russia and China - burned by the US over Libya - vetoed those. Then Obama was within hours of launching an attack on Syria in August, 2013. He only stopped when he got push-back from Congress and then Putin outmaneuvered him by getting Assad to give up his chemical weapons. Then in fall, 2015, Obama was talking no-fly zone yet again. Putin again outmaneuvered him by committing Russian forces to Syria. Then sometime in 2016 - I forget the exact month - there was a news article saying Obama was having a meeting on that Friday to discuss no-fly zone yet *again*. That Tuesday or Wednesday, the Russia Ministry of Defense issued a statement that anyone attacking Syrian military assets would be shot down by Russia. On Friday, Obama pulled back and said there wouldn't be a no-fly zone.

So it was Russia, primarily, that was the reason Obama didn't not succeed *six times* trying to start a war with Syria.

Thank you, it seems that your succinct statement should be included as an auto response macro to every laguerre post. They never stop their blathering those AI CPU's. My take is that they are a retro definition of the term interrupt .

MarkU , Oct 31 2020 22:16 utc | 66
@ Jackrabbit

I remember you as being a reasonably sane contributor but atm you have a serious case of TDS. Are you seriously trying to tell us that the last 4 years of US media foaming at the mouth about Trump (Russia-gate, Trump supporters being 'white supremacists' and egging on a race war) were all a plot to get him re-elected? I mean seriously? WTF? What the hell would they do if they wanted him removed?


Mark2 , Oct 31 2020 22:19 utc | 67
Now I know I have been very very harsh on trump and his supporters of late. Please forgive me ! It's what we call 'tough love' I do have a heart, dispite all of America's crimes against the rest of the world. I did hope that the US at the last moment would come to it's senses and turn it's back on trump. Alas ! I fear not. Really sad, I'm sorry.
But for the rest of the world including myself, we can only watch with fascination and relief as America destroys itself from within. My heart goes out to the inocent.
I fear trump supporters are in for a -- --
Pyrrhic victory (spelt correctly) I recommend googling the word.

Adolph Hitler rose to power with similar glory and power unbridled. Just as trump now !! Then what ?
Dresden!!
Think on.

_K_C_ , Oct 31 2020 22:29 utc | 68
Posted by: MarkU | Oct 31 2020 22:16 utc | 67

Why is it so hard to believe? The media needs a heel and they actually prefer Trump to remain in office. Maybe on the ground level you have a lot of regular old liberals, but the upper echelons of the media (and holding companies) are all about keeping the ratings bonanza going. Another Trump term but with Democrat control of Congress would be like manna from heaven to them. Matt Taibbi is one writer who has chronicled the phenomenon since before Trump ever got elected. Here's a more recent piece. Let me know if it's paywalled and I can copy/paste.
CNN chief has an ethical problem.

Schmoe , Oct 31 2020 22:39 utc | 69
On JCPOA, The Nation had a quote from one of Biden's foreign policy advisers to a group of Jewish campaing donors saying all sanctions on Iran will remain intact unless they return to full compliance. I agree that it will not be as simple as that given political reality, but Biden was closely involved in its negotiation and likely has some ownership of it.

I expect there to be a false flag attack by "Iran" to throw sand in the gears if re-implementation looks likely, or perhaps an Israeli attack on Lebanon. Best plausible outcome is Iran keeps its current level of cooperation, and a Biden admin looks the other way on sanctions violationsw.

jinn , Oct 31 2020 22:40 utc | 70
Are you seriously trying to tell us that the last 4 years of US media foaming at the mouth about Trump (Russia-gate, Trump supporters being 'white supremacists' and egging on a race war) were all a plot to get him re-elected? I mean seriously? What the hell would they do if they wanted him removed?
_____________________________________________
Of course it was all phony and designed to not ring true, which benefits Trump by giving him credibility with the voters.
The whole idea behind trump is the same as with Reagan he is portrayed as the outsider doing battle against the corrupt and powerful Washington swamp. Trump is Reagan on steroids. But it is all phony both Reagan and Trump are one of the powerful elites and their opposition by the left wing media is designed to give them credibility with voters.

Remember that half of the corporate controlled media loves Trump and sings his praises daily. It is only half the corporate media that is attacking Trump the other half is showing its viewers blacks that strongly support Trump and solid evidence that Russiagate is pure bullshit.

As for what the media would do if they really wanted to bring Trump down. They would attack him on real issues instead of phony ones that actually strengthen trump's credibility.

Josh , Oct 31 2020 22:45 utc | 71
What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change?
This,
https://sputniknews.com/viral/202010311080939179-ukrainian-code-biden-has-netizens-in-stitches-as-he-pledges-to-mobilise-trunalimunumaprzure/
Nice,
dave , Oct 31 2020 22:59 utc | 72
"What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change?"

The same thing it always changes, absolutely nothing except who accepts the bribes from the elite.

As long as the American people stay asleep they will continue with the "American DREAM" until they suddenly wake up inside their newly constructed corporate industrial zone. The prison industrial complex is the model society if you're an elite.

Have a wonderful weekend everyone, don't get so caught up in this sham (s)election that you ruin what little freedom you have left.

S , Oct 31 2020 22:59 utc | 73
Berlin's Madame Tussauds has put Donald Trump's wax figure into a dumpster . Is this normal behavior by a museum? Is this not "an interference in the democratic processes of the United States"? Or is it okay because the Germans are doing it? (But God forbid if a Russian or an Iranian criticizes a U.S. presidential candidate publicly ahead of the election.) Have similar performances been staged against Bush, under whom the U.S. intelligence agencies manufactured claims of Saddam Hussein preparing to use weapons of mass destruction, which the U.S. "free" media printed almost in unison without any criticism, leading to an invasion that killed 650,000 Iraqis ? When a visitor beheaded Adolf Hitler's figure in 2008, the same museum had this to say :
Madame Tussauds is non-political and makes no comment or value-judgement either on the persons who are exhibited in the Museum or on what they have done during their lifetime.

I guess starting a war that resulted in deaths of 26,000,000 million Soviets -- most of them Russians -- is not nearly as bad as being a rude person who has once recommended in private grabbing women by their genitals.

S , Oct 31 2020 23:01 utc | 74
*26,000,000 Soviets
MarkU , Oct 31 2020 23:18 utc | 75
@ jinn (71) and _K_C (69)

You are clearly over-thinking this, clutching at straws to justify supporting the other side. Remember the saying "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people". Whoever wins the election is going to be faced with major unrest, the worms are clearly not going back in the can. There are easier ways to get someone re-elected.

Trump is clearly at least as toxic as any of them wrt foreign policy, however he is not a globalist and that is his major sin in their eyes.

Don Bacon , Oct 31 2020 23:19 utc | 76
@ Maureen O # 45
In 2009, Biden tried very hard to convince Obama not to surge 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan.
Perhaps he was successful? . . . Obama actually surged 70,000 troops into Afghanistan, raising Bush's 30K to 100K+. That got Mr Hope & Change the Nobel Peace Prize.
arata , Oct 31 2020 23:21 utc | 77
Posted by: alaff | Oct 31 2020 20:48 utc | 50

What is JCPOA, in reality?

We should remember there were 6 UNSC against Iran, and one of them under Chapter 7 ( the most dangerous), before JCPOA. We should keep in mind there are gang of 5 + 1( 5 in UNSC + Germany) coalition behind 6 resolutions.

From Iran's eye, Imperialism was, combination of these 5 in the club, and their collateral and vassals ( Germany, Japan, etc). The master of JCPOA, caught the opportunity to put a wedge into the body of the club, and it worked perfectly. America is mad cutting her own arteries, out side the club. Trump or Biden are not different in this regard, America needs some one to understand the depth of the wound and retreat immediately, before too much hemorrhage. And such person ( or group ) is not in horizon. Let it die by her own wounding.

Going back to JCPOA is not so simple.

uncle tungsten , Oct 31 2020 23:34 utc | 78
Down South #15

Thank you for that Philip Giraldi report. The descent into madness from the raucus sounds of the echo chamber. Where does a revolution start?

First they need to dismantle their media concentration across the spectrum of "news" including all media forms.

Second they need to send their journalists through the same cultural revolution cycle as was done in the China and other countries where people go to different work supporting the growth of their communities for a five to ten year separation from the craft of journalism. Listen to the people and sweat alongside them in their labour to survive.

Sure there is much more but the echo chamber must surely be demolished at commencement.

Jen , Oct 31 2020 23:39 utc | 79
RSH @ 61:

I believe back in August 2013 after a CW attack in East Ghouta, east of Damascus, wrongly blamed on the Syrian govt that Obama was preparing to enforce his no-fly zone threat. Then the UK parliament voted not to support such a threat, Obama hesitated and then Putin saw his opportunity and posted an opinion in the New York Times. That ultimately stopped the US from going ahead with the attack.

I'm sure British MPs have since been forced to "come to their senses".

karlof1 , Oct 31 2020 23:43 utc | 80
I linked to and commented upon Pepe's article when it was published by Asia Times a few days ago, and I don't see any reason to add to it as b echoes much of my sentiment. What I will do is link to a brief item by Chinese scholar Zhang Weiwei, professor of International Relations at Fudan University, "How China elects their political leaders" , which seems very appropriate at this moment in time:

"China has established a system of meritocracy or what can be described as 'selection plus election'. Competent leaders are selected on the basis of performance and broad support, through a vigorous process of screening, opinion surveys, internal evaluations and various types of elections. This is much in line with the Confucian tradition of meritocracy. After all, China is the first country that invented civil service examination system or the 'Keju' system....

"Indeed, the Chinese system of meritocracy today, makes it inconceivable that anyone as weak as George W. Bush or Donald Trump could ever come close to the position of the top leadership. It's not far-fetched to claim that the China model is more about leadership rather than the showmanship as it is in the West. China's meritocratic governance challenges the stereotypical dichotomy of democracy versus autocracy. From Chinese point of view, the nature of the state including its legitimacy, has to be defined by its substance, that is, good governance, competent leadership and success in meeting the people's needs."

Zhang Weiwei is the author of a very important book some may have heard about and even read, The China Wave: Rise Of A Civilizational State , of which an open preview can be read here . Also, the professor gave a talk at the German Schiller Institute related to the above book and the BRI project, which can be read here .

I've commented several times that China's political-economic system is far superior to the Parasitic Neoliberalism that's destroying the West. China's success suggests very strongly that we listen and closely observe while not taking heed of what any Western source has to say about China.

Jen , Oct 31 2020 23:43 utc | 81
Uncle T @ 79:

I'm all for sending the entire Australian news media into a cave for 5 - 10 years. Maybe in 10,000 years archaeologists investigating the cave will be wondering whether fossil remains there denote a species of human more primitive than those found in Liang Bua cave on Flores Island in Indonesia. :-)

Hagbard Celine , Oct 31 2020 23:51 utc | 82
@worldblee #1

Can you elaborate on this funding you referred to for BLM protests? What is your evidence that it was actually funding street protests? Are you referring to the national corporate BLM? If so, what does that have to do with leaderless protests in the streets?

uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 0:09 utc | 83
Mark2 #68

Adolph Hitler rose to power with similar glory and power unbridled. Just as trump now !! Then what ?
Dresden!!
Think on.

Ahem, Think about this :

From February 13 to February 15, 1945, during the final months of World War II (1939-45), Allied forces bombed the historic city of Dresden, located in eastern Germany. The bombing was controversial because Dresden was neither important to German wartime production nor a major industrial center, and before the massive air raid of February 1945 it had not suffered a major Allied attack. By February 15, the city was a smoldering ruin and an unknown number of civilians -- estimated between 22,700 to 25,000–were dead.

Dresden and other cities held magnificent collections of human posterity. Cities of science - of intellectual excellence and endeavour within europe. Cities of humans associated with brilliant minds doing the work of human understanding and progress.

Sure Hitler's imbecile adventures ably funded by global private finance capitalism and a hatred of communism led to war that ultimately led to the vengeful destruction of great cities and great store houses and museums of this earth of mankind.

Hitler did not bomb Dresden.

Germans were proud of their science and their knowledge and storehouses and museums.

Europe shared in that pride in excellence as did many throughout the world.

The UKUSA bombed Dresden in mid February 1945. They had no need to do so as Germany was crippled, Berlin was surrounded and doomed. On April 20, Hitler's birthday, the first Russian shells fell on Berlin. What followed was a brief but brutal fight.

Those first shells falling on Berlin TWO months after the demolition of cities of science and archeology and human history. NOT cities of military significance.

I think of Vietnam

I think of Iraq

I think of Korea

I think of China

I think of Japan

Bombed by UKUSA. So lets not obsess with a dead nazi comrade, lets open our eyes to the live nazis.

uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 0:12 utc | 84
Jen #82

++ :))

little hairy pens preserved in paperbark and beeswax perhaps

[email protected] , Nov 1 2020 0:34 utc | 85
I think Biden will win this presidency, and win it fairly easily. It will become apparent early on that the Biden Administration intends not only to turn the heat up on Russia, but will continue Trump's aggression towards China. There may be a feint towards renewing JCPOA, but it will not be fulfilled, and aggression towards Iran will not abate either.

The Mighty Wurlitzer of pro-war propaganda is again spinning up in anticipation. The Atlantic and the Economist have been busy comparing Chinese Policy towards it's Muslim citizens with the Holocaust...Russia, Russia, Russia!!! which never went away is again being amped up.

But, this isn't 2016. Four years has given China and Russia time to further modernize their militaries. Iran has developed its missile and drone programs to the point that a conflict with Israel will result in mutual destruction. In 2016 USA/NATO had the military advantage, but that is now gone, and the balance shifts further by the day. I almost feel sorry for Biden, as he will be the one taking the blame when the economy collapses and America gets their asses handed to them. Hopefully it doesn't go nuclear, but I am not very optimistic.

With the NeoCon infestation capturing the Democratic Party, the media, and a big chunk of the Republican, it is only a matter of time before they get their way. Short-sided parasites as they are, this time they will kill their host. If humanity survives, a new multi-polar era may emerge.

Mark2 , Nov 1 2020 0:56 utc | 86
Uncle tungsten @ 84
Please re-read my heart felt comment. It was sincerely ment. To many here think this is just fun and speculation.
But this is real, the USA have the same misguided sense of infalalabilty now, that the German public hand then.
Did we learn nothing from world war 2 ?
Please don't belittle my urgent warning.
This is not a game. Perhaps re read my comment. Respect
_K_C_ , Nov 1 2020 1:12 utc | 87
Posted by: MarkU | Oct 31 2020 23:18 utc | 76

Naw, you're not reading me right. Did you check out the Taibbi piece? He has numerous others over the past 4 years. Also see Les Moonves and other corporate media executives' statements on Trump during that same time period. I acknowledged that the rank and file among the media class is largely woke, liberal and pro-Biden (and very anti-Trump), but they don't call the shots and you're not looking at the situation with enough attention to details. It's the little things that give it away.

Ever heard the saying "there's no such thing as bad publicity"? A brand like Trump's has been clearly demonstrated to benefit immensely from the negative coverage. The media are hated by Trump's followers and the people who watch the media hate Trump. So what does that tell you? Compare CNN and MSNBC ratings during Trump's term to Obama's. They know that hate sells and they never call Trump out for his ACTUAL bad behaviors (other than COVID and ACB, I guess) while they focus on meaningless nonsense, thus distracting the public from the bi-partisan corporate dominated graft going on and the Empire's ongoing wars and sanctions programs abroad. Very rarely if ever will you read or hear about the hundreds of thousands of people who have died due to American sanctions on Iran or Venezuela. Why is that? Because top brass at the corporate media outlets support it. They cheered when he launched the missiles at Syria.

Someone did a study or analysis on the amount of air time given to Trump versus the Democrat primary and it wasn't even close. He plays them and his supporters like a fiddle, too. SNL had him on NBC when he was running against Hillary. Some argue that this might have been due to the same mindset that Hillary's team was alleged to have had. Namely, that Trump would be the EASIEST candidate for her to beat and he had no chance, so he was harmless as a threat. I don't think it's that complicated. They know what gets ratings.

Yeah, occasionally they'll make a peep about the environment or jobs, but like the Democrats in Congress and "Intelligence" Community's Russia and Ukraine witch hunts/impeachment they intentionally ignore the types of actions that DO justify investigations and impeachments. Do you honestly think that the Democrats thought Trump would be removed from office for the bogus "whistle blower" charges they ginned up? Of course not - the Senate was never going to go along with it and it wasn't exactly secret, even over here across the pond it was obvious.

As far as him not being a globalist - he's not exactly anti-globalist when it comes to policy, but why would that matter to the corporate media? Again, it's the corporate big wigs and majority shareholders who make the calls and the reporters, editors and personalities on TV know how to toe the line without being told explicitly. Now, if you want to talk Silicon Valley and the social media giants, I'm with you - they are actively trying to help Joe Biden. But take another example - the Hunter Biden laptop story. Social media giants censored it, but it isn't like it's not being talked about non-stop by the MSM and newspapers. They just don't talk about what was IN the emails or photos, leaving some of their viewers/readers curious to go find out for themselves.

I didn't read jinn's comment in detail, but I'm definitely not trying to make points that justify voting for Biden; but I stand by my points - I'm just pointing out what's REALLY going on with all of the "negative" coverage of Donald Trump in the corporate mainstream media. At the end of the day, the corporate MSM upper brass doesn't really care who gets elected, but they also understand that having a "heel" (from the pro wrestling world) and "bad guy" to always go after on crap that's ultimately meaningless, makes it easier to sell the hate and drive ratings and subscriptions.

David , Nov 1 2020 1:12 utc | 88

You summed it up beautifully tribolij. I believe it will play out just as you described. There is no basis for optimism.
uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 1:19 utc | 89
Mark2 #87
Uncle tungsten @ 84
Please re-read my heart felt comment. It was sincerely ment. To many here think this is just fun and speculation.
But this is real, the USA have the same misguided sense of infalalabilty now, that the German public hand then.
Did we learn nothing from world war 2 ?
Please don't belittle my urgent warning.
This is not a game. Perhaps re read my comment. Respect

Respect and apology in return Mark2. I jumped the gun.

Yes, the sense of infallibility infuses the bloodlust of the UKUSAi.

With any luck humanity will be spared their obscene and lunatic 'reprisal mania' that has rotted their minds. I somehow doubt that.

And I share your fear.

That said though - I am ever the optimist. There are many warrior clans of past decades that have made delightful blunders and ended up on the block instead of on the grog in the opponents bars. Time will tell.

I believe it is time for the great people of South America to shake off these barnacles on the arse of humanity once and for all.

_K_C_ , Nov 1 2020 1:30 utc | 90
@MarkU, #67 -

Sorry I got a little long winded in my last reply. I think this response will make my position easier to interpret.

You asked: " What the hell would they do if they wanted him removed?"

The answer to that question is the same as the answer would be if you asked what the Democrats in Congress would (have) do(ne) if they really wanted to remove him from office. They would actually investigate and attempt to prosecute a litany of possible crimes rather than silly, simplistic accusations from a "whistleblower" that anyone with a IQ over 100 could see was not going to work.

Maybe you're right and I'm wrong, and Americans really are that stupid. It wouldn't necessarily conflict with what I've seen and heard from Democrat supporting relatives and social media contacts. A lot, if not most of them STILL believe that there was collusion between Trump and Russia. It was like my conservative friends and relatives for about a decade after the Iraq war - they were CONVINCED that we DID find WMDs and that the US media had somehow hidden it.

c1ue , Nov 1 2020 1:42 utc | 91
@vk #65
It is striking how you still refuse to acknowledge the reality of the law.
The United States is not a majoritarian democracy.
In fact, there is not one single country in the entire world that is a majoritarian democracy.
If the law were changed via the methods already written, tried and true, then I guarantee that there would be a lot more voters in the minorities of both red and blue states.
As it is, the only partisan here is your and the Democratic party's whining about how they have more popular votes, much as the talk about packing the Supreme Court, etc etc.
If ultimately the existing laws of the land are merely an impediments to anyone doing whatever they have the power to do, then there is no law.
Mark2 , Nov 1 2020 2:01 utc | 92
Uncle @ 90
Thanks for that. I feel we are in full agreement !
To perhaps clarify to those less astute than you.
My comment @ 68 points out the law of unintended consequence. The majority of Americans don't want war, riots, poverty and distruction. They want to keep there families safe.
The comparison being the same can be said for Germans prior to the war, they weren't evil as portrayed in history they simply made the same mistake the US is about to make. With the consequence of there country devistated. A dreadful mistake voting for the wrong man, whipped up by a false sense of superiority !
Don't do it.
Half of America won't tolerate it.
Free quarters of the rest of the world won't. By voting trump you vote for your own distruction.
I would rather vote for a donkey, never mind Biden.
jinn , Nov 1 2020 2:19 utc | 93
the moron wrote:

You are clearly over-thinking this, clutching at straws to justify supporting the other side.
__________________________________________
What other side???
I'm guessing you are accusing me of supporting trump but who knows maybe you think I'm supporting Biden. Either way it is stupid of you to project your "side" based logic onto others. Do you really think it is impossible to analyze without first taking a side?

uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 2:25 utc | 94
c1ue #92
response to vk #65
As it is, the only partisan here is your and the Democratic party's whining about how they have more popular votes, much as the talk about packing the Supreme Court, etc etc.


Thank you, I liked that retort to vk. Can I distort your point that while the Demonazis delude themselves in more popular votes - the Repugnents have more of the un-popular votes. The deeply corrosive nonsense being shouted into the demonazi echo chamber is truly dangerous to the point that they will generate a standing wave resonance and collapse the entire building. Trouble is we will then have to endure an 11/11 to compete with their absurd 9/11 and - we'll never hear the end of it. :))

james , Nov 1 2020 2:26 utc | 95
mark - serious question...have you been drinking?? cheers james who thinks you need to step away from the computer keyboard!
Mark2 , Nov 1 2020 2:39 utc | 96
James
I share one bottle of wine a month. I don't do drugs, but thanks for asking.
I note you don't ask the 'right wing' to step a way'
But if the truth is hurting you. Perhaps you ought ?
Have a peaceful night.
Jackrabbit , Nov 1 2020 2:41 utc | 97
MarkU @Oct31 22:16 #67

I remember you as being a reasonably sane contributor ...

Thanks!

=
... but atm you have a serious case of TDS.

No. I'm neither for nor against Trump. I see him as a symptom of the system who has joined (possibly long ago) Team Deep State (the managers of the Empire). If it wasn't Trump, it would be some other media-savvy guy that can con the people.

=
Are you seriously trying to tell us that the last 4 years of US media foaming at the mouth about Trump (Russia-gate, Trump supporters being 'white supremacists' and egging on a race war) were all a plot to get him re-elected?

IMO Trump's economic nationalism and zenophobia were very much planned. As was the failure of the Democrats to mount any effective resistance. They pretend to hate Trump so so much but shoot themselves in the foot all the time.

Russiagate was nothing more than a new McCarthyism. That works well for the Deep State both internationally and domestically. Any dissenter is called a "knowing or unknowing" Russian asset.

Background: I've written that Trump was meant to beat Hillary. The 2016 election was a farce. Sanders and Trump were friendly with the Clintons for a very long time. Sanders was a sheepdog (not a real candidate) and Hillary threw the race to Trump. Trump is much more capable at what he does than Hillary would've been.

I mean seriously? WTF? What the hell would they do if they wanted him removed?

If the Deep State wanted him removed (but they don't) they would find a reason to invoke the 25th Amendment. They have positioned people to do this, if necessary. For example: VP Pence was a friend of McCain (who was a 'NEVER TRUMP'-er); Atty General Barr is close to the Bushes and Mueller ('NEVER TRUMP'-ers); CIA Dir. Gina Haspel is an acolyte of John Brennan (you guessed it, a 'NEVER TRUMP'-er).

=

MarkU @Oct31 23:18 #76

...he is not a globalist and that is his major sin in their eyes.

He's not anti-globalist as you seem to suggest. He's even bragged about his business dealings with Chinese, Arabs, Russians - pretty much any group with money.

Trump and the Deep State - the true Deep State, not the pretended partisan off-shoot - are EMPIRE-FIRST (and have been for decades). You can see this in what Trump has done globally. USA just wants a bigger cut of the action because they have to do the 'heavy lifting' of taking on China and Russia.

<> <> <> <> <> <>

I know that my cynical perspective must generate a lot of cognitive dissonance in many readers. But I don't see any other way to rationally explain Deep State actions and the history that has brought us to where are today.

!!

Jackrabbit , Nov 1 2020 2:59 utc | 98
MarkU

You might be interested in my comment on the Greenwald thread .

!!

vk , Nov 1 2020 3:04 utc | 99
@ Posted by: c1ue | Nov 1 2020 1:42 utc | 92

The numbers are there for everybody to see: Trump won with 3 million + votes below Hilary Clinton. That is not democracy in any sense of the word unless you go back to the more traditional forms of liberalism of the 16th-19th centuries. Those are the numbers, not my opinion.

Besides, I think you're not getting the irony of your position: the situation in the USA has gotten so degenerated that you're hanging by a thread - a thread you put on a golden pedestal and claim is the salvation of the Empire (the electoral college). Where did I see this? Oh, yes - the War of Secession of 1861-1865, when the slave states were already outnumbered 6 to 1 by the northern states. They kept their parity artificially for decades, until the whole thing suddenly burst up in the war (a war where they were crushed; no chance of victory at all).

So, the problem isn't in the system per se, but the pressure the ossification of the system is building up. When they seceded, the confederates genuinely thought they were the true inheritors of the liberal thought, the slave states being the most perfect manifestation of freedom; the same situation is building up today, albeit, obviously, on a much milder scale (there's no California gold this time, just the good ol' race to the bottom).


--//--

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Nov 1 2020 2:25 utc | 95

I agree with you: the end of the electoral college (with it, any form of district vote) will give a chance for the conservatives (Republicans) to win back, for example, California (which has 40-46% of the popular vote). But it will also give the Democrats Texas (Dallas + Houston regions already make almost 50% of the population of the state and are Democratic bastions). It will also open the gates for third parties to flourish (avoiding a situation like Bernie Sanders, who had to affiliate to the Democrats).

Either way, it will give the American people and government a more honest, precise picture of the state of the nation. Or are you willing to live a perpetual illusion of "coastal elites vs heartland deplorables" forever (which, by the way, only fuels up secession as the only solution)?

denk , Nov 1 2020 3:34 utc | 100
The myth of HIQ whitemen....
--------------------------------------

Caitlin[for prez]johnston

Russia gate morphes seamlessly into China gate without missing a beat.

One hiq white man opines, oh so innocently

IN Russia gate, they were quoting only anon, nameless witness.
This time its different, we've real witness testifying on teevee , in Tucker [fuck China] Carlson show, no less !

The poor dear was referring to an 'ex CIA' [see, an insider, wink wink ] telling Tucker [fuck CHINA] Carlson ....

Psssst, many dem were CCP trojans !

ROFLAMO

oR that HUnter BIden buddy whatshisname again, who told Tucker [fuck China] Carlson oh so solemnly,

'Yes , I think the BIdens were compromised by the chicoms'

OMFG !
BIden is CCP'S man !

What happen if Biden get into the WH and immediately bomb Shanghai.?

Well half of gringos , the Trumpsters, would scream,

'Why isnt BIden bombing Beijing already, well BCOS we all know he's Xi's man in Washington' !

The dems, eager to clear their potus name, would implore earnestly,

'Hey BIden, you should invade Beijing RIGHT now, show them repuc we are just as tough, no, even better in showing the chicoms who's the boss around here.

What a devious brilliant way to get a bi partisan support for more wars.

BI partisan ?
That practically cover 99% of HIQ gringos.
hehehhehehhe


Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me hundreds of times.........

[Nov 01, 2020] What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change

The Blob will dominate the USA foreign policy, no matter who wins.
Notable quotes:
"... I've commented several times that China's political-economic system is far superior to the Parasitic Neoliberalism that's destroying the West. China's success suggests very strongly that we listen and closely observe while not taking heed of what any Western source has to say about China. ..."
"... The executives and majority shareholders of the CIA/NSA infiltrated corporate news media don't care whether Trump wins, and in fact often prefer it. ..."
"... Those guys are just part of the polarization narrative tearing the country apart. The hatred is real but there is acting involved, especially with Olbermann. These commentators feel that this polarization narrative is giving the country what it wants and it drives ratings. Schiff is just a first class liar ... ..."
"... Obama was just put in the pipeline as one of their possible future candidates for president. They have a stable of these people being mentored. Clinton was one as well. I bet Harris is one as well. ..."
"... I think they hate the Trumper so much because he he was in some else's stable. Possibly the controllers from campus in Tel Aviv. Different stable, same horse shit. ..."
"... Election of president = false flag iperation. The purpose is to fund the private media with advertising revenue paid for by consumer taxpayers. ..."
"... The rest of the world knows that the US is not agreement capable, it does not matter for Iran one bit what happens on November 3rd. ..."
"... I understand the rationale behind Trump's policies. But my conclusion is exactly the opposite: his attempt to stop the disintegration of the American Empire is accelerating the disintegration of the American Empire, not averting it. ..."
"... The key here is to understand that that's not how the American Empire should work. The USA continues to deindustrialize at an accelerated pace under Trump; Wall Street was never stronger than under Donald Trump; American debt was never higher. And now, unemployment is as high as during the 1929 era. ..."
"... The American Empire is the American Empire precisely because it doesn't need to produce anything it needs except defense. It prints money in order to siphon wealth from the rest of the world, enriching its economy while impoverishing the rest. That's the only way the Empire can function - any other way will result in its destruction. ..."
"... Obama ran on Hopey-Changey and on his projected charm, actually glib con-man gab. Worked wonderfully, imagine getting the Nobel Prize because you had a dead-beat Dad who was from Kenya and you scored B+ for public speaking? Argh. (The real reason: killing will continue, the status quo is preserved..) ..."
"... That Trump would win in 2016 was obvious as soon as he became a candidate. He was the cartoon contrast of Obomber - white, fat, orange, tall, R vs. D, outspoken, strident, clumsy (vs. the smooth-talking con), opinionated, stupid, and outrageous in a way. Click bait and viewer bait for the MSM - but not for no reason. ..."
"... To pretend that Trump is some special Peacemaker, trying oh so hard to overcome deep state resistance to rolling back empire, is Trumpism. Escobar is always there. Trump must be understood as a leading creature of the swamp himself. Trying so hard just as Obama was trying so hard. ..."
"... The relative scores settled terribly are more a matter of opportunity than ruthless efficiency. Though it is true that "success" requires dialing it back a bit, and having the likes of Bolton around is a way of ensuring either that nothing gets done, or we all end up ashes. Trump managed to axe Bolton on time, that time. ..."
Nov 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
MarkU , Nov 1 2020 4:22 utc | 103
@ Jackrabbit and _K_C

I do agree with you both that the anti-Trump hysteria has probably worked for him to some extent but I really don't believe that is a four year long plan, it is too much of a stretch to believe that the likes of Olbermannn and Schiff are consciously working for him. American politics really is that toxic, remember the stuff about Obama's birth certificate.

I also agree that Trump might actually have the support needed for a landslide win, not so much because of the vilification but because of the arson and looting imo. A lot of Trump supporters are keeping their heads down atm (and who can blame them) However, now it is my turn to make a prediction. I predict mass unrest on polling day. it is well accepted that the majority of the Democrat voters (fraudulent or not) are going to vote by post. Conversely most Trump supporters are likely to vote in person on the day (or try to at least)
I expect a concerted attempt to disrupt the polls by people who know that it will disproportionately affect the Trump vote. I expect violent clashes (with both sides trading blame) and a result that will please nobody. The worms are not going back into the can.

if I am wrong then I will be big enough to say so on the first appropriate thread on this site, fair enough?

OhOh , Nov 1 2020 4:36 utc | 104

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 31 2020 23:43 utc | 81

Zhang Weiwei is the author of a very important book some may have heard about and even read, The China Wave: Rise Of A Civilizational State, of which an open preview can be read here. Also, the professor gave a talk at the German Schiller Institute related to the above book and the BRI project, which can be read here.

I've commented several times that China's political-economic system is far superior to the Parasitic Neoliberalism that's destroying the West. China's success suggests very strongly that we listen and closely observe while not taking heed of what any Western source has to say about China.

More gems, thanks.

uncle tungsten , Nov 1 2020 4:37 utc | 105
Well it wont change Wall Street on Parade or the tireless commentary by Pam Martens and Russ Martens. Legends.

I just paused by their tavern to see what elixirs of despair or mirth they have on offer today. Pour a strong drink comrades and scroll through the cellar. Always worth a visit.

Biswapriya Purkayast , Nov 1 2020 5:54 utc | 109
Trump has been preselected to win. The rest is just a circus.
m , Nov 1 2020 6:01 utc | 111
If Biden is not much different from Trump then why does "the blob" portray Trump as the Beelzebub?
_K_C_ , Nov 1 2020 6:10 utc | 112

If Biden is not much different from Trump then why does "the blob" portray Trump as the Beelzebub?
 Posted by: m | Nov 1 2020 6:01 utc | 112

Because he's the heel and none of the negative coverage they give him sticks, most often on purpose. Don't mistake their serious tones and somber pronouncements for genuineness. It's not. The executives and majority shareholders of the CIA/NSA infiltrated corporate news media don't care whether Trump wins, and in fact often prefer it.

Sorry for the long link, I'm on a tablet and formatting is really difficult here:
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/with-cnn-flap-medias-trump-era-identity-crisis-continues-195072/

MarkU , Nov 1 2020 6:32 utc | 114
@_K_C (108)

I am aware of the fact that corruption is rife in both parties. I saw the link to the Biden bus incident, deplorable yes but hardly on the same scale as the massive rioting, looting and intimidation of the BLM movement, they didn't actually burn down half the neighborhood did they. Organized voting obstruction will largely be confined to swing states for obvious reasons. I made my predictions, we will see.

Just to be clear, I don't even live in the US, I am British. If I did live in the US I wouldn't vote for either party, I'm not a 'lesser of two evils' kind of guy. To be frank I am viewing events in the US with considerable trepidation, I regard what happens in the US as a window into the likely future of the UK and the rest of Europe. I fear that a nuclear war may well occur sometime in the near future, quite possibly by accident owing to the continual cutting of warning times, mainly by the US. A very powerful nuclear armed country convulsed by civil unrest is a very dangerous entity, I fear the worst and so should we all imo.

Anyway thank you for being polite and civilised and for including actual information with your replies.

chu teh , Nov 1 2020 6:50 utc | 117
OT..I just read this translation from a Russian link...most agreeable as a counterpoise to Exceptional Nation nuttiness:

"Construction of the industrial complex, where high-speed trains will be produced, began in the Urals. In five years, Russia will have a domestic rolling stock for the VSM - high-speed highways. Moreover, the level of localization of production is stated at 80%, which means additional orders for the Russian industry."

https://aftershock.news/ [Of course, cannot vouch for the datum]

circumspect , Nov 1 2020 6:51 utc | 118

I do agree with you both that the anti-Trump hysteria has probably worked for him to some extent but I really don't believe that is a four year long plan, it is too much of a stretch to believe that the likes of Olbermannn and Schiff are consciously working for him. American politics really is that toxic, remember the stuff about Obama's birth certificate.

Those guys are just part of the polarization narrative tearing the country apart. The hatred is real but there is acting involved, especially with Olbermann. These commentators feel that this polarization narrative is giving the country what it wants and it drives ratings. Schiff is just a first class liar ...

As far as Obama's birth certificate, since his mom was a CIA officer using the Ford Foundation as cover during the murder of millions of leftists in Indonesia, I am sure she took time out to make sure he was born on US soil. All that stuff about him growing up on embassy row in Indonesia while the left was being slaughtered is carefully taken out of the story. Not his fault but it was quite a slaughter of humans and we know her employer was deeply involved. Going into the Indonesian villages to do studies. Really, studies and observations. They used to call it SOG groups.

Obama was just put in the pipeline as one of their possible future candidates for president. They have a stable of these people being mentored. Clinton was one as well. I bet Harris is one as well.

I think they hate the Trumper so much because he he was in some else's stable. Possibly the controllers from campus in Tel Aviv. Different stable, same horse shit.

Norwegian , Nov 1 2020 9:11 utc | 129
@circumspect | Nov 1 2020 6:51 utc | 118
I think they hate the Trumper so much because he he was in some else's stable. Possibly the controllers from campus in Tel Aviv. Different stable, same horse shit.
That makes a lot of sense!
gm , Nov 1 2020 9:56 utc | 130
What Would A Democratic Presidency Really Change?

Well for one thing you probably won't see any more of this sort of thing escape into the open media: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8901193/National-security-nightmare-Hunter-Bidens-laptop.html

Because the FBI's evidence cleaner/tamperer division's mandate will be greatly expanded, as will the powers of the Silicone Valley Tekkies to more comprehensively throttle public free speech on electronic media, that the deep state's Invisible Hand disapproves of.

snake , Nov 1 2020 11:50 utc | 132

Trump is about controlled demolition of the empire NemesisCalling @ 5.

B summarized the style differences very well. But failed to mention the greater problem. 3 votes at polls every four years is not democracy<= no American is in charge of any thing the USA does.

the layers in the global power stack (each nation state the same):

  1. layer 1: global franchisor sets rules of play; establishes goals <=local nation state franchisees must obtain to remain in power.
  2. Layer 2: oligarch <= national (wall street beneficiaries who use their wealth to conform national outcome consistent with global powers).
  3. Layer 3: copyright y patent monopoly power constitute 90% of corporate Assets.
  4. Layer 4: think tank and other private orgs
  5. public<= layer 5: 527 elected government <= a tool to regulate members of public
  6. Layer 6: Intergov Bureaucracies limit and direct elected power to global goals.
  7. public<= layer 7: the 340,000,000 members of the media regulated public
  8. layer 8: stop and go economic system control
  9. layer 9: media controls info environment & public narrative (many techniques)

all layers but 5 and 7 are contained within an envelop of privately owned control freaks.

Election of president = false flag iperation. The purpose is to fund the private media with advertising revenue paid for by consumer taxpayers.

Article II and amendment 12 clearly deny American people any say in who is to be the P and VP of the USA.

Agree with Nemesiscalling, since 1947, standing orders from Layer 1<= demo the American excellence; deny superior economic power to average Americans . standing orders <=homogenize the world and standardize its governance.

American lifestyle and quality of life is indifferent to who the media puts into the white house.

by c1ue @ 26 said it best "Anyone against the "right" and "proper" Democrat sellouts to pharma, tech and enviro must be rednecks. It is precisely this view that galvanized the vote against HRC in 2016." the method used by the public layers is reflected here, it is called divide and conquer.

B reviewed the elements and factors that maintain the division of the masses..

Norwegian , Nov 1 2020 11:53 utc | 133
@Circe | Nov 1 2020 11:22 utc | 131
Biden is set to restore the JCPOA and treaties and policies that Trump burned.
The rest of the world knows that the US is not agreement capable, it does not matter for Iran one bit what happens on November 3rd.
H.Schmatz , Nov 1 2020 12:49 utc | 137
On the absence of a real left in the US ( is all right and more right..)and of a real program which could include real changes that could make any difference in people´s lives, on that what matters is political technology and communication based on demonizing the other candidate which translates in deep polarizing of societies with unexpected unknown consequences..

"Whoever wins, it will take a long time"

" If Trump were re-elected for another four years, it would be a real calamity and armed conflicts could even break out by the most radical groups, so that the country could be paralyzed "

"The ideological profile and policy of the United States is that of the president and, each one, even if they are from the same party, has maintained quite different political lines throughout history", says Rafael García, professor of International Relations at the USC. For this reason, he affirms that, in North America, "there is no strong party structure, but rather that the party acts as an electoral structure and it is on the candidates of each moment that certain policies are formed."

DEMOCRATS VS. REPUBLICANS. So much so that, as the professor explains, "the ideological configuration of the parties in the 20th century changed radically". On the one hand, he alludes to the fact that the Democrat, "in historical terms, was the party of the southern states, when they faced each other in the Civil War; racist states, which lasted until the 1920s ". Precisely, the political scientist indicates that "it was shortly before when the change took place, with the Roosevelt presidency, that he decided to change the configuration of the Democratic party as a result of the crisis of 29".

On the other hand, the Republican party, he points out, "was that of the union, that of the northern states, championed by Lincoln; the abolitionist party and that of the blacks ". So how did these changes come about until today? Rafael García points to "a consequence of the political strategies that the presidents embodied at all times, not because there was an ideological line behind each party ."

TRY TO ASSIMILATE THE AMERICAN MODEL TO THE EUROPEAN. For Rafael García, the Spaniards, when speaking of US politics, "make a mistake in translating our political structures" to those there. In other words, "in Europe the duality between left and right is widely assumed and we unconsciously transfer it to US policy." "That is a complete error" , sentence.

And it is that there " there is neither right nor left, there is right and more right ", affirms the professor. Which means that there does not exist and did not exist a historical labor-union party as such. In fact, the transmutation that is usually made from the democratic party to 'social democratic' is not correct . For García, Biden embodies "a more moderate man than the crazy Trump, but that does not mean that he has some kind of relationship with a left-wing thought ."

RIGHT AND RIGHT. "A multimillionaire gentleman, absolute representative of the establishment" (referring to Biden), and "a traditional gentleman, more conservative" (referring to Trump) ". "Although Biden is a Democrat, who perhaps holds stronger principles and is hopeful, identifying him with the left is still a long way from reality," he says. Therefore, it is denied that the Democrats are the American left and the Republicans the right .

THE CAMPAIGN LACKS PROGRAMMATIC INTEREST. For the USC political scientist, the US electoral campaign lacks interest: "It is absurd, it seems like a disqualification competition in which a political or government program is not exposed ." And every time Spain is also getting closer to that model of disputes.

"We are Americanized, in the sense that the weight of the parties is also being diluted in Spain in favor of the candidatesThese advisers are responsible for the growing division that is taking place in Western society ," he says.

THE GOVERNMENT IN THE HANDS OF POLITICAL ADVISORS. In Rafael García's opinion, the decision margin "is shrinking", that is, "the autonomy capacity of governments to make decisions is smaller, and they are conditioned ". So, what is the difference, in practice, in management, between PP and PSOE? "Little thing, in the end, little thing," he asserts.

That is why " that little thing can not be said to the voter, but must be mobilized with a degree of identification, unconditional adherence, so that it can be recognized in a brand ." And what is this transformation of Spanish politics due to? The professor is clear about it: " It is a translation of commercial marketing techniques to politics." Thus, a marketing advisor must "build customer loyalty" and a political advisor should build voter loyalty .

Now, if there are no significant differences between the two options, how to achieve it? "Through a demonization of the opposite and the creation of a hostility that is dangerous, because the divisions to which society is returning are irreconcilable ." In this way, García believes that " it is the work of political advisers who, apart from the difficulties that exist in societies, which are many, polarize them when it comes to building and mobilizing a faithful electorate, to the point that they make no difference what the party says or what the leader says ".

In the United States, as evidenced by this expert, "it does not matter if Trump does the atrocities he does, or if he said in the previous campaign that he could murder a person on Fifth Avenue in New York without anything happening to him ." This, transferred to the Spanish sphere, "assumes that the party can do any outrage: fraud, embezzlement, illegal financing ...". "That is something we are seeing, whatever party it is, but for the faithful voter it does not matter, because their party will continue to be so and will continue to listen to the channel and read the newspaper that supports it," he says.

THE ELECTORAL RESULT WILL BE EXTENDED OVER TIME. "I have no idea nor do I want to make forecasts, but I consider that Trump is a calamity and that if he were there for four more years it would be an absolute calamity ", says Professor García. However, " there is a state of opinion that fears that the result of these elections will be complicated and that there will be challenges, so that the end result will be a diabolical process of recount, county-by-county challenges, repetitions in certain districts. .. a real madness that can last several months ", he warns, something that," with this polarization trail, it is not known how it could end. "

" I am referring to the outbreak of armed conflicts; These people have weapons, radical groups, some of them crazy and who can shoot themselves in a demonstration, doing outrages as part of the institutional paralysis in which the country can be plunged ", he asserts.

This is how people, like those at SST, who lied about the real difference amongst Democrats and Republicans in real effective changes of policy, shouting to the four winds that "the Communists are coming", when they are not, and this way spread hatred and division amongst the US society as if there was no tomorrow so that to conserve their "tax cut", could end witnessing the total destruction of the US, not only as "Empire" ( a process already in march before Corona-fear and 2020 electoral process, a construct of decades of lying the electorate for the greed of a minority...), but also as a nation state. All these people who, holding privileged insider knowledege of the funtioning of the state as former insiders, should be held accountable for their willing and conscious participation in the build up of the social and economic disastaer to come....

Forecast at the end of the article posted and quoted above:

The future: Institutional paralysis

··· An institutional paralysis like the one that can come after 3-N "could already occur in 2000, in the elections between George Bush Jr. and Al Gore, but the latter accepted the results even though they were open to challenge, and that it avoided institutional collapse".

··· However, "now it does not seem that either of the two candidates is going to have a gesture of these characteristics, with which, if doubts already appear, it will not only be in the State, but the final collapse may be extremely long and with unimaginable consequences ", indicates Professor García. "It seems to me that the United States has a terrible situation ahead ", he sentenced.

H.Schmatz , Nov 1 2020 13:06 utc | 138
A scene of Game of Thrones which could summarize 2020 US election campaign, that it was based on throwing dirty to each other....But who has the real "power", not the "government"?:

https://twitter.com/IvanRedondo__/status/1322190858427502594

Feral Finster , Nov 1 2020 14:09 utc | 139
The Blob, the Borg, the Deep State, or whatever you want to call it, never left, largely because Trump was unable to effectively fight it.

No, a second Trump term, if it were to happen, would be no better, because Trump will still be Trump. Weak, stupid and easily manipulated.

vk , Nov 1 2020 14:20 utc | 141
@ Posted by: Down South | Nov 1 2020 7:04 utc | 122

I understand the rationale behind Trump's policies. But my conclusion is exactly the opposite: his attempt to stop the disintegration of the American Empire is accelerating the disintegration of the American Empire, not averting it.

The key here is to understand that that's not how the American Empire should work. The USA continues to deindustrialize at an accelerated pace under Trump; Wall Street was never stronger than under Donald Trump; American debt was never higher. And now, unemployment is as high as during the 1929 era.

The American Empire is the American Empire precisely because it doesn't need to produce anything it needs except defense. It prints money in order to siphon wealth from the rest of the world, enriching its economy while impoverishing the rest. That's the only way the Empire can function - any other way will result in its destruction.

Trump's ideology will destroy the American Empire. It will collapse under a wave of hyperinflation, skyrocketing unemployment, shortage of goods and collapsing economic output.

JoeG , Nov 1 2020 14:52 utc | 144
Advance FL voting #s are SERIOUS BAD NEWS for the Blue team. Joe just might be done before it even starts. :) https://joeisdone.github.io/florida/
JoeG , Nov 1 2020 14:59 utc | 146
President Trump pulling over 15% Hispanic early votes in NC. :) https://joeisdone.github.io/northcarolina/
Down South , Nov 1 2020 15:11 utc | 151
vk @ 141
The manufacturing sector saw 17,000 jobs added after four months of flat activity. This followed a strong run of an average of 22,000 manufacturing jobs added every month in 2018 and 15,800 per month in 2017. Those gains followed two weak years that saw 7,000 manufacturing jobs lost in 2016 and only 5,800 per month added in 2015.

In the last 30 months of President Obama's term, manufacturing employment grew by 185,000 or 1.5%. In President Trump's first 30 months, manufacturers added 499,000 jobs, expanding by 4.0%. In the same 30-month time span during the mature, post-recovery phase of the business cycle, some 314,000 more manufacturing jobs were added under Trump than under Obama, a 170% advantage

https://www.google.co.za/amp/s/www.forbes.com/v/s/www.forbes.com/sites/chuckdevore/2019/07/10/in-trumps-first-30-months-manufacturing-up-by-314000-jobs-over-obama-what-states-are-hot/amp/%3famp_js_v=0.1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%253D#ampf=
He's doing a really great job of de-industrialising the US.

I'm not including current figures because of the economic impact of COVID.

Noirette , Nov 1 2020 15:55 utc | 161
As Trump is going to win (provided the usual conditions pertain, fraud is not over the normal levels, and the whole sh*t-story doesn't end up in the courts or fought out on the streets, whereupon no reasoned predictions can be made), speculation about Biden as Prez. is a waste of time.

The last part of the Pepe piece in b's post, which gives reasons to not vote Biden, my take.:

Obama ran on Hopey-Changey and on his projected charm, actually glib con-man gab. Worked wonderfully, imagine getting the Nobel Prize because you had a dead-beat Dad who was from Kenya and you scored B+ for public speaking? Argh. (The real reason: killing will continue, the status quo is preserved..)

Anyway, the ACA was a damp squib, it didn't solve anything, and depending on pov was in effect a gift to Mega Insurance or was just 'lame' or as often, 'favored some over others' etc.

Then the Financial Crisis hit. The Obama admin. didn't prevent it (one might argue they couldn't not sure) and it didn't 'repair' as far as the ppl were concerned. Banks and Some Big Cos were bailed out - millions of homeowners were tossed to the curb by Banks. Child poverty, hunger, increased; wages weren't upped, health stats got worse No need to go on - this provoked tremendous anger. The 2010 elections saw big R gains, 2014 they took the Senate, iirc.

(Who cared about foreign parts like Ukraine, Syria? is what I'm saying.)

That Trump would win in 2016 was obvious as soon as he became a candidate. He was the cartoon contrast of Obomber - white, fat, orange, tall, R vs. D, outspoken, strident, clumsy (vs. the smooth-talking con), opinionated, stupid, and outrageous in a way. Click bait and viewer bait for the MSM - but not for no reason.

DT's electoral promises were both opportunistic and more profound: like fire-brand preachers of old, Build The Wall - MAGA - i.e. pledging a return to the past (see, again the opposite of Barry, who hoped for the future) -- Stop the wars, undo past mistakes (Dems don't run on anti-war..!), and, most important:

Drain the Swamp. The Deplorables are not ordinary ppl, but criminals in positions of power. By putting this forward, Trump became a mirror of the ppl, part of them.

Imho, Trump's record (null or abysmal or whatever depending on pov) is not enough for rejecting him in favor of loathed "failed" policies of the past - Clinton gang, Biden a part of it, Obama, etc. (By US voters I mean.)

but see Kiza 8, gottlieb 63, dave 72, Jack, others, >> no difference.

Down South , Nov 1 2020 15:59 utc | 162
...Bringing the supply chain back to the US and re-industrialising the US isn't going to happen overnight or even in a couple of quarters. Just like the process to de-industrialise didn't happen overnight. But that the process has started, it is undeniable, and will only pick up pace when he wins a second term.
c1ue , Nov 1 2020 16:01 utc | 163
Poll update: Nov 1 update Trafalgar vs. MSM vs. 2016

4 new Trafalgar polls came out for 10/29: Arizona, Nevada, Florida and Michigan. Trump expanded his lead on Biden in Florida and Michigan vs. Trafalgar's earlier October polls:
FL from +2.3% Trump to +2.7%
MI from +0.6% Trump to +2.5%

Trump did worse in Nevada and AZ: AZ from +4% Trump to +2.5%.

Nevada polled +2.3% Biden

Once again: the question is if Trump outperforms vs. MSM polls. If he repeats anywhere near his 2016 - he will win.

William Gruff , Nov 1 2020 16:06 utc | 164
Trump can only win again if the establishment/deep state is once again exceptionally overconfident and asleep in the control room. They have numerous ways of swinging the election at the last hour, from pre-hacked Diebold paperless voting machines to hanging chads to simply having their operatives scattered around the nation throw ballots away and fabricate the tallies. Oddly enough this extreme carelessness is still possible. The establishment/deep state have not yet come to terms with what caused their plans to blow up in 2016 and really do seriously believe that Russia had something to do with it, even though they have no idea what Russia might have actually done to wreck their expected electoral blowout by Clinton. They also think that part of the problem was that Trump wasn't vilified harshly enough (they wanted the election to at least appear competitive), and they think they have that covered this time around. It could be that the over-the-top hysteria from the TDS victims has them overestimating the anti-Trump sentiment, though.

Still, the establishment/deep state screwing up exactly the same way twice in a row doesn't seem likely. Even so, their profound incompetence continues to astonish, so maybe we will once again get treated to the delightful spectacle of crowds of middle class faux left dilettante snowflakes melting down.

Don Bacon , Nov 1 2020 16:14 utc | 165
@ Down South #159

It not hard to see why big pharma despises Trump. They stand to lose a lot of money. My health stock investment has almost doubled during Trump's tenure.

Anne , Nov 1 2020 16:24 utc | 167
vk @158 - Not acreage - but based (until Andrew Jackson, hardly any principled person's prez) on PROPERTY VALUE. JUST as in the good ol' UK. Yep - despite NPR folks believing otherwise (clealry never visited a history book) - the aristo controlled (in what way really different?) Britain was actually a "democracy":, and was so from Magna Carta on... Of course it was a, how to say, constrained, constricted "democracy," but then so was the original one in Athens. Those who count as THE Demos - always been a matter for property holder concern... So in GB - male, 21 and over and owning a property of a taxable (always this, huh) value of a certain sum. Ensured that the hoi polloi males over 21 couldn't vote - and for the exact same reasons, I do not doubt, as the intentions behind the Electoral College construct by those less than admirable FFs. Gotta prevent the vast masses of the population - the great unwashed, "the bewildered herd" in Hamilton's verbiage I do believe - from having the ability to grab (well, they knew all about blood-letting theft of land, after all, didn't they?) that sacred "property." (Sacred, surely 'cos owned by the equivalent of the Murican aristos.)

Little - no, Nothing has changed.

c1ue , Nov 1 2020 16:30 utc | 168
@Down South #159
It shouldn't be surprising. Actual doctors and nurses are, by and large, really great people. They don't want to turn away anyone.
The poorest in America can't afford health care - even the middle class can't really as testified to by the millions of bankruptcies caused by medical expenses. Hospitals thus were losing large sums of profit treating people who simply could not pay.

Obamacare threw many (not all) of those people onto health insurance company plans by having the government pay the health insurance premium and then having the existing health insurance customers pay via increased premiums - all this on top of the ongoing health care profiteering. That's why Obamacare should really have been called "No Health Insurance Company or Hospital Left Behind".

The existence of Obamacare also distracts people from the real problem: actual affordable health care - which every other nation in the world except the US has, entirely due to national health care.

I've posted this before - I will post it again.

In 2006, I left the semiconductor software industry on my own because I disagreed with management decisions to outsource all jobs to India rather than change their fundamentally flawed business model. Semiconductor software companies are the only part of the design chain that charges by software license rather than per part made - this was great in the early days of semiconductors but is a disaster when the industry consolidates to 5 large multinational but US based companies.

In 2007, I experienced a retinal detachment right after my COBRA ended. I paid $35,000 in cash to get that fixed - including a 5 hour total elapsed journey through a hospital which included a 1 hour surgical room occupancy and 1 hour of recovery time. In the door at 6:30 am and waiting for a taxi at 12:30 pm. The UCSF doctor that attended to me (and did a great job to be clear) said his fee out of all that was $1200.

The following year, some cells stirred loose by the corrective surgery landed on my now-attached retina and started reproducing. Instead of coughing up another $35K (or more), I chose to fly to Australia, consult with the best eye doctor recommended by the Royal Opthalmological Society of Australia and New Zealand.
That doctor's office was literally a light year more advanced than UCSF - supposedly one of the premier teaching hospitals in the US. I pay him AU$5000 - US$4000 at the time, plus another AU$800 for the hospital visit. The Sydney Eye Hospital gave me the choice of staying a 2nd night (I stayed 1 night because I was at the end of the queue for the day, as a foreigner), for free, including meals and medications administered on site.

I paid literally 1/7th the price in AU vs. the US - an Australia is not a 3rd world country. The doctor got paid 3.5x in absolute terms. The service I received was immensely better. Even including travel costs: flight plus 2 weeks in AU (which I was vacationing), the overall cost was still 1/5th of my US experience.

That opened my eyes (literally) to just how fucked up the US system is.

It has only gotten worse since.

c1ue , Nov 1 2020 16:36 utc | 169
@Don Bacon #165
Stock price doesn't bear any short term correlation with profits.
Just look at Tesla, Uber and what not.
Health care sector profits have increased disproportionately since Obamacare: CFR report on health insurance company profits
Since ACA implementation on January 1, 2014, health insurance stocks outperformed the S&P 500 by 106 percent.

106% = more than double the overall market.

Down South , Nov 1 2020 16:36 utc | 170
Don Bacon @ 165

Trump has not been able to repeal and replace Obamacare yet so the profits are still rolling in.

vk , Nov 1 2020 17:00 utc | 171
@ Posted by: Anne | Nov 1 2020 16:24 utc | 167

You're right. The early liberals - specially from the American South - loved to compare themselves with the Athenian Republic. The rationale is that the existence of slaves enabled them to enjoy unparalleled freedom. Black slaves were frequently compared with helots when the problem of slave revolts appeared (with the pro-abolitionists evoking the figure of Spartacus). The South considered itself freer than the North in the USA - it was only after their destruction in 1865 that the tide turned and the North became, retrospectively, the paragon of liberal freedom.

In Europe, England was considered the ultimate free nation. Even American liberals (including Benjamin Franklin) built up their legitimacy on being of English stock (Anglo-Saxon race). With time, liberals begun to legitimize their hegemony with a worldwide racial hierarchy - hence the definition of American democracy as Herrenvolk Democracy ("Master race democracy").

And yes, the original liberals considered the Glorious Revolution of 1688 as their birth date - not the French Revolution of 1789 (which they condemned as illiberal, or "radical"). The founders of neoliberalism (Hayek, Mises, etc. etc.) put 1870 as the apex of liberalism, which they tried to revive.

Wind Hippo , Nov 1 2020 17:06 utc | 172
Escobar writes: "In contrast, two near-certain redeeming features would be the return of the US to the JCPOA, or Iran nuclear deal, which was Obama-Biden's only foreign policy achievement"

Anyone who actually thinks this is either ignorant or moronic. Biden will absolutely require Iran to limit their ballistic missiles before "rejoining" that then-altered deal. Iran will never let this happen. Thus the deal is essentially dead [as far as US involvement goes, which the other parties should ignore]. MOA notes this as well.

I don't know why though MOA refers to Escobar at all here though. The ignorance demonstrated in the above quote should be enough to disqualify such a person from any discussion about Biden, Iran, etc. and to also ignore anything else such a person claims. You might as well quote a schizophrenic you meet down by the river for his take on Iran and the JCPOA. Might as well learn sign language and ask the chimps at your local zoo what they think about it.

Down South , Nov 1 2020 17:13 utc | 173
c1ue @ 168

You are not the only American who is doing it. They have even developed a term for it - medical tourism:

With rising healthcare costs in the US and the rise of health tourism destinations that offer quality and affordable healthcare perked up by a beautiful travel experience, Americans are scampering to book appointments with healthcare providers far away from home. Yearly, millions of patients travel from countries lacking healthcare infrastructure or less advanced in a particular area of medical care to countries that provide highly-specialized medical care.
https://www.magazine.medicaltourism.com/article/top-10-medical-tourism-destinations-world
William Gruff , Nov 1 2020 17:22 utc | 174
Noirette @161: " Drain the Swamp. The Deplorables are not ordinary ppl, but criminals in positions of power. By putting this forward, Trump became a mirror of the ppl, part of them."

True enough, and as even the bunny claims, this was part of the act. But those who think Trump's upset victory in 2016 was part of the plan need to offer up a better explanation for why those criminals in positions of power would want to kneecap themselves with public exposure. The rationale has to be extraordinarily critical and of huge value to the elites because that price of exposure has been monumentally damaging to them.

Keep in mind that one of the most important (if not the most important) aspects of US presidential elections is the "electoral mandate" . Far more important than specific campaign promises is the general tone of the campaign. If a winning candidate had campaigned on ending wars, bringing jobs back from abroad, and fighting corruption in government, this isn't just an indication that the public wants something done about these issues. First and foremost it forces an acknowledgement that these are indeed major issues that the public wants to be part of the national discourse that the capitalist mass media tries to control. Allowing these issues to become part of the national discourse is diametrically opposed to the interests of the power elites. They do not want these issues to even be discussed, much less addressed by the state.

So why would they intentionally force these issues into the forefront of national discourse? That is, after all, what Trump's victory did, despite the establishment's best efforts to distract with "Russia! Russia! Russia!" and "Racism, sexism and pussy-grabbing, oh my!" . These issues were already smoldering below the surface due to Sanders' campaign, so why would the elites want them fanned into flames?

Answer: They didn't. As much as the issues that the winner campaigns on getting elevated in priority by the "electoral mandate" , the loser's issues get diminished. Trump was supposed to lose, and lose bigly, and in the process the things he campaigned on were supposed to be crushed down to objects of ridicule by the corporate mass media. Trump's resounding defeat was supposed to signal that Americans rejected Trump's "conspiracy theories" about some fictitious "deep state" that only existed in Trump's imagination, burying the suspicions that the election fraud committed against Sanders aroused. Trump being ignominiously trounced was supposed to allow the mass media to say that Americans unequivocally voiced their opposition to ending war and their support for intervention in Syria, clearing the way for Clinton's "no fly zone" . Trump being utterly humiliated in the polls was supposed to decisively demoralize the "deplorables" , convincing them with finality that there will never again be good-paying blue collar jobs and that they are just disposable relics, while at the same time crippling their resistance to the social engineering of "identity politics" ; social engineering that I should point out is even more ill-conceived and incompetently executed than the 737MAX MCAS system.

Trump was supposed to lose and take those issues with him to the dustbin of history.

It is important to understand this point because it clarifies who our enemies really are and helps us to understand how they view the world.

lysias , Nov 1 2020 17:41 utc | 177
Ancient Athens excluded from power slaves and resident foreigners (metics). Also women in the families of male citizens, although one could argue that they had virtual representation through the male citizens in their families. So also for the children in citizens' families, although they would have full rights once they reached adulthood. The adult male citizens who had full political rights were about 20 percent of the population of Attica.

And even the poorest citizens had much more political power than average citizens of today's so-called democracies have today. They could attend and vote in the Assembly, they could be chosen by lot to serve in such bodies as the Council and juries, and to serve in most offices. And for doing all these things there was pay, so that poor citizens had particular motivation to participate, which they did. Just read Aristophanes. No wonder most rich Athenians hated the system.

NemesisCallimg , Nov 1 2020 18:20 utc | 179
@176 H schmatz

Again, you are mistaken. I am getting tired of correcting you.FoxNews drug their heels when it came to supporting DJT in 2015 until it was clear that the majority of conservatives actually wanted DJT as their candidate.

It was at that point that business-smartz kicked in and they had to acknowledge that they must throw their weight behind the Trump ticket lest they prove themselves the faux-conservative Rinos they actually were/are.

Business 101, my friend. You wanna keep the advert. revenue coming in, you produce content your audience actually agrees with.

TBH and AFAIK Tucker Carlson is still the only truly sane conservative on FOx news. The rest, including Hannity, don't neccessarily mind the endless wars so long as the public endorses them. They are chameleons without an ethical lodestar guiding their commentary.

jinn , Nov 1 2020 18:23 utc | 180

gruff wrote

Trump being utterly humiliated in the polls was supposed to decisively demoralize the "deplorables", convincing them with finality that there will never again be good-paying blue collar jobs and that they are just disposable relics,
_____________________________________________

The problem is you think the oligarchs are every bit as stupid as you are. It would be nice if they were, but unfortunately they're not.

First of all lets examine who are these deplorables who you imagine were set up by the oligarchs to be crushed and demoralized by running Trump as their candidate.

The deplorables are:
-The Americans that own the guns

-The Bible thumping American jihadist

-The Americans that sign up for the police and military and in those rolls operate the states weaponry

-The Americans who believe the tree of liberty needs to be watered with the blood of tyrants

I could go on but all you have to do is tune into the corporate mass media that caters to the deplorables to find out who they are and what they are being sold.

But Mr Gruff is just too stupid to figure out why in the world the oligarchs might want to not antagonize that segment of the population.

The oligarchs would have to have lost their frikken minds to hire trump for the purpose of giving the deplorables a big "fuck you" as you imagine. The oligarchs are well aware that they already gave a big fat finger to the deplorables when they engineered the election of Obama (not to mention the 40 preceding years of marginalizing that segment of the population) and just maybe it was time to pacify that segment of the population that was growing larger and a bit restless.

Charles Peterson , Nov 1 2020 19:26 utc | 183
William Gruff @ 174
But those who think Trump's upset victory in 2016 was part of the plan need to offer up a better explanation for why those criminals in positions of power would want to kneecap themselves with public exposure. The rationale has to be extraordinarily critical and of huge value to the elites because that price of exposure has been monumentally damaging to them.
Amen!!! I don't think that people who forward that narrative fully understand how damaging this exposure has been to them.

By being exposed they have been shown to exist . This is super critical! No more is talk of the deep state relegated to the lunatic fringe where they can be easily derided as "conspiracy theorists"

Whether Trump can drain the swamp or not is to be seen but what is not in dispute is that they exist.

Posted by: Down South | Nov 1 2020 18:31 utc | 181 How can the blob "return" when they never really left?

To pretend that Trump is some special Peacemaker, trying oh so hard to overcome deep state resistance to rolling back empire, is Trumpism. Escobar is always there. Trump must be understood as a leading creature of the swamp himself. Trying so hard just as Obama was trying so hard.

The relative scores settled terribly are more a matter of opportunity than ruthless efficiency. Though it is true that "success" requires dialing it back a bit, and having the likes of Bolton around is a way of ensuring either that nothing gets done, or we all end up ashes. Trump managed to axe Bolton on time, that time.

It's avoidance of those lower probability mega catastrophes that is the principle reason of voting trump out with regards to foreign policy. And there are other reasons.

[Nov 01, 2020] The sad story about Obama Nobel peace price

It was a present from globalist neoliberal elite.
Nov 01, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
Russ , Nov 1 2020 7:53 utc | 123
The globalist "Great Reset" wants to overcome the diverse rising obstacles to globalism's perpetuation, especially the intensifying centrifugal political and economic forces which directly oppose it or which hinder it. The global elites see politics as such, and any mode of economy other than that which is strictly regimented and controlled by the US government, the oligopoly MNCs and a handful of globalization entities, as antiquated obstructions to its power and profit. From the point of view of the Earth and especially humanity it's essential to obstruct the globalist-technocratic elite as much as possible.

So it follows that anything which sustains and multiplies the number of obstacles any globalist actor has to traverse is a good thing, while anything that streamlines, unifies, renders more "efficient" is bad. This includes the character of US foreign policy. Although it will remain aggressively imperialist for as long as this government exists, it makes a significant difference how disciplined and superficially "kinder and gentler" the facade is, as opposed to how wayward, openly brutish and gratuitously insulting to everyone in the world. Real anti-globalists always have known this, and the need never has been more critical than now. From this point of view Trump is vastly preferable. The across-the-board hatred of the elites for him is the best recommendation.

Trump's election was a monkey-wrench in the works, and although the elites were able to make lemonade by turning anti-Trumpism into an organizing principle among the bewildered masses, they certainly want to return to having a reliable, fully pliant figurehead in the White House. With Biden/Harris they'd get the best of both worlds - they either get the obedient Biden or the even more aggressively obedient Harris who would be all the more controllable since she has no political support of her own and wouldn't have been elected even if Biden became president and then had to be retired.

So it follows that gratuitous US imperial belligerence is in fact being "creatively destructive", to use one of capitalism's own religious terms, in spite of the US empire's own long-run goals and interests. The worst thing would be for US foreign policy to become less Kaiser and more Bismarck. The more chaos the better. It may seem more painful in the short run than running home to hide under adult mama's skirts the way almost all former anti-imperialists, anti-globalists, "radicals", "leftists" have done, since they all were frauds all along who can't take the slightest pain or hardship and would rather die than do any movement-building work, but for the long run good of the Earth including humanity there's no other option.

Norwegian , Nov 1 2020 8:09 utc | 124

@Don Bacon | Oct 31 2020 23:19 utc | 76
Obama actually surged 70,000 troops into Afghanistan, raising Bush's 30K to 100K+. That got Mr Hope & Change the Nobel Peace Prize.

Obama got the Nobel Prize in 2009, the year he became president. The deadline for nominations to the Nobel Committee is January 31 the same year. So either he did something extraordinarily good between his inauguration January ~20 and January 31, or the prize was awarded preemptively.

The Nobel Peace price committee resides in Oslo and consists of politically appointed members, that is from parties of the Norwegian parliament (Stortinget). The chairman at the time was Thorbjørn Jagland from the same Labour party as now chief NATO puppet Jens Stoltenberg. Stoltenberg and Jagland were supposed rivals to become Prime Minister in 1996 after Gro Harlem "We have other methods" Brundtland who became WHO director (Hmmm...?).

Jagland is famous for being an imbecile foreign minister. He was once interviewed and stated that Norway is a very important country in the world. His reasoning was that when flying around and meeting people, he always saw a large number of Norwegian flags. I kid you not.

Jagland is also famous for winning the battle against Jens Stoltenberg to become Prime Minister in 1996. He then resigned one year later after winning the election in 1997, because he had promised to resign if the labour party got fewer votes than 4 years earlier, i.e. 36.9%. So he is forever the idiot Thorbjørn "36.9" Jagland, who gave away the government position to the opposition after winning an election.

So this person was obviously qualified to become the chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee, he had shown that he could be made to do anything, including awarding the Peace Prize preemptively to Obama and get his picture with Obama. Even Obama was embarrassed.

Russ , Nov 1 2020 8:23 utc | 125
Norwegian | Nov 1 2020 8:09 utc | 131

"Obama got the Nobel Prize in 2009" This was part of the propaganda to normalize permanent wars of imperial aggression as the new baseline for "peace". Just part of the totalitarian "New Normal" the globalists led by the US government have been working toward.

[Oct 31, 2020] The ban against domestic propaganda that had been in place since shortly after WW2 was repealed in 2013

Et tu, Obama?
Oct 31, 2020 | greenwald.substack.com


Willow Oct 29

The ban against domestic propaganda that had been in place since shortly after WW2 was repealed in 2013. It was known as the Smith-Mundt Act. As part of the repeal, NDAA authorized a huge grant program for NGOs, think tanks, civil society and other experts outside government who are engaged in "counter-propaganda" related work. Sounds like doublespeak for censorship and support for "fake news." I hope Glenn will investigate and connect the dots some day.

Tru Oct 29

omg. I read the whole article...and I'm not really that smart.

Best line: " ...but in journalism, evidence is required before news outlets can validly start blaming some foreign government for the release of information. And none has ever been presented."

[Oct 30, 2020] Why America First Is Here To Stay, Even if Donald Trump Is Defeated by Michael Lind

Oct 26, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

Whether or not this is Donald Trump's last year as president, the near-certainty of new episodes of reckless overreach by American foreign policymakers means that this is not the last the country has seen of his America First policy.

me title=

[Oct 30, 2020] Why Are These Anti-Russian And Anti-Chinese Narratives So Similar-

Notable quotes:
"... I hope you don't mind me opining that the story as written is most likely to be a complete fiction, designed to hide the real source of the fantasy story book that is the Steele dossier. The main mission here being to admit that the dossier was indeed a pack of lies but with the important corollary that J Steele did indeed do some sort of research to dig up the dirt on Trump. Heaven forbid that it ever was discovered that himself, Pablo Miller and Sergei Skripal made the whole thing up over a meal of Zizzi's garlic bread and risotto, washed down with white wine and a bottle of Vodka over at the Mill. ..."
Oct 30, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Caliman , Oct 29 2020 16:04 utc | 6

After more than four years of Russiagate we finally learn (paywalled original ) where the Steele dossier allegations about nefarious relations between Trump and Russia came from:

A Wall Street Journal investigation provides an answer: a 40-year-old Russian public-relations executive named Olga Galkina fed notes to a friend and former schoolmate who worked for Mr. Steele.​ The Journal relied on interviews, law-enforcement records, declassified documents and the identification of Ms. Galkina by a former top U.S. national security official.

In 2016, Ms. Galkina was working in Cyprus at an affiliate of XBT Holding SA, a web-services company best known for its Webzilla internet hosting unit. XBT is owned by Russian internet entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev.

That summer, she received a request from an employee of Mr. Steele to help unearth potentially compromising information on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump 's links to Russia, according to people familiar with the matter. Ms. Galkina was friends with the employee, Igor Danchenko, since their school days in Perm, a Russian provincial city near the Ural mountains.

Ms. Galkina often came drunk to work and eventually got fired by her company. She took revenge by alleging that the company and its owner Gubarev were involved in the alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee. A bunch of other false allegations in the dossier were equally based on Ms. Galkina's fantasies.

Mark Ames @MarkAmesExiled - 18:39 UTC · Oct 28, 2020

So the Steele Dossier that kicked off 4 years of Russiagate hysteria among the US ruling class was cooked up by two Russian alcoholics from Perm. "Gogolesque" does not begin to describe the grotesque credulity & stupidity of the American elites.

The tales in the dossier were real disinformation from Russians but not ' Russian disinformation ' of the American Newspeak variant.

The FBI, and others involved, knew very early on that the Steele dossier was a bunch of lies. But the issue was kept in the public eyes by continues leaks of additional nonsense. All this was to press Trump to take more and more anti-Russian measures which he did with unprecedented generosity . The accusations about a Trump-Russia connection were the 'Russia bad' narrative that pressed and allowed Trump to continue the anti-Russian policies of the Obama/Biden administration.

A similar string of continuous policies from the Obama/Biden administration's 'Pivot to Asia' and throughout the four years of Trump is the anti-China campaign.

We now hear a lot about Hunter and Joe Biden's corrupt deals with Chinese entities. These accusations come with more evidence and are far more plausible than the stupid Steele dossier claims. Their importance is again twofold. They will be used to press a potential President Joe Biden to act against China but they will primarily be used to intensify a public anti-China narrative that creates public support for such policies.

As Caitlin Johnstone points out :

I don't know how or at what level, but we are being played. A narrative is being aggressively rammed down our throats about China in exactly the same way it was being aggressively rammed down our throats about Russia four years ago; two unabsorbed nations the US government has long had plans to attack and undermine .
Russiagate was never really about Trump. It was never about his campaign staff meeting with Russians, it was never about a pee tape, it was never about an investigation into any kind of hidden loyalties to the Kremlin. Russiagate was about narrative managing the United States into a new cold war with Russia with the ultimate target being its far more powerful ally China, and ensuring that Trump played along with that agenda.
...
If Biden gets in we can expect the same thing: a president who advances escalations against both Russia and China while being accused of the other party of being soft on China. Both parties will have their foot on the gas toward brinkmanship with a nuclear-armed nation, with no one's foot anywhere near the brakes.

It is thus assured that the verbal attacks on China , the search for new anti-China allies like the Hindu-fascist India and the dangerous weaponizing of Taiwan will all continue under a Biden administration.

""Gogolesque" does not begin to describe the grotesque credulity & stupidity of the American elites."

Not at all. The "elites" know what's going on; it's being done for their benefit, after all. It's the "normals" who are being sheared of the little wool left on our backs. Just one more true grand larceny before the whole thing falls apart. And for this we need a real enemy. From the great Antiwar.com:

https://news.antiwar.com/2020/10/28/raytheon-ceo-the-idea-that-biden-would-cut-defense-spending-is-ridiculous/

Bemildred , Oct 29 2020 16:10 utc | 7

It's like living in a "B" movie. Probably many of the same sorts of people behind it too. The lack of imagination and knowledge in these propaganda narratives tells you a lot about the mediocrities behind them. In considering these US foreign policy excesses, real and imagined, I keep thinking at some point reality is going to raise its ugly head and Washington will collapse in a puddle of spite. I expect the next adminstration to be overwhelmed by its domestic problems, along with quite a few other countries. I look at what is going on in Western societies today and I think of the movie Brazil.

ptb , Oct 29 2020 16:17 utc | 8
I think this stuff will matter more if Trump wins than if Biden wins. (I'm thinking 3:2 odds in favor of Biden, by the way).

If Biden wins, Republicans will make a lot of noise, but that's about it. Without a huge majority of Congress, they can't do even what little token effects Democrats had to "stop Trump". Then, whenever Harris takes over, she can just distance herself from the whole thing.

If Trump wins, however, the flag humpers in the administration will have the ammunition they need in the fight over Russiagate. Not to shut it down, but to take control of it for their own political ends, and perhaps take down someone famous in the media and intimidate the rest - in a replay of the post-9/11 Bush era (not that it ever stopped). So you can thank Democrats for handing them the setup to do all that, not to mention for nominating Biden, if that is the path we take.

More realistically, Trump still loses, but Dems might fail to get an effective majority in the Senate (something like a 51-49 majority might not be enough in practice, because the most conservative Democrats in the Senate vote Republican half the time.). Again it makes no difference for foreign policy, but it could really change how the country responds to economic hardship, now baked in due to the virus.

Down South , Oct 29 2020 16:28 utc | 9
The MIC needs a Cold War to boost military expenditure. The bigger the boogeyman the more money will be spent the more profits will be generated.

They don't want a hot war as all those profits are meaningless if you are reduced to ashes.

The last thing the MIC can afford is for peace and goodwill amongst nations to break out. There is absolutely no profit in that.

Eisenhower warned against the rise of the MIC for this very reason. If war is profitable then to keep generating more profits you need to keep on generating more wars.

Noirette , Oct 29 2020 17:11 utc | 13

Trump proposed to ally with Russia against China. MAGA clearly implies the US was, is weakening, one way out (classical) is to ally (perhaps only lightly) with one of the other two strong powers. This was total anathema to part of the PTB, mostly represented (officially) by Dems. An all-out attack on Trump thus took place (before he was elected, because all was known) as a stooge for Russia, etc. Russia 3x, Russiagate, all of it clumsily made-up rubbish.

Surely now with Hunter's lap-top and the exposé of Biden-China ties (pay to play at the highest level, potentially billions, not minor corruption chicken-sh*t..) it is possible to grasp that one faction of what some call the Deep State is more pro-China i.e. the aspirations towards that type of society (I leave that aspect aside ..) and the opportunities for money extraction / deals - see tech etc. / also sales (MIC, etc.) favor China. The noise about Chinese incursions (Tibet, sea.. etc.), Chinese human-rights violations (Uighurs, etc.), and the OBOR initiative have always been somewhat glancing more pro-forma than anything else..

It was the 'Dem' faction of the duopoly, Obiman + Biden who 'did' Ukraine, an anti-Russian move (on the face of it. Perhaps it was just an extraction scheme, Mafia style. Of course they had the keen involvement of Germany and support from France.)

I have boiled down complex issues to just one "narrative arc", a simplification if you will, I am aware there is much more to it all

Question. There is a well-know board on which sit, amongst many others:

Mary T. Barra (CEO Gen. Mot.)
Carlos Ghosn (Renault etc.)
H. Kruger (BMW)
Elon Musk

Henry Paulson
Lloyd Blankfein
Laurence Fink (Blackrock)
M. L. Corbat (Citigroup)

Tim Cook
Michael Dell (Dell co.)
S. Nadella (Microsoft)

answer:

https://www.sem.tsinghua.edu.cn/en/aboutsem/advMem.html

Here is the Board of Trustees of Moscow University, Lavrov in first place:

https://english.mgimo.ru/basic-facts/board-of-trustees

I believe such minor examples are quite telling.

Yes the elites know what is going on. (Caliman 6)

karlof1 , Oct 29 2020 17:16 utc | 14
IMO, the current Imperial policy goals of the Outlaw US Empire will continue regardless who wins. IMO, the ultimate question is if the Empire has enough power to continue on its current track. As most know, I see a drowning empire trying to disrupt the rapid rise of two strategically bound nations and those allied with them. China just finished planning and publishing its 14th 5-year plan. This Global Times editorial is supremely confidant for good reason:

"The fifth plenary session of the 19th CPC Central Committee is leading the country forward. China has the capital and ability to do so. In this turbulent world, the meeting has provided a practical and significant guide for our direction, goal and tactics. Despite the many problems, China's political philosophy can constantly generate positive energy to solve the problems, instead of letting the problems crush positive energy.

"At the moment, China is facing the most problems and challenges. However, the country is also the most confident now. Other countries have posed many difficulties, but they provide reference and proof that we are doing better . As the world suffers from shrinking demand and negative growth, we are demanding real and comprehensive growth to realize new achievements in six areas. The country is self-driven ." [My Emphasis]

It's been announced that "The 19th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) will hold a press conference Friday to introduce the guiding principles of its fifth plenary session."

Here are two important articles related to China's next phase that demand reading, "China sets 'pragmatic' targets through 2035 ; and "CPC vows to grasp opportunities amid major strategic [development] period" . I intend to use these and other items in a follow up to the article I wrote in anticipation of China's new phase while recapping the one just concluded.

As for Russia's direction, that was very clearly mapped out by Putin and Lavrov's recent Valdai Club speeches and Q & A sessions and other interviews over the past ten days or so. Compared to the drowning Outlaw US Empire, China and Russia combine to offer the world two not so different examples that are clearly superior to Neoliberal Parasitism. And the longstanding Imperial edict of the Outlaw US Empire saying no threat of a better example can be allowed to exist forms the basis for the confrontation. However, it's no longer just China and Russia that provide such threats as a majority of the world's nations want to join Win-Win and scupper Zero-sum. So the already joined contest between two differing ideological blocs will escalate until the drowning Outlaw US Empire finds it no longer possess the power to dominate outside its borders, but will still have its domestic populace to exploit until they too revolt.

Ilya G Poimandres , Oct 29 2020 17:27 utc | 15
The similarities are there, except that Trump's investigation had not one document of compromat even after 3 years, whilst Biden's already has many from day 1.

Yes, the deepstate attacks Russia from the left, and China from the right, but this does not imply that members of the body politic are not subservient to either side, ever.

Only that Trump was never a Russian stooge, nor did they ever hold compromising documents over him, whilst Biden seems the Cleon of the modern age, that his business partners say he is. Is this compromat? Maybe, but at the very least this is graft. And that should be enough to send him into the gutter.

Babyl-on , Oct 29 2020 17:32 utc | 16
This is a good report as is usually the case here at MoA. Yet, there is nothing really new in this at all other than the details of how the Western empire goes about enforcing its will on the world.
Sense August 6, 1945 the Imperial policy has been "Global full spectrum domination." and to that end it was determined that Russia and China were to be considered one enemy and must be attacked simultaneously.
In the 75 years sense that date when the Western empire declared the world belonged to it and it alone to rule the Western empire has slaughtered innocent people across the globe tens of millions of them, additionally in the last 20 years alone the Western empire has displaced over 37 million people, kicked them out of their homes destroyed their towns and communities. For 75 years non stop slaughter of innocent people.
Western Liberal Democracy and indeed Western civilization itself is an utter and contemptible failure irredeemable in any form which we might recognize as "democracy'
wagelaborer , Oct 29 2020 18:22 utc | 24

Why do media corporations put out remake after remake of popular movies? Is it because they lack imagination, or is it that audiences prefer the familiar.
They use the same war propaganda time after time because the audience falls for it more easily if they've heard it before.
I agree with Michael, however, that we are in dire planetary straits at this point.
Apparently, our ruling overlords are putting in a Hail Mary plan to slow down the destruction of the ecosystem. I don't believe that it is the virus that made them screech the brakes on the global economy back in March. They have a plan to reset and scale back consumption.
We all knew it couldn't last forever, anyway, right?

Sunny Runny Burger , Oct 29 2020 18:23 utc | 25

I'm not so sure about the overall conclusions, instead I'm sidetracked by the attempt to whitewash Russiagate. I guess they finally figured out they had to come up with some kind of lame excuse to brush it off.

"It wasn't me! It was some crazy drunk Russian woman from Perm! She was angry!"

Well that explains everything. They must have been so scared :D

Because that's what people do when they get fired isn't it? Instead of getting a new job (or drinking a bit more, or sliding down the slippery slope of society) they make up and tell stories about politicians in other countries. Not to blackmail anyone, oh no, only to try to tarnish the reputation of the old boss to get revenge. Stuff like this is why watching soap operas (including "Friends") is bad for you :)

"We need a scapegoat but we don't have any good ones available right now, however someone we know has an aunt in Perm who will do anything for money"

It still doesn't make sense but now instead of a problem that doesn't make sense they have a solution that doesn't make sense. They probably threw a party to celebrate how smart they were.

Roger , Oct 29 2020 18:25 utc | 26

"A narrative is being aggressively rammed down our throats about China": I usually respect Caitlin's work a lot but how does this jive with the MSM and Techno-platforms desperate attempts to block all circulation of anything to do with the Biden corruption scandals? Digging deeper into these issues is toxic not just for Biden, but for a significant segment of the neoliberal elite.

The economic elites need time to decouple their profits from China before any real head-to-head battle commences, Biden (or Kamala) will bark a lot but bite much less given the probable wealth-vaporization of increased hostilities with China.

P.S. the number of COVID cases in Sweden is exploding, so to quote one of my favourite movie reviewers (The Critical Drinker) can the Sweden trolls please "just go away now".

Abe , Oct 29 2020 18:39 utc | 31

Jackrabbit @ 22

I don't argue popularity, but strength. Trump is a weakling, both as a person and as a president IMO.

US presidential system won't allow true leaders but puppets (or easily manipulated persons), it is all I'm saying. Do we need more than last 4 years of Trump's reign as a proof?

Christian J. Chuba , Oct 29 2020 18:48 utc | 34

Because the U.S. public is close to brain dead We can't detect obvious lies no matter how brazen.

Let's suppose I told you something was absolutely true and I literally started out by saying, 'Once upon a time there was an evil stepmother ...'. Or I told you about about a villainous neighbor while literally playing a sad song on a violin.

I do not consider myself a genius, in fact I was a neocon but good God, I could just tell I was being lied to just by the pattern of the stories. I didn't know what the truth was but I knew they were lying.

A doozy with FOX promoting genocide against Iran

FOX news does a story about the terrorist attack in France and in the very next segment without any commercial breaks they interview a Congressman about Iran. Now they did not say Iran was responsible but clearly this was a puppet show to make just that association. In addition to the standard blood libel, the Congressman talked about a tweet the Ayatollah made in 2014, so it was not as if there even was any newsworthy item to discuss about Iran. It was just to frame them for something they did not do.

donkeytale , Oct 29 2020 21:47 utc | 54

Correction: I outed the Bytedance board of directors. Bytedance is the parent company of tik tok.

Jen , Oct 29 2020 22:57 utc | 55

S Brennan @ 3, Bevin @ 17, James @ 38:

China and Russia signed a friendship treaty in 2001 pledging co-operation and assistance in diplomacy and across several areas including economic and military assistance and in environmental technology (green or environmental science) and energy issues as well. In Article 6 of the treaty, both nations agreed to respect one another's borders and to preserve the status quo where there were unresolved issues.

On top of the 2001 Sino-Russian Friendship Treaty, both nations also signed an agreement in 2008 officially ending all territorial disputes between the two countries. With no exceptions, the border between Russia and China is fixed.

In addition northeast China (or that area historically known as Manchuria) is now a rustbelt area and is deindustrialising. People especially young people are moving away from this part of the country and into the cities farther south to find more job opportunities. According to this Mercatornet.com article , fertility rates in this part of Northeast Asia across all ethnic groups are the lowest in the world and this part of China is heading for demographic collapse.

Probably the only people in China and Russia who still have fantasies about seizing one another's territories in Northeast China and the Russian Far East are gameboys who spend too much time playing computer games or nattering with one another on their blogsites and who would suffer cardiac arrest the moment they step away from the screen (or who would suffer cardiac arrest anyway from playing games two or three days straight).

oldhippie , Oct 29 2020 23:13 utc | 56

US economy and US life in general is wholly dependent on China. Face masks or pharmaceuticals, car parts or building materials, it comes from China. No, we cannot resume making these things in US, we do not know how. When 3M was told to get busy and make masks under Defence Procurement authority all they could do was refer to Chinese subsidiary. Clear enough it is the "subsidiary" that has the whip hand. What do we have for them? Treasury bonds? Or we can start handing over real estate. Maybe if we give them the West Coast they will supply us for a time.

One of the big stalls with the Foxconn-Racine plant has been there are no American engineers to hire. Just none. All Chinese staff would be easier. Or Chinese lords supervising American coolies.

US basically does not trade with Russia. They have unloaded US paper securities. All we get from them is service as a bogeyman. If we needed another bogey we could get that easy, make up some shit as always.

Russia and China are different.

donkeytale , Oct 29 2020 23:36 utc | 57

Old hippie

Mostly true but it's not because the US cant make these products it's because the shareholder class decided long ago their portfolios would be better enhanced by cheaper labor costs outside the US.

And just as important, the US consumer prefers a "bargain price" and wants cheap goods more than a living wage, especially those consumers who own some stocks (52% of Amerikkkans own at least some shares, usually in a 401k plan) and believe they too are participating in the global wealth machine.

BTW, nearly as much stuff is made in Mexico and exported into the US as is made in China and products from both countries are made by multinational corporations whose ownership consists largely Amerikkkan/western elites.

The problem isn't national-based, it is class based and international .

They are only trying to trick us into believing the problem is we are lazier than the Chinese.

uncle tungsten , Oct 29 2020 23:43 utc | 59

The Chinese authorities have been prosecuting corrupt officials for many years. The prospect of certain USAi officials like the Biden family carpetbaggers and their Chinese associates being prosecuted in public courts in China with no plea bargaining and all those other niceties would be a delight for eyes and ears.

Be careful with those threats USAi, it could come back to haunt you.

uncle tungsten , Oct 30 2020 0:59 utc | 63

Corkie # 49

I hope you don't mind me opining that the story as written is most likely to be a complete fiction, designed to hide the real source of the fantasy story book that is the Steele dossier. The main mission here being to admit that the dossier was indeed a pack of lies but with the important corollary that J Steele did indeed do some sort of research to dig up the dirt on Trump. Heaven forbid that it ever was discovered that himself, Pablo Miller and Sergei Skripal made the whole thing up over a meal of Zizzi's garlic bread and risotto, washed down with white wine and a bottle of Vodka over at the Mill.

I am with you Corkie. That is about the strength of it. The WSJ is BS from front page to last.

[Oct 30, 2020] Why America First Is Here To Stay, Even if Donald Trump Is Defeated

Oct 26, 2020 | nationalinterest.org

Whether or not this is Donald Trump's last year as president, the near-certainty of new episodes of reckless overreach by American foreign policymakers means that this is not the last the country has seen of his America First policy.

by Michael Lind ,

me title=

[Oct 26, 2020] Caitlin Johnstone- America has no allies, only hostages -- RT Op-ed

Oct 26, 2020 | www.rt.com

By Caitlin Johnstone , an independent journalist based in Melbourne, Australia. Her website is here and you can follow her on Twitter @caitoz The US-centralized empire functions like a giant blob that absorbs nations and turns them into imperial client states. Once absorbed, it is rare for a country to escape and rejoin other genuinely sovereign nations.

The new president-elect of Bolivia, Luis Arce, has told the Spanish international news agency EFE that he intends to restore the nation's relations with Cuba, Venezuela and Iran. This reverses the policies of the US-backed coup regime which immediately began closing embassies , kicking out doctors and severing relations with those nations after illegally seizing power last year.

Arce also spoke of warm relations with Russia and China.

"We are going to re-establish all relations," he told EFE. "This government has acted very ideologically, depriving the Bolivian people of access to Cuban medicine, to Russian medicine, to advances in China. For a purely ideological issue, it has exposed the population in a way that is unnecessary and harmful."

Arce expressed a willingness to "open the door to all countries, the only requirement is that they respect us and respect our sovereignty, nothing more. All countries, no matter the size, who want a relationship with Bolivia, the only requirement is that we respect each other as equals. If that is so, we have no problem."

If you know anything about US imperialism and global politics, you will recognize that last bit as brazen heresy against imperial doctrine.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1318663692649639939&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fop-ed%2F504263-caitlin-johnstone-america-allies%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

The unofficial doctrine of the empire-like cluster of international allies that is loosely centralized around the United States does not recognize the sovereignty of other nations, much less respect them as equals. This empire takes it as a given that it has every right to determine what every nation in the world does, who their leaders will be, where their resources will go, and what their military posture on the world stage will be. If a government refuses to accept the empire's right to determine these things, it is targeted, sabotaged, attacked, and eventually replaced with a puppet regime.

The US-centralized empire functions like a giant blob that slowly works to absorb nations which have not yet been converted into imperial client states. It is rare that a nation is able to escape from that blob and rejoin the unabsorbed nations like China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela and Cuba in their fight for self-sovereignty, and it is encouraging that it was able to do so.

We saw the dynamics of the imperial blob explained quite vividly last year by American political analyst John Mearsheimer at a debate hosted by the Australian think tank Center for Independent Studies. Mearsheimer told his audience that the US is going to do everything it can to halt China's rise and prevent it from becoming the regional hegemon in the eastern hemisphere, and that Australia should align with the US in that battle or else it would face the wrath of Washington.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1314204625755537408&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fop-ed%2F504263-caitlin-johnstone-america-allies%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

"The question that's on the table is what should Australia's foreign policy be in light of the rise of China," Mearsheimer said . "I'll tell you what I would suggest if I were an Australian."

Mearsheimer said China is going to continue to grow economically and will convert that economic power into military power to dominate Asia "the way the US dominates the western hemisphere," and explained why he think the US and its allies have every ability to prevent that from happening.

"Now the question is what does this all mean for Australia?" Mearsheimer said. "Well, you're in a quandary for sure. Everybody knows what the quandary is. And by the way you're not the only country in East Asia that's in this quandary. You trade a lot with China, and that trade is very important for your prosperity, no question about that. Security-wise, you really want to go with us. It makes just a lot more sense, right? And you understand that security is more important than prosperity, because if you don't survive, you're not gonna prosper.

"Now some people say there's an alternative: you can go with China," said Mearsheimer. "Right, you have a choice here: you can go with China rather the United States. There's two things I'll say about that. Number one, if you go with China you want to understand you are our enemy. You are then deciding to become an enemy of the United States. Because again, we're talking about an intense security competition.

"You're either with us or against us," he continued. "And if you're trading extensively with China, and you're friendly with China, you're undermining the United States in this security competition. You're feeding the beast, from our perspective. And that is not going to make us happy. And when we are not happy you do not want to underestimate how nasty we can be. Just ask Fidel Castro."

//www.youtube.com/embed/oRlt1vbnXhQ

Nervous laughter from the Australian think tank audience punctuated Mearsheimer's more incendiary observations. The CIA is known to have made numerous attempts to assassinate Castro.

If you've ever wondered how the the US is so successful in getting other nations around the world to align with its interests, this is how. It's not that the US is a good actor on the world stage or a kind friend to its allies, it's that it will destroy you if you disobey it.

Australia is not aligned with the US to protect itself from China. Australia is aligned with the US to protect itself from the US. As a Twitter follower recently observed , the US doesn't have allies, only hostages.

As the recently released Palace Letters illustrated, the CIA staged a coup to oust Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam because he was prioritizing the nation's self-sovereignty. Journalist John Pilger wrote in 2014 after Whitlam's death:

Australia briefly became an independent state during the Whitlam years, 1972-75. An American commentator wrote that no country had "reversed its posture in international affairs so totally without going through a domestic revolution." Whitlam ended his nation's colonial servility. He abolished royal patronage, moved Australia towards the Non-Aligned Movement, supported "zones of peace" and opposed nuclear weapons testing.

The primary difference between the coup in Australia and the one in Bolivia was that the Bolivians refused to roll over and take it while we shrugged and said 'No worries mate.' We had every option to become a real nation and insist on our own self-sovereignty, but we, unlike the Bolivians, were too thoroughly propagandized and placid. Some hostages escape, some don't.

The US empire got rid of Whitlam, and then when we elected in 2007 a prime minister who was considered too friendly with China they did it again; in order to facilitate the Obama administration's "pivot" against Beijing the pro-China Kevin Rudd was replaced by the compliant Julia Gillard. World Socialist Website reports :

Secret US diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks in December 2010 revealed that "protected sources" of the US embassy were pivotal figures in Gillard's elevation. For months, key coup plotters, including senators Mark Arbib and David Feeney, and Australian Workers Union (AWU) chief Paul Howes, secretly provided the US embassy with regular updates on internal government discussions and divisions within the leadership

Rudd had proposed an Asia-Pacific Community, attempting to mediate the escalating strategic rivalry between the US and China, and opposed the formation of a quadrilateral military alliance between the US, India, Japan and Australia, aimed against China.

Gillard, who had cultivated her pro-US credentials through Australia-US and Australia-Israel leadership forums, was literally selected by the US embassy as a reliable replacement to Rudd. In her first public appearance after knifing Rudd, she demonstrated her devotion to Washington by posing for a photo op with the US ambassador, flanked by US and Australian flags. She soon had a phone call with Obama, who had previously twice postponed a planned visit to Australia under Rudd.

The centrality of Australia to the US preparations for war against China became apparent in November 2011, when Obama announced his "pivot to Asia" in the Australian parliament, rather than the White House. During the visit, Gillard and Obama signed an agreement to station American Marines in Darwin and allow greater US access to other military bases, placing the Australian population on the front line of any conflict with China.

Gillard's government also sanctioned the expansion of the major US spying and weapons-targeting base at Pine Gap, agreed to the US military's increased use of Australian ports and airbases, and stepped up Australia's role in the US-led top-level "Five Eyes" global surveillance network, which monitors the communications and online activities of millions of people worldwide.

Rudd's removal marked a turning point. US imperialism, via the Obama administration, sent a blunt message: There was no longer any room for equivocation by the Australian ruling elite. Regardless of which party was in office, it had to line up unconditionally behind the US conflict with China, no matter what the consequences for the loss of its massive export markets in China.

//www.youtube.com/embed/8XQ1onjXJK0

This is what we're seeing all around the world now: a slow motion third world war being waged by the US power alliance against the remaining nations which have resisted being absorbed into it. As the most powerful of the unabsorbed nations by far, China is the ultimate target of this war. If the empire succeeds in its ultimate goal of stopping China, it will have attained a de facto planetary government which no population will be able to oppose or dissent from.

I don't know about you, but I never consented to a world where powerful nuclear-armed forces wave Armageddon weapons at each other while fighting for planetary domination and subverting less powerful nations if they don't play along with their Cold War games. Detente and peace must be sought and obtained, and we must all work to live together on this planet in collaboration with each other and with our ecosystem.

This omnicidal, ecocidal way of living that the oligarchic empire has laid out for us does not suit our species, and it will drive us to extinction along with God knows how many other species if we do not find a way to end it. Rulers historically do not cede their power willingly, so we ordinary human beings as a collective are going to have to find a way to destroy their propaganda engine, force an end to imperialism, and build a healthy world.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

It's me 14 hours ago The USA is just an extension of that country we are not to criticize, which has been expanding their land base as soon as they moved in. The USA is the strong arm that goes around to force other countries to accept the terms and conditions of the country we are not allowed to criticize. Reply 31 Show 2 previous replies HakunaMatata It's me 5 hours ago True, and that's how Gillard got the tap, however, the US has become extremely polarized and a house divided within itself cannot stand. The illusion of democracy in Israel is also showing signs and symptoms of collapse. We should also remember that Harold Holt was Australia's first political assassination. HH was Treasurer at the time The Currency Act 1965 was passed which was a clear violation of the Australian Constitution. As was the War Powers Act 1942. Chapter V, Clause 115: "A State shall not coin money, nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debt." People want to play politics and ignore the Law that governs every well organized society. Reply 3 neeon9 It's me 9 hours ago You mean Jews, the pestilence, the virus, the murderers of nurses and children, the invaders of Palestine? I will criticize them! And the horse they rode in on, the USA. The Jew the Englishman and the American. The axis of evil. Reply 14 Show 1 more replies Crapiola 12 hours ago The US started out as a corporation of elite businessmen who simply wanted King George's tariff and tax revenue as their own. I point to the Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's rebellion as early proof of my assertion. Only the elite could vote, only the elite could hold office. Nothing has changed much. Reply 11 Rocky_Fjord Crapiola 10 hours ago Yep, Shay's Rebellion and James Madison's Constitution filtering out democracy of the common man, defined the state. King George wanted no more expansion across the Appalachian mountains, but the founders were land grabbers and Amerind killers at heart, and so the myth and Monroe's Manifest Destiny began. Reply 9 Cabonnet 57 15 hours ago Things changed in Australia after Thatcher came to power. Her friend and ally was Ronald Reagan . The USA started showing of their warships in Sydney harbor. Were these friendly visit or was the USA telling Australia they have new owners ? Reply 18 Zogg Cabonnet 57 13 hours ago It happened earlier when in 1975 MI6 and CIA have made a coup d'etat in Australia and otherthrown the PM who started to realize a plan to get independent from the US. Reply 17 1 Show 3 more replies westernman Cabonnet 57 14 hours ago Yes the people cheered those idiots on, they were both very stupid. They were both competing to show subservience to elites and corporate money and power. They were both against well being of their respective societies and ordinary poor, middle class and the workers. They sat the stage for what we're living today, a proto-fascist US and Britain robbing their respective taxpayers on continuous basis. This a dare predict will be the catalyst to their rapid downfall, there is no quiet way out for the global masses. Capitalism must end before it ends all life on earth! Reply 19 Show 2 more replies Rocky_Fjord 10 hours ago Examples of US reducing sovereign nations to vassal states -- and the filthy tactics used -- are endless. Bill Blum wrote books about it. Yugoslavia is a prime example, and the story is told in documentary film, The Weight of Chains, a version in English on YT. All nations are subject to US hegemony in a strategy to encircle Russia and China, and one can see it in present time. The CIA sends in the NGO's like NED [National Endowment for Democracy], they do their dirty work organizing local operatives to protest and challenge elections and so on. If that doesn't do the trick, then military force is used as in Yugoslavia, and against civilians and infrastructure, leaving a wake of cancer and genetic mutation, birth defects . ... See more Reply 13 straydog2 15 hours ago "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests" -- Henry Kissinger. Though, to be fair, this applies to the vast majority of countries. Reply 16 1 Cabonnet 57 straydog2 12 hours ago The USSR was a ally . Reply 2 Show 1 more replies Memo1 straydog2 14 hours ago "Friends" ??? You make me laugh. When does imperialist and imperial powers have friends? Its the conquered and foes. Allies and friends are just politically correct terms. In reality, it the conquered and remaining foes. Reply 6 1 Show 1 more replies westernman 14 hours ago "This omnicidal, ecocidal way of living that the oligarchic empire has laid out for us does not suit our species". That statement is most paramount to our planetary survival. Our planet is burning down and the US is worried about war and military/economic domination. We the human kind cannot allow this mad US hegemony to continue unopposed. We have to rid humanity of weapons of mass murder, think collectively in a shared world with all humans and ecosystem coexisting in peace and harmony or parish in misery. Reply 8 Pedro 15 hours ago Oh how poetically correct. The ilusion is the eye the brain the perception. The germans are going to feel it big when merkle disagrees with the usa, n does not delver gas, russia had not stopped the gas supply into ukraine, despite the 20 plus year of unpaid gas bills pilling up, the bill is 1 million, they would only pay a third. Its bern like that all the time. Twenty years of part payments do add up. Reply 9 zoombeenie 12 hours ago Security concerns are a direct result of aggression and invasion. The US needs all the security its war machine can provide. The answer to their problems and Australia's is not to create enemies Reply 7 neeon9 zoombeenie 9 hours ago Without enemies the US will crumble even faster. It is the M.I.C. that keeps the fiscal wheels turning. Without the constant dealing out of death to all who dare to turn their backs on them, the US is over. They are without doubt the most dangerous terrorist nation on the planet, I for one will not morn their passing. Reply 4 TheFishh 5 hours ago US wants to stop China? US still buys more from China than China buys from the US. And China doesn't see those simply doing business with the US as enemies. US will not succeed in stopping China. That time has passed, and in this global economy, countries can't afford to turn their backs on trade and revenue. Besides, US doesn't have anything to offer anymore other than fake promises of security and loans with a million strings attached. Reply 3 roby007 13 hours ago "America has no allies, only hostages" - so true.

[Oct 26, 2020] Politicians books as a subtle form of corruption

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Same principle with speaking engagements. Nobody in the corporate world seriously believed that listening to a speech from Hillary Clinton was worth $200,000 - especially when she sometimes kept getting these gigs at the same company every few months: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-03/every-hillary-and-bill-clinton-speech-2013-fees ..."
"... Furthermore, the book sales conduit adds an extra degree of separation between the ultimate source of the money and the recipient of the money. Somebody who wants to buy a politician could for example donate money to an NGO that does "political education" and buys political books to distribute to people, and that NGO buys the copies of the corrupt politician's book in bulk. ..."
Oct 26, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Learned here on SST that a lot of the huge book contracts given to swampies are a form of money laundering. I have long tried to figure out how the publishing companies could afford to pay yuudge advances for ghost written books in a country where so few people read much of anything any longer. Simple answer! Big money people order yuudge numbers of books in advance so that the publisher is assured a profit.

BillWade , 25 October 2020 at 12:32 PM

I think it was the previous mayor of Baltimore who got a multi-million dollar windfall from her best-selling children's book. I wonder how many kids actually read it.

Lots of trucks out with their flags here, people are becoming optimistic here in South Florida, feels almost normal here.

Trump taking New York would be the ultimate, lets hope. I'm looking forward to watching CNN's Wolf Blitzer on election night, it's been 4 years for me and CNN. I just want to see him squirm.

rgspenser , 25 October 2020 at 02:05 PM

Thanks for posting how money is routed through publishers.
This was right in front of me the whole time.

rho , 25 October 2020 at 05:08 PM

Colonel,

it looks a lot less like corruption when a politician receives money because he wrote an "inspiring book" that seemingly sells lots of copies than when he receives money outright for political favors.

Same principle with speaking engagements. Nobody in the corporate world seriously believed that listening to a speech from Hillary Clinton was worth $200,000 - especially when she sometimes kept getting these gigs at the same company every few months: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-08-03/every-hillary-and-bill-clinton-speech-2013-fees

Furthermore, the book sales conduit adds an extra degree of separation between the ultimate source of the money and the recipient of the money. Somebody who wants to buy a politician could for example donate money to an NGO that does "political education" and buys political books to distribute to people, and that NGO buys the copies of the corrupt politician's book in bulk.

Mark Logan , 25 October 2020 at 06:42 PM

Interesting question about book deals. Certainly it could be a channel to hide the names of donors, which would seem the only rational reason to do so. I would guess the lecture circuit a more appropriate way to do that. If I'm going to part with that much I'd at least want a song for their dinner out of it.

The 10 biggest book deals have a mixture of celebrities, I can't imagine anyone wanting to slip Bruce Springsteen $10 million under the table so it appears the publishers do make money on these deals, counter-intuitive though it be.

https://bookriot.com/biggest-book-deals/

The Twisted Genius , 25 October 2020 at 07:03 PM

Book writing can be far more lucrative than I ever thought possible. James Patterson got 150 million for a 17 book series. I would say he earned it although I've never read any of his stuff. Michelle Obama's first book sold over 10 million copies and netted her at least 65 million in a deal for both her and Barrack's memoirs.

Ken Follett got 50 million for his trilogy.

Bill Clinton got 15 million for his book while George W. Bush only got 7 million for his.

Hillary got 14 million for hers. Springsteen got 10 million for his autobiography.

Even Pope Jan Pavel II made a cool 8.5 million for his memoirs back in 1994. There are an awful lot of 7 figure book advances out there.

Another phenomenon in the book world is the mass purchase of books by organizations. For example the RNC bought $100K worth of Don Trump Jr's book and more than $400K worth of Sean Hannity's latest. I'm sure the RNC is not alone in this practice.

[Oct 26, 2020] Surprisingly, social and cultural collapse didn't really get very far until Russia started regaining its health. Some of the other Soviet socialist republics are in the throes of full-on social and cultural collapse, but Russia avoided this fate.

Notable quotes:
"... Political collapse: obviously there wasn't really a functional government at all for a period of time in the nineties. Lots of American consultants running around and privatizing things in a fashion that created a lot of incredibly corrupt, super-rich oligarchs who then fled with their money, a lot of them. ..."
Oct 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Alicia , Oct 24 2020 22:21 utc | 24

SEPTEMBER 17, 2020

Interview on Radio Voice America

Welcome back to Turning Hard Times into Good Times. I'm your host Jay Taylor. I'm really pleased to have with me once again Dmitry Orlov.

Dmitry was born and grew up in Leningrad, but has lived in the United States. He moved here in the mid-seventies. He has since gone back to Russia, where he is living now.

But Dmitry was an eyewitness to the Soviet collapse over several extended visits to his Russian homeland between the eighties and mid-nineties. He is an engineer who has contributed to fields as diverse as high-energy Physics and Internet Security, as well as a leading Peak Oil theorist. He is the author of Reinventing Collapse: The Soviet Example and American Prospects (2008) and The Five Stages of Collapse: Survivors' Toolkit (2013).

Welcome, Dmitry, and thank you so much for joining us again.

A: Great to be on your program again, Jay.

Q: It's really good to hear your voice. I know we had you on [the program] back in 2014. It's been a long time -- way too long, as far as I'm concerned. In that discussion we talked about the five stages of collapse that you observed in the fall of the USSR. Could you review them really quickly, and compare them to what you are seeing, what you have witnessed and observed in the United States as you lived here, and of course in your post now in Russia.

A: Yes. The five stages of collapse as I defined them were financial, commercial, political, social and cultural. I observed that the first three, in Russia. The finance collapsed because the Soviet Union basically ran out of money. Commercial collapse because industry, Soviet industry, fell apart because it was distributed among fifteen Soviet socialist republics, and when the Soviet Union fell apart all of the supply chains broke down.

Political collapse: obviously there wasn't really a functional government at all for a period of time in the nineties. Lots of American consultants running around and privatizing things in a fashion that created a lot of incredibly corrupt, super-rich oligarchs who then fled with their money, a lot of them.

Surprisingly, social and cultural collapse didn't really get very far until Russia started regaining its health. Some of the other Soviet socialist republics are in the throes of full-on social and cultural collapse, but Russia avoided this fate.....

http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2020/09/interview-on-radio-voice-america.html

[Oct 26, 2020] The goal of neoliberal globalism promoted by CIA and MI6 is ending nation states to end their influence, laws and regulations, and thus try to dynamite, through sowing divide ( and in this they are helped by alleged opponent Soros and his network of franchises mastering regime change, color revolutions

Oct 26, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Eric , Oct 24 2020 21:10 utc | 18

... ... ...

The goal of this movement is ending nation states to end their influence, laws and regulations, and thus try to dynamite, through sowing divide ( and in this they are helped by alleged opponent Soros and his network of franchises mastering regime change, color revolutions

Blunt coups d´etat and lately "peaceful transitions of power", being both, Soros and the NRx, connected to the CIA...)countries with which make what they call "The Mosaic" of regions resulting, at the head of which there will be a corporation CEO and their stakeholders in a hierarchical autocratic order. These people think that Democracy simply does not work and thus must be finished, and that there are people ( white, of course ) who have developed a higher IQ ( at this poin

t I guess some of you have noticed this creed sound very familiar to you, from our neighbors here by the side at SST, where "james" and Pat lately love each other so much...) and must rule over the rest.

To achieve their goals, these people, as geeks from Silicon Valley, are willing to cross the human frontier to transhumanism so as to enhance their human capabilities to submit the rest...

Wondering why this topic have never been treated at MoA...nor at the Valdai Discussion Club...

The Alt-Right and the Europe of the Regions. According to Wikipedia, Steve Bannon is inspired by the theorist Curtis Yarvin ( https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilustration_oscura), who states that countries should be divided into feudal areas in the hands of corporations (Patchwork).

https://twitter.com/andrei_kononov/status/1126684073009639425

The Moldbug Variations

H.Schmatz , Oct 24 2020 23:01 utc | 28

@

[Oct 25, 2020] The Bidens "Did" Ukraine, There Was also Iraq And Serbia.

Oct 25, 2020 | www.unz.com

Agent76 , says: October 25, 2020 at 6:03 pm GMT

Oct 24, 2020 Serbia & Iraq: Joe Biden's history of regime change wars

The Bidens "Did" Ukraine, There Was Iraq And Serbia.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/HqEJFduRBDM?feature=oembed

[Oct 25, 2020] Monkeys Or Children- Russia Chooses Neither, Dooming Germany -

Oct 25, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Monkeys Or Children? Russia Chooses Neither, Dooming Germany by Tyler Durden Sat, 10/24/2020 - 09:20 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Tom Luongo via Gold, Goats, 'n Guns blog,

Russia is done with the European Union. At last week's Valdai Discussion Forum Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made this quite clear with this statement.

Those people in the West who are responsible for foreign policy and do not understand the necessity of mutually respectable conversation–well, we must simply stop for a while communicate with them. Especially since Ursula von der Leyen states that geopolitical partnership with current Russia's leadership is impossible. If this is the way they want it, so be it. (H/T Andrei Martyanov)

Lavrov's statements echo a number of statements made in recent months by Russian leadership that there is no opportunity for diplomacy possible with the United States.

We can now add the European Union to that list. Pepe Escobar's latest piece goes over Lavrov's comments about the European Union and they are devastating, as devastating as when he and Putin described the U.S. as " Not Agreement Capable " a few years ago.

Lavrov reiterated this with the following comments at Valdai last week.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/zV_W3b_4G50

But as badly as the U.S. has acted in recent years in international relations, unilaterally abrogating treaty after treaty, nominally with the goal of remaking them to be more inclusive, Lavrov's upbraiding of the current leadership of the European Union is far worse.

Because they have gone along with, if not openly assisted, every U.S.-backed provocation against Russia for their own advantage. From Ukraine to MH-17, to Skripal to now Belarus and the ridiculous Navalny poisoning, the EU has proved to be worse than the U.S.

Because there can be no doubt the U.S. views Russia as an antagonist. We're quite clear about this. But Europe plays off U.S. aggression, hiding in the U.S.'s skirts while telling Russia, usually through German Chancellor Angela Merkel, "Be patient, we are reluctantly going along with this." But really they're happy about it.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

So Russia is ultimately caught between the U.S. and Europe on all basic issues of trade, politics, and international law.

Adding to Lavrov's frustration, Andrei Martyanov, as an astute analyst on Russian politics as anyone, is correct when he says (H/T to Pepe Escobar).

You do not negotiate with monkeys, you treat them nicely, you make sure that they are not abused, but you don't negotiate with them, same as you don't negotiate with toddlers. They want to have their Navalny as their toy–let them. I call on Russia to start wrapping economic activity up with EU for a long time. They buy Russia's hydrocarbons and hi-tech, fine. Other than that, any other activity should be dramatically reduced and necessity of the Iron Curtain must not be doubted anymore.

And the truth is that Russia is dealing with monkeys in the U.S. and toddlers in the EU. And Martanyov's right that it's time Putin et.al. simply turn their backs on the West and move forward.

Lavrov's statements at Valdai were momentous. They sent a clear signal that if Europe wants a future relationship with Russia they will have to change how they do business.

The problem is however, that the EU is suffused with arrogance on the eve of the U.S. election, mistakenly thinking Joe Biden will beat Trump.

Merkel has betrayed Putin at every turn since 2013. And Germany's appalling behavior over the Alexei Navalny poisoning was the last straw.

That what was another sabotage effort to stop the Nordstream 2 pipeline and add grist to Trump's re-election mill was given even a cursory glance by the highest levels of the German government was insulting enough.

That Merkel allowed her Foreign Minister Heiko Maas to run his mouth on the subject, and then throw the decision to sanction Russia (again) over this to the EU parliament and give it any kind of political play was truly treacherous.

And it proved, yet again, that Merkel's word is worth less than nothing. She tells Putin one thing and then does the exact opposite. Glenn Deisen writing for RT chalked this up to Germany's plans for domination. He rightly sees Germany using Russia to get what it wants in Europe.

Germany has taken the lead in advancing "European integration" and therefore prioritizes Eastern European member states that push for a more aggressive stance towards Russia. Economic connectivity with Russia is no longer an instrument for building trust and cooperation in the pan-European space, rather it was intended to strengthen Germany's position as the center of the EU. Moscow should work with Berlin to construct Nord Stream 2, but not forget why Nord Stream 1 was built while South Stream was blocked.

This is a point I've been making for years. Nordstream 2 is a political tool for Germany to reroute gas coming in from Russia which Merkel can use as a political lever over Poland and the Visegrads.

And it is the Poles who have consistently shot themselves in the foot by not reconciling their relationship with Russia, banding together with its Eastern European brothers and securing an independent source of Russian gas. Putin and Gazprom would happily provide it to them, if they would but ask.

But they don't and instead turn to the U.S. to be their protectors from both Russia and Germany, rather than conduct themselves as a sovereign nation.

That said, I think Mr. Diesen misses the larger point here. It is true Germany under Merkel is looking to expand its control over the EU and set itself up as a superpower for the next century. Putin himself acknowledged that possibility at Valdai. That may be more to dig at the U.S. and warn Europe rather than him actually believing it.

Because under Merkel and the EU Germany is losing its dynamism. And it may even lose control over the EU if it isn't careful. If you look at the current situation from a German perspective you realize that Germany's mighty export business is surrounded by hostile foreign powers.

  1. Russia -- Merkel cut off the country from Russian markets. Even though some of the trade with Russia has returned since sanctions over Crimea went into place in 2014 she hasn't fought the U.S.'s hyper-aggressive use of sanctions to improve Germany's position.
  2. The U.K. -- French President Emmanuel Macron looks like he's engineered a No-Deal Brexit with Boris Johnson which will put up major export barriers for Germany into the U.K. cutting them off from that market.
  3. The U.S. – Trump has all but declared Germany an enemy and when he wins a second term will tighten the screws on Merkel even tighter.
  4. China – They know that the incoming Great Reset, which will have its Jahr Null event in Europe likely next year, is all about consolidating power into Europe and sucking it away from the U.S., a process Trump is dead-set against.

However, don't think for a second that the Commies that run the EU and the World Economic Forum are teaming up with the Commies in China. Oh no, they have bigger plans than that.

And what's been pretty clear to me is Europe's delusions that it can subjugate the world under its rubric, forcing its rules and standards on the rest of us, including China, again allowing the U.S. to act as its proxy while it tries to maintain its standing.

I know what you're thinking. That sounds completely ludicrous.

And you're right, it is ludicrous.

But that doesn't mean it isn't true. This is clearly the mindset we're dealing with in The Davos Crowd. They engineered a mostly-fake pandemic to accelerate their plans to remake the world economy by burning it down.

The multi-polar world will see the fading U.S. and U.K. band together while Russia and China continue to stitch together Asia into a coherent economic sphere. Trump is right to pull the U.S. out of Central Asia and has gotten nothing but grief from the U.S. establishment while Europe, through NATO, continues trying to expand to the Russian border, now with openly backing the attempted coup in Belarus.

This was the dominant theme at Valdai and the focus of Putin's opening remarks.

[Oct 24, 2020] The World Order: New Rules or a Game Without Rules. So, what is happening now? Regrettably, the game without rules is becoming increasingly horrifying and sometimes seems to be a fait accompli."

Oct 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

gm , Oct 22 2020 19:00 utc | 9

@Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 22 2020 18:19 utc | 6

Re: "...Thus, six years ago, in 2014, we spoke about this issue when we discussed the theme The World Order: New Rules or a Game Without Rules. So, what is happening now? Regrettably, the game without rules is becoming increasingly horrifying and sometimes seems to be a fait accompli."

Putin said this virtually in the same breath directly after his previous paragraph you excerpted where he speaks of the serious ongoing challenges of the coronavirus pandemic.

What that says to me is that he is hinting with his trademark subtlety that he thinks the CV pandemic may not be a naturally arising event. In other words, a plandemic.


karlof1 , Oct 22 2020 19:12 utc | 12

gm @9--

Yes, that's the ongoing rhetorical battle between the Collectivist nations who uphold the sanctity of International Law and the Neoliberal Nations controlled by Financial Parasites that can't survive under a functional International Law System. That distinction is constantly becoming clearer particularly to those residing within the Neoliberal nations as they watch their lives being destroyed. IMO, we're on the cusp of entering the most critical decade of this century which will determine humanity's condition when 2101 is reached.

[Oct 23, 2020] Hating Russia is a full time and well paid job

Neocons do not want to fight Russia, they just want to profit from Russophobia while getting nice money from the US MIC.
Oct 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Mister Delicious , 7 hours ago

  1. Introduction
  2. The euphemisms
  3. Hostility to Putin's Russia is largely a Jewish phenomenon
  4. The media
  5. A de facto violation of free speech
  6. Shutting down an honest examination of Russian history
  7. The best alt-media journalists are neutered
  8. Much of what is written about Russian relations and history becomes meaningless and deceptive
  9. A lesson in relevance from the Alt-Right
  10. Malice towards none
  11. The problem extends to all areas of public life
  12. We need serious scholarship and analysis
  13. Low expectations from the existing alt-media
  14. A call for articles and support
  15. https://www.unz.com/pgiraldi/hating-russia-is-a-full-time-job/
ebear , 6 hours ago

Has any nation on Earth suffered more destruction and loss of life in the 20th century? And yet, there they still are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btff8DmOg1k

John Hansen , 7 hours ago

I'd have more hope for Russia if the Russian ruling class weren't so obsessed with the West and didn't send their children to Western (woke) schools, etc.

theallseeinggod , 7 hours ago

They're not doing that well, but they're not repeating many of the west's mistakes.

Normal , 5 hours ago

Now the West has rules only for poor people.

Helg Saracen , 6 hours ago

Advice to Americans (for the sake of experiment): prohibit lobbying in US and the right of citizens with dual citizenship to hold public office in US. I assure - you will be surprised how quickly Russians go from non-kosher to kosher for Americans and how American politicians, the media will convince Americans of this at every intersection. :) Ha ha ha

Nayel , 5 hours ago

If the [Vichy] Left in America weren't so determined to project their own Bolshevik leanings on to a possible great ally that their ideology now fears, Russia would be just that: a great ally that could help America shake the Bolsheviks that have infiltrated the American government and plan the same program their Soviet forefathers once held over Russia...

Arising 2.0 , 1 hour ago

Western zionist controlled propaganda reminds me of Mohamed Ali- he used to talk up the ******** so much before a fight that when the time came to fight the opponent was usually traumatised or confused. Until Ali met with Joe Frazier (Russia) who didn't fall for all the pre-fight BS.

ThePinkHole , 39 minutes ago

Time for a pop quiz! Name the two countries below:

Country A - competency, attention to first principles, planning based on reality, consistency of purpose, and unity of execution.

Country B - incompetency, interfering in everything everywhere, planning based on hubris and sloppy assumptions, confusion, and disunity.

(Source: Adapted from Patrick Armstrong)

foxenburg , 3 hours ago

This one is always good for a laugh....the Daily Telegraph's Con Coughlin explaining in 2015 how Putin will fail in Syria...

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6990/russia-failure-syria

Money-Liberty , 6 hours ago

We have all this talk of the 'Ruskies' when in fact it is not the ordinary Russian people but rather a geopolitical power struggle. The ordinary US citizen or European just wants to maintain their liberty and be able to profit from their endeavours. The rich and powerful globalists who hide behind their military are the ones that play these games. I am no friend of Putin but equally I am no friend of our own political establishment that have been captured by Wall Street. I care about Main Street and as the US dollar loses its privilege there will be real pain to share amongst our economies. The last thing we need is for the elites of the Western alliance to profit with cold/hot wars on the backs of ourselves.

Having been behind the iron curtain as a young Merchant Navy Officer I found ordinary citizens fine and even organized football matches with the local communist parties. People have the same desires and aspirations and whether rich or poor we should respect each others cultures and territories. http://www.money-liberty.com/gallery/Predictions-2021.pdf

[Oct 23, 2020] Russia has been a fixture of the US military-industrial complex for a reason: they need more money and threat inflation is possible only with a suitable bogeyman

Oct 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

rotorhead1871 , 5 hours ago

..they have always been the reason for the industrial-military complex....but now, who needs them.....we got china to point the finger at. so having 2 useful idiot countries...will keep the weapons boys going for quite some time....

Snaffew , 7 hours ago

...he boogeyman has never been Russia, it resides right here in the US under the guise of government, military, mainstream media, propaganda and sanctions, sanctions, sanctions against anyone that rightfully takes our slice of entitled pie because they built a far better and far cheaper mousetrap.

Oh the horrors of claiming to be a democracy and a capitalist nation when you just can't seem to play by the rules. **** America---we have let the elites take us down the road to ruins. We are as much at fault as they are for believing their nonsensical bs the whole while all the evidence was smoking right in front of our face. Who's more stupid...them or us? I'd tell everyone to take a good long look in the mirror if you are looking for an answer to that question---

[Oct 23, 2020] A stark note from Lavrov about the USA neoliberal elite

In America, Truth is a Foreign Agent and World Peace is a threat to National Security.
Oct 23, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
kiwiklown , Oct 22 2020 9:05 utc | 7

The Russians ( Putin / Lavrov) say ever so politely that the US is not agreement-capable.

I add that the US ( politicians, Wall Streeters, MSM, think tanks ) are:

What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world, but loses his soul? He turns into a ghoul without a soul, says I, a devil without human-ness! How dare they call us deplorables when they are the despicables?

[Oct 21, 2020] How Trump Got Played By The Military-Industrial Complex by Akbar Shahid Ahmed

Highly recommended!
Tramp was essentially the President from military industrial complex and Israel lobby. So he was not played. That's naive. He followed the instructions.
Oct 21, 2020 | www.huffpost.com

On March 20, 2018, President Donald Trump sat beside Saudi crown prince Muhammed bin Salman at the White House and lifted a giant map that said Saudi weapons purchases would support jobs in "key" states -- including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida and Ohio, all of which were crucial to Trump's 2016 election victory .

"Saudi Arabia has been a very great friend and a big purchaser of equipment but if you look, in terms of dollars, $3 billion, $533 million, $525 million -- that's peanuts for you. You should have increased it," Trump said to the prince, who was (and still is) overseeing a military campaign in Yemen that has deployed U.S. weaponry to commit scores of alleged war crimes.

Trump has used his job as commander-in-chief to be America's arms-dealer-in-chief in a way no other president has since Dwight Eisenhower, as he prepared to leave the presidency, warned in early 1961 of the military-industrial complex's political influence. Trump's posture makes sense personally ― this is a man who regularly fantasizes about violence, usually toward foreigners ― and he and his advisers see it as politically useful, too. The president has repeatedly appeared at weapons production facilities in swing states, promoted the head of Lockheed Martin using White House resources, appointed defense industry employees to top government jobs in an unprecedented way and expanded the Pentagon's budget to near-historic highs ― a guarantee of future income for companies like Lockheed and Boeing.

Trump is "on steroids in terms of promoting arms sales for his own political benefit," said William Hartung, a scholar at the Center for International Policy who has tracked the defense industry for decades. "It's a targeted strategy to get benefits from workers in key states."

In courting the billion-dollar industry, Trump has trampled on moral considerations about how buyers like the Saudis misuse American weapons, ethical concerns about conflicts of interest and even part of his own political message, the deceptive claim that he is a peace candidate. He justifies his policy by citing job growth, but data from Hartung , a prominent analyst, shows he exaggerates the impact. And Trump has made clear that a major motivation for his defense strategy is the possible electoral benefit it could have.

Next month's election will show if the bargain was worth it. As of now, it looks like Trump's bet didn't pay off ― for him, at least. Campaign contribution records, analysts in swing states and polls suggest arms dealers have given the president no significant political boost. The defense contractors, meanwhile, are expected to continue getting richer, as they have in a dramatic way under Trump.

Playing Corporate Favorites

Trump has thrice chosen the person who decides how the Defense Department spends its gigantic budget. Each time, he has tapped someone from a business that wants those Pentagon dollars. Mark Esper, the current defense secretary, worked for Raytheon; his predecessor, Pat Shanahan, for Boeing; and Trump's first appointee, Jim Mattis, for General Dynamics, which reappointed him to its board soon after he left the administration.

Of the senior officials serving under Esper, almost half have connections to military contractors, per the Project on Government Oversight. The administration is now rapidly trying to fill more Pentagon jobs under the guidance of a former Trump campaign worker, Foreign Policy magazine recently revealed ― prioritizing political reasons and loyalty to Trump in choosing people who could help craft policy even under a Joe Biden presidency.

Such personnel choices are hugely important for defense companies' profit margins and risk creating corruption or the impression of it. Watchdog groups argue Trump's handling of the hiring process is more evidence that lawmakers and future presidents must institute rules to limit the reach of military contractors and other special interests.

"Given the hundreds of conflicts of interest flouting the rule of law in the Trump administration , certainly these issues have gotten that much more attention and are that much more salient now than they were four years ago," said Aaron Scherb, the director of legislative affairs at Common Cause, a nonpartisan good-government group.

The theoretical dangers of Trump's approach became a reality last year, when a former employee for the weapons producer Raytheon used his job at the State Department to advocate for a rare emergency declaration allowing the Saudis and their partner the United Arab Emirates to buy $8 billion in arms ― including $2 billion in Raytheon products ― despite congressional objections. As other department employees warned that Saudi Arabia was defying U.S. pressure to behave less brutally in Yemen, former lobbyist Charles Faulkner led a unit that urged Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to give the kingdom more weapons. Pompeo pushed out Faulkner soon afterward, and earlier this year, the State Department's inspector general criticized the process behind the emergency declaration for the arms.

Red Crescent medics walk next to bags containing the bodies of victims of Saudi-linked airstrikes on a Houthi detention cente MOHAMED AL-SAYAGHI / REUTERS
Red Crescent medics walk next to bags containing the bodies of victims of Saudi-linked airstrikes on a Houthi detention center in Yemen on Sept. 1, 2019. The Saudis military campaign in Yemen has relied on U.S. weaponry to commit scores of alleged war crimes.

Even Trump administration officials not clearly connected to the defense industry have shown an interest in moves that benefit it. In 2017, White House economic advisor Peter Navarro pressured Republican lawmakers to permit exports to Saudi Arabia and Jared Kushner, the president's counselor and son-in-law, personally spoke with Lockheed Martin's chief to iron out a sale to the kingdom, The New York Times found.

Subscribe to the Politics email. From Washington to the campaign trail, get the latest politics news.

When Congress gave the Pentagon $1 billion to develop medical supplies as part of this year's coronavirus relief package, most of the money went to defense contractors for projects like jet engine parts instead, a Washington Post investigation showed .

https://schema.org/WPAdBlock

"It's a very close relationship and there's no kind of sense that they're supposed to be regulating these people," Hartung said. "It's more like they're allies, standing shoulder to shoulder."

Seeking Payback

In June 2019, Lockheed Martin announced that it would close a facility that manufactures helicopters in Coatesville, Pennsylvania, and employs more than 450 people. Days later, Trump tweeted that he had asked the company's then-chief executive, Marillyn Hewson, to keep the plant open. And by July 10, Lockheed said it would do so ― attributing the decision to Trump.

The president has frequently claimed credit for jobs in the defense industry, highlighting the impact on manufacturing in swing states rather than employees like Washington lobbyists, whose numbers have also grown as he has expanded the Pentagon's budget. Lockheed has helped him in his messaging: In one instance in Wisconsin, Hewson announced she was adding at least 45 new positions at a plant directly after Trump spoke there, saying his tax cuts for corporations made that possible.

Trump is pursuing a strategy that the arms industry uses to insulate itself from political criticism. "They've reached their tentacles into every state and many congressional districts," Scherb of Common Cause said. That makes it hard for elected officials to question their operations or Pentagon spending generally without looking like they are harming their local economy.

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, a Democrat who represents Coatesville, welcomed Lockheed's change of course, though she warned, "This decision is a temporary reprieve. I am concerned that Lockheed Martin and [its subsidiary] Sikorsky are playing politics with the livelihoods of people in my community."

The political benefit for Trump, though, remains in question, given that as president he has a broad set of responsibilities and is judged in different ways.

"Do I think it's important to keep jobs? Absolutely," said Marcel Groen, a former Pennsylvania Democratic party chair. "And I think we need to thank the congresswoman and thank the president for it. But it doesn't change my views and I don't think it changes most people's in terms of the state of the nation."

With polls showing that Trump's disastrous response to the health pandemic dominates voters' thoughts and Biden sustaining a lead in surveys of most swing states , his argument on defense industry jobs seems like a minor factor in this election.

Hartung of the Center for International Policy drew a parallel to President George H.W. Bush, who during his 1992 reelection campaign promoted plans for Taiwan and Saudi Arabia to purchase fighter jets produced in Missouri and Texas. Bush announced the decisions at events at the General Dynamics facility in Fort Worth, Texas, and the McDonnell Douglas plant in St. Louis that made the planes. That November, as Bill Clinton defeated him, he lost Missouri by the highest margin of any Republican in almost 30 years and won Texas by a slimmer margin than had become the norm for a GOP presidential candidate.

President Donald Trump greets then-Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson at the Derco Aerospace Inc. plant in Milwaukee on July MANDEL NGAN VIA GETTY IMAGES
President Donald Trump greets then-Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson at the Derco Aerospace Inc. plant in Milwaukee on July 12, 2019. Trump does not appear to be winning his political bet that increased defense spending would help his political fortunes.

Checking The Receipts

The defense industry can't control whether voters buy Trump's arguments about his relationship with it. But it could, if it wanted to, try to help him politically in a more direct way: by donating to his reelection campaign and allied efforts.

Yet arms manufacturers aren't reciprocating Trump's affection. A HuffPost review of Federal Election Commission records showed that top figures and groups at major industry organizations like the National Defense Industrial Association and the Aerospace Industries Association and at Lockheed, Trump's favorite defense firm, are donating this cycle much as they normally do: giving to both sides of the political aisle, with a slight preference to the party currently wielding the most power, which for now is Republicans. (The few notable exceptions include the chairman of the NDIA's board, Arnold Punaro, who has given more than $58,000 to Trump and others in the GOP.)

Data from the Center for Responsive Politics shows that's the case for contributions from the next three biggest groups of defense industry donors after Lockheed's employees.

https://schema.org/WPAdBlock

One smaller defense company, AshBritt Environmental, did donate $500,000 to a political action committee supporting Trump ― prompting a complaint from the Campaign Legal Center, which noted that businesses that take federal dollars are not allowed to make campaign contributions. Its founder told ProPublica he meant to make a personal donation.

For weapons producers, backing both parties makes sense. The military budget will have increased 29% under Trump by the end of the current fiscal year, per the White House Office of Management and Budget. Biden has said he doesn't see cuts as "inevitable" if he is elected, and his circle of advisers includes many from the national security world who have worked closely with ― and in many cases worked for ― the defense industry.

And arms manufacturers are "busy pursuing their own interests" in other ways, like trying to get a piece of additional government stimulus legislation, Hartung said ― an effort that's underway as the Pentagon's inspector general investigates how defense contractors got so much of the first coronavirus relief package.

Meanwhile, defense contractors continue to have an outsize effect on the way policies are designed in Washington through less political means. A recent report from the Center for International Policy found that such companies have given at least $1 billion to the nation's most influential think tanks since 2014 ― potentially spending taxpayer money to influence public opinion. They have also found less obvious ways to maintain support from powerful people, like running the databases that many congressional offices use to connect with constituents, Scherb of Common Cause said.

"This goes into a much bigger systemic issue about big money in politics and the role of corporations versus the role of Americans," Scherb said.

Given its reach, the defense industry has little reason to appear overtly partisan. Instead, it's projecting confidence despite the generally dreary state of the global economy: Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun has said he expects similar approaches from either winner of the election, arguing even greater Democratic control and the rise of less conventional lawmakers isn't a huge concern.

In short, whoever is in the White House, arms dealers tend to do just fine.

[Oct 21, 2020] This Is Not A Russian Hoax 'Nonpublic Information' Debunks Letter From '50 Former Intel Officials'

Highly recommended!
Is this 50 former Intel officials or 50 former national security parasites? Real Intel officials should keep quite after retirement. National security parasites go to politics and lobbying. One telling sign that a particular parson is a "national security parasite" is his desire to play "Russian card"
From comments: "Did the 50 former intelligence officials find the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction yet?"
Oct 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com
"This Is Not A Russian Hoax": 'Nonpublic Information' Debunks Letter From '50 Former Intel Officials'

by Tyler Durden Tue, 10/20/2020 - 08:45 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Hours before Politico reported the existence of a letter signed by '50 former senior intelligence officials' who say the Hunter Biden laptop scandal "has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation" - providing "no new evidence," while they remain "deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case," Tucker Carlson obliterated their (literal) conspiracy theory .

According to the Fox News host, he's seen 'nonpublic information that proves it was Hunter's laptop ,' adding " No one but Hunter could've known about or replicated this information ."

" This is not a Russian hoax. We are not speculating ."

Watch:

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317255675320348673&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fnot-russian-hoax-tucker-carlson-has-seen-nonpublic-information-proving-laptop-was-hunter&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

TUCKER: "This afternoon, we received nonpublic information that proves it was Hunter's laptop. No one but Hunter could've known about or replicated this information. This is not a Russian hoax. We are not speculating." pic.twitter.com/cl2ktdmdVc

-- August Takala (@AugustTakala) October 17, 2020

Meanwhile, the Delaware computer repair shop owner who believes Hunter dropped off three MacBook Pros for data recovery has a signed work order bearing Hunter's signature . When compared to the signature on a document in his paternity suit, while one looks more formal than the other, they are a match.

Going back to the '50 former senior intelligence officials' and their latest Russia fixation, one has to wonder - do they think Putin was able to compromise Biden's former business associate , Bevan Cooney, who gave investigative journalist Peter Schweizer his gmail password - revealing that Hunter and his partners were engaged in an influence-peddling operation for rich Chinese who wanted access to the Obama administration?

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

Did Putin further hack Joe Biden in 2011 to make him take a meeting with a Chinese delegation with ties to the CCP - arranged by Hunter's group, two years they secured a massive investment of Chinese money?

The implications boggle the mind.

Here's the clarifying sentences from the '50 former senior intelligence officials' that exposes the utter farce of it all:

While the letter's signatories presented no new evidence , they said their national security experience had made them "deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case" and cited several elements of the story that suggested the Kremlin's hand at work.

"If we are right," they added, "this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote in this election, and we believe strongly that Americans need to be aware of this."

It would appear these former intel officials are not aware of the current intel official views, confirmed by DNI Ratcliffe yesterday that:

"Hunter Biden's laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign."

And then there's the fact that no one from the Biden campaign has yet to deny any of the 'facts' in the emails. lay_arrow jin187 , 2 hours ago

Totally ridiculous. This ******** beating around the bush for both sides pisses me off. Dump all the laptop contents on Wikileaks if it's real. Let the people sort it out. If you say it's not real, prove it. If Biden wants me to believe it's not real, then stand behind a podium, and say clear as day into a pile of cameras that's it's all a forgery, and that you've done nothing wrong.

Instead we have Giuliani swearing he has a smoking gun, but as far as I can tell he's just pointing his finger underneath his shirt. Biden on the other hand, keep using weasel words to imply it's fake, but never denies it outright. It's almost like he's trying to hedge his bet that no one will manage to prove it's real before he gets into office, and makes it disappear.

Roacheforque , 7 hours ago

To play the "Russian Card" yet again should be beyond embarrassing. An insult to the intelligence of anyone with an IQ over 80. And so it's harmful to the left wingnut derangeables. Like Assad's chemical weapons and Saddam's WMDs, it is now code for pure ********. Not even code, just more like a signal.

A signal that say's "guilty as charged - we got nothin' but lies and BS over here".

East Indian , 4 hours ago

An insult to the intelligence of anyone with an IQ over 80.

They know their supporters wont find this insulting.

Kayman , 4 hours ago

@vulvishka.

538 ? North Korea has better propaganda.

Don't forget to go all in, like you did with Hillary.

Antedeluvian , 2 hours ago

Unfortunately, some very bright people are sucked into the conspiracy theory. I know one. Very bright lawyer. She says, "I still think there is substantive evidence of Russian collusion." I can point to a sky criss-crossed with chemtrails (when you see these "contrails" crossing at the same altitude, this is one sure clue these are not from regular passenger jet traffic) and she refuses to look up. She KNOWS I am an idiot (a PhD scientist idiot at that) because I get news and analysis on the web from sites that just want to sell me tee shirts and coffee mugs (well, she is partly right there!) whereas she gets her news from MSNBC, a venerable and trustworthy news source.

4DegreesOfSeparation , 6 hours ago

More Than 50 Former Intel Officials Say Hunter Biden Smear Smells Like Russia

"If we are right," the group wrote in a letter, "this is Russia trying to influence how Americans vote."

DescendantofthePatriots , 7 hours ago

That ****, James Clapper, signed his name at the top of this list.

Known liar, saboteur, and sneak.

The cognitive dissonance in our country is astounding. The fact that they would take these people's opinion over hard fact is astounding.

No wonder why we're sliding down the steep, slippery slope.

strych10 , 8 hours ago

So... let me get this straight.

50, that's 10 times five, fifty former intelligence officials are going with a convoluted narrative about a ludicrously complicated Russian Intelligence disinformation campaign involving planted laptops and at least half a dozen patsies when the two words "crack cocaine" explain the entire thing?

I'm not sure what's more terrifying; That these people think everyone else is dumb enough to believe this or that they're actually retired intelligence officials ​​​​​​.

Who the actual **** is running this ****show? The bastard child of Barney Fife and Inspector Clouseau?

Seriously, "Pink Panther Disinformation Operation" is more believable at this point.

Someone Else , 9 hours ago

This needs to get out, because a FAVORITE method of the Deep State, Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) is to parade some sort of a stupid letter with a bunch of signature hoping to look impressive but that really don't mean a damn thing.

Notre Dame graduates against the Supreme Court nominee, Intelligence agents alleging collusion, former State Department operatives against Trump. Its grandstanding that has been overdone.

moneybots , 8 hours ago

The letter by 50 former intelligence officials is itself, disinformation.

otschelnik , 8 hours ago

Remember when Weiner's attorney turned over Huma's home laptop to SDNY/FBI with all of Shillary's emails, and the FBI sat on it for a month and then Comey deep sixed them without even looking at them?

So now the FBI subpeona'd Hunter's laptop and burried it? Deja vu all over again.

enough of this , 8 hours ago

The FBI and DOJ constantly hide behind self-serving excuses to refuse the release of documents and, when forced to do so, they release heavily redacted files. They offer up the usual pretexts to fend off public disclosure such as: the information you seek cannot be disclosed because it involves an ongoing investigation, or the information you seek involves national security, or our methods and sources will be jeopardized if the information you seek is divulged to the public. But it seems the ones who would be most harmed by public disclosure are the corrupt FBI and DOJ officials themselves

Cobra Commander , 7 hours ago

A short 4 years ago the FBI and CIA were all concerned about "Kompromat" the Ruskies might have on Candidate Trump; concerned enough to spy on his campaign and open a counter-intelligence operation.

There are troves of Kompromat material, actual emails and video, on Joe, Hunter, and the whole Biden family; not made-up DNC-funded dossiers claiming a Russian consulate in Miami.

Now when it's Candidate Biden, everyone be all like, "Meh."

Cobra!

The Fonz...before shark jump , 5 hours ago

we gotta listen to the 50 former intelligence agents...you know the ones that had lone superpower status in the early 90s and then pissed it all away with 9/11 and infinity wars in middle east hahahahah ok buddy lol... histories D students....

Occams_Razor_Trader_Part_Deux , 7 hours ago

Signed by James Clapper and John Brennan;

You mean, the 2 Bozos who under the threat of perjury said there was NO evidence of Russian Collusion and the Trump campaign................. and 2 hours later called Trump 'Putin's puppet' on CNN.............

[Oct 20, 2020] George Koo linked to a Youtube video of Mike Pompeous and the Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic at a press conference in Dubrovnik. Watch how Plenkovic deals with Pompeosity!

Oct 20, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

MARK CHAPMAN October 19, 2020 at 4:41 pm

YES!! This.

https://asiatimes.com/2020/10/pompeos-record-a-litany-of-failure/

We all like to have our worldview affirmed by a corroborating voice, even if that, too, is an opinion. This, for me, was like lying back in a hot bath.

I have said as far back as I can remember, during Pompeo's tenure as Giant Blasphemous Cream Puff of State, that the damage he was doing to the relationship between America and her allies was significant and perhaps irreparable. The article, if accurate, reveals a China which is quite a bit like Russia in its official treatment of minorities – subordinate ethnicities are recognized as distinct societies if their population meets a reasonable threshold, and where an ethnic population is regionally dominant, an autonomous government is established to facilitate local governance by people of the same ethnic background.

I was not aware that during the term of China's one-child policy – a dreadful time which led to the abortion or other more-horrible disposals of unwanted baby girls – mothers among ethnic minorities were permitted two or even three children.

The article is obviously written in defense of China, but the authors seem to have substantiated their claims satisfactorily where such material is offered. Unsubstantiated opinion is often a close match with those offered by commenters on this forum.

JEN October 19, 2020 at 5:51 pm

George Koo linked to a Youtube video of Mike Pompeous and the Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenkovic at a press conference in Dubrovnik. Watch how Plenkovic deals with Pompeosity!

https://www.youtube.com/embed/0SakMXPwTtk?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

I swear I saw the Pompous One deflate considerably after Plenkovic's speech about China's BRI initiative. Good thing the wind was up and active otherwise the smell would have been horrific and everyone would have been knocked unconscious.

PATIENT OBSERVER October 19, 2020 at 4:51 pm

Mike Pompeo, otherwise known as the international man of catastrophe,

You knew it was going to be good from the first sentence.


[Oct 19, 2020] The Emails Are Russian- Will Be The Narrative, Regardless Of Facts Or Evidence by Caitlin Johnstone

Highly recommended!
Oct 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via CaitlinJohnstone.com,

Fight it all you want, but there's nothing you can do. "The emails are Russian" is going to be the official dominant narrative in mainstream political discourse, and there's nothing you can do to stop it. Resistance is futile.

Like the Russian hacking narrative, the Trump-Russia collusion narrative, the Russian bounties in Afghanistan narrative, and any other evidence-free framing of events that simultaneously advances pre-planned cold war agendas, is politically convenient for the Democratic party and generates clicks and ratings, the narrative that the New York Post publication of Hunter Biden's emails is a Russian operation is going to be hammered and hammered and hammered until it becomes the mainstream consensus. This will happen regardless of facts and evidence, up to and including rock solid evidence that Hunter Biden's emails were not published as a result of a Russian operation.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317449899860951040&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Femails-are-russian-will-be-narrative-regardless-facts-or-evidence&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

This is happening. It's following the same formula all the other fact-free Russia hysteria narratives have followed. The same media tour by pundits and political operatives saying with no evidence but very assertive voices that Russia is most certainly behind this occurrence and we should all be very upset about it.

"To me, this is just classic textbook Soviet Russian tradecraft at work," Russiagate founder and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is heard assuring CNN's audience .

"Joe Biden – and all of us – SHOULD be furious that media outlets are spreading what is very likely Russian propaganda," begins and eight-part thread by Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, who claims the emails are "Kremlin constructed anti-Biden propaganda."

"It's not really surprising at all, this was always the play, but still kind of head-spinning to watch all the players from 2016 run exactly the same hack-leak-smear op in 2020. Even with everyone knowing exactly what's happening this time," tweets MSNBC's Chris Hayes.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

"How are you all circling the wagons instead of being embarrassed for peddling Russian ops 18 days before the election. It's not enough that you all haven't learned from your atrocious handling of 2016 -- you are doubling down," Democratic Party think tanker Neera Tanden tweeted in admonishment of journalists who dare to report on or ask questions about the emails.

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1317307227963678721&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Femails-are-russian-will-be-narrative-regardless-facts-or-evidence&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Virtually the entirety of the Democratic Party-aligned political/media class has streamlined this narrative of Russian influence into the American consciousness with very little inertia, despite the fact that neither Joe nor Hunter Biden has disputed the authenticity of the emails and despite a complete absence of evidence for Russian involvement in their publication.

This is surely the first time, at least in recent memory, that we have ever seen such a broad consensus within the mass media that it is the civic duty of news reporters to try and influence the outcome of a presidential general election by withholding negative news coverage for one candidate. There was a lot of fascinated hatred for Trump in 2016, but people still reported on Hillary Clinton's various scandals and didn't attack one another for doing so. In 2020 that has changed, and mainstream news reporters have now largely coalesced along the doctrine that they must avoid any reporting which might be detrimental to the Biden campaign.

"Dem Party hacks (and many of their media allies) genuinely believe it's immoral to report on or even discuss stories that reflect poorly on Biden. In reality, it's the responsibility of journalists to ignore their vapid whining and ask about newsworthy stories, even about Biden," tweeted The Intercept 's Glenn Greenwald recently.

"You don't even have to think the Hunter Biden materials constitute some kind of earth-shattering story to be absolutely repulsed at the authoritarian propaganda offensive being waged to discredit them -- primarily by journalists who behave like compliant little trained robots ," tweeted journalist Michael Tracey.

Last month The Spectator 's Stephen L Miller described how the consensus formed among the mainstream press since Clinton's 2016 loss that it is their moral duty to be uncritical of Trump's opponent.

"For almost four years now, journalists have shamed their colleagues and themselves over what I will call the 'but her emails' dilemma," Miller writes. "Those who reported dutifully on the ill-timed federal investigation into Hillary Clinton's private server and spillage of classified information have been cast out and shunted away from the journalist cool kids' table. Focusing so much on what was, at the time, a considerable scandal, has been written off by many in the media as a blunder. They believe their friends and colleagues helped put Trump in the White House by focusing on a nothing-burger of a Clinton scandal when they should have been highlighting Trump's foibles. It's an error no journalist wants to repeat."

https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1316900508775280642&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Femails-are-russian-will-be-narrative-regardless-facts-or-evidence&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

So "the emails are Russian" narrative serves the interests of political convenience, partisan media ratings, and the national security state's pre-planned agenda to continue escalating against Russia as part of its slow motion third world war against nations which refuse to bow to US dictates, and you've got essentially no critical mainstream news coverage putting the brakes on any of it. This means this narrative is going to become mainstream orthodoxy and treated as an established fact, despite the fact that there is no actual, tangible evidence for it.

Joe Biden could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and the mainstream press would crucify any journalist who so much as tweeted about it. Very little journalism is going into vetting and challenging him, and a great deal of the energy that would normally be doing so is going into ensuring that he slides right into the White House.

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

If the mainstream news really existed to tell you the truth about what's going on, everyone would know about every questionable decision that Joe Biden has ever made, Russiagate would never have happened, we'd all be acutely aware of the fact that powerful forces are pushing us into increasingly aggressive confrontations with two nuclear-armed nations, and Trump would be grilled about Yemen in every press conference.

But the mainstream news does not exist to tell you the truth about the world. The mainstream news exists to advance the interests of its wealthy owners and the status quo upon which they have built their kingdoms. That's why it's so very, very important that we find ways to break away from it and share information with each other that isn't tainted by corrupt and powerful interests.

* * *

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal , purchasing some of my sweet merchandise , buying my books Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers . For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I'm trying to do with this platform, click here . Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I've written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

[Oct 19, 2020] New report shows more than $1B from war industry and govt. going to top 50 think tanks

Highly recommended!
Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 17 2020 23:20 utc | 76

New report shows more than $1B from war industry and govt. going to top 50 think tanks
Esper's speech demonstrates a confluence of policies, ideas, and funds that permeate through the system, and are by no means unique to a single service, think tank, or contractor.

First, Esper consistently situated his future expansion plans in a need to adapt to "an era of great power competition." CNAS is one of the think tanks leading the charge in highlighting the threat from Beijing.

They also received at least $8,946,000 from 2014-2019 from the U.S. government and defense contractors, including over $7 million from defense contractors like Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Huntington Ingalls, General Dynamics, and Boeing who would stand to make billions if the 500-ship fleet were enacted.

It's all about the money. Foreign and domestic policy is always all about the money, either directly or indirectly. Of course, the ultimate goal is power - or more precisely, the ultimate goal is relief of the fear of death, which drives every single human's every action, and only power can do that, and in this world only money can give you power (or so the chimpanzees believe.)

[Oct 19, 2020] To be fair, Russia was never given a time to grow. It was sanctioned, sanctioned and sanctioned.

Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

steven t johnson , Oct 18 2020 10:52 utc | 112

Not sure who this Andrei Martyanov is, but underlying all the comments is the proposition that Putin-managed capitalism works great, will work great forever, will not have a crisis ever and will make Russia totally independent in all ways. Stated so forthrightly, no doubt it sounds too stupid to admit to. Nonetheless this is the claim. I say capitalist restoration did not improve the Russian economy in the way implied by Martyanov. Putin is still a Yeltsinite, even if he is sober enough to pass for competent.

Smith , Oct 18 2020 11:44 utc | 113

To be fair, Russia was never given a time to grow. It was sanctioned, sanctioned and sanctioned.

China did have a sweet time from the 80s to 10s where they serve as the world factory.

michael , Oct 18 2020 11:47 utc | 114
@vk | Oct 17 2020 17:32 utc | 12

I take the opposite view: Looking from today, Russia is lucky that the USSR collapsed in 1991. It shed its debt, its currency passed through hyperinflation, and their economy collapsed and rebuilt. The US and most Western countries still have that coming for them, and soon.

Plus beyond that the strict Communist/Marxist atheism over 70+ years lead to a rebirth of Christian values in Russia, their biggest advantage in this cultural war. And they practice science, not scientism.

Note: Russia and China are more capitalist than the US, for quite some time now. (12+ years)

Yeah, Right , Oct 18 2020 12:01 utc | 115
@110 Abe as far as I understand it, the economic argument goes like this: take the number of rubles generated/spent/whatever in Russian economic activity, then use the current conversion rate to convert that into an "equivalent" amount of US dollars.

Then see what you can buy with that many US dollars.

If you went shopping in the USA, the answer would be that this many US dollars doesn't buy you much, ergo, Russian economic activity is pathetically low.

An example: the Russian government might budget xxx (fill in the figure) rubles to buy new T-90 tanks. In Washington they would convert that into US dollars, and then declare that this is chicken-feed. Hardly enough to buy less than 10 Abrams tanks.

Only the Russians aren't buying Abrams tanks from the USA, and are not spending dollars. They are buying T-90 tanks, and for the amount of rubles spent they'll get 50 tanks.

Every metric the US analyst are using tells them that the USA is vastly, vastly outspending the Russians on military equipment, to the point where it is obvious that the Russian military must be destitute and decrepit.

But if they every took the time to look they'll see 50 brand-spanking new T-90 main battle tanks. Weapons that their assumptions say that the Russians can't afford, and would wonder "Huh? Where'd they come from?"

If they ever looked, which is doubtful.

vk , Oct 18 2020 14:56 utc | 116
@ Posted by: Andrei Martyanov | Oct 18 2020 4:11 utc | 96

I agree that comparing Russia's economy with the likes of Italy and Spain is ridiculous, but it's not that simple. Capitalism is not what is appears to be.

If a (capitalist) nation wants to get something from another (capitalist) nation, it needs to export something. There's no free lunch in international trade: if you want to import, you have to export or issue sovereign debt bonds (treasury bonds).

In this scenario, either Russia produces everything it needs in its own territory or it will have to export in order to import the technology it needs to do whatever it needs to do. Remember: the Russian Federation is a capitalist nation-state, it has to follow the laws of motion of capitalism, which take precedence over whatever Putin wants. To ignore that economic laws exist is to deny any kind of theory of collapse; nation-states would then be eternal, natural entities with no entropy.

Even if Russia produces everything it needs in its own territory, it is still capitalist. It would need, in order to "substitute imports", to super-exploit its own labor force (working class) in order to extract surpluses for its industrialization efforts. That's what the USSR did during Stalin.

If Russia is doing the imports substitution in the classical way (the way Latin America did during the liberal dictatorships of the 1950s-1980s), then it is trying to sell commodities to industrialized countries in order to import technology and machinery necessary to industrialize its own territory. That is probably the case here.

Assuming this more probable case, then I'm sorry to tell you it won't work. It may work in the short or even medium term, but it will ultimately fail in the long term. The thing is that, in a system of capitalist exchange between an agrarian and an industrial nation-state, the industrial nation-state will always have the advantage (i.e. have a trade surplus). That's because of Marx's labor theory of value: industrialized commodities ("manufactured goods") have more intrinsic value than agrarian/raw material commodities - just think about how many kilos of bananas Brazil would have to export to the USA in order to import one single unit of an iPhone 12, to use an contemporary example. As a social result, industrialized countries have a higher organic composition of capital (OCC) than agrarian countries, as they need more value to just keep themselves afloat (as a metaphor: it's more expensive to keep a big mansion than a little flat in a stationary state). Value (wealth) then tends to flow from lower OCC to the higher OCC, this is the material base that divides the First and Third World countries until today.

To make things even worse, raw materials/agricultural products have an inelastic demand, which means their prices fall when production rises, and their prices rise when production falls, relative to overall demand. You will pay whatever the water company will charge you for the cubic meter of water - but you won't consume more or less water because of its price, hence the term "inelastic": demand tends to be more or less constant on a macroeconomic level. The same problem suffers the commodity exporter nations: there will come a stage where their exports' overall value will collapse vis-a-vis the machinery and technology they need to import.

As a result, the commodity exporter nations will have to get more debt overseas, by issuing more T-bonds, just to keep the trade balance afloat. What was the quest for progress becomes a vicious battle for mere survival. A debt crisis is brewed.

And that's exactly what happened to the Latin American countries in the 1980s-1990s: their debt exploded and they were put to their knees by the USA (the country that issues the universal fiat currency). The USA then charged their debt, which triggered a wave of privatizations of everything those countries had built over decades. This is what will happen to Russia if it falls for the lure of imports substitution.

That's why I urge the Russians to review their concepts and try to get back to the Soviet times. It doesn't need to be exactly how it was before: you can make the due reforms and adopt a more or less Chinese model of socialism. That's the only way out, if the Russian people doesn't want to be enslaved by the liberals (capitalists).

pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 15:11 utc | 117
looks like the fbi is still in bed with the cia on russiagate, they are now pivoting to investigating the laptop as a russian intelligence operation.
pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 15:14 utc | 118
@vk from what i'm reading (stephen cohen: soviet fates and lost alternatives) the chinese adopted something like bukharin's nep policies, which stalin did his best to wipe out in the ussr. i've got some problems with cohen's last book, "war with russia?" but he has a lot of good information on the history of the ussr.
pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 15:17 utc | 119
russia is not "lucky" that it went through a massive collapse following idiotic u.s. austerity policies in the 90's. it is still recovering from that.
vk , Oct 18 2020 15:42 utc | 120
@ Posted by: pretzelattack | Oct 18 2020 15:14 utc | 118

On the surface, yes: the comparison between Reform and Opening Up and NEP are irresistible. But it is not precise: the only merit it has is in the fact that it is fairer than simply classifying Deng Xiaoping's reforms as neoliberalism (Trotskysts, Austrian School) or capitalism (liberals).

The key here is the difference of the nature of the Chinese peasant class and the Russian peasant class. The Chinese peasant class, besides suffering a lot (millions of dead by famine) in the hands of a liberal government for decades (Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Government) (while the Russian equivalent - the "February Revolution" - only lasted a few months, engulfed by their insistence on continuing with the meat-grinder of WWI), had a different historical subtract.

Chinese late feudalism was much more developed, much more manufactured-centered than Russian late feudalism. As a result, the Chinese peasant was much more proletarian-minded than the feudal Russian peasant. Also, the Chinese didn't have the kulak problem (peasant petite-bourgeoisie) - instead, they had regional warlords who self-destructed during the chaotic republican period (1911-1949). When the warlords were gone, what was left was a much more proletarian-minded, egalitarian-minded, small peasantry. This peasantry didn't bother to migrate to the cities to work in the industry or to start their own factories in the countryside itself. That's why Deng Xiaoping's Reform and Opening Up was successful - not because of his genius, but because he was backed up by a capable people.

The Chinese peasantry, for example, didn't hoard or directed their grain surplus to exports in order to starve the proletariat to death in the cities - they sold it to the Chinese market. The Chinese peasantry also trusted their central government (CCP) and saw itself as part of the project - in complete opposition to the feudal-minded Russian kulak, who saw his piece of land as essentially an independent and self-sufficient cell/ecosystem.

That's why the Reform and Opening Up was successful (it survives until the present times) and the NEP soon failed - following the good harvest of 1924, came the awful harvest of 1926, which triggered a shit show where the peasantry hoarded the grain and almost starved the USSR to extinction, and which led to Stalin's ascension and the dekulakization process (forced collectivization).

pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 15:59 utc | 121
@vk thanks for your detailed and thorough response, i will keep it in mind as i read.
pretzelattack , Oct 18 2020 16:11 utc | 122
i should add that i know little about the actual history of communism, but capitalism is revealing itself as a monstrous failure, and not all the propaganda in the world is succeeding at covering that up.
Abe , Oct 18 2020 16:32 utc | 123
Yeah, Right @ 115

I know how economic reasoning comes to that conclusion, but IRL comparing such different countries only by GDP metric is insane and beyond stupid.

Eg. Russia has GDP similar to California!

Yes, in US centric GDP metrics that favors and cheats US itself (surprise!).

But. One of those countries sent man in space, produces everything, has vast resources and is self sufficient nuclear superpower.
Other one cant even feed and provider water to its population without outside help.

GDP means nothing when sh*t hits the fan. What will "richer" country do if it goes to war with "poorer"? Throw money at them while they launch nukes at it?

vk , Oct 18 2020 17:43 utc | 124
@ Posted by: pretzelattack | Oct 18 2020 16:11 utc | 122

There certainly are similarities between the NEP and the Reform and Opening Up. It's very possible Deng Xiaoping took Lenin as inspiration.

Forgot to mention the Scissors Crisis, which erupted in 1923, and triggered the NEP. That crisis is one more evidence that shows manufactured products are inherently more valuable than raw materials/agrarian products.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 19:57 utc | 125
@Eric.
The facts are that even in 2020 Russia does not have anything close to gas turbines that can replace Siemens

Before posting anything--learn your facts. You, obviously, have issues with accessing them.

https://www.interfax.ru/russia/694526

Again, for products of Western "education" basic logic and ability for a basic extrapolation seem beyond the grasp: there are no issues for Russia to produce anything, other than time and some money. Country which produces best hi-tech weapons in the world, dominates world's nuclear energy market (this is not your iPhone "hi tech") and has a full enclosed cycle for aerospace industry, among many other things, will have little trouble in substituting pretty much anything. I remember a bunch of morons, who pass for "analysts", from either WSJ or WaPo declaring 6 years ago that sanctions will deny Russia access to Western extraction technologies. Sure, for a country whose space program alone will crush whole economies of UK or Germany should they ever try to recreate it, will have "problems" producing compressor or drill equipment with the level of Russia's metallurgy and material science. Generally speaking, West's present pathetic state is a direct result of utter incompetence across the board in a number of key fields of human activity and your post, most likely based on some BS by Western media, is a good demonstration of this state of the affairs.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 20:00 utc | 126
@Jason

Per immigration policy, you can easily find a a truck load of resources, especially on the web-sites of Russian diplomatic missions (Embassies, Consulates etc.), easily available. Per cats--Russian love for cats is boundless and intense. You may say that Russia is a cat-obsessed country;)

steven t johnson , Oct 18 2020 20:05 utc | 127
vk@120 posits a mystical cultural difference in Russian and Chinese peasants, which unfortunately has pretty much the same content as the hypothesis of a racial difference. That the morally superior race is supposed to be Chinese doesn't really help. As often, some strange assertions of facts that aren't so accompany such bizarre thinking. The rich peasants in China (what would be kulaks in Russian history,) were notorious for moneylending. As ever, the inevitable arrears ended in the moneylender's family taking the land. Collectivization came early in China, well along the way by 1956. And a key aspect of it was the struggle against the Chinese equivalent of the kulak class. As for the insistence that private farming is superior, the growth of inequality in land drove millions, a hundred million or more, into the cities. Without residence permits this floating proletariat was effectively superexploited by the new capitalist elements, as Deng meant them to do. Nor did the warlords discredit themselves, not as a group. If anything the young warlord who forced Chiang to reject active war against the Communists, in order to fight the Japanese invaders, was the one who kept the GMD (KMT in Wade-Giles,) from discrediting itself. [Xian incident] And what warlords had to do with the Chinese rich peasantry *after* the Revolution is a complete mystery.

Socially, the deliberate uneven development promoted by Deng and his successors, is eroding the social fabric of the larger countryside. This, in addition to the neocolonial concessions, the growing links to the Chinese bourgeoisie of the diaspora suggest that as Dengists may go even back/forward to a new form of warlordism. The thing about comparing Bukharism/NEP to Dengism/the "Opening" is that Bukharin's program failed spectacularly. But modern China is not next door to Nazi Germany. Even more to the point, Stalin's victory over Hitler has provided a kind of moral shield for China, even under Deng, inspiring fear of losing a general war. If Bukharin had beaten Stalin, we can be as sure as any hypothetical can be, the USSR would have been defeated, not victorious. In modern China, the Bukharin won. There is an excellent chance the national government of today's China will be defeated.

Eric , Oct 18 2020 20:53 utc | 128
@125 Andrei Martyanov

That article describes a 110 MW turbine that has now finally been put into production (while Siemens, General Electric etc. produce utility-class gas turbines up to about 600 MW, with far higher efficiency and most likely reliability). The article further describes 40 GW of thermal electrical production to be "modernized" until 2031 (11 years from now), and apparently a microscopic 2 GW of new capacity from "domestic and localized" 65 MW turbines to be commissioned 2026-2028. (I don't understand Russian so I had to rely on Yandex's machine translation.) That's admittedly some kind of progress, but is simply not going to cut it. Nowhere close.

Imagine if China set the ambition to build its own semiconductors and its own turbofans for its stealth fighters sometime around 2040. Imagine if China was still producing a third of the amount of electricity of the United States instead of about double, etc., and considered this to be adequate. It would be akin to abandoning its ambitions for technological and industrial independence from the West, and that is exactly what Russia is doing in the realm of gas turbines. There is apparently no capability and no seriousness going into translating Russia's world-class research and science into actual large-scale, modern industrial production, and everything points to this continuing, while you can blather on all you want about people with "Western education" simply not getting anything.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 21:16 utc | 129
@Eric
That's admittedly some kind of progress, but is simply not going to cut it. Nowhere close.

That's admittedly you switching on "I am dense" mode and trying to up the ante with 600 MW, which are a unique product, while you somehow miss the point that 110 MWt MGT-110 of fully Russian production has completed a full cycle of industrial tests and operations (an equivalent of military IOC--Initial Operational Capability) and is in a serial production. But instead of studying the issue (even if through Yandex translate) with Siemens which when learning about MGT-110 offered Russia 100% localization with technology transfer, Russians declined, you go into generalizations without having even minimal set of facts and situational awareness. In fact 110 MWt turbines are most in demand product for a variety of applications. Get acquainted with this.

https://power-m.ru/en/customers/thermal-power/gas-turbines/

I am not going to waste my time explaining to you (you will play dense again) what IOC means and how it relates to serial production, I am sure you will find a bunch of unrealted "argumentation".

Imagine if China

I don't need to imagine anything, as well as draw irrelevant parallels with China.

There is apparently no capability and no seriousness going into translating Russia's world-class research and science into actual large-scale, modern industrial production, and everything points to this continuing, while you can blather on all you want about people with "Western education" simply not getting anything.

This is exactly what I am talking about. Hollow declarations by people who can not even develop basic factual base.

Grieved , Oct 18 2020 21:16 utc | 130
@125 Andrei Martyanov

It's great to see you here with your excellent facts and perspectives on Russia. I'm sorry you have to deal with people whose minds are too small to grasp the immense scale of Russia - scale in physical size, civilizational depth and importance to the balance of power in the world.

Russia alone stopped the creeping gray hegemony from the west that had looked like it would just ooze over the whole world and suffocate it in bullshit and tribute payments. And then China joined in the fun. The world has a future now, when a decade ago this didn't seem possible, at least from my view in the US. Geopolitically, Russia gave us this future, and China has come to show us how much fun it's going to be.

Many thanks to you and your people.

vk , Oct 18 2020 21:31 utc | 131
@ Posted by: steven t johnson | Oct 18 2020 20:05 utc | 127

There's no mysticism here because we know how the kulaks emerged in Russia: they were the result of the catastrophic capitalist reforms of the 1860s, which completely warped the old feudal relations of the Russian Empire.

The reforms of the 1860s were catastrophic for two reasons:

1) it freed the peasants slowly. The State serfs - the last who gained their freedom - were left with no land. A complex partition system of the land, based on each administrative region, created a distorted division of land, where very few peasants got huge chunks of land (the future kulaks) and most received almost nothing (as Lenin demonstrated, see his first book of his Complete Works, below the rate of subsistence);

2) it tried to preserve the old feudal privileges and powers of the absolutist monarchy.

As a result, the Russian Empire had a bizarre economic system, a mixed economy with the worst of the two words: the inequality and absolute misery of capitalism and the backwardness and lack of social mobility of feudalism.

But yes, you're right when you state Mao's era was not an economic failure. His early era really saw an attempt by the CCP to make an alliance with the "national bourgeoisie", and this alliance was indeed a failure. This certainly led to a more radical approach by the CCP, still in the Mao era (collectivization). Life quality in China greatly increased after 1949, until the recession of the Great Leap Forward (which was not a famine, but threw back some socioeconomic indicators temporarily back to the WWII era). When the Great Leap Forward was abandoned, China continued to improve afterwards.

All of this doesn't change the fact that China's "NEP" was a success, while the original NEP wasn't. Of course, there are many factors that explain this, but it is wrong to call late Qing China as even similar to the late Romanov Russia.

I'm not saying Stalin's reform were a failure. Without them, they wouldn't be able to quickly import the Fordist (Taylorist) method they needed to industrialize. The USSR became a superpower in just 19 years - a world record. The first Five-Year Plan was a huge morale boost and success for the Soviet people - specially because it happened at the same time as the capitalist meltdown of 1929.

--//--

@ Posted by: Eric | Oct 18 2020 20:53 utc | 128

The thing with semiconductors (and other very advanced technologies) is that it is an industry that only makes sense for a given nation to dominate if they're going to mass produce it. That usually means said production must be export oriented, which means competing against already well-established competitors.

China doesn't want to drain the State's coffers to fund an industry that won't at least pay for itself. It has to change the wheels with the car moving. That's why it is still negotiating the Huawei contracts in the West first, why it still is trying to keep the Taiwanese product flowing first, only to then gradually start the heavy investment needed to dominate the semiconductor technology and production process.

They learned with the Soviets in this sense. When computers became a thing in the West, the USSR immediately poured resources to build them. They were able to dominate the main frame technology, and they were successfully implemented in their economy. Then came the personal computers, and, this time, the Soviets weren't able to make it integrate in their economy. The problem wasn't that the Soviets didn't know how to build a personal computer (they did), but that every new technology is born for a reason, and only makes sense in a given social context. You can't just blindly copy your enemy's technology and hope for the best.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 23:03 utc | 132
@Grieved
The world has a future now, when a decade ago this didn't seem possible, at least from my view in the US. Geopolitically, Russia gave us this future, and China has come to show us how much fun it's going to be. Many thanks to you and your people.

Thank you for your kind words. As my personal experience (my third book is coming out soon)shows--explaining economic reality to people who have been "educated" (that is confused, ripped off for huge tuition and given worthless piece of paper with MBA or some "economics" Bachelor of "Science" on it) in Western pseudo-economic "theory" that this "global" "rules-based order" is over, is pretty much an exercise in futility. And if a catastrophe of Boeing is any indication (I will omit here NATO's military-industrial complex)--dividends, stocks and "capitalization" is a figment of imagination of people who never left their office and infantile state of development and swallowed BS economic narrative hook, line and sinker without even trying to look out of the window. They still buy this BS of US having "largest GDP in the world" (in reality it is much smaller than that of China), the de-industrialization of the United States is catastrophic (they never bothered to look at 2018 Inter-agency Report to POTUS specifically about that)and its industrial base is shrinking with a lighting speed, same goes to Germany which for now retains some residual industrial capability and competences but:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-germany-economy-manufacturing/german-manufacturing-output-to-shrink-4-this-year-bdi-says-idUKKBN1XT1D6

This is before COVID-19, after it Germany's economy shrank worst among Western nations, worse even than the US. It is a long story, but as Michael Hudson stated not for once in his books and interviews, what is "taught" as economics in the West is basically a pseudo-science. Well, it is. Or, as same Hudson stated earlier this year:"The gunboats don't appear in your economics textbooks. I bet your price theory didn't have gun boats in them, or the crime sector. And probably they didn't have debt in it either." And then they wonder in Germany (or EU)how come that EU structures are filled with pedophiles, "Green" fanatics and multiculturalists. Well, because Germany (and EU) are occupied territories who made their choice. And this is just the start. What many do not understand here is that overwhelming majority of Russians do not want to deal with Europe and calls for new Iron Curtain are louder and louder and the process has started. Of course, there is a lot of both contempt and schadenfreude on Russian part. As Napoleon stated, the nation which doesn't want to feed own army, will feed someone else's. Very true. Modern West worked hard for it, let it "enjoy" now.

karlof1 , Oct 18 2020 23:52 utc | 133
Andrei Martyanov @132 & elsewhere--

It's good to see you commenting here as barflies seem more inclined to listen to you than me. Did you watch Russian documentary on The Wall , which I learned about from Lavrov's meeting with those doing business within Russia on 5 Oct? I asked The Saker if his translation team would take on the task of providing English subtitles or a voice over but never got a reply one way or the other. IMO, for Russia to avoid the West's fate it must change its banking and financial system from the private to the public realm as Hudson advocates most recently in this podcast . As for Mr. Lavrov, he surprised the radio station interviewers by citing Semyon Slepakov's song "America Doesn't Like Us," of which barfly Paco thankfully provided a translation of the lyrics.С наилучшими пожеланиями крепкого здоровья и долгих лет жизни!

Smith , Oct 19 2020 0:01 utc | 134
So I don't get it, who won that engagement, Andrei or Eric?

Can Russia produce that turbo thingie or not?

Eric , Oct 19 2020 0:18 utc | 135
@132 Andrei Martyanov

I think you an Grieved misunderstand somewhat where I am coming from here. Michael Hudson would be (and has been) the first to describe how Russia's elites (and to a large extent it seems also the people) bought into a bogus neoliberal ideology teaching that somehow Russia needs to earn the money it needs to build its own economy in the form of foreign currency through export revenues. Apparently these economists and politicians in Russia never bothered to look how Western economies actually operate (as opposed to what they preach to countries they want to destroy), or for that matter how China has developed its economy (in all of these countries, the necessary credit is created on a keyboard.) The export revenues that Russia earns in the form of dollars and euros are sold to the central bank for the roubles that Russia's government needs to function. Bizarrely, this creates just as much inflation as it would if the central bank had just created the roubles without "backing" foreign currency. In fact, there is more inflation created, because in times of high oil prices, corresponding amounts of roubles are suddenly thrown into a domestic market that is underdeveloped, for example in its infrastructure and its food processing. There are reasons why China can expand its money supply by much greater proportions each year and still suffer far less inflation than Russia.

Unlike China, Russia had already attained much of the technological expertise for the equipment that it later decided it was unable to produce inside the country. A good example of this are the turboexpanders whose design was perfected (though the basic idea was a bit older) by Pyotr Kapisa in the 1930's in the USSR. This same technology went into the turbopumps of the rocket engines in the Energia boosters. These engines are still to this day, 30 years after the Soviet collapse, imported by the United States. As these rocket engines including the turbopumps are still produced in Russia, the know-how to manufacture was obviously not lost.

I read just the other day that as part of its import substitution program, Russia is considering to produce the turboexpanders for processing natural gas (separating methane from ethane) inside the country. Russia, with the world's largest natural gas reserves and production, and as I described already possessing the expertise to produce the turboexpanders needed for cryogenic separation, chose to hand over possibly billions of dollars to the West to import this machinery over the years, only to be helpless when the West introduced technological sanctions against its oil and gas sector. Very likely, in a couple of years we will receive the announcement that the drive to produce them domestically has been abandoned, after it was realized that their production will require new factories and new machinery, which do not fall out of the sky in Russia as they apparently do in the West and in China. Putin will announce that great business awaits whichever Western investor ready to provide the funds. (Spoiler: They won't! The West is not very interested in investing into building up Russia's industrial capabilities, preferring instead to loot its natural resources and to suck out its skilled worked and scientists.)

While Russia sits and waits for higher oil prices or foreign dollar credit on the one hand, and with unemployed skilled labor and rotting industrial infrastructure on the other hand, China spends the equivalent of trillions of dollars (in yuan, obviously) into fixed capital (not least infrastructure) each year. The funds for this are all created by keystrokes by the PBOC and provide employment for the domestic workforce. You don't have to ponder long on which model has been hugely successful, and which has been an unmitigated disaster.

I can't find the exact figures right now, but Russia produces something like 300,000 STEM graduates every year, more than the United States. (I may very well have read this originally on your blog, by the way.) Many of them will still be forced to emigrate to find gainful employment, even 20 years after the 1990's ended and Putin became President. These graduates remain even in post-Soviet times of a very high quality, and undergraduate students in Russia are trained at a higher level in mathematics and physics than in particular Americans are even as post-graduates. By refusing to invest in its own scientific infrastructure and industry the way China has done and does, Russia gives away all the education and training that were provided to these students, especially to the same Western countries that are seeking to destroy Russia. This is completely unforgivable.

I should add that I myself study physics in Germany. I have great appreciation for the Russian methods of teaching mathematics and physics, as many do here. I have learned, preferentially, mathematical analysis from Zorich, mechanics, electrodynamics etc. from Landau-Lifschitz, much about Fourier series from Tolstov, and so on, and have very often been awestruck and inspired in a mystical fashion by these works. I am not somehow unaware of the unparalleled quality (in particular after the destruction of Germany in WWII) of the USSR's and Russia's math/physics education or unfamiliar with the achievements of the USSR in science and engineering. It's precisely because I am familar with them that it frustrates me immensely how Russia's potential is needlessly wasted.

Digby , Oct 19 2020 0:28 utc | 136
What many do not understand here is that overwhelming majority of Russians do not want to deal with Europe and calls for new Iron Curtain are louder and louder and the process has started. Of course, there is a lot of both contempt and schadenfreude on Russian part.
Andrei (132), do you have a link to an opinion poll that supports this? Thanks in advance.
james , Oct 19 2020 1:01 utc | 137
@ Digby | Oct 19 2020 0:28 utc | 136.. if you haven't already listened to the lavrov interview that b linked to in his main post - it is a question and answer thing - you would benefit from doing so and it would help answer you question some too.. see b's post at this spot -"In a wide ranging interview with Russian radio stations" and hit that link
Digby , Oct 19 2020 2:17 utc | 138
@ james (137)
Well, I looked into the interview. While it is informative in its own right (at some point it briefly touches on Russo-Japanese relations), and some of the interviewers do show some concerns, I'm still not sure how it helps answer my question (maybe I missed something?). My initial impression was that Mr. Martyanov was referring to Russian civilians - not just radio interviewers.
Thanks anyway for the heads up.
james , Oct 19 2020 3:37 utc | 139
@ 138 digby... my impression was the radio interviewers questions were a reflection of the general sentiment of the public.. i could be wrong, but it seems to me they have completely given up on the west based on what they ask and say in their questions to lavrov...

on another note, you might enjoy engaging andrei more directly on his website which i will share here...

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/

cheers..

[Oct 18, 2020] Does This Explain Why Facebook Was So Quick To Suppress Hunter Biden Revelations- -

Oct 18, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

Does This Explain Why Facebook Was So Quick To Suppress Hunter Biden Revelations? by Tyler Durden Sun, 10/18/2020 - 15:20 Twitter Facebook Reddit Email Print

Authored by Andrea Widburg via AmericanThinker.com,

The moment the New York Post reported on some of the sleazy, corrupt details contained on Hunter Biden's hard drive, Twitter and Facebook, the social media giants most closely connected to the way Americans exchange political information, went into overdrive to suppress the information and protect Joe Biden. In the case of Facebook, though, perhaps one of those protectors was, in fact, protecting herself.

The person currently in charge of Facebook's election integrity program is Anna Makanju . That name probably doesn't mean a lot to you, but it should mean a lot – and in a comforting way -- to Joe Biden.

Before ending up at Facebook, Makanju was a nonresident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council. The Atlantic Council is an ostensibly non-partisan think tank that deals with international affairs. In fact, it's a decidedly partisan organization.

In 2009, James L. Jones, the Atlantic Council's chairman left the organization to be President Obama's National Security Advisor. Susan Rice, Richard Holbrooke, Eric Shinseki, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Chuck Hagel, and Brent Scowcroft also were all affiliated with the Atlantic Council before they ended up in the Obama administration.

The Atlantic Council has received massive amounts of foreign funding over the years. Here's one that should interest everyone: Burisma Holdings donated $300,000 dollars to the Atlantic Council, over the course of three consecutive years, beginning in 2016. The information below may explain why it began paying that money to the Council.

Not only was the Atlantic Council sending people into the Obama-Biden administration, but it was also serving as an outside advisor. And that gets us back to Anna Makanju, the person heading Facebook's misleadingly titled "election integrity program."

Makanju also worked at the Atlantic Council. The following is the relevant part of Makanju's professional bio from her page at the Atlantic Council (emphasis mine):

Anna Makanju is a nonresident senior fellow with the Transatlantic Security Initiative. She is a public policy and legal expert working at Facebook, where she leads efforts to ensure election integrity on the platform. Previously, she was the special policy adviser for Europe and Eurasia to former US Vice President Joe Biden , senior policy adviser to Ambassador Samantha Power at the United States Mission to the United Nations, director for Russia at the National Security Council, and the chief of staff for European and NATO Policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. She has also taught at the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University and worked as a consultant to a leading company focused on space technologies.

about:blank

about:blank

me title=

Makanju was a player in the faux Ukraine impeachment. Early in December 2019, when the Democrats were gearing up for the impeachment, Glenn Kessler mentioned her in an article assuring Washington Post readers that, contrary to the Trump administration's claims, there was nothing corrupt about Biden's dealings with Ukraine. He made the point then that Biden now raises as a defense: Biden didn't pressure Ukraine to fire prosecutor Viktor Shokin to protect Burisma; he did it because Shokin wasn't doing his job when it came to investigating corruption.

Kessler writes that, on the same day in February 2016 that then-Ukrainian President Poroshenko announced that Shokin had offered his resignation, Biden spoke to both Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. The White House version is that Biden gave both men pep talks about reforming the government and fighting corruption. And that's where Makanju comes in:

Anna Makanju, Biden's senior policy adviser for Ukraine at the time, also listened to the calls and said release of the transcripts would only strengthen Biden's case that he acted properly. She helped Biden prepare for the conversations and said they operated at a high level, with Biden using language such as Poroshenko's government being "nation builders for a transformation of Ukraine."

A reference to a private company such as Burisma would be "too fine a level of granularity" for a call between Biden and the president of another country, Makanju told The Fact Checker. Instead, she said, the conversation focused on reforms demanded by the International Monetary Fund, methods to tackle corruption and military assistance. An investigation of "Burisma was just not significant enough" to mention, she said.

Let me remind you, in case you forgot, that Burisma started paying the Atlantic Council a lot of money in 2016, right when Makanju was advising Biden regarding getting rid of Shokin.

In other words, there's a really good chance that Sundance was correct when he wrote at The Conservative Treehouse :

NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

That's right folks, the Facebook executive currently blocking all of the negative evidence of Hunter and Joe Biden's corrupt activity in Ukraine is the same person who was coordinating the corrupt activity between the Biden family payoffs and Ukraine.

You just cannot make this stuff up folks.

The incestuous networking between Democrats in the White House, Congress, the Deep State, the media, and Big Tech never ends. That's why the American people wanted and still want Trump, the true outsider, to head the government. They know that Democrats have turned American politics into one giant Augean Stable and that Trump is the Hercules who (we hope) can clean it out.

[Oct 18, 2020] More Pressure On Russia Will Have No Effect

Notable quotes:
"... Russia is militarily secure and the 'west' knows that. It is one reason for the anti-Russian frenzy. Russia does not need to bother with the unprecedented hostility coming from Brussels and Washington. It can ignore it while taking care of its interests. ..."
"... As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint? ..."
"... The nightmare scenario for the Anglo-Americans is a Germany-Russia-China triangle. If that happens it is game over! ..."
"... They don't want an actual war. They just ratchet up the tensions to keep Europe subdued and obedient and Russia off balance and thereby prevent any rapprochement between the two. ..."
"... The strong hatred and hostility coming from the US and the EU are due to the understanding that they don't have much time, and they must act now, or tomorrow it will be too late. ..."
"... Years ago Barack Obama gave speech to West Point graduates, proclaiming US moral and racial superiority (because they mix'n's*it) over whole world, Goebbels would be proud. Germany has long history of hating all those Slavs, and Israel... Lets not go there with how they threat those inferior brown people. ..."
"... Of course that end-point is money for military contractors and power for the FP elite in government and think-tanks which also means money. Yes, there are true-believers who see a mighty struggle between "good" (the USA) an "evil" (Russia/China) but they are incompetent. As for the American people they will believe whatever the NY Times says since they are militantly ignorant of history, geography, foreign affairs in general, and, above all, political science. ..."
"... The USA is lucky the USSR collapsed in 1991. If it managed to somehow survive for mere 17 years more, it would catch the 2008 capitalist meltdown ..."
"... It looks like the USA imported the Irish and imported their luck, too. ..."
"... This loathing was made blatantly manifest during WWII, of course, but it didn't die out because that generation and more likely their children remain with us. Ditto the generational Anglo-American hatred of Russians (yes, for the UK, and their haute bourgeoisie, it has deeper historical roots than the 20thC) and the USSR even more... ..."
"... "Maas added that Germany takes decisions related to its energy policy and energy supply 'here in Europe', saying that Berlin accepts ' the fact that the US had more than doubled its oil imports from Russia last year and is now the world's second largest importer of Russian heavy oil .'" [My Emphasis] ..."
"... The neocon/NATO aggressive expansionism has many purposes, but one is surely domestic repression: to gaslight and cause fear-the-foreign-bogeyman trauma among the American and British people as a whole and make most of them become docile and lose their critical thinking skills and their ability to analyze their own societies. ..."
"... One of the best ways to lobotomize the publics of the US and UK is to very gradually impose martial law in the name of protecting national security and ensuring peace and harmony at home. ..."
"... At the time, I thought it was just Trump and his followers freaking out, now I think it's the NatSec people, who have finally seen the truth of their situation. As one can see in the Atlantic Council piece B posted, they are still trying to keep the old narrative patched together too. ..."
"... As I've said numerous times -- Fuck the US Empire and it's minion bitches. Jesse Ventura commented this past week that EVERY US Incumbent politician should be voted out of office this election. 99% of them are scum. ..."
"... That was the whole point of the first Cold War. It is the whole point of creating a Cold War 2.0. Absolutely nothing has changed. ..."
"... If the Russian Federation really has an ongoing imports substitution program, then this explains everything. Germany is an exports-oriented economy. It wants to integrate with the Russian economy in the sense to keep it as an agrarian-extrativist economy to feed it with cheap commodities to feed their industry. Germany's ideal Russia is Brazil. ..."
"... A Russia that also exports high-value commodities (manufactured commodities) is a direct threat to Germany, as it competes with it directly in the international market. That's the reason Germany doesn't want the BRI to come to Europe, as Merkel once said: Europe must not become China's peninsula. China is Germany's main competitor, as it is also a big manufacturing exporter. ..."
"... Perhaps the US only has one script in the playbook: to balkanise, disrupt and foster 5th columns until their opponent becomes a dysfunctional or failed state. ..."
"... The US and EU attempts to break Russia's independent foreign policy are just stepping stones to the eventual goal of a breakup Russia itself, never forget Albright's comments in the 90s about how Siberia shouldn't belong to Russia alone. ..."
"... We may yet see a Cuban missile crisis scenario but it looks more likely to be caused by arms sales to Taiwan than conflict in the Caucasus. ..."
"... I also think its naive to see these as "fires burning at Russia's borders" instead of as deliberately set bear traps . Azerbaijan is in a strategic location between Russia and Iran and the conflict with Armenia comes just before Russia is about to sell advanced weapons to Iran. ..."
Oct 17, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

Over the last years the U.S. and its EU puppies have ratcheted up their pressure on Russia. They seem to believe that they can compel Russia to follow their diktat. They can't. But the illusion that Russia will finally snap, if only a few more sanctions ar applied or a few more houses in Russia's neighborhood are set on fire, never goes away.

As Gilbert Doctorow describes the situation:

The fires burning at Russia's borders in the Caucasus are an add-on to the disorder and conflict on its Western border in neighboring Belarus, where fuel is poured on daily by pyromaniacs at the head of the European Union acting surely in concert with Washington.

Yesterday we learned of the decision of the European Council to impose sanctions on President Lukashenko, a nearly unprecedented action when directed against the head of state of a sovereign nation.
...
It is easy enough to see that the real intent of the sanctions is to put pressure on the Kremlin, which is Lukashenko's guarantor in power, to compound the several other measures being implemented simultaneously in the hope that Putin and his entourage will finally crack and submit to American global hegemony as Europe did long ago.
...
The anti-Russia full tilt ahead policy outlined above is going on against a background of the U.S. presidential electoral campaigns. The Democrats continue to try to depict Donald Trump as "Putin's puppy," as if the President has been kindly to his fellow autocrat while in office. Of course, under the dictates of the Democrat-controlled House and with the complicity of the anti-Russian staff in the State Department, in the Pentagon, American policy towards Russia over the entire period of Trump's presidency has been one of never ending ratcheting up of military, informational, economic and other pressures in the hope that Vladimir Putin or his entourage would crack. Were it not for the nerves of steel of Mr. Putin and his close advisers , the irresponsible pressure policies outlined above could result in aggressive behavior and risk taking by Russia that would make the Cuban missile crisis look like child's play.

The U.S. arms industry lobby, in form of the Atlantic Council, confirms the 'western' strategy Doctorow describes. It calls for 'ramping up on Russia' with even more sanctions:

Key to raising the costs to Russia is a more proactive transatlantic strategy for sanctions against the Russian economy and Putin's power base, together with other steps to reduce Russian energy leverage and export revenue. A new NATO Russia policy should be pursued in tandem with the European Union (EU), which sets European sanctions policy and faces the same threats from Russian cyberattacks and disinformation. At a minimum, EU sanctions resulting from hostilities in Ukraine should be extended, like the Crimea sanctions, for one year rather than every six months. Better yet, allies and EU members should tighten sanctions further and extend them on an indefinite basis until Russia ends its aggression and takes concrete steps toward de-escalation.

It also wants Europe to pay for weapons in the Ukraine and Georgia:

A more dynamic NATO strategy for Russia should go hand in hand with a more proactive policy toward Ukraine and Georgia in the framework of an enhanced Black Sea strategy. The goal should be to boost both partners' deterrence capacity and reduce Moscow's ability to undermine their sovereignty even as NATO membership remains on the back burner for the time being.

As part of this expanded effort, European allies should do more to bolster Ukraine and Georgia's ground, air, and naval capabilities, complementing the United States' and Canada's efforts that began in 2014.

The purpose of the whole campaign against Russia, explains the Atlantic Council author, is to subordinate it to U.S. demands:

Relations between the West and Moscow had begun to deteriorate even before Russia's watershed invasion of Ukraine, driven principally by Moscow's fear of the encroachment of Western values and their potential to undermine the Putin regime. With the possibility of a further sixteen years of Putin's rule, most experts believe relations are likely to remain confrontational for years to come. They argue that the best the United States and its allies can do is manage this competition and discourage aggressive actions from Moscow. However, by pushing back against Russia more forcefully in the near and medium term, allies are more likely to eventually convince Moscow to return to compliance with the rules of the liberal international order and to mutually beneficial cooperation as envisaged under the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act.

The 'rules of the liberal international order' are of course whatever the U.S. claims they are. They may change at any moment and without notice to whatever new rules are the most convenient for U.S. foreign policy.

But as Doctorow said above, Putin and his advisors stay calm and ignore such trash despite all the hostility expressed against them.

One of Putin's close advisors is of course Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. In a wide ranging interview with Russian radio stations he recently touched on many of the issues Doctorow also mentions. With regards to U.S. strategy towards Russia Lavrov diagnoses :

Sergey Lavrov : [...] You mentioned in one of your previous questions that no matter what we do, the West will try to hobble and restrain us, and undermine our efforts in the economy, politics, and technology. These are all elements of one approach.

Question : Their national security strategy states that they will do so.

Sergey Lavrov : Of course it does, but it is articulated in a way that decent people can still let go unnoticed, but it is being implemented in a manner that is nothing short of outrageous.

Question : You, too, can articulate things in a way that is different from what you would really like to say, correct?

Sergey Lavrov : It's the other way round. I can use the language I'm not usually using to get the point across. However, they clearly want to throw us off balance , and not only by direct attacks on Russia in all possible and conceivable spheres by way of unscrupulous competition, illegitimate sanctions and the like, but also by unbalancing the situation near our borders, thus preventing us from focusing on creative activities. Nevertheless, regardless of the human instincts and the temptations to respond in the same vein, I'm convinced that we must abide by international law.

Russia does not accept the fidgety 'rules of the liberal international order'. Russia sticks to the law which is, in my view, a much stronger position. Yes, international law often gets broken. But as Lavrov said elsewhere , one does not abandon traffic rules only because of road accidents.

Russia stays calm, no matter what outrageous nonsense the U.S. and EU come up with. It can do that because it knows that it not only has moral superiority by sticking to the law but it also has the capability to win a fight. At one point the interviewer even jokes about that :

Question : As we say, if you don't listen to Lavrov, you will listen to [Defense Minister] Shoigu.

Sergey Lavrov : I did see a T-shirt with that on it. Yes, it's about that.

Yes, it's about that. Russia is militarily secure and the 'west' knows that. It is one reason for the anti-Russian frenzy. Russia does not need to bother with the unprecedented hostility coming from Brussels and Washington. It can ignore it while taking care of its interests.

As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

Posted by b on October 17, 2020 at 16:31 UTC | Permalink

james , Oct 17 2020 16:45 utc | 1

thanks b.... that lavrov interview that karlof1 linked to previously is worth its weight in gold...

it gives a clear understanding of how russia sees what is happening here on the world stage... as you note cheap talk from the atlantic council 'rules of the liberal international order' is no substitute for 'international law' which is what russia stands on.... as for the usa campaign to tar russia and claim trump is putins puppet.. apparently this stupidity really sells in the usa.. in fact, i have a close friend here in canada from the usa with family in the usa has bought this hook, line and sinker as well.. and he is ordinarily a bright guy!

as for the endpoint - the usa and the people of the usa don't mind themselves about endpoints... it is all about being in the moment, living a hollywood fantasy off the ongoing party of wall st... the thought this circus will end, is not something many of them contemplate.. that is what it looks like to me.. maga, lol...

Michael Droy , Oct 17 2020 16:52 utc | 2
Belarus - this is happenstance, not long term planning. Like Venezuela - indeed neither original Presidential candidate nor his wife had a Wikipedia entry a week or so before being announced as candidate (much like Guaido 2 weeks before Trump "made" him President.

Yes the Western media make the most of it, and yes there are many in place in and besides the media whose job it is to maximise any noise. But little is happening in Belarus. Sanctioning is all anyone can do now. (Sanctions = punishment therefore proof of guilt without trial or evidence).

US pressure is based on the Dem vs Rep "I am tougher on Russia than you" game spurred on by the MIC.
European pressure is based on the Euro Defence force concept and a low key but real desire to rid itself of Nato. So again we have Nato saying "without US/us Europe would be soft on Russia" and Europe saying we are tough on Russia whatever.

Meanwhile China takes over the real world.

Down South , Oct 17 2020 16:56 utc | 3
What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

It is about driving a wedge between Europe and Russia. The nightmare scenario for the Anglo-Americans is a Germany-Russia-China triangle. If that happens it is game over!

They don't want an actual war. They just ratchet up the tensions to keep Europe subdued and obedient and Russia off balance and thereby prevent any rapprochement between the two.

Putin has repeatedly stated he wants a Lisbon to Vladivostok free trade area.

The Anglo-Americans will never permit that. That Europe is committed to a course that is against their own best interest shows just how subservient they are to the Anglo-Americans.

I think it was the first head of NATO that said the purpose of the organization is to "keep the Russians out, the Germans down and the US in"

Absolutely nothing has changed since then.

bjd , Oct 17 2020 17:01 utc | 4
There is no endpoint. Those who argue for it, the Western think-tank industry and security and intelligence industry, are recipients of huge sums of money. It is bread and butter for large numbers of people. And the acceptance of the conclusions and advice of the immense stacks of papers thus produced mean money towards the defense industry and the cyber warfare industry. In the end, all this is driven by elites' fear of their own populations. Sowing FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) makes these populations docile. Rinse and repeat.
Passer by , Oct 17 2020 17:05 utc | 5
>>As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is.

The reason was probably the new Russian Constitution, which is basically a declaration of independence from the West. This has caused serious triggerings in western elites, although their reaction took some time to crystalise due to the Covid Pandemic.

>>What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

The endpoint is - EU and NATO move into Ukraine, Moldova, Serbia, Georgia, Belarus, Armenia.

A puppet government of someone like Navalny is installed Russia. That government further gives up Crimea, Kaliningrad and Northen Caucasus. In the long run, a soft partition of Russia into 3 parts follows (as per the Grand Chessboard 1997).

The possibility for that happening is overall negative, as the West is on a long term decline, that is, it will be weaker in 2030, and even weaker in 2040 or 2050.

OECD economies were 66 % of the world economy in 2010 but that share is estimated to drop to 38 % of the world economy in 2050 (with further drops after that).

The strong hatred and hostility coming from the US and the EU are due to the understanding that they don't have much time, and they must act now, or tomorrow it will be too late.

Seeji , Oct 17 2020 17:15 utc | 6
Apt cover picture!
Abe , Oct 17 2020 17:18 utc | 7
Well, the hostility in "western" "elite" (rulers) towards Russia is on much more primal level than money and power IMO. It is pure racial hatred combined with Übermensch God complex. Main controllers in modern "west" are US, Israel and Germany.

Years ago Barack Obama gave speech to West Point graduates, proclaiming US moral and racial superiority (because they mix'n's*it) over whole world, Goebbels would be proud. Germany has long history of hating all those Slavs, and Israel... Lets not go there with how they threat those inferior brown people.

Seeji , Oct 17 2020 17:19 utc | 8
@ Down South #3

Yes. And it was so depressing that Germany played the Navalny Novichok hoax recently borrowed from the Perfidious Albion!

Bemildred , Oct 17 2020 17:24 utc | 9
They forsee not having to admit they are incompetent yet.
Chris Cosmos , Oct 17 2020 17:26 utc | 10
"What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?"

Of course that end-point is money for military contractors and power for the FP elite in government and think-tanks which also means money. Yes, there are true-believers who see a mighty struggle between "good" (the USA) an "evil" (Russia/China) but they are incompetent. As for the American people they will believe whatever the NY Times says since they are militantly ignorant of history, geography, foreign affairs in general, and, above all, political science.

The problem as I see it is Europe generally, and Germany in particular. Why do they follow Washington diktats?

gottlieb , Oct 17 2020 17:31 utc | 11
Well let's see, the USA is $30 trillion in debt and counting, faces an upcoming economic depression to rival the 'great' one, with a citizenry on the brink of civil war and a political system that makes a 'banana republic' look like ancient Greece. Desperate is as desperate does.
vk , Oct 17 2020 17:32 utc | 12
As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

For a very simple reason: there's no other option. Capitalism can only work in one way. There's a limit to how much capitalism can reform within itself without self-destructing.

The West is also suffering from the "Whale in a Swimming Pool" dilemma: it has grown so hegemonic, so big and so gloated that its strategic options have narrowed sharply. It has not much more room for maneuver left, its bluffs become less and less effective. As a result, its strategies have become increasingly linear, extremely predictable. The "whale in a pool dilemma" is not a problem when your inner workings (domestic economy) is flourishing; but it becomes one when the economy begins to stagnate and, ultimately, decline (albeit slowly).

On a side note, it's incredible how History is non-linear, full of surprises. The Russian Federation is inferior to the Soviet Union in every aspect imaginable. Except for one factor: it now has an ascendant China on its side in a time where the West is declining. (Historical) context is everything.

The USA is lucky the USSR collapsed in 1991. If it managed to somehow survive for mere 17 years more, it would catch the 2008 capitalist meltdown and have an opportunity to gain the upper hand over capitalism (plus have a strong China on its side). Socialism/communism wouldn't have been demoralized the way it was in the 1990s, opening a huge flank for revolutions in the Western Hemisphere (specially Latin America). NATO would be much weaker. Since the USSR was closed to capitalism, the USA wouldn't be able to enforce as crippling economic sanctions on China and the USSR. The USSR would be able to "reform and open up" in a much safer environment (by copying China, instead of Yeltsin's neoliberalism), thus gaining the opportunity to make a Perestroika that could actually work.

But it didn't happen. Well, what can I say? It looks like the USA imported the Irish and imported their luck, too.

Anne , Oct 17 2020 17:37 utc | 13
Abe @7 - I would agree and have raised somewhere (old age?) that part of what we are seeing in this latest western-NATO cooked up charade re Navalny is, in part at least, a deep historical supremacist loathing of the Slavs an in general and the Russians in particular by the haute bourgeois Germans. This loathing was made blatantly manifest during WWII, of course, but it didn't die out because that generation and more likely their children remain with us. Ditto the generational Anglo-American hatred of Russians (yes, for the UK, and their haute bourgeoisie, it has deeper historical roots than the 20thC) and the USSR even more...

The pressure on Russia is enormous and I would enlarge on the economic sanctions aspect (siege warfare): Belarus, Armenia-Azerbaijan (Erdogan once again playing his role for the US/NATO - in this business, Iran is also a target), Kyrgyzstan - all on or very close to Russia's borders and thus dividing and draining (intention) Russia's focus and $$$$ (the Brzezinski game) in order to open it up to the western corporate-capitalist bloodsuckers. And I suspect that as the US (and UK) economies drain away, so these border country "revolts," "protests" etc. will grow...

Russia really needs to join with China in full comity. Bugger the west - they do not respect the rights of either country to their own culture, societal structures, mores, perspectives...nor apparently even those countries' rights to their own coastal waters, air space...

One wonders how the USA would react to Chinese and/or Russian warships in the Gulf or traversing (lengthwise) the Atlantic or Pacific????

karlof1 , Oct 17 2020 17:50 utc | 14
It appears Lavrov's saying we'll just ignore the EU and its major components for awhile got quick results as Germany's FM just announced "Nord Stream 2 will be completed" ; but he also said this:

"Maas added that Germany takes decisions related to its energy policy and energy supply 'here in Europe', saying that Berlin accepts ' the fact that the US had more than doubled its oil imports from Russia last year and is now the world's second largest importer of Russian heavy oil .'" [My Emphasis]

Now isn't that the interesting bit of news!! The greatest fracking nation on the planet needs to import heavy oil (likely Iranian, unlikely Venezuelan) from its #1 adversary. As for the end game, I've written many times what I see as the goal and don't see any need to add more.

winston2 , Oct 17 2020 18:02 utc | 17
"The Russians are coming' is a long standing fear built the American psyche almost from the very start. Russian colonization of the California Territory outnumbered the US population. The Monroe Doctrine was all about that,not S.America at all. The Brits ruled S.America by mercantile means until WWI cut the sea lanes, then and only then did it fall into the sphere of Yankee control.

Then there is Alaska. The Sewards Folly documents are almost certainly fakes, the verified Russian copy says a 100year LEASE,not a sale. The National Archives refuses examination by any but its own experts. Unless they are forgeries and they know it there can be no real reason for their stance. There is much more background to the antipathy than many are aware.

Rob , Oct 17 2020 18:02 utc | 18
@bjd (4) You nailed it, my friend. Cold wars are immensely profitable for certain sectors of the economy and the parasites who run them. The supreme imperative is always to have enemies--really big, bad, dangerous enemies--whether real or imagined. I will be voting for Biden, but I don't have much hope for positive change in American foreign policy. Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, etc. will continue to be vilified as nations to be feared and hated.
Dao Gen , Oct 17 2020 18:05 utc | 19
The neocon/NATO aggressive expansionism has many purposes, but one is surely domestic repression: to gaslight and cause fear-the-foreign-bogeyman trauma among the American and British people as a whole and make most of them become docile and lose their critical thinking skills and their ability to analyze their own societies.

One of the best ways to lobotomize the publics of the US and UK is to very gradually impose martial law in the name of protecting national security and ensuring peace and harmony at home.

After several color revolutions succeeded, the Russiagate/Spygate op was carried out in the US, with British assistance. This op has been largely successful, though there has been limited resistance against its whole fake edifice as well as with the logic of Cold War2.0. Nevertheless, Spygate has shocked many tens of millions of Dems into a stupor, while millions more are dazed and manipulated by the Chinese bogeyman being manufactured by Trump. The most dangerous result of the martial law lite mentality caused by Spygate and its MSM purveyors is the growing support for censorship of free speech coming mostly from the Dems, such as Schiff and Warner. The danger inherent in this trend became very clear when FaceBook and Twitter engaged in massive and unprecedented arbitrary censorship of the New York Post and of various Trump-related accounts. This is the kind of thing you do during Stage 1 of a coup. Surely it was at least in part an experiment to see how various power points in the US would respond. Even though Twitter ended the censorship later, it was probably a successful experiment designed to gauge reactions and areas of resistance. In November, there could be further, more serious experiments/ops. If so, the current expansionist movements being made and planned by the US and NATO may well be integral parts of a new non-democratic model of "American-style democracy" -- not constitution-based but "rules-based."

Posted by: Dao Gen |

Ike , Oct 17 2020 18:13 utc | 21
"As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?"

I think the answer is clear. The US economy is collapsing and likewise those wedded to the US dollar system. The USA spent 90% more than it received last year. They are desperate to have access to Russia's largely untapped resources and it doesn't want any competition for its position as world hegemon. Thus Russia and China are in the crosshairs.

Fortunately the corruption in the USA has resulted in a weaker military capability over time and they are reduced to behaving in clandestine and terroristic ways to try and achieve this. The turmoil enveloping the USA is scape goated on Trump and Covid19 but is ultimately due to their faltering economy and a big helping of financial corruption. Talk about your chickens coming home to roost

Bemildred , Oct 17 2020 18:27 utc | 22
Posted by: Ike | Oct 17 2020 18:13 utc | 21

Talk about your chickens coming home to roost."

Sounds like thunder, all those chickens. I appeared to me that whomever is in charge here, they started pulling all the levers they could lay a hand on a couple weeks back in terms of stirring up trouble. Throwing sand in the eyes of ones enemy.

At the time, I thought it was just Trump and his followers freaking out, now I think it's the NatSec people, who have finally seen the truth of their situation. As one can see in the Atlantic Council piece B posted, they are still trying to keep the old narrative patched together too.

Paco , Oct 17 2020 18:27 utc | 23
Posted by: vk | Oct 17 2020 17:32 utc | 12

Politfiction, or what could have happened if is an entertaining but futile exercise. Everybody agrees, there was no need for the USSR to dissolve, it was like a big jackpot for an amazed rival that rushed to declare himself the winner. The price has been high, on both sides of the fence but of course with a lot more victims and destruction on the other side of the fallen wall. Gorbachov a tragic figure and Yelstyn a sinister one, in spite of his being a clown, a tragic one at that, bombing his parliament and laughing at the world together with the degenerate Clinton, the 90's were somber indeed. The west paid its price, a self declared victory that did not bring any benefit, the peace dividend never was, to the contrary, military budgets never stopped growing year after year. The end of history was proclaimed, no need to match or better the rival ideology, there is none, so proles you better stop complaining, or else and that's where we are.

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 18:34 utc | 25
Just to repeat the obvious, for the US actually to go to war is out of the question these days -- the US public would not tolerate the casualties. Therefore other methods have to be found to achieve the same objectives -- the maintenance of an eternal enemy in 1984 style, to keep up military budgets and world hegemony, neither of which are the elite ready to abandon. Economic sanctions have been the weapon of choice in the age of Trump, but there isn't really any other. Sometimes they are better aimed and sometimes not.

In any case I am not sure I agree that the EU is really submissive to the US in this respect. They don't want to offend the US, and some leaders have genuinely swallowed the Kool-Aid, but others haven't, and the continuation of Nordstream 2 is where they haven't.

steven t johnson , Oct 17 2020 18:38 utc | 26
Doctorow wrote "Of course, under the dictates of the Democrat-controlled House and with the complicity of the anti-Russian staff in the State Department, in the Pentagon, American policy towards Russia over the entire period of Trump's presidency..."

The Senate is more important for foreign affairs and has been Republican for Trump's entire term. The House was also Republican for half of Trump's term. Lastly the "staff" is not really able to run things in the presence of a minimally competent administrator, at the head of the State Department, acting under leadership of a competent, energetic president. There is no sign Doctorow is particularly intelligent or insightful.

I have long ago lost track of where the bar's consensus on Turkey is, whether the failing US means Erdogan must become the follower of the skilled, brave and indefatigable Putin...or whether his sultanship is suicidally persisting in thinking Russia cannot actually deliver anything his sultanship really needs and wants. At any rate it is entirely unclear what "international law" Lavrov thinks supports Russia.

As to the China Russia "alliance," the difficulty is that Putin has so very little to offer.

Steve , Oct 17 2020 18:39 utc | 27
I can hazard a guess to answer your final question. I think corruption is probably the main reason. Those involved in this are mostly interested in self-enrichment through the gullibility of their societies. I don't think the stenographers and the hot-heads neo liberals pushing for a show-down with Russia are intent on committing suicide by igniting a hot war with Russia, but they hope that Moscow could be intimidated and surrender eventually. As you rightly said, it is a pipe dream of course, but they get paid heavily for the hot air they emit.
Norwegian , Oct 17 2020 18:39 utc | 28
@James2 | Oct 17 2020 18:29 utc | 24
The west insulted the people's intelligence!!!
But unfortunately, the people didn't notice that.
dh-mtl , Oct 17 2020 18:46 utc | 29
'As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?'

The endpoint is quite clear: 'Global Governance, by Global Institutions under control of the 'Globalists' (i.e. the Davos crowd).' For this, the 'Globalists' must subdue Russia.

Russia is not only blocking the 'Globalist's' plans in its own right, but, since 2013, it has been protecting other nations from falling prey to 'Globalist' colonization (Syria, Eastern Ukraine, Iran, Venezuela, Libya, Belarus, etc.). And Russia is the lynch-pin to enable the 'Globalists' to corner China.

In addition, together with China, Russia is offering the world an alternative to 'Globalism', a 'Multi-Polar World Order' that is much more attractive than becoming a 'Globalist' vassal.

For the 'Globalists' time has become critical. They are facing revolts in their home countries (Trump, Brexit, Gilets-Jaunes, etc.). The main source of their geo-political power, (since they can no longer challenge Russia and China militarily) the U.S. dollar, is on the verge of collapse as the World's reserve currency. And the economic growth of China means that China has become the most important trading partner for most of the World's nations.

The window of opportunity for the 'Globalists' to create their 'Global Governance' system may have already closed. But, as usual, the losers of any war are usually the last to know. The desperation with which the 'Globalists' are fighting their last battles, against Trump, against Russia, against Brexit, is testimony to the fact that for the 'Globalists' losing this war means their extinction as a ruling elite.

james | Oct 17 2020 18:55 utc | 30

@ steven t johnson | Oct 17 2020 18:38 utc | 26..

c'mon steve.... what is the usa offering turkey here?? they could give a rats ass about turkey, or any other country in the middle east, excluding their 24/7 darling israel... the usa presence on the world stage is meant to sabotage any and all who don't bow down to the exceptional nations philosophy of 'might makes right'... the obvious benefits of russia-china synergy are apparent to both countries and they continue to capitalize on this, in spite of what you read in the usa msm.. russia as a lot to offer china... the fact that the nation apparently masquerading as a gas station has so much to offer is also the reason that all the pillage of the 90's hasn't turned out the way the harvard boys had envisioned... that you can't see the vast wealth and value of russia has nothing to do with the reality on the ground... keep the blinders on, lol...

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 19:09 utc | 31

The EU's attitude to the US is much like its attitude to Britain and Brexit. They don't want to split with the US, because, after all, there might be war, and NATO would be needed, but it's becoming increasingly less likely. In the same way, they would have preferred to stay in good relations with Britain, until Britain insisted on a hostile Brexit. Basic interests come first, and that will also be the case in the future with the US.
Abe , Oct 17 2020 19:11 utc | 32
Anne @ 13

Russia and China are already de-facto alliance. Militarily they cooperate at every level and will soon extend shared anti ballistic shield over China too. It is clear to any outside enemy (except for most retarded ones) that nuclear attack on one will be treated as attack on both of them. Not having formal alliance is somewhat an advantage (eg. limited attack on one of them by enemy that can be easily handled will not complicate situation) as it controls escalation. Lack of escalation control led to WW1 so...

Apart for military, Russia is one of rare fully self sufficient countries in the world. Having vast natural resources and territory, knowledge and industrial capacity to built EVERYTHING they need, they can afford to be sanctioned by whole world and close borders completely if needed. Having 100% secure land borders with China and already huge (and increasing) trade, including oil & gas, only make Russia's self sufficiency even more stable. It also strategically benefits China, as its main weakness is lack of those same resources Russia has in abundance and is willing to share.

So, if sh*t hits the fan, and Russia and China say f*ck it and close borders to rest of the world (even though China trade profits wouldn't be happy), both countries form self sufficient symbiosis that can carry on for centuries.

Which brings me to all those little fires US is starting in Russia's neighborhood. They don't matter. Unlike USSR, Russia's mission is self preservation only, not changing whole world into communist utopia (even though @VK here repeatedly fails to acknowledge it). And survive it will. All it needs is to wait few generations.

Unlike Russia, collective west is going down the drain. Soon enough, all those Slav hating in Bundestag, UK parlament and elsewhere will have more urgent problem of Islamic head choppers that became majority in their countries, while US will have problem to recruit enough men,women and "others" from pool of rainbow colored too-fat and unfit, godless faggot from broken family snowflakes.

joey_n , Oct 17 2020 19:36 utc | 34
@Down South (3)
At least someone still understands. For what it's worth, Lurk and I briefly discussed in the Brexit thread about England doing all it could to prevent comity between continental powers (e.g. Russia and Germany before the first world war).
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/10/its-a-hard-brexits-a-gonna-fall.html?cid=6a00d8341c640e53ef026be41afef7200d#comment-6a00d8341c640e53ef026be41afef7200d
Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 19:37 utc | 35
As China has been mentioned, I think it is worth saying that although I have full confidence that Putin will maintain his usual good sense in international conflicts, I have more doubts about the Chinese regime. I don't really understand their policy, which is becoming more nationalistic and edgy. I don't see why. They have great economic success; they should be more relaxed, but they aren't. The first signs came with their attitude towards the Muslims in China. One, the concentration camps in Xinjiang - in that case the Uyghur jihadists in Syria must have provoked anxiety in Beijing. But also increasing pressure on the Hui Muslims in central China (who are native Han) to become more "national". Some years ago they weren't bothered. Now they are.

This suggests that the question of Taiwan could blow up, apart from HongKong. They are less tolerant in Beijing.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 17 2020 19:41 utc | 36
@Down South
It is about driving a wedge between Europe and Russia. The nightmare scenario for the Anglo-Americans is a Germany-Russia-China triangle. If that happens it is game over!

It is a tired and false concept. There cannot be a "triangle" which includes Germany, due to Germany's increasingly diminishing status. Moreover, Russians do not view Europe as a viable part of Russia's future--the cultural gap is gigantic and continues to grow--the only place of Europe in general, and Germany in particular, in Russian plans is that of a market for Russia's hydrocarbons and other exports. A rather successful program of export-substitution in Russia in the last 6 years dropped technological importance of Germany for Russia dramatically. In some fields, such as high-power turbines made Germany irrelevant, as Siemens learned the hard way recently.

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 19:49 utc | 37

Andrei Martyanov | Oct 17 2020 19:41 utc | 36

due to Germany's increasingly diminishing status.

Difficult to believe.

CitizenX , Oct 17 2020 19:54 utc | 38

@b on October 17, 2020 at 16:31 UTC

"U.S. and its EU puppies have ratcheted up their pressure...

The 'rules of the liberal international order' are of course whatever the U.S. claims they are. They may change at any moment and without notice to whatever new rules are the most convenient for U.S. foreign policy."

Outstanding assessment and thank you for addressing it.

As I've said numerous times -- Fuck the US Empire and it's minion bitches. Jesse Ventura commented this past week that EVERY US Incumbent politician should be voted out of office this election. 99% of them are scum.

Every politician, corporate CEO Banker and Media whore, Judge, CIA filth should have a pitchfork held to their throat and be tried for treason and war crimes. MIC/Pentagon should be destroyed. Majority of Americans are propagandized dumbfucks. Sounds a bit like an American Cultural Revolution is exactly the medicine.

There will come a day for reckoning and true justice, hopefully it is sooner than later. There should be no mercy. For those committing their treasonous crimes, they know better but have chosen poorly, they should be broken.

Russia, Putin and Lavrov have remained the adults in the room while the Empire Brats tantrum themselves.
Anyone else notice that the Anti-Russia rhetoric increased after Snowden was trapped in Russia?

... ... ...

Stonebird , Oct 17 2020 20:01 utc | 40
"Alas, repent, the endpoint is near...."

I agree with Ike and others who think the US money situation is the problem. But I also think that the underlying endpoint is hyperinflation, not just the loss of the dollars' "reserve status." Hyperinflation is when so much "money" has been produced that it no longer has any value and the Central Bank cannot control what comes next.

There is a point at which people want to get rid of dollars and panic buy or "invest" in assets, or anything solid or simply anything (Gold, land etc. bread) At which time the money they want to get rid of looses value continuously, as others don't want it either. A Rush for the exits happens.

Who has the MOST money - the Rich and the sovereign Nations? (Althought the latter may also be in the same situation as the US.) Russia has more or less got rid of all it's US holdings. The Chinese must be alarmed by the thought of the Fed issuing ONLY new-digicoins, and then the US simply refusing to pay debts to the Chinese at some future point. They might want out now. Not so much dumping everything but a steady reduction of US denominated "assets" or reserves.

Most of this becomes self-sustaining panic, as happened in the Weimar Rep. What can be considered "assets" to grab? ie Russia, minerals and it's Gold, China and its Gold. Then the choice might be to invest in the US military and use it while there is a residue of belief in the Dollar.

The only thing about a panic exit is that it happens very quickly. About a month or two between when the first bright sparks try to get out and when everyone else tries to grab part of a rapidly restricted choice of things to buy with an unending pile of "empty" dollars.

Buy wheelbarrows.

David , Oct 17 2020 20:07 utc | 41
Germany should've been conquered by the Soviet Union entirely as it was won with Soviet, largely Russian, blood. Germany is increasingly irrelevant to Russia's needs now as Martyanov points out above. Germany's existence today should be that of a Russian oblast, same with Eastern Ukraine from Kharkiv to Mariupol and Belarus.

Ask yourself what Germany produces that Russia can't produce for itself with import substitution schemes or similar schemes within a 10 year period. Russia's GDP by PPP is the size of Germany's already and depending on how it deals with the impact of COVID, may continue an upward year-on-year growth trend (People's Republic of China is the only major economy forecast to expand in fiscal quarter this year). The fact of the matter is that Russia's population is much larger, its industrial base, at least in heavy industry, is nearly self sufficient (not much light industry to speak of) and Germany depends on Russian oil and gas to keep its lights on. Russia can carry on without Germany just fine. There may be a noticeable impact now if Russia were cornered into doing that, but it's nothing that can't be overcome in short order.

juliania , Oct 17 2020 20:08 utc | 42
Thank you, b, and before reading comments, I will give my take on your last question:
As this is so obvious one must ask what the real reason for the anti-Russian pressure campaign is. What do those who argue for it foresee as its endpoint?

The whole 'rules based order' became very clear when the Trans Pacific Partnership, TPP, was being debated,and what happened then is what many have noted, the 'rules' were all to advantage the US. So, you might say that was the beginning of the end for the oligarchy. And the partnership reformed after it had taken out that problem, to be fair to all participants. All the oligarchy can do is keep on keeping on until it can't. This is really about survival for that class of individuals who intend to keep on being in charge here in the US and wherever its tentacles have reached. The only endpoint they see is their continuance. And I suppose their fear is that it is simply not possible for that to be the case.

Hopefully there will just come a point where, as in Plato's Republic, the dialogue simply moves on. There, it begins in the home of the ancient one, Cephalus, with a polite discussion, and the old man says his piece, to which Socrates responds:

"What you say is very fine indeed, Cephalus...but as to this very thing, justice, shall we so simply assert that it is the truth and giving back what a man has taken from another, or is to do these very things sometimes just and sometimes unjust? Take this case as an example of what I mean: everyone would surely say that if a man takes weapons from a friend when the latter is of sound mind, and the friend demands them back when he is mad, one shouldn't give back such things, and the man who gives them back would not be just, and moreover, one should not be willing to tell someone in this state the whole truth."

"What you say is right," he said.

[Allan Bloom translation]

In the dialogue, the old man leaves to 'look after the sacrifices', handing down the argument to his heir, Polymarchus. To me, Socrates has adroitly caused this to come about in much the fashion that Lavrov answers his press questioners in the link b provides. That is, he has done so with diplomacy, and a lesson to his younger companions which perhaps Cephalus is no longer able to understand. Quod erat demonstrandum.

m , Oct 17 2020 20:15 utc | 43
Spent much of your money for weapons, brag with your military and wonder why you are perceived as a thread ...
Josh , Oct 17 2020 20:24 utc | 47
https://tass.com/world/1213379
Down South , Oct 17 2020 20:26 utc | 48
Andrei Martyanov @ 36

It is a tired and false concept

Yet in your disparaging comments of Europe and Germany in particular you proceed to show how successful the Anglo-Americans have been in creating a wedge between Europe and Russia actually validating my original point.

"Keep the Russians out, the Germans down and the US in"

That was the whole point of the first Cold War. It is the whole point of creating a Cold War 2.0. Absolutely nothing has changed.

Passer by , Oct 17 2020 20:30 utc | 50
Posted by: m | Oct 17 2020 20:15 utc | 43

By whom exactly? US & several euro puppets? Typical racist thinking that Europe and its former colonies are somehow "the world" or "the international community".

Meanwhile opinion of Russia is positive in India (1,3 billion people, more than the whole West combined) and China (1,4 billion, more than the whole West combined).

Those who don't spend for their own weapons, spend for their master's weapons (like europuppets).

Btw your master (US) spends on weapons too. What are you going to do about it?

norecovery , Oct 17 2020 20:45 utc | 51
@ laguerre -- This interview with Pepe Escobar by Moderate Rebels will answer some of your questions regarding China's treatment of Muslim minorities.
https://soundcloud.com/moderaterebels/the-coronavirus-pandemic-and-us-hybrid-war-on-china-with-pepe-escobar
Down South , Oct 17 2020 21:01 utc | 55
joey_n @ 34

As was rightly pointed out in that discussion, British foreign policy towards Europe was to ensure that no single power was to be allowed to achieve hegemony over Europe. The famous "balance of power"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_balance_of_power

The Cold War with Russia is merely a British and US continuation of that exact same policy.

vk , Oct 17 2020 21:01 utc | 56
@ Posted by: Andrei Martyanov | Oct 17 2020 19:41 utc | 36

If the Russian Federation really has an ongoing imports substitution program, then this explains everything. Germany is an exports-oriented economy. It wants to integrate with the Russian economy in the sense to keep it as an agrarian-extrativist economy to feed it with cheap commodities to feed their industry. Germany's ideal Russia is Brazil.

A Russia that also exports high-value commodities (manufactured commodities) is a direct threat to Germany, as it competes with it directly in the international market. That's the reason Germany doesn't want the BRI to come to Europe, as Merkel once said: Europe must not become China's peninsula. China is Germany's main competitor, as it is also a big manufacturing exporter.

Down South , Oct 17 2020 21:19 utc | 57
https://youtu.be/ZVYqB0uTKlE

Watch in full. UK policy towards Europe in a nutshell

Digby , Oct 17 2020 21:24 utc | 58
@ David (41)
If I recall correctly, after WWII Stalin wanted a united, independent and Russia-friendly Germany, and even rejected the Morgenthau Plan.

https://thesaker.is/stalin-about-allies-idea-of-division-of-germany/

Eventually the Allied zones of occupation became West Germany, and the Soviet occupation zone became East Germany.

H.Schmatz , Oct 17 2020 21:40 utc | 60
@Posted by: vk | Oct 17 2020 21:01 utc | 56

But...it is not China currently main market for German exports...and Turkey second? In detriment of the EU....

Laguerre , Oct 17 2020 21:46 utc | 61
Posted by: Down South | Oct 17 2020 21:19 utc | 57

Old stuff. It's why Britain is losing today. They haven't kept up.

Smith , Oct 17 2020 22:04 utc | 63
Unlike China, Russia lacks the weight of population and reliance on the globalist capitalist system to throw around, China will not shut itself up for Russia when it can trade with EU & Turkey instead.

Russia is increasingly put into weak position, where Russian troops are sent to do the dying, while the Chinese business whoop in afterwards to get all the juicy business deals. In other words, Russia does the dying while China enriches itself.

Russia only hope is that it becomes friendly with the EU, otherwise, it is going to be crushed between two superpowers, the EU and China.

kemerd , Oct 17 2020 22:08 utc | 64
I think the point of the sanctions and all the pressure on Russia is an appeal to Russian elite, Just a reminder that they are isolated from the rest of the elite and hope that it would help them throw Russian nationalists from power. I think this might succeed as Putin did no really take on the new Russian capitalist class, and that will probably be his undoing.
Don Bacon , Oct 17 2020 22:12 utc | 66
@vk 36
That's the reason Germany doesn't want the BRI to come to Europe

BRI in Europe - 16 countries: Austria*, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Ukraine * shaky

SCMP - Aug 17, 2020: China's rail shipments to Europe set records as demand surges for Chinese goods amid coronavirus

> July saw 1,232 cargo trains travel from Chinese cities to European destinations – the most ever in a single month
> Once regarded as merely ornamental, freight service along belt and road trade routes has become increasingly important as exporters turn to railway transport. . . here

c1ue , Oct 17 2020 22:18 utc | 67
Lavrov, Shoigu and Putin are calm, but the domestic economic situation is not. While I have noted before that Russia is better positioned to survive low oil prices than Saudi Arabia - it doesn't mean this is fun.

Couple that with COVID-19 economic losses, and stresses on the domestic Russian economy are enormous.

Among other signs: after bouncing around in the 60s for some time, the ruble just hit 80 to the USD. Anecdotally, I am hearing a lot of direct personal accounts of businesses not being able to pay their people because their own customers aren't paying.

Russia has done relatively little extra to assist with COVID-19 related economic harms, so this isn't great either.

norecovery , Oct 17 2020 22:30 utc | 68
@ laguerre -- The interview with Pepe Escobar deals with the whole range of issues in the hybrid war against China, but the information you're looking for Regarding the suppression and re-education of Muslim terrorists starts just past the 1-hour point.

https://soundcloud.com/moderaterebels/the-coronavirus-pandemic-and-us-hybrid-war-on-china-with-pepe-escobar

H.Schmatz , Oct 17 2020 22:30 utc | 69
@Posted by: c1ue | Oct 17 2020 22:18 utc | 67

One would say you are describing the state of affairs in the US... Projecting?

norecovery , Oct 17 2020 22:34 utc | 70
@ laguerre -- Start at 1:09:40
Don Bacon , Oct 17 2020 22:36 utc | 71
@ Laguerre 35

the Chinese regime. I don't really understand their policy, which is becoming more nationalistic and edgy.

No, it's become more multi-national and sensible. Take the BRI: Launched in 2013, it was initially planned to revive ancient Silk Road trade routes between Eurasia and China, but the scope of the BRI (Belt & Road Initiative) has since extended to cover 138 countries, including 38 in sub-Saharan Africa and 18 in Latin America and the Caribbean.

they should be more relaxed
China has been an open target for the US, which doesn't even mention China any more (Pompeo) but dumps on the "CCP" (Chinese Communist Party). China (like Russia) has not responded in kind.

their attitude towards the Muslims in China
The US State Dept slash CIA has been fomenting terrorism in Xinjiang for years and China has had to contend with it.

the question of Taiwan could blow up
Taiwan like some other places in the world, including Hong Kong, has been another place where the US has fomented instability. This has increased recently with Taiwan "president" Tsai declaring that Taiwan (January this year, BBC interview) is a separate country, which it isn't. China is being pushed to do his Abe Lincoln thing and save the union.

They are less tolerant in Beijing
Chinese by nature are tolerant, and Beijing has been tolerant in the face of US naval fleets and bomber visits in their near seas, plus political attacks, sanctions and tariffs.

winston2 , Oct 17 2020 22:38 utc | 72
66 watch what they do and have done and not what they.
Construction started four years ago on enlarging and modernization of the railway marshaling yards in Duisburg.
The volume of Chinese freight trains arriving daily is already quite amazing and planned to increase to one every hour next month 24/7.They are not returning empty. The oil and gas pipeline corridors also had ten plus railway tracks built alongside .Germany is already at the center of the BRI expansion into Germany and it started four years ago.
vk , Oct 17 2020 22:42 utc | 73
@ Posted by: H.Schmatz | Oct 17 2020 21:40 utc | 60

That's why Germany is not full anti-China.

--//--

@ Posted by: Don Bacon | Oct 17 2020 22:12 utc | 66

Just because Germany doesn't want it, it doesn't mean it's not getting.

--//--

@ Posted by: c1ue | Oct 17 2020 22:18 utc | 67

I agree. Capitalism is a dead end for Russia. It's all about when Putin dies. After he dies, it will be a coin flip for Russia: it could continue its course or it could get another Yeltsin.

Smith , Oct 17 2020 22:48 utc | 74
@ vk

Germany being against BRI is news to me. Any proof? And it is very unlikely that China will be able to fool the europeans lile the american. The EU has regulations and aren't purely about profit.

And they still have strong domestic industry.

Patroklos , Oct 17 2020 22:54 utc | 75
Perhaps the US only has one script in the playbook: to balkanise, disrupt and foster 5th columns until their opponent becomes a dysfunctional or failed state. Then send in the acronyms (IMF etc), establish a provisional administration under trusted local elites but commandeer resource-rich areas under direct provincial command. That's US imperialism and it won't stop until they encounter opposition effective enough to resist it. That's why they'll never forgive Putin for Syria. In the end they want to finish doing to Russia (by other means...) what the Germans began in '41; and not just Russia, but anywhere their markets are prevented from calling the shots.
emersonreturn , Oct 17 2020 23:31 utc | 77
thank you, @72. the chinese learned much from their century of humiliation & clearly one of the important lessons was trade both ways, rather than take their silver, sell them tea, silks & porcelain & need nothing they offered.
Grieved , Oct 17 2020 23:40 utc | 78
@77 emersonreturn

That's an excellent observation, and a concept I had not encountered before. Thank you. How consciously China holds that narrative, if at all, I couldn't say.

But it's a great dynamic - kind of like keeping your enemies close. And if the German increase in reciprocal railroad trade with China is as it was stated up-thread, it would seem to be working.

emersonreturn , Oct 18 2020 0:02 utc | 79
@78, thank you, grieved...i've long admired you. in times such as these it can be a challenge to keep sight of the positive but as china prospers & wishes her trading partners to as well, & so long as russia continues to strive toward the high road rather than descend to the barroom floor perhaps we can also learn to rise...i'm reminded of a sufi saying: 'rise in love do not fall'. may we all.
Yeah, Right , Oct 18 2020 0:05 utc | 80
Do they even think about an endpoint? Is it really on their radar?

Or is this all being done because they are spoilt, and are throwing a tantrum because they aren't getting their way?

I assume that there are sober heads in the Pentagon that wargame possible "endpoints". If not sober at the beginning then sober when the results play out to their bitter end.

Or... maybe not. Post-retirement board seats are at stake, dammit! Full steam ahead and damn the torpedoes!

Grieved , Oct 18 2020 0:10 utc | 81
#35 Laguerre

I'm truly astonished that you don't know the truth of Xinjaing - in sum, that the concentration camps are a huge lie that can be revealed as such by any satellite, and that China has developed a progressive and worthy solution to the foreign-provoked terrorism within its border.

Fortunately, Qiao Collective, a great expert source on China, has recently compiled a treasure trove of links to know the truth:

Xinjiang: A Report and Resource Compilation - Sep 21 Written By Qiao Collective

Based on a handful of think tank reports and witness testimonies, Western governments have levied false allegations of genocide and slavery in Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. A closer look makes clear that the politicization of China's anti-terrorism policies in Xinjiang is another front of the U.S.-led hybrid war on China.

This resource compilation provides a starting point for critical inquiry into the historical context and international response to China's policies in Xinjiang, providing a counter-perspective to misinformation that abounds in mainstream coverage of the autonomous region.

kooshy , Oct 18 2020 0:29 utc | 82
Posted by: Andrei Martyanov | Oct 17 2020 19:41 utc | 36

Andrei

A good justification on Russian German transitional relation, and we hope Russia is not fooled again, by hopes. Those of us who hope for containing and reducing western dominance over the world affairs, politics and economy, hope that Russians have learned from their experience of the 90's joining G7, seat at NATO, joining western sanctions on smaller powers, etc. all those efforts were the carrots thrown at Russia to tame the bear, one would think up to Georgian war, it worked, that war perhaps woke the bear. Russians felt they are part of Europe,part of western community of privileged nations (first world) but all that was a decoy to move the NATO to Russian borders. I hope Russians once for all have learned, as long as they have a big modern military and plenty of energy resources that is not under the western (you read US) control they will never be accepted as a "western" country, Ironically, Russia is the largest European country.

As a strategist you know better than most to circumvent western power and to bring back the rule of international law, it would be impossible without having the Russian defensive political and military power (as in Syria) on the side of resistance. We just hope you are right Russia, will not be bought out again. IMO as you say, is just impossible for Germany, or even France to decouple from the US grip on europe.

jared , Oct 18 2020 1:04 utc | 83
Seems to me its been terribly effective. Russian economy pretty weak heavily reliant on raw materials, fracturing at the periphery. China and Russia seem less than alies.

Seems US has Germany, France by the short hairs. US had to bail them out in 2009. Europe is having some problems with solvency and cohesion - whats a bureaucrat to do? Its not really about the sovereigns, that's only for appearances.

jared , Oct 18 2020 1:06 utc | 84
Also seems maybe Russians are growing tired of lack of progress.
Don Bacon , Oct 18 2020 1:17 utc | 85
@ 77
The Century of Humiliation from 1842 to 1949 and the contemporary discourse around it are a driving narrative of contemporary Chinese history, foreign policy, and militarization of its surrounding regions like the South China Sea. The expansion of the Chinese navy in numbers, mission, and aggression is directly fueled by China's previous weakness and exploitation at the hands of western nations. . . . here
c1ue , Oct 18 2020 1:19 utc | 86
@H.Schmatz #69

The US economy is definitely in trouble, but the US has spent roughly $2 trillion this year to help its economy = a bit under 10% of 2019 GDP.

The difference is structural. The US economy is a service one - and lockdowns are literally the best way to damage it.

The Russian economy is still heavily dependent on natural gas and oil sales. Despite the initial devaluation, ongoing low oil prices plus increasing competition in natural gas (for example, Azerbaijan is now selling natural gas to Italy) is hurting its economy.

Nor has Russia spent much to compensate for COVID-19 losses beyond its existing health and social safety nets - the Russian plan was $73B / 5 trillion rubles = 4.3% of 2019 GDP.

Circe , Oct 18 2020 2:00 utc | 88
I am anti-war and I am an anti-war crimes liberal (examples of war crimes: ethnic cleansing, proof of genocide, torture, collective punishment via deprivation and occupation of dispossessed land). Yet, I am also a non-interventionist except in extreme circumstances but I am against regime change for the sake of neutralizing competing powers or converting them religiously or politically.

All this implies exercising the highest integrity and blocking out all external influence and pressure if one is a true liberal, and relying solely on conscience and wisdom.

Therefore, I don't like the term liberal sullied and usurped by fake liberals, neoliberals and Zionist liberals, and I also take offense to the way liberal as a general term is denigrated in this article.

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 2:24 utc | 90
@vk

Germany is an exports-oriented economy. It wants to integrate with the Russian economy in the sense to keep it as an agrarian-extrativist economy to feed it with cheap commodities to feed their industry. Germany's ideal Russia is Brazil.

True, it was about 10 years ago. Economic reality, of course, is such that Germany already beat the record by consecutive 20 months of real economy shrinkage. In general, Germany's energy policy is suicidal and Russia is increasingly independent from imports.

A lot to be done in the future yet, of course, but as the whole comedy with high-power turbines and Siemens demonstrated, Russia can do it on her own, plus General Electric is always there, sanctions or no sanctions. It is a complicated matter, but it is Germany which increasingly becomes irrelevant for Russia as an old image of technologically-advanced Germans getting their hands on Russia's resources and ruling the world--this image is utterly obsolete, completely false and doesn't correspond to the reality "on the ground".

It is really a simple thing which many Westerners cannot wrap their brains around, that the country which has a space program which operates ISS and second fully operational global satellite navigation constellation, or which produces hypersonic weapons and whose shipbuilding dwarfs that of Germany will have relatively little troubles in developing other crucial industries and removing Western interests from those. Simple as that.

Yeah, Right , Oct 18 2020 3:01 utc | 91
@90 Very true. Every time I read someone proclaiming that the Russian economy is no bigger than Italy's, or Spain's, or ..... (fill in the blanks) I simply think to myself: "This word, I do not think it means what you think it means".

Because it should be obvious to everyone that Italy can not produce all the things that Russia produces.
Equally, Spain can not produce all the things that Russia produces.

So if someone has measured "economy" in such a way that the numbers for Russia are the same as the number for Italy - or Spain - is simply admitting that their economic models are flawed.

Don Bacon , Oct 18 2020 3:13 utc | 92
Map of the World's Manufacturing Output 2018

here

BiloxiMarxKelly , Oct 18 2020 3:20 utc | 93
PLEASE SHARE, THANK YOU MOA
https://youtu.be/kr04gHbP5MQ
Kadath , Oct 18 2020 3:28 utc | 94
The US and EU attempts to break Russia's independent foreign policy are just stepping stones to the eventual goal of a breakup Russia itself, never forget Albright's comments in the 90s about how Siberia shouldn't belong to Russia alone.

Ultimately, though the US and EU nation states are nothing more than tools of the globalist elite whose dream of a fully economically integrated world where the power of labour is completely crushed by the power of capital to move instantly across the planet is already falling apart. The economic elite have already pillaged all of the minor nations in the world and the two grand prizes, Russia and China are too powerful to attack directly now. unable to control their unbridled greed they've begone the process of auto-self cannibalism, destroying their own states (or killing their hosts as Michael Huddson would say) in order to completely centralize all capital within the 0.1%.

This will make them very rich, however hundreds of millions of Americans, Australians, Canadians, Japanese and Europeans will be impoverished in order to do this. When this is eventually realized by the majority of the people in these states, the economic elite will be lucky if they "just" lose everything but their lives in mass nationalization campaigns. I see very little evidence that the Russian or Chinese states would be willing to offer safe harbour for the criminal oligarchs of the West, like London has offered to criminal Oligarchs fleeing justice in Russia

Yeah, Right , Oct 18 2020 4:09 utc | 95
@92 Don Bacon Would be very interesting to know how they define "manufacturing".

I suspect very much that it includes many things that aren't actually, you know, "manufactured".

Andrei Martyanov , Oct 18 2020 4:11 utc | 96
@Don Bacon.

Before posting here monetarist propaganda BS form Western "economic" sources learn to distinguish monetary expression of product and actual product in terms of quantity and quality.

Just to demonstrate to you: for $100,000 in a desirable place in the US you will be able to buy a roach-infested shack in a community known for meth-labs and high crime, for exactly the same money in Russia you will buy a superb brand-new house in a desirable location.

To demonstrate even more, for a price of a single Columbia-class SSBN ($8 billion+) which does not exist other than on paper yet, Russia financed and produced her 8-hulls state of the strategic missile submarines.

UK economy is dwarfed by Russia even in accordance by IMF and World Bank, in fact, it is, once one excludes still relevant RR and few other manufacturers, is down right third world economy. I am not going to post here all data from IMF, but even this can explain why you posted a BS. Anyone "counting" real economic sector in USD and Nominal GDP has to have head examined and is probably dumbed down through "economics" programs in Western madrasas, aka universities.

https://www.investopedia.com/insights/worlds-top-economies/

In related news, learn what Composite Index of National Capability (CINC) is and check energy consumption and production of Germany and Russia, just for shits and giggles.

https://yearbook.enerdata.net/total-energy/world-consumption-statistics.html

But, of course, feel free to remain reliant on economic BS produced by Western "economists".

Grieved , Oct 18 2020 4:16 utc | 97
@92 Don Bacon, @95 Yeah, Right

Yes, and also it should be said that obviously these metrics aren't the correct ones to judge the power of a country among its peers.

Perhaps a better metric is for any nation to ask: Of all these countries, which one do we NOT want to punch us in the face?

This, after all, is how geopolitical stature is measured.

It's not what you produce, it's how you deploy it that matters.

Grieved , Oct 18 2020 4:35 utc | 98
@97 more

And of course, Martyanov @96 is absolutely correct - the relative values of currencies are proved to be nothing more than the entries of bookkeepers and bankers, all "sound and fury, signifying nothing." What matters is what the home unit of currency will buy at home.

A better question is as Andrei suggests, what does it cost for Russia to produce something that works, as opposed to what it costs the US to produce something that doesn't work because of theft and cost inflation in the delivery chain?

The ultimate - MAD - question that the US should ask itself is this: How much does it cost Russia to destroy the US, compared with the cost involved for the US to destroy Russia?

~~

The cost of living is higher in the US. The cost of doing anything is higher. But none of that means the quality of the result is greater - I certainly don't hear anyone lately saying the living is good, compared to what people pay for it.

Jackrabbit , Oct 18 2020 4:41 utc | 99
b quotes Gilbert Doctorow:
Were it not for the nerves of steel of Mr. Putin and his close advisers, the irresponsible pressure policies outlined above could result in aggressive behavior and risk taking by Russia that would make the Cuban missile crisis look like child's play.
We may yet see a Cuban missile crisis scenario but it looks more likely to be caused by arms sales to Taiwan than conflict in the Caucasus.

I also think its naive to see these as "fires burning at Russia's borders" instead of as deliberately set bear traps . Azerbaijan is in a strategic location between Russia and Iran and the conflict with Armenia comes just before Russia is about to sell advanced weapons to Iran.

!!

[Oct 16, 2020] Jacques Chirac President of France told Jr Bush if the United States finds WMDs in Iraq you put them there.

Oct 16, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com


WilliamRD • 12 hours ago

Jacques Chirac President of France told Jr Bush if the United States finds WMDs in Iraq you put them there. The CIA and MI6 knew Iraq had no WMDs because Tariq Aziz Saddam's long time number 2 was a CIA asset. Back in the 1980s Aziz was a regular on the Washington cocktail party circuit and a frequent guest on CNNs Crossfire with Pat Buchanan, Robert Novak vs Tom Braden and Michael Kinsley. Finally Dick Armey Republican and House Majority leader was going to vote against authorizing the war in the fall of 2002. Cheney goes up to Capitol Hill pulls Armey into the Vice Presidents office in the Capitol and tells him that Iraq is close to having suitcase nukes and has very close ties to Osama bin Laden. Both lies of course.

On one occasion when Jr Bush was talking to Chirac he told him that the war on terror is Biblical prophecy. Needless to say Chirac was stunned. Yes the Republican establishment lied the country into one of the biggest foreign policy blunders in our history. Almost as bad as Woodrow Wilson taking us into World war 1 which led to the rise Bolshevik revolution and Nazi Germany

ekaneti WilliamRD • 2 hours ago • edited

Vietnam was a bigger lie and worse than Iraq

WilliamRD ekaneti • an hour ago

Vietnam was bad for sure and had a much larger death count, but the region or the domino theory never materialized. The Middle East has been in chaos ever since our invasion and occupation of Iraq

[Oct 14, 2020] The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy -- RT Op-ed

Oct 14, 2020 | www.rt.com

The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy 30 Sep, 2020 16:19 Get short URL The Vatican's calculated snub of Mike Pompeo exposes the limits of his evangelical, ideological, China-hating foreign policy FILE PHOTO: U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo © Getty Images / Alex Wong 182 1 Follow RT on RT

Tom Fowdy is a British writer and analyst of politics and international relations with a primary focus on East Asia.

His Holiness declining to meet the US secretary of state when he visited the Vatican on his European tour further proves that his misguided America-first chauvinism is alienating more nations than it's winning as friends.

Pompeo, everyone's favourite Cold Warrior and American chauvinist, is on a European tour . Visiting Greece, Italy, Croatia, and notably, the Vatican, the secretary of state is on a roll to win support for American security and energy interests across the region. But he wasn't welcomed by all. Attending the Holy See today, the US' 'top diplomat' found himself snubbed by the Pope as he rolled into town peddling his vitriolic anti-China agenda, and demanding the Church take on Beijing and refuse to renew a deal that gives it a say in the appointment of bishops within that country. Pope Francis wasn't too impressed and refused to meet him accordingly.

The snub is significant, because it reflects more broadly how Pompeo's highly aggressive and evangelical foreign policy agenda is being received around the world. In short, it's a shambles. Rather than respectfully and constructively engage with the interests of other countries, on his watch, the State Department does nothing but pressure other nations. And it does this while parroting the clichéd talking points of American exceptionalism, hysterical anti-Communism, and a refusal to take into account the interests and practicalities faced by its partners. The Vatican has its differences with Beijing, but how would embarking on a collision course help it or the cause of Catholics in China? It wouldn't.

ALSO ON RT.COM US' failure to recognize Cuba's medical efforts during Covid is due to an innate fear of linking socialism with anything positive

Pompeo is repeatedly described by major US newspapers, the Washington Post among them, as " the worst secretary of state in American history," and it's no surprise why. Diplomacy requires the skills of understanding, prudence, compromise, calibration, and negotiation. The current man in charge of America's relations with the rest of the world has none of those in his armoury – only a one-sided diatribe about how every nation Washington holds a grudge against is evil and a threat to the world, and the US' own political system is far superior (as demonstrated by last night's presidential debate, perhaps ?). Pompeo repeatedly positions himself as speaking on behalf of other nations' people against their governments, while pushing a policy that amounts to little more than bullying.

A look at Pompeo and the State Department's Twitter feed shows it to be a unilateral, repetitive loop of the following topics: 'The Chinese Communist Party is evil and a threat to the world', 'Iran is an evil terrorist state', American values are the best', 'We stand with the people of X', and so on, ad nauseam. To describe it as hubris would be generous, and, of course, it does nothing to support the equally inadequate foreign policy of the United States in practice. This is further distorted by the unilateralist and anti-global governance politics of Donald Trump, which place emphasis only on the projection of power to force other countries into capitulating to American demands.

Against such a backdrop, it's no surprise that a toxic mixture of foreign policymaking has led to other countries not being willing to take notice of Washington. It's winning neither hearts nor minds, and it's this that has set the stage for not only the Vatican snub, but the largely fruitless outcomes of his European adventures. Pompeo's visit to Greece produced no meaningful agreements or outcomes of note , and he failed to get Athens to publicly commit to any anti-China measures or even statements. A similar non-result was achieved from his visit to the Czech Republic a month or so ago – the Czech prime minister even came out and played down Pompeo's comments , after he engaged in a spree of anti-Beijing vitriol.

So, what's at stake for the Vatican? Undoubtedly, religion is a sensitive topic in mainland China. The Chinese state sees unfettered religion as a threat to social stability, or as a potential vehicle for imperialism against the country, and thus has aimed to strongly regulate it under terms and conditions set by the state.

ALSO ON RT.COM Oxford University's 'scholarly' RT hit piece has no room for the mundane reality of how the world's news organisations work

This has caused tensions with the Roman Catholic Church, which maintains a strict ecclesiastical hierarchy, answering to the Vatican and not national governments. With China being the world's most populous country, having among its vast population nine million Catholics, this means the Church has had to negotiate and compromise with the Beijing government to maintain its influence and control, and to secure the rights of its members to worship. This has resulted in a 'deal' whereby the Vatican can have a say in the appointment of its bishops in China, rather than the Church being completely subordinate to the government.

But Pompeo doesn't care about these sensitivities – he wants one thing: Cold War. He wants unbridled, unrestrained, and evangelical condemnation of China and, as noted above, is utilizing his 'diplomatic visits' to push that demand. However, building a foreign policy on preaching America First unilateralism, chauvinism, and zero compromise not surprisingly has its limitations. As a result, Pompeo is finding himself isolated and ignored in more than a few areas. Thus it was that, rather than completely squandering the Vatican's interests in diplomacy with China, Pope Francis simply refused to meet him. For someone as fanatically religious and pious as Pompeo, that's a pretty damning indictment of the incompetence within the US State Department right now.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

[Oct 10, 2020] Tell me again how Trump "doesn't want to start a new war": If Trump thinks that he can win re-election by panding to Zionist lonny, he might be mistaken

It time to make him accountable at the election box. Not that it matter much as Biden is yet another neocon and Zionist, but stil...
American people are tied of sliding standard of living, permanent wars and jingoism. Trump might share Hillary fate in 2020, because any illusion that he is for common fold, who voted for him in 2016 now disappeared. So he is not better then neocon Biden and Biden is new bastard. So why vote for the old bastard if we have new, who might be slightly better in the long run
This is a very expensive foreign policy, that doesn't benefit the USA. It has potential to raise the price of oil significantly.
Notable quotes:
"... Behind the move was pressure from the Zionist lobby. President Trump is in need of campaign funds and the lobby provides those. ..."
"... I can also see this green lighting Israeli or joint American-Israeli strikes on alleged Iranian nuclear weapons development sites and other military and petro-state assets. ..."
"... It's disgusting to watch the people of the US/UK/EU go along with this. Western elites are fat, lazy, vicious, and cruel. ..."
"... Paul wrote: "Perhaps a Biden administration would be just as much a Zionist captive as the Trump administration." Yes at least as much or more zionist. Nothing about Harris or Biden (or the DNC) says they won't be. ..."
"... I nominate president Eisenhower as slightly less zionist on one occasion: during the Anglo,French, Zionist Suez invasion of 1956 Eisenhower remarked after numerous UN resolutions condemning the bandit state's aggression ' Should a nation which attacks and occupies foreign territory in the face of United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its withdrawal?' ..."
"... "The EU is trying to prop up the US Empire in response to its decline, instead of trying to free itself. " ..."
"... Donald Trump talked up his Iran policy in a profanity-laden tirade on Friday, telling conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh that Tehran knows the consequences of undermining the United States. ..."
"... "Iran knows that, and they've been put on notice: if you fuck around with us, if you do something bad to us, we are going to do things to you that have never been done before." ..."
Oct 10, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org
" Why U.S. Elections Do Not Change Its Foreign Policies | Main | The Ceasefire In Nagorno-Karabakh Is Unlikely To Hold " October 09, 2020 Europe And The New Sanctions On Iran

The U.S. has imposed new sanctions on Iran which will make ANY trade with the country very difficult:

[T]he Trump administration has decided to impose yet further sanctions on the country , this time targeting the entirety of the Iranian financial sector. These new measures carry biting secondary sanctions effects that cut off third parties' access to the U.S. financial sector if they engage with Iran's financial sector. Since the idea was first floated publicly , many have argued that sanctioning Iran's financial sector would eviscerate what humanitarian trade has survived the heavy hand of existing U.S. sanctions.

Behind the move was pressure from the Zionist lobby. President Trump is in need of campaign funds and the lobby provides those. The move is also designed to preempt any attempts by a potentially new administration to revive the nuclear agreement with Iran:

This idea appears to have first been introduced into public discourse in an Aug. 25, 2020, Wall Street Journal article by Mark Dubowitz and Richard Goldberg urging the Trump administration to "[b]uild an Iranian [s]anctions [w]all" to prevent any future Biden administration from returning to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear accord between Iran and the world's major powers on which President Donald Trump reneged in May 2018.

The new sanctions will stop all trade between the 'western' countries and Iran.

The Foreign Minister of Iran responded with defiance:

Javad Zarif @JZarif - 17:30 UTC · Oct 8, 2020

Amid Covid19 pandemic, U.S. regime wants to blow up our remaining channels to pay for food & medicine.

Iranians WILL survive this latest of cruelties.

But conspiring to starve a population is a crime against humanity. Culprits & enablers -- who block our money -- WILL face justice.

In response Iran will continue its turn to the east. Russia, China and probably India will keep payment channels with Iran open or will make barter deals.

The Europeans, who so far have not dared to counter U.S. sanctions on Iran, are likely to be again shown as the feckless U.S. ass kissers they have always been. They will thereby lose out in a market with 85 million people that has the resources to pay for their high value products. If they stop trade of humanitarian goods with Iran they will also show that their much vaunted 'values' mean nothing.

The European Union claims that it wants to be an independent actor on the world stage. If that is to be taken seriously this would be the moment to demonstrate it.

Posted by b on October 9, 2020 at 16:37 UTC | Permalink

Thomas Minnehan , Oct 9 2020 17:11 utc | 3
Unconscionable but what is new with pompass and his ghouls; treasury dept responsible for cranking up the sanctions program was formerly headed by a dual citizen woman who resigned suddenly after being exposed as an Israeli citizen-not hard to understand that sentiment in that dept has not changed.

The other aspect here is the FDD as key supporter of these severe sanctions; very virulent anti-Iranian vipers nest of ziocons with money bags from zionist oligarch funders.

karlof1 , Oct 9 2020 17:14 utc | 4
Ho-hum. As I wrote earlier, just the daily breaking of laws meaning business as usual. As noted, Russia has really upped the diplomatic heat on EU and France/Germany in particular, and that heat will be further merited if the response is as b predicts from their past, deplorable, behavior.

Much talk/writing recently about our current crisis being similar in many ways to those that led to WW1, but with the Outlaw US Empire taking Britain's role. I expect Iran's Iraqi proxies to escalate their attacks aimed at driving out the occupiers. IMO, we ought to contemplate the message within this Strategic Culture editorial when it comes to the hegemonic relationship between the Outlaw US Empire and the EU/NATO and the aims of both. The EU decided not to continue fighting against the completion of Nord Stream, but that IMO will be its last friendly act until it severs its relations with the Outlaw US Empire. With the Wall moved to Russia's Western borders, the Cold War will resume. That will also affect Iran.

james , Oct 9 2020 18:33 utc | 13
thanks b... it is interesting what a pivotal role israel plays in all of this... and why would there be concern that biden would be any different then trump in revoking the jcpoa? to my way of thinking, it is just pouring more cement and sealing the fate of the usa either way, as an empire in real decline and resorting to more of the same financial sanctions as a possible precursor to war.. frankly i can't see a war with iran, as the usa would have to contend with russia and china at this point... russia and china must surely know the game plan is exactly the same for them here as well.. as for europe, canada, australia and the other poodles - they are all hopeless on this front as i see it... lets all bow down to the great zionist plan, lol...
Daniel , Oct 9 2020 18:48 utc | 14
Yeah but at least Trump didn't start any new wars. /s

The Eurotools in Brussels are absolutely disgusting. A weaker bunch of feckless, milquetoast satraps is difficult to imagine. The EU perfectly embodies the 21st century liberal ethic: spout virtue signaling nonsense about peace, freedom, human rights and the "rules based international order" while licking the boots of Uncle Scam and the Ziofascists and going along with their war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Russia and China need to step up their game and boldly circumvent the collective punishment sanctions that are choking the life out of Iran, Syria and Venezuela. They still let the rogue states of the west get away with far too much.

augusto , Oct 9 2020 18:52 utc | 15
The Teheran men will not surrender to the yankee herds and hordes. And less so the telavivian.
It s easy to see that in the medium run this cruelly extended crime plays in chinese, russian and shia hands.
And they must start immediately a backlash handing hundreds of special forces and weapons opver to the Houthi hands.
Paco , Oct 9 2020 18:54 utc | 17
the Cold War will resume

The Cold War never ended.

Stonebird , Oct 9 2020 19:20 utc | 20
Of course there is a war on, and it has been gathering force for some time.

Iran is but one more skirmish or battle. However, Xi and Putin are using what I call the "Papou yes". You must always say "yes" as this way you avoid direct conflict, but then you go and do exactly what you were going to do in the first place . The person who does the demanding - having had his/her demands "met" has nothing further to add and will go away. (I have seen this effective technique in action).

At the moment it appears that the aim of the subversive (military/CIA/NGO) wings of the Empire are to start as many conflicts as possible. To isolate and overextend Russia, leading to it's collapse. (As they claim to have done before.)

The "Alternative axis" is just carrying on with it's own plan to overextend and eventually let the US dissolve into its own morasss. The opposition are trying to follow their own plan without giving an opening for the US/NATO to use its numerical military advantage, by not taking the bait.

The ultimate battle is for financial control of the worlds currency, or in the case of the US, to halt the loss of it's financial power. To avoid that The next step could be the introduction of a Fed. owned controlled and issued "digi-dollar", When all outstanding "dollar assets" are re-denominated into virtual misty-money which is created exclusively by the Fed. Banks become unnecessary as the Fed becomes the only "lender" available, Congress redundant, debts no longer matter and so on. Who cares about the reserves held by China and overseas "investors" if their use or even existence can be dictated by the Fed?
They have already published a "trial balloon" about introducing a digi-dollar.

Iran? the US is throwing ALL its cards into what looks like it's final battle to preserve the dollars supremacy. Why cut ALL the Iranian financial system out of their sphere of influence? Because it (thinks) it can and by doing so cower the wavering into obeying.

AtaBrit , Oct 9 2020 19:28 utc | 21
Thanks 'b', very well timed. I was actually heading to the open thread with this article until I saw your piece. This Asia Times article focuses on three key points:

- Iran has replaced the dollar with the Yuan as its main foreign currency
"This may become the east wind for the renminbi (yuan) and provide a new oil currency option for traders in oil-producing countries, including Iran," an editorial on qq.com said. "

- Several large banks in Iran are developing a gold encrypted digital currency called PayMon and had issued more than 1,000 crypto-currency mining licenses, which could promote the development of crude oil. Domestic traders use cryptocurrency to import goods and bypass American banks.

- The Iranian-Swiss Joint Chamber of Commerce
"Switzerland had received a special exemption from US supervisory authorities to allow the SHTA operations."

It remains to be seen how effective the Swiss Humanitarian Trade Agreement actually is. Some say it is nothing but a US propaganda stunt. Hopefully, that is not the case.

Richard Steven Hack , Oct 9 2020 20:37 utc | 31
Sure. Tell me again how Trump "doesn't want to start a new war." Morons.
William Gruff , Oct 9 2020 20:50 utc | 32
What does Iran need that they cannot get from China and Russia? The USA has cheap corn, and the EU has... what, cheese? Other than that I don't see why Iran needs to trade with the empire and its more servile vassals anyway.
Tollef Ås/秋涛乐 , Oct 9 2020 20:55 utc | 33
Strange, that ther is a jewish or Israeki ´ animosity agains Iran (or agains tthe Medtans -- as thy are all named in all Greek records(H, that theer is a jewish animosity against, that ther is a jewish anikisit agains Iran (or the Medtans -- as thy are old ptt in all Greek Strenge(Hellemistic) tales, Cyrur+s the Great is reported to have liberatet the Jews of Babilon end sent them back to Jerusalem . So, "PRIMO SON VENETANO, SECUNDO SON CHRISTANO" -- STILL A COMMONLY ACCEPTED SAYING INVENEZIA WHEB I VISITED ABD AKED IT IN THE THE YEAR OF 1´2917! Iran (or the Medtans -- as thy are old ptt in all Greek Strenge(Hellemistic) tales, Cyrur+s the Great is reorted to have liberatet te´he Jews of Babilon end sent them back to Jerusalem . So, "PRIMO SON VENETANO, SECUNDO SON CHRISTANO" -- STILL A COMMONLY ACCEPTED SAYING INVENEZIA WHEB I VISITED ABD AKED IT IN THE THE YEAR OF 1´2917! ellenistic) tales, Cyrur+s the Great is reorted to have liberatet te´he Jews of Babylon end sent them back to Jerusalem . So, "PRIMO SON VENETANO, SECUNDO SON CHRISTANO" -- STILL A COMMONLY ACCEPTED SAYING INVENEZIA WHEB I VISITED ABD AKED IT IN THE THE YEAR OF 2017
Paco , Oct 9 2020 21:05 utc | 34
Quite impressed with all the theories about Europe and its behavior. The answer is very simple, Europe is occupied by a foreign power, it is a colony. And all the qualifiers are quaint.
davenitup , Oct 9 2020 21:09 utc | 35
It's the world's loss that great cultures like the Persians have been suppressed for so long. The madness needs to end.
Passer by , Oct 9 2020 21:11 utc | 36
Posted by: Red Ryder | Oct 9 2020 20:06 utc | 23

I disagree. What did the EU did on Iran, compared to Russia and China? It stopped most trade with Iran, including the purchase of iranian oil, and it stopped all investment projects. INSTEX is a joke. Meanwhile Germany recently banned Hezbollah.

Yes, they did vote for the JCPOA in the UN. I look at actions rather than words though, and EU has imposed de facto sanctions on Iran.

Moreover, German FM Maas told Israel recently that efforts are underway to keep the Iran arms embargo. (He is also a big "Russia fan" - sarc off)

In other words, we "support" the JCPOA, but in practice with arms and trade embargoes on Iran continuing.

Yeah right.

Posted by: powerandpeople | Oct 9 2020 20:15 utc | 24

No, its not so simple, unless you claim that european russophobia started with the US and did not exist before it. Guy Mettan has a good book on it. It is a thousand years old issue, involving Catholicism, France, Germany, Sweden, Britain, and others.

Yes, the US wants to divide the EU and Russia. But the EU itself is rotten from within.

Politics are more important than the economy, German Chancellor Merkel said in relation to Russia.

"Drang nach Osten" - "Drive to the East".

Germany dreams of capturing Eastern Europe and using is as some sort of colonised labor pool similar to what Latin America is for the US.

And this is why the EU, without any prodding, eagerly took the lead in the attempt of colour revolution in Belarus, where it played far bigger role than the US.

m , Oct 9 2020 21:24 utc | 37
I have to disagree with your assessment.

Signing and adhearing to the JCPOA turned Europe and Iran from opponents into partners. This is a great diplomatic achievement. However, no part of the JCPOA made the two allies or obliged the European side to wage an economic war with the USA on behalf of Iran. On the contrary, the Iranians would be the first to say they are no friends of Europa. They have been complaining about "Western meddling" in their region for years. (Note that they don`t differentiate but always speak collectively of "the West").

So that`s their chance to show the world how much of a sovereign nation they are and that they can handle their problems without the "meddling" of the "despicable" Europeans. There is no obligation - neither legal nor moral - for Europe to take the side of Iran in the US-Iran conflict.

And actually it is both sides - both Iran and the USA - who are unhappy with the current European neutrality.

_K_C_ , Oct 9 2020 21:31 utc | 38
Thanks to MoA for being one of the only honest brokers of news on Iran in the English language. As an American citizen living abroad (in EU) I have a more jaded and at the same time worried feeling about this.

Along with all the other stuff, including the current threat to close the U.S. embassy in the Iraqi "Green Zone" and the accompanying military maneuvers, which would spark war in the region, I see this hardening and expansion of sanctions as yet the next clue that the U.S. and Donald Trump's regime are looking toward re-election and a hot war with/on Iran. Rattling the cage ever more and backing Iran into the corner with brutal, all-encompassing sanctions is already an act of war, usually the first prior to bombs falling. I can also see this green lighting Israeli or joint American-Israeli strikes on alleged Iranian nuclear weapons development sites and other military and petro-state assets.

I hope I'm wrong but we've all seen this before and it never ends well. If the EU shows a spine, or more likely Russia and/or China step in directly, perhaps the long desired neocon/neolib/Zionist hot war against Iran can be avoided.

Perimetr , Oct 9 2020 21:32 utc | 39
I think it is very important for the US to kill another 500,000 children via sanctions, in order to demonstrate the importance of freedom and democracy and observing international law.
AriusArmenian , Oct 9 2020 21:48 utc | 40
While reading this post I was thinking what MoA wrote in the last two paragraphs. And also that Iran will just continue to turn to China, Russia, and others in the East.

It's disgusting to watch the people of the US/UK/EU go along with this. Western elites are fat, lazy, vicious, and cruel.

claudio , Oct 9 2020 22:17 utc | 41
@17 passer by
(and others)
"Europeans can not be helped. Ironically, it is their own rejection of their WW2 past that causes them to reject the multipolar world and sovereignty as "primitive things from the past"

plus, as you point out elsewhere, there are longer histories at play: the Crusades against the Slavs, the Moors and the Turks (and the Arabs, in fact), the invention of "western civilization" in the 19th century (Arians vs Semites, Europe vs Asia, ecc) ...

plus, there is the persisting aspiration for world domination, partly frustrated by WW1 and the upheavals of the XXth century, which transformed the UK and the whole of Europe (with Japan, Australia, etc) in a junior partner of the new US Empire

(that's the other lesson learned from WW2: no single european power could dominate the continent and the world, but they could dominate as junior partners under the new young leader of the wolf pack, the US)

plus, there are is a class war that can be better fought, by national oligarchies, within globalist rethoric and rules

plus, there are the US deep state instruments of domination over european national states

but Europeans (and Usaians) do understand the language of force, and they have - at the moment - encountered a wall in their attempts at expansion, in Iran, China, Russia, Venezuela, ecc; an alternative multipolar alliance is taking shape

so they might attempt to win a nuclear war by 20 million deaths to 2 (or 200 to 20, who cares), but they might also decide to tune down their ambitions and return to reality; maybe

wj2 , Oct 9 2020 23:28 utc | 45
@m (#35)
EU promised to uphold JCPOA. They can't because of the US and they are doing next to nothing to change that. EU isn't neutral. They are stooges. Iran is right to complain about it, the US isn't.
Boss Tweet , Oct 9 2020 23:54 utc | 48
Trump is a man of peace, he hasn't started any new wars - whatever that means, lol.

As far as I know economic blocade is tantamount to war. If he wins reelection expect renewed kinetic attacks on venezuela and Iran. He's already lined up his zionist coalition with arabic satraps to launch his Iran quagmire. Trump is a deal maker, he understands the economy and will bring back manufacturing jobs to Murikkka, lol. I'm sure Boeing execs in deep trouble would love to sell plane to the Iranians but Mr. MIGA just made that impossible. Nothing to worry about, there's always the next socialist bailout for Boeing funded by taxpayers - suckers as Trump would call them. So much for winning, can't fix deplorable and stupid...

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/08/iran-deal-fallout-boeing-may-lose-20-billion-in-aircraft-deals.html

Btw b, Trump's opposition to the Iran deal has nothing to do with money or the zionist lobby. Stable genius opposed JCPOA in 2015 even before announcing his run for the presidency. It's not about the mula but all about the mollah's, lol: The Donald in his own words at a tea party event in 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIDNonMDSo8

kooshy , Oct 10 2020 0:00 utc | 49
Ever since the Iranian revolution of 1979 multiple US regimes in DC have been totally successful in making majority Iranian people everywhere in the world, understand that the US is their chronic strategic enemy for decades to come. At same time, these US regimes have equally been as successful in making American people believe Iran is their enemy.
The difference between this two side's belief is, that, Iranian people by experiencing US regime' conducts have come to their belief, but the American people' belief was made by their own regime' propaganda machinery. For this reason, just like the people to people relation between the US and Russian people, Before and after the fall of USSR the relation between US and Iran in next few generations will not come to or even develop to anything substantial or meaningful. One can see this same trajectory in US Chinese relations, or US Cuban. Noticeably all these countries relation with US become terminally irreparable after their revolutions, regardless of the maturity or termination of the revolution. As much as US loves color revolutions, US hates real revolutions. The animosity no longer is just strategic it has become people to people, and the reason and blame goes to Americans since they never were ready to accept the revolutions that made nations self-servient to their interests. The bottom line truth is the US / and her poodles in europe know, ever since the revolution Iran no longer will be subservient to US interests.
Hermius , Oct 10 2020 0:23 utc | 51
This is leverage to bargain away the oil pipeline to germany. That is what is behind it. You scratch my back, the US is saying to the EU, in particular, Germany....
karlof1 , Oct 10 2020 0:25 utc | 52
It's an Economy based on Plunder! , so that's why sanctions here, there and everywhere!! But the real problem is we aren't participating in the Plunder!! Sometimes you gotta use extreme sarcasm to explain the truth of a situation, and that's what Max and Stacey do in their show at the link. 13 minutes of honest reporting about the fraudulent world in which we live. As for Jerome Powell, current Fed Chair, he's complicit in the ongoing criminal activity just as much as the high ranking politicos. Bastiat laid it out 180 years ago, but we're living what he described now. And that's all part of what I wrote @40 above. The moral breakdown occurred long ago but took time to perfect.
joey_n , Oct 10 2020 0:34 utc | 54
Patrick Armstrong did a Sitrep article last month
https://patrickarmstrong.ca/2020/09/24/russian-federation-sitrep-24-september-2020/
where he cited an article on Sputnik titled "Macron: Europe 'Will Not Compromise' With Washington on Iran Sanctions"
https://sputniknews.com/world/202009221080541258-macron-europe-will-not-compromise-with-washington-on-iran-sanctions/
Make of it what you will.
Xingu , Oct 10 2020 0:46 utc | 55
I think it is crazy that EU allows US to manage SWIFT to the point they invent new entities to sidestep SWIFT and US sanctions (which are weak and ineffective, but that is the trajectory of their weak attempts at independence). Force SWIFT to equally service all legal transactions according to EU law, and let US cut itself off from all international financial transfers if it doesn't like using EU's SWIFT. US corps won't allow that to happen, it's just that EU refuses to call US bluff. Of course they are now praying for Biden presidency, but if they can't assert themselves it is all ultimately the same thing.
dh , Oct 10 2020 1:17 utc | 58
These 'foreign policy experts' think the trade war with China has been a mistake. But they think Trump is too soft on Russia and he hasn't been tough enough on NK, Iran and Venezuela.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/foreign-policy-experts-rebuke-trump-administration-for-policies-that-emboldened-rivals-alienated-allies-135205214.html

Paul , Oct 10 2020 1:34 utc | 59
It has become a standard trick for outgoing US administrations to saddle the incoming administration with set in stone policies and judicial appointments.

"Behind the move was pressure from the Zionist lobby. President Trump is in need of campaign funds and the lobby provides those. The move is also designed to preempt any attempts by a potentially new administration to revive the nuclear agreement with Iran."

Perhaps a Biden administration would be just as much a Zionist captive as the Trump administration.

The danger for the world is the Trump administration may go even further than additional sanctions. So I refer to the previous post, US policy remains the same whatever bunch are the frontmen.

Theodore Herzl even tried to drag Kaiser Wilhelm11 into the Zionist spider web: https://middleeastrealitycheck.blogspot.com/2008/07/theodor-herzl-first-photoshopper.html

When that attempt failed they worked on convincing the Sultan of Turkey to give them someone else's homeland. The Zionist Zealot Mr Kalvariski became the administrator of the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association with the aim of establishing a jewish suprematist ghetto. Following that flop the Zionists turned to the hapless British and were rewarded by Balfour with his notorious British government double cross of the Arabs. Now it's the turn of the US and assorted captive nations to uphold and support tyranny and Talmudic violence.

Crush Limbraw , Oct 10 2020 1:59 utc | 60

I am SLOWLY coming to the conclusion that DaTrumpster understands DaDeepState better than any of us armchair pundits. His patient - and yes, perhaps faulty strategy - he's still standing after ALL DaCrap that's been thrown at him.
All the 'EXPURTS' - including MoA - can only see part of DaPicture at best.

I've been as hard on DaTrumpster as anyone on DaConservative side - but I am SLOWLY coming to understand WTF just might be going on.

Point - don't be too sure of your immediate inclinations - we ALL see through DaGlass DARKLY!

Don Bacon , Oct 10 2020 2:27 utc | 61
SWIFT is only a messaging system – SWIFT does not hold any funds or securities, nor does it manage client accounts. Behind most international money and security transfers is the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) system. SWIFT is a vast messaging network used by banks and other financial institutions to quickly, accurately, and securely send and receive information, such as money transfer instructions.
Sunny Runny Burger , Oct 10 2020 2:29 utc | 62
Paul wrote: "Perhaps a Biden administration would be just as much a Zionist captive as the Trump administration." Yes at least as much or more zionist. Nothing about Harris or Biden (or the DNC) says they won't be.

And hasn't it always been that way from one president to the the next? Was there ever one that was less zionist than the predecessor? (Maybe they're all so close this is an impossible question to answer, that too could be the case).

The sitting executive branch gives the favors right now and anyone incoming gives the favors after they win and thus each election becomes a double windfall for the lobby group?

A zionist double dip . Maybe most US voters could grasp it like that.

I can't back this up (much like my previous comment in this thread) but it's my impression. It would probably take a lot of work to make sure it's right; one would have to scrutinize so much over so many decades.

Paul , Oct 10 2020 3:29 utc | 63
@Sunny Runny Burger 60

I nominate president Eisenhower as slightly less zionist on one occasion: during the Anglo,French, Zionist Suez invasion of 1956 Eisenhower remarked after numerous UN resolutions condemning the bandit state's aggression ' Should a nation which attacks and occupies foreign territory in the face of United Nations disapproval be allowed to impose conditions on its withdrawal?'

This could be a useful quote for todays world.

Later, in 1964, Eisenhower approved his hand picked emissary's US $150 million so called Johnston Plan to steal the waters of the Jordan River and further marginalize the Palestine Arabs and surrounding Arab states.

ARI , Oct 10 2020 3:36 utc | 64
Sanctions aren't the story. Once all the players have left the JCPOA, either Israel or the US can claim Iranians are at the point of producing a nuclear weapon. Without the JCPOA and inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities it will be impossible to prove or deny the allegations. Thus giving either the US or Israel justification it wants to conduct military strikes against Iran. The only things stopping this from happening is if the EU stays in the JCPOA...
_K_C_ , Oct 10 2020 3:53 utc | 65
Fully agree with ARI | Oct 10 2020 3:36 utc | 62

Exactly the aim. I said so in an earlier post. This is all part of the program to create a false justification to conduct military strikes inside Iran. At this point, I'm really surprised that the U.S. even tries to construct these narratives after Obama's Syria and Libya operations didn't even really bother, save for a few probably fake "chemical weapons" attack they alleged Assad committed. Libya I don't remember hearing anything. The embassy maybe? After the Soleimani strike and the shootdown of the U.S. drone, not to mention the alleged Iranian attacks on ARAMCO's oil facilities, I'm really quite surprised something more serious (not to minimize the awful acts of war which the sanctions definitely are) hasn't already happened. It will soon, especially if Trump gets re-elected. Wonder what all of his "no new wars" supporters will say then?

Everybody reading knows what SWIFT is. That's a nice attempt to circumscribe the overall sanctions regime and paint it as "no big deal."

Crush Limpbro - Checked out your site. You've got a long way to go before you can criticize MoA. Hope that comment draws a few clicks to keep you going, but I would caution other barflies to use a proxy; could be a honey trap to collect IP addresses.

El Cid , Oct 10 2020 4:10 utc | 66
This United States imposed and Zionist inspired siege on Iran and its people will only further strengthen the political and economic bonds with Russia and China. Meanwhile, the US collapses from its internal social limitations and its abandonment of public healthcare responses to the Corvid 19 pandemic. Europe it close behind the US in this respect.
ARIES , Oct 10 2020 4:17 utc | 67
IRGC Commander-In-Chief: U.S. Is Incapable Of Waging War Against Iran, Its Weapons Are Outdated:

https://toranja-mecanica.blogspot.com/2020/10/irgc-commander-in-chief-us-is-incapable.html

Paul , Oct 10 2020 4:20 utc | 68
ARI @62

What exactly is this 'Justification'.. . 'to conduct military strikes against Iran' that you refer to hasbara boy? Failure to obey foreign imposed zionist diktats?

Would this 'justification' apply to the bandit state if it refused to abide by the NNPT for example?
No double standards pass the test here.

kiwiklown , Oct 10 2020 4:42 utc | 69
Yet another proof that "Western values" and their "rules based international order" mean exactly nothing.

In the past, the West at least kept up some pretense that it was wrong to target unarmed civilians (still, they flattened Driesden; Hiroshima; North Korea, Vietnam, Laos). Today, they do not care to be seen openly, cruelly, brutally, sadistically killing civvies. These American bastards say, "... it is not killing if the victims drop dead later, like, not right now. " Or, "... it became necessary to destroy Iran in order to save Iran."

Iran is perfectly correct to call this a crime against humanity for the West to starve a population of food and medicine. This will boomerang just as the opium-pushing in China will boomerang on the West.

Meanwhile, just as those drug-pushing English bastards earned themselves lordships and knighthoods; just as presidential bastards retire to their Martha Vineyard mansions; so the current crop of bastards in American leadership will retire to yet more mansions, leaving the next couple generations to meet Persian wrath. The American way is to "win" until they are tired of winning, no?

But in truth, in objective reality, only those who have lost their human-ness are capable of crimes against humanity.

michaelj72 , Oct 10 2020 4:50 utc | 71
The US is cruising for a bruising in the middle east fucking with Iran like this. Not that the US hasn't deserved a good knockout punch the past 19 years since invading and destroying Afghanistan and Iraq, etc, etc. Regardless of their rhetoric, how the European rogues and rascals (France, Germany and the UK) can sleep at night is beyond me.
snake , Oct 10 2020 7:00 utc | 75
Yes Psychochistorian @ 1, At the nation state level, EU support for blockade terror and sanction torture (BT&ST), against reluctant nation states and non compliant individuals within those nation states, logically suggests EU nation states are not independent sovereign countries <=EU nation states exist in name only? Maybe its just like in the USA, these private monopoly powered Oligarcks (PMPO), own everything (privately owned copyrights, patents, and property) made possible by rules nation states turn into law. The citizens of those privately owned EU nation states are victims <=in condition=exploitable. Maybe PMPOs use nation states <=as profit support weapons, to be directed against <=any and all <=competition, whereever and however <=competition appears.

The hidden suspects <=capital market linked crowds through out the world..

Media is 92% owned by six private individuals, of the seven typical nation state layers of authority and power: 5 are private and two are public. Additionally, few in the international organizations have allegiance to historic cultures of the nation state governed masses. It is as if, the named nation states are <=threatened by knee breaking thugs, but maybe its not threat, its actual PMPO ownership.

If one accepts PMPO <=to be in control of all of USA and all of allied nation state, one can explain <=current BT&ST events. But private Oligarch scenarios <=raise obvious questions, why have not the PMPO challenged East eliminated <=Israel, MSM propaganda repeatedly blames or points to Israel <=to excuse the USA leaders for their BT&ST policies. Seems the PMPO are <=using the nation states, they own <=to eliminate non complying competition.

What is holding the East back? Russia and China each have sufficient oil, gas and technology to keep things functional, so why has not the competition in the East taken Israel out, if Israel is directing the USA to apply BT&ST against its competitors? Why is the white House so sure, its BT&ST policies will not end up destroying Israel? Maybe because Israel has no real interest <=in the BT&ST policy <=Israel is deceptions:fall guy? The world needs to pin the tail on the party driving USA application of BT&ST because no visible net gain to Governed Americans seems possible from BT&ST policies?

I think Passer @ 17 has hit the nail on its head. "The EU is trying to prop up the US Empire in response to its decline, instead of trying to free itself. "

Norwegian , Oct 10 2020 7:11 utc | 76
@ARI | Oct 10 2020 3:36 utc | 62
Sanctions aren't the story. Once all the players have left the JCPOA, either Israel or the US can claim Iranians are at the point of producing a nuclear weapon.

So you put that forward as a justification for attacking Iran militarily, but that means according to your logic you also have justification for attacking Israel or the US militarily. The rules are the same for all, right?

robin , Oct 10 2020 8:12 utc | 77
Economic warfare is certainly effective. However, time is running out for these weapons as America's lock on the world economy grows weaker. With a rapidly approaching expiry date, the word out may be to use em or lose em.

In a zero-sum great game, it makes sense to deploy such weapons now insofar as an opponent's loss is always a gain for oneself.

jscott , Oct 10 2020 9:26 utc | 79
Donald Trump talked up his Iran policy in a profanity-laden tirade on Friday, telling conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh that Tehran knows the consequences of undermining the United States.

"Iran knows that, and they've been put on notice: if you fuck around with us, if you do something bad to us, we are going to do things to you that have never been done before."

Uncle Samuel is setting up a provocation for war.

uncle tungsten , Oct 10 2020 9:45 utc | 81
psychohistorian #1
What a shit show we are seeing. What is the next phase of this civilization war that is not a war because there are not enough dead bodies for some I guess?...but it sure looks like war to me.

Well for the first time in history Iran's symbolic "Red Flag" is still flying above the popular Jamkaran Mosque Holy dome. Perhaps the USA and its running dogs body count has risen in Iraq and Afghanistan? How would we know. These things are disguised from the fearless press in those countries ;)

Perhaps the dead and mangled are many but we do know that the US chief killer in Afghanistan was reduced to ashes immediately following General Shahid Qassem Suleimanis murder by the USA whilst on a diplomatic mission in Iraq.

In respect of b's observation above, the illegal occupier of Palestine is more likely tipping millions into the Harris Presidency as well as the possible Trump Presidency. I doubt either Harris or the biden bait and switch stooge would restore the JCPOA. Besides they would not be invited to sit at the table any time soon IMO. They would likely refuse to any conditions of reversing the sanctions and then carry on about all that 'unreasonable demands by a terrorist state' stuff etc etc.

No, Iran will be getting on with its future in a multilateral world where the United Nations has been reduced to pile of chicken dung by the USA while most other nations go along with global lunacy.


Circe , Oct 10 2020 12:56 utc | 87
You know what's telling about the bootlickers who hem and haw about U.S. policy with the T Administration, but never mention Trump as the real source of it even when profuse Zionist shit spills from his mouth on Limbaugh's show proving he's a Ziofascist pig?

What's telling is that these usual suspects jumped all over ARI @64 for zeroing in on Trump's precise intentions with Iran but they gave a pass to the real HASBARIST in the room, Crush Limbraw @60, exposing himself, putting his HARD-ON FOR TRUMP on full display.

@60 we ALL see through DaGlass DARKLY!
Speak for yourself- you Zionist MORON!

Ahhhhhh, you can always count on the DUPLICITY of MOA'S weathervane james and friends. Me, I ain't here to win a popularity contest like weathervane; I'm here to kick ass when I witness duplicity in action. My friend here is the truth that I'll defend to the grave.

********

Noooo, dum-dums Putin will not come to Iran's rescue when he's warm in bed with his Zionist Oligarchs and Russian squatters whom he pays homage to from time to time when he visits Ziolandia thanking them for choosing the stolen West Bank over Russia.

Iran knows that, and they've been put on notice. That's Trump blowhard driving the drumbeat.

Just rescue me from my self-destructive self for 4 more years, oh kings of Zion and Wall Street, and I'll give you WAR!!! all in CAPS with three exclamation points. The GREATEST war you've ever seen.

Linda Amick , Oct 10 2020 13:07 utc | 88
When I read the Great Reset article on the World Economic Forum website it seems to me that the western Globalists, in concert align the US and EU. That accounts for the basic vassal arrangements that predominate but allow for some nonalignments on certain issues.
Paco , Oct 10 2020 13:24 utc | 89
Posted by: vk | Oct 10 2020 0:58 utc | 56

That is precisely what the Belarusian authorities announced when Tikhanovskaya left Minsk, that she was helped in her way out, but we know how the MSM acts, they stick to their own script, just like a Hollywood movie.

The Belarusians must be watching with great attention what is happening in Kirguizia, riots and complete chaos, and thinking how lucky they were to avoid the color rev that was in the menu for them, which the same methods, discredit the oncoming election, claim fraud after it, use similar symbols like the clenched fist and the heart, new flag, start transliterating family and geographical names to a mythical and spoken by a very small minority language and then nobody knows if to spell Tikhanovskaya, Tsikhanouskaya or like the politically incorrect but street wise Luka called her, Guaidikha. And that is Kirguizia, how about a shooting war in Armenia and Azerbaijan, all those conflicts were unimaginable when the USSR existed, but the empire even on his way down is insatiable.

Circe , Oct 10 2020 13:25 utc | 90
@88 Linda Amick

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=RDPIAXG_QcQNU&feature=share&playnext=1

Paco , Oct 10 2020 13:35 utc | 91
Posted by: Circe | Oct 10 2020 12:56 utc | 87

There is over a million jews of Russian origin living in Israel, 20% of the population, with deep roots in Russia, language, culture and relatives. Do not let partisanship for the Dems blind you, a true successful leader is someone that defends his country's interests while at the same time tries to have good relations with everybody else, obviously that balance is not easy to achieve in a world full of conflicting interests, but so far Putin seems to be balancing his act while not loosing sight of the main thing, Russia.

Circe , Oct 10 2020 13:52 utc | 92
Paco, strange name for a Russiabot, oh well...

Nice way of putting: Putin belongs to the Zionist Club.

FYI, I'm not blind. I'm one of those special beings who was born with two extra eyes...in the back of my head.

Jackrabbit , Oct 10 2020 13:56 utc | 93
Circe @Oct10 12:56 #87
Putin will not come to Iran's rescue when he's warm in bed with his Zionist Oligarchs

If Putin is so close to Zionists, then why does Russia block the Zionist regime-change in Syria? Why has Russia denied Israel and USA entreaties to allow them to bomb Iran?

Russia Warns U.S. and Israel That Iran Is Its 'Ally' and Was Right About Drone Shoot Down

!!

Paco , Oct 10 2020 14:03 utc | 94
Posted by: Circe | Oct 10 2020 13:52 utc | 92

Not as strange as a mythological demigoddess that turned sailors into swain and that now enjoys to plunge into the mud with her creatures. A bot, what an easy label, it has lost any meaning.

Paco , Oct 10 2020 14:12 utc | 95
special beings who was born with two extra eyes...in the back of my head.

Alaska yellow fin sole, not bad, from Bristol Bay, but the Melva -a tunafish species with more oil in its meat- I cooked for lunch, just caught, has a lot more fish oil with its rich contents of vitamin D, add sunny Mediterranean weather and that is my pill for today, trying to keep the bug at bay.

expat , Oct 10 2020 14:39 utc | 96
Circe, why don't you do what your namesake would have done and whip yourself up some meds to calm down? You're starting to lapse into excessive use of upper case, italics, exclamation points, bolding, profanity, and of course, insults.

This may help. It looks like the orange man is in fact going down, so you will soon have Joe and Kamal empowered to dismantle the evil Putin-Netanyahu-Trump axis, and put the US back on the path to truth and justice.

Circe , Oct 10 2020 14:41 utc | 97
@93 Jackrabbit

It's called... lip service.

@94,95 Fransisco

A bot by any other name will smell as fishy. 🤭
Just messing with you!

ptb , Oct 10 2020 14:44 utc | 98
The unilateral and illegal-under-JCPOA sanctions mean it's time for EU to either confront the extraterritorial US policy it has clearly rejected in principle, or (more likely) acknowlege that it remains in practice just a collection of 'client states'. A sad moment for me, but useful for clarity.
Paco , Oct 10 2020 14:48 utc | 99
Posted by: Circe | Oct 10 2020 14:41 utc | 97

Hard to understand but you guys are incapable of spelling the name of a once great US city, San Francisco. I heard it has changed a lot, got to see long time ago, before the digital craze.

juliania , Oct 10 2020 15:51 utc | 100
This is a brief but subtle post by b, with quiet but telling headline. Perhaps, just guessing, a new take on the post he was having difficulty with earlier? The question of the EU is an interesting one - not to be considered as virulent as the former Soviet Union, but somehow as tugged at by the components thereof...

Sanctions on Iran? We do know what Iran is capable of; surely we have not forgotten? Indeed, by pressing these sanctions at this late date, the Trump administration surely has not forgotten either the effect sanctions had on Russia. They were postive to that country's independent survival, though the immediate effect was demonstrably harsh. So now, sanctions on Iran? One doesn't have to be a world leader to suppose similar cause, similar effect.

Ah, Paco has a wonderful meal of a beneficial fish called the Melva! Bravo, Paco; all is not lost! But you have hooked the sea-serpent as well -- take care! That one - carefully remove the hook and set it free ;)

p> next page "

Post a comment Name:

Email:

URL:
Allowed HTML Tags:

<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

" Why U.S. Elections Do Not Change Its Foreign Policies , Main | The Ceasefire In Nagorno-Karabakh Is Unlikely To Hold "

next page "

Post a comment Name:

Email:

URL:
Allowed HTML Tags:

<B>Text</B> → Text
<I>Text</I> → Text
<U>Text</U> → Text
<BLOCKQUOTE>Text</BLOCKQUOTE>
<A HREF="http://www.aclu.org/">Headline (not the URL)</A> → Headline (not the URL)

" Why U.S. Elections Do Not Change Its Foreign Policies | Main | The Ceasefire In Nagorno-Karabakh Is Unlikely To Hold "

[Oct 10, 2020] Neocons are addicted to regime change like narcoaddicts to heroin

Oct 10, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Originally from: Another Opinion Columnist Pushing War With Iran Who Doesn't Actually Exist - The American Conservative

Tradcon • a month ago

Not very surprising to be honest, some people simply cannot go without regime change to the point where they have to parade people about who weren't even born in Iran and who have little to no support in the country as "dissidents" to try to guilt people into supporting intervention. Of course with that comes slander against those who warn against that, which unfortunately means TAC.

dragnet20 Tradcon • a month ago

Exactly--these folks are addicted to regime change like heroin. Ignoring them is one thing Trump absolutely got right during his first term.

Clyde Schechter dragnet20 • a month ago

Trump ignored them??? Hardly. He hired John Bolton as his national security advisor, and Rudy Giuliani is his personal attorney. Both of those guys are heavily tied to this organization and advocate its line. And while he did stop short of actually invading Iran, he was on the brink of doing so recently, talked out of it only at the last minute. I'll give him credit for not going all the way with them, but he's given them far too wide a berth and much too much influence in his foreign policy if you ask me.

Blood Alcohol Clyde Schechter • a month ago

He did not go all the way with them because he was told by the military and others, who take their jobs and missions to server the American people seriously, that his attacks on Iran - invasion was not "the table" at all - would face a humiliating defeat at the same level of what happened to his efforts to extend the weapons sanctions at the UNSC. Pompeo was sent home with his tail between his legs.

dragnet20 Blood Alcohol • a month ago

The idea that Trump would have invaded if allowed doesn't pass the smell test. He spent much of the 2016 railing against regime change and foreign wars. His recent instincts on this topic have been largely correct.

Carpenter E Clyde Schechter • a month ago

Trump did not want more war, and wanted to end the existing wars, that much is clear. At the same time as he believes the Israeli line about Iran. But he did not want war with Iran - he knows they would mine the Strait of Hormuz shut, and the U.S. economy would go into a depression along with the world economy. No president would survive that.

But, he has had to appease top donor *Sheldon Adelson, in order to prevent a GOP revolt in the Congress. The threat was always that they'd join the Democrats in impeaching him, that Mike Pence would call for the same, and people would leave his cabinet. So he caved by sanctioning Iran and destroying the lives of millions of people. And he had to appease Israel by taking Syria's oil fields via the Marxist Kurd mercenaries, and let them burn the wheat fields. But he did not start a war, and did not want a war.

J Villain Tradcon • a month ago

"The list of MEK disinformation tactics"

Lets be honest here. It isn't MEK disinformation tactics it is the tactics
of the US wrapped up and packaged as MEK. Just as Falon Gong is backed
by the CIA. MEK is a bunch of backwards ass hats with terrorist
tendencies. They are not some national level intelligence agency. This
is most likely crud made up by the US intelligence agencies sold as MEK
and pushed on the American people to convince them that Iran will be
dropping nuclear weapons on their house any minute now if they can stop
eating babies long enough, so they need to push their government to go
to WAR!!!!! with Iran and kill some Muslims. The gullibility of the
American people is why there will never be a time when they are not at
war.

Blood Alcohol J Villain • a month ago

Throw in "Saudi" Arabia and Israel, and France (the home of their leader) then you've got all of them in the same room.

Carpenter E J Villain • a month ago

Possibly, but the MEK does have an online presence and such. But of course, it is all with Washington's money, and Washington's assistance.

For those who don't know: The MEK is a Marxist-Islamist group that initially supported the Revolution, but turned against Ayatollah Khomeini as they didn't get to share power. Because no one liked them. And Marxists were not allowed in revolutionary Iran - the MEK was chased out along with the Soviet-installed communist party in northern Iran.

The MEK have been killing Iranian police, bureaucrats and local administrators. This is their "revolution". They kill people mainly with bombs. The present Ayatollah's left arm is withered after one of their bomb attacks.

The MEK have been killing Iranian physics professors and technicians. They kill them with car bombs in traffic - a motorbike with two killers drive up to a car by a traffic stop and attach a bomb with magnets. Of course, you can wonder where they got the bombs, and money and transport. This is classic Mossad strategy. Likewise, dozens of technicians and professors in Iraq have been murdered. Israel hopes for a counter-reaction which the U.S. can exploit.

Rest assured, the political opposition in Iran hates the Marxist-Islamist MEK as much as the government does. Which Washington and Israel don't acknowledge.

The MEK was housed by Saddam Hussein in an old military base. They had to leave Iraq eventually after the overthrow of Hussein. The U.S. then shipped them to a brand new training base in Albania. Crazy as it might seem. Albania's government is of course as eager to be a paid Washington agent as the Kurds are.

Absurdly, this explicitly terrorist group has been taken off the terror list by Washington. While Iran is called "terrorist" for helping Hezbollah, who formed to fight back when Israel invaded Lebanon and massacred Shia villagers in the south with artillery, because they lived close to the Palestinian refugee camps. And then kept fighting when Israel occupied part of southern Lebanon, Shia land, as a "buffer zone" for many years.

Carpenter E Carpenter E • a month ago

The MEK killed thousands of people, including Americans. But the Lobby always gets what it wants.

The MEK was founded in 1965 by three Islamic leftists with the goal of toppling the U.S.-supported regime of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

In the 1970s it undertook a campaign of assassinating U.S. advisers and bombing U.S. corporations in Iran. It supported the 1979 Revolution in Iran, but in 1981 it turned its guns against the Tehran government and began a campaign of assassinations and terrorist operations that resulted in the death of thousands of Iranians, including the executions of its own supporters by government officials, soldiers, police officers, and ordinary people.

It then moved its headquarters to Iraq, made a pact with the regime of Saddam Hussein, which was fighting a ferocious war with Iran. The MEK spied on Iranian troops for Iraq, attacked Iran at the end of Iran-Iraq war with Hussein's support, and helped Hussein put down the uprisings by the Iraqi Kurds in the north and Shi'ites in the south after the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91.

The MEK is despised by the vast majority of Iranians for what they consider to be treason committed against their homeland.

disgustoo • a month ago

"As a matter of journalistic ethics any organization engaging in systematic dishonesty like this has provided a very good reason to blacklist them. ...This is not a matter of foreign policy differences: if you wish to see the U.S. pursue regime change in Iran, the MEK does not help make that case. Any publishers or think tanks who are aware of this dishonesty and still treat them like a legitimate opposition group should be considered part of a campaign not wholly different from the last time we were lied into a Mideast war."

If MEK does NOT help to make the case for regime change in Iran - & outside sponsored regime change is not ethical - then it would be unethical not to support them, in order to help prevent unethical regime change. Although that's probably not what horrible Hillary had in mind when, as Sec. of State in 2012, she de-listed them from the U.S. official list of terrorist organizations. But if anyone will lie "us" into a war with Iran, it will be AIPAC & innumerable other dishonest zionist organizations working on behalf of the Jewish terror state, & it's new Saudi terror state partner; both of whom look with favor on MEK as a bit partner in their joint effort to take out the government of Iran. MEK is pretty small potatoes compared to The Lobby, who are waging another campaign not wholly different from the last time they pushed us into a M.E. war to benefit lying israel.

Blood Alcohol Guest • a month ago

Why, do you "like" sock puppets"?!

Dodo • a month ago

Don't fall into this trap.

People tell you - You are a conservative, so do I. I support XYZ thus you should also support them.

Before the 2003 Iraqi War, Many then Bush administration officials and self-anointed "conservative opinion leaders" went on TV to lie to people to support their war. Today, we still suffer the consequence but they are preaching to us other wars.

Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

Schopenhauer Dodo • a month ago • edited

In no way should the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq War be excused, nor should "conservative opinion leaders" be let off the hook, but the Congress was complicit, the Senate was complicit, the military was complicit, the intelligence community was complicit, and the majority of the electorate was complicit. Nobody cared whether the reason for the war was valid, people just wanted to vent their frustrations against terrorists on an unrelated Arab country that the US had already used as a whipping boy. What could happen?

Almost twenty years later and-- surprise! surprise!-- suddenly everyone recognizes the war for the folly it was. Some people, like Dreher, seem to have genuinely changed their stance based on what happened subsequently. But we'll all see what happens the next time the war mongers-- from both sides of the aisle and from all over the country-- start rattling their sabers.

IllinoisPatriot Schopenhauer • a month ago

Then there are the appeasers and anti-war peace-niks that would rather surrender than fight for liberty or that (if they are willing to fight) will on risk OTHER PEOPLE's (other American) lives, thus removing the need to ever put themselves at risk of learning what actually goes in in the countries they are so sympathetic to.

Charles IllinoisPatriot • a month ago • edited

"Then there are the appeasers and anti-war peace-niks that would rather surrender than fight for liberty"

Would you expound on that vis a vis current situations. Your sentence is straight out of the Vietnam era,

EliteCommInc. Charles • a month ago

The complete idiocy regarding Vietnam is the anti-war rhetoric surrounding. But has laid the framework for installing fear into anyone who doesn't tow the ridiculousness of what is argued by protesters -- which in every way has nearly every argument backwards.

Since the aggressors in Vietnam were the communists of four countries, it is very safe to say that those opposed to defending an independent S. Vietnam were in fact appeasing communist aggression and that is accurate.

The nation of Vietnam has rarely known peace and the lines during the conflict generally mark the region that separated the country's territorial history. The South Vietnamese sound reason to seek defend their territorial and political independence and we had sound reason to defend the same.

It was during that era that the liberal foundations showed their true colors. And if one doubt it --- just look at the anti-Vietnam advocates -- the managers of the Iraq and Afghanistan missteps and p[perhaps even worse their willingness to destroy the lives of anyone who challenged their rational based on the very case they made -- which was unsupportable.

There are some issues which simply are not really issues,

1. the lives of black people in the country and how they were/are socialized and the consequence

2.what the civil war was really about

3.Mexican invasion of US territory to retake territory they lost to band of squatters (lousy immigration enforcement) a war that is now taking place via our failure to enforce border protection.)

4.loss of the War of 1812
and

5. the colonial revolution and its justification

Blood Alcohol EliteCommInc. • a month ago • edited

"Since the aggressors in Vietnam were the communists of four countries, it is very safe to say that those opposed to defending an independent S. Vietnam were in fact appeasing communist aggression and that is accurate."
It's safe to say that BS like this is not hard to come by in the right wing nutjobs' circles. No Vietnamese had/has ever attempted to attack, invade, kill and spray Agent Orange anywhere in the US. So how come they became the aggressors?!
Viet Nam became truly independent AFTER expelling the American military.

Schopenhauer Blood Alcohol • a month ago

When it comes to discussing Vietnam with this guy-- it's Chinatown, there's nothing you can do.

Shiek Yerbooti Dodo • a month ago

If you're talking about Bush I think the quote is more like this:

"fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again."

Wallstreet Panic Dodo • a month ago

"There's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again. You've got to understand the nature of the regime we're dealing with. This is a man who has delayed, denied, deceived the world." George W. Bush, September 17, 2002

chris chuba • a month ago

Bless you for writing this but you are spitting into the wind. There are too many people who want to believe this. The IRaq war analogy is apt. You have govt in exile types like MEK (remember Chalabi) who have a vested interest in lying to us. You have the hyper-pro Israel crowd and the newly accepted pro-Saudi crowd w/money to burn. I actually expect and don't begrudge foreigners for trying to get the U.S. into their fights. I resent the MSM that is simply in love with U.S. military conflicts who accuse people who oppose them of being anti-American, conspiracy theorists.

The most laughable example was CNN accepting the notion that Iran has a massive cyber presence in influencing our elections because our Intel Agencies told them so. Iran is detested by the U.S. public as we steal civilian cargo from them that would make the lives of people in other countries better. We sell the stolen goods for our benefit and call them terrorists for their trouble. To suggest that they have sway over us is laughable yet this passes for journalism.

Iran will be the next Iraq. If there is a God it will be the rock that breaks us. If not then a crime of shocking proportions.

Fletcher chris chuba • a month ago

I largely agree but I think there's room for optimism, the US military particular the army is largely a broken instrument, morale is not good except for the contractors, General maintenance is down in favor of expensive toys that largely do not work. For all of the bluster of this generation of sociopaths the military in general is a shadow of itself not to mention we live in times of a rising China and the reemergence Russia, neither of which would allow in on opposed attack on Iran.

Blood Alcohol Fletcher • a month ago

True, but the military has also been the biggest obstacle for tRump to make his Saudi/Israeli clients happy.

Fletcher Blood Alcohol • a month ago

How so? Our government seems to be providing the Saudi's with with as many bombs as they need, Air Force retirees to fly in the backseatair of Saudi planes, we have slowed down on the transfer of Thermo nuclear Technology as well as I assume the the delivery systems for them true but that was likely just a temporary Flash of Conscience it'll probably never happen again for that individual but if there something I'm missing please do tell.

Blood Alcohol Fletcher • a month ago • edited

Look at it this way. Either the Saudi/UAE themselves have to deal militarily with Iran, or the US. The US military-industrial complex is for selling weapons to these client states whole-heartedly for obvious reasons. The Saudi/UAE has always expected and often demanded the US is the one to "cut the snake's head" as "king" Abdullah of the "Saudi" Arabia demanded frequently. These states know very well neither the "version" of the weaponry they buy from the West is capable of performing in a real war with a powerful enemy like Iran, nor are their personnel capable of operating them effectively. So what they say to the US is, OK we'll buy your junk, but you need to do the job. In other words, they want to fight Iran to the last AMERICAN soldier. The Pentagon wants none of that. But happy to run the cash register. I hope I made my point clear.

Sorosh Nabi • a month ago

MEK have no support in Iran. If a MEK member would walk down the street there the people would tear them to shreds. When they started killing Iranians and cooperating with Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war they committed political suicide.

EliteCommInc. Sorosh Nabi • a month ago

You know, this really doesn't carry much weight. I am not going to dismiss the complaints of a group because the majority don't support them. That is not a case for regime change. I don't see a case for that as yet. But I don't buy this nonsense about Iran land of peace ----

They were instrumental in destabilizing any peace in Iraq and remain so. Their Islamic revolution has not passed and their ambitions are not as benign as as many including Iranians like to pretend.

Sorosh Nabi EliteCommInc. • a month ago

What does that have to do with anything that I said? If you want to come to power you need the support of the people MEK don't have that so they will never gain power. Also MEK are responsible for the revolution in the first place, they are the ones that carried out bombing and assassinations even of Americans in Iran. They are the ones that attacked the US embassy in Iran and held Americans hostage. There is a reason they were on the US terror list until 2012. As far as Iran being the land of peace not sure where you got that from, Iran has never claimed that and infact Iran will conduct foreign policy that benefits its goals, which is true of any nation. You should try to stay on topic when you reply to somebody though.

Blood Alcohol EliteCommInc. • a month ago • edited

Yes, as you know the Iranians attacked, invaded and looted Iraq's oil and cultural heritage. Had in not been for the US "rescue mission" Iranian would still be there. You must be tone deaf.

Feral Finster • a month ago

Same playbook as in the runup to the War on Iraq.

Gutbomb Feral Finster • a month ago

Mostly. They won't be bothering with the U.N. this time, though.

IllinoisPatriot Feral Finster • a month ago

... or Trump's run-up to the 2016 election.....

Thump the conspiracy theories and emphasize the hard-line approach with no idea or intent to actually go through with anything should he actually win. I see reference to Q-anon and I immediately think Trumpian conspieracy.

I'll pass.

john • a month ago

Conservatives are easy to target, they are prepared to believe all sorts of nonsense. Qanon aside they are prepared to believe that tax cuts pay for themselves and you can lose weight on a vinegar and ice cream diet.

CPT john • a month ago

As opposed to the people who believe that a man can become a "real woman" just by saying so, and nod approvingly when CNN shows the chyron "Mostly peaceful protests continue" over footage of burning buildings.

Fletcher john • a month ago

Really, that's pretty damn funny like you retards don't believe in a bunch of conspiracy nonsense and by the way don't put down Q is good fun to the geriatric Community on the other hand you clowns are playing footsie with actual Nazis in Ukraine while you accuse the right of being fascist that's beautiful congratulations it's going to be great in a couple years when this country has seceded from each other and all of you non-producers get to sort it out for yourselves, it's going to be magic.

hooly • a month ago

Fake dissident groups. Wow! Not even the Chinese are this duplicitous. And people whine and complain about Russian and Chinese 'infiltration' and 'meddling' ??

Iustitiae Semper Valet hooly • a month ago

Which fale dissident groups? I missed that. I am not being sarcastic. I see people who have been named as fake contributors all over the place. But I didn't see a reference to a fake dissident group.

IllinoisPatriot Iustitiae Semper Valet • a month ago

I'm still looking for the proof one way or the other of who the "good guys" are here.

Fake this, fake that I can get from Trump every time he opens his mouth about "fake news".

What I don't get from Trump (or from this article) is any references, documentation, or solid proof of any kind other than accusations and counter-accusations -- one side I'm supposed to believe because the author said so.

I'm not buying it without objective proof and trustworthy corroboration -- not just more sock-puppets.

PointyTailofSatan . • a month ago

I don't understand. The MEK hates the current Iranian government. Why the would the American Conservative be dissing them?

Blood Alcohol PointyTailofSatan . • a month ago • edited

They are being dissed by many smart conservatives and others, because they have become a tool of Saudi/Israel. They practically spearheaded killing Americans during the Shah, and now they are enjoying American political and financial support. In that vein the adage, my enemy's enemy is my friend, does not apply here. But if you are a money hungry Giuliani, Kennedy, Bolton or Howard Dean being a gang of killers, Saddam Husein mercenaries, and Saudi/Israeli agents don't matter.

Steve Blood Alcohol • a month ago

Bravo for this comment!! loved it!

Feral Finster PointyTailofSatan . • 19 days ago

Anyone remember Ahmad Chalabi's "Iraqi National Congress" or whatever it was called?

Same schtick, new players, same CIA..

Dyerville • a month ago

"We are especially on guard when it comes to unsolicited foreign policy commentary.""

So one would hope, but foreign meddling is rife. At least the Washington Examiner makes an effort, whereas the Washington Free Beacon functions almost openly as an Israeli organ inside the United States.

el disgustador • a month ago

Ehem...The Israelis have admitted they essentially founded, financed and thoroughly and continuously infiltrated the Palestinian revolutionary group, HAMAS to counter the PLO achieve the ongoing ethnic destruction of Palestinian land freedom and society...the MEK and their front group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran are comparable Israeli emanations whose ultimate goal is the land grab from the Nile to the Euphrates known as the Greater Israel project. This is Israeli history text book material, it is not conjecture...Read what former Israeli officials such as Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Segev, former Israeli military governor in Gaza in the early 1980s. had to say the New York Times in that he had helped finance the Palestinian Islamist movement as a "counterweight" to the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Fatah party, led by Yasser Arafat (who himself referred to Hamas as "a creature of Israel.") "The Israeli government gave me a budget," the retired brigadier
general confessed, "and the military government gives to the mosques." Moreover, "Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel's creation," said Avner Cohen, a former Israeli religious affairs official who worked in Gaza for more than two decades to the Wall Street Journal in 2009. Deliberately planned, as far back as the mid-1980s, according to Cohen in an official report to his superiors playing the divide-and-rule in the Occupied Territories, by backing Palestinian Islamists against Palestinian secularists, HAMAS was built up to become an "existential threat" fake tool of nuclear mighty Israel. In his report Cohen wrote, "I suggest focusing our efforts on finding ways to break up this monster before this reality jumps in our face," he wrote. That was the point exactly, poor victimized Israel "endowed with the right to defend itself". With Palestine now Kushnerized into oblivion, Iran is next ...Go figure...

Go figure...

chris • a month ago

propaganda is unending when isn'treal wants more war isn't it?

Billo • a month ago

Let the Israel Jews fight and die in their own war. Iran is not our enemy, Israel is.

Ram2017 Billo • a month ago

Who is funding the MEK ?

ddearborn • a month ago • edited

Hmmm
Means, motive, opportunity and who benefits spells out in no uncertain terms that the entire create a justification and then go to war with Iran originates in Israel and is being sold by the Zionists and Israel's literal army of jewish/Zionist/pro-Israel agents masquerading as "lobbyists", "activists", "think tanks" "academics", the Media, Hollywood, Congress, most of the White House Staff, etc., etc., here in the US. In other words, by an Israeli controlled army in America made up of traitors, liars and criminals.... A group who collectively ALWAYS put Israel Uber Alles.

[Oct 10, 2020] BREAKING- Mike Pompeo Says He Has Hillary Clinton's Deleted Emails and Will Begin Releasing Them Before Election Day (VIDEO)

Oct 10, 2020 | www.thegatewaypundit.com

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Friday dropped a little October surprise said his department has Hillary Clinton's 'deleted' emails and will release them before the election.

"We're getting them out," Pompeo told Fox News Dana Perino.

TheGhostOfJamesOtisJr 17 minutes ago (Edited)

Shandong Carter Heavy Industry received all email, including classified material, sent to Hillary Clinton's private server based on an Intelligence Community Investigator General (ICIG) report. The ICIG determined all Hillary Clinton email was being forwarded to " [email protected] ", an address possibly connected to the Chinese equipment manufacturer Shandong Carter Heavy Industry The ICIG alerted FBI agent Peter Strzok who strangely did not seem alarmed by the connection despite the fact all but four of the emails sent to Hillary Clinton's private email server were forwarded to that address, roughly 600,000 in total.( pdf , p14/105) https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019-08-14%20Staff%20memo%20to%20CEG%20RHJ%20-%20ICIG%20Interview%20Summary%20RE%20Clinton%20Server.pdf

The following is an excerpt from testimony by Frank Rucker of the ICIG, "Mr. Strzok seemed to be 'aloof and dismissive.' [Rucker] said it was as if Mr. Strzok felt dismissive of the relationship between the FBI and ICIG and he was not very warm." - ( pdf p15/105)

The FBI later determined the email address was set up by a Clinton IT staffer named Paul Combetta. The FBI dismissed the possible China connection because they found no evidence to contradict Combetta's claim he "had no connection to, and had never heard of, ' Shandong Carter Heavy Industry Machinery CO., Ltd.'''( pdf p104/105) That's an odd statement because IT staffers wouldn't normally be expected to have relationships with Chinese heavy industry. IT workers usually set up email addresses for others.

Paul Combetta is the IT staffer who used BleachBit to erase emails on Clinton's private email server.( pdf p38 ) . Perhaps this is why the FBI didn't consider it necessary to question Combetta in front of a Grand Jury .( pdf , p127 ) That this didn't demonstrated criminal intent to the FBI is beyond comprehension. Obviously this goes beyond mere bias and borders on obstruction of justice. The numerous attempts to debunk this story are almost comical when combined with other evidence, namely Peter Strzok's leaking to the press:

December 15, 2016 Peter Strzok: " Think our sisters have begun leaking like mad. Scorned and worried, and political, they're kicking into overdrive. "
April 10, 2017 Peter Strzok: " I had literally just gone to find this phone to tell you I want to talk to you about media leak strategy with DOJ before you go. "
April 22, 2017 Peter Strzok: " Article is out! Well done, Page. "

https://www.justice.gov/file/1071991/download

Guess where EcoHealth Alliance connected virologist Edward C Holmes did his research in China? Shandong!

https://youtu.be/bEtVOTA1ZtU?t=5034 play_arrow play_arrow deFLorable hillbilly 28 minutes ago (Edited) remove link

There is only one important matter at this time. And that is confirming ACB to the SC prior to the so-called election. All this other stuff can wait. Lose and it's all pointless anyway.

[Oct 06, 2020] How empire is destroying the American republic Responsible Statecraft

Oct 06, 2020 | responsiblestatecraft.org

How empire is destroying the American republic OCTOBER 5, 2020 Written by
William Smith Share Copy Print

Many American hawks fail to grasp one of the most axiomatic rules of history: when a republic becomes an empire, it is no longer a republic.

For all their concern about spreading democracy abroad, many hawks show a decidedly noticeable failure to recognize that imperial adventures weaken republican government at home. The devolution from republic to empire has a number of causes, some practical and some cultural, with most on display in our current politics.

On a practical level, the massive national security commitment necessary to maintain an empire tends to overwhelm the republican safeguards against unnecessary wars. In recent decades, for example, the national security state has gone to war in numerous countries -- Libya and Syria are only two examples -- on the basis of an Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) that was enacted by Congress to sanction attacks on the perpetrators of 9/11.

The use of that AUMF to justify wars unrelated to 9/11 made these wars blatantly unconstitutional. Yet it is apparent that most of Congress is now a mere appendage of the national security state and no longer protects its constitutional prerogative to sanction war as this would require difficult votes as well as jeopardize the largesse bestowed by defense contractors. Madison's famous argument in Federalist #51 that, in a republic with separated powers, one branch of government would "resist encroachments of the others" becomes obviated in an empire. Empires tend to ignore republican rules.

The other practical difficulty of maintaining a republic when it aspires to empire is that the technologies created to fight wars abroad end up undermining republican government at home. In imperial Rome, the legions themselves became a threat to domestic order; in the present U.S. the domestic attacks are more subtle.

Numerous media reports indicate, for example, that an anti-Trump PAC, Defeat Disinfo, is employing retired Army General Stanley McCrystal to deploy a Defense Department-developed Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool to counter candidate Trump's social media posts and to create "counter-narratives" using a network of "paid influencers." The AI technology was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to counter the propaganda of terrorist groups overseas. The culture of our present officer corps seems a long way from that of General George Marshall who once remarked to Eisenhower, "I may make a thousand mistakes in this war, but none will be the result of political meddling!"

McCrystal's deployment of anti-terrorism technology to manipulate domestic political opinion during an election is surely incompatible with republican values. One would have thought that the McCrystal revelation would have generated more controversy as it comes on the heels of the astonishing abuse of another anti-terrorism tool, NSA surveillance, by FBI agents who submitted phony warrants to the FISA court in order to frame Trump campaign operatives.

As observers from both parties have noticed, military technology and tactics have bled into domestic policing with local police departments deploying armored vehicles and drones. One need not be a Trump partisan, nor a rabid libertarian, to conclude that the technologies developed to maintain the American empire are now being used to undermine our republican traditions.

Tufts law professor Michael Glennon has concluded that the national security state has in fact grown so large that the "Madisonian" branches of government -- the presidency, Congress and the courts -- are no longer in charge of national security policy. Glennon asserts that we now have a "double government" in which policy decisions are made by "a largely concealed managerial directorate, consisting of the several hundred leaders of the military, law enforcement, and the intelligence departments and agencies of our government" who "operate at an increasing remove from constitutional limits and restraints, moving the nation slowly toward autocracy." Despite his clear desire to do so, Trump's inability to extricate us from Afghanistan is confirmation that the Madisonian branches of government no longer determine policy.

The rise of a double government was captured perfectly in a Tweet by Michael McFaul, an Obama national security official, who commented that, "Trump has lost the Intelligence Community. He has lost the State Department. He has lost the military. How can he continue to serve as our Commander in Chief?" To those with an imperial outlook, the President serves at the pleasure of those who run the empire, not the voters. To Michael McFaul, the unelected members of the foreign policy establishment determine the legitimacy of elected leaders.

While legal breakdowns and the technologies of American empire are overwhelming our republican traditions, the much deeper problem is that American leaders have eschewed a constitutional culture and adopted an imperial culture.

Republican institutions cannot operate unless its leaders embody a certain temperament or "constitutional personality." They must demonstrate measured and restrained habits even with political opponents. They will seek common ground and compromise. They would, in Hamilton's words, "withstand the temporary delusion" of popular pressures and engage in "more cool and sedate reflection."

In foreign policy, this constitutional temperament would, in Washington's words, "observe good faith and justice toward all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all" and "nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded." In other words, republics have leaders of a certain quality and type, leaders who demonstrate restraint not only in domestic politics but on the world stage.

Contrast this constitutional temperament with our current crop of leaders. In domestic politics, we have fierce, vituperative and irrational partisanship. There is no spirit of compromise and no willingness to show good faith with political opponents. Our politics, as Hobbes said of the state of nature, exhibit "a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death ." In foreign policy, the imperial personality shows itself in "maximum pressure" campaigns, an "inveterate" antipathy toward Russia, and chest-thumping assertions of American exceptionalism. The constitutional personality exhibits a certain humility; the imperial personality exhibits none.

Removing the practical dangers of empire would be hard, but not impossible. Restoring congressional authority in matters of war and peace and banning the domestic use of military and intelligence technologies are both achievable goals for those wishing to restore republican values. However, the imperial culture of our national security elites flows out of a will to power that is, at root, a character flaw. Changing laws is easy compared with improving character.

Written by
William Smith Share Copy Print

[Oct 06, 2020] Kyrgyzstan Color Revolution in Central Asia - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

Oct 06, 2020 | www.globalresearch.ca

Kyrgyzstan Color Revolution in Central Asia Crisis Intensifies the US' Hybrid War Containment of Russia By Andrew Korybko Global Research, October 06, 2020 Region: Asia , Russia and FSU , USA Theme: US NATO War Agenda

2

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?action=&app_id=&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fx%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2F%3Fversion%3D46%23cb%3Df33b4917d9dd1b8%26domain%3Dwww.globalresearch.ca%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.globalresearch.ca%252Ff2d21c99066ebfc%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=69&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca%2Fkyrgyz-color-revolution-crisis-intensifies-us-hybrid-war-containment-russia%2F5725823&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=false&show_faces=false

https://apis.google.com/u/0/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&count=true&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca%2Fkyrgyz-color-revolution-crisis-intensifies-us-hybrid-war-containment-russia%2F5725823&gsrc=3p&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en.76xGL2Yny_o.O%2Fam%3DwQE%2Fd%3D1%2Fct%3Dzgms%2Frs%3DAGLTcCPLubAJPE__-DfP0tDIR1-cduAt3Q%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1602033890177&_gfid=I0_1602033890177&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.globalresearch.ca&pfname=&rpctoken=19440480 3

The sudden outbreak of Color Revolution unrest in the historically unstable Central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan following recent parliamentary elections in this Russian CSTO mutual defense ally intensifies the US' Hybrid War "containment" of Russia when seen in the context of the ongoing regime change efforts in fellow ally Belarus as well as CSTO-member Armenia's dangerous efforts to provoke a Russian military intervention in support of its illegal occupation of universally recognized Azerbaijani territory.

Color Revolution In Central Asia

The historically unstable Central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan [former Soviet Republic] is once again in the midst of Color Revolution unrest after this Russian CSTO mutual defense ally's latest parliamentary elections were exploited as the pretext for members of the non-systemic opposition to torch their seat of government and free former President Atambayev who was arrested last year on charges of corruption. This sudden crisis is actually the third serious one in the former Soviet space in just as many months following the ongoing regime change efforts in Belarus since August and Armenia's dangerous efforts since the end of last month to provoke a Russian military intervention in support of its illegal occupation of universally recognized Azerbaijani territory. Crucially, all three of the aforementioned countries are Russia's CSTO allies, and their respective crises (provoked to varying extents by the US) intensify the American Hybrid War "containment" of Russia.

The US' Triple Hybrid War "Containment" Of Russia

The author has written extensively about the Belarusian Color Revolution campaign and Armenia's aggression in Nagorno-Karabakh , but those who aren't familiar with his analysis of those issues can refer to the two articles hyperlinked earlier in this sentence for a quick overview. The present piece aims to inform the audience about the complex dynamics of the Kyrgyz Color Revolution crisis and the impact that it could have on the US' recent Hybrid War "containment" offensive along the western, southern, and eastern peripheries of Russia's so-called "sphere of influence". The pattern at play is that the US is trying to provoke a Russian military intervention in one, some, or all three of these Hybrid War battlefronts through the CSTO, but the Kremlin has thus far avoided the trap of these potential quagmires. Lukashenko tried do this with his ridiculous claims about a speculated Polish annexation of Grodno while Pashinyan wants to provoke Azerbaijan into attacking Armenian cities to trigger a similar intervention scenario, hence Armenia's attack on its rival's Ganja in order to bring this about.

The Kyrgyz Powder Keg

Kyrgyzstan is an altogether different powder keg, however, since it has a recent history of close to uncontrollable inter-ethnic and political violence after its last two Color Revolutions of 2005 and 2010, especially the latter. The author explained all this in detail in his April 2016 analysis of the US' history of regime change attempts in the region, which comprises one of the chapters of his 2017 ebook on " The Law Of Hybrid Warfare: Eastern Hemisphere ". He expanded upon his research in this direction in August 2019 f ollowing President Jeenbekov's arrest of former President Atambayev, his former mentor, which almost plunged the country back into a state of de-facto civil war. It was explained that "Kyrgyzstan must 'cleanse' its 'deep state' (permanent bureaucracy) simultaneously with cracking down on organized crime (which is sometimes affiliated with some 'deep state' forces)." This is the only way to combat the destabilizing clan-based nature of the country (worsened by Western NGOs and diplomatic meddling ) that's responsible for its regular unrest.

Will The Crisis From 2010 Repeat Itself?

The present situation is so dangerous though because the last round of Color Revolution unrest in 2010 sparked accusations of ethnic cleansing against the local Uzbeks that inhabit Kyrgyzstan's portion of the divided Fergana Valley. That in turn almost provoked an international conflict between both landlocked states that was thankfully averted at the last minute by Tashkent's reluctance to worsen the security situation by launching a "humanitarian intervention" in Russia's CSTO ally (one which could have also been exploited to promote the concept of "Greater Uzbekistan" over the neighboring lands inhabited by its ethnic kin considering the country's closer coordination with American strategic goals at the time). Uzbekistan has since moved closer to Russia after the passing of former President Karimov, but its basic security interests remain the same, particularly as far as ensuring the safety of its ethnic kin in neighboring states. Any repeat of the 2010 scenario could therefore return Central Asia to the brink of war unless a Russian diplomatic intervention averts it.

The Threat To Russian Interests

From the Russian perspective, Kyrgyzstan's capture by Western-backed political forces could lead to long-term security implications. The state's potential internal collapse could turn it into a regional exporter of terrorism, especially throughout the volatile Fergana Valley but also across China's neighboring region of Xinjiang if a new government decides to host Uighur terrorists. The soft security consequences are that Kyrgyzstan's Color Revolution government could reduce its commitment to the CSTO and Eurasian Union up to and including the country's potential withdrawal from these organizations if the new power structure isn't co-opted by Russian-friendly forces first. It's possible, however, that Moscow might succeed in mitigating the blow to its geopolitical interests in the scenario of a regime change in Bishkek since it had previously worked real closely with Atambayev (who's the most likely candidate to seize power, either directly or by proxy), though only if it can prevent a civil war from breaking out first. That might necessitate a CSTO intervention, however, which is risky.

Concluding Thoughts

As it stands, the US' Hybrid War "containment" of Russia is making progress along the western, southern, and eastern periphery of the Eurasian Great Power's "sphere of influence". Belarus is no longer as stable as it has historically been known for being, Armenia is still trying to trick Russia into going to war against Azerbaijan (and by extension Turkey), and Kyrgyzstan is once again on the verge of a collapse that could take down the rest of Central Asia in the worst-case scenario. Having shrewdly avoided the first two traps, at least for the time being, Russia is now being challenged with the most serious crisis of the three after the latest events in Kyrgyzstan. The country's clan-based nature, proliferation of Western NGOs, and Western meddling in its admittedly imperfect democracy make it extremely unstable, thus heightening the risks that any well-intended Russian military stabilization intervention via the CSTO could entail, perhaps explaining why one never happened in 2010 during more dangerous times. The Kremlin will therefore have to carefully weigh its options in Kyrgyzstan.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on OneWorld .

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China's One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

[Oct 06, 2020] Max Boot is pro-Zionism and anti-White nationalism, forgetting that Zionism is a far right nationalist ideology

Oct 06, 2020 | www.unz.com

One morning a couple of years ago I received an urgent email from a moderately prominent libertarian figure strongly focused on antiwar issues. He warned me that our publication had been branded a "White Supremacist website" by the Washington Post , and urged me to immediately respond, perhaps by demanding a formal retraction or even taking legal action lest we be destroyed by that totally unfair accusation.

When I looked into the matter, my own perspective was rather different. Apparently Max Boot, one of the more agitated Jewish Neocons, had written a column fiercely denouncing some recent criticism of pro-Israel policies that Philip Giraldi had published in our webzine, and the "White Supremacist" slur was merely his crude means of demonizing the author's views for those of his readers who might be less than wholeheartedly enthusiastic about Benjamin Netanyahu and his policies.

After pointing this out to my correspondent, I also noted that a good 10% or more of our writers were probably "White Nationalists," and perhaps a few of them might even arguably be labeled "White Supremacists." So although Boot's description of our website was certainly wrong, it was probably less wrong than the vast majority of his other writing, which was typically focused on American military policy and the Middle East.

Our webzine is quite unusual in its willingness to feature a smattering of writers who provide a White Nationalist perspective. Such individuals are almost totally excluded from other online publications, except for those marginalized websites devoted to their ideas, which often tend to focus on such topics and related issues to the near exclusion of anything else. However, I believe that maintaining this sort of ideological quarantine or "ghettoization" greatly diminishes the ability to understand many important aspects of our world.

[Oct 03, 2020] Top US general rushes to defend Pentagon after Trump accuses it of colluding with weapon manufacturers to fight endless wars

Oct 03, 2020 | www.rt.com

foxenburg 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 01:48 AM

An interviewer should test this man's integrity with a simple question, such as.. "When you retire, will promise to live off your generous pension....like Eisenhower in his rocking chair....and not go to work for an arms manufacturer or think tank or any other paid position?"
Rocky_Fjord 9 September, 2020 9 Sep, 2020 05:18 AM
John boy McCain just went into apoplexy in hell.

[Oct 01, 2020] Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations cost him -- but he never gave up by Lev Golinkin

Highly recommended!
I draw your attention to the irrefutable fact that Mr. Cohen said that the Buk missile, which brought down Malaysian Flight 370 over the skies of Donbas, was the Ukraine government "playing with its new toys and made a big mistake." -- and I draw your attention to the irrefutable fact that Mr. Cohen said that the Buk missile, which brought down Malaysian Flight 370 over the skies of Donbas, was the Ukraine government "playing with its new toys and made a big mistake."
He was a real giant in comparison with intellectual scum like Fiona Hill, Michael McFaul and other neocons.
Notable quotes:
"... I tried to explain to American friends what was happening, but quickly realized that ultimately, even friends believe what they read in the newspapers, and the newspapers were pushing the Washington line. Except for Steve Cohen. Steve was the only major figure in America who insisted on remembering the Russian-speaking Ukrainians who, like my family members, distrusted and hated the new Kiev government. He spoke of neo-Nazi paramilitiaries who fought for the US-backed government committing war crimes against civilians in eastern Ukraine. He spoke the truth, regardless of how unwieldy it was. ..."
"... There's a lot to say about Steve. He was extraordinarily kind, never forgetting that in geopolitics, the ones who have the most to lose aren't strategists but everyday individuals impacted by policy. He was a consummate teacher, insisting on giving mentees the skills to navigate the world, a real proponent of the Teach a man to fish philosophy. He had facets and stories and memories; he lived life with empathy and gusto. ..."
"... Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations drew all sorts of attention. America was hurtling toward a new cold war with Russia, and Steve well, from the perspective of Washington's foreign policy establishment, Steve was fucking up the narrative. Steve talked about inconvenient things, things like US-backed war criminals and America's own meddling in Russian affairs; in the process, he himself had become inconvenient. ..."
"... After all, this wasn't some random blogger. This was one of America's foremost Russia experts, a tenured professor at Princeton and New York University, someone who didn't just write about history but had dinner with it, had briefed US presidents, and was friends with legends like Mikhail Gorbachev. Steve had clout earned from decades of brilliant work; by 2014, he was using that clout to throw a wrench in the think tank world. ..."
"... It was something far colder, more sustained, something that ironically the Soviets did to dissidents: a relentless crusade to render the target untouchable, a leper without a platform. The barrage of articles and diatribes hurled at Steve in the national press painted him as not just a dissenter but a supporter of dictators and murderers. It was a vicious, prolonged assault carried out by think tank toadies, the kind of people who win races by kneecapping the competition. ..."
"... I'd often talk with Steve after a new hatchet job or smear on national television. Of course, the attacks were hurtful -- the only way to not be affected was to not care, and Steve cared. But I also noticed he was remarkably free of bitterness. Every time I thought he'd snap, he'd return the next day to write, discuss, keep fighting. ..."
"... It took me a couple of years to understand that what kept Steve going was faith in his beloved institutions. He believed in academia, in scholarship, in discourse, debate, and civility. He believed in the capacity of everyday people to explore and engage with their world, he believed in Russia, and he always believed in America. He believed in these things far more than he believed in the power of today's warmongers. ..."
"... In 1967 Noam Chomsky wrote an article in the NY Review entitled "the Responsibility of Intellectuals" the first sentence ran like this: "IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY of intellectuals to speak the truth and to expose lies.". Stephen Cohen did precisely that when all the parrots and pundits were lined up against him. ..."
"... Always I was skeptical of prevailing scholarly interpretive trends on the Soviet experience that were echoed by colleagues claiming expertise on the subject. Cohen provided the foundation for my skepticism and invigorated my lectures on American foreign policy. ..."
"... Once Cohen plied his knowledge against the hysterical narrative that culminated in 4 years of frothing neo-McCarthyism (by the freakin' "left," no less), we were no longer gonna see him on the PBS newshour any more likely than we would and will see chris hedges, chomsky, or margaret kimberly. ..."
"... His book War With Russia? was an oasis of counter-narrative when I picked it up. Losing voices like his is immeasurable as we hurtle toward total war with Russia and/or China, both of whom are finally, naturally, and perfectly predictably beginning to draw a line in the sand. ..."
Oct 01, 2020 | www.thenation.com

I first reached out to Stephen Cohen because I was losing my mind.

In the spring of 2014, a war broke out in my homeland of Ukraine. It was a horrific war in a bitterly divided nation, which turned eastern Ukraine into a bombed-out wasteland. But that's not how it was portrayed in America. Because millions of eastern Ukrainians were against the US-backed government, their opinions were inconvenient for the West. Washington needed a clean story about Ukraine fighting the Kremlin; as a result, US media avoided reporting about the "wrong" half of the country. Twenty-plus million people were written out of the narrative, as if they never existed.

I tried to explain to American friends what was happening, but quickly realized that ultimately, even friends believe what they read in the newspapers, and the newspapers were pushing the Washington line. Except for Steve Cohen. Steve was the only major figure in America who insisted on remembering the Russian-speaking Ukrainians who, like my family members, distrusted and hated the new Kiev government. He spoke of neo-Nazi paramilitiaries who fought for the US-backed government committing war crimes against civilians in eastern Ukraine. He spoke the truth, regardless of how unwieldy it was.

And so I e-mailed him, asking for guidance as I began my own writing career. Of course, there were many who clamored for Steve's time, but I had an advantage over others. Steve and I were both night owls, real night owls, the kind who have afternoon tea at three am. It was then, when the east coast was sleeping, that he became my mentor and friend.

There's a lot to say about Steve. He was extraordinarily kind, never forgetting that in geopolitics, the ones who have the most to lose aren't strategists but everyday individuals impacted by policy. He was a consummate teacher, insisting on giving mentees the skills to navigate the world, a real proponent of the Teach a man to fish philosophy. He had facets and stories and memories; he lived life with empathy and gusto.

But one thing Steve taught me is to stick to my strengths, and truth be told, there are others who can describe his life better than I. I'll stick to what I learned during our conversations at three in the morning, which is that, above all else, Stephen F. Cohen was a man of faith.

Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations drew all sorts of attention. America was hurtling toward a new cold war with Russia, and Steve well, from the perspective of Washington's foreign policy establishment, Steve was fucking up the narrative. Steve talked about inconvenient things, things like US-backed war criminals and America's own meddling in Russian affairs; in the process, he himself had become inconvenient.

After all, this wasn't some random blogger. This was one of America's foremost Russia experts, a tenured professor at Princeton and New York University, someone who didn't just write about history but had dinner with it, had briefed US presidents, and was friends with legends like Mikhail Gorbachev. Steve had clout earned from decades of brilliant work; by 2014, he was using that clout to throw a wrench in the think tank world.

The DC apparatchiks couldn't discredit Steve's credentials or track record -- he'd predicted events in Ukraine and elsewhere years before they occurred. They couldn't intimidate him -- he'd faced far worse threats, like the KGB. Instead, they set out to turn him into an America-hating, Putin-loving pariah.

This went beyond an ad hominem campaign. It was something far colder, more sustained, something that ironically the Soviets did to dissidents: a relentless crusade to render the target untouchable, a leper without a platform. The barrage of articles and diatribes hurled at Steve in the national press painted him as not just a dissenter but a supporter of dictators and murderers. It was a vicious, prolonged assault carried out by think tank toadies, the kind of people who win races by kneecapping the competition.

I'd often talk with Steve after a new hatchet job or smear on national television. Of course, the attacks were hurtful -- the only way to not be affected was to not care, and Steve cared. But I also noticed he was remarkably free of bitterness. Every time I thought he'd snap, he'd return the next day to write, discuss, keep fighting.

It took me a couple of years to understand that what kept Steve going was faith in his beloved institutions. He believed in academia, in scholarship, in discourse, debate, and civility. He believed in the capacity of everyday people to explore and engage with their world, he believed in Russia, and he always believed in America. He believed in these things far more than he believed in the power of today's warmongers.

Steve liked movies and would often end a lecture with a movie reference to drive home the thesis. When I think of him, I think of the ending of The Shawshank Redemption , the line about Andy Dufresne crawling through filth and coming out clean on the other side. Steve didn't live in a movie; I can't claim he emerged unscathed. What he did was come through without bitterness or cynicism. He refused to turn away from the ugliness, but he didn't allow it to blind him to beauty. He walked with grace. And he lost neither his convictions nor his faith.

Lev Golinkin Lev Golinkin is the author of A Backpack, a Bear, and Eight Crates of Vodka, Amazon's Debut of the Month, a Barnes & Noble's Discover Great New Writers program selection, and winner of the Premio Salerno Libro d'Europa. Golinkin, a graduate of Boston College, came to the US as a child refugee from the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkov (now called Kharkiv) in 1990. His writing on the Ukraine crisis, Russia, the far right, and immigrant and refugee identity has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, CNN, The Boston Globe, Politico Europe, and Time (online), among other venues; he has been interviewed by MSNBC, NPR, ABC Radio, WSJ Live and HuffPost Live.

Pierre Guerlain says: October 1, 2020 at 12:42 pm

In 1967 Noam Chomsky wrote an article in the NY Review entitled "the Responsibility of Intellectuals" the first sentence ran like this: "IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY of intellectuals to speak the truth and to expose lies.". Stephen Cohen did precisely that when all the parrots and pundits were lined up against him. He was a Mensch. History will bear him the historian out.

Valera Bochkarev says to Lance Haley: October 1, 2020 at 11:09 am

Hmm, who's the apologist here ?

If the Ukraine is SO sovereign how is it I did not see any outrage in your diatribe against 'Toria, Pyatt and the rest orchestrating the Maidan putsch or the $5Billion US spent on softening up the ukraine for the regime change ?

I believe in numbers, as in the number of military bases any given country has surrounding the ones it wants to subvert, in the amount of money allocated to vilify and eventually bring down the "unwanted" regimes and the quantity and 'quality' of sanctions imposed against those regimes; and the sum of all of the above perpetrated against humanity in the past 75 or so years.

Your vapid drivel, Mr Haley, evaporates almost without a trace once seen with those parameters in mind.

Numbers don't lie.

Michael Batinski says: September 30, 2020 at 5:48 pm

Let me add from the perspective of an American historian who taught for forty years in a midwestern university. From the start I depended on William Appleman Williams to keep perspective and to counter prevailing interpretive trends.

Always I was skeptical of prevailing scholarly interpretive trends on the Soviet experience that were echoed by colleagues claiming expertise on the subject. Cohen provided the foundation for my skepticism and invigorated my lectures on American foreign policy.

I will always be thankful.

Michael Batinski

Tim Ashby says: September 30, 2020 at 2:37 pm

The smothering agitprop in America trumps even Goebbels and co. with its beautifully dressed overton window and first-amendment-free-press bullshit.

Once Cohen plied his knowledge against the hysterical narrative that culminated in 4 years of frothing neo-McCarthyism (by the freakin' "left," no less), we were no longer gonna see him on the PBS newshour any more likely than we would and will see chris hedges, chomsky, or margaret kimberly.

Let's face it, we were lucky to win the editorial fight to even give him space in the Nation.

His book War With Russia? was an oasis of counter-narrative when I picked it up. Losing voices like his is immeasurable as we hurtle toward total war with Russia and/or China, both of whom are finally, naturally, and perfectly predictably beginning to draw a line in the sand.

[Oct 01, 2020] Getting Rid of the Myth of 'Isolationism' -

Notable quotes:
"... The Tragedy of American Diplomacy ..."
Oct 01, 2020 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Getting Rid Of The Myth Of 'Isolationism'

'Isolationism' is not real, and never has been. It is an insult thrown at realists by the architects of senseless wars. (By Mike Focus/Shutterstock)

SEPTEMBER 30, 2020

|

12:01 AM

DANIEL LARISON

No one claims to be an isolationist, but foreign policy analysts keep imagining and fearing a "resurgence" of isolationism around every corner. This fear was on display in a recent Atlantic article by Charles Kupchan, who tries to rehabilitate the label in order to oppose the substance of a policy of nonintervention and non-entanglement. Kupchan allows that a policy of avoiding entangling alliances and staying out of European wars was important for the growth and prosperity of the United States, but then rehearses the same old and misleading story about the terrible "isolationist" interwar years that we have heard countless times before. This misrepresents the history of that period and compromises our ability to rethink our foreign policy today.

Kupchan's article is not just an exercise in beating a dead horse, since he fears that the same thing that happened between the world wars is happening again: "If the 19th century was isolationism's finest hour, the interwar era was surely its darkest and most deluded. The conditions that led to this misguided run for cover are making a comeback." Kupchan wants to borrow a little from the people he calls "isolationists" so that the U.S. will remain thoroughly ensnared in most of its global commitments.

https://lockerdome.com/lad/13045197114175078?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13045197114175078-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&rid=www.theamericanconservative.com&width=838

At the same time that he warns that "U.S. statecraft has become divorced from popular will," he seems to want to keep it this way by rejecting what he calls the "isolationist temptation." If "a majority of the country favors either America First or global disengagement," as he says, the goal seems to be to ignore what the majority wants in favor of making a few tweaks to the same old strategy of U.S. primacy. Those tweaks aren't going to lessen popular support for a reduced U.S. role in the world, and they will likely make the public even more disillusioned with the remaining costs and demands of U.S. "leadership."

The key thing to remember in all this is that the U.S. has never been isolationist in its foreign relations. The thing that Kupchan calls America's "default setting" is not real. Isolationism is the pejorative term that expansionists and interventionists have used over the last century to ridicule and dismiss opposition to unnecessary wars. Isolationism as U.S. policy in the 1920s and 1930s is a myth , and the myth is deployed whenever there has been a serious challenge to the status quo in post-1945 U.S. foreign policy. Bear Braumoeller summed it up very well in his article , "The Myth of American Isolationism," this way: "the characterization of America as isolationist in the interwar period is simply wrong." We can't learn from the past if we insist on distorting it. As William Appleman Williams put it in The Tragedy of American Diplomacy , "It not only deforms the history of the decade from 1919 to 1930, but it also twists the story of American entry into World War II and warps the record of the cold war." Williams also remarked in a note that the use of the term isolationist "has thus crippled American thought about foreign policy for 50 years." Today we can say that it has done so for a century.

Our government eschewed permanent alliances for most of its history, and it refrained from taking sides in the European Great Power conflicts of the nineteenth century, but it never sought to cut itself from the world and could not have done that even if it had wished to do so. The U.S. was a commercial republic from the start, and it cultivated economic and diplomatic ties with as many states as possible. You can call the steady expansion of the U.S. across North America and into the Pacific and Caribbean "isolationism," but that just shows how misleading and inaccurate the label has always been.

Post-WWI America was a rising power and increasingly involved in the affairs of the world. Its economic and diplomatic engagement with the world increased during these years. If it wasn't involved in the way that later internationalists would have liked, that didn't make the U.S. isolationist. Braumoeller makes this point explicitly: "America was not isolationist in affairs relating to international security in Europe for the bulk of the period: in fact, it was perhaps more internationalist than it had ever been." The U.S. was behaving as a great power, but one that strove to maintain its neutrality. That was neither deluded nor disastrous, and we need to stop pretending that it was if we are ever going to be able to make the needed changes to our foreign policy today.

me title=

00:13 / 00:59 00:00 Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker, Pro-family Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused

Kupchan acknowledges that there has to be an "adjustment" after the last several decades of overreach, but he casts this as a way of preventing more significant retrenchment: "The paramount question is whether that adjustment takes the form of a judicious pullback or a more dangerous retreat." No one objects to the desire for a responsible reduction in U.S. commitments, but one person's "judicious pullback" will often be denounced as a "dangerous retreat" by others. Just consider how many times we have been warned about a U.S. "retreat" from the Middle East over the last 11 years. Even now, the U.S. is still taking part in multiple wars across the region, and the "retreat" we have been told has happened several times never seems to take place. Warning about the perils of an "isolationist comeback" hardly makes it more likely that these withdrawals will ever happen.

He recommends that "judicious retrenchment should entail shedding U.S. entanglements in the periphery, not in the strategic heartlands of Europe and Asia." Certainly, any reduction in unnecessary U.S. commitments is welcome, but a thorough rethinking of U.S. foreign policy has to include every region. Kupchan is right to criticize slapdash, incompetent withdrawals, but one gets the impression that he thinks there shouldn't be any withdrawals except from the Middle East. He cites "Russian and Chinese threats" as the main reasons not to pull back at all in Europe or Asia, but this seems like an uncritical endorsement of the status quo.

It is in East Asia where the U.S. might be fighting a war against a major, nuclear-armed power in the future, and it is also there where the U.S. has some of the wealthiest and most capable allies. If the U.S. can't reduce its exposure to the risk of a major war where that risk is the greatest and its allies are strongest, when will it ever be able to do that? Reducing the U.S. military presence in East Asia will make it easier to manage U.S.-Chinese tensions, and it will give allies an additional incentive to assume more responsibility for their own security.

The U.S. has far more security commitments than it can afford and far more than can possibly be justified by our own security interests. That includes, but is not limited to, our overcommitment to the Middle East. Our foreign entanglements have been allowed to grow and spread to such an extent over the last seventy-five years that modest pruning won't be good enough to put U.S. foreign policy on a sound footing that will have reliable public support. There needs to be a much more comprehensive review of all U.S. commitments to determine which ones are truly necessary for our security and which ones are not. Ruling out the bulk of those commitments as untouchable in advance is a mistake.

There is broad public support for constructive international engagement, but there is remarkably little backing for preserving U.S. hegemony in its current form. In order to have a more sustainable foreign policy, the U.S. needs to scale back its ambitions in most parts of the world, and it needs to shift more of the security burdens for different regions to the countries that have the most at stake. That should be done deliberately and carefully, but it does need to happen if we are to realign our foreign policy with protecting the vital interests of the United States. ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Daniel Larison is a senior editor at TAC , where he also keeps a solo blog . He has been published in the New York Times Book Review , Dallas Morning News , World Politics Review , Politico Magazine , Orthodox Life , Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week . He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter .


Gaius Gracchus • 19 hours ago

Richard Hofsteder is largely responsible for this falsehood, like he is for making "populist" a by-word, as Thomas Frank points out in his new book.

I prefer the term "non-interventionist" or Washingtonian, myself. I continue to be stuck by the amazing wisdom of Washington's Farewell Address (largely written by Hamilton). It really should be our guide to this day.

Room_237 • 13 hours ago

The US had an active and fairly successful foreign policy in the 1920s. What hurt our foreign policy activities was the Great Depression.

bournite Room_237 • 11 hours ago

Try a seance and tell this Augusto Cesar Sandino. Two American brothers who owned a gold mine in his country had another brother at the State Department. That's how FP was "successful." https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

Disqus10021 bournite • 9 hours ago

Europe would have been better off if the US had stayed out of WWI and let major belligerents fight it out until they reached a cease fire on their own. The US entry into the war, tipped the scales in favor of Britain and France and resulted in a very harsh peace treaty being imposed on Germany in 1919. Four years later, Germany's currency collapsed, wiping out the savings of millions of average Germans. The Smoot-Hawley tariff of 1930 made economic conditions for people in central Europe very bad and conrtibuted to the rising popularity of the Nazi party in Germany.

RAF • 12 hours ago • edited

The world is so much smaller today than it was when this country was formed and organized by the Founding Fathers. (Mothers were not allowed)

The idea of international associations and cooperation is required with today's world. When some country like China sneezes, the whole world needs a face mask!

The Age of Daniel Boone is dead. America must be fully engaged in world matters. That does not mean going into every country with our military. America needs to continue to give some leadership in world affairs. It would be suicidal to close the windows to the rest of the world.

rayray RAF • 4 hours ago

I agree. The world is interconnected, engagement is a necessity. The problem with the US FP at this point is to see every issue as an opportunity to throw around our military weight and call it "engagement". Being fully engaged in the world is a state department issue - smart and educated diplomats working the lines of communication and cooperation with every nation to build a reputation for US leadership, to foment peace, and to build prosperity. Obviously, under Trump and Pompeo this is a waste of breath.

Worth noting, a friend of mine, ex-CIA, has made an absolute fortune off of our military preoccupations. And even he said (perhaps exaggerating) that you could get rid of 90% of the traditional military with little or no loss in actual national security. Most of it is, as he said, corporate welfare and window dressing.

(Of course he then said you should spend what you've saved entirely on cyber-security)

bournite • 12 hours ago

Using the 'I' Word for War and Profit
Column by Tim Hartnett, posted on April 03, 2013
in War and Peace
Column by Tim Hartnett.

Exclusive to STR

For about a century now, Humpty-Dumpty has been the go-to man for fans of elaborate American foreign adventures. Unwelcome inquiries are put down with a one word incantation that blesses and immunizes government-funded schemes that are always cash cows for somebody. "Isolationist" means exactly what its users mean it to mean--no more and no less. Every entry on the first page of my online search for the word "isolationism" provided the same definition: "The national policy of abstaining from political or economic relations with other countries." Nobody on the furthest fringes of the political spectrum who gets ink or air time comes close calling for a plan fitting that description.

The word remains in healthy circulation despite the total absence of public figures advocating anything of the kind. Its real linguistic purpose is to obstruct examination of extra-territorial programs that don't work and often do considerable harm.

Most of us first learned of the dreaded I-beast in grade school study of WWI. Back in that good old day, the authorities had sense enough to put these naysayers in prisons after allowing hostile crowds to have at 'em for an hour or so. If the folks at The Weekly Standard, the Heritage Foundation, AEI, Fox News et al get their way, hoosegow entrepreneurs will be back in that market before too long. How could anyone oppose US entry into The Great War, anyway? It's what catapulted us to the top of the economic heap. We are probably only one good war away from reclaiming that title.

The first people to stoke lynch mobs with the "I" word claimed we were fighting a war "to make the world safe for democracy." The Irish, Indians, Algerians, Pacific Islanders, Russian peasants, Filipinos, the Congolese and millions of other Africans were not educated well enough to accept this as readily as freedom-loving Americans did. Without guys like J.P. Morgan, J.D. Rockefeller, Charles Schwab and others who hired PR men to keep the country thinking right thoughts, foreigners are often easily misled. Isolationists are as rare on Wall Street as atheists are in foxholes.

To understand the perfidious way that isolationism works, try and visualize a typical slice of American policy from say 1968. Some experts and officers in a room at the Pentagon decide a spot on the map could use a good bombing, and the order is relayed via satellite to South Vietnam. At five they leave work to fight rush hour traffic and get home in time for a smoke with Walter Cronkite. Some Navy fliers get dispatched, and once the napalm is fixed to the jets, they're airborne. Thirty-five minutes later, the right patch below them, it's bombs away and a U-turn. An undernourished five year old girl foolishly lives nearby and an eight ounce blob of gel burning at 1,800 degrees lands on her back. She is immediately screaming and burns for six minutes until an adult manages to put the incinerating child out.

Meanwhile, the flyboys are on terra firma again with beers, joints, Steppenwolf on the turntable and much lamenting of St. Louis' undeserved defeat at the hands of Detroit. The little girl's screaming still pierces the tropical air. The engineers and the chemists who designed the people-melting device are on the other side of the world asleep in their suburban beds. And the tiny thing can't stop screaming. The next day at Harvard, William Kristol is expounding on communism, the domino theory, social responsibility, moral courage and careful reading. And the 32 lb. waif is still going through an endless agony that no man of oxen strength should ever have to endure in a lifetime. Isolating on these kinds of details misses the "big picture," I've been told. Only communists, terrorists and other abominable -ists focus on this kind of inhumane minutiae.

Forty years later, John McCain was wittily singing the lyrics "bomb Iran" while doubtless a child was on fire somewhere that US ordnance had exploded. The one certain outcome of such events is a profit for weapons manufacturers. Isolationists are oddly skeptical of the many benefits anti-isolationists find in all-purpose bombing campaigns. What's always clear is that people who speak publicly about their love for humanitarian bombing expect to be paid for it.

There are a lot of things that "isolationists" just don't know, and it must be for this ignorance they are so despised by both mainstream media and Wall Street's favorite politicians. They don't know why we have 50,000 soldiers in Germany or another 30,000 in Japan. Why we paid to keep an incorrigible thug like Mubarak in business for 30 years. Why we need missiles in Eastern Europe. Why we helped every bloodthirsty, misanthropic power monger in Central America. Why we needed to help Turkey get Ocalan. Why South Ossetia's nationalistic prerogatives are our business. Why foreign governments should be pressured by our diplomats on Wall Street's behalf. Why our government takes some kind of stand in every foreign war, election, national event or internal matter of almost any kind. How we can indict one country for human rights violations while buddying up to worse offenders like Saudi Arabia regularly. Why our foreign initiatives proceed based on fantastic ideologies in contempt of facts. These are just a few of the quandaries that afflict the minds of people who aren't buying the divine right of American altruist aristocracy to fine tune the rest of the world. They aren't exactly keen on the hyper-interventionist tendencies that keep so many beltway bandits in the chips, either.

What they also don't know is why the elite media, the experts and elected officials, if they truly understand these things, can't be called upon to explain any of them to the rest of us satisfactorily. On March 20, Dana Milbank called Rand Paul an "isolationist" in his column without any explanation. In the future, he might want to right click on Microsoft Word and choose the Look up option before deploying the term.

After American involvement in Vietnam ended, many proponents of the action claimed the death toll there would have been even worse without our presence. Others go so far as to maintain that fighting in such conflicts protects US citizens' privileges, like freedom of speech, here at home. They expect us all to believe that "Isolationists," by any definition, wouldn't get away with spouting their un-American propaganda in public places, or on television if any were allowed there, but for a policy that napalms little girls.

While people smeared with the I-word persistently point out that they are merely against policies that are misguided, immoral and often murderous, their detractors insist that what they really oppose is America. In the "big picture" mindset of the interventionist, you can't have one without the other.

kouroi • 9 hours ago

Beat them over the head with a stick, that might do it.

As for the entanglements in east Asia, none of the countries under direct US vassalage have major disputes with China and do not need US protection. And it is likely that without the US Korea would be on a path to reunification. The US is trying to beat everyone in line to show who's the boss... So it seems, this K guy, like all his ilk are presenting things in a very Manichean way: either primacy or "isolationism". There is so much in between these two...

[Sep 30, 2020] Opinion - I Ran the C.I.A. Now I m Endorsing Hillary Clinton by Michael J. Morell

Highly recommended!
In no way he is a honest intelligence officer. At best, he is a dirty political hack.
Aug 05, 2016 | www.nytimes.com

During a 33-year career at the Central Intelligence Agency, I served presidents of both parties -- three Republicans and three Democrats. I was at President George W. Bush's side when we were attacked on Sept. 11; as deputy director of the agency, I was with President Obama when we killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.

I am neither a registered Democrat nor a registered Republican. In my 40 years of voting, I have pulled the lever for candidates of both parties. As a government official, I have always been silent about my preference for president.

No longer. On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure that she is elected as our 45th president.

Two strongly held beliefs have brought me to this decision. First, Mrs. Clinton is highly qualified to be commander in chief. I trust she will deliver on the most important duty of a president -- keeping our nation safe. Second, Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.

I spent four years working with Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state, most often in the White House Situation Room. In these critically important meetings, I found her to be prepared, detail-oriented, thoughtful, inquisitive and willing to change her mind if presented with a compelling argument.

I also saw the secretary's commitment to our nation's security; her belief that America is an exceptional nation that must lead in the world for the country to remain secure and prosperous; her understanding that diplomacy can be effective only if the country is perceived as willing and able to use force if necessary; and, most important, her capacity to make the most difficult decision of all -- whether to put young American women and men in harm's way.

They'll enjoy our special rate of $1 a week.

Mrs. Clinton was an early advocate of the raid that brought Bin Laden to justice, in opposition to some of her most important colleagues on the National Security Council. During the early debates about how we should respond to the Syrian civil war, she was a strong proponent of a more aggressive approach, one that might have prevented the Islamic State from gaining a foothold in Syria.

I never saw her bring politics into the Situation Room. In fact, I saw the opposite. When some wanted to delay the Bin Laden raid by one day because the White House Correspondents Dinner might be disrupted, she said, "Screw the White House Correspondents Dinner."

In sharp contrast to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump has no experience on national security. Even more important, the character traits he has exhibited during the primary season suggest he would be a poor, even dangerous, commander in chief.

These traits include his obvious need for self-aggrandizement, his overreaction to perceived slights, his tendency to make decisions based on intuition, his refusal to change his views based on new information, his routine carelessness with the facts, his unwillingness to listen to others and his lack of respect for the rule of law.

The dangers that flow from Mr. Trump's character are not just risks that would emerge if he became president. It is already damaging our national security.

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia was a career intelligence officer, trained to identify vulnerabilities in an individual and to exploit them. That is exactly what he did early in the primaries. Mr. Putin played upon Mr. Trump's vulnerabilities by complimenting him. He responded just as Mr. Putin had calculated.

Mr. Putin is a great leader, Mr. Trump says, ignoring that he has killed and jailed journalists and political opponents, has invaded two of his neighbors and is driving his economy to ruin. Mr. Trump has also taken policy positions consistent with Russian, not American, interests -- endorsing Russian espionage against the United States, supporting Russia's annexation of Crimea and giving a green light to a possible Russian invasion of the Baltic States.

In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.

Mr. Trump has also undermined security with his call for barring Muslims from entering the country. This position, which so clearly contradicts the foundational values of our nation, plays into the hands of the jihadist narrative that our fight against terrorism is a war between religions.

In fact, many Muslim Americans play critical roles in protecting our country, including the man, whom I cannot identify, who ran the C.I.A.'s Counterterrorism Center for nearly a decade and who I believe is most responsible for keeping America safe since the Sept. 11 attacks.

My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the C.I.A. This is what I am doing now. Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.

Michael J. Morell was the acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2010 to 2013.

[Sep 29, 2020] This is a threat? Washington is considering closing its embassy in Iraq

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

PATIENT OBSERVER September 28, 2020 at 4:33 am

This is a threat?

https://www.rt.com/usa/501883-iraq-embassy-baghdad-closure-attacks/

Washington is considering closing its embassy in Iraq, nine months after the US killing of an Iranian general on Iraqi soil led to protests over what Baghdad called a "violation" of its sovereignty, according to reports.

Multiple media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and Sky News, reported on Sunday that US officials told their Iraqi counterparts that Washington will shut down its operations unless there is an end to rocket attacks on the embassy, which is located in the heavily-fortified Green Zone in Baghdad.

Sounds more like a possible victory for Iraq and its people. I suspect that there is much more to the story and the US is pre-emptively seeking a face-saving exit excuse if it were to come to that.

However, it would be extremely unlikely for the US to abandon the embassy given that it serves as the headquarters for numerous nefarious operations in Iraq and Iran

ET AL September 28, 2020 at 6:11 am

The claim that I have read is that this is in response to the USA's assassination of General Solemani in Lebanon. More precisely the i-Ranian strategy is not per se to cause American casualties but carry out sustained attacks via proxies on American interest in i-Rack, i.e. psychological pressure, cost etc. the ultimate goal being the USA leaving i-Rack as a suitable price for the assassination.I

I've also read (Vinyard the Saker?)that the USA has so far closed some of its smaller and less defensible outposts but concentrated what remains in fewer better defended bases. The USA does not want to leave i-Rack militarily and will hang on until it is out of options. The US embassy leaving i-Rack will not be good enough for i-Ran, but maybe this is the beginning of some kind of behind the scenes bargaining, though this is hard to believe considering the US is still pushing for a gulf coalition (WAR!) against i-Ran as well as polically neutralizing any potential spoiler countries. Also the embassay was built at quite a significant cost $750 billion.* So, you are right PO, this is bluff by the big puff Plumpeo.

i-Rack has also being trying to get rid of American military presence even though they have bought F-16IQs from Washington but the latter is using the same figleaf excuse as in Syria that they are 'fighting terrorists.'

* https://www.businessinsider.com/750-million-united-states-embassy-iraq-baghdad-2013-3

ET AL September 28, 2020 at 6:18 am

$750 million. Duh!

JRKRIDEAU September 28, 2020 at 6:47 am

$750 million. Duh
Given standard US contracting over-runs I was willg to believe "billions". The surprising thing is that it got built.

MARK CHAPMAN September 28, 2020 at 3:12 pm

The USA will never abandon its crown jewel in Iraq, and it would make little practical difference anyway, as it lies entirely within the American 'Green Zone', and they will surely not abandon that.

"But the location of the compound is well known in Baghdad anyway, where for several years it has been marked by large construction cranes and all-night work lights easily visible from the embattled neighborhoods across the river. It is reasonable to assume that insurgents will soon sit in the privacy of rooms overlooking the site, and use cell phones or radios to adjust the rocket and mortar fire of their companions. Meanwhile, however, they seem to have held off, lobbing most of their ordnance elsewhere into the Green Zone, as if reluctant to slow the completion of such an enticing target."

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2007/11/langewiesche200711

The Baghdad Embassy is the USA's most-expensive embassy in the world, and it costs far more to run it each year than the cost of building it, in excess of a Billion dollars a year. What America might do, and what Iraq does fear, is send its diplomats home for awhile, and use it as an excuse to open a military operation in Iraq against what it terms Iran-aligned militias.

[Sep 29, 2020] Some excellently timed next level trolling of the USA from Putin.

Sep 29, 2020 | thenewkremlinstooge.wordpress.com

ET AL September 27, 2020 at 9:17 am

Neuters via Antiwar.com : Putin Calls For Mutual Ban on Election Meddling With US
https://news.antiwar.com/2020/09/25/putin-calls-for-mutual-ban-on-election-meddling-with-us/

US intel agencies claim Russia, China, and Iran are meddling in 2020 election

On Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said the US and Russia should sign an agreement promising not to meddle in each other's elections. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-putin/putin-says-russia-and-u-s-should-agree-not-to-meddle-in-each-others-elections-idUSKCN26G1LJ

Putin proposed, "exchanging guarantees of non-interference in each other's internal affairs, including electoral processes, including using information and communication technologies and high-tech methods."..

####

That is some excellently timed next level trolling from Pootie-McPoot-Face.

MARK CHAPMAN September 27, 2020 at 12:19 pm

Of course the USA will never agree to such a proposal, because (a) it does not regard its meddling as 'interference' but as the bringing of the gift of freedom, (b) it stands on its absolute right of judgment as to what is a situation that requires more democracy and what is not, and (c) it probably knows at some level that Russia did not meddle in the US elections, and that it would therefore in that case be constraining its own behavior in exchange for nothing.

But then, when refused – I imagine the US will try to extract something from the offer, such as "A-HA!! So you ADMIT to meddling in our elections!! – Russia can obviously claim, "Well, we tried."

[Sep 28, 2020] No wonder Pompey and his friend Jeffries won't give up on Syria! No wonder

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... Virtually every aspect of the Syrian opposition was cultivated and marketed by Western government-backed public relations firms, from their political narratives to their branding, from what they said to where they said it. ..."
Sep 28, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

"Western government-funded intelligence cutouts trained Syrian opposition leaders, planted stories in media outlets from BBC to Al Jazeera, and ran a cadre of journalists. A trove of leaked documents exposes the propaganda network."

"Leaked documents show how UK government contractors developed an advanced infrastructure of propaganda to stimulate support in the West for Syria's political and armed opposition.

Virtually every aspect of the Syrian opposition was cultivated and marketed by Western government-backed public relations firms, from their political narratives to their branding, from what they said to where they said it.

The leaked files reveal how Western intelligence cutouts played the media like a fiddle, carefully crafting English- and Arabic-language media coverage of the war on Syria to churn out a constant stream of pro-opposition coverage.

US and European contractors trained and advised Syrian opposition leaders at all levels, from young media activists to the heads of the parallel government-in-exile . These firms also organized interviews for Syrian opposition leaders on mainstream outlets such as BBC and the UK's Channel 4.

More than half of the stringers used by Al Jazeera in Syria were trained in a joint US-UK government program called Basma, which produced hundreds of Syrian opposition media activists.

Western government PR firms not only influenced the way the media covered Syria, but as the leaked documents reveal, they produced their own propagandistic pseudo-news for broadcast on major TV networks in the Middle East, including BBC Arabic, Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, and Orient TV .

These UK-funded firms functioned as full-time PR flacks for the extremist-dominated Syrian armed opposition. One contractor, called InCoStrat, said it was in constant contact with a network of more than 1,600 international journalists and "influencers," and used them to push pro-opposition talking points.

Another Western government contractor, ARK, crafted a strategy to "re-brand" Syria's Salafi-jihadist armed opposition by "softening its image ." ARK boasted that it provided opposition propaganda that "aired almost every day on" major Arabic-language TV networks."

"The Western contractor ARK was a central force in launching the White Helmets operation.

The leaked documents show ARK ran the Twitter and Facebook pages of Syria Civil Defense, known more commonly as the White Helmets.

ARK took credit for developing "an internationally-focused communications campaign designed to raise global awareness of the (White Helmets) teams and their life saving work."

ARK also facilitated communications between the White Helmets and The Syria Campaign , a PR firm run out of London and New York that helped popularize the White Helmets in the United States.

It was apparently "following subsequent discussions with ARK and the teams" that The Syria Campaign "selected civil defence to front its campaign to keep Syria in the news," the firm wrote in a report for the UK Foreign Office." thegreyzone

--------------

Using really basic intelligence analytic tools; Occam's Razor, Walks like a duck, Smileyesque back azimuth's, etc. it has been clear that the UK government has been deeply involved in sponsoring and influencing the Syrian/ jihadi opposition in that miserable country. The wide spread British Old Boys network of aspirants to the tradition of imperial manipulation has been visible just below the surface if you had eyes to look and a brain to think.

A lot of the money for this folly came right out of USAID.

pl

https://thegrayzone.com/2020/09/23/syria-leaks-uk-contractors-opposition-media/

ISL , 27 September 2020 at 04:03 PM

Dear Colonel agreed.

I object to the line in the article that they "played the media like a fiddle" - as it implies the mainstream media is a victim as opposed to willing accomplice.

The American public very strongly told Obama they didn't want another invasion and war in the middle east (red lines or not) so rather ineffective propaganda.

Moreover, I suspect that given the US public inattention to overseas events that do not involve much US blood (in places they can not find on a map). Today's mess would be where more or less the same if the entire IO had never happened - though maybe with less cynicism of US/UK gov'ts and media.

OTH, it is curious how well the British Old Boys network (and US) aligns with Israeli interests (and runs counter to US or British interests). Maybe grayzone will investigate that (impressive) IO campaign. I think a small country in the middle east played US and UK elites like a fiddle.

The Twisted Genius , 27 September 2020 at 04:48 PM

I've only given this article a cursory reading so far and it is clear that the Brits are going balls to the wall on the PSYOPS/perception management front. This campaign flows naturally from the strong material support for the Syrian "moderate rebels" provided by the US, the Brits and probably others for years. We may still be blowing up IS jihadis, but we're also supporting our own brand of jihadis around Al-Tanf, giving free hand to Erdogan's jihadis along the Turkish-Syrian border and doing our best to stymie R+6 efforts to crush the remaining jihadis and unite Syria.

The article focuses on the contractors role in PSYOP. I'm not sure if it mentions the British government's role in this. The GCHQ's Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG) probably manages most of those contractors. The British Army also has the 77th Brigade. This brigade's slogan is: "behavioural change is our unique selling point". Gordon MacMillan, a reserve officer with the 77th Brigade, is now Twitter's head of editorial operations for the Middle East.
The 77th was formed in 2015 and subsumed the 15th Psychological Operations Group which was headed by Steve Tathan, who went on to head the defence division of SCL, the now defunct parent of Cambridge Analytica. I'm sure the 77th is capable of managing some of those contractors, as well. I wouldn't be surprised if quite a few of contractors were also reservists in the 77th.

I bet we're not letting the Brits have all the fun. The CIA Special Activities Center (formerly SAD) includes the Political Action Group for PSYOP, economic warfare and cyberwarfare. That dovetails nicely with what CENTCOM is doing in Syria. I knew some of those guys a while back. I remember scaring them with some of my own anarchist hacker rantings when I was penetrating those hackers.

Our Army has fours PSYOP groups brigade-sized), two active and 2 reserve. I would think they have advanced their methodology since I took the course at Bragg. For a few years, they were called military information support operations (MISO) groups rather than PSYOP groups. They have since reverted to their PSYOP name although their activities are referred to as MISO. I don't know what the difference is.

Babak makkinejad , 27 September 2020 at 05:10 PM

ISL

No, no, no.

There is no such small country as you describe in the Near East.

There is an self-disciplined proxy force masquerading as a state which is mostly funded by the United States to further the religious policies of the WASP Culture Continent.

It is no accident that in this context, the names of US and UK occur often in the same sentences; one declared a crusade to wrestle control of Plastine from Muslims, and the otber one carried out that crusade and escalated it.

That is also the reason that US cannot end the war over Palestine or leave Islamdom

(Oil, Geostrategic considerations, arms sales, Realpolitik are just pseudo-rationications to obscure the real war.)

Diana Croissant , 28 September 2020 at 07:45 AM

Where is Candide (aka Voltaire) when we need him?

BABAK MAKKINEJAD , 28 September 2020 at 09:14 AM

Ishmael Zechariah

How WASP-dom has arrived in this crusade is not, in my opinion, as significant as that it has been waging it for more than a hundred years.

fakebot , 28 September 2020 at 10:43 AM

"WASP Culture" is into golfing, not crusading. Erik Prince and the religious fundamentalists, maybe, but they don't drive US policy.

Russia and/or Chinese dominion over Eurasia cannot be permitted. Their means to achieve that would be less ethical, not that the US or UK have been prince among men and salts of the earth, as noted in the article.

The US has tried in vain to win over hearts and minds. It has been a mostly noble effort to bring countries like Iraq and Afghanistan into the 21st century, but it was always more of a losing game. The problem lies too much in Islam and tribal rivalries.

[Sep 28, 2020] I wonder if anybody here have considered a possibility that the neoliberal cabal now in power in the US wants to destroy the standard of living of common people and eliminate all social protections of the New Deal, living in place for the police state and oversized the military

Recruiting for military is much easier if there is no jobs.
Notable quotes:
"... They want to eliminate the EPA, vacate the State Dept and many other Depts, except for a few high-placed cronies, wipe all financial, labour, consumer and environmental regulations off the books; eliminate or reduce to a bare minimum federal health insurance, medicaid, medicare and Social Security, crush public education, privatize everything they can sell, and so on. They are not in power to "govern" but to destroy government. This is all being done with a fairly unified agenda: to free "the market" from any restrictions whatsoever, so that they -- global elites -- can make as much money as possible. It's a cabal of global corporations, militarists, Christian sovereign white supremacists, fossil fuel giants and bankers ..."
Sep 28, 2020 | peterturchin.com

Shaun Bartone February 27, 2017 at 3:47 pm

I wonder if any of the commentators here have considered that the [neoliberal] cabal now in power in the US (not elsewhere) are not in power to "take power" except for a temporary period. They don't want to run the federal government, they want to destroy it, except for the police state and the military.

They want to eliminate the EPA, vacate the State Dept and many other Depts, except for a few high-placed cronies, wipe all financial, labour, consumer and environmental regulations off the books; eliminate or reduce to a bare minimum federal health insurance, medicaid, medicare and Social Security, crush public education, privatize everything they can sell, and so on. They are not in power to "govern" but to destroy government. This is all being done with a fairly unified agenda: to free "the market" from any restrictions whatsoever, so that they -- global elites -- can make as much money as possible. It's a cabal of global corporations, militarists, Christian sovereign white supremacists, fossil fuel giants and bankers , and I think there's a high degree of cooperation for the agenda. The revolution is the cabal run by Trump/Bannon who are more extreme and ideological than any previous faction, who have no tolerance for compromise. They have an apocalyptic vision of grinding it all down to a bare minimum police state.

[Sep 28, 2020] The great Orwellian hypocrisy of America's pants-wetting complaints that other countries are meddling in America's (fake) democracy is that the United States itself is guilty of regime changing, balkanizing, and colonizing scores of foreign nations dating back over a century to the USA's regime change and eventual colonization of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

Notable quotes:
"... We have no evidence, but don't forget, they are evil and wouldn't hesitate to do it! ..."
Sep 28, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

ak74 , Aug 10 2020 6:55 utc | 71

"The statement then claims:

Ahead of the 2020 U.S. elections, foreign states will continue to use covert and overt influence measures in their attempts to sway U.S. voters' preferences and perspectives, shift U.S. policies, increase discord in the United States, and undermine the American people's confidence in our democratic process."

What America is yet again conniving to do is to discredit any domestic political dissent against the fraud of "American Democracy" by connecting this dissent to those nations that are the latest targets of America's Two Minutes of Hate campaign.

This is a standard American tactic that the USA always resorts to when it fears its own citizens are starting to question the fairy tale of American "Democracy and Freedom." Thus, during the Cold War, the USA even to discredit some elements of the Civil Rights movement as being assets of the Soviet Union.

The great Orwellian hypocrisy of America's pants-wetting complaints that other countries are meddling in America's (fake) democracy is that the United States itself is guilty of regime changing, balkanizing, and colonizing scores of foreign nations dating back over a century to the USA's regime change and eventual colonization of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

Bottom Line: America needs to drink a big up of Shut the F*ck Up with its pathetic Pity Party whining about foreigners trying to influence its bogus democracy.

This tired psyops is pathetic.

Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq
https://books.google.com/books/about/Overthrow.html?id=Q3o2BaNiJksC

Killing Hope
U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II
https://williamblum.org/books/killing-hope

padre , Aug 10 2020 15:12 utc | 74

We have no evidence, but don't forget, they are evil and wouldn't hesitate to do it!

[Sep 27, 2020] PODCAST- Tribute to Andre Vltchek- "West's sadistic personality disorder" by Kevin Barrett

Sep 27, 2020 | www.unz.com

One of the most vibrantly alive people I met, André Vltchek, just died . Though he barely made it past his mid-fifties he got in a lot more living than a hundred average Americans who live to collect their pensions. Allah yarhamhu.

In honor of this great Truth Jihadi we're replaying this 2018 interview:

André Vltchek on West's sadistic personality disorder (originally broadcast May 2, 2018)

The West claims to be the "free world" -- the global leader in human rights, humanitarianism, and free expression. Globetrotting independent journalist André Vltchek , who joins us from Borneo, isn't buying it. His latest essay begins:

Western culture is clearly obsessed with rules, guilt, submissiveness and punishment.

By now it is clear that the West is the least free society on Earth. In North America and Europe, almost everyone is under constant scrutiny: people are spied on, observed, their personal information is being continually extracted, and the surveillance cameras are used indiscriminately.

Life is synchronized and managed. There are hardly any surprises.

One can sleep with whomever he or she wishes (as long as it is done within the 'allowed protocol'). Homosexuality and bisexuality are allowed. But that is about all; that is how far 'freedom' usually stretches.

Rebellion is not only discouraged, it is fought against, brutally. For the tiniest misdemeanors or errors, people end up behind bars. As a result, the U.S. has more prisoners per capita than any other country on Earth, except the Seychelles.

Andre Vltchek's latest book is : The Great October Socialist Revolution: Impact on the World and Birth of Internationalism

Information on his other books and films

Luther Blisst , says: September 23, 2020 at 11:21 pm GMT

Andre taunted rightwing elites and illness – with a passion. I guess one of them caught up.

Living hard seems like a death-wish, maybe it was. Staring at darkness messes people up and he traveled again and again into the hearts of darkness across the planet because he wanted to be a modern Wilfred Burchett. He was one of the greats. My condolences to his family and friends.

Peace to Stephen Cohen too. You both will be missed.

PetrOldSack , says: September 24, 2020 at 11:00 am GMT

André Vltchek was not an intellectual heavyweight. What is fascinating about his life-story is how and who financed. That should be easy for insiders to fish out, and insiders there be.

As to my humble opinion, Chomsky was neither. From all angles, his pre-fabricated prestige, his in-group attitudes, his encrusted prestance, pettiness, pedantry, always within convention, his factoid approach, the channels of communication, the lack of any systemic approach, his "good guys bad guys" copper´ approach, did not warrant the few hours listening in on his tune and omni-presence. His numb personality, contrary to the combative Vltchek is noted as a minor.

Some "intellectuals" have half a page of original content in them over the course of a life-time (not the same as career (n´est ce pas Pinker?)), most have none. "History repeat itself", through the bull-horns of public intellectuals. They both practiced a sort of journalism that is superficial (accent on the superficial) agenda driven.

They both are within the K. B. range.

No Friend Of The Devil , says: September 24, 2020 at 9:07 pm GMT

@Robert Konrad,

Ex-CIA John Kiriakou stated that the CIA was attempting to recruit just about anyone that they were able to starting in the sixties ranging from Hollywood actors/actresses, musicians, writers, journalists, artists, business people, just about anyone. Operation Mockingbird is still widely used even if it is no longer regerred to it as Operation Mockingbird.

brabantian , says: September 26, 2020 at 11:14 am GMT

André Vltchek (1962-2020) was the son of a Czech nuclear physicist father, and a Russian-Chinese artist-architect mother, born in Soviet-era St Petersburg (then Leningrad). He spent part of his childhood as well in the famous Czech beer city of Pilsen.

Here, an article where Vltchek talked about his roots, and his nostalgia for life under Communism in eastern Europe
https://www.chinadailyhk.com/article/134280#How-we-sold-Soviet-Union-and-Czechoslovakia-for-plastic-shopping-bags

Eulogy for André Vltchek by China expert Jeff J Brown

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EmCFRyDLDJU?feature=oembed

Adûnâi , says: Website September 26, 2020 at 2:12 pm GMT

Western culture is clearly obsessed with rules, guilt, submissiveness and punishment.

What culture is not? Every single population on Earth wants to survive, Westerners want non-Aryans to survive, but the mechanism is always the same. The Stasi, the Gestapo, the CIA, the KGB – they all breathed air, and they all tortured dissenters. Turkey was almost overthrown in 2016. The Shah of Iran was, as were Hosni Mubarak and Gaddafi in Egypt and Libya. Bashar is facing quite a lot of criticism for being free – that critique comes in the form of bombs and jihadi freedom fighters. The Saudi Prince is wise for strangling and beheading Khashoggi. The USSR disintegrated after they had shut down the GULAG.

As a result, the U.S. has more prisoners per capita than any other country on Earth, except the Seychelles.

In 2012, the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in [the DPR of Korea] estimated 150,000 to 200,000 are incarcerated, based on testimonies of defectors from the state police bureau, which roughly equals 600–800 people incarcerated per 100,000.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate

The World Prison Brief puts the United States' incarceration rate at 655 per 100,000.

Anon [790] Disclaimer , says: September 26, 2020 at 5:27 pm GMT

Okay. If the West is the least free society on the planet, why the heck do all these third-world people keep trying to move there? It is plain that Vltchek's thinking flunks the real-world reality test.

The reality is, the rest of the world is worse off than the West, or people wouldn't keep trying to leave the third world for the West.

Robert Konrad , says: September 27, 2020 at 12:50 am GMT
@Anon ey want to have freedom of their stupid religious beliefs, not freedom from religion. They still don't know that freedom of religion is not worth anything if it also doesn't guarantee freedom from religion.

Thomas Jefferson tried very hard to explain this to them, but Yankee morons have never learned what Jefferson tried to teach them. (With some notable exceptions, though, who, however, have absolutely no political power.)

Vltchek is/was right: American/Western civilization [sic] (siphilization, rather) is bankrupt and inhuman. It can only offer an abundance of material goods and military weapons as if the only goals of human life were material things and warfare.

[Sep 25, 2020] Fiona Hill still pushes "Russian Meddling" narrative

It is difficult to teach old chickenhawk a new tricks. Looks like she is a real "national security parasite" and will stay is this role till the bitter end.
"America's world management, NATO, the European Union and the construction of establishments and alliances the US constructed after World War II have taken a hit." took hit because of the crisis of neoliberalism not so much because of Russia resistance to the USA neoliberal domination and unwillingness to became a vassal state a la EU states, Japan and GB.
Her hostile remark confirms grave mistake of allowing immigrants to occupy high position in the US foreign policy hierarchy. They bring with themselves "ancient hatred"
Only a blind (or a highly indoctrinated/brainwashed) person is unable to see where all these neocon policies are leading...
Notable quotes:
"... America's world management, NATO, the European Union and the construction of establishments and alliances the US constructed after World War II have taken a hit ..."
"... "They lost the entire US political class ..."
Sep 25, 2020 | newschant.com

Fiona Hill, the National Security Council's senior director for European and Russian affairs till 2019, says divisions are rising inside the Kremlin over the knowledge of persevering with a "dirty tricks" marketing campaign that's had combined outcomes and will now face diminishing returns.

On the one hand, Russia's 2016 affect operations succeeded past the Kremlin's wildest goals. The US-dominated, unipolar world that Putin has lengthy railed in opposition to is now not. America's world management, NATO, the European Union and the construction of establishments and alliances the US constructed after World War II have taken a hit. "On that ledger, wow, yes, basically over-fulfilled the plan," mentioned Hill.

At the identical time, getting caught in the act of making an attempt to sabotage US democracy has proved pricey. "They lost the entire US political class and politicized ties so that the whole future of US-Russia relations now depends on who wins in November," she mentioned.

[May 30, 2020] Kevin Barrett Interviews Bioweapons Expert Meryl Nass, 4-5-20

Highly recommended!
One very plausible hypothesis is that coronavirus will probably "militarizes the United States even more than 9/11" So the escape from a lab could be orgnized by the same forces which did 9/11 and anthrax attack.
Notable quotes:
"... Well, let me just say two of them I would call spooks with Ph.Ds, who have come out and done research on a whole very odd collection of subjects, all of which the US government has tried to cover up in the past. So I'll just name some of those things: Gulf War Syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, anthrax vaccine induced illnesses, autism, Ebola, and coronavirus ..."
"... And there were very effective biological weapons made and used in the period around World War 2 and subsequent to it that are documented in the literature. There are no books telling you what's been made in the last 10 years. But we know a lot about what was made 50 to 80 years ago. ..."
"... in my understanding of biological warfare, no country used a biological agent against another country if they didn't think they could control it. If they thought it might blow back onto their country, it wouldn't be used. So historically, I don't think this is the kind of agent that would deliberately be used at a nation level. ..."
"... As long as there is no huge history-changing event that radically ends this trajectory that we're on and that there's no obvious way off of, the US essentially will acquiesce to Chinese global hegemony. And that is 100 percent unacceptable, even to sensible realists like Mearsheimer, much less the neocon fanatical crazies at places like PNAC looking for a new American century. ..."
"... And those people did 9/11-anthrax and they're back in power in the Trump administration. So Mearsheimer says that the only way to stop China's rise is essentially to destroy the global economy. He says even wrecking the U.S. economy along with the global economy would would be worth it because security is more important than prosperity. And this is a relatively sensible guy writing back in 2015. ..."
"... I don't see why they would be particularly averse to it escaping, going global and doing precisely what it's doing, because it is doing exactly what they want, which is destroying the global(ized) economy, which ultimately in the long run stops China's displacing the U.S. And number two, it militarizes the United States even more than 9/11 did. And they want to bring us back to the thirties and head towards a World War 2 situation to stop China, although they hope it may not be necessary to go that far. So basically, if the neocons didn't invent coronavirus, they would have had to invent some (similar) virus or its equivalent. This is precisely what one would have predicted five years ago would happen. ..."
"... first we could go to the neocon philosophy, which is that human flourishing only occurs during extreme situations of stress, suffering, struggle and strife epitomized by warfare. So for them, the only real purpose of human life is all out war to the death. And that's where heroic qualities emerge from human beings who are otherwise lazy and worthless. That's their basic philosophy of life. And then secondly -- ..."
"... No, wait a minute. If that's the neocon philosophy of life, why were they all chickenhawks? Have any of them gone to war? ..."
"... Well, that's the point. They're projecting these fantasies in the privacy of their studies and their twisted, warped imaginations. But yeah, they're happy to inflict this suffering and struggle and death on everybody else. And they want the other guy to be the one to die, of course. And so I assume that they're planning to not be casualties of this disaster that they're setting off. But setting the philosophical thing aside, I think that strategically they are really planning for this to take down the current globalized economy, to force countries to go back to more localized manufacturing, certainly to follow Trump's and Kissinger's neocon agenda, the anti-China agenda of bringing back manufacturing to the US. ..."
May 30, 2020 | www.patreon.com
Audio Player

Dr. Meryl Nass is a world-class bioweapons expert. She recently published a must-read article: Why are some of the US' top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2?

It seems that the usual-suspect Lancet authors who were trotted out to dismiss the "bioweapon conspiracy theory" are the same kind of so-called scientists as the NIST "experts" who assured us that WTC-7 miraculously disappeared at free-fall into its own footprint due to minor office fires.

Kevin Barrett: Truth Jihad Radio is often the best place to go for the most important stories that the mainstream won't cover. Today I'm talking to Meryl Nass . She's an expert who has written a very important article about how the propaganda push by very suspicious scientists to claim that Covid-19 couldn't possibly be bioweaponized is a red flag that everybody should be paying attention to.

But you won't see anything about this in the corporate controlled mainstream Mockingbird media. So please help this kind of material continue to come to light, by subscribing to DrKevinBarrett at Patreon.com .

Welcome to Truth Jihad Radio. I'm Kevin Barrett searching fearlessly for truth in all of the most forbidden places, bringing on people who are also going to those kinds of places. And sometimes I find genuine experts on various subjects. And we have one of those with us today, Meryl Nass. She is definitely one of the go-to experts on biological warfare related topics. Yet for some reason, the mainstream media isn't going to her. I wonder why that would be. Maybe because the things she wrote about the anthrax attacks back in 2001 were a little bit too truthful. Anyway, she's got some very interesting posts up now at her anthrax vaccine blog . But first, before we jump into that, let me just say that when I say she's an expert: She has consulted for the World Bank. She's testified to Congress. She diagnosed Zimbabwe's 1978 anthrax epidemic as an episode of biological warfare. She's consulted for Cuba's Ministry of Health on its optic and peripheral neuropathy epidemic, and on and on. So she has a pretty good, solid basis for her views.

And she recently posted what I thought was a critically important piece " Why are some of the US' top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2? " pointing out, why is this that the top U.S. scientists are being trumpeted all over the media, making a specious argument about the natural origin of Sars CoV-2. So why are they, Meryl? Why is it that they're telling us this could not possibly be a bioweapon, and yet obviously it could?

Meryl Nass: Well, that's the $64,000 question, isn't it? Maybe we should go back and explain what I'm aware of that happened. Sometime in late February, a group of scientists, which included the former head of the National Science Foundation and a former top person at CDC, as well as a bunch of other people, many of whom had worked in the biological defense / biological warfare area -- possibly all of them had -- published a very short statement in The Lancet saying they wanted to stand with the Chinese public health officials and scientists and point out that rumors about the unnatural origin of coronavirus were a conspiracy theory and should be dismissed.

They didn't provide evidence, but they made this very strong statement in the top medical journal in the world, The Lancet . And so, OK. I have to say that the first author -- and it was alphabetical, so this is the first author alphabetically who signed that -- is someone that I was told about 27 years ago when I consulted in Cuba, when they had a very severe epidemic of blindness and other neurologic symptoms. And it turned out it was due to cyanide.

Anyway, they named this particular person, this researcher, as having come to Cuba and identified the fact that there were Aedes mosquitoes in Cuba. Which the person had not been aware of. And shortly thereafter, the Cubans were attacked with the illness Dengue , which is a viral disease transmitted by a Aedes mosquitoes. So the Cubans blame this person who worked for a federal agency for their Dengue outbreak .

There were two. They were the first in 100 years, I think, in the Western Hemisphere. And if I remember correctly, this was a long time ago, about 150 or more Cubans died, mostly small children, as a result of the Dengue epidemics. So I thought, that's interesting that this bio-warrior is signing a statement saying that the core idea that the coronavirus might be due to a biological warfare construct should be dismissed outright as a conspiracy theory.

Kevin Barrett: Wow. What a coincidence, that that would be the guy who would do that. You say he's the first author alphabetically?

Meryl Nass: Yes.

Kevin Barrett: Well, we can figure out who that is then.

Meryl Nass: A group of five scientists, and I knew of several of them. I've been in contact with at least one of them in the past, and they too were sort of biological defense, biological warfare people. Well, let me just say two of them I would call spooks with Ph.Ds, who have come out and done research on a whole very odd collection of subjects, all of which the US government has tried to cover up in the past. So I'll just name some of those things: Gulf War Syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, anthrax vaccine induced illnesses, autism, Ebola, and coronavirus .

So that's an odd group of different things that you might be researching and writing about. But oddly enough, a couple of these scientists have chosen that obscure group of things that are somewhat unrelated to each other to comment about. And so these five scientists wrote a piece in Nature Medicine which claimed to have found the scientific linchpin to be able to make the argument that the new coronavirus is a natural occurrence. And the argument they made was that had it been constructed in the lab, it would have used the particular backbone that laboratorians know about. But because it didn't have that backbone, it couldn't possibly be a lab construct.

The problem with that argument is basically it was a straw man argument. They said, well, if I were going to make the novel coronavirus, I would have made it this way. But because it isn't made that way, it's not a lab construct. Of course, you can make the novel coronavirus a lot of different ways. And I pointed out three different ways one might have come up with a novel coronavirus that weren't using the method they suggested.

And I've gotten confirmation. I'm a physician, I'm not a scientist, but I did work in a lab. I went to M.I.T.. So I do know biology, although I am not well versed in modern genetic engineering. But I do know a lot about how biological weapons used to be made, how they were made before and during World War 2 and afterwards. And there were very effective biological weapons made and used in the period around World War 2 and subsequent to it that are documented in the literature. There are no books telling you what's been made in the last 10 years. But we know a lot about what was made 50 to 80 years ago.

So I then looked at the connections between the first group of scientists who had published in The Lancet and the second group that had published in Nature Medicine and found that well, for example, that the person I mentioned before who had been to Cuba and looked at the Aedes mosquitoes, even though that person is now of the retirement age, is a member of the institute of one of the second authors. And I saw other connections between these two groups.

Kevin Barrett: Sounds like the usual suspects.

Meryl Nass: Yes, exactly. It seemed that the second group, anyway, the guys who were trotted out to provide the last word on all these other controversial medical subjects had been again trotted out to provide the last word. Then I thought, who else is talking about this? And when I looked that up, I found the head of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, an MD-Ph.D, cited the work of these five scientists to say basically now we've proven that this is a natural occurrence and everyone can forget about the conspiracy theory. And he further said if you're if you're concerned about what you read about coronavirus, just go to the FEMA website where they are telling you what is a rumor and what isn't. So I thought, well, that's interesting that the policy makers or the people who pull the strings are able to pull Francis Collins' strings and get him to comment on this, again agreeing with an argument that he must have known to be specious.

Kevin Barrett: You don't have to comment on this, but this sure reminds me of what's been going on post-9/11, with first the ridiculous FEMA report on the so-called collapses of the Trade Center towers and then the NIST reports culminating in the most absurd one of all, the NIST report on Building 7. Throughout that whole process, the usual suspect so-called scientists were putting out utter baloney and rubber stamping it, and all the officials were rubber stamping it mindlessly, and any independent voices speaking common sense and truth were marginalized.

Meryl Nass: Yes. So that is of course what's happening here. And it's very helpful, it seems, to be able to identify them as this same group, the same group who can be used over and over and over again over decades to whitewash what the system wants whitewashed. And then you look at their grants. Ugh! Some of these people are making unbelievable grants.

Kevin Barrett: They're probably flying on Epstein's Lolita Express and things like that, too.

Meryl Nass: That I did not look up.

Kevin Barrett: I wouldn't be surprised, anyway.

Meryl Nass: There is a lot of money flowing through their laboratories. So anyway, the final point I made was that every scientist who signed these two documents and then Francis Collins has had something to do with biological defense. If you're a top scientist in the U.S. government, you are asked to look into pandemics and the risk that they could be due to a biological weapon. And so as far as I could tell, virtually all these people have had some background in looking at these things. And they're all old. They all remember the days before the last three decades of genetic engineering and they all must realize, if they have any competence as scientists, that there are other ways to create biological agents, microorganisms. And so for them to all have signed this, knowing that, just makes you wonder -- why did they do this?

They presumably did it because they had some sense that it was a lab organism. Perhaps it was a lab escape and perhaps they were trying to protect the whole enterprise of biological defense, which is a multibillion dollar yearly industry that feeds many, many people, including themselves.

Kevin Barrett: I would argue that's a relatively innocent explanation. There are worse ones than that.

Meryl Nass: The interesting thing is that all these countries do research together. So China, US, (former) Soviet Union, Ukraine All different countries send people to labs in other countries to work on micro-organisms. So you can put your finger on people from many different countries who were working on bat coronaviruses in labs around the world. And this could have been a lab escape from many different places. I mean, it could have been a deliberate attack. But in my understanding of biological warfare, no country used a biological agent against another country if they didn't think they could control it. If they thought it might blow back onto their country, it wouldn't be used. So historically, I don't think this is the kind of agent that would deliberately be used at a nation level.

Kevin Barrett: Let me just give you a possible opposing argument. John Mearsheimer wrote in, I believe 2015, in a very famous article about China's unpeaceful rise that said, in so many words, the US is stuck between a rock and a hard place in terms of trying to contain China's rise, which is based on its double digit growth averaging out since 1980 or so. And that that growth inevitably is pushing China to break out of U.S. containment in Asia and become a regional hegemon, which is unacceptable to U.S. decision makers. And more likely, it will actually "pose global challenges" meaning displace the U.S. as global hegemon as well, simply based on its economic growth, which now has supposedly slowed to maybe 8 percent. But still, the differential between that and the U.S. and its Western allies is such that within a decade or two, at the very most, it's a done deal. As long as there is no huge history-changing event that radically ends this trajectory that we're on and that there's no obvious way off of, the US essentially will acquiesce to Chinese global hegemony. And that is 100 percent unacceptable, even to sensible realists like Mearsheimer, much less the neocon fanatical crazies at places like PNAC looking for a new American century.

And those people did 9/11-anthrax and they're back in power in the Trump administration. So Mearsheimer says that the only way to stop China's rise is essentially to destroy the global economy. He says even wrecking the U.S. economy along with the global economy would would be worth it because security is more important than prosperity. And this is a relatively sensible guy writing back in 2015.

I've argued with Ron Unz about this. He he thinks it would have been a U.S. attack designed not to escape China, like previous U.S. (bio-)attacks on China. But I don't see why they would be particularly averse to it escaping, going global and doing precisely what it's doing, because it is doing exactly what they want, which is destroying the global(ized) economy, which ultimately in the long run stops China's displacing the U.S. And number two, it militarizes the United States even more than 9/11 did. And they want to bring us back to the thirties and head towards a World War 2 situation to stop China, although they hope it may not be necessary to go that far. So basically, if the neocons didn't invent coronavirus, they would have had to invent some (similar) virus or its equivalent. This is precisely what one would have predicted five years ago would happen.

Meryl Nass: That's a reasonable argument. But the economy is not being totally destroyed. It's just that factories are, closed, people aren't going to work. Nothing's been destroyed. When we come out of this, China will still have all the factories and we will have all the monetarists and all the play money. So it seems like China could get its engines going a lot quicker than we can when we come out of it.

Kevin Barrett: We won't come out of it.

Meryl Nass: So if we don't come out of it, then it's not what the neocons chose.

Kevin Barrett: They don't want to come out of it. They want to wreck global prosperity while the U.S. still has most of the military hardware.

Meryl Nass: I'm sorry. I guess I don't understand that.

Kevin Barrett : Well, OK, first we could go to the neocon philosophy, which is that human flourishing only occurs during extreme situations of stress, suffering, struggle and strife epitomized by warfare. So for them, the only real purpose of human life is all out war to the death. And that's where heroic qualities emerge from human beings who are otherwise lazy and worthless. That's their basic philosophy of life. And then secondly --

Meryl Nass: No, wait a minute. If that's the neocon philosophy of life, why were they all chickenhawks? Have any of them gone to war?

Kevin Barrett : Well, that's the point. They're projecting these fantasies in the privacy of their studies and their twisted, warped imaginations. But yeah, they're happy to inflict this suffering and struggle and death on everybody else. And they want the other guy to be the one to die, of course. And so I assume that they're planning to not be casualties of this disaster that they're setting off. But setting the philosophical thing aside, I think that strategically they are really planning for this to take down the current globalized economy, to force countries to go back to more localized manufacturing, certainly to follow Trump's and Kissinger's neocon agenda, the anti-China agenda of bringing back manufacturing to the US.

Meryl Nass: And is there anything wrong with that? That seems to me a worthy goal.

Kevin Barrett: Well, actually, yes, I would support bringing back manufacturing. I would support never having sent it to China in the first place. However, it's in the context of their plan to stop China's rise. And China is just as committed to its rise as these guys are to stopping it. Which means a lot of danger of war and unpleasantness. And I think this is just the first shot of what's going to be a long round of war and unpleasantness through the next decade.

Meryl Nass: Perhaps. Right. We don't know. Another thing I've written is that the whole reason this (pandemic) is (being) stopped. My theory is that, I've tried to think like a politician -- and I did write this before the lockdown -- which is that what would have happened once this coronavirus had spread widely in the US, is that had it not been halted, we would have gotten to a point where the coronavirus had required way more medical facilities, personnel, equipment, etc. than we had, and there would be people dying without access to any medical care. And I thought that given that in America, based on polls, the one thing Americans want from their government is a health care system, and that the idea of people dying in the street without being able to get into a hospital was so beyond the pale for politicians who saw that they would never be re-elected under those circumstances, that they then did everything they could to stop that from happening. And by the point they decided to do something, the only thing that could be done was a lockdown. And then finally attempting to get more equipment, supplies and personnel.

Kevin Barrett: So, yeah, I agree, that's plausible.

Meryl Nass : That's what happened. And I'm sure everybody is trying to now use this very extraordinary circumstance to their own benefit in the near and far future.

Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I agree. We'll see. The thing is, if if you were planning this thing, assuming that my scenario and your scenario are both true, a very small group of people would have unleashed it, and then everybody else would be reacting according to their own self-interest, including the politicians doing precisely what you described.

Meryl Nass: Yeah, that's certainly possible.

Kevin Barrett: Yeah. And I'm using as my model for this 9/11, which is what I've studied quite a lot over the past nearly two decades. And I see parallels here between the two events in that 9/11 was about going to war with Islamic civilization, just as this seems to be a strike against Chinese civilization -- both occurring in the wake of the Samuel Huntington -- Bernard Lewis claim that "the clash of civilizations will be the new paradigm for us." And if it hadn't been for 9/11, that probably wouldn't have happened. There would've been no clash of civilizations per se.

Meryl Nass: I think, yes, you're right. And yet it looks like China is going to get out of this way more unscathed than we are.

Kevin Barrett: That's possible. Of course, you know, "they plot and Allah plots and Allah is the best of plotters." Ron Unz may be right that some of this may have been unforeseen. And it's also possible that I could be wrong. It could be a coincidence. Sometimes the coincidence theorists, even the craziest coincidence theorists, can be right once in awhile.

Meryl Nass: Well, yes, given the fact that there are documented many hundreds of lab escapes of different organisms, going by what's most likely, that seems to be the most likely explanation.

Kevin Barrett: Do you think that's what happened with Lyme disease? Willy Burgdorfer, whose name was applied to the spirochete organism that causes Lyme, is on record, filmed and recorded by Timothy Grey, confessing that he, Burgdorfer not only provided a name for the organism, but he unleashed it on the world as a U.S. biodefense guy. So a lot of people think Lyme was an external escape. Others hypothesize there may have been some U.S. versus Soviet element there, because Burgdorfer had a lot of money he was getting from somebody, and he was flying to places where he might have been meeting with Russians, et cetera. So have you looked into the Lyme issue?

... ... ...

  1. Harold Smith says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 4:38 am GMT • 100 Words @SBaker

    "Barking up a tree is more superstition then evidence unless you are a hunting dog. What about names, fingerprints, DNA evidence, contact with someone who was actually there and willing to talk? This is the real world, not superstitious nonsense."

    They're exploring hypotheses here, not going to trial. (BTW, the U.S. "government" would tell you you're full of shit. Things like DNA evidence, fingerprints, etc. are for suckers).

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Harold Smith says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 4:53 am GMT Is Francis Boyle still insisting – without any kind of evidence whatsoever – that SARS-CoV-2 came from the Wuhan lab? If so he's just a moron whose nonsense doesn't deserve any exposure, IMO.
  1. Parfois1 says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 9:32 am GMT • 600 Words

    Is Francis Boyle still insisting – without any kind of evidence whatsoever – that SARS-CoV-2 came from the Wuhan lab? If so he's just a moron whose nonsense doesn't deserve any exposure, IMO.

    He's a lawyer, therefore he'll play the devil's advocate – an useful role to validate a legitimate conclusion.

    @ Kevin Barrett

    Good on you, Ron Unz and all the cast to pursue the quest for the source of the Cv-19 pandemic and keep the question of biowarfare alive. An event unequal in human history in its sudden appearance, global reach, social and economic consequences, with attendant officially approved and orchestrated propaganda and a long chain of tell-tale "coincidences", must necessarily arouse the suspicion in every thinking person that the Masters of the Universe are up with their usual tricks of attempting to re-shape the world according to their designs and goals.

    All major historical events have arisen, apart from the rare natural cataclysms, from Man's actions, mostly the result of a single conspiracy from which, in turn, originate predictable and unpredictable reactions and other conspiracies. Any plan or scheme to alter the existing status quo starts as a conspiracy whether a band of professional robbers or politicians; it is in the nature of things that any organizational project or task involves the co-operation of individuals as a group to achieve a particular aim and, if in the prosecution of that aim a certain amount of discretion is necessary to have an advantage over the potential opposing side, a conspiracy takes place. Most of governments' actions are conspiracies and their legitimacy and propriety should be probed and investigated. To counter that, most (perhaps all) governments erect "official secrets acts" walls to hide their conspiracies and set up counter-information departments.

    This pandemic has risen a conspirational stench because it stinks of malodorous human interference with the natural order for a purpose unknown, the first characteristic of a conspiracy. The same could be said about the World Trade Centre incident because the official explanation is at variance with the physics natural order, hence its conspiracy credentials because the government is openly hiding the true facts, as a conspirator does.

    As Barrett has noted (and so have other commenters here at UR) the US is at a cross-roads in its history where it must set a course of its own making to counter the rise of China as an economic superpower. The US official policy is to prevent the emergence of any rival power, even a regional one in places where the US has no legitimate concerns, and China must be hindered, blocked and neutralized. So far, nothing has worked to stop the Chinese economic juggernaut and the usual solution of going to war is fraught with danger. Yes, the US could nuke China (as the only military advantage it may have over China) but at a huge cost to itself, both militarily and reputationally. Besides, facing the opprobrium of the world and a resurgent Russia (which would not let the opportunity to be wasted) the US would be doomed. Even the clowns and puppets that masquerade as government in Washington know that the "military solution" is out. Meanwhile, every year China is getting bigger and better and time is of the essence, as Barrett noted.

    What can be done to stop China then? Hybrid warfare (sanctions, blockades, threats, propaganda) is not working either, but China, for the time being, has an Achilles heel: international trade, in which it depends for continuing its economic development. If sanctions and threats against China's trading partners don't work, how about bringing the whole international trade edifice down a la World Trade Centre? If the world global economy is seriously disrupted, countries won't be able to trade and there goes the Chinese trump card. Enter Covid-19.

  1. utu says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 9:59 am GMT • 400 Words SARS-CoV-2 was already pre-adapted to human transmission.

    SARS-CoV-2 is well adapted for humans. What does this mean for re-emergence?
    Shing Hei Zhan, Benjamin E. Deverman, Yujia Alina Chan

    Two authors with: Stanley Center for Psychiatric Research, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.073262v1.full.pdf

    "Our observations suggest that by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, it was already pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV. However, no precursors or branches of evolution stemming from a less human-adapted SARS-CoV-2-like virus have been detected. "

    " and examine the environmental samples from the Wuhan Huanan seafood market. Importantly, the market samples are genetically identical to human SARS-CoV-2 isolates and were therefore most likely from human sources."

    Where did RaTG13 come from?

    Was Shi Zhengli engaging in some cover up, alibi [for whom?] constructing when she published her January 23, 2020 paper:

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.22.914952v2.full

    " on January 23, Shi Zhengli released a paper indicating that CoV2 is 96% identical to RaTG13, a strain which her laboratory had previously isolated from Yunnan bats in 2013. However, outside of her lab, no one knew about that strain until January 2020." – Yuri Deigin, medium.com

    The fact she revealed RaTG13 as her deus ex machina is somewhat odd, that RaTG13 which was sequenced and analyzed was not published and not cataloged soon after its discovery in 2013 is, I would think, strange. And supposedly there is no samples of RaTG13 in the lab. All they have is its sequence in the computer, though, this perhaps might be normal for lab procedures, which I know nothing about.

    RaTG13 is not that close to SARS-CoV-2.

    https://medium.com/@yurideigin/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748
    Reports show that pangolins are potentially the intermediate host, but pangolin viruses are 88–98% identical to SARS-CoV-2. In comparison, civet and racoon dog strains of SARS coronaviruses were 99.8% identical to SARS-CoV from 2003. In other words, we are talking about a handful of mutations between civet strains, racoon dog strains and human strains in 2003. Pangolins [strains of CoV2] have over 3000 nucleotide changes, no way they are the reservoir species.

  1. Alfred says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 10:30 am GMT • 200 Words @Morton's toes Before inventing a hypothesis about powers and forces and geopolitics forming current events, you really need a historical analog. If it has never happened before, anywhere, any time, then you are making an argument which has a form of this time it is different.

    How about Lyme Disease? Just look at a map of how it is spreading and where it started. Humans have lived in this area for many thousands of years – without any such infection. Don't you think that it is a little suspicious that it should start in the USA and in the 1980's?

    TPTB are trying to blame it on "Climate Change". Well, the climate has changed many times in the past. Anyway, there are areas of the USA that are warmer than New England so why did it not start there?

    It is pretty obvious to anyone with the ability to think critically that Lyme Disease was created in the USA and in a laboratory in New England – a leading research area.

    Lyme Disease Maps: Historical Data

    Read More • Replies: @utu Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. utu says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 10:54 am GMT Discernment between deliberate and natural infectious disease outbreaks
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2870591/ Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. utu says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 10:59 am GMT • 100 Words @Alfred Plum Island Animal Disease Center
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plum_Island_Animal_Disease_Center

    Theories: Did Lyme Disease Originate On Plum Island?
    https://aspenn.com/guide-overview/theories-did-lyme-disease-originate-plum-island/
    _____________

    West Nile virus
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Nile_virus

    Vermont Senator Wants Study Of Terror Link to West Nile Virus
    https://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/13/us/vermont-senator-wants-study-of-terror-link-to-west-nile-virus.html

  1. davidgmillsatty says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 12:26 pm GMT • 100 Words Are you going to discuss the pangolin hypothesis as well?

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2313-x

    There are two ways viruses mutate, replication and recombination. It seems highly unlikely that Covid 19 was a naturally occurring replication, hence the support for some kind of man-made virus.

    However, it does seem quite possible, even highly probable that this was a mutation by recombination, the most likely candidate being a mix of bat corona virus and pangolin corona virus.

    Until we get the virology nailed down, blaming governments or labs is just politics and not science.

  1. Corvinus says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT • 700 Words @SBaker "Can we blame it on the virus, even if it was manufactured in the evil labs of the US or China, as has been convincingly suggested by Ron Unz?"

    Suggested, yes. Convincingly? No.

    The Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China.
    January 14, 2020, World Health Organization

    There is no evidence that the coronavirus was created in a laboratory.
    April 20, 2020, The Conversation

    The World Health Organization reiterated that the coronavirus which causes COVID-19 is "natural in origin." Scientists who are examining the genetic sequences of the virus have assured "again and again that this virus is natural in origin."
    May 1, 2020

    Dr. Anthony Fauci, a renowned U.S. infectious disease expert, has said that there is no scientific evidence to back the theory that the coronavirus was made in a Chinese laboratory. "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what's out there now, the scientific evidence is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated," he said.
    May 4, 2020, National Geographic

    WHO says it has no evidence to support 'speculative' Covid-19 lab theory
    May 5, 2020, The Guardian

    The British government has not seen any evidence to suggest that the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 was man-made.
    May 9, 2020, UK Health Minister Matt Hancock

    Scientists: 'Exactly zero' evidence COVID-19 came from a lab.
    May 12, 2020, Center for Infections Disease Research and Policy

    Evidence of COVID's natural origin mounts even as conspiracy theory about Chinese lab refuses to die
    May 13, 2020, Cornell Alliance for Science

    Mr. Unz can't have his cake and eat it, too. On one hand, he tacitly encourages readers to peddle this "Fake News" mantra. On the other hand, he latches on to MSM stories that seemingly support his conclusions. He inferred that we ought to trust ABC News, which cited four separate intelligence sources that a government report *existed* that Covid-19 is a bioweapon. Of course that report "exists". Whether or not that report constitutes a "smoking gun" in an entirely different matter. But I thought that ANYTHING that comes from U.S. intelligence ought not to be trusted. Because Deep State. It would appear that those stories which supports his predisposed narrative, he takes stock in, and for other stories that go against his truth grain, he vigorously questions their veracity, at best, or totally discards.

    Ultimately, a fine number of readers here believe the source he used is part of FAKE NEWS. I would like to know how Mr. Unz would respond to their repeated accusation that ALL of the mainstream media reporting are lies. Here is Anon 223 stating that we ought NOT to trust ABC News.

    I wouldn't take the ABC news report at face value. Essentially, most of the Federal Government despises Trump, and want an excuse to make him look bad. Stating that the coronavirus was known since November would make Trump look bad since he didn't do anything(though he does look bad ). This the same organization that states continuously that Trump had allied with Russia and that he had a hooker pee on him in a Russian hotel.

    Now, if we go by the assumption that Mr. Unz "carefully reads" several MSM publications, then would it not be probable that other people also carry out this same course of action? Would not those people be properly equipped to counter his line of thinking if they underwent a similar process? Or does Mr. Unz possess a unique skillset they ultimately lack?

    "The Global Lockdown is a massive worldwide reset mechanism, deliberately engineered, designed to knock over the chessboard and scatter the pieces, forcing the players to either start over or to create new, invented positions on the board"

    This statement here personifies the descent into modern anti-intellectualism. This insistence that a Globalist cabal will destroy the white race once and for all is predicated on the notion that the Deep State is pulling the strings through a series of coordinated false flags, with high IQ whites being duped along the way by a complicit media. Proof? Not required. But anyone dare to question this general Alt-Right, Q-driven narrative, and (whallah) one is deemed a purveyor of Fake News. Hey, no need to critically think when under the impression that ANY and ALL news from the MSM is doctored, altered, or outright lies.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Desert Fox says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT • 100 Words The coronavirus scam was unleashed to provide trillions to bail out wall street and at the same time bring in UN Agenda 2030 draconian, diabolical, demonic controls over humanity, using the fake coronavirus scare , which it a total scam.

    Gates and Fauci and all involved in this scam should be arrested for crimes against humanity!

  1. Alfred says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 1:33 pm GMT • 100 Words Bioweapon Hypothesis

    This virus is man-made, but it is not a bioweapon.

    The real weapon was the fake media that is controlled by a handful of people. All the countries that went into a national lockdown, including Russia, have a media controlled by Zionists.

    The mainstream media is ignoring the fact that the CDC has admitted the death rate for COVID-19 is actually lower than the flu. This is happening as the media admits that the antibody tests are wrong 50% of the time!

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  1. 2020crazzetrain says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 2:38 pm GMT • 100 Words Great article, Mr. Unz. The US is the consummate propaganda machine!
    Mr. Romanoff's 3 part series on Bio-Weapons , among other things, such as 'The Untold History of the United States' on Netflix; opened my eyes to just how diabolical these global technocratic, psychos have been for as long as I've been alive.
    Fort Detrick was likely place of origin for 'the engineered virus'.
  1. Harold Smith says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 2:53 pm GMT • 100 Words @davidgmillsatty

    "Until we get the virology nailed down, blaming governments or labs is just politics and not science."

    Well that makes sense, but you're preaching to the choir.

    As we would expect, the problem is the corrupt U.S. "government," which is already publicly blaming the enemy du jour, China, without any evidence to back up its claims. And the U.S. "government" is making threats and already taking some action based on those unsupported claims.

    It may be of benefit to humanity if some doubt can be immediately cast on the specious claims of the U.S. "government."

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Robert White says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 3:10 pm GMT • 400 Words Real Probability of SARS-2-nCoV-19 being a bioweaponized nCoronavirus imbued with Gain-ofFunction properties, and Dual Use applications is in fact P=1 given pathogenicity, asymptomatic & undetectable spread, and aged cohort fatalities in Long Term Care environments.

    Epidemiologically, a Six Sigma collapse of the entirety of all Long Term Care facilities in the world would devastate the infrastructure for Tertiary Care Hospitals worldwide via spread & vectoring of this deadly man made Pandemic Pathogen.

    To assert that SARS-2-nCoV-19 is merely yet another nCoronavirus that has manifested naturally whilst asserting on the other hand that it could not possibly be a man made bioweaponized nCoronavirus is a lesson in doublespeak when evidence is not forthcoming for the assertions.

    Real scientists are evidenced based via Empiricism proper. Propagandists don't utilize evidenced based argumentation as that would undermine their task to win hearts & minds one step at a time.
    NIST manufactured so-called 'evidence' that was NOT peer-reviewed whatsoever. The bioweaponized SARS-2-nCoV-19 will undergo the same propagandization process utilized for the CIA Controlled Demolition of the Trade Centers in NYC.

    Most researchers continue to neglect mention of the 2014 Cambridge Working Group Call to Action on Gain-of-Function Dual Use Pandemic Pathogen manufacturing in USA Biosafety Level Four laboratories, but it is key to the historical patterns & USA finance of the global industry of Pandemic Pathogen manufacturing in global BSL-4 laboratories that are primarily funded by USA taxpayers the world over.

    Most researchers also fail to mention that the United States of America is a culture of death & extreme text book Psychopathy via Central Intelligence Agency acts of genocide on a global basis.
    The historiography is replete with evidence that the United States of America is funding the lion's share of Pandemic Pathogen research in BSL-4 labs worldwide, and they are also the most likely & probable culprits for any & all Pandemic Pathogen outbreaks whether accidental or otherwise intentional.

    American is a continent of liars, thieves, and text book Psychopaths helming the political sphere and obviously lost hegemonic status worldwide 2020. In 2016 we were led to believe that if the USA voted in a true text book Psychopath like Trump and facilitated a bogus meme to run on like Make America Great Again-MAGA, we would all live happily ever after until the next round of elections manifested that produced a Democrat replacement.

    Neocons & Republicans always utilize threats of war to finagle their way through terms of corruption whilst pillaging the financial system globally. Today is no different politically from any other Republican term of office whereby violence & threats of violence are their only tools of choice.

    http://www.cambridgeworkinggroup.org/

    RW

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Sean says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 4:05 pm GMT • 400 Words 'American neoconservatives' can only mean the crypto Zionist Jews of the Israel Lobby, and as they are far more worried about Israel than America, to credibly propose US neocons as the authors of a bioweapon attack on China, it is necessary to explain how that would benefit Israel. Or, at least how it might have been calculated by US neocons to be in the interests of Jewish American Zionist aspirations for Israel. A continuing close relationship between Israel and America is the prerequisite for all Zionist hopes for the future. I think the only scenario for neocons attacking China with a bioweapon is they thought it necessary to save Israel from its own leadership. Last December Netanyahu's son said British diplomats should be "kicked out" of Israel because of their reference to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Israel has clearly no fear of anything the international community says about the West Bank Palestinians. American support is a given and while Trump is in office Israel formally annexing the West Bank and penning its Palestinian population up in Bantustans is something American neoconservatives can and will bring about. Unless there is something else Israel is doing that makes sustaining the pro Israel stance geopolitically impossible.

    There is such an obstacle to Trump acquicing in the annexation of the occupied territories: a burgeoning collaboration between China and Israel. China running the Israeli port that US Navy warships dock at and China building the world's biggest desalination plant in Israel (supposedly a key ME ally of the US) is not something that any US president could or would accept. Trump is absolutely going to have to act to counter it, and because the Netanyahu family will be handsomely paid off by the Chinese (valuing the Israel Lobby as a wedge against Trump's China trade policy) there is a possibility that Israel annexing the West Bank will be the begining of the end of the US-Israel, special relationship. It sort of makes sense for the US neoconservatives worried about Israel to attack China in order to separate it from Israel. However from what I have read the Israel Lobby is subservient to Israeli politicians.

[May 30, 2020] Kevin Barrett Interviews Bioweapons Expert Meryl Nass, 4-5-20

Highly recommended!
One very plausible hypothesis is that coronavirus will probably "militarizes the United States even more than 9/11" So the escape from a lab could be orgnized by the same forces which did 9/11 and anthrax attack.
Notable quotes:
"... Well, let me just say two of them I would call spooks with Ph.Ds, who have come out and done research on a whole very odd collection of subjects, all of which the US government has tried to cover up in the past. So I'll just name some of those things: Gulf War Syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, anthrax vaccine induced illnesses, autism, Ebola, and coronavirus ..."
"... And there were very effective biological weapons made and used in the period around World War 2 and subsequent to it that are documented in the literature. There are no books telling you what's been made in the last 10 years. But we know a lot about what was made 50 to 80 years ago. ..."
"... in my understanding of biological warfare, no country used a biological agent against another country if they didn't think they could control it. If they thought it might blow back onto their country, it wouldn't be used. So historically, I don't think this is the kind of agent that would deliberately be used at a nation level. ..."
"... As long as there is no huge history-changing event that radically ends this trajectory that we're on and that there's no obvious way off of, the US essentially will acquiesce to Chinese global hegemony. And that is 100 percent unacceptable, even to sensible realists like Mearsheimer, much less the neocon fanatical crazies at places like PNAC looking for a new American century. ..."
"... And those people did 9/11-anthrax and they're back in power in the Trump administration. So Mearsheimer says that the only way to stop China's rise is essentially to destroy the global economy. He says even wrecking the U.S. economy along with the global economy would would be worth it because security is more important than prosperity. And this is a relatively sensible guy writing back in 2015. ..."
"... I don't see why they would be particularly averse to it escaping, going global and doing precisely what it's doing, because it is doing exactly what they want, which is destroying the global(ized) economy, which ultimately in the long run stops China's displacing the U.S. And number two, it militarizes the United States even more than 9/11 did. And they want to bring us back to the thirties and head towards a World War 2 situation to stop China, although they hope it may not be necessary to go that far. So basically, if the neocons didn't invent coronavirus, they would have had to invent some (similar) virus or its equivalent. This is precisely what one would have predicted five years ago would happen. ..."
"... first we could go to the neocon philosophy, which is that human flourishing only occurs during extreme situations of stress, suffering, struggle and strife epitomized by warfare. So for them, the only real purpose of human life is all out war to the death. And that's where heroic qualities emerge from human beings who are otherwise lazy and worthless. That's their basic philosophy of life. And then secondly -- ..."
"... No, wait a minute. If that's the neocon philosophy of life, why were they all chickenhawks? Have any of them gone to war? ..."
"... Well, that's the point. They're projecting these fantasies in the privacy of their studies and their twisted, warped imaginations. But yeah, they're happy to inflict this suffering and struggle and death on everybody else. And they want the other guy to be the one to die, of course. And so I assume that they're planning to not be casualties of this disaster that they're setting off. But setting the philosophical thing aside, I think that strategically they are really planning for this to take down the current globalized economy, to force countries to go back to more localized manufacturing, certainly to follow Trump's and Kissinger's neocon agenda, the anti-China agenda of bringing back manufacturing to the US. ..."
May 30, 2020 | www.patreon.com
Audio Player

Dr. Meryl Nass is a world-class bioweapons expert. She recently published a must-read article: Why are some of the US' top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2?

It seems that the usual-suspect Lancet authors who were trotted out to dismiss the "bioweapon conspiracy theory" are the same kind of so-called scientists as the NIST "experts" who assured us that WTC-7 miraculously disappeared at free-fall into its own footprint due to minor office fires.

Kevin Barrett: Truth Jihad Radio is often the best place to go for the most important stories that the mainstream won't cover. Today I'm talking to Meryl Nass . She's an expert who has written a very important article about how the propaganda push by very suspicious scientists to claim that Covid-19 couldn't possibly be bioweaponized is a red flag that everybody should be paying attention to.

But you won't see anything about this in the corporate controlled mainstream Mockingbird media. So please help this kind of material continue to come to light, by subscribing to DrKevinBarrett at Patreon.com .

Welcome to Truth Jihad Radio. I'm Kevin Barrett searching fearlessly for truth in all of the most forbidden places, bringing on people who are also going to those kinds of places. And sometimes I find genuine experts on various subjects. And we have one of those with us today, Meryl Nass. She is definitely one of the go-to experts on biological warfare related topics. Yet for some reason, the mainstream media isn't going to her. I wonder why that would be. Maybe because the things she wrote about the anthrax attacks back in 2001 were a little bit too truthful. Anyway, she's got some very interesting posts up now at her anthrax vaccine blog . But first, before we jump into that, let me just say that when I say she's an expert: She has consulted for the World Bank. She's testified to Congress. She diagnosed Zimbabwe's 1978 anthrax epidemic as an episode of biological warfare. She's consulted for Cuba's Ministry of Health on its optic and peripheral neuropathy epidemic, and on and on. So she has a pretty good, solid basis for her views.

And she recently posted what I thought was a critically important piece " Why are some of the US' top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2? " pointing out, why is this that the top U.S. scientists are being trumpeted all over the media, making a specious argument about the natural origin of Sars CoV-2. So why are they, Meryl? Why is it that they're telling us this could not possibly be a bioweapon, and yet obviously it could?

Meryl Nass: Well, that's the $64,000 question, isn't it? Maybe we should go back and explain what I'm aware of that happened. Sometime in late February, a group of scientists, which included the former head of the National Science Foundation and a former top person at CDC, as well as a bunch of other people, many of whom had worked in the biological defense / biological warfare area -- possibly all of them had -- published a very short statement in The Lancet saying they wanted to stand with the Chinese public health officials and scientists and point out that rumors about the unnatural origin of coronavirus were a conspiracy theory and should be dismissed.

They didn't provide evidence, but they made this very strong statement in the top medical journal in the world, The Lancet . And so, OK. I have to say that the first author -- and it was alphabetical, so this is the first author alphabetically who signed that -- is someone that I was told about 27 years ago when I consulted in Cuba, when they had a very severe epidemic of blindness and other neurologic symptoms. And it turned out it was due to cyanide.

Anyway, they named this particular person, this researcher, as having come to Cuba and identified the fact that there were Aedes mosquitoes in Cuba. Which the person had not been aware of. And shortly thereafter, the Cubans were attacked with the illness Dengue , which is a viral disease transmitted by a Aedes mosquitoes. So the Cubans blame this person who worked for a federal agency for their Dengue outbreak .

There were two. They were the first in 100 years, I think, in the Western Hemisphere. And if I remember correctly, this was a long time ago, about 150 or more Cubans died, mostly small children, as a result of the Dengue epidemics. So I thought, that's interesting that this bio-warrior is signing a statement saying that the core idea that the coronavirus might be due to a biological warfare construct should be dismissed outright as a conspiracy theory.

Kevin Barrett: Wow. What a coincidence, that that would be the guy who would do that. You say he's the first author alphabetically?

Meryl Nass: Yes.

Kevin Barrett: Well, we can figure out who that is then.

Meryl Nass: A group of five scientists, and I knew of several of them. I've been in contact with at least one of them in the past, and they too were sort of biological defense, biological warfare people. Well, let me just say two of them I would call spooks with Ph.Ds, who have come out and done research on a whole very odd collection of subjects, all of which the US government has tried to cover up in the past. So I'll just name some of those things: Gulf War Syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome, anthrax vaccine induced illnesses, autism, Ebola, and coronavirus .

So that's an odd group of different things that you might be researching and writing about. But oddly enough, a couple of these scientists have chosen that obscure group of things that are somewhat unrelated to each other to comment about. And so these five scientists wrote a piece in Nature Medicine which claimed to have found the scientific linchpin to be able to make the argument that the new coronavirus is a natural occurrence. And the argument they made was that had it been constructed in the lab, it would have used the particular backbone that laboratorians know about. But because it didn't have that backbone, it couldn't possibly be a lab construct.

The problem with that argument is basically it was a straw man argument. They said, well, if I were going to make the novel coronavirus, I would have made it this way. But because it isn't made that way, it's not a lab construct. Of course, you can make the novel coronavirus a lot of different ways. And I pointed out three different ways one might have come up with a novel coronavirus that weren't using the method they suggested.

And I've gotten confirmation. I'm a physician, I'm not a scientist, but I did work in a lab. I went to M.I.T.. So I do know biology, although I am not well versed in modern genetic engineering. But I do know a lot about how biological weapons used to be made, how they were made before and during World War 2 and afterwards. And there were very effective biological weapons made and used in the period around World War 2 and subsequent to it that are documented in the literature. There are no books telling you what's been made in the last 10 years. But we know a lot about what was made 50 to 80 years ago.

So I then looked at the connections between the first group of scientists who had published in The Lancet and the second group that had published in Nature Medicine and found that well, for example, that the person I mentioned before who had been to Cuba and looked at the Aedes mosquitoes, even though that person is now of the retirement age, is a member of the institute of one of the second authors. And I saw other connections between these two groups.

Kevin Barrett: Sounds like the usual suspects.

Meryl Nass: Yes, exactly. It seemed that the second group, anyway, the guys who were trotted out to provide the last word on all these other controversial medical subjects had been again trotted out to provide the last word. Then I thought, who else is talking about this? And when I looked that up, I found the head of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, an MD-Ph.D, cited the work of these five scientists to say basically now we've proven that this is a natural occurrence and everyone can forget about the conspiracy theory. And he further said if you're if you're concerned about what you read about coronavirus, just go to the FEMA website where they are telling you what is a rumor and what isn't. So I thought, well, that's interesting that the policy makers or the people who pull the strings are able to pull Francis Collins' strings and get him to comment on this, again agreeing with an argument that he must have known to be specious.

Kevin Barrett: You don't have to comment on this, but this sure reminds me of what's been going on post-9/11, with first the ridiculous FEMA report on the so-called collapses of the Trade Center towers and then the NIST reports culminating in the most absurd one of all, the NIST report on Building 7. Throughout that whole process, the usual suspect so-called scientists were putting out utter baloney and rubber stamping it, and all the officials were rubber stamping it mindlessly, and any independent voices speaking common sense and truth were marginalized.

Meryl Nass: Yes. So that is of course what's happening here. And it's very helpful, it seems, to be able to identify them as this same group, the same group who can be used over and over and over again over decades to whitewash what the system wants whitewashed. And then you look at their grants. Ugh! Some of these people are making unbelievable grants.

Kevin Barrett: They're probably flying on Epstein's Lolita Express and things like that, too.

Meryl Nass: That I did not look up.

Kevin Barrett: I wouldn't be surprised, anyway.

Meryl Nass: There is a lot of money flowing through their laboratories. So anyway, the final point I made was that every scientist who signed these two documents and then Francis Collins has had something to do with biological defense. If you're a top scientist in the U.S. government, you are asked to look into pandemics and the risk that they could be due to a biological weapon. And so as far as I could tell, virtually all these people have had some background in looking at these things. And they're all old. They all remember the days before the last three decades of genetic engineering and they all must realize, if they have any competence as scientists, that there are other ways to create biological agents, microorganisms. And so for them to all have signed this, knowing that, just makes you wonder -- why did they do this?

They presumably did it because they had some sense that it was a lab organism. Perhaps it was a lab escape and perhaps they were trying to protect the whole enterprise of biological defense, which is a multibillion dollar yearly industry that feeds many, many people, including themselves.

Kevin Barrett: I would argue that's a relatively innocent explanation. There are worse ones than that.

Meryl Nass: The interesting thing is that all these countries do research together. So China, US, (former) Soviet Union, Ukraine All different countries send people to labs in other countries to work on micro-organisms. So you can put your finger on people from many different countries who were working on bat coronaviruses in labs around the world. And this could have been a lab escape from many different places. I mean, it could have been a deliberate attack. But in my understanding of biological warfare, no country used a biological agent against another country if they didn't think they could control it. If they thought it might blow back onto their country, it wouldn't be used. So historically, I don't think this is the kind of agent that would deliberately be used at a nation level.

Kevin Barrett: Let me just give you a possible opposing argument. John Mearsheimer wrote in, I believe 2015, in a very famous article about China's unpeaceful rise that said, in so many words, the US is stuck between a rock and a hard place in terms of trying to contain China's rise, which is based on its double digit growth averaging out since 1980 or so. And that that growth inevitably is pushing China to break out of U.S. containment in Asia and become a regional hegemon, which is unacceptable to U.S. decision makers. And more likely, it will actually "pose global challenges" meaning displace the U.S. as global hegemon as well, simply based on its economic growth, which now has supposedly slowed to maybe 8 percent. But still, the differential between that and the U.S. and its Western allies is such that within a decade or two, at the very most, it's a done deal. As long as there is no huge history-changing event that radically ends this trajectory that we're on and that there's no obvious way off of, the US essentially will acquiesce to Chinese global hegemony. And that is 100 percent unacceptable, even to sensible realists like Mearsheimer, much less the neocon fanatical crazies at places like PNAC looking for a new American century.

And those people did 9/11-anthrax and they're back in power in the Trump administration. So Mearsheimer says that the only way to stop China's rise is essentially to destroy the global economy. He says even wrecking the U.S. economy along with the global economy would would be worth it because security is more important than prosperity. And this is a relatively sensible guy writing back in 2015.

I've argued with Ron Unz about this. He he thinks it would have been a U.S. attack designed not to escape China, like previous U.S. (bio-)attacks on China. But I don't see why they would be particularly averse to it escaping, going global and doing precisely what it's doing, because it is doing exactly what they want, which is destroying the global(ized) economy, which ultimately in the long run stops China's displacing the U.S. And number two, it militarizes the United States even more than 9/11 did. And they want to bring us back to the thirties and head towards a World War 2 situation to stop China, although they hope it may not be necessary to go that far. So basically, if the neocons didn't invent coronavirus, they would have had to invent some (similar) virus or its equivalent. This is precisely what one would have predicted five years ago would happen.

Meryl Nass: That's a reasonable argument. But the economy is not being totally destroyed. It's just that factories are, closed, people aren't going to work. Nothing's been destroyed. When we come out of this, China will still have all the factories and we will have all the monetarists and all the play money. So it seems like China could get its engines going a lot quicker than we can when we come out of it.

Kevin Barrett: We won't come out of it.

Meryl Nass: So if we don't come out of it, then it's not what the neocons chose.

Kevin Barrett: They don't want to come out of it. They want to wreck global prosperity while the U.S. still has most of the military hardware.

Meryl Nass: I'm sorry. I guess I don't understand that.

Kevin Barrett : Well, OK, first we could go to the neocon philosophy, which is that human flourishing only occurs during extreme situations of stress, suffering, struggle and strife epitomized by warfare. So for them, the only real purpose of human life is all out war to the death. And that's where heroic qualities emerge from human beings who are otherwise lazy and worthless. That's their basic philosophy of life. And then secondly --

Meryl Nass: No, wait a minute. If that's the neocon philosophy of life, why were they all chickenhawks? Have any of them gone to war?

Kevin Barrett : Well, that's the point. They're projecting these fantasies in the privacy of their studies and their twisted, warped imaginations. But yeah, they're happy to inflict this suffering and struggle and death on everybody else. And they want the other guy to be the one to die, of course. And so I assume that they're planning to not be casualties of this disaster that they're setting off. But setting the philosophical thing aside, I think that strategically they are really planning for this to take down the current globalized economy, to force countries to go back to more localized manufacturing, certainly to follow Trump's and Kissinger's neocon agenda, the anti-China agenda of bringing back manufacturing to the US.

Meryl Nass: And is there anything wrong with that? That seems to me a worthy goal.

Kevin Barrett: Well, actually, yes, I would support bringing back manufacturing. I would support never having sent it to China in the first place. However, it's in the context of their plan to stop China's rise. And China is just as committed to its rise as these guys are to stopping it. Which means a lot of danger of war and unpleasantness. And I think this is just the first shot of what's going to be a long round of war and unpleasantness through the next decade.

Meryl Nass: Perhaps. Right. We don't know. Another thing I've written is that the whole reason this (pandemic) is (being) stopped. My theory is that, I've tried to think like a politician -- and I did write this before the lockdown -- which is that what would have happened once this coronavirus had spread widely in the US, is that had it not been halted, we would have gotten to a point where the coronavirus had required way more medical facilities, personnel, equipment, etc. than we had, and there would be people dying without access to any medical care. And I thought that given that in America, based on polls, the one thing Americans want from their government is a health care system, and that the idea of people dying in the street without being able to get into a hospital was so beyond the pale for politicians who saw that they would never be re-elected under those circumstances, that they then did everything they could to stop that from happening. And by the point they decided to do something, the only thing that could be done was a lockdown. And then finally attempting to get more equipment, supplies and personnel.

Kevin Barrett: So, yeah, I agree, that's plausible.

Meryl Nass : That's what happened. And I'm sure everybody is trying to now use this very extraordinary circumstance to their own benefit in the near and far future.

Kevin Barrett: Yeah, I agree. We'll see. The thing is, if if you were planning this thing, assuming that my scenario and your scenario are both true, a very small group of people would have unleashed it, and then everybody else would be reacting according to their own self-interest, including the politicians doing precisely what you described.

Meryl Nass: Yeah, that's certainly possible.

Kevin Barrett: Yeah. And I'm using as my model for this 9/11, which is what I've studied quite a lot over the past nearly two decades. And I see parallels here between the two events in that 9/11 was about going to war with Islamic civilization, just as this seems to be a strike against Chinese civilization -- both occurring in the wake of the Samuel Huntington -- Bernard Lewis claim that "the clash of civilizations will be the new paradigm for us." And if it hadn't been for 9/11, that probably wouldn't have happened. There would've been no clash of civilizations per se.

Meryl Nass: I think, yes, you're right. And yet it looks like China is going to get out of this way more unscathed than we are.

Kevin Barrett: That's possible. Of course, you know, "they plot and Allah plots and Allah is the best of plotters." Ron Unz may be right that some of this may have been unforeseen. And it's also possible that I could be wrong. It could be a coincidence. Sometimes the coincidence theorists, even the craziest coincidence theorists, can be right once in awhile.

Meryl Nass: Well, yes, given the fact that there are documented many hundreds of lab escapes of different organisms, going by what's most likely, that seems to be the most likely explanation.

Kevin Barrett: Do you think that's what happened with Lyme disease? Willy Burgdorfer, whose name was applied to the spirochete organism that causes Lyme, is on record, filmed and recorded by Timothy Grey, confessing that he, Burgdorfer not only provided a name for the organism, but he unleashed it on the world as a U.S. biodefense guy. So a lot of people think Lyme was an external escape. Others hypothesize there may have been some U.S. versus Soviet element there, because Burgdorfer had a lot of money he was getting from somebody, and he was flying to places where he might have been meeting with Russians, et cetera. So have you looked into the Lyme issue?

... ... ...

  1. Harold Smith says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 4:38 am GMT • 100 Words @SBaker

    "Barking up a tree is more superstition then evidence unless you are a hunting dog. What about names, fingerprints, DNA evidence, contact with someone who was actually there and willing to talk? This is the real world, not superstitious nonsense."

    They're exploring hypotheses here, not going to trial. (BTW, the U.S. "government" would tell you you're full of shit. Things like DNA evidence, fingerprints, etc. are for suckers).

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Harold Smith says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 4:53 am GMT Is Francis Boyle still insisting – without any kind of evidence whatsoever – that SARS-CoV-2 came from the Wuhan lab? If so he's just a moron whose nonsense doesn't deserve any exposure, IMO.
  1. Parfois1 says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 9:32 am GMT • 600 Words

    Is Francis Boyle still insisting – without any kind of evidence whatsoever – that SARS-CoV-2 came from the Wuhan lab? If so he's just a moron whose nonsense doesn't deserve any exposure, IMO.

    He's a lawyer, therefore he'll play the devil's advocate – an useful role to validate a legitimate conclusion.

    @ Kevin Barrett

    Good on you, Ron Unz and all the cast to pursue the quest for the source of the Cv-19 pandemic and keep the question of biowarfare alive. An event unequal in human history in its sudden appearance, global reach, social and economic consequences, with attendant officially approved and orchestrated propaganda and a long chain of tell-tale "coincidences", must necessarily arouse the suspicion in every thinking person that the Masters of the Universe are up with their usual tricks of attempting to re-shape the world according to their designs and goals.

    All major historical events have arisen, apart from the rare natural cataclysms, from Man's actions, mostly the result of a single conspiracy from which, in turn, originate predictable and unpredictable reactions and other conspiracies. Any plan or scheme to alter the existing status quo starts as a conspiracy whether a band of professional robbers or politicians; it is in the nature of things that any organizational project or task involves the co-operation of individuals as a group to achieve a particular aim and, if in the prosecution of that aim a certain amount of discretion is necessary to have an advantage over the potential opposing side, a conspiracy takes place. Most of governments' actions are conspiracies and their legitimacy and propriety should be probed and investigated. To counter that, most (perhaps all) governments erect "official secrets acts" walls to hide their conspiracies and set up counter-information departments.

    This pandemic has risen a conspirational stench because it stinks of malodorous human interference with the natural order for a purpose unknown, the first characteristic of a conspiracy. The same could be said about the World Trade Centre incident because the official explanation is at variance with the physics natural order, hence its conspiracy credentials because the government is openly hiding the true facts, as a conspirator does.

    As Barrett has noted (and so have other commenters here at UR) the US is at a cross-roads in its history where it must set a course of its own making to counter the rise of China as an economic superpower. The US official policy is to prevent the emergence of any rival power, even a regional one in places where the US has no legitimate concerns, and China must be hindered, blocked and neutralized. So far, nothing has worked to stop the Chinese economic juggernaut and the usual solution of going to war is fraught with danger. Yes, the US could nuke China (as the only military advantage it may have over China) but at a huge cost to itself, both militarily and reputationally. Besides, facing the opprobrium of the world and a resurgent Russia (which would not let the opportunity to be wasted) the US would be doomed. Even the clowns and puppets that masquerade as government in Washington know that the "military solution" is out. Meanwhile, every year China is getting bigger and better and time is of the essence, as Barrett noted.

    What can be done to stop China then? Hybrid warfare (sanctions, blockades, threats, propaganda) is not working either, but China, for the time being, has an Achilles heel: international trade, in which it depends for continuing its economic development. If sanctions and threats against China's trading partners don't work, how about bringing the whole international trade edifice down a la World Trade Centre? If the world global economy is seriously disrupted, countries won't be able to trade and there goes the Chinese trump card. Enter Covid-19.

  1. utu says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 9:59 am GMT • 400 Words SARS-CoV-2 was already pre-adapted to human transmission.

    SARS-CoV-2 is well adapted for humans. What does this mean for re-emergence?
    Shing Hei Zhan, Benjamin E. Deverman, Yujia Alina Chan

    Two authors with: Stanley Center for Psychiatric Research, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA
    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.01.073262v1.full.pdf

    "Our observations suggest that by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, it was already pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV. However, no precursors or branches of evolution stemming from a less human-adapted SARS-CoV-2-like virus have been detected. "

    " and examine the environmental samples from the Wuhan Huanan seafood market. Importantly, the market samples are genetically identical to human SARS-CoV-2 isolates and were therefore most likely from human sources."

    Where did RaTG13 come from?

    Was Shi Zhengli engaging in some cover up, alibi [for whom?] constructing when she published her January 23, 2020 paper:

    https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.22.914952v2.full

    " on January 23, Shi Zhengli released a paper indicating that CoV2 is 96% identical to RaTG13, a strain which her laboratory had previously isolated from Yunnan bats in 2013. However, outside of her lab, no one knew about that strain until January 2020." – Yuri Deigin, medium.com

    The fact she revealed RaTG13 as her deus ex machina is somewhat odd, that RaTG13 which was sequenced and analyzed was not published and not cataloged soon after its discovery in 2013 is, I would think, strange. And supposedly there is no samples of RaTG13 in the lab. All they have is its sequence in the computer, though, this perhaps might be normal for lab procedures, which I know nothing about.

    RaTG13 is not that close to SARS-CoV-2.

    https://medium.com/@yurideigin/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748
    Reports show that pangolins are potentially the intermediate host, but pangolin viruses are 88–98% identical to SARS-CoV-2. In comparison, civet and racoon dog strains of SARS coronaviruses were 99.8% identical to SARS-CoV from 2003. In other words, we are talking about a handful of mutations between civet strains, racoon dog strains and human strains in 2003. Pangolins [strains of CoV2] have over 3000 nucleotide changes, no way they are the reservoir species.

  1. Alfred says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 10:30 am GMT • 200 Words @Morton's toes Before inventing a hypothesis about powers and forces and geopolitics forming current events, you really need a historical analog. If it has never happened before, anywhere, any time, then you are making an argument which has a form of this time it is different.

    How about Lyme Disease? Just look at a map of how it is spreading and where it started. Humans have lived in this area for many thousands of years – without any such infection. Don't you think that it is a little suspicious that it should start in the USA and in the 1980's?

    TPTB are trying to blame it on "Climate Change". Well, the climate has changed many times in the past. Anyway, there are areas of the USA that are warmer than New England so why did it not start there?

    It is pretty obvious to anyone with the ability to think critically that Lyme Disease was created in the USA and in a laboratory in New England – a leading research area.

    Lyme Disease Maps: Historical Data

    Read More • Replies: @utu Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. utu says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 10:54 am GMT Discernment between deliberate and natural infectious disease outbreaks
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2870591/ Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. utu says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 10:59 am GMT • 100 Words @Alfred Plum Island Animal Disease Center
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plum_Island_Animal_Disease_Center

    Theories: Did Lyme Disease Originate On Plum Island?
    https://aspenn.com/guide-overview/theories-did-lyme-disease-originate-plum-island/
    _____________

    West Nile virus
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Nile_virus

    Vermont Senator Wants Study Of Terror Link to West Nile Virus
    https://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/13/us/vermont-senator-wants-study-of-terror-link-to-west-nile-virus.html

  1. davidgmillsatty says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 12:26 pm GMT • 100 Words Are you going to discuss the pangolin hypothesis as well?

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2313-x

    There are two ways viruses mutate, replication and recombination. It seems highly unlikely that Covid 19 was a naturally occurring replication, hence the support for some kind of man-made virus.

    However, it does seem quite possible, even highly probable that this was a mutation by recombination, the most likely candidate being a mix of bat corona virus and pangolin corona virus.

    Until we get the virology nailed down, blaming governments or labs is just politics and not science.

  1. Corvinus says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 1:09 pm GMT • 700 Words @SBaker "Can we blame it on the virus, even if it was manufactured in the evil labs of the US or China, as has been convincingly suggested by Ron Unz?"

    Suggested, yes. Convincingly? No.

    The Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China.
    January 14, 2020, World Health Organization

    There is no evidence that the coronavirus was created in a laboratory.
    April 20, 2020, The Conversation

    The World Health Organization reiterated that the coronavirus which causes COVID-19 is "natural in origin." Scientists who are examining the genetic sequences of the virus have assured "again and again that this virus is natural in origin."
    May 1, 2020

    Dr. Anthony Fauci, a renowned U.S. infectious disease expert, has said that there is no scientific evidence to back the theory that the coronavirus was made in a Chinese laboratory. "If you look at the evolution of the virus in bats and what's out there now, the scientific evidence is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated," he said.
    May 4, 2020, National Geographic

    WHO says it has no evidence to support 'speculative' Covid-19 lab theory
    May 5, 2020, The Guardian

    The British government has not seen any evidence to suggest that the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 was man-made.
    May 9, 2020, UK Health Minister Matt Hancock

    Scientists: 'Exactly zero' evidence COVID-19 came from a lab.
    May 12, 2020, Center for Infections Disease Research and Policy

    Evidence of COVID's natural origin mounts even as conspiracy theory about Chinese lab refuses to die
    May 13, 2020, Cornell Alliance for Science

    Mr. Unz can't have his cake and eat it, too. On one hand, he tacitly encourages readers to peddle this "Fake News" mantra. On the other hand, he latches on to MSM stories that seemingly support his conclusions. He inferred that we ought to trust ABC News, which cited four separate intelligence sources that a government report *existed* that Covid-19 is a bioweapon. Of course that report "exists". Whether or not that report constitutes a "smoking gun" in an entirely different matter. But I thought that ANYTHING that comes from U.S. intelligence ought not to be trusted. Because Deep State. It would appear that those stories which supports his predisposed narrative, he takes stock in, and for other stories that go against his truth grain, he vigorously questions their veracity, at best, or totally discards.

    Ultimately, a fine number of readers here believe the source he used is part of FAKE NEWS. I would like to know how Mr. Unz would respond to their repeated accusation that ALL of the mainstream media reporting are lies. Here is Anon 223 stating that we ought NOT to trust ABC News.

    I wouldn't take the ABC news report at face value. Essentially, most of the Federal Government despises Trump, and want an excuse to make him look bad. Stating that the coronavirus was known since November would make Trump look bad since he didn't do anything(though he does look bad ). This the same organization that states continuously that Trump had allied with Russia and that he had a hooker pee on him in a Russian hotel.

    Now, if we go by the assumption that Mr. Unz "carefully reads" several MSM publications, then would it not be probable that other people also carry out this same course of action? Would not those people be properly equipped to counter his line of thinking if they underwent a similar process? Or does Mr. Unz possess a unique skillset they ultimately lack?

    "The Global Lockdown is a massive worldwide reset mechanism, deliberately engineered, designed to knock over the chessboard and scatter the pieces, forcing the players to either start over or to create new, invented positions on the board"

    This statement here personifies the descent into modern anti-intellectualism. This insistence that a Globalist cabal will destroy the white race once and for all is predicated on the notion that the Deep State is pulling the strings through a series of coordinated false flags, with high IQ whites being duped along the way by a complicit media. Proof? Not required. But anyone dare to question this general Alt-Right, Q-driven narrative, and (whallah) one is deemed a purveyor of Fake News. Hey, no need to critically think when under the impression that ANY and ALL news from the MSM is doctored, altered, or outright lies.

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Desert Fox says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 1:16 pm GMT • 100 Words The coronavirus scam was unleashed to provide trillions to bail out wall street and at the same time bring in UN Agenda 2030 draconian, diabolical, demonic controls over humanity, using the fake coronavirus scare , which it a total scam.

    Gates and Fauci and all involved in this scam should be arrested for crimes against humanity!

  1. Alfred says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 1:33 pm GMT • 100 Words Bioweapon Hypothesis

    This virus is man-made, but it is not a bioweapon.

    The real weapon was the fake media that is controlled by a handful of people. All the countries that went into a national lockdown, including Russia, have a media controlled by Zionists.

    The mainstream media is ignoring the fact that the CDC has admitted the death rate for COVID-19 is actually lower than the flu. This is happening as the media admits that the antibody tests are wrong 50% of the time!

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  1. 2020crazzetrain says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 2:38 pm GMT • 100 Words Great article, Mr. Unz. The US is the consummate propaganda machine!
    Mr. Romanoff's 3 part series on Bio-Weapons , among other things, such as 'The Untold History of the United States' on Netflix; opened my eyes to just how diabolical these global technocratic, psychos have been for as long as I've been alive.
    Fort Detrick was likely place of origin for 'the engineered virus'.
  1. Harold Smith says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 2:53 pm GMT • 100 Words @davidgmillsatty

    "Until we get the virology nailed down, blaming governments or labs is just politics and not science."

    Well that makes sense, but you're preaching to the choir.

    As we would expect, the problem is the corrupt U.S. "government," which is already publicly blaming the enemy du jour, China, without any evidence to back up its claims. And the U.S. "government" is making threats and already taking some action based on those unsupported claims.

    It may be of benefit to humanity if some doubt can be immediately cast on the specious claims of the U.S. "government."

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Robert White says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 3:10 pm GMT • 400 Words Real Probability of SARS-2-nCoV-19 being a bioweaponized nCoronavirus imbued with Gain-ofFunction properties, and Dual Use applications is in fact P=1 given pathogenicity, asymptomatic & undetectable spread, and aged cohort fatalities in Long Term Care environments.

    Epidemiologically, a Six Sigma collapse of the entirety of all Long Term Care facilities in the world would devastate the infrastructure for Tertiary Care Hospitals worldwide via spread & vectoring of this deadly man made Pandemic Pathogen.

    To assert that SARS-2-nCoV-19 is merely yet another nCoronavirus that has manifested naturally whilst asserting on the other hand that it could not possibly be a man made bioweaponized nCoronavirus is a lesson in doublespeak when evidence is not forthcoming for the assertions.

    Real scientists are evidenced based via Empiricism proper. Propagandists don't utilize evidenced based argumentation as that would undermine their task to win hearts & minds one step at a time.
    NIST manufactured so-called 'evidence' that was NOT peer-reviewed whatsoever. The bioweaponized SARS-2-nCoV-19 will undergo the same propagandization process utilized for the CIA Controlled Demolition of the Trade Centers in NYC.

    Most researchers continue to neglect mention of the 2014 Cambridge Working Group Call to Action on Gain-of-Function Dual Use Pandemic Pathogen manufacturing in USA Biosafety Level Four laboratories, but it is key to the historical patterns & USA finance of the global industry of Pandemic Pathogen manufacturing in global BSL-4 laboratories that are primarily funded by USA taxpayers the world over.

    Most researchers also fail to mention that the United States of America is a culture of death & extreme text book Psychopathy via Central Intelligence Agency acts of genocide on a global basis.
    The historiography is replete with evidence that the United States of America is funding the lion's share of Pandemic Pathogen research in BSL-4 labs worldwide, and they are also the most likely & probable culprits for any & all Pandemic Pathogen outbreaks whether accidental or otherwise intentional.

    American is a continent of liars, thieves, and text book Psychopaths helming the political sphere and obviously lost hegemonic status worldwide 2020. In 2016 we were led to believe that if the USA voted in a true text book Psychopath like Trump and facilitated a bogus meme to run on like Make America Great Again-MAGA, we would all live happily ever after until the next round of elections manifested that produced a Democrat replacement.

    Neocons & Republicans always utilize threats of war to finagle their way through terms of corruption whilst pillaging the financial system globally. Today is no different politically from any other Republican term of office whereby violence & threats of violence are their only tools of choice.

    http://www.cambridgeworkinggroup.org/

    RW

    Read More Reply Agree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  3. Sean says: Show Comment May 30, 2020 at 4:05 pm GMT • 400 Words 'American neoconservatives' can only mean the crypto Zionist Jews of the Israel Lobby, and as they are far more worried about Israel than America, to credibly propose US neocons as the authors of a bioweapon attack on China, it is necessary to explain how that would benefit Israel. Or, at least how it might have been calculated by US neocons to be in the interests of Jewish American Zionist aspirations for Israel. A continuing close relationship between Israel and America is the prerequisite for all Zionist hopes for the future. I think the only scenario for neocons attacking China with a bioweapon is they thought it necessary to save Israel from its own leadership. Last December Netanyahu's son said British diplomats should be "kicked out" of Israel because of their reference to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Israel has clearly no fear of anything the international community says about the West Bank Palestinians. American support is a given and while Trump is in office Israel formally annexing the West Bank and penning its Palestinian population up in Bantustans is something American neoconservatives can and will bring about. Unless there is something else Israel is doing that makes sustaining the pro Israel stance geopolitically impossible.

    There is such an obstacle to Trump acquicing in the annexation of the occupied territories: a burgeoning collaboration between China and Israel. China running the Israeli port that US Navy warships dock at and China building the world's biggest desalination plant in Israel (supposedly a key ME ally of the US) is not something that any US president could or would accept. Trump is absolutely going to have to act to counter it, and because the Netanyahu family will be handsomely paid off by the Chinese (valuing the Israel Lobby as a wedge against Trump's China trade policy) there is a possibility that Israel annexing the West Bank will be the begining of the end of the US-Israel, special relationship. It sort of makes sense for the US neoconservatives worried about Israel to attack China in order to separate it from Israel. However from what I have read the Israel Lobby is subservient to Israeli politicians.

[Apr 25, 2020] Did This Virus Come From a Lab? Maybe Not But It Exposes the Threat of a Biowarfare Arms Race by Sam Husseini

Highly recommended!
Apr 25, 2020 | salon.com

Dangerous pathogens are captured in the wild and made deadlier in government biowarfare labs. Did that happen here?

There has been no scientific finding that the novel coronavirus was bioengineered, but its origins are not entirely clear. Deadly pathogens discovered in the wild are sometimes studied in labs – and sometimes made more dangerous. That possibility, and other plausible scenarios, have been incorrectly dismissed in remarks by some scientists and government officials, and in the coverage of most major media outlets.

Regardless of the source of this pandemic, there is considerable documentation that a global biological arms race going on outside of public view could produce even more deadly pandemics in the future.

While much of the media and political establishment have minimized the threat from such lab work, some hawks on the American right like Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark ., have singled out Chinese biodefense researchers as uniquely dangerous.

But there is every indication that U.S. lab work is every bit as threatening as that in Chinese labs. American labs also operate in secret, and are also known to be accident-prone .

The current dynamics of the biological arms race have been driven by US government decisions that extend back decades. In December 2009, Reuters reported that the Obama administration was refusing even to negotiate the possible monitoring of biological weapons.

Much of the left in the US now appears unwilling to scrutinize the origin of the pandemic – or the wider issue of biowarfare – perhaps because portions of the anti-Chinese right have been so vocal in making unfounded allegations.

Governments that participate in such biological weapon research generally distinguish between "biowarfare" and "biodefense," as if to paint such "defense" programs as necessary. But this is rhetorical sleight-of-hand; the two concepts are largely indistinguishable.

"Biodefense" implies tacit biowarfare, breeding more dangerous pathogens for the alleged purpose of finding a way to fight them. While this work appears to have succeeded in creating deadly and infectious agents, including deadlier flu strains, such "defense" research is impotent in its ability to defend us from this pandemic.

The legal scholar who drafted the main US law on the subject, Francis Boyle, warned in his 2005 book " Biowarfare and Terrorism " that an "illegal biological arms race with potentially catastrophic consequences" was underway, largely driven by the US government.

For years, many scientists have raised concerns regarding bioweapons/biodefense lab work, and specifically about the fact that huge increases in funding have taken place since 9/11. This was especially true after the anthrax-by-mail attacks that killed five people in the weeks after 9/11, which the FBI ultimately blamed on a US government biodefense scientist. A 2013 study found that biodefense funding since 2001 had totaled at least $78 billion , and more has surely been spent since then. This has led to a proliferation of laboratories , scientists and new organisms, effectively setting off a biological arms race.

Following the Ebola outbreak in west Africa in 2014, the US government paused funding for what are known as "gain-of-function" research on certain organisms. This work actually seeks to make deadly pathogens deadlier, in some cases making pathogens airborne that previously were not. With little notice outside the field, the pause on such research was lifted in late 2017 .

During this pause, exceptions for funding were made for dangerous gain-of-function lab work. This included work jointly done by US scientists from the University of North Carolina, Harvard and the Wuhan Institute of Virology. This work – which had funding from USAID and EcoHealth Alliance not originally acknowledged – was published in 2015 in Nature Medicine .

A different Nature Medicine article about the origin of the current pandemic, authored by five scientists and published on March 17, has been touted by major media outlet and some officials – including current National Institutes of Health director Francis Collins – as definitively disproving a lab origin for the novel coronavirus. That journal article, titled "The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2," stated unequivocally: "Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus." This is a subtly misleading sentence. While the scientists state that there is no known laboratory "signature" in the SARS-Cov-2 RNA, their argument fails to take account of other lab methods that could have created coronavirus mutations without leaving such a signature.

Indeed, there is also the question of conflict of interest in the Nature Medicine article. Some of the authors of that article, as well as a February 2020 Lancet letter condemning "conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin" – which seemed calculated to minimize outside scrutiny of biodefense lab work – have troubling ties to the biodefense complex, as well as to the US government. Notably, neither of these articles makes clear that a virus can have a natural origin and then be captured and studied in a controlled laboratory setting before being let loose, either intentionally or accidentally – which is clearly a possibility in the case of the coronavirus.

Facts as "rumors"

This reporter raised questions about the subject at a news conference with a Center for Disease Control (CDC) representative at the now-shuttered National Press Club on Feb. 11. I asked if it was a "complete coincidence" that the pandemic had started in Wuhan, the only place in China with a declared biosafety level 4 (BSL4) laboratory. BSL4 laboratories have the most stringent safety mechanisms, but handle the most deadly pathogens. As I mentioned, it was odd that the ostensible origin of the novel coronavirus was bat caves in Yunnan province – more than 1,000 miles from Wuhan. I noted that "gain-of-function" lab work can results in more deadly pathogens, and that major labs, including some in the US, have had accidental releases .

CDC Principal Deputy Director Anne Schuchat said that based on the information she had seen, the virus was of "zoonotic origin." She also stated, regarding gain-of-function lab work, that it is important to "protect researchers and their laboratory workers as well as the community around them and that we use science for the benefit of people."

I followed up by asking whether an alleged natural origin did not preclude the possibility that this virus came through a lab, since a lab could have acquired a bat virus and been working on it. Schuchat replied to the assembled journalists that "it is very common for rumors to emerge that can take on life of their own," but did not directly answer the question. She noted that in the 2014 Ebola outbreak some observers had pointed to nearby labs as the possible cause, claiming this "was a key rumor that had to be overcome in order to help control the outbreak." She reiterated: "So based on everything that I know right now, I can tell you the circumstances of the origin really look like animals-to-human. But your question, I heard."

This is no rumor. It's a fact: Labs work with dangerous pathogens. The US and China each have dual-use biowarfare/biodefense programs. China has major facilities at Wuhan – a biosafety level 4 lab and a biosafety level 2 lab. There are leaks from labs. (See " Preventing a Biological Arms Race ," MIT Press, 1990, edited by Susan Wright; also, a partial review in Journal of International Law from October 1992.)

Much of the discussion of this deadly serious subject is marred with snark that avoids or dodges the "gain-of-function" question. ABC ran a story on March 27 titled "Sorry, Conspiracy Theorists. Study Concludes COVID-19 'Is Not a Laboratory Construct.'" That story did not address the possibility that the virus could have been found in the wild, studied in a lab and then released.

On March 21, USA Today published a piece headlined "Fact Check: Did the Coronavirus Originate In a Chinese Laboratory?" – and rated it "FALSE."

That USA Today story relied on the Washington Post, which published a widely cited article on Feb. 17 headlined, "Tom Cotton keeps repeating a coronavirus conspiracy theory that was already debunked." That article quoted public comments from Rutgers University professor of chemical biology Richard Ebright, but out of context and only in part. Specifically, the story quoted from Ebright's tweet that the coronavirus was not an "engineered bioweapon." In fact, his full quote included the clarification that the virus could have " entered human population through lab accident ." (An email requesting clarification sent to Post reporter Paulina Firozi was met with silence.)

Bioengineered ≠ From a lab

Other pieces in the Post since then ( some heavily sourced to US government officials ) have conveyed Ebright's thinking, but it gets worse. In a private exchange, Ebright – who, again, has said clearly that the novel coronavirus was not technically bioengineered using known coronavirus sequences – stated that other forms of lab manipulation could have been responsible for the current pandemic. This runs counter to much reporting, which is perhaps too scientifically illiterate to perceive the difference.

In response to the suggestion that the novel coronavirus could have come about through various methods besides bioengineering – made by Dr. Meryl Nass , who has done groundbreaking work on biowarfare – Ebright responded in an email:

The genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 has no signatures of human manipulation.

This rules out the kinds of gain-of-function (GoF) research that leave signatures of human manipulation in genome sequences (e.g., use of recombinant DNA methods to construct chimeric viruses), but does not rule out kinds of GoF research that do not leave signatures (e.g., serial passage in animals). [emphasis added]

Very easy to imagine the equivalent of the Fouchier's "10 passages in ferrets" with H5N1 influenza virus, but, in this case, with 10 passages in non-human primates with bat coronavirus RaTG13 or bat coronavirus KP876546.

That last paragraph is very important. It refers to virologist Ron Fouchier of the Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, who performed research on intentionally increasing rates of viral mutation rate by spreading a virus from one animal to another in a sequence. The New York Times wrote about this in an editorial in January 2012, warning of "An Engineered Doomsday."

"Now scientists financed by the National Institutes of Health" have created a "virus that could kill tens or hundreds of millions of people" if it escaped confinement, the Times wrote. The story continued:

Working with ferrets, the animal that is most like humans in responding to influenza, the researchers found that a mere five genetic mutations allowed the virus to spread through the air from one ferret to another while maintaining its lethality. A separate study at the University of Wisconsin, about which little is known publicly, produced a virus that is thought to be less virulent.

The word "engineering" in the New York Times headline is technically incorrect, since passing a virus through animals is not "genetic engineering." This same distinction has hindered some from understanding the possible origins of the current pandemic.

Fouchier's flu work, in which an H5N1 virus was made more virulent by transmitting it repeatedly between individual ferrets, briefly sent shockwaves through the media. "Locked up in the bowels of the medical faculty building here and accessible to only a handful of scientists lies a man-made flu virus that could change world history if it were ever set free," wrote Science magazine in 2011 in a story titled "Scientists Brace for Media Storm Around Controversial Flu Studies." It continues:

The virus is an H5N1 avian influenza strain that has been genetically altered and is now easily transmissible between ferrets, the animals that most closely mimic the human response to flu. Scientists believe it's likely that the pathogen, if it emerged in nature or were released, would trigger an influenza pandemic, quite possibly with many millions of deaths.

In a 17th floor office in the same building, virologist Ron Fouchier of Erasmus Medical Center calmly explains why his team created what he says is "probably one of the most dangerous viruses you can make" – and why he wants to publish a paper describing how they did it. Fouchier is also bracing for a media storm. After he talked to ScienceInsider yesterday, he had an appointment with an institutional press officer to chart a communication strategy.

Fouchier's paper is one of two studies that have triggered an intense debate about the limits of scientific freedom and that could portend changes in the way U.S. researchers handle so-called dual-use research: studies that have a potential public health benefit but could also be useful for nefarious purposes like biowarfare or bioterrorism.

Despite objections, Fouchier's article was published by Science in June 2012 . Titled "Airborne Transmission of Influenza A/H5N1 Virus Between Ferrets," it summarized how Fouchier's research team made the pathogen more virulent:

Highly pathogenic avian influenza A/H5N1 virus can cause morbidity and mortality in humans but thus far has not acquired the ability to be transmitted by aerosol or respiratory droplet ("airborne transmission") between humans. To address the concern that the virus could acquire this ability under natural conditions, we genetically modified A/H5N1 virus by site-directed mutagenesis and subsequent serial passage in ferrets. The genetically modified A/H5N1 virus acquired mutations during passage in ferrets, ultimately becoming airborne transmissible in ferrets.

In other words, Fouchier's research took a flu virus that did not exhibit airborne transmission, then infected a number of ferrets until it mutated to the point that it was transmissible by air.

In that same year, 2012, a similar study by Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin was published in Nature :

Highly pathogenic avian H5N1 influenza A viruses occasionally infect humans, but currently do not transmit efficiently among humans. Here we assess the molecular changes that would allow a virus to be transmissible among mammals. We identified a virus with four mutations and the remaining seven gene segments from a 2009 pandemic H1N1 virus – that was capable of droplet transmission in a ferret model.

In 2014, Marc Lipsitch of Harvard and Alison P. Galvani of Yale wrote regarding Fouchier and Kawaoka's work :

Recent experiments that create novel, highly virulent and transmissible pathogens against which there is no human immunity are unethical they impose a risk of accidental and deliberate release that, if it led to extensive spread of the new agent, could cost many lives. While such a release is unlikely in a specific laboratory conducting research under strict biosafety procedures, even a low likelihood should be taken seriously, given the scale of destruction if such an unlikely event were to occur. Furthermore, the likelihood of risk is multiplied as the number of laboratories conducting such research increases around the globe.

Given this risk, ethical principles, such as those embodied in the Nuremberg Code , dictate that such experiments would be permissible only if they provide humanitarian benefits commensurate with the risk, and if these benefits cannot be achieved by less risky means.

We argue that the two main benefits claimed for these experiments – improved vaccine design and improved interpretation of surveillance – are unlikely to be achieved by the creation of potential pandemic pathogens (PPP), often termed "gain-of-function" (GOF) experiments.

There may be a widespread notion that there is scientific consensus that the pandemic did not come out of a lab. But in fact many of the most knowledgeable scientists in the field are notably silent. This includes Lipsitch at Harvard, Jonathan A. King at MIT and many others.

Just last year, Lynn Klotz of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation wrote a paper in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists entitled "Human Error in High-biocontainment Labs: A Likely Pandemic Threat." Wrote Klotz:

Incidents causing potential exposures to pathogens occur frequently in the high security laboratories often known by their acronyms, BSL3 (Biosafety Level 3) and BSL4. Lab incidents that lead to undetected or unreported laboratory-acquired infections can lead to the release of a disease into the community outside the lab; lab workers with such infections will leave work carrying the pathogen with them. If the agent involved were a potential pandemic pathogen, such a community release could lead to a worldwide pandemic with many fatalities. Of greatest concern is a release of a lab-created, mammalian-airborne- transmissible, highly pathogenic avian influenza virus, such as the airborne-transmissible H5N1 viruses created in the laboratories of Ron Fouchier in the Netherlands and Yoshihiro Kawaoka in Madison, Wisconsin.

"Crazy, dangerous"

Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois , has condemned Fouchier, Kawaoka and others – including at least one of the authors of the recent Nature Medicine article in the strongest terms, calling such work a "criminal enterprise." While Boyle has been embroiled in numerous controversies, he's been especially dismissed by many on this issue. The "fact-checking" website Snopes has described him as "a lawyer with no formal training in virology" – without noting that he wrote the relevant U.S. law.

As Boyle said in 2015 :

Since September 11, 2001, we have spent around $100 billion on biological warfare. Effectively we now have an Offensive Biological Warfare Industry in this country that violates the Biological Weapons Convention and my Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 .

The law Boyle drafted states: "Whoever knowingly develops, produces, stockpiles, transfers, acquires, retains, or possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for use as a weapon, or knowingly assists a foreign state or any organization to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both. There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section committed by or against a national of the United States."

Boyle also warned:

Russia and China have undoubtedly reached the same conclusions I have derived from the same open and public sources, and have responded in kind. So what the world now witnesses is an all-out offensive biological warfare arms race among the major military powers of the world: United States, Russia, Britain, France, China, Israel, inter alia.

We have reconstructed the Offensive Biological Warfare Industry that we had deployed in this county before its prohibition by the Biological Weapons Convention of 1972, described by Seymour Hersh in his groundbreaking expose " Chemical and Biological Warfare: America's Hidden Arsenal ." (1968)

Boyle now states that he has been "blackballed" in the media on this issue, despite his having written the relevant statute. The group he worked with on the law, the Council for Responsible Genetics, went under several years ago, making Boyle's views against "biodefense" even more marginal as government money for dual use work poured into the field and critics within the scientific community have fallen silent. In turn, his denunciations have grown more sweeping.

In the 1990 book " Preventing a Biological Arms Race ," scholar Susan Wright argued that current laws regarding bioweapons were insufficient, as there were "projects in which offensive and defensive aspects can be distinguished only by claimed motive." Boyle notes, correctly, that current law he drafted does not make an exception for "defensive" work, but only for "prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes."

While Boyle is particularly vociferous in his condemnations, he is not alone. There has been irregular, but occasional media attention to this threat. The Guardian ran a piece in 2014, " Scientists condemn 'crazy, dangerous' creation of deadly airborne flu virus ," after Kawaoka created a life-threatening virus that "closely resembles the 1918 Spanish flu strain that killed an estimated 50m people":

"The work they are doing is absolutely crazy. The whole thing is exceedingly dangerous," said Lord May, the former president of the Royal Society and one time chief science adviser to the UK government. "Yes, there is a danger, but it's not arising from the viruses out there in the animals, it's arising from the labs of grossly ambitious people."

Boyle's charges beginning early this year that the coronavirus was bioengineered – allegations recently mirrored by French virologist and Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier – have not been corroborated by any publicly produced findings of any US scientist. Boyle even charges that scientists like Ebright, who is at Rutgers, are compromised because the university got a biosafety level 3 lab in 2017 – though Ebright is perhaps the most vocal eminent critic of this research, among US scientists. These and other controversies aside, Boyle's concerns about the dangers of biowarfare are legitimate; indeed, Ebright shares them.

Some of the most vocal voices to discuss the origins of the novel coronavirus have been eager to minimize the dangers of lab work, or have focused almost exclusively on "wet markets" or "exotic" animals as the likely cause.

The media celebrated Laurie Garrett, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author and former senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, when she declared on Twitter on March 3 (in a since-deleted tweet) that the origin of the pandemic was discovered: "It's pangolins. #COVID19 Researchers studied lung tissue from 12 of the scaled mammals that were illegally trafficked in Asia and found #SARSCoV2 in 3. The animals were found in Guangxi, China. Another virus+ smuggled sample found in Guangzhou."

She was swiftly corrected by Ebright: "Arrant nonsense. Did you even read the paper? Reported pangolin coronavirus is not SARS-CoV-2 and is not even particularly close to SARS-CoV-2. Bat coronavirus RaTG13 is much closer to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% identical) than reported pangolin coronavirus (92.4% identical)." He added: "No reason to invoke pangolin as intermediate. When A is much closer than B to C, in the absence of additional data, there is no rational basis to favor pathway A>B>C over pathway A>C." When someone asked what Garrett was saying, Ebright responded : "She is saying she is scientifically illiterate."

The following day, Garrett corrected herself ( without acknowledging Ebright ): "I blew it on the #Pangolins paper, & then took a few hours break from Twitter. It did NOT prove the species = source of #SARSCoV2. There's a torrent of critique now, deservedly denouncing me & my posting. A lot of the critique is super-informative so leaving it all up 4 while."

At least one Chinese government official has responded to the allegation that the labs in Wuhan could be the source for the pandemic by alleging that perhaps the US is responsible instead. In American mainstream media, that has been reflexively treated as even more ridiculous than the original allegation that the virus could have come from a lab.

Obviously the Chinese government's allegations should not be taken at face value, but neither should US government claims – especially considering that US government labs were the apparent source for the anthrax attacks in 2001 . Those attacks sent panic through the US and shut down Congress, allowing the Bush administration to enact the PATRIOT Act and ramp up the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. Indeed, in October 2001, media darlings like Richard Butler and Andrew Sullivan propagandized for war with Iraq because of the anthrax attacks. (Neither Iraq nor al-Qaida was involved.)

The 2001 anthrax attacks also provided much of the pretext for the surge in biolab spending since then, even though they apparently originated in a US or U.S.-allied lab. Indeed, those attacks remain shrouded in mystery .

The US government has also come up with elaborate cover stories to distract from its bioweapons work. For instance, the US government infamously claimed the 1953 death of Frank Olson, a scientist at Fort Detrick, Maryland, was an LSD experiment gone wrong; it now appears to have been an execution to cover up for US biological warfare.

Regardless of the cause of the current pandemic, these biowarfare/biodefense labs need far more scrutiny. The call to shut them down by Boyle and others needs to be clearly heard – and light must be shone on precisely what research is being conducted.

The secrecy of these labs may prevent us ever knowing with certainty the origins of the current pandemic. What we do know is this kind of lab work comes with real dangers. One might make a comparison to climate change: We cannot attribute an individual hurricane to man-made climate disruption, yet science tells us that human activity makes stronger hurricanes more likely. That brings us back to the imperative to cease the kinds of activities that produce such dangers in the first place.

If that doesn't happen, the people of the planet will be at the mercy of the machinations and mistakes of state actors who are playing with fire for their geopolitical interests.

Sam Husseini is senior analyst at the Institute for Public Accuracy . He's also set up VotePact.org – which helps break out of the two party bind. His latest personal writings are at http://husseini.posthaven.com/ and tweets at http://twitter.com/samhusseini . Reprinted from Salon with permission.

Continued

Recommended Links

Google matched content

Softpanorama Recommended

Top articles

[Jun 22, 2021] The Imperial Pottery Barn rule: "What cannot be owned must be broken" Published on Jun 22, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

[May 30, 2021] How to Hide an Empire: A History of the Greater United States by Daniel Immerwahr Published on Feb 19, 2019 | www.amazon.com

[Jan 21, 2021] Sometimes you drain the swamp sometimes the swamp drains you Published on Jan 21, 2021 | off-guardian.org

[Jan 20, 2021] Biden will technically be President , so it's time to ask ourselves what kind of world are we in for? Published on Jan 20, 2021 | off-guardian.org

[Jan 19, 2021] Few sights in Washington are more familiar than an intellectual urging "total war" from the safety of the keyboard Published on Jan 19, 2021 | www.nybooks.com

[Jan 17, 2021] "79% of Americans think the US is falling apart" those not accounted for are possibly homeless or illiterate and don't have the opportunity of putting their view forward Published on Jan 17, 2021 | www.rt.com

[Dec 30, 2020] The Unaccountable Nation by Danny Sjursen Published on Mar 16, 2020 | www.truthdig.com

[Dec 17, 2020] The deep state just cannot get over losing Russia to Putin and nationalism after they had turned it into their playground in the 1990s. They are hot to trot to take out Russia and make it bend the knee, whatever the risks are. Published on Dec 17, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

[Dec 13, 2020] The most unfortunate aspect of these large scale disruption and regime change operations exploit actual grievances and truly indigenous civil society reform movements, thereby compromising even the most authentic efforts by the people Published on Dec 13, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

[Nov 25, 2020] A complete schism from reality by Caitlin Johnstone Published on Nov 25, 2020 | caitlinjohnstone.com

[Nov 25, 2020] Bidens's "Cruise missile liberals" will bring "democracy builking" back to the homeland. That should scare most of US people, if we judge by thier results in Ukrain, Syria and Libya Published on Nov 25, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

[Nov 24, 2020] 'Manipulative BULLS--T'- Glenn Greenwald defends calling NBC a CIA mouthpiece, mocks accusation of 'endangering journalists' Published on Nov 22, 2020 | www.rt.com

[Nov 23, 2020] Administrations change but Full Spectrum Dominance Doctine and the desire to portect and emand global neoliberal empire controlled from Washinton is intact. It will eventually banrupt the country much like was the case with the British Empire Published on Nov 23, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

[Nov 18, 2020] When any Washington Swamp creature talks about "threats to US national security" in reality they are talking about threats to the USA global hegemony Published on Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

[Nov 18, 2020] A short summary of Trump achivements: Good -- a cut of State department regime change budget; Bad -- extra 149 billion to MIC via Pentagon budget Published on Nov 18, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

[Nov 06, 2020] Did the Iraq War Cause the Great Recession?' Published on Apr 07, 2013 | marknesop.wordpress.com

[Oct 26, 2020] Politicians books as a subtle form of corruption Published on Oct 26, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

[Oct 21, 2020] How Trump Got Played By The Military-Industrial Complex by Akbar Shahid Ahmed Published on Oct 21, 2020 | www.huffpost.com

[Oct 21, 2020] This Is Not A Russian Hoax 'Nonpublic Information' Debunks Letter From '50 Former Intel Officials' Published on Oct 21, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

[Oct 19, 2020] The Emails Are Russian- Will Be The Narrative, Regardless Of Facts Or Evidence by Caitlin Johnstone Published on Oct 19, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

[Oct 19, 2020] New report shows more than $1B from war industry and govt. going to top 50 think tanks Published on Oct 19, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

[Oct 01, 2020] Steve's insistence on speaking the truth about Ukraine and US-Russia relations cost him -- but he never gave up by Lev Golinkin Published on Oct 01, 2020 | www.thenation.com

[Sep 30, 2020] Opinion - I Ran the C.I.A. Now I m Endorsing Hillary Clinton by Michael J. Morell Published on Aug 05, 2016 | www.nytimes.com

[Sep 28, 2020] No wonder Pompey and his friend Jeffries won't give up on Syria! No wonder Published on Sep 28, 2020 | turcopolier.typepad.com

[May 30, 2020] Kevin Barrett Interviews Bioweapons Expert Meryl Nass, 4-5-20 Published on May 30, 2020 | www.patreon.com

[May 30, 2020] Kevin Barrett Interviews Bioweapons Expert Meryl Nass, 4-5-20 Published on May 30, 2020 | www.patreon.com

[Apr 25, 2020] Did This Virus Come From a Lab? Maybe Not But It Exposes the Threat of a Biowarfare Arms Race by Sam Husseini Published on Apr 25, 2020 | salon.com

Oldies But Goodies

[Sep 14, 2016] The story of Chile s popular, and democratic rejection of government by oligarchs is today s must-read, and provides unsettling similarities to current events

[Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou

[Dec 28, 2017] The CIA as Organized Crime How Illegal Operations Corrupt America and the World

[Dec 27, 2017] Putin is one smart statesman; he knows very well it makes no difference which candidates gets elected in US elections. Any candidate that WOULD make a difference would NEVER see the daylight of nomination, especially at the presidential level. I myself believe all the talk of Russia interfering the 2016 Election is no more than a witch hunt

[Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker

[Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker

[Dec 12, 2017] When a weaker neoliberal state fights the dominant neoliberal state, the center of neoliberal empire, it faces economic sanctions and can t retaliate using principle eye for eye

[Dec 10, 2017] When Washington Cheered the Jihadists Consortiumnews

[Dec 09, 2017] Hyping the Russian Threat to Undermine Free Speech by Max Blumenthal

[Dec 03, 2017] Stephen Kotkin How Vladimir Putin Rules

[Dec 02, 2017] There is a strong continuity in American foreign policy that transcend whatever administration happens to be in office

[Dec 02, 2017] How the United Nations Supports the American Empire by JP Sottile

[Dec 02, 2017] America s Darwinian Nationalism by Robert Kaplan

[Dec 01, 2017] Neocon Chaos Promotion in the Mideast

[Nov 30, 2017] Heritage Foundation + the War Industry What a Pair by Paul Gottfried

[Nov 30, 2017] Money Imperialism by Michael Hudson

[Nov 29, 2017] The Russian Question by Niall Ferguson

[Nov 28, 2017] The Duplicitous Superpower by Ted Galen Carpenter

[Nov 05, 2017] China and the US Rational Planning and Lumpen Capitalism by James Petras

[Nov 04, 2017] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Leads US President Trump to War with Iran by Prof. James Petras

[Oct 31, 2017] Above All - The Junta Expands Its Claim To Power

[Oct 29, 2017] Whose Bright Idea Was RussiaGate by Paul Craig Roberts

[Oct 13, 2017] Sympathy for the Corporatocracy by C. J. Hopkins

[Oct 09, 2017] Dennis Kucinich We Must Challenge the Two-Party Duopoly Committed to War by Adam Dick

[Oct 09, 2017] After Nine Months, Only Stale Crumbs in Russia Inquiry by Scott Ritter

[Oct 09, 2017] Autopilot Wars by Andrew J. Bacevich

[Oct 03, 2017] The Vietnam Nightmare -- Again by Eric Margolis

[Sep 30, 2017] Yet Another Major Russia Story Falls Apart. Is Skepticism Permissible Yet by Glenn Greenwald

[Sep 27, 2017] Come You Masters of War by Matthew Harwood

[Sep 25, 2017] I am presently reading the book JFK and the Unspeakable by James W.Douglass and it is exactly why Kennedy was assassinated by the very same group that desperately wants to see Trump gone and the rapprochement with Russia squashed

[Sep 24, 2017] How Sony, Obama, Seth Rogen and the CIA Secretly Planned to Force Regime Change in North Korea by Tim Shorrock

[Sep 23, 2017] The Exit Strategy of Empire by Wendy McElro

[Sep 20, 2017] The Politics of Military Ascendancy by James Petras

[Sep 19, 2017] Trump behaviour at UN and Nixon's "madman gambit" against Soviets

[Sep 13, 2017] A despot in disguise: one mans mission to rip up democracy by George Monbiot

[Feb 04, 2019] Trump s Revised and Rereleased Foreign Policy: The World Policeman is Back

[Aug 09, 2017] Force Multipliers and 21st Century Imperial Warfare Practice and Propaganda by Maximilian C. Forte

[Jul 30, 2017] Fascism Is Possible Not in Spite of [neo]Liberal Capitalism, but Because of It by Earchiel Johnson

[Jul 28, 2017] Imperial Power Centers Divisions, Indecisions and Civil War by James Petras

[Jul 26, 2017] Regime Change Comes Home: The CIAs Overt Threats against Trump by James Petras

[Jul 26, 2017] US Provocation and North Korea Pretext for War with China by James Petras

[Jul 25, 2017] Oligarchs Succeed! Only the People Suffer! by James Petras

[Jul 25, 2017] The Coup against Trump and His Military by James Petras

[Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills

[Jul 13, 2017] Progressive Democrats Resist and Submit, Retreat and Surrender by James Petras

[Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce

[Jun 24, 2017] The United States and Iran Two Tracks to Establish Hegemony by James Petras

[May 21, 2017] What Obsessing About Trump Causes Us To Miss by Andrew Bacevich

[May 21, 2017] Speech of Lavrov at the Military Academy of the General Staff

[Dec 31, 2017] Truth-Killing as a Meta-Issue

[Dec 29, 2018] NATO Partisans Started a New Cold War With Russia -

[Dec 24, 2018] Jewish neocons and the romance of nationalist armageddon

[Dec 22, 2018] If Truth Cannot Prevail Over Material Agendas We Are Doomed by Paul Craig Roberts

[Dec 08, 2018] Neocons Sabotage Trump s Trade Talks - Huawei CFO Taken Hostage To Blackmail China

[Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games

[Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot

[Dec 02, 2018] Muller investigation has all the appearance of an investigation looking for a crime

[Dec 01, 2018] Congress' Screwed-Up Foreign Policy Priorities by Daniel Larison

[Nov 30, 2018] US Warlords now and at the tome Miill's Poer Elite was published

[Nov 27, 2018] US Foreign Policy Has No Policy by Philip Giraldi

[Nov 25, 2018] Let s recap what Obama s coup in Ukraine has led to shall we?

[Nov 24, 2018] British Government Runs Secret Anti-Russian Smear Campaigns

[Nov 24, 2018] Now we know created MH17 smear campaign, who financial Steele dossier and created Skripal affair ;-)

[Nov 24, 2018] When you are paid a lot of money to come up with plots psyops, you tend to come up with plots for psyops . The word entrapment comes to mind. Probably self-serving also.

[Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Jewish Political Power

[Nov 22, 2018] Facing Up to the Gradual Demise of Zionist Political Power

[Nov 13, 2018] The US's trajectory as it is, clearly parallel's the Soviet Union and Russia's situation during the mid-80's

[Nov 12, 2018] The Best Way To Honor War Veterans Is To Stop Creating Them by Caitlin Johnstone

[Nov 12, 2018] Obama s CIA Secretly Intercepted Congressional Communications About Whistleblowers

[Nov 12, 2018] Protecting Americans from foreign influence, smells with COINTELPRO. Structural witch-hunt effect like during the McCarthy era is designed to supress decent to neoliberal oligarcy by Andre Damon and Joseph Kishore

[Nov 11, 2018] Trump's Iran Policy Cannot Succeed Without Allies The National Interest by James Clapper & Thomas Pickering

[Nov 10, 2018] US Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan Killed 500,000 by Jason Ditz

[Nov 09, 2018] Globalism Vs Nationalism in Trump's America by Joe Quinn

[Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives

[Oct 25, 2018] Putin jokes with Bolton: Did the eagle eaten all the olives

[Oct 10, 2018] A Decalogue of American Empire-Building A Dialogue by James Petras

[Sep 27, 2018] The power elites goal is to change its appearance to look like something new and innovative to stay ahead of an electorate who are increasingly skeptical of the neoliberalism and globalism that enrich the elite at their expense.

[Sep 16, 2018] Perils of Ineptitude by Andrew Levin

[Sep 16, 2018] I m delighted we can see the true face of American exceptionalism on display everyday. The last thing I want to see is back to normal.

[Sep 15, 2018] Why the US Seeks to Hem in Russia, China and Iran by Patrick Lawrence

[Sep 07, 2018] New York Times Undermining Peace Efforts by Sowing Suspicion by Diana Johnstone

[Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan

[Aug 22, 2018] The CIA Owns the US and European Media by Paul Craig Roberts

[Aug 19, 2018] End of "classic neoliberalism": to an extent hardly imaginable in 2008, all the world's leading economies are locked in a perpetually escalating cycle of economic warfare.

[Aug 18, 2018] Corporate Media the Enemy of the People by Paul Street

[Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov

[Aug 08, 2018] Ten Bombshell Revelations From Seymour Hersh's New Autobiography

[Aug 05, 2018] Cooper was equally as unhinged as Boot: Neoliberal MSM is a real 1984 remake.

[Jul 20, 2018] Doubting The Intelligence Of The Intelligence Community by Ilana Mercer

[Jul 20, 2018] Is President Trump A Traitor Because He Wants Peace With Russia by Paul Craig Roberts

[Jul 03, 2018] Russia has a lot of information about Lybia that could dig a political grave for Hillary. They did not release it

[Jul 03, 2018] Corruption Allegations are one of the classic tools in the color revolution toolbox

[Jul 03, 2018] When you see some really successful financial speculator like Soros or (or much smaller scale) Browder, search for links with intelligence services to explain the success or at least a part of it related to xUSSR space , LA and similar regions

[Jun 17, 2018] the dominant political forces in EU are anti-Russia

[Jun 06, 2018] Why Foreign Policy Realism Isn't Enough by William S. Smith

[May 27, 2018] Northwestern University roundtable discusses regime change in Russia Defend Democracy Press

[May 22, 2018] Cat fight within the US elite getting more intense

[May 22, 2018] Can the majority of the USA be made to see that neocons will ruin the USA, and that their power must be liquidated ?

[Apr 27, 2018] A Most Sordid Profession by Fred Reed

[Apr 22, 2018] The Crisis Is Only In Its Beginning Stages by Paul Craig Roberts

[Apr 21, 2018] On the Criminal Referral of Comey, Clinton et al by Ray McGovern

[Apr 15, 2018] The Trump Regime Is Insane by Paul Craig Roberts

[Apr 19, 2018] The Neocons Are Selling Koolaid Again! by W. Patrick Lang

[Apr 11, 2018] Female neocon warmongers from Fox look like plastered brick walls – heartless and brainless.

[Apr 10, 2018] The Ghouta Massacre near Damascus on Aug 21, 2013 was not a sarin rocket attack carried out by Assad or his supporters. It was a false-flag stunt carried out by the insurgents using carbon monoxide or cyanide to murder children and use their corpses as bait to lure the Americans into attacking Assad.

[Apr 09, 2018] When Military Leaders Have Reckless Disregard for the Truth by Bruce Fein

[Apr 02, 2018] Russophobia Anti-Russian Lobby and American Foreign Policy by A. Tsygankov

[Mar 27, 2018] Let's Investigate John Brennan, by Philip Giraldi

[Mar 25, 2018] A truly historical month for the future of our planet by The Saker

[Mar 22, 2018] If it's correct, the Brits made a very nasty error that shows the true nature of their establishment.

[Mar 17, 2018] How the gas was administred in a place which was under surveillance and why passersby were not affected

[Mar 21, 2018] Washington's Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen

[Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair

[Feb 08, 2018] Try Googling Riggs Bank – a lot of interesting information emerges, on matters such as their involvement with Prince Bandar. So, what we are dealing with is a joint Anglo-American attempt to create a comprador oligarchy who could loot Russia s raw materials resources

[Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

[Dec 28, 2017] How CrowdStrike placed malware in DNC hacked servers by Alex Christoforou

[Mar 16, 2018] The French philosopher Alain Soral is quite right when he says that modern "journalists are either unemployed or prostitutes"

[Mar 16, 2018] Are We Living Under a Military Coup ?

[Mar 14, 2018] Jefferson Morley on the CIA and Mossad Tradeoffs in the Formation of the US-Israel Strategic Relationship

[Mar 12, 2018] Obama's has continued his neoliberal ways after leaving office. Obama was NOT forced into neoliberal positions by terrible Repugs like his Obamabot apologists claimed repeatedly

[Mar 12, 2018] Colonizing the Western Mind using think tanks

[Mar 11, 2018] Washington s Century-long War on Russia by Mike Whitney

[Mar 11, 2018] Reality Check: The Guardian Restarts Push for Regime Change in Russia by Kit

[Mar 08, 2018] A key piece of evidence pointing to 'Guccifer 2.0' being a fake personality created by the conspirators in their attempt to disguise the fact that the materials from the DNC published by 'WikiLeaks' were obtained by a leak rather than a hack had to do with the involvement of the former GCHQ person Matt Tait.

[Mar 06, 2018] The U.S. Returns to 'Great Power Competition,' With a Dangerous New Edge

[Mar 06, 2018] The current anti-Russian sentiment in the West as hysterical. But this hysteria is concentrated at the top level of media elite and neocons. Behind it is no deep sense of unity or national resolve. In fact we see the reverse - most Western countries are deeply divided within themselves due to the crisis of neolineralism.

[Mar 04, 2018] Generals who now are running the USA foreign policy represents a great danger. These men seem incapable of rising above the Russophobia that grew in the atmosphere of the Cold War. They yearn for world hegemony for the US and to see Russia and to a lesser extent China and Iran as obstacles to that dominion for the "city on a hill

[Mar 02, 2018] The main reason much of the highest echelons of American power are united against Trump might be that they're terrified that -- unlike Obama -- he's a really bad salesman for the US led neoliberal empire. This threatens the continuance of their well oiled and exceedingly corrupt gravy train

[Mar 02, 2018] Fatal Delusions of Western Man by Pat Buchanan

[Feb 27, 2018] Alfred McCoy The Rise and Decline of US Global Power

[Feb 27, 2018] On Contact Decline of the American empire with Alfred McCoy

[Feb 26, 2018] Why one war when we can heve two! by Eric Margolis

[Feb 20, 2018] Russophobia is a futile bid to conceal US, European demise by Finian Cunningham

[Feb 18, 2018] Had Hillary Won What Now by Andrew Levine

[Feb 16, 2018] A Dangerous Turn in U.S. Foreign Policy

[Feb 16, 2018] The Deep Staters care first and foremost about themselves.

[Feb 14, 2018] The FBI and the President – Mutual Manipulation by James Petras

[Feb 12, 2018] The Age of Lunacy: The Doomsday Machine

[Feb 12, 2018] Ike's Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex Is Alive and Very Well by William J. Astore

[Feb 10, 2018] The generals are not Borgists. They are something worse ...

[Feb 10, 2018] More on neoliberal newspeak of US propaganda machine

[Jan 30, 2018] Washington Reaches New Heights of Insanity with the "Kremlin Report" by Paul Craig Roberts

[Jan 30, 2018] The Unseen Wars of America the Empire The American Conservative

[Jan 29, 2018] It is OK for an empire to be hated and feared, it doesn t work so good when Glory slowly fades and he empire instead becomes hated and despised

[Jan 28, 2018] Russiagate Isn t About Trump, And It Isn t Even Ultimately About Russia by Caitlyn Johnstone

[Jan 27, 2018] The Rich Also Cry by Israel Shamir

[Jan 27, 2018] As of January 2018 Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey, is starting to look like something Trump should have done sooner.

[Jan 22, 2018] Pentagon Unveils Strategy for Military Confrontation With Russia and China by Bill Van Auken

[Jan 19, 2018] #ReleaseTheMemo Extensive FISA abuse memo could destroy the entire Mueller Russia investigation by Alex Christoforou

[Jan 19, 2018] No Foreign Bases Challenging the Footprint of US Empire by Kevin B. Zeese and Margaret Flowers

[Jan 17, 2018] Neoconning the Trump White House by Kelley Beaucar Vlahos

[Jan 12, 2018] The DOJ and FBI Worked With Fusion GPS on Operation Trump

[Jan 06, 2018] Trump's triumph revealed the breadth of popular anger at politics as usual the blend of neoliberal domestic policy and interventionist foreign policy that constitutes consensus in Washington

[Jan 02, 2018] Neocon warmongers should be treated as rapists by Andrew J. Bacevich

[Jan 02, 2018] Jill Stein in the Cross-hairs by Mike Whitney

[Jan 02, 2018] American exceptionalism extracts a price from common citizens

[Jan 02, 2018] The Idolatry of the Donald

[Dec 31, 2017] Maybe Trump was the deep state candidate of choice? Maybe that s why they ran Clinton against him rather than the more electable Sanders? Maybe that s why Obama started ramping up tensions with Russia in the early fall of 2016 – to swing the election to Trump (by giving the disgruntled anti-war Sanders voters a false choice between Trump or war with Russia?

[Dec 31, 2017] Brainwashing as a key component of the US social system by Paul Craig Roberts

[Dec 31, 2017] How America Spreads Global Chaos by Nicolas J.S. Davies

[Dec 22, 2017] When Sanity Fails - The Mindset of the Ideological Drone by The Saker

[Jul 17, 2017] Tucker Carlson Goes to War Against the Neocons by Curt Mills

[Jun 24, 2017] The Criminal Laws of Counterinsurgency by Todd E. Pierce

[Dec 28, 2019] Senior OPCW Official Busted Leaked Email Exposes Orders To Delete All Traces Of Dissent On Douma

[Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.

[Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

[Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

[Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century

[Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels

[Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine

[Dec 18, 2019] Rudy Giuliani Yovanovitch Was Part Of The Cover-Up, She Had To Be Ousted

[Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars

[Dec 14, 2019] Full Interview: Barr Criticizes Inspector General Report On The Russia Investigation

[Dec 07, 2019] Why the foreign policy establishment consensus is neocon by default.

[Dec 06, 2019] The USA is an occupied by neocon country

[Dec 04, 2019] America's War Exceptionalism Is Killing the Planet by William Astore

[Dec 02, 2019] The cost of militarism cannot be measured only in lost opportunities, lives and money. There will be a long hangover of shame

[Nov 27, 2019] Obama Admits He Would Speak Up Only To Stop Bernie Sanders Nomination

[Nov 27, 2019] Could your county use some extra money?

[Nov 21, 2019] The deep state is individuals INSIDE the government that do the bidding of the banksters, the military-industrial complex, the globalists and other nefarious interests

[Nov 03, 2019] How Controlling Syria s Oil Serves Washington s Strategic Objectives by Nauman Sadiq

[Nov 01, 2019] Viable Opposition The Legal Connection Between Washington and Kiev

[Oct 24, 2019] Empire Interventionism Versus Republic Noninterventionism by Jacob Hornberger

[Oct 23, 2019] Neoconservatism Is An Omnicidal Death Cult, And It Must Be Stopped by Caitlin Johnstone

[Oct 20, 2019] How did the United States become so involved in Ukraine's torturous and famously corrupt politics? The short answer is NATO expansion

[Oct 10, 2019] There is no reason that anyone should treat George Bush with respect: he is a war criminal, who escaped justice

[Oct 02, 2019] The Self-Set Impeachment Trap naked capitalism

[Sep 22, 2019] US reconnaissance plane operated drones that attacked Hmeymim

[Sep 18, 2019] To End Endless Wars, We Must Give Up Hegemony by Daniel Larison

[Sep 12, 2019] The Brain-Dead Maximalism of [neocon] Hard-liners by Daniel Larison

[Sep 11, 2019] Video Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 The Bamboozle Has Captured Us

[Sep 22, 2019] Shoigu calls US belief in its superiority the major threat to Russia and other states

[Sep 10, 2019] Neoliberal Capitalism at a Dead End by Utsa Patnaik and Prabhat Patnaik

[Sep 10, 2019] It s all about Gene Sharp and seeping neoliberal regime change using Western logistical support, money, NGO and intelligence agencies and MSM as the leverage

[Aug 27, 2019] House Niggers Mutiny by Israel Shamir

[Aug 26, 2019] US Backs Xenophobia Mob Violence in Hong Kong

[Aug 25, 2019] What Is the US Role in the Hong Kong Protests> by Reese Erlich

[Aug 22, 2019] Trump Doesn t Know How to Negotiate by Daniel Larison

[Aug 20, 2019] Trump is about the agony. The agony of the US centered global neoliberal empire.

[Aug 17, 2019] Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome (PTDS)

[Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson

[Aug 17, 2019] Debunking the Putin Panic by Stephen F. Cohen

[Aug 13, 2019] "Much that passes as idealism is disguised hatred or disguised love of power."

[Aug 12, 2019] Bruce Ohr 302s by Larry C Johnson - Sic Semper Tyrannis

[Aug 17, 2019] Putin-Trump Derangement Syndrome (PTDS)

[Jul 29, 2019] Michael Hudson Trump s Brilliant Strategy to Dismember US Dollar Hegemony by Michael Hudson

[Jul 29, 2019] The Real Reason The Propagandists Have Been Promoting Russia Hysteria by Caitlin Johnstone

[Jul 28, 2019] Antisemitism prejudices projection on Russians

[Jul 27, 2019] Understanding the Roots of the Obama Coup Against Trump by Larry C Johnson

[Jul 17, 2019] Oil Is Driving the Iran Crisis by Michael T. Klare

[Jul 06, 2019] Why is Iran such a high priority for US elite? Because Iran successfully booted out the CIA and CIA-imposed regime out of their country and successfully remained independent since then

[Jul 05, 2019] Globalisation- the rise and fall of an idea that swept the world - World news by Nikil Saval

[Jul 05, 2019] The World Bank and IMF 2019 by Michael Hudson and Bonnie Faulkner

[Jun 29, 2019] Latest Weapon Of US Imperialism Liquified Natural Gas

[Jun 28, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard vs Bolton

[Jun 28, 2019] The Donald's Latest Iranian Caper Sh*t-Faced Stupidity by David Stockman

[Jun 27, 2019] 'The Ugly Americans' From Kermit Roosevelt to John Bolton Iran Al Jazeera

[Jun 27, 2019] The Ongoing Restructuring of the Greater Middle East by C.J. Hopkins

[Jun 25, 2019] Tucker US came within minutes of war with Iran

[Jun 22, 2019] Bolton Calls For Forceful Iranian Response To Continuing US Aggression

[Jun 22, 2019] Why a U.S.-Iran War Could End Up Being a Historic Disaster by Doug Bandow

[Jun 21, 2019] America's Confrontation With Iran Goes Deeper Than Trump by Trita Parsi

[Jun 21, 2019] Russia accuses U.S. of pushing Iran situation to brink of war RIA - Reuters

[Jun 20, 2019] Chuck Schumer 'The American People Deserve A President Who Can More Credibly Justify War With Iran'

[Jun 22, 2019] Bolton Calls For Forceful Iranian Response To Continuing US Aggression

[Jun 20, 2019] Chuck Schumer 'The American People Deserve A President Who Can More Credibly Justify War With Iran'

[Jun 20, 2019] The Trump-Bolton Duo Is Just Like the Bush-Cheney Duo Warmongers Using Lies to Start Illegal Wars by Prof Rodrigue Tremblay

[Jun 19, 2019] Bias bias the inclination to accuse people of bias by James Thompson

[Jun 09, 2019] The looming 100-year US-China conflict by Martin Wolf

[Jun 05, 2019] Do Spies Run the World by Israel Shamir

[May 28, 2019] Any time you read an article (or a comment) on Russia, substitute the word Jew for Russian and International Jewry for Russia and re-read.

[May 25, 2019] The Belligerence Of Empire by Kenn Orphan

[May 22, 2019] On War With Iran, It's Trump Versus the Founding Fathers

[May 22, 2019] NATO has pushed eastward right up to its borders and threatened to incorporate regions that have been part of Russia's sphere of influence -- and its defense perimeter -- for centuries

[May 20, 2019] "Us" Versus "Them"

[May 14, 2019] iJews and the Left-i by Philip Mendes A Review, by Brenton Sanderson - The Unz Review

[May 14, 2019] Despite a $ 22 Trillion National Debt, America Is on a Military Spending Spree. 800 Overseas US Military Bases by Masud Wadan

[May 13, 2019] Not Just Ukraine; Biden May Have A Serious China Problem As Schweizer Exposes Hunter s $1bn Deal

[May 12, 2019] Is rabid warmonger, neocon chickenhawk Bolton a swinger? That is a mental picture that s deeply disturbing yet funny at the same time

[May 10, 2019] Biden is up to neck in Spygate dirt by Jeff Carlson

[May 10, 2019] Obama administration raced to obtain FICA warrant on Carter Page before Rogers investigation closes on them and that was definitely an obstruction of justice and interference with the ongoing investigation

[May 10, 2019] What was the meaning of the term "insurance policy" in Stzok messages to Lisa Page

[May 10, 2019] The Battle Between Rosenstein and McCabe

[May 08, 2019] Obama Spied on Other Republicans and Democrats As Well by Larry C Johnson

[May 03, 2019] Former high-ranking FBI officials on Andrew McCabe's alarming admissions

[May 03, 2019] Andrew McCabe played the key role in the appointment of the special prosecutor

[May 05, 2019] The Left Needs to Stop Crushing on the Generals by Danny Sjursen

[Apr 29, 2019] The Mueller Report Indicts the Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theory by Aaron Maté

[Apr 21, 2019] Psywar: Propaganda during Iraq war and beyond

[Apr 21, 2019] Deciphering Trumps Foreign Policy by Oscar Silva-Valladares

[Apr 21, 2019] Whenever someone inconveniences the neoliberal oligarchy, the entire neoliberal MSM mafia tells us 24 x7 how evil and disgusting that person is. It's true of the leader of every nation which rejects neoliberal globalization as well as for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange

[Apr 17, 2019] The media's interest in the well-being of a foreign population is directly proportional to the West's interest in toppling its government, while editorial standards are inversely proportional to its enemy status

[Apr 16, 2019] The incompetent, the corrupt, the treacherous -- not just walking free, but with reputations intact, fat bank balances, and flourishing careers. Now they re angling for war with Iran.

[Apr 16, 2019] CIA Director Used Fake Skripal Incident Photos To Manipulate Trump

[Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.

[Apr 15, 2019] I wonder if the Middle East is nothing more than a live-fire laboratory for the military

[Apr 13, 2019] America as a Myth of good life is a powerful tool of color revolutions

[Apr 06, 2019] The Magnitsky Act-Behind the Scenes ASEEES

[Apr 04, 2019] How Brzezinski's Chessboard degenerated into Brennan's Russophobia by Mike Whitney

[Apr 04, 2019] Was John Brennan The Russia Lie Ringleader

[Apr 03, 2019] Suspected of Corruption at Home, Powerful Foreigners Find Refuge in the US

[Apr 02, 2019] 'Yats' Is No Longer the Guy by Robert Parry

[Mar 31, 2019] Guaido Set To Enact Uprising Rooted In US Regime-Change Operations Manual

[Mar 31, 2019] What is the purpose of Russiagate hysteria?

[Mar 30, 2019] The US desperately needs Venezuelan oil

[Mar 30, 2019] You don't like Trump? Bolton? Clinton? All of these people who are in or have passed through leadership positions in America are entirely valid representatives of Americans in general. You may imagine they are faking cluelessness to avoid acknowledging responsibility for their crimes, but the cluelessness is quite real and extends to the entire population.

[Mar 29, 2019] I challenge anyone to find anything done by congress or Trump that was done for average Americans

[Mar 25, 2019] Spygate The True Story of Collusion (plus Infographic) by Jeff Carlson

[Mar 25, 2019] Nuland role in Russiagate

[Mar 24, 2019] The accountability that must follow Mueller's report

[Mar 24, 2019] "Russia Gate" investigation was a color revolution agaist Trump. But a strnge side effect was that Clintons have managed to raise a vicious, loud mouthed thug to the status of some kind of martyr.

[Mar 24, 2019] With RussiaGate Over Where's Hillary

[Mar 17, 2019] Mueller uses the same old false flag scams, just different packaging of his forensics-free findings

[Mar 17, 2019] VIPS- Mueller's Forensics-Free Findings

[Feb 21, 2019] The Empire Now or Never by Fred Reed

[Feb 19, 2019] Tulsi Gabbard kills New World Order bloodbath in thirty seconds

[Feb 19, 2019] Warmongers in their ivory towers - YouTube

[Feb 19, 2019] Charles Schumer and questioning the foreign policy choices of the American Empire's ruling class

[Feb 17, 2019] Was Trump was a deep state man from day one, just like Obama, Bush, Clinton and all the rest?

[Feb 17, 2019] The goal of any war is the redistribution of taxpayer money into the bank accounts of MIC shareholders and executives

[Feb 13, 2019] Making Globalism Great Again by C.J. Hopkins

[Feb 10, 2019] Pussy John Bolton and His Codpiece Mustache by Fred Reed

[Feb 08, 2019] To understand Steele and the five eyes involvement in the Russia hoax you need to go to the library

[Feb 04, 2019] Trump s Revised and Rereleased Foreign Policy: The World Policeman is Back

[Jan 30, 2019] The ruling class of the US imperium will simply not tolerate any government that opposes its financial and geopolitical dominance

[Jan 29, 2019] Guardian became Deep State Guardian

[Jan 26, 2019] Can the current US neoliberal/neoconservative elite be considered suicidal?

[Jan 19, 2019] According to Wolin, domestic and foreign affairs goals are each important and on parallel tracks

[Jan 14, 2019] Nanci Pelosi and company at the helm of the the ship the Imperial USA: Most terrifying of all, the crew has become incompetent. They have no idea how to sail.

[Jan 14, 2019] Nanci Pelosi and company at the helm of the the ship the Imperial USA: Most terrifying of all, the crew has become incompetent. They have no idea how to sail.

[Jan 13, 2019] As FBI Ramped Up Witch Hunt When Trump Fired Comey, Strzok Admitted Collusion Investigation A Joke

[Jan 11, 2019] How President Trump Normalized Neoconservatism by Ilana Mercer

[Jan 04, 2019] Veteran NBC-MSNBC Journalist Blasts Network in Resignation

[Jan 02, 2019] That madness of the US neocons comes from having no behavioural limits, no references outside of groupthink, and manipulating the language. Simply put, you don't know anymore what's what outside of the narrative your group pushes. The manipulators ends up caught in their lies.

[Dec 29, 2018] NATO Partisans Started a New Cold War With Russia -

[Sep 25, 2020] US standard "negotiating" techniques

[Sep 21, 2020] How the west lost by Anatol Lieven

[Sep 20, 2020] Darren Beattie Tucker Carlson Discuss Color Revolutions The Plot To Oust President Trump

[Sep 17, 2020] Military desperados and Mattis "military messiah syndrome" by Scott Ritter

[Sep 17, 2020] Why the Blob Needs an Enemy by ARTA MOEINI

[Sep 09, 2020] Proof of collusion at last! - IRRUSSIANALITY

[Sep 01, 2020] Are We Deliberately Trying to Provoke a Military Crisis With Russia by Ted Galen Carpenter

[Aug 19, 2020] American imperialism vs. EU imperialism: Pushed into the Ukrainian adventure by the US? Rubbish. The EU and its constituent members were attempting to play their own hand and were not merely following the US lead submissively.

[Aug 16, 2020] CIA Behind Guccifer Russiagate A Plausible Scenario

[Jul 31, 2020] Tucker Carlson calls Obama 'one of the sleaziest and most dishonest figures' in US political history

[Jul 29, 2020] America's Own Color Revolution by F. William Engdahl

[Jul 23, 2020] Opinion - Defund the Pentagon- The Liberal Case - POLITICO

[Jul 23, 2020] Demorats defeat amedment ot cut Defence by 10%

[Jul 23, 2020] This is a biggie: Egypt's parliament approves troop deployment to Libya

[Jul 06, 2020] US claim of 'Russian Bounty' plot in Afghanistan is dubious and dangerous - The Grayzone

[Jul 04, 2020] The Return of the Neoliberal Interventionists and their alliance with Bush republicans by James W. Carden

[Jul 03, 2020] I don't think we can assume that even now Trump actually has control of the FBI; it is still in hands of Obama faction

[Jul 03, 2020] The world s economy is in contraction. Although capital, what actual capital exists, will have to try and do something productive, it is confronted by this fact, that everything is facing contraction.

[Jul 01, 2020] Three Glaring Problems with the Russian Taliban Bounty Story by Barbara Boland

[Jul 01, 2020] Control freaks that cannot even control their own criminal impulses!

[Jun 28, 2020] Russian position for Start talks: "We don't believe the US in its current shape is a counterpart that is reliable, so we have no confidence, no trust whatsoever".

[Jun 23, 2020] Surely 'legitimacy' goes to the victor. Once you've won you can build a sort of legitimacy that the majority will agree with (whether its real or not)

[Jun 21, 2020] Paul R. Pillar who pointed out that U.S. sanctions are frequently peddled as a peaceful alternative to war fit the definition of 'crimes against peace'.

[Jun 19, 2020] The USG' s definition of Dictator

[Jun 15, 2020] Do Deep State Elements Operate within the Protest Movement? by Mike Whitney

[Jun 14, 2020] Jeane J. Kirkpatrick 30 Years Unheeded

[Jun 14, 2020] Anonymous Berkeley Professor Shreds BLM Injustice Narrative With Damning Facts And Logic

[Jun 13, 2020] Korea is just another distraction: false conflicts with China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are needed to keep support for MIC and Security State which cost 1.2 trillion a year

[Jun 12, 2020] Flynn Case 85 Lies, Contradictions, Oddities, Unusual Occurrences by Petr Svab

[Jun 03, 2020] Internet Users Who Call For Attacking Other Countries Will Now Be Enlisted In The Military Automatically

[Jun 03, 2020] RussiaGate for neoliberal Dems and MSM honchos is the way to avoid the necessity to look into the camera and say, I guess people hated us so much they were even willing to vote for Donald Trump

[Jun 01, 2020] This is one war party -- war party, imperial party of militarism, conquest and killing of civilians

[May 31, 2020] We Are Combat Vets, and We Want America to Reboot Memorial Day by Matthew Hoh and Danny Sjursen

[May 30, 2020] More On "Obamagate!"

[May 29, 2020] You can;t have a Democracy at home and an empire aboard, the violence of empire will always turn against the very idea of democracy

[May 22, 2020] No US president who can withdraw the USA from the Forever Wars

[May 21, 2020] The 'Clean Break' Doctrine OffGuardian

[May 20, 2020] Newly Revealed Texts Show Strzok, Page Altered Flynn Interview Notes

[May 20, 2020] McGovern Turn Out The Lights, Russiagate Is Over by Ray McGovern

[May 19, 2020] America: "We demand an coronavirus origin investigation, but the investigators must agree on the outcome that we specify before they begin investigating!"

[May 19, 2020] Russophobia in the Age of Donald Trump

[May 16, 2020] A model democrat

[May 13, 2020] Dramatic change of direction for Syrian envoy

[May 13, 2020] From RussiaGate To ObamaGate The End Of Boomerville by Tom Luongo

[May 11, 2020] Lee Zeldin Adam Schiff 'should resign today' for role in Russia investigation by Dominick Mastrangelo

[May 11, 2020] McCarthy: It would be 'profoundly crazy if Obama wasn't in on Flynn case'

[May 10, 2020] Did the FBI target Michael Flynn to protect Obama's policies, not national security by Kevin R. Brock

[May 10, 2020] Does Obama now feels his potential liability for staging coup d' tat and gaslighting the whole nation?

[May 07, 2020] Media Malpractice Is Criminalizing Better Relations With Russia by Stephen F. Cohen

[Apr 29, 2020] Trump, despite pretty slick deception during his election campaign, is an typical imperialist and rabid militarist. His administration continuredand in some areas exceeded the hostility of Obama couse against Russia

[Apr 25, 2020] Did This Virus Come From a Lab? Maybe Not But It Exposes the Threat of a Biowarfare Arms Race by Sam Husseini

[Apr 24, 2020] Please Tell the Establishment That U.S. Hegemony is Over by Daniel Larison

[Apr 11, 2020] The country that glorifies profit at any cost and ruthless unethical competition will fare bad in case of any virus epidemic. That includes "Typhoid Mary" cases of selfish anti-social behaviour

[Apr 11, 2020] 'Never in my country': COVID-19 and American exceptionalism by Jeanne Morefield

[Apr 08, 2020] Feudal Japan Edo and the US Empire by Hiroyuki Hamada

[Apr 05, 2020] Esper tone deafness: a sad illustration of wildly misplaced priorities of military industrial complex

[Mar 24, 2020] This weaponizing of random indignation is a classic tool of the Western propaganda

[Mar 21, 2020] When reading any article concerning current events (ie. Ukraine, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, or Coronavirus) consider how the The Seven Principles of Propaganda may apply

[Mar 13, 2020] Daffy Duck. cartoon was made in 1953 and like many Looney Tune cartoon's, they are an extreme parody of life. It dawned on me that this cartoon is an almost perfect description of US Military policy and action.

[Mar 01, 2020] Countering Nationalist Oligarchy by Ganesh Sitaraman

[Feb 29, 2020] Secret Wars, Forgotten Betrayals, Global Tyranny. Who s Really In Charge Of The US Military by Cynthia Chung

[Feb 29, 2020] A very interesting and though provoking presentation by Ambassador Chas Freeman "America in Distress: The Challenges of Disadvantageous Change"

[Feb 26, 2020] A serious US politician has to demonstrate a large capacity for betrayal.

[Feb 23, 2020] Welcome to the American Regime

[Feb 23, 2020] Where Have You Gone, Smedley Butler The Last General To Criticize US Imperialism by Danny Sjursen

[Feb 22, 2020] The Red Thread A Search for Ideological Drivers Inside the Anti-Trump Conspiracy by Diana West

[Feb 21, 2020] Why Both Republicans And Democrats Want Russia To Become The Enemy Of Choice by Philip Giraldi

[Feb 09, 2020] Trump demand for 50% of Iraq oil revenue sound exactly like a criminal mob boss

[Feb 09, 2020] The Deeper Story Behind The Assassination Of Soleimani

[Feb 09, 2020] World Conquest The United States' Global Military Crusade (1945-2020) By Eric Waddell

[Feb 08, 2020] Is Iraq About To Switch From US to Russia

[Feb 07, 2020] How They Sold the Iraq War by Jeffrey St. Clair

[Feb 03, 2020] White House Warriors: How the National Security Council Transformed the American Way of War

[Feb 02, 2020] The most interesting issue is the role of NSC in this impeachment story

[Jan 31, 2020] Trump excoriates Bolton in tweets this morning

[Jan 27, 2020] The end of Trump? Trump betrayed all major promises of his 2016 election campaign. Trump needs to go...

[Jan 25, 2020] Rabobank What If... The Protectionists Are Right And The Free Traders Are Wrong by Michael Every

[Jan 24, 2020] Lawrence Wilkerson Lambasts 'the Beast of the National Security State' by Adam Dick

[Jan 19, 2020] Anyone who has studied the history of the Third Reich would note a curious similarity between Germany s behaviour under Hitler and the current behaviour of the US both internally and externally

[Jan 19, 2020] The frantic attempt to deflect attention from US foreign wars and mainly derisive media coverage of Tulsi Gabbard is a case in point. Is she the harbinger of a growing political movement aiming to dismantle the military empire project?

[Jan 18, 2020] The joke is on us: Without the USSR the USA oligarchy resorted to cannibalism and devour the American people

[Jan 18, 2020] Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire is available for free download

[Jan 12, 2020] MIC along with Wall Street controls the government and the country

[Jan 12, 2020] US has been preaching human rights while mounting wars and lying.

[Jan 12, 2020] Luongo Fears "An Abyss Of Losses" As Iraq Becomes MidEast Battleground

[Jan 10, 2020] The Saker interviews Michael Hudson

[Jan 09, 2020] Opposing War With Iran: Three Reasons by Anthony DiMaggio

[Jan 08, 2020] I can't quite understand how gratuitous US piracy and adventurism in places on the globe beyond the knowledge and reach of most Americans could possibly be compared to Iranian actions securing their immediate regional borders and interests.

[Jan 08, 2020] Iraqi Journalist: Killing Soleimani "Ended An Era In Which Iran And The United States Coexisted In Iraq" by Tim Hains

[Jan 06, 2020] Diplomacy Trump-style. Al Capone probably would be allow himself to fall that low

[Jan 06, 2020] How To Avoid Swallowing War Propaganda by Nathan J. Robinson

[Jan 06, 2020] Neocon Pompeo pushed Trump to kill Soleimani; Looks like West Point educated military contactor mafia to which Pompeo and Esper belongs controls the President, although Trump malleability and recklessness are inexcusable

[Jan 06, 2020] The threat of General Soleimani - TTG

[Jan 05, 2020] The USA is now at war, de-facto and de-jure, with BOTH Iraq and Iran (UPDATED 6X) The Vineyard of the Saker

[Jan 04, 2020] American Meddling in the Ukraine by Publius Tacitus

[Jan 04, 2020] Will Trump welcome the ejection of the US from Iraq - He should by Colonel Lang

[Dec 28, 2019] Senior OPCW Official Busted Leaked Email Exposes Orders To Delete All Traces Of Dissent On Douma

[Dec 21, 2019] Trump administration sanction companies involved in laying the remaining pipe, and also companies involved in the infrastructure around the arrival point.

[Dec 21, 2019] Trump comes clean from world s policeman to thug running a global protection racket by Finian Cunningham

[Dec 21, 2019] The Pentagon s New Map War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century

[Dec 21, 2019] The ruthless neo-colonialists of 21st century

[Dec 19, 2019] MIC lobbyism (which often is presented as patriotism) is the last refuge of scoundrels

[Dec 19, 2019] A the core of color revolution against Trump is Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine

[Dec 17, 2019] Neocons like car salespeople have a stereotypical reputation for lacking credibility because ther profession is to lie in order to sell weapons to the publin, much like used car saleme lie to sell cars

Sites

Youtube

Etc

Society

Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers :   Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism  : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy

Quotes

War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda  : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes :  Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce :  Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes

Bulletin:

Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 :  Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method  : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law

History:

Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds  : Larry Wall  : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS :  Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development :  Scripting Languages : Perl history   : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history

Classic books:

The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month :  How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite

Most popular humor pages:

Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor

The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D

Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.

FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.

This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...

 You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site

Disclaimer:

The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.

Last modified: July, 29, 2021