The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPepe Escobar Archive
A Sea Painted NATO Black
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show 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
British Royal Navy members marching onboard the warship HMS Defender in Georgia’s Black Sea port of Batumi on June 26 as the Defender makes a port call for joint exercises with the NATO-aspirant country’s coast guard. Photo: AFP / British embassy in Georgia
British Royal Navy members marching onboard the warship HMS Defender in Georgia’s Black Sea port of Batumi on June 26 as the Defender makes a port call for joint exercises with the NATO-aspirant country’s coast guard. Photo: AFP / British embassy in Georgia

Welcome to the latest NATO show: Sea Breeze starts today and goes all the way to July 23. The co-hosts are the US Sixth Fleet and the Ukrainian Navy. The main protagonist is Standing NATO Maritime Group 2.

The show, in NATOspeak, is just an innocent display of “strenghtening deterrence and defense”. NATO spin tells us the exercise is “growing in popularity” and now features more than 30 nations “from six continents” deploying 5,000 troops, 32 ships, 40 aircraft and “18 special operations and dive teams”. All committed to implement and improve that magical NATO concept: “interoperability”.

Now let’s clear the fog and get to the heart of the matter. NATO is projecting the impression that it’s taking over selected stretches of the Black Sea in the name of “peace”. NATO’s supreme articles of faith, reiterated in its latest summit, are “Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea” and “support for Ukraine sovereignty”. So for NATO, Russia is an enemy of “peace”. Everything else is hybrid war fog.

NATO not only “does not and will not recognize Russia’s illegal and illegitimate annexation of Crimea” but also denounces its “temporary occupation”. This script, redacted in Washington, is recited by Kiev and virtually the whole EU.

NATO bills itself as committed to “transatlantic unity”. Geography tells us the Black Sea has not been annexed to the Atlantic. But that’s no impediment for NATO’s goodwill – which the record shows turned Libya, in northern Africa, into a wasteland run by militias. As for the intersection of Central and South Asia, NATO’s collective behind was unceremoniously kicked by a bunch of ragged Pashtuns with counterfeit Kalashnikovs.

Meet the Bucharest 9

The White House defines its NATO eastern flank allies as the Bucharest 9.

The Bucharest 9 includes the members of the Visegrad Four (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia); the Baltic trio (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania); and two Black Sea neighbors (Bulgaria and Romania). No Ukraine – at least not yet.

When the White House refers to “strengthening transatlantic relations”, this means above all “closer cooperation with our nine Allies in Central Europe and the Baltic and Black Sea regions on the full range of challenges.” Translation: “full range of challenges” means Russia.

So welcome to the return, in style, of the Intermarium – as in “between the seas”, mostly the Baltic and Black, with the Adriatic as a side show.

After WWI, the drive for what would possibly become a geopolitical entente included the three Baltics, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Belarus and Ukraine. That concoction was made in Poland.

Now, under the hegemon and its NATO weaponized arm, a revamped Baltic-Black Sea intermarium is being pushed as the new Cold War 2.0 Iron Wall against Russia. That’s why the definitive incorporation of Ukraine to NATO is so important for Washington – as it would solidify the intermarium for good.

Double O Seven does Monty Python

The prequel to Sea Breeze took place last week, via a farcical Britannia Rules The Waves stunt enacted like a Monty Python sketch – yet with potentially explosive overtones.

Imagine waiting at a bus stop somewhere in Kent and finding a soggy blob – nearly 50 pages – of secret documents in a trash bin detailing Ministry of Defense elaborations on the explicitly provocative deployment of the Defender destroyer off Sebastopol, in the Crimean coast.

Even a BBC journalist embedded with the destroyer smashed the official London spin that this was a mere “innocent passage”. Moreover, the Defender weapons were fully loaded – as it advanced two nautical miles inside Russian waters. Moscow released a video documenting the stunt.

It gets better. The soggy blob found in Kent revealed not only discussions about the possible Russian reaction to the “innocent passage”, but also digressions about the Brits, “encouraged” by the Americans, leaving commandos behind in Afghanistan after the troop pull out next 9/11.

That would qualify as extra evidence that the Anglo-American-NATO combo will not really “leave” Afghanistan.


A vague “member of the public” contacted the BBC when he innocently found the geopolitically radioactive materials. No one knows whether this was a leak, a trap or a silly mistake. If the “member of the public” were a true whistleblower he would have gone the Wikileaks way, not BBC.

The “innocent passage” happened only hours after London signed a deal with Kiev for the “enhancement of Ukrainian naval capabilities”.

On the Russian reaction front, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova summed it all up: “London has demonstrated yet another provocative action followed by a bunch of lies to cover it up. 007 agents are not what they used to be.”

Meanwhile, in the Mediterranean front, which NATO considers its Mare Nostrum, two Russian Mig-31k fighters – capable of carrying Khinzal hypersonic missiles – were redeployed last week to Syria. The Khinzal range encompasses the whole Mediterranean, east as well as east.

Across the Global South, NATO promoting “global peace” in the port of Odessa, in the Black Sea, is bound to evoke shades of Libya cum Afghanistan. Austin Powers, self-billed Agent Double Oh! Behave! would perfectly fit in the Kent trash bin “secret documents” caper. “Oh. Behave!” totally applies to Sea Breeze. Otherwise, the opportunity might arise to say hello to Mr. Kinzhal.

(Republished from Asia Times by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: NATO, Russia, Ukraine 
Hide 46 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Notsofast says:

    nato is a collection of bankrupt nations that have relied on looting helpless nations to keep their ponzi scheme alive. they have run out of hapless victims to pillage and are trying desperately to remain relevant as smaller nations begin to look to russia and china as new hegemons. this why we must have an eternal series of provocations in order to paint russia and china as imperialist aggressors to keep their remaining “clients” in line. russia and china know that they just have to wait out the inevitable collapse this zombie organization and hope that they don’t play some kind of sampson option.

    • Replies: @GomezAdddams
  2. Lussier says:

    “007 agents are not what they used to be”

    Austin Powers line “Its a man, baby” is now hate speech in the prostrated western world,
    replaced with the tangled phrasing of “Its a non-birthing individual, person of minimal size”.

    There is a Steve Earle song titled ‘The Devils right-hand’, where he sings about the ill-branded Colt Peacemaker – “it can get you into trouble, but it cant get you out”.

    All of this subterfuge and plotting for war and intrigue is underway in a society with people living on the sidewalks of every major city, and out of control domestic street violence from coast to coast..

    You would initially think that the powers that be would have more immediate and pressing local needs to address, but then you think again, and realize that such a thought process does not apply to these interventionists

  3. Wow! Two MIG jets deployed to Syria,real game changer…..not!

    If Russia was stupid enough to launch any aggressive action against NATO from Syria they’d soon find their place in the sun reduced to absolute rubble

    US air power has already handed Russian forces their backsides,namely the Wagner group,so i don’t think they’ll be in much of a rush to repeat that particular lesson,plus Turkey destroyed loads of Assads stuff with their drones,all meant to be state of the art Russian stuff

    Escobar really should have a look at a map before he starts blathering nonsense,but i know where he got this particular ‘ gem’ from about hypersonic wizbangs

    As for the little incident with the Royal Navy,Escobar should do some research about UNCLOS particularly about innocent passage,instead of going off and following the insane rantings of that Russian women,who’s just a big gob propaganda bitch for Putin

    • LOL: GazaPlanet
    • Troll: Mulga Mumblebrain
  4. Cyrano says:

    I suspect that there is a hidden – deeply humanist agenda behind the so called “provocative” NATO navel (gazing?) exercise in the Black Sea.

    I think the real purpose behind this show of force is that the honorable NATO countries want to blackmail – I am sorry, that was quite insensitive – I mean the NATO countries are trying to African-Americanmail Russia into changing the name of the Black sea.

    We live in times of extreme racial sensitivity and names like the “Black sea” can no longer be tolerated. I think what NATO is trying to accomplish here is to force the Russians to change the name of the Black sea sea into “African-American Sea”.

    That would appropriately reflect on the efforts that the west is trying to make in order to eradicate any remnants of racial insensitivity.

    And while there, I wouldn’t be surprised if the NATO crews take a knee into the sea – even if it results in their drownings – because that would only add poignancy to the message that they are tying to send – how much really BLM to them.

    • LOL: RadicalCenter
  5. This is good, in a way. Let them continue foolish and dangerous behavior until they collapse or ruin themselves. The UK had so much hope when it lost the Empire, but instead it had to try being an annoying part of another one. Maybe, one day, when they have “Amexit” or “Nato-exit” they will be a fine island that trades and hosts financial centers.

  6. MarkU says:

    In some respects you are right, so lets look at some basic facts and figures and take the argument to its logical conclusion.

    The Russian Federation has a population of about 150 million, about the same as the population of France and Germany combined. The EU has a population three times larger and the US has a population more than double that of the RF.

    In terms of military spending the Russian Federation is hardly a giant. The UK, France and Germany all spend more on the military than the entire Russian Federation despite have much smaller populations. The US alone spends about fifteen times more on the military than the RF.

    As to GDP, lets just say that the RF has a total GDP comparable to that of Italy.

    Let us assume that you are not going to dispute any of the above easily verifiable facts. Shouldn’t you be calling bullshit on the claims that the RF is a ‘threat’? When persons from the US claim that more military spending is required to ‘counter the Russian threat’, shouldn’t you be heaping scorn and derision on those persons? When Boris Johnson claims that the UK needs to spend more on the military, shouldn’t you be pointing out that the UK already spends more on the military than the entire RF?

    The unfortunate truth is that you are right, in a full scale war with NATO the Russians would be seriously outgunned and outnumbered. In order to avoid defeat they would have no option but to go nuclear with a very high probability that it would mean the end of the world as we know it. We really wouldn’t want that would we?

    Given the above, is it really a good idea to ceaselessly build up forces on Russia’s borders, to relentlessly strive to reduce their warning time against a nuclear first strike, to cynically overthrow any regime that is not hostile to them and to demonise them at every opportunity? After all, they are not actually a credible threat right?

    The problem with anti-Russian trolls and shills is that they want their cake and eat it. They want to jeer at Russia’s military capabilities and brag about how much more powerful and advanced the NATO stuff is. At the same time they want to scream about how threatening the Russian’s are and whine on endlessly about the need for more spending on the military.

  7. antibeast says:

    Putin sent the two MiG-31K jets with the Kinzhal hypersonic missiles to Syria because he knew Biden was playing a ‘bait-and-switch’ game on him: 1). offer Ukraine as a ‘bait’ during the Biden-Putin Summit but then 2). ‘switch’ to bombing Syria less than a fortnight later. Biden’s message to Putin was: “C’mon, man! My Zionist Overlords want me to dismember Syria. So I will leave Ukraine to you if you leave Syria to me.”

  8. Rahan says:

    Sometimes I think the Brits are playing a long game, trying to lead the US into collapse, and then become again a leading Anglospherical center of power, at least on equal terms with a diminished US.

    • Replies: @Ultrafart the Brave
  9. The Ogs says:

    People think USA is strong because of all the taxpayer money absorbed by the American military (a staggering one thousand billion dollars – every year!)
    However, it is not widely known that the Russians demand RESULTS from their military spending. Their investment doesn’t grease military/industrial complex shareholders the way the Americans do.
    If there is ever some kind of new war, Russia and China will fight side by side, mark my words…
    And then the scope and extent of the flim-flamming of the American taxpayer will finally be exposed.

  10. @MarkU

    Russia has gone ballistic,no pun intended, over this British ship,which incidentally has absolute right,as agreed by Russia who are a signatory of UNCLOS ,to sail as it did,innocent passage isn’t an invitation for Russian hysterical threats and behaviour to destroy other countries vessels

    Basically the British ships was sailing by Crimea,an annexed part of Ukraine, an illegal act on behalf of Putin,so Russia doesn’t exactly have the moral high ground does it, to tell anyone what they can do when they’re actually sat on someone else’s land

    In light of Putin’s deep psychological problems as regards the west I’d say right now its a very good idea to build up NATO,don’t forget if Putin hadn’t pulled his Crimea stunt we wouldn’t be having this conversation

    Putin wanted Ukraine in his Eurasian union,and obviously Ukraine didn’t,Putin didn’t want Ukraine in NATO but now he’s pushed them closer to that happening,so basically he’s bringing NATO closer to Russia by his derangement against the west

    Basically the Russian elites are a bunch of paranoid crypto fascist obsessed with a load of old ideological bunkum peddled by insane people like Alexander Dugin

    • LOL: GazaPlanet
    • Replies: @MarkU
    , @Sparkon
    , @anon
  11. anonymous[966] • Disclaimer says:

    Ogs right, the US spends ten times as much and pisses away 95% percent of it so they fall further and further behind with crap like F-35s, littoral combat ships, and rusted-out cannibalized boomers.

    The US is a shit regime with a shit military. All they can do is cowardly sneaky shit like germ warfare and petty cyber-sabotage and proxy wars. Russia should nuke the beltway into a sinkhole of molten basalt. The whole world would cheer, including the US subject population.

  12. Anonymous[986] • Disclaimer says:

    Well over across when they see an American they say they are loud, arrogant and stupid and its proven how right they are every day, but the problem is that It’s just not over across where this reigns supreme for even here it’s the same way, loud arrogant and stupid for anyone who thinks they can take on Russia with a fag army carrying their fag banner all dressed up in their red pumps trying to beat the Russians by making them laugh themselves to death, is just that loud, arrogant and stupid for they forget Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and now Afghanistan none who could even pretend to field a peer army.

  13. Never in history have there been more politicians in the west deserving of the noose than we have today. Nato’s constant provoking of Russia into war could end up costing millions of innocent lives, but as we have seen many times in history, politicians and kings have never considered the lives of the innocent to be anything more than trivial.

    • Agree: Ultrafart the Brave
    • Replies: @Ultrafart the Brave
  14. Military experiences of American Presidents:

    Biden – None

    Trump – None……the bone spurs…….thank goodness he got over them in time to golf incessantly

    Obama – None

    “W” – Pursued graduate degrees while serving in the Texas Air Guard

    Clinton – None, protested against the military

    Bush – Real man

    Reagan – Narrated films in Culver City while living at home during WWII

    • Thanks: showmethereal
    • Replies: @Realist
    , @Quartermaster
  15. MarkU says:

    Perhaps you should examine article 19 of the UNCLOS to see how ‘innocent passage’ is defined before you try to play international legal expert.


    Article 19
    Meaning of innocent passage
    1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good
    order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in
    conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law.
    2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the
    peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in the territorial sea it
    engages in any of the following activities:
    (a) any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial
    integrity or political independence of the coastal State, or in any
    other manner in violation of the principles of international law
    embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;
    (b) any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind;
    (c) any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the
    defence or security of the coastal State;
    (d) any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security
    of the coastal State;
    (e) the launching, landing or taking on board of any aircraft;
    (f) the launching, landing or taking on board of any military
    (g) the loading or unloading of any commodity, currency or person
    contrary to the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and
    regulations of the coastal State;
    (h) any act of wilful and serious pollution contrary to this
    (i) any fishing activities;
    (j) the carrying out of research or survey activities;
    (k) any act aimed at interfering with any systems of communication
    or any other facilities or installations of the coastal State;
    (l) any other activity not having a direct bearing on passage.

    You should also note that by defining Russia as an occupying power you are conceding that they have the right to control the territorial waters of Crimea. The US itself claimed the same rights in Iraq.

    On 2 May 2004, the United States, acting as an occupying Power in Iraq, issued a notice to mariners establishing with immediate effect a 2,000-metre exclusion zone around the Khawr Al’Amaya and Al Basra oil terminals in the Persian Gulf and temporarily suspended “the right of innocent passage […] in accordance with international law around [these] oil terminals within Iraqi territorial waters.”

    As to the question of the legality of the RF claim to Crimea, there are two arguments to consider.

    1) The elected government of Ukraine was chased out of office in a coup ‘midwifed’ by the US, in complete violation of the Ukrainian constitution. Having effectively torn up that constitution, it is somewhat hypocritical to insist that it is applied. Crimea at that point was already an autonomous republic and they can hardly be blamed for refusing to submit to a blatantly illegally constituted government, especially one which was openly hostile to them.

    2) The Kosovo precedent. The secession of Kosovo took place without even a referendum as a fig leaf and the US was warned at the time of the consequences of that precedent.

    • Agree: Dnought
    • Replies: @alwayswrite
  16. Sparkon says:

    Russia has gone ballistic,no pun intended, over this British ship,which incidentally has absolute right,as agreed by Russia who are a signatory of UNCLOS ,to sail as it did

    No, you’ve overlooked the critical point. The British destroyer, with weapons loaded, violated Russian territorial waters, so it had absolutely no right to sail as it did.

  17. anon[367] • Disclaimer says:

    British denied being fired on . If it were Iran or Libya of Ghaddafi , Britain would have falsely claimed that its ships were fired at necessitating a response despite the reality that none of those countries had fired at British to begin with .

    That’s the way warmonger drug peddler Britain works – turn back with tails in between the legs when confronted by one who could smash its drug addicted teeth and thumping chest while raining gas cylinders on the weak.

    When did Britain initiate a war last time without falsely claiming that it was attacked first ?

    Why did Britain let the opportunity fall by wayside after so many Russian crimes on British soils?

  18. @Rahan

    … a leading Anglospherical center of power, at least on equal terms with a diminished US.

    Two pygmies in a land of giants.

    Whether planned or not, that seems to be the likely trajectory.

    • Thanks: Rahan
  19. Rubicon says:

    As you observe:

    Two observations that are very generalized:

    “The US alone spends about fifteen times more on the military than the RF.”

    It’s the US that keeps trying to maintain that hegemonic control via the \$\$\$s. That’s *how* the US can spend untold billions of armament.

    At this point, with the rise of China’s immense trading power, the US \$\$ is starting to slip. This IS how empires lose their way. Once competitors start edging out the current power, a sequencing of related negative effects start to really hurt the standing hegemony.

    “As to GDP, lets just say that the RF has a total GDP comparable to that of Italy.”

    If you were to drill deep down into the US GDP, what you would find is MOST of that GDP reflects NOT what millions of Americans are producing. It IS the US Oligarchy that’s producing riches, not for average citizens, but for themselves and their multi-billionaire pals. Big difference!

  20. @Joe Paluka

    Never in history have there been more politicians in the west deserving of the noose than we have today.

    I believe the situation is about 10 times worse than you might imagine.

    The mindless political conformity within the NATO ecosystem is symptomatic of a darker pathology, namely the subversion of the entirety of the Western political and beauracratic classes to serve a tiny Satanic elite typified by the Davos crowd and the likes of creepy Bill and Uncle Klaus and the World Economic Forum.

    Larry Romanoff gives a hint at the number of individuals involved at the highest levels of the global fraternity of self-appointed “elites”, the ones calling the shots and pulling the strings, in this article –

    Mr. Romanoff speaks in terms of several hundred individuals.

    The true scale of the conspiracy to hijack the planet from a clueless global citizenry is nothing short of monstrous. The actual number of individuals across the globe, the teeming hordes of political stooges and minions carrying out the instructions and imposing the genocidal policies of their true masters with homicidal intent against their own people, must number in the hundreds of thousands if not millions.

    If we ever get around to applying the Nuremburg treatment to all those who so richly deserve it, we’ll likely be in for a very long, drawn out spectacle.

  21. @alwayswrite

    Innocent passage in the UNCLOS absolutely has nothing to do with military ships. Militaries are supposed to ask permission. It is commercial traffic that gets innocent passage.

  22. Lussier says:

    In terms of military spending the Russian Federation is hardly a giant. The UK, France and Germany all spend more on the military than the entire Russian Federation despite have much smaller populations.

    The unfortunate truth is that you are right, in a full scale war with NATO the Russians would be seriously outgunned and outnumbered.

    I think that this assessment ignores the bloat in the US procurement system, and the almost certain likelyhood that latest generation ‘Spoonrest’ has the ability to unmask all US Stealth aircraft.

    Paul Simpkins, 60, of Haymarket, Virginia, is the latest individual to be arrested in connection with a corruption probe involving the U.S. Navy, GDMA, and its owner, Leonard Glenn Francis. To date, seven individuals, including Francis, and GDMA have entered guilty pleas as part of the investigation.

    The complaint alleges that between May 2006 and September 2012, Simpkins accepted several hundred thousand dollars in cash and wire transfers, travel and entertainment expenses, hotel rooms and the services of prostitutes.

    NCIS did not catch on to fairly massive allegations of contract / procurement fraud,
    multiple US Naval vessels crashed into commercial ships in nav routes killing 17 sailors cumulatively,

    This is the same Navy/US forces that are nakedly attempting to pass off non-visible spectrum FLIR rollout as UFO’s, and which until the Russians had already tested and fielded Hypersonic weapons, it apparently did not occur to them to develop any such capacity..

    Lets be real.. there is not going to be a land battle between the US/Nato and Russia, but the reality is that that the Russians are likely well ahead of the US diversity forces, in multiple critical aspects.

    Trying to extrapolate meaning from general population statistics is pointless because with their radar and stealth detection advantage, and jump start on hypersonic development that the US is merely attempting to copy, such a confrontation right now would likely not go well for Nato forces.

    The Russians have working Hypersonic tech and the US diversity force is funding hormone treatments and sex change surgery for its legions of recuperating beneficiaries of this largess.. now, recalculate.

    • Replies: @MarkU
  23. Turn down the literature, turn up the politics! No mention of Turkey – will it assist NATO (toe the line and become a victim later – an attempt to delay the inevitable), or try to act stubborn and give an assist to Russia? What about the Turskish Stream pipeline? Ooops, it has to stop. Israel is preparing an attack on Iran, how does that correlate with the Russian exercise in the east Med? The Intermarium started in Poland, but is this car now filled with gas on an Israeli gas-station? What does Turkey think about Israel becoming the main player on the Balkans – to the detriment of Turkey? How many provocations can Russia take because it wants peace? If you want peace, NATO will move in Ukraine, supply guns, train, bring friends, etc. Where does that stop? Provocation after provocation, eventually NATO will ‘down a Turkish plane’, blame it on Russia and proceed from there. Casus belli is an old concept.

    A quote from Barak Ravid, Axios: “Biden is expected to tell Rivlin that the U.S. recognizes Israel’s right to defend itself against Iran and to make clear that the U.S. is ready to use other measures to stop Iran’s potential pursuit of a nuclear weapon if diplomacy fails, a source familiar with the preparations for the meeting told me.”

    Blinken told Lapid: “We will have occasional differences. We have the same objectives. Sometimes we differ on the tactics.” Same objectives? Israel wants Iran destroyed. What are the tactics and how does that involve the Black Sea?

  24. @MarkU

    As far as Russia is concerned Crimea is Russian territory,hence as a signatory of UNCLOS they have to abide by the law,they certainly don’t have a right to use bombs to threaten ships out of their water,so please show me in UNCLOS where it states any country has that right,because you can’t

    If Russia did drop bombs its a massive escalation on their behalf,the British ship did nothing wrong

    But this is Russian propaganda we’re talking about,truly Orwellian how folks have tied themselves into knots because now they can’t even decide if Russia is an occupying force,ergo they must have invaded,or Crimea is territorial part of Russia,if so they can’t deny innocent passage otherwise they’re in breach of their obligations to the UNCLOS convention

    I’ll repeat it once more for clarity,the British ship did nothing wrong,and more will almost certainly follow,if Russia wants to act like this then thats up to them,all it does is reinforce how untrustworthy Putin’s regime is

    All the international experts I’ve read disagree with the Russian action as it in breach of international obligations,Russia in the wrong again basically,but what more can you expect from a Putin fascist regime

    • Replies: @Begemot
    , @Quartermaster
  25. Svevlad says:

    It is clear. Every single NATO and EU nation must be utterly annihilated and turned to ash. They are irredeemably polluted in the mental sense, and this mental pollution will be hereditary as long as their cultures exist, amen

  26. Realist says:
    @Reverend Goody

    Only a stupid son of a bitch would have voluntarily gone into the military after WWII.

  27. Begemot says:

    … territory,hence … law,they … water,so … invaded,or …

    Above are examples from your writing of a consistent failure to place a space after commas. It should be ” … territory, hence …” not “territory,hence …”. See the difference?

    This is an age of declining standards so I point this out to you so you can correct this and appear to your readers as if you have some education and respect for the language.

    • Replies: @alwayswrite
  28. @Begemot

    Yup,your ,absolutely,correct,especially,when its,,,applied to,,Russian ,,s breaking international law,,,…!?

    Waz thfat bettter 😂😂😂😂

    Of courz Putin could correct his behaviour,but my poor grammar is obviously more important to you

    Over and out wink,wink,,😂😂😂😂

    • Replies: @Icy Blast
  29. Icy Blast says:

    I think it is a good tactic to make a joke of your ignorance. Everyone else does.

    • Replies: @alwayswrite
  30. @MarkU

    The EU has a population three times larger and the US has a population more than double that of the RF.

    Currently, that is the case but looking at the European Medical Agency’s figures there are 1.5 million mRNA vaccine injuries and 15,000 deaths. The US has 6,000 dead and the UK something like 1,047.

    I’m not convinced that Sputnik V is terribly safe – all previous coronavirus vaccines have run into the problem of antibody dependent enhancement – but it looks to me as if the western nations are winning the race to depopulate via a completely untested technology.

  31. @Reverend Goody

    Bone spurs, back then, were a disqualifying condition for military service.

  32. @alwayswrite

    Throw in the small fact that Crimea is Ukrainian territory illegally occupied by Russia, and the Russian actions, if they took place, which I doubt, would be an act of war. The Putin regime is a criminal regime headed by a pirate.

  33. George 1 says:

    The Migs with the Khinzal hypersonic missiles are, IMHO, a secondary defense measure against NATO, actually the U.S. Navy. The Black sea is a Russian lake. Everyone knows that. If hostilities commenced there the NATO ships in the Black Sea would not last long. Putin is now being criticized by his Russian subjects for not sinking the UK destroyer when it crossed into their occupied zone. If NATO (actually the U.S.) pulls that kind of stunt again Putin will be under tremendous pressure to take out the offending ship.

    But Putin and Russia are no longer counting on the U.S. or NATO being logical. If NATO and their bosses do not care about some destroyers in the Black Sea, the Russian military thinks they may care about losing an aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean. Those Khinzal missiles along with other air launched assets the Russians already have in Syria could accomplish that post haste. Assuming the U.S. Navy would not panic first and run the carrier aground or into a cargo ship first.

    • Replies: @alwayswrite
  34. @Icy Blast

    I’m glad I’m in such good company

  35. @George 1

    George you’re right about one thing,Putin is running out of BS propaganda he can feed Russia with

    He won’t attack a ship in Ukraine waters,thats right Ukrainian waters remember Crimea is Ukraine not Russian waters,as he knows that it’d be the end for Russia

    He should just dust of the old agreement the Soviets agreed with the US about innocent passage and he’d be fine,but instead old rubber chops Putler wants to grandstand to his miserable and demoralised domestic audience,who are actually more bothered about jobs and the price of food than Vlads daft geopolitical nonsense

    As for those hypersonic things Russia only just has the space based surveillance assets to target ships and I’d suggest the Americans would deal with those Russian space assets very quickly,without which the Russians can’t target anything,they’d just be fired off into the blue yonder

    But in boys own world of wonder Russian weapons everyone just sits around waiting to get zapped,yeah in your dreams comrade!

    • Replies: @George 1
    , @Anon
    , @George 1
  36. George 1 says:


    Russia did not start the mess in the Ukraine. That would be Obama, the CIA and some NGOs who overthrew the government of Ukraine and installed one hostile to Russia. What would the reaction be in the U.S. if Russia overthrew the Canadian government and installed one hostile to the U.S. ? When Obama’s Ukraine stooge told Russia to get out of the Crimea, I guess he was supposed to just abandon the Black Sea Fleet. We know what happened then.

    But aside from that, Why would you want to conduct “training missions” in the Black Sea? Seems unnecessarily provocative to me. What if Russia conducted “Training Missions” in the Gulf of Mexico.

    As to the capability of the U.S. Military vs. Russia, I make no claim to any special knowledge. I do understand that Russia is a nuclear power and they have lately been thrust into a military alliance with China. I don’t view that as a good thing. I have a friend who is a retired naval officer who tells me that the U.S. Military is not all that any longer, especially the Navy. So all I know is what I read in the papers.

    I am not saying that Putin is a white hat. What I am saying is there are no white hats in sight.

    • Agree: Dnought
  37. Anon[107] • Disclaimer says:

    In the words of the president that you obviously worship, “cmon man” you neglect to mention that a bunch of ragged goatherds armed with AK47 rifles have kicked American arses for 20 years as well as ignoring the Russian submarines in the Black Sea

    • Replies: @alwayswrite
  38. @Anon

    ” ragged goatherds” yup those would be the same ones who not only kicked Soviet “arses” but also helped bring the whole sorry mess of Soviet inhumane social engineering to utter collapse,i think the Soviets managed to only kill about 2 million Afghanis,according the Wikipedia

    i suppose Putin’s war in Syria has been a bit of an improvement ass he’s only managed to kill about 250 thousand

  39. George 1 says:

    You said previously something about the Russian bases in Syria being reduced to rubble, or something along those lines. So I took the opportunity today to call my retired naval officer friend. I had not spoken to him in sometime and we a good catch up conversation. He was a fairly high ranking officer assigned to Naval Intelligence. He does consulting now. I asked him a few questions:

    #1. If war broke out would the U.S. Naval assets in the Mediterranean be threatened by Russian air assets in Syria?
    Answer: Yes definitely.
    #2. From the supersonic missiles?
    Answer: Yes but there are other assets they possess which are dangerous as well.
    #3. Can the U.S. defend against the khinzal or other hypersonic missiles?
    Answer: Not really. If they shoot a few at a carrier that carrier is probably going to be hit.
    #4. If an air war broke out in Syria , Russia and SA against the U.S. who would probably win?
    Answer: With all of the combined air assets available to the U.S. our side would probably win. That includes all U.S. Air force assets and Israeli assets in the region and all of the Naval air assets thrown into the battle.
    HOWEVER. That would be a non-starter militarily and more important (to TPTB) politically.
    He went on to say: The Russians and SA would be defeated. But it would come at a price too high to be paid. The Russians have hugely upgraded their air defense systems in just the last few years. If the battle you describe occurred the U.S. Military would never be the same.
    #5. Can’t we take out the guidance systems for the missiles by destroying the Russian Satellites?
    Answer: Not in time.

    He added you know who you have to thank for the Russian upgrades in Syria? Israel. They set up the Russian recon aircraft to be shot down a few years ago and so Putin stared a massive upgrade to the air defense.


  40. MarkU says:

    I was not suggesting that the US is getting the same ‘bang for the buck’ as the RF (far from it) I was just using raw spending figures to illustrate the disparity in militarisation. It was certainly not my intention to disparage the RF’s military, rather it was to illustrate exactly who is really threatening whom. The idea that the RF might attempt to invade the west is a ridiculous fiction, concocted by the real aggressors in order to support their claims for yet more money for the military.

    It is still a fact that the NATO countries outnumber the RF by more than 5:1 in terms of population and about 20:1 in terms of military spending. While current front line forces are important to consider, if one is talking about a full scale war then things such as population and production capacity cannot be ignored. The Axis countries lost WW2 despite a marked advantage in initial preparedness and a technological superiority which they retained (in most areas) until the end. As Stalin once remarked ‘Quantity has a quality all its own’.

  41. @George 1

    Oh it would all be Israel’s fault wouldn’t it 😂

    Anyway its good to see your friend is on the same page as me

    But the question is why would Putin want to kick off a war in the eastern Mediterranean?

    Incidentally it wouldn’t be a war between Russia,Syria and America,it’d almost certainly be a NATO war against Putin and Assad,which your friend seems to have conveniently forgotten,or did you simply frame your questions to get the answers you wanted?

    anyway Putin and Assad would both lose,as your friend correctly points out,and that would be the end of Putin,he’d have two choices escalate to a higher and very dangerous new level,or be got rid of via some sort of Kremlin coup

    As for a high price to pay,well America paid an extremely high price in Vietnam but it’s still here,the Soviets had their’ Vietnam ‘ in Afghanistan and they also paid a high price,which unfortunately for them they didn’t survive!

    I’d suggest Putin knows full well his weaknesses,he can’t afford a military showdown in which he can’t spin his BS because its going against him,all this stuff about hypersonic and his super weapons is propaganda,of course lobbyists in Washington and Brussels love it all because they can then all get the begging bowl out for more money,for example America was investigating about \$800 millions a few years ago in hypersonic its now investing BILLIONS since Putin’s little show,so i suppose its all Putin’s fault for this particular new arms race,and finally lets just be clear,the Soviets couldn’t win the last one,and Putin with far less resources than the USSR won’t win this one either

    • Replies: @George 1
  42. @George 1

    You make good points – but the power and accuracy of weapons now compared to WW1 and 2 is exponential. If big powers were to fight – it wouldn’t last as long as those wars… There would be too much destruction and people in rich countries aren’t tough enough to sustain those kinds of losses. Long wars only happen in poor countries nowadays. So hopefully we never have to find out – but Russian military assets can reach any NATO country without having to move 1 million soldiers across the border. Different ball game now. Plus the likelihood of non-NATO friendly countries sitting still while Russia (or China) has to fight for survival is not likely. They will see themselves as next on the hit list. Things could spiral out of control.

    • Replies: @George 1
  43. George 1 says:

    I never said that it was “all Israel’s fault” and I think you know that. What I said was that, according to my retired naval officer friend, the Russians built up their air defense systems in Syria after Israel duped the SA to shoot down one of it’s aircraft. Full Stop.

    My friend did not seem to forget anything. What he said to me is that the air assets that would be available to the U.S. would win a Syrian air war against the Russian forces in his opinion. However the price to pay for winning that war would be more than the military or the politicians today would be willing to pay. I would bet that America today would be averse to the kind of loses that they would take in such a battle, Vietnam not withstanding.

    Why would Putin want to kick off a war in the Eastern Mediterranean? Because wars that start in one area do not necessarily stay confined to one area. Wars today can be asymmetrical. This is why starting conflicts, like overthrowing governments and playing chicken in the Black Sea are not good ideas IMO.

    These are my opinions that I have researched myself and asked my friend about. I did not say they are facts. I for one do not wish to test your theory that Putin will always back down and that in a War with Russia the U.S. and NATO would easily be victorious and that Russia would be destroyed.

  44. George 1 says:

    Showmethereal. You sir are a gentleman. I enjoy engaging in conversations with people like you because I learn something. I think that we can all agree that it would be best to avoid a military conflict with Russia. It seems to me that the U.S. with NATO is doing it’s best to start a conflict with Russia. I see no need for this. I do not see Russia attempting to start a conflict with the U.S. or NATO.

    However, I could be wrong. If so please point it out to me.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  45. @George 1

    I would agree with that… And likewise

  46. @Notsofast

    NATO was to have been disbanded when Warsaw Pact was abolished –what happened? Now NATO expanding into the Pacific–the South Pacific to provide cover for Scottie Morrison and protect the Canada-Autralian trade lanes of Coal arriving from Canada for filling in the coal mined in Australia and shipped back to Canada –it is called competive equalization—-a new aspect of 5 Eyes —

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
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pepe Escobar Comments via RSS
How America was neoconned into World War IV
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in...