If the ‘deep state’ is really delusional enough to trigger a war with Russia, in Europe or elsewhere, the narcissistic and hedonistic West, drunk on its own propaganda and hubris, will discover a level of violence and warfare it cannot even imagine and if that only affected those responsible for these reckless and suicidal policies it would be great. But the problem is, of course, that many millions of us, simple, regular people, will suffer and die as a consequence of our collective failure to prevent that outcome.
A case can be made that the Beltway – neocons and neoliberalcons alike - do not want a hot war with Russia. What they want, apart from racking in more cash for the Pentagon, is to raise the ante to such a high level that Moscow will back down - based on a rational cost analysis. Yet oil prices will inevitably rise later in 2016 – and under this scenario Washington is a loser. So we may see a raise of interest rates by the Fed (with all the money continuing to go to Wall Street) trying to reverse the scenario. Russia does not want – and does not need – war.. but The Aegis changes the game in the sense that it qualifies as a launch area for US missile defense.
Not only does Hillary Clinton insist that social security benefits are sacrosanct and actually need to be increased, along with lowering the Medicare age to 50 years, she also insists that Washington remain the world’s policeman and imperial hegemon. In a word, a Clinton presidency would mean Big Government on both sides of the Potomac - a combined Warfare State and Welfare State that would positively bankrupt the nation during the next decade.
With tensions between Russia and the West at post-cold war highs, a former NATO deputy military chief is now saying that a nuclear war with Russia over the Baltic nations in 2017 is "entirely plausible." All that's left is a catalyst, something the US is apparently trying desperately to deliver as it continues to fly spy planes over Russia's border, and encircles Russia with troops. If ever either side were to make one small mistake in how they choose to interact with each other, it could very well lead to nuclear war.
"...the fact that we are able to come here, in Romania, and train with five other nations, that really promotes regional stability."
The Western picture of world order is that “ever since the end of the Cold War, the overwhelming power of the U.S. military has been the central fact of international politics.” This is particularly crucial in three regions: East Asia, where “the U.S. Navy has become used to treating the Pacific as an ‘American lake’”; Europe, where NATO -- meaning the United States, which “accounts for a staggering three-quarters of NATO’s military spending” -- “guarantees the territorial integrity of its member states”; and the Middle East, where giant U.S. naval and air bases “exist to reassure friends and to intimidate rivals.” The problem of world order today is that “these security orders are now under challenge in all three regions” because of Russian intervention in Ukraine and Syria, and because of China turning its nearby seas from an American lake to “clearly contested water.” The fundamental question of international relations, then, is whether the United States should “accept that other major powers should have some kind of zone of influence in their neighborhoods.”
As American and allied officials celebrated the opening of a long-awaited missile defense system in Europe with a ribbon cutting and a band the reaction in Moscow on Thursday was darker: a public discussion of how nuclear war might play out in Europe and the prospect that Romania, the host nation for the United States-built system, might be reduced to “smoking ruins."
Speaking very generally, American libertarianism is consistent nationalism: not the expansionist, militaristic nationalism of Europe, but that of the Founders. In this country, a nationalist necessarily upholds the American tradition of limited government, the rule of law, and – yes – “isolationism” (“She goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy”). No wonder John Kerry preaches the virtues of a “borderless world,” and warns graduating students of the dangers of “looking inward”! Empires aspiring to world hegemony don’t recognize the legitimacy of borders, and as for looking inward – why do that when we have a whole world to conquer?
The United States' European missile defense shield goes live on Thursday almost a decade after Washington proposed protecting NATO from Iranian rockets and despite Russian warnings that the West is threatening the peace in central Europe. As a result, Reuters notes that "Russia is incensed at such of show of force by its Cold War rival in formerly communist-ruled eastern Europe where it once held sway. Moscow says the U.S.-led alliance is trying to encircle it close to the strategically important Black Sea, home to a Russian naval fleet and where NATO is also considering increasing patrols."
This report goes on to document, essentially, that US President Barack Obama is continuing his efforts to replace the the only secular, non-sectarian government in the Middle East, that of the Ba’athist Party, which has always been the only non-religious political party in the Arab world – everything else in Arabia has been fundamentalist-Sunni, to at least some extent.
Putin may top the enemies list of the Beltway establishment, but we should try to see the world from his point of view. Did we not ourselves slap aside the hand of Russian friendship, when proffered, when we chose to embrace our “unipolar moment,” to play the “great game” of empire and seek “benevolent global hegemony”? If there is a second Cold War, did Russia really start it?
The world is undergoing a profound demographic shift that will cause sweeping changes over the next few decades. Those changes will broaden the scope of our study of economics and investing; they will alter our understanding of sociology; and they will radically affect politics and governments.
With anti-establishmentarians on the rise in the US, it appears the neocons and their NATO proxy aren't wasting any time and are stepping up not just the words, but their deeds, against a so-called "resurgent Russia." NATO's European Command (EUCOM) "needs to change," blasts General Philip Breedlove, urging the military to get back to the business of war planning, a skill lost during the post-Cold War era saying his objective is to send a signal of deterrence to Russia. That signal was heard loud and clear as NATO is deploying an additional four battalions of 4,000 troops to the Russian border in Poland and the three Baltic States, according to a report citing US Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work.
The United States is the number one trading partner for 56 countries, with important relationships throughout North America, South America, and Western Europe. Meanwhile, China is the top partner for 124 countries, dominating trade in Asia, Eastern Europe, Africa, and Australia.
The British Response To Obama "Why Should We Take Advice From A President Who Has Surrendered The World To Chaos?"Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/24/2016 21:05 -0400