The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Pat Buchanan ArchiveBlogview
Can Trump and Putin Avert Cold War II?
shutterstock_437782333
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

In retaliation for the hacking of John Podesta and the DNC, Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats and ordered closure of their country houses on Long Island and Maryland’s Eastern shore.

Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned that 35 U.S. diplomats would be expelled. But Vladimir Putin stepped in, declined to retaliate at all, and invited the U.S. diplomats in Moscow and their children to the Christmas and New Year’s party at the Kremlin.

“A soft answer turneth away wrath, but grievous words stir up anger,” reads Proverbs 15:1. “Great move,” tweeted President-elect Trump, “I always knew he was very smart!”

Among our Russophobes, one can almost hear the gnashing of teeth.

Clearly, Putin believes the Trump presidency offers Russia the prospect of a better relationship with the United States. He appears to want this, and most Americans seem to want the same. After all, Hillary Clinton, who accused Trump of being “Putin’s puppet,” lost.

Is then a Cold War II between Russia and the U.S. avoidable?

That question raises several others.

Who is more responsible for both great powers having reached this level of animosity and acrimony, 25 years after Ronald Reagan walked arm-in-arm with Mikhail Gorbachev through Red Square? And what are the causes of the emerging Cold War II?

Comes the retort: Putin has put nuclear-capable missiles in the Kaliningrad enclave between Poland and Lithuania.

True, but who began this escalation?

George W. Bush was the one who trashed Richard Nixon’s ABM Treaty and Obama put anti-missile missiles in Poland. After invading Iraq, George W. Bush moved NATO into the Baltic States in violation of a commitment given to Gorbachev by his father to not move NATO into Eastern Europe if the Red Army withdrew.

Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, says John McCain.

Russia did, after Georgia invaded its breakaway province of South Ossetia and killed Russian peacekeepers. Putin threw the Georgians out, occupied part of Georgia, and then withdrew.

Russia, it is said, has supported Syria’s Bashar Assad, bombed U.S.-backed rebels and participated in the Aleppo slaughter.

But who started this horrific civil war in Syria?

Was it not our Gulf allies, Turkey, and ourselves by backing an insurgency against a regime that had been Russia’s ally for decades and hosts Russia’s only naval base in the Mediterranean?

Did we not exercise the same right of assisting a beleaguered ally when we sent 500,000 troops to aid South Vietnam against a Viet Cong insurgency supported by Hanoi, Beijing and Moscow?

That’s what allies do.

The unanswered question: Why did we support the overthrow of Assad when the likely successor regime would have been Islamist and murderously hostile toward Syria’s Christians?

Russia, we are told, committed aggression against Ukraine by invading Crimea.

But Russia did not invade Crimea. To secure their Black Sea naval base, Russia executed a bloodless coup, but only after the U.S. backed the overthrow of the pro-Russian elected government in Kiev.

Crimea had belonged to Moscow from the time of Catherine the Great in the 18th century, and the Russia-Ukraine relationship dates back to before the Crusades. When did this become a vital interest of the USA?

As for Putin’s backing of secessionists in Donetsk and Luhansk, he is standing by kinfolk left behind when his country broke apart. Russians live in many of the 14 former Soviet republics that are now independent nations.

Has Putin no right to be concerned about his lost countrymen?

Unlike America’s elites, Putin is an ethnonationalist in a time when tribalism is shoving aside transnationalism as the force of the future.

Russia, it is said, is supporting right-wing and anti-EU parties. But has not our National Endowment for Democracy backed regime change in the Balkans as well as in former Soviet republics?

We appear to be denouncing Putin for what we did first.

Moreover, the populist, nationalist, anti-EU and secessionist parties in Europe have arisen on their own and are advancing through free elections.

Sovereignty, independence, a restoration of national identity, all appear to be more important to these parties than what they regard as an excessively supervised existence in the soft-dictatorship of the EU.

In the Cold War between Communism and capitalism, the single-party dictatorship and the free society, we prevailed.

But in the new struggle we are in, the ethnonational state seems ascendant over the multicultural, multiethnic, multiracial, multilingual “universal nation” whose avatar is Barack Obama.

Putin does not seek to destroy or conquer us or Europe. He wants Russia, and her interests, and her rights as a great power to be respected.

He is not mucking around in our front yard; we are in his.

The worst mistake President Trump could make would be to let the Russophobes grab the wheel and steer us into another Cold War that could be as costly as the first, and might not end as peacefully.

Reagan’s outstretched hand to Gorbachev worked. Trump has nothing to lose by extending his to Vladimir Putin, and much perhaps to win.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

Copyright 2016 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Donald Trump, New Cold War, Russia 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup. The vote was watched by international observers and nearly all ethnic Russians, who are the majority in Crimea voted to rejoin, as well as most ethnic Ukrainians there.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_status_referendum,_2014

    Russian forces didn’t invade Crimea since 20,000 troops were based there as they had been for a century. For those who think NATO’s promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement, read about the 2009 “Founding Act” that Obama’s warmongers trashed.

    http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm

    I often hear Americans say that “Putin is a thug”. I ask if they’ve ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a “thug”. They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves “educated.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji

    For those who think NATO’s promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement
     
    But what it was a verbal agreement - how is that a reason for breaking it?
    , @MEexpert

    I often hear Americans say that “Putin is a thug”. I ask if they’ve ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a “thug”. They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves “educated.”
     
    That is the key word "educated." These people have been educated from the neocon school of international studies. They get daily lessons from New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, and FOX news. They are too lazy to do some research and broaden their knowledge. They are used to learning things from the "For Dummies" series of books which the above publication represent.
    , @Cagey Beast
    Re: Putin being a "thug".

    I wonder too how people can believe Putin is a thug and tyrant when we can all view dozens of hours of Putin interacting with the Russia public and press, anytime we choose to, via the web? Just look at his marathon press conferences and ask oneself if this is a room full of cowed and frightened people and whether Putin acts like a bully or a good sport throughout?
    , @Quartermaster

    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup.
     
    It certainly wasn't a "silent coup" by anyone's imagination. It was an invasion, then a referendum was held under the guns of an occupying power. Almost no one recognizes the referendum as legit.

    That it wasn't silent is about all you got right.

    I often hear Americans say that “Putin is a thug”.
     
    Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime. The man is a KGB product, and it tells in the way he conducts himself. One does not have to meet him to be able to judge what he is from his actions.

    They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves “educated.”
     
    Yes, you've been fooled by Putin's propaganda. He's as bad at it as any KGB thug. But they still get the ear of stupid people who won't think for themselves.
    , @CanSpeccy
    Re: Educated Americans who think Putin is a thug.

    Higher Education:

    [A] political racket whereby Democrats fork endless cash to tuition extortionists, and lousy scholars impart insane ideas to debt-strapped students who are made dysfunctional citizens in the process.

    Source:
    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.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/pbuchanan/can-trump-and-putin-avert-cold-war-ii/#comment-1714728
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Pat Buchanan is wise and prophetic like few other political observers. He deserves a special place among Trump’s inner circle. If not as Secretary of State, Pat should be given the position of National Security Advisor.

    Trump’s team would benefit greatly by Buchanan’s judgement and experience, as would our nation.

    Read More
    • Agree: Realist, Anonym
    • Replies: @sturbain
    Agree wholeheartedly. Trump should take advantage of Pat's remarkable historical knowledge and wisdom.
    , @Anon
    Am I the only one who is concerned that one of Trump's top advisors is his Orthodox Jewish son-in-law Jared Kushner, whose family is a huge supporter of Israel?

    He converted Trump's daughter to Judaism. I find that strange.

    Kushner could not have found a Jewish girl in New York? The two families have big, big money, and now Ivanka's share of the Trump fortune will someday go to her Jewish children.

    And Trump's son Eric is now married to a part Jewish woman.

    That's all I will say.
  3. It is salutary that Buchanan, the cofounder of the American Conservative magazine, is in essential agreement with Steve Cohen, a senior editor of The Nation magazine, for the necessity for a Trump/Putin political approachment!

    Read More
  4. This is another excellent article. Obviously, survival beats absurd confrontation on behalf of jihadi thugs, which has become the democratic program since they jumped the shark a few years ago. Even the ACLU has been publishing material from that proven islamofascist Khizr Khan, Clinton’s pet jihadi, defending the Iraq war as based on the defense of the concept of the rule of law. As Buchanan indicates, the Russians are supporting the civilized element in Syria, for instance, and it was “western” influence which broke up the Ukraine and the Russians are only defending their own people in Ukraine, South Ossetia and elsewhere. Meanwhile, even the Washington Post has had to admit that the rumors of Russian influence on the election voting are false. Soon the canard that the Russians released DNC and Podesta documents will also be revealed as false. This should totally discredit all of those involved, and their motives should be fully investigated.

    Read More
  5. @Carlton Meyer
    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup. The vote was watched by international observers and nearly all ethnic Russians, who are the majority in Crimea voted to rejoin, as well as most ethnic Ukrainians there.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_status_referendum,_2014

    Russian forces didn't invade Crimea since 20,000 troops were based there as they had been for a century. For those who think NATO's promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement, read about the 2009 "Founding Act" that Obama's warmongers trashed.

    http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm

    I often hear Americans say that "Putin is a thug". I ask if they've ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a "thug". They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves "educated."

    For those who think NATO’s promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement

    But what it was a verbal agreement – how is that a reason for breaking it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {But what (if) it was a verbal agreement – how is that a reason for breaking it?}

    Agree.

    At that State level of actors, a verbal agreement is also a contract.
    But the link to a written contract provided by [Carlton Meyer] should shut down any illogical arguments or objections about the verbal contract that Neocon warmongers throw out to justify their aggression against Russia.

  6. @Carlton Meyer
    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup. The vote was watched by international observers and nearly all ethnic Russians, who are the majority in Crimea voted to rejoin, as well as most ethnic Ukrainians there.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_status_referendum,_2014

    Russian forces didn't invade Crimea since 20,000 troops were based there as they had been for a century. For those who think NATO's promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement, read about the 2009 "Founding Act" that Obama's warmongers trashed.

    http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm

    I often hear Americans say that "Putin is a thug". I ask if they've ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a "thug". They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves "educated."

    I often hear Americans say that “Putin is a thug”. I ask if they’ve ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a “thug”. They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves “educated.”

    That is the key word “educated.” These people have been educated from the neocon school of international studies. They get daily lessons from New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, and FOX news. They are too lazy to do some research and broaden their knowledge. They are used to learning things from the “For Dummies” series of books which the above publication represent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    That is the key word “educated.”
     
    I agree with your comments as well as the original one and would like to emphasize that the key word is not only "educated," but that the word is in quotes.

    They are not one bit educated in the true sense. They are morons; blockhead adolescents at best. Spoiled, petulant, supercilious, self absorbed one-trick ponies with no ability to think outside the box if they have any ability to think at all.


    They are too lazy to do some research and broaden their knowledge.
     
    Indeed. Too lazy and too arrogant. Typical brats.

    Thank goodness Putin consistently acts like an adult.

  7. Russia, it is said, is supporting right-wing and anti-EU parties. But has not our National Endowment for Democracy backed regime change in the Balkans as well as in former Soviet republics?

    We appear to be denouncing Putin for what we did first.

    Indeed, though comparing Russia’s trivial efforts in this direction with the untold billions poured into “democracy promotion” (ie subversion) by the US and its various proxies, to say nothing of direct and indirect military action, is inherently absurd.

    The irony is that US sphere policy created the very political climate in Russia that ultimately ensured the democratic mandate and imperative for the Russian resistance we have seen in the past decade.

    In the words of Solzhenitsyn in 2007:

    “When I returned to Russia in 1994, the Western world and its states were practically being worshipped. Admittedly, this was caused not so much by real knowledge or a conscious choice, but by the natural disgust with the Bolshevik regime and its anti-Western propaganda.

    This mood started changing with the cruel NATO bombings of Serbia. It’s fair to say that all layers of Russian society were deeply and indelibly shocked by those bombings. The situation then became worse when NATO started to spread its influence and draw the ex-Soviet republics into its structure. This was especially painful in the case of Ukraine, a country whose closeness to Russia is defined by literally millions of family ties among our peoples, relatives living on different sides of the national border. At one fell stroke, these families could be torn apart by a new dividing line, the border of a military bloc.

    So, the perception of the West as mostly a “knight of democracy” has been replaced with the disappointed belief that pragmatism, often cynical and selfish, lies at the core of Western policies. For many Russians it was a grave disillusion, a crushing of ideals.”

    SPIEGEL Interview with Alexander Solzhenitsyn

    And here is what Kissinger said about the Kosovo war:

    “The rejection of long-range strategy explains how it was possible to slide into the Kosovo conflict without adequate consideration of its implications … The transformation of the NATO alliance from a defensive military grouping to an institution prepared to impose its values by force … undercut repeated American and allied assurances that Russia had nothing to fear from NATO expansion.”

    Read More
  8. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Russians live in many of the 14 former Soviet republics that are now independent nations.

    They should go back to Russia, like when the French left Algeria. Instead of using these Russians to destabilize non-Russian countries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    That may be fair in the case of the Baltic states but what about Ukraine? The ethnic Russians of the south and east were included in modern Ukraine thanks to lines drawn on the map by Lenin and Stalin. If anything, the militant Ukrainian nationalist regions of the far west should go ahead and separate from the rest of what's now Ukraine and let the rest of the country can get along with Russia.
    , @Verymuchalive
    When the USSR broke up, it broke up along the borders decided by the Bolsheviks mainly in the period 1922-24. The top Bolsheviks were overwhelmingly non-Russian ( Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Dzerzhinsky etc ) and anti-Russian. As punishment, they put many millions of ethnic Russians into the administrative areas of other ethnic groups in a policy of internal divide and rule. As late as 1954, Nikita Khrushchev, an ethnic Ukrainian, arbitrarily transferred Crimea from Russia to the Ukraine. Crimea had been Russian since 1783.
    As a result of this malicious carve-up, many millions of ethnic Russians find themselves outside the borders of Russia. Many of these areas were regarded as integral parts of Mother Russia before the Bolshevik Revolution. Many have been overwhelmingly Russian for hundreds of years, long before the upstart American republic was founded.
    These people - please note, I do not include recent Russian immigrants to parts of the former USSR not historically Russian - have a right to secede from the country they are now in and join Russia. In several instances ( the border areas of the Ukraine, Georgia and Kazakhstan ) this is what is likely to happen long term.
    It should be emphasized that secession movements in the Ukraine were entirely peaceful until the West helped overthrow the legitimate government and enabled the new regime to physically attack and kill ethnic Russians.
    The North Ossetia war of 2008 was also incited by the West and used their local proxies in Georgia.
    Ethnic Russians in the other former Republics of the Soviet Union live overwhelmingly in historic Russian lands, which will over time be returned to Russia for the most part.
    , @Ondrej

    They should go back to Russia, like when the French left Algeria. Instead of using these Russians to destabilize non-Russian countries.
     
    Well, do you really mean ethnic Russians (Slavic)?

    They actually they lived there for centuries, former soviet republics where established what was originally part of different gubernias of Russian Empire.

    Or you just speaking about those Russians without actually knowing you should speak-of 100+ ethnicties and nationalities. Which are usually not recognized by Western observer and they are just called those Russians.. :-)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Russia
  9. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    So if Russia was promised that NATO wouldn’t expand eastwards, all these Russian immigrants in non-Russian countries should have also been repatriated as a part of such an agreement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    If the Russian had learnt the lesson on the history of the American selling snake oil to the American natives, the Russian would ask the NATO to be disbanded before withdrawing troops from Warsaw Pact when the American promised NATO won't expand eastwards. The history of the American selling snake oil to the American natives shows that the American is totally not trustworthy and creditworthy.
  10. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    her rights as a great power to be respected

    .

    So by your definition, Pat Buchanan, a country can have “rights” outside of its own territory. Ok, that means Canada, Mexico and China, ISIS, or whoever else, too, can have “rights” inside of the US, if they feel like it.

    Read More
  11. Excellent article Mr Buchanan.

    Not only is it absolutely clear that nearly ALL Americans want peace and prosperity over the continued debacle of war and insolvency….we are also quite perturbed by our dishonest leaders who have robbed us blind by initiating them.

    You might find yourself speaking for over 300 million Americans who not only wish our leaders to cease and desist from this grotesque escapade of perpetual, belligerent war making, but we ALL want our 14.3 trillion in obscene war debt clawed back to US , for having been “deceived” into these conflicts in the first place.

    Americans do not ENJOY being defrauded out of all their dough to go murder people that never attacked us.

    We don’t like it AT ALL.

    Tell President Trump what Americans really want……..is OUR MONEY BACK !

    He should make it his TOP priority…to go get it !

    Read More
  12. @Carlton Meyer
    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup. The vote was watched by international observers and nearly all ethnic Russians, who are the majority in Crimea voted to rejoin, as well as most ethnic Ukrainians there.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_status_referendum,_2014

    Russian forces didn't invade Crimea since 20,000 troops were based there as they had been for a century. For those who think NATO's promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement, read about the 2009 "Founding Act" that Obama's warmongers trashed.

    http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm

    I often hear Americans say that "Putin is a thug". I ask if they've ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a "thug". They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves "educated."

    Re: Putin being a “thug”.

    I wonder too how people can believe Putin is a thug and tyrant when we can all view dozens of hours of Putin interacting with the Russia public and press, anytime we choose to, via the web? Just look at his marathon press conferences and ask oneself if this is a room full of cowed and frightened people and whether Putin acts like a bully or a good sport throughout?

    Read More
  13. Off topic a bit, but I think I may have just become a Trump fan.
    I don’t mean to be critical, but I think it would have been even sweeter for him to have “escort” the dude out in person instead of using security.

    Trump kicks biographer off golf course
    Harry Hurt, who was golfing with David Koch, had written a critical book about the president-elect.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-biographer-golf-course-233092

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Saw that too, it was funny, the Koch bro. connection made it doubly so!

    You are right, personal escort off the course with a security guard in tow would have been better, but it would not be possible at this point, with only such a small time before the inaugaration.

    Imagine the hysteria if it had been!

    Even funnier if surveillance camera footage of the reaction appears.

    Suspect the Donald would stop short of allowing that. OTOH, a rogue security guard in the monitoring room ...

    The 'fine, we'll play golf at a superior course nearby' talk was also a laugh. If the nearby course was so superior, why did they not go there first?

    Trump should really get Ted Nugent to do a grinding guitar solo on your anthem, even if brief, but I would guess his advisors already advised against it.

    It would be the best since Jimi Hendrix.

    I don't participate on any 'social media', but if those who do would be interested, a Nugent solo would be brilliant, start the support tags up!

    Hope Trump will do will do well by the US and by its wider influence, still having serious doubts, and only as a non-US person, but for sure, at worst the lesser of two evils.

    Hillary would have been leading the rush to WWIV, I am counting the Cold War and its outlying conflicts as WWIII, as we should.

    Really, there is an absolute continuum from WWI to now, no time of peace, except in some places, at some times, I think the UK and USA definitions of 'WWI' and 'WWII' are useless as definitions.

    WWIII has already happened, if we are to accepting those terms.
  14. Mr. Buchanan has consistently done a great job covering this topic. I’d reinforce his arguments by pointing out Crimea had a unique status within Ukraine as an Autonomous Republic with its own parliament, unlike the other regions. Crimea always had one foot out the door; it was Vicky Nuland and the colour revolution gang who pushed them all the way out.

    I’d also add that it’s well worth watching the hours of video footage collected during and after the Euromaidan revolution and available at YouTube under the title “Roses Have Thorns”.

    Read More
  15. … and let us not forget the extremely violent events in Mariupol and Odessa, clearly coordinated by the coup leaders who assembled the ‘Euromaidan’ under Obama regime direction.

    In itself, the coup d’etat against the elected pres. was extremely violent, almost all from the side of the US- and EU-supported coup makers, along with a contingency of mercenaries who just shot people to ramp it up (an idea strongly supported by mainstream press reports at the time).

    However, everyone is supposed to having the attention span of a gnat, in the face of celeb. bullshit, everybody is supposed to forget all in the glory of Kim Kardashian’s gigantic plastic-surgery-augmented bum, and her stepfather’s strangely late decision to fake being a woman, we can all be sure that Bruce Jenner has demonstrated his lack of belief in the ‘I am really a woman’ narrative by only having silicone tits inserted, and facial surgery to grind away part of his jaw bones.

    The primary sexual characteristics remain intact, not a bad idea on the part of Bruce.

    I am not saying the above two paras. represent part of a conspiracy, but it was surely a useful distraction in the mass-media at the time of the Obama regime making trouble in the Ukraine. Not that I think that was his idea, From what we know of his record, he was rather a dim bulb, benefitting from affirmative action, and never acknowledging the fact that he was dumped on his white grandparents by his slut mother, and his impregnate-and-abandon father.

    Dreams of My Father indeed, his father dumped him, as cuckoo birds do, in the nests of other birds.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Squirt and scram is what I call impregnate and abandon.
    I read Dreams of My Father a couple years before he ran for President. His hatred of Whites was obvious. But all the useful idiots I know read it and gushed and worshipped as they had been instructed to by The Atlantic, New Republic, etc.

    He was the triumph of a breeding program begun by the communist party of the USA back in the 1930s. The idea was to encourage the young women of the far left to marry and have kids with black men. The children would be raised far left and brought along to high public office.

    They finally got Obama. I'm pretty sure his father was Frank Marshall Davis, married, head of the communist party of Hawaii and best friend of grandpa Dunham.

    Sometimes I feel like the little kid in the Emperor's New Clothes story. The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are.
  16. @MEexpert

    I often hear Americans say that “Putin is a thug”. I ask if they’ve ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a “thug”. They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves “educated.”
     
    That is the key word "educated." These people have been educated from the neocon school of international studies. They get daily lessons from New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, and FOX news. They are too lazy to do some research and broaden their knowledge. They are used to learning things from the "For Dummies" series of books which the above publication represent.

    That is the key word “educated.”

    I agree with your comments as well as the original one and would like to emphasize that the key word is not only “educated,” but that the word is in quotes.

    They are not one bit educated in the true sense. They are morons; blockhead adolescents at best. Spoiled, petulant, supercilious, self absorbed one-trick ponies with no ability to think outside the box if they have any ability to think at all.

    They are too lazy to do some research and broaden their knowledge.

    Indeed. Too lazy and too arrogant. Typical brats.

    Thank goodness Putin consistently acts like an adult.

    Read More
  17. @Anonymous

    Russians live in many of the 14 former Soviet republics that are now independent nations.
     
    They should go back to Russia, like when the French left Algeria. Instead of using these Russians to destabilize non-Russian countries.

    That may be fair in the case of the Baltic states but what about Ukraine? The ethnic Russians of the south and east were included in modern Ukraine thanks to lines drawn on the map by Lenin and Stalin. If anything, the militant Ukrainian nationalist regions of the far west should go ahead and separate from the rest of what’s now Ukraine and let the rest of the country can get along with Russia.

    Read More
  18. Vlad Putin is the leader of the free World we should respect and deal fairly with him.
    Another great article!

    Read More
  19. @Anonymous

    Russians live in many of the 14 former Soviet republics that are now independent nations.
     
    They should go back to Russia, like when the French left Algeria. Instead of using these Russians to destabilize non-Russian countries.

    When the USSR broke up, it broke up along the borders decided by the Bolsheviks mainly in the period 1922-24. The top Bolsheviks were overwhelmingly non-Russian ( Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, Dzerzhinsky etc ) and anti-Russian. As punishment, they put many millions of ethnic Russians into the administrative areas of other ethnic groups in a policy of internal divide and rule. As late as 1954, Nikita Khrushchev, an ethnic Ukrainian, arbitrarily transferred Crimea from Russia to the Ukraine. Crimea had been Russian since 1783.
    As a result of this malicious carve-up, many millions of ethnic Russians find themselves outside the borders of Russia. Many of these areas were regarded as integral parts of Mother Russia before the Bolshevik Revolution. Many have been overwhelmingly Russian for hundreds of years, long before the upstart American republic was founded.
    These people – please note, I do not include recent Russian immigrants to parts of the former USSR not historically Russian – have a right to secede from the country they are now in and join Russia. In several instances ( the border areas of the Ukraine, Georgia and Kazakhstan ) this is what is likely to happen long term.
    It should be emphasized that secession movements in the Ukraine were entirely peaceful until the West helped overthrow the legitimate government and enabled the new regime to physically attack and kill ethnic Russians.
    The North Ossetia war of 2008 was also incited by the West and used their local proxies in Georgia.
    Ethnic Russians in the other former Republics of the Soviet Union live overwhelmingly in historic Russian lands, which will over time be returned to Russia for the most part.

    Read More
  20. But Russia did not invade Crimea. To secure their Black Sea naval base, Russia executed a bloodless coup, but only after the U.S. backed the overthrow of the pro-Russian elected government in Kiev.

    This is risible. There was no coup in Ukraine. Yanukovich decided to order the Berkut to open fire on the protesters on the Maidan, and he ran to escape justice. He was removed from office, constitutionally when he abandoned the office and ran for Russia.

    By the Pat, I was part of the “Brigades” when you ran for President, but you’re getting senile. Russia did invade Crimea. That there were already troops there is irrelevant. They left their posts and took over the peninsula. That constitutes an invasion in any book. The “no invasion” business is pure manure.

    As for Putin’s backing of secessionists in Donetsk and Luhansk, he is standing by kinfolk left behind when his country broke apart. Russians live in many of the 14 former Soviet republics that are now independent nations.

    Putin is not standing by anyone. He tried to steal a “land bridge” to Crimea across southeastern Ukraine. No one was being persecuted for speaking Russian, nor was anyone threatened. The majority of the Russian speakers have no desire to be ruled from Moscow, and that fact is testified to by the fact that even with the addition of Russian Army regulars, the quislings in SE Ukraine weren’t able to get any further.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill

    This is risible. There was no coup in Ukraine. Yanukovich decided to order the Berkut to open fire on the protesters on the Maidan, and he ran to escape justice. He was removed from office, constitutionally when he abandoned the office and ran for Russia.
     
    Completely delusional, like everything you write on the topic.
  21. @jacques sheete
    Off topic a bit, but I think I may have just become a Trump fan.
    I don’t mean to be critical, but I think it would have been even sweeter for him to have “escort” the dude out in person instead of using security.

    Trump kicks biographer off golf course
    Harry Hurt, who was golfing with David Koch, had written a critical book about the president-elect.


    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-biographer-golf-course-233092
     

    Saw that too, it was funny, the Koch bro. connection made it doubly so!

    You are right, personal escort off the course with a security guard in tow would have been better, but it would not be possible at this point, with only such a small time before the inaugaration.

    Imagine the hysteria if it had been!

    Even funnier if surveillance camera footage of the reaction appears.

    Suspect the Donald would stop short of allowing that. OTOH, a rogue security guard in the monitoring room …

    The ‘fine, we’ll play golf at a superior course nearby’ talk was also a laugh. If the nearby course was so superior, why did they not go there first?

    Trump should really get Ted Nugent to do a grinding guitar solo on your anthem, even if brief, but I would guess his advisors already advised against it.

    It would be the best since Jimi Hendrix.

    I don’t participate on any ‘social media’, but if those who do would be interested, a Nugent solo would be brilliant, start the support tags up!

    Hope Trump will do will do well by the US and by its wider influence, still having serious doubts, and only as a non-US person, but for sure, at worst the lesser of two evils.

    Hillary would have been leading the rush to WWIV, I am counting the Cold War and its outlying conflicts as WWIII, as we should.

    Really, there is an absolute continuum from WWI to now, no time of peace, except in some places, at some times, I think the UK and USA definitions of ‘WWI’ and ‘WWII’ are useless as definitions.

    WWIII has already happened, if we are to accepting those terms.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Really, there is an absolute continuum from WWI to now
     
    Not a shred of doubt about that.
  22. @Carlton Meyer
    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup. The vote was watched by international observers and nearly all ethnic Russians, who are the majority in Crimea voted to rejoin, as well as most ethnic Ukrainians there.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_status_referendum,_2014

    Russian forces didn't invade Crimea since 20,000 troops were based there as they had been for a century. For those who think NATO's promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement, read about the 2009 "Founding Act" that Obama's warmongers trashed.

    http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm

    I often hear Americans say that "Putin is a thug". I ask if they've ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a "thug". They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves "educated."

    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup.

    It certainly wasn’t a “silent coup” by anyone’s imagination. It was an invasion, then a referendum was held under the guns of an occupying power. Almost no one recognizes the referendum as legit.

    That it wasn’t silent is about all you got right.

    I often hear Americans say that “Putin is a thug”.

    Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime. The man is a KGB product, and it tells in the way he conducts himself. One does not have to meet him to be able to judge what he is from his actions.

    They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves “educated.”

    Yes, you’ve been fooled by Putin’s propaganda. He’s as bad at it as any KGB thug. But they still get the ear of stupid people who won’t think for themselves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus

    Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime. The man is a KGB product, and it tells in the way he conducts himself. One does not have to meet him to be able to judge what he is from his actions.
     
    Sources please. Russia has opposition parties and orgs aplenty, more than you can say for many US allies.

    Putin is not standing by anyone. He tried to steal a “land bridge” to Crimea across southeastern Ukraine. No one was being persecuted for speaking Russian, nor was anyone threatened. The majority of the Russian speakers have no desire to be ruled from Moscow, and that fact is testified to by the fact that even with the addition of Russian Army regulars, the quislings in SE Ukraine weren’t able to get any further.
     
    He chose not to support the separatists (earning the ire of many of them), the Ukrainian oligarch army had no desire to fight, with thousands deserting or fleeing conscription (to Russia among other places)
    , @Avery
    { It was an invasion, }

    No it wasn't: one cannot invade one's own land.
    Crimea was part of Russia for a couple of centuries.
    Part of Russia SSR during USSR.
    Khrushchev, an un-elected Soviet dictator, on a whim, without asking the people of Crimea, transferred the administration of Crimea to Ukriane SSR.
    An illegal act.
    In 1991, as USSR was crumbling, people of Crimea ran a referendum on sovereignty. It passed by 94%. Kiev ignored it.
    Since USSR no longer existed, Ukraine SSR had no legal claim to Crimea, even _if_ for a moment we consider Khrushchev's illegal act 'legal' (sic).

    When neo-Nazis overthrew the legally and democratically elected administration of Yanukovych, a coup financed by Soros (he admitted as much to Fareed Zakaria of CNN), and aided&abetted by anti-American US Neocons (Nuland), and started pogroms of ethnic Russians (e.g. Massacre of Odessa), ethnic Russians of Crimea saw what was coming and wisely chose not to get massacred.
    Done.


    {Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime.}


    The label 'thug' is used by the real thugs in US, anti-American agents of foreign interests, to smear a leader whose allegiance is to his own country.

    Unlike the thugs and gangsters in US Gov who serve foreign interests.
    Who are eager to expend American blood and treasure to advance the interests of anti-American globalists.

    Putin must be demonized, because Putin is a bad example for these reptilian foreign organisms which have infested the US body politic, because suddenly American people might see the light and elect someone whose first allegiance is to America First - imagine that.



    {Yes, you’ve been fooled by Putin’s propaganda.}

    No, you have been.
    Or more likely, you are the purveyor of anti-American propaganda.

    {But they still get the ear of stupid people who won’t think for themselves.}
    Stop gloating about yourself: it is impolite.
  23. @Anonymous

    Russians live in many of the 14 former Soviet republics that are now independent nations.
     
    They should go back to Russia, like when the French left Algeria. Instead of using these Russians to destabilize non-Russian countries.

    They should go back to Russia, like when the French left Algeria. Instead of using these Russians to destabilize non-Russian countries.

    Well, do you really mean ethnic Russians (Slavic)?

    They actually they lived there for centuries, former soviet republics where established what was originally part of different gubernias of Russian Empire.

    Or you just speaking about those Russians without actually knowing you should speak-of 100+ ethnicties and nationalities. Which are usually not recognized by Western observer and they are just called those Russians.. :-)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Russia

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    They actually they lived there for centuries, former soviet republics where established what was originally part of different gubernias of Russian Empire.
     
    Not in the Baltic states. Some of the Russian migrants came as late as the 1980s, so just 5 years before the independence. In the pre-WWII Baltic states there were less than 10% ethnic Russians, some of them Old Believers.

    Russia has been attempting to destablize these countries for years through their 5th column. Not gonna work, there will be no uprising there. But if something bigger happens, and Pat Buchanan and Trump start harping about how Russia has some mystical "rights" to defend its "countrymen", that will turn the US into an official enemy of the Baltic states.
  24. @Quartermaster

    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup.
     
    It certainly wasn't a "silent coup" by anyone's imagination. It was an invasion, then a referendum was held under the guns of an occupying power. Almost no one recognizes the referendum as legit.

    That it wasn't silent is about all you got right.

    I often hear Americans say that “Putin is a thug”.
     
    Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime. The man is a KGB product, and it tells in the way he conducts himself. One does not have to meet him to be able to judge what he is from his actions.

    They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves “educated.”
     
    Yes, you've been fooled by Putin's propaganda. He's as bad at it as any KGB thug. But they still get the ear of stupid people who won't think for themselves.

    Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime. The man is a KGB product, and it tells in the way he conducts himself. One does not have to meet him to be able to judge what he is from his actions.

    Sources please. Russia has opposition parties and orgs aplenty, more than you can say for many US allies.

    Putin is not standing by anyone. He tried to steal a “land bridge” to Crimea across southeastern Ukraine. No one was being persecuted for speaking Russian, nor was anyone threatened. The majority of the Russian speakers have no desire to be ruled from Moscow, and that fact is testified to by the fact that even with the addition of Russian Army regulars, the quislings in SE Ukraine weren’t able to get any further.

    He chose not to support the separatists (earning the ire of many of them), the Ukrainian oligarch army had no desire to fight, with thousands deserting or fleeing conscription (to Russia among other places)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Putin, like Hillary, benefitted from the public till for his personal enjoyment.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/vladimir-putin-corruption-five-things-we-learned-about-the-russian-presidents-secret-wealth-a6834171.html

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/katiasavchuk/2016/03/30/how-vladimir-putins-son-in-law-became-russias-youngest-billionaire/#59accd0b4bc3
  25. Nov 29, 2016 The Map That Shows Why Russia Fears War With USA – Mike Maloney

    Read More
  26. October 29, 2016 Video: US-NATO are Beating the Drums of War. “The US is Threatening Every Country on Planet Earth”

    The Debate: Michel Chossudovsky and Ian Williams By Press TV and Prof Michel Chossudovsky Press TV 27 October 2016

    NATO says it is going ahead with its plans to deploy thousands of troops and military hardware to three Baltic States and Poland that all border Russia. The military alliance claims that the measure is a response to a Russia’s military build-up and increased activity around NATO’s borders. The Russian president, however, has denounced NATO’s expansion in Eastern Europe. President Putin has blamed the military alliance for global instability. NATO’s latest venture to encircle Russia & its repercussions, in this edition of the Debate.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/video-us-nato-are-beating-the-drums-of-war-the-us-is-threatening-every-country-on-planet-earth-michel-chossudovsky/5553678

    Read More
  27. In retaliation for the hacking of John Podesta and the DNC, Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats and ordered closure of their country houses on Long Island and Maryland’s Eastern shore.

    It wasn’t a hack. It was a leak.

    Read More
  28. @Mao Cheng Ji

    For those who think NATO’s promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement
     
    But what it was a verbal agreement - how is that a reason for breaking it?

    {But what (if) it was a verbal agreement – how is that a reason for breaking it?}

    Agree.

    At that State level of actors, a verbal agreement is also a contract.
    But the link to a written contract provided by [Carlton Meyer] should shut down any illogical arguments or objections about the verbal contract that Neocon warmongers throw out to justify their aggression against Russia.

    Read More
  29. @Mark Green
    Pat Buchanan is wise and prophetic like few other political observers. He deserves a special place among Trump's inner circle. If not as Secretary of State, Pat should be given the position of National Security Advisor.

    Trump's team would benefit greatly by Buchanan's judgement and experience, as would our nation.

    Agree wholeheartedly. Trump should take advantage of Pat’s remarkable historical knowledge and wisdom.

    Read More
  30. @Quartermaster

    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup.
     
    It certainly wasn't a "silent coup" by anyone's imagination. It was an invasion, then a referendum was held under the guns of an occupying power. Almost no one recognizes the referendum as legit.

    That it wasn't silent is about all you got right.

    I often hear Americans say that “Putin is a thug”.
     
    Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime. The man is a KGB product, and it tells in the way he conducts himself. One does not have to meet him to be able to judge what he is from his actions.

    They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves “educated.”
     
    Yes, you've been fooled by Putin's propaganda. He's as bad at it as any KGB thug. But they still get the ear of stupid people who won't think for themselves.

    { It was an invasion, }

    No it wasn’t: one cannot invade one’s own land.
    Crimea was part of Russia for a couple of centuries.
    Part of Russia SSR during USSR.
    Khrushchev, an un-elected Soviet dictator, on a whim, without asking the people of Crimea, transferred the administration of Crimea to Ukriane SSR.
    An illegal act.
    In 1991, as USSR was crumbling, people of Crimea ran a referendum on sovereignty. It passed by 94%. Kiev ignored it.
    Since USSR no longer existed, Ukraine SSR had no legal claim to Crimea, even _if_ for a moment we consider Khrushchev’s illegal act ‘legal’ (sic).

    When neo-Nazis overthrew the legally and democratically elected administration of Yanukovych, a coup financed by Soros (he admitted as much to Fareed Zakaria of CNN), and aided&abetted by anti-American US Neocons (Nuland), and started pogroms of ethnic Russians (e.g. Massacre of Odessa), ethnic Russians of Crimea saw what was coming and wisely chose not to get massacred.
    Done.


    {Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime.}

    The label ‘thug’ is used by the real thugs in US, anti-American agents of foreign interests, to smear a leader whose allegiance is to his own country.

    Unlike the thugs and gangsters in US Gov who serve foreign interests.
    Who are eager to expend American blood and treasure to advance the interests of anti-American globalists.

    Putin must be demonized, because Putin is a bad example for these reptilian foreign organisms which have infested the US body politic, because suddenly American people might see the light and elect someone whose first allegiance is to America First – imagine that.


    {Yes, you’ve been fooled by Putin’s propaganda.}

    No, you have been.
    Or more likely, you are the purveyor of anti-American propaganda.

    {But they still get the ear of stupid people who won’t think for themselves.}
    Stop gloating about yourself: it is impolite.

    Read More
  31. January 01, 2017 52,369 Killed in Iraq during 2016; 3,174 Killed During December

    In December, at least 3,174 people were killed and 1,939 were wounded. Of these, 798 were civilians killed. Another 1,658 civilians were injured. Security forces lost 154 personnel, while another 177 were wounded. At least 2,181 militants were killed, and 104 were injured. Also, at least 41 Kurdistan Workers Party (P.K.K.) members were killed in Turkish airstrikes within Iraqi territory. These figures are likely to be low estimates.

    http://original.antiwar.com/updates/2017/01/01/52369-killed-in-iraq-during-2016-3174-killed-during-december/

    Read More
  32. @Marcus

    Putin is a thug. He has jailed or killed anyone that he sees as a threat to his regime. The man is a KGB product, and it tells in the way he conducts himself. One does not have to meet him to be able to judge what he is from his actions.
     
    Sources please. Russia has opposition parties and orgs aplenty, more than you can say for many US allies.

    Putin is not standing by anyone. He tried to steal a “land bridge” to Crimea across southeastern Ukraine. No one was being persecuted for speaking Russian, nor was anyone threatened. The majority of the Russian speakers have no desire to be ruled from Moscow, and that fact is testified to by the fact that even with the addition of Russian Army regulars, the quislings in SE Ukraine weren’t able to get any further.
     
    He chose not to support the separatists (earning the ire of many of them), the Ukrainian oligarch army had no desire to fight, with thousands deserting or fleeing conscription (to Russia among other places)
    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    No doubt, Russia is still corrupt to the core, Putin hasn't done much to change this, though the lot of the average Russian has undoubtedly improved since he took charge.
    , @bluedog
    My God is that the best you can do parroting items from the Independent and Forbes, both noted for their propaganda I have done many search's on Putin's billions and came up empty every time, perhaps you can post a creditable site rather than the two you posted...
    , @Avery
    Your sources are as credible about Russia as the DNC "hack" (actually a leak) that some US intelligence agency or other has allegedly traced -0 - with 'High Confidence' - to President Putin himself personally ordering.

    Pretty much everything Western propaganda and disinformation channels, such as Independent and Forbes, 'report' about Russia is manufactured lies mixed in with a little truth to make it plausibly believable.
  33. @Corvinus
    Putin, like Hillary, benefitted from the public till for his personal enjoyment.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/vladimir-putin-corruption-five-things-we-learned-about-the-russian-presidents-secret-wealth-a6834171.html

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/katiasavchuk/2016/03/30/how-vladimir-putins-son-in-law-became-russias-youngest-billionaire/#59accd0b4bc3

    No doubt, Russia is still corrupt to the core, Putin hasn’t done much to change this, though the lot of the average Russian has undoubtedly improved since he took charge.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "..the lot of the average Russian has undoubtedly improved since he took charge..."

    Life has improved all over the former Soviet space since the late 1990s. It could only go up from there. Life has improved in places like Belarus and the Baltics were longevity, income per capita, birth rates are rising (1.7 per woman which is above the European average), in Kazakhstan which is now flourishing and has built fantastic modern cities such as Astana. Putin has good qualities but the improvement of life in former USSR is an objective, historic process.

    Russia is not a free country, however. It's possible that it's even less free than what it was in the late 1980s.

    , @Che Guava
    Your statement is nonsensical. Putin seems to have done the best job he could under the circumstansces, I would have wanted to use the u-name Putinbot or Agent_ofKremlin here, at times, just to winding up the more foolish posters here, but Unz policy is seeming to allow no change of u-names.

    I suggest to new users with the spirit of lulz, Putinbot and Agent_ofKremlin are good u-names.
  34. @Che Guava
    Saw that too, it was funny, the Koch bro. connection made it doubly so!

    You are right, personal escort off the course with a security guard in tow would have been better, but it would not be possible at this point, with only such a small time before the inaugaration.

    Imagine the hysteria if it had been!

    Even funnier if surveillance camera footage of the reaction appears.

    Suspect the Donald would stop short of allowing that. OTOH, a rogue security guard in the monitoring room ...

    The 'fine, we'll play golf at a superior course nearby' talk was also a laugh. If the nearby course was so superior, why did they not go there first?

    Trump should really get Ted Nugent to do a grinding guitar solo on your anthem, even if brief, but I would guess his advisors already advised against it.

    It would be the best since Jimi Hendrix.

    I don't participate on any 'social media', but if those who do would be interested, a Nugent solo would be brilliant, start the support tags up!

    Hope Trump will do will do well by the US and by its wider influence, still having serious doubts, and only as a non-US person, but for sure, at worst the lesser of two evils.

    Hillary would have been leading the rush to WWIV, I am counting the Cold War and its outlying conflicts as WWIII, as we should.

    Really, there is an absolute continuum from WWI to now, no time of peace, except in some places, at some times, I think the UK and USA definitions of 'WWI' and 'WWII' are useless as definitions.

    WWIII has already happened, if we are to accepting those terms.

    Really, there is an absolute continuum from WWI to now

    Not a shred of doubt about that.

    Read More
  35. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    We have no inherent conflicts with Russia. The USSR was a godless, communist imperial state with expansionist aspirations. We beat them. Over. We WON.

    Russia is our natural ally against China. In terms of the bigger picture, NATO is disturbing, and we needlessly provoked Russia by mindless expansion. However, NATO has led to European nations ‘cheating’ on their commitment to spend 2% of GDP on their military. This cheating has effectively disarmed Europe. And, in fact — we have kept Germany on a short leash. Which is hugely advantageous to Russia.

    But aside from all that — there simply isn’t a serious reason to mix it up with Russia. Does anyone in the West really care about the Black Sea?

    As far as the notion that Russia wants go Imperial and start taking territory — get real. Russia invading Ukraine and annexing the entire country makes as much sense as the US invading and annexing Mexico. Ukraine was (is) a customer for its natural gas. A profit center, if you will. After an invasion, it would simply be an expense. Ukraine is poorer, and it would be expensive to integrate the into Russia. And as far as the ‘breadbasket’ of Eurasia, Russia now exports grain.

    So — why shouldn’t Trump and Putin chill out?

    The biggest problem is that the US can’t seem to take YES for an answer. Or Victory as sufficient. We see it over and over and over. And then take the wasted resources and pass them out to US citizens. Give us our peace dividend.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    The American and their sidekick the Brits are the 'God-fearing' morally defunct evil 'puritans'.
  36. 01.01.2017 How a United Iran, Russia and China are Changing The World – For the Better

    The two previous articles have focused on the various geopolitical theories, their translations into modern concepts, and practical actions that the United States has taken in recent decades to aspire to global dominance. This segment will describe how Iran, China and Russia have over the years adopted a variety of economic and military actions to repel the continual assault on their sovereignty by the West; in particular, how the American drive for global hegemony has actually accelerated the end of the ‘unipolar moment’ thanks to the emergence of a multipolar world.

    http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/01/01/how-united-iran-russia-china-changing-world-better.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Multi polar has more permutations, and more things to go wrong.
  37. If the US had given meaningful support to the rebels, then the Assads would have fallen. The Assads may think they have defeated the US plot against them, but Russia only came in after the US shown iftself unable to act coherently.

    What Trump has to lose by not confronting Putin is only his most valuable asset: his power to make others start worrying about what US powe might do with him at the helm. Trump is an intimidator, an enforcer, he has already shown his true colours to the motor industry and Russia would be wise to emulate Ford.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    Why should the US be involved in Syria?

    "What Trump has to lose by not confronting Putin is only his most valuable asset: his power to make others start worrying about what US powe might do with him at the helm."

    This is a stupid post even by your standards.
    , @Marcus
    The US support for the rebels, plus that contributed by its allies (Turkey, Saudi, etc.) was more than adequate. Erdogan has even said that the US aided IS.
  38. @Agent76
    01.01.2017 How a United Iran, Russia and China are Changing The World - For the Better

    The two previous articles have focused on the various geopolitical theories, their translations into modern concepts, and practical actions that the United States has taken in recent decades to aspire to global dominance. This segment will describe how Iran, China and Russia have over the years adopted a variety of economic and military actions to repel the continual assault on their sovereignty by the West; in particular, how the American drive for global hegemony has actually accelerated the end of the 'unipolar moment' thanks to the emergence of a multipolar world.

    http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2017/01/01/how-united-iran-russia-china-changing-world-better.html

    Multi polar has more permutations, and more things to go wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Agent76
    The Military Industrial Complex has taken charge of the US. Nov 20, 2015 The One Thing You Need to Know About ISIS 'Americans please wake up!'

    https://youtu.be/vkxFT_hJCdQ
  39. “Putin does not seek to destroy or conquer us or Europe. He wants Russia, and her interests, and her rights as a great power to be respected.

    He is not mucking around in our front yard; we are in his.”

    Excellent points. Great article.

    Trump could do no better than to put you in a position of power and advice in his administration.

    Read More
  40. @Sean
    If the US had given meaningful support to the rebels, then the Assads would have fallen. The Assads may think they have defeated the US plot against them, but Russia only came in after the US shown iftself unable to act coherently.

    What Trump has to lose by not confronting Putin is only his most valuable asset: his power to make others start worrying about what US powe might do with him at the helm. Trump is an intimidator, an enforcer, he has already shown his true colours to the motor industry and Russia would be wise to emulate Ford.

    Why should the US be involved in Syria?

    “What Trump has to lose by not confronting Putin is only his most valuable asset: his power to make others start worrying about what US powe might do with him at the helm.”

    This is a stupid post even by your standards.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    To keep the Russians from getting involved in America, which didn't elect Trump because it wanted a nice guy to deal with trouble.
  41. “If the US had given meaningful support to the rebels, then the Assads would have fallen. The Assads may think they have defeated the US plot against them, but Russia only came in after the US shown iftself unable to act coherently.”

    I think you might be correct. There was no unity of purpose. DOD was not on the same wavelength as CIA. Gen. Dempsey of DIA even sabotaged weapon delivery by CIA to rebels and kept open channels to Assad via Tel Aviv, Berlin and Moscow (Seymour Hersh):

    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military#onepass

    Obama was dragging his feet. In 2013 he allowed to defuse the crisis with the help of Putin and avoided introducing the no-fly zone, though Putin paid for it dearly with Ukraine in 2014.

    Whatever was Obama motive (Wanted to have clean hands?, Earn that Peace Nobel Price?), I reluctantly give him a credit for not escalating Syria though still I blame him for letting the civil war in Syria happen on his watch in the first place. After all it was a part of Libyan operation when weapons and rebels were moved between the two countries. Still Obama even among his critics is presented that he reacted only to Libya while the proactive part was done by Hillary, CIA, French and British.

    Read More
  42. Cold War II will be with China, not Russia, sadly. Western neo-nationalists fail to recognize that China is just as tribalistic and anti-SJWism as Russia, if not more — and is in a better position to undermine postmodernist bullshit on a global scale.

    The South China Sea issue is less of an affront to the west geographically than Russia’s actions in Ukraine, which leads me to believe that western nationalists who use this excuse are not ideological nationalists, they’re just acting out tribalism in the simplest ways, using China as the next archrival.

    A more sensible thing to do is for the nationalists of the world to turn their collective energies on the egalitarian left, and root out their beliefs in every society. Infighting between nationalists always gives the left the advantage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Cold War II will be with China, not Russia
     
    Yes, the only question is whether to (a) smash Russia and install US military bases in the various stans around China's Northern border, while the latter are looted by Soros and co. with the aid of Poroshenkite puppets, or (b) play the traditional balance of power game, abandoning the Kissinger-inspired tilt toward China of the Nixon era, which served to counter a dominant Soviet Union, for a Kissinger-inspired tilt toward an intact but much weakened Russia to counter today's rapidly rising China.
  43. Unlike America’s elites, Putin is an ethnonationalist in a time when tribalism is shoving aside transnationalism as the force of the future.

    Putin may be a national sovereigntist–i.e., against the new world order–but he really doesn’t strike me as much of an “ethnonationalist”. He has never opposed all the immigration into Russia from the Caucasus or Central Asia, nor has he annexed any ethnic-Russian enclaves in the former SSRs, apart from Crimea, of course.

    Read More
  44. @Corvinus
    Putin, like Hillary, benefitted from the public till for his personal enjoyment.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/vladimir-putin-corruption-five-things-we-learned-about-the-russian-presidents-secret-wealth-a6834171.html

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/katiasavchuk/2016/03/30/how-vladimir-putins-son-in-law-became-russias-youngest-billionaire/#59accd0b4bc3

    My God is that the best you can do parroting items from the Independent and Forbes, both noted for their propaganda I have done many search’s on Putin’s billions and came up empty every time, perhaps you can post a creditable site rather than the two you posted…

    Read More
    • Agree: Mao Cheng Ji
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "My God is that the best you can do parroting items from the Independent and Forbes..."

    You have to refute their findings with counter evidence rather than disqualify the sources entirely.

    "both noted for their propaganda..." "perhaps you can post a creditable site rather than the two you posted…"

    As is this website. As is Vox Day. As in all sites have an element of propaganda. Your point?

    "I have done many search’s on Putin’s billions and came up empty every time..."

    That would be a False News Story. There are a number of sources that discuss how he "earned" his money.
  45. @bluedog
    My God is that the best you can do parroting items from the Independent and Forbes, both noted for their propaganda I have done many search's on Putin's billions and came up empty every time, perhaps you can post a creditable site rather than the two you posted...

    “My God is that the best you can do parroting items from the Independent and Forbes…”

    You have to refute their findings with counter evidence rather than disqualify the sources entirely.

    “both noted for their propaganda…” “perhaps you can post a creditable site rather than the two you posted…”

    As is this website. As is Vox Day. As in all sites have an element of propaganda. Your point?

    “I have done many search’s on Putin’s billions and came up empty every time…”

    That would be a False News Story. There are a number of sources that discuss how he “earned” his money.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    That would be a False News Story.There are a number of sources that discuss how he "earned" his money.

    List them please so we can all check them, out otherwise your simply spreading some more propaganda about how Putin is worth a few more stolen billions..
    , @Mao Cheng Ji

    There are a number of sources that discuss how he “earned” his money.
     
    Before discussing "how he earned his money", why don't you prove first that he actually has any, any personal money.

    You know, I've been reading all my life about Fidel Castro's billions. When he finally retired, obviously I expected him to move to the most expensive penthouse in Paris, or to buy at least as many mansions as John McCain owns. Alas, he stayed in Cuba and now he's dead. What gives? Where's all his mythical billions?

    , @Seamus Padraig
    If Putin really is stashing away billions, then there's only two possible places could stash them:

    1.) inside Russia
    2.) outside Russia

    If he's storing the money inside Russia, there's really no way they could ever actually know that for sure. And Putin would be very foolish to store it outside of Russia because it could be confiscated on account of the sanctions--that's what happened to Iran's funds abroad after sanctions were imposed on them.

    All in all then, I find their contention pretty weak and hard to swallow.
  46. @Sean
    If the US had given meaningful support to the rebels, then the Assads would have fallen. The Assads may think they have defeated the US plot against them, but Russia only came in after the US shown iftself unable to act coherently.

    What Trump has to lose by not confronting Putin is only his most valuable asset: his power to make others start worrying about what US powe might do with him at the helm. Trump is an intimidator, an enforcer, he has already shown his true colours to the motor industry and Russia would be wise to emulate Ford.

    The US support for the rebels, plus that contributed by its allies (Turkey, Saudi, etc.) was more than adequate. Erdogan has even said that the US aided IS.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/16/contrary-to-popular-belief-houthis-arent-iranian-proxies/

    Rebellions without Stingers but having popular support get crushed by the puppet regimes paymasters. The US couldhave sent undercover delta force into Syria with Stingers, but the rebels have been denied meaningful support. The US has not allowed the Saudis to supply Singers either. It is a sick joke to claim the US has backed the rebels but forgot to give them Stingers. Russia is terrified of the US and only came in when the US washed its hands of the rebels. It was a popular rebellion that Assad faced, and he is supported by a minority of the country.

    See, in Yemen the Saudi are doing the same as Russia in Syria , slaughtering a population that does not acknowledge their foreign overlord's rights.
  47. Unlike America’s elites, Putin is an ethnonationalist in a time when tribalism is shoving aside transnationalism as the force of the future.

    Sorry – Tribalism and transnationalism are both bad for humanity.

    The real bad guy is borderless Rothschild monetarism. Those greedy thugs have no loyalty to any place on the Earth. They are working to make a cashless world where all transactions must flow through them. They want to skim every human interaction that involves money. It will be a world were dollars and pounds are meaningless. Everyone will be churned into an indebted zombie.

    Heaven knows that national tribalism is also bad for humanity. We must return to local ownership and identity. America started out as individual local states where things were voted on by local people. Local people owned the land and the businesses. Localism is the heart of a stable society.

    Read More
  48. @Carlton Meyer
    Since 97% of Crimeans voted to rejoin Russia in 2014 when Kiev was in chaos after a CIA funded coup, I would not refer to its Russian reannexation as a silent coup. The vote was watched by international observers and nearly all ethnic Russians, who are the majority in Crimea voted to rejoin, as well as most ethnic Ukrainians there.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_status_referendum,_2014

    Russian forces didn't invade Crimea since 20,000 troops were based there as they had been for a century. For those who think NATO's promise not to expand and move forces eastward was just a verbal agreement, read about the 2009 "Founding Act" that Obama's warmongers trashed.

    http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm

    I often hear Americans say that "Putin is a thug". I ask if they've ever met him, or read any of his articles. I ask if they speak Russian or have lived there recently. They are stunned at such questions, and are unable to explain why they think he is a "thug". They cannot understand they have been fooled by propaganda, especially if they consider themselves "educated."

    Re: Educated Americans who think Putin is a thug.

    Higher Education:

    [A] political racket whereby Democrats fork endless cash to tuition extortionists, and lousy scholars impart insane ideas to debt-strapped students who are made dysfunctional citizens in the process.

    Source:

    Read More
  49. @Jason Liu
    Cold War II will be with China, not Russia, sadly. Western neo-nationalists fail to recognize that China is just as tribalistic and anti-SJWism as Russia, if not more -- and is in a better position to undermine postmodernist bullshit on a global scale.

    The South China Sea issue is less of an affront to the west geographically than Russia's actions in Ukraine, which leads me to believe that western nationalists who use this excuse are not ideological nationalists, they're just acting out tribalism in the simplest ways, using China as the next archrival.

    A more sensible thing to do is for the nationalists of the world to turn their collective energies on the egalitarian left, and root out their beliefs in every society. Infighting between nationalists always gives the left the advantage.

    Cold War II will be with China, not Russia

    Yes, the only question is whether to (a) smash Russia and install US military bases in the various stans around China’s Northern border, while the latter are looted by Soros and co. with the aid of Poroshenkite puppets, or (b) play the traditional balance of power game, abandoning the Kissinger-inspired tilt toward China of the Nixon era, which served to counter a dominant Soviet Union, for a Kissinger-inspired tilt toward an intact but much weakened Russia to counter today’s rapidly rising China.

    Read More
  50. Everybody relax.

    Now that America again has a real man of normal sexuality at the helm, relations with Russia will normalize. President Putin reminds the former president, little Barry Sotero, that he’s a sissy, and it infuriates little Barry and the Democrats that President Putin will not genuflect to the GayKK. Buchanan’s masterly geopolitical analysis aside, refusal to celebrate LGBTQWERTY is the wellspring of the Left’s Russophobia.

    The fakestream media will continue demonizing President Putin, but President Trump will drop all sanctions against Russia and individual Russians, and Cold War II will be handily averted.

    Bank.

    Read More
  51. Pat Buchanan is truly a great man. Look at how he has made so many accurate predictions of what was to come. He is a scholar, a realist, and a genuine patriot–unlike Bush, McCain, and Romney. He was an unusually talented man in our corrupted world.

    He was and is a far better man than Donald Trump, although Trump at least has an inkling of what it means to be patriotic. It was a tremendous tragedy that the majority of the American people failed to recognize his greatness when he ran for president. I recognized it, but I knew he was doomed because he was considered to be anti-semitic. His cause faltered, and we suffered as a people.

    We are in a far more precarious state today because we failed him. I believe that if we had the good sense to elect him president at the time, our world today would be far better than it is now.

    Read More
  52. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Marcus
    No doubt, Russia is still corrupt to the core, Putin hasn't done much to change this, though the lot of the average Russian has undoubtedly improved since he took charge.

    “..the lot of the average Russian has undoubtedly improved since he took charge…”

    Life has improved all over the former Soviet space since the late 1990s. It could only go up from there. Life has improved in places like Belarus and the Baltics were longevity, income per capita, birth rates are rising (1.7 per woman which is above the European average), in Kazakhstan which is now flourishing and has built fantastic modern cities such as Astana. Putin has good qualities but the improvement of life in former USSR is an objective, historic process.

    Russia is not a free country, however. It’s possible that it’s even less free than what it was in the late 1980s.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy

    Russia is not a free country, however. It’s possible that it’s even less free than what it was in the late 1980s.
     
    It is certainly true that the United States "is even less free than what it was in the late 1980s."
    , @Marcus
    There was nothing inevitable about it: how is Ukraine doing? There was only one legal party in the USSR, so your comparison can't even be entertained.
  53. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    So last night I was watching one of the Russian political talk shows and one of the separatists from Ukraine was saying things like “We’re waiting for you, for your help” and a few Moscovite Russians from the audience (expert and the moderator) were like “Er, you should be able to take care of your own self, we don’t wanna pay for you!”. So there’s that. So much for the “countrymen”.

    Read More
  54. @Anonymous
    "..the lot of the average Russian has undoubtedly improved since he took charge..."

    Life has improved all over the former Soviet space since the late 1990s. It could only go up from there. Life has improved in places like Belarus and the Baltics were longevity, income per capita, birth rates are rising (1.7 per woman which is above the European average), in Kazakhstan which is now flourishing and has built fantastic modern cities such as Astana. Putin has good qualities but the improvement of life in former USSR is an objective, historic process.

    Russia is not a free country, however. It's possible that it's even less free than what it was in the late 1980s.

    Russia is not a free country, however. It’s possible that it’s even less free than what it was in the late 1980s.

    It is certainly true that the United States “is even less free than what it was in the late 1980s.”

    Read More
  55. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Ondrej

    They should go back to Russia, like when the French left Algeria. Instead of using these Russians to destabilize non-Russian countries.
     
    Well, do you really mean ethnic Russians (Slavic)?

    They actually they lived there for centuries, former soviet republics where established what was originally part of different gubernias of Russian Empire.

    Or you just speaking about those Russians without actually knowing you should speak-of 100+ ethnicties and nationalities. Which are usually not recognized by Western observer and they are just called those Russians.. :-)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Russia

    They actually they lived there for centuries, former soviet republics where established what was originally part of different gubernias of Russian Empire.

    Not in the Baltic states. Some of the Russian migrants came as late as the 1980s, so just 5 years before the independence. In the pre-WWII Baltic states there were less than 10% ethnic Russians, some of them Old Believers.

    Russia has been attempting to destablize these countries for years through their 5th column. Not gonna work, there will be no uprising there. But if something bigger happens, and Pat Buchanan and Trump start harping about how Russia has some mystical “rights” to defend its “countrymen”, that will turn the US into an official enemy of the Baltic states.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Oh no, we can't have Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia mad at us. The terror!
  56. @Anonymous
    "..the lot of the average Russian has undoubtedly improved since he took charge..."

    Life has improved all over the former Soviet space since the late 1990s. It could only go up from there. Life has improved in places like Belarus and the Baltics were longevity, income per capita, birth rates are rising (1.7 per woman which is above the European average), in Kazakhstan which is now flourishing and has built fantastic modern cities such as Astana. Putin has good qualities but the improvement of life in former USSR is an objective, historic process.

    Russia is not a free country, however. It's possible that it's even less free than what it was in the late 1980s.

    There was nothing inevitable about it: how is Ukraine doing? There was only one legal party in the USSR, so your comparison can’t even be entertained.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Wait, you're saying that Russia is the only post-Soviet state where life has improved since 2000? You are simply delusional. Living standards have improved in several post-Soviet states. Just look at Kazakhstan, as I said. How has Nazarbayev done less of a splendid job than Putin?

    Even Ukraine has seen an increase in birth rates, in particular in the Western parts.
    , @Anonymous

    There was only one legal party in the USSR, so your comparison can’t even be entertained.
     
    I just don't think people like Artemy Troitsky, who spoke freely in the late 80s, should have criminal cases opened against them and be forced out of the country just because they openly expressed their dislike of Putin. A leader who has the support of 80% of the population can't handle a little bit of criticism?
  57. @Che Guava
    ... and let us not forget the extremely violent events in Mariupol and Odessa, clearly coordinated by the coup leaders who assembled the 'Euromaidan' under Obama regime direction.

    In itself, the coup d'etat against the elected pres. was extremely violent, almost all from the side of the US- and EU-supported coup makers, along with a contingency of mercenaries who just shot people to ramp it up (an idea strongly supported by mainstream press reports at the time).

    However, everyone is supposed to having the attention span of a gnat, in the face of celeb. bullshit, everybody is supposed to forget all in the glory of Kim Kardashian's gigantic plastic-surgery-augmented bum, and her stepfather's strangely late decision to fake being a woman, we can all be sure that Bruce Jenner has demonstrated his lack of belief in the 'I am really a woman' narrative by only having silicone tits inserted, and facial surgery to grind away part of his jaw bones.

    The primary sexual characteristics remain intact, not a bad idea on the part of Bruce.

    I am not saying the above two paras. represent part of a conspiracy, but it was surely a useful distraction in the mass-media at the time of the Obama regime making trouble in the Ukraine. Not that I think that was his idea, From what we know of his record, he was rather a dim bulb, benefitting from affirmative action, and never acknowledging the fact that he was dumped on his white grandparents by his slut mother, and his impregnate-and-abandon father.

    Dreams of My Father indeed, his father dumped him, as cuckoo birds do, in the nests of other birds.

    Squirt and scram is what I call impregnate and abandon.
    I read Dreams of My Father a couple years before he ran for President. His hatred of Whites was obvious. But all the useful idiots I know read it and gushed and worshipped as they had been instructed to by The Atlantic, New Republic, etc.

    He was the triumph of a breeding program begun by the communist party of the USA back in the 1930s. The idea was to encourage the young women of the far left to marry and have kids with black men. The children would be raised far left and brought along to high public office.

    They finally got Obama. I’m pretty sure his father was Frank Marshall Davis, married, head of the communist party of Hawaii and best friend of grandpa Dunham.

    Sometimes I feel like the little kid in the Emperor’s New Clothes story. The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are." -

    Revolutionaries were aware of this. Bolsheviks hated peasants because they were impregnable to their propaganda and they had often had property that was making them self sufficient and most of all because they were Christian. To get peasants to act you had to give them tangible rewards like participation in the loot from houses of aristocracy or to deprave them and bring the most animalistic nature to surface. The Protestant revolution in 16 century went along the same lines. It was looting the property of Catholic Church that sustained it but when the peasants organized themselves (Thomas Muntzer) because they wanted power from the new Protestant masters they were mercilessly massacred. Revolutions proceed to educate masses and start with eradicating illiteracy because this makes indoctrination easier. Tocqueville observed that Americans already in 1830s were exceptionally proud of America and of being Americans and believed in American exceptionalism and superiority. He attributed it to indoctrination carried out in schools.

    The merely educated (the obrazovanshchina) are the perfect product of indoctrination. They constitute the majority of the so-called educated people. The ones who manage to transcend it face the uphill battle because at first they must to unlearn what they were taught and since usually it is done not in a formal setting they are often a prey of silly ideas that may end up with being truly deplorable. I do not exclude the possibility that the silly ideas are planted there on purpose (like Cass Sustein infiltration) to distract them and send them astray, so their awakening amounts to nil.
    , @Art
    For what it is worth, when Obama first came on the national public scene, there was a close up photograph of his mother carrying him when he was a baby.

    He looked zero like his supposed Kenyan father.
    , @Che Guava

    Squirt and scram is what I call impregnate and abandon.
     
    Not bad, I like the phrase. However, the pattern seems to include ensuring the pregnancy is well entrenchred before total abanondment.

    Frank Marshall Davis, that is beyond my ken, but I like the Chelsea Clinton is spawned by man who was not Bill meme, I forget the name now, but showed pics to woman colleagues at the end-of-year party, everyone agreed that he was mnre likeky to be the father, all but two were mothers, so is Chelsea really the daughter of Mr. Cigar insertion?
  58. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Marcus
    There was nothing inevitable about it: how is Ukraine doing? There was only one legal party in the USSR, so your comparison can't even be entertained.

    Wait, you’re saying that Russia is the only post-Soviet state where life has improved since 2000? You are simply delusional. Living standards have improved in several post-Soviet states. Just look at Kazakhstan, as I said. How has Nazarbayev done less of a splendid job than Putin?

    Even Ukraine has seen an increase in birth rates, in particular in the Western parts.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    No, I'm saying it wasn't inevitable that Russia would rebound the way it did, plenty of other post-communist states still moribund. BTW this Troitsky sounds like an idiot, Yeltsin's "democratic mission?" His 1996 "election" was one of the most blatantly rigged in history (with help of the US)
    http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2007/04/yeltsin-elections-russian
  59. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Marcus
    There was nothing inevitable about it: how is Ukraine doing? There was only one legal party in the USSR, so your comparison can't even be entertained.

    There was only one legal party in the USSR, so your comparison can’t even be entertained.

    I just don’t think people like Artemy Troitsky, who spoke freely in the late 80s, should have criminal cases opened against them and be forced out of the country just because they openly expressed their dislike of Putin. A leader who has the support of 80% of the population can’t handle a little bit of criticism?

    Read More
  60. The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are.

    That’s because they’re not educated; only brainwashed.

    It’s even worse with the rich, pampered, bored, simple minded, punks who jump onto every perverse bandwagon that comes along for the thrills of momentarily appearing “hip,” “cool” “defiant” and “fashionable.”

    Read More
  61. @Corvinus
    "My God is that the best you can do parroting items from the Independent and Forbes..."

    You have to refute their findings with counter evidence rather than disqualify the sources entirely.

    "both noted for their propaganda..." "perhaps you can post a creditable site rather than the two you posted…"

    As is this website. As is Vox Day. As in all sites have an element of propaganda. Your point?

    "I have done many search’s on Putin’s billions and came up empty every time..."

    That would be a False News Story. There are a number of sources that discuss how he "earned" his money.

    That would be a False News Story.There are a number of sources that discuss how he “earned” his money.

    List them please so we can all check them, out otherwise your simply spreading some more propaganda about how Putin is worth a few more stolen billions..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "List them please so we can all check them, out otherwise your simply spreading some more propaganda about how Putin is worth a few more stolen billions."

    It is intellectual laziness on your part to broadly label any and all MSM sources as being propaganda machines. In this manner, work on fact checking and verifying is not an option for you. It is has been established through the two sources I provided that Putin financially benefitted from corruption and criminality during his reign. How much he is worth and where that money is located has been the subject of fierce debate. It is now your duty to offer counter evidence rather than disqualify, disqualify, disqualify.
  62. @Alden
    Squirt and scram is what I call impregnate and abandon.
    I read Dreams of My Father a couple years before he ran for President. His hatred of Whites was obvious. But all the useful idiots I know read it and gushed and worshipped as they had been instructed to by The Atlantic, New Republic, etc.

    He was the triumph of a breeding program begun by the communist party of the USA back in the 1930s. The idea was to encourage the young women of the far left to marry and have kids with black men. The children would be raised far left and brought along to high public office.

    They finally got Obama. I'm pretty sure his father was Frank Marshall Davis, married, head of the communist party of Hawaii and best friend of grandpa Dunham.

    Sometimes I feel like the little kid in the Emperor's New Clothes story. The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are.

    “The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are.” –

    Revolutionaries were aware of this. Bolsheviks hated peasants because they were impregnable to their propaganda and they had often had property that was making them self sufficient and most of all because they were Christian. To get peasants to act you had to give them tangible rewards like participation in the loot from houses of aristocracy or to deprave them and bring the most animalistic nature to surface. The Protestant revolution in 16 century went along the same lines. It was looting the property of Catholic Church that sustained it but when the peasants organized themselves (Thomas Muntzer) because they wanted power from the new Protestant masters they were mercilessly massacred. Revolutions proceed to educate masses and start with eradicating illiteracy because this makes indoctrination easier. Tocqueville observed that Americans already in 1830s were exceptionally proud of America and of being Americans and believed in American exceptionalism and superiority. He attributed it to indoctrination carried out in schools.

    The merely educated (the obrazovanshchina) are the perfect product of indoctrination. They constitute the majority of the so-called educated people. The ones who manage to transcend it face the uphill battle because at first they must to unlearn what they were taught and since usually it is done not in a formal setting they are often a prey of silly ideas that may end up with being truly deplorable. I do not exclude the possibility that the silly ideas are planted there on purpose (like Cass Sustein infiltration) to distract them and send them astray, so their awakening amounts to nil.

    Read More
    • Agree: Bill
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    OMG!

    This is the best comment I've ever read. It even beats every article I've ever read.

    Bless you.

    Encore! Encore!!!
    , @Cagey Beast
    Jacques Ellul made very similar observations in his work on propaganda and the technological society. He and José Ortega y Gasset both deserve a revival, especially right now.
    , @CanSpeccy

    The merely educated (the obrazovanshchina) are the perfect product of indoctrination.
     
    Yes, therein lies the explanation for the destruction Western civilization: the stream of PC indoctrinated graduates of institutions of mass secondary and higher so-called education, who will be subject to life-long "learning" aka PC reinforcement via the dying mass media, and the rising social media.
  63. @Corvinus
    "My God is that the best you can do parroting items from the Independent and Forbes..."

    You have to refute their findings with counter evidence rather than disqualify the sources entirely.

    "both noted for their propaganda..." "perhaps you can post a creditable site rather than the two you posted…"

    As is this website. As is Vox Day. As in all sites have an element of propaganda. Your point?

    "I have done many search’s on Putin’s billions and came up empty every time..."

    That would be a False News Story. There are a number of sources that discuss how he "earned" his money.

    There are a number of sources that discuss how he “earned” his money.

    Before discussing “how he earned his money”, why don’t you prove first that he actually has any, any personal money.

    You know, I’ve been reading all my life about Fidel Castro’s billions. When he finally retired, obviously I expected him to move to the most expensive penthouse in Paris, or to buy at least as many mansions as John McCain owns. Alas, he stayed in Cuba and now he’s dead. What gives? Where’s all his mythical billions?

    Read More
  64. @utu
    "The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are." -

    Revolutionaries were aware of this. Bolsheviks hated peasants because they were impregnable to their propaganda and they had often had property that was making them self sufficient and most of all because they were Christian. To get peasants to act you had to give them tangible rewards like participation in the loot from houses of aristocracy or to deprave them and bring the most animalistic nature to surface. The Protestant revolution in 16 century went along the same lines. It was looting the property of Catholic Church that sustained it but when the peasants organized themselves (Thomas Muntzer) because they wanted power from the new Protestant masters they were mercilessly massacred. Revolutions proceed to educate masses and start with eradicating illiteracy because this makes indoctrination easier. Tocqueville observed that Americans already in 1830s were exceptionally proud of America and of being Americans and believed in American exceptionalism and superiority. He attributed it to indoctrination carried out in schools.

    The merely educated (the obrazovanshchina) are the perfect product of indoctrination. They constitute the majority of the so-called educated people. The ones who manage to transcend it face the uphill battle because at first they must to unlearn what they were taught and since usually it is done not in a formal setting they are often a prey of silly ideas that may end up with being truly deplorable. I do not exclude the possibility that the silly ideas are planted there on purpose (like Cass Sustein infiltration) to distract them and send them astray, so their awakening amounts to nil.

    OMG!

    This is the best comment I’ve ever read. It even beats every article I’ve ever read.

    Bless you.

    Encore! Encore!!!

    Read More
  65. @Corvinus
    Putin, like Hillary, benefitted from the public till for his personal enjoyment.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/vladimir-putin-corruption-five-things-we-learned-about-the-russian-presidents-secret-wealth-a6834171.html

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/katiasavchuk/2016/03/30/how-vladimir-putins-son-in-law-became-russias-youngest-billionaire/#59accd0b4bc3

    Your sources are as credible about Russia as the DNC “hack” (actually a leak) that some US intelligence agency or other has allegedly traced -0 – with ‘High Confidence’ – to President Putin himself personally ordering.

    Pretty much everything Western propaganda and disinformation channels, such as Independent and Forbes, ‘report’ about Russia is manufactured lies mixed in with a little truth to make it plausibly believable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Pretty much everything Western propaganda and disinformation channels, such as Independent and Forbes, ‘report’ about Russia is manufactured lies mixed in with a little truth to make it plausibly believable."

    Again, this mentality requires little thought on your part. All you have to do is label any and all MSM stories that counter your own narrative as being driven by propaganda and [poof] you have an "argument". It's lazy and serves no substantial purpose in debate. Critically vet the information being presented rather than entirely dismiss it as being other than factual or accurate.

  66. “We appear to be denouncing Putin for what we did first.”

    This is the most important part of this article, and indeed the guilt of the MSM regarding Russia these past years. The US is involved everywhere, stirring up never ending conflicts. The “Wolfowitz Doctrine” is the basis of this mind set. Let no other nation limit our ability to do or take whatever we want.

    That today both Russia and China have the ability to stand for their own national interests and limit the larceny of the US is driving the neocons to extreme folly.

    Read More
  67. @Anonymous
    Wait, you're saying that Russia is the only post-Soviet state where life has improved since 2000? You are simply delusional. Living standards have improved in several post-Soviet states. Just look at Kazakhstan, as I said. How has Nazarbayev done less of a splendid job than Putin?

    Even Ukraine has seen an increase in birth rates, in particular in the Western parts.

    No, I’m saying it wasn’t inevitable that Russia would rebound the way it did, plenty of other post-communist states still moribund. BTW this Troitsky sounds like an idiot, Yeltsin’s “democratic mission?” His 1996 “election” was one of the most blatantly rigged in history (with help of the US)

    http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2007/04/yeltsin-elections-russian

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji

    His 1996 “election” was one of the most blatantly rigged in history
     
    Not to mention sending tanks to storm the perfectly legitimate Russian parliament, in 1993. Killing a couple of hundred people in the process. The newspeak meaning of 'democrat' is 'American puppet'.
  68. @utu
    "The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are." -

    Revolutionaries were aware of this. Bolsheviks hated peasants because they were impregnable to their propaganda and they had often had property that was making them self sufficient and most of all because they were Christian. To get peasants to act you had to give them tangible rewards like participation in the loot from houses of aristocracy or to deprave them and bring the most animalistic nature to surface. The Protestant revolution in 16 century went along the same lines. It was looting the property of Catholic Church that sustained it but when the peasants organized themselves (Thomas Muntzer) because they wanted power from the new Protestant masters they were mercilessly massacred. Revolutions proceed to educate masses and start with eradicating illiteracy because this makes indoctrination easier. Tocqueville observed that Americans already in 1830s were exceptionally proud of America and of being Americans and believed in American exceptionalism and superiority. He attributed it to indoctrination carried out in schools.

    The merely educated (the obrazovanshchina) are the perfect product of indoctrination. They constitute the majority of the so-called educated people. The ones who manage to transcend it face the uphill battle because at first they must to unlearn what they were taught and since usually it is done not in a formal setting they are often a prey of silly ideas that may end up with being truly deplorable. I do not exclude the possibility that the silly ideas are planted there on purpose (like Cass Sustein infiltration) to distract them and send them astray, so their awakening amounts to nil.

    Jacques Ellul made very similar observations in his work on propaganda and the technological society. He and José Ortega y Gasset both deserve a revival, especially right now.

    Read More
  69. @Marcus
    No, I'm saying it wasn't inevitable that Russia would rebound the way it did, plenty of other post-communist states still moribund. BTW this Troitsky sounds like an idiot, Yeltsin's "democratic mission?" His 1996 "election" was one of the most blatantly rigged in history (with help of the US)
    http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2007/04/yeltsin-elections-russian

    His 1996 “election” was one of the most blatantly rigged in history

    Not to mention sending tanks to storm the perfectly legitimate Russian parliament, in 1993. Killing a couple of hundred people in the process. The newspeak meaning of ‘democrat’ is ‘American puppet’.

    Read More
  70. @bluedog
    That would be a False News Story.There are a number of sources that discuss how he "earned" his money.

    List them please so we can all check them, out otherwise your simply spreading some more propaganda about how Putin is worth a few more stolen billions..

    “List them please so we can all check them, out otherwise your simply spreading some more propaganda about how Putin is worth a few more stolen billions.”

    It is intellectual laziness on your part to broadly label any and all MSM sources as being propaganda machines. In this manner, work on fact checking and verifying is not an option for you. It is has been established through the two sources I provided that Putin financially benefitted from corruption and criminality during his reign. How much he is worth and where that money is located has been the subject of fierce debate. It is now your duty to offer counter evidence rather than disqualify, disqualify, disqualify.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    No your trying to slide out on the fact that both your sources are well known outlets of lets get Putin and Russia, but the fact is the C.I.A. so I read say they have found no traces of these missing billions, and trust me they looked under every rock to try and fined them, for of course its propaganda value would have been worth half of those missing billions...
  71. @Avery
    Your sources are as credible about Russia as the DNC "hack" (actually a leak) that some US intelligence agency or other has allegedly traced -0 - with 'High Confidence' - to President Putin himself personally ordering.

    Pretty much everything Western propaganda and disinformation channels, such as Independent and Forbes, 'report' about Russia is manufactured lies mixed in with a little truth to make it plausibly believable.

    “Pretty much everything Western propaganda and disinformation channels, such as Independent and Forbes, ‘report’ about Russia is manufactured lies mixed in with a little truth to make it plausibly believable.”

    Again, this mentality requires little thought on your part. All you have to do is label any and all MSM stories that counter your own narrative as being driven by propaganda and [poof] you have an “argument”. It’s lazy and serves no substantial purpose in debate. Critically vet the information being presented rather than entirely dismiss it as being other than factual or accurate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {Again, this mentality requires little thought on your part.}


    Again, blah, blah, blah,....mentality, debate, substantial, purpose, ....blah, blah, blah,....

    I already gave you an example from a recent MSM manufactured hysteria tarring Russia.
    There was no hack of US elections.
    There was no hack of anything.
    Not a single piece of evidence implicating Russia or Russian government.
    Innuendo, conjecture, "high confidence", blah, blah, blah,...

    Yet MSM successfully created guilt-by-association in a large potion of Americans' mind. We know this to be true, because a bunch of Republican Electors were demanding to see intelligence briefings about the non-existent Russian hack before they voted.

    The (non) Intelligence Agencies which are talking about "high confidence" this or that are the same ones which were oh-so-sure Iraq had WMDs: "high confidence" b___s__.
    , @Avery
    When Bill and Hillary were in Arkansas, they had how much money to their names?

    Both have been feeding at the public trough their entire professional working lives. They have not started any businesses, have not founded any companies, have created no wealth,

    Yet their current combined net worth is estimated around $100 million.
    So how did two people, albeit with high salaries, manage to accumulate that much wealth?
    The most they should have been able to save is around $5 million.
    How did they get to $100 million?

    Why don't you use your superior mentality to explain that - instead of worrying about Putin who is not, you know, American.
    And who is not living at American taxpayer expense.

    Might it be the good old magician's trick of........misdirection?
    Create a mass hysteria about a foreign leader so that the corruption* of American parasite politicians is swept under the rug.

    -----
    * http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/13/wikileaks-qatar-wrote-clinton-foundation-million-dollar-check-bill-clintons-birthday/

  72. @Anonymous

    They actually they lived there for centuries, former soviet republics where established what was originally part of different gubernias of Russian Empire.
     
    Not in the Baltic states. Some of the Russian migrants came as late as the 1980s, so just 5 years before the independence. In the pre-WWII Baltic states there were less than 10% ethnic Russians, some of them Old Believers.

    Russia has been attempting to destablize these countries for years through their 5th column. Not gonna work, there will be no uprising there. But if something bigger happens, and Pat Buchanan and Trump start harping about how Russia has some mystical "rights" to defend its "countrymen", that will turn the US into an official enemy of the Baltic states.

    Oh no, we can’t have Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia mad at us. The terror!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Oh, of course, Le Pen's France is going to be your best friend, that's right. Nevermind that half of the French population are rabidly anti-American (not to mention Muslimified). Soon you will have no friends left. Let's see how you fight "the war on terror" then.
  73. @jacques sheete

    The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are.
     
    That's because they're not educated; only brainwashed.

    It's even worse with the rich, pampered, bored, simple minded, punks who jump onto every perverse bandwagon that comes along for the thrills of momentarily appearing "hip," "cool" "defiant" and "fashionable."

    They’re known as “Angelenos.”

    Read More
  74. @utu
    "The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are." -

    Revolutionaries were aware of this. Bolsheviks hated peasants because they were impregnable to their propaganda and they had often had property that was making them self sufficient and most of all because they were Christian. To get peasants to act you had to give them tangible rewards like participation in the loot from houses of aristocracy or to deprave them and bring the most animalistic nature to surface. The Protestant revolution in 16 century went along the same lines. It was looting the property of Catholic Church that sustained it but when the peasants organized themselves (Thomas Muntzer) because they wanted power from the new Protestant masters they were mercilessly massacred. Revolutions proceed to educate masses and start with eradicating illiteracy because this makes indoctrination easier. Tocqueville observed that Americans already in 1830s were exceptionally proud of America and of being Americans and believed in American exceptionalism and superiority. He attributed it to indoctrination carried out in schools.

    The merely educated (the obrazovanshchina) are the perfect product of indoctrination. They constitute the majority of the so-called educated people. The ones who manage to transcend it face the uphill battle because at first they must to unlearn what they were taught and since usually it is done not in a formal setting they are often a prey of silly ideas that may end up with being truly deplorable. I do not exclude the possibility that the silly ideas are planted there on purpose (like Cass Sustein infiltration) to distract them and send them astray, so their awakening amounts to nil.

    The merely educated (the obrazovanshchina) are the perfect product of indoctrination.

    Yes, therein lies the explanation for the destruction Western civilization: the stream of PC indoctrinated graduates of institutions of mass secondary and higher so-called education, who will be subject to life-long “learning” aka PC reinforcement via the dying mass media, and the rising social media.

    Read More
  75. @Anonymous
    So if Russia was promised that NATO wouldn't expand eastwards, all these Russian immigrants in non-Russian countries should have also been repatriated as a part of such an agreement.

    If the Russian had learnt the lesson on the history of the American selling snake oil to the American natives, the Russian would ask the NATO to be disbanded before withdrawing troops from Warsaw Pact when the American promised NATO won’t expand eastwards. The history of the American selling snake oil to the American natives shows that the American is totally not trustworthy and creditworthy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Tell that to the Ukraine, which gave up nuclear weapons because it received guarantees from Russia.
    , @Anonymous
    Soon, my friend, there could be no such thing as "trustworthy". It might be a war of all against all.
  76. It is important that America and Russia develop peaceful relation. Good for their peoples and the people of the world. But, I sense Buchanan and his leftie allies mean more than that.

    Tribalism (racism) and transnationalism (globalization) are not incompatible. Globalization will always be here, it is the type of globalization that we can have that varies. When Putin invades Crimea or exterminates Syrians to keep his ‘only’ naval base in the Mediterranean; that is globalization too. It is also called imperialism/colonialism. (Why he must have a naval base beyond Russian borders? The question applies to America too. It is doubly criminal to say that since the US murdered millions of Vietnamese people, Russia must also murder Syrians)

    It is possible to combine self-determination for tribes and a benign form of globalization. But, the environment is being engineered for a globalization of the super crazies.

    There is now a consensus among right wing conservatives and leftie Nazis who write for so called counterpunch site that an American-Russian alliance is the way to go. They want a super imperialist alliance to rule the world, a New Berlin Conference. They will call for the extermination of non-European peasants who idiotically annoyingly refuse to worship Trump or Trotsky. It will be an openly fascist neoconservatism perhaps dubbed neo Bolshevism in Russia and among its satellite ‘progressives’ in the West. (They love to be named Bolsheviks, it is cool, I guess, red fascists.)

    People who talk about democracy, rule of law, and other universal human values will be dubbed ‘globalists’, traitors of the nation-state-god and criminalized. Dictators and racists will be praised as realists and peace makers. The usual neoconservative formula: up is down, black is white, war is peace will be applied. I have seen an article calling for a Nobel peace prize for Putin for his war on Syria. So it goes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    When I got to this part…

    "When Putin invades Crimea or exterminates Syrians to keep his ‘only’ naval base in the Mediterranean"

    I stopped reading. If I wanted to fill my head with nonsense I'd simply turn on the TV, I certainly wouldn't be here at unz. Have you considered posting on Murdoch sites?
    , @Anonymous
    Yes, you are totally right, it will be these two terrible, selfish "superpowers" who will do whatever they want. And they possess the most advanced murder weapons. And what can the international community do about it?
  77. It is interesting to know that our American Revolutionary War naval hero, John Paul Jones, joined the Russian navy after serving us, and commanded a ship defending the Crimea for Russia and against Turkey.

    Read More
  78. @Realist
    Why should the US be involved in Syria?

    "What Trump has to lose by not confronting Putin is only his most valuable asset: his power to make others start worrying about what US powe might do with him at the helm."

    This is a stupid post even by your standards.

    To keep the Russians from getting involved in America, which didn’t elect Trump because it wanted a nice guy to deal with trouble.

    Read More
  79. @Corvinus
    "My God is that the best you can do parroting items from the Independent and Forbes..."

    You have to refute their findings with counter evidence rather than disqualify the sources entirely.

    "both noted for their propaganda..." "perhaps you can post a creditable site rather than the two you posted…"

    As is this website. As is Vox Day. As in all sites have an element of propaganda. Your point?

    "I have done many search’s on Putin’s billions and came up empty every time..."

    That would be a False News Story. There are a number of sources that discuss how he "earned" his money.

    If Putin really is stashing away billions, then there’s only two possible places could stash them:

    1.) inside Russia
    2.) outside Russia

    If he’s storing the money inside Russia, there’s really no way they could ever actually know that for sure. And Putin would be very foolish to store it outside of Russia because it could be confiscated on account of the sanctions–that’s what happened to Iran’s funds abroad after sanctions were imposed on them.

    All in all then, I find their contention pretty weak and hard to swallow.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "If he’s storing the money inside Russia, there’s really no way they could ever actually know that for sure."

    It's not about certainty, it's about probability. With Putin's political clout and connections, he and his cronies engaged in shady business dealings to benefit themselves. Again, how much funds he has at his personal disposal, no one exactly knows, but the sources offer insight.

    Regardless if he has money inside or outside of Russia, the sources I listed discuss in detail his corruption. Bluedog foolishly insists that any reference to Putin in this regard automatically dismissed as propaganda. Do you share his sentiments as well?
  80. @Joe Wong
    If the Russian had learnt the lesson on the history of the American selling snake oil to the American natives, the Russian would ask the NATO to be disbanded before withdrawing troops from Warsaw Pact when the American promised NATO won't expand eastwards. The history of the American selling snake oil to the American natives shows that the American is totally not trustworthy and creditworthy.

    Tell that to the Ukraine, which gave up nuclear weapons because it received guarantees from Russia.

    Read More
  81. @Corvinus
    "List them please so we can all check them, out otherwise your simply spreading some more propaganda about how Putin is worth a few more stolen billions."

    It is intellectual laziness on your part to broadly label any and all MSM sources as being propaganda machines. In this manner, work on fact checking and verifying is not an option for you. It is has been established through the two sources I provided that Putin financially benefitted from corruption and criminality during his reign. How much he is worth and where that money is located has been the subject of fierce debate. It is now your duty to offer counter evidence rather than disqualify, disqualify, disqualify.

    No your trying to slide out on the fact that both your sources are well known outlets of lets get Putin and Russia, but the fact is the C.I.A. so I read say they have found no traces of these missing billions, and trust me they looked under every rock to try and fined them, for of course its propaganda value would have been worth half of those missing billions…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "No your trying to slide out on the fact that both your sources are well known outlets of lets get Putin and Russia..."

    They are well known outlets of offering proof that Putin has amassed assets in the billions of dollars through his Kremlin contacts and his business associates. Take umbrage with the content of those sources. But when you simply label these two sites as only propaganda tools you undermine your credibility. Do you show the same disdain for "well known outlets" who are "out to get" politicians you find particular obnoxious?
  82. @anon
    We have no inherent conflicts with Russia. The USSR was a godless, communist imperial state with expansionist aspirations. We beat them. Over. We WON.

    Russia is our natural ally against China. In terms of the bigger picture, NATO is disturbing, and we needlessly provoked Russia by mindless expansion. However, NATO has led to European nations 'cheating' on their commitment to spend 2% of GDP on their military. This cheating has effectively disarmed Europe. And, in fact -- we have kept Germany on a short leash. Which is hugely advantageous to Russia.

    But aside from all that -- there simply isn't a serious reason to mix it up with Russia. Does anyone in the West really care about the Black Sea?

    As far as the notion that Russia wants go Imperial and start taking territory -- get real. Russia invading Ukraine and annexing the entire country makes as much sense as the US invading and annexing Mexico. Ukraine was (is) a customer for its natural gas. A profit center, if you will. After an invasion, it would simply be an expense. Ukraine is poorer, and it would be expensive to integrate the into Russia. And as far as the 'breadbasket' of Eurasia, Russia now exports grain.

    So -- why shouldn't Trump and Putin chill out?

    The biggest problem is that the US can't seem to take YES for an answer. Or Victory as sufficient. We see it over and over and over. And then take the wasted resources and pass them out to US citizens. Give us our peace dividend.

    The American and their sidekick the Brits are the ‘God-fearing’ morally defunct evil ‘puritans’.

    Read More
  83. You sling labels about without the most basic understanding of what they mean. Much of that is due to the century-long disinformation campaign that has imposed meanings on those terms, and changed the cognitive map, or intellectual tool-kit, of millions of people throughout the world, by the use of propaganda techniques and emotionally charged, irrational, vilifying rhetoric and (especially) film-making.

    Rational definitions of those terms would produce a far different, and far more useful basis for historical analysis.
    That’s one reason, the main reason, I insist that it is essential that the holocaust narrative be deconstructed. A free people, in a participatory form of government, for whom the right to speak freely was specifically guaranteed in their founding documents, have not only the right but the sacred responsibility to study and explain that history thoroughly and objectively — rationally, not emotionally. Few if any of those hate-mongers have ever produced an objective definition of Nazism – National Socialism, preferring instead to use expanded forms of ad hominem and counter-chronological atrocity propaganda.

    Nazism, and phenomena related to it, such as Hitler, swastika, Wehrmacht, SS, Gestapo, and the German people and nation themselves — have been emotionally loaded to connote the essence of evil.

    National Socialism — distorted via the derogatory term “Nazism,” was what the words say it was: a political movement to extend socialist economic and governing- and German cultural- principles among and within the German nation. NSDAP did not have an international agenda (as Bolshevism did).

    Bolshevism names an ideological movement purveyed by a defined set of Russian and East European political leaders and ideologues, that had at its original core the intention to spread its ideology throughout the world.
    British historian Jeremy Black has argued that the USA and other “civilized” western nations waged war against Bolshevism for over 70 years, starting in World War I and proceeding thru the so-called Cold War era that ended with the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989. https://www.c-span.org/video/?407529-1/dwight-d-eisenhower-cold-war

    Fascism is the name given by Benito Mussolini to his vision for unifying and modernizing the Italian nation/people and their economy and culture. Fascism, like National Socialism, was a national movement; it did not have international ambitions. Mussolini’s ill-conceived and ill-fated attempt to colonize Ethiopia was a throw-back to a just-ending era of colonization, much like the Jewish zionist project to colonize Palestine was and remains.

    Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt led separate and competing efforts to drive a wedge between the alliance of Italy under Mussolini, the Italian nationalist, and Germany under Hitler, the German nationalist. It is believed that Communists assassinated Mussolini; it is not at all unlikely that OSS, the precursor to CIA, was involved in the deed.
    In other words, the Allies — then-called the “United Nations” — used internationalist Bolsheviks to destroy two nationalist movements.

    Fit those definitions and realities into your discourse on the ability of “globalization” and “racism” and “tribalism” to co-exist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig

    NSDAP did not have an international agenda (as Bolshevism did).
     
    Nonsense. In Mein Kampf, first published in the mid-twenties, Hitler made clear that he coveted Lebensraum in Russia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf#Lebensraum

    Fascism, like National Socialism, was a national movement; it did not have international ambitions. Mussolini’s ill-conceived and ill-fated attempt to colonize Ethiopia was a throw-back to a just-ending era of colonization ...
     
    You forgot about Abyssinia, Libya, Albania and Greece.

    German National Socialism and Italian Fascism were thoroughly imperialist projects, which is why it grates on me to hear people refer to Hitler and Mussolini as nationalists--they were definitely not that.
    , @Mao Cheng Ji

    Bolshevism names an ideological movement purveyed by a defined set of Russian and East European political leaders and ideologues, that had at its original core the intention to spread its ideology throughout the world.
     
    Actually, I think you're conflating 'bolshevism' and 'revolutionary marxism' here. The former ideology ('bolshevism') was specifically designed as 'communism in one single country' (i.e. the USSR), and therefore had no world-wide ambitions (especially after expelling Trotsky and condemning his ideology as 'left-wing deviation').

    The latter ('revolutionary marxism') is very much a western ideology, extremely popular in the West, both western working class and western intellectuals, till about mid-1970s, when the establishment had managed to covertly discredit and overtly suppress it (Greece junta, Chilean junta, etc.).

    But it's still alive, and waiting in the wings, I believe. It's a natural reaction to the excesses and contradictions of capitalism, and these contradictions are getting more and more evident and painful again today...

  84. Excellent article. It is clear the Putin bashers/Russia haters are determined to bring Trump around to their propaganda. I admire the fact that he is standing his ground as these “facts” are lies, no evidence, and the more others deny Russian hacking, the more O. and his criminals dig their heels in. Many legitimate journalists have made it very clear this is sore loser PR, instead of falling on their own sword for their repeated failures over decades (tossing workers, unions, voter protections, etc.) to protect us citizens and voters. The DP got into bed withe moneyed, the Establishment, and now whine about a lost elections–another one, and the death of their Party.
    They brought it on themselves.

    As for O. I see he has rented an office in DeeCee in order to undermine Trump and help rebuild the DP. Good luck with that. He and the Clintons destroyed the DP. Actually HRC was the one who destroyed the DP but it was hubby who blazed the trail, and began the abandonment of us 99 Percenters for the 1/10 and 1 Percenters.

    The war lovers, Putin haters, intel community, HRC lovers have declared war on Trump. I didn’t vote for him or HRC. I didn’t vote for O. the second time. HRC would have nuked Syria or Iran or Russia as she made it very clear she would do that when it was called for. O. must have liked that idea as he knelt at her feet. If D. stands his ground, he will definitely stave off WW3. Personally, I don’t believe he has much chance of surviving 4 years, or even 1 year. His conflicts of interests are massive. And if history is any indication, pissing off the CIA is very bad for remaining in power or alive. Pence is the larger threat to us 99 Percenters.

    Jan 6 is two days away and Trump isn’t in the White House as yet. HRC and her posse have one more card to play and that is having the EC votes voided and the election tossed to the Senate. They need one from the Senate and 2 from the House. (See the article over on Alternet) and the group (a majority of those being black who should be no fan of HRC) is gathering in DeeCee looking for those 3.

    As for those deplorables he has chosen for his Administration (all crooks, sociopaths, one and all), an article over on Counterpunch made an interesting point when he stated these corporate rapists and plunderers have gotten almost all theu can get out of teh private sector, and now intend to pillage the public sector (Medicaid, Medicare, the Post Office, Social Security, and all personal savings accounts, etc.) He is absolutely correct.

    Read More
  85. @SolontoCroesus
    You sling labels about without the most basic understanding of what they mean. Much of that is due to the century-long disinformation campaign that has imposed meanings on those terms, and changed the cognitive map, or intellectual tool-kit, of millions of people throughout the world, by the use of propaganda techniques and emotionally charged, irrational, vilifying rhetoric and (especially) film-making.

    Rational definitions of those terms would produce a far different, and far more useful basis for historical analysis.
    That's one reason, the main reason, I insist that it is essential that the holocaust narrative be deconstructed. A free people, in a participatory form of government, for whom the right to speak freely was specifically guaranteed in their founding documents, have not only the right but the sacred responsibility to study and explain that history thoroughly and objectively -- rationally, not emotionally. Few if any of those hate-mongers have ever produced an objective definition of Nazism -- National Socialism, preferring instead to use expanded forms of ad hominem and counter-chronological atrocity propaganda.

    Nazism, and phenomena related to it, such as Hitler, swastika, Wehrmacht, SS, Gestapo, and the German people and nation themselves -- have been emotionally loaded to connote the essence of evil.

    National Socialism -- distorted via the derogatory term "Nazism," was what the words say it was: a political movement to extend socialist economic and governing- and German cultural- principles among and within the German nation. NSDAP did not have an international agenda (as Bolshevism did).

    Bolshevism names an ideological movement purveyed by a defined set of Russian and East European political leaders and ideologues, that had at its original core the intention to spread its ideology throughout the world.
    British historian Jeremy Black has argued that the USA and other "civilized" western nations waged war against Bolshevism for over 70 years, starting in World War I and proceeding thru the so-called Cold War era that ended with the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989. https://www.c-span.org/video/?407529-1/dwight-d-eisenhower-cold-war

    Fascism is the name given by Benito Mussolini to his vision for unifying and modernizing the Italian nation/people and their economy and culture. Fascism, like National Socialism, was a national movement; it did not have international ambitions. Mussolini's ill-conceived and ill-fated attempt to colonize Ethiopia was a throw-back to a just-ending era of colonization, much like the Jewish zionist project to colonize Palestine was and remains.

    Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt led separate and competing efforts to drive a wedge between the alliance of Italy under Mussolini, the Italian nationalist, and Germany under Hitler, the German nationalist. It is believed that Communists assassinated Mussolini; it is not at all unlikely that OSS, the precursor to CIA, was involved in the deed.
    In other words, the Allies -- then-called the "United Nations" -- used internationalist Bolsheviks to destroy two nationalist movements.

    Fit those definitions and realities into your discourse on the ability of "globalization" and "racism" and "tribalism" to co-exist.

    NSDAP did not have an international agenda (as Bolshevism did).

    Nonsense. In Mein Kampf, first published in the mid-twenties, Hitler made clear that he coveted Lebensraum in Russia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf#Lebensraum

    Fascism, like National Socialism, was a national movement; it did not have international ambitions. Mussolini’s ill-conceived and ill-fated attempt to colonize Ethiopia was a throw-back to a just-ending era of colonization …

    You forgot about Abyssinia, Libya, Albania and Greece.

    German National Socialism and Italian Fascism were thoroughly imperialist projects, which is why it grates on me to hear people refer to Hitler and Mussolini as nationalists–they were definitely not that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    oh dear.

    just the kind of thinking that, one would have thought, Unz readers would avoid; namely, simplistic thinking -- if you can call spouting "lebansraum!" and relying on wikipedia to interpret Mein Kampf "thinking."

    Mein Kampf is available online.
    If you're going to refute the claims based on what Hitler wrote, then it's a good idea to actually dig into what Hitler wrote: what was the context, how did Hitler frame the argument (not 'how did narcissistic Jews with an axe to grind bastardize the argument) -- what Hitler wrote might be objectionable enough on its face, but judge it on its own merits, not what some self-serving, anonymous, likely-as-not hasbarat feeds you like a robin feeds its chicks regurgitated worms.

    I spent 15 minutes or so reading two parts of MK.
    First I did a word search for "lebensraum." It does not appear in MK.
    So I searched for "colonies." Large section discusses the problems with "internal colonization," some history of Germany's past colonial enterprises, which Hitler characterizes as "half-hearted and counterproductive." He writes about how a people who expect to - or intend to- preserve themselves as a people, and to grow and prosper, must have a sound relationship between the territory it controls, as that defines its ability to feed itself, etc etc etc.

    Maybe you are from the USA, Seamus, where land is abundant and, in 1923, two oceans protected a vast interior from threat of harm.
    In 1923 Germany's territory was reduced to about the size of California, and its population was twice that of California.
    You may recall that in WWI 800,000 German civilians starved to death because Germany was dependent on imports to supply sufficient food -- because Germany did not have the correct proportion of territory-to-population (plus room for industrialization) required to sustain itself.
    If what the USA is up to today, and what the British had going on in the 19th and 20th centuries was imperialism, then it is ludicrous to call Hitler's ambitions for Germany in 1924 "imperialism." (I might grant lebensraum).

    You may also recall that in the 1920s and 1930s people in the United States were starving to death. All that land! All those resources! A veritable fortress, especially compared to European states that were surrounded by much larger states with much larger populations and who had large colonies that it drew upon to feed their people and fight for them.
    Hitler wrote that Germany had never drawn in soldiers from colonies it used to have, to fight for Germany -- soldiers from Germany's colonies fought only to defend German colonies, unlike the French, Hitler observes, who had so many Negroes in its continental fighting force that the French people were on their way to losing their French racial identity. Don't white nationals in USA make the same argument today, and isn't it fulsomely endorsed on Unz?

    These are just a few of the realities of life in Germany that were rattling around in Hitler's 30-year old brain.
    It's certainly not imperialism -- Hitler said repeatedly that Germany should ally with the British as imperial protector; and "da moos" made far more of Hitler's characterizations of Jews than Hitler or the German people or NSDAP did -- David Engel, who styles himself a "holocaust scholar," affirms that Hitler and the NSDAP leadership made very few references to Jews after 1933.

    Please note that the point is not to exculpate Hitler, NSDAP, and Germany -- one is always forced to append that disclaimer, although we don't feel compelled to write disclaimers for Israel when it kills Palestinian children with weapons provided by US taxpayers.

    My argument is that we have got to look at the full context of Germany at that time, on its own terms and NOT rely on the propaganda narrative that was supplied by the British and Jews to draw USA into wars

    (Ron Unz wrote about that here: http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-alexander-cockburn-and-the-british-spies/

    and Unz referenced Stephen Sniegoski's review of the Thomas Mahl's research on that situation here https://popularresistance.org/record-traffic-for-our-fake-news-russian-propaganda-website/

    here http://www.unz.com/announcement/record-traffic-for-our-fake-news-russian-propaganda-website/

    and here http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/mahl.htm )

    Don't give credence to the many, many streams of disinformation, propaganda and lies that the zionist community and its acolytes have been ramming down our throats ever since.

    Pleeeeeeaase don't limit yourself to wikipedia, or to AIPAC talking points -- it makes you no more discerning than your average Hageeite. These groups are powerful enough without people like Unz readers -- the ones who are supposed to lead the Resistance! -- paving the way for them.

    The story is far more complicated than bumper stickers like lebensraum and Hitler hated Jews.

  86. @Quartermaster
    But Russia did not invade Crimea. To secure their Black Sea naval base, Russia executed a bloodless coup, but only after the U.S. backed the overthrow of the pro-Russian elected government in Kiev.

    This is risible. There was no coup in Ukraine. Yanukovich decided to order the Berkut to open fire on the protesters on the Maidan, and he ran to escape justice. He was removed from office, constitutionally when he abandoned the office and ran for Russia.

    By the Pat, I was part of the "Brigades" when you ran for President, but you're getting senile. Russia did invade Crimea. That there were already troops there is irrelevant. They left their posts and took over the peninsula. That constitutes an invasion in any book. The "no invasion" business is pure manure.

    As for Putin’s backing of secessionists in Donetsk and Luhansk, he is standing by kinfolk left behind when his country broke apart. Russians live in many of the 14 former Soviet republics that are now independent nations.

    Putin is not standing by anyone. He tried to steal a "land bridge" to Crimea across southeastern Ukraine. No one was being persecuted for speaking Russian, nor was anyone threatened. The majority of the Russian speakers have no desire to be ruled from Moscow, and that fact is testified to by the fact that even with the addition of Russian Army regulars, the quislings in SE Ukraine weren't able to get any further.

    This is risible. There was no coup in Ukraine. Yanukovich decided to order the Berkut to open fire on the protesters on the Maidan, and he ran to escape justice. He was removed from office, constitutionally when he abandoned the office and ran for Russia.

    Completely delusional, like everything you write on the topic.

    Read More
  87. @Seamus Padraig
    If Putin really is stashing away billions, then there's only two possible places could stash them:

    1.) inside Russia
    2.) outside Russia

    If he's storing the money inside Russia, there's really no way they could ever actually know that for sure. And Putin would be very foolish to store it outside of Russia because it could be confiscated on account of the sanctions--that's what happened to Iran's funds abroad after sanctions were imposed on them.

    All in all then, I find their contention pretty weak and hard to swallow.

    “If he’s storing the money inside Russia, there’s really no way they could ever actually know that for sure.”

    It’s not about certainty, it’s about probability. With Putin’s political clout and connections, he and his cronies engaged in shady business dealings to benefit themselves. Again, how much funds he has at his personal disposal, no one exactly knows, but the sources offer insight.

    Regardless if he has money inside or outside of Russia, the sources I listed discuss in detail his corruption. Bluedog foolishly insists that any reference to Putin in this regard automatically dismissed as propaganda. Do you share his sentiments as well?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    "Bluedog foolishly insists that any reference to Putin in this regard automatically dismissed as propaganda. Do you share his sentiments as well?"

    I do.
    , @Realist
    "It’s not about certainty, it’s about probability."

    With you it is, but it should be about certainty.
  88. @bluedog
    No your trying to slide out on the fact that both your sources are well known outlets of lets get Putin and Russia, but the fact is the C.I.A. so I read say they have found no traces of these missing billions, and trust me they looked under every rock to try and fined them, for of course its propaganda value would have been worth half of those missing billions...

    “No your trying to slide out on the fact that both your sources are well known outlets of lets get Putin and Russia…”

    They are well known outlets of offering proof that Putin has amassed assets in the billions of dollars through his Kremlin contacts and his business associates. Take umbrage with the content of those sources. But when you simply label these two sites as only propaganda tools you undermine your credibility. Do you show the same disdain for “well known outlets” who are “out to get” politicians you find particular obnoxious?

    Read More
  89. @Alden
    Squirt and scram is what I call impregnate and abandon.
    I read Dreams of My Father a couple years before he ran for President. His hatred of Whites was obvious. But all the useful idiots I know read it and gushed and worshipped as they had been instructed to by The Atlantic, New Republic, etc.

    He was the triumph of a breeding program begun by the communist party of the USA back in the 1930s. The idea was to encourage the young women of the far left to marry and have kids with black men. The children would be raised far left and brought along to high public office.

    They finally got Obama. I'm pretty sure his father was Frank Marshall Davis, married, head of the communist party of Hawaii and best friend of grandpa Dunham.

    Sometimes I feel like the little kid in the Emperor's New Clothes story. The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are.

    For what it is worth, when Obama first came on the national public scene, there was a close up photograph of his mother carrying him when he was a baby.

    He looked zero like his supposed Kenyan father.

    Read More
  90. @Seamus Padraig

    NSDAP did not have an international agenda (as Bolshevism did).
     
    Nonsense. In Mein Kampf, first published in the mid-twenties, Hitler made clear that he coveted Lebensraum in Russia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf#Lebensraum

    Fascism, like National Socialism, was a national movement; it did not have international ambitions. Mussolini’s ill-conceived and ill-fated attempt to colonize Ethiopia was a throw-back to a just-ending era of colonization ...
     
    You forgot about Abyssinia, Libya, Albania and Greece.

    German National Socialism and Italian Fascism were thoroughly imperialist projects, which is why it grates on me to hear people refer to Hitler and Mussolini as nationalists--they were definitely not that.

    oh dear.

    just the kind of thinking that, one would have thought, Unz readers would avoid; namely, simplistic thinking — if you can call spouting “lebansraum!” and relying on wikipedia to interpret Mein Kampf “thinking.”

    Mein Kampf is available online.
    If you’re going to refute the claims based on what Hitler wrote, then it’s a good idea to actually dig into what Hitler wrote: what was the context, how did Hitler frame the argument (not ‘how did narcissistic Jews with an axe to grind bastardize the argument) — what Hitler wrote might be objectionable enough on its face, but judge it on its own merits, not what some self-serving, anonymous, likely-as-not hasbarat feeds you like a robin feeds its chicks regurgitated worms.

    I spent 15 minutes or so reading two parts of MK.
    First I did a word search for “lebensraum.” It does not appear in MK.
    So I searched for “colonies.” Large section discusses the problems with “internal colonization,” some history of Germany’s past colonial enterprises, which Hitler characterizes as “half-hearted and counterproductive.” He writes about how a people who expect to – or intend to- preserve themselves as a people, and to grow and prosper, must have a sound relationship between the territory it controls, as that defines its ability to feed itself, etc etc etc.

    Maybe you are from the USA, Seamus, where land is abundant and, in 1923, two oceans protected a vast interior from threat of harm.
    In 1923 Germany’s territory was reduced to about the size of California, and its population was twice that of California.
    You may recall that in WWI 800,000 German civilians starved to death because Germany was dependent on imports to supply sufficient food — because Germany did not have the correct proportion of territory-to-population (plus room for industrialization) required to sustain itself.
    If what the USA is up to today, and what the British had going on in the 19th and 20th centuries was imperialism, then it is ludicrous to call Hitler’s ambitions for Germany in 1924 “imperialism.” (I might grant lebensraum).

    You may also recall that in the 1920s and 1930s people in the United States were starving to death. All that land! All those resources! A veritable fortress, especially compared to European states that were surrounded by much larger states with much larger populations and who had large colonies that it drew upon to feed their people and fight for them.
    Hitler wrote that Germany had never drawn in soldiers from colonies it used to have, to fight for Germany — soldiers from Germany’s colonies fought only to defend German colonies, unlike the French, Hitler observes, who had so many Negroes in its continental fighting force that the French people were on their way to losing their French racial identity. Don’t white nationals in USA make the same argument today, and isn’t it fulsomely endorsed on Unz?

    These are just a few of the realities of life in Germany that were rattling around in Hitler’s 30-year old brain.
    It’s certainly not imperialism — Hitler said repeatedly that Germany should ally with the British as imperial protector; and “da moos” made far more of Hitler’s characterizations of Jews than Hitler or the German people or NSDAP did — David Engel, who styles himself a “holocaust scholar,” affirms that Hitler and the NSDAP leadership made very few references to Jews after 1933.

    Please note that the point is not to exculpate Hitler, NSDAP, and Germany — one is always forced to append that disclaimer, although we don’t feel compelled to write disclaimers for Israel when it kills Palestinian children with weapons provided by US taxpayers.

    My argument is that we have got to look at the full context of Germany at that time, on its own terms and NOT rely on the propaganda narrative that was supplied by the British and Jews to draw USA into wars

    (Ron Unz wrote about that here: http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-alexander-cockburn-and-the-british-spies/

    and Unz referenced Stephen Sniegoski’s review of the Thomas Mahl’s research on that situation here https://popularresistance.org/record-traffic-for-our-fake-news-russian-propaganda-website/

    here http://www.unz.com/announcement/record-traffic-for-our-fake-news-russian-propaganda-website/

    and here http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/mahl.htm )

    Don’t give credence to the many, many streams of disinformation, propaganda and lies that the zionist community and its acolytes have been ramming down our throats ever since.

    Pleeeeeeaase don’t limit yourself to wikipedia, or to AIPAC talking points — it makes you no more discerning than your average Hageeite. These groups are powerful enough without people like Unz readers — the ones who are supposed to lead the Resistance! — paving the way for them.

    The story is far more complicated than bumper stickers like lebensraum and Hitler hated Jews.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus

    So, today we find a number of powers on the earth who have a considerably larger population than Germany the USA and who have greater political support for their powerful positions. When we compare the area and population ratio of the German Reich with other rising world powers, Germany the USA has never seen such unfavorable conditions, not since the beginning of our history two thousand years ago, not until today. At that time, we were a young, bold nation entering a world of large political structures that were already crumbling
    and we helped to dispose of one two of the last giants, Rome the British empire, and Communist Russia. Today, we find ourselves in a world where large power states are again developing while our own Reich nation gradually sinks deeper and deeper into insignificance.

    It is necessary for us to coldly and calmly keep this bitter truth in our mind. It is necessary for us to study and compare the area and population of the German empire the USA throughout the centuries with that of other states. I am convinced that everyone will come to the same alarming conclusion that I have already pointed out. Germany the USA is no longer a world power, regardless of whether she is strong or weak in the military sense.

    We are no longer in proportion when compared to the other great states of the world. That is thanks to the disastrous leadership of our nation in matters of foreign policy, thanks to the absolute lack of a clearly-defined foreign policy, and thanks to the loss of all natural instincts and loss of the desire for self-preservation.

    If the National-Socialist movement American experiment in Constitutional, representative self-government wants to shine brightly in history and show it is ordained to pursue a great mission for our people, it must fully recognize and feel deep pain over their situation on this earth. It must take up the fight, with courage and purpose, against the aimlessness and ineptitude that has guided our foreign policy. Without regard to “tradition” or bad past experiences, it must find the courage to organize our people and unite their strength in a march forward on the road that will lead our people out of their present narrow living area to new [intellectual] territory and new soil a new national narrative . We must liberate them forever from the danger of perishing from the face of this earth, and we must not allow them to serve others as slaves.
     
    -Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf
  91. @Sean
    Multi polar has more permutations, and more things to go wrong.

    The Military Industrial Complex has taken charge of the US. Nov 20, 2015 The One Thing You Need to Know About ISIS ‘Americans please wake up!’

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Wow! I'd never heard of truth stream until you posted that. That is one hell of an under ten minute wake up call. Cheers
  92. @Sean
    To keep the Russians from getting involved in America, which didn't elect Trump because it wanted a nice guy to deal with trouble.

    Wow!

    Read More
  93. @SolontoCroesus
    oh dear.

    just the kind of thinking that, one would have thought, Unz readers would avoid; namely, simplistic thinking -- if you can call spouting "lebansraum!" and relying on wikipedia to interpret Mein Kampf "thinking."

    Mein Kampf is available online.
    If you're going to refute the claims based on what Hitler wrote, then it's a good idea to actually dig into what Hitler wrote: what was the context, how did Hitler frame the argument (not 'how did narcissistic Jews with an axe to grind bastardize the argument) -- what Hitler wrote might be objectionable enough on its face, but judge it on its own merits, not what some self-serving, anonymous, likely-as-not hasbarat feeds you like a robin feeds its chicks regurgitated worms.

    I spent 15 minutes or so reading two parts of MK.
    First I did a word search for "lebensraum." It does not appear in MK.
    So I searched for "colonies." Large section discusses the problems with "internal colonization," some history of Germany's past colonial enterprises, which Hitler characterizes as "half-hearted and counterproductive." He writes about how a people who expect to - or intend to- preserve themselves as a people, and to grow and prosper, must have a sound relationship between the territory it controls, as that defines its ability to feed itself, etc etc etc.

    Maybe you are from the USA, Seamus, where land is abundant and, in 1923, two oceans protected a vast interior from threat of harm.
    In 1923 Germany's territory was reduced to about the size of California, and its population was twice that of California.
    You may recall that in WWI 800,000 German civilians starved to death because Germany was dependent on imports to supply sufficient food -- because Germany did not have the correct proportion of territory-to-population (plus room for industrialization) required to sustain itself.
    If what the USA is up to today, and what the British had going on in the 19th and 20th centuries was imperialism, then it is ludicrous to call Hitler's ambitions for Germany in 1924 "imperialism." (I might grant lebensraum).

    You may also recall that in the 1920s and 1930s people in the United States were starving to death. All that land! All those resources! A veritable fortress, especially compared to European states that were surrounded by much larger states with much larger populations and who had large colonies that it drew upon to feed their people and fight for them.
    Hitler wrote that Germany had never drawn in soldiers from colonies it used to have, to fight for Germany -- soldiers from Germany's colonies fought only to defend German colonies, unlike the French, Hitler observes, who had so many Negroes in its continental fighting force that the French people were on their way to losing their French racial identity. Don't white nationals in USA make the same argument today, and isn't it fulsomely endorsed on Unz?

    These are just a few of the realities of life in Germany that were rattling around in Hitler's 30-year old brain.
    It's certainly not imperialism -- Hitler said repeatedly that Germany should ally with the British as imperial protector; and "da moos" made far more of Hitler's characterizations of Jews than Hitler or the German people or NSDAP did -- David Engel, who styles himself a "holocaust scholar," affirms that Hitler and the NSDAP leadership made very few references to Jews after 1933.

    Please note that the point is not to exculpate Hitler, NSDAP, and Germany -- one is always forced to append that disclaimer, although we don't feel compelled to write disclaimers for Israel when it kills Palestinian children with weapons provided by US taxpayers.

    My argument is that we have got to look at the full context of Germany at that time, on its own terms and NOT rely on the propaganda narrative that was supplied by the British and Jews to draw USA into wars

    (Ron Unz wrote about that here: http://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-alexander-cockburn-and-the-british-spies/

    and Unz referenced Stephen Sniegoski's review of the Thomas Mahl's research on that situation here https://popularresistance.org/record-traffic-for-our-fake-news-russian-propaganda-website/

    here http://www.unz.com/announcement/record-traffic-for-our-fake-news-russian-propaganda-website/

    and here http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/mahl.htm )

    Don't give credence to the many, many streams of disinformation, propaganda and lies that the zionist community and its acolytes have been ramming down our throats ever since.

    Pleeeeeeaase don't limit yourself to wikipedia, or to AIPAC talking points -- it makes you no more discerning than your average Hageeite. These groups are powerful enough without people like Unz readers -- the ones who are supposed to lead the Resistance! -- paving the way for them.

    The story is far more complicated than bumper stickers like lebensraum and Hitler hated Jews.

    So, today we find a number of powers on the earth who have a considerably larger population than Germany the USA and who have greater political support for their powerful positions. When we compare the area and population ratio of the German Reich with other rising world powers, Germany the USA has never seen such unfavorable conditions, not since the beginning of our history two thousand years ago, not until today. At that time, we were a young, bold nation entering a world of large political structures that were already crumbling
    and we helped to dispose of one two of the last giants, Rome the British empire, and Communist Russia. Today, we find ourselves in a world where large power states are again developing while our own Reich nation gradually sinks deeper and deeper into insignificance.

    It is necessary for us to coldly and calmly keep this bitter truth in our mind. It is necessary for us to study and compare the area and population of the German empire the USA throughout the centuries with that of other states. I am convinced that everyone will come to the same alarming conclusion that I have already pointed out. Germany the USA is no longer a world power, regardless of whether she is strong or weak in the military sense.

    We are no longer in proportion when compared to the other great states of the world. That is thanks to the disastrous leadership of our nation in matters of foreign policy, thanks to the absolute lack of a clearly-defined foreign policy, and thanks to the loss of all natural instincts and loss of the desire for self-preservation.

    If the National-Socialist movement American experiment in Constitutional, representative self-government wants to shine brightly in history and show it is ordained to pursue a great mission for our people, it must fully recognize and feel deep pain over their situation on this earth. It must take up the fight, with courage and purpose, against the aimlessness and ineptitude that has guided our foreign policy. Without regard to “tradition” or bad past experiences, it must find the courage to organize our people and unite their strength in a march forward on the road that will lead our people out of their present narrow living area to new [intellectual] territory and new soil a new national narrative . We must liberate them forever from the danger of perishing from the face of this earth, and we must not allow them to serve others as slaves.

    -Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

    Read More
  94. @Corvinus
    "If he’s storing the money inside Russia, there’s really no way they could ever actually know that for sure."

    It's not about certainty, it's about probability. With Putin's political clout and connections, he and his cronies engaged in shady business dealings to benefit themselves. Again, how much funds he has at his personal disposal, no one exactly knows, but the sources offer insight.

    Regardless if he has money inside or outside of Russia, the sources I listed discuss in detail his corruption. Bluedog foolishly insists that any reference to Putin in this regard automatically dismissed as propaganda. Do you share his sentiments as well?

    “Bluedog foolishly insists that any reference to Putin in this regard automatically dismissed as propaganda. Do you share his sentiments as well?”

    I do.

    Read More
  95. @Corvinus
    "If he’s storing the money inside Russia, there’s really no way they could ever actually know that for sure."

    It's not about certainty, it's about probability. With Putin's political clout and connections, he and his cronies engaged in shady business dealings to benefit themselves. Again, how much funds he has at his personal disposal, no one exactly knows, but the sources offer insight.

    Regardless if he has money inside or outside of Russia, the sources I listed discuss in detail his corruption. Bluedog foolishly insists that any reference to Putin in this regard automatically dismissed as propaganda. Do you share his sentiments as well?

    “It’s not about certainty, it’s about probability.”

    With you it is, but it should be about certainty.

    Read More
  96. @Corvinus
    "Pretty much everything Western propaganda and disinformation channels, such as Independent and Forbes, ‘report’ about Russia is manufactured lies mixed in with a little truth to make it plausibly believable."

    Again, this mentality requires little thought on your part. All you have to do is label any and all MSM stories that counter your own narrative as being driven by propaganda and [poof] you have an "argument". It's lazy and serves no substantial purpose in debate. Critically vet the information being presented rather than entirely dismiss it as being other than factual or accurate.

    {Again, this mentality requires little thought on your part.}

    Again, blah, blah, blah,….mentality, debate, substantial, purpose, ….blah, blah, blah,….

    I already gave you an example from a recent MSM manufactured hysteria tarring Russia.
    There was no hack of US elections.
    There was no hack of anything.
    Not a single piece of evidence implicating Russia or Russian government.
    Innuendo, conjecture, “high confidence”, blah, blah, blah,…

    Yet MSM successfully created guilt-by-association in a large potion of Americans’ mind. We know this to be true, because a bunch of Republican Electors were demanding to see intelligence briefings about the non-existent Russian hack before they voted.

    The (non) Intelligence Agencies which are talking about “high confidence” this or that are the same ones which were oh-so-sure Iraq had WMDs: “high confidence” b___s__.

    Read More
  97. @Corvinus
    "Pretty much everything Western propaganda and disinformation channels, such as Independent and Forbes, ‘report’ about Russia is manufactured lies mixed in with a little truth to make it plausibly believable."

    Again, this mentality requires little thought on your part. All you have to do is label any and all MSM stories that counter your own narrative as being driven by propaganda and [poof] you have an "argument". It's lazy and serves no substantial purpose in debate. Critically vet the information being presented rather than entirely dismiss it as being other than factual or accurate.

    When Bill and Hillary were in Arkansas, they had how much money to their names?

    Both have been feeding at the public trough their entire professional working lives. They have not started any businesses, have not founded any companies, have created no wealth,

    Yet their current combined net worth is estimated around $100 million.
    So how did two people, albeit with high salaries, manage to accumulate that much wealth?
    The most they should have been able to save is around $5 million.
    How did they get to $100 million?

    Why don’t you use your superior mentality to explain that – instead of worrying about Putin who is not, you know, American.
    And who is not living at American taxpayer expense.

    Might it be the good old magician’s trick of……..misdirection?
    Create a mass hysteria about a foreign leader so that the corruption* of American parasite politicians is swept under the rug.

    —–
    * http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/13/wikileaks-qatar-wrote-clinton-foundation-million-dollar-check-bill-clintons-birthday/

    Read More
  98. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Can Trump and Putin Avert Cold War II ??

    I worry less about cold war w/ Russia than hot war against Iran.

    Makovsky of “the JINSA crowd” in Wall Street Journal is unhinged

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/five-ways-for-trump-to-put-tehran-on-notice-1483488338

    Five Ways for Trump to Put Tehran on Notice
    The new administration can renegotiate the Iran nuclear deal from a position of strength.

    “A proven necessary ingredient in dealing with Iran is a credible military threat. . . .

    First, instruct the Pentagon to update contingency plans for the use of force against Iran, including its nuclear facilities, especially in the event of a significant violation of, or withdrawal from, the nuclear agreement. This will communicate a new robust posture and prepare for what might be necessary.

    Second, change the rules of engagement for U.S. naval vessels in the Persian Gulf. Provocative Iranian forces should no longer be tolerated . . .but instead, as Mr. Trump stated in his first debate with Hillary Clinton, “shot out of the water.” The U.S. cannot hesitate to do this when the first such situation arises, as it certainly will. This will demonstrate credible resolve to Iran and other global powers, and it should contribute to improved Iranian behavior regionally as well as toward the agreement.

    Third, boost the anti-Iran regional coalition. Instead of alienating traditional regional allies as Mr. Obama has done, we must embrace them and collaborate closely. This includes unapologetically supporting the Saudi-led coalition . . .

    Fourth, announce plans to establish a regional missile-defense system—to include Israel and U.S. allies in the Persian Gulf and Eastern Europe, building on the ample infrastructure already in place. . . .

    Fifth, and more challenging, undercut the Iranian crescent forming from Tehran to Beirut. Iran dominates the capitals of Iraq and Syria, both failed artificial, multiethnic states created from the Ottoman Empire after World War I. The U.S. should double down on the post-World War I focus on self-determination and support new political entities that are emerging. In Iraq, that starts with an independent Kurdish state and stationing a U.S. military base there. In Syria, work toward creating Sunni, Alawite and Kurdish entities that could check each other perhaps as part of a confederation.

    Even more unhinged — or flat-out detached from his obligation to put American interests First, is Mike Pence, who pledged his undying fealty to Israel.

    The Trump-Putin spat might well be a head-fake; Izzies have been “orgasmic” to destroy Iran since the Iranian revolution — zionists are relentless, and vicious, and dangerous as a dog with rabies.

    Read More
  99. @Bayan
    It is important that America and Russia develop peaceful relation. Good for their peoples and the people of the world. But, I sense Buchanan and his leftie allies mean more than that.

    Tribalism (racism) and transnationalism (globalization) are not incompatible. Globalization will always be here, it is the type of globalization that we can have that varies. When Putin invades Crimea or exterminates Syrians to keep his ‘only’ naval base in the Mediterranean; that is globalization too. It is also called imperialism/colonialism. (Why he must have a naval base beyond Russian borders? The question applies to America too. It is doubly criminal to say that since the US murdered millions of Vietnamese people, Russia must also murder Syrians)

    It is possible to combine self-determination for tribes and a benign form of globalization. But, the environment is being engineered for a globalization of the super crazies.

    There is now a consensus among right wing conservatives and leftie Nazis who write for so called counterpunch site that an American-Russian alliance is the way to go. They want a super imperialist alliance to rule the world, a New Berlin Conference. They will call for the extermination of non-European peasants who idiotically annoyingly refuse to worship Trump or Trotsky. It will be an openly fascist neoconservatism perhaps dubbed neo Bolshevism in Russia and among its satellite ‘progressives’ in the West. (They love to be named Bolsheviks, it is cool, I guess, red fascists.)

    People who talk about democracy, rule of law, and other universal human values will be dubbed ‘globalists’, traitors of the nation-state-god and criminalized. Dictators and racists will be praised as realists and peace makers. The usual neoconservative formula: up is down, black is white, war is peace will be applied. I have seen an article calling for a Nobel peace prize for Putin for his war on Syria. So it goes.

    When I got to this part…

    “When Putin invades Crimea or exterminates Syrians to keep his ‘only’ naval base in the Mediterranean”

    I stopped reading. If I wanted to fill my head with nonsense I’d simply turn on the TV, I certainly wouldn’t be here at unz. Have you considered posting on Murdoch sites?

    Read More
  100. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @RadicalCenter
    Oh no, we can't have Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia mad at us. The terror!

    Oh, of course, Le Pen’s France is going to be your best friend, that’s right. Nevermind that half of the French population are rabidly anti-American (not to mention Muslimified). Soon you will have no friends left. Let’s see how you fight “the war on terror” then.

    Read More
  101. @Agent76
    The Military Industrial Complex has taken charge of the US. Nov 20, 2015 The One Thing You Need to Know About ISIS 'Americans please wake up!'

    https://youtu.be/vkxFT_hJCdQ

    Wow! I’d never heard of truth stream until you posted that. That is one hell of an under ten minute wake up call. Cheers

    Read More
  102. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    No, I’m saying it wasn’t inevitable that Russia would rebound the way it did, plenty of other post-communist states still moribund.

    You’re entitled to your opinion, but you weren’t there 15 years ago (and I was).

    The shock therapy was awful and one can still debate whether the whole collapse could’ve been made gradual (probably not). The blow to these populations was heavy. But to think that these populations are like dumb herds of animals who can only do well with a “strong leader” is not fair to these people. Many of the Soviet people were white and they inherited good education systems. They were able to clobber out of the hole. Of course, there are different profiles – there are countries such as Russia, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan that have resources, oil, gas (Russia has the most). I’ve been to Baku and I give thumbs up. I’ve seen videos of Astana and I’m quite impressed. Same with Russia. Those countries have had authoritarian leaders and have succeeded in general but I would argue that it is just as much because of these leaders as the potential of the people themselves. Other countries such as the Baltics and Belarus do not have commodities but have still succeeded in their own way. There are problems, but, as I said, longevity has been gradually rising across the board and over the past few years so have the birth rates, infant mortality decreasing, infrastructure improving, more locally made products offered to global markets, including new cancer therapies and new infertility treatments from the Baltics, newly built infrastructure in Belarus, beautiful high rises in Astana, etc, etc. Maybe Georgia and Armenia have it harder, but they are rather an exception not the rule.

    BTW this Troitsky sounds like an idiot, Yeltsin’s “democratic mission?” His 1996 “election” was one of the most blatantly rigged in history (with HELP of the US)

    Help of the USA? Hahahha, Russia was in chaos then. Nobody knew what was gonna happen there, least of all the US whose leaders were simply apprehensive. You really underestimate Russians if you think Americans can rule or direct them in any way. That’s just not Russian character!

    Artemy Troitsky is far from an idiot but I don’t blame you for not knowing that since you’re not from there. Everyone who grew up in the USSR in the 1980s will tell you that he is a very interesting guy. People like him and Boris Grebenshchikov (of the band Aquarium) are Russians with the capital “R” and people of true honor and great quality. I don’t agree with some of what Artemy Troitsky says and I would never be that blatant but he should have the freedom to say it. There are people in Russia who say even more insulting and koo koo things than he. By far. He has never crossed the line like the Pussy Riot did (blasphemising, etc) and he in fact dislikes immigration from third countries into Europe. If 80% of Russians support United Russia and Putin they should feel strong enough yet they can’t tolerate this guy – it’s a shame. Peace with Russia is great, but Russia is not a free country. Be pro-Russian, but be honest even if the truth is not pleasant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    And please, please, follow the oil prices. During Yeltsin and Nemtsov's years oil was 15$ per barrel. During Putin's rule it rose all the way to 100$ plus. It' s gonna be a tough moment for Russian oligarchs now because, as Artemy Troitsky says, the three sources of their income are gone - state budget constricting, oil prices low, Western investment low or non existent.

    And regarding Putin's assets... it would be weird if he didn't have some money stashed away. I know people like Nikolai Starikov keep saying Russians love Putin because "he is like us" but really.... it would be totally weird... yea, his daughter married to a billionaire Russian Jew, living in the West and Putin not having any money.. that would be kind of... un-Russian.

    Seriously, if Nancy Pelosi, Mitt Romney, Rex Tillerson, the Saudi princes, etc, can have money, why can't Vladimir (and hopefully Ludmila) Putin?

  103. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Joe Wong
    If the Russian had learnt the lesson on the history of the American selling snake oil to the American natives, the Russian would ask the NATO to be disbanded before withdrawing troops from Warsaw Pact when the American promised NATO won't expand eastwards. The history of the American selling snake oil to the American natives shows that the American is totally not trustworthy and creditworthy.

    Soon, my friend, there could be no such thing as “trustworthy”. It might be a war of all against all.

    Read More
  104. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Bayan
    It is important that America and Russia develop peaceful relation. Good for their peoples and the people of the world. But, I sense Buchanan and his leftie allies mean more than that.

    Tribalism (racism) and transnationalism (globalization) are not incompatible. Globalization will always be here, it is the type of globalization that we can have that varies. When Putin invades Crimea or exterminates Syrians to keep his ‘only’ naval base in the Mediterranean; that is globalization too. It is also called imperialism/colonialism. (Why he must have a naval base beyond Russian borders? The question applies to America too. It is doubly criminal to say that since the US murdered millions of Vietnamese people, Russia must also murder Syrians)

    It is possible to combine self-determination for tribes and a benign form of globalization. But, the environment is being engineered for a globalization of the super crazies.

    There is now a consensus among right wing conservatives and leftie Nazis who write for so called counterpunch site that an American-Russian alliance is the way to go. They want a super imperialist alliance to rule the world, a New Berlin Conference. They will call for the extermination of non-European peasants who idiotically annoyingly refuse to worship Trump or Trotsky. It will be an openly fascist neoconservatism perhaps dubbed neo Bolshevism in Russia and among its satellite ‘progressives’ in the West. (They love to be named Bolsheviks, it is cool, I guess, red fascists.)

    People who talk about democracy, rule of law, and other universal human values will be dubbed ‘globalists’, traitors of the nation-state-god and criminalized. Dictators and racists will be praised as realists and peace makers. The usual neoconservative formula: up is down, black is white, war is peace will be applied. I have seen an article calling for a Nobel peace prize for Putin for his war on Syria. So it goes.

    Yes, you are totally right, it will be these two terrible, selfish “superpowers” who will do whatever they want. And they possess the most advanced murder weapons. And what can the international community do about it?

    Read More
  105. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anonymous

    No, I’m saying it wasn’t inevitable that Russia would rebound the way it did, plenty of other post-communist states still moribund.
     
    You're entitled to your opinion, but you weren't there 15 years ago (and I was).

    The shock therapy was awful and one can still debate whether the whole collapse could've been made gradual (probably not). The blow to these populations was heavy. But to think that these populations are like dumb herds of animals who can only do well with a "strong leader" is not fair to these people. Many of the Soviet people were white and they inherited good education systems. They were able to clobber out of the hole. Of course, there are different profiles - there are countries such as Russia, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan that have resources, oil, gas (Russia has the most). I've been to Baku and I give thumbs up. I've seen videos of Astana and I'm quite impressed. Same with Russia. Those countries have had authoritarian leaders and have succeeded in general but I would argue that it is just as much because of these leaders as the potential of the people themselves. Other countries such as the Baltics and Belarus do not have commodities but have still succeeded in their own way. There are problems, but, as I said, longevity has been gradually rising across the board and over the past few years so have the birth rates, infant mortality decreasing, infrastructure improving, more locally made products offered to global markets, including new cancer therapies and new infertility treatments from the Baltics, newly built infrastructure in Belarus, beautiful high rises in Astana, etc, etc. Maybe Georgia and Armenia have it harder, but they are rather an exception not the rule.

    BTW this Troitsky sounds like an idiot, Yeltsin’s “democratic mission?” His 1996 “election” was one of the most blatantly rigged in history (with HELP of the US)
     
    Help of the USA? Hahahha, Russia was in chaos then. Nobody knew what was gonna happen there, least of all the US whose leaders were simply apprehensive. You really underestimate Russians if you think Americans can rule or direct them in any way. That's just not Russian character!

    Artemy Troitsky is far from an idiot but I don't blame you for not knowing that since you're not from there. Everyone who grew up in the USSR in the 1980s will tell you that he is a very interesting guy. People like him and Boris Grebenshchikov (of the band Aquarium) are Russians with the capital "R" and people of true honor and great quality. I don't agree with some of what Artemy Troitsky says and I would never be that blatant but he should have the freedom to say it. There are people in Russia who say even more insulting and koo koo things than he. By far. He has never crossed the line like the Pussy Riot did (blasphemising, etc) and he in fact dislikes immigration from third countries into Europe. If 80% of Russians support United Russia and Putin they should feel strong enough yet they can't tolerate this guy - it's a shame. Peace with Russia is great, but Russia is not a free country. Be pro-Russian, but be honest even if the truth is not pleasant.

    And please, please, follow the oil prices. During Yeltsin and Nemtsov’s years oil was 15$ per barrel. During Putin’s rule it rose all the way to 100$ plus. It’ s gonna be a tough moment for Russian oligarchs now because, as Artemy Troitsky says, the three sources of their income are gone – state budget constricting, oil prices low, Western investment low or non existent.

    And regarding Putin’s assets… it would be weird if he didn’t have some money stashed away. I know people like Nikolai Starikov keep saying Russians love Putin because “he is like us” but really…. it would be totally weird… yea, his daughter married to a billionaire Russian Jew, living in the West and Putin not having any money.. that would be kind of… un-Russian.

    Seriously, if Nancy Pelosi, Mitt Romney, Rex Tillerson, the Saudi princes, etc, can have money, why can’t Vladimir (and hopefully Ludmila) Putin?

    Read More
  106. @SolontoCroesus
    You sling labels about without the most basic understanding of what they mean. Much of that is due to the century-long disinformation campaign that has imposed meanings on those terms, and changed the cognitive map, or intellectual tool-kit, of millions of people throughout the world, by the use of propaganda techniques and emotionally charged, irrational, vilifying rhetoric and (especially) film-making.

    Rational definitions of those terms would produce a far different, and far more useful basis for historical analysis.
    That's one reason, the main reason, I insist that it is essential that the holocaust narrative be deconstructed. A free people, in a participatory form of government, for whom the right to speak freely was specifically guaranteed in their founding documents, have not only the right but the sacred responsibility to study and explain that history thoroughly and objectively -- rationally, not emotionally. Few if any of those hate-mongers have ever produced an objective definition of Nazism -- National Socialism, preferring instead to use expanded forms of ad hominem and counter-chronological atrocity propaganda.

    Nazism, and phenomena related to it, such as Hitler, swastika, Wehrmacht, SS, Gestapo, and the German people and nation themselves -- have been emotionally loaded to connote the essence of evil.

    National Socialism -- distorted via the derogatory term "Nazism," was what the words say it was: a political movement to extend socialist economic and governing- and German cultural- principles among and within the German nation. NSDAP did not have an international agenda (as Bolshevism did).

    Bolshevism names an ideological movement purveyed by a defined set of Russian and East European political leaders and ideologues, that had at its original core the intention to spread its ideology throughout the world.
    British historian Jeremy Black has argued that the USA and other "civilized" western nations waged war against Bolshevism for over 70 years, starting in World War I and proceeding thru the so-called Cold War era that ended with the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989. https://www.c-span.org/video/?407529-1/dwight-d-eisenhower-cold-war

    Fascism is the name given by Benito Mussolini to his vision for unifying and modernizing the Italian nation/people and their economy and culture. Fascism, like National Socialism, was a national movement; it did not have international ambitions. Mussolini's ill-conceived and ill-fated attempt to colonize Ethiopia was a throw-back to a just-ending era of colonization, much like the Jewish zionist project to colonize Palestine was and remains.

    Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt led separate and competing efforts to drive a wedge between the alliance of Italy under Mussolini, the Italian nationalist, and Germany under Hitler, the German nationalist. It is believed that Communists assassinated Mussolini; it is not at all unlikely that OSS, the precursor to CIA, was involved in the deed.
    In other words, the Allies -- then-called the "United Nations" -- used internationalist Bolsheviks to destroy two nationalist movements.

    Fit those definitions and realities into your discourse on the ability of "globalization" and "racism" and "tribalism" to co-exist.

    Bolshevism names an ideological movement purveyed by a defined set of Russian and East European political leaders and ideologues, that had at its original core the intention to spread its ideology throughout the world.

    Actually, I think you’re conflating ‘bolshevism’ and ‘revolutionary marxism’ here. The former ideology (‘bolshevism’) was specifically designed as ‘communism in one single country’ (i.e. the USSR), and therefore had no world-wide ambitions (especially after expelling Trotsky and condemning his ideology as ‘left-wing deviation’).

    The latter (‘revolutionary marxism’) is very much a western ideology, extremely popular in the West, both western working class and western intellectuals, till about mid-1970s, when the establishment had managed to covertly discredit and overtly suppress it (Greece junta, Chilean junta, etc.).

    But it’s still alive, and waiting in the wings, I believe. It’s a natural reaction to the excesses and contradictions of capitalism, and these contradictions are getting more and more evident and painful again today…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
    Good point. After Stalin came to power, Trotsky and his 'world revolution' doctrine were tossed out and the USSR officially adopted the 'socialism in one country' policy, which endured until WW2.
    , @Che Guava

    The former ideology (‘bolshevism’) was specifically designed as ‘communism in one single country’ (i.e. the USSR)
     
    That is not true, firstly, it was only after rise of Stalin that 'Socialism (not communism) in a single state' became the formula.

    I would recommending some reading of history.

    Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) was never a Bolshevik, he was an opportunistic chancer who oozed his way into a top position in the chaos following Lenin's trans-shipment and coup d'etat, the German high command thought sending Lenin might make the eastern front collapse.

    They succeeded in the short-term aim, but also made a great lesson in consequnces that were not desired.
  107. @Mao Cheng Ji

    Bolshevism names an ideological movement purveyed by a defined set of Russian and East European political leaders and ideologues, that had at its original core the intention to spread its ideology throughout the world.
     
    Actually, I think you're conflating 'bolshevism' and 'revolutionary marxism' here. The former ideology ('bolshevism') was specifically designed as 'communism in one single country' (i.e. the USSR), and therefore had no world-wide ambitions (especially after expelling Trotsky and condemning his ideology as 'left-wing deviation').

    The latter ('revolutionary marxism') is very much a western ideology, extremely popular in the West, both western working class and western intellectuals, till about mid-1970s, when the establishment had managed to covertly discredit and overtly suppress it (Greece junta, Chilean junta, etc.).

    But it's still alive, and waiting in the wings, I believe. It's a natural reaction to the excesses and contradictions of capitalism, and these contradictions are getting more and more evident and painful again today...

    Good point. After Stalin came to power, Trotsky and his ‘world revolution’ doctrine were tossed out and the USSR officially adopted the ‘socialism in one country’ policy, which endured until WW2.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji
    Hmm, well, it was Lenin (before Stalin) who came up with the unorthodox concept of "socialism in one country". Trotsky was still around at the time, but even then he represented a left-wing opposition with no real power. Lenin's NEP was a decisively moderate, even counter-revolutionary direction: state-capitalism, similar to today's China.
  108. @Seamus Padraig
    Good point. After Stalin came to power, Trotsky and his 'world revolution' doctrine were tossed out and the USSR officially adopted the 'socialism in one country' policy, which endured until WW2.

    Hmm, well, it was Lenin (before Stalin) who came up with the unorthodox concept of “socialism in one country”. Trotsky was still around at the time, but even then he represented a left-wing opposition with no real power. Lenin’s NEP was a decisively moderate, even counter-revolutionary direction: state-capitalism, similar to today’s China.

    Read More
  109. @Marcus
    The US support for the rebels, plus that contributed by its allies (Turkey, Saudi, etc.) was more than adequate. Erdogan has even said that the US aided IS.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/16/contrary-to-popular-belief-houthis-arent-iranian-proxies/

    Rebellions without Stingers but having popular support get crushed by the puppet regimes paymasters. The US couldhave sent undercover delta force into Syria with Stingers, but the rebels have been denied meaningful support. The US has not allowed the Saudis to supply Singers either. It is a sick joke to claim the US has backed the rebels but forgot to give them Stingers. Russia is terrified of the US and only came in when the US washed its hands of the rebels. It was a popular rebellion that Assad faced, and he is supported by a minority of the country.

    See, in Yemen the Saudi are doing the same as Russia in Syria , slaughtering a population that does not acknowledge their foreign overlord’s rights.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    It is a sick joke to claim the US has backed the rebels but forgot to give them Stingers.

    Not really, The US operation in Benghazi was running guns to Syria and we were training jihadis to fight in Syria. However, we were lying about it the whole time and Stingers in the hands of the jihadis would indicate our involvement. In addition, do you really want to give those people the ability to down commercial jet airliners? They probably got RPGs which only have a range of about a half mile.

    It was a popular rebellion that Assad faced, and he is supported by a minority of the country.

    The people that don't support him are mainly the Sunnis who want an Islamic Caliphate and to kill all the infidels in Syria - just the kind of people we need.
    , @Marcus

    Rebellions without Stingers but having popular support get crushed by the puppet regimes paymasters.
     
    This ain't the 80s

    The US couldhave sent undercover delta force into Syria with Stingers, but the rebels have been denied meaningful support.
     
    They've tried to, but the results have been terrible, even tragicomic, so they're letting Turkey handle it
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/16/american-commandos-forced-to-run-away-from-us-backed-syrian-rebe/

    See, in Yemen the Saudi are doing the same as Russia in Syria , slaughtering a population that does not acknowledge their foreign overlord’s rights.
     
    No, the Saudis are indiscriminately terrorizing the Yemeni population because their pilots are inbred retards who can't target anything. Russia is aiding the Syrian gov in removing ZOG's jihadi proxies who are using human shields to gain media support http://www.mintpressnews.com/aleppo-evacuations-slow-as-al-qaeda-burns-idlib-buses/223271/
  110. @Sean
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/16/contrary-to-popular-belief-houthis-arent-iranian-proxies/

    Rebellions without Stingers but having popular support get crushed by the puppet regimes paymasters. The US couldhave sent undercover delta force into Syria with Stingers, but the rebels have been denied meaningful support. The US has not allowed the Saudis to supply Singers either. It is a sick joke to claim the US has backed the rebels but forgot to give them Stingers. Russia is terrified of the US and only came in when the US washed its hands of the rebels. It was a popular rebellion that Assad faced, and he is supported by a minority of the country.

    See, in Yemen the Saudi are doing the same as Russia in Syria , slaughtering a population that does not acknowledge their foreign overlord's rights.

    It is a sick joke to claim the US has backed the rebels but forgot to give them Stingers.

    Not really, The US operation in Benghazi was running guns to Syria and we were training jihadis to fight in Syria. However, we were lying about it the whole time and Stingers in the hands of the jihadis would indicate our involvement. In addition, do you really want to give those people the ability to down commercial jet airliners? They probably got RPGs which only have a range of about a half mile.

    It was a popular rebellion that Assad faced, and he is supported by a minority of the country.

    The people that don’t support him are mainly the Sunnis who want an Islamic Caliphate and to kill all the infidels in Syria – just the kind of people we need.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Dubious that the US could not have found way to stop the Russian planes killing the US linked rebels and making America look like a paper tiger. The Syrian barrel bombing helicopters would not have required advanced Stingers to shoot wown anyway. Moreover , in view of the US having the capability to mount undercover operations with the Delta force, the idea that it could have not sent Stingers into Syria cannot be accepted. The US was always openly training anti Assad rebel, so half measured US support for the rebels was no secret. The Russians concentrated on the US linked Syria rebels, making America look litifully weak, and all Syrians got the message that ISIS and company paid well and didn't get many air attacks and abandoned the non Jihadi rebels. The original leadership and fighters of the uprising are all dead now, but the US could have prevented that with weapons and money. The US air force could have crushed Assad with one air raid on some humanitarian pretext, but the US didn't want to.
  111. @Sean
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/16/contrary-to-popular-belief-houthis-arent-iranian-proxies/

    Rebellions without Stingers but having popular support get crushed by the puppet regimes paymasters. The US couldhave sent undercover delta force into Syria with Stingers, but the rebels have been denied meaningful support. The US has not allowed the Saudis to supply Singers either. It is a sick joke to claim the US has backed the rebels but forgot to give them Stingers. Russia is terrified of the US and only came in when the US washed its hands of the rebels. It was a popular rebellion that Assad faced, and he is supported by a minority of the country.

    See, in Yemen the Saudi are doing the same as Russia in Syria , slaughtering a population that does not acknowledge their foreign overlord's rights.

    Rebellions without Stingers but having popular support get crushed by the puppet regimes paymasters.

    This ain’t the 80s

    The US couldhave sent undercover delta force into Syria with Stingers, but the rebels have been denied meaningful support.

    They’ve tried to, but the results have been terrible, even tragicomic, so they’re letting Turkey handle it

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/16/american-commandos-forced-to-run-away-from-us-backed-syrian-rebe/

    See, in Yemen the Saudi are doing the same as Russia in Syria , slaughtering a population that does not acknowledge their foreign overlord’s rights.

    No, the Saudis are indiscriminately terrorizing the Yemeni population because their pilots are inbred retards who can’t target anything. Russia is aiding the Syrian gov in removing ZOG’s jihadi proxies who are using human shields to gain media support http://www.mintpressnews.com/aleppo-evacuations-slow-as-al-qaeda-burns-idlib-buses/223271/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    Why would Israel be concerned with Syria, Syria is worthless, and no threat to Israel. Jordan is the Arab country that the US saw as worth having 100%, the US owns and defends the Hashemite family dictatorship of Jordan with the old elites in Israel not demurring, but that is about to change under Trump.

    http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/jordan-says-moving-us-embassy-to-jerusalem-is-red-line/


    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2016/12/donald-trump-as-zionist/

    THROUGHOUT MUCH of his adult life and childhood, at seemingly every significant juncture in his business career, Donald J. Trump has surrounded himself with members of a single minority group. … Trump seems to have something of an affirmative prejudice toward Jews.[...] “When we talk about the Jewish community and I really think about it, I can’t think of one Christian person on his senior staff,” said Goldberg, who will vote for Trump in November. “It’s amazing to me. It’s almost prejudice in favor of Jewish people.”“The way I would describe his perception of Jews is that he thinks of them in very simple and very stereotypical terms ...advantage”
     

    To do what he wants to do, Trump needs US Jews to run interference for him. It will be increasingly evident that he is walking Israel into putting out the trash. At that point the bleating liberals in the Israel Lobby will be faced not only with cognitive dissonance, but unbearable execration from their own community if they try to criticise Trumps domestic policies.To use a word the man himself Tweeted, America's actions over the next few years will be ‘unpresidented’ .
  112. @MarkinLA
    It is a sick joke to claim the US has backed the rebels but forgot to give them Stingers.

    Not really, The US operation in Benghazi was running guns to Syria and we were training jihadis to fight in Syria. However, we were lying about it the whole time and Stingers in the hands of the jihadis would indicate our involvement. In addition, do you really want to give those people the ability to down commercial jet airliners? They probably got RPGs which only have a range of about a half mile.

    It was a popular rebellion that Assad faced, and he is supported by a minority of the country.

    The people that don't support him are mainly the Sunnis who want an Islamic Caliphate and to kill all the infidels in Syria - just the kind of people we need.

    Dubious that the US could not have found way to stop the Russian planes killing the US linked rebels and making America look like a paper tiger. The Syrian barrel bombing helicopters would not have required advanced Stingers to shoot wown anyway. Moreover , in view of the US having the capability to mount undercover operations with the Delta force, the idea that it could have not sent Stingers into Syria cannot be accepted. The US was always openly training anti Assad rebel, so half measured US support for the rebels was no secret. The Russians concentrated on the US linked Syria rebels, making America look litifully weak, and all Syrians got the message that ISIS and company paid well and didn’t get many air attacks and abandoned the non Jihadi rebels. The original leadership and fighters of the uprising are all dead now, but the US could have prevented that with weapons and money. The US air force could have crushed Assad with one air raid on some humanitarian pretext, but the US didn’t want to.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    The US should have stayed out as Assad is the only one keeping that country from becoming a chaotic dung heap. That's what the US is supporting Syria becoming another Iraq.
  113. @Mao Cheng Ji

    Bolshevism names an ideological movement purveyed by a defined set of Russian and East European political leaders and ideologues, that had at its original core the intention to spread its ideology throughout the world.
     
    Actually, I think you're conflating 'bolshevism' and 'revolutionary marxism' here. The former ideology ('bolshevism') was specifically designed as 'communism in one single country' (i.e. the USSR), and therefore had no world-wide ambitions (especially after expelling Trotsky and condemning his ideology as 'left-wing deviation').

    The latter ('revolutionary marxism') is very much a western ideology, extremely popular in the West, both western working class and western intellectuals, till about mid-1970s, when the establishment had managed to covertly discredit and overtly suppress it (Greece junta, Chilean junta, etc.).

    But it's still alive, and waiting in the wings, I believe. It's a natural reaction to the excesses and contradictions of capitalism, and these contradictions are getting more and more evident and painful again today...

    The former ideology (‘bolshevism’) was specifically designed as ‘communism in one single country’ (i.e. the USSR)

    That is not true, firstly, it was only after rise of Stalin that ‘Socialism (not communism) in a single state’ became the formula.

    I would recommending some reading of history.

    Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) was never a Bolshevik, he was an opportunistic chancer who oozed his way into a top position in the chaos following Lenin’s trans-shipment and coup d’etat, the German high command thought sending Lenin might make the eastern front collapse.

    They succeeded in the short-term aim, but also made a great lesson in consequnces that were not desired.

    Read More
  114. @Marcus

    Rebellions without Stingers but having popular support get crushed by the puppet regimes paymasters.
     
    This ain't the 80s

    The US couldhave sent undercover delta force into Syria with Stingers, but the rebels have been denied meaningful support.
     
    They've tried to, but the results have been terrible, even tragicomic, so they're letting Turkey handle it
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/16/american-commandos-forced-to-run-away-from-us-backed-syrian-rebe/

    See, in Yemen the Saudi are doing the same as Russia in Syria , slaughtering a population that does not acknowledge their foreign overlord’s rights.
     
    No, the Saudis are indiscriminately terrorizing the Yemeni population because their pilots are inbred retards who can't target anything. Russia is aiding the Syrian gov in removing ZOG's jihadi proxies who are using human shields to gain media support http://www.mintpressnews.com/aleppo-evacuations-slow-as-al-qaeda-burns-idlib-buses/223271/

    Why would Israel be concerned with Syria, Syria is worthless, and no threat to Israel. Jordan is the Arab country that the US saw as worth having 100%, the US owns and defends the Hashemite family dictatorship of Jordan with the old elites in Israel not demurring, but that is about to change under Trump.

    http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/jordan-says-moving-us-embassy-to-jerusalem-is-red-line/

    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2016/12/donald-trump-as-zionist/

    THROUGHOUT MUCH of his adult life and childhood, at seemingly every significant juncture in his business career, Donald J. Trump has surrounded himself with members of a single minority group. … Trump seems to have something of an affirmative prejudice toward Jews.[...] “When we talk about the Jewish community and I really think about it, I can’t think of one Christian person on his senior staff,” said Goldberg, who will vote for Trump in November. “It’s amazing to me. It’s almost prejudice in favor of Jewish people.”“The way I would describe his perception of Jews is that he thinks of them in very simple and very stereotypical terms …advantage”

    To do what he wants to do, Trump needs US Jews to run interference for him. It will be increasingly evident that he is walking Israel into putting out the trash. At that point the bleating liberals in the Israel Lobby will be faced not only with cognitive dissonance, but unbearable execration from their own community if they try to criticise Trumps domestic policies.To use a word the man himself Tweeted, America’s actions over the next few years will be ‘unpresidented’ .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Well Golan Heights is very important to Israel, also remember in 1973 it was the Syrian army that nearly broke through Israeli lines
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_Tears
  115. @Sean
    Why would Israel be concerned with Syria, Syria is worthless, and no threat to Israel. Jordan is the Arab country that the US saw as worth having 100%, the US owns and defends the Hashemite family dictatorship of Jordan with the old elites in Israel not demurring, but that is about to change under Trump.

    http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/jordan-says-moving-us-embassy-to-jerusalem-is-red-line/


    http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2016/12/donald-trump-as-zionist/

    THROUGHOUT MUCH of his adult life and childhood, at seemingly every significant juncture in his business career, Donald J. Trump has surrounded himself with members of a single minority group. … Trump seems to have something of an affirmative prejudice toward Jews.[...] “When we talk about the Jewish community and I really think about it, I can’t think of one Christian person on his senior staff,” said Goldberg, who will vote for Trump in November. “It’s amazing to me. It’s almost prejudice in favor of Jewish people.”“The way I would describe his perception of Jews is that he thinks of them in very simple and very stereotypical terms ...advantage”
     

    To do what he wants to do, Trump needs US Jews to run interference for him. It will be increasingly evident that he is walking Israel into putting out the trash. At that point the bleating liberals in the Israel Lobby will be faced not only with cognitive dissonance, but unbearable execration from their own community if they try to criticise Trumps domestic policies.To use a word the man himself Tweeted, America's actions over the next few years will be ‘unpresidented’ .

    Well Golan Heights is very important to Israel, also remember in 1973 it was the Syrian army that nearly broke through Israeli lines

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_Tears

    Read More
  116. Israel had no fear of Syria even before the civil war. Barak offered to give Golan (they cannot sent the West Bank Palestinians there) back in return for a final deal with Assad. Moreover, although the current leadership didn’t share Barak’s analysis they have never built up Israel’s forces in the Golan in all the time since the begining of the rebellion which would have been impossible for Assad to counter while he was fighting a civil war. So Israel does not act as if it now needs the Golan, and is not bothered by Assad surviving.

    Read More
  117. @Sean
    Dubious that the US could not have found way to stop the Russian planes killing the US linked rebels and making America look like a paper tiger. The Syrian barrel bombing helicopters would not have required advanced Stingers to shoot wown anyway. Moreover , in view of the US having the capability to mount undercover operations with the Delta force, the idea that it could have not sent Stingers into Syria cannot be accepted. The US was always openly training anti Assad rebel, so half measured US support for the rebels was no secret. The Russians concentrated on the US linked Syria rebels, making America look litifully weak, and all Syrians got the message that ISIS and company paid well and didn't get many air attacks and abandoned the non Jihadi rebels. The original leadership and fighters of the uprising are all dead now, but the US could have prevented that with weapons and money. The US air force could have crushed Assad with one air raid on some humanitarian pretext, but the US didn't want to.

    The US should have stayed out as Assad is the only one keeping that country from becoming a chaotic dung heap. That’s what the US is supporting Syria becoming another Iraq.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    *Newsflash: the Russians have (yet again) announced they are pulling out of Syria; America is being played for a fool. Putin's incompetent FSB goons, as with the London Polonium poisoning, have left a trail like an elephant in six feet of snow over the E mails. Trump can't stand being diminished, and Russia is about to be humbled before the arrogant self assertion of his ego.
  118. @MarkinLA
    The US should have stayed out as Assad is the only one keeping that country from becoming a chaotic dung heap. That's what the US is supporting Syria becoming another Iraq.

    *Newsflash: the Russians have (yet again) announced they are pulling out of Syria; America is being played for a fool. Putin’s incompetent FSB goons, as with the London Polonium poisoning, have left a trail like an elephant in six feet of snow over the E mails. Trump can’t stand being diminished, and Russia is about to be humbled before the arrogant self assertion of his ego.

    Read More
  119. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The Neo-cons and Old Cold Warriors want the US to dominate the Middle East and surround Russia.
    Why – so the Bolsheviks can take over Russia again?
    Israel is a close ally of Azerbaijan. What’s that about?

    Read More
  120. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Mark Green
    Pat Buchanan is wise and prophetic like few other political observers. He deserves a special place among Trump's inner circle. If not as Secretary of State, Pat should be given the position of National Security Advisor.

    Trump's team would benefit greatly by Buchanan's judgement and experience, as would our nation.

    Am I the only one who is concerned that one of Trump’s top advisors is his Orthodox Jewish son-in-law Jared Kushner, whose family is a huge supporter of Israel?

    He converted Trump’s daughter to Judaism. I find that strange.

    Kushner could not have found a Jewish girl in New York? The two families have big, big money, and now Ivanka’s share of the Trump fortune will someday go to her Jewish children.

    And Trump’s son Eric is now married to a part Jewish woman.

    That’s all I will say.

    Read More
  121. @Marcus
    No doubt, Russia is still corrupt to the core, Putin hasn't done much to change this, though the lot of the average Russian has undoubtedly improved since he took charge.

    Your statement is nonsensical. Putin seems to have done the best job he could under the circumstansces, I would have wanted to use the u-name Putinbot or Agent_ofKremlin here, at times, just to winding up the more foolish posters here, but Unz policy is seeming to allow no change of u-names.

    I suggest to new users with the spirit of lulz, Putinbot and Agent_ofKremlin are good u-names.

    Read More
  122. @Alden
    Squirt and scram is what I call impregnate and abandon.
    I read Dreams of My Father a couple years before he ran for President. His hatred of Whites was obvious. But all the useful idiots I know read it and gushed and worshipped as they had been instructed to by The Atlantic, New Republic, etc.

    He was the triumph of a breeding program begun by the communist party of the USA back in the 1930s. The idea was to encourage the young women of the far left to marry and have kids with black men. The children would be raised far left and brought along to high public office.

    They finally got Obama. I'm pretty sure his father was Frank Marshall Davis, married, head of the communist party of Hawaii and best friend of grandpa Dunham.

    Sometimes I feel like the little kid in the Emperor's New Clothes story. The more educated they are, the more gullible and brainwashed people are.

    Squirt and scram is what I call impregnate and abandon.

    Not bad, I like the phrase. However, the pattern seems to include ensuring the pregnancy is well entrenchred before total abanondment.

    Frank Marshall Davis, that is beyond my ken, but I like the Chelsea Clinton is spawned by man who was not Bill meme, I forget the name now, but showed pics to woman colleagues at the end-of-year party, everyone agreed that he was mnre likeky to be the father, all but two were mothers, so is Chelsea really the daughter of Mr. Cigar insertion?

    Read More
  123. after the U.S. backed the overthrow of the pro-Russian elected government in Kiev.

    No, it was not pro-Russian. FYI, that “pro-Russian” government had been preparing the EU association agreement for 3 years and was about to sign it but outsmarted itself trying to play on two tables simultaneously.

    the Russia-Ukraine relationship dates back to before the Crusades.

    This is utterly ridiculous. I’ve never read such a nonsense in my life. Have you read Ukrainian pseudo-history too much? Go study some real history.

    Russians live in many of the 14 former Soviet republics that are now independent nations.

    It is not about Russians who were left in the 14 republics. It is about Eastern Slavs in two bogus Soviet created republics facing a vitally important dilemma, choosing between two ethnic self-identities: to keep their own ancient identity and remain being Russians, or to become a newly mostly Soviet invented artificial nation, Ukrainians (and/or Belarusians). Do not confuse a clearly internal Eastern Slavic issue “Russia/Ukraine/Belarus” with “Russia and all the others”.

    Has Putin no right to be concerned about his lost countrymen?

    Putin is never concerned about his countrymen, he simply uses them for his own ends. He’s betrayed Donbass and its people when they really needed his help. Now his main concern is how to put Donbass back into Ukraine.

    Unlike America’s elites, Putin is an ethnonationalist in a time when tribalism is shoving aside transnationalism as the force of the future.

    Yes, he has favored ethnic non-Russians for his entire career and he’s trying to create a bogus rootless ethnicless “Russianian” nation while depriving real ethnic Russians of their name and their rights. If he is an ethnonationalist, he is of a very peculiar ethnic group.

    Read More
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 Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
While other top brass played press agents for the administration’s war, William Odom told the truth about Iraq—though few listened.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?