Allen Dulles and his Nazi Pals in Ukraine 🇺🇦

[Guest]

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Benjamin, 

So as far as you're concerned, the US foreign policy of full spectrum dominance, which has included serial regime change and NATO expansion in eastern Europe, is only a figment of Russian imagination.

An Aussie pal who is a geopolitics buff was chatting with me yesterday, he was explaining what happened to Yugoslavia / Bosnia where his grandparents were from. I am half way through but, the US influence in the break up his clear. They got what they wanted. Thought it was a complicated scenario. I couldn’t help but think of Ukraine in the same light and its more recent history. The full spectrum dominance is just too subtle for most people to want to delve into. It’s often not “armies by day, but, guerrillas by night”, or just a plan propaganda war with mechanisms of bribery. 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Benjamin, 

So as far as you're concerned, the US foreign policy of full spectrum dominance, which has included serial regime change and NATO expansion in eastern Europe, is only a figment of Russian imagination.

Well, hard to answer your question, given the framing. 

The US foreign policy-military apparatus operates as a global guard service for multinationals. Sometimes the apparatus gets ideas of its own, and it always wants more money and domain, like any bureaucracy. 

On the other hand, globalists are happy to do business with mainland China, and worsening communist authoritarian repression. I do not think globalists had any plans for Putin as long as he did business with globalists. See Rex Tillerson. 

My view is Putin was secure in his homeland, and had little to worry about. That does not justify the US apparatchiks sticking their noses into Eastern Europe. 

A war should be a last resort, not a possible prophylactic. As we know in the US, wars can always be "justified" by concocting possible chains of events and threats. 

Worse for Putin, he will likely lose this war. Occupations tend not to work out. 

Just IMHO. 

 

 

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

My view is Putin was secure in his homeland, and had little to worry about. That does not justify the US apparatchiks sticking their noses into Eastern Europe. 

Hey Ben,

How secure can you be if you are slowly but surely being put in a noose by the worlds most dominant power? Lets say nothing is done and Ukraine became a NATO country. What next? Will the US / NATO continue to chip away at the fringes of Russia, providing investment, bribes, military hardware, organised propaganda and encouraging break away states. Have they already been doing that? What if the end goal is to splinter Russia into a thousand pieces? Any resistance to the US liberal hegemony has been met with coup’s, or opposition parties being funded, wherever they are on earth. There is a very distinct modus operandi, which is full spectrum dominance. 
 

With all of that said, many here might be like; Russia broken into small, weak pieces, sounds great right? We can exploit their resources and erode their culture, making the world safer. Well, guess what? If you are Russian, that doesn’t sound optimal at all, they lose everything. It creates us the very dangerous situation that we have now. 
 

None of that is picking sides, or being pro anything. It just points out the appalling situation we are in now. Let me also point out, the spending on this war coming from the west makes you and I poorer, it makes inflation worse, its human beings that have to fight and die in it, and all the while the corporations / elites that propagated this plan are getting wealthier by the second. 
 

This isn’t specifically at you, Ben. More just airing my thoughts to the thread.

 

Chris

[Benjamin Cole]

1 minute ago, Chris Barnard said:

Hey Ben,

How secure can you be if you are slowly but surely being put in a noose by the worlds most dominant power? Lets say nothing is done and Ukraine became a NATO country. What next? Will the US / NATO continue to chip away at the fringes of Russia, providing investment, bribes, military hardware, organised propaganda and encouraging break away states. Have they already been doing that? What if the end goal is to splinter Russia into a thousand pieces? Any resistance to the US liberal hegemony has been met with coup’s, or opposition parties being funded, wherever they are on earth. There is a very distinct modus operandi, which is full spectrum dominance. 
 

With all of that said, many here might be like; Russia broken into small, weak pieces, sounds great right? We can exploit their resources and erode their culture, making the world safer. Well, guess what? If you are Russian, that doesn’t sound optimal at all, they lose everything. It creates us the very dangerous situation that we have now. 
 

None of that is picking sides, or being pro anything. It just points out the appalling situation we are in now. Let me also point out, the spending on this war coming from the west makes you and I poorer, it makes inflation worse, its human beings that have to fight and die in it, and all the while the corporations / elites that propagated this plan are getting wealthier by the second. 
 

This isn’t specifically at you, Ben. More just airing my thoughts to the thread.

 

Chris

Chris--

Hey, air your views, that is what a forum is for! Glad to have your insights. 

So, we disagree. So what? 

IMHO, as long as Putin did business with the multinationals, he was safe. Ponder Rex Tillerson, for example. Ponder the CCP and their chums at Apple, Disney NBA, BlackRock, WalMart ,Tesla, Citigroup and so on....

Even beyond that, invading Russia will be stroll into hell on earth. Global suicide. Who would plan such an invasion? 

The strange thing is Putin once wanted to join NATO. 

Just IMHO. I am not a Russia expert. 

I hope an armistice is agreed to soon. 

[Pat Speer]

6 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

I agree, Pat. Thank you for taking the time to chip in with this. There is a book I have been meaning to get through sat on my desk, which specifically addresses the use of propaganda in Hollywood. I am sure it’ll reveal more than smoking actresses to sell cigarettes. I’ll add something further if it is of value. Did you read “Chasing The Lights” by Oliver Stone? It was very interesting how difficult it was to get Platoon made and other movies. He eludes that it was a little more than just pressure about what would or wouldn’t sell.  

I had a stretch where I read quite a bit about Hollywood and its beginnings. One book that comes to mind is "A Kingdom of Their Own." It detailed the rise of the Hollywood movie studios from the penny arcade business in New York and New Jersey, with a particular focus on the fact the moguls were mostly Jews living in constant fear of a backlash against their Jewishness. As a consequence, they were reluctant to make films about anti-Semitism--until Darryl F. Zanuck, one of the few non-Jews running a studio, broke the seal.  

There is another great book I read whose title escapes me. It was about the Hays Code--an actual code put in place to control Hollywood productions--that put restrictions on subject matter and what could be shown on the screen. As I recall, this was largely put in place to appease the Catholic Church, which was most upset by what those darned "Jews" in Hollywood were showing the country. In any event, the book detailed a number of films where the producers and directors fought the code, and helped erode its harshness. I particularly remember the chapter on A Streetcar Named Desire.. The code would not allow Stanley to rape Blanche--so they were forced to make it seem like maybe he only beat her up. But the director and actors made sure the audience knew what happened anyhow. I remember also that the code forbade Stanley's receiving no come-uppance for the rape. So they were forced to pretend his wife Stella, Blanche's sister, left him. Only Kim Hunter, the actress playing Stella, played the last scene in a way where the audience could tell she was still in love with him, and would probably return to that sexy beast, played by Marlon Brando.

I also read another book or two on the pro-Russian propaganda films put out by Hollywood at the onset of WWII. These were created at the request of the U.S. Government, which wanted the public to accept our partnership with Uncle Joe and his Commie Army. Many of those working on these films were socialists, and sympathetic to Russia. Their work on these films would come back to haunt them, as their work for the U.S. Government would come to bite them in the ass after the war when the Government decided Russia was the new enemy, and they were no longer trusted. Hoover, McCarthy, et al, pressured the studio heads--ever-fearful of an outcry against their Jewishness--to create a blacklist, and disallow those insufficiently anti-commie from working.

If I recall, one young actress, Nancy Davis, was concerned she would be roped into this nonsense, and kissed up to the head of the Screen Actors Guild, who had decided to side with the studios against his fellow actors. She soon thereafter married this man and became Mrs. Ronald Reagan. (I could be wrong about the timing of this, but I think that's correct.)

History is made of such things. If Edison didn't claim a patent on films made in New York, the early film companies may not have moved to Hollywood. If they didn't have to move to Hollywood, they may not have been run by recent immigrants with no long-time roots in New York, which is to say, they may not have been run by Jews. If they hadn't been run by Jews, well, they may not have put up with the Hays Code, or gone along with the blacklist, and maybe Ronnie and Nancy wouldn't have become an item, and he wouldn't have run for President, and he wouldn't have spent a gazillion on his Star Wars scheme, and bankrupt the Soviet Union.

So, heck, if it weren't for Edison's greed, the Soviet Union might still be around, and Putin could have stayed in the KGB, hunting down Ukrainians who wanted to defect, and disrupting western democracies. .

It's all one big circle, ain't it?

 

 

[Matthew Koch]

A Canadian perspective on the conflict.. 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

46 minutes ago, Matthew Koch said:

A Canadian perspective on the conflict.. 

 

MK--Is that a verified account?

Peterson has been saying strange things lately. 

Russians want radiation on their homeland?  I find this hard to fathom. 

Would the US nuke Canada along the border? 

My (sad) outlook is for a long conventional war, without Russia ever prevailing. These wars of occupation are almost always losing propositions. 

Putin has bombed and killed Ukrainians. Now, they will never quit. 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[Matthew Koch]

13 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

MK--Is that a verified account?

Peterson has been saying strange things lately. 

Russians want radiation on their homeland?  I find this hard to fathom. 

Would the US nuke Canada along the border? 

My (sad) outlook is for a long conventional war, without Russia ever prevailing. These wars of occupation are almost always losing propositions. 

Putin has bombed and killed Ukrainians. Now, they will never quit. 

Yes, that is his account.

Please be more specific what are you referring to? 

Russian's don't want radiation which is why they recently told NATO and the USA that depleted uranium munitions will be considered the same as a dirty bomb. 

I hope so💯😝

My outlook is Bakhmut is falling, and the conflict should be over by spring unless NATO or USA puts boots on the ground,  uses Fighter jets or tactual nukes

Maybe, it's also the most corrupt country in Europe, and I don't associate honorable traits with corrupt peoples... 

 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Matthew Koch

[Matt Allison]

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

9 minutes ago, Matthew Koch said:

Yes, that is his account.

Please be more specific what are you referring to? 

Russian's don't want radiation which is why they recently told NATO and the USA that depleted uranium munitions will be considered the same as a dirty bomb. 

I hope so💯😝

My outlook is Bakmut is falling, and the conflict should be over by spring unless NATO or USA puts boots on the ground,  uses Fighter jets or tactual nukes

Maybe, it's also the most corrupt country in Europe, and I don't associate honorable traits with corrupt peoples... 

 

When you predict the conflict will be over by Spring, do you mean an armistice, or Russian tanks in Kyiv or what? 

It may be the NATO-West will cede eastern Ukraine to an "independent" authority, which would be a vassal state of Russia. 

I doubt NATO will use nukes. 

Didn't you previously predict a Russian victory by winter? 

As stated, wars of occupation are almost always losing battles. See Russia and Afcrapistan. 

Well, all we can do is wait and see. 

[Matt Allison]

13 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

As stated, wars of occupation are almost always losing battles. See Russia and Afcrapistan. 

Yep.

I'm surprised Putin hasn't figured out the strategy being used against him, which is essentially that they're going to allow Russia to ultimately defeat itself just as they did in Afghanistan.

[Matthew Koch]

26 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

As stated, wars of occupation are almost always losing battles. See Russia and Afcrapistan. 

Ben, no offense but I see that "Russia in Afcrapistan" as a Rambo Hollywood exaggeration to make Reagan Neo Cons feel like they got even for being duped by the Yankee and Cowboy Wall Street War Profiteers in Nam. The Russians got out pretty soon after the invasion, realizing that it was like Vietnam and not worth spending another 9 years there. This is also a good example of the Hollywood demonization of the Ruskies and those glorified "Freedom Fighters" would go on to perpetrate 911 20yrs later. lol

 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Matthew Koch said:

Ben, no offense but I see that "Russia in Afcrapistan" as a Rambo Hollywood exaggeration to make Reagan Neo Cons feel like they got even for being duped by the Yankee and Cowboy Wall Street War Profiteers in Nam. The Russians got out pretty soon after the invasion, realizing that it was like Vietnam and not worth spending another 9 years there. This is also a good example of the Hollywood demonization of the Ruskies and those glorified "Freedom Fighters" would go on to perpetrate 911 20yrs later. lol

 

Wikipedia suggest Russia had more than a cup of coffee in Afcrapistan.

 

"The Soviet–Afghan War was a protracted armed conflict fought in the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989. It saw extensive fighting between the Soviet Union and the Afghan mujahideen after the former militarily intervened in, or launched an invasion of,[nb 1] Afghanistan to support the local pro-Soviet government that had been installed during Operation Storm-333. Most combat operations against the mujahideen took place in the Afghan countryside, as the country's urbanized areas were entirely under Soviet control."

 

---30---

10 years? 

Sad to say, Ukraine could last as long. With the same result. 

Horrific casualties, and for what? 

Did Afghanistan threaten Russia? Did Ukraine threaten Russia? 

(I feel sheepish as an American making these statements, as no one rivals the US for getting itself entangled in horrible, counter-productive wars of occupation....) 

[Matt Allison]

The U.S. funded the Afghans in that war as well.

Which, led to the demise of the Soviet Union.

See the strategy?

Invading Ukraine was a huge mistake for Putin.

He should withdraw and take the L.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

The U.S. funded the Afghans in that war as well.

Which, led to the demise of the Soviet Union.

See the strategy?

Invading Ukraine was a huge mistake for Putin.

He should withdraw and take the L.

In general, IMHO you are correct in your analysis.

The problem with these wars of occupation is that elaborate arguments are erected to justify the occupation, and then horrific losses are endured. 

A leader cannot then say, "Oh, la-dee-dah, I made a mistake so I am pulling out. Sorry about the several hundred thousand dead I left behind."  

I do not see an easy escape hatch for Putin. And I cannot read Putin's mind, and he may truly believe Ukraine rightfully belongs to Russia.

Looks like a long and ugly war.