The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 American Media American Military Britain China CIA Civil Liberties Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Ebola Economics EU Eurozone Fake News Federal Reserve Foreign Policy Free Trade Gold Government Surveillance Greece Gun Control Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration Iran ISIS Israel Israel Lobby Las Vegas Massacre Neocons Neoliberalism Nuclear War Paris Attacks Police State Political Correctness Race/Ethnicity Russia Science Syria Terrorism Trade Turkey Ukraine Unemployment Wall Street Abraham Lincoln Academia Affirmative Action Africa Alt Right Amazon.com American Jews American Left American Prisons Amnesty International Anthrax Antitrust Armenia Article Assassinations Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack Obama Bill Clinton Bill Of Rights Bitcoin Blacks Boston Marathon Bombing Brazil Brexit BRICs Capitalism Censorship Charlie Hebdo Charlottesville Christianity Christine Lagarde Christmas Civil Rights Civil War Cold War Confederacy Confederate Flag Constitutional Theory Cuba Cultural Marxism Czech Republic Dallas Shooting David Stockman Deficits Democracy Democratic Party Department Of Justice Deregulation Developmental Noise Diversity Dollar Dominique Strauss-Kahn Don Siegelman Duterte Emmanuel Macron Environment Europe European Right European Union False Flag Attrack Feminism Ferguson Shooting FIFA Financial Debt France Free Speech Gaza Gaza Flotilla George W. Bush Germany Glass-Steagall Global Warming GMO Google Government Shutdown Guns Hacking Healthcare IMF Inequality Inflation Iraq Iraq War Islam Israel/Palestine Japan JFK Assassination John F. Kennedy Judicial System Julian Assange Labor Day Latin America Libya Lithuania Macedonia Magna Charta Malaysian Airlines MH17 Marine Le Pen Martin Luther King Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Merkel MH 17 Michael Hudson Middle East Mike Pence Minimum Wage Multiculturalism Muslims NATO Nazis Neoconservatives New Cold War New York Times North Korea NSA Nuclear Weapons Nuremberg Obamacare Oklahoma City Bombing Orlando Shooting Osama Bin Laden Pakistan Patriotism Paul Krugman Philippines Pornography Portugal Poverty Privatization Propaganda Prostitution Public Schools Putin Qatar Racism Real Estate Republican Party Republicans Richard Nixon Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Sandy Hook Saudi Arabia Slavery Social Security Stephen Cohen Story Supply-Side Economics Switzerland Syriza Tax Cuts Taxes The Saker Tony Blair Torture TPP TTIP Unions United Nations USS Liberty Venezuela Vladimir Putin War On Terror White Nationalists Wikileaks Workers Working Class World War II Youtube Ban Zbigniew Brzezinski
Nothing found
 TeasersPaul Craig Roberts Blogview

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
🔊 Listen RSS

We often hear that we need a conversation on race. Considering that Americans are a brainwashed people living in a false history, such a conversation would resemble the one the Russians were expected to have with the British in regard to the Skripal poisoning: “Yes, we are guilty. We will pay reparations. Where would you like us to send Putin for trial?” In other words, the only acceptable race conversation in the US is one in which white people accept the accusation that they are racist and offer to make amends.

Considering that the only slavery experienced by any living black or white person is income tax slavery, race is an issue only because it has been orchestrated as an issue along with gender and sexual preference. These divisive issues are the products of Identity Politics spawned by cultural Marxism.

In real Marxism, conflict is class conflict. Workers and capitalists have different interests, and history is a struggle between material interests. The capitalist is the villain and the workers are the victims.

In the pseudo Marxism of Identity Politics, the white race is the villain, especially the white heterosexual male, and racial minorities, women, and homosexuals are the victims.

There is, of course, no such thing as a white or black race. There are many different nationalities of whites, and they have done a good job throughout history of killing each other. Similarly, there are many different black tribes and Asian ethnicities who also have fought more among themselves than with others. But all of this goes by the wayside, along with the fact that in the world the “racial minorities” are actually majorities and the “white majority” is actually a minority. There are more Chinese or Indians alone than there are white people.

But orchestrated histories are not fact-based.

The working class, designated by Hillary Clinton as “the Trump deplorables,” is now the victimizer, not the victim. Marxism has been stood on its head.

The American ruling class loves Identity Politics, because Identity Politics divides the people into hostile groups and prevents any resistance to the ruling elite. With blacks screaming at whites, women screaming at men, and homosexuals screaming at heterosexuals, there is no one left to scream at the rulers.

The ruling elite favors a “conversation on race,” because the ruling elite know it can only result in accusations that will further divide society. Consequently, the ruling elite have funded “black history,” “women’s studies,” and “transgender dialogues,” in universities as a way to institutionalize the divisiveness that protects them. These “studies” have replaced real history with fake history.

For example, it was once universally known that black slavery originated in slave wars between black African tribes. Slaves were a status symbol, but they accumulated beyond the capacity of tribes to sustain. The surplus was exported first to Arabs and then to English, Spanish, and French who founded colonies in the new world that had resources but no work force. The socialist scholar Karl Polanyi, brother of my Oxford professor Michael Polanyi, told the story of the origin of the African slave trade in his famous book, Dahomey and the Slave Trade.

The first slaves in the new world were white. When real history was taught, this was widely understood. Movies were even made that showed that in King George III’s England, the alternative to criminal punishment was to be sold as a slave in the colonies. See, for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAgfWhlc3gQ

Among the first New World lands to be exploited by the Europeans were the Caribbean Islands, which were suitable for sugar and rice production. The problem was that the white slaves died like flies from malaria and yellow fever. The Spanish lack of success with a work force of natives of the lands they conquered led those in search of a work force to the slave export business of the black Kingdom of Dahomey. The demand for black workers rose considerably when it was discovered that many had immunity to malaria and resistance to yellow fever. This meant that a plantation’s investment in a work force was not wiped out by disease.

The resistance of blacks to malaria is due to the protective feature of the sickle cell trait that, apparently, only blacks have. See: https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/biology/sickle_cell.html

Slavery existed in the New World long before the United States came into existence. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are today written off by Identity Politics as racists simply because they were born when slavery was a pre-existing institution.

Slavery had existed for many centuries prior to the Confederacy. Yet, in some accounts today one comes away with the impression that the South invented slavery. As the tale sometimes goes, Southern racists so hated blacks that they went to Africa, captured blacks at great expense, only to return them to the South where they whipped and abused their investments to the point of death and demoralized their work force by breaking up black families, selling children in one direction and wives and husbands in the other. This tale is not told as an occasional abuse but as the general practice. Economically, of course, it makes no sense whatsoever. But facts are no longer part of American history.

Northern states held slaves as well. However, the predominance of slaves were in the South. This was not because Southerners hated blacks. It was because the land in the South supported large agricultural cultivation, and there was no other work force. The South, like the United States, inherited slavery from the work force that European colonists purchased from the black Kingdom of Dahomey.

Why wasn’t there an alternative work force to slaves? The reason is that new immigrants by moving West could take land from the native Americans and be independent as opposed to being wage earners working on someone else’s land. The Western frontier did not close until about 1900. At the time of the War of Northern Aggression the Plains Indians still ruled west of the Mississippi River. It was Lincoln’s Northern war criminals, Sherman and Sheridan, who were sent to exterminate the Plains Indians. Ask the American natives, or what is left of them, who the racists are: the Northerners or the Southerners.

Black studies has even corrupted other aspects of history. Consider the so-called “civil war.” The name itself is an orchestration. There was no civil war. There was a War of Northern Aggression. A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The South had left the union and had no interest whatsoever in controlling the government in Washington. The only reason the South fought was that the South was invaded by the North.

Why did the North invade the South? As was once understood by every historian and every student, Abraham Lincoln invaded the South in order, in Lincoln’s own words, expressed time and time again, “to preserve the Union.”

Why did the South leave the Union? Because it was being economically exploited by the North, which, once the North gained the ability to outvote the Southern states, imposed tariffs that benefited the North at the expense of the South. The North needed protection from British manufactures in order for the economic rise of the North. In contrast, the South’s economy was based on cotton exports to England and on cheap manufactures imported from England. Tariffs would bring the South higher cost of manufactured goods and retaliation against their cotton exports. The economic interests of the North and South did not coincide.

 
🔊 Listen RSS

Many, including Russia’s President Putin, have asked why the US launched an illegal attack on Syria prior to the chemical weapons inspectors examining the site of the alleged chemical attack.

This popular question completely misses the point. The US attack on Syria is a clear and indisputable war crime against a sovereign country regardless of whether Syria used a chemical weapon in driving the Washington supported terrorists from Douma. No one acted to stop Washington’s war crime. Some of Washington’s vassals, such as Germany and Italy, refused to participate in Washington’s war crime, but no one attempted to block it. The impotent UN Security Council, to which Russia is wasting its time appealing, the EU, NATO, Russia and China themselves did nothing to stop Washington’s Nazi era war crime.

Russia said that if Washington’s attack harmed its citizens, there would be military consequences, but Russia did not protect its ally Syria from the attack.

Perhaps it doesn’t matter as Washington’s attack was carefully conducted so as to have no effect except to serve as a face-saver for Trump. Apparently no one was killed and no damage was done to anything real except to a facility in which anti-venom for snake bites was being produced.

On the other hand, it does matter, because of the perception that the American presstitutes have created that it was a great victory for America over the evil Syrian government and the evil Russian government that supports them. This perception, which the presstitutes have created with their fake news, justifies the war crime and will lead to more attacks on Syria.

It is unlikely that the UN Security Council will condemn Washington, which pays 25% of the UN’s budget. Moreover, the Security Council is loaded up with Washington’s vassals, and they will not vote to censure their liegelord. Putin is wasting his time taking the matter to the Security Council, unless his purpose is to prove that every Western institution is completely corrupt. As most informed people already know this, I don’t understand the point of proving the known. Putin should read Eric Zuesse’s article before he puts too much faith in the UN. https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/04/17/how-us-has-virtually-destroyed-un.html

As I have written on a number of occasions, I admire Putin’s Christian character of sidestepping the beatings he continuously takes from Washington in order to save the world from the massive deaths of a world war. The problem is that by turning the other cheek, Putin encourages more aggression from Washington. Putin is dealing with neoconservative psychopaths. He is not dealing with common sense.

During the entirety of the Cold War no US ambassador to the UN spoke aggressively and disrespectfully to the Soviet representative as Nikki Haley speaks to the Russian ambassador. During the Cold War no American president would have tolerated Nikki Haley. The crazed bitch would have instantly been fired.

The Russian government is captured by delusion if the Russians believe that the US government, in which Nikki Haley is Trump’s choice to be America’s spokesperson to the world, in which the crazed neoconservative war monger John Bolton is a principal influence over US military and foreign policy, and in which the President himself is under threat of indictment for wanting to normalize relations with Russia, has any prospect of avoiding war.

The best chance of preventing the oncoming war is Russian-Chinese-Iranian unity and a defeat for American arms in a regional context not worth the Washington psychopaths launching of nuclear weapons. Until Washington is effectively resisted, Washington’s European vassals, the UN Security Council and the OPCW will stand with Washington. Once Washington experiences a defeat, NATO will dissolve and with this dissolution Washington’s ability to threaten other countries will lose its cover and evaporate.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Neocons, Russia, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

I wonder how many people, not just Americans but those in other countries, have come to the conclusion that the United States today is a less free and less aware society than the societies in the dystopian novels of the 20th century or in movies such as The Matrix and V for Vendetta. Just as people in the dystopian novels had no idea of their real situation, few Americans do either.

What are we to make of the extraordinary war crimes committed by the United States in the 21st century that have destroyed in whole or part seven countries, resulting in millions of dead, maimed, orphaned, and displaced peoples? Consider, for example, the latest Washington war crime, the illegal attack on Syria. Instead of protesting this illegality, the American media egged it on, cheering impending death and destruction.

During the entirety of the 21st century, Israel, Washington’s only ally—as contrasted with the European, Canadian, Australian, and Japanese vassal states of Washington’s empire—has continued with Washington’s support, protection, and encouragement the genocide of the Palestinian people. Essentially, all that is left of Palestine is a ghetto concentration camp known as Gaza which is routinely bombed by Israel using weapons and money supplied by Washington. When a bombing of Gaza is announced, God’s Chosen People take their lawn chairs and picnics up on a hill overlooking Gaza and applaud as the Israeli military murders women and children. This is America’s only ally.

The crimes committed by the US and Israel are horrific, but meet with little opposition. In contrast, an alleged attack in which 70 Syrians are alleged to have died sets in motion the wheels of war. It makes no sense whatsoever. Israel routinely bombs Syrian targets, killing Syrians, and the US arms and supports the “rebels” that the Obama regime sent to overthrow Assad, resulting in large numbers of dead Syrians. Why all of a sudden do 70 Syrians matter to Washington?

According to the Washington authorities, or to the presstitutes’ reports of their statements, two or three alleged Syrian chemical weapons facilities were destroyed by Washington’s missile attack. Think about this for a minute. If Washington bombed or sent missiles into chemical weapons facilities, a vast cloud of lethal gas would have been released. The civilian casualties would be many times higher than the claimed 70 victims of Assad’s alleged and unsubstantiated chemical attack used as the pretext for the Trump regime’s war crime against Syria. There is no evidence whatsoever of these casualties.

Had there been casualties, Washington’s attack would obviously be a far greater crime than the chemical attack that Washington used as cover for its own crime. Yet the American presstitutes are crowing over the lesson that America has taught Syria and Russia. Apparently, the American media consists of such immoral or moronic hirelings that the presstitutes are unable to comprehend that an attack by Washington on Syrian chemical weapons plants, if such actually existed, is the equivalent of an attack on Syria with chemical weapons.

As I wrote yesterday, when I was a Wall Street Journal editor, if Washington had just announced that it had bombed the chemical weapons facilities of another country in punishment for that country’s alleged use of a chemical weapon, the Journal’s reporters were sufficiently intelligent to ask where are the victims of Washington’s chemical attack on that country? Are there thousands of dead people from the chemical gas released by Washington’s attack? Are the hospitals of the country over-filed with the injured and dying?

If a reporter had brought to us a story that was nothing but a Washington press release claiming obviously impossible happenings, we would have told him to go look again and ask the obvious questions. Today the NY Times and Washington Post put the unsubstantiated report on the front page.

Today reporters no longer have to check sources, because there is no longer journalism in America. When the Clinton regime in compliance with the Deep State that made the Clintons super-rich permitted 90% of the independent and diverse US media to be concentrated in the hands of six political companies, that was the end of journalism in America. All we have now is a propaganda ministry that lies for a living. Anyone in American journalism who tells the truth is either immediately fired or in the case of Tucker Carlson at Fox News is set upon by outside presstitutes in an effort to force Fox to replace him. I wonder how long before some woman pops up and claims Tucker Carlson sexually harrassed her.

As far as I can tell, the United States is now a police state in which all information is controlled and the population is trained to believe the propaganda or be accused of lack of patriotism and consorting with terrorists and Russians.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

US officials and the presstitutes tell us that the illegal US missile attack on Syria destroyed chemical weapons sites where chlorine and sarin are stored/manufactured. If this were true, would not a lethal cloud have been released that would have taken the lives of far more people than claimed in the alleged Syrian chemical attack on Douma? Would not the US missile attack be identical to a chemical weapons attack and thus place the US and its vassals in the same category as Washington is attempting to place Assad and Putin?

What about it, you chemical weapons experts? Do chemical weapons only release their elements when they explode from intended use but not when they explode from being militarily attacked?

There is no evidence in Syria of chemical residue from the chemical weapons facilities allegedly destroyed by US missiles. No dead victims. No reports of hospitals treating Syrian casualties of the American chemical attack. How can this be if such sites were actually hit?

When I was a Wall Street Journal editor newspapers had competent journalists to whom such a question would occur. But no more. Stephen Lendman takes the New York Times to task for its unprofessionalism. The NY Times is no longer a news source. It is a propaganda megaphone.http://stephenlendman.org/2018/04/nyt-imperial-mouthpiece-2/

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media, Russia, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

“As US President Donald Trump is said to be considering a full scale ground assault against the Syrian administration of President Bashar al-Assad, the top UN official has decried the onset of a new global Cold War and warned against “full-blown military escalation” in the war-torn region.”https://sputniknews.com/military/201804151063572249-UN-head-warns-of-escalation/

If this report of a US ground invasion of Syria is true, which I doubt, it will be a consequence of Russian passivity in the face of Washington’s aggression.

Is the Russian government too humane to comprehend the evil that Russia confronts?

If Russia and China do not take steps to defeat the US before Washington forces nuclear war on the world, we are all doomed.

The American people are denied information, are uninformed, and helpless. The same is true for Europe and Britain, Canada, Australia, Japan.

Even if the peoples knew, they are impotent.

Putin often relies on non-existent or impotent common sense in the West, but does Russia have enough common sense to realize that there is no common sense in the West that can be effective?

The Russian government does not understand that the “rule of law” constructed by Washington is not a rule of law. It is a rule of Washington’s rule. Washington owns Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, the Atlanticist Integrationists inside Russia, and the UN. This is why Russia’s appeal to the UN is pointless, as Russia just again learned: https://www.rt.com/news/424171-unsc-russia-resolution-syria/

To restate the point once again, the passivity of the Putin government in the face of Washington’s aggressiveness is leading directly to nuclear war and the end of life on earth.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Neocons, Russia, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

It speaks to the humanity and moral greatness of the Russian government led by Vladimir Putin that Russia consented to a pretend attack in order that Donald Trump could save face. Unfortunately for us all, the consequences of Russia’s generosity will not be the thanks that the Russians deserve. Russia and Putin will get no credit for saving Trump from having to back down or have his naval flotilla sunk and his bombers shot down.

Russia is intent on avoiding a conflict, not because Russia is scared of the US military, but because Russia understands it is dealing with a government of psychopaths that are willing to destroy not only seven Muslim countries in whole or part within the past 17 years, but also the entirety of humanity. Therefore, Putin sidesteps each orchestrated confrontation and stands on international law and legal norms.

The result, however, is not what a humane person would expect. The result of Russian humaneness is to provoke more provocations from the evil that is the West.

This morning I visited a friend who had the TV on. I could not believe the lies that Trump, members of his government, and the presstitutes were telling Americans and the world. It was astonishing. Here is Stephen Lendman’s report on some of the lies. http://stephenlendman.org/2018/04/pentagon-lies-overnight-aggression-syria/

Only readers of my website and a few others will ever know that the only reason thousands of US sailors and dozens of US pilots are still alive is that Russia spared their lives.

Although the Russian government has every good intention, Russia’s moral conscience and consideration for others is leading the world to Armageddon. The reason is that the neoconservatives who control US foreign policy are not going to stop orchestrating events that they blame on Russia. The longer Russia waits before it finally puts its foot down, the stronger the provocations will become. The successive provocations will narrow down Russia’s response to surrender or nuclear war.

The Syrian provocation was an ideal one for Russia to put its foot down. Russia held the military cards. Russia could easily have destroyed every ship and every airplane. Having made the consequences clear in advance to the world, the US would have backed off. The defeat of America without a shot fired would have undermined the crazed neoconservatives who intend US world hegemony.

Under such a clear statement from Russia that the American force would be completely and utterly destroyed, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff would have prevented the attack.

As long as Russia accommodates Washington’s aggressiveness, the agressiveness will continue to increase.

At times I think that Russia is relying on the Western peoples to wake up to the gratuitous dangerous confrontations that are being provoked in their name. In fact, the Western peoples are helpless. Neither Washington nor the governments of Washington’s British and French vassals consulted the people or the people’s elected representatives about launching a military attack on another country. This fact shows conclusively that neither the US, UK, or France have any respect for law and their own alleged democracies and that the counries have governments that are unaccountable to the peoples. The British and French governments are accountable to Washington, and Washington is accountable to the military/security complex and Israel, which history shows can unseat any US Senator and Representative.

If the Russian government had watched today the US TV media, it would understand the futility of sidestepping Washington’s provocations. Not only would the Russian government observe the lies from Washington about the great success of a non-event, the Russian government would have observed that, on the one hand, there was proclamation of a great American victory, but, on the other hand, John Bolton’s allies among the neoconservaives, were saying that the attack was insufficient to bring Syria and Russia to heel.

The victory and its insuficiency combine to lead to worse provocations. The next provocation will be orchestrated in a situation more favorable to US than to Russian arms. Washington will not again risk a confrontation, as it did in Syria, where it clearly would have lost. What this means is that Russia’s humanity and moral conscience will result in a confrontation far more dangerous to Russia and to all of us.

As I wrote earlier today, “It would be a mistake to conclude that diplomacy has prevailed and common sense has returned to Washington. Nothing could be further from the truth. The issue is not resolved. War remains on the horizon.”

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Neocons, Russia, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

It appears from the very limited US missile attack, most of which were intercepted and destroyed by Syrian air defenses, that the US military prevailed over the crazed John Bolton and carefully avoided a strike that would have resulted in a Russian response. No significant Syrian site appears to have been targeted, and no Russians were endangered. https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/04/in-depth-syria-stuns-world-thwarts-us-attack/

The US ambassador to Russia said that the US strikes were coordinated with Russia to avoid a great power confrontation. https://www.rt.com/news/424132-us-russia-syria-strikes/ Russia Insider concludes that the exercise was a face-saver for Trump https://russia-insider.com/en/out-whimper-trump-blinks-delivers-limited-strikes/ri23132

The main effect seems to be that Trump has further discredited himself and the US by violating the UN Charter and international law and committing an act of aggression, which is a war crime for which Nazi civilian and military officials were executed. Russia’s President Putin said that the wanton and illegal use of force by Washington has had “a devastating impact on the whole system of international relations” and called for an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council. China also condemned the illegal US attack. https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/04/china-says-us-led-attacks-against-syria-are-illegal-and-against-international-law/

How was the feared conflict between the US and Russia avoided? From what I have been able to learn, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff would not accept the risk of conflict with Russia. The reason is not that the Joint Chiefs are more moral, more caring about the deaths and injuries that would result, or less inclined to go to war based on lies. Their objection was based on the lack of protection US Navy ships have from the new Russian weapons systems. An attack that brought a Russian response could sink the US flotilla and present the US with a humiliating defeat that would discredit American military prowess.

Bolton’s position was that Putin is a pussy who, as in every previous case, will do nothing. Bolton’s position is that the Russians are so scared of US military might that they will not respond to any US attack on their forces and Syrian forces. The Russians, Bolton says, will do what they always do. They will whine about the crime to the UN, and the Western media will ignore them as always.

The US Secretary of War, Mattis, represented the Joint Chiefs opinion. What, Mattis asked, if the Russians have had enough and do what they are capable of and sink the US flotilla? Is Trump prepared to accept a defeat engineered by his National Security Adviser? Is Trump prepared for a possible wider conflict?

The Joint Chiefs would rather use the orchestrated “Syrian crisis” to argue for more money, not to go to war that could be terminable of their retirement plans. The Joint Chiefs can tell Congress: “We couldn’t risk conflict with Russia over the use of chemical weapons in Syria because we were outgunned. We need more money.” The older American generation will rementer the fantasy “missile gap” of the Nixon/Kennedy presidential campaign that was used to boost US defense spending.

It would be a mistake for anyone to conclude that common sense has prevailed and the conflict has been resolved. What has prevailed is the Joint Chiefs’ fear of a defeat. The next crisis that Washington orchestrates will be on terms less favorable to Russian arms.

Bolton, the neoconservatives and the Israeli interest that they represent will go to work on Mattis and the dissenting generals. Leaks will appear in the presstitute media that are designed to discredit Mattis and to foment Trump’s distrust. The neoconservatives will advance military men more in line with the neoconservatives’ aggressiveness to positions on the Joint Chiefs.

Syria is not about any chemical weapons use. Ahmet Uzumcu, director general of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, reported that all chemical weapons had been removed from Syria. “Never before has an entire arsenal of a category of weapons of mass destruction been removed from a country experiencing a state of internal armed conflict, and this has been accomplished within very demanding and tight time frames.” https://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/06/24/last-of-syrias-chemical-weapons-removed.html

Syria is not about dictatorship or building democracy. It is not about the alleged 70 victims of chemical weapons. It would take a complete idiot to believe that Washington and its European vassals, who have killed, maimed, orphaned, and displaced millions of Muslims in seven countries over the last 17 years to be so upset over the deaths of 70 Muslims that they are willing to risk war with Russia.

Syria and Iran are an issue, because Syria and Iran supply the Lebanese millita, Hezbollah, with money and weapons. This support from Syria and Iran gives Hezbollah the capability of preventing Israel’s occupation and annexation of southern Lebanon, whose water resources Israel covets.

Twice the vaunted Israel Army has been chased out of Lebanon by Hezbollah. Israel’s military reputation cannot risk a third defeat by a mere militia, so Israel is using its control over US foreign policy and its rock solid alliance with the neoconservatives to use the US military to destabilize Syria and Iran as the US did to Iraq and Libya.

Additionally, there is the crazed neoconservative ideology of US world hegemony. The interests of Russia and China are in the way of US hegemony. Therefore, these two countries are defined as “threats.” Russia and China are not threats because they intend to attack the US, which neither has shown any indication of doing. They are threats because they are in opposition to US unilateralism which overrides their sovereignty. In other words, to be clear, the US cannot tolerate any country that has an independent foreign or economic policy.

That Russia and China have independent policies is the reason that they are “threats.”

It would be a mistake to conclude that diplomay has prevailed and common sense has returned to Washington. Nothing could be further from the truth. The issue is not resolved. War remains on the horizon.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Neocons, Russia, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

Is it insane to push for war with Russia, a major nuclear power?

Is it insane to threaten Russia and bring false charges against her?

Is it insane to brag about killing “hundreds of Russians”? https://news.antiwar.com/2018/04/12/pompeo-russians-met-their-match-us-killed-hundreds-of-them/

A normal person would answer “yes” to the three questions. So what does this tell us about Trump’s government as these insane actions are the principle practice of Trump’s government?

Does anyone doubt that Nikki Haley is insane?

Does anyone doubt that John Bolton is insane?

Does anyone doubt that Mike Pompeo is insane?

Does this mean that Trump is insane for appointing to the top positions insane people who foment war with a nuclear power?

Does this mean that Congress is insane for approving these appointments?

These are honest questions.

Assuming we avoid the Trump-promised Syrian showdown, how long before the insane Trump regime orchestrates another crisis?

The entire world should understand that because of the existence of the insane Trump regime, the continued existence of life on earth is very much in question.

People such as Stephen Cohen and myself, who were actively involved throughout the entirety of the Cold War, are astonished at the reckless and irresponsible behavior of the US government and its European vassals toward Russia. Nothing as irresponsible as what we have witnessed since the Clinton regime and which has worsened dramatically under the Obama and Trump regimes would have been imaginable during the Cold War. In this brief video, Stephen Cohen describes to Tucker Carlson the extreme danger of the present situation:

The failure of political leadership throughout the Western world is total. Such total failure is likely to prove deadly to life on earth.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Donald Trump, Russia, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

Here is “Mad Dog” Mattis, the US Secretary of War, stating that he has no evidence that there was a chemical weapons attack in Syria last week, but that he personally believes that there was one.

I remember when a person who claimed to believe something for which there was no evidence was either a religious fanatic or an ideologue. No serious person would express a conviction when there was no evidence to support it.

This raises questions as to Mattis’ fitness for office. He is prepared to lead the US into war with Russia based on nothing but his belief. This is insanity.

Even a low grade moron, which appears to be above the intelligence level of the current US Secretary of War, understands that Syria would not, within a few hours of its liberation of the Syrian people of Douma, have used chemical weapons against the civilian population for which its soldiers were dying in order to liberate.

According to RT, the Organization for the prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is on its way to inspect the site. I had read that the US had vetoed allowing an investigation. According to RT, the OPCW is only permitted by Washington to determine whether any chemical weapons were used, not, if they were, by who. If the OPCW can be pressured to say evidence of chemical weapons use was found, Washington will seize on that as proof that Syria did it.

As the former head of the OPCW has made clear, the organization is not independent of Washington’s control. It is supposed to be independent but is not. Jose Bustani, a Brazilian diplomat who was Director-General of the OPCW reports that he was ordered to resign by John Bolton, the dangerous neoconservative warmonger who is currently National Secruity Adviser to President Trump. Bustani pointed out to Bolton that he was appointed by the OPCW member states, not by the US, and refused to resign. Here is Bolton’s reply: “OK, so there will be retaliation. Prepare to accept the consequences. We know where your kids are.” https://www.rt.com/usa/423477-bolton-threat-opcw-iraq/

This is American diplomacy at work. It is based entirely on lies, bribes, threats, coercion, murder. Remember the State Department official who told the president of Pakistan, do as I say now or we will bomb you into the stone age?

Bolton had Bustani voted out. The members of the OPCW preferred their Washington subsidies to being an honest organization.

It makes no sense for Russia to rely on “international organizations” that are under Washington’s control.

It makes no sense for Russia to rely on common sense in the West. There is no common sense anywhere in the West. If the West had common sense, the West would not be sending a flotilla to attack Russian and Syrian forces.

It makes no sense for Russia to speak about their “American partners.” No such partner exists. Russia has only American enemies.

The neoconservatives who control US foreign policy have stated it clearly in their declaration that the principle goal of US foreign policy is to prevent the rise of Russia and any other country that could serve as a constraint on US unilateralism. The neoconservatives have made it abundantly clear that Russia has to go. It is dangerous for Russia to disregard such a clear warning. Yet when I am interviewed by Russian media, the journalists are perplexed by “neoconservative.” What is that, they ask.

How can it be that Russian journalists are unaware that the powerful interest group whose most warmonger member, John Bolton, sits as Trump’s right-hand man, has marked Russia for vassalage, conquest, or annihilation? A country this uninformed hasn’t much survival potential.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Neocons, Russia, Syria 
🔊 Listen RSS

The criminally insane governments of the US, UK, and France are sending a flotilla of missile ships, submarines, and an aircraft carrier to attack Syria in the face of Russian warnings. What is the likely outcome of this outrageous act of aggression based entirely on an orchestrated and transparent lie, an act of reckless aggression that is more irresponsible and more dangerous than anything done by the demonized Nazi regime in Germany?

There are no protests from European governments. There are no protesters in the streets of European and US cities. Congress has not reminded Trump that he has been given no authority by Congress to launch a military attack on a soverign country that is likely to ignite a war, possibly World War 3. Everyone seems content with the prospect of the end of the world. The moronic American presstitutes are egging it on.

Here are possible outcomes:

(1) The Russians, trapped in the deluded belief that facts and evidence matter to the West and that common sense will prevail, accept the attacks. This outcome is the most dangerous of all, because this outcome will encourage more attacks until Russia is backed into a corner and has no alternative to a direct nuclear attack on the US.

(2) Russia takes the initiative in the brewing conflict and escorts the US missile ship, USS Donald Cook, out of attack range of Syria before the attack flotilla arrives and declares a perimeter line beyond which the Western flotilla becomes target for attack. This should force a showdown between Trump’s warmonger government and the US Congress that would challenge Trump’s ability to unilaterally commit the US to war.

(3) Russia escorts the Donald Cook away from the scene and simultaneously wipes out the military capabilities of Saudi Arabia and Israel, removing Washington’s ground-based allies in its attack on Syria, thus loading the odds in Russia’s favor, and making it clear that Russia is going to pre-empt attack, not respond to one.

(4) Russia, in the deluded belief that it must prove itself in the right, accepts the attack and its unpredictable damage before responding. This outcome is almost as bad as the first, as this lets the war start in contrast to options (2) and (3) which have some possibility of preventing a US/Russian confrontation by forcing common sense on the Americans.

(5) Senior German politicians inform Merkel that Britain and France’s support of the US strike on Syria could commit NATO to a war with Russia. Germany has had one devastating experience with the Russian military and does not need another. They could pressure Merkel to withdraw Germany from NATO. The resulting consternation/confusion would likely halt the US attack on Syria/Russia.

(6) The US Joint Chiefs of Staff could easily and honestly conclude that in the event of a Russian response to an attack on Syria, the entire flotilla could be lost, carrier included, inflicting a humiliating defeat on US arms, and that in view of this possbility, the Joint Chiefs recommend against the announced attack. Possibly this has occurred and explains Trump’s latest tweets, which suggest that doubts might have entered Trump’s mind.

Even if a hopeful outcome such as (5) and (6) occurs, we are left with the dangerous situation that some elements in the US and UK governments were able to orchestrate two events—the alleged Skripal poisoning and the alleged Assad chemical attack—and use the events to leverage unsupported accusations against Russia and Syria as justifications for an illegal military attack on a sovereign country. That such an outrageous orchestration is possible proves that there is no democracy or constraint on government in the US and UK.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Russia, Syria 
Paul Craig Roberts
About Paul Craig Roberts

Paul Craig Roberts has had careers in scholarship and academia, journalism, public service, and business. He is chairman of The Institute for Political Economy.

Dr. Roberts has held academic appointments at Virginia Tech, Tulane University, University of New Mexico, Stanford University where he was Senior Research Fellow in the Hoover Institution, George Mason University where he had a joint appointment as professor of economics and professor of business administration, and Georgetown University where he held the William E. Simon Chair in Political Economy in the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Dr. Roberts was associate editor and columnist for The Wall Street Journal and columnist for Business Week and the Scripps Howard News Service. He was a nationally syndicated columnist for Creators Syndicate in Los Angeles. In 1992 he received the Warren Brookes Award for Excellence in Journalism. In 1993 the Forbes Media Guide ranked him as one of the top seven journalists in the United States.

President Reagan appointed Dr. Roberts Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and he was confirmed in office by the U.S. Senate. From 1975 to 1978, Dr. Roberts served on the congressional staff where he drafted the Kemp-Roth bill and played a leading role in developing bipartisan support for a supply-side economic policy. After leaving the Treasury, he served as a consultant to the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Department of Commerce.