Peak Oil is You

Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)

Page added on October 10, 2016

Bookmark and Share

Do We Really Want A War With Russia?

Do We Really Want A War With Russia? thumbnail

I wish I could say things were improving between the US and Russia but they aren’t. They’re rapidly worsening.

There’s so much happening right now, I can only provide a summary of a few of the more interesting and worrying developments.

This report builds on those I’ve released over the past two years and begins with a chilling editorial put out by the NY Times on September 29th, 2016, which further demonized Putin specifically, Russia generally, and openly advocates for military confrontation.

Hey, we’ve been down this path before.  The deeply conflicted NY Times has never met a war in the Middle East it didn’t support, and has never had any trouble repeating war plan talking points (that always neatly align with those put out by neocon think tanks) or even printing obviously fake “intelligence” from unnamed sources such as that used to justify the illegal US attack and invasion of Iraq.

As a reminder for my US readers who many only have read US press sources on the matter, prior to being attacked Iraq had never threatened the US, had no role in 9/11, and had allowed extensive UN access to its country’s military bases none of which ever showed the slightest trace of manufacturing weapons of mass destruction. And, even if they had been producing these so-called weapons of mass destruction (weapons which are also owned and maintained in the US, for the record), there was still no legal case for an attack by the US because pre-emptive attacks are not justifiable, ever.

What the NY Times has done, again, I fear, is served as a conduit for neocon talking points and therefore has become a propaganda arm readying the US population for another war, this one with Russia.  This is a very disturbing development.

Here’s the editorial, into which I have inserted comments where appropriate [in brackets].  Remember, propaganda is designed to elicit core emotional responses such as fear, anger, moral indignation, and a sense of threat to one’s very survival:

Vladimir Putin’s Outlaw State

Sept 29, 2016

President Vladimir Putin is fast turning Russia into an outlaw nation. As one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, his country shares a special responsibility to uphold international law. Yet, his behavior in Ukraine and Syria violates not only the rules intended to promote peace instead of conflict, but also common human decency.

[Which “rules intended to promote peace” is the NY Times referring to here?  The same sorts of rules that led NATO to bomb Libya back into the stone age?  Or are these the “rules” that allow a country to manufacture fake evidence on Iraq and then attack that country unleashing a decade of bitter sectarian violence?  Also, how does “common human decency fit into that schema?  I’m truly curious.]

This bitter truth was driven home twice on Wednesday. An investigative team led by the Netherlands concluded that the surface-to-air missile system that shot down a Malaysia Airlines plane over Ukraine in July 2014, killing 298 on board, was sent from Russia to Russian-backed separatists and returned to Russia the same night.

[The MH-17 disaster is anything but clear-cut and the JIT investigation was heavily compromised from the start.  Nothing like the claim being made here is supported by the actual investigation evidence presented.  This is pure, unsupported speculation at this stage.  More on this at a later date.]

Meanwhile, in Syria, Russian and Syrian warplanes knocked out two hospitals in the rebel-held sector of Aleppo as part of an assault that threatens the lives of 250,000 more people in a war that has already claimed some 500,000 Syrian lives.

[Meanwhile, in Afghanistan the US bombed a MSF hospital and has killed ~90% innocents with its drone program.  Also, not to pick nits, but the US and European interests funded and started the war in Syria.  It seems a bit short-sighted to now claim that Russia bears some special responsibility for the lives at stake.  You have to forget everything that happened prior to this moment.]

Russia has tried hard to pin the blame for the airline crash on Ukraine. But the new report, produced by prosecutors from the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Malaysia and Ukraine, confirms earlier findings. It uses strict standards of evidence and meticulously documents not only the deployment of the Russian missile system that caused the disaster but also Moscow’s continuing cover-up.

[Nope.  Just nope.  I’ll detail why in a future report, but the MH-17 investigation was bogus from the get go.  Short version: there were only two suspects, the Ukrainian military and rebels.  The Ukrainian secret service (SBU) was inside the investigation from the beginning and supplied all of the ‘evidence’ against Russia and the rebels.  What investigation ever has one of the prime suspects supplying the evidence?  As I said, completely rigged and bogus.]

Some Western officials have accused Russia of war crimes, charges that could be pursued through international channels, even if Moscow blocks a formal referral to the International Criminal Court. New sanctions against Russia also should be considered. Mr. Putin will undoubtedly fight any such action, using his veto on the Security Council, but whatever his response, the United States should lend its support to Ukraine’s quest for accountability.

[“Some western officials?”  There the NYT goes again with the unnamed sources.  How about you name names this time NY Times?  Well, in truth, a whole host of named individuals and organizations have accused the US of war crimes, as well as Israel, which the US has routinely blocked.  Glass houses and all of that.]

Over recent days, Mr. Putin has again shown his true colors with air attacks that have included powerful bunker-busting bombs that can destroy underground hospitals and safety zones where civilians seek shelter.

[Note the slippery use of the word ‘can’ in this sentence.  Have they been used to target and destroy hospitals and civilian safety zones, or not?]

On Sept. 19, Russia bombed an aid convoy, which like hospitals and civilians are not supposed to be targeted under international law.

[Russia denies this, and has also released radar evidence showing that the only planes in the region at the time were two US drones, plus the sort of damage seen on the fire-destroyed trucks is consistent with the damage caused by the US drone based Hellfire missile.   If the US wants to release some radar data showing Russian planes in the area or other compelling evidence, then we can all be more confident in that claim.  For now the NY Times is repeating an unproven assertion made by the US State Department.]

President Obama has long refused to approve direct military intervention in Syria. And Mr. Putin may be assuming that Mr. Obama is unlikely to confront Russia in his final months and with an American election season in full swing. But with the rebel stronghold in Aleppo under threat of falling to the government, administration officials said that such a response is again under consideration.

[The “rebel stronghold in Aleppo under threat” is interesting use of evocative language.  However the nature of war is that the sides attempt to take key positions form each other.  The “rebels’ in question are some of the most dodgy humans to ever walk the planet.  The rebels backed by the US include nasty elements of Al-Nusra, Al-Qaida,  ISIS and a host of really vile outfits.  If you are not aware, these groups have executed thousands of civilians, taken sex slaves, and conducted other horrible crimes against the innocent. ]

Mr. Putin fancies himself a man on a mission to restore Russia to greatness. Russia could indeed be a great force for good. Yet his unconscionable behavior — butchering civilians in Syria and Ukraine, annexing Crimea, computer-hacking American government agencies, crushing dissent at home — suggests that the furthest thing from his mind is becoming a constructive partner in the search for peace.

[Pay close attention to that word “unconscionable.”  It really stood out for me here and I knew something was up when I heard it used again by a US official.  It will soon appear again in media quotes below.  For now, let’s just note that every act declared as ‘unconscionable’ has also recently been done by the US: civilians have been ‘butchered’ (again a strongly evocative word very different from the ‘collateral damage and targeting mistakes’ that the US reserves for its own actions), computers have been hacked (even Angela Merkel’s cell phone as you may recall), and peaceful protests have been crushed in the US, most recently a peaceful prayer circle of Native Americans at Standing Rock by heavily armed LEO’s who brought armored personnel carriers for the task)]


Okay, that editorial was yet another in a long line from the NY Times which has never met a neocon-proposed war it didn’t blindly support.  Supposedly the bastion of the east coast liberal elites, the NY Times is actually acting once again more like the personal propaganda arm of the US necons and Israeli likuds who have been dragging the US into one war after another.

As I’ve written about extensively in the past, a war this time could mean anything from a shooting (kinetic) war, to a cyberwar, financial or trade war, or even a hacking attack that takes out the grid or other critical infrastructure.  If you want to go deeper into the details of what that might mean and how you should prepare, we have a more extensive Part 2 of this report prepared.

Now, lets continue on with our thesis that a propaganda effort is underway to drag the US into yet another useless war. This one with the potential to literally end the US as a going concern.

I’m going to skip over a few events here so we can connect this propaganda dot.  Then we’ll get back to the other worrying events that show how the situation with Russia is deteriorating badly.

Fast forward just five days from that NY Times editorial and we read this:

White House Warns of ‘Actions’ If Russia Won’t Negotiate

Oct 4, 2016

President Obama faces an increasingly stark choice in Syria — he can order American military action or watch thousands of women and children die as the rebel stronghold of Aleppo falls.

So far, he has shown no willingness to launch a U.S. military response, but White House officials told NBC News Monday they are now considering escalating the U.S. involvement in Syria’s civil war, including unspecified “actions…that would further underscore the consequences of not coming back to the negotiating table.”

American intelligence officials on Monday pointedly accused Russian and Syrian forces of mass atrocitiesduring their advance on the city, describing a horrific bombing campaign in recent days that has killed women and children at an increasing rate.

“The regime and Russia’s use of incendiary weapons have contributed to the unconscionable civilian deaths and suffering,” a U.S. intelligence official said.


How much more obvious can all that be?  First there’s a NY Times editorial that literally lays to a series of talking points ranging from women and children being at risk to a rebel stronghold to unconscionable civilian deaths and suffering.

It’s all there in this second article and, just for a bonus, it’s all attributed to unnamed White House and intelligence “officials.”  Exactly the same pattern we saw in the run up to the Iraq war.  I would put a lot of money on the bet that these scripted talking points were developed by a small team of neocons operating in the shadows.  A lot of money.

As in the past, when these folks pull the levers to try and goad the US into a(nother) war, they never come out in the open. They always hide behind anonymity. Your tip-off is the number of times you read the words “US officials” or  “a highly placed source” or some other phrase that hides the individual while evoking authority.

If they weren’t so secretive, we’d certainly see the pattern more easily for what it actually is – the same small cadre of people who are always agitating for the use of military force to “solve” whatever objectives they are seeking.

Now, of course it’s horrible when civilians get trapped or die in a war. But here we might note that if a nation truly cannot abide innocent deaths, then it also shouldn’t go about starting wars, or supplying military armaments.

I mean, let’s wander a few miles south of Syria and take a peek at what’s happening in Yemen where the US is supplying both weapons and targeting data to the Saudis:

Civilian casualties in Yemen bring charges of U.S. responsibility for Saudi actions

Civilian casualties have spiked in Yemen since the collapse of peace talks in August, the United Nations reported recently, bringing the total number of civilians killed since March 2015, when a coalition led by Saudi Arabia launched its operation against Houthi rebels there, to more than 4,000.

Despite repeated strikes on schools and hospitals, officials see little choice for now but continued support, given the intense desire to shore up a bilateral relationship rocked by President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran and new legislation linked to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.


Where are the ‘unnamed officials’ wringing their hands at thousand of innocent deaths in Yemen?  Where’s our sense of responsibility for being the primary arms dealer to the Saudis, and direct supplying them with targeting data? These morals are nowhere to be found when it comes to Yemen.

In fact, according to ‘officials’ in the above article, when it comes to Yemen, the desire to make nice with the Saudis (after the Iran deal) is the driving US objective at the moment.

In other words, in Yemen, political realities are more important than innocent lives.  Ah, do you see it now?  Innocent deaths don’t matter as much as the political realities.

How can it be a moral imperative in Syria but a political one when it comes to Yemen?

Would it be out of line for us to wonder if perhaps these same ‘officials’ are merely using the innocent deaths in Syria as cover for some deeper political purposes that are really the main drivers?

To me, morality is not conditional.  Either innocent deaths are always unconscionable, or they aren’t.  They cannot be morally unacceptable in one place and subservient to political realities in another.  Obama cannot cry for the children of Sandy Hook one day, but continue the drone program (which kills lots of children) with steely determination the next.

Which is why I am especially on alert when I read such things as the NY Times editorial above, which screams out a moral argument when a quick scan of the news reveals a profound lack of moral consistency.  As ever, that’s a red flag that propaganda is being deployed.  Morals are for the populace…when you need something from them, like their consent.

In psychological terms, what’s happening here is called projection.  This is what happens when an individual, or a nation, accuses an external party of the exact same traits that they secretly dislike about themselves.

An example being a parent who procrastinates at work but then yells harshly at their child for not doing their very best at school.  Or the explosive anger that an aggressive driver displays when someone cuts them off.

This very human habit of projecting our shadows onto others is very, very dangerous when it gets to the explosive blame stage.

Deep, dark and highly emotional and irrational outbursts are what follows.  Insults are slung, sometimes objects are thrown, that forever change the relationship.  Real damage can be inflicted in such moments that sometimes cannot be undone. Do we really want that kind of breakdown with nuclear-armed Russia?

A No Fly Zone

So, when it comes to Russia, what are the military options that an angry US might pursue?

This too is easy to track because the neocons write about their plans openly and prolifically, and they are especially fond of imposing no-fly zones.  What this always means to them, however, is not the absence of aircraft from a given area, but rather that no planes besides US/NATO planes are flying over the area.  No-fly only applies to the other side, naturally.

A no-fly zone means you have air supremacy and therefore control over a country.

There are two ways to create this. The first is a low level no-fly zone where you supply shoulder-fired antiaircraft rockets (“manpads”) to the rebel forces.  These have limited range so they basically keep low-level aircraft out of the picture; helicopters, low and slow flying support/attack aircraft and the like.

The second level is to bring your own aircraft into the theater to enforce a complete no-fly zone at all altitudes.

Unsurprisingly, I came across this from the Brookings Institution, a key neocon ‘think tank,’ in August. So I knew where all this was heading:

We must also be clever about employing various options for no-fly zones: We cannot shoot down an airplane without knowing if it’s Russian or Syrian, but we can identify those aircraft after the fact and destroy Syrian planes on the ground if they were found to have barrel-bombed a neighborhood, for example.

These kinds of operations are complicated, no doubt, and especially with Russian aircraft in the area—but I think we have made a mistake in tying ourselves in knots over the issue, since there are options we can pursue.

(Source – Brookings – O’Hanlon)

Yes, “these operations are complicated, no doubt…” is another breezy dismissal, similar to how all Iraqis were going to greet the American forces as “libertators” after Desert Sheild. As if engaging a major nuclear superpower with advanced hardware were no different from the complexities involved in taking out Gadhafi.

The “various options” mentioned are code-speak for supplying manpads to the rebels. It might be helpful to recall that the Russians have not (yet) supplied similar hardware to any of the various forces the US and NATO are fighting in Libya, Iraq, or Afghanistan, and they’ve not yet decided to start shooting US and NATO planes out of the sky either.  One could see that as an act of restraint that could be lifted at some point, enormously complicating US ambitions in a variety of military theaters.

How these Brookings neocons have any voice left at all after the massive screwups in all the prior conflicts they cheered on an supported is beyond me.  Anybody making the case that it is simply “complicated” to take on Russia should lose their job, be laughed off the stage, and have to find other employment.

But they’d have lots of company in that unemployment line, including at least one US Senator.  Speaking about making life more difficult for the Russians, on September 30th, 2016 John McCain said:

MCCAIN: No, but I might do what we did in Afghanistan many years ago, to give those guys the ability to shoot down those planes. That equipment is available.

CAVUTO: Who would be shooting them down?

MCCAIN: The Free Syrian Army, just like the Afghans shot down the Russian…

CAVUTO: Not us?

MCCAIN: No. Just like the Russians — the Afghans shot down Russian planes after Russia invaded Afghanistan.


McCain is calling for arming the rebels with manpads, again a dangerous escalation that really needs to be debated vigorously at the highest levels because anything that begins a hot (kinetic) war with Russia in Syria stands little chance of remaining safely contained there.    Further, it would greatly increase the risk of Russia returning the favor to the US elsewhere.

It’s also worth remembering here that in mid-September the US, using two F16s and two A-10 “low and slow” attack aircraft bombed a Syrian government position killing anywhere from 60 to 100 government troops that where garrisoning a surrounded position whose borders were well known to all parties.

While the US pentagon dismissed the incident as a ‘targeting error’ implying a few bombs errantly fell in the wrong place, everybody in the business knows better.  Those bombs fell exactly where there were meant to fall, and Russia’s view is that the US did this on purpose, especially since a coordinated ISIS attack followed minutes later on the same position allowing ISIS to make a key advance.

The fact the A-10’s were involved only hardens my view that this was not an accident on the part of the US.  Those aircraft are meant to fly low and be used for close in support.  Who got bombed and who advanced with close in support?  Answering those questions leads to the conclusion that the US has already militarily attacked the Syrian government, and by extension Russia and, once again, “inadvertently” provided military support to ISIS (done previously when “errant” drops of pallets loaded with military gear that landed on ISIS positions).

Russia Responds

So, what’s been Russia’s response to all this?

Well, they terminated diplomatic communications on Oct 3rd:

Contacts between Russian and US military on Syria suspended 

MOSCOW, October 3./TASS/. Exchange of information between Russian and US military over Syria has stopped of late, Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said on Monday.

“All contacts between the military have been stopped of late, there has been no exchange of information,” he said.


That’s probably not a good sign.

As another reminder, we’d like to point out that Russia already has their S-400 anti-aircraft missile system in place, which has an enormous range and can take out US and NATO aircraft from a ridiculous distance:

This is one of the most, if not the most sophisticated anti-aircraft systems in the world.  Note to armchair warriors in the neocon central: this system is more than a ‘complication.’  It is a game changing system, which will end lives and destroy the hardware of any country that goes up against it.

This ‘complication’ is why this 4-star general visibly freezes when a dreadfully uninformed (or ignorant, or possibly unintelligent) Senator on the armed service committee asks why the US hasn’t already enforced a no fly zone in Syria:

Now, such a system is vulnerable to being taken out, of course.  Not by a bombing run by aircraft, but by a missile attack, perhaps a cruise missile.

Which explains this next bit of news, also from Oct 4:

Russia deploys advanced anti-missile system to Syria for first time, US officials say

Oct 4, 2016

Russia has deployed an advanced anti-missile system to Syria for the first time, three US officials tell Fox News, the latest indication that Moscow continues to ramp up its military operations in Syria in support of President Bashar al-Assad.

It comes after Russia’s actions led to the collapse of a cease-fire and the cut-off of direct talks with the U.S.  

While Moscow’s motives are not certain, officials say the new weapon system could potentially counter any American cruise missile attack in Syria.

Components of the SA-23 Gladiator anti-missile and anti-aircraft system, which has a range of roughly 150 miles, arrived over the weekend “on the docks” of a Russian naval base along Syria’s Mediterranean coastal city of Tartus, two US officials said.

It is the first time Russia has deployed the SA-23 system outside its borders, according to one Western official citing a recent intelligence assessment. The missiles and associated components are still in their crates and are not yet operational, according to the officials.

The U.S. intelligence community has been observing the shipment of the SA-23 inside Russia in recent weeks, according to one official.

While the purpose is not clear, one US official asked sarcastically, “Nusra doesn’t have an air force do they?”speaking about the Al Qaeda-linked group in Syria.  The Islamic State also does not fly any manned aircraft or possess cruise missiles, in a sign that Russia is directing its actions to protect itself against any potential attack from the United States or its allies.


Heh heh.  “While the purpose is not clear…”  That’s funny.  The purpose could note be any clearer if it were written in neon on a billboard outside the bedroom window of this “US official.”  The purpose is to protect its other military hardware from a US attack,.

It’s there because the US is ramping up its ‘no fly’ talk and preparing its citizens via propaganda pieces in the NY Times, et al., for a major conflict with Russia.

It’s there because all trust is gone and the time for talking has come to a close.

It’s there because the US is pushing for a war with Russia that cannot be sold on its own merits and so its being sold as a humanitarian mission to prevent more unconscionable acts from being carried out (and pay no mind to similar such acts being carried out by Israel against Palestinians, or Saudis against Yemenis).

Prepping for War

Now, what would a responsible government do if hostilities were increasing between major superpowers and the possibility, if not the inevitability, of an armed conflict were on the horizon?

Well, they’d do more than prepare their citizens to accept the moves via propaganda, they get their citizens to physically prepare as well.

In Germany we see this sort of view:

German Politician to Sputnik: ‘US Pulling Us Into Abyss of War in Middle East’

Oct 1, 2016

How has the situation on the ground in Syria changed after a year of Russian military involvement? Speaking to Sputnik,veteran German politician Willy Wimmer suggested that it has demonstrated that Russia is the only major power ready to seriously fight terrorism, and to call for an end to a war which risks spreading across the region.

The US and its allies, meanwhile, have only managed to throw a wrench in the peace process, and have been unable to reach any of their own goals due to the Russian intervention, the politician argues.

Wimmer is a veteran member of the Christian Democratic Union with over thirty years of experience in the Bundestag. The politician has served as State Secretary of the German Defense Ministry, and as a vice president of the OSCE; he is a close friend of former Chancellor Helmut Kohl.

Interviewed by Sputnik Deutschland and asked to comment on the evolution of the Syrian crisis, Wimmer began by noting that virtually from the beginning, that conflict was a product of foreign meddling. “What we are witnessing today is part of a longer development,” the politician said. “The civil war which broke out five years ago resulted in a tragic struggle right at the moment when the Syrian-Israeli conflict over the Golan Heights seemed to have already been settled. All that was left to do was sign the agreement which could have resulted in peace in the Middle East. And if not for certain forces who were not interested in peace, this agreement would have been signed.” “We know that at the very beginning of the Syrian tragedy, British, French and US special forces became involved, giving this war, at the moment looking more like a civil conflict, a global significance,” the politician emphasized

Now, Wimmer suggested, the central question comes down to “whether we can put an end to this disaster and prevent the spread of the Syrian inferno to other countries, which would signify the start of a great war.” 

“The intervention by the Americans and Europeans in Syria is a clear violation of international law,” Wimmer emphasized. “This is a military operation on the territory of another state, one that’s not authorized by the UN or under international law.”


Okay, so a German politician with 30 years experience and who served at the highest levels in the Defense Ministry thinks that the entire Syrian conflict is the result of meddling by US/NATO forces that had no interest in a budding peace agreement in 2011, that only Russia has a legal mandate to be in Syria, and that the whole thing could boil over into a wider and far more dangerous greater war.

I concur with all of that, by the way.

Here’s what a responsible government who saw things that way would respond:

Germany to tell people to stockpile food and water in case of attacks

Aug 21, 2016

For the first time since the end of the Cold War, the German government plans to tell citizens to stockpile food and water in case of an attack or catastrophe, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung newspaper reported on Sunday.

“The population will be obliged to hold an individual supply of food for ten days,” the newspaper quoted the government’s “Concept for Civil Defence” – which has been prepared by the Interior Ministry – as saying.


That’s what the US government should be advising its own citizens but is not, either because of hubris deceit, or the mistaken belief that because the last two great wars did not reach US shores this one won’t either.  But having some self-reliance is always a good idea, and one shouldn’t need their government to tell them so, but however people become more prepared is okay by me.

Russia too is not only advising its citizen to prepare, but going one step further by telling them to specifically prepare for a nuclear war

Russia tells citizens to ‘prepare for nuclear war with West’

Oct 4, 2016

Russia has warned citizens that a nuclear war with the West could be imminent – sparked by clashes in the Middle East.

Zvezda, a nationwide TV service run by the country’s Ministry of Defence, said last week, ‘Schizophrenics from America are sharpening nuclear weapons for Moscow.’

Officials said on Friday that underground shelters had been built which could house 12 milion people – enough for the entire population of Moscow.


That’s how badly trust in the West has been damaged for Russia – it now thinks such madmen and madwomen are in charge in the West that it’s now saying nuclear war is a distinct possibility.  How this is not front page news and being actively debated in the US is simply fascinating. And scary.

If war is a possibility, then a responsible party will prepare.  The Russians and the Germans are being responsible in that sense.

The Russians have gone further and are actively preparing their citizens not just for war, but nuclear war.   This may seem extreme and certainly nobody wants anything to go that far, but Russia’s background has taught her that when it comes to war, nothing is ever certain.

And that war comes to her lands regularly.  Every invading force has paid a bitter price for trying to occupy Russia and that informs her mindset.  Shit happens.  Best to be ready for it.

The US is on the opposite side of that spectrum having been in the bully position for so long, and not having ever been invaded and occupied, that it seems delightfully unaware that suffering from the effects of war is a distinct possibility.

Perhaps not by an invading force, but certainly by one that possesses nuclear weapons and superior cyber skills.

The Russian Mindset

Far be it from me to claim that I have any particular insight into the Russian mindset.  I’ll leave that to such experts as Dmitry Orlov.

But I can read the tea leaves and I don’t think it takes a Russian or military expert to divine the meaning behind this:

Russia’s Putin suspends plutonium cleanup accord with U.S. because of ‘unfriendly’ acts

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday suspended an agreement with the United States for disposal of weapons-grade plutonium because of “unfriendly” acts by Washington, the Kremlin said.

A Kremlin spokesman said Putin had signed a decree suspending the 2010 agreement under which each side committed to destroy tonnes of weapons-grade material because Washington had not been implementing it and because of current tensions in relations.

The deal, signed in 2000 but which did not come into force until 2010, was being suspended due to “the emergence of a threat to strategic stability and as a result of unfriendly actions by the United States of America towards the Russian Federation”, the preamble to the decree said.

It also said that Washington had failed “to ensure the implementation of its obligations to utilize surplus weapons-grade plutonium”.


Trust is broken; the US has not been living up to its end of the agreement and is being antagonistic towards Russia.  Russia thinks it may need its weapons grade plutonium after all.  Two very bad signs.

With trust broken and diplomacy cut off, all we can do is note that Russia is now acting as if it has to defend itself and be prepared for war.

Here’s one editorial from inside Russia that lays out some of the thinking going on, much of which we’ve already covered and which echoes the German politician’s views:

The United States is, once again, the aggressor nation calling foul when things don’t go according to plan.

Washington has no international mandate to be in Syria — neither in its skies, nor as “advisors” to “moderate rebels” on the ground. Washington (along with its freedom-loving allies — Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE, all bastions of democracy) has simply invited itself to the party. And by “party” we mean “a proxy war dressed up as a democratic uprising that has killed hundreds of thousands and further destabilized the entire region, while creating a massive refugee crisis in the process.”

A week ago, Washington murdered (with bombs) more than 60 uniformed soldiers of a country that they aren’t even officially at war with, inside their own borders. Putin strikes again! according to the New York Times.

Of course, the editorial is eager to point out all the heinous war crimes that Russia has committed in Syria — none of which have been verified by anyone aside from the Pentagon. Should we really be surprised, though? In a recent article in The Nation, Adam Johnson reminds his readers that:

The New York Times‘s editorial board has supported every single US war—Persian Gulf, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, Libya—for the past 30 years. While its reporting and op-eds on these wars has often been critical, much of it’s coverage has also helped to sell war-weary liberals on the current military mission—the most notable example being Judith Miller and Michael Gordon’s hyping Iraq’s nonexistent nuclear program in the buildup to the March 2003 invasion.

Indeed, the image of The New York Times as an objective, unbiased news outlet is precisely how it was able to sell the war in the first place.”


The summary:  The US started the Syrian conflict with the intention of toppling yet another Middle Eastern government (“regime” in the parlance of the spin masters), things have not gone exactly as it wanted, and now it’s acting illegally and dangerously because it did not get its way.

Also, the NY Times is not an unbiased news source, especially when it comes to supporting wars general and in the Middle East specifically.

I would also remind everyone here that a letter was written earlier in the spring of 2016 and signed by 51 State Department workersurging Obama to bomb Assad’s forces, which would have meant, by proxy, bombing Russia.  When your alleged “diplomats” are the ones calling for bombing it tells you just how far off the rails your entire apparatus of state has gone.

The main conclusion here is that the US is the most war like country on the planet, and it has somehow defaulted into using force early and often to get its way.

The difference this time?  It’s picked a fight with a smaller kid in the school yard who happens to be a black belt in judo.

This time, the fight won’t be as easy as in times past.  Things are very different now, and Russia has spent the past few decades improving its missile technology which I predict will turn out to be a real game changer with a very high ROI.

The thinking seems to be, you build a $100 million ship and I will sink it from very far away with a $100,000 missile.

It took me a while to confirm this, but I believe this next video to be true and showing the Yemeni ‘rebels’ sinking a very modern and expensive HSV-2 navy catamaran that had been sold to the UAE from a very long distance away.

While the claim of having struck this ship cannot be completely verified at this time, the missile launch and resulting explosion at sea in the video above are consistent with the claim.

This should be a big wake-up call to everyone, and I’m sure it is in the military, but your chance of reading about this and its implications n the western press are very low indeed.  Did you hear of this?  I doubt it.


Russia and the US are edging ever closer to armed conflict in Syria.  We can hope and pray for our own selfish purposes that the conflict remains confined to Syria but it may not.

I cannot find any particularly good reason to be demonizing Russia at this point.  From my perspective all Russia has done is react to the circumstances presented to it by the west.  Russia did not destabilize Ukraine, the US and the EU did.  By reacting to that and protecting the Russian speaking people on it’s own borders, Russia has committed some sort of sin to the power players in the US.

Similarly, by legally responding to a request to help by the government of Syria, Russia has done something unconscionable…namely, resisted the wishes of the necons and likuds.

Let’s be perfectly blunt, innocent civilian lives mean nothing to those people.  They never have and they never will.

What matters to people who regularly transgress other people’s boundaries is that they themselves are not resisted.  Have you ever noticed this in your own life?  I have.  When someone who violates my boundaries is met with any sort of resistance at all, they experience it as me attacking them.

I remember well being yelled at by someone who did that a lot to people in their life and when I’d had enough an exactly matched their intensity to simply say “Stop!  This is where I begin and you end!” they recoiled and told everyone that I had attacked them.

Where we could analyze the Russian-US situation from a variety of directions – political, historical, etc. – I am going to do it from the psychological perspective.

I see the neocons and likuds as very damaged and traumatized individuals.  They carry a set of internal wounds that express on the outside as a very belligerent and hostile set of postures and actions.

If I were to guess at their internal wound, it might be something along the lines of “I was really hurt as a child and nobody will ever hurt me again like that.”

The best way to not be hurt is to lash out as fiercely and as rapidly as you can, in every circumstance.  The motto is “Do one to others before they do one to me.”

The mistake you and I could make would be to assume on any level that these people share our world view and will not “go all the way” before turning back.  They are not built the same.  The ends always justify the means to these people.  They do not rationally calculate outcomes because they are operating from a very wounded and highly irrational spot.

Have you ever tried using logic on someone who is in a full emotional meltdown?  How did that work out?  Not well, right?  In fact, it almost certainly made things worse.

Well even though the neocons who have inserted themselves into every crevice of power in the US seem cold and rational, they are not.  They are driven by demons that came to them early in life, perhaps handed down as a part of their culture, which taught them that the world was a very hostile place always looking for a reason to kill them.

That’s the nature of all childhood wounds.  Delivered early enough they all come down to survival.  If you are told directly or covertly over and over again that you are defective, unloved and unlovable, then the early innocent mind goes to insane lengths to wrap itself around that harsh reality.

Inner contracts are written, and they inform that person’s outlook and actions for the rest of their lives or until they are healed, whichever comes first.

The colossal mistake being made in the US is failing to recognize that people carrying such childhood wounds really cannot ever be trusted to act rationally.  In a healthy culture we’d  be able to detect these people early in life and usher them either into harmless yet worthy jobs or get them the treatment they need.

Instead, they roam the halls undetected and because they crave the power that they lacked in childhood they become over-represented in the halls of power.  Once they achieve critical mass in any institution they take over the entire machinery of that organization.

That is where the US is now.  This (next) rush to war is not a matter of anything rational or explicable, it is a function of having too many damaged and wounded people in charge operating from deeply unconscious levels.

And here’s the thing; they will not stop, ever, unless stopped by circumstances.  They will never achieve enough power.  The void they seek to fill cannot be filled from the outside.  Nothing will ever ‘be enough.’

There’s no end, but a violent one.

And this is why I am warning you to prepare for war.  Whether it happens now with Russia or later with someone else, it will happen.  The only thing that will stop these neocons is if they are exposed and flushed from the system or if their power is stripped away by losing a war.

By failing to understand the wound dynamics at play we are all being held hostage to a drama being scripted by very old and unhealed wounds.

Nothing about this circumstance can ever be solved on the outside; only inner healing can shift any of this.

It is deeply telling that the two main party candidates for the US presidency are each poster-children for wound-driven egos run amuck.  Both are obviously fragile and unable to handle anything but fawning admiration, neither seems capable of honest introspection or real empathy.

They are, literally, the direct manifestations of a nation that has yet to confront its own inner demons.  And until it does there will always have to be some sort of external bogey man that it can project its on worst traits upon as it desperately avoids asking the most important question of them all; “Hey, what if my troubles are because of me and my actions?”

In our report How To Prepare For War, we explain how conflict can take many forms: trade wars, energy wars, financial wars, cyberwar, shooting wars, and nuclear war. We lay out in great detail the steps we, as individuals, can do to prepare for each.

And fortunately, this preparation comes with an upside: as many of these precautions will be life-enhancing steps even if — hopefully, if — tensions de-escalate from here.

So, sadly, please follow the actions of the German and Russian governments and prepare yourself for war.  While we can all hope this too blows over and cooler heads prevail, hope alone is a terrible strategy.

Click here to read How To Prepare For War (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)

~ Chris Martenson

Peak Prosperity

93 Comments on "Do We Really Want A War With Russia?"

  1. matyi on Mon, 10th Oct 2016 11:45 pm 

    I m glad to read something , like this so sobering, and open minded, Im just surprised that this article actually made to this propaganda site

  2. David on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 2:15 am 

    Well researched and an sane person should take this advise to make a better and peaceful world. Not the imagined world that Russsia is a third world generations behind USA

  3. C. N. Muhingo on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 3:31 am 

    The article is such an eye opener that should be read by all who seek balanced reporting. The villain in the whole saga comes out vividly.

  4. JELLBOY on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 4:15 am 


  5. Davy on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 6:28 am 

    Save me the drama Yanfin, no country is ready for war not the kind of war you are boasting about. Any future war that is greater than the small skirmishes we see today is the end for us all. The global system cannot accommodate all its problems and war. Russia is just as vulnerable to war as any other nation in this situation. There will be no winners. There are no lands to conquer and riches to realize like the 20th century. There is only the pain and suffering of economic destruction and a corresponding human die off. People are so naïve today about war and its consequences.

  6. Cloggie on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 7:22 am 

    The deeply conflicted NY Times has never met a war in the Middle East it didn’t support

    There is nothing “conflicted” about the NYT, but instead for a century now, the NYT is the #1 international propaganda outlet of the US sanhedrin. But poor Chris pretends that he doesn’t have a clue; in reality he simply doesn’t have the nerve to talk about “sanhedrin’s” and shit. The NYT has backed any US war over the last 100 years, wars that were waged with the intention to bring the world in the hands of the self-chosen. Now WW3 is next, the war between Eurasia and Anglosphere, a war that Anglosphere is going to lose, because the latter is divided to the core, as the present election circus clearly shows.

    always neatly align with those put out by neocon think tanks

    Chris never mentions the real culpritts, but prefers to hide behind repeated references to code word “necons”.

    prior to being attacked Iraq had never threatened the US, had no role in 9/11

    Indeed, instead 9/11 was created by these very same PNAC neocons, using the recources of the Mossad. But that’s a bridge too far for our Chris.

    pre-emptive attacks are not justifiable, ever.

    BS: if you know that somebody is preparing to burn down your house, you are perfectly entitled to intervene, even backed by international law. But Iraq had never any intention to burn the US house down, so yes the intervention was illegal (in sharp contrast to the German intervention in the USSR in June 1941).

    What the NY Times has done, again, I fear, is served as a conduit for neocon talking points

    Now why would that be the case, Chrissie-boy? Hint: the NYT and neocons are functions of a single organisation. Go read Henry Ford for the details. Or Mein But your spine wasn’t designed for these kind or burdens, right?

    Next follows a long annotated quote from a warmongering NYT article.

    CM: The MH-17 disaster is anything but clear-cut and the JIT investigation was heavily compromised from the start.

    Wanna know the truth about what really happened with MH17? This twitter stream by Spanish flight controller in Kiev “Spain-Buca” was for real. MH17 was shot down by a Ukrainian fighter jet, not a Buk.
    It was an operation planned by Ukrainian and western secret services with the aim to discredit Putin-Russia. The Dutch government and “leader” of JIT was bribed into covering up the truth by this mysterious returning of 122.5 ton of gold, shortly afterwards.
    The US holds much of Europe’s gold (pretext: safe-guarding against Soviets overrunning Europe) and flatly always refused to return it to its rightful owner after 1991. Like every thief, the US government knows it doesn’t matter who owns a commodity, but instead in whose pocket the commodity resides. But for the Dutch they made an exception and MH17 cover-up is the key to understand why the US suddenly repatriated 122.5 ton gold to the Netherlands, where they refuse to act likewise vis-avis Germany.

    For now the NY Times is repeating an unproven assertion made by the US State Departmen

    Um Chris, the NYT ***IS*** the State Department.

    The rebels backed by the US include nasty elements of Al-Nusra, Al-Qaida, ISIS and a host of really vile outfits.

    At least Chris admits that US=ISIS, chapeau! It still is btw. The US perhaps doesn’t desire an ISIS take-over anymore of Syria, but they still want to fight them Assad, a proxy-fight against Putin and for the NWO (global US empire) from the start.

    Mr. Putin fancies himself a man on a mission to restore Russia to greatness.

    What Putin really “fancies” is to prevent Russia from becoming absorbed into the US empire, like was briefly the case between 1991-2000. Being a member of that sordid empire means that you country becomes a third world hell hole, thanks but no thanks. The US sinking away into third world status is perfect, it will make the US impotent, but not for Europe and Russia thank you very much.

    [part 1]

  7. Cloggie on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 7:22 am 

    Supposedly the bastion of the east coast liberal elites, the NY Times is actually acting once again more like the personal propaganda arm of the US necons and Israeli likuds who have been dragging the US into one war after another.

    Now you’re talking Chris, the truth at last! Forget these East coast liberals (or cuckservatives), they are just useful idiots. Neocohns and Likudniks are the real deal. The “Land of the Brave and the Free” was never anything but a kosher colony. After this revelation it remains to be seen if you will receive further invitations for the

    As I’ve written about extensively in the past, a war this time could mean anything from a shooting (kinetic) war, to a cyberwar, financial or trade war, or even a hacking attack that takes out the grid or other critical infrastructure.

    If the US shoots down a Russian jet over Syria, doesn’t apologize and threatens to down more, it will mean that the US will have crossed the Rubicon. It doesn’t necessarily mean WW3 the next day; after all when Britain and France declared war on Germany September 3, 1993, after Berlin came to the aid of the persecuted Germans forced to live in Versailles-Poland, it took 8 full months before the shooting war started (initiated by Churchill):

    – Expect a whirlwind of diplomatic activity first. Like Russia pointing out to Europe that if Europe doesn’t at least act neutrally, Russia will cut all fuel supply. Supplies that can and will be absorbed by China instead.
    – Expect a further rise of the pro-Russian European Right. Expect secret talks about the geopolitical architecture of the world after the end of American Era.
    – Expect most American citizens living in Eurasia packing their bags. Expect attacks against those who remain.
    – Expect the EU to greatly speed up the formation of a European army, independent of Washington.
    – Expect a Chinese declaration that a NATO assault against Russia means an assault against China.
    – Expect declaration from Iran that in case of a World War, the Straight of Hormuz will be closed.
    – Expect attacks against Muslims in Europe (France & Germany) who correctly are seen as agents of the US empire.

    As in the past, when these folks pull the levers to try and goad the US into (another) war, they never come out in the open. They always hide behind anonymity.

    Yeah Chris, they are essentially a hyperintelligent-tapeworm, hidden in the belly of the beast, unvisible for the television boobs. Only the elite knows.
    [12:00-15:38, mostly English]

    How these Brookings neocons have any voice left at all after the massive screwups in all the prior conflicts they cheered on an supported is beyond me.

    These clowns have been sitting for too long in cinemas equiped with bombastic Dolby Surround systems, where the US always wins, while popping popcorn. But reality is not a movie.

    [part 2]

  8. Cloggie on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 7:23 am 

    The article mentions the S-400 anti-aircraft missile, which will make it extremely difficult for NATO to maintain a no-fly zone over Syria.
    But it is inexplicable why Martenson completely leaves out China in his “analyses”. If a full scale war between Russia and the US develops it is unlike for China to standby and do nothing, because they would the next and last item on the todo list in case of a Russian loss. China has been working on troop airlift capability over the last few years and I see no reason why not a few hundred thousand of Chinese troops could be stationed in Iran, like hundreds of thousands of US troops were stationed in Britain in 1944.

    Iran is neighbouring Pakistan and few people in the West realize that in the recent years Pakistan has moved from the western to the Chinese sphere of influence.

    Thanks to this it is in theory possible that Chinese army equipment can be transported by road to the war theater in Syria via Karakoram highway, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria.

    But if you look at a map of SCO…

    …one can verify that China is not reliant of Pakistan for troops transportations: the Caspian Sea offers a direct connection to Iran and the rest of the Middle East.
    After the failed US backed coop against Erdogan, Turkey might consider a far-going alliagnment with SCO, provided they get a free hand in Eastern Syria and Western Iraq and set-up an anti-Western “neo-Ottoman empire” together with KSA.

    P.S. I am back from Istanbul and going to curtail posting and instead concentrate on finding a new contract, earn some money and build up extra (non-financial) reserves to weather the coming chaos. Not that I expect to run out of work, there wil be a lot of opportunities in the armaments industry and military, but the yuppie days of $90/hour in contracts for the duration of several-months, will be over for good (yes ghung, from this respect we are indeed going to miss the US empire). That chaos will be caused by military conflict and financial collapse, not peak oil or climate baloney. Besides, when the US crosses the Rubicon we all will be consumed by war fever and will become enemies of each other and the discussion will stop or confined to the US only, to avoid this forum into becoming a global platform for death If the internet will continue to exist in the first place. More likely it will be split up in pieces (US, EU, Russia, China, etc.)

    Interesting times indeed.

    [part 3 – last]

  9. Davy on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 7:41 am 

    LOL more Makati style military fantasy. “China has been working on troop airlift capability”. Clog, maybe in 5-10 years they will be a force. It takes more than hardware to make a force. It takes years of training and logistics behind the building of a force. Since June only 2 heavy lift aircraft have been delivered.


    “As of January 2016, around eight Y-20 aircraft have been built of which two have already been delivered to the PLAAF in June this year.”

  10. Morak on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 7:53 am 

    A master piece. Well researched and well thought-out. I hope both nations wont fight for the sake of the world existence, or else, the fourth world world will be fought with stones and sticks

  11. mario lopezgisgis on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 8:31 am 

    My exact take on world events for years now….

  12. Cloggie on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 9:34 am 

    @Davy – from your own (Indian) link:

    The traumatic reality for the nation is that the Indian aerospace industry has been left far behind in the race with its Chinese counterpart and the way things are moving, there appears to be practically no hope of catching up!.., On July 06 this year, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) of China formally inducted into service the Xian Y-20, a heavy-lift military transport aircraft manufactured by the Xian Aircraft Corporation (XAC). The induction ceremony was held in the South Western city of Chengdu. The Y-20 is the first indigenously produced large military transport aircraft with strategic airlift capability to enter service with the PLAAF. This represents a major step forward in the nation’s effort to acquire the wherewithal for the projection of military power globally… However, as reported by the Chinese media in early June 2016, the requirement for the aircraft has now been revised upwards to 1000 platforms.

    Now why would the Chinese put so much priority in producing so many troop transportation aircraft? Perhaps they plan to use it?

    Note that Chinese are masters in rapidly producing large structures as they have unlimited man power:

    With the induction of the 1000 Y-20 aircraft in the PLAAF, the Chinese government will have the capability to quickly transport large combat forces to any part of the world in the pursuit of its national security interests.

    As I said before, the last phase of WW3 will be fought in North-American soil.

    Hopefully we can keep them out from North-America as much as possible, but the area around Vancouver is already lost:

  13. Davy on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 10:13 am 

    Cloggie, what does that have to do with current capabilities? As usual you live as if the future is now. 2 deliveries of Chinese heavy lift aircraft does not make 1000. Think of it this way 2% of nothing is still nothing. Until events unfold this great fleet of aircraft is just hype. Your other geopolitical and socioeconomic theories are also full of hype and speculation. Reality is the here and now last time I looked.

  14. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 11:04 am 

    “As I said before, the last phase of WW3 will be fought in North-American soil.”

    You aren’t the only one that has been saying this cloggie. Unfortunately, a Hillary presidency will far more than likely seal that fate, and it certainly looks like a Hillary presidency is exactly what the world is about to receive. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

  15. penury on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 11:19 am 

    Davy, I think you are exhibiting a little touch of “recency bias”. “If China has not done it yet, they will be unable to do it” I think that the political situation in the U.S. is a greater cause for concern about preparedness than lack of aircraft for Chinam Armies have fought without air support before and could again.

  16. Davy on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 11:35 am 

    “recency bias”. Oh, Pen, they are capable of it if their economy holds and the global economy holds for another 5-10 year. I think you are exhibiting a little touch of “economy bias”, this is bias that the economy is a constant so with a constant economy China will do it. Greenies do the same thing with their shiny new alternative world.

  17. Apneaman on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 11:45 am 

    old dutch, who is this “we” you are hopeful can keep “them” out of Vancouver? Your only connection to Canada is that Canada saved Hollands ass (mommy & daddy) from Nazi tyranny and starvation. This is a fact. Stop saying “we” you’re not Canadian and not welcome here. There is no “we”, since we ain’t a nation of soft cowards who stood on the sidelines for the two 20th century world wars. You and the rest of your effeminate country have no say – no we. If there is another big war “we” won’t be bailing you out again and “we” don’t need any input from a fucking cowardly race of sissy’s like you. You don’t count. You have no say. You ceded any right to sit at the table a long time ago. Y’all sitting at the kiddie table with your barbie dolls. You need to STFU and spare us all more of your ridiculous future fantasies.

    On D-Day there were 5 beachheads. The Americans had 2, The British had 2, and little ole Canada had 1. After they took Juno beach Canadian forces eventually fought and died their way to the Netherlands and saved millions of starving Dutch from Nazi tyranny. Saved millions of Dutch from starving to death. Clogged you can bitch moan and complain all you want about empire and war profiteers and all the rest of the reasons for the war, but the fact remains that your people were being starved to death by the Nazis and Canadian forces saved their asses and your country still has an annual day of remembrance for them.

    Canada was a full partner in the success of the Allied landings in Normandy (‘D- Day’).

    Liberation of the Netherlands
    In the final months of the Second World War, Canadian forces were given the important and deadly task of liberating the Netherlands from Nazi occupation.

    Chaps your ass don’t it little Dutch girl?

  18. penury on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 12:04 pm 

    No Davy, if history has taught us anything we learned in WW2 that domestic production could be converted to war5 in a short period of time. Boeing is building a plant in China, General Motors and other car makers are already in production. Apple makes their electronics in China. Where will the U.S. do their manufacturing? Mexico? Trally heither side can defeat the other in a conventional war, that is why the current war is being fought in other fashions.

  19. Davy on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 12:19 pm 

    Pen, good luck navigating your way into a 21st century reality using WWII history as a guide.

    “Chinese Banks Will Need $1.7 Trillion To Cover Bad Debt Deluge, S&P Calculates”

    “The implications of this, for the nation with nearly $20 trillion in corporate debt as well as a grand total of 300% in debt to GDP are staggering: it means that sooner or later, up to a quarter of bank loan exposure will have to be discharged, restructured, equitized or otherwise eliminated due to its non-performing nature, dramatically impacting not just the asset side of the bank ledger, but the liabilities as well, namely deposits, which could see a drop in the trillion.”

    “Overnight, in a report published by S&P Global, the rating agency’s analysts noticed not only the latest deterioration in corporate China, but also the relentlessly growing leverage, noting that rising debt levels will worsen the credit profiles of China’s top 200 companies, requiring the country’s banks to raise $1.7 trillion in capital to cover a likely surge in bad loans.”

    “How does S&P get to that number? The rating agency estimated the problem credit ratio at Chinese banks was 5.6% at the end of 2015. In a downside scenario of unabated credit growth, that ratio could worsen to 11-17 percent. In such a situation, banks would need as much as $1.7 trillion in recapitalisation funds by 2020. Even under a base case scenario, they would require $500 billion.”

  20. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 12:26 pm 

    “that is why the current war is being fought in other fashions.”

    So far. That will likely change rather quickly with the installation of Hillary. TPTB are more interested in maintaining the status quo, for themselves, than they are in “Making America Great” again. That much should be painfully obvious. The TTP is not about closing the gap between the rich and the poor, it is all about more of the same that we have witnessed since the mid 90s.

    “The House of Representatives approved NAFTA, by a vote of 234 to 200 on November 17, 1993, and the Senate voted 60 to 38 for approval on November 20. It was signed into law by President Clinton on December 8, 1993, and took effect on January 1, 1994.”

  21. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 12:27 pm 

    Sorry, the TPP.

  22. John on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 1:20 pm 

    The article fails to discuss Russian aggression and fact that even former countries in its sphere of influence have gravitated towards NATO. The article also fails to discuss what has happen to the press and the persecution of opposition parties in Russia. In many ways, Russia has moved towards a fascist state with an all powerful dictator. Russia has made a decision quite a while back to move into aggression mode. There were actions before, but the Olympics in Sochi was its coming out with Crimea the first big move. Putin won’t even tell the truth of Russia funding and participating in Eastern Ukrane. Russia only understands strength and needs to be checked short of war. Moving nuclear-capable missiles in Kalingrad needs to be checked and the attempted extortion of making it a requirement of tying sanctions removal to the plutonium treaty is ridiculous. Russia has been the aggressor towards sovereign countries that were former vassal states due to wanting have control of their direction without Russian interference. Russia’s poor relationship with Ukraine is its own fault. Even neutral states on its border have moved towards the West. Russia has become a rogue nation under Putin and is aligned with other rogue nations. Once the China crash happens, it will be interesting to see where Russia’s economy goes because China will become even more protectionist. China is still at a stage where it still could move towards more openness, but it is looking like slowing growth and high bubbles in real estate, and massive debt, and lack of institution reforms will create an atmosphere for it to implode when countries it exports to retaliate. Russia will receive a double impact. Now war may be only to keep its citizens in line and also to increase oil prices as option as oil will resume decline or at least stabilize at lower price due to global recession. Russia has had an opportunity to join benefits of participating with the West but Putin’s and the Kremlin’s fear of losing power and control has moved it in a direction that will ultimately accelerate its decline as a nation. Only way to grow in the future is to be open and enable demographics to shift to growth. The Soviet model took from its vassal states and Putin’s attempt at a recombination of ex- soviet vassal states through the use of force (e.g., Ukraine) needs to be countered. If Russia plays in a positive manner it should be given the benefit, but acting rogue should be countered and promptly.

  23. John on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 1:30 pm 

    Boeing’s plant in China is a joint venture for only installing interiors and paint exteriors on 737 airliners. It is for cosmetic activities and not a plane production plant. China probably already has bought an aircraft and is able reversed engineered it, but China is behind on engine technology – reason its aircraft use Russian engines.

  24. Apneaman on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 1:52 pm 

    John, what articles have you been reading? Time magazine? The official anti Putin, anti Russian rag of note. So obvious in it’s over the top propaganda that it’s comical.

    Time Warner

    Profile for 2016 Election Cycle

    “Top Recipients
    Recipient Total From Indivs From Orgs
    Clinton, Hillary $327,308 $327,308 $0
    DNC Services Corp $208,192 $208,192 $0
    Harris, Kamala D $102,975 $101,975 $1,000
    Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte $96,906 $96,906 $0
    Sanders, Bernie $41,985 $41,985 $0
    Bennet, Michael F $28,300 $22,800 $5,500
    Leahy, Patrick $19,800 $14,800 $5,000
    Strickland, Ted $15,516 $15,516 $0
    Americans for Responsible Solutions $15,250 $15,250 $0
    Gottheimer, Josh $14,400 $14,400 $0
    The total of contributions to candidates from Time Warner individuals is 2 times larger than contributions from PACs

    Contributions from Individuals

    Contributions from PACs
    LOBBYING: $1,468,000 (2016)
    20 out of 22 Time Warner lobbyists in 2015-2016 have previously held government jobs
    See their employment history by clicking on their RevDoor icon here

    See more lobbying by Time Warner
    Boxer, Barbara (D-CA)
    Burgess, Michael (R-TX)
    Cohen, Steve (D-TN)
    Collins, Susan M (R-ME)
    Dingell, Debbie (D-MI)
    Dold, Bob (R-IL)
    Fitzpatrick, Michael G (R-PA)
    Joyce, David P (R-OH)
    Marchant, Kenny (R-TX)
    McCaul, Michael (R-TX)
    Rooney, Tom (R-FL)
    Trott, Dave (R-MI)
    Upton, Fred (R-MI)
    Westerman, Bruce (R-AR)
    Whitehouse, Sheldon (D-RI)
    Search for an organization:”

    Put your trust in the American MSM kids – completely unbiased. Nothing but the highest level of journalistic integrity and ZERO conflict of interest.

    John, Putin is no angel – no leader of any great power is, but spare us the imperial fairy tales ok, and if you truly believe them then grow the fuck up.

  25. Anonymous on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 1:53 pm 

    In order to maintain the same ‘standard’ of living for the uS elite and their population of HFCS sucking, lowest prices everyday morons, the uS would need to increase its ‘share’ of the worlds resources(theft really) to at least 50%. Up from the current 33% of world resources they use (steal) now. Since this is physically impossible, and other nations are beginning (albeit slowly and inconsistently) to gain greater access to the world’s resources, the uS empire cannot avoid the decay and decline they are currently experiencing.

    Financial\market fraud, proxy wars, and endless propaganda have been able to mask this process and its effects from the ‘average amerikcan’, somewhat. But the uS population continues to swell,(more than doubled since end of WWII-along with their waistlines), while the resources coming INTO the empire, are, if not increasing, then holding steady. Its a slowly shrinking pie, and the .1% have decided its all theirs.

    Blaming Russia, and China only ‘works’ with the ‘average amerikan’ (sub-par intelligence and education’ as well as it does because of the endless ‘exceptionalist brainwashing’ that pours out of hollyjewwood, and the uS re-education system. Its not difficult to see why amerikans are always so eager to go to war. uS infotainment messaging is solely designed to assign blame for uS failures outwards. To the ‘average amerikan’, that reads the jew york times, or watches CNN (Complete Nonsense Network), the sole causes of the world’s (uS’s) ills, are Putin, Chavez(deceased), China, Iran, Palestinians, Assad, etc. The second part of this messaging is, those ‘others’ that are to blame, are unreasonable , violent evil-doers that cant be reasoned with, except with force and or economic war(fuck diplomacy right?). This messaging is reinforced with the idea it is the uS that is the calm, reasonable one, in contrast to everyone ‘else’s’ stubbornness, and evil.

    But at the root of it all, is amerika’s inability to increase its share of the worlds resources much beyond what it steals now. A disproportionate share no less, that will likely decrease over time. This would matter far less if the empire didnt have the massive stockpiles of illegal WoMD it does, and a ruling class filled with PNAC psychopaths and syncohonts (ie Killary Clint-on), happy to consider using them. Maybe its past due for UN inspections of uS WoMD sites and production facilities?

    I would not be at all surprised if the Jew York Times ran a headline like this on day:

    Pre-emptive Nuclear War: Good for amerika, good for the world.

    How the uS can pretend it is the voice and goodness and reason when it puts individuals like this before the world:

    , is a mystery of course.

  26. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 2:00 pm 

    “Russia’s poor relationship with Ukraine is its own fault.”

    Laughable. The civil war in Ukraine was instigated by the US State Department under Victoria Nuland, wife of neoconservative Robert Kagan, (who also happens to be the leading advocate and cofounder of the Project for a New American Century). The citizens of Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine. The fact that the west does not acknowledge this, flies in the face of the democratic principal. What continues on to this day in Ukraine is nothing less than genocide/ ethnic cleansing. Russian Ukrainians continue to be murdered in their own homelands. Homelands that they have occupied for generations.

    Sorry John, but the Russians managed to stop a western led bloodbath in Crimea. The people of the Donbass were not as fortunate. They are still being brutally slaughtered by the tens of thousands.

  27. Baptised on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 2:29 pm 

    Where did Mondays comments go?

  28. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 2:38 pm 

    Right here Baptized.

  29. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 2:58 pm 

    “How the uS can pretend it is the voice and goodness and reason when it puts individuals like this before the world:

    , is a mystery of course.’

    Not really Anonymous. Samantha Powers’ husband Cass Sunstein, is also a neocon.

    Neocon Sunstein Targets First Amendment, Other Freedoms

  30. penury on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 4:13 pm 

    Just one question Davy. In the event war is declared name three reasons why anyone will give a furry rodents rear about China”s corporate debt or any other debt?

  31. Davy on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 5:14 pm 

    Did I say they would? My point is don’t expect some huge military build up in an economic collapse situation. Militaries will be scrambling to adapt like everyone else. There are many on this board that can’t connect the dots of globalism and war.

    If war breaks out the fragile global financial system loaded with debt and non performing assets will simple stop working. Stuff will quit moving. I want to see China’s 2MIL man army get thing rolling LOL. The same is true for the US military. This world cannot afford a war. If a major war starts it will be over in a few weeks with a lot of helpless people including military personnel. How is that for a fury rodents ass?

  32. makati1 on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 5:29 pm 

    penury, You got it in one! Debt means nothing in war. It will be forgotten/ignored/reset. Corporations and banks will fail and be forgotten.

    China’s debt is only numbers, just like your bank account, retirement account, etc.. All can be wiped out with a few clicks on the keyboard. Only real, in-hand, possessions will count. Only in a capitalist country does debt matter and then only in the minds of the peasants who have the most debt. If you owe no one, you are free. All others are slaves.

  33. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 5:31 pm 

    “My point is don’t expect some huge military build up in an economic collapse situation.”

    The great depression was the precursor to WW2 Davy. A rather largish military buildup, would you not agree?

  34. penury on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 5:42 pm 

    Davy I agree the war will be over in days not years.

  35. Davy on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 5:54 pm 

    Welll Makati!, if that is true than I guess the economy will make shit by osmosis.

  36. Davy on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 5:57 pm 

    Greg, how does that equate to global war in the 21st century with a just in time global economy. I don’t get your point. This is not the 20th century and it sure and the hell is not a WWII world wouldn’t you agree?

  37. Apneaman on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 5:59 pm 

    There is no need for war now that america is energy independent.

    Hillary Hallucinates Energy Independence

  38. Boat on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 6:21 pm 

    Apneaman on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 1:52 pm

    Years ago the Supreme court in citizens united basically said pacs, corporations deserve the right to fund any candidate they want without fear of prosecution for undue influence. This what Rep’s wanted. Then Hillary got much more money. Lol

  39. Apneaman on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 6:22 pm 

    To War

  40. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 7:07 pm 


    Stick to PVC pipe. Much less complicated.

  41. GregT on Tue, 11th Oct 2016 9:47 pm 


    We haven’t even officially entered into a depression yet, there is far more labour available for a war effort today then there was in the 40s, and the MIC (which didn’t even exist back then) generates a substantial chunk of the US economy.

  42. JuanP on Wed, 12th Oct 2016 7:28 am 

    John ,Russia has the right to deploy any weapons it wants anywhere on its sovereign territory. Would the USA accept having a foreign nation determine where on its territory it places its weapons? NO! The aggressor is the USA and Russia is defending itself. I believe that Russia has the right to defend itself from continued US agressions and attacks by any and all means available to it. If the USA doesn’t stop its abusive behavior this could lead to a nuclear war and it will be the USA’s responsibility. The whole world will hate the USA for a very long time if that happens. The USA already is the most hated and disliked nation on Earth. You reap what you sow!

  43. Dale on Fri, 14th Oct 2016 6:02 am 

    I was with you until you blamed the Jews, then I quit. At least update and blame Putin. He’s the hot bad guy for today.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *