Allen Dulles and his Nazi Pals in Ukraine 🇺🇦

[John Cotter]

27 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

Just curious. What do you call what Putin is doing? Anxiously waiting...

There's only one country in the world whose foreign policy is full spectrum (ie global) dominance.

It's not Russia.

[Guest]

28 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

Just curious. What do you call what Putin is doing? Anxiously waiting...

Bob, could you give a bit more context? Are you inferring something other than what the Russian leader has said in his speeches? Or something other than Mearsheimer and other geopolitics experts have suggested? I think what you are asking might have been explained in this and the 58 years thread repeatedly. Which is why I have to ask the questions. 

[Ron Bulman]

45 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

Just curious. What do you call what Putin is doing? Anxiously waiting...

Murder.  He is the invader.  He's murdering his own troops in the process.  The people of Ukraine nor their government asked Russia or Putin to liberate them from their independence and freedom. 

[Matt Allison]

36 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Murder.  He is the invader.  He's murdering his own troops in the process. 

Yep. And everyone knows that.

But I wouldn't expect the America-haters to stop pushing Putin's propaganda. They don't care about the dead.

[Lori Spencer]

The Sy Hersh Nordstream sabotage story was a good read — thanks. 

Gotta admit it was solid reporting. I usually take Hersh’s work with several grains of salt (because I still haven’t forgiven him for that poorly sourced crap book on JFK), and I always double-check his work. In this case, it checks out. My own research and sources led me to the same conclusion months ago. 
 

This certainly comes as no surprise to anyone old enough to remember that time the CIA blew up the Trans Siberian Pipeline in 1982. They sabotaged it using a primitive computer virus which caused a pressure explosion that was, at the time, the largest non-nuclear explosion in history. 
 

This was done to stop the Russians from selling natural gas to Europe (sound familiar?). 
 

Of course, Reagan and the CIA denied it at the time — just like Biden and the CIA are denying they did Nordstream 1&2 — then they admitted it 30 years later. 
 

To refresh your memory about the Trans Siberian pipeline episode, here’s a brief video from the Smithsonian channel about it. Ring a familiar bell 🔔? 
 

Lol I’m sure the CIA would NEVER do such a thing again! 😉 💥 💣 

[John Cotter]

2 hours ago, Lori Spencer said:

The Sy Hersh Nordstream sabotage story was a good read — thanks. 

Gotta admit it was solid reporting. I usually take Hersh’s work with several grains of salt (because I still haven’t forgiven him for that poorly sourced crap book on JFK), and I always double-check his work. In this case, it checks out. My own research and sources led me to the same conclusion months ago. 
 

This certainly comes as no surprise to anyone old enough to remember that time the CIA blew up the Trans Siberian Pipeline in 1982. They sabotaged it using a primitive computer virus which caused a pressure explosion that was, at the time, the largest non-nuclear explosion in history. 
 

This was done to stop the Russians from selling natural gas to Europe (sound familiar?). 
 

Of course, Reagan and the CIA denied it at the time — just like Biden and the CIA are denying they did Nordstream 1&2 — then they admitted it 30 years later. 
 

To refresh your memory about the Trans Siberian pipeline episode, here’s a brief video from the Smithsonian channel about it. Ring a familiar bell 🔔? 
 

Lol I’m sure the CIA would NEVER do such a thing again! 😉 💥 💣 

Thanks for that, Lori.

As Guido Preparata and others have explained, friendly relations or cooperation between Russia and western Europe was anathema to the ruling elites in Britain and America because it threatened their global hegemony.

Hence they supported the rise of the Nasties in Germany because of the Nasties' anti-Bolshevik ideology.

The demonisation and isolation of Russia has continued despite the ending of the Cold War for the same basic reason - the preservation of US global hegemony.

US imperialists refuse to acknowledge that the US foreign policy of global hegemony means that the US is the primary aggressor globally, which by definition includes the Ukraine war, and that the February 2022 invasion was not the beginning of the story.

Things happen for reasons. It's called rationality.

 

Edited February 9, 2023 by John Cotter

[Bob Ness]

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Thanks for that, Lori.

As Guido Preparata and others have explained, friendly relations or cooperation between Russia and western Europe was anathema to the ruling elites in Britain and America because it threatened their global hegemony.

Hence they supported the rise of the Nasties in Germany because of the Nasties' anti-Bolshevik ideology.

The demonisation and isolation of Russia has continued despite the ending of the Cold War for the same basic reason - the preservation of US global hegemony.

US imperialists refuse to acknowledge that the US foreign policy of global hegemony means that the US is the primary aggressor globally, which by definition includes the Ukraine war, and that the February 2022 invasion was not the beginning of the story.

Things happen for reasons. It's called rationality.

 

And the US combined with Germany to invade Poland? The US and Germany criss crossed Europe resulting in the deaths of 40 or 50 million people? I didn't hear about that. Clue me in.

[Bob Ness]

8 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Bob, could you give a bit more context? Are you inferring something other than what the Russian leader has said in his speeches? Or something other than Mearsheimer and other geopolitics experts have suggested? I think what you are asking might have been explained in this and the 58 years thread repeatedly. Which is why I have to ask the questions. 

I'm asking what are you calling the invasion of Ukraine? Simple enough. Why is that mysterious?? I don't care about their opinions. I'm asking you.

As far as the other thread goes I dropped and am not going back for more nonsense.

[Bob Ness]

8 hours ago, John Cotter said:

There's only one country in the world whose foreign policy is full spectrum (ie global) dominance.

It's not Russia.

You can't answer either John? If I need buzz words I'll let you know.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

I'm asking what are you calling the invasion of Ukraine? Simple enough. Why is that mysterious?? I don't care about their opinions. I'm asking you.

As far as the other thread goes I dropped and am not going back for more nonsense.

Hi Bob. It just seemed self explanatory, thats all. My personal terminology would be the common one “An invasion of Ukraine.” Exactly that would be my terminology. 

[W. Niederhut]

14 hours ago, John Cotter said:

There's only one country in the world whose foreign policy is full spectrum (ie global) dominance.

It's not Russia.

John & Chris,

     Any thoughts about this recent story in the international news wires?

Britain's Boris Johnson says Putin threatened him with missile strike | Reuters

     Also, for those who are endorsing the narrative blaming NATO, instead of Putin, for Putin's decision to invade and bomb Ukraine, in an apparent quest for neo-Soviet lebensraum...

Putin's Own Words Used Against Him in Ukraine War Debate (newsweek.com)

     Let's not forget that Putin and his FSB apparatchiks have murdered journalists and political opponents, while turning the Russian Federation's Yeltsin-era democracy into a totalitarian police state during the past twenty years.

Amazon.com: Putin's People: How the KGB Took Back Russia and Then Took On the West eBook : Belton, Catherine: Kindle Store

     Putin's Russian media is now a Yahtzee-type organ of state propaganda-- at home and abroad.

     And Putin, like Stalin, is openly contemptuous of Western democracy, is he not?

     Do Putin apologists believe that democracy and self-determination in Europe is no longer worth defending?

     Let's recall that FDR and Churchill's Atlantic Charter-- the origin of the NATO concept-- was rooted in the commitment to defending democracy and self-determination from totalitarianism.

    

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

John & Chris,

     Any thoughts about this recent story in the international news wires?

Britain's Boris Johnson says Putin threatened him with missile strike | Reuters

My honest opinion on BJ would be that he doesn’t have any credibility. The idea that he is this happy go lucky, bungling buffoon who was making mistake after mistake but, doing his best for the British people is illusory. 
 

Some things to note as references of his character are; 

- Before Brexit he wrote two pieces (for and against) for the Times of London (or Telegraph, I forget which) and then decided which would be best to publish in terms of furthering his career. He saw more opportunity for him personally in leaving the EU. 
- He had a maskless party with upto 60 people (politicians) during the same days as he was telling the public to be afraid, to avoid all contact with people, to stay home, to save lives. This was at a time when people were being fined for being outdoors without good reason.

- He is largely to blame for scuppering the peace talks in early 2022. 
 

That’s the common sense stuff, without me getting into the scandalous side of BJ’s private life, which has been made into a documentary. Much of it has prohibitive restrictions on reporting. 
 

Is he lying now? Maybe, maybe not. Is he to be trusted? No. He is a highly manipulative, calculating character. 
 

Perhaps Trump was right when he called BJ “The Brit Trump”. 
 

——————————————————

I have a question for you in return;

What do you make of the alleged US bombing of the Nordstream 2 pipeline? Was that ethical? Has it helped the situation? 

[W. Niederhut]

Chris,

     The answer to your question about Nordstream is implicit in my (above) question and post.

      Is democracy worth defending?

      Also, my initial question wasn't about Boris Johnson.  It was about Putin threatening to nuke the U.K.

      Dr. Fiona Hill claims that Putin also threatened Trump with nukes.

      You completely sidestepped the issue of Putin's nuclear threats.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Chris,

     The answer to your question about Nordstream is implicit in my (above) question and post.

      Is democracy worth defending?

I am sorry, William. That isn’t adequate as a response. Treat it as a stand alone question if you so wish. Again:

40 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

I have a question for you in return;

What do you make of the alleged US bombing of the Nordstream 2 pipeline? Was that ethical? Has it helped the situation? 

 

6 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

You completely sidestepped the issue of Putin's nuclear threats.

PS. I answered your questions directly. You have now redefined their meaning and asked further questions to me. Lets establish a ‘quid pro quo’ here. I am happy to answer any questions you have in order, once you extend me that courtesy, agreed? 
 

 

[Bob Ness]

4 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Hi Bob. It just seemed self explanatory, thats all. My personal terminology would be the common one “An invasion of Ukraine.” Exactly that would be my terminology. 

Well, I would agree with that. Putin invaded Ukraine in 2014. Putin offered passports and citizenship to various sundry groups in Ukraine before that as a pretext and then used murder and mercenaries to destabilize an already shaky situation. That has been the modus operand in the continent for hundreds of years. They're not the only ones to do that. Because of the fluid settlement issue in Europe for centuries that method of destabilization is part of the landscape.

I've asked before (and will again) what NATO member country has experienced sustained conflict within its borders? Nobody seems to be able to come up with that answer. Maybe you can. It's not a trick question.