The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Craig Roberts Archive
Vladimir Putin Is the Only Leader the West Has
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

A Reuters news report under the names of presstitutes Robin Emmott and Sabine Siebold shows how devoid the West is of honest, intelligent and responsible journalists and government officials.http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-nato-summit-idUKKCN0ZN2NN

First we will examine the dishonesty or incompetence of the reporters and then that of Western government officials.

Emmott and Siebold describe NATO as a “Western defense alliance.” Since the Clinton regime NATO has been an alliance for waging offensive war, a war crime under the Nuremberg rules established by the United States. Under the NATO banner a number of countries have been bombed, invaded, and had their governments overthrown by Washington acting under the cover of NATO.

These destroyed countries posed no threat whatsoever to the countries of the NATO alliance and undertook no aggressive actions against NATO members. How is it possible that Reuters’ reporters and editors are not aware of this? Why do they call an instrument of Washington’s aggression a “defense alliance”?

Emmott and Siebold report that “Russian aggression” is the reason NATO is deploying 3,000 to 4,000 troops in the Baltic states and Poland. In other words, something that does not exist–Russian aggression toward the Baltics and Poland–is assumed to be a fact that must be countered with military deployments.

The reporters do not question whether this insignificant number of NATO troops constitutes a defense or a provocation. The number of troops would have to be 100 times greater before the force even begins to approach a defensive force. What then is the purpose of the 3,000 or 4,000 NATO troops?

Every informed person knows that there is no need of a defense force against Russia in the Baltics and Poland. Aside from this fact, only an absolute idiot could think that three or four thousand troops constitutes a defense against the Russian Army. In June 1941 Operation Barbarossa hit Russia with an invasion of four million troops, the majority German component of which were probably the most highly trained and disciplined troops in military history, excepting only the Spartans. By the time that the Americans and British got around to the Normandy invasion, the Russian Army had chewed up the Wehrmacht. There were only a few divisions at 40% strength to resist the Normandy invasion. By the time the Russian Army got to Berlin, the German resistance consisted of armed children.

The Reuters reporters raise no question about President Obama’s statement that 1,000 of this insignificant force will be Americans in order “to enhance our forward presence in central and eastern Europe.” Why does the United States need a “forward presence” in central and eastern Europe? What does a US “forward presence” in central and eastern Europe represent except an insane recklessness? One thousand US troops are good for nothing except a provocation.

Emmott and Siebold report with a straight face without laughter or question unverifiable accusations of Russian aggression by White House Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes, Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski, President Obama, and head of NATO’s military committee, Czech General Petr Pavel.

Gen. Pavel “said Russia was attempting to restore its status as a world power, an effort that included using its military.”

Obama said it is necessary to “keep sanctions on Moscow in place until it fully complies with the ceasefire agreement in Ukraine.”

Waszczykowski said: “We have to reject any type of wishful thinking with regard to pragmatic cooperation with Russia as long as Russia keeps on invading its neighbors.”

Rhodes threatened Russia with a NATO response to Russia’s “continued aggression.”

These statements are propagandistic. If those who made the statements actually believe them, they are too imbecilic to be trusted with public offices.

Is it possible that the Czech general does not know that Russia has used its military only to repel a Washington-inspired Georgian invasion of South Ossetia and against ISIS in Syria, which the US, UK, and France also claim to be doing? After repelling the Georgian invasion, Russia withdrew its forces. After dealing ISIS a setback in Syria, Russia withdrew and was forced to return by Washington’s resupply of ISIS.

Can the Polish Foreign Minister identify the countries that “Russia keeps on invading”?

Does the President of the United States really not know that Russia is not a party to the ceasefire agreement in Ukraine? This is an agreement between the breakaway republics and the government in Kiev. Washington has done everything possible to discourage Kiev from keeping the agreement Kiev signed.

Can National Security Adviser Rhodes tell us where “continued aggression by Russia” is occurring? What countries are being invaded and overrun?

How can there be so much Russian aggression and no evidence of it?

Recently, President Putin dressed down to their faces the Western media whores who are fanning the flames of World War III by repeating without question Washington’s propagandistic lies. These lies are reckless. They endanger all life on planet Earth.

During my lifetime, American presidents worked to reduce tensions between the two major nuclear powers. JFK worked with Khrushchev to defuse the dangerous situation arising from the placement of US missiles in Turkey and, in response, the placement of Russian missiles in Cuba.

President Nixon brought forth SALT I, the strategic arms limitation treaty, and the ABM Treaty.

President Carter crafted SALT II.

President Reagan negotiated with Gorbachev the end of the Cold War, the most promising achievement of the 20th century.

The Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama regimes have done everything possible to raise the tensions between nuclear powers to heights beyond those of the most dangerous days of the Cold War.

The evil Clinton regime broke the word of the government of the United States, thereby destroying the honor of the US government, by taking NATO to Russia’s borders.

The evil George W. Bush regime pulled the US out of the ABM Treaty and rewrote US war doctrine in order to elevate nuclear weapons from a retaliatory weapon to a first strike weapon. This insane act put the Russians on notice.

The evil Obama regime intends to place nuclear missiles on Russia’s borders in Poland and Romania and engineered a coup in Ukraine with the intent of depriving Russia of its Black Sea naval base in Crimea, Russia’s only warm water port.

ORDER IT NOW

Faced with a Russophobic Washington-installed government in Ukraine, the Russian population in Crimea, a Russian province since the 1700s, voted practically unanimously to rejoin Russia, where Crimea had resided until Khrushchev reassigned the Russian province to Ukraine in the mid 20th century. The Russian government’s acceptance of the wishes of its own people were propagandistically misrepresented by Washington and the presstitutes as “Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea.” This lie is where the myth of “Russian invasion” came from. Russian military forces were already present in Crimea, because when Russia granted independence to Ukraine, Russia retained a long-term lease on the Russian naval base in Crimea. As all international observers testified, the vote was independent of the Russian military presence.

The White House Fool said that the vote in Crimea was meaningless because all of Ukraine did not get to vote. The Fool was too ignorant to know that by this laughable charge he discredited the American Revolution because the British people didn’t get to vote. For the precise same reason that The Fool wants Crimea returned to Kiev, the US must be returned to Britain. I doubt that the British would have us. Who wants a war criminal nation drowning in its own hubris?

The world is now faced with the prospect that insouciant Americans will elect a crazed and incompetent criminal or semi-criminal as their president, a person who has declared the President of Russia to be “the new Hitler.” The stupid bitch’s statement is a declaration of nuclear war, and this dangerous, reckless, incompetent, careless person has been selected by the Democratic Party as the next POTUS !!!

The ignorance and stupidity of the American people will destroy the world.

Little wonder that Vladimir Putin, the only responsible world leader other than the president of China, is desperate that the Western media understand that their irresponsible negligence to the truth is helping Washington drive the world to nuclear war.

Putin does not want war. He is doing everything in his power to avoid it. But Putin is not going to surrender Russia to Washington. The trip-point of World War III will be the installation of Washington’s missiles in Poland and Romania. As Putin recently made clear to the imbecilic Western journalists, these missiles can easily and secretly be changed from anti-ballistic missiles to nuclear attack missiles that can strike their Russian targets within 5 or fewer minutes of launch, thus depriving Russia of its retaliatory deterrent. Once these missiles are in place, Washington can issue orders to Russia.

Whatever the evil men and women in Washington who are gambling with the life of the planet think, Russia is not going to accept these missiles.

Where does world leadership reside? In Washington, the war criminal capital of the world that is driving the world to nuclear war, or in Russia whose leadership accepts countless affronts and provocations in an effort to avoid war?

(Republished from PaulCraigRoberts.org by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: NATO, Russia, Ukraine 
Hide 12 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. A Reuters news report under the names of presstitutes Robin Emmott and Sabine Siebold shows how devoid the West is of honest, intelligent and responsible journalists and government officials.

    It is not the job of a politician to be honest and that includes Putin. In his very own words there are no friendships in politics just temporary relationships.

    These destroyed countries posed no threat whatsoever to the countries of the NATO alliance and undertook no aggressive actions against NATO members. How is it possible that Reuters’ reporters and editors are not aware of this? Why do they call an instrument of Washington’s aggression a “defense alliance”?

    I am sure most of them are aware of this fact but they are simply not prepared to loose their job by reporting the truth.

    What then is the purpose of the 3,000 or 4,000 NATO troops?

    The purpose is to create uncertainty, to poke a finger in Putin’s eye, to keep the Kremlin guessing, to make them nervous.

    The trip-point of World War III will be the installation of Washington’s missiles in Poland and Romania.

    The land based missile defence station in Romania which will form part of a larger and controversial European shield has been activated. The Polish segment will come into service in 2018.

    The ignorance and stupidity of the American people will destroy the world.

    This statement can be applied to the majority of humanity not just the Americans. I think the world will survive minus humanity.

    • Replies: @pink_point
    , @Drapetomaniac
  2. Parbes says:

    Russia should just attack and conquer Poland and Romania, and this time keep them as permanent subjugated vassals and never let them go. These stupid and degenerate nations don’t deserve independence. They are a danger to themselves, to Russia, and to the world; and a liability for Europe.

  3. Ed says:

    This is a comment that will nitpick on of the historical claims in the article and not address the main argument that Western governments are trying to start a war with Russia for no apparent reason.

    People have gone from underrating the Red Army’s effectiveness in World War 2 to somewhat over-rating it. Though its true that the German Army had gotten pretty battered by June 1944, Hitler had a few well manned and well equipped divisions left and he concentrated those in Normandy and Pas-de-Calais to face the impending Anglo-American-Canadian invasion.

    • Replies: @bluedog
    , @MarkU
  4. bluedog says:
    @Ed

    True indeed and those few divisions gave us enough to handle, but just think if all those divisions that Russia eliminated had been at Normandy, some 200 + divisions with armor,so this is one American rather then carping about Russia has no problem in saying thank you for all the American lives you saved.!!!

  5. MarkU says:
    @Ed

    You are right to point out that PCR has overstated his case, he often does that and I really wish that he wouldn’t. It is very common these days for people to turn a reasonable enough generalisation into an untrue absolute by failing to appropriately qualify a statement, in fact you did it yourself when you wrote :-

    “Hitler had a few well manned and well equipped divisions left and he concentrated those in Normandy and Pas-de-Calais to face the impending Anglo-American-Canadian invasion.”

    Hitler concentrated some of his remaining well manned and well equipped divisions in France to face the impending invasion, not all of them.

  6. Putin is the only leader belonging with the ancien-regime the West has; the only political leader.

    The West has leaders today: financial, marketist leaders. It’s debatable whether they can still seen as people, or they should be seen as organizations: suppose Goldman Sachs board undergoes full change; would anything at all change?

    The same goes for Google and Facebooks, perhaps: the companies and their technology, rather than their CEOs, are leaders of the West.

  7. @Regnum Nostrum

    It is not the job of a politician to be honest and that includes Putin. In his very own words there are no friendships in politics just temporary relationships.

    You can say that if you take “honest” as “sincere to the governed people.”
    Honesty is a category of politics. Honest leaders don’t go on the TV and tell truth to their governed people; the deception they play and untruths they say are, nevertheless, said for the good of their country; and the good of a country will always be the good of the country’s wide population.

    Craig Roberts is very spot-on on the state of journalism in the West: it’s certainly at its lowest in the last 2 centuries. It no longer seems to have a sense of shame; or, for that matter, a limit in its despisal of the very readers who entrust it.

    This statement can be applied to the majority of humanity not just the Americans. I think the world will survive minus humanity.

    It certainly can.
    The problem is the different approach dishonest or honest officials and “informers” will have to it; the different use they’ll put the rich resources of human simple-mindedness to.
    Craig Roberts may have meant that the “ignorance and stupidity” of the American elite may disrupt or destroy the world.
    If you look at the activity of Washington “think tanks”, and the boldness of the hawks (who are only waiting Obama’s term’s end to show their true colours) that fear is justified, probably.

  8. I’ve said it before, but in light of the potential seriousness of events, it bears repetition: Irrespective of how one thinks or feels about Donald Trump,* it is simply imperative that Hillary Clinton never become the President.

    *I’m actually a very enthusiastic Trump supporter, but I can understand how some reasonable people might feel otherwise.

  9. @Kevin O'Keeffe

    Trump wants to be more nationalistic economically, eliminate the huge tax burden of ILLEGAL immigrants, and stop the endless military interventions around the world.

    Hillary wants the status quo. More of the same. Clinton/Bush/Obama II.

    Open borders, racial strife, moral decay, WallSt/MIC ownership of the USA.

    • Agree: pink_point, pink_point
  10. @Regnum Nostrum

    “It is not the job of a politician to be honest and that includes Putin. In his very own words there are no friendships in politics just temporary relationships.”

    That’s being honest.

  11. Check to see how your hometown will do in WWIII. My favorite is the Tsar Bomba on Washington, DC.

    http://www.gizmag.com/nuclear-bomb-damage-map-nuke/12097/

  12. @Kevin O'Keeffe

    Couldn’t agree more. Trump is derided because he’s not yet a “made man” of the political mafia. Not a dues paid up member of the club. Hasn’t yet earned the right to feed at the trough filled with the largess of the oligarchs and special interests (i.e. Israel specifically). What ever happened to “anyone can grow up to be president”? Back in the days of the formation of America wealthy and successful land owners and businessmen were expected to do their turn in the barrel in D.C. to help run the country and then go back home. Noblesse oblige. But I ramble. The concept of Hillary getting in poses an existential threat not just to the U.S. but to humanity as a whole. As the puppet of Israel, the military industrial complex and the neocons she will antagonize Russia and China into actual conflicts and will not hesitate to push that button just to prove her ovaries are bigger than any man’s.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Paul Craig Roberts Comments via RSS