The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
What Price for Collapse of the Empire?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_243798025

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

I am surrounded, they are outside, I don’t want them to take me and parade me, conduct the airstrike, they will make a mockery of me and this uniform. I want to die with dignity and take all these bastards with me. Please my last wish, conduct the airstrike, they will kill me either way. This is the end commander, thank you, tell my family and my country I love them. Tell them I was brave and I fought until I could no longer. Please take care of my family, avenge my death, goodbye commander, tell my family I love them

Alexander Prokhorenko

This is for our guys”

Roman Filipov

We are currently living the most dangerous days in human history. You think that this is hyperbole?

Think again.

We are risking a nuclear Armageddon

The first thing to realize is that this is not, repeat, not about Syria or chemical weapons, not in Salsbury, not in Douma. That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them. The truth is that the AngloZionists are the prime proliferators of chemical weapons in history (and the prime murderers of Arabs and Muslims too!). So their crocodile tears are just that – crocodile tears, even if their propaganda machine says otherwise.

Does anybody seriously believe that Trump, May, Macron or Netanyahu would be willing to risk an apocalyptic thermonuclear war which could kill several hundred million people in just a few hours because Assad has used chemical weapons on tens, hundreds or even thousands of innocent Syrian civilians (assuming, just for argument’s sake, that this accusation is founded)? Since when do the AngloZionist care about Arabs?! This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever!

For those who would say that speaking of “several hundred million people” killed is hyperbole, I would recommend looking up past western plans to “solve the Russian problem” including:

  • Plan Totality (1945): earmarked 20 Soviet cities for obliteration in a first strike: Moscow, Gorki, Kuybyshev, Sverdlovsk, Novosibirsk, Omsk, Saratov, Kazan, Leningrad, Baku, Tashkent, Chelyabinsk, Nizhny Tagil, Magnitogorsk, Molotov, Tbilisi, Stalinsk, Grozny, Irkutsk, and Yaroslavl.
  • Operation Unthinkable (1945) assumed a surprise attack by up to 47 British and American divisions in the area of Dresden, in the middle of Soviet lines. This represented almost a half of roughly 100 divisions (ca. 2.5 million men) available to the British, American and Canadian headquarters at that time. (…) The majority of any offensive operation would have been undertaken by American and British forces, as well as Polish forces and up to 100,000 German Wehrmacht soldiers.
  • Operation Dropshot (1949): included mission profiles that would have used 300 nuclear bombs and 29,000 high-explosive bombs on 200 targets in 100 cities and towns to wipe out 85% of the Soviet Union’s industrial potential at a single stroke. Between 75 and 100 of the 300 nuclear weapons were targeted to destroy Soviet combat aircraft on the ground.

Articles like this one, this one, and this one are also good pointers (these are all estimates, of course, nobody knows for sure; all that matters is an approximate orders of magnitude).

By the way, I am not suggesting that at this point in time the AngloZionists would want to deliberately start a thermonuclear war with Russia. What I am suggesting is that there is a very simple and basic asymmetry between the Russian and AngloZionist forces in the Middle-East which could lead to such an outcome regardless of original intentions. Here is how:

How are we risking a nuclear Armageddon?

Step one: the AngloZionists strike Syria hard enough to force the Russians to retaliate.

Step two: now outraged by the Russian response, the AngloZionists retaliate against the Russian forces in Syria.

At this point it is crucial to remember that while the Russians have better equipment and far better soldiers than their “western” opponents (the examples of Alexander Prokhorenko or Roman Filipov will tell you all you need to know about how Russians in Syria fight, especially compared to the kind of personnel deployed by the US and NATO), the CENTCOM+NATO+Israel+KSA have an immense numerical advantage. It does not matter how effective the Russian air defenses or (tiny) air superiority aircraft force is when it can simply be overwhelmed by numbers. All the Empire needs to do is first fire a large number of dumb old Tomahawk cruise missiles, let the Russian use their stores of air defense missiles and then follow-up with their more advanced weapons. The truth is that if the Empire wanted to, it could even establish a no-fly zone over Syria and completely wipe-out the Russian task force. Sure, there would be losses on both sides, the Russians would fight heroically, but they would lose. Unless, of course, they got help from the Motherland, specifically in the form of cruise missile attacks from the Black Sea Fleet, the Caspian Flotilla, the aircraft stationed in southern Russia (Crimea) or even in Iran. Russia also strike with land and sea based missiles. So Russia does have the capability to strike at numerous lucrative (and more or less defenseless) US and “coalition” targets throughout the Middle-East. But what would be the consequences of that?

Step three: Russian strikes on CENTCOM targets would force the Empire to fight back and strike at Russian Navy ships and, even worse, at military installations in Russia proper.

Step four: US/NATO attacks on Russian territory would inevitably trigger a Russian response on the US itself.

That response would be initially conventional, but as the losses on both sides would mount, the use of nuclear weapons would be almost inevitable.

Yes, in theory, at any time during this escalatory cycle both sides could decide to de-escalate. In theory. But in the real world, I don’t see that happening nor have I ever seen any model which would convincingly explain how such a de-escalation could happen (especially with the exceptionally low-quality type of narcissistic and psychopathic individuals in command in the US – think Trump or Bolton here – and all their “we are the best and biggest and greatest” pseudo-patriotic nonsense).

I am not predicting that this is what will actually happen, but I am saying that this is the risk the AngloZionist Empire is willing to take in order to achieve.. what exactly? What is worth taking such a risk?

I think that the UK Minister of Defense put it best: the AngloZionists want Russia to “go away and shut up”.

Why we are risking a nuclear Armageddon (go away and shut up!)

ORDER IT NOW

Go away and shut up” has been the dream of all western leaders since at least a millennium (interspersed and strengthened by regular (and failed) attempts at conquering and/or converting the Russians). Just think how frustrating it has been for a civilization which has established colonies worldwide, including in the farthest regions of our planet, to have this unconquerable nation right next door which was not only refusing to submit, but which would regularly defeat them on the battlefield even when they all joined forces lead by their “best and brightest” leaders (Napoleon, Hitler and… Trump?). Just imagine how a civilization centered on, and run by, bankers would go crazy realizing that immense riches were literally “right next door” but that those who lived on that land would, for some unfathomable reason, refuse to let them exploit it! The very existence of a “Russian Russia” is an affront to all the real (as opposed to official) western values and that is simply not something the leaders of the Empire are willing to tolerate. Hence Syria, hence the Ukraine, hence all the silly accusations of “novichok” cum buckwheat attacks. These are all expressions of the same policy

  1. Paint Russia as some kind of Mordor and create yet another “grand coalition” against her
  2. Force Russia to submit to the AngloZionist Hegemony
  3. Defeat Russia politically, economically or militarily

These are objectives for which it is worth risking it all, especially when your own Empire is collapsing and time is not on your side. What we are witnessing since at least 2015 is yet another western Crusade against Russia, a kind of holy war waged in the name of everything the West holds sacred (money, power, hegemonic world domination, secularism, etc.) against everything it abhors (sovereignty, independence, spirituality, traditions).

The simple truth is this: were it not for the Russian military capabilities, the West would have wiped Russia “off the map” long ago, and replaced it with something like a number of “mini-Poland’s” ruled by a liberal comprador elite just like the one currently in charge of the EU. The desperate scream “go away and shut up” is just the expression of having this “western dream” frustrated by the power of the Russian armed forces and the unity of the Russian people behind their current leader. But even the admittedly frustrating existence of Russia is not a sufficient reason to risk it all; there is much more at stake here.

Russia as the tip of a much larger iceberg

Due to geographical, historical, cultural, religious and military factors, Russia is today the objective leader of the worldwide resistance to the Empire, at least in moral, psychological and political terms. But that does not mean that she is “anti-USA”, not at all. For one thing, Russia absolutely does not run or control the worldwide resistance to the Empire. In fact, to a superficial analysis, Russia often looks pretty much alone in her stance (as shown by the recent Chinese behavior at the UN Security Council). The truth is that other countries who want an end to the AngloZionist hegemony have absolutely no incentive to join Russia on top of the US “shit list” and expose themselves to the wrath of the Hegemon, especially not when Russia seems to be more than willing to bear the brunt of the Empire’s hatred. Besides, like all large and powerful countries, Russia lacks real friends and most countries are more than happy to demand that Russia fix all their problems (as shown by the constant stream of accusations that Russia has not done enough in this or that part of the planet). And yet all these countries are not exactly standing in line to show solidarity with Russia when she might need it. So when I say that Russia leads the resistance I am not suggesting that she does that the way the US runs NATO or some “coalition of the willing”. Russia simply leads by the fact that she does not “go away” or, even more so, does not “shut up”.

Russia is the only country on the planet, with the possible exception of Iran, which openly and unapologetically dares to denounce the Empire’s hypocrisy and which is willing to back her words with military power if needed. The DPRK is a unique and local case. As for the various Bolivarian countries and movements in Latin America, they are currently being defeated by the Empire. In theory, the Muslim world definitely has the potential to play a bigger role in the resistance to the Empire, but the Wahabi-virus injected into the Muslim world by the US+KSA+Israel has, at least so far, prevented the emergence of a successful and truly Islamic model besides the one of the Islamic Republic of Iran (hence the demonization of the latter by the AngloZionists).

And yet …

The Empire is in the process of losing the entire Middle-East. Not so much because of some brilliant and Machiavellian Russian or Iranian policies, but more as a courtesy of its own infinitely arrogant, stupid and self-defeating policies. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein will probably go down in history as one of the dumbest political decisions ever (Bolton was behind that one too, by the way). That was an entirely self-inflicted catastrophe. As was the almost equally disastrous invasion of Afghanistan. Another self-inflicted disaster for the AngloZionists was their support for the US/EU led coup in the Ukraine, which not only resulted in a calamity which the Europeans will have to pay for for many decades to come (think of it as a big Somalia on the EU’s doorstep) but also did an amazing job uniting the Russian people behind their leaders and reduced the pro-Western feelings in the Russian public opinion to something in the range of 2-5 percent at the most. “Getting” the Ukraine sure would not have been worth “losing” Russia.

Then there is China which the US has grossly mismanaged since the so-called Third Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1996 when Clinton militarily threatened China (see here for details) and with whom Trump has now launched a trade war in order to MAGA (good luck with that!).

In contrast, all the real “action” is now centered around the OBOR project in which China and Russia play the main role and in which the Anglosphere will play no role at all. Add the Petro-Yuan to the equation and you have the emergence of a new Eurasian model which threatens to make the entire Empire simply irrelevant.

And then there is Turkey (2nd most powerful NATO member state). And Pakistan for that matter. Or Afghanistan. Or Iraq. Or Yemen. Everywhere the Empire is in full retreat leaving only chaos behind.

The truth is that Russia would never be a credible threat to the AngloZionist Hegemony if it was not for the innumerable self-inflicted disasters the Empire has been absorbing year after year after year. In reality, Russia is no threat to anybody at all. And even China would not be a threat to the Empire if the latter was not so arrogant, so over-stretched, so ignorant, reckless and incompetent in its actions. Let me just give one simple, but stark, example: not only does the US not have anything remotely resembling a consistent foreign policy, it does not even have any ministry of foreign affairs. The Department of State does not deal with diplomacy simply because the US leaders don’t believe in diplomacy as a concept. All the DoS does is issue threats, sanctions, ultimatums, make demands, deliver score-cards (on human rights and the like, of all things!) and explain to the public why the US is almost constantly at war with somebody. That is not “diplomacy” and the likes of Nikki Haley are not diplomats. In fact, the US has no use for International Law either, hence the self-same Nikki Haley openly declaring at a UNSC meeting that the US is willing to ignore the decisions of the UNSC and act in complete violation of the UN Charter. Simply put: thugs have no need for any diplomacy. They don’t understand the concept.

Just like their Israeli masters and mentors, the Americans have convinced themselves that all they need to be successful on the international scene is to either threaten the use of force or actually use force. This works great (or so it seems) in Gaza or Grenada, but when dealing with China, Russia or Iran, this monomaniacal approach rapidly shows its limitations, especially when your force is really limited to shooting missiles from afar or murdering civilians (neither the US nor Israel nor, for that matter, the KSA has a credible “boots on the ground” capability, hence their reliance on proxies).

The Empire is failing, fast, and for all the talk about “Animal Assad” or “Rocket Man” being in need of AngloZionist punishment, the stakes are the survival of Hegemony imposed upon mankind at the end of WWII and, again, at the end of the Cold War, and the future of our planet. There cannot be one World Hegemon and a multipolar world order regulated by international law. It’s an either-or situation. And in that sense, this is all much bigger than Syria or even Russia.

From Douma to Donetsk?

There is still a chance that the AngloZionists will decide to strike Syria symbolically, as they did last year following the previous chemical false flag in Khan Sheikhoun (Trump has now probably tweeted himself into a corner which makes some kind of attack almost inevitable). Should that happen though, we should not celebrate too soon as this will just be a minor course change, the 21st-century anti-Russia Crusade will continue, most likely in the form of a Ukronazi attack on the Donbass.

Quick reminder: the purpose of such an attack will not be to reconquer and then ethnically cleanse the Donbass, but to force the Russian Federation to prevent such an outcome by openly intervening. Such a Russian intervention will, of course, quickly stop the war and crush the Ukronazi forces, but at that point the tensions in Europe will go through the roof, meaning that NATO will (finally!) find a halfway credible mission for itself, the Germans will have to give up on North Stream II, Poland and the Baltic statelets will make money by becoming the East European version of Okinawa and the Anglo powers (US/UK) will firmly reestablish control over the EU, Brexit notwithstanding. Furthermore, Russia will become the target of a total economic war, including an energy blockade (the US will be more than happy to impose its overpriced gas on the Europeans), a disconnection from SWIFT, a seizure of Russian assets, a ban on Russian financial operations in the EU, etc. That could be risky, of course, especially with a trade war with China also taking place, but these are just options. What is certain is that as long as Putin or anybody like him remains in power in Russia, the Congress will continue to slap sanctions after sanctions after sanctions on Russia. In fact, during most of her history, even before the Revolution, Russia was under one type of western sanctions or another. There is absolutely nothing new here and, as I like to remind people these days, the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, especially with maniacal regimes and leaders.

Besides, as I have already mentioned in the past, and unlike the current confrontation in Syria, a war in the Ukraine is a very safe bet for the Empire. First, when the goal is the defeat of “your” side, almost any military adventure is pretty safe. Second, once the Russians are in Novorussia, they will “own it”, meaning that they will have to carry the huge financial burden of rebuilding it. Third, such a Russian presence would consolidate and even boost the Ukie nationalists who, by the way, will have a golden opportunity to blame everything they did wrong over the past 4 years on the Russians. Fourth, any such operation will get a lot of the worst and most rabid Ukronazi killed and that will remove a potential problem from the Poroshenko-types the US much prefers to deal with.

Finally, as I said, this will give NATO a sacred mission to “defend Europe against a revanchist Russian rogue state” thereby crushing any European hopes for even a modest degree of independence from the Anglosphere. And the worst case? The worst case would be if the Novorussians can stop the Ukronazi attack without overt Russian intervention. But even if that happens and even if the Novorussians launch some kind of counter-offensive liberating Mariupol or Slaviansk, these are irrelevant losses from the point of view of the Empire which sees both Russians and Ukrainians as cannon fodder. Just as the Empire wants Arabs and Muslims to kill each other on Israel’s behalf in the Middle-East, so does the Empire want nothing more than to see Ukrainians and Russians kill each other in maximal numbers and for as long as possible.

ORDER IT NOW

Some might suggest here that the Novorussians could not only defeat the Ukronazi forces but also liberate the rest of the Ukraine, including Kiev. I find that exceedingly unlikely. Here is why: First, all the hurrah-patriotic nonsense notwithstanding, there are very good and objective reasons why the Novorussians could not liberate Mariupol the first time around (there was a major risk of Ukrainian envelopment for the Novorussian force) or why it took them so long to retake control of the Donetsk airport: during most of their existence, Novorussian forces were composed of a mix of different types of units which, for all their personal courage, were simply not capable of operational-level offensives. They were limited to tactical-level engagements which, even when successful, do not necessarily lead to operational-level developments. There seems to have been major changes made in the command structure of the Novorussian forces. The liberation of the Donetsk airport and, even more so, the Debaltsevo “cauldron” were joint DNR-LNR efforts, but even if, as I suspect, the Novorussians are now capable of operational-level counter-offensives, this is still not what it would take to liberate Kiev. Furthermore, as one Novorussian officer commented, “the further West we go, the less we are seen as liberators and the more as occupiers”. Last but not least, Russia will not allow the Novorussians to liberate most of the Ukraine even if they could do so, because then Russia would have to pay for the staggering costs of trying to fix this massive “European Somalia”, and that is a task far beyond her current means. For all the East-European hallucinations about some Russian invasion, Russia has neither the desire nor even the means to invade anybody. The painful reality is this: the Ukrainians will pay a dear price for their Russophobic delusions and most of the bill to fix that mess will have to be paid by the rest of Europe. They created that nightmare, let them fix it now.

Conclusion: back to Syria

None of the above should distract us from what is by far the biggest danger currently facing us all – the risks of a US-Russian war in Syria. In fact, this reality seems to be slowly dawning even on the most obtuse of presstitutes who are now worrying about a spill-over effect. No, not in Europe or the US, but on Israel, of course. Still, the fact that there are folks who understand that Israel might not survive a superpower clash on its doorstep is a good thing. Maybe the Israel lobby in the US, or a least the part of it which cares for Israel (many/most only pretend to), will be more vocal than all the silent Anglo shabbos-goyim who don’t seem to be able to muster even a minimal amount of self-preservation instinct? Bibi Netanyahu felt the need to call Putin after the Israeli ambassador to Russia was read the riot act by Russian officials following the (admittedly rather lame) Israeli airstrike on the T-4 Syrian air force base. Not much of a hope, I admit…

This is not about good guys versus bad guys anymore. It’s about sane versus insane. I think that we can safely place Trump, Bolton, Haley and the rest of them in the “terminally delusional” camp. But what about the top US generals? I asked two well-informed friends, and they both told me that there is probably nobody above the rank of Colonel with enough courage left to object to the Neocon’s insanity, even if that means WWIII. Again, not much hope here either…

There is a sura (Al-Anfal 8:30) of the Qur’an which Sheikh Imran Hosein often mentions which I want to quote here: And [remember, O Muhammad], when those who disbelieved plotted against you to restrain you or kill you or evict you [from Makkah]. But they plan, and Allah plans. And Allah is the best of planners. And since we are talking about Syria where Iran and Hezbollah are targets as much (or more) as the Russians, it is also fitting here to quote a very popular Shia slogan which calls to remember that the battle against oppression must be fought ceaselessly and everywhere: “Every Day Is Ashura and Every Land Is Karbala”. And, of course, there are the words of Christ Himself: “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matt 10:28).

Such religious references will, no doubt, irritate the many “enlightened” westerners for whom such language reeks of obscurantism, fanaticism, and bigotry. But in Russia or the Middle-East, such references are very much part of the national or religious ethos. To illustrate my point I want to quote from Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah’s “Divine Victory Speech” spoken in 2006 following the crushing victory by a relatively small Hezbollah force of the combined might of the Israeli ground, air and naval forces:

We are today celebrating a big strategic, historic, and divine victory. How can the human mind imagine that a few thousand of your Lebanese resistance sons – if I wanted, I would give the exact number – held out for 23 days in a land exposed to the skies against the strongest air force in the Middle East, which had an air bridge transporting smart bombs from America, through Britain, to Israel; against 40,000 officers and soldiers – four brigades of elite forces, three reserve army divisions; against the strongest tank in the world; and against the strongest army in the region? How could only a few thousand people hold out and fight under such harsh conditions, and [how could] their fighting force the naval warships out of our territorial waters? By the way, the army and the resistance are capable of protecting the territorial waters from being desecrated by any Zionist. [Applause] [And how could their fighting] also lead to the destruction of the Mirkava tanks, which are an object of pride for the Israeli industry; damage Israeli helicopters day and night; and turn the elite brigades – I am not exaggerating, and you can watch and read the Israeli media – into rats frightened by your sons? [How did this happen] while you were relinquished by the Arabs and the world and in light of the political (human solidarity was profound though) division around you? How could this group of mujahidin defeat this army without the support and assistance of Almighty God? This resistance experience, which should be conveyed to the world, depends – on the moral and spiritual level – on faith, certainty, reliance [on God], and readiness to make sacrifices. It also depends on reason, planning, organization, armament, and, as is said, on taking all possible protective procedures. We are neither a disorganized and sophistic resistance, nor a resistance pulled to the ground that sees before it nothing but soil, nor a resistance of chaos. The pious, God-reliant, loving, and knowledgeable resistance is also the conscious, wise, trained, and equipped resistance that has plans. This is the secret of the victory we are today celebrating, brothers and sisters.

These words could also be used to describe the relatively small Russian task force in Syria. In fact, there are numerous parallels which could be made between Hezbollah’s role and position in the Middle-East and Russia’s role and position in the world. And while both are well-trained, well-armed and well-commanded, it is their spiritual power which will decide the outcome of the wars waged against them by the Hegemony. AngloZionist secularists will never understand that – they just can’t – and that will bring their inevitable downfall. The only question is the price mankind will have to pay to have that last Empire finally bite the dust.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Military, Nuclear War, Russia, Syria 
Hide 320 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:

    What use is the UN and the Hague?

    US is in Syria illegally, but UN does nothing.

    Bush and Obama are war criminals but Hague does nothing.

    In the end, principles be damned. It’s about the power.

    Read More
    • Agree: Realist, The Scalpel
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    Spinoza already explained that justice is based on power.
    This of course means that the power is not under jurisdiction.
    , @Proud_Srbin
    Nuremberg trials were NOT possible until Heroes of Red Army paid high price in LIVES and hoisted Hammer and Sickle over House of Evil in Berlin.
    Myself, my children and their children OWE our lives to brave HEROES of Red Army under your great leadership.
    Thanks and Glory to Uncle Stalin.
    , @GourmetDan

    What use is the UN and the Hague?

    US is in Syria illegally, but UN does nothing.

    Bush and Obama are war criminals but Hague does nothing.

    In the end, principles be damned. It’s about the power.

     

    The U.N. is simply a tool of the globalists and will always act to enable globalist ambitions... never accept anything at face-value... everything is a lie...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. hunor says:

    ” what price for the collapse of the empire ”

    mr saker all this melancholic analysis is a very interesting read , one has to give you that , but analysis is theory, not understanding.
    for there to be understanding , one has to ask the correct question because incorrect question
    can not possible have correct answer. / how about that for understanding?/.
    in this case the correct question is , what is the empire ??? , what makes it function ? under what
    circumstances can it function ?
    in this case the empire is a structure of 320 million carbon units.
    conflict of interest in this structure must be maintained in order to function
    under what circumstances can this structure be compromised ?
    when the desire for safety and wellbeing of this structure is shocked, interrupted or damaged.
    translate that to our challenges of the day in the Syrian standoff.
    in the Syrian conflict it does not matter who or how many will fall, the only thing matters
    from the point of view of the empire is how many thousand of body bags needed on the very first days of the conflict , after number of warship is destroyed, but the real kick comes when satellite services are destroyed , no I phone to follow the circus and no bread to be delivered
    the 320 million carbon unit will be on the street demanding the safety and wellbeing they once had.
    on that day the empire will collapse like a house of cards.
    one unfortunate carbon unit must pray for Vladimir vladimirovic , and hope he has understanding
    not just theory.

    Read More
    • Troll: CK
    • Replies: @Steve Gittelson
    Oh, for Christ's sake! Apply grammar rules, you self-indulgent little nitwit! Write like you intend to make sense instead of blithering nonsense.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. Antonio says:

    “All the Empire needs to do is first fire a large number of dumb old Tomahawk cruise missiles, let the Russian use their stores of air defense missiles and then follow-up with their more advanced weapons.”

    That assumes that Russia can’t destroy the missile launch platforms. That’s not really the case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Moi
    Putin is weak. The more sand he gets kicked in face, the more he wants to have normal relations with the US. Russia will not confront the US unless it involves a situation like Crimea/Ukraine. The US has moved weapons right up to Russia's border. And what does Putin do? Nothing, but more happy talk.

    PS: As for Saker noting that people in the east believe in God and use religious terms, thank God for that.
    , @sarz

    “All the Empire needs to do is first fire a large number of dumb old Tomahawk cruise missiles, let the Russian use their stores of air defense missiles and then follow-up with their more advanced weapons.”

    That assumes that Russia can’t destroy the missile launch platforms. That’s not really the case.
     
    Very interesting. Jim Stone mentions at his website (http://82.221.129.208/) that after Syria's ancient Russian gear had taken out over seventy percent of America's cruise missiles on their own, without Russian help, Russian planes were seen headed for the American ships, and then the assault was prematurely terminated.

    Can someone please give a link to a reliable report on this? - if there is something to it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. m___ says:

    Right into the heart of the matter. Touching the core. A consideration though, how well does your rational stance translate to the ordinary people, and by “enlightening” them, if that ever was possible, how not to create the next pathway to catastrophe.

    Islam elites realizing that conquering the world by breeding themselves as a pathway to consumption and Western life patterns, how would that help?

    Something got to give, our guess, the elites of the West, Anglo-Zionist indeed, but some having as the only ones, some nerve ends in Moscow and Holy Peter-burg, as compared to the “local only”, contained global masses of waste humanity(production-consumption cycles are now unending loops with little to be creamed and immense derivatives), these Western elites are back against the wall. The some that matter within the elites(do not include figurehead politicians in the West, hardwood academics of Harvard and other, know first-hand that the global economy is religious make believe, and that there can only be one single God, and only a limited group of his representatives on earth. They succeeded fairly well of holding of locally the masses(the average American citizen, the Chinese workhorses, the UK Londoner, but that is a limited feat. Thinking forward, the Western Zionists, the Chinese elites, the ones in command in Moscow, have only two options, power games to the end or cowering down and eating dirt to live another day. The ones hardest squeezed today are the Westerners, since from ruling the “all” they have become a laughing stock, the effect even percolating and risking to disrupt the underworld of commoners. Not even an Albanian peasant, can look at Boris Johnson and not see a bloated bag of potatoes, give or take a fart or two.

    To mention the real life alternative of rational new concepts, and assessments of the real global problems as to man-kind, to merely mention them, is of course illusionary. What goes up must come down, there is no sustainability in the current world systemic, the issue of a planetary context is creeping up the backs of our elites. Day to day, the Russians and the Chinese have a few life-cycles left, the West has not.

    Disruption(Syria or other is mere pretext) must be, anything in the future, the grind or the blow, but no harmony can be!

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

    “These words could also be used to describe the relatively small Russian task force in Syria. In fact, there are numerous parallels which could be made between Hezbollah’s role and position in the Middle-East and Russia’s role and position in the world. And while both are well-trained, well-armed and well-commanded, it is their spiritual power which will decide the outcome of the wars waged against them by the Hegemony. AngloZionist secularists will never understand that – they just can’t – and that will bring their inevitable downfall. The only question is the price mankind will have to pay to have that last Empire finally bite the dust.”

    Totally non-sense. The Israelis fighting Hezbollah are equally religiously fanatic. The more religiously fanatic of all (ISIS) is clearly defeated. Americans are more or less equally religious than Russians, if not more. Etc.

    The real difference in will power is not related to religion, or at least not only, and not for all countries. Americans don’t want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives. OTOH, Russians are strongly united under Putin and, while they don’t want invasion wars, they are totally supporting that their military should defend themselves and their allies if atacked, and don’t mind to pay more taxes or the cost in lives. Hezbollah, Iran, etc. are fighting for their homeland. They haven’t other place to go. Israelis are fighting to invade and submit their neighbours. Very different situations.

    The same can be said for DPRK, an atheistic country. As Putin once said, north koreans would rather eat grass than give up their nuclear weapons program.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yurivku

    Americans don’t want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives.
     
    Just a BS. Americans want war, they are in majority stupid brainwashed idiots who believe in their indispensability and highest military power.
    Where are they protesting against their rulinig imbeciles?

    Theirs meeting with realitity could be very painful.
    , @Macon Richardson
    Wha' chu sayin'?

    "The Israelis fighting Hezbollah are equally religiously fanatic." Orthodox Jews are not often found in the Israeli military and Ultra-Orthodox Jews are exempt from military service, though the Israeli Supreme Court has recently ruled that exempting Ultra-Orthodox from military service is unconstitutional. So who are the "equally religiously" fanatical persons in the Israeli military? American Jews who want to learn how to be tough? Non-Orthodox conscripts? Secular conscripts? You mistake compulsion or chauvinism for religious belief.

    As to ISIS, there is no religious fanaticism there. ISIS is a bunch of hillbilly rednecks out for blood. Lord of the Flies! Anton leVey's Church of Satan! Just a bunch of guys who enjoy killing people for fun. Sort of like the Phoenix Program in Vietnam.

    "Americans are more or less equally religious than Russians, if not more." Come on! Worshiping money or TV or sex is hardly a religion worth following. As to Christianity, one must follow the words of Jesus Christ to be a Christian. The Roman church is merely a continuation of the Caesars. Protestantism is old testament Judaism (which present day Judaism is not). Neither of these sects follows the teachings of Jesus Christ.
    , @Joe Wong
    But there seems a lot of Latinos, Blacks and MEers in the American invasion forces doing the gruesome business diligently.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Antonio says:

    Nevertheless, I agree with the rest of the article.

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

    Sane Vs Insane
    At the end of the day, it may be that Putin himself proves himself to be the only sane one among all these utter idiots

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. yurivku says:
    @Antonio
    "These words could also be used to describe the relatively small Russian task force in Syria. In fact, there are numerous parallels which could be made between Hezbollah’s role and position in the Middle-East and Russia’s role and position in the world. And while both are well-trained, well-armed and well-commanded, it is their spiritual power which will decide the outcome of the wars waged against them by the Hegemony. AngloZionist secularists will never understand that – they just can’t – and that will bring their inevitable downfall. The only question is the price mankind will have to pay to have that last Empire finally bite the dust."

    Totally non-sense. The Israelis fighting Hezbollah are equally religiously fanatic. The more religiously fanatic of all (ISIS) is clearly defeated. Americans are more or less equally religious than Russians, if not more. Etc.

    The real difference in will power is not related to religion, or at least not only, and not for all countries. Americans don't want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives. OTOH, Russians are strongly united under Putin and, while they don't want invasion wars, they are totally supporting that their military should defend themselves and their allies if atacked, and don't mind to pay more taxes or the cost in lives. Hezbollah, Iran, etc. are fighting for their homeland. They haven't other place to go. Israelis are fighting to invade and submit their neighbours. Very different situations.

    The same can be said for DPRK, an atheistic country. As Putin once said, north koreans would rather eat grass than give up their nuclear weapons program.

    Americans don’t want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives.

    Just a BS. Americans want war, they are in majority stupid brainwashed idiots who believe in their indispensability and highest military power.
    Where are they protesting against their rulinig imbeciles?

    Theirs meeting with realitity could be very painful.

    Read More
    • Troll: MikeatMikedotMike
    • Replies: @bluedog
    Your probably correct for they re-elected Bush after he invaded Iraq, and it was more than evident that he lied about everything to do so,and Obama was no better,and now along comes the twit and twitter who has/is beating the war drums for yet another war ,which the American people will suck up and give him another four years.!!!
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Particularly on matters of war and peace it is desirable to be discriminating even at the expense of brevity. Surely the Americans who get puffed up with stupid belligerence are indeed either almost irredeemably stupid or very young. And for those who note the election and re-election of George W. Bush (by fewer than 50 per cent of those entitled to vote and voting) I invite attention to what moved them to vote that way. Given Trump's anti-war statements before Americans elected him - and Obama's vote against the Iraq war as a senator - it is a fair bet that it was for reasons that had nothing much to do with making war as a positive element.
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
    Wrong.

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ivf96ImOYhA/WtF8VnlQqdI/AAAAAAAAFyI/JtpLtTJahPEPcstxIPImiV_orQJoZYJbQCLcBGAs/s1600/syria.png
    , @Ronald Thomas West
    The Americans who want war are a minority but they hold the positions of power that count; military-industrial corporate board seats with nearly limitless money to buy votes (of congressmen) ... this makes more money than it spends, so it is an endless, profitable loop. What is stupidly inexcusable is ordinary Americans allowing this to go on; for too many reasons to note here, but a few reasons stand out, like Americans too busy hating each other to work together to stop the stupid stuff... or too caught up in the 'it's all about me' to even care what the future will bring (that's a big one) ... and what none of them will wish to look at is if the USA quit it's aggression and related arms production, the economy would likely collapse, the trap the rabbits avoid discussing because it's too scary to contemplate.

    And so it is the fringe right warmongers rule, except when it is the fringe liberal warmongers rule; in any case, the label is 'humanitarian violence' .. a sort of 'let's kill to keep it all civilized' rationale that is a peculiar form of insanity perhaps inherited from the emptied jails and lunatic asylums of Western Europe prior to the USA's founding; hybridized with Europe's banished religious fanatics.

    Myself, I've named it 'Proto-Anglo-Saxon-Chauvinism'

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/05/17/bozos-handcock-u-speech/

    ^ (it's satire)

    , @Vojkan
    Well, if you look at Americans' voting history in presidential elections since Bush sr., you'll notice that they have systematically voted for the candidate they perceived as less bellicose. They voted Clinton against Bush I after Gulf War I, Clinton against the even more bellicose Dole, Bush II vs Gore because he promised a more humble foreign policy, Bush vs Kerry because it made no difference, they preferred Obama to Hillary Clinton in the primary because of their respective stances regarding the Iraq War, then Obama against MacCain in the election, then again Obama against the zio-puppet Romney, and finally for Trump against Hillary Clinton.
    Americans voted Republican vs Democrat when the Republican promised peace rather than foreign military adventures and Democrat vs Republican when the Democrat made a similar promise. You must give them that. Don't get fooled by various trolls and bots you see on social networks or comment sections or official fake news media. American voters systematically vote for peace but the thing is American voters don't get what they vote for because they don't run America, the Deep State, the MIC, banksters and Zionists do.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. metamars says: • Website

    I very much appreciate the sort and severity of question that this essay poses. However, it reflects the sort of blinkered view that I detect from the Russian government, itself. There appears to be no thought as to how to reach the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of the desirability of stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of methodology for stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public, after means of communication is determined.

    At least, as regards this essay, that is how I read
    “That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them. ”

    So, my questions for the Saker is: do you think changing American public opinion is worth the effort, or are we – in your view – hopelessly “zombified”?

    Secondly, if we are not completely “zombified”, then what suggestions do you have to stir Americans to ACTIONS to change the course of events?

    Please note that the a significant number of right wing media types, without whom I don’t think Trump would be President, have not supported this latest lunacy by Trump. Specifically, Alex Jones of infowars (who openly called Douma “chemical attack” a false flag), Michael Savage, and Tucker Carlson.

    So, there are 3 examples of influencers who are not “zombified” – amongst the people they influence, there are millions. It is self evidently true that “zombification” is not monolithic, or incapable of being resisted.

    Unfortunately, you seem as devoid of ideas for de-zombifying the American public as the Russian government.

    I recently wrote of a no-brainer that would – barring censoring from Twitter – allow Putin to reach millions of Americans, every day. Both pro- and anti- Trump Americans.

    https://thesaker.is/trump-tries-to-tweet-russia-into-submission/#comment-509044

    Another idea leaps out: There are 1 million Russian Americans. Can they not arrange a speaking and debating tour by Sergei Lavrov? Yeah, I know that in an ideal world, he would be performing his #1 job of being Russia’s top diplomat, but faced with the prospect of a NUCLEAR WAR, I think he could show enough flexibility to delegate to his reports. Last I heard, he’s looking to retire, anyway, so ending his diplomatic duties is on his radar.

    A suggestion for billing for such events: “The Soviet Union was a US ally during WW2, suffering a loss of about 20 soldiers for every US soldier. Why are former allies currently at risk for a nuclear confrontation?”

    The question you ask is very good. The answer is less impressive. Some outside-the-box thinking would improve the answer.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Apollonius

    There appears to be no thought as to how to reach the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of the desirability of stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of methodology for stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public...
     
    The "American public" is a black hole of cynicism, nihilism, ignorance, and depravity that would consume any Quixote foolish enough to bring "enlightenment". To go down that road would be folly of the highest order.

    I think we've all been around long enough, or had enough experience in our own public and private lives to know that America is a terminal case. The best we can do is to hasten its passing into the graveyard of history and to limit the blast radius of the inevitable implosion (explosion?). These are the desperate times when the only way to win the game is not to play. What does that mean in practice? Hunkering down, cutting your losses, consolidating real assets and resources, securing a solid redoubt. Putin's course of not taking the bait is the best possible tactic, and is in fact the geopolitical analogue of the suggestions above. The only out of this for Russia, and by the Saker's implication, "the resistance to the Empire" who are united with Russia in their defence of "sovereignty, independence, spirituality, traditions", is to preserve the status quo. We just need to keep killing time. Stall them to death. They are headed straight for the abyss, and at this point, all we have to do to win is not to let them drag us down with them.

    I pray to God that Putin does not sink an American carrier or shoot down an American jet if he chooses to respond. I hope in fact that his response consists of moving all vital assets out of the way so that Trump declares victory over a patch of sand. The Saker is correct that the risks here are grave and enormous.

    That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them.
     
    Does this offend you somehow? This is the truth after all. Though, I guess, it makes sense that Americans would be offended by reality.
    , @Dante
    That was absolutely brilliant, Well said and thanks for writing.
    , @ploni almoni
    "Another idea leaps out: There are 1 million Russian Americans. Can they not arrange a speaking and debating tour by Sergei Lavrov?"
    The one million Russian Americans are something like 92% Jewish for some reason, so one would think their sympathies lie with Netanyahu or with the Kaganate of Nuland. But yes, it is worth a try to ask Masha Gessen of the New Yorker and the New York Times to sponsor a speaking tour by Lavrov. We have a whole week for the world to wake up.
    , @HogHappenin
    Do you really think that channels like RT or Sputnik were declared "foreign propaganda" and promptly shutdown from cable TV in the "land of the free" for no reason?

    They've played a pretty good enough role in helping hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans to come out of their zombified dreamscape to face the reality.

    How much more can the Russians actually do? They don't print federal reserve bills by the minute and hence do not have infinite resources. It also depends on 'woke' Americans to push more and more in the face of cynical, consumerist and often 'heck-I-care' zombies who have been brainwashed quote thoroughly.

    As scraping by gets more and more difficult for everyday schmucks (even outside the rust belt), it can be used as a two sided sword. Either people will double down on their zombification (immersing themselves in more alcohol and sex to forget the pain) or they might actually become more open to asking questions as to why things are going from bad to worse yet the 'government' is more concerned in the general well being of a certain nation(s) in the middle east.

    Easier said than done but you've got to swallow the bitter pill and face people. Ron Unz's American pravda provides some guidelines as to how to loosen the stranglehold of MSM allowing more and more people to question the 'official' narrative. Ask them tough questions, prod them and don't get discouraged!

    Here, be my guest
    https://www.unz.com/runz/american-pravda-breaching-the-media-barrier/

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. bluedog says:
    @yurivku

    Americans don’t want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives.
     
    Just a BS. Americans want war, they are in majority stupid brainwashed idiots who believe in their indispensability and highest military power.
    Where are they protesting against their rulinig imbeciles?

    Theirs meeting with realitity could be very painful.

    Your probably correct for they re-elected Bush after he invaded Iraq, and it was more than evident that he lied about everything to do so,and Obama was no better,and now along comes the twit and twitter who has/is beating the war drums for yet another war ,which the American people will suck up and give him another four years.!!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @yurivku
    Lenin said - "practice is the criterion of a truth", so we see I'm right and we're all probably will die soon in pain. Even those who weren't to blame. But US/UK/etc they are certainly are to blame.
    , @GourmetDan

    Your probably correct for they re-elected Bush after he invaded Iraq, and it was more than evident that he lied about everything to do so,and Obama was no better,and now along comes the twit and twitter who has/is beating the war drums for yet another war ,which the American people will suck up and give him another four years.!!!
     
    Good evidence to support the claim that the U.S. is controlled by people other than U.S. citizens... it obviously doesn't matter who is president... the behavior of the state doesn't change...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. yurivku says:
    @bluedog
    Your probably correct for they re-elected Bush after he invaded Iraq, and it was more than evident that he lied about everything to do so,and Obama was no better,and now along comes the twit and twitter who has/is beating the war drums for yet another war ,which the American people will suck up and give him another four years.!!!

    Lenin said – “practice is the criterion of a truth”, so we see I’m right and we’re all probably will die soon in pain. Even those who weren’t to blame. But US/UK/etc they are certainly are to blame.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Lenin said – “practice is the criterion of a truth”,
     
    Well, Lenin was reiterating Hegel and Clausewitz, of who Lenin was a great admirer. In reality, the original from early 1800s sounded as: "it is legitimate to judge event by its outcome for it is the soundest criterion."
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @yurivku
    Lenin said - "practice is the criterion of a truth", so we see I'm right and we're all probably will die soon in pain. Even those who weren't to blame. But US/UK/etc they are certainly are to blame.

    Lenin said – “practice is the criterion of a truth”,

    Well, Lenin was reiterating Hegel and Clausewitz, of who Lenin was a great admirer. In reality, the original from early 1800s sounded as: “it is legitimate to judge event by its outcome for it is the soundest criterion.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @lavoisier
    I love that quote and I am very happy that it did not come from Lenin.

    His outcome in Russia would be an indictment of his project.
    , @AnonFromTN
    This idea is much older than that. It was clearly expressed in the New Testament: “you will know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15-20).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. I wouldn’t be surprised if WW3 starts around the Caspian.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  14. @hunor
    " what price for the collapse of the empire "

    mr saker all this melancholic analysis is a very interesting read , one has to give you that , but analysis is theory, not understanding.
    for there to be understanding , one has to ask the correct question because incorrect question
    can not possible have correct answer. / how about that for understanding?/.
    in this case the correct question is , what is the empire ??? , what makes it function ? under what
    circumstances can it function ?
    in this case the empire is a structure of 320 million carbon units.
    conflict of interest in this structure must be maintained in order to function
    under what circumstances can this structure be compromised ?
    when the desire for safety and wellbeing of this structure is shocked, interrupted or damaged.
    translate that to our challenges of the day in the Syrian standoff.
    in the Syrian conflict it does not matter who or how many will fall, the only thing matters
    from the point of view of the empire is how many thousand of body bags needed on the very first days of the conflict , after number of warship is destroyed, but the real kick comes when satellite services are destroyed , no I phone to follow the circus and no bread to be delivered
    the 320 million carbon unit will be on the street demanding the safety and wellbeing they once had.
    on that day the empire will collapse like a house of cards.
    one unfortunate carbon unit must pray for Vladimir vladimirovic , and hope he has understanding
    not just theory.

    Oh, for Christ’s sake! Apply grammar rules, you self-indulgent little nitwit! Write like you intend to make sense instead of blithering nonsense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @hunor
    This is your chance Steve, demonstrate how to make sense the none nitwit way. Please
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. anonymous[138] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s gotten hard to visualize what the next few steps might be since things no longer seem to be conducted on a basis of rationality. It’s not just Trump but May and Macron also; what is their thinking? It’s obvious by now that ISIS and the other so-called rebels were a creation of an alliance of states led by the US. The jihadis have run through an enormous amount of weapons and ammo in this war and clearly they’ve been generously supplied by the US and it’s allies since the rebels don’t own any arms or ammo factories themselves; they’re the beneficiaries of state actors who’ve recruited, organized, trained, supplied and mapped out their strategies. Since the rebels have been mostly thwarted perhaps it’s been decided that only direct intervention can save their project of demolishing Syria. This obsession with Syria is downright bizarre and how any of it serves US interests is impossible to see. In related news Pompeo has bragged that the US killed hundreds, not dozens, of Russian mercs in that Feb incident in Syria. That has to ratchet tensions up.
    One reality that emerges is that in surveying the carnage unleashed by the US throughout the entire Middle East and Afghanistan there’s not the slightest concern about causing hundreds of thousands of people to die and causing millions to become miserable refugees. There is something that goes beyond the merely inhumane in all this; it has become a force of evil in the world.

    Read More
    • Agree: Herald, sayless
    • Replies: @Johann
    There is something remarkably demonic about the American soul that absolutely loves war. The infamous theme song of the American military : The Battle Hymn Of The Republic” absolutely glorifies and sanctifies War with its praising his terrible swift sword. This was written to cheer on the America Civil War which brought about almost one million casualties on the American population. The leader of this war has a little temple built to him in DC where Americans bring their children so that they can learn to worship him. From the beginning of the twentieth century until the present the American War Department has been engaged in endless wars sanctified by their constitutional government “of the people”. In Japanese and German cities countless civilians including many many children were incinerated by American bombs dropped by heroic young American men barely out of high school. Nowadays the same military tactic has been sanitized by using misiles and drones so that the current crop of bombardiers can sit behind their computer screens and reek havoc on the rest of the world. America delenda est.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    None of this serves any US or European interest, only Israeli. On full display is just how captive western institutions are to Organized Jewry.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. But Think says:

    I think the Donald is being underestimated. I think he said what he meant when he said I want out. I think he is being coerced into attacking Syria. So what he has done is taken that aggression that has been directed at him and amplified it and redirected it at Russia. The result he is trying to achieve is to get the deep state and mic to chicken out on their attack. I think it has worked to a degree. Mattis is back peddling. He may get us all incinerated anyway. But I think he would rather be spending money at home rather than building out infrastructure for people who hate the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Herald
    Your faith in the innate goodness of Trump is touching but remarkably misplaced.

    Cuddly Trump has a mad dog as Defence Secretary and a psychopath as National Security Advisor. He is currently pushing for two more psychos to head the State Department and CIA, respectively.

    Even Alex Jones seems to be seeing things a bit more clearly in these dire times but just what is it going to take for people like yourself to wake up?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. CK says:

    Iran has announced that it will be constructing a multi lane highway from Tehran to the Beirut. Iran will once again have Mediterranean access independent of either the Bosporus/Dardanelles or the Suez. The Tehran end of the highway will connect to OBOR.
    The Chinese already have a SWIFT equivalent in place. Once the Asean group develop an equivalent to BIS they will have in place the same four pillars that support the $ hegemon (IMF, World Bank, SWIFT, BIS ), but available to support the PetroYuan or whatever other currency might be supportable as a safer alternative to the PetroDollar.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. “This is not about good guys versus bad guys anymore. It’s about sane versus insane.”

    I would have to disagree with this. As I see it, “insane” is a word used in an attempt to frame a spiritual condition as a “worldly” issue. What we’re dealing with here is a spiritual war of “evil” vs “good.”

    In its essence, U.S. foreign policy boils down to someone’s attempt to establish Satan’s kingdom on earth as per Isaiah 14:13,14.

    Someone made the deal with Satan that Jesus rejected (Luke 4:5-8), and that Satanic cult made the decision to knowingly, willingly and calculatingly “give worth to evil” (i.e. worship Satan) as a means of achieving unprecedented worldly gain.

    This Satanic cult, known as the first beast of Rev 13 (aka fourth beast of Daniel 7) attempts to rise to the top by bringing everybody else down. Thus the beast ostensibly gets to the top, evil destroys all “goodness” on earth (evil is only “bad” in comparison to good), and Satan “exalts [his] throne above the stars of God.”

    Unfortunately, the beast wasn’t planning on the re-emergence of Russia as a world military super power. Mighty Russia now stands squarely in the way of the beast’s Satanic agenda. Just like Cain hated and ultimately murdered Abel (because evil hates a good example) the beast hates Russia.

    But the beast will fail because evil contains withn itself the seeds of its own destruction. The same corruption that brought the beast to power over the west prevents it from being an effective military force. Demon possessed people tend to have personality issues that ultimately result in catastrophic failure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Druid
    Why not just say who you mean. The Ziofascists. And I hope you're right about them getting their own, though I don't see it!
    , @AnonFromTN
    I am sure a lot of ideologically driven people will disagree. Let them.
    In and of itself, the fact that in the last 70 years or so the US was invariably on the side of the evil does not mean that the USSR/Russia was always on the side of the good. Two evil forces can and will fight for dominance. I’ve read someone’s comment somewhere that in living memory there was no case when the USSR was on the side of the oppressors or when the US was on the side of the oppressed. To the best of my knowledge this is true, but the side of the oppressed is not always the side of the good, even though the side of the oppressors is always the side of the evil. Say, the fact that current government in Kiev, Ukraine, is evil through and through does not mean that the leadership of Donetsk or Lugansk People’s Republic is absolutely good. The US is a global calamity, shameless bandits with mighty weapons. However, Russia stands up to the Empire to defend its own interests, not to defend good in general.
    Back to Syria. Any even half-honest person would agree that ISIS and other Islamists, created, armed, and funded by the US and its vassals, are thoroughly evil. But that does not mean that Assad is good. It only means that he is a lesser evil, possibly the best Syria can have today. Most Syrians, including Sunnis, with the experience of living under Islamists, became staunch supporters of Assad: compared to them he looks positively good. But let’s not forget that it’s easy to win in this comparison. There is no doubt that in an honest election today in Syria Assad is likely to win by a large margin, maybe even as large as Putin won in Russian elections. But winners aren’t necessarily good. After all, the US was among the winners in WWII.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. Philip Owen says: • Website

    Saker is very ill but it is true that Gavrilo Princep shot just one person and that triggered a massive mistake by the Tsar … Are 20,000 Russian military in Syria worth a repeat performance?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Moi
    You could incinerate all of the 20k Russkies, and Putin would seek a comprise. Putin is neither smart nor strong, something he's repeatedly demonstrated.
    , @ploni almoni
    Hey, Joe, put down your gun and come over here a minute.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. andoheb says:

    If Ukraine attacks Donbass in a big way could not Russia rapidly destroy attacking forcd and then pull back so as not to enable NATO to propogandize about an imminent Russian threat?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  21. Herald says:
    @But Think
    I think the Donald is being underestimated. I think he said what he meant when he said I want out. I think he is being coerced into attacking Syria. So what he has done is taken that aggression that has been directed at him and amplified it and redirected it at Russia. The result he is trying to achieve is to get the deep state and mic to chicken out on their attack. I think it has worked to a degree. Mattis is back peddling. He may get us all incinerated anyway. But I think he would rather be spending money at home rather than building out infrastructure for people who hate the US.

    Your faith in the innate goodness of Trump is touching but remarkably misplaced.

    Cuddly Trump has a mad dog as Defence Secretary and a psychopath as National Security Advisor. He is currently pushing for two more psychos to head the State Department and CIA, respectively.

    Even Alex Jones seems to be seeing things a bit more clearly in these dire times but just what is it going to take for people like yourself to wake up?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. hunor says: • Website
    @Steve Gittelson
    Oh, for Christ's sake! Apply grammar rules, you self-indulgent little nitwit! Write like you intend to make sense instead of blithering nonsense.

    This is your chance Steve, demonstrate how to make sense the none nitwit way. Please

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Steve made a valid point, you should thank him. There are many worthwhile comments to read here without wasting time trying to decipher ones written in some sort of obscure code.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Y.L. says:

    Andrei Martyanov, who wrote this for Unz: http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/ has communicated with Colonel W. Patrick Lang.

    Col. Lang posted this today: http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/mutually-assured-suicide.html

    I have the following comment today from a retired Russian officer.

    ********

    “This is where it gets very interesting and dangerous. Russia has drawn its own redline. Putin and his Generals know for a fact that there was no chemical weapon of any kind used in Syria. They recently warned the world that this kind of staged event was in the offing. They know what they have and have not done on the ground and know the lies spilling from Washington, London and Paris are vicious calumny. They are not a punching bag and are not going to sit back and do nothing.

    A lot will depend on the “structure” and the “weight” of a possible salvo and how respective militaries will communicate with each-other. It was indicated strongly by Pentagon that they are trying to do their utmost in avoiding hitting of Russian regulars in Syria. I am sure that if within the range of namely Russia’s (not Syria’s) AD assets any TLAM will be shot down–this is so to speak “not that big of a deal” scenario. Washington draft-dodgers, however, push for attack on specifically Russian assets, including Damascus and recently including Douma where alleged attack took place. The reason being bombing the place of staging of this false flag into oblivion and then saying that no we can not prove that attack didn’t happen. Obviously, it is not the case anymore, since Douma in under control of SAA and Russian MPs.

    Most people in Pentagon and, obviously, some in the so called IC understand consequences of attacking Russians directly–they know the score, they have calculated probabilities for a number of contingencies and none of them, obviously, looks good for CENTCOM assets in the area. But for the BORG there is no way back–and the reasons for that are way larger than Syria. We are talking about global realignment and major shift in power balance. This is not an easy thing to take to self-proclaimed “exceptional” people in Washington plus add here their utter lack of grasp of scales and proportions involved in a purely military aspect–it is difficult to those who never spent a day in uniform and whose military “expertise” is limited to few seminars on strategy and weapons and on, not always first class, work by Congressional Research Service. Thus, on American side we have today not rational players.” Pen Name – Smoothiex12

    There is definitive proof perfidious Albion (the damned Brits) staged the attack:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/it-was-known-all-along-just-never-said.html

    It Was Known All Along, Just Never Said Publicly. It Changed Now.

    The issue, however, is this: there is no denial that UK and its “intelligence” services were suspected in all these false flags be them hapless Skripals or Douma “chemical attack”. But when Russia’s Defense Ministry states this:

    “Today, the Russian defense ministry has other evidence proving the United Kingdom’s direct involvement in the organization of this provocation in Eastern Ghouta,” he said, adding that the so-called White Helmets had been pressed by London in a period from April 3 to 6 to hurry up with the implementation of the planned provocation.

    Unlike pathetic and hollow spectacle by London, it means Russia has real proof and the gloves started to come off. Could those rumors that Syrians (or Russians) hold couple of SAS POWs from Eastern Ghuta be true then? There are possible ramifications for… drum roll Steele and his BS “dossier” which may also factor mightily into all of that. But I think, Russia also just pointed out that if, God forbids, push comes to shove–first targets which will be shot down or sunk will be British ones. Let those ass-holes and war-criminals from 10 Downing Street sort it out after that. UK was clearly identified as a power behind Syria’s atrocity and this may be just the start.

    I truly hope if war starts the evil bastards who started this pay a heavy price, not just ordinary people like us.

    Read More
    • Agree: bluedog
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. @metamars
    I very much appreciate the sort and severity of question that this essay poses. However, it reflects the sort of blinkered view that I detect from the Russian government, itself. There appears to be no thought as to how to reach the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of the desirability of stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of methodology for stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public, after means of communication is determined.

    At least, as regards this essay, that is how I read
    "That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them. "

    So, my questions for the Saker is: do you think changing American public opinion is worth the effort, or are we - in your view - hopelessly "zombified"?

    Secondly, if we are not completely "zombified", then what suggestions do you have to stir Americans to ACTIONS to change the course of events?

    Please note that the a significant number of right wing media types, without whom I don't think Trump would be President, have not supported this latest lunacy by Trump. Specifically, Alex Jones of infowars (who openly called Douma "chemical attack" a false flag), Michael Savage, and Tucker Carlson.

    So, there are 3 examples of influencers who are not "zombified" - amongst the people they influence, there are millions. It is self evidently true that "zombification" is not monolithic, or incapable of being resisted.

    Unfortunately, you seem as devoid of ideas for de-zombifying the American public as the Russian government.

    I recently wrote of a no-brainer that would - barring censoring from Twitter - allow Putin to reach millions of Americans, every day. Both pro- and anti- Trump Americans.

    https://thesaker.is/trump-tries-to-tweet-russia-into-submission/#comment-509044

    Another idea leaps out: There are 1 million Russian Americans. Can they not arrange a speaking and debating tour by Sergei Lavrov? Yeah, I know that in an ideal world, he would be performing his #1 job of being Russia's top diplomat, but faced with the prospect of a NUCLEAR WAR, I think he could show enough flexibility to delegate to his reports. Last I heard, he's looking to retire, anyway, so ending his diplomatic duties is on his radar.

    A suggestion for billing for such events: "The Soviet Union was a US ally during WW2, suffering a loss of about 20 soldiers for every US soldier. Why are former allies currently at risk for a nuclear confrontation?"

    The question you ask is very good. The answer is less impressive. Some outside-the-box thinking would improve the answer.

    There appears to be no thought as to how to reach the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of the desirability of stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of methodology for stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public…

    The “American public” is a black hole of cynicism, nihilism, ignorance, and depravity that would consume any Quixote foolish enough to bring “enlightenment”. To go down that road would be folly of the highest order.

    I think we’ve all been around long enough, or had enough experience in our own public and private lives to know that America is a terminal case. The best we can do is to hasten its passing into the graveyard of history and to limit the blast radius of the inevitable implosion (explosion?). These are the desperate times when the only way to win the game is not to play. What does that mean in practice? Hunkering down, cutting your losses, consolidating real assets and resources, securing a solid redoubt. Putin’s course of not taking the bait is the best possible tactic, and is in fact the geopolitical analogue of the suggestions above. The only out of this for Russia, and by the Saker’s implication, “the resistance to the Empire” who are united with Russia in their defence of “sovereignty, independence, spirituality, traditions”, is to preserve the status quo. We just need to keep killing time. Stall them to death. They are headed straight for the abyss, and at this point, all we have to do to win is not to let them drag us down with them.

    I pray to God that Putin does not sink an American carrier or shoot down an American jet if he chooses to respond. I hope in fact that his response consists of moving all vital assets out of the way so that Trump declares victory over a patch of sand. The Saker is correct that the risks here are grave and enormous.

    That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them.

    Does this offend you somehow? This is the truth after all. Though, I guess, it makes sense that Americans would be offended by reality.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Druid says:
    @Harold Smith
    "This is not about good guys versus bad guys anymore. It’s about sane versus insane."

    I would have to disagree with this. As I see it, "insane" is a word used in an attempt to frame a spiritual condition as a "worldly" issue. What we're dealing with here is a spiritual war of "evil" vs "good."

    In its essence, U.S. foreign policy boils down to someone's attempt to establish Satan's kingdom on earth as per Isaiah 14:13,14.

    Someone made the deal with Satan that Jesus rejected (Luke 4:5-8), and that Satanic cult made the decision to knowingly, willingly and calculatingly "give worth to evil" (i.e. worship Satan) as a means of achieving unprecedented worldly gain.

    This Satanic cult, known as the first beast of Rev 13 (aka fourth beast of Daniel 7) attempts to rise to the top by bringing everybody else down. Thus the beast ostensibly gets to the top, evil destroys all "goodness" on earth (evil is only "bad" in comparison to good), and Satan "exalts [his] throne above the stars of God."

    Unfortunately, the beast wasn't planning on the re-emergence of Russia as a world military super power. Mighty Russia now stands squarely in the way of the beast's Satanic agenda. Just like Cain hated and ultimately murdered Abel (because evil hates a good example) the beast hates Russia.

    But the beast will fail because evil contains withn itself the seeds of its own destruction. The same corruption that brought the beast to power over the west prevents it from being an effective military force. Demon possessed people tend to have personality issues that ultimately result in catastrophic failure.

    Why not just say who you mean. The Ziofascists. And I hope you’re right about them getting their own, though I don’t see it!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  26. Will the neoliberal globalist elite really risk Armageddon or will they try to skulk away and rule the world from Asia? I predict a really nasty economic downfall for us in America.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. Looks like somebody made a decision to got to war. It also appears to be coordinated. If you could trace out a timeline of events leading here you might have an idea who is doing it.

    But, where to start and what elements should be put on the timeline?

    Julian Assange being silenced?

    Skripal case?

    Russia sanctions?

    Trump’s lawyer raided?

    It would be interesting to see a chart.

    Here is an interesting summary from someone who likes to connect dots.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato
    Frankly the Coalition of the Three Muscular Clobberers seems to have run a missile test with no objectives here. Only Syrian air defenses had to be engaged. The goal is vague. The assurances cheap. The haste unseemly. The completely disregard of anything that the UN is supposed to stand for, unbecoming.
    , @jilles dykstra
    Pearl Harbour, when the America First Committee ended its activities.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. @hunor
    This is your chance Steve, demonstrate how to make sense the none nitwit way. Please

    Steve made a valid point, you should thank him. There are many worthwhile comments to read here without wasting time trying to decipher ones written in some sort of obscure code.

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

    Saker, any chance the Russians are going to get off their hands and actually do something in Syria? When do we get the to see the S-400?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    No!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. anon[694] • Disclaimer says:

    It’s official. Trump is a Jew, as is Pence, Bolton, Haley, Mattis, May, Macron. All are Jews, fighting the Jews’ war with American lives and American weapons paid for by American taxpayers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Momus
    Fighting the good fight then.
    , @Moi
    If you want a career with career "advancement," then you're probably assured of success if you are Jewish--or you drink the Jewish kool-aid. Seen that all too often.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. Biff says:

    Does anybody seriously believe that Trump, May, Macron or Netanyahu would be willing to risk an apocalyptic thermonuclear war which could kill several hundred million people in just a few hours because Assad has used chemical weapons on tens, hundreds or even thousands of innocent Syrian civilians (assuming, just for argument’s sake, that this accusation is founded)? Since when do the AngloZionist care about Arabs?! This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever!

    I get a kick out the doofus politicians when they garble out concern over a group of people they have been bombing, and killing for decades. I had a good laugh when Obama sounded concerned about a few Libyans he never heard of before, and would sooner kill them for empire than save them.

    Who believes this crap?(unfortunately, a lot people do)

    “And you’ll be goin’ just the same! Three time the pain. Let your bullets fly like rain”
    Machine gun

    Jimi Hendrix

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    Trump crossed the Red Line. He stepped from America-First over to GLOB-First. Just when a long-suffering nation was emerging from its tragic misery, Trump did the bidding of globalists to further the tragedy of war. Shame on the US.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  33. El Dato says:
    @Si1ver1ock
    Looks like somebody made a decision to got to war. It also appears to be coordinated. If you could trace out a timeline of events leading here you might have an idea who is doing it.

    But, where to start and what elements should be put on the timeline?

    Julian Assange being silenced?

    Skripal case?

    Russia sanctions?

    Trump's lawyer raided?

    It would be interesting to see a chart.

    Here is an interesting summary from someone who likes to connect dots.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SfCWqX8w14

    Frankly the Coalition of the Three Muscular Clobberers seems to have run a missile test with no objectives here. Only Syrian air defenses had to be engaged. The goal is vague. The assurances cheap. The haste unseemly. The completely disregard of anything that the UN is supposed to stand for, unbecoming.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    WTF indeed.
    , @SteveRogers42
    Your writing style, entertaining.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. The news this morning here in Europe of course is about the attack, hardly ever is mentioned that Russia was warned in advance, as the last time.
    So I think Erdogan’s advisor is right until now, a show for internal USA political consumption.
    And a sign of the civil war in the White House, and/or, Trump trying to avoid the fate of Kennedy.
    Putin, also for political reasons, now must also do something, he also will warn in advance.
    Maybe atomic weapons are great, they prevent a world war.
    As to empires crumbling, not understanding, incapable of understanding that the end is near, degraded Great Britain to third rate country status.
    The process lasted from 1914 until 1945, as Churchill said ‘one long war’.
    Yet Churchill still is a hero.
    1956 was the final end of the illusion for Britain, as Eisenhower said ‘I had them U2′ed’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  35. @Si1ver1ock
    Looks like somebody made a decision to got to war. It also appears to be coordinated. If you could trace out a timeline of events leading here you might have an idea who is doing it.

    But, where to start and what elements should be put on the timeline?

    Julian Assange being silenced?

    Skripal case?

    Russia sanctions?

    Trump's lawyer raided?

    It would be interesting to see a chart.

    Here is an interesting summary from someone who likes to connect dots.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SfCWqX8w14

    Pearl Harbour, when the America First Committee ended its activities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. @Anon
    What use is the UN and the Hague?

    US is in Syria illegally, but UN does nothing.

    Bush and Obama are war criminals but Hague does nothing.

    In the end, principles be damned. It's about the power.

    Spinoza already explained that justice is based on power.
    This of course means that the power is not under jurisdiction.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @yurivku

    Americans don’t want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives.
     
    Just a BS. Americans want war, they are in majority stupid brainwashed idiots who believe in their indispensability and highest military power.
    Where are they protesting against their rulinig imbeciles?

    Theirs meeting with realitity could be very painful.

    Particularly on matters of war and peace it is desirable to be discriminating even at the expense of brevity. Surely the Americans who get puffed up with stupid belligerence are indeed either almost irredeemably stupid or very young. And for those who note the election and re-election of George W. Bush (by fewer than 50 per cent of those entitled to vote and voting) I invite attention to what moved them to vote that way. Given Trump’s anti-war statements before Americans elected him – and Obama’s vote against the Iraq war as a senator – it is a fair bet that it was for reasons that had nothing much to do with making war as a positive element.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johnny Rico

    Obama’s vote against the Iraq war as a senator
     
    Obama was elected to the Senate in November 2004. His introduction to the nation was earlier in 2004.

    The Iraq War was March 2003.

    So, no.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. Such religious references will, no doubt, irritate the many “enlightened” westerners for whom such language reeks of obscurantism, fanaticism, and bigotry. But in Russia or the Middle-East, such references are very much part of the national or religious ethos

    There is a consistently missing (not only The Saker) element in the many analysis of the West’s peculiar insanity; when it comes to the security structures, ‘secularism’ is factually overthrown and at best a mask or myth thinly concealing what is overlooked.

    From the view at the Pentagon, the contest with Russia is theological as much or more than anything else; why would this be any other way (from perspective) of history is the subject to explore. Manifest Destiny was an evangelical movement, Manifest Destiny 2.0 of today’s empire is little different:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/04/13/the-erudite-eduard-popov/

    ^ There is religion underlying either side’s motivation, and a real problem for Russia with the West is, the West’s perception Russia’s religion is the wrong religion… recalling Rome’s crusader era sack of Constantinople was one of ‘Christian on Christian’ violence -

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tsar Nicholas
    The British philosopher John Gray discusses your point about the theology of the West in his book "Black Mass."

    Modern capiatlism, he argues is every bit, if not more, revolutionary and destabilising of accepeted traditional values and cultural norms as Bolshevism. He may even have used the term "Market Leninism," but I'm not sure - I may have got this from elsewhere.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. “And while both are well-trained, well-armed and well-commanded, it is their spiritual power which will decide the outcome of the wars waged against them by the Hegemony. ”
    The attack on Syria by the empire just preceded the OPCW inspection of the factuality of the alleged chemical attack which would have either confirmed or denied the event. In the case of confirmation, the western aggression would have had the legal fig leaf for the aggression, and in the case of denial, the aggression would have been thwarted. This is the same scenario that preceded the war against Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction when the U.N. inspectors where in full mission trying to prove or disprove the existence of such weapons only to be decommisioned by a premature announcement of hostilities by George W. Busch boy. So one would have expected an outrage by the Western public over such policy shenanigans by Western leaders; well there was none of it. For the fact of the matter, the declining West is bereft of morality and spirituality save for very brave souls who despite their courage are so much overwhelmed by the treachery or the insousience of the many that they can hardly count for the Westerner’s conscience.
    Despite this flagrant act of aggression, most westerners will carry on with their lives with the predictable routine of near slave work to non stop sport and gossip entertainment to the plethora of hedonistic pursuits while relegating any political decision, notwithstanding its effects on peace or justice, to the deadly clowns of their ” representative democracy actors”, who are along with the news agents, nothing more than the puppets of the power that be who are with respect to morality what black is to white.
    The Saker’s contention that it is moral and spiritual fortitude that will eventually decide the outcome of the struggle between the empire and the resistance is very much true. Any close examination of the rise and fall of empires would confirm that the biggest enemy to a holding power is a moral decline more than the power of the enemy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  40. Maybe someone should tell “Saker” (and Paul Craig Roberts) to cool down and just stop writing these tiring and boring articles.
    Putin and most of the Russian elite surrounding Putin are part of “the Anglo Zionists”.
    I guess even the Chinese are members of the club. Russia/Putin is the controlled opposition.
    After long and “difficult” discussions with its “western partners” Putin authorized the “Anglo Zionist” to strike Syria.
    All this soap opera about the third world war is just that: a soap opera.
    It is very good to scare the proles and to increase the value of shares of some companies. Including Russian and Chinese companies. It’s win-win for the elite.
    I have no doubt whatsoever that the “Anglo Zionists” want to destroy Syria and Iran: the main objective of all this farce.
    But this objective can only be thwarted by the Iranians not, of course by the Russians, who are playing the role they were given. Otherwise, they would have put an end to this soap opera long time ago. They supposedly have the means to do that without starting the 3rd WW: They can just sell to the Iranians and Syrians some weapons…But it seems that they were/are not authorized to do so….by the…You guess.

    No one -except the main players-has all the information to know where the truth lies.
    Maybe Russia is not completely the controlled opposition. Russia is trying to become independent ?
    But one thing one can be sure: the role Russia/Putin is playing was written by someone else.
    Otherwise, Putin wouldn’t have as his best friend the warmonger and criminal that is responsible for the destruction of Iraq and Libya and Syria and the Palestinians. I am talking of course about the guy who is the true boss of Trump and was the boss of Obama, Clinton etc…
    Even diplomacy/hypocrisy has limits.
    Putin even allows the disgusting little Macron to play Napoleon. He allows the slut that is playing the role of British PM, to play Churchill…A well known war criminal…like the lance corporal that was put in power to destroy Germany and who is the only “monster” and war criminal the proles are allowed to hate.

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

    Stopped reading at Russians have better equipment and better soldiers. Hahahahahaha.

    https://imgur.com/a/Nu9Ir

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  42. Realist says:
    @istevefan
    Saker, any chance the Russians are going to get off their hands and actually do something in Syria? When do we get the to see the S-400?

    No!

    Read More
    • Replies: @istevefan
    If the Russians don't do anything, it just shows they are not ready for prime time. Why deploy to Syria in the first place if you are so easily cowered? I'd be embarrassed if I were Russian right now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. Another self-inflicted disaster for the AngloZionists was their support for the US/EU led coup in the Ukraine, which not only resulted in a calamity which the Europeans will have to pay for for many decades to come

    Hardly. The Ukraine has turned into an unmitigated disaster for Russia and a boon for Europe. The Russians were for the most part united against the West even before 2014, but now Putin has managed to turn every Ukrainian west of the Dnieper permanently against Russia. Ukrainian immigrants are now keeping the Polish and Slovak economies afloat and Germans and Poles are already buying up cheap assets all across Ukraine. If Russia keeps Ukraine too unstable to join the EU, probably better for the EU, as long as they have access to cheap Ukrainian labor and resources they aren’t complaining. Long term Putin will go down in Russian history as the man who lost Ukraine. Planting a flag in Crimea was a dumb and short-sighted trade for losing influence in Russia’s historical front-yard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    The Ukraine association, another nail in the EU coffin, in Dutch eyes.
    We voted against it.
    Crimea, who thought that Putin would give up his main naval base, Sebastopol ?
    Reactions on Dutch fora are more and more anti USA/NATO/EU, and pro Russia.
    The German left questions the strikes of last night, so does GB Corbyn.
    The Ukraine prize, oil and gas in the east, still not in USA's hands.
    Rumanian workers, a joke, drunk truck drivers, alas the accidents they cause are not jokes.
    , @RadicalCenter
    If Russia had not retaken the Crimea, the US would have put a naval base there, and then land troops and installations at will. Russia would be acquiescing in its own continuing encirclement if it allowed that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. @Antonio
    "These words could also be used to describe the relatively small Russian task force in Syria. In fact, there are numerous parallels which could be made between Hezbollah’s role and position in the Middle-East and Russia’s role and position in the world. And while both are well-trained, well-armed and well-commanded, it is their spiritual power which will decide the outcome of the wars waged against them by the Hegemony. AngloZionist secularists will never understand that – they just can’t – and that will bring their inevitable downfall. The only question is the price mankind will have to pay to have that last Empire finally bite the dust."

    Totally non-sense. The Israelis fighting Hezbollah are equally religiously fanatic. The more religiously fanatic of all (ISIS) is clearly defeated. Americans are more or less equally religious than Russians, if not more. Etc.

    The real difference in will power is not related to religion, or at least not only, and not for all countries. Americans don't want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives. OTOH, Russians are strongly united under Putin and, while they don't want invasion wars, they are totally supporting that their military should defend themselves and their allies if atacked, and don't mind to pay more taxes or the cost in lives. Hezbollah, Iran, etc. are fighting for their homeland. They haven't other place to go. Israelis are fighting to invade and submit their neighbours. Very different situations.

    The same can be said for DPRK, an atheistic country. As Putin once said, north koreans would rather eat grass than give up their nuclear weapons program.

    Wha’ chu sayin’?

    “The Israelis fighting Hezbollah are equally religiously fanatic.” Orthodox Jews are not often found in the Israeli military and Ultra-Orthodox Jews are exempt from military service, though the Israeli Supreme Court has recently ruled that exempting Ultra-Orthodox from military service is unconstitutional. So who are the “equally religiously” fanatical persons in the Israeli military? American Jews who want to learn how to be tough? Non-Orthodox conscripts? Secular conscripts? You mistake compulsion or chauvinism for religious belief.

    As to ISIS, there is no religious fanaticism there. ISIS is a bunch of hillbilly rednecks out for blood. Lord of the Flies! Anton leVey’s Church of Satan! Just a bunch of guys who enjoy killing people for fun. Sort of like the Phoenix Program in Vietnam.

    “Americans are more or less equally religious than Russians, if not more.” Come on! Worshiping money or TV or sex is hardly a religion worth following. As to Christianity, one must follow the words of Jesus Christ to be a Christian. The Roman church is merely a continuation of the Caesars. Protestantism is old testament Judaism (which present day Judaism is not). Neither of these sects follows the teachings of Jesus Christ.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    We attend a Protestant Church in the USA, and the focus is certainly NOT more Old Testament than New Testament.

    And we, like some other members of our church (though not enough) have ditched TV “service”, movies, and the depraved Hollywood violence/hypersexuality /homosexuality
    /transgender/perversion/mental illness culture entirely. This includes no longer giving a shit about dysfunctional and perverted “celebrities”, their disgusting lives, and their ignorant ill conceived childish political advice, and refusing to waste a minute talking or reading about them.

    Some of us are trying, bud, and more than a few of us in the USA. If this culture continues down the sewer, it’s not my family and friends contributing to it or passively following along.

    Finally, as should be obvious, one can be a Roman Catholic, Protestant, Ukrainian/Greek Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox Christian and be a good Christian and a good person.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Vojkan says:

    I agree with almost all stated in the article except one little thing: all Russia has to do when hostilities start is to take out Western communication satellites and then shoot stool pidgeons and sitting ducks. Without satellites, it’s game over. That’s why the Chinese have developed the capability to destroy them. If Russia has the capability, the West is no match in a conventional war. They have the numbers only on paper, in reality the number of capable soldiers they have doesn’t match the number of capable soldiers the Russians have. If the Russians don’t have the capacity to take out satellites, it’s game over before it even starts. For God’s sake, NATO couldn’t even defeat tiny Serbia’s military and had to resort to threat of mass killing civilians to make Milošević accept only what he already accepted before the Rambouillet ultimatum. Granted, bombing Serbia was a goal in itself regardless of any other officially stated goal, as Serbs are always regarded by the West, rightly or wrongly, as little Russians so bombing them is the next best thing to bombing Russia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. Vojkan says:
    @El Dato
    Frankly the Coalition of the Three Muscular Clobberers seems to have run a missile test with no objectives here. Only Syrian air defenses had to be engaged. The goal is vague. The assurances cheap. The haste unseemly. The completely disregard of anything that the UN is supposed to stand for, unbecoming.

    WTF indeed.

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

    Mate, contact your mother ship immediately.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. Momus says:
    @anon
    It's official. Trump is a Jew, as is Pence, Bolton, Haley, Mattis, May, Macron. All are Jews, fighting the Jews' war with American lives and American weapons paid for by American taxpayers.

    Fighting the good fight then.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  49. Mrs Thatcher was one of the most divisive British prime ministers in postwar history and was liked and loathed in roughly equal measure. She had her moment of triumph with the Falklands War against Argentina, which at so many points could have become a disaster.

    Thatcher had a tough stance towards the Soviet Union,a position which earned her the soubriquet “Iron Lady.” Nevertheless, I cannot believe that even Mrs Thatcher,an intelligent woman who was a lawyer as well as a scientist, would have risked a nuclear war for an entirely fictitious chemical weapons attack.

    We don’t need to ponder merely the evil of the shadowy controllers of this Empire, whoever they may be. We need to consider too the moral and intellectual weakness of the frontmen (and women), the current generation of politicians.

    Mrs May risked the future existence of her country for the right to send four – FOUR(!) planes to join in this attack on innocent civilians. A poor show frrom any half-decent human being, let alone a woman who boasts of being a vicar’s daughter.

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

    This is a great description by Saker of where Germany stood in 1941. Since 1933 Saker’s Anglo-zionists had conducted an economic war against her. In fact, a complete embargo of all German products and exports was declared upon Hitler winning the elections of 1933. Germany, without gold, had also been completely cut off from the Anglo-zionist usury money machine, unlike Russia today.

    All those little struggling fragments of Zionist shattered empires strewn about all around Germany were teetering on collapse, just as now in the ex-CIS, due to Zio-banking. Slovakia had sided with the Germans against the artificial Versailles construct of Czechoslovakia which had doomed them to a slow genocidal purge like the Hungarians and Sudetans, but Slovakia was no more a loyal partner to the German resistance to Zionism than Belorussia is to Russia today.

    There was the German rescue of Danzig that is so similar to the Russian rescue of Crimea. Hitler proceeded to take all of Poland when the ango-zio-empire declared war on Germany. Putin failed to secure Ukraine from the anglo-zionists, he could afford to. To Hitler’s demise, he didn’t have the strategic depth of Russia, and couldn’t allow the anglo-zionists to use Poland against him.

    Then we have Stalin’s incredible hordes of offensive tanks (~24000 vs ~8000 German) of which the vast majority were heavier armored, heavier gunned, faster, and many were even amphibious to cross the rivers of Poland and Germany. The Germans were hopelessly out gunned and out numbered by the Soviets and their Anlgo-zionist allies, yet they prevailed in same way Saker thinks Russia will. Germany mostly had flimsy and lightly armed Pkw I and II tanks. The USSR, well supplied by the Zio-empire, had incedible advantages in numbers of artillery, aircraft, soldiers, paratroopers, you name it.

    Even these fake chemical weapons attacks in Syria have their parallels in ’40′s battles for the destruction of Germany and Russia, namely Gleiwitz and the vom Rath murder (Kristalnacht), both of which were Anglo-zionist false flags and war provocations. The slaughter of ethnic Germans in Sudetanland and Prussia is strikingly similar to the recent zio-slaughter of ethnic Russians in Novorussia.

    Unfortunately, so many like Saker still buy the wikipedia version of WWII hook, line and sinker and accept lies like bogus Nazi war crimes. Katyn forest and the murders commited by Russians under orders from their jewish kommisars to cover it up far, far exceeds any Zio-difficulties Russia is facing in Syria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato

    Even these fake chemical weapons attacks in Syria have their parallels in ’40′s battles for the destruction of Germany and Russia, namely Gleiwitz and the vom Rath murder (Kristalnacht), both of which were Anglo-zionist false flags and war provocations.
     
    Gleiwitz ... a German false flag performed to have a nice reason to start firing the very next day ... declared actually a false flag of "Anglo-Zionists"?

    I guess Hollywood-style Orwellian historical unlogic is everywhere.

    Next you will be declaring that Hitler and his Prussian Generalstab ready to test their mettle at winning THIS TIME 'ROUND were actually rudely awakened by Polish guns firing on the Schleswig-Holstein from the Westerplatte.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  51. Quotes:
    Military Officer:
    Furthermore, as one Novorussian officer commented, “the further West we go, the less we are seen as liberators and the more as occupiers”.
    &
    Anrei (“Saker”) Raevsky:
    In reality, Russia is no threat to anybody at all.

    In light of current facts on the ground, these two quotes appear contradictory. I agree with the first one but not the second one, nor would the people of Poland and Lithuania.

    The author’s reference to “Baltic statelets” is very telling. Most Europeans likely agree that Russia would be in a much stronger legal and moral position if it were to finally end its ongoing illegal occupation of the Stalinist enclave in the Königsberg / Kaliningrad region, which does not belong to Russia.

    For informative background (including links) about this unresolved conflict perpetuating the Cold War in Europe, see my five initial contributions, a few days ago, in the commentary thread at the following link:

    http://www.unz.com/jpetras/why-the-uk-the-eu-and-the-us-gang-up-on-russia/

    Once Russian leaders and their apologists face up to that issue and come clean to relieve themselves of their uncomfortable and surely embarrassing burden as occupiers maintaining a threatening military posture, they will eventually earn more respect from Europeans and others.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ploni almoni
    Let's start by giving back Palestine. Then California. Then Northern Ireland, then.... And then we will have earned your respect. Who are you, by the way? Do you really know? Yes you will say, our fathers were... but really. To lie to others, you first have to lie to yourself.
    , @Jesse James
    The US should end its Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, Trump- era military occupation of Western and Eastern European countries spanning the last 73 years. How about it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. Herald says:

    The NATO thugs have settled for a token strike, in effect a cop out for now. No doubt the Russians have colluded in this pantomime but nevertheless appear to have acted too timidly. This token show of strength will nevertheless embolden the war hawks and Russia will be called to give a better account of itself in the inevitable next time around. Speaking quietly and carrying a big stick will not work forever.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    I am more and more puzzled about the why of launching 101, it is said, obsolete cruise missiles, that seem to have done no damage at all.
    Who benefits ?
    The only statement that has significance in my opinion is what Putin said: the refugees will again flood to Europe.
    Was this the objective ?
    If yes, at a high price to the west, loss of prestige.
    How will Rocketman see Trump as a serious man, when he meets him in one or two months time ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  53. Dante says:
    @metamars
    I very much appreciate the sort and severity of question that this essay poses. However, it reflects the sort of blinkered view that I detect from the Russian government, itself. There appears to be no thought as to how to reach the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of the desirability of stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of methodology for stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public, after means of communication is determined.

    At least, as regards this essay, that is how I read
    "That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them. "

    So, my questions for the Saker is: do you think changing American public opinion is worth the effort, or are we - in your view - hopelessly "zombified"?

    Secondly, if we are not completely "zombified", then what suggestions do you have to stir Americans to ACTIONS to change the course of events?

    Please note that the a significant number of right wing media types, without whom I don't think Trump would be President, have not supported this latest lunacy by Trump. Specifically, Alex Jones of infowars (who openly called Douma "chemical attack" a false flag), Michael Savage, and Tucker Carlson.

    So, there are 3 examples of influencers who are not "zombified" - amongst the people they influence, there are millions. It is self evidently true that "zombification" is not monolithic, or incapable of being resisted.

    Unfortunately, you seem as devoid of ideas for de-zombifying the American public as the Russian government.

    I recently wrote of a no-brainer that would - barring censoring from Twitter - allow Putin to reach millions of Americans, every day. Both pro- and anti- Trump Americans.

    https://thesaker.is/trump-tries-to-tweet-russia-into-submission/#comment-509044

    Another idea leaps out: There are 1 million Russian Americans. Can they not arrange a speaking and debating tour by Sergei Lavrov? Yeah, I know that in an ideal world, he would be performing his #1 job of being Russia's top diplomat, but faced with the prospect of a NUCLEAR WAR, I think he could show enough flexibility to delegate to his reports. Last I heard, he's looking to retire, anyway, so ending his diplomatic duties is on his radar.

    A suggestion for billing for such events: "The Soviet Union was a US ally during WW2, suffering a loss of about 20 soldiers for every US soldier. Why are former allies currently at risk for a nuclear confrontation?"

    The question you ask is very good. The answer is less impressive. Some outside-the-box thinking would improve the answer.

    That was absolutely brilliant, Well said and thanks for writing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Lenin said – “practice is the criterion of a truth”,
     
    Well, Lenin was reiterating Hegel and Clausewitz, of who Lenin was a great admirer. In reality, the original from early 1800s sounded as: "it is legitimate to judge event by its outcome for it is the soundest criterion."

    I love that quote and I am very happy that it did not come from Lenin.

    His outcome in Russia would be an indictment of his project.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
    What outcome? The fact that USA does not dare to do anything against Russia and Russian forces in Syria is direct outcome of Lenin policies and continuation of those by great Stalin. What you are observing in Russian capabilities now is result of educational and scientific progress which started under Lenin policies backed by his words Study, study and yet more study and then continued by Stalin and following Soviet leaders. The fact that last Soviet leadership and early Russian leader Yeltsin happened to be traitorous morons has
    nothing to do with Lenin. Following your logic Washington project outcome is Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama and Current Mr. Twitter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. Moi says:
    @Antonio
    "All the Empire needs to do is first fire a large number of dumb old Tomahawk cruise missiles, let the Russian use their stores of air defense missiles and then follow-up with their more advanced weapons."

    That assumes that Russia can't destroy the missile launch platforms. That's not really the case.

    Putin is weak. The more sand he gets kicked in face, the more he wants to have normal relations with the US. Russia will not confront the US unless it involves a situation like Crimea/Ukraine. The US has moved weapons right up to Russia’s border. And what does Putin do? Nothing, but more happy talk.

    PS: As for Saker noting that people in the east believe in God and use religious terms, thank God for that.

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

    The ‘western’ desire to utterly subdue Russia is a Germanic thing. It is the Germanic desire to obliterate whatever politically, nationally, culturally, ethnically, linguistically, religiously stands in its way of conquest of all the known world.

    The Germanic imperative, if you will, is endless aggression, endless warring to add more territory and more client states and make each client state more helpless before whomever and whatever at the moment is kingpin of that Germanic imperial thrust.

    If that which is Germanic is not ‘forced’ by something (even conditions of poverty, but more effectively by religion wrapped tightly in non-Germanic language and culture) to behave, it will always be going a-viking. Germanic culture being itself is a raider. It lives to expand itself, at least its wealth and political tentacles, by military conflict, which means by theft and extortion, which require killing.

    ‘Viking’, raiding with all the rapine it takes to grab what is desired and hold it, is not the name of the northernmost Germanic tribes. ‘Viking’ is what Germanics do if they are not forced to behave.

    Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes. The ethnic base of WASP culture is Germanic

    World Wars 1 and 2 are best understood as the WASPs’ willingness to destroy all of Europe to make certain that they, and not the heirs of Prussians, Bavarians, and Continental Saxons, would remain the Germanics in control of the globe.

    And now the WASP Empire, the Anglo-Zionist Empire, has its sights set on forever extinguishing what it – very much like the Nazis and earlier Continental Germans – perceives as ‘the Slavic problem,’ which necessarily becomes a long campaign to destroy Russia. so the Germanics can use the resources of Eastern Europe as their superior minds wish.

    The Ukraine is soon to be turned into the bread basket serving Germanic peoples and war machines that Hitler and the Nazis dreamed of.

    We do live in times that mirror Tolkien’s fiction. And the Mordor, the power that would destroy the world in order to grasp the One Ring to Rule Them All, is not Russia, is not China, is not Iran, is not North Korea. Mordor is the WASP Empire, the Anglo-Zionist Empire, which now features the horror that is the House of Saud as not merely an ally, but as a very close client state, a part of the second ring of the inner circle.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Great theory, except that the people who would allegedly be served in Germany, France, and formerly-great formerly-Britain are not Germanic but Muslim Africans, arabs, and Pakistanis. The number of actual Germanic people in the world dwindles by the day.

    I rue that, just like I’m saddened by the fact that the Slavic peoples are generally dying out too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. @Peter Akuleyev
    Another self-inflicted disaster for the AngloZionists was their support for the US/EU led coup in the Ukraine, which not only resulted in a calamity which the Europeans will have to pay for for many decades to come

    Hardly. The Ukraine has turned into an unmitigated disaster for Russia and a boon for Europe. The Russians were for the most part united against the West even before 2014, but now Putin has managed to turn every Ukrainian west of the Dnieper permanently against Russia. Ukrainian immigrants are now keeping the Polish and Slovak economies afloat and Germans and Poles are already buying up cheap assets all across Ukraine. If Russia keeps Ukraine too unstable to join the EU, probably better for the EU, as long as they have access to cheap Ukrainian labor and resources they aren't complaining. Long term Putin will go down in Russian history as the man who lost Ukraine. Planting a flag in Crimea was a dumb and short-sighted trade for losing influence in Russia's historical front-yard.

    The Ukraine association, another nail in the EU coffin, in Dutch eyes.
    We voted against it.
    Crimea, who thought that Putin would give up his main naval base, Sebastopol ?
    Reactions on Dutch fora are more and more anti USA/NATO/EU, and pro Russia.
    The German left questions the strikes of last night, so does GB Corbyn.
    The Ukraine prize, oil and gas in the east, still not in USA’s hands.
    Rumanian workers, a joke, drunk truck drivers, alas the accidents they cause are not jokes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Moi says:
    @Philip Owen
    Saker is very ill but it is true that Gavrilo Princep shot just one person and that triggered a massive mistake by the Tsar ... Are 20,000 Russian military in Syria worth a repeat performance?

    You could incinerate all of the 20k Russkies, and Putin would seek a comprise. Putin is neither smart nor strong, something he’s repeatedly demonstrated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  59. Moi says:
    @anon
    It's official. Trump is a Jew, as is Pence, Bolton, Haley, Mattis, May, Macron. All are Jews, fighting the Jews' war with American lives and American weapons paid for by American taxpayers.

    If you want a career with career “advancement,” then you’re probably assured of success if you are Jewish–or you drink the Jewish kool-aid. Seen that all too often.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. @Herald
    The NATO thugs have settled for a token strike, in effect a cop out for now. No doubt the Russians have colluded in this pantomime but nevertheless appear to have acted too timidly. This token show of strength will nevertheless embolden the war hawks and Russia will be called to give a better account of itself in the inevitable next time around. Speaking quietly and carrying a big stick will not work forever.

    I am more and more puzzled about the why of launching 101, it is said, obsolete cruise missiles, that seem to have done no damage at all.
    Who benefits ?
    The only statement that has significance in my opinion is what Putin said: the refugees will again flood to Europe.
    Was this the objective ?
    If yes, at a high price to the west, loss of prestige.
    How will Rocketman see Trump as a serious man, when he meets him in one or two months time ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    There is probably a hidden war going on among the western oligarchs, between crazed Zionists (whose mouthpieces are the neocon/neo-Likudniks) and the intelligence organs, and remnants of the old foreign policy/military elite. The former want chaos and instability, the latter wants old-fashioned imperialism. Sadly the old guard is losing this battle (humanity itself is at stake), these ineffectual missile strikes will not assuage the warmongers.
    , @GourmetDan

    I am more and more puzzled about the why of launching 101, it is said, obsolete cruise missiles, that seem to have done no damage at all.
    Who benefits ?
     
    This was all telegraphed to the Russians (and Syrians) to minimize casualties and real damage... perhaps Trump gets to trumpet his strong 'response' and satisfy his zio handlers without causing any significant damage in Syria..
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  61. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    Only anti-Semitic Americans don’t want to go to war for the glory of Apartheid Israel. We should be happy to disappear in a burst of radioactive haze to ensure Israel’s survival!

    If Israel wants Syria completely destroyed and Assad murdered, then by G-d, we’ll do it for their sake and to hell with any foreign policy of our own.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  62. @Philip Owen
    Saker is very ill but it is true that Gavrilo Princep shot just one person and that triggered a massive mistake by the Tsar ... Are 20,000 Russian military in Syria worth a repeat performance?

    Hey, Joe, put down your gun and come over here a minute.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  63. @Anon
    What use is the UN and the Hague?

    US is in Syria illegally, but UN does nothing.

    Bush and Obama are war criminals but Hague does nothing.

    In the end, principles be damned. It's about the power.

    Nuremberg trials were NOT possible until Heroes of Red Army paid high price in LIVES and hoisted Hammer and Sickle over House of Evil in Berlin.
    Myself, my children and their children OWE our lives to brave HEROES of Red Army under your great leadership.
    Thanks and Glory to Uncle Stalin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    Were you proud when you heard about your "heroes" raping every female in conquered Germany, from 8 to 80 years old? Did your heart swell when you heard about the good Russian soldiers who tried to prevent the rapes being arrested and sent to prison camps? What about the murder of the Poles at Katyn? Did that make you proud of your "heroes"? The Soviet Military was as evil, perhaps more evil, than the Nazis.
    , @Greg Bacon
    HEROES of Red Army?

    Try reading Thom Goodrich's "Hellstorm: The death of Nazi Germany" and see what your 'heroes' did to around 2 million German females, raping any female between the age of 8-80. They also murdered millions more, mostly civilians, who died from exposure when they were kicked out of their homes or denied food and water or just beaten to death.

    https://youtu.be/Ck-TEamhLBk
    , @Wally
    On the Nuremberg Show Trials:

    - The Soviet communists presented a detailed study of steam chambers which was accepted a Nuremberg, no study for the now alleged pesticide using 'gas chambers' was ever presented at Nuremberg, or any other court
    - statements by 'eyewitnesses' and 'survivors' defy laws of science' and are immensely contradictory
    - it was admitted by those participating in the Nuremberg show trials that Germans were routinely tortured to get 'confessions'
    - the absurd 'gas chambers' were given 'judicial notice' (accepted as fact in post war trials and could not be argued against) even though no forensic study for these 'gas chambers' was ever presented, so the falsely accused had little chance for defense, how convenient it all was
    - the so called 'most documented event in world history' in fact has no documents which support the ridiculous '6M & gas chambers', no Hitler order, no orders from anyone to confirm the laughable claims
    - English translations of Russian translations of Polish copies of an alleged German original which cannot be found. That is typical of Nuremberg 'documents'.
    - All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:" 23.1.49, The Sunday Pictorial (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21.The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months..The investigators would put a black hood over the accused's head, punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses. Observer & American judge, van Roden
    - Judge van Roden's allegation of torture to gain "confessions" is confirmed by Texas Supreme Court Judge, Gordon Simpson. He confirmed that savage beatings, smashing of testicles, and months of solitary confinement occurred. Congressional Record, appendix v. 95, sec.12, 3/10/49
    -U.S. Congressional Representative, Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin said:
    " The Nuremberg Trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history."
    Congressional Record, appendix, v.95, sec.14, 6/15/49
    - "The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to [Bernard] Clarke the blows and screams were endless. Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: 'Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.'"(12)
    12.R. Butler, Legions of Death, Hamlyn, (London, 1983), p.237
    - The admission of Bernard Clarke was corroborated by Mr. Ken Jones in 'The Wrexham Leader', October 17, 1986.
    Mr. Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery stationed at Heid in Schleswig-Holstein.
    "They brought him to us when he refused to cooperate over questioning about his activites during the war. He came in the winter of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks," recalls Mr. Jones. Two other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Hoess in his cell to help break him down for interrogation."
    "We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed with axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to help break down his resistance," said Mr. Jones.
    When Hoess was taken out for exercise, he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.
    - "The London Cage was used partly as a torture centre, inside which large numbers of German officers and soldiers were subjected to systematic ill-treatment. In total 3,573 men passed through the Cage, and more than 1,000 were persuaded to give statements about war crimes. The brutality did not end with the war, moreover: a number of German civilians joined the servicemen who were interrogated there up to 1948.
    As the work of the Cage was wound down, the interrogation of prisoners was switched to a number of internment camps in Germany. And there is evidence that the treatment meted out in these places was, if anything, far worse. While many of the papers relating to these interrogation centres remain sealed at the Foreign Office, it is clear that one camp in the British zone became particularly notorious. At least two German prisoners starved to death there, according to a court of inquiry, while others were shot for minor offences.

    www.codoh.com
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. @metamars
    I very much appreciate the sort and severity of question that this essay poses. However, it reflects the sort of blinkered view that I detect from the Russian government, itself. There appears to be no thought as to how to reach the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of the desirability of stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public. Neither is there any suggestion of methodology for stimulating anti-war ACTION by the American public, after means of communication is determined.

    At least, as regards this essay, that is how I read
    "That kind of nonsense is just “mental prolefeed” for the mentally deficient, politically blinded or otherwise zombified ideological drones who, from the Maine, to the Gulf of Tonkin, to NATO’s Gladio bombing of the Bologna train-station, to the best and greatest of them all – 9/11 of course – will just believe anything “their” (as they believe) side tells them. "

    So, my questions for the Saker is: do you think changing American public opinion is worth the effort, or are we - in your view - hopelessly "zombified"?

    Secondly, if we are not completely "zombified", then what suggestions do you have to stir Americans to ACTIONS to change the course of events?

    Please note that the a significant number of right wing media types, without whom I don't think Trump would be President, have not supported this latest lunacy by Trump. Specifically, Alex Jones of infowars (who openly called Douma "chemical attack" a false flag), Michael Savage, and Tucker Carlson.

    So, there are 3 examples of influencers who are not "zombified" - amongst the people they influence, there are millions. It is self evidently true that "zombification" is not monolithic, or incapable of being resisted.

    Unfortunately, you seem as devoid of ideas for de-zombifying the American public as the Russian government.

    I recently wrote of a no-brainer that would - barring censoring from Twitter - allow Putin to reach millions of Americans, every day. Both pro- and anti- Trump Americans.

    https://thesaker.is/trump-tries-to-tweet-russia-into-submission/#comment-509044

    Another idea leaps out: There are 1 million Russian Americans. Can they not arrange a speaking and debating tour by Sergei Lavrov? Yeah, I know that in an ideal world, he would be performing his #1 job of being Russia's top diplomat, but faced with the prospect of a NUCLEAR WAR, I think he could show enough flexibility to delegate to his reports. Last I heard, he's looking to retire, anyway, so ending his diplomatic duties is on his radar.

    A suggestion for billing for such events: "The Soviet Union was a US ally during WW2, suffering a loss of about 20 soldiers for every US soldier. Why are former allies currently at risk for a nuclear confrontation?"

    The question you ask is very good. The answer is less impressive. Some outside-the-box thinking would improve the answer.

    “Another idea leaps out: There are 1 million Russian Americans. Can they not arrange a speaking and debating tour by Sergei Lavrov?”
    The one million Russian Americans are something like 92% Jewish for some reason, so one would think their sympathies lie with Netanyahu or with the Kaganate of Nuland. But yes, it is worth a try to ask Masha Gessen of the New Yorker and the New York Times to sponsor a speaking tour by Lavrov. We have a whole week for the world to wake up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  65. @Wizard of Oz
    Particularly on matters of war and peace it is desirable to be discriminating even at the expense of brevity. Surely the Americans who get puffed up with stupid belligerence are indeed either almost irredeemably stupid or very young. And for those who note the election and re-election of George W. Bush (by fewer than 50 per cent of those entitled to vote and voting) I invite attention to what moved them to vote that way. Given Trump's anti-war statements before Americans elected him - and Obama's vote against the Iraq war as a senator - it is a fair bet that it was for reasons that had nothing much to do with making war as a positive element.

    Obama’s vote against the Iraq war as a senator

    Obama was elected to the Senate in November 2004. His introduction to the nation was earlier in 2004.

    The Iraq War was March 2003.

    So, no.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Tanks. Indeed not as a Senator, but I think he was truly critical at the right time - unlike Donap Trump whatever he now pretends. Right?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Z-man says:

    Step one: the AngloZionists strike Syria hard enough to force the Russians to retaliate.

    Argument ended. Saner minds, I can’t believe it but ‘slurpy dog’ Mattis actually constrained Zio-Trump, prevailed and just had a limited strike against the ‘chemical’ targets.
    We have to get the NEOCON’s out of power. Targeted assassinations work for the Zionists it should work for us!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  67. Johann says:
    @anonymous
    It's gotten hard to visualize what the next few steps might be since things no longer seem to be conducted on a basis of rationality. It's not just Trump but May and Macron also; what is their thinking? It's obvious by now that ISIS and the other so-called rebels were a creation of an alliance of states led by the US. The jihadis have run through an enormous amount of weapons and ammo in this war and clearly they've been generously supplied by the US and it's allies since the rebels don't own any arms or ammo factories themselves; they're the beneficiaries of state actors who've recruited, organized, trained, supplied and mapped out their strategies. Since the rebels have been mostly thwarted perhaps it's been decided that only direct intervention can save their project of demolishing Syria. This obsession with Syria is downright bizarre and how any of it serves US interests is impossible to see. In related news Pompeo has bragged that the US killed hundreds, not dozens, of Russian mercs in that Feb incident in Syria. That has to ratchet tensions up.
    One reality that emerges is that in surveying the carnage unleashed by the US throughout the entire Middle East and Afghanistan there's not the slightest concern about causing hundreds of thousands of people to die and causing millions to become miserable refugees. There is something that goes beyond the merely inhumane in all this; it has become a force of evil in the world.

    There is something remarkably demonic about the American soul that absolutely loves war. The infamous theme song of the American military : The Battle Hymn Of The Republic” absolutely glorifies and sanctifies War with its praising his terrible swift sword. This was written to cheer on the America Civil War which brought about almost one million casualties on the American population. The leader of this war has a little temple built to him in DC where Americans bring their children so that they can learn to worship him. From the beginning of the twentieth century until the present the American War Department has been engaged in endless wars sanctified by their constitutional government “of the people”. In Japanese and German cities countless civilians including many many children were incinerated by American bombs dropped by heroic young American men barely out of high school. Nowadays the same military tactic has been sanitized by using misiles and drones so that the current crop of bombardiers can sit behind their computer screens and reek havoc on the rest of the world. America delenda est.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Z-man
    Good post but don't forget the power of the Cabal in getting us into wars also.
    The Zionist yoke has to be broken!
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
    Congratulations, you win "The Stupidest Comment of the Day" award. You may now resume your habit of gargling Drano.
    , @Yankee Doodle Dipsh-t
    "America delenda est."

    Truer words were never spoken. The whole world will be much safer when this land mass is broken into smaller, saner successor states with less capacity to push other countries around, and freed from US government indoctrination. Look what a shithole this government has made of this land. Bottom of the barrel in just about every category. We might as well live in Saudi or Myanmar:

    http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Indicators/Pages/HRIndicatorsIndex.aspx

    The US government doesn't measure up to world standards. All they know how to do is blow shit up. What good does that do me? US government brainwashing puts flags on every stick and constantly drones American this, American that.

    I'm not an American. I am a resident of the North American land mass, and a psycho-killer kleptocracy called the USA has got its hooks in me. Screw America, it's male-believe government crap. Let's do to the USA what we did to the USSR, slough the beltway parasites off and put them out to pasture. Break it up. And have another Nuremberg Tribunal to hang the worst of them.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @anonymous
    It's gotten hard to visualize what the next few steps might be since things no longer seem to be conducted on a basis of rationality. It's not just Trump but May and Macron also; what is their thinking? It's obvious by now that ISIS and the other so-called rebels were a creation of an alliance of states led by the US. The jihadis have run through an enormous amount of weapons and ammo in this war and clearly they've been generously supplied by the US and it's allies since the rebels don't own any arms or ammo factories themselves; they're the beneficiaries of state actors who've recruited, organized, trained, supplied and mapped out their strategies. Since the rebels have been mostly thwarted perhaps it's been decided that only direct intervention can save their project of demolishing Syria. This obsession with Syria is downright bizarre and how any of it serves US interests is impossible to see. In related news Pompeo has bragged that the US killed hundreds, not dozens, of Russian mercs in that Feb incident in Syria. That has to ratchet tensions up.
    One reality that emerges is that in surveying the carnage unleashed by the US throughout the entire Middle East and Afghanistan there's not the slightest concern about causing hundreds of thousands of people to die and causing millions to become miserable refugees. There is something that goes beyond the merely inhumane in all this; it has become a force of evil in the world.

    None of this serves any US or European interest, only Israeli. On full display is just how captive western institutions are to Organized Jewry.

    Read More
    • Agree: Z-man
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @jilles dykstra
    I am more and more puzzled about the why of launching 101, it is said, obsolete cruise missiles, that seem to have done no damage at all.
    Who benefits ?
    The only statement that has significance in my opinion is what Putin said: the refugees will again flood to Europe.
    Was this the objective ?
    If yes, at a high price to the west, loss of prestige.
    How will Rocketman see Trump as a serious man, when he meets him in one or two months time ?

    There is probably a hidden war going on among the western oligarchs, between crazed Zionists (whose mouthpieces are the neocon/neo-Likudniks) and the intelligence organs, and remnants of the old foreign policy/military elite. The former want chaos and instability, the latter wants old-fashioned imperialism. Sadly the old guard is losing this battle (humanity itself is at stake), these ineffectual missile strikes will not assuage the warmongers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. @Been_there_done_that
    Quotes:
    Military Officer:
    Furthermore, as one Novorussian officer commented, “the further West we go, the less we are seen as liberators and the more as occupiers”.
    &
    Anrei ("Saker") Raevsky:
    In reality, Russia is no threat to anybody at all.

    In light of current facts on the ground, these two quotes appear contradictory. I agree with the first one but not the second one, nor would the people of Poland and Lithuania.

    The author's reference to "Baltic statelets" is very telling. Most Europeans likely agree that Russia would be in a much stronger legal and moral position if it were to finally end its ongoing illegal occupation of the Stalinist enclave in the Königsberg / Kaliningrad region, which does not belong to Russia.

    For informative background (including links) about this unresolved conflict perpetuating the Cold War in Europe, see my five initial contributions, a few days ago, in the commentary thread at the following link:

    http://www.unz.com/jpetras/why-the-uk-the-eu-and-the-us-gang-up-on-russia/

    Once Russian leaders and their apologists face up to that issue and come clean to relieve themselves of their uncomfortable and surely embarrassing burden as occupiers maintaining a threatening military posture, they will eventually earn more respect from Europeans and others.

    Let’s start by giving back Palestine. Then California. Then Northern Ireland, then…. And then we will have earned your respect. Who are you, by the way? Do you really know? Yes you will say, our fathers were… but really. To lie to others, you first have to lie to yourself.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  71. Z-man says:
    @Johann
    There is something remarkably demonic about the American soul that absolutely loves war. The infamous theme song of the American military : The Battle Hymn Of The Republic” absolutely glorifies and sanctifies War with its praising his terrible swift sword. This was written to cheer on the America Civil War which brought about almost one million casualties on the American population. The leader of this war has a little temple built to him in DC where Americans bring their children so that they can learn to worship him. From the beginning of the twentieth century until the present the American War Department has been engaged in endless wars sanctified by their constitutional government “of the people”. In Japanese and German cities countless civilians including many many children were incinerated by American bombs dropped by heroic young American men barely out of high school. Nowadays the same military tactic has been sanitized by using misiles and drones so that the current crop of bombardiers can sit behind their computer screens and reek havoc on the rest of the world. America delenda est.

    Good post but don’t forget the power of the Cabal in getting us into wars also.
    The Zionist yoke has to be broken!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. Joe Wong says:
    @Antonio
    "These words could also be used to describe the relatively small Russian task force in Syria. In fact, there are numerous parallels which could be made between Hezbollah’s role and position in the Middle-East and Russia’s role and position in the world. And while both are well-trained, well-armed and well-commanded, it is their spiritual power which will decide the outcome of the wars waged against them by the Hegemony. AngloZionist secularists will never understand that – they just can’t – and that will bring their inevitable downfall. The only question is the price mankind will have to pay to have that last Empire finally bite the dust."

    Totally non-sense. The Israelis fighting Hezbollah are equally religiously fanatic. The more religiously fanatic of all (ISIS) is clearly defeated. Americans are more or less equally religious than Russians, if not more. Etc.

    The real difference in will power is not related to religion, or at least not only, and not for all countries. Americans don't want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives. OTOH, Russians are strongly united under Putin and, while they don't want invasion wars, they are totally supporting that their military should defend themselves and their allies if atacked, and don't mind to pay more taxes or the cost in lives. Hezbollah, Iran, etc. are fighting for their homeland. They haven't other place to go. Israelis are fighting to invade and submit their neighbours. Very different situations.

    The same can be said for DPRK, an atheistic country. As Putin once said, north koreans would rather eat grass than give up their nuclear weapons program.

    But there seems a lot of Latinos, Blacks and MEers in the American invasion forces doing the gruesome business diligently.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Z-man

    But there seems a lot of Latinos, Blacks and MEers in the American invasion forces doing the gruesome business diligently.
     
    A new and diverse generation of sheeple for the ZioCons to manipulate.
    , @prusmc
    WHERE ARE THOSE MEers? IN over 30 years, I remember only 3 men who I can say were Jews because they said they were Jews. In those days no one went around broadcasting their religion or lack of it. I remember 4 Arabs and I believe they were Christians. True about the large number of Latinos good dependable, force multipliers. There also was a large number of Blacks filling billets on the TOE.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. @yurivku

    Americans don’t want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives.
     
    Just a BS. Americans want war, they are in majority stupid brainwashed idiots who believe in their indispensability and highest military power.
    Where are they protesting against their rulinig imbeciles?

    Theirs meeting with realitity could be very painful.

    Wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Z-man
    Telling.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    Striking entry for “Republican Clinton voters” (i.e. neocons).
    , @AndrewR
    Go to Fox News' Facebook page and read the comments on their posts.

    No, we didn't invade Syria but there are a large number of absolute idiots who support Trump no matter what, even when he's engaging in war against our interests. You and a number of other delusional people on here think that, because you don't want war, there is little appetite for war among the deplorables*.

    *As much as I hate Hillary, she was right when she said about half of Trump's support came from irredeemable, deplorable trash humans. Of course, it was politically foolish to say what she did publicly, and at least half of the Democrat base is deplorable trash, but what she said was not wrong
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Rich says:
    @Proud_Srbin
    Nuremberg trials were NOT possible until Heroes of Red Army paid high price in LIVES and hoisted Hammer and Sickle over House of Evil in Berlin.
    Myself, my children and their children OWE our lives to brave HEROES of Red Army under your great leadership.
    Thanks and Glory to Uncle Stalin.

    Were you proud when you heard about your “heroes” raping every female in conquered Germany, from 8 to 80 years old? Did your heart swell when you heard about the good Russian soldiers who tried to prevent the rapes being arrested and sent to prison camps? What about the murder of the Poles at Katyn? Did that make you proud of your “heroes”? The Soviet Military was as evil, perhaps more evil, than the Nazis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    Wars hell isn't it, and of course the Germans had done the same as they tried to walk thru Russia, raping and killing from one village to the next,and we aren't immune from that either, as you read about the wars in Asia that we created,Nam where they raped and killed from one village to the next,yes wars hell and just what are you going to do about as your leaders take you from war to war,my guess is nothing its easier that way...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. Putin’s biggest misstep to date was not concurrently taking over the Donbas (specifically the majority-Russian Luhansk and Donetsk) along with Crimea. That brief window in 2014 has long past. Had it happened, the Russians would hav faced maybe slightly worse sanctions than they did over Crimea alone, and would have had to deal with a more active pro-Ukraine element in the Donbas than in Crimea. But that all would have blown over, just like Crimea has blown over. And Ukraine would never dare to attack a Donbas that was overtly under Russian control.

    Read More
    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  76. Z-man says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike
    Wrong.

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ivf96ImOYhA/WtF8VnlQqdI/AAAAAAAAFyI/JtpLtTJahPEPcstxIPImiV_orQJoZYJbQCLcBGAs/s1600/syria.png

    Telling.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Z-man says:
    @Joe Wong
    But there seems a lot of Latinos, Blacks and MEers in the American invasion forces doing the gruesome business diligently.

    But there seems a lot of Latinos, Blacks and MEers in the American invasion forces doing the gruesome business diligently.

    A new and diverse generation of sheeple for the ZioCons to manipulate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. bluedog says:
    @Rich
    Were you proud when you heard about your "heroes" raping every female in conquered Germany, from 8 to 80 years old? Did your heart swell when you heard about the good Russian soldiers who tried to prevent the rapes being arrested and sent to prison camps? What about the murder of the Poles at Katyn? Did that make you proud of your "heroes"? The Soviet Military was as evil, perhaps more evil, than the Nazis.

    Wars hell isn’t it, and of course the Germans had done the same as they tried to walk thru Russia, raping and killing from one village to the next,and we aren’t immune from that either, as you read about the wars in Asia that we created,Nam where they raped and killed from one village to the next,yes wars hell and just what are you going to do about as your leaders take you from war to war,my guess is nothing its easier that way…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    Wait, let me get this straight, you believe that because "war's hell" raping children and old ladies is justified? That Russian soldiers that tried to prevent the rapes should've been imprisoned? That Polish POW's should have been murdered in the Katyn Forest? Raping women is never justified, not in war or peace. It was the policy of the Soviet high command to allow their soldiers to rape any female they could find. This barbarism was unheard of in modern warfare before these war crimes were committed. Of course rapes occurred, but they were never sanctioned by commanders. Not even in the Nazi military.

    Your statement about the US raping from one village to the next, is, of course, Hollywood nonsense. Rape is a crime under the US Military Code of Justice, and soldiers suspected of committing rape were arrested and prosecuted by the Americans during the Vietnam War.

    , @Mike P

    Wars hell isn’t it, and of course the Germans had done the same as they tried to walk thru Russia, raping and killing from one village to the next,
     
    This is the first time I have seen that claim. Rounding up civilians for forced labour, yes, summary executions in retribution for partisan attacks, yes, but mass raping by unbridled bands of soldiers, no.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  79. @yurivku

    Americans don’t want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives.
     
    Just a BS. Americans want war, they are in majority stupid brainwashed idiots who believe in their indispensability and highest military power.
    Where are they protesting against their rulinig imbeciles?

    Theirs meeting with realitity could be very painful.

    The Americans who want war are a minority but they hold the positions of power that count; military-industrial corporate board seats with nearly limitless money to buy votes (of congressmen) … this makes more money than it spends, so it is an endless, profitable loop. What is stupidly inexcusable is ordinary Americans allowing this to go on; for too many reasons to note here, but a few reasons stand out, like Americans too busy hating each other to work together to stop the stupid stuff… or too caught up in the ‘it’s all about me’ to even care what the future will bring (that’s a big one) … and what none of them will wish to look at is if the USA quit it’s aggression and related arms production, the economy would likely collapse, the trap the rabbits avoid discussing because it’s too scary to contemplate.

    And so it is the fringe right warmongers rule, except when it is the fringe liberal warmongers rule; in any case, the label is ‘humanitarian violence’ .. a sort of ‘let’s kill to keep it all civilized’ rationale that is a peculiar form of insanity perhaps inherited from the emptied jails and lunatic asylums of Western Europe prior to the USA’s founding; hybridized with Europe’s banished religious fanatics.

    Myself, I’ve named it ‘Proto-Anglo-Saxon-Chauvinism’

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/05/17/bozos-handcock-u-speech/

    ^ (it’s satire)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:

    Mr. Saker,

    would you please stop your propaganda for the racist Russia and Putin, a zionist liar, then get lost. Russia always has cooperated with the criminal west, selling Arabs and Muslims for few bones.

    The fact is that there was, again, agreement between the zionist pimp and Putin, a jewish servant in last night strike against Syria, where Russia stays AWAY let the mass murderers bomb a sovereign nation and ITS OWN ALLY.

    Russia also played A CRITICAL ROLE IN the ESTABLISHMENT OF ZIONIST ENTITY IN PALESTINIAN LAND AND THE MIDDLE EAST, AGAINST THE INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE OF ME AND BEYOND siting with the Criminal west around the same table. Putin also has military cooperation and agreement with the zionist mass murderers and racists in Israel. Russia always cooperated with the West against Muslims and Arabs. Putin would love to have milliary alliance with the criminal west, but they don’t want Russia, ONLY AS A COLONY.

    During the MI6/CIA 1953 coup in Iran, Russia sided and cooperated with the Mass murderers, US and Britain against a democratically elected Prime Minister, Mosaddegh, by asking the ‘communist’ Tudeh Party, a Russian servant, not to come out in support of Mosaddegh against the imperialists because Stalin was in bed, like stupid Putin, with the criminals to divide Iran into ‘zone of influence’, the criminal British in the South and criminal Russian in the North. This is known to every knowledgeable person except the ediot Russia propagandists.

    We don’t READ your ‘rhetoric’ which is nothing except propaganda. Russia is a racist country like the West and is begging the West to be accepted as a colony like GERMANY, FRANCE, JAPAN.

    Putin is trying to use Syria to expand Russian’s interest in the middle east using Iranians hard work and so many deaths as chip, but working in secret and closely with Erdugan, a mass murderer to isolate Iran and Syria for the interest of Israel, where Putin is their servant. Putin, a coward allows Israel to Bomb Syria regularly where he even does not move his balls, if he has any????

    Putin, a traitor, is trying to divide Syria into ‘zones of influence’ to help the zionist mass murderers that he is in bed with and American criminals in Washington. NO ONE SHOULD EITHER TRUST PUTIN AND HIS STUPID FOREIGN MINISTER, LAVROV, or Turkey and Erdugan FOR A SECOND , nor their PROPAGANDISTS from Island.

    Why didn’t Russia shoot the missiles’ down????????? US can bomb Syria many times through cooperation with the racist Russian, by AVOIDING RUSSIANS. Then, if Russia, as an ally of Syria, why is in Syria? Putin should fuck off now.

    Putin has NO CREDIBILITY. Syria and Mr. Assad must know that Putin is in bed with the mass murderers and the zionist baby killers. He also working in secret with the dictator and US Trojan horse, Turkey, and the US dog Erdugan AGAINST SYRIAN INTEREST AND IRANIAN INTEREST.

    Lavrov, Erdogan, and Afrin: Masterful Perception Management in Action

    [The Russian-Turkish Tango

    Should Russia have really believed that this was the case and sincerely felt offended by President Erdogan’s rebuke, then its witty spokeswoman Maria Zakharova would have surely responded, though interestingly enough, there was silence from Moscow’s side and the issue wasn’t returned to. It’s unrealistic to imagine that Russia “accepted the loss” and decided to, as the UK Defense Minister rudely urged last month, “go away and shut up”, so another explanation must be presented. It’s here where careful consideration of Russia’s current strategy comes into play and allows one to appreciate the mastery behind what just happened, but it can’t be properly understood without looking at the background context. The first thing to keep in mind is that Russia is cooperating closely with Turkey over the creation of so-called “de-escalation zones” in Syria that the author warned last May could easily end up turning into unofficial “zones/spheres of influence” in the country.

    his emerging outcome isn’t coincidental either, but is probably exactly what Russia and Turkey planned together as part of the speculated Great Power “compromise” that underpins the basis of their fast-moving rapprochement that began with Ankara’s multipolar pivot after the failed pro-American coup attempt in summer 2016. Objectively speaking, a large and strong Great Power like Turkey is much more important to Russia’s overall geostrategic calculus than a small and weak war-torn state such as Syria, which means that Moscow might have concluded that it’s better to “balance” regional affairs between these two neighboring Mideast states by giving a tacit “preference” to Ankara’s ambitions over Damascus’. In practice, this takes the form of Russia “passively facilitating” Turkey’s anti-terrorist interventions in northern Syria and subsequent establishment of FSA proxy “spheres of influence” by at the very least not doing anything to stop them, to say nothing of the potential coordination between these two Great Powers in each instance.]

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/lavrov-erdogan-and-afrin-masterful-perception-management-in-action/5635859

    Read More
    • Replies: @ploni almoni
    White man speaks with forked tongue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Anon
    What use is the UN and the Hague?

    US is in Syria illegally, but UN does nothing.

    Bush and Obama are war criminals but Hague does nothing.

    In the end, principles be damned. It's about the power.

    What use is the UN and the Hague?

    US is in Syria illegally, but UN does nothing.

    Bush and Obama are war criminals but Hague does nothing.

    In the end, principles be damned. It’s about the power.

    The U.N. is simply a tool of the globalists and will always act to enable globalist ambitions… never accept anything at face-value… everything is a lie…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @MikeatMikedotMike
    Wrong.

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ivf96ImOYhA/WtF8VnlQqdI/AAAAAAAAFyI/JtpLtTJahPEPcstxIPImiV_orQJoZYJbQCLcBGAs/s1600/syria.png

    Striking entry for “Republican Clinton voters” (i.e. neocons).

    Read More
    • Agree: MikeatMikedotMike
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. @bluedog
    Your probably correct for they re-elected Bush after he invaded Iraq, and it was more than evident that he lied about everything to do so,and Obama was no better,and now along comes the twit and twitter who has/is beating the war drums for yet another war ,which the American people will suck up and give him another four years.!!!

    Your probably correct for they re-elected Bush after he invaded Iraq, and it was more than evident that he lied about everything to do so,and Obama was no better,and now along comes the twit and twitter who has/is beating the war drums for yet another war ,which the American people will suck up and give him another four years.!!!

    Good evidence to support the claim that the U.S. is controlled by people other than U.S. citizens… it obviously doesn’t matter who is president… the behavior of the state doesn’t change…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. @jilles dykstra
    I am more and more puzzled about the why of launching 101, it is said, obsolete cruise missiles, that seem to have done no damage at all.
    Who benefits ?
    The only statement that has significance in my opinion is what Putin said: the refugees will again flood to Europe.
    Was this the objective ?
    If yes, at a high price to the west, loss of prestige.
    How will Rocketman see Trump as a serious man, when he meets him in one or two months time ?

    I am more and more puzzled about the why of launching 101, it is said, obsolete cruise missiles, that seem to have done no damage at all.
    Who benefits ?

    This was all telegraphed to the Russians (and Syrians) to minimize casualties and real damage… perhaps Trump gets to trumpet his strong ‘response’ and satisfy his zio handlers without causing any significant damage in Syria..

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    I conjured up two reasons, one given by Putin: migration will begin again, to Europe; what Soros wants.
    The EU now tries to remove anti migration, and anti Soros Orban, elected in Hungary.
    Then there is Bolton, the pawn of a jewish rich man, needed to finance the next election, Israel does not want peace in Syria.
    A high price, morally and politically for the west, in any case.
    But if indeed Soros and the jewish oligarch are the reasons, 'that is politics', according to former senator Hollings, when talking about the why of the Iraq war.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. @Johann
    There is something remarkably demonic about the American soul that absolutely loves war. The infamous theme song of the American military : The Battle Hymn Of The Republic” absolutely glorifies and sanctifies War with its praising his terrible swift sword. This was written to cheer on the America Civil War which brought about almost one million casualties on the American population. The leader of this war has a little temple built to him in DC where Americans bring their children so that they can learn to worship him. From the beginning of the twentieth century until the present the American War Department has been engaged in endless wars sanctified by their constitutional government “of the people”. In Japanese and German cities countless civilians including many many children were incinerated by American bombs dropped by heroic young American men barely out of high school. Nowadays the same military tactic has been sanitized by using misiles and drones so that the current crop of bombardiers can sit behind their computer screens and reek havoc on the rest of the world. America delenda est.

    Congratulations, you win “The Stupidest Comment of the Day” award. You may now resume your habit of gargling Drano.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. prusmc says: • Website
    @Joe Wong
    But there seems a lot of Latinos, Blacks and MEers in the American invasion forces doing the gruesome business diligently.

    WHERE ARE THOSE MEers? IN over 30 years, I remember only 3 men who I can say were Jews because they said they were Jews. In those days no one went around broadcasting their religion or lack of it. I remember 4 Arabs and I believe they were Christians. True about the large number of Latinos good dependable, force multipliers. There also was a large number of Blacks filling billets on the TOE.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. Anonymous[221] • Disclaimer says:

    There is no ‘anglo zionist’ empire.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  88. @GourmetDan

    I am more and more puzzled about the why of launching 101, it is said, obsolete cruise missiles, that seem to have done no damage at all.
    Who benefits ?
     
    This was all telegraphed to the Russians (and Syrians) to minimize casualties and real damage... perhaps Trump gets to trumpet his strong 'response' and satisfy his zio handlers without causing any significant damage in Syria..

    I conjured up two reasons, one given by Putin: migration will begin again, to Europe; what Soros wants.
    The EU now tries to remove anti migration, and anti Soros Orban, elected in Hungary.
    Then there is Bolton, the pawn of a jewish rich man, needed to finance the next election, Israel does not want peace in Syria.
    A high price, morally and politically for the west, in any case.
    But if indeed Soros and the jewish oligarch are the reasons, ‘that is politics’, according to former senator Hollings, when talking about the why of the Iraq war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. This sounds like total panic and thus confirms Anatoly Karlin’s analysis of yesterday.

    Read More
    • Troll: Beefcake the Mighty
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  90. Rich says:
    @bluedog
    Wars hell isn't it, and of course the Germans had done the same as they tried to walk thru Russia, raping and killing from one village to the next,and we aren't immune from that either, as you read about the wars in Asia that we created,Nam where they raped and killed from one village to the next,yes wars hell and just what are you going to do about as your leaders take you from war to war,my guess is nothing its easier that way...

    Wait, let me get this straight, you believe that because “war’s hell” raping children and old ladies is justified? That Russian soldiers that tried to prevent the rapes should’ve been imprisoned? That Polish POW’s should have been murdered in the Katyn Forest? Raping women is never justified, not in war or peace. It was the policy of the Soviet high command to allow their soldiers to rape any female they could find. This barbarism was unheard of in modern warfare before these war crimes were committed. Of course rapes occurred, but they were never sanctioned by commanders. Not even in the Nazi military.

    Your statement about the US raping from one village to the next, is, of course, Hollywood nonsense. Rape is a crime under the US Military Code of Justice, and soldiers suspected of committing rape were arrested and prosecuted by the Americans during the Vietnam War.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    Never watch holly wood flicks for they are for the brain dead, but there are a number of very good books written on our genocide in Nam (a good starting place is with "Kill Anything That Moves) one you have read that come back and I'll give you a few more) but then again you never read anything you dis-agree on,do you.!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. AndrewR says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike
    Wrong.

    https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ivf96ImOYhA/WtF8VnlQqdI/AAAAAAAAFyI/JtpLtTJahPEPcstxIPImiV_orQJoZYJbQCLcBGAs/s1600/syria.png

    Go to Fox News’ Facebook page and read the comments on their posts.

    No, we didn’t invade Syria but there are a large number of absolute idiots who support Trump no matter what, even when he’s engaging in war against our interests. You and a number of other delusional people on here think that, because you don’t want war, there is little appetite for war among the deplorables*.

    *As much as I hate Hillary, she was right when she said about half of Trump’s support came from irredeemable, deplorable trash humans. Of course, it was politically foolish to say what she did publicly, and at least half of the Democrat base is deplorable trash, but what she said was not wrong

    Read More
    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    I'm providing data from a poll and you're attempting to use facebook comments as a refutation. Who exactly is delusional here?

    "but there are a large number of absolute idiots who support Trump no matter what,"

    Thank you for that profoundly unremarkable remark. I think you just uncovered a phenomenon that has only been observable for oh, the last 3,000 years, give or take: Groups of people support their guy no matter what. Shocking!

    If you want to be taken seriously, bring some actual facts to the discussion instead of unhinged, prejudicial screeching about low income whites. Kevin Williamson has that market cornered.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    Fair point, but places like Fox are going to have a fair number of Israel-firsters and hasbara.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. if the american oligarchs dare to take on russia, this is what would most likely happen:
    the russians would send in teams of infiltrators into the large american cities (NYC, Boston, Chicago, Philly, etc)…the teams would manufacture explosives and use them to destroy the infrastructure of the large american cities (sewage, water, electric power, subways, freeway overpasses etc)…and also manufacture poison gas for use in subways and other crowded venues such as skyscrapers…
    the american oligarchy depends on a smoothly functioning urban economy…they use that and mass immigration to prop up the ponzi economy…the russians could thus cripple the economy…the american ruling class would then collapse because the white working class would turn on them…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I just started reading and I had this fantasy. Why wouldn't Russia be able to send in uniformed troops - only basically trained so not very valuable and pleased that they might survive - by parachute or crash landing planes so that they could carry out limited but extremely damaging operations before surrendering. Nuclear power plants? Whole underground railway systems? Civilian airports where many planes were lined up? Dams? Bridges? They could be made to believe that as soldiers in uniform and therefore POWs the US would treat them better than say Japanese-American civilians in WW2....
    , @wraith67
    Infiltrators have been in for decades, with other than home made explosives. Same with the Iranians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  93. @Johann
    There is something remarkably demonic about the American soul that absolutely loves war. The infamous theme song of the American military : The Battle Hymn Of The Republic” absolutely glorifies and sanctifies War with its praising his terrible swift sword. This was written to cheer on the America Civil War which brought about almost one million casualties on the American population. The leader of this war has a little temple built to him in DC where Americans bring their children so that they can learn to worship him. From the beginning of the twentieth century until the present the American War Department has been engaged in endless wars sanctified by their constitutional government “of the people”. In Japanese and German cities countless civilians including many many children were incinerated by American bombs dropped by heroic young American men barely out of high school. Nowadays the same military tactic has been sanitized by using misiles and drones so that the current crop of bombardiers can sit behind their computer screens and reek havoc on the rest of the world. America delenda est.

    “America delenda est.”

    Truer words were never spoken. The whole world will be much safer when this land mass is broken into smaller, saner successor states with less capacity to push other countries around, and freed from US government indoctrination. Look what a shithole this government has made of this land. Bottom of the barrel in just about every category. We might as well live in Saudi or Myanmar:

    http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Indicators/Pages/HRIndicatorsIndex.aspx

    The US government doesn’t measure up to world standards. All they know how to do is blow shit up. What good does that do me? US government brainwashing puts flags on every stick and constantly drones American this, American that.

    I’m not an American. I am a resident of the North American land mass, and a psycho-killer kleptocracy called the USA has got its hooks in me. Screw America, it’s male-believe government crap. Let’s do to the USA what we did to the USSR, slough the beltway parasites off and put them out to pasture. Break it up. And have another Nuremberg Tribunal to hang the worst of them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. @Johnny Rico

    Obama’s vote against the Iraq war as a senator
     
    Obama was elected to the Senate in November 2004. His introduction to the nation was earlier in 2004.

    The Iraq War was March 2003.

    So, no.

    Tanks. Indeed not as a Senator, but I think he was truly critical at the right time – unlike Donap Trump whatever he now pretends. Right?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Vojkan says:
    @yurivku

    Americans don’t want war overseas, they hate the cost of those wars in taxes and American lives.
     
    Just a BS. Americans want war, they are in majority stupid brainwashed idiots who believe in their indispensability and highest military power.
    Where are they protesting against their rulinig imbeciles?

    Theirs meeting with realitity could be very painful.

    Well, if you look at Americans’ voting history in presidential elections since Bush sr., you’ll notice that they have systematically voted for the candidate they perceived as less bellicose. They voted Clinton against Bush I after Gulf War I, Clinton against the even more bellicose Dole, Bush II vs Gore because he promised a more humble foreign policy, Bush vs Kerry because it made no difference, they preferred Obama to Hillary Clinton in the primary because of their respective stances regarding the Iraq War, then Obama against MacCain in the election, then again Obama against the zio-puppet Romney, and finally for Trump against Hillary Clinton.
    Americans voted Republican vs Democrat when the Republican promised peace rather than foreign military adventures and Democrat vs Republican when the Democrat made a similar promise. You must give them that. Don’t get fooled by various trolls and bots you see on social networks or comment sections or official fake news media. American voters systematically vote for peace but the thing is American voters don’t get what they vote for because they don’t run America, the Deep State, the MIC, banksters and Zionists do.

    Read More
    • Agree: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @anonymous

    look at Americans’ voting history in presidential elections
     
    You can go back further than that; go back for the past hundred years. Every president who planned to take the US into war hid their intentions from the American public and posed as a peace candidate. Wilson (he kept us out of the war), FDR, LBJ, Obama, Trump. All portrayed their opponents as dangerous warmongers. Americans generally understand they get nothing from these wars, all of which are foreign, except the taxes and the chance to volunteer as cannon fodder. American public opinion is a manufactured concoction that's engineered by the loudspeakers on every corner. Loudmouth gung-ho characters are put on the public stage. Bottom line-Americans always vote peace. It takes a Pearl Harbor type event to get them to sign up.
    , @TT
    Have you seen any massive strike & street protest in US over their endless illegal wars? Nil. Except Vietnam war bcos of high casualties on draft personnel, nothing about how Vietnamese been killed & raped.

    Since then Murkans gov learn, use paid regular army killers, and it work like magic. If it isn't affecting me, who cares.

    Try obstruct a LBGT sharing your daughter toilet or passing a bill to deny illegal migrants a dream, you see thousands suddenly awaken to their civil rights & swamped the street chanting slogans & holding their reps accountable.

    But not even a little meow to bring Clintons, Bush, Obama & their murderous team to justice.

    Term after term, murkans vote enthusiastically in biggest fanfare for their warmonger Potus in a row, millions are waving and screaming in rally. Since when a Green party ever get significant vote?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. @propagandist hacker
    if the american oligarchs dare to take on russia, this is what would most likely happen:
    the russians would send in teams of infiltrators into the large american cities (NYC, Boston, Chicago, Philly, etc)...the teams would manufacture explosives and use them to destroy the infrastructure of the large american cities (sewage, water, electric power, subways, freeway overpasses etc)...and also manufacture poison gas for use in subways and other crowded venues such as skyscrapers...
    the american oligarchy depends on a smoothly functioning urban economy...they use that and mass immigration to prop up the ponzi economy...the russians could thus cripple the economy...the american ruling class would then collapse because the white working class would turn on them...

    I just started reading and I had this fantasy. Why wouldn’t Russia be able to send in uniformed troops – only basically trained so not very valuable and pleased that they might survive – by parachute or crash landing planes so that they could carry out limited but extremely damaging operations before surrendering. Nuclear power plants? Whole underground railway systems? Civilian airports where many planes were lined up? Dams? Bridges? They could be made to believe that as soldiers in uniform and therefore POWs the US would treat them better than say Japanese-American civilians in WW2….

    Read More
    • Replies: @propagandist hacker
    the main thing is that the russians could easily win by damaging the economy, and it is a ponzi economy...the economy could be hurt best by going after the big cities where the workers live and work...the infrastructure is vulnerable to organized guerrilla attacks...and the populace of the large american cities depends on food and water and sewage and electricity...all these services could be taken out by organized guerrilla infiltrators...and the populace would be panicked...
    , @Anon
    Russia and America always planned Air Force attacks on each other via the short North Pole artic route, not through the Atlantic and pacific oceans.

    Since 1946, America has a massive Air Force installation and satellite spy service to keep track of what the Russian Air Force is doing.

    Long before the Russians planes were ready to take off, the American military would know exactly what was planned through its satellites.

    Within minutes of the Russian planes taking off, American planes and missiles would meet them while still on Russian territory and the battle would be on.

    These plans have been made and are continually refined by both sides since 1946.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. wraith67 says:

    You may be giving too much credibility to any long term strategic thinking by the US political class, which would also include the senior leadership of DoD and various agencies – they seem more interested in reacting to the latest manufactured public emergency the media are hysterically shrieking about. Anymore it’s simply 2 – year election cycle power struggles, and military think tanks are constantly publishing articles on science fiction cyber and Starship Trooper style wars. You can tell the DoD is not concerned about winning wars by it’s embrace of Social Justice Warrior issues and Climate Change.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  98. wraith67 says:
    @propagandist hacker
    if the american oligarchs dare to take on russia, this is what would most likely happen:
    the russians would send in teams of infiltrators into the large american cities (NYC, Boston, Chicago, Philly, etc)...the teams would manufacture explosives and use them to destroy the infrastructure of the large american cities (sewage, water, electric power, subways, freeway overpasses etc)...and also manufacture poison gas for use in subways and other crowded venues such as skyscrapers...
    the american oligarchy depends on a smoothly functioning urban economy...they use that and mass immigration to prop up the ponzi economy...the russians could thus cripple the economy...the american ruling class would then collapse because the white working class would turn on them...

    Infiltrators have been in for decades, with other than home made explosives. Same with the Iranians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. istevefan says:
    @Realist
    No!

    If the Russians don’t do anything, it just shows they are not ready for prime time. Why deploy to Syria in the first place if you are so easily cowered? I’d be embarrassed if I were Russian right now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Realist
    It's embarrassing enough being American.

    Russia is all bluster and bluff....why be there indeed.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    I disagree, although we definitely getting close to the time when a firmer Russian response will be required. It is not clear how well the Russians understand this.

    However, who looks worse right now, the Americans who were careful, after clear Russian warnings, to do little of consequence with these strikes, or the Russians who avoided a major war that the propaganda organs of the west would have blamed on them despite clear provocations? It’s pretty clear, I think. The Russians are in Syria for a number of reasons, but their legitimate national interest is at the forefront and this interest has been protected here. Syria would have been dismembered and subjected to Iraqi-style Mad Max chaos if not for Russia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  100. m___ says:

    A repost, four hours ago, this same post was deleted by the editor,
    Mr. Who, please get in touch, my intentions are genuine, what made unz.com
    cower?

    [Comments that are excessively long quotations from outside sources, but lacking a source link, proper spacing, or paragraphs are unlikely to be published.]

    Read More
    • Replies: @m___
    This is not a first post on your platform, there is also consistency in style and content as compared to latter posts of m___, we go back months. The flagging underwritten seems utmost lame, the content being as always, first hand, no references are needed, try to find similar wording anywhere on the web, or print.
    The posting was timely, when Unz could not produce new appropriate content, the morning after Syria pot-shots, our postings before and after, were quite timely.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. anonymous[362] • Disclaimer says:

    Much hysteria is manufactured around this issue of chemical weaponry, a fake issue to begin with. These chemical weapons are primitive WWI era weapons from a hundred years ago with little utility today. Iraq used them against massed Iranian troops back in the 80′s during their war but that’s probably it’s last gasp. Just another boogeyman. The western leaders are aggrieved that Assad ‘kills his own people’ so they’ll come in and kill some Syrians also just to prove they too can do so. Very logical. Abraham Lincoln also ‘killed his own people’ but let’s not go there.
    The news keeps presenting the US, UK and France as being the ‘international community’ although at last count there were more than just three countries in the world. It’s reported that Trump declared ‘mission accomplished’. So, is that it or is there more to follow? At this point we’ll have to see how things unfold.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  102. @anonymous
    Mr. Saker,

    would you please stop your propaganda for the racist Russia and Putin, a zionist liar, then get lost. Russia always has cooperated with the criminal west, selling Arabs and Muslims for few bones.


    The fact is that there was, again, agreement between the zionist pimp and Putin, a jewish servant in last night strike against Syria, where Russia stays AWAY let the mass murderers bomb a sovereign nation and ITS OWN ALLY.

    Russia also played A CRITICAL ROLE IN the ESTABLISHMENT OF ZIONIST ENTITY IN PALESTINIAN LAND AND THE MIDDLE EAST, AGAINST THE INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE OF ME AND BEYOND siting with the Criminal west around the same table. Putin also has military cooperation and agreement with the zionist mass murderers and racists in Israel. Russia always cooperated with the West against Muslims and Arabs. Putin would love to have milliary alliance with the criminal west, but they don't want Russia, ONLY AS A COLONY.


    During the MI6/CIA 1953 coup in Iran, Russia sided and cooperated with the Mass murderers, US and Britain against a democratically elected Prime Minister, Mosaddegh, by asking the 'communist' Tudeh Party, a Russian servant, not to come out in support of Mosaddegh against the imperialists because Stalin was in bed, like stupid Putin, with the criminals to divide Iran into 'zone of influence', the criminal British in the South and criminal Russian in the North. This is known to every knowledgeable person except the ediot Russia propagandists.


    We don't READ your 'rhetoric' which is nothing except propaganda. Russia is a racist country like the West and is begging the West to be accepted as a colony like GERMANY, FRANCE, JAPAN.


    Putin is trying to use Syria to expand Russian's interest in the middle east using Iranians hard work and so many deaths as chip, but working in secret and closely with Erdugan, a mass murderer to isolate Iran and Syria for the interest of Israel, where Putin is their servant. Putin, a coward allows Israel to Bomb Syria regularly where he even does not move his balls, if he has any????

    Putin, a traitor, is trying to divide Syria into 'zones of influence' to help the zionist mass murderers that he is in bed with and American criminals in Washington. NO ONE SHOULD EITHER TRUST PUTIN AND HIS STUPID FOREIGN MINISTER, LAVROV, or Turkey and Erdugan FOR A SECOND , nor their PROPAGANDISTS from Island.

    Why didn't Russia shoot the missiles' down????????? US can bomb Syria many times through cooperation with the racist Russian, by AVOIDING RUSSIANS. Then, if Russia, as an ally of Syria, why is in Syria? Putin should fuck off now.

    Putin has NO CREDIBILITY. Syria and Mr. Assad must know that Putin is in bed with the mass murderers and the zionist baby killers. He also working in secret with the dictator and US Trojan horse, Turkey, and the US dog Erdugan AGAINST SYRIAN INTEREST AND IRANIAN INTEREST.


    Lavrov, Erdogan, and Afrin: Masterful Perception Management in Action


    [The Russian-Turkish Tango

    Should Russia have really believed that this was the case and sincerely felt offended by President Erdogan’s rebuke, then its witty spokeswoman Maria Zakharova would have surely responded, though interestingly enough, there was silence from Moscow’s side and the issue wasn’t returned to. It’s unrealistic to imagine that Russia “accepted the loss” and decided to, as the UK Defense Minister rudely urged last month, “go away and shut up”, so another explanation must be presented. It’s here where careful consideration of Russia’s current strategy comes into play and allows one to appreciate the mastery behind what just happened, but it can’t be properly understood without looking at the background context. The first thing to keep in mind is that Russia is cooperating closely with Turkey over the creation of so-called “de-escalation zones” in Syria that the author warned last May could easily end up turning into unofficial “zones/spheres of influence” in the country.

    his emerging outcome isn’t coincidental either, but is probably exactly what Russia and Turkey planned together as part of the speculated Great Power “compromise” that underpins the basis of their fast-moving rapprochement that began with Ankara’s multipolar pivot after the failed pro-American coup attempt in summer 2016. Objectively speaking, a large and strong Great Power like Turkey is much more important to Russia’s overall geostrategic calculus than a small and weak war-torn state such as Syria, which means that Moscow might have concluded that it’s better to “balance” regional affairs between these two neighboring Mideast states by giving a tacit “preference” to Ankara’s ambitions over Damascus’. In practice, this takes the form of Russia “passively facilitating” Turkey’s anti-terrorist interventions in northern Syria and subsequent establishment of FSA proxy “spheres of influence” by at the very least not doing anything to stop them, to say nothing of the potential coordination between these two Great Powers in each instance.]

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/lavrov-erdogan-and-afrin-masterful-perception-management-in-action/5635859

    White man speaks with forked tongue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  103. The US and Russia shouldn’t fight.

    Putin understands this.
    Saker doesn’t.

    If the Saker didn’t exist, Lockheed and GD would invent him.

    No further comment.

    Read More
    • Agree: Philip Owen
    • Replies: @utu

    If the Saker didn’t exist, Lockheed and GD would invent him.
     
    And Andrei Martyanov.
    , @Jake
    The US and Russia should not fight.

    Putin understands this.

    The American Neocons (who control nearly 100% of Republican Party foreign policy and 65-70% of Democrat Party foreign policy) reject it and clamor to war against Russia as much as they clamor to war in the Middle East. The Neocons are monsters who worship (mostly Semitic but also Germanic) gods of war and human sacrifice.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  104. @AndrewR
    Go to Fox News' Facebook page and read the comments on their posts.

    No, we didn't invade Syria but there are a large number of absolute idiots who support Trump no matter what, even when he's engaging in war against our interests. You and a number of other delusional people on here think that, because you don't want war, there is little appetite for war among the deplorables*.

    *As much as I hate Hillary, she was right when she said about half of Trump's support came from irredeemable, deplorable trash humans. Of course, it was politically foolish to say what she did publicly, and at least half of the Democrat base is deplorable trash, but what she said was not wrong

    I’m providing data from a poll and you’re attempting to use facebook comments as a refutation. Who exactly is delusional here?

    “but there are a large number of absolute idiots who support Trump no matter what,”

    Thank you for that profoundly unremarkable remark. I think you just uncovered a phenomenon that has only been observable for oh, the last 3,000 years, give or take: Groups of people support their guy no matter what. Shocking!

    If you want to be taken seriously, bring some actual facts to the discussion instead of unhinged, prejudicial screeching about low income whites. Kevin Williamson has that market cornered.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    I said nothing about income.

    Unless you have a poll from today asking people's opinions of what Trump did last night, the FB comments I cited are far more meaningful than you old poll. There's not even a date on that poll.
    , @Anon
    Thank you. Both Andrew R and Thomm are probably Jews who think all White goyim are dumb hillbillies.

    People who continually sneer at poor White trash do so because they know they are pretty low on the educational economic status level themselves.

    It’s usually 4th rate university liberal arts grads who haven’t yet found a decent job who go around sneering at White trash rednecks.

    It’s very characteristic of Jews to think they are the only educated, informed people in a group. They, like Andrew R have the fantasy that they are intellectuals above the rest of us.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  105. m___ says:
    @m___
    A repost, four hours ago, this same post was deleted by the editor,
    Mr. Who, please get in touch, my intentions are genuine, what made unz.com
    cower?

    [Comments that are excessively long quotations from outside sources, but lacking a source link, proper spacing, or paragraphs are unlikely to be published.]

    This is not a first post on your platform, there is also consistency in style and content as compared to latter posts of m___, we go back months. The flagging underwritten seems utmost lame, the content being as always, first hand, no references are needed, try to find similar wording anywhere on the web, or print.
    The posting was timely, when Unz could not produce new appropriate content, the morning after Syria pot-shots, our postings before and after, were quite timely.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    He rejected my critical comment too, which was funny, wasn't long, and was on topic.

    Saker is the nuttiest of the Unz.com Putin Squad and says so many things that are obviously false as matters of fact. Peter A. is the best of them, even when I disgree, which is most if the time, he's a smart guy who knows his stuff.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  106. @Peter Akuleyev
    Another self-inflicted disaster for the AngloZionists was their support for the US/EU led coup in the Ukraine, which not only resulted in a calamity which the Europeans will have to pay for for many decades to come

    Hardly. The Ukraine has turned into an unmitigated disaster for Russia and a boon for Europe. The Russians were for the most part united against the West even before 2014, but now Putin has managed to turn every Ukrainian west of the Dnieper permanently against Russia. Ukrainian immigrants are now keeping the Polish and Slovak economies afloat and Germans and Poles are already buying up cheap assets all across Ukraine. If Russia keeps Ukraine too unstable to join the EU, probably better for the EU, as long as they have access to cheap Ukrainian labor and resources they aren't complaining. Long term Putin will go down in Russian history as the man who lost Ukraine. Planting a flag in Crimea was a dumb and short-sighted trade for losing influence in Russia's historical front-yard.

    If Russia had not retaken the Crimea, the US would have put a naval base there, and then land troops and installations at will. Russia would be acquiescing in its own continuing encirclement if it allowed that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  107. @AndrewR
    Go to Fox News' Facebook page and read the comments on their posts.

    No, we didn't invade Syria but there are a large number of absolute idiots who support Trump no matter what, even when he's engaging in war against our interests. You and a number of other delusional people on here think that, because you don't want war, there is little appetite for war among the deplorables*.

    *As much as I hate Hillary, she was right when she said about half of Trump's support came from irredeemable, deplorable trash humans. Of course, it was politically foolish to say what she did publicly, and at least half of the Democrat base is deplorable trash, but what she said was not wrong

    Fair point, but places like Fox are going to have a fair number of Israel-firsters and hasbara.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Hasbara? Maybe.

    I'm also in a normie Pennsylvania politics group. A large chunk of the members are A-OK with Trump today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  108. @Macon Richardson
    Wha' chu sayin'?

    "The Israelis fighting Hezbollah are equally religiously fanatic." Orthodox Jews are not often found in the Israeli military and Ultra-Orthodox Jews are exempt from military service, though the Israeli Supreme Court has recently ruled that exempting Ultra-Orthodox from military service is unconstitutional. So who are the "equally religiously" fanatical persons in the Israeli military? American Jews who want to learn how to be tough? Non-Orthodox conscripts? Secular conscripts? You mistake compulsion or chauvinism for religious belief.

    As to ISIS, there is no religious fanaticism there. ISIS is a bunch of hillbilly rednecks out for blood. Lord of the Flies! Anton leVey's Church of Satan! Just a bunch of guys who enjoy killing people for fun. Sort of like the Phoenix Program in Vietnam.

    "Americans are more or less equally religious than Russians, if not more." Come on! Worshiping money or TV or sex is hardly a religion worth following. As to Christianity, one must follow the words of Jesus Christ to be a Christian. The Roman church is merely a continuation of the Caesars. Protestantism is old testament Judaism (which present day Judaism is not). Neither of these sects follows the teachings of Jesus Christ.

    We attend a Protestant Church in the USA, and the focus is certainly NOT more Old Testament than New Testament.

    And we, like some other members of our church (though not enough) have ditched TV “service”, movies, and the depraved Hollywood violence/hypersexuality /homosexuality
    /transgender/perversion/mental illness culture entirely. This includes no longer giving a shit about dysfunctional and perverted “celebrities”, their disgusting lives, and their ignorant ill conceived childish political advice, and refusing to waste a minute talking or reading about them.

    Some of us are trying, bud, and more than a few of us in the USA. If this culture continues down the sewer, it’s not my family and friends contributing to it or passively following along.

    Finally, as should be obvious, one can be a Roman Catholic, Protestant, Ukrainian/Greek Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox Christian and be a good Christian and a good person.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  109. @lavoisier
    I love that quote and I am very happy that it did not come from Lenin.

    His outcome in Russia would be an indictment of his project.

    What outcome? The fact that USA does not dare to do anything against Russia and Russian forces in Syria is direct outcome of Lenin policies and continuation of those by great Stalin. What you are observing in Russian capabilities now is result of educational and scientific progress which started under Lenin policies backed by his words Study, study and yet more study and then continued by Stalin and following Soviet leaders. The fact that last Soviet leadership and early Russian leader Yeltsin happened to be traitorous morons has
    nothing to do with Lenin. Following your logic Washington project outcome is Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama and Current Mr. Twitter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    I’d LOL this, but I realize you’re being serious. And you realize Stalin wasn’t Russian, right?
    , @lavoisier
    Are mass murder and genocide some of the noble accomplishments of these two great men?

    I know. You have to crack a few million eggs to create that utopian omelet.
    , @FB
    Excellent comment...

    Of course you realize that the word 'study' is not useful to the pursuit of ignorant bliss...?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  110. utu says:
    @SimplePseudonymicHandle
    The US and Russia shouldn't fight.

    Putin understands this.
    Saker doesn't.

    If the Saker didn't exist, Lockheed and GD would invent him.

    No further comment.

    If the Saker didn’t exist, Lockheed and GD would invent him.

    And Andrei Martyanov.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johnny Rico
    Hahahaaaa! I thought Stanley Kubrick invented Martyanov back in the 60s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  111. anonymous[362] • Disclaimer says:
    @Vojkan
    Well, if you look at Americans' voting history in presidential elections since Bush sr., you'll notice that they have systematically voted for the candidate they perceived as less bellicose. They voted Clinton against Bush I after Gulf War I, Clinton against the even more bellicose Dole, Bush II vs Gore because he promised a more humble foreign policy, Bush vs Kerry because it made no difference, they preferred Obama to Hillary Clinton in the primary because of their respective stances regarding the Iraq War, then Obama against MacCain in the election, then again Obama against the zio-puppet Romney, and finally for Trump against Hillary Clinton.
    Americans voted Republican vs Democrat when the Republican promised peace rather than foreign military adventures and Democrat vs Republican when the Democrat made a similar promise. You must give them that. Don't get fooled by various trolls and bots you see on social networks or comment sections or official fake news media. American voters systematically vote for peace but the thing is American voters don't get what they vote for because they don't run America, the Deep State, the MIC, banksters and Zionists do.

    look at Americans’ voting history in presidential elections

    You can go back further than that; go back for the past hundred years. Every president who planned to take the US into war hid their intentions from the American public and posed as a peace candidate. Wilson (he kept us out of the war), FDR, LBJ, Obama, Trump. All portrayed their opponents as dangerous warmongers. Americans generally understand they get nothing from these wars, all of which are foreign, except the taxes and the chance to volunteer as cannon fodder. American public opinion is a manufactured concoction that’s engineered by the loudspeakers on every corner. Loudmouth gung-ho characters are put on the public stage. Bottom line-Americans always vote peace. It takes a Pearl Harbor type event to get them to sign up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  112. @Jake
    The 'western' desire to utterly subdue Russia is a Germanic thing. It is the Germanic desire to obliterate whatever politically, nationally, culturally, ethnically, linguistically, religiously stands in its way of conquest of all the known world.

    The Germanic imperative, if you will, is endless aggression, endless warring to add more territory and more client states and make each client state more helpless before whomever and whatever at the moment is kingpin of that Germanic imperial thrust.

    If that which is Germanic is not 'forced' by something (even conditions of poverty, but more effectively by religion wrapped tightly in non-Germanic language and culture) to behave, it will always be going a-viking. Germanic culture being itself is a raider. It lives to expand itself, at least its wealth and political tentacles, by military conflict, which means by theft and extortion, which require killing.

    'Viking', raiding with all the rapine it takes to grab what is desired and hold it, is not the name of the northernmost Germanic tribes. 'Viking' is what Germanics do if they are not forced to behave.

    Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes. The ethnic base of WASP culture is Germanic

    World Wars 1 and 2 are best understood as the WASPs' willingness to destroy all of Europe to make certain that they, and not the heirs of Prussians, Bavarians, and Continental Saxons, would remain the Germanics in control of the globe.

    And now the WASP Empire, the Anglo-Zionist Empire, has its sights set on forever extinguishing what it - very much like the Nazis and earlier Continental Germans - perceives as 'the Slavic problem,' which necessarily becomes a long campaign to destroy Russia. so the Germanics can use the resources of Eastern Europe as their superior minds wish.

    The Ukraine is soon to be turned into the bread basket serving Germanic peoples and war machines that Hitler and the Nazis dreamed of.

    We do live in times that mirror Tolkien's fiction. And the Mordor, the power that would destroy the world in order to grasp the One Ring to Rule Them All, is not Russia, is not China, is not Iran, is not North Korea. Mordor is the WASP Empire, the Anglo-Zionist Empire, which now features the horror that is the House of Saud as not merely an ally, but as a very close client state, a part of the second ring of the inner circle.

    Great theory, except that the people who would allegedly be served in Germany, France, and formerly-great formerly-Britain are not Germanic but Muslim Africans, arabs, and Pakistanis. The number of actual Germanic people in the world dwindles by the day.

    I rue that, just like I’m saddened by the fact that the Slavic peoples are generally dying out too.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake
    Gotterdammerung: the way the ancient Germanics mythologically expressed the death wish that was at the heart of the culture.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  113. @Sergey Krieger
    What outcome? The fact that USA does not dare to do anything against Russia and Russian forces in Syria is direct outcome of Lenin policies and continuation of those by great Stalin. What you are observing in Russian capabilities now is result of educational and scientific progress which started under Lenin policies backed by his words Study, study and yet more study and then continued by Stalin and following Soviet leaders. The fact that last Soviet leadership and early Russian leader Yeltsin happened to be traitorous morons has
    nothing to do with Lenin. Following your logic Washington project outcome is Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama and Current Mr. Twitter.

    I’d LOL this, but I realize you’re being serious. And you realize Stalin wasn’t Russian, right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
    Yes I am. So what if he was not Russian. Gorbachov and Yeltsin were. Compare results.
    , @Joe Wong
    Stalin was a Russian and born in Georgia. Georgia may be independent now, but Stalin was alive Georgia was part of Russia which official name was USSR. Calling Stalin not a Russian is fabricating history, a tradition of the West that it always wants to write other people’s history for others in order to white wash their war crimes, crimes against humanity and peace, as well as gloss over their ugly past.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  114. @Been_there_done_that
    Quotes:
    Military Officer:
    Furthermore, as one Novorussian officer commented, “the further West we go, the less we are seen as liberators and the more as occupiers”.
    &
    Anrei ("Saker") Raevsky:
    In reality, Russia is no threat to anybody at all.

    In light of current facts on the ground, these two quotes appear contradictory. I agree with the first one but not the second one, nor would the people of Poland and Lithuania.

    The author's reference to "Baltic statelets" is very telling. Most Europeans likely agree that Russia would be in a much stronger legal and moral position if it were to finally end its ongoing illegal occupation of the Stalinist enclave in the Königsberg / Kaliningrad region, which does not belong to Russia.

    For informative background (including links) about this unresolved conflict perpetuating the Cold War in Europe, see my five initial contributions, a few days ago, in the commentary thread at the following link:

    http://www.unz.com/jpetras/why-the-uk-the-eu-and-the-us-gang-up-on-russia/

    Once Russian leaders and their apologists face up to that issue and come clean to relieve themselves of their uncomfortable and surely embarrassing burden as occupiers maintaining a threatening military posture, they will eventually earn more respect from Europeans and others.

    The US should end its Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, Trump- era military occupation of Western and Eastern European countries spanning the last 73 years. How about it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  115. Lot says:
    @m___
    This is not a first post on your platform, there is also consistency in style and content as compared to latter posts of m___, we go back months. The flagging underwritten seems utmost lame, the content being as always, first hand, no references are needed, try to find similar wording anywhere on the web, or print.
    The posting was timely, when Unz could not produce new appropriate content, the morning after Syria pot-shots, our postings before and after, were quite timely.

    He rejected my critical comment too, which was funny, wasn’t long, and was on topic.

    Saker is the nuttiest of the Unz.com Putin Squad and says so many things that are obviously false as matters of fact. Peter A. is the best of them, even when I disgree, which is most if the time, he’s a smart guy who knows his stuff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    Sorry, it was posted eventually. Still think Sakes is a nut, but not censors critics in my case.
    , @m___
    The idea of a two-layered world, the insignificant but burdensome masses, infighting, at times concerting elites, that have some kind of global scope, as compared to the local, and ignorant only global masses, is an idea that is taboo. How else to read the pot-shot kermesse of yesternight?

    The idea of "ignorant masses" also, the concept of "not belonging" no matter what follows up.

    Islam, white identity, Jewry, terrorism, remember if you are old enough, the "war on drugs", short memories North Korea anyone a few weeks ago are decoys.

    Amen at hoc.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  116. Lot says:
    @Lot
    He rejected my critical comment too, which was funny, wasn't long, and was on topic.

    Saker is the nuttiest of the Unz.com Putin Squad and says so many things that are obviously false as matters of fact. Peter A. is the best of them, even when I disgree, which is most if the time, he's a smart guy who knows his stuff.

    Sorry, it was posted eventually. Still think Sakes is a nut, but not censors critics in my case.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  117. Greg Bacon says: • Website
    @Proud_Srbin
    Nuremberg trials were NOT possible until Heroes of Red Army paid high price in LIVES and hoisted Hammer and Sickle over House of Evil in Berlin.
    Myself, my children and their children OWE our lives to brave HEROES of Red Army under your great leadership.
    Thanks and Glory to Uncle Stalin.

    HEROES of Red Army?

    Try reading Thom Goodrich’s “Hellstorm: The death of Nazi Germany” and see what your ‘heroes’ did to around 2 million German females, raping any female between the age of 8-80. They also murdered millions more, mostly civilians, who died from exposure when they were kicked out of their homes or denied food and water or just beaten to death.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  118. @Beefcake the Mighty
    I’d LOL this, but I realize you’re being serious. And you realize Stalin wasn’t Russian, right?

    Yes I am. So what if he was not Russian. Gorbachov and Yeltsin were. Compare results.

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

    The Saker?… is that you Alex Jones?!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  120. Jake says:
    @RadicalCenter
    Great theory, except that the people who would allegedly be served in Germany, France, and formerly-great formerly-Britain are not Germanic but Muslim Africans, arabs, and Pakistanis. The number of actual Germanic people in the world dwindles by the day.

    I rue that, just like I’m saddened by the fact that the Slavic peoples are generally dying out too.

    Gotterdammerung: the way the ancient Germanics mythologically expressed the death wish that was at the heart of the culture.

    Read More
    • Troll: Zumbuddi
    • Replies: @Jake
    Just as there are simplistic white Gentiles who assume that all would be hunky-dory if not for Jews, there are Jews who play up such stupidity - say, on the internet - to help herd the simpletons into permanent inability to discern the large frame. I cannot know for certain into which camp you fall.

    If I recall you as poster correctly, you have expressed a notion about the slick Jews seducing the whites (meaning primarily WASPs) to go against their best interests. If you go back to the beginning of WASP culture (which requires getting to that P: Anglophone Protestantism, the English Reformation), you find that the Puritans were Judaizing heretics. Most specifically, you will find that Oliver Cromwell made alliance with Jews, allowing them back into England (with special rights and privileges). Cromwell took Jewish money specifically to keep waging war to destroy non-WASP white Christian cultures.

    That is what WASP culture is and always has been: WASPs allied with Jews against the best interests of virtually all other white Gentiles, and with a pronounced WASP desire to exterminate more than a few of the non-WASP white cultures against which they warred.

    If you have a philosophic, you will then wonder about Ashkenazi Jews almost all speaking Yiddish (which is Jewish German, which is merely German with a handful of Hebraisms) as their first language, even centuries after not living in a German state. When the Bolshevik Revolution started, the vast, vast majority of Jews living in the Russian Empire spoke Yiddish as their first language.

    So what is it with Jews attracted to Germanic culture so deeply and thoroughly?

    And when Jews began cashing in Yiddish, they did it for English, another Germanic language. Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes.

    Again, Jews gravitating almost completely to things culturally Germanic.

    Why? What does that say about Germanic culture? What does that say about Jews?

    Is traditional Germanic desire to make serfs/slaves/corpses of virtually all non-Germanic whites important to how we got into this mess and how we can have any hope to escape it?

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  121. vegob says:

    if you kill all the joos in the world, then we will have peace, not before.

    Read More
    • Replies: @sarz

    if you kill all the joos in the world, then we will have peace, not before.
     
    If you mean it, spell out "Jews". If you don't mean it, shut up.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  122. anon[412] • Disclaimer says:

    that 1mm russian americans are all jews who run from Putin and his predecessors. They are zionists themselves and pro terrorist-Israel.

    Truth is, there is only one problem in today’s world: israel and its slave, the USA. israel must be restrained like the bubonic plague. Americans must wake up to that reality and then all is good.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  123. m___ says:
    @Lot
    He rejected my critical comment too, which was funny, wasn't long, and was on topic.

    Saker is the nuttiest of the Unz.com Putin Squad and says so many things that are obviously false as matters of fact. Peter A. is the best of them, even when I disgree, which is most if the time, he's a smart guy who knows his stuff.

    The idea of a two-layered world, the insignificant but burdensome masses, infighting, at times concerting elites, that have some kind of global scope, as compared to the local, and ignorant only global masses, is an idea that is taboo. How else to read the pot-shot kermesse of yesternight?

    The idea of “ignorant masses” also, the concept of “not belonging” no matter what follows up.

    Islam, white identity, Jewry, terrorism, remember if you are old enough, the “war on drugs”, short memories North Korea anyone a few weeks ago are decoys.

    Amen at hoc.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  124. Jake says:
    @SimplePseudonymicHandle
    The US and Russia shouldn't fight.

    Putin understands this.
    Saker doesn't.

    If the Saker didn't exist, Lockheed and GD would invent him.

    No further comment.

    The US and Russia should not fight.

    Putin understands this.

    The American Neocons (who control nearly 100% of Republican Party foreign policy and 65-70% of Democrat Party foreign policy) reject it and clamor to war against Russia as much as they clamor to war in the Middle East. The Neocons are monsters who worship (mostly Semitic but also Germanic) gods of war and human sacrifice.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  125. AndrewR says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike
    I'm providing data from a poll and you're attempting to use facebook comments as a refutation. Who exactly is delusional here?

    "but there are a large number of absolute idiots who support Trump no matter what,"

    Thank you for that profoundly unremarkable remark. I think you just uncovered a phenomenon that has only been observable for oh, the last 3,000 years, give or take: Groups of people support their guy no matter what. Shocking!

    If you want to be taken seriously, bring some actual facts to the discussion instead of unhinged, prejudicial screeching about low income whites. Kevin Williamson has that market cornered.

    I said nothing about income.

    Unless you have a poll from today asking people’s opinions of what Trump did last night, the FB comments I cited are far more meaningful than you old poll. There’s not even a date on that poll.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Homer-Simpson-AT-Get-it-facbook.com
    Is there any reason why you have a special interest in the demographic of people who are stupid enough to trust Facebook? Stupid enough to get on it it even now, after Zuck pimped you out to every databroker on earth and censored every thought you ever had? Of course these people are propaganda victims. Facebook users are the first IQ quartile. The US government doesn't care what they think.
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
    Oh that's right, this is a comments section, so when faced with evidence of your own asininity, always double down, or bet on black, or whatever the loser's mantra is these days:

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM121Y13_6


    I'll hold my breath and wait for you to provide some real data showing how a majority of Americans just want to send our young adults off to die in foreign wars.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  126. AndrewR says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Fair point, but places like Fox are going to have a fair number of Israel-firsters and hasbara.

    Hasbara? Maybe.

    I’m also in a normie Pennsylvania politics group. A large chunk of the members are A-OK with Trump today.

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

    ‘…The truth is that if the Empire wanted to, it could even establish a no-fly zone over Syria and completely wipe-out the Russian task force.

    Sure, there would be losses on both sides, the Russians would fight heroically, but they would lose.

    Unless, of course, they got help from the Motherland…’

    Well…now the Flaker has changed his tune…

    The Russians would still lose in Syria…‘unless’

    And the Russians in Syria aren’t part of the ‘motherland’…?

    How very interesting…?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  128. @AndrewR
    I said nothing about income.

    Unless you have a poll from today asking people's opinions of what Trump did last night, the FB comments I cited are far more meaningful than you old poll. There's not even a date on that poll.

    Is there any reason why you have a special interest in the demographic of people who are stupid enough to trust Facebook? Stupid enough to get on it it even now, after Zuck pimped you out to every databroker on earth and censored every thought you ever had? Of course these people are propaganda victims. Facebook users are the first IQ quartile. The US government doesn’t care what they think.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    I think internet comment sections are generally representative samples of people in general, or at least to people to whom any given website is targeted. For example, Fox News comment sections are likely representative of the views of Fox News viewers in general, and god knows there are a lot of them.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  129. Nikki says the US is locked and loaded so we must all be on the alert for Russkie doorknobs impregnated with BullZhit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  130. @AndrewR
    I said nothing about income.

    Unless you have a poll from today asking people's opinions of what Trump did last night, the FB comments I cited are far more meaningful than you old poll. There's not even a date on that poll.

    Oh that’s right, this is a comments section, so when faced with evidence of your own asininity, always double down, or bet on black, or whatever the loser’s mantra is these days:

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM121Y13_6

    I’ll hold my breath and wait for you to provide some real data showing how a majority of Americans just want to send our young adults off to die in foreign wars.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    Cute strawman. If you want to argue against claims I never made, do that with someone who isn't me.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  131. TheJester says:

    There was “buzz” on the Internet that Trump (and his poodles Britain and France) would resolve Trump’s forthrightly stupid commitment to “missile” Syria by again coordinating with the Russians ahead of time. That’s apparently what they did.

    NATO precoordinated their strikes with the Russians and Syrians. Both of the latter withdrew personnel from the targets. Media reports that in spite of 103 missiles launched, only three civilians were wounded. That does not speak well of Western military capability … or its ability to conduct foreign policy.

    The Russians report that the normally incompetent Syrian air defenses destroyed 73 of these missiles using antiquated air defense systems. I doubt this. A better guess is that the Russians again turned on their formidable EW capabilities that disabled the missiles targeting functions.

    Yawn! Let’s assume that each Western missile cost about $1 million. This exercise is “nothingness” cost the US, Britain, and France $103 million … results “0″.

    Trump, May, Macron: “Boy, we showed those Syrians (and Russians) a thing or two!”

    Yawn! Assad reportedly went to work as if it was a normal day at the office.

    This has to go down in history as the epitome of a historically debased, cowardly dissimilitude on the part of the Anglo-Zionist Empire. Was all of this “war theater” really necessary to cover a phone call from Netanyahu to Trump demanding that, in spite of the Syrian victory in their civil war, the US will keep the Muslim Middle East in perpetual turmoil? Orders are orders, you know.

    Epilogue:

    Yawn! The Anglo-Zionist Empire backed down again. Confront the Russians and someone other than some Muslims dribs might actually die. Actually, this is an appealing paradigm for war. Just pretend; nobody (who matters) actually dies.

    Who won? The Russians. “Damn, those Russkies might be serious about protecting themselves and therein. DON’T PISS THEM OFF!”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    You are WRONG, TheJester, you are so WRONG WRONG WRONG!!

    A guy with a chest full of little plastic bits of color was right there at the US Pentagram and said, "Every one of our missiles hit their target; the Syrians did not launch counterattacks until all of our missiles had landed. Syrians used ballistic missiles and they had to land somewhere, we don't know where; they may have hurt somebody, we don't know yet."

    That's what he said.

    General Kenneth Lots o' colored bits McKenzie.
    Right there on the tee vee.

    Are you saying he was wrong? 'Cause either you are or he is, and anyone who gets up in the morning and puts on a jacket with a load of colored bits of plastic can't be wrong.

    Oh -- he also said that Russia did not make any attempt to defend against the attack, and also that USA had not coordinated in advance w/ Russia.

    Another blog quoted another person who said that Americans and Russians were up all night working out who would do what, but that's just blogger noise.

    Finally, just so you know US journalists are not as dumb as they are, one journo asked Colored Plastic McKensie if the reduction to dust of a chemical factory where, he had said, sarin as well as chlorine supplies and equipment had been, if blowing up that factory would not release toxic clouds.

    McKenzie was cool, tho; he said No, that the fighters figured that into their approach. So not to worry about a sarin gas cloud.
    Chest covered with colored plastic can't be wrong.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  132. Realist says:
    @istevefan
    If the Russians don't do anything, it just shows they are not ready for prime time. Why deploy to Syria in the first place if you are so easily cowered? I'd be embarrassed if I were Russian right now.

    It’s embarrassing enough being American.

    Russia is all bluster and bluff….why be there indeed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  133. Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    When you want something done right, my rabbi said...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  134. AndrewR says:
    @Homer-Simpson-AT-Get-it-facbook.com
    Is there any reason why you have a special interest in the demographic of people who are stupid enough to trust Facebook? Stupid enough to get on it it even now, after Zuck pimped you out to every databroker on earth and censored every thought you ever had? Of course these people are propaganda victims. Facebook users are the first IQ quartile. The US government doesn't care what they think.

    I think internet comment sections are generally representative samples of people in general, or at least to people to whom any given website is targeted. For example, Fox News comment sections are likely representative of the views of Fox News viewers in general, and god knows there are a lot of them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  135. anon[107] • Disclaimer says:
    @TheJester
    There was "buzz" on the Internet that Trump (and his poodles Britain and France) would resolve Trump's forthrightly stupid commitment to "missile" Syria by again coordinating with the Russians ahead of time. That's apparently what they did.

    NATO precoordinated their strikes with the Russians and Syrians. Both of the latter withdrew personnel from the targets. Media reports that in spite of 103 missiles launched, only three civilians were wounded. That does not speak well of Western military capability ... or its ability to conduct foreign policy.

    The Russians report that the normally incompetent Syrian air defenses destroyed 73 of these missiles using antiquated air defense systems. I doubt this. A better guess is that the Russians again turned on their formidable EW capabilities that disabled the missiles targeting functions.

    Yawn! Let's assume that each Western missile cost about $1 million. This exercise is "nothingness" cost the US, Britain, and France $103 million ... results "0".

    Trump, May, Macron: "Boy, we showed those Syrians (and Russians) a thing or two!"

    Yawn! Assad reportedly went to work as if it was a normal day at the office.

    This has to go down in history as the epitome of a historically debased, cowardly dissimilitude on the part of the Anglo-Zionist Empire. Was all of this "war theater" really necessary to cover a phone call from Netanyahu to Trump demanding that, in spite of the Syrian victory in their civil war, the US will keep the Muslim Middle East in perpetual turmoil? Orders are orders, you know.

    Epilogue:

    Yawn! The Anglo-Zionist Empire backed down again. Confront the Russians and someone other than some Muslims dribs might actually die. Actually, this is an appealing paradigm for war. Just pretend; nobody (who matters) actually dies.

    Who won? The Russians. "Damn, those Russkies might be serious about protecting themselves and therein. DON'T PISS THEM OFF!".

    You are WRONG, TheJester, you are so WRONG WRONG WRONG!!

    A guy with a chest full of little plastic bits of color was right there at the US Pentagram and said, “Every one of our missiles hit their target; the Syrians did not launch counterattacks until all of our missiles had landed. Syrians used ballistic missiles and they had to land somewhere, we don’t know where; they may have hurt somebody, we don’t know yet.”

    That’s what he said.

    General Kenneth Lots o’ colored bits McKenzie.
    Right there on the tee vee.

    Are you saying he was wrong? ‘Cause either you are or he is, and anyone who gets up in the morning and puts on a jacket with a load of colored bits of plastic can’t be wrong.

    Oh — he also said that Russia did not make any attempt to defend against the attack, and also that USA had not coordinated in advance w/ Russia.

    Another blog quoted another person who said that Americans and Russians were up all night working out who would do what, but that’s just blogger noise.

    Finally, just so you know US journalists are not as dumb as they are, one journo asked Colored Plastic McKensie if the reduction to dust of a chemical factory where, he had said, sarin as well as chlorine supplies and equipment had been, if blowing up that factory would not release toxic clouds.

    McKenzie was cool, tho; he said No, that the fighters figured that into their approach. So not to worry about a sarin gas cloud.
    Chest covered with colored plastic can’t be wrong.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  136. AndrewR says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike
    Oh that's right, this is a comments section, so when faced with evidence of your own asininity, always double down, or bet on black, or whatever the loser's mantra is these days:

    http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM121Y13_6


    I'll hold my breath and wait for you to provide some real data showing how a majority of Americans just want to send our young adults off to die in foreign wars.

    Cute strawman. If you want to argue against claims I never made, do that with someone who isn’t me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
    Translation: You got nuthin'.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  137. Mike P says:
    @bluedog
    Wars hell isn't it, and of course the Germans had done the same as they tried to walk thru Russia, raping and killing from one village to the next,and we aren't immune from that either, as you read about the wars in Asia that we created,Nam where they raped and killed from one village to the next,yes wars hell and just what are you going to do about as your leaders take you from war to war,my guess is nothing its easier that way...

    Wars hell isn’t it, and of course the Germans had done the same as they tried to walk thru Russia, raping and killing from one village to the next,

    This is the first time I have seen that claim. Rounding up civilians for forced labour, yes, summary executions in retribution for partisan attacks, yes, but mass raping by unbridled bands of soldiers, no.

    Read More
    • Agree: utu
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Yes. Certainly in France, the behavior of German soldiers towards women civilians was far, far more exemplary than the Americans, who raped their way through the country.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  138. @utu

    If the Saker didn’t exist, Lockheed and GD would invent him.
     
    And Andrei Martyanov.

    Hahahaaaa! I thought Stanley Kubrick invented Martyanov back in the 60s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  139. anon[258] • Disclaimer says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Looks like Israel is getting fed up with their servants:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-14/unidentified-warplanes-strike-iranian-military-base-southern-syria-skynews-arabia

    When you want something done right, my rabbi said…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  140. @istevefan
    If the Russians don't do anything, it just shows they are not ready for prime time. Why deploy to Syria in the first place if you are so easily cowered? I'd be embarrassed if I were Russian right now.

    I disagree, although we definitely getting close to the time when a firmer Russian response will be required. It is not clear how well the Russians understand this.

    However, who looks worse right now, the Americans who were careful, after clear Russian warnings, to do little of consequence with these strikes, or the Russians who avoided a major war that the propaganda organs of the west would have blamed on them despite clear provocations? It’s pretty clear, I think. The Russians are in Syria for a number of reasons, but their legitimate national interest is at the forefront and this interest has been protected here. Syria would have been dismembered and subjected to Iraqi-style Mad Max chaos if not for Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jake
    That chaos is what Israel and Saudi Arabia and the US and the UK want.
    , @istevefan

    However, who looks worse right now,
     
    I think it is the Russians. They look weak. Add to this strike the fact that we supposedly killed a couple hundred Russian mercenaries in February, and they look very weak. So much so they might be encouraging the US to be even more aggressive in the future.

    I am not saying the Russians should directly attack the US. But they should combat the Saudis and other Gulf Arabs interfering in Syria. They should also in the near term take out a sizable group of US-backed rebels.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  141. @Andrei Martyanov

    Lenin said – “practice is the criterion of a truth”,
     
    Well, Lenin was reiterating Hegel and Clausewitz, of who Lenin was a great admirer. In reality, the original from early 1800s sounded as: "it is legitimate to judge event by its outcome for it is the soundest criterion."

    This idea is much older than that. It was clearly expressed in the New Testament: “you will know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15-20).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  142. @Mike P

    Wars hell isn’t it, and of course the Germans had done the same as they tried to walk thru Russia, raping and killing from one village to the next,
     
    This is the first time I have seen that claim. Rounding up civilians for forced labour, yes, summary executions in retribution for partisan attacks, yes, but mass raping by unbridled bands of soldiers, no.

    Yes. Certainly in France, the behavior of German soldiers towards women civilians was far, far more exemplary than the Americans, who raped their way through the country.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    "Americans, who raped their way through the country"? Are you insane? I guess on the anonymous internet you can throw out any ridiculous charge you want as you giggle at your key board, but I will at least call you out as a liar. The US Military has never, in its history, condoned rape, and soldiers who were suspected of rape, were arrested and tried for their crimes under the USMCJ. The penalty for rape in the US Military is death, by the way, and back in the 1940's, Americans weren't afraid to use it.
    , @Mulegino1
    That is true. The German occupation forces behaved in a relatively exemplary manner with respect to the French civilian population. There was very little or no violent repression until the Maquis started their criminal partisan attacks against the occupation forces.

    I would go so far as to say that the Anglo-American invasion forces, including the USAAF and the RAF, caused death and devastation in France orders of magnitude beyond anything realistically imputed to the Germans. Americans have been fed a steady diet of Hollywood's kosher saccharine war propaganda for so long it has created a psychological defense mechanism against the truths of real history.

    The so called "Liberators" liberated many a European from his home, his possessions, his life, and ultimately even his dignity.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  143. Well... says: • Website

    You wasted a whole lot of words on nothing. The US took steps to avoid step 1 from being completed as written, no heavy strike on major targets took place. What steps were not taken, including allegedly targeting a non-military airport, the Syrians/Russians took measures to mitigate, which shows they were not looking to escalate for whatever reason, strategy or otherwise. I think this is over. The question is whether the Syrians/Russians can still drive out the last of the resistance or if the US will use the blank Cheque it created for Itself in its resolution to bomb again if “chemical attacks take place”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  144. Jake says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    I disagree, although we definitely getting close to the time when a firmer Russian response will be required. It is not clear how well the Russians understand this.

    However, who looks worse right now, the Americans who were careful, after clear Russian warnings, to do little of consequence with these strikes, or the Russians who avoided a major war that the propaganda organs of the west would have blamed on them despite clear provocations? It’s pretty clear, I think. The Russians are in Syria for a number of reasons, but their legitimate national interest is at the forefront and this interest has been protected here. Syria would have been dismembered and subjected to Iraqi-style Mad Max chaos if not for Russia.

    That chaos is what Israel and Saudi Arabia and the US and the UK want.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Correct, and they haven’t gotten it in Syria precisely because of the Russians.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  145. Rich says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Yes. Certainly in France, the behavior of German soldiers towards women civilians was far, far more exemplary than the Americans, who raped their way through the country.

    “Americans, who raped their way through the country”? Are you insane? I guess on the anonymous internet you can throw out any ridiculous charge you want as you giggle at your key board, but I will at least call you out as a liar. The US Military has never, in its history, condoned rape, and soldiers who were suspected of rape, were arrested and tried for their crimes under the USMCJ. The penalty for rape in the US Military is death, by the way, and back in the 1940′s, Americans weren’t afraid to use it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    I am afraid you are a Team America nut-hugger, and probably beyond hope. For others, it is not hard at all to confirm American conduct during the war, e.g.

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/books/rape-by-american-soldiers-in-world-war-ii-france.html
    , @FB
    Calm down eagle scout...

    You weren't in France in WW2 so your silly whining is simply useless noise...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  146. @Harold Smith
    "This is not about good guys versus bad guys anymore. It’s about sane versus insane."

    I would have to disagree with this. As I see it, "insane" is a word used in an attempt to frame a spiritual condition as a "worldly" issue. What we're dealing with here is a spiritual war of "evil" vs "good."

    In its essence, U.S. foreign policy boils down to someone's attempt to establish Satan's kingdom on earth as per Isaiah 14:13,14.

    Someone made the deal with Satan that Jesus rejected (Luke 4:5-8), and that Satanic cult made the decision to knowingly, willingly and calculatingly "give worth to evil" (i.e. worship Satan) as a means of achieving unprecedented worldly gain.

    This Satanic cult, known as the first beast of Rev 13 (aka fourth beast of Daniel 7) attempts to rise to the top by bringing everybody else down. Thus the beast ostensibly gets to the top, evil destroys all "goodness" on earth (evil is only "bad" in comparison to good), and Satan "exalts [his] throne above the stars of God."

    Unfortunately, the beast wasn't planning on the re-emergence of Russia as a world military super power. Mighty Russia now stands squarely in the way of the beast's Satanic agenda. Just like Cain hated and ultimately murdered Abel (because evil hates a good example) the beast hates Russia.

    But the beast will fail because evil contains withn itself the seeds of its own destruction. The same corruption that brought the beast to power over the west prevents it from being an effective military force. Demon possessed people tend to have personality issues that ultimately result in catastrophic failure.

    I am sure a lot of ideologically driven people will disagree. Let them.
    In and of itself, the fact that in the last 70 years or so the US was invariably on the side of the evil does not mean that the USSR/Russia was always on the side of the good. Two evil forces can and will fight for dominance. I’ve read someone’s comment somewhere that in living memory there was no case when the USSR was on the side of the oppressors or when the US was on the side of the oppressed. To the best of my knowledge this is true, but the side of the oppressed is not always the side of the good, even though the side of the oppressors is always the side of the evil. Say, the fact that current government in Kiev, Ukraine, is evil through and through does not mean that the leadership of Donetsk or Lugansk People’s Republic is absolutely good. The US is a global calamity, shameless bandits with mighty weapons. However, Russia stands up to the Empire to defend its own interests, not to defend good in general.
    Back to Syria. Any even half-honest person would agree that ISIS and other Islamists, created, armed, and funded by the US and its vassals, are thoroughly evil. But that does not mean that Assad is good. It only means that he is a lesser evil, possibly the best Syria can have today. Most Syrians, including Sunnis, with the experience of living under Islamists, became staunch supporters of Assad: compared to them he looks positively good. But let’s not forget that it’s easy to win in this comparison. There is no doubt that in an honest election today in Syria Assad is likely to win by a large margin, maybe even as large as Putin won in Russian elections. But winners aren’t necessarily good. After all, the US was among the winners in WWII.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB
    Thank you Socrates from TN...

    Where would we be without your lantern of wisdom to guide us...?
    , @Anon
    To say that within living memory the Soviet Union was never on the side of the oppressors is so ridiculous as to sink your credibility to a permanent zero.

    Leave aside Russian victims, think of the Holomodor. Then
    Poland 1939 and onwards (ever heard of the Katyn forest massacre?)
    The whole of Eastern Europe where Communist régimes were foisted on the people after WW2. Ever heard of the risings in Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968?

    C'mon...

    , @m___
    Russia and the US, maybe not the right focus, in se.

    Putin, and inferiorly Trump must be dethroned, in the eyes of stealthy globalism. Putin this time took a big blow. Trump of course has been a punching bag.

    The real question is how stealth globalism, is organized, how well at that, if it has the larger scope of globalism beyond "religious economics" included.

    For now, and in this particular case of pot-shots in Syria, it seems that Russia and China are on board, the elites have a global capacity of consensus. Putin was castigated, nationalism was castigated, not globalism.

    Secondly, as for stealth, beyond the public eye, this was a conclusive test, it has pissed the complete layer of politicians and media to oblivion. It makes me smile to see, and although his work is genuine, to have some predict "World war"(Saker), and others dig exhaustively into the intricacies of military capabilities(Akarlin).

    Some constats, there is a "global collegiate", it has capacitative stealth, it is daring, and the public, but better still the layer of media, consenting and dissenting was thought a lesson. They, the media and politicians, anything in the public eye deserve their broth, for lack of physical courage, and a calls for action defined as "out of scope".

    Probably the most obvious one: nationalism can't do, and that is a valuable conclusion, on a rational and theoretical base. After all, how to take on a bulging world population, a derivative of itself, population density, toxicity, climate change, and the goodies, genetic analysis and engineering, AI, interplanetary scope, the quest for our missing particle, who in his right mind can pretend that national entities, or the existing global economics is capable of making timely progress.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  147. bluedog says:
    @Rich
    Wait, let me get this straight, you believe that because "war's hell" raping children and old ladies is justified? That Russian soldiers that tried to prevent the rapes should've been imprisoned? That Polish POW's should have been murdered in the Katyn Forest? Raping women is never justified, not in war or peace. It was the policy of the Soviet high command to allow their soldiers to rape any female they could find. This barbarism was unheard of in modern warfare before these war crimes were committed. Of course rapes occurred, but they were never sanctioned by commanders. Not even in the Nazi military.

    Your statement about the US raping from one village to the next, is, of course, Hollywood nonsense. Rape is a crime under the US Military Code of Justice, and soldiers suspected of committing rape were arrested and prosecuted by the Americans during the Vietnam War.

    Never watch holly wood flicks for they are for the brain dead, but there are a number of very good books written on our genocide in Nam (a good starting place is with “Kill Anything That Moves) one you have read that come back and I’ll give you a few more) but then again you never read anything you dis-agree on,do you.!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    Nick Turse? I read his book and it was filled with inaccuracies and lies.

    1. It was never the policy of the US to commit atrocities and those accused of them were arrested and prosecuted.

    2. Turse makes the ridiculous claim that 2 million Vietnamese civilians were killed by the US, when the actual number, according to every other expert is much lower.

    3. Turse is an anti-American author who received payment from the Communist government in Vietnam .

    4. Turse neglected to interview men who actually were involved in the war and defamed decorated Warrant Officer Thomas Equels, for which he sued, forcing Turse to admit his lies.

    5. Turse neglects the millions killed by the North Vietnamese.

    These are just five lies written by Turse, there are many more. If you're basing your knowledge of the Vietnam War on men like Nick Turse, I can understand your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  148. John Henry says: • Website

    “…especially compared to the kind of personnel deployed by the US and NATO), the CENTCOM+NATO+Israel+KSA have an immense numerical advantage.”

    You mean all the homos, girls, and trannys? Good luck.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  149. Jake says:
    @Jake
    Gotterdammerung: the way the ancient Germanics mythologically expressed the death wish that was at the heart of the culture.

    Just as there are simplistic white Gentiles who assume that all would be hunky-dory if not for Jews, there are Jews who play up such stupidity – say, on the internet – to help herd the simpletons into permanent inability to discern the large frame. I cannot know for certain into which camp you fall.

    If I recall you as poster correctly, you have expressed a notion about the slick Jews seducing the whites (meaning primarily WASPs) to go against their best interests. If you go back to the beginning of WASP culture (which requires getting to that P: Anglophone Protestantism, the English Reformation), you find that the Puritans were Judaizing heretics. Most specifically, you will find that Oliver Cromwell made alliance with Jews, allowing them back into England (with special rights and privileges). Cromwell took Jewish money specifically to keep waging war to destroy non-WASP white Christian cultures.

    That is what WASP culture is and always has been: WASPs allied with Jews against the best interests of virtually all other white Gentiles, and with a pronounced WASP desire to exterminate more than a few of the non-WASP white cultures against which they warred.

    If you have a philosophic, you will then wonder about Ashkenazi Jews almost all speaking Yiddish (which is Jewish German, which is merely German with a handful of Hebraisms) as their first language, even centuries after not living in a German state. When the Bolshevik Revolution started, the vast, vast majority of Jews living in the Russian Empire spoke Yiddish as their first language.

    So what is it with Jews attracted to Germanic culture so deeply and thoroughly?

    And when Jews began cashing in Yiddish, they did it for English, another Germanic language. Angles and Saxons were Germanic tribes.

    Again, Jews gravitating almost completely to things culturally Germanic.

    Why? What does that say about Germanic culture? What does that say about Jews?

    Is traditional Germanic desire to make serfs/slaves/corpses of virtually all non-Germanic whites important to how we got into this mess and how we can have any hope to escape it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  150. @AndrewR
    Cute strawman. If you want to argue against claims I never made, do that with someone who isn't me.

    Translation: You got nuthin’.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  151. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    If you listen to pundits, the problem is Trump and nationalism.

    The problem with Trump is not Nationalism.

    Nationalism means minding one’s own business. It means having national sovereignty and respecting the sovereignty over other nations.

    Imperialism, in contrast, means trampling on the rights and independence of other nations.

    If Nazism or National Socialism had remained in nationalist mode, it wouldn’t have done much harm. But it went into imperialist mode and trampled/violated the nationalist rights of self-determination and self-rule of other nations. It went into imperialist mode.

    Initially, Japan modernized for nationalist reasons. Threatened by British and American imperialism, it emulated the West and industrialized to defend the motherland. But it went from nationalism to imperialism because it noticed that the world was being divided by empires. And indeed, UK and US, two imperialist powers, welcomed Japan as a fellow imperialist to counterbalance Russia and China.

    Before there was modern nationalism, the world was divided among empires that had no use of secure borders. This had been the case since time immemorial. Power and might decided the boundaries. So, Persians could lay claim to a huge empire. Same with Romans. Same with Mongols. Same with Russians. There was no Rule or Ideal in the world that said any people, culture, or land had a Basic Right of defense, security, independence, and self-rule. Security could only be realized by might. And if a kingdom or state was powerful enough, it sought to invade and rule other parts of the world.
    It was about grabbing more.

    And then, there was the rise of modern nationalism in UK, France, US, then Germany and Italy and Japan. It was good insofar as the elites were supposed to represent and defend their own folks. There was also the nascent idea that a nation had a RIGHT of security and freedom.

    But because of the legacy of imperialism since time immemorial, modern nationalism also carried on with the imperial legacy. Even as nationalism defended the nation from other empires, it sought to expand its own empire. So, Japan went from defending itself to grabbing other lands. Brits went from creating a secure Island Kingdom-Republic to conquering other lands. US went from creating a new nation in the New World to invading and taking over other peoples. This was especially doable since the non-West itself was in imperial mode of endless invasions and counter-invasions. They didn’t have the nationalist ideal of elites-and-peoples bound as one with the right of national autonomy. When Brits invaded India, it was not a nation but a vast territory under Mughal Imperial rule.

    But WWI and esp WWII dealt a great blow to the imperialist model. Nazi imperialism and Japanese imperialism were defeated. But soon after, the Third World folks demanded national independence, waged wars, and threw out the European imperialists. And Viets kicked out the US imperialists from ‘Indochina’.

    So, with the end of WWII, there was the ideal of Universal Nationalism. It used to be ‘Nationalism for me, but not for thee’. After with the fall of empires, it was ‘Nationalism for me and thee’. Let all nations be free and independent. In this era, the Progs were very supportive of Vietnam, Algeria, and Cuba for resisting imperialist powers. And when Soviet tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia, even leftists denounced it as imperialism.

    Still, US and USSR were still the two remaining empires. But the Cold War finally ended and even the Soviet Empire collapsed, and there was the liberation of newly free nations from Soviet-Russian yoke: Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and etc.
    Universal nationalism seemed to have won. Russians now ruled over Russia, not over others.

    With the end of the Cold War, the hope was that US empire would end too. After all, US empire had been justified on grounds of countering Soviet threat. With no more Soviet Empire, what need for US empire?
    And maybe just maybe, US empire would have come to an end, and US would have returned to nationalist mode: US minds its own business, other nations mind their own business, and as good neighbors, they trade with one another and communicate. Fences make good neighbors.

    But three things happened. US got filled with hubris of End of History. Winning the Cold War meant the US way was the only way. “If you’re not with us, you’re against us.” “My way or the highway.”

    Second reason was the West allowing mass immigration that turned into all-out invasion by the Third World. As non-whites figured it’s easier to have a good life by moving to the West than working as patriots to fix and develop their own nations, they effectively became champions of demographic imperialism and colonization. And if, like Fareed Zakaria or Nikki Haley, they gained a position in elite spheres, they became cheerleaders for globo-imperialism.
    As for EU, I hear Brussels is already 1/3 Muslim and will be majority Muslim in 30 yrs.
    As non-whites settled in the West, they neither identified with their nations-or-origin or with white Westerners. They existed in an ideological limbo of globalism, a kind of Universal Imperialism. Take Francis Fukuyama. He’s not Japanese, but he’s not for White-Western power either. He’s for some la-la-limbo-land called Endofhistoria. And Amy Chua feels a member of some ‘supergroup’.

    Another reason for globalist imperialism was that Jews became the new elites of the US. Why did this matter? Because Jewish power is essentially and intrinsically imperialist. As Jews are a minority elite in the US, they don’t identify with most Americans who are goyim.
    Jews mainly identify with other Jews in other nations. So, for Jews, nationalism means gentile national independence and autonomy. Jews fear this because Jewish power is about global Jewish networking, e.g. making Americans care more about Zionists in Israel than about their own kind.

    Jews are like the British imperialists who feared the rise of nationalism in Third World nations. After all, British elites didn’t feel shared affinity or identity with the native majority in each of the subject domains. Kenyan nationalism meant Kenyans reasserting authority over the British rulers. Indian nationalism meant the brown people of the subcontinent demanding self-rule and self-determination and asking the Brits to leave. As Gandhi said. So, even as Brits were all about the ‘nationalism for me but not for thee’, or imperialist-nationalism, Gandhi was about universal nationalism, aka ‘nationalism for me and thee’. British imperialists feared this because it would mean the Empire of Albion. After all, if every subject domain of British Empire wanted its own autonomy, it would mean the end of the British hegemony.

    Today, Jews feel and act like the British imperialists. Most Jews don’t feel much affinity with fellow nationals in nations like US, Canada, Poland, France, UK, and etc. To Jewish minority elites in such nations, most people are goyim. To suppress goy power, Jews suppress nationalism.

    Jews now practice imperialist nationalism of ‘nationalism for me but not for thee’. So, Jews say all Western nations must support Israel as a JEWISH STATE, but they say white gentile nations must abandon nationalism(even one that says ‘for me and for thee’) because Jews fear gentile national autonomy that may disobey Jewish demands. Also, Jews push for massive invasion(aka immigration) to turn the native majority population into minorities in their own nations. That way, Jews can control the native majority by guilt-baiting them with ‘racism’. And as the nation becomes diverse, Jewish Imperial elites can play divide and rule.

    But Jewish imperialism is far more dangerous than British imperialism. At the very least, British Imperialism, like the French kind, was OUT IN THE OPEN. Brits were singing anthems about how Britain rules 1/3 of the globe. So, there was NO DOUBT as to who was in power in the British Empire.

    In contrast, the Empire of Judea is a Hidden Empire. Even though the biggest power in the world is Jewish Global Networking — most of US politicians, academics, media people, etc are agents or shills of Zion — , Jewish power uses gentile nations as fronts to carry out their deeds. So, even though the Power of Zion was behind the Syrian attacks, we’ve been led to believe US, UK, and France done it!
    No one would have thought so during the Era of British Empire. Even if Brits recruited and used Indian, African, and Arab troops to fight in war, no one would have thought India, Kenya, or Arabia were waging the war. No, they would have known that it was the British Empire doing it and simply using non-white troops. But because the Empire of Judea is a Hidden Empire, we fall for the charade that ‘liberal democratic’ Western nations have decided to wage all these Wars for Human Rights which are really Wars for Zion. In fact, UK and France are vassal nations of the US that is a vassal state of the Empire of Judea.

    The problem with Trump isn’t nationalism. If the US had gone into nationalist mode after the Cold War, the world be much better. Soviet Union was gone, Russia was no longer a threat and wanted cooperation.
    But Jewish globalists economically plundered Russia in the 1990s. Also, NATO was pushed right up to Russian borders. And then, Jewish power demanded that US use sanctions, invasions, and aid to Jihadis to undermine stability in the Middle East for the interests of Israeli hegemony.

    Trump ran on nationalism that would promised to end US ventures overseas. US has been the main imperialist destroyer in Iraq, Libya, Syria(where CIA aided Alqaeda, the very people who did 9/11), and recruited Neo-Nazi elements to pull off a coup in Ukraine. Trump sounded good during the campaign, but the Deep State is now surrounding him like sharks and forcing him to become yet another globalist warmonger serving the Empire of Judea than being a nationalist who focuses on US problems for the American people. Jews hate US nationalism because it means the goy cattle of the US will no longer wage Wars for Zion. Also, if US were properly nationalist, the main political theme would be, “What can the elites do for the American people?” Jews hate this because Jews feel zero affinity with gentile Americans whom Jews seek to replace with endless mass invasion.

    The world needs universal nationalism. Nationalism for Me and Thee.
    But as long as Jewish power rules the West, this is impossible. Jews fear gentile nationalism because it undermines the neo-imperial globalist hegemony of the US.
    To get a good sense of the microcosm of the Jewish mindset, look at the Israel-Palestine conflict. How nice if Jews went for ‘Nationalism for Me and Thee’. Jews would have Israel as their homeland, and Palestinians would have West Bank as their homeland. But nope, US summons the support of the West to crush Palestinian nationalism while maximizing their own nationalism with massive walls. It is like the Imperialist Nationalism of the British Empire and Japanese Empire. “Nationalism for Me but not for Thee.” That is unjust.

    “Nationalism for Me but for Thee” is like American Slavery. “Freedom for Me but not for Thee.” But if white folks should be free, why not blacks too?
    Likewise, if Israel has a right to be free and independent as a Jewish state, why doesn’t Hungary have a right to be a free and independent Hungarian state? Jews demand that the West support Zionist nationalism but then pressure EU to sanction and destroy Hungary for having chosen national self-determination.

    We know why. It’s because Jews seek to maximize their own tribal power, they seek to weaken the ethno-national power of all other peoples so that they will serve Jewish globalist hegemony.

    Anyway, how depressing that Trump who ran on nationalism and end of globo-imperialism of US interference has NOW been pressured by the Deep State Zionists and Military Industrial Complex to cook up BS about ‘chemical attacks’ to sabotage Syria’s rightful nationalism.
    US now illegally occupies much of Syria. US accuses Russia of meddling and global ambitions when US is the #1 meddler in other nations elections and it was US that invaded and wrecked Iraq and Libya and aided terrorists in Syria and Ukraine.

    When will this madness ever end?

    Anyway, the overall arc of history.

    1. Imperialism. The mighty dominate and rule over all others. Might is right.

    2. National Imperialism. The right of one’s own nation to be safe and secure from invasion but no such rights bestowed to other nations. Example: Japan defends itself from other empires but tries to take over China.

    3. Universal Nationalism. The right of each nation/people/culture to be free and independent. Nationalism for all as basis for international cooperation. The Template that soon emerged from WWII and end of empires.

    4. Universal Imperialism. The right of great powers to militarily, financially, and culturally invade and transform other nations: Drop bombs, take over banks, bribe politicians, and spread Homomania as the new crusading faith. And yet, the the great powers must themselves be open to vast demographic invasions by rest of the world.
    We see this between EU and Middle East. EU supports the Zionist-US invasions of the Middle East and welcomes the millions of Muslim ‘refugees’ displaced by those invasions. EU become demographically invaded in turn.

    Gandhi for Universal Nationalism: “It is time you left”.
    It is time to Gandhize the Imperialists of Zion. As nationals and patriots, Jews can stay. As imperialists over the West, it is time they left.
    All nationalists must refuse to cooperate with the Empire of Judea. During the campaign, Trump promised not to cooperate. No more wars, he said. But he’s sinking into the Swamp. Deep State imperialists now just own him as their doggy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ANONYmous

    If Nazism or National Socialism had remained in nationalist mode, it wouldn’t have done much harm. But it went into imperialist mode and trampled/violated the nationalist rights of self-determination and self-rule of other nations. It went into imperialist mode.
     
    Do you mind expanding on NSDAP "imperialism mode?"

    Is there a difference between emplacing an occupation force in time of war, vs. "imperialist mode?"
    , @jilles dykstra
    " Nationalism means minding one’s own business. It means having national sovereignty and respecting the sovereignty over other nations. "

    It would be great if it was that simple.
    Germany was never able to feed the own population with home grown food, it had to buy foreign food.
    To pay for this export was needed, for export outside resources were needed, such as oil and iron.
    When protection was not called economic war control of other countries was necessary, such as now western control over ME oil.
    Except for rubber the USA was practically autark until 1940.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  152. @Rich
    "Americans, who raped their way through the country"? Are you insane? I guess on the anonymous internet you can throw out any ridiculous charge you want as you giggle at your key board, but I will at least call you out as a liar. The US Military has never, in its history, condoned rape, and soldiers who were suspected of rape, were arrested and tried for their crimes under the USMCJ. The penalty for rape in the US Military is death, by the way, and back in the 1940's, Americans weren't afraid to use it.

    I am afraid you are a Team America nut-hugger, and probably beyond hope. For others, it is not hard at all to confirm American conduct during the war, e.g.

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/books/rape-by-american-soldiers-in-world-war-ii-france.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    Did you even read the article you cite as "proof" of American soldiers committing rape in France? Even the writer says the accusations were "shaky". Rape was the official policy of the Soviet Army, condoned at the highest levels, Russian soldiers who tried to protect German women were arrested and imprisoned. That's a big difference from a few bad apples on the American side risking the death penalty for committing rape.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  153. @Jake
    That chaos is what Israel and Saudi Arabia and the US and the UK want.

    Correct, and they haven’t gotten it in Syria precisely because of the Russians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  154. Wally says:
    @Proud_Srbin
    Nuremberg trials were NOT possible until Heroes of Red Army paid high price in LIVES and hoisted Hammer and Sickle over House of Evil in Berlin.
    Myself, my children and their children OWE our lives to brave HEROES of Red Army under your great leadership.
    Thanks and Glory to Uncle Stalin.

    On the Nuremberg Show Trials:

    - The Soviet communists presented a detailed study of steam chambers which was accepted a Nuremberg, no study for the now alleged pesticide using ‘gas chambers’ was ever presented at Nuremberg, or any other court
    - statements by ‘eyewitnesses’ and ‘survivors’ defy laws of science’ and are immensely contradictory
    - it was admitted by those participating in the Nuremberg show trials that Germans were routinely tortured to get ‘confessions’
    - the absurd ‘gas chambers’ were given ‘judicial notice’ (accepted as fact in post war trials and could not be argued against) even though no forensic study for these ‘gas chambers’ was ever presented, so the falsely accused had little chance for defense, how convenient it all was
    - the so called ‘most documented event in world history’ in fact has no documents which support the ridiculous ’6M & gas chambers’, no Hitler order, no orders from anyone to confirm the laughable claims
    - English translations of Russian translations of Polish copies of an alleged German original which cannot be found. That is typical of Nuremberg ‘documents’.
    - All but two of the Germans [on trial at Nuremberg], in the 139 cases that we investigated, had their testicles kicked in beyond repair. This was standard operating procedure with our American investigators:” 23.1.49, The Sunday Pictorial (quoted in For Those Who Cannot Speak (ref. 27), p.21.The statements which were admitted as evidence were obtained from men who had first been kept in solitary confinement for three, four and five months..The investigators would put a black hood over the accused’s head, punch him in the face with brass knuckles, kick him and beat him with rubber hoses. Observer & American judge, van Roden
    - Judge van Roden’s allegation of torture to gain “confessions” is confirmed by Texas Supreme Court Judge, Gordon Simpson. He confirmed that savage beatings, smashing of testicles, and months of solitary confinement occurred. Congressional Record, appendix v. 95, sec.12, 3/10/49
    -U.S. Congressional Representative, Lawrence H. Smith of Wisconsin said:
    ” The Nuremberg Trials are so repugnant to the Anglo-Saxon principles of justice that we must forever be ashamed of that page in our history.”
    Congressional Record, appendix, v.95, sec.14, 6/15/49
    - “The prisoner was torn from the top bunk, the pyjamas ripped from his body. He was then dragged naked to one of the slaughter tables, where it seemed to [Bernard] Clarke the blows and screams were endless. Eventually, the Medical Officer urged the Captain: ‘Call them off, unless you want to take back a corpse.’”(12)
    12.R. Butler, Legions of Death, Hamlyn, (London, 1983), p.237
    - The admission of Bernard Clarke was corroborated by Mr. Ken Jones in ‘The Wrexham Leader’, October 17, 1986.
    Mr. Jones was then a private with the Fifth Royal Horse Artillery stationed at Heid in Schleswig-Holstein.
    “They brought him to us when he refused to cooperate over questioning about his activites during the war. He came in the winter of 1945/6 and was put in a small jail cell in the barracks,” recalls Mr. Jones. Two other soldiers were detailed with Mr. Jones to join Hoess in his cell to help break him down for interrogation.”
    “We sat in the cell with him, night and day, armed with axe handles. Our job was to prod him every time he fell asleep to help break down his resistance,” said Mr. Jones.
    When Hoess was taken out for exercise, he was made to wear only jeans and a thin cotton shirt in the bitter cold. After three days and nights without sleep, Hoess finally broke down and made a full confession to the authorities.
    - “The London Cage was used partly as a torture centre, inside which large numbers of German officers and soldiers were subjected to systematic ill-treatment. In total 3,573 men passed through the Cage, and more than 1,000 were persuaded to give statements about war crimes. The brutality did not end with the war, moreover: a number of German civilians joined the servicemen who were interrogated there up to 1948.
    As the work of the Cage was wound down, the interrogation of prisoners was switched to a number of internment camps in Germany. And there is evidence that the treatment meted out in these places was, if anything, far worse. While many of the papers relating to these interrogation centres remain sealed at the Foreign Office, it is clear that one camp in the British zone became particularly notorious. At least two German prisoners starved to death there, according to a court of inquiry, while others were shot for minor offences.

    http://www.codoh.com

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  155. FB says:
    @Rich
    "Americans, who raped their way through the country"? Are you insane? I guess on the anonymous internet you can throw out any ridiculous charge you want as you giggle at your key board, but I will at least call you out as a liar. The US Military has never, in its history, condoned rape, and soldiers who were suspected of rape, were arrested and tried for their crimes under the USMCJ. The penalty for rape in the US Military is death, by the way, and back in the 1940's, Americans weren't afraid to use it.

    Calm down eagle scout…

    You weren’t in France in WW2 so your silly whining is simply useless noise…

    Read More
    • Replies: @TheJester
    Regarding Americans raping women during war, you are right and you are wrong. It happened ... but not as policy or as a general outcome of troops running amuck.

    I'll cite a rare instance. During the sack of Mexico during the Mexican-American War in 1846, the rabidly anti-Catholic, Protestant American soldiers desecrated Mexican Catholic churches and raped Mexican women. The Irish Catholic American soldiers (recent immigrants) objected and defected to the Mexican cause. They were captured and executed ... for treason. The Protestant American soldiers who raped Mexican women got off "Scott free".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Patrick%27s_Battalion

    My father fought in Europe in WWII. He told me that American soldiers did on rare occasion rape French and German women. When they were caught and convicted, they were executed. However, rape was a policy for Soviet troops seeking revenge in Germany and Austria. He spoke of a General Order from the Soviet Commander in Austria that all Austrian women of age in Vienna would be raped twice ... to make it clear who was in charge. My father would not have engaged in historical research. This is what was "on the street" at the tail end of the war in Europe.

    I served in the US military in Germany in the 1970s. We were told to never ask a German woman (of age) what happened to her in WWII. Later, in another life, I found myself in an Intuit village in Canada. A woman (obviously a German immigrant) related that she was born in 1946 but her father, a German soldier, was killed in 1942. Go figure. Her biological father was most likely a Soviet soldier.

    I've since read tales of Soviet soldiers who related that, yes, they raped German women ... but, contrary to German behavior in Russia and Ukraine, they did not kill them. Were they given a medal for showing such restraint?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  156. Joe Wong says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    I’d LOL this, but I realize you’re being serious. And you realize Stalin wasn’t Russian, right?

    Stalin was a Russian and born in Georgia. Georgia may be independent now, but Stalin was alive Georgia was part of Russia which official name was USSR. Calling Stalin not a Russian is fabricating history, a tradition of the West that it always wants to write other people’s history for others in order to white wash their war crimes, crimes against humanity and peace, as well as gloss over their ugly past.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Jesus. Stalin was a Georgian, not a Russian. And you are an idiot.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  157. FB says:
    @AnonFromTN
    I am sure a lot of ideologically driven people will disagree. Let them.
    In and of itself, the fact that in the last 70 years or so the US was invariably on the side of the evil does not mean that the USSR/Russia was always on the side of the good. Two evil forces can and will fight for dominance. I’ve read someone’s comment somewhere that in living memory there was no case when the USSR was on the side of the oppressors or when the US was on the side of the oppressed. To the best of my knowledge this is true, but the side of the oppressed is not always the side of the good, even though the side of the oppressors is always the side of the evil. Say, the fact that current government in Kiev, Ukraine, is evil through and through does not mean that the leadership of Donetsk or Lugansk People’s Republic is absolutely good. The US is a global calamity, shameless bandits with mighty weapons. However, Russia stands up to the Empire to defend its own interests, not to defend good in general.
    Back to Syria. Any even half-honest person would agree that ISIS and other Islamists, created, armed, and funded by the US and its vassals, are thoroughly evil. But that does not mean that Assad is good. It only means that he is a lesser evil, possibly the best Syria can have today. Most Syrians, including Sunnis, with the experience of living under Islamists, became staunch supporters of Assad: compared to them he looks positively good. But let’s not forget that it’s easy to win in this comparison. There is no doubt that in an honest election today in Syria Assad is likely to win by a large margin, maybe even as large as Putin won in Russian elections. But winners aren’t necessarily good. After all, the US was among the winners in WWII.

    Thank you Socrates from TN…

    Where would we be without your lantern of wisdom to guide us…?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Looks like you are ready to offer me poison? Thanks, but no, thanks!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  158. Any thoughts on speculation that these lame-ass strikes were merely a testing of defenses for a more serious follow-up attack? The Russians would surely have considered this, but there is an uneasy feeling that this particular round is not yet over.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB
    That's the question isn't it...?

    As always my go-to man PCR has a very solid take on this...

    His take is that Mattis prevailed upon restraining the nutbar Bolton and the puppet Dump [Bolton now being the Svengali pulling the strings it seems]...because neither he nor Joe Dunford felt good about the idea of actually coming to blows with the Russians...

    PCR also speculates a little further afield that Putin acquiesced to take the pie in the face for the sake of sanity...

    However...PCR argues that this may have been a mistake...I agree...the relentless drive of the neocon crazies is not about to stop...

    He adds that this was perhaps the perfect time and place for the Russian military to deliver a forceful blow that would deflate the balloon...and perhaps wake people up...ie sinking US ships and shooting down US planes...

    I agree with this also...unlike some disneylanders here like Karlimp and the Flaker...I have a good idea of what the physical capabilities are in this geographical theater...taking out US ships and planes would be a cakewalk if only Putin had given the nod...


    '...The next provocation will be orchestrated in a situation more favorable to US than to Russian arms. Washington will not again risk a confrontation, as it did in Syria, where it clearly would have lost.

    What this means is that Russia’s humanity and moral conscience will result in a confrontation far more dangerous to Russia and to all of us...'
     

    Yup...Judo grandmaster Putin should have pulled the trigger...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  159. ANONYmous[107] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    If you listen to pundits, the problem is Trump and nationalism.

    The problem with Trump is not Nationalism.

    Nationalism means minding one's own business. It means having national sovereignty and respecting the sovereignty over other nations.

    Imperialism, in contrast, means trampling on the rights and independence of other nations.

    If Nazism or National Socialism had remained in nationalist mode, it wouldn't have done much harm. But it went into imperialist mode and trampled/violated the nationalist rights of self-determination and self-rule of other nations. It went into imperialist mode.

    Initially, Japan modernized for nationalist reasons. Threatened by British and American imperialism, it emulated the West and industrialized to defend the motherland. But it went from nationalism to imperialism because it noticed that the world was being divided by empires. And indeed, UK and US, two imperialist powers, welcomed Japan as a fellow imperialist to counterbalance Russia and China.

    Before there was modern nationalism, the world was divided among empires that had no use of secure borders. This had been the case since time immemorial. Power and might decided the boundaries. So, Persians could lay claim to a huge empire. Same with Romans. Same with Mongols. Same with Russians. There was no Rule or Ideal in the world that said any people, culture, or land had a Basic Right of defense, security, independence, and self-rule. Security could only be realized by might. And if a kingdom or state was powerful enough, it sought to invade and rule other parts of the world.
    It was about grabbing more.

    And then, there was the rise of modern nationalism in UK, France, US, then Germany and Italy and Japan. It was good insofar as the elites were supposed to represent and defend their own folks. There was also the nascent idea that a nation had a RIGHT of security and freedom.

    But because of the legacy of imperialism since time immemorial, modern nationalism also carried on with the imperial legacy. Even as nationalism defended the nation from other empires, it sought to expand its own empire. So, Japan went from defending itself to grabbing other lands. Brits went from creating a secure Island Kingdom-Republic to conquering other lands. US went from creating a new nation in the New World to invading and taking over other peoples. This was especially doable since the non-West itself was in imperial mode of endless invasions and counter-invasions. They didn't have the nationalist ideal of elites-and-peoples bound as one with the right of national autonomy. When Brits invaded India, it was not a nation but a vast territory under Mughal Imperial rule.

    But WWI and esp WWII dealt a great blow to the imperialist model. Nazi imperialism and Japanese imperialism were defeated. But soon after, the Third World folks demanded national independence, waged wars, and threw out the European imperialists. And Viets kicked out the US imperialists from 'Indochina'.

    So, with the end of WWII, there was the ideal of Universal Nationalism. It used to be 'Nationalism for me, but not for thee'. After with the fall of empires, it was 'Nationalism for me and thee'. Let all nations be free and independent. In this era, the Progs were very supportive of Vietnam, Algeria, and Cuba for resisting imperialist powers. And when Soviet tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia, even leftists denounced it as imperialism.

    Still, US and USSR were still the two remaining empires. But the Cold War finally ended and even the Soviet Empire collapsed, and there was the liberation of newly free nations from Soviet-Russian yoke: Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and etc.
    Universal nationalism seemed to have won. Russians now ruled over Russia, not over others.

    With the end of the Cold War, the hope was that US empire would end too. After all, US empire had been justified on grounds of countering Soviet threat. With no more Soviet Empire, what need for US empire?
    And maybe just maybe, US empire would have come to an end, and US would have returned to nationalist mode: US minds its own business, other nations mind their own business, and as good neighbors, they trade with one another and communicate. Fences make good neighbors.

    But three things happened. US got filled with hubris of End of History. Winning the Cold War meant the US way was the only way. "If you're not with us, you're against us." "My way or the highway."

    Second reason was the West allowing mass immigration that turned into all-out invasion by the Third World. As non-whites figured it's easier to have a good life by moving to the West than working as patriots to fix and develop their own nations, they effectively became champions of demographic imperialism and colonization. And if, like Fareed Zakaria or Nikki Haley, they gained a position in elite spheres, they became cheerleaders for globo-imperialism.
    As for EU, I hear Brussels is already 1/3 Muslim and will be majority Muslim in 30 yrs.
    As non-whites settled in the West, they neither identified with their nations-or-origin or with white Westerners. They existed in an ideological limbo of globalism, a kind of Universal Imperialism. Take Francis Fukuyama. He's not Japanese, but he's not for White-Western power either. He's for some la-la-limbo-land called Endofhistoria. And Amy Chua feels a member of some 'supergroup'.

    Another reason for globalist imperialism was that Jews became the new elites of the US. Why did this matter? Because Jewish power is essentially and intrinsically imperialist. As Jews are a minority elite in the US, they don't identify with most Americans who are goyim.
    Jews mainly identify with other Jews in other nations. So, for Jews, nationalism means gentile national independence and autonomy. Jews fear this because Jewish power is about global Jewish networking, e.g. making Americans care more about Zionists in Israel than about their own kind.

    Jews are like the British imperialists who feared the rise of nationalism in Third World nations. After all, British elites didn't feel shared affinity or identity with the native majority in each of the subject domains. Kenyan nationalism meant Kenyans reasserting authority over the British rulers. Indian nationalism meant the brown people of the subcontinent demanding self-rule and self-determination and asking the Brits to leave. As Gandhi said. So, even as Brits were all about the 'nationalism for me but not for thee', or imperialist-nationalism, Gandhi was about universal nationalism, aka 'nationalism for me and thee'. British imperialists feared this because it would mean the Empire of Albion. After all, if every subject domain of British Empire wanted its own autonomy, it would mean the end of the British hegemony.

    Today, Jews feel and act like the British imperialists. Most Jews don't feel much affinity with fellow nationals in nations like US, Canada, Poland, France, UK, and etc. To Jewish minority elites in such nations, most people are goyim. To suppress goy power, Jews suppress nationalism.

    Jews now practice imperialist nationalism of 'nationalism for me but not for thee'. So, Jews say all Western nations must support Israel as a JEWISH STATE, but they say white gentile nations must abandon nationalism(even one that says 'for me and for thee') because Jews fear gentile national autonomy that may disobey Jewish demands. Also, Jews push for massive invasion(aka immigration) to turn the native majority population into minorities in their own nations. That way, Jews can control the native majority by guilt-baiting them with 'racism'. And as the nation becomes diverse, Jewish Imperial elites can play divide and rule.

    But Jewish imperialism is far more dangerous than British imperialism. At the very least, British Imperialism, like the French kind, was OUT IN THE OPEN. Brits were singing anthems about how Britain rules 1/3 of the globe. So, there was NO DOUBT as to who was in power in the British Empire.

    In contrast, the Empire of Judea is a Hidden Empire. Even though the biggest power in the world is Jewish Global Networking -- most of US politicians, academics, media people, etc are agents or shills of Zion -- , Jewish power uses gentile nations as fronts to carry out their deeds. So, even though the Power of Zion was behind the Syrian attacks, we've been led to believe US, UK, and France done it!
    No one would have thought so during the Era of British Empire. Even if Brits recruited and used Indian, African, and Arab troops to fight in war, no one would have thought India, Kenya, or Arabia were waging the war. No, they would have known that it was the British Empire doing it and simply using non-white troops. But because the Empire of Judea is a Hidden Empire, we fall for the charade that 'liberal democratic' Western nations have decided to wage all these Wars for Human Rights which are really Wars for Zion. In fact, UK and France are vassal nations of the US that is a vassal state of the Empire of Judea.

    The problem with Trump isn't nationalism. If the US had gone into nationalist mode after the Cold War, the world be much better. Soviet Union was gone, Russia was no longer a threat and wanted cooperation.
    But Jewish globalists economically plundered Russia in the 1990s. Also, NATO was pushed right up to Russian borders. And then, Jewish power demanded that US use sanctions, invasions, and aid to Jihadis to undermine stability in the Middle East for the interests of Israeli hegemony.

    Trump ran on nationalism that would promised to end US ventures overseas. US has been the main imperialist destroyer in Iraq, Libya, Syria(where CIA aided Alqaeda, the very people who did 9/11), and recruited Neo-Nazi elements to pull off a coup in Ukraine. Trump sounded good during the campaign, but the Deep State is now surrounding him like sharks and forcing him to become yet another globalist warmonger serving the Empire of Judea than being a nationalist who focuses on US problems for the American people. Jews hate US nationalism because it means the goy cattle of the US will no longer wage Wars for Zion. Also, if US were properly nationalist, the main political theme would be, "What can the elites do for the American people?" Jews hate this because Jews feel zero affinity with gentile Americans whom Jews seek to replace with endless mass invasion.

    The world needs universal nationalism. Nationalism for Me and Thee.
    But as long as Jewish power rules the West, this is impossible. Jews fear gentile nationalism because it undermines the neo-imperial globalist hegemony of the US.
    To get a good sense of the microcosm of the Jewish mindset, look at the Israel-Palestine conflict. How nice if Jews went for 'Nationalism for Me and Thee'. Jews would have Israel as their homeland, and Palestinians would have West Bank as their homeland. But nope, US summons the support of the West to crush Palestinian nationalism while maximizing their own nationalism with massive walls. It is like the Imperialist Nationalism of the British Empire and Japanese Empire. "Nationalism for Me but not for Thee." That is unjust.

    "Nationalism for Me but for Thee" is like American Slavery. "Freedom for Me but not for Thee." But if white folks should be free, why not blacks too?
    Likewise, if Israel has a right to be free and independent as a Jewish state, why doesn't Hungary have a right to be a free and independent Hungarian state? Jews demand that the West support Zionist nationalism but then pressure EU to sanction and destroy Hungary for having chosen national self-determination.

    We know why. It's because Jews seek to maximize their own tribal power, they seek to weaken the ethno-national power of all other peoples so that they will serve Jewish globalist hegemony.

    Anyway, how depressing that Trump who ran on nationalism and end of globo-imperialism of US interference has NOW been pressured by the Deep State Zionists and Military Industrial Complex to cook up BS about 'chemical attacks' to sabotage Syria's rightful nationalism.
    US now illegally occupies much of Syria. US accuses Russia of meddling and global ambitions when US is the #1 meddler in other nations elections and it was US that invaded and wrecked Iraq and Libya and aided terrorists in Syria and Ukraine.

    When will this madness ever end?

    Anyway, the overall arc of history.

    1. Imperialism. The mighty dominate and rule over all others. Might is right.

    2. National Imperialism. The right of one's own nation to be safe and secure from invasion but no such rights bestowed to other nations. Example: Japan defends itself from other empires but tries to take over China.

    3. Universal Nationalism. The right of each nation/people/culture to be free and independent. Nationalism for all as basis for international cooperation. The Template that soon emerged from WWII and end of empires.

    4. Universal Imperialism. The right of great powers to militarily, financially, and culturally invade and transform other nations: Drop bombs, take over banks, bribe politicians, and spread Homomania as the new crusading faith. And yet, the the great powers must themselves be open to vast demographic invasions by rest of the world.
    We see this between EU and Middle East. EU supports the Zionist-US invasions of the Middle East and welcomes the millions of Muslim 'refugees' displaced by those invasions. EU become demographically invaded in turn.

    Gandhi for Universal Nationalism: "It is time you left".
    It is time to Gandhize the Imperialists of Zion. As nationals and patriots, Jews can stay. As imperialists over the West, it is time they left.
    All nationalists must refuse to cooperate with the Empire of Judea. During the campaign, Trump promised not to cooperate. No more wars, he said. But he's sinking into the Swamp. Deep State imperialists now just own him as their doggy.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZVsWzIb6Vk

    If Nazism or National Socialism had remained in nationalist mode, it wouldn’t have done much harm. But it went into imperialist mode and trampled/violated the nationalist rights of self-determination and self-rule of other nations. It went into imperialist mode.

    Do you mind expanding on NSDAP “imperialism mode?”

    Is there a difference between emplacing an occupation force in time of war, vs. “imperialist mode?”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  160. You are such a hopeless rube. Your American troop comrades-in-arms got lotsa hot gangbang action off wog babes. Guess nobody invited you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Source?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  161. @Joe Wong
    Stalin was a Russian and born in Georgia. Georgia may be independent now, but Stalin was alive Georgia was part of Russia which official name was USSR. Calling Stalin not a Russian is fabricating history, a tradition of the West that it always wants to write other people’s history for others in order to white wash their war crimes, crimes against humanity and peace, as well as gloss over their ugly past.

    Jesus. Stalin was a Georgian, not a Russian. And you are an idiot.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  162. FB says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Any thoughts on speculation that these lame-ass strikes were merely a testing of defenses for a more serious follow-up attack? The Russians would surely have considered this, but there is an uneasy feeling that this particular round is not yet over.

    That’s the question isn’t it…?

    As always my go-to man PCR has a very solid take on this…

    His take is that Mattis prevailed upon restraining the nutbar Bolton and the puppet Dump [Bolton now being the Svengali pulling the strings it seems]…because neither he nor Joe Dunford felt good about the idea of actually coming to blows with the Russians…

    PCR also speculates a little further afield that Putin acquiesced to take the pie in the face for the sake of sanity…

    However…PCR argues that this may have been a mistake…I agree…the relentless drive of the neocon crazies is not about to stop…

    He adds that this was perhaps the perfect time and place for the Russian military to deliver a forceful blow that would deflate the balloon…and perhaps wake people up…ie sinking US ships and shooting down US planes…

    I agree with this also…unlike some disneylanders here like Karlimp and the Flaker…I have a good idea of what the physical capabilities are in this geographical theater…taking out US ships and planes would be a cakewalk if only Putin had given the nod…

    ‘…The next provocation will be orchestrated in a situation more favorable to US than to Russian arms. Washington will not again risk a confrontation, as it did in Syria, where it clearly would have lost.

    What this means is that Russia’s humanity and moral conscience will result in a confrontation far more dangerous to Russia and to all of us…’

    Yup…Judo grandmaster Putin should have pulled the trigger…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    Pulling the trigger would have been taking part in an exercise in futility because the strike was that, an exercise in futility. Why open fire and risk damage if there's no damage in the first place, just for the sake of chest thumping?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  163. Iran trending toward a win in long game,
    M K Bhadrakumar – April 14, 2018

    “. . . even as Trump was ratcheting up rhetoric against Syria, the powerful Iranian statesman Ali Akbar Velayati, advisor to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei landed in Damascus on Wednesday, met President Assad and toured Douma, the alleged site of the chemical attack. It was a defiant gesture and act of solidarity with Assad.

    Tehran has hinted at “regional consequences.” But Iran’s style will be to avoid direct conflict with the US and opt instead to intensify its political work and consolidate its wide networking with various groups on the ground, which systematically keep undermining the US presence in Syria and Iraq. No doubt, Iran will intensify the politics of “resistance” against Israel.

    The Russia-Iran partnership in Syria is steadily morphing into an alliance, which is in mutual interests. The defeat of the US-Israeli-Saudi containment strategy against Iran may turn out to be the most significant and enduring outcome of this US attack on Syria.http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2018/04/14/winners-and-losers-in-trumps-syria-attack/

    h/t Ramzpaul / Brabantian http://www.unz.com/video/ramzpaul_why-did-trump-attack-syria/#comment-2288131

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  164. @FB
    Thank you Socrates from TN...

    Where would we be without your lantern of wisdom to guide us...?

    Looks like you are ready to offer me poison? Thanks, but no, thanks!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  165. lavoisier says: • Website
    @Sergey Krieger
    What outcome? The fact that USA does not dare to do anything against Russia and Russian forces in Syria is direct outcome of Lenin policies and continuation of those by great Stalin. What you are observing in Russian capabilities now is result of educational and scientific progress which started under Lenin policies backed by his words Study, study and yet more study and then continued by Stalin and following Soviet leaders. The fact that last Soviet leadership and early Russian leader Yeltsin happened to be traitorous morons has
    nothing to do with Lenin. Following your logic Washington project outcome is Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama and Current Mr. Twitter.

    Are mass murder and genocide some of the noble accomplishments of these two great men?

    I know. You have to crack a few million eggs to create that utopian omelet.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
    You want to take a ride along history road of capitalism rise? You sure the path is not covered by bones? Actually if you calculate how much it has cost the world to keep American dream alive you would be surprised. The life is tragic and what happened in Russia was much the guilt of the "partners" who financed and participated in Russian civil war which would not be possible without their direct support.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  166. FB says:
    @Sergey Krieger
    What outcome? The fact that USA does not dare to do anything against Russia and Russian forces in Syria is direct outcome of Lenin policies and continuation of those by great Stalin. What you are observing in Russian capabilities now is result of educational and scientific progress which started under Lenin policies backed by his words Study, study and yet more study and then continued by Stalin and following Soviet leaders. The fact that last Soviet leadership and early Russian leader Yeltsin happened to be traitorous morons has
    nothing to do with Lenin. Following your logic Washington project outcome is Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama and Current Mr. Twitter.

    Excellent comment…

    Of course you realize that the word ‘study’ is not useful to the pursuit of ignorant bliss…?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  167. TheJester says:
    @FB
    Calm down eagle scout...

    You weren't in France in WW2 so your silly whining is simply useless noise...

    Regarding Americans raping women during war, you are right and you are wrong. It happened … but not as policy or as a general outcome of troops running amuck.

    I’ll cite a rare instance. During the sack of Mexico during the Mexican-American War in 1846, the rabidly anti-Catholic, Protestant American soldiers desecrated Mexican Catholic churches and raped Mexican women. The Irish Catholic American soldiers (recent immigrants) objected and defected to the Mexican cause. They were captured and executed … for treason. The Protestant American soldiers who raped Mexican women got off “Scott free”.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Patrick%27s_Battalion

    My father fought in Europe in WWII. He told me that American soldiers did on rare occasion rape French and German women. When they were caught and convicted, they were executed. However, rape was a policy for Soviet troops seeking revenge in Germany and Austria. He spoke of a General Order from the Soviet Commander in Austria that all Austrian women of age in Vienna would be raped twice … to make it clear who was in charge. My father would not have engaged in historical research. This is what was “on the street” at the tail end of the war in Europe.

    I served in the US military in Germany in the 1970s. We were told to never ask a German woman (of age) what happened to her in WWII. Later, in another life, I found myself in an Intuit village in Canada. A woman (obviously a German immigrant) related that she was born in 1946 but her father, a German soldier, was killed in 1942. Go figure. Her biological father was most likely a Soviet soldier.

    I’ve since read tales of Soviet soldiers who related that, yes, they raped German women … but, contrary to German behavior in Russia and Ukraine, they did not kill them. Were they given a medal for showing such restraint?

    Read More
    • Replies: @istevefan

    I’ve since read tales of Soviet soldiers who related that, yes, they raped German women … but, contrary to German behavior in Russia and Ukraine, they did not kill them. Were they given a medal for showing such restraint?
     
    You have to remember that the Soviets lost about 25 million people in the four years of war with Germany. As a comparison the US has lost less than 2 million in 241 years. The Germans chose to to make it a war of annihilation. They chose to designate the Slavs as sub-human. There was going to be some sort of payback if the Germans lost. I don't like it. I am biased towards NW Europeans. But if you try to annihilate some group, don't expect them to treat you well if they win.

    As for the Americans and the British, there was not near the level of hatred between us and the Germans as there was between the Soviets and Germans. I hope we will never find out, but I don't doubt that Americans would be capable of similar brutalities if a foreign army invaded, caused the deaths of 30 million and treated us as less than human.
    , @prusmc
    One of the American soldier rapist murders executed by the US military in Europe during WWII was the father of Emmit Till.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  168. @lavoisier
    Are mass murder and genocide some of the noble accomplishments of these two great men?

    I know. You have to crack a few million eggs to create that utopian omelet.

    You want to take a ride along history road of capitalism rise? You sure the path is not covered by bones? Actually if you calculate how much it has cost the world to keep American dream alive you would be surprised. The life is tragic and what happened in Russia was much the guilt of the “partners” who financed and participated in Russian civil war which would not be possible without their direct support.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jilles dykstra
    How about the road to communist rise ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  169. Rich says:
    @bluedog
    Never watch holly wood flicks for they are for the brain dead, but there are a number of very good books written on our genocide in Nam (a good starting place is with "Kill Anything That Moves) one you have read that come back and I'll give you a few more) but then again you never read anything you dis-agree on,do you.!!

    Nick Turse? I read his book and it was filled with inaccuracies and lies.

    1. It was never the policy of the US to commit atrocities and those accused of them were arrested and prosecuted.

    2. Turse makes the ridiculous claim that 2 million Vietnamese civilians were killed by the US, when the actual number, according to every other expert is much lower.

    3. Turse is an anti-American author who received payment from the Communist government in Vietnam .

    4. Turse neglected to interview men who actually were involved in the war and defamed decorated Warrant Officer Thomas Equels, for which he sued, forcing Turse to admit his lies.

    5. Turse neglects the millions killed by the North Vietnamese.

    These are just five lies written by Turse, there are many more. If you’re basing your knowledge of the Vietnam War on men like Nick Turse, I can understand your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    I’m not sure you understand the definition of the word “lie”.
    , @bluedog
    Of course you read it but you skipped over all the reports "in the book"made by other troops, about the rapes going on, or how it was reported to their superiors clear up to General Powell and swept under the rug,which leads me to suspect that you never it at all,another one you might try is "The Untold History of The United States".Yes I know it blows the concept that we would'nt do those things why we are christian son-a-bitchs but only the later part of that is true.!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  170. istevefan says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    I disagree, although we definitely getting close to the time when a firmer Russian response will be required. It is not clear how well the Russians understand this.

    However, who looks worse right now, the Americans who were careful, after clear Russian warnings, to do little of consequence with these strikes, or the Russians who avoided a major war that the propaganda organs of the west would have blamed on them despite clear provocations? It’s pretty clear, I think. The Russians are in Syria for a number of reasons, but their legitimate national interest is at the forefront and this interest has been protected here. Syria would have been dismembered and subjected to Iraqi-style Mad Max chaos if not for Russia.

    However, who looks worse right now,

    I think it is the Russians. They look weak. Add to this strike the fact that we supposedly killed a couple hundred Russian mercenaries in February, and they look very weak. So much so they might be encouraging the US to be even more aggressive in the future.

    I am not saying the Russians should directly attack the US. But they should combat the Saudis and other Gulf Arabs interfering in Syria. They should also in the near term take out a sizable group of US-backed rebels.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Perhaps. But the claim of two hundred Russian mercenaries killed in February is almost certainly bullshit:

    http://m.spiegel.de/international/world/american-fury-the-truth-about-the-russian-deaths-in-syria-a-1196074.html
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    BTW, a general problem the Russians face here, given the nature of the war the Americans are waging, is that the general public (esp. in the US) will remain completely uninformed about real Russian gains and retaliations. E.g. there’s no doubt the Russians have captured American and British intelligence agents, but this will never be acknowledged officially.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Sorry Fanfella but the Russians only look weak to those with weak minds (if the cap fits and all that...) The better informed among us know that the war in Syria (more of a proxy war than a civil one) was largely funded and supplied by the US and it's "allies" for the benefit of Israel and corporatist internationals of banking, weaponry and oil fame.

    The war was going swimmingly well for them right up until Russia decided that enough was enough and, on the invitation of the Syrian government, took over the defence of Syria and has largely defeated the terrorist mercenaries, jihadists and Syrian rebels. Currently there are mopping up operations being conducted and the only reason for the non response from Russia is due to their understanding that the missile attacks were conducted primarily as a PR exercise for the weak minded so they they can continue chanting USA! USA! USA! without suffering any undue duress. Carry on.
    , @Vojkan
    The Russian may only look weak in the eyes of Westerners spoon fed like babies with CNN-style news. I don't see why they would waste ammunition to counter a strike that was striking nothing. Are the Russians now packing up and leaving, has the SAA fortune been reversed or are Western and Saudi backed jihadists anywhere farther from annihilation?
    , @anonymous
    Evidently you subscribe to the white supremacist ideology of "whites should not be killing whites," but other "lesser" humans are fair game. White psycho-killers and their apologists like you could then merrily live with implementing that ideology for centuries to come.

    Perhaps what should be happening is the opposite of "whites should not be killing whites." Why don't you white racist degenerates cluster bomb at your own cities to settle your differences, like you did decades ago?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  171. @El Dato
    Frankly the Coalition of the Three Muscular Clobberers seems to have run a missile test with no objectives here. Only Syrian air defenses had to be engaged. The goal is vague. The assurances cheap. The haste unseemly. The completely disregard of anything that the UN is supposed to stand for, unbecoming.

    Your writing style, entertaining.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  172. @Rich
    Nick Turse? I read his book and it was filled with inaccuracies and lies.

    1. It was never the policy of the US to commit atrocities and those accused of them were arrested and prosecuted.

    2. Turse makes the ridiculous claim that 2 million Vietnamese civilians were killed by the US, when the actual number, according to every other expert is much lower.

    3. Turse is an anti-American author who received payment from the Communist government in Vietnam .

    4. Turse neglected to interview men who actually were involved in the war and defamed decorated Warrant Officer Thomas Equels, for which he sued, forcing Turse to admit his lies.

    5. Turse neglects the millions killed by the North Vietnamese.

    These are just five lies written by Turse, there are many more. If you're basing your knowledge of the Vietnam War on men like Nick Turse, I can understand your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.

    I’m not sure you understand the definition of the word “lie”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    He dosen't that;s why he tells so many>!!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  173. istevefan says:
    @TheJester
    Regarding Americans raping women during war, you are right and you are wrong. It happened ... but not as policy or as a general outcome of troops running amuck.

    I'll cite a rare instance. During the sack of Mexico during the Mexican-American War in 1846, the rabidly anti-Catholic, Protestant American soldiers desecrated Mexican Catholic churches and raped Mexican women. The Irish Catholic American soldiers (recent immigrants) objected and defected to the Mexican cause. They were captured and executed ... for treason. The Protestant American soldiers who raped Mexican women got off "Scott free".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Patrick%27s_Battalion

    My father fought in Europe in WWII. He told me that American soldiers did on rare occasion rape French and German women. When they were caught and convicted, they were executed. However, rape was a policy for Soviet troops seeking revenge in Germany and Austria. He spoke of a General Order from the Soviet Commander in Austria that all Austrian women of age in Vienna would be raped twice ... to make it clear who was in charge. My father would not have engaged in historical research. This is what was "on the street" at the tail end of the war in Europe.

    I served in the US military in Germany in the 1970s. We were told to never ask a German woman (of age) what happened to her in WWII. Later, in another life, I found myself in an Intuit village in Canada. A woman (obviously a German immigrant) related that she was born in 1946 but her father, a German soldier, was killed in 1942. Go figure. Her biological father was most likely a Soviet soldier.

    I've since read tales of Soviet soldiers who related that, yes, they raped German women ... but, contrary to German behavior in Russia and Ukraine, they did not kill them. Were they given a medal for showing such restraint?

    I’ve since read tales of Soviet soldiers who related that, yes, they raped German women … but, contrary to German behavior in Russia and Ukraine, they did not kill them. Were they given a medal for showing such restraint?

    You have to remember that the Soviets lost about 25 million people in the four years of war with Germany. As a comparison the US has lost less than 2 million in 241 years. The Germans chose to to make it a war of annihilation. They chose to designate the Slavs as sub-human. There was going to be some sort of payback if the Germans lost. I don’t like it. I am biased towards NW Europeans. But if you try to annihilate some group, don’t expect them to treat you well if they win.

    As for the Americans and the British, there was not near the level of hatred between us and the Germans as there was between the Soviets and Germans. I hope we will never find out, but I don’t doubt that Americans would be capable of similar brutalities if a foreign army invaded, caused the deaths of 30 million and treated us as less than human.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Byrresheim
    The Russian losses were enormous but, in large part, self-inflicted.

    It is enlightening to read Martin van Crevelds analysis of the battle of Berlin, when the Reich had definitely lost the war, the defenders had no air cover, nearly no heavy weapons, no clear objective.

    Still the Russians managed to lose more soldiers than the army that was losing the last battle of a war lost months, if not years ago.

    While it is understandable and even necessary that a people groups around its leaders in wartime, it is amazing that even eighty years later there seems to be no critical thinking about the Russian leaders during the war possible for most Russians.

    , @jilles dykstra
    " The Germans chose to to make it a war of annihilation "

    Any proof ?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  174. @istevefan

    However, who looks worse right now,
     
    I think it is the Russians. They look weak. Add to this strike the fact that we supposedly killed a couple hundred Russian mercenaries in February, and they look very weak. So much so they might be encouraging the US to be even more aggressive in the future.

    I am not saying the Russians should directly attack the US. But they should combat the Saudis and other Gulf Arabs interfering in Syria. They should also in the near term take out a sizable group of US-backed rebels.

    Perhaps. But the claim of two hundred Russian mercenaries killed in February is almost certainly bullshit:

    http://m.spiegel.de/international/world/american-fury-the-truth-about-the-russian-deaths-in-syria-a-1196074.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  175. Rich says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    I am afraid you are a Team America nut-hugger, and probably beyond hope. For others, it is not hard at all to confirm American conduct during the war, e.g.

    https://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/books/rape-by-american-soldiers-in-world-war-ii-france.html

    Did you even read the article you cite as “proof” of American soldiers committing rape in France? Even the writer says the accusations were “shaky”. Rape was the official policy of the Soviet Army, condoned at the highest levels, Russian soldiers who tried to protect German women were arrested and imprisoned. That’s a big difference from a few bad apples on the American side risking the death penalty for committing rape.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    The writer doesn’t say the accusations were “shaky” as such, just that the French may have exaggerated some things associated with black troops. In other words, she’s virtue signaling PC. Perhaps you should read more carefully.

    The point is not whether Americans behaved as badly as Red Army troops. The point is whether the “Greatest Generation” (who unlike the Soviets had absolutely no claims against the Germans) were the angels so many brain-dead Americans wish they were.

    , @ValmMond
    According to J. Robert Lilly and his book "Taken By Force", between 1945 and 1946 American servicemen in Germany raped some 11,000 women.
    It was worse in the Pacific Theater. American troops raped 10,000 women on Okinawa alone. The vast majority of rapes went unreported. Some Marines would stay behind after fighting had stopped so that they could regularly raid villages and rape women.
    In France, American GIs raped also thousands. In the most egregious cases, the rapists were caught and sentenced. But most went unreported and unaccounted for.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  176. @istevefan

    However, who looks worse right now,
     
    I think it is the Russians. They look weak. Add to this strike the fact that we supposedly killed a couple hundred Russian mercenaries in February, and they look very weak. So much so they might be encouraging the US to be even more aggressive in the future.

    I am not saying the Russians should directly attack the US. But they should combat the Saudis and other Gulf Arabs interfering in Syria. They should also in the near term take out a sizable group of US-backed rebels.

    BTW, a general problem the Russians face here, given the nature of the war the Americans are waging, is that the general public (esp. in the US) will remain completely uninformed about real Russian gains and retaliations. E.g. there’s no doubt the Russians have captured American and British intelligence agents, but this will never be acknowledged officially.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    there’s no doubt the Russians have captured American and British intelligence agents
     
    I have doubts. Somehow Russians have never tried to capitalize on it. Why? If they caught agents, the agents are not protected by the Geneva Convention on POWs and thus they can be paraded in public and used in propaganda and made interviews with and so on. But we have never seen anything.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  177. @Buster Hymen
    You are such a hopeless rube. Your American troop comrades-in-arms got lotsa hot gangbang action off wog babes. Guess nobody invited you.

    https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-gU3vbwGE8nI/TXFrE-GnlBI/AAAAAAAAAqU/xA3lsfYTKZI/s1600/raped.jpg

    Source?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Buster HYmen
    Ask Gina Haspel, the Deputy Director of Shredding the Evidence.
    , @anonymous
    Shame on you criminal. I have the source too, I am not going to give it to you, arrogant dummy. Move your behind and search it in the the internet.


    I am afraid the fucking Zionist google is in the business of purging all the evidence of American crimes against humanity. Majority of my important links become inactive as soon as it was posted.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  178. @Wizard of Oz
    I just started reading and I had this fantasy. Why wouldn't Russia be able to send in uniformed troops - only basically trained so not very valuable and pleased that they might survive - by parachute or crash landing planes so that they could carry out limited but extremely damaging operations before surrendering. Nuclear power plants? Whole underground railway systems? Civilian airports where many planes were lined up? Dams? Bridges? They could be made to believe that as soldiers in uniform and therefore POWs the US would treat them better than say Japanese-American civilians in WW2....

    the main thing is that the russians could easily win by damaging the economy, and it is a ponzi economy…the economy could be hurt best by going after the big cities where the workers live and work…the infrastructure is vulnerable to organized guerrilla attacks…and the populace of the large american cities depends on food and water and sewage and electricity…all these services could be taken out by organized guerrilla infiltrators…and the populace would be panicked…

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Why should they do that, pray? As a wise saying has it, “when you see your enemy committing suicide, do not interfere”.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  179. @Rich
    Did you even read the article you cite as "proof" of American soldiers committing rape in France? Even the writer says the accusations were "shaky". Rape was the official policy of the Soviet Army, condoned at the highest levels, Russian soldiers who tried to protect German women were arrested and imprisoned. That's a big difference from a few bad apples on the American side risking the death penalty for committing rape.

    The writer doesn’t say the accusations were “shaky” as such, just that the French may have exaggerated some things associated with black troops. In other words, she’s virtue signaling PC. Perhaps you should read more carefully.

    The point is not whether Americans behaved as badly as Red Army troops. The point is whether the “Greatest Generation” (who unlike the Soviets had absolutely no claims against the Germans) were the angels so many brain-dead Americans wish they were.

    Read More
    • Agree: Byrresheim
    • Replies: @Byrresheim
    It seems while the GIs were no angels (no army can be) the were not even remotely approaching the level of callousness and intentional lack of discipline displayed by the red army.

    Chewing gum and nylon stockings alone do not even begin to explain the difference in attitude of the occupied populations.

    The fact that the US in Syria is clearly on the side of the morally and intellectually wrong does not take away one iot of the red army's crimes in the last war.

    The Russians may have had claims against the Germans – but they had no claims against Poles, Ukrainians, Romainians, Bulgarians and their behaviour was atrocious wherever they went.

    There is a reason Russians are hated in eastern Europe. The complete lack of interest in this reason regularly shown by Russian authors is shocking and not helpful to their own cause.
    , @Rich
    Well, you've got the wrong guy if you think I'm one of those who believe the WWII generation was the "greatest generation". That was just a book written by an idiot newsreader. Doesn't change the fact that it was never US policy to allow its troops to commit rape, and those suspected of rape were subject to death under the USMCJ.

    People who believe in the "Greatest Generation" nonsense, are usually the same people who believe in the crazed Vietnam era soldier "baby-killer, peasant raper" myth. Guys like your hero Nick Turse, liar and libeler.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  180. After what the Bolsheviks inflicted on the Ukrainian people (and a good part of Russia to boot) I would really appreciate if todays Russians could just shut up about Ukronazis and do some historical research of their own, research not focussed on denial of the undeniable.

    What the Germans right now do to excess, wallow in the guilt of their forebears, the Russians would do well to at least consider: that all was not well with their murderous bolshevik past.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Sorry to disappoint, Holodomor is a myth created by Ukrainian Nazis. The funniest thing is that there was severe hunger in Western Ukraine at the same time, which was part of Poland back then. At that time there was widespread hunger in Russia and Kazakhstan, as well, and in Ukraine the most severely affected parts were the least Ukrainian, including Donbass, that is now fighting against current regime in Kiev.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  181. Anon[436] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN
    I am sure a lot of ideologically driven people will disagree. Let them.
    In and of itself, the fact that in the last 70 years or so the US was invariably on the side of the evil does not mean that the USSR/Russia was always on the side of the good. Two evil forces can and will fight for dominance. I’ve read someone’s comment somewhere that in living memory there was no case when the USSR was on the side of the oppressors or when the US was on the side of the oppressed. To the best of my knowledge this is true, but the side of the oppressed is not always the side of the good, even though the side of the oppressors is always the side of the evil. Say, the fact that current government in Kiev, Ukraine, is evil through and through does not mean that the leadership of Donetsk or Lugansk People’s Republic is absolutely good. The US is a global calamity, shameless bandits with mighty weapons. However, Russia stands up to the Empire to defend its own interests, not to defend good in general.
    Back to Syria. Any even half-honest person would agree that ISIS and other Islamists, created, armed, and funded by the US and its vassals, are thoroughly evil. But that does not mean that Assad is good. It only means that he is a lesser evil, possibly the best Syria can have today. Most Syrians, including Sunnis, with the experience of living under Islamists, became staunch supporters of Assad: compared to them he looks positively good. But let’s not forget that it’s easy to win in this comparison. There is no doubt that in an honest election today in Syria Assad is likely to win by a large margin, maybe even as large as Putin won in Russian elections. But winners aren’t necessarily good. After all, the US was among the winners in WWII.

    To say that within living memory the Soviet Union was never on the side of the oppressors is so ridiculous as to sink your credibility to a permanent zero.

    Leave aside Russian victims, think of the Holomodor. Then
    Poland 1939 and onwards (ever heard of the Katyn forest massacre?)
    The whole of Eastern Europe where Communist régimes were foisted on the people after WW2. Ever heard of the risings in Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968?

    C’mon…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Byrresheim
    Perhaps if we keep reminding them, they might, one day …

    it seems as if the Russians are blinded by their innocence just in a mirror image of the Germans who cannot see anything but their guilt.

    Is it necessary to point out that both extreme attitudes are not helpful towards an understanding of complex historical processes?

    , @Sergey Krieger
    Some of those Eastern soviet union policy of turning thos atea onto buffer zone against fiture invasion eas justified morally and as a right of a winner. European countries were Germany allies in her war against ussr. Others provided manufacturing capacity or served as super highway or staging area of invasion.
    Then I hear many in those eastern European countries miss old days of communism but alas this option is not available for some time. Hence they have to toil in capitalistic purgatory while trying to fight off waves of barbarians. Their populations are shrinking while under evil communism their populations were growing.
    , @AnonFromTN
    What made you think I want to have credibility among trolls? If you sincerely believe that, think again.

    The regime did victimize the USSR population, particularly peasants, but whoever wrote the comment I cited meant foreign policy.
    Besides, Holodomor is a myth created by Ukrainian Nazis. The funniest thing is that there was severe hunger in Western Ukraine at the same time, which was part of Poland back then. At that time there was widespread hunger in Russia and Kazakhstan, as well, and in Ukraine the most severely affected parts were the least Ukrainian, including Donbass, that is now fighting against current regime in Kiev.

    Calling Poland of 1939 “oppressed” is stretching it beyond the breaking point. Churchill at the time called Poland “the hyena of Europe” for a reason: it snatched a piece of Czechoslovakia while it was being dismembered by Hitler.

    As to Eastern Europe, many people in numerous Eastern European countries are worse off after EU “liberation” than they were under Soviet “oppression”. You (or, rather, honest readers) can find info here:
    http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2015/02/03/have-living-standards-in-eastern-europe-decreased-after-communism/#.WtNuL4JOkdU
    https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/2gpfmp/polls_show_eastern_europeans_miss_communism/
    https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/kurt-biray/communist-nostalgia-in-eastern-europe-longing-for-past
    and on many other websites.

    The fate of Gdansk (Danzig) shipbuilding plant in Poland, where the Solidarnost movement started, is a symbolic example. Soviet “oppressors” built a huge shipbuilding plant from scratch, which employed tens of thousands of people. USSR supplied it with orders for many years. “Liberators” from the EU killed it, like many other industries in Eastern Europe. It is “kaput”, no matter what your paymasters say. Those Russians who are inclined to schadenfreude are saying “serves them right”. Personally, I commiserate with Poles, as they stepped into the same trap as Russians and many others did.

    Now, how much of Hungarian uprising in 1956 or Czech uprising in 1968 was genuine and how much was “color revolution” still remains to be seen. Swap of one set of myth for another does not get us any closer to the truth. We also should not forget that “saint” Havel, the leader of “velvet revolution” in Czechoslovakia in 1989, kicked a lot of families out of the apartments “oppressors” gave them, because his ancestors owned those properties before nationalization.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  182. @Beefcake the Mighty
    The writer doesn’t say the accusations were “shaky” as such, just that the French may have exaggerated some things associated with black troops. In other words, she’s virtue signaling PC. Perhaps you should read more carefully.

    The point is not whether Americans behaved as badly as Red Army troops. The point is whether the “Greatest Generation” (who unlike the Soviets had absolutely no claims against the Germans) were the angels so many brain-dead Americans wish they were.

    It seems while the GIs were no angels (no army can be) the were not even remotely approaching the level of callousness and intentional lack of discipline displayed by the red army.

    Chewing gum and nylon stockings alone do not even begin to explain the difference in attitude of the occupied populations.

    The fact that the US in Syria is clearly on the side of the morally and intellectually wrong does not take away one iot of the red army’s crimes in the last war.

    The Russians may have had claims against the Germans – but they had no claims against Poles, Ukrainians, Romainians, Bulgarians and their behaviour was atrocious wherever they went.

    There is a reason Russians are hated in eastern Europe. The complete lack of interest in this reason regularly shown by Russian authors is shocking and not helpful to their own cause.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    The Russian-Polish different being a different matter and dating back to the Middle Age, when the Poles along with the Lithuanians were the aggressor, the only ones in Central and Eastern Eurooe against whom the Russian had no claim were the Czechs and the Serbs - the latter took in and sheltered white Russians after the October revolution, which could have been cause for a grudge -, all the others were allies of the Axis and participated in the nazi invasion of Russia so Russian attitude after WWII was not that unreasonable and seems all the more sensible now that all the allies of the Axis during WWII have joined NATO, with some of them even having US missiles aimed at Russia on their soil.
    , @1RW
    Romania and Bulgaria participated in the invasion of the USSR on Germany’s side.

    Poland invaded the USSR in the 1920s. It invaded Germany as well, kind of predatory behavior actually.

    Ukranian nationalists were willing auxiliaries for the Germans. While Waffen SS division Galicia was a joke that lasted three days of contact with the Red Army, civilians had less luck dealing with them.

    So you see, there were plenty of claims.
    , @anonymous

    The Russians may have had claims against the Germans – but they had no claims against Poles, Ukrainians, Romainians, Bulgarians and their behaviour was atrocious wherever they went.
     
    I don't get it.

    Soviets starved to death millions of their own people and many Commies, still today, say, No problem, Stalin had to kill the kulaks to bring about his vision.

    But Germans killing Soviet troops that Stalin sent into battle unprepared, poorly armed, and threatened w/ death if they turned back -- doesn't that amount to Germans doing Soviet dirty-work?

    But Russians call that a major crime for which Soviets raped 2 million German women.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  183. @istevefan

    However, who looks worse right now,
     
    I think it is the Russians. They look weak. Add to this strike the fact that we supposedly killed a couple hundred Russian mercenaries in February, and they look very weak. So much so they might be encouraging the US to be even more aggressive in the future.

    I am not saying the Russians should directly attack the US. But they should combat the Saudis and other Gulf Arabs interfering in Syria. They should also in the near term take out a sizable group of US-backed rebels.

    Sorry Fanfella but the Russians only look weak to those with weak minds (if the cap fits and all that…) The better informed among us know that the war in Syria (more of a proxy war than a civil one) was largely funded and supplied by the US and it’s “allies” for the benefit of Israel and corporatist internationals of banking, weaponry and oil fame.

    The war was going swimmingly well for them right up until Russia decided that enough was enough and, on the invitation of the Syrian government, took over the defence of Syria and has largely defeated the terrorist mercenaries, jihadists and Syrian rebels. Currently there are mopping up operations being conducted and the only reason for the non response from Russia is due to their understanding that the missile attacks were conducted primarily as a PR exercise for the weak minded so they they can continue chanting USA! USA! USA! without suffering any undue duress. Carry on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Agreed. Though the Russians are weak compared with the US with or without NATO they don't look weak as he suggested. In fact they appear to be opportunistically playing a weak hand pretty well. It would be of interest to know how many of those with influence on the White House recognise that the Russisns are bringing about what may be the least bad outcome, namely survival of Assad and his effectively secular régime. Russia should hang about until their Trump promises to get all Russians out of shit holes.
    , @Anon

    the missile attacks were conducted primarily as a PR exercise for the weak minded

     

    You mean mocking a Russia most senior General with Israel attack, killing number of senior Iranian advisors with unspecified Russian casualty, and US Nato public threat of more massive strikes are an acceptable PR?

    And what's Russia response? We can't risk a war by attacking the launchers even losing our highest credibility from our prez & highest rank general completely, but you see we have many means to frustrate them by disrupting their GPS….blah blah…

    https://www.rt.com/news/423925-russia-air-defense-syria/

    The current situation appears much tenser, with Russia openly threatening to directly oppose an American attack on Syrian soil. Russia’s determination may be questioned, considering its record of not opposing Israeli raids in Syria, but its capabilities to resist the attack are not in dispute.

    …boasting & more shameless boasting…

    In a limited missile attack scenario, the Russian military may deliver on the threat it made and retaliate against the origin of the missiles – the US guided- missile destroyers and possibly attack submarines currently deployed in the Mediterranean. Attacking them with lethal force would be a major escalation in the conflict, but the Russian military may use a limited response – using airborne electronic warfare equipment to harass the American ships, messing up their target acquisition, geolocation or even AEGIS anti-aircraft systems. The extent of damage this may cause is debatable, but it would certainly make the job of destroying whatever targets the US command has in mind in Syria much more difficult.
     
    Where is that coward highest ranking Russia General now after been called bluff? Running to mama crying and hiding under her panty host since without a whimper or fart. How the world & West hostile force see Russia making itself a big laughing stock?

    What a good Team Russia PR by a self deluded one like you. Good try.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  184. @istevefan

    I’ve since read tales of Soviet soldiers who related that, yes, they raped German women … but, contrary to German behavior in Russia and Ukraine, they did not kill them. Were they given a medal for showing such restraint?
     
    You have to remember that the Soviets lost about 25 million people in the four years of war with Germany. As a comparison the US has lost less than 2 million in 241 years. The Germans chose to to make it a war of annihilation. They chose to designate the Slavs as sub-human. There was going to be some sort of payback if the Germans lost. I don't like it. I am biased towards NW Europeans. But if you try to annihilate some group, don't expect them to treat you well if they win.

    As for the Americans and the British, there was not near the level of hatred between us and the Germans as there was between the Soviets and Germans. I hope we will never find out, but I don't doubt that Americans would be capable of similar brutalities if a foreign army invaded, caused the deaths of 30 million and treated us as less than human.

    The Russian losses were enormous but, in large part, self-inflicted.

    It is enlightening to read Martin van Crevelds analysis of the battle of Berlin, when the Reich had definitely lost the war, the defenders had no air cover, nearly no heavy weapons, no clear objective.

    Still the Russians managed to lose more soldiers than the army that was losing the last battle of a war lost months, if not years ago.

    While it is understandable and even necessary that a people groups around its leaders in wartime, it is amazing that even eighty years later there seems to be no critical thinking about the Russian leaders during the war possible for most Russians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @1RW
    You’re wrong. Russians have had a long debate about the merits of their leaders in WW2. There are plenty who feel that the huge losses were the fault of Stalin et al. The problem with this position is that Germans, not Stalin, not the NKVD invaded on June 21 1941 and proceeded to bomb, shell, shoot, enslave, and starve millions of Russians. Stalin and co on the other hand spent the preceding decade industrializing the country and building up the armed forces, and of course then led the effort that ended in Berlin, not at the edge of the Ural Mountains like Hitler wanted.

    Loosing more men when attacking is normal. The Germans defending Berlin had no where to run and thought that surrender meant death - it certainly was for most Soviet soldiers that surrendered to them. This is what Sun Tzu called “Death Ground”, and advised the reader to avoid. Yet Stalin felt that taking Berlin was imperative to keep away from US/Britain to whom Germans likely would have surrendered with little fight. Was he right? Probably. So Berlin had to be taken, and was.

    These attempts to draw a parallel between Stalin and Hitler are ridiculous. The Germans literally had plans for exterminating/enslaving Slavs and erasing all records of their culture. The Soviets merely imposed friendly governments on East Europeans - many of whom fought alongside Hitler.
    , @jilles dykstra
    Since I read
    Rainer Karlsch, 'Hitlers Bom, Hoe Nazi-Duitsland nucleaire wapens testte in een wanhopige poging om de oorlog te winnen, Tielt, 2005 (Hitlers Bombe, München)
    it is clear to me that Hitler hoped to turn the tide of the war with a hydrogen bomb.
    The first operational bomb was destined for the Ural electricity plants, to stop USSR tank production.
    Two planes converted to carry the bombs were stationed in Prague, Rudel was to drop the first bomb.
    I wonder what one or two V2's with a hydrogen bomb on London would have accomplished.
    , @El Dato
    Russians bodies were cheap. And if your army is actually an outfit managed by upwardly mobile political commissars they are cheaper still.

    The first rule upon encountering a political operator is kill the politicial operator.

    Russia likes to complain mucho about invading fascists but the sad truth is The 3rd Reich and The Soviet Union were mirror images of each other in a deadly embrace.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  185. @Anon
    To say that within living memory the Soviet Union was never on the side of the oppressors is so ridiculous as to sink your credibility to a permanent zero.

    Leave aside Russian victims, think of the Holomodor. Then
    Poland 1939 and onwards (ever heard of the Katyn forest massacre?)
    The whole of Eastern Europe where Communist régimes were foisted on the people after WW2. Ever heard of the risings in Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968?

    C'mon...

    Perhaps if we keep reminding them, they might, one day …

    it seems as if the Russians are blinded by their innocence just in a mirror image of the Germans who cannot see anything but their guilt.

    Is it necessary to point out that both extreme attitudes are not helpful towards an understanding of complex historical processes?

    Read More
    • Replies: @myself
    A dose of guilt is sometimes useful, it shows self-reflection. A lot of guilt is paralyzing and leads to the surrender of the will, and the loss of the spirit.

    Japan, for example, is unrepentant, while Germany is TOO repentant. Both are unhealthy.

    A dose of innocence is good, it leads to higher civilization-level morale to tell yourself you're on the side of God. An excess of innocence can become delusion.

    If a people are to survive in the long run, they have to learn balance.
    , @Sergey Krieger
    Russians developing guilt over bs that you spread will happen right after you smash into Empire State Building riding flying pig. I see the odds are pretty grim.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  186. Vojkan says:
    @FB
    That's the question isn't it...?

    As always my go-to man PCR has a very solid take on this...

    His take is that Mattis prevailed upon restraining the nutbar Bolton and the puppet Dump [Bolton now being the Svengali pulling the strings it seems]...because neither he nor Joe Dunford felt good about the idea of actually coming to blows with the Russians...

    PCR also speculates a little further afield that Putin acquiesced to take the pie in the face for the sake of sanity...

    However...PCR argues that this may have been a mistake...I agree...the relentless drive of the neocon crazies is not about to stop...

    He adds that this was perhaps the perfect time and place for the Russian military to deliver a forceful blow that would deflate the balloon...and perhaps wake people up...ie sinking US ships and shooting down US planes...

    I agree with this also...unlike some disneylanders here like Karlimp and the Flaker...I have a good idea of what the physical capabilities are in this geographical theater...taking out US ships and planes would be a cakewalk if only Putin had given the nod...


    '...The next provocation will be orchestrated in a situation more favorable to US than to Russian arms. Washington will not again risk a confrontation, as it did in Syria, where it clearly would have lost.

    What this means is that Russia’s humanity and moral conscience will result in a confrontation far more dangerous to Russia and to all of us...'
     

    Yup...Judo grandmaster Putin should have pulled the trigger...

    Pulling the trigger would have been taking part in an exercise in futility because the strike was that, an exercise in futility. Why open fire and risk damage if there’s no damage in the first place, just for the sake of chest thumping?

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB
    You don't get it do you...?

    This 'exercise in futility' is just the appetizer for the main course to come...

    A psychopath that is allowed to continue his crimes is simply going to be emboldened by every sign of weakness...or even perceived weakness...of his victim...

    '...Although the Russian government has every good intention, Russia’s moral conscience and consideration for others is leading the world to Armageddon.

    The reason is that the neoconservatives who control US foreign policy are not going to stop orchestrating events that they blame on Russia.

    The longer Russia waits before it finally puts its foot down, the stronger the provocations will become.

    The successive provocations will narrow down Russia’s response to surrender or nuclear war...'
     
    That's PCR writing yesterday...and he is absolutely correct about everything...

    '...The Syrian provocation was an ideal one for Russia to put its foot down. Russia held the military cards. Russia could easily have destroyed every ship and every airplane.

    Having made the consequences clear in advance to the world, the US would have backed off...'
     
    You just don't understand the psychology of conflict...even on the micro or personal level I suspect...

    Why do you think those people who snap and end up mowing down dozens of innocents are able to carry this out...?

    It's because they weren't stopped while there was time...it's too late once the nutcase decides to go all in and is holding an assault rifle...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  187. Vojkan says:
    @Byrresheim
    It seems while the GIs were no angels (no army can be) the were not even remotely approaching the level of callousness and intentional lack of discipline displayed by the red army.

    Chewing gum and nylon stockings alone do not even begin to explain the difference in attitude of the occupied populations.

    The fact that the US in Syria is clearly on the side of the morally and intellectually wrong does not take away one iot of the red army's crimes in the last war.

    The Russians may have had claims against the Germans – but they had no claims against Poles, Ukrainians, Romainians, Bulgarians and their behaviour was atrocious wherever they went.

    There is a reason Russians are hated in eastern Europe. The complete lack of interest in this reason regularly shown by Russian authors is shocking and not helpful to their own cause.

    The Russian-Polish different being a different matter and dating back to the Middle Age, when the Poles along with the Lithuanians were the aggressor, the only ones in Central and Eastern Eurooe against whom the Russian had no claim were the Czechs and the Serbs – the latter took in and sheltered white Russians after the October revolution, which could have been cause for a grudge -, all the others were allies of the Axis and participated in the nazi invasion of Russia so Russian attitude after WWII was not that unreasonable and seems all the more sensible now that all the allies of the Axis during WWII have joined NATO, with some of them even having US missiles aimed at Russia on their soil.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Did you really post that Poland was an ally of Germany during WW2?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  188. Vojkan says:
    @istevefan

    However, who looks worse right now,
     
    I think it is the Russians. They look weak. Add to this strike the fact that we supposedly killed a couple hundred Russian mercenaries in February, and they look very weak. So much so they might be encouraging the US to be even more aggressive in the future.

    I am not saying the Russians should directly attack the US. But they should combat the Saudis and other Gulf Arabs interfering in Syria. They should also in the near term take out a sizable group of US-backed rebels.

    The Russian may only look weak in the eyes of Westerners spoon fed like babies with CNN-style news. I don’t see why they would waste ammunition to counter a strike that was striking nothing. Are the Russians now packing up and leaving, has the SAA fortune been reversed or are Western and Saudi backed jihadists anywhere farther from annihilation?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  189. utu says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    BTW, a general problem the Russians face here, given the nature of the war the Americans are waging, is that the general public (esp. in the US) will remain completely uninformed about real Russian gains and retaliations. E.g. there’s no doubt the Russians have captured American and British intelligence agents, but this will never be acknowledged officially.

    there’s no doubt the Russians have captured American and British intelligence agents

    I have doubts. Somehow Russians have never tried to capitalize on it. Why? If they caught agents, the agents are not protected by the Geneva Convention on POWs and thus they can be paraded in public and used in propaganda and made interviews with and so on. But we have never seen anything.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Fair question, I suspect the Russians are holding back information (as they clearly are about, say, MH17), because they know once the US deep state’s cover is completely blown, all formal restraints are off and Russia is not yet ready for total war. The crazies are running the US, but still rely on the facade of political openness and other such lies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  190. Vojkan says:

    I must say that the reaction of the USA fanboys seems saner to me – they still look stupid though – than that of Russia fans here. As if the latter were deceived that WWIII didn’t happen – yet.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  191. 1RW says:
    @Byrresheim
    The Russian losses were enormous but, in large part, self-inflicted.

    It is enlightening to read Martin van Crevelds analysis of the battle of Berlin, when the Reich had definitely lost the war, the defenders had no air cover, nearly no heavy weapons, no clear objective.

    Still the Russians managed to lose more soldiers than the army that was losing the last battle of a war lost months, if not years ago.

    While it is understandable and even necessary that a people groups around its leaders in wartime, it is amazing that even eighty years later there seems to be no critical thinking about the Russian leaders during the war possible for most Russians.

    You’re wrong. Russians have had a long debate about the merits of their leaders in WW2. There are plenty who feel that the huge losses were the fault of Stalin et al. The problem with this position is that Germans, not Stalin, not the NKVD invaded on June 21 1941 and proceeded to bomb, shell, shoot, enslave, and starve millions of Russians. Stalin and co on the other hand spent the preceding decade industrializing the country and building up the armed forces, and of course then led the effort that ended in Berlin, not at the edge of the Ural Mountains like Hitler wanted.

    Loosing more men when attacking is normal. The Germans defending Berlin had no where to run and thought that surrender meant death – it certainly was for most Soviet soldiers that surrendered to them. This is what Sun Tzu called “Death Ground”, and advised the reader to avoid. Yet Stalin felt that taking Berlin was imperative to keep away from US/Britain to whom Germans likely would have surrendered with little fight. Was he right? Probably. So Berlin had to be taken, and was.

    These attempts to draw a parallel between Stalin and Hitler are ridiculous. The Germans literally had plans for exterminating/enslaving Slavs and erasing all records of their culture. The Soviets merely imposed friendly governments on East Europeans – many of whom fought alongside Hitler.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  192. 1RW says:
    @Byrresheim
    It seems while the GIs were no angels (no army can be) the were not even remotely approaching the level of callousness and intentional lack of discipline displayed by the red army.

    Chewing gum and nylon stockings alone do not even begin to explain the difference in attitude of the occupied populations.

    The fact that the US in Syria is clearly on the side of the morally and intellectually wrong does not take away one iot of the red army's crimes in the last war.

    The Russians may have had claims against the Germans – but they had no claims against Poles, Ukrainians, Romainians, Bulgarians and their behaviour was atrocious wherever they went.

    There is a reason Russians are hated in eastern Europe. The complete lack of interest in this reason regularly shown by Russian authors is shocking and not helpful to their own cause.

    Romania and Bulgaria participated in the invasion of the USSR on Germany’s side.

    Poland invaded the USSR in the 1920s. It invaded Germany as well, kind of predatory behavior actually.

    Ukranian nationalists were willing auxiliaries for the Germans. While Waffen SS division Galicia was a joke that lasted three days of contact with the Red Army, civilians had less luck dealing with them.

    So you see, there were plenty of claims.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    To be honest, Bulgaria was formally an ally of Nazi Germany, but Bulgarian tsar said that he can’t send any troops against the Russians, as they won’t be reliable. He was right: puppet Nazi regime in Slovakia sent an army corps to the Eastern Front, and it promptly surrendered to the Red Army, along with it’s officers and commander. On the other hand, Romania fought on the side of Hitler and Romanians committed a lot of atrocities in Odessa region that they occupied. Hungarians also fought with Germans and were reputed to be the worst beasts, so that the Red Army shot them on the spot, did not take Hungarian prisoners of war (but took surrendering Germans). The only army on Hitler’s side that had a reputation of being relatively nice was Italian: they only demanded food and drinks, but did not commit any atrocities. For the curious: this info is from my grandparents who lived through German occupation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  193. anonymous[497] • Disclaimer says:
    @istevefan

    However, who looks worse right now,
     
    I think it is the Russians. They look weak. Add to this strike the fact that we supposedly killed a couple hundred Russian mercenaries in February, and they look very weak. So much so they might be encouraging the US to be even more aggressive in the future.

    I am not saying the Russians should directly attack the US. But they should combat the Saudis and other Gulf Arabs interfering in Syria. They should also in the near term take out a sizable group of US-backed rebels.

    Evidently you subscribe to the white supremacist ideology of “whites should not be killing whites,” but other “lesser” humans are fair game. White psycho-killers and their apologists like you could then merrily live with implementing that ideology for centuries to come.

    Perhaps what should be happening is the opposite of “whites should not be killing whites.” Why don’t you white racist degenerates cluster bomb at your own cities to settle your differences, like you did decades ago?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  194. El Dato says:
    @Heros
    This is a great description by Saker of where Germany stood in 1941. Since 1933 Saker's Anglo-zionists had conducted an economic war against her. In fact, a complete embargo of all German products and exports was declared upon Hitler winning the elections of 1933. Germany, without gold, had also been completely cut off from the Anglo-zionist usury money machine, unlike Russia today.

    All those little struggling fragments of Zionist shattered empires strewn about all around Germany were teetering on collapse, just as now in the ex-CIS, due to Zio-banking. Slovakia had sided with the Germans against the artificial Versailles construct of Czechoslovakia which had doomed them to a slow genocidal purge like the Hungarians and Sudetans, but Slovakia was no more a loyal partner to the German resistance to Zionism than Belorussia is to Russia today.

    There was the German rescue of Danzig that is so similar to the Russian rescue of Crimea. Hitler proceeded to take all of Poland when the ango-zio-empire declared war on Germany. Putin failed to secure Ukraine from the anglo-zionists, he could afford to. To Hitler's demise, he didn't have the strategic depth of Russia, and couldn't allow the anglo-zionists to use Poland against him.

    Then we have Stalin's incredible hordes of offensive tanks (~24000 vs ~8000 German) of which the vast majority were heavier armored, heavier gunned, faster, and many were even amphibious to cross the rivers of Poland and Germany. The Germans were hopelessly out gunned and out numbered by the Soviets and their Anlgo-zionist allies, yet they prevailed in same way Saker thinks Russia will. Germany mostly had flimsy and lightly armed Pkw I and II tanks. The USSR, well supplied by the Zio-empire, had incedible advantages in numbers of artillery, aircraft, soldiers, paratroopers, you name it.

    Even these fake chemical weapons attacks in Syria have their parallels in '40's battles for the destruction of Germany and Russia, namely Gleiwitz and the vom Rath murder (Kristalnacht), both of which were Anglo-zionist false flags and war provocations. The slaughter of ethnic Germans in Sudetanland and Prussia is strikingly similar to the recent zio-slaughter of ethnic Russians in Novorussia.

    Unfortunately, so many like Saker still buy the wikipedia version of WWII hook, line and sinker and accept lies like bogus Nazi war crimes. Katyn forest and the murders commited by Russians under orders from their jewish kommisars to cover it up far, far exceeds any Zio-difficulties Russia is facing in Syria.

    Even these fake chemical weapons attacks in Syria have their parallels in ’40′s battles for the destruction of Germany and Russia, namely Gleiwitz and the vom Rath murder (Kristalnacht), both of which were Anglo-zionist false flags and war provocations.

    Gleiwitz … a German false flag performed to have a nice reason to start firing the very next day … declared actually a false flag of “Anglo-Zionists”?

    I guess Hollywood-style Orwellian historical unlogic is everywhere.

    Next you will be declaring that Hitler and his Prussian Generalstab ready to test their mettle at winning THIS TIME ‘ROUND were actually rudely awakened by Polish guns firing on the Schleswig-Holstein from the Westerplatte.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  195. @Byrresheim
    The Russian losses were enormous but, in large part, self-inflicted.

    It is enlightening to read Martin van Crevelds analysis of the battle of Berlin, when the Reich had definitely lost the war, the defenders had no air cover, nearly no heavy weapons, no clear objective.

    Still the Russians managed to lose more soldiers than the army that was losing the last battle of a war lost months, if not years ago.

    While it is understandable and even necessary that a people groups around its leaders in wartime, it is amazing that even eighty years later there seems to be no critical thinking about the Russian leaders during the war possible for most Russians.

    Since I read
    Rainer Karlsch, ‘Hitlers Bom, Hoe Nazi-Duitsland nucleaire wapens testte in een wanhopige poging om de oorlog te winnen, Tielt, 2005 (Hitlers Bombe, München)
    it is clear to me that Hitler hoped to turn the tide of the war with a hydrogen bomb.
    The first operational bomb was destined for the Ural electricity plants, to stop USSR tank production.
    Two planes converted to carry the bombs were stationed in Prague, Rudel was to drop the first bomb.
    I wonder what one or two V2′s with a hydrogen bomb on London would have accomplished.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  196. @istevefan

    I’ve since read tales of Soviet soldiers who related that, yes, they raped German women … but, contrary to German behavior in Russia and Ukraine, they did not kill them. Were they given a medal for showing such restraint?
     
    You have to remember that the Soviets lost about 25 million people in the four years of war with Germany. As a comparison the US has lost less than 2 million in 241 years. The Germans chose to to make it a war of annihilation. They chose to designate the Slavs as sub-human. There was going to be some sort of payback if the Germans lost. I don't like it. I am biased towards NW Europeans. But if you try to annihilate some group, don't expect them to treat you well if they win.

    As for the Americans and the British, there was not near the level of hatred between us and the Germans as there was between the Soviets and Germans. I hope we will never find out, but I don't doubt that Americans would be capable of similar brutalities if a foreign army invaded, caused the deaths of 30 million and treated us as less than human.

    ” The Germans chose to to make it a war of annihilation ”

    Any proof ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @istevefan
    Generalplan Ost
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  197. El Dato says:
    @Byrresheim
    The Russian losses were enormous but, in large part, self-inflicted.

    It is enlightening to read Martin van Crevelds analysis of the battle of Berlin, when the Reich had definitely lost the war, the defenders had no air cover, nearly no heavy weapons, no clear objective.

    Still the Russians managed to lose more soldiers than the army that was losing the last battle of a war lost months, if not years ago.

    While it is understandable and even necessary that a people groups around its leaders in wartime, it is amazing that even eighty years later there seems to be no critical thinking about the Russian leaders during the war possible for most Russians.

    Russians bodies were cheap. And if your army is actually an outfit managed by upwardly mobile political commissars they are cheaper still.

    The first rule upon encountering a political operator is kill the politicial operator.

    Russia likes to complain mucho about invading fascists but the sad truth is The 3rd Reich and The Soviet Union were mirror images of each other in a deadly embrace.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  198. @Sergey Krieger
    You want to take a ride along history road of capitalism rise? You sure the path is not covered by bones? Actually if you calculate how much it has cost the world to keep American dream alive you would be surprised. The life is tragic and what happened in Russia was much the guilt of the "partners" who financed and participated in Russian civil war which would not be possible without their direct support.

    How about the road to communist rise ?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  199. @Anon
    If you listen to pundits, the problem is Trump and nationalism.

    The problem with Trump is not Nationalism.

    Nationalism means minding one's own business. It means having national sovereignty and respecting the sovereignty over other nations.

    Imperialism, in contrast, means trampling on the rights and independence of other nations.

    If Nazism or National Socialism had remained in nationalist mode, it wouldn't have done much harm. But it went into imperialist mode and trampled/violated the nationalist rights of self-determination and self-rule of other nations. It went into imperialist mode.

    Initially, Japan modernized for nationalist reasons. Threatened by British and American imperialism, it emulated the West and industrialized to defend the motherland. But it went from nationalism to imperialism because it noticed that the world was being divided by empires. And indeed, UK and US, two imperialist powers, welcomed Japan as a fellow imperialist to counterbalance Russia and China.

    Before there was modern nationalism, the world was divided among empires that had no use of secure borders. This had been the case since time immemorial. Power and might decided the boundaries. So, Persians could lay claim to a huge empire. Same with Romans. Same with Mongols. Same with Russians. There was no Rule or Ideal in the world that said any people, culture, or land had a Basic Right of defense, security, independence, and self-rule. Security could only be realized by might. And if a kingdom or state was powerful enough, it sought to invade and rule other parts of the world.
    It was about grabbing more.

    And then, there was the rise of modern nationalism in UK, France, US, then Germany and Italy and Japan. It was good insofar as the elites were supposed to represent and defend their own folks. There was also the nascent idea that a nation had a RIGHT of security and freedom.

    But because of the legacy of imperialism since time immemorial, modern nationalism also carried on with the imperial legacy. Even as nationalism defended the nation from other empires, it sought to expand its own empire. So, Japan went from defending itself to grabbing other lands. Brits went from creating a secure Island Kingdom-Republic to conquering other lands. US went from creating a new nation in the New World to invading and taking over other peoples. This was especially doable since the non-West itself was in imperial mode of endless invasions and counter-invasions. They didn't have the nationalist ideal of elites-and-peoples bound as one with the right of national autonomy. When Brits invaded India, it was not a nation but a vast territory under Mughal Imperial rule.

    But WWI and esp WWII dealt a great blow to the imperialist model. Nazi imperialism and Japanese imperialism were defeated. But soon after, the Third World folks demanded national independence, waged wars, and threw out the European imperialists. And Viets kicked out the US imperialists from 'Indochina'.

    So, with the end of WWII, there was the ideal of Universal Nationalism. It used to be 'Nationalism for me, but not for thee'. After with the fall of empires, it was 'Nationalism for me and thee'. Let all nations be free and independent. In this era, the Progs were very supportive of Vietnam, Algeria, and Cuba for resisting imperialist powers. And when Soviet tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia, even leftists denounced it as imperialism.

    Still, US and USSR were still the two remaining empires. But the Cold War finally ended and even the Soviet Empire collapsed, and there was the liberation of newly free nations from Soviet-Russian yoke: Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and etc.
    Universal nationalism seemed to have won. Russians now ruled over Russia, not over others.

    With the end of the Cold War, the hope was that US empire would end too. After all, US empire had been justified on grounds of countering Soviet threat. With no more Soviet Empire, what need for US empire?
    And maybe just maybe, US empire would have come to an end, and US would have returned to nationalist mode: US minds its own business, other nations mind their own business, and as good neighbors, they trade with one another and communicate. Fences make good neighbors.

    But three things happened. US got filled with hubris of End of History. Winning the Cold War meant the US way was the only way. "If you're not with us, you're against us." "My way or the highway."

    Second reason was the West allowing mass immigration that turned into all-out invasion by the Third World. As non-whites figured it's easier to have a good life by moving to the West than working as patriots to fix and develop their own nations, they effectively became champions of demographic imperialism and colonization. And if, like Fareed Zakaria or Nikki Haley, they gained a position in elite spheres, they became cheerleaders for globo-imperialism.
    As for EU, I hear Brussels is already 1/3 Muslim and will be majority Muslim in 30 yrs.
    As non-whites settled in the West, they neither identified with their nations-or-origin or with white Westerners. They existed in an ideological limbo of globalism, a kind of Universal Imperialism. Take Francis Fukuyama. He's not Japanese, but he's not for White-Western power either. He's for some la-la-limbo-land called Endofhistoria. And Amy Chua feels a member of some 'supergroup'.

    Another reason for globalist imperialism was that Jews became the new elites of the US. Why did this matter? Because Jewish power is essentially and intrinsically imperialist. As Jews are a minority elite in the US, they don't identify with most Americans who are goyim.
    Jews mainly identify with other Jews in other nations. So, for Jews, nationalism means gentile national independence and autonomy. Jews fear this because Jewish power is about global Jewish networking, e.g. making Americans care more about Zionists in Israel than about their own kind.

    Jews are like the British imperialists who feared the rise of nationalism in Third World nations. After all, British elites didn't feel shared affinity or identity with the native majority in each of the subject domains. Kenyan nationalism meant Kenyans reasserting authority over the British rulers. Indian nationalism meant the brown people of the subcontinent demanding self-rule and self-determination and asking the Brits to leave. As Gandhi said. So, even as Brits were all about the 'nationalism for me but not for thee', or imperialist-nationalism, Gandhi was about universal nationalism, aka 'nationalism for me and thee'. British imperialists feared this because it would mean the Empire of Albion. After all, if every subject domain of British Empire wanted its own autonomy, it would mean the end of the British hegemony.

    Today, Jews feel and act like the British imperialists. Most Jews don't feel much affinity with fellow nationals in nations like US, Canada, Poland, France, UK, and etc. To Jewish minority elites in such nations, most people are goyim. To suppress goy power, Jews suppress nationalism.

    Jews now practice imperialist nationalism of 'nationalism for me but not for thee'. So, Jews say all Western nations must support Israel as a JEWISH STATE, but they say white gentile nations must abandon nationalism(even one that says 'for me and for thee') because Jews fear gentile national autonomy that may disobey Jewish demands. Also, Jews push for massive invasion(aka immigration) to turn the native majority population into minorities in their own nations. That way, Jews can control the native majority by guilt-baiting them with 'racism'. And as the nation becomes diverse, Jewish Imperial elites can play divide and rule.

    But Jewish imperialism is far more dangerous than British imperialism. At the very least, British Imperialism, like the French kind, was OUT IN THE OPEN. Brits were singing anthems about how Britain rules 1/3 of the globe. So, there was NO DOUBT as to who was in power in the British Empire.

    In contrast, the Empire of Judea is a Hidden Empire. Even though the biggest power in the world is Jewish Global Networking -- most of US politicians, academics, media people, etc are agents or shills of Zion -- , Jewish power uses gentile nations as fronts to carry out their deeds. So, even though the Power of Zion was behind the Syrian attacks, we've been led to believe US, UK, and France done it!
    No one would have thought so during the Era of British Empire. Even if Brits recruited and used Indian, African, and Arab troops to fight in war, no one would have thought India, Kenya, or Arabia were waging the war. No, they would have known that it was the British Empire doing it and simply using non-white troops. But because the Empire of Judea is a Hidden Empire, we fall for the charade that 'liberal democratic' Western nations have decided to wage all these Wars for Human Rights which are really Wars for Zion. In fact, UK and France are vassal nations of the US that is a vassal state of the Empire of Judea.

    The problem with Trump isn't nationalism. If the US had gone into nationalist mode after the Cold War, the world be much better. Soviet Union was gone, Russia was no longer a threat and wanted cooperation.
    But Jewish globalists economically plundered Russia in the 1990s. Also, NATO was pushed right up to Russian borders. And then, Jewish power demanded that US use sanctions, invasions, and aid to Jihadis to undermine stability in the Middle East for the interests of Israeli hegemony.

    Trump ran on nationalism that would promised to end US ventures overseas. US has been the main imperialist destroyer in Iraq, Libya, Syria(where CIA aided Alqaeda, the very people who did 9/11), and recruited Neo-Nazi elements to pull off a coup in Ukraine. Trump sounded good during the campaign, but the Deep State is now surrounding him like sharks and forcing him to become yet another globalist warmonger serving the Empire of Judea than being a nationalist who focuses on US problems for the American people. Jews hate US nationalism because it means the goy cattle of the US will no longer wage Wars for Zion. Also, if US were properly nationalist, the main political theme would be, "What can the elites do for the American people?" Jews hate this because Jews feel zero affinity with gentile Americans whom Jews seek to replace with endless mass invasion.

    The world needs universal nationalism. Nationalism for Me and Thee.
    But as long as Jewish power rules the West, this is impossible. Jews fear gentile nationalism because it undermines the neo-imperial globalist hegemony of the US.
    To get a good sense of the microcosm of the Jewish mindset, look at the Israel-Palestine conflict. How nice if Jews went for 'Nationalism for Me and Thee'. Jews would have Israel as their homeland, and Palestinians would have West Bank as their homeland. But nope, US summons the support of the West to crush Palestinian nationalism while maximizing their own nationalism with massive walls. It is like the Imperialist Nationalism of the British Empire and Japanese Empire. "Nationalism for Me but not for Thee." That is unjust.

    "Nationalism for Me but for Thee" is like American Slavery. "Freedom for Me but not for Thee." But if white folks should be free, why not blacks too?
    Likewise, if Israel has a right to be free and independent as a Jewish state, why doesn't Hungary have a right to be a free and independent Hungarian state? Jews demand that the West support Zionist nationalism but then pressure EU to sanction and destroy Hungary for having chosen national self-determination.

    We know why. It's because Jews seek to maximize their own tribal power, they seek to weaken the ethno-national power of all other peoples so that they will serve Jewish globalist hegemony.

    Anyway, how depressing that Trump who ran on nationalism and end of globo-imperialism of US interference has NOW been pressured by the Deep State Zionists and Military Industrial Complex to cook up BS about 'chemical attacks' to sabotage Syria's rightful nationalism.
    US now illegally occupies much of Syria. US accuses Russia of meddling and global ambitions when US is the #1 meddler in other nations elections and it was US that invaded and wrecked Iraq and Libya and aided terrorists in Syria and Ukraine.

    When will this madness ever end?

    Anyway, the overall arc of history.

    1. Imperialism. The mighty dominate and rule over all others. Might is right.

    2. National Imperialism. The right of one's own nation to be safe and secure from invasion but no such rights bestowed to other nations. Example: Japan defends itself from other empires but tries to take over China.

    3. Universal Nationalism. The right of each nation/people/culture to be free and independent. Nationalism for all as basis for international cooperation. The Template that soon emerged from WWII and end of empires.

    4. Universal Imperialism. The right of great powers to militarily, financially, and culturally invade and transform other nations: Drop bombs, take over banks, bribe politicians, and spread Homomania as the new crusading faith. And yet, the the great powers must themselves be open to vast demographic invasions by rest of the world.
    We see this between EU and Middle East. EU supports the Zionist-US invasions of the Middle East and welcomes the millions of Muslim 'refugees' displaced by those invasions. EU become demographically invaded in turn.

    Gandhi for Universal Nationalism: "It is time you left".
    It is time to Gandhize the Imperialists of Zion. As nationals and patriots, Jews can stay. As imperialists over the West, it is time they left.
    All nationalists must refuse to cooperate with the Empire of Judea. During the campaign, Trump promised not to cooperate. No more wars, he said. But he's sinking into the Swamp. Deep State imperialists now just own him as their doggy.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZVsWzIb6Vk

    ” Nationalism means minding one’s own business. It means having national sovereignty and respecting the sovereignty over other nations. ”

    It would be great if it was that simple.
    Germany was never able to feed the own population with home grown food, it had to buy foreign food.
    To pay for this export was needed, for export outside resources were needed, such as oil and iron.
    When protection was not called economic war control of other countries was necessary, such as now western control over ME oil.
    Except for rubber the USA was practically autark until 1940.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  200. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    A theory…

    Maybe the main reason for the missile strike was to test Russian defensive strength.

    Maybe the bigger plan is war with Russia. And this attack was to see how well Russian defenses would hold up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  201. @NoseytheDuke
    Sorry Fanfella but the Russians only look weak to those with weak minds (if the cap fits and all that...) The better informed among us know that the war in Syria (more of a proxy war than a civil one) was largely funded and supplied by the US and it's "allies" for the benefit of Israel and corporatist internationals of banking, weaponry and oil fame.

    The war was going swimmingly well for them right up until Russia decided that enough was enough and, on the invitation of the Syrian government, took over the defence of Syria and has largely defeated the terrorist mercenaries, jihadists and Syrian rebels. Currently there are mopping up operations being conducted and the only reason for the non response from Russia is due to their understanding that the missile attacks were conducted primarily as a PR exercise for the weak minded so they they can continue chanting USA! USA! USA! without suffering any undue duress. Carry on.

    Agreed. Though the Russians are weak compared with the US with or without NATO they don’t look weak as he suggested. In fact they appear to be opportunistically playing a weak hand pretty well. It would be of interest to know how many of those with influence on the White House recognise that the Russisns are bringing about what may be the least bad outcome, namely survival of Assad and his effectively secular régime. Russia should hang about until their Trump promises to get all Russians out of shit holes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  202. myself says:
    @Byrresheim
    Perhaps if we keep reminding them, they might, one day …

    it seems as if the Russians are blinded by their innocence just in a mirror image of the Germans who cannot see anything but their guilt.

    Is it necessary to point out that both extreme attitudes are not helpful towards an understanding of complex historical processes?

    A dose of guilt is sometimes useful, it shows self-reflection. A lot of guilt is paralyzing and leads to the surrender of the will, and the loss of the spirit.

    Japan, for example, is unrepentant, while Germany is TOO repentant. Both are unhealthy.

    A dose of innocence is good, it leads to higher civilization-level morale to tell yourself you’re on the side of God. An excess of innocence can become delusion.

    If a people are to survive in the long run, they have to learn balance.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  203. @Anon
    To say that within living memory the Soviet Union was never on the side of the oppressors is so ridiculous as to sink your credibility to a permanent zero.

    Leave aside Russian victims, think of the Holomodor. Then
    Poland 1939 and onwards (ever heard of the Katyn forest massacre?)
    The whole of Eastern Europe where Communist régimes were foisted on the people after WW2. Ever heard of the risings in Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968?

    C'mon...

    Some of those Eastern soviet union policy of turning thos atea onto buffer zone against fiture invasion eas justified morally and as a right of a winner. European countries were Germany allies in her war against ussr. Others provided manufacturing capacity or served as super highway or staging area of invasion.
    Then I hear many in those eastern European countries miss old days of communism but alas this option is not available for some time. Hence they have to toil in capitalistic purgatory while trying to fight off waves of barbarians. Their populations are shrinking while under evil communism their populations were growing.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  204. @Byrresheim
    Perhaps if we keep reminding them, they might, one day …

    it seems as if the Russians are blinded by their innocence just in a mirror image of the Germans who cannot see anything but their guilt.

    Is it necessary to point out that both extreme attitudes are not helpful towards an understanding of complex historical processes?

    Russians developing guilt over bs that you spread will happen right after you smash into Empire State Building riding flying pig. I see the odds are pretty grim.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  205. sarz says:
    @Antonio
    "All the Empire needs to do is first fire a large number of dumb old Tomahawk cruise missiles, let the Russian use their stores of air defense missiles and then follow-up with their more advanced weapons."

    That assumes that Russia can't destroy the missile launch platforms. That's not really the case.

    “All the Empire needs to do is first fire a large number of dumb old Tomahawk cruise missiles, let the Russian use their stores of air defense missiles and then follow-up with their more advanced weapons.”

    That assumes that Russia can’t destroy the missile launch platforms. That’s not really the case.

    Very interesting. Jim Stone mentions at his website (http://82.221.129.208/) that after Syria’s ancient Russian gear had taken out over seventy percent of America’s cruise missiles on their own, without Russian help, Russian planes were seen headed for the American ships, and then the assault was prematurely terminated.

    Can someone please give a link to a reliable report on this? – if there is something to it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  206. m___ says:
    @AnonFromTN
    I am sure a lot of ideologically driven people will disagree. Let them.
    In and of itself, the fact that in the last 70 years or so the US was invariably on the side of the evil does not mean that the USSR/Russia was always on the side of the good. Two evil forces can and will fight for dominance. I’ve read someone’s comment somewhere that in living memory there was no case when the USSR was on the side of the oppressors or when the US was on the side of the oppressed. To the best of my knowledge this is true, but the side of the oppressed is not always the side of the good, even though the side of the oppressors is always the side of the evil. Say, the fact that current government in Kiev, Ukraine, is evil through and through does not mean that the leadership of Donetsk or Lugansk People’s Republic is absolutely good. The US is a global calamity, shameless bandits with mighty weapons. However, Russia stands up to the Empire to defend its own interests, not to defend good in general.
    Back to Syria. Any even half-honest person would agree that ISIS and other Islamists, created, armed, and funded by the US and its vassals, are thoroughly evil. But that does not mean that Assad is good. It only means that he is a lesser evil, possibly the best Syria can have today. Most Syrians, including Sunnis, with the experience of living under Islamists, became staunch supporters of Assad: compared to them he looks positively good. But let’s not forget that it’s easy to win in this comparison. There is no doubt that in an honest election today in Syria Assad is likely to win by a large margin, maybe even as large as Putin won in Russian elections. But winners aren’t necessarily good. After all, the US was among the winners in WWII.

    Russia and the US, maybe not the right focus, in se.

    Putin, and inferiorly Trump must be dethroned, in the eyes of stealthy globalism. Putin this time took a big blow. Trump of course has been a punching bag.

    The real question is how stealth globalism, is organized, how well at that, if it has the larger scope of globalism beyond “religious economics” included.

    For now, and in this particular case of pot-shots in Syria, it seems that Russia and China are on board, the elites have a global capacity of consensus. Putin was castigated, nationalism was castigated, not globalism.

    Secondly, as for stealth, beyond the public eye, this was a conclusive test, it has pissed the complete layer of politicians and media to oblivion. It makes me smile to see, and although his work is genuine, to have some predict “World war”(Saker), and others dig exhaustively into the intricacies of military capabilities(Akarlin).

    Some constats, there is a “global collegiate”, it has capacitative stealth, it is daring, and the public, but better still the layer of media, consenting and dissenting was thought a lesson. They, the media and politicians, anything in the public eye deserve their broth, for lack of physical courage, and a calls for action defined as “out of scope”.

    Probably the most obvious one: nationalism can’t do, and that is a valuable conclusion, on a rational and theoretical base. After all, how to take on a bulging world population, a derivative of itself, population density, toxicity, climate change, and the goodies, genetic analysis and engineering, AI, interplanetary scope, the quest for our missing particle, who in his right mind can pretend that national entities, or the existing global economics is capable of making timely progress.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    I'm sorry, but I have to admit that I have no idea what you're struggling to say in this post. If you could dumb it down just a little, or at least cut the verbiage to a manageable volume, I might have a clue.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  207. sarz says:
    @vegob
    if you kill all the joos in the world, then we will have peace, not before.

    if you kill all the joos in the world, then we will have peace, not before.

    If you mean it, spell out “Jews”. If you don’t mean it, shut up.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  208. Anon[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    Sorry Fanfella but the Russians only look weak to those with weak minds (if the cap fits and all that...) The better informed among us know that the war in Syria (more of a proxy war than a civil one) was largely funded and supplied by the US and it's "allies" for the benefit of Israel and corporatist internationals of banking, weaponry and oil fame.

    The war was going swimmingly well for them right up until Russia decided that enough was enough and, on the invitation of the Syrian government, took over the defence of Syria and has largely defeated the terrorist mercenaries, jihadists and Syrian rebels. Currently there are mopping up operations being conducted and the only reason for the non response from Russia is due to their understanding that the missile attacks were conducted primarily as a PR exercise for the weak minded so they they can continue chanting USA! USA! USA! without suffering any undue duress. Carry on.

    the missile attacks were conducted primarily as a PR exercise for the weak minded

    You mean mocking a Russia most senior General with Israel attack, killing number of senior Iranian advisors with unspecified Russian casualty, and US Nato public threat of more massive strikes are an acceptable PR?

    And what’s Russia response? We can’t risk a war by attacking the launchers even losing our highest credibility from our prez & highest rank general completely, but you see we have many means to frustrate them by disrupting their GPS….blah blah…

    https://www.rt.com/news/423925-russia-air-defense-syria/

    The current situation appears much tenser, with Russia openly threatening to directly oppose an American attack on Syrian soil. Russia’s determination may be questioned, considering its record of not opposing Israeli raids in Syria, but its capabilities to resist the attack are not in dispute.

    …boasting & more shameless boasting…

    In a limited missile attack scenario, the Russian military may deliver on the threat it made and retaliate against the origin of the missiles – the US guided- missile destroyers and possibly attack submarines currently deployed in the Mediterranean. Attacking them with lethal force would be a major escalation in the conflict, but the Russian military may use a limited response – using airborne electronic warfare equipment to harass the American ships, messing up their target acquisition, geolocation or even AEGIS anti-aircraft systems. The extent of damage this may cause is debatable, but it would certainly make the job of destroying whatever targets the US command has in mind in Syria much more difficult.

    Where is that coward highest ranking Russia General now after been called bluff? Running to mama crying and hiding under her panty host since without a whimper or fart. How the world & West hostile force see Russia making itself a big laughing stock?

    What a good Team Russia PR by a self deluded one like you. Good try.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Calling out, "Come out and fight, coward" sounds a bit Medieval to me, but obviously you are a great strategic thinker and I'm just a guy who comments here at The Unz Review. If I were a General though, and my opponent was sending 100 million dollars plus worth of high tech munitions smashing into rubble and achieving absolutely nothing except generating headlines for idiots (not you, of course. OK you) I'd be inclined to just say, please do carry on.

    Feel free to don a flight jacket and break out the "Mission Accomplished" banner, I think we all know how that worked out. You might even catch the eye of an LBGTQI whatever on board. Good luck!

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  209. TT says:
    @Vojkan
    Well, if you look at Americans' voting history in presidential elections since Bush sr., you'll notice that they have systematically voted for the candidate they perceived as less bellicose. They voted Clinton against Bush I after Gulf War I, Clinton against the even more bellicose Dole, Bush II vs Gore because he promised a more humble foreign policy, Bush vs Kerry because it made no difference, they preferred Obama to Hillary Clinton in the primary because of their respective stances regarding the Iraq War, then Obama against MacCain in the election, then again Obama against the zio-puppet Romney, and finally for Trump against Hillary Clinton.
    Americans voted Republican vs Democrat when the Republican promised peace rather than foreign military adventures and Democrat vs Republican when the Democrat made a similar promise. You must give them that. Don't get fooled by various trolls and bots you see on social networks or comment sections or official fake news media. American voters systematically vote for peace but the thing is American voters don't get what they vote for because they don't run America, the Deep State, the MIC, banksters and Zionists do.

    Have you seen any massive strike & street protest in US over their endless illegal wars? Nil. Except Vietnam war bcos of high casualties on draft personnel, nothing about how Vietnamese been killed & raped.

    Since then Murkans gov learn, use paid regular army killers, and it work like magic. If it isn’t affecting me, who cares.

    Try obstruct a LBGT sharing your daughter toilet or passing a bill to deny illegal migrants a dream, you see thousands suddenly awaken to their civil rights & swamped the street chanting slogans & holding their reps accountable.

    But not even a little meow to bring Clintons, Bush, Obama & their murderous team to justice.

    Term after term, murkans vote enthusiastically in biggest fanfare for their warmonger Potus in a row, millions are waving and screaming in rally. Since when a Green party ever get significant vote?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    There's no such thing as spontaneous demonstrations. People don't go out in the streets if nobody organises them. Americans have consistently voted for the candidate they perceived as the lesser warmonger so they voted Trump vs Hillary. If more of them had voted for Johnson or Stein, Killary would have become POTUS.
    There is no organised nation-wide peace movement in the US because it is immediately infiltrated and neutralised by Deep State agents. Going nation-wide in a nation of 340 million is not the same feat as going nation-wide in e.g. Belgium. There are too many steps on the ladder and only Deep State, MIC and Israel compatible actors are allowed to reach the top.
    Peace movements are not allowed to organise, the LGBT are b/c the LGBT hate white Christians as much as the Zionists or the Illuminati do. I don't count a nutjob like Pence and Protestant sects wishing for Armageddon as Christian.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  210. @utu

    there’s no doubt the Russians have captured American and British intelligence agents
     
    I have doubts. Somehow Russians have never tried to capitalize on it. Why? If they caught agents, the agents are not protected by the Geneva Convention on POWs and thus they can be paraded in public and used in propaganda and made interviews with and so on. But we have never seen anything.

    Fair question, I suspect the Russians are holding back information (as they clearly are about, say, MH17), because they know once the US deep state’s cover is completely blown, all formal restraints are off and Russia is not yet ready for total war. The crazies are running the US, but still rely on the facade of political openness and other such lies.

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

    #50

    Fantastic comment. Agree100%

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  212. Rich says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    The writer doesn’t say the accusations were “shaky” as such, just that the French may have exaggerated some things associated with black troops. In other words, she’s virtue signaling PC. Perhaps you should read more carefully.

    The point is not whether Americans behaved as badly as Red Army troops. The point is whether the “Greatest Generation” (who unlike the Soviets had absolutely no claims against the Germans) were the angels so many brain-dead Americans wish they were.

    Well, you’ve got the wrong guy if you think I’m one of those who believe the WWII generation was the “greatest generation”. That was just a book written by an idiot newsreader. Doesn’t change the fact that it was never US policy to allow its troops to commit rape, and those suspected of rape were subject to death under the USMCJ.

    People who believe in the “Greatest Generation” nonsense, are usually the same people who believe in the crazed Vietnam era soldier “baby-killer, peasant raper” myth. Guys like your hero Nick Turse, liar and libeler.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    I never said the US military condoned or encouraged their troops to rape, only that it happened a lot more than commonly acknowledged and certainly far more than the Germans did. (Along these lines, I believe far more Dutch civilians were killed by Allied bombing during their “liberation” than under German occupation.) Either a blind eye was turned towards these things by US commanders, or official sanctions were unevenly applied (e.g. mainly against black troops).

    BTW, you should know that discussing US war crimes does not require giving equal time to the crimes of others. That doesn’t constitute “lying”.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  213. @SteveRogers42
    Source?

    Ask Gina Haspel, the Deputy Director of Shredding the Evidence.

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

    Russia often looks pretty much alone in her stance (as shown by the recent Chinese behavior at the UN Security Council). The truth is that other countries who want an end to the AngloZionist hegemony have absolutely no incentive to join Russia on top of the US “shit list” and expose themselves to the wrath of the Hegemon, especially not when Russia seems to be more than willing to bear the brunt of the Empire’s hatred.

    I was quite curious about why China abstained in UNSC vote instead of supporting Russia in veto US demand.

    It was only quite recent that China openly show solidarity with Russia by sending its new Defense minister to Russia in a very rare declaration that mention US name directly: China military is there to support Russia against US.

    After some readings, it seems China had skillfully relieve itself from pairing with Russia to oppose US UK Fr team, thus avoiding to turn UNSC into deadlock. Otherwise this will fulfil Nikki Haley threat to attack Syria with or without UN mandate.

    Since a single Russia veto is sufficient to block US drafted action, China is quick to play a neutral role to insist all parties must not escalate in military confrontation, and strongly pushed for a UN mandate inspection to Syria chemical attack(which is what Russia has proposed but vetoed by US).

    This make US team unable to find single excuse to veto, with all other security members approving readily.

    Thus US team is denied all legality & excuse to strike Syria until UN completed its investigation, literally approving Russia request.

    Saker might has missed the preplan shrewd move by China-Russia team in UNSC.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  215. @Anon

    the missile attacks were conducted primarily as a PR exercise for the weak minded

     

    You mean mocking a Russia most senior General with Israel attack, killing number of senior Iranian advisors with unspecified Russian casualty, and US Nato public threat of more massive strikes are an acceptable PR?

    And what's Russia response? We can't risk a war by attacking the launchers even losing our highest credibility from our prez & highest rank general completely, but you see we have many means to frustrate them by disrupting their GPS….blah blah…

    https://www.rt.com/news/423925-russia-air-defense-syria/

    The current situation appears much tenser, with Russia openly threatening to directly oppose an American attack on Syrian soil. Russia’s determination may be questioned, considering its record of not opposing Israeli raids in Syria, but its capabilities to resist the attack are not in dispute.

    …boasting & more shameless boasting…

    In a limited missile attack scenario, the Russian military may deliver on the threat it made and retaliate against the origin of the missiles – the US guided- missile destroyers and possibly attack submarines currently deployed in the Mediterranean. Attacking them with lethal force would be a major escalation in the conflict, but the Russian military may use a limited response – using airborne electronic warfare equipment to harass the American ships, messing up their target acquisition, geolocation or even AEGIS anti-aircraft systems. The extent of damage this may cause is debatable, but it would certainly make the job of destroying whatever targets the US command has in mind in Syria much more difficult.
     
    Where is that coward highest ranking Russia General now after been called bluff? Running to mama crying and hiding under her panty host since without a whimper or fart. How the world & West hostile force see Russia making itself a big laughing stock?

    What a good Team Russia PR by a self deluded one like you. Good try.

    Calling out, “Come out and fight, coward” sounds a bit Medieval to me, but obviously you are a great strategic thinker and I’m just a guy who comments here at The Unz Review. If I were a General though, and my opponent was sending 100 million dollars plus worth of high tech munitions smashing into rubble and achieving absolutely nothing except generating headlines for idiots (not you, of course. OK you) I’d be inclined to just say, please do carry on.

    Feel free to don a flight jacket and break out the “Mission Accomplished” banner, I think we all know how that worked out. You might even catch the eye of an LBGTQI whatever on board. Good luck!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    " If I were a General though, and my opponent was sending 100 million dollars plus worth of high tech munitions smashing into rubble and achieving absolutely nothing except generating headlines for idiots (not you, of course. OK you) I’d be inclined to just say, please do carry on."

    Agreed. To paraphrase Sun Tzu: When your opponent is shooting himself in the foot, don't interrupt him. ;-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  216. prusmc says: • Website
    @TheJester
    Regarding Americans raping women during war, you are right and you are wrong. It happened ... but not as policy or as a general outcome of troops running amuck.

    I'll cite a rare instance. During the sack of Mexico during the Mexican-American War in 1846, the rabidly anti-Catholic, Protestant American soldiers desecrated Mexican Catholic churches and raped Mexican women. The Irish Catholic American soldiers (recent immigrants) objected and defected to the Mexican cause. They were captured and executed ... for treason. The Protestant American soldiers who raped Mexican women got off "Scott free".

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Patrick%27s_Battalion

    My father fought in Europe in WWII. He told me that American soldiers did on rare occasion rape French and German women. When they were caught and convicted, they were executed. However, rape was a policy for Soviet troops seeking revenge in Germany and Austria. He spoke of a General Order from the Soviet Commander in Austria that all Austrian women of age in Vienna would be raped twice ... to make it clear who was in charge. My father would not have engaged in historical research. This is what was "on the street" at the tail end of the war in Europe.

    I served in the US military in Germany in the 1970s. We were told to never ask a German woman (of age) what happened to her in WWII. Later, in another life, I found myself in an Intuit village in Canada. A woman (obviously a German immigrant) related that she was born in 1946 but her father, a German soldier, was killed in 1942. Go figure. Her biological father was most likely a Soviet soldier.

    I've since read tales of Soviet soldiers who related that, yes, they raped German women ... but, contrary to German behavior in Russia and Ukraine, they did not kill them. Were they given a medal for showing such restraint?

    One of the American soldier rapist murders executed by the US military in Europe during WWII was the father of Emmit Till.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  217. @Ronald Thomas West

    Such religious references will, no doubt, irritate the many “enlightened” westerners for whom such language reeks of obscurantism, fanaticism, and bigotry. But in Russia or the Middle-East, such references are very much part of the national or religious ethos
     
    There is a consistently missing (not only The Saker) element in the many analysis of the West's peculiar insanity; when it comes to the security structures, 'secularism' is factually overthrown and at best a mask or myth thinly concealing what is overlooked.

    From the view at the Pentagon, the contest with Russia is theological as much or more than anything else; why would this be any other way (from perspective) of history is the subject to explore. Manifest Destiny was an evangelical movement, Manifest Destiny 2.0 of today's empire is little different:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/04/13/the-erudite-eduard-popov/

    ^ There is religion underlying either side's motivation, and a real problem for Russia with the West is, the West's perception Russia's religion is the wrong religion... recalling Rome's crusader era sack of Constantinople was one of 'Christian on Christian' violence -

    The British philosopher John Gray discusses your point about the theology of the West in his book “Black Mass.”

    Modern capiatlism, he argues is every bit, if not more, revolutionary and destabilising of accepeted traditional values and cultural norms as Bolshevism. He may even have used the term “Market Leninism,” but I’m not sure – I may have got this from elsewhere.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  218. @Rich
    Well, you've got the wrong guy if you think I'm one of those who believe the WWII generation was the "greatest generation". That was just a book written by an idiot newsreader. Doesn't change the fact that it was never US policy to allow its troops to commit rape, and those suspected of rape were subject to death under the USMCJ.

    People who believe in the "Greatest Generation" nonsense, are usually the same people who believe in the crazed Vietnam era soldier "baby-killer, peasant raper" myth. Guys like your hero Nick Turse, liar and libeler.

    I never said the US military condoned or encouraged their troops to rape, only that it happened a lot more than commonly acknowledged and certainly far more than the Germans did. (Along these lines, I believe far more Dutch civilians were killed by Allied bombing during their “liberation” than under German occupation.) Either a blind eye was turned towards these things by US commanders, or official sanctions were unevenly applied (e.g. mainly against black troops).

    BTW, you should know that discussing US war crimes does not require giving equal time to the crimes of others. That doesn’t constitute “lying”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    BTW, you should be aware that Nick Turse's book is filled with so many inaccuracies, which are so very easily debunked, they must be considered lies. When you use an obvious liar like him as your evidence of "atrocities", you make yourself look foolish.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  219. FB says:
    @Vojkan
    Pulling the trigger would have been taking part in an exercise in futility because the strike was that, an exercise in futility. Why open fire and risk damage if there's no damage in the first place, just for the sake of chest thumping?

    You don’t get it do you…?

    This ‘exercise in futility’ is just the appetizer for the main course to come…

    A psychopath that is allowed to continue his crimes is simply going to be emboldened by every sign of weakness…or even perceived weakness…of his victim…

    ‘…Although the Russian government has every good intention, Russia’s moral conscience and consideration for others is leading the world to Armageddon.

    The reason is that the neoconservatives who control US foreign policy are not going to stop orchestrating events that they blame on Russia.

    The longer Russia waits before it finally puts its foot down, the stronger the provocations will become.

    The successive provocations will narrow down Russia’s response to surrender or nuclear war…’

    That’s PCR writing yesterday…and he is absolutely correct about everything…

    ‘…The Syrian provocation was an ideal one for Russia to put its foot down. Russia held the military cards. Russia could easily have destroyed every ship and every airplane.

    Having made the consequences clear in advance to the world, the US would have backed off…’

    You just don’t understand the psychology of conflict…even on the micro or personal level I suspect…

    Why do you think those people who snap and end up mowing down dozens of innocents are able to carry this out…?

    It’s because they weren’t stopped while there was time…it’s too late once the nutcase decides to go all in and is holding an assault rifle…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    Tell me, what exactly did that volley of rockets achieve, militarily speaking, and tell me, why waste ammunition on unnecessary killings that would have almost certainly led to a major conflagration? You see, even if you are militarily superior, you have to take into account your foe's vanity and vain, the people who command the USA definitely are.
    A couple of thousands dead American sailors would most definitely have made laptop warriors rise from their armchairs to shout for escalation, even nuclear war. Letting your enemy waste his ammunition and demonstrating the inefficiency of his hyper advanced super duper glittering hi-tech weaponry is far more efficient than slaughtering his cannon fodder.
    So, again, after the dust settles, what exactly did that volley of rockets achieve? I don't count arousing fanboys on both sides as a military achievement and I for one praise Putin for not falling into the traps the Western psychopaths set for him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  220. Vojkan says:
    @TT
    Have you seen any massive strike & street protest in US over their endless illegal wars? Nil. Except Vietnam war bcos of high casualties on draft personnel, nothing about how Vietnamese been killed & raped.

    Since then Murkans gov learn, use paid regular army killers, and it work like magic. If it isn't affecting me, who cares.

    Try obstruct a LBGT sharing your daughter toilet or passing a bill to deny illegal migrants a dream, you see thousands suddenly awaken to their civil rights & swamped the street chanting slogans & holding their reps accountable.

    But not even a little meow to bring Clintons, Bush, Obama & their murderous team to justice.

    Term after term, murkans vote enthusiastically in biggest fanfare for their warmonger Potus in a row, millions are waving and screaming in rally. Since when a Green party ever get significant vote?

    There’s no such thing as spontaneous demonstrations. People don’t go out in the streets if nobody organises them. Americans have consistently voted for the candidate they perceived as the lesser warmonger so they voted Trump vs Hillary. If more of them had voted for Johnson or Stein, Killary would have become POTUS.
    There is no organised nation-wide peace movement in the US because it is immediately infiltrated and neutralised by Deep State agents. Going nation-wide in a nation of 340 million is not the same feat as going nation-wide in e.g. Belgium. There are too many steps on the ladder and only Deep State, MIC and Israel compatible actors are allowed to reach the top.
    Peace movements are not allowed to organise, the LGBT are b/c the LGBT hate white Christians as much as the Zionists or the Illuminati do. I don’t count a nutjob like Pence and Protestant sects wishing for Armageddon as Christian.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  221. anonymous[107] • Disclaimer says:
    @Byrresheim
    It seems while the GIs were no angels (no army can be) the were not even remotely approaching the level of callousness and intentional lack of discipline displayed by the red army.

    Chewing gum and nylon stockings alone do not even begin to explain the difference in attitude of the occupied populations.

    The fact that the US in Syria is clearly on the side of the morally and intellectually wrong does not take away one iot of the red army's crimes in the last war.

    The Russians may have had claims against the Germans – but they had no claims against Poles, Ukrainians, Romainians, Bulgarians and their behaviour was atrocious wherever they went.

    There is a reason Russians are hated in eastern Europe. The complete lack of interest in this reason regularly shown by Russian authors is shocking and not helpful to their own cause.

    The Russians may have had claims against the Germans – but they had no claims against Poles, Ukrainians, Romainians, Bulgarians and their behaviour was atrocious wherever they went.

    I don’t get it.

    Soviets starved to death millions of their own people and many Commies, still today, say, No problem, Stalin had to kill the kulaks to bring about his vision.

    But Germans killing Soviet troops that Stalin sent into battle unprepared, poorly armed, and threatened w/ death if they turned back — doesn’t that amount to Germans doing Soviet dirty-work?

    But Russians call that a major crime for which Soviets raped 2 million German women.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Stalin also murdered tens of thousands of Russians held as prisoners of war by the Germans when they were sent back to Russia after the war.

    The Russian army used the commissar military police method of keeping its soldiers moving forward.

    Behind the Russian soldiers were stationed commissars (often Jewish) with machine guns. At first sign of retreat the commissars killed Russian soldiers trying to retreat.

    So the Russian soldiers had no choice but to advance. Advance and there was a chance of survival. Retreat and be killed by the commissars.

    Many armies have done this sort of thing over the centuries. I believe Alexander the Great did the same.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  222. istevefan says:
    @jilles dykstra
    " The Germans chose to to make it a war of annihilation "

    Any proof ?

    Generalplan Ost

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Nothing in the multiple plans the Germans contemplated for the post-war settlement after a prospective victory in the East supports the wild claims of an “extermination plan”.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  223. Vojkan says:
    @FB
    You don't get it do you...?

    This 'exercise in futility' is just the appetizer for the main course to come...

    A psychopath that is allowed to continue his crimes is simply going to be emboldened by every sign of weakness...or even perceived weakness...of his victim...

    '...Although the Russian government has every good intention, Russia’s moral conscience and consideration for others is leading the world to Armageddon.

    The reason is that the neoconservatives who control US foreign policy are not going to stop orchestrating events that they blame on Russia.

    The longer Russia waits before it finally puts its foot down, the stronger the provocations will become.

    The successive provocations will narrow down Russia’s response to surrender or nuclear war...'
     
    That's PCR writing yesterday...and he is absolutely correct about everything...

    '...The Syrian provocation was an ideal one for Russia to put its foot down. Russia held the military cards. Russia could easily have destroyed every ship and every airplane.

    Having made the consequences clear in advance to the world, the US would have backed off...'
     
    You just don't understand the psychology of conflict...even on the micro or personal level I suspect...

    Why do you think those people who snap and end up mowing down dozens of innocents are able to carry this out...?

    It's because they weren't stopped while there was time...it's too late once the nutcase decides to go all in and is holding an assault rifle...

    Tell me, what exactly did that volley of rockets achieve, militarily speaking, and tell me, why waste ammunition on unnecessary killings that would have almost certainly led to a major conflagration? You see, even if you are militarily superior, you have to take into account your foe’s vanity and vain, the people who command the USA definitely are.
    A couple of thousands dead American sailors would most definitely have made laptop warriors rise from their armchairs to shout for escalation, even nuclear war. Letting your enemy waste his ammunition and demonstrating the inefficiency of his hyper advanced super duper glittering hi-tech weaponry is far more efficient than slaughtering his cannon fodder.
    So, again, after the dust settles, what exactly did that volley of rockets achieve? I don’t count arousing fanboys on both sides as a military achievement and I for one praise Putin for not falling into the traps the Western psychopaths set for him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I agree with this. It's possible that the last missile attack was a "learning experience" for both sides of this (needless) conflict and if Putin does indeed have several new generation weapons in his arsenal, he would be wise to keep them holstered until the point where conflict is absolutely unavoidable and they can inflict maximum surprise and damage. There is (hopefully) also the element that John Q Public in the US, UK and France will increasingly turn against their own governments whereas responding too soon would more than likely solidify support.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  224. Do you even know what you are talking about? This sort of BS is what you programmed to believe.
    Germans must be eternally grateful for not getting exterminated and even if it were true, 2 million raped German women is a cheap way out for what Germans committed in USSR.
    Talk about something you know. From what you wrote you have no clue about Soviet history.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  225. @Anon
    To say that within living memory the Soviet Union was never on the side of the oppressors is so ridiculous as to sink your credibility to a permanent zero.

    Leave aside Russian victims, think of the Holomodor. Then
    Poland 1939 and onwards (ever heard of the Katyn forest massacre?)
    The whole of Eastern Europe where Communist régimes were foisted on the people after WW2. Ever heard of the risings in Hungary 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968?

    C'mon...

    What made you think I want to have credibility among trolls? If you sincerely believe that, think again.

    The regime did victimize the USSR population, particularly peasants, but whoever wrote the comment I cited meant foreign policy.
    Besides, Holodomor is a myth created by Ukrainian Nazis. The funniest thing is that there was severe hunger in Western Ukraine at the same time, which was part of Poland back then. At that time there was widespread hunger in Russia and Kazakhstan, as well, and in Ukraine the most severely affected parts were the least Ukrainian, including Donbass, that is now fighting against current regime in Kiev.

    Calling Poland of 1939 “oppressed” is stretching it beyond the breaking point. Churchill at the time called Poland “the hyena of Europe” for a reason: it snatched a piece of Czechoslovakia while it was being dismembered by Hitler.

    As to Eastern Europe, many people in numerous Eastern European countries are worse off after EU “liberation” than they were under Soviet “oppression”. You (or, rather, honest readers) can find info here:

    http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2015/02/03/have-living-standards-in-eastern-europe-decreased-after-communism/#.WtNuL4JOkdU

    https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/2gpfmp/polls_show_eastern_europeans_miss_communism/

    https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/kurt-biray/communist-nostalgia-in-eastern-europe-longing-for-past

    and on many other websites.

    The fate of Gdansk (Danzig) shipbuilding plant in Poland, where the Solidarnost movement started, is a symbolic example. Soviet “oppressors” built a huge shipbuilding plant from scratch, which employed tens of thousands of people. USSR supplied it with orders for many years. “Liberators” from the EU killed it, like many other industries in Eastern Europe. It is “kaput”, no matter what your paymasters say. Those Russians who are inclined to schadenfreude are saying “serves them right”. Personally, I commiserate with Poles, as they stepped into the same trap as Russians and many others did.

    Now, how much of Hungarian uprising in 1956 or Czech uprising in 1968 was genuine and how much was “color revolution” still remains to be seen. Swap of one set of myth for another does not get us any closer to the truth. We also should not forget that “saint” Havel, the leader of “velvet revolution” in Czechoslovakia in 1989, kicked a lot of families out of the apartments “oppressors” gave them, because his ancestors owned those properties before nationalization.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ANON
    Oh well said brother and loyal serf.
    God bless the Czar!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  226. @propagandist hacker
    the main thing is that the russians could easily win by damaging the economy, and it is a ponzi economy...the economy could be hurt best by going after the big cities where the workers live and work...the infrastructure is vulnerable to organized guerrilla attacks...and the populace of the large american cities depends on food and water and sewage and electricity...all these services could be taken out by organized guerrilla infiltrators...and the populace would be panicked...

    Why should they do that, pray? As a wise saying has it, “when you see your enemy committing suicide, do not interfere”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  227. @Byrresheim
    After what the Bolsheviks inflicted on the Ukrainian people (and a good part of Russia to boot) I would really appreciate if todays Russians could just shut up about Ukronazis and do some historical research of their own, research not focussed on denial of the undeniable.

    What the Germans right now do to excess, wallow in the guilt of their forebears, the Russians would do well to at least consider: that all was not well with their murderous bolshevik past.

    Sorry to disappoint, Holodomor is a myth created by Ukrainian Nazis. The funniest thing is that there was severe hunger in Western Ukraine at the same time, which was part of Poland back then. At that time there was widespread hunger in Russia and Kazakhstan, as well, and in Ukraine the most severely affected parts were the least Ukrainian, including Donbass, that is now fighting against current regime in Kiev.

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

    ‘…Tell me, what exactly did that volley of rockets achieve, militarily speaking..?’

    ‘Militarily speaking’ nothing…

    Psychological warfare speaking…everything…

    Propaganda speaking…everything…

    Like I said…if you don’t get it then stop making useless noise…if I wanted useless noise I would go to the MSM…

    Yes…the risk of a major conflgration is exactly what is needed here…

    What do you think the neocons’ game plan is…?

    Exactly that…brinksmanship…leading to a much higher risk confrontation…

    There is a method to their madness…that is plain as the nose on your face…they are ratcheting up little by little until there is no alternative but all out war…

    At that point it is too late…

    So at some point Russia is going to have to decide to either surrender Syria or go to all-out war…that is a lose-lose option…

    It’s better to strike when you are in control of the escalation…

    If Russia had downed a French or UK aircraft at minimum…and made clear that ships were next…it would force the crazies to back off…

    You don’t understand the psychology of brinksmanship…ie the game of chicken do you…?

    If you keep backing down you lose…

    The silly populace under mind control of the FUKUS propaganda machine now is on board with ever more escalation…

    A forceful response would make the sheeple scared enough that they would not care what the crazies tell them on the idiot tube…they would make a hue and cry that they want no more…

    That is what is needed…obviously I am talking to a moron…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    You are the moron. What on Earth makes you think the Russian backed down?

    I'll try again, by dumbing down my post to fit your IQ.

    Trump: "Hey Russians, I'm sending you super smart and sexy rockets"

    Russians: "Let us see, Donald"

    Trump: "Here they go, woohoo"

    Russians: "Oops, Donald, we didn't get to see them, those Syrians, they downed your super smart and sexy fancy rockets with some ugly outdated hardware we sold them forty years ago, you think you can try again?"

    Now, I maybe a moron but I find that way of dealing with Americans much smarter than killing their troops, for whose lives the deciders don't give a damn anyway. As all egomaniacs, they do fear mockery though and that's exactly what the Russian did, instead of giving them a fight and let them out with some honour, they mocked them.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Sorry FB, he's not a moron, he simply disagrees with you. I too think that this was not the time to retaliate with force. Putin has shown restraint and maturity here and at some point it is hoped that this will become inescapable even to the chest-thumpers of the USA!USA!USA! crowd and all other people around the world.

    Niccolò Machiavelli taught that returning a blow for a blow is not the way to go (he didn't put it quite that poetically though) but when you strike you must strike really, really hard so that a return strike is impossible. Let us hope that the outcome will resemble something like that.

    I don't like the fact that many decent Americans would needlessly die in that scenario but all currently serving Americans are complete fools if they haven't worked out in a post Vietnam world that they are not defending America at all but are actually contributing to its downfall and the rise of an anti-American regime. Trump promised to rebuild America not destroy it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  229. @istevefan
    Generalplan Ost

    Nothing in the multiple plans the Germans contemplated for the post-war settlement after a prospective victory in the East supports the wild claims of an “extermination plan”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @1RW
    General plan Ost called for a reduction of 30 million
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  230. @1RW
    Romania and Bulgaria participated in the invasion of the USSR on Germany’s side.

    Poland invaded the USSR in the 1920s. It invaded Germany as well, kind of predatory behavior actually.

    Ukranian nationalists were willing auxiliaries for the Germans. While Waffen SS division Galicia was a joke that lasted three days of contact with the Red Army, civilians had less luck dealing with them.

    So you see, there were plenty of claims.

    To be honest, Bulgaria was formally an ally of Nazi Germany, but Bulgarian tsar said that he can’t send any troops against the Russians, as they won’t be reliable. He was right: puppet Nazi regime in Slovakia sent an army corps to the Eastern Front, and it promptly surrendered to the Red Army, along with it’s officers and commander. On the other hand, Romania fought on the side of Hitler and Romanians committed a lot of atrocities in Odessa region that they occupied. Hungarians also fought with Germans and were reputed to be the worst beasts, so that the Red Army shot them on the spot, did not take Hungarian prisoners of war (but took surrendering Germans). The only army on Hitler’s side that had a reputation of being relatively nice was Italian: they only demanded food and drinks, but did not commit any atrocities. For the curious: this info is from my grandparents who lived through German occupation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  231. 1RW says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Nothing in the multiple plans the Germans contemplated for the post-war settlement after a prospective victory in the East supports the wild claims of an “extermination plan”.

    General plan Ost called for a reduction of 30 million

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

    Great article,Saker and great prediction regarding the extent of the military punishment dealt out by our own insane “Rocket Man!”

    If there is a silver lining in all this it surely must be watching the triple Morons: May, Macron, and Merkel trying to justify their support for Trump’s erratic behavior while pretending to be statesmen.

    The whole charade makes a mockery of the ‘common values’ they supposedly stand for; and that’s a good thing!

    However, one point of the analysis which I found to be lacking, is discussion of the power behind the throne. As we all know, the US government is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Israeli government. Ignoring this point makes it impossible to understand all the motivations or to predict the actions the US embarks on.

    Put it this way: what are the chances that the Israeli owners and partisans, in charge of US and Western European countries’ foreign policies would have no say in the way these countries engage with Russia, which could potentially jeopardize the whole system they’ve set up and are working so hard to maintain ?

    No, no, if you want to discuss the inimical attitude of the west toward Russia, you have to look at those who are driving the dumb ox.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  233. Rich says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    I never said the US military condoned or encouraged their troops to rape, only that it happened a lot more than commonly acknowledged and certainly far more than the Germans did. (Along these lines, I believe far more Dutch civilians were killed by Allied bombing during their “liberation” than under German occupation.) Either a blind eye was turned towards these things by US commanders, or official sanctions were unevenly applied (e.g. mainly against black troops).

    BTW, you should know that discussing US war crimes does not require giving equal time to the crimes of others. That doesn’t constitute “lying”.

    BTW, you should be aware that Nick Turse’s book is filled with so many inaccuracies, which are so very easily debunked, they must be considered lies. When you use an obvious liar like him as your evidence of “atrocities”, you make yourself look foolish.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    I never mentioned Nick Turse, you’ve got your replies mixed up. It’s clear what sets you off, though.
    , @Johnny Rico

    Nick Turse’s book
     
    Which one?

    is filled with so many inaccuracies
     
    Yeah. I guess that would make it one of the few books containing inaccuracies? Care to elaborate?

    Have you even read this book?

    Did you hear about the guy who got caught trying to bring books from Kentucky into Tennessee? He wasn't convicted. He went free. The jury couldn't prove they were books.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  234. @Rich
    BTW, you should be aware that Nick Turse's book is filled with so many inaccuracies, which are so very easily debunked, they must be considered lies. When you use an obvious liar like him as your evidence of "atrocities", you make yourself look foolish.

    I never mentioned Nick Turse, you’ve got your replies mixed up. It’s clear what sets you off, though.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  235. Vojkan says:
    @FB

    '...Tell me, what exactly did that volley of rockets achieve, militarily speaking..?'
     
    'Militarily speaking' nothing...

    Psychological warfare speaking...everything...

    Propaganda speaking...everything...

    Like I said...if you don't get it then stop making useless noise...if I wanted useless noise I would go to the MSM...

    Yes...the risk of a major conflgration is exactly what is needed here...

    What do you think the neocons' game plan is...?

    Exactly that...brinksmanship...leading to a much higher risk confrontation...

    There is a method to their madness...that is plain as the nose on your face...they are ratcheting up little by little until there is no alternative but all out war...

    At that point it is too late...

    So at some point Russia is going to have to decide to either surrender Syria or go to all-out war...that is a lose-lose option...

    It's better to strike when you are in control of the escalation...

    If Russia had downed a French or UK aircraft at minimum...and made clear that ships were next...it would force the crazies to back off...

    You don't understand the psychology of brinksmanship...ie the game of chicken do you...?

    If you keep backing down you lose...

    The silly populace under mind control of the FUKUS propaganda machine now is on board with ever more escalation...

    A forceful response would make the sheeple scared enough that they would not care what the crazies tell them on the idiot tube...they would make a hue and cry that they want no more...

    That is what is needed...obviously I am talking to a moron...

    You are the moron. What on Earth makes you think the Russian backed down?

    I’ll try again, by dumbing down my post to fit your IQ.

    Trump: “Hey Russians, I’m sending you super smart and sexy rockets”

    Russians: “Let us see, Donald”

    Trump: “Here they go, woohoo”

    Russians: “Oops, Donald, we didn’t get to see them, those Syrians, they downed your super smart and sexy fancy rockets with some ugly outdated hardware we sold them forty years ago, you think you can try again?”

    Now, I maybe a moron but I find that way of dealing with Americans much smarter than killing their troops, for whose lives the deciders don’t give a damn anyway. As all egomaniacs, they do fear mockery though and that’s exactly what the Russian did, instead of giving them a fight and let them out with some honour, they mocked them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Trying again is exactly what did happen. So the Sharyat strike in 2017 must have been closer to the US version of events than the Russian. Otherwise why risk humiliation twice?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  236. Mulegino1 says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    Yes. Certainly in France, the behavior of German soldiers towards women civilians was far, far more exemplary than the Americans, who raped their way through the country.

    That is true. The German occupation forces behaved in a relatively exemplary manner with respect to the French civilian population. There was very little or no violent repression until the Maquis started their criminal partisan attacks against the occupation forces.

    I would go so far as to say that the Anglo-American invasion forces, including the USAAF and the RAF, caused death and devastation in France orders of magnitude beyond anything realistically imputed to the Germans. Americans have been fed a steady diet of Hollywood’s kosher saccharine war propaganda for so long it has created a psychological defense mechanism against the truths of real history.

    The so called “Liberators” liberated many a European from his home, his possessions, his life, and ultimately even his dignity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    "There was very little or no violent repression until the Maquis started their criminal partisan attacks against the occupation forces."

    I had to read thrice to be sure that I've read what I've read. Foreign occupation of a country is OK. Resistance to occupation is criminal. The occupied should just STFU. Wow, that's a daring statement. I'm left speechless.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  237. joe webb says:

    The Sacker is way out of control and joins company with PCR.

    Trump just demonstrated considerable restraint. Is it still dangerous? yes, but the sky-fallers like to gaze upon images of mushroom clouds.

    Maybe this is a reflex of old age.

    Joe Webb

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  238. anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:
    @SteveRogers42
    Source?

    Shame on you criminal. I have the source too, I am not going to give it to you, arrogant dummy. Move your behind and search it in the the internet.

    I am afraid the fucking Zionist google is in the business of purging all the evidence of American crimes against humanity. Majority of my important links become inactive as soon as it was posted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Geez, take it easy pal. You might be the toughest guy I've ever seen in my life.

    Plus, I don't recall asking you. So quit runnin' your suck.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  239. @Rich
    BTW, you should be aware that Nick Turse's book is filled with so many inaccuracies, which are so very easily debunked, they must be considered lies. When you use an obvious liar like him as your evidence of "atrocities", you make yourself look foolish.

    Nick Turse’s book

    Which one?

    is filled with so many inaccuracies

    Yeah. I guess that would make it one of the few books containing inaccuracies? Care to elaborate?

    Have you even read this book?

    Did you hear about the guy who got caught trying to bring books from Kentucky into Tennessee? He wasn’t convicted. He went free. The jury couldn’t prove they were books.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    You're a little late to the discussion, but if you follow the thread, you'll see where I listed some of the lies he wrote in his nonsensical, communist financed, "novel" about American actions in Vietnam. I assume that since you're writing this on the internet, you're familiar with looking up information on Al Gore's great invention, the "world wide web", and you can find even more inaccuracies than the ones I listed.
    , @AnonFromTN
    In KY they know only one book: the Book. They don’t read it, either, as they can’t read: they are good God-fearing church-going folks there.
    , @Anon
    It’s the prosecuting district attorney who has to prove the charges, not the jury.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  240. Rich says:
    @Johnny Rico

    Nick Turse’s book
     
    Which one?

    is filled with so many inaccuracies
     
    Yeah. I guess that would make it one of the few books containing inaccuracies? Care to elaborate?

    Have you even read this book?

    Did you hear about the guy who got caught trying to bring books from Kentucky into Tennessee? He wasn't convicted. He went free. The jury couldn't prove they were books.

    You’re a little late to the discussion, but if you follow the thread, you’ll see where I listed some of the lies he wrote in his nonsensical, communist financed, “novel” about American actions in Vietnam. I assume that since you’re writing this on the internet, you’re familiar with looking up information on Al Gore’s great invention, the “world wide web”, and you can find even more inaccuracies than the ones I listed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  241. Vojkan says:
    @Mulegino1
    That is true. The German occupation forces behaved in a relatively exemplary manner with respect to the French civilian population. There was very little or no violent repression until the Maquis started their criminal partisan attacks against the occupation forces.

    I would go so far as to say that the Anglo-American invasion forces, including the USAAF and the RAF, caused death and devastation in France orders of magnitude beyond anything realistically imputed to the Germans. Americans have been fed a steady diet of Hollywood's kosher saccharine war propaganda for so long it has created a psychological defense mechanism against the truths of real history.

    The so called "Liberators" liberated many a European from his home, his possessions, his life, and ultimately even his dignity.

    “There was very little or no violent repression until the Maquis started their criminal partisan attacks against the occupation forces.”

    I had to read thrice to be sure that I’ve read what I’ve read. Foreign occupation of a country is OK. Resistance to occupation is criminal. The occupied should just STFU. Wow, that’s a daring statement. I’m left speechless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Propagandists of the Empire would specify that there is “good” occupation (by the Empire and its sidekicks) and “bad” occupation (by anyone who does not take orders from the Empire).
    , @Mulegino1
    Which nation declared war and invaded the other first? The answer, of course, is France. Did the French ever occupy a foreign country? Did the British? The Americans? Would the American invaders (excuse me, "liberators") have tolerated resistance by French partisans against their own military forces, even though they turned large swathes of the country into rubble and killed far more French civilians than the Germans? There is no question that the US has a terrible record with regards to its own foreign occupation policies- stretching back to the occupation of the Philippines to that of Iraq. Anytime anyone condemns the Germans for their reprisal executions for partisan atrocities, I am reminded of the siege of Fallujah.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    You missed the point of course. At any rate, it is hard to see how France would have been worse off under the mild military occupation of the Germans (on whom France declared war, not vice versa, you should know), than under the current neo-liberal/multi-cult nightmare, run by an ex-bankster with mommy issues, who does the Americans’ bidding based on some doctored YouTube videos.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  242. @Johnny Rico

    Nick Turse’s book
     
    Which one?

    is filled with so many inaccuracies
     
    Yeah. I guess that would make it one of the few books containing inaccuracies? Care to elaborate?

    Have you even read this book?

    Did you hear about the guy who got caught trying to bring books from Kentucky into Tennessee? He wasn't convicted. He went free. The jury couldn't prove they were books.

    In KY they know only one book: the Book. They don’t read it, either, as they can’t read: they are good God-fearing church-going folks there.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  243. @Vojkan
    "There was very little or no violent repression until the Maquis started their criminal partisan attacks against the occupation forces."

    I had to read thrice to be sure that I've read what I've read. Foreign occupation of a country is OK. Resistance to occupation is criminal. The occupied should just STFU. Wow, that's a daring statement. I'm left speechless.

    Propagandists of the Empire would specify that there is “good” occupation (by the Empire and its sidekicks) and “bad” occupation (by anyone who does not take orders from the Empire).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    And those who stick to observable reality reply that there is no such thing as a "good" occupation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  244. Mulegino1 says:
    @Vojkan
    "There was very little or no violent repression until the Maquis started their criminal partisan attacks against the occupation forces."

    I had to read thrice to be sure that I've read what I've read. Foreign occupation of a country is OK. Resistance to occupation is criminal. The occupied should just STFU. Wow, that's a daring statement. I'm left speechless.

    Which nation declared war and invaded the other first? The answer, of course, is France. Did the French ever occupy a foreign country? Did the British? The Americans? Would the American invaders (excuse me, “liberators”) have tolerated resistance by French partisans against their own military forces, even though they turned large swathes of the country into rubble and killed far more French civilians than the Germans? There is no question that the US has a terrible record with regards to its own foreign occupation policies- stretching back to the occupation of the Philippines to that of Iraq. Anytime anyone condemns the Germans for their reprisal executions for partisan atrocities, I am reminded of the siege of Fallujah.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    The French occupied Germany first in 1940, really?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  245. @Vojkan
    "There was very little or no violent repression until the Maquis started their criminal partisan attacks against the occupation forces."

    I had to read thrice to be sure that I've read what I've read. Foreign occupation of a country is OK. Resistance to occupation is criminal. The occupied should just STFU. Wow, that's a daring statement. I'm left speechless.

    You missed the point of course. At any rate, it is hard to see how France would have been worse off under the mild military occupation of the Germans (on whom France declared war, not vice versa, you should know), than under the current neo-liberal/multi-cult nightmare, run by an ex-bankster with mommy issues, who does the Americans’ bidding based on some doctored YouTube videos.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    At any rate, France was better off under the presidency of de Gaulle, the guy who called to resist the Germans, than under their occupation or under the current neo-liberal regime. The difference is that the current regime is of their own volition, albeit with a little help from the CIA, so it has a little more legitimacy than any occupation. If they want to be shitty, it's their choice, German troops patrolling their streets weren't their choice and that makes a big difference.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  246. Gleimhart says:

    This “The Saker” guy seems to think he has access to U.S. top secret military technology. I can assure you, he does not. His “Russians are the best” obsession is wearisome. I almost wish the U.S. would have a conventional war with his beloved Russia so at least “The Saker” would be put in his proper place. Russia will not vanquish the U.S. with their cheesy and amateurish, 90’s style computer animation video showing us supposedly all the awesome yet unproven things their neat missiles can do. They tried this with Eisenhower, but the superior U.S. U2 spy plane was able to tell us that the Russians were blowing smoke.

    If the Russians want to get out from under their present predicament, I would strongly suggest you cease from any further lame animations showing one of your missiles bombing Florida. You won’t scare us. You’ll just piss us off. Good luck with that, posers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mulegino1
    Yes, I am certain that the invincible American military, fresh from its overwhelming victories against such military giants as Grenada, Panama, Haiti, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya would make short work of the feeble Russian forces- Hollywood has demonstrated this time and time again. We all know it was Tom Hanks who won the war against Germany virtually single handed. It was Private Ryan, not Private Ivan, who gained the upper hand against the Hun. Those hundreds of Soviet divisions tying down the bulk of the Wehrmacht were simply engaged in a sideshow, while the outnumbered and outgunned Americans sliced through the German lines like hot knives through butter. How can one doubt this, if Hollywood has declared it to be so?

    The fact of the matter is that the US military has not faced an enemy at rough conventional parity with itself since it was sucker punched by the low tech Chinese in Korea. And that conflict hardly resulted in a decisive victory, seeing as the hostilities ended in a mere ceasefire. American military invincibility is a very dangerous legend, a legend which has heretofore served as an anodyne bedtime story to somnolent sunshine patriots and neocon warmongers and has led to criminal conflict after criminal conflict for the benefit of the usual tribal suspects.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    Team America tough guys. Go actually fight some goat herders, instead of dropping bombs on them from the safety of an aircraft carrier. And while we’re on the subject, the German high command had a rather low opinion of American soldiers. On D-Day celebrations, remember how you fought kids while the experienced soldiers were getting routed by the Soviets in Operation Bagration.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  247. Philip Owen says: • Website
    @Vojkan
    You are the moron. What on Earth makes you think the Russian backed down?

    I'll try again, by dumbing down my post to fit your IQ.

    Trump: "Hey Russians, I'm sending you super smart and sexy rockets"

    Russians: "Let us see, Donald"

    Trump: "Here they go, woohoo"

    Russians: "Oops, Donald, we didn't get to see them, those Syrians, they downed your super smart and sexy fancy rockets with some ugly outdated hardware we sold them forty years ago, you think you can try again?"

    Now, I maybe a moron but I find that way of dealing with Americans much smarter than killing their troops, for whose lives the deciders don't give a damn anyway. As all egomaniacs, they do fear mockery though and that's exactly what the Russian did, instead of giving them a fight and let them out with some honour, they mocked them.

    Trying again is exactly what did happen. So the Sharyat strike in 2017 must have been closer to the US version of events than the Russian. Otherwise why risk humiliation twice?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    They fired at exactly what this time? What was the goal? Deter Assad from doing again something he didn't do in the first place? What changed in Syria after the strike? Nothing. Nothing was achieved militarily nor psychologically. Bragging that you didn't even have to turn on your hi-tech defenses since the low-tech were enough to do the job is hardly behaviour of a terrified victim. After pausing a little to assess the damage, it's business as usual in Syria. The only thing this strike has proven is that the US, the British and the French are total morons. Nothing else. Why should I trust their version if observable reality is inconsistent with their version?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  248. Mulegino1 says:
    @Gleimhart
    This "The Saker" guy seems to think he has access to U.S. top secret military technology. I can assure you, he does not. His “Russians are the best” obsession is wearisome. I almost wish the U.S. would have a conventional war with his beloved Russia so at least “The Saker” would be put in his proper place. Russia will not vanquish the U.S. with their cheesy and amateurish, 90’s style computer animation video showing us supposedly all the awesome yet unproven things their neat missiles can do. They tried this with Eisenhower, but the superior U.S. U2 spy plane was able to tell us that the Russians were blowing smoke.

    If the Russians want to get out from under their present predicament, I would strongly suggest you cease from any further lame animations showing one of your missiles bombing Florida. You won’t scare us. You’ll just piss us off. Good luck with that, posers.

    Yes, I am certain that the invincible American military, fresh from its overwhelming victories against such military giants as Grenada, Panama, Haiti, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya would make short work of the feeble Russian forces- Hollywood has demonstrated this time and time again. We all know it was Tom Hanks who won the war against Germany virtually single handed. It was Private Ryan, not Private Ivan, who gained the upper hand against the Hun. Those hundreds of Soviet divisions tying down the bulk of the Wehrmacht were simply engaged in a sideshow, while the outnumbered and outgunned Americans sliced through the German lines like hot knives through butter. How can one doubt this, if Hollywood has declared it to be so?

    The fact of the matter is that the US military has not faced an enemy at rough conventional parity with itself since it was sucker punched by the low tech Chinese in Korea. And that conflict hardly resulted in a decisive victory, seeing as the hostilities ended in a mere ceasefire. American military invincibility is a very dangerous legend, a legend which has heretofore served as an anodyne bedtime story to somnolent sunshine patriots and neocon warmongers and has led to criminal conflict after criminal conflict for the benefit of the usual tribal suspects.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Never the less, Mulengino is right that Saker is a chauvinist imperialist Russian war monger.

    I don’t know much about him. But I’m positive he doesn’t speak for the Russian War and foreign affairs departments, Putin and the leadership.

    The Russian military and foreign affairs depts under Putin seem very sensible and determined to avoid war, especially a war involving the US and or China.

    They must have wide freedom of speech in Russia to allow this Saker to publish his war mongering all over the internet.

    He reminds me of the 19th century British cartoon character Colonel Blimp always rooting for war. At least Colonel Blimp was on the army.

    Judging by the restrained behavior of Russia for decades, I doubt Saker speaks for the Russian leadership.
    , @Gleimhart
    If the U.S. has a conventional war with Russia we will slaughter them. I don't want that to happen, but it just might if you Russian posers keep up with the bluffing and tuff-guy talk. You're sure as hell not going to beat us with your cheesy, amateur hour computer video. Putin embarrassed himself with that one, and my sympathy for the Russian side declined somewhat.

    As for the skirmishes you mention, well, so what? Russia, too, has had small skirmishes.

    As for WWII:

    1) The Americans had to project their power all the way to another continent. That’s a really big deal, but you wouldn’t know that since you live according to “America sucks.”

    2) The lame-ass Commies fought on their own soil mostly, with excursions into Germany that would not have been possible had the Americans not entered the war and siphoned off the Germany army to lighten the load for the struggling Russians, and had the Americans not supplied the Soviets with war materiel.

    3) Therefore, the Russians owe us eternal thanks. Especially since we didn't have to enter the war at all, and since the Russians were a bunch of lousy, genocidal, psychopath commies at the time. Frankly, we fought on the wrong side.

    As for the U.S. not having a war recently with someone of equal parity, well of course not. There is no one of equal parity.

    As for Korea, the U.S. was not "sucker punched" by anyone. You amateur hour military historians never seem to understand that Korean and Vietnam (and the other stupid interventions) were purposely designed by the lowlife sell-out politicians to prolong the issue and not end in any sort of decisive victory. This is very basic, ya igit.

    "American military invincibility is a very dangerous legend, a legend which has heretofore served as an anodyne bedtime story to somnolent sunshine patriots and neocon warmongers and has led to criminal conflict after criminal conflict for the benefit of the usual tribal suspects."

    This obnoxious quote by you is an example of the type of presumptuous reaction that people like you engage in on a routine basis. I'll take apart, one piece at a time:

    1) "Somnolent sunshine patriots"? "Anodyne bedtime story"? Oh brother. Let me guess. Creative writing class at the local community college? What other stupid shite would you like to pull outta yer ass?

    2) "American invincibility"? I said no such thing. This "The Saker" head case is the one that does the "Russians are awesome/Americans suck" comparison about three times a damn week, so don't pretend that I'm the one pressing the issue. He's no more an expert than lots of other people, less so than lots of other people, and he doesn't know a damned thing about top secret American military tech.

    3) I have no problem with what you said about the Neocons. I knew Trump would sell us out the minute he went to AIPAC during the election campaign and started singing for his supper. Many times thereafter that assessment was repeatedly affirmed. I've been telling everyone I know that these chemical attacks in Syria, if they happened at all, were false flags.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  249. @Gleimhart
    This "The Saker" guy seems to think he has access to U.S. top secret military technology. I can assure you, he does not. His “Russians are the best” obsession is wearisome. I almost wish the U.S. would have a conventional war with his beloved Russia so at least “The Saker” would be put in his proper place. Russia will not vanquish the U.S. with their cheesy and amateurish, 90’s style computer animation video showing us supposedly all the awesome yet unproven things their neat missiles can do. They tried this with Eisenhower, but the superior U.S. U2 spy plane was able to tell us that the Russians were blowing smoke.

    If the Russians want to get out from under their present predicament, I would strongly suggest you cease from any further lame animations showing one of your missiles bombing Florida. You won’t scare us. You’ll just piss us off. Good luck with that, posers.

    Team America tough guys. Go actually fight some goat herders, instead of dropping bombs on them from the safety of an aircraft carrier. And while we’re on the subject, the German high command had a rather low opinion of American soldiers. On D-Day celebrations, remember how you fought kids while the experienced soldiers were getting routed by the Soviets in Operation Bagration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    apologies if this has already appeared in comments ---

    MoonofAlabama compared several reports of What targets were hit and What missiles were deflected.

    It appears the Pentagon is lying; US aimed most of its missiles at Syria airports, most of them were intercepted or did little damage.

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/the-moa-week-in-review-and-open-thread-2018-17.html


    "According to the Pentagon only three places related to non-existing Syrian chemical weapons were targeted:

    This combined military strike was directed against three distinct Syrian chemical weapons program targets.
    ...
    In summary, in a powerful show of allied unity, we deployed 105 weapons against three targets.
     
    It does not make any sense to send 35 cruise missiles against each of those not hardened, not defended targets like the now destroyed Barzeh research center which was a small two story building complex (pic of destruction) and had been declared free of chemical weapons and weapon research by the OPCW. Why would the U.S. military use such a high number of precision weapons against only three targets? This is extremely unusual and does not make sense at all.
     
    The article then lists the number and location of other missiles, based on Russian reporting and reports of "other sources on the ground "; namely, tweets from Danni Makki on the scene in Damascus, and series of time-stamped tweets from Wael-- Russia.

    Targets included Damascus International airport; Al Dumayr , Blai, Mazzeh, and Homs airdromes; and the Shayrat airbase.

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/the-moa-week-in-review-and-open-thread-2018-17.html

    , @Gleimhart
    Thank you for disrespecting the awesome and brave American soldiers at Normandy (who were mostly 18 years old by the way). Your sorry ilk is what makes me less sympathetic to the America-hating maggots that populate this Russophilic site.

    The Americans had to project their power all the way to another continent. That's a really big deal, but you wouldn't know that since you live according to "America sucks."

    The lame-ass Commies fought on their own soil mostly, with excursions into Germany that would not have been possible had the Americans not entered the war, and had the Americans not supplied the Soviets with war materiel.

    And by the way, stick your fake history. People like you always have an alternate version of everything, and wouldn't you know it, it's always "the real story".

    And if it helps you understand a little better of the kind of damage your incessant America bashing and Russian cheerleading is doing, bear in mind that no one hates the American government, the Neocons, Israel, foreign interventions and meddling, and these damn attacks on Syria based on false flags more than I do. But if Putin puts out another cheesy, amaterish video of Russian nukes landing on Florida or any other U.S. state, you — and HE — will learn that we're not scared, but mostly just pissed. He's going to make an enemy of people like me who had some amount of sympathy and regard for Russia. Have fun with that, dumbass.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  250. bluedog says:
    @Rich
    Nick Turse? I read his book and it was filled with inaccuracies and lies.

    1. It was never the policy of the US to commit atrocities and those accused of them were arrested and prosecuted.

    2. Turse makes the ridiculous claim that 2 million Vietnamese civilians were killed by the US, when the actual number, according to every other expert is much lower.

    3. Turse is an anti-American author who received payment from the Communist government in Vietnam .

    4. Turse neglected to interview men who actually were involved in the war and defamed decorated Warrant Officer Thomas Equels, for which he sued, forcing Turse to admit his lies.

    5. Turse neglects the millions killed by the North Vietnamese.

    These are just five lies written by Turse, there are many more. If you're basing your knowledge of the Vietnam War on men like Nick Turse, I can understand your complete lack of knowledge on the subject.

    Of course you read it but you skipped over all the reports “in the book”made by other troops, about the rapes going on, or how it was reported to their superiors clear up to General Powell and swept under the rug,which leads me to suspect that you never it at all,another one you might try is “The Untold History of The United States”.Yes I know it blows the concept that we would’nt do those things why we are christian son-a-bitchs but only the later part of that is true.!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rich
    Nick Turse and Oliver Stone? That's where you get your history? If you get the chance to meet to Mr Stone, ask him if the men he served in Vietnam with were murderers and rapists. I'd be curious to hear his answer. The men I know who served in Vietnam were honorable men, and, for the most part, good soldiers. Obviously you prefer sensationalism and anti-Americanism. Turse's lies have been well documented in magazines, newspapers and online, if you prefer to believe those lies, I guess that's your problem. Best of luck with it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  251. bluedog says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty
    I’m not sure you understand the definition of the word “lie”.

    He dosen’t that;s why he tells so many>!!!

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

    The fact of the matter is that the US military has not faced an enemy at rough conventional parity with itself since it was sucker punched by the low tech Chinese in Korea.

    It’s not a sucker punch when you openly warn someone that you’re gonna punch him. Which the Chinese made ABUNDANTLY clear to everybody.

    What they said was simple: That the conflict was an affair of Koreans, and that since Russia was giving weapons and supplies to North Korea, it was acceptable for America to similarly support South Korea – but here’s the catch – NO non-Koreans could set foot above the 38th parallel!

    Basically, if the S. Koreans could kick N. Korean ass and charge north to unify their own country, fine. China could live with that. But if American or British Commonwealth troops went towards the Yalu river, then it was WAR. They said this to the Soviets, who relayed this explicit message to the U.N and the State Department.

    So we KNEW what China was going to do. Hell, they were shouting it to our faces! It’s just that we felt completely invincible, and thought the Chinese could not fight properly. MacArthur’s HQ did not believe China would attack, and that even if they did, they’d be pathetic and useless. So U.N. forces kept driving north. That the PLA infiltrated into Korea right under our noses was on us and our hubris.

    So IMHO, not a sucker punch. A self-inflicted shock? Yes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mulegino1
    You may be right- it was not a sucker punch to high echelon US intelligence; it was in a tactical sense to the "United Nations'" forces on the ground though. In any case, it was the last time the US was involved in large land war against an adversary at rough conventional parity.
    , @Uebersetzer
    The Chinese warned against the US and allies entering the DPRK but only reacted militarily when the Yalu was being approached, in late October 1950. The Chinese did not "sucker punch" - they conveyed warnings that they would react through the Indian ambassador to China and the Polish ambassador to Beijing. The Americans dismissed them, assuming that the Indian ambassador was a Communist fellow traveller etc. A certain contempt for a China that had been warlord-ridden and a victim of the Japanese was also present.
    Then the Chinese landed a warning punch, overwhelming several South Korean and American units, but withdrew in early November 1950. The Americans assumed that was it, resumed the advance, and were hit by a full-scale Chinese attack in late November.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  253. @Beefcake the Mighty
    Team America tough guys. Go actually fight some goat herders, instead of dropping bombs on them from the safety of an aircraft carrier. And while we’re on the subject, the German high command had a rather low opinion of American soldiers. On D-Day celebrations, remember how you fought kids while the experienced soldiers were getting routed by the Soviets in Operation Bagration.

    apologies if this has already appeared in comments —

    MoonofAlabama compared several reports of What targets were hit and What missiles were deflected.

    It appears the Pentagon is lying; US aimed most of its missiles at Syria airports, most of them were intercepted or did little damage.

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/the-moa-week-in-review-and-open-thread-2018-17.html

    “According to the Pentagon only three places related to non-existing Syrian chemical weapons were targeted:

    This combined military strike was directed against three distinct Syrian chemical weapons program targets.

    In summary, in a powerful show of allied unity, we deployed 105 weapons against three targets.

    It does not make any sense to send 35 cruise missiles against each of those not hardened, not defended targets like the now destroyed Barzeh research center which was a small two story building complex (pic of destruction) and had been declared free of chemical weapons and weapon research by the OPCW. Why would the U.S. military use such a high number of precision weapons against only three targets? This is extremely unusual and does not make sense at all.

    The article then lists the number and location of other missiles, based on Russian reporting and reports of “other sources on the ground “; namely, tweets from Danni Makki on the scene in Damascus, and series of time-stamped tweets from Wael– Russia.

    Targets included Damascus International airport; Al Dumayr , Blai, Mazzeh, and Homs airdromes; and the Shayrat airbase.

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/the-moa-week-in-review-and-open-thread-2018-17.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Yes, sadly the American strikes are looking more like a test rather than bluster/incompetence (although this is also possible given the staggering amount of waste by the Pentagon). Unfortunately this is not over.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  254. ANON[107] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnonFromTN
    What made you think I want to have credibility among trolls? If you sincerely believe that, think again.

    The regime did victimize the USSR population, particularly peasants, but whoever wrote the comment I cited meant foreign policy.
    Besides, Holodomor is a myth created by Ukrainian Nazis. The funniest thing is that there was severe hunger in Western Ukraine at the same time, which was part of Poland back then. At that time there was widespread hunger in Russia and Kazakhstan, as well, and in Ukraine the most severely affected parts were the least Ukrainian, including Donbass, that is now fighting against current regime in Kiev.

    Calling Poland of 1939 “oppressed” is stretching it beyond the breaking point. Churchill at the time called Poland “the hyena of Europe” for a reason: it snatched a piece of Czechoslovakia while it was being dismembered by Hitler.

    As to Eastern Europe, many people in numerous Eastern European countries are worse off after EU “liberation” than they were under Soviet “oppression”. You (or, rather, honest readers) can find info here:
    http://www.debatingeurope.eu/2015/02/03/have-living-standards-in-eastern-europe-decreased-after-communism/#.WtNuL4JOkdU
    https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/2gpfmp/polls_show_eastern_europeans_miss_communism/
    https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/kurt-biray/communist-nostalgia-in-eastern-europe-longing-for-past
    and on many other websites.

    The fate of Gdansk (Danzig) shipbuilding plant in Poland, where the Solidarnost movement started, is a symbolic example. Soviet “oppressors” built a huge shipbuilding plant from scratch, which employed tens of thousands of people. USSR supplied it with orders for many years. “Liberators” from the EU killed it, like many other industries in Eastern Europe. It is “kaput”, no matter what your paymasters say. Those Russians who are inclined to schadenfreude are saying “serves them right”. Personally, I commiserate with Poles, as they stepped into the same trap as Russians and many others did.

    Now, how much of Hungarian uprising in 1956 or Czech uprising in 1968 was genuine and how much was “color revolution” still remains to be seen. Swap of one set of myth for another does not get us any closer to the truth. We also should not forget that “saint” Havel, the leader of “velvet revolution” in Czechoslovakia in 1989, kicked a lot of families out of the apartments “oppressors” gave them, because his ancestors owned those properties before nationalization.

    Oh well said brother and loyal serf.
    God bless the Czar!

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Wow! A troll trying his/her/its hand at stand-up comedy. Good luck!
    , @Wizard of Oz
    The way you're going your only credability will be with fellow trolls. Oh well chacun à son gout
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  255. @SolontoCroesus
    apologies if this has already appeared in comments ---

    MoonofAlabama compared several reports of What targets were hit and What missiles were deflected.

    It appears the Pentagon is lying; US aimed most of its missiles at Syria airports, most of them were intercepted or did little damage.

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/the-moa-week-in-review-and-open-thread-2018-17.html


    "According to the Pentagon only three places related to non-existing Syrian chemical weapons were targeted:

    This combined military strike was directed against three distinct Syrian chemical weapons program targets.
    ...
    In summary, in a powerful show of allied unity, we deployed 105 weapons against three targets.
     
    It does not make any sense to send 35 cruise missiles against each of those not hardened, not defended targets like the now destroyed Barzeh research center which was a small two story building complex (pic of destruction) and had been declared free of chemical weapons and weapon research by the OPCW. Why would the U.S. military use such a high number of precision weapons against only three targets? This is extremely unusual and does not make sense at all.
     
    The article then lists the number and location of other missiles, based on Russian reporting and reports of "other sources on the ground "; namely, tweets from Danni Makki on the scene in Damascus, and series of time-stamped tweets from Wael-- Russia.

    Targets included Damascus International airport; Al Dumayr , Blai, Mazzeh, and Homs airdromes; and the Shayrat airbase.

    http://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/04/the-moa-week-in-review-and-open-thread-2018-17.html

    Yes, sadly the American strikes are looking more like a test rather than bluster/incompetence (although this is also possible given the staggering amount of waste by the Pentagon). Unfortunately this is not over.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  256. @ANON
    Oh well said brother and loyal serf.
    God bless the Czar!

    Wow! A troll trying his/her/its hand at stand-up comedy. Good luck!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  257. Aha. Lame American nerf war finally makes sense. It was a photo-op to divert domestic attention from the rout of yet another feckless US ground assault.

    https://ejmagnier.com/2018/04/15/the-us-secret-plan-on-damascus-foiled-the-russian-role-before-and-after-the-us-uk-france-attack-revealed/

    As cognoscenti will recall, when Saddam annihilated the 3/7 Cav, fought the 3rd Infantry to a standstill, and overwhelmed Fort Stewart Hospital with casualties, DoD unleashed their secret weapon: thrilling helmet-cam video of the uncontested hospital rescue of fetching POW Jessica Lynch.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  258. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    I just started reading and I had this fantasy. Why wouldn't Russia be able to send in uniformed troops - only basically trained so not very valuable and pleased that they might survive - by parachute or crash landing planes so that they could carry out limited but extremely damaging operations before surrendering. Nuclear power plants? Whole underground railway systems? Civilian airports where many planes were lined up? Dams? Bridges? They could be made to believe that as soldiers in uniform and therefore POWs the US would treat them better than say Japanese-American civilians in WW2....

    Russia and America always planned Air Force attacks on each other via the short North Pole artic route, not through the Atlantic and pacific oceans.

    Since 1946, America has a massive Air Force installation and satellite spy service to keep track of what the Russian Air Force is doing.

    Long before the Russians planes were ready to take off, the American military would know exactly what was planned through its satellites.

    Within minutes of the Russian planes taking off, American planes and missiles would meet them while still on Russian territory and the battle would be on.

    These plans have been made and are continually refined by both sides since 1946.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Naturally, the Russians, limited as they are to using clockwork computers and having zero weapons capable of reaching high altitudes, would never even dream of knocking out the very satellites that would be essential for both early warning and targeting systems. Pssst... don't tell anyone in case the Russians pick up on the idea.

    If only the American government would attend to the needs of the American people instead of giving total priority to the demands of Israel's government, America would be a better place and the world would be a little more peaceful too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  259. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike
    I'm providing data from a poll and you're attempting to use facebook comments as a refutation. Who exactly is delusional here?

    "but there are a large number of absolute idiots who support Trump no matter what,"

    Thank you for that profoundly unremarkable remark. I think you just uncovered a phenomenon that has only been observable for oh, the last 3,000 years, give or take: Groups of people support their guy no matter what. Shocking!

    If you want to be taken seriously, bring some actual facts to the discussion instead of unhinged, prejudicial screeching about low income whites. Kevin Williamson has that market cornered.

    Thank you. Both Andrew R and Thomm are probably Jews who think all White goyim are dumb hillbillies.

    People who continually sneer at poor White trash do so because they know they are pretty low on the educational economic status level themselves.

    It’s usually 4th rate university liberal arts grads who haven’t yet found a decent job who go around sneering at White trash rednecks.

    It’s very characteristic of Jews to think they are the only educated, informed people in a group. They, like Andrew R have the fantasy that they are intellectuals above the rest of us.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  260. Vojkan says:
    @Mulegino1
    Which nation declared war and invaded the other first? The answer, of course, is France. Did the French ever occupy a foreign country? Did the British? The Americans? Would the American invaders (excuse me, "liberators") have tolerated resistance by French partisans against their own military forces, even though they turned large swathes of the country into rubble and killed far more French civilians than the Germans? There is no question that the US has a terrible record with regards to its own foreign occupation policies- stretching back to the occupation of the Philippines to that of Iraq. Anytime anyone condemns the Germans for their reprisal executions for partisan atrocities, I am reminded of the siege of Fallujah.

    The French occupied Germany first in 1940, really?

    Read More
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    What are you arguing with that personage for? Next you will start presenting arguments that the Earth is not flat. He/she/it is posting what the master paid for, nothing more, nothing less.
    , @Mulegino1
    No, the French invaded German territory (the Saar Offensive) during the Polish Campaign in 1939; they were driven out once the defeat of Poland was a done deal. The French declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    Your skill at evading the point is impressive. (France actually did invade and occupy part of Germany in 1939, but it was ineffectual and pointless, a bit of a metaphor for France’s involvement in the whole tragedy.)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  261. @Vojkan
    The French occupied Germany first in 1940, really?

    What are you arguing with that personage for? Next you will start presenting arguments that the Earth is not flat. He/she/it is posting what the master paid for, nothing more, nothing less.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
    Or he could argue that a commercially available pesticide can be used to murder millions of people.
    , @Beefcake the Mighty
    Don’t get steamed up. (See what I did there?)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  262. Mulegino1 says:
    @Vojkan
    The French occupied Germany first in 1940, really?

    No, the French invaded German territory (the Saar Offensive) during the Polish Campaign in 1939; they were driven out once the defeat of Poland was a done deal. The French declared war on Germany on September 3, 1939.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  263. Anon[257] • Disclaimer says:
    @Vojkan
    The Russian-Polish different being a different matter and dating back to the Middle Age, when the Poles along with the Lithuanians were the aggressor, the only ones in Central and Eastern Eurooe against whom the Russian had no claim were the Czechs and the Serbs - the latter took in and sheltered white Russians after the October revolution, which could have been cause for a grudge -, all the others were allies of the Axis and participated in the nazi invasion of Russia so Russian attitude after WWII was not that unreasonable and seems all the more sensible now that all the allies of the Axis during WWII have joined NATO, with some of them even having US missiles aimed at Russia on their soil.

    Did you really post that Poland was an ally of Germany during WW2?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Vojkan
    If you read my post, then you must have read that I wrote that the different with Poland wasn't from WWII but from far earlier in the past. I apologise for assuming that it would be understood that I implied that to the exception of others, Poland wasn't an ally of Germany.
    , @AnonFromTN
    Well, as the matter of fact there was a German-Polish non-aggression pact (see here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German%E2%80%93Polish_Non-Aggression_Pact) signed in 1934. That’s why Poland felt bold enough to snatch a piece of Czechoslovakia when Hitler dismembered that country (with the blessing of France and the UK, a treaty signed in Munich in 1938). Churchill called Poland “hyena of Europe” because of this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments