Home » Posts tagged 'anti-war'

Tag Archives: anti-war

It’s always useful to visit the museum in order to offset the recency bias that distorts perceptions of current realities.

In the great scheme of things, the picture below is admittedly not that ancient – from just 42 years ago. But it is nevertheless a museum piece because it pertains to a matter that has long since faded from the scene. Namely, the public debt and in this instance the day when your editor was compelled to warn the Gipper that the Federal debt was about to cross the dreaded one trillion dollar mark.

Back then, that prospect gave one and all the fiscal heebie-jeebies. Massive public debt was viewed as an immoral imposition on future generations and an economic scourge on the present. That’s because when properly financed in the bond pits it drove up interest rates, thereby crowding-out household and business borrowers and economic growth and rising prosperity on main street.

1/28/1981: President Meeting with David Stockman, Don Regan, Murray Weidenbaum, and Martin Anderson to discuss the economy in oval office

No more. Massive fiscal deficits year-after-year have become a way of life in the Imperial City, but even then CBO’s latest 10-year forecast is a shocker. It shows that even if there is no recession for the next ten years (fat chance!) and existing tax and spending policies (dashed red line) remain in place without enactment of a single new spending program or tax cut (even fatter chance!), the deficit will exceed $3 trillion per year by the end of the decade.

That would amount to a structural deficit equal to 8.4% of GDP and a ticket to fiscal perdition. In dollar terms, it would add $20.3 trillion to the public debt over the next decade, taking the total debt to $50 trillion by 2032.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

UK Threatens Russia With ‘High Impact’ Sanctions Over Ukraine

January 8, 2022

UK Threatens Russia With ‘High Impact’ Sanctions Over Ukraine

NATO foreign ministers are meeting Friday to discuss Ukraine

On Thursday, British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss warned Russia that the UK is working on “high impact” sanctions Western powers could implement over allegations that Moscow is plotting to invade Ukraine.

“The UK is working with our partners on these sanctions, including high impact measures targeting the Russian financial sector and individuals,” Truss said.

For their part, the Russians have strongly denied the claim that they are planning to invade Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin is concerned with the increased US and NATO presence in the region and is seeking security guarantees that NATO won’t expand further eastward.

Truss insists that Russia is the “aggressor” and that NATO has always been a “defensive alliance,” although since the Soviet Union collapsed, NATO has waged wars of aggression in the Balkans and across the Middle East and North Africa.

Truss’ language on sanctions echoes what is coming out of Washington. The US has warned Moscow of “severe” sanctions that would aim to isolate Russia from the global financial system. In a call with President Biden last week, Putin said such sanctions could lead to the end of US-Russia relations.

On Friday, Truss and other NATO foreign ministers will hold virtual talks on Ukraine ahead of planned meetings with Russia. On January 10th, US and Russian officials will meet in Geneva to discuss Moscow’s concerns. On January 12th, NATO will hold a meeting with Russian officials in Brussels.

Putin Says the West Is Taking Russia’s ‘Red Lines’ Too Lightly

November 20, 2021

Putin Says the West Is Taking Russia’s ‘Red Lines’ Too Lightly

The Russian leader says relations with US are ‘unsatisfactory’ and is open to more talks

On Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Western powers are taking Moscow’s “red lines” too lightly.

“We’re constantly voicing our concerns about this, talking about red lines, but we understand our partners — how shall I put it mildly — have a very superficial attitude to all our warnings and talk of red lines,” Putin said in a foreign policy speech.

The Russian leader has warned NATO against expanding cooperation with Ukraine, but NATO countries continue to do so. This week, the UK signed a new navy deal with Kyiv to build warships for Russia’s neighbor.

The US and NATO have stepped up military activity in the Black Sea, which Moscow views as a major provocation. Putin described this activity as going “beyond boundaries” and said a Western strategic bomber recently flew within 20 kilometers (12.5 miles) of Russia’s borders. US B1-B bombers recently flew over the Black Sea, but it’s not clear how close they were to Russian territory.

Putin said that NATO has destroyed all mechanisms for dialogue with Moscow. The military alliance recently expelled diplomats from Russia’s mission to NATO in Brussels, and Moscow responded by closing the mission.

Putin described relations with the US as “unsatisfactory,” but said he was open to more talks. “However, I want to say once again, we are open to contacts and exchanges of opinion, constructive dialogue,” he said.

Russia Voices Concern Over Increased US and NATO Military Activity in Arctic

May 22, 2021

Russia Voices Concern Over Increased US and NATO Military Activity in Arctic

Russia’s FM called for military meetings between Arctic states

On Thursday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov voiced concern over the uptick in US and NATO military activity in the Arctic. The comments were made in a speech at a meeting of the Arctic Council in Reykjavik, Iceland.

“We are concerned about what is going on close to our border with Norway,” Lavrov said. The US has been putting more focus on military cooperation with Norway as part of its strategy to confront Russia in the Arctic. Earlier this year, the US deployed long-range bombers to Norway for the first time.

Next year, Norway will host US and NATO forces for military exercises that will involve about 40,000 troops, which the head of Norway’s military said will be “the largest military exercise inside the Arctic Circle in Norway since the 1980s.”

The Arctic Council currently does not deal with military issues, something Lavrov said should change. “It is important to extend the positive relations that we have within the Arctic Council to encompass the military sphere as well,” he said.

On Tuesday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken accused Russia of making “unlawful” claims in the Arctic, something he said the US will “respond to.” Blinken also warned against increased military activity in the region, but it’s clear that the US and NATO are set on militarizing the Arctic.

On Wednesday, Blinken met with Lavrov on the sidelines of the Arctic Council meeting, marking the first high-level in-person meeting between US and Russian officials of the Biden administration. While tensions are high between the two countries due to Biden’s hostile policies, Lavrov was cautiously optimistic and described the talk with Blinken as “constructive.”

The Kremlin’s Military Posture Reconsidered

February 27, 2019

The Kremlin’s Military Posture Reconsidered

To the vast majority of Americans, including the foreign policy establishment, the question posed in the title may seem something of a joke. After all, absolute military superiority over Russia and other potential rivals for global influence has been the objective of US military policy for the last twenty-five years or more, at vast budgetary expense. One instrument for its achievement has been the roll-out of a system known as the global missile defense, which in effect encircles Russia and China, posing the threat of massive simultaneous missile strikes that could overwhelm any defenses. To intelligence specialists at the Pentagon, who likely have been watching, as I have done, what the Kremlin disseminated earlier today in Russian only versions so far, the question of Moscow turning the tables is entirely serious and shocking.

When Vladimir Putin first publicly described Russia’s latest state-of-the-art weapons systems in development and deployment one year ago, during his 1 March 2018 Address to the bicameral legislature, he said these systems would ensure the re-establishment of full strategic parity with the United States. Western media sniggered. US politicians, with a very few exceptions, chose to ignore what they considered to be just domestic electioneering during a presidential campaign that Putin was expected to win handily. It was all a bluff, they said.

In his annual Address this past Wednesday, 22 February, President Putin expanded on those developments in armaments, reported which systems were now entering active service. He made it clear one of them is the planned Russian response to a likely consequence of US withdrawal from the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty: the stationing by the U.S. of nuclear armed cruise missiles like the Tomahawk on land and directed against Russia, all of which would reduce the warning time of incoming attack in Moscow to just 10–12 minutes and constitute an existential risk.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Venezuela: The US’s 68th Regime Change Disaster

February 6, 2019

Venezuela: The US’s 68th Regime Change Disaster

In his masterpiece, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and C.I.A. Interventions Since World War II, William Blum, who died in December 2018, wrote chapter-length accounts of 55 US regime change operations against countries around the world, from China (1945-1960s) to Haiti (1986-1994). Noam Chomsky’s blurb on the back of the latest edition says simply, “Far and away the best book on the topic.” We agree. If you have not read it, please do. It will give you a clearer context for what is happening in Venezuela today, and a better understanding of the world you are living in.

Since Killing Hope was published in 1995, the US has conducted at least 13 more regime change operations, several of which are still active: Yugoslavia; Afghanistan; Iraq; the 3rd US invasion of Haiti since WWII; Somalia; Honduras; Libya; Syria; Ukraine; Yemen; Iran; Nicaragua; and now Venezuela.

William Blum noted that the US generally prefers what its planners call “low intensity conflict” over full-scale wars. Only in periods of supreme overconfidence has it launched its most devastating and disastrous wars, from Korea and Vietnam to Afghanistan and Iraq. After its war of mass destruction in Iraq, the US reverted to “low intensity conflict” under Obama’s doctrine of covert and proxy war.

Obama conducted even heavier bombing than Bush II, and deployed US special operations forces to 150 countries all over the world, but he made sure that nearly all the bleeding and dying was done by Afghans, Syrians, Iraqis, Somalis, Libyans, Ukrainians, Yemenis and others, not by Americans. What US planners mean by “low intensity conflict” is that it is less intense for Americans.

President Ghani of Afghanistan recently revealed that a staggering 45,000 Afghan security forces have been killed since he took office in 2014, compared with only 72 US and NATO troops. “It shows who has been doing the fighting,” Ghani caustically remarked. This disparity is common to every current US war.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Neocons Rage: International (And Domestic) Support for Trump’s Syria Pullout

January 4, 2019

Neocons Rage: International (And Domestic) Support for Trump’s Syria Pullout

The mainstream press coverage of President Trump’s announcement that he would be removing US troops from Syria has been unanimously apocalyptic. Journos who until a few days ago couldn’t care less about the Kurds (certainly not when US president after US president has used them as a cat’s paw and then abandoned them to their fate), were all of a sudden up in arms warning about an impending slaughter with the blood dripping squarely onto Trump’s hands.

In fact, US weapons, training, and backing had carved out a de facto super-sized Kurd-controlled section of northern Syria which it does not take a geopolitical expert to understand would incense NATO ally Turkey. Why prop up the Kurds and in the process infuriate Erdogan? The US-led regime-change program simply did not have many other boots on the ground to turn to. After years of arming jihadists whose masks slipped quickly thereafter to reveal al-Qaeda or ISIS markings, the game was up for the “Assad must go” crowd and the only move left was to pretend that a proxy Kurd militia was something called the “Syrian Democratic Forces.” When in fact it was nothing of the sort. It was simply the Kurds, rented by Washington.

And the bloodbath the media and neocons warned would come about should Trump dare reconsider another US forever war? More lies and bluster. The Kurds are re-considering their foolish refusal to partner more closely with the Syrian government against foreign-sponsored insurgencies. Just last week, they began negotiations with Damascus to reconcile and forestall a massive Turk incursion.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article..

The Myth of the Just War

December 9, 2018

The Myth of the Just War

The notion that war can be just is almost entirely utopian. The arguments used to justify wars seem morally sound in a vacuum, but when put into practice, the justifications fall apart. Justifying war becomes a slippery slope, especially when considering that those whom are most capable of waging war can do so asymmetrically. The rules for the use of force (AKA rules of engagement) and the Geneva Conventions have been enacted (and modified with alarming exceptions) to paint war as being more humanitarian (as ironic as that may sound), and when coupled with actions sanctioned by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the United Nations, and the United States, these rules and actions are subsequently utilized as means to justify engaging in armed conflict to further the geopolitical agendas of the most powerful and corrupt institutions with which humanity has ever been burdened. War is only justified as an act of self-defense in the face of an imminent threat, but this term, “imminent,” must be further defined in light of the rampant abuse and perversion of the concept of “imminent threat” for the U.S. Empire’s Global War on Terrorism. Furthermore, due to the contemporary nature of limitless war on the idea called “terrorism,” the definitions of the terms “noncombatant/combatant” and terrorism must also be revised.

It is imperative that a very specific definition for imminent threat be established, for this would eliminate all of the slippery slopes offered by just war theory. A threat is imminent if a foreign state or group formally declares war and expresses or proves intent to wage war on the state or people which it threatens; this would warrant self-defense.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

US Treasury Dept Warns Allies Against Accidentally Trading With Iran

June 6, 2018

US Treasury Dept Warns Allies Against Accidentally Trading With Iran

Companies ‘face substantial risks’ if they’re caught trading with Iran

The US Treasury Department on Tuesday issued a statement directed at allied governments, and private companies operating out of allied countries, warning them against any trade with Iran, warning they “face substantial risks” if they are caught.

Undersecretary of the Treasury Sigal Mandelker says that the world must “harden your financial networks,” and make sure they have “airtight” procedures in place to prevent even accidental business ties to Iran. He added that nations must make sure “Iran and its proxies are not exploiting your companies to support their nefarious activities.”

Though presented as a warning about being tricked by Iran, the warning is likely primarily directed at EU nations, as the EU has already decided to prohibit its companies complying with US sanctions on Iran. The EU is planning to try to block the US from punishing those companies, but many of the major businesses are being very cautious about new deals with Iran, fearing the US will go after them anyhow.

US sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program are expected to ratchet up in the next several months, after President Trump withdrew the US from the nuclear deal. Yet the deal remains in place, and many nations may not be willing to follow the US in this crackdown so long as Iran remains compliant.

Turkey Detains Nearly 600 for Opposing Syria Invasion

February 7, 2018

Turkey Detains Nearly 600 for Opposing Syria Invasion

Erdogan Spokesman: Opposing War Means Glorifying Terrorism

As Turkey’s invasion of northern Syria continues, so too does their policy of arresting anyone seen as even sort of opposed to the attack. The Turkish Interior Ministry now says 449 people have been detained for criticizing the war on social media, and 124 more detained for taking part in actual protests.

*Riot police detain a demonstrator during a protest against Turkey’s military operation in Syria’s Afrin region, in Istanbul, Turkey*

Turkey’s Erdogan government doesn’t have a lot of patience for dissent, or for Kurds. Unsurprisingly, dissent about a war against Kurds is being cracked down on intensely. Erdogan’s spokesman warned that statements criticizing the war amount to statements “glorifying terrorism,” and that the government is just enforcing the law as written.

With Turkey’s largely state-run media praising the war, public support for it is still relatively strong. Opposition is mostly in the ethnic Kurdish region, which Turkey is more than willing to crack down on at any rate, and political opponents.

When other NGOs issue statements against the war, as did a medical union in the country, President Erdogan has condemned them as traitors, and arrested 11 of their senior members for a statement calling for “peace immediately.”

With the war continuing and casualties rising, war exhaustion is inevitable. For now,however, expressing opposition to the conflict is a very dangerous crime indeed in Turkey.

Must-Watch: Ex Marine Goes Crazy, Blows Whistle On Syrian False Flag And Real Agenda

September 12, 2015

Must-Watch: Ex Marine Goes Crazy, Blows Whistle On Syrian False Flag And Real Agenda

“We have tortured and killed and maimed and raped around this planet. We don’t operate under international law; we have the law of the jungle”

Ken O’ Keefe is a former US Marine turned anti-war campaigner who appeared on a Press TV debate called Syria: War of Deception, and absolutely owned his opponent in such an awesome way that you’ll be cheering at his every comment.

Recorded in August 2013, this interview is now two years old, but in light of the current European refugee crisis it’s more relevant today than ever before. Passionate, articulate and knowledgeable about the subject matter, O’Keefe is the perfect guy to step up and tell these home truths- and boy, does he do a good job. This guy nails so many crucial points about the Syria situation in one interview, he’ll have you jumping around and punching the ceiling.

“We have tortured and killed and maimed and raped around this planet; who in their right mind would consider the United States or the West in general to be in any position to punish anybody?” the veteran begins angrily, going on to outline the evidence for Syria being a false flag attack (Note: leaked emails showing how Assad was framed by the USA are detailed in this cached Daily Mail report from January 2013, which was published online briefly before being removed).

He rightly points out that the USA dropped more bombs in Vietnam than during the whole of WW2 combined, that it regularly arms terrorists (but the mainstream press refer to them as ‘freedom fighters’ when it suits them) and the former marine also points out how the so-called ‘War on Terror’ is nothing more than a well-planned strategy to be in a “perpetual state of war to destabilize the region for the Greater Israel plan.”

How the Pentagon is hiding the dead

April 28, 2015

How the Pentagon is hiding the dead

The secret campaign to undercount the ‘war on terror’ death toll in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Latin America

In the name of ‘counting every casualty,’ the Pentagon is systematically undercounting deaths from the ‘war on terror’ and the ‘war on drugs,’ in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Latin America. Complicit in this great deception are some of the world’s most respected anti-war activists.

In this exclusive investigation, Insurge Intelligence reveals that a leading anti-war monitoring group, Iraq Body Count (IBC), is deeply embedded in the Western foreign policy establishment. IBC’s key advisers and researchers have received direct and indirect funding from US government propaganda agencies and Pentagon contractors. It is no surprise, then, that IBC-affiliated scholars promote narratives of conflict that serve violent US client-regimes and promote NATO counter-insurgency doctrines.

IBC has not only systematically underrepresented the Iraqi death toll, it has done so on the basis of demonstrably fraudulent attacks on standard scientific procedures. IBC affiliated scholars are actively applying sophisticated techniques of statistical manipulation to whitewash US complicity in violence in Afghanistan and Colombia.

Through dubious ideological alliances with US and British defense agencies, they are making misleading pseudoscience academically acceptable. Even leading medical journals are now proudly publishing their dubious statistical analyses that lend legitimacy to US militarism abroad.

This subordination of academic conflict research to the interests of the Pentagon sets a dangerous precedent: it permits the US government to control who counts the dead across conflicts involving US interests — all in the name of science and peace.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Tag Archives: anti-war

Content

Post categories

Economic Links

Energy/Resource Links

Environmental Links

Geopolitical Links

Liberty Links

News Links

Other Links

Survival Skills

Post Archives by Category

Latest Posts