The situation in the Ukraine is more or less calm right now, and this might be the time to step back from the flow of daily reports and look at the deeper, underlying currents. The question I want to raise today is one I will readily admit not having an answer to. What I want to ask is this: could it be that one of the key factors motivating the West’s apparently illogical and self-defeating desire to constantly confront Russia is simply revanchism for WWII?
We are, of course, talking about perceptions here so it is hard to establish anything for sure, but I wonder if the Stalin’s victory against Hitler was really perceived as such by the western elites, or if it was perceived as a victory against somebody FDR could also have called “our son of a bitch“. After all, there is plenty of evidence that both the US and the UK were key backers of Hitler’s rise to power (read Starikov about that) and that most (continental) Europeans were rather sympathetic to Herr Hitler. Then, of course and as it often happens, Hitler turned against his masters or, at least, his supporters, and they had to fight against him. But there is strictly nothing new about that. This is also what happened with Saddam, Noriega, Gaddafi, al-Qaeda and so many other “bad guy” who began their careers as the AngloZionists’ “good guys”. Is it that unreasonable to ask whether the western elites were truly happy when the USSR beat Nazi Germany, or if they were rather horrified by what Stalin had done to what was at that time the single most powerful western military – Germany’s?
A few days ago I saw this picture on Colonel Cassad’s blog:
Looking at that photo I thought that for the western elites, to see these men must have been rather frightening, especially considering that they must have known that their entire war effort was, at most, 20% of what it took to defeat Nazi Germany and that those who had shouldered 80%+ were of an ideology diametrically opposed to capitalism.
Is there any evidence of that fear?
I think there is and I already mentioned them in the past:
Plan Totality (1945): earmarked 20 Soviet cities for obliteration in a first strike: Moscow, Gorki, Kuybyshev, Sverdlovsk, Novosibirsk, Omsk, Saratov, Kazan, Leningrad, Baku, Tashkent, Chelyabinsk, Nizhny Tagil, Magnitogorsk, Molotov, Tbilisi, Stalinsk, Grozny, Irkutsk, and Yaroslavl.
Operation Unthinkable (1945) assumed a surprise attack by up to 47 British and American divisions in the area of Dresden, in the middle of Soviet lines.This represented almost a half of roughly 100 divisions (ca. 2.5 million men) available to the British, American and Canadian headquarters at that time. (…) The majority of any offensive operation would have been undertaken by American and British forces, as well as Polish forces and up to 100,000 German Wehrmacht soldiers.
Operation Dropshot (1949): included mission profiles that would have used 300 nuclear bombs and 29,000 high-explosive bombs on 200 targets in 100 cities and towns to wipe out 85% of the Soviet Union’s industrial potential at a single stroke. Between 75 and 100 of the 300 nuclear weapons were targeted to destroy Soviet combat aircraft on the ground.
But the biggest proof is, I think, the fact that none of these plans was executed, even though at the time the Anglosphere was safely hidden behind its monopoly on nuclear weapons (and have Hiroshima and Nagasaki not been destroyed in part to “scare the Russians”?).
And is it not true that the Anglos did engage in secret negotiations with Hitler’s envoys on several occasions? (The notion of uniting forces against the “Soviet threat” was in fact contemplated by both Nazi and Anglo officials, but they did not find a way to make that happen.)
So could it be that Hitler was, really, their “son of a bitch”?
More proof? Okay.
Hitler was most definitely not a Christian. If anything, he and Himmler were pagans with a strong satanic bend to their dark cult of ancestor worship (Ahnenerbe). But what about Hitler’s allies such as Petain, Franco, Pavelic – where they not defenders of what they would call the “Christian West”? Is it not a fact that 70 years after the fall of the Third Reich those who admire Petain, Franco and Pavelic *still* speak of the need to defend the “Christian West”, but this time against the “Islamic threat”?
Furthermore, if the Nazi regime represented an existential threat to European Jewry, a quick survey or articles written by Jewish authors in the US and British press during much of the 20th century clearly shows that most Jews had little to no sympathy not only for pre-Revolutionary Russia, but also for the post-Trotsky USSR and that even though the USSR fully supported the creation of the state of Israel, many if not most US and European Jews felt that the Soviet Union was also a threat to their interests.
I believe that the rabid russophobia (phobia in both the sense of “hate” and “fear”) of the AngloZionist Empire cannot be only explained by pragmatic reasons of great power competition or a struggle of political systems. The constant propaganda about the “Russian threat” is not only a political tool to dumb down the western people by keeping them in a state of constant fear (of Russia or Islam), but it is also the expression of a deep fear really felt by the 1% plutocracy which rules over the western world.
Finally, the fear of Russia is also a fear of the Russian leaders. When they are like Eltsin (a drunken imbecile) or his Foreign Minister Kozyrev (the ultimate “yes” man) western politicians feel appropriately superior. But remember that even mediocre personalities like Krushchev or Brezhnev truly frightened them. So it is no wonder that strong and smart leaders (like Stalin or Putin) would absolutely terrify them and make them feel inadequate. The infantile way in which Obama has tried to show that he was smarter and stronger than Putin is a clear indication of how inferior he really felt face to face. The same, of course, also goes for Kerry and Lavrov.
Everything I have written above fully applies to East European leaders too, only with even more intensity. We are talking about countries which sometimes had a rather glorious past and who during WWII had no other purpose then being the furniture in the room where the two Big Guys slugged it out. Worse, they more or less kept that same passive role during the Cold War and now they have hardly become more relevant. In part, I would argue that this is their own fault, instead of finally making use of their new found freedom to develop some kind of meaningful political identity, all they did was to engage in a brown-nosing competition to see who would become Uncle Sam’s favorite pet (Hungary under Orban being the sole exception to this sad rule).
It is really no wonder that when the Americans overthrew Yanukovich the Europeans felt that now, finally, their “hour had come” and they would show those disrespectful Russians who “is boss” on the Old Continent. And every time the Russians warned the Eurocretins in Brussels that there were issues linked to the Ukraine which required urgent consultations they were told “that is none of your business, there is nothing to discuss”. The problem was, of course, that the West European leader had forgotten that in the real world they were just the administrators of the USA’s “EU colony” and that the US leaders truly did not give a damn about them (as Mrs Nuland so lyrically put it in simple words). As for East European leaders, their irrelevance is simply painful to look at, I almost feel sorry for them and their trampled egos.
I personally think that contrary to the official narrative, there is a strong case to be made that the end of WWII left a lot of people very, very unhappy and that all those who felt wronged or frightened by the Soviet victory in 1945 did join forces in an attempt to correct the wrongs of the outcome of that war. At the very least, the question of the importance of russophobia and revanchism has to be asked.
It just not make sense to explain away the apparently crazy behavior of the western leaders during the entire Ukrainian crisis by saying that they are simply stupid, naive or ill informed. What they are doing may appear stupid, naive or ill informed to us, but that does not mean that there is no deep rationale behind the actions of these “elites”.
Most people in the West want to live in peace and are completely unaware of these undercurrents of the war in the Ukraine. What I describe above is only relevant to various minority groups. The problem is that taken together and when they act in unison, these minorities end of wielding a lot of power and influence. The best way to stop them, is to shed a strong light on them and their real motives.
The Saker
Zbigniew Brezinzki. Obama is his poodle. Nuff said.
ZB has had a whole lot of Presidents as lap dog.
Brzezinski has always worked for Rockefeller
Brzezinksi is from Galicia (he was born in Warsaw, but his roots are in the town nowadays called Berezhina, polish Brzezina, 100 kms from Lwiw).
I read that Z Brzezinski was instrumental in selecting the chairmen & most important professors on Russian Studies. Thus, only the most anti-Russian ideology has been taught for many decades in US Universities.
Z’s family were minor nobility and he has an obsessive hatred for Russia.
His mentor is Carl Schmitt who was the nazi party lawyer and was brought to usa after the war and taught in Chicago http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/schmitt/
Webster Tarpley at his blog also has a very good article on the basis of Russiaphobia. He blames the Brits who said they would rather have a nuclear war with Russia rather than be number three with a ruined economy. And ultimately, that is the source of the US’s current fear of Russia – fear that their de-dollarization policy in concert with the other BRICs will cause the collapse of the dollar as the reserve currency leading to collapse of our bonds and the bankruptcy of our government.
One recently revealed addition to the list: Churchill urged Truman to launch a nuclear attack which would ‘wipe out’ the Kremlin.
(P.S. I apologize if it already was mentioned here, but there is undeniable proof that Putin murdered Nemtsov.)
As you see with the Link below – our pretty (not so pretty Re UA/RU standards go) has come out with this BS/Spin
So – one with half a brain will decipher – that the “golden Kievian pussy/cat” had obviously been a FULL part of the Media attack on Kremlin/Putin.
If she had been 100% innocent victim to this hit – she would be celebrating from the highest level “how LUCKY” she was not to have been taken out with him !!
http://t.co/N7jZK02QDE
Original English of that article
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/world/europe/boris-nemtsov-killing-russia.html?_r=0
In English she would be called a “Judas goat”
I love it!!!!
I thought Colon Bowell was the ultimate ‘House Negro’, until Obama slithered onto the scene.
That’s a great satelite image, anonymous. I’ve been wondering about the creature on Hollande’s shoulder. Do you think it’s the mouse that didn’t roar?
It’s obvious that without the Jewish control of the West, the USA and Great Britain would be very different countries. US Russophobia is therefore not ‘Western’. It’s Jewish, and everybody with a brain knows it.
Norman Pollack has written an interesting article where he argues that Israel and the USA are engaged in a toxic relationship where each is dragging the other further Right and further into maniacal belligerence. I would assert that the relationship is pretty one-sided, the Israeli tail wagging the US dog very effectively, as the latest outbreak of hysterical adulation for the psychopathic liar and hatemonger Nutty-yahoo by his slaves in the US Congress shows.All facilitated by money, the Universal Lubricant.
Mulga, certainly a great many people seem to believe that the Israeli tail wags the US dog. I don’t really think that’s possible due to the very great wealth that the US banksters command– and with it, poltical, military and media control. The NeoCons and jewish media execs are often pointed to in this regard. However, neither are powerful in their own right; their power is conditional upon their continuing to carry out the wishes of the banksters and a few powerful families.
I see it rather as a good-cop bad-cop routine in which Israel is delegated certain vile acts which the US pretends to condemn. I even doubt most of the US-Israel bickering as it never stands in the way of more military and cash support for Israel.
I don’t think either is being “dragged into” a wish to rule the world.
@ Penelope
Q: due to the very great wealth that the US banksters…
R: And who are those banksters…?
They may or may not be Jewish but their power predated the existence of Israel. I still see the US oligarchs as more powerful than the Israeli ones. I think it over-simplified to think all the evil roted in Zionism. However, I would like to kinow about the present-day activities of the Rothschild family, but it seems barely mentioned anywhere.
Thanks for your reply; I’m always willing to learn.
One of the Rothschild grandsons is doing a multi billion development in Montenegro. The development is financed by Peter Munk (Barrick Gold) Canada in the town of Tivat in Montenegro. Munk and his co-investors, his son Anthony Munk, the Russian oligarch Oleg Derispaska and Lord Jacob Rothschild, grandson of the Rothschild clan have taken over the old Yugoslav , former Austrian naval base and are building the new playground for the rich and famous. Last year while there I did not see a yacht under $50 million. Met lots of Russians Brits and others looking over the superyachts, being wined and dined by the international community while the locals look on eating bag lunches and hoping for a construction job which in 90% of the cases have gone to foreign workers. Like in almost every former republic of Yu the people have become servants in the land that they once owned. Kosovo Albanians are fleeing by the thousands while the mafia and NATO divide the mines and anything of value. .
https://www.google.ca/search?q=porto+montenegr%C3%B3&biw=1920&bih=910&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=9qD9VLG5NcivogSm8oLoDw&ved=0CDwQsAQ&dpr=1
The idea that its the Israelis that wag Washington’s tail is mistaken. It makes for a good plot-line, but that’s about it. The hard, *boring* truth is that the neo-cons, neo-liberals, and Israelis are all on the same page of the same playbook. It’s not that the Israelis trick or coerce the US into acting against it’s own interests; it just happens that the neo-cons, neo-libs and Israeli “interests” are perfectly aligned with each other, even though they happen to be at odds with the actual interests of Americans and Israelis.
It’s not that the Israelis “pushed” the US into Iraq, getting into Iraq was precisely what the neo-cons/libs wanted. Israel isn’t torpedoing the Iran-US nuclear deal against the wishes of the US, the neo-libs and neo-cons want it dead and are using Israel to blow it up.
When you go down the list it becomes clear that Israel is simply the ugly stick that the neo-cons/libs use to beat their opponents when it is pragmatically unable to do so themselves. Surely the dog might not be entirely on its leash, but its simply shortsighted not to see Israel as an extension of US policy and interests, not the other way around.
The neo-conservatives are overwhelming Jews. Many are former acolytes of the sinister Jewish ‘philosopher’ Leo Strauss. Neo-liberalism is an economic ideology to which Jews like Friedman and various others from the University of Chicago, where Jewish influence is considerable, contributed greatly. I think that Voltaire’s aphorism that you can tell who is in control of a society by seeing who it is that you are forbidden to criticise.
take a look at the family names of the neo-cons and the dual passports (israeli) they and a lot of u.s. gubment officials hold.
And in the same way they used and fostered Far Right groups in Jugoslavia and recently in Ukraine, and then used and will use NATO to pursue exactly the same aims.
@Penelope,
We watched recently a retrospective of Monty Python on OZTV. The famous “Don’t mention the war” of Basil Fawlty came straight to mind. Only that in today’s political language would be: “Don’t mention the Jews”. But what is Israel other than a window for the Jews that are in vastly greater numbers outside Israel but, having the banks, press, TV, call the shots unobtrusively and with total impunity? It’s true that sometimes the “center” send one of them to the colonies to give the marching orders and castigate the unruly “schwartzas”.
If you believed the Thought Police then you would imagine that Jews have no influence in Western politics, MSM, business, finance, ‘entertainment’ etc. It is to laugh. The sheer chutzpah of it all is breath-taking.
Penelope, who do you imagine the banksters are? It, I believe,further reinforces my point, as does the massive over-representation of Jews in the Federal reserve, the US Treasury, the Justice Department, the Supreme Court, the Ivy League Universities etc.
Precisely. The Great Unmentionable – the Jewish Connection. Virtually all global unrest can be traced back to the International Bankers and their geopolitical games through the past few centuries. The Khazarian hatred for Russia has deep, deep roots, back to the founding of Russia when the Khazars were driven out of their empire (Ukraine/Southern Russia) by the Kievan Rus, and made to spread their tentacles into the lands now comprising Poland and Germany. The rest is history, as the Khazars adopted Judaism as their religion and took on the Abrahamic persona, a lie which they themselves eventually forgot and under which the world has consistently suffered since.
Since then these Khazars have infiltrated virtually every government and important institution of the Western world, and throughout all times have constantly plotted and schemed against Russia. They did in in the 1800s with Napoleon, with the Bolshevik Revolution which they tried without success to use to completely eliminate the Russian people, their culture and their religion from the face of the earth, and now in current world events where they are using their great financial, economic, political and media power in the world to orchestrate the final assault on the Russian civilisation.
This effort is of course not that of ALL Jews (Khazars), but an incredibly powerful central group of them, controlled and managed by the international bankers.
Until we understand and clearly identify these people as the true enemies of not only Russia, but of the entire world, we are merely pussy-footing around what should be our real target.
I am glad you did not blanket an entire people with “all” and so yes I agree that there is a major problem with elements within the Jewish Diaspora. This element are however noarco gangsters first and foremeost and the rest is largely PR and spin in which they can hide and keep their illgotten.
This is the problem, that during the 20th Century that the US and UK has been progressively hijacked politically by these organised criminals.
The roots of this go back to the Opium wars, which were organised and financed by one Mr David Sassoon of India. His family later intermarried with the Rothschilds to create the perfect merger of contraband trafficking and money laundering.
These gangs came to the US in the early 20th Century and introduced narcotics and quickly displaced the local muscle gangs of Mafia, Irish etc to take over the underworld. These activities of these gangs are now “legitimised” as “Big Pharm”, which is why you are warned never to mess with them.
Lastly, it is no surprise that today US troops are active in or interested in every major narcotics producing country in the world and that production goes up when Uncle Sam is in town. The War of Drugs is utterly Orwellian and its purpose is to ensure uninterrupted supply.
For the Gangsters, Zionism and Isreal is just a cover, A Pirate Bay where Kosher crooks can bolt too when things get to hot. This is why they pressured and paid to create it. There is no real religious element behind it with these guys whatsoever.
To these narco gangsters, countries like Russia and China that fail to “respect” the Godfathers, are simply rival gangs to be whacked and taken down.
Nobody with any civilised value can be prepared to just sit back and let this happen.
@Sampanviking
Great analysis. Agree! They also use religion, but whatsoever for there criminal purposes.
The danger nowadays is the total mondial scale what happens.
Very well said.
It is not that simple.
There are no proofs that Askenazim Jews are descendants of Khazars. Genetic research showed that Askenazim Jews are of Semitic, Near-East origins, just like Sephardim Jews, and are not a Turkic people (Khazars were Turkic).
Knowing that, I also have to say that I don’t know what happened with the Khazar people after they were defeated by the pagan Russians under the prince Svyatoslav Igorevich.
We simply don’t know.
Eran Elhaik would beg to differ on the Khazaria hypothesis. He built some new tools to measure wandering whos, and his challenge to fellow scientists to identify non-gentility via blind analysis went unmet.
The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses
Department of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health,Baltimore, MD, USA, 21208.
McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA, 21208.Running head: The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry
Genome Biology and Evolution Advance Access published December 14, 2012 doi:10.1093/gbe/evs
Abstract
The question of Jewish ancestry has been the subject of controversy for over two centuries andhas yet to be resolved. The “Rhineland Hypothesis” depicts Eastern European Jews as a“population isolate” that emerged from a small group of German Jews who migrated eastward and expanded rapidly. Alternatively, the “Khazarian Hypothesis” suggests that Eastern European Jew descended from the Khazars, an amalgam of Turkic clans that settled the Caucasus in theearly centuries CE and converted to Judaism in the 8th century. Mesopotamian and Greco-Roman Jews continuously reinforced the Judaized Empire until the 13
th century. Following the collapse of their empire, the Judeo-Khazars fled to Eastern Europe. The rise of European Jewry is therefore explained by the contribution of the Judeo-Khazars. Thus far, however, the Khazar’s contribution has been estimated only empirically, as the absence of genome-wide data from Caucasus populations precluded testing the Khazarian Hypothesis. Recent sequencing of modernCaucasus populations prompted us to revisit the Khazarian Hypothesis and compare it with the Rhineland Hypothesis. We applied a wide range of population genetic analyses to compare these two hypotheses. Our findings support the Khazarian Hypothesis and portray the European Jewish genome as a mosaic of Caucasus, European, and Semitic ancestries, thereby consolidating previous contradictory reports of Jewish ancestry. We further describe major difference among Caucasus populations explained by early presence of Judeans in the Southern and Central Caucasus. Our results have important implications on the demographic forces that shaped the genetic diversity in the Caucasus and medical studies.
. . .
2Our results fit with evidence from a wide range of fields. Linguistic findings depict Eastern European Jews as descended from a minority of Israelite-Palestinian Jewish emigrates who intermarried with a larger heterogeneous population of converts to Judaism from the Caucasus, the Balkans, and the Germano-Sorb lands (Wexler 1993). Yiddish, the language of Central and Eastern European Jews, began as a Slavic language that was re-lexified to High German at an early date (Wexler 1993). Our findings are also in agreement with archeological, historical, linguistic, and anthropological studies (Polak 1951; Patai and Patai 1975; Wexler 1993; Brook 2006; Kopelman et al. 2009; Sand 2009) and reconcile contradicting genetic findings observed in uniparental and biparental genome data. The conclusions of the latest genome-wide studies (Atzmon et al. 2010; Behar et al. 2010) that European Jews had a single Middle Eastern originare incomplete as neither study tested the Khazarian Hypothesis, to the extent done here. Finally, our findings confirm both oral narratives and the canonical Jewish literature describing the Khazar’s conversion to Judaism (e.g., “Sefer ha-Kabbalah” by Abraham ben Daud [1161 CE],and “The Khazars” by Rabbi Jehudah Halevi [1140 CE]) (Polak 1951; Koestler 1976)
. . .
Conclusions
We compared two genetic models for European Jewish ancestry depicting a mixed Khazarian-European-Middle Eastern and sole Middle Eastern origins. Contemporary populations were used as surrogate to the ancient Khazars and Judeans, and their relatedness to European Jews was compared over a comprehensive set of genetic analyses. Our findings support the Khazarian Hypothesis depicting a large Caucasus ancestry along with Southern European, Middle Eastern,and Eastern European ancestries, in agreement with recent studies and oral and written traditions. We conclude that the genome of European Jews is a tapestry of ancient populations including Judaized Khazars, Greco-Romans Jews, Mesopotamian Jews, and Judeans and that their population structure was formed in the Caucasus and the banks of the Volga with roots stretching to Canaan and the banks of the Jordan.
[emphasis added]
http://www.scribd.com/doc/123652605/Genome-Evolution-of-Jewish-Population-John-Hopkins
The Jews are a mixed lot with many ancestries, just like the Palestinians (whose antecedents include Judean Jews who converted from Judaism in the centuries after the Roman expulsions)and just like the rest of us. The Zionazi lie that the Jews are all descended from the Jews who inhabited Judea at the time of the Romans is bulldust. Schlomo Sand has outlined the many and varied Jewish antecedents. Unfortunately Zionism and fundamentalist Judaism are intensely racist and supremacist doctrines.
I think the Khazar theory is wrong. You’re right – how could a steppe based Turkic people aspire to world domination. The Jews are descendents of slaves taken by the Romans after the Roman Emperor Titus captured Jerusalem circa 78 AD. The job was finished by the Emperor Hadrian when the Romans again captured Jerusalem after the last Jewish rebellion in circa 120 AD. Emperor Hadrian destroyed the temple and to this day is vilified by the Jews. The captive Jews subsequently spread all over the Roman Empire like a virus. So – it was the Romans not the Russians.
“how could a steppe based Turkic people aspire to world domination”
That is an interesting question, however I beg to differ with your conclusions.
The Jewish religion appears to me more to be based on *rules* than on moral. I could explain it with the simple remark ‘just read the Talmud’, but that is a lot of text to swallow.
Let me invite you (well, all) to read the excellent summary about how Jews and the state of Israel tick – you will be surprised, and not necessarily in a positive way. It is written by Israel Shahak, an Israeli Jew himself: https://ifamericaknew.org/cur_sit/shahak.html . It is about 100 pages, and please be invited to read the notes at the end too.
There you will find many answers. It is well, pure racism. Another variant of the ‘Ahnenerbe’ that the Saker mentioned above, the theory to be descendants of superior people.
Genetically and historically this might be far from the truth, but will be fought viciously by Jewish institutions.
It might even be possible, that nowadays the largest concentration of original descendants of the tribe of Judah live in Tehran, Iran – one of the largest Jewish communties outside Israel.
Cheers, Rob
You have nailed it.Period
Completely wring. England is the msin evil plotter and Jews are just patsys to be used as scape goat when thing do not turn out well. All the wars against Rusdia and germanynplotted by English race.
That is why English arebnot happy with juncker who is proposing an European wide army for European security which will neatrlise Nato influnce through whivh England has bullied Europe through American influnce.
The,main enemy of whole humanity is not Jews but English nation which needs to be tackled by the whole world.
“Hitler was most definitely not a Christian”
There is enough evidence that Hitler was at least a opportunist using Christian ideas to further Nazism – just read Mein Kampf.
“Als Adolf Hitler 1933 zum Reichskanzler gewählt wurde, führte dies zu einer Spaltung unter den evangelischen Christen im Deutschen Reich. Unter dem Namen Deutsche Christen versammelten sich nationalsozialistische Kirchenmitglieder, die in Hitler eine Art Messias sahen und für eine Symbiose von Christentum und nationalsozialistischer Ideologie eintraten.”
http://www.deutschlandfunk.de/vor-80-jahren-hitler-spaltete-evangelische-christen.871.de.html?dram:article_id=287831
To claim that Hitler most definetely was not a christian is a simplistic claimwith very little support in the reality of Germany at the time.
Christianity has been shown to be flexible enough to support almost any attrocities and governments, from dictatorships in South America to killings in Rwanda.
Any religion to me is nothing but an attempt to keep people satisfed with whatever opression one might want to impose on them, from feudalism in Europe including Russia to the Chinese empire with the pseudo religion of Confucianism or the Shinto relgion supporting the claims of the Japanese emperor or the beliefs of the Incas sacrificing the living to the atrocities of IS as an interpretation of Islam (and in essence a truer reflection of this religion as the so called “moderate interpretations” that just deny the validity of the unalterability that Muhamed claimed for the revealed word of Allah). A pox on them all.
If you want to know if he was a christian? Easy, Jesus said, you shall know them by their fruits. People claim to be Christians, but actions are louder than words. Also, there are no stories about him being born again, a clear requisite spoken by Christ.
Saker you have opened a can of worms.
‘It is easier to believe a lie one has heard a hundred times than a truth one has never heard before.’ ~ Robert S Lynd (American sociologist).
With the years and years of anti-Hitler indoctrination, via Hollywood and state education and the incessant harping of the Jewish lobby, merely hearing the voice of Hitler heard in sound bites from his speeches, invokes fear and loathing in most people.
We have been so indoctrinated, as to salivate like Pavlovian dogs, when either shown an image of Hitler or hearing his voice or even just hearing the name ‘Adolf’!
Yet, in many public speeches, Hitler declared himself at war with High Finance, International Jewry and Freemasonry. In other words, the very same Anglo/Zion Empire that this website condemns.
So, here is food for thought:
1. Zionism declared war on Germany in 1933.
2. National Socialism was ‘national’ for Germany only. Hitler was against Jewish Marxist Communism because of its ‘global agenda’.
3. Hitler was a Christian and felt it was his moral duty to oppose Jewish influence.
4.
This site offers a wealth of information.
http://wintersonnenwende.com/scriptorium/english/welcome.html
We can read Starikov but we can also find the same conclusions about WWII in AJP Taylors writing. “Taylor is scathing about the incompetence of British and French statesmen. They first backed Czechoslovakia, then told her to surrender. They encouraged the Poles to resist, considering them militarily formidable, but cold-shouldered the Russians, whom they regarded as aggressive but weak: in every case, the opposite of the truth. It was precisely Russia’s desire for peace – and the refusal of the British and the French to offer an alliance that would guarantee her security – that lead to the Molotov- Ribbentrop Pact”
Litvinov lobbied the French and British governments for an alliance against Germany. Both countries refused. Russia felt that Britain and France were appeasing Hitler so that he would invade Russia. Hitler’s rise to power was nothing more than Germany’s desire to eliminate the punitive Treaty of Versailles that Germany was forced to sign.
As far as German anti Jewish policy is concerned everybody is gung ho to lay the blame on Germany when really everyone was anti Semitic particularly the countries that joined the Nazis in their invasion of Russia. There was anti Semitism in Britain as well as we know that on the Channel Islands Jews were rounded up and turned over to the Nazis. .
Your comment about the Jews “rounded up” in the channel islands is incorrect. The occupying force ordered them to be deported, so facing the wrath of the Germans on the community if they disobeyed, they were deported.
Not quite
“A British intelligence report from August 1945 states:
When the Germans proposed to put their anti-Jewish measures into force, no protest whatsoever was raised by any of the Guernsey officials and they hastened to give the Germans every assistance. By contrast , when it was proposed to take steps against the Freemasons, of which there are many in Guernsey, the Bailiff [Alexander Coutanche ] made considerable protests and did everything possible to protect the Masons”
I am quite sure that if the British Isles had fallen it would have been just as bad as what happened in other occupied countries like France. .
Most French Jews survived WW2. France had the largest proportion of gentiles saving Jewish people of all European countries.
The rest is BS and antifrench propaganda.
Hollande gave almost 100% of its Jews but Ann Frank’s story seems to have sanitized this country historical behavior.
Funny. .
That’s exactly what Vuki said. Rounded – up and deported.
Most people are not even aware that World Jewry declared war on Germany in 1933. Why did they do so? Was it because of what Hitler who had just come to power in Germany was saying about Jews? No, it wasn’t. It was because Hitler made the mistake of throwing off the monetary shackles of the central bankers and dared to print his own money, backing it with the productive power of the German people. This act infuriated the Jews. They fought back by declaring war on Germany and a global German economic boycott that severely impacted German ability to do business internationally. It was after this war and its associated boycott was declared that Hitler officially declared Jews under suspicion – an act mirrored in the States with the roundup of people of Japanese ancestry being thrown into concentration camps – and began planning the removal of all Jews from German controlled territories – he worked very closely with the World Zionist Organisation to locate an appropriate new home for Israel and to provide financial incentives to Jews who were willing to move there. In short, Jews in Germany were then considered ‘enemy combatants’ and were treated as such by Germany.
Here are some historical notes of interest recalling the long forgotten cooperation between Russia and the US in the struggle against the Rothschild ‘clan’. —-
The other day in the edition “Arguments of the Week” ( number 2 (443) from January 22, 2015) Alexander Chuikov published sensational material “One hundred years ago, the Russian and Chinese capital created the US Federal Reserve.”
Сто лет назад Россия и Китай создали ФРС США
http://www.prezidentpress.ru/news/2762-sto-let-nazad-rossiya-i-kitay-sozdali-frs-ssha.html
http://www.prezidentpress.ru/news/2762-sto-let-nazad-rossiya-i-kitay-sozdali-frs-ssha.html
Remarkable stuff. Impossible to judge validity of these claims as no documentation presented. I note that Glazyev in an EIR article said, “US owes Russia billions”. Don’t know if this is what he meant.
Victor, your comment looks interesting. Do you have a link?
@ Penelope,
You might find quite some answers about Germany over @ the Justice For Germans web site. After reading several articles, you’ll probably be less likely to use the word ‘nazi’ ever again [because in using it, everyone who does so serves the zionist agenda].
The Real German flag.
Interesting and possibly true (I truly do not know, just saying).
But there were many, many small banks in Germany. Some run by Jews and some run by Gentiles, or a combo.
Were the “central bankers” whose shackles Hitler threw off German Jews? Does this mean Rothschilds? . . .
Per Preparata, the problem was the reparations and the fact that wealthy Germans’ assets had not been tapped but instead had been preserved by Versailles, and there was huge capital flight in the twenties. This caused the Weimar inflation and the backlash that powered Hitler (plus, he was financed by Western bankers). So, far from throwing of shackles it would seem, per Preparata (if I understand correctly) that Hitler got into bed with western bankers, indeed, was pushed forward by them. Indeed, was in effect a useful idiot whose fanatical hatred of Jews caused him to wander off the track of just destroying Russia, and so became the new (but temporary) target.
As the Saker pointed out, so many parallels with the US creation of “puppets” who come to dreadful life and develop their own agendas. Call it the Pinocchio syndrome. Or the robot that gives the finger to Mission Control.
Re mechanics, still confused by the fact that a comment doesn’t disappear when “post a comment” is clicked. This seems odd. Suppose one wanted to post a P.S. One could not do it. Why not? Here goes maybe nothing.
Katherine
Thank you for a good sense comment Katherine. I’m finding more heat than light in some of today’s comments.
Victor, you say, he [Hitler] worked very closely with the World Zionist Organisation to locate an appropriate new home for Israel and to provide financial incentives to Jews who were willing to move there”.
You can’t possibly believe that! We have all seen the emaciated bodies of Jews & others at the concentration camps.
The Zionists worked throughout the war with the Nazis, even Eichmann himself, to get Jews to Palestine. But only the young and fit. the old were simply sacrificed to the Nazi genocidists, the worst example the fate of the Hungarian Jews. Ben-Gurion once asserted that if he to chose between saving half the Jewish children of Europe by getting them to Palestine, or all of them in removing them to England, he would choose the half in Palestine.
Here is the conclusion of an article by Richard Carrier, then a researcher at Columbia University, and published in the pay-for-access German Studies Review:
“All this is not to say that Hitler doesn’t criticize Christianity even in Picker’s and Jochmann’s
version of the Table Talk. For instance, again on 13 December 1941, Hitler argues against the
idea of a physical resurrection and in favor of a spiritual one, and there and elsewhere he
takes a very cynical view of Catholicism, voicing many of the same criticisms one might hear
from a candid (and bigoted) Protestant. Yet even there he makes it clear that he believes in
God, Christ, the immortality of the soul, and divine providence. Confirming this picture is
Bärsch’s recent study of Hitler’s religious beliefs.19 As Jochmann himself concludes after
surveying Hitler’s remarks on religion in the Table Talk: “Hitler was by no means
unreligious” (Hitler keineswegs areligiös war, p. 31).”
Thanks for this Sasha. The Saker shows zero sympathy for the factors leading to Hitler’s rise, or understanding of his reforms in Germany prior to the war. The Saker, despite his many fine contributions, is on “the German question” still as much a slave to WWII Soviet propaganda as anything else.
Much to ponder here. And I can take these ideas on board. But wish Sasha would integrate into this picture Hitler’s fanatical hatred of Jews. It surely was more than “political.” Because anyl such analysis I believe has to integrate the main manifestations of Hitler’s policies, not just putative motivations.
Even from a questionable source such as wiki, cracks in the facade appear. About the only thing that is certain is that the west has been fed lies about anything of import. If it were not for this relatively new form of ‘samizdat’ – the internet, none of this info would be available for debate and discussion.
Emil Maurice (19 January 1897, Westermoor – 6 February 1972, Munich) was an early member of the National Socialist German Workers Party and a founding member of the SS. Together with Erich Kempka, he served as one of Hitler’s personal chauffeurs. Unusually, he was one of the few mischlings (a person of mixed Jewish and ethnic German ancestry) to serve in the SS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emil_Maurice
Katherine ‘Hitlers fanatical hate’ … was not unique these 2 books might help:
Jewish Domination of Weimar Germany – published 1933
https://archive.org/details/JewishDominationOfWeimarGermany1919-1932
The Victory of Judiasm over Germanism by Wilhelm Marr – published 1879
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.kevinmacdonald.net%2FMarr-Text-English.pdf&ei=vHf3VPWOFM3U8gWO74HQCw&usg=AFQjCNEu1HVCcRv24LBR3upTAvct64RxVA&bvm=bv.87519884,d.dGc
How like the current situation in the USA-the victory of Judaism over Americanism.
Jewish writer, Maurice Samuels (1895-1972), in his book, You Gentiles (New York, 1924) wrote:
‘Wherever the Jew is found he is a problem, a source of unhappiness to himself and to those around him.’ p10
‘There are two life-forces in the world I know: Jewish and gentile, our and yours.’ p19
‘These are two ways of life, each utterly alien to the other. Each has its place in the world- but they cannot flourish in the same soil, they cannot remain in contact without antagonism… to each other they are enemies.’ p36
‘… you must learn (and are learning) to dislike and fear the modern and ‘assimilated’ Jew more than you did the old Jew, for he is more dangerous to you. At least the old Jew kept apart from you, was easily recognizable as an individual, as the bearer of the dreaded Jewish world-idea: you were afraid of him. But as the Jew assimilates, acquires your languages, cultivates a certain intimacy, penetrates into your life, begins to handle your instruments, you are aware that his nature, once confined safely to his own life, now threatens yours…’ p144
‘We Jews, we, the destroyers, will remain the destroyers for ever. Nothing that you will do will meet our needs and demands. We will for ever destroy because we need a world of our own, a God-world, which it is not in your nature to build.’ p155
‘We cannot assimilate: it is so humiliating to us that we become contemptible in submitting to the process: It is so exasperating to you that, even if we were willing to submit, it would avail us nothing.’ p209
Hitler’s not being the only one with a fanatical hatred of Jews is not IMO particularly relevant to my question.
Sasha posited (I believe) an alternative analysis of Hitler’s relationship to other western powers and covert powers (fnance) and hence of the true aims and origins of WW2. So just becuase a whole lot of people had a fanatical hatred of Jews doesn’t explain how this hatred was an element of a war policy. It would make more sense if Hitler had coolly used this hatred. But this doesn’t seem to be the case, as the Final Solution actually weakened GErman industry by killing off the labor. Admittedly, slave, but still. (While we’re at it, let’s not get on our high horse here about slave labor, since that is partly what our penal Gulag in teh USA is about.
Also, regarding this hatred and especially the warning about assimilated Jews, I have to say, sorry, IMO that is BS.
My grandfather, born 1866 in Berlin (that is, before Barr, before teh unification of Germany),, was an assimilated Jew, wife GEntile, who was partner in a respected firm and two of the partners were Gentiles. He was of course a smart guy and knew what was coming in March 1933. He died before the worst. And he got his children out of the country.
The members of Berlin’s Jewish community in the main were not Zionists.
So, you are saying that these people, BY DEFINITION, are worse than the sidelocks crowd because they are a stealth force. I won’t say what I think of this but it is not a useful form of analysis.
Not every banker is a criminal. Not every assimilated Jew is a Zionist. Not every Jew is anything. Not every anything is anything. In fact, what becomes more and more apparent to me is that one must look at very specific people and the threads of families adn organizational connections as “families” that continue to run through history and pull the strings (i.e., the use of “family” for mafia groups is really apposite) . E.g., analysis of the Bush family’s tentacles. I think the general public underestimates the importance of this point as a result of the 99%’s fantasy of living in a true meritocracy, and naivete regarding how elites actually function/socialize/marry/learn of investment opportunities/use the useful idiots, etc.
IMO Barr’s comments are racist and reflect the racist views of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Which still do not IMO explain Hitler qua politician and strategist.
Katherine
I think rather that religion, being organized and run by men, is often corrupted in its practice and misused by state powers. This has nothing to do with the true practice of religion. Political leaders will use anything to justify their misdeeds. The US gov has been coaching American ministers since 9/11 to brainwash their congregations to accept and acquiesce to the growing American fascism. Some are submissive to state authority and cooperate with them, while others are horrified by the change in their government. If you pay attention to trends in conservative Christianity in the US you will find that many popular ministers are speaking out about the NWO and are educating their followers against it. Most religious people do what they can under the circumstances, I believe.
Dear Saker:
I am Sanjay the Indian. If you remember (however it is difficult for you since you are very busy), I wrote to you exactly same thing quite a while ago. If you could recall then you could find it. Nevertheless it is not neccessary. But you are absolutely correct. Just it took almost 70 years for Russians to see thru and come out of illusions. The entire WEST and of course the East Europe are internally burning for the revenge against Russia. Although they were working on their plans but those didn’t materialize because nobody is above the “DEVINE POWER”. The destruction and looting of materials of RUSSIA during 90s opened their eyes. As the Gandhi opened the eyes of India and the “quit India movement” started. Material can be regained and regenerated but once the Culture & Civilization is gone is GONE. In the journey of all this, there is one Key Word called “TRUTH”. Whoever is with TRUTH that side will win eventually. As was the WWII and so would be the ultimate war. One thing I could tell you is The WEST is all abt Lies, torture, Plunder and above all the ILLUSION of Technologies. All these have their limits which is already arrived. The reality of the WEST is in front of everybody to see those who could not they are bound to get ruined. The Middle EAST in general, and the latest in the series is UKRAINE. It is surprising to see how the East/Central Europe couldn’t see. May be the West Europe finally have started seeing. But Russia,China,India,South-Am, Africa and even Middle-East are certainly seeing it thru. Hence the future of Eurasia would be very vibrant and exciting. West has nothing to offer. One can’t eat devices…… The prosperity needs the consistent growth without FEAR.
Regds
Sanjay
Hi /sanjay, I remember your other comment and I really liked it too. But I would argue that the world is not predestined 100% to succeed in right over wrong. Its up to the freedom of the human race.
If those who refuse to get off their couches in the West continue to be the majority, then the world could become a prison planet for as long as they can keep it that way. And technology is powerful now, more so than ever before.
It would be much better if the information war is won sooner than later.
Hi Ann:
I couldn’t be agreed with you more. In fact you are absolutely right. What I meant is “TRUTH” is the Key and in this Information/Tech age, The Truthful side has and must take the full use of it to defeat the Evil in their own battle. In fact the Indian Epic is full of it. I totally agree with you. In the beginning of a battle/War it is always the “barbarians” wins so to speak. Because the people of highest civilization and culture goes to war as a last resort. But when they go eventually they will win because they go with Devinity….. I hope I made my point. Nevertheless I am really thankful to you for your appreciation.
Moreover I have yet to find one Westerner who could really see what is happening….. I could understand them very well. It is the social engn of 200+ years at the least.
More on some other time
Regds
Sanjay
was it in this, sanjay? you had a lovely comment in this one
/vineyard-of-the-saker-white-paper-the-china-russia-double-helix/
O Yes. Thnx for appreciation.
A document that could shine some light into some of the dark corners of that time is downloadable at https://archive.org/download/RedSymphony/RedSymphony.pdf
Whatever its provenance, it makes for a very interesting read. In any case, the people in the document are certainly real historical figures, and coincides with reality where we know the facts.
Erebus
Good grief. Two pages on the terrors haunting capitalism and the word “socialism” does not appear. I cannot take this seriously.
I’m sorry, what about socialism? Is there something wrong with it? I’ve spend first 20 years of my life under socialism and it was probably the best period of my life. Personally I have no problems with socialism.
…and anyone who thinks the US is NOT a socialistic country has their eyes shut. Socialism for the 1% and the capitalism for the rest is actually much worse than 100% of either of them.
Because it was time of your youth. And generally all people things about their youth that it was great time.
I think of the personalty types that get to positions of power rather than nationalities/ethnic groups/religions.
Politics is power, money is power. The US seems to be a garden of Eden for these types where they can flourish with few regulations to stop them.
These types are in every country but they tend to gravitate to the US.
Sovereign countries are the enemy of these people because they cannot extend their power, as in China and now Russia.
Although old animosity’s would be there to some extent, I believe the craving for power and control by those at the top in the US is perhaps more relevant.
Putin seems the exception rather than the norm. He seems to have come to power more by accident rather than design and is now using that power for the good of his country.
Xi Jinping seems a similar person to Putin though I know virtually nothing of Chinese politics.
Hopefully both good men for the hour of need.
Interesting document posted after Yesterday Mr.Natanyaho speech
http://www.wiesenthal.com/atf/cf/%7B54d385e6-f1b9-4e9f-8e94-890c3e6dd277%7D/BEN%20GURION%20LETTER.PDF
I was thinking something similar the last few days. During the 90’s, as often happens, social turmoil led to a mushrooming of far right, neo-Nazi groups in Russia. I don’t know the inside story, but with Putin’s coming to power these groups almost disappeared from public view. (When’s the last time you heard of Pamyat and the others?) The thought came to mind – do they hate Putin so much because he crushed the neo-Nazi resurgence in the bud? Why do they support the Nazis in the Ukraine? What’s really going on?
Agree with “Revanchism and Russophobia”, but whose? Imperial Russia and the Union were allies in the US war between the states. Originally Anglo Americans had no Russophobia. Where did it come from? The eastern European expats who hated Christian Russia for dispossessing their native Khazaria! Then as Bolsheviks they returned with a vengeance to slaughter Christian Slavs by the millions. Later, some of the followers of Trotsky moved back to the US after losing the power struggle with Stalin, and resumed their subversive activities inside the (then Christian) US.
“Oh, my name is Irving Kristol
And my son his name is Bill
In my youth I followed Trotsky
But in truth I follow him still
But to say you are a Bolshevik
Would fill the world with dread
So please don’t call me a commie
Call me a neocon instead”
Now they are making a second holodomor in Ukraine, driving the east to Russia through shelling and the west to anywhere they can make a living by deliberately creating an economic collapse. When much of the Christian population has emigrated, been killed in the war, frozen, or starved, Khazaria can rise again. Devilry is the only word to describe what is being done.
Completely wring. England is the msin evil plotter and Jews are just patsys to be used as scape goat when thing do not turn out well. All the wars against Rusdia and germanynplotted by English race.
That is why English arebnot happy with juncker who is proposing an European wide army for European security which will neatrlise Nato influnce through whivh England has bullied Europe through American influnce.
The,main enemy of whole humanity is not Jews but English nation which needs to be tackled by the whole world.
Roschilda were not there when English were helping themselves with piracy which they still do today through other means,
Naploeanic war against Rusdia was plotted by tEnglish
check out these numbers.
looks like all those ratings agencies ludicrous downgrades of russian debt (almost all corporate, since russia state debt is i recall under 15% of gdp) is just more desperate smoke unt mirrors being staged, more misdirection to mask gigantic implosions coming in western institutions & cities.
Little Big Chicago: Rahmbo’s Last Stand
http://investmentresearchdynamics.com/is-chicago-the-next-enron/
note item about runoff election coming april that rahmbo is hoping to survive.
“…ideology diametrically opposed to capitalism” State capitalism, i.e. Soviet communism, was but a variation of capitalism with the final phase being a disolving of the state in a self-managed chaos. The dictatorship of the proletariat is not different from the dictatorship of the “exceptional elite” of the Straussian Neoconservatives.
One has to ask if the elitist neocons leaving chaos in their path isn’t the convergence of Western corporate capitalism and State capitalism of communism, the convergence of the dictatorship of the prolitariat and elitist/self-managed chaos that the neocons leave in their path.
It seems I have at least one thing in common with Vladimir Putin -I know what a live Amur Leopard coat feels like. Beautiful.To a non-cat person that might seem irrelevant or eccentric but I can assure you it is a memory I will treasure for all time -particularly given their almost extinct numbers in the wild.
On another note, the Hegemon’s vassal Broadcasting Corp. has the following. Perhaps the rumours are true -they have quarantined the cockpit area with all the 30mm cannon shell holes in it away from view according to the video -if indeed they even brought it along. I don’t see the classic side cockpit area in the video at all.
At the rate they are going (1 day was sufficient to determine forensic analysis of metals/ explosive traces) it should be another decade before anything is released -assuming Kiev allows it.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31719040
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/12/19/why-the-secrecy-on-the-mh17-investigation/
Like Lockerbie they will fake it and just sit out the truth-tellers. This is a Big Deal, so the truth will never pass a single Western MSM presstitute’s inbuilt, job-preserving, filters.
Putin was stupid to have allowed British -the most vehement enemy of Rusdia -to take the black box and let the investigation drag for months.
Yes, we do treasure our fleeting contacts w wildlife, don’t we? You got to caress a leopard’s coat. I got to nurse a hummingbird back to life for a few days. She was comatose in the grass & when I had warmed her in my hand she came to & I fed her sugar water. Because they must eat every few hours I took her to a large law office w me where I immediately received 30 ! e-mails from fellow employees who’d imm’y researched the correct feeding and care for a hummingbird.
Two days later I discovered a nearly invisible natural fiber which was imprisoning the three feathers of one wing. After I freed her feathers and fed her one last time she took off backwards into the sun.
I shall always remember the feel of those little claws on my finger– she was so light I could feel no sensation of her weight at all.
Thanks.
What I want to ask is this: could it be that one of the key factors motivating the West’s apparently illogical and self-defeating desire to constantly confront Russia is simply revanchism for WWII?
It goes back further, to the Octobre Revolution when the USA was part of the western oligarch fascists fighting to overthrow that setback to their interests. The fascists lost that war and the USSR survived and prospered.
The nazis were seen by the fascist oligarchy as a way to knock out the USSR, the western fascists then going in and taking over after both the USSR and the nazis were prostrate and spent. Much like the USA taking over after WW1 killed off European powers. Truman literally said this around 1942, before he was prez.
But remember that even mediocre personalities like Krushchev or Brezhnev truly frightened them. So it is no wonder that strong and smart leaders (like Stalin or Putin) would absolutely terrify them and make them feel inadequate.
Comaring Putin to Stalin, or even mentioning Stalin as being in the same class is an insult to Putin. Stalin is much closer to Brezhnev. Better yet, Yeltsin. A petty personality who stayed in power only because others behind the scenes found his lack of intelligence and personal greed useful to them. In fact, Stalin and Yeltsin share mare attributes. It was Stalin’s insecurity and total lack of intelligence that nearly cost the USSR their independence from the western fascists (nazis). His gutting of most the intelligence and experience in the Soviet armed forces is well known. What is not is the way the USSR was industrialised. This entailed a total lack of quality and a pursuit of quantity, irrelevant numbers. In fact, the Ukraine junta the zionazis now front pursue a similar strategy with their armed forces. The Soviets under Stalin’s people were stuck with less than a mediocre leadership, the intelligent ones killed off because they were a potential threat to the fat parasites, with equipment where mechanical failure was rampant due to factory pursuit of numbers rather than quality. Image over substance. It was Stalin and co. who quite literally cost the losses of 1941-3 to the Soviet people. Because of their purges, the USSR was unable to confront the nazis in 1938, when the time was ideal to do so. Had those purges not happened, the USSR could have simply walked all over Germany and WW2 would have ended before it started. But Stalin’s policies made sure the USSR was too weak to do this. Of all the leaders of the USSR, Stalin cost the people of the country the most due to his government’s corruption and incompetence. The only one who exceeds him is Yeltsin.
My comment above aside, I agree with the majority of what Saker wrote in this entry. Reading back, I realised I should have mentioned that.
BOT TAK even with all that a number of innovations/advances. The Katusha rockets perhaps others.
But what I find amazing is that even with the purges, Russia detonated its first atomic bomb in 49.
I look at the Manhattan Project which was 4-5 years in the making with no purges, no invasion.
Although Russia had gone through the Stalin purges and invasion and huge losses in WWII they still built the bomb within 4 years.
With this I am not looking at the ethical side, but purely at logistics and expertise/science.
Peter
That was postwar. Quite a bit changed during the war and a lot of the pre war corruption and incompetence got cleaned up during the war. It was that, or no more USSR it was realised, and much of “Stalinism” was corrected.
Also, I don’t disagree with most of what Saker posted, though my initial comment might make it sound that way. I thought I should explain that. I wrote a follow comments explaining that, but I guess I messed up somewhere since it hasn’t shown up.
It’s quite easy to make a Bomb in 4 years if you have the plans and materials, including uranium given to you under the Lend/Lease arrangements. L/L aid to the Soviet Union had higher priority than shipments to US Forces. Soviet attaches travelled with the shipments preventing their inspection by americans. Plant aimed at acheiving parity with American industry was shipped for use after the war. The abrupt turn of the Soviets from ally to enemy made the topic of L/L to Russia something to be wiped rapidly from the American record after 1945. Add to that the intelligence passed on by Klaus Fuchs, and it’s hardly amazing the Soviets got one bomb for years later.
Robert
L/L aid to the Soviet Union had higher priority than shipments to US Forces.
Rubbish. Aide to the Soviets was mostly weaponry not being used by the USA such as M3 Medium tanks and P-39 and P-63 aircraft. Russophobic Churchill even had to prod the pindos to even send any at all, initially, they were not going to do it. The US military always got first priority, materials generally kept ahead of US users. The UK always had a higher priority that USSR in American lend-lease.
Soviet attaches travelled with the shipments preventing their inspection by americans.
More rubbish. You are claiming Soviet officials over rode American officials in the USA. In wartime. That is absurd. :D
Plant aimed at acheiving parity with American industry was shipped for use after the war.
Again rubbish. USA/UK had already decided upon designating the USSR the next enemy before the end of the war. Lend-lease was quickly cut off in 1945 with the end of the European war, IE: the capitalist west were going to renew their cold war on the USSR, which from late 1941 – mid 45 they put on hold. There was never any intention to have the USSR achieve any kind of parity, they were supposed to been left weak and vulnerable, like Europe after WW1. Didn’t work out that way, fortunately.
The abrupt turn of the Soviets from ally to enemy made the topic of L/L to Russia something to be wiped rapidly from the American record after 1945.
Rubbish again. The pindos claimed the aide is what saved the Soviets from losing the war and vastly exaggerated the it’s affect in the war on the Eastern Front.
The main problem with American “history” is it is as full of exceptional myth and the news media reporting current affairs. This makes it useless for understanding the past and reduces those who rely upon American sourced “history” to propaganda echos – at best.
Somewhat conspicuously, the Nazis, when they attacked the USSR, were not welcomed by their fifth column, unlike everywhere else they went. The US ambassador took note of that. “Maybe those trials were no circus after all?”
Nope.
re: Bok Tak on Stalin and Yeltsin: Thank you for the clarification and continuation of the comparison and contrast rifting.
teranam13 – cheers.
As the gravedigger of revolutions with policies of peaceful co-existence, and socialism in one country and forced collectivization these were the policies that Trotsky rebelled against and this was the reason he got an ice-pick that and his popularity as the leader of the Red Army in 1917 and the fact that Lenin wanted Trotsky to take over his lead upon his death. Anti-Semitism was the reason Trotsky did not which allowed Stalin the leadership. Marxism a Jewish conspiracy. I dare say that if Marx and Engels were alive today they would not be here on an internet chat carrying on ill-informed debates about which way the wind is blowing they would have seen the struggle in the Donbass as their own and been down their fighting. They were above all else revolutionaries which is the reason they were exiled from country to country as a threat. Marx a British agent come on he spent 18 hours a day by candlelight studying manuscripts in the British Library and classical political economy. Read the communist manifesto for crying out loud. I would venture to say that disparaging Marxism, Lenin and Trotsky as a Jew Bolshevik Zionist conspiracy is British propaganda. It was King Edward who set up the divide and conquer strategy for Europe and they are still at it today. Did the aristocracy want Hitler to win out over Stalin-many currents were very sympathetic to Hitler just look at the Royal Family in Great Britian or whatever it is called today. The capitalist class and the aristocracy was scared out of their wits over the 1917 revolution it was no capitalist conspiracy or jewish one for that matter. Throw in the Aliens and you’d be right at home with the psych ops playing out on American am radio 24/7 from midnight to morn. However, it was FDR who said I think Russia should be 50% more like America and America should be 50% more like Russia meaning socialist. It was Harriman and the British bankers no doubt representing the Rothschild bank that upon Roosevelt’s death turned the policy around and initiated the cold war along with Churchill still trying to prop up the fading British Empire. It was they above everyone else who could not stand to play poor third cousin to Russia and America and it was Great Britain that did more than any country in the world to keep Germany down Russia out and the Anglo American alliance on top. Had Roosevelt not passed away when he did-we would be living in an entirely different world today not facing world war three. One other thing. Fascism that erupted in Germany during the depression and ww2 was an entirely new phenomena no one knew exactly What to make of it. It was Trotsky who did the most to identify the sociological basis for fascism and the complete atomization and destruction of organized labour during a period of capitalist crisis. After studying modern social history at two universities and one college I have yet to hear a definition with the explanatory power of Trotsky. Read Trotsky as Alternative by Earnest Mandel both his chapter on the bureaucracy in the Soviet Union and his chapter on Fascism are highly illuminating. I beseech you put your prejudices aside and READ those two chapters. Your understanding of the world we live in and its most recent history will expand exponentially I swear by all that is good in this world an epiphany will occur.
RockyRacoon
It looks like your comment is a reply to what I wrote (from the placement of it in the column), but I fail to see the relevance since I didn’t mention the things you were writing about.
The 1917 Bolshevik Revolution was based on the teachings of Karl Marx who advocated a violent overthrow of the bourgeoisie and the unity of the working classes or the proletariat. In The Communist Manifesto Marx called for the abolition of Capitalism. He stated that “the proletariat will use its political supremacy in order, by degree to wrest all capital from the bourgeoisie to centralize all the means of production into the hands of the State” Many Americans feared these ideas. Furthermore, many Americans after WWI were disillusioned with European squabbles and intrigues and wanted to distance their society from further involvement in their conflicts. As a result America with its new Republican government turned inwards and politically became isolationist. In ‘isolationist’ America, ‘internationalism’ was a dirty word.
The new government under Warren Harding promoted business and wanted to bring America “back to normalcy”. This new administration refused to sign the Treaty of Versailles and participate in the League of Nations. The new world economic and military power abrogated its moral responsibility to shape the post war world and in fact some Americans saw Europe and particularly events in Russia as dangerous and uncivilized. “During the winter of 1918-1919 the committee heard a parade of Russian émigrés and Americans back from Russia recite hair-raising tales of Bolshevik outrages against private property, churches, the family, and everything sacred.” (Powers, 20). America government reacted with fear to these events and dispatched armies of intervention to restore capitalism in Russia. Specifically they feared left wing ideas, as they perceived them to be a threat to their way of life. Even though, in 1920 only some 150,000 American were anarchist or communists, American business classes saw these left-wingers as union leaders, troublemakers and criminals.
Readjustment in the post World War One markets caused some dislocation in the American economy. Many workers during the war joined unions and since the trade union movement was weak organizers wanted changes in the relationship with their employers. To achieve this new relationship the unions wanted to organize many more industrial workers. Specifically the coal miners, Boston police and the steel workers went on strike to demand better wages and working conditions. The industry owners and politicians saw this as some Bolshevik plot to undermine the American way of life. As a result the new Republican administration and the business classes blamed the communists and anarchists for this unrest. Furthermore, many Americans remembered that an anarchist assassinated President McKinley in 1901 and they did not want a repeat of this violence.
However, more important at this time was the attitude of American business class who did not want to see unionism succeed. Republican politician and industrialists feared that the growing trade union movement might lead to a Bolshevik-style revolution such as had swept the tsar from power in 1917.Since many union leaders had left-wing ideas business owners fired these union organizers and their supporters. Industrialists such as Henry Ford and others went so far as to employ gangs of ex-soldiers to break up trade union and/or socialist meetings and the private police, the Pinkertons, were used to intimidate, beat up and in some cases even kill union organizers. The ‘Reds’ as they were called were viewed as enemies of American business and politics. Of particular interest is the activity of the Attorney General Mitchell Palmer and his Justice Department lawyer J. Edgar Hoover.
Mitchell Palmer was the Attorney General in charge of law and the police in the Harding Administration. He hated the ‘Reds’. As a chief law officer in the nation he used his position to persecute the left-wingers. His anti ‘Red” campaign organized by Hoover became particularly rigorous after a botched attempt on Palmer’s life. A bomb exploded on his front porch killing the perpetrator who was carrying a communist newspaper the Plain Words. During the same period many factories were destroyed by gang activities and many politicians received bombs in their mail. Palmer and Hoover organized a campaign against foreigners and ‘internationalism’ and police and troops were ordered to raid magazine offices, public houses, union headquarters and meetings of any liberal organization and “over 6000 were arrested and put in prison” (Brooman, 8). Americans did not protest this action, which went against the Bill of Rights “even though America’s leading law officer had wrongly arrested 6000 innocent people” (Brooman, 8). However the “newspapers cheered the Justice Department with headlines like “ALL ABOARD FOR THE NEXT SOVIET ARK””(powers, 27). However, more important for the anti communists was Palmer and Hoover’s success in splintering the American Socialist party and destroying the only viable left wing option in American politics.
Most interesting case of legal persecution and manipulation of justice occurred in 1920 in the Sacco and Vanzetti case. This landmark case in American jurisprudence was tainted with racism and political fear. Sacco and Vanzetti were Italian immigrants who spoke English poorly and both were anarchists. They were accused of killing a guard in a wages robbery and when they were arrested they were carrying guns and anarchist literature. Sixty-four witnesses identified them as the perpetrators of the crime while some one hundred and seven witnesses at their trial stated that they were elsewhere during the robbery. Judge Webster Thayer sentenced them to death in the electric chair.
Even though, many petitions were signed and demonstrations held which called for a general strike unless a fair trial was held, Judge Thayer refused to grant an appeal. A leading lawyer stated that he has known judge Thayer all his life and describes him as “a narrow-minded man… a half educated man… unintelligent man… full of prejudice …carried away by fear of ‘Reds’, which [has] captured about ninety five percent of the American people” Brooman, 9). Sacco and Vanzzetti died in the electric chair on 24 August1927 and it is now generally agreed that the two Italians were innocent and victims of the ‘Red scare’ campaign.
The ‘Red scare’ ant communist campaign of the early twenties gradually gave way to a more organized and less hysterical attack on the communist movement in America. The Catholic Church who saw communism as anti God led this new movement and it became “the backbone of American anticommunist movement for most of the movement’s history” (Powers, 51). Jewish American and black American communities who also became vocal opponents of Communist ideas joined the Catholics. However, the strongest anticommunist voice came from the Democratic Socialists who attempted to unify the American left. Like other segments of American society in the post war years the left went through the process of restructuring, however it was never able to win the confidence of he American public because the challenge from the right was to strong.
America went through four Republican presidents from 1920 to 1933. This period in American history was characterized by isolationism from Europe and imperialism in Asia and South America pushed by American corporate interests. By 1928 America was the richest nation in the world. Even though, with all this prosperity America had its dark side where prohibition led to crime, religious fundamentalism led to censorship and racism while overproduction and speculation led to the stock market crash. However, for the American left prosperity of the twenties reduced the number of card carrying communist and anarchist. At the same time, the United States refused to recognize the Soviet regime and this was in part due to its international revolutionary program the Comintern as well as its failure to acknowledge the financial obligations of earlier governments. Senator William Borah of Idaho was a consistent critic of the American non-recognition policy.
In conclusion, politicians and newspaper editors who warned Americans against the danger of ‘international’ trade unionism orchestrated the “Red scare”. Industrialist feared trade unionism and under the guise of international communist threat to the American way of life they financed anti communist activities. It was Roosevelt’s use of Keynesian economic policies and his passage of the Wagner Act in 1935, which brought some peace to the union movement in America. The ‘Red scare’ abated until after World War Two when post war political competition between the two new Superpowers led to the resumption of the ‘Red scare’ and once more its leading campaigner was J. Edgar Hoover.
You are all overcomplicating the issue. It is in our human genetic nature as mammals to compete for power and territory, despite the efforts of religious visionaries and philosophers to moderate this instinct. And, if we do not compete, we follow the herd.
The USA derives immense wealth from the seigneuriage of issuing the world’s reserve currency, from the usury of dollar loans, and from the forced loaning of dollar trade surpluses back into Treasury Bonds. Without the need to use dollars in world trade, the US financial house of cards will collapse, and so will its ability to project military power. It will implode just like the western Roman Empire did.
Jim Rickards, the Wall Street, stock-market tout and self-proclaimed CIA insider, has stated unequivocally, in one of his tedious promotional videos, that the USA considers any move away, from the trading of oil, natural gas and other commodities in dollars, as an act of war – a casus belli, although it always offers other, seemingly more publicly-palatable excuses for its various acts of aggression to enforce this rule.
China and Russia are rebelling against the paying of such tribute to the current “world” financial empire, by promoting trade in their own and other currencies, or by barter, and by buying gold. They threaten the very existence of the empire. No empire accepts such rebellion without a vigorous effort to bring the rebellious vassals back under control. It defends its paramountcy just like any mammalian alpha male. Preachers may preach, and Philosophers philosophise, but human nature doesn’t change.
The Israeli interest is simply one of self protection, in that it cannot exist without the financial and military support of the USA. It is naturally going to support the USA strenuously in the mission to regain control of the rebellious vassals, lest it lose the essential, protective shelter of the USA. West European and British financial interests feed well on the table scraps of the empire. So, they too naturally support it.
The problem that faces the human race, is whether or not the empire eventually resorts to nuclear weapons, either in desperation or out of spite, the Sampson option, as it were, being “if we can’t have it, then neither can you.”
Perhaps only a massive, world-wide public awakening about this risk could possibly prevent this fallout, but the public in general seems to prefer sleepwalking into oblivion. For we in the West, such an awakening is unlikely, because we do not wish to think about anything which might threaten our comfortable lifestyle, especially if our survival appears to depend on our accepting its loss. It is so much less stressful to remain in denial, and to believe the lies of the empire. Laissez les bons temps rouler.
” And, if we do not compete, we follow the herd.”
You are right here. Humans are a herd animal. That is why business can make dollars out of fashion.
It is why propaganda works. Some that understand this achieve money/power. Others end up on sites like Vineyard of the Saker doing battle with the power and money faction.
Above comment on the herd animal was mine. Forgot to add my name. Peter.
Israel, through Jewish influence in US business, politics, the MSM, entertainment and sundry other lucrative ‘businesses’, controls the USA. To argue otherwise when the facts are so plain, so undisguised, is ludicrous. I can think of few, if any, comparable situations in global history.
Jewish influence is up there, but there are other factors. As I believe and anonymous has posted it is more to do with human nature than any other factor.
Anon, another factor in human nature is that nuclear weapons, now that they are developed will be used. If not now, then fifty years down the track, but they will be used.
The Jews have been notorious, throughout history and almost universally wherever they dwelt, for their supremacism, nepotism, entryism, duplicity and pleonexia. Where these tendencies were suppressed, as under the Ottomans or in Andalucia, the Jews have still prospered but not excited the resentment, even hatred, that such behaviour always will incite in the victims of this behaviour. Many apologists for the Jews have attempted, most often ludicrously, to explain the ubiquity of Judeophobia, in societies different in religion, social arrangements, history and geographical distribution, and over millennia.These apologias always blame the goyim entirely, and exculpate the Jews totally, in other words they are crude agit-prop.
You not describing the English race and its evil spawn of anglosaxon parasites who have spread like plague on a large landmass of world thrpugh deciet, piracy and theivery and never through fair victory of arms?
“It is in our human genetic nature as mammals to compete for power and territory”
I vehemently disagree on Scientific Grounds: “Gene’s are not outputs, they are variables.”
We humans all seek love; not hunger for loss, or as you say, “for power and territory”.
So — you no longer believe in anything but brute force, kinda like your sexual style, rapist.
“Our comfortable life style”…
This phrase, oft used, does not sit well with me. I don’t see it as all that comfortable. People drag themselves awake in early morning, contend with rush hour traffic to get to a meaningless job where they toil under the boss’s ken for too little pay, and then go home to collapse in a chair watching mindless drivel, while eating lousy industrially manufactured food before beating their zombified kids into bed so that can at last get between the covers for a few troubled dreams before starting the whole thing all over again — until the weekend when, if lucky they don’t have to go to a second job and can spend the day mowing lawns and doing other silly household tasks, or joining the herd at Walmart, being blasted deaf by the din and over-loud ‘music’, while stocking up on cheap junk which might last the year out.
All so the very few wealthy capitalists can engage in psychotic games and fantasies.
Not comfortable at all compared to hunting and gathering a couple of hours a day and then engage in genuine liesure and social interaction. But that’s the ‘good life’ that people have been brainwashed and pressured into, and what they think they must destroy the Earth and it’s lifeforms to have.
Maybe if people would become more aware of this then choosing surviva insteadl, with more comfort and meaning in their lives, would not be such a hard choice to make.
Anonymous, to compete for power and influence is one thing– to do it w/o any limits is another. The AngloZionist oligarchy has killed millions of human beings. And not merely to advance their own nations, but to advance solely the power of their own oligarchy against the interests of all nations. It is their desire to reduce the hman population to one million. This is not “normal” competition; this is unspeakable.
Saker,
You say that “The best way to stop them, is to shed a strong light on them and their real motives”.
This is nonsense and I’m sure you know it.Their real motives are well known by those who want to know. There is no conspiracy. Western elite criminals do everything openly. Their sheeple are too busy surviving or watching stupid TV and movies. They don’t count. They will vote accordingly to their masters’ wishes.
The only question is “how many divisions Russia and China have got”?
Let’s hope they have lots and they can save the world. Russia did save the world once from Nazism…Can she do it again?
@There is no conspiracy. Western elite criminals do everything openly.
They conspire openly:
– Conspiracy (civil), an agreement between persons to deceive, mislead, or defraud others of their legal rights, or to gain an unfair advantage
– Conspiracy (criminal), an agreement between persons to break the law in the future, in some cases having committed an act to further that agreement
– Conspiracy (political), an agreement between persons with the goal of gaining political power or meeting a political objective
Of course they do it in broad day-light, like 9/11 or the framing of Libya for Lockerbie, then the Western MSM lies through its teeth, suppresses information and, their intellectual tour de farce, accuses the truth-tellers of being ‘conspiracy theorists’, which is the sum total of their ‘arguments’.
Dear WizOz,
Political conspiracy, in real life, not in the dictionary, means that (as Saker seems to believe) the real motives are not known…What I was trying to say is that this is completely wrong. The real motives in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, Ukraine..are well known. Maybe the western sheeple don’t know, but that is another question. Saker obviously knows.
You are very much right.
Only way for world and humanity to survive is to sort out not thee west but anglosaxon parasites centred in and directed from England -the main source of evil.
And it comes fown to question of how mant divisions do Russia have and how much are they willing to see the truth and use those divisions to kill the enemies.
Dear Saker,
I have read a great deal about the history of WW2. During 1944 – 1945, it is an historical fact that Hitler and his henchmen had a strong belief that the Western-Soviet alliance would break up and following this the western armies would ally themselves with Germany to repel the Soviets from Central Europe. In the conventional history books this was always dismissed as delusional and wishful thinking by a demented Hitler. But I now wonder – was it really? Operation “ünthinkable” actually exposes the delusional and psychotic nature of Churchill – since 1920, bent on destroying Russia. Unthinkable indeed, laughable really – can anyone imagine the US and British popgun Sherman tanks imposing their will upon the Soviets with their armies of T64s, and heavy JS tanks in 1945? The Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombs were utterly unnecessary as Japan was already on the verge of surrender. These bombs were exploded to warn the Russians who at that time were invading and defeating the Japanese Kwantung army in Manchuria.There is a great deal of evidence that the US provided finance for Hitler’s war effort up until 1942, until – like Al Qaeda and ISIS, the creation bit the hand that fed it. I am convinced that everything the US tries to engineer in terms of foreign interventions they stuff up and for one simple reason – they are woefully ignorant of any culture and history external to their pathetic 50 states. To anyone who doubts this – look at the record – every intervention by the US has resulted in disaster and mayhem. AND – they seem to be incapable of learning from their numerous repetitive mistakes. Only a moron keeps making the same mistakes over and over again. The very sad reality is that now they are playing their childish domination game with the only country in the world that can reduce them and all of us to radioactive dust.
God help us and pray for a miracle.
small correction – the T-64 was only introduced in the 60s. the main battle tank of the Red Army in 1945 was still the trusty T-34-85 (one of the best tanks in history in price/performance, btw).
You are right -I meant the T34-85. The T64 was much later
You are right – I meant the T34/85, undoubtedly the most effective tank of WW2. The T64 was much later.
Here Dimitry Orlov considers failure analysys. He concludes failure is not an option, it is a requirement.
http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2015/03/financial-collapse-leads-to-war.html#more
Only 5% of American’s have passports. So much for the high life everybody lives if you can’t get off the continent and go on a vacation and see the world. A culture of poverty and a poverty of culture. And we thought a human mind was a terrible thing to waste. It sure is especially when you spend 1/4 million and 4 years of your life doing it at an American University.
Oversimplification. While the animosity the unnamed and varied power entities that lie behind the New World Order and its associated evils feels towards all that is foreign and powerful, and is thus felt to be a threat – be it Russia, China, a small country refusing to kneel down, or a religion they haven’t yet subjugated and turned into a tool (evangelical Protestantism of the ‘jamming session instead for liturgy’ variety), or a watered-down sludge devoid of any actual faith (most other Protestant denomination, bar a few ‘reactionary’ elements cantering on true believers who oppose the forced introduction of the spirit of this world into their faith) – is unquestionable, things can’t quite be put down to a universally shared hatred or an entirely conscious response on part of all the actors. There is naturally animosity and mistrust, just as there was animosity and mistrust towards the USSR. The West perceived the USSR as a threat much earlier than the Nazi Germany became an enemy, and it took them a while to decide on whom to fight, but the mistrust and cloaked manoeuvres and schemes continued even after a alliance was made. The USSR was never an ally to them – it was a temporary lesser of two evils, and an enemy-to-be.
It’s a combination of things. In some respects it is driven by the age-old hatred you speak of, but in other respects, Russia is perceived as a roadblock and a barrier to finding a cure for the Wests’s slowly fading power, while others perceive a confrontation with it as the cure for that very problem. The U.S. has for decades now functioned on the basis of having a monolithic enemy which it could use to both justify militarisation and render its public compliant. With the ‘War on Terror’ loosing its freshness, a new enemy is needed, and Russia is a perfect candidate.
Many operate simply based on self-interest, and are used as pawns of those with more awareness and more power, while others truly believe the propaganda and serve in the roles of useful idiots.
Hi Saker,
Noriega and Gaddafi weren’t AngloZionist “good guys” in the beginning. I don’t know about Saddam. Further, I don’t think Al Quaida was a real, existing organization in any perceptible sense of the word “organization”, but more like a PR creation. The US never ceased to use those Al Quaida types for its own purpose, either as shocktroops, cannon fodder, or reason for intervention. You don’t even have to have “Al Quaida” for the US to use it as a justification, like Iraq before the 2003 attack, or Somalia, for that matter, before the Ethiopian invasion. Later on, “Al Quaida in Iraq” was a few hundred idiots imported mostly from Libya, and used as a justification (and a divide and conquer method). The domestic opposition, the one that really got the USA out of Iraq, wasn’t of these fanatic types.
And now, Islamic State is the same shit. What I can perceive from sites written by locals (and Arabs in general), they are convinced without any doubt that IS is STILL a US puppet, shocktroops against the Syrian state, and the reason for a coup that got Iran ally Maliki out of the Iraqi government. The three way division of Iraq was always a US wet dream. Now de facto they got it. The half heartenedness of the “air campaign” agains IS was even noticed by the mainstream.
While Hitler’s ascendence to power was really helped buy US and British elements, the clash between them was real, and was for a division of Europe (and more generally, the division of the world). That’s why the victors turned against each other.
One reason to fear Russia is the historic expansion of its territory, which has been going on for a thousand years.
Times change, people change. Wake up to the real world of today. US is now the empire, as in financial empire with military bases around the world to protect its interests.
The only time Russia expanded is when she was defending her territory.
All these attacked Russia
Vikings
Mongols-several wars
Teutonic Knights
Swedes-several wars
Poles-several wars
Turks-several wars
Britain-several wars
France-several wars
Germans-several wars
Japanese-two wars
USA Canada, Britain France
Cold War
Those groups you mention are all from west of Russia.
Russia also expanded south, into the Caucasus, in the early 19th Cent and to the east, subjugating many tribal groups of varying levels or organization and sophistication along the way. Accomplishing this goal of expanding to the Amur and beyond was made possible by the crack military group, the Cossacks. In this respect, the trajectories of Russia and the USA are very similar. Both were building continental empires at about the same time, in somewhat similar ways. As they progressed they created strings of forts to hold the new territory. In both cases, indigenous peoples were cleared out of the way. In the USA, the wagon trains to Oregon kind of accomplished what the Cossacks accomplished along, say, the Amur and the rivers of Siberia and Yakutia between. AAMOF, Russia pushing east and the USA pushing west basically met up in the Oregon Territory. The Russian expansion of course started much, much earlier than the “American” (which started with the Brits but really got going during and after the American Civil War—actually, the struggle for the west was a major driver of that war). But the idea was the same. The need for land was similar, even though a lot of the land in question was not that great for agriculture. The political drive to control the whole continent and to extend control to border areas (cf. Iran, Mexico) was similar. Funnyt that Russia is connected by an isthmus to western Europe and the USA by one to Latin America. Maybe Mexico is our Poland . . .
An easy-to-read intro to this subject can be found in Paul Jackson, The Birth of the Modern. Just look up Russia in the index.
Katherine
Correx:
1.The prev. post did mention Mongols and Japan. Still, I think the main point is the both the USA and Russia were and still are expansionary continental powers. An important difference is that the USA is also a maritime power. That is how the continent was originally settled, so of course the Americans possess these maritime skills and opportunituies and it is in their nature to weaponize them (i.e., the USA is not the only country with coastline).
2. And, the author of The Birth of the Modern is Paul Johnson. He also wrote A History of the jews, and the first chapter is pretty interesting on some questions such as how come the Isrealites thought they had a right to Canaan. See p. 21. Per Johnson, “It is during [Jacob’s] lifetime that these links with the east and the north were finally severed, and his followers began to think of themselves as linked in some permanent way to Canaan, so that even if they go to Egypt in time of famine, the divine dispensation is that they will return, inexorably.” He also has interesting info on why the pharoahs got sick of the Israelites and were happy to get rid of them.
Katherine
The Slavs of which Russians are a subgroup are Indo European speakers who lived in the Pripet Marshes. Groups from this original cluster lived to the West as far as the Elbe and North to Kaliningrad where a Slavic tribe the Prossen (Germanized Prussia) made their home, South to Kiev and north of the Danube. Between the 1st and 4th centuries they were pushed from all sides and in some cases they pushed back. From the East it was the Goth and Visigoth, from the South Romans , from the North Vikings. As these tribes moved through they left their genetic mark on each other.
Much of what you write is valid . The Slavs were attacked from the East by the Goth and Visigoth, Mongols, Tatars, Volgars (Bulgars) and so on. Ivan the Great opened the gates into Siberia when his army defeated the Golden Horde that hemmed the Slavs in on this side of the Urals. Once the Yoke was lifted it took 100 Cossacks to take most of Siberia from the Mongol khans. From the South they were attacked by the Greeks, Romans and Turks as well as Britain and France. Defeating some assimilating others they expanded to the B lack Sea.
As the Germanic tribes moved through Rome and displaced the Celtic people along the way they pushed the Slavs East from the Elbe assimilating some and expelling others like the Serbs, Croats and other Slavic people who moved to the Balkans. Another wave of invasions from the East split (Hungarians) the Slavs between North and South . After the Schism the Roman Catholic crusades split off the Western Slavs. It was these continuous crusades and attacks Eastward that allowed the Eastern Slavs to gain territory in the West,
That would be true of all Empires of the past.The British Empire owned 25% of the World in it’s “glory” days.Today the US,after a century of bloodily seizing half a continent for themselves as “manifest destiny”.Seeks a neo-colonialist control over the entire globe.At least the vast majority of Russia’s territorial additions were mostly done through assimilation in the East.And in the West as a “gathering” of lands,once Russian,and lost to invaders in the past.
If you continue to refuse to call out the Jews for their collective crimes, you simply abet them by being an ineffective voice for peace.
There was a program on Cross Talk last season where Peter had two academics on his show. One from the University of Chicago and I don’t remember the other one.
Anyways, this Professor from Chicago stated that he had done his doctoral thesis with a lot of the neocons so influential today and what he said was very illuminating.
He said most of the neocons were descendants of Russian jews that fled to the US in the 19th century and that hatred for Russia that the emigres brought with them has been passed down through the generations.
They hate Russians in particular and slavs in general.
Its like the want revenge today for supposed wrongs done more than a century ago.
If you wish to hear the bitterest essence of Zionazi Russophobic hatred, listen to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s ‘Media Report’ from 5 March, and the hate rant, the lie-fest, the demented (just listen to the maniac’s voice) hypocrisy of a ‘Treasure’ called Ben Judah. Hatred is their life-blood.
The Soviet Union was a creation of the Modern West. It was funded by “International Shylocks”. Much more so than N.S Germany. The Modern West hated and hates Russia because of her sincere (Orthodox) Christian faith. That is why they instigated the Bolshevik revolution and the USSR persecuted religion. The purpose of the USSR was to weaken Russia and cultivate deep seated hatred between Russia and her neighbors in Europe and in Asia. After they collapsed their own creation, you can see what a mess Russia was left with. But they have their plans and God has his and God is the best of Planners!
N.S Germany was a “rebel” from the Modern West and she taught the Germans a lesson they would never forget. It is a shame that the N.S Germans did not study eschatology more seriously.
There is a series of books written by Anthony Sutton that shows how Wall Street financed the October revolution, thinking that once in power, the revolutionaries would let them access Russia’s vast natural mineral wealth for a song. They did not realise that Lenin and co and other ideas once in power.
That is why Lenin was so dismissive of capitalists saying they would sell you the same rope today that you will hang them with tomorrow.
While a research fellow at Stanford University he access to state department records that dealt with the October revolution and the lead up to it and wrote several books that exposed how Wall street had financed the Revolution”
Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution
Online version:
http://link-address.com“>Name of your link
Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution
I don’t vouch for the website just read the online book
You can also read his book on how Wall Street financed Hitler:
Wall Street and the rise of Hitler:
Online version
Wall Street and the rise of Hitler
First time posting. Great source of information and excellent analysis.
I think it’s fairly settled history now that Neville Chamberlain was not an appeaser. He actually looked to Germany to solve the USSR’s threat to Western elites. For many years he and his entourage encouraged Hitler to turn to the East, encouraged aggression toward Russia while denying an effective entente that would bind Russia in with France and Britain.
He and the British power structure collaborated with Hitler. It wasn’t merely appeasement. The fly in the ointment was that between Russia and Germany were a bunch of near fascist countries (Poland notably) whom the British did not want subsumed hegemonically into Germany. This was the sticking point where Chamberlain effectively caught up with Churchill. Both were admirers of fascism. But Churchill realised sooner that Germany was capable of outclassing Britain and threatening its own interests, particularly in India and the Near East.
Why this is relevant to your post is that it is simply a truism that Russian victory was a cataclysm to the British ruling class. It was intolerable to the Americans who had timed D-Day to, like their entry into WW1, make maximum impact with minimum losses so that they could extend their hegemony. They were deeply frustrated that the Soviet Union hadn’t exhausted itself doing all the heavy lifting by war’s end.
It’s a well of constant resentment that Russia won WW2 against the Germans and one that the Anglosphere deals with in its usual manner, by giving the reality of the SU’s dominance in WW2 zero air in their media, their history books (in which you will get the impression that the SU, although fighting the largest land battles ever fought, was somehow a junior partner) or their ceremonies. Narcissistic cultures don’t do sober assessments and certainly don’t share truths that they think diminish them with their citizens.
But the spitfire did have the most delightful wing shape of any fighter in the war – and that’s something.
No, Churchill did not want anything to do with the Germans aside from their complete eradication. This goes back to WW1 and Churchill’s part in the Admiralty of the Royal Navy. Chamberlain on the other hand, was not seeking peace but just time so the UK could build up their forces which were in a terrible state during the 30’s compared to the Continental powers.
Although the Spitfire was a thing of beauty, owing it’s lines to the The Schneider Trophy winning S.6B entry of Mitchell, it was the Yak 3 and 9 which the German Pilots were told to stay clear of on the Eastern Front. Until the Americans started using England as a unsinkable Aircraft Carrier against the Germans, The Western Front was sparsely defended by the Luftwaffe as the Brits idn’t pose much of a threat to them.
The denials of Soviet contribution to both theaters of WW2 by the other powers is condescending and the subsequent hubris which rears its ugly head now days as a result leads to very stupid ideas Geo-politically.
Ironic that is was for the same reasons that led to the war against Germany in the late 30’s that we are seeing happen again today against Russia and her BRICS partners. The move away from Western Oligarchy / Parasitical Finance. May this time be more successful. Not looking forward to TTIP and TPP, the hall marks or real Fascism as opposed to the Hollywood version.
Yes this thesis was developped and based on substantial evidence by Alvin Finkel and another author in the remarkable book “In our Time”. The politics of leaving Hitler “free hand in the east” are the key to understand the apparently incoherent stands of the british elite politicians.
Appeasement is a too soft concept. It suppose ignorance of Hitler’s real goals. It was instead a very calculated strategy to destroy SSSR.
I guess this not as off topic as I thought, but I’ve just recently noticed the semi-swastika embedded in the NATO star/compass-rose. Also, the NATO/OTAN banners at the Wales summit had me thinking of Wotan. http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pictures/graphics_banners/260814-banner-wales-summit-376.jpg Notice the swastika in the center of the Celtic knot? I’ll throw this in the mix: http://newcoldwar.org/death-wotan-extremist-militias-ukraine/
The anti-Russian agenda of the Anglo-American elites predates the 20th century. Brzezinski quotes the great grandfather of Geo-politics, Halford Mackinder, in The Grand Chessboard. Most of the history of the 20th century can be understood as the working of the West (Great Britain/USA) to keep Germany and Russia from forming a meaningful partnership lest they lose control of the World Island (Eurasia).
One prominent German said the NS had turned the swastika in the wrong direction. “Es bewegt sich falsch”, he said. The proper swastika should turn to the right, according to him. Some say “Sieg heil” was a perverted form of the old “Heil und Sieg. Another way of turning things around and a possible indication of occultism.
The NATO version also turns to the left. I have been suspicious of NATO/OTAN for years. Read it backwards. In the UK, Battenberg became Mountbatten (berg means mount). I wonder if Steiner ever talked talked about these things.
Indeed. The ancient swastika brings luck, the Nazi swastika defeat.
Yes, Steiner tried to educate his followers in this regard, during and after the war. I’ve been mining this seam the last year and a half. Terry Boardman has done great research incorporating Steiner’s indications on the workings of hidden (“occult”) groups influencing world events. If your interested you can check out his website http://threeman.org/ and many of his lectures are recorded and available on YouTube. Best wishes.
Thanks Anthroposophe, I am a Christian, but I have Steiner in high regard. I visited a Steiner center in the beginning of the 1970s. A young autistic boy started singing when I played the guitar and that was my reward. Everybody was amazed. After that, all my children got to hear childrens stories, as in the 19th century, that I made up and they all got music. One of them studied at a Walldorf school.
I still remember what happened to the first Goetaunum. Steiner knows how the fire started.
Alles gute.
Swastikas are everywhere in India. “Swastika or Swastik, Toothpaste, Hotels, Restaurants etc’.
It is an ancient Hindu symbol. It’s not quite the same as the Nazi one though. Interesting history to it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika
They’ve been in full control since they were brought in right after ww ii under opn paperclip.
they’re so arrogant & smug about it they just thumb their nose in our face every chance.
u must have heard of this one? articles on it everywhere. this from 2007.
note though they intentionally did not change it at all despite being outed, because the image is from google 2014!
note also it is the modern nazi swastika ie not the ancient symbol going back untold thousands of years to india, because the arm ends are twisted opposite way.
CORONADO, Calif. — The U.S. Navy has decided to spend as much as $600,000 for landscaping and architectural modifications to obscure the fact that one its building complexes looks like a swastika from the air.
The four L-shaped buildings, constructed in the late 1960s, are part of the amphibious base at Coronado and serve as barracks for Seabees.
From the ground and from inside nearby buildings, the controversial shape cannot be seen. Nor are there any civilian or military landing patterns that provide such a view to airline passengers.
But once people began looking at satellite images from Google Earth, they started commenting on blogs and websites about how much the buildings resembled the symbol used by the Nazis.
articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/26/local/me-swastika26
https://www.google.com.au/maps/@32.676185,-117.157184,205m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en
Thanks for the tip. I live in San Diego and always get a weird feeling when I’m on the beach at Coronado and the Navy planes fly over.
You see swastikas pointing both ways in Hindu iconography and in Buddhist too, I seem to recollect. A very ancient symbol, something to do with matter coming into existence, if I recall correctly.
This is Preparata’s basic thesis.
He also writes quite a lot about secret societies and clubs and their role in Britain (and of some pals in Germany, getting friendly with Hitler via occult clubs; Hitler was interested in teh occult and was quite malleable in this area) in the political maneuverings of elites of the British Empire in decline, and the choice of the swastika as the Nazi symbol. The Brits who were giving Hitler the Obama treatment (find puppet and make of him a “leader”) spent quite a lot of time and effort reviewing the options among runish symbols that were floating around, like Madison Avenue logoteers, and chose the swastika for a bunch of reasons, can’t recall them all, but the direction of the arms was relevant to something. THis is all per Preparata, I have no independent info on this. But someone chose this symbol, and I don’t think it was Hitler.
BTW, the “attacks” of 9/11 on the Pentagon took place exactly 60 years after ground was broken for the it. Off factoid.
Katherine
England was the only instigator and plotter of world wars one and two just like cold war one and now two.
Sorting England would be sorting Chaos and wars out of existence from this world.
Wrong from start to finish. Very disappointing, Saker.
1) “Could it be that one of the key factors motivating the West’s apparently illogical and self-defeating desire to constantly confront Russia is simply revanchism for WWII?”
[Revanchism (ruh-vanch, noun): the policy of a state intent on regaining areas of its original territory that have been lost to other states as a result of war, a treaty signed under duress, etc.]
No, Saker, it could not. There is little to no Russian physical territory to roll back. NATO and the EU have advanced eastwards by vast distances.
Metaphorically, there is precious little Russian ‘conceptual’ territory to roll back: even Putin was a staunch neo-liberal, trying to integrate into the Euro-Atlantic system as late as 2014.
Russia’s Central Bank is neo-liberal and Euro-Atlanticist.
Putin’s BRICS vision is still astonishingly neo-liberal in conception: using the same tools and models as the existing system, but with BRICS power-brokers instead of Wall Street power brokers.
1/4 of Russia’s wealthiest oligarchs are Jews, most of them resident in Israel. Not exactly ‘Mir’ and ‘Nashi’, is it?
2) “There is plenty of evidence that both the US and the UK were key backers of Hitler’s rise to power”
No. Not entire countries. of the US and the UK’s banking, political and industrial establishments: both pro- and anti-Zionist alike, and for different reasons and objectives. (E.g., the Zionists often gave funds in order to secure German Jews’ emigration to Palestine. E.g., American industrialist Henry Ford was a strong supporter of Hitler – and also a vocal and tireless opponent of Jewish power.)
Churchill himself wrote that Hitler sealed his own fate in the mid-1930s when he took control of the German currency back into German state hands from the ‘bankers’ i.e. Ashkenazi Jews.
Woodrow Wilson was persuaded, by his Jewish advisors, to provide vast funds to the new Bolshevik junta in Russia. Wall Street’s Jewish bankers (Baruch, for example) were instrumental in financing Russia’s Bolshevik Government as the Russian Civil War raged, and long into the 1920s. The Holodomor, and the Purges, and the gulags, were all built on Wall Street finance – to a great degree, at least.
3) “Their entire war effort was, at most, 20% of what it took to defeat Nazi Germany.”
I seem to recall that the USA and British Empire also fought the Empires of Italy and Japan. Perhaps your history books omit the Atlantic, Pacific, North African and Mediterranean campaigns. Or the considerable material aid given to Russia. Or perhaps you’re obsessed with Nazis. They make for a convenient boogeyman, rather like ManBearPig.
Russia aided Nazi Germany more than any other country, until 1941. German tankers trained in Russia during the 1930s, for example. The two countries’ leaders conspired to divide Poland. Etc.
4) “And is it not true that the Anglos did engage in secret negotiations with Hitler’s envoys on several occasions?”
And is it not true that you have forgotten the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact? And the German-Soviet Boundary and Friendship Treaty of September 28, 1939? And the German-Soviet Commercial Agreement of 1940? And the German–Soviet Border and Commercial Agreement of 1941?
Also: I recall that Rudolf Hess was rewarded with his attempts to negotiate peace by being imprisoned for life, in defiance of all diplomatic norms. (Or more accurately, shot in the head in the basement of London’s Reform Club; but let us stick to ‘official’ history’.)
You have stepped into the gutter, Saker. Say hello to Eric Zuesse while you are there.
Your reading of Russia as “neo-liberal” is inaccurate. Neo-liberalism refers to a particular set of policies that became orthodox dogma in leading circles in the West (and by extension the world, sans PRC) during the early 80s onwards. If you are insinuating that Russia is part of the Western capitalist elite, then you are dead wrong. Russia is a late, latecomer to the global capitalist system. The privileged regions of the world in this arrangement are: a) USA, b) the rest of the Anglophone world, c) Western Europe, d) Japan. South Korea and Taiwan used to be a part of this arrangement, but once the Cold War against Communism had been won, there was a lesser need for them. In short, while Russia (and China) may be nominally capitalist today (the case of China is far more complex than that if we are being honest) they are definitely not part of the privileged Western clique. In fact, they are the primary obstacles to the domination of the planet by the traditional imperialist powers. So, we must be able to distinguish between the capitalism of the West (exploitative) and the capitalism of the BRICS (counter to the exploitative capitalism of the West*)
While Russia is indeed a capitalist country for 25 years now, it does not mean that the West is OK with Russia. The West is anything but. In fact, the West is even more hostile to the capitalist Russia of today, than they ever were against the USSR in the post-war period.
As to your remarks about WWII.
The USSR was far and away the biggest contributor in the defeat of the Nazi powers. While you are correct to point out that the Americans did most of the fighting against the Japanese and provided most of the material for the Chinese (who actually had most of the Japanese Army pinned down in mainland China. The US Army did not face but a fraction of the Japanese Army in its successful war in the Pacific)
The Germans had 93% of their KIA on the Eastern Front. 80% of their casualties, but 93% of their dead (very crucial distinction)
Keep also in mind, that the Germans were not alone on the Eastern Front. You have to also add the Finns, Hungarians, Italians, Romanians, Croatians and Slovakians. There were also many fascist volunteers from the rest of Europe, like the Francoist Blue Division, fascists from France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Scandinavia, Boznia, the Baltic countries etc etc etc. From some of these countries, there were also communists who fought with the USSR, but not in equal numbers. Another extremely crucial aspect of WWII that is often overlooked is that as Germany occupied almost the whole of Europe, they had at their disposal colossal productive resources. Put simply, Nazi Germany threw almost everything that Europe had against the USSR.
It is also true that the US provided the USSR with considerable supplies, but not as great as it sometimes claimed. Help to the USSR through lend-lease, was about 10% to maximum 12% of Soviet output, considerable, but not as great as suggested by some anti-Soviet historians, and surely much less than it should have been. Especially useful was the provision of food, radios and Studabaker trucks. The tanks provided by the British and Americans were of extremely poor quality (much worse than the T-34, KV-1, IS 1/2/3 or anything the Germans had) but at least were better than nothing. In fact, the Soviets used the American tanks for training and for the least important battles, mostly.
You also fail to recognize that the defeat of Japan was also partly down to Russian efforts**. You can watch this American documentary (despite the British voiceover) on the most crushing defeat suffered by the Japanese in WWII: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBuMDG2TvcY
*When I claim that Western capitalism is “exploitative” what I mean is that it is exploitative in relation to the rest of the world, which the West still likes to treat as colonies. Chinese and Russian capitalism may also be exploitative in the strictly Marxist sense of extracting a surplus from the working class etc, but it is not operating at the expense of other countries. This is a most crucial difference that many leftist critics of both Russia and China tend to completely miss.
**Yet another reason (as if there were not dozens already) for the PRC to ally strongly with Russia in the ongoing war between Russia and the West.
Bear in mind we must think in terms of capitalitmS. Google it. The Australian govt has a project for the study of capitalismS.
All of these heated arguments about capitalism and who is an is not one are pointless if they are premised on capitalism’s being one pure color (or, lack of it, to be precise) in a black and white universe. Think spectrum. Or Venn diagram.
Katherine
I forgot to mention something:
“A quick survey or articles written by Jewish authors in the US and British press during much of the 20th century clearly shows that most Jews had little to no sympathy not only for pre-Revolutionary Russia, but also for the post-Trotsky USSR and that even though the USSR fully supported the creation of the state of Israel, many if not most US and European Jews felt that the Soviet Union was also a threat to their interests.”
That must have been a very quick survey indeed.
As Putin himself stated, 80% of the First Soviet was Jewish. You trust Putin’s word, don’t you? (I can vouch for the accuracy of his statement, but don’t let that put you off him.)
And, as I noted in my earlier comment: Wall Street did much to keep the Soviet Union afloat during the 1920s and 1930s. American financial institutions were hostile to Russia; most of the American funds that the USSR received came from Jewish bankers.
American food aid and grain sales to the USSR prevented the Bolsheviks’ collapse: Woodrow Wilson’s Jewish advisors were the sole reason that these exports were allowed. They lobbied Wilson hard until he changed his (feeble) mind.
Soviet and Jewish enmity grew only after Israel’s foundation in 1948. Well after Stalin’s death, in fact, when the USSR began supplying ‘monkey model’ weaponry to the Arab world. (I use the Russian term meaning degraded weapon systems lacking key refinements reserved for the Warsaw Pact. E.g. selling tanks without fully-specified packages of armor or fire control systems.)
History showed – repeatedly – that this was just enough (second-tier) weaponry to keep the Arabs tied to one of the Superpowers, without truly threatening Israel’s massive qualitative military edge.
Until 1948, Jews were treated as First Class citizens in the USSR, all other religions and ethnicities subordinate to them. Stalin – the arch murderer – made anti-Semitism punishable by death. He himself said so. This death sentence for merely expressing anti-Jewish thoughts came at a time when domestic violence, bar fights, or child-beating would merely arouse the indifference of the Soviet police authorities.
The USSR’s Jewish citizens enjoyed their own Jewish Oblast – a prototype for Israel.
Jews were given privileged emigration status, allowing them to leave for Israel when other religious groups remained trapped in the USSR.
Stalin’s loyalties could not be clearer; he was even married to three Jewesses in a row. That isn’t chance. That’s a closet Jew.
Saker, you have lost it.
The reasons behind why “…most Jews had little to no sympathy… for the post-Trotsky USSR” is one of the topics touched on by the document I linked to above.
Haha, there is clearly a Freudian revelation in your alias. Whatever “intelligence” you might have possessed is gone forever, hence “Ex-Inteligence”.
On a more serious note, your real problem is actually two-fold. Firstly, Western so-called “analysts” are simply paid to produce propagandistic blather in defence of the powers that be. Secondly, the West is deteriorating all along the line, leaving its bought-and-paid-for analysts with few options other than to regurgitate old worthless tripe learned by rote accompanied by plain braggadocio. Saker is dead right that the Western elites — with their ingrained sense of entitlement to other peoples’ natural resources and labour output based on 500+ years of global rampage — don’t take lightly to “inferior” countries, peoples, and rulers causing serious trouble. Russia and China with their current, able leaderships make a huge difference. The Western imperialist bourgeoisie is made up of very class-conscious people, knowing their class interests to a T even if their pathetic analysts most likely do not.
@The USSR’s Jewish citizens enjoyed their own Jewish Oblast – a prototype for Israel.
Good point. The only thing was that the Jews wanted more and better. They wanted a Jewish Soviet Republic (at least Autonomous) in Ukraine and Crimea in nice warm climate, not near the permafrost. That is why they revolted against Stalin and finally busted him. To refresh memories, strangely deficient when they come close to the matter:
“… a memorandum presented in the summer of 1944 by members of the Committee to the Soviet leadership containing a proposal to create a Jewish Soviet republic in the *Crimea (the Tatar population of which was exiled by Stalin by May 1944) on the territory of the former German republic of the Volga. Noting the successes of the Jewish national regions in the Crimea and in the Kerson region, the authors of the memorandum based their proposal on the lack of a geographical base of a significant part of the Jewish population of the Soviet Union and on the need to grant the Jews equality in governmental-legal terms with the other nationalities of the Soviet Union. They also expressed the hope that “the Jewish masses of all countries, in particular the United States would give substantial aid” to building up such a republic. Despite the rumors that some members of the Politburo of the Central Committee ( Lazar *Kaganovich and Vyacheslav Molotov) were favorably disposed toward the idea of the “Crimean Plan,” it was rejected in 1944…
” Projects for establishing a Jewish republic in the southern Ukraine or in the Crimea had been suggested earlier. For example, in 1923 the social leader A. Bragin had proposed that one be established on the Black Sea coast from Bessarabia to Abkhaz with its capital in Odessa, while Yuri *Larin supported, in opposition to the Birobidzhan plan, a Jewish autonomous area in the southern Crimean and Azov region centered in Kerch”.
Now, it would be hard not to think that these projects were a revamping of other earlier projects of creating a Jewish state in Ukraine:
“The League of East European States or Federation of East European States (German: osteuropäischer Staatenbund) was a political idea conceived during World War I for the establishment of a buffer state (Pufferstaat) within the Jewish Pale of Settlement of Russia, , which would be a de facto protectorate of the German Empire in Mitteleuropa.
The idea was conceived by prominent Zionist Max Bodenheimer. Bodenheimer was a founder of the German Committee for Freeing of Russian Jews. The Committee drew up a plan to establish a buffer state between Germany and Russia, created from territory to be taken from Imperial Russia. It would be a federation of Poles, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians but “the Germans, and Jews would hold the power”. According to this plan, the new state should be a monarchy ruled by the Hohenzollern dynasty.
Bodenheimer submitted a Memorandum with the proposal to the German Foreign Office in 1914, where it and the Committee received the support of Erich Ludendorff and then Paul von Hindenburg.
The plan soon proved unpopular with other German officials and Bodenheimer’s Zionist colleagues, and was dead by the following year. The Poles were not very keen on the plan either.
The idea was criticized by various Zionist leaders as impractical and dangerous, and eventually was given up after Wilhelm II of Germany and Franz Joseph of Austria issued the Act of November 5th 1916 in which they proclaimed the creation of the Kingdom of Poland”. (Wikipedia).
And what happens now?
Israel’s Secret Plan for a «Second Israel» in Ukraine
Wayne MADSEN | 03.12.2014 | 10:04@http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/12/03/israel-secret-plan-for-second-israel-in-ukraine.html:
“One of the main reasons why Ukrainian Jewish billionaire tycoon Ihor Kolomoisky, the governor of Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk province and citizen of Ukraine, Israel, and Cyprus, is spending tens of millions of dollars on the recruitment of right-wing Ukrainian nationalists and neo-Nazis from other parts of Europe to fight against the Russian-speaking majority in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine, is a fear that plans to turn Ukraine into a «second Israel» will be derailed. Russia’s protective measures for the Donbass, as well as its incorporation by referendum of Crimea, the latter prized by the resurgent Khazarian Jewish nationalists, threaten the transformation of Ukraine into a second homeland for Ashkenazi Jews who are finding their hold on Israel prime tenuous, at best”.
Wouldn’t you think that this is Revanchism?
@ Ex-Intelligence Analyst
I am amazed they even let your comments appear on this site, probably so it wouldn’t always look like a Communist Party Congress. And thinking that other commenters would set you right. Which they couldn’t really do it.
I was thinking Mr or Mrs. Ex-Inteligence was sounding a bit snarky and smug in spots. Genuine truth seekers take a more humble tone.
This is a most interesting thread, and pleasantly absent have been the “you have lost it” “you are obviously a troll” ” you have just revealed yourself as a CIA asset” kind of nonsense and tone that has seemed to be a feature on certain threads. Perhaps those troll seekers are not that interested in this kind of topic.
I am flabbergasted (in a positive way) at the breadth and depth of knowledge of so many commenters. Surely site this is one of the more erudite and informed bits of real estate in cyberspace. So much to read, so little time . . .
Katherine
Practically every so=called “international conflict” has a domestic component—that is, a civil war or major tension within the countries that are at war adn that affects agreements, treaties, alliances. In particular when a revolution is going on. As now (IS etc.), also then. It makes little sense to speak of the Russian Rev. in terms of a monolitlhic “Russia.” There were Bolsheviks and then there were Mensheviks. Ever wonder why the Bolsheviks won? Were they rich? Did they have the military (e.g., Cossacks and other crack troops) on their side? Did they have money to pay troops or mercenaries, or buy ammo and uniforms and food? How come the Bolsheviks won? And cui bono from that? Or, who hoped to bono?
Katherine
As that brilliant commentator Fursov pointed out: the centrality of internal conflict in geopolitics and its exploitabililty by any aggressive power.
1.- Visto desde lejos (Sudamérica), era evidente que los “aliados” (sin la URSS) esperaban el resultado de la confrontación entre la URSS y Alemania para decidir que hacer; y que no era precisamente salvar al mundo del nazismo sino impedir que los soviéticos llegaran al mar mediterráneo.
Pero luego del resultado y hasta ahora, acá nos han inundado constantemente con películas, revistas y medios en general, donde se ignora sistemáticamente el papel de los soviéticos. Hace unos años vi un reportaje de TVE de España (TV publica y en contexto de gobierno “socialista”) sobre la II guerra mundial de mas de una hora donde en ningún momento se menciona a los rusos.
2.- Esta es una guerra permanente entre los piratas, saqueadores, usureros, ladrones, etc., en concomitancia con el Vaticano, y la gente que trabaja honestamente para vivir. Entre los que establecen relaciones humanas de explotación y esclavitud, o de colaboración y equidad. Entre langostas que devoran todo a su paso hasta que no queda nada, y los que cosechan y replantan o reforestan.
3.- Los judíos que han sufrido o muerto en holocaustos, como en el supermercado en Francia (después del “tongo” de charlie hebdo), o los campos de concentración nazi, o la AMIA en Argentina, siempre son personas corrientes, ningún oligarca (igual que el 11-S, el 11-M, y muchos otros)
El pueblo judío es rehén del anticristo.
~~translation ~~
1. Seen from afar (South America), it was clear that the “allies” (without the USSR) awaited the outcome of the confrontation between the USSR and Germany to decide what to do; and it was not exactly save the world from Nazism but to prevent the Soviets reached the Mediterranean Sea.
But then the result and so far, here we have constantly inundated with movies, magazines and media in general, where the role of the Soviets is systematically ignored. A few years ago I saw a report of TVE in Spain (TV publishes and in context of government “socialist”) on the World War II over an hour where the Russians mentioned in no time.
2. This is a permanent war between pirates, robbers, usurers, thieves, etc., in conjunction with the Vatican, and the people who work honestly to live. Among those who establish human relations of exploitation and slavery, or collaboration and equity. Among locusts devouring everything in its path until nothing is left, and those who harvest and replant or reforest.
3. The Jews who suffered or died in holocausts, as in the supermarket in France (after the “Tongo” of hebdo charlie), or Nazi concentration camps, or AMIA in Argentina, are always ordinary people, no oligarch (like 11-S, 11-M, and many others)
The Jewish people are hostage to the antichrist.
Look at Hollywood’s take on this. Not just King Kong and Godzilla, but at least 30 major movies about aliens, another 30 about mutant (usually giant) creatures, mostly insects…… the feared other out to destroy us. Year after year. After about 1980 they calmed down, opponents became ancient familiar symbols — vampires, werewolves, demons, with known means of disposal.
The OTHER. Always monstrous, always out to get us, always defeated by our ( USA, this was Hollywood) superior decency, co-operation, and most importantly MILITARY MIGHT. Sometimes all the way to nuking them.
The OTHER was the USSR. Today Russia. Inaccessible. Undecipherable. Unknowable. The quintessential alien. Paranoia the “logical” response.
1: Cyrillic. We can’t read their news, never mind their literature or history books, to see what they’re thinking, how they see themselves. How do we know there’s not some secret against us?
2: Slav. On the whole, European languages are either Latin or Germanic, English has plundered from both. Even after painstakingly deciphering that weird writing, the words are still unintelligible. What are they whispering about us?
3: White(ish). China and the other “yellow hordes”, Africa and all the “savages” also have scripts and languages we can’t make head or tail of. But at least they have the decency to LOOK DIFFERENT, so we can’t for a moment mistake them for one of us, unsuspectingly treat them as equals.
4: Soul. Every human has a soul. Likely also animals. Russians claim an overarching communal soul that the individual ones hook into. The soul is not of this world so it cannot be defeated by military might. Souls cannot be bought, either, except by the Devil, and that’s not us (despite an occasional vague likeness). The only damage Russia ever suffered she always did to herself.
So that is the “west’s” problem with Russia. Someone just posted a long list of countries who’ve tried to subjugate Russia. It can’t be done. That must be crazymaking for empires that want to expand, to control in order to feel safe..
In my very terse (non-Latin non-Germanic) Hungarian mother tongue
letérdeltetlenek
“they cannot be forced to their knees” [yep all that in one word].
Kat Kan, one of the proposed sites for the origin of the Proto Uralic language, which Hungarian is a descendent is the region around the Ob and Yenisei Rivers. Now inhabited by speakers of Indo European, Uralic and Turkic languages, I’m sure all would be proud to say “letérdeltetlenek” in their own languages.
Yep. Finno-Ugric. Finnish changed so much, not recognisable except for bits of the grammar; the words nearly all Germanic now, while Hungarian picked up a lot of Slav and Turkish (both Ottoman and 1000 years before). So actually there’s quite a few Russian words I do recognise, once I get through the Cyrillic (which I learned only now, for Novorossiyan news). The modern technical words in Russian are the same Latin/Greek root neologisms as everywhere else.
I recently learned that “fake” is a Russian word now. Lol.
There are lots of cognates. Russians have borrowed many words through the years. Which is obviously a very typical process. But for those interested in learning Russian (or any foreign language, for that matter), a good way to get going is to learn as many cognates as possible. Here is a partial list of Russian-English cognates:
аэропорт — airport
бар — bar
брюнет — brunette
бюджет — budget
бюст — bust (sculpture)
видео — video
водка — vodka
гитара — guitar
джинсы — jeans
Джихад — jihad
директор — director
Европа — Europe
журналист — journalist
зебра — zebra
идея — idea
Интернет — Internet
кафе — cafe
класс — class
компьютер — computer
лифт — lift (elevator)
меню — menu
музыка — music
музыкант — musician
номер — number
океан — ocean
опера — opera
парашют — parachute
паспорт — passport
президент — president
радиация — radiation
робот — robot
рокер— rocker
сандали — sandals
секс — sex
студент — student
субъект — subject
телевизор — television
телефон — telephone
ура — hurrah
фильм — film (movie)
футбол — football (soccer)
хоккей — hockey
центр — centre
цирк — circus
чемпион — champion
шоколад — chocolate
шорты — shorts
шофёр — chauffeur
экзамен — exam
юмор — humour
юрист — lawyer
яхта — yacht
Katherine
Thanks a million Katherine!
Hi Saker,
You present a good case and it seems to ring true.
With everything that’s happened in the last few years, IMO, Russophobia has existed and it was only maya, that the west considered Russia a “partner”.
Russophobia, like racism, has always existed in the U.S.
Our entire history is one of domination, submission, and control.
Cheers
I am usually amazed at how insightful I find your analysis but this one sounds off the mark to me. Maybe you do too much projection : you have a good sense of history so you easily think that history matters to other too.
What’s the common patterns as of late with US geopolitics ? US supremacism, either incompetent or malevolent, then ultimately weak. Either they’re totally dumb, historically ignorant, and what goes in that direction is the clear degradation of the elites when you hear them speak vs elderly figures. Either they’re malevolent, the true goal being rampage and chaos. And this works, more or less, although with Russia I think they’ve accomplished the very thing they wanted to avoid.
But at the end on the day you don’t have a russio phobia exclusive. It’s everything that doesn’t bend, really. If it doesn’t bend, they try to crush it. The real new things is that previously, they wouldn’t wait too long before crushing it military. Now they don’t, they didn’t go in Syria and are not really pushing vs Daesh. So maybe it’s just the remnant attitude of “bend or I’ll crush you” that has a hard time to swallow that “actually there is no money for that anymore, sir”.
I would agree with this post, especially the ‘degradation of the elites’ part. I don’t believe those in power since probably the Reagan administration have had an historical memory of WWII at all. They are not governed by what happened in the past – take, for example Obama’s constant refusal to look back at even the accountability of the criminal regime he replaced (or rather perpetuated.) History is anathema to these people – another example is Obama’s refusal to bring FDR or Eleanor Roosevelt into the historical memory of the populace. He goes back as far as Reagan for his memes, and Reagan perpetuated the movie star role, indeed a phony elitism, back beyond which we should not remember.
It seems to me there were plenty of deaths during WWII to go around, and the position of FDR was very similar to that of Lincoln before him facing the real horrors of a real catastrophe. Of course Russia was overwhelmingly historically important against the Nazis in that war. And there were horrors on all sides. Russia was a far different country then. The USSR and Stalin were, not just because of the propaganda, scary. Kruschev pounding his shoe at the UN and saying ‘we will bury you’ was scary.
Times are different now. I remember Hugo Chavez alluding to the devil’s smoke at that same UN. I remember Colin Powell standing in front of a curtained Guernica at that same UN. I remember Adlai Stevenson showing the missile silos under construction in Cuba at that same UN. The moving finger writes, and having written, moves on.
Breaking the Russian Federation is just a sorry step in the neo-world-domination plan of the present day antihistorical oligarchs who consider, like Cheney and a few other antecedents, that they make their own history with shock and awe. It’s why I think they are confounded by Putin’s popularity and the intransigence of the resistance in the Ukraine. They don’t have a sense of history and they can’t believe that even after all their propaganda and threats, other people actually do.
For Finns and for Stalin Finnish-Russo problematic relationship of 1918-44 taught a lot. For instance for Finns that Stalin’s foreign policy was actually much more flexible than believed. And for Stalin that winning “hearts and minds” of Finns seems can be jointed to geopolitical interests. Yes, the border in Karelian Isthmus was too near Leningrad. Yes, Finns were actually less pro-Nazi than former believed (based on documents of German intelligence about Finnish political climate in summer 1944). Amazingly facts that in just few days during September 1944 Finnish Army and Soviet Military Forces co-operated against German forces in both Suursaari (Гогланд) and Finnish Lapland (Лапландия). Finland was not conquerred by Red Army partly because vicious Finnish resistence but mostly because strategic interests of Kreml will be in long run possible with other methods. Stalin debunked pleas of general Govorov – the road to Berlin does not go via Helsinki. Even Henry Kissinger has later admitted this as peace of art of win-win case. The other got off the hook and the other secured its geopolitical interests.
One of the reasons why things are now going in wrong direction might be because there is new generation of politicians in Finland whose knowledge of history of Finnish-Russo issues are – not bad – but too narrow. The idea that history is over and west have won may not be as strong as it was in 1990’s but anyway, we have now that generation of fantasy deep in Finnish political life. And now once again hard facts of realism have to be taught to younger generation. Let’s not be too cruel, they are young and naive. (Let’s not forget that in USA, in Europe and in Russia too there are also some groups who might think that war could be a fun).
Matti, lessens that seem in need to be learned again by a new generation of Finns. The Finnish media in general is pathetic but it seems most see through it. Strange about the current Gov as the foreign minister is quite rational with his stance towards Russia but the Prime Minister, Stubb and the President, not to mention the defense minister…..
It was some of the older Finns I have had discussions with that told me of Stalin’s initial offer to give land in Northern Karelia as compensation to extending the buffer near Leningrad. Something that is over looked with the younger Finns I talk with. Least there still is a healthy showing against NATO in the polling, not like the media and politicians aren’t trying to convince Finns to join though.
Like in the Baltics, the Russo phobia seems to be more in the political and media spheres than with the day to day general public. A recent stay in Riga, Latvia was quite interesting in how people seemed at home with Russian as they were with English or Latvian as languages of use. Eating out in the city center and shopping at stores or the large market near the train station was an eye opener and quite not what I expected.
Pleasantly Surprised.
Also talking with a friend in Kiev yesterday and after dryly adding that “all is ok as the US Cavalry will be coming to save them soon”, my friend that yes, this is a US vs Russia conflict and the feeling is that war is going to get worse. A change from how they perceived the conflict earlier.
For some time I have also wondered the same. Is it a coincidence that a German-led EU attempt to recruit Ukraine happened so soon after the Lisbon Treaty was signed and became EU law? I’ve made the study of Germany into my main interest in my research on ordoliberalism, and I am driven to the view that the EU is trying to do “peacefully” what Hitler failed to do militarily. The EU is increasingly becoming not just an Empire as Barosso said in a moment of of triumphalism after the Czech signature completed the accession of the Czech Republic, but a totalitarian Empire led by Germany. Merkel is not a demagogue like Hitler, that is the only difference.
I will be doing a copy-paste of this post on my EU: the Ramshackle Empire blog in the coming week or so.
The imperialists, at this juncture, hide behind a woman and a black guy — sneaky fellers that they are.
There is quite some truth in your argument about the EU as successor of a Nazi idea.
Wiesenthal reports about a secret meeting in 1944 in Strasbourg, SS leadership and German industry captains discussing the strategy in face of the upcoming defeat. They resolved:
1) The war ist lost for Germany.
2) All resources – in particular the leadership and experts – should move to the South American exile (see Croatian Catholic ratline providing Vatican passports). The others had been picked up by Operation Paperclip.
3) After the defeat, these resources should be used to achieve the goals with economic instead of miltary means.
The SS was a multi-ethnic military organisation along the Habsburg Austrian empire tradition, and Hitler applied an Austrian approach in his geopolitics. That is why the Prussian Reichswehr Generals didn’t like him, and some of them tried to kill him to co-opt with Brittain aginst Soviet Russia. The SS came up in 1944 with a plan of a federal Europe pretty similar to the EU of the 90ies.
I do not think that the N.S Germans and Hitler envisioned the Europe Union as their idea of a federal Europe. Far from it. It would be an insult to Hitler. However the Europe Union is a millder form of the USSR. Some call it the EUSSR.
The “NS Germans” and Hitler have not been homogenous at all, and the SS had their own specific character as a pseudo-religious death-cult (see “Black Sun”). Hitler tried to offer the British Empire a joint venture in sharing world domination, leaving the Commonwealth to the Empire. As with the Wilhelm II attempts to appease the British Empire for allowing the Bagdad Bahn project, no way. Europe has to be splitted and isolated from the Eurasian land mass, this is stille the core principle for the British long term policy (yes, Ukraine).
The entire fake “3rd Reich” had strong internal contradictions – the bourgeois “Konservative Revolution” hating the Weimar Republic and profitting from looting the Jewish assets and the occupied territories, the anarcho-syndicalist SA becoming eliminated as being incompatible with the imperalist agendas, the Prussian Reichswehr disdaining the ‘Austrain private’, the US investments of the 20ies in German industries supporting the mobilization (Prescott Bush) and receiving US federal compensations for war damages on their properties in Germany after 45. Of course, the Nazi idea for ruling greater Europe in an arrangement with the British Empire did not envision the – however still quite limited – democratic structures of the EU. But it had no problems with a multi-ethnic federalism – remember, Czechoslovakia has been the only democratic republic between WW I and WW II, being trashed firstly, and the rest of continental Europe had been ruled by fascist dictators cooperating more or less with Nazi Germany (and Mosley in UK had quite some support as well, not to mention “Patrie, travaille, famille” in Vichy France).
Yes, the Nazis had their plans, but another force was also at work. Count Richard Nikolaus von Coudenhove-Kalergi was a mason who worked for a united Europe.in the 1920s. He was supported by some influential Americans.
“[…] he co-founded the Pan-European Union (PEU) with Archduke Otto von Habsburg, as “the only way of guarding against an eventual world hegemony by Russia””
“[…] he came through Baron Louis de Rothschild in contact with Max Warburg who offered to finance his movement for the next 3 years giving him 60,000 gold marks”
“His original vision was for a world divided into only five states”
“with English serving as world language”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nikolaus_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi
Thanks a lot pointing mit to this interesting personality. Of course, the EU is not a Nazi German creation, and has a strong positive current within its ambivalent development. In particular, the practical implementation of a “Locarno from the grass roots” in particular by the Erasmus programme (see the interesting web site geab.eu) is one of the few and very important assets of contemporary Europe for a humane development in a world who’s leaders seem to think in Hobbe’s categories only.
The potential compatibility with the Nazi ideas of Europe is an important caveat, as you can see in the idiocy of Brussels Ukraine policy. Another one, and IMHO a real danger, is its size and power. Leopold Kohr points out this general issue convincingly, and this danger Europe still has to master. A potential solution could be the old structure of the first Reich – a travelling Kaiser negotiating with small and medium quite independent local emperors in a diverse European space for political coordination. Such a weakness could be a real strength for a good future.
Jim: An interesting link here to the actual Nazi planning of the EU-creation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yONSTDDNYc EU AS 4TH REICH AT 25
Saker. I think we overestimate Obama. He is just a figure without practically real power. Look what Nethanyau is doing to him right now, challenging him in his own backyard so you can guess who the ones really on charge are. To me they are more frightening since they rule from behind (they hide) and move the threads then pretend that it was someone else.
I must wade in on this!
I saw 9/11 happen (the second plane crashing into WTC1/2) with my very own eyes on television on 9/11/2001, but I still don’t know exactly what happened on that day. What I do know that the US narrative on 9/11 is full of sh*t. And I know that WTC7 could not have collapse the way it did without some very heavy controlled demolition being done to it (WTC7 was an extremely structurally fortified because of where it stood…). Such an operation is not possible in less than 8 hours (I am a professional mechanical engineer). So, I know from engineering deduction that there was fore-knowledge and pre-planning prior to 9/11/2001.
Now, as I wasn’t around during WW2, I really don’t know what happened before, during and after WW2. But what I can say is that much of our collective “knowledge” and “awareness” of WW2 is pure bullshit! Much of it is just pure Hollywood bullshit and propaganda, i.e., re-educational movies about the Holocaust (fictional Schindler’s List) and Yankee heroism (Saving Private Ridiculous), which is extremely effective and extremely pervasive.
What I do know is that the Victors write the narrative, and they have been doing it throughout history. There is a very poignant scene in the British propaganda movie Gandhi where Ben Kingsley is talking about how throughout history there are tyrants but good always triumphs or some bullshit like that. It is pure bullshit! In one honestly studies “history” even the narratives that are handed down to us, most of this “history” are won by tyrants, dictators, and pure Evil.
So having state the above, I must say that I cannot agree with what the Saker wrote above, simply because he is spouting the Soviet narrative.
People of Good Will can disagree on certain things and still fight the good fight!
[If you look near the bottom of the side bar on the front page, you’ll find a very comprehensive 9/11 section.]
They say history is written by the victors. But that is not true. The losers write their own version (in which usually they are the victims). Thus having two opposing versions, in which both parties are totally justified in everything they did (in theirs) and badly done by/up to betrayed (in the other’s version) you get a guarantee they’ll never have real peace. One side will keep festering, the other keep crowing, until it breaks out again. Either side may solicit help from others in the same boat they’ve placed themselves in. They or third parties may but in and take advantage and twist the version for their own ends. Just look at a simple single event like Holodomor, how many ways that can be exaggerated and twisted?
In some countries collective awareness is indeed from propaganda films. In some countries history is studied very seriously in great detail (but of course only from their side, and theatres they were not involved in may rate barely a mention).
Even at a simple car smash, 10 witnesses may have 8 versions. Ever more so in a war with 1000’s of witnesses, and then analyzing why, who thought what, the “real” truth is not available. The “real” truth does not even exist. It may have been (and I prefer this one) that numerous layers and trends came together, to create a spark that caused la fire which not be stopped.
Or look at it like the Swiss Cheese theory of accidents. Each action moves one slice of Swiss Cheese, independently, until holes line up that go through the whole block. That hole is what allows the accident or war. ANY one slice moved differently would have prevented the clear pathway for the event.
The Saker is Russian. It would be odd for him to have a Japanese or Canadian point of view. He runs a blog where people with those views can turn up and give their side, ie what they believe to be the truth. Each holds only 1 or 2 slices of the cheese. If we add them together, layer by layer, and find a combination that leaves the hole, we’re close to the “real” reality.
Did the west plan for nazi Germany to destroy the USSR? Well gee gosh golly darn, could that be the reason they refused to open a second front until the USSR was clearly winning anyway? Revelation!
Look around, they specialize in creating Golems to do their dirty work
Here a bit of post-war history in support of your arguments:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_%28World_War_II_aftermath%29
I will not mention the well known names who were helped do escape
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratlines_%28World_War_II_aftermath%29#Ratline_escapees),
but look up Aribert Heim. He was practically evil incarnate and perhaps even more vile than Mengele.
There is much more to it than the English (or the German) Wikipedia mentions, but most of the more comprehensive sources are in German language. (The English sources that are named by Wikipedia are awfully superficial).
Now compare this to how the Don Cossacks who had escaped to Austria were treated:
http://www.fluchtwege.eu/geschichte-19.html
On the other hand, one can make a nice argument which explains everything by current geopolitical situation and interests of the arms industry in a convincing bogey man. But then, the question remains: Why is it that just this bogey man seems to be convincing? What became of the “Yellow Peril” and “Islamofacism”?
There is so much more to it, but I have not the time to translate it. Here just one aspect: How some of them were send into Arabic countries (instead of Latin America) with a little bit of their friends (influence agents anyone?):
“1953 kam Gamal Abd al-Nasir (Nasser) in Ägypten an die Macht und bat die CIA um Hilfe bei der Reorganisierung des ägyptischen Geheimdienstes. Jedoch hielt es die US-Regierung für politisch höchst unklug, ihm direkt zu helfen (so der CIA-Agent Miles Copeland in seinen Memoiren, zit. n. Martin A. Lee: The Swastika & the Crescent. In: Intelligence Report, Spring 2002, Issue 105). Daher wandte sich der frischgebackene CIA-Chef Allen Dulles an seinen Schützling Reinhard Gehlen (der ab 1947 de facto – wenn auch unter neuem Namen – mit alten Kameraden die einstige Abwehrabteilung „Fremde Heere Ost“ in Pullach bei München wiederaufbaute), der ihm den diensteifrigen [Otto] Skorzeny vermittelte. Dieser installierte, finanziert durch den CIA, in Ägypten eine Gruppe von insgesamt über 100 Altnazis als Berater, Ausbilder und Propagandisten.”
(Sorry, no time to translate, awfully busy these days). Just a few names: Hans Eisele (Egypt), Aribert Heim (Egypt), Johann von Leers (Egypt), Joachim Deumling (Egypt), Otto-Ernst Remer (Egypt, Syria), Alois Brunner (Syria), Leopold von Mildenstein (Egypt), Hartmann Lauterbach (Oman), Walther Rauff (until 1949 Syria), Emil Gelny (Syria, Iraq), Leopold Gleim und Louis Heiden.
Dear Saker,
i partly agree with you but would like to encourage you to not focus on WW2. In fact it’s been – at least – the 3rd WW. The 1st has been the Seven Years War (7YW, 1754 – 1763). And, more important, the 7YW is a major turning point in regards of relationship between the (still) rising (both sides of Atlantic) Anglo-Saxon Empire and Germany (Prussia). The 7YW has been the last time anglo-saxons and germans (prussians) fought together (against former Austria and Russia). Thereafter, until nowadays, the Anglo-Saxon Empire always used Germany (of all types: Holy Roman Empire, Empire (Kaiserreich), 3rd Reich and Federal Republik of Germany (Deutschland as of now)) to fight and conquer Russia.
I agree with you, russophobia is jewish driven and, of course, it started in the beginnng of the 20th century. But, but, religion doesn’t matter. It never interessted the 1% in what religion the subjects confirmed. The only point of interesst always has been – keeping them as subjects. If some stupid people of eastern Europe for no reason fear Russia, the Anglo-Saxons didn’t care if they are jewish, christian or buddhistical. The important aspect has been (and still is) – russophobia. Nevertheless, the people believing in a jewish kind of god for a very long time played a special role in the rising Anglo-Saxon Empire: the anglo-saxons used the jewish people to succesfully implement their empire of chaos some 80 years ago in the western part of the roman province Palestine.
If there is anybody thinking the jewish got to (the roman province) Palestine by themselves – wrong! Completly wrong! Zionism is an invention of Oliver Cromwell (scotish anglo-saxon) some 400 years ago. Zionism has nothing to do with jewish faith. It’s just a main principle. It’s the principle of installtion of chaos. It’s the groundwork for Divide et Impera (the german/latin notion is more precise than the english Divide and Rule).
In regard to the history of russophobia the jewish people have been misused like the little russians are misused nowadays (another implementation of the same zionist main principle). The jewish (in nowadays Israel) like the little russians in nowdays Little Russia (you call it Ukraine, but some 250 years ago the region has been known all over Europe as Little Russia, north-west of New Russia/Novorussia) are just puppets of the zionist main principle. Even someone like Netanyahu is just a pit bull of the Anglo-Saxons. BTW, as you mentioned Hitler: he, too, has been just a puppet of them, regardsless of his religion or not religion. (That doesn’t mean he or the germans aren’t guilty!)
The germans have been misused in absolutly the same way – they just didn’t recognize it. As stated above zionism and the rise of the Anglo-Saxon Empire (both sides of the Atlantic) are not only the same but do have a very long history (multiple centuries). Just imagine World War1 and World War2 (and all the little wars in between, many of them against Russia already) as just one war lasting some 30 years (1914 until end of 1944/beginning of 1945). Thus: there is no such thing like WW2 or WW1. It’s just a second Thirty Years War. Like the 1st one (1618 – 1648) the main purpose of the 2nd one has been to transform the germans into subjects (Untertanen) and, and to pilot/master them against Russia (what they typically, not only for geographical reasons, refused to do). Well, the winner take’s it all and not only dictates the urban legends of WW1 and WW2 as socalled history, but even succeeded in tranforming germany and the germans into subjects.
The problem with (the notion) WW2 or WW1 is, that just by refering to WW2 one is taken by the Anglo-Saxons. If we want to uncage ourselves we would have to write history ourselves. Thus it’s no longer WW2 (or WW1), it’s the Second Thirty Years War – implemented not only to vandalise germany but in the long-term view also aimed against Russia.
Thanks for reading
P.S. Zionism is just the implementation of the main principle of the Anglo-Saxon Empire for conquering the world, i.e. “AngloZionists” is a pleonasm.
Ten Delusions That Show Obama Hasn’t a Clue about Russia –
And that’s just stuff he and his advisors don’t know about Russia – Lots of other things out there to be wrong about too
Something to bear in mind is that Obama and his advisors are spectacularly (is that strong enough? how about apocalyptically?) mis-informed about Russia. Rather frighteningly so indeed for people who are making such important decisions. For example…
Read more here:http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/03/03/4064
well, somewhere I have been reading that even in 1938 german aircraft engines were inferior and up to that time were supplied by english companies.
also somewhere I found that soviet industry was barely making anything since revolution of 1917 and was backed by world banksters heavily for years up to ww2.
that two combined gives impression that back then soemone wanted pan european war badly…
history does no repeat itself but it rhymes heavily
The origin of Russophobia is a kind of metaphisical topic. We could discuss it for ages. Everyone will have a different opinion.
That’s why it is a distracting, debilitating, paralyzing topic for Russians.
In practical terms, the only thing that should concern Russians with respect to Russophobia, is that Russophobia exists, regardless of its roots. It is abundant. The West has a system of generation of ideas to be implanted in people’s minds, and Russophobia is one such idea constantly being generated; has been for a long time.
Russians are not so good in the art of implanting thoughts in people’s minds. That’s a very advanced science in the West. The fact that Russians are not so good at that, is one of the reasons I like them.
Russia should concern itself with being alert and ready at all times to defend itself against a historic constant: the impetus by the West to destroy it, rape it, pillage it.
Russia was almost erased after the policies of Gorbachev-Yeltsin. Had not a leader of the caliber of Putin emerged to put a stop to it, the self-destructive, rape-me-please process initiated by Yeltsin might be irreversible at this point.
Russia needs to be well armed. Alert. Ready to push off the bastard hordes coming from the west again and again. Make it very clear that, if attacked, it will respond with overwhelming destructive power. And Russians need to make babies. And they need to keep a close eye on Russian “liberals” who, though a minority, have been historically very pernicious to Russia.
The west is thoroughly rotten. A purely satanic collection of rulers, ruling over zombified people.
I basically agree with the substance of that, saker.
And for all spare time if any of the military political analyst, also have got a question, I admit has been focused by someone in the last 14 years.
Is there a valid paralel between the stupidities of the vendetta commited by the winners of WW-I in Versailles and those perpetrated by the winners of the Cold war – invading and arming Eastern europe just to crush and humiliate the loser (Russia)?
but I´m convinced that concluding the first deed gave birth to Hitler and the second has produced Vlad Putin is a thin air based evaluation -though useful to the western pundits…A longer historic analysis, please anyone?
There is only perpetual mayhem,no peace,balance,that is only an illusion, like from road rage to international scenarios.Get used to it.
Unless you can get out of it.Look at all those russian cities so close to Nato-so tempting,so much emptiness behind to drive russia back into the wildness where they belong, look how easy to shut russia out from baltic, black sea,meditteranean……
Has anyone seen that film Stalker by TARKOVSKY ? Post apocalyptic,a native russian guide takes ideological searching hopeful travellers eg scientist and journalist /writer?, across a landscape destroyed(looks a bit like Donetsk) ,through the sentient zone to the blue room where they can ask questions/get an answer, get what they seek but they aren’t up to it,only the native guide can survive ,accept,live,because of what is naturally in his being and soul,even though it -russia, life, civilisation etc etc-may not be understandable.
Also re gulags, I think that the work area outside of the camp was also called the zone, the camp and guards kept inmates “safe “because the outside world was too unknown, terrifying, no escape through it.
Better to be there than challenging the system?
Interesting analogies,metaphors etc?
Saker, regarding this century, read PNAC: Project for the NEW American Century, together with the original wolfowitz doctrine, read this: http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/08/world/us-strategy-plan-calls-for-insuring-no-rivals-develop.html – ‘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’ & ‘With its focus on this concept of benevolent domination by one power, the Pentagon document articulates the clearest rejection to date of collective internationalism, the strategy that emerged from World War II when the five victorious powers sought to form a United Nations that could mediate disputes and police outbreaks of violence.’ & ‘in the event of a resurgent threat [i.e. not necessarily in reality, but whatever the US Govt states as such] from Russia, “we should plan to defend against such a threat” farther forward on the territories of Eastern Europe.’
Saker, the above is a truly excellent treaty on the subject of imperialist Russophobia, thank you! As you wrote:
And I couldn’t agree more on the assessment which followed right after the one above (emphasis mine):
As always, whenever you fail to toe the line of slandering Stalin no matter what, you will get at least some hysterical reactions. вот так’s temper tantrum in particular is silly beyond laughable, portraying Stalin as akin to Yeltsin. As I wrote in my comment to Saker’s blog post From Napoleon to Adolf Hitler to Conchita Wurst:
The rest of вот так’s raging and fuming amounts to wishful thinking, most typical of the Western Trotskyist and anarchist invertebrates. To wit: If Stalin hadn’t been such a lousy scum, he could have done this and this and that instead and there would never have been a World War 2. Indeed, if comparing Putin to Stalin is an insult to Putin, then comparing Stalin to Yeltsin is — in accordance with my assessment above — an insult not only to the Russian people who hold Stalin in high regard and Yeltsin in utter contempt, but to the entire Western imperialist bourgeoisie as well. Good luck with that, I’d say.
Speaking of Russophobia and World War 2, I conclude by what I wrote a few years back over at that truly adorable forum of Kim Zigfeld’s — La Russophobe.
revanche:
http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/02/26/3910 ex U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union speaks out for sanity…” our problem is an autistic foreign policy”
Interesting analysis as usual Saker. I think you give too much credit to the historical memory of Americans in general. The generation running things now still keeps the embargo on Cuba and still smarts over the “defeat” in Vietnam. These folks were very, very upset about how Putin outmaneuvered them in Syria particularly and Iran and the midEast in general. And re: revenge–it was the old Soviet Union which supplied N. Vietnam with SAMs and other military supplies.
As for Stalin….well, I suppose that picture of him with his Generals is not the one before the purge of most of them which weakened the Red Army ( yes, set up by Trotsky) in the face of the German attack. To mention Putin and Stalin in the same breath is an insult to Putin. Putin is not a bully—he is first respected by the Russian people and, more important, he has the ability to inspire them. He is cutting edge and will encourage leadership in technology, science, philosophy, ecology, sports, art etc. you name it.
I think that it is pretty plain that the Judeofascist elite is propelling this assault on Russia. It is Rightwing Jews who are doing much of the hate-mongering, in the Western MSM and it is being expressed with that deranged excess of raw hatred and contempt for the truth that we see whenever Nutty-yahoo, of Lieberman or Bennett, or any of the Jewish grandees in the West, the Bernard-Henry Levys et al, spew out their hatred og Arabs, Moslems, Palestinian or anyone who dares criticise their barbarity, the semi-mythical ‘antisemites’, and the invidious ‘self-hating Jews’. Of course this sampling is biased due to the massive disproportionality of Jewish employment in the Western MSM, but the sheer venom, the actually deranged hatred and the sheer impudence of the lying of the likes of Ben Judah (and his screeching denunciation of those who dared refute his lies as, you guessed it, ‘antisemites’)is trade-mark.
fantastic! Thank you!
Today this blog is so slow that it is almost unusable.
I beg to disagree with the Saker in this post:
– Yes, many Americans feel superior to Russia. But so what? In every country there are many people who feel superior to the rest of the world. And that applies even more when it concern countries that are poorer than theirs.
– All that hostility to Russia after World War II was to be expected after Russia had expanded its borders and occupied a lot of countries.
– Some politicians like to profile themselves by “being tough” on foreign countries. Since the end of the Cold War their favorite country has remained Russia. That has less to do with Russia than with the lack of alternative candidates. Putin’s occasional anti-American rhetoric didn’t hurt either.
That is a lot of cold war propaganda. Russia never did anything the big three didn’t agree on and he reacted to provocations when he did act. Stalin with all of his failures was a man of his word and was never the first to break an agreement with the West.
RR
Saker this is to you personaly.
I don’t think I have ever seen anybody anywhere think in this direction.
Here goes:
I had a epiphany.
After reading you headline something struck me as a pattern.
Second World War was not fought as a conquest by Germany of Europe but used as front to try to conquer Russia by the Jew.Chew on that rest of you commentators and bloggers.
Hey Colonel Casad please weigh in.I am realy interested in you view too.
Saker,put up or be shown as a shill that you are.
Such an interesting and important post and thread. Don’t have time right now to read all (deadline) but do want to mention here again Guido Preparata’s Conjuring Hitler. Some shorter but still detailed summaries of his thesis at his website. Which is, BTW, a pretty but pretty annoying site in how long it takes to get through the music and all. He would get a lot more hits if he would can the “art” and just get to the meat of it. Still, worth the effort.
Excuse me, I didn’t already say this.
What is the deal?
Pstoing again. I am on deadine and can’t waste time.
Such an interesting and important post and thread. Don’t have time right now to read all (deadline) but do want to mention here again Guido Preparata’s Conjuring Hitler. Some shorter but still detailed summaries of his thesis at his website. Which is, BTW, a pretty but pretty annoying site in how long it takes to get through the music and all. He would get a lot more hits if he would can the “art” and just get to the meat of it. Still, worth the effort.
Firstly:
There is absolutely no way that Hitler’s Germany could have defeated the Soviet Union, even without U.S. help being given to the Soviets. It is absolutely true that there was no way that the Soviet Union could have defeated Hitler’s Germany without the help of the U.S. either.
The same is true put the other way around: America could not have defeated Hitler’s Germany on its own; and neither could Hitler’s Germany have been able to defeat America, even if Britain had surrendered.
I truly think that it is provincial chauvinism for either the Americans or the Russians to try make the case which country was more responsible for the defeat of Hitler’s Germany. But there can be no doubt that the Russians suffered much much more than the Americans.
Secondly:
There was no sympathy for Nazi Germany in evidence anywhere in America after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. The lust for the blood of Germans was insatiable on the part of the Americans and British. The punitive raids on German cities in 1945 and the destruction of the basic industries and transportation systems are ample testament that the western allies just wanted to kill as many Germans as possible and to destroy Germany outright.
In the winter of 1945-1946, Eisenhower imposed such conditions upon German prisoners of war that more than a million of them died in in prison camps. That may not exceed the harshness with which German POWs were treated by the Soviets; but it certainly was comparable.
Thirdly:
Just taking the raw numbers of civilians killed, Stalin and Lenin together ruled over a reign of terror that was several time worse than than the Nazis. And this killing didn’t stop after 1945.
If Americans were properly informed of the horrors of Bolshevism and the evil tactics of Lenin and Stalin, they would have properly equated Hitler’s Germany with Stalin’s Soviet union; and they would probably have welcomed Hitler’s attack on Stalin’s regime as a good way for the two greatest evils on earth to destroy each other. The Russians should thank the British and the Jews for persuading Americans to go to war against Germany.
Fourthly:
The western civilizations are obsessed with materialism, with hedonism, and with greed. And worse still, the individuals, who garner the most wealth and all the perquisites that accompany it, cannot stand to know that some other person or entity possesses wealth and influence which rivals theirs and -much more- should the others’ wealth and influence exceed theirs.
Regardless whether the rival is Russia, Germany, China or Japan, the powers that be -within the United States and the European nations which serve as vassals to it- cannot let such a rival to persist in acquiring wealth, power, and prestige. If they cannot own it or diminish it, they will aspire to destroy it. And that is what I believe is the driving force of western imperialism through the ages. Currently the sources of their frustration are Russia and China.
The US Empire committed the Native People’s Holocaust, was the last to curtail the African Slavery Holocaust–that Crime Against Humanity is endorsed by its Constitution and still causes tragic death for many peoples of African descent–Korean Peoples Holocaust–70% of Korean populous was destroyed by the USA during its war against the People of Korea, North and South–the Southeast Asian Holocaust of close to 5 millions, 100% responsible for the Guatemalan Holocaust, Iraqi Holocaust, the Rape of Russia during the 1990s, Rape of Yugoslavia, the ongoing Rape of Ukraine, and numerous other acts of destruction and breakage of the Laws of Humanity–and GOD. When it comes to comparing the USA with Hitler and Stalin, the latter two have nothing on #1 USA. For 95% of its existence, the USA’s been at war somewhere on the planet. It’s by far the #1 Terrorist Organization and Outlaw Nation, and ought not to be considered civilized whatsoever.
US elites will NOT change their ways unless they are forced. And the populous is every bit as cowed as East Germany’s was. The best thing for the remaining nations of the planet to do is to 100% contain the USA, throw it out of its overseas bases, outlaw all its NGOs, reduce the staffing of its embassies to the most basic level, end its dollar hegemony, and dismiss it from the UN and all other multilateral organizations. All we need to is convince those nations that all of the above must be done ASAP.
Well said. The USA is, by far, the greatest force for evil in human history. The genocide of the Native American, the slavery Holocaust, the Philippines Holocaust, nearly 200 years of barbarity along the length and breadth of Latin America, the Korean, Indochina, Iraqi, Syrian, Libyan Holocausts, the Rwanda Holocaust by the US protege’ Kagame, the Congo Holocaust by Kagame and another US favourite Musuveni, the support of numerous butchers like Suharto, Pinochet, the Afrikaaner apartheid regime etc, all attest o that. Gideon Polya a demographer,has calculated the excess deaths due to US policies, including the barbaric Washington Consensus economic terror, and the total is utterly staggering.
Sorry but your first point is nonsense. Soviet army would have destroyed Hitler on its own, it would have just take longer and more people would have died. USA only entered that war not to miss its bit of a pie at the end. And they got a huge bit of a pie. And Soviet Union paid for all tinned meat they got from the USA during the war in gold. Read some proper history books.
N.S Germany was going to be defeated. She had to put up with the combined forces of the British Empire, French Empire, American Empire and the Soviet Empire. She had no choice to fight to stay alive. The longer the war raged on the higher the chance she would lose. They knew that.
The UK/US attitude goes back further. The west stopped suppling the USSR with interecepted intelligence on German military movements from 1942 onwards. The hope was that the Germans and the Soviets would reduce each other to dust.
Yes, that was the beginning. Then nascent Cold War Policy can be seen by USA behavior and internal memoranda during occupation of Italy during 1943. All began during FDR’s third term, not by Truman.
After all the distractions and the humiliation (for the US) of Minsk 2, it is expected the empire will make a countermove:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/03/us-military-chief-backs-arming-ukraine-against-separatists
To me it sounds, extreme pressure will be applied to some EU governments, and as a sort of compromise, some token and not so token sanctions will be applied.
But what would happen if most EU countries send (a few) hundred ´trainers´? That would mean over a thousand NATO forces, + weapons will be overtly present.
In a few months (May?) that would mean another offensive.
I fully trust the NAF fighters to be victorious, gain huge stretches of land, probably including Kharkov and Mariopol, Slaviansk, etc.
But many trophies will be gained. Lots of new stuff destroyed, but most of all: Quite some ´trainers´ will be killed or captured.
What are we expecting after: a Vietnam scenario?
Saker said:
” Hitler was most definitely not a Christian. If anything, he and Himmler were pagans with a strong satanic bend to their dark cult of ancestor worship.”
———————————————————————————-
I am afraid you are oversimplifying a little bit here, the Saker. Himmler was definitely into occultism and ancestor worship, but Hitler was not! Hitler always said that he believes in “God”, which can only be understood as in Christian god. That is what is absurd about Hitler, because Christian god is the same as Jewish Old Testament god. I will not go further.
Besides this, a very interesting questions you are posing in your text.
I lived in Western Europe, and from what I saw there, there is an inherited , instinctive hatred of Russia and Russians. But then again, as a Serb, I also met a lot of hatred against the Serbs.
I think it has something to do with the historic impression of West-Europeans with Slavic people in general.
They hate Poles also.
The Slavs are numerically by far the biggest ethnic/linguistic group in Europe. The Westerners cannot stand this fact, consciously and subconsciously.
true, but I think it has to do with the religions: Catholic west and Orthodox east…
British Coup d’Etat In Washington, April 12, 1945: How The Harriman Gang Started The Cold War
Against Oligarchy
Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
October 1995
« Against Oligarchy – Table of Contents
To those whose adult lives and historical experience have been largely dominated by the Soviet-American rivalry, by the division of the world into the opposed military blocs of NATO and the Warsaw Pact, and by the Cold War, the idea that the fundamental interests of the United States and Russia are necessarily in conflict may appear as self-evident, and the clash of these two powers may seem inevitable. In reality, nothing could be further from the truth. The legitimate national interests of American and Russia are not in conflict. Russia supported the American Revolution through the anti-British League of Armed Neutrality, and Tsar Alexander II was Lincoln’s only ally during the US Civil War. America, in turn, was the only power friendly to Russia during the British onslaught of the Crimean War.
Up until the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt on April 12, 1945, a Soviet-American clash would have been considered by most informed observers as less likely than other outcomes. FDR’s design for the postwar world can be summed up under three headings:
1.The unity and cooperation of the United States, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the United Kingdom – the Big Three – as the content for the United Nations. The essence of Roosevelt’s views on the US-USSR-UK relationship was included in the Yalta declaration: “Only with the continuing and growing cooperation and understanding among our three countries and among all the peace- loving nations can…be realized a secure and lasting peace….” Roosevelt intended to hold summits with Moscow and London about once a year, with continuous consultation in the interims at the foreign minister level.
2.The dismantling of the colonial empires, which were to be supplanted by sovereign states. At Yalta, Roosevelt asked Gen. Patrick Hurley to draw up a plan for safeguarding the independence and sovereignty of Iran. After Yalta, FDR – despite the fact that he was a very sick man – took time to meet with King Farouk of Egypt, King Saud of Saudi Arabia, and Haile Selassie of Ethiopia – meetings which the British interpreted as harbingers of a strong anti-colonial, anti-imperial thrust in postwar US policy. FDR, in conversations with Churchill, had rejected the latter’s “eighteenth century methods.”
3.Economic development, as exemplified by the proposal FDR made at Yalta to develop the entire Danube River basin according to the methods of the highly successful Tennessee Valley Authority.
full article here: http://tarpley.net/online-books/against-oligarchy/how-the-harriman-gang-started-the-cold-war/
Cold war was initiated by FDR beginning in 1943’s Occupied Italy–see Kolko’s “Politics of War.” It was escalated in Greece also by FDR. Cold War policy and post war strategy to create the National Security State were both planned during FDR’s third term. Easily manipulated Truman replaced the purged, very independent Henry Wallace as FDR’s VEEP for 1944 election. (Please read Wallace’s excellent essay, “The Danger of American Fascism” published by NY Times in April 1944, prompted and approved by FDR, http://newdeal.feri.org/wallace/haw23.htm Wallace was horrified by changes FDR made to his administration during campaign and after re-election and soon resigned from his position as head of the Commerce Department. He mounted a Third Party Campaign against Truman in 1948; his level of support faded rapidly with Truman’s fake War Scare used to rescue the USA’s aviation industry.)
The only way to discover the above facts is to pursue your own PhD Dissertation-type research as it won’t be taught in any class or read in any textbook.
A bit off topic, in the Dutch media the judicial forensic experts investigating ma17 complained to t6he media (Telegraaf and maybe others) that the Dutch secret service AIVD were uncooperative in sharing important information with the crash investigators.
The Dutch version of news-night (Nieuwsuur claimed that the AIVD was unable to release information that could harm the investigation, and be insulting to Russia.
Of course today everybody denies that the investigation team have course for grievances.
Dear Saker,
you are a bit blind on one eye. I agree that anglozionists supported Germany to slaughter it after. But you forget from my point of few, the extremly strong support of the anglozionist empire for the early 20 years of sowjet union.
Who was the creator of communism with loans? Who took over the controll over the most important adminstrations of the country after the revolution? Who were totaly overrepresented in all organs of the Union compared to the size of his group?
Think about industrialisation. Who has given the money? Who has given not just products, but also the complete factorys to produce it? Who has delivered all the stuff to build up the heavy inudstries you need to make an army. It was the anglozionist empire!
Just one example. I think you dont know Albert Kahn. He was an american Jew, born in Germany. He is one of the most important industry architects of the last 100 years. Detroit was formed by his architecture for plants and hugh office buildings. What I want to meantion before. Such kind of architecture means not just a nice design outside. The architecture of a factory means also to plan it to have a perfect production place. Short ways…fluent production you know.
What I try to say is, we talk about very important know how in production planing and processes. In his case, architecture is not just about optic. Kahn was also a very good connected person to the 1% in the USA. He designed not just Henry Fords house, he worked for all the important key persons.
Back to topic. In 1929, Khan opend his own office in Moscow. In the time between 1929 and 1932 he builded 521 factorys in the Sowjet Union. So he was example responsible for some famouse factorys. The tractor plant Felix Dserschinski in Stalingrad and the tractor plant of Tscheljabinsk. I think we both know..what in Sowjet Union was meant with “Traktor plant”. As I remember, but I cant find my note about it, he was also responsible for the tractor plant of karkov.
He was engaged by Saul Bron, head of AMTORG and ARCOS. Sounds a bit like brooterhood to me, dont you think? Whit his second contract, his bureau got the order to train more as 4000 Soviet architects and engineers.
I would say his work alone stands nearly for the basic industrialistion of the Sowjet Union. For example the Kirov plant in Leningrad was reconstructet by Ford Industrys. There was a massive transfer of know how which has incredible increased the force of Sowjet army .
If we took this four plants, Kirov, karkov, Tscheljabinsk and Felix Dserschinski which stand more or less for the Sowjet tank industry ,,,not one of this factorys would be possible without anglozionist support. Not one! Think about, the Stalingrad tracor plant was completly builded in US and shipped overseas. Without permission of US goverment it would be simply not possible. Look who has financed it all. Look who was in charge!
The disharmony between anglozionist Empire came much later in the last years of Stalin.
My personal opinion is, someone has created a problem, provoked a reaction and offered after all a solution. As stupid it is in these days to go into a fight between Germany and Russia, as stupid it was in that time. Just some ideas and hints of a lonly wolf ;-)
Saker, achei interessante:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T65SwzHAbes
:-)
Hi all,
Have you seen this map from 1918. Any comments on that?
http://i.imgur.com/1lRCK0L.jpg
Anyone following my posts on this blog will certainly be acutely aware of the fact that I am of the opinion that the latest assault by the “Western World” against Russia has two fundamental “material” reasons behind it.
a) Energy reserves/pipeline routes. I have long emphasized the fact that western energy reserves are dwindling rapidly. It is no exaggeration to claim that hydrocarbon energy production in western Europe is at an all-time low and will probably be wiped out in the next 10 years or so.
North America has some more leeway than western Europe, but their production is still very expensive (very marginal as well, as it is currently wholly unprofitable) and in the case of US crude production, I firmly believe that we will see shale oil production peak THIS year. Canada still has significant crude oil reserves, but they are of the heavy sands type, which makes them extremely expensive to produce. The natural gas situation in North America is somewhat better, but even then, production will definitely peak by 2020 and then decline significantly after that.
Juxtapose the energy situation in the West, with Russia’s truly staggering oil and gas reserves. Russia *officially” possesses 27% of the world’s conventional natural gas reserves. Add in the massive shale gas reserves (Russia has shale reserves incomparably higher than North America, let alone Europe, which has more or less nothing) plus the vast expanses in Eastern Siberia and the Russian Arctic that have not yet been explored and you get the picture.
In *official” oil reserves, Russia is supposed to be sitting on around 80bln bbl of crude oil. That is completely laughable. Russia has in its subsoil quantities far larger than that. All good insiders in the global oil business are acutely aware of this fact (famous Russophobe Edward Lucas, understands this brutal reality all too well, but can never say it out loud)
While I can provide several links to the estimates of western experts concerning the true number of Russian oil reserves, I will just leave you with this. Yesterday, Exxon Mobil, the biggest, most venerable and most powerful of all the western oil majors, announced a massive increase in its drilling rights acreage in the Russian Federation to the tune of 450%!!!! As things currently stand, Exxon Mobil, owns 5 times more acreage in Russia than in the USA!!! Now consider why one of the most venerable US corporations (if not THE most venerable) would attempt such a move and such commitment in the country that is most hostile to US interests! The one country that the US cannot really bully (excepting China)
I think it is clear why. Exxon Mobil know the global oil business better than anyone on the planet. They also know dirty politics better than anyone else as well (the have been behind it for decades) Exxon Mobil fully understand at least two important things. a) Russia has vast oil reserves and is therefore the future of the oil business and they have to be there no matter how much Putin taxes them if they want to survive as an oil major. b) The West’s brutal attempt at overthrowing Putin (or even weakening Russia) will almost certainly fail, and hence will have to adapt to the new reality.
The second reason why the West has been assaulting Russia for the past 2 years or so, is of course strategic. With Russia controlling vast reserves and production of hydrocarbons (also able to ally with other producers around the globe, and especially the Middle East, but also Venezuela) and making really good money out if it, the Russian Armed Forces will be well funded, and the Russian military industrial complex will be churning new and state of the art weaponry. A financially and strategically independent Russia, will simply mean that the era of Shock and Awe and “limited air campaigns” will soon be over. US bullying of the rest of the planet will become a lot harder, if not impossible, and when attempted it will be prohibitively costly.
But, to come to the point of conversation, after these very obvious “material” reasons behind western enmity towards Russia, is it fair to claim that the “collective western mind” still holds a grudge against Russia for WWII???
My answer is this: ABSOLUTELY YES.
The Red Army’s victory over Euro-Fascism (it was not just Germany that was Nazi back then, it was actually most of Europe, even though the Germans were indeed the protagonists) between 1941 and 1945 fills the arrogant western consciousness with horror and dread. Out of the world’s bloody and brutal history, the Great Patriotic War stands head and shoulders above anything else. It is special not just in the very obvious military sense in that the battles were greater and bloodier than anything before or since, but also in the sense that a relatively poor and backward country that was in ruins just 10 years before, could take on the most sophisticated, most advanced and most brutally savage western army and defeat it. In a sense, WWII, is not just unnerving for westerners for what did happen during it, but also in the sense that what happened before, can happen again in the future for western imperial plans. WWII is also a source of great shame for Euro-cheerleaders. They love to present themselves as uniquely civilized and brilliant, but their conduct during WWII was more barbaric than darkest Africa.
The Anglo-powers are also deeply disturbed by WWII, for one extra reason. They full well realize that they could never have done what they Red Army did during 1941-5. They full well realize that they showed cowardice whenever it came to taking on the Nazis head on. They only attacked when they could massively outnumber the Germans on the ground, and crucially have total air superiority.
And this doesn’t have to do with percentages of the western populations. It’s a matter of degree. The point here being that the Soviet victory of World War II haunts the collective western psyche, so used to superiority and arrogance.
Always look for your comments! Almost everything you write enlarges and singularly clarifies my own often inchoate thinking in very significant ways on whatever topic on which you comment, especially on world oil/energy claims on the future. If you are not familiar with the book, GoeDestinies, subtitled “The inevitable control of Earth resources over nations and individuals, by Walter Youngquist, Phd, oil geologist and scientist, you might wish to check it out. First published in 1997, his main thesis still holds even as particulars have been superceded by new research. It is the main source that alerted me, as its title implies, of how the control of oil/energy and earth’s natural resources determines the present and future. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and perceptions.
The best introduction to the subject of “American-Russian Relations, 1781-1947” is a book of the same name by one of the premier students of the US Empire: William Appleman Williams. Used copies exist and any decent 4-year university will have a copy in its library. The Saker and most everyone else commenting here need to read it–Russophobia amongst US elites has existed since US Independence. I also want to bring to everyone’s attention another extremely influential book amongst US elites despite its age: “The Law of Civilization and Decline,” by Brooks Adams–yes from That Adams clan. It should be combined with Turner’s “Frontier Thesis” to attain the reasons behind the longstanding US Elite’s Expansionary–Imperialist–Policy, which really hasn’t changed very much since 1810.
U.S., Europe weighing potential deeper Russia sanctions: Nuland
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/04/us-ukraine-crisis-nuland-idUSKBN0M023Y20150304
I do think one thing has not been mentioned in this article, and I think it is important. A very important reason for the animosity is, apart from the things mentioned, simply the geographic location. Most Russians live in western ‘great-Russia’, blocking the vast great planes of the east towards Mongolia and Siberia for the other Europeans. And those vast lands have, apart from its lands to live on, a lot more attraction, like the huge amounts of natural resources. So the Russians stand in the way of the Europeans.
I think there’s quite a bit of truth to both the article and many of the comments. But I think there’s a dimension that’s being neglected, or occasionally referred to elliptically (talk of bankers, etc):
Class and capital.
It’s hard to fathom in the modern USA, but in the first half or even three quarters of the 20th century, systemic change from capitalism to something else was seen as a real possibility in many places, from Africa to Germany. Before the Nazis became powerful, there was a strong Socialist and Communist movement in Germany; it seemed at the time as if they had the potential to take power. Even in the US, the “New Deal” was framed by Roosevelt as saving capitalism from itself. There was so much unrest and so many Communist, Socialist or Anarchist trade union members and activists right in the heart of the United States that there seemed real prospects of socialist candidates winning elections or mass movements with strong socialist elements bringing down governments.
In that mix, we had Russia, an avowedly Communist country which at least claimed to be planning to export Communist revolution world wide. Between that and the Depression, there was a huge challenge to the power of capital. So the fear was twofold: That anti-capitalist elements might gain power in various places, and that they might actually run things better than capitalists had, creating the danger of a positive example. Again, that latter fear can be hard to fathom in the modern US, but with capitalism in Depression-era crisis and Russia doing, if not amazing, probably rather better than Czarist Russia which had been backward and dysfunctional, it seemed eminently plausible that production run from the top in a “scientific”, “rational” way (in a time when faith in science and rationality was very strong) might work distressingly well.
So. Russia, and any other country that adopted non-capitalist politics, had to be stopped. It constituted an existential threat to the ruling class of fat cats around the entire globe. This had been agreed in all the halls of world power from the moment the 1917 revolution succeeded, but gained all the more urgency as the Great Depression made the system feel fragile and vulnerable. Given that, while there may have been some dislike for and fear of Russia simply as Russia as WW II approached and afterwards, the main hatred was reserved for Communism. If Russia had not been Soviet, the normal “Great Game” would certainly have resumed, but there would have been no Cold War, very likely no bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and almost certainly a much more amicable dismembering of the various losers of the war.
It was certainly the spectre of Communism that led many to consider Hitler the lesser evil and to support overt forms of fascism generally. It was that, much more than any vague anti-Russian bias, that was the reason the other Allies probably would have preferred if Hitler and Stalin had just continued exhausting each other rather than Stalin actually winning. The fear of other forms of anticapitalism had similar effects; nobody would have backed fascists in Spain if it weren’t for the hatred and fear of the Spanish Anarchists.
By the time of the 1990s, things were somewhat different. First, the US had, as propagandists always seem to after long enough, started believing their own lies; you had a generation of leaders who had been brought up on anti-Russian propaganda. Russia became the enemy in the first place because of Communism, but once there was an enemy it had to be demonized, and once it’s been demonized for decades it isn’t so simple to un-demonize it. So these cold warriors never adjusted to the loss of a cold war.
Second, capitalism had intensified. It had become more transnational, more universal, but had remained oddly fragile. For both reasons, it could tolerate still less competition. And the United States had become not just the greatest power, but the world hegemon, the enforcer of world capitalism. So now, the system considered as a threat not only avowedly anticapitalist countries, but any country that either watered down “free market” approaches within its borders, or posed through independent policies of any sort, any kind of challenge to the global reach of dominant (American) capitalist institutions. Both could not be tolerated, either as limits on the system in themselves, or as “threats of a positive example”–things that others might emulate if they worked.
Venezuela is an example of the first kind, watering down capitalist intensity within its borders with social programs, strengthened community institutions and so on. Russia is an example of the second kind, presuming to operate an independent foreign policy. It is no co-incidence that the US is trying hard to destabilize both.
Weird to reply to myself, but I’d like to add one thing: Where were the Jews in all this? Deeply ambiguous. Some Jews were part of the spearhead of capitalism, at the top of high finance. But Jews were also known for their strong involvement in broadly socialist working class struggles. Which again comes down to class. Some Jews were rich capitalists, other Jews were educated but not particularly well off and so made good leaders of socialist struggles. In short Jews like everyone else tended to divide along class lines–but their tradition of education made the lower class ones powerful activists.
The Nazis didn’t bother to deal with this contradiction and just declared both types part of the same imagined grand conspiracy of evil Judaism.
While there where elements in the U.S. with Nazi sympathies, I don’t think that was true of the FDR administration. It was not a given that the U.S. would join WWII. FDR was aware the Japanese planned a surprise attack (but not the details– Pearl Harbor) and wanted this to take place to force America into the war. The Americans were trying to provoke a Japanese attack.
It is true that the British tried to maneuver the Germans into attacking the USSR– successfully, and that the Western Allies purposely dragged their feet in launching an offensive against Germany so that the USSR and Germany could wear themselves out in combat.
And of course Western capitalists were hostile to the communist experiment in the USSR. They supported the White guard in an attempt at regime change. Stalin was the best gift the capitalists could hope for. If better people had been in charge of the Soviet experiment, communism might have posed a real ideological threat to capitalism instead of becoming discredited. Although the corporate media will never reveal this, there were actually a substantial number of communists in the U.S. in the 1930’s.
»Hitler was most definitely not a Christian.«
Oh boy. Hitler was most definitely a pro forma Catholic Christian, like millions of other Europeans, then and now. I haven’t talked to him but from listening to his speeches I’d say he considered the Catholic Church an essential fact of History (which it is), and a force to reckon with; but he doesn’t seem to have had any profound interest in religion himself.
Hitler definitely wasn’t into »pagan« or »satanic« or other esoteric nonsense …
I guess next you’re going to claim Stalin wasn’t a Christian either …
No he wasn’t.Just because someone is born into a nominal “Christian” culture doesn’t mean they are christian…especially when they advance causes that diametrically oppose Christian belief.Simple distaste for Christianity or religion in general doesn’t give you license to tar those beliefs with the actions of mad men and monsters who were defacto atheists.
No True Scotsman . . .
Hungarians are the Scourge of God, alright. It was Hungary that instigated the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the Soviet Union and unravelling of the Warsaw Pact. Now they are nudging along the eventual destruction of the EU and Nato. Just ask Peter Lavelle and Neil Clark; they will tell you that the Magyars are the biggest troublemakers in Europe. They like to knock over the first domino, dirty bunch of rebels. Peter Lavelle got his Ph.D. in Eastern European studies, which explains his great sense of humor. He is always laughing his ass off about something. He knows too much.
There is a certain extra freedom in being of a tribe not related to any of the others in Europe. Also in living on the crossroads between major cultures.
:)) :))
Hungarians were notable in Sydney crime and vice circles after WW2. One Hungarian friend of my father (who was a journalist, so knew many ‘colourful characters’) used to joke, and boast, that Hungarians were the only people who could enter a revolving door after you but still exit in front of you.
Saker
I think you are spot on. In fact, we had the same conversation at home yesterday, when I was trying to prove the same point to my husband. I think Russia’s adversaries tried to crush it twice, in WWI and WWII, but never succeeded in the way they wanted to. The two world wars, from their perspective, did not resolve their problem. They will not rest until they either win or die. I think the latter will happen.
Наше дело правое. Победа будет за нами.
OT
3/4/15 Nuland Planning an Imminent Coup in Georgia w Saakashvili http://journal-neo.org/2015/03/04/victoria-nuland-s-secret-coup-d-etat-in-georgia/
To Lumi and others who insist that Hitler was a Catholic Christian. I own a rare video of a Pagan Nazi procession led by Hitler and thousands of German participants (German: military,business elites,Government officials and civilians). Hitler was no more a Christian than Obama even tho Obama frequented for years a black Christian church and professed to be a Christian as a presidential candidate. He now is openly anti-Christian in his rhetoric. Those who posted this blog stating that the controlling power in this country is a banking cabal, not the jews, are semi-truthful in their assertion. It is banking elite (Jewish bankers) from which none-jew world elites lust and chase for the table crumbs which provide them for enough to live a lavish lifestyle and get a feeling of superiority above the rest of the herd. The concerted effort to alienate and demonize Russia has two fairly recent events. The first has to do with Putin eliminating with the rule of law the almost total control of all Russian wealth stolen after the Soviet collapse by a handful of Soviet Jews. Everyone of the Oligarchs who bragged and are now living in exile that 13 men (all jews) owned 80% of soviet banking and industry. Jewish interest (behind the corporations) own most American media and so explains its inability to give a non-bias reporting on any issue. All news we hear are the news seen thru the eyes of these people. Many western none-jews find it difficult to believe that a group of people such as the self-style jews can carry on grudges and seek revenge for something done against them hundreds, even thousands years ago. I say read the old testament. They believe in revenge (an eye for an eye) and that it is the duty of all the tribe to see that it gets done. Forgiveness is not one of the old testament 10 commandments. The only religion in the world that teaches forgiveness of your enemies is Christianity. This virtue gives Christians a nobility of heart admired by all Christians and both leagued at and encouraged by Jews, Muslims and Hindus, etc. The demonizing and aggression against Russia has many components, not a single simplistic one. The world empire with its seat in DC cannot place the final capstone on top of its financial/military pyramid until its monetary system is all encompassing, read revelation (no one allowed to buy or sell which doesn’t have the seal (sign) of the beast (financial beast, seal of the US dollar). Russia, China, and other smaller players understand and thus their superhuman effort to free themselves (their people) from such devastating yoke facing all humanity. Wolf