Is the US and its NATO "allies" planning to attack Russia and start World War III?

696 posts / 0 new
Last post
kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

jjuares wrote:
kropotkin1951 wrote:

6079_Smith_W wrote:

By contrast, having forces toe to toe used to be the norm in Europe. And one thing convenently being ignored here is that the deployment of those ground troops is far more in the interests of the border states than the other NATO nations.

I am sure that the war manoeuvres bring lots of money into the local economies. The idea that Russia is about to invade a NATO ally is just patently absurd. 

It might be absurd but it seems tobe the only reasonable explanation. NATO might believe this, otherwise this policy of ramping up heat is counterproductive.

It is certainly not counterproductive for the war industry that is trying to get all NATO countries to invest in unbelievable obscene amounts of new weapons systems and planes etc.

WIthout any tension who knows maybe the citizens of the "free" world would vote for parties that didn't want to spend on WMD and other war toys.

jjuares

kropotkin1951 wrote:

jjuares wrote:
kropotkin1951 wrote:

6079_Smith_W wrote:

By contrast, having forces toe to toe used to be the norm in Europe. And one thing convenently being ignored here is that the deployment of those ground troops is far more in the interests of the border states than the other NATO nations.

I am sure that the war manoeuvres bring lots of money into the local economies. The idea that Russia is about to invade a NATO ally is just patently absurd. 

It might be absurd but it seems tobe the only reasonable explanation. NATO might believe this, otherwise this policy of ramping up heat is counterproductive.

It is certainly not counterproductive for the war industry that is trying to get all NATO countries to invest in unbelievable obscene amounts of new weapons systems and planes etc.

WIthout any tension who knows maybe the citizens of the "free" world would vote for parties that didn't want to spend on WMD and other war toys.


The other interesting thing is the focus on Putin and his human rights record. I am no Putin fan but it seems to me that Saudi Arabia is worse, much worse and we are helping to arm them.

6079_Smith_W

You can quibble about it or call it fake news as much as you want.

I offered it as a reason why those border states might want tanks and troops there. And that is the reason. Not that they would make any difference in an end game that involved nuclear arms. They wouldn't at all. But as a bit of insurance that the parties who control those missiles would act.

Here's a story from a year and a half ago, before they traded him back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/19/russia-jails-estonian-poli...

And of course it is absurd that Russia would invade a NATO ally. Which is precisely the point. Especially when they look at other non-NATO border states which have been invaded.

 

 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

You can quibble about it or call it fake news as much as you want.

So the answer is you don't have a clue about the news "media" you quote. You quote them because they spout the NATO propaganda line. That is consistant with your posting history. 

NDPP

It's not the only one...

The Guardian Uses Anti-Russian Hacking Claims to Proselytise For CIA and War  -  by Julie Hyland

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/01/13/guar-j13.html

"In Britain, The Guardian newspaper is at the forefront of the McCarthyite witch-hunt against Russia.

[Nick] Cohen's op-ed ['Russia's treachery is extreme and it is everywhere'] articulates the further rightward lurch of the pseudo-left, and the social impulses driving them.  It confirms that The Guardian and the nominally liberal coterie that it represents is not only preparing for war with Russia, but is actively seeking it."

The same 'progressive' babblegangers so wrong on Libya, Ukraine, and Syria follow the same poxy pied piper all over again - one  guaranteed to leave  them lost on the wrong side of history again. Once again they try to prove themselves right no matter how wrong. 'R2P in Libya!',  'Slava Ukraine!' 'White Helmets for Nobel Prize!' 'Putin is Hitler!'

 Reality will out, in the end.

jjuares

6079_Smith_W wrote:

You can quibble about it or call it fake news as much as you want.

I offered it as a reason why those border states might want tanks and troops there. And that is the reason. Not that they would make any difference in an end game that involved nuclear arms. They wouldn't at all. But as a bit of insurance that the parties who control those missiles would act.

Here's a story from a year and a half ago, before they traded him back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/19/russia-jails-estonian-poli...

And of course it is absurd that Russia would invade a NATO ally. Which is precisely the point. Especially when they look at other non-NATO border states which have been invaded.

 

 

 


The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming. I hope they don't make us drink vodka and wear those furry hats. My head would be so itchy from them.

6079_Smith_W

kropotkin1951 wrote:

6079_Smith_W wrote:

You can quibble about it or call it fake news as much as you want.

So the answer is you don't have a clue about the news "media" you quote. You quote them because they spout the NATO propaganda line. That is consistant with your posting history. 

No kropotkin. It was an international story, covered by numerous media. He was kidnapped and jailed, which is why people in that country are understandably alarmed.

 My point is I am not surprised you doubt the story.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

6079_Smith_W wrote:

You can quibble about it or call it fake news as much as you want.

So the answer is you don't have a clue about the news "media" you quote. You quote them because they spout the NATO propaganda line. That is consistent with your posting history. 

No kropotkin. It was an international story, covered by numerous media. He was kidnapped and jailed, which is why people in that country are understandably alarmed.

 My point is I am not surprised you doubt the story.

So the answer is you don't have a clue about the news "media" you quote. You obviously believe in news far more than I do. I doubt many things especially spin from either side in an international dispute. That idea of doubting most things is probably why I, unlike you, do not believe the majority of NATO propaganda. 

Here's another good international story covered by numerous media that I doubted and frankly still do. For some people it was enough for them that a US envoy made the claim. It didn't pass the smell test for me.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-troops-rape-idUSTRE73S74B20110429

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/29/diplomat-gaddafi-troops-vi...

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

NDPP wrote:
The same 'progressive' babblegangers so wrong on Libya, Ukraine, and Syria follow the same poxy pied piper all over again - one  guaranteed to leave  them lost on the wrong side of history again. Once again they try to prove themselves right no matter how wrong. 'R2P in Libya!',  'Slava Ukraine!' 'White Helmets for Nobel Prize!' 'Putin is Hitler!'

 Reality will out, in the end.

You forgot to add "Putin killled Boris Nemtsov", "Putin shot down MH-17," "Putin is responsible for my dirty underwear", and "The Russian [bear] attacked "peaceful" Georgia in August '08".

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

So much pro-Russian "rebuttal" seems to take the form of way over-the-top nonsense like "All Russians should be killed with a red-hot dagger, because Freedom!!! Hoo-rah!!!"

Here's my current favourite -- and no, this isn't my parody of it, it's for realz:

Quote:
Should they all just die or should some be allowed to live? And who decides? Maybe you could be in charge. Because freedom.

Are all us "Russophobes" just not actually "Russophobic" enough, and so you have to turn to make-believe?

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

That was my reply to your revolting claim of Russia as a "rogue state".

Sorry if i beat you up for your obstinate Russophobia.

 

Actually, I'm not sorry. It's good to embarrass stupid. And you were.

You simply have no shame, Magoo.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Actually, I'm not sorry. It's good to embarrass stupid. And you were.

"Should they all just DIE???  Or can some be allowed to LIVE??? ", said the tough victor, weeping.

Congrats on "winning" that one.  A manly display of manliness, it was.  And as a happy ending, all those Russians DID live.

iyraste1313

 Is this proof America is preparing for war with Russia? US plane is spotted in a mock dogfight with a Russian jet above the top secret Area 51 base 

  • EXCLUSIVE: The US Air Force conducted a mock dogfight using a Russian fighter jet above Area 51 in Nevada
  • The 'enemy' jet was a single-seat Sukhoi SU-27P, which is used by the Russian and Chinese air forces 
  • The Sukhoi was intercepted by an F-16 fighter operating out of the nearby Nellis Air Force Base 
  • The two jets fought each other for 25 minutes at altitudes ranging between 20,000 and 30,000 feet  

By DARREN BOYLE FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 12:39 GMT, 17 January 2017 | UPDATED: 15:25 GMT, 17 January 2017

 

 

bekayne

Area 51. The Daily Mail.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Yes, the war will be won in the air.

sherpa-finn

Gotta wonder if they are the same planes that just a few months back were being touted here and elsewhere as signs of an imminent American false flag aerial attack in Syria ... yawn. 

6079_Smith_W

I think the fact you are all doubting it and that the propaganda campaign has been fully implemented is the strongest evidence that it must be true.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

ikosmos wrote:
That was my reply to your revolting claim of Russia as a "rogue state".

Sorry if i beat you up for your obstinate Russophobia.

Magoo! Did you erase the offending remark?  How clever. 

NDPP

Operation Barbarossa II, The Yanks in Their Armoured Parade  -  by Christopher Black

http://journal-neo.org/2017/01/18/operation-barbarossa-ii-the-yanks-in-t...

Meanwhile, as the media and Obama regime keep the people off balance with the Trump scandal, US military forces continue their deployments against Russia and China. 

The machine is in motion..."

 

'God Bless America'  -  by Harold Pinter

Here they go again,

The Yanks in their armoured parade,

Chanting their ballads of joy

As they gallop across the big world

Praising America's God.

The gutters are clogged with their dead

The ones who couldn't join in

The others refusing to sing 

The ones who are losing their voice,

The ones who've forgotten the tune.

The riders have whips which cut. 

Your head rolls onto the sand, 

Your head is a pool in the dirt

Your head is a stain in the dust

Your eyes have gone out and your nose 

Sniffs only the pong of the dead

And all the dead air is alive

With the smell of America's God.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

I haven't erased or changed anything.  Looks like it's all still here.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Ah, yes. Russia as "a rogue nation". So it wasn't a comment about the regime there but rather about the people. 

Bigotry. Racism. Seemingly welcome on babble. 

Keep up the "good" work, Magoo. Your contributions are really valued. 

bekayne

NDPP wrote:

'God Bless America'  -  by Harold Pinter

Here they go again,

The Yanks in their armoured parade,

http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/trump-administra...

"We're going to show the people as we build up our military, we're going to display our military. That military may come marching down Pennsylvania Avenue. That military may be flying over New York City and Washington, D.C., for parades. I mean, we're going to be showing our military."

— President-elect Donald Trump, in an interview with the Washington Post. 

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Bigotry. Racism. Seemingly welcome on babble.

Seemingly the mods can tell the difference between criticizing a country's intentional actions and racism.

Sean in Ottawa

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
Bigotry. Racism. Seemingly welcome on babble.

Seemingly the mods can tell the difference between criticizing a country's intentional actions and racism.

I would think so -- especially as this intentional confusion is the tool of the let Israel away with anything tactic.

This is exactly the same argument used to defend Israel against anything and everything.

It is not as if there are not people who are bigotted and racist but instead of promoting a world free of that, there are people who will use the existence of racism and bigotry to silence those they disagree with. It is disgusting.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Magoo knows exactly what he wrote. "A rogue nation" is not "the repressive ZYX regime" and he knows it, as, I think, do you. 

This is bigotry and racism. Dress it up any way you like. 

6079_Smith_W

ikosmos wrote:

Magoo knows exactly what he wrote. "A rogue nation" is not "the repressive ZYX regime" and he knows it, as, I think, do you. 

This is bigotry and racism. Dress it up any way you like. 

Funny, because you are the one who is so big on targetting nations, like The United States of Stupid.

Yet when someone calls another nation out it is pretty clear you can dish it out, but not take it.

Of course we knew that already, given what you seem to think falls under your definition of Russophobia.

But even if that were not the case, no, having an opinion on a nation and its policies is neither bigotry nor racism. Nations are not people. They do not have a race, and they do not have rights.

 

josh

6079_Smith_W wrote:

ikosmos wrote:

Magoo knows exactly what he wrote. "A rogue nation" is not "the repressive ZYX regime" and he knows it, as, I think, do you. 

This is bigotry and racism. Dress it up any way you like. 

Funny, because you are the one who is so big on targetting nations, like The United States of Stupid.

Yet when someone calls another nation out it is pretty clear you can dish it out, but not take it.

Of course we knew that already, given what you seem to think falls under your definition of Russophobia.

But even if that were not the case, no, having an opinion on a nation and its policies is neither bigotry nor racism. Nations are not people. They do not have a race, and they do not have rights.

 

More idiotic propaganda from ikosmos.

Rev Pesky

The problem with using 'rogue nation' as a description is that it was initially used by the USA to describe any nation that didn't do what the USA wanted.

Here's the lowdown on 'rogue state' from Wikipedia:

Rogue State

Quote:
Rogue state is a controversial term applied by some international theorists to states they consider threatening to the world's peace. This means meeting certain criteria, such as being ruled by authoritarian regimes that severely restrict human rights, sponsor terrorism, and seek to proliferate weapons of mass destruction. The term is used most by the United States, though the US State Department officially stopped using the term in 2000. However, it has been applied by other countries as well.

...As early as July 1985, President Reagan had asserted that "we are not going to tolerate … attacks from outlaw states by the strangest collection of misfits, loony tunes, and squalid criminals since the advent of the Third Reich," but it fell to the Clinton administration to elaborate this concept. In the 1994 issue of Foreign Affairs, National Security Advisor Anthony Lake claimed "the reality of recalcitrant and outlaw states that not only choose to remain outside the family [of democratic nations] but also assault its basic values. Lake labeled five regimes as "rogue states": North Korea, Cuba, Iraq, Iran and Libya.

In theory, at least, to be classified as a rogue, a state had to commit four transgressions: pursue weapons of mass destruction, support terrorism, severely abuse its own citizens, and stridently criticize the United States. While four of the listed rogue states met all these transgressions, Cuba, though still known for severely abusing its citizens and its strident criticism of the United States, no longer met all the transgressions required for a rogue state and was put on the list solely because of the political influence of the American Cuban community and specifically that of the Cuban American National Foundation.

Syria and Pakistan, two nations which were hardly regarded by the United States as paragons of rectitude, avoided being added to the list because the United States hoped that Damascus could play a constructive role in the Arab-Israeli peace process, and because Washington had long maintained close relations with Islamabad—a vestige of the Cold War.

There you have it, folks. What's a 'rogue' state? Ask the USA State Department.

 

Sean in Ottawa

Rev Pesky wrote:

 

There you have it, folks. What's a 'rogue' state? Ask the USA State Department.

 

I have used the term quite often. Usually in reference to the US.

6079_Smith_W

Glad we agree it is fair comment. Most of us, anyway.

Sean in Ottawa

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Glad we agree it is fair comment. Most of us, anyway.

Some use the word nation and state interchangeably.

A nation can reference the people or those who speak for the nation (a government).

A state is very specific to the government.

I think a reference to a state shows a clear and important distinction and I do not find it offensive. Those who are offended are trying to hide the state behind the people in my view.

Of course I do not accept the US definition but that's okay -- I know what the word "state" means and I know what the word "rogue" means (and it is really a very useful word).

A good many Russians would probably think that they live in a rogue state as well. I know that a good many US citizens think so.

ikosmos ikosmos's picture

Ok, then , let's say we replaced the word "Russian" with the word "Jew" in the context noted. 

Then we have "the rogue Jewish nation" as acceptable comment, according to Magoo, and others, on babble. 

Still not bigotry, hmm?

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Actually, Israel is frequently referred to as a rogue nation.

Not a "rogue Jewish" nation, but then neither would Zimbabwe be referred to as a "rogue Black" nation.

Anyway, you've thrown the same cold spaghetti at the wall a half dozen times now and it's not sticking.  Have you alerted the mods to this "bigotry" as you see it?  And what did they say?

Please, EVERYONE click on the "flag as offensive" link on my original post, so there's no danger that this atrocity might have been overlooked.  And then they can either ban me or not, but we won't be going around this same mulberry bush in 2018.

6079_Smith_W

ikosmos wrote:

Ok, then , let's say we replaced the word "Russian" with the word "Jew" in the context noted.

Do you consider Russia to be a place for ethnic Russians, and no one else? Do you see its government as serving the interests of ethnic Russians, and no one else?

That is one of the criticisms of Israel's government in fact. And it is also a policy issue Vladimir Putin has raised with other countries:

http://www.eurodialogue.eu/Putin%20courts%20ethnic%20Russians,%20goads%2...

So in a backwards sort of way you might be right, even though it has nothing to do with our criticism. But it does raise the question of who is the one being racist.

josh

ikosmos wrote:

Ok, then , let's say we replaced the word "Russian" with the word "Jew" in the context noted. 

Then we have "the rogue Jewish nation" as acceptable comment, according to Magoo, and others, on babble. 

Still not bigotry, hmm?

 

I guess then you agree with the Likud mentality that attacks on the state of Israel are anti-Semitic.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
This is bigotry and racism. Dress it up any way you like.

The discussion was, and always was, focussed on the involvement of the Russian government in the cheating.  I'm not sure how that was ever unclear, since that was all that made this exceptional.  It was not about a few "bad" apples, similar to (say) Lance Armstrong and his coach, it was about official participation.  Government participation.  That was literally what we were commenting on.

And four months later you're still trying to tell me what I was "really" saying.

FWIW, ikosmos, this is a great example of what a lot of babblers seem to be getting really bored of.  Are you sure you wouldn't rather keep your powder dry? 

bekayne

http://gizmodo.com/doomsday-clock-moves-30-seconds-closer-to-midnight-an...

Dr. Krauss stressed at the press conference that Trump’s “loose talk” about nuclear weapons certainly wasn’t the only thing that influenced their decision to move the clock. But it still played an important role.

“Over the course of 2016, the global security landscape darkened as the international community failed to come effectively to grips with humanity’s most pressing existential threats, nuclear weapons and climate change,” the Bulletin’s Science and Security Board said in a statement.

“This already-threatening world situation was the backdrop for a rise in strident nationalism worldwide in 2016, including in a US presidential campaign during which the eventual victor, Donald Trump, made disturbing comments about the use and proliferation of nuclear weapons and expressed disbelief in the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change,” the statement continued.

The press conference even mentioned other threats like fake news and automated military systems to the destabilizing forces in the world. Fake news was specifically called out for potentially causing panic around the globe and casting doubt on the integrity of our electoral systems.

“The board’s decision to move the clock less than a full minute—something it has never before done—reflects a simple reality: as this statement is issued, Donald Trump has been the US president only a matter of days,” the Bulletin said.

 

Sean in Ottawa

Those saying that the current regime in the US is safer than Clinton -- read this:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/1/29/1626928/-Bannon-s-Blueprint-Read...

Very difficult after reading this to think that this is any improvement

NDPP

Fighting Flares in Eastern Ukraine Amid Continued NATO Buildup Against Russia 

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2017/02/02/ukra-f02.html

"...Not only are the lives of thousands of children in Avdivka, and on all sides of the conflict at risk, but to make matters worse, the lack of water and electricity means that homes are becoming dangerously cold and health conditions deteriorating as we speak,' Giovanna Barberis, UNICEF's rep in Ukraine said Tuesday.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the fighting was the result of a deliberate 'provocation'.

NDPP

Putin Predicted Uncontained Hyper-Use of Military Force by NATO a Decade Ago

https://t.co/QKzC5v4Ejc

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/376972-anniversary-putins-munich-speech/

Putin's speech at the 2007 Munich Security Conference has proven prophetic...

NDPP

NATO Accuses Russia of Fake News While Hysterically Warning of WWIII  -   by Finian Cunningham

http://rt.com/op-edge/377327-nato-fake-news-myths-russia

"News media organizations in NATO member countries have no qualms about repeating unfounded reckless claims of an imminent invasion of Europe by the Russian military, even threatening to ignite WWIII. Yet when it comes to Russian media presenting valid alternative perspectives on a range of international issues, the Western alliance chokes up with accusations of Russian 'fake news'.

The irony of western self-declared 'free and independent' politicians and media behaving like an army of robots marching to war while accusing Russia of fake news is too much for words."

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
NATO Accuses Russia of Fake News While Hysterically Warning of WWIII

Hasn't babble been "hysterically" warning of WWIII?

I was literally going to post a link to that thread until I noticed that THIS is that thread.

Do you feel that maybe you were also being a bit "hysterical" when you started this thread a year and a half ago, NDPP?

NDPP

Not a bit.

And I didn't.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Not sure how I duffed that, but you're right.  My mistake.

MegB

Continued here.

Pages