This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Is It Time To Prepare For War?
Submitted by Chris Martenson via PeakProsperity.com,
This report was initially released to PeakProsperity.com's paid subscribers earlier this week. Given the significance of the subject matter and the number of request from our enrolled members to share it more widely, we're making it available to all readers here.
For our paying subscribers, who have already read this, please see the new Part 2 companion to this report: How To Prepare For War.
From my perspective, the made-for-public Western news copy regarding Ukraine and Russia is childishly slanted and one-sided. The level of so-called aggression by Russia cannot even remotely be compared to the United States' naked aggression against Iraq – a country that had not attacked the US, threatened the US, or had any WMD program (which even if it did, would still have not constituted a legitimate reason for invasion by another nation under existing international law.)
So there’s a heavy dose of “Do as we say, not as we do” when it comes to US pronouncements of ‘unacceptable aggression’ on the part of Russia. Predictably, Russia is less than pleased -- as in the way they would be if routinely lectured in the press by Captain Hazelwood on the importance of boating safety.
Despite Western claims, it is highly unlikely Russia has yet moved heavy equipment and troop concentrations across the Ukraine border -- because if they had, you’d for sure have seen pictures. Endless pictures of those troops and equipment on TV, morning, noon and night. You haven’t seen any pictures, so none likely exist, which means no Russian army troops or military armaments are yet in Ukraine.
But that has not stopped the US and NATO from accusing Russia of exactly those transgressions in nearly every single announcement and press release.
The latest hawkish salvo by General Breedlove was so over-the-top that Germany expressed public alarm:
Breedlove's Bellicosity: Berlin Alarmed by Aggressive NATO Stance on Ukraine
Mar 6, 2015
It was quiet in eastern Ukraine last Wednesday. Indeed, it was another quiet day in an extended stretch of relative calm. The battles between the Ukrainian army and the pro-Russian separatists had largely stopped and heavy weaponry was being withdrawn. The Minsk cease-fire wasn't holding perfectly, but it was holding.
On that same day, General Philip Breedlove, the top NATO commander in Europe, stepped before the press in Washington. Putin, the 59-year-old said, had once again "upped the ante" in eastern Ukraine -- with "well over a thousand combat vehicles, Russian combat forces, some of their most sophisticated air defense, battalions of artillery" having been sent to the Donbass.
"What is clear," Breedlove said, "is that right now, it is not getting better. It is getting worse every day."
German leaders in Berlin were stunned. They didn't understand what Breedlove was talking about. And it wasn't the first time. Once again, the German government, supported by intelligence gathered by the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany's foreign intelligence agency, did not share the view of NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR).
The pattern has become a familiar one. For months, Breedlove has been commenting on Russian activities in eastern Ukraine, speaking of troop advances on the border, the amassing of munitions and alleged columns of Russian tanks. Over and over again, Breedlove's numbers have been significantly higher than those in the possession of America's NATO allies in Europe. As such, he is playing directly into the hands of the hardliners in the US Congress and in NATO.
The German government is alarmed. Are the Americans trying to thwart European efforts at mediation led by Chancellor Angela Merkel? Sources in the Chancellery have referred to Breedlove's comments as "dangerous propaganda." Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier even found it necessary recently to bring up Breedlove's comments with NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg.
(Source)
Think about how truly and utterly bizarre this all is. It is literally not possible to hide “well over a thousand” combat vehicles from air and satellite surveillance, and everybody who knows anything at all knows this. How can Breedlove make such outlandish claims and expect anybody to think he’s anything other than daft?
What are reasonable intelligence analysts and diplomats in Germany, or anywhere for that matter, to make of any of this?
One uncomfortable pattern that fits is that the US has gotten used to lying overtly to get its way. All reasonable analysts who read the UNSCOM report on Iraq’s defunct WMD program back in 2002 (as I did) knew that Iraq did not have any such program as claimed by Colin Powell, Rumsfeld, Perle, Feith and the rest of the unbalanced individuals who rushed the world to a war of choice. The spin doctors of today will say that “bad intelligence” was to blame, but that too is a lie.
There was no bad intelligence, only bad people who made up false ‘intelligence’ and then foisted it upon the world. And it’s happening again.
To my mind, there’s no other way to interpret Breedlove’s comments; they are just too far outside of the bounds of what is a possible misinterpretation of data. Again, ‘more than a thousand’ pieces of heavy armor cannot be hidden from satellites, especially not in the open, flat country that is eastern Ukraine.
From a bit further in the Der Spiegel article we have this:
The experts contradicted Breedlove's view in almost every respect. There weren't 40,000 soldiers on the border, they believed, rather there were much less than 30,000 and perhaps even fewer than 20,000. Furthermore, most of the military equipment had not been brought to the border for a possible invasion, but had already been there prior to the beginning of the conflict. Furthermore, there was no evidence of logistical preparation for an invasion, such as a field headquarters.
Breedlove, though, repeatedly made inexact, contradictory or even flat-out inaccurate statements. On Nov. 18, 2014, he told the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that there were "regular Russian army units in eastern Ukraine." One day later, he told the website of the German newsmagazine Stern that they weren't fighting units, but "mostly trainers and advisors."
He initially said there were "between 250 and 300" of them, and then "between 300 and 500." For a time, NATO was even saying there were 1,000 of them.
A short word for the phrase “flat out inaccurate statements” is lie. We might as well get used to calling things by their correct terms, it makes things easier to follow and understand.
The reason I bring all this up is because the bellicosity of a small band of war hawks in the US seem to be driving policy for the entire nation. Back in 2002, it was a very small group operating out of the Office of Special Plans from a small corner of the pentagon under the direction of Donald Rumsfeld to generate the false intelligence used to ‘justify’ a truly unnecessary and ill-advised war.
This time it seems to be Vitoria Nuland, General Breedlove, and the usual assemblage of war hawks in the Senate and Congress.
But the risk cannot be denied. 2002 taught us all that the momentum of war can be initiated by obvious lies and a few dedicated people. That same risk is afoot today.
Will it come to pass? For the people of Ukraine it already has. For the people of Syria and Iraq, it already has.
The question is, will this spill over into a wider conflict that involves Europe and the US against Russia and whoever sides with Russia (*cough*cough* I’m looking at you, China).
As I predicted in the fall of 2014, things would continue to escalate before they deescalate. The moves are coming fast and furious now. The US has moved heavy armor into the region, right on Russia’s border:
US sends heavy armour to Baltic states to 'deter' Russia
Mar 9, 2015
Riga (AFP) - The United States on Monday delivered more than 100 pieces of military equipment to vulnerable NATO-allied Baltic states in a move designed to provide them with the ability to deter potential Russian threats.
The deliveries are intended to "demonstrate resolve to President (Vladimir) Putin and Russia that collectively we can come together," US Major General John R. O'Connor told AFP as he oversaw the delivery of the equipment in the port of Riga.
The delivery included Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, Scout Humvees as well as support equipment and O'Connor said the armour would stay "for as long as required to deter Russian aggression".
The three former Soviet-ruled Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, all NATO and European Union members since 2004, have very little military hardware of their own.
(Source)
Because the Western press seems unable to understand these things from a neutral perspective, let’s imagine how the US might react if Russia were to move heavy armor into Mexico to help “deter US aggression.”
I think we all know the answer to that: the US would immediately react in a very threatened manner.
It needs to be pointed out that this is precisely the reason that NATO expansion was undertaken so aggressively back in the 1995–2005 period. The potential for military action became much greater than if the foreign affairs of individual countries were managed independently by their own governments. Now, because of the NATO treaty, Europe and the US are obligated to military action if ever and whenever a perceived threat arises against any NATO member.
Of course, the chances of starting a conflict are immeasurably better if you taunt and parade yourself as close as possible to your intended adversary:
U.S. military vehicles paraded 300 yards from the Russian border
Feb 24, 2015
MOSCOW — U.S. military combat vehicles paraded Wednesday through an Estonian city that juts into Russia, a symbolic act that highlighted the stakes for both sides amid the worst tensions between the West and Russia since the Cold War.
The armored personnel carriers and other U.S. Army vehicles that rolled through the streets of Narva, a border city separated by a narrow frontier from Russia, were a dramatic reminder of the new military confrontation in Eastern Europe.
The soldiers from the U.S. Army’s Second Cavalry Regiment were taking part in a military parade to mark Estonia’s Independence Day.
(Source)
It's obvious that there are factions within the US military establishment that are not just preparing for war with Russia, but actively provoking tensions.
Which makes today’s news out of the EU all the more concerning because it shows a degree of coordination that now spans the Atlantic, and has jumped outside of the usual NATO military alliance and into the civilian bureaucracy of the EU:
Juncker calls for EU army, says would deter Russia
Mar 9, 2015
(Reuters) - The European Union needs its own army to face up to Russia and other threats as well as restore the bloc's foreign policy standing around the world, EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker told a German newspaper on Sunday.
Arguing that NATO was not enough because not all members of the transatlantic defense alliance are in the EU, Juncker said a common EU army would also send important signals to the world.
"A joint EU army would show the world that there would never again be a war between EU countries," Juncker told the Welt am Sonntag newspaper. "Such an army would also help us to form common foreign and security policies and allow Europe to take on responsibility in the world."
German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen welcomed Juncker's proposal: "Our future as Europeans will at some point be with a European army," she told German radio.
(Source)
It's telling that Juncker trotted out his proposal and immediately a German defense minister was at the ready to lend support. This means it's a serious proposal, and has already been circulated and vetted.
While we might disagree as to whether a common military would prevent future wars between EU countries, the thing about armies is that once you have one, there’s a tendency to want to use it.
They are very expensive to just have lying about. In times past, no country would think of keeping one assembled after a war because they have a bad habit of needing something to do, and if nothing is available externally, they have been known to turn their power inwards (see: Egyptian military coup. Also: US military industrial complex).
And how has Russia reacted to all this? In an escalate-y, predicable sort of way:
Russian legislator: EU’s common army, if created, to play provocative role
MOSCOW, 9 March. /TASS/. The European Union’s common armed forces, if they are ever created, may play a provocative role, first deputy chairman of the United Russia faction in the State Duma, Frants Klintsevich, told the media on Sunday.
"In the nuclear age extra armies do not provide any additional security. But they surely can play a provocative role," Klintsevich said, adding it was regrettable that such ideas had already met with some support.
"One should presume that a European army is seen as an addendum to NATO. And in this kind of situation Western politicians are not shy to accuse Russia of some aggressiveness," Klintsevich said.
(Source)
Russia went right for the nuclear trump card, noting that conventional forces do not really have a clearly defined role when nukes are on the table. That is, Russia has said (again!) very clearly that they have nukes, might use them, and do not appreciate being constantly threatened. And yet here we are.
I mean, it was barely a week ago that a Russian military chief said this:
Russia says ready to reciprocate nuclear strike
Mar 1, 2015
A Russian military chief says the country's Strategic Missile Forces (SMF) are ready to defend the country against any possible “lightning-speed” nuclear strike.
“If we have to accomplish a task of repelling a ‘lightning-speed’ nuclear strike, this objective will be attained within a prescribed period,” Andrei Burbin, the SMF Central Command’s chief, was quoted by Russian media as saying on Saturday.
He voiced the SMF preparedness to deliver a retaliatory nuclear strike “unhesitatingly” if Russia comes under any assault.
Referring to the geographic position of Russia’s missile units, the major general said it will protect them from demolition by “any global strike,” adding that 98 percent of the SMF systems would be new in 2020.
The comments come against the backdrop of a recent boost in NATO’s military presence near Russia’s borders. In 2014, NATO forces held some 200 military exercises with the Western military block’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg promising that such maneuvers would continue.
(Source)
You’d think that with the stakes being so high that there would be obvious diplomatic efforts underway to try and defuse the situation and prevent any accidents from happening. But instead, we see the West consistently accusing Russia of aggressiveness while holding hundreds of military exercises and positioning its NATO equipment closer and closer to Russia’s borders.
Meanwhile Russia is busy saying to the world, Hey look: we still have a bunch of working nukes over here and we think you should keep that in mind.
Conclusion
I fear that I will have to issue an ALERT at some point over this entire matter. Again, an ALERT happens when I come into possession of information that causes me to personally take new or different actions.
I am seriously entertaining preparing for war, and as I’ve written before, the nature of this next war could involve everything from trade battles, to cyber attacks, to financial system assaults, a downing of the US electrical grid, to an actual shooting war -- perhaps one that escalates to a nuclear exchange.
When things are this obviously crazy, anything is possible.
It is my contention that the next shooting war will change the geopolitical landscape permanently and irrevocably for the US and the US dollar’s reserve currency status. Much of the weight carried by the US is because of its dominant military. But a military is only as powerful as its ability to project force; and that requires that you either walk to the conflict via a land bridge or you ship your heavy equipment over the seas.
Light skirmishes can be accomplished via air, but nothing too serious because it’s just not possible to fly in everything you need. Tanks are heavy. So is food and fuel. Ammunition too. Moving a hundred thousand troops requires ships. Of which, clearly, the USA has many.
But ships are no longer useful in the modern world, as France rather embarrassingly proved to the US recently:
US supercarrier ‘sunk’ by French submarine in wargames
Mar 6, 2015
The French Ministry of Defence has revealed one of its attack submarines pulled of an astounding upset during recent war-games in the North Atlantic.
The Aviationist blog spotted an article on the French defence force’s website — quickly withdrawn — which told how one of their submarines, the “Saphir” tackled the might of the United States’ navy off the coast of Florida.
At the core of the surface force was the enormous aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt and its powerful strike wing of 90 combat aircraft and helicopters.
Clustered protectively about it was several advanced cruisers and destroyers, and its own guardian submarine.
In one element of the war games, the Saphir was tasked with the role of being the “bad guy”.
Its mission: To seek, locate and exterminate the US naval force.
The exact details of how it achieved this embarrassing outcome is not known.
Somehow, the French submarine must have been able to slip between the defensive sensor patchwork of patrol aircraft, helicopters, warships and submarines to line up a shot on the $13 billion monstrosity.
There she lurked as a fictitious political crisis evolved in the world above.
On the final day of the exercise, the order finally came.
Sink the Theodore Roosevelt.
This 30-year-old Saphir proceeded to do. Along with most of the escorting warships.
(Source)
Yes, a single 39-year old submarine managed to sneak into the protective ring of an entire aircraft carrier group and go through a mock firing of its entire complement of torpedoes against the entire set of targets.
Oops.
Besides the embarrassment for the US crews involved, this proves an important point: ships are no match for submarines. And there are a lot of submarines out there on both sides. Offensive anti-ship technology in the form of advanced submarine torpedoes, as well as missiles fired from land or aircraft, have advanced by enormous leaps and bounds since WWII.
The US has never faced an adversary with such technology in open warfare. But Russia and China (and even Iran) are stocked to the gills with such weapons.
By provoking Russia, the US risks exposing the fact that it cannot really project power all across the globe anymore because it cannot possibly ship things to and fro with impunity. Once that calculus changes, everything changes -- with King Dollar right at the top of the list.
Whether that comes to pass, I am finding the risk of a major conflict between NATO/EU and Russia to be high and seemingly growing higher with every passing week. Such are the times in which we live.
It leaves me asking if it’s time to begin preparing for war, which means being ready for the worst.
I truly wish that this were not how things were unfolding, but seeing General Breedlove and Victoria Nuland get away unchallenged with their blatant falsehoods is giving me a serious case of déjà vu.
We’ve been here before. And we know that the war hawks seem to get their way, for reasons that remain murky at best. Only this time they have a real, legitimate and dangerous foe in their sights.
In Part 2: How To Prepare For War, we investigate the risks associated with the most likely forms of conflict should things escalate from here: trade war, energy war, financial war, cyberwar, grid-down sabotage, shooting war and nuclear war.
While any of these developments will be grim at best, there are a surprising number of steps you can take today that will reduce your vulnerability to each off these. And in most cases, the investment of material and time will have persisting value even if (hopefully) the current global tensions de-escalate.
But as we often say, the time to prepare for crisis is in advance. Given the risks, why wouldn't you start taking at least a few precautions now?
Click here to read Part 2 of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)
»
- 87428 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
->if we see nuke war while obozo reign total end of the world.
->if we see hitlary/jeb on the joystick, then you might expect some chirugical strikes,trying to have something to remaining after the party.
How do things work then. Central banking always leads to more war, so what is different now?
Stop calling them "hardliners". That is misdirection.
Call them, as Prof. Cohen has: "The War Party"
There's the story of the launch of a Norwegian weather satellite early in the 1990s. From Russian radar it had the trajectory of an incoming Tridnet nuclear missle launch. Because there was some level of trust between the US and Russia, Yeltsin hesitated to within five minutes of launching Russia's nuclear ICBMs when it was determined that the missile was not a Trident.
Now all the trust is gone only suspiscion remains and the hope that Norway doesn't launch another weather satellite.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az4dzdS79jU
2017 The Great Chastisement : Kiev is mentioned at about 12 minutes.
what makes this truly dangerous is a disconnect between new york and london banksters and the eurozone banksters, a turf war, with china/russia on the euro side.
this is not dedollarization. this is deusaing.
Nope....this is bankster thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis playing itself out on an internaitonal scale.
When all else fails for the US we go to war.
It is NOT possible to be prepared for war that becomes an out of control exchange of weapons of mass destruction. It is nostalgic nonsense to believe that one could be prepared! ... But nevertheless, of course, I sympathize with those who continue to want to believe that the real world is not as criminally insane as it actually is!
yes sir
Falling heavens is THE ONLY WAY to obliterate the criminally insane.
Indeed RM, survival will be down to sheer luck, better to accept it and live every moment right now, because the next 20 years will be nothing like the last 20 years.
First
no down arrows, but a big moron, employee of CIA.
Does your IQ achive at least the value of your body temperature?
The contemplation of a nuclear exchange between Russia and the US is certainly not a requirement of zh commenters. It's only an elective for those of us who are not in an acute state of denial.
No one in their right mind wants a NE, and I don't think there will be one this century. The Orwellian alternative probably will turn out to be almost as bad, but less radioactive
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAH0ed6kV3I
as for the French submarine....
Not saying that's what happened off the Florida coast but either the French could have been in on it or the US Navy just let the sub win.
Just one moar thing for you lap top generals to factor in.
OR the US Navy has again demonstrated clearly how corrupted the infrastructure and armed forces of the Empire have become over the years. Having technology and vast numbers of military weapons is one thing - having uncorrupted leadership and cost-cut technology is another. Look at some of the recent disclosures of this 'rotting from within' with the lying and cheating taking place in our military academies, the hugely expensive, non-functional and severely limited warplanes we are producing (F35) and our continued dependence on naval power to project US interests in the world - all signs of an ageing empire decaying from within and becoming increasingly vulnerable to up-and-coming powers who see the weak points and are developing weapons to attack those points.
usa refuse to land and take off from french aircraft, track is "too short"...
namely Russia.
I really don't think this tired, old planet can take another world war.
"(free executive summary, enrollment required for full access)"
This article is more infomercial than substance.
The US does benefit from deteriorating relations between the EU and Russia and does everything in its power to stabilize the current cold war situation. Without the active support of the EU a full-fledged war at the new Ukraine / Donbass border is impossible. This support is and will not be available. Russia is undermining the economical viability of the Ukraine and will continue doing so. The EU / IMF financial support of Ukraine will be sufficient to keep the limited military conflict at the new border burning. Russia might support further small territorial consolidation by the separatists in the Donbass. It is therefore possible that we shall witness further ups and downs of war rethoric on both sides. Unless the EU becomes tired of the stand-off and eliminates her financial support for Kiev the conflict is here to stay for a long time. To wait for the financial collapse of Russia shall likely proof to be futile. It is similiar to QE a situation that seems to invite "can kicking". Hence we got a new permanent conflict but a big war including the use of atomic arsenal remains highly unlikely. I do not find Chris's analysis convincing.
overall you can rest comfortably knowing there won't be any nuclear war. the MIC and the looters can't make much money from it.
That might be true for our side, but you can't discount by any means an escalating factor that causes the other side to launch. And that is precisely why Russia keeps warning the US not to escalate. You can of course say that Russia is playing the nuke card, and that would be true - but what she is trying to warn everyone of is there there IS a nuke card - and eventually, it WILL be played in any significant escalation between nuclear powers.
Bet: if the military draft were reinstated tomorrow, 100% of the Chickenhawks and anti Putin types would be on the next plane to Canada to beg for citizenship-or else declare at the draft office that they cant fight becuase they have 'chronic dandruff' lol
Canada is no longer a safe haven for conscientious objectors -but for Chickenhawks, I beleive they would make an exception.
Already at least 300 American fools died in Ukraine. But before we are asked to die for Soros, we have right to know why we have die for him as well as for another Nobel peace price winner. See link below.
https://contrarianopinion.wordpress.com/2015/01/18/ukraine-no-country-fo...
As Cheney would say: "They volunteered." We can always get 300 more where they came from.
Nuclear weapons and MAD (mutually assured destruction) mean there should be no WW3.
The Oligarchs like to survive wars.
Perhaps they are just trying to get back to the good old days when the US citizens enemy was the Russians and not it's politicians and Wall Street.
There will never be large scale nuclear war because that would annihilate most of humanity. That will never happen. The only way it could would be if some of the government or military leaders of the developed nations were mentally unstable, or had a death wish.
Oh... wait...
japan did not respond to usa about hiroshima just because they didnt have nuke .... think about it.
at some point, one or another will use it, then... then.... then it's gone !
Here we have inside the Pentagon, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and all the other lesser star generals walking around in their ridiculous uniforms with fruit salad all over their chests and shoulders—working on their military plans and strategies to "defend America and democracy under God". They all pass for normal. Sane. Fully accepted by the broad public. When in fact what should happen is that the doors and windows of the Pentagon should be sealed up and the place should be declared a mental institution for acute psychotics and sociopaths. Same should happen with the NSA, CIA and FBI. The same goes for the equivalent military and security organizations in every other country. As regards the individuals that get involved in and further these organizations and their intentions, the best way I can describe them is... the lights are on but nobody's home.
re ...the Joint Chiefs of Staff and all the other lesser star generals walking around in their ridiculous uniforms with fruit salad all over their chests and shoulde
You got that right - though the "fruit salad" decorations always reminded me more of the muliticolored pages of stamps I used to have in my collection when I was about 11 years old.
I looked up somewhere what that psychotic bloviating buffoon Breedlove got his "decorations" for - more than a damn Christams tree - and apart the the one for waking up for Reveille and polishing his buttons on time, couldnt quite figure it out - but definitely NO combat.. unless you're counting nasal/anal "combat"
Same for that dope Dempsey - looks like he's due a medal for getting his diaper changed in the geriatric ward.
Yep - buffoon Breedlove & diaper Dempsey et al are just the useful fools & idiotic posturing dupes for the slimeball Neocon criminals to hide behind
Then again, any Military that wouldnt go along with the NeoCOn/Bolshevik ZIO-Plan were all fired - or had to resign under dubious circumstances.
Or murdered. Or slandered. Or NSAed
Someone is keeping score.
These cocksuckers better get their stories created and rehearsed...
Patriot demands, "How about you, fuckface? Where did you work? You look like one of them!"
Exbanker/General/Politico/Puke, "Er, Uh, I , Well, uh...."
Patriot, "Take him out back"
Fellow Patriot, "You got it"
There are more than enough of us that know the likes of these pukes. We know how they look, how they talk, how they think. We can see through the guise. We know what questions to ask. They won't be getting away anywhere inside the US.
War is certainly possible, as Putin is mentally ill person. Dangerous sociopath.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11431850/Inside...
Face facts, you will never meet this woman.
http://www.catersnews.com/uploadedimages/28032013115287713753.jpg
After all, how many Latvian women come with their own dowry...
Do you remember Putin-Merkel incident with dogs?
Putin have no empathy, he is a classic sociopath, very dangerous, mentally ill person.
Face the facts, man.
astonishing you can believe some fucking shit writing such telegraph...
you believe in god as well i guess.... turnin water in to wine, stone into gold.... 50 shade of grey as oscar_able movie...?
buy yourself a brain, weanwhile, ffs shut up.
Be patient with him, he is a pole
And to mention this neocon bitch masha gessen ... Crazy
you can check everything in other sources, try Google
Oh you mean like the US "negotiates" with Russia ? You mean the US commands and Others obey routine ?
Just how does the US "negotiate" with Germany or France or Japan or China ? The US thinks it can walk over people and nations with impunity because it is run by people with Aspergers
Leszek a.k.a freedom123 a.k.a. viedoklis_lv
The only thing worthwhile reading in the Telegraph is Ambrose Evans-Pritchard -.
Otherwise a piece of shit.
Do wish he changes his moorings before he looses relevance being attached to this nauseating pice of shit ( Telegraph)
re Is It Time To Prepare For War?
Yes - war on the USSA NeoCON/Bolshevik SCUMMM*
With scheming to kick-start WW3 - they've already declared war on humanity.
(SCUMMM* - Satanic Cabal Underwriting Mass Murder & Mayhem)
Good that the U.S. isn't in any war yet so we still can think about this question: Is It Time To Prepare For War?
Rhetorical question I presume, considering Merca has always been at war and USually in multiple wars at once.
WARS R US!
i listed days ago... 223 years in war for a total of 239 years...
usa are the problem.
The USSAN zero 1% elite are lying, psychopathic sacks of filth. If Mercans don't riot and take back their "demoKKKracy" they can definitely look forward to a lethal global dose of M.A.D.. The Uruppeans and especially the Germans will not be destroyed for a third time to save the same anglozionazi fascists that financed Uncle Adolf to fight Moscow last time around.
Either the collapsing Third World Fourth Reich gets with the program or it will be taken out by the rest of the planet.
Lying, cheating and genocide...the Mercan way of "life".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p1TOA99S88
re Time To Prepare for War?
Nope - at least, not according to the headline over at Drudge:
There's a shooter on the loose in Ferguson! OMG!!!
1. Russia must guard from a surprise nuclear attack.
2. If NATO invades Ukr. Russia is likely to issue an order to pull back those forces within a set number of hours or the missiles will fly.
Russia has a land army. The US has an air force.
Russia isn't going to bomb the US - their air force is good enough to defend Russia, but not good enough to attack the US.
Likewise the US army won't be marching on Moscow soon. The US army is good enough to keep anyone from invading the States, but not good enough to invade Russia. Last time someone tried to invade Russia, they sent an army of three million - three times the size of the US army - and got back mincemeat. No-one is going to try that again, I hope.
So what we're left with doing mischief. Sponsor a color revolution, send over some NGOs, have the press agencies spout propaganda than usual, that kind of stuff.
Perhaps the US hasn't learned yet.
Europe discovered in WWI and WW2 that wars destroy your ecomony and the debts incurred last an awful long time
US bankers made pots of money funding these wars in Europe.
This leads to two possible conclusions:
1) A war in Europe would be a good earner for US bankers
2) The US has yet to learn of the consequences of debts incurred by major wars
Wait and see how it pans out.
A war in Europe also gives the US another competitive advantage as discovered in WWII.
As manufacturing and industry are decimated in Europe the US can ship its stuff out there.
Good for US business, good for US banking ..... a few million dead , there is always collateral damage.
A shooting war with Russia will only be a sideshow in Europe. The primary battlefields will be any city in the US with a 100,000 or so former population. Wall street, the bankers, and their children will be among the collateral damage. Yes, the Russians will lose cities too, but they don't break and run so don't count on intimidating them into submission.
Batman11, considering that Iraq costed one trillion, perhaps that lesson has already been driven home. not understood, no, but that price tag is nevertheless a... benchmark
Linda Bilmes calculated $3 trillion
banksters always get paid, war is business and debt is the winner every time, banksters win every war, it's nice to make it off misery, and misery is in a bull market bubble - we enslaved some folks.
war used to be an honest business: winning side could rape and steal with the lowly fighters getting a %, as late as WWII soldiers got spoils of war, now the greedy banksters put an end to that. can't believe some fools still kill for nuthin (although ISIS did bring back rape privilages don't know about plunder tho)
so why fight soldiers of the world the deal was changed and you got nuthin. war is a racket.
" yada......To me belongeth vengeance, and recompense; their foot shall slide in due time; for the day of their calalmity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste".
This is a very well written article and perfect assessment of the blatant lying culture that permeates the unipolarite world, however…
Proxy WW3 is already underway in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Nigeria, against ‘Takfiri terrorists’, aka ISIS, Boko Haram et al, created, marketed and backed by the Anglonazis, using their weapons, support and supply chains, with the aim of stealing and controlling Petrodollar exports, and other valuable resources and strategic land.
The other side of the proxy war coin is being supported by Russia and Putin-friendly armies in Syria, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Cuba and China, to make the Anglonazis give back the stolen property and start reselling these resources in not-Dollars.
Now the Anglonazi regime-change-or-preserve Petrodollar obsessed entity is moving in Yemen, Oman, Ukraine, Angola, Venezuela, Haiti, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordon and Israel, with the potential for their ‘Takfiris’ to come to Europe itself in Greece, Italy, France and Germany etc. France already has 10,000 troops on the streets in readiness, and they already know that one of their old nuclear submarines can beat an entire US carrier group, so might not be a good idea to pick a fight with France either.
The trigger for escalation into a direct USNATO-Russia conflict could be a deliberate and serious financial attack on Russia, e.g. SWIFT; a targeted, selective or global financial collapse; a failure of Minsk 2.0, or a serious military incident – like Breedlove calling Putin a “Goddam pussy!”.
The traditional Republican argument has always been, "never trust government." The smaller and less intrusive the federal government is the better. But when it comes to foreign policy these neocons not only routinely deceive us they demand that everyone believe every word about the Russia or any other foreign threat. Fear mongering is the order of the day, and somehow the same government we should question at home we should trust implicity when it comes to anything outside our borders. I'm beginning to wonder if the goal of the the U.S. is world subjugation rather than the spread of liberty.
psquared, you imply that the GOP is the problem perhaps you missed the last 6 yrs of ZH..there is one party in DC and the dems are in it right up to hillary's turkey neck. rob rubin and buffet laugh at you even considering the goal is anything but- NWO.
I am sure the warmongering cabal in Washington, DC have their fully stocked underground nuclear bunkers to run to when Russia unleashes 11,000 nuclear warheads upon us.
3 minutes to nuclear midnight!
Unless a nuke goes off in 'merika you are going to have to let me know when we go to war. As far as I have lived we have never left. Where's my fucking "peace dividend".
You have to start by deciding for yourself why this is happening. Personally I think there are two main reasons:
1) The banking mafia in London and New York are playing a huge game of chicken with Russia/China trying to preserve the doillar system.
2) The neocons want to destroy Iran and Syria and Putin is in the way.
Two separate but related reasons.
If they win they win and the world continues towards a giant slave camp ruled by the banking mafia families.
The big question is what happens if they start feeling they are going to lose?
The banking mafia only care about money so seems to me if the banking mafia feel they are going to lose they will simply betray what little is left of USUK and side with China.
(This also implies them ditching Israel and the euro banks.)
If the neocons think they're going to lose I'd expect them to keep ramping up the false flags up to using a nuke somewhere. Whether that startes WWIII or not who knows but it does seem likely.
One possible wild card is the banking mafia betraying the neocons if they decide to throw in with China.
(China loses either way as either they lose and become ruled by the banking mafia from New York or they "win" and the banking mafia move to Hong Kong and wreck China from there.)
"banking mafia only care about money "
the banking mafia only care about control... fixed it...
We need a new means to communicate the following: Dear FedGov-- You start another war and we will start a war with you! No more war! We the people will not stand for it!
When war happens, invest in the Three Generals...
Motors, Electric, and Dynamics.
You can also expect gains from Raytheon, Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman.
Quote: One uncomfortable pattern that fits is that the US has gotten used to lying overtly to get its way. All reasonable analysts who read the UNSCOM report on Iraq’s defunct WMD program back in 2002 (as I did) knew that Iraq did not have any such program as claimed by Colin Powell, Rumsfeld, Perle, Feith and the rest of the unbalanced individuals who rushed the world to a war of choice. The spin doctors of today will say that “bad intelligence” was to blame, but that too is a lie.
The above quote is either an outright lie misinformed perception. Iraq was the regional bad guy that had invaded Kuwait. When forced to withdraw from Kuwait, Iraq defiantly destroyed Kuwaiti oil infrastructure and grossly polluted environment that persists. Iraqi regime and populace remained at large for that deed of invasion and destruction up until the invasion of Iraq. Moreover, between the time of the Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait and the U.S. led invasion of Iraq, the Iraqi regime had been making threats of possessing and using weapons of mass destruction on its neighbors.
If a common criminal had invaded your own home and destroyed your homes contents, escaped and defiantly threatened to kill you would surely expect local police to take down the perpetrators. Even if nobody had actually seen the weapon that perpetrators were threatening to use, you would expect police to approach accordingly.