Softpanorama

Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Bigger doesn't imply better. Bigger often is a sign of obesity, of lost control, of overcomplexity, of cancerous cells

Neoconservatism

Neocons are attack dogs of neoliberalism and lobbyists for MIC:  "national security parasites"

"There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare." ~Sun Tzu

News Neoliberalism as a New Form of Corporatism Recommended Links New American Militarism American Exceptionalism Neocon foreign policy is a disaster for the USA
"F*ck the EU": State Department neocons show EU its real place Hillary "Warmonger" Clinton Demonization of Putin Anti Trump Hysteria The Great Democratic Party Betrayal: Pro-War Democrats as Vichy Left Anti-Russian hysteria in connection emailgate and DNC leak
Wolfowitz Doctrine Audacious Oligarchy and "Democracy for Winners" Nation under attack meme Neocons Credibility Scam Inside "democracy promotion" hypocrisy fair Obama: a yet another Neocon
War is Racket Media-Military-Industrial Complex Merkel as Soft Cop in Neocon Offensive on Eastern Europe and Russia Madeleine Albright Samantha Power Susan Rice
Robert Kagan Anatol Leiven on American Messianism National Security State / Surveillance State Predator state National Socialism and Military Keysianism Roots of Reaganolatry 
Neoliberalism as a New form of Corporatism Neocolonialism as Financial Imperialism IMF as the key institution for neoliberal debt enslavement Machiavellism vs Mayberry Machiavellians Gangster Capitalism: The United States and the Globalization of Organized Crime Power abroad rests on justice and decency at home
The Deep State Amorality and criminality of neoliberal elite Corporatist Corruption: Systemic Fraud under Clinton-Bush-Obama Regime Two Party System as polyarchy Neoliberal Propaganda: Journalism In the Service of the Powerful Few  Leo Strauss and the Neocons
Color revolutions Neoliberal Compradors and lumpenelite From EuroMaidan to EuroAnschluss Hong Cong Color Revolution of 2014 Russian White Revolution of 2011-2012 Conservatives Without Conscience
War is racket War is a Racket - Incredible Essay by General Smedley Butler Media domination strategy Bureaucracy as a Political Coalition Bureaucratic avoidance of responsibility Bureaucratic Collectivism
Fighting Russophobia Neo-fascism Anti-Americanism Torture Politically Incorrect Humor Etc

Due to the size an introduction was converted to a separate page Neoconservatism, an introduction

Neoconservatives, which like Bolsheviks in the past are mostly Jewish intellectuals, are frequently described as ideologues with pro-Israel and anti-Russian bent, but the truth is that they are far more interested in gaining access to money and power. Most of them are useless smacks with degree in journalism or history and they would starve if not fed by military industrial complex. Being a lobbyist of military industrial complex is the only job they can get. Add to that that most of them are personal cowards and chicken hawks and you get the picture: they are just bottom-feeders. "National security parasites" is a very apt definition for this category of people.

Large part of neocons consist of a large class of elite-wannabes, often well-educated and highly capable, who has been denied access to elite positions and who decided to use warmongering backdoor to get there

Proselytizing their own brand of global regime change is just a mean to sustain the access to funds and political power.  They know perfectly well which side of the bread is buttered and by whom.   We can suspect that for many of them (Max Boot is a good example here) access to money from MIC and Israel lobby is the primary driving force. Often they are viewed as Likud lobby in the USA:  "The definition of a neocon is somebody who has great difficulty distinguishing between the strategic interests of Israel, on the one hand, and the strategic interests of the United States on the other. Israel wants bedlam in Syria, and they’ve got it." ( Israel lobby in the United States - Wikipedia ):

The formal component of the Israel lobby consists of organized lobby groups, political action committees (PACs), think tanks and media watchdog groups. The Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks all lobbies and PACs, describes the ‘background’ of those ‘Pro-Israel’ as, “A nationwide network of local political action committees, generally named after the region their donors come from, supplies much of the pro-Israel money in US politics. Additional funds also come from individuals who bundle contributions to candidates favored by the PACs. The donors' unified goal is to build stronger US-Israel relations and to support Israel in its negotiations and armed conflicts with its Arab neighbors.”[24]

According to Mitchell Bard, there are, three key formal lobbying groups:

... ... ...

A summary of pro-Israel campaign donations for the period of 1990–2008 collected by Center for Responsive Politics indicates current totals and a general increase in proportional donations to the US Republican party since 1996.[46] The Center for Responsive Politics' 1990–2006 data shows that "pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990."[47] In contrast, Arab-Americans and Muslim PACs contributed slightly less than $800,000 during the same (1990–2006) period.[48] In 2006, 60% of the Democratic Party’s fundraising and 25% of that for the Republican Party's fundraising came from Jewish-funded PACs. According to a Washington Post estimate, Democratic presidential candidates depend on Jewish sources for as much as 60% of money raised from private sources.[49]

... ... ...

AIPAC does not give donations directly to candidates, but those who donate to AIPAC are often important political contributors in their own right. In addition, AIPAC helps connect donors with candidates, especially to the network of pro-Israel political action committees. AIPAC president Howard Friedman says “AIPAC meets with every candidate running for Congress. These candidates receive in-depth briefings to help them completely understand the complexities of Israel’s predicament and that of the Middle East as a whole. We even ask each candidate to author a ‘position paper’ on their views of the US-Israel relationship – so it’s clear where they stand on the subject.”[43]

.... ... ...

Mearsheimer and Walt state that “pro-Israel figures have established a commanding presence at the American Enterprise Institute, the Center for Security Policy, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). These think tanks are all decidedly pro-Israel and include few, if any, critics of US support for the Jewish state.”[50]

When strategic interests of Israeli (for example remaking of the Middle East so that Israel can exercise dominant power in this region; which includes fragmentation of several existing states) deviate from the strategic interests of the USA (which mostly are interested in uninterruptable supply of cheap oil) neocons do betray the USA national interests with ease. The US-Israel relationship significantly damages the relationship between the United States and the Arab world. They also were serving as propagandists and influencers for all recent Middle East military adventures and regime change efforts.  Recently that was the case in Syria: in no way Assad government represented a threat to the USA interests. Still the pressure of "likudniks" was such that the USA engaged in the "regime change" efforts.

But in reality they should be viewed more like lobbing group of MIC then lobbing group of Israel. As well as transnational corporations interested in opening new markets. But recently facts that Israel spend large sums on money on trying to influence the USA politicians came to light and to this extent one gets impression that the tail is wagging the dog. 

They should probably be viewed as the lobbying and propaganda arm of military industrial complex. In now way they represent an important political force on the USA political landscape. With Democratic Party becoming the second  warmongering party.

And there is not much conservative in neocon ideology -- it is basically a revamped Trotskyism, if not neo-fascism. Just look at Nuland's fraternization with Ukrainian far right nationalists despite her Jewish roots (and despite the fact that this movement was hell-bent on killing Jewish people during WWII and served as capos in concentration camps)  is not accidental; this was a conscious political choice -- they are birds of the feather.

Ideologically they are a more militant flavor of neoliberals ("neoliberals with the gun", so to speak). So their neo-Trotskyites roots are especially evident in foreign policy (they do not have a coherent domestic policy; but generally their views are more aligned with the  Democratic Party than Republican Party views).  Again, we will essentially view then as "neoliberals with a gun".


Top Visited
Switchboard
Latest
Past week
Past month

NEWS CONTENTS

Old News ;-)

Home 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003

For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[Dec 09, 2018] Carlson is saying Trump's not "capable" of sustained focus on the sausage-making of right-wing policy

Dec 09, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

kees_popinga , December 8, 2018 at 12:43 pm

Tucker Carlson: "Trump is not capable" Weltwoche (Anita)

Carlson is saying Trump's not "capable" of sustained focus on the sausage-making of right-wing policy. The clickbait (out of context) headline makes it sound like a more general diss. I'm not supporting Trump here [standard disclaimer], but these gotcha headlines are tiresome.

[Dec 09, 2018] Pax Americana: Pompeo tells UN, WTO, ICC to bow and comply with US-led world order

Notable quotes:
"... The senior member of the Donald Trump administration said a multilateral approach is failing to produce a world of unrestricted capitalism, so the US should rule supreme – sorry, assume a leadership role – to ensure that countries like China didn't try to offer an alternative way. ..."
"... The UN is a vehicle for regional powers to "collude" and vote in bad actors into the Human Rights Council. "Bad actors" are of course not Saudi Arabia. The World Bank and the International Monetary fund are in the way of private lenders. The EU is good, but Brexit should be a wake-up call for its bureaucracy, which doesn't know how good nationalism actually is. The International Criminal Court is "rogue" because it attempts to hold Americans accountable for crimes in Afghanistan. ..."
"... But what organization was a good boy and doesn't deserve a piece of coal from Uncle Sam? SWIFT was. The banking communications organization caved in to Washington and cut off Iranians from its system, so it has a place in the bright new world of US leadership. ..."
"... "new liberal order" ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | www.rt.com

The US will lead a new liberal world order, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo declared. Organizations and treaties not fitting this picture must be scrapped or reformed, so that non-compliers could not use them against America. The vision of the bold new and prosperous (for the US and its supporters) world was delivered by Pompeo in a keynote speech to the German Marshall Fund on Tuesday.

The senior member of the Donald Trump administration said a multilateral approach is failing to produce a world of unrestricted capitalism, so the US should rule supreme – sorry, assume a leadership role – to ensure that countries like China didn't try to offer an alternative way.

China, as well as Russia, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and other nations on the US grudge list got their share of bashing in the speech, but its focus was more on international institutions, which Pompeo claimed to be incompatible with his grand vision.

The UN is a vehicle for regional powers to "collude" and vote in bad actors into the Human Rights Council. "Bad actors" are of course not Saudi Arabia. The World Bank and the International Monetary fund are in the way of private lenders. The EU is good, but Brexit should be a wake-up call for its bureaucracy, which doesn't know how good nationalism actually is. The International Criminal Court is "rogue" because it attempts to hold Americans accountable for crimes in Afghanistan.

Also on rt.com 'Surrealism': Iran blasts US claim its missile test violated UN resolution on nuclear deal

The Paris Agreement on climate change was bad for America, so it left. NAFTA was bad for America, so it forced a renegotiation. The nuclear deal with Iran didn't make Tehran complacent, so it had to go.

But what organization was a good boy and doesn't deserve a piece of coal from Uncle Sam? SWIFT was. The banking communications organization caved in to Washington and cut off Iranians from its system, so it has a place in the bright new world of US leadership.

Watch Murad Gazdiev's report about Pompeo's "new liberal order" to find out more.

[Dec 09, 2018] Die Weltwoche Weltwoche Online – www.weltwoche.ch Tucker Carlson Trump is not capable Die Weltwoche, Ausgabe 49-2018

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... He hasn't? ..."
"... I've come to believe that Trump's role is not as a conventional president who promises to get certain things achieved to the Congress and then does. I don't think he's capable. I don't think he's capable of sustained focus. I don't think he understands the system. I don't think the Congress is on his side. I don't think his own agencies support him. He's not going to do that. ..."
"... I think Trump's role is to begin the conversation about what actually matters. We were not having any conversation about immigration before Trump arrived in Washington. ..."
"... Trump asked basic questions like' "Why don't our borders work?" "Why should we sign a trade agreement and let the other side cheat?" Or my favorite of all, "What's the point of NATO?" The point of NATO was to keep the Soviets from invading western Europe but they haven't existed in 27 years, so what is the point? These are obvious questions that no one could answer. ..."
"... I mean let me just be clear. I'm not against an aristocratic system. I'm not against a ruling class. I think that hierarchies are natural, people create them in every society. I just think the system that we have now the meritocracy, which is based really on our education system, on a small number of colleges has produced a ruling class that doesn't have the self-awareness that you need to be wise. ..."
"... it was only after the financial crisis of 08 that I noticed that something was really out of whack, because Washington didn't really feel the crisis. ..."
"... If you leave Washington and drive to say Pittsburgh, which is a manufacturing town about three and a half hours to the west, you drive through a series of little towns that are devastated. There are no car dealerships, there are no restaurants. There's nothing. They have not recovered. I remember driving out there one day, maybe eight or nine years ago and thinking, boy, this is a disaster. ..."
"... That's kind of strange since we're the capital city in charge of making policy for everybody else... Massive inequality does not work in a democracy... ..."
"... If you make above a certain income, or if you live in my neighborhood, you have zero physical contact with other Americans. In other words, the elite in our country is physically separated in a way that's very unhealthy for a democracy, very unhealthy. ..."
"... The Democratic Party, which for 100 years was the party of average people is now the party of the rich. ..."
"... He served the purpose of bringing the middle class into the Republican Party, which had zero interest, no interest in representing them at all. Trump is intuitive, he felt, he could smell that there was this large group of voters who had no one representing them and he brought them to the Republican side, but the realignment is still ongoing. ..."
"... In other words, the Democratic Party used to represent the middle class, it no longer does, it now hates the middle class. ..."
"... I do think, going forward the Republican Party will wake up and realize these are our voters and we're going to represent them whether we want it or not. ..."
"... I am deeply suspicious of foreign adventurism, voluntary wars, wars of self-defense are not controversial, I'm for them completely, there's an invasion repellent. The idea that you would send 100,000 troops to a country to improve its political system is grotesque to me. It would've been grotesque to them. ..."
"... The Vietnam War was horrifying to them because it was a voluntary war, waged for theoretical reasons, geostrategic reasons which they rejected, and I do too. ..."
"... We can make autonomous choices about how we respond to market forces. People get crushed beneath its wheels. ..."
"... Capitalism drives change, innovation change, the old ways give way to new ways of doing things, and in the process of change the weak get hurt always, this was true in industrialization 100 years ago and it's true in the digital revolution now. What's changed is that nobody is standing up on behalf of the people who are being crushed by the change. ..."
"... In your book, you say they've vanishing but they seem to come back again. ..."
"... Have you ever seen this amount of discontent and aggression here in your lifetime? ..."
"... How close to a revolution is your country? ..."
"... The country is getting redder and bluer. ..."
"... Do you think that Europe will get in control of the migration? ..."
Dec 09, 2018 | www.weltwoche.ch

The Swiss are very suspicious of anybody who is boastful. That's why I have a question about Trump

I hate that about him. I hate that it's not my culture. I didn't grow up like that.

In your book you speak a lot about people who attack Trump, but you actually don't say very much about Trump's record.

That's true.

Do you think he has kept his promises? Has he achieved his goals?

No.

He hasn't?

No. His chief promises were that he would build the wall, de-fund planned parenthood, and repeal Obamacare, and he hasn't done any of those things. There are a lot of reasons for that, but since I finished writing the book, I've come to believe that Trump's role is not as a conventional president who promises to get certain things achieved to the Congress and then does. I don't think he's capable. I don't think he's capable of sustained focus. I don't think he understands the system. I don't think the Congress is on his side. I don't think his own agencies support him. He's not going to do that.

I think Trump's role is to begin the conversation about what actually matters. We were not having any conversation about immigration before Trump arrived in Washington. People were bothered about it in different places in the country. It's a huge country, but that was not a staple of political debate at all. Trump asked basic questions like' "Why don't our borders work?" "Why should we sign a trade agreement and let the other side cheat?" Or my favorite of all, "What's the point of NATO?" The point of NATO was to keep the Soviets from invading western Europe but they haven't existed in 27 years, so what is the point? These are obvious questions that no one could answer.

Apart from asking these very important questions has he really achieved nothing?

Not much. Not much. Much less than he should have. I've come to believe he's not capable of it.

Why should he be not capable?

Because the legislative process in this country by design is highly complex, and it's designed to be complex as a way of diffusing power, of course, because the people who framed our Constitution, founded our country, were worried about concentrations of power. They balanced it among the three branches as you know and they made it very hard to make legislation. In order to do it you really have to understand how it works and you have to be very focused on getting it done, and he knows very little about the legislative process, hasn't learned anything, hasn't and surrounded himself with people that can get it done, hasn't done all the things you need to do so. It's mostly his fault that he hasn't achieved those things. I'm not in charge of Trump.

The title of your book is "Ship of Fools". You write that an irresponsible elite has taken over America. Who is the biggest fool?

I mean let me just be clear. I'm not against an aristocratic system. I'm not against a ruling class. I think that hierarchies are natural, people create them in every society. I just think the system that we have now the meritocracy, which is based really on our education system, on a small number of colleges has produced a ruling class that doesn't have the self-awareness that you need to be wise. I'm not arguing for populism, actually. I'm arguing against populism. Populism is what you get when your leaders fail. In a democracy, the population says this is terrible and they elect someone like Trump.

When did you first notice that this elite is getting out of touch with the people?

Well, just to be clear, I'm not writing this from the perspective of an outsider. I mean I've lived in this world my whole life.

Which world exactly?

The world of affluence and the high level of education and among-- I grew up in a town called La Jolla, California in the south. It was a very affluent town and then I moved as a kid to Georgetown here in Washington. I've been here my whole life. I've always lived around people who are wielding authority, around the ruling class, and it was only after the financial crisis of 08 that I noticed that something was really out of whack, because Washington didn't really feel the crisis.

If you leave Washington and drive to say Pittsburgh, which is a manufacturing town about three and a half hours to the west, you drive through a series of little towns that are devastated. There are no car dealerships, there are no restaurants. There's nothing. They have not recovered. I remember driving out there one day, maybe eight or nine years ago and thinking, boy, this is a disaster. Rural America, America outside three or four cities is really falling apart. I thought if you're running the country, you should have a sense of that. I remember thinking to myself, nobody I know has any idea that this is happening an hour away. That's kind of strange since we're the capital city in charge of making policy for everybody else... Massive inequality does not work in a democracy... You become Venezuela.

You write about vanishing middle class. When you were born over 60 % of Americans ranked middle class. Why and when did it disappear?

If you make above a certain income, or if you live in my neighborhood, you have zero physical contact with other Americans. In other words, the elite in our country is physically separated in a way that's very unhealthy for a democracy, very unhealthy.

The Democratic Party is out of touch with the working class.

Well, that's the remarkable thing. For 100 years the Democratic Party represented wage earners, working people, normal people, middle class people, then somewhere around-- In precisely peg it to Clinton's second term in the tech boom in the Bay Area in Francisco and Silicon Valley, the Democratic Party reoriented and became the party of technology, of large corporations, and of the rich. You've really seen that change in the last 20 years where in the top 10 richest zip codes in the United States, 9 of them in the last election just went for Democrats. Out of the top 50, 42 went for Democrats. The Democratic Party, which for 100 years was the party of average people is now the party of the rich.

Donald Trump, who is often seen as this world-changing figure is actually a symptom of something that precedes him that I sometimes wonder if he even understands which is this realignment. He served the purpose of bringing the middle class into the Republican Party, which had zero interest, no interest in representing them at all. Trump is intuitive, he felt, he could smell that there was this large group of voters who had no one representing them and he brought them to the Republican side, but the realignment is still ongoing.

In other words, the Democratic Party used to represent the middle class, it no longer does, it now hates the middle class. The Republican Party which has never represented the middle class doesn't want to. That is the source of really all the confusion and the tension that you're seeing now. I do think, going forward the Republican Party will wake up and realize these are our voters and we're going to represent them whether we want it or not.

They have to, or they will lose.

They have to, or they will die. Yes.

You're writing in an almost nostalgic tone about the old liberals? People like Miss Raymond, your first-class teacher. You describe her wonderfully in the book. You say that they have vanished. What happened?

I find myself in deep sympathy with a lot of the aims of 1970s liberals. I believe in free speech, and I instinctively side with the individual against the group. I think that the individual matters, I am deeply suspicious of foreign adventurism, voluntary wars, wars of self-defense are not controversial, I'm for them completely, there's an invasion repellent. The idea that you would send 100,000 troops to a country to improve its political system is grotesque to me. It would've been grotesque to them.

The Vietnam War was horrifying to them because it was a voluntary war, waged for theoretical reasons, geostrategic reasons which they rejected, and I do too. They were also suspicious of market capitalism. They thought that somebody needed to push back against the forces of the market, not necessarily because capitalism was bad, capitalism is not bad, it's also not a religion. We don't have to follow it blindly. We can make autonomous choices about how we respond to market forces. People get crushed beneath its wheels.

Capitalism drives change, innovation change, the old ways give way to new ways of doing things, and in the process of change the weak get hurt always, this was true in industrialization 100 years ago and it's true in the digital revolution now. What's changed is that nobody is standing up on behalf of the people who are being crushed by the change.

Is that really so? Look at the grassroot movement on the left: Alexandra Ocasio Cortez and her socialist group. It is probably a 100 years ago when Americans last saw a socialist movement of substance emerging?

Yes. You're absolutely right. That's the future.

In your book, you say they've vanishing but they seem to come back again.

Well, you're absolutely right. You're incisive correct to say that the last time we saw this was 100 years ago, which was another pivot point in our economic and social history. Where, after 10,000 years of living in an Agrarian society, people moved to the cities to work in factories and that upended the social order completely. With that came huge political change and a massive reaction.

In the United States and in Western Europe labor unions moderated the forces of change and allowed us to preserve capitalism in the form that we see it now... You're seeing the exact same dynamic play out today, we have another, as I said, economic revolution, the digital age, which is changing how people work, how they make money, how families are structured. There is a huge reaction to that, of course, because there always is, because normal people can't handle change at this pace. People are once again crying out for some help. They feel threatened by the change. What bothers me is that there is no large group of sensible people asking, how can we buffer this change? How can we restrain it just enough, not to stop it, but to keep people from overreacting and becoming radical?

Talking about radical. Recently, a radical left-wing group have threatened to storm your Washington home. How is your wife? How is your family?

They are fine, they're pretty tough. They're rattled.

The Antifa-mob came right to the door of your home?

Yes, they did and threatened my wife.

Which must have been absolutely scary?

Yes, it was. My wife was born in the city, my four children were born here, we're not moving.

Your attackers have a goal, they're trying to silence you.

Of course. I would never, of course, that's a cornerstone of Western civilization is expression and freedom of conscience. You can tell me how to behave, you can force me not to sleep or take my clothes off in public, that's fine. Every society has the right to control behavior. But no one has the right to control what you believe. You can't control my conscience, that's mine alone. Only totalitarian movements do that, and that's what they're attempting. Of course, I would die first I'm never going to submit to that.

Have you ever seen this amount of discontent and aggression here in your lifetime?

No, I've never seen anything like this. What's so striking is that [chuckles] this is really... The radicalism is not on behalf of people who are actually suffering, fellow Americans who are suffering, on behalf of the 70,000 people who died of drug ODs last year, or on behalf of the people displaced by automation in GM, or whatever, on behalf of those dying American low class, it's really on behalf of theoretical goals.

They're saying that I [Tucker Carlson] am saying naughty things that shouldn't be allowed to be expressed in public. Basically, it's a totalitarian movement. Totally unhelpful. I would say childish. What they're really doing is defending the current order. They're the shock troops of the elites actually. Actually, what you're seeing is something amazing, you're seeing for the first time in history a revolution being waged against the working class. When does that happen?

Your way of debating is very tough. You're sitting there, hammering your guests. Sometimes we have a bit of a problem to understand that. For us it's a bit disturbing.

Of course, it is. It's disturbing for me too!

How tough do you need to be nowadays to have an audience?

Less, I think than sometimes we put into it or I put into it. I'm actually, in my normal life, I think a pretty gentle person. I've never had a yelling fight with my wife in 34 years. I mean, I've never yelled at my children. No, I don't ever.

Never?

Not one time. No, it's not how I communicate. I never want to be impolite. I have been impolite. I've lost my temper a couple times, but I don't want to. I don't like that. I believe in civility.

... ... ...

How close to a revolution is your country?

By revolution, let me be clear, I don't think that we're anywhere near an outbreak of civil war, armed violence between two sides for a bunch of different reasons... Testosterone levels are so low and marijuana use is so high that I think the population is probably too ... What you don't have, prerequisite fall revolution, violent revolution, is a large group of young people who are comfortable with violence and we don't have that. Maybe that will change. I hope it doesn't. I don't want violence for violence. I appall violence, but I just don't see that happening. What I see happening most likely is a kind of gradual separation of the states.

If you look at the polling on the subject, classically, traditionally, Americans had antique racial attitudes. If you say, "Would you be okay with your daughter marrying outside her race?" Most Americans, if they're being honest, would say, "no, I'm not okay with that. I'm not for that." Now the polling shows people are much more comfortable with a child marrying someone of a different race than they are marrying someone of a different political persuasion.

"I'd rather my daughter married someone who's Hispanic than liberal", someone might say. That is one measure. There are many measures, but that's one measure of how politically divided we are and I just think that over time, people will self-segregate. It's a continental country. It's a very large piece of land and you could see where certain states just become very, very different. Like if you're Conservative, are you really going to live in California in 10 years? Probably not.

Orange County is now purely Democrat.

That's exactly right. You're going to move and if you're very liberal, are you really going to want to live in Idaho? Probably not.

The country is getting redder and bluer.

Exactly.

This revolution you are warning about - What needs to be done to stop it from happening?

Just the only thing you can do in a democracy which is address the legitimate concerns of the population and think more critically and be more wise in your decision making. Get a handle on technology. Technology is the driver of the change, so sweep aside the politics, the fundamental fact about people is they can't metabolize change at this pace because as an evolutionary matter, they're not designed to, they're not. If you asked your average old person what's the most upsetting thing about being old? You expect them to say, "Well, my friends are dead". But that's not what they say. Or "I have to go to the bathroom six times a night". That's not what they say.

You know what they say? "Things are too different. This is not the country I grew up in. I don't recognize this." All people hate that. It doesn't mean you're a bigot, it means you're human. Unless you want things to fall apart, become so volatile that you can't have a working economy, you need to get a handle on the pace of change. You have to slow it down.

How important is migration in terms of change?

It's central because nothing changes the society more quickly or more permanently than bringing in a whole new population and that's not an attack on anybody. There are lots of populations- there are lots of immigrants who are much more impressive than I am. I have no doubt about that. I'm not attacking immigrants. I'm merely saying that the effect on the people who already live here is real and they're not bigots for feeling that way.
You come from an ancient country with a series of ancient cultures within it and if you woke up one morning and everyone was speaking Amharic and you didn't recognize any of your surroundings, that would be deeply upsetting to you.

What you saying, it's necessary to slow it down, control it?

You have to slow it down. Look at the Chinese. I abhor, I despise the Chinese government. However, I'm willing to acknowledge wise behavior when I see it. The Chinese would never accept this pace of demographic change not simply because they're racist, though of course, they are, but that's not the point. The point is because they don't want their society to fall apart because they're in charge of it.

The childlike faith that we have in America, and America is the worst at this, that all change is good and that progress is inevitable and if something is new and fresh and more expensive, it's got to be better.

It is kind of refreshing for Europeans that even Hillary Clinton tells Europeans, "You have got to stop this. You've got to get control of migration or you disintegrate."

John Kerry said the same thing, amazingly. They're telling the truth.

Do you think Europe is going to be able to get in control of that? We have 28 countries in the EU. And Switzerland is not a member?

So smart, so smart... You know why? Because they're mountain people. Love them. You know why? Because they're suspicious, that's what I like about them.
[laughter]

Do you think that Europe will get in control of the migration?

The EU has been doomed since the first day because it's inconsistent with human nature. The reason we have nation states is because people wanted them, it's organic. A nation-state is just a larger tribe and it's organized along lines that make sense. They evolved over thousands of years. To ignore it and destroy it because you think that you've got a better idea, is insane!

[And with that, our interview concludes. It has already run far past the allotted 40 minutes. I offer to take Carlson, who seems to be very passionate about Switzerland, on a ski run in our Alps soon. Perhaps a smoke in one of the outdoor saunas I tell him smell like rotten eggs. Ambassador Grenell is on the phone line patiently waiting.]

[Dec 08, 2018] In office, both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama rarely fought for progressive principles -- and routinely undermined them."

Dec 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

ben , Dec 5, 2018 4:54:14 PM | link

"The last two Democratic presidencies largely involved talking progressive while serving Wall Street and the military-industrial complex. The obvious differences in personalities and behavior of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama diverted attention from their underlying political similarities. In office, both men rarely fought for progressive principles -- and routinely undermined them."

Article from Truthdig: https://www.truthdig.com/articles/what-it-means-that-hillary-clinton-might-run-for-president-in-2020/

[Dec 08, 2018] How False Testimony and a Massive U.S. Propaganda Machine Bolstered George H.W. Bush's War on Iraq - YouTube

Dec 05, 2018 | www.youtube.com

https://democracynow.org - As the media memorializes George H.W. Bush, we look at the lasting impact of his 1991 invasion of Iraq and the propaganda campaign that encouraged it. Although the Gulf War technically ended in February of 1991, the U.S. war on Iraq would continue for decades, first in the form of devastating sanctions and then in the 2003 invasion launched by George W. Bush. Thousands of U.S. troops and contractors remain in Iraq. A largely forgotten aspect of Bush Sr.'s war on Iraq is the vast domestic propaganda effort before the invasion began. We look at the way U.S. media facilitated the war on Iraq with journalist John "Rick" MacArthur, president and publisher of Harper's Magazine and the author of the book "Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the 1991 Gulf War."

Democracy Now! is an independent global news hour that airs weekdays on nearly 1,400 TV and radio stations Monday through Friday. Watch our livestream 8-9AM ET: https://democracynow.org

Please consider supporting independent media by making a donation to Democracy Now! today: https://democracynow.org/donate

[Dec 08, 2018] Internet as a perfect tool of inverted totalitarism: it stimulates atomizatin of individuals, creates authomatic 24x7 surveillance over population, suppresses solidarity by exceggerating non-essential differences and allow more insidious brainwashing of the population

Highly recommended!
Dec 08, 2018 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

Livius Drusus , December 8, 2018 at 7:20 am

I think the Internet and the infotech revolution in general have been largely negative in their impact on the world. Ian Welsh has a blog post that largely sums up my views on the issue.

https://www.ianwelsh.net/what-the-infotechtelecom-revolution-has-actually-done/

Contrary to what many people say I think large organizations like governments and corporations have significantly more power now than before and ordinary people have less power. The Internet has made it easier to get information but you have to sift through tons of junk to get to anything decent. For every website like Naked Capitalism there are thousands pushing nonsense or trying to sell you stuff.

And even if you are more knowledgeable, so what? If you cannot put that knowledge to use what good is it? At best it makes you more well-rounded, interesting and harder to fool but in political terms knowing a lot of stuff doesn't make you more effective. In the past people didn't have access to nearly as much information but they were more willing and able to organize and fight against the powerful because it was easier to avoid detection/punishment (that is where stuff like widespread surveillance tech comes in) and because they still had a vibrant civic life and culture.

I actually think people are more atomized now than in the past and the Internet and other technologies have probably fueled this process. Despite rising populism, the Arab Spring, Occupy, the Yellow Jackets in France, Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the DSA this is all a drop in the bucket compared to just the massive social movements of the 1960s much less earlier periods. Robert Putnam argued that television, the Internet and other technologies likely helped to produce the collapse of civic life in the United States by "individualizing" people's leisure time and personally I think Putnam is right. Civic life today is very weak and I think the Internet is partially to blame.

Mark , December 8, 2018 at 12:10 pm

And even if you are more knowledgeable, so what? If you cannot put that knowledge to use what good is it?

Agreed. If anything these more knowledgeable people had a greater audience prior to the internet. Whether you were a journalist, a great economist, a great author, or a great orator you need to persist and show intellect and talent to have your message heard wide and broad.
(This is probably a little idealistic, but I think there is truth there.)

Now you need very little of this. If your most famous asset is your attractive body you can attract a greater audience than great scholars and politicians.

Rosario , December 8, 2018 at 2:56 pm

I can't speak much on authoritarianism since whatever form it takes on today is wildly different from what it was in the past. Unfortunately, it is hard to convince many people living in western societies that they are living in an authoritarian system because their metal images are goose-stepping soldiers and Fraktur print posters.

I suppose the way I can assure myself that we are living in an authoritarian society is by analyzing the endless propaganda spewed from countless, high-viewership media and entertainment outlets. It is quite simple, if the media and entertainment narratives are within a very narrow intellectual window (with lots of 600 lb. gorillas sitting in corners) than the culture and politics are being defined by powerful people with a narrow range of interests. This is not to say that forming public opinion or preferring particular political views is a new thing in Western media and entertainment, just that its application, IMO, is far more effective and subtle (and becoming more-so by the day) than it ever was in, say, NAZI Germany or the Soviet Union.

I'd put my money down that most educated Germans during NAZI rule were well aware that propaganda was being utilized to "manufacture consent" but they participated and accepted this despite the content for pragmatic/selfish reasons. Much of the NAZI propaganda played on existing German/European cultural narratives and prejudices. Leaveraging existing ideology allowed the party to necessitate their existence by framing the German as juxtaposed against the impure and unworthy. Again, ideologies that existed independent of the party not within it. Goebbels and company were just good at utilizing the technology of the time to amplify these monstrosities.

I question that being the case today. It is far more complicated. Technology is again the primary tool for manipulation, but it is possible that current technology is allowing for even greater leaps in reason and analysis. The windows for reflection and critical thought close as soon as they are opened. Seems more like the ideology is manufactured on the fly. For example, the anti-Russia narrative has some resonance with baby boomers, but how the hell is it effective with my generation (millennial) and younger? The offhand references to Putin and Russian operatives from my peers are completely from left field when considering our life experience. People in my age group had little to say about Russia three years ago. It says volumes on the subtle effectiveness of Western media machines if you can re-create the cold war within two years for an entire generation.

In addition and related to above, the West's understanding of "Freedom of Speech" is dated by about 100 years. Governments are no longer the sole source of speech suppression (more like filtering and manipulation), and the supremacy of the free-market coupled with the erroneously perceived black-and-white division between public and private have convinced the public (with nearly religious conviction) that gigantic media and entertainment organizations do not have to protect the free speech of citizens because they are not government. Public/Private is now an enormous blob. With overlapping interests mixed in with any antagonisms. It is ultimately dictated by capital and its power within both government and business. Cracking this nut will be a nightmare.

Yes, this is an authoritarian world, if measured by the distance between the populace and its governing powers, but it is an authoritarianism operating in ways that we have never seen before and using tools that are terribly effective.

[Dec 08, 2018] Our benighted nation has become a "Global" entity, which entails our young men and women being used as cannon fodder for Israel's designs

Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

David Baker , says: December 4, 2018 at 9:40 pm GMT

Though I'm no friend of Michael Moore, he at least was candid about American "Judeo-Christian" adventures within foreign countries. America needs to pull in its horns, and stop fooling around with other governments.

Our benighted nation has become a "Global" entity, which entails our young men and women being used as cannon fodder for Israel's designs, in addition to furthering the campaign by Globalists to divvy up the world's resources and labor markets .

Our country is blessed with all the necessary raw materials, manufacturing capabilities, educated and motivated work forces and security to completely support our population, without the need to obtain staple supplies from foreign countries. Developing alternative energy sources should be a top priority, to free our people from the yoke of foreign oil cartels -- or the domestic variety, for that matter. Globalism has done little more than implement the enslavement of populations to mega-corporations, establishing a cabal of non-elected, inviolable potentates who wield tremendous power over our leaders to do their bidding.

[Dec 08, 2018] Putin wants to normalize relations with the west but, inexplicably, he provokes and alienates the West just prior to every scheduled meeting with Trump. These events only makes sense if the provocations are coming from agents in the West who wish to derail any rapprochement between the US and Russia

Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Mike from Jersey , says: December 4, 2018 at 6:21 pm GMT

Good article. You wrote:

There also has to be some consideration the encounter with the Russians on the Kerch Strait was contrived by Poroshenko with the assistance of a gaggle of American neoconservative and Israeli advisers who have been actively engaged with the Ukrainian government for the past several years. The timing was good for Poroshenko for his own domestic political reasons but it was also an opportunity for the neocons warmongers that surround Trump and proliferate inside the Beltway to scuttle any possible meeting between a vulnerable Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin at the G20 gathering in Argentina.

I came to the exact same conclusion.

Putin wants to normalize relations with the west but, inexplicably, he provokes and alienates the West just prior to every scheduled meeting with Trump. Of course, that doesn't make any sense. These events only makes sense if the provocations are coming from agents in the West who wish to derail any rapprochement between the US and Russia. Then it makes sense.

If this is true (as it appears to be) one can reasonably predict that any time Trump and Putin are about to meet, that a Skripal/Ukraine or other Russia-is-evil event will be staged to derail the meeting.

Let's watch in 2019 and see if this prediction comes true.

If it does, we will know that someone, behind the scenes, is staging these events.

APilgrim , says: December 5, 2018 at 4:42 am GMT
The ongoing campaign to vilify Vladimir Putin & the Russian Federation, is a complete failure, with conservatives, evangelicals, and republicans.

The globalists continue to waste their time & our money, with this shit.

JLK , says: December 5, 2018 at 5:09 am GMT
@APilgrim

The ongoing campaign to vilify Vladimir Putin & the Russian Federation, is a complete failure, with conservatives, evangelicals, and republicans.

I'll keep an open mind until Mueller's report is released, but Cohen's connections are allegedly with the mainly Jewish Russian mob. It is unclear what their agenda may have been, but Trump has been a lot nicer to Israel than to Russia.

[Dec 08, 2018] Anyone who knows anything about history is that the rich were always better off than the poor, in fact the very definition of rich and poor. In this respect it never mattered if a society was capitalistic, communistic, or a theocracy,

Notable quotes:
"... Capitalism never was benign, Chrustjow worked as a miner in a commercially exploited mine, where there was little regard for safety, he abhorred capitalism. ..."
Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

jilles dykstra , says: December 4, 2018 at 12:30 pm GMT

@Bill Jones Interesting to read how these idealists agree with Christian Gerondeau, 'Le CO2 est bon pour la planete, Climat, la grande manipulation', Paris 2017

Gerondeau explains how many deaths reducing CO2 emissions will cause in poor countries, simply as an example how electricity for cooking will remain too expensive for them, so cooking is done on smoky fires in confined spaces.

" to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history." " To intentionally impoverish the world. To what end, I wonder ?

Anyone who knows anything about history is that the rich were always better off than the poor, in fact the very definition of rich and poor.
In this respect it never mattered if a society was capitalistic, communistic, or a theocracy, as Tibet was.

These idealistic idiots do not understand how they created the problem they now intend to solve with creating an even bigger problem, their example is the EU, the EU is following this policy for more than twelve years now, since 2005, when the EU grabbed power through the rejected EU 'consitution'.

Capitalism is no more than deciding between consumption and investment, Robinson Crusoë invested in a fishing net by temporarily reducing consumption, he did not go fishing, but made a fishing net, expecting that his investment would make it possible to eat more fish.

Capitalism never was benign, Chrustjow worked as a miner in a commercially exploited mine, where there was little regard for safety, he abhorred capitalism.

Dutch 17th century capitalistic commerce to the far Indies, east and west, was not benign. Typically a ship left Amsterdam, near the Schreierstoren, trans 'the tower for the crying', wives, mothers and girl friends, with 300 men aboard, and returned with 100. Most of those who died were common sailors, captain and officers had a far lower mortality, mainly better food.

Our East Indies commerce also was not much fun for the people in the East, in the Banda Sea Islands massacre some 30.000 people were killed, for a monopoly on pepper, if I remember correctly.

But, as the earth developed economically, there came room for also poor people getting lives beginning to look as worth living. Engels in 1844, hope the year is right, described the conditions of working people in GB, this resulted in Das Kapital.

This room for a better life for also the poor was not given by the capitalistic system

In their struggle for a better world for anyone the idealists wanted globalisation, level playing field, anyone should be welcome anywhere, slogans like this.
Globaliation, however, is the end of the nation state, the very institution in which it was possible to provide a better life. Anyone following me until here now can see the dilemma, the end of the nation state was also the end of protection by that state against unbridled capitalism.

As the idealists cannot give up their globalisation religion they must, as those who cannot give up the biblical creation story, find an ideological way out of their dilemma. My conclusion now is 'in order to save our globalisation religion we try to destroy economic growth, by making energy very expensive, in the hope of destroying capitalism'.

Alas, better, luckily, capitalism cannot be destroyed, those who invented the first furnaces for more or less mass producing iron, they were capitalists. They saw clearly how cheap iron would bring economic growth, the plow.

In the country where the CO2 madness has struck most, my country, the Netherlands, the realisation of the poverty that drastically reducing CO2 emissions will cause, has begun. If there really is madness, I wonder.

I indeed see madness, green leftists unable to make a simple multipiclation calculations about costs, but maybe mainly political opportunism. Our dictator, Rutte, is now so hated that he needs a job outside the Netherlands, in order to qualify, either at Brussels or in New York, with the UN, has to howl with the wolves.

At the same time, we have a gas production problem,, earthquakes in the NE, houses damaged, never any decision made to solve the problem, either stop gas production, or strenghten the houses, both expensive solutions.

So, in my suspicious ideas, Rutte now tries to improve himself, at the same time solving a problem: within, say ten years, the Netherlands functions without gas, and remains prosperous; the idea he tries to sell to us. In a few years time it will emerge that we cannot have both, prosperous, and zero emission, but the time horizon for a politician is said to be five years.

[Dec 08, 2018] Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games

Highly recommended!
You can read online at epdf.tips
Dec 08, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Richard , Dec 7, 2018 2:50:07 PM | link

Came across this book which gives some excellent background to where we're at today:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Postmodern-Imperialism-Geopolitics-Great-Games/dp/098335393X

There may be a pdf available if you search.

"The game motif is useful as a metaphor for the broader rivalry between nations and economic systems with the rise of imperialism and the pursuit of world power. This game has gone through two major transformations since the days of Russian-British rivalry, with the rise first of Communism and then of Islam as world forces opposing imperialism. The main themes of Postmodern Imperialism: Geopolitics and the Great Games include:

This work brings these elements together in historical perspective with an understanding from the Arab/ Muslim world's point of view, as it is the main focus of all the "Great Games"."

Jay Dyer discusses the book here, its strengths and weaknesses:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcmrBD4Ez2c

[Dec 08, 2018] Israel is one undeniably large factor behind spending surges since 2005.

Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

anon [228] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 7:18 pm GMT

Israel is one undeniably large factor behind spending surges since 2005. Israel successfully demanded enormous increases in joint U.S.-Israeli cyber warfare expenditures and benefited from related U.S. contingency planning. Due to onerous secrecy, Americans remain unable to engage in informed public debate about whether what amounts to US subjugation to the Israeli prerogatives driving these massive expenditures should continue.

The US increased spending on the National Intelligence Program by 9 percent in fiscal year 2018 to $59.4 billion. The Military Intelligence Program surged 20 percent to $22.1 billion. NIP plus MIP beat the year 2005 expenditure record totaling $81.5 billion for fiscal year 2018.

The development of secret offensive cyber warfare programs targeting Iran are included in MIP and NIP budgets. According to the 2016 documentary Zero Days by director Alex Gibney, Israel's incessant public threats to attack Iran coupled with intense secret demands for cyber warfare targeting Iran were the catalyst for massive new US black budget spending.

Former NSA Director (1999-2005) and CIA Director (2006-2009) Michael Hayden claimed in Zero Days that the goal of any Israeli air attack against Iran's nuclear facilities would be to drag the United States into war.

by Grant Smith Posted on November 07, 2018 He is director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington, D.C.

Jon Baptist , says: December 4, 2018 at 10:38 pm GMT
There is very little spoken of the foreign threat of the Chabad network. It must be serious opposition if even the CFR "globalists" write about it. ( https://www.theglobalist.com/donald-trump-benjamin-netanyahu-democracy-corruption/ ) When I say threat, I mean global nuclear war, mass starvation, and disease. Chabad is the link binding Trump and Putin advisors. Do you think anyone belonging in this protected "religion" holds any sort of good will for the regular common folk inhabiting the world?
Art , says: December 5, 2018 at 12:59 am GMT
@Art

What chance does peace have with these people having Trump's ear: Javanka Kushner, Gina Haspel, Nikki Haley, Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence, Mad Dog Mattis, and John Bolton?

Doesn't look good does it!

West Point says NO to Peace!

The warmongering bastard and West Point grad (first in class) -- Pompeo -- says NO peace for Yemeni! Trump says wars are for Israel.

West Point is Jew occupied territory. All US Army generals are pro Israel.

US to keep aiding Saudis in Yemen despite furor: Pompeo

Buenos Aires (AFP) -- Secretary of State Mike Pompeo vowed Saturday that the United States would continue suppor ting Saudi Arabia's military campaign in Yemen, despite rising outrage over the kingdom.

Speaking from a Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires, Pompeo acknowledged that the humanitarian crisis in Yemen -- where millions are at risk of starvation -- had reached "epic proportions" but said Washington and Riyadh were offering aid.

"The program that we're involved in today we intend to continue," Pompeo told CNN when asked about military assistance to the Saudi-led coalition.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-keep-aiding-saudis-yemen-despite-furor-pompeo-173323301.html

Think Peace -- Do No Harm -- Art

p.s. Pompeo defends MBS -- what human trash!

Art , says: December 5, 2018 at 5:15 am GMT
@JLK

All US Army generals are pro Israel

I suspect not, but they answer to politicians. Ditto the CIA.

I suspect not also -- but only privately and in secret, would they be anti-Israel. If they keep their mouth shut, they will have a six figure job waiting for them in the J-MIC. Hmm -- so much for the flag. Think Peace -- Do No Harm -- Art

ChuckOrloski , says: December 5, 2018 at 1:47 pm GMT
Fyi, The AIPAC Starship strikes back, and excluded Senator Rand Paul from meeting with Gina Haspel on the Kashoggi murder.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/4/rand-paul-rips-deep-state-for-freezing-him-out-of-/

anon [415] Disclaimer , says: December 5, 2018 at 3:01 pm GMT
"The AIPAC Starship strikes back, and excluded Senator Rand Paul from meeting with Gina Haspel on the Kashoggi murder."

Could it not be more clear that Mossad runs our government? Didn't the military swear oaths to protect the US from enemies foreign AND domestic? Oh, and I've given up on Trump. He's an Israel-worshiping ineffective

Anon [340] Disclaimer , says: December 5, 2018 at 3:33 pm GMT
What foreign threats indeed. Out biggest threats come from our own government:

"The new version clarifies that people cannot face jail time for participating in a boycott, but the ACLU has argued that it still leaves the door open for criminal financial penalties."

https://theintercept.com/2018/12/04/israel-anti-boycott-act-lame-duck/

But yet these clowns will do next to nothing to stop illegal seizures of white farms in South Africa. Our treasonous government busy working to strip away our freedoms. Don't think they won't use this precedent to outlaw other types of "hate speech." And brought to you by the republican party.

anon [309] Disclaimer , says: December 5, 2018 at 3:57 pm GMT
@anon As AIPAC and WINEP demanded in 2003, the office as initially led by Undersecretary of Treasury Stuart Levey, who worked in unusually close coordination with the Israeli government. Levey's Harvard thesis (PDF) was about how Israel lobbying organizations could become more effective by staying beneath the radar of public scrutiny and distancing themselves from the notoriety generated by the illicit activities of such ideological fellow travelers as the Jewish Defense League. https://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2018/08/29/treasury-sanctions-foreigners-for-israel
anon [309] Disclaimer , says: December 5, 2018 at 4:21 pm GMT
A few years ago, I had the temerity to write to David McCullough, the biographer of Harry Truman, to tell him I thought he was wrong about an aspect of Truman's character.

McCullough was nice enough to write back. He said he thought Truman had not been malicious but had simply lacked understanding, and in a revealing remark, he acknowledged that Truman "just didn't know enough about [the Palestinians] and their situation" -- which he said, quite accurately, is still true of most Americans. "The great shame," he wrote, "is that a reasonable discussion of the subject remains so difficult to achieve in any public way."

Which brings me to my point: Reasonable discussion of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and particularly of the Palestinian perspective, has always been "so difficult to achieve in any public way," and since the days of Woodrow Wilson .

https://www.counterpunch.org/2002/07/15/the-history-of-anti-palestinian-bias-from-wilson-to-bush/ by BILL CHRISTISON -- KATHLEEN CHRISTIAN

Prevent any discussion , don't expose,don't talk,don't report and when alluded to the issue by someone call it HATE SPEECH or CONSPIRACY THEORY .

Art , says: December 5, 2018 at 9:22 pm GMT
@ChuckOrloski

Fyi, The AIPAC Starship strikes back, and excluded Senator Rand Paul from meeting with Gina Haspel on the Kashoggi murder.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/4/rand-paul-rips-deep-state-for-freezing-him-out-of-/

From the article: Tuesday's briefing on Khashoggi's killing was limited to a small group of lawmakers, including those of the Senate's Armed Services Committee, Intelligence Committee, and Foreign Relations Committee.

Chuck,

These oversite committees are a joke!

Those committees are cheer leaders for those agencies. Those senators are hand picked to support the Jew Security State.

We can be sure that they work to hide what those agencies are doing from We the People.

Think Peace -- Do No Harm -- Art

[Dec 08, 2018] The British, most directly, and then the US Brennan-Hayden (ok, he is no longer operational) CIA-Deep State are launching myriad ops to wedge Trump in (Khashoggi, current CentCom terror ops in Syria, and Ukraine now).

Dec 08, 2018 | thesaker.is

GeorgeG on November 28, 2018 , · at 11:27 am EST/EDT

Short overview as it looks from my current perch: Piggy Poro will go down in history , way down, that's for sure.

1. The British, most directly, and then the US Brennan-Hayden (ok, he is no longer operational) CIA-Deep State are launching myriad ops to wedge Trump in (Khashoggi, current CentCom terror ops in Syria, and Ukraine now). If the Trump-Putin meeting a G20 falls through, it would not necessarily be a definitive signal; if it does not fall through, that would be a definitive signal. Yes, MI-6 and the US cohorts are anxious about the "declassification" of FISA and other documents, both because of Russiagate as well as the definitive disenfranchisment it entails. That makes the timing of Piggy's Kerch fiasco important.

2. At the moment, the European or NATO response is not what the British or CIA expected or wanted.

a. Yesterday Ursula von der Leyen, German Defense Minster, spoke at a security confrence covered by Sputnik (German): "Russia has Europe in check" was the headline, "check" as in chess, which in a chess game sometimes means not just a single check, but chasing the opponent with "checks" over the board until finally declaring "checkmate."

b. https://www.kyivpost.com/article/opinion/op-ed/jack-laurenson-in-this-dark-hour-where-are-ukraines-allies.html?cn-reloaded=1 In this dark hour, where are Ukraine's allies?, "The Kremlin wants to know how much it can get away with. If the response so far, in the last day or so, is a measure of that, then Moscow will likely feel emboldened to push even further. There is still time for NATO and the West to respond, but the question on everyone's lips is how and whether the political will and strength to do so exists." The end: "At Ukrainian Week in London this October, Ukrainian and British officials all agreed that a safe and secure Ukraine is necessary for the safety and security of Europe. The time for talk from Ukraine's so-called allies is long over. It's time to act." -- The article is otherwise full of juicy nonsense: I highly recommend it.

c. https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-russia-putin-is-in-control/ 'Putin is in control' Europe stands by as Russian president goes after Ukraine. "BERLIN -- Chalk another one up for Vlad." "To be perfectly honest, we don't have many options," a senior European official said. "We don't want to risk war, but Putin is already waging one. That makes us look weak." Given Europe's dearth of options, its leaders revert to hackneyed pronouncements about the importance of dialogue and, as German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas put it, "de-escalation on both sides."

d. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/11/27/ukraines-new-front-is-europes-big-challenge/ Ukraine's New Front Is Europe's Big Challenge -- There's plenty Europe should do to push back against Russia's latest attack on Ukraine.
There's plenty Europe should do to push back against Russia's latest attack on Ukraine. By Carl Bildt, Nicu Popescu. -- Juicy nonsense galore, a plea sent into the winds.

e. http://time.com/5463988/russia-ukraine-trump-putin-g20/?utm_source=RC+Defense+Morning+Recon&utm_campaign=1f01df16ac-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_11_27_07_09&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_694f73a8dc-1f01df16ac-85033789 President Trump Could Help Stop a War Between Russia and Ukraine -- But Only If He Will Stand Up to Putin -- Admiral Stavridis (Ret.) was the 16th Supreme Allied Commander at NATO and is an Operating Executive at The Carlyle Group. "

f. https://www.afpc.org/publications/articles/why-is-the-sea-of-azov-so-important -- Atlantidc Council -- Stephen Blank -- Why Is the Sea of Azov So Important? "Moreover, even a casual examination of Russian actions reveals the deep and continuing parallels with China's equally illegitimate actions in the South and East China Sea. In the Asian case, the United States has mounted and continues to stage numerous Freedom of Navigation Operations to demonstrate to China that it will uphold the time-honored principle of the freedom of the seas. This principle is no less at stake in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov. Ideally, NATO, at Kyiv's invitation, should send a fleet to Mariupol to shatter the pretense of Russian sovereignty and show Putin that the invasion of Ukraine has brought NATO into Ukraine. This is precisely the outcome Russia aimed to avert."

And that is what, at the moment, "NATO" of "the Europeans" apparently do not want. Send a fleet to Mariupol? -- Ask the Germans: they have a few speed boats that might not get stuck.

Poroshenko seems to be on the way to demonstrating that NATO is irrelevant.

[Dec 08, 2018] It appears that Jared Kushner (JK) is in the crosshair of Micheal Flynt!

Dec 08, 2018 | www.unz.com

Garreth Smith , says: December 5, 2018 at 4:41 am GMT

@ChuckOrloski

Am big for '60′s protest folk music, and linked (below) is the best song around since contemporary artists took leave of anti-war fame.

Greetings Chuck,

It appears that Jared Kushner (JK) is in the crosshair of Micheal Flynt!

[Dec 07, 2018] Brexit Theresa May Goes Greek! by Brett Redmayne

Highly recommended!
" The Fleeting Illusion of Election Night Victory." that phrase sums up the situation very succinctly
Notable quotes:
"... " A Brexit Lesson In Greek: Hopes and Votes Dashed on Parliamentary Floors," ..."
"... "Brexit means Brexit!" ..."
Dec 07, 2018 | www.unz.com

It has become all too easy for democracy to be turned on its head and popular nationalist mandates, referenda and elections negated via instant political hypocrisy by leaders who show their true colours only after the public vote. So it has been within the two-and-a-half year unraveling of the UK Brexit referendum of 2016 that saw the subsequent negotiations now provide the Brexit voter with only three possibilities. All are a loss for Britain.

One possibility, Brexit, is the result of Prime Minister, Theresa May's negotiations- the "deal"- and currently exists in name only. Like the PM herself, the original concept of Brexit may soon lie in the dust of an upcoming UK Parliament floor vote in exactly the same manner as the failed attempt by the Greeks barely three years ago. One must remember that Greece on June 27, 2015 once voted to leave the EU as well and to renegotiate its EU existence as well in their own "Grexit" referendum. Thanks to their own set of underhanded and treasonous politicians, this did not go well for Greece. Looking at the Greek result, and understanding divisive UK Conservative Party control that exists in the hearts of PMs on both sides of the House of Commons, this new parliamentary vote is not looking good for Britain. Brexit: Theresa May Goes Greek! "deal" -- would thus reveal the life-long scars of their true national allegiance gnawed into their backs by the lust of their masters in Brussels. Brexit: Theresa May Goes Greek!, by Brett Redmayne-Titley - The Unz Review

Ironically, like a cluster bomb of white phosphorous over a Syrian village, Cameron's Brexit vote blew up spectacularly in his face. Two decades of ongoing political submission to the EU by the Cons and "new" labour had them arrogantly misreading the minds of the UK voter.

So on that incredible night, it happened. Prime Minister David Cameron the Cons New Labour The Lib- Dems and even the UK Labour Party itself, were shocked to their core when the unthinkable nightmare that could never happen, did happen . Brexit had passed by popular vote!

David Cameron has been in hiding ever since.

After Brexit passed the same set of naïve UK voters assumed, strangely, that Brexit would be finalized in their national interest as advertised. This belief had failed to read Article 50 - the provisos for leaving the EU- since, as much as it was mentioned, it was very rarely linked or referenced by a quotation in any of the media punditry. However, an article published four days after the night Brexit passed, " A Brexit Lesson In Greek: Hopes and Votes Dashed on Parliamentary Floors," provided anyone thus reading Article 50, which is only eight pages long and double-spaced, the info to see clearly that this never before used EU by-law would be the only route to a UK exit. Further, Article 50 showed that Brussels would control the outcome of exit negotiations along with the other twenty-seven member nations and that effectively Ms May and her Tories would be playing this game using the EU's ball and rules, while going one-on-twenty-seven during the negotiations.

In the aftermath of Brexit, the real game began in earnest. The stakes: bigger than ever.

Forgotten are the hypocritical defections of political expediency that saw Boris Johnson and then Home Secretary Theresa May who were, until that very moment, both vociferously and very publicly against the intent of Brexit. Suddenly they claimed to be pro- Brexit in their quest to sleep in Cameron's now vacant bed at No. 10 Downing Street. Boris strategically dropped out to hopefully see, Ms May, fall on her sword- a bit sooner. Brexit: Theresa May Goes Greek!, by Brett Redmayne-Titley - The Unz Review

So, the plucky PM was left to convince the UK public, daily, as the negotiations moved on, that "Brexit means Brexit!" A UK media that is as pro-EU as their PM chimed in to help her sell distortions of proffered success at the negotiating table, while the rise of "old" Labour, directed by Jeremy Corbyn, exposed her "soft" Brexit negotiations for the litany of failures that ultimately equaled the "deal" that was strangely still called "Brexit."

Too few, however, examined this reality once these political Chameleons changed their colours just as soon as the very first results shockingly came in from Manchester in the wee hours of the morning on that seemingly hopeful night so long ago: June 23, 2016. For thus would begin a quiet, years-long defection of many more MPs than merely these two opportunists.

What the British people also failed to realize was that they and their Brexit victory would also be faced with additional adversaries beyond the EU members: those from within their own government. From newly appointed PM May to Boris Johnson, from the Conservative Party to the New Labour sellouts within the Labour Party and the Friends of Israel , the quiet internal political movement against Brexit began. As the House of Lords picked up their phones, too, for very quiet private chats within House of Commons, their minions in the British press began their work as well.

Brexit: Theresa May Goes Greek!, by Brett Redmayne-Titley - The Unz Review

jim jones , says: December 5, 2018 at 4:55 am GMT

Government found guilty of Contempt of Parliament:

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/12/04/uk-govt-forced-to-publish-full-brexit-legal-documents-after-losing-key-vote/

Brabantian , says: December 5, 2018 at 7:17 am GMT
This article by Brett Redmayne is certainly right re the horrific sell-out by the Greek government of Tsipras the other year, that has left the Greek citizenry in enduring political despair the betrayal of Greek voters indeed a model for UK betrayal of Brexit voters

But Redmayne is likely very mistaken in the adulation of Jeremy Corbyn as the 'genuine real deal' for British people

Ample evidence points to Corbyn as Trojan horse sell-out, as covered by UK researcher Aangirfan on her blogs, the most recent of which was just vapourised by Google in their censorship insanity

Jeremy Corbyn was a childhood neighbour of the Rothschilds in Wiltshire; with Jeremy's father David Corbyn working for ultra-powerful Victor Rothschild on secret UK gov scientific projects during World War 2

Jeremy Corbyn is tied to child violation scandals & child-crime convicted individuals including Corbyn's Constituency Agent; Corbyn tragically ignoring multiple earnest complaints from child abuse victims & whistleblowers over years, whilst "child abuse rings were operating within all 12 of the borough's children's homes" in Corbyn's district not very decent of him

And of course Corbyn significantly cucked to the Israel lobby in their demands for purge of the Labour party alleged 'anti-semites'

The Trojan Horse 'fake opposition', or fake 'advocate for the people', is a very classic game of the Powers That Be, and sadly Corbyn is likely yet one more fake 'hero'

niceland , says: December 6, 2018 at 9:13 am GMT
My theory is, give "capitalism" and financial interests enough time, they will consume any democracy. Meaning: the wealth flows upwards, giving the top class opportunity to influence politics and the media, further improving their situation v.s. the rest, resulting in ever stronger position – until they hold all the power. Controlling the media and therefore the narrative, capable to destroy any and all opposition. Ministers and members of parliaments, most bought and paid for one way or the other. Thankfully, the 1% or rather the 0.1% don't always agree so the picture can be a bit blurred.

You can guess what country inspired this "theory" of mine. The second on the list is actually the U.K. If a real socialist becomes the prime minister of the U.K. I will be very surprised. But Brexit is a black swan like they say in the financial sector, and they tend to disrupt even the best of theories. Perhaps Corbin is genuine and will become prime minister! I am not holding my breath.

However, if he is a real socialist like the article claims. And he becomes prime minister of the U.K the situation will get really interesting. Not only from the EU side but more importantly from U.K. best friend – the U.S. Uncle Sam will not be happy about this development and doesn't hesitate to crush "bad ideas" he doesn't like.

Case in point – Ireland's financial crisis in 2009;

After massive expansion and spectacular housing bubble the Irish banks were in deep trouble early into the crisis. The EU, ECB and the IMF (troika?) met with the Irish government to discuss solutions. From memory – the question was how to save the Irish banks? They were close to agreement that bondholders and even lenders to the Irish banks should take a "haircut" and the debt load should be cut down to manageable levels so the banks could survive (perhaps Michael Hudson style if you will). One short phone call from the U.S Secretary of the treasury then – Timothy Geithner – to the troika-Irish meeting ended these plans. He said: there will be no haircut! That was the end of it. Ireland survived but it's reasonable to assume this "guideline" paved the road for the Greece debacle.

I believe Mr. Geithner spoke on behalf of the financial power controlling – more or less-our hemisphere. So if the good old socialist Corbin comes to power in the U.K. and intends to really change something and thereby set examples for other nations – he is taking this power head on. I think in case of "no deal" the U.K. will have it's back against the wall and it's bargaining position against the EU will depend a LOT on U.S. response. With socialist in power there will be no meaningful support from the U.S. the powers that be will to their best to destroy Corbin as soon as possible.

I hope I am wrong.

niceland , says: December 6, 2018 at 10:07 am GMT
My right wing friends can't understand the biggest issue of our times is class war. This article mentions the "Panama papers" where great many corporations and wealthy individuals (even politicians) in my country were exposed. They run their profits through offshore tax havens while using public infrastructure (paid for by taxpayers) to make their money. It's estimated that wealth amounting to 1,5 times our GDP is stored in these accounts!

There is absolutely no way to get it through my right wing friends thick skull that off-shore accounts are tax frauds. Resulting in they paying higher taxes off their wages because the big corporations and the rich don't pay anything. Nope. They simply hate taxes (even if they get plenty back in services) and therefore all taxes are bad. Ergo tax evasions by the 1% are fine – socialism or immigrants must be the root of our problems. MIGA!

Come to think of it – few of them would survive the "law of the jungle" they so much desire. And none of them would survive the "law of the jungle" if the rules are stacked against them. Still, all their political energy is aimed against the ideas and people that struggle against such reality.

I give up – I will never understand the right. No more than the pure bread communist. Hopeless ideas!

jilles dykstra , says: December 6, 2018 at 11:27 am GMT
" This is because the deal has a provision that would still keep the UK in the EU Customs Union (the system setting common trade rules for all EU members) indefinitely. This is an outrageous inclusion and betrayal of a real Brexit by Ms May since this one topic was the most contentious in the debate during the ongoing negotiations because the Customs Union is the tie to the EU that the original Brexit vote specifically sought to terminate. "

Here I stopped reading, maybe later more.
Nonsense.

What USA MSM told in the USA about what ordinary British people said, those who wanted to leave the EU, I do not know, one of the most often heard reasons was immigration, especially from E European countries, the EU 'free movement of people'.
"Real' Britons refusing to live in Poland.
EP member Verhofstadt so desperate that he asked on CNN help by Trump to keep this 'one of the four EU freedoms'.
This free movement of course was meant to destroy the nation states

What Boris Johnson said, many things he said were true, stupid EU interference for example with products made in Britain, for the home market, (he mentioned forty labels in one piece of clothing), no opportunity to seek trade without EU interference.
There was irritation about EU interference 'they even make rules about vacuum cleaners', and, already long ago, closure, EU rules, of village petrol pumps that had been there since the first cars appeared in Britain, too dangerous.
In France nonsensical EU rules are simply ignored, such as countryside private sewer installations.

But the idea that GB could leave, even without Brussels obstruction, the customs union, just politicians, and other nitwits in economy, could have such ideas.
Figures are just in my head, too lazy to check.
But British export to what remains of the EU, some € 60 billion, French export to GB, same order of magnitude, German export to GB, far over 100 billion.
Did anyone imagine that Merkel could afford closing down a not negligible part of Bayern car industry, at he same time Bayern being the Land most opposed to Merkel, immigration ?

This Brexit in my view is just the beginning of the end of the illusion EU falling apart.
In politics anything is connected with anything.
Britons, again in my opinion, voted to leave because of immigration, inside EU immigration.
What GB will do with Marrakech, I do not know.

Marrakech reminds me of many measures that were ready to be implemented when the reason to make these measures no longer existed.
Such as Dutch job guarantees when enterprises merged, these became law when when the merger idiocy was over.
The negative aspects of immigration now are clear to many in the countries with the imagined flesh pots, one way or another authorities will be obliged to stop immigration, but at that very moment migration rules, not legally binding, are presented.

As a Belgian political commentator said on Belgian tv 'no communication is possible between French politicians and French yellow coat demonstrators, they live in completely different worlds'.
These different worlds began, to pinpoint a year, in 2005, when the negative referenda about the EU were ignored. As Farrage reminded after the Brexit referendum, in EP, you said 'they do not know what they're doing'
But now Macron and his cronies do not know what to do, now that police sympathises with yellow coat demonstrators.

For me THE interesting question remains 'how was it possible that the Renaissance cultures manoevred themselves into the present mess ?'.

jilles dykstra , says: December 6, 2018 at 11:40 am GMT
@Digital Samizdat Corbyn, in my opinion one of the many not too bright socialists, who are caught in their own ideological prison: worldwide socialism is globalisation, globalisation took power away from politicians, and gave it to multinationals and banks.
jilles dykstra , says: December 6, 2018 at 12:27 pm GMT
@niceland The expression class war is often used without realising what the issue is, same with tax evasion.
The rich of course consume more, however, there is a limit to what one can consume, it takes time to squander money.
So the end of the class war may make the rich poor, but alas the poor hardly richer.

About tax evasion, some economist, do not remember his name, did not read the article attentively, analysed wealth in the world, and concluded that eight % of this wealth had originated in evading taxes.
Over what period this evasion had taken place, do not remember this economist had reached a conclusion, but anyone understands that ending tax evasion will not make all poor rich.

There is quite another aspect of class war, evading taxes, wealth inequality, that is quite worrying: the political power money can yield.
Soros is at war with Hungary, his Open University must leave Hungary.
USA MSM furious, some basic human right, or rights, have been violated, many in Brussels furious, the 226 Soros followers among them, I suppose.
But since when is it allowed, legally and/or morally, to try to change the culture of a country, in this case by a foreigner, just by pumping money into a country ?
Soros advertises himself as a philantropist, the Hungarian majority sees him as some kind of imperialist, I suppose.

Tyrion 2 , says: December 6, 2018 at 12:49 pm GMT
@Simon in London 90% Labour party members supported remain, as did 65% of their voters and 95% of their MPs.
Anon [424] Disclaimer , says: December 6, 2018 at 12:53 pm GMT
For me THE interesting question remains 'how was it possible that the Renaissance cultures manoevred themselves into the present mess ?'.

Well , I am reading " The occult renaissance church of Rome " by Michael Hoffman , Independent History and research . Coeur d`Alene , Idaho . http://www.RevisionistHistory.org
I saw about this book in this Unz web .

I used to think than the rot started with protestantism , but Hoffman says it started with catholic Renaissance in Rome itself in the XV century , the Medici , the Popes , usury

Mike P , says: December 6, 2018 at 1:20 pm GMT
This whole affair illustrates beautifully the real purpose of the sham laughingly known as "representative democracy," namely, not to "empower" the public but to deprive it of its power.

With modern means of communication, direct democracy would be technically feasible even in large countries. Nevertheless, practically all "democratic" countries continue to delegate all legislative powers to elected "representatives." These are nothing more than consenting hostages of those with the real power, who control and at the same time hide behind those "representatives." The more this becomes obvious, the lower the calibre of the people willing to be used in this manner – hence, the current crop of mental gnomes and opportunist shills in European politics.

Wizard of Oz , says: December 6, 2018 at 1:48 pm GMT
I would only shout this rambling ignoramus a beer in the pub to stop his mouth for a while. Some of his egregious errors have been noted. and Greece, anyway, is an irrelevance to the critical decisions on Brexit.

Once Article 50 was invoked the game was over. All the trump cards were on the EU side. Now we know that, even assuming Britain could muster a competent team to plan and negotiate for Brexit that all the work of proving up the case and negotiating or preparing the ground has to be done over years leading up to the triggering of Article 50. And that's assuming that recent events leave you believing that the once great Britain is fit to be a sovereign nation without adult supervision.

As it is one has to hope that Britain will not be constrained by the total humbug which says that a 51 per cent vote of those choosing to vote in that very un British thing, a referendum, is some sort of reason for not giving effect to a more up to date and better informed view.

Stebbing Heuer , says: Website December 6, 2018 at 1:57 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat Erm Varoufakis didn't knuckle under. He resigned in protest at Tsipras' knuckling under.
anon [108] Disclaimer , says: December 6, 2018 at 2:28 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat Hypothesis: The British masses would fare better without a privatized government.

"Corbyn may prove to be real .. .. old-time Labour platform [leadership, capable to].. return [political, social and financial] control back to the hands of the UK worker".. [but the privateers will use the government itself and mass media to defeat such platforms and to suppress labor with new laws and domestic armed warfare]. Why would a member of the British masses allow [the Oligarch elite and the[ir] powerful business and foreign political interests restrain democracy and waste the victims of privately owned automation revolution? .. ..

[Corbyn's Labour platform challenges ] privatized capitalist because the PCs use the British government to keep imprisoned in propaganda and suppressed in opportunity, the masses. The privateers made wealthy by their monopolies, are using their resources to maintain rule making and enforcement control (via the government) over the masses; such privateers have looted the government, and taken by privatization a vast array of economic monopolies that once belonged to the government. If the British government survives, the Privateers (monopoly thieves) will continue to use the government to replace humanity, in favor of corporate owned Robots and super capable algorithms.

Corbyn's threat to use government to represent the masses and to suppress or reduce asymmetric power and wealth, and to provide sufficient for everyone extends to, and alerts the masses in every capitalist dominated place in the world. He (Corbyn) is a very dangerous man, so too was Jesus Christ."

There is a similar call in France, but it is not yet so well led.

Michael Kenny , says: December 6, 2018 at 2:29 pm GMT
This sounds like a halfway house between hysterical panic and sour grapes. The author clearly believes that Brexit is going to fail.
T.T , says: December 6, 2018 at 2:32 pm GMT
Every working Dutch person is "owed" 50k euro from the bailout of Greece, not that Greece will ever pay this back, and not as if Greece ever really got the money as it just went straight to northern European banks to bail them out. Then we have the fiscal policy creating more money by the day to stimulate the economy, which also doesn't reach the countries or people just the banks. Then we have the flirting with East-European mobsters to pull them in the EU sphere corrupting top EU bureaucrats. Then we have all of south Europe being extremely unstable, including France, both its populations and its economy.

It's sad to see the British government doesn't see the disaster ahead, any price would be cheaper then future forced EU integration. And especially at this point, the EU is so unstable, that they can't go to war on the UK without also committing A kamikaze attack.

Brett Redmayne-Titley , says: Website December 6, 2018 at 2:36 pm GMT
@Brabantian Thank you for your comment and addition to my evaluation of Corbyn. I do agree with you that Corbyn has yet to be tested for sincerity and effectiveness as PM, but he will likely get his chance and only then will we and the Brits find out for sure. The main point I was hoping to make was that: due to the perceived threat of Labour socialist reform under Corbyn, he has been an ulterior motive in the negotiations and another reason that the EU wants PM May to get her deal passed. Yes, I too am watching Corbyn with jaundiced optimism. Thank you.

[Dec 06, 2018] Western airlines really not believe Poroshenko's words that the Ukrainian Armed Forces did not bring down the Malaysian "Boeing" over the Donbas in 2014 The first "fruits" of martial law in Ukraine

(Google translation)
Dec 06, 2018 | thesaker.is

Military Review – News

The owner of FC "Lion": It is difficult for us to find a plane that would fly to Ukraine
published 2018/11/28

In 10 Ukrainian regions, martial law imposed by Poroshenko did not come into force de jure, and
the first "swallows" of this entry have already arrived on Ukrainian soil. And flew in, from where
Kiev did not expect. European air carriers stated that in connection with the introduction of martial
law on the territory of Ukraine, they are forced to radically reconsider the air traffic regime with this
country.

The situation is told by the Ukrainian media, reporting and the accompanying nuances of this decision.
The nuances are connected with the fact that international-level football matches that are scheduled
to take place on Ukrainian territory are becoming suspended in the air.

The UNIAN Information Service cites a statement by Jean-Michel Olas, owner of the "Lyon" (France)
football club: " The decision was made to postpone the "Arsenal" match in London. We do not know
whether we will fly to "Shakhtar", taking into account the political situation. It's difficult for us find a
plane whose owners would send him there. Now the decision is made at the UEFA level. "

Earlier it became known that the match between "Arsenal" (London) and Poltava "Vorskla" in the
Europa League was decided to be moved from the Poltava stadium to Kiev. It is noteworthy that the
Poltava region by the Verkhovna Rada was not included in the zone of introduction of the EaP.

At the same time, the possibility of transferring the match outside Ukraine was also discussed due to
the fact that martial law is beginning to operate in a number of regions of the country.

Conducting two more international matches in Ukraine is open to question.

Recall that the martial law provides, among other things, the closure of airspace. European air
carriers, apparently, are wary of how Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile systems move along the streets
of Ukrainian cities. Do they really not believe Poroshenko's words that " the Ukrainian Armed Forces
did not bring down the Malaysian "Boeing" over the Donbas in 2014 "? ..
(Google translation)

https://topwar.ru/150410-vladelec-fk-lion-nam-trudno-najti-samolet-kotoryj-poletel-by-na-ukrainu.html

[Dec 05, 2018] INF Treaty End Is Near After Pompeo Gives Russia An Ultimatum

Pompeo is glib and insincere. That a very bad feature for a diplomat.
Dec 05, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

"We must confront Russian cheating on their nuclear obligations," Pompeo said at the conclusion of the NATO meeting, claiming the U.S. has warned Russia to re-enter compliance about 30 times over the past five years. He urged the West to increase pressure, arguing it can no longer "bury its head in the sand" over repeat violations.

But for the first time Pompeo signaled it's not too late to salvage the treaty, despite Trump already saying the US it taking steps to pull out: he said Washington "would welcome a Russian change of heart."

On Oct. 20 President Trump first announced the United States' planned withdrawal from the historic treaty brokered by Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev and US President Ronald Reagan in 1987. At the time Russia's Foreign Ministry slammed the move as "a very dangerous step" which is ultimately part of "continuing attempts to achieve Russia's concessions through blackmail". Russian officials have issued the counter-charge that it is the US that's out of compliance with the treaty.


Ace006 , 9 hours ago link

The US is waging unconstitutional war in Syria without authorization of the UNSC but Pompeo has the effrontery to lecture the Russians on their "lawlessness."

Is there ONE freaking day out of the year when some senior official of the USG is not acting like an utter horse's ***?

Victor999 , 9 hours ago link

""We don't want a new arms race, we don't want a new Cold War,""

Yet NATO and the US are doing everything they can to start one. Threatening others with ultimatums is no way to negotiate new terms.

thisandthat , 8 hours ago link

"doesn't account for China or North Korea as rising technologically advanced threats"

Yeah, nor for israel...

dogismycopilot , 11 hours ago link

Putin should just have the SVR make some fake "proof" Trump is a Russian agent and feed it to the democratic-isis-******-lover party and let them tear Trump a new *******.

Pompeo is an aging **** pig.

thisandthat , 8 hours ago link

Considering it was the democrats who first pushed this muh russian meddlings, can't even see how will the US be able to pull itself out of this (****)hole they dug for themselves...

rtb61 , 11 hours ago link

So the US with a big lead in ballistic missiles and anti-ballistic missiles, wants to blow that up to promote the development of long range stealth cruise missiles, well, I guess there must be a massive profit in it.

The normal rule in a arms race though, the big losers are the countries with the biggest lead in current war technologies, when new technologies enter the fray, negating existing investments and bankrupting that country as the right off their existing lead and having to race to play catch up and take the lead again.

It's like the crazy, the US leads in space, great lets that it into a battlefield and eliminate that lead, why, just ******* why would you be stupid enough, banning war in space protects you lead, promoting war in space ends it. Blocking long range cruise missiles protects the US lead in ballistic missiles and anti-ballistics missile systems, allowing it ends that lead.

Now in the most idiotic fashion, the US has declared it will arbitrarily leave that treaty without any evidence of anything, now setting the precedent, that any country can withdraw from any treaty with the US for any arbitrary reason because that is the behaviour the US government has set precedent for, why hold any treaty with the US, when they will pull out at any time for any reason. The probable message from the rest of the world to the US, yeah **** off America, we are not Native Americans who exist for you to abuse us https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/01/18/368559990/broken-promises-on-display-at-native-american-treaties-exhibit (we know it is in the American government nature but **** off anyhow).

haruspicio , 12 hours ago link

What a pompous *** Pompeo is. After his lies about MbS how can I trust him on this issue. Is the US clean? They are certainly not in compliance with the chemical weapons treaty having destroyed no stockpiles as they agreed to do....almost 2 decades after the treaty was signed.

Treaties are ******** unless the parties to them actually implement them and follow the rules. The US seems to believe they have an inherent right to ignore the treaties they sign up to. Why anyone deals with them I have no idea.

dogfish , 13 hours ago link

Donald Trump has lost complete control of his presidency and is being led by the nose by his cabinet,the US will start a new world war.

CatInTheHat , 13 hours ago link

Where did Trump get these Bush 2,Zionist pig holdovers?

After Bush 2 dumped ABM treaty NATO/US have been creeping up to Russias border.

Then in 2014, Obama & Nuland decided it would be a good idea to effect regime change in Ukraine and put neonazi thugs on Russia's border.

EU Israhelli clients all know this is ******** about Russia. But Russia pissed off the Zionist entity in interfering with Yinon/7countries in five years plan.

How LONG are we going to put up with this Zionist attack on our country?

Et Tu Brute , 13 hours ago link

"We don't want a new arms race, we don't want a new Cold War," Stoltenberg added.

A bit like a rapist doesn't want sex, he just wants to **** people.

NATO doesn't want a cold war, they want a real one!

africoman , 9 hours ago link

Correct!!

Predator mindset and US exceptionalism at play

They are asking why Russia not keeping treaty while we violate it?

Secretary of war Mike Pompeo

Washington Seeks 'Pretext' to Abandon INF Treaty - Russian Envoy to US

"...We are accused of violating the Treaty by allegedly possessing a certain 9M729 missile that violates the accord's provisions. However, we do not see any clear facts or arguments that could lead to conclusions of violations," Sputnik Here

Russia, China, Iran challenging global US leadership: Pompeo

"..US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has targeted Russia, China and Iran for opposing Washington's "leadership role". PressTv

Just accuse without any specific evidence.

another

China has simply made no effort to halt its ongoing pattern of aggressive , predatory trade .

Chain election meddling blah balh

NiggaPleeze , 14 hours ago link

US always blaming others while violating every law and treaty known to man.

" I regret that we now most likely will see the end of the INF Treaty," North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declared ...

Fixed: " I'm ecstatic that our fabricated accusations allows us to finally see the end of the INF Treaty, which really benefits Russia far more than NATO," North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declared ...

chippers , 14 hours ago link

They dont want another cold war? Thats why they are doing everything possible to start another cold if not hot war I suppose.

Anunnaki , 14 hours ago link

We have been in a Cold War since Ukraine 2014

me or you , 14 hours ago link

5000+ bunker shelters and unknown number of hypersonic weapons...US has zero chance.

NiggaPleeze , 14 hours ago link

The whole point of the US strategy is to use short-range cruise missiles to take out Russian retaliatory capability in a first strike, thereby destroying all of those hypersonic weapons, and using their ABM systems to "clean up" any missiles that survived the initial onslaught. The "advantage" of the short-range cruise missiles is that they greatly reduce Russia's available response times - it basically must decide to annihilate the US within 5 minutes of notice of an attack, or face being wiped out with no retaliatory capabilities. (It is worth noting that, in the past, false alarms have lasted for longer than 5 minutes.)

This is by far the most destabilizing, dangerous move, ever - any false blip on a Russian radar can lead to an all-out nuclear exchange. It is infinitely more threatening to humanity than "global warming". Brought to you by the Evil Drumfpster.

Anunnaki , 14 hours ago link

Dead Man Hand

NiggaPleeze , 12 hours ago link

The Dead Man Hand only allows you to respond with capabilities that have survived and that are not eliminated by the ABM. The 5 minutes notice is until the vast majority of your nuclear arsenal is decimated - dead hand (i.e., ability to retaliate if the leadership is entirely decapitated) or not.

me or you , 13 hours ago link

With the black-holes awaiting somewhere in the big oceans it's enough to take the whole US territory.

me or you , 14 hours ago link

If you have not hypersonic missiles you are powerless to dictate.

artistant , 14 hours ago link

The CONFLICT with Russia was orchestrated by Apartheid Israhell

because Russia is an IMPEDIMENT to Israhell's design for the MidEast .

In the process, the Zionist Neocons mortally WOUNDED America

and the CONSEQUENCES are just getting started .

Omega_Man , 14 hours ago link

west would lose arms race against Russia and China and Iran and NK easy... just as they lose all races in manufacturing... cheap labour

Minamoto , 14 hours ago link

Mike Pompeo ought to be reminded that confrontation with Russia in missile technology is unwise.

Russia has hypersonic missiles. The US doesn't have anything remotely comparable.

beijing expat , 14 hours ago link

Even if they did it wouldn't change the equation. These are doomsday weapons.

Minamoto , 14 hours ago link

Absolutely not. They can deliver conventional warheads. They can sink carriers anywhere on the planet.

Moribundus , 14 hours ago link

USA do not need hypersonic m. because Russia do not have big navy fleet. Russia is building defense, USA prepares for attack

Minamoto , 14 hours ago link

Yet... the US is busy trying to catch up with the Russians.

CatInTheHat , 13 hours ago link

The US CANT.

https://southfront.org/why-the-u-s-military-is-woefully-unprepared-for-a-major-conventional-conflict/

francis scott falseflag , 15 hours ago link

INF Treaty End Is Near After Pompeo Gives Russia An Ultimatum

Unless Trump caves or changes his mind as he has been known to do

Moribundus , 15 hours ago link

Is Mike Pompeo Starting to Look Like Kim Jong Un? He is talking like communist leader at Communist party congress.

Mike Pompeo argued that Trump's reassertion of national sovereignty through his "America First" policy would make those institutions function better. "In the finest traditions of our great democracy, we are rallying the noble nations of the world to build a new liberal order that prevents war and achieves greater prosperity for all," Pompeo said at a speech at the German Marshall Fund thinktank. "We're supporting institutions that we believe can be improved; institutions that work in American interests – and yours – in service of our shared values."

He listed a series of current international institutions, including the EU, UN, World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, that he said were no longer serving their mission they were created.

The remarks were frequently punctuated with praise for Trump, who is referred to 13 times in the text. Pompeo portrayed his president as restoring an era of triumphal US leadership in the world, for the first time since the end of the cold war.

"This American leadership allowed us to enjoy the greatest human flourishing in modern history," the secretary of state said. "We won the cold war. We won the peace. With no small measure of George HW Bush's effort, we reunited Germany. This is the type of leadership that President Trump is boldly reasserting."

http://thebrutaltimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/popmeo-un-260x200.jpg

Federica Mogherini:

President [George H. W.] Bush used to talk about a new world order, based on shared rules and on cooperation among free nations. I was at high school at the time, and I remember perfectly well the sense of hope and of opening that one could breathe in Europe over these years.

He imagined - and I quote - "a world where the rule of law supplants the role of the jungle; a world in which nations recognise their shared responsibility for freedom and justice; a world where the strong respect the rights of the weak."

My generation believed in this vision, believed in the possibility for this vision to turn into reality, to become true, especially in Europe - a continent divided by the Cold War. We hoped that after the Cold War a more cooperative world order would indeed be possible and indeed be built.

Today, I am afraid we have to admit that such a new world order has never truly materialised and worse, there is a real risk today that the rule of the jungle replaces the rule of law. The same international treaties - so many in which we are together - that ended the Cold War are today put into question.

Instead of building a new order, we have to today invest a huge part of our energy in preventing the current rules from being dismantled piece by piece.

https://eeas.europa.eu/topics/culture/54773/speech-hrvp-federica-mogherini-harvard-kennedy-school-science-and-international-affairs_en

torabora , 11 hours ago link

well Russia rolling on Georgia and then Eastern Ukraine Crimea put all that unicorn **** to bed. You need to get woke.

pinkfloyd , 15 hours ago link

children

DEDA CVETKO , 15 hours ago link

Ultimatum? To Russia ???????

Um...WTF...? Where's this guy been for the past 300 years?

uhland62 , 14 hours ago link

In his bubble. Being confrontational gets your bubble pierced - someone tell him.

Let it Go , 15 hours ago link

Like many people, I do not find what is known as the concept of Mutual Assured Destruction, or MAD to be reassuring. Spurring the creation of more ways to use nuclear weapons is what ending the INF Treaty will do. Joschka Fischer, German Foreign Minister, and Vice-Chancellor from 1998-2005 writes;

In this new environment, the "rationality of deterrence" maintained by the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War has eroded. Now, if nuclear proliferation increases, the threshold for using nuclear weapons will likely fall.

The nuclear deterrent we hold is a hundred times larger than needed to stop anyone sane or rational from attacking America, and for anyone else, an arsenal of any size will be insufficient. What we are talking about is the Intermediate-range Nuclear-Forces treaty also known as the INF Treaty which limits short-range missiles. The article below explores the insanity of a new arms race.

https://Who Profits From Ending The Mid-Range Nuclear Treaty.html

attah-boy-Luther , 15 hours ago link

Dear POMPUS *** Pompa-oh:

We will happily comply with your chicken chit terms right after you take ALL of your NATO toys back to the Berlin wall line.

You know the one where your peeps told Gorbachev not one inch east.

Other wise F-U!

Luv,

Vlad

Haboob , 15 hours ago link

Mike Pompeo offered 'military assistance' to Ukraine in Crimea stand-off with Russia, says Poroshenko

'We have full support, full assistance,' Ukrainian president says

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ukraine-crimea-latest-russia-petro-poroshenko-mike-pompeo-vladimir-putin-donald-trump-a8655106.html

Haboob , 15 hours ago link

China and Russia don't want a military arms race but they will get one. The funny part is they will confide in Trump about their woes and he will mimic their desires but not agree with them.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1070110615627333632

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1070110927788347393

"We are either going to have a REAL DEAL with China, or no deal at all - at which point we will be charging major Tariffs against Chinese product being shipped into the United States. Ultimately, I believe, we will be making a deal - either now or into the future....

.....China does not want Tariffs!"

Bet hes laughing his *** off and so am i.

uhland62 , 14 hours ago link

China will find customers elsewhere, it just takes more than a day. The US is not the only game on this planet.

[Dec 05, 2018] The Ignorant and the Arrogant How Pompeo and Bolton Bring Us Closer to War in the Middle East

Dec 05, 2018 | www.counterpunch.org

Armed conflict between the US and Iran is becoming more probable by the day as super-hawks replace hawks in the Trump administration. The new National Security Adviser, John Bolton, has called for the US to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal of 2015 and advocated immediate regime change in Tehran. The new Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, has said the agreement, which Trump may withdraw from on 12 May, is "a disaster". Trump has told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he will not accept a deal with "cosmetic changes" as advocated by European states, according to Israeli reporters. If this is so, then the deal is effectively dead.

... ... ...

The new line-up in Washington is being described as "a war cabinet" and it may turn out to be just that. But looking at ignorant, arrogant men like Bolton and Pompeo, it is difficult to avoid the feeling that it will all end in disaster.

[Dec 05, 2018] Mueller s Flynn Memo Should Worry Kushner and Trump by Timothy L. O'Brien

The author is tried to deceive: Flynn lobbed Russians on behave of Israel.
Muller dirty trick with Flynn (entrapment during the FBI interview) will eventually backfire
Notable quotes:
"... Mueller's memo noted that federal investigators' curiosity about Flynn's role in the presidential transition seemed to have been sparked by a Washington Post account of a conversation he had with Russia's ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak, in December 2016 ..."
"... But the meat of what should worry Team Trump is in Mueller's disclosure that Flynn has provided firsthand information about interactions between the transition team and Russian government officials -- including, as was already known, several conversations with Kislyak in December 2016. Those included a discussion about lifting economic sanctions the Obama administration had imposed on Russia and about a separate matter involving a United Nations resolution on Israel. ..."
Dec 05, 2018 | www.bloomberg.com

All of that, plus Flynn's "substantial assistance," early cooperation, and acceptance of "responsibility for his unlawful conduct," led Muller's team to ask the court to grant Flynn a lenient sentence that doesn't include prison time, according to a highly anticipated sentencing memo the special counsel's office filed Tuesday night.

And there wasn't much more than that in 13 concise and heavily redacted pages that let down anyone expecting the document to be another public narrative fleshing out lots of fresh detail about Mueller's investigation. Still, the filing, and some new details in it, should give pause to members of Trump's inner circle -- especially the president's son-in-law and senior White House adviser, Jared Kushner.

Mueller's memo noted that federal investigators' curiosity about Flynn's role in the presidential transition seemed to have been sparked by a Washington Post account of a conversation he had with Russia's ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak, in December 2016 . The filing also detailed a series of lies Flynn told about his contacts with and work for the Turkish government while serving in the Trump campaign. (Given that Trump and a pair of his advisers had been pursuing a real estate deal in Moscow during the first half of 2016, Flynn might mistakenly have seen wearing two hats as noncontroversial.)

But the meat of what should worry Team Trump is in Mueller's disclosure that Flynn has provided firsthand information about interactions between the transition team and Russian government officials -- including, as was already known, several conversations with Kislyak in December 2016. Those included a discussion about lifting economic sanctions the Obama administration had imposed on Russia and about a separate matter involving a United Nations resolution on Israel.

Flynn lied to federal agents who questioned him about those chats on Jan. 24, 2017, and that was a crime (as, possibly, were his efforts as a private citizen to meddle with a sitting government's foreign policy). The former general acknowledged lying , pleaded guilty a year ago, and then began cooperating with Mueller's probe.

The timeline around Flynn's conversations is crucial because it shows what's still in play for the president and Kushner -- and why Mueller may have been content to lock in a cooperation agreement that carried relatively light penalties, as well as why Flynn's assistance seems to have subsequently pleased the veteran prosecutor so much.

Kushner's actions are also interesting because the Federal Bureau of Investigation has examined his own communications with Kislyak -- and Kushner reportedly encouraged Trump to fire his FBI director, James Comey , in the spring of 2017, when Comey was still in the early stages of digging into the Trump-Russia connection.

Comey, and his successor, Mueller, have been focused on possible favor-trading between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. We know that Russian hackers directed by Russian intelligence operatives penetrated Democrat computer servers in 2016 and gave that information and email haul to WikiLeaks to disseminate as part of an effort to undermine Hillary Clinton's presidential bid. Trump was also pursuing that business deal in Moscow in 2016 and had other projects over the years with a Russian presence . What might the Kremlin have been expecting in return? A promise to lift U.S. economic sanctions?

Kushner also had personal financial issues weighing on his mind at the time. He had spent much of 2016 trying to bail out his family from his ill-considered and pricey purchase of a Manhattan skyscraper, 666 Fifth Avenue .

After a meeting in Trump Tower with Kislyak on Dec. 1, 2016, which Flynn and Kushner attended together , the ambassador arranged another gathering on Dec. 13 for Kushner and a senior Russian banker with Kremlin ties, Sergei Gorkov. The White House has said that meeting was innocent and part of Kushner's diplomatic duties. In a statement following his testimony before Congress in the summer of 2017, Kushner said that his interactions with Flynn and Kislyak on Dec. 1 only involved a discussion of Syria policy, not economic sanctions. He said that his discussion with Gorkov on Dec. 13 lasted less than 30 minutes and only involved an exchange of pleasantries and hopes for better U.S.-Russian relations -- and didn't include any discussion of recruiting Russians as lenders or investors in the Kushner family's real estate business .

Kislyak enjoyed continued lobbying from the White House after his meetings with Kushner. On Dec. 22, Flynn asked Kislyak to delay a UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel for building settlements in Palestinian territory. Flynn later told the FBI that he didn't ask Kislyak to do that, which wasn't true. Court documents filed last year said that a "very senior member of the Presidential Transition Team" directed Flynn to make an overture to Kislyak about the sanctions vote. According to reporting from my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Eli Lake and NBC News , Kushner was that "senior member." Bloomberg News reported that former Trump advisers Steve Bannon and Reince Priebus also pushed Flynn to lobby Kislyak on the U.N. vote. (Kushner didn't discuss pressing Flynn to contact Kislyak in his statement last summer and instead noted how infrequent his direct interactions were.)

Kushner's role in these events isn't discussed in Mueller's sentencing memo for Flynn. The absence of greater detail might cause Kushner to worry: If Flynn offered federal authorities a different version of events than Kushner -- and Flynn's version is buttressed by documentation or federal electronic surveillance of the former general -- then the president's son-in-law may have to start scrambling (a possibility I flagged when Flynn pleaded guilty in 2017).

Other portions of the 2016 and early 2017 timelines still matter, too.

On Dec. 28, less than a week after Flynn called Kislyak about the U.N. vote, the ambassador contacted Flynn, according to court documents. The Obama administration had just imposed economic sanctions on Russia because of the Kremlin's effort to sabotage the 2016 election. Kislyak apparently told Flynn that Russia would retaliate because Flynn asked him to "moderate" Russia's response. Flynn reportedly discussed these conversations with a former Trump adviser, K.T. McFarland, on Dec. 29.

In the weeks that followed, Sally Yates, then acting U.S. attorney general, warned the Trump administration about Flynn's duplicity and said he was a national security threat. She was fired days after that for refusing to enforce Trump's executive order seeking to ban immigration from seven Islamic nations. The White House forced Flynn out in February of last year, and Trump fired Comey three months later. The president subsequently began using "witch hunt" to describe the investigation that Mueller inherited from Comey.

Since then, as the White House and Trump have surely absorbed and as Flynn's sentencing memo reinforces, Mueller's hunt has now ensnared a number of witches.

[Dec 05, 2018] Who are the Neocons by Guyenot

Highly recommended!
Notable quotes:
"... The American Neocons are Zionists (Their goal is expanding political / military power. Initially this is focused on the state of Israel.) ..."
"... Obviously , if Zionism is synonymous with patriotism in Israel, it cannot be an acceptable label in American politics, where it would mean loyalty to a foreign power. This is why the neoconservatives do not represent themselves as Zionists on the American scene. Yet they do not hide it all together either. ..."
"... American Jewish Committee ..."
"... Contemporary Jewish Record ..."
"... If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it. It's a thought one imagines most American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal, will find horrifying . And yet it is a fact that as a political philosophy, neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants' grandchildren ..."
"... Goyenot traces the Neocon's origins through its influential writers and thinkers. Highest on the list is Leo Strauss. (Neocons are sometimes called "the Straussians.") Leo Strauss is a great admirer of Machiavelli with his utter contempt for restraining moral principles making him "uniquely effective," and, "the ideal patriot." He gushes over Machiavelli praising the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech. ..."
"... believes that Truth is harmful to the common man and the social order and should be reserved for superior minds. ..."
"... nations derive their strength from their myths , which are necessary for government and governance. ..."
"... national myths have no necessary relationship with historical reality: they are socio-cultural constructions that the State has a duty to disseminate . ..."
"... to be effective, any national myth must be based on a clear distinction between good and evil ; it derives its cohesive strength from the hatred of an enemy nation. ..."
"... deception is the norm in political life ..."
"... Office of Special Plans ..."
"... The Zionist/Neocons are piggy-backing onto, or utilizing, the religious myths of both the Jewish and Christian world to consolidate power. This is brilliant Machiavellian strategy. ..."
"... the "chosen people" myth (God likes us best, we are better than you) ..."
"... the Holy Land myth (one area of real estate is more holy than another) ..."
"... General Wesley Clark testified on numerous occasions before the cameras, that one month after September 11th, 2001 a general from the Pentagon showed him a memo from neoconservative strategists "that describes how we're gonna take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan and finishing off with Iran". ..."
"... Among them are brilliant strategists ..."
"... They operate unrestrained by the most basic moral principles upon which civilization is founded. They are undisturbed by compassion for the suffering of others. ..."
"... They use consciously and skillfully use deception and "myth-making" to shape policy ..."
"... They have infiltrated the highest levels of banking, US military, NATO and US government. ..."
Dec 11, 2015 | Peak Prosperity

Mememonkey pointed my to a 2013 essay by Laurent Guyenot, a French historian and writer on the deep state, that addresses the question of "Who Are The Neoconservatives." If you would like to know about that group that sends the US military into battle and tortures prisoners of war in out name, you need to know about these guys.

First, if you are Jewish, or are a GREEN Meme, please stop and take a deep breath. Please put on your thinking cap and don't react. We are NOT disrespecting a religion, spiritual practice or a culture. We are talking about a radical and very destructive group hidden within a culture and using that culture. Christianity has similar groups and movements--the Crusades, the KKK, the Spanish Inquisition, the Salem witch trials, etc.

My personal investment: This question has been a subject of intense interest for me since I became convinced that 9/11 was an inside job, that the Iraq war was waged for reasons entirely different from those publically stated. I have been horrified to see such a shadowy, powerful group operating from a profoundly "pre-moral" developmental level-i.e., not based in even the most rudimentary principles of morality foundational to civilization.

Who the hell are these people?!

Goyenot's main points (with a touch of personal editorializing):

1. The American Neocons are Zionists (Their goal is expanding political / military power. Initially this is focused on the state of Israel.)

Neoconservativism is essentially a modern right wing Jewish version of Machiavelli's political strategy. What characterizes the neoconservative movement is therefore not as much Judaism as a religious tradition, but rather Judiasm as a political project, i.e. Zionism, by Machiavellian means.

This is not a religious movement though it may use religions words and vocabulary. It is a political and military movement. They are not concerned with being close to God. This is a movement to expand political and military power. Some are Christian and Mormon, culturally.

Obviously , if Zionism is synonymous with patriotism in Israel, it cannot be an acceptable label in American politics, where it would mean loyalty to a foreign power. This is why the neoconservatives do not represent themselves as Zionists on the American scene. Yet they do not hide it all together either.

He points out dual-citizen (Israel / USA) members and self proclaimed Zionists throughout cabinet level positions in the US government, international banking and controlling the US military. In private writings and occasionally in public, Neocons admit that America's war policies are actually Israel's war goals. (Examples provided.)

2. Most American Jews are overwhelmingly liberal and do NOT share the perspective of the radical Zionists.

The neoconservative movement, which is generally perceived as a radical (rather than "conservative") Republican right, is, in reality, an intellectual movement born in the late 1960s in the pages of the monthly magazine Commentary, a media arm of the American Jewish Committee, which had replaced the Contemporary Jewish Record in 1945. The Forward, the oldest American Jewish weekly, wrote in a January 6th, 2006 article signed Gal Beckerman: "If there is an intellectual movement in America to whose invention Jews can lay sole claim, neoconservatism is it. It's a thought one imagines most American Jews, overwhelmingly liberal, will find horrifying. And yet it is a fact that as a political philosophy, neoconservatism was born among the children of Jewish immigrants and is now largely the intellectual domain of those immigrants' grandchildren".

3. Intellectual Basis and Moral developmental level

Goyenot traces the Neocon's origins through its influential writers and thinkers. Highest on the list is Leo Strauss. (Neocons are sometimes called "the Straussians.") Leo Strauss is a great admirer of Machiavelli with his utter contempt for restraining moral principles making him "uniquely effective," and, "the ideal patriot." He gushes over Machiavelli praising the intrepidity of his thought, the grandeur of his vision, and the graceful subtlety of his speech.

Other major points:

4. The Zionist/Neocons are piggy-backing onto, or utilizing, the religious myths of both the Jewish and Christian world to consolidate power. This is brilliant Machiavellian strategy.

[The]Pax Judaica will come only when "all the nations shall flow" to the Jerusalem temple, from where "shall go forth the law" (Isaiah 2:1-3). This vision of a new world order with Jerusalem at its center resonates within the Likudnik and neoconservative circles. At the Jerusalem Summit, held from October 12th to 14th, 2003 in the symbolically significant King David Hotel, an alliance was forged between Zionist Jews and Evangelical Christians around a "theopolitical" project, one that would consider Israel "the key to the harmony of civilizations", replacing the United Nations that's become a "a tribalized confederation hijacked by Third World dictatorships": "Jerusalem's spiritual and historical importance endows it with a special authority to become a center of world's unity. [...] We believe that one of the objectives of Israel's divinely-inspired rebirth is to make it the center of the new unity of the nations, which will lead to an era of peace and prosperity, foretold by the Prophets". Three acting Israeli ministers spoke at the summit, including Benjamin Netanyahu, and Richard Perle.

Jerusalem's dream empire is expected to come through the nightmare of world war. The prophet Zechariah, often cited on Zionist forums, predicted that the Lord will fight "all nations" allied against Israel. In a single day, the whole earth will become a desert, with the exception of Jerusalem, who "shall remain aloft upon its site" (14:10).

With more than 50 millions members, Christians United for Israel is a major political force in the U.S.. Its Chairman, pastor John Haggee, declared: "The United States must join Israel in a pre-emptive military strike against Iran to fulfill God's plan for both Israel and the West, [...] a biblically prophesied end-time confrontation with Iran, which will lead to the Rapture, Tribulation, and Second Coming of Christ".

And Guyenot concludes:

Is it possible that this biblical dream, mixed with the neo-Machiavellianism of Leo Strauss and the militarism of Likud, is what is quietly animating an exceptionally determined and organized ultra-Zionist clan? General Wesley Clark testified on numerous occasions before the cameras, that one month after September 11th, 2001 a general from the Pentagon showed him a memo from neoconservative strategists "that describes how we're gonna take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia and Sudan and finishing off with Iran".

Is it just a coincidence that the "seven nations" doomed to be destroyed by Israel form part of the biblical myths? [W]hen Yahweh will deliver Israel "seven nations greater and mightier than yourself [ ] you must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them."

My summary:

[Dec 04, 2018] Comparing China and America by Fred Reed

Chinese version of neoliberalism and the USA version do differ.
Notable quotes:
"... I especially encourage the Russians on here to return to their home country. There is little point writing material critical of America in English on fringe media sites while in America contributing to the US economy and paying US taxes. My observation has been that the Russian personality not to mention background doesn't fare terribly well in corporate America. Why waste your energy in a country and system beyond reform that despises you for who you are that only accepts you for your labor. You'll find a better fit in your home country where you'll actually have genuine social belonging, which, unlike China, actually really needs more people. ..."
"... Xi might have stepped up too early, but maybe this wouldn't matter. When the Americans decide to confront China depends on the Americans. In case you believe that US presidents drive US policy, Trump was saying things about China 25 years ago. ..."
"... Chinese progress has been most impressive but the country is sitting on an enormous pile of private and SOE debt.. There has not been a country in recorded history that has accumulated debt at the rate China did post the 2008 crash. ..."
"... @Achmed E. Newman Dictatorships are personality dependent, as opposed to democracies that are ? dependent. Communism came up with a catchy slogan – dictatorship of the proletariat. Why couldn't US – which are, after all, a birthplace of propaganda – come up with a similarly catchy slogan, such as: Democracy – dictatorship of the elitariat? Or maybe, Democracy – dictatorship of the deep state. ..."
"... I worked for Chinese-Filipinos and this is really 100% true. The ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia are the most heartless capitalists on earth. ..."
"... [You have been repeatedly warned that you leave far too many rambling, vacuous comments, especially since so many of them demonstrate your total ignorance. Fewer and fewer of your comments will be published until you improve your commenting-behavior or better yet permanently depart for another website] ..."
Dec 04, 2018 | www.unz.com

Jason Liu , says: November 30, 2018 at 7:42 am GMT

Great, but kinda pedestrian. Lemme use this platform to point out China's flaws from a Chinese perspective.

Chinese society and Chinese people are too arrogant, materialistic, and hypersensitive to criticism.

This is a huge problem. One, it alienates pretty much anyone who becomes familiar with China. Two, it leads to mistake after mistake when no criticism is offered to correct them in time. Three, it causes society to view things overly in terms of money, falling behind in all other aspects. Nobody cares how much rich or strong you are if you're a crass, materialistic asshole. They'll hate you.

All societies have these issues, few are as bad as China. There are Chinese reading this right now and getting angry and ready to call me a traitor, demonstrating my point exactly.

A wise dictator is great for the country, but Xi is not wise. He is a stubborn old man stuck in the past who is clearly not listening to advisers. He has overplayed his hand, confronted the US 10~20 years too early, damaged China's image out of some paranoid fear of Uyghurs, and absolutely failed at making friends with our East Asian neighbors, instead driving them further into the arms of the Americans.

China does not need more repression right now, it needs to slowly liberalize to keep the economy growing and competitive. I'm not talking about western style "open society" bullshit, traitors like multiculturalists and feminists should always be persecuted. But the heavy-handed censorship, monitoring of everyday citizens is completely unnecessary. If China does not develop a culture of trust, and genuine, non-money based curiosity, it will not have the social structure to overcome the west.

Outside of trade and money-related issues, the Chinese citizenry is woefully ignorant of the outside world. There is no widespread understanding of foreign cultures and ideologies, how they might threaten us, how to defend against them, or how to work around them. An overwrought sense of nationalism emphasizes Chinese victimhood to the point of absurdity, squandering any sympathy onlookers might have, and actually causes some to turn 180 and hate China instead.

Angry, condescending attitudes towards our neighbors, especially Japan, severely cripple China's ability to be a world player. Without a network of like-minded friends (actual friends, not trade partners), China will never be able to match the western alliance. It is not just America we have to overcome, but an entire bloc of nations. I don't care how much people hate our neighbors, China must extend the olive branch, present a sincere face of benevolence, and not act like the big guy with a fragile ego. Racially and culturally similar East Asians are the best candidates for long-term friendship, it is wrong to forsake them under the assumption that all we need is Russia or Pakistan.

Despite the trade war, I'm not worried about China's economy, infrastructure, political system, or innate ability. These are our strengths. I have no love for liberal democracy or western values. But China must change its attitude and the way it interacts with the outside world soon, or face geopolitical disaster.

Don't overreact to every insult or criticism. Compete in areas that isn't just money or materials. Really understand soft power, and what it takes to be liked around the world. Develop our own appealing ideas and worldview. Listen to well-meaning, nationalistic critics, and change before the world discovers China's ugly side.

Cyrano , says: November 30, 2018 at 8:06 am GMT
I would say that yes, dictatorships tend to be more efficient than "democracy". The only major downside to dictatorships are that usually dictators – thanks perhaps to personal ambitions, lack of accountability, volatile personalities – tend to cause major wars.

That's a reason why someone becomes a dictator – to make it into the history books. And the easiest way to make it into the history books is to cause a major war(s) and capture all the glory that comes with causing the deaths of as many people as possible.

But then again, looking at the US, they don't seem to have been disadvantaged by a lack of dictators at all, as far as starting wars goes. One has to wonder, are dictatorships even competitive with US in the category of causing wars?

gmachine1729 , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 8:16 am GMT
https://gmachine1729.com/2018/11/30/a-call-to-boycott-jewish-media/

By Tiensen do you mean Tencent, famous now for its WeChat which I use for messaging and payments. I now also use their cloud storage Weiyun (3 TB on only 10 RMB / month) as well as their email.

By the way, Nvidia, YouTube, and Yahoo were all founded by ethnic Chinese from Taiwan. I actually think Nvidia is more impressive than both Microsoft or Google. Its GPU technology is much higher barrier to entry and as far as I can tell still exclusive to America.

I may well never come back to America ever again, and thus, most of what goes on in America will no longer be directly relevant to me. I could give pretty much zero of a fuck about the nonsense on China in the English language press, which I will only look at very occasionally, and those who create it. It would be rather futile to try to change the views of the majority of white Americans. Of course, there are a minority of white Americans who are more informed, reasonable, and open-minded, the ones I tended to interact with back in America, many of whom are unhappy with the state of American society. They are welcome to contact me (my email is on my website), and if they use not an American email, I'll be more willing to share certain information with them and possibly connect them to China-related business/opportunities.

I especially encourage the Russians on here to return to their home country. There is little point writing material critical of America in English on fringe media sites while in America contributing to the US economy and paying US taxes. My observation has been that the Russian personality not to mention background doesn't fare terribly well in corporate America. Why waste your energy in a country and system beyond reform that despises you for who you are that only accepts you for your labor. You'll find a better fit in your home country where you'll actually have genuine social belonging, which, unlike China, actually really needs more people.

Anon [319] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:00 am GMT
Main difference is China is about Chinese ruling over Chinese with Chinese pride, whereas America is about JAG(Jews-Afros-Gays) ruling over whites with 'white guilt', jungle fever, and homomania.

Problem with China is too much corruption and petty greed.

Anon [319] Disclaimer , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 9:20 am GMT
If you look at centuries of Chinese painting, you will see that each generation largely made copies of earlier masters.

Prior to Romanticism and esp modernism, Western Art changed very slowly over centuries.

Franz , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:25 am GMT
Many tried to warn the weenies what would happen while our industries were "donated" to China and got hosed for their trouble. Pat Buchanan's troubles actually started when he wrote The Great Betrayal , even if they took a little extra time to pull his syndicated column down.

Did you know about a World War II-era Kaiser steel mill once in California, that was cut up in blocks like a model kit and shipped in its entirety to China?

It happened right out in the open, under Daddy Bush, and everyone who complained became an unperson, Orwell-style. Nobody dared object to the glories of free trade. And the Chinese in California said it was doing so because they had a multi-million ton Plan to fill, and it was almost the 21st century.

China is now taking the wealth their nation is creating with stuff developed in Europe, Britain, and the United States. The hole in the donut is they could have done all that under license and we could have kept on with, and even improved our industrial base.

But in fact our leaders had Gender Reassignment in mind for the 21st century, not actual productive work that truly builds nations. The Impoverishment of Nations is well known: Send the real work out, keep the barbarians inside well-fed, sharp-clawed, and morally depraved.

Godfree Roberts , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:44 am GMT
" its stunning advance in forty years from impoverished Third World to a huge economy"

Bullshit. The stunning advance occurred between 1950-1975. Starting with an industrial base smaller than that of Belgium's in the 50s, the China that for so long was ridiculed as "the sick man of Asia" emerged at the end of the Mao period as one of the six largest industrial producers in the world.

National income grew five-fold over the 25-year period 1952-78, increasing from 60 billion to over 300 billion yuan, with industry accounting for most of the growth. On a per capita basis, the index of national income (at constant prices) increased from 100 in 1949 (and 160 in 1952) to 217 in 1957 and 440 in 1978.

Over the last two decades of the Maoist era, from 1957 to 1975, China's national income increased by 63 percent on a per capita basis during this period of rapid population growth, more than doubling overall and the basic foundations for modern industrialism were laid and outpacing every other development takeoff in history.

Bear in mind that, save for limited Soviet aid in the 1950s, repaid in full and with interest by 1966, Mao's industrialization proceeded without benefit of foreign loans or investments–under punitive embargoes the entire 25 years–yet Mao was unique among developing country leaders in being able to claim an economy burdened by neither foreign debt nor internal inflation.

Anonymous [126] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 12:24 pm GMT

Socially China has a great advantage over America in that, except for the Muslims of Xinjiang, it is pretty much a Han monoculture. Lacking America's racial diversity, its cities do not burn, no pressure exists to infantilize the schools for the benefit of incompetent minorities, racial mobs do not loot stores, and there is very little street crime.

Wait, weren't you a supporter of American racial diversity? Weren't the millions of dusty beaners entering the US a God's gift to the country's rich, colorful, cultural tapestry?

A dictatorship can simply do things. It can plan twenty, or fifty, years down the road.

So can the Western, globalist (((deep state))). The Chinese dictatorship is simply doing it for themselves and their nation. Their people's lives are getting better for decades while we have every reason to envy our grandfathers.

dearieme , says: November 30, 2018 at 12:43 pm GMT
"China has an adult government that gets things done. America has a kaleidoscopically shifting cast of pathologically aggressive curiosities in the White House."

Well put: I have long argued that the last adult president was Bush the Elder – what followed was a sorry sequence of adolescents.

There was only one chance to elect a non-preposterous grown-up – Romney. It was spurned.

But be of good cheer: the White House might currently be occupied by an absurd oaf, but it might have been Hellary, a grown-up with vices not to my taste. Better the absurd than the appalling?

As for China – I've never been there. At second-hand I am impressed. But it too could take a tumble – life's like that.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 1:44 pm GMT
@Cyrano Having a dictator is not just a bad idea because of wars, Cyrano. The English spent many centuries slowly chipping away at the ultimate power of Kings and Queens. I'm pretty sure that if they hadn't done that, you and I would not be here writing to each other today.

There can be a powerful Monarchy or Dictator, say, like under Queen Victoria or Josef Stalin. There will be much different outcomes. It would be a shame if the good King or dictator happens to die and leave the whole nation to a bad one, and your children's lives are much the worse for it, don't you think?

China is a perfect example, as anyone growing up under Mao had it very rough, even if he didn't get swept up in the 1,000 lawnmowers campaign or the Cultural Revolution. If you had been born in 1950, say, that was tough luck for much of your life. If you were born in 1985, though, well, as one can read in the column above, it's a different story.

Since I brought up Queen Victoria, and now have this song in my head (not a bad thing), I will move it into Reed's Reeders' heads now. Great stuff!:

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 2:00 pm GMT
@dearieme I agree with your sentiment, Dearieme, and I completely agree with you about George H.W. Bush* being the last President to act like one should.. However, that shouldn't matter anyway. Our system of government is NOT supposed to be about who is president making a big difference in how things run. It used to work like that too, before the people betrayed the US Constitution and let the Feral Gov't get out of hand.

The fact is, that Mitt Romney or not, per Mr. Franz above, the country has been in the process of being given away for > 2 decades now. Yes, no manufacturing might, no country left. That brings up what is wrong with Mr. Reed's article, which I'll get to in a minute.

* Politically, I hate the guy, but that's not what your point is.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 2:25 pm GMT
I am not knocking the observations of how things run economically in America vs. in China. I think the article does a good job on that. However, the whole analysis part seems kind of STATIC. I know Fred knows better, as he grew up in what was a different country and BY FAR the most powerful economically, precisely because it was when the US Feral Gov't still left private (at least small) business alone for the most part.

You do realize, Mr. Reed, that the US was NOT created to be a democracy, but a Constitutional Republic? China WAS a totalitarian society, but things only got (WAY) better after Chairman Deng decided that the central government would start leaving people alone to do business. The Chinese are very good at business and are very hard workers.

Yes, the Chinese government runs much better, at this point, than the US Feral Gov't after years and years (say 5 decades) of infiltration by the ctrl-left. All of our institutions have been infiltrated, governments , big-business , media , universities , lower education all of it. China had it's physical Long March, and 3 decades of hard-core Communism, but they got over it. America has had it's Long March on the down low, and is reaping the whirlwind at the present. Will we get over it? Maybe, but it'll take guns. We got 'em.

The winds of change have blown through. They can change direction again. For a place like America, it's not going to take one powerful man (look how ineffective President Trump has been), but the people and a movement. Just as some have been unobservant of China over the last 2 decades, many will miss the changes here too.

Thorfinnsson , says: November 30, 2018 at 2:37 pm GMT
@Godfree Roberts Glad to see our resident white Maozuo is back.

Your comparisons are not good.

Germany in 1880 was much nearer the technological frontier than China was in 1950. The Japan comparison is better, but Japan at the end of the Tokugawa era was about as developed as Britain in 1700 (and had already for instance substantially displaced China in the exported silk market).

The Soviet Union suffered certain events in the period from 1941-1945 you may wish to look up.

More relevant comparisons might be South Korea and Taiwan. Or even postwar Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Greece.

I think most informed people now are aware that Soviet-style central planning is effective for the initial industrialization phase. What we dispute is that it is uniquely effective, as Mazuo and Sovoks insisted. Other systems have matched its performance at lower human and geopolitical cost.

Thorfinnsson , says: November 30, 2018 at 2:45 pm GMT
@dearieme GHW certainly acted Presidential, but did that help America?

He was the architect of NAFTA (even if signed by Bill Clinton) and signed the Immigration Act of 1990, which significantly increased the yearly number of immigrant visas that could be issued and created the disastrous Temporary Protected Status visa.

Anonymous [261] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 2:54 pm GMT
@Jason Liu

A wise dictator is great for the country, but Xi is not wise. He is a stubborn old man stuck in the past who is clearly not listening to advisers. He has overplayed his hand, confronted the US 10~20 years too early, damaged China's image out of some paranoid fear of Uyghurs, and absolutely failed at making friends with our East Asian neighbors, instead driving them further into the arms of the Americans.

Xi might have stepped up too early, but maybe this wouldn't matter. When the Americans decide to confront China depends on the Americans. In case you believe that US presidents drive US policy, Trump was saying things about China 25 years ago.

The Uyghur thing nobody cares about. The western media would find something else to lie about.

I agree with the things you say afterwards. although I find it difficult to see China becoming likable to it's neighbors. I believe the big thing will be to see what the CCP does in the next economic crisis; will they change or will they turtle into bad policy and stagnate. The challenge after that would be the demographics.

The Anti-Gnostic , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 3:02 pm GMT
@dearieme Mormons are idealists, not realists, which puts them outside the grown-up pale in my book. Mormonism might as well be called American Suburbanism at this point. That lifestyle takes a lot of things for granted that will not be around much longer. They top out intellectually at the level of mid-tier management.

To be fair, this applies to most Americans, convinced that inside everybody is a conformist, suburban American just waiting to get out.

There's a case that can be made that Mormonism is actually the official American religion.

Ali Choudhury , says: November 30, 2018 at 3:25 pm GMT
Chinese progress has been most impressive but the country is sitting on an enormous pile of private and SOE debt.. There has not been a country in recorded history that has accumulated debt at the rate China did post the 2008 crash.

When the chickens come home to roost it will not be pretty.

Anonymous [126] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 3:28 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman

It would be a shame if the good King or dictator happens to die and leave the whole nation to a bad one, and your children's lives are much the worse for it, don't you think?

Sure, but the bad one would run the risk of being overthrown and his bloodline slaughtered. Everyone would know that the buck ends with him and his family.

Modern "democracies" dilute this responsibility and leave room for a set of hidden kings and dictators to run the show from the shadows. The plebs are supposed to vent their frustration by voting out the bad guys but that's useless (a pressure relief valve, really) if the shadow dictators control the information and the choices.

Luckily, the goyim are waking up to this scam.

Ali Choudhury , says: November 30, 2018 at 3:33 pm GMT
@dearieme The Cold War and threat of nuclear annihilation is gone, so why not elect entertaining charlatans, dunces, fools and outright crooks?
dearieme , says: November 30, 2018 at 4:06 pm GMT
@Thorfinnsson "GHW certainly acted Presidential, but did that help America?:

I've no idea but it's not the point anyway. The point is that he presumably arrived at his decisions by thinking like an adult, instead of being blown around on gusts of adolescent emotions, like Slick Willie, W, O, and Trump.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website November 30, 2018 at 4:19 pm GMT
@Anonymous He may run that risk, but with absolute authority, who will stand up to him? You've got to know the history of Western Civilization (Europe, I mean) is filled with years and centuries of terrible, evil Kings and Queens in countries far and wide, right?

As far as democracies go, no, it doesn't work in the long, or even medium, run, unless you withhold the vote for landowners and only those with responsibility. I don't thing that's been the case here except for the first 50 years or so. You give the vote to the young, the stupid, the irresponsible, the women, etc., and it goes downhill. In America's case, it took a long time to go downhill because we had a lot of human and real capital built up.

Now, this is all why this country, as I wrote already above, was not set up to BE a democracy, Mr #126. It was to be a Constitutional Republic, with powers of the Feral Gov't limited by the document. However, once the population treats it as nothing but a piece of paper, that's all it becomes.

AnonFromTN , says: November 30, 2018 at 4:56 pm GMT
Chinese progress is impressive in absolute terms, but it is much more impressive in relative terms. While the US and all its sidekicks are ruining their countries by losing manufacturing, running up mountains of debt, and dumbing down the populace by horrible educational system and uncontrolled immigration of wild hordes with medieval mentality, some countries, including China, keep moving up. But the achievements of China or Russia wouldn't look so great without the simultaneous suicide of the West.

Let me give you the example I know best. As a scientist and an Editor of several scientific journals I see the decline of scientific production in the US: just 20 years ago it clearly dominated, but now it went way down. There emerged lots of papers from big China. Quality-wise, most of them are still sub-par, but they are getting into fairly decent journals because of the void left by the decline of science in the US.

Yes, if current tendencies continue for 20 more years, Chinese science would improve and China would become an uncontested leader in that field. However, if the US reins in its thieving elites and shifts to a more sensible course, it still has the potential to remain the world leader in science. It just needs to cut military spending to 20-30% of its current crazy unsustainable levels and invest some of the saved resources into science, industry (real one, not banking that only produces bubbles galore), and infrastructure. Is this realistic? Maybe not, but hope springs eternal.

DB Cooper , says: November 30, 2018 at 5:05 pm GMT
@Jason Liu As a long time China watcher myself I didn't see anything you described with regards to China's foreign policy, including its dealing with its East Asian neighbors. From what I saw China's statecraft with respect to its neighbors is mature, friendly, measured, restraint and long term thinking. May be I am missing something or see something and interpret it in an opposite way than you did. For example you said

"and absolutely failed at making friends with our East Asian neighbors, instead driving them further into the arms of the Americans"

"Angry, condescending attitudes towards our neighbors, especially Japan, severely cripple China's ability to be a world player. "

I didn't see any of that. Any specific example to illustrate your point?

AnonFromTN , says: November 30, 2018 at 5:23 pm GMT
@DB Cooper Again, Chinese and Russian foreign policy looks best when you compare it to the US. Both countries made their fair share of blunders, but next to the rabid dog US they look decidedly sensible and restrained.
Digital Samizdat , says: November 30, 2018 at 6:38 pm GMT
@Jason Liu You may very well be accurately describing the attitudes of individual Chinamen; but I see no evidence that the Chinese government is all that guilty of alienating other countries. On the contrary, they seem to be doing quite well. Even the hated Japs can't seem to invest enough money into China.
Digital Samizdat , says: November 30, 2018 at 6:43 pm GMT

There may be something to this. If you look at centuries of Chinese painting, you will see that each generation largely made copies of earlier masters. As nearly as I, a nonexpert, can tell, there is more variety and imagination in the Corcoran Gallery's annual exhibition of high-school artists than in all of Chinese paining.

There was a point in time when I would have agreed with Fred on this; but seeing what's become of Western art over the last century, I can't anymore. A few centuries ago, Western art was surely making progress by leaps and bounds. These days though, it's in swift decline. All it's got left to offer is pointless pretentiousness. At least traditional Chinese painting still requires some real craftsmanship and skill.

Digital Samizdat , says: November 30, 2018 at 6:56 pm GMT
@Ali Choudhury

Chinese progress has been most impressive but the country is sitting on an enormous pile of private and SOE debt.. There has not been a country in recorded history that has accumulated debt at the rate China did post the 2008 crash.

This is what happens to your brain on Forbes and the Wall Street Journal . In reality, China is the world's largest creditor. In fact, it's the US which is the largest debtor in the world.

All that Chinese debt that the Western presstitutes go on an on about is really just an accounting gimmick: some state-owned bank in China makes a loan to some state-owned conglomerate there, and this gets written down as a debt. But the Chinese government (which owns both of them) is never going to allow either of the two parties to actually go bankrupt, so the debt isn't actually real. It's no different than ordering your right-pocket to lend your left-pocket ten dollars: your right-pocket may now record that loan as an 'asset' on a balance sheet somewhere, while your left-pocket will now record it as a 'liability', but you as a person aren't any richer or poorer than you were before. You still have ten dollars–no more, no less. And so it is with China. They merely 'owe' that money to themselves.

Cyrano , says: November 30, 2018 at 7:11 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman Dictatorships are personality dependent, as opposed to democracies that are ? dependent. Communism came up with a catchy slogan – dictatorship of the proletariat. Why couldn't US – which are, after all, a birthplace of propaganda – come up with a similarly catchy slogan, such as: Democracy – dictatorship of the elitariat? Or maybe, Democracy – dictatorship of the deep state.

I personally prefer elections where there is only one candidate and one voter – the dictator, it kind of simplifies things. I think it takes a lot of bravery to be a dictator, you don't delegate glory, but you don't delegate blame either, you take full responsibility and full credit for whatever is happening in the country.

raywood , says: November 30, 2018 at 8:07 pm GMT
I didn't have time to read all the comments. But the ones I read, and especially the article itself, I found very interesting. Keep up the good work!
Ali Choudhury , says: November 30, 2018 at 8:40 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat The sheer amount of shadow debt outstanding is huge. 250 to 300% of GDP by some estimates. You reckon the Chinese government have this covered and can rescue failing institutions. They probably don't even know how many bad loans need to be written off and how badly it will cause a squeeze on normal lending.
Random Smartaleck , says: November 30, 2018 at 8:56 pm GMT
@DB Cooper

From what I saw China's statecraft with respect to its neighbors is mature, friendly, measured, restraint and long term thinking.

Do you think that correctly describes China's handling of claims in the South China Sea, or its attitude toward the independent country of Taiwan, or its promotion of anti-Japanese propaganda on Chinese television?

Random Smartaleck , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:09 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat

but I see no evidence that the Chinese government is all that guilty of alienating other countries.

Its complete disregard of other nations' entirely legitimate claims in the South China Sea is evidence to the contrary. It's not as if other nations must completely sever all relations with China for any alienation to be occurring.

Random Smartaleck , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:22 pm GMT
@Jason Liu Excellent comment, Jason. Certainly if China wishes to again become Elder Brother to East Asia, it needs to start relating to its neighbors as Little Brothers instead of obstacles to be rudely shoved aside.
Brian Reilly , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:24 pm GMT
@gmachine1729 gmachine, Glad to hear you are in a place that you like and suits you. That is what nations are all about. I am also in favor of native peoples contributing their effort (through commercial, intellectual and spiritual endeavors) to the benefit of their fellow nation-citizens, as long as those contributions are not wrung out by force of the state.

And Russia will have a lot more people by and by. They will be Chinese or Uyghar (sp?) perhaps, but that empty space will surely be put to use by someone or someones. Whether the Russians like that much could be another matter.

DB Cooper , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:35 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck China's handling of the claims in South China Sea has been characterized by restraint and a lot of patience. Basically a combination of dangling a big carrot with a small stick. This is the reason the ASEAN has signed up to the SCS code of conduct and the relation between the Philippines and China is at a all time high since Aquino's engineered the PCA farce several years ago.

Taiwan considered itself the legitimate government of all of China encompassing the mainland. It's official name is the Republic of China. Mainland China considered itself the legitimate the government of all of China encompassing the island of Taiwan. Its official name is the People's Republic of China. The so called 92 consensus agreed by both sides is that each side agreed there is only one China and each side is free to interpret its own version of China. For the mainland that means PRC (Peoples Republic of China). For Taiwan that means ROC (Republic of China). There is no such thing as the independent country of Taiwan.

China's tv has world war II drama doesn't constitute propaganda in as much as history channel in the US has world war II topics all the time.

Brian Reilly , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:38 pm GMT
If the reporting I have read (widely sourced) about infrastructure quality, durability, and actual utility is even 1/2 correct, quite a lot of government (especially provincial government) directed development cannot and will not prove to be wise investment. Combined with the opaque economic reporting, also subject to differing reporting as is infrastructure rating, there is some good reason t believe that the nation has some huge huge challenges diretly ahead.

The male overhang in China (and in India, others as well, but much smaller) is another potential problem that is difficult to assess. Maybe it is a nothingburger, and 50 million men without any chance to have a single wife will just find something else worthwhile and rewarding to do with their time. Maybe not. Combine wasted urban investment, financial chicanery on a gross scale, a narrow authoritarian structure and tens of millions of unsatisfied, un-familied men, the downside looks pretty ugly.

Maybe that reporting is all bullshit. I don't think so. I think that Chinese leadership is likely very concerned, hence so many of them securing property and anchor babies in the West. I do hope for the sake of the Chinese people, and the rest of the globe, that whatever comes along will not be too bad.

DB Cooper , says: November 30, 2018 at 9:43 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck "Its complete disregard of other nations' entirely legitimate claims in the South China Sea is evidence to the contrary."

The fact is that the claim of the Phillipines and Vietnam is highly illegitimate according to international law and convention.

Anon [348] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 10:58 pm GMT
This is why I'm not afraid of China: Chinese are greedy soulless capitalists, or pagans as another poster calls them. Spot on. A country of 1.3 billion pagans will always stay a low trust society. Every Chinese dreams of getting rich, so they can get the hell out of China.

As for all the worship of education, no fear there either, the end goal of every single one of their top students is to go an American university, then once they get here, do everything they can to stay and never go back.

This is why I fear China: they are invading us, and bringing their dog-eat-dog, pagan ways with them, slowly but surely turning us into another low-trust, pagan society like the one they left behind. Also once they get here they instantly start chanting "China #1!", and look out for interest of China rather than that of the US. If we were wise we would stop this invasion now, but Javanka can't get enough of their EB5 dollars.

Anon [348] Disclaimer , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:10 pm GMT

when a society favors profits over freedom and conscience, it becomes crass, shallow, and materialistic.

i.e. it becomes the United States.

another fred , says: November 30, 2018 at 11:50 pm GMT
@Digital Samizdat The problem is neither debt nor bankruptcies, although they are part of what is going on. It is the artificially elevated level of economic activity and the expectations of the people depending on that level continuing to sustain their lifestyles. The activity can only be sustained by expanding credit. If you believe that credit can continue to expand infinitely, well, we will see.

I notice that the Chinese are reducing their personal consumption in response to the cracks appearing in the economies of the world. They are wise to do so.

We have the same problem in the US, probably worse, and it exists throughout most of the "first" world. China has a decided advantage because of the degree of social control of its people, but China will not be immune when the bubble breaks.

witters , says: December 1, 2018 at 12:02 am GMT
@Anon Fred probably shouldn't say anything about art, but when has ignorance got in the way of USian cultural putdowns? Anyway, the very idea that the Chinese merely make copies is nonsense, pure and simple.

https://aeon.co/essays/why-in-china-and-japan-a-copy-is-just-as-good-as-an-original

Mark T , says: December 1, 2018 at 11:54 am GMT
@Digital Samizdat Well put. The propaganda on US websites is always about the debt as there is a need to believe that China is going to collapse as it simply can't have achieved what it has without freedom, democracy and the American way, or more accurately by not employing the disastrous policy mix known as the Washington Consensus. It is the countries who followed that (likely deliberately) flawed model of open exchange rates, low value added manufacturing (to enrich US multinationals and consumers) with western FDI that have given the support for the otherwise flawed Reinhardt and Roghoff study that everyone (who hasn't actually read it) uses to justify why debt to GDP is 'a bad thing' over a certain level. As those benighted emerging economies prospered from their trade relationship they were then offered lots of nice $ loans for consumption, buying cars and houses and lots of western consumer goods. So current account deficit, more $ funding, inflation, higher interest rates to control inflation triggering a flow of hot money that drivers the exchange rate temporarily higher undermining the export model. Then crash – exchange rate has killed export model, interest rates cripple domestic demand, financial markets plummet, hot money rushes out, exchange rate collapses so stagflation. Wall Street comes in and privatises the best assets and the US taxpayer bails out the banks. Rinse and repeat.
China was supposed to 'act like a normal country' and play this game, but it didn't. It followed the mercantilist model and built a balanced economy without importing western consumer goods and financial services. However, unlike Germany, Japan or S.Korea, China does not have a standing US Army on its soil to ensure that everything gets done for good old Uncle Sam. Hence the bellicosity and the propaganda. China's debts are owned by China, as are a lot of America's debts. Raising debt to build infrastructure and assets like toll roads, airports, electricity grids, high speed railways means that there is an income bearing asset to offset the liability. Raising debt to maintain hundreds of imperial bases around the world less so.
Digital Samizdat , says: December 1, 2018 at 5:50 pm GMT
@Mark T You are very perceptive. The reason why China's debts are 'bad' while Uncle Scam's debts are 'good' is because (((the usual suspects))) are profiting off the latter, but not the former. They were betting that, if they gave the Chinese our industry, China would repay the favor by giving them their finance sector in return. But that's not what happened! And now, (((the usual suspects))) are waking up to the rather embarrassing realization they got played by some slick operators from the East from wayyyy back East.
Random Smartaleck , says: December 1, 2018 at 9:15 pm GMT
@DB Cooper

The so called 92 consensus agreed by both sides is that each side agreed there is only one China and each side is free to interpret its own version of China. For the mainland that means PRC (Peoples Republic of China). For Taiwan that means ROC (Republic of China). There is no such thing as the independent country of Taiwan.

The "One China Policy" is a diplomatic sham designed to avoid bruising the fragile egos of the two Chinas, and is insisted on by the PRC to aid in their Finlandization & eventual absorption of Taiwan. Taiwan has been an independent country in all but diplomatic nomenclature for 70 years. The PRC's claim that Taiwan is a "renegade province" is laughable. The island is simply territory that the CCP never conquered. It is only the CCP's mad insistence on the "China is the CCP, the CCP is China" formulation that convinces it otherwise.

Likewise, Taiwan's claim of jurisdiction over the mainland -- while justifiable given history -- is simply delusional. The ROC can do absolutely nothing to enforce this claim, and, barring something truly extraordinary, will never be the government of the mainland again. Regardless, this claim does not negate Taiwan's de facto independence because it has absolutely nothing to do with placing Taiwan under others' control.

So, thus, "the independent country of Taiwan."

Random Smartaleck , says: December 1, 2018 at 9:37 pm GMT
@DB Cooper

China's tv has world war II drama doesn't constitute propaganda in as much as history channel in the US has world war II topics all the time.

You know better than that. We aren't talking about sober, fair-minded documentaries here. The Chinese productions are lurid, over-the-top demonizations of the Japanese. These combined with the National Humiliation curriculum and various museums show that the CCP quite likes stoking hatred against Japan among the Chinese masses perhaps they hope to exploit it in some near-future manufactured conflict.

DB Cooper , says: December 1, 2018 at 10:42 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck "The "One China Policy" is a diplomatic sham designed to avoid bruising the fragile egos of the two Chinas, and is insisted on by the PRC to aid in their Finlandization & eventual absorption of Taiwan. "

It is insisted on by both sides. The quarrel between the ROC and the PRC is which one is the legitimate government of China. The 92′ consensus only formalized this understanding in a documented form.

This "One China Policy" has its root deep into the historic narrative of China when successive dynasties replaced one after another and which dynasty should be recognized as the legitimate successor dynasty to the former dynasty. If you read any Chinese history book at the end of the book there is usually a cronological order of successive Chinese dynasties one followed another in a linear fashion. But of course in reality very often it is not that clean cut. Sometimes between transition several petty dynasties coexist each vying for the legitimacy to get the mandate of heaven to rule the whole of China. This "One China Policy" is just a modern manifestation of this kind of cultural understanding of the Chinese people and has nothing to do with Communism, Nationalism or whateverism.

DB Cooper , says: December 1, 2018 at 10:48 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck "These combined with the National Humiliation curriculum and various museums show that the CCP quite likes stoking hatred against Japan among the Chinese masses perhaps they hope to exploit it in some near-future manufactured conflict."

These kind of museums are fairly newly built, three decades old at most, many are even newer and is a direct response to Japan historic revisism. If the CCP want to milk this kind of anti-Japanese sentiment for its political purpose shouldn't they built this kind of museum earlier? From what I understand the elaborate annual reenactment of the atomic bombing in Nagasaki and Hiroshima begin the moment the US retreated from the administration of Japan in 1972. Now this is what I called the milking a victimhood sentiment for its political purpose.

The largest tourist group to Japan from a foreign country is from mainland. If the CCP is really stoking hatred to the Japanese then they really suck at it. What Japan did to China in the last century don't need any stoking. History speaks for itself.

Simply Simon , says: December 1, 2018 at 11:02 pm GMT
I would not debate Fred on any of the points he makes but I have a point of my own.After they read Fred's article select any number of Chinese men and women at random and tell them they are welcome to migrate to the US with no strings attached and at the same time select any number of American men and women at random and tell them they will likewise be welcomed by the Chinese. The proof should be in the pudding.
Anon [131] Disclaimer , says: December 1, 2018 at 11:28 pm GMT
@Mark T

It followed the mercantilist model and built a balanced economy without importing western consumer goods and financial services.

Agree somewhat. China did and does import a lot of western consumer goods. China is Germany's biggest trading partner, and Germany has trade surplus with China. And China isn't even the world's largest trade surplus country . Germany is, followed by Japan. ..

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-poised-to-set-worlds-largest-trade-surplus/a-45150968

Germany poised to set world's largest trade surplus. Germany is on track to record the world's largest trade surplus for a third consecutive year. The country's $299 billion surplus is poised to attract criticism, however, both at home and internationally. Germany is expected to set a €264 billion ($299 billion) trade surplus this year, far more than its closest export rivals Japan and the Netherlands, according to research published Monday by Munich-based economic research institute Ifo.

GM does well in China, selling more cars in China than it does in the US. (Personally I think GM makes crappy cars. ) It is successful in China, because GM has been doing a fantastic job of marketing its brand and American brands still enjoy prestige in China. And Apple certainly wouldn't have become the first trillion dollar company without China's market.

On a personal note, one of my relatives sells American medical devices to China and makes decent money. It isn't easy though as competition is fierce. America is not the only country that makes good medical devices. You have to compete with products from other countries.

With regard to the financial section, China has been extremely cautious of opening it up. Can you blame China? Given how the Wall Street operates. China just didn't have expertise, experience or regulations to handle a lot of these stuff. China has been preparing it, though, and it is ready to reform the market.

Beijing pushes ahead with opening up its financial sector despite trade tensions.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/25/beijing-pushes-ahead-with-financial-opening-up-despite-trade-tensions.html

Also, China is one of the backers for the WTO reform.

Anon [131] Disclaimer , says: December 2, 2018 at 12:25 am GMT
@DB Cooper Well said.

In "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" , the first sentence of the book is " 話說天下大勢,分久必合,合久必分. It can be roughly translated as "Under the heaven the general trend is : what is long divided, must unite; what is long united, must divide".

I believe in my lifetime China and Taiwan will unite again, and North Korea and South Korea will become One Korea.

Romance of the Three Kingdoms – Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_of_the_Three_Kingdoms

Romance of the Three Kingdoms is a 14th-century historical novel attributed to Luo Guanzhong. It is set in the turbulent years towards the end of the Han dynasty and the Three Kingdoms period in Chinese history

SZ , says: December 2, 2018 at 4:22 pm GMT
What is wrong with less 'inventiveness'? Do we really need a software update every 1 or 2 years? Just think, for example, how annoying the 'microsoft office ribbon' is for most of its adult and serious users who would prefer good-old drop-down menus! Or do we really need to change our clothes and phones every year and renew our furniture every decade because the preferred style is changing? The vast majority of the world, especially those areas where communitarian family models were the norm at some point in time, would embrace a little stability over coping with each unnecessary 'invention'. For the Anglo-Saxon world, marked by the 'absolute nuclear family', on the other hand, stability and predictability is a nightmare and an assault on their precious individuality. Hence, the tension between the US-led bloc of English-speaking nations and China-Russia-led Eurasia is no surprise, but rather the natural outcome of the cultural fabric of each bloc. A world succumbing to the Chinese vision would definitely be more dull, but more stable and foreseeable as well.
Rich , says: December 2, 2018 at 6:44 pm GMT
This has been an excellent article along with some excellent commentary. It's difficult to get a clear picture of what's actually happening in China and every little bit helps. Two of my kids went to Ivy League schools and when we were doing the drive to check them all out, they were filled with Asians. The Chinese I deal with are very materialistic and appear to base their importance on wealth and position. One poor Chinese kid I know who works as a mechanic tells me Chinese girls won't even date him because of his status. Of course I live in NY where most people are materialistic so it's hard to tell if that's a Chinese trait or not. They do appear to be a very smart, hard driven people and there's a whole lot of them, so there's a chance we start seeing them replace our present elite in the near future.
Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 2, 2018 at 7:48 pm GMT
@Rich

One poor Chinese kid I know who works as a mechanic tells me Chinese girls won't even date him because of his status.
so it's hard to tell if that's a Chinese trait or not.

Yes that is a trait, Rich, and though somewhat prevalent in America too, the Chinese seem to have no respect for guys that work with their hands. To me, that's shameful. They respect the rich conniving businessman over the honest laborer.

I'd like to see one of the China-#1 commenters on here, or even Fred Reed*, argue with me on that one. The British-descended especially, but all of white American culture has a respect for honesty. That is absolutely NOT the case with the Chinese, whether living in China or right here. See Peak Stupidity on DIY's in China vs. America – Here is Part 1 .

* You're not gonna gain this kind of knowledge in a couple of weeks and without hanging with Chinese people, though.

Realist , says: December 2, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT

Socially China has a great advantage over America in that, except for the Muslims of Xinjiang, it is pretty much a Han monoculture. Lacking America's racial diversity, its cities do not burn, no pressure exists to infantilize the schools for the benefit of incompetent minorities, racial mobs do not loot stores, and there is very little street crime.

America's huge urban pockets of illiteracy do not exist. There is not the virulent political division that has gangs of uncontrolled Antifa hoodlums stalking public officials. China takes education seriously, as America does not. Students study, behave as maturely as their age would suggest, and do not engage in middle-school politics.

Agreed. China is not burdened by the abomination of cultural and racial strife. The United States has lost trillions of dollars due to racial and cultural differences.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 2, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT
@DB Cooper I'm not picking on, or arguing at all with, you in particular, Mr. Cooper, but let me chime in about this whole Mainland China vs. Taiwan thing. The first thing to remember is, excepting the original Taiwanese people who've been invaded left and right, these people are ALL CHINESE. They will eventually get back together, as the Germans have, and (I'm in agreement with another guy on this thread) the Koreans will.

Even the Chinese widow of Claire Chenault, the leader of the great American AVG Flying Tigers who supported the Nationalist Chiang Kai-Shek, had worked for years enabling business between Taiwan and the mainland. There is so much business between the 2 that any kind of war would seriously impede, and right now, the business of China is business (where have I heard that before?)

Another thing I can say about it is that it's sure none of America's business, at this point. The Cold War ended almost 3 decades ago. We are beyond broke, and it does us nothing but harm in thinking we must "defend" an island of Chinamen against a continent of Chinamen. Let the Republic Of China and the People's Republic Of China save faces in whatever asinine ways they see fit to. It's not a damn bit of America's business.

Realist , says: December 2, 2018 at 8:06 pm GMT
@Simply Simon

After they read Fred's article select any number of Chinese men and women at random and tell them they are welcome to migrate to the US with no strings attached and at the same time select any number of American men and women at random and tell them they will likewise be welcomed by the Chinese. The proof should be in the pudding.

American propaganda plays a big part here. Plus more Chinese speak English than Americans speak Mandarin.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 2, 2018 at 8:40 pm GMT
@Citizen of a Silly Country YOU may be behind about about a decade on this one, CoaSC, so touche*!

What I mean is, you may not have looked at it in a while, but the last bunch of times I've seen the "History Channel", it was all about one set of guys trying to sell their old crap to another bunch of guys, and the drama that apparently goes with that the Pawn Stars . Where history comes in, I have no earthly idea. I'd much rather be watching the Nazi Channel over this latest iteration of that network. Better yet, though, I don't watch TV.

* I think from the Chongching vs. Chongqing thing (you were right, of course). I hope I am remembering correctly.

MIT Handle , says: December 2, 2018 at 9:09 pm GMT
@Simply Simon I recently did a graduate degree at MIT, where there are a ton of Chinese students. They seem to be proud of China's progress, but as far as I can tell, almost all of them want to remain in the U.S.
Ben Sampson , says: December 2, 2018 at 10:18 pm GMT
@Jason Liu fine commentary Jason Lu. from the little I know Lu is very useful here..for the Chinese!
Ben Sampson , says: December 2, 2018 at 10:35 pm GMT
@Realist abomination of racial and cultural strife! Incredible! why is such diversity an abomination and not an advantage?

Because America ripped off all the people who are in strife' currently..and never addressed what such exploitation did to them socially ..making what could be an advantage a so-called 'abomination'

if some of the trillions had been spent on the needs of the American people by building essential physical and social infrastructure to meet popular need, then there would be no strife, people would have opportunity and structures to do their business..there would be no social loss and diversity would not be the problem that it is

the American system uses up people and discards them to the wayside when immediate exploitation needs are met. but we all know this making that comment inaccurate, nonsense really.

and again the 'strife has been going on so long that the elites should know it inside out and be able to address it positively. that they have not means that they do not care about the people period. they are prepared to let the strife go on and exploit that for profit and social control too

Simply Simon , says: December 3, 2018 at 12:14 am GMT
@MIT Handle It's the proof of the pudding. No matter how progressive China is the students value America's freedom of speech, movement, and religious liberty to name a few of the things we cherish.
Biff , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:12 am GMT
@AnonFromTN

It just needs to cut military spending to 20-30% of its current crazy unsustainable levels and invest some of the saved resources into science,

An idealist, and way off the mark. Empire's number one goal isn't a scientific one, but rather a financial one. The entire purpose of the U.S. military is to secure, and shore up Wall Street(White/Jewish) capitol on a global scale. Smedley Butler wrote about this very fact in the 1930's, and it still remains just as true. The Cold War/Vietnam war wasn't fought to battle a weak, retarded economic system such as communism, but rather to shore up financial dominance – for the same reason the U.S. military is fixated on oil fields, pipelines and other resources – Money!
Financial weapons(sanctions) can kill way more people than bombs, and(loan sharking-IMF World Bank) can conquer more territory than armies(Central, South America, Africa, Greece, etc )
And the goal is not to just remain the the financial dominant system, but more importantly, to destroy any potential competition – this is what is putting Russia, China, and the Eurasian economic system in Washington's cross hairs.

The U.S. military strategists have mentioned on many occasions that they are not afraid of a larger military, but rather they are deathly afraid of a larger economy. If scientists are needed for stated goals then so be it, but they are not the crucial factor.

Priorities man.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:56 am GMT
@MBlanc46 Why would China need US investment? They get massive investment from Singapore other wealthy Asian countries.

There is massive remissions from Chinese in Canada, UK and Australia. China has the money to invest extensively in Africa. Recently the Philippines went to China for investment instead of the United States. The rest of the world has pretty much written the US as declining irrelevant former Superpower in economic terms. It still has military power as Fred noted but you cannot take over foreign economies with a military.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 3, 2018 at 7:08 am GMT
@Jason Liu JASON

You say all that but Fuji Chinese took over the economies of Philippines (A US ally no less), Malaysia, Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam (Less so because the Vietnamese hate the Chinese).

If the Koreans or Japanese did not hate the Chinese so much, they would probably take over their economies as well.

The real Chinese power is not IN China. It is with Fuji Chinese merchants in Southeast Asia.

Petty greed? And this is not rampant in Israel, US, Russia, Latin America .

Tyrion 2 , says: December 3, 2018 at 8:03 am GMT
@Jason Liu The most anti-China people I've ever spent time with were the incredibly successful Chinese diaspora in SE Asia. I found their contempt shocking. Chinese people were made the butt of their jokes even on seemingly random topics. Your post offers an explanation.

I'm much more positive about your (?) country. I really liked it. But it does give me pause for thought whenever familiarity breeds contempt.

My own little annoyance came recently. I had reason to download WeChat. It was the easiest way to coordinate some business. When I later tried to delete my account, I found I could not. After searching for an answer, I read that I had to email the company and was certainly not guaranteed a response nor any action. That put the first line of their marketing about "300 million" users into perspective.

Another anecdotal thing I've noticed. There used to be lots of Chinese restaurants in London and very few Japanese, Korean, Thai and Vietnamese. There are now more of all of the latter near me, and the Chinese restaurants are generally very low quality holdouts, probably surviving by holding long cheap leases. People really like the other cultures, especially Korea and Japan, not so much the Chinese – a strange fact given the history of East Asia.

Hanoodtroll , says: December 3, 2018 at 9:19 am GMT
@Thorfinnsson

More relevant comparisons might be South Korea and Taiwan

Neither comparisons are exactly relevant. These two countries are tiny compared to China. But more importantly, America took both of them entirely under its wings, due to specific geopolitical conditions. Without the Korean and Vietnam wars, China-US thaw might have happened earlier, who knows. Godfree isn't wrong when he points out that China was under complete embargo. It's not like they had much of a choice other than central planning.

Nonny , says: December 3, 2018 at 10:14 am GMT
@Jason Liu Brilliant, Jason! Now, what does he have to fear from giving the Uigurs and Tibetans the right of self-determination instead of following the Israeli model and sending swarms of Han in?

And why the threat of war over every square inch along the Indian border, where the people are definitely not Han?

Why this greedy insanity, when if the idiot could learn the meaning of reconciliation China would zoom ahead at record speed! Is he a Jew in disguise?

Jeff Stryker , says: December 3, 2018 at 12:18 pm GMT
@Tyrion 2 I worked for Chinese-Filipinos and this is really 100% true. The ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia are the most heartless capitalists on earth.
Mike P , says: December 3, 2018 at 1:15 pm GMT

China has a government that can do things: In 2008 an 8.0 quake devastated the region near the Tibetan border, killing, according to the Chinese government, some 100,000 people. Buildings put up long before simply collapsed

Well what the Chinese government could not do is prevent the corruption that allowed many of these collapsed buildings to be constructed from poor materials and without regard for earthquake-related building codes.

That an overall mediocre country like China can be held up as a paragon of efficiency and achievement to an American audience only speaks to the desperate rot afflicting America itself. China has not managed to produce any internationally competitive products of any complexity such as cars or airplanes; and to the extent it is beginning to succeed, this is due to foreign investment and theft of IP. Meanwhile, South Korea has shown the world how it's done properly.

Prusmc , says: December 3, 2018 at 2:25 pm GMT
@Mike P Poor construction materials, second rate engineering, pay offs and cronyism sounds like diversity bridge that collapsed in Miami.
therevolutionwas , says: December 3, 2018 at 2:35 pm GMT
@Jason Liu Alasdair Macleod puts out some interesting articles on China, economically speaking. I liked your comment. https://www.goldmoney.com/research/goldmoney-insights/china-s-monetary-policy-must-change
Z-man , says: December 3, 2018 at 2:51 pm GMT

In terms of economic systems, the Chinese are clearly superior. China runs a large economic surplus

Up to now on the backs of poorly paid/overworked peasants. Shot a big hole in your article right away. Damn and I don't get paid for this?!? (Grin)

PS. Intelectual theft of mostly Western knowledge. Snap! Second hole shot. I need to get an agent, I'm soooo good I should be in charge of Face the Nation. (Smile) But I would keep the lovley Margaret Brennan as the host. (Grin)

TG , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:00 pm GMT
OK, good points, but a couple of comments.

1. China's one-child policy did not come about as a sort of attempt at eugenics. It came about because the previous six-child policy ("strength through numbers") was a colossal failure, and the resulting poverty nearly tore the communist state apart at the seems. So often governments insist on rapidly growing the population, and then when they get their wish, they realize that a massive number of hungry and angry people leads not to strength but to weakness. Just look at what happened when the Syrian government tried that

2. China peaceful? Not hardly. China is peaceful now because most people are doing OK. Back when population was pushing at the limits – during Mao's early phase, and before – when people were chronically malnourished and living in mud – no, the Chinese people were not peaceful.

3. Again, numbers do not always translate into strength. India looks to surpass China in total population, and they will be lucky just to avoid collapse.

4. Another thought: China is essentially ethnically pure Han Chinese. This might make revolts possible, as the people find it easy to band together. Not so in India, which is a massive pastiche of 100′s of different racial and ethnic groups – which are too busy competing with each other to band together. There is an old saying that the worst poverty that a people will accept before revolting, is exactly what they will end up with. Could part of China's strength be the fear of the elites that, if the people are crushed too much, that things could fall apart?

Carroll Price , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:41 pm GMT
Regarding economic and scientific advancements with which no one at the time could effectively compete, China sounds a bit like Germany prior to England, Russia and the United States combining economic and military resources to destroy it.
Jeff Stryker , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:42 pm GMT
@Realist That isn't true. There are thousands of us now in Asia. White males are everywhere in Asia doing every kind of business. I've been here for years.
anonymous [739] Disclaimer , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:46 pm GMT
Can some ethnic Han Chinese in the know give us the scoop on this: Are Han Chinese merchants, bankers getting back on top in places like Vietnam, Indonesia? There were huge anti Chinese riots in Indonesia in the 1960s and Han Chinese Merchants were singled out for ethnic cleansing by victorious Vietnamese Communists in ~ 1975 – the first Vietnamese boat people were Han Chinese merchants.

My take is that the Han Chinese in China and elsewhere in Asia are a lot like Japanese nationalist in the 1930s and Jewish merchants/bankers forever.

In all of this Chinese sphere of influence ares of Asia I think 2018 USA has pretty much nothing to offer except maybe playing balance of power to contain China and yes, have military alliances with all the countries in Asia that are not mainland China – I'm sure the Vietnamese want us back to militarize the Vietnam/China border – and we're good at that sort of thing, but we absolutely can not and will not control, protect our own Southern border.

Life sucks.

Agent76 , says: December 3, 2018 at 3:48 pm GMT
Nov 28, 2018 Belt & Road Billionaire in Massive Bribery Scandal

The bribery trial of Dr. Patrick Ho, a pitchman for a Chinese energy company, lifts the lid on how the Chinese regime relies on graft to cut Belt and Road deals in its global push for economic and geopolitical dominance.

Sent from my iPhone

Carroll Price , says: December 3, 2018 at 4:06 pm GMT
@nickels When was the last time Western Christianity demonstrated any moral conduct toward other nations? Was it England and the US fire-bombing German cities filled with civilians, followed by dropping two nuclear bombs on a defeated nation?
Rurik , says: December 3, 2018 at 5:22 pm GMT

as the US tries to garrison the world. Always favoring coercion, Washington now tries to batter the planet into submission via tarifffs, sanctions, embargos, and so on.

"and so on" ? Why not just be honest Fredo? Without tariffs, the lot of the American working class would eventually fall to the level of the rest of the Third World's teeming billions of near-starving wretches. As the one percent continued to move all its manufacturing to the slave labor wage rates of China and Mexico, et al.

By imposing tariffs on the products that the internationalist scumfucks build in China and elsewhere, it tends to encourage the production of these things domestically, thereby protecting the ever falling wages of the reviled American working class. Also China engages in policies that are specifically intended to bolster China, like protectionist economics. Whereas the ZUS does the opposite, its elite favoring policies that specifically fuck over the despised American citizen in favor of anyone else.

So Trump's tariffs are one of the few things he's actually doing right. At least if you're not one of those internationalist scumfucks who despise all things working class American.

As for

"US tries to garrison the world. Always favoring coercion, Washington now tries to batter the planet into submission sanctions, embargos,"

That is all being done on behalf of the Zionist fiend who owns our central bank. Duh.

What would be good, is for the ZUS to tell the Zionists to fuck off –

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/30/rand-paul-israel-military-aid-congress-senate-1036943

- returned to being the USA (by ending the Fed), and imposed massive tariffs on any industry that off-shored its manufacturing. Hell, any industry that threatens the well-being of our domestic industries. That pay domestic taxes and employ Americans.

This is the kind of thing China does, and if though some miracle our treasonous government scoundrels were all to get hanged by lampposts on the glorious Day of the Rope, perhaps then we'd do the same.

denk , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:11 pm GMT
@Jason Liu A wog's self critique

A wise dictator is great for the country, but Xi is not wise. He is a stubborn old man stuck in the past who is clearly not listening to advisers. He has overplayed his hand, confronted the US 10~20 years too early, *

When was the last time China sent gunboats or spy planes to murikka's doorstep ? [hint] fukus have been doing that since the day of Opium war.]

Who started the trade war anyway ?

*damaged China's image out of some paranoid fear of Uyghurs,*

Tell that to the victims of CIA sponsored Uighurs head choppers

[1]

*and absolutely failed at making friends with our East Asian neighbors, instead driving them further into the arms of the Americans.*

[sic]

I've posted many times here and MOA, a tally of all panda huggers PM/prez in EA, SA, SEA .,who were ousted/liquidated by fukus shenanigans. [2]

True to form, fukus turned around to accuse China .of ' driving all its friends into the arm of the murikkans'

fukus have many sins.
but their vilest depravity must surely be .
Robbery crying out robbery.

There's this sanctimonious journo from BBC , who 'boldly' confront a Chinese diplomat,
' Do you realise your assertive/aggressive policies are driving all your friends away/ / .'

what a prick !

[1]
Ron frowns on image posting,
but very often a picture is worth a thousand words.!

[2]
Exhibit jp

http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/10/a-japanese-ex-diplomat-accues-the-sino-japanese-rift-part-of-us-agenda-the-truth-behind-post-war-history/

P.S.
YOUR critique might be very PC and earns you hundreds of up votes, but its all a load of bull.
Trouble is, the mushroom club members have been kept in the dark and fed bullshit so long, bull is exactly what they enjoy most.
hehehheh

Realist , says: December 3, 2018 at 6:14 pm GMT
@Jeff Stryker

That isn't true. There are thousands of us now in Asia.

Thousands out of 1.6 billion .that is insignificant. Are you a citizen of China???

MarkinPNW , says: December 3, 2018 at 7:38 pm GMT
@Achmed E. Newman So Mao's Cultural Revolution to elevate the status of workers and peasants didn't have any lasting effect?

I seem to remember from Historian David Hackett Fisher how in the British American colonies craftsmen who work with their hands such as tinsmith/silversmith Paul Revere were highly regarded and enjoyed status due to recognition of the value of their work to society, with honest skilled workers enjoying status as a calling equal to religious and government leaders.

I also remember from somewhere the idea that countries with thriving middle classes were countries that acknowledged and valued the work of blue collar and even unskilled labor, while those that don't value the work of the "lower classes" are the ones stuck with a rich elite, and poverty for the masses.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 3, 2018 at 7:47 pm GMT
@Durruti Nah, humor doesn't come across too well, or you missed my "dictator" signature – your language, if you will recall. That's where the "or else" came from. You do need to calm down, as we are pretty much on the same side here.

Don't mind the Commies on here – it was much worse under the previous 2 Fred Reed posts on China.

OK, pre-emptive apologies here for any more wrong interpretations

SafeNow , says: December 3, 2018 at 7:49 pm GMT
Great comments. I can only add (1) Here in Calif the Chinese-Americans I know all seem to love vegetables, and are lean. I wish I could be more like that. New Year's Resolution. (2) Harvard downgrades Asian-American applicants because of the "personality" factor of being decent. I think our culture is in trouble if we are penalizing students for being polite, genial, decent.
Carroll Price , says: December 3, 2018 at 8:00 pm GMT
@Nonny

Why was there a Cold War?

Answer: To replace WW 2, which was the best thing that ever happened to the US economy, allowing it to recover from an economic depression that would have otherwise been permanent. The US started the Cold War like they started all other wars in which they've been engaged, including the current war on terror.

Sven Lystbæk , says: December 3, 2018 at 8:18 pm GMT
@Random Smartaleck As I understand it the ROC and the PRC share the view that the South China Sea islands are Chinese even though they don't entirely agree how to define China.
Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 3, 2018 at 8:46 pm GMT
@MarkinPNW

So Mao's Cultural Revolution to elevate the status of workers and peasants didn't have any lasting effect?

Noooooo it didn't. [/George Castanza mode]

Actually, wait, it didn't have ANY effect to elevate ANYONE, besides those elevated onto the stage to get pig blood poured on them sort of a poor man's Carrie scene.

Anyway, Mark, whatever you remember from your David Hackett Fischer (sorry that I'm not familiar) along with your last paragraph sound like pretty good explanations. Though China has a pretty large middle class now, it's NOT your father's middle class. I don't know if it could ever be a very trusting society, no matter how much money the median Chinafamily has.

Whether things were different in this respect way back a century ago, before the > 1/2 century of turmoil (starting with the end of the last empire .. 1912, I believe), I don't know. I do know that 3-4 decades of hard-core Communism will beat the trust and morality out of a whole lot of people .

Carroll Price , says: December 3, 2018 at 8:54 pm GMT
@Jeff Stryker

If you are not Chinese you cannot be a citizen.

If you read Mein Kampf, you'll find that Adolph Hitler held similar views regarding German citizenship, with the first requirement being that you must be of German blood, followed by meeting various physical, civic and educational requirements prior to anyone becoming a citizen of Germany, including those born in Germany. The idea that there could be any such thing as a Black German struck him as preposterous.

Achmed E. Newman , says: Website December 3, 2018 at 8:58 pm GMT
@SafeNow

(2) Harvard downgrades Asian-American applicants because of the "personality" factor of being decent. I think our culture is in trouble if we are penalizing students for being polite, genial, decent.

If you don't already, SafeNow, you should read the archives (or current writings) of Mr. Steve Sailer, right here on this very site. He has been all over this stuff for years – I think that the college admissions/high-school quality/graduation rates/etc by race, IQ etc. is close to an obsession for him, but the posts are usually pretty interesting.

As to this specific point of yours, my answer is that this is the way Harvard keeps the black/hispanic/other special people's numbers up where they want them along with Oriental numbers down where they want them. That personality thing is just a way of putting "vibrant" young people ahead. I don't like vibrancy a whole lot myself, unless there are kegs of beer involved and only on the weekends. That is a problem for some of the Oriental young people, as they can't drink as much as they would like – I'm not sure if it's allergies or not.

BTW, I'd be remiss in not letting you know that the blog owner himself, Mr. Unz, is involved in a lawsuit about Harvard admissions and has also written a whole lot about this.

Oh, on your (1), agreed about the tons of vegetables, but they do not consider anything without rice a meal. Rice can be OK, but when you eat lots of the white rice, with its very high Glycemic Loading, you can balloon up fast. Not as many of the Oriental girls I see in America and China are as slim as the way it used to be.

Vidi , says: December 3, 2018 at 9:19 pm GMT
@Ali Choudhury

The sheer amount of shadow debt outstanding is huge. 250 to 300% of GDP by some estimates.

The amount of shadow debt is probably exaggerated: all that extra cash would either increase China's inflation rate or else greatly boost the import of goods. The Chinese inflation rate is reasonable, as is the quantity of imports (nowhere near GDP).

As Digital Samizdat said, China's debt is mostly internal; the country's development was largely due to her own efforts.

phil , says: December 3, 2018 at 9:33 pm GMT
@Godfree Roberts You continue to use bad statistics. World Bank specialists know more than you do. Ordinary Chinese know that their living standards lagged terribly under Chairman Mao. The most important changes came after he died.

Deng Xiaoping traveled to Southeast Asia in November 1978. Rather than telling the Southeast Asians about China's "incredible advances," he sought to learn from Singapore's progress and listened intently to Lee Kuan Yew, who told Deng that China must re-open international trade, move toward privatization, and respect market forces. Farmers were given greater choice in planting crops and, after meeting production quotas, were allowed to sell surplus produce on the free market. Starvation deaths declined. Widespread privatization began in the 1990s. China eventually acceded to the World Trade Organization. Economic growth took off as economic freedom increased from less than 4 to more than 6 on a 10-point scale. (Hong Kong and Singapore are close to 9 on this scale, and the US is about 8.) Human capital, which China has in abundance (more so than the US) is more than important than economic freedom, once a minimum of economic freedom (at least 6 on a 10-point scale) is attained, but economic freedom below 4 (as in pre-1979 China or today's Venezuela or North Korea) does not lead to much improvement in living standards.

Vidi , says: December 3, 2018 at 10:02 pm GMT
@Simply Simon China is still a developing country: the average per capita income is lower than Mexico's level. (China is growing faster than Mexico, of course.) However, because China has so many people, the country as a whole can do great things.
Rurik , says: December 3, 2018 at 10:08 pm GMT
@denk

tar all whiteys as white trash supremacists, even tho there's an army out there.

what is that? another gratuitous smear? Here's a clue: Not wanting to see your nation- whether it be Chinese or Palestinian or German – flooded and overcome by foreigners- does not make you a Chinese or Palestinian or German "supremacist". K? It simply means that you are sane and of sound mind and psychological health. Only the insane would agitate to fund an army of foreign invaders to overcome your nation and people. That, or having an ((elite)) that resents, envies and despises your people, and desires to see them replaced and bred out and overcome.

Being an American, we're acutely aware of the loss suffered by the Amerindian tribes when whitey overcame them.

But somehow I can't imagine anyone telling an Apache that his desire to preserve the lands they had conquered – as distinctly Apache lands, suggested that he was a vile and reprobate "Apache supremacist". I can only imagine the look on Geronimo's face if some SJW type of the day, were to scold him as an 'Apache supremacist!' for not laying down and accepting his tribe's marginalization and replacement.

But in the insane world we live in, Germans and N. Americans and others, are all expected to want to be overcome, or it can only mean that they must be terrible "white trash supremacists".

It's so laughably deranged that it's literally, clinically insane, but you still hear such raving nevertheless.

Simply Simon , says: December 3, 2018 at 10:14 pm GMT
@neutral It's all relative. Our freedom of speech , movement and religious liberty has been degraded but obviously not to the degree the MIT students would prefer to return to China.
FB , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:02 pm GMT
@Jason Liu You sound like a retard

So you have a better plan than President Xi ? That's pretty fucking funny especially as your plan sounds like the talking points coming out of some neocon stinktank

The world is moving on your dinosaur thinking where the irrelevant west is still the reference point doesn't exist anymore except in the fervid imaginations of American exceptionalists

Basically everything you said is bullshit China's diplomacy is light years ahead of the west the country is in fact presenting all kinds of benevolence to neighbors, with mutually beneficial development pulled along by the Chinese locomotive

Even Japan, a country in denial about its massive crimes of the past, is coming around to the inevitable conclusion that it must live in CHINA'S neighborhood India joined the SCO last year look up the SCO btw and think about which will be more relevant 10 or 20 years from now this org or dying bullshit like Nato and the G7

As for supposedly 'challenging' the US that's pretty funny what's to challenge US doesn't have a pot to piss in

US doesn't even have an industrial base anymore with which to produce weapons in case of a real war with an actual enemy that doesn't wear sandals look up the Pentagon's 'Annual Industrial Capabilities' report even the MIC's stuff comes from China, somewhere down the supply chain that's fucking hilarious

US is is well on its way to finding out the hard way a financialized Ponzi economy that has figured out how to de-industrialize a previously industrial country for untold riches for a handful of parasites and actually being a strong and healthy country with actual capabilities to PRODUCE REAL STUFF are two mutually exclusive goals

Look at the so-called 'trade war' most Americans don't even realize that tariffs on Chinese goods only means that they will be paying an extra tax Chinese are laughing at this 'trade war' what happens to Walmart and Amazon if China just stops exporting stuff to the US they can do that you know it will hit some Chinese billionaires but so what 70 percent of the economy is in government hands and there is enough of a consumer base in China that even eliminating all US exports is not going to do much damage

In the meantime GM is shutting down factories and cutting 15,000 high paying jobs but setting up shop in China along with Harley and others LOL

You're obviously some brainwashed Chang Kai-shek acolyte keep on living in your make believe disneyworld while a socialist and dynamic China grows tall all around you LOL

anon [153] Disclaimer , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:20 pm GMT
No amount of tariff will force China to go along with Trump's "fair trade" plan until Trump does what his brilliant senior advisor Stephen Miller wants him to do -- stop issuing student visas, plus EB5, H1b, OPT and green cards to Chinese nationals, step up raids of Chinese birth hotels in CA, NY, WA, and rescind all passports issued to Chinese birth tourist babies. That will send tens of thousands of Chinese citizens out on the streets protesting as they are all eager to get the hell out with their ill gotten gains while they still can, and Xi will bend over backwards in no time.
anon [153] Disclaimer , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:26 pm GMT
@FB I think your diatribe just proved Jason Liu's point about mainland Chinese being thin skin, arrogant and, I will also add, extremely dishonest and ill-mannered. It's why most people in Southeast Asia, Oz and NZ, including the Chinese diaspora, despise the mainland Chinese.
ThreeCranes , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:38 pm GMT
@Anon Machine tools make up a fair percentage of what China imports from Germany. Tools to make tools and patterns for manufacturing should be considered an investment.
someone , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:58 pm GMT
@FB FB gets it. All the bluster of the disingenuous American billionaire sellouts and their xenophobic, gullible domestic fanbase will amount to nothing.

Apart from nuking China or bribing their leaders (a la Yeltsin) to follow the Washington Consensus, China will continue its economic development. And unlike dissolution era Soviet Union, China isn't broken and desperate to seek the "knowledge" of neoclassical economists. Unlike Plaza Accord Tokyo, China isn't under American occupation, and unlike Pinochet era Chile and countless other minnows, the US establishment cannot hope to overthrow the Chinese government.

Then we get the Anon dude who replied to FB. Way to ignore history and empirical evidence and bolster yet another dimbulb argument with racism.

someone , says: December 3, 2018 at 11:59 pm GMT
@anon LOL.

Jason Liu is a retard. You resorting to typical racism is acceptable to a number of this site's resident know-nothings, but resorting to racism to bolster your non-argument is pretty much the definition of stupidity.

the grand wazoo , says: December 4, 2018 at 12:05 am GMT
Democracy fails simply because it is basically mob rule, and 51% of the mob isn't anymore intelligent than the minor 49%. When the Supreme Court passed Citizens United (a misnomer) which misinterpreted money as speech, the coup, that began with the assassination of JFK, was complete. The effect has been devastating for the average Joe; completing the transfer of power from the people to the corporations and the billionaire class, i.e. the bGanksters. There's much to be said of a dictatorship, but where do we fit in with the selection, and would the elite ever allow a new JFK? No, they wouldn't even tolerate a new Muammar Gaddafi. So were stuck with the revolving door wannabes.
utu , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:03 am GMT
No western country allowed itself to be destroyed by its leadership as China did. This includes Nazi Germany (and I do not consider USSR a western country). Watch this video and reflect on the fatal flaw in Chinese culture and character.
Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:15 am GMT
@anonymous The ethnic Chinese of Southeast Asia who control the economies of those places are Fuji Chinese, not Han.

Fuji Chinese actually immigrated to Philippines and Malaysia and Indonesia to escape Han persecution and the Han themselves were escaping the Manchu Chinese by migrating South into the Fuji Province.

Virtually all the ethnic Chinese of Southeast Asia are from the Fujian Province. This is especially true of the Philippines. Virtually all Chinese-Filipinos are from Amoy very near to Taiwan on the coast of the Fujian Province.

Anon [436] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:20 am GMT
@someone But he didn't resort to racism. And if anyone deserves the insulting "retard" it is you and FB for not seeming to see the lack of relevance to what he said in your purported responses to Jason Liu.
Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:23 am GMT
@Carroll Price Hitler wrote that in jail before he was taking orders from psychics and astrologers. The syphilis had not really set in yet at that point.

Black US GI's wreaked a fair amount of havoc in Germany on and off the bases. There were always rapes, stolen cars, assaults around US army bases.

Of course so did some white American GI's. Dahmer is suspected-though he did not admit it-of having killed people around the base where he was stationed. Ironically the country most adhering to this policy these days is Israel.

someone , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:24 am GMT
What is it with people whose grasp of Chinese history is limited to the Cultural Revolution? Why do they comment here, and why are they somehow ignorant of the previous.. say 130 years of Chinese history? Maybe, just maybe, Chinese society would not have collapsed if it weren't for Opium traders destroying both China and India under the guise of free trade, de facto colonization, then outright genocidal invasion and occupation from the Japanese military regime?

And way to bag on any sort of collective action against the ossified rentier class. Cause Marx/Engels/Lenin/Mao is a scourge of present-day societies for some reason?

The Cultural Revolution sure has an analogue in the US and its vassal states. The whole neoliberal/militarist Reagan revolution and similar class war developments have wracked the US and its minion states for FORTY YEARS. Yet few people seem to be aware of it. And others correctly note the decline in living standards, then proceed to ignore the oligarchy beneficiaries of neoliberalism/militarism, and instead are led to demagogues to blame irrelevant scapegoats.

Anon [436] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:26 am GMT
@FB If you believe this arrogant rant counts as a responsive reply to Jason Liu then, assuredly you are the candidate retard. And that is true notwithstanding the presence of intemperately stated truths in your rant.
Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:28 am GMT
@denk And you are a typical non-American who is obsessed with a country you have never been to because you have been watching US films your entire life and your perception of reality is formed by screenwriters in Los Angeles.

You secretly would like to go to the United States but have a distorted perception based upon second-rate Hollywood films.

Typical of the Chinese Singaporean you are not Chinese and possibly have never been to China. Your family has been in Singapore for three or four generations.

As a result you see white Americans and are secretly enthralled by them. Their towering height and self-confidence and loud voices in Orchard Road STARBUCKS.

someone , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:30 am GMT
@Jeff Stryker Jeff, your history sucks, your political economy sucks.

Filipino Chinese are Fujian, not Fuji–Not written nor pronounced like the Japanese mountain or film.

Fujianese are Han. Their dialect is distinct, but they are as Han as the other southern subgroups like the Hakka (who also compose a part of Sino-Filipinos) and Cantonese. Places like Thailand and Malaysia have large numbers of Teochow and Cantonese, not Fujis or Fujians or any other of your malapropisms.

What is it with your dipsh!t obsession with (incorrect) demographics and your piss poor knowledge of EVERYTHING ELSE?

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:35 am GMT
@denk How would a Singaporean (Who vaunts his Chinese heritage but is probably third or fourth-generation Singaporean) KNOW anything about this?

You've never even BEEN to the West. Perhaps you have been to the United Kingdom, but I am dubious that you are even that well-traveled.

What would you know about white Supremacy from seeing a few Westerners at the STARBUCKS on Orchard Road a time or two?

I can speak with firsthand knowledge about Asia because I have lived all over it and done business there for years.

Wizard of Oz , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:38 am GMT
@Carroll Price Yes, the comparison of late 19th century Germany and China today has been made quite often with at least some plausibility for non specialist readers. Happily Miranda Carter's marvellous New Yorker article doesn't seem to have relevance to China's leadership today. See

"What happens when a bad tempered distractible doofus runs an empire".

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/what-happens-when-a-bad-tempered-distractible-doofus-runs-an-empire/amp#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:46 am GMT
@Realist I've already said that no person not born in China can be a citizen.

The only Caucasians who are Chinese citizens are the descendants of Portuguese settlers in Macau of which there is still a small community.

Philippines in particular would take a huge economic hit if every Western man living there left. Other Asian countries would feel a similar affect to their economies.

Locals PREFER to work for Western men rather than the Chinese ethnics because Chinese ethnics treat Malay employees like farm animals and pay a pittance.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:52 am GMT
@someone The correct term is "Chinese-Filipino" or "Chinoy" not "Filipino Chinese".

Fukkian Province, Fujian Province, Hakkan, Hokkien

You say Tom-AH-Toe, I say To-MAY-toe.

I did not mention Thailand because the Chinese-Thai (I'm married to one and we have two children) are no longer a distinct group and don't have the economy in a stranglehold like they do in Philippines or Malaysia.

Cantonese have never been the businessmen that Fujian Chinese are in Southeast Asia and live in piss-poor Chinatowns in Manila or Jakarta.

When we talk about ethnic Chinese economic dominance in Southeast Asia we are talking about Fujian Chinese shopkeepers.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 1:59 am GMT
[You have been repeatedly warned that you leave far too many rambling, vacuous comments, especially since so many of them demonstrate your total ignorance. Fewer and fewer of your comments will be published until you improve your commenting-behavior or better yet permanently depart for another website]

ATTENTION ALL CHINESE POSTERS (OR ETHNIC CHINESE WHO FANCY THEMSELVES AS SUCH)

You may be offended by my views but I have earned them. I've worked with ethnic Chinese in Asia a long time.

I'm married to one. I have two children with one. They go to Chinese schools.

So I have a right to my cynical opinions.

Most of you see a bunch of loud American tourists in some local Starbucks and you think you know everything about the West.

You know very little.

I at least have lived in squalor with ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia in the trenches doing business with them.

last straw , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:17 am GMT
@Mike P @Mike P

Well what the Chinese government could not do is prevent the corruption that allowed many of these collapsed buildings to be constructed from poor materials and without regard for earthquake-related building codes.

That an overall mediocre country like China can be held up as a paragon of efficiency and achievement to an American audience only speaks to the desperate rot afflicting America itself. China has not managed to produce any internationally competitive products of any complexity such as cars or airplanes; and to the extent it is beginning to succeed, this is due to foreign investment and theft of IP. Meanwhile, South Korea has shown the world how it's done properly.

Those buildings were built in a different era, when China was much poorer. When China gets richer, the regulations will be strengthened and more effectively enforced. It's the same for every country.

East Asian countries develop in stages. Today's China is like South Korea 20 years ago. 20 years ago, South Korea was like Japan 40 years ago. The difference is that while Japan and South Korea can obtain Western technologies without problem, China has been under Western military embargo since 1989.

You probably did not realize it, but China has burst onto the scene of some cutting edge technologies such as super computer, the application of quantum physics, and space technologies including China's own GPS system; not to mention dominating in ship-building, the manufacturing of solar panel, LCD panel and LED light, cell phone including 5G technology, electric vehicles and highspeed rail etc etc.

Also, do not forget all the Chinese infrastructures. Go to there and take a look youself: https://www.skyscrapercity.com/forumdisplay.php?s=90e04ddfc408930e982a709bcb9991ff&f=803

FB , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:19 am GMT
@someone Dude you're never going to convince the koolaid gulping Unz whackadoodles with actual historical knowledge and facts

They're Pavlovian reactions is to defend the rentier class that is driving them into the ground talk about irrational and self-destructive they must love and worship the 0.01 percent since they are voting for their good which in fact entails the death of the middle class and ordinary folks by definition

What clowns they only spout what they have been spoonfed to spout marching blindly like the proverbial lemmings off the cliff believe me, better men have tried to talk sense into these morons, without effect see PCR

PS notice the flurry of anon retards here and they actually think I'm Chinese LOL

last straw , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:25 am GMT
@Simply Simon Most MIT graduates want to stay in the U.S. because it's a much richer country than China and much easier to get ahead materialistically. After working 10-15 years in the U.S., you can easily get a 4-bed room house with 2 nice cars in its garages in a decent neighborhood. What can you get in China? You probably can only afford an apartment with a semi-decent car with nowhere to park. It has little to do with free speech or politics.
someone , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:26 am GMT
@Anon You worship at the altar of that incompetent demagogue Steven Miller. Not only are you a dimbulb racist, you can't see through the thinnest veneer of an oligarch who harnesses the latent xenophobia of the masses to ram through yet more regressive policies. His dipsh!t eugenicist immigration policies are just a reflection of the same color/ethnicity bar which led to the deaths of his relatives several generations ago.

You think banning individuals of a certain ethnicity are enough to make America Great Again? That's gullible, even for this site.

Should have followed eugenics and banned your idiot fetus from ever hatching.

Agent76 , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:31 am GMT
20 SEPTEMBER 2010 Mao's Great Famine: the History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe (1958-62)

https://www.newstatesman.com/books/2010/09/mao-china-famine-western

China under Mao – Great Leap Forward

Anonymous [392] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:32 am GMT
@Jason Liu Wow. Well said.
FB , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:45 am GMT
@someone Actually I have to wonder if even the standard narrative about the 'terrible' cultural revolution has anything to do with reality

I would love to see a Godfree Roberts essay on this subject, since I am far from anything approaching a China scholar his essays on Mao were absolutely tremendous there can be no doubt that there could have been no modern Chinese economic miracle had it not been for Mao's Great Leap Forward

Anonymous [392] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 2:55 am GMT
@DB Cooper The point being is that China currently has poor relations with its East Asian neighbors when it could be a strong relationship.
utu , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:06 am GMT
@someone You are wrong. Stopping immigration form India and China would be a good thing.
DB Cooper , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:20 am GMT
@Anonymous Which one you are talking about? Name the countries and we can talk about them.
The scalpel , says: Website December 4, 2018 at 3:42 am GMT
@Annonymous Yes, and no matter where you go – there you are.
Anonymous [681] Disclaimer , says: December 4, 2018 at 3:55 am GMT
@Jeff Stryker

I did not mention Thailand because the Chinese-Thai are no longer a distinct group and don't have the economy in a stranglehold like they do in Philippines or Malaysia.

According to Amy Chua in her book World on Fire , the Chinese make up 12% of Thailand's population and they do still by and large control Thailand's economy, it's just that it's very hard to tell them apart from native Thais because they've changed their names to local Thai names, but those in the know can still tell because Chinese Thai last names tend to be very long.

DB Cooper , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:05 am GMT
@FB I like Godfree. He is a contrarian and certainly not afraid of voicing his opinions. He offers some unique perspective on looking at China and this is very refreshing because I can say most of the things the MSM on China is just nonsense and Godfree got some but not all of them right, in my opinion.

As to Mao's Great Leap Forward, or Cultural Revolution for that matter, let's look at it this way. If you pay attention to China's pundits talking about China in Chinese TV today you get the impression that the Chinese government is very proud of what it has accomplished in the last forty years. And it should be. Lifting hundreds of millions of people out of abject poverty and transforming China to today's situation like what Fred described in such a short span is no easy feat. These Chinese pundits always talk about 'Reform and Opening Up' all the time. This is the phrase they used most often. But 'Reform and Opening Up' refers to the policy Deng implemented when he took over. I have yet to see anybody praising the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution in Chinese TV. To the extent that it was brought up on very rare occasion, it was brought up in passing but never elaborated. It is as if the history of Communist China started in 1979 instead of 1949. May be it has some dirty laundry it doesn't want to air? The CCP has officially declared Mao's legacy as 70% good and 30% bad. What's that 30% bad about?

I am convinced that the standard narrative about the 'terrible' cultural revolution is close to reality. utu posted a video on China's Great Leap Forward on this thread. Do you think the video is CGI graphics?

Biff , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:19 am GMT
@someone

Places like Thailand and Malaysia have large numbers of Teochow and Cantonese, not Fujis or Fujiafns or any other of your malapropisms.

My family in Thailand refer to themselves as Teochow. Never heard of Fuji's, so you may be on to something.

Jeff Stryker , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:27 am GMT
@Anonymous Amy Chau got a good many things about her own Chinese-Filipino people wrong, I place little stock in what she says about Thailand. Or even about the Philippines.

She is only relevant for touting herself as Chinese when her family has been in the Philippines for generations-that reflects how at odds Chinese-Filipinos are with the predominant population and also why the Indonesians and Malaysians have carried out savage pogroms from time to time.

Worse in the Philippines is Chinese-Filipino involvement in meth. They make it and distribute it and import it from China. The drug war in Philippines is entirely the result of Chinese. And Tiger Mom is unlikely to bring that up in her wildly self-congratulatory books which also focus on German Jews because she is married to one.

Chinese do not control the Thai economy to anywhere near the extent that they control the economy of the Philippines or other countries. Thailand has actively forced the Chinese to assimilate to a degree and at any rate they are probably the most clever of the Southeast Asians.

Chinese immigrants also fair best in countries broken up by colonialism like Philippines by Spain or Malaysia by Brits where they can slide in during post-colonial confusion.

denk , says: December 4, 2018 at 4:29 am GMT
@Nonny

*And why the threat of war over every square inch along the Indian border, where the people are definitely not Han?*

Pleeeeze, Show me ONE instance of China threatening war on India.

*In the NEFA, China seemed tacitly to have accepted the Indian claim and the fact of indian occupation, even though this meant the loss of a very large and valuable territory populated by Mongoloid people and which in the past had clearly belonged to Tibet. It had come into Indian hands only as a result of British expansionism during China's period of historical weakness, a fact firmly suggested by the very name of the frontier Beijing had tacitly accepted as the line of control -- the McMahon Line. *

https://www.rediff.com/news/2002/oct/24chin.htm

How did the seven sisters ended up as India's sex slaves old chap ?

[Dec 04, 2018] The Ignored Legacy Of George H.W. Bush War Crimes, Racism, Obstruction Of Justice

Dec 04, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden Tue, 12/04/2018 - 00:05 178 SHARES Authored by Mehdi Hasan via The Intercept,

The tributes to former President George H.W. Bush, who died on Friday aged 94, have been pouring in from all sides of the political spectrum. He was a man "of the highest character," said his eldest son and fellow former president, George W. Bush. "He loved America and served with character, class, and integrity," tweeted former U.S. Attorney and #Resistance icon Preet Bharara. According to another former president, Barack Obama , Bush's life was "a testament to the notion that public service is a noble, joyous calling. And he did tremendous good along the journey." Apple boss Tim Cook said : "We have lost a great American."

In the age of Donald Trump, it isn't difficult for hagiographers of the late Bush Sr. to paint a picture of him as a great patriot and pragmatist; a president who governed with "class" and "integrity." It is true that the former president refused to vote for Trump in 2016, calling him a " blowhard ," and that he eschewed the white nationalist, "alt-right," conspiratorial politics that has come to define the modern Republican Party. He helped end the Cold War without, as Obama said , "firing a shot." He spent his life serving his country -- from the military to Congress to the United Nations to the CIA to the White House. And, by all accounts, he was also a beloved grandfather and great-grandfather to his 17 grandkids and eight great-grandkids .

Nevertheless, he was a public, not a private, figure -- one of only 44 men to have ever served as president of the United States. We cannot, therefore, allow his actual record in office to be beautified in such a brazen way. "When a political leader dies, it is irresponsible in the extreme to demand that only praise be permitted but not criticisms," as my colleague Glenn Greenwald has argued , because it leads to "false history and a propagandistic whitewashing of bad acts."

The inconvenient truth is that the presidency of George Herbert Walker Bush had far more in common with the recognizably belligerent, corrupt, and right-wing Republican figures who came after him - his son George W. and the current orange-faced incumbent - than much of the political and media classes might have you believe.

Consider:

... ... ...

He made a dishonest case for war . Thirteen years before George W. Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction to justify his invasion and occupation of Iraq, his father made his own set of false claims to justify the aerial bombardment of that same country. The first Gulf War, as an investigation by journalist Joshua Holland concluded , "was sold on a mountain of war propaganda."

For a start, Bush told the American public that Iraq had invaded Kuwait " without provocation or warning ." What he omitted to mention was that the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, had given an effective green light to Saddam Hussein, telling him in July 1990, a week before his invasion, "[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait."

Then there is the fabrication of intelligence. Bush deployed U.S. troops to the Gulf in August 1990 and claimed that he was doing so in order "to assist the Saudi Arabian Government in the defense of its homeland." As Scott Peterson wrote in the Christian Science Monitor in 2002, "Citing top-secret satellite images, Pentagon officials estimated that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood on the border, threatening the key U.S. oil supplier."

Yet when reporter Jean Heller of the St. Petersburg Times acquired her own commercial satellite images of the Saudi border, she found no signs of Iraqi forces; only an empty desert. "It was a pretty serious fib," Heller told Peterson, adding: "That [Iraqi buildup] was the whole justification for Bush sending troops in there, and it just didn't exist."

President George H. W. Bush talks with Secretary of State James Baker III and Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney during a meeting of the cabinet in the White House on Jan. 17, 1991 to discuss the Persian Gulf War. Photo: Ron Edmonds/AP

He committed war crimes. Under Bush Sr., the U.S. dropped a whopping 88,500 tons of bombs on Iraq and Iraqi-occupied Kuwait, many of which resulted in horrific civilian casualties. In February 1991, for example, a U.S. airstrike on an air-raid shelter in the Amiriyah neighborhood of Baghdad killed at least 408 Iraqi civilians . According to Human Rights Watch , the Pentagon knew the Amiriyah facility had been used as a civil defense shelter during the Iran-Iraq war and yet had attacked without warning. It was, concluded HRW, "a serious violation of the laws of war."

U.S. bombs also destroyed essential Iraqi civilian infrastructure -- from electricity-generating and water-treatment facilities to food-processing plants and flour mills. This was no accident. As Barton Gellman of the Washington Post reported in June 1991: "Some targets, especially late in the war, were bombed primarily to create postwar leverage over Iraq, not to influence the course of the conflict itself. Planners now say their intent was to destroy or damage valuable facilities that Baghdad could not repair without foreign assistance. Because of these goals, damage to civilian structures and interests, invariably described by briefers during the war as 'collateral' and unintended, was sometimes neither."

Got that? The Bush administration deliberately targeted civilian infrastructure for "leverage" over Saddam Hussein. How is this not terrorism? As a Harvard public health team concluded in June 1991, less than four months after the end of the war, the destruction of Iraqi infrastructure had resulted in acute malnutrition and "epidemic" levels of cholera and typhoid.

By January 1992, Beth Osborne Daponte, a demographer with the U.S. Census Bureau, was estimating that Bush's Gulf War had caused the deaths of 158,000 Iraqis, including 13,000 immediate civilian deaths and 70,000 deaths from the damage done to electricity and sewage treatment plants. Daponte's numbers contradicted the Bush administration's, and she was threatened by her superiors with dismissal for releasing " false information. " (Sound familiar?)

He refused to cooperate with a special counsel . The Iran-Contra affair , in which the United States traded missiles for Americans hostages in Iran, and used the proceeds of those arms sales to fund Contra rebels in Nicaragua, did much to undermine the presidency of Ronald Reagan. Yet his vice president's involvement in that controversial affair has garnered far less attention. "The criminal investigation of Bush was regrettably incomplete," wrote Special Counsel Lawrence Walsh, a former deputy attorney general in the Eisenhower administration, in his final report on the Iran-Contra affair in August 1993.

Why? Because Bush, who was "fully aware of the Iran arms sale," according to the special counsel, failed to hand over a diary "containing contemporaneous notes relevant to Iran/contra" and refused to be interviewed in the later stages of the investigation. In the final days of his presidency, Bush even issued pardons to six defendants in the Iran-Contra affair, including former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger -- on the eve of Weinberger's trial for perjury and obstruction of justice. "The Weinberger pardon," Walsh pointedly noted, "marked the first time a president ever pardoned someone in whose trial he might have been called as a witness, because the president was knowledgeable of factual events underlying the case." An angry Walsh accused Bush of "misconduct" and helping to complete "the Iran-contra cover-up."

[Dec 04, 2018] The Trump as neocons marionette by Tom Luongo

From ZeroHedge comments it looks like Trump lost a large part of his votters
Dec 03, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

by Tyler Durden

Authored by Tom Luongo,

I knew there was something wrong with Donald Trump's presidency the day he bombed the airbase at Al-Shairat in Syria. It was a turning point. I knew it was a mistake the moment he did it and argued as such at the time.

No act by him was more contentious.

It cost me hundreds of followers gained throughout the campaign who wanted to believe Trump was playing 4-D chess. My Periscopes went from being events to afterthoughts.

Those that left needed to believe this because they had invested so much in him.

They had to believe he was playing some deep game with Putin to bring peace to the region.

He wasn't.

I was right and truth is painful. The need for him to be Orange Jesus was so strong they created Qanon and the 'science' of political horoscope as slowly but surely Trump was stripped of all of his power except that of complaining about how unfair it all is.

That day he did something in the moment, with bad intelligence and let fly with tomahawks which Russian and Syrian air defenses misdirected and/or shot down.

Empty President

His goal was to show everyone there was a new, strong sheriff in town.

All it did was weaken him.

The neocons praised him as presidential. They began to get their hooks in him then. But truly, Trump was destroyed before he took office, giving up Michael Flynn, expelling Russian diplomats and compromising his cabinet picks.

Because making war is the only true test of a President to the laptop bombardiers who control foreign policy. With that one act Trump's days as an independent agent in D.C. were numbered.

And since then the hope has been that given the enormity of the opposition to his Presidency he was still fighting for what he campaigned on -- no nation building, bring the empire home, protect the borders, and clean up the corruption.

He's made a few minor changes but not enough to change the course of this country and, by extension, the world.

The people want this change. Those with the power don't.

G-20 Ghost

So here we are with a pathetic Trump outclassed at the G-20, a meeting he should dominate but instead is ushered around like a child, given poor earpieces and looking a little lost. He's only allowed to have one meeting of note by his handlers, with China's Xi Jinping.

Because that meeting wasn't going to end with anything damaging to the long-term plan. Trump's tariff game is tired and all it will do is hasten the demise of U.S. competitiveness in the very industries he wants us to be competitive in.

Because tariffs are a band-aid on the real problems of bureaucracy, corruption, waste and sloth within an economy. They are not a product of China stealing our technology (though they have).

And that $1 trillion deficit Trump is running? Music to the ears of the globalists who want the U.S. brought low. More military spending. More boondoggles the banks can cut a nice big check to themselves for with funny money printed without risk. This can go on for a few more years until it doesn't matter anymore.

Trump's folding on meeting Putin is the final nail in his presidency's coffin. He's not even allowed to make statements on this issue anymore. That's for Sarah Sanders, Mike Pomposity and John Bolt-head to do.

You know, the grown-ups in the room.

No. Putin and Trump met once when they weren't supposed to and since then Trump has been getting smaller and smaller. Sure, he held some rallies for the mid-terms to shore up his base for a few weeks while the Democrats stole more than a dozen House seats, three governorships and a couple of Senate seats, but hey he's still working hard for no pay.

Please.

Trump needed to show some real moral courage and speak with Putin about the Kerch Strait incident like men, not sulk in the corner over a couple of ships. And yet his still throws his full support behind a butcher like Mohammed bin Salman because arms sales and Iran.

Putin, for his part, makes no bones about doing business with the Saudis. He knows that bin Salman is creating a quagmire for Trump while driving the U.S. and European Deep State mad.

Hence: https://www.youtube.com/embed/sggVhrwSAFs Putin refuses to apologize for thwarting our plans to overthrow him in Russia and steal Ukraine.

Time Enough to Win

For this Secretary of Defense James Mattis calls Putin, " A slow learner." This is a flat-out threat that Mattis has more coming Putin's way. But in fact, it is Mattis who is the slow learner since he still thinks Putin isn't three steps ahead of him.

Which he is. The game is all about time and money. And thanks to Mattis and, yes, Trump, Putin will win the war of attrition he is playing.

Because that is what has been going on here from the beginning. Iran, China and Russia know what the U.S. power brokers want and they knew Trump would always cave to them. So, they knew exactly how to get Trump to over-commit to a strategy that cannot and will not ever come to fruition.

I warned that Trump's blind-spot when it comes to Iran was his weakness. I warned that he would eventually justify breaking every foreign policy promise to fulfill his plan to unite the Sunni world behind him and Israel by giving them Iran.

The End of the Beginning

Welcome to today. And welcome to the end of Trump's presidency because now he is pot-committed to regime change while the vultures circle him domestically. He has become Bush the Lesser with arguably better hair.

He has alienated everyone the world over with sanctions and tariffs, hence his desire to " Get me out of here " as the G-20 wound down. No one believes he matters anymore. By tying himself to the Saudis and the Israelis the way he has he, the master negotiator, has left himself no room to negotiate.

And that is leading to everyone defying him versus cutting deals to carve up the world, end the empire and come home.

Trump is not leading here. He is being led. And change requires leaders. He has been led down the path so many presidents have, more militarism, more empire. Because when you're the Emperor everyone is your enemy. This is the paranoia of a late-stage imperial mindset.

It certainly is the mindset of Trump's closest advisors - Mattis, Bolton and Pompeo.

So Trump's "America First' instincts, no matter how genuine, have been twisted into something worse than evil, they are now ineffectual keepers of the status quo fueling ruinous neoconservative dreams of central Asian dominance.

And he has no one to blame but himself.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/_qlE7PPH9C4

* * *

To support more work like this and get access to exclusive commentary, stock picks and analysis tailored to your needs join my more than 230 Patrons on Patreon and see if I have what it takes to help you navigate a world going slowly mad.


Brazen Heist II , 1 hour ago link

The Orange Orangutan had his chances to make a difference. He instead chose the Neocunts and his ego.

There will be no more "voting" oneself out of this shitshow. Trump was the last peaceful chance.

It could have been worse, I guess. At least there's that for consolation.

The silver lining to the Trump phenomenon is that the Deep State is at war with itself, and this is bringing down the evil empire from within.

And lastly, Trump was always the symptom, not the cause of all this malaise. A malaise that only Americans can fix.

WTFUD , 1 hour ago link

His nose is wedged right up Adelson's & Bibi's ring-hole.

Even as we speak now, 100 drones crossed over from Turkey into Syria with French experts modifying them to accept warheads of a chemical nature. Simultaneously the innovative British military are providing miscellaneous WMD's/support to Jabhat-Al -Nusra in Idlib.

Time for Putin/Russia to take these cockroaches/vermin out in quick time, for their own good.

Trump's grasshopper mind could be construed for severe Alzheimer's.

Bokkenrijder , 2 hours ago link

Trump boasted of how HE would "Make the US Military Great again" (as if it wasn't too big to begin with..) and spent $16 billion EXTRA on 'defence,' yet now he suddenly flip-flopped and calls defence spending "crazy."

https://www.rt.com/news/445463-trump-laments-defense-budget/

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1069584730880974849?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

How mentally UNstable and completely UNhinged is Dufus J. Chump?

Bokkenrijder , 2 hours ago link

Spot on, I completely agree with Luongo, and #metoo have been saying this for a long time.

Trump's unstable and unhinged waffling, lying and flip-flopping (i.e. "4D chess") is finally beginning to catch up with him and his presidency will not be marked with him being the one who drained the swamp, but a presidency marked with a trail of destruction.

He has talked himself into so many corners, that it will be impossible to back out of those corners....unless of course he turns the volume of his bullshitting, lying and waffling up to 11.

"You can fool some people some of the time, but you can't fool all people all of the time."

It's easy to fool dumb American Trumptards, but it's not easy fooling the Russians, the Europeans and the Chinese. They see right through his fake bravado and ********.

Expat , 3 hours ago link

"I am certain that, at some time in the future, President Xi and I, together with President Putin of Russia, will start talking about a meaningful halt to what has become a major and uncontrollable Arms Race," Trump wrote. "The U.S. spent 716 Billion Dollars this year. Crazy!"

Another classic Tweet from Captain Bonespurs. No wall, no change to healthcare, no immigration policy, no amazing trade agreements, no slavery, no mandatory mullets, no mandatory bible study at school, no burning of witches. And now he is talking about reducing the largest military budget in history.

You guys need a box of tissues?

MAGA

I am Groot , 6 hours ago link

Trump is finished. He had two years to replace Sessions and Rosenstein and have someone at the DOJ appoint a Special Councils for each item to look into:

The Clinton Foundation

Uranium One Deal

Hillary's Email Server

The murder of Seth Rich

The Benghazi Consulate Disaster

The Democrats computer scandal with the Iwan brothers.

Bill Clinton giving China classified missile and sub technology

The unelected Deep State actors controlling the country.

Q is a total ******* fraud. Trump has 3 weeks before he is assraped and left bleeding on the floor by the Democrats and the RHINO's in the senate. If he gets impeached, Pence will be impeached and Nitwit Nancy becomes POTUS. And within 2 months of that happening, we will have full balls out, open Civil War II.

[Dec 02, 2018] Muller investigation has all the appearance of an investigation looking for a crime

Highly recommended!
Essentially Mueller witch hunt repeat the trick invented by Bolsheviks leadership during Stalin Great Terror: the accusation of a person of being a foreign agent is a 'slam dank" move that allows all kind to nasty things to be performed to convict the person no matter whether he is guilty of not.
Consolidation of power using Foreign Counter Intelligence as a tool is a classic and a very dirty trick.
Notable quotes:
"... It would be of great value to know what the underlying predicate crime(s) are that are sustaining Mueller's scorched earth approach to what looks to be 'all things Trump,' whether the crimes relate to counter intelligence jurisdiction (treason, espionage), illicit overseas business transactions relating to sanctions violations or something of that sort, or election law violations, the smoke of which got the whole Mueller jihad underway ..."
"... This would not be unusual in a Foreign Counter Intelligence case which are almost by definition open ended; it would be very unusual, in fact prohibited, in a criminal case where a factual predicate needs to be articulated that constitutes reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed. ..."
"... It seems Mueller has been riding the FCI horse whither he pleases to round up interviews, compare them, and then take the chicken shit route of charging 1001 violations to leverage his way forward. If that seems to smell bad, it is because it does. ..."
"... IMO, Trump is not helping himself or the American people get to the objective truth by declassifying all the documents and communications. Unless all the documents are released unredacted, all we have are theories and speculation. And Trump will be on the losing end of that as the news media and their Deep State collaborators have all the means to drive the narrative and attempt to convict in the court of public opinion through constant innuendo. ..."
"... In the mean time the Mueller investigation itself creates the crimes as pretty much most Trump associates have been indicted for perjury. Even Manafort was prosecuted for money laundering that took place over a decade ago ..."
"... Trump has stated that he doesn't want to declassify as the American people shouldn't know how corrupt their government is. This seems to contradict his Drain the Swamp rhetoric. ..."
"... Mueller may have created more crimes than existed before his inquiry. ..."
Dec 01, 2018 | turcopolier.typepad.com

Mad_Max22 , 12 hours ago

Very informative post.

It would be of great value to know what the underlying predicate crime(s) are that are sustaining Mueller's scorched earth approach to what looks to be 'all things Trump,' whether the crimes relate to counter intelligence jurisdiction (treason, espionage), illicit overseas business transactions relating to sanctions violations or something of that sort, or election law violations, the smoke of which got the whole Mueller jihad underway .

It certainly does give every appearance, at least from the outside perspective, of an investigation looking for a crime.

This would not be unusual in a Foreign Counter Intelligence case which are almost by definition open ended; it would be very unusual, in fact prohibited, in a criminal case where a factual predicate needs to be articulated that constitutes reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.

It seems Mueller has been riding the FCI horse whither he pleases to round up interviews, compare them, and then take the chicken shit route of charging 1001 violations to leverage his way forward. If that seems to smell bad, it is because it does.

Precisely the same approach could have been taken vis a vis the Uranium mattter or any of the Clinton Foundation speaker forays into foreign lands and almost certainly a boatload of 1001 violations would have come into port.

kievite -> Mad_Max22
So Muller reinvented the tactics used by Bolsheviks during the Great Purge period ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... )

Most Stalin's political enemies were liquidated using the "foreign agent" charge.

Might be a good time to reread a book on "Moscow show trials" like

The prosecutor and the prey: Vyshinsky and the 1930s' Moscow show trials Arkadii V̆aksberg.

https://www.amazon.com/pros...

The quote "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce" might be applicable here.

blue peacock , 21 hours ago

IMO, Trump is not helping himself or the American people get to the objective truth by declassifying all the documents and communications. Unless all the documents are released unredacted, all we have are theories and speculation. And Trump will be on the losing end of that as the news media and their Deep State collaborators have all the means to drive the narrative and attempt to convict in the court of public opinion through constant innuendo.

In the mean time the Mueller investigation itself creates the crimes as pretty much most Trump associates have been indicted for perjury. Even Manafort was prosecuted for money laundering that took place over a decade ago .

There have been no claims from Mueller that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election.

Trump has stated that he doesn't want to declassify as the American people shouldn't know how corrupt their government is. This seems to contradict his Drain the Swamp rhetoric. With the Democrats gonna run the House come January. I think Trump will come under increased pressure from all sides. I don't believe the Mueller investigation will ever wind down until Trump is defeated either via impeachment or loss of the next presidential election.

Pat Lang Mod -> blue peacock , 15 hours ago
I heard Dershowitz (my new hero) say the other day that Mueller may have created more crimes than existed before his inquiry.

[Dec 01, 2018] The US elite started viewing Chin a a grave threat to "full spectrum dominance"

Notable quotes:
"... China is leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce neighboring countries to reorder the Indo-Pacific region to their advantage, ..."
"... As China continues its economic and military ascendance, asserting power through an all-of-nation long-term strategy, it will continue to pursue a military modernization program that seeks Indo-Pacific regional hegemony in the near-term and displacement of the United States to achieve global preeminence in the future. The most far-reaching objective of this defense strategy is to set the military relationship between our two countries on a path of transparency and non-aggression. ..."
"... Shouldn't an important US foreign policy goal of the next couple of decades be regime change in China? ..."
Dec 01, 2018 | www.rt.com

"China is a sleeping lion," Napoleon Bonaparte said. "Let her sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world." A new Cold War is upon us, only this time the giant is no longer deep asleep; stirring as it begins to wake. " China is leveraging military modernization, influence operations, and predatory economics to coerce neighboring countries to reorder the Indo-Pacific region to their advantage, " a recent summary of the 2018 US National Defense Strategy states .

" As China continues its economic and military ascendance, asserting power through an all-of-nation long-term strategy, it will continue to pursue a military modernization program that seeks Indo-Pacific regional hegemony in the near-term and displacement of the United States to achieve global preeminence in the future. The most far-reaching objective of this defense strategy is to set the military relationship between our two countries on a path of transparency and non-aggression. "

... ... ...

Donald Trump's trade war with China also signals a greater shift towards a US-China Cold War 2.0 scenario, and the stakes are even higher than we imagined.

The aim of the US appears to be to change China for good (if not its attitude, then its regime ) and build a new international framework which still puts Washington's interests above that of its adversaries. Successfully doing so requires the US to retain and promote its more traditional allies, something which seems somewhat questionable in the age of Trump.

... ... ...

Shouldn't an important US foreign policy goal of the next couple of decades be regime change in China? " The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol asked his 411,000 followers on Twitter.

Shouldn't an important U.S. foreign policy goal of the next couple of decades be regime change in China? https://t.co/TpFODNTwQZ

-- Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) November 23, 2018

After failed regime change operations in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and Iran, just to name a few, I think the answer to this question is quite clearly a resounding " no ."

[Dec 01, 2018] In a separate interview, a retired four-star general, who has advised the Bush and Obama Administrations on national-security issues, said that he had been privately briefed in 2005 about the training of Iranians associated with the M.E.K. in Nevada

Dec 01, 2018 | discussion.theguardian.com

RobGehrke -> MonaHol , 30 Aug 2012 06:12

"What do you mean by claiming Hersh "cozys up" to MIC ppl? And what would be a specific example of a story he broke after doing that?"

Our Men in Iran?

"We did train them here, and washed them through the Energy Department because the D.O.E. owns all this land in southern Nevada," a former senior American intelligence official told me. ... In a separate interview, a retired four-star general, who has advised the Bush and Obama Administrations on national-security issues, said that he had been privately briefed in 2005 about the training of Iranians associated with the M.E.K. in Nevada

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/04/mek.html

His conversations with Lieutenant Calley are apparently what allowed him to break the My Lai massacre story as well, even though members of the military had already spoken out about it, and there had been already been charges brought. It just revealed the story to the general public, which prompted a fuller investigation and courts martial. I'm sure there are others.

So, obviously Hersh's "cozying up" (surely not the right term for it, though) is in the interests of raising public awareness of nefarious deeds, and is not scared of painting these organizations in a bad light, whereas Mazzetti's goal here seems to be to maintain his privileged access by providing favors - totally different motivations. It's rather easy to contrast the two, which "smartypants54" has even stated here.

Whatever the case, it's true that elements of the NYT have been mouthpieces more or less for government and corporate power for a long time. While I agree with Glenn about the faux cynicism perpetuating this kind of activity - "don't be naive, this is done all the time" - I can understand that it exists.

Such cynicism on the part of the public, rather than being an acknowledgment of acceptance and approval of such practices, can also be seen as part of a more radical critique of the corporate media in general, and the NYT particularly, in that such organizations - not that I totally agree with this - , by their very nature, can't be reformed and can never be totally effective checks on power because of the way they're structured, and who they answer to.

That's definitely not a reason to stop pointing it out, though.

[Dec 01, 2018] Whitewashing McCain's Support for the War on Yemen by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... not doing enough ..."
Nov 29, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Josh Rogin uses the Senate's 63-37 vote on S.J.Res. 54 earlier this week to make a very strange claim:

The Senate's stunning bipartisan rebuke of President Trump's handling of U.S.-Saudi relations shows that the internationalist, values-based foreign policy of the late senator John McCain still holds significant weight in both parties [bold mine-DL].

At the end of his career, McCain was one of the foremost defenders of U.S. involvement in the war on Yemen. I suppose it was fitting that he capped off a long career of supporting unnecessary and illegal wars by proudly supporting a truly indefensible one. When U.S. support for the war began in 2015, he and Lindsey Graham chastised Obama for not doing enough to help the Saudi coalition. Needless to say, he was an early and eager supporter of the intervention . When McCain was asked about the coalition's bombing campaign and the civilian casualties that it was causing, he denied that there were any. "Thank God for the Saudis," he once said , praising the kingdom for its role in fueling the war in Syria.

I commented on McCain's support for the war on Yemen in a post last year:

In addition to dismissing the civilian casualties caused by the indiscriminate coalition bombing campaign, McCain has reliably recited Saudi propaganda to provide cover for the war while completely ignoring the catastrophic humanitarian crisis that their campaign has done so much to cause.

McCain was the champion of a particular strain of aggressive interventionism that relied on moralizing rhetoric to justify unjust actions. His foreign policy was "values-based" in the sense that he would use "values" language to rally support for attacking certain regimes, but when it came to applying the same standards to U.S. allies and clients McCain frequently became mute or turned into a cynical apologist on behalf of states aligned with Washington. That is certainly how he acted when it came to the Saudi coalition war on Yemen . Back when there were very few critics of the war in the Senate, McCain was one of their loudest opponents :

McCain incredibly described the Saudis as a "nation under attack" because of incursions into Saudi territory that were provoked by the Saudi-led bombing campaign. Graham portrayed the Saudis as victims of Yemeni "aggression," which has everything completely and obviously backwards. It requires swallowing Saudi propaganda whole to argue that the Saudis and their allies have been acting in self-defense, and that is what McCain and Graham tried to do. Both repeatedly asserted that the Houthis are Iranian proxies when the best evidence suggests that Iran's role in the conflict has always been negligible, and then justified their complete indifference to the consequences of the Saudi-led war by complaining about Iranian behavior elsewhere. Needless to say, the humanitarian crisis brought on by the Saudi-led bombing campaign and blockade never once came up in their remarks, but I'm sure if they ever do mention it they'll blame it on Iran somehow.

McCain used many of the same cynical and dishonest arguments then that Trump administration officials use now. The senators that voted for S.J.Res. 54 were not following McCain's example and they were definitely not embracing the kind of foreign policy he supported. On the contrary, the success of the Sanders-Lee-Murphy resolution this week was as much a rebuke to McCain's foreign policy legacy as it was a rebuke to Trump's shameless Saudi First behavior. Opposition to the war on Yemen was something that McCain vehemently rejected, and it is simply and obviously wrong to credit McCain's foreign policy views for the antiwar victory that Sens. Sanders, Murphy, Lee, and their colleagues won this week. For the last twenty-five years, McCain never saw a U.S.-backed war he couldn't support, and that included the war on Yemen. When the Senate voted to advance S.J.Res. 54 on Wednesday, they were voting against the war that McCain had vocally backed for years.

Posted in foreign policy , politics . Tagged Barack Obama , Yemen , Lindsey Graham , John McCain , Josh Rogin , Mike Lee , Saudi Arabia , Chris Murphy , Bernie Sanders , S.J.Res 54 .

about:blank

IranMan November 30, 2018 at 1:02 pm

Can anyone name a war McCain did not salivate about and support?

I can't.

He was a war criminal who did not live to see his shameful, warmongering legacy, exposed or discussed in public.

[Dec 01, 2018] Congress' Screwed-Up Foreign Policy Priorities by Daniel Larison

Highly recommended!
Nothing changed in almost five years. The situation actually became worse as Democratic Party became the second War Party.
Notable quotes:
"... Interventionists in Congress have no problem if a president starts wars on his own, because he is pursuing the policy they would have voted for anyway if they were bothered to vote on such things. They are ..."
"... Other members of Congress have no strong ideological motivation for this behavior, but simply want to be able to grandstand on major issues without suffering serious political consequences. They are glad to avoid having to vote one way or another on a war, since that potentially could come back to haunt them if the war drags on, if it fails, or if many Americans are killed. It's safer and easier for them to cheer on a president's illegal war when it's popular and then start griping about it when it goes badly ..."
Apr 30, 2005 | www.theamericanconservative.com

Paul Pillar remarks on Congress' screwed-up priorities regarding its role in foreign policy decisions:

The role that the U.S. Congress has assumed for itself as a player in foreign policy exhibits an odd and indefensible pattern these days. Senator Chris Murphy calls it a "double standard," although that might be too mild a term. On one hand there are vigorous efforts to insert Congress into the negotiation of an agreement on Iran's nuclear program. The efforts extend even to attempts to interfere in the details of what is being negotiated, as reflected in a string of amendments being considered in debate in the Senate this week on a bill laying out a procedure for Congress to pass a quick judgment on the agreement. On the other hand there is inaction, with little or no prospect of any action, on an authorization for the use of military force against the so-called Islamic State.

Pillar is right that this is just the opposite of what Congress should be doing. If there is a time when Congress ought to be deferring to the executive on foreign policy, it is when the U.S. is involved in negotiations with other governments. The same people that claim to be horrified by the idea of "535 commanders-in-chief" believe that they must sound off early and often on every detail of a complex negotiated settlement. War can be left to the discretion of the president and his officials, but not diplomacy. The same members that can't be bothered to assume their proper constitutional responsibilities and happily yield to one illegal presidential war after another cannot wait to meddle in a diplomatic process that, if successful, will make a future conflict less likely.

Interventionists in Congress have no problem if a president starts wars on his own, because he is pursuing the policy they would have voted for anyway if they were bothered to vote on such things. They are alarmed by negotiations that could make it more difficult for a future president to attack the regime involved in the talks. These hawks have excessive confidence that military action can "solve" problems overseas, and so they don't to impose limits on what the U.S. does in its foreign wars. They tend to see diplomacy as nothing but appeasement and therefore something that should be undermined, second-guessed, and sabotaged as much as possible.

Other members of Congress have no strong ideological motivation for this behavior, but simply want to be able to grandstand on major issues without suffering serious political consequences. They are glad to avoid having to vote one way or another on a war, since that potentially could come back to haunt them if the war drags on, if it fails, or if many Americans are killed. It's safer and easier for them to cheer on a president's illegal war when it's popular and then start griping about it when it goes badly, and because they never cast a vote one for or against the war they can have it both ways. If Congressional meddling succeeds in damaging negotiations, any later costs to the U.S. from that missed opportunity won't be linked back to the meddling members of Congress.

If the meddling doesn't work as intended, most people will quickly forget it. In the meantime, the meddlers will get credit for "standing up" against appeasement or whatever nonsensical description they choose to use.

Unfortunately, there is normally no political cost for members of Congress that want to use diplomacy with an unpopular government as an excuse to demagogue and look "tough" to the voters back home. That is why many of them will try to interfere with U.S. diplomacy while giving the president free rein to wage illegal wars for as long as he wants.

collin April 30, 2015 at 11:09 am

After reading Josh Marshall/David Frum debate on the nuclear deal yesterday, I found one of the most effective Frum's arguments was liberals are claiming it is 2002 Iraq/n again. (Fair argument considering Chait's great note on the 61 times Kristol uses Churchill/Chamberlain/Hitler references.) Trying to avoid historical analogies, I am still looking for actual evidence that Iran is building the bomb. The conservative argument still rest on Iran still wants the bomb and the deal can't absolutely stop them.

Any thoughts on Stewart on Judith Miller interview on why the press accepted the government's point that Iraq was building the bomb. Living through 2002, I was against the Iraq War because I did not find the Bush administration WMD argument convincing enough and felt it was a lot of heresy evidence. And i am seeing a similar argument with Iran.

PlusFours , says: April 30, 2015 at 1:46 pm
"These hawks have excessive confidence that military action can "solve" problems overseas"

"Excessive confidence" is an excessively polite way of characterizing it.

[Dec 01, 2018] Whitewashing McCain's Support for the War on Yemen

Notable quotes:
"... not doing enough ..."
Dec 01, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

about:blank

Daniel Larison

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/follow_button.0568ee90c37ccf52b40a4b1e312811ff.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&screen_name=DanielLarison&show_count=false&show_screen_name=true&size=m&time=1543642473725

Whitewashing McCain's Support for the War on Yemen By Daniel Larison November 29, 2018, 10:50 PM

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=347697165243043&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2Fr%2F7LloFuHvA7I.js%3Fversion%3D43%23cb%3Df74e2b3791be35%26domain%3Dwww.theamericanconservative.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%252Ff1c4059c2993808%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&font=lucida%20grande&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Flarison%2Fwhitewashing-mccains-support-for-the-war-on-yemen%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=true&show_faces=false&width=125

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.0568ee90c37ccf52b40a4b1e312811ff.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-1&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Flarison%2Fwhitewashing-mccains-support-for-the-war-on-yemen%2F&related=amconmag&size=m&text=Whitewashing%20McCain%E2%80%99s%20Support%20for%20the%20War%20on%20Yemen%20%7C%20The%20American%20Conservative&time=1543642473731&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Flarison%2Fwhitewashing-mccains-support-for-the-war-on-yemen%2F&via=amconmag

https://apis.google.com/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Flarison%2Fwhitewashing-mccains-support-for-the-war-on-yemen%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en_US.t2UPL-v4NsI.O%2Fam%3DQQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAGLTcCNp4MZuwN6M1DIuMNrgVi7_Y_XLXg%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1543642473422&_gfid=I0_1543642473422&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&pfname=&rpctoken=25188346

Gage Skidmore / Charles Haynes /Flickr Josh Rogin uses the Senate's 63-37 vote on S.J.Res. 54 earlier this week to make a very strange claim:

The Senate's stunning bipartisan rebuke of President Trump's handling of U.S.-Saudi relations shows that the internationalist, values-based foreign policy of the late senator John McCain still holds significant weight in both parties [bold mine-DL].

At the end of his career, McCain was one of the foremost defenders of U.S. involvement in the war on Yemen. I suppose it was fitting that he capped off a long career of supporting unnecessary and illegal wars by proudly supporting a truly indefensible one. When U.S. support for the war began in 2015, he and Lindsey Graham chastised Obama for not doing enough to help the Saudi coalition. Needless to say, he was an early and eager supporter of the intervention . When McCain was asked about the coalition's bombing campaign and the civilian casualties that it was causing, he denied that there were any. "Thank God for the Saudis," he once said , praising the kingdom for its role in fueling the war in Syria.

I commented on McCain's support for the war on Yemen in a post last year:

In addition to dismissing the civilian casualties caused by the indiscriminate coalition bombing campaign, McCain has reliably recited Saudi propaganda to provide cover for the war while completely ignoring the catastrophic humanitarian crisis that their campaign has done so much to cause.

McCain was the champion of a particular strain of aggressive interventionism that relied on moralizing rhetoric to justify unjust actions. His foreign policy was "values-based" in the sense that he would use "values" language to rally support for attacking certain regimes, but when it came to applying the same standards to U.S. allies and clients McCain frequently became mute or turned into a cynical apologist on behalf of states aligned with Washington. That is certainly how he acted when it came to the Saudi coalition war on Yemen . Back when there were very few critics of the war in the Senate, McCain was one of their loudest opponents :

McCain incredibly described the Saudis as a "nation under attack" because of incursions into Saudi territory that were provoked by the Saudi-led bombing campaign. Graham portrayed the Saudis as victims of Yemeni "aggression," which has everything completely and obviously backwards. It requires swallowing Saudi propaganda whole to argue that the Saudis and their allies have been acting in self-defense, and that is what McCain and Graham tried to do. Both repeatedly asserted that the Houthis are Iranian proxies when the best evidence suggests that Iran's role in the conflict has always been negligible, and then justified their complete indifference to the consequences of the Saudi-led war by complaining about Iranian behavior elsewhere. Needless to say, the humanitarian crisis brought on by the Saudi-led bombing campaign and blockade never once came up in their remarks, but I'm sure if they ever do mention it they'll blame it on Iran somehow.

McCain used many of the same cynical and dishonest arguments then that Trump administration officials use now. The senators that voted for S.J.Res. 54 were not following McCain's example and they were definitely not embracing the kind of foreign policy he supported. On the contrary, the success of the Sanders-Lee-Murphy resolution this week was as much a rebuke to McCain's foreign policy legacy as it was a rebuke to Trump's shameless Saudi First behavior. Opposition to the war on Yemen was something that McCain vehemently rejected, and it is simply and obviously wrong to credit McCain's foreign policy views for the antiwar victory that Sens. Sanders, Murphy, Lee, and their colleagues won this week. For the last twenty-five years, McCain never saw a U.S.-backed war he couldn't support, and that included the war on Yemen. When the Senate voted to advance S.J.Res. 54 on Wednesday, they were voting against the war that McCain had vocally backed for years.

Posted in foreign policy , politics . Tagged Barack Obama , Yemen , Lindsey Graham , John McCain , Josh Rogin , Mike Lee , Saudi Arabia , Chris Murphy , Bernie Sanders , S.J.Res 54 .

about:blank

IranMan November 30, 2018 at 1:02 pm

Can anyone name a war McCain did not salivate about and support?

I can't.

He was a war criminal who did not live to see his shameful, warmongering legacy, exposed or discussed in public.

[Nov 30, 2018] America Is Headed For Military Defeat in Afghanistan

Notable quotes:
"... other year of the war ..."
"... Enough Afghans either support the Taliban or hate the occupation, and managed, through assorted conventional and unconventional operations, to fight on the ground. And "on the ground" is all that really matters. This war may well have been ill-advised and unwinnable from the start. ..."
"... There's no shame in defeat. But there is shame, and perfidy, in avoiding or covering up the truth. It's what the whole military-political establishment did after Vietnam, and, I fear, it's what they're doing again. ..."
Nov 30, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

about:blank

America Is Headed For Military Defeat in Afghanistan It is time to acknowledge this is more than political. We can lose on the battlefield, and it's happening right now. By Danny Sjursen November 30, 2018

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=347697165243043&channel=https%3A%2F%2Fstaticxx.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter%2Fr%2F7LloFuHvA7I.js%3Fversion%3D43%23cb%3Df14748e39457f%26domain%3Dwww.theamericanconservative.com%26origin%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%252Ff82bc2938f8f8b%26relation%3Dparent.parent&container_width=0&font=lucida%20grande&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Famerica-is-headed-for-military-defeat-in-afghanistan%2F&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&sdk=joey&send=true&show_faces=false&width=125

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.0568ee90c37ccf52b40a4b1e312811ff.en.html#dnt=false&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Famerica-is-headed-for-military-defeat-in-afghanistan%2F&related=amconmag&size=m&text=America%20Is%20Headed%20For%20Military%20Defeat%20in%20Afghanistan%20%7C%20The%20American%20Conservative&time=1543603027326&type=share&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Famerica-is-headed-for-military-defeat-in-afghanistan%2F&via=amconmag

https://apis.google.com/se/0/_/+1/fastbutton?usegapi=1&size=medium&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com%2Farticles%2Famerica-is-headed-for-military-defeat-in-afghanistan%2F&gsrc=3p&ic=1&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fscs%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fk%3Doz.gapi.en_US.4BOpmQl8fPg.O%2Fam%3DQQ%2Frt%3Dj%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAGLTcCMoKF2A6fOyMfdBCNikAdyYCXQ5iw%2Fm%3D__features__#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Concircled%2Cdrefresh%2Cerefresh&id=I0_1543603027036&_gfid=I0_1543603027036&parent=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theamericanconservative.com&pfname=&rpctoken=3167179

Marines with Bravo Company, 1st Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, sprint across a field to load onto a CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter during a mission in Helmand province, Afghanistan, July 4, 2014. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Joseph Scanlan / released) There's a prevailing maxim, both inside the armed forces and around the Beltway, that goes something like this: "The U.S. can never be militarily defeated in any war," certainly not by some third world country. Heck, I used to believe that myself. That's why, in regard to Afghanistan, we've been told that while America could lose the war due to political factors (such as the lack of grit among "soft" liberals or defeatists), the military could never and will never lose on the battlefield.

That entire maxim is about to be turned on its head. Get ready, because we're about to lose this war militarily.

Consider this: the U.S. military has advised, assisted, battled, and bombed in Afghanistan for 17-plus years. Ground troop levels have fluctuated from lows of some 10,000 to upwards of 100,000 servicemen and women. None of that has achieved more than a tie, a bloody stalemate. Now, in the 18th year of this conflict, the Kabul-Washington coalition's military is outright losing.

Let's begin with the broader measures. The Taliban controls or contests more districts -- some 44 percent -- than at any time since the 2001 invasion. Total combatant and civilian casualties are forecasted to top 20,000 this year -- another dreadful broken record. What's more, Afghan military casualties are frankly unsustainable: the Taliban are killing more than the government can recruit. The death rates are staggering, numbering 5,500 fatalities in 2015, 6,700 in 2016, and an estimate (the number is newly classified) of "about 10,000" in 2017. Well, some might ask, what about American airpower -- can't that help stem the Taliban tide? Hardly. In 2018, as security deteriorated and the Taliban made substantial gains, the U.S. actually dropped more bombs than in any other year of the war . It appears that nothing stands in the way of impending military defeat.

Then there are the very recent events on the ground -- and these are telling. Insider attacks in which Afghan "allies" turn their guns on American advisors are back on the rise, most recently in an attack that wounded a U.S. Army general and threatened the top U.S. commander in the country. And while troop numbers are way down from the high in 2011, American troops deaths are rising. Over the Thanksgiving season alone, a U.S. Army Ranger was killed in a friendly fire incident and three other troopers died in a roadside bomb attack. And in what was perhaps only a (still disturbing) case of misunderstood optics, the top U.S. commander, General Miller, was filmed carrying his own M4 rifle around Afghanistan. That's a long way from the days when then-General Petraeus (well protected by soldiers, of course) walked around the markets of Baghdad in a soft cap and without body armor.

More importantly, the Afghan army and police are getting hammered in larger and larger attacks and taking unsustainable casualties. Some 26 Afghan security forces were killed on Thanksgiving, 22 policemen died in an attack on Sunday, and on Tuesday 30 civilians were killed in Helmand province. And these were only the high-profile attacks, dwarfed by the countless other countrywide incidents. All this proves that no matter how hard the U.S. military worked, or how many years it committed to building an Afghan army in its own image, and no matter how much air and logistical support that army received, the Afghan Security Forces cannot win. The sooner Washington accepts this truth over the more comforting lie, the fewer of our adulated American soldiers will have to die. Who is honestly ready to be the last to die for a mistake, or at least a hopeless cause?

Now, admittedly, this author is asking for trouble -- and fierce rebuttals -- from both peers and superiors still serving on active duty. And that's understandable. The old maxim of military invincibility soothes these men, mollifies their sense of personal loss, whether of personal friends or years away from home, in wars to which they've now dedicated their entire adult lives. Questioning whether there even is a military solution in Afghanistan, or, more specifically, predicting a military defeat, serves only to upend their mental framework surrounding the war.

Still, sober strategy and basic honesty demands a true assessment of the military situation in America's longest war. The Pentagon loves metrics, data, and stats. Well, as demonstrated daily on the ground in Afghanistan, all the security (read: military) metrics point towards impending defeat. At best, the Afghan army, with ample U.S. advisory detachments and air support, can hold on to the northernmost and westernmost provinces of the country, while a Taliban coalition overruns the south and east. This will be messy, ugly, and discomfiting for military and civilian leaders alike. But unless Washington is prepared to redeploy 100,000 soldiers to Afghanistan (again) -- and still only manage a tie, by the way -- it is also all but inevitable.

America's Disastrous Occupation of Afghanistan Turns 17 The War in Afghanistan is Enabling Pedophilia

The United States military did all it was asked during more than 17 years of warfare in Afghanistan. It raided, it bombed, it built, it surged, it advised, it everything. Still, none of that was sufficient. Enough Afghans either support the Taliban or hate the occupation, and managed, through assorted conventional and unconventional operations, to fight on the ground. And "on the ground" is all that really matters. This war may well have been ill-advised and unwinnable from the start.

There's no shame in defeat. But there is shame, and perfidy, in avoiding or covering up the truth. It's what the whole military-political establishment did after Vietnam, and, I fear, it's what they're doing again.

Danny Sjursen is a U.S. Army officer and a regular contributor to Unz. He served combat tours with reconnaissance units in Iraq and Afghanistan and later taught history at his alma mater, West Point. He is the author of a memoir and critical analysis of the Iraq War, Ghostriders of Baghdad: Soldiers, Civilians, and the Myth of the Surge . Follow him on Twitter @SkepticalVet .

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author, expressed in an unofficial capacity, and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. government.

[Nov 30, 2018] US Warlords now and at the tome Miill's Poer Elite was published

Highly recommended!
This is from 1999 and in 2018 we see that Mills was right.
Notable quotes:
"... Personnel were constantly shifting back and forth from the corporate world to the military world. Big companies like General Motors had become dependent on military contracts. Scientific and technological innovations sponsored by the military helped fuel the growth of the economy. ..."
"... the military had become an active political force. Members of Congress, once hostile to the military, now treated officers with great deference. And no president could hope to staff the Department of State, find intelligence officers, and appoint ambassadors without consulting with the military. ..."
"... Mills believed that the emergence of the military as a key force in American life constituted a substantial attack on the isolationism which had once characterized public opinion. He argued that "the warlords, along with fellow travelers and spokesmen, are attempting to plant their metaphysics firmly among the population at large." ..."
"... In this state of constant war fever, America could no longer be considered a genuine democracy, for democracy thrives on dissent and disagreement, precisely what the military definition of reality forbids. If the changes described by Mills were indeed permanent, then The Power Elite could be read as the description of a deeply radical, and depressing, transformation of the nature of the United States. ..."
"... The immediate consequence of these changes in the world's balance of power has been a dramatic decrease in that proportion of the American economy devoted to defense. ..."
"... Mills's prediction that both the economy and the political system of the United States would come to be ever more dominated by the military ..."
"... Business firms, still the most powerful force in American life, are increasingly global in nature, more interested in protecting their profits wherever they are made than in the defense of the country in which perhaps only a minority of their employees live and work. Give most of the leaders of America's largest companies a choice between invading another country and investing in its industries and they will nearly always choose the latter over the former. ..."
"... Mills believed that in the 1950s, for the first time in American history, the military elite had formed a strong alliance with the economic elite. ..."
May-June 1 1999, | prospect.org

Originally from: The Power Elite Now

... ... ...

The Warlords

One of the crucial arguments Mills made in The Power Elite was that the emergence of the Cold War completely transformed the American public's historic opposition to a permanent military establishment in the United States. In deed, he stressed that America's military elite was now linked to its economic and political elite. Personnel were constantly shifting back and forth from the corporate world to the military world. Big companies like General Motors had become dependent on military contracts. Scientific and technological innovations sponsored by the military helped fuel the growth of the economy. And while all these links between the economy and the military were being forged, the military had become an active political force. Members of Congress, once hostile to the military, now treated officers with great deference. And no president could hope to staff the Department of State, find intelligence officers, and appoint ambassadors without consulting with the military.

Mills believed that the emergence of the military as a key force in American life constituted a substantial attack on the isolationism which had once characterized public opinion. He argued that "the warlords, along with fellow travelers and spokesmen, are attempting to plant their metaphysics firmly among the population at large." Their goal was nothing less than a redefinition of reality -- one in which the American people would come to accept what Mills called "an emergency without a foreseeable end." "

War or a high state of war preparedness is felt to be the normal and seemingly permanent condition of the United States,"

Mills wrote. In this state of constant war fever, America could no longer be considered a genuine democracy, for democracy thrives on dissent and disagreement, precisely what the military definition of reality forbids. If the changes described by Mills were indeed permanent, then The Power Elite could be read as the description of a deeply radical, and depressing, transformation of the nature of the United States.

Much as Mills wrote, it remains true today that Congress is extremely friendly to the military, at least in part because the military has become so powerful in the districts of most congressmen. Military bases are an important source of jobs for many Americans, and government spending on the military is crucial to companies, such as Lockheed Martin and Boeing, which manufacture military equipment. American firms are the leaders in the world's global arms market, manufacturing and exporting weapons everywhere. Some weapons systems never seem to die, even if, as was the case with a "Star Wars" system designed to destroy incoming missiles, there is no demonstrable military need for them.

Yet despite these similarities with the 1950s, both the world and the role that America plays in that world have changed. For one thing, the United States has been unable to muster its forces for any sustained use in any foreign conflict since Vietnam. Worried about the possibility of a public backlash against the loss of American lives, American presidents either refrain from pursuing military adventures abroad or confine them to rapid strikes, along the lines pursued by Presidents Bush and Clinton in Iraq. Since 1989, moreover, the collapse of communism in Russia and Eastern Europe has undermined the capacity of America's elites to mobilize support for military expenditures. China, which at the time Mills wrote was considered a serious threat, is now viewed by American businessmen as a source of great potential investment. Domestic political support for a large and permanent military establishment in the United States, in short, can no longer be taken for granted.

The immediate consequence of these changes in the world's balance of power has been a dramatic decrease in that proportion of the American economy devoted to defense. At the time Mills wrote, defense expenditures constituted roughly 60 percent of all federal outlays and consumed nearly 10 percent of the U. S. gross domestic product. By the late 1990s, those proportions had fallen to 17 percent of federal outlays and 3.5 percent of GDP. Nearly three million Americans served in the armed forces when The Power Elite appeared, but that number had dropped by half at century's end. By almost any account, Mills's prediction that both the economy and the political system of the United States would come to be ever more dominated by the military is not borne out by historical developments since his time.

And how could he have been right? Business firms, still the most powerful force in American life, are increasingly global in nature, more interested in protecting their profits wherever they are made than in the defense of the country in which perhaps only a minority of their employees live and work. Give most of the leaders of America's largest companies a choice between invading another country and investing in its industries and they will nearly always choose the latter over the former.

Mills believed that in the 1950s, for the first time in American history, the military elite had formed a strong alliance with the economic elite. Now it would be more correct to say that America's economic elite finds more in common with economic elites in other countries than it does with the military elite of its own....

[Nov 30, 2018] Pompeo's Perverse Yemen Rhetoric by Daniel Larison

Notable quotes:
"... The Senate didn't go for Pompeo and Mattis' sales pitch for the war on Yemen on Wednesday. That's because it was filled with dishonest nonsense ..."
"... The absurdity of Pompeo's position becomes clear when we remember that Yemen would not be suffering from the world's worst humanitarian crisis were it not for the Saudi coalition's intervention, blockade, and interference in Yemen's economy. ..."
Nov 30, 2018 | www.theamericanconservative.com

The Senate didn't go for Pompeo and Mattis' sales pitch for the war on Yemen on Wednesday. That's because it was filled with dishonest nonsense like this:

Secretary Pompeo

* @SecPompeo

Iran's regime has no interest in easing Yemeni suffering; the
mullahs don't even care for ordinary Iranians. Saudi Arabia has
invested billions to relieve suffering in #Yemen. Iran has
invested zero.

C10.8K 11:02 AM-Nov 28, 2018 в

The truth is that Saudi Arabia and the UAE have used their donations as another weapon of war while doing everything in their power to worsen the humanitarian crisis that their policies created. Saudi "aid" efforts have been denounced by humanitarian organizations as a "war tactic," and the Saudi government has used its donations to buy good publicity from aid agencies and silence criticism. The "investments" that the Saudi coalition governments have made are little more than poorly-concealed bribes to relieve international pressure, and these same governments have used their donations as leverage to blackmail the U.N. in the past.

The absurdity of Pompeo's position becomes clear when we remember that Yemen would not be suffering from the world's worst humanitarian crisis were it not for the Saudi coalition's intervention, blockade, and interference in Yemen's economy. The governments responsible for causing the displacement of millions of people and creating famine conditions potentially affecting up to 14 million do not merit praise for throwing a little money at the catastrophe they have unleashed. Iran's interest in assisting suffering Yemenis or lack thereof is truly beside the point when it is the Saudi coalition backed by the U.S. that has caused so much of that suffering. War criminals do not get credit when they throw some cash at the wreckage of the country they have destroyed, and Pompeo's attempt to give Saudi Arabia credit for "relieving" suffering in Yemen is as perverse and disgusting as it gets.

about:blank


TomG November 30, 2018 at 11:07 am

If only Pompeo could taste the excrement coming out of his mouth. May he go to Yemen and live off the great Saudi relief.

Daniel Larison for Secretary of State!

Sid Finster , says: November 30, 2018 at 12:23 pm
Bravo, TomG!

TomG for Senate Foreign Relations Committee or something!

Taras 77 , says: November 30, 2018 at 1:21 pm
Pompeo's statements about saudi support is absolutely astonishing in a very bad way.

Does he actually believe such nonsense? Is he being fed these gross distortions of reality by his Iran working group led by Hook?

At some point,these lies go beyond the absurd, they go beyond propaganda, they become for the world to see a war monger's mantra and justification for an attack on Iran.

Pompeo and bolton have gained world wide recognition as being mindless war mongers with much power but to continue with absurd twisting of facts on the ground really does this country a huge disservice-meanwhile the population in yemen starve.

Where is the justice, where is the humanity amongst these lies?

[Nov 30, 2018] Is Putin the Provocateur in the Kerch Crisis, by Pat Buchanan

Crimea was a variation of Kosovo. As the USA destroyed post WWII order, as its position weakens, real chaos can occurs. because Might is right can work not only for the USA anymore. And in this theater the USA has no advantages, other then their geopolitical weight. It is too fat from US mainland.
The USA speed up events probably by 20 years or so and coursed considerable suffering of the Ukrainian population. Ukraine was gradually detaching itself from Russia anyway (which is a natural process for any xUSSR republic after the independence.). Essentially the USA raped the Ukraine using Ukrainian nationalist as a fifth column of neoliberal globalization.
The net result of the premature and by-and-large successful attempt to break Ukraine from Russia and play Baltic's scenario (which was possible due to existence of Western Ukrainian nationalists) was drastic impoverishing (already very poor after chaos and neoliberal economic plunder of 1990th) of the bottom 99% of Ukrainian population which now is the poorest population of Europe.
Ukrainian nationalists now are finding the hard way that bordering with Russia created some problems for their agenda... The good analogy is Canada and the USA.
In a way, incorporation of Western Ukraine into the USSR looks now like Stalin's geopolitical mistake. Now attempts to colonize Eastern Ukraine by Western Ukrainian nationalists will face resistance and it already led to civil war in Donbass.
Things became way too complex and unpredictable in this region. Of course, neocons still are pushing their usual might is right policy, not they might face considerable setbacks in the future. Like they did in Iraq. Which still did not affect much their paychecks.
Notable quotes:
"... Russian warships fired at the Ukrainian vessels and rammed the tug. Three Ukrainian sailors were wounded, and 24 crew taken into custody. Russia's refusal to release the sailors was given by President Trump as the reason for canceling his Putin meeting. Moscow contends that Ukraine deliberately violated the new rules of transit that Kiev had previously observed, to create an incident. ..."
"... For his part, Putin has sought to play the matter down, calling it a "border incident, nothing more." "The incident in the Black Sea was a provocation organized by the authorities and maybe the president himself. (Poroshenko's) rating is falling so he needed to do something." Maxim Eristavi, a fellow at the Atlantic Council, seems to concur: "Poroshenko wants to get a head start in his election campaign. He is playing the card of commander in chief, flying around in military uniform, trying to project that he is in control." ..."
"... Predictably, our interventionists decried Russian "aggression" and demanded we back up our Ukrainian "ally" and send military aid. Why was Poroshenko's ordering of gunboats into the Sea of Azov, while ignoring rules Russia set down for passage, provocative? Because Poroshenko, whose warships had previously transited the strait, had to know the risk that he was taking and that Russia might resist. ..."
"... Why would he provoke the Russians? Because, with his poll numbers sinking badly, Poroshenko realizes that unless he does something dramatic, his party stands little chance in next March's elections. ..."
"... Some Westerners want even more in the way of confronting Putin. Adrian Karatnycky of the Atlantic Council urges us to build up U.S. naval forces in the Black Sea, send anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles to Ukraine, ratchet up sanctions on Russia, threaten to expel her from the SWIFT system of international bank transactions, and pressure Europe to cancel the Russians' Nord Stream 2 and South Stream oil pipelines into Europe. ..."
"... If Ukraine had a right to break free of Russia in 1991, why do not Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk have the right to break free of Kiev? ..."
Nov 30, 2018 | www.unz.com

On departure for the G-20 gathering in Buenos Aires, President Donald Trump canceled his planned weekend meeting with Vladimir Putin, citing as his reason the Russian military's seizure and holding of three Ukrainian ships and 24 sailors.

But was Putin really the provocateur in Sunday's naval clash outside Kerch Strait, the Black Sea gateway to the Sea of Azov?

Or was the provocateur Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko?

First, a bit of history.

In 2014, after the pro-Russian regime in Kiev was ousted in a coup, and a pro-NATO regime installed with U.S. backing, Putin detached and annexed Crimea, for centuries the homeport of Russia's Black Sea fleet.

With the return of Crimea, Russia now occupied both sides of Kerch Strait. And this year, Russia completed a 12-mile bridge over the strait and Putin drove the first truck across.

The Sea of Azov became a virtual Russian lake, access to which was controlled by Russia, just as access to the Black Sea is controlled by Turkey.

While the world refused to recognize the new reality, Russia began to impose rules for ships transiting the strait, including 48 hours notice to get permission.

Ukrainian vessels, including warships, would have to notify Russian authorities before passing beneath the Kerch Strait Bridge into the Sea of Azov to reach their major port of Mariupol.

Sunday, two Ukrainian artillery ships and a tug, which had sailed out of Odessa in western Ukraine, passed through what Russia now regards as its territorial waters off Crimea and the Kerch Peninsula. Destination: Mariupol.

The Ukrainian vessels refused to obey Russian directives to halt.

Russian warships fired at the Ukrainian vessels and rammed the tug. Three Ukrainian sailors were wounded, and 24 crew taken into custody. Russia's refusal to release the sailors was given by President Trump as the reason for canceling his Putin meeting. Moscow contends that Ukraine deliberately violated the new rules of transit that Kiev had previously observed, to create an incident.

For his part, Putin has sought to play the matter down, calling it a "border incident, nothing more." "The incident in the Black Sea was a provocation organized by the authorities and maybe the president himself. (Poroshenko's) rating is falling so he needed to do something." Maxim Eristavi, a fellow at the Atlantic Council, seems to concur: "Poroshenko wants to get a head start in his election campaign. He is playing the card of commander in chief, flying around in military uniform, trying to project that he is in control."

Our U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, however, accused Russia of "outlaw actions" against the Ukrainian vessels and "an arrogant act the international community will never accept."

Predictably, our interventionists decried Russian "aggression" and demanded we back up our Ukrainian "ally" and send military aid. Why was Poroshenko's ordering of gunboats into the Sea of Azov, while ignoring rules Russia set down for passage, provocative? Because Poroshenko, whose warships had previously transited the strait, had to know the risk that he was taking and that Russia might resist.

Why would he provoke the Russians? Because, with his poll numbers sinking badly, Poroshenko realizes that unless he does something dramatic, his party stands little chance in next March's elections.

Immediately after the clash, Poroshenko imposed martial law in all provinces bordering Russia and the Black Sea, declared an invasion might be imminent, demanded new Western sanctions on Moscow, called on the U.S. to stand with him, and began visiting army units in battle fatigues.

Some Westerners want even more in the way of confronting Putin. Adrian Karatnycky of the Atlantic Council urges us to build up U.S. naval forces in the Black Sea, send anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles to Ukraine, ratchet up sanctions on Russia, threaten to expel her from the SWIFT system of international bank transactions, and pressure Europe to cancel the Russians' Nord Stream 2 and South Stream oil pipelines into Europe.

But there is a larger issue here. Why is control of the Kerch Strait any of our business? Why is this our quarrel, to the point that U.S. strategists want us to confront Russia over a Crimean Peninsula that houses the Livadia Palace that was the last summer residence of Czar Nicholas II?

If Ukraine had a right to break free of Russia in 1991, why do not Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk have the right to break free of Kiev?

Why are we letting ourselves be dragged into everyone's quarrels -- from who owns the islets in the South China Sea, to who owns the Senkaku and Southern Kurils; and from whether Transnistria had a right to secede from Moldova, to whether South Ossetia and Abkhazia had the right to break free of Georgia, when Georgia broke free of Russia?

Do the American people care a fig for these places? Are we really willing to risk war with Russia or China over who holds title to them?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of "Nixon's White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever."

[Nov 29, 2018] If The Saudi s Oil No Longer Matters Why Is Trump Still Supporting Them

Notable quotes:
"... Washington Post ..."
"... Wall Street journal ..."
"... Everyone knows it's the US presence in the Middle East which creates terrorists, both as proxies of and in resistance to the US imperial presence (and often one and then the other). So reading Orwellian language, Pompeo is saying the US wants to maximize Islamic terrorism in order to provide a pretext for creeping totalitarianism at home and abroad. ..."
"... The real reason is to maintain the petrodollar system, but there seems to be a conspiracy of silence never to mention it among both supporters and opponents of Trump. ..."
"... everyone knows why the usa is in the middle east.. to support the war industry, which is heavily tied to the financial industry.. up is down and down is up.. that is why the usa is great friends with ksa and israel and a sworn enemy of iran... what they don't say is they are a sworn enemy of humanity and the thought that the world can continue with their ongoing madness... ..."
"... The importance of oil is not to supply US markets its to deny it to enemies and control oil prices in order to feed international finance/IMF ..."
Nov 29, 2018 | www.moonofalabama.org

Russ , Nov 28, 2018 3:28:31 PM | link

Why are U.S. troops in the Middle East?

In an interview with the Washington Post U.S. President Donald Trump gives an answer :

Trump also floated the idea of removing U.S. troops from the Middle East, citing the lower price of oil as a reason to withdraw.

"Now, are we going to stay in that part of the world? One reason to is Israel ," Trump said. "Oil is becoming less and less of a reason because we're producing more oil now than we've ever produced. So, you know, all of a sudden it gets to a point where you don't have to stay there."

It is only Israel, it is no longer the oil, says Trump. But the nuclear armed Israel does not need U.S. troops for its protection.

And if it is no longer the oil, why is the U.S. defending the Saudis?

Trump's Secretary of State Mike Pompeo disagrees with his boss. In a Wall Street journal op-ed today he claims that The U.S.-Saudi Partnership Is Vital because it includes much more then oil:

[D]egrading U.S.-Saudi ties would be a grave mistake for the national security of the U.S. and its allies.

The kingdom is a powerful force for stability in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is working to secure Iraq's fragile democracy and keep Baghdad tethered to the West's interests, not Tehran's. Riyadh is helping manage the flood of refugees fleeing Syria's civil war by working with host countries, cooperating closely with Egypt, and establishing stronger ties with Israel. Saudi Arabia has also contributed millions of dollars to the U.S.-led effort to fight Islamic State and other terrorist organizations. Saudi oil production and economic stability are keys to regional prosperity and global energy security.

Where and when please has Saudi Arabia "managed the flood of refugees fleeing Syria's civil war". Was that when it emptied its jails of violent criminals and sent them to wage jihad against the Syrian people? That indeed 'managed' to push millions to flee from their homes.

Saudi Arabia might be many things but "a powerful force for stability" it is not. Just ask 18 million Yemenis who, after years of Saudi bombardment, are near to death for lack of food .

Pompeo's work for the Saudi dictator continued today with a Senate briefing on Yemen. The Senators will soon vote on a resolution to end the U.S. support for the war. In his prepared remarks Pompeo wrote:

The suffering in Yemen grieves me, but if the United States of America was not involved in Yemen, it would be a hell of a lot worse.

What could be worse than a famine that threatens two third of the population?

If the U.S. and Britain would not support the Saudis and Emirates the war would end within a day or two. The Saudi and UAE planes are maintained by U.S. and British specialists. The Saudis still seek 102 more U.S. military personal to take care of their planes. It would be easy for the U.S. to stop such recruiting of its veterans.

It is the U.S. that holds up an already watered down UN Security Council resolution that calls for a ceasefire in Yemen:

The reason for the delay continues to be a White House worry about angering Saudi Arabia, which strongly opposes the resolution, multiple sources say. CNN reported earlier this month that the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, "threw a fit" when presented with an early draft of the document, leading to a delay and further discussions among Western allies on the matter.

We recently wrote that pandering to the Saudis and keeping Muhammad bin Salman in place will hurt Trump's Middle East policies . The piece noted that Trump asked the Saudis for many things, but found that:

There is really nothing in Trump's list on which the Saudis consistently followed through. His alliance with MbS brought him no gain and a lot of trouble.

Trump protected MbS from the consequences of murdering Jamal Khashoggi. He hoped to gain leverage with that. But that is not how MbS sees it. He now knows that Trump will not confront him no matter what he does. If MbS "threws a fit" over a UN Security Council resolution, the U.S. will drop it. When he launches his next 'adventure', the U.S. will again cover his back. Is this the way a super power is supposed to handle a client state?

If Trump's instincts really tell him that U.S. troops should be removed from the Middle East and Afghanistan, something I doubt, he should follow them. Support for the Saudi war on Yemen will not help to achieve that. Pandering to MbS is not MAGA.

Posted by b on November 28, 2018 at 03:12 PM | Permalink

Comments Pompeo: "Saudi Arabia has also contributed millions of dollars to the U.S.-led effort to fight Islamic State and other terrorist organizations."

Everyone knows it's the US presence in the Middle East which creates terrorists, both as proxies of and in resistance to the US imperial presence (and often one and then the other). So reading Orwellian language, Pompeo is saying the US wants to maximize Islamic terrorism in order to provide a pretext for creeping totalitarianism at home and abroad.


lysias , Nov 28, 2018 3:35:15 PM | link

The real reason is to maintain the petrodollar system, but there seems to be a conspiracy of silence never to mention it among both supporters and opponents of Trump.
Ross , Nov 28, 2018 3:41:42 PM | link
There is really nothing in Trump's list on which the Saudis consistently followed through. His alliance with MbS brought him no gain and a lot of trouble.

He did get to fondle the orb - although fuck knows what weirdness was really going on there.

james , Nov 28, 2018 3:47:06 PM | link
thanks b... pompeo is a very bad liar... in fact - everything he says is about exactly the opposite, but bottom line is he is a bad liar as he is thoroughly unconvincing..

everyone knows why the usa is in the middle east.. to support the war industry, which is heavily tied to the financial industry.. up is down and down is up.. that is why the usa is great friends with ksa and israel and a sworn enemy of iran... what they don't say is they are a sworn enemy of humanity and the thought that the world can continue with their ongoing madness...

oh, but don't forget to vote, LOLOL.... no wonder so many are strung out on drugs, and the pharma industry... opening up to the msm is opening oneself up to the world george orwell described many years ago...

uncle tungsten , Nov 28, 2018 3:49:24 PM | link
Take a wafer or two of silicon and just add water. The oil obsession has been eclipsed and within 20 years will be in absolute disarray. The warmongers will invent new excuses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Lk3elu3zf4

karlof1 , Nov 28, 2018 4:33:18 PM | link
A hypothetical: No extraordinary amounts of hydrocarbons exist under Southwest Asian ground; just an essential amount for domestic consumption; in that case, would Zionistan exist where it's currently located and would either Saudi Arabia, Iraq and/or Iran have any significance aside from being consumers of Outlaw US Empire goods? Would the Balfour Declaration and the Sykes/Picot Secret Treaty have been made? If the Orinoco Oil Belt didn't exist, would Venezuela's government be continually targeted for Imperial control? If there was no Brazilian offshore oil, would the Regime Change effort have been made there? Here the hypotheticals end and a few basic yet important questions follow.

Previous to the 20th Century, why were Hawaii and Samoa wrested from their native residents and annexed to Empire? In what way did the lowly family farmers spread across 19th Century United States further the growth of its Empire and contribute to the above named annexations? What was the unspoken message sent to US elites contained within Frederic Jackson Turner's 1893 Frontier Thesis ? Why is the dominant language of North America English, not French or Spanish?

None of these are rhetorical. All second paragraph questions I asked of my history students. And all have a bearing on b's fundamental question.

A. Person , Nov 28, 2018 5:20:13 PM | link
b says, "And it its no longer the oil, why is the U.S. defending the Saudis?"

The US has a vital interest in protecting the narrative of 9/11. The Saudis supplied the patsies. Mossad and dual-citizen neocons were the architects of the event. Hence, the US must avoid a nasty divorce from the Saudis. The Saudis are in a perfect blackmailing position.

Tobin Paz , Nov 28, 2018 5:50:19 PM | link
Maybe Trump is unaware, but the fracking boom is a bubble made possible by near zero interest rates:

U.S. SHALE OIL INDUSTRY: Catastrophic Failure Ahead

Of course, most Americans have no idea that the U.S. Shale Oil Industry is nothing more than a Ponzi Scheme because of the mainstream media's inability to report FACT from FICTION. However, they don't deserve all of the blame as the shale energy industry has done an excellent job hiding the financial distress from the public and investors by the use of highly technical jargon and BS.

Oil is the untold story of modern history.

NOBTS , Nov 28, 2018 6:08:53 PM | link
S.A. is a thinly disguised US military base, hence the "strategic importance" and the relevance of the new Viceroy's previous experience as a Four Star General. It's doubtful that any of the skilled personnel in the SA Air Force are other than former US/Nato. A few princes might fancy themselves to be daring fighter pilots. In case of a Anglo-Zio war with Iran SA would be the most forward US aircraft carrier. The Empire is sustained by its presumed military might and prizes nothing more than its strategically situated bases. Saud would like to capture Yemen's oil fields, but the primary purpose of the air war is probably training. That of course is more despicably cynical than mere conquest and genocide.
Pft , Nov 28, 2018 6:08:56 PM | link
Trump is the ultimate deceiver/liar. Great actor reading from a script. The heel in the Fake wrestling otherwise known as US politics. It almost sounds as if he is calling for an end of anymore significant price drops now that he has got Powell on board to limit interest rate hikes. After all if you are the worlds biggest producer you dont want prices too low. These markets are all manipulated. I cant imagine how much insider trading is going on. If you look at the oil prices, they started dropping in October with Iran sanctions looming (before it was announced irans shipments to its 8 biggest buyers would be exempt) and at the height of the Khashoggi event where sanctions were threatened and Saudi was making threats of their own. In a real free market prices increase amidst supply uncertainty.

Regardless of what he says he wants and gets now, he is already planning a reversal. Thats how the big boys win, they know whats coming and when the con the smaller fish to swim one way they are lined up with a big mouth wide open. Controlled chaos and confusion. For every winner there must be a loser and the losers assets/money are food for the Gods of Money and War

As for pulling out of the Middle East Bibi must have had a good laugh. My money is on the US to be in Yemen to protect them from the Saudis (humanitarian) and Iranian backed Houthis while in reality we will be there to secure the enormous oil fields in the North. Perhaps this was what the Khashoggi trap was all about. The importance of oil is not to supply US markets its to deny it to enemies and control oil prices in order to feed international finance/IMF

psychohistorian , Nov 28, 2018 6:35:06 PM | link
@ Pft who wrote: "The importance of oil is not to supply US markets its to deny it to enemies and control oil prices in order to feed international finance/IMF"

BINGO!!! Those that control finance control most/all of everything else.

Augustin L , Nov 28, 2018 6:37:43 PM | link

Saudi Arabia literally owns close to 8% of the United States economy through various financial instruments. Their public investment funds and dark pools own large chunks from various strategic firms resting at the apex of western power such as Blackstone. Trump and Pompeo would be stupid to cut off their nose to spite their face... It's all about the petrodollar, uncle sam will ride and die with saudi barbaria. If push comes to shove and the saudis decide to untether themselves from the Empire, their sand kingdom will probably be partitioned.
Pnyx , Nov 28, 2018 7:02:31 PM | link
The oil certainly still plays an important role, the u.s. cannot maintain the current frack oil output for long. For Tronald's term in office it will suffice, but hardly longer. (The frack gas supplies are much more substantial.)

Personal interests certainly also play a role, and finally one should not make u.s. foreign policy more rational than it is. Much is also done because of traditions and personal convictions. Often they got it completely wrong and the result was a complete failure.

Likklemore , Nov 28, 2018 7:07:15 PM | link
Let us watch what Trump does with this or if the resolution makes it to daylight:

Senate advances Yemen resolution in rebuke to Trump

The Senate issued a sharp rebuke Wednesday to President Trump, easily advancing a resolution that would end U.S. military support for the Saudi-led campaign in Yemen's civil war despite a White House effort to quash the bill.

The administration launched an eleventh-hour lobbying frenzy to try to head off momentum for the resolution, dispatching Defense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to Capitol Hill in the morning and issuing a veto threat less than an hour before the vote started.

But lawmakers advanced the resolution, 63-37, even as the administration vowed to stand by Saudi Arabia following outcry over the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

"There's been a lot of rhetoric that's come from the White House and from the State Department on this issue," said Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. "The rhetoric that I've heard and the broadcasts that we've made around the world as to who we are have been way out of balance as it relates to American interests and American values." [/]
LINK TheHill

But Mattis says there is no smoking gun to tie the Clown Thug-Prince to Kashoggi's killing.
TheHill

And Lyias @ 2 is a bingo. Always follow the fiat.

Soon, without any announcements, if they wish to maintain selling oil to China, KSA will follow Qatar. It will be priced in Yuan...especially given the escalating U.S. trade war with China.

2019 holds interesting times. Order a truckload of popcorn.

Midwest For Truth , Nov 28, 2018 7:29:46 PM | link
You would have to have your head buried in the sand to not see that the Saudi "Kings" are crypto-Zionistas. Carl Sagan once said, "One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It's simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we've been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back." And Mark Twain also wrote "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
karlof1 , Nov 28, 2018 7:59:31 PM | link
Gee, not one taker amongst all these intelligent folk. From last to first: 1588's Protestant Wind allowed Elizabeth and her cronies to literally keep their heads as Nature helped Drake defeat the Spanish Armada; otherwise, there would be no British Empire root to the USA, thus no USA and no future Outlaw US Empire, the British Isles becoming a Hapsburg Imperial Property, and a completely different historical lineage, perhaps sans World Wars and atomic weapons.

Turner's message was with the Frontier closed the "safety valve" of continental expansion defusing political tensions based on economic inequalities had ceased to be of benefit and future policy would need to deal with that issue thus removing the Fear Factor from the natives to immigrants, and from wide-open spaces to the inner cities. Whipsawing business cycles driving urban labor's unrest, populist People's Party politics, and McKinley's 1901 assassination further drove his points home.

Nationwide, family farmers demanded Federal government help to create additional markets for their produce to generate price inflation so they could remain solvent and keep their homesteads, which translated into the need to conduct international commerce via the seas which required coaling stations--Hawaii and Samoa, amongst others--and a Blue Water Navy that eventually led to Alfred T. Mahan's doctrine of Imperial Control of the Oceans still in use today.

As with Gengis Khan's death in 1227 that stopped the Mongol expansion to the English Channel that changed the course of European history, and what was seen as the Protestant Wind being Divine Intervention, global history has several similar inflection points turning the tide from one path to another. We don't know yet if the Outlaw US Empire's reliance on Saudi is such, but we can see it turning from being a great positive to an equally potential great negative for the Empire--humanity as a whole, IMO, will benefit greatly from an implosion and the relationship becoming a Great Negative helping to strip what remains of the Emperor's Clothing from his torso so that nations and their citizens can deter the oncoming financialized economic suicide caused by massive debt and climate chaos.

Vico's circle is about to intersect with Hegel's dialectic and generate a new temporal phase in human history. Although many will find it hard to tell, the current direction points to a difficult change to a more positive course for humanity as a whole, but it's also possible that disaster could strike with humanity's total or near extinction being the outcome--good arguments can be made for either outcome, which ought to unsettle everyone: Yes, the times are that tenuous. But then, I'm merely a lonely historian aware of a great many things, including the pitfall inherent in trying to predict future events.

robjira , Nov 28, 2018 8:08:58 PM | link
"The suffering in Yemen grieves me, but if the United States of America was not involved in Yemen, it would be a hell of a lot worse." And I'll bet Pompeo said that with a straight face, too. lmfao

And as for "...keep[ing] Baghdad tethered to the West's interests and not Tehran's," I'm guessing the "secretary" would have us all agree "yeah, fk Iraqi sovereignty anyway. Besides, it's not like they share a border with Iran, or anything. Oh, wait..."

p.s. Many thanks for all you have contributed to collective knowledge, b; I will be contacting you about making a contribution by snail mail (I hate PayPal, too).

imo , Nov 28, 2018 8:25:35 PM | link
"... a powerful force for stability in the Middle East."

"Instability" more like it.

Paid for military coup in Egypt. Funding anti-Syrian terrorists. Ongoing tensions with Iran. Zip-all for the Palestinians. WTF in Yemen. Wahhabi crazy sh_t (via Mosque building) across Asia. Head and hand chopping Friday specials the norm -- especially of their South-Asian slave classes. Ok, so females can now drive cars -- woohoo. A family run business venture manipulating the global oil trade and supporting US-petro-$ hegemony recently out of goat herding and each new generation 'initiated' in some Houston secret society toe-touching shower and soap ceremonies before placement in the ruling hierarchy back home. But enough; they being Semites makes it an offence to criticize in some 'free' democratic world domains.

karlof1 , Nov 28, 2018 8:52:24 PM | link
Likklemore @14--

Instead of the "rebuke to Trump" meme circulating around, I found this statement to be more accurate:

"'Cutting off military aid to Saudi Arabia is the right choice for Yemen, the right choice for our national security, and the right choice for upholding the Constitution,' Paul Kawika Martin, senior director for policy and political affairs at Peace Action, declared in a statement. ' Three years ago, the notion of Congress voting to cut off military support for Saudi Arabia would have been politically laughable .'" [My Emphasis]

In other words, advancing Peace with Obama as POTUS wasn't going to happen, so this vote ought to be seen as an attack on Obama's legacy as it's his policy that's being reconsidered and hopefully discontinued.

Peter AU 1 , Nov 28, 2018 9:44:50 PM | link
Trump, Israel and the Sawdi's. US no longer needs middle east oil for strategic supply. Trump is doing away with the petro-dollar as that scam has run its course and maintenance is higher than returns. Saudi and other middle east oil is required for global energy dominance.

Energy dominance, lebensraum for Israel and destroying the current Iran are all objectives that fit into one neat package.

Those plans look to be coming apart at the moment so it remains to be seen how fanatical Trump is on Israel and MAGA. MAGA as US was at the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Pft , Nov 29, 2018 1:15:05 AM | link
As for pulling out of the Middle East Bibi must have had a good laugh. Remember when he said he wanted out of Syria. My money is on the US to be in Yemen before too long to protect them from the Saudis (humanitarian) and Iranian backed Houthis, while in reality it will be to secure the enormous oil fields in the North. Perhaps this was what the Khashoggi trap was all about.

The importance of oil is not to supply US markets its to deny it to enemies and control oil prices in order to feed international finance/IMF .

james , Nov 29, 2018 1:57:51 AM | link
@16 karlof1.. thanks for a broader historical perspective which you are able to bring to moa.. i enjoy reading your comments.. i don't have answers to ALL your questions earlier.. i have answers for some of them... you want to make it easy on us uneducated folks and give us less questions, like b did in his post here, lol.... cheers james
b , Nov 29, 2018 2:33:04 AM | link
This came faster than assumed:

Yemen war: US Senate advances measure to end support for Saudi forces

The US Senate has advanced a measure to withdraw American support for a Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen.

In a blow to President Donald Trump, senators voted 63-37 to take forward a motion on ending US support.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Defence Secretary Jim Mattis had urged Senators not to back the motion, saying it would worsen the situation in Yemen.

...

The vote in the Senate means further debate on US support for Saudi Arabia is expected next week.

However, correspondents say that even if the Senate ultimately passes the bipartisan resolution it has little chance of being approved by the outgoing House of Representatives.

That is quite a slap for the Trump administration. It will have little consequences in the short term (or for Yemen) but it sets a new direction in foreign polices towards the Saudis.
jim slim , Nov 29, 2018 4:04:44 AM | link
Pompeo is a Deep State Israel-firster with a nasty neocon agenda. It is to Trump's disgrace that he chose Pompeo and the abominable Bolton. At least Trump admits the ME invasions are really about Israel.
mina , Nov 29, 2018 4:14:20 AM | link
duterte...idris deby...so many democrats visiting Netanyahu lately!!
Rhisiart Gwilym , Nov 29, 2018 4:49:48 AM | link
@Uncle Tungsten, 5:

Take a look at some of the - informed - comments below the vid to which you linked. Then think again about an 'all electric civilisation within a few years'. Yes, and Father Christmas will be providing everything that everyone in the world needs for a NAmerican/European standard of living within the same time frame. Er - not.

'Renewables' are not going to save hitech industrial 'civilisation' from The Long Descent/Catabolic Collapse (qv). Apart from any other consideration - and there are some other equally intractable ones - there is no - repeat NO - 'renewable' energy system which doesn't rely crucially on energy subsidies from the fossil-hydrocarbon fuels, both to build it and to maintain it. They're not stand-alone, self-bootstrapping technologies. Nor is there any realistic prospect that they ever will be. Fully renewable-power hitech industrial civilisation is a non-deliverable mirage which is just drawing us ever further into the desert of irreversible peak-energy/peak-everythig-else.

Rancid , Nov 29, 2018 5:58:26 AM | link
@16 karlof1. I also find your historical references very interesting. We do indeed seem to be at a very low point in the material cycle, it will reverse in due course as is its want, hopefully we will live to see a positive change in humanity.
Russ , Nov 29, 2018 7:24:10 AM | link
John 28

For example we know Tesla didn't succeed in splitting the planet in half, the way techno-psychotics fantasize. As for that silly link, how typical of techno-wingnuts to respond to prosaic physical facts with fantasies. Anything to prop up faith in the technocratic-fundamentalist religion. Meanwhile "electrical civilization" has always meant and will always mean fracking and coal, until the whole fossil-fueled extreme energy nightmare is over.

Given the proven fact that the extreme energy civilization has done nothing but embark upon a campaign to completely destroy humanity and the Earth (like in your Tesla fantasy), why would a non-psychopath want to prop it up anyway?

bob sykes , Nov 29, 2018 7:37:37 AM | link
It is still the oil, even for the US. The Persian Gulf supplies 20% of world consumption, and Western Europe gets 40% of its oil from OPEC countries, most of that from the Gulf. Even the US still imports 10% of its total consumption.
y , Nov 29, 2018 7:47:36 AM | link
Peter AU 1 | Nov 28, 2018 9:44:50 PM | 20
b | Nov 29, 2018 2:33:04 AM | 23
USD as a world reserve currency could be one factor between the important ones. With non US support the saud land could crash under neighbours pressure, that caos may be not welcomed.
Guerrero , Nov 29, 2018 10:16:10 AM | link
Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 28, 2018 7:59:31 PM | 16

"Vico's circle is about to intersect with Hegel's dialectic and generate a new temporal phase in human history. Although many will find it hard to tell, the current direction points to a difficult change to a more positive course for humanity as a whole..."

Yes!

Humble people around where I live have mentioned that time is speeding up its velocity; there seems to be a spiritual (evolutionary)/physical interface effect or something...

Tolstoy, in the long theory-of-history exposition at the end of War and Peace, challenges 'the great man' of History idea, spreading in his time, at the dawning of the so-called: European Romantic period of Beethoven, Goerte and Wagner, when the unique person was glorified in the name of art, truth, whatever (eventually this bubble burst too, in the 20th C. and IMO because of too much fervent worship in the Cult of the Temple of the Money God. Dostoyevki's great Crime and Punishment is all about this issue.)

Tolstoy tries to describe a scientifically-determined historical process, dissing the 'great man of History' thesis. He was thinking of Napoleon Bonaparte of course, the run-away upstart repulican, anathema to the established order. Tolstoy describes it in the opening scene of the novel: a fascinating parlor-room conversation between a "liberal" woman of good-birth in the elite circles of society and a military captain at the party.

...only tenuously relevant to karlofi1's great post touching upon the Theory of History as such; thanks.

Now as to the question: ¿Why is Trump supporting Saudi Arabia? Let me think about that...

[Nov 29, 2018] Neocons 'Taking Over The White House' WSJ's Kissel Joins Trump Administration

Looks like Trump lost control of appointments in his administration... and it is Pompeo who is intrumental in defining the US foreign policy, not Trump.
Notable quotes:
"... The decision by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to give former Wall Street Journal editorial writer Mary Kissel a senior position at the department, despite her previous clashes with US President Donald Trump, shows that neoconservatives are moving in on the administration ..."
"... As a writer, Kissel took Trump to task on Twitter on multiple occasions, criticizing him for his " frightening ignorance " on foreign policy. During a March 2016 appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," Kissel even went as far as saying on air that then-candidate Trump had neither principles nor policies. To this, Trump shot back on Twitter, calling her a " major loser ." ..."
"... The only thing that I can think of is that nobody takes Trump seriously in the White House on what he says from day to day ..."
"... Kissel's recent appointment, to no one's surprise, isn't exactly sitting well with the folks on the more conservative side of the political spectrum. In a recent opinion piece for the Washington Examiner, writer Ryan Girdusky wrote that "Kissel is so wrong so frequently that not only should she not be advising Pompeo on policy, she shouldn't be employed by a single newspaper in the country to talk about politics." ..."
"... Kissel, however, isn't the first Trump opponent to be hired by Pompeo. There's also Jim Jeffrey, who, along with several other GOP insiders, signed a letter in August 2016 which noted that then-candidate Trump "lacks the character, values and experience" to be president. Despite his past objections, Jeffrey is now serving in the Trump administration as the special representative for Syria engagement. ..."
Nov 29, 2018 | www.defenddemocracy.press

The decision by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to give former Wall Street Journal editorial writer Mary Kissel a senior position at the department, despite her previous clashes with US President Donald Trump, shows that neoconservatives are moving in on the administration, investigative reporter Dave Lindorff told Sputnik.

As a writer, Kissel took Trump to task on Twitter on multiple occasions, criticizing him for his " frightening ignorance " on foreign policy. During a March 2016 appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe," Kissel even went as far as saying on air that then-candidate Trump had neither principles nor policies. To this, Trump shot back on Twitter, calling her a " major loser ."

An unidentified senior State Department official told Politico that Kissel's past remarks were more of a reflection of her "role as a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board."

"As she has said previously when asked similar questions, her job there was to analyze and write about policy," the department official said. "As a member of the editorial board, Mary strongly endorsed this administration's policies on Iran, Afghanistan, tax cuts, energy policy, regulatory reform, judicial nominations and other issues. She is proud to serve this President and Secretary Pompeo."

"The only thing that I can think of is that nobody takes Trump seriously in the White House on what he says from day to day," Lindorff told Radio Sputnik's Loud & Clear on Wednesday in an attempt to explain Kissel's hiring.

"That could be one answer the other one could be that this kind of neocon person, which she is, are basically taking over the White House. I wouldn't have called Trump a neocon when he was running for office, but I think his policies are at this point pretty much in the neocon playbook on foreign policy."

Read also: The Bolton threat to the Iran nuclear deal

While it's unclear how Trump reacted to Pompeo's move, Lindorff, who also writes as a columnist for CounterPunch, suggested that he might have let bygones be bygones after certain apologies are exchanged.

Kissel's recent appointment, to no one's surprise, isn't exactly sitting well with the folks on the more conservative side of the political spectrum. In a recent opinion piece for the Washington Examiner, writer Ryan Girdusky wrote that "Kissel is so wrong so frequently that not only should she not be advising Pompeo on policy, she shouldn't be employed by a single newspaper in the country to talk about politics."

"It is frightening that Kissel has managed to fail forward," he added.

Kissel, however, isn't the first Trump opponent to be hired by Pompeo. There's also Jim Jeffrey, who, along with several other GOP insiders, signed a letter in August 2016 which noted that then-candidate Trump "lacks the character, values and experience" to be president. Despite his past objections, Jeffrey is now serving in the Trump administration as the special representative for Syria engagement.

Published at https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201811291070224029-neocons-white-house-kissel-hire/

[Nov 29, 2018] Putin On Washington Asking For Russian Help Americans Are Interesting Folks

Nov 29, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Red onyx , 11 months ago

Maaan , Putin is really smart guy...

Maria Kuzali , 11 months ago

He is something else. He has the right answer for everything, and a lots of sense of humer!!!!

Johnny Aingel , 11 months ago (edited)

Asking for help after all the crap they did to Russia unbelievable but...

Dawud Yasin , 11 months ago

I'm British and I trust Putin more than any other leader in the world. He's a good politician and has been at the top longer than any of today's leaders his down to earth approach is something that reaches out to the masses. There's a new sheriff in town and he's Russian...

[Nov 29, 2018] Putin Shocked St. Petersburg Forum Participants with Frankness

Nov 29, 2018 | www.youtube.com

Paul van Dijck , 1 year ago

I am a Dutchman, but when I listen to Wladimir Putin, I can only conclude ANY western politician is a small child compared to him.

Maria Jordan , 1 year ago

Putin is brilliant intellectually and politically! He is strong and independent but not in a proud way, but with a strength coming directly from his heart for his Russia! I am originally Polish and I wish we would have had such a leader in our country. So, many mistakes in our history could have been avoided! Bravo Putin! American leaders look impressive but most of them have a plastic personalities

Susie Gladwell , 1 year ago

I love the forthrightness of President Putin; he is kind in his choice of words, patient as ever and manages to add his wonderful humor. A sheer joy to listen to.

joshron99 , 1 year ago

What an amazing human being is Putin. His command of the issues, their histories, the big picture as well as minute details, his ability to express himself, his steeliness and his humor must impact everyone who meets him and foreign leaders drawn to him who, with this generation of Russians seem to have a "rendezvous with destiny."

joshron99 , 1 year ago

What an amazing human being is Putin. His command of the issues, their histories, the big picture as well as minute details, his ability to express himself, his steeliness and his humor must impact everyone who meets him and foreign leaders drawn to him who, with this generation of Russians seem to have a "rendezvous with destiny."

zpetar , 1 year ago

These days all media is talking is about Russia hacking US elections. Why nobody is talking about NSA hacked Angela Merkel's phone? Maybe because that's old news not worth mentioning any more? Or maybe because its because US is democratic country so it doesn't count. This is quote from The Guardian "Germany has closed its investigation into a report that the US National Security Agency had hacked Chancellor Angela Merkel's mobile phone, a move that appears to be aimed at ending transatlantic friction that threatened intelligence cooperation between the two countries." Who cares about democracy and truth when higher interests are threatened.

Lia Spring , 1 year ago

Putin is a true PEACE MAKER !! May God be with Russia and its PRESIDENT!

ecocivilian , 1 year ago

Putin is just the baddest man on the planet jeez he really rocks like a superstar on stage such a diplomat but deadly like a stinging bee when you dont treat him seriously how can you not like this man

[Nov 28, 2018] Leaked Transcript Proves Russiagaters Have Been Right All Along (Spoiler Not Really)

Nov 28, 2018 | www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone via Medium.com,

A transcript of exchanges between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin has been leaked to National News Conglomerate by an anonymous source within the Kremlin . We here at NNC have confirmed the authenticity of this document using the same rigorous verification process we've been using to authenticate the evidence for all our other reporting on Russia's involvement in the 2016 US elections over the last two years. These verification methods include hunches, gut intuitions, and an introspective assessment of the way our feelings feel. The following exchanges revealed in this transcript provide the clearest evidence yet that the President of the United States has been in collusion with the Russian government for years.

This introduction has been authored by the editorial board of the National News Conglomerate. Obey.

11/9/2016

Trump: I have done as you commanded, my dominant and all-powerful lord. I have conspired with your hackers to steal the election, and now I'm going to be president! I want to thank you for not releasing that video footage of those Russian prostitutes I hired to urinate on a bed the Obamas once slept in. If that had come out it would have offended and alienated a lot of people, which is something I never normally do.

Putin: Yes that is an old KGB tactic called kompromat, a word which only extremely intelligent people know about. Keep this line of communication open. As long as you do as I command, your pee pee tape will remain secret.

Trump: One thing I'm curious about though my lord, if you don't mind my asking. If you already had an army of hackers targeting Democratic Party emails, why did you need my help? Couldn't you just have hacked the emails and published them on your own? Why did you need me to interact with them at all?

Putin: Moral support, mainly. We don't need to get into specifics.

Trump: Oh okay.

~

1/20/2017

Trump: I'm in! Whew! I was really worried that leaked dossier would be the end of me! What are my instructions, my lord?

Putin: Begin introducing racism and division to the United States. America has never experienced these things before, and it will shock and disorient them. With the US divided against itself, your nation will be far too weak to stand against my plans of total world domination.

Trump: That's a really tall order! America has always been a harmonious place where everyone gets along up until today. I'll try my best though. Anything else?

Putin: Yes, make them distrust your nation's large media outlets and convince them that the US intelligence community is often dishonest.

Trump: That will be really hard because those institutions have always been trusted for their unparalleled integrity. But your wish is my command, oh lord.

~

4/7/2017

Putin: Bomb a Syrian airbase.

Trump: What? Really? Aren't they, like, your allies?

Putin: Exactly. This will throw inquisitive minds off the scent. We can't have them finding out about that pee tape.

Trump: Are you sure? Some people are saying that chemical attack looks like it could have been perpetrated by the many terrorist factions in Syria and not the government.

Putin: Who cares? Have you seen how relentless they've been in exposing us?? Have you never watched Rachel Maddow? That woman is a psychic bloodhound, masterfully sniffing out the truth at every turn! We can't afford to take chances. Do as I say.

Trump: Yes sir.

Putin: And see if you can arrest that WikiLeaks guy.

6/28/17

Trump: Hey do you want me to do anything about Montenegro's addition to NATO?

Putin: No. NATO expansion is good.

Trump: Uhhh okay.

~

6/28/17

Trump: Who do you want tapped for Ukraine envoy?

Putin: Kurt Volker.

Trump: Volker? He hates you! He's like the biggest Russia hawk ever.

Putin: We still need to throw the Russiagaters off the scent. We're playing 3-D chess here. This is high-level disinformation, or dezinformatsiya as very smart people call it. I want as many Russia hawks in your administration as possible.

Trump: 3-D chess? Alright. I guess you know what you're doing.

~

8/30/17

Putin: Shut down the Russian consulate in San Francisco and throw out a bunch of diplomats. That will confuse the hell out of them.

~

11/21/17

Putin: Now approve the sale of arms to Ukraine. Not even Obama would do that. This will throw them off the trail for sure.

~

1/1/18

Putin: Happy new year. Force RT and Sputnik to register as foreign agents.

~

1/29/18

Putin: Make sure your Nuclear Posture Review greatly escalates its aggressive posture toward Russia.

~

2/14/18

Putin: Happy Valentine's Day. Don't worry about those Russians your guys killed in Syria.

~

2/19/18

Putin: Send a fleet of war ships to the Black Sea.

~

3/25/18

Putin: Better expel a few dozen diplomats over the Skripal thing.

~

4/5/18

Putin: Sanction a bunch of Russian oligarchs.

~

4/10/18

Putin: Bomb Syria.

Trump: What?? Again?

Putin: Yes.

Trump: What the hell, man? Why'd you even recruit me if you're just going to have me do everything all the Russia hawks want?

Putin: Well, you know how I told you we were playing 3-D chess against the Russiagate investigation?

Trump: Yeah?

Putin: Well that wasn't enough. Now we're playing 4-D chess.

Trump: Fine, whatever, I don't care. Just don't release my pee tape.

~

7/17/18

Trump: Oh man. They're really making a major fuss about that summit. What should I do?

Putin: Play it cool. Don't let them know about our secret diabolical plot.

Trump: Right. Remind me what that was again?

Putin: Make Jim Acosta feel really, really sad.

~

9/2/18

Putin: Have you arrested Julian Assange yet?

Trump: Working on it.

~

10/20/18

Putin: I like John Bolton's idea. Pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

~

11/25/18

Putin: Make sure your administration loudly and aggressively backs Ukraine in our Kerch Strait spat.

Trump: OMFG this is getting too weird. Are you just trolling me? What the hell is this?

Trump: Hello?

Trump: Are you there?

Trump: Answer me!

Putin: 5-D chess.

* * *

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook , following my antics on Twitter , throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal , buying my new book Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone , or my previous book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2


The little voice inside my head , 18 minutes ago link

Just encountered a Denzel Washington interview from last year, how true it's become, like the Guardian and Wikileaks "story"

Doesn't matter if it's true or not, just be the first , sell it!

DisorderlyConduct , 1 hour ago link

LOL.

...bomb a Syrian airbase...

This is awesome.

francis scott falseflag , 1 hour ago link

Hey, that's where I stopped reading. Did I miss anything?

The little vo