The United States and the 27 other NATO-member nations on Wednesday agreed to a new multinational force that will patrol the eastern European border setting up what many believe is "a dangerous dynamic...that has every possibility of spiraling out of control."
Somewhat bizarre that Trump is the only presidential candidate who has friendly things to say about Putin. Even Bernie Sanders seems to go along with the establishment view that Russia presents some kind of threat to world peace. But according to Trump, Putin is simply a strong leader looking out for his country's interests, the kind he claims he will be for the US.
Another odd thing about the presidential,campaign is the unchallenged view among Republicans that Obama has been some kind of appeaser when in reality he has led a dangerously aggressive military policy against Russia and China, while assisting Israel and Saudi Arabia in every possible way - not to mention earmarking $1 trillion for improvement of the nuclear arsenal over the next couple of decades. Of
Professor Stephen Cohen is a voice of sanity on this wholesale madness. I recommend listening to some of his past talks as well.
I check under my bed for Putin every night--NOT.
Every morning, the "Next Big Future" newsletter is emailed to me. All too often, it has article about some VERY scary new weapons being developed by Russia and China. China is building another big aircraft carrier, and has new jets and other stuff I can't remember, being 72.
Russia has the new Armata tank, a new jet, and nuclear bomb-carrying drone submarines that can be "parked" near our ports. New missiles... And I just hope we're keeping up.
So I'm fine with "keeping Russia in check".
Eastern European countries have already been occupied once by Russia (it was called the Soviet Union then). I guess they don't wanna end up like Eastern Ukraine and Crimea.
I have been studying Russia in depth for the past 2 years as part of an ongoing research project. Any build-up that Russia is doing is defensive. I encourage you to read up on Russia's geography and history, which explains its political psychology when it comes to its security. As a sampling: due to its lack of natural barriers such as oceans and mountain ranges, Russia has been invaded numerous times from all directions throughout its history. In the 20th century alone, it was invaded twice by Germany within a 25 year period (coming in through Ukraine and Poland). WWII resulted in 27 million dead Soviets, 19 million of them civilians, and 1/3 of its country destroyed. By comparison, the US lost about 350,000 in WWII and did not see any damage or fighting on its homeland. The U.S. also has a vast ocean on either side and relatively friendly neighbors to the north and south. When was the last time we were invaded? So, it's probably difficult for the average American to understand the Russian mindset in terms of security. If the Monroe Doctrine, granting us the whole western hemisphere as our security zone is still active (and its never been repudiated as far as I know), then how can we justifiably deny Russia a security zone? Why can't it be negotiated? Putin has made several efforts over the years to do just that -- negotiate a security zone that addresses everyone's security issues, including Russia and the Euro-Atlantic community. These efforts have been dismissed.
Also, read up on James Baker's promise to Gorbachev not to extend NATO "one inch to the east" in order to get him to agree to a reunified Germany in NATO -- something any Russian leader would have been very hesitant to do.
There is a lot more to the story with what is going on with Russia.
"The result of this massive increase of spending will be more military hardware, more troops, more provocative exercises on Russia’s western flank and much more tension between Moscow and NATO—which once upon a time promised Russia it would not expand 'one inch east' following the collapse of the Soviet Union," Bridge wrote.
* And there you have it, the answer:
Profits, profits, profits _PROFITS, PROFITS, PROFITS!!!!
* The "Cold War" was the most profitable time in history for the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Complex, except for actual war. The CCCP collapsed and so did the profits. The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) laid out in excruciating detail the "Full Spectrum Domination" of the World through military and economic warfare. The PNAC document said that the only thing needed was a "new Pearl Harbor" to drag the American People along. The Black Op of 9/11 did exactly what it was supposed to do, and the illegal, misnamed and unconstitutional Patriot Act was trotted out and approved, mostly unread and, just like the German People with the Enabling Acts, we lost our Constitutional Freedoms and have been sliding deeper into a Fascist, Nazi, Fourth Reich ever since.
* Now, in addition to the fabulous profits of the seven or eight wars currently being fought, often with both sides being supplied with arms by the MICC, they want to reestablish a new Cold War, right on Russia's borders.
* Apparently, Russia is to be pushed into surrendering or something. Apparently the
Clowns Powers that Be feel they can discount a nuclear response, or they are just too stupid to care. As a nuclear veteran, I do care!
* Somehow, this international cartel of greedy power brokers has to be reined in by We the People of the Earth before it is too late.
There is no threat to Eastern Europe from Russia. As for your comments regarding eastern Ukraine and Crimea, you are repeating western propaganda. I've studied this in depth for the past 2 years. Here is an article I wrote summing up a lot of the Ukraine issue:
Also, I traveled to 3 cities in Crimea this past October and spoke to a wide range of Crimeans. They are majority ethnic Russians and Russian speakers and were genuinely alarmed by the coup in Kiev and the actions by the ultra-right groups that had hijacked the Maidan protests and beaten Crimeans who had participated in anti-Maidan protests. They told me they knew the "little green men" were Russian soldiers legally stationed via lease at the naval base in Sevastopol and were wearing unmarked uniforms. They viewed them as protectors who allowed them to peacefully conduct their referendum without interference. Suggestions that they were forced to vote at gunpoint were dismissed as ridiculous. Once they saw how Kiev chose to undertake an "anti-terrorist" operation against the residents of Donbass who had similar concerns, instead of negotiating with them, this only reinforced their view that seceding from Ukraine and going to Russia was the right thing to do.
I guess so were the Germans in Sudetenland
Tick tock, tick tock. The MIC and the right wing is starting WWIII. It won't be long. Just wait until they start hurling bombs over here. Remember our government can't cope with hurricanes in major metropolitan cities. Best of luck to everyone because you will be on your own.
The Germans' in WWII were shocked when the allies starting bombing them. Their ignorant leaders told them that Germany was invincible. Hell, we out spend most countries combined in our military budget and we can't even win a war against countries who don't even have a military.
A friend of mine, a boat person from Vietnam, told me that in her village, when the communist came, the villagers claimed to be communist and when the Americans' came they all claimed they were capitalists many times over and over again. Maybe that is what is happening where we are in proxy wars?
I was watching a documentary on the Revolutionary War and it said that in 1776, only one third of the people living in America were for independence. Of course this does not include the natives, who we eventually genocided. So the pro-independence leaders did all they could to provoke the British and being the Empire that they were, the British came down hard to quell the uprising. After the Boston Massacre and the Tea Party, one in six people in Boston were a British soldier. This caused the majority of Americans to join the independence movement. Do you think the idiots running our military are making the same mistake?
I don't think that many people in power have a clue about true history, just the made up version. Did you see where Yum Foods started a Vietnamese food chain and the idiots who made the original trade mark used, by mistake, the Vietnamese Communist symbol for their trademark until the pro-American Vietnamese in the USA complained? It is to me a perfect example of the historical knowledge of our leaders. God help us!
Fallacious comparison. Russia did not invade Crimea. They had a legal contract stating that they could have up to 25,000 troops there and the Crimeans conducted a referendum stating their desire to secede after the coup. No one was killed during the secession or the subsequent reunification. As I said, numerous Crimeans told me directly that they were not intimidated by the Russian troops that were legally stationed in Crimea, they viewed them as protectors from interference by marauding ultra-rightists who had already committed violent acts against Crimeans.
Totally different set of circumstances.
I don't think anybody was killed in the annexation of Sudetenland either, and if i remember correctly most western powers didn't oppose it either. They thought they could appease that "little paper hanger in Berlin".
Ah, the "Putin is Hitler" meme. If Putin was simply looking to "annex" the Crimea so he could gobble up some more land for his "empire", he could have done it after the numerous times that Crimeans had previously voted, either in referendums or through their autonomous parliament, to be reunited with Russia. Moscow had always ignored these votes and requests in the post-Soviet period. He did it in reaction to the coup next door and the threat to his naval base and only warm water port -- as well as protecting the Crimeans in the process. Any Russian leader would have been forced to react to these provocations, led by Mrs. Kagan at the State Dept.
The GOP has been so successful in making the "weak on defense" label stick to them, Democrat tend to say as little as possible on defense, or go overboard proving that they have huevos.
President Sanders might consider appointing Trump Secretary of State. If his diplomacy failed he would humor the enemy to death.
Only in the West could 27 member nations allied against one , with a total population over 8 times that one and with military spending some 20 times greater call that singular nation aggressive even as the 27 move troops from all over the world to Russia's borders.
The most hyper aggressive nation on this planet, as witnessed by its thousand plus military bases the world over and it having attacked more Nations in the past 50 years than Russia has attacked in 200 , is the United States of America.
It is the most hyper aggressive nation since the British Empire collapsed and by a country mile. No other nation comes close.
The client nations to Empire that are called NATO tag along and like some gang of bullies who have singled out a single victim to assault bravely claim they are defending themselves as they all lay the boots to that next victim.
Other rarely discussed parts of US history:
In 1776 Britain considered signing the Declaration of Independence a capital offense. Although not all signers were harmed by the British, some were killed or had their farms destroyed by the British military.
While most Murkins think the US was solidly unified against fascism during the 30s, Prescott Bush (Dubya's grandpa), Henry Ford and other Murkin elites pushed hard for the US to join Germany, Italy and Spain in going fascist, allegedly to keep the US from going commie. They even hired retired retired Army General Smedley Butler to assassinate FDR to help them achieve their goal. Butler foiled the plot. Ford continued supplying Hitler with vehicles until FDR stopped that practice. Cold war propaganda then became the elites' successful strategy for creeping US fascism.
Most notably Prescott Bush and Henry Ford.
Yes, and Ford won the highest medal given to a non-military person from Adolf Hitler and Ford supplied all of the German supply trucks in WWII. We bombed Ford's plant in the war and Ford sued to be reimbursed for the damage in 1955 or 1956 and the US Government paid Ford for the damages.
I try to not miss an endorsement of Professor Cohen, I think he has had Ukraine right from the begining. I wish he had a bigger microphone...