The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
Retro Cold War Guff from the NY Times
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

A striking example of how dangerously Americans are misinformed and misled by the war party was featured in a major article in 24 December, New York Times.

In “Russia Rearms for a New Era,” the authors assert Russian military spending is growing and has risen $11 billion from 2014 to 2015. Lurid maps and diagrams of weapons make it seem that Stalin’s 210-division Red Army is again on the march – and headed into Europe.

A professor at Columbia’s Harriman Institute was actually quoted claiming that President Vladimir Putin is trying to “provoke the US and NATO into military action” to bolster his popularity.

What unbelievable rubbish. This dimwitted lady believes that Putin, whose popularity ratings rise over 82% in Russia, needs to court nuclear war to gain a few more points? Shame on the NY Times.

Let’s look at the true figures. The US so-called “defense budget”(it should be called “offense budget”) is in the range of $600 billion, 37% of total world military spending by a nation that only 5% of world population.
Some studies put the true figure at $700 billion.

Not included in this figure are “black” projects, a lot of handouts to foreign military forces, and secret slush funds for waging small wars in Afghanistan, the Mideast, Africa and Asia. The US has over 700 military bases around the globe, with new ones opening all the time.

The US spends more on its armed forces than the next nine military powers – combined. America’s wealthy allies in Europe and Japan add important power to America’s global military domination.

Russia defense spending is roughly $70 billion, and this in spite of plunging oil prices and US-led sanctions. France and Britain each spend almost as much; Saudi Arabia spends more. A French admiral ruefully told me the US Navy’s budget alone exceeded that of France’s total armed forces.

Russia is a vast nation with very difficult geography that limits its different military regions from supporting one another – a problem from which Russia has suffered since its 1904 war with Japan. Moscow needs large, often redundant armed forces to cover its immensity. This includes the warming Arctic, where Russia, like other coastal nations, is asserting its sovereignty. And Russia must also keep a watchful eye on neighboring China.

The Kremlin’s view is that America is trying to tear down what’s left of the post-Soviet Russian Federation by subversion (see regime changes in Georgia, Ukraine) and by stirring up Muslim independence movements in the Caucasus and Central Asia. That’s why Russian military forces are fighting in Syria.

After the total collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia’s economy and its once potent military fell to ruin. For two decades, Russia military was starved of men and money, and allowed to rust. Putin has been playing catch-up for the past decade to rebuild his nation’s great power status and defend against what Russians see a constant western plots.

Memories are still raw of how Russia’s most secret military technologies were sold to the US during the ultra-corrupt Yeltsin era.


Russia’s relatively modest military budget is hardly a threat to the mighty United States. In fact, the only real Russia threat we face is the danger of blundering into a potential nuclear confrontation with Russia in Ukraine, the Black Sea, Syria or Iraq. Great, nuclear-armed powers should never…repeat, never…engage in direct confrontations.

It appalls and mystifies me that otherwise smart, world-wise people at the NY Times and the anti-Russian Council on Foreign Relations would even contemplate military conflict with Russia – for what? Mariupol Ukraine or Idlib, Syria, places no one has ever heard of.

We have been closer to blundering into nuclear war with Russia than any time since the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. Or worse, 1983, when a NATO military exercise codenamed Able Archer was misinterpreted by the Soviet military as an incoming attack by NATO.

This ultimately terrifying crisis was played against the background of intense anti-Soviet propaganda by the West, crowned by Ronald Reagan’s fulminations against the “Evil Empire,” which convinced the Kremlin a western attack was coming. Nuclear war was just averted thanks to a few courageous officers in the Soviet Air Defense Command.

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: American Media, American Military, Russia 
Hide 44 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. attonn says:

    “…. otherwise smart, world-wise people at the NY Times and the anti-Russian Council on Foreign Relations…” LOL

    • Replies: @William
  2. DCBillS says:

    Chicken hawks have no shame. All they want is your money and blood.

    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
  3. World-wise, smart, and any otherwise positive quality goes right out the window when propaganda needs pushing.

  4. Rehmat says:

    I’m sure, as usual, NYT must had got the article passed by Israel’s Hasbara Committee.

    According to Israel advocacy group, IISS, Russian military budget ($70 billion) for 2015 is even less than Saudi Arabia ($80 billion). America’s military budget for 2015 is $581 billion, Israel ($23.1 billion + $3.2 billion US military aid), and Iran ($6 billion).

    Both the US and Russia will provoke together WWIII, only if Israel is attacked by Iran – which is never going happen – period.

    “The only honorable alternative for the United States to protect its national interests in the Middle East is to distance itself from Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, which have created bloodshed in the region for decades, and make an alliance with the Islamic Republic of Iran – the sooner the better,” says Canadian writer and author Eric Walberg.

  5. Our policymakers really believe they can balkanize Russia into a number of inferior satrapies with U.S. appointed leaders. With the commander in chief celebrating the joys of Caitlyn thought, it’s probable that there are military and political perceptions also at odds with reality.

  6. To use an old Chinese Communist Party term, the New York Times is nowadays a running dog of the Administration.

    Why do the hard work of investigative journalism when we can, instead, have inside access to the Government?

    And if the price of that is to occasionally run a piece that supports the agenda of some foreign policy faction at Foggy Bottom or the Pentagon, hey, after all, they are well-intentioned, intellectually honest, world-wise people, so it must be at least one legitimate perspective, right?

    And is not the US the exceptional nation? After all, our foreign policy efforts, at heart, must be motivated and shaped by the morally clear and right view of human lives our nation necessarily has, by design of the founding fathers, so anything the Government ultimately concludes is, at least, one correct option. Let’s print that.

    So, what’s the harm in being a mouthpiece? It save us a lot of hard work that would result if we were independent and doors of access slammed shut.

    Thus has American journalism been corrupted at the NYT and elsewhere.

    • Replies: @Rehmat
  7. Tom Welsh says:

    One eye-catching fact that Mr Margolis could have emphasized is that Russia’s military spending is approximately one-tenth of the USA’s – although Russia has twice as much territory to defend, and land frontiers with all kinds of potential enemies.

    As for the USA, nothing has changed since 1910 when French Ambassador Jules Jusserand remarked that, “The United States was blessed among nations. On the north, she had a weak neighbour; on the south, another weak neighbour; on the east, fish; and on the west, fish”.

    Abraham Lincoln had previously enlarged on this: “At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years. At what point, then, is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide”.
    – Abraham Lincoln; The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln edited by Roy P. Basler, Volume I, “Address Before the Young Men’s Lyceum,of Springfield, Illinois (January 27, 1838), p. 109.

    Unlike Russia, the USA hardly has any strategic threats to worry about. Its immense military spending is almost entirely directed towards gaining control of other countries and sucking out their wealth.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    , @scoops
    , @MikeP
  8. Mark Green says: • Website

    The NY Times may be published in NY, but it has one leg in Israel. This is true for most Big Media. These patterns of ownership deeply affect our news and entertainment. There’s a top-down bias at work. And come to think of it, more than a few editors and producers share the same point of view as the owners. Funny, that.

    This entrenched bias (coupled with enormous political donations and other interconnected lobbies) pushes Washington in ways that separate it from its traditional duties, which were once the health, wealth and safety of US citizens. And the Gray Lady has enabled these extra-national missions every step of the way. We have become a glorious world power!

    With no popular mandate, Washington has also become a vast military empire, and a crusading one at that. Global commerce is simply not enough. But this newfangled mission to ‘democratize’ the world undermines global stability since 1) it requires lethal force and 2) Washington is driven more by ‘alliances’ and lobbies than the rule of law.

    I smell blood. Do you?

    Indeed, since Israel’s conquest of Palestine is taking far longer than expected, Americans must be prepared for evermore threats which may necessitate the ‘military option’. But don’t worry. The Times will explain it to you.

    There’s unfinished work to do! Democracy. Freedom. War on Terror and all that.

    Plus, Israel’s conquest of Palestine is still incomplete. (Won’t those dumbshit Arabs ever just GIVE UP?!) Anyway, US bombs and intervention in the Middle East shall not rest anytime soon. In the meantime, let’s go get those nasty terrorists!

    Meanwhile (back here at home) due to our media’s dumbing and numbing influence, typical Americans would rather scrutinize a pro football game than attempt to comprehend the obtuse forces behind Washington’s curious constellation of ‘allies’ way off in places that most people cannot find on a map. Say what?

    The Times is very good at keeping Washington’s lethal and far-flung policies needlessly obtuse. In most instances, the Times’ fog machine on on HIGH. Upshot: expect more public passivity mixed with insecurity over phantom threats like ISIS. And expect more US interventions in nations that surround Israel.

    Indeed, Media bias is why there is just enough negative ‘news’ about Iran, Assad’s Syria, Libya (OOOPS! Too late), Iraq (ditto), Hamas, and Hezbollah, to keep the citizenry ready for another ‘pro-democracy’ military campaign or another regime change in some fragile Muslim state. Freedom! Equality for women! But it doesn’t stop just there. There’s the never-ending scourge of ‘racism’, too. This requires new taboos and evermore analysis by the NY Times.

    In case you missed it, white people who fashion their in-group identity in ways that resemble Jewish traditions is a definite ‘NO NO’. It’s discriminatory! It’s hate speech! It’s even… anti-Semitic!

    Thus, certain varieties of disdainful speech and certain kinds of cultural expressions (that are commonplace elsewhere) has become–for European-derived Americans–taboo, if not illegal.

    These rules are designed to dampen ‘bigotry’ and (wouldn’t you know it?) anti-Semitism. So get with the program you redneck neo-nazi bigots.

    Since WWII, many of America’s grassroots, cultural taboos have been turned their head. Equality! These transformations are also due to the widening scope of our courts, coupled with the rise of a certain ideology and activism dubbed ‘liberalism’. And yes, you can find it all over the place in the NY Times. But don’t worry. There’s also plenty of neo-conservatism opinion there to balance things out. Thank goodness for Free Speech and a wide range of opinions!

    As a result of all this magnificent diversity, European-derived Americans may not express any kind of racial solidarity since it might be seen as ‘exclusionary’. Freedom is shrinking.

    But not for everyone.

    Ethnic solidarity and ethnic cohesion and ethnic enclaves are in fact still permitted–if not endorsed from high above–just so long as you’re an officially-recognized ‘minority’. So a seat at the national table is still slightly ‘restricted’–only now in reverse. Whites have been demoted.

    Indeed, in the official US census, we members of the founding stock of the United States are now officially categorized as ‘non-Hispanic whites’.

    Are you proud to be a ‘non-Hispanic white’?

    Are you looking forward someday to a month or commemorative holiday devoted to the accomplishments of ‘non-Hispanic whites’? Let’s hope so!

    With that in mind, we have one important question for you: Are you a Democrat or a Republican? Please choose one. And don’t forget to vote! Our nation depends on it.

    But the Superbowl is coming also. So don’t forget to watch and root for your favorite team!

    • Replies: @Seamus Padraig
  9. annamaria says:

    The NYT article in question has three authors: Catrin Einhorn, Hannah Fairfield, and Tim Wallace.
    The first author is a “multimedia journalist at The New York Times” (whatever that means)
    The second is a “senior graphics editor at The New York Times”
    And the third one is a NYT’ “graphics editor and cartographer.”

    What an interesting situation! The New York Times could not find any real experts that could eagerly and convincingly presstitute on a theme of “Russian aggressions,” therefore Arthur Ochs Sulzberger (the paper’s publisher and the NYT company’s chairman) and his three “running dogs – a “multimedia journalist” C. Einhorn, “graphic editor” H. Fairfield, and “cartographer” T. Wallace – have produced an apparently fraudulent “research” (for which they are not qualified) and the ridiculous conclusions to satisfy the “handlers.”

    Meet an old prostitute with a home-grown crop of new presstitutes.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  10. Svigor says:

    The Kremlin’s view is that America is trying to tear down what’s left of the post-Soviet Russian Federation by subversion (see regime changes in Georgia, Ukraine) and by stirring up Muslim independence movements in the Caucasus and Central Asia. That’s why Russian military forces are fighting in Syria.

    Well, that, and the vacuum left in the region by Hussein’s policy of military withdrawal and general projection of weakness.

    This ultimately terrifying crisis was played against the background of intense anti-Soviet propaganda by the West, crowned by Ronald Reagan’s fulminations against the “Evil Empire,” which convinced the Kremlin a western attack was coming. Nuclear war was just averted thanks to a few courageous officers in the Soviet Air Defense Command.

    Yes, thankfully the heroic Soviets saved us from the evil Soviets bent on pressing the nuclear button.

  11. Rehmat says:

    Correction: NYT is a dog which dance on Israeli tune.

    American Jewish blogger Roger Tucker honored NYT with the kosher title of “The Jew York Times”.

    On October 8, 2015, Rick Gladstone, Jewish York Times foreign editor, repeated Israel’s propaganda lie about Islam’s third most sacred worship place, Al-Aqsa Mosque built on top of the so-called “Temple Mount”.

    “The question, which many books and scholarly treaties have never definitively answered, is the 37-acre site, home to Islam’s sacred Dome of Rock shrine and Al-Aqsa Mosque, was also the precise location of two ancient Jewish temples, one built on the remains of the other, and both since gone.”

    Even though Gladstone amended his original article after he was ridiculed and insulted by former Israeli jail-guard Jeffrey Goldberg, Liel Leibvitz, Jeremy Burton, etc. by adding “Temple Mount” after “37-acre” – it still doesn’t meet the historical and religious facts. For example, calling the two temples destroyed by Babylonian and Titus, as “Jewish temples” is ridiculous. Israeli historian Dr. Shlomo Sand has claimed that “Jews were invented only a century ago.”

    Islam’s sacred building on the hilltop is Al-Aqsa Mosque and not the shiny Dome of Rock. Al-Aqsa Mosque was built originally by Caliph Abd al-Malik of Umayyad dynasty in 890 CE on the spot from where the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) began his journey (Miraj) to have conversation with the Mighty Allah. Al-Aqsa Mosque expansion was done by Ottoman Sultans. Currently, it can hold nearly 3000 worshippers.

    Caliph Abd al-Malik also built a separate structure to enclose a large piece of rock which according to Islamic traditions was used by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to embark on Buraq (Heavenly creature that looked like a horse). The structure also covers a small cave where the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said to have meeting with prophet Abraham. A large dome, originally covered with gold-plates, was installed on top of the structure by Sultan Salahuddin Ayubi after he captured Jerusalem from the Franks (crusaders), who used Al-Aqsa Mosque as a palace in the 1100s…..

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  12. Rurik says:

    people at the NY Times and the anti-Russian Council on Foreign Relations would even contemplate military conflict with Russia – for what? Mariupol Ukraine or Idlib, Syria, places no one has ever heard of.

    No, not for Ukraine or Syria, but for absolute domination of the planet by the Zionists whose voice the NYT has been for over a hundred years.

    But unlike the last century when the NYT was able to lie America and Europe into catastrophic wars, today there’s the Internet, and their lies don’t work as well as they used to. So the faces of the fiends pulling all the puppet strings are becoming more unmasked, as the Zionists scramble for proxies to fight their wars for them.

    Margolis surly must know this. He must know that the hostilities between the US and Russia are a direct consequence of the Zionists push to destroy all Muslim countries in the Middle East- and send them reeling into the stone age. And that when they get done with the Middle East, they’re coming for the rest of us. And Putin’s Russia is standing there like the last remaining blade of grass to wither before Rothschild’s juggernaut. But wither it doesn’t. Not to the endless intrigues and treachery of lies and murder the Zionists have become known for, nor to the threats and temper tantrums the Zio-rats screech from their bullhorns of calumny like the NYT. Because what Rothschild and the NYT can not comprehend, not even begin to fathom, is the concept of human integrity. The kind of integrity that makes it quite impossible for someone like Putin to betray the ancient lands of his ancestors and his people for personal gain. Like honor, this kind of integrity is completely alien to them. They don’t know how to fight it or twist it to their designs or subvert it, because they have zero ability to even begin to comprehend it.

    And that’s where we are today.

    We are in the midst of a cataclysmic meeting of forces of the human spirit that you might even describe as an apocalyptic war between good and evil.

    Corruption vs. Integrity. Rot vs. Strength. Degradation vs. Hope.

    It almost seems like you could go on for ever with these comparisons.

    the lie vs. the truth.

    Just consider that last one in terms of the NYT vs. Putin. When it comes to these wars of Zion, who has been telling us lies all along? (WMD, Benghazi, MH17, Syrian gas attack, etc…) And who has been telling the truth?

    When Obama or John Kerry or Hillary Clinton talk about the wars (or just about anything), we all know they’re lying. This is accepted as common knowledge the world over. Same for all quisling puppets of the Zio-Rothschild empire. Merkel, Erdogan, Hollande, Cameron, et al. If they’re talking about the wars, just like Bush and Blair before them, we all know they’re telling us lies, don’t we. Who in this day in age actually believe one word that Bibi says? Who? Nobody, that’s who. Even his biggest fans are just enthralled at his ability to threaten and bully using nothing but blatant and belligerent lies and threats. But it seems that almost to a man and women in the thoroughly corrupted west, they all bow down to the lie.

    But then consider Putin. Imagine what the reaction would be if he told an obvious lie like the attack on Benghazi was due to a movie. Or if he tried to sell a false flag chemical weapon attack in order to demonize an opponent. There’d be shock and disbelief, from the people of Russia even down to his most ardent enemies. Because all along he has been telling the truth and we’ve all come to expect nothing less, whereas the west has done nothing but tell lies. And, we all know it.

    The “west”(a corrupted and rotten, hollowed-out shell of what it once was) today that I live in runs a torture camp off the coast of Florida. We fund and arm with advanced weapons sub-human animals who torture their victims before they execute them, including children

    Compared to a principled Russia today, which I see as like a man who is unwilling to watch another man savagely beat a child or a woman in front of him, and is willing to tell this other, bigger and stronger man that he won’t tolerate such a thing, even at his own peril.

    Integrity and a shred of human decency. Things that, like the truth, are almost completely dead inside the soul of this corrupted west of big screen TVs and ball games and an all pervasive mendacity that is exemplified by the daily lies of the NYT.


    just some random and rambling thoughts …

    {Go Trump : }

  13. joe webb says:

    “ appalls and mystifies me that otherwise smart, world-wise people at the NY Times….”

    surely sir , you jest. Russia threw out the Jewish Power, and since that time, the jews like neocons and the bitch njewland, hate Russia.

    Margolis…is that a liberal name?

    Joe WEbb

    • Replies: @Mark Green
  14. @Mark Green

    Are you looking forward someday to a month or commemorative holiday devoted to the accomplishments of ‘non-Hispanic whites’? Let’s hope so!

    Well, as far as ‘non-Hispanic Whites’ are concerned, we used to have George Washington’s birthday and Lincoln’s birthday in February, but those had to be folded into one ‘Presidents’ Day’ in order to make room for MLK.

    Mind you, I have nothing at all against MLK, whose demands were usually reasonable, and who also bravely spoke out against the “greatest purveyor of violence on the planet today” – a speech that probably got him killed. I just regret that they could find no better solution than to rob our first president of his special day.

  15. QUESTION: Exactly how many dual-citizens now work for the Jew York Times?

  16. @Tom Welsh

    Why do you prefer as reason for America’s vast military expenditure an intention (by whom exactly and with what levers of power in hand?) to gain control of other countries and suck out their wealth over a combination of inertia and the material interests of the military-industrial complex in keeping up the excuse of threats to America so their budget won’t be reduced? And you haven’t mentioned the Israel lobby!!

    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
  17. @annamaria

    NYT nicely skewered.

    Despite having found out Eric Margolis in a silly made up quote (to do with Stalin and Kaganovich and quite some time ago) I have given him credit for knowing something worth reading about and I applaud his realism in puncturing the stupid idea that Putin might be seeking war with the US or even being willing seriously to risk it.

  18. @Rehmat

    As my Sunni born Arab friend says “religion” is the problem though it is tempting to add “tribalism”. As a matter of fact doesn’t it seem likely that both temples to the Hebrew deity that existed in Jerusalem and were destroyed are under the foundations of the Temple Mount or whatever one should call the place where the only religious buildings are now mosques? And so what?

    • Replies: @Rurik
  19. Rurik says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    “religion” is the problem though it is tempting to add “tribalism”….

    …religious buildings are now mosques? And so what?

    well perhaps because that religion that wants to rebuild that temple- that you correctly interpret as raw tribalism- is at the center of WWIII. Because some members of that tribe want to destroy a monument of one religion in order to build in its place a monument to their tribe’s tribal religion. And by doing so, they’re betraying all the good will and covenants that they forged with the world’s people when the world allowed them, out of sympathy for the Holocaust and their ‘persecutions’ by the Romans centuries earlier, to steal the people’s land who lived there.

    So you see, the Khazars were given that land so long as they behaved and played nice with the locals and Jerusalem remained neutral and so on. But they want to betray their oath (what a shock eh?), and destroy a religious monument that is sacred to over a billion people, and that was never part of the deal, see? So it’s a problem. But that’s just me ; )

    Personally I couldn’t give a rip if it was a dog house sitting on that slab, but I sure don’t think one dime of Western/Christian treasure, let alone one drop of sacred Western blood should be spilt so some stone age tribal racists can build some silly monument on a rock to their ethno wet dreams.

  20. Mark Green says: • Website
    @joe webb

    “Is that [Margolis] a Liberal name?” Ha! Good one, Joe. No, it’s not.

    I’m fairly well-acquainted with Mr. Margolis’ work. He just avoids uttering the J-word in a critical context. As you surely know, this (unannounced) policy is not uncommon among editorial writers. But surrendering to this taboo makes Margolis’ generally-incisive analyses less direct and penetrating than they could be.

  21. scoops says:
    @Tom Welsh

    strategic threats I agree. americans in the homeland need a few to toughen them up! but sucking out other nations wealth? I doubt it, that’s why they keep coming here, to get a little!

    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
    , @annamaria
  22. Kiza says:

    This is the usual mild & fashionable criticism by the CIA asset Margolis. If you want to read something with a real punch, here is an interview with a former State Department employee in Saudi Arabia, who was forced by CIA to issue US visas to Al Qaeda terrorists, to be trained in the US:

    Just remember that Guantanamo Bay is a re-education camp for the terrorists who do not work for the US to start working for the US. But terrorists are trained in just about in every country which the US controls, including US itself.

  23. Tom Welsh says:

    Hi scoops. Have you ever wondered (just a little) why it is that so much of the world’s wealth seems to be owned by Americans? I know the official reason is because Americans are just so much better than foreigners – smarter, harder-working, more ingenious, and so on. But really? Honestly?

    • Replies: @dahoit
  24. Tom Welsh says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Hi Wizard of Oz! In reply to your first question, it would take a long time to reply properly. Best you take a look at (for instance) Stephen Kinzer’s book “The Brothers” or “The Devil’s Chessboard” by David Talbot. Did you realize, for example, that most of the founding bosses of the CIA were bankers, lawyers, or both? And that they and their friends and colleagues advised US corporations like United Fruit, so that the Marines (see Smedley Butler’s book “Maverick Marine”) were sent in to countries to smooth the way of the corporations? And those things happened over 50 years ago…

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  25. the lion says:

    It I funny Americans believe what they are told, do they know that the F135 is based on Russian aircraft designs, well the Propulsion systems for the VTOL F135b as well as some of the ancillary systems! Yes from the Yeltsin era as described! Yet still the Russians do have weapons systems that the US has no countermeasures for, and wait for it Iran has them in Numbers!

    If there is a nuclear war it will be by US design and US actions, they didn’t learn from the precursors of the Cuban Missile Crisis, putting Nuclear missiles within 20 minutes of Moscow! Now they are trying hard to do it again Nuclear missiles in Poland as well as Anti Ballistic missile systems…………ostensibly to target Iranian Missiles and we believe that right…………! I know the Russians don’t they have said so clearly! Every move in Europe by the US relates to putting missiles on the Russian doorstep again, even the overtures to Cuba are to stop a similar return of Russian nuclear Missiles there! Americas funding of Ukraine’s coups both of them have been to that end, either a buffer zone or an even shorter Missile flight!

    We shouldn’t discount the funding of Al Nusra in Syria as part of this either, a distraction to Russia by causing its ally Syria grief! the Pentagon didn’t realise that Russia would intervene, or that they would make such good headway! Nor would they have realised that Russia would show that a NATO state was funding ISIS either! Al Qaeda from its inception was a tool of the CIA, remember Charlie Wilsons War, even today Al Nusra formerly known as Al Qaeda in Iraq is funded by the CIA even John McCain went and visited them and said to the world we should help these people fight! Noting it is a Criminal offence under US law to have any dealings with Al Qaeda or its associated organisations!

    We should also understand that the leaders that the US funds in their regime fight in Syria include leaders whom Georgia and the CIA funded and trained to fight in Chechnya in 2008 onwards! Again attacking Russia any way they could!

  26. @Tom Welsh

    I think you are perhaps exaggerating the scale of military expenditure and effort needed for the Central American countries where US corporations have been extractive and the US government has assisted with a little local thuggery. Those escapades don’t explain the trillions spent on “defence”.

    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
  27. annamaria says:
    @the lion

    “…a NATO state was funding ISIS … Al Qaeda from its inception was a tool of the CIA… Al Qaeda in Iraq is funded by the CIA even John McCain went and visited them and said to the world we should help these people fight … regime fight in Syria include leaders whom Georgia and the CIA funded and trained to fight in Chechnya in 2008 onwards…”

    True. Sigh…

  28. dahoit says:
    @Tom Welsh

    The military might translates into resource theft which makes Americans rich..

    • Replies: @Rurik
  29. Tom Welsh says:


    Pretty much the way I see it too. It’s really surprising how “little” things – like the ability to break laws with impunity, and impose your own rules in other people’s countries – can add up to really, really, really huge piles of money.

    And of course when a country becomes a “failed state” – without a functioning government, or any other institutions such as a legal system – it’s so much easier for outsiders to break laws with impunity and impose their own rules.

    Funny how many failed states there are nowadays, isn’t it?

  30. Tom Welsh says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    The two things certainly aren’t exclusive. The fact that the wealthiest oligarchs are using American military and “soft” power to wring concessions and get their own way abroad doesn’t mean they don’t also enjoy getting lots more money through their shares in the armaments industry. Indeed, the more pseudo-religious among them are probably delighted at how “all things work together for those that love God”.

    I have a better quotation for those people. “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!”

  31. Rurik says:

    The military might translates into resource theft which makes Americans rich..

    and don’t forget the Fed, that allows them to create a trillion here or there when it’s expedient to their agenda (war, domination, strife, theft) to do so.

    and also it’s important to remember that it makes some Americans rich

    the working and middle class are reeling and dying off

    and the white people of certain ages are simply just killing themselves

    but some Americans are getting wealthy beyond the dreams of sultans or kings

  32. We have not been “blundering” into conflict with Russia, but seeking to reduce it to a cipher that cannot threaten our world domination since World War II ended. The Times has taken a strong role in this endeavor, reporting hysterical accounts of Russia’s actions in Ukraine and Crimea for example. It would be pathetic if not so terrifying.

    Mr. Obama either shares these views or is afraid of the members of his administration, such as Victoria Nuland, who are actively pushing a “destroy Russia” agenda, as he does not remove any of them.

    • Replies: @annamaria
  33. annamaria says:
    @Helen Marshall

    “…it would be pathetic if not so terrifying.”
    What else would we expect from plutocrats that believe firmly in their right to be above all laws, always? – Hence a profound loss of a sense of reality. The approaching nuclear war, courtesy the US plutocracy, will not be soft on the psychopathic deciders as well. The plutocracy (parasitoids) still could not get/accept that.

    “The position of the current American political media establishment is that this new Cold War is all Putin’s fault––all of it, everything. We in America didn’t do anything wrong. At every stage, we were virtuous and wise and Putin was aggressive and a bad man. And therefore, what’s to rethink? Putin has to do all of the rethinking, not us….
    … globalization and other developments have ended the mono-polar, US-dominated world. That world is over. A multi-polar world has emerged before our eyes, not just in Russia but in five or six capitals around the world. Washington’s stubborn refusal to embrace this new reality has become part of the problem…”

  34. bondo says:

    nyt, only news acceptable to jews

    pretty sure u.s. aggression budget exceeds not next 9 countries but rest of world combined.
    weapons in s. arabia, other gulf puppies for amurderka’s use.

  35. No country meddles militarily with more other countries, most of which it has no business meddling with, than the United States.

    Putin’s five giant sins:
    1. Accepting Crimea’s vote to join Russia.
    2. Providing humanitarian aid to the opponents of the regime in Kiev put into power by an America backed coup.
    3. Being more eager to defeat ISIS than Assad.
    4. Leading a country that treats homosexuals about the same way the United States did in 1965.
    5. Helping to restore Eastern Orthodox Christianity to Russia.

    For these great crimes we must risk nuclear war.

  36. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @the lion

    that the F135 is based on Russian aircraft designs, well the Propulsion systems for the VTOL F135b

    1. NO aircraft of such type exists–F135. There is F35B STOVL aircraft by Lockheed.
    2. It is true that said Lockheed (Martin) in early 1990s, for a laughable price, bought technical documentation from Yakovlev TzKB on Yak-141 (NATO–Freestyle) VTOL which was revolutionary. Some technical solutions, especially in terms of thrust vectoring (nozzles’ design) were, indeed, incorporated into F35B.
    3. It is also clear that F-35B is thoroughly US-designed and made aircraft, especially so in terms of its avionics.
    4. F-35B uses separate lift fan–the feature which did not exist on Yak-141.
    5. While there is no denial that Yak-141 influenced F35B designed in some aspects–most aggregates of F35B are US designed and produced.

    P.S. If you have any questions–I am Russian.

  37. William says:

    This first line in Mr. Margolis’ article is true, but the primary reason for this should be explained.
    The U.S. has no free press. The main stream media constitute an enormously powerful propaganda machine for Israel and its U.S. fawners and the greedy politicians who are recipients of neocon funds for their re-election.
    Mr. Margolis should know this. I admit that it would be extremely risky for him to do so, but many American patriots have done more and risked more.

  38. While we’re waxing nostalgic about going mano a mano with the Red Horde in a latter day gotterdammerung, let’s just reflect that in those ‘good’ old days somebody civilized thought that it was going to take a 143 nukes to neutralize Moscow and 176 for Leningrad – as well as the other 147 targets for a preemptive strike -in Russia and another 150 in Eastern Europe.

    No doubt out NATO allies are glad things improved enough to have them scratched from the target list. I’d bet they’d be as happy to think that somebody civilized in Moscow isn’t thinking those same kinds of thought about them to-day.

  39. ” It appalls and mystifies me that otherwise smart, world-wise people at the NY Times and the anti-Russian Council on Foreign Relations would even contemplate military conflict with Russia – for what?”

    Even if we accept the otherwise unsupported assertion that they’re smart, the answer is clear: $$$$$$ from the military industrial complex, which assumes that it can browbeat and intimidate Russia into backing down without an actual direct war, despite the total lack of any evidence of this.

    Also, Russia isn’t spending much but it’s spending smart. It is focused on force multiplier armaments like the S 400 system and the tsunami causing nuclear torpedo, which essentially render much higher levels of Amerikastani military splurging null and void. Let Amerikastan bankrupt itself running bases and making the useless F 35. The faster this utterly evil and criminal entity spends all its resources on its sham of a military, which can’t even beat the Taliban, the better.

    • Agree: Kiza
  40. Correction to the above 179 targets were identified for systemic destruction in Moscow, 145 in Petersburg – as well as thousands of other targets in Russia and Eastern Europe.

    Details at :

  41. annamaria says:

    There is something that creates a sharp dissonance with the supposedly righteous voices of critics of Russian federation.
    1. “…an Ukrainian government source confirmed 40 metric tons of Ukraine’s gold had been airlifted to the United States. …one of the questionable issues at the heart of the mystery is that if Yatsenyuk gave the order for the removal of his nation’s gold reserves, he did it in March, just weeks after he was propelled into power by Washington. U.S. officials had conspired with right wing elements to overthrow the elected government of the country’s president, Victor Yanukovich.”
    2. “A professor at Columbia’s Harriman Institute was actually quoted claiming that President Vladimir Putin is trying to “provoke the US and NATO into military action” to bolster his popularity.” The professor’s name is Kimberly Marten; she is a Director of the Program for U.S.-Russia Relations ( There is no doubts that Kimberly Marten knows the stats re the US/RF defense budgets. But she is dedicated to lying, because this is both her calling and foundation of her paycheck. The article, “Russia Rearms for a New Era,” was written by three aspiring nincompoops that have zero credentials with regard to the Russian History and political sciences (the authors like color pictures and the graphics in the article is indeed nice); the quote from the whoring professor Kimberly Marten was supposed to add some weight to their “research.” Poor wretched woman – a minor activist among big-time thieves.

  42. annamaria says:

    “…but sucking out other nations wealth? I doubt it, that’s why they keep coming here, to get a little!’

    You mean, the US have been maintaining some 1000 military bases around the globe out of altruism?
    This could be a cold shower for you:

    “I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country’s most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism…. I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912 (where have I heard that name before?). I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.”

    It only has got worse, see the wars in the Middle East and the US gangsterism on the Russian borders.

    More on today’s affairs:

  43. MikeP says:
    @Tom Welsh

    No, the military might of the United States is there to secure the freedom of the free world. It is the great blessing of our age.

    • Replies: @Tom Welsh
  44. Tom Welsh says:

    “No, the military might of the United States is there to secure the freedom of the free world. It is the great blessing of our age”.

    Very droll – but I suggest in future you make it explicit that you are indulging in irony. Otherwise some simple wouls might take your words literally.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Eric Margolis Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Bin Laden is dead, but his strategy still bleeds the United States.
Egyptians revolted against American rule as well as Mubarak’s.
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in...
A menace grows from Bush’s Korean blind spot.
Far from being a model for a “liberated” Iraq, Afghanistan shows how the U.S. can get bogged down Soviet-style.