A view from outside the Goldfish bowl.
May 21, 2016 10:37 AM   Subscribe

A world war has begun. Break the silence.
In 1947, a series of National Security Council directives described the paramount aim of American foreign policy as "a world substantially made over in [America's] own image".
( John Pilger previously).

A little more from Paul Craig Roberts.
posted by adamvasco (81 comments total) 17 users marked this as a favorite
 
The first is an address at the University of Sydney, apparently. Pilger rarely says things people want to hear these days. That doesn't mean that he's necessarily wrong.
posted by Sonny Jim at 11:00 AM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


What's frustrating about John Pilger is that he's all about the unipolar evil. It's possible for China and Russia to be extremely (realpolitik and non-realpolitik) evil at the same time as the US (and its allies) are evil in a different set of ways. And the trouble with this is that it's a counsel of despair, therefore something that you only need in very small doses.
posted by ambrosen at 11:06 AM on May 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


Wow is that depressing.
posted by Slinga at 11:13 AM on May 21, 2016


thank you for this post, adamvasco
posted by infini at 11:20 AM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


That was insightful, makes voting for Trump in the general a lot less depressing.
posted by MikeWarot at 11:42 AM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


I love zerohedge content, but if there's one thing I can say about it, it's that it looks exactly like a website designed by a stockbroker.
posted by rhizome at 11:49 AM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


wat
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 11:49 AM on May 21, 2016


Most of America's wars (almost all of them against defenceless countries) have been launched not by Republican presidents but by liberal Democrats: Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama.

So that's wrong.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:57 AM on May 21, 2016 [14 favorites]


Interesting headlines showing up in streams
posted by infini at 12:03 PM on May 21, 2016


I’m seeing a lot of wild statements of “facts” with no supporting evidence.
posted by D.C. at 12:04 PM on May 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


Demagogue is gonna demagogue.

What is the alternative to US hegemony slowly being displaced by international institutions like the WTO and UN? Shall we go back to the colonial age of pre WW2? Return to the cold war where the world is split between the Soviets and Americans? Shall we undo the peace in the Balkans, Northern Ireland, and elsewhere?
posted by humanfont at 12:12 PM on May 21, 2016


Intimating that Ukraine having been in the Soviet Union justifies Russia invading it bit by bit... that tells me all I need to know about how "not wrong" Pilger is okay with being.
posted by Etrigan at 12:13 PM on May 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


What is the alternative to US hegemony slowly being displaced by international institutions like the WTO and UN?

I don't know, but I don't think regression is the only choice.
posted by rhizome at 12:19 PM on May 21, 2016


I am friends with one of Pilger's old mates and colleagues, and have great respect for his journalism particularly in earlier decades.

But this is poorly argued tripe.

Saying things that people don't want to hear doesn't necessarily make him particularly right, either.
posted by C.A.S. at 12:23 PM on May 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


"In the last eighteen months, the greatest build-up of military forces since World War Two -- led by the United States -- is taking place along Russia's western frontier. Not since Hitler invaded the Soviet Union have foreign troops presented such a demonstrable threat to Russia."

So does he get a monthly check from Putin to write this sort of thing, or does he get paid by the word, or what
posted by Oxydude at 12:32 PM on May 21, 2016 [16 favorites]


Mefi: bringing snarky rationalism to end-times verbiage.
posted by diode at 12:47 PM on May 21, 2016


I’m seeing a lot of wild statements of “facts” with no supporting evidence.

I don't see any problems with the "facts"in the first link. The US has deployed troops to the borders of Russia. We are engaging in challenging China in the seas bordering China. Obama has supported "modernizing"the US nuclear weapons stockpile, which means building lots of new bombs. The Obama administration has waged continual war across the globe, in mockery of his Nobel.

now, I don't think the US is planning for war, any more than the fact that we, by congressional mandate, plan for at least major wars fought simultaneously. But the US had been militarily aggressive and is engaged in provocative contests with Russia and China on *their* borders.

But the combination of ignorance, hypocrisy, and cognitive dissonance of Americans wrt the foreign policy of their government is long-standing.

mind that you may think that the US should be confronting China and Russia militarily, but you should at least be honest about it.
posted by ennui.bz at 12:50 PM on May 21, 2016 [15 favorites]


So we should vote for Trump because otherwise we'll leave the legacy of a black man in the hands of Israel and a woman?

Turns out there's more than one way to whistle for your dogs.
posted by chavenet at 1:20 PM on May 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


It is a dangerously stupid game to equate someone willing to turn people against their own countrymen, who blatantly doesn't give a damn about freedom of religion, who doesn't give a damn about war crimes, who can get away with his staff threatening violence against electors with the status quo, as shitty as it is.

We take things like "freedom" for granted. That letting people speak their mind, letting people make their own choices and live their own lives and have their own beliefs regardless of who they are is an unequivocally good thing. Freedom and liberty are not just jingoist buzzwords. They mean something. And it is important. And they are the principles the United States of America was founded on, no matter all the hypocrisy and violence and lies over the years.

But there is a growing strain of thought in the world that does not believe this. That believes that freedom for some is enough. That believe that countries should be beholden to only one ethnic group, one religion, and screw everyone else. Who are at best indifferent and callous to the suffering of people Not Like Them, or worse, would strip them of their citizenship and drive them from their homes.

There are very real threats to freedom and democracy growing in this world. And this is not a euphemism for "American economic interests." Laugh at conservatives that say ISIS are the 'enemies of freedom' if you want, but it's true. But that's still a sideshow. You've got Putin's Russia, you've got rising fascist parties in Europe, you've got the BJP in India. Hell, even China's working on the nationalism these days. You've got people all over preaching that different religions and ethniticies aren't equal, that they're threats, that tolerance is for fools, that "liberty" means liberty for the chosen few. No justice for all.

And then you have Trump and his followers here, preaching the same damned things. He promises greatness, promises the world, just like any good salesman or politician. But if you want to talk straight, he's riding on a wave of ethnic nationalism: that there are good Americans born and bred who are under siege by immigrants who are rapists and terrorists and job-thieves.

And it is all bullshit. And there is any country under threat of this crap where it is obviously blatant bullshit, then it is the United States of America. We didn't fight a war of independence against the most powerful nation on the planet because we were a different ethnicity, we fought for life and liberty and for the equality for all, and against the principle that there were some special class of people that deserved to rule.

And even if you want quibble over all the less savory and mundane details of why it all started, revolutionaries from many nations and many peoples joined us in the fight because they believed in those ideals - the Marquis de Lafayette, Casimir Pulaski, so many more... America won her freedom because it believed that nations should be something more than just a bunch of people who just kinda look the same.

America is a big country. We aren't one people, we're many. We're the descendants of immigrants and slaves and religious refugees and oppressed natives and smugglers and indentured servants and all sorts. You aren't an American because of your fancy family tree or any pretentious shit, you're an American because you believe in the ideals of personal freedom, of freedom of speech, of freedom of religion, and and want to protect that for all your Americans and fellow humans.

And now that all may be bullshit too. We have never lived up to those ideals. We have and continue to do bad and hypocritical and fucked up things. But that is not an excuse. That is not a reason to give up. It is not a reason to surrender.

Make no mistake, this is a battle for the soul of this country. You can argue about policy details all you want, but remember, presidents don't make laws - they are our face to the world and to ourselves. And if you have any shred of decency or respect for this country's stated ideals, if you have ever taken an oath to uphold and defend this country's constitution, you had better think long and hard before voting for a man that doesn't give a damn about freedom of religion and thinks his ego is more important the the rule of law.

For my part, I am an American. It's not even a choice.
posted by Zalzidrax at 1:55 PM on May 21, 2016 [25 favorites]


I don't see any problems with the "facts"in the first link.

You don't see any problem with his implicit claim, disguised under the word "most", that that Dubya did not start any wars?
posted by Pyrogenesis at 1:57 PM on May 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Here is an example of how this article is misleading.

Claim: Nuclear warhead spending alone rose higher under Obama than under any American president.

How this this is misleading: The US in the process of decommissioning its highest yield warheads and upgrading the targeting packages on lower yield devices as a means of maintaining the deterrent. The weapons in our stockpile are also old and required electronics and battery refurbishment to remain functional and safe. Finally Obama made a big investment in working to upgrade the security of our arsenal. The fact is that that now new nuclear warheads have been manufactured under Obama and no new designs tested. Our total number of warheads (which Obama was the first to publicly disclose) and the combined yield of those weapons is lower today thanks to Obama.
posted by humanfont at 2:13 PM on May 21, 2016 [18 favorites]


The US has deployed troops to the borders of Russia. We are engaging in challenging China in the seas bordering China

is engaged in provocative contests with Russia and China on *their* borders.

An interesting interpretation of events. US and all of NATO are deploying in the Baltics as a response to signs of potential Russian interest in destabilising these countries. The Germans have one battalion, UK has one battalion, and the US has a battalion deployed along with prepositioned equipment. The US announced plans to reduce the planned deployments by a battalion which sent other European countries scrambling to add the 4th. 4000 troops between Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Lithuania.

Where else are US troops deployed "to the borders of Russia"? Its hard to see these deployments as threatening Russia itself.

Regarding challenging China in the "seas bordering China", that is one interesting way to describe the shared South China Sea and East China Sea.

NYT playing chicken in the south china sea

One could say rather that China has emerged to challenge its less powerful neighbours including Japan, the Philipinnes, and Vietnam over various islands with aggressive territorial claims, sometimes justified by as little as dumping man-made piles of sand as islands and then claiming hundreds of miles of the surrounding sea. The US has been interested in maintaining open multilateral access through the Pacific as has existed since the end of WWII. Its a similar role to that played by the British navy in maintaining open seas prior to WWII. I wonder whether other Asian countries view this the same as you describe it, I suspect not.
posted by C.A.S. at 2:42 PM on May 21, 2016 [12 favorites]


I am having a real hard time making heads or tails of the position advanced by these articles. I read the comments on the zero hedge article to try to get a better idea of where the people who believe this are coming from, and they were filled with antisemitism and conspiracy theories. Is this some kind of dark enlightenment thing?
posted by Pyry at 3:02 PM on May 21, 2016


Pilger is snapping good fun to read. I recently read some of his F.E.E.R. articles covering Cambodia, 91-94'.
You'd think he try and get it right and use a variety of sources.

From the linked article.

"In Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia -- next door to Russia - the US military is deploying combat troops, tanks, heavy weapons. This extreme provocation of the world's second nuclear power is met with..."

Huh, did we invade these countries, have we set up Wal-marts yet? We're we asked to go, over there, though, why the hell are we
Over there.
posted by clavdivs at 3:05 PM on May 21, 2016


Pentagon Readies More Robust U.S. Military Presence in Eastern Europe. When I last looked E. Europe was on the Russian border.
The new gear includes 250 tanks, Bradley Fighting Vehicles and Paladin self-propelled howitzers as well as more than 1,700 additional wheeled vehicles and trucks.
posted by adamvasco at 3:08 PM on May 21, 2016


I don't understand what the deal is with whistling for dogs... as I'm a cat person. ;-) I'm sick and tired of being told I'm racist... I know I'm racist, sexist, and all sorts of other stupid, especially when angry... but that doesn't mean my decision is motivated by it.... I try REALLY hard to avoid that type of stupid thinking.

Trump is by no means a person I want to vote for, but faced with Hillary as an alternative, I'll do it. She's a known war hawk, and liar, and in the pocket of wall street. She's the increasingly unacceptable status quo, incarnate.

The continued push for an American Empire, run by megacorps, for megacorps, means that in short order we're going to have to take on Russia or China in WWIII, and I'm sure Hillary would be willing to give that order, if the polls said it was the thing to do, and Wall Street approved.

Hillary also represents (this week, unless the polls or her sponsors have changed her mind), the interests of the Salary class, and not those of working class people. We're going to need a ton of support as automation kills off the jobs we used to have to pay the bills.

Eventually, some sort of Universal income needs to happen, or the result is more than 1/2 of the population will be "useless", and un-employable at any living wage. Hillary won't care about that.

Of course, if by some miracle, Bernie manages to make it passed the outright favoritism of the DNC, and get the nomination, I'll be a much, MUCH happier camper.
posted by MikeWarot at 3:18 PM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


I was having a good time reading this end of the world porn but I lost my boner when he got to blaming "identity politics" for the sheepling of America.
posted by Annika Cicada at 3:43 PM on May 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


Bernie Sanders has drawn from the same pool of foreign policy advisors who advise Clinton and Obama. Hillary is not a liar, nor has she ever been charged with a crime, even though a fortune has been spent trying to get her. The claim that she's in the pocket of Wall Street/Big Banks isn't substantiated by any evidence. To the contrary she negotiated the implementation of FACTA which has been the biggest crackdown on bank secrecy laws in history. She also supports Dodd Frank and the CFPB two things Wall Street hates.
posted by humanfont at 3:50 PM on May 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


I don't see any problems with the "facts"in the first link.

You don't see any problem with his implicit claim, disguised under the word "most", that that Dubya did not start any wars?


That's an opinion. The fact is that the US was in a state of continual military conflict with Iraq since the first gulf war.

"In Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia -- next door to Russia - the US military is deploying combat troops, tanks, heavy weapons. This extreme provocation of the world's second nuclear power is met with..."

Huh, did we invade these countries, have we set up Wal-marts yet? We're we asked to go, over there, though, why the hell are we
Over there.


Again, facts. Yes, we deployed soldiers there. Why is it that stating this fact is so infuriating?

Imagine, for a moment, Chinese Navy boats patrolling the Caribbean or Russia stationing a national guard battalion in Nicaragua. I mean, really.
posted by ennui.bz at 4:01 PM on May 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


The continued push for an American Empire, run by megacorps, for megacorps, means that in short order we're going to have to take on Russia or China in WWIII, and I'm sure Hillary would be willing to give that order, if the polls said it was the thing to do, and Wall Street approved.

But yet you seem to think Trump wouldn't give the same order? I mean. Just wow.

I know in the abstract there are people out there that think like this, but it's still a shock to meet one.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:12 PM on May 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


Chinese police are currently stationed in downtown Rome and we are not freaking out. Also there are Chinese run port facilities in many Latin American and Carribian nations. Chinese warships regularly make port calls there. Russians subs regularly go up and down the Atlantic sea board testing international waters.

Finally the US and Russia are only separated by 60 miles anyway. So we are already at their border.
posted by humanfont at 4:15 PM on May 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


Chinese police are currently stationed in downtown Rome and we are not freaking out.

Wow, they have an entire battalion of regular army + heavy weapons in downtown Rome? How have I not heard about this?

Finally the US and Russia are only separated by 60 miles anyway. So we are already at their border.

Whoa, good point, I forgot about those times when Napoleon and Hitler invaded Russia from the east. By amphibious landing. And marched halfway across the world through Siberia to reach Moscow.
posted by indubitable at 4:25 PM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


When I last looked E. Europe was on the Russian border.

And don't think that Russia isn't pissed that E. Europe is no longer effectively inside the Russian border.
posted by Etrigan at 4:45 PM on May 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


The claim that she's in the pocket of Wall Street/Big Banks isn't substantiated by any evidence. To the contrary she negotiated the implementation of FACTA which has been the biggest crackdown on bank secrecy laws in history. She also supports Dodd Frank and the CFPB two things Wall Street hates.

250,000 a speech is not a good smell. As to FATCA, it's been a nightmare for normal US citizens abroad who find that foreign banks don't want the hassle of them as clients and so are left with few options for day to day banking. Except, of course, US banks that happen to have branches in those countries. If they have branches in those countries. The alternative is dropping citizenship, which, if one is married to a foreign national (whose accounts the IRS also assumes it can look at) can be strong.

As to crackdown in general, the US has now become a top tax haven for foreign money.

Her stalwart defense of Dodd Frank is a little softer when talking behind closed doors: "At another speech to Goldman and its big asset management clients in New York in 2013, Clinton spoke about how it wasn’t just the banks that caused the financial crisis and that it was worth looking at the landmark 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law to see what was working and what wasn’t."

"Worth looking at" is nice.
posted by IndigoJones at 4:48 PM on May 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Where else are US troops deployed "to the borders of Russia"?

Germany?
posted by happyroach at 4:50 PM on May 21, 2016


Let´s look at it Pictorially and here´s a Global version.
U.S. and NATO escalate, plan bases on Russian border.
posted by adamvasco at 5:06 PM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


I am curious why you would think those are credible sources adamvasco?
posted by humanfont at 5:52 PM on May 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Why is it that stating this fact is so infuriating?


Well, I think humanfont covers that that international in-your-backyard thing like the FBI in Yemen or those pesky russian air shows, those ones that make news. I'm not infuriated by this fact, a little tired, I simply don't think renumertation for our troops is fair.
And that's what hurts, these folks want guns and training, asking, some times pleading and what, say no?
posted by clavdivs at 5:56 PM on May 21, 2016


Regarding that "Pictorially" link, so wow, Volgograd is an active hotspot on a par with Afghanistan or Iraq? I fished up the article that map appeared in but drew a blank. So I searched that website for "Volgograd" and found ... this. I didn't really expect to find a whale but actually it seems it's not even a minnow.

So yeah, what humanfront said.

The FPP here isn't outside any goldfish bowl looking in, and it deserves the fisheye.
posted by Autumn Leaf at 7:27 PM on May 21, 2016


I am curious why you would think those are credible sources

The FPP includes a Zerohedge link, so. Zerohedge is pretty conclusively proven to be a fraudulent huckster syndicate at this point. This Pilger guy doesn't seem to be any different. There's not one remotely credible statement in this entire thread, except I think someone linked to a NYT article.

There's always money in crying that the sky is falling, ask Glenn Beck. Or Zerohedge.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:03 PM on May 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


These days, even the NYT is suspect in that it has its own ideological preferences for headlines. I know that we've had that conversation elsewhere on the site. The bottomline is that there's a tossup between information sources and slants, and the best anyone outside the fishbowl can do is read everyone's angles and find some triangulated middle path.
posted by infini at 1:33 AM on May 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


There's lots (and lots) of interesting criticisms one can make about American Foreign Policy.

But John Pilger is an idiot. Criticizing American Foreign Policy should be really easy, but he make an awkward pro-Putin mess of it.
posted by ovvl at 7:12 AM on May 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


we fought for life and liberty and for the equality for all, and against the principle that there were some special class of people that deserved to rule

That may well have been what those doing the fighting thought they were fighting for, but it wasn't what those who wrote the Constitution designed the US to achieve.

A Critique of Madisonian Democracy
posted by flabdablet at 11:40 AM on May 22, 2016


I would suggest the RahRah brigade reads this recent FPP
and then considers: -

Spiegel March 2015
Breedlove's Bellicosity: Berlin Alarmed by Aggressive NATO Stance on Ukraine.
Business Insider Feb 2016
NATO is planning its largest military build-up in eastern Europe since the Cold War.
NYT April 2016
Race for Latest Class of Nuclear Arms Threatens to Revive Cold War.
Reuters May 2016
Putin considers the US missile shield in Romania to be the start of a new arms race.
Guardian May 2016
A startling claim that the west is on course for war with Russia has been delivered by the former deputy commander of Nato, the former British General Sir Alexander Richard Shirreff.
(That last is a book plug and is pro raising the the budget for more militarization but that is hardly surprising from a General)
The western powers seem hell bent on provoking a nuclear first strike. Nuclear used to be considered the ultimate resource - all or nothing. However the thinking is changing (2013)
It’s precisely because US conventional power is so overwhelming that the temptation to turn to nuclear weapons to redress the balance is so irresistible.
posted by adamvasco at 12:08 PM on May 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


"hell bent on provoking a first strike"?

There is no actual evidence to support this assertion.

And describing everyone who doesn't necessarily question the need for some deterrence in the South China Sea or the Baltics as the "rahrah brigade", a horde of Dr Strangeloves, is not responsible.

This kind of all-or-nothing, extreme black or white thinking is unhelpful.
posted by C.A.S. at 12:46 PM on May 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


"It’s precisely because US conventional power is so overwhelming that the temptation to turn to nuclear weapons to redress the balance is so irresistible."

So when the U.S. builds up its nuclear arsenal, it's wrong. When other countries build up their nuclear arsenals, it's an "irresistible temptation". It's odd to see someone trying to deny the agency of a couple of countries with a billion and a half people between them.
posted by Etrigan at 1:13 PM on May 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


This kind of all-or-nothing, extreme black or white thinking is unhelpful.
posted by infini at 1:32 PM on May 22, 2016


I'm going to leave this comment from another thread here because I believe it sums up everything I feel about this thread and I don't like repeating myself.
posted by Annika Cicada at 2:59 PM on May 22, 2016


It's odd to see someone trying to deny the agency of a couple of countries with a billion and a half people between them.

And absolving Putin's aggression completely. There's a disturbing undercurrent of pro-Strongman, pro-Putin, anti-Western, anti-Obama and frankly anti-Democracy reflexive rhetoric that's leaking around the circle of extremism in the wake of Trump and some far left supporter's inability to accept the failure of the Bernie revolution to fix everything wrong in the world. Ergo, Putin. Apparently.
posted by T.D. Strange at 3:10 PM on May 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


rock, meet hard place.
posted by infini at 4:18 PM on May 22, 2016


Let me try to see if I can be a wee bit more articulate. adamvasco's links are not all from writers with skin in the game. nor may they be those who are citizens or residents with direct interest in the election. in fact they might be outside the goldfish bowl. being able to see all the chessplayers' moves from various different points around the board might have bring up different nuances, and complexity beyond an either/or situation or anti everything. imagine people who were neither christian or muslim. nor black or white. its alright if you can't. the goldfish doesn't feel wet either. just don't let these blinkers blindside.
posted by infini at 4:26 PM on May 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


So when the U.S. builds up its nuclear arsenal, it's wrong. When other countries build up their nuclear arsenals, it's an "irresistible temptation".

Remember all those conversations on the invisible backpack? why men have disproportionate power or why caucasians might have certain privileges? this is kind of like that. Imagine the entire planet is full of ants. And there's one elephant.
posted by infini at 4:30 PM on May 22, 2016


Imagine the entire planet is full of ants. And there's one elephant.

Russia and China are ants compared to the American elephant? You know that they are already nuclear powers, right? And not like the way North Korea is, but real nuclear powers.
posted by Etrigan at 4:54 PM on May 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Diana Johnstone is a veteran American Journalist who choses to live in Paris.
As early as 2010 she wrote about Encircling Russia, Targeting China – NATO'S True Role in US Grand Strategy.
Counterpunch has a recent article about Obama’s Last Gasp Imperialism.
posted by adamvasco at 8:12 PM on May 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Counterpunch article states regarding Syria that "Russia answered the call to help but America doesn't want that war to end."

The Diana Johnstone article makes no mention of China's South China Sea island building project. It also makes no mention of the Baltic region and claims that the US insists on Georgia and Ukraine joining NATO, something advocated only by a minority of PNAC types that will never happen, and never should.

That tells me everything I need to know in order to assess the seriousness of their conclusions.
posted by C.A.S. at 12:43 AM on May 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Which of the various sources used to create this infographic fall short of the very high media credibility standards being demanded?
posted by infini at 1:58 AM on May 23, 2016


I want to giggle, Torquemada would have rubbed his hands with glee.
posted by infini at 2:00 AM on May 23, 2016


You mean the infographic that shows Russia with more, bigger, and longer-range nuclear weapons?
posted by Etrigan at 3:38 AM on May 23, 2016




Yes, Russia won the cold war arms race.
posted by infini at 5:01 AM on May 23, 2016


Russia built more tanks, bombs and guns and kept a larger army than NATO; but they still lost the cold war. They lost because Saudi Arabia took the price of oil to the bottom and they couldn't afford the weapons anymore.
posted by humanfont at 6:19 AM on May 23, 2016


Then the current status of oil prices* is going to be very interesting to watch, with regard to the topic of this thread.

*Unsure if Reuters credible enough source
posted by infini at 6:36 AM on May 23, 2016


*Unsure if Reuters credible enough source

Geez. The point isn't the source per se, but how connected to reality the assertions being made are.

Any piece in any publication that summarises the Syrian situation as ""Russia answered the call to help but America doesn't want that war to end" is so simple-minded and distant from events on the ground as they actually are as to be laughable, if it weren't all so tragic.
posted by C.A.S. at 10:38 AM on May 24, 2016 [1 favorite]


America doesn't want that war to end
Give me some proof that it does. What´s your military industrial complex going to do then? Produce plowshares?
Feb 2016. Steven Klinzer, Boston Globe: - In Syria, it is: “Fight Assad, Russia, and Iran! Join with our Turkish, Saudi, and Kurdish friends to support peace!” This is appallingly distant from reality. It is also likely to prolong the war and condemn more Syrians to suffering and death.
Feb. 2016 Independent London: Syria civil war: Prospect of Saudi incursion raises fears of a conflict without end.
Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary, who met Prince Mohammed at the summit, said: “We welcome the offer. The Saudis are serious, they are leading this coalition.”
Re Diana Johnson link. The article is six years old; before China´s Island building had started.
As a point of reference China has been claiming the Spratley´s since at least 1883.
posted by adamvasco at 2:36 PM on May 24, 2016


The military industrial complex makes money off expensive new weapons programs, their ongoing maintenance and upgrades. They don't care about the war in Syria, that's just a distraction that takes money from their balance sheets and transfers it relatively cheap bullets, jdams, drones and jet fuel. They want to sell F35, new submarines, aircraft carriers, direct energy weapons, cyber-whatever. That's where the money is.
posted by humanfont at 4:45 PM on May 24, 2016


It defies logic that US interests are in the Syrian war continuing. It is producing a flood of refugees to Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon and threatening to destabilise the entire region and beyond, impacting Europe. The flood of refugees is even destabilising European politics. There is no clear path to end this besides a peace process, which will not happen while various parties believe there is more advantage to gain still. There is no putting a genie back in a bottle, even whatever dream of supporting the restoration of the Assad regime might be hinted at in your links

The Klinzer article you linked to (and I do believe he can be an interesting voice with something to say, generally speaking) states that the Syrian army is offering a "glimmer of hope" to Aleppo. Really?

Again, a completely simple minded view of a train wreck. There are at least 14 belligerents at a minimum, including but certainly not all, the worst kind of jihadis, fighting a completely repressive regime that could not handle environmentally influenced drought and populations movement. Sadly, I don't see any hope for Aleppo from any quarter, which has been barrel bombed by the regime, half-flattened, and taken over by jihadis.

Syrian civil war wiki

Let's forget about for a moment that thalf of the ridiculous claim, and look at the first one.

Russia answered the call to help

Seriously?

Russian war crimes and attacks on civilians wiki
posted by C.A.S. at 11:23 PM on May 24, 2016


Does this singleminded single vision approach actually work, do you think?
posted by infini at 4:16 AM on May 25, 2016


Chomsky - NATO a global intervention force, run by the United States. - Transcript pdf.
posted by adamvasco at 3:45 PM on May 26, 2016 [1 favorite]


So here are five straightforward lessons -- none acceptable in what passes for discussion and debate in this country -- that could be drawn from that last half century of every kind of American warfare:

1. No matter how you define American-style war or its goals, it doesn’t work. Ever.

2. No matter how you pose the problems of our world, it doesn’t solve them. Never.

3. No matter how often you cite the use of military force to “stabilize” or “protect” or “liberate” countries or regions, it is a destabilizing force.

posted by infini at 11:47 AM on May 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Nato countries begin largest war game in eastern Europe since cold war.
Marcin Zaborowski, a Polish defence analyst acknowledged that the backdrop to the exercise was “tense, and accidents can happen”.
posted by adamvasco at 12:34 PM on June 6, 2016 [1 favorite]


NATO exercises raise tensions at Soini-Lavrov meeting
A press conference in Moscow Monday following talks between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Finland's Foreign Minister Timo Soini heard Lavrov make it clear he was vexed by the start of NATO-led exercises in Finland. Soini responded that Finland is acting independently with the aim of its own security.
posted by infini at 2:41 PM on June 6, 2016 [1 favorite]




The U.S. is stoking tensions by sending one ship into half a million square kilometers of water that's bordered by three NATO countries. Sure.
posted by Etrigan at 6:20 PM on June 10, 2016 [2 favorites]


I really don´t get that you can´t understand the ratcheting up of tensions. To compare see what happens when Russia sends an Aircraft carrier into the Caribbean. Anyhow it isn´t the war ship which is raising concern but the missile system it is carrying.
These military dick waving contests are all fun and games until it it isn´t. And when that happens
what safeguards are there if any especially for those unfortunates who happen to be in the area. Or do they just become (charming term) ``Collateral damage´´. But hey wave your dick but don´t be upset when others laugh and point or call you out on it.
posted by adamvasco at 8:09 AM on June 11, 2016


I really don't get how you can't understand that it takes two to ratchet up tensions. At least, your constant blaming of only one side makes it seem like you can't.
posted by Etrigan at 8:21 AM on June 11, 2016 [1 favorite]


I really don´t get that you can´t understand the ratcheting up of tensions.

"Tensions" is a curiously vague, isn't it?

Military exercises seem to be what governments do when they're bored and not particularly under threat.
posted by rhizome at 9:12 AM on June 11, 2016


Military exercises seem to be what governments do when they're bored and not particularly under threat.

No, they seem to be what governments do when they want to 1) telegraph that they are prepared to respond to a threat, 2) reassure allies that they acknowledge a sense of threat, or 3) project a sense of threat themselves.

As no one has proposed that NATO contemplates a land invasion of Russia from the Baltics, it seems that these exercises relate to 1) and 2).
posted by C.A.S. at 9:42 AM on June 11, 2016


That would imply that there is a threat, and at any rate a single ship is a caricature of reassurance in this day and age.
posted by rhizome at 10:53 AM on June 11, 2016


To compare see what happens when Russia sends an Aircraft carrier into the Caribbean.

You mean like the Kusnetsov was sent a couple years back and nothing happened?

Funny that you bring that up -- Russia stole the Kusnetsov from Ukraine too. I guess they were forced to by te U.S. somehow.
posted by Etrigan at 11:33 AM on June 11, 2016


We don't need an imaginary aircraft carrier in the Caribbean. Intrusive incidents are rampant since the Crimea was taken and sanctions imposed.

Russia has flown bombers off the California costs (CNN why is russia sending bombers to US airspace?), been sending warships down the English Channel (ITV alerts over Russian ships and jets) , simulated cruise missle attacks on the US and Canada, practiced an airborne attack at the Danish island Borhholm (thelocal.dk) and regularly flying defence testing intrusions at US/Canadian borders and into other European/British airspace, causing several alarming near-miss incidents by turning their transponders off, for example the near-misses with a landing airliner at Amsterdam and a taking off airliner from Denmark (The Aviationist near miss in Copenhagen)

And yes, the implication is that there has been threat to the Baltic countries from Russia in the last decade.

Russia launched a major cyberattack on Estonia in 2013 (cyberattack on Estonia (Guardian), and captured an Estonian military intelligence officer on Estonian soil. ( Russia parades detained police officer (Guardian)

Estonia had 6 intrusions into its airspace by Russian military planes in 2014 alone and Russia regularly violates the Baltic country's airspace.

Its not the cold war, but we are in an era where Russia is interested in establishing a wider reach and these are not necessarily the reactions of a poor innocent country that is only reacting to the provocations of the Capitalist Imperialist Western War Machine.
posted by C.A.S. at 1:16 AM on June 12, 2016


The whole ratcheting up of tensions is totally counterproductive but what militaries do to proove their worth. Neither side is innocent and Russia is the local playground bully. What suffers most is things like joint action to lock down loose nukes.
The United States has entered an era of perpetual war. The U.S. military has been at war for 15 straight years with no end in sight, and President Obama will soon have the dubious distinction of being the only American president to have been at war for all eight years of a two-term presidency.
posted by adamvasco at 6:32 AM on June 12, 2016


« Older "Of Albions glorious Ile the Wonders whilst I...   |   420 Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments