“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
Jesus said:
“Love your enemies,
Do good to them who hate you.”
But do notice, in pragmatic terms, Jesus made himself scarce around the religious elites who were out to get him and his small band. He too encouraged the selling of a cloak (coat) to purchase a sword (gun) for the disciples to use as self defense in times of crisis.
However, the truth is there as Paul notes in his letter to those in Rome:
“But if your enemy is hungry, feed him, and if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in so doing you will heapburningcoalsonhishead.”
Jesus too set the stage for a unique way with dealing with those out to do one harm:
Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you.
While this all sounds like life on a personal level, this also extends to relationships between communities, cultures and countries as well. I am guessing I would get booed like Ron Paul did during a GOP debate in South Carolina years ago, but I stand by it. So would Francis Marion! But I digress.
The reality is that those that choose to do good in this world will find opposition. Even back in the 1st century Paul wrote to the Thessalonians:
“For we wanted to come to you — I, Paul, more than once — and yet Satan thwarted us.”
The Roman Empire had good roads too .. so this was not an infrastructure issue, but a real one with a real adversary. There is evil in this world that makes life difficult.
So on to the core of my message here and the article and book that led me down this strange path. “The (Real) Revolution in Military Affairs” by Andrei Martyanov does a convincing job at painting an accurate picture for the state of the American Empire, which by definition is the enemy of most of the people of the world and IF we were honest, considering our erosion of privacy and freedoms, it is also an enemy of its own citizens, not unlike the USSR of its day.
This book gives an insight into the evolution of weapons and the way they influenced international relations in the 20th and 21st centuries. It also defines Revolution in Military Affairs as manifested via policy, politics, and technology. It reviews some models which are useful in assessing the current geopolitical situation. This book also tries to give a forecast of the future development of warfare and the ways in which it is going to change the whole system of international relations, hopefully towards a new geopolitical equilibrium.
Some helpful early quotes from this book will help you see the value of knowing your enemy, knowing the truth, so that y’all can be prepared.
modern war between nation-states became so complex, in reflection of the tools of such wars, that it is an axiom, not even a theorem, that people who cannot grasp fundamental mathematical, physical, tactical and operational principles on which modern weapon systems operate are simply not qualified in the minimal degree to offer their opinions on the issues of warfare, intelligence operations and military technology without appropriate backgrounds. Failing that, what can one think but that they are merely in the business of content provision (filling space/entertainment) or of propagating the official line—of propaganda, in short—mostly with regard to warmongering? In today’s information-oversaturated world of massive egos nurtured by the dopamine of public visibility and of American politics turned into showbiz, these are the types who dominate the discussion on the most important, vital issue of war and peace in our time.
This is so true, the information overload renders most people helpless in sifting through the lies to find the foundational truth. So much of media is indeed government blow-horns used to confuse and disorient the sheep on any given day making them in fact impotent.
I can only hope that the knowledge readers will gain through this book will help to increase public awareness of the deadly consequences of even a conventional war between global superpowers and will help to dispel the war propaganda being pushed on the public by ignorant and incompetent pundits who have no business offering even an iota of their opinions on what is today a Revolution in Military Affairs of historic magnitude.
Again, the ignorance of the elite usually leads to the slaughter of the innocent. Herein lies the dilemma, how does one find the time to sift through all the Geo-politics while real life is raging right along side in real time in their own communities and their own relationships?
Those holding a modern Ph.D. in philosophy or political science, unless they have a serious education and experience in other fields, will be hard-pressed to derive any sensible conclusions on automation, for example, barring some self-evident and easily accessible truths such as that increased automation removes workers from the manufacturing floor, thus increasing unemployment. This same Ph.D. will have very little knowledge of what goes into the fundamental technological principles relating to the automation of modern industry or, for that matter, how G-code interpreters work for Computer Numerical Control machining centers and what is required to run them—a knowledge domain belonging to college-educated engineers.
This is why we have the blind leading the blind. Those at the top are ill-informed by their own ignorance in attempting to make good decisions. This happen not just in government committees, think-tanks or even at the state and local level, but this also occurs in most major corporations these days as technology has outpaced the knowledge that middle and upper management were taught as little as one decade ago.
The article by Moon of Alabama is a good one to understand the pragmatic situation we find ourselves in with the latest Russian technology advances (such as underwater drones pictured below) as well as the coordinated drone (two pictures down) strike on the Saudi oil production facility.
Artistic rendering of a drone submersible
Martyanov explains why the models the ‘experts’ use fail. He shows how the advantage of one weapon system against another one can be calculated. People who have had a military education know these formulas. Those who only studied political science have likely never heard of them.
I will allow MOA to be the expert on that aspect of this book.
Houthi drones on display
My own interest lies in the philosophic underpinnings of Martyanov’s book itself. More posts on this book will be in the works shortly.
I do hope that the readers of this blog are well versed in what can happen after empires oppress people toward a degree of rebellion. The thirteen American colonies stood up to the powerful British army and navy and then formed their own federated republic in its aftermath.
In 2019, on the world stage, we have seen a 4 year war by Saudi Arabia (aided by US arms and the US military) on its neighbor Yemen. The blogger “Moon of Alabama” does a great job of not only covering the events of the evening of 13SEP2019 but also the context for this ongoing war that has led to a humanitarian disaster inside of Yemen:
The war on Yemen, launched by the Saudi clown prince Mohammad bin Salman in 2015, cost Saudi Arabia several billion dollar per month. The Saudi budget deficit again increased this year and is expected to reach 7% of its GDP. The country needs fresh money or much higher oil prices.
How does one country get away with attacking another country without consequences in 2019. Enter the United States of America, the American Empire. The Saudis actually launched the war in late MAR2015 with the full support of the Obama administration. They had that agreement ahead of time that the United States would provide the logistical support, the bombs themselves as well as assistance in targeting. Not necessarily explicitly targeting of each bomb, but sort of the strategic technical assistance in making decisions about how to approach the war. In addition to this, was the assurance the United States government would provide the political and even diplomatic cover for the war.
Is this sick or what? Actually, this is the same guarentee the American Empire has given to Saudi Arabia’s middle east partner (in crime) Israel, but I digress. (I sense another blog post is needed for that one right there)
The Saudis have actually felt that they could get away with not just continuing to bomb civilian targets, infrastructure targets and establishing a thorough blockade, but this economic blockade of Yemen preventing the fuel, food and medicine from coming into the country that this poorest nation in the Middle East needs to have in order to survive is lunacy. Only the US could enable a nation to operate above international laws in this world.
So the continuity from the Obama administration through the Trump Administration is that all they care about is to support the Saudis because the Saudis are anti-Iranian. Human life is second to keeping the US citizens in fear about what the Iranians might do. Millions starve because the American Empire is acting as the world’s bully. This ain’t no shining city on a hill. This ain’t no land of the free, it is a land of sheep who care less about what its masters do across the globe.
Again, I digress.
Back to the events of a few nights ago when 10 drones controlled by Yemeni Houthi forces targeted two major Saudi oil installations, Abqaiq and Babqaiq only 60 km (37 miles) southwest of Aramco’s Dhahran headquarters, and caused several large fires.
The oil and gas conditioning plant in Abqaiq is the largest of the world. It sits at the center of Saudi Arabia’s oil and gas infrastructure. Abqaiq processes 6.8 million barrels of crude oil each day. More than two thirds of all Saudi oil and gas production runs through it. It is not clear yet how much of the widespread facility was destroyed.
Looking at this map and the sheer distance from Yemen, one does have to wonder about these ten drones being this accurate. My own questions include, is this a false flag? Could these have been launched from within the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or from Iraq or Iran even?
‘Moon of Alabama’ is on it:
But drones may not have been the sole cause of the incident. Last night a Kuwaiti fishermen recorded the noise of a cruise missile or some jet driven manned or unmanned aircraft coming from Iraq. Debris found on the ground in Saudi Arabia seems to be from an Soviet era KH-55 cruise missile or from a Soumar, an Iranian copy of that design. The Houthi have shown cruise missiles, likely from Iran, with a similar design (see below). After an attack on Saudi oil installations in August there were accusations that at least some of the attacks came from Iraq. Iran was accused of having been involved in that attack. While this sounds unlikely it is not inconceivable.
The August 2019 turning point of this war with Yemen has the Saudi’s on their heels. The Saudi’s have no protection setup to the south of their oil production facilities. ‘Moon of Alabama’ said last month:
Saudi Arabia finally lost the war on Yemen. It has no defenses against the new weapons the Houthis in Yemen acquired. These weapons threaten the Saudis’ economic lifelines.
Houthi drones on display
Blowback is like Karma .. sometimes it is a b****. In my mind, this is partial justice for the Saudi’s decision (along with Israel, UK and US) to create ISIS and all the havoc it did in Iraq and Syria.
The projected Saudi expenses to get protection is expense and takes time and will not necessarily work.
… would require hundreds of Russian made Pantsyr-S1 and BUK air defense systems to protect Saudi oil installations.
In the mean time to shore up their financial state the Saudis recently renewed plans to sell a share of its state owned oil conglomerate Aramco.
What goes around, comes around. For whatever reason Saudi Arabia had for starting a war with the poorest country in the Middle East has coincided with low oil prices which is driving the Saudis to new levels of desperation in order to maintain control of the citizens of their country.
American exceptionalism gives those in power the encouragement to make believe that any means necessary are acceptable to accomplish the American Dream on a global scale.
The US Empire is morally bankrupt. As in society and community circles, a person’s actions, when compared to their words, determine the type of character they really are. The habitual liar’s history goes a long way in understanding what, if anything, that comes out of their mouth can be believed.
From Moon of Alabama comes a right understanding of the current situation with Iran, especially after the US immediately accused Iran of attacking oil tankers off their shore WITHOUT any evidence. As with the WMDs in Iraq, the Malaysian passenger jet shot down over Ukraine and “chemical weapons” attacks in Syria, the Western governments and their media know that the masses of people will only pay attention to the first few snippets of news and will never think again months and years later as to what really happened after careful investigations are completed.
To say that the attacks were provocations by the U.S. or its Middle East allies is made easier by their evident ruthlessness. Any accusations by the Trump administration of Iranian culpability will be easily dismissed because everyoneknows that Trump and his crew are notorious liars.
We do have a history of US government lying going back years, decades and even centuries, ask the American Indians about US treaties!
We know the damned lies from the US government as well. The US republic, or federation or democracy is not exempt from the DNA of the state. Murray Rothbard in his essay, “Anatomy of the State,” wrote of how states preserve their power with a number of tools, most notably an alliance with “intellectuals.” In return for power and positions, the “intellectuals” work diligently to persuade “the majority” that “their government is good, wise and, at least, inevitable.”
To think that the swamp was actually created recently is a fallacy as much as expecting Donald Trump to drain this swamp. Ain’t happening, ever. His very position depends on the existence of the swamp, both those in official government position as well as in and around the deep state including a subset of the elite.
It did not take long after the American Revolution to see that lies, damned lies and statistics were to be at the core of the general government and subsequently into the state governments (especially after Lincoln violently reacted to even the thought of state’s rights) and beyond.
One of the first major liars on the scene was Alexander Hamilton. Suck a duplicitous liar Hamilton was in that he could speak out of both sides of his mouth, saying one thing in his Federalist Papers essays, and then spending the rest of his life doing exactly the opposite. He defended states’ rights and federalism in these essays but when pressed by Jefferson and Madison, he “would often backtrack and advance positions he favored during the Philadelphia Convention, namely for a supreme central authority with virtually unlimited power, particularly for the executive branch.” This was “the real Hamilton,” who “made a habit of lying when the need arose.”
It was Hamilton who first spread the outrageous, ahistorical lie that the states were never sovereign and that the Constitution was somehow ratified by “the whole people” and not by state conventions, as required by Article 7 of the Constitution itself. It was Hamilton who John C. Calhoun must have been thinking about when he warned of “intellectuals” reinterpreting the constitution in a way that would essentially destroy it. Hamilton’s lifelong goal was to subjugate the citizens of the states to the central government and render the states irrelevant and powerless. The most Hamiltonian of all presidents, Abraham Lincoln, finally achieved this goal.
So it must be of no surprise that the wars of 1812, Mexican-American War in the 1840s, the so-called, mis-named Civil War of the 1860s, the American Indian wars, the Spanish-American War, WWI, WWII were ALL started based on lies by the US government. So much for the Greatest Generation who I refer to as their actual designation, the Silent Generation, as they did little to investigate the lies that catapulted the US into a two front war that distracted the public enough about US government failure to engineer a recovery from the Great Depression. Especially damning was the economic manipulation FDR orchestrated against Japan the year before Pearl Harbor and the fact that his administration was well aware of the Japanese fleet’s route to Pearl but decided to keep the US Navy in Hawaii in the dark. So much for that “surprise”.
We all should be aware of the lies since the close of WWII (the damned lie that the US had to have “unconditional surrender of Japan”, that only allowed the US government a live experiment of what nuclear weapons could do on two Japanese civilian population centers, and then settle for the same terms Japan offered in May 1945). The lies about the Korean War (our bombing of dams in North Korea causing so many innocent deaths will not be soon forgotten, can you blame them for retaining nuclear weapons?). The lies about Vietnam (yes, the Gulf of Tonkin incident that changed the course of that war under LBJ was made up), about Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria all point to a major character flaw in the US government. Topping all this was the revelation by the hero Edward Snowden that the US government was indeed spying on all its citizens, capturing not just meta-data but actually phone, e-mail, text communications for the past two decades.
So now that we have the context, let us look briefly into the whole Iran thing. Historically, it must be noted that in 1953, the CIA actually assassinated the democratically elected president of Iran, a secular nationalist, Mohammad Mossadegh, the elected leader of the Majlis, Iran’s parliament. Operation Ajax was conceived by MI6, the UK’s foreign spy agency, and the CIA would organize the coup. Kermit Roosevelt, a grandson of former US President Teddy Roosevelt, was the CIA officer in charge. Like North Korea, damned lies like this will be hard to be forgotten for generations of Iranians!
It should also be noted that in the late 1970s, many Iranians were students of mine in electronics classes in the US Navy. These are an honorable people with a rich heritage. I believe those who doubt this can watch this Rick Steve’s documentary accomplished five years ago about the Iranian people:
Fast forward to 2019. Moon of Alabama paints the near-term context:
In early May 2018 U.S. President Trump broke the nuclear deal with Iran and sanctioned all trade with that country. Iran reacted cautiously. It hoped that the other signatories of the nuclear deal would stick to their promises and continue to trade with it. The year since proved that such expectations were wrong.
Under threat of U.S. sanctions the European partners stopped buying Iranian oil and also ended their exports to it. The new financial instrument that was supposed to allow payments between European countries and Iran has still not been implemented. It is also a weak construct and will have too little capacity to make significant trade possible. Russia and China each have their own problems with the United States. They do not support trade with Iran when it endangers their other interests.
Meanwhile the Trump administration increased the pressure on Iran. It removed waivers it had given to some countries to buy Iranian oil. It designated a part of the Iranian armed forces, the Revolutionary Guard Corp (ICRG), as a terrorist entity. On Friday it sanctioned Iran’s biggest producer of petrochemical products because that company is alleged to have relations with the ICRG.
Why? Regime change is the M.O. (modus operandi) of the US Empire. It matters not the lives this endeavor may cost, Trump, his cabinet, his and his cabinet’s kids will not show up in any casualty lists, neither will war-hawks like Obama, Hillary, and others who happen to wear a “D” on their suits and pantsuits instead of an “R”. I am sure, the agenda is the same as in 1953 except for getting the United Kingdom what they wanted, Iranian oil, now the US Empire is accomplishing this on behalf of Israel, the empire’s new buddy and will satisfy Saudi Arabia as well.
How does a nation without nuclear weapons (in a proverbial “gun-free”zone) stay independent? History shows that when Libya gave up their nuclear ambitions, it is then when they were regime-changed. However, its actions to date are very honorable (especially if you compare their actions to that of the USA!):
The strategic patience Iran demonstrated throughout the year since Trump killed the deal brought no result. Trump will stay in power, probably for another five and a half years, while Iran’s economic situation continuous to get worse. The situation requires a strategic reorientation and the adoption of a new plan to counter U.S. pressure.
I am impressed by Iran’s response to this pressure from a global bully. It would be interesting to see how many parallels this effort has with Russia and even China as the US Empire threatens any nation that refuses to bow down to American Exceptionalism with sanctions and tariffs. From a Middle East Policy expert, Elijah J. Magnier, we see this four point plan outlined:
The first step suggested by Sayyed Ali Khamenei is for Iran to develop its resources and reduce imports to a minimum level in the years to come. Iran’s imports range from 40 to 65 billion dollars a year (in 2010, Iranian imports reached $65.4 billion while in 2017, they amounted to $51.6 billion). These imports are mainly related to machinery, computers and phone system devices, pharmaceuticals and medical instruments, electrical machinery, wheat, cereals and corn, rice and soya beans, transport vehicles, iron and flat-rolled steel, and organic chemicals.
The second recommendation is for Iran to behave on the premise that it has no loyal and established friends. The Leader of the revolution indicated that relationships with countries should be based on mutual interest rather than strategically established. Iran should count on its capabilities to defend its existence and continuity, without isolating itself. Countries may stand with Iran for their common benefit and interest, but such alliances should be considered related to circumstances and opportunities rather than taken for granted.
The third recommendation would be to ease domestic pressure on all political parties, including reformers (Mehdi karroubi, Mir Hossein Mousavi, Zahra Rahnavard). The Iranian leadership considers national unity of paramount importance in this period of crisis that may last for another five years if Donald Trump is re-elected. Moreover, Iran has taken a unified stand against US sanctions; moderates such as President Hassan Rouhani and his Foreign Minister Jawad Zarif have adopted hard-line positions, similar to those of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.
The Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s fourth recommendation is that Iran relies much less on oil export revenues in the future. Iran’s annual crude petroleum shipments are worth 21 to 27 billion dollars, representing 4.3% of the world market share. The Iranian leader suggested increasing and diversifying other domestic products Iran could export, mainly but not exclusively to neighbouring countries. This measure is meant to lessen the effect of US sanctions on Iranian energy exports, in place not only under the Trump administration but also under previous US administrations throughout the life of the “Islamic Revolution” (1979).
I also wonder how the US’s “founding fathers” might have also approached this same strategy in its battle against the British Empire and its King George from 1775 – 1783.
Beyond this four-point plan, there is another shift happening:
Trump continues to call for negotiations with Iran but he can accept nothing but a total capitulation. Trump also proved that the U.S. does not stick to the agreements it makes. There is therefore no hope for Iran to achieve anything through negotiations. There is only one way to counter Trump’s maximum pressure campaign and that is by putting maximum pressure on him.
Neither Washington, nor the anti-Iranian countries in the Middle East, nor the other nuclear deal signers have so far paid a price for their hostile acts against Iran. That will now change.
Marine Traffic – Oil Tanker ONLY
Iran’s coast and reach can have a huge impact on the oil business
Iran will move against the interests of the U.S., Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. It will do so in deniable form to give the U.S. and others no opening for taking military actions against it. Iran has friends in various countries in the Middle East who will support it with their own capabilities. The campaign Iran now launches will also create severe damage for other countries.
In the last 30 days we have seen the shift start as “things” start to happen in the oil shipping channel, is this coincidence or is that part of a strategy either by MI6/Mossad/CIA or by Iranian forces?
In mid May 2019, one year after Trump destroyed the nuclear deal, a demonstration of capabilities damaged four tankers which anchored near Fujairah in the UAE. There was no evidence to blame the attack on Iran. The incident was a warning. But the U.S. ignored it and increased the sanction pressure on Iran.
Yesterday two tankers with petrochemical products were attacked while crossing the Gulf of Oman. Coming only a few days after Trump sanctioned Iran’s petrochemical exports points to Iran’s involvement. But again no evidence was left in place to blame the incident on Iran.
Early reports seem to indicate drone use in the latest attacks:
Meanwhile the owner of the Kokuka Courageous, one of the stricken ships, said that the damage to its ship was not caused by mines but by drones:
Two “flying objects” damaged a Japanese tanker owned by Kokuka Sangyo Co in an attack on Thursday in the Gulf of Oman, but there was no damage to the cargo of methanol, the company president said on Friday.
…
“The crew told us something came flying at the ship, and they found a hole,” Katada said. “Then some crew witnessed the second shot.”
Drones also are the M.O. of the US Empire. Ask anyone in the Middle East! I do not rule out Iranian involvement, but they know that any Iranian fingerprint would be dealt with swiftly.
At the US Empire’s core, there seems to be an alliance of disgusting personalities. Iran’s leadership is very aware of this team they call the “B-team”:
That the US immediately jumped to make allegations against Iran—w/o a shred of factual or circumstantial evidence—only makes it abundantly clear that the #B_Team is moving to a #PlanB: Sabotage diplomacy—including by @AbeShinzo—and cover up its #EconomicTerrorism against Iran.
I warned of exactly this scenario a few months ago, not because I’m clairvoyant, but because I recognize where the #B_Team is coming from.
Moon of Alabama goes on to call out these war-jockeys:
The “B-team” includes Trump’s National Security Advisor John Bolton, Israel’s Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahoo, Mohammad bin Salman of Saudi Arabia and Mohammed bin Zayed of the UAE.
So the focus that was on Syria from this alliance has now shifted to Iran yet again as it seems that Russia has subtly been able to shore up Venezuela for the time being.
The deep state is looking for a war, it needs war profits (in addition to the drug trade) to continue it existence, and at some point in the future, it will follow-through on something, somewhere.
So sad. So sick.
The sad truth remains, as Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning are all well aware:
Politics is indeed the poison that honorable people must reject outright. The problem is in a democracy, “the people” are given the “political power” (in principle only) to get what they want. Dividing people into groups while inciting violence from time to time tends to keep our eyes off the most evil element of our society, our tyrannical and narcissistic governments.
Expect the lies, damned lies (and statistics) to continue.
I have to be honest, I am a “boomer” who served in the US Navy after Vietnam and before Gulf War I, in a relative season of peace (rare for the US Empire these days).
The 1970s saw increased cooperation and trade with China and in the late 1980s finally saw increased cooperation and trade with Russia. With the Cold War over, people in general felt a lot better about the global conflicts and started to look at our domestic issues. Politicians and the Deep State do not like that. In search of distractions the Deep State looked for opportunities and continued to feed skewed Intel to the US government.
One would have thought that peace would allow the US to get a handle on its own economy and its own trade balance sheet. Nothing could be further from the truth. What happens time and again in large corporations, government and in bureaucracy in general is that politics squanders opportunities to take things to the next level, a better place AFTER addressing some key foundational and structural issues. The problem with politics and older organizations is that the momentum of the status quo keeps the change agents and whistle-blowers at bay while the existing paradigm sucks the life out of the organization or nation slowly. Because the leaders are temporary custodians of the organization, there is little incentive to do anything but “kick the can” down the road for others to deal with, the next generations of corporate leaders or the next crop of politicians or even the next generation of consumers and taxpayers.
Not cool.
In our existing morass it is apparent that the US Empire desperately needs an enemy. It needed one in 1990 as the USSR dissolved into over a dozen republics and it needed it yet again after the easy Gulf War I win that failed to produce the need for military in a big way for the long haul. Enter the “War on Terror” (Gulf War II, Iraq Invasion), which was designed to never end. This helped Bush II and Obama to satisfy the deep state and elites who see nothing but upsides to perpetual war, but after some rather apparent blunders, the target has shifted to Russia especially followed by China. Sure North Korea and Iran are in the mix but I am pretty sure the deep state is after another multi decade conflict so it can keep its job.
The blunder in the war on terror had to do with the exposure from Wikileaks and other leaks that made it clear that ISIS was actually a US/Saudi/UK and Israel initiative (to keep Iran from being a regional power that threatened Israel). The attempts to regime change Libya and Syria were part of an effort to further destabilize the Middle East which sent refugees to Western Europe by the droves, destabilizing Germany and France especially. The empire likes to keep its competition at bay, either directly or indirectly.
For the past three years, Russia has received the brunt of the attacks claiming that its motives are evil. A quick look at maps from 1990 to present say otherwise:
As you can see, the efforts in the Ukraine in 2014 was an attempt to further weaken Russian influence in the region. Their actual restraint shows the wisdom that Putin possesses in dealing with the US Empire and NATO. Russia did tactfully stepped in and secured Crimea and the critical port of Sevastopol on the Black Sea which they had possession of under lease agreements up until the US sponsored regime change in 2014. Beyond this, with the vast majority of Crimeans desiring ties to Russia there was swift and peaceful investments made by Russia like the Crimean Bridge below:
Crimean BridgeSevastopol Naval Base (Russia) on the Black Sea
This peaceful move PLUS the fact that the Russians were invited by Syrians to remove ISIS from their territories actually allowed Russian military to test their weapon systems and now have an edge in several different technological categories that make the Pentagon nervous. The fact that in October 2015 when this calculated effort to push ISIS out of Syria really started, Obama predicted that Russia would fail:
Syria (October 2015)Syria Dec 2018
So the US was showed up in Syria, as trespassers they “fought” ISIS until Russia could beat ISIS .. and now the US rebels hold the land east of the Euphrates River.
Then, in 2019, the US turns its attention to Venezuela. The US Empire DOES have an addiction that it is not ready to admit. Of course they pull out the old Monroe Doctrine crap .. wondered if that applied in Iraq and Afghanistan, opps, wrong continent. Geez. But I digress. Why can’t the US just defend the US? Because it has a “need for empire” and its belief in the myth called “American Exceptionalism”.
At its root, the US obsession with “extending” Russia until it breaks is summed up by Moon of Alabama in this hilarious highlighting of a RAND think-tank article that was revised to look at the US instead in this post:
This brief summarizes a report that comprehensively examines nonviolent, cost-imposing options that the Russian Federation and its allies could pursue across economic, political, and military areas to stress —overextend and unbalance— the United States’ economy and armed forces and the U.S. government’s political standing at home and abroad. Some of the options examined are clearly more promising than others, but any would need to be evaluated in terms of the overall strategy for dealing with the United States, which neither the report nor this brief has attempted to do.
Today’s United States suffers from many vulnerabilities — the financial crisis has caused a drop in living standards, regressive tax policies that have furthered that decline, a decreasing life expectancy, and increasing authoritarianism under Barack Obama’s and now Donald Trump’s rule. Such vulnerabilities are coupled with deep-seated (if exaggerated) anxieties about the possibility of Russia-inspired political manipulation, loss of great power status, and even military attack.
Despite these vulnerabilities and anxieties, the United States remains a powerful country that still manages to be Russia’s peer competitor in a few key domains. Recognizing that some level of competition with the United States is inevitable, RAND researchers conducted a qualitative assessment of “cost-imposing options” that could unbalance and overextend the United States. Such cost-imposing options could place new burdens on the United States, ideally heavier burdens than would be imposed on the Russian Federation for pursuing those options.
A team of RAND experts developed economic, geopolitical, ideological, informational, and military options and qualitatively assessed them in terms of their likelihood of success in extending the United States, their benefits, and their risks and costs.
Too funny, because the original 2019 RAND publication was focused in Russia’s situation and how the US might exploit her weaknesses.
What is noteworthy is the last line of this think-tank production, which SHOULD cause the deep state (as well as their Mossad ties) to pause in their agenda:
Most of the options discussed, including those listed here, are in some sense escalatory, and most would likely prompt some Russian counterescalation. Thus, besides the specific risks associated with each option, there is additional risk attached to a generally intensified competition with a nuclear-armed adversary to consider. This means that every option must be deliberately planned and carefully calibrated to achieve the desired effect. Finally, although Russia will bear the cost of this increased competition less easily than the United States will, both sides will have to divert national resources from other purposes. Extending Russia for its own sake is not a sufficient basis in most cases to consider the options discussed here. Rather, the options must be considered in the broader context of national policy based on defense, deterrence, and—where U.S. and Russian interests align—cooperation.
Cooperation, now there is a novel idea!
Hang on, there are more deep state and political thinkers that love their wallet more than life on this planet, especially for generations after their death!
Next time we will look more at China as well as the budding relationship that Russia and China are now enjoying and how Japan and other nations like Iran and Syria figure into all these geopolitics as well as the association called BRICS ( Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa ).
Many will say that at the conclusion of WWII that the US emerged unscathed and became the sole superpower. Sure the USSR tried to stay in the contest until it dissolved in 1989 after 40 years of Cold War, but the US was definitely the replacement for the British Empire by then.
Others will point to the Spanish-American war in 1898 as the turning point when the fake news that the Spanish blew up the USS Maine in Havana harbor in Cuba resulted in the US expanding all the way to the Philippines in the Pacific and in Teddy Roosevelt’s day, expanded its Navy to match its ambitions.
Still others will point to the fateful day when states rights, the last thing keeping the republic from becoming a centralized democratic (not a good thing) nation, was not only beaten back with bayonets, gunfire and cannon, but continued to steamroll the section of the country (the South) through over a decade of military rule and economic plundering that had rallied around the founder’s idea of a federated republic. The post war correspondence quoted below from this post shows what was gained, and what was lost:
Lord Acton, the British historian and philosopher, and General Robert E. Lee, corresponding in 1866, both saw States’ Rights as an essential component of free government.
Lord Acton:
“saw in States’ Rights the only availing check upon the absolutism of the sovereign will.” He mourned over the defeat of the Confederate States and what it meant for liberty.
General Lee,responding, feared:
“Whereas the consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it.”
So yes, after steamrolling a defiant South from 1865-1877 the “Union” focused on the American Indian and proceeded on the breaking of all Indian treaties, genociding the defiant and bringing the rest of the population under a dependency on government to pacify it for generations.
So the seeds for empire actually go back even further. In this post, a former history teacher at West Point points out that the War of 1812 actually was out of a desire for added territory. What complicated things politically, was that the party (Republican) that was principled against standing armies actually turned into war-hawks!
The Republicans clamored for war even though their party supposedly hated standing armies and militarism. To wage this war, Madison and the Republicans would have to restrict trade, build a military establishment and coerce obedience—the very actions most abhorred in Republican ideology.
Seems that there was a lingering effort from the American Revolution that desired Canada to be part of the American Republic:
There were other motives for this war [of 1812] besides the affirmation of neutral rights and the reclamation of national honor. Many Westerners (who tended to be avid Republicans) had long coveted Canada, then a British colony. In fact, the Continental Army had previously attempted, unsuccessfully, to conquer Canada during the Revolutionary War. And, strikingly, the first American constitution, the Articles of Confederation, claimed the province of Canada as a future state within the expanding American union. In 1812, “Free Canada!” became a rallying cry, and the U.S. would spend most the war in this fruitless endeavor. We were the invaders!
So yes, the desire for empire had been there from the start.
What was the most interesting part of this post is a statement here:
Canada was primarily (though sparsely) populated by two types of people: French Canadians and former American loyalists—refugees from the late Revolutionary War. Some, the “true” loyalists, fled north just after the end of the war for independence. The majority, however, the “late” loyalists, had more recently settled in Upper Canada between 1790 and 1812. Most came because land was cheaper and taxes lower north of the border.
Yes, post American Revolution, cheaper taxes existed in the British Empire in Canada than in the United States. I thought we fought the War for Independence over high taxes?
Another myth that was busted was the “David and Goliath” slant most history books take on the War of 1812:
In point of fact, the British were busy and spread thin. They had been at war with the powerful French on a global scale for some 19 years. The only British force within striking distance of the U.S. was in Canada, and this—in a stunning reversal of the popular myth—represented a stunning mismatch. There were barely 500,000 citizens in Canada, compared with about 8 million in the United States. The British had only a few thousand regular troops to spare for the defense of this massive Canadian landmass. The Americans might be unprepared, and might prove “bad” at war, but by no means was the initial deck stacked against the large and expansive American republic.
The myth of American defensiveness is also belied by a number of other inconvenient facts. The United States declared this war, a war that Britain had no interest in fighting. Furthermore, despite the exaggerated claims of war hawks and patriots of all stripes, this was not a Second War of Independence. There is no evidence that the British sought to reconquer and colonize the mammoth American republic. Any land seizures were planned to be used only as bargaining chips at an eventual peace settlement. Tied down in an existential war of its own, Britain had neither the capacity nor intent to resubjugate their former colonists.
The bottom line is to question everything .. and to be willing to learn, unlearn and relearn.
