The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
Do We Really Want War with Russia?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_362005916

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

War with Russia appears increasingly likely as the US and its NATO satraps continue their military provocations of Moscow.

As dangers mount, our foolish politicians should all be forced to read, and then re-read, Prof. Christopher Clark’s magisterial book, ‘The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914.’ What is past increasingly appears prologue.

Prof. Clark carefully details how small cabals of anti-German senior officials in France, Britain and Russia engineered World War I, a dire conflict that was unnecessary, idiotic, and illogical. Germany and Austria-Hungary of course share some the blame, but to a much lesser degree than the bellicose French, Serbs, Russians and British.

We are seeing the same process at work today. The war party in Washington, backed by the military-industrial complex, the tame media, and the neocons, are agitating hard for war.

US and NATO combat forces are being sent to Russia’s western borders in Ukraine, the Baltic and Black Sea. NATO is arming, financing ($40 billion so far) and supplying Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. Prominent Americans are calling for the US to attack Russian forces in Syria. US warships are off Russia’s coasts in the Black Sea, Baltic and Pacific. NATO air forces are probing Russia’s western air borders.

Some of this is great power shadow boxing, trying to cow insubordinate Russia into accepting Washington’s orders. But much appears to be the work of the hard right and neocons in the US and Europe in spite of the desire of most Americans and Europeans to avoid armed conflict with Russia.

Hence the daily barrage of anti-Russian, anti-Putin invective in the US media and the European media controlled by the US. Germany’s lapdog media behaves as if the US postwar occupation is still in force – and perhaps it is. Germany has not had a truly independent foreign policy since the war.

In an amazing break with Berlin’s normally obsequious behavior, German’s foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, just demanded that Washington and NATO stop their ‘sabre-rattling’ against Russia. He speaks for many Germans and other Europeans who are deeply alarmed by the alliance’s provocations of Russia.

In fact, many Europeans want to see the end of NATO-imposed sanctions against Russia that were ordered by the US. No one in Europe cares about Russia’s re-occupation of Crimea. The sanctions have been a big backfire, seriously hurting EU exports to Russia at a time of marked economic weakness. Nor are any Europeans ready to fight a war, or worse, even court nuclear war, for such dark-side-of-the-moon places as eastern Ukraine’s Luhansk or Mariupol.

America’s numb-brained Republican members of Congress, who could not find Crimea on a map if their lives depended on it, may be counted on to beat the war drums to please their big donors and hard right religious donors.

The only Republican to buck this trend is Donald Trump who, for all his other foolish positions, has the clear sense to see no benefit for the US in antagonizing Russia and seeking war in Europe or the Mideast.

ORDER IT NOW

What the US and its sidekick NATO has done so far is to antagonize Russia and affirm its deeply held fears that the west is always an implacable enemy. But it seems very unlikely that the tough Vlad Putin and his battle-hardened nation is going to be cowed into submission by a few thousand US and NATO troops, a few frigates and some flyovers. Ever since Frederick the Great, wise European leaders have learned not to fight with Russia.

Not so President Obama’s strategic Walkures, Samantha Power, Susan Rice and, until recently, Hillary Clinton. They proved the most bungling military-strategic leadership since Madame de Pompadour was briefly given command of France’s armies by King Louis XV and proved an epic disaster.

One shudders watching Hillary Clinton aspire to be a commander-in-chief.

It’s also inevitable that land, sea and air provocations against Russia will eventually result in accidental clashes and a stern Russian response. All one needs is a Sarajevo II terror incident to spark a big shooting war between nuclear powers.

(Republished from EricMargolis.com by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: NATO, Neocons, Russia 
Hide 45 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. a lefty desperately attempting to blame America’s empire building on the right. How are neocons ‘right wing’? How are the religious right interested in fighting Russia, a largely Christian nation? Since the rise of Trump, its become clear evangelicals are no longer enthralled by the city on the hill narrative the neocons used to garner their votes.

    Consider that most US wars since 1900 have been fought with democrats at the helm. Warmongering is a bi-partisan consensus.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BaldurDasche
    You obviously dwell in a land unaffected by the 'New American Century'. If the hebrew thinkers who coined the expression believed in Jesus, they would have worked Him into their plan.

    There are a substantial number of 'christian' citizens in America and elsewhere, who believe the 'forces of light' in the foretold battle of Armageddon will be flying the Stars and Stripes. Like jihadis in expectation of some virginic reward, they would like to 'move things ahead' to the 'end time' and the 'Second Coming' - pornographic as that might sound.

    War is 'sexy' again - evverywhere.
    , @anti_republocrat
    Huh? I think he was pretty even-handed, calling out "Obama’s strategic Walkures" writing, "One shudders watching Hillary Clinton aspire to be a commander-in-chief," and clearly identifying Donald Trump as less likely to begin "a big shooting war between nuclear powers."

    Are you of the opinion that only Democrats should be called out as warmongers rather than warmongers of both parties, or that people you perceive as "lefty" should be universally dismissed as not genuinely anti-war?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /emargolis/do-we-really-want-war-with-russia/#comment-1467396
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. 5371 says:

    [Madame de Pompadour was briefly given command of France’s armies by King Louis XV]

    I don’t think this actually happened.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BaldurDasche
    Didn't somebody paint her in body armor with rouged breasts exposed above her cuirass? A 17th century prediction of the 'Gals 'nGunz Calendar'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. hbm says:

    Our Armed Forces comprised of illegal Mexicans, black women and transvestites strikes fear into the hearts of Russians. They won’t dare try anything against us.

    Not that they would, anyway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Philip Owen [AKA "Soarintothesky"] says:

    Who are you trying to frighten?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  5. anon says: • Disclaimer

    “US and NATO combat forces are being sent to Russia’s western borders in Ukraine..”

    Is Margolis saying that American and NATO forces are IN the Ukraine? The Ukraine is not even a NATO member. When did this happen? Russia’s “western” (it really has only one border if we ignore the Crimea) border with the Ukraine lies deep in the east along Taganrog and north near Belgorod.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. The USA is the new France, France is the new England. England is the new Russia and Germany is the new Syria. The new Iraq was supposed to be better after the war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. I constantly wonder when the esteemed E. Margolis found religion?

    I remember him in 1999 when he was spewing anti-Serb hate at every microphone pointed at his schnozz, repeating all the MSM genocide “justifications” verbatim.

    Carrying all the water he could possibly muster on his hump for the Nuremburg-style criminals.

    Then, he somehow transforms himself into a truth-seeker and gains wide respect and acclaim in the alternative media.

    What a fake.

    Read More
    • Agree: Kiza
    • Replies: @Jacques Sheete
    I agree.

    I believe it was also in favor of the Shrub's war on the Iraqi people.

    These cats write any garbage that may garner attention. Nauseating goofs.

    Note to UNZ: Do you ever publish anything by Uri Avnery or Phillip Weiss? I bet their columns would add a lot to this site.
    , @Baldurdasche
    Isn't the ability to admit a mistake the mark of the modern mensch? Even if one can still insist that although it was wrong, it 'needed to be done' for some other reason less-apparent at the time (but more so afterward).

    It's not as if Nurmenburg-style trials have become any part of modern warfare outside the Third World, is it?
    , @Kiza
    Margolis is Prussian moron moonlighting as a CIA's progressive online writer.
    , @Marcus
    People make mistakes, that's not so bad compared to his embarrassingly poor writing skills.
    , @Verymuchalive
    How many times do I have to tell you morons!
    Margolis' mother was an Albanian Muslim. This has resulted in 2 obvious failings in Margolis.
    1 A dishonest attitude in writing about the Religion of Violence.
    2 Complete falsehood about the crimes committed in Kosovo and elsewhere by Albanian gangsters and jihadis and their western facilitators.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says:

    It’s a Jewish War on Russia or J-WOR. Jews use homos as main allies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  9. @flankerbandit
    I constantly wonder when the esteemed E. Margolis found religion?

    I remember him in 1999 when he was spewing anti-Serb hate at every microphone pointed at his schnozz, repeating all the MSM genocide "justifications" verbatim.

    Carrying all the water he could possibly muster on his hump for the Nuremburg-style criminals.

    Then, he somehow transforms himself into a truth-seeker and gains wide respect and acclaim in the alternative media.

    What a fake.

    I agree.

    I believe it was also in favor of the Shrub’s war on the Iraqi people.

    These cats write any garbage that may garner attention. Nauseating goofs.

    Note to UNZ: Do you ever publish anything by Uri Avnery or Phillip Weiss? I bet their columns would add a lot to this site.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greg S.
    You'd be wrong in your uneducated guesses. Margolis was one of the very people in any media to immediately come out against going into Afghanistan after 9-11. In the wake of that event, all media, left right AND alternative, was so cuckolded that the general consensus among all was that this was "good war" and was "justified." Margolis understood Afghanistan and warned against it, costing him his job in the corporate media. He's been on the sidelines ever since and has been speaking mostly truth ever since, and he did not approve of the Iraq war either. He's not right all the time, but he has some interesting perspectives because he has actually spent time in the bowels of many of these conflict countries, something that all the "armchair quarterbacks" constantly criticizing him can't come close to.
    , @tbraton
    "I believe it was also in favor of the Shrub’s war on the Iraqi people. "

    To add to what Greg S. posted in response to your message, here is what Mr. Margolis wrote in his blog of August 15, 2015 on unz.com:

    "Prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, polls showed a majority of Americans believed Iraq was threatening the US with nuclear attack and was behind 9/11. Amazingly, a poll taken of self-professed evangelical Christians just before the US attacked Iraq showed that over 80% supported war against Iraq. So much for turning the other cheek.

    Most of the US media, notably the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, amplified the lies of the Bush administration. TV networks were ordered never to show American military casualties or civilian dead. Those, like this writer, who questioned the rational for war, or who wouldn’t go along with the party line, were blanked out from print and TV.

    For example, I was immediately dropped from a major TV network after daring mention that Israel supported the 2003 Iraq war and would benefit from it. I was blacklisted by another major US TV network at the direct demand of the Bush White House for repeatedly insisting that Iraq had no nuclear capability." http://www.unz.com/emargolis/republicans-cant-face-the-truth-about-iraq/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Greg S. says:
    @Jacques Sheete
    I agree.

    I believe it was also in favor of the Shrub's war on the Iraqi people.

    These cats write any garbage that may garner attention. Nauseating goofs.

    Note to UNZ: Do you ever publish anything by Uri Avnery or Phillip Weiss? I bet their columns would add a lot to this site.

    You’d be wrong in your uneducated guesses. Margolis was one of the very people in any media to immediately come out against going into Afghanistan after 9-11. In the wake of that event, all media, left right AND alternative, was so cuckolded that the general consensus among all was that this was “good war” and was “justified.” Margolis understood Afghanistan and warned against it, costing him his job in the corporate media. He’s been on the sidelines ever since and has been speaking mostly truth ever since, and he did not approve of the Iraq war either. He’s not right all the time, but he has some interesting perspectives because he has actually spent time in the bowels of many of these conflict countries, something that all the “armchair quarterbacks” constantly criticizing him can’t come close to.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. I wonder why this endless hysteria about war with Russia or China. It is extremely unlikely, almost certain, that nuclear armed powers will not engage in a full scale military conflict with each other. Unless the goal of war is to sit on a pile of a smoking, radioactive rubble enjoying the view of your opponent’s smoking, radioactive rubble. The adversaries will just have to find other ways of defeating each other or try to outlast the other guy. As far as the sabre rattling on both sides is concerned it is just that. Sabre rattling. Do not let that disturb your sleep. There are much more serious threats to humanity than endless mantra about nuclear war. It is just cheap attention grabber.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KA
    US has been trying to deform disintegrate and destroy Russia for decades

    "https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/18/neocons-scheme-for-more-regime-change/

    Searching for a post-World War Two rationale on which to base American policy in the aftermath of perceived Soviet aggression in Greece and Turkey, President Harry Truman’s National Security Council issued NSC-68. The brainchild of former Wall Street wunderkind turned uber-hawkish policy adviser Paul Nitze, NSC-68 might correctly be viewed at the original sin of the America’s postwar foreign policy.

    According to the policy directive, the U.S. must “foster a fundamental change in the nature of the Soviet system … foster the seeds of destruction within the Soviet system … with a view to fomenting and supporting unrest and revolution in selected strategic satellite countries” all with an eye toward reducing “the power and influence in the Kremlin inside the Soviet Union.”

    Sound familiar? Substitute the word “Soviet” with “Russia” or even “Syria” and we have the template for America’s more recent imperial adventures. Worryingly, as we approach the November presidential elections, there seems not an ounce of interest inside the Washington establishment for a new approach."

    - One likely way ,given the nuclear warheads involved is mount aggression against Russia from periphery . Wean away Russian Friends from Russia ,destroy those that wont move out of Russian orbit,and continue economic blockade rendering the direct conflict as a moot point .

    Use of Nuclear bombs against enemies and even friends ( Saudi Oil fields and Gulf oil fields ) essentially against Russian influenced pockets have appeared periodically in American mind [http://nationalinterest.org/feature/revealed-how-america-britain-planned-destroy-the-middle-16701]

    , @Erelis
    On the issue of potential nuclear war, we should be hysterical. A simple search reveals that the world came close to nuclear war a number of times just through failures of systems and technologies. Even if countries don't want nuclear war, it is still possible due to errors, and humans make errors. Look up Stanislav Petrov.

    From my reading of the current crop of never-been-too-a-war neocons, there looks to be a growing belief that the United States can win a nuclear war/exchange. MAD is old news. In fact your post basically has as a fundamental assumption for your statements that MAD is a shared belief, and thus any talk of nuclear war is in fact hysterical--nobody would be that stupid. And at one point I would have agreed.

    Add in to this that there are lunatics trying to goad Russia and US/NATO into a war. Georgian leadership was hoping for US intervention when it attack Russian troops. The Ukraine is constantly trying to stir up direct conflict through false flag operations and propaganda. The idiot in Turkey tried to goad a Russian counter attack. The next day after the downing of the Russian war plane, US and NATO leadership was showing off their brave testicles bellowing about if Turkey is attacked then NATO must defend them.

    With the election of Hillary Clinton and her pack of neocons, I firmly believe that Poland or one of the Baltic nations will try a serious provocation such as shooting missiles into the Russian homeland. Poland has in fact been demanding the stationing and control of nuclear weapons in their territory. I can imagine neocon civilian leadership trying to out do each other in the extremity of any counter action to a Russian response--and we are off to the proverbial races.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. KA says:
    @Regnum Nostrum
    I wonder why this endless hysteria about war with Russia or China. It is extremely unlikely, almost certain, that nuclear armed powers will not engage in a full scale military conflict with each other. Unless the goal of war is to sit on a pile of a smoking, radioactive rubble enjoying the view of your opponent's smoking, radioactive rubble. The adversaries will just have to find other ways of defeating each other or try to outlast the other guy. As far as the sabre rattling on both sides is concerned it is just that. Sabre rattling. Do not let that disturb your sleep. There are much more serious threats to humanity than endless mantra about nuclear war. It is just cheap attention grabber.

    US has been trying to deform disintegrate and destroy Russia for decades

    https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/18/neocons-scheme-for-more-regime-change/

    Searching for a post-World War Two rationale on which to base American policy in the aftermath of perceived Soviet aggression in Greece and Turkey, President Harry Truman’s National Security Council issued NSC-68. The brainchild of former Wall Street wunderkind turned uber-hawkish policy adviser Paul Nitze, NSC-68 might correctly be viewed at the original sin of the America’s postwar foreign policy.

    According to the policy directive, the U.S. must “foster a fundamental change in the nature of the Soviet system … foster the seeds of destruction within the Soviet system … with a view to fomenting and supporting unrest and revolution in selected strategic satellite countries” all with an eye toward reducing “the power and influence in the Kremlin inside the Soviet Union.”

    Sound familiar? Substitute the word “Soviet” with “Russia” or even “Syria” and we have the template for America’s more recent imperial adventures. Worryingly, as we approach the November presidential elections, there seems not an ounce of interest inside the Washington establishment for a new approach.”

    – One likely way ,given the nuclear warheads involved is mount aggression against Russia from periphery . Wean away Russian Friends from Russia ,destroy those that wont move out of Russian orbit,and continue economic blockade rendering the direct conflict as a moot point .

    Use of Nuclear bombs against enemies and even friends ( Saudi Oil fields and Gulf oil fields ) essentially against Russian influenced pockets have appeared periodically in American mind (http://nationalinterest.org/feature/revealed-how-america-britain-planned-destroy-the-middle-16701]

    Read More
    • Replies: @mtn cur
    I have to agree, although I tend to believe the creeps running Russia differ from ours only in the brand of vodka or perhaps gin they induce their delusions with. Our excuses for intervening everywhere there are bad boys is just as imbecilic or dishonest as the notion that masturbation is as sinful as unwed pregnancy resulting in illegitimate parents, there being no such thing as illegitimate babies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Bellicose in World War One? While there certainly were some bellicose’ participants in the opening moves – aside from the Austrians, the rest of them were probably surprised by how easily gong to war really was. Most ordinary people were surprised that it wasn’t ‘over by Christmas’ (as they had been told) and that the casualty lists were suggesting a bloodbath that might have shocked Napoleon.

    The lesson here isn’t as much the bellicosity as the ease with which things can get well and truly ‘out of control’. Look at recent experience – what late war hasn’t started with some modicum of organized ‘success’ and then gone right into a ca-ca hole?

    Conventional war is destructively worse than it has ever been. Is it possible a nuclear one could be much worse? After all, if it ends things quickly it ‘saves lives’ – another selling feature of modern war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkU
    "Conventional war is destructively worse than it has ever been. Is it possible a nuclear one could be much worse?"

    Are you kidding or have you no idea what a large scale thermonuclear war would do?

    Even if the human race managed to survive, our civilisation would be effectively ended, forever. No appreciable rebuilding would be possible. The difficulties of survival in an irradiated world with a terrifying cancer rate, a horrific infant mortality rate, a life expectancy of about thirty and without even beasts to pull ploughs (owing to their probable extinction) would be daunting enough.

    Our civilisation was built the first time on a pristine and abundant planet full of untapped resources, I seriously doubt that we could even duplicate the bronze age (any idea where the nearest tin mine is?) And don't bother to tell me about all the knowledge we have stored up, two or three generations down the line there probably won't be anyone left who can understand most of it, even if they can read.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Lemurmaniac
    a lefty desperately attempting to blame America's empire building on the right. How are neocons 'right wing'? How are the religious right interested in fighting Russia, a largely Christian nation? Since the rise of Trump, its become clear evangelicals are no longer enthralled by the city on the hill narrative the neocons used to garner their votes.

    Consider that most US wars since 1900 have been fought with democrats at the helm. Warmongering is a bi-partisan consensus.

    You obviously dwell in a land unaffected by the ‘New American Century’. If the hebrew thinkers who coined the expression believed in Jesus, they would have worked Him into their plan.

    There are a substantial number of ‘christian’ citizens in America and elsewhere, who believe the ‘forces of light’ in the foretold battle of Armageddon will be flying the Stars and Stripes. Like jihadis in expectation of some virginic reward, they would like to ‘move things ahead’ to the ‘end time’ and the ‘Second Coming’ – pornographic as that might sound.

    War is ‘sexy’ again – evverywhere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. @flankerbandit
    I constantly wonder when the esteemed E. Margolis found religion?

    I remember him in 1999 when he was spewing anti-Serb hate at every microphone pointed at his schnozz, repeating all the MSM genocide "justifications" verbatim.

    Carrying all the water he could possibly muster on his hump for the Nuremburg-style criminals.

    Then, he somehow transforms himself into a truth-seeker and gains wide respect and acclaim in the alternative media.

    What a fake.

    Isn’t the ability to admit a mistake the mark of the modern mensch? Even if one can still insist that although it was wrong, it ‘needed to be done’ for some other reason less-apparent at the time (but more so afterward).

    It’s not as if Nurmenburg-style trials have become any part of modern warfare outside the Third World, is it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @myname1sl1nk
    What do you mean, if I may ask?
    , @flankerbandit
    The ability to admit a mistake? I've never heard Margolis ever admitting to any mistake about anything.

    Why is the 1999 Nato aggression against Serbia still important? Because it was the original test article and blueprint for all the other crimes against humanity that followed:

    The invasion of Afghanistan

    The invasion of Iraq

    The destruction of Libya (for the benefit of jihidis)

    The proxy war against Syria

    The proxy war against Yemen

    The putch in Ukraine and its criminal war on its own people in the east

    The march to war against Russia and China

    All of these crimes against humanity have one thing in common: mass indoctrination of a totally bogus narrative by a monolithic media-propaganda machine that has now become a formidable apparatus for mind control.

    This mind control extends beyond just rapacious imperial wars of conquest overseas...it is also directed at the domestic sheeple...making them believe and support huge domestic criminal enterprises (the bankster system) that work precisely against their own self-interest.

    The sheeple are deluded like tranquilized zombies. Unable to think for themselves and unable to stop their own economic destruction by the very people they trust and believe in.

    As for Nuremburg-style trials, we only have the Orwell-type pseudo version, like the criminal tribunals...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @5371
    [Madame de Pompadour was briefly given command of France’s armies by King Louis XV]

    I don't think this actually happened.

    Didn’t somebody paint her in body armor with rouged breasts exposed above her cuirass? A 17th century prediction of the ‘Gals ‘nGunz Calendar’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. Kiza says:
    @flankerbandit
    I constantly wonder when the esteemed E. Margolis found religion?

    I remember him in 1999 when he was spewing anti-Serb hate at every microphone pointed at his schnozz, repeating all the MSM genocide "justifications" verbatim.

    Carrying all the water he could possibly muster on his hump for the Nuremburg-style criminals.

    Then, he somehow transforms himself into a truth-seeker and gains wide respect and acclaim in the alternative media.

    What a fake.

    Margolis is Prussian moron moonlighting as a CIA’s progressive online writer.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Charron says:

    What this country needs is Margolis to be president. Why can’t we have someone intelligent and knowledgeable to govern. Something is wrong here.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Marcus says:
    @flankerbandit
    I constantly wonder when the esteemed E. Margolis found religion?

    I remember him in 1999 when he was spewing anti-Serb hate at every microphone pointed at his schnozz, repeating all the MSM genocide "justifications" verbatim.

    Carrying all the water he could possibly muster on his hump for the Nuremburg-style criminals.

    Then, he somehow transforms himself into a truth-seeker and gains wide respect and acclaim in the alternative media.

    What a fake.

    People make mistakes, that’s not so bad compared to his embarrassingly poor writing skills.

    Read More
    • Replies: @myname1sl1nk
    No surprise a commenter meaning to say Mr. Margolis' writing is poor will write "embarrassingly".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. Wally says: • Website

    Margolis:

    … Donald Trump who, for all his other foolish positions …

    Of course Margolis does not explain what these “positions” are.

    At least Margolis doesn’t elaborate on his being from New York City as he usually does, as if that is something so very special.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. mtn cur says:
    @KA
    US has been trying to deform disintegrate and destroy Russia for decades

    "https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/18/neocons-scheme-for-more-regime-change/

    Searching for a post-World War Two rationale on which to base American policy in the aftermath of perceived Soviet aggression in Greece and Turkey, President Harry Truman’s National Security Council issued NSC-68. The brainchild of former Wall Street wunderkind turned uber-hawkish policy adviser Paul Nitze, NSC-68 might correctly be viewed at the original sin of the America’s postwar foreign policy.

    According to the policy directive, the U.S. must “foster a fundamental change in the nature of the Soviet system … foster the seeds of destruction within the Soviet system … with a view to fomenting and supporting unrest and revolution in selected strategic satellite countries” all with an eye toward reducing “the power and influence in the Kremlin inside the Soviet Union.”

    Sound familiar? Substitute the word “Soviet” with “Russia” or even “Syria” and we have the template for America’s more recent imperial adventures. Worryingly, as we approach the November presidential elections, there seems not an ounce of interest inside the Washington establishment for a new approach."

    - One likely way ,given the nuclear warheads involved is mount aggression against Russia from periphery . Wean away Russian Friends from Russia ,destroy those that wont move out of Russian orbit,and continue economic blockade rendering the direct conflict as a moot point .

    Use of Nuclear bombs against enemies and even friends ( Saudi Oil fields and Gulf oil fields ) essentially against Russian influenced pockets have appeared periodically in American mind [http://nationalinterest.org/feature/revealed-how-america-britain-planned-destroy-the-middle-16701]

    I have to agree, although I tend to believe the creeps running Russia differ from ours only in the brand of vodka or perhaps gin they induce their delusions with. Our excuses for intervening everywhere there are bad boys is just as imbecilic or dishonest as the notion that masturbation is as sinful as unwed pregnancy resulting in illegitimate parents, there being no such thing as illegitimate babies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. MarkU says:
    @Anonymous
    Bellicose in World War One? While there certainly were some bellicose' participants in the opening moves - aside from the Austrians, the rest of them were probably surprised by how easily gong to war really was. Most ordinary people were surprised that it wasn't 'over by Christmas' (as they had been told) and that the casualty lists were suggesting a bloodbath that might have shocked Napoleon.

    The lesson here isn't as much the bellicosity as the ease with which things can get well and truly 'out of control'. Look at recent experience - what late war hasn't started with some modicum of organized 'success' and then gone right into a ca-ca hole?

    Conventional war is destructively worse than it has ever been. Is it possible a nuclear one could be much worse? After all, if it ends things quickly it 'saves lives' - another selling feature of modern war.

    “Conventional war is destructively worse than it has ever been. Is it possible a nuclear one could be much worse?”

    Are you kidding or have you no idea what a large scale thermonuclear war would do?

    Even if the human race managed to survive, our civilisation would be effectively ended, forever. No appreciable rebuilding would be possible. The difficulties of survival in an irradiated world with a terrifying cancer rate, a horrific infant mortality rate, a life expectancy of about thirty and without even beasts to pull ploughs (owing to their probable extinction) would be daunting enough.

    Our civilisation was built the first time on a pristine and abundant planet full of untapped resources, I seriously doubt that we could even duplicate the bronze age (any idea where the nearest tin mine is?) And don’t bother to tell me about all the knowledge we have stored up, two or three generations down the line there probably won’t be anyone left who can understand most of it, even if they can read.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    I live in the USA, but no longer recognize the nation I was taught in school existed. Maybe it never did.

    What we need is a good dose of what we’ve been giving others for decades, some ‘Shock and Awe’ to make us think differently about war.

    A dozen or so 50 megaton nukes dropped on the USA would take a lot of the war whooping out of the brain-dead who worship war like they worship professional sports.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hbm

    Maybe it never did
     
    Oh, I think it did.

    The issue is that for 60 years the people who claim "Palestinians never existed" have been working the same magic on us. They've been doing it in Europe as well, and have gaslighted an entire continent into committing suicide.

    What's really really curious is that these folks responsible are the very ones whose supposed ancient history is indeed a fabrication. This not us-- you projection is the most basic type yet somehow they get away with it.

    All the crap about "Russian aggression" is just an ethnically-driven push to war (that we will fight), compelled by their desire for ethnomythological vengeance and their visions of a god-given right to global hegemony-- to be provided for them, of course, by the dummies they can manipulate into bringing it about.

    Their tried and true (and truly ancient) tactic is to make a cartoonish bête noire of their racial enemies-- a la Pharoah or Caesar or Nebuchadnezzar or Herod or Haman-- and with relentless propagandizing and exploitation of our Indo-European taste for moral universals convince us that their enemy is our enemy and then stampede us off to war against him.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Erelis says:
    @Regnum Nostrum
    I wonder why this endless hysteria about war with Russia or China. It is extremely unlikely, almost certain, that nuclear armed powers will not engage in a full scale military conflict with each other. Unless the goal of war is to sit on a pile of a smoking, radioactive rubble enjoying the view of your opponent's smoking, radioactive rubble. The adversaries will just have to find other ways of defeating each other or try to outlast the other guy. As far as the sabre rattling on both sides is concerned it is just that. Sabre rattling. Do not let that disturb your sleep. There are much more serious threats to humanity than endless mantra about nuclear war. It is just cheap attention grabber.

    On the issue of potential nuclear war, we should be hysterical. A simple search reveals that the world came close to nuclear war a number of times just through failures of systems and technologies. Even if countries don’t want nuclear war, it is still possible due to errors, and humans make errors. Look up Stanislav Petrov.

    From my reading of the current crop of never-been-too-a-war neocons, there looks to be a growing belief that the United States can win a nuclear war/exchange. MAD is old news. In fact your post basically has as a fundamental assumption for your statements that MAD is a shared belief, and thus any talk of nuclear war is in fact hysterical–nobody would be that stupid. And at one point I would have agreed.

    Add in to this that there are lunatics trying to goad Russia and US/NATO into a war. Georgian leadership was hoping for US intervention when it attack Russian troops. The Ukraine is constantly trying to stir up direct conflict through false flag operations and propaganda. The idiot in Turkey tried to goad a Russian counter attack. The next day after the downing of the Russian war plane, US and NATO leadership was showing off their brave testicles bellowing about if Turkey is attacked then NATO must defend them.

    With the election of Hillary Clinton and her pack of neocons, I firmly believe that Poland or one of the Baltic nations will try a serious provocation such as shooting missiles into the Russian homeland. Poland has in fact been demanding the stationing and control of nuclear weapons in their territory. I can imagine neocon civilian leadership trying to out do each other in the extremity of any counter action to a Russian response–and we are off to the proverbial races.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Regnum Nostrum

    On the issue of potential nuclear war, we should be hysterical. A simple search reveals that the world came close to nuclear war a number of times just through failures of systems and technologies. Even if countries don’t want nuclear war, it is still possible due to errors, and humans make errors. Look up Stanislav Petrov.
     
    If you feel safer being hysterical then be hysterical. The world has never come close to nuclear war except in sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers. Nuclear weapon systems are so tightly controlled that an error or failure are not possible. Otherwise there would have been a number of nuclear wars since 1945.

    From my reading of the current crop of never-been-too-a-war neocons, there looks to be a growing belief that the United States can win a nuclear war/exchange.
     
    Belief is one think and reality another. Nuclear war is not winnable.

    Add in to this that there are lunatics trying to goad Russia and US/NATO into a war. Georgian leadership was hoping for US intervention when it attack Russian troops.
     
    Well the lunatics failed, didn't they? All those operations are intended to harass Russia. They are not meant to start nuclear war. Both US and Russia know that.

    With the election of Hillary Clinton and her pack of neocons, I firmly believe that Poland or one of the Baltic nations will try a serious provocation such as shooting missiles into the Russian homeland.
     
    Hillary may be many things but she is definitely not suicidal. Not with that nice pile of money in her bank account. As far as Poland is concerned they can do nothing without permission. I am sure they are not in control of any nuclear missiles and never will be.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Anonymous says: • Website • Disclaimer

    When you posit enemy, it HAS to grow. There are no enemies. People who have “enemies” want to kill.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. @Erelis
    On the issue of potential nuclear war, we should be hysterical. A simple search reveals that the world came close to nuclear war a number of times just through failures of systems and technologies. Even if countries don't want nuclear war, it is still possible due to errors, and humans make errors. Look up Stanislav Petrov.

    From my reading of the current crop of never-been-too-a-war neocons, there looks to be a growing belief that the United States can win a nuclear war/exchange. MAD is old news. In fact your post basically has as a fundamental assumption for your statements that MAD is a shared belief, and thus any talk of nuclear war is in fact hysterical--nobody would be that stupid. And at one point I would have agreed.

    Add in to this that there are lunatics trying to goad Russia and US/NATO into a war. Georgian leadership was hoping for US intervention when it attack Russian troops. The Ukraine is constantly trying to stir up direct conflict through false flag operations and propaganda. The idiot in Turkey tried to goad a Russian counter attack. The next day after the downing of the Russian war plane, US and NATO leadership was showing off their brave testicles bellowing about if Turkey is attacked then NATO must defend them.

    With the election of Hillary Clinton and her pack of neocons, I firmly believe that Poland or one of the Baltic nations will try a serious provocation such as shooting missiles into the Russian homeland. Poland has in fact been demanding the stationing and control of nuclear weapons in their territory. I can imagine neocon civilian leadership trying to out do each other in the extremity of any counter action to a Russian response--and we are off to the proverbial races.

    On the issue of potential nuclear war, we should be hysterical. A simple search reveals that the world came close to nuclear war a number of times just through failures of systems and technologies. Even if countries don’t want nuclear war, it is still possible due to errors, and humans make errors. Look up Stanislav Petrov.

    If you feel safer being hysterical then be hysterical. The world has never come close to nuclear war except in sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers. Nuclear weapon systems are so tightly controlled that an error or failure are not possible. Otherwise there would have been a number of nuclear wars since 1945.

    From my reading of the current crop of never-been-too-a-war neocons, there looks to be a growing belief that the United States can win a nuclear war/exchange.

    Belief is one think and reality another. Nuclear war is not winnable.

    Add in to this that there are lunatics trying to goad Russia and US/NATO into a war. Georgian leadership was hoping for US intervention when it attack Russian troops.

    Well the lunatics failed, didn’t they? All those operations are intended to harass Russia. They are not meant to start nuclear war. Both US and Russia know that.

    With the election of Hillary Clinton and her pack of neocons, I firmly believe that Poland or one of the Baltic nations will try a serious provocation such as shooting missiles into the Russian homeland.

    Hillary may be many things but she is definitely not suicidal. Not with that nice pile of money in her bank account. As far as Poland is concerned they can do nothing without permission. I am sure they are not in control of any nuclear missiles and never will be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erelis

    Nuclear weapon systems are so tightly controlled that an error or failure are not possible
     
    The incidents are well known and documented. The systems tied into the launching of
    nuclear weapons did not function properly. Luckily, human intervention prevented
    the launching of the weapons. There is no such thing as a fail safe system.

    Belief is one think and reality another. Nuclear war is not winnable.
     
    Get no argument from me. The point I am making is that the people making America's policies
    on war and foreign affairs have begun to entertain the idea that nuclear wars can be won.


    Well the lunatics failed, didn’t they? All those operations are intended to harass Russia.
    They are not meant to start nuclear war. Both US and Russia know that.
     
    The lunatics and even those proposing aggressive policies are setting up trip wires
    that have the potential to turn into full blown shooting wars, and once that happens
    nuclear exchanges become possible. As Steven Cohen has noted, at least during the Cold
    War there were rules and open lines of communication to prevent a war from happening.
    Those do not exist anymore. What is frightening is that the lunatics do not see
    the possibility of uncontrolled escalation.

    Is Hillary suicidal. Probably not. But she has shown extremely poor judgement, and she
    has surrounding herself with people with the same lack of judgement. She has shown a singular
    lack of empathy or understanding of the effects of war on people. Hopefully Bill of
    all people might be the moderating influence on her (all the money, and all the women).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. Erelis says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    On the issue of potential nuclear war, we should be hysterical. A simple search reveals that the world came close to nuclear war a number of times just through failures of systems and technologies. Even if countries don’t want nuclear war, it is still possible due to errors, and humans make errors. Look up Stanislav Petrov.
     
    If you feel safer being hysterical then be hysterical. The world has never come close to nuclear war except in sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers. Nuclear weapon systems are so tightly controlled that an error or failure are not possible. Otherwise there would have been a number of nuclear wars since 1945.

    From my reading of the current crop of never-been-too-a-war neocons, there looks to be a growing belief that the United States can win a nuclear war/exchange.
     
    Belief is one think and reality another. Nuclear war is not winnable.

    Add in to this that there are lunatics trying to goad Russia and US/NATO into a war. Georgian leadership was hoping for US intervention when it attack Russian troops.
     
    Well the lunatics failed, didn't they? All those operations are intended to harass Russia. They are not meant to start nuclear war. Both US and Russia know that.

    With the election of Hillary Clinton and her pack of neocons, I firmly believe that Poland or one of the Baltic nations will try a serious provocation such as shooting missiles into the Russian homeland.
     
    Hillary may be many things but she is definitely not suicidal. Not with that nice pile of money in her bank account. As far as Poland is concerned they can do nothing without permission. I am sure they are not in control of any nuclear missiles and never will be.

    Nuclear weapon systems are so tightly controlled that an error or failure are not possible

    The incidents are well known and documented. The systems tied into the launching of
    nuclear weapons did not function properly. Luckily, human intervention prevented
    the launching of the weapons. There is no such thing as a fail safe system.

    Belief is one think and reality another. Nuclear war is not winnable.

    Get no argument from me. The point I am making is that the people making America’s policies
    on war and foreign affairs have begun to entertain the idea that nuclear wars can be won.

    Well the lunatics failed, didn’t they? All those operations are intended to harass Russia.
    They are not meant to start nuclear war. Both US and Russia know that.

    The lunatics and even those proposing aggressive policies are setting up trip wires
    that have the potential to turn into full blown shooting wars, and once that happens
    nuclear exchanges become possible. As Steven Cohen has noted, at least during the Cold
    War there were rules and open lines of communication to prevent a war from happening.
    Those do not exist anymore. What is frightening is that the lunatics do not see
    the possibility of uncontrolled escalation.

    Is Hillary suicidal. Probably not. But she has shown extremely poor judgement, and she
    has surrounding herself with people with the same lack of judgement. She has shown a singular
    lack of empathy or understanding of the effects of war on people. Hopefully Bill of
    all people might be the moderating influence on her (all the money, and all the women).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Regnum Nostrum

    The systems tied into the launching of nuclear weapons did not function properly.
     
    All the system are useless and cannot launch a ping pong ball unless provided with a code. The code is provided after the top political and military brass decides to initiate hostilities. As I said before all the "well documented incidents" are just sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers.

    There is no such thing as a fail safe system.

     

    Absence of nuclear war in the last 71 years proves the opposite.

    The point I am making is that the people making America’s policies
    on war and foreign affairs have begun to entertain the idea that nuclear wars can be won.

     

    I doubt it very much. All we know is what the media presents to us. What the media presents to us may not be what was actually said. Just because somebody says something or is reported to have said something does not translate into foreign policy. By the way your claim about the non existence of direct communications is not true. There is a thing called "The Moscow–Washington hotline" formally known in the United States as the Washington-Moscow Direct Communications Link. It is a system that allows direct communication between the leaders of the United States and the Russian Federation. Personally I am more worried about overpopulation, diminishing resources and pollution.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. As dangers mount, our foolish politicians should all be forced to read, and then re-read, Prof. Christopher Clark’s magisterial book, ‘The Sleepwalkers: How Europe Went to War in 1914.’

    IN PRISON

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Putin will fight American aggression if Americans not stop snooping Russia.
    But Americans are so ignorant and get used to start wars won’t realise that : Putin has power / motivation / abd means to take on Americans. And it will not be like Cuban missile crisis.
    NATO should be dissolved as communism runs it courses.
    If Hilary is President world would be in trouble, Americans should realised that this women newer been successful whatever she served in politics.
    But ignorant public won’t be allowed to see this by media.
    To choose Trump or Hilary to face off Putin is complete disaster to making.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Putin will fight American aggression if Americans not stop snooping Russia."

    He best ought to solve his nation's own internal problems.

    "But Americans are so ignorant and get used to start wars won’t realise that : Putin has power / motivation / abd means to take on Americans. And it will not be like Cuban missile crisis."

    I'll wait for the movie to come out. Those who believe the U.S. and Russia will go to war in the near future are conspiracy nuts.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. @Lemurmaniac
    a lefty desperately attempting to blame America's empire building on the right. How are neocons 'right wing'? How are the religious right interested in fighting Russia, a largely Christian nation? Since the rise of Trump, its become clear evangelicals are no longer enthralled by the city on the hill narrative the neocons used to garner their votes.

    Consider that most US wars since 1900 have been fought with democrats at the helm. Warmongering is a bi-partisan consensus.

    Huh? I think he was pretty even-handed, calling out “Obama’s strategic Walkures” writing, “One shudders watching Hillary Clinton aspire to be a commander-in-chief,” and clearly identifying Donald Trump as less likely to begin “a big shooting war between nuclear powers.”

    Are you of the opinion that only Democrats should be called out as warmongers rather than warmongers of both parties, or that people you perceive as “lefty” should be universally dismissed as not genuinely anti-war?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. The problem is that the US aims to achieve a Disarming First Strike Capability according to missile engineer Bob Aldridge-www.plrc.org, Professor J. Ed Anderson, and others. Minuteman-3 and Trident-2 are state-of-the art first strike weapons. And 648 missiles in Romania and Poland and on 32 ships in the Mediterranean to defend us from something Iran doesn’t have and isn’t working to get ? Or to defend us from N.Korea’s few nukes ? Why invite a suicidal mistake on Launch On Warning ? It’s just TOO STUPID !!! Now in Romania, in 2017 in Poland. What’s the matter with the people in Pentagon/Washington, NATO, do they really want to commit Suicide ? How can they expect anybody but in remote mountains to survive ? Disarming First Strike Capability (see the books by Bob Aldridge) ? Someone in Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament said, “Don’t worry, it’s only for Blackmail.” Blackmailing the Russians ? For that reason General Harbottle said to me, “They are bloody fools in the Pentagon!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. @Marcus
    People make mistakes, that's not so bad compared to his embarrassingly poor writing skills.

    No surprise a commenter meaning to say Mr. Margolis’ writing is poor will write “embarrassingly”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. @Baldurdasche
    Isn't the ability to admit a mistake the mark of the modern mensch? Even if one can still insist that although it was wrong, it 'needed to be done' for some other reason less-apparent at the time (but more so afterward).

    It's not as if Nurmenburg-style trials have become any part of modern warfare outside the Third World, is it?

    What do you mean, if I may ask?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. hbm says:
    @Greg Bacon
    I live in the USA, but no longer recognize the nation I was taught in school existed. Maybe it never did.

    What we need is a good dose of what we've been giving others for decades, some 'Shock and Awe' to make us think differently about war.

    A dozen or so 50 megaton nukes dropped on the USA would take a lot of the war whooping out of the brain-dead who worship war like they worship professional sports.

    Maybe it never did

    Oh, I think it did.

    The issue is that for 60 years the people who claim “Palestinians never existed” have been working the same magic on us. They’ve been doing it in Europe as well, and have gaslighted an entire continent into committing suicide.

    What’s really really curious is that these folks responsible are the very ones whose supposed ancient history is indeed a fabrication. This not us– you projection is the most basic type yet somehow they get away with it.

    All the crap about “Russian aggression” is just an ethnically-driven push to war (that we will fight), compelled by their desire for ethnomythological vengeance and their visions of a god-given right to global hegemony– to be provided for them, of course, by the dummies they can manipulate into bringing it about.

    Their tried and true (and truly ancient) tactic is to make a cartoonish bête noire of their racial enemies– a la Pharoah or Caesar or Nebuchadnezzar or Herod or Haman– and with relentless propagandizing and exploitation of our Indo-European taste for moral universals convince us that their enemy is our enemy and then stampede us off to war against him.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. @Erelis

    Nuclear weapon systems are so tightly controlled that an error or failure are not possible
     
    The incidents are well known and documented. The systems tied into the launching of
    nuclear weapons did not function properly. Luckily, human intervention prevented
    the launching of the weapons. There is no such thing as a fail safe system.

    Belief is one think and reality another. Nuclear war is not winnable.
     
    Get no argument from me. The point I am making is that the people making America's policies
    on war and foreign affairs have begun to entertain the idea that nuclear wars can be won.


    Well the lunatics failed, didn’t they? All those operations are intended to harass Russia.
    They are not meant to start nuclear war. Both US and Russia know that.
     
    The lunatics and even those proposing aggressive policies are setting up trip wires
    that have the potential to turn into full blown shooting wars, and once that happens
    nuclear exchanges become possible. As Steven Cohen has noted, at least during the Cold
    War there were rules and open lines of communication to prevent a war from happening.
    Those do not exist anymore. What is frightening is that the lunatics do not see
    the possibility of uncontrolled escalation.

    Is Hillary suicidal. Probably not. But she has shown extremely poor judgement, and she
    has surrounding herself with people with the same lack of judgement. She has shown a singular
    lack of empathy or understanding of the effects of war on people. Hopefully Bill of
    all people might be the moderating influence on her (all the money, and all the women).

    The systems tied into the launching of nuclear weapons did not function properly.

    All the system are useless and cannot launch a ping pong ball unless provided with a code. The code is provided after the top political and military brass decides to initiate hostilities. As I said before all the “well documented incidents” are just sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers.

    There is no such thing as a fail safe system.

    Absence of nuclear war in the last 71 years proves the opposite.

    The point I am making is that the people making America’s policies
    on war and foreign affairs have begun to entertain the idea that nuclear wars can be won.

    I doubt it very much. All we know is what the media presents to us. What the media presents to us may not be what was actually said. Just because somebody says something or is reported to have said something does not translate into foreign policy. By the way your claim about the non existence of direct communications is not true. There is a thing called “The Moscow–Washington hotline” formally known in the United States as the Washington-Moscow Direct Communications Link. It is a system that allows direct communication between the leaders of the United States and the Russian Federation. Personally I am more worried about overpopulation, diminishing resources and pollution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Historian

    All the system are useless and cannot launch a ping pong ball unless provided with a code. The code is provided after the top political and military brass decides to initiate hostilities. As I said before all the “well documented incidents” are just sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers.
     
    It has been well-documented that the code for American warheads was set to all-zeroes. The military resented being forced to put a code on the warheads..

    The code is no longer all zeroes, but what about the other fail-safe systems that have never been examined?

    Absence of nuclear war in the last 71 years proves the opposite.
     
    That's just the anthropic principle. If you lived in one of those other universes where we blew ourselves up, then you wouldn't be alive to talk about it.
    , @El Dato

    "Washington-Moscow Direct Communications Link"
     
    But if a post-PUTIN nationalist is convinced that it better lob a few nukes in the next 5 minutes in the general direction of NATO or otherwise risk destruction of good percentage of its military capabilities west of the Urals (because with all the stealth crap and reprogrammable "anti-missile defense", who knows what's already in the air, right) how does it help?

    "Absence of nuclear war in the last 71 years proves the opposite."
     
    I hope you are not doing statistics professionally. People might die.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. husq says:
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. @flankerbandit
    I constantly wonder when the esteemed E. Margolis found religion?

    I remember him in 1999 when he was spewing anti-Serb hate at every microphone pointed at his schnozz, repeating all the MSM genocide "justifications" verbatim.

    Carrying all the water he could possibly muster on his hump for the Nuremburg-style criminals.

    Then, he somehow transforms himself into a truth-seeker and gains wide respect and acclaim in the alternative media.

    What a fake.

    How many times do I have to tell you morons!
    Margolis’ mother was an Albanian Muslim. This has resulted in 2 obvious failings in Margolis.
    1 A dishonest attitude in writing about the Religion of Violence.
    2 Complete falsehood about the crimes committed in Kosovo and elsewhere by Albanian gangsters and jihadis and their western facilitators.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Baldurdasche
    Isn't the ability to admit a mistake the mark of the modern mensch? Even if one can still insist that although it was wrong, it 'needed to be done' for some other reason less-apparent at the time (but more so afterward).

    It's not as if Nurmenburg-style trials have become any part of modern warfare outside the Third World, is it?

    The ability to admit a mistake? I’ve never heard Margolis ever admitting to any mistake about anything.

    Why is the 1999 Nato aggression against Serbia still important? Because it was the original test article and blueprint for all the other crimes against humanity that followed:

    The invasion of Afghanistan

    The invasion of Iraq

    The destruction of Libya (for the benefit of jihidis)

    The proxy war against Syria

    The proxy war against Yemen

    The putch in Ukraine and its criminal war on its own people in the east

    The march to war against Russia and China

    All of these crimes against humanity have one thing in common: mass indoctrination of a totally bogus narrative by a monolithic media-propaganda machine that has now become a formidable apparatus for mind control.

    This mind control extends beyond just rapacious imperial wars of conquest overseas…it is also directed at the domestic sheeple…making them believe and support huge domestic criminal enterprises (the bankster system) that work precisely against their own self-interest.

    The sheeple are deluded like tranquilized zombies. Unable to think for themselves and unable to stop their own economic destruction by the very people they trust and believe in.

    As for Nuremburg-style trials, we only have the Orwell-type pseudo version, like the criminal tribunals…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. Corvinus says:
    @Anonymous
    Putin will fight American aggression if Americans not stop snooping Russia.
    But Americans are so ignorant and get used to start wars won't realise that : Putin has power / motivation / abd means to take on Americans. And it will not be like Cuban missile crisis.
    NATO should be dissolved as communism runs it courses.
    If Hilary is President world would be in trouble, Americans should realised that this women newer been successful whatever she served in politics.
    But ignorant public won't be allowed to see this by media.
    To choose Trump or Hilary to face off Putin is complete disaster to making.

    “Putin will fight American aggression if Americans not stop snooping Russia.”

    He best ought to solve his nation’s own internal problems.

    “But Americans are so ignorant and get used to start wars won’t realise that : Putin has power / motivation / abd means to take on Americans. And it will not be like Cuban missile crisis.”

    I’ll wait for the movie to come out. Those who believe the U.S. and Russia will go to war in the near future are conspiracy nuts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. Historian says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    The systems tied into the launching of nuclear weapons did not function properly.
     
    All the system are useless and cannot launch a ping pong ball unless provided with a code. The code is provided after the top political and military brass decides to initiate hostilities. As I said before all the "well documented incidents" are just sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers.

    There is no such thing as a fail safe system.

     

    Absence of nuclear war in the last 71 years proves the opposite.

    The point I am making is that the people making America’s policies
    on war and foreign affairs have begun to entertain the idea that nuclear wars can be won.

     

    I doubt it very much. All we know is what the media presents to us. What the media presents to us may not be what was actually said. Just because somebody says something or is reported to have said something does not translate into foreign policy. By the way your claim about the non existence of direct communications is not true. There is a thing called "The Moscow–Washington hotline" formally known in the United States as the Washington-Moscow Direct Communications Link. It is a system that allows direct communication between the leaders of the United States and the Russian Federation. Personally I am more worried about overpopulation, diminishing resources and pollution.

    All the system are useless and cannot launch a ping pong ball unless provided with a code. The code is provided after the top political and military brass decides to initiate hostilities. As I said before all the “well documented incidents” are just sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers.

    It has been well-documented that the code for American warheads was set to all-zeroes. The military resented being forced to put a code on the warheads..

    The code is no longer all zeroes, but what about the other fail-safe systems that have never been examined?

    Absence of nuclear war in the last 71 years proves the opposite.

    That’s just the anthropic principle. If you lived in one of those other universes where we blew ourselves up, then you wouldn’t be alive to talk about it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. Diogenes says:

    My, my what a lively tit for tat, embellishing Eric’s piece, full of self satisfied certainty, signifying nothing and utterly futile. Can I join the game next time?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. tbraton says:
    @Jacques Sheete
    I agree.

    I believe it was also in favor of the Shrub's war on the Iraqi people.

    These cats write any garbage that may garner attention. Nauseating goofs.

    Note to UNZ: Do you ever publish anything by Uri Avnery or Phillip Weiss? I bet their columns would add a lot to this site.

    “I believe it was also in favor of the Shrub’s war on the Iraqi people. ”

    To add to what Greg S. posted in response to your message, here is what Mr. Margolis wrote in his blog of August 15, 2015 on unz.com:

    “Prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, polls showed a majority of Americans believed Iraq was threatening the US with nuclear attack and was behind 9/11. Amazingly, a poll taken of self-professed evangelical Christians just before the US attacked Iraq showed that over 80% supported war against Iraq. So much for turning the other cheek.

    Most of the US media, notably the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, amplified the lies of the Bush administration. TV networks were ordered never to show American military casualties or civilian dead. Those, like this writer, who questioned the rational for war, or who wouldn’t go along with the party line, were blanked out from print and TV.

    For example, I was immediately dropped from a major TV network after daring mention that Israel supported the 2003 Iraq war and would benefit from it. I was blacklisted by another major US TV network at the direct demand of the Bush White House for repeatedly insisting that Iraq had no nuclear capability.” http://www.unz.com/emargolis/republicans-cant-face-the-truth-about-iraq/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. El Dato says:

    Meanwhile:

    “Hacked Emails Reveal NATO General Plotting Against Obama on Russia Policy”

    https://theintercept.com/2016/07/01/nato-general-emails/

    Next:

    “Putin Warns Finland Against Joining NATO: Says Russia Might Move Troops Closer to Finnish Border in Response”

    http://news.antiwar.com/2016/07/01/putin-warns-finland-against-joining-nato/

    Do we want war?

    YES, WE WANT WAR!

    You think the “New Deal” saved the US economy?

    Like with WWII, it is the ONLY MEANS to keep people occupied while the economy crumbles. Unlike WWII, there will be no post-war liberalization and snapback.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  44. El Dato says:
    @Regnum Nostrum

    The systems tied into the launching of nuclear weapons did not function properly.
     
    All the system are useless and cannot launch a ping pong ball unless provided with a code. The code is provided after the top political and military brass decides to initiate hostilities. As I said before all the "well documented incidents" are just sensational articles written by publicity seeking scribblers.

    There is no such thing as a fail safe system.

     

    Absence of nuclear war in the last 71 years proves the opposite.

    The point I am making is that the people making America’s policies
    on war and foreign affairs have begun to entertain the idea that nuclear wars can be won.

     

    I doubt it very much. All we know is what the media presents to us. What the media presents to us may not be what was actually said. Just because somebody says something or is reported to have said something does not translate into foreign policy. By the way your claim about the non existence of direct communications is not true. There is a thing called "The Moscow–Washington hotline" formally known in the United States as the Washington-Moscow Direct Communications Link. It is a system that allows direct communication between the leaders of the United States and the Russian Federation. Personally I am more worried about overpopulation, diminishing resources and pollution.

    “Washington-Moscow Direct Communications Link”

    But if a post-PUTIN nationalist is convinced that it better lob a few nukes in the next 5 minutes in the general direction of NATO or otherwise risk destruction of good percentage of its military capabilities west of the Urals (because with all the stealth crap and reprogrammable “anti-missile defense”, who knows what’s already in the air, right) how does it help?

    “Absence of nuclear war in the last 71 years proves the opposite.”

    I hope you are not doing statistics professionally. People might die.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. The BBS has some out with a topical look at how the Baltic situation could easily spin out of control.

    “World War Three Inside the War Room” illustrates how a panel of pols, technocrats and brasshats could put paid to modern civilization trying to save the neo-nazis of Estonia from themselves.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Eric Margolis Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Bin Laden is dead, but his strategy still bleeds the United States.
Egyptians revolted against American rule as well as Mubarak’s.
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in Palestine, which inevitably invites terrorist attacks against US citizens and property.”
A menace grows from Bush’s Korean blind spot.
Far from being a model for a “liberated” Iraq, Afghanistan shows how the U.S. can get bogged down Soviet-style.