The situation is getting very serious. I cannot fathom what Obama thinks he is doing, my only conclusion is he is so far from reality he really has not a clue. Since a very great deal of this aggressive noise is emanating from The Pentagon one can only conclude that Pentagon is doing what Obama wishes, if they were not he has the power to cashier them instantly. He has not cashiered any officers and has not said a word of what looked like almost a soft coup by Pentagon against Washington, ergo there is no ‘soft coup’, Pentagon is following orders albeit with alacrity.
In my opinion this whole mess started over Sevastopol. Sevastopol was the prize, the goal of the coup in Ukraine three and more years ago. From Sevastopol, the planned base of an American Black Sea Fleet, Russia would have lost her lake and access, however tenuous, to the Med and Europe and her fleet would have been defacto destroyed without a shot being fired, caught between the American presence in Krimea and Sevastopol and a resurgent Gruzya with another American Navy base, effectively surrounding the Russian Navy base in Novorossisk.
Well, Sevastopol turned out to be a tough nut to crack. The citizens took up arms and negated any plans America had for the city and peninsula, much to the rage and frustration of Washington. This rage is ongoing today and is doubled by Russia frustrating the plans of Washington to take Syria and fragment that ancient country in to little fiefdoms that would be easy to manipulate as massive pipelines were built through what was Syria to take the oil and gas from Saudi et al directly to Europe, effectively destroying Russia’s supplies to Europe and hopefully destroying the Russian economy. That hasn’t worked either, Russia went in to Syria at the invitation of the legal government of Syria and saved that sovereign nation by the skin of it’s teeth. Literally within a few weeks of Russia’s presence in Syria if that presence had not been accomplished Syria would have fallen completely.
Today the threats emanating from Foggy Bottom are getting ever more strong and vitriolic. Threats are being promulgated about ‘no fly zone’s’, attacks on Syria Armed Forces, Russian soldiers coming home in body bags and Russian planes being shot down in Syria. Let me ask this simple question. Who has the right to be in Syria, Russia assisting Syria defeat a civil war started, supported and commanded by an outside source, or US et al who were neither invited nor welcomed in Syria and have no national or international mandate to attack and destroy Syria?
Now, for a little history lesson for those in Foggy Bottom, Berlin, Paris and London.
- Napoleon picked a fight with Russia, in particular the Czar, and gathered a huge army, the largest the world had seen at that time, that was about 35% French and 65% European, European either press ganged or joining the army willingly. How many months later was the Russian Army in Paris? All those little hills alongside the road of retreat of the ‘French’ army between Moskau and Vilnius are the burial mounds of the soldiers, literally hundreds of thousands of them. There is still an island in the Berizina River formed from the corpses of dead French soldiers swept off the rickety bridges thrown across the Berizina in the attempt to escape the Russians.
- Germany returns Lenin et al to Russia in a closed and guarded train to the Russian border. February 1917 the revolution in Russia is successful and SSSR was born. Germany lost the first war, the War To End All Wars. All European participants in that war except America were exhausted and some ceased to exist. However, after patiently waiting for another generation of young men to grow to maturity the second round of the War To End All Wars commenced. This time, after unbelievable sacrifice Russia was in Berlin and stayed there for 45 years. The German army, and its allies, are buried in mass graves from Stroganoh just outside of Mockba to the Elbe. 35,000 of them and their allies are buried just south of Yalta Ring in Sevastopol in the German Cemetery, to this day maintained by the Federal Government of Germany.
This is the fate of anyone who attacks Russia. Your army will be in mass graves from Mockba all the way to the English Channel and beyond but in the end you will lose and your armies will perish. Yes, you have the toys to kill us in our tens, our hundreds of thousands but you will not get one square centimeter of Russian land. Perhaps you should look to your west, look at the Bering Straights. Think about that and understand that Russia is the master of Winter War.
Leave us in peace because Peace is all we desire. But if you want war you will get war and a war you cannot comprehend. Russia will destroy you, pure and simple. You can not win.
Thank you for your time,
Auslander
Author
And also recommended by Auslander
The US and Syria SitRep September 24th, 2016
USA SitRep November 21 2015 by Auslander
Report from Crimea by Auslander
Life in Crimea 20 months after reunification with Russia … by Auslander
NATO is invited to leave Crimea: An Incident On Simonka book by R H Auslander
It is my belief that Ukraine was a reaction to Russia’s courageous stance in Syria in 2013 when the US launched ICBMs from Europe against Damascus and the heavy frigate Moskva brought them down over the Mediterranean. It was considered so humiliating to the US (in spite of the news blackout) that it led to the decision to launch the Ukraine “project”. Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s how i interpret it.
They do things on impulse all too often, but Ukraine has been a project since a disorganized and demoralized Russia agreed in 1997 to put Russia’s use of the Crimean home of the Black Sea Fleet on a lease basis.
The Orange Revolution installed a government whose often announced policy was to refuse to renew those leases when they came due in 2016. The Constitution was amended to provide that no foreign bases would be allowed on Ukrainian soil starting in 2017.
But in 2010 they lost control of the government, and Yanukovich renewed the Crimean leases in advance. Now the U.S. could wait until 2042, or overthrow Yanukovich and reinstall the Orange Revolution gang, and especially their favourite banker, Yatseniuk, who said immediately after the coup that Ukraine would abrogate the leases.
Isn’t that why Yanukovych, out of loyalty to Putin, did not seriously attempt to quash the small (250,000) demonstration in the Maidan? It was winter; every country has water canon. Putin told him to let the coup succeed and Putin used the coup to reinstate Crimea in the Federation.
It will always be a source of amusement to me that the Great Hypocrites of Europe rallied around a revolution by 250,000 people out of a nation of 45,000,000. But denied the rights of the Russians in Crimea to vote to return to Russia.
@ Antonio Arganda Hussa
” Ukraine was a reaction to Russia’s courageous stance in Syria in 2013″
The plan may have been on the books in the Pentagon for a while, but in my opinion it was the arrival of Snowden in Russia in June 2013 that got Nuland off her butt.
I don’t believe Russia wanted the coup to succeed. You would need to find some historical evidence for that.
That is a very astute observation. Letting the U.S. apparently ‘succeed’ – at first only – in return for the Crimea which denied the Americans their main prize. Later, the Kiev regime would deteriorate and the U.S. would own it. Plus, by long war of attrition, the Donbass could drain and sap the Kiev regime additionally sending a message to any parties anywhere what will happen is you try one of these ‘colour revolution’ stoogeries.
No doubt Putin wanted the coup to succeed. Russian army could have been in Kiev in 8 hours and put the revolution down. Maidan would give him the chance to take back the Ethnically Russian areas, and financially drain the EU and USA supporting the bankrupt rump of Ukraine.
I am friends with a Ukranian and from his reckoning only around 20-25% of Ukranian speakers backed the revolution. They were mostly students, very pliable and mostly fluent in English. Not that this man is any fan of Russia, because in his view, Russia took too much advantage of its energy monopoly on Ukraine. Well now EU will charge much more than Russia to buy second hand Russian gas ;)
No, Putin did not want the coup to succeed. He wanted Ukraine to remain stable and peaceful, for crying out loud. Who wants war on their border? Who wants to see pro-Russian Ukrainians slaughtered? I remember him praising the Ukranian army that no blood had been shed when Crimea entered the Russian Federation, but both he and Lavrov have been firm in statements that the coup displaced the legitimate, elected government. I also remember an interview in which President Putin spoke somewhat disparagingly (not strongly because he was being sympathetic) concerning Yanukovych’s departure from office.
Ukraine has always been a project.
For example, the tactics and strategy of a plan to splinter Russian civilization formulated by Bismarck, who was an ambassador to Russia:
”The Russia’s power can be undermined only through Ukrainian secession from the rest of Russia. It is imperative not only to tear Ukraine off Russia but also to oppose Ukraine to Russia, to play off one part of the same nation against the other so that eventually it is possible to watch a fratricidal war.
All what should be done to make the plan realized is to find and cherish betrayers chosen among representatives of the national elite.
And with their help, the self-consciousness of one part of the great nation will be mutated to such a dramatic extent that they will not be able to stand anything related to the Russian civilization, they will rundown their origin even without realizing the motivation for acting that way.
The rest is the matter of time.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWFKc7zV4wo
You have an interesting take on History. There was no ‘Ukraine’ per se in Bismark’s time, it was ‘little russia’, Malo or Mal’ya Rus. At that time Little Rus was a farm.
Auslander
I was quoting Natalia Vitrenko from the above video Nazi Ukraine as German-United States Project. She is reading Bismark’s words from a book, so that book must be wrong. Are you saying that Bismark didn’t propose to split Russia or that he did propose that but formulated it differently?
I did not watch the attached video long enough to get to that part, I’ve seen too many of that sort of thing to give them much of my time or credibility.
My statement was that there was no ‘Ukraine’ per se at the time Bismark was ambassador to Russia, it was ‘Mal’ya Rus’ or ‘Malo Rus’ and had been for quite some time. The area was regarded as a backwater that was little better than a farm for Russia.
Who is to say what book she read, what the book actually said and was the author being truthful about what he wrote. Since the author was not alive in Bismark’s time he can say anything he wants and Count Bismark is not here to dispute the writings.
Auslander
I think the author of that book confuses Bismarck with Paul Rohrbach or Matthias Erzberger.
“The Orange Theory
One of the first to promote this plan was Paul Rohrbach, an influential publicist in Berlin’s foreign policy establishment. As one of his associates later recalled, Rohrbach repeatedly compared Russia to an orange. “This fruit consists of individual, easily separable segments, like the Russian empire with its various regional elements, the Baltic provinces the Ukraine, Poland, etc.” It would suffice “to detach these elements one from another and give them a modicum of autonomy,” and it would “be easy to put an end to the Great Russian Empire.” At the time, some pompously referred to this as “decomposition,” while others called it the “orange theory.”[2] The centrist politician, Matthias Erzberger, supported a similar policy. In September 1914, in an exposé on the objectives of the war, he called for the “liberation of the non-Russian peoples from the yoke of the Muscovites and the establishment of autonomy within the individual population groups” – naturally “under German military sovereignty.”[3] That concept influenced the operative policies. As a “means of struggle against Russia,” the “rebellion of not only Poland, but also of the Ukraine” was sought, according to the decree handed down August 11, 1914 by the Chancellor of the German Reich.[4]
…
April 29, 1918, following social rebellions, the Germans put the large landowner Poavlo Skoropadski at the reins in Kiev, quasi as a proconsul. His brutal regime provoked strong protests from the poor peasants. According to one analysis of that period’s German East Policy, “formally speaking” the government was “a dictatorship, however, in the substance, (…) a German General Government.”[6]
…
Already in 1918, the “orange theoretician,” Paul Rohrbach, founded the German-Ukrainian Society, to promote the destruction of the Soviet Union – and simultaneously provide Ukrainian exiles a meeting point, since it could be assumed that, for another German attempt to break off the Ukraine, activists of the Skoropadski regime could come in handy. Berlin’s foreign policy establishment pursued these plans throughout the 1920s and ’30s, until Ukrainian Nazi collaborators led by the fascist Stepan Bandera invaded the Soviet Union in 1941 with the German Army.”
http://german-foreign-policy.com/en/fulltext/58703
“Germans Taught Russian Prisoners of War the Idea of Ukraine”
http://tarpley.net/metaphysical-doubts-concerning-the-existence-of-modern-ukraine-a-1918-creation-of-the-german-general-staff/
You are wrong. The idea of breaking Russia up into her component parts and especially of creating a Ukranian State independent of Moscow and dependent on Berlin, existed long before Hitler. But it’s chief exponent was Paul Rohrbach, from whom it was borrowed by Hitler, Rosenberg and many others. About projects for the break-up of Russia, Bismarck wrote on the 3rd May 1886 to the German Ambassador in Vienna (the source probably of your incomplete quotation) “Even if separated from one another by treaties, they (the Russian people) would reunite like a mass of mercury that has been broken up into globules…” (Off.doc.German Foreign Office, vol vii. p.274.) Rohrbachs theory about Ukraina (Kiew =nordic and European) and Russia (Moskwa=mongolian and asiatic) can be found in his book “Weltpolitisches Wanderbuch, Durch die Ukraina 1897, Leipzig 1916.” Till the end of the First World War there was a general agreement that Russia was culturally more advanced than the backward Ukraina (the Russian language, literature, grammar etc). The Germans needed this more or less artificial state to realize a separate peace with Russia. You might find very interesting details about the making of the “peace treaty of Brest” and the role that the national Ukrainian Government (a German puppet) played, in General Ludendorff’s “kriegserinnerungen”.
I agree. It was the humiliation that Obama perceived he received from Putin’s proposal of the chemical weapon agreement, and his preventing the U.S. and its thralls in Western Europe from bombing Syria, in 2013, which led to the U.S. going for broke in the Ukraine one year later.
I was not aware that this happened. Do you have a source I can refer to please?
You have a good point, but Ukraine has always been considered part of the homelands of the Kazar Jews, the ones known as Ashkenazi. The half Jews from the Sephardic viewpoint because they are not of the tribes but were voluntary converts.
During WW2 1,300,000 Jews were exterminated there during Operation Reinhardt, many of them Ukrainian residents, though most were Polish or of that area.
Israel is a failed state. It never had much chance of surviving despite employing Nazi tactics of racial extermination of the indigenous inhabitants, (Palestinians and Sephardic Jews who used to live together peacefully).
The plan has always been ultimately to move back to the racial homelands of Ukraine, with the entire Israeli population moving lock, stock and barrel to reestablish the Kazar nation.
With the fall of the USSR this became a realistic possibility, and after the colour revolution promoted by Soros, a probability.
The question is whether Russia will permit this? Israel and international Jewry are going to have to change their tune radically by ditching the brain dead US neocons, if they hope to take over Ukraine.
Since Russia now buys lots of fresh produce from Israel, it seems possible that should the Jews manage to exploit the highly fertile Ukrainian soil, and sell it to Russia, the US and the EU might get sidelined faster than they realise.
After all many Israeli Jews originate from both Russia and Ukraine, plus Russia has quite a number of Jews, so this is a realistic scenario which Russia might consider to settle the Syria/Iraq/Iran problems.
With Israel relocated to Ukraine it would mean the US would lose its foothold (justification) to meddle in the Middle East.
The only problem would be the indigenous Ukrainian population. Russia might accept them in to its hinterland to swell its population.
*Paragraph 7, line 4 should read…sell its produce to Russia…
Turning Ukraine into an enemy of Russia has been a major objective for NATO since the Soviet collapse. Russia’s position is indeed weakened with Ukraine being hostile instead of friendly. It has strategic, economic, ideological and other implications for Russia.
This has been a constant policy for them, but they did turn-up the heat after they realized that Russia was not going to back-off from her support for Bashar Al-Assad.
Russia’s open defiance of the entire Empire did cause them to go mad with rage, and the incident with two cruise missiles (not ICBMs) was part of the equation.
One thing that the NATO degenerates were hoping to gain with Ukraine, was to maybe even push a bargain, give-up Assad and we’ll give you back Ukraine.
Ukraine also gave them an excuse to place sanctions on Russia once the ground was prepared for a period of very low oil prices.
The NATO strategists genuinely believed that the combination of losing Ukraine, supporting Assad, low oil prices, sectoral sanctions, propaganda war etc would cause Russia to buckle and fold under their collective pressure.
NATO strategists were mistaken.
“One thing that the NATO degenerates were hoping to gain with Ukraine, was to maybe even push a bargain, give-up Assad and we’ll give you back Ukraine.”
Sounds a little far-fetched. Rather, the point of the Maidan Nazi Putsch was to make the Zionazis’ wildest wet dreams come true by turning the entire Crimean peninsula into a giant NATO stronghold and, hence, Russia all but landlocked to the south and west. It would have been a catastrophic defeat possibly bringing about Russia’s collapse which seemed to be materialising under Yeltsin but was averted by Putin 17 years ago and — for a second successive time — in 2014.
One thing Syria and Ukraine clearly do have in common, however, is the open meddling of the Zionist Entity. Syria is literally a thorn in the side of the entire Zionist Project with her non-compliant government in Damascus. Hence, Israel’s commitment to the promotion of Wahhabi squalor is no accident. By contrast, Kosher Nazi Ukraine shows convincingly what happens to a totally subjugated Zio-colony. The Ukros are targeted for old-fashioned land-grabbing, squatting, and ethnic cleansing just like in Palestine. They asked for “Jewropean values” and they got it. With much much more to come.
Is this true? Cool if it is! Wheres the information on this?
just google ‘sept 3 2013 icbm damascus’ mod-hs
http://www.nairaland.com/1452388/russia-shot-down-two-us
https://theinternetpost.net/2013/09/03/russian-defense-ministry-reports-two-ballistic-targets-launched-in-mediterranean-israel-says-was-missile-test/
Auslander, you said it.
And the picture of Lavrov and Putin in front of the White House is beyond priceless. It’s a paradigm change in itself.
“Perhaps you should look to your west, look at the Bering Straits”
That quote sums it all up.
The land war the USA has not known for long will come through the north.
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity think there has been a coup; the Pentagon has rejected civilian authority and is now in control.
The government is now involved in keeping it from leaking.
That is what the re-writers of Obama’s legacy would love us to think. But Auslander is correct: Obama has the power to fire anyone with whom he disagrees, and presidents have done that across the board in the past.
As was mentioned in an earlier comment, it was the chemical weaponry ultimatum to Syria, broached by Kerry and seized upon by Lavrov that turned the tables on an escalation several years ago – and the Rose Garden press conference when Obama had to announce the de-escalation is proof that he himself was very much in favor of bombing. He obviously hated to have to back down, barely containing his fury at having to do so. I agree with the earlier comment. He, himself, is behind the current rhetoric coming from the Pentagon. He, our ‘civil-ian’ commander in chief, is giving one last thrash of the tail.
And unfortunately, Clinton is stitched out of the same cloth. The devil we know is very much not the devil we need.
Sorry folks, obama does not possess the power that you speak of. Have you a clue concerning the actual power structure in not just the US but also any and all states under the control of the international banking and corporate elite sectors. It is they and the “deep states” within that hold power over decision making processes. Obama is merely a figurehead chosen by those same groups and individuals to obfuscate reality. He follows the dictates of those who hold real power. Obama does as he is told to do. He is certainly not the one in charge. You delude yourself if you believe otherwise. Take time to understand who and what were behind obama’s meteoric rise from community organizer, to a not very accomplished or heralded junior senator to what you are lead to believe is the most powerful holder of office on the planet. Know your history.
Charles Fasola
You need to read UCMJ and see exactly the power the Commander in Chief has and it’s been used often but not this time.
Auslander
C. Fasola. I agree that Obama is a figurehead because he is a weak and ill informed person and as far as I can see does little on his own initiative, except perhaps go golfing. He could be a player in the power structure of the USA-western orbit but is clearly out of his depth and as the tele prompter in chief he is only able to recite what others write. Someone has to fill this vacuum and it looks as though too many are seeking to assert their authority in the presence of this empty suit. This is why you have the various power centers responding to stimuli rather than the president who most likely says “you handle it and report back, I’m going golfing.” These power centers are in collusion with the real powers behind the USA LLC that you mention, who must be aghast at the lack of coordination in the public power structure they ultimately control. Tough titty for them.
Point well taken. It’s a hard thing to be hostage to the madness of the neocons. The neocons reigned in Obama and Kerry long time ago after Lavrov and Putin steered them out of military action in Syria a few years back. Putin then wrote his opinion piece in the New York Times. The neocons cracked the whip, started the mess in Ukraine, and put the US back in line.
Why are we allowing some pencil-neck neocons(Ashton Carter etc) to push the world to this potential nuclear crisis? These guys are like drunk drivers, but real Americans are too cowed or chicken-sh** to take away the keys. What do they have on everybody? They don’t give a hoot about Americans, too busy chasing Pokemons and sports to even realize the danger they are in. It’s horrifying.
With the fate of the world on our hands (our own, not the “authorities”), it is obvious that we need to take out the 1% who are sending us all to nuclear war for their greater profits.
I essentially agree with all that you’ve said, but with some reservation about your usage of the word “civil war”. A Civil War is normally recognized as: ”A war between citizens of the same country.”.
The overwhelming majority of those fighting against the legitimate Syrian Government are not Syrian citizens. They are foreign terrorists and criminals who have no right to be on Syrian soil.
From all indications the Syrians who are involved only constitute a token number.
Syrian citizens have no desire to see their beautiful country laid to waste and they do not wish to have deranged Organ Eaters control swathes of territory and behead children.
Syrian citizens love their cultural heritage and would not use explosive to disfigure Palmyra.
There is no Civil War and there are no Moderate Rebels! All are terrorists!
Using the term ”Civil War” confers an undeserved veneer of legitimacy on the crimes being perpetrated by them and that is why the US likes to use the term.
When the US invaded Afghanistan they deliberately opted for the term ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ to describe those opposing the invasion. This term ensured that the internationally recognized Rules of War would not apply to those opposing the Empire. This explains what subsequently transpired with persons being illegally transferred and held at Guantanamo Bay.
By using the terms and definitions devised by the US we run the risk unwittingly supporting their aims…
Other Orwellian American phrases:
Enhanced Interrogation Techniques: Torture
Extraordinary Rendition: Kidnapping
Kinetic Military Action: War, Bombing.
Disposition Matrix: Kill List (see Obama, Barack)
Pre-emption: War of Aggression
And of course, the ever popular Moderate Rebel: American-backed jihadists/terrorists
We live in Orwell’s world of NewSpeak in the Land of the Free.
The parasite doesn’t mind killing its host eventually.
Had the French people an axe to grind with the Russians? Not that I know of. So it took the true victors of the French Revolution, the Rothschild bankers, quite advanced acrobatics – beside total media control, of course – to make Crypto-Jew Napoleon’s carefully scripted march to the east look at least half way organic.
The same goes for the completely ludicrous narrative that is sold to us as the Russian Revolution. All ‘fairy tales & false flags’, B movie style.
And what about the heroic Barbarossa adventure by the most famous of all Zionist assets: boy scout Adolf Hitler? No doubt the greatest blockbuster ever! Free Holohoax bonus DVD included!
And now, it seems, the parasites are ready to sacrifice its current main host, the US, in a desperate try to bring down their nemesis, Mother Russia.
What folly!
Brilliant summing up.
I’ll copy and paste that if I may?
“Right to protect R2P”: carpet bombing
“Humanitarian intervention”: total destruction
“Democratic revolution”: subversion of democracy
“war criminals and Hitlers”: individuals who oppose US hegemony
There’s so many of these, we could have a bingo board game…
And also…
Collateral damage: slaughtered civilians
Regime: Disobedient government
“By using the terms and definitions devised by the US we run the risk unwittingly supporting their aims…”
I have noticed this to.
Terms like “surgical strike” and so forth.
US terms are designed to sterilise warfare, make it seem like some sort of scientific endeavor or surgical process rather psychopaths attacking someone, or somebody defending themselves.
I’m reminded of the last US invasion of Russia, which occurred when Russia was at its worst point of crises, totally racked by revolution and fratricidal civil war. The result of that invasion was such a totally embarrassing failure – its intent being to destroy the Red Army and ensure victory of the White Army in that civil war – that it doesn’t even get mentioned in American history books except possibly as a footnote.
In archives and newspaper articles of that time is still evidence of Americans leaving a trail of blood in the fate of the Russian people and in the history of Primorye. Americans were carrying expeditions to the villages and committed massacres, looted, tortured peasants for days, butchered, mutilated and executed them.
They were burying local peasants alive, stabbing them with bayonets and then drowning in a cesspit, mutilating them with knives and bayonets until they were unrecognizable, cutting off noses, lips, ears, pricking their faces and eyes with bayonets, knocking their teeth out, cutting off the tongues, cutting off hands and legs, beheaded them.
They tortured and killed men, women and children. Even US general Graves admitted us much albeit only in a form of received reports from the area, where American solders were.
US colonel Morrow in his memoirs described that his solders couldn’t sleep without killing somebody that day. Russian prisoners were taken away and executed with machine guns. Most memorable day for US colonel Morrow was the day when 1600 people was shot.
In the archives of the Vladivostok museums are photographic evidences of the atrocities of the invaders, posing next to the beheaded and tortured bodies of Russians. Many politicians don’t want to to remember this and many don’t even know.
https://cont.ws/post/391468
And that episode came barely 50 years after Russia had stood loyally by the USA’s side in its Civil War. Gratitude? They’ve heard of it, and see it as a useful way to manipulate sentimental fools.
@ TomWelsh
“Russia stood loyally by the USA’s side in its civil war”
It is quite ironical that Russia supported the faction that was to become its ferocious enemy and probable nemesis. Although both France and England were at loggerheads with Russia, the Russian support to the Yank faction was one of the greatest strategic errors ever made.
Had Russia remained aloof, it is quite certain that France and England would support the Confederates, the USA would have been broken and the world saved from its savagery.
ergo there is no ‘soft coup’
Perhaps some dispute in the US hierarchy on how to attain their goals, but the goals are the same for all. Obama by stealth or McCain out in the open no difference. Obama perhaps more dangerous as many view him as a moderate.
Is the US flag being hauled down in the background and are those SU-34s flying cover?
Could that be the Trumpster second from right on top?
“These guys are like drunk drivers, but real Americans are too cowed or chicken-sh** to take away the keys. What do they have on everybody?”
Quite simple, if you ask me:
1) Psychotic, omnipresent corporate fascist mis-culture.
2) Genocidal violence and enslavement of other peoples as the backbone of national consciousness.
3) Threat of imperialist defeat, instantly turning our beloved Exceptionals and Indispensables to little more than disposable garbage. Europe’s rendition of US exceptionalism (Nazi Germany) springs to mind.
I think this covers the most essential aspects of Pindo political reaction, past and present.
@ Nussiminen
It could be a serious miscalculation to believe that it is only the supra-elite as the source and cause of hegemonic ambitions. Through deliberate indoctrination and other forms of mass control, a culture of supremacy has been inculcated into people’s consciousness and the majority of them believe it, they even vote for world dominance, after all that is what feeds them.
Aleppo is the new Stalingrad……look what happened to German army there, and how so very very few returned after surrendering to the Red Army………
btw, Sophie and Co interview today with Col Peter Mansoor Ex Executive Officer to Gen Patreus in Iraq -some very searching questions, some honest answers and reflections re the middle east Syria, Iraq, Libya etc……..
more
usa up to usual kidnapping tricks, just like ukr forces taking hostages in Donbass?
US has three days to notify Russia about arrest of its nationals in Denver — source
World October 07, 10:43 UTC+3
Two Russians are suspected of conspiring to obtain cutting-edge US microelectronics with the purpose of further export to Russia, evading the US licensing system
More:
http://tass.com/world/904775?_ga=1.36386400.1531488177.1475662548
“Cutting”…”edge”….
And terrorist flag is thrown in the bushes, brothers hugging ea, great stuff!
another call for arms and revolution in Russia?
80-year-old member of the Rothschild dynasty, Jacob Rothschild is confident that the United States can find support in some of the Russian elites, he said on American political TV show.
“The current crisis may last much less time than the cold war. At the moment the US has allies among the Russian elites, who are ready to take over the initiative. In this scenario, ordinary people will not notice anything. The course of Russia’s foreign policy will change – this will be presented as some kind of achievement of Russian diplomacy,” – said Rothschild.
Meanwhile Rothschild is sure that the so-called conflict of the Russian elites is in the final stage.
“A part of Russian elite insists that the Russian leadership pushes for the lifting of sanctions. Part are against concessions to the West. Next year we’ll know who won,” – said Rothschild.
It is worth noting that since September 30, 2016, a video of the famous Donbass defender Igor Girkin (Strelkov) lashing out at Putin has been circulating online. Strelkov makes it clear that his followers are ready to protest, and did not shy from personal insults towards Putin.
Earlier those Russian experts who favor Putin dubbed Strelkov “the fifth column”. Who is Strelkov’s sponsor remains a mystery.
***
KK:
Every country has its patriots and traitors, and it’s no doubt that Rothschild is not exaggerating. He seems very well informed for a government outsider. Strelkov is the least of Putin’s worries. The tentacles of the sprout reach far and wide and there is no doubt America has its ‘allies’ deeply planted in every strategic sector of the Russian society. But so they did in the 90’s but it did not prevent an emergence of a new strong and defiant leader seemingly out of nowhere. Undoubtedly America succeeded in enslaving much of the world, but Russia is no stranger to such attempts. Whenever Russia was plunged into dark times it has found its way out.
Apparently for America a victory means complete defeat and surrender of the opponent, which is consistent with it’s adherence to the law of the jungle in international politics. It has worked so far as long as 95% of global population are content with the status quo. However everyone understands that sharing a pie is better than giving it all to one, and global leaders and their constituents are watching Putin’s moves with envy and anticipation. In that regard we can safely conclude that Putin himself has many more silent allies among global elites than he is even aware of. ”
http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/10/jacob-rothschild-us-has-allies-among.html
It’s interesting how those at Fortruss choose to promote the opinions of this man when he is no more important than george Soros
Russia has been on a journey of enlightenment about the west and what it represents and about what they want for their country. The type of people that this Rothschild knows like khodokovsky could never come to power in Russia.
Fortruss are suspect in who am what they choose to promote.
Russia’s is being attacked and Fortruss choose to undermine Russia leaders.
The rothschild parasite coming out of the shadows, interesting. These bloodsuckers usually stay in the background. Desperation? He no doubt still has a lot of connections to Russian oligarchs set up in the 90’s, since rothschild money probably allowed many to gain control so quickly.
One wonderful outcome of the Ukrainian maidan is that it showed Russians exactly what would happen to their country if they backed a US color revolution.
Very interesting.
The willingness – quite unusual – of Lord R to court publicity speaks volumes.
The purpose seems twofold: to ‘reassure’ US neocons their plans are shared and being brought to fruition in Russia. That suggests jitters in the banking/MIC sector who have been no doubt assured their investment in war on Russia is secure. That looks to be challenged by a changing consciousness in Russia, not least the news of the huge drills and Putin’s ultimatum, so bringing Lord R out to make ‘reassuring’ noises.
The second is to ‘sow the seeds of doubt and confusion’ in Russia itself, especially among those who formulate foreign policy. It will no doubt be viewed with amusement by Russia’s Security Council, who are surely going recruit Lord R to the FSB ;-)
The fact that he has to use an American channel to promote his propaganda suggests Lord R has a personal problem re persuasion – this kind of thing normally goes on behind closed doors in ‘influential circles.’
While Auslander’s point is clear and fair – and appreciated – some may see the situation in Obama’s DC differently. They may think that Obama has zero power, that he is a pharmacos, and a shill, and is simply a minor co-conspirator. It may be well to recall that presidents who do not enjoy a condition of close alignment with the institutions, both formal and secret, that control and define what is permitted and what is not, tend to have unfortunate events befall them – as JFK did. Perhaps the intrepid gentleman is aware of this. If not, he’s delusional. Obama may remind some observers of Oswald – trapped by a vast machine. But weak presidents are not the only ones to examine – FDR suffered, according to some, 5 assassination attempts and may well have been murdered..(Gore Vidal and Webster Tarpley, among others, supply a few details about the FDR stuff)
In such a view the forces driving the delusional good fellas in DC do not rely on will. Instead they generate will. Forces? All the deadly sins ranged ’round in an economic model that’s irrational and exploitative – essentially a Ponzi Economy. They’ve run out of rope – so to speak. This view illustrates that Obama is not in a position to do much beyond a modicum of mitigation of excesses. Meantime the warrants he signs may well later condemn him… Meantime the “logical” thing for the Ponzi Empire is to “colonize” Russia and China. These ancient peoples, Long-establish Nations, object. The Ponzi Empire has no other “option”… And here we are. War.
Sevastopol is tactically a critical prize – obvious. But the goal is far more ambitious. The goal is total domination of everything. The war started – when? 2014? 1945? You tell me… But it is absolutely certain that it is not about to start – that happened long ago.
The question is how kind or how cruel Fortune will be to us all as the War ravels and burns mankind and Earth – making the wastelands where Peace descends on putrid corpses.
It’s important to see clearly in order to get solutions and develop hypotheses – and imagining that a party has the options of “choice” when he does not, as Auslander seems to, may be a grave error. Obama may well be helpless. Indeed the entire Empire may be helpless, locked in an irrational logical loop. If so then the outcome set is not pleasant.
If Russia see this as inevitable, and a cogent arguments for such a view exists, then the general course of strategy is differentiated. This means that Russia sees a set of options. These are real options. The goodfellas in DC only imagine that they have options. When you run out of options you lose. Indeed it is not too hard to see that the war’s outcome is already partially defined.
It is unclear what condition Russia will be in when this crises is past. A partial list of defeated or ruined places already exists – rather as the outcome of W2 existed in December of ’43…
The facts of history, the inadvisability of war with Russia, is lost on the goodfellas. They bear the delusion that they are exceptional. This is to say that they actually brag about being delusional, because there are no exceptional peoples or states. Anyway the lessons are for others and do not apply to the celestially anointed good-fellas.
It may also be worthwhile to remember that nearly all Americans in DC, the preponderance anyway, and almost surely the “leadership”, is taking psychotropic drugs…
Pax, and Thanks too to AL especially.
Bearing in mind what is at stake, personal weakness in a US president is not an excuse. If personally at some point he had other views, then these have been put aside, to side with the enemy and save his own skin.
Dear Peter – I did not intend to address personalities, Obama’s or anybody s. What is described is a weak system. A system that has zero options is weak. It necessarily eliminates choice. Individuals must as a prerequisite be delusional in order to enter into what they imagine is a power structure. Delusional individuals are by definition weak. It is absolutely NOT a matter of character, personalities, or will – but structural. The Ponzi Empire has no use for or place for the sane or for choice. In the metaphysics it is already gone, self-destructed by internal contradiction. Some may recall Burroughs’ dictum to hustlers (and the US is a hustler) “Hustlers of the world beware the mark you cannot beat, the mark inside.” Nothing I’ve written should be understood to stand as an “excuse”. Rather simply say the truth: The Empire Requires Delusional Beliefs. Delusional people do things that are irrational. Is this not true, Peter? Then, when the irrational acts are followed by disagreeable results, they do more irrational things…no? This is fact, not excuse. If, in the fullness of time, individuals find themselves standing before the bar, then they may make excuses and try to avoid the noose. They may have lawyers. Let us agree that it is then that any excuse may be offered by those lawyers.
Meantime we must say the truth. Obama is weak. He has no options other than violence, violence which cannot provide the necessary results. This defines defeat. The structure demands that he forge ahead in hope that the reality will somehow change and bestow, deus ex machina, options. Empire has, evidently, provoked a natural response. The die is, as Caesar said, cast. Actually, they say, he said it in the Imperative: “Let the die be cast.”
At least Caesar knew the import of what he was doing…. Some historians say he was trying to save the Republic. People say the same things about JFK. Both Heroic men fail, because the currents of History made their efforts futile, not because they were weak men. Same to-day. Empire is doomed by currents of History.
Pax.
Hi Dimitri.
Good analysis. Here’s a speech from the US head of JCS, Dunford.
It looks to me, couched in the usual tub-thumping rhetoric, to be a warning of less-than-optimal conditions for US to go to war.
Also, though this is only an impression, a subtle dig at Carter.
I hope he’s a realist at least, if still a reflection of the paradigm problem:
http://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/965661/change-coming-to-strategic-levels-in-military-dunford-promises
What do you and others think?
Dear Ausländer,
though I truly respect your attitude and your Russian patriotism (or your feelings towards Russia) your statement, that anyone, who attacks/invades Russia is doomed, is historically incorrect.
As any other country in the world, Russia has been defeated and invaded several times.
We can leave aside the Vikings of the 9th century, because there surely was no Russia back then, but the Mongols defeated, invaded and ruled over the Russians for over 200 years.
It’s true, that Russia, after expelling the Mongols in the 16th century, defeated Karl XII of Sweden and later on Napoleon.
But Russia was defeated again in the Crimean War of 1853 – 1856, afterwards by Japan in 1905, afterwards by Germany in 1917 (due to the Revolution, surely, but nonetheless defeated – only not for longer, because shortly afterwards, the Germans lost on the Western front).
WW II was close but thanks to Uncle Sam, who actively funded both sides, the Russkies kept the upper hand (in a war, which the quicker of two evil men had started – meaning, before the Red Army could invade Poland and Eastern Germany in the summer of 1941, Hitler striked first on the 22. of June – we know, how it has ended).
What we do not know is the true history of this conflict – as we do not know all that is to know about the Russian revolution of 1917 and all of the history afterwards – by whom everything was initiated, supported, controlled, manipulated etc.
Hints of knowledge we find in Solschenizyn and others (Solschenizyn for example writing about the fact, that miraculously Trotzky got an American passport in 1918 and 10.000,- $, while he was an emigrant in the United States – hopefully one day someone will follow all these clues – or the money, rather).
Then and only then will we know about the real powers, the real politics and the real victims.
As long as this is not done, we will remain puppets on strings – even Vladimir Putin is in this game. To what extent I do not know – but I fear, that one day he will fail – and fall.
And afterwards will come the great war to end all wars and hope and liberty.
Luckily fate has its own ways, so there is chance, that things will turn out differently from what the puppet masters intended.
But until this happens we need to call a spade a spade, as the saying goes.
And that Russia never has been defeated or invaded or that every invading power found its doom in Russia is just not true.
Alles Gute Ausländer – and take care
Goldgräber
Russia lost some battles but it never lost a war. When Mongols invaded Russia it was not a united Russia – it was split into multitudes of small Slavic states. Actually, thanks to Mongols Russia is united today. The Russian state today and its geographical space should provide a solid answer in regards to the history of wars against Russia. It is immense!
No offense, but you’re both wrong about a lot of things, because you rely too much on (100-year-old) bankster & gangster disinformation (they control the system and the M$M). But main thing, you (Goldgräber) at least recognize that!
It’s all about the ‘neocons’ (AngloZionists), aka the banksters & gangsters, not so much about countries (although Nationalism certainly is good) . . . They run the West (Holland, British Empire) since the 17th century, and also the US since1913 (Fed), and Germany since WWWI (1918 coup d’état/occupation/plunder/take-over).
[By the way, it was the banksters & gangsters who helped organize the Russian Revolution, and sent and supported (money) Lenin & his group out of Switzerland! . . . Germany merely. reluctantly let them pass, because it might end the War in the East, but then the same banksters & gangsters stabbed Germany in the back by massively entering WWI with the US at the Western (and home) front]
They organized WWI, after they had already (somewhat) corrupted both the German & the Russian Empire (otherwise Germany & Russia would never have fought each other in the first place), the Hitler Project, the persecution of Jews (‘holocaust’), in order to establish ‘Israel’, WWII, murdered Stalin, murdered Kennedy, the NASA ‘moon landings’ hoax, 9/11, al-Qaeda/ISIS, the ‘War on Terror’ hoax, and so forth.
(the banksters & gangsters mafia/cult wants world-wide totalitarian dictatorship)
They may have funded Lenin, but they got thoroughly ‘played’ by him.
@ Goldgrabber
Your understanding of history is deeply flawed, full of elementary school level learning. Just the statement justifying Barbarossa ( in fact blaming Stalin for starting WWII, as many neofascists are doing to day to sanitize the horrors fascism has caused and continues to cause by the US fascist cabal in cohorts with Zionism) shows clearly where you come from.
Russia was not defeated by Germany in WWI, Russia was fighting alone against three empires (Austrian, German, Ottoman) and another one (Japan) waiting for the opportunity to strike, along a 3,000-mille long front for 3 years in an imperialist war. The new Bolshevik Russian government acted according to their revolutionary anti-war programme to bring peace to the country and the world in its first proclamation to all belligerents. They all ignored Lenin’s call but the Germans saw an advantage in having peace with Russia and started negotiations to their advantage of course. Brest-Litovsky was not a defeat – it was a message of peace, Russia was prepared to give something up for the sake of peace. And that was Lenin’s call to all nations: “peace, no annexations and no reparations”, so that no nation would harbour grudges afterwards. They ignored him of course, but later ended up in Versailles to make a treat to star another war.
So you gloat on the fact that Russia suffered some defeats. So what? Perhaps they made her stronger. Just look at “Mother Calling” in Stalingrad (one day each year) and you might get the message.
But the US tried it in WWI in the Far East and North, and got a taste. Do they think they won?
They got beat badly in Vladivostok and in Arkhangelsk.
Now we have a potential war of the missiles (and the anti-missile defenses and EW systems).
Will the Kaliper or the US cruise missiles determine the outcome?
It looks as if the US wants to try it.
Certainly, jet fighters and stealth bombers are doomed in this scenario.
Even flow-flying drones have little hope of getting their mission accomplished.
But missiles from subs, surface ships, and jet platforms will be the weapons of the Hegemon.
They can standoff at significant distances and try to penetrate the Syrian defenses.
At the least, the Aleppo offensive by air will be disrupted. The US may be able to save al Nusra/al Sham and keep Aleppo from returning to Syrian control. (Imagine, the largest Syrian city returning to its owners, the Syrian people, millions of them.)
Syria is the last war of the Hegemon’s unipolar regime. It might not be the last war of the Hegemon because that beast is far from done regardless of Syria.
Until NATO is cratered, the Hegemon can do whatever it wants.
Russia needs to shock NATO in Ukraine. The back of NATO must be broken in Ukraine.
When the missiles fly in Syria, Russia needs to destroy the Ukie nazi battalions, unleash the Donbass Army and sweep clear Mariupol, Odessa and Kharkiv. Demarcate Novorossiya, fracture Ukraine, and leave. Ukraine will be halved, its military destroyed, Kiev in turmoil and NATO shamed into uselessness.
60 hours of RF combat focused on the monster criminal battalions, then back out to Russia.
The Donbass Army would double from the freed cities.
The Ukraine would be Free Ukraine in the East and South, and the rest would be Banderstan.
It turns out that the reported german threats of new sanctions against Russia were just the zio-gay media telling lies and doing their part in the zionazi psywar ops.
Rumors of New German Anti-Russian Sanctions a ‘Provocative Information Hoax’
https://sputniknews.com/world/20161007/1046102478/us-germany-russia-sanctions.html
Kerry is calling for Russia to be charged with War Crimes in Syria!
https://www.rt.com/usa/361939-kerry-russia-war-crimes/
More evidence that Kerry is delusional and his view of the world conflicts rather badly with reality.
“War crimes” is a subjective term, and anyone who studies history will note that the decision on what constitues a war crime and any consequences for the acts are always made by the victors, not the losers.
The US is not in any position to be deciding anything in Syria. This reminds me of a football fan crying in his beer that the game was “rigged” by the refs.
Charging Putin and his government for war crimes in Syria sounds highly convincing. Pindo chieftain Obama is a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate after all; Putin not so.
Dear President Putin: You could become a most distinguished Nobel Peace Prize Laureate yourself rather than a war criminal. Just surrender Crimea and enjoy the ensuing lovefest abroad!
When Americans commit violent extra-judicial murder or war crimes it is a “Nobel Peace Prize” nomination.
When someone else does anything that looks even remotely similar it is a ‘War Crime’.
UN special envoy to Syria, offers personally to escort Al-Nusra fighters from Aleppo.
Lavrov – Russia backs proposals to allow Al-Nusra fighters leave Aleppo.
(this was aired on RT today)
All the better to deal with them – they can’t use civilians as human shields if they leave.
Yes, it would be good to get them out in the open countryside, where they can be neatly eliminated.
What are these old memories of a ‘highway of death’?
Dear Auslander, thanks for the contribution — as always, enlightening and inspirational.
A question, now, for you and any others who choose to answer; and please forgive any ignorance implied.
I have read the statement from the Russian military spokesman about destroying unidentified objects flying over Syria. Is it wrong of me to interpret this rather detailed description of
“what’s going to happen” as the proscribing of a “no-fly zone” in pre-emption of any such US/NATO “illegal” action?
It is my observation that one should pay close attention to Russian “how it will be” statements, because they are not oft repeated and very likely to come to pass. Should I expect this declaration to be repeated by VVP, himself, before I hear news that Russia has shot down a “coalition” aircraft, or is the word of the military enough warning of “how things are now going to be.”?
Thanks for any insights shared.
GrandmaR
The statement about anti air defenses was made in response to some DoS news reader who stated that Russian soldiers will come home in body bags, Russian aircraft might possibly shot down and American aircraft would attack Syrian Arab Army and Syrian Air Force bases, soldiers and areas under government control.
The Russian Ministry of Defense’s statement in reply to the news reader’s statements was in essence Syria is under a Russian made and in many areas Russian manned air defense network that has a lot longer range than in the official brochures, in other words all of Syria and vast areas of Turkei, Irak, Iran, Jordan etc are also in the targeting envelope of some of these systems.
Any attack on Syrian armed forces, which have Russian advisors and technicians down to almost Rota levels, endangers Russian soldiers and Russian civilians working not only with the Syrian Armed Forces but doing Herculean work with the civilians and civilian infrastructure. Harm them or attack Syrian forces again and the gloves are off and the world will see how stealthy American airframes are.
There was a lot more in the statement but that is it in a nutshell.
Russia only warns once. If the subject of the warning goes stupid and does what he threatened you can rest assured Russia will do exactly as she warned, nothing more and nothing less.
VVP has not told me personally whether or not he will make that statement himself and publicly but you can rest assured that the compete text of the warning was approved by him word for word.
Auslander
Dear Auslander, thank you for your marvelous account of life in Crimea. I was there one year ago and everything you said resonates and I can also confirm it, having spoken with scores of Crimean Russians and some people close to the liberation of Crimea in Sebastopol.
I would like to show Konashenko’s ‘warning’ to Washington. I saw it somewhere with English subs but now cannot locate it. Could you tell me where to find it or post a link again please?
Franz
Finally found it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ0cTxABUY8
To quote Montgomery:
“…In reaching a decision on that matter, we must first be clear about certain rules of war. Rule 1, on page I of the book of war, is: “Do not march on Moscow”. Various people have tried it, Napoleon and Hitler, and it is no good. That is the first rule…”
Have they forgoten that one?
Or even recent by Farage:
“…If you poke the Russian bear with a stick he will respond. And if you have neither the means nor the political will to face him down that is very obviously not a good idea…”
They never learn ,,,
The British, for all their wickedness in the Imperial times, were different to the continental powers in being sufficiently intelligent to know not to try and attack Moscow directly. Instead, they used the 1900s era to try and contain Russia subversively and indirectly. No nation can realistically defeat Russia’s rump territory and keep hold of the land. Post Brexit, UK will play a role in keeping EU weak and distracted with negotiations, all this hopefully helping Russia to advance its interests in the east. Russians will, ultimately, have a common interest with UK against the Ultra-liberal, French-German EU Neo-Napoleonic Army.
The Anglo-Zionist entity will never have a common interest with an Orthodox, or any Russia.
Their fondest dream since before Catherine the Great has been to destroy Russia.
I do not think that Russians are about to forget.
I live in UK, Nobody here wants war with Russia, for a start we are too poor and weak. A big arms industry maybe talks it up, but it would be suicidal for the Anglo to start any war, even against Syrian Government or Iran, never mind Russia.
I have a question for all those who use the term Anglo-Zionist. How do you maintain these anti Israeli, pro Putin views, when Putin and many United Russia officials, and people like Zirinovsky, hold Pro Israeli views? Putin constantly praises the contribution of (non Bolshevik) Jews in Russian history. After Israel struck Palestinian positions, Putin came out and said Israel was right to have a counter terrorism operation. He has not encouraged any boycotts of Israeli products, criticised settlements in West Bank, or done anything to harm Bibi politically. In fact Sweden is more pro Palestinian and anti Israeli than Russia is now!
@ Anonymous
There are two different issues: Anglozionist (essentially Jewish-controlled “western” governments) hegemonic ambitions and, specifically, Russian defiance for its own survival as an independent country. Mr. Putin may have friendly relations with Russian Jews and Israelis but it is my take that he is Russian first, hence no contradiction there although the cozing up with that scum may be tainted with suspicion.
Putin is diplomatic and has a Russian Jewish population to consider in Russia.
Russian Orthodox Jewish leadership supports him,they are not Zionist.
The Russian record on UN resolutions re Israel does not in anyway support Zio-fascism – quite the reverse.
The term ‘Anglo-Zionism’ really refers to the control of the world finance system, whose members are responsible for the fomenting of war and conflict and are a continuation of colonial diktat by stealth: the centres are the City of London (actually independent from the rest of UK), Wall st and Tel Aviv.
The term ‘Anglo’ does not really refer to ethnicity – eg the Rothschild dynasty is deeply embedded in France (whose elites played a significant role in the destruction of Libya, and Syria) as much as origins – they were the bankers of the Anglo-Saxon royals.
Similarly Zionism is primarily associated with Jews, but is also associated with the Calvinist strain of American Protestantism.
In a nutshell, the term refers to the tribal origins of the globalists, who are actually atheists and serve no national interests in their quest for hegemony.
Either they succeed, or they face the increasingly likely prospect of another 1789.
And this time it will be global.
As regards the piece of advice “Do not march on Moscow”, it most likely has a tacit understanding: “…if your goal is to achieve Regime Change there “. Hitler, Napoleon, Sweden’s Charles XII and, looking ahead, Hillary Clinton should she become President (assuming Humanity survives) are just a bunch of violently insane Western megalomaniacs that will always be rewarded by crushing defeat against Russia in military terms. One could say that they, believing their own savage propaganda and absurd imbecilities, simply don’t care about what actually works or at least has any chance of achieving Regime Change in Russia.
As the 1980s and 1990s showed, Russia can indeed be vanquished but only through High Treason. It wasn’t Reagan, Thatcher, or even the Taleban who brought the West victory in the Cold war; it was Gorbachov and Yeltsin on behalf of the Russian Oligarchy and Western imperialism.
According to ancient Chinese philosophy, it is more difficult to conquer from the West to the East. It is easier to conquer from East to West, and also from North to South.
Russia, which is ruled by Moscow, is undefeated by the forces lying to the West and South of Moscow,
Auslander is correct in giving a “history lesson for those in Foggy Bottom, Berlin, Paris and London.” It will be more difficult for them to take on Russia which lies to the East and North of their capitals.
Afghanistan is South but also East Of Moscow, so they had a 50:50 chance of winning there. Syria is directly South of Moscow.
Your comment reminds me of the War of 1812, when the fledgling United States attempted to invade and take Canada, at that time a British Empire possession to the North of the United States. The main result of that adventure was the British burning the city of Washington, including the White House. Apparently invading to the North doesn’t work that well in the New World either.
There is no reason to conquer any one if you can self sufficient. Conquest does not pay.
@ J
That is the best message to all people of good will and reminds me of events of WWI when the Russian army was given orders from the new Bolshevik government to cease hostilities on the frontlines except in self-defence. German and Russian soldiers started confraternising instead of fighting, which was a capital crime for the German soldiers and many were executed on the spot by their officers.
Capitalism leads inevitably to wars: competition and exploitation necessarily involve conflict and aggression – that’s the nature of the beast. The USzionist quest for world domination is not driven by just the ambitious nature of some super-rich individuals, it is inherent to the structure of the system which enables them to exercise power and influence and smother any resistance to it.
.
Hi, anon, I think the problem is not Capitalism, socialism, or communism, or one religion or other. I think the problem is people fell in love with a label or a religion, and go overboard one way or other.
In case of China always facing wars from north (and west), precisely because the north is too harsh to sustain it self. The reason China(Han people) does not go out invade, because we thought war cost way more than trade. China is rich enough to trade for anything it does not already own. Much cheaper than send out children to administer hostile people in foreign land.
Europe likes wars because they do not know any better and too ideology in religion, or some kind of label. They are learning though.
! ! !
“This may be an innocent coincidence: Secretary Kerry is asking the scam artists of the White Helmets for video of Russian jets “bombing civilians” in Syria and, just by chance, the U.S. military is painting one of its jets to look like a “Russian” Su-34 strike fighter like those deployed in Syria.”
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/10/is-the-us-preparing-a-false-flag-bombing-in-syria.html#comments
Looks like another frame-up in the works. Another reality created to be judiciously studied.
@ smr
“U.S. military is painting one of its jets to look like a “Russian” Su-34 strike fighter like those deployed in Syria”
I think you are being facetious and cynical – it’s only readying some props for a new Hollywood movie. There is a long-time arrangement between film makers and the Pentagon for mutual assistance, the scripts being of course vetted first by the military for “enhancing American values”.
Either that, or some US Air Force tech wizard had an Einstein-moment and came to the brilliant conclusion that the Su-34’s superiority was not due to advanced engineering but was a purely accidental side effect of its peculiar, somehow Siberian, sinister shade of paint.
I suppose for the benefit of pedantic types like our friend @Goldgräber above, it would do to qualify the theme of the article to “This is the fate of anyone who attacks the modern Nation-State of Russia”
Yes, the Mongols conquered most of the Rus principalities in the 13th century. But the country of Russia did not yet exist. In the middle Ages the pricipalities were a collection of feudal territories with a common language and culture, much like the regions that would develop into the states of Italy and Germany. They fought as much among themselves as much as they fought outsiders, and were too disorganized to resist the Mongol forces.
By the early 18th century though, Russia transformed into a modern Nation-State, the largest of its day. It was inevitable that the Ottoman Empire would come into conflict with the consolidating Russian Empire, and indeed it did.
After the founding of the Russian Empire in 1721, the Ottomans invaded Russia and vice versa in: 1735, 1768, 1787, and 1828. The Ottoman Empire was repelled every time, usually with massive losses.
In 1853 the Ottomans allied with the British, French and Italians in a war to deny Crimea to the Russians, and to consolidate and shore up the Ottoman Empire’s control of the Balkans and the Eastern Black Sea regions which were disintigrating under rebellions and attempts at seccession as the Ottoman Empire declined economically and found itself without the resources to hold every part of its periphery together. The large Euro countries did not want to see restoration of large Balkan countries, such as a restored Bulgaria envisiged by many of the nationalists of the time.
Is any of this starting to sound vaguely familiar? Foreshadowings of the decline of a future empire? (Plus ça change . . . )
The Crimean war was the first large-scale war in which recent technological developments in weaponry (high explosive artillery shells, machine guns) were deployed on a total war scale, and in which communications developments such as rail transport and telegraphy enabled fast, effective engagement of huge numbers of combattants. The results were horrific, unprecedented to observers in the day. A foreshadowing of the US Civil War that would soon follow, and WW I.
The numbers were immense for such a relatively small region of operations. Just short of a million men on the allied side, more than 700,000 on the Russian side.
By comparison, Napoleon invaded Russia with an army of 700,000 in 1812. That was the same year the Americans launched the first step of their progress toward empire with the invasion of Sandwich, Upper Canada, by General William Hull, the opening shot in a war which the United States thought would add the territories of Upper and Lower Canada to the young nation.
The Russians lost approximately 150,000 killed, the allies about 250,000. These numbers are very approximate, because unknown numbers of men died from disease rather than direct combat.
The Russians capitulated under a treaty that, most onerously, required them to dismantle their naval and defensive facilities at Sevastopol. But by 1870 they had repudiated the treaty.
To this day, the Crimean War, and the disastrious Charge of the Light Brigade in particular, are bywords in Britain for incompetence and Pyrrhic victory, ie. wasting immense resources to win a victory that turns out to be useless.
In 1877 the Russian Empire allied with the Austro-Hungarian Empire and various rebel groups in the Balkans to finally drive the Ottoman Empire out of Europe, and consolidate its control of the North Caucasus region.
So, has anyone successfully invaded Russia since 1721?
Well, the Turks lost repeatedly, with huge losses, but in the one they “officially” won, the cost was still an immense number of soldiers’ and sailors’ lives, far greater than losses suffered by the Russian side. Then they lost the next and final one with disproportionate deaths, due to a combination of incompetence on the Ottoman officers’ part, and having to operate in areas with hostile populations as well as opposing military forces.
So the track record for people who want to attack Russia is pretty much as Auslander has described, even when you consider the Ottomans.
In 1920 Bolsheviks hoped to fully occupy Poland. The Polish victory had gained twenty years of independence not only for Poland, but at least for an entire central part of Europe.
And in 1939 it was Polish resistance to the nazis that delayed Barbarossa just long enough to save the bolshi state, the USSR, if I recall correctly. The delay in the schedule put the nazis in the mud and then the snow, dressed for summer… And the Poles are Slavic people too… tough as iron.
Hmm, something is telling me that your history lacks some facts. Poland fought Germans for little over a month (September 01 to October 07, 1939).
Barbarossa did not happen until summer 1941. Germans needed some time to collect huge army and weapons before the attack on Soviet Union. The delay had nothing to do with Poland resisting Germans. Poland was second to be consumed after Czechoslovakia and before the rest of Europe.
Oh, and after the Yugoslav resistance delayed the German attack on Russia at Britain’s request, the British showed the same “loyalty” to the Yugoslav’s as the US showed to Russia for helping the US North in the American civil war, by destroying the peace and unity of Yugoslavia some 50 years later.
@ Anonimus
Good observation, very glaring though, except the poor things only know to hate Russia. I hope the Russians are not vindictive and don’t exact retribution next time they come to Warsaw by the nth time.
Actually it was Yugoslav resistance to the Nazis that delayed Barbarossa, at the behest of Churchill, who having set up Germany and Russia to fight each other then become afraid that Germany’s early successes in the war would make it too powerful of a rival, especially since the British Empire was formally at war with Germany.
@ Markin
These Polish patriots have no inkling whatsoever about the world outside their primary school books and their Guide to Hate Russia. I posted comments similar to yours and the fact that Poland joined Germany to carve up Czechoslovakia and its scheming and dealings to thwart an alliance with the USSR as disclosed recently by the Russian ambassador in Warsaw. My post got lost.
The one and only really significant act attributable to “independent” Poland was her happy partaking 1938 in the Western rape of Czechoslovakia. Poland = Scavenging nation forever trying to boost her “glorious Western credentials” before the whole world.
Corollary question: Why do the Pindos joke about Poles rather than Russians?
Oh, you mean something like “oh yet another polish joke”?
On the serious note, I believe that polish jokes are rather complex and are beyond “slap stick” Americans.
The North American Reich masters would do well to read this- they will be on their own in a world war against Russia. is they are foolish enough to start it. The USA is actively despised. They will join the long list of failed invaders- Poland, Lithuania, Sweden, France, Germany……. Anti Russian sentiment is declining or non existant outside the North American bubble. In polls, Putin is almost as popular in China as he is in Russia itself. In Asia and Africa, Russia is widely admired for its resistance to hegemonic USA Imperialism.
The change in atmosphere in UK is immense. We were told packs of lies and threats by USA and its willing servants in Brussels. Well the threats made by Obama in that famous speech for the Remain campaign, are now materialising- USA companies pulling our investment, artificially crashing the sterling currency and lowering the credit rating. Effectively UK became, on the night of the referendum, part of the Global Other, the Normal countries, against the Hegemon. China is helping us rebuild Infrastructure. No way will I allow my children to die in american wars. Only USA are stupid enough to think they are able to defeat Russia.
It’s really very, very hard to continue to read a piece when someone suggests that the POTUS makes executive decisions. The presidential administration is surely a shop front for the deep state, an interface between them and the public. For goodness sake, Obama can barely string coherent sentences together without a teleprompter, let alone make strategy decisions.
Happy birthday Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin, I wish you a very long and healthy life and may Peace rules the world,
More crazy & violent words from this Army Chief of Staff. Threatening Russia AND China !!!
Video. WTF?!?!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1Qt4t6rfMbc
Oh for God’s sake ain’t nobody tryin to march on no Moscow. That would be as futile as Russia trying to invade the US through Mexico.
Everybody has their phallus on the table over energy access in the Middle East. Every move on either side is about containing the other to keep them out of the game. Most Americans rightly believe we can easily take care of our own energy needs, while our European and Israeli allies cannot.
American citizens and the vast majority of military personnel don’t want a war with Russia. We don’t want a war in the Middle East. It is unlikely Congress will declare a war. They didn’t even officially declare a war after the supposed “attack” on our home turf on 9/11.
Our government has been usurped by psychopaths in the military industrial complex and their proxies in the three branches of government. Every military operation since WWII has been an illegal act of war. They love violence, power and chaos and have a complete disregard for humanity, truth, beauty and goodness. It seems the Russian leadership has recognized this fact in elegant diplomatic fashion. It must be nice for the Russian people to finally be rid of the psychopaths in their own government after nearly a century of personal and religious repression.
Sane Americans believe in fierce, peaceful negotiation backed by a formidable defense in order to attain our goals. I guess it is our turn to clean up the homeland now….
@ Erin
“Oh for God’s sake ain’t nobody tryin to march on no Moscow”
Nobody has suggested that, not marching like Napoleon and Hitler. That is too manly, honourable and upfront. The Anglozionists spearheaded by the Pentagon do it surreptitiously, by subterfuge, deception and all vile acts taught by the perfidious Albion and perfected by its mongrel child on the other side of the Atlantic.
Occasionally they may actually send fighting men to the frontlines but only to take advantage of and profit from the spoils of war when the combatants are exhausted and the winning side is becoming evident (see WWI, WWII); or when the adversary is so piss-poor it cannot offer much resistance, in which case they are bombarded into submission before a boot is put in harm’s way.
As to Yanks not wanting war, what they mean is no war in the USA; elsewhere is OK, after all, it is war elsewhere that justifies having huge fleets of warplanes and warships, keep “allied” countries as vassals, enemies paralysed, the dollar solvent and their self-esteem afloat by appointment as the exceptional nation.
I’m not an expert on USA history or politics, but there is something exceptional about that country: its exalted democracy never produced a single representative for the common man, only mean servants for its corrupt kleptocracy.
They will attempt to attack Russia indirectly by underming its neighbors. The NATO forces are semi intelligent enough to know they will be beaten if they try and attack Russia. The Islamists are the main weapon that AngloZioSaudi forces will use to attack Russia and its Central Asian allies. They are extremely active in Kazakhstan already. When Nazarbaeyev gets ill or dies, the country will be ripe fruit for the westerners, being full of oil and gas and minerals as well as being a major pipeline, road and rail route between China and central asia. We must watch closely in Central Asia to see their moves. Russia will have to offer full assistance to the state security forces of these countries, including having joint air bases.
One of the things that troubles me with the above article is the hubris. Pride comes before a fall (Proverbs 16:18). Have the Russians explored why they were able to resist so many invasions? Was it only due to their much vaunted fighting ability, bravado and spirit or were there other more critical factors? By doing so they would be able to inject into their national psyche a vital measure of humility which would preserve them in the longer term. For example: why did the Mongols decide to tax Muscovy instead of wiping it out as they did with so many other more populous nations before they subdued Muscovy? Since I am not a Russian, just an ordinary member of the human race, I shall drop this hint and shall leave it to those more humble Russians to really explore the real foundations of their ‘success’ as a nation. In so doing, I hope that they will also discover for themselves the critical national weaknesses that nearly cause them to crumble if not for the grace of God and which may yet cause them to come asunder as a country.
I am not Russian, but perhaps a “cousin” by having Swedish ancestors from the same area as the Viking portion of the ancient Kievan Rus. Russia has, throughout her history, suffered much from war, invasions, revolutions, Autocratic Czars and rulers; all of which have, I believe as an outside admirer, helped to add a certain amount of humility to the Russian character. Orthodox Christianity also helps, even though Orthodoxy suffers from some of the same defects as Western Christianity, principally tying itself too much to the fashions, whims, and politics of the secular world, starting even before the Council of Nicea (Saker even had an article about this subject, even though He and I would not agree on all the particulars). Indeed, as written by both Tolstoy and Solzhenitsyn, it is when Russia forgets or minimizes her Orthodox Christian heritage that she suffers her worst calamities, such as the Bolshevik Revolution, and the economic and political suppression she experienced in the post WW2 era after remembering that heritage during the war, then forgetting it upon victory with the rape and pillage of her wartime enemies. Russia has done great things in defending Christianity and civilization when she remembers her Christian heritage, and suffers greatly when she forgets. But, even in suffering, she somehow survives and comes back to thrive. Even under atheistic Bolshevism many Russians still retained a sense of their Christian heritage such as Survivors of the Gulag discussing and trying to avoid the toxic effects of bitterness and revenge, and even Atheistic Khrushchev sponsored a program of Rehabilitation of many victims of the purges and the Gulag based on the Christian principle of forgiveness.
If Russia can come back to her Christian heritage, including especially Christ’s teachings on love and forgiveness, she will be able to call on God’s protection, and become a great nation once again.
Let’s pray for that Markin, that Russia can come back to her Christian heritage, including especially Christ’s teachings on love and forgiveness, she will be able to call on God’s protection, and become a great nation once again. God had preserved Russia as a nation in His sight for so long. I don’t think God will give up on Russia. I heard that millions of Russians went through a period of personal repentance of their sins during the Communist era and after. Maybe that’s why God did not shatter Russia completely after putting away the USSR. But my impression is that Russia still needs to go through national repentance as a state. For example they, like the US, need to repent for the national sin of genocide against the original native inhabitants of the land east of the Caucasus which they took over during Russia’s westward expansion across northern Asia. Maybe the Patriarchate of Moscow can take the lead. It is my prayer that Russia, both as Russians and as a nation-state will realise it was the grace of God that enabled them to survive and repel their enemies and not because of some inherent racial/national superiority as the above article seem to imply.
The Pentagon may be happy to engage in some sabre rattling. What may happen however if bombast and limited skirmishing is poised to become nuclear bombing? Will self preservation prevent them from obeying such orders? The threat that if they don’t obey the President’s order to destroy the world he will have them executed loses it’s force. The common sense response would be to execute the political establishment, under a flag of patriotism and restoration of the Republic. That prudence might be undermined if emotions are running high over losses in smaller battles or if they truly believe they can survive. Hence the value in Russia demonstrating its strength, resolve and cautious intentions.
That impressive reminder is beautifully written and published in a most timely manner.
The situation is indeed getting very serious. I have never seen the word “insanity” being used so liberally by prominent people (including so many Americans) talking about the role being played in the world by the Empire, as well as about the declarations made in public by its representatives. The world is now facing the last Empire gone mad. Imperial diplomats are no more diplomats, behaving as they are like fierce, enraged animals, seemingly prepared to destroy, even annihilate, everything in sight. In my long life, I never thought I would witness such chaos generated by a country claiming to specialize in “the best in the world” on everything, of all places.
The above is a most welcome reminder that as always, Russia will resist tyranny and ultimately lead the world to peace. At Oxford, recently, an eloquent Chinese voice was also heard, warning that China too should be expected to resist mightily to tyranny originating in the West, become “irrational”. (*) It so happens that both Russia and China know all too well, from long past and from recent history, who the enemies are and what they are about. While their warnings remain couched in very moderate terms still, we would be wise to listen to what they are now saying, pause, and consider, again and again, the likely disastrous consequences of our intolerable, revolting actions. Time is fast running out.
(*) Eric X. Li, “Democracy Is Failing”, Oxford Union Society.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9kqwMKyBvLc
There are several things that advantage Russia in this struggle and they all have to do with my disagreement that Obama can cashier anyone–he can’t because he is not in charge pure and simple. Washington is ruled by a virtual Junta that is now in disarray though it seems the Neocons (who Obama like Reagan opposes) have, perhaps, won most of the internal battles in the past few weeks at least it so appears. Russia has, more or less, a relatively unified leadership and can make reasonable decisions on the battlefield. The factional fighting inside Washington implies each major actor has to fight his/her rival and try to placate powerful allies and, at the same time, try and manipulate the complex situation in Syria. This is an impossible task and thust the chest-thumping within the military (which has it’s internal rivalries and tensions also). If Russia can just remain cools until after the election it will be able to accrue advantages that may not be overcome during the transition period and before the new President which is likely to be Clinton with her 24/7 full court media attack on Trump–she has all the power elite lined up with her takes office at the end of January. Even after that it won’t end the internal dissension and foot-dragging that the losing sides will continue to employ as they have for the past few years.
Mr. Lavrov has spokenly openly about increasing US aggression toward Russia and Russia’s need of nuclear weapons to protect itself from the US threat of attack.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-09/russia-accuses-us-threatening-its-national-security-warns-need-nuclear-arms-protecti
Indeed I must admit that I’ve never read anything so rightfully written both in the level of information and historically. Respect..!