This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Secret Back Story to Russia and Ukraine that Americans Never Learned In School
Preface: We believe that Soviet communism was an abomination. Stalin was certainly a tyrant: he killed countless political enemies or threw them into insane asylums. We also have littler tolerance for useful idiots who defend communism as a force for good. In short, we hate Soviet era communism.
And Putin also runs Russia like it’s his plaything, with little regard for the desires of his people.
But U.S. warmongers have also been hyping the Russian threat with self-serving lies – and committing atrocities and telling lies – for some 70 years. As an American, my concern is keeping America from destroying itself. And – unless we learn our history – we could get in a lot of trouble.
America Launched the Cold War Even Before World War II Had Ended
Joseph Stalin and the Soviets were key in helping the U.S. to defeat the Nazis. 20 million Russians died fighting the Nazis in World War II.
And yet the U.S. started competing against Stalin – and treating him like an enemy – before WWII had even ended.
Specifically, dropping atomic bombs on Japan had a duel purpose: defeating the Japanese, and sending a message to Stalin that the U.S. was in charge.
History.com notes:
In the years since the two atomic bombs were dropped on Japan, a number of historians have suggested that the weapons had a two-pronged objective …. It has been suggested that the second objective was to demonstrate the new weapon of mass destruction to the Soviet Union. By August 1945, relations between the Soviet Union and the United States had deteriorated badly. The Potsdam Conference between U.S. President Harry S. Truman, Russian leader Joseph Stalin, and Winston Churchill (before being replaced by Clement Attlee) ended just four days before the bombing of Hiroshima. The meeting was marked by recriminations and suspicion between the Americans and Soviets. Russian armies were occupying most of Eastern Europe. Truman and many of his advisers hoped that the U.S. atomic monopoly might offer diplomatic leverage with the Soviets. In this fashion, the dropping of the atomic bomb on Japan can be seen as the first shot of the Cold War.
New Scientist reports:
The US decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 was meant to kick-start the Cold War rather than end the Second World War, according to two nuclear historians who say they have new evidence backing the controversial theory.
Causing a fission reaction in several kilograms of uranium and plutonium and killing over 200,000 people 60 years ago was done more to impress the Soviet Union than to cow Japan, they say. And the US President who took the decision, Harry Truman, was culpable, they add.
***
[The conventional explanation of using the bombs to end the war and save lives] is disputed by Kuznick and Mark Selden, a historian from Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, US.
***
New studies of the US, Japanese and Soviet diplomatic archives suggest that Truman’s main motive was to limit Soviet expansion in Asia, Kuznick claims. Japan surrendered because the Soviet Union began an invasion a few days after the Hiroshima bombing, not because of the atomic bombs themselves, he says.
According to an account by Walter Brown, assistant to then-US secretary of state James Byrnes, Truman agreed at a meeting three days before the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima that Japan was “looking for peace”. Truman was told by his army generals, Douglas Macarthur and Dwight Eisenhower, and his naval chief of staff, William Leahy, that there was no military need to use the bomb.
“Impressing Russia was more important than ending the war in Japan,” says Selden.
John Pilger points out:
The US secretary of war, Henry Stimson, told President Truman he was “fearful” that the US air force would have Japan so “bombed out” that the new weapon would not be able “to show its strength”. He later admitted that “no effort was made, and none was seriously considered, to achieve surrender merely in order not to have to use the bomb”. His foreign policy colleagues were eager “to browbeat the Russians with the bomb held rather ostentatiously on our hip”. General Leslie Groves, director of the Manhattan Project that made the bomb, testified: “There was never any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and that the project was conducted on that basis.”
University of Maryland professor of political economy – and former Legislative Director in the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, and Special Assistant in the Department of State – Gar Alperovitz says:
Increasing numbers of historians now recognize the United States did not need to use the atomic bomb to end the war against Japan in 1945. Moreover, this essential judgment was expressed by the vast majority of top American military leaders in all three services in the years after the war ended: Army, Navy and Army Air Force. Nor was this the judgment of “liberals,” as is sometimes thought today. In fact, leading conservatives were far more outspoken in challenging the decision as unjustified and immoral than American liberals in the years following World War II.
***
Instead [of allowing other options to end the war, such as letting the Soviets attack Japan with ground forces], the United States rushed to use two atomic bombs at almost exactly the time that an August 8 Soviet attack had originally been scheduled: Hiroshima on August 6 and Nagasaki on August 9. The timing itself has obviously raised questions among many historians. The available evidence, though not conclusive, strongly suggests that the atomic bombs may well have been used in part because American leaders “preferred”—as Pulitzer Prize–winning historian Martin Sherwin has put it—to end the war with the bombs rather than the Soviet attack. Impressing the Soviets during the early diplomatic sparring that ultimately became the Cold War also appears likely to have been a significant factor.
***
The most illuminating perspective, however, comes from top World War II American military leaders. The conventional wisdom that the atomic bomb saved a million lives is so widespread that … most Americans haven’t paused to ponder something rather striking to anyone seriously concerned with the issue: Not only did most top U.S. military leaders think the bombings were unnecessary and unjustified, many were morally offended by what they regarded as the unnecessary destruction of Japanese cities and what were essentially noncombat populations. Moreover, they spoke about it quite openly and publicly.
***
Shortly before his death General George C. Marshall quietly defended the decision, but for the most part he is on record as repeatedly saying that it was not a military decision, but rather a political one.
General Dwight Eisenhower said, “Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary” and “the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn’t necessary to hit them with that awful thing.”
And Truman’s chief of staff, Admiral William Leahy, who chaired the meetings of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, claims:
The use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.
America Has Waged a Brutal Dirty Tricks Campaign for 70 Years
Right after the end of WWII, the U.S. backed Nazi fighters in Ukraine in an attempt to dislodge Soviet control of that country.
In late September 1947, [George] Kennan urged Forrestal to establish a “guerrilla warfare corps”—a suggestion Forrestal heartily endorsed—although the [Joing Chiefs of Staff] recommended against establishing a “separate guerrilla warfare and corps.” In December, Truman approved secret annex NSC 4-A, authorizing the CIA to conduct covert operations. He had dismantled the OSS’s covert parmilitary operations capabilities in September 1945, but now he brought them back in force. In the summer of 1948, he approved NSC 10/2, which called for “propaganda, economic warfare, preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground movements, guerrillas and refugee liberation groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.” These activities were to be done in a way that would always afford the US government plausible deniability. In August 1948, Truman approved NSC 20, which authorized guerrilla operations in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe ….
***
Beginning with Truman’s first day in office, his receptiveness to the views of hard-line anti-Communists, his denial of Roosevelt’s understanding with Staling, the provocative and unnecessary dropping of the atomic bombs, his spreading a network of military bases around the world, Churchill’s speech at Fulton, Truman’s call for fighting Communism in greece, the division and remilitarization of Germany, the continued testing of bigger and bigger atomic and hydrogen bombs which he used to threaten the Soviet Union, Truman’s deliberate exaggerations of the Communist threat both overseas and at home and his persecution and silencing of those who challenged these distortions. In all these matters, with few exceptions, the United states, after successfully liberating Western Europe, was now signaling fear and aggression ….
The U.S. also admits that the U.S. and NATO also used false flag terror attacks to discredit the Soviets. For example:
- The CIA admits that it hired Iranians in the 1950′s to pose as Communists and stage bombings in Iran in order to turn the country against its democratically-elected prime minister
- The former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and other European countries in the 1950s and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security” (and see this)(Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred). And watch this BBC special
- As admitted by the U.S. government, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960′s, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See the following ABC news report; the official documents; and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC’s World News Tonight with Peter Jennings.
The U.S. and NATO Have Been Trying to Encircle Russia Militarily Since 1991
President George H. W. Bush promised Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that – if the Soviets broke up the Soviet Union and dissolved the Warsaw Pact – then NATO would not move into those former Soviet countries. This assured the Soviets that NATO would not encircle Russia.
Similarly, Germany promised Gorbachev that NATO would not expand “one inch to the east.” As Andrew Gavin Marshall explains:
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 prompted the negotiated withdrawal of the Soviet Union from Eastern Europe. The ‘old order’ of Europe was at an end, and a new one “needed to be established quickly,” noted Mary Elise Sarotte in the New York Times. This ‘new order’ was to begin with “the rapid reunification of Germany.” Negotiations took place in 1990 between Soviet president Gorbachev, German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, and President Bush’s Secretary of State, James A. Baker 3rd. The negotiations sought to have the Soviets remove their 380,000 troops from East Germany. In return, both James Baker and Helmut Kohl promised Gorbachev that the Western military alliance of NATO would not expand eastwards. West Germany’s foreign minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, promised Gorbachev that, ” NATO will not expand itself to the East.” Gorbachev agreed, though asked – and did not receive – the promise in writing, remaining a “gentlemen’s agreement.”
But Bill Clinton broke America’s promise, and the U.S. has pursued a campaign of encircling Russia ever since:


And NATO has also broken its promise, and now largely encircles Russia:

In 1997 – as part of the strategy of encirclement – former U.S. national security advisor and high-level Obama policy advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski called for the U.S. to take Ukraine away from Russia.
Cheney Has Controlled U.S. Policy Towards Russia with a Strategy of Global Domination For Decades … And Continues to Do So Today
The U.S. has also long exaggerated the “Russian menace” in order to justify its military spending and expansion.
For example, Dick Cheney made false claims exaggerating the threat posed by Russia’s weapons in the 1970s to ramp up cold war fears and justify huge increases in military spending.
Subsequent instances of fear-mongering by Cheney and his subordinates include:
- New York Times and Wikipedia, 1992: “Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere .… We do not dismiss the risks to stability in Europe from a nationalist backlash in Russia or efforts to reincorporate into Russia the newly independent republics of Ukraine, Belarus, and possibly others.”
- Toledo Blade, 2006: “Vice President Dick Cheney accused Russia of pursuing antidemocratic policies and using its vast energy supplies to blackmail neighboring countries”
- Wall Street Journal, 2008: “The vice president … accused Russia of seeking to reinvent the old Soviet Union’s sphere of influence, and beat back the advance of democracy in Eastern Europe …. ‘Let us make clear that the enlargement of NATO will continue as and where the allies decide,” Mr. Cheney said. ‘Allies agreed that those nations will be NATO members, and the time to begin their membership action plans has come.’ “
- Telegraph, 2008: “We believe in the right of men and women to live without the threat of tyranny, economic blackmail or military invasion or intimidation …. Ukrainians have a right to choose whether they wish to join NATO, and NATO has a right to invite Ukraine to join the alliance when we believe they are ready and that the time is right”
Todd E. Pierce – Major (ret.) U.S. Army Judge Advocate General – notes in a must-read article that “Cheneyism” has driven U.S. policy towards Russia for decades:
Dick Cheney’s ideology of U.S. global domination has become an enduring American governing principle regardless of who is sitting in the Oval Office, a reality reflected in the recent Ukrainian coup ….
The final form of this ideology took shape in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union when the world was then to be subjected to eternal U.S. military dominance, as revealed in the leaked “Draft Defense Planning Guidance” (DPG) devised by Cheney’s subordinates when he was Defense Secretary under President George H.W. Bush.
Since then, Cheney has been so successful in propagating this ideology of permanent U.S. domination abroad and rule by a “unitary executive” at home that it has now survived multiple changes of U.S. presidents largely intact. It is so much attributable to Dick Cheney that it merits his name: Cheneyism.
As unprecedented as Cheneyism may be – not even history’s most power-mad conquerors ever envisioned anything like “full-spectrum dominance” – President Obama has cemented Cheney’s ideological legacy by continuing his unilateralism and even expanding it ….
Cheney’s ideology combines militarism under a state of permanent war with an un-American, anti-constitutional authoritarianism. It also embraces an aggressiveness toward past, present and possibly future adversaries, especially Russia.
Robert Gates, who was CIA director in 1991, has written in his memoir Duty that with the collapse of the U.S.S.R., Cheney “wanted to see the dismantlement not only of the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire but of Russia itself,” so “it could never again be a threat to the rest of the world.”
Little wonder that Russian President Vladimir Putin concluded that denying Russian access to Crimean ports via the coup in Ukraine was just one step in a larger U.S. plan to deny Russia a means of naval defense, just as he might have seen the Kosovo War in the late 1990s as a move against a Russian ally.
***
There is virtually no deviation in the United States from the core of Cheney’s ideology. That is, the unrelenting pursuit of total U.S. global military domination as outlined in the Defense Planning Guidance.
This February’s successful subversion of Ukraine’s democratically elected government by Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland is merely the latest example of U.S. policies first conceived and promoted by Cheney and like-minded ideologists, including Nuland’s husband, renowned neocon Robert Kagan, a co-founder of the Project for the New American Century.
If there was any doubt about the continuation of Cheneyism under Obama, the activities of Nuland – a Bush-43 holdover who was promoted by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and then Secretary of State John Kerry – shows there was no real break in foreign policy with the change of administrations in 2009.
As revealed by Nuland, there has not been a Russian policy “reset” by the U.S.; it was a mere subterfuge. And as Putin is learning, any objection to U.S. strategic expansionism is treated as “terrorism” or “aggression” and becomes a pretext for U.S. diplomatic, economic and military suppression of the “threat.”
In 1991, as conceived by Cheney and other Pentagon ideologues, such as Paul Wolfowitz and David Addington, this strategy of constantly violating other nations’ sovereignty has been waged both by military and political means ….
***
For Cheney, it was as if he saw the Cold War as having been a winner-take-all contest for global domination. When the U.S. “won,” the countries of the world were to submit to global U.S. domination. As stated in Harper’s Magazine, the United States would move from “countering Soviet attempts at dominance to ensuring its own dominance.”
***
Clinton preserved the general outlines of the force structure and strategy that had been worked out under Cheney and Wolfowitz. Cheney’s ideology of permanent U.S. dominance achieved its purest form under President George W. Bush, with Cheney as his influential Vice President. But Cheneyism also has maintained a strong foothold in the five years of the Obama administration.
***
Cheney’s geopolitical ideas have become the consensus of both Republicans and Democrats and have assumed a permanent place in “mainstream” American political thought and governance under Obama.
***
For a foreign government to anticipate how the U.S. will act, their analysts need to understand Cheneyism as a controlling ideology in U.S. policy, just as American intelligence analysts were steeped in theories of Marxism and Stalinism during the Cold War. U.S. citizens should understand the tenets of Cheneyism, too, since this arrogant ideology has the potential
for disastrous consequences.
***
Indeed, there is a German precedent for Cheney’s ideology that is not Nazism. Following the failure of the Imperial German Army in World War I, philosophical militarists such as Ernst Junger and authoritarian legal philosophers like Carl Schmitt came together in the “Conservative Revolutionary Movement.”
Celebrating war and authoritarianism, they believed that Germany was the “exceptional” nation of Europe, deserving of military expansion in both eastern and western Europe. The German Conservative Revolutionaries didn’t all become Nazis, but they created a hospitable culture for them. With hindsight, they could have been called proto-Cheneyites.
Not only are Cheney and Neocons back … they never actually left.
The neoconservatives planned campaigns of destabilization all over the world 20 years ago, and Obama is implementing the same plans today.
The Bottom Line: Putin’s No Angel … But Americans Need to Gain a Little Perspective
Putin is no angel, and Stalin really was a murderous tyrant.
But Americans also need to understand that the U.S. and NATO have been seeking domination even before WWII ended.
Dick Cheney has dominated U.S. policy towards Russia for decades, and Obama is following Cheney’s playbook.
America needs to gain a little perspective.
See this for other interesting and little-known facts about Russia.
- advertisements -



It is not our fight until Russia invades and makes it our fight.
OUR USA SIGNED THE 1994 BUDAPEST MEMORANDUM.
That means YOU GEORGIE. YOU.
YOU agreed to honor and protect Ukrainian independence in return for their giving up of a HUGE Nuclear ICBM force.
GEORGE, YOU AND I are on the hook. We sleep better knowing that fewer nukes are in the world...but Ukraine now needs us to honor our commitment from 1994.
YOU and I George! It is our responsibility. It is our duty.
Dear novictim,
Fuck the Budapest Memorandum. I didn't sign it. Someone else did. Neither did my kids for that matter. Change - it's the one constant in the universe.
So - in light of this I'm tearing up the contract with a disclaimer:
Europe grow up (and the middle east too). Get rid of your politicians and bankers and you'll have less conflict. Make fun of your neighbors but quit killing them. Theya re also your cusomters and killing your customers is bad for business.
As for us North Americans we are going back to building cars and televisions. However, we are keeping our guns. Our TV's and cars are for sale. You can have our guns when you pry them from our cold dead bloody fingers. And you are always welcome to visit. We take cash, credit (on approval) and gold.
Peace.
;-)
I believe what he is saying is, treaties (and the like) are agreements (a form of law) relegating the conduct between nations. The interesting question in all this is, if nations are not subject to their own voluntary agreements (laws & treaties) why are we subject to their laws, that is to say us, the commoners?
"why are we subject to their laws, that is to say us, the commoners?"
How many attack helicopters, nuclear weapons, aircraft carriers, tanks, cruise missles, smart bombs, etc. does the average commoner have in their personal possession?
I do not want these guys knocking on my door (which is the only reason I pay my taxes every year).
"How many attack helicopters, nuclear weapons, aircraft carriers, tanks, cruise missles, smart bombs, etc. does the average commoner have in their personal possession?"
Not enough...just yet ;-)
Whoa. Can of worms.
Lot's of important terms here like "nations" "laws" "treaties" "agreements" and "voluntary".
This raises a lot of questions about the nature of "representational" democracy (ie: the nature of our particulair state) it's realtionship to the individual what law is and is not and whether or not any of this is indeed "voluntary" because it appears even this term means different things to different people.... sort of like "is".
I would start by asking if in fact a treaty is even really "law" as the word was originally inteneded?
As for "commoners" and the "law" we have always had the choice. Law prevents us from doing nothing. It penalizes but does not prevent but I think I'm getting off topic.... too much wine again tonight.
I guess the question is: is this a law or is it a contract? The law enforces contracts but a contract is not necesarrily a law. They are related but different. I would say a treaty is not truly a law in its literal sense - it is a contract. Contracts are by and large temporary and in general serve to benefit each party equally or to some degree so. Some - depending on the terms are corrupt. Like this one for example - it attempts to include innocent by standers by its very nature and therefor is essentially corrupt because it does so without their consent. Of course people might respond by saying "But Jreb - how the hell would government conduct their business if they didn't write treaties?" to which I would respond "Well - just what should a governments business be?" That's an even bigger discussion and its late.
At any rate a corrupt contract that includes unwilling participants is really not a contract at all but more of a scam perpetrated on its victims. It should therefore be terminated. Last time I looked - in order to be subject to a contract I had to sign it. I didin't. Neither did you (I'm assuming but pretty safe assumption). Therefor they can take this contract and stick it where the sun don't shine. No one - including my government - has the right to bind me to a contract with a foreign government I don't agree to.
I know I'm waxing philisophic here (the difference between the way the world is and the way it ought to be) but you get my gist. I get tired of small men with lots of money and tiny members playing "God" with the lives of the rest of the planet.
If there was any kind of cosmic justice they would all drop dead together of heart failure simultaneously.
Oh to dream....
You got my point...lol.
Yep.
me 2.
And it's the "acceptance" voluntarily or not (mostly not) that should be pondered, no?
Are you saying that if the USA does not abide by its international treaties and agreements, then all laws are put in jeopardy of arbitrary application or nullification?
For instance, if Ukraine is invaded and the USA and European signers of the Budapest Memorandum fail to aid Ukraine then all international and domestic laws can be ignored at will as the greatest laws of security are the bedrock of civil society and international community.
Interesting. I think I'll rob my bank tomorrow...after I shoot my neighbors dog.
I'm saying, law & treaties are a sop for the ignorant masses and a joke told among elites and oligarchs at dinner parties because only they understand the humor of the punchline. If the ones who make laws & treaties never intended to abide by them in the first place or the ulterior motive of their creation is only seen later, who has been made to look the greater fool?
Shall we run through the list of "fake" or broken laws & treaties commited by governments world-wide, its a very long list you know, so I'll just touch on a few.
Stalin & Hitler had "laws" and they had "treaties" did they not? At the end of the day, millions were dead, so to whose purpose did they serve? The US government had "laws & treaties" with Indian nations didn't they, one right after another in fact and again, to what purpose in the end? Or ObamaCare or fugitive slave laws, just to bring it full circle domestically...lol...and by what logical extension of "law" do we not issue our own letters of marque?
What you want is order, a plan, a script to be slavishly followed by the masses, not anything recognized as genuine law or justice even if the planned order is hideous and criminal.
"You know what I noticed? Nobody panics when things go "according to plan." Even if the plan is horrifying. If tomorrow I tell the press that, like, a gang banger will get shot...or a truckload of soldiers will be blowing up...nobody panics. Because it's all part of the plan. But when I say that one little old mayor will die...well, then, everyone loses their minds."...true, isn't it?
And if you rob that bank just realize, you're NOT stealing from people (they're insured) you're stealing from a banker and they employ men with guns that intend to kill you just like your neighbor who's dog you just shot ;-)
+100, nm.
Better make sure you're wearing your uniform when you do it or you'll probably go to jail for a long, long time.
WW II. White Christians killed each other by the tens of millions. They destroyed vast treasures too. In that era, satan was in his glory.
A few may gain depth with this perspective; http://kevinmacdonaldespanol.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/americas-unpardonable-crime/
White Christians are damned good at killin' shit.
I think God makes them do it to keep in practice for when they go toe to toe Satan.
Of course, it's damned hard to recognize Satan, since he looks different to everybody.
'
'
'
The Russians appear blameless in this article.
Sorry, but they grabbed and annexed a whole chunk of Europe for 60 years. And they only let it go when their system collapsed from within.
And now they're at it again.
Do not forget this.
•?•
V-V
Ever heard of Teheran and Yalta Conferences, SweetDoug? It was a travesty of justice on the part of Roosevelt to sell the whole Eastern Europe to Stalin but this is exactly what happened. To Churchill's credit -- at least he tried to prevent it.
And the Alma-Ata protocol...in which Russia clearly accepted Ukraine as a sovereign state along with many others?
Piffel...I hold in my hand a piece of paper, signed by...lol.
The Russians were (rightfully) more than a bit paranoid after Napoleon, The Crimean War, The Russo-Japanese War, The Nohoman Incident, WWII, WWII......
You'd want a buffer too if you'd been invaded and lost millions each time.
What is ALSO omitted from US history books is that AMERICAN troops were on Russian soil, fighting Russians in 1917-19. Russians have never been on US soil.
During WWII, Iran had been split 'administratively' between Russia and the US. The US threatened the Russians with nukes to force them to leave, while the US maintained control through the Shah after overthrowing the elected government.
The US - last invaded by a neighboring state in 1812 - has little to directly fear yet we spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined. We have bases all over the world - in places where the locals have no need for US 'defense' and in places where the US has no significant interest.
.
for SweetDoug. It's more accurate to observe that the Soviets occupied and insured that they had the deciding influence in, a series of countries that had provided significant combat forces to aid and abet Germany in invading their country, and in murdering and destroying on a huge scale behind the front lines. These were combat victories in the field. not "grabs". The list of countries that have ever given back anything they gained on the battlefiield in a desperate fight for their own survival is even shorter than the list of Italian war victories. Stalin wanted Germany prostrate, and Poland for a buffer state for the best of all possible reasons; recent bitter experience in the real world.
You're a moron.
You understand the "why" of history but absolutely nothing about the "how" of the present. I can't stand people like you. You will say anything to justify any action you believe is right because your side is doing it. You can justify anything with a bit of history buddy boy. To sacrifice the lives of tens, hundreds, thousands or even millions is justified to you because you "have a side" and "history" backs you up. How the hell do people like you even sleep at night?
NATO stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organization; I would observe that LIthuainia and the Ukraine are rather a long ways from the "North Atlantic". It's important to have a balance of power in the world; and two power centers that can be compared to each other; and compete for allegiance. The one power global domination that the USA has pursued single-mindedly since WW11 is very bad for the citizens of the world; and for the lack of restraint on the local madmen in Washington which it implies. This is the main reason I'm "Rootin for Putin". The rest of the reason is that un-like George Washington, I've made a serious and detailed study of the subject of US-Soviet relations and policies and decisions and I actually know what has gone on. This cannot be summed up in a few buzz words; you'll have to study a few books to begin to get the idea. The most outstanding and remarkable characteristic of this relationship is the consistent and delusional paranoia exhibited by the US; which often has a violent and militaristic bent. The simple fact is that the Soviets never had any ambitions in the new world and only responded as necessary to maintain a balance of power with the US as they pushed the power balance relentlessly and recklessly during the entire cold war. The missiles in Cuba were a response to missiles in Turkey; they were merely maintaining a balance of power. Never at any time did they have any idea of attacking the US; why would they? But out history is full of lunatics like Curtis LeMay who were chafing at the curb reins looking for an opportunity to execute a "first strike" against the Soviets. Amazingly, instead of being cashiered, or retired to a mental rest home; he was listened to in Washington. This is a very crazy, very ignorant, and very dangerous country. It would have been better for everyone if we had lost the revolutionary war. Which, of course, was fought for the wealth and privelege of a class of wealthy real-estate speculators. Naturally, suitable propaganda about "freedom" etc. etc. was generated for the public.
It's interesting to read posts like this. A claim to knowledge with little wisdom.
Perhaps the problem is power in general? Which leads me to wonder why anyone would root for either side? Why favor one tyrant over another?
I guess I'm old fashioned. I'm rooting for justice, the truth and humanity. Freedom in general for everyone. Russians and Americans included. Fuck Putin. Fuck Washington and fuck the IMF. (Gee - that feels better).
But hey - we haven't had a mass murder of human beings on the level of miilions for quite a while so by all means - let's stoke the fire of conflict with the rhetoric of "history" and "sides".
Good for you!
The globalist PTB serve no nation and do not want nations.
Russia and China are useful to help destroy the west (if the USA goes so to do the little pip squeaks Aust, NZ, etc -then again we're socialist and our labour politcians openly worship Mao and Gorbachev so not sure why we bother with the 5 eyes alliance except that its logical in TPTB strategy).
Anyway since all wars are globalist wars it worth being cynical of any "side". This has been years, decades if not longer in the making. We know cretins like Kissenger and Maurice Strong serve higher masters and have spent many years meeting with key Russians and Chinese power brokers...the UN is communist and entwined with the same powers that set everything else up from Rhodes to CFR to BIS to IMF; this is a long slow incestuos chess match that uses double-propoganda like double-agents.
Now that the USA has been hollowed out and drowned in false debt, its the perfect time to deal the final blows. Obama is a groomed pin head perfect for the set up, he appeals to the metrosexual tv obsessed moochers and looks evil to the more astute thinkers. Putin's murky history and cronism is an ignored shadow while he's given the strings of 'strength' to pull and mechanism for soaring popularity.
This is a grand set up for a global revolution, the western nations (us normal people) are going to be fucked. Though its likely Germany (i.e. TPTB not the peeps) is playing its way into a good position when the global revolution fully transpires.
The 'Anglo-American' alliance is not us; they have used us and are tired of us; its a bunch of globalist cretins wanting to destroy us for control and power by any means. They act in a way that makes the Gorgia Guidestones seem extremely relevant and prophetic....'half a billion people in harmony with nature' -there is no level to which these drug running murderous psycho's will not stupe to - the rest is smoke and mirrors, death and suffering, all for and at their pleasure.
This is a good point Kermy. While one cannot help but put the lion's share of the blame on the US for this mess because of the way they instigated a coup one cannot also deny that Putin is having a good time with it all. And using it to his advantage.
There are no "good guys" here - and there will be many, many losers if it continues to escalate.
But then - this is likely the plan. Why is it so hard to believe - in a situation where communists fight with fascists - that both are working for the same people?
I disagree; the "good guy" is the one whose ancestral capital and regional province is under attack by armed provacateurs from a foreign empire. Vladimir Putin.
I have to go with SAT 800. If Russia instigated it so that China took out out Washington DC I would be marching that way immediatly after the party and i sober up. But I'd be headed that way just to clear the city out so we could get something better in place.
I agree. The problem is this is not the case and Putin is still a KGB scum bag. This whole situation is none of our business beyond the fact that memebers of our governments have helped to stir the pot and pissed him off. Just because a tyrant has been poked by another tyrant doesn't suddenly make him some sort of hero. The appropriate repsonse would be for citizens throughout the west to start Telling their governments how they will deescalate the problem which we helped to create - to spank them properly on their idiotic bottoms and to leave Ukraine and Russia to their own stupidity. You can't fix these people any more than you can fix Sunni's and Shiites (fuck did I spell that right?) and for the same reasons. Hard for me to wave the banner for these people in any way whatsoever other than beyond saying "Sorry our leaders are such jack asses - we're sticking them back in their corners for the duration. And by the way have fun killing each other. Oh - And fuck the IMF." I think I said that before though.
Point is there are no "heroes" here. Just lots of bad situations, assholes and vicitims.
Jreb What name do I use when I write you in for pres?
“Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.”
Emerson
Please please PLEASE... I'm so sick of liars, and truthers. When will it get old, wither and die?
Carthagem delenda est...applies to USA's vision of red Russia since 1945 and Potsdam confontration, where Truman was traumatized by Stalin's quip : The Vatican how many divisions?
Remember Truman at Potsdam felt very alone, as Churchill had been replaced by Atlee who had no experience, alike Truman, of Stalin. He was more of an isolationist only interested in building a welfare state economy in UK.
Not surprising that on his return to DC he authorised Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Truman was no Roosevelt, he had no geo political vision and his knowledge of outside world could be summarised in Orson Welles famous program "The Martians are coming ". It was the sort of thing Truman could well believe.
He acted accordingly, as Stalin to him was a Martian from Carthage; a barbarian on rampage under his bed.
On a personal note I once personally met Truman. He held me in his arms. I was one years old.
He was in Texas for some military thing, and both my parents were in the Air Farce.
That clearly makes you the real expert on this thread of posts!
Could you please "school" us on the hetergeneous nature of US local, state, and Federal politics during the time of Truman's political career? You realize America is/was a country of immigrants.
How about delving into Truman's Great War experience? I'm sure there are meaningful observations there.
You have completely missed the mark. I sometimes wonder if you are a serious student of anything of note.
lol, I was being tongue in cheek about Welles and the Martians. I'm sorry I ruffled your canuke feathers on Truman. I know that Truman never met Sitting Bull nor Geronimo's skull. (The greatest living original AMerican).
As for Potsdam I feel that is relevant and not derogatory in any trivial or "taking the mickey" sense about good ole Harry.
I know Truman like Patton shot bullets at German big Berthas during WW1, a bit like david against goliath; all the while the red baron knocked the Brits and french out of the skies with his Triplane Fokker.
The battle cry of British pilots in WWI: "Die, Fokker, die!"
http://books.google.com/books/about/Sitting_Bull.html?id=QvrzJJcUNsUC
Sitting Bull Champion of the Sioux by Stanley Vestal
Do you think these stories are true?
http://www.ww2incolor.com/forum/showthread.php/8811-A-Successful-Japanese-Atomic-Bomb-Test
http://www.reformation.org/atlanta-constitution.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_nuclear_weapon_program
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/hiroshima_hoax_japans_wllingne.html
Why wouldn't Japan surrender when Germany surrendered?
Why didn't Japan surrender after any of their key losses?
Why was Nagasaki choosen and what marked ground zero? (I'm using the pre-911 definition of ground zero here.)
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-bombing-of-nagasaki-august-9-1945-the-u...
Tv Theme Flipper
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azEOeTX1LqM (0:53)
An excellent article like this one ends up confirming that it is quite realistic to be afraid of another insane world war. In my opinion, most ordinary people are not able to comprehend, and certainly were not consulted, when decisions like those to drop a couple of atomic bombs on Japan were made, which were certainly made in the political context that this article above reviewed.
The ruling classes that dominate civilization ARE able to make decisions to burn to death hundreds of thousands of people, including large numbers of women and children, in order to advance their political agenda. Apart from attempting to understand how and why that happens, I see no practical ways to prevent it. America is not merely going to "shoot itself in the foot" with weapons of mass destruction, because those are trillions of times more powerful than any gun ever was during previous human history.
The excellent articles from George Washington surely assist with the intellectual efforts to understand how and why our civilization operates in criminally insane ways. However, appears to be nothing political practical which can be done to stop the people who were the best at being dishonest, and backing that up with violence, from continuing to control civilization to behave in ways which have an ultimately suicidal direction.
E.g., regarding Dick Cheney's leading role in those processes presented in this article above, there is no reasonable doubt that he was necessary to enable the events on 9/11/2001 to happen. Hence, I repeat, that most ordinary people have a hard time comprehending the minds of people who can mass murder thousands of other innocent human beings, in order to advance their political agenda. Although I struggle to try to understand how and why that happens, I continue to discover that the more I learn, the worse it gets, that: THE PEOPLE WHO ASSERT THAT THEY ARE "DEFENDING" US TEND TO ACTUALLY BE OUR WORST ENEMIES, while the "war on terror" is currently the most spectacular symbol of that!
In my view, the controlled opposition groups arraigned "against" that social situation tend to never get remotely close to finding their ways through the maze of paradoxical developments, which were due to the long history of success in warfare being based on deceits. The final results of successful warfare being waged through deceits are that civilization has become criminally insane on a scale that can no longer be comprehended.
Somewhere at the core of that labyrinth is the fact that THERE ARE CHRONIC POLITICAL PROBLEMS INHERENT IN THE NATURE OF LIFE. However, the ways that those problems were resolved through warfare, whose success was based on deceits, which then enabled a political economy based on frauds to be built on top of that, has resulted in the civilization we live in today, which is controlled by the best organized gangs of criminals, who were the best at being dishonest, and backing up that with violence, which had enabled them to capture control over governments.
At present, our current civilization is being directed by international bankers, who are attempting to consolidate their global hegemony by being able to totally dominate an integrated system of enforced frauds, primarily by them being able to make the global public "money" supply out of nothing as debts, while everyone else is forced to accept living within that fundamentally fraudulent financial accounting system, directed by the banksters, who benefit from the positive feedbacks from them being able to do that. There has already been enough vicious spirals of success in that agenda for them to already control the USA and other NATO countries.
"THEY" tend to regard the degree of national control over the Russian, and Chinese, central banks as an obstacle to the international banksters consolidating their global hegemony over the monetary system, which would thus control natural resources, through globalized systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence. "THEY" have already been systematically wiping out those few smaller countries whose governments did not have central banks, or were not already in deep debt slavery to the international banksters, and therefore, already under their control. THE INTERNATIONAL BANKSTERS HAVE BEEN TOO SUCCESSFUL, FOR TOO LONG.
"THEY" plan on forcing Russia and China to be changed in ways whereby they lose national control over their central banks, by becoming more subservient and integrated into the international banksters' globalized systems of enforced frauds. "THEY" are able and willing to risk world war, that could result in the use of weapons of mass destruction going out of control, in order to attempt to advance their agenda. "THEY" already almost totally dominate the USA and other NATO countries. "THEY" already dominate the school systems, and mass media, in those countries, so that the vast majority of people do not have a clue about who "THEY" are and what "THEY" are doing. Furthermore, the vast majority of people in North America, along with varying degrees throughout all other countries belonging to NATO, have been successfully conditioned to feel that they do not want to understand how the monetary and taxation systems really work, which are as enforced frauds, which drive social polarization and destruction of the natural world.
The chronic political problems which are inherent in the nature of life have become hyper-complicated entangled Gordian Knots, of paradoxically looping levels of lies, which control almost everything, due to the long history of successful warfare being based on deceits, and then, successful finance being based on frauds. We are now ALL trapped inside increasingly vicious spirals of combined money/murder systems which are operating on the basis of a history which developed those to be done through the maximum possible deceits and frauds.
Therefore, OF COURSE, there was a "Secret Back Story to Russia and Ukraine that Americans Never Learned In School," and are NOT being told by the American mass media. Rather, on every level, throughout American society, and NATO countries generally, huge lies about almost everything dominate almost everything, and that includes throughout almost all of the controlled opposition groups, as well as the established ruling classes.
The profound paradox is that human warfare was the way that chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life were resolved, BUT, that history has resulted in a civilization which is almost totally dominated by deceits, backed by destruction, which have been amplified to astronomical sizes of runaway criminal insanities.
"Human warfare was the way that chronic political problems inherent in the nature of life were resolved."
Are you really, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, sure about this statement?
Just to play the devil's advocate, who writes history, who has played both sides in these "inherent" wars? Don't want to force you down the rabbit hole, but you might want to take a little peak, but keep writing, my friend. The pen is mightier than the sword. That is the little secret they really don't you want to know, or exploit, or change the reality they have imposed.
Wow. Fabulous writing. +100. May I humbly offer up some hope? The majority of humans are not truely evil. A fair number may be dominated by a reptilIan brain stem to help with survival perhaps, but most of us want to be left alone. And when it comes to fighting and killing, most have a tough time with that as well.
We are the many. They are the few. Most of us are not awake but that is changing quickly. Look at this site. You know it's a powerful site by the number of shills that work here. And they are getting better. But once woken up, we can sniff out the bullshit.
I'm telling you- we are all connected. Just through waking up and conscious rejection of their system of debt, corruption and vices will put us all on a path of throwing off the shackles.
My journey began when discovering 9/11 was an inside job and has now taken a turn when I found out that this evil force has always been with us, preying on our good nature. We have it within us to fight them on a more spiritual level. Don't forget that intent and thought is the most powerful tool. This is why we are here, addicted to zero hedge, getting our fix of truth and discovery.
Re-waking up.
This is true. After two years of showing her indisputable facts, my wife has finally woken up. And when she woke up, boy howdy! She's pissed off! That's what we can expect to see. The most deluded sheep, when they wake up its a major event cause they trusted their leaders implicitly, much more so than us, who suspected all along they were demons.
When a true sheeple wakes up, they want to see hangings.
When a true sheeple wakes up, they want to see hangings.
Change see to do and we have some change we can believe in.
Yeah, Carpenter1, like a blade of grass growing through a layer of concrete or asphalt: "And when she woke up, boy howdy! She's pissed off! "
Russia is surrounded. Add China to the list of bases in real terms. That is a dry analysis. Another one would be to ask if the risk the reward?
Mankind has the Internet, a giant mirror. We cannot run away or use what was expediant in the past which always ends in tears for all anyways. Problem solving requires new tools which requires innovation.
I tgink that is the hardest part for all of us as we accelerate in evolution ever faster, modifying tools be them policy or invention when one class is comfy and with little short term incentive. Young and old need to pick up the phone and get busy.
Yeah, we can meet our needs by talking on the phone. Action Jackson!