The world is edging closer and closer towards a hot war. Are you doing what you can to prevent it?
World War Three has already started with sanctions and manipulations of currency- and energy- markets. An economic war between USA and Russia is raging since the early summer of 2014 with sanctions towards Russia from USA and NATO countries. The manipulations of the oil-price plus the attack on the Russian ruble in December, brought this economic war even closer to a hot war.
The purpose of any kind of war is to force the opponent to give in to the demands of the attacker. Any reason of “punishment” are invented.
Some of you reading this might have bought into the reasons given by President Obama (and the American Senate, House of Representatives and Congress, and their compliant western mainstream mass-media) about the need to “stop the Russian aggression” (meaning, what they call the “annexation” of Crimea and the “invasion” of South-East Ukraine and the “threat” against other neighboring countries).
This article by Prof Michel Chossudovsky describes the political build-up in America (as well as Russia's answer) which brings us closer to extinction.
America is on a Hot War Footing: House Legislation Paves the Way for War with Russia? | Global Research
America is on a war footing. While, a World War Three Scenario has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than ten years, military action against Russia is now contemplated at an “operational level”. Similarly, both the Senate and the House have introduced enabling legislation which provides legitimacy to the conduct of a war against Russia.
We are not dealing with a “Cold War”. None of the safeguards of the Cold War era prevail.
There has been a breakdown in East-West diplomacy coupled with extensive war propaganda. In turn the United Nations has turned a blind eye to extensive war crimes committed by the Western military alliance.
Global security is at stake. This historic vote –which potentially could affect the lives of hundreds of millions of people Worldwide– has received almost no media coverage. A total media blackout prevails.
The World is at a dangerous crossroads. Moscow has responded to US-NATO threats. Its borders are threatened.
While, a World War Three Scenario has been on the drawing board of the Pentagon for more than ten years, military action against Russia is now contemplated at an operational level. Similarly, both the Senate and the House have introduced enabling legislation which provides legitimacy to the conduct of a war against Russia. We are not dealing with a Cold War.
Anyone who has followed the drama in Ukraine in more detail than what is presented by the representatives for the western financial elite in their controlled media, knows that the “Russian aggression” is only a response to the American aggression in Ukraine.
Russia's responses to the forced regime-change in Ukraine have just forced the ruling elite behind the governments in the USA and their “coalition of the tractable” (Canada, Australia, most of the EU-countries) to show their real intentions and to speed up the process of pressing Russia (back) into their fiat-economy driven extremely unequal form of capitalism.
The demonization of President Putin reminds us (or should remind us) about the public build-up of the wars in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya and Syria, all based on lies and invented “crimes” committed by their leaders.
If you have any doubts about that the accusations about Putin in western media is invented and exaggerated, you should read this book (now also on Kindle):
Amazon.com: The War Against Putin: What the Government-Media Complex Isn't Telling You About Russia eBook: M S King: Kindle Store
In the West, politicians and journalists of all stripes have referred to Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “thug”, a “tyrant”, a “murderer”, a “Communist”, a “Nazi”, the next “Hitler” and more. But amongst the Russian people, his popularity rating has reached levels as high as 85%.
So, who's right? Why such hatred for Vladimir Putin? Is it justified? Or has Putin been targeted merely for standing up the US-EU Axis of Internationalism? In clear, simple, powerful and concise language – supported by more than 100 illustrations – ‘The War Against Putin' takes readers on an exciting ‘crash course' journey from Russia's Medieval founding, through the days of the Czars, through the Communist Revolution and bloody Civil War, through Stalin & World War II, through the Cold War, through the Soviet collapse, through the Yeltsin disaster, and finally the Putin-led rebirth of the Russian nation.
It is one of the “greatest stories never told”, and will shed badly needed light on the new Russia, its dynamic leader, the dark forces aiming to bring about its demise, and maybe even World War III.
Says Dr. William Carlucci: “I was glued to the edge of my seat with jaw wide open as I read this gem of a book from start to finish, in a single sitting. The clarity and simplicity with which King's masterpiece demystifies current events represents a rare ability to speak to the reader with entertaining and understandable prose. This piece really needs to go viral, and fast. 5 Huge Stars!” Amazon.com: The War Against Putin: What the Government-Media Complex Isn't Telling You About Russia eBook: M S King: Kindle Store
So, if the “Russian aggression” is a myth, who invented it and why are they so determined to push us into a new hot war which is bound to go nuclear?
The video and the article below will explain this much better that I can. Watch, read and judge for yourself …
Eric Zuesse: “Anyone who still believes Obamas rhetoric and honesty would be wasting time to read the following analysis, which is only for people who have doubts about his honesty, and thus an open mind to the possibility of his lying about his intentions.
A pattern of aggressive lying for secret objectives is by now clear under Barack Obama; and in both the North Korean and the Russian and Ukrainian cases, nuclear weapons are very much on the table. Previously, after he had failed to achieve from the European Union the stringent economic sanctions that he had wanted against Russia — a nation that’s, of course, a far larger nuclear power than is North Korea — Obama used the pretext of the downing of the MH17 Malaysian airliner in order to obtain from the EU a hiked set of sanctions that are now causing real damage to Russia’s economy. Subsequently, it was virtually proven that the Ukrainian Government had actually shot down this airliner; furthermore, the Ukrainian Government had itself been installed in a violent U.S.-financed coup on 22 February 2014 which had been misrepresented as being a democratic revolution. As I headlined on December 22nd, “Head of Stratfor, ‘Private CIA’, Says Overthrow of Yanukovych Was ‘The Most Blatant Coup in History’,” and this fact that it was a coup, which is now known to the entire world’s knowledgeable community, has caused the Czech President publicly to break with the U.S. and EU and to make clear that his own country’s 1968 “Velvet Revolution,” unlike the overthrow of the Ukrainian Government in February 2014, was non-violent and expressed the public’s will, no coup at all.
President Obama seized control over Ukraine on 22 February 2014 in order for Ukraine to join NATO and become a staging-area for U.S. missiles aimed at Russia, next door. Of course, this wouldn’t be at all more acceptable to any Russian leader than was, to U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1962, the attempt by Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev to do that sort of thing to the U.S., in our own neighbor Cuba. So: this is a real provocation to nuclear war, but Obama keeps describing Russia as the aggressor here.
Perhaps the only way for the U.S. aristocracy to continue its global dominance will entail a nuclear war. It would be the final tragedy, the ultimate crime by the aristocracies, against the publics everywhere. Anyone who would say that it’s insane doesn’t get the point, which is that, for aristocrats, status is more important than everything else: dominance is everything, to them.
At West Point, on 28 May 2014: “Russia’s aggression toward former Soviet states unnerves capitals in Europe, while China’s economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors. From Brazil to India, rising middle classes compete with us. … So the United States is and remains the one indispensable nation. That has been true for the century passed [properly spelled ‘past,’ but this is his text] and it will be true for the century to come.” He wasn’t only saying that the graduating cadets would be facing an enemy that consists of America’s economic competitors and so these soldiers would fight and kill and die for America’s aristocracy and should accept and honor such a commitment, but that Russia’s resistance to subordination to America’s aristocracy and to America’s actual aggression is itself “aggression” that they must wage war against.
Obama does not represent the American public. He has fooled the American public, just as his predecessor did. If the only way to preserve the international dominance of America’s aristocracy will be a nuclear attack, he will probably do it. He represents fascist, pro-aristocratic and anti-public, values. He sees the public as the enemy.
Now, back to the question in the title of this post: “Are you doing everything you can trying to prevent WWIII”?
The neocons behind America's foreign policy, believe that if they act “tough enough”, Putin and Russia (and China) will back down and give up their plans of making BRICS leave the USD-based fiat-economy. This is a very dangerous wishful thinking. Just as the western banking elite is prepared to go all the way to a nuclear war to defend their rotten system and privileges, the modern Russia and most Russians (with or without President Putin) are just as determined to defend Russia's integrity and freedom.
Assuming that you already have an opinion (and it actually doesn't matter which side you are on, since you hopefully anyhow don't want to experience a nuclear war) do you spread your knowledge-based opinion among friends, colleagues and relatives? Do you tweet and post on Facebook timeline? Do you translate all the information (like this post) to your language and post on your blog or social media pages? Do you send links to interesting articles by email to your peers?
If not, you better start today! Tomorrow it might be too late!
If you still are “sitting on the fence” regarding your opinion about the events in Ukraine, here are two more articles which might help you with your conclusion. And, please note, that all of the articles and video referred to in this post are written by western scholars and researchers, not Russian.
How and Why the U.S. Has Re-Started the Cold War (The Backstory that Precipitated Ukraine's Civil War) Washington's Blog
When the Cold War ended, in 1990, Russia was in a very weak position, no real threat at all (except for nuclear weapons, but the nuclear rivalry had been greatly reduced via arms-control agreements). Communism was proven to have failed as an economic system, and this failure of communism had left a former U.S.S.R. that was decayed and unproductive. Russias climb-back, after that libertarian surge, was brief, ending in 1998, and Russia still hasnt yet improved itself beyond the Soviet era.
By Eric Zuesse.
There was no longer any doubt that Marxism was dead, and that it can never come back. As an ideology, its value had gone to zero. A few people (in places such as Cuba) still spout Marxism, but it’s actually finished, and there was in its wake within Russia only a kleptocratic form of capitalism, mainstream-economics “greed-is-good” corporatist or “fascist” economics, which, when introduced after communism, turned out to be hardly better than the communist regime itself was at its end. Though the 70-year Marxist experiment had definitely failed, Russia is still crippled by what Harvard designed and largely implemented in Russia to replace it. Since 2004 at the latest, Russia has been recovering from that form of “capitalism,” Harvard-economics capitalism, mainstream-economics capitalism.
U.S. President Barack Obama is therefore very concerned to stop the rise of Russia and of China. They are now a national security threat to the U.S., because they present a threat to the continuation of the dollar’s being the world’s reserve currency. That threat is clear from just that second chart alone (“Per Capita GDP”). Understandably, Obama wants to whack both Russia and China, to serve America’s aristocrats, who benefit enormously from the dollar’s being the global reserve currency. Whereas the Chinese threat right now is primarily economic, the Russian “threat” right now is supposedly military (and that’s fictitious because our military bases surround Russia, and Russia’s military bases don’t surround the U.S.; it’s a “threat” purely in U.S.-aristocracy-controlled “news” media, pure propaganda); but if those trend-lines continue, the aristocracies in both Russia and China will become powerful competitors against the now-dominant aristocracy (roughly the top 0.001%), which is the aristocracy in the U.S., the aristocracy that controls the largest number of international corporations.
The Obama-pushed international-trade agreements, the Trans Pacific Partnership, and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TPP and TTIP, are designed to tie or bind, respectively, Asia and Europe to the dollar, and to give U.S. international corporations, which is to say the largest chunk of the world’s aristocratic wealth, supranational control over national laws regarding labor, consumer protection, environment, and the regulation of foods and drugs. This U.S.-led mega-corporate control will also protect the dollar’s dominance. Russia and China might separate themselves from American economic theory, but they won’t present a serious threat unless they break the dominance of the dollar. It’s the wealth and power of the various nations’ respective aristocracies that’s driving this, not any ideology at all.
This also explains why the U.S. is encircling Russia with NATO members and weapons and U.S. military bases. Things like this are probably major factors of concern at secret private meetings of U.S. and EU aristocrats and their top agents, at the annual Bilderberg conferences; but, since those meetings are secret, one cannot know. Among the attendees at both the 2013 and the 2014 meetings were not only Martin Feldstein and Lawrence Summers, but Robert Rubin, Eric Schmidt, Peter Sutherland, Peter Thiel, James Wolfensohn, Robert Zoellick, David Petraeus, Richard Perle, George Osborne, Mario Monti, John Mickelthwait, Peter Mandelson, Christine Lagarde, Henry Kissinger, Klaus Kleinfeld, Alex Karp, James Johnson, Kenneth Jacobs, Carl Bildt, John Kerr, and Roger Altman. Even the husband-wife pair of Henry and Marie-Josée Kravis attended it during both of those latest years. There were no Russian oligarchs, and none from China, attending either meeting. Even the Japanese oligarchs are excluded. This cannot make them feel welcomed by the western oligarchs. Various western kings and queens are also regularly in attendance, but none from outside Europe. Also attending the 2013 conference were both Jeff Bezos and Donald Graham, the former of whom purchased a few months later the Washington Post from the latter. Also attending then: Peter Carrington, Manuel Barroso, and Timothy Geithner. Among the people not attending (or at least not publicly listed) in either year were: Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, George Soros, and any member of the family that owns Koch Industries, and of the family that controls Walmart. Attendance is by invitation only; and, among the many secret features of these meetings is the criteria for attendance. However, clearly: that particular oligarchic organization doesn’t even make a pretense at representing any aristocracy outside of the U.S. and Western Europe. Like the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the World Economic Forum, and a few other such oligarchic organizations, the Bilderberg meetings have provided opportunities for aristocrats from more than merely a single nation to get to know each other and transact business together personally, outside the reach of the NSA, KGB, or any of the “news” media (most of which are themselves owned by oligarchs). The fates of the publics everywhere, and of war and peace, might be more determined by such meetings as these, than by “democratic” “elections” in any single country. Democracy, within nations as well as internationally, is so strongly “influenced” by aristocrats, so that it might be a PR sham to merely “legitimize” rank exploitation. Nobody outside the inside can possibly know. The very existence of such an “inside,” appears to be inconsistent with any authentic democracy existing anywhere. Putin himself expressed publicly at the 2009 World Economic Forum in Davos his view of the 2008 economic crash, and it clearly rejects the view that Lawrence Summers, Timothy Geithner, Eric Holder, Barack Obama, and the entire Obama Administration, have put into practice to deal with that crash and to prevent a recurrence of it. Only time will tell whether Russia under Vladimir Putin and his successors, whomever they will be, will perform better or worse than the U.S. under its oligarchs. The only news-medium that devoted any attention to the 2014 Bilderberg meeting was Britain’s Guardian.
In this context, the current civil war in Ukraine can be understood; but western “news” media present it as being instead a result of Putin’s supposed aggressive expansionist agenda for Russia, even though it was actually started by Barack Obama (backed up by Christine Lagarde of the IMF just a day before the May 2nd massacre in Odessa against the supporters of independence from Kiev). Putin has struck back against the fascism of Obama and the IMF, by making serious arrangements with China to ditch the dollar as the world’s reserve currency — their own assertion of independence from West’s fascists. The movement for independence isn’t just within Ukraine, but is now (after the May 2nd massacre) an international independence movement. Read more…
Will 2015 Bring War? | The American Conservative
But the most determined push for war in 2015 will come from neocons and interventionists who want a U.S.-Putin confrontation and regime change in Russia. And as Russia has a nuclear arsenal to match our own, this is a matter of real gravity. Because of U.S.-EU sanctions on Russia for its role in Ukraine and the collapse in the price of oil, Russia’s principal export, the ruble has lost half its value, and the economy faces a contraction of 5 percent in 2015.
Real hardships lie ahead for the Russian people. But it seems they are not blaming Vladimir Putin for their troubles. They are blaming us.
“According to the respected Moscow ‘Levada Center,’ which measures political sentiment in Russian society,” the New York Observer reports, “74 percent of Russians have negative feelings towards the USA. … In the 1990s, 80 percent had positive attitude toward America.
“Currently, 76 percent of Russians hate Obama personally and only a meager 2 percent like him. … These are the maximum peaks of anti-American feelings in Russia in years. … Just last week Visa and MasterCard completely stopped their operations in Crimea, leaving more than 2 million people there without access to their money.”
Before going home, Congress voted to levy new sanctions on Russia and authorized U.S. lethal weapons to be sent to Kiev to enable Ukraine to retake Luhansk and Donetsk and perhaps Crimea. Obama signed the bill.
With Republican hawks taking over all congressional committees dealing with foreign and defense policy, peace and war, in the new year, there will be a competitive clamor that Obama send the guns to Kiev.
And what happens then?
Will Putin abandon the rebels and face the rage of the Russian people for backing down? Will Putin wait for the U.S. anti-tank weapons and ammunition to arrive and be sent to eastern Ukraine? Or will Putin, a decisive sort, send in the Russian army before the U.S. weapons arrive, hive off a land bridge to Crimea—and maybe more for bartering purposes—and call Obama’s bluff?
In his New Year’s message to the Russian people, Putin hailed the annexation of Crimea as an achievement that will “forever remain a landmark in the national history.” Doesn’t sound as if he’ll be giving Crimea up any time soon.
It is a bad thing, albeit in some ways understandable, that much of the clamor on the right for upcoming military intervention is coming from long-time died in the wool neocons who never seem to see a conflict that the US shouldn’t be a part of.
It is a travesty, and a mockery of our political system, that there’s no shortage of those on the right who are pushing for war not because they contend that the US has a role in some of those conflicts, or because they believe our intervention will actually improve anything … but because they think the US getting involved in a war will stain Obama’s reputation. Which explains their cynical rush to be painting Obama as “weak” each time some tyrant or terrorists act badly somewhere in the world.
That prize, of course, not being a healthy America free of being entangled in geopolitical struggles that pose little or no existential risk to us … but the 2016 Presidential election.
This is foreign policy, wagged by Wall Street rules.
It is time to wake up to the fact that NeoCons are not just Zionists. They are imperial fanatics and salesmen for the military industrial complex. Their full time job is fomenting war. See more…