Will Italy face off with the European Union? From Tom Luongo at tomluongo.me:
Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini just declared himself the leader of the Europe’s future. He refuses to budge one inch in negotiations with the European Union over Italy’s budget now threatening to take down the government.
And in doing this he not only speaks for Italians, he is now speaking for that growing part of the European population who sees what the EU is morphing into and recoiling in horror.
Protests in France over Emmanuel Macron’s new tax on diesel have turned violent. The British leadership has completely betrayed the people over Brexit. They may win this battle but the animosity towards the Britain’s leadership will only grow more virulent over time.
As the core leadership in France and Germany fades in popularity, held in place because of domestic political squabbling, Angela Merkel and Macron are ratcheting up the rhetoric against the rising nationalism Salvini represents and are now pushing hard for their Federation of Europe before both of them leave the scene in the next few years, at best.
If they lose their battles with Salvini and Hungary’s Viktor Orban they may be run out of office with pitchforks and firebrands.
Posted in banking, Currencies, Debt, Economy, Geopolitics, Governments, Politics
Tagged EU, European banks, Germany, interest rates, Italy
The European Union is become European’s answer to the Hotel California: you can check out anytime you want, but you can never leave. from Thierry Meyssan at Voltairenet.org via lewrockwell.com:
For Thierry Meyssan, the way in which Germany and France are refusing the right of the United Kingdom to leave the European Union demonstrates the fact that the EU is not simply a straight-jacket – it also goes to show that the Europeans still care as little about their neighbors as they did during the two World Wars. Manifestly, they have forgotten that governing a country means more than simply defending its interests in the short term, but also thinking in the long term and avoiding conflicts with its neighbours.
The member states of the European Union seem unaware of the clouds that are gathering above their heads. They have identified the most serious problems of the EU, but are treating them with nonchalance, and fail to understand what the British secession (Brexit) implies. They are slowly sinking into a crisis which may only be resolved by violence.
The origin of the problem
During the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the members of the European Community accepted to bow to the decisions of the United States and to integrate the states of Central Europe, even though these states did not correspond in any way to the logical criteria of adhesion. With this momentum, they adopted the Maastricht Treaty, which transformed the European project of economic coordination between European States into that of a supra-national State. The idea was to create a vast political bloc which, under the military protection of the United States, was intended to engage with the USA on the road to prosperity.
If it ever was, NATO is no longer about the US protecting Europe, it’s about making Europe the US’s vassal. An editorial from strategic-culture.org:
“Insulting” – that’s how US President Donald Trump sharply reacted to the idea of a “real European army” proposed by French President Emmanuel Macron.
And it was how Macron rationalized the need for an independent military force for Europe that perhaps most irked the American leader.
Speaking on a tour of World War I battlefields in northern France last week, Macron said that Europe needed to defend itself from “China, Russia and even the United States of America”.
It was a pretty extraordinary choice of words by the French leader. To frame the US among an array of perceived foreign enemy powers was a devastating blow to the concept of a much-vaunted transatlantic alliance.
Since the Second World War, ending 1945, the concept of an American-European alliance has been the bedrock of a supposed inviolable, mutual defense pact. That nearly seven-decade alliance is now being questioned more than ever.
Macron’s call for a European army was further backed up by German Chancellor Angela Merkel who also pointedly said this week that Europe can no longer rely on the US for its defense.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has welcomed the proposal for Europe to form its own military organization, independent from Washington. No doubt, Moscow views such a development as augmenting a move towards a multipolar international order, which Russia and China, among others, have been advocating in opposition to American ambitions of unipolar dominance.
Posted in Foreign Policy, Geopolitics, Governments, History, Imperialism, Military, War
Tagged Angela Merkel, Emmanuel Macron, Europe, France, Germany, NATO, President Trump
Why the world would have been better of if the US hadn’t entered WWI. From David Stockman at antiwar.com:
Read part 1 and part 2
The Great European War posed no national security threat whatsoever to the US. And that presumes, of course, the danger was not the Entente powers – but Germany and its allies.
From the very beginning, however, there was no chance at all that Germany and its bedraggled allies could threaten America – and that had become overwhelmingly true by April 1917 when Wilson launched America into war.
In fact, within a few weeks, after Berlin’s Schlieffen Plan offensive failed on September 11, 1914, the German Army became incarcerated in a bloody, bankrupting, two-front land war. That ensured its inexorable demise and utter incapacity in terms of finances and manpower to even glance cross-eyed at America on the distant side of the Atlantic moat.
Likewise, after the battle of Jutland in May 1916, the great German surface fleet was bottled up in its homeports – an inert flotilla of steel that posed no threat to the American coast 4,000 miles away.
As for the rest of the central powers, the Ottoman and Hapsburg empires already had an appointment with the dustbin of history. Need we even bother with any putative threat from the fourth member of the Central Powers – that is, Bulgaria?
Posted in Geopolitics, Governments, History, Imperialism, Military, Politics, War
Tagged British blockade, France, Germany, Great Britain, Neutrality, Russia, submarine warfare, US, World War I
There have been neo-Nazi groups within Germany since the original Nazis exited the scene after World War II. No surprise that some of the neo-Nazis are in the German military. From Alex Gorka at strategic-culture.org:
Sometimes real-life stories are the equal of the best screenplays for breathtaking action movies. You can’t make this stuff up — the facts seem stranger than fiction.
It’s clear to everyone how political polarization is tearing up German society. Violence has become widespread and is drawing in the extreme right, radical left, and Salafists. In October, German police arrested six men on suspicion of belonging to a far-right terrorist group that had attacked foreigners in the city of Chemnitz. This time that terror ring had devised a conspiracy to sow chaos throughout the entire country and put an end to democracy.
According to the British Sun, Germany’s Focus magazine has reported that some 200 far-right special operations forces (KSK) soldiers and vets had conspired to kill Green Party leader Claudia Roth, Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, and former President Joachim Gauck, as well as the leaders of asylum groups. The plot was uncovered by German criminal police .
The investigation found that far-right groups had tried to establish neo-Nazi cells within the German armed forces. A lieutenant colonel from military intelligence tried to obstruct the investigation and warned the plotters. This was surprising. Usually very serious vetting procedures are conducted before anyone can become a German serviceman, especially a commissioned officer. Far-right elements have normally been barred from military service, even back in the days of conscription. Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, defense spokeswoman for the Free Democratic Party (FDP), has demanded that the military conduct their own investigation.
Posted in Crime, Culture, Governments, History, Immigration, Media, Military, Society
Tagged Far right, German military, Germany, UK
One it’s 100th anniversary, Eric Margolis remembers WWI for what it actually was. From Margolis at lewrockwell.com:
We are now before the 100th anniversary of World War I, the war that was supposed to end all wars. While honoring the 16 million who died in this conflict, we should also condemn the memory of the politicians, officials and incompetent generals who created this horrendous blood bath.
I’ve walked most of the Western Front of the Great War, visited its battlefields and haunted forts, and seen the seas of crosses marking its innumerable cemeteries.
As a former soldier and war correspondent, I’ve always considered WWI as he stupidest, most tragic and catastrophic of all modern wars.
The continuation of this conflict, World War II, killed more people and brought more destruction on civilians in firebombed cities but, at least for me, World War I holds a special horror and poignancy. This war was not only an endless nightmare for the soldiers in their pestilential trenches, it also violently ended the previous 100 years of glorious European civilization, one of mankind’s most noble achievements.
Posted in Civil Liberties, Geopolitics, Governments, History, Imperialism, Military, Money, Morality, Politics, War
Tagged Austria, France, Germany, Great Britain, Russia, World War I
Russia, Turkey, Germany and France are shaping the peace in Syria without the US and Britain. From a Strategic Culture Foundation editorial at strategic-culture.org:
There were several takeaways from the recent Quadrilateral Summit in Istanbul on finding a peaceful settlement to the war in Syria. Russian President Vladimir Putin convened with his counterparts from Turkey, Germany and France for a two-day summit last weekend in a convivial and constructive atmosphere.
The four powers signed a communique emphasizing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria. It was Putin who underscored the inviolability of the Syrian government of President Assad as the internationally recognized authority in the Arab country. The communique also endorsed the right of the Syrian nation to self-determination over the future political settlement, free from external interference.
These principles have been stated before in a previous UN Security Council Resolution 2254. But it seems more than ever that the sovereignty of Syria has been widely accepted. Recall that not too long ago, Turkey and France were calling for President Assad to stand down. That demand is no longer tenable, at least as far as the four powers attending the Istanbul summit are concerned.