Russia holding the line to prevent total global war
Finian Cunningham
The deployment in mid May of a US missile system in Eastern Europe is another step towards all-out global war. Despite Western propaganda demonizing Russia, the truth is that it is Russian military might that is actually holding the line to prevent such a cataclysm.
The United States and its NATO allies are already at war with Russia.
This is not hyperbole. It is fact. The US and its allies are amassing weapons and troops on Russia's borders, and engaging in simulated attacks from various directions.
Orwellian language of "war games" in Western media serves to
diminish the disturbing fact that NATO forces are preparing offensive
strikes on Russia.
War machinery on both sides are locked on. The encounter last month of the US warship with Russian fighter jets
in the Baltic Sea is but one of many such close encounters occurring
almost every week. Granted, weapons have not actually been fired yet.
Nevertheless, the weapon machinery is engaged.
Again, Western media serve to normalize what is a balefully abnormal
situation. At the behest of Washington, the Western countries are trying
to blockade Russia with economic sanctions. This is just another provocative act of war.
Moreover, diplomatic channels between Washington and Moscow seem
attenuated to levels as low as at any time during the former Cold War.
Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has apparently maintained a cordial working relationship
with his American counterpart John Kerry, but apart from that
individual rapport the bilateral position between the two powers has
sunken to an all-time low.
Another manifestation of war is the US proxy conflict with Russia in Syria and Ukraine. On the surface there may be talk about ceasefires
and political solutions, but make no mistake the jihadist mercenaries
and the neo-Nazi Kiev regime are nonetheless American military assets
ever-poised to attack Russia's geo-strategic interests.
The move this week by Washington to activate its
long-anticipated missile system in Eastern Europe is another act of
aggression in a whole panoply of offensive actions. US and NATO
officials deny that the Aegis system
is targeting Russia, and make the ludicrous claim that it is to defend
Europe against Iranian ballistic rockets or some other "rogue state".
Such transparent, deceitful nonsense.
Russia rightly dismisses Washington and NATO's cynical assurances. The
Kremlin this week said that the installation of the US missile system is
a direct threat to Russia's security. Moscow said it would take
counter-measures to restore the strategic balance of nuclear deterrence.
It was no coincidence that official Russian reports disclosed details
of a new hypersonic Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile
that could penetrate any American missile shield to deliver a warhead
capable of destroying an area the size of Texas or France.
This is not irresponsible Russian bravado. It is vital that Russia lets aggressive Washington know that any future war moves will be met with equal or greater force.
Of course, the outcome would be an all-out nuclear war which could
destroy the planet as we know it. But the only way of saving the peace
and the planet is for Russia to show that it has the military might to
face down any American belligerence.
The upgrade of Russian military power under President Vladimir Putin is perhaps the only thing that is holding back the push for all-out war by the US.
And let's face it. It is the US that is the source of belligerence. As
American political analyst Randy Martin points out, the so-called
Wolfowitz Doctrine is the touchstone of Washington's foreign policy. The
neocon doctrine of former Department of Defense official Paul
Wolfowitz, who served in the George W Bush administrations, is embedded
in US military strategic thinking.
Says Martin: "Wolfowitz's worldview of seeing the US as the
world's only superpower and not tolerating any other rival to the point
of going to war, is taught in all American military academies. It is
mainstream US military thinking."
This is what motivates Washington's bellicose policies towards Russia
and China, adds Martin. "The US is programed to go to war with any
perceived rival global power in order to maintain its unwarranted
ambitions of hegemony."
The analyst says that if it were not for Russian, and Chinese,
military power the US state planners would have gone further by now in
prosecuting their war actions, with catastrophic consequences for the
world. It is a sobering thought that, despite all the Western media disparagement of Russia, it is actually Russia that is saving the world from such a catastrophic conflict - a conflict that the US alone is pushing.
Indeed, it is averred that Russia's intervention in Syria may have been
partly based on this bigger, far more serious calculation. Not only was
Russia salvaging the Middle East country from Western-backed war for
regime change. Moscow's deployment of latest weaponry, including its
sea-launched cruise missiles and the S-400 anti-ballistic defense, could have been aimed at demonstrating to Washington that it better think twice about pursuing a wider war agenda.
Little do we know it because of so much Western mind-numbing
misinformation, but our world is facing the abyss of nuclear war.
Russia's military power is holding the line from this abyss.
How can we transcend this abysmal situation before stumbling over the edge?
Russia must remain vigilant and strong, with a determination to not capitulate. The anniversary last week
of the defeat of Nazi Germany is a timely reminder of Russia's epic
importance in thwarting international aggression. The same fascist
aggression is virulent again in the form of American hegemonic
ambitions, and just as with the Third Reich it is Russian fortitude that
is preserving the world from Total War.
Political analyst Randy Martin does not see the American public has
having a decisive role in practice. In theory, yes, US citizens need to
call their warmongering leaders to account and to elect a democratic
government - for a change. However, says Martin, the American
public are so disenfranchised, brainwashed, beaten down, and oppressed
with poverty and consumerist psychosis, he does not see how a mass
movement in the US can be mobilized at this point in history in order to
abolish the warmongering ruling elite in Washington.
Perhaps, it is up to the people of Europe to take decisive action.
Growing popular discontent with European leaders who toe the American
line of aggression and sanctions on Russia may have the potential of
decisively breaking the US-EU-NATO war front.
What people need to urgently wake up to is that Washington and
its European vassals in government are already at war on Russia. There
is absolutely no objective justification for this destructive dynamic,
other than the US trying to unilaterally assert its hegemony. That is
not the policy of a law-abiding democracy; it is a fascist power in the
same vein as Nazi Germany.
The war on Russia is being waged on entirely spurious grounds of alleged
Russian annexations, invasions and expansionism. This is utter
propaganda - again a la Nazi Germany.
The crucial question is this: can Russia hold the line long enough
against US-led aggression until the people of the world mobilize the
political action to overthrow the criminal regime that operates out of
Washington and through European capitals?
CHINA BOOSTS JET DRILLS, RAMPING UP COMBAT READINESS
TURKEY AND UKRAINE FORM MILITARY ALLIANCE IN FACE OF COMMON RUSSIAN ENEMY
Clock Is Ticking Down, US Is Preparing The Middle East For Something Big
Ex-general says NATO-Russia nuclear war ‘possible within a year’
NATO’s former deputy military chief in Europe says his book, a
fictional story which describes a nuclear war with Russia over the
Baltic nations taking place in 2017, is based on an “entirely plausible”
scenario.
General Sir Richard
Shirreff, from Britain, served at the second-highest NATO military
office in Europe between 2011 and 2014. He says his experience acquired
in the alliance of war-gaming future conflicts helped him model the
narrative for the book.
According to his scenario, starting next year Russia would first occupy Ukraine to secure a land route to Crimea and then invade the three Baltic nations, all of which are members of NATO. The move, Shirreff argued, would be driven by the perception of NATO’s weakness and Russia’s opposition to what it sees as the alliance’s attempts to encircle it.
“We need to judge President [Vladimir] Putin by his deeds not his words,” the retired general told BBC Radio 4’s Today program. “He has invaded Georgia, he has invaded the Crimea, he has invaded Ukraine. He has used force and got away with it.”
The supposed invasion of Georgia in 2008 was Russia’s response to a Georgian attack on its breakaway region of South Ossetia, which started with the killings of Russian peacekeepers stationed there to prevent such hostilities. Russia responded by defeating the NATO-trained Georgian Army and withdrew. Moscow later recognized South Ossetia as a sovereign state, formalizing its de facto independence from Georgia that had been in place since the 1990s.
The supposed invasion of Ukraine in 2014 was Russia’s use of its troops, which were legally deployed in Crimea under a treaty with Ukraine, to prevent hostilities after an armed coup in Kiev. The Crimean people, who overwhelmingly opposed the new Ukrainian government and its nationalistic leanings, voted in a referendum to part ways with Ukraine and rejoin Russia.
If Russia used military force against any NATO members, the entire alliance would be obliged to declare war on Russia. The US is the most powerful member of NATO and has the world’s biggest military force. According to Shirreff, Russia would use its nuclear arsenal to counter NATO’s response.
“Be under no illusion whatsoever – Russian use of nuclear weapons is hardwired into Moscow’s military strategy,” he said, omitting the fact that NATO’s nuclear nations – the US, Britain and France – have always kept a pre-emptive nuclear strike as a possible option. Russia dropped its pledge not to use nuclear weapons first in 1993.
A scenario of conflict between Russia and NATO members over one of the Baltic states was earlier explored by the BBC in a film, which focused on decision-making at a British advisory body responding to the crisis. In the film, the stand-off escalated into a full-scale nuclear conflict and the advisers contemplating an option to destroy Russia’s biggest cities with Trident missiles.
According to his scenario, starting next year Russia would first occupy Ukraine to secure a land route to Crimea and then invade the three Baltic nations, all of which are members of NATO. The move, Shirreff argued, would be driven by the perception of NATO’s weakness and Russia’s opposition to what it sees as the alliance’s attempts to encircle it.
Read more
The supposed invasion of Georgia in 2008 was Russia’s response to a Georgian attack on its breakaway region of South Ossetia, which started with the killings of Russian peacekeepers stationed there to prevent such hostilities. Russia responded by defeating the NATO-trained Georgian Army and withdrew. Moscow later recognized South Ossetia as a sovereign state, formalizing its de facto independence from Georgia that had been in place since the 1990s.
The supposed invasion of Ukraine in 2014 was Russia’s use of its troops, which were legally deployed in Crimea under a treaty with Ukraine, to prevent hostilities after an armed coup in Kiev. The Crimean people, who overwhelmingly opposed the new Ukrainian government and its nationalistic leanings, voted in a referendum to part ways with Ukraine and rejoin Russia.
If Russia used military force against any NATO members, the entire alliance would be obliged to declare war on Russia. The US is the most powerful member of NATO and has the world’s biggest military force. According to Shirreff, Russia would use its nuclear arsenal to counter NATO’s response.
“Be under no illusion whatsoever – Russian use of nuclear weapons is hardwired into Moscow’s military strategy,” he said, omitting the fact that NATO’s nuclear nations – the US, Britain and France – have always kept a pre-emptive nuclear strike as a possible option. Russia dropped its pledge not to use nuclear weapons first in 1993.
A scenario of conflict between Russia and NATO members over one of the Baltic states was earlier explored by the BBC in a film, which focused on decision-making at a British advisory body responding to the crisis. In the film, the stand-off escalated into a full-scale nuclear conflict and the advisers contemplating an option to destroy Russia’s biggest cities with Trident missiles.
NATO exercises on Russian border: Are these people actually mad?
Less than a week after Russia marked its annual Victory Day
commemoration of the end of the Second World War, NATO troops began
planned military exercises in Estonia all the way up to Russia’s border.
It begs the question – are these people actually mad?
Many countries and many
people suffered enormously during World War Two. It was the first
conflict in history in which technology played a dominant part in the
air, on land, and at sea, allowing for the development of weaponry of
unparalleled destructive force, power, and reach. Add to this the
brutality and barbarism of the fascist ideology that underpinned the
war, with its objective of eradicating entire peoples from the earth,
the carnage that ensued was inevitable.
No country suffered more than the Soviet Union over the course of the war, and no people suffered more than the Russian people, who made up the vast bulk of the Soviet population. It is estimated that between 25-30 million Russian and Soviet citizens perished, while the country itself was devastated, turned upside down and inside out.
Consequently, this is a conflict that left deep and eternal scars on the Russian psyche. It is something that Western ideologues either fail to understand, or do understand and don’t care. How else are we to explain NATO military exercises in Estonia starting in the wake of the annual Victory Day commemoration? How else are we to explain the said exercises being conducted on the Estonian-Russian border? Above all, how are we to explain that among the 5,000 or so NATO troops taking part are German and Estonian troops?
If this doesn't qualify as a provocation, what does?
Why is the West and NATO intent on pursuing a cold war strategy when it comes to Russia? How can it possibly profit Western countries and their citizens to experience a return to the decades of enmity previous generations endured, with all the dangers that such a state of mutual antagonism brings?
Russia considers its security to be every bit as precious and non-negotiable as the US, UK, France, Germany do theirs, with its people and government reminded of the centrality of security to the nation’s wellbeing each Victory Day. A nation that lost and sacrificed so much in the war against fascism seven decades ago would be remiss if it did not refuse to countenance any attempt to weaken or probe its defenses today. It simply cannot be allowed to happen.
Yet despite what should be a matter of basic logic, we have countries on Russia’s border – Ukraine, Estonia, Georgia et al. – doing their utmost to cause tension and discord. In the case of eastern Ukraine in 2014 and Georgia in 2008, conflict was the inevitable result, and is evidence of Washington and the West’s refusal to consider any other option when it comes to relations with Russia than vanquished enemy or deadly foe.
It is also relevant to ponder the benefits the countries on Russia’s border have enjoyed or are enjoying as a result of their turn to the West. Ukraine, the second largest country in Europe after Russia, is today an economic and political basket case. The decision to sever all economic and political ties with Russia has caused living standards to fall by more than 50 percent in a year, while the value of its currency (hryvnia) has dipped by two thirds. Inflation, meanwhile, has risen to a whopping 43 percent.
Forced to rely on IMF bailout loans in order to forestall complete economic collapse, Ukraine is a prime example of Western promises not being matched by Western reality. For Western governments the plight of the Ukrainian people comes low on a list of priorities dominated by strategic and self serving objectives. In other words, if the price of weakening Russia is misery and economic collapse for Ukraine and its people then so be it.
Estonia has fared significantly better than Ukraine as a result
of moving into a Western orbit. Indeed, in terms of growth and
innovation there is no doubt that Estonia has been a success story, even
though its economy is highly indebted to external creditors.
However the sustainability of Estonia’s economic success and stability is contingent on stable relations with Russia. The more stable those relations the more stable the Estonian economy, and vice versa. It is a simple equation that the Estonian government appears to have great difficulty in grasping, given its desire to join NATO and have NATO forces permanently stationed on its territory.
Such a course can only lead to a bad outcome. Given its recent history, when invasion and occupation decimated its land and people, Moscow cannot be expected to acquiesce to NATO expanding all the way up to its borders. Indeed the very idea is preposterous, and would immediately turn countries such as Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania from neighboring states into frontline states, with all the potential and inherent dangers involved.
READ MORE: Nordic leaders pledge allegiance to NATO at Washington summit
Ultimately, common sense must prevail. The 25-30 million who perished in the war against fascism did not do so in order for Russia to stand idly by while the West, its allies in that struggle, attempts to box it in with what is tantamount to a military, economic, and geopolitical cordon sanitaire.
It really doesn’t have to be this way. Russia and the West do not have to be enemies. They can also be partners. Moreover, in a globalized world facing global threats and challenges, there is no longer any excuse for cold war attitudes. The millions living in the countries concerned deserve better.
Source: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/russians-have-shot-down-numerous-us-drones-violating-crimean-airspace/ri14963
The
war you don’t hear about: numerous American military aircraft (albeit
of the unmanned variety, though with the possibility of being armed and
dangerous) have apparently been violating Russian airspace, leading to
the Russians shooting – yes, shooting – them down following the refusal of the Americans to acknowledge Russian diplomatic notes of protest.
The military violation of the territory, including the airspace, of a sovereign state is ordinarily taken to be a casus belli – an act of war.
No country suffered more than the Soviet Union over the course of the war, and no people suffered more than the Russian people, who made up the vast bulk of the Soviet population. It is estimated that between 25-30 million Russian and Soviet citizens perished, while the country itself was devastated, turned upside down and inside out.
Consequently, this is a conflict that left deep and eternal scars on the Russian psyche. It is something that Western ideologues either fail to understand, or do understand and don’t care. How else are we to explain NATO military exercises in Estonia starting in the wake of the annual Victory Day commemoration? How else are we to explain the said exercises being conducted on the Estonian-Russian border? Above all, how are we to explain that among the 5,000 or so NATO troops taking part are German and Estonian troops?
If this doesn't qualify as a provocation, what does?
Why is the West and NATO intent on pursuing a cold war strategy when it comes to Russia? How can it possibly profit Western countries and their citizens to experience a return to the decades of enmity previous generations endured, with all the dangers that such a state of mutual antagonism brings?
Russia considers its security to be every bit as precious and non-negotiable as the US, UK, France, Germany do theirs, with its people and government reminded of the centrality of security to the nation’s wellbeing each Victory Day. A nation that lost and sacrificed so much in the war against fascism seven decades ago would be remiss if it did not refuse to countenance any attempt to weaken or probe its defenses today. It simply cannot be allowed to happen.
Yet despite what should be a matter of basic logic, we have countries on Russia’s border – Ukraine, Estonia, Georgia et al. – doing their utmost to cause tension and discord. In the case of eastern Ukraine in 2014 and Georgia in 2008, conflict was the inevitable result, and is evidence of Washington and the West’s refusal to consider any other option when it comes to relations with Russia than vanquished enemy or deadly foe.
It is also relevant to ponder the benefits the countries on Russia’s border have enjoyed or are enjoying as a result of their turn to the West. Ukraine, the second largest country in Europe after Russia, is today an economic and political basket case. The decision to sever all economic and political ties with Russia has caused living standards to fall by more than 50 percent in a year, while the value of its currency (hryvnia) has dipped by two thirds. Inflation, meanwhile, has risen to a whopping 43 percent.
Forced to rely on IMF bailout loans in order to forestall complete economic collapse, Ukraine is a prime example of Western promises not being matched by Western reality. For Western governments the plight of the Ukrainian people comes low on a list of priorities dominated by strategic and self serving objectives. In other words, if the price of weakening Russia is misery and economic collapse for Ukraine and its people then so be it.
Read more
However the sustainability of Estonia’s economic success and stability is contingent on stable relations with Russia. The more stable those relations the more stable the Estonian economy, and vice versa. It is a simple equation that the Estonian government appears to have great difficulty in grasping, given its desire to join NATO and have NATO forces permanently stationed on its territory.
Such a course can only lead to a bad outcome. Given its recent history, when invasion and occupation decimated its land and people, Moscow cannot be expected to acquiesce to NATO expanding all the way up to its borders. Indeed the very idea is preposterous, and would immediately turn countries such as Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania from neighboring states into frontline states, with all the potential and inherent dangers involved.
READ MORE: Nordic leaders pledge allegiance to NATO at Washington summit
Ultimately, common sense must prevail. The 25-30 million who perished in the war against fascism did not do so in order for Russia to stand idly by while the West, its allies in that struggle, attempts to box it in with what is tantamount to a military, economic, and geopolitical cordon sanitaire.
It really doesn’t have to be this way. Russia and the West do not have to be enemies. They can also be partners. Moreover, in a globalized world facing global threats and challenges, there is no longer any excuse for cold war attitudes. The millions living in the countries concerned deserve better.
THIS MASSIVE MILITARY BUILDUP ON RUSSIAN BORDERS HAS NOT BEEN SEEN SINCE 1941
US & Coalition Forces Preparing A Large Scale Military Operation In Northern Syria
Russians Easily Shooting Down US Drones – and Why This Is Happening (Video)
And one of them, the mother of all drones, the massive Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk, was apparently commandeered by Russian electronic warfare and landed in SimferopolSource: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/russians-have-shot-down-numerous-us-drones-violating-crimean-airspace/ri14963
The
war you don’t hear about: numerous American military aircraft (albeit
of the unmanned variety, though with the possibility of being armed and
dangerous) have apparently been violating Russian airspace, leading to
the Russians shooting – yes, shooting – them down following the refusal of the Americans to acknowledge Russian diplomatic notes of protest.The military violation of the territory, including the airspace, of a sovereign state is ordinarily taken to be a casus belli – an act of war.
But to be fair to the Americans, they may justify their belligerent behavior, flagrantly refusing to respect Russia’s sovereignty, on the basis that they do not recognize Crimea to be a part of Russia. Therefore, they do not recognize any violation of the airspace of Russia as having taken place. Rather, they would contend that the American aircraft in question were flying within the sovereign territory of Ukraine, with the permission of the government with the only legitimate authority to grant or refuse such permission, namely the government of Ukraine.
Nevertheless the Russians have made it clear that they consider Crimea to be a sovereign part of Russia. The Russians have made diplomatic protests over what they see as violation of their territory. The Americans have ignored them. The Russians have therefore shot down – and in one case commandeered and landed – these aircraft making incursions into their sovereign territory.
An act of war has been committed by America against Russia; and if you accept the American position, an act of war has been committed by Russia against both the Ukraine and the United States. Shots have been fired, and the Americans have lost materiel.
Note that these are not exchanges of fire through proxies, as happened throughout the Cold War and is happening now through Syria and in the east of Ukraine. No, these are two nuclear-armed powers already in the process of shooting at each other!
Are we already in the opening stages of World War III? How many minutes to midnight is the nuclear clock? May God help us all.
————o————
For the REAL Reason WHY this is happening now…
Russia and China have had enough of the U.S.-funded proxy wars being waged in the Middle East and in the Ukraine. They know the U.S. and U.K. are behind the weapons build-up in Eastern Europe and in the Pacific, and the oil and resource driven wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc., through the ISIS group the CIA and Israeli Secret Intelligence Service helped invent, arm and train to overthrow regional governments and install western puppet politicians. They also know the U.S. needs Syria out of the way to attack Iran, so they can run petroleum pipelines from Saudi Arabia into Europe, to bypass the Russian pipelines running through the Ukraine.
Russia and China are not going to let this happen, which is why they have been training together militarily for over 10 years just for such an event and their recent military muscle-flexing isn’t for show; they mean business.
And speaking of business, the U.S. and U.K. are about to find out that most of their fair-weather NATO allies are going to happily stab them in the back when the time comes (Rev. 11:10). Some already have. Europe doesn’t want to be on the losing side of this war, nor do they want Russia shutting off their oil and gas.
Make no mistake…this is GAME-ON, and has been for some time. Outmanned and outgunned, the U.S. and U.K. CANNOT win this war against Russia and China, but that won’t stop them from trying. Arrogant, ignorant and desperate to salvage the dying American empire, the treasonous, puppet U.S. politicians are ready, willing and able to sell the American people into slavery for this lost cause. In fact, they already have.
Vladimir Putin says The Only Interesting Thing About America is Tupac
