Another “Jolly Little War”?

another-“jolly-little-war”?

05-05-19 02:46:00,

Authored by Eric Margolis,

Sure. Let’s invade Venezuela. Another jolly little war. It’s full of commies and has a sea of oil. The only thing those Cuban-loving Venezuelans lack are weapons of mass destruction.

This week, leading US neocons openly threatened that if the CIA’s latest attempts to stage a coup to overthrow Venezuela’s Maduro government failed, Washington might send in the Marines.

Well, the coup was a big fiasco and the Venezuelan army didn’t overthrow President Maduro. The CIA also failed to overthrow governments in Moscow, Tehran and Damascus. Its only ‘success’ to date has been in overthrowing Ukraine’s pro-Moscow government and putting a bunch of corrupt clowns in its place at a cost near $10 billion.

The US has not waged a major successful war since World War II – unless you count invading Grenada, Panama and Haiti, or bombing the hell out of Iraq, Syria, Somalia and Libya. That’s a sobering thought given the Pentagon’s recent announcement that it is cutting back on little colonial wars (aka ‘the war on terror’) to get ready for real big wars against Russia and China, or even North Korea.

Venezuela is in a huge economic mess thanks to the crackpot economic policies of the Chavez and Maduro governments – and US economic sabotage. But my first law of international affairs is: ‘Every nation has the absolute god-given right to mismanage its own affairs and elect its own crooks or idiots.’

Now, however, the administration’s frenzied neocons want to start a war against Venezuela, a large, developed nation of 32.7 million, at the same time we are threatening war against Iran, interfering all around Africa, and confronting Russia, China and perhaps North Korea. Large parts of the Mideast and Afghanistan lie in ruins thanks to our ‘liberation’ campaigns.

Invading Venezuela would not be much of a problem for the US military: half the population hates the current government and might welcome the Americans. Venezuela’s military has only limited combat value. Right-wing regimes in neighboring Colombia and Brazil might join the invasion.

But what then?

Recall Iraq. The US punched through the feeble Iraqi Army whose strength had been wildly exaggerated by the media.

 » Lees verder

Yet Another Conspiracy Theory Died Today

yet-another-conspiracy-theory-died-today

11-04-19 09:07:00,

It bears repeating, given the nearly past three years of ‘Russiagate’ collusion hysteria which focused heavily and uncritically on the role of WikiLeaks in both Hillary’s defeat and the rise of Trump, and centrally the “Russian connection” supposedly tying it all together: there seems yet more daily and weekly evidence demonstrating how absurd the claims were and are. 

With Thursday’s dramatic UK arrest of WikiLeaks founder and leader Julian Assange, revealed to be based largely on a US extradition request, which we’ve all now learned has been pursued for the past two years by the Trump Department of Justice, another conspiracy theory bites the dust. Journalist Aaron Maté points out “over the last 2 years, just as Maddow et al were feverishly speculating that Trump and Assange secretly conspired, Trump’s DOJ was secretly trying to extradite Assange.”

Looking back in light of Thursday morning’s events, Maté says, “Assange’s arrest reminds us how moronic the Wikileaks aspect of the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory…”.

So much of it continues to unravel. Maté continues: “The conspiracy theory never slowed even after Roger Stone’s indictment revealed that a) Trump camp had no advance knowledge of WL releases b) they tried to find out from Stone, who also had no advance knowledge.

Assange’s arrest reminds us how moronic the Wikileaks aspect of the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory is: over the last 2 years, just as @Maddow et al were feverishly speculating that Trump and Assange secretly conspired, Trump’s DOJ was secretly trying to extradite Assange.

— Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) April 11, 2019

Maté adds that further “Stone had no such knowledge because he had no actual contact to WikiLeaks.”

And just last month here’s the aptly dubbed Russiagate Grand Wizard Rachel Maddow with her Glenn Beck style visuals to suggest a Trump-WikiLeaks-Russia conspiracy plot was thickening:

Something appears to be happening in federal court that pertains to WikiLeaks and Julian Assange… pic.twitter.com/lVVKywh0zY

— Maddow Blog (@MaddowBlog) March 6, 2019

But as Maté also previously pointed out:

And that something “is based on [Assange’s] pre-2016 conduct,

 » Lees verder

Ilhan Omar Is Just Another Victim of Zion’s Politically Lethal Sting

ilhan-omar-is-just-another-victim-of-zions-politically-lethal-sting

13-03-19 11:30:00,

Ilhan Omar Is Just Another Victim of Zion’s Politically Lethal Sting

Freshman US Representative Ilhan Omar, Democrat of Minnesota and a Somali-American Muslim, is not the first nor will she be the last victim of Zion’s sting. Omar is merely the latest in a long line of US politicians who have faced the onslaught of Israel’s powerful lobbying vise grip in Washington. In fact, long before there was a state of Israel, American presidents and statesmen fell victim to the power of political Zionism to retaliate against those who failed to back the concept of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East.

On March 5, 1891, President Benjamin Harrison received a visitor to the White House bearing a petition signed by 421 influential American citizens urging the president to recognize Palestine as the “restored” homeland of the Jewish people. The bearer of the petition, evangelical Christian clergyman William E. Blackstone was one of the earliest “Christian Zionists” in proclaiming solidarity with certain Jewish Zionists in support of a Jewish state in the Holy Land. Blackstone was no different than many of today’s Zionists who ensure total fealty of US administrations to Israeli policy, no matter how reprehensible it may be, especially toward the Palestinian people. Blackstone’s petition had been signed by John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, US Supreme Court Chief Justice Melville Fuller, Speaker of the US House of Representatives Thomas Reed, inventor Cyrus McCormick, co-owner and managing editor of The Chicago Tribune Joseph Medill, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Robert Hitt, and US Representative and future president William McKinley.

Blackstone, then the chairman of the Conference of Christians and Jews, wrote in his petition that the Ottoman Empire, which had control over Palestine, could be enticed into handing the territory over to Jewish control through the “funding of a portion of the [Ottoman] National debt by rich Jewish bankers.” Such a clause, today, would result in the same howls of “anti-Semitism” that are being directed at Omar because of her statement that pro-Israel lobbying groups, like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), ensure congressional support for Israel by showering members of Congress and candidates with “benjamins,” a reference to US$100 bills.

Harrison, who was president from 1889 to 1893, was polite to Blackstone and promised to give his petition “careful attention.” Harrison, who had his hands full with civil service reform,

 » Lees verder

Another Reason for Washington in Venezuela? | New Eastern Outlook

another-reason-for-washington-in-venezuela-new-eastern-outlook

13-03-19 11:28:00,

Journal NEO Collage USA VENEZUELA 2

Many myself among them have pointed to the vast hydrocarbon reserves of Venezuela as a possible driving motive behind the otherwise bizarre Washington intervention in Venezuela. The more I look into the situation, the more I suspect a quite other explanation for the intervention from a President who campaigned on a call to end US regime change interventions into other countries. The President’s NSC advisor, John Bolton openly stated it was about the oil. Could there be another reason as well? What then could it be?

Bolton also declared recently, “In this administration, we’re not afraid to use the word Monroe Doctrine. This is a country in our hemisphere.“ The last President to invoke the Monroe Doctrine, something going back to 1823, was Ronald Reagan. Before Reagan, JFK did so to justify US measures against the growing influence of the Soviet Union in the region after the Bay of Pigs fiasco.

The Monroe Doctrine was drafted by US Secretary of State John Quincy Adams and proclaimed in the State of the Union address by President James Monroe at a point most all South American colonial nations had achieved independence from Spain or Portugal. It declared that any attempts by European powers to try to establish new colonies there would be considered by Washington as “the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.” In effect it declared that the New World would be a separate sphere of influence from that of the colonial Old World of Europe. Notably, the immediate trigger for the 1823 declaration was a Russian Ukase of 1821 asserting rights to the Pacific Northwest and forbidding non-Russian ships from approaching the coast.

Historically the original Monroe Doctrine was largely a bluff, as the US at the time had no serious navy and relied on the British Royal Navy informally to keep other powers out. What then could be the basis of invoking the Monroe Doctrine in 2019, nearly 200 years later?

Target China?

Given the track record in brutal regime change of US operators such as Elliott Abrams and others in the present effort to oust President Maduro in favor of Assembly President Juan Guaidó as interim president, it seems something other than supporting free and fair elections is involved to put it mildly.

 » Lees verder

US Blows Up INF… Another Move Towards Downfall

us-blows-up-inf8230-another-move-towards-downfall

18-01-19 10:06:00,

US Blows Up INF... Another Move Towards Downfall

It is rather astounding the American double-think. It was the US side which unilaterally abolished the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty in 2002. And it is the US side which is now unilaterally threatening to walk away from a second landmark arms control treaty, the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) accord, which was first put in place in 1987.

Yet it is Washington that is accusing Russia of violating the global arms control architecture.

Washington has been relentlessly encroaching on Russia’s national security over the past two decades with expansion of NATO forces on Russia’s borders, including the deployment of missiles systems. And yet Washington has the bare face to accuse Moscow of breaching arms controls.

How would the US feel, if say, Russia were to deploy missile systems in Mexico? Yet, the US is doing similar on Russia’s borders and then turning around and accusing Moscow of aggression. The American double-think here betrays a disturbing, stupid arrogance.

This week, US and Russian officials met in Geneva to discuss the INF and problems surrounding the treaty on both sides. But the US side in typical high-handed fashion refused to enter into detailed negotiations about alleged grievances contended by both sides. Washington spurned detailed talks and simply repeated its threats to unilaterally abrogate the INF.

It now seems certain that the US will withdraw from the INF over the next two months. The abrogation of the treaty, in place since 1987 as negotiated by former President Ronald Reagan and former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, could mean the return of US medium-range nuclear missiles to Europe targeting Russia.

It is a stupendous retrograde step. Moscow has already warned that if the US abandons the INF, then it will be compelled to respond by installing missiles that will target European allies of the US. This is a lamentable unwinding of arms control and undoing of global security.

But who is responsible? It is the US that is wholly responsible for this retrograde step. No doubt about it. The question has to be asked: which side has continually sought to undermine global security? Any objective observer can see that the US and its cancellation of the ABM in 2002 followed by relentless expansion of NATO offensive forces towards Russia is the malign motive force.

 » Lees verder

Yet Another America’s Runaway Bacteria is getting Rampant in Europe | New Eastern Outlook

yet-another-americas-runaway-bacteria-is-getting-rampant-in-europe-new-eastern-outlook

05-12-18 09:16:00,

C014

In my previous articles I’ve touched upon the deadly weapons of tomorrow, those that reek of death and destruction for the mankind, developed in top-secret US laboratories. Previously, I’ve examined the mutated bacteria codenamed Cynthia, that was originally designed to consume hydrocarbon wastes but instead it started to consume human flesh. Even though there’s been a number of lethal cases along the Gulf of Mexico, American authorities chose to keep this whole deal a secret.

However, their secret experiments haven’t stopped there, but now they are being conducted away from American shores, namely in Europe, as Donald Trump himself listed this continent as one of the principal rivals of the United States in the world-wide war for global domination.

A rather disturbing number of reports has recently been presented by independent media sources, all talking about the Xylella fastidiosa bacteria that threatens to completely wipe both Italy and a number of other Mediterranean countries clean off centuries-old olive trees. This microbe, which would typically appear in America, has already infected 800 thousand olive trees in the closed commune of Salento, located in Apulia, Italy.

This Italian region produces more than a third of the world’s supply of olive oil, which amounts to some 11 million tons a year. The standards of olive oil producers in Puglia are widely regarded as industry standards that most other producers can only strive to achieve. The rapid spread of bacteria has already resulted in oil manufacturers suffering 250 million euros in losses, and it doesn’t seem that anybody knows how to put a stop to it. As it’s been pointed out by Angelo Corsetti, a representative of the Italian agricultural group Coldiretti, Italian oil producers were forced into creating a sanitary cordon, cutting off an area of 8,000 hectares from their lands completely. The contaminated area is going to be purged of any surviving olive trees in a bid to save those still unaffected by the bacteria.

Olive oil producers have recently expressed their concern about the possible spread of Xylella fastidiosa across the Mediterranean states, namely Greece, Spain, and France, with regions of Northern Africa and Middle East also being at risk of contamination.

According to European ID specialists,

 » Lees verder

Syria: Another US Forever War? – Global Research

Syria: Another US Forever War? – Global Research

15-10-18 04:27:00,

Is Afghanistan the prototype for all US wars of aggression? Forever war rages in the country, now in its 18th year with no prospect for resolution.

Is Syria following the same pattern, war in its eighth year with no end in sight? 

The difference between Washington’s aggression in the country and all its other war theaters is Russia’s intervention to combat US-supported terrorism at Assad’s request.

Is it enough to make a great enough difference? Will Russia’s involvement lead to conflict resolution?

It’s unattainable as long as US forces occupy parts of the country with no intention to leave – Washington’s goal unchanged since Obama launched war on Syria.

It’s all about regime change, controlling the country’s resources and population, partitioning it for easier control, and isolating Iran ahead of a similar scheme to topple its sovereign independent government.

The ultimate aim is achieving unchallenged US regional control along with eliminating rival governments opposed to Israel.

Forever war could continue as long as US imperial rage remains unchanged – in Syria and elsewhere.

Iranian military advisors are aiding Assad combat US-supported terrorists at his request, intending to remain in the country as long as Damascus values its involvement.

Days earlier, Iranian Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) spokesman General Islamic General Ramezan Sharif said his country’s military advisors will remain in Syria as long as their presence is “effective and useful,” and Damascus wants them to stay, adding:

“This fabricated crisis has been led from abroad with the purpose of instigating insecurity in Syria and creating a safety margin for the Israeli regime.”

Last May, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) spokesman Ali Shamkhani said ruling authorities in Syria and Iraq requested Iranian military aid to help combat terrorism in their countries.

In late September, US war secretary James Mattis said Pentagon forces will remain in Syria to combat ISIS – jihadists the US created and supports, he failed to explain.

Last month on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, John Bolton said

“(w)e’re not going to leave (Syria) as long as Iranian troops are outside Iranian borders, and that includes Iranian proxies and militias.”

US forces are “outside (their) borders” almost everywhere,

 » Lees verder

Another Nail in the Coffin of US-Russian Relations: US Pulls Out of Open Skies Surveillance Treaty

Another Nail in the Coffin of US-Russian Relations: US Pulls Out of Open Skies Surveillance Treaty

16-08-18 07:56:00,

This means Russia may no longer overfly the US, but America’s many junior allies who remain in the treaty still get to overfly Russia

A little discussed portion of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the $716 billion US military spending bill also defunds US participation in Open Skies Treaty. The move was presented as a way to punish Russia.

Effective since 2002, the Open Skies Treaty has 34 participants. The treaty allows nations to carry out unarmed surveillance flights over one another’s nations, theoretically to build confidence that none of them are secretly building up military forces.

Russian Deputy FM Sergei Ryabkov issued a statement of regret on Tuesday over the US suspension of the treaty. Russian MPs suggested this was a prelude to a new arms race, and would lead to a US arms buildup that dishonoring the treaty is meant to hide.

The language in the NDAA demands an assessment of what Russian surveillance flights over the US are for, and claimed such flights could expose certain American counterintelligence “vulnerabilities.”

  • 234 reads

 » Lees verder

Trump Is Another Obama.

Trump Is Another Obama.

08-01-18 12:06:00,

Go to the profile of Caitlin Johnstone

Caitlin JohnstoneFollow
Rogue journalist, poet, and utopia prepper.
Jan 6

Trump Isn’t Another Hitler. He’s Another Obama.

Not a lot of people remember this, but George W Bush actually campaigned in 2000 against the interventionist foreign policy that the United States had been increasingly espousing. Far from advocating the full-scale regime change ground invasions that his administration is now infamous for, Bush frequently used the word “humble” when discussing the type of foreign policy he favored, condemning nation-building, an over-extended military, and the notion that America should be the world’s police force.
Eight years later, after hundreds of thousands of human lives had been snuffed out in Iraq and Afghanistan and an entire region horrifically destabilized, Obama campaigned against Bush’s interventionist foreign policy, edging out Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries partly because she had supported the Iraq invasion while he had condemned it. The Democrats, decrying the warmongering tendencies of the Republicans, elected a President of the United States who would see Bush’s Afghanistan and Iraq and raise him Libya, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia, along with a tenfold increase in drone strikes. Libya collapsed into a failed state where a slave trade now runs rampant, and half a million people died in the Syrian war that Obama and US allies exponentially escalated.
Eight years later, a reality TV star and WWE Hall-of-Famer was elected President of the United States by the other half of the crowd who was sick to death of those warmongering Democrats. Trump campaigned on a non-interventionist foreign policy, saying America should fight terrorists but not enter into regime change wars with other governments. He thrashed his primary opponents as the only one willing to unequivocally condemn Bush and his actions, then won the general election partly by attacking the interventionist foreign policy of his predecessor and his opponent, and criticizing Hillary Clinton’s hawkish no-fly zone agenda in Syria.
Now he’s approved the selling of arms to Ukraine to use against Russia, a dangerously hawkish move that even Obama refused to make for fear of increasing tensions with Moscow. His administration has escalated troop presence in Afghanistan and made it abundantly clear that the Pentagon has no intention of leaving Syria anytime soon despite the absence of any reasonable justification for US presence there.  » Lees verder