The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
Reply to Paul Craig Roberts' Crucial Question
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_775021507

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

In a recent article, Paul Craig Roberts directly asked me a very important question. Here is the relevant part of this article (but please make sure to read the full article to understand where Paul Craig Roberts is coming from and why he is raising this absolutely crucial issue):

Andrei Martyanov, whose book I recently reviewed on my website, recently defended Putin, as The Saker and I have done in the past, from claims that Putin is too passive in the face of assaults. https://russia-insider.com/en/russia-playing-long-game-no-room-instant-gratification-strategies-super-patriots/ri24561 As I have made the same points, I can only applaud Martyanov and The Saker. Where we might differ is in recognizing that endlessly accepting insults and provocations encourages their increase until the only alternative is surrender or war.

So, the questions for Andrei Martyanov, The Saker, and for Putin and the Russian government is: How long does turning your other cheek work? Do you turn your other cheek so long as to allow your opponent to neutralize your advantage in a confrontation? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you lose the support of the patriotic population for your failure to defend the country’s honor? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you are eventually forced into war or submission? Do you turn your other cheek so long that the result is nuclear war?

I think that Martyanov and The Saker agree that my question is a valid one

First let me immediately state that I do find this question valid, crucial even, and that is a question which I have been struggling with for several years now and that still keeps me up at night. I think that this question ought to be raised more often, especially by those who care for peace and oppose imperialism in all its forms and I am grateful to Paul Craig Roberts for raising it.

Second, considering the overall nastiness of so much of the pro-Russian blogosphere and so-called “alternative media”, I want to go on record by saying that I have the utmost respect for Paul Craig Roberts, especially for his remarkable courage and intellectual honesty. At times I might not agree with everything Paul Craig Roberts writes, but I never forget that he is most definitely a real American patriot and a true friend of Russia. I consider him a precious ally in my own struggles.

Having clarified this, let me turn to Paul Craig Roberts’ question.

First, I will begin by questioning the very premise of this question and ask whether it is true that Russia has a policy of “turning the other cheek”?

In my opinion, that is a mistaken assumption. For one thing, Russia does not have “a” foreign policy, but several very different policies towards different countries and situations. I won’t list them all here, but I will mention two which are most often mentioned in this context: Syria and the Ukraine.

These are dramatically different conflicts with profoundly different characteristics:

Syria The Ukraine
Risk of direct superpower confrontation between Russia and the US Yes No (only indirect)
Risk of a local incident escalating into a full scale and nuclear war High Very low
Proximity to the Russian border No Yes
Overwhelming force advantage US/CENTCOM/NATO Russian military
Presence of a large Russian population No Yes
(Russian) Popular mandate for the use of force if needed Supportive but cautious (not a blank check) Strong (in case of Russian counter-attack to save Novorussia)
Risk of political blowback if Russia is forced to escalate or intervene Limited (the EU has more or less accepted that Russia is in Syria, and even the US and Israel have) Very high (in the EU)
Russian intervention justifiable under international law Yes, self-evidently Yes, but not self-evidently
Major economic and social consequences (for Russia) from the conflict’s outcome No Yes
Is Russia pressed for time to resolve this conflict? No No

As you see, out of 10 characteristics the conflicts in the Ukraine and Syria have only one in common: that Russia is under no time pressure to resolve them. In fact, I would argue that time is very strongly playing to the advantage of Russia in both conflicts (note that I did not say that the local populations in the Ukraine and Syria are in the same position as Russia – for them every passing day is a nightmare).

The two most important comparative characteristics are the risk of the conflict escalating into a full scale and direct superpower confrontation which, by itself, could easily escalate into a nuclear war. This is most unlikely in the Ukraine and very possible in Syria.

Why?

Just look at the current stand-offs taking place in the two countries: in the Ukraine the Novorussians are warning of a concentration of Ukronazi armor near Mariupol; in Syria the Russian Navy and Aerospace Forces are poised to sink USN ships if given the order. See the difference in magnitude and quality?!

For these reasons I believe that we need to look at the Russian stance in these two conflicts separately.

Syria

I have written a lot about the Russian stance in Syria and I will therefore only provide a short bullet-point type summary

  • The conflict in Syria places in very close proximity Russian and US forces. Furthermore, the Russian military task force in and near Syria is very small and cannot resist against a determined US/CENTCOM/NATO attack. If attacked, the Russians will rapidly have to use their long-range cruise missiles which are based (or in port) in Russia. What will the US do if that happens?
  • There is no reason whatsoever to believe that the US side will react rationally (or even proportionally) if US bases or ships are destroyed in a Russian counter-attack: the political pressure to “teach the Russians a lesson”, to show that the US “has the greatest military in history” and all the rest of the typical US flag-waving nonsense will force Trump to show that he is the MAGA-President. The current US elites are not only “non-agreement capable”, but they are also ignorant, stupid, arrogant, and they also have an immense sense of self-righteousness, a messianic ideology and a religious belief in total impunity. To assume that the US is a “rational actor” would be highly illogical and, in the case of a possible nuclear war, completely irresponsible.
  • Vladimir Putin was elected by the Russian people to protect and preserve their interests, not the interests of the people of the Ukraine or Syria. First and foremost, his main obligation is to protect the people of Russia and that, in turn, means that he must do everything possible to avoid a superpower confrontation from which the people of Russia would immensely suffer.

I personally fully support the Russian decision to intervene in Syria, but I have been very worried about the dangers inherent to such an operation from day 1. So far, I believe that the Russians have done a superb job: they have saved the Syrian people from the Takfiri nightmare, they have made it possible for the Syrian government to survive and liberate most of the Syrian people, and they have comprehensively defeated the plans A, B, C, D, etc. of already two (rather nasty, if incompetent) US Administrations. So far, the Russian intervention in Syria is a stunning success. This is also why the Americans are so desperate for anything which would look like a “victory” for the “greatest nation on earth”, “land of the free, home of the brave” bla, bla, bla… And yet, for this Russian operation to become a real success Russia must do all she can to simultaneously increase the potential costs of intervention for the AngloZionists while denying them any political rewards of a US/Israeli attack. I would not call this “turning the other cheek” but rather I would refer to it as “absorbing blow after blow (especially when the “blows” are ineffective to the point of being almost totally symbolic ones!) until your opponents run out of steam while changing the reality on the ground“. Compare the situation in Syria 2 years ago and today, and tell me: who is winning this one?

The only possible conclusion is that, at least so far, the Russian policy towards Syria has been an immense success.

Now let’s look at the conflict in the Ukraine

The Ukraine

ORDER IT NOW

Here, I must confess, I am much more dubious. First, while I understand that this was a tough call, I have to admit that I still wonder whether it was the right thing to do to recognize the Ukronazi junta that came to power in Kiev. Why did the Kremlin agree to deal with them when they so clearly came to power as a result of a violent neo-Nazi coup, executed by a small number of hardcore extremists, and in direct violation of an international agreement signed just the day before? If in the EU it is legal to ban swastikas or even “revisionist books” (and jail people for writing them!), how is it that a bona fide Nazi regime which came to power by violence is instantly recognized? Well, we know that the AngloZionist Empire is the pinnacle of hypocrisy, but the recognition of this gang of corrupt and hate-filled thugs by Russia raises a lot of very disturbing questions. Finally, how hard was it for the Russians to see that the only possible outcome from a Nazi coup in Kiev was a civil war? After all, if I, using only open sources could predict the civil war in the Ukraine as early as on November 30th 2013, then surely the immense and highly competent Russian intelligence community had come to the same conclusions many months and even years before I did! So why did the Kremlin recognize a regime which would immediately start a bloody civil war? Again, disturbing questions.

Still, I won’t second-guess the Kremlin since the President and his aides had much more information upon which to take their decision than I do, even now in hindsight. I am much more bothered by the lack of Russian economic sanctions against the Ukraine, especially in the face of an almost never-ending stream of atrocities, provocations and hostile acts. It does appear that following the Ukronazi acts of piracy in the Sea of Azov, the Russians have finally decided that enough is enough and that the Ukros need to pay a high price (in economic terms) for their acts of piracy. But that is very little very late. What will it take to really get Russia serious? A bloody Ukronazi terrorist attack in Russia maybe?

Now, following the murder of Alexandr Zakharchenko, an increasing number of Russian politicians and public figures are calling for the recognition of the DNR and LNR by Russia. Frankly, I can only agree with this. Enough is enough, especially since there is nobody to negotiate with in Kiev, and there won’t be for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, the junta in power needs to pay for its constant provocations and I believe that Russia should slap some severe economic sanctions on the Ukronazi leaders and on the Ukraine itself. Just look at these two facts and tell me if you also see a problem here:

  1. The Russian FSB (whose investigators are in Donetsk) has declared that the Ukrainian SBU is behind the murder of Alexandr Zakharchenko
  2. Russia is the biggest economic investor in the Ukraine

Does that make sense to you?!

As for the Minsk Agreements, which were stillborn anyway, the Ukronazis have proven in words and in deeds that they have no intention whatsoever to implement them. I understand that the decision-makers in the Kremlin also realize that and that their goal is not to wait and hope for the Ukros to begin implementing these Agreements, but to use these Agreements as a “hook” to keep slowly weakening the regime in Kiev. Likewise, I do see the advantage of not recognizing the LNR/DNR: just like the US created an anti-Russia in the Ukraine, so did the Russians create an anti-Ukraine in the Donbass. However, I think that this strategy has now outlived its usefulness and that the protection of the people of the Donbass should be considered more important than the weakening of the Nazi regime in Kiev. And yet, the spokesman for Vladimir Putin has just declared (yet again) that:

“After the perpetration of this terrorist attack it is very difficult to discuss anything with the Ukrainian side, but this does not mean that Russia is withdrawing from the Minsk process,”

Does that make sense to you?!

If/when the Russian military openly intervenes in the Donbass (like it did in Crimea) there is absolutely nothing the Ukros, NATO, the EU or the US will be able to do about it. This is not Syria and here the Russians have a huge, overwhelming, military advantage.

This is why in military terms, all this “surrounding” of Russia by US/NATO military bases is nonsensical. As are the Baltic/Polish requests to host US/NATO bases on their territory. Modern superpower conflicts won’t really have frontlines and rears but are mostly fought throughout the depth of the theater of war. By placing US/NATO bases so close to Russia the Empire only makes the list of Russian weapons systems which can strike them longer and longer, resulting on more firepower and more redundancy for the Russian attack. This entire “encirclement” business is typical Neocon ideological nonsense. My favorite one? When the USN sails ships into the Black Sea where the survival time of any ship is measured in minutes once the Russians decide to sink it. Ditto for the Persian Gulf which is a terrible place to send USN ships, by the way. Should the Empire order a strike on Iran, it would probably begin by flushing all the USN ships out of the Persian Gulf (unless the Pentagon wants a tripwire force or a repeat of the “Liberty” false flag operation as pretext for attack)

Not only will the Ukroarmy cease to function as a fighting force in 24-36 hours (most men will survive, by the way, but as combat subunits and units the Ukroarmy will cease to exist), but NATO will be in no position whatsoever to intervene. There is no risk of escalation in the Donbass, especially not a nuclear one. However, unlike Syria, any overt Russian intervention in the Donbass will have immense political consequences in Europe: all the tiny timid baby-steps that were taken by EU leaders to have some kind of independent foreign policy (I think of North Stream 2 for example) will be immediately crushed by a huge chorus of Russophobic hysteria coming out of AngloZionist puppet regimes in eastern Europe.

Truth be told, so far the Russian policy of sending equipment (the Voentorg) and specialists (the North Wind) has been very successful. The Russians managed to defeat the Ukronazis without direct intervention (with some minor exceptions like a few special ops, a few artillery strikes and some help to create a de facto air exclusion zone over the Donbass). The problem is that with Poroshenko being so unpopular and the Ukraine becoming a failed state (which it has been for a while already), the junta could well decide to attack again with (at least on paper) a re-organized, re-trained, re-equipped and much beefed up military force. And if they lose to the Novorussians – which they mostly likely will – then they can blame all their own self-inflicted disasters on Russian military intervention.

Finally, as I have written in the past, the big problem is that the AngloZionists risk very little in telling their Ukronazi proxies to attack Novorussia. Oh sure, a lot of Ukrainians will die, but the AngloZionists don’t care, and if the Ukroarmy is capable enough to force a Russian military intervention, then the Empire wins politically. The only bad scenario for the Empire would be for the LNR/DNR forces to be able to defeat the Urkos for a third time, again without any overt Russian intervention, which is a distinct possibility.

From a Russian point of view, I understand that an open intervention in the Donbass would be very costly in political and economic terms. However, I do believe that it is not an ‘all or nothing’ situation. Russia does not have to choose between doing nothing and sending her tanks into Kiev. Russia does have the option of tightening the screws on Kiev without going overboard. At the very least, Russia could implement painful economic sanctions. The Kremlin could also tell the regime in Kiev that there are red lines (including terrorist attacks in Novorussia, Crimea, or elsewhere in Russia), which should not be crossed and that Russia will not stand by for any Ukronazi provocation.

In conclusion of this section, I will say that the Russian policy towards the Ukraine has been a mixed bag with some real successes mixed in with some probably less than ideal responses. I believe that the Kremlin ought to consider political and economic means to retaliate against the Ukronazi policies while staying clear of any overt military operation for as long as possible (i.e., that is unless the Urkonazis threaten to over-run Novorussia).

Having compared and contrasted these two conflicts, let’s now look at the bigger picture. After all, Paul Craig Roberts is speaking about the future of our entire planet with his question: “Can War Be Avoided and the Planet Saved?”. And he is absolutely correct: what is at stake here is not just the outcome of a local or regional conflict, but the future of our entire planet.

The bigger picture: the existential war between Russia and the Empire

The US and Russia have been at war for several years now. Yes, this war is roughly 80% informational, 15% economic and only 5% kinetic. But this can change very rapidly. The main reasons for this war are not just the usual mix of grand power rivalries, economic and financial struggles, the desire to control raw materials or strategic geographical locations. These are all present this time too, but the deeper reason for this war is that Russia and the US represent two mutually exclusive civilizational models. Very succinctly, Russia wants a multi-polar world in which each country is free to develop as its people see fit and in which international law regulates relations between nations. The Empire stands, well, for itself, of course. Meaning that it wants a single world hegemony ruled by the AngloZionists. Furthermore, Russia stands for traditional moral and spiritual values whereas the Empire stands for greed, globalism and the destruction of all traditions and moral values. It is pretty self-evident that these two systems cannot coexist. They present existential threats to each other. Russia will either become sovereign or enslaved. The Empire will either control the planet or crumble. Tertium non datur.

The Russians fully understand that, as do the leaders of the transnational AngloZionist Empire. You think that I am exaggerating? Well, see for yourself what Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen had to say on this topic: (emphasis added)

We are witnessing historic changes across the entire threat landscape … The balance of power that has characterized the international system for decades has been corroding. America’s unipolar moment is at risk. Power vacuums are springing up across the globe and are quickly filled by hostile nation-states, terrorists and transnational criminals. They all share a common goal: They want to disrupt our way of life — and many are inciting chaos, instability and violence

Except for the totally hypocritical comment at the end about “chaos, instability and violence” (which are, by far, the biggest US exports), she is spot on. Hence the current tensions.

There is the very real possibility that this war will suddenly become 100% kinetic. The Russians also understand that, and this is why they have been preparing for WWIII for several years now. As I have already stated many times, the US armed forces are in no condition to fight a conventional war against Russia, and the recent Russian advances in military technology have pretty much rendered the US Navy and Air Force more or less useless. The US nuclear triad, however, is still fully functional and is more than sufficient to destroy Russia.

Russia has therefore also dramatically increased her strategic deterrence capabilities and in effect rendered all the US ABM efforts useless. Following the old motto si vis pacem, para bellum, Russia has now developed an entire family of new weapons systems designed to deter the US from any attack (see Andrei Martyanov’s analysis here and my own here). Putin’s plan is quite evident: he hopes that Russia will be able to convince the leaders of the United States that an attack on Russia would be suicidal. Now all Russia can do is try to do everything in her power to avoid such a conflict.

Paul Craig Roberts presents us with a very bleak picture when he says that:

The people in the West with whom he is dealing are idiots who do not appreciate his statesmanship. Consequently, each time Putin turns the other cheek, so to speak, the insults and the provocations ratchet upward (…) The reason I think Putin needs to do a better job of standing up to Washington is that I think, based on history, that appeasement encourages more provocations, and it comes to a point when you have to surrender or fight.

Sadly, I can only totally agree with Paul Craig Roberts, and I explained that in my article Each “Click” Brings Us Closer To The Bang!” which I concluded with the following words:

I can’t ignore the fact that each “click” brings us one step closer to the “bang.” And that suggests to me that the only real solution to this perilous situation is to find a way to remove the finger pressing on the trigger or, better, take away the gun from the nutcase threatening us all with it.

This is, I think, the core of the Russian policy towards the United States: trying to find a way to get the AngloZionst finger off the US nuclear trigger. This is a difficult and complicated task which can only be tackled very carefully, one step at a time. And yes, this strategy does imply that, at times, they seem to meekly “turn the other cheek” when in reality they are trying not to give the nutcase a reason to open up.

ORDER IT NOW

Think of it this way: what is the biggest mistake the US is currently making? The US leaders do not realize (or, worse, do not care) that US actions are pushing Russia into a corner from which she cannot retreat. They are thus forcing Russia to stand her ground including, if needed, by military force. What would be the point of the Russians doing precisely the same thing, pushing the Neocons into a corner from which they would perceive that they cannot retreat? Please keep in mind that understanding what is unacceptable to your enemy (to reach the “breaking point” in negotiations theory) does not at all imply that you agree with your enemy’s values or point of view. We don’t have to find the AngloZionist messianic ideology and worldview as anything but repugnant and delusional to understand the fact that if openly and directly challenged the AngloZionists will strike out, most likely in a completely irresponsible and even suicidal manner. Thus the only possible strategy is to slowly weaken the Empire without ever giving its leaders the unambiguous signal that what Russia is really seeking is their complete demise. And, again, if that means giving them the illusion that Russia is “turning the other cheek”, then that is the price to pay to buy more time and further weaken the Empire.

That strategy, however, cannot be sustained forever, if only because appeasement does invite further abuse. Each time Russia successfully avoids WWIII the imbeciles in Washington DC interpret this as a further sign that “Russia is weak, and we are strong, we are the best, we are invincible!” and plan a further escalation of tensions and hostilities.

This is why I think that each conflict needs to be looked at on a case by case basis. In Syria, appearing to be “turning the other cheek” to avoid WWIII makes sense. In the Ukraine where such a risk does not exist, this strategy needs to be fundamentally reassessed. In Syria, Russian and US forces are in direct proximity, facing each other; in the Ukraine, however, the Ukronazi forces are a proxy for NATO, and thus they act like a buffer which reduces the risks of rapid uncontrolled escalation. Russia can use that to her advantage.

I also want to add this: should Russia decide to push-back in a more energetic manner, she will not do that across the board, but only in specific instances and specific conflicts. A stronger push-back in Syria will not automatically signal a stronger push-back in the Ukraine, and vice-versa. Russian military strategy places great importance on the concentration of forces on the main axis of attack, not across the entire battle area and so do Russian politicians. This entire notion of “being tough on” (crime, drugs, terror, etc.) is very American. Russians don’t think this way at all. They will study the full disposition of the enemy and pick the one spot where a (counter-)attack makes most sense. So don’t expect Putin to suddenly stop “turning the other cheek” and “get tough with the Americans”. It simply won’t happen this way. In some spots the Russians will appear to give in, while in others they will increase the pressure. That is how all wars are won.

The internal factor: the 5th columnists

As I have mentioned many times in the past, Vladimir Putin also has to contend with a pro-Western and pro-Zionist 5th column inside the Kremlin and, more generally, inside the state apparatus. I call this 5th column the Atlantic Integrationists (as opposed to the Eurasian Sovereignists), but we could also call them the Washington Consensus/IMF/WTO/WB/etc/ or follow the example of Gary Littlejohn and call them “supporters of international financial institutions” (except that rather calling them “supporters” I would refer to them as “agents”). But whatever term we choose to use, it is crucial to always keep in mind that this 5th column remains the biggest threat Putin and Russia are facing and Putin has to keep that in mind in every decision that he makes. So far, these 5th columnists have focused mostly on what is dear to their hearts – money issues and internal politics – and left the military and security services to deal with what is dear to their hearts: the protection of Russian sovereignty and foreign policy. But you can be sure that if Putin ever makes a mistake (or even if he doesn’t, but only appears to make one) they will pounce on him and do everything they can to either outright oust him or, at least, force him and his supporters to agree to their treacherous agenda: to return to the nightmare of the 1990s: a total sellout of Russia to the AngloZionists.

Conclusion: simple perceptions vs a complex reality

So is Russia acting like a bully (like the US/EU say), or adequately responding when needed (as most Putin supporters believe) or does she meekly turn the other cheek (as Paul Craig Roberts concludes)? I would say that none of these characterizations are correct and that the reality is just far more complex.

For one thing, the examples of South Ossetia and Crimea show that Putin is willing, when needed, to take forceful military action. But in other cases, he prefers to delay any confrontation. In the case of Syria, this makes sense. In the case of the Ukraine, less so. Furthermore, Russia is still only a partially sovereign country and the power of the 5th columnists still strongly influences Russian decision making, especially in non-time-critical cases (South Ossetia and Crimea being perfect examples of a time-critical situation). This is why Russian actions often appear as contradictory zig-zags (even when they are not). Russians also still have a rather weak public relations capability (for examples, see here, here and here)

This perception problem is made worse by the regrettable fact that much of the English language Russia-focused blogosphere has been roughly split:

  • On the one hand, mindless cheerleading combined with emphatic denials that there are any problems at all.
  • On the other hand, defeatist “all is lost” or “Putin sold out” kind of commentary only serving to confuse the matter further.

They are all equally wrong. Worse, they both damage Russia in general and Putin in particular (sadly, most of them have sold out to their financial sponsors and are more interested in pleasing this or that oligarch than about being truthful).

Russian policies should be viewed dialectically: as evolving processes which often contain the seeds of their own contradiction, but which still end up being tremendously successful at the end, at least so far. Rather than hoping for perfection or infallibility from Putin, we should offer him our conditional and critical support. In fact, I would even say that Putin and the Eurasian Sovereignists can greatly benefit from critical support as this gives them a justification to take corrective action (for example, Putin has already amended, albeit minimally, the proposed pension reform project as a direct result of a massive public outcry). You could also put it this way: each time the Russian public opinion is outraged by Ukronazi actions or the perception that Russia is meekly turning the other cheek brings closer the day when Russia will finally recognize the two Novorussian republics. Right now what I hear a lot in the Russian media (including state media) are expressions of immense frustration, disgust and anger and calls for the Kremlin take a much harder line on the Ukros in Kiev. Popular anger is a powerful weapon which Putin can use against his enemies, both internal and external.

So let us follow Paul Craig Roberts’ example and continue to ask the hard questions and remain critical of Russian policies.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Neocons, Russia, Syria, Ukraine 
Hide 125 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Rational says:

    ISRAEL IS FINISHED, MOSES IS GONE, JUDAISTS LEAVING THE CULT—THE END IS NEAR.

    I know you people are having an interesting discussion, but the Judaists and the Zionists who are too busy inciting the war between Russia and US in their goal for world domination do not realize that Israel is finished, and the end is near, and no amount of military intervention will save it.

    The reason is simple. It is called Higher Criticism.

    Moses is gone. Or, rather, he never was. The Rabbis have been outed as just scammers.

    See: mosesneverexisted.zohosites.com

    “Why 71% of Jews believe that leaving Judaism is not a tragedy but simply a natural progression”

    http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1013/glick100913.php3

    • Replies: @Abbybwood
    , @jacques sheete
  2. I found this account, as well as  Roberts position thoroughly satisfying. I do, however, regret that both writers seem to consider the Russia/ US conflict as a stand alone in the world scene. This, to me, has to be assumed a false flag effort on the part of US planners as they surely realize China is the real target eventually. And to assume Putin does not consider Xi in every third thought I believe is disingenuous. Between those two huge nations lies the future when the real conflict might soon be between the Eastern and Western hemispheres. China with BRI and other initiatives has resurrected an entire hemisphere while the US since 1820 has wrecked one. That’s the real deal.

    https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2018/09/01/six-thousand-years-ago-humankind-began-to-speak-in-a-single-voice-that-voice-was-male-the-rest-is-history/

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Sam Nelson
  3. I.M says:

    A few points to note:

    > Regarding the recognition of Kiev government following the events of the maidan, there were several articles on fort russ discussing exactly this about 2 years ago (if i recall correctly). The gist of it was that one of the primary officials in charge of dealing with the affair assured the Kremlin that Poroshenko was a good friend and that they could work with and whatnot. I know sounds absurd considering that he would obviously be a puppet however this was the reasoning given.

    > Dealing with the conflicts as seperate issues is a fundamentally flawed. The conflict in “the borderlands” was instigated in order to force Russia to give up it’s positions in Syria and the ME. For this reason i find such comments regarding ‘Russia having no obligation to these people’ revolting to the point of physical illness. These CIVILLIANS are being targeted because of their inclination towards russia and as a direct result of Kremlin policy. A similar case can be made for Syria regarding the pipeline that never was thanks to the countries pro-russian tilt, a tilt that they were subsequently destroyed for. So this being said we can only conclude that ANY talk of limited obligations and ‘Putin was elected to represent Russia, not Ukraine and Syria!’ to be incredibly DISHONORABLE.

    > This over the top posturing and acting as if the they will blow up the world if slightly slighted isn’t really a reflection of insanity or huge balls or anything like that. It’s purely a matter of irreverance on the part of people who REALLY hold power, be it Israhell, the US ruling class etc… If these people were targeted in response to provocations as opposed to some nobodies that barely register as bacteria in their eyes then i’m quite certain they would back off.

    > Don’t ever be afraid to second guess. More information doesn’t consistently lead to higher quality decisions. We find throughout history that leaders make gernerally catastrophic mistakes that appear obvious to distant observers at the time or to us in retrospect, however generally emotional and historical bias, fundamental parradigm/religion, pro western inclinations, influences of different domestic factions /subversion etc… play a massive role and skew decision making, this thinking presupposes that people decide like robots.

    > We may mention covert action though i would rather not talk about on a public forum considereing the lengths BOTH sides go towards keeping these hushed up.

  4. Arioch says:

    > Major economic and social consequences (for Russia) from the conflict’s outcome No

    I guess it is a mistake to mix social and economic in one row like that.

    Ukraine had a huge social impact, and banderism-infected migrants would have long term effects.

    While economic effects of disentanglement with Ukraine were limited. The preparations were already made when Yanukovich refused economic cooperation with Russia in 2010 and instead gambled upon smuggling EU products into Russian market.
    There is not that much unique that Ukraine was offering Russia. A market for gas and uranium? But Ukraine went politically insolvent: even when it could pay it refused to. Offering their VVER-1000 reactors to Westinghouse for testbeds? That hurts, but is not a critical wound. Some cooperation in space and military areas? Again, painful but not critically. Ukraine did not supplied as with anything that could stop oir lives. Delays, sure. And granted “1000 small cuts” could facilitate a strong blow by some other adversary in some other place. But the cuts themselves were small and ambiguous. Yeah, Russia missed a year or two of helicopter engines supplies, but it gained its own factory that now has the Russian market freed by Ukrainians. Was it a curse or a bliss is not that clear.

    With Syria it is another way. Socially their tragedy hurts Iran and Lebanon. But Russia? Even Chechnya are Sunni rather than Shia. Did Libyan collapse put much social burden upon Russia?

    Economically though it should had been another way around. Agression at Syria started when Assad refused Qatar gas pipeline project, that should had remove GazProm from EU market in sync with Saudi Arabia dropping oil prices and USA thumping the shale gas ponzi. That had to be huge.

    There are opinions that the well known premature start of EuroMaidan was conditioned by the mecessity for West to prevent Russia from entangling into Syria in 2013/2014. It was only end of 2015 when Russia quagmired Ukrainian war enough to finally distract and help Asad. Granted, Ukraine was not the only reason for this delay, but on off. Girkiniites and “small adequate Ukrainians” still are guilting Russia that “Syrians are more brothers to you than we true Russians in Ukraine”.

    So that row in the table should actually look like following:

    Social impact upon Russia: Ukraine: yes, Syria: no
    Economic impact upon Russia: Ukraine: short-term and small, Syria: huge and long-term

    • Agree: Iris
    • Replies: @CalDre
  5. APilgrim says:

    PCR does not deign to allow comments.

    That probably limits his number of readers.

  6. Excellent piece. Meanwhile: Pentagon confirms that it was warned by Russia that strikes are about to commence in the areas of US bases and operations in Idlib. Putin was also explicit:

    https://www.rt.com/news/437877-putin-idlib-syria-summit/

    Pretty much the answer to THE question.

    • Replies: @Arioch
    , @Anon
  7. republic says:
    @APilgrim

    only his articles on ZeroHedge have comments.
    PCR allowed comments on Unz a few times last July

    • Replies: @republic
  8. Arioch says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    At the same time a serious rehashing of ruling elites in DPR and LPR seems to had started.
    For good or for bad some changes have to come.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  9. Anon[381] • Disclaimer says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    As in your ‘Russia is a cat’ idea, Russia is not simply turning its cheek, it is turning to doing things, like the Caspian treaty. Those kind of efforts are continuing. Russia is promoting dialogues to advance settlement of the Afghan conflict, and the US is not involved. Eventually, the interests of Russia and others present or bordering central Asia would seem to be the ones that will win, and external actors will be excluded, as it is far too costly for external actors.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  10. @Arioch

    At the same time a serious rehashing of ruling elites in DPR and LPR seems to had started.

    About time, there are many things which need to be changed, now that FSB is in place there. Some dirty laundry will be shown. Plus, today’s Peskov’s official statement that there is no way Kremlin is going to communicate with Porky. 2019, 2019…tick-tock, tick-tock.

    • Replies: @Joun
  11. @Anon

    As in your ‘Russia is a cat’ idea, Russia is not simply turning its cheek, it is turning to doing things, like the Caspian treaty. Those kind of efforts are continuing. Russia is promoting dialogues to advance settlement of the Afghan conflict, and the US is not involved.

    I wrote about many times these years, I will reiterate my point–Russia today is the main exporter of the most valuable and extremely high-demand product–geopolitical stability. There is NO other nation or block which can offer this, Russia can and is “selling” it extremely well.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  12. Joun says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    What’s the significance of 2019?

  13. alley cat says:

    Moshe Dayan said that “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.” The flaw in Dayan’s simile is that a mad dog is too dangerous to ignore as well as too dangerous to bother. Not even Dayan took his own advice seriously, but the neocons, who are mostly Zionists, are less intelligent than Dayan and even more arrogant. They are too arrogant to take world opinion into account, a fatal mistake if world opinion concludes that neocons are mad dogs that must somehow be put down.

    The question confronting the planet, not just Russia, is how to put down the neocons without being bitten by their huge nuclear arsenal.

    You don’t turn the other cheek to a mad dog of course. If he’s too powerful to kill, you stay out of his way until everyone realizes the danger and all unite to confront it.

    If the neocons interpret aversion to nuclear holocaust as weakness and become bolder in response, their increased belligerence and recklessness will only increase the numbers and determination of their enemies.

    Those whom the gods destroy they first make mad, and neoconservatism, in a nuclear-armed world, is a form of madness.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  14. CalDre says:
    @Arioch

    Interesting analysis, but I don’t buy the Qatar pipeline for a second. Or that Iraq was about oil. It’s all about Israel, first, and Empire, second, though in this case they are intimately related. If you look at US interventions in the last 100 years, and there have been many many of them, the only thing they have in common is that in each case the country attacked was not a vassal. It acted independently. Empire is all about controlling the world, and unipolarity is all about controlling all of the world.

    Now, as to the pipeline, it is a huge myth that a pipeline must go through Syria. Just like it is a (widely understood) myth that Russian gas must flow through Ukraine. There are many routes for a Qatari pipeline to take, and many would be better than Syria, since there already is a pipeline in plan from Cyprus to Europe (and Israel already has a pipeline to Cyprus). The logical pipeline then is through Jordan and Israel then Cyprus to EU (which has the advantage of avoiding Turkey and potentially Iraq, just crossing Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel). There are of course other options too, which do not align so nicely with existing pipelines and plans, but then again, the Syria pipeline did not do so either: e.g. just going around Syria, from Iraq directly to Turkey, which would barely increase the pipeline’s length, given that Qatar is significantly east of Turkey.

    No, sorry, the Syria gas pipeline hypothesis is utter bunk.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @Arioch
  15. We don’t consider that there is only a US orchestrated conflict with Russia.
    We are addressing that conflict, not the one with China.

  16. @Joun

    What’s the significance of 2019?

    Completion of Nord Stream-2 and automatic devaluation of Ukraine as a transit to Europe. With it the break up of Ukraine accelerates and the game of who pays for what begins. Russia IS NOT going to pay for central and western Ukraine–let the US and EU eat this shit sandwich of their own making. And then, Power of Siberia gets activated in 2019 and China’s strategic rear gets completely secured, plus Russian accompanying programs of Siberia and Far East comprehensive development kick in big time. Energetically Eurasia becomes united. This is a nightmare for Washington.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  17. There is so much wrong here it is difficult to know where to start. Combine Saker’s normal idiocy about “UkroNazis,” Putin’s wisdom (he is anything but wise) and the lies about the Maidan and Donbas, with Robert’s idiocy and naivete about Putin and Russia, and you get a perfect storm of stupidity.

    There is a very good reason why Roberts is no longer well regarded in the US. It’s also why there is normally no comment area on his articles. He simply doesn’t want his stupidity paraded before the world, or have it rubbed in his face.

    Putin is running Russia into the ground. The country is mafia ruled plutocracy and Putin is simply allowed to be the face of the country. as long as he goes along with the rest of the Plutocrats. They’ve made him a very rich man, so Putin has a lot of incentive to go along and get along.

    The Nazi regime is in Moscow, not Kiev. Saker and Roberts are simply too stupid and historically ignorant to be able to recognize it. There was no coup in 2014, and Putin is an aggressor in Crimea and the Donbas. he’s headed that way in Belarus, and even Putin’s buddy Lukashenko is getting nervous. Putin has nothing more in Ukraine because of what the rest of the world would have to do if jumped again. As it is, the situation in Ukraine that Russia has fomented can’t be allowed to continue, and Putin is going to be forced to do something – either go all in, or leave, because he can’t afford to putz around much longer as he is bankrupting his country.

  18. @alley cat

    They are too arrogant to take world opinion into account, a fatal mistake if world opinion concludes that neocons are mad dogs that must somehow be put down.

    They are too stupid to see (albeit, I am sure they can smell it) what even arrogant ass Bibi gets–that Israel’s security is suddenly not with the US, despite moronic idea of placing US Army’s units in Israel. Once Syria is completely cleaned up, which seems now inevitable, the new game in town, so to speak, starts. A good indicator is a behavior of a very large Israeli Russian Jewish community.

    • Replies: @alley cat
  19. @CalDre

    but I don’t buy the Qatar pipeline for a second. Or that Iraq was about oil. It’s all about Israel, first, and Empire, second,

    You forgot another key US “ally”–Saudi Arabia, which bought so many in US power elites that it is now up for a debate who corrupted US government more–Saudis or Israelis. This is not to speak of Saudis’ panic fear of Iran. It is a perfect storm of moneyed megalomaniacs buying D.C. left and right. One doesn’t need intelligence when one has an unlimited (for now) disposable ‘income”. Hey, John and Paul (and George and Ringo) were wrong–”Can’t by me love” is an outdated concept in D.C. They will do it better than a top-notch whore, granted the price is right.

    • Replies: @Arioch
  20. republic says:
    @republic

    This youtube interview has comments

    Paul Craig Roberts Interview Deep State Plot to Overthrow Trump

  21. wraith67 says:

    I don’t know that Putin has to do much but wait. Under the GOP, deficit spending will not come under $1trillion and will continue to increase annually – the interest payments and unchecked social welfare programs will devour everything eventually. The Democrats want to add $10trillion a year in additional spending ($6trillion for Bernie Care, $1+ trillion in Jobs for All, $1+ trillion in “free” college) – idiot New York gubernatorial candidate Cynthia Nixon seriously proposed passing Bernie Care first and then try to figure out how to pay for it later… while the GOP will eventually collapse the US economy over the course of years, the Democrats will collapse the economy near instantaneously.

  22. “…Russia stands for traditional moral and spiritual values whereas the Empire stands for greed, globalism and the destruction of all traditions and moral values. It is pretty self-evident that these two systems cannot coexist. They present existential threats to each other. Russia will either become sovereign or enslaved. The Empire will either control the planet or crumble. Tertium non datur.”

    Exactly. And this is what could be called a “spiritual” war, which may be best analyzed by resort to Biblical concepts.

    In essence, the Satanic cult that controls the “West” i.e., the “deep state” of which the “neocons” are an organ, is aggressing against Russia because evil hates a good example. To put it another way, a “good example” is a manifestation of truth, and truth is to a Satanist what clorox bleach is to a colony of bacteria.

    The “deep state” which is apparently the entity described by the prophet John of Patmos as the beast from the sea (i.e. the first beast of Rev 13), is a Satanic cult that came to power over the West by deception, corruption and manipulation. IOW, the cult made the deal with Satan that Jesus rejected (Luke 4:5-8). This is to say, the cult members knowingly, willingly and calculatingly – give worth to evil (i.e. worship Satan) – as a means of achieving unprecedented worldly power.

    Alas there’s a fly in the ointment. The problem that the “deep state” (beast) has is that corruption only works to keep the Satanic cult in power as long as everybody and everything in the world is corrupt.

    For example, if corruption prevents the U.S. government from being able to acquire cost effective new, technologically advanced weapon systems (with which to beat the world into submission), and there is nowhere near such corruption in Russia and China, then the beast’s Satanic empire will lose its military edge (among other things it will similarly lose) which is exactly what’s happening as I type this.

    Consider another example of a hypothetical sales office with a dozen people working there. And all the employees are lazy and corrupt and they typically give the boss four hours of work for eight hours of pay. But the boss doesn’t realize that they’re robbing him blind, so everything just hums along fine until one day one of the long-term employees retires and is replaced by a new guy.

    Much to the dismay of the other office workers, the new guy turns out to be ambitious, hard working and honest. And within a few weeks, the boss starts wondering why the new guy does twice as much work as the other employees. Soon the boss realizes that they’ve been ripping him off for a long time, and by now the other workers hate the new guy, because his honesty has exposed their dishonesty and put an end to the scam.

    This is apparently why Cain murdered Abel and this is why the first beast of Rev 13 hates Russia. If the beast is to realize its goal – the forcible imposition of its Satanic, messianic judeo-communist New World Order on the whole world, it must destroy every example of “goodness” on earth and replace it with corruption and perversion. Only then – when by definition there is no such thing as “evil” because there is no longer any such thing as “good” to compare it against – can the Satanic goal of Isaiah 14:13,14 be fulfilled.

  23. Arioch says:
    @Joun

    To add, there was an interesting interpretation on russian GeoEnergetics site ( they see GeoPolitics as a bla-bla-bla cover over sturggle for energy. Professional bias, maybe, or an interesting angle of view ) of some messages made by GazProm and EuroCommission. In their interpretation the real exchange went like this:

    GP: add these numbers. And these numbers. What a coincidence! As soon as Turkish Stream and both Nord Streams are active we can secure all our EU contracts by our own pipes and LNG terminals. And all our EU partners are happy, cause they liked being Kiev crazies hostages no any better than we did.
    EC: Ukrainian pipe must have at least XXX transit gas or it stalls. And if it stalls all Ukrainian economics dies.
    GP: Whatever.
    EC: Without minimally working Ukrainian economy there can be no minimal civil stability in Ukraine.
    GP: Whatever.
    EC: That is the question of European security! There MUST be a way to secure transit of no less than XXX….
    GP: …there is. Find us more buyers in EU. After OUR pipes are 100% loaded we can route surplus contracts through Ukraine. Remember the numbers? So if you want XXX tranfers through Ukraine find us YYY extra contracts in EU.
    EC: oh… Well… F..k! Oook we will find them.
    GP: It is always a pleasure to have business with you.

    Granted, that interpretation comes from people with a “professional deformation” but i guess to the end of 2019 we would see the dynamics of total GP sells to EU.

    There still remains a quesiton of Moldova though, AFAIR Ukrianian pipeline near Odessa is their only source of gas. But i wonder if EU or Russia would see it as their problem. Afterall EC’s answer to Bulgarian pleas was quite explicit.

  24. Arioch says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    > who corrupted US government more–Saudis or Israelis

    Should we really make a difference?

    Did Saudi and Israeli had any major clash of interest in last 10 years?
    Did ISIS ever caused any nuisance to Israel?
    Isn’t Iran a designated enemy of both Israel and Saudi?

    Afterall Arabs and Jews are almost the same nation, Semites. And House of Saud was pulled to power by UK, who seems today to be in perfect symbiosis with zionists.

    USA and UK are different countries but except for some family dramas sometimes they most ususally act like twins in foreign afairs. I am not sure the difference between Saudi Arabia and Israel is real or perceived.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  25. CalDre says:
    @Arioch

    They are all part of the same Empire. The Blue Bloods (House of Windsor) put the Saudis (radical Wahhabists, known at the time) as hereditary dictators over the “Holy Land”, this was all part of their ancient plot for total world domination (British Empire). Saudis have created the global supply of terrorists (pawns for global control) through their global network of madrassi, where they radicalize children from a tender age to be these takfiri extremist murderers we see in ISIS videos (you almost feel sorry for these guys, having been brainwashed since childhood to commit such horrors). Jews of course are the other large power, and they play out through Israel and many other countries as well, which they have effectively colonized.

    Question is whether the Blue Bloods ever lost control of the US, or it was just a farce (political theater, like “democracy”), like the Royals “giving power to Parliament” (House of Windsors are still UK’s hereditary dictators, and exercise tremendous power over the entire Commonwealth). My view is that the American Revolution was a farce and the Blue Bloods never lost control.

    So we have two primary groups running the Empire: the Blue Bloods (a large clan of Germanic “royals”, including the “Windsors” (Saxe-Coburg and Gotha), Habsburgs, Hannovers, etc.) and the Rabbis (a large clan, within a tribe, of Jewish “kings”). These two groups control virtually the entire planet. Their control over Russia though is not as clear, they may be setting up this East-West conflict as a step in their drive toward Global Government.

    Generally I think Saker is a demagogue who offers no valuable insight into much of anything in his area of alleged expertise, he has a valid point with his AngloZionist analysis. And recently raised the question, is it AngloZionist or ZioAngloist – i.e., which group is the dominant one among the two? Almost impossible to tell from the outside. Sometimes it’s hard to tell even between your best friend and his/her spouse, who is the dominant one! :) It’s all very complicated.

    I tend toward the Aryans having the upper hand since many of the powerful Jews, such as Rothschilds, Schiffs, Warburgs, etc., are clearly Aryan “converts”, most likely Blue Bloods themselves. Looking at a portrait of some of their leading figures, I cannot tell if it is a Rothschild or a Habsburg, they look like one family to me. But that’s also not important. Both groups – the Aryan Blue Bloods and the largely Aryan Rabbis – are agitating toward the same nefarious ends, their absolute and total dominion over the entire planet. And they MUST. BE. STOPPED.

    • Replies: @Arioch
    , @anonymous
  26. Arioch says:
    @CalDre

    > It’s all about Israel, first, and Empire, second,

    And they both co-existed quite okay with Syria until 2011.
    Remember, Bashar lived in London, married in London, and probably planned to spend there most of his life. He was quite a westerner, integratee, admitted, accepted.

    But then something abruptly changed.

    > US interventions in the last 100 years….. in each case the country attacked was not a vassal

    Sure. You do not have to attack vassal to get what you want – you just spell the order.
    However, does USA attack every non-vassal state every day? Or does USA attack them when they obtain some demands that those states do not submit to?

    > It acted independently.

    Yep. So what “independent” did Syria do around 2011 that it swiftly turned from a funny remote savageland to a blood-flooded dictatorship?

    Gaddafi was on the edge of introducing Golden Dinar and fresh water supplies for Nothern Africa. What were Bashar Assad’s recent crimes then?

    > Empire is all about controlling the world

    And control is about dispatching orders and see them hastily executed by vassals. So what order Syria was not executing hastily enough in 2011?

    > Now, as to the pipeline, it is a huge myth that a pipeline must go through Syria.

    Sure, the pipeline could in theory go anywhere, including through the North Pole by international waters. But ROI-optimal options are more limited.
    In particular, in 2008 there happenned Egypt-Jordan-Syria gas pipeline. Turkey wanted it prolonged and attached to Nabucco. Which was all nice, but Syria was not very friendly with Turkey over fresh water issues, and Egypt back then did not have a lot of gas to export further to Europe. Erdogan wanted to become a gas hub, Qatar sought cheap (in both building and operating) transport to EU. And Iraq was under strong Iran influence after Shia mostly supported US invasion agains Iran nemesis Saddam. Notice also that Qatar wanted to sell all the gas from the field they shared with sanctioned isolated Iran. Would Iran allow it through Mosul region? Did Muslim Brotherhood allow Egypt to sell gas to Israel 20 years ago? Did Saddam allowed Kuwait to suck oil from their shared fields?

    In principle Qatar could reach Jordan and reverse the pipe to Egypt and from Egypt shores try to lay underwater pipeline to mainland Turkey… But that would be very expensive. Removing one Asad probably seemed much cheaper.

    > there already is a pipeline in plan from Cyprus to Europe (and Israel already has a pipeline to Cyprus).

    1) since when? Those fields were not discoverer thwt long ago.
    2) yep, there are many plans about pipelines in the world. Most of them remain plans, like Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan pipeline. Or like South Stream that Bulgaria is welcome to implement now, alone.

    > Jordan and Israel

    Do they have any pipeline? I wonder what is the geography there, would there be a place for easy pulling one far away from Golans?..

    > then Cyprus to EU (which has the advantage of avoiding Turkey

    What?
    Cyprus has an advantage of avoiding Turkey???
    Cyprus?

    ….and why that was advantage before 2016?

    > do not align so nicely with existing pipelines and plans

    to align with plans? Why? You may align with your own plans as well. Plans are just that, plans. Invent them twice a day, who cares.

    And of real pipelines there was Egypt-Jordan-Syria and all. Israel to Cyprus and more so Cyprus to Greece/Italy were not there yet i think.

    > from Iraq directly to Turkey,

    Through an area contested by Kurds and influenced by Iran.

    Remember 2014 Mosul ? Soon after Syrian war started exactly that area of Iraq was swiftly “liberated” by pro-Saudi pro-American ISIS. Of all the Iraq lands. Perhaps it was indeed seen crucial.

    http://Www.translate.ru -> http://geoenergetics.ru/2016/08/12/sirijskij-konflikt-s-tochki-zreniya-geoekonomiki/

    • Replies: @CalDre
  27. Arioch says:
    @CalDre

    I do think the war between USA and UK was real, but it was a quarrel within a family. Like two brothers might fight about toy, or about elder one bossing the yonder one too much. Fight even for real, with blood.

    But towards any outsider their attitude would be almost the same, family-determined.

    Or to remember the famous book, “sonna cosa nostra” and Italian families kill each other to their heart desire, but about their “class interest” of blackmailing small businessman they have the same approach, regardless who won right to racket this specific street today.

    So, yeah, your analogy with spouses hold. UK and USA fallen out about dominance, they even moved to different bedrooms, but remained spouses and for people alien to their anglo-saxon family little had changed.

  28. CalDre says:
    @Arioch

    And they both co-existed quite okay with Syria until 2011. … But then something abruptly changed.

    Nothing abruptly changed, it’s just a matter of getting the pieces lined up properly. As General Clark revealed, the neo-cons planned to overthrow 7 countries in 5 years (the insubordinate ones). He named them, starting with Iraq and Syria and ending with Iran. While Clark doesn’t name the other four countries at that time, he has mentioned in televised interviews that the hit list included Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan.

    Now see where we are on the list? And this list was drawn up in 2001 already (actually even before then, but that’s when Clark saw it), long before any pipeline project rejection that you foolishly focus on.

    Gaddafi was on the edge of introducing Golden Dinar and fresh water supplies for Nothern Africa. What were Bashar Assad’s recent crimes then?

    Do you seriously think they can start a revolution in just a few months with 100,000 armed terrorists? It takes a lot of planning and aligning of chess pieces, since they need to maintain “plausible deniability”. The war against Qaddafi, his demonization, started long ago, under Reagan in the 80s, they killed his daughter. And as noted, both Libya and Syria were on the 2001 list. Sure, they kept doing things that pissed off the Empire, but they were already on the list. As is Iran. So sure, maybe in 4 years Iran does something and then you can blame the war on that. Right.

    In any event, the alleged Qatari pipeline offer was made in 2009, not 2011, and Syrian-Qatari relations were fine afterwards. See here.

    Notice also that Qatar wanted to sell all the gas from the field they shared with sanctioned isolated Iran. Would Iran allow it through Mosul region? Did Muslim Brotherhood allow Egypt to sell gas to Israel 20 years ago? Did Saddam allowed Kuwait to suck oil from their shared fields?

    You think Iran could not attack a pipeline in Syria if it wanted to? LOL. All it takes is one RPG in the middle of the night along a long, long, long sitting duck. Syria, Mosul, Iraq, it’s all the same. Now, Saudi Arabia would be more difficult, as would Jordan, as those are both firmly in the Empire camp and have good security. But in any case, you think supporting al Qaeda and ISIS and getting them dug into Syria would be more stable for a pipeline? A pipeline is extremely difficult to protect, unlike an oil refinery, and see how often those are taken out in Iraq and Libya these days. And Europe should rely on that to get it through the winter? Really? You’re killing me! :) See also here and here.

    Another thing you are missing (and I had forgotten) is that there actually was an alternate plan to take the Qatari plan through Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq.

    since when? Those fields were not discoverer that long ago.

    Recent announcement here, but it doesn’t matter “since when”. The point is that the pipeline through the Med is feasible. It was already seriously studied in 2011-12 (translation) (there could be an even earlier study, I haven’t thoroughly researched it). There was simply no need to spend tens of billions on arming terrorists, risk WW III, and take huge political hits to overthrow Assad.

    Now, your turn, was there a feasibility study for the Syrian pipeline? Just because someone once allegedly proposed it, does not make it feasible, much less worthy of a messy war risking WW III and costing tens of billions of dollars and 100,000s of lives. Where is the study? And also, was Saudi Arabia’s permission granted? Where is evidence of that? Saudi Arabia has frequently denied use of its territory for transit pipelines, including a planned pipeline from Qatar to UAE.

    Cyprus has an advantage of avoiding Turkey??? Cyprus?

    Yes, may recall that Turkey controls only half of Cyprus. See above for links to the recently planned EastMed pipeline. Do you think Israel is relying on Erdogan for that? That’s why the earlier plan, to route the gas through Turkey (instead of through the Med), was abandoned in favor of the EastMed pipeline.

    • Replies: @Arioch
  29. Krollchem says:

    Saker:

    (1) What is your basis for making the statement that US/CENTCOM/NATO has an overwhelming advantage in the Syrian airspace? Remember the force capability breakdown of US allies vs Russia and Syria discussed in the comments at http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

    (2) Would Qatar and Turkey allow US planes to launch against Syria knowing that they are economically linked to Iran and Russia and would collapse without this aid?

    (3) Why does the conventional force advantage of Russia over America or America vs Russia matter if the US and its allies kill Russian soldiers or sailors?

    (4) When US ships are sunk would the US and its allies use tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) in case of a losing conventional battle with Russia in the Syrian theatre?

    (5) Given that TNWs have the potential to be the “indispensable bridge from peace to nuclear war” (5000MT exchange) http://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pdffiles/pub1103.pdf
    Is the US willing to risk the end of civilization due to a Nuclear Winter? by using TNWs?

    (6) Consider that Trump is severely wounded politically with the Democrats such as Senator Warren calling for Trump’s removal under the 25th Amendment and the MSM now claiming that Trump now only trusts his children. Would Trump be all in in hopes of a military victory to quell the Democrats prior to November 6th?

    (7) Has the US considered game theory in any war game of an attack on Syrian forces with Russian troops embedded with the SAA?

    • Replies: @prusmc
  30. alley cat says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    The neocons’ grip of fear on their vassal states is already slipping, along with the mask of international gendarme they have been wearing, revealing the hideous countenance of international gangster underneath. By the time the neocons realize they are losing their empire it will be too late for them to do anything about it. Judging by their desperate attempts to hoax the world about Russiagate, the Skripals, and all the false flag attacks in Syria, world opinion about the neocons may have already reached the tipping point.

    The neocons are finding themselves increasingly alone. Increasingly few governments are buying the neocons’ preposterous excuses for remaining in Syria. Or for remaining anywhere else but in their own country for that matter.

  31. Arioch says:
    @CalDre

    DEPA link is interesting: it shows DEPA tries to hack together a group rich enough to finance the project.
    The studies started in “2011-2012″ so probably in second half 2011. Syrian turmoil started in January-March 2011.
    The driving force seems to be Israel, who discovered gas field near Cyprus, and to a degree Cyprus/Greece itself.
    But u do not think DEPA/Greece really can finance such a project.

    EU told how they like the project in 2013 and 2015, but seems to do little but talking.
    The project seems to me stillborn, like a technically possible odea of Bukgaria building South Stream single-handedly.
    BTW Qatar is not on the list, despite having lots of money (they now invest into Russia) and lot of gas.
    Maybe they did not believe in the project, maybe they did not like Israel, but faikire of EU and Israel and Depa to secure Qatari fundings seems important.

    And while Erdogan indeed can not formally object to activity south from Cyprus who knows what he can do behind the curtains. Many things formally impossible happen, including coup against Erdogan, Erdogan’s chikdren trading ISIS/Syrian oil, etc.
    Anyway that project seems to be all talking for now.

    Yep, exactly because those “revolutions” we external invasions they can be kickstarted fast. All you need is TV picture and fighting proxies invading. With Ukraine it shows how few “protestors. Are needed. Just half a year before EuroMaidan those politicians were rallying across Ukraine and could not find many followers. But come autumn and $5bln from Nulland – and we have few dozens of protestors having nothing better to do, and we have millions of protestors in MSM fables.

    Additionally, the “alleged offer” was made in 2009 and street protests in Syria started in early 2011, thus more than a year for initial preparations for “Plan B”. Would Assad back off that would probably end there. But he doubled down and street protests were escalated into armed mutiny. Preparations for that mutiny had to to be ended in 2010 before the first protest, they could start ongoing when the protests already surfaced. In Poland neo-nazi Ukrainian were trained for years, like a tool to be ready. However it took Yanukovich to do a very specific action for street protests to be called. And even then it took 4 months from first “student” protest to massive stealing of firearms and open assault. In a sense Yanukovich himself was preparing the coup, as during those 4 months his appeasement of attackers demoralozed law enforcers who could support him initially. Looks like a forrest fire, it is not totally prepared in advance, it is planted and helped to grow – if proves able to grow and in whatever direction it grows.

    There are now public protests in East Germany about migrants violence. And those are not first and not last. So was Germany a Libya – aby such protest could be picked up by MSM, inflated oit of proportion, supplied with arms and “sacred victims” and helped with French AirForces. You do not have to bring all your troops before war outbreak, for plausible deniability it is the contrary, yoi must show some organic protests and regime initially successfully squashing it, and only then protests grow stronger and overthrough the regime. Would it be “greenlight street” it would only make invasion clear to see even for the few organic domestic protestors.

    There are many “wrong” countries not on Clark’s list. DPRK, Venezuela, Belorussia. Russia.
    But there is no “ISIS invasion” in them. Though neocons would haplily do if the could.

    For Libya it was relatively simple: Al Qaeda “boots on the ground” and NATO (mostly French) air force.
    For Syria it took to concoct a coalition including Turkey, Israel, Saudi, UAE, Qatar and very limited NATO participation.
    Yep, McCain-type postals are ready to attack anyone anywhere, but others had to be given a compelling reason to jump into the vagon.

  32. Arioch says:

    > Now, your turn, was there a feasibility study for the Syrian pipeline?

    It would not get public because Qatar does not need external investments like DEPA.
    It is like looking for financial performance reports from AramCo. Since IPA did not hapoen the reports are not public.

    > Just because someone once allegedly proposed it, does not make it feasible,

    putting yet another pipeline through flats? Political problems can be, like nomads with bazookas, or financial, but hardly technical.

    > much less worthy of a messy war risking WW III

    Russia was distracted by Ukraine. Russia waved off Libya overthrow. In 2011 it hardly looked about WW3 at all. Just springing out yet another Arab.

    > and costing tens of billions of dollars

    was it that expensive at the start?
    Al Qaeda and Muslim brothers already there, asking for new job to do.
    Libyan armories already taken.
    In 2011 it most probably looked much cheaper.
    Syria and Iran gave much more desperate fight than was expected.
    And Russian overt participation was hardly expected at all.
    Russia should had been head over heels suppressing and appeasing guerilla in occupied Ukraine.
    Rememeber how strong they pushed Russia to invade Ukraine.

    > and 100,000s of lives.

    Who cares?

    > was Saudi Arabia’s permission granted?

    Later Saudi participation in Syrian war hints they were on board with that project.
    And we can also say “Saudi is not the only route”, that very Iraq andmaybe Kuwait and seabed pipes could do also, albeit more expensive.
    Where is evidence of that? Saudi Arabia has frequently denied use of its territory for transit pipelines, including a planned pipeline from Qatar to UAE.

    • Replies: @CalDre
    , @CalDre
  33. Arioch says:

    Clark’s map is well known, but it is not the only one.
    There are maps of properly distributing Russia and they are as old and maybe older.

    https://yandex.ru/images/touch/search?text=%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%8F%20%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8C-%D1%83%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BB%20%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B7%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BB%20%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8&img_url=https%3A%2F%2Fcensoru.net%2Fuploads%2Fposts%2F2017-01%2F1483459777_rhqrifo.png&pos=1&rpt=simage&ts=1536398582765

    However there were not many Russia’s neighbors enlisted to try to invade and enforce the map.
    With Syria there was a vast front if “Friends of Syria” who in 2011 came together and did try.
    There had to be something Clark’s tribe had to offer them all that they could not get as easy without the war.

    There was and is truly lot of noise how bad is Russia or DPRK.
    Sometimes that noise peaks in economic blockades.
    But military involvement? Even in Chechnya even in the first war there was never nothing like at-Tanf.
    Libya was mostly smashed by French army.
    Against Syria we saw a vast regional coalition.

    Clark’s map alone is not enough IMHO to explain that

  34. @Quartermaster

    Have you tried to change medication?

  35. The greatest virtue of any warrior is patience. A great warrior chooses his moment and his terrain and his time. Time is clearly on the side of the east. The two biggest threats to world stability and peace are being waged at this moment and these are where the east is focused, not on the numerous brush fires that will extinguish themselves. Americas nuclear arsenal is under siege by the neocon military industrial complex. There have already been several attempts at commandeering nuclear weapons and facilities. If this should ever happen- nuclear war will be a reality. Iblid(?), if it becomes a vassal state for the neocons, will be turned into a launching base for terrorists into Iran and the Caucasus, and a full scale attack on Iran. This is why Iblid is vitally important to Russia and Iran. Make no mistake about it, one way or another, the terrorists will be destroyed. Russia is not turning its’cheek, it is remaining focused to point. Russia has not thrown Donbass under the bus, that is ridiculous twaddle. Ukraine is imploding- it desperately needs a war started by Russia to rally its’ demoralized population- ain’t goin’ to happen. A large offensive against the east would probably lead to another revolution or civil war and an overthrow of the current government. .. The next great war will not be fought on the ground, but in the air. Positioning troops on the Russian border makes them easy and convenient targets. Russia has a large and lethal Tank force for that moment. Patience is on Russia, Iran, and Turkeys’ side. Posturing is the strategy of the weak.

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
  36. CalDre says:
    @Arioch

    In other words, you got absolutely nothing. Thought so.

  37. KenH says:

    I thought within the last year Putin talked about how the outcome in Syria is of vital national interest but Saker is almost saying that it is but not so much or that it’s not worth the risk of a wider confrontation with the Anglo-Zionist empire? If that’s the case and the naval base at Tartus is of no importance then I guess pull out entirely and cede the entire nation to Muslim fanatics.

    Although a victory of Takfiri fanatics might be good for Israel in the short term it would not be good for the region and Russia and Putin seems to understand this from his interviews.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    , @CalDre
  38. @KenH

    Perhaps Vladimir Putin takes the view (correctly IMO) that if the evil empire has its way in Syria, then “the rule of law” is stone cold dead, as is the concept of “national sovereignty.”

    I believe that Trump is a presidential puppet ruler of last resort, and the whole point of the fraudulent Trump administration is to present an ultimatum to the world (particularly to the one power that’s capable of resisting the forcible imposition of the Satanic, messianic judeo-communist New World Order: Russia).

    I believe that Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem was an important symbolic act of “pulling off the mask” to show the whole world who’s actually running things.

    So first the mask was pulled off, and the ever worsening provocations and threats are intended to be taken as an ultimatum by those now shown to be fully in charge, IMO.

    • Agree: CalDre
  39. CalDre says:
    @KenH

    “Saker” doesn’t really know squat.

    Russia cares about Syria for a number of reasons aside from the naval base (which, frankly, isn’t much use in a time of real crisis since Russian navy is the proverbial sitting duck in the Med). One, it is one of their few long term allies (this one seems like the most realistic reason). Two, its proximity to Russia makes it a convenient launching pad for destabilizing Russia with jihadists (this argument, though made, I don’t buy so much, there are plenty of existing launching pads, including Afghanistan, which actually shares a border with Russia).

    If you let your allies get picked off one by one and never fight back, one way or another you will soon be out of allies. Sometimes protecting your friend is actually a case of mandatory self-defense.

  40. CalDre says:
    @Arioch

    Where is evidence of that? Saudi Arabia has frequently denied use of its territory for transit pipelines, including a planned pipeline from Qatar to UAE.

    Look at the path of the Dolphin Gas Pipeline, it avoids Saudi Arabia and goes through the sea. The explanation is, for example, here (Point 5 in the article) and here (Section 3.1).

    And here is a story about Saudi Arabia blocking a pipeline from Qatar to Kuwait going through Saudi’s territorial waters.

    So twice, long before 2011, Saudis had blocked a Qatari pipeline through their country’s territorial waters. Yet you are saying, despite these pipelines never having been built, suddenly Saudis would go to war against Syria, an Arab country, to force a pipeline through Saudi Arabia and Syria … for the benefit of Qatar, against whom it currently has in place massive sanctions.

  41. Kiza says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Spot on comment in terms of Ukraine v. Russia. The only thing missing in your comment is what the West will do before 2019, which is likely to be an all out attack with massacres of civilians of Donbass to draw Russia in, just as Saker describes. Never underestimate the Western preparedness to do pure evil, all Western empires in history were based on this Western trait.

    Do you really think that the murder of Zakharchenko was a stand-alone terrorist act without any bigger plan? Do you really think that Ukrainian SBU operates autonomously of the masters in Langley and Tel Aviv?

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  42. @Andrei Martyanov

    The EU’s track record on for invitations geopolitical stability is vastly greater than Russia’s. All without bullets. Russia is doing a worse job than De Gaulle’s France of letting go of it’s imperialism. It’s borderlands are in chaos.

    • LOL: Andrei Martyanov
  43. @CalDre

    Gas pipelines too. No Russian control and there will be a Gulf Arab pipeline across Syria in a few dozen months.

  44. @Kiza

    Do you really think that the murder of Zakharchenko was a stand-alone terrorist act without any bigger plan?

    True. But here are some news from Donetsk, from none other than Andrei Babitsky–there are no vacancies in any more or less decent hotel in Donetsk, all occupied by FSB operatives. This is way beyond Zakharchenko’s murder investigation.

    Do you really think that Ukrainian SBU operates autonomously of the masters in Langley and Tel Aviv?

    Of course they are stooges.

    The only thing missing in your comment is what the West will do before 2019, which is likely to be an all out attack with massacres of civilians of Donbass to draw Russia in, just as Saker describes.

    There are serious doubts that VSU can mount a real strategic operation. On one axis, such as Mariupol? Sure, but even that is a question. Yes, VSU got the numbers, but who said that LDNR will not get some new volunteer units, you know–well armed. Plus, you forgot that US sanctions on Russia are going to kick in soon, and new ones are also coming, plus all this BS in Syria. So, there are very many factors in all that. It is a huge game on many fronts and on all of them US doesn’t really have the ability to gain any favorable result. Pentagon today decided to deploy another 1500 personnel to Germany–I guess Russia is already writing the letter of surrender;-)

  45. @CalDre

    ncluding Afghanistan, which actually shares a border with Russia).

    Hm, the product of American “education”, yet still shares his “opinion” on geopolitics. Scary news: Russia has NO border with Afghanistan. In fact, she is 1000s kilometers away from that country. What Russia has, though, is her 201 Military Base in Tajikistan.

    • Replies: @CalDre
    , @Sergey Kriger
  46. Avery says:
    @APilgrim

    {PCR does not deign to allow comments.}

    PCR ‘deigned’ allowing comments for a very long time since his columns started appearing @unz.com.

    Then a notorious event happened that kinda-sorta ‘forced’ PCR to ask Ron to block any and all comments for his columns.

    Somehow a very clever individual or a group of individuals bypassed all the unz.com security measures and posted a comment under one of PCR’s articles posing as PCR himself.
    The comment heaped abuse on the posters, which created quite a a commotion. Unz people discovered the breach shortly, but the damage to PCR was done.

    After that event, he announced that only way he would continue writing articles for unz.com would be if Ron agreed to “no comments” policy for PCR.

    Plus – and this is just my opinion – Mr. Roberts is of certain age, and after a while you don’t need the abuse that many posters dish out to the columnists/authors. And you don’t need to spend the time and effort to moderate the trash from the gems.

    And you can’t blame PCR: some of the posters are really nasty.
    So for someone like him, why bother?
    Easier not to allow comments.

  47. Abbybwood says:
    @Rational

    I know….but….

    The first Red Heifer in 2,000 YEARS!! has been born!

    And according to PROPHECY that poor little calf MUST be brought to “The Temple Mount” (huh?!) and be SACRIFICED for the JEWS!

    https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/weird-news/728262/bible-prophecy-hebrew-red-heifer-messiah-jewish-christianity-israel-jerusalem-third-temple

    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    , @El Dato
  48. CalDre says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Yeah, I caught that after posting, about 25 years ago that changed. However as I recall the US mission still sent supplies through Russia to get to Afghanistan, but they also went through Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan.

    Wow, I’ve made 1 mistake in 100 comments, which I type out generally without any research, and you go on this general diatribe about my supposed lack of education. I’ll match my education and IQ against yours any time, any day, and twice on Sundays. Arrogant prick. And look, something you’re incapable of, I admit when I make a mistake.

    • Replies: @Krollchem
    , @NotCalDre
  49. Krollchem says:
    @CalDre

    The Unz review is one of the few sites where learning occurs through dialogue. Discussion, derived from percussion, is acceptable but you have crossed the line. It is childish and just bad form to insult the writer and you can be banned at many sites for your behavior.

    If you are so smart that you never make mistakes, why do you hang out here? Perhaps you should have your own website and publish articles rather than insult others at the Unz review.

    ps. you also have a lot to learn about oil and gas pipeline geopolitics.

    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    , @CalDre
  50. Brilliant and precise analysis.
    ………………………………………………………….
    US has no other option than to take out Syrian government.
    Make a false gas attack and then send cruse missiles on Damascus.
    …………………………………………………………………………………………..
    It is imperative that Russia protect Syrian government.
    If any cruse missile is coming on Damascus Russia must take out all US assets in and around Syria,
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
    There is no other way.

  51. Respect says:
    @Joun

    2020 , end of the subventions of the UE to Poland and the Baltics who are sick rusofobics, always serving the US and attacking Russia and even the EU , always sabotaging the relations EU-Russia .

    Poland gets 100.000 million euros fron the UE in the period 2014-2’020

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  52. anon[317] • Disclaimer says:

    The USA is [cornering and] forcing Russia to stand her ground including, if needed, by military force. By Saker

    CalDre @14 09/07/18 @4:52pm GMT “..the Syria gas pipeline hypothesis is utter bunk…” and @11:37pm GMT So we have two primary groups running the Empire: the Blue Bloods (a large clan of Germanic “royals”, including the “Windsors” (Saxe-Coburg and Gotha), Habsburgs, Hannovers, etc.) and the Rabbis (a large clan, within a tribe, of Jewish “kings”). These two groups control virtually the entire planet. Their control over Russia though is not as clear, they may be setting up this East-West conflict as a step in their drive toward Global Government. … goes on to say

    Both groups – the Aryan Blue Bloods and the largely Aryan Rabbis – are agitating toward the same nefarious ends, their absolute and total dominion over the entire planet. And they MUST. BE. STOPPED.

    Andrei Martyanov 09/07/18 says: Website Energetically Eurasia becomes united. This is a nightmare for Washington.

    I.M @3 says: 7/09/.18 @ 10:46 am GMT ‘Russia has no obligation to the ,,[the Syrian People] people’

    Arioch @4 says: 9.07.18 @ 12:35 pm GMT
    Social impact upon Russia: Ukraine: yes, Syria: no
    Economic impact upon Russia:
    Ukraine: short-term &small, Syria: huge & long-term

    I say, in all of this comes to two realizations:
    1) war against Russia is inevitable. If not Syria then somewhere.
    Where ever Bear Russia goes, the mountain kings will chase her.
    2) a human centric form of global government must be found to
    replace the nation state system because the nation state system is
    not organized to advance or protect humanity.
    It is instead organized to host, a king of the mountain game between blood types.

    How can humanity permanently disable wars between the blood types?
    How can humanity disarm the nation states and outlaw their weapon toys.

  53. Respect says:

    The ucranians benefited from cheap russian gas and oil , from russian industry , from russian markets , from russian lands , from russian culture ….. they were Russia ….

    But greedy as they are , they thought that the ” west ” , EU-US , would give them more , much much more , the west promised everything , they thought that they would be rich as Germany overnight , they only had to betray Russia , to betray themselves , and they thought it was worth it …..

    Now Ucrania is the Senegal of Europe , with a per capita income down to 2000 dollars /year , just like Senegal . Ucrania is an abcess in the heart of Europe , it is a shame for Europe , for the european races , it is a shame for mankind .

  54. Miro23 says:

    These are all present this time too, but the deeper reason for this war is that Russia and the US represent two mutually exclusive civilizational models. Very succinctly, Russia wants a multi-polar world in which each country is free to develop as its people see fit and in which international law regulates relations between nations. The Empire stands, well, for itself, of course. Meaning that it wants a single world hegemony ruled by the AngloZionists.

    Furthermore, Russia stands for traditional moral and spiritual values whereas the Empire stands for greed, globalism and the destruction of all traditions and moral values. It is pretty self-evident that these two systems cannot coexist.

    Conclusion:

    I can’t ignore the fact that each “click” brings us one step closer to the “bang.” And that suggests to me that the only real solution to this perilous situation is to find a way to remove the finger pressing on the trigger or, better, take away the gun from the nutcase threatening us all with it.

    The article focuses on Russian actions to “to remove the finger pressing on the trigger” but there’s also quite a lot happening off stage. The Anglo/Zionist Empire seems to be in real trouble locally – thinking for example about the Swedish elections, “Brexit”, Austrian and German political movements, European voter rejection of open frontiers, and fast growing public antipathy to Blairite type elite fake leftist corporate/globalization. Also Trump was elected on an anti-immigration/America First platform, whatever he’s saying or doing now.

    In Marxist terminology, the Empire seems to be struggling with its own “Internal Contradictions” with Russia more in the role of wary bystander.

    • Replies: @Respect
  55. @steinbergfeldwitzcohen

    I think not. Clearly it destroys brain cells.

  56. @Rational

    “Why 71% of Jews believe that leaving Judaism is not a tragedy but simply a natural progression”

    I recently “discovered” one probably genuine Rich Siegel who writes,

    “It is so terribly and dramatically disturbing to have been raised Jewish and Zionist, and to see the death and destruction that my people are bringing to the world. It is so frustrating … to only hear the same broken record of Jewish victimization and accusations of “self-hating Jew” in response. If I, as one born and raised in this death-crazed narcissistic cult, don’t know how to resolve this desperate situation, how will anyone else figure it out? Please- Jews- my people- you are desperately sick. The whole world sees this and knows it, and yet so many are afraid to say so for fear of being called “Anti-Semite”, while you kill children and refuse to be embarrassed by your blatantly evident tribal mental illness. But the world will stop being afraid of you, and cease to tolerate your murderous narcissism, and the result will be terrible for you. Please, please stop before this happens. Stop before you kill another child in Palestine! STOP THE KILLING IN GAZA!”

    Rich Siegel
    Saturday, September 8, 2018

    The Zio-Whiners, besides being sick in the head and soul, also would do well to just grow up and get on with the rest of the world.

    As for PCR, he is no doubt a great guy with some great insights, but his refusal to allow comments (where he could also learn something) causes me to ignore his articles. I’ll begin reading when he allows them again.

    • Replies: @Jesse James
  57. @Quartermaster

    There is so much wrong here it is difficult to know where to start.

    You can start by removing yourself. You and your ilk are the major wrong here, and if you haven’t noticed, it’s likely that no one here is ever convinced by your drivel.

  58. anonymous[819] • Disclaimer says:
    @CalDre

    All you say about the ISIS may be true, but people like you always appear to be “blind,” deceitfully of course, to the almost necrophiliac levels of barbarism by the western world. Survive, thrive and glorify thyself by any means, is your motto. That may work for animals, but humans will be judged differently.

    Talking of radicalisation in madrasas, a similar kind of radicalisation of Christian white children is clearly happening in your own homes, for them to grow into the heartless, soulless mass murderers many of you turn out to be.

    It doesn’t need to be the kind of crude radicalisation madrasas are indulging in, but the brainwashing of tender minds towards white supremacy has evidently produced far more evil.

    So, as your kind tries to divert attention to hide your own evil (oh look, takfiris), you also ignore the soul rot of your own kind.

    Anyway, came across this somewhat good news ;)

    https://www.gq.com/story/sperm-count-zero

  59. Respect says:
    @Miro23

    Agree , the Hollywoodian Empire who trusts in Go(l)d has exhausted itself . Every year it collects less likes and more dislikes , even among its own citizens .

  60. Putin’s behaviour, very simple, in my opinion, protecting Russia’s interests, avoiding anything that might give the west an excuse for war.
    Soros’ Fifth Column was thrown out of Russia.

  61. @Krollchem

    Cannot say I learned much here, again saw that with many discussion is impossible.

    • Replies: @Respect
    , @krollchem
  62. @Boris M Garsky

    Patience is on Russia, Iran, and Turkeys’ side. Posturing is the strategy of the weak.

    Agree. Only hysterical drama queens who watch too much tee vee would urge him to act for the sake of doin’ sumpin.

  63. @Abbybwood

    The first Red Heifer in 2,000 YEARS!! has been born!

    What is it with primitive tribes and their colored calves? For instance, I believe the Sioux, Cheyenne and others think there’s something magical about white bison ones.

  64. El Dato says:
    @Abbybwood

    Shit’s embarrasing.

    Seriously, someone should make a nyancat video with a “red heifer” forever blasting towards the Temple Mount.

    • Replies: @Respect
  65. @Harold Smith

    I think you are right about this. What EVIL=US CORPORATE ELITES hate is SUCESSFULL models of independent economic developement. This is why I agree with Noam Chomsky that the US really won the Vietnam War. The goal of US Corporate Elites was to destroy the rotten apple=Vietnam so Vietnam would be an economic basket case incapable of independent economic developement. The fact that Vietnam successfully drove the US Military out of Vietnam was, and is beside the point.

    In 2018, Vietnam is a neoliberal success story that is enthusiastically open to gay holidays for Western Coporate Elite man-man husband-husband couples……no doubt raping Vietnamese boys is part of the honeymoon package deal.

  66. Respect says:
    @jilles dykstra

    I understand that you learn little here Dijstra . You are a wise old dutchman and you already know all , everything , alles .

    But even if you don`t learn anything here , we learn from you , from your wise comments , thank you wise old dutchman for your comments .

  67. If it’s Sunday … Putin is winning hands down! The usual re-hash.

  68. Iris says:

    How much is the USA as a super-power relevant anymore?

    I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but why should Russia be expected to center its foreign and economic policies around the USA’s Deep State agenda? How important and relevant is the USA today as a super-power, apart from the nuisance it causes? Is every US/Israel tantrum worth responding to?

    Military might is sustainable only if supported by economic power. The US economic power is spectacularly waning, despite a GDP figure bloated by money-printing and by an unsustainable, unproductive, gigantic debt.

    On the contrary, the Eastern hemisphere is witnessing major economic improvements. Russia has profound and solid ties with China: the Russia/China pipeline currently under construction is worth $55 billions (compared to the $ 10 Billion investment in Nordstream 2).

    China has just hosted an extraordinary economic forum gathering all African countries (except Swaziland). Such initiatives will profoundly change international relations. Still, they are blindly ignored by Western MSM… but not by Russia who knows who holds the keys to the future.

    So why would Russia compromise its future prospects, which look very good, for the sake of “responding” to a declining empire which has clearly run its course and is collapsing on its own weight?

    Being given such ineluctable decline, the only provocation worth responding to will be that of a nuclear confrontation. Unfortunately, it cannot be ruled out as a last throw of dices by the demented AngloZionist cabal.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  69. prusmc says: • Website
    @Krollchem

    The head of what used to be called SAC is on record that that force would not obey an order to attack. No one realizes the impotence of US military forces more than the politically correct set of star officers in the Pentagon and the field.
    They will lay back manipulate for position and curry favor with the congressional paymasters until the democrats take power in January 2018.
    Saker talks about a 5th column in Russia. Such as it may be, it is a joke compared to that existing and ruling in the USSA. Yes an influential body of opinion shapers want increased hostility toward Russia. But it is only for the purpose of deposing the President. He is an outsider and had harmful thoughts that, if put into effect, promised to cause discomfort to people who have been in control since the end of the real Soviet threat in 1989-91.
    There will be No war because those who know best recognize they will have less with war than they have by posturing about Russia. Senator Warren will see her 25th Amendment scenario bear fruit in 2019.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
    , @krollchem
  70. Anonymous[299] • Disclaimer says:
    @Robert Magill

    China is the real target eventually

    Of course – or rather – China, Japan, Koreas and the rest of the World are the real target. Russia is the only country at the moment which can counter the force projection in the hands of the NWO architects. If they submit, others will have to submit or face nuclear annihilation. Unfortunately, China does not have the capability to destroy the planet for everyone (yes, I know how it sounds). Let’s hope they get there ASAP because without Russia, and without their own M.A.D. capability – we will get the NWO.

    And that’d be a worldwide, almost unimaginable, hell-hole for everyone. I mentioned Japan and the two Koreas because in the planned NWO there’s no room for High-IQ, homogeneous nations. Any semblance of sovereignty is to be removed starting with races, nations and ending with families and individuals. All freedoms will be taken away.

    Watch what they’re doing in the EU now and multiply it by infinity – because now they still fear the people but that won’t be the case if they win. This is biblical.

  71. Tsigantes says:

    These two conflicts [Syria, Ukraine] can be viewed together as two parts of a whole in the age-old context of cutting off Russian access to warm seas i.e. the Mediterranean via the Black Sea / Dardanelles.

    In the case of Ukraine this totally backfired when Crimea elected to be restored to Russia in the wake of the coup. Thus Sebastopol is once again Russian.

    In the case of Syria Russia has now established a PERMANENT fleet at its naval base there.

    Since Turkey is now in question for NATO, the American action has retreated to Greece, where Souda Bay in Crete has long been the base of the US Navy in Europe.

    The ground was prepared in September 2015 following the betrayal of the OXI referendum by means of the de-sovereignisation of Greece.
    - An EU apparatchik was put in charge of the Greek government though the now-Potemkin parliament was retained for optics.
    - The US gov. (“NATO”) de-sovereignised the Greek armed forces and placed them under NATO command, putting the Greek navy specifically under German (!) command in the Aegean.
    – A SOFA agreement (the only one outside US) with Israel was forced on Greece – and Israel took over a Greek air force base at Kasteli Crete – six months before the Egyptian Air crashed in the sea as it passed over Crete 2016.
    - US Amb. Geoffrey Pyatt was dispatched to Athens from Kiev, daily intoning his fears that war could be set off in the Med between Turkey and Greece.

    Since that time nine new US bases have been set up in Greece with more to come.
    Turkey has being playing its war game against Greece, obliging NATO. There have been 17-country naval exercises in the Med and NATO air force exercises in Israel (coinciding? with the downing of the Russian tourist jet from Egypt).

    The opposing fleets and air forces are in place. This is where things stand now.

    • Replies: @Robert Magill
  72. Herald says:
    @APilgrim

    PCR circulates his articles on websites like this where comments are very welcome. So your point is actually quite pointless.

  73. @Tsigantes

    In the case of Syria Russia has now established a PERMANENT fleet at its naval base there.

    Interesting that since 1971 Russia has maintained a base at Syria but has just now permanently stationed a fleet. Add to this the new Chinese naval base at one end of the Red Sea at Djbouti coupled with a huge “container” base at the top of the Red Sea in Egypt and the Suez Canal could be contained at will. The Med would be a pond for sitting ducks.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  74. Tsigantes says:
    @Quartermaster

    “The Nazi regime is in Moscow”…..hmm, that gives you away: that good ole overworked nazi meme.

  75. @prusmc

    “The head of what used to be called SAC is on record that that force would not obey an order to attack. ”

    If true, that’s no problem. Our rulers will just spoof an attack by the enemy du jour as they’ve been doing forever; i.e., a false-flag attack.

    “Yes an influential body of opinion shapers want increased hostility toward Russia.

    Huh? The U.S. government has been hostile toward Russia ever since at least the end of WW2, and the hostility is increasing dramatically as a resurgent Russia reasserts itself on the world stage.

    “But it is only for the purpose of deposing the President.”

    Seriously? Which “president” are you referring to, Trump?

    “He is an outsider and had harmful thoughts that, if put into effect, promised to cause discomfort to people who have been in control since the end of the real Soviet threat in 1989-91.”

    For an “outsider” Trump’s interventionist and very dangerously confrontational “foreign policy” sure seems a lot like that of his predecessor, or like what I would’ve expected had Hillary Clinton been elected president instead.

    “There will be No war because those who know best recognize they will have less with war than they have by posturing about Russia.”

    The problem’s that the demon-possessed madmen that run the U.S. “government” may not (and probably don’t) see things that way.

    And I hope somebody informs Russia that there’ll be no war, because with all the bad faith and the provocations, and with Aegis Ashore missile launchers deployed near their border, for example, they might not see it that way either.

    “Senator Warren will see her 25th Amendment scenario bear fruit in 2019.”

    If “they” really want to get rid of Trump, why don’t they just impeach him for his impeachable war crimes in Syria?

  76. @Respect

    Poland gets 100.000 million euros fron the UE in the period 2014-2’020

    A very-very good point since the “free ride” ends for Poland in 2020 and a lot of privileged loans are due for repayment. This is in the country which was thoroughly deindustrialized. When Poland was needed as a showcase and a show-window of “economic success” after her tenure in Soviet orbit, tings were just fine. Well, they are not that fine anymore, plus, I am sure, Poles will greatly appreciate American LNG three times the price of Russian pipe gas.

  77. @Robert Magill

    Interesting that since 1971 Russia has maintained a base at Syria but has just now

    It actually wasn’t a real base, it was what is called PMTO (Point of Material-Technical Supply). Now, Tartus and Khmeimim have become full blown bases (naval and VKS) and Tartus will be able to host nuclear cruisers and subs. Revival of the 5th OPESK (Operational Squadron) is in progress. It will take some time for Russia to settle things in the area but there is no turning back. In related news, Russia’s VKS and Syrian AF continued today bombing operations in Idlib. I am sure Russian SSO and Syrian special forces are already on the ground there.

  78. CalDre says:
    @Krollchem

    It is childish and just bad form to insult the writer and you can be banned at many sites for your behavior.

    Only thing I wrote is I don’t think Saker knows much what he is writing about. If that is an insult to you it is because you worship the man. I can’t think of any site that would ban you for writing that. If you are referring to Martyanov, he is just a poster here, I don’t go to or comment on his part of this website (where he is a guest, mind you). And the only reason I called him an arrogant prick is because that is what he was being: I would have been quite happy had he simply pointed out my momentary error, I appreciate people correcting my errors, but he had to attack my education in particular and make a derogatory generalization about “American education” generally. You reap what you sow, buddy. (And btw a reputable author on a website would never stoop to such generalized insults, particularly since the bulk of the audience on this site is American – insulting your own readers, hmm, that’s the sign of a genius, right? or maybe an arrogant prick? You tell me.)

    If you are so smart that you never make mistakes

    Never claimed that. If I proof something thoroughly, I do make mistakes quite rarely, but when I write once without review, it’s more frequent. There is certainly a different standard for publishing an article and making a comment in terms of due diligence and review process.

    you also have a lot to learn about oil and gas pipeline geopolitics.

    Yeah, sure I do, lol. But yet you are unable to point to a single error in my analysis. Perhaps it is you who has a lot to learn – a/k/a “projection”.

  79. krollchem says:
    @jilles dykstra

    It is sad that twitter speak and insults have taken to place of dialogue. I wish that more posters would provide links to support their point of view. Scholarship is too much work for most Amerikins.

    • Replies: @seeing-thru
    , @renfro
  80. krollchem says:
    @prusmc

    I would in all honestly like a link to your comment that “The head of what used to be called SAC is on record that that force would not obey an order to attack.”

    US military commanders have long held the viewpoint that they could “win” a nuclear war:

    http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb580-JCS-chairmans-diary-from-1971-reveals-high-level-deliberations/

    Under Obama the American military and political leaders downplayed the consequences of a nuclear war this includes:

    The members of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Council :
    • Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics
    • Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
    • Under Secretary for Nuclear Security of the Department of Energy
    • Under Secretary of Defense for Policy
    • Commander of the United States Strategic Command

    Turning a Blind Eye Towards Armageddon — U.S. Leaders Reject Nuclear Winter Studies

    https://fas.org/2017/01/turning-a-blind-eye-towards-armageddon-u-s-leaders-reject-nuclear-winter-studies/

    • Replies: @CalDre
  81. @APilgrim

    “PCR does not deign to allow comments”

    “Which can be traced directly to the idiocy, of which he is somehow aware, of his commentaries.
    He apparently does not want to be confronted and questioned of the invalidity of his own BS.

    Regarding every other conflicted, pandemoneous, nightmarish , unamanagable looney bin on this sowieso insane planet : Leave them fucking alone, keep out of their tribal wars and don’t give them ANY MORE so-called FOREIGN AID, as they are never going to constitute a “threat” to our national security. The great majority of our “Humane” actions have only back-fired on us, period.

    Authenticjazzamn “Mensa” qualified since 19073, airborne trained US Army vet, and pro jazz artist.

    • Replies: @Begemot
  82. @Andrei Martyanov

    LOL. How one can talk to people who mess Austria and Australia.

    • Replies: @CalDre
    , @Iris
  83. CalDre says:
    @Sergey Kriger

    Yeah, I could mention 1 million stupid things some Russians have done in the past week alone, or what some Russian drunks did, and generalize to all Russians and to all Russians always being drunk. Or compare the US educational system – and US science/technology accomplishments – to Russian ones.

    But I’m not a racist like you two Russian supremacist losers.

    Maybe you morons can pull your heads out of your asses long enough to note I am a friend of Russia and generally of Russians (though not arrogant, obnoxious, supremacist pricks like you two) and maybe not be constantly antagonistic.

    Insulting your potential allies only shows/proves your evil and stupidity.

    • Agree: renfro
  84. @krollchem

    The sad lesson that I have learnt is that taking part in debates/discussions on internet and blogs is to open doors to foul insults, coarse language, bad manners, and displays of temper tantrums and rank stupidity. I still sometimes post critiques, often to regret later when the response is a torrent of abuse. I normally write in formal language, not in street language, so am somewhat unprepared for street filth being thrown back. Perhaps you are feeling the same way. I am going to more or less quit commenting, confining my time and effort to reading good stuff and moving on.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  85. Iris says:
    @Sergey Kriger

    When he made this statement, President Putin never meant the American people.

    He very clearly meant the US Establishment and administration, referring to a gaffe made by President Bush in 2007, where he thanked Australian PM for visiting “Austrian” troops in Iraq.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/putin-us-administration-russia-austria-australia-confuse-george-w-bush-white-house-administration-a7930241.html

    • Replies: @Sergey Kriger
  86. Mike-SMO says:

    All very interesting.

    I have been impressed that the relations between Russia/Putin and the U.S./Trump & Co. and the relations between Russia/Putin and Israel have been “correct” and “careful”. The weapons strikes in Syria from the West and from Israel have been either an “air shows” or have fallen on Hezbollah facilities. The destruction of the Group Wagner + Shiite attack near Dier Azzor (variously spelled) was conducted with a massive air operation that was, I think, designed to remove any temptation for local Russian forces to get involved. The “surprise” involvement of BUFFs (B-52s) as “bomb trucks” was probably the most severe military threat against Russia in decades. Strategic BUFFs each can carry about 3 dozen nuclear cruise missiles and would have been or were within range of the Crimea and, most likely, Moscow. As Ambassador Haley later said to the “Syrians”, (paraphrase) You will not see us coming. There is no power on Earth that can protect you. Otherwise, there were no exciting speeches, lines in the sand, or threats of total destruction.

    I wager that the Kurds are to be a “non-offensive” [no other party"likes" them; no other party except Turkey "hates" them.] keystone to the construction of both Saudi and Iranian pipelines to Europe. The potential fuel lock which Russia might have had on Europe will be nullified. LNG shipments from the Chesapeake will provide further redundancy. Russian will have a warm water training base at Tartus and have Hero status for crushing ISIS/ISIL and new “friends”. The Alawite Regime is “un-loved” but has a track rercord of allowing “quiet” minorities to prosper. In other words, the Shia in Syria and Lebanon could be “safe” in the future, thus removing the “need” for a Hezbollah force. Russia seems to be taking effective control of the area adjacent to Israel and Jordan which might allow both of those countries to “relax” a bit.

    Thus Europe could be getting fuel and everybody in the Mid-East gets a “taste” of the profits. The economic pressure on Iran is just “encouragement”. All just “business”. “Correct” and “careful”. Somebody has a plan.

    Something productive might come out of this, yet. If no one screws it up.

    • Replies: @Respect
  87. CalDre says:
    @seeing-thru

    Well the irony is Krollchem attached me for calling out Martyanov for posting “racist” (generalized) insults against me and all Americans simply because I made a stupid mistake in an otherwise insightful series of posts.

    So, no, Krollchem is not disturbed by incivility; if he were, he would have taken Martyanov, who is actually a named, paid (or am I wrong?) author on this site, to task for being insulting not just to (anonymous) me, but to all of the American readers of this site, which happens to be a majority of readers if you check the logs. Instead, he is disturbed that I criticized this abysmal behavior by describing correctly what he wrote as being an “arrogant prick”, for which I make no apologies whatsoever.

    It’s not just comment boards that have degraded, it’s articles themselves. Generally not on this site, but when I read the shrieking and hysteria on MSNBC, CBS, NBC, CNN, NY Times, WaPo, and virtually all the other Establishment media, the incivility, acrimony and rudeness is beyond the pale. Granted, I engage in that too, but only after someone first attacks me. To me this is a principle of not leaving the playground because some bully shows up and starts causing a ruckus. I stand up to bullies like Martyanov (or NY Times) because if nobody does, they end up ruling the world.

    Don’t stop publishing your reasoned responses just because some bullies attack you. You don’t have to fight back like me, but also please do not run away, stand your ground proudly.

    • Replies: @seeing-thru
  88. NotCalDre says:
    @CalDre

    @CalDre spews:

    “I’ll match my education and IQ against yours any time, any day, and twice on Sundays. Arrogant prick. And look, something you’re incapable of, I admit when I make a mistake.”

    Oh noononononononononono

    Oh no! I look stupid on the Interwebs! Cannot allow this to happen. Must be total fucking asshole in response, don’t care about learning, teaching or exchange of ideas. Only thing important is the size of my intellectual dick MUST.NOT.BE.QUESTIONED!!!!

    What a loser….

    • Replies: @CalDre
  89. Respect says:
    @Mike-SMO

    Nothing productive will come out of it . You want the destruction of earth , your arrogance is diabolic .

    • Replies: @Mike-SMO
  90. Dr Roberts although obviously an intelligent and insightful commentator comes across to me as someone who is always itching for war and asking the wrong questions or rather asking leading questions that assume that war is the only answer.

    If Russia was my country I would expect the President to turn the other cheek until the last possible moment to spare the needless loss of the lives of our young men and women. Its not a question that need keep anyone up at night unless you are a member of the military.

    The right question to ask and keep us up at night is how do we insist that the US behave more like Russia not when will Russia start to behave more like the US.

    Anyway Russia is already at war with the US in Syria so PCR must be happy about that! Personally I would not give him too much credit for intellectual honesty. He is stuck in the paradigm of war even while professing to speak of freedom.

    • Replies: @Harold Smith
  91. Mike-SMO says:
    @Respect

    @Nothing.

    Thank you. “Diabolic” sounds impressive, by the way why that, pray tell?

  92. @Iris

    Are Americans better educated and have broader knowledge of the outside world than elites that represent them? Have not American people as a whole supported elites policies and handsomely benefited from those policies living far beyond their means for decades? Why there should be any sympathy towards American people then? I am not Putin and neither you are. He alone knows whether it was towards American elite or America as a whole. In both cases he would be right.

    • Replies: @CalDre
    , @Iris
  93. CalDre says:
    @NotCalDre

    Oh fuck you asshole. You created a new profile just to try to insult me with your imbecilic, immature, rambling comment? I would normally not respond but I don’t want anyone to think your idiotic, pathetic attempt at cyber-bullying has any consequences whatsoever. Never has, and never will have, with me. You attack me, I attack you back. And that’s on the streets too, punk.

    What are the odds you are Martyanov? First and only comment by this “handle”. You’re truly and profoundly pathetic.

    • Replies: @Herald
  94. CalDre says:
    @Sergey Kriger

    LOL, you write about American education when you wrote just a few days ago about “great October socialist revolution”.

    Great revolution, that says EVERYTHING one needs to know about you. Bolsheviks like you are 1,000 times worse than any Nazi ever was. The American elites do share your Bolshevik mentality, indeed many are Bolsheviks, so at least you have more in common with them than the vast majority of Americans ever will.

    • Replies: @Sergey Kriger
  95. @jacques sheete

    If you are so smart, why don’t you have your own website where we may be so privileged as to learn from your comments about the world as you know it exists?

  96. @World citizen

    “Dr Roberts although obviously an intelligent and insightful commentator comes across to me as someone who is always itching for war and asking the wrong questions or rather asking leading questions that assume that war is the only answer.”

    I have to disagree with you. If I understand Roberts correctly, it’s not that he’s “itching for war”; rather, if some kind of ‘kinetic’ conflict is unavoidable (which it seems to be) he would rather have a smaller war now, to try to knock some sense into the bully, rather than an all out nuclear exchange later, when Russia – if it is to preserve its sovereignty – has no other options.

    “The right question to ask and keep us up at night is how do we insist that the US behave more like Russia not when will Russia start to behave more like the US.”

    Nonsense. First of all, Russia is in a defensive situation here while the U.S. is the aggressor. Second, the U.S. is controlled by evil people, and evil people do what they do because they’re evil, not because they’re simply “misguided” (and thus impliedly open to some kind of diplomatic persuasion). Unfortunately, recent events prove that it’s impossible to reason with the bully.

  97. Anonymous[209] • Disclaimer says:

    This is my take on it too. Civil discourse has died. The other problem is that many posters like the saker drones come here directly from his echo chamber and are unprepared to process any opposing position in a debate. The hostile response only underlines their passive acceptance of anything he writes. And, having given up the ability to decide what to think about something are positively outraged when someone forms a different opinion about a subject.

  98. In my opinion, one important thing being over-looked is that when and if push-comes-to-shove, the US will be very reluctant to go head-to-head with an enemy (like Russia) with known and proven air power at it’s disposal. A situation US forces have never had to dealt with even during WW2, not to mention hundreds of other military conflicts since.

  99. Svigor says:

    In a recent article, Paul Craig Roberts directly asked me a very important question. Here is the relevant part of this article (but please make sure to read the full article to understand where Paul Craig Roberts is coming from and why he is raising this absolutely crucial issue):

    Please make sure to tell PCR to tell Unz to re-enable comments on all his articles, if you want me to read his pieces.

  100. Herald says:
    @CalDre

    What are the odds you are CalDre?

    • Replies: @CalDre
  101. Iris says:
    @Sergey Kriger

    For clarity, I have no links neither to America, nor to Russia.
    I read the English translation of what President Putin’s said, and what he meant was very clear:

    ” America is really a great nation and the Americans are a great people if they can endure so many people [in the government] with such a low level of political culture”.

    “It’s difficult to have a dialogue with people who confuse Austria and Australia. There is nothing to do about it. Apparently that’s the level of political culture of a certain part of the American establishment.”

    https://www.rt.com/news/402026-putin-us-relations-brics/

    The Americans posting on UR are often worldly, smart and interesting. They are the first to complain of the organised propaganda inflicted upon them by their media.
    As a people, Americans did not support imperial wars: they supported their soldiers, which is not the same. I am not sure neither they benefitted from these imperial wars, seeing how their veterans are treated and the level of poverty affecting them.

    The fact that their government has been hijacked by a minority is the consequence of a very long historic process, in which the people of today have little responsibility and little levy upon.
    Generalisations are wrong, counter-productive and intellectually irrelevant.

    • Agree: CalDre
    • Replies: @Sergey Kriger
  102. CalDre says:
    @Herald

    It is Unz policy not to use “sock puppets”. See http://www.unz.com/masthead/ in the second paragraph under “Comments Policy”. On the other hand, Unz encourages pseudonymous handles, like “CalDre”.

    I have always used one and only one handle on Unz. You can see my full posting history of 500+ comments going back just over two years at http://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=CalDre

    You can read all of it and in general I am rude/aggressive only in response to the same – as I explained, because I believe you have to confront, not appease, bullies. (On occasion I may have crossed the line due to attempted bullying on another site that carried over, unfortunately you cannot edit comments on Unz after a few minutes so a few cases of this may have slipped through, and for that I sincerely apologize to anyone I wrongly attacked.) And I consistently stand up for myself when attacked by bullies, who resort to assaults because they cannot defend their opinions and attempt to drive off those with other ideas (which is unacceptable abuse).

  103. Begemot says:
    @Authenticjazzman

    ‘“Mensa” qualified since 19073.’ Is that AD or BC?

  104. @CalDre

    I wonder why you keep talking about things you have no clue. Just like you saying about Afghanistan being Russia neigborough. You just do not learn.

    • Replies: @CalDre
  105. @Iris

    I think when USA becomes regional northern American power with no grand designs than things might improve. Looks like things are moving in that direction.

  106. It’s good that The Saker has developed second doubts about the merits, or even existence, of Putin’s “clever plan”/mnogokhodovka in the Ukraine.

    Now all that’s left is to acknowledge that the Ukraine has substantially strengthened since 2014, such that large-scale military intervention will now be so costly as to be politically unfeasible.

    Of course, appreciation of that will necessarily shift one’s judgment of Putin’s dithering on the Ukraine from “questionable” to “levels of idiocy previously thought to be impossible”.

    If the goal was indeed to strengthen Russian security, regather the Russian lands, and/or pull one on the “AngloZionists”. But it wasn’t. Putin’s prime concern was solidifying his own power, which would have come under threat in the event of non-intervention in the Ukraine. And credit where it’s due, he succeeded at that marvelously.

  107. @CalDre

    Thanks for your kind response and for pointing out some facts in your exchanges with krollchem that I had ignored, for which my apologies.

    My friend, I applaud your fighting spirit, do keep it up, remaining civil as far as you can. No one lost a debate being civil – shouting matches perhaps, reasoned debates no. As for me, I guess I was born in perhaps gentler times. I no longer have the stomach for shouting matches and trading insults, so maybe I will just stand on the sides and listen in.

    Sadly, you are right about the general climate of loutish behavior and filthy speech everywhere. An omen of worse things to come? When people, even enemies, cannot exchange factual words without trading insults, the time for exchanging blows may not be far off. Sad! But what can a complete non-entity, and an old man to boot, do?

    There were times when Samurai warriors would bow to each other before embarking on slicing off each other’s heads. Duels, except for the tragic endings, were otherwise affairs of formal gentility and displays of courtly manners. Armies at war would play bugles promptly at sundown to usher in 10 hours of ceasefire and much needed care for the wounded. So the question really is this: if the world has reached a stage when ideas can no longer be exchanged, what lies ahead?

    • Replies: @Iris
  108. tac says:

    Here is a good article on Russia’s asymmetric warfare against the West.

    ALEKSANDR KHALDEY: RUSSIA’S ASYMMETRIC RESPONSE TO THE US IN SYRIA

    In the war between Russia and the Anglo-Saxons all the tricks of our enemies happen because of a certain political course that, under Vladimir Putin, is being gradually embodied by the Russian political government. This course is shortly expressed as the gradual squeezing out of the West from spheres representing basic importance for it. This squeezing out is not a whim or avidity, but a vital need, that’s why Russia will follow this course regardless of the one who leads it.

    Since the military power of Russia doesn’t allow the enemy to use military methods to push it back, the West uses all the other things at its disposal – diplomacy, finance, special operations, and propaganda. It in order to provide a complex of measures to push Russia back, the Anglo-Saxon elite uses the principle of provocation, where a crime is organised and then attributed to Russia, and, under the control of dependent pseudo-expert and information structures, statements about Russia’s guilt are spread. On the basis of these charges, a number of aggressive strategies are put to work that couldn’t have legitimate justification in the opinion of public opinion of the West if it wasn’t for these provoked pretexts.

    http://www.stalkerzone.org/aleksandr-khaldey-russias-asymmetric-response-to-the-us-in-syria/

  109. CalDre says:
    @Sergey Kriger

    Awww, the radical Bolshevik that cherishes the murders of tens of millions of people in the worlds greatest genocide ever writes about someone being clueless. How cute.

    I am sure all your blood-thirtsy Bolshevik comrades believe your worthless and, as always, unsubstantiated opinion. All Bolsheviks can do is try to force others to conform to their evil agenda. You are a perfect prototype of Bolshevik mentality and why it is such a profound evil that it must be fully, completely and permanently stopped.

    Let’s take, for example, your spurious allegation “you just do not learn”. Twice already in this thread I admit I made a stupid mistake because I did not proof my post. Of course I know there is no Afghanistan-Russia border, but there used to be and I was careless and let an old memory get through. Yet, although I admitted my mistake immediately, you claim “I do not learn”. These kinds of blatant lies and bully attempts, slander, etc. are the hallmarks of Bolsheviks. And when that does not work, when you can, you resort to violence, even murder. That is 100% Bolshevik mentality. Your mentality.

  110. renfro says:
    @krollchem

    It is sad that twitter speak and insults have taken to place of dialogue. I wish that more posters would provide links to support their point of view. Scholarship is too much work for most Amerikins.

    I agree about the comments here that are made with no sources or evidence to back them up.
    But why limit your criticism to ‘Amerikins’?
    I am an American and you are welcome to peruse my achieves and see that the majority of my ‘informational’ comments have sources, references and links to official documents to up hold my comments.

    So kindly get off the ‘Amerikins’ insults.

    • Replies: @Krollchem
  111. CalDre says:
    @krollchem

    I would in all honestly like a link to your comment that “The head of what used to be called SAC is on record that that force would not obey an order to attack.”

    No doubt he meant this, though it refers to an illegal order (obviously the general is not saying he would refuse to retaliate against a Russian first strike or a strike ordered by Congress): https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-strategic-command-gen-john-hyten-resist-illegal-nuke-order-from-trump/

    Of course US plans winning a nuclear war. Russia does to. Every nuclear power does. Like they plan on winning a conventional war. Unsurprisingly, since that’s what militaries are formed and maintained to do. But let’s hope no military actually tries to accomplish that.

    I actually feel some comfort from that, believing Trump to be rather unhinged and him having made some mad threats against NK and Iran.

    • Replies: @Avery
    , @Krollchem
  112. @Iris

    Upfront costs of $55 Bn versus $10 BN both going the long way round speaks volumes about the reality of the gravity model of trade. Most Russian people live in Europe and the rest just over true Urals. Russia’s best hopes for trade are the EU, Belarus, Ukraine, Turkey, post Brexit UK and Iran. In that order. Things are improving in relations with Iran.

  113. Iris says:
    @seeing-thru

    You are not a “non-entity”. We learn to be more civilised when reading from people like yourself. This is how civilisation is transmitted: don’t give up on human kind. With regards.

  114. I don’t entirely agree. Debate amongst “experts” should assume some level of knowledge of the basic events and background facts. No one is going to retreat from an emotional position such as ungrateful Ukrainians are are all Nazis. They will cherry pick what they want and ignore inconvenient facts that disrupt the narrative anyway. Providing references to people who should know the facts but chose to ignore them anyway is a waste of time.

  115. Avery says:
    @CalDre

    {… or a strike ordered by Congress}

    How does US Congress order a strike?

    I didn’t know there is such a provision in US Constitution.
    As far as I know, if POTUS is deemed incapacitated or removed, Veep takes over.
    Then I think it’s the Speaker of the House and so on.

    Of course in an active nuke war situation all that becomes moot, because things have to be decided in a matter of minutes. I am pretty sure the military has pre-existing procedures – agreed to by civilian leadership – what to do in case the civilian chain of command is broken.

    My guess is there will be an acting POTUS in any case.
    But I still don’t know of a Constitutional provision authorizing US Congress to order a strike.
    Maybe there is: I just don’t know of one.

  116. Krollchem says:
    @renfro

    “So kindly get off the ‘Amerikins’ insults.”

    America is not some shining city on the hill but rather an empire that and has some 1000 bases in other countries and has killed some 20 million foreigners in my lifetime for the corporate interests. See General Smidley Butler’s essay titled “War is a Racket”.

    I was born in the Territory of Hawaii (legally the Royal Kingdom of Hawaii) from American parents some 70 years ago. Sorry that you took this as a personal insult.

  117. Krollchem says:
    @CalDre

    Thanks for the link documenting that the current SAC commander would not obey an illegal order from the President. His response is consistent with the oath one takes when entering the US military.

    Unfortunately, what actually constitutes an illegal order in the case of a conventional conflict that “accidently” leads to casualties to one of the three superpowers. Under conditions where US ships or other NATO ships are sunk in retaliation to a NATO attack on Russian forces, a field commander may resort to tactical nuclear weapons (TNW). Unfortunately, use of Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNW) has the potential to be the “indispensable bridge from peace to nuclear war”. http://ssi.armywarcollege.edu/pdffiles/pub1103.pdf

    Andrei Martyanov has covered the hubris of US military superiority in respect to Russian forces in his the UNZ article “Russia as a Cat” http://www.unz.com/article/russia-as-a-cat/and and also hammered out previously in http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/. I have recently read his book “Losing Military Supremacy” which in my opinion distills the concerns over the arrogance by US politicians and military leaders concerning US military supremacy.
    My comments at UNZ review are generally an attempt to warn about the potential for a “Black Swan” event leading to Nuclear War. See my comments #127 and 156 at: http://www.unz.com/article/russia-as-a-cat/

    Conflicts over energy and other mining resources form a backdrop for military conflicts that can lead to nuclear war. I have closely followed energy geopolitics closely since the Putin administration outmaneuvered Ambassador Morningstar and Condoleezza Rice over Caspian oil resource exploitation and recognize that this is a very complex subject. Please understand that I cannot properly address this subject in comments except in very specific points (e.g. the importance of the T4 pumping station in Syria).

  118. Iris says:

    A video of President Putin symbolically offering honey paid in ruble to President Xi – Filmed during the Eastern Economic Forum at Vladivostok.

    China and Russia have agreed to trade in their national currencies in the future and avoid using the US dollar. The volume of trade expected after the 2018 Forum is equivalent to $100.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T69zVpgNbVg

    Who cares about the NeoCons’ provocations? Not Russia. Good on Russia.

    • Replies: @Iris
  119. Iris says:
    @Iris

    The volume of trade expected after the 2018 Vladivostok Forum is equivalent to US$ 100 Billions (RUB 3.5 trillion ).

  120. @Robert Magill

    Old Three Names knows or he should know, war is the idea of Rothschild, rather the God Father or any family member, war is and has been for two hundred years, the work of the Rothschild Banking Family.
    We had two world wars last century, maybe only one this century, one bad enough nothing is left of life on Earth. Rothschild Wars One and Two were terrible killing times, but, so short of what the outcome is hoped to be, drastic and total devastation of the human population.
    To even try to consider the future and not include the Rothschild’s and drastic population reduction in the equation is like adding the future together and leaving out the next hundred years.
    It is just that complicated and just that simple, Rothschild, the craven desire of the Rich and Powerful to reduce human populations, until and unless the leaders of the resistance really come together and go all out on Rothschild and Population Reduction, drastic population reduction, we are just going along with the plan and gaining speed toward the grave.
    The Rothschild Family have complete control of the dialogue and the reality, like the gorilla in the room or right before your eyes, whoever controls the money controls the nation(s), what is so hard to understand about that ?

  121. Rope a dope, let’s give credit where it’s due: “I would not call this “turning the other cheek” but rather I would refer to it as “absorbing blow after blow (especially when the “blows” are ineffective to the point of being almost totally symbolic ones!) until your opponents run out of steam while changing the reality on the ground“.” Muhammad Ali.

    Your article seems to be a feint with a left hook in order to see how your opponent responds. Is that Putin over there in your corner holding the water-bottle and white towel?

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 The Saker Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.