World Politics

[python]

blutto, those were interesting reads.. i follow escobar from time to time. i think he's well informed and sharp but sometimes i am too slow, deliberately so, for his usually predictable angle . i prefer to consult many diverse sources before reading him, that is, if i lean in the direction he's likely to enlighten.

i have been curious of the turkey connection too. their involvement with the tatars is obvious, i just wonder what are turkey's goals ? preventing the russian fleet from attaining stability ? that's rather moot if so b/c they are building another base in novorossiys anyway.

also, while i have little doubt that many individual rioters in kiev were non-locals/foreigners, it is far more significant to figure how they were organized and managed, financed and trained. right now, the many stories originating with the russians i dont view seriously.

 

[blutto]

....part two...


questioning some 200 witnesses.

“… Center UA received more than $500,000 in 2012, according to its annual report for that year, 54 percent of which came from Pact Inc., a project funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development. Nearly 36 percent came from Omidyar Network, a foundation established by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar and his wife. Other donors include the International Renaissance Foundation, whose key funder is billionaire George Soros, and National Endowment for Democracy, funded largely by the U.S. Congress.”

* * * *

What all this adds up to is a journalistic conflict-of-interest of the worst kind: Omidyar working hand-in-glove with US foreign policy agencies to interfere in foreign governments, co-financing regime change with well-known arms of the American empire — while at the same time hiring a growing team of soi-disant ”independent journalists” which vows to investigate the behavior of the US government at home and overseas, and boasts of its uniquely “adversarial” relationship towards these government institutions.

As First Look staffer Jeremy Scahill told the Daily Beast…


We had a long discussion about this internally; about what our position would be if the White House asked us to not publish something…. With us, because we want to be adversarial, they won’t know what bat phone to call. They know who to call at The Times, they know who to call at The Post. With us, who are they going to call? Pierre? Glenn?

Of the many problems that poses, none is more serious than the fact that Omidyar now has the only two people with exclusive access to the complete Snowden NSA cache, Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras. Somehow, the same billionaire who co-financed the “coup” in Ukraine with USAID, also has exclusive access to the NSA secrets—and very few in the independent media dare voice a skeptical word about it.

In the larger sense, this is a problem of 21st century American inequality, of life in a billionaire-dominated era. It is a problem we all have to contend with—PandoDaily’s 18-plus investors include a gaggle of Silicon Valley billionaires like Marc Andreessen (who serves on the board of eBay, chaired by Pierre Omidyar) and Peter Thiel (whose politics I’ve investigated, and described as repugnant.)

But what is more immediately alarming is what makes Omidyar different. Unlike other billionaires, Omidyar has garnered nothing but uncritical, fawning press coverage, particularly from those he has hired. By acquiring a “dream team” of what remains of independent media — Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, Wheeler, my former partner Matt Taibbi — not to mention press “critics” like Jay Rosen — he buys both silence and fawning press.

Both are incredibly useful: Silence, an absence of journalistic curiosity about Omidyar’s activities overseas and at home, has been purchased for the price of whatever his current all-star indie cast currently costs him. As an added bonus, that same investment buys silence from exponentially larger numbers of desperately underpaid independent journalists hoping to someday be on his payroll, and the underfunded media watchdogs that survive on Omidyar Network grants.

And it also buys laughable fluff from the likes of Scahill who also boasted to the Daily Beast of his boss’ close involvement in the day to day running of First Look.


“[Omidyar] strikes me as always sort of political, but I think that the NSA story and the expanding wars put politics for him into a much more prominent place in his existence. This is not a side project that he is doing. Pierre writes more on our internal messaging than anyone else. And he is not micromanaging. This guy has a vision. And his vision is to confront what he sees as an assault on the privacy of Americans.”

Now Wheeler has her answer — that, yes, the revolutionary groups were part-funded by Uncle Sam, but also by her boss — one assumes awkward follow up questions will be asked on that First Look internal messaging system.

Whether Wheeler, Scahill and their colleagues go on to share their concerns publicly will speak volumes about First Look’s much-trumpeted independence, both from Omidyar’s other business interests and from Omidyar’s co-investors in Ukraine: the US government.

Cheers

 

[blutto]

blutto, those were interesting reads.. i follow escobar from time to time. i think he's well informed and sharp but sometimes i am too slow, deliberately so, for his usually predictable angle . i prefer to consult many diverse sources before reading him, that is, if i lean in the direction he's likely to enlighten.

i have been curious of the turkey connection too. their involvement with the tatars is obvious, i just wonder what are turkey's goals ? preventing the russian fleet from attaining stability ? that's rather moot if so b/c they are building another base in novorossiys anyway.

also, while i have little doubt that many individual rioters in kiev were non-locals/foreigners, it is far more significant to figure how they were organized and managed, financed and trained. right now, the many stories originating with the russians i dont view seriously.

....don't really know absolutely beyond that reference but it could be seen as just another job for a key part of the gang that is raising Cane in Syria...though it is interesting that the first move by Putin was into Crimea and not into areas that are more obviously "Russian"....maybe that move was to deal with the most pressing problem, Turkish involvement...

..do keep in mind Turkey had US ICBM's on their soil during the height of the Cold War ( so the connection with US military interests and objectives is long....and the Turks don't seem to shy away from dangerous assignments....having ICBM's on what was the USSR southern border was pretty crazy given the potential blow-back...)...

...there have also been rumours of Israeli involvement....which given Israeli involvement in the recent Georgian conflict may not be so farfetched....Israelis have long been "cleaners" during various CIA operation and are also a big player in the Syrian conflict...

Cheers

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

So you'd have hundreds of millions of people re-enslaved under a brutal system of dictatorships, in order to satisfy a hate you have?

What we have now? Enslaved and battered countries all over the world who feed the oil hunger (next to other things) of a 300 million people country (Where half of the population is looking from the outside in in a very poor 3rd world kind statuts. Really sweet to have that kind of "freedom & democracy").
In the old days it was at least a level playing field.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

And this seems to be historically the modus operandi of US backed coups: place a fascist/anti-social regime in power through financial backing in the name of capitalism and to hell with the horrendous consequences this has for the local ethnic populations. So long as the expansion of the "free-market" is ensured and the socialist boogeyman is thwarted (this, of little concern today) the ends justify the means.

There's a lot of talk about "invasion," well more insidious forms besides sending troops exist. When you can simply impose a government to your image and liking through coercion and bribery, then there's no need to invade with an army. It's far less messy in appearance and the stupid masses don't realize what you've done.

Tito's fall and the disillusionment of the social Pan-Slavia had given way to ethnic cleansing. Sure the dictator's iron fist was potent, though was here imposed in light of a greater cause, namely prevention of the type of nationalisms that led to the ethnic disaster in its absence. You can bet with Russia in control of Ukraine similar efforts to unite the disparate parties to avoid the worst ethnic-religious conflicts would be policy. By contrast, as has been witnessed time and time again, a US and Western backed fascist regime would only exacerbate them.

1+
And one of the biggest examples, the blue print that was always followed since, was the putsch in Chile. That was the time the dark age of US imperialism begun to blossom. Ukraine is the latest victim unless Russia stops them...

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1033593

There is missing a lot of countries. Ok they wasn´t directly putsched, but they were implemented with the shock doctrine the Friedman ways. Basically the whole South America, many Asia countries, South Africa, eastern europe countries after the fall of the wall and so on...
"Freedom & democracy" crusades by the US only bring scorched earth, ethnic conflicts, plundering of natural resources that only benfit the multi co-orperations, and poverty worse than the last dictator in power left the country with.
This dirty game is repeated again and again.

 

[RetroActive]

blutto, those were interesting reads.. i follow escobar from time to time. i think he's well informed and sharp but sometimes i am too slow, deliberately so, for his usually predictable angle . i prefer to consult many diverse sources before reading him, that is, if i lean in the direction he's likely to enlighten.

i have been curious of the turkey connection too. their involvement with the tatars is obvious, i just wonder what are turkey's goals ? preventing the russian fleet from attaining stability ? that's rather moot if so b/c they are building another base in novorossiys anyway.

also, while i have little doubt that many individual rioters in kiev were non-locals/foreigners, it is far more significant to figure how they were organized and managed, financed and trained. right now, the many stories originating with the russians i dont view seriously.

Sibel Edmonds Gladio B
https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en-...0...1.1.34.heirloom-hp..0.22.2765.hADsvlIcvLE

Turkey appears to be the lynchpin. It's really about the battle for central Asia as outlined by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book "The Grand Chessboard".

 

[RetroActive]

....part two...


questioning some 200 witnesses.

“… Center UA received more than $500,000 in 2012, according to its annual report for that year, 54 percent of which came from Pact Inc., a project funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development. Nearly 36 percent came from Omidyar Network, a foundation established by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar and his wife. Other donors include the International Renaissance Foundation, whose key funder is billionaire George Soros, and National Endowment for Democracy, funded largely by the U.S. Congress.”

* * * *

What all this adds up to is a journalistic conflict-of-interest of the worst kind: Omidyar working hand-in-glove with US foreign policy agencies to interfere in foreign governments, co-financing regime change with well-known arms of the American empire — while at the same time hiring a growing team of soi-disant ”independent journalists” which vows to investigate the behavior of the US government at home and overseas, and boasts of its uniquely “adversarial” relationship towards these government institutions.

As First Look staffer Jeremy Scahill told the Daily Beast…


We had a long discussion about this internally; about what our position would be if the White House asked us to not publish something…. With us, because we want to be adversarial, they won’t know what bat phone to call. They know who to call at The Times, they know who to call at The Post. With us, who are they going to call? Pierre? Glenn?

Of the many problems that poses, none is more serious than the fact that Omidyar now has the only two people with exclusive access to the complete Snowden NSA cache, Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras. Somehow, the same billionaire who co-financed the “coup” in Ukraine with USAID, also has exclusive access to the NSA secrets—and very few in the independent media dare voice a skeptical word about it.

In the larger sense, this is a problem of 21st century American inequality, of life in a billionaire-dominated era. It is a problem we all have to contend with—PandoDaily’s 18-plus investors include a gaggle of Silicon Valley billionaires like Marc Andreessen (who serves on the board of eBay, chaired by Pierre Omidyar) and Peter Thiel (whose politics I’ve investigated, and described as repugnant.)

But what is more immediately alarming is what makes Omidyar different. Unlike other billionaires, Omidyar has garnered nothing but uncritical, fawning press coverage, particularly from those he has hired. By acquiring a “dream team” of what remains of independent media — Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, Wheeler, my former partner Matt Taibbi — not to mention press “critics” like Jay Rosen — he buys both silence and fawning press.

Both are incredibly useful: Silence, an absence of journalistic curiosity about Omidyar’s activities overseas and at home, has been purchased for the price of whatever his current all-star indie cast currently costs him. As an added bonus, that same investment buys silence from exponentially larger numbers of desperately underpaid independent journalists hoping to someday be on his payroll, and the underfunded media watchdogs that survive on Omidyar Network grants.

And it also buys laughable fluff from the likes of Scahill who also boasted to the Daily Beast of his boss’ close involvement in the day to day running of First Look.


“[Omidyar] strikes me as always sort of political, but I think that the NSA story and the expanding wars put politics for him into a much more prominent place in his existence. This is not a side project that he is doing. Pierre writes more on our internal messaging than anyone else. And he is not micromanaging. This guy has a vision. And his vision is to confront what he sees as an assault on the privacy of Americans.”

Now Wheeler has her answer — that, yes, the revolutionary groups were part-funded by Uncle Sam, but also by her boss — one assumes awkward follow up questions will be asked on that First Look internal messaging system.

Whether Wheeler, Scahill and their colleagues go on to share their concerns publicly will speak volumes about First Look’s much-trumpeted independence, both from Omidyar’s other business interests and from Omidyar’s co-investors in Ukraine: the US government.

Cheers

...create, corrupt, co-opt...it's how the machine rolls.

 

[RetroActive]

The question could be posed another way: what do you think of the numerous state sponsored coups in the name of extending US economic hegemony throughout the globe, which caused untold deaths and suffering while toppling democratically legitimized governments? I guess it's ok as long as it's done in the name of pro-Americanism? Condemnable actions don’t become virtuous based on whose doing them.

Then, like the free market, it’s the strong powers ability to break the rules by which any intervention, or military action, is given international legitimacy, without having to pay the price for breaking them: the same way the giant multi-nationals can get away from their full fiscal responsibility to the collective, in ways for which the small business get heavily penalized. When Iraq invaded Kuwait the repercussions were what they were, though when the US invaded Iraq on spurious charges the "coalition of the willing" was dragged in under UN aegis.

Even this, though, isn't what should be debated here. What's important to recognize is that for far too long the strong powers have made prey of those weak ones, whenever the opportunity has arisen to augment their sphere of power and economic influence. However in the current chess game being played out, its the usual victims of those that have impoverished them who are made to pay the heavy penalty for other's benefit.

Putin is the worst type of anti-democratic leader, however, I don't see anything worse about Russia's invasion of the Crimea, than the greed and power driven motives behind why the US and Western plutocrats find it necessary to extend their market sphere into near Asia. At some point the anachronistic colonial and Cold War policy needs to be given up and replaced with something less opportunistic, predatory and objective before anything else. That’s what’s missing in all of this: objectivity.

I'm not sure how you mean this but I think it's worth noting that "anti-democratic" in contemporary western propaganda appears to mean nothing more than closed for western corporate business, or at least not completely under their sway. Democracy, or anti-democracy, is the new communism in many instances from my perch anyway.

 

[rhubroma]

....part two...


questioning some 200 witnesses.

“… Center UA received more than $500,000 in 2012, according to its annual report for that year, 54 percent of which came from Pact Inc., a project funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development. Nearly 36 percent came from Omidyar Network, a foundation established by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar and his wife. Other donors include the International Renaissance Foundation, whose key funder is billionaire George Soros, and National Endowment for Democracy, funded largely by the U.S. Congress.”

* * * *

What all this adds up to is a journalistic conflict-of-interest of the worst kind: Omidyar working hand-in-glove with US foreign policy agencies to interfere in foreign governments, co-financing regime change with well-known arms of the American empire — while at the same time hiring a growing team of soi-disant ”independent journalists” which vows to investigate the behavior of the US government at home and overseas, and boasts of its uniquely “adversarial” relationship towards these government institutions.

As First Look staffer Jeremy Scahill told the Daily Beast…


We had a long discussion about this internally; about what our position would be if the White House asked us to not publish something…. With us, because we want to be adversarial, they won’t know what bat phone to call. They know who to call at The Times, they know who to call at The Post. With us, who are they going to call? Pierre? Glenn?

Of the many problems that poses, none is more serious than the fact that Omidyar now has the only two people with exclusive access to the complete Snowden NSA cache, Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras. Somehow, the same billionaire who co-financed the “coup” in Ukraine with USAID, also has exclusive access to the NSA secrets—and very few in the independent media dare voice a skeptical word about it.

In the larger sense, this is a problem of 21st century American inequality, of life in a billionaire-dominated era. It is a problem we all have to contend with—PandoDaily’s 18-plus investors include a gaggle of Silicon Valley billionaires like Marc Andreessen (who serves on the board of eBay, chaired by Pierre Omidyar) and Peter Thiel (whose politics I’ve investigated, and described as repugnant.)

But what is more immediately alarming is what makes Omidyar different. Unlike other billionaires, Omidyar has garnered nothing but uncritical, fawning press coverage, particularly from those he has hired. By acquiring a “dream team” of what remains of independent media — Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, Wheeler, my former partner Matt Taibbi — not to mention press “critics” like Jay Rosen — he buys both silence and fawning press.

Both are incredibly useful: Silence, an absence of journalistic curiosity about Omidyar’s activities overseas and at home, has been purchased for the price of whatever his current all-star indie cast currently costs him. As an added bonus, that same investment buys silence from exponentially larger numbers of desperately underpaid independent journalists hoping to someday be on his payroll, and the underfunded media watchdogs that survive on Omidyar Network grants.

And it also buys laughable fluff from the likes of Scahill who also boasted to the Daily Beast of his boss’ close involvement in the day to day running of First Look.


“[Omidyar] strikes me as always sort of political, but I think that the NSA story and the expanding wars put politics for him into a much more prominent place in his existence. This is not a side project that he is doing. Pierre writes more on our internal messaging than anyone else. And he is not micromanaging. This guy has a vision. And his vision is to confront what he sees as an assault on the privacy of Americans.”

Now Wheeler has her answer — that, yes, the revolutionary groups were part-funded by Uncle Sam, but also by her boss — one assumes awkward follow up questions will be asked on that First Look internal messaging system.

Whether Wheeler, Scahill and their colleagues go on to share their concerns publicly will speak volumes about First Look’s much-trumpeted independence, both from Omidyar’s other business interests and from Omidyar’s co-investors in Ukraine: the US government.

Cheers

Agreed with python those were good reads, which reaffirm a praxis we already know of political and economic sabotage to feed the corporate-finance leviathan.

FoxxyBrown has succinctly recalled the dramatic results for the unseen and largely unheard majority populations involved, to the benefit of an ever restricted class of Western (and not just American, it must be said) plutocrats and their minions, the ruling political-business classes in the provinces.

Still it's impressive how, under liberalism, the division between the state and private enterprise have created the very conditions through which they have been inseparably brought together, in a perverse alliance of special interests that's played-of as "for the public good" and in "the nation's interests." Of course, neither the public nor nation exist in the transnational universe of financial governance: only profit and wealth acquisition of corporate enterprise. This is the salient point the article brought up about the occult means by which Pax Americana has elaborated and obtained its strategic objectives.

Like I said before its very messy business. But as long as the leviathan gets fed, it’s easy to keep the people ignorant and raise their consensus against the "big bad guy" (who may indeed be so) who sends in ground troops to ruin the party, against what was palmed off as a "democratic revolution."

 

[rhubroma]

I'm not sure how you mean this but I think it's worth noting that "anti-democratic" in contemporary western propaganda appears to mean nothing more than closed for western corporate business, or at least not completely under their sway. Democracy, or anti-democracy, is the new communism in many instances from my perch anyway.

Well, sure, that too. I was thinking, however, along the more conventional lines of say eliminating all the opposition, or the legislation against gays, the incarceration of Pu$$y-Riot, the persecution and even death of any that stand in the way, and so forth. Yet by all acounts he's quite popular nonetheless and, while Russia is certainly far from a model of freedom, from someone I know who has lived there for twenty years not really a bad place if the climate and culture suits you I guess.

 

[RetroActive]

Well, sure, that too. I was thinking, however, along the more conventional lines of say eliminating all the opposition, or the legislation against gays, the incarceration of Pu$$y-Riot, the persecution and even death of any that stand in the way, and so forth. Yet by all acounts he's quite popular nonetheless and, while Russia is certainly far from a model of freedom, from someone I know who has lived there for twenty years not really a bad place if the climate and culture suits you I guess.

I basically knew where you were coming from but I thought I'd check it out as the level of propaganda surrounding the word democracy has become feverish, as in sick.

I've never been to Russia so I really don't know. My impression is that Russians (in general) appreciate a strong man to lead.

 

[RetroActive]

Blutto didn't provide a link so I will:
http://pando.com/2014/02/28/pierre-...ion-groups-with-us-government-documents-show/

Greenwald has responded, which is linked at the bottom of the Ames article.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/03/01/journalistic-independence/

Let’s leave to the side the laughable hyperbole that Omidyar is now the mastermind who has secretly engineered the Ukrainian uprising. Let’s also leave to the side a vital fact that people like this Pando writer steadfastly ignore: that there are numerous media entities in possession of tens of thousands of Snowden documents, including The Guardian, Bart Gellman/The Washington Post, The New York Times, and ProPublica, rendering absurd any conspiracy theories that Omidyar can control which documents are or are not published.

The real falsehood here is that Omidyar himself has any access, let alone “exclusive access”, to “the NSA secrets.” This is nothing short of a fabrication. The writer of this article just made that up.

The only Snowden documents Omidyar has ever seen are the ones that have been published as part of stories in media outlets around the world. He has no possession of those documents and no access to them. He has never sought or received access to those documents. He has played no role whatsoever in deciding which ones will be reported. He obviously plays no role in deciding which documents all those other news outlets will report. Other than generally conveying that there is much reporting left to be done on these documents – something I’ve publicly said many times – I don’t believe I’ve ever even had a single discussion with him about a single document in the archive

...and Paul Carr has jumped in responding to Greenwald...Wee Have a RrrUuummmmBle.
http://pando.com/2014/03/01/on-the-...oom-and-not-treating-your-readers-like-fools/

 

[rhubroma]

Good to see you, blutto. I shall return after Feyenoord-Ajax finishes.

In short, what we've got here is a big, juicy sh!t sandwich....

I love how you never mix words old chap.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I must say I am positively surprised by the good insightful posts by "blutto", "RetroActive", "rhubroma", "python", and some others with open eyes. Not all hope is lost.

And even those who can only offer insulting posts as counter "arguments" like "del1962" or "jens_attacks" one day will wake up when their beautiful life/job/small business is literally eradicated by neocon "reforms/laws" to the benefit of big business. That day will certainly come.
Last time I visited the USA (end 90s) it looked already pretty bad. The inner cities of NYC, and especially Oakland & LA looked already as worse (poverty-wise) as Nairobi. I can only wonder how it is now.
But yeah, go on and celebrate the necons as the good bringers of "freedom & democracy", and those who stand against them as whatever you call us.

 

[gooner]

Amazing to see the anti-American comments with Russia roared on as the coming of our saviour which is the same country that were up to their necks in arm deals with Syria and using their veto in the UN as they were killing their own people.

All is forgotten now though.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Amazing to see the anti-American comments with Russia roared on as the coming of our saviour which is the same country that were up to their necks in arm deals with Syria and using their veto in the UN as they were killing their own people.

All is forgotten now though.

Why don´t you bring up the arms deals by Germany, and of course USA for example?
Just some days ago, we had a good docu about Heckler & Koch here, how they feed the drug gangs war in Mexico. Killings "Made in Germany" right in front of the BFF USA.
Or how about a story about the USA millitary budget that is as big as all the other 200+ countries combined?

Always this diversionary maneuvers...

 

[RetroActive]

Amazing to see the anti-American comments with Russia roared on as the coming of our saviour which is the same country that were up to their necks in arm deals with Syria and using their veto in the UN as they were killing their own people.

All is forgotten now though.

lol, I love the simplicity.

I simply see Bruxelles (the EU), the City of London, Wall st., Washington D.C., Tel Aviv and Moscow- all of them- as criminal gangs involved in turf wars. The first five generally cooperate, often against the sixth. It's so much simpler.
How could I forget Beijing? Them too, gang 7 of the big 7.

 

[blutto]

Say what you want about G.W. Bush, but he wouldn't have stood for Russian aggression in the Ukraine
.
.
.
.
.
He'd have invaded New Zealand by now.

Cheers

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

lol, I love the simplicity.

I simply see Bruxelles (the EU), the City of London, Wall st., Washington D.C., Tel Aviv and Moscow- all of them- as criminal gangs involved in turf wars. The first five generally cooperate, often against the sixth. It's so much simpler.
How could I forget Beijing? Them too, gang 7 of the big 7.

I would sign that.
But what is disturbing, is that only China and Russia are circled in as the evil ones.
If the first five wouldn´t be too greedy, there was no conflicts next to Russias borders, or in South America, or Asia, or Africa, or Middle America, or eastern europe...

 

[rhubroma]

Amazing to see the anti-American comments with Russia roared on as the coming of our saviour which is the same country that were up to their necks in arm deals with Syria and using their veto in the UN as they were killing their own people.

All is forgotten now though.

As far as arming governments go to fight colonial wars, I don't think there is need to walk down that slippery slope.

While where has anybody among the so-called "anti-American" brigade here made Russia out to be the savior? I don't see it, because nobody's said it. Rather the complexities of an extremely delicate regional drama make it necessary to look beyond the usual ideological views of good vs. bad guys, which the propagandists of both camps count upon to gain consensus; to come up with a possibly objective analysis, in which no solution is ideal, though, given the background and local reality, at least entirely not fortuitous.

Amster has humorously and succinctly reminded us, at least for those among the critically minded, that all is indeed not forgotten.

 

[gooner]

Why don´t you bring up the arms deals by Germany, and of course USA for example?
Just some days ago, we had a good docu about Heckler & Koch here, how they feed the drug gangs war in Mexico. Killings "Made in Germany" right in front of the BFF USA.
Or how about a story about the USA millitary budget that is as big as all the other 200+ countries combined?

Always this diversionary maneuvers...

I have criticised US foreign policy on this forum(check the US politics thread) but all I see here is the use of the situation to selectively portray the US as the bad boy while Putin is the light and shining armour that has come to the rescue.

Foxxy, you seem to forget The Budapest Memorandum and what it entailed with respect to Ukraine's borders.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I have criticised US foreign policy on this forum(check the US politics thread) but all I see here is the use of the situation to selectively portray the US as the bad boy while Putin is the light and shining armour that has come to the rescue.

Foxxy, you seem to forget The Budapest Memorandum and what it entailed with respect to Ukraine's borders.

The feel good stories about the USA are written in the mainstream press. No need to give them space here.
I don´t know which rules apply now for Ukraine (I am no law expert). But what I see and read is that an illegal mob regime, financed by western necon NGOs, is proclaimed as the new leaders of Ukraine. I don´t think that anything they do is in the name of Ukraine. So I further think Russia has all rights to defend themselves...

 

[python]

Say what you want about G.W. Bush, but he wouldn't have stood for Russian aggression in the Ukraine
.
.
.
.
.
He'd have invaded New Zealand by now.

Cheers

not sure how serious/caustic you were, but if he presided TODAY, he'd bark just as loud as obama whilst quietly reaching out to a fellow intelligence pro.

the west has no winning military option, none, strategy-wise speaking, and even if there was one, you dont want to face off with today's russian army on its own turf. it is day and night compared to 2008.


sorry, did i confuse the bushes ?

 

[rhubroma]

I basically knew where you were coming from but I thought I'd check it out as the level of propaganda surrounding the word democracy has become feverish, as in sick.

I've never been to Russia so I really don't know. My impression is that Russians (in general) appreciate a strong man to lead.

Yes and I'm convinced it is a product of their orthodox tradition, in terms of following a kultur of established hierarchies. It's not for nothing that Moscow was called the third Roma, after Constantinople, the seat of Byzantium, and that the supreme ruler within its oligarchic system was called, Tsar (Caesar). Even the Bolsheviks transformed the sacrality of orthodoxy, into the sanctification of power under Soviet-style communism.

We among the "democratic" states simply have a hard time coming to grips with those that simply prefer to be ruled by an aristocratic establishment, as if it were somehow out of the natural order (while throughout the history of civilization, the rule of the people was just that). Although the first signs of change among the so-called people of the Great Bear are seemingly beginning to appear.

Of course in Russia this gets blamed, in the reactionary sense, on an intrusive Western imperialism. Putin even said as much. Interesting to consider the different perspectives, under a scientific lense.