INTL Putin is Especially Dangerous Right Now

Used Camels

Inactive
http://www.businessinsider.com/putin-is-especially-dangerous-right-now-2015-1

Putin Is Especially Dangerous Right Now
MICHAEL HAMMERSCHLAG, GLOBALPOST

The sanctions against Russia and cuts in oil prices have finally worked. They are destroying the Russian economy.

The ruble has collapsed, losing 60 percent of its value since President Putin’s invasions of Ukraine began. But that's little solace for Ukraine, whose economy has collapsed even faster; the value of its currency, the hryvna, has lost 60 percent of its value since February.

The difference is that Russia had an enormous cash reserve of $550 billion —now said to be $400 billion or less — whereas Ukraine had a $40 billion deficit.

The decision of Western governments to assess sanctions on Russia after it annexed Crimea rather than give direct military aid to Ukraine meant that the eastern part of Ukraine would fall under Russian influence. It was understood by the West that economic sanctions would take eight months to have any significant effect.

Each cautious step of Putin's escalation went unopposed — and no spine was shown by the US or NATO — despite the 1994 Budapest Memorandum pledging US, England, and Russia to defend Ukraine's borders in exchange for giving up their nukes.

A firmer initial response might have backed Putin away from the Eastern Ukraine insurgency/invasion; he already had Crimea to digest. Ukraine could endure the loss of Crimea, but losing the industrial heart of Donbas likely will be fatal to its economy, no matter how much Western money is available to them.

Putin saw sanctions as a tool of the weak; they infuriated him far more than a US fleet in the Black Sea or squadrons of F-16’s sent to Ukraine.

Putin's response hurt Russians. He put an embargo on Western foods. He jailed friendly oligarchs to rob their companies, provoking capital flight of perhaps $200 billion. He continued sending massive Russian military aid and troops into the Donbas. He spit in the West's eye with recklessly aggressive military acts.

Imperial Crimea now needs billions in support for construction of a huge bridge across the Kerch Strait to link it to Russia and restoration of its devastated tourist industry.

Russia has lost $110 billion in oil revenue since June; oil and gas are 70 percent of Russia's exports. And gas prices take about six months to reflect oil prices, which means they are about to tumble, too. Sanctions prohibit refinancing the $700 billion of Russian bond debt.

Ukraine, roiled by six months of protest, turmoil, revolution, invasion and war, badly mishandled the initial subversion in the East. Sixty loyal commandos and 500 troops could have easily taken back all Separatist-occupied buildings in April and May.

With paltry finances and a crippled military, Ukrainian leaders didn't make the hard decisions of declaring martial law in the Donbas, mobilizing the people, instituting a draft, tripling military funding and cutting military exports to Russia.

The Hryvna is collapsing. Ukraine is facing $12 billion of foreign loans due in 2015, 40 percent bad bank loans, an 8 percent drop in GDP, company and country bonds devalued 33 to 50 percent, and under $9 billion of foreign reserves. Default is looming for Ukraine. The EU is showing no desire to offer the $15 billion Ukraine is begging for.

The Ukrainian people are suffering; product prices, even domestic, have doubled, but wages haven't budged, and utilities have skyrocketed because of IMF pressure to stop the hemorrhaging of Naftogaz, which loses $10 billion a year.

After all the pain and travail Ukraine has suffered in its year-long odyssey to escape the Soviet chains, it would be a tragedy for it to fail now, especially when the new 75 percent reformist Parliament and government are finally undertaking brutal reforms and confronting corruption.

Seeing his realm and power shrinking or collapsing, Putin is utterly unpredictable. He might react militarily and up the ante or back off. He is a small man of enormous self-regard, serious skills and a steely will — a retreat now would be an almost inconceivable humiliation.

That makes Vladimir Putin the most dangerous man in the world.


Michael Hammerschlag is a journalist whose political commentary and articles have been published in the US, Russia and Ukraine. He has spent nine years in Russia and Ukraine.
 

MS_Tank

Contributing Member
I think the real moves will come once Russia is off the west's payment clearing system(s). That time is quickly approaching.
 

Meadowlark

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Hopefully there is not a blinding blueish flash and firestorm coming from the south of me soon.
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
putininteresting1final-copy.jpg
 

iceblue

Inactive
What a load of horse cakes. The danger in Putin is that he will set in train a way to destabilise the US and its affiliates. Southern American migration to North America comes to mind. As long as you keep prodding him the less happy he is going to be about it.

Try reading: http://valdaiclub.com/politics/62880.html and get informed.
 

imaginative

keep your eye on the ball

jed turtle

a brother in the Lord
er, no, the most dangerous man in the world is the illegal alien impersonating a president in the white house. or the guy that owns him, anyways.
 

Garryowen

Deceased
Actually, we are in more danger from our own criminals that from Putin. I rather think the NWO crowd hates him as much as it loves the won.
 

Doc1

Has No Life - Lives on TB
If we can lose the patriotic blinders for a moment and look at the European geopolitical situation more objectively, Putin - IMHO - is the only national leader who has been acting responsibly. We, that is the US, underwrote an illegal coup that deposed the lawfully elected Ukraine administration and replaced it with our puppets. The OP's author mentions, "the 1994 Budapest Memorandum pledging US, England, and Russia to defend Ukraine's borders in exchange for giving up their nukes." What he (conveniently) fails to mention is the earlier NATO/US commitment to Russia not to expand NATO any further east in return for Russia allowing East and West Germany to peacefully reunite.

When a so-called journalist can write a piece like this with a straight face, you know he's a tool and probably a paid shill for his NWO controllers. Personally, I'm as much of an anti-communist as you are likely to find and I'm an old Cold Warrior. I was and am happy to see the fall of the old Soviet Union and the expansion of personal freedom and Christianity in Russia. Putin has been instrumental in these changes. We have been very bad neighbors and have acted in bad faith.

Best regards
Doc
 

the watcher

Inactive
All Putin has to do is announce they are selling oil and NG for gold. AND they are taking the ruble to the gold standard. DO NOT think he doesn't know this would be the dollars kiss of death.
 

Dozdoats

Deceased
Putin?

Why, he doesn't even use a telepropmpter! There's no telling WHAT he might say on camera. Such people are dangerous!

(snark)
 

Used Camels

Inactive
I'm surprised at the number (and identities) of some of the folks who are apparently riding on the Putin bandwagon these days.

Being an American patriot today means different things to different people. Our 21st century reality is indeed complex and incredibly convoluted for a number of reasons and purposely so, of course.

My old pal JR Nyquist recently wrote a few very pertinent and timely essays on the matter that I will reference here. He speaks fact-based truth with such insight and eloquence that really, I can do no better in any way. Take the time to read thru at least these three essays (there is also a part 4) and then consider what you believe:

The Psychopath Under the Bed Part 1, ... Part 2, ... Part 3
 

Ben Sunday

Deceased
Originally posted by UsedCamels:

Seeing his realm and power shrinking or collapsing, Putin is utterly unpredictable. He might react militarily and up the ante or back off. He is a small man of enormous self-regard, serious skills and a steely will — a retreat now would be an almost inconceivable humiliation.

That makes Vladimir Putin the most dangerous man in the world.

A simple yet eloquent statement struggling to get the attention of the Western world.

It was apparent a long time ago that our nation lacks depth and character in our rather vapid leadership in Washington, D.C. Now it seems we are developing a gross deficiency of the will to stand free, or, perhaps even survive. Just as Obama refuses to brand ISIS radicals as Islamics, he seems hell bent on giving a free pass to the dapper thug Vlad Putin and his Soviet military and counter-intelligence operatives.

The views in the OP represent failure within the West and serve as a painful reminder that the road to war is surprisingly short.

:sht:
 

Be Well

may all be well
The reason why the US and NATO want to destroy Russia should be examined. Either international banking crimes that Putin wouldn't go along with or his anti-jihad position or both.
 

Be Well

may all be well
Quote Originally Posted by jed turtle View Post
er, no, the most dangerous man in the world is the illegal alien impersonating a president in the white house. or the guy that owns him, anyways.


Communists and moslems own him. But he's agreed to be the puppet since he agrees with the goals.
 

Be Well

may all be well
If we can lose the patriotic blinders for a moment and look at the European geopolitical situation more objectively, Putin - IMHO - is the only national leader who has been acting responsibly. We, that is the US, underwrote an illegal coup that deposed the lawfully elected Ukraine administration and replaced it with our puppets. The OP's author mentions, "the 1994 Budapest Memorandum pledging US, England, and Russia to defend Ukraine's borders in exchange for giving up their nukes." What he (conveniently) fails to mention is the earlier NATO/US commitment to Russia not to expand NATO any further east in return for Russia allowing East and West Germany to peacefully reunite.

When a so-called journalist can write a piece like this with a straight face, you know he's a tool and probably a paid shill for his NWO controllers. Personally, I'm as much of an anti-communist as you are likely to find and I'm an old Cold Warrior. I was and am happy to see the fall of the old Soviet Union and the expansion of personal freedom and Christianity in Russia. Putin has been instrumental in these changes. We have been very bad neighbors and have acted in bad faith.

Best regards
Doc

I agree with you at least 100% if not more.
 

Ben Sunday

Deceased
If we can lose the patriotic blinders for a moment and look at the European geopolitical situation more objectively, Putin - IMHO - is the only national leader who has been acting responsibly. We, that is the US, underwrote an illegal coup that deposed the lawfully elected Ukraine administration and replaced it with our puppets. The OP's author mentions, "the 1994 Budapest Memorandum pledging US, England, and Russia to defend Ukraine's borders in exchange for giving up their nukes." What he (conveniently) fails to mention is the earlier NATO/US commitment to Russia not to expand NATO any further east in return for Russia allowing East and West Germany to peacefully reunite.

When a so-called journalist can write a piece like this with a straight face, you know he's a tool and probably a paid shill for his NWO controllers. Personally, I'm as much of an anti-communist as you are likely to find and I'm an old Cold Warrior. I was and am happy to see the fall of the old Soviet Union and the expansion of personal freedom and Christianity in Russia. Putin has been instrumental in these changes. We have been very bad neighbors and have acted in bad faith.

Best regards
Doc

Like you, I'm an old Russophobe from way back when (1961-1962). I don't necessarily disagree with your thoughtful views but they certainly get a different review in my mindset.

No question that Putin is a nationalist oriented statesman - one of the few major heads of state, sadly NOT including the tribe in Washington, D.C., who value the fate of his nation and takes the somewhat longer view of his nation's well being, growth and most notably, policy direction in meeting challenges of a changing world.

I'm not necessarily beating the war drums here but my concerns run along the concept of every action having an equal and opposite reaction. Of course Vlad is pissed at the economic wounds inflicted by the collapse of the Ruble and world oil prices. Rightfully so. Where my charity of thought ends is deliberate barbarism and carnage in Ukraine and Crimea. In our allegedly enlightened times we live in, that sort of conduct by a superpower towards two underling neighbors was thought to be a thing of the past...I'm thinking of the Prague Spring, the actions enforcing the Warsaw Pact and later intrusions such as Afghanistan. We should not neglect the events of 1962 either. What is stopping Putin from setting up a Soviet military installation in "good neighbor" Cuba now? (cough-cough).

Putin has a short memory for deeds that make him look bad and hangs on to to his vodka soaked Soviet Bear theatrics seemingly forever, or at least as long as they serve a convenient purpose.

The West is NOT innocent by ANY means. That should not morph into a deliberately mindless attitude that leaves the CONUS vulnerable in the face of the snorting Russian bear.

What a mess east-west affairs have become!

imo/ymmv
 

Zoner

Veteran Member
The leaders imagine a vain thing.
They conspire and plot and plan to rule the world.
The Banksters, the Communists, the humanists, Islam, Christianity, but their plans will come to naught.
They fail to see that God has already put Earth's Ruler on His throne next to Him.
He laughs at the plans of men as they ignore and neglect the true Ruler of this planet.
This is going to end badly for all who will not bow to the King of Kings....and soon.
Blessed are all those who take refuge in Him and trust in His plan to rule the world.

-


Psalm 2

1
Why do the nations rage,
And the people plot a vain thing?

2
The kings of the earth set themselves,
And the rulers take counsel together,
Against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying,

3
“Let us break Their bonds in pieces
And cast away Their cords from us.”

4
He who sits in the heavens shall laugh;
The Lord shall hold them in derision.

5
Then He shall speak to them in His wrath,
And distress them in His deep displeasure:

6
“Yet I have set My King
On My holy hill of Zion.”

7
“I will declare the decree:
The Lord has said to Me,
‘You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.

8
Ask of Me, and I will give You
The nations for Your inheritance,
And the ends of the earth for Your possession.

9
You shall break them with a rod of iron;
You shall dash them to pieces like a potter’s vessel.’”

10
Now therefore, be wise, O kings;
Be instructed, you rulers of the earth.

11
Serve the Lord with fear,
And rejoice with trembling.

12
Kiss the Son, lest He be angry,
And you perish in the way,
When His wrath is kindled but a little.
Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him.
 

seeking one

Inactive
I read the essays, Used Camels, and they are frightening in the extreme, because they are true! I never understood how Russia went from being our enemy for many years to our friend overnight, and now I understand that they sold us a "bill of goods" without the goods. I don't know if we can survive this with our current inept leadership.
 

the watcher

Inactive
I'm surprised at the number (and identities) of some of the folks who are apparently riding on the Putin bandwagon these days.

Being an American patriot today means different things to different people. Our 21st century reality is indeed complex and incredibly convoluted for a number of reasons and purposely so, of course.

My old pal JR Nyquist recently wrote a few very pertinent and timely essays on the matter that I will reference here. He speaks fact-based truth with such insight and eloquence that really, I can do no better in any way. Take the time to read thru at least these three essays (there is also a part 4) and then consider what you believe:

The Psychopath Under the Bed Part 1, ... Part 2, ... Part 3

How many countries does Putin currently have occupying forces in? How about the US? People can wave the stars and strips around, and throw it over the deeds being done in the dark, but it is what it is. Remember this saying "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

So do you support the regime currently in power in Washington? Is that what being "patriot" is?

Oh Afghanistan had a stellar year on Opium production this last year. Best ever according to sources. I wonder why.

You might want to define what "patriot" means to you.
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
How many countries does Putin currently have occupying forces in? How about the US? People can wave the stars and strips around, and throw it over the deeds being done in the dark, but it is what it is. Remember this saying "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".

So do you support the regime currently in power in Washington? Is that what being "patriot" is?

Oh Afghanistan had a stellar year on Opium production this last year. Best ever according to sources. I wonder why.

You might want to define what "patriot" means to you.

Let's say that our current government is "bad". I'm not arguing the validity of the assumption, let's just agree to it.

So, if Russia opposes our government's moves, then it must be "good", then?

Read Nyquist, and understand that the forces in play are not defined as Bad America versus Good Russia. It is Bad America & Bad Russia versus the Public. I'll say it until I can no longer: The plan announced by Khrushchev decades ago has been waiting for a man like Barack Obama. He may have even been created intentionally to serve his part of the plan.
 

the watcher

Inactive
I'm not foolish on the fact there is no white and black. Like I have stated numerous times, there are many shades of gray. Waving the flag and pulling the patriot card, does nothing at this point.

Patriotic to what, is what I would love to know. I would love to see just how many countries are currently occupied, Russia VS the US. So what's patriotic anymore? Vowing to protect Americans citizans INSIDE the US from being forced to become serfs?

Maybe I missed the boat and invading and occupying some other country is patriotic? Maybe usurping their gold, and throwing their lawfully elected officials out of office is patriot?

Maybe protecting bankers and corrupt politicians is patriotic?

Sorry, my patriotism give a shit is almost non existent at this moment. :dstrs::shr:
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
I'm not foolish on the fact there is no white and black. Like I have stated numerous times, there are many shades of gray. Waving the flag and pulling the patriot card, does nothing at this point.

Patriotic to what, is what I would love to know. I would love to see just how many countries are currently occupied, Russia VS the US. So what's patriotic anymore? Vowing to protect Americans citizans INSIDE the US from being forced to become serfs?

Maybe I missed the boat and invading and occupying some other country is patriotic? Maybe usurping their gold, and throwing their lawfully elected officials out of office is patriot?

Maybe protecting bankers and corrupt politicians is patriotic?

Sorry, my patriotism give a shit is almost non existent at this moment. :dstrs::shr:

I think we're talking about two different things. What might patriotism be, though, cast in the mold of what Used Camels and myself are talking about? I'd say recognizing that we have both foreign and domestic enemies that have become an immediate threat, and doing what we can to beat them back, I think that would be pretty patriotic. Re-establishing what we've lost, that would be patriotic. Comparing what our government is doing to what Russia is doing and imagining some relative scale of goodness with Russia as "more good" seems solidly anti-patriotic. It's like a little kid claiming the moral high ground when their brother stole two cookies and they merely stole one...

All I'm saying is that there is no white/black, yin/yang where the US government and Russia have swapped colors. Russia is what it has always been, we've just been stained with their dark plan. The spread of this stain was very slow for a long time, but the inertia has been great, and we are in danger. We may fade to black.
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
LOL. Let me express a side thought: It's pretty funny that you and I are debating.

TheWatcher vs. TheSearcher
 

OldArcher

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I think the real moves will come once Russia is off the west's payment clearing system(s). That time is quickly approaching.

Concur... The West is too quick to right-off Mr. Putin... "Small?" He's the epitome of Russia, a true nationalist. Disregard him at your own peril... I'd rather work with him, as a businessman or mover and shaker, than looking across gun sights... The Banksters, Wall Street, NATO, the Traitors in the CONgress, and Ovomit in the Oval Orifice, all are stirring a cauldron of DOOM! They do the bidding of their father, the Devil, and they could care less about their souls, or the lives of others...

With Mr. Putin, you know what you've got. He may look and act like a 1920's Mafia Don at times, but you gotta admit, he ain't like the Queer, Mu-slime, Eunuch, ******-in-Chief that the "electorate" voted in... I'll take the Don, anytime...

Maranatha

OA
 

Used Camels

Inactive
Watcher--It's a straightforward question with a simple answer for most of us, I suspect ... we are beholden to the America as established and defined by the U.S. Constitution and the ratified Amendments. Many of the best of us actually swore an oath to uphold and defend those ideals.

America is not a government and patriots are not bound to political parties or personalities. We are all permitted by the Constitution to believe and swear allegiance to most anything we want--and of course that is the beauty of it.

But you are pretending to wrestle with the definition of a word whose meaning we are reminded of several times every year. We all partake in a few annual holiday commemorations intended to honor the sacrifices many better folks than us before us have made for those very real ideals.

One thing I can say for sure, those feeling drawn to support and defend Russian President Putin today are not going to find a place in any red, white, and blue organization that I have ever heard of, and their "patriotism" has a place with other holidays celebrated elsewhere (where the colors that are waved are simply red).

Back to the point I made earlier--Jeff Nyquist has made it his life to research and monitor what is going on in the old Soviet Union. His well-documented archives and the Final Phase forum are amazing resources that today just may hold a key to ascertaining what comes next.
 

the watcher

Inactive
I agree Two. I never forget the sacrifices our military has made for America, and I actually mourn for their losses and what it has become now. But while agents tear America apart from the inside, I find pointing fingers at Russia to be less than sincere. Imo what's makes Putin dangerous is surrounding him with weapons, done. Driving the price of oil down to try to break their economy. Their exports are around 70% oil based. In the last several years, Russia has been the driving force, as well as China, on creating their own central banks. Specially cutting their former partner, America, out of the loop. Countries are tired of holding their economy down, to allow the dollar to reign.

I do think at one time Putin was one of the boys, but not any longer. Another aspect that makes him dangerous. But while everyone is wagging fingers at Russia, a group of crocodiles is approaching them from behind.

Bottom line is: America needs a war, period. To escape the coming economic collapse. The best way to get public opinion supporting that, is vilify Russia, for anything. So when I see articles like above, it makes me wonder the objective.

So I would think a little introspective research inside, who is running the US might be in order. No doubt in my mind Obama is a tool for others. But he's allowed to run his Muslim agenda, as long as he sticks to the grand plan. I don't have the doc handy, but I have posted it showing at least from the 80's there has been a Muslim agenda to usurp power in the US.

So sorry if I don't rant and rave about evil Russia. I'm more concerned about what is closer to home.
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
I agree Two. I never forget the sacrifices our military has made for America, and I actually mourn for their losses and what it has become now. But while agents tear America apart from the inside, I find pointing fingers at Russia to be less than sincere. Imo what's makes Putin dangerous is surrounding him with weapons, done. Driving the price of oil down to try to break their economy. Their exports are around 70% oil based. In the last several years, Russia has been the driving force, as well as China, on creating their own central banks. Specially cutting their former partner, America, out of the loop. Countries are tired of holding their economy down, to allow the dollar to reign.

I do think at one time Putin was one of the boys, but not any longer. Another aspect that makes him dangerous. But while everyone is wagging fingers at Russia, a group of crocodiles is approaching them from behind.

Bottom line is: America needs a war, period. To escape the coming economic collapse. The best way to get public opinion supporting that, is vilify Russia, for anything. So when I see articles like above, it makes me wonder the objective.

So I would think a little introspective research inside, who is running the US might be in order. No doubt in my mind Obama is a tool for others. But he's allowed to run his Muslim agenda, as long as he sticks to the grand plan. I don't have the doc handy, but I have posted it showing at least from the 80's there has been a Muslim agenda to usurp power in the US.

So sorry if I don't rant and rave about evil Russia. I'm more concerned about what is closer to home.

I understand and agree with a lot of what you're saying here, I'm just trying to get across the idea that this is bigger than just what is close to home. Obama and his cohort are the implements that Khrushchev was referring to when he said Russia would bury America. The impacts of the Soviet plan culminate in the problems we are now dealing with domestically, and they stood at a podium and said that this is the way it would go down. They said to our faces with a smile on their lips. I point fingers at Russia because they are indeed following through with what they said they'd do, what they fomented to do to ourselves.

As for the objective of the articles? To point this plan out to people. Nyquist has been very accurately calling the shots on this for a very long time, it isn't like he just sprung up recently to snipe at Putin.


The Muslim danger is undeniable, but it is just part of the Western decline that has been engineered.
 

the watcher

Inactive
I think it started long before that. Back in the Banker's rebellion. And with the group that tells the Bilderbergs what's going to happen, The Steering Group. But blaming Khrushchev works also. As long as a few can keep countries warring, they achieve their ends.
 

TheSearcher

Are you sure about that?
I think it started long before that. Back in the Banker's rebellion. And with the group that tells the Bilderbergs what's going to happen, The Steering Group. But blaming Khrushchev works also. As long as a few can keep countries warring, they achieve their ends.

Perhaps so. But the net result is the same: Our problems are not purely domestic, and the foreign enemy we have now is the same one that initiated the plan. We must look within and without, because they are working together to double-team us.
 

Used Camels

Inactive
Continued Fighting In Ukraine Could Lead to Nuclear War

More liberal, blame-America spins and twists here, but again worth noting. And my suggestion is: grease the hinges on the bunker hatch and sweep out the fallout shelter ... just in case.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...-warn-continued-fighting-ukraine-could-lead-n

Top Russian, American and Polish Leaders Warn that Continued Fighting In Ukraine Could Lead to Nuclear War

Former Soviet leader and Nobel prize winner Mikhail Gorbachev warned today that the battle in Ukraine could result in a nuclear war:

“A war of this kind would unavoidably lead to a nuclear war,” the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize winner told Der Spiegel news magazine, according to excerpts released on Friday.

“We won’t survive the coming years if someone loses their nerve in this overheated situation,” added Gorbachev, 83. “This is not something I’m saying thoughtlessly. I am extremely concerned.”

One of America’s top experts on Russia – Steven Cohen – has also warned that failure to negotiate a peace treaty in Ukraine could lead to nuclear war.

Steven Starr - a nuclear arms expert and senior scientist for Physicians for Social Responsibility - warns that proposed U.S. legislation would be a direct path towards nuclear war with Russia.

Former Polish president – and famed anti-communist activist – Lech Walesa also warned that the U.S. and Nato’s arming of Ukraine could lead to a nuclear war.

Leading American political activist Noam Chomsky agrees.

Australian doctor and Nobel prize winner Helen Caldicott warns:

The expansion of NATO to Russia’s borders is “very, very dangerous,” Caldicott said. “There is no way a war between the United States and Russia could start and not go nuclear. … The United States and Russia have enormous stockpiles of these weapons. Together they have 94 percent of all the 16,300 nuclear weapons in the world.”

“We are in a very fallible, very dangerous situation operated by mere mortals,” she warned. “The nuclear weapons, are sitting there, thousands of them. They are ready to be used.”

***

Caldicott strongly criticized Obama administration policymakers for their actions in forward positioning U.S. and NATO military units in countries of Eastern Europe in response to Russian support of breakaway separatists in the provinces of eastern Ukraine. On –, the U.S. government announced the deployment of the Ironhorse Brigade, an elite armored cavalry unit of the U.S. Army to the former Soviet republics of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, along the historic invasion route from the West to St. Petersburg.

“Do they really want a nuclear war with Russia?” she asked “The only war that you can have with Russia is a nuclear war. … You don’t provoke paranoid countries armed with nuclear weapons.”

And see this, this, this and this.

Indeed, Eric Zuesse says that the risks are so high – and the American leaders so reckless – that Russia is preparing for an expected nuclear attack by the U.S.

Postscript: In the 1987 book To Win a Nuclear War: The Pentagon’s Secret War Plans, one of the world’s leading physicists – Michio Kaku – revealed declassified plans for the U.S. to launch a first-strike nuclear war against Russia. The forward was written by the former Attorney General of the United States, Ramsey Clarke.

In Towards a World War III Scenario, Michel Chossudovsky documents that the U.S. is so enamored with nuclear weapons that it has authorized low-level field commanders to use them in the heat of battle in their sole discretion … without any approval from civilian leaders.

May cooler heads prevail ...
 

danielboon

TB Fanatic
World War 3: Mikhail Gorbachev Warns Of A Russian Nuclear War Over Ukraine

Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev is warning that if the Ukraine crisis transforms into World War 3, then it may be unavoidable that Vladimir Putin may launch a Russian nuclear war.

In a related report by the Inquisitr, when the U.S. Congress passed the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, it authorized President Obama to give Ukraine lethal aid and military support. Based upon the date of the signing of the law, the Obama administration has until February 16, 2015 to provide details for how this military action will be enacted.

Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1744204/wor...Is2SVq8lefC.99
 

the watcher

Inactive
Sigh. Notice the date of this article. I was reading an interview on an unnamed site of a General discussing there are those in Washington, who are really pushing for a first strike. Who wins in an exchange? No one... Who would know who fired first??

Indications that the U.S. Is Planning a Nuclear Attack Against Russia

Posted on June 13, 2014 by WashingtonsBlog

Partial copy, long post at link.............So, President Obama is now trying to persuade EU leaders to join with him to complete this plan to replace MAD with a first-strike nuclear capability that will eliminate Russia altogether from the world stage.

As I also documented, the IMF is thoroughly supportive of this plan to remove Russia, and announced on May 1st, just a day prior to our massacre of independence-supporters in the south Ukrainian city of Odessa on May 2nd, that unless all of the independence supporters in south and eastern Ukraine can be defeated and/or killed, the IMF will pull the plug on Ukraine and force it into receivership.

Obama clearly means business here, and so the government that we have installed in Kiev is bombing throughout southeastern Ukraine, in order to convince the residents there that resistance will be futile. Part of the short-term goal here is to get Russia to absorb the losses of all of Ukraine’s unpaid debts to Russia, so that far less of Ukraine’s unpaid debts to the IMF, U.S. and E.U., will remain unpaid. It’s basically an international bankruptcy proceeding, but without an international bankruptcy court, using instead military means. It’s like creditors going to a bankrupt for repayment, and the one with the most gunmen gets paid, while the others do not. This is the reason why the IMF ordered the leaders in Kiev to put down the rebellion in Ukraine’s southeast. What’s important to the IMF is not land, it’s the Kiev government’s continued control over the assets in the rebelling part of Ukraine — assets that will be worth something in a privatization or sell-off to repay that debt. However, for Obama, what is even more important than repaid debts is the continued dominance of the U.S. dollar. Wall Street needs that.

Among other indications that the U.S. is now preparing a nuclear attack against Russia is an article on May 23rd, “U.S. Tests Advanced Missile For NATO Interceptor System,” and also a June 10th report from a website with good sources in Russian intelligence, which alleges that Ukrainian President Petro “Poroshenko secretly met with … [an] American delegation headed by the Director of … the CIA’s National Clandestine Service, Frank Archibald, which also included former CIA chief in Ukraine Jeffrey Egan, the current – Raymond Mark Davidson, Mark Buggy (CIA, Istanbul), Andrzej Derlatka, a CIA agent in the Polish intelligence Agency, and member of CIA Kevin Duffin who is working as senior Vice President of the insurance company Brower. Poroshenko and Archibald signed a paper entitled an ‘Agreement on Military Cooperation between the U.S. and Ukraine’”

Furthermore, barely a month before the CIA and State Department overthrew the previous, the pro-Russian, President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, the government of Netherlands decided, after 18 years of “dithering,” to allow the U.S. to arm our F-35 bombers there with nuclear weapons. And this was already after Holland’s “Parliament in November signed off on a government plan to purchase 37 F-35As to replace the Dutch air force’s aging fleet of nuclear-capable F-16s. The Netherlands is widely understood to host about two dozen U.S. B-61 gravity bombs at the Volkel air base, as part of NATO’s policy of nuclear burden-sharing.”

Moreover, Obama isn’t only beefing up our first-strike nuclear capability, but is also building something new, called “Prompt Global Strike,” to supplement that nuclear force, by means of “a precision conventional weapon strike” that, if launched against Russia from next-door Ukraine, could wipe out Russia’s nuclear weapons within just a minute or so. That might be a fallback position, for Obama, in case the EU’s leaders (other than Netherlands and perhaps one or two others) might happen to decide that they won’t participate in our planned nuclear invasion of Russia.

As if it’s not already enough, that the U.S. has troops in many countries, which include the following nations where our soldiers are stationed (and this includes ones with missile bases located near Russia): Norway, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Kazakhstan.

We also have some soldiers in other former parts of the U.S.S.R.: Moldova, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan.

We also have nearly 35,000 troops stationed in Japan, a nation near Russia and that claims ownership of four small Sakhalin Islands and two small Kuril Islands, from Russia.

Not to mention, of course, installations in places like Romania, Singapore, Turkey, Peru, Kenya, and Oman, totaling 185 countries throughout the world.

The United States is, of course, not surrounded by any Russian soldiers at all — not in Mexico, nor in Canada, nor anywhere near this country, except Russia itself near Alaska.

Certainly, Obama means business here, but the big question is whether he’ll be able to get the leaders of other “democratic” nations to go along with his first-strike plan.

The two likeliest things that can stop him, at this stage, would be either NATO’s breaking up, or else Putin’s deciding to take a political beating among his own public for simply not responding to our increasing provocations. Perhaps Putin will decide that a temporary embarrassment for him at home (for being “wimpy”) will be better, even for just himself, than the annihilation of his entire country would be. And maybe, if Obama pushes his indubitable Superpower card too hard, he’ll be even more embarrassed by this conflict than Putin will be. After all, things like this and this aren’t going to burnish Obama’s reputation in the history books, if he cares about that. But maybe he’s satisfied to be considered to have been George W. Bush II, just a far better-spoken version: a more charming liar than the original. However, if things come to a nuclear invasion, even a U.S. “victory” won’t do much more for Obama’s reputation than Bush’s “victory” in Iraq did for his. In fact, perhaps Americans will then come to feel that George W. Bush wasn’t America’s worst President, after all. Maybe the second half of the Bush-Obama Presidency will be even worse than the first.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/indications-u-s-planning-nuclear-attack-russia.html
 

Flippper

Time Traveler
Let's say that our current government is "bad"... I'll say it until I can no longer: The plan announced by Khrushchev decades ago has been waiting for a man like Barack Obama. He may have even been created intentionally to serve his part of the plan.
First, our Government is not "bad". The people who have infiltrated and illegally obtained office within it, are. Sorry, I find it necessary to repeat this until folks pick up on it and use it liberally-lest we be labeled "anti-government" nuts helping insinuate that leftist, NWO communists are "pro" legal government.

As to the last bit of your post:
From January 6th, 2009, before obola officially, and illegally, took office. Kissinger: Obama primed to create 'New World Order' Note the word "primed"-a nobody from nowhereville, primed? Created he was, kissinger admits it, lending further evidence that obola was not elected but chosen by 'elite' scum for the office and placed there via electronic vote machines and MSM announcements of the "winner".
 

Used Camels

Inactive
Interesting and important detail to note regarding article in post #38: "Indications that the U.S. Is Planning a Nuclear Attack Against Russia" ... the author of that opinion piece is a renowned "Progressive/Liberal/Leftist (Eric Zuesse). In fact, earlier in the year, they were debating on that blog whether to allow him to continue to post. See: "Are Eric Zuesse's Posts Promoting Healthy Debate?" I found that other blogs and websites removed posts that he had written for them, though plenty such as HuffPo have his pieces archived.

I dug a little further on him and found an amazing number of hateful, anti-Judeo-Christian writings as well as a prolific number of Marxist hit pieces he's written against both conservatives and Democrats who are not radical enough (including Obama apparently).

In this case, I feel it's quite clear that this "reporter" is in fact an obvious communist antagonist whose role is to create hatred, confusion and chaos. (In fact, it seems he is so prolific in articles attributed to him across the web that he must have a full-time staff somewhere feeding him drafts to submit under his name.)
 
Top