Nobody in Europe wants to state the obvious suspicions in the Nordstream sabotage and the bombing of the Crimean bridge. Nobody wants to ask any questions. From Alastair Crooke at strategic-culture.org:
Sir A Conan Doyle: Holmes: Curious: the fact that the dog did not bark when you would expect it so to do.
Western media is full of speculation whether, or not, we stand at the cusp of WW3. Actually, we are already there. The long war never stopped. In the wake of America’s 2008 Financial Crisis, the U.S. needed to reinforce its economy’s collateral resource base. For the Straussian current (the neocon hawks if you prefer), Russia’s then post-Cold War weakness was ‘opportunity’ to open a new war front. The U.S. hawks wanted to kill two birds with one stone: to pillage Russia’s valuable resources to reinforce their own economy and to fracture Russia into a kaleidoscope of parts.
For the Straussians, the Cold War too never ended. The world remains binary – ‘us and them, good and evil’.
But the neoliberal pillage ultimately didn’t succeed – to the lasting chagrin of the Straussians. Since 2014 at least, (according to one senior Russian official), the Great Game has moved towards the attempt by the U.S. to control the flows and corridors of energy – and to set its price. And, on the other side, on Russia’s counter-measures to create fluid and dynamic transit networks through pipelines and Asian internal waterways – and to set the price of energy. (Now via OPEC+)
So, Putin holding the Ukraine referenda; mobilising Russian military forces; and reminding the world that he is open to talks, clearly ‘ups the ante’. Should the NATO-led Ukrainians push into these areas after next week, it will constitute a direct attack on Russian soil. This retaliation threat is backed up by the mobilisation of massive military deployments.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, the neocons thought they had a clear route to U.S. hegemony. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.com:
My obituary of Gorbachev brought interview requests from three major Russian media organizations. At the risk of being labeled “a Russian agent” I accepted. It was an interesting experience. Russians tend to see NATO on Russia’s border’s as Gorbachev’s fault for not getting in writing the George H. W. Bush administration’s guarantee that NATO would not move one inch to the East if Gorbachev permitted the reunification of Germany. This is known as “Gorbachev’s mistake.”
I think this misinterpretation of what Gorbachev’s mistake was can be cleared up with a question: If a government does not respect its word, why would it respect its signature? Indeed, we have seen with later US regimes the breaking of arms limitation agreements that were signed.
Gorbachev’s mistake was his failure to appreciate the distress his concessions to the US about Germany and Eastern Europe were causing politburo hardliners. Hardliners thought Gorbachev was giving up Russian buffers prematurely. To stop what they saw as erosion of Russia’s strategic position, they placed Gorbachev under house arrest. Thus, Gorbachev’s mistake was misjudging the Politburo.
It was not Washington that collapsed the Soviet Union. It was the Politburo’s arrest of the President of the Soviet Union.
Explosive presentation hosted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs
reveals what no government official, no political representative, no NGO
executive and no think tank director has ever said before in public.
STRATFOR Founder George Friedman Expresses the Profound Flaws and Extreme Hubris of American Exceptionalism and U.S. Foreign Policy
The preceding map of Eastern Europe and Western Asia represents the most active part of the current global geopolitical chessboard. The few colored lines illustrate the very essence of the Anglo-American geopolitical strategy to maintain world domination and global economic control. This map was shown as a slide at a critical speech given by STRATFOR founder George Friedman. It was taken as a screenshot in case the exceedingly volatile and incriminating video is removed from the internet.
The neocons, joined at the hip with Israel, really want to go to war with Iran. From Daniel Larison at antiwar.com:
The drumbeat for war with Iran is starting up again in Western media outlets, and it is following the usual pattern of promoting false claims to exaggerate the threat from Iran and its non-existent nuclear weapons. One recent report stands out as an example of how news outlets can misinform the public about major foreign policy issues to make military action seem as if it is inevitable. NBC News published a story that was supposedly on Biden’s trip to Israel and Saudi Arabia, but the story was focused almost entirely on whipping up fear of Iran’s nuclear program and distorting the facts about the Iranian government’s ability to obtain nuclear weapons. Now that the nuclear negotiations have stalled, we can expect to see even more agitation for attacking Iran and more “news” reports that pave the way for another unnecessary war.
One of the most important claims in the story is wildly inaccurate, and it creates the impression that the Iranian government could soon be on the verge of possessing nuclear weapons. According to the report, “Iran has stockpiled a significant amount of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity…and could create an atomic bomb in a matter of days if it chose to enrich the material to 90 percent, arms control experts says.” Even if the Iranian government decided to enrich to 90%, which it hasn’t done, it would take much longer than a “matter of days” to build even one working weapon. That assumes that their government made the choice to build weapons in the first place, and that option is one that their government has rejected for a long time. The report doesn’t quote any of these “experts” by name, and we are just expected to swallow this outlandish claim.
There’s no money or power in a non-interventionist foreign policy, which is why such a policy has been an ideological orphan since the 1930s. From Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., at lewrockwell.com:
Supporters of an aggressive American foreign policy like brain-dead Biden and the gang of neocons who control him reply to critics by playing the Hitler card. They say, “Imagine what would happened if the US stayed out of World War II. Hitler would have conquered the world! This shows why we have to fight against Russia and China now!”
Of course it doesn’t show that, and if we do fight Russia and China, we will destroy the world in a nuclear war. But we should look at their argument in its own terms. Should we have stayed out of World War II? The answer is clear. Yes, we should have, and in seeing why, our best guide is the great Murray Rothbard.
As Murray makes clear in his great book The Betrayal of the American Right, the left used the same tactics against those who wanted to stay out of World War II as the Trotskyite neocons do today. They called non-interventionists fascists, just the way they do today: “Still worse was the attitude of these new interventionists toward those erstwhile friends and allies who continued to persist in their old beliefs; these latter were now castigated and denounced day in and day out, with extreme bitterness and venom, as ‘reactionaries,’ ‘fascists,’ ‘anti-Semites,’ and ‘followers of the Goebbels line.’ Joining with great enthusiasm in this smear campaign was the Communist Party and its allies, from the ‘collective security’ campaign of the Soviet Union in the late 1930s and again after the Nazi attack on Russia on June 22, 1941. . . The opponents of war were not only being shut out from liberal journals and organizations but from much of the mass media as well. As the Roosevelt administration moved inexorably toward war, much of the Establishment that had been repelled by the leftwing rhetoric of the New Deal eagerly made its peace with the government, and swiftly moved into positions of power. In Roosevelt’s own famous phrase, ‘Dr. New Deal’ had been replaced by ‘Dr. Win the War,’ and, as the armaments orders poured in, the conservative elements of Big Business were back in the fold: in particular, the Wall Street and Eastern Establishment, the bankers and industrialists, the Morgan interests, the Ivy League Entente, all happily returned to the good old days of World War I and the battle of the British Empire against Germany.”
Neither party wants to confront or capitalize on the truth that most of the time most Americans don’t want to go to war. Both parties get too much money from defense contractors. From Sean Willich at antiwar.com:
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been yet another polarizing event in the news cycle. It seems like other topics being covered by the mainstream media that if you do not have the correct opinion then you are some sort of villain, in this case you are a pro-Russian propagandist. So, what is the establishment narrative? Well, it’s simple, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is a threat to western democracy and America should be involved, doesn’t that sound familiar? Establishment Neo-Conservatives and Neo-Liberals started ringing the war bells before it was clear that Russia was going to invade Ukraine. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin expressed how the Russian threat to Ukraine could lead to a possible hot conflict between the U.S. and Russia. Republican Senator Roger Wicker suggested that we need to leave the nuclear option on the table. Many politicians have voiced their support for Ukraine, some calling for boots on the ground, and many calling for President Joe Biden to do more to support Ukrainian forces. All of this has done nothing but escalate the war in Ukraine.
Currently, President Biden is increasing financial support for Ukraine. Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal recently claimed that Ukraine has received $12 Billion in weapons and financial aid since the start of the invasion, obviously not all of this has come from the US It does seem that this war is dragging out much longer than anticipated by the Russians. It is widely reported that Vladimir Putin thought that taking Ukraine would be an easy task. Now whether this is the case depends on what news sources you are listening to. Some reports have said that Ukraine is holding back the Russian military, other reports have depicted a much bleaker situation for the Ukrainians. Some reports have stated the Ukraine and Russia are close to a cease fire agreement. It is hard to decipher what is really going on in Ukraine.
Covid is the latest manifestation of a long running plan to use bioweapons and bioweapon response as instruments of control. From Matthew Ehret at unz.com:
A little over 20 years ago, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) conducted a military exercise that involved a “hypothetical scenario” of hijacked planes flying into both the Pentagon and the World Trade Center.
One year later, on October 24-26, 2000, another “hypothetical” military exercise was played out featuring an airline crashing into the Pentagon killing 341 people followed by yet another May 2001 Department of Defense “hypothetical scenario” which saw hundreds of medical personnel training for a “guided missile in the form of a hijacked 757 airliner” crashing into the Pentagon.
What arose from the smoke and debris of September 11, 2001 was unlike anything the sleeping masses or international community expected.
Being a neocon means never having to say you’re sorry—certainly not for your multitudinous blunders, and not even for those blunders’ innocent dead. From Matt Taibbi at taibbi.substack.com:
More and more, we’re told outright war isn’t just necessary and right, but the thing that will solve America’s existential problems
Robert Kagan, neoconservative writer and husband to Deputy Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland, wrote a piece called “The Price of Hegemony” in Foreign Affairs last week that was fascinating. If I’d written his opening, people would denounce me as a Putin-concubine:
Although it is obscene to blame the United States for Putin’s inhumane attack on Ukraine, to insist that the invasion was entirely unprovoked is misleading.
Just as Pearl Harbor was the consequence of U.S. efforts to blunt Japanese expansion on the Asian mainland, and just as the 9/11 attacks were partly a response to the United States’ dominant presence in the Middle East after the first Gulf War, so Russian decisions have been a response to the expanding post–Cold War hegemony of the United States and its allies in Europe.
Kagan went on to make an argument straight out of Dr. Strangelove. Instead of doing what some critics want and focusing on “improving the well-being of Americans,” the U.S. government is instead properly recognizing the responsibility that comes with being a superpower. So, while Russia’s invasion may indeed have been a foreseeable consequence of a decision to expand our hegemonic reach, now that we’re here, there’s only one option left. Total commitment:
Putin has a way of highlighting the hypocrisies of Western leaders that infuriates them. Thus the nonstop hate. From Tom Luongo at tomluongo.me:
As we end this third week of World War III it’s becoming clear that the West’s end-game strategy is now regime change in Russia. As the money and weapons pour into Ukraine the Ukrainian Flag further morphs into the 21st century’s version of ‘Old Shoe,’ all around the Twittersphere.
Zelenskyy’s even been invited to the Oscar’s for pity’s sake.
Speaking at a press conference, Graham said “I hope he will be taken out, one way or the other,” adding “I don’t care how they take him out. I don’t care if we send him to The Hague and try him. I just want him to go.”
Should NATO be taking on Russia over Ukraine? Should NATO exist at all? From Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. at lewrockwell.com:
As you would expect from brain-dead Biden and the people controlling him, American policy has been moving in the wrong direction. Whatever you think about the situation in the Ukraine, one thing is obvious. It’s a crisis. Shouldn’t we try to stay out of danger? Instead, the US has led the way in imposing drastic economic sanctions on Russia, backing Putin to the wall. What if he gets desperate and uses atomic weapons? This could result in the end of civilized life on our planet. Is this what Americans want?
The danger isn’t just something I and other critics of American policy have conjured up. “President Vladimir Putin said on Saturday [March 5] that Western sanctions on Russia were akin to a declaration of war and warned that any attempt to impose a no-fly zone in Ukraine would lead to catastrophic consequences for the world. . . ‘These sanctions that are being imposed are akin to a declaration of war but thank God it has not come to that,’ Putin said, speaking to a group of flight attendants at an Aeroflot training centre near Moscow. He said any attempt by another power to impose a no-fly zone in Ukraine would be considered by Russia to be a step into the military conflict.”
The neocon warmongers brush this danger aside. They say that “we” have to do something to defend the Ukraine from an unprovoked Russian attack. But this totally distorts what is happening there. The Ukrainian government started things by moving against Donbass, a territory that declared independence and is allied with Russia. According to the Ukrainian government, the Ukrainians can secede from Russia but people can’t secede from the Ukraine. As Rick Rozoff pointed out in an article on February 2, “Two-thirds of Ukrainian army servicemen have been amassed along the Donbas contact line, Eduard Basurin, spokesman for the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) militia, said on Thursday.
Unlike many websites, Straight Line Logic does not solicit donations. If you're going to lay out your hard-earned money, you should get something in exchange. If you like the site and want to support it, buy The Golden Pinnacle or The Gordian Knot, either as a book or download. The links are on the right-hand side of the page, in the Blogroll section. You'll be supporting the site, and getting a great book and hours of enjoyable reading.